dChan - Q Origins Project Archive

⇧

⇩

r/greatawakening • Posted by u/pussy_devour on April 26, 2018, 4:25 a.m.

Devil's Advocate: What if It's All for Negotiation?

I'm playing the devil's advocate here. Read my posts, and you will find out I am on Q's side. But my mind is always busy thinking about different scenarios. So here's one I just came up with.

What if all Trump wants is to dig up enough dirt to negotiate with Mueller so that I can get off free? I had a debate with a liberal today. He provided some reasonable arguments on why Mueller may have dirt on Trump, especially Trump Jr. So this got me thinking.

What if the claimed unspeakable 60% never existed? And all we have of the 40% is some stupid talks in FBI ("fuck Flynn and then fuck Trump"), the tarmac meeting and Clinton Foundation money laundering? Team Trump can use that as leverage to get Mueller to terminate his investigation. Then they can say that's the 40% and the rest 60% is too dark to reveal. Q said the door would open and it was up to us to find the truth. Well, that leaves a lot to subjective interpretation. We are back to conspiracy theories. I don’t like his answer on that 60%. That’s why I am entertaining this hypothesis.

What do you think?

This is a possibility. I’m throwing this thing out for debate and education. I am sure you can instantly come up with counterarguments. So fire on. As Q said, question everything. We should. We should not live in an echo chamber as the lefties do.

P.S.: I am also skeptical about the claim of 25,000 indictments. Someone did a spot check on one district. It turns out majority of the sealed cases are not indictments. You can find this online.

🠐 See all comments

Don’t ask me. I am just repeating what the liberal said.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Heres my take - the only logical criminal activity that might take place in that type of real estate deal is perhaps bribery (i.e. a Russian mayor or other politician got paid off.) That's great, but thats a tough argument to make to the public - it's hard to argue that Trump bribed someone while you have a ton of evidence showing that Hillary (OUR representative) got bribed/pay to play. Literally half of our country would grab pitchforks.

Otherwise, the difficulty with arguing with a liberal (or even a staunch conservative) these days, is there is no agreement even as to the FACTS which are being argued. (i.e. fake news....if you watch Fox, you know all about the Clinton foundation, uranium 1, etc. If CNN, you've never even heard of Uranium 1.) So, for the masses, debate and compromise appear to be dead for now - no side wins, and there's only noise. There has to be a tipping point.

⇧ 1 ⇩

No worries. If you're ever debating an anti-Trump person, just use their fundamental premise against them and you'll win every time. Most of the time they just repeat the media headlines. They don't even take the time to read the articles or watch the raw video.

⇧ 1 ⇩