Q Anonymous Related Articles & Videos

[buffy]

I noticed a string of tweets Julian Assange posted on March 22nd having to do with something Q was posting about - UK spying on behalf of the OBama Administration to avoid detection and oversight. I screenshot Assanges tweets and they can be seen here at Posts #398, 399 & 400. They were among the last tweets JA sent because, on March 29th, his twitter feed stopped. We heard he was silenced - his Internet was shutdown for violating a term of his Ecuadorian hosts. But now we learn that it's more than that. Wikileaks says there was a "grab team" and that JA was investigating U.K. Spying at the time...



Wikileaks asking for help enhancing ....


https://mobile.twitter.com/wikileaks...936000/video/1

Earlier on Qresearch...
An Anon asked Q about Seth Rich. Q says due to the DNC the lawsuit linked below, Seth Rich will become part of the case...along with Julian Assange. Estimated court date is in June.

Q !xowAT4Z3VQ ID: 5a1150 No.1116248 ��
Apr 20 2018 12:43:14 (EST)
Answer Q re: SR.
SR June JA.
Now….
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018...65533;�
Coincidence?
Q

UPDATE: 5/25/18

While Assange has in the past claimed his position in the embassy was under threat, sources say his current situation is "unusually bad" and that he could leave the embassy "any day now,". Assange's exit from the embassy could open a new phase for US investigators eager to find out what he knows.

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/05/24/p...rdy/index.html

[buffy]

Wikileaks has an email from The Global Intelligence Files that relates (from a 4 Star General) How Valerie Jarrett talked Obama out of numerous attempts to take out Osama bin Laden. The raid at the compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan was a Leon Panetta operation done with minimal input from Obama (he was golfing and had no idea it commenced until he was pulled from the course and taken to the Situation Room at last minute, which is why he was photographed in golf clothes).

In my initial communication to you of these events I described what unfolded
as a temporary Coup initiated by high ranking intelligence and military
officials. I stand by that term. These figures worked around the uncertainty
of President Obama and the repeated resistance of Valerie Jarrett. If they
had not been willing to do so, I am certain Osama Bin Laden would still be
alive today. There will be no punishment to those who acted outside the
authority of the president’s office. The president cannot afford to admit
such a fact.

I was correct in stating there had been a push to invade the compound for
several weeks if not months, primarily led by Leon Panetta, Hillary Clinton,
Robert Gates, David Petraeus, and Jim Clapper. The primary opposition to
this plan originated from Valerie Jarrett, and it was her opposition that was
enough to create uncertainty within President Obama.

There appears NOT to have been an outright overruling of any specific
position by President Obama, simply because there was no specific position
from the president to do so. President Obama was, in this case, as in all
others, working as an absentee president.

As for Jarrett, her concern rested on two primary fronts.. One, that the
military action could fail and harm the president’s already weakened
standing with both the American public and the world. Second, that the
attack would be viewed as an act of aggression against Muslims, and further
destabilize conditions in the Middle East.

The now famous photo released shows the particulars of that of that room and
its occupants. What that photo does not communicate directly is that the
military personnel present in that room during the operation unfolding,
deferred to either Hillary Clinton or Robert Gates. The president’s role
was minimal, including their acknowledging of his presence in the room.

What will be most interesting from here is to now see what becomes of Valerie
Jarrett. One source indicated she is threatening resignation. I find that
unlikely given my strong belief she needs the protection afforded
her by the Oval Office and its immense powers to delay and eventually
terminate investigations on her back in Chicago, but we shall see.

Read more:
http://socyberty.com/issues/white-ho...#ixzz1LLRp2GTh

https://wikileaks.org/gifiles/docs/1...ng-osama-.html

[buffy]

Q !xowAT4Z3VQ ID: 32a824 No.1061084 📁
Apr 15 2018 23:37:31 (EST)
Re_read Five Eyes.
Avoid US data collection laws.
Hussein.
Public: Dossier FISA.
Not Public: Five Eyes UK/AUS POTUS targeting using pushed RUS decoy meetings / campaign insertions.
Hussein HRC LL Brennan Clapper NAT SEC WH SIT RM OP UK AUS assist/set up.
Q

According to one of the former intelligence officers who spoke to The Gateway Pundit, “this was a coup attempt without firearms; relying instead on manufactured intelligence designed to feed the meme that Trump surrogates were in contact with the Russians.

