(Fellow Anons, below is a list I'm devising to help us red-pill others based on FACT. There are also MAGA who are growing desperate because they still can't see what the good guys are doing to bring the DS to justice. We need to present them with clear understanding of what's actually going on in order to cut through all the MSM's anti-POTUS propaganda. Im seeking correction and/or additional information to my initial list below regarding the primary proprietorial vectors of attack by POTUS and team-Q vs the DS. I also need additional secondary evidences that support a patriot roll-up is indeed happening, which I touch on at the end.)
Primary Prosecution Vectors:
1.) The Trojan Horse, General Flynn - Q told us Flynn "knows where the bodies are buried", and confessed to something he didn't do in order to dump all that information into evidence, which in turn is now subject to evidence disclosures by Huber and Horowitz in other prosecution vectors, -brilliant.
2.) The Weiner/Abedin Laptop - The 'Insurance Policy' folder NYPD sex crimes detectives found when they executed their 2016 warrant contains a mountain of incriminating evidence on the illegality of HRC, Bill, and the Clinton Foundation. It's said video of some of the most heinous acts done to a child were also found, we'll see. Huma knew the Clinton Body Count was real and tried to create a safety net by documenting most of HRC's crimes, and now we have it.
3.) The Clinton Foundation - We know a local Arkansas media outlet broke the story last summer, reporting witnesses saw a DOJ/FBI 747 being loaded with boxes from the Clinton Foundation marked as 'evidence'. Last Week none of the MSM (including FOX) reported on congressional hearings that revealed 2.5 billion were transferred from foreign entities to the CF, that the CF misreported it to the IRS, and that the Clinton's used it for personal reasons. So, new investigations are to ensue. This comes on the heels of (3) CF whistle-blowers who are also now primed to testify.
4.) HRC's Server(s) - Q said 'we have the servers'. We know Clinton's once lost e-mails are sitting somewhere and will re-appear at the right point in this process. They alone are damming along with all the pay-for-play she ran through the State Department, and the identity of every single DS player and the role they played, to include human and narcotics trafficking.
5.) FISA Abuse Scandal - Does POTUS seem like the type of guy who will simply let Obama's FBI/DOJ and others LIE to a judge in order to secure a warrant based on false evidence, to in turn spy on him and his campaign, in order to support the fake Russia Collusion narrative against him? ANS: Nope. (BTW, ALL guilty sentences that emerge from fraudulent processes become labeled as 'Fruit of the Poisonous Tree' and are by legal precedent deemed INVALID. Q has said FISA will lead the way and it absolutely will play a major role in the criminal roll-up.
6.) Aman Server - Let's not forget Imran Awan and his data collection on (mostly Democrat) Congressional members. It's our understanding he took a plea, and is being held in reserve to testify at the appropriate time.
7.) The HRC (Criminal) Email Scandal - Like the server and foundation investigations, HRC's emails will again emerge to the fore as they ultimately will serve to incriminate her while exonerating POTUS in the TRUE Russia Collusion story. Peter Stzrok and Comey's (fake) 'investigation' into HRC's emails were the nexus of Obama/DS criminal cover-up. When revealed this scandal alone will expose the attempt by Obama's FBI/DOJ to cover crimes SO heinous that NO American will be able to defend it. The fake HRC email 'investigation' has been reverse-engineered by Huber/Horowitz to assist in their larger prosecution and will itself be prosecuted. (See testimonies of: Lynch, Comey, Stzrok, Page, etc. for confirmation).
8.) NEXIUM and Human Trafficking/Pedo Arrests - Have you seen what POTUS and Sessions quietly did in the first two years? Global trafficking and pedophile networks arrests have risen exponentially above the norm. What happens when you arrest thousands of people involved? ANS: key members take a plea to testify as to who runs it from on high. We already know Allison Mack took a plea and will reveal the names of clients and those at the very top, and we suspect leader Keith Raniere will do the same. (*****I could an updated graph or govt stat that depicts the spike since inauguration in contrast to years prior...)
