In terms of the "false world" Q has described, Epstein and Maxwell have already been arrested for child sex trafficking. The charge of "sex trafficking of minors" implies they had "customers". Not one of these customers has been exposed. There are so many pictures of Epstein and Maxwell with many different famous people. It's not too much a "baseless conspiracy" to wonder if they perhaps were the customers.
In addition, even Wikipedia now agrees that "Epstein allegedly "lent" girls to powerful people to ingratiate himself with them and also to gain possible blackmail information".
I see no reason why Trump doesn't condemn Q worldview or the idea that he is saving them. It is nothing but a loss for him unless there is a conspiracy, and he is in good faith stopping them. As you say, people will lose faith in the "plan". However, they would also be against him, for many reasons, including not denouncing the plan and misleading them. Therefore, even if he is this terrible self-centered person that NPCs claim, the best thing for him to do would have been to denounce the whole worldview. It only makes sense for him not to, if the worldview is true.
I don't think there will be a true domestic terrorist attack as you and them are implying.
I do know that they are using this hypothetical threat of MAGA/Q attackers (again, hasn't happened once) to distract from their failures.
They are using it to support division, which they claimed and lied that Trump and we were doing.
They are using these hypothetical terror threats claims that free speech on the internet is bad.
They call both truth social and Elon buying Twitter "threats to democracy" (when they aren't calling them idiot weak failures, because apparently we are both super strong threats, and weak idiots stupid and uncaring)
By that logic, literally any conversation in any living room is a "threat to democracy", if it isn't being "fact checked"
It seems "threat to democracy" means questioning what they don't want questioned.
Their standard for fact checking figures they like is "well they didn't claim it was for what anyone with pattern recognition can obviously see, therefore its false.
They are making a "department of combatting misinformation" in the department of HOMELAND SECURITY with a leftist partition head, due to these hypothetical terror threats.
There's likely no chance these hypothetical right-wing attacks even happen since they haven't happened yet despite fearmongering from the fake news. Despite this, they have gotten half the population to believe all these terrible things about the other half of the population, and have gotten them to be unable to question the institutions or figures they are told not to question.
If God forbid an actual Q/Trump supporter right-wing terror attack did happen, half of the country would support literally any measure to "protect democracy", especially if questioning it makes you a "MAGA/Q sympathizer". If they support all this scapegoating and division, I'm scared for what the NPCs would support as a response in the event of an actual attack.
In terms of the "false world" Q has described, Epstein and Maxwell have already been arrested for child sex trafficking. The charge of "sex trafficking of minors" implies they had "customers". Not one of these customers has been exposed. There are so many pictures of Epstein and Maxwell with many different famous people. It's not too much a "baseless conspiracy" to wonder if they perhaps were the customers.
I would never contest that sex traffickers of minors exist. We knew that long before Q. I don't even doubt that Cabals exist.
I just doubt that the chan poster Q has anything to do with fighting sex trafficking, or that Trump is being deliberately targeted by this Cabal as some sort of Warrior for Good, or anything like that.
The world is a scary place. It'd be nice to believe that all evil roads lead to one big bad Cabal responsible for everything, but I think the world is far more complicated than that, and that Q theories VASTLY oversimplify the world's problems.
I see no reason why Trump doesn't condemn Q worldview or the idea that he is saving them. It is nothing but a loss for him unless there is a conspiracy, and he is in good faith stopping them. As you say, people will lose faith in the "plan". However, they would also be against him, for many reasons, including not denouncing the plan and misleading them. Therefore, even if he is this terrible self-centered person that NPCs claim, the best thing for him to do would have been to denounce the whole worldview. It only makes sense for him not to, if the worldview is true.
I'm going to be honest: I would bet actual money I could beat Donald Trump in a Q trivia contest.
I don't think Trump really knows or wants to know what "QAnon" is about. Q people are his supporters. That's what he knows. And Trump has always been extremely hesitant to call out his supporters for any reason.
