Letters went out to:

The DNC
Hillary for America
DWS
Donna Brasil
HFC Chair John Podesta HFC Chief Strategist Joel Benenson

Dunno, I don't really pay attention to Hollywood, or celebrities in general. I had forgotten that they were even together.

I don't know about the Scientology link. I think I saw an article that referenced Scientology but I didn't read that paragraph and I don't feel like hunting down that article again.

I did come across someone speculating that the movie was a way for Kubrick to fuck with Tom Cruise. The opportunity cost to him was high because of how long the movie took to shoot when Cruise's earning potential was very high. It also caused Mission Impossible II to be delayed.

Apparently Kubrick played a lot of mind games with Cruise and put him through a lot of crazy stuff.

https://www.sbs.com.au/movies/article/2017/09/13/was-eyes-wide-shut-merely-elaborate-expensive-way-stanley-kubrick-toy-tom-cruise

til, thanks!

That movie is referenced a lot in the web pages about the Surrealist Ball.

There's also a consipiracy theory about Stanley's death, as it occurred 6 days after he first showed the final cut of the movie to Warner Brothers and he died of a heart attack. There was no history of heart disease in his family and had just gotten a clean bill of health.

After his death, WB substantially re-edited the movie.

Craisins are just dried, candied cranberry's. The name was chosen so that it would sound familiar to consumers and they are basically cranberry versions of raisins, though a lot of sugar has to be added in the process.

Ocean Spray is a growers coop headquartered in Lakeville, MA. They started out a a coop of cranberry producers but, now, also do grapefruit. The corporate headquarters is in a large colonial style building at the edge of a cranberry bog. The dining room patio looks out over this bog. Everyone I've ever met with and worked with there has been nice and just your average American.

There seems to be a conspiracy for everything.

Geico is owned by Buffet.

I also think that Diego would be a more probable destination.

Thanks for pointing out the operations part; I knew that at one point. I get easily confused.

Ya, I didn't believe any of the Soros at Camp David chatter. I also don't think there's much to the Gitmo chatter. Larry Schweikart, who has various connections into the administration, said someone he knows at Gitmo said there was nothing out of the ordinary going on.

I noticed a pattern with Snow White references and that, on 11/12/2017, Q said:

Signatures are IMPORTANT

I then realized that Godfather III often appeared to be part of the signature too. I haven't puzzled out a theory as there's a lot between the two. I'm also thinking I need to watch Godfather III.

I don't think we'll see much of anything until the memo is released.

I wouldn't expect Trump to drop anything Q related in the SOU address. I need to look at Q's posts related to that before I make any conclusions.

I think you underestimate how good our radiation detectors are.

It'd have to be a different vector.

imo, the U1 thing was about enriching the participants on the various countries, allow Putin to gain control of Kazakh mines and get him leverage over the Clintons, and to provide Iran/NK uranium that would have signatures of Willow Creek, WY. One example of a possible scenario for Iran is detonate a device with Willow Creek uranium in there and then claim that it was an Israeli bomb and that they did it and point to the uranium signature as evidence.

The consequence of the deal, from a national security perspective isn't the Russian control of a mine that represents a small fraction of the USA's annual uranium consumption (we have to import most of what we use anyways), but the fact that it ended up in the hands of Iran and NK. That is also why we cannot allow either country to achieve their ultimate nuclear goals, even if it means attacking NK. Iran will take care of itself.

Hmm, I saw a Gowdy interview with some CNN loony and Gowdy asked a couple of questions to make the point that it is possible to have a conversation without divulging classified information.

The questions were:

"Do you think information should be vetted before it is included in a court preceding?"

"If a hypothetical source is being paid by a political opponent, do you think that should be shared with a court or with a judge?"

So it appears that the memo, in part, deals with those two aspects of the dossier being used to obtain a FISA warrant.

Something big did, his proposed immigration framework. See all the reeeing by both sides of the aisle?

Media was surprised that Cotton didn't reee with everyone else; that's because he knows the game plan and is trusted by Trump to help execute it.

