>>60699791
If you take the time to watch both of jakes videos, you will understand that the depth of argument is not tin foil or numerology. He is attempting to digest and relay what would appear to be a multi million dollar legal fight for ownership of a mismanaged company subject to both criminal and civil litigation.
This is not a investigation (on Jakes part) built on fantasy. It is built on the understanding and application of legal terminology and advocacy written and applied by some of the top lawyers in the world in their field. He is attempting to do that with redacted information and by filling in blanks with logic and/or inference.
What he has compiled (regardless of its accuracy) should be held up and recognised as nothing less than extraordinary.
Listening to that clip, the time and mental effort to do the above, its inexplicable. Only because to me, someone even attempting to do that is unfathomable. The fact he has constructed a coherent argument out of it.. its compelling.
But you also have to recognise that there is a very large proportion of people who are not able to comprehend 1/10th of what he talks about in that video. To many people it sounds like made up nonsense because they don't have the attention span or the brain capacity to listen and digest it.
I'm not saying I can or I do. But I have tried, and his arguments are well reasoned, well supported and well explained. The fact he reeled that off in an hour and a half with what seems like no script. Even if its all wrong, its a remarkable attempt to try and understand and communicate the process that should be admired. Particularly as the counterparts are legal firms with 50,000 highly paid staff doing the work for them.
So yeah. To me its no surprise people have struggled to keep up. The guy posts a 90 minute summary of 3.5 years research and people still won't listen to it. There's really not much more he or anyone else could do.
