WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2026 Poal.co

Be careful who you listen to and take careful note of who tells you what and where it comes from. Byrne is painting a picture that only comes from himself.

Patrick Byrne appears to be attacking Rudy because Byrne wasn't included on the inside team and was let go after that WH meeting. He's the only source for the story that there was a rift in the team, which he says had two sides wanting to go in different directions. He attacks Rudy and claims Rudy only wanted to go after the process crimes, and sucks up to Sidney, who is dealing with the voter-fraud crimes. He claims that he, Sidney Powell, and Mike Flynn wanted to do a televised election count, but the idea was brushed off. This is the appearance of things, according to him.

Let's look at things more closely...

Rudy has spent most of his time investigating the Biden crimes, both in the Ukraine and China. He's had very little to do with the election fraud case, other than talk about it and help with some court-related stuff. He's been sitting on Hunter's laptop and a lot of evidence from the Ukraine and China, and most of us have forgotten that because everything went silent about it when new events arose. He's made a number of podcasts where he focused on the election fraud and talked about process crimes. That led everyone to forget about the other stuff and think he was involved in the election fraud, dealing with process crimes. Perhaps he was, but it was mostly for optics. The Biden investigation will become a big part of things later on, but for now it's better that people (particularly the DS) forget about it and focus on the election fraud, and more importantly, the impeachment.

Note that Byrne quoted Rudy saying, "You can never prove election fraud in a courtroom." This is part of his basis for claiming that Rudy is incompetent. But of course, Rudy knows (and probably Byrne doesn't) that it won't be proven in a courtroom but in a military tribunal. Byrne is very likely unaware that the military is in charge and that the Insurrection Act was called. This all goes much deeper than just election fraud.

Meanwhile, Sidney Powell has been gathering evidence related to election fraud and building up a solid case. I don't believe she was cut off from the WH like we were made to think, but was rather set aside with the evidence until the time comes to introduce it. Again, it's all optics, leading certain people to think that nothing will come of it.

Right after that WH meeting, things took a spin. Trump was banned from social media and others on his team soon followed. Byrne and Wood were allowed to continue to have a public voice, and they both went in their own directions. Wood started making wild claims against certain people based on rumors we've all heard, while Byrne started yammering it up about his own importance in the election fraud case, eventually making the personal attacks against Rudy and others that we see now. But he still kisses Sidney's ass because he thinks that's his one possible way back in the door. He also stays on Flynn's good side because Flynn probably oversaw whatever work Byrne did with his cyber-team, and so it would be better not to trample him as well because Byrne wouldn't want to end up exposing people who may have been involved with him in other crooked deals in the past. It could get very bad for Byrne if he's a plant so he has to tread carefully among Trump's inner circle while still staying connected to his own people. He still has a rope around his neck that the DS holds.

It should be noted that Byrne's claim that Rudy is a drunk is based solely on the hearsay of another unnamed person who allegedly told him that Rudy had 3 triple scotches one night, and that he thinks he smelled booze on him another time. Big deal. He plays on the fact that Rudy is getting old and makes suggestions that he's incompetent. Very weak arguments meant to lead his audience to think the same. If you don't like Rudy for whatever reason you'll likely accept his claims without question and without concrete reasons. That's basic psychology at work, and Byrne seems to know a thing or two about psyops.

I think that Byrne, who came into the picture only because he confessed to Trump about an illegal blackmail deal he was involved in with Hilary, was allowed by Trump to work his way into the deeper circles by volunteering himself, his people, and his money. Why would Trump trust him so quickly after what he confessed to? He wouldn't. Trump was watching him and weighing him while making use of him, and Byrne was led to believe (or hoping) that he was more useful and important than he actually was. Trump may have posed Rudy as an alternative option in the strategy, creating an apparent split in the team that allowed Trump to test Byrne. Byrne failed or was no longer of use and was discarded from the team after that WH meeting.

If Byrne's plan was to get deep inside Trump's inside circles and then pass information to his handlers, he would be pissed off and even desperate (under his circumstances) to create doubt and suspicion about people in Trump's team at this point, particularly those closest to Trump. But he worked closely with Sidney and he still feels he has a shot there so he's soft on her, and Flynn could raise concerns about him so he doesn't rattle his name too much either.

