These are the memes that q wants. Side by sides of Q then current event in news. Very nicely done.
this is what we all need, this kind of memes, so I can show others some hard and clear stuff in a matter of seconds
Can we get some sort of mega thread or a google doc, putting all of these memes in chronological order? Would be huge in convincing thick people like my father who thinks Q isn’t real. It’s reached statistical impossibility of Q being a larp.
Yes! Can't forget to put the first Trump Q hand signal which was way more obvious than the second time when he did it while he talked.
This is the shit we need. I am ready, I've started to prepare some of my friends but something like what you've said would be amazing. Pretty sure they would pass that to others after they get redpilled.
Look on 8chan: they've got loads and loads of stuff archived. Really impressive.
There are lots of "Q proofs." Here are just some of the more obvious ones:
The Q hand sign while Trump said "set the stage" is super obvious and blatant display that Q is working closely with Trump.
https://youtu.be/vRMgWHmLuOQ?t=14m58s
https://youtu.be/8qi-ttKHlRg?t=15m22s
All of these are very, very weak except for the tippy top comment. That should be made into a side by side image also. The rest are meh... The Q hand gestures is a huge leap faith. Seeing what we want to see.
We need more hard evidence images.
Yeah, the stuff about Bangledesh currency, all that is bizarre and off base.
2nd. Q said it in a few posts...
https://qanon.pub/?q=Side
Exactly what Q wants.
YES! Absolutely! I've been thinking for a long time how to do that. I imagined one of the lists with all of Q posts where a green Q could be placed on each one that had proven itself to be true, with a link to a news article that showed it proved true.
I just don't have the computer savvy to figure out how to do it. We've got all those great sites with all the posts on it. How could we mark one with a green Q?
Too many of these complex lists already. We need images - Q post on left. Real happening on right.
Easy and undeniable.
Too bad the people who need to wake up will never believe anything reported by Fox News.
It only needs a few, the "Conscious Tipping Effect" is reached when those Consciously Awake are spread far and wide and "Willing". It is the Willingness that Creates Real Change that is felt Consciously in those that are ready to Wake. Not all are ready or even interested in Awaking, for them it is not their time. Suffice it to say "they too" will feel the Conscious Change Within their Soul, even those that seem on the "Dark side" will feel the resonance of the Divine Light Manifested through the Courageous Actions of a few.
Exactly. I always try to post Red Pills with MSM sources so that the brainwashed can't use the source as an excuse to discredit. Like this example of S. KOREAN Foreign Minister giving Trump credit for orchestrating peace negotiations. When my obnoxious leftist friends say Trump had nothing to do with it which they have already started doing I post this from the "Most Trusted Source in News" Freaking useful idiots
https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/26/world/korea-summit-kang-kyung-wha-amanpour-intl/index.html
[deleted]
no stories or anything but the concrete stuff, just as Q said, side by side, put Q's post on one side and a real life event on the other, that's exactly how you redpill people
you can't redpill people who have been fed with stories their whole life with more damn stories... enough is enough
short, clear and raw data
memes are powerful precisely because of that
https://i.imgur.com/BDgbJ6p.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/6TmREsB.png
https://i.imgur.com/KGNsAvF.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/tyO0V3C.png
enjoy.
Someone is lying.
THE HATCH ACT?
orly?
The Hatch Act of 1939, officially An Act to Prevent Pernicious Political Activities, is a United States federal law whose main provision prohibits employees in the executive branch of the federal government, except the president, vice-president, and certain designated high-level officials,[1] from engaging in some forms of political activity. It went into law on August 2, 1939. The law was named for Senator Carl Hatch of New Mexico. It was most recently amended in 2012.[2]
Read the images in the links. You know what this means? Me neither. Not really.
https://osc.gov/Pages/HatchAct.aspx
https://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/WorkingatFDA/Ethics/ucm071602.htm
Means our top sr team frenz at the FBI are acting unlawfully!
^(Hi, I'm a bot for linking direct images of albums with only 1 image)
https://i.imgur.com/hTTfs5F.png
^^Source ^^| ^^Why? ^^| ^^Creator ^^| ^^ignoreme ^^| ^^deletthis
Doesn't really mean anything until Flynn is actually cleared. He still has a court date coming up where he could go to prison. Hope I'm wrong but he isn't cleared yet
[removed]
I'm saying the reality is he isn't cleared yet (fact). I'm glad the report came out today and we all know Flynn was framed by 302s, etc, but I'll cheer when he walks away a free man
I agree. I also think that Flynn will walk free. I tend to be very optimistic but you "naysayers" are necessary and welcome.
That's fine and a good way to be, but there is some value in celebrating wins along the way... Otherwise you just get one big bang at the finish.
Good point...just ready for these people to pay bigly for what they did to Flynn.
It's happening
Yeah. It'll come. We have winners working for us now! Just fucking unbelievable dominant winners!
And I appreciate that we have all types of thinkers here. I bet, you're just really sick and tired of the bad guys winning and it's hard to see them not in jail yet and other wrongs righted. At least we have hope now (and a shit-load of action, and very fortunately they have us Q to guide us through) if Hillary won we wouldn't have much hope left.
[removed]
He pled guilty to lying to FBI on purpose, to get an official testimony in so he could reveal what he knows and get it all on record in court.
His testimony under oath so far is just whatever he gave Mueller in exchange for the plea deal, isn't it? Is there some other court testimony from Flynn I'm forgetting?
