Infiltration, Not Invasion

Propaganda and Lies

Nov 26, 2024

This feature is a follow-up to ‘A Deriliction of Duty.’

Benghazi was at the center of everything happening in the Middle East during the Obama administration.

By overthrowing Gaddafi, the Obama administration had created a “safe haven” for Al Qaeda training camps in Libya and Benghazi became a pipeline for Islamic terrorists, who we were fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. It was also a pipeline for Islamic terrorists joining ISIS in Syria as they attempted to overthrow Bashar Al Assad.

Syria was supposed to be a replay of the overthrow of Gaddafi.

But there is a bigger connection to the overthrow of Gaddafi and attempted overthrow of Assad than most people know. Neither of them were a threat to the United States. Both of them were fighting Al Qaeda in their own countries.

Weren’t we at war with Al Qaeda, too?

Why weren’t we allied with these two leaders, instead of trying to overthrow them?

Why were we training, arming and funding these Al Qaeda fighters that overthrew Gaddafi and were now trying to overthrow Assad?

As I’ve explained in all of these articles focused on Benghazi; We were funding our enemies.

But it’s so much more than that.

There was a much bigger plan.

Why were Gaddafi and Assad specifically targeted for removal when they weren’t a threat?

What is the common thread that links the two leaders and made them big targets of the Obama administration?

The answer to that question is connected to the ‘excuse’ the Obama administration used to explain the surprise attack on the consulate in Benghazi that killed Ambassador Christopher Stevens.

Do you remember the lame excuse that the Obama administration pushed for several weeks?

Susan Rice made the rounds on all the Sunday news shows to push the phony narrative that the Benghazi attack was just a protest that got out of hand. She pushed the lie that an ‘online video’ besmirching the Muslim religion was responsible for the protest that killed four Americans and seriously wounded several others.

Susan Rice wasn’t just Obama’s ambassador to the United Nations, she was also his national security adviser. She was clearly in the loop on what was happening in Benghazi; did she know she was pushing a complete lie in the media?

But why was this ‘SPECIFIC LIE’ so important?

Why push a lie that was instantly criticized and easily proven to be false?

There’s a reason, and it reveals a much bigger plan in Benghazi, besides the arming and funding of terrorists.

Guess who first pushed the online video excuse while the attack was still in progress?

According to FOX News:

Hillary Clinton’s newly released memoir leaves little doubt she was the first member of the Obama administration to publicly link an anti-Islam video to the 2012 Benghazi terror attack – though she does not explain what intelligence she relied on to make the faulty connection.
The former secretary of State and potential Democratic presidential candidate discussed the Benghazi attack in her memoir “Hard Choices.” The 33-page Benghazi chapter sheds some light on events, but it leaves plenty of inconvenient details out.
According to the chronology she offers, Clinton issued the statement linking Benghazi to the video before she called President Obama on the night of the attack to provide an update, suggesting she was the originator of the flawed explanation.
The State Department press release, issued in her name, on Sept. 11, 2012 at 10:07 p.m., tied the death of Foreign Service officer Sean Smith to the video.

Hillary herself admits that she was the one who first pushed the online video protest excuse for the Benghazi attack. She was pushing that lie within the Obama administration before she had given Obama an “update” on the ongoing attack in Benghazi.

This is really important to understand.

Obama and Hillary, along with others, had already met to discuss the attack underway in Benghazi. Between that meeting and her first update to Obama, she began pushing the anti-Islam online video as the reason a protest in Benghazi turned violent.

Do you really think Hillary was the only one that came up with the online video excuse?

Remember, Hillary had supposedly committed a “dereliction of duty” by obstructing a direct order from the Commander in Chief to send help to Benghazi. Not only did Obama not punish Hillary for that obstruction in any way, Obama then sent his National Security Adviser out to make all the rounds in the media to push the same lie Hillary was using as the excuse for the deadly Benghazi attack.

Why?

Why would Obama push this lie for weeks?

Clearly it wasn’t just Hillary’s idea. The Obama administration was pushing hard on a narrative that Benghazi was a protest and not a terrorist attack.

Was that true? Was it just a ‘protest’ that got out of control?

More from FOX News:

Later that evening, a mortar strike killed former Navy SEALs Ty Woods and Glen Doherty, permanently maimed another CIA contractor and severely injured diplomatic security agent David Ubben – all of whom were defending the CIA annex. U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens also died in the Benghazi assault.
The accuracy of the mortar attack, three out of five rounds on target, from more than a half mile away in the dark of night in under a minute, required military training, and premeditation according to multiple military and intelligence professionals.

