TH3WH17ERABB17 -Q- Questions. White House Insider's postings -PART- -13-

a reply to: EndtheMadnessNow

Stan Lee might be his Avatar, like he will use different people until they expire, Trump, Stan Lee, Hillary...

but we all know "q" is Santa Claus... I mean, sees you when you are sleeping, knows when you awake... sounds like "q"

Did anyone ever consider that Q may not win?

Boston Globe:

Memo to Black Men: Stop voting Republican

Just one of many examples of how MSM is now resorting to direct commands.

a reply to: ketsuko

Have you considered the ramifications of if Q's right or just a little?

Both possibilities exist, but only one can stand. Hold Fast.
Historical either way you slice it !

Too much push on evil stuff everywhere. I don't like the sight of [Gore]. Crazy times lol
yes I've considered it.

DECODES of Q Post #2490

FAKE NEWS > [optics] 'FALSE' majority > BLUE WAVE
BLUE WAVE [optics] > No Voter Irregularities > Nothing to See Here
FAKE NEWS > Voter Irregularities Challenge > CONSPIRACY
Q

1) CAPS only gives:

FAKENEWSFALS
EBLUEWAVEBLU
EWAVENVINSHF
AKENEWSVICCO
NSPIRACYQ


2) GUCCIFER/FLORIDA method using all characters:
Using "p" gives V t = Videotape
Using "q" gives Eos = Element of Suprise OR Equations of State

3) TIMESTAMP/DELTA2ACRONYM methods:
LJS = Law and Justice Sector
CII = Criminal Investigation Index
FC = Fat Chance

4) COVFEFE method using:
"FAKE NEWS > " gives LTJBOWTBNLA
"BLUE WAVE [optics]" gives HETBOFPAZLD
"> CONSPIRACY" gives DSBLCBENMMF
"[optics]" gives GNUWDRNHVGY

a reply to: RelSciHistItSufi

Quick look up
fc justice

FC: Justice Department publishes "list of post-9-11 accomplishments"

Coincidence ?


I think it maybe a BOOM



Shhhh. LoL

The Hill / John Solomon:

The deafening quietude of the FISA Court

But a troubling whisper has begun inside the Justice Department. “FISAs aren’t required to include exculpatory evidence,” one official told me on background in a recent text message.

That emerging sentiment should alarm all of us, no matter our political stripe. A court that excludes legal representation for the accused almost certainly will fail to protect civil liberty if it isn’t allowed to see proof of innocence or evidentiary flaws.

NSA Mike Rogers disclosed FISA Abuse days after Page warrant was issued

Rogers played a major role in uncovering ongoing FISA abuses, and his efforts are revealed in the April 26, 2017, FISA court ruling. Significant changes to the handling of raw Section 702 FISA data resulted from the FISA court’s findings.

On April 18, 2016, Rogers moved aggressively in response to the disclosures. He abruptly shut down all FBI outside-contractor access. At this point, both the FBI and the DOJ’s National Security Division (NSD) became aware of Rogers’s compliance review. They may have known earlier, but they were certainly aware after outside-contractor access was halted.

originally posted by: RelSciHistItSufi
a reply to: queenofswords

I'm not only having a "wait until you find out who's been talking to you here" but also a "wait until you find out who you yourselves are" moment.

That is going to be something to see. You would need one hell of a proof for them to believe it.

That link I hit on , take look at that Menu !
on the left

7 August 2018, Techcrunch:

Anonymous vows to take down Q

Anonymous said they found much to dislike. “None of us are happy with your bull#,” they wrote. “We gonna wreck you. We are Anonymous.”

Why weren't they able to do it?

If it's just a LARP without Military backing, it shouldn't be a problem for notorious Anonymous. They've taken on much bigger than a LARP.

Monday, November 12, 2018

The Justice Department is expected to give its formal "blessings" to Acting AG Matthew Whitaker tomorrow.

WASHINGTON—The Justice Department is expected to publish a legal opinion in support of Matthew Whitaker’s installation as acting attorney general as early as Tuesday, a person familiar with the matter said, following questions about whether he can legally serve in the role.

The department’s Office of Legal Counsel is expected to say that President Trump had the ability to appoint Mr. Whitaker, the person said. Mr. Whitaker took over last week as an interim replacement for former Attorney General Jeff Sessions when Mr. Sessions was ousted by Mr. Trump.

The opinion is expected to support the Trump administration’s position that the president’s authority to tap Mr. Whitaker is affirmed by guidance the office issued in 2003. At that time, the office concluded that President George W. Bush could name a non-confirmed employee of the Office of Management and Budget as the agency’s acting director.

The OMB director, like the attorney general, is a principal officer of the federal government. The 2003 opinion avoided that problem by defining an acting director as an “inferior officer,” who under Supreme Court precedent doesn’t require Senate approval to be appointed.

Critics from across the ideological spectrum have said Mr. Whitaker’s appointment is a potentially invalid end-run around the Senate’s power to provide “advice and consent” on senior executive-branch nominations. Others have said Mr. Whitaker’s appointment was lawful under a statute called the Vacancies Reform Act.

In addition, others say Mr. Whitaker’s ties to a witness in special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe into Russian interference in the 2016 elections and his history of critical comments about that inquiry raise questions about his impartiality and his ability to supervise it. The special counsel is designed to be insulated from political considerations.

More at: www.wsj.com...

Considering how certain people in the MSM and DEM leadership are suffering seizures over what Matthew Whitaker might do, this DOJ endorsement, along with Rosenstein's personal endorsement of him, will cause certain Democrats to DEMAND that Congress "PROTECT MUELLER".

BTW... While typing this post, Judge Andrew Napolitano is on FoxNews (again) condemning Whitaker as an ILLEGAL Acting Attorney General. WTF is Napolitano paranoid about??

a reply to: carewemust

Napolitano has been saying the same since the day Whitaker took over. He did say it with a caveat when I heard it though....said the law is actually able to be interpreted in a different way. So the way he interprets it is apparently different from others.

Either way, if it was illegal by law then Whitaker could not be appointed. It appears it is not illegal so I guess Napolitanos interpretation is incorrect.

a reply to: MetalThunder

Yep, reminds me of my ole toolbox back in the day.

a reply to: MetalThunder

Cheers MT! extra 3rd budget for 20 years and exactly what it was supposed to stop has spread like wildfire.

I prefer this version of Shhh... it's even got 3 BOOMs!

a reply to: RelSciHistItSufi

on shh

Follow the money - cookie crumbs lol - ! Maybe find what's in the box !

a reply to: Creep Thumper

Pallets of cash was money belonging to Iran that was frozen and returned. It wasn't yours (USA's) to begin with.

originally posted by: Bill1960
Sorry Q, but I think you've over played your hand. We've been patient, quietly believing that crimes that have been rubbed in our collective faces would be served with justice. We believed only to be rewarded with a blue wave of stolen elections. Our forefathers are wretching in heaven as I type. All will be revealed, my ass. Trust the plan, my ass. Here's my advice to you, # or get off the pot. Here's what I do know, at this point I'm done across the board and to me, when you can steal our most sacred institution, our electoral process. Well my friend, the law of the jungle is how I'm moving forward. Sorry guys

But...but....Q said election was secured!

Sure. My ass..... lol

a reply to: MetalThunder

Looks like valuable resources!

originally posted by: CanadianMason
a reply to: Creep Thumper

Pallets of cash was money belonging to Iran that was frozen and returned. It wasn't yours (USA's) to begin with.

Not entirely. There is much much more to this cash-on-pallets-in-the-dead-of-night incident than that. There have been threads here on ATS where this was discussed.