https://twitter.com/Biz_Shrink/status/1740790026802462918
Added: the apology is about her claim that Trump visited the Epstein pedo island once, in 1997.
But when I see this tweet she retweeted its possible she is a Zionist asset.
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (149)
sorted by:
You are full of shit. You know perfectly well there was nothing new she got on Twitter that she didn't already know, to suddenly believe she was deceived by this whistleblower. You know perfectly well she is part of a psyop and got caught with her pants down.
You wanna be emotional and keep admiring her and keep letting her waste your time, yo go right on ahead. Dont come arguing with me trying to justify it.
You dont want to ask questions? You are a disgrace to the Anon community.
Remember what Q wrote ?
Who woulda thought it applies to people here too?
And you are full of insults. I don't know anything other than what she said in that post. You have already admitted that your whole chain of inquiry begins with an assumption on your part, for which you have no confirmation. And you keep asserting that you know something that is nothing more than your own supposition. I am expected to watch all this as an adult and give it respect?
What emotion? Jan Halper is only a name and a photograph to me, and I don't even remember her face. More supposition on your part. It must give you a sense of power to imagine you know my inner thoughts. This is why the paranoid universe leads inexorably into psychosis.
Q can write a lot of things. The quotation is probably apt. But he is talking about "they thought," not about me or you.
As i said before, mine is not an assumption. Its a fact.
Here is your answer to your first question:
"Question 1: I do not believe she has any new ability to suddenly conclude this source is wrong, that she did not posses before being called out."
You do not believe.... What has belief to do with fact? What you are stating is an assumption that the does not have "any new ability to suddenly conclude this source is wrong, that she did not possess before being carried out." You present no justification for this assumption.
After 50 years spent in engineering, I have come to know the difference between facts and theories. You haven't.
Ah you are confusing my wording because I said "I believe" so Let me restate it.
"She did not receive any new information from any one on her tweet where everyone were pointing out that the blurred screen shot she attached was indeed from Florida to Newark"
Btw you still conveniently have not addressed why she would attach a blurred page of that if she actually based her post on a whistle blower info?
You know, that concern is independent of my first question so you can't try same weasel your way out of it. .
Yet you kept insisting it was an assumption. I guess in those 50 years of bliss, you failed to grasp the difference between theories and assumptions (and deductions for that matter).
Honestly, the best part about engaging with you is how you keep exposing yourself constantly.