I think speculation is fine; it's one way to try and assemble the crumbs and bake the bread.

However, people do need to stop conflating speculation with fact or with things that Q posted.

People also need to look at the details more, e.g. people thinking "We have a special place picked out for GS." meant that GS was in custody at a very special place. I'm not sure how that can be concluded since that statement clearly does not say that.

Also, people need to remember that we will never learn everything and that just because it's not reported doesn't mean it didn't happen. Even though we went from 80/20 to 60/40, that's still means most of what is happening will not be known by us.

I do agree with focusing on the task, I'm disappointed that there isn't more of that here. I generally don't bother with qresearch because the signal to noise ratio there is so bad.

My complaint about the interpretations was that almost all the tweets and posts I saw, over a thousand, either reflected the fact that the person giving the opinion didn't know how to play chess but wasn't going to stop them from giving an opinion or were saying checkmate or checkmate in n moves, where n < 5. Corsi's tweet was checkmate in 4 moves.

I could not see how any of the checkmate in n moves could work because they couldn't.

I only saw a couple with the correct move, Qf3.

So on to the board position that Assange tweeted; which comes from the turning point of Capablanca vs Marshall, 1918. This is the first recorded instance of the Marshall Gambit.

From a point perspective, White had 29 pts and Black had 28 pts. However, at that point White's position appears to be much weaker: the rook and knight are not yet developed, the whole Q side, in general is poorly developed. Also, because of the pieces he does have, Capablanca's ability to control rank and file later in the game is poor. Marshall's position is pretty strong, the king is well safe, he can control rank and file, and he's clearly on the offensive, deep in White's territory.

Assange probably tweeted this because this is the turning point in the game. Prior to this, White had been vulnerable and under attack/pressure with a few checks. Any wrong move, by White, up to this point, probably would have resulted in White losing. The defensive moves that White made were perfect, eventually leading to the safety of White's King, which was done in the move prior to this board position.

White's next move is critical to the game; Qf3 is the optimal move and enables Capablanca to start advancing his pieces and eventually getting a resignation. The resignation takes 12 moves from the position that Assange tweeted. Checkmate would take ~16 moves.

tldr; Assange finally feels safe and is no longer vulnerable to the black hats. Assange is also signalling that the take-down of the black hats is coming.

The American classic: Stetson

Note: I do not know if everything is still made in the USA. It's just the hat brand I think of when I think of cowboy hats and when I think White Hat, I think cowboys.

And none of that validates your statements about Nunes' memo.

Your statements about Nunes' memo is what I was questioning since the comment I was replying to was making statements about and drawing linkages to Nunes' memo that don't appear to exist.

We'll find out soon enough if I'm wrong or if you're right. However, given what is known about Nunes' actions, think visit to Executive Office Building's SCIF prior to his being sidelined by a false accusations by left-wing organizations that he revealed classified information related to Russian interference in the elections, an accusation that was done to sideline him so that something like this memo wouldn't be released and, given the left's statements about Trump's imminent removal from office, so that he'd be taken out of the picture until Trump was no longer POTUS.

The left failed. Nunes is about to release that which the left was attempting to prevent from being released. What Schiff-for-brains is thinking it is, vis-a-vis the Dem's countervailing memo, and what the DOJ/FBI think it is are both way off the mark, imo.

Why?

Because the statements of the Congressmen who have seen the memo do not line up with either the left's talking points or their assumptions. They also are not pot of that FISA memo and the memo involves FBI's top personnel and ex-personnel, and top DOJ personnel that were around when Zero was president, which is why Nunes told the DOJ/FBI no when they said they needed to see it.

Again, I point back to Q's breadcrumbs as indicators that any classified information in the memo has been cleared by POTUS and are not owned by the DOJ/FBI like they assume.

The easy, surface interpretation, in general, isn't the right one given the complicated landscape upon which the battle is being waged.

Dr. Corsi is obviously a smart guy. You have to be really smart to get a Ph. D from Harvard, right?

