[–] 16686609? 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
How are they preparing to combat [narrative = vital]?
House intel launch of more 'FAKE' investigations in attempt to retain 'FALSE NARRATIVE' and claim 'POLITICAL ATTACK(S)' if investigated/prosecuted themselves?
[AS]?
[SDNY-AG]?
Attempts to retain 'BLOCKADE'?
Attempts to prevent public release of the TRUTH?
Q is implying that the left is planning to pivot to a new investigation of some kind, as soon as the Mueller probe flops. They want to keep negative optics against the POTUS, thinking that they can limit him from investigating their swamp.
To do this, they need to be able to hide behind the false claim of "obstruction of 'justice,'" in hopes of stopping the investigations against them. Therefore, expect some kind of new bullshit claim, and calls for new special prosecutor nonsense, likely surrounding something involving the SDNY attorney general.
[–] 16688921? [S] 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago (edited ago)
They already have. The SDNY subpoenaed Trumps inauguration records. This isn't gonna end well for them. The guy they are targetting is the former co chair of Obama's election finance effort. He donated millions to Hillary & Obama. So this guy also gave Trump money as soon as he was elected -- as a setup to smear Trump with the same dirty paint brush
This is going to boomerang on the dems. The SDNY AG supported Trump's election. That's why Q mention it in this post.
[–] 16681852? 2 points 2 points 4 points (+4|-2) ago
It was already a news story. https://www.businessinsider.com/senator-chuck-grassley-expects-mueller-report-within-a-month-2019-2?r=US&IR=T Not new information.
[–] 16685274? 3 points -1 points 2 points (+2|-3) ago
No. He releases cryptic information that makes it seem like he has inside information but if fact it's just regurgitated news stories, speculation and bullshit. Why would he phrase it like this >Probe conclusion coming?
[-30]
instead of just actually telling us what the news story was?
[–] 16684889? 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
bomberS? Plural? This again mashes me wonder if not only is Mueller a gray hat, who will suddenly exonerate Trump and indict (in a non-legal sense) O, Hillary and others j but also that they are others (Schumer?) who will suddenly emerge as hidden Trump assets. Imagine if that private meeting with the NY Times editor, as well as someone like Brazile suddenly came out against the cabal.....
[–] 16685223? 1 point 3 points 4 points (+4|-1) ago
[-30] kind of implies that mueller finished a month ago.
[–] 16686156? 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
No it means it will be finished 30 days or less
[–] 16686178? ago
that would be [30].
[–] 16693244? ago
If there’s something happening in the future, the proper phrase would be “T-x” with x being the days left until d-day so to speak. The minus sign means it’s yet to come. A plus sign before the number would infer that it’s already happened.
[–] 16699643? ago
I would agree with this if Q hadn't used [30] before in previous posts to signify positive delta time.
This is the first time ive seen [-30] in his posts.