-@TH3WH17ERABB17 -Q- Questions. White House Insider's postings -PART -8-

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: Dem0nc1eaner
Why can't someone from the WH spell out their plans in advance??

Are you serious?

He didn't say in advance, he asked why he has to be cryptic about things that already happened.

Well there are obviously deeper motives than what is known on the surface. There is a large amount of game theory to what is happening now. Apparently there are some kind of strange rules that everyone follows. None of us know what is going on, so it is mysterious on purpose. Coming out and just saying everything is not Q’s style whether we like it or not. There is obviously a deeper theory behind all this. A method to the madness if you will.

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: PokeyJoe
How many times and how many different ways do people have to say that Q just asks us questions and we, the people hunt for the answers. Very very rarely has Q made direct statements about what’s going to happen. They’re questions for a very specific reason. Well two really - 1. It’s the Socratic Method, we learn and retain much better if we search and learn the information for ourselves. 2. A lot of this stuff is classified, so instead of giving out classified information, we come to the information ourselves using open source clues that are already available. Q is not a prophet or a psychic. How hard is any of this for you to figure out?

1. Is BS if what you want is for info to get out. You are not learning something that needs to be retained. The info isn't a set of skills.

2. A lot of the stuff isn't classified. "Where is Huma?" isn't going to lead you to a pile of classified info. Also, if it is classified then you are not going to find it hunting around the clear net, which makes this BS as well.

All of this is so that we are prepared and know what is going on when the hammer drops. Everyone is going to freak out when what Huber has been up to comes to light. 470 prosecutors (Mueller has ~25). 45,000 sealed indictments. It’s going down whether you like it or not.

originally posted by: PokeyJoe
Well there are obviously deeper motives than what is known on the surface. There is a large amount of game theory to what is happening now. Apparently there are some kind of strange rules that everyone follows. None of us know what is going on, so it is mysterious on purpose. Coming out and just saying everything is not Q’s style whether we like it or not. There is obviously a deeper theory behind all this. A method to the madness if you will.

Obviously and apparently kind of rule each other out.

Nobody knows so it has to be mysterious? Are you listening to yourself?

Everyone is free to play along if they like but don't get mad at those who don't and question the method.

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: PokeyJoe
Well there are obviously deeper motives than what is known on the surface. There is a large amount of game theory to what is happening now. Apparently there are some kind of strange rules that everyone follows. None of us know what is going on, so it is mysterious on purpose. Coming out and just saying everything is not Q’s style whether we like it or not. There is obviously a deeper theory behind all this. A method to the madness if you will.

Obviously and apparently kind of rule each other out.

Nobody knows so it has to be mysterious? Are you listening to yourself?

Everyone is free to play along if they like but don't get mad at those who don't and question the method.

I used obviously and apparently referring to two different things. Are you serious? And yes, they’re mysterious on purpose. Are you listening to yourself?

originally posted by: PokeyJoe
All of this is so that we are prepared and know what is going on when the hammer drops. Everyone is going to freak out when what Huber has been up to comes to light. 470 prosecutors (Mueller has ~25). 45,000 sealed indictments. It’s going down whether you like it or not.

It not going down like that is also a possibility, whether you like it or not.

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: PokeyJoe
All of this is so that we are prepared and know what is going on when the hammer drops. Everyone is going to freak out when what Huber has been up to comes to light. 470 prosecutors (Mueller has ~25). 45,000 sealed indictments. It’s going down whether you like it or not.

It not going down like that is also a possibility, whether you like it or not.

What’s your theory on what Huber is doing with 470 lawyers and 45,000 (and climbing) indictments?

originally posted by: PokeyJoe
I used obviously and apparently referring to two different things. Are you serious?

Sure you did but they are dependent on each other.

And yes, they’re mysterious on purpose. Are you listening to yourself?

We know that they’re mysterious on purpose but you said it is because nobody knows which is a non sequitur.

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: PokeyJoe
I used obviously and apparently referring to two different things. Are you serious?

Sure you did but they are dependent on each other.

And yes, they’re mysterious on purpose. Are you listening to yourself?

We know that they’re mysterious on purpose but you said it is because nobody knows which is a non sequitur.

Can we talk about Q, and not my English homework?

a reply to: Dem0nc1eaner

So you are saying Q doesn't post anything that hints at the WH plans?

Why have Q at all why not just look at Trumps Twitter?

