THE TRAYVON HOAX

Unmasking the Witness Fraud that Divided America

 

In this stunning work of investigative journalism, filmmaker Joel Gilbert uncovers the true story of the shooting of Trayvon Martin, a case that divided America. By examining Trayvon’s 750-page phone records, Gilbert discovers that Rachel Jeantel, the key witness whose testimony led to the prosecution of George Zimmerman, was a fraud. Gilbert’s research takes him to the high schools of Miami Gardens, into the back alleys of Little Haiti, and finally to Florida State University where he finds Trayvon’s real girlfriend, Diamond Eugene, the girl who actually was on the phone with Trayvon in his final minutes. Gilbert confirms his revelations with forensic handwriting analysis and DNA testing. He then exposes in detail the most consequential hoax in recent judicial history and reveals how The Trayvon Hoax was ground zero for the downward spiral of race relations in America. This incredible film and book have the potential to bring America back together again.

Source:   https://www.thetrayvonhoax.com/

WATCH: Good Guy with a Gun Shoots Alleged Texas Church Shooter

Video shows man opening fire at Texas church before he is shot by a security guard; 2 dead, 1 critical (blurred to hide victims, viewer discretion is advised)

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/12/29/watch-good-guy-gun-shoots-alleged-texas-church-shooter/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_term=todays_hottest_stories&utm_campaign=20191229

 

 

Tucker: Left hates when Trump tells the truth

 

Image

My Rifle

Image

HERE IS A CHRISTMAS PRESENT.

AWK News Dec. 23: NOBODY is above the law anymore. FISA = START. Q

Quote

To Our Soldiers, Thank You. — The Q Tree

From FG

via To Our Soldiers, Thank You. — The Q Tree

Fake News Represents a Clear and Present Danger to the Constitutional Republic of the USA

Q Post #3721
New: Title TBD
Q
!!Hs1Jq13jV6
18 Dec 2019 – 3:22:19 PM
[Re_drop]
What happens when 90% of the media is controlled/owned by (6) corporations?
What happens when those same corporations are operated and controlled by a political ideology?
What happens when the news is no longer free from bias?
What happens when the news is no longer reliable and independent?
What happens when the news is no longer trustworthy?
What happens when the news simply becomes an extension/arm of a political party?
Fact becomes fiction?
Fiction becomes fact?
When does news become propaganda?
Identity creation?
How does the average person, who is under constant financial stress (by design), find time to research and discern fact v fiction?
Majority of people more prone to believe someone in power sitting behind a big brand ‘news’ name?
Do people [human psyche] tend to follow the ‘majority/mainstream viewpoint’ in fear of being isolated and/or shunned?
‘Mainstream’ is used for a reason [dominate trend in opinion].
[If majority of people believe ‘x’ then ‘x’ must be validated / true]
Why do ‘mainstream’ media heads, within different orgs, always use the same keywords and/or catch phrases?
Coordinated? By who? Outside entity providing instructions?
Do they count on the fact that people [human psyche] are more prone to believe something if heard over-and-over again by different ‘trusted’ sources?
Do ‘echo chamber’ tactics provide validation / credibility to the topic/point being discussed?
Threat to intellectual freedom?
Would control over[of] these institutions/organizations allow for the mass control of a populations viewpoint re: a desired topic?
Read again – digest.
Would control over[of] these institutions/organizations allow for the mass control of a populations viewpoint re: a desired topic?
Logical thinking.
Why, after the election of 2016, did [D]’s and media corps jumpstart a [coordinated & planned] divisive blitz intended to create falsehoods re: illegitimacy of election, character assassination of POTUS through sexism, racism, every other ‘ism’?
Pre/post 2016 election?
Why were violent [masked] terror orgs such as Antifa immediately created/funded?
Why were these orgs tasked w/ immediate intimidation/shut down of any pro-POTUS rally[s] and/or events?
Why were marches immediately organized to counter and silence pro-POTUS rally[s] and/or events?
Why were marches immediately organized which divided people into sex/gender, race, [ism]?
When you control the levers of news dissemination, you control the narrative.
Control of the narrative = power
When you are blind, what do you see?
They want you divided.
Divided by religion.
Divided by sex.
Divided by political affiliation.
Divided by class.
When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those ‘different’ from you, not those responsible [controllers].
Divided you are weak.
Divided you pose no threat to their control.
When ‘non-dogmatic’ information becomes FREE & TRANSPARENT it becomes a threat to those who attempt to control the narrative and/or stable [livestock kept – sheep].
When you are awake, you stand on the outside of the stable (‘group-think’ collective), and have ‘free thought’.
“Free thought” is a philosophical viewpoint which holds that positions regarding truth should be formed on the basis of logic, reason, and empiricism, rather than authority, tradition, revelation, or dogma.
THIS REPRESENTS A CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER TO THE CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
Q