I don't think he has any idea what you guys think "the Plan" is, or how important it is to you that it succeed.
I think he knows you want him back in office, and that you believe that he won 2020, and so he'll continue to talk about it and use that political power as long as he has it. And maybe he'll run in 2024.
But I have never seen any evidence that Q is remotely important to him, and while you will likely see that as Sun Tzu optics, I see it as Trump simply saying what he needs to say to keep his supporters voting for him.
Which includes not deliberately antagonizing the people who see him as a strategic genius who fights pedophiles.
I don't think there will be a true domestic terrorist attack as you and them are implying.
I didn't intend to imply this.
What I do know is that this forum recently had a thread fantasizing about ways to graphically torture politicians while at the same time insisting that any violence committed by alleged Q-aligned people must be a false flag.
You guys believe in a war. A real war with real casualties against real people you can name for alleged crimes that would not only be traitorous, but monstrous.
And if Q isn't fighting these monsters, you still believe it's paranoid for normies to worry about what the "digital soldiers" will consider their marching orders to be in absence of any real soldiers? That's something you can't understand?
Okay, before we go any further on this video, I want to show you who the person doing this analysis is. Per the video, this came from the Twitter account @Euniqueje. Who's that?
Elchemyst - frequency specialist - blood researcher - inventor + do-er of cool + noble shizzle...
I... don't know what an elchemyst is. Let's look it up.
And I found nothing. It appears to be a trendy spelling for "alchemist."
I've looked into the name associated with the Twitter account. I can't find anything. No credentials. No research. No work history in the field. No associates degree in biology from an online community college.
Nothing.
As far as I can tell, this woman is nobody. I have no way to prove she has any ability to talk as an expert on blood whatsoever.
I can't even prove she has access to vaccinated and unvaccinated blood. I can't even prove she took her own videos, and isn't just talking over something she pulled from a database somewhere. I can't prove a single thing about this woman or this video.
All I know is that she's someone on Twitter who makes no effort to establish herself as an expert and has no traceable credentials. But talks like she's an expert anyway.
Like much of the internet, I suppose.
So you tell me. How can I establish that this woman's alleged analysis of blood pathology is any more credible than one done by a gas station attendant? How can I even prove this video is comparing blood when the woman can't even prove she knows ANYTHING about this field?
Well, I have no idea. I'm not a doctor. I've seen clots, and that is definitely a clot, but that's all I can say with certainty.
I've run across this video before. The man who filmed it, Richard Hirschman, is NOT a doctor. He's an embalmer. He's not a medical expert and can't diagnose anything. He is not a pathologist who establishes cause of death.
His only job is to prepare bodies for funerals.
What he can say with confidence is that he is pulling out an unusual number of clots from the bodies he works on.
What he CANNOT say is that these clots happened because of the vaccine. He has no way to know or prove that.
In fact, since the vaccination status of dead bodies is not really useful info for an embalmer, I'm not entirely certain how Hirschman would know or prove the vaccination status of any of these bodies.
So why all the new clots?
Well, probably because COVID-19 is well-known to cause microdamage in vessels, which can lead to clotting problems. Blood clots are a known and established side-effect of COVID-19 infection.
So with videos like this, what can I say is probably true?
Richard Hirschman is probably an embalmer, based on outside sources.
Hirschman probably did pull out that clot from a real dead body.
Hirschman probably is seeing more clots than he's used to seeing in usual places (although I'd like to see hard data that "over half" of his bodies are showing these clots).
What do I have to assume here to reach your conclusion?
That the body he's working on is vaccinated. There is no proof of this, and it's literally the only detail that supports his argument.
If the body was vaccinated, that the person had never gotten COVID-19 (which would explain clotting damage), either before or despite the vaccine.
That unvaccinated bodies are not showing the same signs of clots (the research I've seen suggests otherwise).
