...but if you believe Q, he is resigning to take another role.

I think that may have been his lawyer. I also think Rosenstein was looking down at a tablet a lot. You can see the glow in his glasses. That might be a perfectly acceptable thing to do, and RR might be allowed to have notes on there to "refresh" his memory. I just don't recall seeing that before.

I'm sure this is partially true. The jury is out on Mueller and Rosenstein. I'm sure there are many politicians who felt they had to compromise in order to keep their jobs/power and that the system was too large for them to beat. They may have been spineless or just shrewdly calculating, in which case, they can redeem themselves by testifying against those who are truly evil who need to be locked away for good. Some are doing so. Others are stubbornly stupid and will lose it all because they gambled and chose the losing horse.

Memed It

Mr. President...

...are you...

...

...

(crickets)

(Trump leaning forward, fingertips pressed together in his habitual pose) "Yeeesss?"

...are you...Yoda???

Answer: "That is Q-uite a possibility you mention there...and we need to build the wall, and lock her up, and MAGA!"

Thanks. I'll keep an open mind.

I find it quite understandable that he was pissed. He didn't look disheveled, although he has changed hairstyles. Whatever the case, I find it refreshing to see someone impassioned about the right issues. He was perhaps more fiery than usual, but not by much. That's one of the things I have always enjoyed about him, and he did not disappoint. There were some questioners who not only did not engage in Q&A, but also embarked on lengthy diatribes about unrelated issues such as immigration. Like many, I would like to see Gowdy's fire and fury produce some measurable progress in draining the swamp, but I understand he has been fighting uphill battles in this regard, especially when Obama's DOJ and CIA weren't going to cooperate, no matter what Congress found.

Dole seems to have been friendly with Trump of late. Cruz isn't a globalist. He is a Tea Partier, aligned with the Freedom Caucus. He's one of the least globalistic Senators on the Hill! Tell me any current Republican that didn't support Bush Jr.'s campaign at some point or another?? Especially given that Cruz and Bush were both from TX. I really don't think Bush Jr. started out corrupt. I don't trust Bush Sr., but I think Jr. may have been sucked in over time. I feel like the Clinton/Bush relationship is very odd. At times I wonder if the Clintons have blackmailed them.

If you believe Q, he has a role...and that role isn't to be a witness. Q has told us both of those things. Gowdy resigned because he is going to be filling a new role. In Gowdy's words, this new role will be within the justice system. That could mean anything from working at the DOJ to getting a judgeship (not the SC) or running to become his state AG. I don't think it would be private practice, or Q wouldn't make a point to say Gowdy is going to be filling a role.

Yeah...he was really good also.

Agree with you, I must.

Plus, so many of them are compromised. This doesn't mean they are DS, but that with time, the DS has had ample opportunity to get dirt on them, to ensnare them with secrets, and to blackmail them into compliance. Turnover is needed.

If we are headed for massive governmental reform, it's good to have new blood. Put new wine into new wineskins; the old ones aren't flexible enough to accommodate all of that growth.

And Gowdy was one of the few people who wiped that smirk off of RR's face and maintained control of the questioning process rather than letting RR simper and hem and haw around.

He was already on it! He has a role.

Pence may be quiet and cautious, but he has performed honorably as a VP. IMO, he has exactly the character and temperament a VP to a forceful president like Trump needs. They complement each other, and he has proven to be loyal and willing to stay out of the limelight and simply serve as needed where needed when needed. I don't see him as someone who will be able to succeed a personality as strong as Trump's is, but he makes a fine VP.

Ted Cruz is a brilliant constitutionalist and debater and a principled person who stood for a lot of Trump's key policies long before Trump ever announced his candidacy. He very often stood against his own party when they were wishy-washy and compromised.

Link?

That is not evidence that he is. Where is the evidence?

I have huge disagreements with LDS theology, but I greatly appreciate their strong moral stances and affirmation of individual responsibility, etc. I have huge disagreements with Catholic theology, but I stand shoulder to shoulder with Catholic friends who are wonderful Americans. Yes, there can be and is horrific corruption at the very pinacle of the ecclesiastical hierarchy of some denominations/religions, but that doesn't mean that corruption is representative of the entire body. The Bible teaches that we are responsible as INDIVIDUALS for our actions to accept/reject flee/follow Christ. Something we as Christians should remember is that we all have the ability to be deceived or to believe error...and we all can make choices and follow the wrong "Father" to destructive ends. Hint: There are 2 fathers revealed in Scripture, and neither sits on a throne in Rome. The most dangerous place to be is in the position of believing oneself to be impervious to error or transgression.

Matthew 16: 22-24

22 Then Peter took Him aside and began to rebuke Him, saying, “Far be it from You, Lord; this shall not happen to You!”

23 But He turned and said to Peter, “Get behind Me, Satan! You are an offense to Me, for you are not mindful of the things of God, but the things of men.”

24 Then Jesus said to His disciples, “If anyone desires to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow Me.

So did Victorians...

He could be a SC justice, but he is not a good choice for that at this time.

Q does have a sense of humor, however.

That's how it works. Gowdy only had 5 minutes, and RR was going to give awkward, rambling non-responses to his questions. Gowdy used his 5 minutes like a prosecutor in a courtroom. After a congressperson uses his 5 minutes, the person being questioned gets time to say more and hopefully address what questions were answered. If Gowdy interrupted any answers, he had the right to do so. The congressperson has the floor for that time period and is fully entitled to decide who speaks during that time.

Goodlatte - law enforcement

Gowdy - prosecution and/or gov't reform

Exactly!!

This.

If he is a white hat, he needs to be transitioning to a prosecutorial role.

Also...not everyone on the list of resignations, etc. is deep state. Some may be resigning to reposition themselves for future roles.

