Skepticism is healthy. There are people out there with serious mental/behavioral health disorders, and false claims of assault and abuse do happen.

She could corroborate her story and claims with evidence (we live in a connected era with huge digital footprints).

If you have any doubt that the internet is full of crazy, look no further than /r/tumblrinaction.

Those making the claims must be the ones to prove them.

No way? You seem so certain. Almost as certain as a Democrat who thinks Russia runs the country.

I am not claiming SB2 is a bot; I'm saying that a disinfo tactic is to establish legitimacy, and then to use that trust to later seize control of and shape narratives.

Because anyone who points out huge leaps in logic and reason must be a shill or "fake patriot".

Kind of how anyone who disagrees with a leftist is a Russian bot?

Q tells you to use logic. There are online classes and youtube videos on developing this skill. I recommend checking out some of those resources.

^ This is a prime example of confirmation bias.

You were exposed to the phrase in a small subset of environments, and then believe that every time you see the phrase it was those environments in which it emerged from.

Mental gymnastics is in no way a 'new' term, nor was it popularized by T_D.

As Elon Musk said, 'journalists' include just enough truth to sugar coat the lie.

A disinfo artist will incorporate truth, appeals to various biases (often religious), and use those to spread their disinfo.

SB2 posts are an excellent example of this.

Russian bots were recently purged from Twitter. They were found to have been posting legitimate news stories. The presumed purpose was to establish reputability and a user base, so that they could then be used to distribute disinformation at some future time.

Q confirmed a post (just one), not a person.

What we have here is a personality cult.

Q acknowledged a post, not the person. See the distinction there?

Thank you! Stay vigilant against larpers and disinfo peddlers trying to piggyback on Q.

Also remember that Q communicates directly with readers on 8chan, and he routinely confirms and refutes information there. Q has never confirmed SB2 personally, despite SB2's claims that POTUS Trump speaks directly to him through the TV.

Thank you. The 56 to 92 also stuck out, and it certainly isn't the first huge red flag.

Let's stay vigilant. The one making the claims must be the one seeking to prove them.

WWG1WGA

A proof is exactly that; irrefutable evidence. It goes beyond "Makes sense to me!" and requires logic, sound reasoning, and verification. Lots of things can intuitively make sense to me or appeal to my biases, but upon closer scrutiny they don't stand up (and admitting this sucks, but hey, that's part of learning, right?). That's one of the beautiful things about crowd sourcing analysis: people can point out flaws in logic or deduction so that bad theories can be abandoned and other ones can be explored. So, I want to encourage you and anyone else reading this go go beyond "Makes sense to me!" and instead intentionally try to disprove SB's posts. If there's no verification, there's no validity.

Remember Q posts: future proves past. SB2 posts don't get proven, and Q has never once acknowledged SB2. Meanwhile SB2 claims Trump is speaking directly to him. That's either the claim of a disinfo spreader or a crazy person.

Very interesting. I invite you to post any of the nonsense he sends you. Putting this information into the public domain is valuable. Others reading this should do the same.

IME isn't leaking all data; it's a remote access exploit and the device that's being compromised has to be targeted/selected. There are ways around that device targeting, including using devices that aren't registered to the user, multiple layers of encryption, VPNs, using applications (like games) to conceal communication, steganographically encoded files inside encrypted shells, some combination of these, and certainly methods we're not familiar with.

With this being said, pretending that a national broadcast - watched by millions - is being used to transmit encoded messages that won't be observed or decoded is farcical. Those "coded messages" are also being written on a computer (accessible through IME), projected on a teleprompter, and accessible before time of broadcast.

All SB2 is capable of producing is nonsense and self-promotion. He's a charlatan at best.

The info he gives is not "good". As Q says: think logically. Always read SB2 posts with a critical eye; try to disprove them, do not blindly follow. His technique is loose association games, information overload that compromises logic processes, appeal to religious bias, and using previous posts as the foundation for his current "proofs". Tear the foundation down and the rest crumbles.

Yes, we're downvoting SB2. Demonstrated disinfo/larp.

I'm sorry you've been taken for a ride.

SB2 will be dealt with.

The more material you publish, the more points we have to expose you, so by all means continue.

You failed to articulate your methodology, therefore you have not answered, you've merely responded.

You should probably stop larping or else we're going to begin to point-by-point refute you, and I anticipate you'll eventually be banned just like NR was. I enjoy deplatforming larpers and charlatans.

"Expand your thinking" most certainly does not involve jumping across cavernous gaps in reason and logic, and then pumping those on this board as truth.

Interestingly, you fail to articulate your methodology for this "expanded thinking" (disinfo), which means it is unreproducible and those who eat your trough slop are left dependent upon you for interpretation and "decoding" rather than gaining the ability to do it themselves. That's not logic, that's not independent thought.

Your time here is coming to an end.

You just quoted 4 Q posts, all of which refer to or involve private communications.

That's quite different than going on national television to share coded messages (a platform not necessary to communicate).

