Found this on the Brit thread, needs to be here too

British Secrecy Laws Passed to Hide Pedophile Ring Connection to Royals

3-28-19

The Royal Family has been granted absolute protection from public scrutiny over their connections to high profile pedophiles.

'''Letters, emails and documents relating to the Royal Family will no longer be disclosed in pedophile investigations, even if they are in the public interest….

Hangthebankers.com reports: Sweeping changes to the Freedom of Information Act will reverse advances which had briefly shone a light on the royal finances – including an attempt by the Queen to use a state poverty fund to heat Buckingham Palace – and which had threatened to force the disclosure of the Prince of Wales’s prolific correspondence with ministers.

Lobbying and correspondence from junior staff working for the Royal Household and Prince Charles will now be held back from disclosure. Buckingham Palace confirmed that it had consulted with the Coalition Government over the change in the law. The Government buried the plan for “added protection” for the Royal Family in the small print of plans called “opening up public bodies to public scrutiny”.

Maurice Frankel, head of the Campaign for Freedom of Information, said that since the change referred to communications written on behalf of the Queen and Prince Charles it might be possible for “park keepers working in the royal parks” to be spared public scrutiny of their letters written to local authorities.

The decision to push through the changes also raises questions about the sincerity of the Liberal Democrats’ commitment to government transparency. In opposition, senior Liberal Democrats frequently lined up to champion the Freedom of Information Act after it came into force in 2005.

Ian Davidson, a former member of Parliament’s Public Accounts Committee (PAC), told The Independent: “I’m astonished that the Government should find time to seek to cover up royal finances. When I was on the PAC what we wanted was more disclosure not less………..

https://newspunch.com/british-secrecy-laws-hide-pedophile-ring-royals/

>>5995481

British Secrecy Laws Passed to Hide Pedophile Ring Connection to Royals

Completely outrageous.How do they get away ''Letters, emails and documents relating to the Royal Family will no longer be disclosed in pedophile investigations, even if they are in the public interest''

>>5995478

CBS and ABC versus NBC on Q

Really interesting that, of what used to be the "Big 3" networks, two of them–CBS and ABC–are not particularly interested in Q. But NBC/MS-NBC wastes no opportunities in attacking Q.

I located three articles each for ABC & CBS; half were written by "staff," which means they are just covering the news in a perfunctory way.

For NBC/MS-NBC, it's a different story: 30 reports, some with videos. Majority are from & Ben Collins & Brandy Zadrozny, who obviously search out opportunities to do Q hit pieces. The most recent is from Collins on the Michigan rally:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_VJG91FQpJ4 MS NBC QAnon Conspiracy Theorists Increase Their Presence At Donald Trump Rallies | The Last Word | MSNBC 7:40 mins, 2019-03-29

>>5995600

MSNBC has been after Q since the beginning. Nothing new for them. Too bad that their lurid reports aren't gaining them the traction they hope for.

>>5995531

Good material but not today's news (2-11-19)

Please date your contributions so baker and anons know this.

>Sauce: https://www.technocracy.news/one-world-religion-pope-francis-signs-historic-covenant-with-islam/?fbclid=IwAR3seUsXGYQx-2ClYFg9dQyAoUtdgjqM_zAI975EMQ7hc2O0SXfFhilupV0

>>5995753

>>5995740

notable

Add to >>5995481 ?

>>5995763

>>5995789

Yeah, the difference between NBS/MSNBC and CBS/ABC is not exactly subtle. I just happened to be looking at the article list when perusing the posts on this bread (and the one on latest MSNBC hit piece). Ben Collins is a real shark.

>>5995763

>>5995789

Here is what I was trying to recall before replying to both of you–the recent Q drop on Dafna Linzer, NBC's top political editor (see below).

The question is:

Is NBC going after Q because of Linzer or does Linzer act of behalf of a higher-up? I'm guessing the latter.

#3304

Q !!mG7VJxZNCI ID: dd96c6 No.5966027 📁

Mar 29 2019 15:35:53 (EST)

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/msnbc-nbc-news-top-political-editor-accused-of-trying-to-intimidate-reporter-on-behalf-of-the-dnc📁

>>>

https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/4203📁

[Dafna Linzer]

FAKE NEWS = propaganda arm of [D] party.

Q

>>5995948

There should be a DIGG going on Dafna Linzer….let's see….Jackpot!

>>5976797 dafna linzer / Barton Gellman / Pulitzer Prize dig

>>5975688 Reporter Exposes NBC/MSNBC Politics Editor for Advocating on Behalf of Democratic Party

>>5968795, >>5968814, >>5968875, >>5968994, >>5968959 [dafna linzer] dig

Dafna Linzer is an American political operative. Since October 2015, she has been managing editor of politics for NBC News and MSNBC, with a role spanning broadcast and digital coverage on both networks for the 2016 election campaign. Linzer was formerly managing editor of MSNBC; senior reporter at ProPublica; foreign correspondent for the Associated Press; and national security reporter for the Washington Post. In March 2019, she was alleged to be bullying on behalf of the DNC, a clear violation of journalistic principles.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dafna_Linzer

Qresear.ch rocks!!!

>>5996024

Here is the link for the video:

https://youtu.be/_VJG91FQpJ4