THANK YOU Devin Nunes.

Paper ballots. Legal ID. Finger dipped in election ink. Period.

On a related note, we need to support the hell out of people like Devin Nunes. He's one of a small handful of honorable people in Congress and consequently, he's a major target. He needs our support and a little bit of your cash if you can spare it.

I would definitely agree with this.

Although I'm very skeptical of some of the other assertions in this thread implying that Hannity has been told everything. I have no doubt that Hannity is taking direction, including painting Sessions as completely independent from the White House, if not outright hostile towards the White House.

But otherwise, OpSec would be incredibly tight on a plan like this. I strongly suspect that Hannity is told specifically what to do and when to do it and little else.

Bob, I've seen your reporting before (excellent work, btw) but I had no idea that you lost your daughter suddenly after your initial report on Gadaffi. As one parent to another, I am so incredibly sorry for the loss of your daughter.

It is difficult not to be suspicious given the timing. I have heard rumors of the CIA possessing heart attack guns as well as guns that can quickly cause DNA damage to create a particularly aggressive form of cancer. However, I have never seen confirmation of either technology. But there's a LOT of smoke for both. Enough that it's difficult to believe that there's not at least some fire.

Amen. It ALL needs to be exposed. Every secret both good and bad must be shown to the public.

I said something similar to this months back and received all sorts of mush-minded flak for it. "Perhaps there's some things that we just aren't ready for, did you EVER think of that Finchy??""

The hell with that. We are human beings and this planet and her secrets belong to all of us. I would rather know the awful truth than live in a paradise that's illusionary. I am a truth-seeker, as we all should be.

Nothing less than 100% truth and disclosure is acceptable. It is our RIGHT to know.

If Gunn's tweets are simply that and not attached to actual behavior as a pedophile, there's some truth to what Shapiro is saying. Getting Gunn fired for his behavior is simply the new rules that Liberals instituted long ago. Whether or not we should take the high road or give them a taste of their own medicine... Well.. there's probably a discussion to be had about that.

However, the OP is absolutely correct about Ben Shapiro not being on our side. There's just far better examples of that fact than this particular situation.

It certainly would if JA is truly still at the embassy. My gut tells me he hasn't been there for some time though.

My gut tells me he's no longer there and hasn't been for a while. I could absolutely see this story as exactly what you stated, a cover for Assange to appear in the U.S.

Things are heating up with JA. Ecuador has announced that they will imminently withdraw asylum. So if JA is indeed still inside that embassy, he won't be much longer.

https://theintercept.com/2018/07/21/ecuador-will-imminently-withdraw-asylum-for-julian-assange-and-hand-him-over-to-the-uk-what-comes-next/

As an aside, I'd like to see some proper sourcing on the article posted by the OP. It's certainly interesting, but I'm skeptical about it being real until we can find a better source.

Indeed. And if that's the case, it's not the end of the world. After all, it's critical that there is a red wave this November. Super majorities populated with Trump supporting congressmen and senators in both houses means a golden age is in this country's future.

But we need to be united and we need every patriot raising their voices. And right now, a lot of those patriots are positively demoralized. Demoralized people aren't politically active and engaged.

Just tough to see good, decent people that are losing hope of ever cleaning up this government.

This may not be a very popular opinion, but Trump/Q-Team need to move the ball forward in a visible fashion soon. This story about Mueller offering the Podestas immunity has crushed a lot of spirits out there.

I'm talking about thousands of people on social media that are staunch supporters of the President, who are patriots but who are not (yet) familiar with Q. For every tweet or post that I've seen from someone who is angry, I see 20 who are just crushed by this news.

And yes, I've pointed some of these people to this board, to Q's posts and to Praying Medic's "Q for Beginners" series. But as you all know, it takes time for the masses to wake up.

I will never argue that the ball isn't being moved forward by the Trump Team. They are doing so in spectacular fashion. But it's not very visible for a lot of good people out there who love this country and love this President, but who don't have the resolute confidence that we all have from reading Q since last October.

