Q ~ Trust Trump's Plan ~ 10/03/22 Vol.427, Q Day 1799

Oh, THAT is classic!

You need to learn how to scale your images. That thing is Yuuuge.

I actually know how - I just failed to do it.

I’ll assign myself 1 demerit and shall swab the deck at 0500 tomorrow.

I can’t believe you’re flaming me, LJ.

Regardless, I think for myself. I have NEVER disparaged Q, unless you think saying “Q is neither infallible nor omniscient” is an insult.

That idea would be wrong on so many levels.

I leave you to your fantasies of Trump returning before Jan 20, 2025. Enjoy.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I’m not flaming you, just re-stating in plainer words what you have said yourself. And thinking there will anything in our country salvageable with Bitem gang in control until 2025 is delusional.

Evidence of Fauci’s criminality:

https://truthsocial.com/users/Breaking911/statuses/109122956673481311

Every time he says this, our children disrespect us more! We hates him!

KC ... slap on the wrist, then got his law license back and no doubt paid off behind the scenes. At this point nothing is clear about much of anything to me lol. TBD + WWG1WGA - Maranatha! :)

(Generally speaking) A Ship can carry a Boat, but a Boat cannot carry a Ship.

I contend that she has a Y-chromosome as well as a XX set.
Prove me wrong.

Could be.
All I know is her ring finger is longer than her index finger. The trait of a man.

The poultry in the picture are being destroyed, likely due to disease. They will be composted.
The chickens that you eat are not killed this way. They are stunned and then bled out. Known as meat birds or broilers, both the hens and roosters are processed for consumption at about 8 weeks. They grow very rapidly.
Layers, or chickens that produce eggs, are handled differently. They are sexed when hatched, and the males are destroyed since as Petey said they will not grow well enough to become broilers.

Question about this point:

“
9. If he so desired, Special Counsel John Durham could charge all involved in continuing an illegally predicated federal criminal investigation and surveillance of a sitting President, his Cabinet and his staff and his family?
“

What would those involved be charged with?

Sealed indictments also stop the clock.

You mean the SOL stops on the date of a sealed indictment? Then starts again when unsealed?

Gotta say, I never heard that before. Hope it is true.

Muzzies do Christmas trees? Who knew?

PS- there’s a photo of her around 13, in tights at some dance performance, I’ve posted it before. There is NO package.

No photos of her pregnant, seems it was determined who the real parents were.

I am not a lawyer so I can’t say, I only know what I wish it were.

Those mean guys are calling you a bad Swabby. But Ill help by turning on the countermeasure washdown system so’s you have plenty of water to scrub with. You’ll need a really big mop.

A Preview of the Igor Danchenko Trial
Unanswered questions of Clinton Campaign involvement
Techno Fog

2 hr ago The trial of Igor Danchenko is scheduled for October 11, 2022. While it is only a false statement case, we can’t help but ask whether the trial will reveal any Danchenko contacts with the Hillary Clinton Presidential Campaign while he was acting as Christopher Steele’s primary subsource.

The reason for that question? More on that below.

First we start with the background. As you might recall, Danchenko was used by Steele as he conducted opposition research on Trump and his associates. Steele’s dossier (also called “Company Reports”) eventually made it into the hands of federal officials and the FBI and Special Counsel Robert Mueller, who used it to prepare and submit applications for warrants under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) to spy on Carter Page (and to collect the communications of the Trump campaign).

As Special Counsel John Durham alleged in the Danchenko indictment:

“Each of the FISA applications set forth the FBI’s assessment that Page was a knowing agent of Russia and further alleged – based on the Company Reports – that Page was part of a “well-coordinated conspiracy of co-operation” between Trump’s campaign and the Russian government.”1

The charges against Danchenko stem from false statements he gave the FBI during multiple interviews from January 2017 through November 2017. These are the counts from the Danchenko indictment:

Count 1. June 15, 2017: Danchenko denied to FBI agents that he spoke with public relations executive Charles Dolan (a long-time participant in Democrat party politics) about materials in the Steele dossier. In fact, Dolan was the source of Danchenko’s and, as alleged by Special Counsel Durham, was “otherwise involved in the events and information described in the” dossier.