PALADIN : THE WHITE HATS REPORT LATEST NEWS

Playing now. Started 10:10 pm Dec 11, 2019.

 

PART 1: Inspector General FISA Investigation President Trump – Senate Hearing

 

 

Cross Fire Hurricane, Clear Abuse Of FISA, People Will Be Held Accountable – Episode 2041b

https://www.justice.gov/storage/120919-examination.pdf

Here is just an example, sections of 2 pages tie together: 

From page 188:    The Primary Sub-source was questioned again by the FBI beginning in March 2017 about the election reporting and his/ her communications with Steele. The Washington Field Office agent {WFO Agent 1) who conducted that interview and others after it told the OIG that the Primary Sub-source felt that the tenor of Steele’s reports was far more “conclusive” than was justified.  The Primary Subsource also stated that he/she never expected Steele to put the Primary Subsource’s statements in reports or present them as facts. According to WFO Agent 1, the Primary Sub-source said he/she made it clear to Steele that h’e/she had no proof to support the statements from his/her sub-sources and that “it was just talk.” WFO Agent 1 said that the Primary Sub-source explained that his/ her information came from “word of mouth and hearsay;” “conversation that [he/she] had with friends over beers;” and that some of the information, such as allegations about Trump’s sexual activities, were statements he/she heard made in “jest.”341 The Primary Sub-source also told WFO Agent 1 that he/she believed that the other sub-sources exaggerated their access to information and the relevance of that information to his/her requests. The Primary Sub-source told WFO Agent 1 that he/she “takes what [sub-sources] tell [him/ her] with ‘a grain of salt.”‘
In addition, the FBI interviews with the Primary Sub-source revealed that Steele did not have good insight into how many degrees of separation existed between the Primary Sub-source’s sub-sources and the persons quoted in the reporting, and that it could have been multiple layers of hearsay upon hearsay…….snip…..

Ties in with page 190:   As discussed in Chapter Eight, Carter Page FISA Renewal Application Nos. 2 and 3 advised the court that following the January interview with the Primary Subsource, “the FBI found the Russian-based sub-source to be truthful and cooperative.” Renewal Application Nos. 2 and 3 continued to rely on the Steele information, without any revisions or notice to the court that the Primary Subsource contradicted the Steele election reporting on key issues described in the renewal applications. We found no evidence that the Crossfire Hurricane team ever considered whether any of the inconsistencies warranted reconsideration of the FBl’s previous assessment of the reliability of the Steele election reports, or notice to 01 or the court for the subsequent renewal applications.

Review of Four FISA Applications and Other Aspects of the FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane Investigation

Click to access 120919-examination.pdf

Internal Justice watchdog finds that Russia probe was justified, not biased against Trump

No political bias but many mistakes in FBI probe of Trump campaign – watchdog

Fw: 98 million Americans were given a cancer virus in their polio shots CDC admits

https://www.vaccines.news/2015-09-23-cdc-admits-98-million-americans-were-given-cancer-virus-via-the-polio-shot.html

 

We will soon find out why?

