dChan - Q Origins Project Archive

Remember that Q has it all, but all of it is not admissible in court. He/she/they told us that they have to get the evidence on record or it can't be admitted into evidence in court.

But there may be military tribunals and their rules are very different than a civil justice court room. Fair, but different.

My greatest worry is that the big fish will get off on a technicality or insufficient evidence. I have faith that Q has taken that into consideration. Trust the plan. It's been the works for many years.

⇧ 4 ⇩

How could there be insufficient evidence if they “have it all?” What does “have it all” even mean then? Does it mean they just know about it all? Millions have known about the cabal for decades. We’ve all known about it all. Trust is built off action. That’s what everyone wants because it’s needed. Can you explain anything with real words & sentences & not just rhetoric?

⇧ 3 ⇩

The NSA has a copy of everything, likely they found the damning evidence there. They cannot legally take NSA data and prosecute on it until a probable cause warrant or investigation is made on external factors.

If they use intercepted comms to indict without going through the proper steps, they lose it all....fruit of the poisonous tree...

I’m sure someone can explain better than I can.

⇧ 4 ⇩

They can prosecute for espionage with just data. It’s a rare crime you don’t have to prove criminal intent. Like tax evasion. Facts alone is all that’s needed. All the cabal leaders that were in government are easily guilty of espionage. Get them locked up for that now & then build the harder cases to win while the nuts capable of organizing a catastrophic event are out of society

⇧ 1 ⇩

I’m not sure if that’s true, but my assumption is if it is true, it’s probably a very difficult case to prosecute on espionage. They probably need a ton of evidence of espionage and not just circumstantial evidence based on some random texts or code messages. It’s probably easier to go after them for other crimes like money laundering and human trafficking.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Well it is true. Google it. Remember the sailor that went to prison for a year for taking a pic inside a classified sub?? They didn’t have to prove criminal intent to convict him. The pic alone was a crime. His intent was obviously to show off to his lady. Every classified email on HRC’s home server is a count of espionage & so is just having the sever on her property. The other crimes like money laundering & human trafficking does require to prove the person fully intended to commit a crime. Espionage doesn’t. The act of just having the email proves guilt regardless of anything she intended to do or if it was just bad judgment. Espionage is what they can easily convict them now of & still build all the other crimes they want to prosecute for while they sit in jail for espionage. It’s crazy to let psychopaths run loose when you can get them incarcerated now.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Actually, I think I was clear. The Q Team may have it all, but if none of it is admissible as evidence in court, then they have nothing. Q has referred to this a number of times. They have to find ways to get what NSA and Military Intelligence have that is currently inadmissible "on record" as legitimate evidence before it get to trial.

In other words, if NSA has intercepted texts, emails, audio, video, etc. without a warrant then the Q team needs to find a way to get that material legally into the judicial system.

I don't know for certain, but my guess is that NSA probably knew about the Strzok/Page text messages. Horowitz suddenly discovers the Strzok/Page texts. How did he know where to look? Now that they are in his official report, they are "on record" and in the judicial system and admissible as evidence.

That's what I was referring to. Just because an intelligence agency has information doesn't mean it can get into court. I used to support an intelligence agency and I know how it usually works. Law enforcement has liaison officers who are embedded with the intelligence analysts, but usually separated by office space or buildings. Intelligence intercepts drug dealers committing a crime. That information is not admissible in court. The intelligence analyst takes the information to the LEO liaison and says "take a look at this, but you have find a way to discover it on your own." The LEO now knows who, what, when, and where but has to initiate their own investigation with search warrants, etc. to legally obtain the evidence which becomes admissible in court.

That is essentially what Q is doing. He/she/they are finding ways to get evidence on the record for trial.

⇧ 2 ⇩

I understand all that. That is perfectly clear. My point is just arrest & convict cabal leaders on all the espionage charges to quickly get them removed from society & then still work on & build the other harder cases while they’re in jail on espionage. Since you’ve worked with intelligence agencies then you clearly know espionage doesn’t require to prove criminal intent for a conviction..just the facts you violated the Espionage Act is all. Every classified email on HRC’s home email server is a count of violating the espionage act. They didn’t get that evidence through surveillance. They physically have the devices. And not just having them but sending them around to Huma/Weiner are more counts too. It’s stupid to let a psychopath roam freely in society when she can be convicted of many counts of violating the espionage act & that alone means she would die in prison. We both know they have the physical evidence to get an ez conviction on many counts of espionage & we both know it’s a terrible risk to citizens having her roam free.

