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.

I never got that abuse vibe from him. He’s brash and taking on the establishment. Not everyone’s cup of tea. Reminds of a President in recent years.

FreeTopG

Honestly I could definitely see him being a connoisseur of legal age escorts, but CP? Nah... Unless if he's a controlled opposition deepstate shill. Then yes.

Some sicko pervs on .win seem to love him

that outside of Twitter no one really gives a shit

What does this mean? Hate to break it to you, but "outside of Twitter" isn't this big wide world like you're implying. Twitter is where about 70% of Earth is getting most of its political news these days actually.

Only old dinosaurs like me still even check the MSM television crap anymore. If they weren't state-sponsored arms of the Federal it's likely they've had already gone broke and been taken off air. They aren't surviving due to the amount of eyeballs on them, very few remaining.

So inside of Twitter is a pretty big deal whatever we think of it.

Me too. For some reason that Tate came out? I think he is trying to confuse people. Who is he anyways.

Bro I think I speak for all of us when I say you couldn't be more wrong about what you're insinuating. I am not a fan of Andrew Tate in any way shape or form.

But if you had even the slightest knowledge of the guy, just did enough research into him from THIS latest thing and had known nothing before you'd realize you're way off.

Now as far as this board is concerned I'm not going to speak for anyone. However your issue or gripe with giving Tate attention here kind of smacks of others who used to cruise thru and make similar arguments about Musk. "Why give him attention" "he's a black hat who cares" "he doesnt matter"

So hows that one going now??

Like it or not Andrew Tate has a MASSIVE FOLLOWING particularly in the realm of young men from teenagers to early 30s. His reach is in the 100s of millions internationally.

So while you may not like him, he has broad influence and thus NEEDS to be discussed because he can be a force for our movement - good or bad. Musk was one example but the other side would be say, Kanye.

And it was good to keep the info flowing on Kanye too. Why? When he turned into a grifter, MK Ultra'd plant attempting to smear and takedown Trump himself?

The more we keep these people in the line of sight the faster we can spot the traitors, move that narrative forward and disconnect ourselves from him. This is important for defense too because there are a TON of people trading on America First and MAGA rn who are nothing but shameless grifters.

Don't think Tate is one, personally. Either way we need to keep track, in places like this.

Yeah but anyway.