9.) 'We Know Everything' Q - This is a kind of catch-all category. Thanks to Admiral Rodgers and patriots at the NSA, we have all their comms. These alone would (not) have stood up in trials because they would present a challenge to prosecutors under the Constitution. However, they are an amazing tool in the overall ability to determine and navigate legal proceedings (listed above) way beyond simply distinguishing patriot from DS enemy. It is the glue that binds together the all legal vectors transpiring now.
These are primary (known) events being played out in plain view right now. They prove that a 360 degree prosecutorial roll up of the Deep State is happening NOW, and should provide assurance to the MAGA community as well as assist in the red-pilling of others.
Secondary Evidences:
1.) Gitmo expanded - to many times its former capacity, and Q just confirmed Gitmo is only 1 of 3 designated facilities for THEM.
2.) POTUS changes UCMJ - regarding tribunals and the executive branch's ability to participate in tribunals! This is designed to maintain evidence safeguards among other advantages in a prosecutorial effort. REMEMBER what Q gave us: "2381- Treason 2382 - Misprison of Treason 2383 - Rebellion or Insurrection 2384 - Seditious Conspiracy 2385 - Advocating overthrow of Government"
3.) Sealed Indictments now approaching 70,000 - When you consider 800-1,200 is the annual average, this is a KEY indicator.
4.) Mass Resignations - Since POTUS took office executive resignations (and other) have spiked (mostly by those in their prime) to nearly 6,000, resulting in unprecedented turnover. This indirectly supports the supposition that many top DS players have been offered ultimatums and/or plea deals. The results are exponentially pro-patriot, especially in regard to legal vacancies now being filled by POTUS.
(Secondary evidences are so numerous it's difficult to list them all but I'd like you to try in the comments section below (with primary's too) and I will cherry pick the most solid ones for the final version of this list. Help me get this list as air-tight as possible!)
THANK YOU FELLOW PATRIOTS...., WWG1WGA.
view the rest of the comments →
awaymay45 ago
This is completely inaccurate. The 70k number is not the amount of sealed indictments, it is the amount of EVERY sealed document in the court system (search warrants, juvenile records, petty offenses... everything). This is not even debated, as at the bottom of the chart in small letters, it says that the numbers represent 'proceedings'. They titled it 'sealed indictments' for clickbait, and to mislead people... it worked.
In addition to that, there is no proof that 70k sealed 'proceedings' is unusual. It only looks unusual because they are falsely comparing it to a study from 12 years ago, that examined an entirely different category of data.
For example, the '800-1200 SIs per year is normal' line was NOT the amount of SI's filed. That was the amount of a certain category of data from 2006, that included SIs within it. Furthermore that amount (1077) was only the amount STILL REMAINING SEALED 2 YEARS AFTER BEING FILED. The amount that was filed in 2006 could have been 100k for all we know.
When compared to recent history (2016), the 70k amount is normal.
In other words, the claim is completely bogus. This article explains it in detail:
https://wmerthon6.wixsite.com/website-1/home/comprehensive-analysis-of-the-50k-sealed-indictment-claim
The mass resignation thing really isn't noteworthy. It's not 'wrong' per se, but there is absolutely no evidence that shows the current tracked number (6k) is unusual.
There is no historical data to compare that number to, and the person that maintains the database even says the number is meaningless as a comparison. We could be experiencing LESS resignations this year, compared to others, for all we know.
The only data available is this report that examines US CEO resignations. There is less than a 4% difference over 2014, this year.
http://www.challengergray.com/press/press-releases/2018-october-ceo-report-2018-ceo-changes-surpass-year-end-2017-total
So it really shouldn't be used as evidence of anything. Anyone that researches it will find what I just discussed, and know that it is a meaningless statistic.
