Thanks 4ever. I've very well aware of Kash Patel in the context of the Q drops, and have been for years!
Sometimes, I think some of us have a way of thinking that just because someone is a white hat or important or doing an important function in the Q operation sense, awakening sense or maga sense, that optics or the way of politics or the way the rest of the world functions isn't important.
All of the signatories to this letter - a letter that is being submitted on a formal basis in a govt. administration situation - are heads of their departments etc. They held very significant formally TOP positions.
"never working on the same level of these guys" = was not working on the same level of POSITION in any formal sense.
Kash did very important, if not critical work. He was an aide to Nunes, a staffer at the Nat. Sec. Council, and later was in the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) as a principal deputy to Acting Director Grenel.
In the way the world works, you just don't add a junior staff member to a list of signatories like this. It would not make sense, and seem very out of place to all involved.
By the way, this says nothing about the significance of Patel as a player or feature in the current info war. Given his work at Truth Social, and the 'trolling' he and others did around baby q, later Q account at TS, it's not too difficult to imagine that Patel may easily have been or is currently very close to the nexus of the Q operation.
While for some, maybe like yourself, seeing Kash's signature on this letter might inspire some sort of confidence or belief in whether its a good thing or a bad thing or whether people signing it are 'good' or 'bad', contextually, it just would not make sense. I mean, we can be confident that whether the letter / initiative is good or bad, if it is 'good' its purpose and audience is NOT you NOR I nor anons.
We should see and understand what is being done in the context it is being done, and the purpose for which it is done. To me, that's more effective in terms of attempting to apply evaluations, as opposed to whether "the guys I like and trust" signed something or were involved in something. But maybe that's just me?
Personally, it gives me confidence that things are going the way we believe they are going. I’d be concerned if any of the people I mentioned earlier were on the letter. It shows us who is DS.
Aha. So you are assuming that the submission of this letter is NOT something that Donald Trump or the White Hats want? is that the idea?
"Fisa goes both ways" Q3603
I think the assumption that this letter must be bad, that it helps the DS, and therefore, that signatories must be deep state is very simplistic. I understand that people can think like that, but it seems way too simplistic and well, naive to me. But I guess that's mixed in with a lot of my own conclusions and beliefs about "what is going on".
For example, I'm def. of the school, and confident, that Barr is certainly cooperating with Trump. Nunes there can be no real question about, or Ratcliff. And the only reason I might doubt Pompeo is because of Tucker's recent statements, but in themselves, they are not enough for me to feel conclusive in any way that DJT does not trust Pompeo.
And believing someone is DS just because they lost weight, or that them losing weight shows they are somehow deep state, well, that seems pretty dumb to me (no offense). I think Q would want us to practice freedom of thought:
"Free thought" is a philosophical viewpoint which holds that positions regarding truth should be formed on the basis of logic, reason, and empiricism, rather than authority, tradition, revelation, or dogma.
Personally, I'm 100% confident that things are going the way 'we' want them. The signs of the winning are everywhere. But its narrative warfare, and there are MANY layers to the narratives, and different groups get attached to different layers.
For example, Con Inc aka the Establishment "conservative" voices want everyone to believe that NOT impeaching Biden, NOT doing it yesterday, and that Biden in office itself is a really bad thing (something we should all doom about).
But in reality, Biden in the Oval Office is absolutely brilliant and wonderful from the viewpoint of the Plan, the Q operation, the awakening of the public (esp. central people and even now folks on the left), from the viewpoint of the 2024 election. That last one should be obvious, because IF they actually try to steal the election again and EVEN if they so-called 'succeeded', absolutely NO ONE would buy it. Because even the left hate Biden in the office now. But they cannot just get rid of him, because they spent the last 3-4 years telling everyone ON the left that Biden was going to be so different and do so well compared to Trump.
Biden is the perfect campaign opponent for Trump. Biden is EVERYTHING the establishment tried to tell America that Trump was, narratives which have been in collapse since the day Biden took office. So running against Biden in 2024 is exactly what Trump, and maga, should want.
Particular if Trump put in place some sort of devolution continuity plan, it means a lot of the key, critical functions of the govt and nation are actually safe, protected, while the exposure and disclosure phase all plays out (2021-2025).
Anyway, as for "the way we believe they are going", I'm not sure who you include in "we" there, as I can only see a LOT of diversity among anons as to how they understand and believe how things are going, and I'm wondering if you're not assuming that everyone believes or sees things the way you do.
Diversity of belief and thought are a good thing, if we are open to discussion, learning, and aren't overly protective of our own rigid beliefs, imo.
No, I’m not seeing that everyone thinks the way I do. Thank you for your “pretty dumb, no offense” comment. I’m far beyond what you believe. And, for the comment about Pompeo and losing weight, I’m not cutting on him.-I’m using this as a reference regarding time. In other words, Pompeo started waffling regarding Trump at about the same time as we see the “new and improved” Pompeo. Both of these coincide but thank you for your assumptions. I’m pretty dumbfounded at what this has been interpreted as. I’m saying that if you want some
of us old timers to buy what the letter is trying to sell, try harder. My comment was a hint to where they,(the DS), need to focus.
