Sauce: https://qanon.pub/#4958
What is at stake?
Who has control?
SURPRISE WITNESS.
Who was surprised?
Who will be surprised?
Use your logic.
Can emotions be used to influence decisions?
How do you control emotion?
Define 'Plant'.
How do you insert a plant?
Can emotions be used to insert a plant?
Who is Cassidy Hutchinson?
Trust the plan.
Q
Note: Q is asking questions in order to stimulate a thinking process. Q's questions are in -Bold Italics-. (Potential) Answers indicated by "A:"
-What is at stake?-
A: The whole enchilada. The Jan 6 false flag is a bulwark against the American People discovering how deep their treason goes. That bulwark falls, and the floodgates open.
-Who has control?-
A: The Patriots have control. DJT, Q Team, Devolved Military.
-SURPRISE WITNESS.-
A: [Statement]. Indicates Cassidy.
-Who was surprised?-
A: Hmmmm. No one paying attention is surprised that the Unselect pulled a 'surprise witness' with bogus info, info that can be debunked within hours no less. So, who was surprised? Speculation the Unselect DS was surprised. As in Cassidy raised her hand, and said: "I have damning evidence on Trumpy!"
Speculation Unselected said, "Great. Let's put her up there! We need SOMETHING to distract everyone! Roe Vs Wade, etc., etc..... everything is going to shit!"
-Who will be surprised?-
A: Speculation The Unselected will be surprised (were surprised?) that 1) the evidence of the 'surprise witness' is totally bogus and easily debunked and 2) that in fact, the surprise witness was .... a plant?
-Use your logic.-
A: [Exhortation by Q to apply correct and effective thinking processes, in order to correctly decypher and understand what is going on in the situation/event being discussed.] Yes, Sir! Right away, Sir! <salutes>
-Can emotions be used to influence decisions?-
A: Yes, emotions can be used to influence decisions.
-How do you control emotion?-
A: 1) Information - true, false, partly true/false information can be used to influence emotional response, as emotions respond to conceptual constructs. 2) pressure, situational conditioning - e.g. presenting 'a massive threat' can be used to trigger fear, for example, and manipulate the desired emotional outcome. Or creating a situation where there is a desperate need, and thus, target is conditioned to respond urgently and without thinking. Or, offering something so 'juicy' that the recipient is more concerned with how it might benefit them than considering whether its true or something else is going on.
-Define 'Plant'.-
A: (Sauce: The Free Dictionary)
A person or thing put into place in order to mislead or function secretly, especially: a. A person placed in a group of spectators to influence behavior. b. A person stationed in a given location as a spy or observer. c. A misleading piece of evidence placed so as to be discovered. d. A remark or action in a play or narrative that becomes important later.
-How do you insert a plant?-
A: Many different methods might exist. One possible method is: Manipulate emotional response of target(s) by offering something tempting in a situation where great pressure is created by intense or desperate need, or by perceived massive personal gain, etc. Plant is accepted because decision making process is compromised by fear, need and desperation, or avarice and ambition.
-Can emotions be used to insert a plant?-
A: [Q is delivering a two-part pronged question. “How do you insert a plant” = question to stimulate thought direction. “Can emotions be used to insert a plant?”= question to direct reader to correct direction.] See above.
-Who is Cassidy Hutchinson?-
A: Anon Question: is Cassidy Hutchinson a plant? Is she a sacrificial pawn who agreed to go to the Jan 6 committee and offer a bogus, easily debunkable story to the Unselect Committee? Who is she? Digs on this are likely to yield important info.
EDIT: Anon (u/Serendipity8): "Cassidy worked for Meadows, Scalise and Ted Cruz, according to a bio I just read. Will try to find link".
EDIT: Alt. Is the information (story about Potus, the limo, the stranglehold, etc) the plant, offered to Hutchinson at a time when they knew she would lap it up because of her ambition?
-Trust the plan.-
A: WWG1WGA.
-Q-
A: Thank you, Q.
Possible interpretation: Is Q asking us to consider that in fact, Hutchinson is a plant inserted by the Q team in order to misdirect and subvert the Unselected Jan 6 Committee? Is it possible that, using the timing of the Supreme Court decisions, which have put incredible pressure on the DEMS, Deep State, Q team manipulated their emotional condition to have them recklessly and foolishly accept the plant of Hutchinson with a story so patently ridiculous that it will both redpill a lot more normies but also highlight the absolute illegitimacy and ludicrous nature of the Jan 6 premise as a whole, including the sham committee investigation?
