It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

-@TH3WH17ERABB17-Q- Questions. White House Insider's posting twitter account- PART 2

page: 191
180
<< 188  189  190    192  193  194 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 3 2018 @ 07:41 PM
link   
a reply to: IAMTAT

I decided to abstain. You are a brave soul.




posted on Feb, 3 2018 @ 07:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: The GUT

originally posted by: WhatTheory

originally posted by: Perfectenemy
a reply to: Grambler

Of course. link


I think this is just a rebuttal to the Nunez memo and not the actual dem memo being released from the Intel committee.
Having said that, the dem memo will probably say the exact same thing. It does reek of desperation.


And it's laughable. I'm gonna quote Comey (can't believe I said that) and say: That's It? Lol.

No substance there. Grambler could deconstruct that in his sleep and make it rhyme. πŸ˜‚πŸ‘


I think the entire purpose of this release is to protect RR.
The last two pages deal with the reasons NOT to remove RR. Something is up with RR. I don't know what though.



posted on Feb, 3 2018 @ 07:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Perfectenemy
Well something else is definitely up. 8 is currently taking care of an pelican infestation.

What does that mean?
Seriously, I don't know. Sorry for being so lame.



posted on Feb, 3 2018 @ 07:47 PM
link   
a reply to: WhatTheory

It's another code for shills and trolls on 8. Pelicans are not active on ATS as far as i know. Nothing to worry about.



posted on Feb, 3 2018 @ 07:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: RadioRobert

originally posted by: Perfectenemy
a reply to: Grambler

Of course. link



This is purely for MSM dissemination.


Many would call those 'Talking Points'.



posted on Feb, 3 2018 @ 07:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: IAMTAT
Checking out the anti-Q thread was a really interesting experience.

The amount of vitriol and personal insults being directed towards this thread and those of us going about our business in this thread...is quite remarkable.

I sincerely feel bad for them. Really.


Their nerves are shattered beyond recognition.

Desperate and obvious. Sad 😞



posted on Feb, 3 2018 @ 07:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: Greenanon
Lots of anti-q shill posting going about.

Interesting timing.

Shills tying the storm up in a nice little package for people.

If Hillary is living rent free in Donald’s head post election, I’ve been living rent free in hers since 2015.


In some cases, PAID shills.

Trying to put the toothpaste back in the tube.

These are only the outer bands, however. This storm is much bigger than them.

They will not be able to deny what is coming. They will have 2 choices. Either repent and stand with WE the PEOPLE who seek the erasure and prosecution of corruption and treason run rampant at the highest levels of our government. Or stand against us and be washed away with the coming tide.

WE WILL take our country back.
edit on 2/3/2018 by Jubilation T Cornpone because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2018 @ 07:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: Whereismypassword

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: IAMTAT

I didn't know there was another one of those.


Yeah.
It's a full-blown insult and hate fest.
It's not worth responding to them or reasoning with them...but I star'd the post of those few from here who've tried.


come on in on that thread and participate so this thread can remain on topic


This thread covers a wide variety of things relating to Q. No need to be like that.



posted on Feb, 3 2018 @ 07:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: WhatTheory

originally posted by: The GUT

originally posted by: WhatTheory

originally posted by: Perfectenemy
a reply to: Grambler

Of course. link


I think this is just a rebuttal to the Nunez memo and not the actual dem memo being released from the Intel committee.
Having said that, the dem memo will probably say the exact same thing. It does reek of desperation.


And it's laughable. I'm gonna quote Comey (can't believe I said that) and say: That's It? Lol.

No substance there. Grambler could deconstruct that in his sleep and make it rhyme. πŸ˜‚πŸ‘


I think the entire purpose of this release is to protect RR.
The last two pages deal with the reasons NOT to remove RR. Something is up with RR. I don't know what though.


Adam Schiff started saying back on December 17th that Donald Trump's goal is:
1. Remove Rosenstein
2. Install a "friendly" Asst A.G. (My guess = Gowdy)
3. Have that new Asst AG limit the scope of what Mueller can investigate.

Adam Schiff has stated and restated this plan so frequently on CNN that the entire Dem organization is on alert. Not a thing they can do about it...but they're on alert.



posted on Feb, 3 2018 @ 07:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Perfectenemy
a reply to: WhatTheory

It's another code for shills and trolls on 8. Pelicans are not active on ATS as far as i know. Nothing to worry about.


Sorry if I gave the wrong impression but I'm not worried. I literally did not understand how the term "pelicans" was being used. Thanks for clarifying. It makes sense now. Should have guessed that.



posted on Feb, 3 2018 @ 08:11 PM
link   
A request:

Those of you posting, or visiting the anti Q threads: Please stay out.

They have their own thread, let them work their own views. If you post, or visit with your disdain you have invited them back here. If this is your intention then so be it, but I hazard a guess that this is not your intention.

For those of you having some trouble on such matters...

See the world in three parts. Part one agrees with you. Part two is unsure. Part three disagrees. Of course you are always right, never wrong so the division is clear. The problem here is nearly all people seek to convince those who disagree with them to agree with them. Why? Why do we care what part 3 thinks, or do we even know what they think? Many are just polarity arguers, they gain energy by picking the simpletons polarity point and arguing it to steal your energy while giving you nothing at all but aggravation. Tactic: ask a question in tone that makes it seem that this is god's question, then ignore the response. Tactic: Point out you fail to understand logic. Tactic: get you to argue a strawman. All of this is predictable and lazy, and in many cases generated by a bot.

