Hi, folks. I have not been part of any Q-related community in the past, and presently in GAW, I just consider myself a guest and a curious, open-minded reader. Let me be crystal clear that I condemn all political violence in America (the majority of which comes from the left, but I'll set that tangent aside for now). Q is far too complicated for me to comment on because I am very new to it. I am not being coy in writing that. I am genuinely ignorant of most things Q. I do; however, have some Q-adjacent observations I would like to share which are apparent to me as a specialist in both rhetoric and 'reading' people (both are absolutely essential to my professional work). It is indeed my hope that my speculations below calm readers and bring peace to those who might be on edge.

Observation: The President unquestionably believes he can still win or at the very least that Biden & Harris will never hold positions as President and Vice President. Evidence: The key players have never used the word “concede” explicitly, nor have the names of the 'victors' ever been mentioned. ...not by the President, not by Pompeo, and not even by the First Lady... If you doubt this, reread the alleged 'concessions' and compare them to concessions from previous election cycles. The difference will astound anyone who hasn't already noticed it. It takes a lot of careful wording to make something have the flavor of a concession while actually conceding nothing. Wording like that is not accidental. Remark: I have no crystal ball. I am not saying who wins. I am analyzing rhetoric (formulated in the mind or as writing prior to speaking) and authenticity (does the person's voice and body language suggest that they believe the 'script'). The President, a profoundly well-informed person who receives the highest level of intelligence briefings available to anyone in any of the Three Branches, BELIEVES he will prevail or at the very least, that his opposition will fail.

Observation: Pence was brave; literally. Evidence: If you can do so in a calm state of mind, go back and re-listen to the President's speech on the day of the supposed 'betrayal.' I don't remember the exact wording, but he said it would be brave for Pence to uphold the constitution, but it would be even braver to do nothing. This is utterly bizarre wording and it stuck out like a sore thumb. If the intent was to suggest that Pence should be brave and do the right thing and be afraid of the consequences of doing the wrong thing, then the way it was phrased, as a choice between two positives, would be so inartful, logically-tortured, and convoluted that it would not be worth saying at all, but the President repeated some version of this line around three or more times in almost an identical way each time (a choice between two positives). With that in mind, try assuming a different meaning as you listen and then re-gauge the authenticity of the message and its clarity for you as a listener. Try this: 'it would take bravery for Pence to uphold the constitution (kick the can down the road by using the strategy that the opposition expects and has prepared for), but it would take even more bravery to do nothing (open the flood gates for a high-risk, high-reward solution that first deceives and then dooms the opposition).' Remark: Yes, in my own estimation Pence is not only a double-agent, but the opposition fell for it hook, line, and sinker until they followed up with him. Additionally, the President wanted at least some people to re-listen to this speech, figure out his real meaning after the fact, and inform others about it. Usually, this claim would be 'mind-reading,' but listen to it again and hone in on the authenticity of the delivery and the vastly greater clarity of the statement if the double-agent interpretation is applied.

Observation: Pompeo sounding exactly like Trump's understudy is not an accident. Evidence: Read not only Pompeo's recent Tweets but also his older ones. Listen to his recent speeches but also his older ones. He is progressively sounding more and more like Trump. Remark: Pompeo sounds like Trump and is acting Trumpian because he will have to be Trump at least temporarily, and he needs the blessing of over half of the country (Trump supporters), and at least initially he will have some degree of good will from independents and even some leftists because they have not ingested years of propaganda that primes them to hate him. The play, although not easy, will be to make Trump supporters like Pompeo because they speak and act the same way, while also bringing along others under the guise of 'at least that Trump guy is not in power anymore.'