That Hirschman actually does even know the vaccination status of any of the bodies he's working on (again, I'm not sure why, and he'd need to document this for it to be credible).
So if I make absolutely no assumptions, what does this video actually prove?
That an embalmer pulled a long clot out of a body, and he thought it was weird.
That's all I can really get from this, because that's all the video directly provides. Anything else, including the vaccination status of the body, is just an assumption.
In terms of the "false world" Q has described, Epstein and Maxwell have already been arrested for child sex trafficking. The charge of "sex trafficking of minors" implies they had "customers". Not one of these customers has been exposed. There are so many pictures of Epstein and Maxwell with many different famous people. It's not too much a "baseless conspiracy" to wonder if they perhaps were the customers.
In addition, even Wikipedia now agrees that "Epstein allegedly "lent" girls to powerful people to ingratiate himself with them and also to gain possible blackmail information".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Epstein
This would be UNBELIEVABLE to nearly anyone just 10 years ago.
Anyone except conspiracy theorists and this dude. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8XCTnFsIuM
I see no reason why Trump doesn't condemn Q worldview or the idea that he is saving them. It is nothing but a loss for him unless there is a conspiracy, and he is in good faith stopping them. As you say, people will lose faith in the "plan". However, they would also be against him, for many reasons, including not denouncing the plan and misleading them. Therefore, even if he is this terrible self-centered person that NPCs claim, the best thing for him to do would have been to denounce the whole worldview. It only makes sense for him not to, if the worldview is true.
I don't think there will be a true domestic terrorist attack as you and them are implying.
I do know that they are using this hypothetical threat of MAGA/Q attackers (again, hasn't happened once) to distract from their failures.
They are using it to support division, which they claimed and lied that Trump and we were doing.
They are using these hypothetical terror threats claims that free speech on the internet is bad.
They call both truth social and Elon buying Twitter "threats to democracy" (when they aren't calling them idiot weak failures, because apparently we are both super strong threats, and weak idiots stupid and uncaring)
By that logic, literally any conversation in any living room is a "threat to democracy", if it isn't being "fact checked"
It seems "threat to democracy" means questioning what they don't want questioned.
Their standard for fact checking figures they like is "well they didn't claim it was for what anyone with pattern recognition can obviously see, therefore its false.
They are making a "department of combatting misinformation" in the department of HOMELAND SECURITY with a leftist partition head, due to these hypothetical terror threats.
There's likely no chance these hypothetical right-wing attacks even happen since they haven't happened yet despite fearmongering from the fake news. Despite this, they have gotten half the population to believe all these terrible things about the other half of the population, and have gotten them to be unable to question the institutions or figures they are told not to question.
If God forbid an actual Q/Trump supporter right-wing terror attack did happen, half of the country would support literally any measure to "protect democracy", especially if questioning it makes you a "MAGA/Q sympathizer". If they support all this scapegoating and division, I'm scared for what the NPCs would support as a response in the event of an actual attack.
I would never contest that sex traffickers of minors exist. We knew that long before Q. I don't even doubt that Cabals exist.
I just doubt that the chan poster Q has anything to do with fighting sex trafficking, or that Trump is being deliberately targeted by this Cabal as some sort of Warrior for Good, or anything like that.
The world is a scary place. It'd be nice to believe that all evil roads lead to one big bad Cabal responsible for everything, but I think the world is far more complicated than that, and that Q theories VASTLY oversimplify the world's problems.
I'm going to be honest: I would bet actual money I could beat Donald Trump in a Q trivia contest.
I don't think Trump really knows or wants to know what "QAnon" is about. Q people are his supporters. That's what he knows. And Trump has always been extremely hesitant to call out his supporters for any reason.
I don't think he has any idea what you guys think "the Plan" is, or how important it is to you that it succeed.
I think he knows you want him back in office, and that you believe that he won 2020, and so he'll continue to talk about it and use that political power as long as he has it. And maybe he'll run in 2024.
