>>11091291It's not an assumption, Q said it ffs.
https://qmap.pub/read/15https://qmap.pub/read/34I just disagree it's a "Q Proof" which is, as a reminder, something that proves Q is an insider or has insider information. There are legitimate Q Proofs. Now random social media boomers and newfags to /qresearch/ think any and everything is a proof just because they've dried up due to Q's posts no longer containing the actual inside information needed to formulate a proof.
Q is a legitimate small group of insiders close to Trump (Q+), but like I said the posts have dried up and action is needed.