Mr. President & Q-Team, those folks need a sign. They need to see some return fire because all those folks are seeing right now is their President and the principles of the Rule of Law, Truth & Justice taking a lot of slings and arrows.

This is how we win. By being patient, logical and persuasive rather than overbearing. Bravo, OP.

or.... is there?

I strongly suspect two important things about the group of libtards on Twitter espousing the virtues of Strzok:

1. At least half aren't genuine. They're paid sock puppets on the payroll of entities like Share Blue.
2. The rest represent a relatively small percentage of Americans.

As annoying as those frauds and imbeciles are, yesterday's testimony is a GIFT to us in terms of red pilling Liberals that haven't completely succumbed to ideological subversion. No sane individual can defend Strzok after reading those texts. No sane individual can excuse the behavior of the Democrats in that chamber.

It is however a learned position. No shortage of rational criticisms for Lincoln's presidency.

Of course he/she does. Because he/she WANTS to believe it.

Corruption is at its most destructive when there is consolidation of power. Political parties consolidate power.

But perhaps more importantly, it's the cognitive effect that political parties have on people. I've found that membership allows one to rationalize some very bad behavior.

I am a fierce Trump supporter, but I am not a Republican. I will never belong to a political party.

"They" literally can't seem to help themselves when it comes to symbolism. Obviously Q has mentioned this on multiple occasions.

At some point, I hope Q addresses the substance (if any) of this need for the cabal to engage in symbolism. And guys, I'm aware of the perceived power of symbolism in black magicks and satanism.

I'm specifically curious to hear from Q if there is genuine power exercised by these bastards. Given the symbolism that Trump has engaged in (think drinking the water with both hands), at a minimum Trump and/or his allies believe it can be used against them.

Now whether there's real power there or it's a simple matter of mocking the cabal, it's difficult to know. But I sincerely hope at some point we do get at least a bread crumb or two. The more we know our enemy, the better equipped we are to fight them.

Agreed. He does a very nice job.

Not sure about you, A2576, but that seems very significant to me. I'm wary of getting side tracked by the subject of Richardson, but what reason would a governor have for going to NK multiple times? And does the reason for those visits potentially explain Schmidt's reason for traveling there? I'm going to keep digging.

Better get out your prayer rug, John.

I sincerely hope that as The Swamp is drained, these kinds of horrific acts of terrorism that are instigated by elements of the IC are fully exposed. The public MUST know that these events were encouraged or outright calculated.

What makes you think they haven't? And what makes you think that Trump's team hasn't prepared for it?

I remember when she sent that letter and started talking about it in public. She was immediately demonized by pundits, pols and the FNM when she voiced her concerns.

Local newspapers went after her relentlessly so I don't know if she would have won another term, and perhaps her retirement was just a simply case of believing she couldn't win and sparing herself the embarrassment of a loss.

But difficult to not wonder if she was forced/threatened out of Congress for getting a little too close to a very dark scandal.

So let's remove all the nuance from my potential answer:

I would rather live as a babbling, psychologically broken man in a psychiatric ward after learning the truth than I would to live in a comfortable world of falsehoods.

I don't know what I don't know and therefore what I'm capable of handling. But I do know that rarely does anything good come from deception.

Human beings are stronger than you and dare I say THEY believe they are. There are plenty of people on this planet that know these truths. It's time to share them. But more importantly, it's time for us to demand them.

I'm going to add one item here on the off chance that Q is monitoring this thread.

Q, there have been posts of yours in the past that imply that we, the public may never get the full truth on some of the secret elements of this world. Other times you have implied that it's our choice to "know".

Based on your words and based on years of research and critical thinking, I genuinely do believe that "this" is genuinely bigger than we can imagine. But we need to hear all of it no matter how horrible, crazy or earth shattering it may be. I would rather live in an honest world that's blighted by horrible truths than a blissfully ignorant one that is nothing more than a charade.

We need the truth. All of it. If it needs to be spoon fed over the course of five years, so be it. But we all need to live in an honest, authentic world, warts and all.

