It's talking about actions and control. It's not biden in control, it's not bidens actions. It's his masters actions, and his masters that are in control.
Deleted my previous comment because I don’t disagree with your point.
But I don’t think that’s the point of Brainstorm Joe’s post.
There’s a string of his recent tweets that strongly suggest that the globalists were never the ones controlling Biden (or “Biden”). However, I’ll concede that we don’t know whether they’ve been made aware of that fact all along, since the 2020 steal was allowed to take place.
To reiterate it, I'll quote something I wrote yesterday...
So frequently these sorts of conspiracy theory conspiracy theories (I repeat the phrase to function as an adjective to contrast what many of us know are called 'conspiracy theories' but which in fact, are real and reflect truth), hinge and get amplification due to really weird and sloppy interpretations of text, sentences, and announcements. From a linguistics point of view, I constantly see people twisting what are natural but easily resolvable ambiguities in language to posit some 'secret message' or comms.
Which bear, most of the time, extremely little resemblance to what Q taught us about actual comms.
Someone hears this very obvious and easily interpret-able comment by DJT which, while grammatically ambiguous (a lot of language is) is not ambiguous contextually, and they grab that as "evidence" for whatever theory they have.
Making 15 second clips that exclude the actual context is a favorite practice among the would-be 'true believers'.
I completely agree, I'm sure you get down votes a lot for pointing out the truth, even on here people don't like hearing things that go against theor bias.
Lol, the post is too old to garner many downvotes. But (between you and I) I actually wrote a whole post on the topic of 'true believers' but I shelved it for reflection. I hope to post it sometime soon.
Issues like "not the real Joe Biden" tend to elicit the 'true believer' behavior in our midst. For me, that's an indicator that the narrative itself might actually be less than productive.
Could you then, please explain how you can square "it's not biden" and "his masters tell him what to do?" if they aren't talking about actions, pointing to the fact that he is a puppet and are instead speaking literally that biden is not biden, who is the him and his and why does he have masters? And why point them out? Doesn't seem like you can say there is an actor and simultaneously say he is a puppet in the sentence.
Um, I don't know, maybe because actors who are playing a retard dementia cases really well don't have the same set of skills required to be a puppet master...come on people.
For those of us paying attention: I'm pretty sure basic logic would tell you that the "actor(s)" is/are a very good method actor who is male relatively the same size proportionally as the real Biden. The puppet masters are the deep state. Or the patriots. Or both working together in one way or another through some sort of deal or something along those lines. Pretty easy to figure that one out if you've been paying attention to the wold stage lately like Q suggested you do.
It's talking about actions and control. It's not biden in control, it's not bidens actions. It's his masters actions, and his masters that are in control.
Deleted my previous comment because I don’t disagree with your point.
But I don’t think that’s the point of Brainstorm Joe’s post.
There’s a string of his recent tweets that strongly suggest that the globalists were never the ones controlling Biden (or “Biden”). However, I’ll concede that we don’t know whether they’ve been made aware of that fact all along, since the 2020 steal was allowed to take place.
Thank for making this point.
To reiterate it, I'll quote something I wrote yesterday...
Someone hears this very obvious and easily interpret-able comment by DJT which, while grammatically ambiguous (a lot of language is) is not ambiguous contextually, and they grab that as "evidence" for whatever theory they have.
Making 15 second clips that exclude the actual context is a favorite practice among the would-be 'true believers'.
I completely agree, I'm sure you get down votes a lot for pointing out the truth, even on here people don't like hearing things that go against theor bias.
Lol, the post is too old to garner many downvotes. But (between you and I) I actually wrote a whole post on the topic of 'true believers' but I shelved it for reflection. I hope to post it sometime soon.
Issues like "not the real Joe Biden" tend to elicit the 'true believer' behavior in our midst. For me, that's an indicator that the narrative itself might actually be less than productive.
Could you then, please explain how you can square "it's not biden" and "his masters tell him what to do?" if they aren't talking about actions, pointing to the fact that he is a puppet and are instead speaking literally that biden is not biden, who is the him and his and why does he have masters? And why point them out? Doesn't seem like you can say there is an actor and simultaneously say he is a puppet in the sentence.
Um, I don't know, maybe because actors who are playing a retard dementia cases really well don't have the same set of skills required to be a puppet master...come on people.
For those of us paying attention: I'm pretty sure basic logic would tell you that the "actor(s)" is/are a very good method actor who is male relatively the same size proportionally as the real Biden. The puppet masters are the deep state. Or the patriots. Or both working together in one way or another through some sort of deal or something along those lines. Pretty easy to figure that one out if you've been paying attention to the wold stage lately like Q suggested you do.