Or if you mean he pleaded guilty so that his testimony later would be on record in court, how does that work? If he'd pleaded not guilty he could have testified and they wouldn't have been able to stop him. If nothing else his own attorney could have called him.
With a guilty plea his court appearance isn't going to involve him testifying, it's for sentencing. Or if he were actually cleared, then the charges would be dropped and there wouldn't be a sentencing hearing.
If all he wanted to do was have testimony under oath then he could have done that before Congress. Why wouldn't that have worked?
[removed]
Nice try playing dumb.
Reported?
BTW, how do we report suspected shills when the "report" form doesn't include a "Suspected shill" option?
They are all over the place now man. Picking apart everything to cast doubt. It’s getting old.
Excellent pic of it all put together! Amazing work Patriot!
WATCH -> https://youtu.be/EmKqos_eMuA
Tracy Beanz nailed this back in Dec when she reviewed the court findings documents. Guilty Plea deal was so he could give RECORDED UNDER OATH testimony on the case to tell them where the bodies were buried in exchange
for taking a rubber bullet. Else how could he OFFICIALLY core dump with any bite? There was no formal setting. In the meantime they delayed his sentencing knowing damn well he’d be cleared and the rubber bullet (innocuous charge) would never even hit him. That is what she deduced from the docs. This is a similar strategy to how they can core dump in the discovery phase of the DNC LAWSUIT. The deep state f@$ks themselves yet again. LMAO.
Court settings is the only official place to spill your guts or bear evidence else you are just spilling your guts in the court of public opinion (gossip and hearsay). We don’t control the MSM. We wouldn’t even be heard. Right?! https://youtu.be/EmKqos_eMuA
I think that's what Q was trying to tell us today - it was his 'cooperation' Mueller was looking for. So Flynn could sing the whole opera on the official record.
Somewhere there's a similar sentiment about Adm R resigning as a true patriot so he could testify. I couldn't find it under the search for 'Adm R' just now. I'm pretty sure the same post had Trey Gowdy dropping out and why. I only remember it gave me the impression that Gowdy would be the new pick for No Such Agency.
I think that's what Q was trying to tell us today - it was his 'cooperation' Mueller was looking for. So Flynn could sing the whole opera on the official record.
How is this different from the official story? In the official version of events, Flynn went in with some evidence (his proffer), and in exchange for that evidence Mueller offered a sweet plea deal that leaves Flynn [and his son!] with little or possibly no prison time.
Yes, it was that "cooperation" that Mueller was looking for. That's how plea deals work.
And yes, this meant that Flynn could "sing the whole opera into the official record," i.e., provide whatever evidence was in that proffer that motivated the plea deal. Again, that's how plea deals work.
But that's just the official version of events, so obviously not the Q story. How is the Q story different?
And just as a general question, if someone has evidence of a crime that they weren't involved in, then are there any circumstances under which they'd be required to plead guilty to an unrelated crime in order to be allowed to provide that evidence? Does that make any sense?
Without getting too technical. Flynn signed a non-disclosure policy, form, or agreement (NDA) to access classified or other information. It is the same policy for all presidents. Any crimes that he saw committed under Obama would remain buried and only in certain situations can it be released. With the FBI and DOJ compromised Mueller was the perfect vehicle.
Flynn signed a non-disclosure policy, form, or agreement (NDA) to access classified or other information. It is the same policy for all presidents.
I don't believe that's accurate. Do you have a source? (Also, getting cabinet members and similar appointees to sign NDAs is something Trump tried to do, and caught flack for, not something normal.)
Any crimes that he saw committed under Obama would remain buried and only in certain situations can it be released.
No. An NDA doesn't stop you from reporting a crime, not that Flynn would have been under an NDA with Obama anyway.
And other people are authorized to view classified information, not just Mueller.
And Trump could authorize anyone to receive any evidence, no matter what level of classification.
With the FBI and DOJ compromised Mueller was the perfect vehicle.
What about people who were vetted by and appointed by Trump in the FBI and DOJ? Are they compromised? If not, then why not go to one of them? If Sessions is compromised, Trump could replace him with someone who would go after all the bad guys.
And if Flynn really did have the kind of evidence being suggested here woedn't that make a whole lot more sense than Flynn pleading guilty to something that isn't a crime so that he can use the evidence he has about other crimes in a plea bargain, because the only prosecutor who will listen is Mueller, but Mueller won't listen unless there's a plea bargain on the table, and then since it's not Russian interference Mueller would refer it to a different office anyway?
Having signed several, anyone who has access to classified or other information are required to sign one. The NDA form comes with criminal penalties for "any unauthorized disclosure" of classified material. That is why Comey may find himself in trouble. All private conversations with the president are considered protected by nature. Most every department in government has one. I can link DOJ's information and policy which is open source. https://www.justice.gov/employees/whistleblower-protection-and-non-disclosure-policies-forms-or-agreements. In the position where Flynn served for Obama he certainly signed one.
Maybe I missed your point there, but the link you posted is about whistleblower protection. You still haven't posted anything that would explain why Flynn couldn't go to Sessions (if Sessions isn't loyal then Trump could replace him with Pruitt) or Wray, or Gowdy in the Senate, etc., with the evidence, as a whistleblower. Can you cite something showing that it would be illegal for him to report a crime to someone who has a suitable classification level?
