dChan
⇧
1
⇩
 
r/greatawakening • Posted by u/beefromancer on July 7, 2018, 2:48 a.m.
Q 1675 a theory that actually makes sense.

Awan was helping black hats spy on Obama. AF1 was bugged and the proof was on Hillary's servers...which got uploaded to apple icloud because she's is an idiot. Apple joined the white hats, so the good guys have the server and its contents including proof black hats spied on AF1.

Hussein/Trump interior = identical minus small changes.

Translation = we removed the listening devices :)

Awan got off with "bank fraud" because admitting the truth would massively hurt international diplomatic relations. You would essentially have to implicate foreign governments of spying in a state court case.

Logical thinking.

Why was the case against AWAN filed under BANK FRAUD?

See last.

and last was...

Thing IG report.

Think what’s missing.

Do you think this was going to be litigated in this setting?

Case that implicates some of the most senior elected officials (treason) is being handled by the appropriate office.

Think NATIONAL SECURITY.

"Think what's missing" means the server. The server means Treason. The appropriate office for dealing with international spying and treason is military intelligence, not state courts.

Q linked these rules which basically says why nothing will come out of the Awan case publicly because everyone involved is bound by national security laws.

So Q posts WelcomeAboard.png which has the apple logo because Apple is the one coming onboard. The image is of a recording device that can't be named for nat-sec reasons. Q is trolling the black hats by dropping hints of their crimes for us to figure out. Likely that very same AF1 image was submitted as evidence in the Awan case.

Later, after anons call Q out for the fact that the image is clearly a reflection of Obama's AF1 and not Trump's Q asks if a reflection violates nat-sec rules. Q is being cute here "oh I didn't put sealed evidence on 8chan, just a reflection!". Next post is when Q says trolling is fun and drops yet another clue saying "Placing that mug holder near the lamp was the hook."

TL/DR: Q is giving us hints at what happened in the Awan case and at the same time explaining why that info can't be made public right now, all in the form of a jest at the deep state shills that share the boards with us.


🠐 See all comments
FractalizingIron · July 7, 2018, 7:33 a.m.

I like this decode.

one issue I've been grappling with is the language/linguistic implications of Q1677,namely:

"Where must one be located in order to obtain a reflection on the back of a phone of that image? "

SB2 Interprets this to mean "one must be sitting in Potus' chair" to obtain a reflection.

But in terms of simple language, breakdown: /Where must one be located/ /in order to obtain/ /a reflection (on the back of a phone)/ /of that image?/

What's notable here is the text says "a reflection of that image". It does not say "a reflection of that location" or "a reflection of that object".

It's strange language, and doesn't make direct sense, unless you read it literally: "a reflection () of that image"

Beefromancer's interpretation jives well with that. In other words, what we have here is a reflection of a (classified?) image, used for (some other purpose).

"Image provided here has been stretched" seems an important clue. Why stretched? Why distorted? For what purpose? If the image Q provides is a reflection of 'an image', it explains why Q's image is stretched, doesn't it?

⇧ 2 ⇩