The former intelligence officers agreed that the U.K.’s Joint Intelligence Committee was the venue used by the CIA and the DNI to share and receive “intelligence” allegedly linking Trump to Russia.
.”

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...ygate-scandal/

[buffy]

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/forme...pted-espionage

[buffy]

Joseph Mifsud, the mysterious "professor" who has since emerged as a central figure in the Trump-Russia affair. (And mentioned by Julian Assange here in Post #398



Mifsud, who vanished as soon as his role in Trump-Russia was revealed, is widely thought to be some kind of Russian agent. True or not, he had certainly been a frequent visitor to Moscow and claimed to have high-level contacts there.

In the run-up to the 2016 presidential election in the United States, Mifsud was in contact with George Papadopoulos, a foreign policy adviser to the Trump campaign. According to a document released by the US Justice Department, Mifsud acted as go-between in trying to set up a meeting between candidate Trump and the Russian president, Vladimir Putin. Mifsud also informed Papadopoulos (and through him, the Trump campaign) that Russia had acquired “dirt” on Hillary Clinton in the form of “thousands of emails”.

Saudis, Russians and Italians: the murky world of Joseph Mifsud
http://al-bab.com/blog/2018/03/saudi...-joseph-mifsud

Assange’s threadreader on Mifsud
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/9...394323973.html

[buffy]

Hidden in the information are unredacted Strzok – Page texts that show the FBI initiated actions to insert multiple spies in the Trump campaign in December 2015.

Once again Internet sleuths unearthed damning evidence that the FBI was engaged in Spygate long before they let on.

As we reported previously, according to far left Politico, Comey stated in March of 2017 under oath that the FBI investigation into the Trump – Russia scandal started in July 2016:

FBI Director James Comey told lawmakers Monday that his agency has been investigating possible coordination between the Trump campaign and Russian officials since last July [2016].

The texts released today from corrupt FBI investigator Peter Strzok to corrupt FBI attorney Lisa Page state the following –

"BOMBSHELL- From DECEMBER 2015–The word LURES is redacted by FBI but not OIG; OCONUS LURES; OCONUS= Outside Contiguous US LURES= In this context LURES = SPIES – multiple – Is this an admission that the FBI wanted to run a baited Sting Op using foreign agents against Trump?”

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...december-2015/

Mifsud (in Post above) was one of the OCONUS Lures.

[buffy]

Part One of Three: The Deep State of Data

Part One: The few control the many.

Regardless of your background, socioeconomic status, or political spectrum, everything you do, everything you say, and everything you think is being subtly shaped by a “Deep State.” But the shadow organization I’m talking about isn’t a past or present administration. This isn’t the Alt-Right or Globalist Left. There’s no FBI or NSA faction trying to control your mind. No, the Deep State I’m referring to is the cabal of tech giants and data miners overtly and surreptitiously controlling what you see, whom you connect with, what you read, click, and care about.

Some, like Google, Facebook and Twitter are doing this out in the open. They believe the American public either doesn’t know, doesn’t care, or simply believes they don’t have a choice. Others, including Equifax and lesser known companies, shy away from the spotlight. Their offices may not be in Silicon Valley, but they’re minting profits from your information—whether you consent or not. They do this with the permission and support of our elected leaders (at least until they screw it up), through complex Terms of Service, and sheer will—not only assimilating our culture, but defining it.

The Deep State of Data is a convenient and comprehensive public-private partnership that exchanges information for access—access to services and utilities, access to other information, and even entire communities.

Meanwhile, your personal information generates endless amounts of digital gold for them. Take Facebook, for example. Every status update, like, and comment you’ve ever typed (even those you never published), every place you logged in from, every Messenger conversation and photograph, is paired with other “offline” data about you, then sold and exploited for any number of purposes. And that’s just one platform.

Your Facebook activity, Google searches, clicks, views, and retweets form the currency with which the Deep State of Data trades. They endlessly mine, store, and sell this data, supplementing it with information gathered by way of personal tracking devices (smartphones, smartwatches, and smart speakers) to collect and analyze your calls, messages, movements, habits, and influences, further fueling algorithms engineered to psychologically manipulate you.