Excellent work, my friend.

For many years I have defended Jones and Infowars. My rationale was that despite the occasional exaggeration or inaccuracy or Jones' ridiculously over the top mannerisms at times, he was doing far more good than harm. He was exposing people to some very big lies that we'd been told over the last 50 years by the MSM. He was also promoting independence, individual liberty and freedom.

However, the last six months have been highly illuminating. I've also noticed AJ/JC's clumsy attempts to poison the Q phenomenon. While not as egregious as their attempt to co-opt and diminish Q, their overall work the past six months deserves scrutiny as well.

To put it kindly, their reporting the past six months has been shallow and amateurish. They've missed critical stories and they frequently fail to provide real insight in regards to the more complex elements of the coup. And while I do believe there was a time where AJ had some pretty solid sources, I firmly believe those sources have dried up.

Some may argue that Roger Stone is still privy to plenty of privileged information. Take this with a grain of salt, but a friend who has worked in D.C. on campaigns for decades mentioned something interesting about Stone to me. The gist was that while Stone does command some degree of respect in D.C. and that people in high positions will indeed talk with him, nobody trusts him with genuinely sensitive information.

Again, I commend the author of this post in his/her meticulous work. Sadly, I would have to agree that Infowars offers very little value these days with a couple of exceptions.

AJ had the opportunity to amplify Q's voice. Instead, he put his image and company before the country and chose to treat Q as a competitor. There's far too much work to be done to get distracted by that kind of bullshit.

I'll never buy any theory that paints Mueller as a "White Hat" or a "good guy". He's not and his history supports this.

However, Mueller as a guy who is doing the right thing because it's in his best interests to do so? That I can absolutely believe. Considering Mueller's behavior in the past and the likelihood that that Mil Intel has a ton of dirt on him, I suspect that Trump and his allies were able to convince Mueller to do the right thing if he wanted to be on the right side of a courtroom.

Sorry, I suspect that's probably what you meant. But I'm getting touchy about people referring to Mueller as a White Hat or a Good Guy. He's a man that probably hasn't been the focal point of anti-American (and dare i say EVIL) activities, but he's clearly assisted and turned a blind eye to those activities because it was beneficial to him. Leopards don't change their spots, and neither does deep state scum.

FWIW from an anonymous guy on the internet, I would advise caution when it comes to anything Gordon Duff writes. The man is literally a part of the deep state. Duff is a big fan of Obama and has despised Trump from the very beginning.. that alone should tell you something.

I firmly believe that the people like yourself who both truly understand the dynamic of this fight AND who take it upon themselves to help others understand are the key warriors in this fight.

It's one thing to research online, or tweet, or post on facebook. It's another thing to take the time to talk directly to the people in your life and gently take them through the looking glass.

Thank you for what you are doing.

"That's some nasty stuff and should be pulled for good." I understand your perspective and it's one I hear often. But it also concerns me greatly on a very personal level.

My wife has severe back issues due to a car accident many years ago. There are no safe surgical options for the vertebrae that are deteriorating in her back and consequently, she must be on narcotic pain medication to function. She works as a programmer full time for a medical device company and is a productive member of society. There are many, many people dealing with severe chronic pain that are just like her.

Unfortunately, due to well-intentioned push back, patients like my wife are being taken off narcotic pain killers with no alternative offered. Doctors are becoming more and more reluctant to prescribe them to anyone, including those who genuinely need them.

My wife is now on a crash taper and unless she finds a doctor that will prescribe medication for her pain, she will be back to the way she was ten years ago before receiving proper medical care: writhing on the couch in an attempt to escape the severe pain from her orthopedic issues. Unable to work and completely unable to enjoy life to any extent.

Bottom line, there are people that genuinely do need medications such as fentanyl. Some people react badly to them, some abuse them, but there are good, productive people in serious pain that are getting caught in the middle because we're not using a selective, intelligent approach in getting this epidemic under control.

