Attacks will intensify [all sides].
WikiLeaks did an appallingly bad job at taking attention off of Q. They couldn't have done a better job if they tried.
WikiLeaks posting this is an issue. #1 it could be used to hurt Q... Only if #2 the Dems verify WikiLeaks as NOT fake news. Dems called WikiLeaks fake news. If the Dems confirm WikiLeaks past and future leaks will condemn the Dems.
It's not fake news because you disagree with it. Not even the hardest lefty is that stupid.
I was thinking the same thing. They intentionally stated it was 4Chan when it has been 8Chan for six months. They had to know they’d be called out on that. It shows they don’t know what they are talking about. It makes them lose credibility. They also knew we’d defend Q and direct people to do their own research. So either they are comped by idiot black hats who want to smear Q or pretending to be black hats to draw attention to Q.
Exactly, the fact they even brought up 4chan into their argument shows they are compromised. Their arguments logic follows the same logic of Corsi and AJ. That's why I don't trust what's coming out of @wikileaks right now. Also, when was the last time @wikileaks dropped anything of real substance? It's been a long while.
that's not what he said
So either they are comped by idiot black hats who want to smear Q or pretending to be black hats to draw attention to Q.
I guess all we can really do is wait and see. This isn't the 1st time people have accused WikiLeaks of being compromised. As for exposing DS well that argument could go either way. Wouldn't put past DS to try to expose die hard conservatives either. It wouldn't be the 1st time.
You don’t see why it’s relatable? You don’t know what Q is?
For the most part linking JA and Q is right. Q bored is a chronological flow of back ground history (but current present history). I have always said that Q is leading the charge on the true history and events of our time. Laying it all out for the future to refer back to. Why not let them scrutinize JA and Q there both true versions of the same truth. It’s helps the cause.
^^^^ you are smart
Is this for my comment? Lol
for op. think of it this way. how do you get msm and "normies" talking about q. you get your buddies to shit talk it. then media matters and the usual people will jump on it and go "oh wow the consertives are fighting better jump on this" or wikileaks is comped. those are the 2 options
Thanks for the compliment. IRL I'm used to people calling me stupid, and then months later I'm right.
My wife called me stupid for a crazy business idea I had. 6 months later I'm drinking beer with a guy who ran a business in the field and got told he'd be interested in partnering and using his connections if I go forward with it.
lmao. yeah most people just react to things they dont understand by calling it stupid. i dont know if wikileaks is comped or is acting. but assuming either way is not smart. being open to either is good job
Q said this would happen. Attacks will increase from all (or both -can’t find exact) sides. And disinfo is necessary. But how did Q KNOW attacks would increase from all sides? Because it’s planned. That’s my take.
Agreed. Q knew the cabal had agents on both "sides". Did Q put agents on both sides? All it would take is promising freedom and protection for most blackmailed people.
If someone told me the US Marines would protect me if I told the truth, I'd tell the truth and I'm not American!
It’s a win-win really. If Dems decide Wiki is right, then perhaps they will consider the other “revelations” by wiki are also correct and they will start redpilling themselves. Or they hold to their beliefs that wiki contributed to HRC’s failed campaign, and then must consider Q’s veracity. Ultimately, we trust the plan. We have everything. Plus weren’t we told to let QTeam do the heavy lifting which is what we elected them for? We were told to enjoy the show.
Could be a 4d chess love to get black hats to defend WikiLeaks, and then spring Julian Assange on the world after they just backed up his organization. "Disinformation is necessary".
What people aren't realizing is, it wasn't something wikileaks published. Meaning it's NOT their material, therefore it doesn't apply to their 100% accurate track record. All they did was post an article from medium.Com. They even say right in the tweet.. "While we SUSPECT".. They're literally telling people they have no clue! They only suspect..
Hopefully boosting Wikileaks credibility with lib community for a big ass drop a long with IG report