I don't, I'm just wondering at what point it's not just "theater" but the real thing.
I know the DS going after Trump now proves they view him as a threat -- however, that is a 101 for a communist coup -- they always go after (and execute if they can) the previous leadership.
So whether they view him as a legitimate threat or not, they were always going to do this to him if they got power -- because it's main purpose is not to stop him (in their minds, they wouldn't need to), but to instill the fear in us.
If you're screwed, you're screwed. No amount of pounding on a keyboard is going to change that.
Explain how the world is a better place if you're able to convince others to doubt as much as you doubt. Rhetorical, you can't.
Far more likely you're a consensus cracker shill who hates Trump and hates Q and your mission is to do your best to destroy support for both by spreading FUD.
There's 7 days that remain when all will be revealed and you're mocking patriots for what will hypothetically happen. That's right ... you're investing your precious time and effort to convince people of something that will be known in 7 days ...
There's been no "mocking" by me -- that assertion is the only ridiculous thing in this thread, and it's coming from you.
I'm not trying to "convince" any one of anything, I'm trying to make sense of what is happening, as up until Trump's speech yesterday, it still seemed reasonable (in my mind) that there was a plan. My questions here (not "convincing") are trying to ascertain if it's still possible or not. The original question stems from OP's assertion that Trump's speech yesterday should be dismissed as counter signal, as public statements are just for show and optics only, and I asked if that line of thinking also applies to the inauguration event itself? But maybe asking Qs are no longer allowed?
Whether we're screwed or saved, what's done is done now -- nothing we talk about now is going to change what happens in the next 7 days as you say.
You know what is counterproductive? Faulty logic. The only thing that matters is the truth, and that's what we're all trying to get to -- so stop using the logic that a Q here must be "rhetorical" and thus must be from a shill (both the observation and the conclusion are false).
are trying to ascertain if it's still possible or not.
No, you're not.
But maybe asking Qs are no longer allowed?
When your question is "When will you accept defeat? Will it be when my imaginary hypothetical happens?", the answer is shove it up your ass.
You know what is counterproductive? Faulty logic.
You devised a hypothetical outcome that is the complete antithesis of Q, then demanded we accept your outcome as real as we elaborate on how we'll feel when your antithesis happens.
Sounds like you have a buttload of hopium that Biden will be inaugurated.
You should pay Nancy a visit, she could use some of that good stuff.
Because if she thought Biden was about to be inaugurated, she wouldn't be trying to invoke the 25th.
That's plainly evident for all to see without having even heard of Q.
I don't, I'm just wondering at what point it's not just "theater" but the real thing.
I know the DS going after Trump now proves they view him as a threat -- however, that is a 101 for a communist coup -- they always go after (and execute if they can) the previous leadership.
So whether they view him as a legitimate threat or not, they were always going to do this to him if they got power -- because it's main purpose is not to stop him (in their minds, they wouldn't need to), but to instill the fear in us.
There's literally zero benefit to concernfagging.
If you're screwed, you're screwed. No amount of pounding on a keyboard is going to change that.
Explain how the world is a better place if you're able to convince others to doubt as much as you doubt. Rhetorical, you can't.
Far more likely you're a consensus cracker shill who hates Trump and hates Q and your mission is to do your best to destroy support for both by spreading FUD.
There's 7 days that remain when all will be revealed and you're mocking patriots for what will hypothetically happen. That's right ... you're investing your precious time and effort to convince people of something that will be known in 7 days ...
Completely ridiculous.
There's been no "mocking" by me -- that assertion is the only ridiculous thing in this thread, and it's coming from you.
I'm not trying to "convince" any one of anything, I'm trying to make sense of what is happening, as up until Trump's speech yesterday, it still seemed reasonable (in my mind) that there was a plan. My questions here (not "convincing") are trying to ascertain if it's still possible or not. The original question stems from OP's assertion that Trump's speech yesterday should be dismissed as counter signal, as public statements are just for show and optics only, and I asked if that line of thinking also applies to the inauguration event itself? But maybe asking Qs are no longer allowed?
Whether we're screwed or saved, what's done is done now -- nothing we talk about now is going to change what happens in the next 7 days as you say.
You know what is counterproductive? Faulty logic. The only thing that matters is the truth, and that's what we're all trying to get to -- so stop using the logic that a Q here must be "rhetorical" and thus must be from a shill (both the observation and the conclusion are false).
No, you're not.
When your question is "When will you accept defeat? Will it be when my imaginary hypothetical happens?", the answer is shove it up your ass.
You devised a hypothetical outcome that is the complete antithesis of Q, then demanded we accept your outcome as real as we elaborate on how we'll feel when your antithesis happens.
Fuck that, DOOMER.