The second half of Donald Trump’s first term as President will be different from the first half.
He is now on offense.
The second half of Donald Trump’s first term as President will be different from the first half.
Q assures us that truth, transparency and equal justice under the law will prevail as global corruption is exposed and prosecuted.
Qanon April 26 2019 – I Spy
Q highlights some comments made by Joe DiGenova that point to the prosecution of corrupt people.
Q gives us information about the Mueller report and we look at how the President gets his message out through Sean Hannity, Sara Carter and John Solomon.
Was I the only one scratching my head on April 9th, when Sean Hannity said US Attorney John Huber was investigating “leaking?”
Where did Hannity get that idea? No one else (that I’m aware of) has reported that Huber is investigating leaking.
Let’s review what information the Department of Justice has provided regarding Huber’s investigation:
We know that Jeff Sessions appointed “senior federal prosecutors” to look into allegations of corruption in the FBI and the Department’s handling of investigations into the Clinton Foundation and sale of Uranium One. Sessions appointed these prosecutors rather than a second Special Counsel which had been requested by Trey Gowdy, Bob Goodlatte and other members of Congress. According to the letter sent to Bob Goodlatte by Assistant Attorney General Stephen Boyd, that appointment was made on November 13th, 2017. (Link to full document)
The next day, Qanon asked why sealed indictments might be done outside of Washington DC. Since more than 90 percent of the 2016 presidential vote went to Hillary Clinton, it would not be the best venue to impanel grand juries to hear evidence of political corruption.
It wasn’t until March of 2018 that Jeff Sessions made it publicly known that John Huber was the US Attorney he had appointed to investigate allegations of corruption. Recently, it was confirmed that Huber was tasked with investigating the Department’s handling of the Clinton Foundation investigation and sale of Uranium One.
In an April 1, 2019 interview with Mark Levin, Sara Carter and John Solomon dismissed Huber’s investigation as a nothing burger. A head fake. Solomon said this:
“Yes, so I get a hold of a document. It is in the IRS whistleblower complaint put together by some professional former law enforcement people that there might have been criminality inside the Clinton Foundation and my story comes out, gets a lot of attention. Congress is about to hold hearings.
John Huber’s office calls the gentleman who wrote this and says, “Could I have a copy of it?” And they said, “Sir, we sent it to you nine months ago.” He didn’t even know he had it. It tells you something about — maybe I think a lot of people in the Justice Department that think the Huber investigation was ahead made by Sessions to take President Trump’s pressure off. “Oh, we’ll have this guy look at it.” Not much evidence. Not much has happened there.”
Last night, Sean Hannity again claimed that John Huber is merely investigating leaking. That contradicts everything the Justice Department has said about Huber’s investigation.
Why would Hannity make such a claim?
It’s possible that Sean Hannity, John Solomon and Sara Carter are simply mistaken about what and whom Huber is investigating. If that’s the case, then we can’t learn anything about Huber’s investigation from them.
It’s equally possible they are correct and Huber’s investigation is nothing more than a leak investigation. If that’s the case, then many people are going to be disappointed with the outcome of Huber’s investigation.
There is a third possibility. Huber could be investigating FBI & DOJ corruption, Uranium One and all things Clinton. And Hannity, Solomon and Carter might be perfectly aware of it. If that’s the case, then their comments would seem to be an attempt to downplay the importance of Huber’s investigation to prevent any real information from being released about it, publicly.
If you were attempting to prosecute a slippery, cunning and dangerous cabal of politicians and crooked cops, would you make public the details of your investigation and risk tipping them off?
Or as Q put it:
How do you capture a very dangerous animal?
Do you attack it from the front?
Do you walk through the front door?
Do you signal ahead of time you will be attacking?
I don’t believe the three Fox News amigos are ignorant. I also don’t buy the narrative that Huber is investigating leaking. I suspect they know the truth about Huber’s investigation and they’re being told what to say (and what not to say). Critical information must be released at exactly the right time and not before. Q has suggested in a couple of different posts that Hannity, Carter and Solomon are trusted by the President and his team, they’re being protected and they’re being given inside information to help shape the public narrative.
If my theory is correct, Huber’s investigation is one of the most important ever to be undertaken by the Department of Justice. And much to the surprise of political pundits, it will end with the prosecution of hundreds (perhaps thousands) of corrupt people.
We may indeed be watching a carefully scripted movie. If so, we might as well enjoy the show.
