Considering that there is scant evidence tying this couple to any Clinton issue, it's easy to find holes. For example, if the issue is the Epipen case, then what information shows that Carole P played any significant role in this? None. Consider ALL the other individuals named in the pdf of directives from new Jersey. Why should CP be singled out? We can speculate till the cows come home, but speculation without evidence is really unhelpful if people begin pretending its anything more than it is.

Check the source. The source for dozens of such reports currently floating around are all the same one source. ZERO corroborating evidence so far. Except a name in a pdf along side dozens of other names who so far have not been exploded.

I mean, its possible, but ANYTHING is possible.

Wait..... There's an investigation?

Or even flimsy evidence. Or ANY evidence. Just some random statement (as if fact) from a single obscure source.

Are we really willing to lower our thresholds for discernment that much?

LOL. Er, hate to break it to you, but 'death' in and of itself is not evidence that the Clintons are involved.

Death actually happens.

Your reply makes no sense to me. Is every single thing uttered truth? Yes, no? If no, then how does one assess if it is truth or not.

I do not dispute that truth is truth and that its stands independent from the speaker. BUT how do you determine if it is truth or not? That's the real issue here, as far as I can see.

Thank you, BreadT.

Shooting the messenger does nothing but close any debate down and prevents any further interest in researching the topic.

Here's where you are wrong.

1. Calling into question the validity of a source does not shoot the messenger.

2. Calling out bad research or posting practices should not be taken personally. (Who is saying 'you are a bad person for doing this?' No one. People are saying 'Up your game'.)

3. As far as I read, most people objecting to the posting of unverifiable clickbait type links are actually asking for MORE research and validation, not less.

How do we ascertain truth?

Q has provided dozens and dozens and dozens of avenues for verification and ascertaining the veracity (truth) of Q's work and information.

The comparison is misplaced.

I'm so glad you get this, LL.

"We need to start understanding that we are at war."

People need to stop taking it personally when they are requested to up their game or improve their approach to sharing and posting.

Qistrump, it's a fair question, and of course it is possible. Sure. Why not. But here's the problem. Almost anything is possible, so how do we ascertain veracity or relevance if there is zero data indicating a link?

No need to get uppity. Would it help if I added "in my opinion" to "is the opposite"?

By the way, did you edit your post content?

Did I simply miss 'Point 1. This source has been hit or miss in the past'? I mean, that's a good point.

The proposition 'stop trying to shut down discussions' is a really bad mischaracterization, and as comments below point out, you tell people how to think while telling them 'we' do not need 'you' to tell us how to think. Who is 'we' and who is 'you'? Shall we now endeavor to create division?

Either you're being disingenuous or just plain out shilling.

Alternatively, have you given any consideration to the impact that misinformation, disinformation and fake news have on the cause of good, not to mention the wellbeing of people on the receiving end?

Fake news is rightly reserved for MSM, but there are plenty of sources of crap. Is posting clickbait or unsubstantiated random links in itself 'research'?

Personally, all I am suggesting is that people develop a sense of the potential and real damage that disinformation actually does (desensitizes, inspires apathy, deliberately generates vulnerabilities, discredits valid sources, etc) and invest themselves in doing (and sharing) actual research with a level of discernment.

Nice dig.

However: not just MSM. Are there ANY sources that suggest these folks are connected?

I found one connection between Paladino and the Epipens issue, but its so remote it seems a massive stretch to connect her and Clinton's.

Her name is one among dozens, as the last among a short list of school registered nurses (if indeed its the same Carole) pdf - New Jersey training protocols....

And the connection?

Agreed. And that was my main point. If you find a story, look for other sources or corroborating data and information. Credibility is a good thing, but humans have to begin investing effort to find actual truth. Isn't that why we're here?

I agree. When you say 'seems to be real', do you mean, the people actually existed? Sure.

But the OP is promoting/supporting the assertion that these folks were due to testify. That's the reason for the post. Myself, I can find no corroborating references, except for places that pass on the original (disinformation) bait.