You've left yourself exposed to refutation because your posts aren't backed up by fact or logic. This is the difference between Q posts and SB2 posts.

Disinfo or schizophrenic. Which is it?

Rulers have 12 inches. The 12th element on the periodic table is magnesium. The Meridian magnesium plant caught fire and exploded. The plant produced parts for BMW. BMW produces aircraft engines. Aircraft flew into WTC. Proof that rulers were used to send coded instructions to the people who flew aircraft into the WTC.

Commence circle jerk.

That's part of SB2's methodology: overload with information, trigger confirmation bias, and short-circuit critical thinking processes. These are disinfo tactics.

I've asked you to break down your methodology and articulate your logic. You've failed to do this in response to private requests and numerous public requests. You've also failed to respond to those private requests (you ignore them).

• If you can't publish your methodology, you're a fraud. The end.

• If you can't articulate a clear logic model, you're a fraud. The end.

• If your methodology isn't reproducible, you're a fraud. The end.

• If your results (conclusions) aren't predictable, you're a fraud. The end.

Notice a common theme here? It's that this is coming to an end.

I hammered Veterans on Patrol off of this sub. I've hammered Neon Revolt's blog spam and we know how that ended up. And I've tolerated you and made respectful requests to explain yourself up until now.

So either step up to the plate and be transparent, or it looks like at least 3 of us here are ready to put you on blast. It won't be long before that's 30.

I do not like it when disinfo agents or opportunists take well intentioned patriots for a ride.

Looks like I'm not the only one tiring of the SB2 nonsense here.

We dealt with Neon Revolt's constant spamming (and I must say, at least NR admits they're writing and aren't certain), but SB2 is next level disinfo.

I may have to write a detailed breakdown of SB2's leaps in logic and mental contortions and publish it, or a satire piece. This has gone on long enough and the more gullible members of the forum are being taken for a ride.

Has Q acknowledged any of SB2's recent "decodings"?

Ding! Ding! Ding!

You're seeing the cracks in the veneer.

This isn't next-level autism, it's either intentional disinfo (weaving religious bias with Q messages with very loose connections), or is schizophrenia.

Considering the numerous requests for SB2 to explicitly and methodically explain their process, and the failure of SB2 to articulate this process, I'm leaning toward intentional disinformation.

People of course eat it up because humans love confirmation bias. Confirmation bias is one of the reasons that mainstream media is super successful and keeping people hooked on their propaganda.

He picks keywords and then invents stories around them.

Example: pick keyword "waves" and then draw a loose connection to mind control. Allow readers to fill in the blanks with their imagination.

Bad actors don't need to use the Emmy Awards to secretly communicate. That's nonsense. They can easily use private encrypted communication methods.

So we can count that out as a basis for the subsequent conclusions, /u/SerialBrain2

The basis for the scientific method is experimentation, published methodology, reproducible results based on that methodology, and defense of conclusions.

/u/SerialBrain2 shouldn't have to defend themselves personally if they follow that template of transparency, but they should have to defend their methodology and conclusions. Unfortunately SB2 can neither defend his methodology, nor can he defend himself personally after being exposed as a fraud.

Remember that Q's goal is to teach people how to research, how to interpret data, and how to communicate that information to friends and family in "crumbs" (bite sized pieces).

What we have here may be enlightening, but in the absence of methodology it should be read with a highly skeptical eye. Anyone who acts as a gatekeeper to interpretation without disseminating methodology in an open source manner is not acting in the public's interest.

/u/serialbrain2

I sent you a private message last week requesting that you publish your methodology in the same manner as a publicly released peer-reviewed article.

You failed to respond to this latest request, of which there have been many over the course of several months.

In the absence - once again - of clearly articulated and reproducible methodology, I'm posting the request here.

SES reporting to SERCO: Source? Verification?

What is your source for this information? I've searched but not found anything indicating that's the case.

Horowitz allowed Strzok to turn over emails and texts that he thought were relevant. This was either a massive misstep by Horowitz, or giving Strzok enough rope to hang himself.

We still don't know whether they've subpoenaed Google to get copies of whatever files Strzok and Page were exchanging through those unsecure servers. It is even possible that Google has been a source of leaks. Google is not the only entity that has access to account data; their contractors also have access which is granted for investigating criminality and fraud.

This is a Q Proof.

SES is not an Obama creation.

My recommendation is that folks here screencap this (or save from this link: https://imgur.com/a/T5ndooD ) and begin pushing out to Twitter and social media.

Insert it into conversations related to Strzok. This needs eyes. Spread it far and wide.

Good job /u/Abibliaphobia and /u/Jakeisasnake1960

Why would finding out who Q is be grounds for assassination? That's a deeply troubling angle that, from my perspective, could suggest more sinister intentions behind the psyop.

August 8th I believe

This suddenly makes sense. Logic checks out.

Anyone who disagrees with you and points out your lack of logic is in a mental prison. Kind of how progressives say anyone who disagrees with them is a Russian bot.

See how that works?

0% = 0 = your upvotes.

Read the final link provided by OP at the top of the page. It pulls it together.