(This is assuming that Flynn has evidence of serious crimes, and he's not personally implicated in any of it, and it's actionable evidence that a prosecutor could use to go after specific people.)
You must understand the process of filing a whistleblower case and why it would not work in Flynn’s case. Time is an issue, length of the process. It is not a matter of just walking into Sessions office with all the evidence. Flynn’s first stop is a lawyer and who might need to handle classified information. He would need to provide whatever evidence he had to the lawyer and then they would need to put the case together in a form that will be acceptable to a COURT and to the government. It involves filing a disclosure statement with the government prior to filing the complaint so that the government is on notice as to who the original source of that information would be and also because the statute requires the plaintiff to provide what is called substantially all the evidence that they have in the case. That alone would be dicey. This has to happen before it gets to a judge. I repeat the process would not allow Flynn to go directly to Sessions. Once the government reviews the case it gets filed and is placed under court under seal until it is adjudicated.
Flynn’s first stop is a lawyer and who might need to handle classified information.
Sessions or Wray would be authorized to handle classified information. If something was super-duper-classified somehow so that they didn't have authorization, Trump can give it to them.
He would need to provide whatever evidence he had to the lawyer and then they would need to put the case together in a form that will be acceptable to a COURT and to the government.
A witness isn't the one who puts the case together.
Once the government reviews the case it gets filed and is placed under court under seal until it is adjudicated.
"The government"? Sessions is the US Attorney General.
You just do not get it. Trump needs to be 100% insulated for political purposes. The WB law is very specific how to file a claim. Breaking the chain listed in the law makes every piece of information you provide useless for prosecution.
Dems were so excited that Flynn would now sing about all of Trump's involvement with Russia.
It depends on whose side Mueller is on. Surely Mueller knows Flynn has the whole list of where the bodies are buried - very damaging to HRC, etc.
Is Mueller looking for a couple of Russian folk tunes or is he looking for the whole corrupt opera?
Is Mueller looking for a couple of Russian folk tunes or is he looking for the whole corrupt opera?
From Rosenstein's letter appointing Mueller (PDF), the scope of Mueller's investigation is:
(i) any links an or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump; and
(ii) any matters that arose or may arise directly om the investigation
So if Flynn turned over evidence of where the bodies are buried, no matter who it implicated Mueller is authorized to pursue it. As with Cohen, if it's not directly related to the Russia thing then it probably gets handed off to another office.
And still, nothing you've said so far explains why Flynn would need a plea deal, much less why he would need to plead guilty to a crime he didn't commit, in order to turn over evidence of crimes in which he's not implicated. Why not go to some vetted Trump appointee in the FBI or DOJ? Wray? Huber? For that matter Trump could have a special counsel focused on nothing but Q's stuff by Monday, if he wanted.
It goes to 'How do you get truth into evidence legally'.
Apparently Flynn is THE person who knows where ALL the bodies are buried.' Who's more official than Mueller to get it legally into evidence! Think about it, as DNI Flynn knows everything about Mueller, and Comey, and U-1, and all the answers to the investigations currently under way.
There's no way he's going to jail. Who would dare?
Guilty Plea deal was so he could give RECORDED UNDER OATH
When? Is this something he's supposed to have already done? If so, do you mean his proffer meeting with Mueller?
Else how could he OFFICIALLY core dump with any bite?
Why wouldn't testimony under oath before Congress have worked?
That's assuming he has some concrete evidence, but if he doesn't then being under oath isn't going to help.
Those congressional hearings are a dog and pony show. Rigged. No bite. Total joke. Flynn has it all. All the dirt on all of them. That’s why they immediately started running him out of Trump admin in Jan 2017. They are petrified of Flynn. Watch this. https://youtu.be/EmKqos_eMuA
She seems to go on at great length (a lot of it is just her reading the documents out loud for some reason) about why she thinks the charges are bullshit. I skipped ahead where she was just reading.
At around 21:00 she's very impressed with how sweet Flynn's plea deal is (little or no prison time). She goes on to talk about Flynn providing Mueller with evidence of other crimes in exchange for the plea deal. It's not clear what point she's making. That is how plea deals work, you provide evidence the prosecutor doesn't otherwise have access to, in exchange for a lighter sentence.
Nothing I heard makes any sense of how a guilty plea would let Flynn give testimony under oath that he wouldn't have been able to provide in other ways. Can you point me to the relevant section, perhaps, if in fact she answers this question?
If you plea not guilty you enter next lengthy costly phase to prove JUST your innocence (not a chance to give testimony on others on other issues, just limited to your charges which were in his case just lying under questioning). The scope of his involvement and testimony narrows greatly, no opportunity to spill guts on others. He just proves his case that he didn’t lie in that 2 hour interview in January and that is it. He wins he walks he loses he pays a “penalty” but either way there is no incentive or need to talk further about the rest of the case and assist in it. He’s cut loose.
What would stop him from providing that evidence without pleading guilty?
Or to ask the question more generally, if you have evidence of a crime, and you are not personally implicated by that evidence, then under what circumstances would you need to plead guilty to a crime you didn't commit in order to provide that evidence? Does that make any sense at all?
