Thread by @QOrigins

IMO we don't spend enough time talking about how Q's followers -- a whole lot of 'em, anyway -- straight-up take orders from Q.

Consider Jenn here: Q talked about making QAnon more mainstream, so she did interviews.

Or consider the "digital camouflage" drop, or the Oath, etc.

We REALLY dodged a bullet when Q more or less stopped posting after November 3rd.

How bad would it have been if Q *had* posted something like "Storm (insert city here)'s ballot counting operation to save the state for Trump?"

I'm guessing... bad. Very, very bad.

So why *didn't* Q do it?

If Q really is, as some people have speculated, a foreign "psyop" aimed at sowing division in US society,

A) why not *use it* operationally to plunge us into a terrible constitutional crisis?

and

B) why abandon it at all?

Q's silence -- the willingness of Q, in a "use it or lose it" scenario, to *lose* their persona instead of *using* it to achieve some strategic objective -- strongly suggests (at least to me!) that Q is a non-state actor who's very much afraid of consequences.

This is largely speculation, of course. What do I know, really? The boundaries of my expertise are very, very narrow, and this kinda thing is WAY outside them.

But still... Q *would* be an incredibly valuable asset and I *do* struggle to imagine why a state would just walk away