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

"Documentary Evidence" seems to be words getting thrown around.

Who in the h-e-double hockey sticks is going to document their plans in a written memo to commit such-and-such a crime, or plot somebody's assassination?

They use codes amongst themselves.....like Lisa Page's KILL BOX around Trump's name and Strzok's confirmation that they will stop him.

In-person plots in out-of-the-way places and coded language can't be easily tracked.

originally posted by: burntheships
a reply to: ketsuko

Do we have an idea of a release date on the next IG Report
looking into the FISA abuse/SPYGATE?

Anyone know if the IG releases these quarterly?

Hopefully we wont have to wait until next spring?

I read that there will be two separate reports, one for FISA abuse (July release) and one for Spygate (September release). Nothing official though.

originally posted by: MIdnightImpact
a reply to: crankyoldman

You are right of course but i doubt the people who think that way will even read all the pages, They will just wait for a "news" report. The spin is already in full effect.

This is the problem IMO. Folks will say "he's ruining the county" and I say, "have you read the documents?" "no."

I say, "have you read the EO's and understand the language?" "no, doesn't matter."

"The EO's on human trafficking, war on poverty, SES changes, streamlining regs, how about the trade deals?" "No, and shut up I have a right to my opinion, I know what I know..."

That part is painful, opinion, often just polarity opinion, is the all you need to be informed and it seems the most ignorant are the least shameful about it.

Hence the needs for Q, and still I see few reading and understanding the docs that matter. The review of poverty help EO is monumental: crickets...

originally posted by: crankyoldman

originally posted by: MIdnightImpact
a reply to: crankyoldman

You are right of course but i doubt the people who think that way will even read all the pages, They will just wait for a "news" report. The spin is already in full effect.

This is the problem IMO. Folks will say "he's ruining the county" and I say, "have you read the documents?" "no."

I say, "have you read the EO's and understand the language?" "no, doesn't matter."

"The EO's on human trafficking, war on poverty, SES changes, streamlining regs, how about the trade deals?" "No, and shut up I have a right to my opinion, I know what I know..."

That part is painful, opinion, often just polarity opinion, is the all you need to be informed and it seems the most ignorant are the least shameful about it.

Hence the needs for Q, and still I see few reading and understanding the docs that matter.

The review of poverty help EO is monumental: crickets...

Cranky, you are so right. You just described my best friend.

originally posted by: Khaleesi
a reply to: imthegoat

I believe it said there was no political bias on Comey's part. I don't think it exonerated Page and Strzok of political bias. In fact it exposed the text that stated they would prevent Trump from becoming president. But I am hearing arguments from both sides so I guess it depends on how you interpret it.

Newly discovered texts between FBI agent Peter Strzok and FBI lawyer Lisa Page also play a key role in the findings. The inspector general, though, said he "did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that improper considerations, including political bias, directly affected the specific investigative decisions."

“In particular, we were concerned about text messages exchanged by FBI Deputy Assistant Director Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, Special Counsel to the Deputy Director, that potentially indicated or created the appearance that investigative decisions were impacted by bias or improper considerations,” the report says.

According to the report, Strzok texted Page in August 2016 that “we’ll stop” Donald Trump from becoming president.

“[Trump’s] not ever going to become president, right? Right?!” Page texted Strzok.

“No. No he won’t. We’ll stop it,” Strzok responded.

Horowitz's review months ago revealed other anti-Trump texts between the two officials, who were romantically involved. The "stop" Trump text goes further, and is likely to fuel claims from the White House that the bureau was working against him.

The FBI, in its response contained in the report, said the inspector general “found no evidence to connect the political views expressed by these employees with the specific investigative decisions.” But it said the inspector general has referred five employees for investigation into whether the messages violated the FBI’s Offense Codes and Penalty Guidelines.

From the FoxNews article her e.

FBI Agents were scoring freebie game tickets, golf passes, alcohol and free meals
in exchange for leaks? Talk about cheap and dirty.

On page XII in the report, the IG says the department “identified numerous FBI employees, at all levels of the organization and with no official reason to be in contact with the media, who were nevertheless in frequent contact with reporters.”

Profound Concerns

The contact between FBI agents and the media extended to receiving “improperly receiving benefits from reporters, including tickets to sporting events, golfing outings, drinks and meals, and admittance to nonpublic social events.”

dailycaller.com...