But I have never seen any evidence that Q is remotely important to him, and while you will likely see that as Sun Tzu optics, I see it as Trump simply saying what he needs to say to keep his supporters voting for him.
Which includes not deliberately antagonizing the people who see him as a strategic genius who fights pedophiles.
I didn't intend to imply this.
What I do know is that this forum recently had a thread fantasizing about ways to graphically torture politicians while at the same time insisting that any violence committed by alleged Q-aligned people must be a false flag.
You guys believe in a war. A real war with real casualties against real people you can name for alleged crimes that would not only be traitorous, but monstrous.
And if Q isn't fighting these monsters, you still believe it's paranoid for normies to worry about what the "digital soldiers" will consider their marching orders to be in absence of any real soldiers? That's something you can't understand?
Okay, before we go any further on this video, I want to show you who the person doing this analysis is. Per the video, this came from the Twitter account @Euniqueje. Who's that?
https://twitter.com/euniqueje?lang=en
I... don't know what an elchemyst is. Let's look it up.
And I found nothing. It appears to be a trendy spelling for "alchemist."
I've looked into the name associated with the Twitter account. I can't find anything. No credentials. No research. No work history in the field. No associates degree in biology from an online community college.
Nothing.
As far as I can tell, this woman is nobody. I have no way to prove she has any ability to talk as an expert on blood whatsoever.
I can't even prove she has access to vaccinated and unvaccinated blood. I can't even prove she took her own videos, and isn't just talking over something she pulled from a database somewhere. I can't prove a single thing about this woman or this video.
All I know is that she's someone on Twitter who makes no effort to establish herself as an expert and has no traceable credentials. But talks like she's an expert anyway.
Like much of the internet, I suppose.
So you tell me. How can I establish that this woman's alleged analysis of blood pathology is any more credible than one done by a gas station attendant? How can I even prove this video is comparing blood when the woman can't even prove she knows ANYTHING about this field?
Well, I have no idea. I'm not a doctor. I've seen clots, and that is definitely a clot, but that's all I can say with certainty.
I've run across this video before. The man who filmed it, Richard Hirschman, is NOT a doctor. He's an embalmer. He's not a medical expert and can't diagnose anything. He is not a pathologist who establishes cause of death.
His only job is to prepare bodies for funerals.
What he can say with confidence is that he is pulling out an unusual number of clots from the bodies he works on.
What he CANNOT say is that these clots happened because of the vaccine. He has no way to know or prove that.
In fact, since the vaccination status of dead bodies is not really useful info for an embalmer, I'm not entirely certain how Hirschman would know or prove the vaccination status of any of these bodies.
So why all the new clots?
Well, probably because COVID-19 is well-known to cause microdamage in vessels, which can lead to clotting problems. Blood clots are a known and established side-effect of COVID-19 infection.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/art.42094
So with videos like this, what can I say is probably true?
Richard Hirschman is probably an embalmer, based on outside sources.
Hirschman probably did pull out that clot from a real dead body.
Hirschman probably is seeing more clots than he's used to seeing in usual places (although I'd like to see hard data that "over half" of his bodies are showing these clots).
What do I have to assume here to reach your conclusion?
That the body he's working on is vaccinated. There is no proof of this, and it's literally the only detail that supports his argument.
If the body was vaccinated, that the person had never gotten COVID-19 (which would explain clotting damage), either before or despite the vaccine.
That unvaccinated bodies are not showing the same signs of clots (the research I've seen suggests otherwise).
That Hirschman actually does even know the vaccination status of any of the bodies he's working on (again, I'm not sure why, and he'd need to document this for it to be credible).
So if I make absolutely no assumptions, what does this video actually prove?
That an embalmer pulled a long clot out of a body, and he thought it was weird.
That's all I can really get from this, because that's all the video directly provides. Anything else, including the vaccination status of the body, is just an assumption.