Not really. I was afraid my post would be longer than yours so I stopped when I thought I'd posted enough. That post I put together took forevah.
Any who trusts johnheretohelp/Ryan Dark White/Jonathon McGreevy should at least look at the research that has been done and decided for themselves.
Yes. I hope all investigators will include the endorsements of Lin Wood and Lt. General McInnery in their considerations, and contrast it with, for example, unsupported claims he obtained his information from an emotionally troubled Youtuber.
NOQ Report had more about Lt. Gen McInerney:
Today, The Two Mikes against hosted General Tom McInerney who spoke about a document that was published today at Populist Press. The document is a verbatim interview by Lin Wood and his associates of a credible whistleblower, who uses the name “Ryan”.
The interview will trouble your soul greatly as Ryan describes the insatiable pedophilia of Joe Biden, Mike Pence, Judge Emmet Sullivan, and others; the central role Mrs. Biden and Mrs. Pence play in abetting their husbands’ behavior; and the role Rod Rosenstein played in commanding a FBI “Dirty Tricks Squad” which, with Chief Justice John Roberts’s help—compromised or murdered Judges—including Justice Scalia.
Ryan also explains how the Deep Staters got Jeffrey Espstein’s help to move children from Ireland to the United States for the use of John Roberts. The content of the interview is startling and disgusting, but it shows clearly the great depth, breadth, and depravity of those who run the republic’s leading institutions and now occupies a White House surrounded by razor wire and heavily armed military forces.
You referrenced, "The True Education and Criminal Record of Fake “Whistleblower” Ryan Dark White" by Gateway Pundit.
So Gateway Pundit is attacking Lin Wood's witness because, despite Wood's reputation as a defamation attorney, Gateway Pundit believes Wood is recklessly distributing Dr. McGreevey's accusations against the 'filthy elites' at the top of the Deep State without properly investigating them.
It seems Gateway Pundit is concerned we might trust Wood when we should trust them instead?
Remember how much online 'content' there was purporting to 'prove' President Trump as every kind of evil, incestuous, serial rapist, murderous treasonous dictator?
Dr. McGreevey is now getting a taste of that 'treatment'; why now? Before, the Deep State ignored him to avoid calling attention to him the same way 8ch was kept out of the news. When 8ch became a problem it was full on attack portraying that place as Moloch's Tavern. Now, it's Dr. McGreevey's turn. It seems information is surfacing and they want to make sure he is not believed.
Yes, he has convictions. I don't think the deep state's legal attacks on Trump (countless lawsuits in addition to the 'big treason claims we know about') and all of Trump's contacts, including General Flynn, were the first time they used that tactic. It's depressing to think how many lacked Trump/Flynn etc. resources and were unable to escape.
Dr. McGreevey has said that Comey et. al. arrange to download porn onto the computers of those they don't like and then have them arrested. What better way to 'silence' those who might testify against you? Have them arrested, throw them in jail and later deride them as an unreliable witness.
I trust that Lin Wood and McInnery have better sources than Gateway Pundit, otherwise Lin would not be interested in using Dr. McGreevey's testimony and vouching for him. Likely Lin is aware of the accusations against McGreevey, right?
I did make the point that whatever is blowing around in the public is not what got the trust of Wood and McInnery, as he has been through the ringer (CIA setups, scrubbed personal history by CIA and him) etc.
Dr. McGreevey has made depositions on so many people, I still don't think we have to throw him under the bus to protect Pence.
Lin Wood and Lt. General McKinnery have had plenty of opportunity to vouch for Mike Pence. They have never done so.
Both support @JohnHereToHelp/Dr. McGreevey and it has to be based on hard evidence - they don't just vouch for people who make 'claims'.
Since you feel I've left too much out, I'll put together more material for consideration.