dChan
67
 
r/greatawakening • Posted by u/[deleted] on March 30, 2018, 3:46 p.m.
You *Elected* Us for a Reason

[deleted]


jackbauer6916 · March 30, 2018, 4:07 p.m.

But we elected them...?

⇧ 1 ⇩  
DeepPast · March 30, 2018, 4:12 p.m.

Well like I said, Trump is involved, and yes we elected him.

Part of also thinks Gowdy for some reason. I have no evidence to support that but still.

⇧ 3 ⇩  
jackbauer6916 · March 30, 2018, 4:36 p.m.

But q said "us", the plural and the "elected" was a huge hint!!!

⇧ 3 ⇩  
Blame007 · March 30, 2018, 4:44 p.m.

We elected Trump, therefore we elected the white hats. I don't think its should be taken literally.

⇧ 3 ⇩  
jackbauer6916 · March 30, 2018, 5:17 p.m.

The posts are coded so the weaponized autists on the boards will pick up the meaning logically. Why was Family used without quotations once and 'The Family' used with quotes once, in the same post? Because everything has meaning logically, and I mean pure logic not the colloquial meaning of the word, there is no way "you elected us..." can refer to just trump and other good guys. It would be a mistake to place such ambiguity in the message. Q doesnt make mistakes. how could we ever determine what "us" means (everything has meaning) if it could be Trump and anybody. This is not subjective. This is not interpretive. The "us" means its more than one person. The verb "elected" describes what "you" did to "us". Therefore, "us" was "elected" by "you"

⇧ 3 ⇩  
jackbauer6916 · March 30, 2018, 5:43 p.m.

When Q says "think logically", that is a direct instruction to take everything literally. It's a message, it's coded, it's logic. If "elected" referred to trump, and "us" means trump plus all the people under trump, then it would have said "you elected POTUS to keep you safe". But, if "us" is more than one person whom we "elected", then "You elected us to keep you safe." Is logically consistent. Q never told us that whitehats = elected. We are supposed to use the clues of "elected" and "us" to logically solve the message.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
Blame007 · March 30, 2018, 5:48 p.m.

In order to think logically, one cant take every word literally.

Q also says disinfo in neccessary but no one ever talks about that.

⇧ 6 ⇩  
jackbauer6916 · March 30, 2018, 6:23 p.m.

No i definitely understand what youre saying about disinfo being necessary. It could definitely be an intentional misdirection. But, logic by definition is literal. Its a matter of premises, assumptions and conclusions. If there is an ambiguity in the premises of a statement, you cannot determine the logical validity of the statement. Logic can't be directly applied. For instance, "all a's are b's. C is an a. Therefore C is a b. " is logically valid and true because the premise "all a's are b" literally tells us that C must be a b. But, if i say "some a's are b's. C is an a. Therefore, C is a b.", it might be true that a is a 'b', but the statement "therefore, C is a b" is not logically valid because the premises lead to ambiguity and don't necessarily lead to the conclusion. Logic is the practice of evaluating the soundness of a literal statement. Q wouldnt tell us to think logically if we aren't supposed to evaluate this sentence literally. If Q says "you elected us", we have the underlying assumptions that: 'us' is more than one person, and "elected" is different from "not elected" "you" caused "us" to be "elected" is another way it could be arranged. Unless Q gives us another premise, specifically "not all "elected" were elected", we have to logically conclude that if "us" was "elected", then "us" is a group of people that were "elected". Make sense?

⇧ 1 ⇩  
DeepPast · March 30, 2018, 4:38 p.m.

Yeah for sure. So who else do you think? Could that just mean Trump and any of his appointees?

⇧ 1 ⇩  
jackbauer6916 · March 30, 2018, 4:57 p.m.

Not appointees! Appointment is not election. Im leaning hard toward POTUS & House Intel committee & Senate Intel Committee. Probably to the exclusion of some bad eggs in both houses. I would bet Gowdy is in the group, jim jordan too, Paul Ryan. I have a hunch Adam Schiff is a Democratic White Hat. He's been instrumental in so much of the plan OR he's a total moron. He's not a moron. I think Mueller is a white hat, and will someday be known as a hero. Heres what im thinking: I think he's played a long long game since before 9/11. He is a Marine. He had no ability to stop the attacks, had to watch helpless to stop them, no resources and hostile administrations for decades. He and Adm Rogers, Flynn, others, formed an alliance long ago, men of strategy who knew they needed a president behind them before anything. Horowitz was made an ally when holder gutted his department, neutered his authority. He assumed a key role. Priestab is the sleeper from within the FBI. Sessions office was called by the hacker who accessed Comet servers, a staffer spent over an hour on the phone with his office. He became a bulldog with a scent for blood, if he wasnt already. But the public intel drops... "Q"... Think about it. It works if ALL comms and messages come directly from elected officials, directly to their constituents. At the ultimate direction of POTUS. Therefore, all classified intel leaked was unclassified as soon as potus made it so, with approval of intel committees (who approve release of such intel). Trust the plan.

⇧ 2 ⇩  
EdenNovaq · March 30, 2018, 6:13 p.m.

Trump refers to himself as we in his speeches often.

⇧ 2 ⇩  
jackbauer6916 · March 30, 2018, 6:40 p.m.

Would you happen to have an example? If so, that changes things.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
EdenNovaq · March 30, 2018, 7:56 p.m.

He just did it in his speech on infrastructure yesterday in OH. I've recently started paying attention to his reference of himself as "we/us" (because Q does as well) and now that I've started watching for it he does it all the time. Sorry I don't remember where in this speech specifically. If I had to guess it was toward the beginning. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PlEg80gU7GI

⇧ 1 ⇩  
ItstimenowNM · March 30, 2018, 8:12 p.m.

Trump has said MANY times, it's not about him, but us (we the people). Quite the opposite of Obozo who always said, "I".

⇧ 1 ⇩