0
0

[–] 19623168? ago 

it lends credibility to future information if correct

It DOESN'T though, that's the problem. It's such a vague prediction and is already out there in the media. No shit that when a rich/powerful man is arrested for the crime of SEX TRAFFICKING that there's a good chance someone "big" will get busted in the same sweep.

If you're right, you've managed to "predict" something that was reasonably likely and already speculated in the media, and if you're wrong nobody will be able to prove it - you can say the indictment is "sealed" or it got moved or any other number of excuses. The reality is if anybody "big" gets arrested for anything in the relatively near future this person will probably take credit for it.

0
0

[–] 19623756? ago 

the prediction is vague and already out there in the media so its not useful

Why do you hate Qanon, anon?

;)

Sarcasm aside, the point still stands : almost everything Q has said has either been mostly known before as pizzagate stuff, or is so 30,000ft it cannot even vaguely be proved whether or not it was correct or disinfo. About the best example against this would be the NK visit, but honestly there are valid counerarguments (iran solved by (11/11 I think?), for example).

It's not the most useful information, but its still better than nothing. I stand by my statement : whether he's wrong, right, or just plain larping, I'd rather people like him kept posting than didn't.