ImaSueDeNym 3 points ago +3 / -0

Yes. He was the one that said someone told him he was going to be arrested last Tuesday.

I made a point out of it then to ask if anyone knew who it was that told him that, because I couldn't find anything anywhere else saying they were planning on indicating him for sure at all, much less specifically on that Tuesday.

Pretty sure I got down voted and called a shill for it.


Guess people are really feeling the need for a win and are stretching things a bit to get one.

So if saying the MSM and/or the left has egg on their face because Trump said he was going to be arrested and then wasn't...🤷‍♀️.

ImaSueDeNym 1 point ago +1 / -0

Thanks so much! Really! You don't know how much time I spend trying to track down news items that other people reference in posts. It's gotten to the point that I just have to give up after awhile, not throwing good time after the bad.

This is some really interesting stuff, and makes me think now that the article we're talking about here was updated ( not changed but "regurgitated" you might say) to get this info circulating again, and get people reacquainted with the issue.

We've been waiting for a good minute or twelve waiting for Durham's wrap up report. Hopefully this is an indication that it will be sooner rather than later.

ImaSueDeNym 0 points ago +1 / -1

Yes, obviously I'm still going, because you keep engaging me in conversation.

If you don't want to have a conversation, then stop trying to have a conversation.

Sure, I'm a shill. You caught me. I admit it.

There, happy?

ImaSueDeNym 1 point ago +1 / -0

Crap, I wasn't paying attention to when that post was yanked. It's been 4 hours now. Anyone note how close I got to the time?

ImaSueDeNym 2 points ago +2 / -0

Trump told people how they wanted to steal the election and what they were planning, but also said that we were going to win by coming out and voting for him, so....🤷‍♀️

Saying that the other side is going to cheat in an election is pretty standard. It wasn't in any way ever used by any Anons here in discussion of it being part of The Plan (other than, after the inauguration, it being a ploy to "trap" the DS, and suddenly he'd jump out from behind a bush and yell "Surprise!" and it would be revealed he was secretly the President and then the DS would be shipped down to Gitmo for tribunals that will air Live On TV!! And that day keeps getting pushed back until I guess we're waiting for 2024 to start all over again?)

Him saying that he will lose and saying that he will win makes it pretty impossible to say he's wrong, doesn't it?

ImaSueDeNym 1 point ago +2 / -1

Yeah, ok. I am so tired of "You're a shill!" whenever people can't figure out an answer.

I am literally begging someone, anyone, to give me a little bit of guidance in what the fuck is going on.

And all I get is "If you'd spend thousands of hours like we do, you'd know what the plan is!" BS, which is BS, because you obviously had no clue what the Plan was supposed to be.

Again, unless you were aware that the plan was for Trump to lose 2020.

And if you didn't know that, which is pretty goddamn crucial to everything going on, then you don't know shit.

Which makes the "You're a shill if you don't spend thousands of hours researching and know what's going on without people sharing their own ideas!" BS so obnoxious.

ImaSueDeNym 0 points ago +2 / -2

Show me one post showing you or anyone else here saying that Trump was supposed to lose 2020 before he lost 2020. And then when he was supposed to be put in office on all the various datefags since then. And wasn't.

Just one.

You can't, because there aren't any, because no one had any clue Biden would be in office right now.

All the "It Had To Be This Way!!!" stuff happened months or years AFTER it happened.

Which means that none of the thousands of hours of research that you or anyone else here supposedly put in amounted to shit.

So, WTF makes you so supremely confident you're right about what the Plan is now? Other than 100% crack grade hopium?

You were massively wrong already. Obviously your judgement isn't infallible.

Of course I could be wrong and there is some super secret faction of GAW who knew before the election was stolen that The Plan was for the election to be stolen.

I'm 100% open to seeing any sort of evidence you have for me there.

Edited to add: it's not a Strawman that knowing if Trump would be President or not right now is an important part of the Plan. And 2020 is hardly "right from the start". You act as if it's completely inconsequential who is President.

If who is President is not important to the Plan, then wtf is the entire point of Trump?