Ask yourself a very simple question, why?
The ‘why’ will be (publicly) answered soon.
Dark > Light
Q

https://www.qmap.pub/             #3661

Quote

The Collapse of the Obama-Holder Racial Division Plot Approaches the Crump Radius — The Q Tree

How a Lawsuit REVERSING the Holder-Created and Media-Assisted Trayvon Narrative Promises To Destroy the BGI, the Fake News, and the Obama Legacy in the Collapse of an Architecture of LIES, While Freeing Black America from Addiction to Democrat Socialist Victim Psychology Don’t look now, but the very case that turned The Conservative Treehouse into a […]

via The Collapse of the Obama-Holder Racial Division Plot Approaches the Crump Radius — The Q Tree

World Elite EXPOSED: How Mossad’s International Spy For Hire Jeffrey Epstein Orchestrated ‘Honeytrap’ Operation

Virginia Giuffre — previously known as Virginia Roberts — this week told the BBC that when she was 17 years old she was trafficked by Epstein and forced to have sex with his friends, including the Duke of York,

In this exclusive extract from the sensational new book EPSTEIN: DEAD MEN TELL NO TALES, former CIA counter-terrorism specialist Philip Giraldi said he also has “little doubt” that Epstein was running an intelligence operation, and that his knowledge helped him escape justice. But who orchestrated the “sweetheart deal” that allowed him to evade justice for masterminding an international child sex ring? The answer lies within.

“Epstein was sort of flying very important people around the world, providing young girls for some of them,” said author Martin Dillon, after conversations with sources in the Mossad. “Building files. It’s how the intelligence services work.”

“They call it the honeytrap,” Dillon said, referring to the time-honored intelligence practice of spies using the lure of sex to entrap targets. “But it’s much more sophisticated than that.”

The honey trap — or “love trap,” as it is sometimes known — has a long and salacious history in American espionage. According to a 1975 Washington Post report, “For years, the Central Intelligence Agency operated love traps in New York and San Francisco, where foreign diplomats were lured by prostitutes in the pay of the CIA.”

“Through hidden one-way mirrors, CIA agents filmed the sexual adventures and later tried to blackmail the victims into becoming informants.”

The article noted, “The CIA possibly got the idea from the Russians, who have long used sex blackmail to entrap Westerners into spying for them.”

CIA reps told the Washington Post reporters that they “had never heard of this.” But for Epstein, the playbook was already written.

“If you’re an intelligence community, and you have someone like Epstein, who’s kind of a celebrity, who can attract celebrities, who can be in part of conversations about world events about the most secret things. If you could put people like Clinton on his planes and you can put Ehud Barak, a former Prime Minister of Israel and a former general, then he is a guy who really matters to you,” Dillon continued.

“If he is going to be your friend, he is going to work for you. He is going to be an asset for you. Look what he can do. He can give you information on all those politicians; on their private behavior, their peccadilloes, all these things are important to intelligence communities.”

View at Medium.com

View at Medium.com

Former CIA counter-terrorism specialist Philip Giraldi said he also has “little doubt” that Epstein was running an intelligence operation, and that his knowledge helped him escape justice.

“There is no other viable explanation for his filming of prominent politicians and celebrities having sex with young girls,” Giraldi wrote in the American Herald Tribune in August 2019. “Epstein clearly had contact with former Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres and Ehud Barak and [Epstein’s client Leslie] Wexner also had close ties to Israel and its government.”

In addition to flying on the Lolita Express, former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak also visited Epstein at his Manhattan home. In January 2016, he was photographed entering the property, followed by four young women soon after.

“I was there, for lunch or chat, nothing else. So what?” said Barak in a statement when the visit was reported. “I never attended a party with him. I never met Epstein in the company of women or young girls.” He also admitted to having visited Little St. James, but said he did not attend any parties or see any young girls there either.

According to Giraldi, former Palm Beach County State Attorney Barry Krischer also may have been responsible for swaying Acosta in 2008, behind-the-scenes. Krischer had won the prestigious Anti-Defamation League (ADL) Award ten years before. (The ADL is a US-based Jewish organization with a long history of domestic spying allegations.)

“The Jewish state regularly tops the list for ostensibly friendlycountries that aggressively conduct espionage against the U.S.,” Giraldi claimed. “Mossad would have exploited Epstein’s contacts… Those blackmailed would undoubtedly in most cases cooperate with the foreign government involved to avoid a major scandal.”

Fallen into the hands of the American justice system in Florida, he could have provided information far more explosive than whatever was happening at Bear Stearns.

Indeed, Epstein’s attorney Kenneth Starr at one point went over Acosta’s head to Republican appointees at the Department of Justice, demanding that they drop the case. The Attorney General in 2008, who likely would have received the request, was Michael Mukasey — an Orthodox Jew with such deep ties to Israel, he has been accused of having dual citizenship.