Count 2. March 16, 2017: Danchenko told FBI agents he received a call in late July 2016 from a person he thought was Sergei Millian, when Danchenko knew he had never received a call from Millian.

Count 3. May 18, 2017: Danchenko gave a false statement to FBI agents that he “was under the impression” that the late July 2016 call was from Millian.

Count 4. October 24, 2017: Danchenko falsely stated to FBI agents that he believed he spoke to Millian on the phone on more than one occasion.

Count 5. November 16, 2017: Danchenko lied that he “believed he has spoken to [Millian] on the telephone,” when Danchenko well knew he had never spoken to Millian.

This isn’t the easiest false statements case, so credit to Durham for bringing it. The reason isn’t because Danchenko told the truth. He’s most certainly a serial fabricator. It’s that Danchenko’s statements were made around 5 years ago to sloppy agents, and to an FBI and Department of Justice that was uninterested in uncovering and pursuing the truth.

Adding to the problems is that Sergei Millian, concerned about FBI abuses and generally untrustworthy of US assurances, remains somewhere overseas and will not testify at trial. At the same time, Durham must be conscious of the fact that the FBI was more than willing to allow Danchenko to lie.

Materiality

That brings us to “materiality.” Danchenko is charged under 18 USC § 1001, which criminalizes false statements to federal officials. Under this statute, Durham must prove that Danchenko’s statements were “materially false.”2

Normally, proving materiality in this context wouldn’t be difficult. But Durham faces the challenge of proving that Danchenko’s false statements were material to an FBI that invited and ignored Danchenko’s lies. If there is any relief to those waiting on justice to be administered, it is that Danchenko’s lies didn’t need to influence the FBI. They only needed to be “capable of influencing” the FBI. Danchenko’s false statements definitely meet that standard.

One way Durham will explain the materiality of Danchenko’s false statements will be to point to FBI obligations to notify the FISC about the misrepresentations from its witness under FISC Local Rule 13:

“the FBI and DOJ would be required to inform the FISC about the misrepresentations made in each of the applications it provided to the FISC. Had the FISC known of these misrepresentations, it could have terminated the surveillance of Carter Page and/or ordered the FBI and DOJ to destroy the information it had already collected.”3

Not that the FBI would have notified the FISC. As we have discussed, the FBI was generally aware of Danchenko’s contacts with Charles Dolan (and thus that one source of Danchenko’s information was a Clinton ally) and likely suspected back June 2017 that Danchenko had lied about his conversations with Dolan. Then there is the fact that the FBI refused to notify the FISC, contrary to the court’s rules, that Danchenko had contradicted some of Steele’s reporting.

Moreover, the FBI misrepresented to the FISC in 2018 that it had “no control over” Danchenko, when in fact the FBI made Danchenko a paid confidential human source (CHS) from March 2017 through October 2020. This hid Danchenko from inquiry, and thus protected the FBI (and the DOJ and the Mueller Special Counsel) from their own lies being exposed. “Sources and methods.”

To elaborate on that issue, I’m wondering if we’ll see any evidence as to who approved Danchenko as a paid CHS and why the FBI took that step. It might happen, if only because Danchenko lied while he was a confidential human source. If we had to guess a name, we’d venture it may have been former FBI Assistant Director for Counter Intelligence Bill Priestap who approved Danchenko as a CHS.

And if the past provides any guidance, we may also see the steps the FBI took - or refused to take - to corroborate Danchenko’s statements, and who at the FBI was involved in that effort. At the Sussmann trial, for example, it was revealed that FBI leadership stopped inquiry into Sussmann’s role as the source for the bogus Alfa Bank information. As we wrote a couple weeks ago:

“the dispute over the materiality of Danchenko’s lies almost requires the defense to prove government misconduct/ignorance. To which we say - good. Expose them.”

