Dan Scavino’s “Baby fist” could also be a warning and confirmation that Jim Watkins, known larper “Babyfist” (aka Laughing_MAN), Steinbart, and other BOs on 8kun spoofed Q’s tripcode and started the fake Q posts.
A couple of weeks ago, Watkins said he was interrogated for 6 hours by J6 committee prosecutors over a zoom call. It was in a Rolling Stone article, so I dunno if it's true or not.
Of course they are going to say pizzagate was debunked, but if they have an opportunity to say "Evil QAnon Nazi Scum Jim Watkins Interrogated by Peaceful Prosecutors Over the Meticulously Planned Violent Insurrection" they are going to take it.
I’m stoked if it’s real because as the gipper said “trust but verify”… we can only watch and see how things shake out. At this point I kind of think it’s been a positive cos the drops have been a shot in the arm boost to the energy of the movement but whether it’s legit time will tell
There are many evidence filled theories on 8ku n as to why it is and isnt Q. I would give some time to shake out a little more. Rome wasnt built in a day as they say.
I have no patience for doomfaggotry. And at this point even if it is reasonable, this is the time to nut up or shut up. Whining on the internet is wasteful.
Since you can't name it. I'll start guessing. Scavino posting a baby fist first. Q posting after him, 12 minutes later.
Not a "coincidence" in the Q coincidence set of standards. If Q would have posted first then Scavino a minute or 2 later, yes, coincidence would have been good there.
OP is establishing a series which depends on Q being Q and discussion has veered into how recent Q posts may not be Q. Jim Watkins from 8kun has come under attack for some reason.
No no no. Please delve into this. There are legit reasons to be skeptical right now. I'm not saying that the new Q posts are not legitimate, but we cannot consider them legitimate yet if you dive into the evidence.
We must be cautious and use healthy skepticism. Again, look into the evidence that anons are linking to on GAW. There are good reasons for people not yet being satisfied that this is the legit Q.
This. 8nwatched Q move from 4chan to 8chan to 8kun, and each time it was a big deal to make sure the trip codes were legit. Once there was a suspected infiltration and Q went dark and then came back up on 8kun with the conirmed trip code.
And then also came against the Christians for coercing her into being against Planned Parenthood. Norma McCorvey was an attention seeing con-artist who sold out either side when it was convenient for her.
You say that like it requires belief. It does not. Q simply is or isn't(lol) and more specifically these comms it's either Q is back or isn't, but all anon research is pointing to it is... but it doesn't hinge on belief. Never did. It always has been.
Right? I mean come on people, surely your life doesn't depend on this being Q or not. If it is great, exciting. If not, life goes on. I'm going to leave it to the experts on 8kun for the consensus either way.
The only thing I would say to that is that there are many pedes around here, like me, who didn't find GAW until after Q stopped posting. So to have it start up again and to drop more crumbs about what's going on behind the scenes is exciting. You are right, life goes on either way but in my world if it's Q, there's just a little more pep in my step...especially as we get closer to the midterms that the libs are poised to steal once again.
I'm a noob when it comes to Q and confirming comms, but why would Dan Scavino do a "negative" confirmation as opposed to just not confirming? Seems like you'd either confirm or not confirm.
Who was "Jane Roe"? is correct, because he was asking who was Jane Roe.
If it had been a conversation in a book for example: Q paced pondering the events of the day, then time stood still as he asked his assistant the question on everyone's mind... "Who was Jane Roe?" Q ran to the computer to search Jane Roe, her actual name is Norma McCorvey.
At least that's how I was taught.
The quotation marks are to show that "Jane Roe" is an alias, not in a book where he was speaking her name in a conversation.
It's alright I was an English minor in college, grammar is not my strong suit, I tend to use too many commas, or make run-on sentences, lol. I used to read a lot when my eyes worked better, you couldn't get me out of books.
Two errors on Q post.
"Jane Roe"? should be "Jane Roe?"
Estabilishing comms instead of establishing comms. spelled incorrectly. Looks like stupid grammer and spelling errors or is there a message in it. Spelling counts no?
I’ll give you “Jane Roe”?, but, like you mentioned, could be an intentional message in that one.
But my dude, Establishing is spelled correctly in the post.
