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

originally posted by: crankyoldman
Interesting graphs on the twatter Q question. Make of it what you will

so , if I understand the graph correctly, this is showing that impressions went up last night a HUGE amount when the algorithm was interrupted?

a reply to: Perfectenemy

When is Harry going to become king?

a reply to: Perfectenemy

Harry? William no? Or really Charles but they dont want him in...

a reply to: tiredoflooking

Correct.

originally posted by: MindBodySpiritComplex

Inside the 25,000 sealed indictments fueling the QAnon conspiracy

Mike Rothschild—

Apr 13 at 08:30:56

A random sampling of these files showed 83 percent of sealed magistrate cases to be warrant applications or tracking devices. They are NOT indictments, but #QAnon’s number includes them anyway. We know this from their own methodology.

But we do know, at the very least, that the massive numbers of “sealed indictments” being thrown around by #QAnon believers is inaccurate, and isn’t being compared to previous years correctly.

Inside the 25,000 sealed indictments fueling the QAnon conspiracy

This is the author's second article about the Q phenomenon (did you notice his name?). I don't have any knowledge about the subject but it is something I have been wondering about. Do we have anybody here that is able to judge the claims made in this article? I think it is an important discussion to have.

Mr. Rothschild, hmm, Rothschild?? He has another article there where he says the Q phenomenon is the "oldest scam out there" but of course fails to explain why it is a scam or even how it is the "OLDEST" out there. He compares it to NESARA which of of course it is not, then goes on to debunk his strawman using the discredited name of Rothschild.

The OLDEST??? Internet being what it is, "oldest" seems beyond farfetched, as I remember nothing revealing his families horrors on mass, in the 70's, 80's or 90's and certainly not in the 1600s.

FTR, the oldest scam on record is Fiat Currency currently run by the Rothschild family and their brethren.

a reply to: RelSciHistItSufi

Cambridge Analytica got the Facebook data through a person doing a study at a Russian university. He isn't Russian but everyone seems to imply there is a Russian connection.

a reply to: MindBodySpiritComplex

I've had my doubts about the indictments. I noticed that the info put together used 2006-2009 data, IIRC, to compare.

I then saw an amendment in court procedure laws which allowed indictments made over cctv in 2011 which made me wonder if something like this, or even just everyone and their dog having access to the net and therefore PACER, has made sealed indictments more common.

Of course this highlights the limits of what we, as "internet investigators", can or are willing to verify.

Just saw this in the Syrian war news: the Russian defense ministry is specifically accusing Britain of ordering the White Helmets to stage the phony chemical attack.

The sad part is, Russia is probably telling the truth. I know from years of following the Syrian war that the White Helmets are a propaganda outfit. Multiple videos have surfaced over the years showing them staging fake "casualty" pictures and videos using crisis actors. Just like with Western crisis acting, you see the same people again & again.

a reply to: Perfectenemy
A couple of points arising from UK in the last couple of days:

1) A cameo, regularly run on BBC 24hr news yesterday, showed a newscaster walking through palace grounds with the Queen:
a) Firstly, the Queen says "I won't be here then" in response to what things will be like in 50 years,
b) Secondly, a big point was made by the newscaster that a sun-dial was under a trees shade so could not give time - the Queen asks an off camera equerry if it can be moved,
2) When interviewees are in Westminster studio a backdrop of Big Ben live is shown - yesterday the clock had NO HANDS.

Are both these unusual news items messaging someone "Out of time - find a way to gain time"?

originally posted by: tiredoflooking
a reply to: Perfectenemy

Harry? William no? Or really Charles but they dont want him in...

Charles definitely not. My take on the Harry and Meghan wedding is that it's arranged because of bloodlines.

a reply to: tiredoflooking
A different thread on ATS few months ago predicted that Harry was the antichrist and would take the throne after William and Kate were killed in Jerusalem. Thread was about end times - no time to search.

originally posted by: tiredoflooking
a reply to: Perfectenemy

Harry? William no? Or really Charles but they dont want him in...

Oh don’t believe the internet, Charles will be next and he is liked

Then when he dies William will take over, and then his children will be next in line


Harry will only be king if a lot of family members die

originally posted by: RelSciHistItSufi
a reply to: tiredoflooking
A different thread on ATS few months ago predicted that Harry was the antichrist and would take the throne after William and Kate were killed in Jerusalem. Thread was about end times - no time to search.

People on ATS can make up what they want, doesn’t mean anything

a reply to: crankyoldman

Very telling graph there. What a spike!

originally posted by: Perfectenemy
Trojan Horse? Comey hints at damaging material involving ex-AG Lynch 'still unknown to the American public'

I must admit, it is fun watching these people turn on each other.

Comey turns on Lynch.

McCabe turned on Comey.

Today Rosenstein stands by his turning on Comey.

Please, someone turn on Hillary, please!

originally posted by: Whereismypassword

originally posted by: tiredoflooking
a reply to: Perfectenemy

Harry? William no? Or really Charles but they dont want him in...

Oh don’t believe the internet, Charles will be next and he is liked

Then when he dies William will take over, and then his children will be next in line


Harry will only be king if a lot of family members die

As an American, it seems to me that the whole "hating Charles" thing started when his marriage to Diana fell apart. Diana was a media darling, and was universally portrayed as the victim by the press. Since then, however, it seems as if a general consensus has emerged that Diana was a very shallow, self-centered, and insecure person. I suspect the anti-Charles sentiment is overblown.

originally posted by: burntheships
Please, someone turn on Hillary, please!

You mean turn her on like in a sex video?

a reply to: RelSciHistItSufi

That is scary...

Ha Brennan sounds like he is freaking out. They are throwing everything before the IG report hits.

There will only be one side standing at the end of this.

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: burntheships
Please, someone turn on Hillary, please!

You mean turn her on like in a sex video?

a reply to: pavil

Brennan is getting increasingly desperate, for sure. I hope he ends up getting waterboared at one of his own black sites. It would be nothing less than what he deserves.