Anonymous ID: ad61ce May 21, 2020, 8:26 p.m. No.9272482   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>2560 >>2591

>>9272415

Why would they do that? Scarborough was never important enough to justify that kind of op. Digging him out of his own doo-doo would have been simple. Then he’s owned and might be made use of, even if he is a putz. How he merited a handler like Mika B is more of a mystery.

Anonymous ID: ad61ce May 21, 2020, 8:33 p.m. No.9272554   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>9272505

Q is a psychological operation with many targets and with many objectives. Q is not an “intel buddy” that keeps fags fed with nuggets, just because. And that’s okay. But the nature of this operation needs to be accepted.

Anonymous ID: ad61ce May 21, 2020, 8:56 p.m. No.9272809   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>2937

>>9272560

I agree that there is an inconsistency. I was aware of it as I was writing. But it’s unarguable that Scarborough, at least from any analysis of his public performance, was a minor political figure. Not particularly charismatic. Not gifted with great vision or oratory. A very ordinary politician: vain and not overly bright. Not a Bill Clinton, for example - not destined for the top. Maybe the relationship with Mika is genuine. I know, I know. Unlikely with these people. But not impossible. And if he were actually guilty of, say, manslaughter, what sane woman would voluntarily expose herself to that? And then her old man: even a psychopath like Zbig presumably would shield his daughter from an unindicted felon? The problem with cover ups is that there are always fraying edges to the narrative. I don’t have a particularly satisfying theory, or a particularly satisfying argument against theories of a deeper plot. I just see Scarborough and wonder what he possesses that justifies special consideration by some significant power players. One could conclude that there’s nothing there and that he had no involvement at all in Klausutis’ death. But the absence of transparency suggests otherwise.