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 postings -PART -8-

page: 32
158
<< 29  30  31    33  34  35 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 15 2018 @ 06:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Khaleesi
a reply to: imthegoat

You do understand this report deals exclusively with the Clinton email investigation, right? I'm hearing arguments from both sides of this. I've specific wording being spun multiple ways. One stance is that the wording is specifically referencing Comey. Others say it refers also to Strzok an Page. What I have seen says the investigative decisions were not affected by political bias. That could mean various things. It could mean Comey didn't allow his decisions to be affected by political bias. Or it could mean no one allowed their political bias to interfere. It really depends on how you interpret it. One thing that is clear to me is Strzok's text showed his bias. On top of all that this doesn't address whether that bias influenced the Mueller investigation. This report is exclusively about the Clinton email investigation and whether there was bias involved in it.


What it doesn't say is they are innocent and that means an AG needs to decide the charges and proceed to allow a grand jury decide if there is a case. At this point my disappointment in those representing our FBI for this debacle has made it clear we need a lot of scrutiny.

This is sedition or maybe treason and needs to be resolved in favor of re-establishing law and order following our fairly created laws that can be changed by congress in a fair way.




posted on Jun, 15 2018 @ 06:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: XAnarchistX
a reply to: nikkib0421

Starting when?

has this "Q" ever said anything before it happens, or just claims it after?


Wow, just asking that question proves you have never read all the previous posts.
People here have pointed out the Q proofs numerous times. Guess you like to ignore certain things.
Oh, well.



posted on Jun, 15 2018 @ 07:13 PM
link   
a reply to: WhatTheory

Well, no, they seem to be peoples interpretations of what "Q" has said and some sort of contorting things to fit certain narratives, no one has shown any solid "proof"



posted on Jun, 15 2018 @ 07:16 PM
link   
Q !CbboFOtcZs ID: 0d582e No.1763131 📁
Jun 15 2018 17:45:29 (EST)
>>1763093
We do try!
Have a wonderful weekend.
Trust in your President!
Q

Don't loose Faith guys, " Rome wasn't un-built in a Day ". So far the POTUS has been trustworthy, lol, not as monogamous husband in his younger years, but that's really his/her business. Usually people Grow Up, lol, some sooner then others. As far as I can discern, the Women in Trump's life weren't left "broken and broke"...lol, Stormy got 130k for a consensual one night stand...anyways I don't want to defend infidelity, but as far as I know Trump never tried to destroy the live's of people that called him out for being a Dog, can't think of anyone that ended up "suicide'd" ?



posted on Jun, 15 2018 @ 07:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: WhatTheory
Wow, just asking that question proves you have never read all the previous posts.

How about the first question?

2.5 hours from when?



posted on Jun, 15 2018 @ 07:28 PM
link   
a reply to: MountainLaurel

"Rome wasn't un-built in a Day"

Love it.


Regarding red shoes and Rome:

Sex and Sin: The Magic Of Red Shoes


By combining two potent and ambiguous elements, red shoes assume complex symbolic power. Historically, red shoes conveyed authority, wealth and power, linked to the status-enhancing cost of red dyes such as madder, kermes, cochineal and lac.

Red shoes were the prerogative first of Roman senators, and later solely of the emperor. Popes have worn red since the thirteenth century, while both Edward IV and Henry VIII were buried in red shoes as emblems of their monarchical power. In the seventeenth century, Louis XIV wore red heels on his shoes as a sym-bol of the divine right of the king.

As argued by Elizabeth Semmelhack in this volume, this style filtered down, through imitation, to the aristocracy of both sexes and by the eighteenth century it had become a sign of aspirational fashionability. The cost and quality of shoes made of fine, red morocco leather meant that they were status symbols.

www.academia.edu...



posted on Jun, 15 2018 @ 07:36 PM
link   

If @TH3WH17ERABB17 was a rap song.



posted on Jun, 15 2018 @ 07:38 PM
link   
Re: Q post #1507

Who's the man holding hands with Obama?



Well I'll tell you who!

Sal Maqbool. From this article in The Guardian it appears he was a delinquent cokehead that lived with Obama while Barry was attending Columbia University. Though they lived off campus, and Sal wasn't a student. Hmm.

How he's linked to the administration is the big question. Still digging on that.

www.theguardian.com...


(post by Kaworu removed for a serious terms and conditions violation)

posted on Jun, 15 2018 @ 07:46 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 15 2018 @ 07:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: tiredoflooking




twitter.com...