I’ll go on record and say that Julian Assange’s testimony will be a key part of the prosecution of many corrupt people around the globe. It’s hard to appreciate the plausibility of this theory outside of the revelation provided by Qanon but there are other experts who have provided supporting information.
Sean Hannity has interviewed Julian Assange on numerous occasions. That Hannity is so deeply interested in and connected to Assange is a point worth considering on its own (especially if you believe Donald Trump gives him information other journalists don’t have access to). A significant data point was provided when Hannity asked Assange if Russia was the source of the DNC emails published by WikiLeaks. In keeping with his policy of not revealing sources, Assange didn’t name his source but said,
“We can say, we have said, repeatedly that over the last two months that our source is not the Russian government and it is not a state party.”
If, as the mainstream media has claimed for 2 years, Russia is not the source of the DNC emails, who is the source?
In an interview with Dutch TV, Assange brought up Seth Rich, the DNC staffer who was killed not long after WikiLeaks received the DNC’s emails.
Speculation about Seth Rich’s involvement in the DNC email leak/hack has gotten wide publicity from the mainstream media (most of it negative) due to a plethora of YouTube videos attempting to prove he was Assange’s source. Assange didn’t state that Rich was his source but what other reason would he have for mentioning him while emphasizing that his sources take significant risks?
For years, Assange has been free to keep his sources anonymous. As he’s entered into a DOJ investigation, he’ll be compelled to tell exactly who his sources are and provide any corroborating evidence he’s received such as source files.
We know the narrative that Trump colluded with Russia was false. Time and evidence proved it to be a story the deep state pushed on the public, knowing the entire time it was untrue. The narrative that Russia hacked the DNC emails is the flip side of the same coin. Time and evidence will prove that narrative to be a lie manufactured to support the now debunked Russian collusion narrative.
In the post below, Q suggested the UK government has been after Assange because they want to silence him before he discloses what he knows about their involvement in the plot to illegally spy on Donald Trump and his campaign. Assange’s evidence (which apparently includes source files) doesn’t just implicate the UK government but most of Obama’s cabinet and staff and many corrupt people in Congress who were involved in the plot.
Q has suggested that rather than being hacked by Russia, the DNC’s emails were leaked by Seth Rich. Rich was then murdered and Crowdstrike was hired to create fake evidence that fingered Russia as the culprit. (WikiLeaks Vault 7 explains how the CIA’s “Umbrage” program enables users to create false digital fingerprints implicating another entity.)
Q has indicated that the Generals working with Donald Trump expected General Mike Flynn to be attacked by the deep state. The deep state’s distrust of Flynn was evidenced when in 2014, Obama removed him as head of the Defense Intelligence Agency. As head of the DIA, Flynn would have the dirt on nearly every corrupt organization in the world.
The Generals working with Trump anticipated James Comey’s firing and the fact that it would lead to the appointment of a Special Counsel. It’s becoming more clear that the objective was to get Flynn entered into the Special Counsel’s investigation and let him provide the evidence he had about the crimes of corrupt people. While the mainstream media assured us Flynn’s guilty plea pointed to Trump’s eventual indictment, Mueller’s team would have no choice but to accept Flynn’s testimony and whatever evidence he could provide and refer it to the appropriate US Attorney’s office for investigation. The Mueller team’s December 2018 sentencing memo indicated that Flynn was providing testimony into several open investigations. The fact that he has still not been sentenced suggests his testimony is presently ongoing.
Assange has been sitting in the Ecuadorian embassy for years with an outstanding indictment related to a crime he allegedly committed in 2010. A week after our new Attorney General goes on the Spygate offensive, Assange is suddenly apprehended and is in the process of being extradited to the US to face charges.
Military planning at its finest?
I suspect that in the same way General Flynn was entered into the Mueller investigation under the cover of prosecution to expose the crimes of corrupt people, the mainstream media and political pundits will, in ignorance, paint Assange as a criminal (or perhaps a helpless victim) while he provides testimony further incriminating bad actors around the globe.
I’ll close with Rudy Giuliani’s observations about Assange’s arrest:
“Maybe it will shed light on the plot to create an investigation of President Trump based on a false charge of conspiracy with the Russians to affect the 2016 elections. Keep your eye on Ukraine,” Giuliani told the Washington Examiner. “It’s possible with all his sources he might know or have information of how it all started.”