451
posted ago by Factfiler ago by Factfiler +451 / -0

From Patel Patriot: I got so excited I forgot to even reference what I'm talking about. Trump's official spokeswoman, Liz Harrington, released a 12 page letter from Trump.

It's one big ass devolution-proof.

https://tinyurl.com/vtk38yba

Comments (152)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
6
JessWithTheMess 6 points ago +14 / -8

You want him banned... for not agreeing with you? God, help this forum. Not to mention Devolution isn’t even a Q prediction! You guys are acting like Q went away and left y’all in charge... He’s not a shill and people like you are what is pushing anons away from places like this. This is exactly what I’m talking about. Treating skeptics or even berating doomers like shills, and then when their predictions come true, you are quieter than a church mouse, explaining why this loss is actually a win in disguise.

2
I-AM-ANON 2 points ago +3 / -1

No, I want doomers who INSIST on pessimism to be banned, because they are not productive to discussion. When Trump literally signs off with NCSWIC and people get up in the thread with “myh expectations of drastic overnight change” and start detracting from the CLEAR Q proofs present in comms, it’s time to hit the ban. After all the HUNDREDS OF PROOFS you’ve seen if you are on the forum bitching it up about timetables, yes, it’s time to free up the comment feed for persons who are capable of ON TOPIC DISCUSSION.

1
JessWithTheMess 1 point ago +2 / -1

It’s skepticism about YOUR devolution theory, not a Q proof. This isn’t the first time Trump used NCSWIC, not to mention on publishing’s he made about Durham trial, audits, etc. that did not come into fruition, and the alleged “doomers” were more informative and PROVED accurate and productive, than you and others were about the situation.. So by your logic should the mods ban you? Of course not, because differing opinions matter, even those making blind, unrealistic, hopium-filled predictions/analysis that end up being a nothingburger and distraction. It’s aggravating because you criticize and critique these people, who end up being more correct and realistic about the circumstances were in and the elements at hand, and you wouldn’t bother to even mention or acknowledge when wrong in any instance, or even acknowledge (as we’ve all seen recently) when those “doomers” predictions ended up being right.

1
I-AM-ANON 1 point ago +2 / -1

Youre making a lot of inferences here that don’t apply: namely what is meant by “devolution” and B) the fact that “doomers were right, and have muh level headed down to earth predictions that aren’t false and hopium filled.”

Youre the one dismissing evidence and insisting your predictions were right. Literally doing an exact 180 of what youre saying.

Doomers IGNORE plentiful and continuing proofs. 5/25 jack resigned. Q525 says goodbye jack. Trump just put out a letter which the third paragraph starts “Seventeen” and ends NCSWIC.

The entire Q phenomenon is based on anons being able to string together crumbs and bake bread.

When you get in here and start shitting in the bread because you want a nice baget fucking hand delivered and won’t put in the cognitive effort to piece it together, youre fucking up the whole board and being a demoralizing bitch.

Doomers aren’t making “down to earth, PROVEN accurate predictions,” — what the fuck are you even talking about? Are you bitching about the Sussman trial? We’ve all established it was a sleight of hand play to get critical evidence introduced, which is consistent with Q. In this situations doomers were also PROVEN wrong.

You see, YOU are the one being willfully ignorant to the comms. Doomers repeatedly shit in breads all over the boards and employ a MO where

They IGNORE PROOFS They IGNORE COMMS they take MSM narratives and announcements at face value

They over all and consistently push PESSIMISM AND DEMORALIZATION.

The shit is fucking annoying and forum slides. It’s honesty bullshit to read a bunch of bitching, but it’s gotten to the point we have to bitch about the bitching.

Either way, this type of behavior isn’t “healthy skepticism” — it’s DEMORALIZATION

it should be a clear rule added to the side bar that continued offenses in this regard is grounds for removal from discussion