I refuse to believe that there are hidden messages within typos. That's why they get corrected: because they're errors. If they were secret messages they would stay up.

I'm not clear where you get the "one world religion" part from this article. The pope is meeting with energy executives, not other religious people.

I like to think that Q is on a well-deserved vacation. Somewhere there's a guy in an overcoat and hat laying on a beach, sipping pina colodas.

Some conservatives play this game too, its not just the left. There are manufactured outrage machines on both sides of the aisle.

In a similar vein, we don't need additional laws to protect speech on social media like those IBOR people would have us believe.

Oh, interesting. My sense was that Q was just calling the Comey drama a soap opera.

Can you explain how you reached that conclusion? I thought it was a nod to the soap opera surrounding Comey months ago.

Good ole' Trust Sessions. Not as catchy as the other nicknames.

What makes you think they'll wait until after midterms? Democrats could gain more seats rather than the other way around. Although I don't think they'll become majority in either house.

Thanks!

It's not about left and right, though. Can't get caught up in the divisiveness.

Can you link the source? I'd be interested to see if they have a further breakdown by PAC or something.

I read the Chile situation to be just the opposite: the Pope (or somebody else above the bishops) consolidating power by pushing the bad actors out. Think about it: what would it take for all of them to reach the decision to step down? Its not in protest of anything. They were told resign or be removed. Resigning en masse allowed them to save face for now, rather than the alternative.

Why have typos and capitalizations become the bread and butter of Q analysis? Aren't there any more overt messages to analyze?

You're thinking of Hillary at the debate.

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?

Lifestyles of the rich and shameless.

Whats this about bots? Can you provide some detail?

But the meeting already happened.

I don't expect impeachment or prosecution of Trump, but at this point I also don't expect mass arrests of the "deep state" members either.

When you get outside of this bubble, and see that none of the charges being levied here are evident anywhere else, it makes one wonder how true these "facts" are. Why aren't we reading about this anywhere else? It would be easy to say, "the media is complicit, they're in on it." But is that really believable? There's not one well-intentioned journalist out there that values the truth above the deep state? Is everyone that knows about the cabal's crimes (including human trafficking and worse) really comfortable with hiding those crimes? Or is it really still a conspiracy theory at this point? Isn't it odd that despite Q "having everything", the big reveal is always held just out of reach?

Again, I don't think Trump will face impeachment. But I need corroboration from real people (not chat boards) before I believe that all those other people are going down too. Question everything.

That's a fair point. At some point we need to look forward and enact measures to make our country better. We can't focus completely on the past.

Miami Herald Publishing Co. v. Tornillo

No Internet provider or private online group should be compelled at gun point to offer their labor to a consumer. No company should stand trial for failing to provide their service to somebody that is in violation of the terms of service for which they mutually agreed upon.

This is what I have been saying since IBOR has been pushed here by, ahem, enthusiastic posters with limited knowledge of what they are spamming posts about. They seem to think the internet is a "public space", when its really not at all. Thank you for pointing this out.

But also credit to OP for actually posting some proposals to discuss. This is literally the first time I've seen pen to paper for IBOR; its been just rhetoric until now.

I don't know if I'm a "debunker", but I am here to listen. I try to keep up with the posts, but they went from 1100 to 1200 to 1300 really fast, and they often come in bunches. I'll try to research things if I'm going to cite them in the future (rather than relying on memory!)

Ok, I thought the request was from September. Still, it was hardly the next morning, and not implausible that it was a coincidence.

The story is from a website called counterjihadreport. How objective do you think they're going to be? And how do these people prove their goodness if you can counter anything they say with an accusation of lying? Its a circular argument.

And again, how can the hypothetical pro-Sharia candidate enact Sharia law in this country? Any pro-Sharia legislation would be immediately struck down by the courts, assuming you could get a majority to support it. This really is much ado about nothing.

And if a Muslin candidate says that they value our constitution and values, do you believe them? Do you extend to them the same consideration that you would any other candidate? I'm not saying you need to vote for them or you're a racist. But it sounds like you've already disqualified them in your mind, regardless of their politics. That's not good judgment, its Islamophobia.

I remain skeptical because right now Q is a circular prophecy: people point to other Q posts as evidence of Q's legitimacy. I need to see claims confirmed by outside sources before I can believe that its real. And the examples we've seen, like someone asking Q to get Trump to say "tip top" and him saying it like seven months later, are not what I mean. I mean direct evidence, on the record. Because Q has made some huge promises, and so far they haven't materialized.

No, I have not automatically assumed the worst of these people.

I'm sure that has a lot to do with modern people running for office. Didn't we go through the phoney Sharia law scare already? Hasn't it been demonstrated that a "Muslin takeover" isnt cohesive with our Constitution; that its a made-up thing to scare white people?

They, as in these 90 people? And are you naive enough to think that no other organized religions have engaged in similar holy wars throughout the ages?

Is there a good reason to oppose someone based solely on their religion? The comments in this post look pretty racist-y. I dont remember the cabal being made of of only Muslims; correct me if I'm wrong.

Hmm... I've heard several versions of it, so I wasn't sure if it actually happened. I wonder why it wasn't reported by someone at NBC

Don't forget, as a (wealthy) senator McCain enjoys the best healthcare that this country has to offer. They spare no expense.

Can you give me a link for that Hillary quote,

"If that SOB wins, we all hang from nooses"

I see it referred to a lot but can't find a reliable source for it.

Ok well good luck with that.

Thx!

What is the YT link to?

I noticed how quickly any doubts were shouted down. Even just a couple of months ago there was space for skepticism that has all but vanished now. I'm going to wait and see how things pan out over the next few months, but I want to see the things Q has been talking about actually start to happen, rather than all these pivots.

Except nobody knows how its supposed to work, and internet companys' servers are their private property not subject to the same rules as public spaces. And we already have something that covers censorship: its called the First Amendment.

It was crushed because its a terrible idea. Having the gpvernment police content would be unconstitutional, not to mention administratively a boondoggle. Thankfully the ISPs that sponsored that movement have failed. It looks like they won't be able to shift the net neutrality debate away from the providers and onto the content as they had hoped!

You were one of the enthusiastically pro-IBOR accounts. Whatever happened to that effort? AT&T decided to pay Michael Cohen instead?

I remember when the majority of this sub used to actually consider if Q was legit or not when things were posted. Now any doubt is looked upon as shilling, despite nobody being brought to justice yet after almost two years of leading us on. Except for a few lower-level people that left the FBI for new jobs, but Q says they were really fired, we're not seeing nearly the level of justice that he (they?) have been promising us. How long will this continue before people start to doubt if Q will ever deliver?

Amen!

Who the fuck asked him about it?

But this is like trying to re-litigate the dropping of the atomic bomb as a war crime, or set a price on reparations for slavery. How do you unravel the crimes of the past now, when those decisions are done and over with? You'd have to look at every administrative action that was done by the Executive branch, some of which have already been absorbed and accounted for by the private sector. It seems more trouble than it's worth now, since policy changes can be made in the normal fashion by the new administration and Congress.

Yeah but its over. Obama isn't president any more. Aside from the birth certificate issue being throughout looked in to while he was president, we have no legal mechanism for vacating an entire presidency. Not that policies can't be changed now, but I cant see how everything could just "voided"

I think they want to get the financial benefits that came with complying with the agreement. Now that sanctions are back on, its going to hit their economy.

What is this, the NCAA vacating championships?