- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: The White House Will Be Q Posting Today
Posted on 6/25/26 at 11:00 am to VoxDawg
Posted on 6/25/26 at 11:00 am to VoxDawg
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here. quote:
STUNNING: USAID + THE BIG GRIFT
Looks like USAID supported college tuition for Anwar Aulaqi (Awlaki) who later became a high level al Qaeda terrorist.
Aulaqi falsely claimed he was born in Yemen to secure the financial help via the State Dept. when he was actually a US citizen, born in Las Cruces New Mexico.
Aulaqi would later develop close ties with several 9/11 hijackers and attain leadership status in AQ's Yemen affiliate.
Aulaqi was the godfather of the digital jihad that leveraged his writings and the web to radicalize Americans to AQ's cause.
Aulaqi became the first American targeted for death by the CIA. In 2011, he was killed in a US drone strike.
This 1997 Aulaqi mugshot is for soliciting prostitutes.
Good catch first flagged Feb. 2025 via
@browne_pamela
@intelwire
1
Posted on 6/25/26 at 11:02 am to VoxDawg
Amen. It is good to be ToE back on the TD.
Do we still have a Chicken?
Do we still have a Chicken?
Posted on 6/25/26 at 11:04 am to Holderofthehorns
He's around, but I believe he's still on Kiffening high.
That we got this far in the thread is encouraging. I hope everyone remains civil and on their best behavior so we keep it rolling.
When in doubt, just ignore the shitbirds and stay engaged with known good faith participants.
That we got this far in the thread is encouraging. I hope everyone remains civil and on their best behavior so we keep it rolling.
When in doubt, just ignore the shitbirds and stay engaged with known good faith participants.
Posted on 6/25/26 at 11:10 am to VoxDawg
quote:
I hope everyone remains civil
Do you mean "I hope everyone remains civil to other believers but we don't have to be civil to anybody who disagrees with us because they're shitbirds."?
Posted on 6/25/26 at 11:16 am to VoxDawg
quote:
MIL-CIV alliance is right.
So do you believe he is acting legally under the insurrection act or extra judicially due to the unprecedented nature of the actions of the Obama/deep state/globalist coalition leading up and subsequent to his election?
The distinction is… significant.
Posted on 6/25/26 at 11:20 am to Flats
Everyone here knows you’re full of shite. Even supa. That didn’t shut the thread down last time, and it won’t this time.
The truth is you’re just here because you are entertained by attempting to be intentionally inflammatory.
The truth is you’re just here because you are entertained by attempting to be intentionally inflammatory.
Posted on 6/25/26 at 11:20 am to Flats
Everyone here knows you’re full of shite. Even supa. That didn’t shut the thread down last time, and it won’t this time.
The truth is you’re just here because you are entertained by attempting to be intentionally inflammatory.
The truth is you’re just here because you are entertained by attempting to be intentionally inflammatory.
Posted on 6/25/26 at 11:20 am to Flats
No, I hope everyone can act like adults because I don't want the thread to get nuked.
It's unreasonable to suspect that on a digital forum like this where some are emboldened to be more harsh thanks to relative anonymity, we'd overcome fundamental human differences of opinion. If we were all in the same room, we wouldn't be able to get a unanimous opinion on what to have for lunch.
What we can control is how we choose to respond to ideas that we disagree with.
It's unreasonable to suspect that on a digital forum like this where some are emboldened to be more harsh thanks to relative anonymity, we'd overcome fundamental human differences of opinion. If we were all in the same room, we wouldn't be able to get a unanimous opinion on what to have for lunch.
What we can control is how we choose to respond to ideas that we disagree with.
Posted on 6/25/26 at 11:20 am to Ailsa
11.3 is Election Day this year.
Posted on 6/25/26 at 11:21 am to Kjnstkmn
Posted on 6/25/26 at 11:24 am to VoxDawg
quote:
What we can control is how we choose to respond to ideas that we disagree with.
That's what I've done; I've talked about Q, not other posters, not even people who closely follow Q. I've given my reasoned opinion on Q. Read the replies to me and get back with me about being civil and who's likely to get the topic nuked.
Posted on 6/25/26 at 11:27 am to VoxDawg
quote:
USAID
Notice all the right wing candidates winning elections in South America since USAID was put on ice?
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here. This post was edited on 6/25/26 at 11:28 am
Posted on 6/25/26 at 11:30 am to tide06
Not necessarily under the Insurrection Act, but given the events of Jan. 6 (not the attendees of the Stop the Steal rally & those Trump supporters present at the Capitol), all of the criteria for invoking it were met.
I'm not finding the video that was released around 4pm where the dispersal order was given, but this one remains:
I'm sure I can find the video that resulted in Twitter 1.0 nuking his account for years.
I'm not finding the video that was released around 4pm where the dispersal order was given, but this one remains:
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here. I'm sure I can find the video that resulted in Twitter 1.0 nuking his account for years.
Posted on 6/25/26 at 11:31 am to VoxDawg
Here it is:
Posted on 6/25/26 at 11:31 am to VoxDawg
None of that is interesting to me anymore after the WH embraced the messaging because none of those are plausible anymore unless someone believes that DJT co-opted the entire social media apparatus of the US government as part of an elaborate ****post media campaign.
The only questions and effort I’m interested in devoting to this is why would DJT embrace, legitimize or claim Q and most importantly what comes next?
What possible benefits are there to him for doing that?
He isn’t running for president in 2028 (I don’t think…).
