Okay, I will be the one to ask... not because I am dooming (which I am not, I believe the Plan!)... but because I really want to understand.
Any person, including Trump, could access the Q posts and then coordinate something via communications so that is lines up with a Q post. That is not difficult. So I am not sure why these ar "proofs" rather than simply evidence that Trump is aligned with the Q posts? I mean, it is definitle reassuring. But a true proof would be something occurring that is not controlled by someone... something truly random (which, ironically, we have learned there isn't much that is random).
Connections go two ways. Talking about Q and Trump: Consider that Trump is the president, and Q is just some random poster on an anonymous internet forum. From this standpoint, it is not noteworthy at all whenever Q connects himself to Trump, as he does a lot. However if Trump were to connect himself to Q, that would be a big deal. And it has happened, quite a lot, for example, in the OP. Q’s credibility is built entirely on “coincidences” like this.
Imagine you’re a kid on a playground and you hear someone say “my uncle works at Nintendo and he says …”
That’s not notable, some kids will say anything for attention.
But if some employee at Nintendo were to share a picture of his extended family and that kid is there, suddenly the kid has a lot more credibility, even though the uncle didn’t tell you anything directly about the company’s plans.
Okay, I will be the one to ask... not because I am dooming (which I am not, I believe the Plan!)... but because I really want to understand.
Any person, including Trump, could access the Q posts and then coordinate something via communications so that is lines up with a Q post. That is not difficult. So I am not sure why these ar "proofs" rather than simply evidence that Trump is aligned with the Q posts? I mean, it is definitle reassuring. But a true proof would be something occurring that is not controlled by someone... something truly random (which, ironically, we have learned there isn't much that is random).
Anyway, just my thought at the moment.
Connections go two ways. Talking about Q and Trump: Consider that Trump is the president, and Q is just some random poster on an anonymous internet forum. From this standpoint, it is not noteworthy at all whenever Q connects himself to Trump, as he does a lot. However if Trump were to connect himself to Q, that would be a big deal. And it has happened, quite a lot, for example, in the OP. Q’s credibility is built entirely on “coincidences” like this.
Imagine you’re a kid on a playground and you hear someone say “my uncle works at Nintendo and he says …” That’s not notable, some kids will say anything for attention. But if some employee at Nintendo were to share a picture of his extended family and that kid is there, suddenly the kid has a lot more credibility, even though the uncle didn’t tell you anything directly about the company’s plans.
Tippy Top.
Of all the words and phrases in the English language, that one is probably up there with the rarest used.
When Trump publicly spoke that phrase, he didn't just connect himself to Q, he fulfilled a direct request from an anon.
Trump has not only connected himself to Q, he has established himself as specifically Q+, many times over.