Q FISA = START Time[ing] is important
Working something here. Following Q's latest crumb.
→ 1:29 - 12/9 ←
Seems like Q is trying to lead us with a laser pointer.
—–
(Anon post)
>>7517634 (pb)
We have three things issued at 1:29 aka Q-watch time:
>IG report
>Durham rebuttal
>Barr rebuttal
We have confirmation that there are no coincidences.
So that means one of three things:
-
Horowitz, Durham and Barr are all in communication with Q
OR
-
Horowitz, Durham and Barr were specifically directed by Q+ to issue their reports/rebuttals at precisely 1:29 PM ("Why, POTUS?" "You'll find out. Just do it.")
OR
-
Some combination of the above.
(Q responds)
>>7517634 (pb)
Time[ing] is important.
How many coincidences [use of coincidences essential not to violate NAT SEC?] before mathematically impossible?
FISA = START
Q
——
Here's where I think Q might be pointing us.
FISA = START
Time[ing] is important
[use of coincidences essential not to violate NAT SEC?]
——
So if: 1:29 - 12/9 are clues.
Here's intel we already have ref: Crossfire Hurricane
Strzok - Page text from (Dec 28, 2015)
Strzok: "You got all our oconus lures approved ;)"
Page: No, it's just implicated a much bigger policy issue. I'll explain later. Might even be able to use it as a pretext for a call…:)"
Could it just be that Q is pointing us to:
FISA = START (Time[ing] Important)
FISA [Real] Start = (Dec 9, 2015)?
Is it going to come out that the initial FISA application was submitted (Dec 9, 2015)?
Then (Dec 28, 2015) Strzok & Page were working on getting their [moles] & [plants] lined up?
——
Q's London Corinthia Hotel location pics were winter if I remember correctly.
Just a thought.
https://clintonfoundationtimeline.com/december-28-2015-a-text-message-between-strzok-and-page-seeks-approval-for-double-agents/
https://pjmedia.com/trending/strzok-page-texts-refer-to-oconus-lures-spies-in-december-of-2015/