-@TH3WH17ERABB17- -Q- Questions. White House Insider's postings -PART- -7W3N7Y sIx-

a reply to: liveandlearn

Nice find

a reply to: IAMTAT

Grenell is a beast. It was a no win moment for the dems. Grenell or Ratcliff.

Epoch Times updated their mega huge infographic.

INFOGRAPHIC: Timeline of FBI’s FISA Abuse in Trump Campaign Investigation

Timeline Image

www.thegatewaypundit.com... anager-robbie-mook/

HUGE! Clinton Campaign Attorney Mark Elias Admitted in Testimony He Sent the Bill from Fusion GPS for Dossier Directly to Campaign Manager Robbie Mook

a reply to: Trillium

ABC thought they had a "scoop" today, but as Jesse Watters reported on Saturday, Grenell turned over a big satchel of documents to A.G. Barr on Friday morning. MSM has self-distracted with their continued focus on Covid-19.

But the big question is, what does "Unmasking" of Flynn prove? We know from FBI notes that he was investigated by Obama's people, and ultimately set-up/framed because the investigation turned up zilch.

a reply to: carewemust

A. That’s great news that it was on ABC

B. Hopefully the unmasking is not just going to be about Flynn

a reply to: fringeofthefringe

imo Gowdy panders to Trump skeptics by framing his arguments with their stale info, instead of "now we know...".

It seems like he's simply broadening the audience for these subjects in general, like how "any publicity is good publicity".

Graham tends towards the same playbook, and I think it's for the reason I said. They trade a tiny bit of their staunch Republican reputation to "hook" followers from the middle of the pond, so when they inevitably drop truth bombs, they already have the ear of a certain demographic.

Tbd I have technically had a twat acct longer than I have had one here (lurking off and on since 03. I have posted more here tho. It is fun to call out fake news to all the twats. I twattede today than ever tho. Restarting obamagate was fun. Kind of like an I told you so to the ignorant a reply to: Quadrivium

a reply to: carewemust

Part of the narrative has always been that they had good reasons to be surveilling certain individuals. And that any information they collected on Trump and the rest of the campaign was "incidental".

Neither of those things are true, but if it were, the identities of US citizens are protef-- all identifying information of nontargeted US citizens is supposed to be scrubbed.

They deliberately "unmasked" people to see who the information "incidentally" collected belonged to.

There is a process for this, and the hows and whys which (supposedly) prevents the warrantless search of US citizens (ha ha). If they ignored those rules to gather specific information on campaign members and the candidates without a real, real compelling reason, they might actually be toast. IF the DOJ can prove that.

So who unmasked who, what was collected, and the why's of it all, might be a huge key to the whole op.

a reply to: carewemust

It would be funny if Trump and Pence Punk'ed Pelosi with a fake scenario where she rushes up to the podium prematurely and makes a bunch of insane declarations, swinging the gavel like an empty vodka bottle.

a reply to: Aallanon

Thanks. We always knew that Russia would prefer Hillary (a known commodity) over Trump who being a well known NY billionaire had no history of corruption.

Does anyone remember the early days before Q when the FBI released all the docs on John Trump as well as doc relating to something like FBI policies related to temporarily deputized FBI agents. This was after he was running and before he was elected.

It all seemed to be a clue to us.

a reply to: liveandlearn

“Ambassador Kislyak continued his efforts to interact with Campaign officials with responsibility for the foreign-policy portfolio—among them Sessions and Gordon—in the weeks after the convention,” the Mueller report stated.
...

And there is another odd angle to the Kislyak mystery that still is unresolved. The ambassador apparently received a $120,000 payment 10 days after the 2016 election. “Employees at Citibank raised an alarm about the transaction because it didn’t fit with prior payroll patternsand because he immediately split the money in half, sending it by two wire transfers to a separate account he maintained in Russia,” BuzzFeed reported in January 2018. It’s unclear whether this payment remains is under investigation by Congress or the FBI.

So the intelligence community, for example, can spy on Kislyak's communications anytime they want. He's the Russian ambassador, not a citizen of the US. But if he's talking to General Flynn, Flynn's name and identifying information is supposed to be redacted in those records.

How much do you want to bet that the money was paying Kislyak to continue to reach out to the Trump campaign, so that they could "incidentally" unmask the communications with Flynn, Sessions, etc and read everyone's mail?

And when the bad guys lost the investigation, this same info was used to set up the "insurance" policy of Russiagate. All these foreign people connected to the StateDept and the Clinton's just happened to keep talking to the Trump campaign and asking them about Russia... Weird...