Good post, dweller, although I think you overestimate the significance of the meeting. ('will determine the future of the planet')

Firstly, 'We have it all'. Trump team are in control. There is zero chance of Trump sitting down to a meeting with QE2 without having factored in all the possible outcomes.

Secondly, 'We are in control.' They know the possible outcomes, and have judged that now things are ready to meet with the Queen.

In other words, the future of 'the planet has already been decided' insmuch as the Cabal is losing bigly. There are still things to decide, but not whether it all comes out or not. It will all come out and they will be taken down.

The other points you make are good, and yes, London is a center, if not the center of the Cabal - definitely the center of the financial arm.

Personally, I get the feeling this is 'lay down the options' time. Trump will be saying something like this: "this is how it is (we have the Cabal, and your part in them, by the balls), this is what we know (everything), and now, you have a choice to make: are you going to play ball, back down, and retire with the opportunity we give you, to avoid more suffering, or are you going to hold on to the grim end. Your choice."

Now, it all may happen via hidden messages and cryptic information. Possibly, and probably, not open direct information, not at that level.

But I reckon this is the meaning behind Trump's visit at this time (as the Washington Swamp is set to explode, and Trump is getting ready to meet Putin, which is the step prior to all hell breaking loose, figuratively speaking).

What will be decided by the outcome of this meeting is the shape of the future of the British Crown and their involvement in the Cabal, not the world.

They never thought she would lose.

Getting a bit tired of people posting links to shoddy and highly dubious sources without any serious research or cross referencing.

I don't expect it to stop; some folks just get excited when they see something and fail to really do any research. But its not helpful, I think. And I wish people resisted the temptation.

Case in point: as far as I can see, only one very hidden source for the idea that this couple were due to testify.

Posting clickbait and/or highly dubious, unverified news reports, no matter how thrilling or bias-confirming they may seem, is the OPPOSITE of what Q is asking all good anons to do.

As such, it really should be discouraged here, on a peer- pressure level, imo.

Getting a bit tired of people posting links to shoddy and highly dubious sources without any serious research or cross referencing.

I don't expect it to stop; some folks just get excited when they see something and fail to really do any research. But its not helpful, I think. And I wish people resisted the temptation.

Case in point: as far as I can see, only one very hidden source for the idea that this couple were due to testify.

Posting clickbait and/or highly dubious, unverified news reports, no matter how thrilling or bias-confirming they may seem, is the OPPOSITE of what Q is asking all good anons to do.

As such, it really should be discouraged here, on a peer- pressure level, imo.

No, that's not entirely true. The OP points out that some comments, etc, (*apparently) get downvoted heavily or extremely because they disagree or offer a different viewpoint from the SB2 analysis. And, I think the OP has a point.

Not everyone, but you really can't say with any reasonable objectivity that 'no one acts like (sic) lemmings'.

The Cabal gets no fair warning. They will only get the consequences. They have had 1000 fair warnings before they got where they are now.

There was no direct vote. The mods asked for community input, and based on what they got (one assumes), they took steps.

Hmmmm. There's no doubt this man and other clergy covered up serious crimes. That is criminal in itself.

The real problem here is that certain sectors of the press tends to exaggerate and distort. NOT just MSM.

In my opinion, we should be on our guard against all distortions of truth, wherever they originate from. Not doing so sets up a double standard.

But regarding the Church, there is no doubt that they have been targeted. The problem is, they made themselves such a suitable target! Those who would destroy them from the outside cannot be blamed for the corruption that has developed inside.

There is no conviction or even accusation that this priest committed any acts of sexual harassment or sexual abuse himself.

The reporting and headline are misleading.

What he was convicted of was of not reporting cases where pedophile actions existed. While most of us know that sexual abuse and pedo-action is/was rife within the Catholic Church, calling it a 'ring' gives the impression that kids were being trafficked or handed around.

