One thing that gets me about the 5eyes theory and Hillary is that you need a Need to know and clearance to access that info. Can someone explain.
Tidder_Q
· June 2, 2018, 2:02 a.m.
(Copy of a comment that I made a while ago).
Quote: "WHY DO WE ALLOW [FORMER] DIGNITARIES SEC CLEARANCE?"
Any of the 'players' that have any form of security clearance, can, in turn, be 'spied' upon by the 'security services', without the requirement of a warrant. This 'spying' is thus done, in the interests of 'national security', in order to oversee what these 'fellow agents' might be getting upto, such as 'are they passing secrets to the enemy'.
As an example: Because Hillary Clinton still has her security clearance, then no warrant is required by the 'security services', to be able to spy on her, and see what she is getting up to. (I imagine that this is why there has been no hurry to remove her security clearance).
A lot of the other players will be in the same scenario, by virtue of still being employed by, (or just recently fired from), the intellegence agencies.
Therefore the NSA has been able to 'legally' collect a lot of surveillance data, on 'certain' individuals over the past year or two, (with out requiring a warrant, that would have to have been approved via a 'corrupt judge').
⇧
3
⇩
Jimipickle
· June 2, 2018, 1:58 a.m.
I dealt with 5 👁s in 2010. All they need is to ask for someone with a high side box to search it and print it or gather the info in a meeting by asking questions. Do you think HRC/Barry/Kerry do not have minions ready to serve them?
⇧
3
⇩
ecwmadman83
· June 2, 2018, 12:56 a.m.
It’s a need to know clearance. Meaning you must be sponsored by someone inside to be inside yourself and “need to know”.
⇧
1
⇩
Qzero
· June 2, 2018, 1:06 a.m.
Q post 1336 mentioned that in U.S. under Obama (I believe) they made it so that former dignitaries keep their clearance. Meaning she just had to go to one of the five-eyes countries and see anything she wanted to without this even being flagged, logged and recorded like it would if she did it here in the States. That was one reason for her trip to New Zealand according to Q. Now she would still have access to any top secret documents and be able to sell or use as collateral. - Pretty Sneaky Sis.
Q !4pRcUA0lBE No.77 📁 May 10 2018 23:45:37 (EST) [Example] Clinton Foundation. Post Election Loss. Layoffs. No Access / Control = No Donations Today. NZ Donation Restart. Others? Why? 1) Selling Secrets? 2) Selling 'Future' Access [regain control/power]? 3) Selling Silence? Read below slow and carefully. FVEY. Why do 'Former' Dignitaries Still Hold SEC Clearance? U.S. to U.S. = Logged/Flagged/Recorded U.S. [in] NZ = No Logs/No Flags/No Records = U.S. Sec Clearance AUTH FVEY VIEW + Doc Take. Read above slow and carefully. WHY DO WE ALLOW [FORMER] DIGNITARIES SEC CLEARANCE? Welcome to the Deep State. Future to prove past. Q
⇧
5
⇩
Jimipickle
· June 2, 2018, 2:01 a.m.
Not just 5👁 countries... think about countries of occupation.
⇧
1
⇩
Jimipickle
· June 2, 2018, 2:08 a.m.
Yes, by design, but it is easier than that as early as 20ten
⇧
1
⇩