Storm coming?

Check this:

1st: anon here finds that delta between last two Q posts (4620 & 4621) is 17:17:55:55

>>10325459 (pb)

In Q4620, Q is confirming anon theory that 11.3 = KC (Kevin Clinesmith).

But muh double meanings…

11.3 is also a marker for Podesta going down.

2nd: anon here notices that in DS vid tweet, Podesta appears between 0:17 and 0:23

>>10325800 (pb)

https://twitter.com/DanScavino/status/1295554369518280704

And let me add this… the Podesta vid is his ELECTION NIGHT speech when he looked like a dead man walking.

So really this is a double confirmation of 11.3 (since that is the election date this year).

Now add this:

Check the POTUS tweet posting pattern tonight. A clear TWEETSTORM begins at… 23:02:23!

Looks like this all fits together!

And let me state the obvious (which sometimes gets missed here)… 17, 55, 23 are the BASIC COMMS EVERYONE KNOWS.

Not some crazyass shit (and some of that is no doubt true). But if Q and Scavino and POTUS are all dropping BASIC comms?

Makes me think it might be the real deal.

>>10326728

Made obvious mistake there… it is the drop today (4621) where Q confirms anon theory on KC.

>>10326477

I've taken a look at the Springmeier material a number of times, since I often see it mentioned, but I don't get any clear sense of why THAT particular guy was able to put together this supposedly authoritative account of the topic. What were his research methods? What personal story led him to the topic? Contrast his writing with Behold a Pale Horse by William Cooper: I get the sense that Cooper is an honest guy who is onto SOMETHING (even if I suspect he might have been fed disinfo for nefarious purposes).

>>10327058

Not well versed enought on those particular topics to make a clear judgement there.

Agree that AJ pushes utter BS at times, and if he is promoting Springmeier repeatedly (who I already have questions about) then this counts as a negative against Springmeier.

As for P=Payseur, suspect that may well be true in some important way, but maybe there are double meanings.

Trying to solidly investigate the "Payseur" issue seems a problem, since what I've read in older breads (last year maybe) suggests that this family systematically aimed to distort the historical record. This makes it all the more crucial, I think, for anyone trying to "dig past" the falsification to explain HOW they are getting at the truth.