Anonymous ID: 4e95fb Sept. 18, 2018, 9:36 p.m. No.3083752   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>3799

>>3083651

 

>>3083651

>>>3083601

>>>3083551

>There's another problem too, that nobody has discussed (but Q has mentioned). What does it mean if RR KNEW before signing?

>It means more than one thing depending upon WHY he knew. If he knew and was part of the conspiracy, then he's screwed. Or if he knew because he was told to sign so they could continue monitoring 2 hops from Page, all the people that thought Page was /theirguy/โ€ฆ which is what we are going to find out.

>Just wait.

>

Hmm good points. So the FISA we get is from June 2017, obviously after Trumps already elected. Why would RR implicate himself in a FISA that he knows POTUS is keeping tabs on?? Is it possible the FISA that we get from June 2017 is the FISA that was issues to launch or continue an investigation on the Clinton Foundation? Meaning the FISA from June 2017 is legit and legal? Meaning Mueller and RR were grey hat? So many questions right now

Anonymous ID: 4e95fb Sept. 18, 2018, 9:49 p.m. No.3083879   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun

>>3083859

>>>3083137 โ†’ (lb)

>>Schiff claims that the current FBI Director, Robert Wray, and Deputy Attorney General, Rod Rosenstein, have proclaimed that the presidentโ€™s declassification order โ€œcrossed a red line.โ€

>>Robert Wray?

>baker notable already?

>

"Schiff claims" may be the clue here

Anonymous ID: 4e95fb Sept. 18, 2018, 10:01 p.m. No.3083992   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun

>>3083934

That's a tough call. It would definitely be some disinfo from Q as he seemed pretty persistent against ES imo. Also calling the failure of a Snowden 2.0. I just feel Snowden is black hat CIA or even MI6.