Is leaking classified information to the media a crime?

IG report is a huge disappointment at first glance. I'm having serious, serious doubts now about Q.

Could Q be a deep state operation with the intention of building our hopes up only for nothing to happen? This would really damage morale and cause a loss of faith amongst a significant portion of Trump's base. It could also be a distraction - Q says Trust Sessions so everybody is holding out for some 4D chess that may never happen - in the meantime we could lose the President. I think we all need to do some serious thinking about this - are the deep state winning?

originally posted by: burntheships
FBI Agents were scoring freebie game tickets, golf passes, alcohol and free meals
in exchange for leaks? Talk about cheap and dirty.

On page XII in the report, the IG says the department “identified numerous FBI employees, at all levels of the organization and with no official reason to be in contact with the media, who were nevertheless in frequent contact with reporters.”

Profound Concerns

The contact between FBI agents and the media extended to receiving “improperly receiving benefits from reporters, including tickets to sporting events, golfing outings, drinks and meals, and admittance to nonpublic social events.”

dailycaller.com...


Is leaking classified information to the media a crime?

Yes, varies depending on what type of information.source

a reply to: MIdnightImpact

I understand that people who follow Q closely are disappointed in this report but keep in mind normies knew nothing about all of this and it is basically just for them. They did not have access to the information we received.

I don't buy it. Normies (adults that have jobs and taking care of their family) are no more informed or aware of the corruption. They (normies) were ALWAYS aware of the corruption they just feel whats the point if they cant do anything about it and they get away with it anyways.

Looks like the normies are correct.

Tick Tock for Q , no justice (arrest) by next election Trump and Q can suck it.

a reply to: interupt42

You have to go back. Your oil has run dry and you didn't bring an extra flask. So sorry.

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.

Dark to LIght.
Redacted to Unredacted.

There you have it. IG refers five FBI employees for investigation.

Alright Q just answered my previous question. The released IG report is number three. ThankQ.

originally posted by: crankyoldman

originally posted by: MIdnightImpact
a reply to: crankyoldman

You are right of course but i doubt the people who think that way will even read all the pages, They will just wait for a "news" report. The spin is already in full effect.

This is the problem IMO. Folks will say "he's ruining the county" and I say, "have you read the documents?" "no."

I say, "have you read the EO's and understand the language?" "no, doesn't matter."

"The EO's on human trafficking, war on poverty, SES changes, streamlining regs, how about the trade deals?" "No, and shut up I have a right to my opinion, I know what I know..."

That part is painful, opinion, often just polarity opinion, is the all you need to be informed and it seems the most ignorant are the least shameful about it.

Hence the needs for Q, and still I see few reading and understanding the docs that matter.

The review of poverty help EO is monumental: crickets...

Yes, exactly! Which to my mind, is what makes it so remarkable. The idea of using the bad actor's story frame instead of trying to dismantle it with truer information, leaves them sputtering and gasping. Played out in relative public, they have to at least pretend to be following their own rules...sort of a Reverse Cloward-Piven...Sun Tzu stuff for sure.

There are several shows going on all at once, IMO. the dreary stuff, like actual investigation and the signing of EOs gets done quietly in the background, and all the ts must be crossed, and the is dotted, if we want to return to an actual rule of law.

Timing is everything. Slowly and methodically waking normies, is essential to the process. Too fast would collapse everything catastrophically into a big heap. It is instead be demolished in a safer and more controlled fashion. Get used to being the one your normie friends and family ask about what catches their interest. And don't try to convince them to do their own digging. As you've noted, they won't. Instead just give them the short version, and soothe any fears they may have, about the fact that just about everything they've been told was false, with malice aforethought.

Lots of people are waking up now. Maybe we can help best, by making them some coffee!

I'm not very experienced at MEMEs but feel obliged to try!



If anyone wants to improve or use then feel free!

a reply to: MIdnightImpact

Who???
and Q said last night that this would be Version 3.0.

originally posted by: BrennanHuff
a reply to: MIdnightImpact

Who???
and Q said last night that this would be Version 3.0.

No idea. Just thought it was worth mentioning because various blue bird people are reporting it.

a reply to: BrennanHuff

Version 3 wasn't written, "#" or Number 3 was...