I've responded to the video before. It doesn't really help your case on deltas.

For instance, the first proof they talk about is between post 310 and Trump's tweet three minutes later. They both mention the word "military."

Q then posts four more times within a few minutes before post 315, in which he claims credit for the delta between his post and Trump's post.

It's worth noting that Trump's tweet was talking about the Army vs Navy game, which is a big deal, usually covered by the national news. The fact that Trump said "military" at this time is unremarkable, and it would have been weird if he DIDN'T say "military" on Dec 9, 2017.

So, the timeline on this proof?

1. Q posts 16 different posts within the span of one hour on Dec 9th, 2017 (he posts more on that day, but this was all in one sitting).

2. In the middle of this post storm, Trump posts a "yay military" Tweet in response to the very well-known Army vs Navy game taking part that day.

3. Q (or a Q researcher) notices Trump's post and Q's post both mention the same common word within a few minutes of each other, and Q claims credit for the delta.

It's possible he's responsible. It's also possible Q is just taking advantage of the three factors I named above producing a coincidence, and a somewhat unimpressive one at that.

I've also discussed the famous tippy-top proof.

https://qanon.pub/data/proofs/01b6f3c7b899e31528bf3355bd28f666957ecd7490ec8263a2ce562602ffaeb3.jpg

A Q supporter says they want to hear the phrase "tip top", and Trump says "tippy top" in the speech shortly after. Q then claims credit in post 991.

This would be a HUGE proof of Q's connection to Trump under ONE or BOTH of two conditions:

1. Q took credit for making this specific connection happen BEFORE Trump said the phrase, and therefore guaranteed taking action on one of the hundreds of requests he got before every Trump speech.

2. Trump was not known to use the phrase "tip top" or "tippy top" before this speech, and therefore, there is no other explanation than it being a signal and a response to the Q supporter.

Unfortunately, neither of these things are true. Q only took credit for this delta AFTER it had occurred, which means it's possible he watched the speech, and then scanned through the requests to see if anything matched up. If it did, he claimed credit. I can't rule that out, because Q didn't specify that he would be accommodating ANY request, let alone that specific one.

The second point required some digging on my part. Had Trump ever used such a weird phrase as "tippy top" before in a speech? Was this a part of Trump's usual vocabulary?

As it turns out, yes. The speech that Q took credit for was in 2018.

However, this other video was uploaded in 2016. And in this video, Trump makes a REALLY big deal about using the word "tippy top."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypYy-WMuyiU&t=6080s&ab_channel=DonaldTrumpLiveSpeeches%26Rallies

And this was two years before any request for the weird phrase. So, clearly, this was already a part of Trump's lexicon, not just a random out-of-place word that showed up in 2018 for the first time. Predicting that it would occur in a Trump speech is as unusual as predicting the word "malarky" in a Biden speech.

So, once again, the mere connection between these two things is pretty soft. It seems absolutely possible that Q just took credit for this after it happened and let people believe that this wasn't something Trump had said before.

We can make all sorts of excuses why Q would not confirm these connections before they actually happen, in order to make the proof actually convincing, but the fact that he only takes credit for connections after they occur means that any skeptic can simply say Q is a grifter who relies on confirmation bias to make coincidences look like "Q meant for that to happen, because he said so after it happened."

And I think if Q was serious about his philosophy, he would wholeheartedly agree with me about this analysis, and would have a very good explanation as to why I should give him the benefit of the doubt when he could, but never does, confirm a delta connection PRIOR to it actually happening. Because that's not unreasonable critical thinking.

I've responded to the video before. It doesn't really help your case on deltas.

For instance, the first proof they talk about is the one between post 310 and Trump's tweet three minutes later. They both mention the word "military."

Q then posts four more times within a few minutes before post 315, in which he claims credit for the delta between his post and Trump's post.

It's worth noting that Trump's tweet was talking about the Army vs Navy game, which is a big deal, usually covered by the national news. The fact that Trump said "military" at this time is unremarkable, and it would have been weird if he DIDN'T say "military" on Dec 9, 2017.

So, the timeline on this proof?

1. Q posts 16 different posts within the span of one hour on Dec 9th, 2017 (he posts more on that day, but this was all in one sitting).

2. In the middle of this post storm, Trump posts a "yay military" Tweet in response to the very well-known Army vs Navy game taking part that day.

3. Q (or a Q researcher) notices Trump's post and Q's post both mention the same common word within a few minutes of each other, and Q claims credit for the delta.

It's possible he's responsible. It's also possible Q is just taking advantage of the three factors I named above producing a coincidence, and a somewhat unimpressive one at that.