Ummm. Ya. You be the judge.

It's doing the rounds.


My judgment is that is not Obama. The hairline doesn't match. The eyes are not almond shaped enough. Eyebrows are not as thick. His cheek dimple to ear ratio is too exaggerated. Similar jawline but Obama is not as forward extended. The facial dimensions are 'off.

While Obama may very well costume up like this....this is not him.



posted on Jun, 15 2018 @ 07:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: PokeyJoe

originally posted by: Enderdog

originally posted by: PokeyJoe

originally posted by: tiredoflooking


twitter.com...

Ohhhh not Russia after all?


Yeah, a 3rd party cut-out named Seth Rich!!!


*cut-down

Just sayin'....


Huh? The quote says cut out...


It was a play on words...as Seth was murdered.



posted on Jun, 15 2018 @ 08:01 PM
link   
What is the point of Q?
What does it accomplish?
What purpose does it serve?



posted on Jun, 15 2018 @ 08:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aallanon
What is the point of Q?
What does it accomplish?
What purpose does it serve?


he did it for teh lulz



posted on Jun, 15 2018 @ 08:38 PM
link   

TO BE READ and FOLLOWED BY ALL:


After a long conversation and consensus among Staff including Mods, Super Mods, Admins and Owners, we are posting the following reminders:

  • We don't want to shut the thread down or stifle debate.
  • The T&C must be followed by everyone.
  • No Political Trolling.....either in words or images.
  • Forum gangs or the illusion of a special group will not be tolerated.
  • PG and pedo talk will not be tolerated. Those topics belong in RATS.
  • External material must be sourced.
  • Members are always responsible for their own posts.
  • Members who repeatedly disregard the T&C may face temporary posting restrictions or permanent banning.




    and, as always:

    Do NOT reply to this post!!



  • posted on Jun, 15 2018 @ 08:40 PM
    link   
    a reply to: AgarthaSeed

    That name was from a play based on Obamas book.
    His real name is Sohale Siddiqi, from what I have been able to find.
    Edit to add:
    He was an illegal alien at the time that he cohabitated with Obama. Pakistani born, overstayed his visa. Was not a student.
    edit on b000000302018-06-15T20:42:57-05:0008America/ChicagoFri, 15 Jun 2018 20:42:57 -0500800000018 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)



    posted on Jun, 15 2018 @ 08:42 PM
    link   
    I'm becoming a little frustrated with Q in these latest drops.

    Feels like being strung along, sent on a wild goosechase to keep up the intrigue.

    Still open-minded, let's see what surfaces next.

    If that HRC drop in the IG report re: Clinton Foundation, Crime against Children - doesn't lead to any investigation, then that's a big problem.

    It is interesting that it ended up in the IG Report however...


    Don't know quite what to think about what's going on..

    edit on 15-6-2018 by AnkhMorpork because: (no reason given)



    posted on Jun, 15 2018 @ 08:44 PM
    link   
    Q saying Manafort was a 'Plant'?


    Q Post #1508


    Q !CbboFOtcZs ID: bb2ba6 No.1764530 📁
    Jun 15 2018 19:13:47 (EST) >>1764437

    Plants need water!
    Q

    qanon.pub...



    posted on Jun, 15 2018 @ 08:49 PM
    link   
    a reply to: butcherguy

    Q said no facial hair. The pics of Siddiqi that I have seen show a full beard.



    posted on Jun, 15 2018 @ 08:50 PM
    link   
    I won't belabor this. We all know about the deep state ie; the Illuminati, Skull & Bones, the Bilderbergs, the Rothchilds, Bohemian Grove, etc etc. We are getting validation of what we all knew for sure. We're getting tons of information proving it all beyond the shadow of a doubt via investigative reports and questioning in front of our elected officials. It's great that we are being informed and others are becoming informed. My question is, that's great what are you going to do about it and when? I understand that in order to drive a stake through this vampires heart, the aim must be true with great force. However, being one who was schooled in the military art. You always want everything 100% in your favor before you step off, but that's not reality. If we waited for 100%, our fathers and grandfathers would still be sitting on boats in the south of England waiting to head to Normandy. Sometimes you have to take the 70% and hope like hell you can make up the 30% in the jimmies you're dragging around in that wheelbarrow. Just sayin



    new topics

    top topics



     
    158
    << 29  30  31    33  34  35 >>

    log in

    join