Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer quickly warned Trump against seizing on the report as a reason to dismiss Rosenstein.
“This story must not be used as a pretext for the corrupt purpose of firing Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein in order install an official who will allow the president to interfere with the Special Counsel’s investigation,” Schumer said in a statement. He added that many “White House and cabinet officials have been reported to say critical things of the president without being fired.”
[LL] talking = TRUTH reveal BRENNAN NO NAME COORD TO FRAME POTUS?
……………..
FISA = START
FISA BRINGS DOWN THE HOUSE.
WHEN DO BIRDS SING?
Q
▶Q !!mG7VJxZNCI 09/22/18 (Sat) 06:46:16 No.289
MUSIC IS ABOUT TO STOP.
202-456-1414
Q
▶Q !!mG7VJxZNCI 09/22/18 (Sat) 07:09:15 No.290
FAKE NEWS ABOUT TO SHIFT NARRATIVE AGAINST THEIR MASTERS IN EFFORT TO WEATHER THE STORM?
PANIC EVERYWHERE.
PATRIOTS ARE READY.
ENJOY THE RALLY @ THE ‘Q’ TONIGHT!
Q
▶Q !!mG7VJxZNCI 09/22/18 (Sat) 07:21:00 No.291
Comey & McCabe talking?
Next comes NYT article against [RR]?
PANIC.
ALLIANCES FORMING?
These people are stupid.
Q
Q wrote about the USA and other countries as follows:
My interpretation is as follows:
Currently, the powers that run society are aware that Barack Hussein Obama tried to rig the 2016 presidential election, but they don’t have to say that in public. They are currently silent.
However, if Rod Rosenstein were to be held up to public accusation, the powers that be would be under pressure to answer various questions and FISAgate and SPYgate. They would not be able to coordinate their misinformation and misdirection efforts.
I don’t want to keep bringing up the fact that Wikileaks called Q a “Pied Piper operation,” but sometimes the shoe seems to fit. Q told us that disinfo was necessary. I would not be surprised if, after the whole Q operation has come to an end, many of the apparent clues believed by Anons will turn out to have been disinformation all along.
In the best-case scenario, Q’s ambiguities and cryptic hints will stir people up and make them demand answers from public officials such as President Trump. I don’t mind Q being cryptic if Trump is informative! Q made some claims that were not very shocking:
All right, most people believe that the moon landings happened; that is not the shocking part.
Q also put forth some very shocking claims – but as usual, they were cryptic, vague, and ambiguous.
Note that this is a very vague claim. In context, “we are not alone” means “there are intelligent extraterrestrials living in other star systems.”
But Q did NOT clarify the claim. When MOST people say “we are not alone,” they mean “humanoid extraterrestrials visit the Earth in flying saucers.” But technically, you could claim “we are not alone” even if you believe the only other life in the universe is an unintelligent bacterium orbiting Alpha Centauri.
Another question is – what support can we give to our claims? Most UFO believers might say, “Roswell was a flying saucer crash that proved aliens are real, therefore we know we are not alone.” However, someone like Carl Sagan could say, “Roswell was just a weather balloon, Roswell is not proof of anything, but when we consider the vastness of space, we know we are not alone from a priori logic and mathematical reasoning.” Therefore, in context, Q team seems to be suggesting that they know the USA government has a serious interest in Roswell, but perhaps Q team themselves has no personal need-to-know for the details, and thus Q team falls back on a priori arguments from the “vastness of space.”
This was a bit disheartening, because one can imagine Q taking down thousands of corrupt Deep State swamp creatures, bringing about a new era of national unity, but still refusing to say anything substantial about flying saucers. Still, if the swamp gets drained, most people will be happy that their children are no longer being abducted by Comet Pizza conspirators, even if flying saucers remain mysterious.
However, it is noteworthy that “To the Stars Academy” wants flying saucer disclosure, and is linked to the CIA. Thus any disclosures will probably be spin-doctored for propaganda purposes.
This is a bit shocking, but not impossible. Many people believe that the Pentagon was hit by a small cruise missile rather than by a plane. Some people believe that a Douglas A3 Skywarrior attack jet was used. Very few people believe the USA government’s story that a civilian airliner managed to pull off aerobatic stunts and hit the Pentagon. Regardless of the brouhaha about flying saucers, the mystery of the 911 attacks is a very practical and applicable issue, and Donald Trump himself has a personal interest in getting justice for his friends who died that day. Thus even if we can’t hope for disclosure about flying saucers, we can hope for disclosure of the 911 attacks as an inside job (probably involving Mossad).
After Q had made these claims, 8ch had a lot of visitors:
Q apparently wants they anons to speak up and become politically vocal:
A traditional motto of hackers is “Information wants to be free.” Q seems to be referencing that with a little tweak: “Information is MEANT to be free.” This seems to be a more teleological twist on the ethics: the USA has a long tradition of invoking natural law, natural rights, etc. God designed men to have rights, and thus men are MEANT to have rights, and thus society had better honor those rights. Similarly, Q seems to be saying, God designed information to be free, and information is MEANT to be free, and society had better honor that freedom.
>Recent events in Canada have proven once again that – for better or worse – the information genie has escaped into cyberspace and can’t be put back in the bottle. When an Ontario judge issued an order barring media coverage of a sensationalized murder trial, Canadians used the Net to break the ban.
>The case concerns Paul “Bernardo” Teale and his wife, Karla Homolka Teale, who were each charged in the grisly murders of two teenagers. Paul Teale now stands accused of 48 sex-related charges, while Karla Homolka entered into a plea bargain: She pleaded guilty to manslaughter and is expected to testify against Paul.
>The nonstop press coverage prompted Paul Teale’s lawyer to ask for a media gag order until the conclusion of his trial, on the grounds that it would be impossible to impanel an impartial jury. Faced with the concurrence of the Crown, the Court and Karla, Paul Teale’s lawyer switched camps. But it was too late!
>Despite legal intervention by several major Canadian media outlets, the court imposed a ban on the publication of the details of the crimes.
>At first the ban had its desired effect. When the US television show A Current Affair featured the case, it was banned in Canada, and Canadian cable stations blacked out CNN coverage of the case.
>With the conventional media halted, the infosphere took over. First, two BBSes in Toronto began to post daily details of the trial. In August, an irregular posting directly to newsgroup “control” (“approved” by “Justice Kovacs”) created alt.fan.karla-homolka.
>By December, after phone calls by law-abiding Net surfers to systems managers, the Usenet group had been banned by systems managers and university officials at sites all over Canada.
>After the banning of alt.fan.karla-homolka, two new Usenet groups were created: alt.pub-ban and alt.pub-ban.homolka.
>Some Net users theorized that if they cross-posted all over the Net, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police would be in the impossible position of scrambling through cyberspace plugging leaks. One Net dweller jokingly proposed the ideal tactic: “The solution is obvious. Take the discussion to rec.sport.hockey. You silly Canadians would never ban that group.”
>Other curious Canadians searched the pay-per-view news and magazine databases on Nexis and CompuServe for stories published by US newspapers. Most of the banned articles were re-posted verbatim to alt.true-crime, a group overlooked by the Mounties.
>As the infosphere grows to encompass the planet, the question is no longer whether certain information is too sensitive to be made public. The real question becomes whether it is even possible to keep certain information out of cyberspace. In the Teale-Homolka case, the ban was not so much broken as rendered irrelevant by the voracious online community: It is estimated that one in four Canadians knows the banned facts.
Hawaiian Libertarian