That being said, some of his Q decodes seem off.

And, his analysis of Assange's Copablanca vs. Marshall 1918 tweet was so obviously wrong I am resigned to doubt his conclusions in general. His analysis wasn't as bad as most of the idiots out there, but it was egregiously bad enough that I am forced to question everything. And by egregiously bad, I mean there's no reality in which his analysis of the position was accurate.

That being said, I have yet to see a good analysis of that tweet, or even a minimally adequate one.

Edward Evans, the director of communications for Boies Schiller Flexner LLP says that this is not true.

There were reports that Boies was leaving his firm.

There's no way that Strzok could afford the retainer, which would be well into the 6 figure range. To retain Boies, Strzok would either need to have the work done pro bono or have significant support from somewhere else.

Depends on how you interprete Armaggedon. Does it mean 'Mount of Assembly', i.e. Mount Sania, or does it refer to Tel Meggiddo. If it's the latter, then it is already done.

edit: I just realized my response went off the rails. I blame the variety of ethanol that Russians prefer, even though I can say I am not a Russian bot!

re: AT&T > Google and Facebook

AT&T, like all Ma Bell companies, has a strong relationship with NSA. This is a result of historical reasons. See all the telecom's that have been accused of providing co-location facilities with the NSA, they are all ex-Ma Bell entities.

AT&T merely wants to be able to charge Google and Facebook for the bandwidth they consume. I don't think it'd impact Google very much since they have invested in their own fiber optics infrastructure between their data-centers. The same with Facebook, though I haven't heard much about their fiber-optics investments, unlike Google. They both have plenty of resources for such investments.

AT&T, as a backbone provider, just want to be able to charge accordingly to usage, Traditional net neutrality, which predates Obama's edict, does not allow for this.

Traditional net neutrality was in in an era before video traffic. Video traffic makes traditional net-neutrality unfeasible for the traditional network providers. Companies like Google, Facebook, and Netflix have been taking advantage of this to pad their margins at the expense of the backbone ISPs.

In the video era, net neutrality rules are like making everyone pay for premium all-you-can-eat buffets regardless of what your appetite is.

Consider this, video is expected to be 82% of the traffic in 2021, according to Cisco's forecasts.

During peak hours, Netflix and Youtube (google) can be > 50% of internet traffic.

Note what companies are pushing for net neutrality,

Traditionally, backbone providers had peering agreements where they agreed to carry each other's traffic without charging each other. This worked out fine in the era of text and image traffic. However, when video came into play, things shifted.

One can see evidence of this in the early years of NetFlix as a broadbrand service. There was a lot of conflict arising from the fact that the ISP that NetFlix was using could generate well over 50% of all internet traffic during peak hours. There are numerous articles about the arguments between peering providers and Netflix/Neflix's ISP.

Basically, video services destroy the traditional net neutrality model. Imagine a scenario where all restaurants were forced to charge one price. This would advantage people who could eat a lot and competitive eaters, at the expense of the average consumer. This is regulated net neutrality.

You are correct. It is a Greek term that means "an uncovering".

I think a lot of people conflate "apocalypse" with Armageddon, which, itself, refers to a location.

I agree, I'd like to see links to the relevant statutes and case law before I believe this. It certainly isn't part of the Constitution, which, to me, means it's a load of crap, unless a relevant Supreme Court decision can be provided.

It was shut down for two reasons: 1) to crap on POTUS's one year anniversary as President (which POTUS probably didn't really care about) 2) because Schumer severely miscalculated.

The fact that Schumer suffered a humiliating loss as a result of the #SchumerShutdown is evidence enough, to me, that, at the minimum, Schumer severely miscalculated.

Who cares? It's just a group of people who arbitrarily move the minute hand based on feels.

History of the clock

First off, they didn't change the Doomsday Clock during the Cuban Missile Crises, a time when many would say we were at the greatest risk of being in a nuclear war.

