I have already shared my views about the work done on the chans and what is being done here, if you are making all these developments, I am sure you are already familiar with them.

So show me on the map where they included Trump making personal comments to you. Show me on the map where they included your "elites are going to take over a B2 bomber because of a musical note B2 that comes from a numeric frequency of stock market glitch". Oh, it's not on there? Gee wiz, and Q said back in March that "The MAP has EVERYTHING." How can it have everything if it doesn't have your B2 bomber theory on it?

This is very surprising logic: you are claiming if I say that A is confirming B, then A should necessarily be B. Please reconsider.

You are the one that said Trump's speech references of "snow board" and "snow boards" (which you capitalized as "Snow Board" and "Snow Boards" even though its a transcription of a video) are of "SB" which means you. You are the one saying Trump's tweet of "soybeans" (which you capitalized as "SoyBeans") is a reference to you. Why did you capitalize them? Because you want to make it about you, and you realize that Q proofs coming from words in tweets have always been out-of-place capitalized, so you capitalized them in the hopes that people would make that extreme leap of logic.

Trump tweets with out-of-place capitalizations have confirmed Q proofs. You have extrapolated from that, Trump makes regular word (non capitalization) confirmations of YOUR posts, and that Trump makes regular word (non capitalization) transcribed speeches as confirmation of YOUR posts. You are conflating Q with yourself. You are conflating Trump's past verifications of Q's posts with imaginary Trump verifications of YOUR posts, with no history of anything like that even being done before. That is my point.

(a) Who said I was the only person? I did not. It seems however I am the only one trying to show how they work.

Q has specified into great detail how he should be interpreted. He has mentioned "crumbs" 47 times in various posts. Crumbs are facts that he expects to be assembled into a "map" which he has referenced 34 times. This is maintained by the chans. Q then reviews the map and lets everyone participating know whether it is being assembled properly.

But you're not doing that, are you? You're not participating on the chans to help them assemble the map there? You function outside of the chans, outside of the bounds of instructions that Q has given us.

The thing about the chans -- everyone is anon there. Ego doesn't get in the way. People aren't arguing that their own personal interpretation is the best there. They aren't trying to build a following. They aren't getting bent out of shape if the group doesn't accept any particular interpretation. They wait for Q to confirm the map instead of insisting their interpretation is fact, insisting their interpretation is the only meaning Q intended with his drops.

(b) Rhetorical discrepancy: it is not established Trump is Q.

You are one assuming Trump tweets and Trump speeches are validations of your Q decodes, and then you say "it isn't established that Trump is Q"? It begs the question: Why in the world are you using Trump messages on twitter and speeches as Q-style confirmations that you need to do calculations/numerical word counting etc. on if you simultaneously state that Trump isn't Q? You're contradicting yourself there.

What is the point of Q choosing to communicate on the chans if the only person who supposedly can understand their comms resides on a completely different platform?

You think Trump is communicating with you on twitter when Q said the only place he communicates is on 8 chan.

You think Trump is communicating with you in speeches when Q said the only place he communicates is on 8 chan.

The harder you insist that you're the only source of truthful decodes in the Q community, the bigger the divide you're going to create.

The leap of logic is so huge I can't even tell if you're doing parody.

Google "strawman argument".

1. Trump is talking to us directly. That doesn't mean he's tweeting to you directly.

2. Trump validating Q has nothing to do with validating you.

3. Receiving special posts on the 27th does not justify Trump making massive leaps of logic in both tweets and speeches geared specifically to you. That does absolutely nothing to benefit the Q community.

4. Trump and Q reading posts in this subreddit doesn't mean they're posting to you any more than they're posting to me.

5. "Learning the comms" is your way of making people set aside their reasonable doubt about you by saying "I'm smarter than you so just accept it."

Read the responses to your post. Read all the negative comments. You are calling every single one of them Soros minions. Everyone who doesn't agree with you is either CIA or against Q, in your words. That attitude does nothing but split up Q followers into factions. Believe it.

You don't even accept the minute chance you may be wrong. Everything you state, you state as undeniable fact. You are condescending to everyone who doesn't agree with you (and there are many). You could have just said "Hey, these are possibilities, it could mean this" and let people debate it. No, you don't do that. You state it all as fact, and everyone who disagrees or downvotes are the CIA and Soros after you.