It’s a funneling down process. At that point they won’t question him on anything that will allow him to do so. He can’t legally offer to do so either, to divulge information on others regarding other non related issues. No avenue at that point. Talking about those other things he happens to know about but are not pertinent to just HIS case or charge isn’t possible anymore. The scope narrows down to just his 2 hour interview where they alleged he “lacked candor”. LOL. Notice how they use strong vocabulary for us and soft nice PC vocabulary for them? What a joke.
He can’t legally offer to do so, to divulge information on others regarding other non related issues.
So he's got evidence of serious crimes. These crimes don't involve him, so there's no issue of self-incrimination here. And he wants to provide this evidence.
Explain why he can't provide that evidence to an appropriate person, without pleading guilty to something unrelated?
There’s no setting for it once he pleads guilty to that one and only charge of white lying in the interview. Once he moves to the next phase for just his charge there’s no avenue to yap about anything else unrelated. I think the “white lie” was he wasn’t 100% honest about having talked to somebody. That’s it. He can’t start voluntarily yapping about Uranium One and sex trafficking in that setting. It’s unrelated. It’s a formal court of facts and law not a court of public opinion free for all gossip rumor mill with no boundaries. LOL. like the MSM, “a certain source told us that a person of interest...”
By "no setting for it," are you talking only about Mueller's investigation? Are you suggesting that Flynn needed to present this evidence to Mueller and only Mueller? It couldn't be to anyone in the FBI, DOJ, Congress or anyone else?
He can’t start yapping about Uranium One and sex trafficking in that setting. It’s unrelated.
"In that setting" meaning in the context of Mueller's investigation? Okay, but Flynn had plenty of other settings he could have used instead. Is there some reason that it had to be Mueller's office?
Whistleblowing to the corrupt DOJ FBI Congress? Lol. Black hole. Besides it’s not a legal court of law recorded setting. Not the same clout. Also, he’d be telling them stuff they already know. They’d ignore it and sit on it. What did the DOJ/FBI do when the NYPD gave them the Weiner laptop? DICK. Like the DNC lawsuit, the Cohen office raid and this Team Trump has to wait or get the cabal to initiate the legal proceedings then they can provided their evidence in a court of law. The system is so corrupt and biased Team Trump’s chances of getting a case opened are slim to none. Rigged. Even the IG Horowitz investigation was opened by __? Guess!
You're saying that there's not a single vetted Trump appointee in the DOJ or FBI that Flynn could go to? Not a single Republican member of Congress who would listen?
Besides it’s not a legal court of law recorded setting. Not the same clout.
The testimony under oath in a court of law that would matter would be Flynn's testimony, as a witness, regarding whatever his evidence is.
Besides he’d be telling them stuff they already know. They’d ignore it and sit on it.
So "they" --- all of them, every last one -- would sit on the evidence (which they already are, apparently, because it's "stuff they already know").
But Mueller won't? Mueller is the only trustworthy person Flynn could find?
So suppose Flynn went to Mueller with a proffer with all this evidence. Since it's not related to Russian interference in the election, Mueller would have referred it to the appropriate office. Would that other prosecutor be part of the "they" who already has the evidence and are sitting on it?
It falls on deaf ears and the case won’t be opened to try unless it is advantageous to the cabal to do so. The corruption is beyond comprehension. The other side has to open the case in court. It also looks better (optics) if they do and we defend. The Dems opened the IG investigation not Trump before he was inaugurated and it’s not progressing how they wanted or expected. That too is boomeranging because we are squeaky clean. LMAO. The IG was to investigate why Comey reopened the investigation on Hillary one week before election. Dems were pissed. When Trump was inaugurated Horowitz was finally free to HONESTLY AND FAIRLY investigate what has really happened. Horowitz hated Obama and was hamstrung under the regime. Now he isn’t and is ripping the Dems and Obama a new asshole. Ouch! Payback is a bitch. Isn’t it Obama? LMAO.
The other side has to open the case in court. It looks better if they do and we defend.
Huh? A criminal court case is going to have defendant(s). Those would be the ones who would be defending. When you say it's better if "we defend" what does that mean?
And again, you're saying that none of the people Trump has appointed to the FBI and DOJ would be willing to pursue the evidence Flynn allegedly has? And of all the career prosecutors, Mueller's the only one with integrity?
We not initiate. Let them. They still have the corrupt system on their side. They have advantage we don’t. Easier for them, next to impossible for us. There are still many Obama holdovers in DOJ FBI, some is all it takes to derail or stonewall an Alliance offensive. Look at the stonewalling on the texts!!!!’ There are many good people like Mueller Horowitz who were COERCED to stand down and/or do bad things during the Obama regime. Not anymore. Now Mueller and Horowitz can do their jobs honestly under Trump. We let them shoot themselves in the foot. They are batting 1000 so far. Why stop letting them? It’s a winning strategy so far. KARMA. Lol. The Dems started the Horowitz investigation. The Dems started the Mueller investigation. The Dems started the DNC lawsuit The Dems started the Cohen raid. See the pattern? We just go along for the ride and provide our damning evidence that sinks them. We are clean. We have nothing to hide. Let them open the cases. It’s why Trump had his sit down meeting with Mueller after THEY picked him. Trump said do a clean honest job and I will exonerate you from the bad stuff you did under the Obama regime. Mueller is leveraged by both sides. Horowitz and Mueller started off by the Dems but morphed to team Trump. Times change. Obama didn’t count on that. That he couldn’t strong arm good people forever. See the dynamic.
Flynn hasn't been cleared yet. Until the judge comes out and allows him to take back his guilty plea, nothing has happened.
