Posted on 03/16/2018 7:38:19 PM PDT by ransomnote
This happened once before. greatawkening was wiped out, and "regular anons" were allowed to post in there. At the time there was speculation we'd seen the last of Q, at least in that role. That speculation proved false, Q resumed posting in the same places (greatawakening and qresearch) a few days later.
I think removal of the posts is done to draw attention. I think leaving the 2016 Trump campaign speech behind is to cause it to remain in view.
Maybe Q will resume posting at greatawkening, or maybe at dayofreckoning.
My take is Q sees "now" as a meaningful marker point in the process or revealing and dealing with "everything involved." What the significance of this point is in "the plan," no way to know, only speculation.
Hmm you are right
Well it is just a rumor anyway
Thank you for your thoughts. Sounds very reasonable.
His requests if true will lead to spiderwebs of bad guys. Also if true, gives top cover to search and destroy all else with the cover of Trump fever.
This is also why the BC/HRC investigations at FBI are in Little Rock office. It all goes back to Whitewater and all of the previous hush-mouthed Arkansas Clinton appointees are out of office with no top cover.
[Sounds just like regular ferals’ violence.]
2nd shooting in a month. Chicago gangs have moved into the area.
I think it depends on who you ask, and the conditions on the day you ask it. You're probably right, under the current situation of apparent order, at least on the surface.
Like a dog returning to its vomit, HRC will lead to her handlers.
I’m not familiar with that part of the country, but now that I know it’s near Chicago, I am sure it is just standard ferals’ behavior.
Penalty: U.S. Code Title 18: Death,[8] or not less than 5 years imprisonment and not more than life imprisonment without the possibility of parole (minimum fine of $10,000, if not sentenced to death).[9][10]
Interesting about the two witnesses; IIRC Q mentioned something about one or more phone black hats' calls that were being listened to by two people. Witnesses....
Maybe someone else remembers more about this.
Until next time! LOL!
Hahaha.
p.s. It IS about to get real.
I know, right?
:)
The Supreme Court Goes to War:Hamdi, Padilla, and Rasul
Moreover, although Justice Breyer provided the key fifth vote in favor of the authority to detain Hamdi, he also joined in full Justice Stevens's dissent in Padilla-where the majority ducked the merits of Padilla's detention on a technicality, holding that Padilla should have filed in South Carolina, rather than New York. In addition to dissenting on the procedural point, Justice Stevens emphasized that the dissenters "believe that the Non-Detention Act prohibits-and the [AUMF] does not authorize-the protracted, incommunicado detention of American citizens arrested in the United States." Along with Justice Breyer (who joined the dissent in Padilla) and Justice Scalia (whose dissent in Hamdi should have applied a fortiori to the merits of Padilla's detention), that meant that, on the merits, there were at least five votes for Padilla.Such tea-leaf-reading may help to explain why, when Padilla's case came back to the Court, the Bush Administration mooted it by having Padilla indicted on criminal charges. ...
I seriously doubt Trump is going to invoke military tribunals against any of the perps in the soft coup attempt. Doing so is a substantial (maybe all CAPS would make the point properly_ hurdle, more than a loud distraction, but a real risk of being booted and also found, by the public, to be unreasonably heavy-handed. It would be a captial S stupid move.
She already did. Lynn Rothschild was walking down the stairs behind the unstable C word.
Thanks for the background on those cases.
Also, I agree with your conclusion, for now. That was why I also said “under current, stable circumstances.”
Some of the wilder talk on these Q-threads goes into the possibility of widespread hot insurrection if the hammer comes down on all of the people in the leftist conspiracy. Under “hot” conditions, I postulate that all bets are off—the courts wouldn’t have the bandwidth to handle all cases in the full glory of precedent and procedural detail.
LoL That sounds like a great time!
There weren’t any words? It looked as though people were talking!
Thank you!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.