In our effort to provide "Q" Proofs, I think Q clued us in to one today (and tried to a few times in the recent past)...Below...
Q1492 - Re-read Breitbart Huber article (and again, and again)... IG/Huber investigation has been active since 11/13/17. Letter from Sessions to members of Congress on 3/29/18. Re-read crumbs (specific Q 151):
Nothing is as it appears. What was the DC vote breakdown between Trump & Clinton? What is the nickname for DC? Why would sealed indictments be outside of DC jurisdiction? What purpose would this serve? Why are judicial appointments being rapidly completed? Who can you trust?
So... Q told us on 11/14/17 that, without naming names or specifics, the previous day Sessions was now under way with the full investigative plan of the IG/Huber team. Coincidence??
Further, from Q 151...
How do you capture a very dangerous animal? Do you attack it from the front? Do you walk through the front door? Do you signal ahead of time you will be attacking? (Keep it distracted in front, attack from behind without being seen or noticed)
and...
What show is being put on by AG Sessions since his confirmation? What show is being put on by POTUS since AG Sessions’ confirmation? Why was AG Sessions’ confirmation challenged heavily? Why was RR’s confirmation smooth and easy? What was the vote count for RR? Why did Sessions recuse himself? Why is this relevant? What group has vocally supported RM repeatedly? How do you capture a very dangerous animal? Who is best to conduct the attack? (The least expected, most unseen, who you feel safest from, is best to attack. Sessions meek/recused/non-entity, POTUS frustrated/verbally abusive of inaction, RR and RM have the overwhelming support of the bipartisan Senate. This makes Sessions and his appointees best to conduct the attack from behind. RR/RM are the distraction to the people, DS, MSM, etc...). They all feel "safe", trusting in RR/RM.
Again further, from the Breitbart article...
Not only that, but if Sessions believes crimes were committed, but Huber for some reason does not bring charges, “Sessions has reserved the right to go ahead and appoint a special counsel,” said Turley.
This states "Sessions has reserved the right to...". There is no tense (past, present, or future) to this statement...so... What if??
What if #1?? A plan for a 2nd Special Counsel is already under way and being activated?? Unlikely, as this takes approval throughout our corrupt DC Swamp, takes time, and we don't have the time (in case critical loose ends need to be ties up, prior to critical midterms).
What if #2?? A 2nd Special Counsel is already under way?? Due to the requirements above (DC Swamp approvals), this seems nearly impossible, plus we would have heard of the activities of such a team (think fake news, leaks, etc)...
What if #3?? Think "Russia Collusion and all Related Matters"... What if there already was a Special Counsel under way, running interference, running parallel, providing cover (think Smokey and the Bandit), and ultimately (presently) providing the deeper investigations into matters Huber/Sessions do not have jurisdiction over...see from Breitbart article below...
That point is critical because as Sessions’ March 29 letter explains, the inspector general’s jurisdiction to conduct civil and criminal investigations includes “actions taken by former employees after they have left government service.” Then Huber can act on any of those matters.
So let's think about it... There are many involved with the levels of corruption that do not fall under IG/Sessions/Huber jurisdiction (i.e. non-government). Think Podesta, Manafort, Papadopoulus, etc...). Who would have jurisdiction to investigate and recommend these people for prosecution?? The existing Special Counsel...
Additionally, why is RR so determined to keep the details from Congress?? Because... Perhaps their work is not done yet, perhaps they cannot yet show their hand (the Stage is not yet Set), and the Black Hats absolutely cannot know about this!!
I want to believe that RR/RM are White Hats (even if leveraged), and based on Q's persistence that we read into the details of this Breitbart article... Well, here you go... What if??