LuDe Media dropped a hint a while back (at about the time of the WH meeting) warning that there was a plant in the Trump team, someone with deep ties to China and a lot of money. I immediately thought of Patrick Byrne, who by his own admission spent a lot of time in China in the past, speaks the language fluently, and who, by the way, calls Warren Buffet his mentor (his 'rabbi'). Warren Buffet is deeply tied in with the DS.

What sense would it make for Trump to keep Byrne around after his usefulness in the election-fraud investigation? What sense did it make to even include him? The answer is that it allowed Trump (through Flynn) to look deeper into who and what Byrne was involved in. It allowed Trump's team to learn what people Byrne was tied to, while Byrne (if he was a plant) might have thought it would allow him to gain information on Trump's strategy and pass it on to others, perhaps even derail it.

Whether or not Byrne is a plant, he's using his rejected idea of redoing the ballot count on live TV as an excuse for his animosity and the creation of doubt about Trump's team. He tells us that Flynn accepted the idea, and perhaps Flynn led Byrne to think he did, but if the goal has always been military tribunals, and this has been kept very secret, then Byrne would need to be kept out of it and led to think that the courtroom was the goal. No one outside of Trump's inner circle knows whether or not the Insurrection Act has been called and the military are in control. We see signs that something isn't right with the Biden Administration and guess that this is the case. The impeachment would therefore be another stage in the plan, and everything that Byrne is saying is beside the point. But to cast doubt on members of Trump's team seems to fit another purpose, one that suggests that Byrne is totally out of the loop and has a deep level of animosity (and possibly fear) because of it. As a plant he failed, and may have jeopardized those he works for.

Remember who he is, and where he came from. He was involved in shady deals with Hilary at least once, so he's probably got other shady deals in his past that he hasn't confessed to, and is therefore still owned by someone. Things took a spin after that WH meeting and Byrne started yammering more and more about problems among Trump's team while Trump and others were cut off from communicating to the public, so it's his word only.

I could be wrong that Byrne was a plant, and I may not have said enough about every point I tried to make above, but nonetheless there's a lot that needs to be considered about Byrne's one-sided claims than his face-value accounts.

