This Q ride has been longer than some of us expected!

But where are we now?

In particular, why did Trump "lose" the election?

And how is that "move" panning out?

I am going to offer some "big picture" answers to these questions (and then later some much more detailed analyses and decodes... many of these days or weeks later).

But first I want to set down some things I take for granted.

First is that Q is real.

What I mean is simply that some person or team within the Trump administration was responsible for the Q drops.

This was clear beyond reasonable doubt years ago, although it was not a simple process to put together the evidence, and yet many did.

The mainstream media lies about this, and many people who regard themselves as intelligent and educated still have no idea, but so it is.

Second is that Q aimed to organize the battle against the ruling global cabal.

But this claim involves a supposition that such a cabal actually exists and should be fought.

I am not going to argue for that now.

More and more are waking up and getting it.

They are powerful (in some concrete sense) and evil and we need to crush them and Q has organized for this purpose.

That said, there is a certain argument to the effect that maybe "Q" was actually a disinformation campaign by the cabal itself.

The goal would be to sow confusion and inculcate passivity.

But as some have noted, this would make "Q" the most counterproductive "black pill" operation in history.

The actual effect has been to foster clarity of mind and an eagerness to work together to destroy the villains.

And then there is an argument that says that "Q" really did come from the Trump camp, but was just a propaganda effort to rally morons for Trump.

There was never any real goal of striking the global cabal.

But if that were true, then Trump and Q effectively formed a vast army that will eventually turn against them when we realize we've been duped.

And they did it very, very cleverly... but that is not the sort of thing you do cleverly.

The only viable conclusion, if you have been following Q for years now and have a grasp of the scope and complexity of it all, is that Q really did come from the Trump White House, and really did marshal us to fight the cabal, and did so rather effectively.

And the battle is ongoing.

>>115813

But then why did Trump "lose" the election?

Remember how it happened.

On election night, Trump was winning.

But then, in a handful of cities ruled by the Democratic machine, cities that just happened to be in contested states with many electoral votes, enough ballots appeared to knock Trump out of office.

Did Q team get duped by fake water main breaks and hidden suitcases?

It is really quite absurd, isn't it?

The only reasonable conclusion is that our guys on the inside allowed it to happen.

But why?

To answer that, first step back further and ask a different question: why didn't Trump act to smash the cabal while he was in office?

Obviously it took time to put good people in place, and oust bad people, and collect evidence and write indictments and so on.

But you might have thought (as I thought) that at some point well before the end of the Trump term, they'd have to go with what they'd got and actually make the arrests.

But suppose that the arrest teams struck suddenly, grabbing Soros and bundling him off to a special place, and likewise all his comrades.

What would the mainstream media say?

They would scream that Trump had assumed illegal dictatorial powers, and demand immediate protests.

And tens of millions or more would heed the call.

So, realistically, Trump would have to strike the mainstream media as well, at the same time.

And not just the legacy media, but the main sites for social media.

And realistically not just that, but email and text messaging too.

Actually he'd have to shut down the whole internet, at least temporarily.

So one problem is that this ends up shutting down many other things too, basically most of the economy, since things that didn't use to depend on the internet now do.

People would die just from that.

And another thing is that the more extreme the measures are, the more the typical American will be inclined to see Trump as the bad guy and be ready to take even desparate measures to fight against him.

It would seem to be Antifa's dreamworld.

But more likely it would end up as hot civil war, and if the US were to fall into civil war, it is likely that other countries would start taking sides.

So that wouldn't be good.

Now obviously this is a very basic problem that I'm sure the white hats in military intelligence pondered for years, and no doubt the Q operation was a stroke of genius designed to prepare the people for the arrests, so that when they do come, people will cheer.

Q did very well during Trump's term.

But did Q fully prepare the people for mass arrests?

Take a look at the election.

I don't know how many people really voted for Biden/Harris, but let's say 70 million.

That's 70 million adult Americans voting for a mentally defective man who's family gets paid millions by the genocidal government of communist China.

And as his potential replacement, they chose a woman who's top qualification is that she will have sex with older men to advance her political career.

How would these people have reacted had Trump launched mass arrests in October or November or December of 2020?

I suppose that Trump and Q team mapped this all out well in advance, and realized that not enough people would be "awake" by Innauguration Day, 2021.

And so they conceived the plan to let the enemy steal the election.

One result is that now millions are much more "awake" than they were one year ago.

In that respect, giving the enemy a victory worked, as it has prepared the conditions that better enable their total defeat.

The upshot is that, regardless of what Trump or Q has said, it seems Trump's "loss" was planned well in advance.

>>115814

If Trump was meant to "lose" the election, then Mike Pence did as needed during the electoral vote count.

He allowed it to proceed so that Biden could be named President-Elect.

Pence might have done otherwise.

The Vice-President typically has no official powers of his own, and so acts as a political and ceremonial surrogate for the President.

But as President of the Senate, the Vice-President acts on his own authority.

In normal circumstances, this doesn't amount to much, since his main function is to break ties, and he votes to serve the agenda of the President, even though that is not constitutionally required.

But the electoral vote count was hardly a normal circumstance.

The powers of the President of the Senate in that situation are rather ill-defined, and he most certainly could have taken action to delay the count.

Moreover, it is not difficult to imagine scenarios where he would be inclined to do so even if Trump didn't want it that way.

For instance, suppose that Trump were simply a rich guy who ran as a lark, and won, but had tired of the job.

In such a case Pence might feel duty bound to fight to find a way to allow legitimate electoral votes to be counted.

