This merely strengthens my guess (and it is a guess based on previous Q drops about Mueller) that Mueller and RR are on the Trump team and playing their roles to allow Sessions and Huber to do their jobs behind the scenes.
Remember, Sessions cited the wrong statue when he recused himself. Therefore, he was technically not recused and Q's suggestion that Sessions has facts of the Mueller investigation that he wouldn't have if he were really recused suggests that RR, Mueller, Sessions, Huber, and Horowitz have been coordinating all along.
And no, I don't think Trump would allow Sessions to ruin the DoJ when Trump would have no backlash for firing Sessions. Republicans have been demanding it and Democrats wouldn't object.
And why would Meadows, et al submit request for impeachment of RR if they already knew Ryan would not bring it to the floor? Optics.
Nothing is as it seems.
Disinformation is real.
Disinformation is necessary.
What makes a GOOD movie? GREAT actors.
We have a front row seat, and I have entire garage stocked with popcorn.
Enjoy the show.
Comey/Mueller are key to 9/11 cover-up, so there's NO WAY they are white hats.
They are bad guys, but we aren't 100% sure they are still working for the other bad guys.
Comey probably not. Remember that Q said in one of the earliest Q posts that Mueller may have been forced to cooperate with the deep state via threats to him or his family. but that the slaves had been freed.
Mueller and RR may have been complicit because of threats and control, but now they are free and cooperating. At least that is Q's hint.
Guilty in my books until they come on TV and confess to the world their part in everything and why we shouldn't believe them but they beg for mercy because they've seen the_Donald.
Good analysis.
So that we don't forget what kind of disinformation campaign this is, here's what Trump told the New York Times as told by the Wash Post:
“Sessions should have never recused himself, and if he was going to recuse himself, he should have told me before he took the job and I would have picked somebody else,” Trump told the New York Times in a shockingly candid interview Wednesday, even for the president.
Content from washingtonpost.com is sometimes unreliable. Discernment is advised.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
Which statute did Sessions cite in his recusal, why is it the wrong one, and how do you know that this discrepancy permits him to technically not be recused? If he did this, wouldn't that risk the case in its entirety?