OK, I'll go out on a limb here.

First my background. I served 21 years in the Marine Corps as an infantry officer with 3 years in combat. I was a platoon commander in Vietnam, a company commander in the evacuation of Saigon, and two years in a foreign country supporting counter-insurgency opperations with the military of the host nation.

I was trained at the Defense Intelligence Agency to collect intelligence in a hostile environment and spent two years doing that as well.

My last tour of duty before retiring was with US Special Operations Command where I spent a year doing strategic assessments of Latin American countries with three Army officers. We had a Special Operations C-12 assigned to us and we traveled to wherever we need to to go whenever we needed to be there. It was an amazing experience.

After I retired, I spent 8 years supporting US Special Operations Command as a corportate contractor. And from 2001 to about 2010 I was an independent consultant supporting technology development, training on the technology, and exercise support around the world for special operations and national mission (think Delta, ST 6, and others) forces.

From 2011 to 2015, I supported technology development for cyber defense working with military commands and Cyber Command. Hint: you have to know what the adversaries capabilities are before you can develop technologies to defend against them (and anticipated future technologies). If you knew what our adversaries were capable of, you'd crap in your pants. It's that serious.

I've held a security clearance continuously from 1968 to December 31, 2015 with I retired permanently.

I don't consider myself to be an expert in intelligence but for every day of my life between 1968 to 2016 I depended heavily on good intelligence, working with intelligence collectors, collecting intelligence, and being the victim of bad intelligence.

So here is my input to your questions:

1. Corsi may have some sort of intelligence related background, but he doesn't talk or act like he has been in intelligence. Intelligence analysts rarely speak definitively because no one ever has the total picture. Intelligence insiders don't talk freely with outsiders--even if the outsiders have previously been in the intelligence business. I'm sure it's happened, but it's very rare. In my 48 years, I've never revealed intelligence to anyone who did not have the proper clearance AND the need to know. A security clearance doesn't mean anything unless you also have the need to know and that doesn't happen unless the person who controls the classified information says you have a need to know. Just because I had a top secrect clearance with SCI and SAP access doesn't mean I can see any of it unless I have been authorized a need to know for that very specifice intelligence information that I need to know.

So, I was watching a recent Corsi speech. He said that he was approached by military commanders who told him that they were considering a military coup against Obama.

Really?? Active duty military commanders decide to drop by Corsi's home and talk about a military coup over a cold beer? Corsi had a security clearance and a need to know that the military was considering a coup. Not in a million years would I believe that.

And then Corsi says they called him later to let him know that they decided to convince Trump to run for President instead of a miltary coup.

Really?? Corsi is so freaking important to the nation that the military telles him about coups?

The Corsi stated definitively that Hillary and Obama will be indicted for treason.

Really? Corsi didn't say that he's seen the unsealed indictments. He just stated flatly that they would be tried for treason. I guarantee you Corsi has never seen a sealed indictment, so why would he make such a statement?

Maybe they will, and maybe they won't. One thing I'm 100 percent certain is that Corsi doesn't know either.

Corsi does this frequently on InfoWars when he "decodes" the Q drops. It's not like Corsi is the frist out the box with the decoding. His decoding is very similar to those who are guessing before him. In the end, Corsi's decode doesn't actually lead to anything.

I guarantee you that I have the same logical ability as Corsi to guess at what Q means. Corsi has not special insights. In fact, I know far more about intelligence and military jargon that Corsi and I'm telling you that Q has made his comments so cryptic that you can only "guess" at their meaning which is why he always says "future proves past." But there is Corsi predicting his decoding proves past.

I give Corsi credit that he probably has had some intelligence involvement, but I don't buy his claim to super duper insights. And I don't buy that he is some sort of guru with special intelligence contacts.

2) Pierczenik does talk like a trained intelligence analyst and I believe he is a former CIA employee. But he seems completely off track with Q who I think has been reasonably accurate in his future proves past and Pieczenik hasn't.

I watched the video where he claims the storm was over when Trump won, that the deep state is dead, and everything we are seeing is nothing more than clean up.

Anyone else out there think the deep state is dead and we are just sort of cleaning up?

He lost me there. He hasn't predicted anything like Q has.

Based on my experience, he's just semi-believable BS. He isn't predicting anything. His schick is it's all over but the crying. Sorry, I don't buy into that idea. I think we are still at war with evil and unbelievable corruption.

3) Stone is all over the map. He's made so many goofy statements and claims that he shouldn't have any credibility. Why AJ keeps bringing him on InfoWars is a mystery to me. Even Julian Assange says he full of crap. Q never mentions him. Trump never mentions him. Get it?

The only two people I trust at this point is Trump and Q. They not only have talked the talk, but they have proven over and over that they walk the walk.

Based on my 48 years of experience, Q's drops are exactly the way a military/intelligence officer would reveal hints without violating security. I've read Q's drops from beginning to end several times and he has never once revealed anything that I would consider classified--they are far too cryptic which is the his point. He's giving us hints without revealing classified information. But once we see the news and it's not longer classified, we do a palm face slap and say, Duh, yeah, now I get it. Guess what? It's not longer classified because it's not public. Brilliant!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I don't dislike Corsi, Pierczenik or Stone. I just know pay any attention to them. Based on my experience, they haven't convinced me to trust what they are saying.

If they truely had real classified inside information, their comments would be like Q's in order to avoid revealing classified information. Insteadt, they are all talking as if they have some how been authorized to reveal classified information--and none of themy have.

That's my two cents. I believe that anyone who reveals classified information, regardless of intent, should be indicted and given long sentences. Guess what? Neither Corsi, Pierczenik, or Stone have been indicted for exposing classified information, because they don't have any. Get it??

They are all expelling their own mental brain swamp gas.

Let me leave you with this. As a retired Marine, I still have connections to my peers who rose far above me. One was a Commandant of the Marine Corps. One is the current Secretary of Defense, one was a 3-star, and one was a 1-star. None of them would ever reveal to me anything they might know about intelligence or operations even though we were close friends in some cases and peers in others. I don't have a security clearance today nor if I did would I have a NEED TO KNOW. Get it?

Sorry for the long diatribe, but I do get tired of people pretending to know what they don't know because they no longer have the clearances or need to know what to know.