You seem confused.

Awan Case

Looks like he's headed for a plea deal. Could the deal allow him to verify the "server?"

a reply to: PokeyJoe

If its open source why can't Q just link you to it? Since its open source this wouldn't be considered giving classified information.

Why does he need you to come to the answer first? Why does he need to remain ambiguous?

Maybe its because when Q first started and he gave you a direct prediction it was FAKE and he got caught out. He learnt that he needs to be cryptic to stop people from seeing through his charade.

originally posted by: PokeyJoe
What’s your theory on what Huber is doing with 470 lawyers and 45,000 (and climbing) indictments?

My theory is that those 45K sealed indictments are not Huber's, at least not the bulk of them. They have to do with a new standard operating procedure that involves sealing more indictments.

I posted in one of the other Q threads that it is suspicious that the claim that "never in history of sealed indictments" makes a comparison to a time before tech was used for remote court hearings which was accompanied by new standards to deal with them.

Honestly, it was ignored then so excuse me if I lack the enthusiasm to go digging for it right at this moment.

originally posted by: PokeyJoe

What’s your theory on what Huber is doing with 470 lawyers and 45,000 (and climbing) indictments?

I must of missed this, can you show me where its confirmed Huber has 470 lawyers and the 45000 indictments are related to the "deep state"?

Genuine question as I'd like to see this.

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: PokeyJoe
What’s your theory on what Huber is doing with 470 lawyers and 45,000 (and climbing) indictments?

My theory is that those 45K sealed indictments are not Huber's, at least not the bulk of them. They have to do with a new standard operating procedure that involves sealing more indictments.

I posted in one of the other Q threads that it is suspicious that the claim that "never in history of sealed indictments" makes a comparison to a time before tech was used for remote court hearings which was accompanied by new standards to deal with them.

Honestly, it was ignored then so excuse me if I lack the enthusiasm to go digging for it right at this moment.

What is Huber (appointed by Sessions to investigate spygate, Hilary’s email, etc.) doing in Utah with 470 lawyers while the Mueller team is only 25?

originally posted by: PokeyJoe
Can we talk about Q, and not my English homework?

I wasn't talking about your english, I was talking about the logic applied to reach your conclusions, which are Q related.

originally posted by: BringMeThanos

originally posted by: PokeyJoe

What’s your theory on what Huber is doing with 470 lawyers and 45,000 (and climbing) indictments?

I must of missed this, can you show me where its confirmed Huber has 470 lawyers and the 45000 indictments are related to the "deep state"?

Genuine question as I'd like to see this.

www.google.com... ounsel/amp/

originally posted by: PokeyJoe
What is Huber (appointed by Sessions to investigate spygate, Hilary’s email, etc.) doing in Utah with 470 lawyers while the Mueller team is only 25?

Huber doesn't have a team of 470 lawyers. The article that Q linked says:

He also informed the chairmen that Inspector General Michael Horowitz, who is working with Huber, has a staff of 470 investigators, giving Huber access to enormous investigative firepower that far exceeds the staff of any special counsel.

That doesn't mean that they are all working on the same thing with Huber in Utah. Those are just people working under Horowitz.

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: PokeyJoe
What is Huber (appointed by Sessions to investigate spygate, Hilary’s email, etc.) doing in Utah with 470 lawyers while the Mueller team is only 25?

Huber doesn't have a team of 470 lawyers. The article that Q linked says:

He also informed the chairmen that Inspector General Michael Horowitz, who is working with Huber, has a staff of 470 investigators, giving Huber access to enormous investigative firepower that far exceeds the staff of any special counsel.

That doesn't mean that they are all working on the same thing with Huber in Utah. Those are just people working under Horowitz.

Are you a lawyer by trade? Do you argue semantics all day? Huber is working in conjunction with Horowitz. They’re the same team. If Horowitz has 470 investigators, so does Huber. What do you think Horowitz has been investigating this entire time?

a reply to: PokeyJoe

First off, that article does not back up your claim... time to change your narrative again.

Secondly, you tell us since you obviously know and have proof otherwise you wouldn't be so confident.

Maybe try reading the articles yourself instead of just blindly trusting anonymous posts on the internet. lol

a reply to: daskakik

They have to do with a new standard operating procedure that involves sealing more indictments.

Can you show us any proof or provide a source for your opinion that there is some "new operating procedure" for sealed indictments?