>3203320

Yes. The most obvious interpretation of…

[LL] recorded calls with [RR]

…appears to be that [LL] was recording [RR]. But take the time to read this line again and consider its potential ambiguity such that [LL] was the one being recorded by [RR].

If you insist that there is no ambiguity, i.e. no hidden meaning here, then how do you explain [RR]'s involvement with these recorded phone calls considering that all four of Q's "reveals" have NOTHING to do with [RR] and EVERYTHING to do with [LL].

Would it not make a lot more sense to read the reveals for "[LL] talking" as [LL]'s incriminating statements recorded by [RR]?

I suspect that these 4x calls [RR] made to [LL] in the past 11 days had nothing to do with Q's 4x indicated reveals. I suspect that [RR] has been on team POTUS since the day "TRUST SESSIONS" appointed [RR] as Deputy Attorney General. I further conclude that the recorded phone calls pertaining to "[LL] talking" took place months ago when [LL] and the Deep State believed that [RR] remained loyal to the Deep State. I'm sure that the Deep State now knows the reality of [RR]'s allegiance to POTUS.

The only logical conclusion is that the 4x phone calls [RR] made in the past 11 days to [LL] involved [RR] letting [LL] know about the recorded phone call evidence (reveals) in the hands of POTUS and that she'd better come clean and begin cooperating with POTUS before the music stops.