What of Charles Dolan and the Clinton Campaign?

Expect Charles Dolan to testify to his conversations with Danchenko and others relating to the dossier allegations at the trial. He’s already testified before a grand jury. For background, Dolan is described in the Danchenko indictment as having “maintained historical and ongoing involvement in Democratic politics.” His history includes serving as chairman of a national Democratic political organization, being a state chairman of Bill Clinton’s 1992 and 1996 presidential campaigns, and an advisor to Hillary Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign.

Based on his ties with the Clintons, one would think that the Clinton Campaign would have known about Dolan’s contacts with Danchenko. However, the Danchenko indictment states “individuals affiliated with the Clinton Campaign did not direct, and were not aware of, [Dolan’s] meetings with Danchenko and other Russian nationals.”

That statement concerns Dolan’s lack of interactions with the Clinton Campaign. It still leaves unanswered the question of whether Danchenko had any contacts with the Clinton campaign, and whether the Clinton campaign was aware of Danchenko’s activities.

Two theories on that. It’s possible that the Clinton campaign received updates on the opposition research but otherwise isolated itself from these matters, preferring its lawyers at Perkins Coie and its contractors at Fusion GPS (and their sources) get their hands dirty. That would be consistent with what we saw in the Michael Sussmann trial, a real-time demonstration of how the Clinton machine uses the the attorney-client and work-product privileges to manipulate the press, spread false accusations, and hide a number of sins.

It is also possible that the Clinton campaign had more knowledge about Danchenko than has been made publicly available. I bring that up because back in December, we discussed a curious filing by Durham, which confirmed that the Clinton campaign and “multiple former employees of that campaign” were subject to “matters before the Special Counsel.” In that filing, Durham discussed the potential conflict of interest of Danchenko’s lawyers, whose firm also represented the Clinton campaign and those former campaign employees.

Specifically, Durham raised these areas of inquiry that may become issues at the Danchenko trial:

The Clinton Campaign’s knowledge or lack of knowledge concerning the veracity of information in the dossiers sourced by Danchenko;

The Clinton Campaign’s awareness or lack of awareness of Danchenko’s collection methods and sub-sources;

Meetings or communications between and among the Clinton Campaign, Fusion GPS, and Christopher Steele regarding or involving Danchenko;

Danchenko’s knowledge or lack of knowledge regarding the Clinton Campaign’s role in the activities surrounding the Steele Dossier; and

The extent to which the Clinton Campaign and/or its representatives directed, solicited, or controlled Danchenko’s activities.

All of those points are important, but that last one is particularly compelling and is worth repeating: “The extent to which the Clinton Campaign and/or its representatives directed, solicited, or controlled Danchenko’s activities.”

That implies the Clinton Campaign’s awareness of Danchenko and contacts with Danchenko. (After all, if the answer was “no,” then there would be no conflict.) Thus the potential conflict described by Durham:

“the Clinton Campaign and [Danchenko] each might have an incentive to shift blame and/or responsibility to the other party for any allegedly false information that was contained within the Company Reports and/or provided to the FBI.”

All this reminds us of a question we have previously asked. If the Clinton Campaign was being informed of the work by Fusion GPS, what of the likelihood that the Clinton Campaign was informing the work of Fusion GPS?

And here’s a follow-up question: from whom did Danchenko get the name Sergei Millian?

Furthermore, one has to ask whether those Clinton Campaign/Danchenko contacts, if they existed, stopped after the election – or whether they continued through Danchenko’s 2017 interviews with the FBI.

Will these issues be raised, and will we get answers on the Clinton Campaign’s ties to Danchenko (or Danchenko’s “sources”)? As outside observers, we can’t – and won’t – make guarantees. There’s danger in false promises just like there’s danger in false hope. Durham, however, has suggested the possibility of former representatives of the Clinton Campaign testifying at trial, stating:

“in the event that one or more former representatives of the Clinton Campaign are called to testify” at trial, Danchenko and the witness “would be represented by the same law firm, resulting in a potential conflict.”