Artificial intelligence is shaping what you think and how you think about it, telling you not only what to buy, but how often you need it, promoting specific agendas, feeding you fake news, and taking increasingly aggressive steps to garner even greater control.

This isn’t a near-future dystopian scenario. It’s happening right now. People in power are using massive amounts of data collection, obfuscated algorithms, and AI to control and manipulate the public in subtle and unpredictable ways, and no one is outside of their reach.

When the primary news source of 43 million people tailors its news feed based on past “click and like” behavior, and survives solely on advertising dollars, empirically neutral, nonpartisan, and even factually reliable media cease to exist. And yet the same outlets that serve us our news, interests, and other tailored, tunnel-vision-inducing hits of dopamine, do it under the guise of being “unbiased.” That’s doublethink at its finest.

We’re told that it’s ok that these companies monitor and maintain huge Stasi-like profiles on us. It’s ok because they’re doing it for our benefit, so they can better serve us advertising, expand our networks with like-minded people, and give us the best possible answer to our searches. Although some aren’t quite buying this: ad blocker use is at an all-time high, the share of non-Google search engines continues to increase, and Global VPN usage by consumers continues to grow.

Whether all at once, or through “death by a thousand cuts,” mainstream media and social media sites have betrayed the trust we once gave them. It’s over, and it’s not coming back.

In a recent Pew survey about misinformation online, experts are split on the outlook for the future. Some hold out hope that AI and machine learning will save us, while others rely on human nature as their guidepost to optimism. And yet, for now, the algorithms are written by the same humans who are both the authors and recipients of bias, and the problem of “trusted” sources isn’t going away.

“We can’t machine-learn our way out of this disaster, which is actually a perfect storm of poor civics knowledge and poor information literacy."

— Mike Devito

The issue at hand is not one of bias, advertising, or even profiling, but control. Control over the how and the what, control over our personal information. It’s what many call “privacy” and though it’s quite easy to maintain in the real world (through intentional omission of information based on your social setting), protecting it in the digital world has become increasingly difficult—if not impossible.

Mark Zuckerberg says “Users control their data” and that users “can leave anytime they want” but that is completely disingenuous. Look at the work involved to actually leave Facebook. And more concerning is “leaving Google” isn’t even an option. These are simple, bold, lies. The Deep State doesn’t want, or in Google’s case, doesn’t let us out. Welcome to the Digital Hotel California.

I’m not here to be defeatist however. There is a way out. We can take back control of our lives, our inputs, our safety, and our data—it all starts with one simple act: Owning our identity.

https://www.zerohedge.com/sponsored-...did=4697215562

[buffy]

The FBI's fractured fairytale

Once upon a time, the FBI said some thugs planned to rob a bank in town. Thugs are always looking to rob banks. They try all the time. But at this particular time, the FBI was hyper-focused on potential bank robberies in this particular town.

The best way to prevent the robbery — which is the goal, after all — would be for the FBI to alert all the banks in town. “Be on high alert for suspicious activity,” the FBI could tell the banks. “Report anything suspicious to us. We don’t want you to get robbed.”

Instead, in this fractured fairytale, the FBI followed an oddly less effective, more time-consuming, costlier approach. It focused on just one bank. And, strangely, it picked the bank that was least likely to be robbed because nobody thought it would ever get elected president — excuse me, I mean, because it had almost no cash on hand. (Why would robbers want to rob the bank with no cash?)


Stranger still, this specially-selected bank the FBI wanted to protect above all others happened to be owned by a man who was hated inside and outside the FBI.

So, to protect this bank owned by the guy the FBI hated, the FBI secretly examined a list of bank employees and identified a few it claimed would be likely to help robbers — or, at least, would not stop a robbery. How did it select these targets? By profiling them based on their pasts.

These particular bank employees, the FBI said, were chosen because they worked long ago with customers who might have known bank robbers in the past — maybe not the particular robbers planning a bank robbery this time, but different people who knew people who were thought to have robbed banks in the past ... or, perhaps, people who thought of robbing banks at some point but never got around to it.

So the FBI decided these particular bank employees, who may have known or met with suspicious people in the past, might be capable of committing a future crime.

Mind you, these targeted bank employees had never served time in prison, never been convicted of anything, never even been charged with a crime. If the FBI had just gone to them and said, “Hey, we think some people are going to rob this bank and we’ve got our eye on you, too,” the bank robbery probably would be avoided. Everybody would be watching out for the robbers.

