>>4849677 (LB)

A starting point would be a certain crime. Say Uranium One. Then you would map out the companies involved in the deal. Rosatom, State Department, et cetera. Anyone who financially gains gets mapped. Then that would involve Clinton Foundation since they got big kickbacks because of this. From the Clinton Foundation the map could spider into many multiple government crimes. The sense of direction would be to follow the money and hard verifiable connections and leave the theorizing to the reader. FISA is another central point that can connect multiple crimes. Chasing the crime and those involved would be the sort of your guiding direction.

I understand what you mean though. We need hard set parameters to construct the map. Q says to expand your thinking, but if I am understanding you I would say the guiding factors to establish a sense of direction would be N - Financial, S - Child Crimes, E - Human/Organ Trafficking - War. Those are probably their biggest 4 rackets. Travel (research) in any of those directions and eventually you land on Clinton Foundation and government shenanigans and it all connects together from there. Explaining those connections is what the goal is though. I think your thinking on this is a bit rigid.