Yes. And I thought that was a little suspicious, however, it's not conclusive. To say "Q" in the public sphere you pretty much have to say Qanon for people to know what your talking about. I've had to use "Qanon" when people had no clue what I meant. Who knows.
Regardless, if she was compromised, taking her out isn't useful without evidence of the compromise. There is nothing there that I can find. Keeping her in, even if she is controlled opposition, is still useful. I have a long list of people that I think fall into that category. Just deleting her without declass is a loss of a useful asset no matter her intentions.
Yes. And I thought that was a little suspicious, however, it's not conclusive. To say "Q" in the public sphere you pretty much have to say Qanon for people to know what your talking about. I've had to use "Qanon" when people had no clue what I meant. Who knows.
Regardless, if she was compromised, taking her out isn't useful without evidence of the compromise. There is nothing there that I can find. Keeping her in, even if she is controlled opposition, is still useful. I have a long list of people that I think fall into that category. Just deleting her without declass is a loss of a useful asset no matter her intentions.
My read is that, she was not useful enough to be read in to higher levels of this oepration, but could not be whetted enough to be read in.
Her Father.. Mike N. Of NY pushed that shady public land sale deal...