I spent some time analyzing this video, please give feedback on anything if possible.

>Date Jan 17, 2020

Pretty obvious there's some Q symbolism on the date of release.

>0:16

>Nancy is wearing a silver outfit

Maybe some quicksilver/mercury symbolism here.

>0:28

>Random guy in red stops clapping and holds one of his hands up as if trying to get nancy's attention

No idea, definitely stands out however since nobody else in the crowd does this.

>0:34

>Wearing a gold plated united states flag pin on her outfit

No idea.

>0:36

>Nancy stands up to do some strange bowing motion

No idea.

>0:40

>Random guy in red is the one whistling in the crowd

Might be relevant, might not.

>0:48

>Maher: "First of all, thank you so much for waiting until we got back on air before you started the impeachment

This implies some type of coordination, could just be a coincidence of course.

>1:02

>Maher: "You know it was only a year ago that you were fighting just to be the speaker of the house, we could be having speaker seth moulton right now

>Nancy: "I never really was fighting, I thought the press made more of it, but let them have their fun; I know what the outcome would be. I knew what the outcome would be, Yes.

The media AND reddit shills were both fighting to remove nancy if she didnt do what they wanted her to do. Nancy implies that she knew she would be fine for SOME reason despite her supposed allies publicly turning on her.

>1:27

>Maher mentions that new emails came out Dec. 20th which mention the perfect call occuring 91 minutes before the department of defence withheld aid among other people like Lev, Bolton and the Government Accountability Office speaking up.

>Maher asks Nancy if she knew this would happen or if she just made an experienced guess.

>Nancy for a bit deflects and congratulates Maher on his opening show.

Nancy might be deflecting here to keep the audience from thinking too hard about what Maher just said.

>2:28

>Nancy mentions his opening was very ???, she implies she meant to say normal in some way. This implies she was expecting it to be the exact opposite for some reason

I can't say much here, not sure what she was expecting from Maher.

>2:46

>Nancy goes back to the question Maher just asked.

>Nancy mentions they KNEW they had a solid case for impeachment

>Nancy mentions the facts were clear and the constitution "required" it.

>Nancy mentions they knew there was loads more information they could have gathered to impeach the president but they only wanted just enough to run the articles through the house.

>Nancy mentions the extra information was not necessary to impeach BUT also mentions she didnt want to weaken her case of impeachment in any way.

She implies that the extra information may have weakened her "case for impeachment." She implies that any more information would incriminate Trump further but also implies it could weaken the support her caucus was giving her for it.

All she wanted was the votes in the house, she only did what was necessary to get them. This is a pretty strange situation no matter how you look at it, why would more evidence lead to a weaker support for impeachment?

>3:24

>Maher mentions that Nancy did not want to impeach trump but waited until it was "inevitable"

>Nancy mentions that Trump gave her and the democrats no choice as he was "self impeaching" almost every single day

This implies that trump was either doing things that MADE the democrats want to impeach him OR that trump wanted to be impeached and was working towards it almost every day.

There is no such thing as an impeachable offence, Impeachment will always be at the discretion of the house of representives, no real reason needed, just votes.

>3:42

>Maher mentions that some people argued that Trump wanted to be impeached.

>Maher asks Nancy to clarify if being impeached is "a bad thing."

>Nancy avoids answering the question, simply IMPLIES that it's bad and argues that it's permanent in the historical record.

>Nancy argues that no matter what a president does, the impeachment cannot be erased.

This is something I mentioned before, the fact that Nancy avoids the question kind of implies she knows Trump is the one that wanted to be impeached. This also implies that Nancy could be working with Trump.

Nancy also argues that impeachments cant be erased but I don't know what erasing it would even mean in this context besides erasing it from the historical records.

>>7988542

>4:02

>Maher says Trump may be accidentally watching his show tonight.

>Maher says Trump has made him part of his act.

>Maher says Trump will not "leave" even if he loses

>Maher says Trump has "woven in" to something he doesnt mention because "he's a comedian" and he does his rallies.

This implies Trump is blackmailing Bill Maher to do what he wants him to do. This has been implied before by Q and Bill Maher's recent shows do imply that hes no longer working for the "deep state".

I'm not sure what Maher is talking about when he says Trump won't leave even if he "loses." What is he referring to when he talks about Trump leaving and what is he referring to when he talks about winning or losing? I would guess the presidency and impeachment trial but I'm not sure.