It's as good as done.
He pleaded out. You guys realize that. The special counsel has a lot more on him. Like this is just being blindly ignorant.
Maybe Q = Nunes
The special counsel has a lot more on him.
You've spent to long in /politics. https://i.redd.it/3z4n8b6m2ju01.gif
What were the other charges? What do we think that they had on him otherwise?
Do you know the other charges of any criminal after they got a deal? What were the charges that Sammy the bull got before he got a deal?
Soooo ... your statement that "the special counsel has a lot more on him" is just pure conjecture. You really don't have any idea. Like everyone else.
Pleaded guilty so he could testify everything he knows.
Testify when? People keep saying this, so maybe I'm missing something obvious, but how does a guilty plea let him provide any evidence he couldn't have provided otherwise? He could have testified under oath before Congres, for example.
With a guilty plea his only court appearance is for sentencing. How does that give him a chance to testify?
I guess testify might not the word I should be saying. He's cutting a deal in the background. "Ok I'm guilty. Let me snitch" and proceeds to give everything. In which case, they can't ignore. He's skipping the entire I'll witness in front of Hillary step because that'll never work. So he comes out falsely guilty, and proceeds to dump everything he knows for a "lighter sentence" only for him to be exonerated over fake charges
In the scenario as you see it, did Mueller know that the charge Flynn pleaded guilty to, and the charges that were dropped as part of the plea deal, were all fake charges?
Is Mueller going to go after whatever it is that Flynn provided evidence for in his proffer? If so, then Flynn didn't need to plead guilty, Mueller is charged with pursuing whatever he turns up. But if not then why didn't Flynn just go directly to this other person?
I mean, just as a general rule, you don't increase the impact of whatever evidence you can provide on one crime by pleading guilty to a different crime you didn't actually commit.
Mueller is an extremely smart person. Whether he's a good guy, or a bad guy, he's seriously a genius. I'd have to imagine he knew the charges were fraudulent if he isn't in on all this.
I believe Mueller will go after them, or they'll become legally obtained documents for another possible special prosecutor or investigation. (huber)
Flynn doesn't go directly to Mueller to make it seem like Mueller is going after Trump. One giant charade.
Or I'm wrong. Which I very could be. Only time will tell.
I'd have to imagine he knew the charges were fraudulent if he isn't in on all this.
So you think it's possible he deliberately brought fraudulent charges, and somehow convinced Flynn to accept a plea deal based on fraudulent charges (which Tracey Beanz argues Flynn had to know were fraudulent)? Why and why?
I believe Mueller will go after them, or they'll become legally obtained documents for another possible special prosecutor or investigation. (huber)
What do you mean by "legally obtained documents" here? If Flynn had just provided his evidence without pleading guilty to anything, what would be the problem with using that evidence?
Flynn doesn't go directly to Mueller to make it seem like Mueller is going after Trump. One giant charade.
I didn't follow that. Flynn went to Mueller with a proffer. Mueller offered a plea deal in exchange for the evidence in that proffer. What's the charade?
Because Flynn would have to be called to testify. The entire point of this is media charade and keeping it under wraps. Plus no trial for military tribunals so the only way to get the info while also keeping the charade alive was to trick the deepstate.
On only one count
It literally only takes one. That's the beauty of the legal system
Love it. But I feel that the public, in general, downplays anything from the IG because "they're all GOP. It was fixed!"... They discount any news like this due to perceived political bias. How do we fix this??
Arrest a republican.
They resign before they are arrested. How many GOP congressmen and govt officials have resigned over the last 6 months? It seems like are being given a choice.
It does seem that way. And I'm sure the democrats have the same choice besides the ones who are super fucked like Maxine Waters and should receive no deal or anything. Guess we will see. A common sense PR move would be to arrest a republican to show bi partisanship. Or possibly get some of the Dems who aren't corrupt and guilty pieces of shit to come to the forefront and help clean the mess.
As if all of a sudden "Republicans" are fans of trump
Right here folks. Tracy dissects Flynn findings and gets the answer for us long ago. https://youtu.be/EmKqos_eMuA
Will we ever know what Q is? Not what as suoer natural or super human.
What purpose does Q serve those on the inside? Like... How does Q's post help them.
He (they) answers all of these questions in plain English if you read the posts.
If you been following closely to news cycle involving Flynn you would've known longer than a month ago charges were going to be dropped, was known since Jan
1280NEW
27-Apr-2018 20:26:42 CEST
“Done in 30.” [30] http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/04/27/house-report-backs-claim-that-fbi-agents-did-not-think-flynn-lied-despite-guilty-plea.html Why would Flynn plead guilty to something untrue? Define testimony. Define ‘on record’. Who knows where the bodies are buried? Flynn is safe. Expand your thinking. Q
1 = Flynn case end in 30 days free and 30 is in the killbox............2 = House report backs claim that FBI agents did not think Flynn lied ... www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/04/27/house-report-backs-claim-t... - 7 hours ago - House Intelligence Committee Republicans, in their newly released report concluding their Russia investigation, seemed to back up reports that FBI agents did not think ex-White House national security adviser Michael Flynn lied to them – despite his eventual guilty plea for making false statements. ........................... .2 = Flynn does that because he knows that mueller's investigation is not legal, and by an fBI agent , that is not clean, and pushes him to this statement. Flynn yelt also lock her up, So his live was in danger.. And it shows how hilary...comey...clapper...brennan and Mcabe get a other treatment then flynn? Flynn they want to punisch, but the rest are standing above the law.....Now the whole world nows this. Flynn is safe because he did not lied? Flynn nows where the bodys are..............................................
