All Q Drops – Part 129: Plan to Kill POTUS? Constitution Calls It Treason. Can You Read the Message? Find the Photo.

Help Spread the Word

Please subscribe, like, and share with others! Hitting the re-TRUTH button on TRUTH Social is the best way you can make an impact and help get this message out! Let’s build a community of Patriots and make progress together. You can find me @PatriotsInProgress. Thank you!

How this Works

For each publication, I will review at least one Q drop and discuss at a high level. There is a vast amount of data out there that I cannot not hope to capture in these publications. Therefore, I encourage each of you to independently research the data and come to your own conclusions.

Drops #669 through #673 (https://qalerts.app/):

Q indicates there is evidence of a phone call existing between Valerie Jarrett and Adam Schiff in drop #669. Q indicates this discussion was witnessed by several others through several command stringers. Searching for the video / audio clip or any corroborating reports yields no results, indicating the data remains classified / unreleased. Q indicates this conversation would be of particular interest to Article 3, Section 3 of the Constitution. The following website has some information on the content and interpretation of this section of text and the topic of treason (https://bit.ly/3FAAaxq). Ultimately, Q is talking directly to the Deep State with this drop, reminding them that “we have it all,” and applying additional game theory / pressures to the situation.   

Q asks Anons if they could read the message in drop #670. Q clarifies through the rest of this drop, and the next three drops, that the focus of the question was several cell phones that were seen being used by representatives during Trump’s State of the Union address. Q ponders openly if the civilian technology (e.g. cameras) inside the Capitol Building was advanced enough to capture the screens at large distances. Q indicates they could, by ending the drop calling the Deep State LITERALLY MORONS. Q responds to an Anon in drop #671. The Anon re-posts drop #670 and a photo that was circulating. “It’s no secret that many Democrats stayed seated in an apparent act of protest throughout much of Donald Trump’s State of the Union speech Tuesday night.” “A particularly sneaky photograph from Getty Images caught exactly what some Democrats were doing on their phones while Trump was speaking. A photo from Chip Somodevilla shows an unidentified Congressional Black Caucus member playing an iPhone game on her phone as Trump spoke.” “Two other members were looking at twitter and editing what looks like a talking point” (https://bit.ly/3BjfNTb). The Anon states “definitely not the candy crush phone, directing focus to the other two phones. Q responds to the Anon by stating “center,” focusing attention on that phone exclusively.

Q responds to another message from the same Anon in drop #672. The Anon re-posts Q’s text from drop #671 and provides a set of enhanced (i.e. zoomed in) pictures of the three phones. The Anon states the pictures were “better.” Q responds by stating, “find the roll” (specifically the 4^th roll in a set of four). Q states to find the film specifically and not the capture. Finally, Q states to enhance the resulting data and spread. Q indicates it would go viral and directs the archiving to be done offline and the data to be “raw only.” Q provides additional information on this topic in drop #673. Q states that the footage would show the text “Trump should be shot!” At this point, Q states that the collection of this data was time-bound as those monitoring the boards had also been made aware. Thinking over the content of drops #670 through #673, I believe Q is not directing the Anons in this case, but rather providing directions to operators / white hats. I believe Q is requesting they capture the local surveillance data before it was lost / compromised, to add to the pile they already had (i.e. it all) for later use. I conclude with this interpretation primarily because I dug extensively attempting to locate said film / photograph (interested evidence of their death threats / discussions), but with no success. I even asked some OG Anons if they recalled some sauce. They did not recall anything ever being found or Q providing additional information on the subject. Therefore, I place this in the category of a potential future proves past marker. At minimum, it further provides context into the events that were ongoing and the environment of early 2018.