Do protesters carry mortars and heavy weapons with them?

This was never a protest. It was a planned and coordinated attack, and I pointed out the reason Stevens was purposely targeted in my last article.

Most people think the enemy just got a ‘lucky shot’ when they killed Ty Woods and Glen Doherty with a mortar round, which also severely injured two others.

But it had nothing to do with luck. These Al Qaeda terrorists had been trained by someone’s military, and this was always a premeditated attack, not a protest.

More from FOX News:

“As we work to secure our personnel and facilities, we have confirmed that one of our State Department officers was killed. We are heartbroken by this terrible loss,” Clinton’s press release said. “Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet."
In her book, Clinton makes passing reference to the Sept. 11 press release, and the former secretary of state offers this argument for citing the video: that violence was erupting all over the Middle East and the obscure Internet video was to blame, throwing Benghazi, without credible intelligence reporting, into the same category.
“[The video] was unquestionably inciting the region and triggering protests all over, so it would have been strange not to consider, as days of protests unfolded, that it might have had the same effect here, too," Clinton wrote. "That's just common sense."

The Obama administration was emphasizing the term, “inflammatory material posted on the internet,” for a reason. Everyone knew immediately that this was a coordinated terrorist attack on the consulate that killed Stevens. But Hillary, along with Obama immediately pushed the “obscure internet video” as the blame and purposely connected the Benghazi attack to the uprisings in the Middle East called the “Arab Spring.”

This was purposeful. This wasn’t a reactionary response in order to come up with a quick excuse for the attack. This ‘excuse’ was planned ahead of time.

Hillary claimed that it was just “common sense” to assume that there was a connection between the Benghazi attack and the “Arab Spring” uprisings. The Obama administration claimed they were all just protests.

Except the evidence says otherwise.

More from FOX News:

But sources told Fox News in late September 2012 that U.S. officials knew it was terrorism within 24 hours and U.S. personnel on the ground in Libya reported a direct assault -- not a protest gone awry.
Recently released documents to conservative watchdog Judicial Watch show the Obama administration continues to withhold the full contents of a "media strategy" discussion it had weeks after the attack.

Those on the ground in Benghazi knew it was a terrorist attack immediately and within 24 hours, the entire Obama administration knew it had nothing to do with an online video or protest. Hillary had even informed her own family members in an email that it was an attack, not a protest.

But what did she tell the father of Ty Woods, who had died in the Benghazi attack?

More from FOX News:

In "Hard Choices," Clinton described the emotional toll of meeting with the families at Andrews Air Force Base on Sept. 14, 2012, when the bodies of the four Americans, including Stevens, were returned to Washington.
”But she did not mention her comments to the father of Ty Woods. Asked about the book, Charles Woods reiterated his claim that rather than offering comforting words, Clinton told him: "We are going to have the person responsible for the video arrested" -- which he says he found odd given the event's tone.

Even at the moment where the families were grieving their loss, Hillary was pushing the lie about the video, and even told Ty Woods father that they were going to “arrest” the maker of the video.

Why was the Obama administration pushing so hard and lying about a protest over this particular video?

Here’s where most people miss the real reason that they forced that narrative throughout the media.

It wasn’t to hide the fact that Al Qaeda was expanding.

It was something far more sinister, and most people don’t realize the real reason that this particular anti-Islam video lie was pushed so hard.

Do you remember Nakoula Basseley Nakoula?

I wouldn’t be surprised if you don’t know who he is.

According to FOX News:

Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, the Coptic Christian whose short video “The Innocence of Muslims” was initially faulted for sparking the Sept. 11, 2012 terror attack at U.S. diplomatic compounds in Libya, is now living in a homeless shelter run by First Southern Baptist Church in Buena Park, Calif. He has served time in prison, been shamed publicly by the White House and threatened with death.
In the aftermath of the Benghazi attack, President Obama and then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton seized on the anti-Islamist film as the cause of a spontaneous protest that turned violent. U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, Foreign Service Information Management Officer Sean Smith and CIA contractors Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty were killed when armed terrorists laid siege to the compound and set it ablaze.

Nakoula Basseley Nakoula was targeted by the Obama administration and made to be the excuse for the Benghazi attack. But they were also blaming him for the entire “Arab Spring” uprisings.

This American citizen, who was exercising his free speech rights when he made his video, became a public target of the White House.

