The point of my scorecard is to keep track of events not subject to interpretation. It's funny that someone can post a two page exposition on the "Q Clock", which even Bagster (our Lesser Oracle) says is bunk, but a simple chart of objective facts so upsets some people here.
I really don't get it.
I think my scorecard is very accurate representation of what is happening. One could argue that the points should be higher or lower, or even that the points are extraneous, and I would say that's a fair assessment.
But the simple facts remain that Mueller is creating a great deal of legal jeopardy, convictions, and consequences for people associated with Trump.
My scorecard doesn't include things that don't fit within the very narrow boundaries of indictments, guilty pleas, convictions (and "not guilty verdicts, should their ever be any)
For instance, I would say that Mueller's raid on Cohen's offices was a major blow against Trump. It was really inconceivable, violating a principle that has heretofore been held almost sacred in US courts. Even drug dealers attorneys are not raided and subject to having all of their papers seized.
But it hasn't resulted in any indictments, so it's not in my chart. It may be that my chart is underestimating the shellacking that Mueller is putting on Trump. When you flip a guys lawyer (which he appears to), that's gotta hurt, no matter what.
On the other side: well McCabe got fired for cause after an official finding that he lied. That's good. About 20 more like that please.
And Wolfe was indicted. As others have noticed, it's the lowest charge possible. Odd given that the indictment itself makes it clear he was leaking to three reporters. Perhaps the information being leaked was not classified?
Now the entire Q narrative is based on the idea that there is a second, secret process happening, and that it will eventually result in an overwhelming cascade of arrests, indictments, firings, and scandal.
We were promised a MOAB, and we've been promised that July would be a big month by Q and his interpreters. About 38 hours to go.
I too read Q's recent posts, where he takes naysayers to task for doubting what's going on, and points out the risk and danger that the "white hats" are under.
That implies to me that even from his point of view the outcome is not assured, there are tactics being tried, and then their are black hats devising responses and counter tactics. Some of the counters are effective.
Thought exercise: If we are sitting here on Jan 21, 2020 and a news President has been inaugurated and the score in my little chart is Mueller 65 to Trump 3, or something like that, with Mueller having succeeded in convicting even more people associated with Trump of various crimes, and the feckless DOJ and Congress essentially not laying a hand on the various criminals in the Obama administration - will you still be saying that my chart is biased? Or will you reluctantly concede that the narrative Mueller built, and supported with convictions and guilty pleas, painted a picture of Trump that hurt him. (No matter that it is not justified).
I'm looking forward to Team Trump scoring lots of points: all the people we've been promised. Hillary, Huma, Cheryl, Strzok, Page, Warner, Susan Rice, both Podestas ... we all know the names. And they are all walking free, giving speeches and sh*t-talking our President.
At this point the White Hats are losing based on what we can see and objectively measure.
Narrative, at the end of the day without indictments, is just talk, and doesn't mean much. Even things like the Strzok hearing, which I felt was devastating for him and the FBI, really doesn't mean much in this environment where you have Democratic hacks and the media backing the most ridiculous positions of the anti-Trump guys.
Without indictments Trump's position is precarious.
Retaining the House is clearly the most important goal for us as Trump supporters. If we lose that, and Mueller indicts Trump, even on his ridiculous charge of "obstruction" then his impeachment is assured. Maybe he can hold on in the Senate, but we all know how feckless RINOs are, and how infested the Senate is with them.
That's not the outcome I want, which is why I'm staying focused on the objective legal facts of the two sides.
We need indictments, we need convictions, we need guilty pleas.
You may note that I've recently added all the NIXVM cases to my chart. One of Q's main themes has been that there is huge corruption in the world, and that it is all connected, and that it's worse than just horny Harvey molesting starlets on the casting couch. We have not quite achieved convergence on NIXVM, but it's close.
My addition of this, even thought it's not (yet) connected to Mueller vs. Trump shows where my sympathy and bias lie.
I was supporting Trump when at least 1/2 of FR were for Ted Cruz, including a few people on this thread.
Still, despite all my love for Trump, my desire for the White Hats to win, my agony over the crimes that the Clintons and Obamas have gotten away with for decades, at this moment I do not feel the forces of good are winning.
Show me the indictments!
You are clearly and purposefully missing the many firings and demotions in the DOJ and FBI. You also omit the CEO exedus, and the pedophile/ sex trafficking indictments and arrests.
Your scorecard is myopic, and biased. (And you don’t even reslize it, supposedly.)
Very telling, thanks!
that trap lets frustration trump logic.
We simply don't know what indictments are out there, on who and how far along they are, who has been compromised who made deals who didnt, and it may be good that we don't know!
It's very possible that lots of bad guys get lost or jailed and we never ever find out.
For me its all about trusting Trump.
For me I have been wrong so many times that I thought Trump had screwed up or blown it I decided to just trust the guy. That's what I do these days.I'M seldom disappointed as well.