0
0

[–] 17787671? [S] ago 

Just for your information, I have noticed that lower case letters are coming into play more frequently.

There have been two or three tweets were lower case letters actually SPELL OUT the subject.

I am looking to share and learn, rather than argue.

If you are curious I will tell or show you the tweets.

Best

0
0

[–] 17790296? ago  (edited ago)

Thank you, but I think everyone should stick to the method he or she is convinced of.

I use the way of SB because it's the way the military and the secret service use. Trump learned it from the military, that's why I believe, it's the right interpretation. And SB always proves his findings, it is amazing!

Good luck, anon.

0
0

[–] 17790880? [S] ago 

Of course, Trump has access to military and intel codes.

That does not mean there is only one method being emplyed in his public tweets.

SB2 says to scrub or "clean" punctuation. Fine, but that is his system. I do the opposite, punctuation is important. Different method.

0
0

[–] 17790783? [S] ago 

You are welcome.

0
0

[–] 17779236? [S] ago  (edited ago)

Why don't you post something about your interpretation of the tweet.

You have stated my interpretation is wrong.

But you offer no alternates.

That is the subject we all want to get at.

I see code ciphers that read 24 42 TPR TPR TPR TPR

I say it means BILL CLINTON

What say you ?...what does 24 42 TPR TPR TPR TPR mean ?

And don't tell me it's not in the tweet, because it is and I have the proof.

To your point about context. It is true that this tweet relates to the others. I suspect it but I have no proof to link Bill Clinton to Jussie Smollett, and other individuals I read in the tweets, like Chicago PD, Obama, etc.

Maybe SB2 will show how 42 BC connects. I am not claiming to do that. All I am claiming is that 24 42 BC BC BC BC is in the tweet, and I interpret to mean BILL CLINTON.

If you have a better or more complete reading, I would love to hear it.

0
0

[–] 17774829? [S] ago  (edited ago)

If I have made a mathematical, typograhical or operational error, or created signals that are not there, that is an error; it is a mistake; and I will be grateful for the correction.

But with all due respect, my decoding may be invalid for SB2's methods,

But that does not mean my methods and results are "wrong".

Multiple meanings are possible.

___________________________________-

  1. CAPS I do treat all caps "equally", if I have not done so please point out my error.

  2. CONTEXT I take context into account. As far as context, I am well aware of references and confirmations across multiple tweets But I have found that related tweets often have somewhat different subjects; they are not all necessarily part of one grand puzzle over multiple tweets. I am aware of references and puzzles across multiple tweets. I do not read them as well as SB2, but I am aware of them.

I am working on one now in the April Fool's series. T P R. or **2 P R **appears in consecutive tweets on April 1.
It appeared four times in one. I read it as BILL CLINTON. Do you have a different read than I do ?

  1. If my timestamp calculation has a mechanical mistake or additive , please point it out. An addition error, I will admit. A more likely read, I will concede. But I am entitled to read time stamps differently that SB2 does.

I do appreciate your call-outs and I greatly respect SB2 and his work. But SB2 and I have different methods. That does not make your method correct, and mine incorrect.

I do not claim to use SB2's decode methods, my method does not involve referring to Q drops, hence SB2's methods and mine are not going to be consistent in all particulars. I do not refer to Q drops nor claim to be working within SB2's methods, as you are.

0
0

[–] 17776741? ago 

Can you prove anything you do? SB does. That is the difference.

0
0

[–] 17779093? [S] ago  (edited ago)

I do not post unless I have a proof.

Sometimes the proof is incomplete, but I am confident of the main subject.

People don't like the proofs very much, they are like reading math equations....boring for most people and they have trouble following. I have a few examples on the TRUMPTWEETDECODES subverse.

If I am not confident of the subject, I do not post about the tweet. On a few short ones I post some proof on a thread like this, to stop people from accusing me of making it up.

0
0

[–] 17778405? [S] ago  (edited ago)

What do you mean ?

My code proofs are there in the open, in the tweet by PRESIDENT TRUMP.

SB2 requires one to give credibility to Q, an anonymous source.

My code proofs do not require you to consult anything, other than Trump's tweet.

I am not criticizing SB2, I admire him. And Q is credible to me.

But my method is closer to proof and known sources than his is.

President Trump is sending my source material, the material I am looking is from DONALD J. TRUMP.