You've Been Misled

Case 024 · QAnon mechanics

The prediction
had a date.

Q's first posts made big claims. They said Hillary Clinton would be extradited and her passport flagged. They said the National Guard would activate and riots would break out. They gave dates for indicting John Podesta and Huma Abedin. Months later, a follower gave the claims a new reading. It recast the two dated indictments as secret, sealed events. Q praised that reading out loud.1

October 2017 to June 2018Dated posts and reinterpretation preserved

The test

A source that claims secret inside knowledge should be judged by what it actually predicted. This claim had a date. Later it was recast as a hidden success no one can check. That changes the test after the date has passed. And it keeps the new version from ever failing in public.1

What was predicted, and by whom

The anonymous prompt that Post 1 answered said Clinton would be arrested. Q's Post 1 on October 28 said more. It said her extradition was already moving. It said her passport would be flagged on October 30. It said the National Guard would activate and mass riots would happen. Post 15 came next, under the Q name, on October 31. It stated “11.3 - Podesta indicted” and “11.6 - Huma indicted.”1

It matters to keep the prompt apart from Q's reply. The claims that came from Q can still be tested. We do not need to borrow the anonymous poster's arrest line.

How the test changed

In June 2018, an anonymous poster gave 11.3 and 11.6 a new meaning. He said they were dates when prosecutor John Huber supposedly filed sealed indictments. Q's Post 1518 quoted that and replied: “Well done, Anon. Shows commitment.”1 The archive shows no case number, no charging document, and no outside proof for that story. The key move is clear. Dated “indicted” claims became a later sealed-indictment reading. The public could not test that reading at the time.

This is a method test

A public search that finds nothing cannot disprove a sealed case. It also cannot turn a follower's sealed-case story into proof. The person claiming hidden success has the burden. They must show something others can check.

What the archive can carry

The 4chan archive records and a two-mirror copy of Post 1518 are saved locally with hashes. They keep the text, the IDs, and the timestamps. That is enough to compare the dated claims with the later reading. They do not prove any government access. They do not prove one person ran the Q account.

Supported

The saved post text and dates. The split between the anonymous arrest prompt and Q's reply. The dated indictment lines. And Q's clear praise for the later sealed-indictment reading.

Not established

Whether a matching public or sealed case existed. Whether any passport flag or Guard call-up happened. Who wrote as Q, or how many people did. Any government access. Or one shared belief held by every follower.

Receipts 001 to 002

Read with the archive warning

Receipt 001 · Searchable historical mirrorPost 1, Post 15, and Post 1518Dated claim, sealed-indictment reinterpretation, and Q's explicit praiseReceipt 002 · Versioned research corpusMachine-readable archive of Q postsThird-party collation at a fixed commit; anonymous-board provenance, not authentication of identity or access

Claim map

What the archive carries

Opening posts
The claims posted under the Q name, and their dates. They do not show who wrote them or what access they had.
Later exchange
A follower's sealed-indictment story and Q's clear praise. This does not prove the story was true.
Evidence boundary
The recorded change in how the prediction was read. This is not a full finding about public or sealed court records.

Last updated: August 23, 2026.