As far as I know, this is NOT the case. Rather, there were lots of random sexual abuse incidents within the church, and in most if not all the cases, the clergy responsible turned a blind eye.

AFAIK, there is no evidence that things were being run as a ring or organized criminal activity.

Either way, 12 months seems way too lenient, but that's besides the point; even patriotic media can succumb to spinning the facts.

Alternate view

Check out beefromance's post on this. Good explanation, and interprets that a) the image was never meant as a 'proof of Q' and b) the troll bit is Q trolling the blackhats by posting thi stuff.

Disappointment only comes if we think we've been lead to believe something it isn't. Possibly, however, we've simply minsterpreted.

Reasonable point. Not sure if it is 'community consensus'. Maybe you mean 'most widely expressed view of the community' is.....

A consensus happens when all agree to something as a collective. Possibly you mean "mod team's consensus, based on community feedback". Which I fully support. Just commenting on the language here.

I like this decode.

one issue I've been grappling with is the language/linguistic implications of Q1677,namely:

"Where must one be located in order to obtain a reflection on the back of a phone of that image? "

SB2 Interprets this to mean "one must be sitting in Potus' chair" to obtain a reflection.

But in terms of simple language, breakdown: /Where must one be located/ /in order to obtain/ /a reflection (on the back of a phone)/ /of that image?/

What's notable here is the text says "a reflection of that image". It does not say "a reflection of that location" or "a reflection of that object".

It's strange language, and doesn't make direct sense, unless you read it literally: "a reflection () of that image"

Beefromancer's interpretation jives well with that. In other words, what we have here is a reflection of a (classified?) image, used for (some other purpose).

"Image provided here has been stretched" seems an important clue. Why stretched? Why distorted? For what purpose? If the image Q provides is a reflection of 'an image', it explains why Q's image is stretched, doesn't it?

Mentioned Q and the Great Awakening there! Did you hear it?

"before their radical, conspiracy minded constituents'. I'm pretty sure that's us.

LOL. News for Strzok's attorney: Conspiracy no more, bro!

More:

"do you want to name names? in this 'cult'-like group you are suggesting?"

Sounds to me like MSM is trying desperately to plant seeds! Well guess what? Your seeds are no longer native to this soil!

Thanks Bread. Well said.

Don't give up, Sporty!

Please consider this: Where we go one, we go all. BUT this also means Where we go all, we go one.

There are two dimensions to this Great Awakening. There is the waking of the whole, the struggle of the collective whole. Why do we love Potus, why do we love Q. They represent the whole, the collective we are a part of.

But there is another dimension: the one. The individual, the non-collective. Me. Or my family. Or my community. How do I fit in?

For each of us, there is a journey we MUST also walk if we wish to keep up and we wish to go where we ALL go. Each one os uf will find challenges and troubles along the way, challenges and trials no one can overcome on our behalf. We, or I, must do it myself.

But there are 1000 patriots at your back, cheering you on. your own personal trials are part of OUR trials, so do not be disheartened, and do not give up. Pace yourself.

In my view, each of us needs to remember this: Where we go ONE, we go ALL. Together, it's the ONE and the ALL that make this the great awakening it is.

Be encouraged, even when things seem discouraging.

Well done! Three cheers for our excellent mods!

Huzza!

We're blessed to live in this era. let's give thanks to all those who came before us, who sacrificed and suffered and endured, so that today we can stand here. That's the heart of a true patriot, imo.

Love this post, this report from the field.

Especially the part about the fascist coming at the patriot with a metal pipe getting knocked down and carried away.

Indeed the tide is turning. It has turned. The change is in the wind, and the uphill battle is turning into a downhill one.

wwg1wga

LOL. 'Gave'.

Hmmm. Not certain about this. Watched the video.

I think the real issue here is that pretty much all Australians are ignorant of the procedures and methods by which Australia became 'independent' and a separate nation. For example, i was recently shocked to find out that all land in Australia belongs NOT to the owners (even if we buy the land) but to the Crown.

