>>8558723 lb
>send halp 4 sleep.
Non-narcotic halp for you to sleep. In drugstore or Wallyworld - in pharmacy section, near where baby stuff is - find Calms made by Hyland. Small bottle with small white pills in it that taste like sugar. Homeopathic, safe for babies!>>8559419
Put 4 pills under your tongue ~ 1/2 hour before you want to go to sleep. You will want to put your head down and sleep. Then you will drift off peacefully.
You're very welcome. You might also look where the sleep aids are in the pharmacy section (Walmart always is moving things around). I know this works, my family uses it and it works for adults, because I've used it.
>trying to demonstrate that he's in charge
Fuck these people - who else would be in charge?!?
They are desperate to silence him and take away the ability to talk to the People directly. The more that mockingbirds cut away while he's talking or splitscreen to talk over him ("fact-checking") the more people will watch it from the WH channel on their site or youtube or find Fox10 Phoenix stream so they can hear the what the President is actually saying.
The more desperate [they] become, the more they shoot themselves in the foot.
Nevada corporations, like Delaware corporations, have a far smaller reporting requirement than in other states. That's why they are the favorite for shell companies, money laundering or other nefarious activities.
>The Pope owns the bank
That's not correct. The Pope had to make a deal with bankers to even get in the game, once Mussolini did his thing. The Pope pouted for a few months and then approached the bankers.
This is not speculation or opinion.
Do you consider it confirmation by Q every other time when Q responded to an anon without text? Just responded to their post without saying anything? Or do you consider it to be that Q is refuting that anon's position/hypothesis every time?
Curious because the position is consistent or it isn't.
Have you looked at every instance from the beginning where Q has responded with no comment? And then at what Q posted directly after or later on, incorporating what that anon posted?
Will that consistently support your position?
I'm not bashing you, just curious if you have done this and it bore your theory out.
>what amounts to a blank check
It's no such thing, it's actually broken out into categories/designees and specific amounts.
>why all the medical production for something that is gonna be over in 3-4 weeks?
USA is a YUGE country and the virus is travelling around the country. In earliest-hit places, it will be over sooner (IF people do social distancing), in later-hit places it will take a month or so to subside substantially. You may also have heard the 'experts' mention that they expect a resurgence of it in the fall. Do you think POTUS would get a pass if there is not enough equipment/supplies for that fall outbreak?
Logical thinking, forward-thinking.
POTUS is a forward-thinking guy.
>look how the stock photo company marks the foot on the horse. One of those spirals.
That stock photo company places evenly spaced watermarks on every image so people can't use it without paying (paid one has no watermarks, obviously). Every single preview image from that company has the same watermarks in the same pattern and spacing. This image is not unique and the watermark was not cleverly placed on the horse's hoof, that's just where it ended up, on the watermark overlay, that is, again, on every single preview photo from this company.
The question was: have you compared every instance of Q responding to an anon with no text, what Q posted directly after and later on that incorporated what that anon said, and does that prove or invalidate your theory?
Looking at one instance doesn't really do anything to show whether your theory is correct or not.
Either that pattern of Q responses/later posts show the theory correct or it does not.
Whether the issue is "pressing" at the moment or not, either the theory hold across the board (other subjects/topics where Q has responded to an anon post with no text) or not.
It has nothing to do with anon's personal style.