>>115821 (lb)

Mostly agree, will add a few points.

>- Wakeup also matters coz this isn't just about elections, it's about a transformation of consciousness - worldwide event

I think the worldwide focus is another reason why this all went beyond Trump's first term. The actual "covid crackdown" has to some degree been hindered in the US due to a still semi-functioning Constitution, but many other countries got hit hard (Australia, etc.), regardless of whether their people thought they were part of the "free world". But those people are waking up now, as we see in all the protest videos that never get shown on TV.

>>116079 (lb) kek... appeared as I was writing this

>Huge protests expected in Greece today

>Dunno about Pence, time will tell.

I have an additional possible "decode" on Pence below.

>Some of what has happened was, as Q once noted, not meant to happen. Good guys lose battles. They do not lose the war ("God wins"), the only question is "at what cost?"

Totally agree.

>What white hats CAN do is gather good intell, make good use of it, stay alert and ready to respond to change, and take advantage of enemy mistakes whenever possible.

In principle, white hats can also infiltrate the enemy.

Infiltration goes both ways, kek.

I suspect this has been done in a way that goes beyond even the biggest "undercover cop" stings.

For any anons following this discussion, let me recommend the two books by Greg Jarrett (The Russia Hoax and Witch Hunt) as great sources for reviewing the whole Russia hoax.

The second is a followup to and expansion of the first.

He is good for putting together basic facts and exposing the flaws in the enemy narrative.

I am taking a much more Q-centric approach, with more double meanings.

But I found these books invaluable in recalling what happened and filling in gaps in my knowledge.

>>116087

>>115813 (lb) 1st post in DOJ decode/review

>>115817 (lb) last post so far, this post picks up from there

Hold, for the moment, the question about what really went on with the Flynn firing.

I hope I have at least raised serious doubts regarding the official story.

Up to this point, I have employed a rather intuitive sort of argument, aiming to piece together widely accepted facts to tell a plausible story about a bigger picture.

But now I want to introduce a different sort of reasoning that I will also use at length in the posts to come.

Or rather I will introduce it to this particular discussion, since anons who follow Q are quite familiar with it.

I am talking about the "decode" style of reasoning that looks at "errors" and timestamps and other such features of communications from key figures and aims to tie them to other pieces of information to draw a conclusion or tell a story.

Anyone who has followed Q attentively knows that at least some "decodes" of this sort are on the mark.

A good example (a very good example) is Scott Free.

President Trump capitalized that phrase in a tweet, and to Trump haters he just seemed to be a moron, but anons who pay attention to Q grasp that he gave us an excellent Q-proof.

(If my posts happen to reach some who have no idea what I am talking about right there, then make the effort to find out. You are in for a wild ride.)

That said, it is also true that sometimes anons post more speculative decodes that seem to go beyond what the solid evidence indicates.

And it is also true that some anons get burned out by decodes and end up tuning out.

That is why I am clarifying the role of the decodes in my larger set of reasoning here.

You can follow what I am saying if you simply follow the overt reasoning and skip the decodes.

And I think it is convincing even then.

But I think the decodes buttress that.

But if you disagree, and find the decodes outlandish, then just skip them.

(Or critique them... maybe I am just wrong in some cases. But being wrong in some cases doesn't mean I am wrong everywhere.)

The starting point of this decode is a misspelling in a tweet by Pence.

He wrote Louisiana as Lousiana (neglecting the [i]).

Multiple anons saw this and offered analyses (and some of them may also be right, regardless of what I say here).

But my take is that the tweet is an ingenious pointer to Pence's two big scenes in the show: the Flynn "firing" and the electoral count.

See the graphic for details.

>>116090

I have argued that Pence was acting when it came to the electoral count, and knew to allow the Biden "win".

And I have argued that Pence was also acting when it came to the Flynn firing.

The idea that Trump fired Flynn to mollify Pence ultimately makes very little sense at all.

What then did happen?

