**When Q Mentions Rachel Brands Replacement The MSM Freaks Out! Why?** Here is a partial of Q’s last post on Tuesday, September 24th at 11:29 am. Q2274 Pic of Q1433 Why was Rachel Brand removed? Q has asked this question several times. Why? Rachel Brand served as the United States Associate Attorney General from May 22, 2017, until February 20, 2018, when she resigned to take a job as head of global corporate governance at Walmart. She admits that she loved her position as the AAG. So why did she leave? Under the pressure of being fired she was forced to leave. Q1316 Rachel Brand, Associate Attorney General – No. 3 official behind Deputy AG Rosenstein - FIRED/FORCE But why was she “forced” to leave? Praying Medic: 27) #Qanon asked: Why was Rachel Brand removed? Because #RodRosenstien was brought in by Sessions to placate the swamp until now. Brand would not succeed Rosenstein. POTUS would fill that position with his own guy. This all goes back to Q1433 which Q repeated refers back to including in his last post Q2274. Q1433 Once the 'extremely guarded & highly classified' information is finally revealed to House investigators, DNI, public etc., RR must recuse or forcefully terminated. [RR] problems. ……. [RR] recuse/fired who has direct oversight of Mueller? Sessions un-recuse or #3 [until refill]? Who is Rachel Brand? Why was Rachel Brand dismissed? Think timing. "The succession question is actually a bit complicated. By default, under an obscure statute known as the the Vacancies Reform Act of 1998, Brand’s temporary successor as the “acting” associate attorney general is her principal deputy, Jesse Panuccio. That same statute would also allow the president to choose someone else to serve as the “acting” AAG on a temporary basis for up to 210 days; the pool of individuals from which the president could draw in this case includes individuals already holding Senate-confirmed positions elsewhere in the executive branch (like EPA administrator Scott Pruitt) or senior civil service lawyers in the Justice Department, specifically." "Acting" https://www.justice.gov/asg📁 When does the clock run out? ………. D5. Q An Anon asks Q, “>>1497716 "under the Justice Department’s own succession statute and guidelines implementing that law issued by Attorney General Loretta Lynch in November 2016, Brand is replaced in that line of succession by Solicitor General Noel Francisco (the solicitor general is the nation’s chief legal representative in front of the Supreme Court)." Trust Solicitor General Francisco?” Here we see the MSM going crazy about who will replace Rosenstein: https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/24/politics/noel-francisco-succession-rod-rosenstein/index.html https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/solicitor-general-noel-francisco-would-take-over-mueller-probe-if-n912566 https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/sep/24/noel-francisco-dcs-suddenly-most-important-man/ https://nypost.com/2018/09/24/heres-who-would-replace-rod-rosenstein/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/09/24/noel-francisco-three-things-man-who-could-lead-russia-probe/1410133002/ Here’s what CNBC had to say: All eyes are on Solicitor General Noel Francisco amid reports Monday that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein could be on the chopping block. Rosenstein is expected to meet with President Donald Trump on Thursday to discuss his future with the Justice Department and the administration. If he's ousted or resigns, Francisco is widely expected to succeed Rosenstein as head of the Mueller probe. In that role Francisco would have enormous control over the Russia inquiry, including determining its scope and resources. […] A February sighting of Francisco dining with Rosenstein and Attorney General Jeff Sessions on the same day that Trump lashed out against Sessions, calling him "disgraceful," was perceived by some as evidence that there was daylight between Francisco and the president. Nonetheless, his expansive views on executive power worry the president's critics who fear that Francisco could limit the inquiry. […] Replacing Rosenstein with Francisco would also represent the transfer of oversight on the probe from a lawyer who has expressed grave misgivings about the president — reportedly even bringing up the prospect of a Cabinet-level mutiny — to a close Trump ally. What do you think?