Why?

More from FOX News:

It was revealed in last year’s House Select Committee hearings on Benghazi that, despite public proclamations otherwise, Clinton was well aware that the attacks were well-crafted and not spurred by “The Innocence of Muslims.”
According to Kris “Tanto” Paronto, one of the CIA security contractors and survivors of the Benghazi mayhem, the first he heard of the infamous movie or even protests was about 36 hours after the attack.
“I was in Germany recovering and had just woken up and I saw [U.S. Ambassador to the UN] Susan Rice mention it as the cause. Honestly, my first thoughts were that this was typical for this administration – spinning the truth,” he told FoxNews.com. “Even then we knew that it was Al Qaeda, and this incident would crush the narrative that we had terrorism under control.”
Paronto stressed that “Innocence of Muslims” played no part in Benghazi, and that the attack was well planned in advance.
“They knew when the ambassador was going to be there and they knew there would be no response when they attacked,” he continued. “He was a high-value target that was vulnerable and they exploited this opportunity to attack the consulate.”

Both Hillary and Obama knew that the lie about the protest over an online video would not hide the fact that the Benghazi attack was a terrorist attack.

So why push that specific narrative so hard?

While most people think it was foolish to push a lie that was so easily debunked, they are missing the real reason that this specific lie was so important.

Why was it so important to push the anti-Islam video as the reason for Benghazi, and then to arrest Nakoula?

This was the opening salvo to something that was going to become a major focus of the Obama administration.

What was it?

More from FOX News:

Kenneth Timmerman, author of “Deception: The Making of the YouTube Video Hillary and Obama Blamed For Benghazi,” asserts that Nakoula was ultimately “the first victim of Islamic Sharia blasphemy laws in the United States.”
“He was collateral damage, as were the actors and actresses who became subject to death threats and fatwas,” Timmerman said. “Nakoula takes the fatwas seriously because he understands they are still active and cannot be rescinded.”

Nakoula was made “the first victim of Islamic Sharia blasphemy laws in the United States.”

That goes directly against the constitution and free speech rights. They didn’t charge him for blasphemy, but as Hillary had stated, they were going to arrest him and make an example of him. They were going to find charges against him, whether he had violated his probation or not.

Nakoula wasn’t arrested to hide the fact that Benghazi was a terrorist attack. He was arrested to usher in the next part of Obama’s sixteen year plan to weaken the country and destroy the constitution.

All of this was planned ahead of time.

Don’t believe me?

Do you remember this big event that happened just months before Nakoula’s arrest?

According to Forbes:

While you were out scavenging the Wal-Mart super sales or trying on trinkets at Tiffany and Cartier, your government has been quietly wrapping up a Christmas gift of its own: adoption of UN resolution 16/18.
An initiative of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (formerly Organization of Islamic Conferences), the confederacy of 56 Islamic states, Resolution 16/18 seeks to limit speech that is viewed as “discriminatory” or which involves the “defamation of religion” – specifically that which can be viewed as “incitement to imminent violence.”
Initially proposed in response to alleged discrimination against Muslims in the aftermath of 9/11 and in an effort to clamp down on anti-Muslim attacks in non-Muslim countries, Resolution 16/18 has been through a number of revisions over the years in order to make it palatable to American representatives concerned about U.S. Constitutional guarantees of free speech.

These are the important facts to remember:

UN Resolution 16/18 was an initiative being pushed by ‘Muslim countries’ after 9/11 to limit ‘free speech’ that was discriminatory, defamatory or incited violence against Muslims. The U.S. constitution guarantees free speech rights, even against religion, and that was the reason this resolution had never been approved by our government until the Obama administration.

Now do you understand why Obama refused to call terrorists that killed Americans “Islamic terrorists,” or use the term “radical Islam.”?

Why?

It wasn’t just to intimidate Americans from saying anything bad about Islam or Islamic terrorists. It was just one part of a much bigger agenda.

What was Obama’s big agenda?

It’s far bigger than most people realize, and almost nobody understands the connection to Benghazi.

Do you think it was just a coincidence that the “Arab Spring” began under Obama’s presidency?

Did you know that there is a COMMON THREAD connected to most of the leaders who were overthrown during the “Arab Spring”?