I am sure most anons recall Comey's smug recollection of how it was "early" and he just decided to send some agents over to entrap Flynn, protocol notwithstanding.

But it was actually Andy McCabe who called Flynn to set up the meeting.

Put aside, for the moment, your own internal "official" story about what is what.

Just focus on your impressions of Andy McCabe and Mike Flynn.

I don't care how much you "know" about Q or any of the DOJ subplots... you likely has some distinct impression of these two guys.

Which one set the trap?

Which one really set the trap?

>>116091

I think that Flynn dropped a clue in advance, pointing to the fact that he knew he would be unjustly ousted (and Trump too)

As he was settling in for his short term in the White House, he told a reporter that Trump was like the charioteer in Ben-Hur.

I think that I ultimately decoded a hidden message there, but it took me some thinking to get there, so maybe it is worth explaining my initial steps.

Flynn seems to be referring to the 1959 film with a notorious chariot race.

But the film is based on an earlier book, and the book was enormously popular.

It was the second most popular book after the Bible.

And the author, former Union general Lew Wallace, was from Indiana (like Mike Pence).

He seems like an interesting guy: https://web.archive.org/web/20151015220552/http://www.neh.gov/humanities/2009/novemberdecember/feature/ben-hur

In the film, Judah Ben-Hur is played by Charlton Heston, and it struck me that there could be a "watch the water" angle when you look at his interactions with Jesus.

But I think some of these clues end up being teasers that point to a deeper comm.

The key was finding a Q post that matched the Flynn remark.

I think Flynn dropped a message for our enemies that Q confirmed.

For the rest, see the graphic.

>>116092

But if Flynn (and our team) set a trap for the enemy, then it surely backfired, right?

Flynn even had to sell his house to pay the resulting legal fees.

But that isn't really a counterargument.

Is this a game or is this war?

Our enemies are cowards who think they deserve prizes for playing a game.

Is it surprising that they can be duped by real men willing to take on pain if duty calls?

If Flynn did trap McCabe, then it was surely a brilliant move.

But why? What did it gain?

It gave Trump his first big defeat as President.

It put him on defense, and draining the swamp never took off.

Eventually those promoting the MAGA agenda got purged from the administration.

And the Flynn firing was the first big win for the Russia hoax, which hounded Trump for the next two years.

Wait... that all sounds bad, doesn't it?

But did it all work out?

The Russian hoax occupied the fake news media for the next two years.

And it occupied the overt deep state operators too.

But it proved a total failure... for them.

They launched all of their troops into an attack that achieved nothing.

But actually less than nothing, since the obvious failure led to a sharp drop in trust of the mainstream media, and they will never recover.

With the media salivating over the Russia hoax, the Q operation went live.

At first the media ignored it, and when it got traction, they chose their story: it was a baseless conspiracy theory.

By the time the not-all-there Mueller testified before Congress and dealt the final blow to their Russia hopes, they were too far gone with Q.

There was no way to backtrack and "discover"... with horror... that it was all actually a psyop coming from the White House itself.

In principle, they could have taken that angle, had they started in time.

They could have claimed that Trump was posting "coded" message on the "evil" site 8chan to stir up racists and anti-Semites... to start a race war or something like that.

But they missed the window of opportunity, since they were diverted by the Russia hoax.

After so much time had passed, any admission by the "official" media that Q was coming from the White House... but was bad and illegal and dangerous... would have undermined their own credibility even more.

In the big picture, the entire Russian hoax was a diversion for the enemy.

It led the deep state operators and their media lackeys to think they were on the verge of "getting" Trump.

But they lost the battle..

And while focused there, they missed the real attack from our side, the Q operation.

Trump was never meant to win without Q, because Trump was never meant to win without us, and it is the Q operation that has prepared us for war.

The media took the bait and missed that entirely.

But if the Russia hoax is ultimately a good thing...

[I will pause for now on that cliffhanger...

I have additional posts in the works, but trying to put this stuff together in a coherent way takes time.]