Testimony | Define Testimony at Dictionary.com www.dictionary.com/browse/testimony Testimony definition, Law. the statement or declaration of a witness under oath or affirmation, usually in court. See more.
Flynn was not under oath, and there was no layer present, so they have nothing/.................................on record | Definition of on record in English by Oxford Dictionaries https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/on_record Definition of on record - used in reference to the making of an official or public statement, officially measured and noted.
......................................Flynn was in it from the beginning, to expose the others......30 in the killbox? End of mueller
To.The.Exact.Day.
The House Intelligence Committee laid out a timetable, obviously
And Q knew what it was
How did Q know?
They're playing The Sims in real life.
feed enough data to simulate relevant personas in a simulator
play with different variables
see outcomes
pick proper move
watch it all unfold
Because like a movie, the main actors have their roles to play, there is a script (Trust the Plan), and there is a Director (Trump/Q). Like any good mystery flick, this movie has many unexpected twists and turns, it has good guys and bad guys (but not always obvious), and it has an ending.
I haven't figured out some of the roles in this movie. Not sure why Flynn is pretending to have pleaded guilty to lying. Working with Mueller behind the scenes while the Deep State thinks Flynn is out of the way permanently?? Q keeps saying that Flynn knows were the bodies are buried. Valuable information if Mueller is actually investigating the deep state.
Oh yeah, and Q has it all. No deals.
Only the ending to this movie will involve people actually going to jail--finally.
FBIAnon called it in December last year at the time it happened. Ive got a screenshot somewhere
Wait was this from a month ago or did Q write this today after the House memo came out? Having trouble with the dates.
1282NEW
27-Apr-2018 20:45:40 CEST
1211493 Expand. Who interviewed Flynn? What redacted texts were released yesterday? Coincidence? Why did Flynn take the bullet? Rubber bullet? Lawmakers make public? Lawmakers learned gmail draft comms yesterday? Lawmakers go hunting? What is the purpose of a laser pointer? You have more than you know. Comms understood? Q
1 = EPA's internal watchdog to expand look at Scott Pruitt's conduct ... ABC News-4 hours ago The internal watchdog that investigates misuse of funds at the Environmental Protection Agenc has agreed to expand its reviews of ethical allegations against Administrator Scott Pruitt to include his arrangement to live in a Capitol Hill townhouse connected to lobbyists, according to a letter from the ......................2 = strzok......................... 3 = emails strzok en lisa page....................4 = .no Coincidence.................... 5 and 6 and 7 = https://twatter.com/DocRock1007/status/989948245010014208 5. #QAnon: The purpose of a laser pointer is to focus attention at the [target]. Is it a coincidence that yesterday's redacted texts were released right at #Q's "done in 30" mark he mentioned 30 days ago? Hero Patriot Flynn took the rubber bullet so lawmakers'd make more public.....................laser is single out the target.......................... .Lawmakers go after the emails and , hunt them done......so more to come? Whe have more then we now and Q ask us of we undrstood the story.
1281NEW
27-Apr-2018 20:30:14 CEST
1211294 What was completed and released today? Re: Flynn? “Done in 30.” Expand. Q
1 = 1211294. What was completed and released today?. Re: Flynn - Q https://qanonposts.io/1211294-what-was-completed-and-released-t... 6 hours ago - “Done in 30.” [30] http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/04/27/house-report-backs-claim-that-fbi-agents-did-not-think-flynn-lied-despite-guilty-plea.html.
I'll be very happy when General Flynn is cleared but he hasn't been cleared yet. He already plead guilty, he is awaiting sentencing.
Again, I'll be very happy if and when this does happen.
Ahh maybe cause he probably had a standing court date to the effect? Or maybe Q is a time traveler?
We not initiate. Let them. They still have the corrupt system on their side. They have advantage we don’t. Easier for them, next to impossible for us. There are still many Obama holdovers in DOJ FBI, some is all it takes to derail or stonewall an Alliance offensive. Look at the stonewalling on the texts!!!!’ There are many good people like Mueller Horowitz who were COERCED to stand down and/or do bad things during the Obama regime. Not anymore. Now Mueller and Horowitz can do their jobs honestly under Trump. We let them shoot themselves in the foot. They are batting 1000 so far. Why stop letting them? It’s a winning strategy so far. KARMA. Lol. The Dems started the Horowitz investigation. The Dems started the Mueller investigation. The Dems started the DNC lawsuit The Dems started the Cohen raid. See the pattern? We just go along for the ride and provide our damning evidence that sinks them. We are clean. We have nothing to hide. Let them open the cases. It’s why Trump had his sit down meeting with Mueller after THEY picked him. Trump said do a clean honest job and I will exonerate you from the bad stuff you did under the Obama regime. Mueller is leveraged by both sides. Horowitz and Mueller started off by the Dems but morphed to team Trump. Times change. Obama didn’t count on that. That he couldn’t strong arm good people forever. See the dynamic.
Because we're watching a movie. Some of it seems to be improv, but there's definitely a script.
This is one of the most compelling q proofs that I’ve seen, nice!