According to Wikipedia:

The Arab Spring, or the First Arab Spring(to distinguish from the Second Arab Spring) was a series of anti-government protests, uprisings and armed rebellions that spread across much of the Arab world in the early 2010s.
It began in Tunisia in response to corruption and economic stagnation.From Tunisia, the protests then spread to five other countries: Libya, Egypt, Yemen, Syria and Bahrain. Rulers were deposed (Zine El Abidine Ben Ali of Tunisia in 2011, Muammar Gaddafi of Libya in 2011, Hosni Mubarak of Egypt in 2011, and Ali Abdullah Saleh of Yemen in 2012) or major uprisings and social violence occurred including riots, civil wars, or insurgencies.

These were coordinated insurgencies.

The “Arab Spring” was supposedly a ‘spontaneous’ protest in several Arab countries that then led to uprisings and rebellions.

If you listen to the Obama administration, they would tell you that the common thread was ‘oppression.’ Obama would crow about the people rising up throughout the Middle East to demand democracy and overthrow their oppressive leaders.

Obama, Hillary and McCain all painted Gaddafi as an oppressive leader, which was why he needed to be removed. They described Assad in Syria the same way. They lumped in the leader of Tunisia named Zine El Abidine Ben Ali and even abandoned Hosni Mubarak, the leader of Egypt, who had been our ally since 1981.

Why would Obama abandon one of our biggest ally’s in the Middle East? Was Hosni Mubarak an oppressive leader?

This is the key to Obama’s big agenda and part of the sixteen year plan.

Mubarak actually was a big oppressor. But who was it that he was oppressing?

Have you ever heard of the Muslim Brotherhood?

That is the COMMON THREAD amongst these nation’s involved in the “Arab Spring,” but nobody will tell you that.

The leaders of Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, Yemen, Syria and Bahrain were standing in the way of Obama’s sixteen year plan. They were all oppressing the Muslim Brotherhood in their countries.

The Muslim Brotherhood is a movement that seeks to establish Sharia law under a global caliphate. This “Arab Spring” uprising toppled many of the leaders who were oppressing the Muslim Brotherhood and preventing them from enforcing strict Sharia law.

Sharia law is what is oppressive, especially to women and other religions, not to mention free speech.

Obama first signed UN Resolution 16/18. Then his administration pushed the anti-Islam video as the reason for the Benghazi attack, which led to the arrest of the American citizen who made the anti-Islam video. This was a purposeful and coordinated weakening of the constitution, and promotion of Sharia law within the United States by the president himself.

This was part of the sixteen year plan. All of it was coordinated ahead of time.

Want proof?

Guess who was really behind the “Arab Spring” uprisings.

According to The New York Times:

Even as the United States poured billions of dollars into foreign military programs and anti-terrorism campaigns, a small core of American government-financed organizations were promoting democracy in authoritarian Arab states.
But as American officials and others look back at the uprisings of the Arab Spring, they are seeing that the United States’ democracy-building campaigns played a bigger role in fomenting protests than was previously known, with key leaders of the movements having been trained by the Americans in campaigning, organizing through new media tools and monitoring elections.

There were American “government-financed organizations” who were responsible for the uprisings during the Arab Spring. Key leaders of the uprisings and rebellions were actually trained by our government, with taxpayers’ money, to campaign and organize, using social media, in order to overthrow these specific Arab leaders.

Which government organizations were responsible?

Why?

The overthrow of Mubarak led to an election that was promoted by these same NGO’s that helped to elect a Muslim Brotherhood leader as president.

Mohamed Morsi was elected president and then immediately placed all his Muslim Brotherhood allies into powerful positions within the government, and started implementing Sharia law. The Egyptian people then rose up in protest by the millions. They didn’t want to give up their freedoms, and the Morsi government was being exposed as completely corrupt. The military then stepped in and removed Morsi’s government in a coup, backed by the people.

Once again, the Muslim Brotherhood was outlawed and the leaders were arrested.

Egypt’s investigations proved that these American NGO’s were behind the overthrow of their government during the Arab Spring, so they began arresting everyone involved, including members of the International Republican Institute.

Guess who was leading IRI and was partly responsible for the Arab Spring uprisings?

A guy that was also at the center of the Benghazi scandal and selling weapons to our enemy.

According to the Council on Hemispheric Affairs:

Presidential hopeful John McCain is hiding a skeleton in his closet. Not your typical political scandal, Senator McCain’s dirty little secret is his longtime involvement with the International Republican Institute (IRI), an organization that operates in 60 countries and is budgeted by millions of US taxpayer dollars each year.
The IRI is “officially” a politically independent entity, though in reality it is aligned in most respects with the Republican Party and its ideals. Senator McCain has been chairman of the IRI since 1993 and Lorne Craner, president of the organization, is one of the presumptive Republican candidate’s informal foreign policy advisors.

