[–] 22769464? ago (edited ago)
Example: When i witness you stealing in a mall, i can 'report' you on the spot. So you have to give your 'prey' back to the Store and face the consequences.
If i decide to use it to 'blackmail' you (LATER), i'd just videotape you in the act.
In this scenario, you will walk Home with your 'prey' and without facing consequences. Just until i knock on your door and show you my little videotape.
See what i mean? It's not unlogical.
Your other question, about November: 2016 is evidence that there are measures to effectively stop election rigging, as there were attempts. Otherwise, Hillary would be in the WH right now
You are not making any sense. Sorry. The “blackmail” can be replaced with evidence and as I’ve clearly proven, the evidence (blackmail) exists without having to “let them win”.
Not trying to be rude but it’s frustrating to see anons not using any logic. Think about your replies more before you engage someone. You might just end up looking silly if you don’t. Just being honest.
Got to go. Hope this helped.
[–] 22769594? ago (edited ago)
In LE, it's common to let some minor things happen to catch the 'much bigger fish'.
You're saying literally "They caught them on voter fraud so it has to be punished ON THE SPOT!!!" (And therefore make them aware of the fact that they have been caught)
That's just retarded, given you are following a big Plan.
[–] 22769479? 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago (edited ago)
I agree. That's exactly what I've thought all along, since Q stated "The Senate was the key".
[–] 22769521? ago
Makes zero logical sense to require that they had to let the house flip. None.