I'm guessing Maher is talking about Trump weaving into the media and gaining control over some of them but I'm not sure.

>4:28

>Maher asks if Nancy could talk to him directly what would she say?

>Nancy says if Trump was listening "accidentally" he would want him to know that he's impeached forever because he used the office of the president to influence a foreign country for his personal and political benefit

>Nancy says that in doing so he undermined our national security and was disloyal to his oath in office to protect the constitution and placed in jeopardy the integrity of our election

>Nancy says Trump gave her and the democrats no choice in his impeachment later on with some of the charges and violations of the law that came forward

>Nancy said impeaching Trump was NOT worth doing until Trump gave them a reason to do so.

>Nancy says this was necessary to protect the constitution in some way.

It should be obvious that Trump has probably watched this segment at some point in time. Maher gave Nancy the opportunity to send some kind of message to Trump for him to look at.

I would suspect that if Nancy was actually working for Trump, they would not be able to talk often or in any direct fashion so this is a good opportunity for Nancy to send some messages.

With that being said, I'm not sure what the message is that Nancy is sending. Maybe it refers to the strategy the democrats will use in the senate to try and convict.

>5:20

>Nancy address the timing of the impeachment articles being delivered.

>Nancy says that 70% of the American people want to see witnesses and documentation

>Nancy argues that this will presure the senators to allow both.

I'm not sure what to think of this since I don't know if the poll numbers are accurate. I would assume they are so Trump is ready to drop whatever he needs and can use the public to pressure any traitor in the senate that tries to go against Trump when he does so.

>5:45

>Maher says the senate conviction will only come down to 4 senators who are even considering convicting him

>Maher talks about the democrats attempts at flipping a small group of republicans like when they tried to pass obamacare

>Maher says that moderate republicans have never flipped for the democrats, making a charlie brown reference as well

>Maher asks Nancy to predict if any republicans will flip and if there will be any witnesses at all

I don't see much here really. Maher might know if some republicans plan on flipping or not. The democrats implied after the house vote for impeachment that they wont send the articles over until they know they can get a "fair" trial, whatever that might mean.

>6:24

>Nancy argues that everything is determine by public sentiment and uses Abraham Licoln as an example.

>Nancy argues that the public sentiment in "these states" is in favor of witnesses and documentation

>Nancy argues that if senators go against public sentiment they will pay a price of some kind

>Nancy argues that if Mitch McConnel does not allow witnesses and documentation then that gives us some information on him

>Nancy argues that republican senators are in a bad place

I definitely agree with Nancy here. There could be traitors on the republican side, this looks like a plan to force their hand.

>6:54

>Nancy argues that this is a clear case of defending the constituion and HONORING THE VISION that the founding fathers had in mind in regards to separation of powers that makes us a REPUBLIC

>Nancy reminds everyone THREE times that we are a republic just like the flag pledge says.

Both of these arguments go against the common libtard arguments that the media has been pushing recently which implies Nancy is not on their side as of now.

The libtards on reddit/media argue against interpreting the constitution the way the founding fathers did and they argue that we live in a democracy instead of a republic.

>>7988546

>7:16

>Nancy argues that Trump is undermining the republic by arguing that Article 2 of the Constitution allows him to do whatever he wants.

>Maher argues that Mitch McConnel is undermining the republic as well

>Maher argues that Nancy has almost called Mitch McConnel unamerican and/or a russian agent

>Nancy brings up the Moscow Mitch nickname as an example for Maher's argument

No idea if this is true.

>7:36

>Maher argues that Mitch McConnel has done more "damage" than trump in a lot of ways

>Maher argues that Mitch McConnel is a strict constitutionalist who violates the constitution in some way.

>Maher argues that Mitch McConnel violated the constitution by not allowing Merrick Garland, Obama's Supreme Court pick, to have a hearing.

I can't say much here, no idea if this is true or not.

>7:52

>Nancy talks about a book called "All the President's Men" and what it would be called if Trump and his men wrote it.

>Nancy argues this is about patriotism and it's about our constitution

>Nancy argues that we do not want ANY president to get away with "this" and that "he" had to be stopped because he's jeapordizing the integrity of the next election

>Nancy argues he's blaming it on the Ukrainians and not giving any accountability to the Russians for what they ???

I've never read the book she references so I can't say much there.

I find it interesting that Nancy mentions Patriotism when the word we should be using is Nationalism.