Q finishing up with "Trust the Plan" feels like a confirmation that the Surprise Witness was part of Q work (aka the Plan), but that's just a feeling (that's a rather subjective interpretation)
Alternative Interpretation: Cassidy Hutchinson was a plant from the DS, into the Republican ranks, and eventually into the WH, in wait for such a time as this. However, if Hutchinson is DS plant, how does that make sense in the context of all Q's questions here? Was Hutchinson perhaps a white hat plant to the DS rank and file from way back? A sort of double agent, pretending to be DS sympathizer but in fact, inserted by the White Hats a good time back?
*Addendum: additional speculation; Q is simply messing with the DS Unselect, trolling them into thinking that Hutchinson was a plant.
Addendum (Update): By all looks and appearances, it seems that Cassidy Hutchinson is a rather sad case of someone wanting to get ahead, and then being spurned (reportedly she wanted to staff at Mar A Lago, but was rejected by DJT due to being mediocre at best) decided to become a witness to the Unselect Jan 6. (see: Bannon Interview with Joanna Miller – Former WH Senior Policy Analyst (see also: Bannon War Room discussion re: Hutchinson's testimony between Bannon, Ephshteyn, and Posobeic first 15 minutes
Is it possible that Hutchinson's emotions were manipulated and used in order to plant this lameass story in her, by the WH Deputy Chief of Staff and Head of SS, who she apparently heard this story from? Did they set her up, knowing she would likely, at the right time, spill the beans? Was she the set up? Meaning that the story was the plant, Hutchinson herself not the plant but the soil in which the plant was planted? That seems plausible given the apparently sad nature of this woman's character....
Final Edit: Jury is still out whether this or that or the other is in fact Q. This analysis done on the (unproven) premise that the drop is legit from Q, and will obviously be null and void should that eventually prove not to be the case.
Q1842:
-"Never Interfere With an Enemy While He’s in the Process of Destroying Himself."-
Nicely done OP.
This Hutchinson thing will, for all its bluster and unsubstantiated fluff, have an disproportionately large impact on how the country negatively views the democrats.
She was a nail in the coffin, used to discredit the entire J6 thing, and people everywhere are rolling their eyes.
I hope she has been paid well enough to disappear for awhile.
I agree. Just when you think the Dems can sink no further, along comes another stooge.
And I'm guessing when the Dems are done with her, she'll "disappear" forever.
She can be roomies with Christine Blasey Ford
Easily within the realm of possibilities especially when she says stuff like
Trump proclaiming Im the fking President...lol
It sounds like Schiff wrote her lines...
Jack Posobeic reckons this is what Rachel Maddow is writing when she's not doing her show.
Lol
Actually, I empathize with the President. If you are the most powerful guy in the country then nobody, I mean nobody would be able to deny you the perogative to go where ever you choose to go. Give this, I don't see any secret service agent telling DJT- President that he CAN"T do something as simple as a ride to a building. Just wouldn't and couldn't happen. But if it did, and I was him, I too would be very angry, forceful and adament... so if the scenario DID happen as described I say "Good for him" and add these three words, "You are fired!"
Yeah.... nah. It never happened. It's BS.
I would bet that is something Hussein or spleepedo Bidexit would say
Absolutely!
the limo thing was so ridiculous too...OP could be onto something
The limo story is up there with Trump watching The Gorilla Channel, though the latter was way funnier.
It is dumb even for Adam Schiff...so it is not a leap to think that there is more to this than meets the eye. Plus, Trump's response to it was unusually mocking of someone. He doesn't even personally attack Schiff or Pelosi or Cheney as he did this witness.
I love the " Schiff video" with the speeding fishtailing beast...
Note: the Blue Check marks are out in force:
https://twitter.com/Alyssafarah/status/1541857822740283400?s=20&t=X2BYd6LPtvq5Il0mHn-aHw
Alyssa Farah Griffin ("Conservative. CCN political commentator") tweeted:
Cassidy Hutchinson is my friend. I knew her testimony would be damning. I had no idea it’d be THIS damning. I am so grateful for her courage & integrity.
To anyone who would try to impugn her character, I’d be glad to put you in touch w/ @January6thCmte to appear UNDER OATH.
Blue Check marks respond:
Dan Rather: The biggest scandal in American political history. And that’s saying a lot. Jaw dropping. Sickening. Infuriating.
George Conway: He. Physically. Attacked. A. Secret. Service. Agent.
