I think they are trying to emotionally compromise Grusch, or convince us that he’s emotionally compromised.

Many have questioned the potential benefits of the smear campaign on here. While I’m not an expert, it’s challenging for me to see how casting doubt on an army veteran, who has bravely overcome the effects of PTSD, would impact a congressional testimony.

It’s been said that when a person is emotionally compromised, it can cloud their judgment, making them more susceptible to reacting based on emotion rather than logic. This can sometimes result in unintended consequences, like inadvertently discussing classified information in public, which has serious legal repercussions.

There’s also a perspective that suggests that the real intention might not be to compromise the person directly, but to cast doubt in the public’s eye. By making people believe someone is compromised, it’s possible to manipulate perceptions and narratives. The implications of such a strategy are vast and unsettling.

Thankfully, Grusch seems to stand firm against these tactics. I sincerely hope to see him navigate these challenges with resilience. Our focus should be on uncovering the truth about our world’s history, our identity, and our purpose. Grusch took the bold step to initiate this conversation, and it’s crucial for us to stand with him in this journey.