Be careful who you listen to and take careful note of who tells you what and where it comes from. Byrne is painting a picture that only comes from himself. Patrick Byrne appears to be attacking Rudy because Byrne wasn't included on the inside team and was let go after that WH meeting. He's the only source for the story that there was a rift in the team, which he says had two sides wanting to go in different directions. He attacks Rudy and claims Rudy only wanted to go after the process crimes, and sucks up to Sidney, who is dealing with the voter-fraud crimes. He claims that he, Sidney Powell, and Mike Flynn wanted to do a televised election count, but the idea was brushed off. This is the appearance of things, according to him. Let's look at things more closely... Rudy has spent most of his time investigating the Biden crimes, both in the Ukraine and China. He's had very little to do with the election fraud case, other than talk about it and help with some court-related stuff. He's been sitting on Hunter's laptop and a lot of evidence from the Ukraine and China, and most of us have forgotten that because everything went silent about it when new events arose. He's made a number of podcasts where he focused on the election fraud and talked about process crimes. That led everyone to forget about the other stuff and think he was involved in the election fraud, dealing with process crimes. Perhaps he was, but it was mostly for optics. The Biden investigation will become a big part of things later on, but for now it's better that people (particularly the DS) forget about it and focus on the election fraud, and more importantly, the impeachment. Note that Byrne quoted Rudy saying, *"You can never prove election fraud in a courtroom."* This is part of his basis for claiming that Rudy is incompetent. But of course, Rudy knows (and probably Byrne doesn't) that it won't be proven in a courtroom but in a military tribunal. Byrne is very likely unaware that the military is in charge and that the Insurrection Act was called. This all goes much deeper than just election fraud. Meanwhile, Sidney Powell has been gathering evidence related to election fraud and building up a solid case. I don't believe she was cut off from the WH like we were made to think, but was rather set aside with the evidence until the time comes to introduce it. Again, it's all optics, leading certain people to think that nothing will come of it. Right after that WH meeting, things took a spin. Trump was banned from social media and others on his team soon followed. Byrne and Wood were allowed to continue to have a public voice, and they both went in their own directions. Wood started making wild claims against certain people based on rumors we've all heard, while Byrne started yammering it up about his own importance in the election fraud case, eventually making the personal attacks against Rudy and others that we see now. But he still kisses Sidney's ass because he thinks that's his one possible way back in the door. He also stays on Flynn's good side because Flynn probably oversaw whatever work Byrne did with his cyber-team, and so it would be better not to trample him as well because Byrne wouldn't want to end up exposing people who may have been involved with him in other crooked deals in the past. It could get very bad for Byrne if he's a plant so he has to tread carefully among Trump's inner circle while still staying connected to his own people. He still has a rope around his neck that the DS holds. It should be noted that Byrne's claim that Rudy is a drunk is based solely on the hearsay of another unnamed person who allegedly told him that Rudy had 3 triple scotches one night, and that he *thinks* he smelled booze on him another time. Big deal. He plays on the fact that Rudy is getting old and makes suggestions that he's incompetent. Very weak arguments meant to lead his audience to think the same. If you don't like Rudy for whatever reason you'll likely accept his claims without question and without concrete reasons. That's basic psychology at work, and Byrne seems to know a thing or two about psyops. I think that Byrne, who came into the picture only because he confessed to Trump about an illegal blackmail deal he was involved in with Hilary, was allowed by Trump to work his way into the deeper circles by volunteering himself, his people, and his money. Why would Trump trust him so quickly after what he confessed to? He wouldn't. Trump was watching him and weighing him while making use of him, and Byrne was led to believe (or hoping) that he was more useful and important than he actually was. Trump may have posed Rudy as an alternative option in the strategy, creating an apparent split in the team that allowed Trump to test Byrne. Byrne failed or was no longer of use and was discarded from the team after that WH meeting. If Byrne's plan was to get deep inside Trump's inside circles and then pass information to his handlers, he would be pissed off and even desperate (under his circumstances) to create doubt and suspicion about people in Trump's team at this point, particularly those closest to Trump. But he worked closely with Sidney and he still feels he has a shot there so he's soft on her, and Flynn could raise concerns about him so he doesn't rattle his name too much either. LuDe Media dropped a hint a while back (at about the time of the WH meeting) warning that there was a plant in the Trump team, someone with deep ties to China and a lot of money. I immediately thought of Patrick Byrne, who by his own admission spent a lot of time in China in the past, speaks the language fluently, and who, by the way, calls Warren Buffet his mentor (his 'rabbi'). Warren Buffet is deeply tied in with the DS. What sense would it make for Trump to keep Byrne around after his usefulness in the election-fraud investigation? What sense did it make to even include him? The answer is that it allowed Trump (through Flynn) to look deeper into who and what Byrne was involved in. It allowed Trump's team to learn what people Byrne was tied to, while Byrne (if he was a plant) might have thought it would allow him to gain information on Trump's strategy and pass it on to others, perhaps even derail it. Whether or not Byrne is a plant, he's using his rejected idea of redoing the ballot count on live TV as an excuse for his animosity and the creation of doubt about Trump's team. He tells us that Flynn accepted the idea, and perhaps Flynn led Byrne to think he did, but if the goal has always been military tribunals, and this has been kept very secret, then Byrne would need to be kept out of it and led to think that the courtroom was the goal. No one outside of Trump's inner circle knows whether or not the Insurrection Act has been called and the military are in control. We see signs that something isn't right with the Biden Administration and guess that this is the case. The impeachment would therefore be another stage in the plan, and everything that Byrne is saying is beside the point. But to cast doubt on members of Trump's team seems to fit another purpose, one that suggests that Byrne is totally out of the loop and has a deep level of animosity (and possibly fear) because of it. As a plant he failed, and may have jeopardized those he works for. Remember who he is, and where he came from. He was involved in shady deals with Hilary at least once, so he's probably got other shady deals in his past that he hasn't confessed to, and is therefore still owned by someone. Things took a spin after that WH meeting and Byrne started yammering more and more about problems among Trump's team while Trump and others were cut off from communicating to the public, so it's his word only. I could be wrong that Byrne was a plant, and I may not have said enough about every point I tried to make above, but nonetheless there's a lot that needs to be considered about Byrne's one-sided claims than his face-value accounts.

(post is archived)

[–] 3 pts

My goodness, are we still believing the military is in control?

[–] 3 pts

Yes, the MILITARY is and has been. You think BIDEN is in control. That is a laughing freakin' riot if you believe that guy or any of his CCP cronies are actually in charge and have ANY significant power. Do you think our country was just given over to them? DISCERN or STFU

[–] 2 pts

Tell me how you know they're not?

Tell me why it shouldn't still be believed.

Are you addicted to the MSM change of stories every 24 hours, where what has come and gone is no longer relevant?

