What you can't make up is the media's obsession with this whole thing. That's the part I find completely intriguing.

Like you, they are trying way too hard with this. Forces me to stop and ask why.

Do you think the media criticizing "Q" is fake news?

No, I think it's a distraction most likely.

One of the things they are trying to distract from might be this?

http://thefederalist.com/2018/08/08/...ed-office-spy/

I see. The Wash. Post and the mainstream media is "distracting" a story about one senator and China by blasting the public with tons of the "Q" conspiracy stuff?

Did they also arrange all the looney "Q" conspiracy nuts to appear at Trump rally's.

Does Reply Randall also distract us from the Federalist story?
Is that why it is limited to right wing sources? Are liberals and middle of the road news sources controlled by lying politicians in order to have us ignore Feinstein, one of their own?

Funny how when Mueller takes forever to investigate Trump and still has nothing concrete, hcap says this stuff takes time, but he dismisses this offhand.

Guess life is easier when reality is optional.:lol:

Apparently, "Q nuts" have been showing up at Trump rallies for months now...but for some reason, on a certain date, the combined media suddenly took notice and ran with it in a BIG way.

When idiocy and delusion intrude at a presidential rally, as well as burns the internet for months the free press althogh not abler to catch it all at once, eventually does notice.

Here we go again! Another tin foil hat conspiracy theory about the lamestream media colluding to "distract" from how well Chumpy is doing and Senator Feinstein is not, hugh?

Going back almost 50 years, the average duration of a special counsel investigation is 1,154 days, and that's not even including one that took almost 5000.

The Mueller investigation is still young in comparison at about 500 days old. And neither you or anyone else has any idea if he has anything concrete, altho 32 indictments and guilty pleas so far might give you an inkling.. :p

Are you talking about Q or Trump himself at the beginning of that sentence? :lol:

You need to be more open minded hcap. I think I would have liked you better back in the 60s and early 70s...

Which is the point I was making - hcap has dismissed this off before day one.
I would say, seeing how every day it seems they are barking up another tree that they do not have anything concrete. BUT time will tell.

I meant "Q", but it works both ways.

I didn't hang out with toddlers then. I babysit a few now. Not on this board :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Time has told.

There are a lot of intertwined DIRTY trees.

So far, four former Trump campaign associates – Michael Flynn, Paul Manafort, Richard Gates and George Papadopoulos – have been charged. Alex van der Zwaan, an attorney, pleaded guilty to lying to FBI investigators. The special counsel filed new tax evasion and bank fraud charges against Manafort and Gates in late February, potentially increasing the amount of prison time the pair could face if convicted at trial. The charges are similar to those filed in October. A grand jury indicted 13 Russian nationals and three Russian companies in February for allegedly interfering in the 2016 election. In the case, Mueller details a sophisticated plot to wage “information warfare” on the U.S. 12 Russian intelligence officers

HHHHmmmm 25 ham sandwiches and some old tax frauds that Rod Rosenstein
himself decided not to prosecute for lack of evidence years ago.

You go girl.

You are among a bunch of OT posters who consistantly post fact-free rebuttals thinking you made some sort of rational points.

Imaginary delusional "victories" for the cult and it's incoherent leader. Whatever.

So the score is tied on both sides.