POTUS tweet said to read the whole NYP article. Did anyone? I just did, well I'm about half way done. This raised my eyebrows.
>Mitt Romney, talking to Utah lawmakers about what he would do if he’s elected to the Senate, said he wants to copy John McCain. “There’s got to be somebody who can stand up to the president,” Romney said, according to usnews.com. “Who’s going to stand up to Trump?”
Yeah, definitely he is. He was I think, maybe one of the 7 people who met privately post POTUS election that Q mentioned. Plus, and maybe this refers to that meeting, he went to Antarctica right after too didn't he? Fucked up.
>Is it to be a crack team of codebreakers for which we are not trained?
Not to sound shitty but realistically, don't kid yourself. You can bet whatever codes Q does encode, are fairly simplistic all things considered. Granted some are designed for fellow operators, and maybe some of those we're not even aware of, but generally, the codes have to be easy enough for untrained autists to crack. Crytology gets really sophisticated is all.
Right now our primary mission is to (a) identify all markers (b) collect visual evidence, eg form a graphic in order to (c) assemble easily understandable, convincing authentication of Q/POTUS link for later viewing by, and convincing of, normies.
>Is it rather for our expertise?
>What is our expertise?
Autism and memetics. It's what got Trump elected. Or played a key role at least.
Oh wait I see what you're doing. I thought these were legit questions at first. Heh.
Hahahaha. I know what it is, but it just looks like Trump Derangement Syndrome knows no bounds, keeps getting worse and worse for the affected.
>She started at a news station and built a media empire.
How did she get in a position to do that first of all? I seem to recall reading questionable details about her past, but I can't recollect. Then again, POTUS did (jokingly, likely) say he'd have her be VP in a previous presidential run he did; then again, we know POTUS: he may have been being snarky at that time. Presumably him asking her relates to a question she asked him in an interview in 88, on her show - if he would ever run for prez.
Yes. By the way, is there an image of both versions of the tweets yet? I've seen compilations of the first two, original tweets with Q's posts - the "before" - but not the "after." Make sense?
I'd point out, Q didn't start posting last night until after somebody posted pics of POTUS's tweets. We, and our development, are an active part of the overall ongoing operation. Given that Q needs us to have certain level of understanding by and within certain frames of time, given that our role is to document happenings as future proof to normies.
Just to add a sense of urgency I guess, a reminder of the importance of what we do - and staying on task.
Future proves past, sure. But with us, eventually it may prove true that past proves future: our work now will come in handy later, as literal proof.
Baker if you read please put something in batter about link breaking. If people are going to break links, do it after
>www.
Thank you. Many are still confused (understandable).
Hmm. There are no coincidences…
>Sometime soon, a friend or a family member is going to approach you and try to provide you with some context about what you are seeing in the news.
>
>Your friend/family member has been collaborating in an online workspace with like-minded patriots and a small team of Trump administration officials. This collaboration has been going on for months, and has been kept deliberately obscure from the public and mainstream media. This is not a joke.
>
>During this collaboration, information relevant to what you are seeing in the news was surfaced, evaluated, and prioritized. Listen to your friend/family member. They will explain this information and why you aren’t hearing these revelations from the mainstream media.
>
>Although it is not that important to the overall story unfolding in the news now, the small team of administration officials, known as “Q Group”, or simply “Q”, had some difficulty establishing their bona fides / credibility in the online collaboration forum they chose.
>
>On January 7th, 2018, all doubt was removed when Q arranged for POTUS to send a personal message via Twitter that was hiding in plain sight. If you are interested in the details your friend/family member will be happy to show you a graphical representation of how this occurred.
>
>Please trust what you are hearing from your friend/family member. Be skeptical of the mainstream media reporting on these new revelations. This is not a game.
I would post this off-site right now if only I had the missing half of this image, that shows how Potus revised the tweet as per Q.
POTUS original tweets 15 minutes apart
Q posts, including defcon [1]
POTUS then deletes said tweets
POTUS reposts said tweets (spelling corrected?) 1 minute apart
We have imagery showing 1 and 2. WE NEED IMAGERY SHOWING 4 AND 2.
Has he? Anyway, if they just recently launched, or will within the next few days, some big new shit they've been working on, that's public news - that seems like what Q's talking about to me, if that's the case. Just my instinct.
>Excellent clock graphic was provided upthread for the [1] marker (1 minute between Q post & POTUS tweet).
Refer me to it?
>I suggest re-reading this and the prior thread.
No time, sorry. Plus, my efforts, I feel, are better spent participating productively in current threads. You could augment my effectiveness, by summarizing those threads for me and others. For that maybe, maybe thread summarizations should become a thing? Might be useful. I often feel after participating throughout a thread, some useful posts get lost along with their content between the jump to the new thread. Problem is it's subjective. Position would require numerous intelligent anons with good discernment + decent writing ability.
You glorious bastard.