John McCain was the Chairman of IRI since 1993. He had been directly involved in many color revolutions since then, including the Arab Spring.

Did you know that he made a panicked trip to Egypt after the military overthrew the Muslim Brotherhood government?

The interim military government in Egypt was trying to arrest members of the IRI, and some of them were hiding in the American embassy. McCain went there to try and rescue them.

According to Raymond Ibrahim, writing for PJMedia:

In the eyes of tens of millions of Egyptians, Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham’s recent words and deeds in Egypt—which have the “blessing” of President Obama—have unequivocally proven that U.S. leadership is aligned with the Muslim Brotherhood.
Egyptian media is awash with stories of the growing anger regarding this policy.

The Egyptian people were angry at McCain and the Obama administration because they had helped the Muslim Brotherhood take over their country in order to force Sharia law on them.

This is an important point.

After Morsi’s government tried to force Sharia law on the people, the masses rose up and were protesting in the streets.

There were millions of Egyptian’s protesting, and that’s what drove the military to step in and remove the Morsi government. McCain referred to it as a military “coup,” but the truth is, Morsi was trying to change the Egyptian constitution to force Sharia law on the people and that caused them to rise up. Had the military not removed the Muslim Brotherhood from the government, Egypt would have fallen into a bloody civil war.

Don’t miss this important point:

Al Jazeera was using video and images of the millions of Egyptian’s protesting against the Morsi government and promoting the lie that they were against the military coup to remove the Muslim Brotherhood. McCain was pushing the same lie, while threatening the Egyptian military with a loss of U.S. funding.

A lot of good journalists at Al Jazeera resigned because it had become the propaganda arm of the Muslim Brotherhood in the Middle East.

Do you think that’s just a coincidence?

According to Sada Elbalad English News:

Many leaked e-mails related to former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton revealed her close relation with Qatari Al-Jazeera TV network and how she had used it to spread chaos in the Middle East, according to media reports published on Saturday.
Those e-mails were revealed after US President Donald Trump recently announced the declassification of all documents related to federal investigations concerning Hillary’s use of a private server for government emails.
According to one of the e-mails, Hillary had visited Al-Jazeera in May 2010 and met with the network’s director back then, Waddah Khanfar.
She met with the channel’s board of directors afterwards, they discussed and arranged a visit for a delegation from the TV network to Washington in mid-May 2010.

It is no coincidence that Trump declassified these Hillary emails that were centered around the Arab Spring. He knows exactly what was happening back then and the treason that they were all trying to hide.

Al Jazeera was the dominant television channel in the Middle East, and it is based in Qatar. The CIA had been directly tied to the government in Qatar for many years, and that’s why the government was helping to facilitate the weapons deals to arm Al Qaeda in Libya and ISIS in Syria.

But there was another big reason that Hillary was making deals with Qatar.

Everything is about money.

Hillary was using Qatar to funnel money through the Clinton Foundation in order to fund the Arab Spring, just like McCain was funding the Arab Spring through the International Republican Institute.

The Obama administration, with the help of McCain, was doing everything it could to help the Muslim Brotherhood bring their global caliphate to reality.

Trump knows all about this plan.

There were definitely Muslim Brotherhood followers in the United States. Many of them were occupying key positions within the Obama administration, which was pushing for Sharia law. Hillary was planning on doing the same, had she been elected.

According to the Center For Security Policy:

Unfortunately, Mrs. Clinton has all-too-often been an enthusiastic supporter of those like Muslim Public Affairs Council president Salam al-Marayati as they seek to dominate their fellow Muslims (notably in places like Egypt, Libya and Syria) and subvert the United States and the rest of the Free World with what the Brothers call “civilization jihad.”

Have you ever heard of “civilization jihad”?

According to Breitbart:

Violent jihad dominates the attention of those responsible for national security. But the more dangerous long-term threat, the Center for Security Policy’s Team B report found, is what the Muslim Brotherhood calls “civilization jihad.”
This pre-violent form of jihad, according to the totalitarian ideology of sharia, is considered an integral, even dominant element of jihad.
Such tactics are ostensibly “non-violent” (and therefore “moderate”) not because the Muslim Brotherhood eschews violence out of principle, but because it has decided that this phase of battlefield preparation is better accomplished through stealthy means. Hence civilization jihad can be considered “stealth jihad.”
Civilization jihad is a form of political and psychological warfare that includes multi-layered cultural subversion, the co-opting of senior leaders, influence operations, propaganda and other means of insinuating shariah gradually into Western societies.