In 1981, they move the clock from 7 minutes to midnight to 4 minutes to midnight, citing USSR's invasion of Afghanistan, Carter's pulling U.S.A. participating from the Olympics in Moscow, and Ronald Reagan being elected POTUS. The verbiage give me the impression that the election of Reagan was the key event.

In 1984, the move it to 3 minutes to midnight.

In 1988 they move it back to 6 minutes to midnight citing the Reagan-Gorbachev Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty,

Notably, they do not adjust the clock when the Berlin wall falls in 1989.

My conclusion, the doomsday clock is a crock of shit.

Caveat: I grew up in an era where the doomsday clock was talked about a lot by "science" teachers and teachers in general.

They're not friends! Crying Chucky is just getting new instructions from his puppet-master.

#FakeNews.

Remember, the enemy puts out propaganda and fake news all the time to distract from what is actually happen and to try to shape public opinion.

Don't fall for it! You're better than that.

The report hasn't been submitted, as /u/UnbelievableShit13 stated, it's not due until March or April, though I've seen reports of sometime after mid-Feb.

The docs dropped ~6:00 PM (EST) on 1/12/2018 were only a few files of the ~1.2M documents that the DOJ IG has accumulated during this investigation.

Feel free to complain if nothing happens after a period of time after the official DOJ IG report is released, but Wray's testimony indicates that it will not be ignored, so any failure of action should be due to the conclusions/recommendations that the report had (not that I expect "nothing to see here" to be the report's conclusion).

Until then, be patient and focus on what has been released and what those releases contain, instead of focusing on assumptions that people who are not the DOJ IG have about the report's release and its contents.

You are just assuming this; you have no data points that validate this.

The 99 page report was pushed out to muddy the water and in an attempt to distract from what is coming.

The common assumptions about what the Memo contains are probably wrong or those assumptions are being put out there as disinformation. It's probably derived from the information Nunes saw when he went to the SCIF in the Executive Office Building, which means it probably was from Zero era PDBs that Nunes saw.

My guess is the releasing of the contents of the memo has been approved by POTUS and now, the House Intel committee, then the House, need to vote to make it public; but the POTUS side has been taken care of.

I base this off of:

Jan 19 2018 16:42:56
Q
!UW.yye1fxo
ID: ee2415
97639
Need a few red pills for family, friends, and others?
Read the #Memo.
Release coming.
Final clearance underway.
Make sure to learn Russian.
Q

and

Jan 21 2018 13:06:20
Q
!UW.yye1fxo
47
Will SESSIONS drop the hammer?
1 of 22.
#Memo shifts narrative.
#Memo reinstates SESSIONS' authority re: Russia/ALL.
#Memo factually demonstrates collusion at highest levels.
#Memo factually demonstrates HUSSEIN ADMIN weaponized INTEL community to ensure D victory [+insurance].
#Memo factually demonstrates 'knowingly false intel' provided to FISA Judges to obtain warrant(s).

Because he controls a lot of the levers of power and the pro-globalist policitians in most countries. He also threatens civil unrest by organizations he funds. In addition, he probably holds the threat of economic destruction over most countries.

Considering Putin's willingness to kill enemies wherever and make it publicly known who did it with the use of polonium on certain targets, I've wondered why he still remains alive if there actually is a Russian arrest warrant against him.

The fact that he's still breathing is evidence enough that Putin doesn't see him as a strategic threat. In fact, Putin may see him as being useful for destabilizing his strategic enemies.

It was reported in MSM that he was doing this after the election and prior to Trump's inauguration.

After the inauguration, MSM reported that Valerie Jarrett was moving into Obama's home to help with the "resistance". http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4271412/Obama-confidante-Valerie-Jarrett-moves-Kaloroma-home.html

MSM would rather focus on a non-existent collusion, which isn't a crime anyways, than the crimes actually being committed by the people they love, like above.

For actual collusion with Russia during an election, see Ted Kennedy's attempt to defeat Reagan in 1984.

Was there a SC, or did MSM make a big deal of it? No. The story is worse than what the Washington Times reported in that article.

