Hi Courtenay,

If I were to pick up a common thread of all three remote viewings of potential presidential successors in the 2024 election race, it would be violence. I agree that your country is becoming more and more polarized. My intuition tells me there is the potential for civil war--even breakup of the country.

It doesn't matter who wins, confirmed by the sessions, violence will occur. This sentiment is echoed by brilliant economist Martin Armstrong, who says that no matter the victor, the other side will not accept the result.

In the sessions, each remote viewer picked up different aspects of the same foci; however, the common overlap was violence. Even from up here in Canada, we need to brace ourselves.

Great job!

Sincerely,
Richard Brandon

But... even if a common thread was 'violence', it's a hugely long step to 'civil war'.

Violence could (and probably does) simply mean a few riots, maybe some burnt cars, a few molotov cocktails thrown at police, etc... you know, a typical day in Paris.

I'd also say - if "the other side will not accept the result", then it's a fairly clear indicator right now that extra precautions need to take place... how about, UN observers? (not saying that would really alleviate concerns, nor that it would ensure anything, but it makes it that bit harder to argue against).

What the US (and any other 'democratic' nation needs is voting papers with "none of the above", and if it takes a sizeable proportion of the vote (a percentage can be decided), then a new election should be arranged with new candidates (and, obviously, better platforms).