I've also discussed the famous tippy-top proof.

https://qanon.pub/data/proofs/01b6f3c7b899e31528bf3355bd28f666957ecd7490ec8263a2ce562602ffaeb3.jpg

A Q supporter says they want to hear the phrase "tip top", and Trump says "tippy top" in the speech shortly after. Q then claims credit in post 991.

This would be a HUGE proof of Q's connection to Trump under ONE or BOTH of two conditions:

1. Q took credit for making this connection happen BEFORE Trump said the phrase, and therefore guaranteed taking action on one of the hundreds of requests he got before every Trump speech.

2. Trump was not known to use the phrase "tip top" or "tippy top" before this speech, and therefore, there is no other explanation than it being a signal and a response to the Q supporter.

Unfortunately, neither of these things are true. Q only took credit for this delta AFTER it had occurred, which means it's possible he watched the speech, and then scanned through the requests to see if anything matched up. If it did, he claimed credit. I can't rule that out, because Q didn't specify that he would be accommodating ANY request, let alone that specific one.

The second point required some digging on my part. Had Trump ever used such a weird phrase as "tippy top" before in a speech? Was this a part of Trump's usual vocabulary?

As it turns out, yes. The speech that Q took credit for was in 2018.

However, this other video was uploaded in 2016. And in this video, Trump makes a REALLY big deal about using the word "tippy top."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypYy-WMuyiU&t=6080s&ab_channel=DonaldTrumpLiveSpeeches%26Rallies

And this was two years before any request for the weird phrase. So, clearly, this was already a part of Trump's lexicon, not just a random out-of-place word that showed up in 2018 for the first time. Predicting that it would occur in a Trump speech is as unusual as predicting the word "malarky" in a Biden speech.

So, once again, the mere connection between these two things is pretty soft. It seems absolutely possible that Q just took credit for this after it happened and let people believe that this wasn't something Trump had said before.

We can make all sorts of excuses why Q would not confirm these connections before they actually happen, in order to make the proof actually convincing, but the fact that he only takes credit for connections after they occur means that any skeptic can simply say Q is a grifter who relies on confirmation bias to make coincidences look like "Q meant for that to happen, because he said so after it happened."

And I think if Q was serious about his philosophy, he would wholeheartedly agree with me about this analysis, and would have a very good explanation as to why I should give him the benefit of the doubt when he could, but never does, confirm a delta connection PRIOR to it actually happening. Because that's not unreasonable critical thinking.

I've responded to the video before. It doesn't really help your case on deltas.

For instance, the first proof they talk about is the one between post 310 and Trump's tweet three minutes later. They both mention the word "military."

Q then posts four more times within a few minutes before post 315, in which he claims credit for the delta between his post and Trump's post.

It's worth noting that Trump's tweet was talking about the Army vs Navy game, which is a big deal, usually covered by the national news. The fact that Trump said "military" at this time is unremarkable, and it would have been weird if he DIDN'T say "military" on Dec 9, 2017.

So, the timeline on this proof?

1. Q posts 16 different posts within the span of one hour on Dec 9th, 2017 (he posts more on that day, but this was all in one sitting).

2. In the middle of this post storm, Trump posts a "yay military" Tweet in response to the very well-known Army vs Navy game taking part that day.

3. Q (or a Q researcher) notices Trump's post and Q's post both mention the same common word within a few minutes of each other, and Q claims credit for the delta.

It's possible he's responsible. It's also possible Q is just taking advantage of the three factors I named above producing a coincidence, and a somewhat unimpressive one at that.

I've also discussed the famous tippy-top proof.

https://qanon.pub/data/proofs/01b6f3c7b899e31528bf3355bd28f666957ecd7490ec8263a2ce562602ffaeb3.jpg

A Q supporter says they want to hear the phrase "tip top", and Trump says "tippy top" in the speech shortly after. Q then claims credit in post 991.

This would be a HUGE proof of Q's connection to Trump under ONE or BOTH of two conditions:

1. Q took credit for making this connection happen BEFORE Trump said the phrase, and therefore guaranteed taking action on one of the hundreds of requests he got before every Trump speech.

2. Trump was not known to use the phrase "tip top" or "tippy top" before this speech, and therefore, there is no other explanation than it being a signal and a response to the Q supporter.

Unfortunately, neither of these things are true. Q only took credit for this delta AFTER it had occurred, which means it's possible he watched the speech, and then scanned through the requests to see if anything matched up. If it did, he claimed credit. I can't rule that out, because Q didn't specify that he would be accommodating ANY request, let alone that specific one.

The second point required some digging on my part. Had Trump ever used such a weird phrase as "tippy top" before in a speech? Was this a part of Trump's usual vocabulary?