Rick Wilson: There has never in my lifetime been a Congressional hearing more damning to a President. Never. This makes Watergate’s darkest moments look like a bridge club meeting.
Adam Kinzinger: Cassidy Hutchinson is one of the most brave and honorable people I know.
Etc. The replies to this twiff by all the blue checkmarks are ludicrous, but let's face it: twiffer is a propaganda machine.
I love the smell of desperation first thing in the morning.
Oh my…all the Twitter deep state fluffers came out.
Lol
KEK! Oh the visual you just put in my head Fren!
Dan Rather ......dope
I applaud you for trawling through the blue-checkmark waters to catch this stuff. Excellent compilation.
Solid analysis and great formatting.
Someone on here immediately said she had to be a plant. That no one would lie that balantly. Where it could be debunked almost immediately.
I don't know about that. They lie blatantly on a daily basis and have lied blatantly about Trump for years. The normies / leftists gobble it up and have never cared about the debunking from our side, even if you show them clear evidence including a correction of articles etc.
Yet postulate that Biden is a WH "plant" and watch GAW cry out.
Cassidy Huchenson is 25 years old today, which would have made her 23 years old at the time of the event.
Nobody is Chief Coffeemaker to the President at 23 years old.
"Two Sugars Hutchinson"
Bannon and crew nicknamed her "two sugars".
These are the kind of Q posts that I’ve missed
This drop isn’t meant for anons, it’s meant for the deep state to install fear. Is she a plant or no? Who else are you working with that could be a plant? Anybody is suspect there as they continue to tear each other down.
to instil fear
To install the instilment, still.
No, install fear, into the NPCs, malaka :)
Cassidy wearing white... !?
That's ok - it is still before Labor Day.
At first i was pissed at this bitch but i now believe she is a whitehat plant that tempted the retarded left with a made up story to good to be true in order to make the sham J6 hearing look even that much more ridiculous and desperately grasping for straws in the eyes of normies. Brilliant. Winning!
I'm currently digging around on her. Seems like she is a rather insipid wanna be. She applied to be staff at Mar A Lago after DJT left the WH, but was rejected.
On closer investigation (no doubt need to do a lot more digging over the next day or two) I'm leaning to thinkin that the story was the plant. That she was the sucker (the patsy) and the story was planted in her, by the Dep CoS and the Head of the SS. See my addended edits to the post.
Leaning pretty hard you way, Fract.
This was the only part of the testimony that piqued my interest...
@ 3:54:34 --> 3:56:45
https://youtu.be/bC3_VFFJlSY?list=RDCMUC6ZFN9Tx6xh-skXCuRHCDpQ&t=14074
Meadows shuts her out.
Gut says she's was a plant, a known plant.
A jabberjay.
"Their cries reverberated and he caught a glimpse of small black birds perched above them. The name 'jabberjay' popped into his mind. A brief chapter in his genetics class. The failed experiment, the bird that could repeat human speech, that had been a tool for espionage until the rebels had figured out its abilities and sent it back carrying false information."
page 115
The Ballad of Songbirds and Snakes
I have not researched any part of this story at all, but will say that generally ...
If you want someone to give convincing "testimony," then they should actually believe what they are saying.
Here, we have someone claiming they heard someone else say something. It is not first-hand knowledge (and, therefore, hearsay, though these criminals don't care about that).
So, it is more likely that she believed the story that she says she overheard, than that she made it up herself to rock the committee's world.
BTW, the hardcore leftist dimwits are eating this up like it is etched in stone. Leftist radio station is pushing it hard, as if it could have happened and did. To quote Q, "These people are stupid."
How many times did that lying bitch recount what SOMEONE ELSE said (illegal "hearsay" 3rd hand info to begin with) and use the phrase "something to the effect of _______" (which equals total SUBJECTIVE interpretation - on top it already being hearsay)!
I thought the surprise witness was this
https://greatawakening.win/p/15IXu3f73v/boom-ildonaldo-trumpo/c/
It would have been awesome if President Trump was the surprise witness and he only said one thing.
The storm is upon us!
I don't think anyone could miss that trending on Twitter.
I posted on this too (https://greatawakening.win/p/15IXu5wRrl/todays-q-drop-4958/)
I think your analysis is deeper than mine, I just found significance in the first two lines and discussed.
indeed. Nice answers!
Not we, I guess. Another Omarosa! I am wondering when her book will come out and how many MSDNC appearances she will get.
added: https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=plant
Or
Are we in the entertainment business?
