>>5107232

NOTABLE

>>5107290

I certainly do not believe in coincidences…..

Bless you and your digging skills, an honor to be here with you.

>>5107322

while I still 100% concur it is notable, wouldn't (((they))) use the excuse that being she is a high profile figure, the event's public listing wouldn't be present? Just thinking like the enemy ….I am sure even that narrative would clash with what has already been reported….

>>5107472

interesting take on "repeats necessary" double meaning…I did have a theory on that, not sure if provable at all, but most social media and low rate MSM articles are obvious repeated headers with articles different from former articles containing the same headers……people are literally passing around old articles under guise they are new…I point out the dates when I find them…tends to raise eyebrows…