Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 11/09/2019 in Blog Comments

  1. 1 point
    But yeah, let's trust the anonymous Q source who posts to racist lair of scumbags run by a pigfarmer. "Objectivism, anyone?"
  2. 1 point
    This is a stupid, ugly question. The accusation you slop around is utterly without warrant. That you repeat this accusation casually is on your head, Jon. A malicious repetition of disgusting charges poisons this forum, which you might understand were you not an unreasoning lunatic. You seem proud of this smear, which is also disgusting. You reap what you sow ...
  3. 1 point
    "Fuck off, pedophile." The QAnon movement is chockful of anti-semitic garbage -- based on the wildest bullshit peddled by the Q-collective itself. If the correspondent wasn't so opposed to reason, he'd figure that one out on his own.
  4. 1 point
  5. 1 point
    Penultimate. Trap gun slogan [OBS]. Think thank thunk. One hour of old glory as touted by the mysterious entity ... this does not seem like Q-level insider knowledge. They may need to get caffeinated and a bit blasted on marijuana, to clear away the staleness and low energy.
  6. 1 point
    Testing an easier way to add in Q-drops. Previously I took screen-captures of Qmap items one by one, then uploaded them, then posted them, then added link attributes pointing to the actual drop on (previously) 8chan.net. Since the 'new' Q server is on an unreliable and often-unreachable channel of the facelifted 8kun, and since Qmap has now added extra editorial material, it's easier for a lazy person like me to simply copy text/HTML snips from Qmap ... This is the experiment. Unfortunately for Q-enthusiasts, there is no way to reach 8kun through Qmap or from these drop-copies below. While 8chan was still functional, Qmap featured embedded links to the particular drop ... but cannot do that now as the 8Kun hosting services are a mess. When you try to get to the original ... 82.9K people are talking about this [Q #3620] https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-44107570� Publicly known? Think non_public. Access granted. Q [Q #3619] /pf/ was taken down [cleared of content] just prior to platform TERM [specific reason]. NAT SEC [charter] prevents use of 'keys' to establish IDEN via public utility/domain - non_reg. Formation of 'clean' board possible to lock in trip(s) > issues w/ safeguards. Q Fredrick Brennan finds the handwaving and excuses hilarious and inept. The Qmap site has sharing links embedded. This is an example of what a lazy-man's Qdrop to OL could look like, if anyone at all is interested. The headline is from whoever manages the code at Qmap -- "Vindictive Vindman ..." is a editorial gloss. -- if you click the meat of the Tweet above, you get sent to an individual Qmap posting, with even more editorial material added:
  7. 1 point
    Millerism and the Great Disappointment. For Patreon supporters ...
  8. 1 point
    Billy, You've got a pretty good handle on your new vid toys there. Fun stuff. But, ugh, please explore lighting. And you don't need to invest in soft boxes or umbrellas with modeling lights. Just consider turning your current light so that it's facing the other way (away from you), and not shining on you directly. Bounce the light off of a wall in front of you to diffuse and soften it. Wall not close enough? Then clamp a foam board to an old mic stand from back in your band days, and bounce the light off of it. You're welcome.
  9. 1 point
    The President has things to say about Roger Stone and justice. Something something "planted into Team Trump" in 1999 by mumble mumble ... Stone is a plant of the Kabbal woop woop.
  10. 1 point
    Roger Stone has been found guilty on all counts.
  11. 1 point
    "Kamala Harris wielded her shtick fairly effectively at the game show formal whoopup in Miami. Building on her law order justice rap back in California, when she turns her steely eyes on you, it feeds electricity into the moment." [Edited for Twitter-friendly] That is what we could call charisma or native talent. The ugly business of Vote4ME is often the 'screen test' for the various actors. I have sampled a whole lot of individual opinion on last night, and conclude that she probably had the most 'impact' of the second and third-tier candidates, those between zero and eight percent in opinion surveys ... Does this woman have the brains and ability and money and 'talent' to push herself out of the middle? I don't know. But she is attracting the right kind of attention: critical. This from Elizabeth Nolan Brown at Reason. Kamala Harris Won the Democratic Debate by Fudging Her Record. Michael pointed to a Drudge round-up of opinion which indicated some folks were most happy with the representative from Hawaii, Tulsi Gabbard, in the first night of the game show: Added: 5 minute Fox News report on Harris's shtick-y moments. Fake 'juice'? Did 'juice' get her atop her party's front bench from California? More juice, please.
  12. 1 point
    I like this woman's poise. Anybody put money on Harris win place or show? Even if the steely grace is a false front, there is a certain gravity in her performance. Will the presidential nickname stick?