It doesn’t help him win midterms.
It won’t help him with his base now if he doesn’t deliver on what Q outlined.
Then there’s this as context for all of it:
So a president embraces a platform of messaging that accuses Obama as being guilty of treason after publicly accusing him of treason.
At that point unless Trump has truly lost it, the most obvious and likely explanation is that he was behind Q all along and that paints a pretty clear path forward.
The only questions and effort I’m interested in devoting to this is why would DJT embrace, legitimize or claim Q and most importantly what comes next?
What possible benefits are there to him for doing that?
He isn’t running for president in 2028 (I don’t think…).
It doesn’t help him win midterms.
It won’t help him with his base now if he doesn’t deliver on what Q outlined.
Then there’s this as context for all of it:
So a president embraces a platform of messaging that accuses Obama as being guilty of treason after publicly accusing him of treason.
At that point unless Trump has truly lost it, the most obvious and likely explanation is that he was behind Q all along and that paints a pretty clear path forward.
Posted on 6/25/26 at 11:39 am to VoxDawg
quote:
Watermelon-headed, bug-eyed pervert Adam Schiff
I know you have a soft spot for Schiff LOL
That said, I have a friend who has come up with a theory that really makes a lot of sense ----essentially the idea that you can often infer aspects of someone's personality, worldview, or leadership style from their facial structure and expressions.
He calls it 'Long Face' and attributes these characteristics to those people:
Soft, weak, apologetic, bureaucratic, collectivist. He believes these people often appear uncomfortable with confrontation, less dominant, and more likely to support large institutions or progressive politics and contrasts them with square-jawed, broader-faced people, whom he associates with confidence, decisiveness, competitiveness, and traditional masculinity.
Think about the people below and draw your own conclusions:
Fauci
Trudeau
Macron
Anderson Cooper
Don Lemon
Gavin Newsom
Adam Schiff
Zuckerberg
Chuck Schumer
AOC
John Kerry
Posted on 6/25/26 at 11:42 am to VoxDawg
quote:
Not necessarily under the Insurrection Act, but given the events of Jan. 6 (not the attendees of the Stop the Steal rally & those Trump supporters present at the Capitol), all of the criteria for invoking it were met.
Without the insurrection act or some other legal justification what Q proposes is illegal even for a sitting president.
The reason I ask the question is that one path leads to a crisis in which one side arrests the other using the military using “legal” means and we see where that leads within our existing structure.
The other path without that is basically the end of the republic.
Maybe that’s what’s required, maybe it’s justified, maybe it isn’t.
Maybe a new republic follows it after the “mil-civ” alliance does what it does. Maybe it doesn’t.
But that bell can’t be unrung.
Not in Rome, not here and it’s important as yet another conspiracy theory enters the realm of conspiracy “fact” to understand that.
Posted on 6/25/26 at 11:55 am to Flats
We get our information from different sources, so it's unreasonable to suspect that we would reach the same conclusions. We don't agree on what the nature of the Q operation is, so we're never going to agree on many fundamental facts about its intent.
Chief among those is the false premise that Q existed as some sort of prognostication account, calling shots that would or would not come to pass and somehow that metric that no one asked for, nor anyone agreed upon was supposed to be the determining factor if the person/people posting as Q were credible.
As I said the other day in another thread:
Honest question for you - Do you see the connections being made in this tweet?
Here's what we're looking at:
1. WH posts "WE ON GO" at 9:30pm
2. Q Drop #930 uses the phrase "Enough is enough"
3. There are multiple drops (8) that use the phrase "Enough is enough", but only #452 has the letters "G" & "O" highlighted in brackets
Do you see the connections that would lead someone to the belief that the WH account is affirming Q's legitimacy?
Chief among those is the false premise that Q existed as some sort of prognostication account, calling shots that would or would not come to pass and somehow that metric that no one asked for, nor anyone agreed upon was supposed to be the determining factor if the person/people posting as Q were credible.
As I said the other day in another thread:
quote:
It was never a matter of Q predicting anything. Working from a place of insider information. Big difference.
If I say I think Black Cat have a cameo in the new Spider-Man film, that's a prediction.
If someone who works at Marvel Studios as an electrician says that Black Cat is in the new Spider-Man film because he was working on the set and saw the actress in costume - that's the opposite of a prediction.
That's a spoiler alert.
Honest question for you - Do you see the connections being made in this tweet?
Here's what we're looking at:
1. WH posts "WE ON GO" at 9:30pm
2. Q Drop #930 uses the phrase "Enough is enough"
3. There are multiple drops (8) that use the phrase "Enough is enough", but only #452 has the letters "G" & "O" highlighted in brackets
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here. Do you see the connections that would lead someone to the belief that the WH account is affirming Q's legitimacy?
Posted on 6/25/26 at 12:19 pm to tide06
quote:
the most obvious and likely explanation is that he was behind Q all along and that paints a pretty clear path forward
My boy Occam agrees with you.
Is it incredible? Yes.
Is it fantastic? Yes.
Is it unprecedented? Yes.
Is it like something from a Tom Clancy novel? Absolutely.
Is it consistent with Trump's constant messaging that Obama and others have sold out our republic for their own personal gain at the cost of American sovereignty? Most assuredly.
Posted on 6/25/26 at 12:27 pm to VoxDawg
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here. Over the past 17 months.
This post was edited on 6/25/26 at 12:28 pm
Page 28 of 45
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News