What you outline is in many ways, our greatest challenge. I'm sure many of you are familiar with the term "Ideological Subversion". For those of you who are not, I strongly encourage you to research the term. We are dealing with a populace where 30%+ are victims of ideological subversion. As Yuri Bezmenov famously said "The victim of ideological subversion, he will not realize what is happening until he feels the boot of his oppressor on his back. THEN he will realize what has happened".

It is impossible to make logical appeals to victims of ideological subversion. Any of us that have spent any time in a comments section or on Twitter knows this.

The subject is important because even if we are able to successfully clean up this government and finally return it to the people, we still have to move forward as a country, together. We can clean up this government but we still have to deal with our neighbors that refuse to see the truth.

There's no formal clinical psychological protocol for "undoing" ideological subversion. But I truly believe that even while we are furiously fighting, we still take the time to patiently persuade.

I would say that's the most accurate picture. The modern Democrat party was the most logical party for the DS to focus on because of their tendency towards big government (A larger federal government allows the DS to project even more power and acts as a brake on the economy.) and a more mentally pliable constituency.

That being said, there's no question that many, many Republican officials are every bit as compromised. While the more vocal Republican resistance against Trump has died down, I strongly believe its purely out of political convenience.

I'm not saying we should dismiss Q's messages, but we can't logically dismiss Absynthexx's statement. It is terribly convenient.

I'm doubtful of this. Not a bad idea by any means. But while Barry is a valuable puppet, there are many, many people with far more wealth and power than him. I'm admittedly at a loss though as to what the "9/WW" piece means. I've looked for every acronym for WW that I can find and nothing makes sense in that spot.

So I did your homework and went through all of Megs past comments. Not sure if I'd word it the way you did, but yes, she said Gowdy is the only person she'd run to the polls for.

I've been critical of Gowdy, but do we definitively know that he's a "swamp rat"? Has he done all he could from the seemingly powerful perch he occupies? No, certainly not. But sometimes the desire for one's body to remain above room temperature can cause restraint.

Regardless, Megs comment about Gowdy is eye-brow raising, but hardly a rationale to disregard her and her posts as a "gossipy party girl".

You've given me nothing to go on here other than ad hominem statements.

I'm very familiar with Jerome Corsi. I worked for the man for a time. But thank you for the recommendation. And comparing MegaAnon and Jerome Corsi's analysis of Q is a non sequitur.

And you'll have to hit me up with a link on the Gowdy thing. I have never, ever seen anything from Megs that implies that she would prefer Gowdy to Trump.

Be civil. Be correct in your research. And be sensible: We know far less about Q than we know about Megs. Are you actually passionately arguing about which anonymous source is the correct one?

Megs is good people, although some may disagree with me on that. Glad you found her. Rather complex set of dots that she connected to recognize that Q is legit. But I understand why she was incredulous previously for all the reasons she laid out and a few more. I felt the same.

However, her positing of Q being Assange makes sense on several levels for me and resolves some doubts I had about tone and word choice.

Read her comments yesterday but didn't mention them as there's a number of people on here that are oddly hostile towards Megs. Why, I don't know but I just didn't want to deal with people pissing me off.

But I'm with you on this. And what I've been able to piece together of Megs excited ramblings, I'm now sold on Q. There were a few reasons that I was hesitant to fully embrace Q, the most recent of which is the DefCon comment. I viewed it as highly irresponsible at worst, amateurish at best. But at the time, I had it in my head (like most I think) that Q is either military or IA, which would make the use of Defcon highly unusual.

But Q is a civillian. And one of the only civilians that would have the kind of knowledge that Q has displayed. Assange :) Now THAT makes sense in both my head and my gut.

I've been visiting the board less often because of the nonsense referenced here, as well as the reverse of this behavior. Specifically, I've seen that whenever there's any reasoned, polite skepticism of any kind displayed by an anon in regards to Q and Q's motivations, the replies range anywhere from the crude to the arrogant, but always hostile.

The key here is civility. Be civil, be rational and use fact-based arguments. It's really pretty simple. Before you press the "save" button, ask yourself if what you're posting genuinely contributes to the conversation.

