Megyn Kelly is the classic example of how a person ‘worked’ for the corrupt MSM, then once she got away and had a clear picture of what media bias looked like, now has seen the light! She is now a star by taking that brilliant mind and attacking that which she used to support!
There is no Great Awakening without people waking up, changing, revising their world view and view of the players.
In early 2016, I thought Donald Trump was a clown. I thought his candidacy was a joke. Then I watched a video called "the untruth about Donald Trump", a classic completely exposing the contradictions between what he was actually saying and what the media says he was saying, and I asked myself: why?
And then I listened to one speech, two speeches and then three, and I realized, he is the real deal 100%.
Imagine someone far more embedded in the system, say, a news reporter or high level journalist. How much farther someone like that might have to travel to re-orient themselves.
But the clip speaks for itself. She's powerful, and personally, I don't detect any traces of slime. Only clear straight hitback.
The point is not "now this person is good". Who is good, actually? From the spiritual perspective, no one is "good' in the full sense.
The point is, what is she doing now, this year, this month. Not what or who she was 2 3 or 8 years ago.
We cannot win without people waking up and changing. It doesn't mean we should dump our discernment, or simply fawn over words, or apparent actions. (There are some really big slimeballs out there pretending to support DJT, when its clear they are slime or even DS assets).
But discernment swings both ways. If you have doubts in this case, put it on the shelf, and continue to observe. But note: an inability to see possibilities is the fundamentalist's game.
And, in severe danger of taking this reply/comment to ridiculous lengths, (too late?), I'll also mention one possible angle to consider this from; narrative impact. Did Kelly advance or push back the DJT / Maga agenda in this interview? Were her actions a + for us, or a -?
Rather than seeking to judge personalities, we can also look at things from the vantage point of: net effect: Good or bad?
I can't believe this timeline sometimes, Megyn Kelly is on our side now?
Great comment in the x thread:
Megyn Smelly is now Megyn Smelly-Good?
There is no Great Awakening without people waking up, changing, revising their world view and view of the players.
In early 2016, I thought Donald Trump was a clown. I thought his candidacy was a joke. Then I watched a video called "the untruth about Donald Trump", a classic completely exposing the contradictions between what he was actually saying and what the media says he was saying, and I asked myself: why?
And then I listened to one speech, two speeches and then three, and I realized, he is the real deal 100%.
Imagine someone far more embedded in the system, say, a news reporter or high level journalist. How much farther someone like that might have to travel to re-orient themselves.
But the clip speaks for itself. She's powerful, and personally, I don't detect any traces of slime. Only clear straight hitback.
The point is not "now this person is good". Who is good, actually? From the spiritual perspective, no one is "good' in the full sense.
The point is, what is she doing now, this year, this month. Not what or who she was 2 3 or 8 years ago.
We cannot win without people waking up and changing. It doesn't mean we should dump our discernment, or simply fawn over words, or apparent actions. (There are some really big slimeballs out there pretending to support DJT, when its clear they are slime or even DS assets).
But discernment swings both ways. If you have doubts in this case, put it on the shelf, and continue to observe. But note: an inability to see possibilities is the fundamentalist's game.
And, in severe danger of taking this reply/comment to ridiculous lengths, (too late?), I'll also mention one possible angle to consider this from; narrative impact. Did Kelly advance or push back the DJT / Maga agenda in this interview? Were her actions a + for us, or a -?
Rather than seeking to judge personalities, we can also look at things from the vantage point of: net effect: Good or bad?
End of diatribe.