6
VoterIDMatters 6 points ago +6 / -0

And we will fight that one. With guns.

4
VoterIDMatters 4 points ago +4 / -0

Totally. Should specify those who BELIEVE MASKS WORK AND SHOULD BE MANDATED.

13
VoterIDMatters 13 points ago +13 / -0

Flynn isn’t a lawyer, that doesn’t make sense

Now, Sydney Powell...there’s an AG.

20
VoterIDMatters 20 points ago +21 / -1

Have hammer, will travel

All pedophile’s locations accepted

2
VoterIDMatters 2 points ago +2 / -0

Trolls is a good example

When they open up the dish and there are trolls in it

That dinner scene was performed on a woman inducted into the cult but when the dish was opened it was her own baby’s decapitated head

3
VoterIDMatters 3 points ago +3 / -0

Yep, and satanists in the church of Satan say they don’t ackshually believe in Satan

Learn to spot deception

0
VoterIDMatters 0 points ago +1 / -1

You joined the thread, dumbass. If you don’t know what is happening in a conversation, don’t fucking join it.

One is a claim (“q is pro mueller”) and requires evidence that if true is easily gotten.

The other is a counterclaim in response (“q did not say mueller is good ever”) and does not require proof because it is a response to an accusation with no evidence. The accuser must provide evidence or shut the fuck up.

1
VoterIDMatters 1 point ago +2 / -1

This argument has been me pointing out that the person who said q was pro-mueller and then said that saying the opposite was a claim I needed to prove, was wrong and the burnen of proof is on the person making the claim, and that to for ME to prove a negative to YOU I would simply have to link all 4000+ q posts. I said go read it and show me where it says q is pro-mueller.

You are the retard, retard. Sounds like we agree on the fact that q is not pro-mueller, so there’s that.

FYI the origination of the idea that mueller was a sEcReT wHiTe HaT was a dumbass named Brian Cates, a 90000-D chess proponent

2
VoterIDMatters 2 points ago +4 / -2

They forgot one category: people who switched to republican/conservative while watching

1
VoterIDMatters 1 point ago +2 / -1

No, you didn’t prove anything. The absence of the sentiment that Mueller is a good guy is what proves that Qanon never said to trust Mueller.

Unless you can produce proof, your opinion that q is pro-mueller is full retard.

But you’re a shill, and shills love logical fallacies and circular arguments and trying to make their opponents prove negatives.

Fuck you.

2
VoterIDMatters 2 points ago +3 / -1

And you didn’t find one single post saying that.

If you did, please go ahead and link it.

by DasBurt
12
VoterIDMatters 12 points ago +13 / -1

Lucky you.

Here in WA, you get shown the door.

1
VoterIDMatters 1 point ago +3 / -2

Ok, I will prove it by linking all 4000+ Qanon posts and you can verify by reading them all that in fact q never said that.

“Prove you didn’t rape that woman.”

Not how it works, dumbfuck.

If Qanon has said to trust mueller, it would be easy to prove, by just posting one instance of that.

4
VoterIDMatters 4 points ago +6 / -2

Prove a fucking negative?

The person who claimed something can prove that, faggot.

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›