Posted on 06/24/2018 12:01:53 AM PDT by ransomnote
“DW Ulsterman”
Is that the same person as Ulsterman, rt that had that blog?
Yes it is!
You should ping him.
Laz lurks here.
I’m still not convinced that H is Hillary within the Q-context.
I see no instances of Q using ‘H’ to indicate Hillary, always ‘HRC’.
I missed that one. So two independent errors in the same post, and each error blamed on "busy day."
My pleasure.
WHAT A WEEK!! And it’s not over yet!
“July 4th carries significant ethos for Patriots”
Wypepo holiday
Something’s been puzzling me about that in-flight photo of the jet blue plane that I haven’t seen addressed.
The photo was most certainly taken from a nearby jet, however normal fight patterns would not allow two commercial flights to fly at the same altitude, parallel and in this close proximity, at this altitude.
So who took the photo? Why was another jet flying this close to the plane? Was it taken from a CAP/Mil jet on an intercept? If so, why was CAPbMil flying next to this jet blue flight?
All great questions Sheep Whisperer. Preach it my fellow freeq, I am with you. Although this morning I’m just trying not to lose it, watching this rosenstein ahole laugh it up in this committee. I ask my Father in Heaven may we please begin to see some justice today?
Perfect imaegry to support what I was describing here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3666034/posts?page=41#41
Thank you.
“True confession - For some reason, I find myself wanting to go for a romp in the hay with Ms. Harf. She just has that look.”
She worked for Hillary, and she likely has the same taste in women as you do. She certainly had a thing for that blonde singer with the ample busom.
So, you’re willing to work for HRC, and you know going in what she’s about. What does she know?
As a spokesperson, I realize, the idea is to keep them in the dark. HRC was never one for OPSEC, however, and she probably picked up some things.
It triggered the notion that for her entire admin, she was HRC’s spokesperson, and she’s ABSENT from any mention, anywhere, of all this business.
And now she’s at Fox.
How does that work? You don’t think that they aren’t going to end up interrogating anybody and everybody in that corrupt regime trying to figure out how many are either dead or turned out to the juvenile skin trade.
Unfortunately, the quote is “the blood of tyrants AND patriots”, so keep your head down and stay frosty.
RR must have given the judge an authorization document that allows Mueller to do what he does. Apparently, Manafort didn’t make the same argument about the constitutionality of Mueller’s SC appointment, just that he was not authorized.
That’s certainly a logical perspective.
However, imho, very bright folks can follow logical arguments without a significant problem.
And, there are a lot of OCD compulsively logical folks around in all disciplines.
If the argument is not logical, then it’s a poor argument anyway.
imho.
I do recognize that not all atnys are useless or problematic.
Many are.
But I might feel similarly about such a huge percentage of any single discipline having sooooooooooooo much influence on laws and culture.
In the case of atnys and our culture, I think it has been a disaster.
I’d like to see the Supreme Court function for 50 years with at least 5 out of the 9 NOT being atnys. Trying that experiment for 50 years COULD NOT be worse than we have seen, imho.
good logic. I got the O O W too but tossed it.
Honestly, this is very hard to parse.
I find very interesting that your comments seem to suggest that 1. You alone have figured this all out (not by a long shot but who really cares) Well my recurring chart is of the most obvious information out there: who has been charged with a crime, plead guilty, or been fired after a formal investigation.
It was extremely surprising to me how much push back on got on this simple little chart.
Mostly that seems to have subsided. And, there is not a lot of movement in that right now on either side.
So, as regards that, no, I didn't figure anything out.
More recently I've tried to add some value to this continuing thread by posting things of interest to me.
My first post was on the NIXVM case, and had about 6 links in it, with some text tying them together. Presumably this is of interest to others here as it is quite clearly connected to one of the central themes of Q (the powerful pedo rings). Again, I wasn't claiming to have figured anything out, just aggregating public data that others may not have seen.
Several people found the posting interesting, and thanked me for it.
The next two postings had to do with the treatment of Q in the press. One the one side I examined that Q is breaking out into the right-wing blog-o-sphere, as evidence by Vox Day's postings, which I included. I pointed out who Vox Day was for those who might not know him. Someone asked me what about his famous 16 principles, so I posted that. It was not an endorsement of them. So, your characterization of me is incorrect.
But again, this was me putting up links to publicly available Q related stuff.
My third recent large posting on the thread was on the MSM coverage of Q, which seems to have picked up in both quantity and intensity of denunciation.
Once again I was not claiming to have some great insight: Q himself had called out one of the posts I linked.
I'm not sure why you are here, or what your focus is.
I am trying to do citizen research on the topics Q raises. I have chosen to focus on more "above board" sources, things that require less interpretation. I am not, for instance, ever going to be one of the people trying to decipher aerial photographs, but luckily there are many here who are.
Moving on to your point 2. That you seem to imply shock of some sort that this is/was the plan all along. Wondering why you seem shocked when you also profess that you’ve figured it all out?
This is an impenetrable comment. I don't believe I have figured it all out (much less) by myself, as I've explained above.
I am not sure what the "shock" is you are referring to exactly, but of course a lot of the Q allegations are extremely shocking to me.
In general if you want to criticize me that's your prerogative. If you want clear responses it would be better if you use the common Freeper convention of quoting my postings (in context) and asking me about them, as I have had the courtesy to do here, rather than just making off-target accusations.
But, of course, until you piss off the Admins you are free to do less if that floats your boat.
In general I don't go around telling other people how stupid their posts are. If I don't like them I just skip over them.
I view this as a friendly collective endevour, and while some amount of criticism, if constructive is good, I don't feel driven to force anyone to adopt my views, or denounce ideas that have about things that I disagree with.
Cheers!
I asked him if he was aware of the large ring of Russian sleeper agents arrested a few years ago. To refresh my memory I went to find an article on this.
Now, the WP hangs it on the series "The Americans", but one of the things you learn reading the article is that, while the series is set in the 1980s, the actual events it is based on happened much later, in the 2000s, culminating in the arrests in 2010 (under Obama).
So that is where things get interesting. The spies were not really held long, they were all traded for 4 American spies. At the time, in 2010, Obama had not made his infamous Bergdahl spy swap, so we (probably) didn't really understand that he was capable of using even something like that in a treacherous way.
The article further goes into some detail about the efforts of the Russians to infiltrate the Hillary circle-of-influence.
Which obviously leads to the question: where the Russian agents traded for spies and deported before any public trials could take place and they could spill the beans on how badly they have compromised Hillary or other Obama leftists?
Also, one thing we did learn is that they were targeting Columbia University and specifically student and faculty who were recruited by the CIA.
There are many questions about Obama's time at Columbia (including if there was any). One theory that has been put forward is that he was working for the CIA (thus the Pakistan trip and after-graduation job at the CIA front magazine).
Here's the article. This seems like an interesting thread to pull on, maybe others can tie more together on it:
What happened to the American spies who inspired "The Americans"
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.