Anonymous ID: c5a486 Feb. 9, 2020, 11:29 p.m. No.8089714   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>9724 >>9731 >>9738 >>9769

>>8089700

For real, if you answer the Q and say it's real, you are admitting you have a leaker, that is on YOUR side. If you denounce the Q, you legitimize your greatest asset, an army of digital warriors that are willing to fight for you. The Q will NEVER be asked, or should I say, Never be ANSWERED. Get it?

Anonymous ID: c5a486 Feb. 9, 2020, 11:37 p.m. No.8089743   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>9774 >>9795

>>8089731

I'm not saying Q is POTUS, I'm just saying whether you ask the Q question, either answer is a negative. You ignore the "LARP" and it works in your benefit. If real, you would NEVER admit it. This is the beauty of Q. I don't need media validation. I rely on time stamps, past posts having relevance, info given years before that comes out years later. Q is real, I just doubt POTUS ever confirms, if even asked.

Anonymous ID: c5a486 Feb. 9, 2020, 11:52 p.m. No.8089822   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>9837

>>8089795

Psy-Ops, it is how it works. Narrative, counter-narrative. Which one is true? The point is you get a counter-narrative started, then it grow, grows beyond a point of containment, "critical mass" comes to mind. We all have more than we know. The question is, what do you do with the information you get? Do you keep it inside, or try to tell others? Asking the Q on national TV is futile. What you and I do with the info is what matters in the endโ€ฆ.

Anonymous ID: c5a486 Feb. 9, 2020, 11:58 p.m. No.8089849   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun

>>8089837

That;s the point. If they ask, they look like assholes confirming a "conspiracy." If they don't ask, they ignore the truth and just hurt their credibility even further. They spent a ton of resources proving Q to be a LARP. Now ask your self, why?