Whether they testify remains to be seen. We haven’t yet seen a witness list.

Other Matters

If you’re interested about Danchenko’s potential defenses, they’re outlined in his motion to dismiss, which was ultimately denied by the Court. I’ll summarize briefly: during trial, expect his attorney to argue that Danchenko’s answers were literally true and that the statements were immaterial.

Also, this week the Court issued an order concerning evidence Durham sought to admit at trial. You can read the order here. It’s heavy on details, many of which are ancillary to the charges against Danchenko. Here’s a summary of some of the more important parts of that order.

Danchenko was subject to a prior counterintelligence investigation, after Danchenko told colleagues “he had access to people who would be willing to pay money in exchange for classified information.” The FBI made this a “full investigation” after learning Danchenko was an associate of “two FBI counterintelligence subjects” and had previous contacts with “the Russian Embassy and known Russian intelligence officers.” This investigation was closed after the FBI mistakenly believed Danchenko had left the country. The Court will allow the admission of the fact that Danchenko was part of a prior counter-intelligence investigation, though it will exclude details of this investigation.4

Durham seeks to admit evidence of Danchenko’s uncharged false statements to the FBI regarding his sourcing of the Ritz-Carlton (pee tape) allegations. The Court has generally denied that request, with leave to possibly allow for evidence that Danchenko knew Millian was not a Steele source for that information “based on the evidence submitted at trial.”

Evidence of Danchenko’s false statements about disclosure of his work for Steele and Orbis is admissible as it relates to Dolan.

The Court will allow the below July 26, 2016 e-mail from Sergei Millian to be introduced at trial, even though Millian will not be present. It will be used by Durham to show that Millian’s state of mind – one of confusion – after Danchenko reached out to him. It advances the theory that Millian never talked to Danchenko. (Other e-mails from Millian are inadmissible.)

Trial Transcripts and Updates Throughout the Trial

Finally, we will be ordering transcripts for each day of the Danchenko trial and will be posting the most relevant and important excerpts here (just as we did during the Sussmann trial). We should be receiving the transcripts every evening.

Cleaned up.

2 A materially false statement has the “natural tendency to influence, or [is] capable of influencing, the decision of the decision-making body to which it was addressed.” Kungys v. United States, 485 U.S. 759, 770 (1988).

3 Cleaned up.

4 This being a false statements case, the Court found the probative value of these allegations is “substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice and confusion of the issues.” This ruling is no surprise.

https://technofog.substack.com/p/a-preview-of-the-igor-danchenko-trial

“https://t.me/TheStormHasArrived17/11327

VIDEO 2 MIN

President Trump: “When we do what has to be done, people will accept it…”

Did you notice the flags in that interview? They were gold fringed, but it didn’t look like “fringe”. Just looked like gold material sewn around the edge. Am I wrong?

Find a good side pic of her with something fitting to check the back curvature. The real hips and junk in the trunk give me pause. But those vidyas of the swinging junk also give me pause. Now that I write about it, I’ve decided not to care.

Bright Brief – To Tweet, Perchance to Dream
Exploring the Implications of the Musk-Twitter Deal
Burning Bright

3 hr ago We may yet witness more twists and turns in this dramatic, administrative, cultural, memetic, legal saga between enigmatic billionaire Elon Musk and Twitter, one of the most influential and maligned corporations in the world, but for now, we appear to be settling into something approaching a climax in one of the most-discussed news items of the year—and that’s saying something.

This week, Musk reportedly agreed to consummate his offer to purchase the flagging tech communications platform for the original offer price after running them through cultural, media and even legal ringers over the last few months that revealed everything from suspected bot counts at the platform to the incompetence, pettiness and subversive nature of its leadership.

If there is a word to describe the entire ordeal from a public optics perspective, I would offer simply that it has all been rather strange.

