Your post reminds me of when I was a fairly average high school football player. Sometimes on defense I would get faked out because I failed to focus on my key, which in my case was the tight end.
I think there is really only one key to follow in this scenario and that is POTUS himself, and, I would say, by extension Scavino. The farther you move away from POTUS and his inner circle, the more you have to sift through the bits and pieces of information to find a few flecks of golden truth.
I get that some people are adverse to putting all their eggs in one basket like that. My reasoning is if somehow President Trump is not the ultimate white hat we believe he is, we are totally screwed anyway. Don’t get me wrong, I think for myself and consult other sources. Usually when things don’t initially make sense to me, or wasn’t forecasted in the Q drops.
As for who to vote for? My opinion is the people POTUS endorses have been carefully studied to know if they will support the MAGA agenda, or ride the claim they are mavericks who vote on principle. Even when those principles have them voting with the Dems.
He sounds like a broken record. He made an almost identical speech last September. I do understand his reverence for the role of biblical Israel in the history of the world, but the modern state of Israel is hardly the same thing. And, as a Christian minister he should be well aware of that.
I will say he always sounds upbeat and positive when he is speaking, regardless of the topic. I would like to read the entire speech transcript before I render a more harsh judgment on his comments.
Comey was arrested. Bolton was arrested and pled guilty. Letitia James indicted. Fulton County Election Commission raided, DNI active in the investigation. Maricopa County avoided a raid and chose to cooperate in being investigated.
As for the Epstein files, I believe the President was saying the way the Democrats portrayed them was a hoax. Out of 3+ million documents dropped were there really any new revelations? Maybe Epstein‘s ties to the DS scientific community. I also recall there was some evidence that Bannon had closer ties to Epstein than most people realized.
My personal belief on the really damning Epstein material is that was gathered, cleaned up, and hidden away by the clowns a long time ago. If they had lost containment of that core material there would have been no need for Epstein to die, the damage would have already been done.
A little off topic, but my favorite moment of amazement by a foreign visitor was their reaction to needing medical care in the United States. I work for a French owned company and one of their managers needed medical care while visiting our facility. I explained our Immediate Care facilities and drove her there.
When she came out she was in total amazement at how efficient the process was compared to France. She went from being afraid of our medical system based on the propaganda she had heard, to admitting it was much better than the care in France.
If you stop to consider the overarching objective and the strategy employed, there is no reason to panic. The objective isn’t to just get the current Iranian Government to capitulate, it is to cut the Cabal’s strings and truly liberate Iran.
The strategy employed should actually put people’s minds at ease. There was no conventional saber rattling. No build up to justify a boots on the ground invasion and occupation. Instead there were crippling strikes against their command and control, and their military. Next, was the equally crippling blockade that has a stranglehold on Iran’s oil industry and economy.
But, that blockade isn’t just impacting the economy of Iran. It is impacting the EU, the UK, and Israel. Those impacts aren’t collateral damage, they are intentional, they are leverage to eliminate the NWO’s control over the corrupt Iranian regime and by extension the people of Iran.
That’s my opinion and analysis, for what it’s worth. Knowing what is at stake, I don’t mind paying more for gas now, because we’re going to be living in a better version of the world when this is done. And, gas prices are going to plummet when the Strait of Hormuz reopens.
Remember when Graham asked very specific questions about Unlawful Enemy Combatants to then SCOTUS nominee Kavanaugh? I can’t find the video clip, but I think about it occasionally.
I don’t understand Graham’s role in all of this, but POTUS seems to still have some use for him. And, given the choice between the two, I’ll follow POTUS over Flynn.
The “free market” Bessent trashed is the illusion the NWO has been selling to us for decades. But, I have to begrudgingly admit it was pretty smart to brand their system of economic control as “the free market” system.
I live close enough to Massie’s district that I was inundated with ads for this race. I didn’t find the ads for either candidate to be very good or persuasive. So, I’m not sure how much the money really influenced the outcome.
This race followed the same pattern as incumbents Liz Cheney and Tom Rice being defeated during in a primary. President Trump endorsed their opponent and used his bullhorn to bash them. Each race followed a similar pattern, primary turnout nearly doubled and the incumbent was readily defeated.
What I think should be concerning to all of is the fact both candidates were getting the majority of their financial support from Pro-Israel entities. That’s something that should make us all curious.