Drops #674 through #676 (https://qalerts.app/):

Q highlights public interest and states the goal was to keep it high in the kill brackets, in drop #674. Next, Q provides a future proves past marker by stating there would be a Uranium 1 FBI Informant going public. Interestingly, the next day on February 7, 2018, we see the legacy media begin reporting on this informant. “An FBI informant connected to the Uranium One controversy told three congressional committees in a written statement that Moscow routed millions of dollars to America with the expectation it would be used to benefit Bill Clinton's charitable efforts while Secretary of State Hillary Clinton quarterbacked a ‘reset’ in U.S.-Russian relations.” “He accused Obama administration officials of making decisions that ended up benefitting the Russian nuclear industry, which he said was seeking to build a monopoly in the global uranium market to help President Vladimir Putin seek a geopolitical advantage over the United States.” (https://bit.ly/3uxPBAg). Then, Q points to topics like Awan, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Pakistani Intelligence, and the Muslim Brotherhood. I believe Q is indicating, and the collection of data we have reviewed supports, that everything is connected at some level when reviewing these scandals / players. Ultimately, we fight one enemy at the end of the day, regardless of how it is sliced and diced. Q ends the drop by referencing the tarmac meeting between Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch. In the kill brackets, Q indicates the topics of discussion were Loretta’s bid for the Supreme Court and a murder (i.e. 187) involving Adam Schiff. Recall the discussion about the Standard Hotels.  

Q responds to an Anon in drop #675. The Anon re-posts drop #674 and asks if Loretta Lynch was offered a supreme court position if Hillary won. Q responds to the Anon by telling them to build the timeline. Q starts the timeline by referencing the death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia (thanks for bringing the better interpretation to my attention TexCrowfly on TRUTH). As most suspect, and Q indicates, this was most likely a murder to vacate the SCOTUS slot and allow Obama / Hillary to fill the slot with a player of their choosing. However, I must state that topics / labels like satanist, clone, body double, actor, pedophile, murderer, etc. are often impossible to verify with credible / sufficient sauce due to the information landscape. Q continues the timeline by referencing the pivot points in the Hillary investigation (i.e. transition from suspect to “innocent”) and the various actions / dismissal by players like James Comey, Andy McCabe, and Peter Strzok to dismiss the case / charges / accusations. Q ends the drop by stating that the timeline of interest ends with the Wikileaks dump (i.e. where a variety of lies were exposed).

Q provides a link to the FBI website in drop #676. This link neither works nor shows up in the archives, so I searched the key words and found the following. “FBI Director James B. Comey has named Carl Ghattas as the executive assistant director of the National Security Branch at FBI Headquarters (FBI HQ) in Washington, D.C. Mr. Ghattas most recently served as the assistant director for the Counterterrorism Division at FBI HQ. Mr. Ghattas entered on duty with the FBI in 1997 and was first assigned to the extraterritorial investigations squad at the Washington Field Office, where he investigated acts of terrorism committed against Americans abroad. Throughout his career, Mr. Ghattas has served in leadership positions in the Counterterrorism Division, the Directorate of Intelligence, and the Washington Field Office” (https://bit.ly/3VWZOSD). This drop seems to be another future proves past marker, as it was posted in early February 2018, and the appointment of Carl Ghattas to executive assistant director of the National Security Branch didn’t happen until later that month. As always, I will let you decide.

If you have made it to the end, congratulations! I hope you have had a wonderful week. For my perspective on current events and how they relate to the Q drops, please watch Eye of the Storm and Rugpull Radio on Badlands Media! Please show your support by subscribing and sharing the content. Hodl the line, relinquish nothing, advance when possible! God Bless, Patriots!

• EOTS #14: https://rumble.com/v28mb66-eye-of-the-storm-ep-14-tue-1030-pm-et-.html?mref=u4jax&mc=7s2op

• Rugpull Radio #17 w/ Jon Herold: https://rumble.com/v28vc70-rugpull-radio-ep-17-thur-1030-pm-et-.html?mref=u4jax&mc=7s2op

1 John 4:5-6 (NKJV) “They are from the world and therefore speak from the viewpoint of the world, and the world listens to them. We are from God, and whoever knows God listens to us; but whoever is not from God does not listen to us. This is how we recognize the Spirit of truth and the spirit of falsehood.”

Fair Use Notice: This publication / video contains some copyrighted material whose use has not been authorized by the copyright owners. We believe that this not-for-profit, educational, and/or criticism or commentary use on the Web constitutes a fair use of the copyrighted material (as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Fair Use notwithstanding we will immediately comply with any copyright owner who wants their material removed or modified, wants us to link to their web site, or wants us to add their photo.

Patriots in Progress is my "opinion." Anything said by me, or my guests is either opinion, criticism, information, or commentary. This content is not financial advice. I encourage you to use this as a starting point to do / continue your own research.