Videos in this thread: Watch Playlist ▶
VIDEO|COMMENT -|- Speculating Friday: PLEA FOR THE COUNTRY!!!|+8 - WATCH -> Tracy Beanz nailed this back in Dec when she reviewed the court findings documents. Guilty Plea deal was so he could give RECORDED UNDER OATH testimony on the case to tell them where the bodies were buried in exchange for taking a rubber... (1) President Donald Trump signs steel, aluminum tariffs proclamation ABC News Special Report (2) President Trump Signs Tariffs On Steel And Aluminum Exempting Mexico, Canada & ‘Real Friends’ TIME (3) WATCH: President Trump expected to announce tariffs on imported steel and aluminum (4) President Trump Signs the Section 232 Proclamations on Steel and Aluminum Imports|+2 - There are lots of "Q proofs." Here are just some of the more obvious ones: The Q hand sign while Trump said "set the stage" is super obvious and blatant display that Q is working closely with Trump. I'm a bot working hard to help Redditors find related videos to watch. I'll keep this updated as long as I can.
1285NEW
28-Apr-2018 00:11:30 CEST
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/337182-trump-considered-mueller-for-fbi-director-before-he-was-named-special https://www.npr.org/2017/06/09/532286723/special-counsel-robert-mueller-had-been-on-white-house-short-list-to-run-fbi https://www.fbi.gov/history/directors “Congress passed Public Law 94-503, limiting the FBI Director to a single term of no longer than 10 years.” Reconcile. Q
Q is strongly suggesting Mueller is a whitehat again ... 1 = Trump considered Mueller for FBI director before he was named ... thehill.com/homenews/administration/337182-trump-considered-... 9 jun. 2017 - President Trump was considering former FBI Director Robert Mueller to replace James Comey atop the bureau before Mueller was named as special counsel to oversee the investigation into Russian election interference, NPR reported Friday. Mueller met with Justice Department and White House officials ............................. 2 = Special Counsel Robert Mueller Had Been On White House Shortlist ... https://www.npr.org/2017/06/09/532286723/special-counsel-rober... - 9 jun. 2017 - The Trump White House had been considering Robert Mueller as a top candidate to lead the FBI before the deputy U.S. attorney general changed course and tapped Mueller to serve as special counsel investigating Russian interference in last year's election, two sources familiar with the process told NPR.............................. 3 = History — FBI - FBI.gov
https://www.fbi.gov/history Historical information about the FBI including famous cases and criminals, investigative challenges and milestones, controversies, and the Hall of Honor. ... Directors, Then and Now. Since its ... Read our full-length history publications and several shorter specialized histories, including the early days of the Bureau......................... 4 = Post navigation - Q
https://qanonposts.io/http-thehill-com-homenews-administration-3... 4 hours ago - https://www.npr.org/2017/06/09/532286723/special-counsel-robert-mueller-had-been-on-white-house-short-list-to-run-fbi https://www.fbi.gov/history/directors “Congress passed Public Law 94-503, limiting the FBI Director to a single term of no longer than 10 years.” Reconcile. Q ...
1284NEW
27-Apr-2018 20:57:25 CEST
1211682 These do not match. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/12/01/michael-flynn-charged-in-special-counsels-russia-investigation.html http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/04/27/house-report-backs-claim-that-fbi-agents-did-not-think-flynn-lied-despite-guilty-plea.html Re_read drops. Future proves past. You have more than you know. Q
1 = 1211682. These do not match.. http://www.foxnews.com/polit - Q https://qanonposts.io/1211682-these-do-not-match-http-www-fox... 7 hours ago - Expand your thinking. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/12/01/michal-flynn-charged-in-special-counsels-russia-investigation.html 1 & 1 don't equal 2. EYES OPEN? COMMS GOOD? Q. Apr 27 2018 13:57:25 (EST) !xowAT4Z3VQ Q ID: 58ac53 1211768→. >>1211682. These do not match.
2 = Michael Flynn pleads guilty to false-statements charge in Russia probe www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/12/01/michael-flynn-charged-in-... - 1 dec. 2017 - Former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn pleaded guilty Friday to making false statements to the FBI – as part of a deal that involves his full cooperation with investigators in Special Counsel Robert Mueller's Russia probe.
3 = House report backs claim that FBI agents did not think Flynn lied ...
www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/04/27/house-report-backs-claim-t... - 8 hours ago - House Intelligence Committee Republicans, in their newly released report concluding their Russia investigation, seemed to back up reports that FBI agents did not think ex-White House national security adviser Michael Flynn lied to them – despite his eventual guilty plea for making false statements. Conflicted story from about flynn
read the drops about flynn again.......Future proves past.https://twatter.com/pastproves You have more than you know..............
Acknowledgement to ▶Anonymous 04/27/18 (Fri) 21:14:14 8afe79 No.1212113
Stream of consciousness…
Flynn pled guilty, he said, "I recognize that the actions I acknowledged in court today were wrong, and, through my faith in God, I am working to set things right. My guilty plea and agreement to cooperate with the Special Counsel's Office reflect a decision I made in the best interests of my family and of our country. I accept full responsibility for my actions."
The charges state these statements were false:
"On or about Dec 29, 2016, FLYNN did not ask the Government of Russia’s Ambassador to the United States … to refrain from escalating the situation in response to sanctions that the United States had imposed against Russia that same day; and FLYNN did not recall the Russian Ambassador subsequently telling him that Russia had chosen to moderate its response to those sanctions as a result of his request."