You posted so quickly, you couldn't have read what I posted.

[–] 0 pt

I know it's been a long time at least a couple of weeks or almost.

[–] 2 pts

Folks we are in the storm, not the clean up. It's disinformation all round seeking a door, not yet found.

[–] 1 pt

I'm in line with what you are saying. I've never felt good about Byrne, personally. He seems to wants,too badly, to wedge himself in Trump's inner circle. Did he really spend so much of his own money to expose the election fraud? How instrumental was his help, actually? Something just doesn't feel right about the whole thing, to me.

[–] 1 pt

Everything we know about his involvement in things comes from his mouth only.

Trump would let him run himself into a corner if he was fake. Let's see what happens....

[–] 1 pt

If hopium is considered believing the Election was a Fake, Military has been Given Full Control to Resolution, Resolving the CCP and US Congressional persons in acts of blatant treason on both sides 80% total, plus the Horrific Evidence of the kid crimes, etc. This is not over. They WILL write books, true ones about what happened. White House dark at night how many days in a row now? Flynn asked for 30 more days on Dec 31st. FREEDOM Day is tomorrow. Snowstorm slamming them now (if they are even behind the keep-in type of barbed wire People's building).

[–] 1 pt

Remember...none of Trump's lawyers would know anything about a military operation.

The lawyers were only there to show how corrupt the judicial system was and never part of the real plan.

It was always going to be this way.

[–] 0 pt

Sidney Powell, being so close to General Flynn, likely knows at least some of what’s going on behind the scene.

[–] 0 pt

I believe that Giuliani is in the know.

[–] 1 pt

Quality discernment.

Correct in whole or only in part, no matter, this is a clearly presented opinion that reflects quality discernment.

Props to OP

[–] 0 pt

Thank you. I seldom post my thinking on things, but when I do, I try to do a good job.

[–] 0 pt

Very interesting write-up about Patrick Byrne.

Concerning a relating subject, everyone has been asking about the BIG declassification. It hasn't been released to the public and because of this, they are using it to attack Trump and Q even though Trump never promised it.

First of all, I think everything posted by 'Q' is an absolute enigma to me. No one has been right decoding these ambiguous writings. I have no idea what all those messages mean, nor do I pretend to understand their meaning. This makes me an 'enigmatic Q non-lurker'. The following revelation came to me why the Declassification has not occurred.

Declassification of information becomes impossible when there is an active investigation going on. When Robert Mueller/ Andrew Weissmann became special council and was given such as a wide bandwidth of investigative powers by Rod Rosenstein, declassification of anything became virtually impossible. After the Mueller/Andrew Weissmann tag-team investigation ended, AG Bill Barr secretly made John Durham Special council for investigating the origins of the Russia probe and would continue into the next administration. Attorney John Durham has been given a wide latitude to investigate all thing relating to the Russia probe and the election. I really questioned Bill Barr being chosen as AG because of all his previous ties to the swamp. There's one certainty with an active special counsel, Declassification efforts come to a grinding halt.

What's your take on this?

[–] 0 pt

There's very little to decode from Q. That's why those people who talk about decodes are always wrong. He gave some proofs to show he was legit, but those aren't the same thing. Much of what he's posted has been about the events going on at the time . Some of it has been coded info that later became meaningful, and some of it was disinfo or messages for the black hats. But most of it was to get people's attention on certain people or events at certain times in order to get them talking more publicly about them.

In the same vein, the big declass has been expected because Q continually highlighted it. It's the linchpin to exposing everything, and will probably start to come out when Trump has his impeachment hearing, as well as after when the fake election has been exposed and the military tribunals start. It can't all come out at once because there's just too much. They'll have to roll it out in stages over a long period.

Durham is sitting on a huge pile of evidence. So are Giuliani and Powell. Each will have their turn in presenting it when that time comes. Right now they're being very quiet about it, and the DS thinks they have nothing or can do nothing with what they have because they haven't pushed any of it except early on.

Also, I trust Barr. If so many people don't trust him and the DS are leaving him alone, then he's played his role extremely well.

[–] 0 pt

Thank you for this thorough evaluation/analysis. You've clearly put a lot of thought into it. I read it all with an open mind, and my gut reaction first thought was: If Byrne was in fact pushed out of Trump's inner circle (as you indicated), then Byrne would be free to speak the truth and call a spade a spade since he's no longer part of 'the gang.' I tend to believe people more when they're not playing politics about things - they're just laying it out there on the field (much like Lin Wood does).

