If it pleases you, may I follow up briefly upon my previous post concerning Phil Godlewski?

Previously, I said that he absolutely has a source. He has a source, but the source may use him as a "voice" for disinformation or accurate information or some combination of the two. And I'm not sure whether Phil, himself, knows. But he has a source.

My previous post concerning Phil was here: https://greatawakening.win/p/15JAXfN1lL/phil-godlewski--some-reflections/

The post is long. Probably the most casually interesting aspect of that post is that in one particular video, Phil accidentally directly addresses his handler. Read my previous post for details.

For further consideration, I ask you to listen to the follow video at 31:56. https://rumble.com/v16weeu-current-events-may-31st-2022.html

In this video, on May 31, Phil asserts that Paul Pelosi was in fact arrested for child pornography. That may prove to be incorrect. That said, we have just recently learned that Mr. Pelosi had an undisclosed passenger in the car with him at the time of the crash. And Trump's attorney has suggested it was a child. ...And Phil was connecting this arrest with some sort of sexual incident involving a child on May 31. Bottom line: there's a source. Things may be a little garbled. The source may introduce disinformation along with information along with nearly-correct information. But there's a source.

Before you tell me everything he gets wrong, let me ask you to perform a mental exercise. Assume I tell you that I have a "source" that lets me know the lottery numbers ahead of time. Further assume that I am wrong 97% of the time. But that I am correct 3% of the time. You could dwell on the 97%. But the thing is this. I could not be right 3% of the time without a source. At a 3% hit rate, I'd be winning once per month. and would track to being the wealthiest man on earth. The only way to do that is with the aid of a source.

The bottom line is that if a person accomplishes something that there is no way to accomplish with an outside factor, then there is an outside factor. Irrespective of whether the person is a good person, a classy person, whether you like what the person sells, whether the person has a "past," or any other thing you might think of, there is an outside factor at play. That's where we are with Phil.

If it pleases you, may I follow up briefly upon my previous post concerning Phil Godlewski?

Previously, I said that he absolutely has a source. He has a source, but the source may use him as a "voice" for disinformation or accurate information or some combination of the two. And I'm not sure whether Phil, himself, knows. But he has a source.

My previous post concerning Phil was here: https://greatawakening.win/p/15JAXfN1lL/phil-godlewski--some-reflections/

The post is long. Probably the most casually interesting aspect of that post is that in one particular video, Phil accidentally directly addresses his handler. Read my previous post for details.

For further consideration, I ask you to listen to the follow video at 31:56:00. https://rumble.com/v16weeu-current-events-may-31st-2022.html

In this video, on May 31, Phil asserts that Paul Pelosi was in fact arrested for child pornography. That may prove to be incorrect. That said, we have just recently learned that Mr. Pelosi had an undisclosed passenger in the car with him at the time of the crash. And Trump's attorney has suggested it was a child. ...And Phil was connecting this arrest with some sort of sexual incident involving a child on May 31. Bottom line: there's a source. Things may be a little garbled. The source may introduce disinformation along with information along with nearly-correct information. But there's a source.

Before you tell me everything he gets wrong, let me ask you to perform a mental exercise. Assume I tell you that I have a "source" that lets me know the lottery numbers ahead of time. Further assume that I am wrong 97% of the time. But that I am correct 3% of the time. You could dwell on the 97%. But the thing is this. I could not be right 3% of the time without a source. At a 3% hit rate, I'd be winning once per month. and would track to being the wealthiest man on earth. The only way to do that is with the aid of a source.

The bottom line is that if a person accomplishes something that there is no way to accomplish with an outside factor, then there is an outside factor. Irrespective of whether the person is a good person, a classy person, whether you like what the person sells, whether the person has a "past," or any other thing you might think of, there is an outside factor at play. That's where we are with Phil.

If it pleases you, may I follow up briefly upon my previous post concerning Phil Godlewski?

Previously, I said that he absolutely has a source. He has a source, but the source may use him as a "voice" for disinformation or accurate information or some combination of the two. And I'm not sure whether Phil, himself, knows. But he has a source.

My previous post concerning Phil was here: https://greatawakening.win/p/15JAXfN1lL/phil-godlewski--some-reflections/

The post is long. Probably the most casually interesting aspect of that post is that in particular video, Phil accidentally directly addresses his handler. Read my previous post for details.

For further consideration, I ask you to listen to the follow video at 31:56:00. https://rumble.com/v16weeu-current-events-may-31st-2022.html

In this video, on May 31, Phil asserts that Paul Pelosi was in fact arrested for child pornography. That may prove to be incorrect. That said, we have just recently learned that Mr. Pelosi had an undisclosed passenger in the car with him at the time of the crash. And Trump's attorney has suggested it was a child. ...And Phil was connecting this arrest with some sort of sexual incident involving a child on May 31. Bottom line: there's a source. Things may be a little garbled. The source may introduce disinformation along with information along with nearly-correct information. But there's a source.

Before you tell me everything he gets wrong, let me ask you to perform a mental exercise. Assume I tell you that I have a "source" that lets me know the lottery numbers ahead of time. Further assume that I am wrong 97% of the time. But that I am correct 3% of the time. You could dwell on the 97%. But the thing is this. I could not be right 3% of the time without a source. At a 3% hit rate, I'd be winning once per month. and would track to being the wealthiest man on earth. The only way to do that is with the aid of a source.

The bottom line is that if a person accomplishes something that there is no way to accomplish with an outside factor, then there is an outside factor. Irrespective of whether the person is a good person, a classy person, whether you like what the person sells, whether the person has a "past," or any other thing you might think of, there is an outside factor at play. That's where we are with Phil.