Are you seeing the complete picture?

Political and psychological warfare was being waged from within our government and culture in order to weaken the constitution and replace it with Sharia law.

Q kept telling us:

Infiltration not invasion.

The violent and deadly terrorist attacks are grabbing all the media attention on purpose.

The media helps to drive the “fear narrative,” which allows the government to strip away our constitutional rights on the basis of “national security.” Our privacy rights have been stripped away, and now our free speech rights were being removed as well. Our own CIA/shadow government were funding, training and supplying these terrorist groups with weapons in order to launder taxpayers’ money and create fear in the population to go along with these changes to our constitution.

But while the violent attacks were getting all the attention, a “civilization/stealth jihad” was happening under the radar within our government in order to change our constitution and institute Sharia law.

The Muslim Brotherhood’s mission was to establish itself in America and entrench itself within our government. This was a far more dangerous long-term threat than fighting terrorism.

Infiltration not invasion.

But there were heroes who recognized the threat at the time.

Here are two pictures from an important Q drop.

Q drop #1236 - Apr 22, 2018:

Do you remember Michele Bachmann?

She was a member of Congress from Minnesota, and she was publicly demanding that the five National Security Agencies investigate the infiltration of our government by the Muslim Brotherhood. She specifically named Hillary Clinton’s closest aide, Huma Abedin.

Why?

According to Salon:

In the new letter, Bachmann questions why Abedin, a top aide to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the wife of former Rep. Anthony Weiner, was able to receive a security clearance despite having family members that Bachmann believes are connected to the Brotherhood.
“I am particularly interested in exactly how, given what we know from the international media about Ms. Abedin’s documented family connections with the extremist Muslim Brotherhood, she was able to avoid being disqualified for a security clearance,” the congresswoman wrote.

Huma Abedin’s entire family had a long history of direct ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.

Why didn’t that disqualify her from receiving a security clearance? Why was she allowed to serve as the second most powerful person at the State Department?

Infiltration, not invasion.

The Obama administration was helping the Muslim Brotherhood spread their global caliphate throughout the Middle East with the Arab Spring uprisings and the arming of Al Qaeda and ISIS. They were also pushing for the adoption of Sharia law within the United States.

Hillary was playing a big role, and Huma Abedin was at her right hand through it all. Michele Bachmann was sounding the alarm back in 2012.

But guess who quickly came to Huma’s defense?

Leave it to “no name” to defend the enemy from within. He’s the worst kind of traitor.

Q mentioned him specifically in a portion of this Q drop:

Q drop #58 - Nov 02, 2017:

Senator McCain and others roundly criticized Rep. Michele Bachmann in 2012 when she and four members of the House Permanent Select Committee Intelligence and the House Judiciary Committee cited Ms. Abedin in letters sent to the Inspectors General of the Department of Defense, Department of State, Department of Justice, Department of Homeland Security, and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, warning about Muslim Brotherhood INFILTRATION of the United States government.
Why is this relevant? Who took an undisclosed trip to SA? What was the purpose of a f2f v phone call? Alice & Wonderland.

Bachmann had publicly called out the Muslim Brotherhood INFILTRATION of our government, so McCain quickly went to her defense.

All assets were being deployed.

Here’s Q drop #1360 - May 13, 2018:

Nancy Pelosi and John Kerry had met with Bashar Al Assad, who the Obama administration was trying to overthrow by arming ISIS. The Muslim Brotherhood was helping the CIA smuggle shoulder-fired missiles into Syria with the help of Turkey.

Q is tying all of that to Huma Abedin and her direct connections to the Muslim Brotherhood.

Who took an undisclosed trip to SA? What was the purpose of a face-to-face vs a phone call?

And what big event happened just three days AFTER this Q drop?

It’s all connected.

In my next article, I’ll go deeper into Huma Abedin to reveal her important role in this treasonous conspiracyn and focus on the Muslim Brotherhood’s infiltration of our government.

Badlands Media articles and features represent the opinions of the contributing authors and do not necessarily represent the views of Badlands Media itself.

If you enjoyed this contribution to Badlands Media, please consider checking out more of Joe’s work for free at Joe Lange’s Substack.

Badlands Media

Discussion about this post

Ready for more?