Note the bribe .....
Quite so!
She was used and not only took the bait but swallowed the hook. It’s seems she likes drama, was undermining her superiors, lacked character and wanted to feel important. They let her hear nonsense, then she ran to Liz where they blew smoke up her butt and she smelled a book deal. She is Jussie Smell-it.
Reminds me of that time when Trump leaked his own audio tape. This is definitely a play he is capable of. :)
https://youtu.be/nnMsUaT6e8k
Beat the grass and drive the snakes...
https://greatawakening.win/p/140c9TQbPr/analyzing-durhams-first-indictme/ N_F_D
TO19237
Gregg Phillips / @greggphillips 06/29/2022 08:12:12
"We pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor."
Our great nation under God was built on this pledge 246 years ago.
The spirit of these words is renewed for most once a year on July 4th.
We get to watch them acted out every day on this platform and in our comms with each other.
for freedom,
g2
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G-2_(intelligence)
https://qagg.news/?q=%23%23TO19237
I think your update nailed it.
She was played by someone she trusted.
Her information was laughably debunk-able.
Seeing this in realtime is incredible.
Another self-inflicted wound by the Left-Tards. They just can't stop shooting themselves in the foot.
Is it possible that, when Q asks if emotions can be used to insert a plant, that Q means something like Deep Dream/Project Monarch?
Christine Blasey Ford comes to mind.
Contextually, not relevant, imo.
Idk.
We have a capital “P” plant and two lowercase plants. I feel like they might be two different things.
Plantagenet?
What? Fighting roses now, are we?
I did notice her display some of the “duper’s delight” behavior ala Peter Strozk at his hearing…fascinating…
Like what?
She has to fight smirking and smiling at inappropriate times, just like Strozk did. And squirming in her seat but very tight controlled mannerisms that seem almost Ultra MK if not at the least over rehearsed
Thanks! Very helpful.
Great post, I think you hit the nail on the head with the addendum too. The Ultra MAGA King called her a leaker yesterday which I think supports your post.
Donald J. Trump / @realDonaldTrump 06/28/2022 13:02:52 https://truthsocial.com/users/realDonaldTrump/statuses/108556410689094582
I hardly know who this person, Cassidy Hutchinson, is, other than I heard very negative things about her (a total phony and “leaker”), and when she requested to go with certain others of the team to Florida after my having served a full term in office, I personally turned her request down.
If she is a known "leaker," then it adds credibility to the idea that she was set up with a fake story so she could leak it to the J6 Unselect Committee.
Worth discussing.
When reading any text, and especially a Qdrop, there are a number of things one should probably take into consideration, including factual info, linked drops or information (that is, info that is linked via: allusion, direct reference, cryptic reference, etc), timing, overall context, etc.
Then, analysis based on all these elements. For example, in this drop, why would Q ask "Who has control?" Contextually, the implication is firstly that the DS does not have control, really. COntextually, the question is framed by other questions and discussion around the J6 committee, the surprise witness, Cassidy Hutchinson. Why would Q make some random allusion to whether 'the people are in control or not' in this context?
That's not really logical. Overall, its a worthwhile question, but contextually, it doesn't fit.
The context is the skirmish between the DS Dems (in the form of the J6 committee) and the White Hats. Logically, the question goes then to which of these is (really) in control.
Contextually, it doesn't seem to me to be discussing an unrelated larger question. Obviously, Logically, "Patriots in Control" does not mean the Patriots control every single thing. In any war, there is territory controlled by one side, and territory controlled by the other. If all the territory is controlled by one side, then the war is over, as you have pointed out.
Some folks took "Patriots in control" in the Q drops to mean "the Patriots control everything". I don't think that's a logical inference. But, consider a chess game. Once a player has the upper hand, he can be considered to be incontrol if he can define the moves the opponent must or will make, even though the opponent is on control of his own pieces. That's why a Chess master will capitulate when he knows, its over 5, 10, 12 moves down the road. But the DS is not a chess master. This war is for their very existence. They will not give up, ever.
The best anons I know of understand "patriots in control" to mean, the White Hats have the upper hand, are guiding or directing the situation because they are forcing the DS into situations and actions that WHs want them to do.
That overarching feature of the current war is the feature that Q is alluding to in this question "Who has control", I think.
Example: DS thinks, we'll get this woman to testify. That will help us. But WH team has already outmaneuvered them, 5 steps ahead, and know that this move will in fact hasten the DS demise, not help them in the long run. Thus, "Patriots have control".