Dan Scavino’s “Baby fist” could also be a warning and confirmation that Jim Watkins, known larper “Babyfist” (aka Laughing_MAN), Steinbart, and other BOs on 8kun spoofed Q’s tripcode and started the fake Q posts.
https://imgur.io/a/J22HBR7
A couple of weeks ago, Watkins said he was interrogated for 6 hours by J6 committee prosecutors over a zoom call. It was in a Rolling Stone article, so I dunno if it's true or not.
Edit: archive of the article,
https://archive.ph/pDgMd
Rolling Stone who said Pizzagate was debunked?
and who said there were so many overdoses of ivermectin in Oklahoma that gunshot victims couldn't be seen....
SauceFag Here.
That's been debunked. No one wears coats in line at a hospital in August in Oklahoma.
https://www.westernjournal.com/ivermectin-hit-piece-debunked-hospital-steps-forward-truth/
Of course they are going to say pizzagate was debunked, but if they have an opportunity to say "Evil QAnon Nazi Scum Jim Watkins Interrogated by Peaceful Prosecutors Over the Meticulously Planned Violent Insurrection" they are going to take it.
Damn. Bubble bursted a bit. But this looks like the truth to me
Yeah ok, so Q chose Jim's board to drop the most significant intelligence op in modern history and left him high and dry with no protection. Got it
yw *frenhugs
Give it a good 48hr to a week or so. I am sure much will pan out in time!
I’m stoked if it’s real because as the gipper said “trust but verify”… we can only watch and see how things shake out. At this point I kind of think it’s been a positive cos the drops have been a shot in the arm boost to the energy of the movement but whether it’s legit time will tell
He posted the air Q. Your theory therefore makes no sense.
There are many evidence filled theories on 8ku n as to why it is and isnt Q. I would give some time to shake out a little more. Rome wasnt built in a day as they say.
Dan Scavino would only post an air Q if the latest posts were legit.
Wasn’t this press conference held in Mendon, Illinois? Which is part of the Quincy, Illinois, area, that goes by Qtown?
@ArchiveAnon also seems to be weary of it.
https://truthsocial.com/users/ArchiveAnon/statuses/108543179265488180
Legit.
He posted the air Q. Cry harder doomers
He posted that at 23:02. Q post 2302 mentions Trump rallies. Significant? I have no idea.
Some. Just add it to the massive "coincidence" pile.
How many coincidences are we up to, Doomerfaggots?
Just a couple more!
😂🐸
spicy anon lately. 😁
I have no patience for doomfaggotry. And at this point even if it is reasonable, this is the time to nut up or shut up. Whining on the internet is wasteful.
Fuckin A bro.
Which coincidence are you referring to?
...the one in this post...
Since you can't name it. I'll start guessing. Scavino posting a baby fist first. Q posting after him, 12 minutes later.
Not a "coincidence" in the Q coincidence set of standards. If Q would have posted first then Scavino a minute or 2 later, yes, coincidence would have been good there.
You're too young to understand. 😉
☹️
😂
thats a true Kek
OP is establishing a series which depends on Q being Q and discussion has veered into how recent Q posts may not be Q. Jim Watkins from 8kun has come under attack for some reason.
Q is back and shills are trying to undermine Q.
You should always be prepared and be skeptical. That isn't shilling. That is what the great awakening was supposed to teach, not unquestioning faith.
Homey Q taught us to ask questions. We dont want to be as blind as those that believe the nightly news.
No no no. Please delve into this. There are legit reasons to be skeptical right now. I'm not saying that the new Q posts are not legitimate, but we cannot consider them legitimate yet if you dive into the evidence.
We must be cautious and use healthy skepticism. Again, look into the evidence that anons are linking to on GAW. There are good reasons for people not yet being satisfied that this is the legit Q.
If we can't trust trip codes, can we trust ANY Q posts? This discussion is a dead end.
This. 8nwatched Q move from 4chan to 8chan to 8kun, and each time it was a big deal to make sure the trip codes were legit. Once there was a suspected infiltration and Q went dark and then came back up on 8kun with the conirmed trip code.
YES through a Q TRUMP DELTA.
"They're doing it in spades and they should be fired immediately! (furious look to the side)"
8kun admin > identified by ♠️ a spade on posts.
