DOG COMMS AGAIN, DAN SCAVINO?

Dan Scavino Jr.🇺🇸🦅

@DanScavino

𝗕𝗜𝗚 𝗗𝗢𝗚🐾𝗥𝗔𝗡𝗖𝗛 𝗥𝗘𝗦𝗖𝗨𝗘🧵

9:30 AM · Oct 3, 2026

https://x.com/DanScavino/status/2106376368049037525

Dan shares a 7:05 video from BIG DOG RANCH RESCUE, a wonderful organization helping animals.

But Anons have long examined recurring DOG imagery as possible symbolic communications.

Now look at the NUMBERS.

Dan's post: 9:30 → Q93

Q93 discusses HRC as a puppet whose strings were cut, leaving her “on her own and fighting for her life.”

Video length: 7:05 → Q705

Q705 contains just [5].

Why is that interesting? Because [5] also appears in Q453, which discusses Andrew McCabe, James Comey, Hillary Clinton's 33,000 deleted emails and the reported $700,000 in campaign contributions connected to McCabe's wife.

Q453 then asks:

==“How can FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, the man in charge, along with leakin' James Comey, of the Phony Hillary Clinton investigation (including her 33,000 illegally deleted emails) be given $700,000 for wife's campaign by Clinton Puppets during investigation? [5]"

FOLLOW THE CONNECTION TO Q1:

The first Q post, dated October 28, 2017, claimed HRC extradition was underway and warned of organized riots, people fleeing the country, and a military/National Guard operation.

And we're approaching the 9-YEAR DELTA of Q1, originally posted October 28, 2017! Could the timing be significant? So here's the pattern being examined:

DOG COMMS

9:30 → Q93 → HRC's strings cut

7:05 → Q705 → [5]

[5] → Q453 → Clinton investigation, McCabe, Comey and timestamps

Q1 → HRC extradition and military operation

Are Dan's timestamp and video length intentional markers pointing back to these older Q posts—or numerical coincidences?

Remember, Q repeatedly emphasized: “NO COINCIDENCES.”

>>25102251

agreed. Without X many would not be awake.

>>25102375

Elon 2.0 is, no doubt

>>25102376

some of us probably know who is actually posting as Elon. I saw a post once, so I believe I know and he's alive.

From JMC Broadcasting "Guardian Daniel R" only on Telegram.

https://t.me/warcorrespondent107

>>25102431

JMC Broadcasting shares his information, but he only posts on Telegram: https://t.me/warcorrespondent107

>>25102415

07

>>25102457

Because we are the ones sharing information they share.

>>25102457

could be plausible deniability. Those with eyes to see, see it, but others can't deny what they can't accept.

>>25102516

can deny

>>25102521

You have an interesting ID that no one else seems to possess, no alpha characers in it.

>>25102495

Not a man and no, I won't show them.

>>25102342

Maybe when Anons are stuck solving a Q post, someone who is in the "less than 10" solves it as an Anon. That's my theory.

>>25102365

I don't know how to turn the post into a video.

https://x.com/DanScavino/status/2106376368049037525

>>25102574

You couldn't tell I was a woman? I didn't realize DOG COMMS came with a gender test!

Perhaps a little history lesson is in order.

Long before today's power structures, women ruled powerful kingdoms. Hatshepsut, Nefertiti and Cleopatra ring any bells?

Never underestimate a woman who knows how to connect the dots!

And remember, gentlemen, there was a time when women wore the crowns!

WHEN WOMEN RULED THE WORLD:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQkCH1DJzGA

>>25102598

I could, but why diminish the woman I am just to satisfy someone else's curiosity?

>>25102619

I'm not, I'm just playing around

It doesn't offend me, but there are actually some men who don't think we are intelligent or capable.

>>25102641

>Have you ever been rage baited?

Rage baited? You mistook a classy response for an emotional reaction. Nice try, though!

>>25102683

I'm not still "going on," I am simply responding to posts like everyone does.

>>25102666

And men sending dick picks. I guess they didn't know that one day they would be famous and everyone would see them.

>>25102670

NZ, EU? Oh, we're comparing corrupt rulers now? Shall we look at the MEN'S division?

Here's a little historical refresher!

Men named in Transparency International's 2004 report on alleged embezzlement of public funds:

Suharto — Indonesia

Ferdinand Marcos — Philippines

Mobutu Sese Seko — Zaire

Sani Abacha — Nigeria

Slobodan Milošević — Serbia/Yugoslavia

Jean-Claude Duvalier — Haiti

Alberto Fujimori — Peru

Pavlo Lazarenko — Ukraine

Arnoldo Alemán — Nicaragua

Joseph Estrada — Philippines

And that's just ONE historical report!

My original point was that women have ruled powerful kingdoms throughout history, not that every female ruler was a saint.

Corruption isn't a gender trait. Neither is intelligence.

>>25102668

There were women warriors, as well, but I'd rather have men backing me up, personally.

>>25102655

A movie? Apparently history is now considered fiction!

Hatshepsut ruled ancient Egypt. Cleopatra VII ruled Egypt. Wu Zetian ruled China. Elizabeth I ruled England.

All historically documented, sweetheart.

Perhaps try a history book instead of a movie!

And as for “Post-tits or GTFO” — I came here to share knowledge, not anatomy.

>>25102650

Actually, modern life expectancy increased largely thanks to advances in medicine,

sanitation and public health—not because men took over the crowns!

And here's a fun little fact: Women still outlive men by nearly FIVE YEARS on average in the U.S.

Apparently, we're still doing something right!

>>25102639

>>25102643

The Dark Ages? Oh, sweetheart, we need to work on your timeline!

Hatshepsut ruled Egypt around 1470 BC, Nefertiti around 1350 BC, and Cleopatra in the 1st century BC.

Europe's so-called Dark Ages didn't begin until around the 5th century AD.

That's not just a historical misunderstanding — that's time travel!

Perhaps the Dark Ages refer to your history education

>>25102822

>>25102822

Menopausal? Is that your diagnosis, Doc, or did you just run out of intelligent arguments?

>>25102581

Thanks Anon.

>>25102840

Interesting! I've actually seen numerous articles over the years about kings, queens, and other royalty around the world stepping down or abdicating their thrones.

It certainly makes you wonder whether we're witnessing a gradual shift away from traditional royal power structures.

Perhaps there's more to this story than meets the eye!