That's how I read it, anyway.
Thanks for taking the time to reply, Uh.
This anon is waving at you from across the ditch. I live in crazy central here, (I like to refer to our CCP state as Danistan - hoping you will understand the reference. Otherwise, they named this south east corner after the Queen of England who reigned in the 1800's.)
Keep at it.
I stumbled across some red pills in 2015, and then went down other rabbit holes in 2016. Once I first listened to speeches by DJT, I could tell this guy was dimensionally and intrinsically different to ALL the establishment pollies out there.
After DJT was elected, I though, shite, I'd better find out what's going on in Oz, if there is alt-media here, etc. That's when I began looking at Oz situation, and started posting etc on Aus forums (faesbuk to start with) and learning about our alt-media.
So it was that I was primed and ready when Q came along, and then followed along behind Q since end of 2017/start of 2018.
My prime focus was on the USA during 2018 to 2020, but once Covid19 hit, I knew I had to pay more attention to home soil.
My digital soldiering went local realworld with 2021, when Dan Andrews began lifting our lockdowns.
Point is, we all had our path to the current time and reality, and I applaud your desire to make the fight home-soil focused in uncovering, exposing and analysing NZ situation. It's all important.
Looking forward to seeing more content by you as it comes along. Keep up the good work, pede.
"Discovered Q on Joe Biden's Inauguration Day" kek. Ironic, but fitting.
wwg1wga
They thought she would never lose. They were and are that delusional. They’ve had power for centuries. Their pride makes them blind to their own precarious position. Trump was a bump in their smooth road to ultimate control worldwide. They can’t fathom that their own blunders are the unmaking of themselves. The explosions have started the syncopation of their implosion but they don’t realize it yet.
Wait a second. I know this isn't related to the possible drop, but I have to ask:
It seriously really is called the Unselect Committee?!
Good God, how evil-sounding can you get?! That's some Kingdom Hearts shit!
No, sorry. That's DJT's nickname for them. I seek to honor DJT by adopting his nomenclature. Formally, they are called a "Select Committee" (see https://history.house.gov/Education/Fact-Sheets/Committees-Fact-Sheet2/)
Ah, thank you. I haven't been keeping up with the sham hearings--and judging by the TV ratings, who has?
Not me.
How naive and unaware could you be to believe that this account in particular wouldn’t be debunked in an hour flat? I agree that they must have set up Cassidy with bad intel and she thought she would get ahead this way. A woman scorned…el.oh.el.
…dumb b*tch
name checks out
She’s either the plant or the information is…I’m leaning towards the latter…
On who she is, I agree most with your Adendum Update. She was rejected and ran to the other side, imo. Thanks also for such an intelligently stated breakdown of this drop.
26 years old about to take national stage. Surely it's not because of her looks.
GOP is full of scumbags like Cruz and mark.
Based on the headlines I'm seeing in the fake news:
I would say that if this turns out to be false it will be another black eye for the fake news. Though surprisingly, the people who are still watching don't seem to care. It's amazing.
Just like Trump’s perfect call with Ukraine. It’s a set up. He released the transcript and eyewitness come forward to debunk her. MSM drawing attention to this adds to their discredit and the joke that is the J6 hearings
it is unfathomable that useful idiots, so inept, have been able to create and maintain such psychological pestilence for so long...
Well, to be honest, they haven't had much resistance for so long.... Our side has always been way, way behind the ball until 2016 came along.
this
Great talking point and interesting topic. Happy to see mods sticky!
heresay evidence but a perfect example of someone not being able to stop themselves and tumbling right over the precipice
If her story was true, they would have tried to use it earlier. Weakest mic drop over ever witnessed.
When you type "Cassidy Hutchinson" into DDG search, the results give you the current MSM propaganda headline "Who is Cassidy Hutchinson?"
And most of the articles can go no further than to give her age and that she was Mark Meadows aid.
I looked up her LinkedIn account, but it's pretty bare. Not even a profile pic or other work history prior to 2019 and her school of 2015. There are some endorsements. Maybe worth looking into those relations? https://www.linkedin.com/in/cassidy-hutchinson-07b24b131/
Guess we need to stay tuned for the result. In the meantime, good to remember: If the opposition can run with stories such as the "PEE, PEE DOSSIER" they can run with anything. It's just the brick wall they need to be concerned about, which was a lesson not learned in regard to golden showers.