May 12 - POTUS Schedule

12:00 PM THE PRESIDENT receives his intelligence briefing in Oval Office - Closed Press

4:00 PM THE PRESIDENT meets with Republican Members of the Senate
Cabinet Room - Closed Press

Pool Report

That is what I saw too.
I still can't believe, towards the end of the interview, Trey denied it was a witch hunt and seemed clueless about Shawn Henry[former FBI] Crowd Strike President & CSO in an interview undisclosed until this past Thursday, stated he had no knowledge of Russians hacking the DNC...
Did Trey not know about the download speeds of the DNC sever hack?
Trey just took the FBI-Comey's-Word for it, after the Comey presser on the Hillary exoneration on July 5th 2016, incidentally the same day as the DNC hack with a zip drive...has any of these guys really done their homework?

Simply put, I expected more from Trey.

originally posted by: FlyingFox
a reply to: fringeofthefringe

imo Gowdy panders to Trump skeptics by framing his arguments with their stale info, instead of "now we know...".

It seems like he's simply broadening the audience for these subjects in general, like how "any publicity is good publicity".

Graham tends towards the same playbook, and I think it's for the reason I said. They trade a tiny bit of their staunch Republican reputation to "hook" followers from the middle of the pond, so when they inevitably drop truth bombs, they already have the ear of a certain demographic.

We're up to 13 Q posts and 40 POTUS tweets, so running total is 53, hence I'm expecting a couple more of either before midnight!

ETA - scratch that... we've just had 13 more tweets... making a total of 66.

originally posted by: fringeofthefringe
That is what I saw too.
I still can't believe, towards the end of the interview, Trey denied it was a witch hunt and seemed clueless about Shawn Henry[former FBI] Crowd Strike President & CSO in an interview undisclosed until this past Thursday, stated he had no knowledge of Russians hacking the DNC...
Did Trey not know about the download speeds of the DNC sever hack?
Trey just took the FBI-Comey's-Word for it, after the Comey presser on the Hillary exoneration on July 5th 2016, incidentally the same day as the DNC hack with a zip drive...has any of these guys really done their homework?

Simply put, I expected more from Trey.

originally posted by: FlyingFox
a reply to: fringeofthefringe

imo Gowdy panders to Trump skeptics by framing his arguments with their stale info, instead of "now we know...".

It seems like he's simply broadening the audience for these subjects in general, like how "any publicity is good publicity".

Graham tends towards the same playbook, and I think it's for the reason I said. They trade a tiny bit of their staunch Republican reputation to "hook" followers from the middle of the pond, so when they inevitably drop truth bombs, they already have the ear of a certain demographic.

As I said before, if that list from Twitter of "Farm" graduates is true -- Gowdy is on it. So is Posobiec if anyone is curious. Does it mean that they're untrustworthy? No idea. Maybe they're good guys, maybe they're not. But for me it takes the probability of them being DS coyotes to a higher degree.

originally posted by: Aallanon
a reply to: carewemust

A. That’s great news that it was on ABC

B. Hopefully the unmasking is not just going to be about Flynn

Sounds like Democrats are about to have their world ROCKED. From today's Q&A between President Trump and the Press.

When asked by a reporter in the Rose Garden what crime he is accusing Obama of committing, Trump responded: “Obamagate, it’s been going on for a long time, it’s been going on from before I got elected, and it's a disgrace that it happened. You look at now all of this information that’s being released and from what I understand that’s only the beginning.”

When pressed for details, the commander in chief told a Washington Post reporter, "You know the crime. The crime is very obvious to everybody. All you have to do is read the newspapers, except yours."

More at: www.foxnews.com...

Obama shouldn’t mess with Sydney Powell
LOL He’s out of his league.

To late

a reply to: RadioRobert

yep, and there was an early report that when Flynn spoke to McCabe that Flynn said he (Flynn) figured they (FBI) already had the conversation.

Flynn knew all foreigners were recorded.

But things like free speech in modern times needs a place and they stomp it out as we see daily now.


What do we do next? We are going to have to create our own site like Friends with Bene's or something snazzy.
On this one, you have the right to be offended and take it. You can dish it out.

It could be like ATS with no mods. There will still be some limits like no Nuclear Bomb assembly lessons we can all agree need to be ironed out precisely. But if you want to call me a racial or other derogatory slur, then we should consider it free speech and decide if we like it or not. Not decide that it should be banned. We must let dissenters speak to make this work.
The George Carlin's could play again. We don't have to watch them or pay money to go see their shows. Dave Chappelle and Chris Rock are about the only ones it seems who can call people out by making fun of them.

originally posted by: pheonix358
a reply to: imthegoat

Linky

SUPREME COURT JUDGES RULE “PUBLIC AIRWAVES” ARE OWNED BY DISNEY, NBC, CBS, ABC AND FOX.

That is why. Americans cannot use Public Airwaves because they are owned by private entities.

Another thing you all lost.

P