Hmm…
Seems a little sketchy, but I suppose if something like that did exist, it would go for that image so as to be dismissed. Yet … Still declare itself for future proving past?
I think "we" are looking a bit too much from the past. We know DJT would be elected President and we also know DJT would be the GOP nominee for President.
Logically, you would have an entire surveillance net laid out over the candidates. It was also Hillary who proposed advancing DJT as a sort of Pied Piper in their strategy.
My question is - how far did those efforts go and at what point did they incorporate the anti-Russian idea?
This is why I am extremely suspicious of Kushner, who owes his businesses to Soros, and who has a business/political marriage with Ivanka (as termed by them both) - where she was under threat of sanctions because she was friends with an ex wife of a Deripaska affiliate. It's a rather convoluted link - but a corrupt system could leverage it.
This all compounds with the selection of Paul Manafort and Carter Page - both of whom were candidates who could be warranted a FISA.
The other person I am suspicious of is PapaD. He was a no-name who went from the Carson campaign to the DJT campaign via a rather shady process where he just quantum-tunnelled in. Of all the staffers, he was the one who Mifsud was instructed to meet with and inject the narrative regarding hacked emails. We already know Mifsud was an MI5 operative.
The problem with PapaD is that he basically acts exactly as you would expect a guilty party to act…. Right up until it became obvious that something was amiss. Then he started tweeting and writing books about things. Something is off.
I think we are looking at a multi-layered plan.
I think Hillary expected to throw the election to Trump and then formulate an insurgency exactly as we saw happen, with the idea that Russia compromised our nation. Or, perhaps she was just a pawn in someone else's game to that end. In either event - the "Russia" hacking story really only makes sense to pull if the goal was to try and strike up a war against Russia in Syria and elsewhere. Consider that they were meeting in an SCIF right after the election - if she expected to win the election - why would she have an SCIF to report to? It's possible this was reactionary… But I think the election results were exactly what certain people wanted and the left is basically just a useful tool for division - even within government agencies.
The compromising status of China regarding our electronic hardware is concerning, and I suspect there were plans to have China Pearl-Harbor us on the digital front.
I could be looking a bit too deep, but I also think this explains some of the odd reactions related to Q, early on. I think Q was either part of their plan or a related contingency designed to compartmentalize and contain revolutionary activists. Q was initially very cryptic and can be read different ways. It would have been the assessment of a number of agents that Q was someone's limited hangout and contingency plan.
It wasn't until Mueller's report that things really started to flip and it became apparent that the plan was not working. Or - perhaps this is all more insidious than I imagine and even whatever the democrats and financial interests had planned was all a poisoned well from a sting in the first place.
I suppose that point hardly matters - but my thing is that I think everyone thought this was their idea (mostly) up until that point. Hence "trust the plan."
You know what's interesting?
The pyramids.
How do you measure accurately?
Classic units of measure exist as 1/2, 1/4, 1/8, 1/16 - etc…. Why?
An angle bisector is simple to construct. Given any arbitrary standard of length, one can bisect it nearly perfectly with nothing more than string.
But… How do you know it is straight? How do you go from drawing plots with string to verifying a tool?
There is a granite table in one of the pyramids, correct? It is flat as a pancake - calibration standard. This isn't as mystical as it first appears - one can do the same by taking three stones and lapping them against each other alternatingly such that the only congruent surface is a plane.
But this is significant as it allows you to know you have a flat reference. You can prove a straight edge to be straight and a right angle to be right. This allows you to build tools of precise measure and in so doing create machines. Cast bronze, for example, could create rollers for stones and hardened bronze could cut stones perhaps not as well as a carbide or modern steel blade - but they were working with what they had and tin/copper alloys could be hardened well beyond what iron could be with the proper technique.
So… Let's ask a question….
If such manufacturing capability existed back then - why was it lost?
Who benefits from lost technology?
Who usually has access to lost or restricted capabilities?
Why is it more generally and commonly available, today?
You can't just "throw epstein to the wolves." That is like saying "they just decided to throw Bin Laden to the wolves by arresting and interrogating him."
There is a reason they don't do those types of things. The more such people talk or the more is learned about them - the more people jump on that "uprising" ship. It's just that if they are in government, they have a means to do it legally and the authority to compel information from records.