Mayra Flores, the first Mexican-born woman sworn in to Congress believes in Q.
(www.cnn.com)
📺 MEDIA PANIC
Comments (47)
sorted by:
She tweeted "QAnon hashtags" OMG NOT THAT!!!!
Easily remedied. https://archive.ph/knyrb
Not clicking CNN, no laughing with it.
What? So even the LameStream Media now cannot use the word conspiracies correctly and has just dumped the "theory" part?
Man. That cooks my noodles. I hate it when people say "Oh, that's a conspiracy" when they mean, "Oh, that's a conspiracy theory".
The WEF agenda is a conspiracy, and that's not a conspiracy theory, either.
It's conspiracy fact.
The law does not consider conspiracy a theory.
The law considers conspiracy a serious felony.
Exactly. That's why switching the two expressions chalks my blackboard; because a conspiracy theory is a an idea, but a conspiracy is something that is real, and very often criminal.
Also, a conspiracy theory carries a negative connotation even though it is a neutral term. They use conspiracy theory to act as if it's untrue, when that's not what that phrase means
yes and no
language works by linking/connecting meanings (conceptual, emotional, intentional meanings) to verbal or written forms (words, expressions, phrases, etc).
On one level, "conspiracy theory" could be used as neutral, but in reality, it was originally coined by the Clowns and infused (connected) to that negative connotation you speak of.
If you parse "conspiracy theory" as conspiracy + theory, then sure, it's neutral. But as a whole expression "conspiracy theory", it indeed carries that negative connotation and so it actually means, in that sense, "a false theory about the existence of a conspiracy". That's the pragmatic meaning (aka illocutionary force - the meaning the expression communicates when used in context)
(Another example: "fat chance". Parse that as "fat" + "chance" and it means what? a broad chance? But as a whole expression, it means, "that's really, really unlikely".)
But language is fluid. Old connections die, and new connections are born every day.
The meaning of "conspiracy theory" is slowly being transformed into "true theory about the existence of a conspiracy", because more and more people are realizing that the so-called 'theories' they have derided as "conspiracy theories" are in fact turning out to be true.
Similarly, in a pragmatic practical sense, "conspiracy theory" will likely come to mean "the person who is making this comment does not know anything about the truth and has a closed mind", because that's what is saying more and more.
Great stuff man
/werdnerd
Theories are theoretical until absolutely proven true. So when our theories are proven factual, we simply just call the result, REALITY.
I like the direction you're headed in.
However, note: no theory can be 'absolutely proven' until you have absolute knowledge, and that's not feasible. There may always be a case where some new factor comes into play, and the theory needs to be modified. Even if something is proven 1000 times, it's inherently not absolute, because 'proven' simply refers to reaching a certain threshold of evidence.
When we have enough evidence, we hold something to be proven, but that doesn't mean its absolute.
When a theory is proven, it then becomes 'truth'. We hold it to be true.
In this entire area of thought, I think it's valuable to recognize that all these things hinge on a deliberate choice made by people. We choose to accept something as true because it reaches the threshold of evidence we require. We consider a theory to be proven, because we make a deliberate choice to recognize it as such because it satisfies our criteria.
Same with how we approach 'reality'. We need to recognize that a) each of us has a 'map' of reality - that is, our conceptualization of what 'reality' is, and that b) the map is not the territory. How we see or understand reality is not reality itself.
Ideally, we aspire to our map or concept of reality being accurate and representing reality as closely as possible, but it's important in some areas to remember that our conception of reality and reality itself are two separate things.
anything to avoid her points about the border! Was her home county the one that just declared an invasion? There’s some bad hombres at the southern border kiddies.
Sounds like a great woman! Let's see what she does...
There's a common theme to the leftist, MSM, websites, they generally don't allow comments :) (although, the MSN "news" feed that comes to the Windows browser does allow comments (but I got blocked for throwing some truth and need to change user info if I want to comment any more :) ))
This is something I noticed starting back in the early / mid 2010s. Strangely I noticed it on the pop culture / sports site Grantland (R.I.P.). Comments were taken away because the authors were constantly getting called out for inaccuracies. The editors admitted as such, staring it was "toxic" etc.
It was not surprising my local newspaper / NWO rag The Tampa Times turned off commentary during COVID due to "staffing shortages". Comments are still off, and likely always will be. It allows them to run fake letters to the editors with no repercussions.
Seriously, the letters to the editor glow like neon signs.
Once you see it...
Foreigners should never be allowed to hold office here.
I know some foreigners who love, understand the constitution, and respect this country more than some born here.
viva frie. poor man fled Canada this week. He loves his home country Canada but if he had stayed in Canada, he would have eventually been arrested by Trudeau and his lackeys. the guy is a lawyer that over the last year has been red pilled about everything and wishes that Canada had a bill of rights like the United States.
Yep! I'm not so sure barring them from the Presidency is right either. And I mean if we declaw our government it shouldn't matter who holds what office anyway.
Requiring tests for citizenship is all fine and good, but I think a stricter test on Constitutionality needs to be administered in order to even file for candidacy.
He wasn't elected he was installed. And any President that puts the interests of the citizens before anything else, should be held in contempt and tried for treason.
But a naturalized citizen of at least 15-20 years that has no criminal history has very obviously made a choice at that point and I think can be trusted with the keys...
I mean there are people who should have the citizenship stripped...
Especially dual citizens.
I call it dueling citizenship.
Dude many naturalized citizens are way more patriotic than those who were born here and who have loyalties to Israel and China. These days the senators who were born in this country have a stronger loyalty to Ukraine, sending $40 billion there.
Anyone making fun of the Indian names in the Boris resignation threads, should be agreeing with your comment.
Well... Good for her. Except belief is irrelevant. Q simply is or is not (lol, come on, man).
Point is, Q, like Jesus, doesn't hinge on belief. No amount of disbelief will make Jesus and/or Q disappear.
I think Q is Ivanka Trump, pictures of AF1, China, other different locations, Trumps watch and pen, leads me to believe it's her, and she is smart too!
Or perhaps Dan
That would be so cool! Love her!
Q is a team of people...... majority being military intelligence
I was told this several years ago, but the more I look the more things lead to Ivanka!
What gives you that impression my man?
Soooo, she wanted to seek the truth and dares ask the questions we are all asking? BASED!
'The Deep Staye' did not even start with Q. Awareness of it has been around for decades.
Whats funny is CNN thinks this will hurt her campaign....
good for her.. no..seriously..
I hope she's ready for the msm and Swamp shitstorm they are about to fire her way. First, she is a major narrative buster, and second, while all she wants to do is represent the interest of the people of her district, in order to do that, she will have to go directly against the Swamp. They will hammer her relentlessly.
For CNN, amazingly enough, that article is a wealth of good information. CNN likes to sprinkle adjectives like "fraudulent", "false", etc. throughout the article, but if you ignored those pejoratives, the article is actually a pretty good one.
Literally every time they explain what Q is they use the same phrase:
"Followers of the false QAnon conspiracy theory believe there is a “deep state” within the US government that is controlled by a cabal of Satan-worshiping pedophiles."
They pick the most outlandish thing normies wouldn't believe. Q rarely talks about that. Probably like 1% of the posts are specifically about a govt being controlled by satanic worshiping pedos.
Best wishes and God bless.
Hooray! Now they can replace us, but LEGALLY!