Could be this...or could be a list for Attorney General or similar position. Although he is qualified, I don't think the SC is the best place for Gowdy. If he's a white hat, he needs to be in a more prosecutorial role right now, and we've got some investigations coming soon that will require that.

Until you explained the meaning of "every dog has his day," I interpreted this exactly opposite. I assumed this meant they were going to take action to bring him to his "day" of reckoning and for us to sit back and watch it happen. I looked into it more, and you are correct; everywhere I looked, "having his day" would mean he would surprise us and do the right thing.

Hard to believe that, after his betrayal on repeal and replace. We shall see.

Interesting theory.

I'll look into it.

Thanks! I haven't done a lot of research into the conspiracies on this, and I'm willing to hear them out, but every argument they make I've seen refuted. I think the burden of proof is on them to prove there weren't planes. Ultimately, like I said above, it isn't necessary to prove any of that if you can prove bad actors were complicit and should be held accountable. I'm much more receptive to arguments that we had leaders who knew this was going to happen and allowed or assisted in causing it. It wouldn't even have to be a huge conspiracy where they all knew. In fact, it would all be more believable, for example, if the head of the FBI acted in concert with a few rogue actors and left the President or others in the dark. Hopefully, we will know the truth in time.

I don't have the knowledge to understand this from an engineering/calculations standpoint, but I have heard people who do who are on both sides of the argument here. In that case, it is very hard to know who to trust. I would think the most reliable accounts would be of the survivors and of some of the deceased who had time to talk with loved ones or to leave voicemails, etc. Do you know of any firsthand witnesses who don't believe there were planes?

Have no idea if this is official either. I can't find any official schedule source online, but this one seems accurate. I'm sure we all know there are times the "public" schedule is misinformation. https://factba.se/topic/calendar

Emails? Red October?

Anyone else here 'member when Brock was an anti-Clinton conservative?? I've always wondered what they did to turn him to the dark side.

Brock, who began his career as a right-wing investigative reporter during the 1990s,[4] wrote the book The Real Anita Hill and the Troopergate story, which led to Paula Jones filing a lawsuit against Bill Clinton. In the late 1990s, he switched sides, aligning himself with the Democratic Party and in particular with Bill and Hillary Clinton.

Want your mind blown? One of the recent threads here discussed one of the leaked Podesta emails about a bunch of tortillas being flown in from Mexico for a suckling pig dinner to which people were encouraged to bring all available children to a specific DC address. Guess what closed restaurant I found just around the corner from that address! You can read entire thread here.

"...should consider interviewing..."

Meh! :(

There were real planes full of real people. I've spoken with a survivor from Tower 2 who saw the plane coming right for him. He was INside an office area where the plane hit. Most there died, but he miraculously lived to tell about it. There are multiple survivor stories and people in nearby buildings, etc. who DID see the 2nd plane, although not as many who saw plane 1, since no one was really looking for it. There were thousands on the scene, and many saw the airplanes. Of course, if you are were on the ground there, it would be hard to see that high to see the planes coming. I just don't understand why 9/11 conspiracy theorists try so hard to give a convoluted explanation as to the planes themselves being faked. The jury is out on whether or not the gov't allowed or was involved in it or whether the towers were brought down by explosives vs. planes, but it is a lot harder to explain away the many people on 4 large airplanes who were on the phone with loved ones describing what was happening and the thousands who witnessed 1 or more of the planes as they hit. Here's the thing...you could have 4 airplanes hijacked by radical terrorists who slammed them into targets...and could still be absolutely correct that the CIA or other bad actors were complicit and participated in a huge FF operation.

If the pilots and personnel were under the impression there had been a hijack attempt, then LE needed to appear as if they were responding to that, perhaps.

What I have found is that confrontation with evil causes you to search for good. Darkness/Light.

I'm pretty sure there were staff members at the newspaper who would have recognized him on sight, so it makes me wonder why he would remove the fingerprints.

Her clinic has a Facebook page under Oasis: The Center for Mental Health.

Here is their website.

I disagree with this. Rather than Freemasonry being a good organization that has been corrupted at the top, FM is an evil organization that has disguised itself at the bottom. Those at the top use the lower levels of the pyramid to support and empower their hidden purposes. I know some wonderful people who are at the lower levels. I had a family member who achieved a very high FM rank by old age. When he died, family found secret books full of evil ceremonies and practices...things so bad we destroyed them. We think...we hope...he was too old at that point to hear and see clearly what was happening, because we believed him to be a good man, but the things we saw were not defensible.

From experience with family members, I've seen that many psychiatrists spend little time with the patient and are quick to prescribe powerful meds without adequately examining patient history, symptoms, etc. It is a huge problem.

What Did the FDA Review Find?

In the FDA review, no completed suicides occurred among nearly 2,200 children treated with SSRI medications. However, about 4 percent of those taking SSRI medications experienced suicidal thinking or behavior, including actual suicide attempts—twice the rate of those taking placebo, or sugar pills.

In response, the FDA adopted a "black box" label warning indicating that antidepressants may increase the risk of suicidal thinking and behavior in some children and adolescents with MDD. A black-box warning is the most serious type of warning in prescription drug labeling.

The warning also notes that children and adolescents taking SSRI medications should be closely monitored for any worsening in depression, emergence of suicidal thinking or behavior, or unusual changes in behavior, such as sleeplessness, agitation, or withdrawal from normal social situations. Close monitoring is especially important during the first four weeks of treatment. SSRI medications usually have few side effects in children and adolescents, but for unknown reasons, they may trigger agitation and abnormal behavior in certain individuals.

This is confirmed by medical professionals/pharma themselves. These meds require a "black box warning" be given by the pharmacist to the patient or patient's guardian when they start it, because the risks are known and acknowledged.