Getting ready for full disclosure.

Keep your fingers crossed!

I more surprised that .win giving any attention to Tate

A guy I listen to, a chemist turned economics/geopolitics guy, has a thesis going around that a lot of people in the economist world are starting to pick up on.

The WEF plan would do away with commercial banking. The NY commercial banks, while most likely a faction within the cabal, probably aren't down with that and have been fighting back. He possits that Jerome Powell, in fighting the other central banks (Fed vs ECB) now most likely answers to Jamie Dimon (JP Morgan) and a few others more than he answers to say, Biden. The thesis backs this up with the recent switch from LIBOR to SOFR (different financing rates and rules in very basic terms), which would amount to casting off the City of London chains for us.

Jamie Dimon has been very outspoken the last few months on things like fossil fuels and such, basically publicly shooting down the green agenda. So perhaps a faction of the cabal has decided to go rogue to protect itself. Not because they are good guys, but because this is how you expect people to behave when facing an existential threat. So long story short, maybe we're hearing about this because it's the WEF effort to smear Dimon.

I just woke up, and it's a lot more nuanced than that, but if anyone is interested, this guy's name is Tom Luango, and his podcast is called "Gold, Goats, and Guns". I started listening around episode 98ish, around when the Russia/Ukraine War started. It's super interesting around that point. Keep an open mind. He's not all about Q though he is aware, but the way he talks aboit plans sometimes, I almost feel like it's there under the surface, he's just not trying to get caught up in the "QAnon" crusade the left wages just yet. He also collaborates with "Crypto Rich" (another podcast found on Odysee) where they discuss the geopolitics and the WEF and all that as well.

Because if you report on something first you set the narrative. It is coming out through other media. They'd rather make sure the sheep hear it from them first. That's why they "report" on it.

For example, if a cheating wife knows her husband is about to hear about her Saturday orgies with 30 men, it's better if she "talk" to him first about it before he hears about it on the news. Then she can "try" to explain and gaslight. She can try to downplay it and play the victim.

"I was drunk... I think someone put something in my drink! I'd never cheat on you! I love you! Those thirty men raped me! I'm innocent! The news s lying!"

"But you went every Saturday!"

"B-because" sob "They filmed the first time and forced me to come back. They were gonna release the footage. I was so scared! I didn't want to hurt you! Please believe me!"

And smirks if she can sucker him into believing her "lie".

She sets the narrative if she tells it first.

This is why when White Hats force something to come out that the Fake News can't stop from coming out, the Fake News chooses to "report" on it. They want to shape how the story is seen.

Because it’s a play. If MSM are shining a light, it’s not for any honorable pursuit of truth and justice, of that we can be sure.