6chthomps ago
Ur a faggot
Red-Pill-NOW ago
I get your argument, especially regarding the mass resignation stat unavailability, but the 70k sealed indictment count on pacer.gov is a stretch for me. I have followed it from the 15k mark and you'll have a hard time convincing me that since Huber/Horowitz that rise from around 1k to 70k is a normal swing of "all sealed court documents" within any given period. (Can you imagine a nationwide count in 2006 of only 1077 TOTAL sealed docs?) Id be willing to say there are at least 70k sealed juvi docs alone! Also any contention someone set up a fake 'pacer.gov' In which to red herring us with a sad scheme is also dubious. Your response seems to make allowance for both theories being in effect simultaneously, but they really couldn't be as they would counter one another. It just doesn't add up.
awaymay45 ago
I wrote the first article I linked. I did extensive research on this using PACER, and by talking to the team that makes the chart. I sourced all the data in the article, so you can verify... I also included the discussions I had with the team that makes the chart. Their claim is provably false.
But what are you basing the assumption that 70k sealed documents in a year is unusual, on? Their comparison to the 1077 number? That is a blatantly false comparison. That was NOT the amount of sealed proceedings filed in 2006.
There is NO data available anywhere that says what a normal amount of sealed proceedings filed in a year should be. With that being the case, we are essentially dealing with a situation like the mass resignations: how can anyone say 70k is more or less than normal, with no real data to compare it to?
The best we can do is run the exact PACER searches on recent history (2016), and see how the numbers compare. On the districts where that has been accomplished -- including the most active ones, like CA and DC -- the evidence shows that this year's amounts are normal. (Included in the article.)
Not entirely sure what point you are making here. 1077 was a specific case type (cr). The study reported 24,375 sealed proceedings in total. This was not 'every' sealed proceeding, like the 2018 team is counting, but it was the largest categories.
(And again, 24,375 was not the amount filed, it was the amount still sealed 2+ years after being filed.)
Just for clarification, a search warrant is not an indictment. It may be involved with a case where an indictment exists, but the search warrant itself is not part of the indictment.
Not entirely sure of your point here. Are you saying that I am implying that the PACER data was faked? I'm not. I'm saying that the numbers themselves are legitimate, but they have been deceptively misrepresented through false comparisons and misleading terminology.
Here's another article I wrote that reveals the exact person that started the 60k chart. She didn't understand how to read the PACER search results, and started incorrectly calling EVERY document an indictment. It starts when she was reporting only 12. Her posts went viral, which caused others to join in, and they formed the team that makes the chart.
At some point they learned of their mistakes about the data, but they didn't correct them... they kept falsely reporting it. Legal experts correctly pointed out their mistakes at the very beginning, when there were only 33 being reported, but everyone in the Q community ignored it.
https://wmerthon6.wixsite.com/website-1/home/who-started-the-60k-sealed-indictment-claim
Read that and you will get a very good idea of the shenanigans that have been going on. It's a mixture of ignorance and willful deceit. Most of the people on the research team are simply ignorant of the data.
The issue is that it went unchecked for so long that it became a 'fact'. Everyone read the '1077 is normal' line, and because no one understood the details (and make no mistake, it is confusing to understand... it took me a long time to get it all straight), it simply became a 'fact'. It's not a fact. It is irrefutably false, using objective, publicly verifiable data.
Red-Pill-NOW ago
Don't get me wrong, I sense you are coming from a good place and have also done a lot of homework on this and I truly respect that. What continues to bother me is that we are looking at a spike in this 'sealed ____' Docs or indictments. IF we conclude the spike is organic to actual court processes and not fraud, then we still must account for the spike. In a country of 325 million people I find 70k to be a reasonable number for ALL (temporary) sealed court docs, yet we have witnessed a steady rise from far less than 10k. So my point is when we account for the spike, we must also in tandem qualify what variable driving it. If the spike is attributed to a rise in juvi record sealing, for example, then we must be able to show a bevy of non-criminal sealed juvi docs caused the spike.