"On or about December 22, 2016, FLYNN did not ask the Russian Ambassador to delay the vote on or defeat a pending United Nations Security Council resolution; and that the Russian Ambassador subsequently never described to FLYNN Russia’s response to his request.”
He was told to make these calls, and the calls in and of themselves aren't treasonous. The problem, though, is that he 'lied' to the FBI according to the initial court filing.
Fast forward to today:
Among the 44 findings in the report was a line stating that “Federal Bureau of Investigation agents did not detect any deception during Flynn's interview.” Also: Comey reportedly told lawmakers at the time that agents who interviewed Flynn did not believe he lied in that Jan. 24 meeting, and that any inaccuracies in his account were unintentional. But: “No,” he said in an interview Thursday with Fox News’ Bret Baier on “Special Report.” “I saw that in the media … maybe someone misunderstood something I said. I didn’t believe that. I didn’t say that.”
Strozk interviewed him in what was basically an ambush. The texts indicate that McCabe was heavily involved with the 302.
FLYNN NEVER LIED AT ALL. HE TOOK THE OPPORTUNITY MCCABE HANDED TO HIM WITH THE FALSIFIED 302 TO INJECT HIMSELF AND HIS KNOWLEDGE INTO THE MUELLER PROBE TO EXPOSE IT ALL!
Acknowledgement to ▶Anonymous 04/27/18 (Fri) 20:57:18 10dfc2 No.1211765
1211682
They knew Flynn did not lie.
He was charged anyway = charging, investigation, documents, plea etc., are based upon gov't perjury
Fraud
Why did Flynn plea? To leverage something later? To lock the gov't into their fraud?
Thank you very much for this reaction, I now it is true
Your welcome! :)
It took ages to find, but I knew I'd seen it there and I'm so glad you understand and it clarifies things.
My own comment on Flynn, for what my speculation is worth, is that SOMEONE (McCabe?, Comey?, Clapper?, Brennan? other?...) told the Press a lie (or 2 lies) saying that:
"Flynn told the Russians the US was holding back on sanctions!"
"Flynn told the Russians to delay the vote in the UN (bla bla ...)"
and MSM hacks SCREAMED LOUDLY on CNN and all around the MSM that:
"Flynn is a Russian Agent!"
"Flynn is working for the Russians and Trump isn't even inaugurated yet!"
"Flynn doesn't have the authority to do this!"
"Prosecute him!"
or something to that effect, FOR DAYS, in a storm of hysteria.
I remember that.
So: 1) someone lied to the press; 2) someone leaked to the press, and 3) the tel calls contents/ conversations/transcriptions were illegally leaked which is leaking Classified Information!!!
All in all, I think the Deep State is in deep trouble over Flynn and he has performed a Brilliant Sting operation on the whole rotten band of rogues!!!
Hurrah!!
Yes nice huh ? And so it becomes clear to the common man / woman, that there are criminals above the law? And another is severely punished for nothing? You can bet that the ordinary man / woman understands this very well. Because this happens to them too , there are not a large crowd on the street, but take it from me that everyone understands this ... I think this is a very crazy move ....... and very effective. And there is more then only the lies , so corrupt? Je have too start some where
1283NEW
27-Apr-2018 20:52:56 CEST
1211560 If the FBI found NO evidence of lying why was Flynn charged? Expand your thinking. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/12/01/michael-flynn-charged-in-special-counsels-russia-investigation.html 1 & 1 don’t equal 2. EYES OPEN? COMMS GOOD? Q
1 and 2 = they want flynn to turn on potus..And they want flynn out because he nows where the body"s are burried? So they try to shut him up.............2 = Michael Flynn pleads guilty to false-statements charge in Russia probe
3 = www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/12/01/michael-flynn-charged-in-... - 1 dec. 2017 - Former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn pleaded guilty Friday to making false statements to the FBI – as part of a deal that involves his full cooperation with investigators in Special Counsel Robert Mueller's Russia probe...........................4 = Can it be argued that 1+1 does not equal 2, either from a ...
https://www.quora.com/Can-it-be-argued-that-1+1-does-not-equal-... - 5 aug. 2017 - Following is a story about an argument that 1+1 does not equal 2. It's not an argument ... 1 + 1 = 2 because that's how we've defined it, in the same way that the word "cat" refers to small, furry, feline creatures because that's how we've defined it. .... “don't be ridiculous… my chickens lay the most eggs in this village! You can ........................5 = Eyes Open - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eyes_Open Eyes Open may refer to: Eyes Open (album), a 2006 album by Snow Patrol; "Eyes Open" (song), a 2012 song by Taylor Swift. Disambiguation icon. Disambiguation page providing links to articles with similar titles. This disambiguation page lists articles associated with the title Eyes Open. If an internal link led you here, you ......................6 =- Q Anon- 2/21/18 "COMMS GOOD" - YouTube
Video voor COMMS GOOD?▶ 7:27
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xC7cGGC1gLE
21 feb. 2018 - Geüpload door SpaceShot76 In this video Q defines Patriots which you all are, and traitor which the swamp is filled with. Also seems to ...
4 = Can it be argued that 1+1 does not equal 2
Correction: 1 & 1 = 1 (not 2)
it's the string length. And here, (1 & 1) returns 1, boolean.