Q Anon: 08/08/18 "Trust The Plan"

qmap.pub ^ | 08/08/18 | FReepers, vanity

[ichabod1]

That was supposed to be why they created a Director of National Intelligence, not to let them engage in joint attacks on the citizenry. Though we all knew at the time that the DNI was just another layer in the river of mud, and besides, who cares when the ex-usurper has issued an NSO to share it all with all ~17~ Intelligence agencies.

[ransomnote]

I do think we have a prime opportunity to up our game regarding visitor/FReeQ relations.

The Alinsky tactic of ridicule backfires when dealing with people whom are or are mistaken for, trolls. They may have used that tactic on us elsewhere, or on this thread, but responding with Alinsky ridicule (e.g., that they are stupid, clueless etc.) can inadvertently insult lurkers or visitors with legitimate version of the same questions. I make the case for the fact that people who have a hard time beleiving that Q is real are not stupid in this long (sorry!) post:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3674854/posts?page=1#1

Other than that, I focused my prior response to you on what I believe is the “biggest” problem (thread identity) because it’s most difficult to articulate and therefore address, but I otherwise agree with your idea that we can agree to disagree on many topics and we can always grow to become better at it.

[ichabod1]

Isn’t Jamie Gorelick on Jared Kushner’s staff, or representing him or something?

[Steven W.]

yep Gorelick is Kushner attorney

[ichabod1]

It may have been, the content that was posted seemed crude, almost childish, antifa crap. However Anonymous is well known to be derp state controlled so they probably showed them how to break the password.

However, Q reported being under attack by three intelligence agencies so this public bit may have been a feint, plus we’re pretty sure it was a honey trap set by Q.

[SERKIT]

I read Playboy for the articles Decolletage. Fixed it.

[ichabod1]

Taking out a Peter Strzok may not change the world, but for the detestable Peter Strzok, EVERYTHING CHANGES!!! HAHAHA!

[ransomnote]

Lol stupid trolls think they are “doxing” someone who already has published their real name.

---

I think they go around bragging about doxxing him because they want to intimidate other bloggers/vloggers whose identities aren’t public. Chill factor.

[Melian]

I posted this on that other thread:

That’s the point. We here on FR know how to think and investigate. Q is a method of teaching young people and those who are unaware how to think for themselves and investigate. Change can’t happen if two-thirds of the voters are uninformed sheep.

What Q is doing is what we’ve done on FR for years. Q just does it by posing questions and cryptic phrases to protect his identity from being discovered.

When has FR ever refused to investigate an issue? When has FR ever made a snap judgement on an event without looking at it closely? Why are some FReepers asking us to do that now? What is to be feared by discussing it?

[ransomnote]

From truthluva’s link:
https://www.truthorfiction.com/clinton-watergate/

“In an interview on the Neal Boortz Show in 2008, Jerry Zeifman altered his claim about Hillary’s termination from the Watergate investigation:

“Well, let me put it this way: I terminated her, along with some other staff members who were — were no longer needed, and advised her that I would not — could not — recommend her for any further positions.”

I think he had to change his initial stated reason for firing her due to legality. If he states she was fired for lying and unethical behavior, he could be sued and forced to prove her lies and behavior in court ($$$). That’s why many employers will not provide information about why they fired someone.

He says he didn’t have the power to fire her but I wonder if he “worked with” someone to get her fired, and that person is covering themselves legally because they don’t personally have the direct knowledge of her behavior as he does. So there’s now a generic suggestion she was no longer needed.
Just my 2 pesos.

PS: Interesting how her reputation (Watergate and onward) rarely ever slowed her down politically. No wonder she believes she’s invincible.

[ransomnote]

I’m comfortable with the Mueller/RR-———white hat/black hat debates and have seen many other normal debates as well. I think I have a “thread identity” focus on some issues because of the specific way I try to serve the threads. If we didn’t have a troll history or a troll present I would not have concerns about thread identity that I presently do. One day...soon I hope! MAGA

[Muslady]

Here is a thread from 2003 I found interesting:

Hillary Rodham’s 1974 Watergate “Procedures were Ethically Flawed”
http://freerepublic.com/focus/news/925684/posts

[HarleyLady27]

I find your reply very interesting, Mother of Dragons, I do love to read your posts, makes me think...

I agree we as managers have to be careful how we let people go...preventing law suits etc. and thus the reply when asked: “ Why did you fire them “...we are not allowed to give out anything other than: “ They started on this date and ended on this date “ or “ we downsized “...

I wonder at that time in Smelly hag's career if she hadn't learn yet how to ‘kill’ her subjects...like for example the guy that raped the young girl she giggled about...compared to Qaddafi when she said: “We came, We saw, he died”...

Sorry state of affairs when you know all the ‘accidents’ and ‘suicides’ were done on Smelly’s orders...

Just a different train of thought...

[ransomnote]

I wonder at that time in Smelly hag’s career if she hadn’t learn yet how to ‘kill’ her subjects...like for example the guy that raped the young girl she giggled about...compared to Qaddafi when she said: “We came, We saw, he died”...
________________________________

When I watch the FISA hearings or read about Hillary’s killings, I sadly reflect on how like a banana republic it sounds.

I think Saddam’s sons were known socios - one had a romantic rival smeared with honey and thrown to lions. In D.C., it’s all most more sanitary than that, what with the pin stripe suits and all. :(

[HarleyLady27]

I see what you mean...I watched a lot of the Iraq war, the big beautiful buildings, gorgeous animals that Saddam's kids were allowed to have...

When you said ‘known socios’ that hit the nail on the head for Smelly...both her and the disgraced, impeached former idiot are socios...

[meyer]

New Q alert!

Antitrust laws, google, FB, etc.

At work, can’t post easily.

[HarleyLady27]

Where is blu???

[No_Doll_i]

NEW Q

Q !!mG7VJxZNCI No.138
Aug 11 2018 11:51:36 (EST) media-consolidation.png

FAKE NEWS consolidation [propaganda arm of the D party].
Define Antitrust Law(s).
https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-antitrust-laws/antitrust-laws
The Sherman Act outlaws "every contract, combination, or conspiracy in restraint of trade," and any "monopolization, attempted monopolization, or conspiracy or combination to monopolize."
https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-antitrust-laws
"The FTC's competition mission is to enforce the rules of the competitive marketplace — the antitrust laws. These laws promote vigorous competition and protect consumers from anticompetitive mergers and business practices."
Reconcile.
+GOOG
+FB
+TWITTER
[CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN]
Q

__________________________________________________________

[SERKIT]

Yeah, but have you seen Maria’s Decolletage? Vavava Voom....BOOM BOOM!

[ransomnote]

#1841

#1841
Q !!mG7VJxZNCI 11 Aug 2018 - 9:51:36 AM




media-consolidation.png

FAKE NEWS consolidation [propaganda arm of the D party].
Define Antitrust Law(s).
https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-antitrust-laws/antitrust-laws📁

The Sherman Act outlaws "every contract, combination, or conspiracy in restraint of trade," and any "monopolization, attempted monopolization, or conspiracy or combination to monopolize."
https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-antitrust-laws
📁
"The FTC's competition mission is to enforce the rules of the competitive marketplace — the antitrust laws. These laws promote vigorous competition and protect consumers from anticompetitive mergers and business practices."
Reconcile.
+GOOG
+FB
+TWITTER
[CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN]
Q