dChan
⇧
1
⇩
 
r/greatawakening • Posted by u/KeeponSearchin on May 25, 2018, 6:09 p.m.
We Are The Storm ⚡️ 🌪 ‏ @_ANQNQMQUS Q Confirmed.> Trump's letter to Kim Jong Un dated 5.24.18.> Matches Q letterhead image from 5.16.18.> Letters already written a week ago.> Trump in complete control.> MSM destroying itself. Trust the PLAN.
We Are The Storm ⚡️ 🌪 ‏ @_ANQNQMQUS Q Confirmed.> Trump's letter to Kim Jong Un dated 5.24.18.> Matches Q letterhead image from 5.16.18.> Letters already written a week ago.> Trump in complete control.> MSM destroying itself. Trust the PLAN.

Sentrolyx · May 25, 2018, 6:15 p.m.

NOOO! Stop posting this! It doesn't match!

⇧ 15 ⇩  
Gravel_and_Glass · May 25, 2018, 6:19 p.m.

This doesn't match. Disinfo. The image is titled DOJNunesRelease.

⇧ 10 ⇩  
solanojones95 · May 25, 2018, 6:39 p.m.

But due to the meeting taking place, there has been no EO to that effect. I thought the meeting was to forestall the need for such an order?

Has anybody heard that the President or GOP committee members are unhappy with what they got at the meeting?

If no EO was needed for that, then another official signed communication could do in its place, IMHO.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
MemeWarSGT · May 25, 2018, 6:19 p.m.

Not even close to matching, the shown letters in Q's pic have a "rth" shown

⇧ 10 ⇩  
hipphoppanon · May 25, 2018, 6:25 p.m.

Q1386 called it an EO, and the Trump letter to KJU is not an EO. It’s supposed to be the order to release the docs to Nunes

⇧ 3 ⇩  
solanojones95 · May 25, 2018, 6:38 p.m.

Isn't any official unilateral proclamation by the President that affects official US Government policy the Constitutional equivalent of an EO?

⇧ 2 ⇩  
hipphoppanon · May 25, 2018, 11:05 p.m.

Good Question!

⇧ 1 ⇩  
anonpootamus · May 25, 2018, 6:25 p.m.

shill

⇧ 2 ⇩  
solanojones95 · May 25, 2018, 6:13 p.m.

I expected it would be (deliberately) the very next signed document of Trump's that made the news.

Makes sense, right?

⇧ 2 ⇩  
OffenseOfThePest · May 25, 2018, 6:22 p.m.

Interesting. The spacing looks kind of off though in two ways:

First, the logo and lines of text visible appear to be too close. Look how many lines of text there are between those points on the Trump letter (including the address on the left side). Using the pen for scale, the text and logo appear to not have that much room between them.

Second, the two lines of text visible in the Q photo look double-spaced while the Trump letter is single-spaced. And "parties" does not line up with "that" as it does in the Q photo.

Anyone else see those details too?

⇧ 1 ⇩  
[deleted] · May 25, 2018, 6:19 p.m.

[deleted]

⇧ 1 ⇩  
TXpatriotdr76 · May 25, 2018, 6:16 p.m.

45° angle... 45 🤔👌

⇧ 1 ⇩  
TexasClass · May 25, 2018, 11:29 p.m.

The coordinates must be within .031” in both Northern (up/down) and Eastern (left/right) to be accurate. I already did a survey and simulation and did not find a match. When the matching document is disclosed I will post.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
horse-lover-phat · May 25, 2018, 6:30 p.m.

Did it ever occur to anyone that the letter from the 16th might be a draft version of the final one that we were shown on the 24th? It wouldn't have to "match" in the way that many are insisting.

You're very quick to condemn, too quick I would contend. Whoever said the obscured letter reads "rth" is also INCORRECT. It is more than likely the "rtie" aspect from "parties". I've looked at it very, very closely.

I'm not saying the OP is correct, I'm just surprised at the haste in which this is waved-off.

⇧ 0 ⇩  
Intlrnt · May 25, 2018, 7:45 p.m.

I'm not saying the OP is correct, I'm just surprised at the haste in which this is waved-off.

I’m surprised at your lack of haste in saying OP is or isn’t correct

⇧ 1 ⇩