And if we just look at the foundational 'who is more trustworthy' question re: Byrne vs. Guiliani, all we really know about Byrne is that he participating DIRECTLY in a sting to catch Killary in taking a multi-million dollar bribe. Despite the FBI deciding to bury that one crime (out of thousands) by Killary and nothing ever came of it doesn't change the fact that Byrne willingly put his life on the line to set up HRC to get busted. I'd say that scores him some SERIOUS points in the "good guy" column. I don't view that sting on HRC as "shady dealings," but instead, as balls-of-steel courage.

As for Guiliani, he's certainly poured his guts into collecting evidence on the Biden crime family - for well over a year - and delivered the goods for POTUS. Guiliani has done the same in collecting and presenting evidence on the mass election fraud in support of POTUS. These actions also give Guiliani HUGE points in the "good guy" column in my view.

But I still have major unresolved questions about Guiliani's potential involvement - whether it be complicity in the crime itself or participation in the cover up - re: 9/11 in NYC and the 3 towers that fell by OBVIOUS controlled demolition (and building 7 was never even hit).

Just my $.02 there!

[–] 0 pt

I don't view that sting on HRC as "shady dealings," but instead, as balls-of-steel courage.

Byrne wasn't working a sting op for the white hats when he got involved in that deal with Hilary. He was deeply involved just as corrupt as anyone else who was in on it. He later confessed, and I think it was only so he could offer his services to Trump in order to get close to him for the DS.

But I still have major unresolved questions about Guiliani's potential involvement - whether it be complicity in the crime itself or participation in the cover up - re: 9/11 in NYC and the 3 towers that fell by OBVIOUS controlled demolition (and building 7 was never even hit).

Why would you give Byrne a free pass so easily but hold 9/11 against Giuliani, when you've already said that Byrne put his life on the line over something that was much less serious? Do you think Giuliani wouldn't have been in even greater danger if he had tried to expose things? Look at what Trump is up against. Things were no better in 2001.

[–] 0 pt

Nice writeup!

[–] 0 pt

Excellent post! I too am questioning the whole Byrne thing. I read his post on his DeepCapture blog about his CIA ties and his involvement with the whole blackmail setup of Hillary so Obama could control her. Why was he confessing all this and why and who does such a thing and think that OH Golly, I'm actually a good person? He didn't really talk about how he felt about President Trump but absolutely fawned over Obama. So yeah, I agree that somethings rotten in Denmark and your assessment might actually be quite close if not totally accurate.

[–] 1 pt

Thank you. The guy certainly is fishy. I got the same feeling when he first went on TV talking about his resignation from his company and then broke the story about being a whistleblower.

https://youtu.be/T5J-1rs1LJo

[–] 0 pt

Or maybe everything Byrne said about giuliani is correct.

Seems like you have forgotten, but the p.o.s. giuliani was an active participant in the planning, execution, and cover-up of 9/11.

He assisted in the destruction of the crime scene and had the steel from Ground Zero shipped to chy-nah.

As I'm sure The Penguin is figuring out, all the triple-scotches in the world aren't going to make his picked-brain forget the evil he has done.

Pretty simple to figure out what the ds is blackmailing Bald Packman with to get him to betray America, yet again.

I wonder why the op is swinging from giuliani's nuts with such devotion and glee?

[–] 0 pt

giuliani was an active participant in the planning, execution, and cover-up of 9/11.

This is new to me. Where's your evidence?

You make a lot of accusations but provide no explanation. I tend to reject these kind of cheap responses, but I'll give you a chance to back it up.

[–] 0 pt

You're going to give me a chance to back it up, huh?

Ohhhh my!

Thank you soooo much for this chance, sir, you won't regret it!

First, go fuck yourself, faggot.

Secondly, if you really want to know what I'm talking about, get off of your lazy ass and go research it for yourself.

The fact that you don't believe it, doesn't make it any less factual.

I'm not here to waste my time proving jack shit to some random retard.

If you don't believe me, good.

The fact that you even question such an obvious fact demonstrates that you have no fucking brain or you're willfully ignorant.

I'm going to give you this chance to go do some research and learn something.

I am done with you.

You may now fuck off.

[–] 0 pt

Too bad you spent so much time writing all that.

When I got to the attack on me as a person, I stopped reading.

You're a fucking loser.

Load more (6 replies)