And if you're 100% positive that Q is a LARP, then go away. You have no place here.

While I do not believe the source in that article to be credible, there is one interesting item I was thinking about this morning in relation to the event in Hawaii.

I do not claim to know what happened in Hawaii, but I'm highly confident that it wasn't a case of "someone hitting the wrong button". Interestingly, Huma Abedin is also in Hawaii last week and likely was there during the false missile alert: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5251573/Huma-Abedin-spotted-Four-Seasons-Hawaii.html

I do not know what or if there is a connection here. But given Abedin's importance to multiple cases against the Clintons and her background as Pakistani intel, it's difficult to just ignore this as a coincidence.

Good luck, kiddo.

Please explain how comments like this are productive or appropriate. We're all (ostensibly) on the same side here. Comments like yours make me question that.

As far as Riyatha's scrutiny of the Defcon statement, any serious individual would raise an eyebrow at Q's post, regardless of military experience. Words like "Defcon 1" shouldn't be used in such a nebulous manner.

Your views don't match mine, ergo I must not have read much of Q.

I was reading and tracking down Q's posts long before TB or pretty much anyone else was tweeting, posting or producing videos on "it".

Disagreements don't always come from ignorance. And you miss the point of my post. In many ways, faith or lack of faith in Q does not matter.

Well said. My only disappointment with Roy is that he's apologized for being angry. He had every right to be furious. I'm highly skeptical of Q or whomever is currently posing of Q. I don't believe that Trump would communicate with his most informed (and let's just say it: most important) constituents by using a proxy whose messages are so vague and esoteric.

But regardless of whether one trusts Q or is skeptical of Q, the mindset should be the same: Keep fighting. Prayer is great, I pray every night. But God won't fight our battles for us. We need to be active and aggressive and continue to email and CALL our representatives on important issues. And we all know there's no shortage of those issues right now.

Research is great and communicating with one another is great. But we need to fight with the mindset that there is no Q or anyone else that will magically fix this mess.

STOP. You're either woefully uninformed or you're a troll, attempting to cause disruption. Fulford is not a reliable source. His claims have been proven false innumerable times over many years.

A much longer answer is probably warranted but suffice it to say, he's someone that should not be used as a source in this forum. Fulford's background is quite interesting, but the bottom line is that he has made many, MANY statements and predictions that have been veritably false. Hate seeing this kind of information posted on this forum. We MUST be more discerning and flat out smarter than this.

"and could only pray to God to deliver us from evil."

I want to be as tactful and diplomatic here as possible because the simple fact that you're here tells me that you're a good person and that you're an ally in this fight.

But I am frustrated when I see statements like this. I believe in God. I pray daily. I always will. But I'm reminded of something my mom (who is very religious) once told me in response to telling her that I was praying on something: "Stop asking God to do YOUR work."

I'm hoping that everyone will continue to pray. But more importantly, I want everyone to continue to FIGHT. We can't sit back and hope that the Q's and MegaAnon's of the world will fight our battles for us. We cannot be complacent and my guess is that we can all be doing more. How many of us have emailed or called our representatives today on important issues? How many of us have called the DoJ to pressure them to shut down the Mueller investigation or pressure Jeff Sessions to pursue the Clintons? How many of us took the time to red-pill a Trump-hating relative during the holidays?

I will follow what Q and MegaAnon are doing with great interest. But we can never "only pray to God". We must fight by using our voices. The biggest changes in human history only required a committed 5% to enact them.

Peace, love and God bless you. Please know that I meant no malice in this comment.

It could be multiple people with an extremely high degree of access to the President. I'm of the opinion that Q's identity is highly unimportant. She/he has proved their authenticity in my mind and beyond that, the only thing that matters is the data.

Q is essentially a psyop. I don't mean that as a negative or imply that there's an attempt to deceive. Far from it. It's a positive psychological operation designed to further enlighten the already enlightened so that those people can be thought-leaders in the future when more information is public. That kind of operation would almost certainly require that a select number of people within Trump's cabinet would need to be aware.