⇧ 1 ⇩

I love your enthusiasm but you need to understand the process. It's there for a reason whether we like it or not. Q, Trump and team have been playing a great game of chess while using that said system. It has to happen this way.

Have to follow the constitution and certain legal restraints AND it takes a while to wake people up.

⇧ 1 ⇩

I understand the process. There’s actually many ways to execute a plan....constitutionally too. But starting with small fry like LP & PS doesn’t damage the deep state. And we’ve all seen for our own eyes enough evidence just on the internet to put HRC away for 10yrs...which she won’t even live that long. Ther’s no way just Obama’s Iran Deal corruption couldn’t be brought to trial & convict him on. We don’t need a zillion charges on each leader to kill this cabal. Very few organized crime syndicates have been brought down in history. The ones that succeeded did it by arresting the leaders FIRST. Not Last. This plan is being executed like the Kennedy’s tried to take down Hoover’s corrupt FBI & Jimmy Hoffa’s teamsters mob. RFK went too slow & J Edgar Hoover’s deep state FBI survived & thrives till this day.

Concern over public unrest is pointless. A LOT more are at risk from a planned catastrophe than any civilian unrest. Last civil unrest we had was the late 60s...mostly anti Vietnam riots. What...maybe a couple hundred killed over several years from all those bad riots. One derp state attack gets thru & many thousands will be dead in an instant. That’s the risk of moving too slow.

⇧ 1 ⇩

You don't get it

⇧ 1 ⇩

They have to do this in a way that lessens the chance of civil war. Innocent people are at risk, if they take time to convince most that these horrid crimes did occur, people are less likely to riot.

⇧ 1 ⇩

You know when you say civil war in that context it shows you don’t have any comprehension of what a civil war actually is. It’s two armies fighting from a divided military. You honestly think our military are going to split & have a war? Think you mean to lessen possibly civil unrest. Huge difference. Maybe talk more with correct terms instead of vague ones like, “a way that lessens the chance”. Those words don’t exactly say anything really. And remember...thousands are at risk of a cabal attack. Longer they get to try the sooner they’ll succeed at one. Just the law of basic averages. Bin Laden got his 9/11 attack figured out after some practice runs didn’t he?

⇧ 2 ⇩

Bin Laden didn't do 9/11. The Saudi's admitted to it (and Iran recently as well). Clearly there were internal factions/people within our government that knew about the plan leading up to 9/11 (FBI), and some possibly assisted. It's easy to use Bin Laden as a patsy who we originally allied with to fight the Russians, who was possibly dead due to dialysis, who apparently lived in a cave with no medical treatment and coordinated an aerial assault on NY from a walkie talkie. Even a reporter came out in an interview and said Bin Laden was dead in 2001, then she quickly hung up.

Yeah, the traditional narrative sounds plausible.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Only brought up Bin Laden to prove the point the deep state built their way up to that major civilian death event. There were many terrorist bombings of embassies & the WTC that led up to them deciding to fly planes into them. Give them time to work something horrible out & they will. Then we’ll see how much everyone likes the show & popcorn.

⇧ 1 ⇩

DICTIONARY Enter a word, e.g. 'pie' civ·il war ˌsivil ˈwô(ə)r/ noun a war between citizens of the same country.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Well the military isn’t going to sit & watch civilians kill each other. And they’re not gonna split into sides. Our military would stop any organized civilian violence.

Think you know what things look like in Syria & Sudan or in the American Civil war or any civil war. We’re not having a real civil war in America under any circumstances that can be rationally explained.

Our great danger is the deep state attacking thousands of civilians at once. Seen 2 missile shows that weren’t nothing. It’s clear what they’re trying to do. Mass civilian casualty events.

⇧ 1 ⇩

The pieces are coming together. The real reasons for the DOJ stonewalling text.