>>8964509 (lb)

There seems to be a misunderstanding. Let me clarify. Either Q plans to confirm Q, publicly, or they do not. Anon wants to know which.

Confirmation isn't interfering with mass arrests.

Confirmation isn't interfering with ISIS/MS13 dismantling.

Confirmation isn't interfering with safety/security of the public.

Confirmation isn't preventing COC kill-off (check that status chart Q posted recently)

Confirmation isn't preventing or comms top, down, bottom, sideways, or between XBOX or PC Gaming chat logs.

Confirmation will, 100%,shift the narrativein such a way that it willneverbe the same again. This will give everyone the freedom to get behind everything, 100%.

Until then, stalemate.

"We are researchers who deal in open-source information, reasoned argument, and dank memes. We do battle in the sphere of ideas and ideas only. We neither need nor condone the use of force in our work here."

>>8964966

Every single person you know that doesn't currently believe in Q would instantly start looking it up, and catching up. It's not manufacturing consent if you simply come out with the truth.

I'm really not sure why anons seem to be wanting Q to not address it, publicly. If @POTUS had used the last presser to get the Q asked, then this movement would have absolutely exploded, overnight. And yes, having the most powerful man in the world confirm it would "do the trick" for the majority of people that are still on the fence. As a matter of fact, that's precisely what everyone's waiting for. They'll "believe it" when something is said about it, publicly.

Why do anons not want it addressed? Why is Q, after alluding to it not being done, then saying it will be done, dodging the question? You want to pull the rip cord on the engine to get this country back moving again? Confim Q.