The ONLY two options for what is happening are: 1) it's really Q, or 2) it's an 8kun admin.
Jan Roe. Was Norma McCorvey.
She was put up to the lie
She became a devout Christian and exposed the ROE lie for all time
God bless her soul In heaven
And then also came against the Christians for coercing her into being against Planned Parenthood. Norma McCorvey was an attention seeing con-artist who sold out either side when it was convenient for her.
Fucking amazing that Q is posting again!
So you’re on the “this is really Q” train, then?
If that's how you want to put it...Yes, I am...
You say that like it requires belief. It does not. Q simply is or isn't(lol) and more specifically these comms it's either Q is back or isn't, but all anon research is pointing to it is... but it doesn't hinge on belief. Never did. It always has been.
Right? I mean come on people, surely your life doesn't depend on this being Q or not. If it is great, exciting. If not, life goes on. I'm going to leave it to the experts on 8kun for the consensus either way.
Angel gets it.
The only thing I would say to that is that there are many pedes around here, like me, who didn't find GAW until after Q stopped posting. So to have it start up again and to drop more crumbs about what's going on behind the scenes is exciting. You are right, life goes on either way but in my world if it's Q, there's just a little more pep in my step...especially as we get closer to the midterms that the libs are poised to steal once again.
And that's been my take away from the last year and a half or so: my life continues and I am free. Always.
"all anon research is pointing to it is"
lol
You're welcome to scroll the site some more.
I've been on 8kun since Q started posting. Was there for 5 hours last night listening to both sides. The trip doesn't auto mean it's legit Q.
The delta has between Trump and Q. Q used this to confirm in the past. Now all of a sudden it doesn't matter?
It's looking more and more like it is.
I’m just excited that the quality of posting around here has gone back up. Lots of critical thinking going on… good to see!
Yeah I doubt I will ever be a bread baker but I will always be a coms fag lol. I do a lot of reading as well.
It is really good to see the breadbakers doing their thing.
u/#crumbs
Gives a whole new meaning to the phrase “use your loaf” 😉
It comes in waves doesn't it
Isn't everything on the internet true?
Definitely
Waiting for CNN.com to confirm.
Breaking…
Lol okay I'm in!
https://imgur.com/a/J22HBR7
Just read that.
I'm a noob when it comes to Q and confirming comms, but why would Dan Scavino do a "negative" confirmation as opposed to just not confirming? Seems like you'd either confirm or not confirm.
For those not getting it, see Q post 2244, corresponding to Scavino's fist bump posted at 22:44.
Q's grammar is correct.
Who was "Jane Roe"? is correct, because he was asking who was Jane Roe.
If it had been a conversation in a book for example: Q paced pondering the events of the day, then time stood still as he asked his assistant the question on everyone's mind... "Who was Jane Roe?" Q ran to the computer to search Jane Roe, her actual name is Norma McCorvey.
At least that's how I was taught.
The quotation marks are to show that "Jane Roe" is an alias, not in a book where he was speaking her name in a conversation.
It's alright I was an English minor in college, grammar is not my strong suit, I tend to use too many commas, or make run-on sentences, lol. I used to read a lot when my eyes worked better, you couldn't get me out of books.
I’ll give you “Jane Roe”?, but, like you mentioned, could be an intentional message in that one.
But my dude, Establishing is spelled correctly in the post.
how about "GRAMMER?" Try GRAMMAR!!!!!!
Haha! You do grammar better then most people.😃😃😃😃😃
Punctuation can go outside of quoted material. It depends on how it is being phrased.
Jane roe being quoted. Did it originally have the question mark? If it did then it should be inside the quotes. If not. Then no.
I Always go here... https://qposts.online/
You have to click on >>16520866 and >>16521137 to open more...
4957 26-Jun-2022 4:55:06 AM SAST Q !!Hs1Jq13jV6 8kun/qresearch16521604
Who was "Jane Roe"?
How do you control generations of a populace?
50 years of conditioning.
50 years of propaganda.
50 years of lies.
Peaceful protests?
Riots?
"Summer of Love" redux?
What happens when you corner an animal?
Midterms.
[D] power implosion.
Q
Establishing comms.
Q
Established.
Q
qagg.news
If you say so....