Yes there is one post which tells us roughly how many members, less than 10 3 non military.
I stated remembering vividly a post where Q basically says we will know all the members, and that trump will eventually fully endorse his involvement.
Again, I can’t find these posts but one of the most famous posts
“Wait till you find out who has been talking to you here”
Is a pretty straightforward implication/indication that he is saying
“Wait till you find out WHO (who the Q is) that has been talking to you (anons) here (on the board)”
So I still need to find the one about Trump endorsing which isn’t really that far out of an idea.
But not sure what other way you could interpret the post above other than we will find out who has been talking.
So did all the members use the boards to talk to us? Just one? Just 2? Just 3? “Who has been talking” would mean if it were 3 people only posting we will be told!
Not sure why you’re so ready to rail against me saying these posts exists.
Why do you think it’s so wild, and what would I possibly have to gain by saying eventually Q team will reveal their iden and trump will endorse?
I just find it annoying when someone emphatically insists on something they can't back up. It reminds me of an idiot on glp I had the misfortune of interacting with.
I find it annoying how I have now proved 1 / 2 claims
And you have yet to respond.
What is YOUR interpretation of Q the anonymous poster, claiming to be working with trump saying
“Wait until YOU find out who has been talking to you here”
You seemed to have dodged it and mumbled something about not knowing what that means.
So there’s 1 post claiming he will reveal the iden, ontop of the other post I claim on good faith to remember.
If you want me to keep looking through posts for some benign fact that most of us even without a Q post assume will happen, then at least tell me what your gripe with “who has been talking” would be?
No I said it’s not the post I’m thinking of, I’m still firm the two I described exist. However this post is not very cryptic or any word play.
Assuming there’s no disinfo, in what other way could you interpret “wait till anons find out who has been talking here
There is only one post about less than 10 know the full picture, etc. that I recall.
"Q says Trump WILL come out in full support of his connection to Q
Eventually the team less than 10, 3 being non mill WILL reveal their full names."
So I think that is a bunch of bullshit. You should have settled for anons finding out.
I think you’re confused.
Yes there is one post which tells us roughly how many members, less than 10 3 non military.
I stated remembering vividly a post where Q basically says we will know all the members, and that trump will eventually fully endorse his involvement.
Again, I can’t find these posts but one of the most famous posts
“Wait till you find out who has been talking to you here”
Is a pretty straightforward implication/indication that he is saying
“Wait till you find out WHO (who the Q is) that has been talking to you (anons) here (on the board)”
So I still need to find the one about Trump endorsing which isn’t really that far out of an idea.
But not sure what other way you could interpret the post above other than we will find out who has been talking.
So did all the members use the boards to talk to us? Just one? Just 2? Just 3? “Who has been talking” would mean if it were 3 people only posting we will be told!
Not sure why you’re so ready to rail against me saying these posts exists.
Why do you think it’s so wild, and what would I possibly have to gain by saying eventually Q team will reveal their iden and trump will endorse?
This is not the hill to die on fren
I just find it annoying when someone emphatically insists on something they can't back up. It reminds me of an idiot on glp I had the misfortune of interacting with.
I find it annoying how I have now proved 1 / 2 claims
And you have yet to respond.
What is YOUR interpretation of Q the anonymous poster, claiming to be working with trump saying
“Wait until YOU find out who has been talking to you here”
You seemed to have dodged it and mumbled something about not knowing what that means.
So there’s 1 post claiming he will reveal the iden, ontop of the other post I claim on good faith to remember.
If you want me to keep looking through posts for some benign fact that most of us even without a Q post assume will happen, then at least tell me what your gripe with “who has been talking” would be?