Just like cockroaches, for every shill you see, there's thousands more you don't. But your mod team sees 'em. Some of these diseased shills are DIRECTLY demon-possessed. They want YOU and our patriotic cause back under their evil control. CONDITION ORANGE! Thank you, patriots! WWG1WGA!!!
(media.greatawakening.win)
🤢 These people are sick! 🤮
Sidebar = leniency, as long as sidebar is upheld, say whatever you like. 😎
Respectfully, no. Your thinking re the military is extremely myopic. Expand your thinking. Just as a lot of people don't realize that Federal Express is a bigger "airline" than United Airlines (they have more planes), if the you looked at the highest concentration of lawyers, the military could qualify as the biggest law firm in the country.
The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ, 64 Stat. 109, 10 U.S.C. §§ 801–946) is the foundation of military law in the United States, and, quite frankly, it can be said, the entire world.
That's the Q team. That's what you're seeing right now.
Nobody here is expecting "teh military" to flood the streets to save our precious Trump. As much as we love him, we are more concerned about the restoration of the rule of law—which, if you investigate the USM's mission, it is the final arbiter (albeit of last resort, which is where we are headed).
One thing I noticed very strongly about your participation here is that, despite health reasons and intelligent you clearly are it's the way you approached this, your interrogatory framework crosses the water, but never connects to the land. It doesn't take you anywhere. When presented with information that clearly, clearly disputes your interpretation of the facts at hand, you just double down and rephrase. That's sad, because the FUN is in watching this unfold.
This is about to be AMAZING.
I don’t deny that I do sometimes rephrase rather than directly answer a question, but my reasoning is usually to avoid being dragged into a conservation that I wasn’t already having.
The thing about Q is that there are really no smoking guns; it’s about networking Q posts to possible habbenings and deltas and shared quotes and such. Discussions about the validity of any one piece of evidence usually require me to have a conversation about ten other pieces of evidence that may support that piece, and now I have to evaluate those pieces too, which are supported by their own network of maybes.
And I’m usually being asked to do that on multiple fronts by multiple users about roughly the same topics, and almost everyone is looking to drag me to a different area of Q world to discuss.
I’m not complaining. I know what I signed up for and am happy to do my best. But it does mean that I try to have discussions one at a time and not let them get too far into the weeds.
And when someone asks me a question that I feel like I either already answered in the thread, or is a question in response to what I feel may be a misunderstanding of my point, I prefer to clarify what I was saying rather than let the misunderstanding go.
BUT, I am not sensitive to being criticized. If you feel like I’m unfairly dodging a question, call me the fuck out, and if I don’t know how to answer it, I’ll admit it.