>>6392032

Is RM a black hat?

Is RM a white hat?

Both. Neither.

He's a piece in the game.

Imagine a chessboard.

Two players maneuver pieces to create advantages.

Now let's say that the pieces themselves can choose their own color, white or black, at any moment of the game.

Each piece has to keep in mind where they're placed on the board and what peril they're in from each side.

That's the game we're in.

The pieces can flip more than once, so it's not a binary game… each piece is also a player.

A Maggie Haberman, a Lisa Page, a Robert Mueller, a Julian Assange…

Some will flip to their advantage.

Some won't flip at all.

Some will flip because they're forced for survival.

So it's fun to speculate what color RM started,

But we can see from the report he's currently white.

Otherwise, there would be collusion and/or obstruction.

The real game is for the two main players to put pieces in places where they need to choose their side or die.

RM did what he was forced to do by the game.

And that's all the evidence we need.

Winning.

>>6392247

>What a sad excuse..

Yes. Shame me. That works (on reddit).

Present your evidence, from the report, that he's still black hat.

I will wait.

>>6392308

>You'll get no such responce as I'm still waiting for you to prove otherwise.

You have nothing then.

Only conclusion I can draw.

Otherwise you'd be trying to convince me.

But you completely missed the point I was making, so I'll dumb it down for you.

I don't care what color RM "has always been".

He was probably trapped, against his will, into the swamp.

But in his final report he donned a white hat.

That itself is evidence that the pieces around him forced the action.

POTUS is winning.

What do you call a man,

standing behind a loaded cannon

who, instead of firing at his target

takes the ammo out, removes the firing pin

and dismantles the whole thing?

(You): "muh still black hat…"

It's so obvious I feel bad having to explain it for you.

I'm sure you could have figured it out yourself.

>>6392350

>what if instead of a chess game, where pieces are taken out, what kind of game can we use that captures pieces and they become our pieces to use in the game

Right, that's basically what I'm saying.

I don't have a name for it, chess is the best analogy since pieces have different strengths.

Pieces can be taken out, but can also be flipped and used against the other side.

Maybe we call it 5D interdimensional chess (kek).

>>6392529

>Curious that the central piece of your argument, that he flipped at the last second, is indistinguishable from him being a black hat that couldn't find anything on Trump.

I never said he flipped at the last second.

Not part of my argument.

Maybe you should lurk moar.

>>6392612

I didn't dodge anything.

I corrected your mis-characterization of my argument.

What would look different?

Pic related.

You really think RM "couldn't find anything" on Trump?

You expect too little of the deep state.

He would have manufactured it.

In fact, he was expected to manufacture it.

He had the A team of manufacturing evidence on his staff.

The fact that he didn't, proves the strength of Trumps position.

And THAT is the totality of my argument.

>>6392632

Holy shit you guys are triggered by an analogy.

When did I say someone was sucked in suddenly?

You really need to think moar. Dearie.