>>6410123
2 – When the settlements were taking place in what is now the States, it was like a miniature race between each European monarchy to secure as much as ground as they can. Eventually, England and France got the largest 2 parts in the NOW States. So you see, these territories were directly controlled by the king of each of France and England. When the Americans rebelled against the British, the French didn’t help the American out the goodness of their hearts. It was a very strategic move in order to secure influence and power, have leverage over previous British parts of the US. By helping Washington and the rest, I bet the French king had some sort of agreement with them that he keeps the full control of the southern territories where the loyal French henchmen of Louis XVI have already established settlements and were creating ALREADY a network. And by kicking out the British from the north, I bet Louis XVI was hoping to extend this already built network of his upper north by gaining not ground = territory, but commercial and trade network. Unlike the British whom prioritized ownership of the land and its dominance, the French had an interest in building a trade, commercial & financial network = they wanted to dominate the States not by the force of arms but by the force of the economy. I’m not talking in the air and out of theory, I’ve spent hours and hours reading a lot about how the first French settlements were founded and how they grew and how they operated. This is an observation I made from seeing a number of them.
So you see my dear friend, even before the French revolution broke, there was already a powerful French economical trade network established there. The “Bourbon Empire” was already in place while Louis XVI was still king, and it was run by many ROYAL LOYALIST whom were for sure Masonic and probably Satanists in some cases at least. Louis XVI didn’t entrust just anyone with this wealth management because he was cautious and worried about the spies and infiltration from the English side, so he put people in charge of these businesses of his whom he was sure and certain were loyal to him no matter what happens. The best example I can give you is the Chouteau family in St Louis. So I started thinking whom would Louis XVI trust strong enough to entrust the management of his “hidden wealth” or “shadow economical empire” to. Well, He would entrust its management to a direct family bloodline member = French branch Merovingian bloodline = a relative that won’t betray him because they share the same blood and the same ideology = Cousins, first degree, 2nd degree or 3rd degree, loyal subjects or lesser family bloodline elites whom he is sure are loyal to his lineage and won’t betray him with the British. As an example, I will give you Marie-Thérèse Chouteau = Auguste Chouteau’s mother (1733-1814). I didn’t put the bio of that gal out of nothing. Look at her maiden name = Bourgeois, now that on its own is very telling, VERY. And look at her date of birth and date of death. I won’t be surprised to find out some time in the future she is in some sort of way a distant cousin of Louis XVI. That gal was the one running everything in St Louis until William Clark showed up – she was the matriarch of the place. They buried her the basilica/cathedral, right in the “hot” zone, that’s quiet a high honor for a simple citizen, don’t you think? Mostly now we know about the tunnels and the rituals etc.
It always bugged me personally how can a simple little boy, persecuted and without a penny, can create such an empire, so big, so strong and so wealthy in barely a couple of decades. The answer to that was easy to find = he didn’t do it himself, the ground work was laid there by his father and his predecessors. He simply took control of the “economical empire” built previously by the Bourbon kings. Don’t take m word on it, go check it out yourself. I know it’s a bit long, but you will see the network was already in place when Louis XVII left France to England.
3 – Which brings me to another question that used to bug a lot as well: why was Louis XVII sent to the US? Why not Canada, or Australia or Argentina or Brazil? Why specifically the US? Well, I just answered this in the previous point = it’s because the royal loyalist had already established an “economical” powerful kingdom there and they would also protect him physically, they were still loyal to the Merovingian French bloodline. These loyalist not only built an economical + spy + connection network, but they also had the ritual/sacrificial network already built as well.
4 – Well, you already know I speak both French and English, and I’ve already explained about the Passeur = Payseur trick in a previous drop of mine, so I’m not going to repeat it here again. But this also is another factor that convinced me that Louis XVII is Payseur.