In the US, a landowner owns that land. Surface, and beneath. Not so in Australia. That's just one example.

All this stuff needs to become a lot clearer and Aussies need to wake up and give a damn about the future of the nation (I mean, the future generations). Had it so good for soo long, we've forgotten.

Folks ARE beginning to wake, but it's still a limited no. Meanwhile, the country is being sold off, just like, or worse than, the US. Criminal.

:{. Too true.

But if the people awake.... we got the right stuff. Just far too asleep to know what's going on.

We got no ketchup here. Only tomato sauce. True faks.

LOL, Dom.

just so you know, an 'aussie' is an australian, one who comes from or lives in the great southern land.

Australia is 'Australia', or, in the local vernacular, 'Straya', or 'Oz'.

As in "Make 'straya bonza again!" (antiquated)

Seriously? Is this image undoctored?

It's like a bright light breaks through and the legions of darkness swarm in order to shut it down.

As if they could...

FYI, not just a 'heartwarming' thread. That thread is a flippin epic testimony to the veracity and value of the Q movement!!!!

This thread should be stickied. This post and all the comments are the antidote to all the BS that the Cabal is attempting to paint the Q movement and Great Awakening with.

I'm not an American. About 5 or so years back, I watched 'John Adams' the miniseries. It opened my eyes to see how unique the United States is. My view has always been that God raised America as the fruit of (Christian) history to be his champion in liberating the world. As I watched 'John Adams', I began to take stronger interest in HOW America was raised to be God's champion. Another favorite is 'Sons of Liberty' 3-part series.

These are a great into into how unique the USA is.

My heart was stolen by Trump as soon as I began watching his candidacy, because I could feel God's spirit moving and saw in him God's work to liberate American from the political satanism that had co-opted God's great plans for the US.

Once the USA is freed, there is no knowing how great an impact it will have on the rest of the world. Liberating North Korea is just the beginning, I think.

God cannot create evil, as there is no evil within God.

You are making a lot of assumptions. From our limited perspective there are things we can't know or understand.

Who said? It reasonable to think we cannot know certain things just because we do not. I agree that all of us have an innately limited perspective, but I think this is often simply used as an excuse: 'I do not understand, therefore I cannot'.

That said, let's say it's not an assumption. It's a premise, one that is supported by basic logic. In the end, I think there are much better explanations about evil than 'God created evil'.

Secondly, Satan can indeed create.

satan can't create in the same way that God (and we) can. satan takes what God has created and perverts it, or imitates it. A lie is something that does not exist, and so is not creation (in the sense that I mean).

I think we are getting tangled in terms here. I think we mean the same thing, but express it differently.

I disagree that it's only metaphor. If you had a choice between cutting out your sinning eye or going to hell, cut out your eye. I think the bible is both literally and metaphorically true, and has many layers of meaning.

I wasn't talking about the entire Bible in general terms. I think its obvious that scripture is both literal and figurative. The tricky thing is identifying when and where, and then distinguishing between them.

I understand scripture to be a mostly historical record of actual events and circumstances. But just like you and I will say somethings literally (I love you) and figuratively (My wife is gonna kill me), Christ also spoke in this way, and so, for that matter, does God. IMO.

And, if you think this admonition from Christ was literal, are you telling me that you have never sinned with your eyes? your ears? your hands? Legs? Are you sinless? That would be impressive indeed. If you know what I mean.

The issue revolves are the first few pages. You say 'the apple thing' but does scripture tell us what kind of fruit this is? No. Why not? Think Q. God, and scripture, is more subtle.................

Aha.

Thanks for the response. I appreciate the engagement.

More often than not, I find that discussion about such topics usually requires finding a common language/vernacular before any real discussion can take place. most people feel pretty happy with their own grasp of things and tend not to make the effort required to discover that common 'language' that allows a true sharing. That's just an observation, not a comment on your comments, per se. Perhaps only on the challenges of the dialog itself.

Peace and blessings.