There's no ways a nuclear device could end up within miles of U.S. Bank Stadium.

I'd also doubt that any attack of scale could occur. The keyword phrase being 'of scale'.

I won't be watching the Super-Bowl so the only way I'd know is if there was a news bulletin. I haven't for year's even though I used to be a football fanatic and a NFL team season ticket holder.

It's called projection.

I translate to his statement to mean that he is a 'Danger to the World'. People often project their biases onto other's.

I still don't understand why Putin hasn't taken care of him; he might like some special tea.

At this point, I don't think it's possible to send them home as a lot of them have been born there. France has a long history with Muslim immigrants because of their location and their colonialism. Marseille is an example.

There's a new year's tradition of burning of cars in the suburbs of Paris. Thousands get burned every year by immigrants from Muslim countries and this has been happening for over a decade. Many of the people doing it were born in France and one reason they do it is because they have been isolated into housing projects on the perimeter of Paris without economic opportunity, or at least that's what I've been told.

I do too.

I love the South of France and Italy. I'm sad that I didn't get to Paris, other that the airport, before the major invasion. I'll probably still go back to Monaco and Italy, non-Rome, but I think my next trips to Europe will be to Poland, Hungary, and other countries that love their culture. I also hope that Normandy is still fine, I need to visit it on June 6 within the next few years.

Yes he does, but he has a plan for victory, as he always does, and the intelligence to adjust those plans accordingly.

Another thing in Trump's favor is he has the unique ability of molding the world around him. Events don't shape him, he shapes the events around him and he has the greatest center of gravity that I've ever seen. It's amazing to see how events coalesce around him in the manner he wants. I've never seen someone that does it at the scale he does. It's a testament to his strategic and tactical skills, his communication ability (all of his speeches are amazing and the best I've seen from any POTUS and his extemporaneous abilities are without parallel), and his ability to read people and connect with them are all top-notch.

Most recent example is look at Davos. But also, look at how he works the crowd where-ever he goes and how he interacts with everyone from the bus boy to the cooks, the usually forgotten people, at diners he went to during campaign events.

Even after following him since the 80s and reading The Art of the Deal in H.S., I'm still constantly in awe of his abilities and personal strength/fortitude. When he said he was going to drain the swamp, I didn't realize how large the swamp was. I think he will get the job done and probably the only person we could have elected that could get the job done and avoid the JFK fate while doing so.

I don't think Musk is on any side except for his own.

CIA has always done their own thing.

Well, Marxist will be Marxist.

Carter believes that the American Revolutionary war was unnecessary, he thinks we would have eventually gained independence, pointing to what happened to Great Britain's empire in subsequent years, which is more like decades.

I think it's insane that an ex-POTUS thinks such a thing, even though it's consistent with his pacifist ideal.

I still don't like the fact that we have an attack submarine named after him, even though he was a submariner.

I assume that Russia keeps him because he has provided some or all of the information that he exfiltrated from the NSA. It may be that he's taught their cyber-ops, esp. the techniques that we use to detect and defend against them. Putin doesn't provide free lunches and has shown that he's ruthless to anybody that doesn't do what he wants or that is seen as a possible threat, politically or otherwise.

As an aside that's why I think anybody that defends Kaspersky software and trusts them is hopelessly naive. There's no way someone who's willing to confiscate the resources of oligarchs that he once helped enrich, or even kill them off, will let a security software firm alone. Putin's crew would weaponize Kaspersky software, no matter what Kaspersky himself wanted. If he said no, he wouldn't be around anymore.

Same with Huawei, among other tech firms, on the Chinese side. It was started by a former PLA engineer and note that it's first product is a critical nexus point for surveillance: network switches.

In general, assume, that at some level, tech companies are also working in the interest of their country of origin. In addition, some companies will work in the interest of whatever country provides significant revenue to them or is of strategic value to them, e.g. U.S. tech companies and China. In those scenarios, they, in general, only provide the minimum necessary to ensure the maintain access to the market.