Even if this reading of Trump were wrong, Pence might nonetheless think it right and act accordingly.

So if the plan was for Trump to "lose", then Pence needed to know and understand that, so he wouldn't go rogue.

It might seem that Trump could have given Pence some "soft" guidance.

"Mike, this is not the result we wanted, but you have a duty to perform and we don't want to go out by undermining the rule of law..."

But one problem is that Pence could have interpreted this as Trump wrongly giving up, and taken it upon himself to fight the good fight.

But we know that didn't happen, given how Trump and Pence speak about the topic in recent times.

Trump says that Pence is a good guy who la did the wrong thing on that day.

If Trump had actually offered tacit guidance to let Biden win, then why doesn't Pence defend himself and say that Trump is lying?

He doesn't, and instead rests on constitutional principle.

This means that Pence didn't get "soft" guidance.

And since he must have had guidance, it must have been "hard" guidance, and he must have been "read in" to the plan for Trump to "lose" as a tactical move.

And he followed that guidance, regardless of what he says or insinuates now.

Of course, none of that was meant to be obvious at first, so Pence must have known the role he would need to play during the past year.

He would be the one accused by many of letting Biden steal the election.

But I suspect that was a significant factor in why he was chosen from the start.

"We need a principled conservative who can do the job and take the abuse and trudge along with a cheery tone."

Both Trump and Pence are acting now when it comes to the electoral count, Pence saying he had to stand on principle, and Trump saying Pence is basically a good guy who fell short at the crucial moment.

The reality is that Trump planned to "lose" and so Pence had to understand this and be prepared to act accordingly and follow through with the act.

>>115815

Mike Pence actually has two big scenes in the big show.

He plays the same character in both, a principled conservative who is perhaps a bit too dim to "get" the hurly-burly of real politics, and so screws things up by being too rigid.

His second scene was the electoral vote count, and his first scene was the "firing" of Mike Flynn.

But if Pence was acting in the second scene, doesn't it make sense that he was acting in the first scene too?

The official story is that Trump fired Mike Flynn for lying to Pence.

But if we step back and look at the big picture considering what we know now, nothing really adds up.

Obama notoriously "advised" Trump to pick for his team whomever he deemed best... but avoid Mike Flynn.

Trump then hired Mike Flynn as National Security Advisor.

The Deep State was right to fear Flynn, as it seemed that he intended to slash the size of the intelligence apparatus.

But that would be very bad for them, since they rely on having the facilities and the imprimatur of the US government in collecting dirt on people.

Moreover, both Flynn and his son (who also worked for the transition team) had signaled that they believed there was something to Pizzagate (as indeed there is).

It was as if Flynn had overtly signaled to the bad guys that he was coming to get them.

And they got the signal and plotted to stop him.

As part of his transition work, Flynn spoke with the Russian ambassador, and the bad guys figured they could use this to tie Flynn to the "Russia collusion" attack that they had begun developing the prior summer.

Of course, it is perfectly reasonable and hardly illegal for an incoming national security official to have conversations with the official representatives of foreign countries.

The plot against Flynn started in the final days of the Obama administration, but it kicked into action when FBI Director James Comey decided to send two agents to interview Flynn at the White House, the apparent goal being to get Flynn to incriminate himself, or at least to get him to lie, which would be a crime in that circumstance.

But even though one of those agents was notorious anti-Trumper Peter Strzok, they didn't think he was lying.

The upshot is that Comey and the Deep State crew had basically nothing on Flynn.

But Trump fired Flynn anyway, supposedly because he lied to Mike Pence.

The official story is that Flynn had briefed Pence on the phone calls that were being targetted.

And Flynn, perhaps feeling the pressure of top DOJ officials coming after him just as he is getting established in his new job, misled Pence about what he had discussed with the Russian.

And then Pence, trusting Flynn, restated the content of Flynn's asssertions on national TV, and was afterwords exposed as speaking a falsehood.

So Flynn's "dishonesty", however minor and forgivable, was the cause of Pence embarassing himself on national TV.

Now if Flynn was meant to be an important player, as the Deep State certainly supposed, why didn't Trump just tell Pence to buck up and deal with it?

Well, maybe he couldn't.

Maybe Pence, being a very principled guy, was extremely offended by the lie, and by the fact that it led to him dishonoring himself in public by speaking falsely.

And maybe Trump knew that he couldn't afford to offend Pence at this early point, lest he lose support from social conservatives and establishment Republicans.

So he sacrificed Flynn.

But here's the thing: Trump has now "lied" about Pence repeatedly.

And Pence doesn't object.

What I mean, of course, is that Trump has repeatedly accused Pence of botching the job on the electoral vote count.

But if you follow my reasoning above, Pence was just doing what Trump wanted and needed.

But if Pence can tolerate and cooperate with these "lies" now, doesn't it seem that he could tolerate a relatively minor lie from a guy less accustomed to the political limelight than him, especially if that guy was basically decent and was meant to be a key player?

And especially if his loss would give the enemy a big victory?

The only way handing the deep state a win would would make sense is if Trump absolutely had to mollify Pence to keep his team together.

That might have seemed a viable interpretion back then, and the whole episode likely contributed to the view that Pence is not entirely reliable.

(Maybe not entirely reliable to the good guys, I mean, but potentially a witting or unwitting asset for the bad guys.)

But that now seems absurd, as it now seems apparent that Pence has proven himself a team player able to play his role in the big show.

>>115817

Actually I have a few more posts ready, but I will just pause there for now.