It wasn’t necessary to be curious about Gallrein, there has been a vocal and concerted effort to make sure people knew he was getting this level of support from Pro-Israel groups.
On the other hand, it is scarcely mentioned that Massie is also backed by a major Pro-Israel organization. Maybe it’s because Yass claims to be libertarian and it takes a little digging to learn Yass is a big AIPAC supporter who also supports Netanyahu.
But, honestly, is it surprising that people who want control would butter both sides of their political bread?
Yass also provides substantial financial support to AIPAC.
The best defense I could make for Massie is that he sincerely believes what he says, but the net effect of his political career has maintained the status quo.
That’s why in spite of Massie’s rhetoric being diametrically opposed to other causes Yass supports, Yass recognizes Massie’s votes will almost always block real change. And, blocking real change is the objective.
I always chuckle when the backseat drivers feel the need to tell the guy swinging the wrecking ball against the Cabal how he could do it better. Prior to Donald Trump surprising the world and becoming POTUS, I don’t recall these people being so bold.
If POTUS is controlled by Israel there would be no Abraham Accords. The last thing Israel’s DS wants is lasting peace in the Middle East.
If POTUS is controlled by Israel, we would not have taken the lead in Iran. Instead, we would have set back and let Israel do what they always do, stir the pot just enough to keep the region in turmoil.
The Q drops listed the rogue nuclear states who are leveraged to protect the Cabal and they were being systematically taken off the list. The drops told us there would come a day where Iran was next. And, they told us a certain country was being saved for last. Everything we’re seeing today was basically foretold.
Instead of putting stars, and former stars on stage, put average Americans who have undiscovered talent up there. We should be showcasing people who make up the fabric of our country. My guess is we have literally millions of people with equal, or more talent than these “stars” the music industry selected to put in front of us.
SCOTUS narrowed the Milligan precedent in the 1942 case Ex parte Quirin. They ruled that it does not protect those classified as unlawful enemy combatants under the laws of war.
I think there were also a couple cases that came up during the aftermath of 9/11 that further addressed unlawful enemy combatants. And, there are Q posts where Lindsey Graham was asking Brett Kavanaugh very pointed questions about how the law treats unlawful enemy combatants. Unfortunately, I don’t have time to dig them up right now.
What I am having trouble reconciling is that Massie’s single largest donor also supports AIPAC.
I know there is a technicality that those donations get washed through a PAC run by former Rand Paul campaign people. But, that doesn’t mean Massie had to quietly accept that support, he could have publicly asked for it to stop.
This seems to beg two serious questions:
Why would someone who supports AIPAC also support Massie?
Why would Massie accept that support?
My money is on the white hats.
When I learned who Massie’s biggest donor is, I started questioning the veracity of Massie’s anti-Israel rhetoric. While it’s true the money gets washed through a PAC, Massie is well aware where the money originates. He could easily ask that Yass not support him.
It seems to me Massie fits the definition of performative controlled opposition. You grandstand a lot, but your real objective is to slow down reforms that threaten the status quo.
I looked at a couple other primaries where President Trump went after a Republican opponent and the results were similar.
When Harriet Hageman unseated Liz Cheney in 2022, turnout was up 70 percent.
I also took a look at 2022 when Tom Rice was primaried in South Carolina. There was no primary in 2020 due to Covid. During the 2018 primary there were 45,812 votes cast, he won. During 2022 there were 85,212 votes cast to unseat him. That’s an 86% increase in turnout, so it’s a fair precedent.
It’s also an example of Democrat’s hypocrisy. All their race baiting rhetoric goes out the window if their own political career is at stake. If she was true to Democrat doctrine Wasserman-Schultz would retire and make room for a minority candidate.
I have one difference of opinion. It might actually be about Israel and its DS. They desire to hamstring President Trump’s efforts to bring down the cabal and hopefully run the clock out in his term.
If paying people to besmirch their country and claim it is controlling President Trump severely erodes his political power they would privately be congratulating themselves. Publicly they would discredit all their controlled opposition operatives and continue their influence operations.
Part of me says don’t waste your time and part of me says we do have to engage with these people. So, I would answer their question with a question/statement and it would be:
The only way I can answer that question is if you explain to me what you believe we already had?
If you try to answer them, without understanding their frame of reference, they have a wide open field to refute every point you make. If you know their frame of reference, then you have the ability to tick off what’s different and they can only debate on the basis of what they defined.