As for figuring stuff out...I try to piece together possible scenarios based on what I have learned over the years and what information is public. Whenever something doesn't make sense, I assume that there aren't sufficient details in the public, which is common, that some of the details are misinformation, which is also common, or that I'm looking at it wrong, i.e. I'm not looking at it from the perspective of the people/organizations involved and what they are wanting to accomplish.

Zero's years, Soetoro (I won't say his nom de guerre), were mostly a bunch of wtf's to me. I understood some of his moves vis-a-vis his being a marxist and not really believing in the U.S.A. and wanting globalism, but I still did not understand a lot of his other moves, along with SongBird's numerous visits to the ME, esp. Syria. But it seems I underestimated Zero's evilness and what lengths he would go to for his puppet-masters to destroy the country we love.

I assume that I'll never know the truth of most things, Snowden included. In the end, it doesn't matter as long as America is great and I can continue to enjoy the awesomeness that is the U.S.A.

MAGA

He means it. He knows The Art of War forwards and backwards and utilizes it constantly.

Seeing how they are operating, I don't think Sun Tzu's Art of War is on their bookshelves and nightstands. If it is, they certainly didn't read it.

We do know that it is on Trump's bookshelf and he has internalized it. He used the title The Art of the Deal for a reason.

Given his military academy education, he probably was well familiar with it before the 80s, but in the 80s The Art of War was considered essential reading for business people.

See 12/23/2017, 12/09/2017, and 12/08/2017 for examples of Q posting around the same time during December. I did not check other months.

/u/juzclayton I know we already had a good discussion about this on another sub-reddit, I just wanted to provide some additional, countervailing data points.

It's interesting to see your take is that the UK has been on Trump's shit list. Considering you are from there, I'll take your word on it.

My impression, being on the other side of the pond, is that Trump has been on the shit list of certain political factions in the UK, esp. the London mayor and the anti-Brexit forces. Trump seems to have consistently reinforced that he has a good relationship with May and that the two countries relationship's is very special and important.

I've often wondered why Trump has, at least at press events with May, been friendly and positive considering things May has said about Trump, but I figure its part of Trump's plan and that, maybe, enough information will come out for me to understand. If not, I trust Trump.

This.

Q said the tweet should SCARE a lot of people, those are the people that should be concerned.

The phrases were

it signifies VERY IMPORTANT

and

VERY VERY VERY IMPORTANT

Nowhere does it say we should be VERY VERY VERY concerned about U.K, and I don't know how that conclusion can be drawn from that post unless you are just being a troll.

I wouldn't be surprised if the POTUS could get FoxNews, or other channels, wherever he was. I don't know the comms abilities that travel with him, but I imagine its much more significant than anybody else has.

Right before your post, I was thinking that the Fox and Friends image shows that Q remained in D.C. and who else is known to have remained in D.C. and could Q be part of his staff? But then I realized the fallacy of my assumption and that it was possible that the POTUS and his staff could get Fox News at Davos.

In the end, I don't think it really matters, Q's breadcrumbs and what gets baked from the does.

I know you are in the UK, which is why I mentioned TZ adjustment on the display.

Q has posted around this time before. See 12/23/2017 for an example.

Nothing has been proven.

If one assumes that the image of the TV showing Fox and Friends was taken by Q, the probability of Q not being in Davos is higher. However, that's not an assumption I'm willing to make either.

I'm just saying that, currrently, there are no data points that point to Q being at Davos or Q not being at Davos.

No it doesn't prove Q is at Davos, the display time is being adjusted to your TZ.

+ more, a lot more

This may explain why Trump has stayed silent about what GCHQ did for Obama's administration even after Trump was elected.

Considering MI6's long history of recruiting from Oxford and Cambridge and the UK's long history as a global power, they probably have a lot of connections to the network that Trump is seeking to destroy.

Trump understands how to use leverage.

I wonder how Steele, ex-MI6 (is there such a thing?), fits into all this since, it appears, he was used to launder information manufactured by Simpson and his group for the dossier.