“Nominating someone who has a track record of pushing conspiracy theories … is not only irresponsible choice, but also dangerous”.
If people like this are saying similar things - is this a Q proof? It sounds like.
Let’s think logically:
The new DNI (with a track record of “conspiracy theories”) starts the job. What are the possible scenarios?
The DNI gains the access to the best information in class and finds out that the “conspiracy theories” were just false … curing the brain from ever believing these type of theories again.
The DNI gains the access and finds out that all these theories were true!
“… is not only irresponsible choice, but also dangerous”.
Let’s look at our scenarios:
Is the first one dangerous? Nope.
Is the second dangerous? Yep! Dangerous for them.
What the ex-CIA just told us? Is this a Q proof (right from the Deep State)?
“Nominating someone who has a track record of pushing conspiracy theories … is not only irresponsible choice, but also dangerous”.
If people like this are saying similar things - is this a Q proof? It sounds like.
Let’s think logically:
The new DNI (with a track record of “conspiracy theories”) starts the job. What are the possible scenarios?
The DNI gains the access to the best information in class and finds out that the “conspiracy theories” were just false … curing the brain from ever believing these type of theories again.
The DNI gains the access and finds out that all these theories were true!
“… is not only irresponsible choice, but also dangerous”.
Let’s look at our scenarios:
Is the first one dangerous? Nope.
Is the second dangerous? Yep! Dangerous for them.
What the ex-CIA just told us? Is this a Q proof (right from the Deep State)?