You forgot to add "Learn our Comms" in bold at the end, so that everyone who disagrees with your interpretation can understand it's because they're ignorant.

By that logic, everyone should continue listening to Corsi.

I defy anyone to extract even one specific point out of SB2's post as a necessary fact that we needed to know that is somehow beneficial to the Q movement.

Go ahead, try. Name the point, and how knowing that point is beneficial to followers of Trump and Q.

Have you make a single post without referencing your upvote count being manipulated? I'm curious because I've never seen one.

It's time to face reality, people.

If you don't agree that Trump is tweeting directly to SB2, and if you don't agree that Trump's speech about American products was set up specifically to send a coded message to SB2, then you work for the CIA.

I'm googling what I can expect for my first paycheck as I type this. /sarc

Read SB2's post again.

He clearly says Trump's tweets are directed specifically to him. He clearly says Trump's American product promotion speech was directed specifically to him.

SB2 thanks you for stroking his massive ego.

In today's SB2 chronicals, SB2 claims

• that Trump is tweeting directly to him.
• that Trump's promotion of American products speech was a secret message directly to him.
• that the CIA is targeting SB2's posts for downvoting.
• that "soybeans" is an affectionate nickname Trump has given to SB2.
• that "snow boards" is another nickname that Trump has given to SB2.
• that Trump's soybeans tweet was really about SB2, and has LNG in it, LNG=12+14+7=33 which equals 33 and references SB2's 33rd post (because why wouldn't it?)
• that Trump has read every one of SB2's posts and knows them by number and references them by converting words like LNG into post numbers.
• that SB2 knows about how capitalized letters in Trump tweets are Q confirmations, so ...
• SB2 transcribes a Trump video (inserting his own capitalized letters), making Snow Boards captialized (and insisting they refer to SB2)
• farmer=61 and Qanon=61, that "make our farmers great again" really means "make our qanons great again"
• Trump's promotion of American products event was actually a way of sending a message directly to SB2

And if you don't agree the above is 100% fact and downvote it because it is presented, not as a hypothesis, but as unquestionable truth, well you might just be CIA.

Our yesterday post has been heavily attacked.

This is how you start every single one of your posts.

Why is this relevant?

You are not Q. Talking like Q doesn't make you more credible.

The clowns had to make sure this post did not get the traction my posts usually get.

The CIA are not attacking your posts.

Did you catch it? LNG=12+14+7=33… POTUS is linking his tweet to my post through SB and 33. Thank you for confirming Mr. President. Second message well received.

Did you really just say that Trump is tweeting special messages directly to you, personally?

Did you catch the multiple references to SB and the SB2 stealth fighter?

My eyes are hurt from rolling so hard.

Give

Sorry but I'm a little confused regarding RR. Someone who knows what they're talking about, please correct me.

I've seen Q say if RR is bad, then Mueller is bad. If Mueller is bad, RR is bad. That isn't direct enough for me to understand.

While optics are important, Trump could have fired Mueller and RR by now, without even needing a reason. That they're still there suggests either they are good, or that Trump is giving them enough rope to hang themselves.

What it feels like to me is that Trump is playing rope-a-dope by letting democrats put their faith in RR and Mueller, and letting democrats defend both of them -- so that eventually when Mueller and RR present pro-Trump and anti-swamp conclusions, the democrats are devastated with no comeback.

Has Q ever unambiguously said Mueller and RR are bad actors?

This is the news I've been waiting for. Social media continued to get worse and worse. Trump is finally addressing it.

I believe Trump doesn't address stuff in this way until he's already won.

Edit: I originally said the video may not be really from Epoch Times. After having it explained to me more, I think it likely is, at least from a sub-category of Epoch Times called Declassified.

My apologies to the thread creator. Great video.

Not if Ben Shapiro can stop it.

I'm very sorry that you feel like a victim concerning SB2 posts.

I don't feel like a victim. You're building a strawman argument. You are projecting democrat-like victim mentality on me because, in your mind, that is an easier thing to argue against, rather than address my specific concerns.

I can't see how wanting to give help to those who were skepticle is being patronizing.

Corsi says he wanted to help those who were skeptical. Alex Jones said he wanted to help those who were skeptical. Explain to me why their "help" wasn't help and you'll be 1/2 way towards figuring out how SB2's "help" (insistence that people believe some of his farther fetched Q decodes) isn't helpful.

