Hey Q,

Been confused about a few things. Would appreciate clarification, if at all possible.

Why is POTUS supporting a CIA regime change op in Venezuela? Why assist a transition of these extra-legal ops from the ME to SA? Why has this not been addressed directly? He pledged to end foreign interventions. Was that bs?

Why, in one breath, does POTUS (and do you) assert the sovereignty of states, just to contradict that in the next breath by attempting to install an unelected pawn of establishment interests (Guaido) in contravention of the results of the election and those espoused beliefs? Why choose to do something that you, yourself, have said, in respect to similar actions taken here, at home, are treasonous? Do you fail to see the contradiction? Why do you allow such ignorance to go unchecked amongst your followers?

Who's the guy 'in Russia' you keep referring to as @Snowden? More specifically, who actually leaked all the docs and program-specific data illuminating the extent of NSA's abrogation of the 4th Amendment, and then put that return address on the packages sent to journalists? Why attempt to claim NSA is a victim? Is this an elaborate disinformation campaign intended to mitigate the fallout from an unapproved release which threatens the elitists' status quo?

Why has POTUS surrounded himself with proxies of the establishment, installing them into positions of particularly robust influence (Ross, Bolton, Bannon, Cohn, etc)? Why employ a convicted felon and established war criminal (Abrams)? Why support pawns (Rubio) of the CIA-funded Cuban expat community, just as Jeb or any establishment pol would have, and then disingenuously cite JFK, when you know those same actors were on the opposite side of peace and reason back when "that Bay of Pigs thing" was engineered?

Why wait until Democrats took the House to attempt to get funding for the wall? Why blame Paul Ryan for not doing so while Republicans controlled both chambers? Why not make the argument pre-2018 elections, when Republicans had incentive to rally behind POTUS, and when the benefit of corralling Democrats into a pen had potential to damage their reelection chances? Is this meant as a distraction?

Why champion the same Executive overreach as pursued by previous holders of the office if the goal is to strengthen the constitutional republic? Why provide further precedent for future Executive office holders to do the same?

Why complain about WaPo, but still permit Bezos to retain so many lucrative DOD contracts (which actually keep Amazon afloat)? Why structure the tax cuts in such a way that elite capitalists gained most, if so much planning went into the policies of this administration?

Why not call out the Mercer/Simons "Breitbart" scam for the disinformation op it is? Why not point out the intentional damage done to antiestablishment constituencies by lumping them under the alt-right label so enthusiastically embraced by establishment proxies (Bannon, et al) in the effort to conflate those constituencies with ignorant, nativist rhetoric?

>>5639580

Why refer to Gowdy as a "patriot" if you know he covered up CIA arms trafficking (through Gulf state proxies to arm ISIS and foment war in Syria under 44) out of Benghazi, when he could have pushed it into public discussion while chairing the investigation?

Why is POTUS covering for SIS? Why, if SIS pulled CIA strings to set up the nominee, would he then postpone declassification? Obviously, it has nothing to do with natsec, and the only 'sources and methods' that would be exposed are those which would illuminate the breadth of (foreign) establishment control over our (domestic) agencies. What better timing could there be, if the goal is actually to unseat those forces, than prior to elitist pols attempting to ram a 'Brexit' 'compromise' down their subjects' throats? Why cover for them so blatantly?

Why, if POTUS's goal is to "drain the swamp" and counteract the machinations of the "deep state", does POTUS not inform the public that NK has been harvesting opium for refinement in China for, lo, these many years, a trade essentially keeping them 'afloat'? Why does he not expose the impetus for the never-ending war footing on the peninsula for what it is (initially, a conflict engineered by the war powers to create a market for Japanese goods - to ensure the Liberal Democrats we installed and still control would retain power; subsequently, a 'pariah state' in which international norms could be ignored)? Why give NK and China a 'pass' if such could be brought to bear in negotiations?

Why doesn't POTUS expose Iran for the (SIS/)CIA-run proxy that it is and has been since '79? Why doesn't he explain that Khomeini was a British pawn? Why doesn't he point out Rouhani's subordinate role in Iran-Contra? Why are these facts left buried under bs propaganda? Why not expose our enemies? Why protect their interests?

And why, why, why is revisionist propaganda being employed to paint Reagan as some kind of hero? The same guy let GHWB run his own, parallel Executive that pursued regime change in the interests of the establishment, lied to Congress and the American people, and coordinated drug trafficking into this country, while having his elitist wife tell commoners to "Just Say No"? That's not heroic. It's pathetic.

Is your narrative's intention to Create divisiveness or dispel it? Judging by the comments of your followers on these boards, they've effectively herded themselves into new silos, referring to anything critical of this (admitted) propaganda op as 'distraction' from the 'important work' you've assigned them. Is that "thinking for oneself", or is that preying upon the desperately hopeful?

These are serious questions, and they represent concerns many of us have for the glaring contradictions in your well-constructed narrative.

I've yet to see you respond to a single, rational criticism. Is that because this military-intel op is intended to deceive, or are you just providing distractions from reality?

As you know, quality disinformation always provides measures of truth interspersed with its fictions (or, in some cases, topics presented to distract from rational treatment of subjects matter at hand). Your narrative fits the bill. Why is that so? Is it "necessary"?

>>5639594

I left out the absurdity of POTUS ignoring the rational criticism of AIPAC and jumping on the dishonest "antisemitism" bandwagon because you implied he was 'leaving (that issue) for last'.

It's not a good look, for a supposed champion of 'the people', though, to avoid dealing with the serious issue of money buying influence in politics.

>>5639611

Thanks. I'm not some 'shill'. I'm just probably less trusting than some, and would appreciate any reasonable treatment of the topics. Confused, obviously, and wary of ploys.

>>5639655

Agreed. The 'compromised' narrative leaves much to be desired.

It's seems exactly what an op by elites to co-opt a movement would actually, in practice and structure, look like.

>>5639810

>>5639739

All of the 'POTUS as savior' rhetoric is extremely disconcerting. Why post allusions to scripture? That's diametrically opposed to "thinking for oneself". It's more akin to mindless 'hope porn', and so many so willingly wearing blinders is not a good sign, regardless of the intentions.

Like anon said, "we deal in facts."