It is clear that Q is being coy, and used the timing of people talking PUBLICLY about "the list" of potential SCOTUS nominees.
However, there is a 0% chance anyone who is remotely serious about this is considering Gowdy for a SCOTUS seat. If you think otherwise, then you are falling prey to pop-politics level analysis, where people just take popular characters and mash them into news stories.
Given that Gowdy is not relevant to the SCOTUS, Q is using a bit of doublespeak to refer to THE LIST of swamp members that have been forced to "retire."
Q asking "Should we add him to the list?" is the same as asking "Should we trust Gowdy?"
I think it's likely that Q is teasing us with the fact that opinion on Gowdy is often split among anons….but if we find out he was the source of the following, we might find out once and for all:
>"Mr S, I believe nobody here is buying what you are selling. I believe there was/is a serious effort on the part of people more senior than you to remove Mr Trump from office out of fear of what this Administration may uncover. I believe you are being dishonest in your answers and frankly shocked you agreed to come here today. I believe everyone on this panel (minus those from the other side of the aisle) knew exactly what your answers would be and if you think we are going to sit here and accept these answers you would be a foolish. We are also following the facts and once we uncover more (which we will) we will act accordingly. I'm glad you retained counsel - you'll need one and hopefully they are very good."