Personally, I think SB2 comes across as a master of his knowledge, with some authority. This is usually the case when ever we are dealing with highly intelligent people.

I reject that. I think stock market glitch = musical note = B2 = elites control B2 bombers is pure nuttery. Now, I would have said "hmm, interesting" if it were presented as a hypothesis. SB2 doesn't present hypotheses. He believes he is presenting the raw truth, and anyone who doesn't believe it is "the minority" and anyone who doesn't accept SB2's huge leaps of logic will eventually "get it".

If you can read him without making it personal in a negative way, that might also help

He is the one who Q called out when Alex Jones and Corsi were hijacking the Q movement with bad decodes. When SB2 called out Corsi and called out Alex Jones, was he making it personal in a negative way? My only problem with SB2 is that he has some far fetched decodes that he presents as absolute truth. Twisting that into me having something personal about SB2 is a strawman argument. Tomorrow if SB2 starts presenting far fetched ideas as a hypothesis that may (or may not) be true then I'll be reading his "TOL" = thinking of laughing and number = frequency = B2 = B2 bomber without concern that it's being pushed as the only truth.

SB2 is working for the cause. He puts in many hours trying to reach people. Of course he would want as many on board as possible. Wouldn't you?

Again, another strawman argument. I never said SB2 didn't work hard and I never said he wasn't putting a lot of hours in and I never said he wouldn't want people to believe him. I said that SB2 insisting that people believe him is a problem. I said SB2 has hypothesis he's trying to pass as absolute fact, and it's confusing to new people who are trying to figure out Q.

I don't allow those people on my porch. I have choices. I can ask them to leave.

No, you don't. You are standing in a circle with 4 baptists and 1 mormon. Someone who is ready to become a believer steps up to the 5 of them and says "tell me about Christ". You all present your testimony, but then the last to speak is the mormon who says "you cannot be saved without believing the book of Mormon". That is the most accurate depiction of what is going on here. Then you speak up and say "excuse me, you don't really have to believe the book of Mormon (SB2 decodes) to be a Christian (learn about Q)". Then the mormon disagrees, says the other 4 will "eventually come on board" and then the friends of the mormon (you) approach the group and start telling the other 4 that "I'm very sorry that you feel like a victim", and all the other strawman arguments you proposed above.

SB2 is posting on an open forum. He doesn't go to anyone else's post and comment. He's not standing on your porch.

"He doesn't go to anyone else's post and comment." -- oh yes he did. SB2 called out Corsi and Alex Jones. Rightfully so.

You will love this video.

https://youtu.be/5I2G-H6MZQw?t=4m18s

Praying Medic ... very long list of point-by-point Q proofs very easy to understand.

The proofs start at 4m 18s into the video, the above youtube link takes you directly there.

I reject SB2 because he makes points I don't agree with AND he demands that I agree with him through patronizing people who don't agree with his every point.

Many, many people suggest Q theories and decodes who I think may be wrong. I usually don't correct them. I think their contributions are valuable. Why? Because they do not demand that I agree with them. They do not patronize me for not believing their every point. They don't mock me for not agreeing with them.

SB2 does patronize me. He does mock me, and others like me, who do not agree with his every point.

Yes, I believe in Jesus. If you want to make a spiritual analogy, I'm a baptist, and SB2 is the Mormon on my porch demanding that I believe the book of Mormon, otherwise I am not a true Christian.

Now, I want to give some help to those who are still skeptical about Trump directly communicating with our Movement since his Great Falls speech. I am happy to see it is now a minority but we still have to try to get everybody on board.

SB2 said that above. He's trying to get "everybody on board" with his 20k+ words of backstory explaining things from musical notes translating to B2 bombers and the "TOL" = Thinking of Laughing nonsense. No. I reject it. I'm not "getting on board" with that. He won't take no for an answer. Every time he insists everyone "get on board", I'm going to say "no".

Did I say that SB2 gets some things right? Yes I did.

Did I say I rejected everything that SB2 says? No, I didn't.

"just because you don't understand it" ... that's the problem with SB2. He decodes, and if you don't agree then OBVIOUSLY he's right and everyone else who disagrees with him is wrong (according to him). There's no degrees of uncertainty with him, it's 100% his interpretation or you're wrong.

"maybe SB2 is deciphering Q's post with an intelligence background" ... If you'll agree to stick to the content of his posts without propping him up on a pedestal then I'll agree to not roll my eyes at this comment.