P.S.-I believe that the plan is going exactly as planned.
u/#q1482
Thanks 4ever. I've very well aware of Kash Patel in the context of the Q drops, and have been for years!
Sometimes, I think some of us have a way of thinking that just because someone is a white hat or important or doing an important function in the Q operation sense, awakening sense or maga sense, that optics or the way of politics or the way the rest of the world functions isn't important.
All of the signatories to this letter - a letter that is being submitted on a formal basis in a govt. administration situation - are heads of their departments etc. They held very significant formally TOP positions.
"never working on the same level of these guys" = was not working on the same level of POSITION in any formal sense.
Kash did very important, if not critical work. He was an aide to Nunes, a staffer at the Nat. Sec. Council, and later was in the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) as a principal deputy to Acting Director Grenel.
In the way the world works, you just don't add a junior staff member to a list of signatories like this. It would not make sense, and seem very out of place to all involved.
By the way, this says nothing about the significance of Patel as a player or feature in the current info war. Given his work at Truth Social, and the 'trolling' he and others did around baby q, later Q account at TS, it's not too difficult to imagine that Patel may easily have been or is currently very close to the nexus of the Q operation.
While for some, maybe like yourself, seeing Kash's signature on this letter might inspire some sort of confidence or belief in whether its a good thing or a bad thing or whether people signing it are 'good' or 'bad', contextually, it just would not make sense. I mean, we can be confident that whether the letter / initiative is good or bad, if it is 'good' its purpose and audience is NOT you NOR I nor anons.
We should see and understand what is being done in the context it is being done, and the purpose for which it is done. To me, that's more effective in terms of attempting to apply evaluations, as opposed to whether "the guys I like and trust" signed something or were involved in something. But maybe that's just me?
Personally, it gives me confidence that things are going the way we believe they are going. I’d be concerned if any of the people I mentioned earlier were on the letter. It shows us who is DS.
Aha. So you are assuming that the submission of this letter is NOT something that Donald Trump or the White Hats want? is that the idea?
"Fisa goes both ways" Q3603
I think the assumption that this letter must be bad, that it helps the DS, and therefore, that signatories must be deep state is very simplistic. I understand that people can think like that, but it seems way too simplistic and well, naive to me. But I guess that's mixed in with a lot of my own conclusions and beliefs about "what is going on".
For example, I'm def. of the school, and confident, that Barr is certainly cooperating with Trump. Nunes there can be no real question about, or Ratcliff. And the only reason I might doubt Pompeo is because of Tucker's recent statements, but in themselves, they are not enough for me to feel conclusive in any way that DJT does not trust Pompeo.
And believing someone is DS just because they lost weight, or that them losing weight shows they are somehow deep state, well, that seems pretty dumb to me (no offense). I think Q would want us to practice freedom of thought:
Personally, I'm 100% confident that things are going the way 'we' want them. The signs of the winning are everywhere. But its narrative warfare, and there are MANY layers to the narratives, and different groups get attached to different layers.
For example, Con Inc aka the Establishment "conservative" voices want everyone to believe that NOT impeaching Biden, NOT doing it yesterday, and that Biden in office itself is a really bad thing (something we should all doom about).
But in reality, Biden in the Oval Office is absolutely brilliant and wonderful from the viewpoint of the Plan, the Q operation, the awakening of the public (esp. central people and even now folks on the left), from the viewpoint of the 2024 election. That last one should be obvious, because IF they actually try to steal the election again and EVEN if they so-called 'succeeded', absolutely NO ONE would buy it. Because even the left hate Biden in the office now. But they cannot just get rid of him, because they spent the last 3-4 years telling everyone ON the left that Biden was going to be so different and do so well compared to Trump.
Biden is the perfect campaign opponent for Trump. Biden is EVERYTHING the establishment tried to tell America that Trump was, narratives which have been in collapse since the day Biden took office. So running against Biden in 2024 is exactly what Trump, and maga, should want.
Particular if Trump put in place some sort of devolution continuity plan, it means a lot of the key, critical functions of the govt and nation are actually safe, protected, while the exposure and disclosure phase all plays out (2021-2025).
Anyway, as for "the way we believe they are going", I'm not sure who you include in "we" there, as I can only see a LOT of diversity among anons as to how they understand and believe how things are going, and I'm wondering if you're not assuming that everyone believes or sees things the way you do.
Diversity of belief and thought are a good thing, if we are open to discussion, learning, and aren't overly protective of our own rigid beliefs, imo.
No, I’m not seeing that everyone thinks the way I do. Thank you for your “pretty dumb, no offense” comment. I’m far beyond what you believe. And, for the comment about Pompeo and losing weight, I’m not cutting on him.-I’m using this as a reference regarding time. In other words, Pompeo started waffling regarding Trump at about the same time as we see the “new and improved” Pompeo. Both of these coincide but thank you for your assumptions. I’m pretty dumbfounded at what this has been interpreted as. I’m saying that if you want some of us old timers to buy what the letter is trying to sell, try harder. My comment was a hint to where they,(the DS), need to focus. P.S.-I believe that the plan is going exactly as planned.