That said, I personally am in the camp of believing the spectacle was quite intentional, a viewpoint that has only strengthened and calcified as the peak of the narrative deployment—and I do believe it was a narrative deployment—happens to align perfectly with the idea of Narrative Convergence we have been discussing in this community for months as intersecting, congruent and even forgotten narratives from the first Trump term seem to be re-entering the public consciousness with speed and intent all at once.

While some are positioning this agreement as a legal loss or face-saving opportunity for Musk, who bit off more than he could chew by getting into a lawfare pissing match with the tech giant, I see it as yet more tacit confirmation that we’re currently in the midst of a multi-front psychological war for the Collective Mind of American Society, and that the overly dramatic and somewhat cartoonish saga surrounding Musk’s Twitter acquisition was meant to garner a critical mass of psychological attention en route to a transition of the platform to new management as we enter the beginnings of what could be a new paradigm of public discourse and disclosure.

If you see that reading as overly optimistic, allow me to do what I do best and point out a series of directional data points that might put the whole thing in a new context for you:

For starters, Elon Musk himself, while an enigma from a personality and even an intent perspective is a known contractor with the Department of Defense under Donald Trump. This has been discussed at length by Kash Patel, who has explained that Musk’s Starlink satellite internet infrastructure has been a major component of ongoing DOD communications technology projects.

For those of us who’ve been following Q Drops and other narratives over the last few years, the idea of a communications blackout is not just some baseless conspiracy theory, but a very real and very possible concern as the powers that would be increasingly lose more of their grasp over the Collective Mind. As we discuss at Burning Bright, their own narrative deployments have lost significant steam as of late, evidenced more plainly by their need to constantly shift their narratives rather than playing them out and permeating the public mind space with. The acceleration inherent in this approach has resulted in exponentially-increasing instances of Narrative Whiplash, which is resulting in more of the populace disengaging from the former informational matrix and either separating themselves from programmed narratives completely, or, better yet seeking out alternative and decentralized sources of information.

Are we to believe it’s a coincidence that the world’s most culturally-relevant, anti-establishment technology billionaire has deals in place with the Trump-era DOD specifically focusing on satellite infrastructure BEFORE he decides to target the establishment’s most powerful and ubiquitous communications (ie: brainwashing) platform under the guise of a personal crusade or, more lightly an amusing distraction game between ideological sides within the otherwise-homogenous elite?

This week alone, it was announced that Starlink has yet more contracts being actioned alongside the Trump-founded and designated Space Force branch of the US Military, focusing once more on satellite and communications technology.

Add this to the aforementioned fact that we are a matter of weeks away from the most consequential election in US history (aren’t they all these days?) while a series of other controversial and suppressed narratives are re-entering the public consciousness, and a self-described free speech absolutist is primed to seize the reins of a platform that has been utterly dominated by Marxist, collectivist ideologues, to say nothing of their rumored and speculated intel agency origins?

If that isn’t enough for you, I often revert to the most baseline observations I can make, zooming out and trying to divorce what I believe from what I’m witnessing, and leaving projections to the side. Thus, if one were to only look at the collective reaction trends to this news by ‘our side’ and ‘theirs,’ one seems almost giddy with excitement while the other, symbolized most aptly by the ‘blue check Twitterati’ and Media Industrial Complex journalists are having public meltdowns at the very prospect of free speech returning to the internet on the eve of such a monumental election cycle.

In their own words, cretins such as NBC’s Ben Collins believe it’s a foregone conclusion that Twitter’s impending change in leadership will bring with it a change in philosophy and policy implementation—or lack thereof—that will ultimately affect the Midterm Elections.

I’ll give you one guess as to which direction he sees such a change pushing said elections …

All of us know that Silicon Valley is not only home to literal programmers of the software variety, but also social and sociopolitical programmers at a much higher level. Either through ideological subversion or more overt coercion, these elites and their respective platforms have come to define much of modern society and culture through the strategic deployment and—perhaps more often—the strategic suppression of free debate and honest disclosure.

