>>7394
Well, I try not to take much for granted unless i have definite evidence, scientific training kicks in. Yes, this whole phone call situation could be a way to potentially trap leakers. But to use it specifically to expose Crowdstrike --don't think i've heard anybody talk about that idea. Or seek out evidence to confirm or deny. Would love to hear hints from Q.

It's also strange that Buzzfeed could be so incredibly stupid as to generate a story like this, one that could completely change the way anon research is viewed by the public. The only thing close to it was a story in July asking whether--since Epstein was arrested--the work of anons on him should be seen as valid (the answer was no), see http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/07/does-the-jeffrey-epstein-indictment-qanon.html

Buzzfeed has become so arrogant that they are saying too much, could really BOOMERANG on them if people start getting the idea that maybe the chans aren't just a bunch of haters but actual researchers. May get their asses handed to them on this one, i hope so.