First off, she is highly intelligent. Several times, the interviewer made a misstatement and she quickly (and kindly) corrected it. Stupid people tend to not notice or correct things the way she did.
Second, even if she were a LARP or Black Hat psyop, the CONCEPT that she is conveying makes sense. If there is a Q Team, and if they are White Hat, and if they want to take down the evil globalist system, then OF COURSE they would be monitoring the thinking of the people, and especially the sheep, to understand what move to make next.
You could not possibly conduct such a mission without extensive intel on what people are thinking. Even low-life politicians have people conducting opinion polls and focus groups to figure out how they can manipulate their language to become frauds by saying things people want to hear.
Q Team would have to keep an eye on the pulse of the thinking out there, on all sides, to gather intel to know what steps to take next.
Globalists would have the same desire, but they are so arrogant in their little bubble world that they might not be so focused on this type of thing. They have been able to force things in the past. A group of people who wanted to do things more cleanly would need to understand the people.
Third, if they were to form a task force for this, she is an excellent candidate to recruit. If her background is the psychology of groups of employees in the business world, as it relates to mergers and acquisitions, she has experience trying to understand HOW people think and WHY they think what they do, and then providing reports of her analysis.
I was skeptical of her TV interview. Had never heard of her and didn't really believe her explanation of why she was saying Q talking points.
But this interview brought a lot of that out, and was very interesting.
Everything you detailed struck me as well as I continue to feel her out.
Side note - but relevant...
The methodology she describes - studying people and all that jazz - to measure/get a temperature reading on where different people groups are...
This is an area that I have been focusing on for the last three years, as understanding the answers to those observation data points helps plot out trajectory and leads to insight on what to do next (speaking purely on a personal level).
So knowing how real and true and useful this methodology has been for myself - and how I have used it to know when and where to Move the Overton Window - in which people groups, etc. AND monitor when others are moving the Overton Window....
She's either very aware of said elements and is just parroting these things... Or she's very aware and what she says about being involved with them (whether simply observing them herself, or being part of a group that feeds these perspectives to other operators) - is true.
Either way - I know she is not full of crap.
And - I can see it in this thread here - there are minds that will see this, and minds that simply can't.
I get it. But that doesn't mean it's wrong or doesn't exist.
So by my own assessment - as someone who operates in the very ways she details - I believe, at least what she is speaking about, as a subject matter - is completely on point.
The rest is left to be shown - but does it even matter, if the concepts and need for said concepts are true and real?
First off, she is highly intelligent. Several times, the interviewer made a misstatement and she quickly (and kindly) corrected it. Stupid people tend to not notice or correct things the way she did.
Second, even if she were a LARP or Black Hat psyop, the CONCEPT that she is conveying makes sense. If there is a Q Team, and if they are White Hat, and if they want to take down the evil globalist system, then OF COURSE they would be monitoring the thinking of the people, and especially the sheep, to understand what move to make next.
You could not possibly conduct such a mission without extensive intel on what people are thinking. Even low-life politicians have people conducting opinion polls and focus groups to figure out how they can manipulate their language to become frauds by saying things people want to hear.
Q Team would have to keep an eye on the pulse of the thinking out there, on all sides, to gather intel to know what steps to take next.
Globalists would have the same desire, but they are so arrogant in their little bubble world that they might not be so focused on this type of thing. They have been able to force things in the past. A group of people who wanted to do things more cleanly would need to understand the people.
Third, if they were to form a task force for this, she is an excellent candidate to recruit. If her background is the psychology of groups of employees in the business world, as it relates to mergers and acquisitions, she has experience trying to understand HOW people think and WHY they think what they do, and then providing reports of her analysis.
I was skeptical of her TV interview. Had never heard of her and didn't really believe her explanation of why she was saying Q talking points.
But this interview brought a lot of that out, and was very interesting.
Thanks, OP, for posting!
Also ...
Just noticed that behind her, on a table, is a painting of the Columbia Pictures woman statue logo.
"You are watching a movie."
Hmm ...
That stood out to me too. Odd picture to just have hanging out in your house. Definitely intentional.
Everything you detailed struck me as well as I continue to feel her out.
Side note - but relevant...
The methodology she describes - studying people and all that jazz - to measure/get a temperature reading on where different people groups are...
This is an area that I have been focusing on for the last three years, as understanding the answers to those observation data points helps plot out trajectory and leads to insight on what to do next (speaking purely on a personal level).
So knowing how real and true and useful this methodology has been for myself - and how I have used it to know when and where to Move the Overton Window - in which people groups, etc. AND monitor when others are moving the Overton Window....
She's either very aware of said elements and is just parroting these things... Or she's very aware and what she says about being involved with them (whether simply observing them herself, or being part of a group that feeds these perspectives to other operators) - is true.
Either way - I know she is not full of crap.
And - I can see it in this thread here - there are minds that will see this, and minds that simply can't.
I get it. But that doesn't mean it's wrong or doesn't exist.
So by my own assessment - as someone who operates in the very ways she details - I believe, at least what she is speaking about, as a subject matter - is completely on point.
The rest is left to be shown - but does it even matter, if the concepts and need for said concepts are true and real?
No prob👍🏻
Many of these mistakes bolstered her points but she still had the integrity to correct them.