Are you frustrated those Q haters just don't get it? Why?

Provocateurs and polarity arguers KNOW THIS energy/argue process and live by this process, and seek to get your energy through baiting. You are too easy to steal energy from if you are so sure of your position you'll fight the naysayers to death to convince them of your righteous position. We've done a pretty good job allowing those who view Q as a Con to exist outside here the last week, leave it that way.

Are you really sure you want to give away your precious energy to those who seek to steal from you? Why do you give provocateur X your energy so freely but demand the government stop taking from you?

There is a thing going on here, we have several Q connected folks both posting and lurking to support us and them too - really get the past part (we support them!), and they thought enough of the energy in this thread to be here. Do not disrespect them by feeding those who see Q Train as something that is ruining their lives.

I ask you all to police yourselves, but if one of us steps out of line, the regulars should ask our member to politely stop in private as to publicly out them is feeding the provocateurs. Sharing here is to precious to ruin by engaging a provocateur.

Statement of Fact: The Q haters are right, we all agree.


Lastly, if you reply to this please quote.
edit on 3-2-2018 by crankyoldman because: forgot one line



posted on Feb, 3 2018 @ 08:17 PM
link   
ATTENTION Please -

Calling people names like "shills" can and will end up in people being Post Banned. Be forewarned.

Do not reply to this post.



posted on Feb, 3 2018 @ 08:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: Perfectenemy
Holy f#ck the Democrat memo reads like a preschooler wrote it. Is Nadler mentally impaired? Btw 8 is mentioning that they just leaked classified information and digged themselves a bigger hole. Oops.


All they need is to derail and distract. It doesn't have to have substance. Just plenty of screeching and drama. Confuse, obfuscate, distract, even if it makes them look unhinged or downright stupid. They are beyond caring about appearances at this point.



posted on Feb, 3 2018 @ 08:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: WhatTheory

originally posted by: The GUT

originally posted by: WhatTheory

originally posted by: Perfectenemy
a reply to: Grambler

Of course. link


I think this is just a rebuttal to the Nunez memo and not the actual dem memo being released from the Intel committee.
Having said that, the dem memo will probably say the exact same thing. It does reek of desperation.


And it's laughable. I'm gonna quote Comey (can't believe I said that) and say: That's It? Lol.

No substance there. Grambler could deconstruct that in his sleep and make it rhyme. πŸ˜‚πŸ‘


I think the entire purpose of this release is to protect RR.
The last two pages deal with the reasons NOT to remove RR. Something is up with RR. I don't know what though.


Adam Schiff started saying back on December 17th that Donald Trump's goal is:
1. Remove Rosenstein
2. Install a "friendly" Asst A.G. (My guess = Gowdy)
3. Have that new Asst AG limit the scope of what Mueller can investigate.

Adam Schiff has stated and restated this plan so frequently on CNN that the entire Dem organization is on alert. Not a thing they can do about it...but they're on alert.




As I have stated before, I am not one for many of the out there Q theories at this point.

But I admit I had a similar gut reaction to the news of Gowdy resigning.

That combined with the heavy push for rosenstein to not be fired made me wonder if the dems are worried that if Gowdy comes in as a replacement, the jug may be up.



posted on Feb, 3 2018 @ 08:38 PM
link   
a reply to: WhatTheory

I am pretty sure they either expect Trump will remove RR or they want him to.

Look at it like this:

Mueller has shifted to an Obstruction of Justice case, but consider ... what if he doesn't actually have enough to make that case solid? About the only thing they have to go on is the Comey firing, and that has been undermined by the whole memo release and what could lie behind it. So that may be why they've held up Flynn's sentencing.

If they can get RR fired too, then they may have a second pillar to stand on.

"OH! But Trump fired RR just when Mueller was about to bring his case! OBSTRUCTION! IMPEECH! IMPEECH!"

So they may be either trying to pressure Trump into it or hoping that's where Trump is going to go.

At this point, it may be critical to wait for OIG Report in order to move further.
edit on 3-2-2018 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2018 @ 08:44 PM
link   
Bear in mind, that thing that just got released was Democratic rebuttal of the Nunes Memo.

It's my understanding that the actual Schiff memo is going to be nuked by (purposeful) redactions. They're going to leave all sorts of sensitive material in it in order to cry foul. Their only play left is to claim there were other valid reasons for obtaining the warrant, not just the dossier, and that Trump tried to obstruct the investigation. I've seen no evidence to support this, whatsoever.

I have a serious question. Can someone obstruct an illegally executed investigation?



posted on Feb, 3 2018 @ 08:47 PM
link   
a reply to: TomLawless

I am seeing mixed opinions on that.



posted on Feb, 3 2018 @ 08:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: TomLawless
I have a serious question. Can someone obstruct an illegally executed investigation?


Probably.

The real question should be "is the lawful hiring or firing by the chief executive obstruction?"
No.



posted on Feb, 3 2018 @ 08:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: RadioRobert

originally posted by: TomLawless
I have a serious question. Can someone obstruct an illegally executed investigation?


Probably.

The real question should be "is the lawful hiring or firing by the chief executive obstruction?"
No.



This is the way I'm leaning.



posted on Feb, 3 2018 @ 08:56 PM
link   
Here is the official Charge and Response document.

If you're autistic, give it a look.

Charge and Response (FISA MEMO)
edit on 3-2-2018 by TomLawless because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
180
<< 188  189  190    192  193  194 >>

log in

join