As it turns out, yes. The speech that Q took credit for was in 2018.

However, this other video was uploaded in 2016. And in this video, Trump makes a REALLY big deal about using the word "tippy top."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypYy-WMuyiU&t=6080s&ab_channel=DonaldTrumpLiveSpeeches%26Rallies

And this was two years before any request for the weird phrase. So, clearly, this was already a part of Trump's lexicon, not just a random out-of-place word that showed up in 2018 for the first time.

So, once again, the mere connection between these two things is pretty soft. It seems absolutely possible that Q just took credit for this after it happened and let people believe that this wasn't something Trump had said before.

We can make all sorts of excuses why Q would not confirm these connections before they actually happen, in order to make the proof actually convincing, but the fact that he only takes credit for connections after they occur means that any skeptic can simply say Q is a grifter who relies on confirmation bias to make coincidences look like "Q meant for that to happen, because he said so after it happened."

And I think if Q was serious about his philosophy, he would wholeheartedly agree with me about this analysis, and would have a very good explanation as to why I should give him the benefit of the doubt when he could, but never does, confirm a delta connection PRIOR to it actually happening. Because that's not unreasonable critical thinking.

I've responded to the video before. It doesn't really help your case on deltas.

For instance, the first proof they talk about is the one between post 310 and Trump's tweet three minutes later. They both mention the word "military."

Q then posts four more times within a few minutes before post 315, in which he claims credit for the delta between his post and Trump's post.

It's worth noting that Trump's tweet was talking about the Army vs Navy game, which is a big deal, usually covered by the national news. The fact that Trump said "military" at this time is unremarkable, and it would have been weird if he DIDN'T say "military" on Dec 9, 2017.

So, the timeline on this proof?

1. Q posts 16 different posts within the span of one hour on Dec 9th, 2017 (he posts more on that day, but this was all in one sitting).

2. In the middle of this post storm, Trump posts a "yay military" Tweet in response to the very well-known Army vs Navy game taking part that day.

3. Q (or a Q researcher) notices Trump's post and Q's post both mention the same common word within a few minutes of each other, and Q claims credit for the delta.

It's possible he's responsible. It's also possible Q is just taking advantage of the three factors I named above producing a coincidence, and a somewhat unimpressive one at that.

I've also discussed the famous tippy-top proof.

https://qanon.pub/data/proofs/01b6f3c7b899e31528bf3355bd28f666957ecd7490ec8263a2ce562602ffaeb3.jpg

A Q supporter says they want to hear the phrase "tip top", and Trump says "tippy top" in the speech shortly after. Q then claims credit in post 991.

This would be a HUGE proof of Q's connection to Trump under ONE or BOTH of two conditions:

1. Q took credit for making this connection happen BEFORE Trump said the phrase, and therefore guaranteed taking action on one of the hundreds of requests he got before every Trump speech.

2. Trump was not known to use the phrase "tip top" or "tippy top" before this speech, and therefore, there is no other explanation than it being a signal and a response to the Q supporter.

Unfortunately, neither of these things are true. Q only took credit for this delta AFTER it had occurred, which means it's possible he watched the speech, and then scanned through the requests to see if anything matched up. If it did, he claimed credit. I can't rule that out, because Q didn't specify that he would be accommodating ANY request, let alone that specific one.

The second point required some digging on my part. Had Trump ever used such a weird phrase as "tippy top" before in a speech? Was this a part of Trump's usual vocabulary?

As it turns out, yes. The speech that Q took credit for was in 2018.

However, this other video was uploaded in 2016. And in this video, Trump makes a REALLY big deal about using the word "tippy top."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypYy-WMuyiU&t=6080s&ab_channel=DonaldTrumpLiveSpeeches%26Rallies

And this was two years before any request for the weird phrase. So, clearly, this was already a part of Trump's lexicon, not just a random out-of-place word that showed up in 2018 for the first time.

So, once again, the mere connection between these two things is pretty soft. It seems absolutely possible that Q just took credit for this after it happened and let people believe that this wasn't something Trump had said before.

We can make all sorts of excuses why Q would not confirm these connections BEFORE they actually happen, in order to make the proof actually convincing, but the fact that he only takes credit for connections after they occur means that any skeptic can simply say Q is a grifter who relies on confirmation bias to make coincidences look like "Q meant for that to happen, because he said so after it happened."

And I think if Q was serious about his philosophy, he would wholeheartedly agree with me about this analysis, and would have a very good explanation as to why I should give him the benefit of the doubt when he could, but never does, confirm a delta connection PRIOR to it actually happening. Because that's not unreasonable critical thinking.