In short, the public square has never been so siloed and controlled, and while it is beneficial to have powerful alternatives cropping up such as Truth Social and Rumble, even these platforms for now exist more as ideological bunkers in which banished and disaffected thinkers and speakers congregate with other like-minded patriots, ultimately forming ostensibly more truthful, but ultimately equally-siloed echo chambers.

To understand why this acquisition is calling up such existential dread in the powers that would be and their mouthpieces, we need to understand exactly what Twitter is to them and how it has been used.

Leaving First Amendment arguments to the side for the time being, we need only consider Twitter as a narrative and psychological weapon in order to grasp the effect it has visited on the Collective Mind of American Society. By fully controlling the largest communications platform in the modern age, one management and technology team—and a highly partisan, ideological one at that—has cultivated the perfect testing ground in which to germinate and workshop narrative deployments in order to foment and form new paradigms with which to guide the unwieldy ship that is American culture and opinion.

Ultimately, if said narratives are rejected even with the prodding of Twitter’s illusionists, the directive changes from consciousness seeding to bludgeoning, as strategic censorship and narrative boosting in a seemingly-connected, but ultimately segmented and siloed online environment results in the relatively easy manufacturing of illusory consensus, in which the majority viewpoint is suppressed and ridiculed until holders of that viewpoint no longer consider themselves ideologically ‘safe’ within the larger tribe of society. During this process, narratives are deployed and then artificially spotlighted through bot swarms and algorithm rewiring, and while the outspoken Matrix-denier is kicked out into the cold, those who stay on the platform or passively absorb its illusory effects are none the wiser.

We saw these techniques deployed in earnest over the last few years, from 2020’s ‘peaceful protests’ to the concept of election fraud itself, to the damaging, controversial and ultimately ineffectual lockdown and vaccination push that irrevocably changed American society, leaving it more firmly in the grasp of the administrative state than it has ever been before.

When used as an illusory cypher through which they can imprint or project mass consensus on given topics, Twitter may not directly reach a large portion of the US population, but it does reach a massive portion of academia and entertainment culture, creating a trickle-down messaging effect that, when combined with the MSM foghorn manufactures an illusion of mass consensus and ultimately grants its wielder unparalleled control over the Collective Mind we must reach and free in order to ‘win’ a Fifth-Generation War.

By breaking up this paradigm, Musk could not only be returning a powerful psychological weapon back to the people, but he could also be denying [them] one of their most potent psychological weapons as we enter this period of Narrative Acceleration and Convergence.

Should their echo chambers be opened up again to the rigors and crucible that is free debate, exposure and disclosure, the informational battlefield could see more free competition and parity of ideas than it has since the early days of Trump’s presidency.

What’s more, the would-be Controllers’ time spent puppeteering a closed-loop of artificial discourse has left them and their adherents and ultimately victims atrophied on a cognitive and emotional level, and unprepared for the sort of honed, forged and perfected logical and evidenced-based deployments this community is now capable of.

Many a wise Anon has taken to using the, ‘Where We Go One, We Go All’ mantra as a personal philosophy and a philosophical nucleus around which the Truth Community can coalesce.

But if we truly want to put that truism and those words into action … we can’t stay put forever, and it seems that new ‘where’s’ are soon to be reopened to us.

Exciting times, indeed.

https://burningbright.substack.com/p/bright-brief-to-tweet-perchance-to

What you smell is not the loud and dank aroma of a fine cannabis flower, but the smell of PANIC.

Biden announces pardons for thousands convicted of federal marijuana possession

President Joe Biden on Thursday announced he’s pardoning all Americans who’ve been convicted of simple marijuana possession under federal law, coming closer to keeping a 2020 campaign promise to decriminalize the drug a little more than a month before the midterm election.
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/biden-announces-pardon-federal-offenses-simple-marijuana-possession/story?id=91122888

Have you seen President Trump's powerful 4 minute video message? Don't miss it!

Where We Go 1, We Go All