In retrospect, it’s clear that Epstein’s blackmail files were at the heart of his epic sweetheart deal. It wasn’t just the contents of those files that his friends and enemies wanted kept quiet, however. It was the fact that the deal itself that seemed most dangerous.

“EPSTEIN: DEAD MEN TELL NO TALES” by DYLAN HOWARD, MELISSA CRONON & JAMES ROBERTSON is available for purchase at all good book stores along with Amazon and Barnes & Noble.

Written by

Dylan Howard

Follow

Described by AdWeek as “the king of Hollywood scoops,” Dylan Howard is an investigative journalist, author and producer with unprecedented access to the facts.

JFK, Trump & THE DEEP STATE — John Barbour

Starting at around 15.00 mark , SGT asks John Barbour why Trump did not release JFK files……..

 

Thank you to SGT Report.   https://www.sgtreport.com/

 

Patriots Leading [DS] Down The Path, IG FISA Is The Primer, It’s Time – Episode 2031b

 

Quote

Q At The Movies; Will U B 2? — The Q Tree

 

Q has mentioned some interesting movies before. Godfather III. Iron Eagle. Speed. This time, it may be even more relevant. I’m taking this as a HINT. 3635 Dig: Official Secrets (Movie, 2019) Q !!mG7VJxZNCI 25 Nov 2019 – 4:34:40 PM Sometimes a good ‘movie’ can provide a lot of truth and/or background. ‘Official Secrets.’ Relevant […]

via Q At The Movies; Will U B 2? — The Q Tree

National Emergencies Act will continue.

So the President will have the power to do certain things without the Congress’ approval.

Fullsized image

 

 

17 (Q) Times? Q Times? LOL

Are they saying that Trump did an impeachable offense 17 (Q) times. Really 17(Q)? LOLOL

 

Just look at this timeline of NEARLY THREE YEARS of liberal attempts to impeach President Trump.

December 2016: Five Democratic senators announce a bill laying the groundwork for impeaching Donald Trump unless he divests certain financial assets. The bill makes failure to comply “a high crime or misdemeanor” under the impeachment clause of the U.S. Constitution.

  • February 2017: The “Impeach Trump Leadership PAC” is created by California Democratic Party congressional candidate Boyd Roberts.
  • February 2017: Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) states that her “greatest desire is to lead Trump into impeachment.”
  • June 2017: Rep. Al Green (D-Texas) announces that he is drafting articles of impeachment against President Trump.
  • July 2017:  Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) formally introduces an article of impeachment (H.Res. 438) against President Trump.
  • November 2017:  Six House Democrats introduce five articles of impeachment (H.Res. 621) against President Trump.
  • January 2018: Rep. Al Green (D-Texas) introduces an article of impeachment (H.Res. 705) against President Trump.
  • November 2018: –  Two Days after Democrats win back the House, Democratic megadonor and future presidential candidate Tom Steyer publishes op-ed in the New York Times titled “Why Democrats Must Impeach the President.”
  • January 2019: On her first day in office, Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) proclaims, “We’re going to impeach the m*****f***er.”
  • March 2019: Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) again introduces an article of impeachment (H.Res.13) against President Trump.
  • March 2019: Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) introduces H.Res.257 to direct the Judiciary committee to open up an impeachment inquiry into President Trump.
  • May 2019: Rep. Shelia Jackson Lee (D-Texas) introduces H.Res.396 to direct the Judiciary committee to open up an impeachment inquiry into President Trump.
  • July 2019: Rep. Al Green (D-Texas) introduces an article of impeachment (H.Res.498) against President Trump.
  • July 2019:  Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.), Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee states that his committee has already “in effect” been conducting an impeachment inquiry.
  • September 2019: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif) unilaterally announces that six House committees would commence an impeachment inquiry against Trump. Speaker Pelosi refuses to put the impeachment inquiry to a vote on the House floor, breaking established precedent set in the impeachment inquiries of Nixon and Clinton.
  • October 2019: After serious public skepticism to Speaker Pelosi’s (D-Calif) unilateral edict to open an impeachment inquiry, Pelosi relents and holds a vote on the House floor to formally open an impeachment inquiry.
  • November 2019: House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff begins public committee hearings on impeachment.