Instead, the FBI secretly sent at least one spy — er, “informant” — to commingle with the bank employees and get info. Yes, you are thinking, it would seem to make a lot more sense to spy on the would-be robbers than their intended victims. But the FBI chose to spy on the victims. You know, for their own good.

At least one of the FBI informants/spies met with the targeted bank employees, pretending to be interested in them, and asked questions like “If you could have a million dollars tomorrow, what would you buy?” and “Would the owner of this bank be happy for you if you came across a sudden inheritance?” The FBI informant/spy then reported back to FBI headquarters that the bank employees were clearly thinking about robbing the bank, and that the owner of the bank was part of the scheme.

Next, because the FBI claimed these employees were clearly acting suspiciously and had criminal minds, the FBI unleashed the most intrusive, sensitive intel tools on them, tools that are rarely to be used against U.S. citizens — surveillance and wiretapping. FBI officials also leaked information about their investigation to the local press — not information that disparaged the robbers so much as cast suspicion on the bank’s owner and employees. In fact, it almost seemed like the FBI had forgotten all about the robbers.

And so, while all this was going on, the robbers robbed the bank.

Despite all the media innuendo, the secret surveillance and the spies/informants, the FBI said the robbers made off with a lot of cash. Even though the bank didn’t have much cash.

Afterward, the FBI stepped up its investigation of the bank employees. It couldn’t find solid proof the employees had anything to do with any bank robbery but claimed they were present a couple of times when the robbers cased the joint, so they must have known a robbery was going to happen. The owner must have known, too, the FBI concluded.

After digging deeply into the bank employees’ background, the FBI found other things: One bank employee hadn’t paid proper taxes six years before; another had been briefly accused of embezzling from a previous employer years ago but was never charged; a third said things in an FBI interview that the FBI concluded were untrue. The FBI charged them all with crimes and pressured them to become witnesses — not against the robbers, but against the bank owner.

In the end, the FBI held out hope that the townsfolk wouldn’t focus on the idea that all the FBI’s hard work and planning to supposedly protect the town’s banks only resulted in the utter failure of its stated mission: The bank got robbed, the cash would never be recovered, and the robbers would never serve time. Yet, some of the bank employees might — not for the robbery but for that other stuff.

The moral of the story: It’s a weird way to prevent a bank robbery.

On the other hand, if the FBI’s real goal — in this fractured fairytale — was to frame the hated owner of the bank and his employees, it all makes sense.

Sharyl Attkisson (@SharylAttkisson) is an Emmy-award winning investigative journalist, author of the New York Times bestsellers “The Smear” and “Stonewalled,” and host of Sinclair’s Sunday TV program, “Full Measure.”

http://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/...ured-fairytale

[buffy]

When the report drops tomorrow, there will be much to process. So, here’s a primer of some key points of interest...

http://thefederalist.com

This comment raises more questions....

Many conservatives are starting to make calls demanding a second special counsel be created to investigate the behavior of the FBI and others involved in the Clinton investigation and other sins. This cannot work for one simple reason - there is so much to investigate, they issues are so interrelated, and there are so many people involved, that it would become an impossibility.
>
Consider how long and involved Mueller's investigation into the fabricated Trump-Russia collusion affair has been and how it seems as though it will be a never ending investigation. Now consider what all is becoming more and more apparent that needs to be investigated. A partial list would include:
>
Voter fraud and election misconduct,
HRC apparent violation of secrecy laws,
HRC use of a private server for government business (FOIA violations, record keeping violations, etc.),
HRC destruction of evidence and impeding a federal investigation,
The Clinton Foundation and HRC's apparent pay-to-play influence peddling,
Uranium One,
Benghazi,
Fast and Furious,
Solyndra,
IRS weaponization against conservatives,
Use of law enforcement agencies to spy upon reporters and others in the news media,
Awan spying on Congressional computers with DWS help,
DNC violation of election law and their illegally influencing elections,
Child trafficking, child pornography, etc.,
Espionage by HRC and others,
Racketeering, and
Criminal participation by White House including Obama.
>
Mind you, this is not a complete list and during any investigation other criminal acts will likely be uncovered. Given the enormous number of potential crimes, the depth and width of each potential crime, the interactions between these various apparent criminal activities, the number of people involved in these activities, and so forth, it quickly becomes apparent that a special prosecutor could not begin to investigate all of this in a timely manner. Also, for the sake of the country, all of these need to be investigated for not to do so would send a message that criminal activity by those in power is to be considered acceptable.
>
Lastly, while thinking about all these potential crimes, how long they continued, how large they were, and how many were potentially involved, ask yourself why the MSM remained willfully ignorant and refused to report on all of this. Ask yourself why the MSM not only refused to report on these scandals/crimes, but why they even went further to defend Obama, Clinton, and so many others, to the point of even declaring the Obama years to be scandal free. While considering all of this, think about how our free press did essentially nothing while it was individuals on the internet, YouTube, Twitter, and elsewhere, as well as a handful of dogged conservatives in the news media that continually shouted out the alarms despite attempts silence them with accusations of being racist, paranoid, and worse.
>
Could a special prosecutor handle all of this? No. If the entire FBI were to tackle this as their sole job, it would take decades to treat these issues sufficiently. That this all was so large, that this all was kept hidden for so long, and that this all had such a profound effect on so many, should care the daylights out of everyone.