For example, this spike did happen since Huber/Horowitz were impaneled with supposedly a team of 460 attorneys. Someone who believes these sealed docs are criminal indictments would now be able to correlate and reconcile the two. This represents a validation of said spike. If you acknowledge a 60+k spike occurred, then I need to know what precipitated it from your perspective. Either you need to account for why it was initially well under 10k before the spike, or for the spike itself.
IF in your argument you are saying (incompetent or fraudulent) anons have gradually, over the past year, bunched in groups of (all sealed cases) to (fraudulently) reflect a steady increase, (spike) then that's what I need to convince me with proof beyond innuendo. They either used real information (erroneously) or they are completely making up the increases that represent the spike.
My original response was along these same lines, if an appx 65k spike occurred, it must be accounted for. BTW I understand warrants are not indictments. But I think Im hearing you say the spike isnt indictments specific but all sealed docs. So if that's the case, why still the spike?
awaymay45 ago
I want to add one thing. We dont know that anything unusual started when Huber was appointed, that just happens to be when the data collection started. For all we know, years like 2014 could have had 300k sealed proceedings filed.
It's all unknown because no one has EVER kept track of newly filed sealed cases, before they started doing it in Nov. 2017.
Even with the 2+ year old sealed cases from 2006... whose to say that year wasn't an anomaly, and that a typical year would have had 100x as many sealed cases filed?
The truth is that sealed cases is a TERRIBLE statistic to try and compare... there are far too many unknowns involved, as well as a COMPLETE lack of historical data available for comparison.
Red-Pill-NOW ago
Okay, fair enough, I'm just still not comfortable with a trend that has maintained for a year now, that is now held steady between 65-70k. I can't think of anything that would cause such fluctuations, even if you contend 300k could be a norm. I appreciate the effort and time you've put in, but having worked in the courts I dont think such a swing can't be arbitrary or within the norm.
awaymay45 ago
Just making sure you saw my other reply:
https://voat.co/v/GreatAwakening/2925556/15705025
As I explained in it, the 'swing' is an illusion. It only looks like a swing because they are comparing it to incomplete data from 12 years ago.
Compare properly to recent history, and there is no evidence of an unusual uptick in sealed cases this year.
awaymay45 ago
First of all, I want to thank you for a civil and intelligent discussion about this. Many people refuse to listen, and just yell shill over and over. Your approach shows that you are indeed interested in the truth, and aren't just saying that to say it, like many people do.
This all hinges on where your starting point is. You say we have seen a steady rise from 'less than 10k', but I'm not sure where you are getting that number from. Is your starting point the 2006 data?
If so, the 2006 study found 24k sealed proceedings. That was not the amount filed, it was only the amount still sealed after 2+ years. Add in everything that became unsealed within 2 years, and that would be the true total.
Then you have to take into account the fact that it was 12 years ago. If you read in my first article, about mid-way through, there is a 15 district analysis that went back 10 years. It showed a steady increase in cases over time.
So the true comparison is 24k + all cases unsealed before 2 years + inflation of 12 years.
It's not possible for us to know this information, so it's not possible to definitively state if this year is unusual compared to 2006.
In addition to that point, I'm also saying lets just throw out all the stuff from 2006, and analyze recent history in PACER, using their exact search settings. That would yield a FAR more accurate comparison.
When I did this, I found no evidence that this year is experiencing unusual amounts of sealed cases. The amounts filed in 2016, in places like CA and DC, were essentially the same amount that we are seeing filed this year.
The conclusion is that we are not seeing a spike in sealed cases this year. It only 'appears' that there is a spike, because we are comparing the numbers to incomplete data from 2006.
Red-Pill-NOW ago
I get what you are saying. I had been watching Pacer.gov and thought I was witnessing a steady rise (of over 60k) to just shy of 70k. Hence my 'spike' verbiage. Now I don't know what I've witnessed. lol