Nancy does not name Trump specifically when she talks about what is implied to be the Trump Ukrainine scandal.

Considering the fact that Obama and Biden did something very similar to Trumps Ukraine scandal she could be referencing them instead.

Biden and potentially Obama are set to become the democrat frontrunners.

>8:38

>Maher argues that Nancy is a lot more generous in spirit to him than Maher is

>Nancy tells Maher that she is not generous to "him" but to the CONCEPT of him and that she does not HATE ANYONE

>Maher tells Nancy that she believes her but may not agree with her

This further reinforces the theory that Nancy may not be talking about trump in this particular case as Trump still hasnt been named in this context.

>8:50

>Maher argues that the left's mantra should be "you can hate trump, but you cant hate the people who like him."

>Maher mocks some of the tactics the left uses against trump supporters.

>Maher argues that if the left continues their tactics, it will lead to civil war

>Nancy tells Maher that she completely agrees with him

The left argues that you should hate trump supporters, i.e. the deplorable meme.

Bill Maher and Nancy Pelosi going against this argument of theirs further implies that hes not on their side anymore.

>>7988548

>9:11

>Nancy argues that despite having very little in common with other people in congress, she respects the people who elected them.

Nancy echoes what Bill Maher just argued in favor of respecting the people instead of going against the common left/democrat argument of demonizing them.

>9:27

>Maher argues that nancy was never the "scary radical" but that was how she was portrayed in 2008

>Nancy mentions there were 137,000 ads that described her as a "scary radical" in the 2008 election

>Nancy emphaises the number 137,000 and says shes proud to be san francisco liberal

I'm not sure what the symbolism is with the number 137,000. Might be related to sealed indictments as I have seen that number in a similar range.

>9:47

>Maher says he found it disturbing that very often the democrats did not defend Nancy.

>Nancy says that does not worry her for some reason and then tells us what she DOES worry about

>Nancy argues that "our country in its greatness" CAN "absorb" ONE TERM of the "present occupant of the white house," NOT TWO TERMS of what he does to the courts and the rest of the government

This heavily implies that trumps second term will be the killing blow. Nancy did not seem worried about the opinion of most democrats for some reason which is a bit strange, she might know something most people dont.

>10:07

>Nancy argues that what "we" have to do from right to left in "our" own party and beyond "our" own party is to elect a new president of the united states

>Nancy argues that whoever the nominee is, everyone must embrace and advance and that there is plenty of common ground in the mainstream message that can take "us" to the white house

I can't get much out of this other than the implication that a more moderate democrat like biden is what she thinks will beat trump.

>10:36

>Maher argues that the democratic party is not unified enough due to the fact that many of them cannot pass the purity tests they self impose on themselves which causes them to reject each other

>Maher uses examples of democrats losing key elections as evidence that the democrats cannot unite very well.

>Maher argues that they should be proud of the legislation they've passed like the stimulus, the auto bailout, the dodd-frank act, and obamacare.

>Maher calls Nancy the "Iron Lady" of the left.

When Maher says "obamacare" for some reason the audio cuts off a little bit. Any time Obama is mentioned by name, the audio tends to do strange things throughout this entire video, probably not a coincidence

>11:12

>Nancy tells Maher not to worry about the concerns he just raised.

>Nancy tells Maher what she worries about which is when she's in the "arena," you must be able to take a punch and throw a punch for the CHILDREN

>Nancy re-affirms what she actually is concerned about is for the CHILDREN is the future of this country

I can't get much out of this. Congress used to have actual fights in the early days of the country, maybe this is some foreshadowing. They will PHYSICALLY fight for the children if they have to.

>11:37

>Nancy argues that they have to have their common ground and mainstream message.

>Nancy argues that they won in the house and they showed that they know how to win.

>Nancy says that they used disciplined, focused, cold-blooded winning methods to win the recent elections

>Maher says its good to have Nancy's cold blooded self on his show.

>The show ends with a handshake between Nancy and Maher

Nancy appears to reveal the strategy that the democrats used in the 2018 mid-term elections.

Nancy describes their strategy as DISCIPLINED, FOCUSED, and COLD-BLOODED which I would argue implies they had competent people working on voter fraud for specific elections which may have involved killing a few people.

Maher implies that it's good to have Nancy's cold-blooded self on TRUMPS show as he implied earlier this show actually belongs to TRUMP.

The final handshake seems to be a specific type of handshake but I am not sure as to which one.