What's more how do they know they didn't arrest her on that date? I'm not suggesting clones or anything more strange, but it's not uncommon for people in major investigations to be brought into custody and then released, or interrogated, or tracked, etc.
Realistically, if they had arrested her, but weren't prepared to publicize the state of affairs, they'd do their best to make it look like she wasn't.
It's too ambiguous to utilize as a counter-proof. If anything, the greatest Q criticism is the ambiguity. Realistically, the only reason I put any salt to it is because there are so many instances in which future has proven past.
What's more how do they know they didn't arrest her on that date? I'm not suggesting clones or anything more strange, but it's not uncommon for people in major investigations to be brought into custody and then released, or interrogated, or tracked, etc.
Realistically, if they had arrested her, but weren't prepared to publicize the state of affairs, they'd do their best to make it look like she wasn't.
It's too ambiguous to utilize as a counter-proof. If anything, the greatest Q criticism is the ambiguity. Realistically, the only reason I put any salt to it is because there are so many instances in which future has proven past.
https://qanon.pub/#1
That's a quote. It's in a box. That's how quotes appear when you reply to a post and quote the original poster on most image boards.