ImaSueDeNym 8 points ago +8 / -0

Trick question. Neither of them should be fined. People are responsible for their actions.

You know, whenever I get down by all the stupid shit I see being spewed around here, it's like God notices it and sends someone to make a completely well thought out, rational argument to give me hope again.

Honestly, thank you. It might seem like a little thing, but it's not.

ImaSueDeNym 1 point ago +1 / -0

Ok. So you're with the nurture side of the debate, I take it.

That we're like we are because of how society shapes us.

Edited to add:

Not sure if you were paying attention to what I was saying, but that entire conversation began with me saying:

"Wondering how much of their behavior is a result of being treated as subhuman/evil/degenerates/whatever by society at large."

Do you see how that ties into what I'm talking about with the nature/nurture stuff?

That delightful person I was speaking with yesterday was making the argument (or trying to, anyway) that trans people had mental problems because they were Trans, not because of how they are treated. That it was a nature issue.

But if society can make people trans and deviants, why does it seem unreasonable that society can affect their mental stability as well?

The entire point of the conversation seems to have gotten lost.

Now, if you'd like to have a conversation about that, then I'd be happy to do so.

ImaSueDeNym 2 points ago +3 / -1

Yeah, that just seems like BS reasoning to me because you don't want to commit to something that might not pan out in the future.

It makes zero sense that Anons are supposed to be red pilling people left and right, yet balk when people beg them to help them understand what is going on.

I obviously have no fucking clue what the plan is, but I'm ok revealing that. It's not a character flaw. It's not a lack of effort.

Because either the plan was for Trump to lose 2020 and everyone here was wrong about that (I dare one person here to show me any evidence that 2 years ago they were saying that it was all part of The Plan that Biden be in office right now) or we are no longer following The Plan, which means you're probably wrong about what you believe The Plan to be.

ImaSueDeNym 1 point ago +1 / -0

Interesting. Could you give your input on what you think the plan is, and if we're still following it or not?

ImaSueDeNym 7 points ago +7 / -0

From what I understand, they're saying the graphene oxide is used in lab tools that they're using to study samples. Not in the samples themselves.

ImaSueDeNym 4 points ago +4 / -0

Yeah, I think this might be a case of "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing".

If the only reason why you believe that this paper is Pfizer admitting that graphene oxide is in the Covid-19 vax is because you see the words "graphene oxide" on this paper, please do not go rushing out sending this to every normie you know, because it probably will cause greater harm than good.

But if you believe this paper is Pfizer admitting graphene oxide is in the vax because you understand the science behind it, please explain it so that others may understand it as well.


ImaSueDeNym 3 points ago +3 / -0

Chatgpt is unaware of most things past 2021 right now, due to that being when the mass uploading of info into it stopped.

Some important things here or there, sure. But a minor paper that was just published? Highly doubtful.

ImaSueDeNym -3 points ago +1 / -4

That man really needs to crowd source approval for his appointment selections through we the people next term, because he sure is getting some shitty advice about who to hire from somewhere, and it ain't from us.

Trump, for whatever reason, has shown that he makes some epically bad judgement calls when it comes to hiring/nominating people.

Pence, Cohen, Tillerson, Bannon, Bolton, Sessions, and so on and so on.

ImaSueDeNym 2 points ago +5 / -3

How far have things had to deviate from the original plan?

And possibly "what exactly is the plan"?

Because no two people seem to have the same idea on what the plan is.

Makes it seems pretty weird when you're told to trust the plan, but no one really knows what it is.

ImaSueDeNym 3 points ago +4 / -1

All joking aside, I find it interesting that like 90% of what people here would ask Q is stuff that I have been called a shill for even mentioning (not stuff that I have said is true or likely, just things that I have pointed out could be a possibility or have shown doubt over).

Very interesting.

ImaSueDeNym 2 points ago +2 / -0

How many licks does it take to get to the center of a Tootsie Pop. That owl lied. It's not 3.

And if that one is unknown, then how much wood would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood.

Now that one is a question that has plagued me since I was knee high to a grasshopper.

view more: Next ›