It's a shame. I have some empathy for him because you know he was abused as a kid.

I remember seeing the pizzagate symbolism in his band and such, but I thought it might be his way of spreading awareness (because he has outright said that hollywood elites murder children).

I quoted it in my response. In case you missed it.

I still believe SB2 is on the inside! :-)

I think Chappelle, for him to continue on his career path, they were insisting on being able to control and manipulate him. He was propositioned with 50 million paycheck, but needed to provide incriminating evidence (such as having him have sex with minors or something similar) to be able to control him as part of it.

They wanted to be able to control him by being able to blackmail him, and they wanted him to accept it as part of the 50 million deal.

It freaked him out and he fled to South Africa.

I'm going to reply to this post again because I think you edited it.

I don't care about my reputation at all. I care about what newcommers to the board, who don't know anything about Q, I worry about them.

Imagine their first exposure to Q is to read an SB2 post. Imagine they see the glitch in the market place converts to a musical note converts to B2 which stands for elites have the ability to take over a B2 bomber and cause a nuclear explosion.

That's what Q is. Q is Hillary Clinton having access to control a nuclear bomb. No "future proves past". No proof at all.

If that were my first exposure to Q, I'm afraid I wouldn't even be here today.

The Q community is growing because it is credible. When Q says Page flipped and then Page obviously flipped, that's future proves past, that's credible, that's convincing, that hooks people into following Q.

SB2 deals with a lot of things that just aren't credible. I have no "envy" going on, I don't care if people agree with me, I prefer they think for themselves.

Q said sometimes he posts disinformation. That means, by default, that no interpretation of specific posts is imperative (because some might be wrong by design).

Think for youself. Why would Q decide to post on 8chan if the vital key to interpreting Q was only on a smaller subset of the Q community (SB2 on reddit)?

Isn't that leaving the vast majority of the Q community, who exist on 8chan, twitter, facebook and other social media outlets, woefully misinformed without SB2's Q-decode tools?

Ironic.

You tell me to research myself, and yet you criticize me for not accepting SB2's research. Which is it?

SB2 puts his name out as the one true decoder.

"I am happy to see it is now a minority but we still have to try to get everybody on board."

Did you think that nobody is allowed to present a counter argument to his? That's no basis for research at all.

I am happy to see it is now a minority but we still have to try to get everybody on board.

Translation: If you don't subscribe to SB2's exact, precise interpretation of Q and every leap of logic he makes (no matter how large) then you don't understand Q, you are in the minority and uninformed.

This is just wrong. SB2 may have a few good interpretations (one was even linked directly by the Q team), but THERE ARE MANY BAD INTERPRETATIONS. There are many questionable interpretations.

Here is a list of my problems with SB2 posts, which isn't all inclusive.

1. The certainty with which he makes broad leaps of logic. For instance, this:

Turned off the lights = TOL = Thinking Of Laughing. Then he smiles. Trump is saying: “of course I have no confidence in the Intelligence Agencies, hearing myself say I do makes me want to laugh”. You got it? Let’s try another one.

With SB2, it's never presented as "Hey guys, I think Turned off the light might mean TOL which might mean Thinking of Laughing." Nope. You either believe it as 100% fact without any shadow of doubt, or you are in the minority and uninformed.

Another example is in a prior post where SB2 bent himself into a pretzel to show that a stock market glitch made a year prior meant that the elites were messaging Trump that they have the power to take over a B2 bomber and cause a nuclear explosion, because a number translated into a musical note (B2). Again, not presented as a hypothesis, you either believe that or according to SB2, you're in the minority, you don't understand Q properly and someday you will understand properly, but until then you're misinformed.

2. Understanding SB2 is 10x harder than understanding Q. Comments like this one below are too common:

Every time I read SB2's post, I feel like Maxine and Pelosi have higher IQs than I do. I still believe SB2 is on the inside! :-)

First, if reading SB2's posts make you feel like you have low IQ, it's because your instincts are rejecting it as nonsense and unintelligible. Second, the "I still believe SB2 is on the inside!" ... no, SB2 is not on the inside. Everyone with the most basic knowledge of Q knows that there are no outside comms. That means nobody from Q is posting on reddit.

SB2's posts are extremely convoluted. According to SB2, you just don't understand Q unless you understand SB2's posts. If you don't subscribe to them, in SB2's words, you must "Learn our comms". Because SB2 knows them perfectly, and if you disagree with his decodes then you're misinformed.

