I got out of a "Brigade of Amphibians" channel recently when they started alluding to Lin Wood and Flynn as untrustworthy. To my eyes they'd make flimsy connections, ask questions, and provide no theory or substance.
Ex. "Flynn was in Haiti with Clinton. Now he's selling WWG1WGA shirts. Here's a picture of him with Alex Jones. ?? Interdasting kek"
I'm open-minded to most things nowadays, but I got sick of all the theories being put out with little substantiation. It seems many of them are just for "shock value" than anything else. And if/when you're wrong, you can conveniently fall back on not having all the info. If, for example, you directly/indirectly say that Flynn is a mole, Lin Wood is a grifter, and Pence is secretly a good guy. You gotta have something to back that up besides happenstance. If they're lurking here, sorry, but I call it like I see it.
I got out of a "Brigade of Amphibians" channel recently when they started alluding to Lin Wood and Flynn as untrustworthy. To my eyes they'd make flimsy connections, ask questions, and provide no theory or substance.
Ex. "Flynn was in Haiti with Clinton. Now he's selling WWG1WGA shirts. Here's a picture of him with Alex Jones. ?? Interdasting kek"
I'm open-minded to most things nowadays, but I got sick of all the theories being put out with little substantiation. It seems many of them are just for "shock value" than anything else. And if/when you're wrong, you can conveniently fall back on not having all the info. If, for example, you directly/indirectly say that Flynn is a mole, Lin Wood is a grifter, and Pence is secretly a good guy. You gotta have something to back that up besides happenstance. If they're lurking here, sorry, but I call it like I see it.