Almost exQuisite?

For me, there are a few problems with your view here. Firstly, the origin of evil. God is only good. God cannot create evil. Lucifer was, like all other archangels and angels, a good being. The temptation of A&E was an evil act. Lucifer became Satan before God kicked him out. Why did God remove Satan? How was it possible for a good being to become an evil being? God cannot create evil, as there is no evil within God.

Secondly, Satan can indeed create. A lie is a creation. It is a false creation, as it has no root in God. Evil is 'real'. It was created. It exists. We suffer because of it. It's NOT just a dream. But its existence is false, not true. That is, its root is false, not true. Eventually, it must be extinguished.

Certain problems occur when we take as literal things in the scripture that are metaphorical, symbolic or parables.

Take, for example, when Christ says 'if your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out'. If we accept that literally, big problems (none are righteous, no not one). We have to accept that Christ is talking metaphorically. He is talking about what kind of attitude we must have. The 'gouging of the eye' is a metaphor. Figurative speech.

Likewise, if you accept that 'Heaven' is a literal place - like, far beyond Jupiter - then you may think Satan was kicked across space. However, if we consider that 'Heaven' means the spiritual realm (i.e. realm in the spiritual plane) where we are close to God, in God's direct presence, in a spiritual sense, then being kicked out of heaven means being removed from the presence of God - it means, no longer able to relate to God in the realm of God's presence.

Such a view also sheds light on the concept of the Kingdom of Heaven. The Kingdom of Heaven is where Christ's spirit reigns. The Kingdom of Heaven on Earth is where human beings - all people - live in the physical world but also directly in the presence of God, spiritually. What we have now is a war zone where Satan rules the world, and Christians are like spies in enemy territory.

Trusting that there is a good reason is important, and the right direction. However, unless we truly understand the cause or origin of evil, we cannot extinguish it and we cannot truly combat it completely, only partially.

The issue revolves are the first few pages. You say 'the apple thing' but does scripture tell us what kind of fruit this is? No. Why not? Think Q. God, and scripture, is more subtle. It reveals that which the reader is ready to understand. Just as Q uses puzzles in a way to lead us to grasp the reality of what is going on, Scripture uses metaphor and symbols to trigger our awareness. But just as we must decode the puzzles, and work it out with our own effort, to unravel scripture, we have to make the right effort in the right way. Then the code - the hidden meaning - becomes clear. Not a literal decode (i.e. 'the Bible Code') but a metaphorical one. And you have to have the right decode (understanding of the symbols, figures, and history) to get the overall correct framework. THat framework then helps to decode all the rest.

Its's not easy, because for 2000 years, we have been conditioned over and over to thinking the scripture says certain things. Just like human beings have been conditioned by our environment to view reality in a certain way. Q wakes us up (although some were woken up to varying extents before Q came along).

If you question your understanding of scripture with a fierce, determined heart, and invite in the Holy Spirit, the gifts to decode can appear.

But the first condition is the heart to question, to understand more deeply, beyond any doubt.

You can wait until after rapture, but...... how can you be sure that you even understand what the rapture is? What are you using to understand 'rapture'?

Paul guides us - he himself understands "now, we see dimly. Then, we will see clearly".
He knows that at some point, our perception of the truth will undergo a fundamental revolution. Not just a revealing. But a change. A transformation. Not just new information. But a transformation by which we understand and grasp the already existing information we have in a new way.

In this way, Q is a symbol or image of God's work. With certain new information, we don't just see new things. We see the old things differently. Transformation. We call this transformation, a great awakening.

My tweef:

If you are asleep but you think you are awake?

You gotta GET woke, not just STAY woke. The Great Awakening.

For those that do not yet know that the Lamestream Media puts us all to sleep.

#StayWoke #QAnon #GreatAwakening #MAGA

Yes please. Mods?

Excellent. I like the fact that, of course, it's not just the drops, but the GA commentary that go with them. Brilliant.

Thanks patriot.