[buffy]

The priest claims that his unhappiness living in D.C. drove him to collect child pornography, however, while visiting a church in Canada, he distributed the child pornography he had in his possession! . Interesting that the Vatican refused to waive his diplomatic immunity and opted to try him at the Vatican. How courteous and forgiving they are to this lying pervert.



VATICAN CITY: A Catholic priest who worked as a diplomat at the Vatican's embassy in Washington admitted at the start of his trial on Friday that he had possessed child pornography while based in the United States.
Msgr. Carlo Alberto Capella, who was arrested in the Vatican in April after he had been recalled, told the court he had developed a "morbid" desire after he arrived in the United States to take up the diplomatic post in 2016.

"It was never part of my priestly life before," he told the court, adding that he was unhappy at the embassy in Washington.

In August 2017, the U.S. State Department notified the Holy See of a possible violation of laws relating to child pornography images by a member of the diplomatic corps of the Holy See accredited to Washington.
A few weeks later, the United States requested that Capella's diplomatic immunity be waived to open the way for possible prosecution there, but the Vatican refused.

After Capella was recalled to Rome, police in Windsor, Canada, said they had issued an arrest warrant for him on suspicion of possessing and distributing child pornography on the internet while visiting a church in Canada.

The trial was adjourned until Saturday.
(Reporting by Philip Pullella; Editing by Catherine Evans)

Read more at https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news...raphy-10461722



http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/...raphy-10461722

[buffy]

https://nypost.com/2017/03/03/indian...-got-him-visa/

[buffy]

Avenatti exposed that Cohen had set up a shell company to profit from selling access to Trump. Cohen set up the shell company the month before Trump took office and hid it in Delaware where there are strict privacy laws so it wouldn't be easily found.

Financial records show that Cohen used the shell company for business activities that went beyond what was publicly known, according to The Times. Transactions totaling at least $4.4 million started flowing through Essential Consultants shortly before Trump was elected president, and they continued until this January.

http://www.businessinsider.com/who-p...company-2018-5

[buffy]

[buffy]

As the “Q Anon” movement races into worldwide relevance, the White House press corps still refuses to address this growing phenomenon. The Q movement — predicated on the revelations of an apparent government insider named “Q” — seeks to expose the globalist criminal conspiracy that operates from
within the confines of the U.S. federal government. Q alleges or implies that human trafficking, sexual exploitation of minors, narcotics smuggling, and unspeakable violence are being perpetrated by a small number of globalist elites, including those in the U.S. intelligence agencies who either condone or actively participate in the crimes...

The anons revealed to us that President Trump is aware of their movement, that the Deep State is actively trying to silence and frame and imprison truth-tellers, that a missile was witnessed fired near Singapore aimed at Air Force One, the significance of the number 17 to President Trump, and so much more. They describe the process for how to join Q, and outline their end goals to save the world.

https://bigleaguepolitics.com/who-is...f-the-mystery/

[buffy]

EU, European Commission president Jean-Claude “Britain belongs to Europe” Juncker, coming out of NATO talks...