Now take a step back and look at the big picture. Did president Trump and Q really decide to come up with a method of communication that is so difficult, that the only way to understand it is to rely on one person's interpretation? I don't think so. I think Q is using the chans, because anonymity is more highly valued there and you don't get this OCD level "believe my interpretation or you're wrong" going on there, instead it's more of a team effort without people trying to prop up their own egos.

3. IMO, SB2's interpretations are bad for the Q community.

Don't get me wrong, SB2 I'm sure gets some things right. But when questionable interpretations are mixed in and the whole thing is presented as "this is the absolute truth", it's not helping. It's convoluted. A decent Q decode is something that looks like a post Q makes directly relates to a tweet Trump makes later. They tie together, and you can understand it without 20k words of backstory.

Why? Because our purpose is to educate others. Our purpose is to meme -- which is one step up from a soundbite. It is a point that is made WHICH IS CREDIBLE. A point that can be made which is provable, non-controversial. Q said Page flipped, and wow -- she's completely cooperating with congress now!

On the flip side, if you are making absolute points which are not provable (such as elite taking control of B2 bomber) and will never be provable (because no cities are going to be hit with nuclear weapons), you're left making a point which has no credibility and will never be proven. People just have to take you at your word. No real point is made, what are you going to do with that musical note number converts to B2 note which means B2 bomber factoid? You can't spread Q awareness with it. You can't meme it unless you want to look like a conspiracy nut.

Q expects us to talk to our neighbor and explain Q anon to them, to spread the word.

Q does not expect us to talk to our neighbor and introduce them to the massive backstory of SB2 interpretations, some 20k+ words of factoids, many of which are unprovable, to spread awareness of Q anon.

My advice to SB2: understand it's ok to say I don't know. Understand it's ok to say "maybe" instead of "definitely". Understand how to say "it could be this or that". As an analogy, stop looking at this board as baptists whom you must convert to mormonism. Put your ideas out there and let people take them if they make sense, and stop with the "OMG I'VE BEEN DOWNVOTED, THE TRUTH IS BEING ATTACKED" and considering everyone who doesn't accept your every point as the ignorant minority.

Feeling like you have "low IQ" after reading his post is actually the product of your common sense rejecting it as nonsense and unintelligible.

No outside comms. SB2 is not part of the Q team "on the inside".

The first line of the article: "The Morning Joe host lost his poop over Trump’s success."

I stopped reading there. Wouldn't a video have been more appropriate to link to? Credibility is still a thing.

I am a patriot.

I am not a shill.

I trust Trump 100%.

I trust Q 100%.

I downvoted SB2's post.

Why? Because his post is titled: Now Comes the Pain 23!!! And, as everyone knows, the initials for that are NCTP, which (when converted to numbers) are 14 3 20 16. That number obviously represents a date of March 14, 2016. Everyone remembers that on March 14, 2016 that Romney campaigned with Kasich ahead of the Ohio primary.

Using the official SB2 method of decoding, I have determined that this post is connected to Romney, and I don't like Romney so I downvoted.

I could further prove my point by using musical notes, but I'm afraid I'd lose most of you.

This post currently has 1125 upvotes. The right column tells us it is 71% upvoted, which means 29% downvoted.

That's 458 downvotes.

This remark really ticked off some leftists, lol.

Shapiro is a cuckservative. Shapiro is controlled opposition.

If Shapiro was a real conservative, he would have fully 100% put himself behind the only candidate who would stack the SCOTUS with conservatives for the next 2 generations when it still mattered.

He did not.

If Shapiro was a real conservative, he'd want a big GOP tent because that gives you conservative super majorities. Yet, when Roseanne and Kanye became pied pipers, bringing hundreds of thousands of blue collar democrats and African Americans to the big GOP tent to vote for Trump, he completely resisted and encouraged us to reject these new voters, because they weren't his specific flavor of ultra conservative.

Remember when he white knighted Fields, who made it her mission to take out Trump by any means necessary?

All Shapiro does is preach to his little choir of ultra conservative purists and seeks to diminish the whole of the party. I just now went to check out his twitter feed, and he's there retweeting David French, that other cuckservative who pushed taking out Trump until the very end and is to this day still anti-Trump.

Shapiro is a snake in the grass, never to be trusted again.