>>7483286 pb, >>7483298 pb

These posts from LB are on Ted Cruz's remarks on Jason Bourne.

not notabled but led to a familiar rabbit hole from a new perspective

Rather than repost, will refer anons to QRB listing

because there are four posts all posted together so you can see what's going on

Breitbart article listed here for yr convenience

Posts 1 & 2 >>>/qrb/39588 (vid), >>>/qrb/39589 (article)

Vid of Ted Cruz on spying: This wasn't Jason Bourne, this was 'Beavis & Butthead' plus article

anon on QR wondered about link to Q drops mentioning Bourne

Post 3 >>>/qrb/>>39590

Five Q posts on "Bourne" (all from Nov 11-12 2017)

Post 4 >>>/qrb/>>39591

Sixth post on "Bourne"--which is a year and a half after the first five (June 28, 2018)

Summary of posts:

Summary

Drop 1 (Q 140): Jason Bourne (2016)(Dream/CIA)

Drop 2 (Q 142): Jason Bourne (Dream/CIA)

Drop 3 (Q 144): Why was Jason Bourne (CIA/Dream) repeated?

Drop 4 (Q 165): Why was Jason Bourne (CIA/Dream) repeated?

Drop 5 (Q 166): Jason Bourne (Deep Dream)

Drop 6 (Q 1638): Think Bourne, Covert OPs classified....rt DEEP DREAM = TWITTER

Bourne >>Project Deep Dream and two moar Q drops: 790 & 3584

Q 790 (Feb 2018): tells us Project Deep Dream is connected with @jack

Q 3584 (Nov 11 2019): Proj Deep Dream is related to Proj Deep Mind

Proj Deep Dream is related to Proj Deep Mind = AI Manhattan Project

here is a reference to a Breitbart article on that:

https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/10/14/whistleblower-google-is-developing-ai-for-planetary-surveillance/

includes podcast from Google whistleblower Zach Vorhies talking about DeepMind.

See >>>/qrb/39591 for details on Q Q 791, Q 3584, and breitbart article

Breitbart article not further dugg on -- Worth a DIGG??

this was during the transitional period for QR/QRB

article listed in endchan & QR but not capped or discussed

There are other digs on DeepMind but not on this

>>7483775

Breitbart article cap:

https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/10/14/whistleblower-google-is-developing-ai-for-planetary-surveillance/

>>7483618 Barr states in NBC interview that the Russian investigation ended in Sept 2017

notable

>https://youtu.be/LRKFo0JmuBc?t=8m57s

Full Interview: Barr Criticizes Inspector General Report On The Russia Investigation | NBC News

Yes, this IS interesting

Barr clearly states that the Russia investigation ended in Sept 2017.

thx for easy access link anon

>>7483796

>>7483775

yes, have a blown up version posted in the /qrb/ posts, but might as well drop it here

>>7483947

Free speech includes saying "You don't have anything worthwhile to contribute"

(or anon version: "GTFO!")

'control freaks' can posts too

why not?

>>7483989

>>7483997

>>7484022

that's right

NO FUN ALLOWED

need moar 'no fun' memes

gotta bee sirius atoll tines

o7

>>7484042

>repeat impeachments

now that dems got the impeachment bug

i spose they'll do it

for all future Repubs too

(why stop with just Trump?)

and why do anything else?

govt = impeachments plus vacations

nice work if ya kin git it!

>>7484048 Possible links between 'Finders' cult, BCCI & Maxwell sisters' Information on Demand (Amazing Polly vid)

notable

While digging on Maxwell sisters' names, came across this nice summary based on Polly's work:

anons, take a look

Digging Into The Maxwell Family

http://exposinginfragard.blogspot.com/2019/09/digging-into-maxwell-family.html

>>7484087

yep

good look for Gowdy

(along with the hair, kek)

>>7484198

like the way Collins looks right at the camera and speaks directly to the public

also like watching Dems staring intently down at their papers so they don't have to look at Collins calling them out

To the dems:

"2019: this is the year you put a dagger in minority rights!"

>>7484239

amazing how the Repubs have at least a dozen viable candidates for President in the future

and the dems have ZERO

>>7484239

>some of the bakers and note takers have made a point of supressing this information

have seen plenty of discussion on the misspellings issue in notables

but it can be a technical topic, so anons' points can be hard to evaluate at times

bakers typically have a very short time to decide whether something's notable

most of the time, when things are left out of notables, it's not fuckery

it's either a judgment call, baker's assessment or being really busy

(and much of the time when someone points out supposed fuckery, they're either jumping the gun or…..)

if you are not a shill, try baking sometime and you will inevitably get called out as a shill, no matter what you do

(we who dig all know it can be frustrating not to get good stuff noticed but it's usually nobody's "fault" just ones of those things)

o7