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

NEW Q #1632

Q !CbboFOtcZs ID: cdb588 No.1948303 📁 NEW
Jun 28 2018 19:04:44 (EST) >>1947578

Most all powerful organizations have sinister components.
With power comes corruption.
Like alphabet agencies, not all are bad apples.
Should the bad spoil the bunch?
Q

qntmpkts.keybase.pub...

originally posted by: erikthegreen
a reply to: eisegesis

Thanks E. It was crystal clear down here in the southern hemisphere. My pic looks terrible but the rabbit was blood red and easy to see. I was out on the rooftop jumping rope while it came over the horizon (and listening to Alison Wonderland ha).

By the way...I wasn't able to find out what this word translated to (particularly the letter/symbol on the right). Little help?

Is the door peace and love? or YHWH? hmm..

RE: How do you introduce evidence into an investigation (legally)?

I'm sure you all have come to this conclusion yourselves, but it just dawned on me...

DECLAS / Unredact evidence from a current/ongoing investigation.

Big fight going on now is the WHEN was "spy" introduced into the Trump camp, WHY the redactions to texts etc... (cannot comment on an ongoing investigation)

Ordered to declassify and turn over the unredacted information.

This was way clearer in my head .... Not so great at communicating my point. Feel free to add clarity

This individual, "Qanon", has gotten more mileage on this website than anything I've ever seen.

I think this person is an imposter, and just playing the odds, like Vegas.

The REAL 'anon' was, "FBIanon". All these others are palm readers, crystal ball mystics and wannabes.

Sorry, but they are.

ETA...all these other 'coat-tail" mystics are a product of 4Chan and Reddit. They saw the "likes" and they glommed on.

Nothing to see here, folks...move along (and I'm serious too).

originally posted by: Jusvistn
RE: How do you introduce evidence into an investigation (legally)?

I'm sure you all have come to this conclusion yourselves, but it just dawned on me...

DECLAS / Unredact evidence from a current/ongoing investigation.

Big fight going on now is the WHEN was "spy" introduced into the Trump camp, WHY the redactions to texts etc... (cannot comment on an ongoing investigation)

Ordered to declassify and turn over the unredacted information.

This was way clearer in my head .... Not so great at communicating my point. Feel free to add clarity

JVN,

This is WAY complicated. Something doesn't become evidence until it becomes needed. Then it is argued whether or not is material, chain of custody etc. The OIG report was a report, a document designed to reform the system it was reporting on. If a justice official decides to "press charges" based on that information say, then things start to become evidence. But one runs into the problem of introducing something to the world for PR, which can in fact damage it as evidence.

Now here is where it all goes haywire. Through the Q drops we've concluded that there are going to be tribunals done by the military: Gitmo is for military folks. Evidence in that arena will be different indeed. I think the reason for the tribunals is folks are going to be guilty of acts of war and the like in which case the effort to sterilize the process to perfection is key - it has not happened like that here in the US. My take is the entire process SHOULD not become a ten year distraction for the world, then HRC wins by default, so this thing is bonkers: 35k in sealed indictments says so to me at least.

originally posted by: RelSciHistItSufi
a reply to: crankyoldman

Good point Cranky... isn't it also true that the earlier you remove the bad apples the less the crop is compromised?

Agreed. Notice the key admonition Q drop is 16 (32) FOLLOWING, 30,31 and preceding 33. His appeal is to the rank and file folks who are not rotten, the "32's" of the world. I think this relates to the FEMA hurricane meeting.

So many proofs and still people doubt?

RR practically begging to be fired

The Storm claiming perverts and traitors left and right

Q bois claiming deserved shoutouts

Red Tsunami imminent

DOJ lied

Grand Jury approaching

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

While you are entitled to your viewpoint and opinion, you should know you aren't going to sway anyone here. You are free to keep posting.

*There. I think that will pass the DTOM test.*

Did it D?
:

originally posted by: JadeEmpire
So many proofs and still people doubt?

RR practically begging to be fired

The Storm claiming perverts and traitors left and right

Q bois claiming deserved shoutouts

Red Tsunami imminent

DOJ lied

Grand Jury approaching

I am very looking forward to the Iran liberation, maybe folks will cheer that since they seemed to have ignored NK.

So I didn't see the "Bottom graphic" (post 1634) on the linked page but its out "there". Red shield (Roths), spikes, any other notables features?

qanon.pub...

On second thought I probably shouldn't link it. Its a family coat of arms. I think the Roth connection is the main point.

Jarrod Ramos' father, Miguel, was NSA...August 1983 to June 2005

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Nothing to see here, folks...move along (and I'm serious too).

No. Not yet.
Long way to go. Just look what you can do if you really try:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: JadeEmpire


Did Rod Rosenstein say that whatever Strzok did to attempt and affect the election outcome, it wasn't criminal, just "carelessness" on his part?

originally posted by: JadeEmpire
So many proofs and still people doubt?

RR practically begging to be fired

The Storm claiming perverts and traitors left and right

Q bois claiming deserved shoutouts

Red Tsunami imminent

DOJ lied

Grand Jury approaching

Some people have doubt, some believe, while others see a bigger picture altogether.

Nothing worse than not questioning all that which has historically oppressed us.

As they say. Trust but verify.

a reply to: crankyoldman

A helpful analysis, COM. Thank-you!

a reply to: JadeEmpire

its just a coincidence anon

originally posted by: IAMTAT
Jarrod Ramos' father, Miguel, was NSA...August 1983 to June 2005

Wha!! Do you have sauce for that?

a reply to: carewemust

I wasn’t aware of the potential for Strzok to have personally influenced election outcomes.

Care to elaborate?

a reply to: crankyoldman

Thanks for the response. I get what you're saying. I have a hard time wrapping my head around "tribunals", there is something there that I just can't get to click...

My line of thinking was the reveal through declassifying docs that would open that can of worms and the ball (publicly) rolling.

Like I said. Sometimes what I think I'm thinking doesn't make as much sense once I say it out loud, and vise-versa.

Interesting times we are in. (im)patiently waiting for those sealed to be unsealed.