Analysis,  Decodes,  News,  Q,  Research

Mueller’s Secret Case: Who is Company A? Q’s Drops May Provide Hint on Secret Case

Since December, a federal court has kept secret the nature of a case that created a media buzz, leading to a guessing game about who the secret witness is — a government official, a private citizen or a company. Reporters were removed and banned from an entire floor of the courthouse, apparently to prevent them from seeing the attorneys on the case, leaving them wondering what was going on.

On the day the court order under appeal was issued, two lawyers were observed exiting a sealed hearing before Chief Judge Beryl A. Howell of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia — who oversees grand-jury proceedings — along with five prosecutors from Robert Mueller’s special counsel office, including Michael Dreeben, who has been confirmed to work for Mueller.

On December 18th, 2018, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued a vaguely worded judgment that revealed only a few small details.

“The grand jury seeks information from a corporation owned by Country A.”

“We are unconvinced that Country A’s law truly prohibits the corporation from complying with the subpoena.”

When the corporation failed to produce the requested information, the court held the corporation in contempt. The company had sought to quash the subpoena by arguing it is immune from such demands under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act and because complying with the subpoena would cause the company to violate its own domestic laws.

The appeals court disagreed, saying that in this case, prosecutors have met the burden of having reason to believe the evidence they are seeking relates to an act “outside the territory of the United States” but one that also had “a direct effect in the United States.”

Yesterday, a new docket in this case was unsealed for the mystery foreign company battling Mueller grand jury subpoena. The docket gives us a rare insight into this case.

Background and Items of Interest

The first entry on this docket is on 8/16/2018, and it’s a motion to seal the case. A hearing was held on September 11th, 2018.

Of interest is a docket entry on 9/14/2018. The entry states, in part:

MINUTE ORDER DIRECTING, upon consideration of the government’s ex parte, in camera submission and arguments made at the hearing on 9/11/2018, the government to submit by 9/17/2018, an additional ex parte, in camera submission addressing the following question:

Whether an act or activity of the kind described in 28 U.S.C. § 1605 (a)(2) establishes a reasonable possibility that the category of materials the Government seeks will produce information relevant to the general subject of the grand jury’s investigation.


Now, let’s translate this quote:

Upon consideration of the government’s private submission, which is in the government’s interest, and arguments made at the hearing held on 9/11 – the judge has directed the government to submit, by 9/17, an additional private document addressing the question below.

The 28 U.S.C. § 1605 (a)(2) states:

in which the action is based upon a commercial activity carried on in the United States by the foreign state;  or upon an act performed in the United States in connection with a commercial activity of the foreign state elsewhere;  or upon an act outside the territory of the United States in connection with a commercial activity of the foreign state elsewhere and that act causes a direct effect in the United States;


The parties representing the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA in this case must tell the judge whether the activity of Company A, clearly a foreign company, establishes that the material which has been subpoenaed by the court is relevant to the Robert Mueller Special Counsel investigation.

PHEW! That’s a mouthful, guys.

This code is taken from the longer “General exceptions to the jurisdictional immunity of a foreign state.” The Company A mentioned in this case first claimed that by agreeing to comply with the subpoena, they would be violating their own country’s laws.

On 1/10/2019, the following happens:

….(3) proposing any order to limit [REDACTED] from issuing a public statement about this matter.

Whoever Company A or their spokesman or figurehead is, they’ve been forced to not speak about this matter in public.

So who is Company A?

The entity’s name seems to be 22 to 27 characters long. The U.S. seems to have moved to seize related property by this point. One guess? Qatar Investment Authority, counting spaces, is 26 characters long. Another possibility is the Russian Direct Investment Fund.

The Russian Direct Investment Fund is a part of Vnesheconombank or VEB Bank, which has a NY branch where the Russian spy who recruited Carter Page ‘worked’. Translated to English, its name means “Bank of Foreign Economic Activity.” In 2016, Evgeny Buryakov, who posed as a banker in VEB’s Manhattan office and who attempted to recruit Trump advisor Carter Page, pleaded guilty in U.S. district court to having acted as a secret agent of the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service. Buryakov’s lawyers were paid by VEB. However, I personally do not think this docket or case is in reference to a Russian entity.

RDIF also has a partnership with another Company A prime suspect – the Qatar Investment Authority. Interestingly enough, a QIA executive, Ahmed Al-Rumaihi was at Trump Tower on December 12, 2016. He was there in his then role as head of Qatar Investments to accompany the Qatari delegation that was meeting with Trump transition officials on that date. He did not participate in any meetings with Michael Flynn, and his involvement in the meetings on that date was limited.

Michael Cohen and Avenatti are both guilty of distributing narratives about this meeting and other details associated with Ahmad Al-Rumaihi. We do know that Cohen offered Qatar access to the Trump administration. If you subscribe to the theory that the Trump Tower Meetings were a complete set-up like I do, you’ll find this case very interesting.

Before now, the media and deep-state narrative on the Trump Tower meetings has been “RUSSIA, RUSSIA, RUSSIA!” But if this court docket being unsealed is to be taken at face value, we may be looking at another piece of the real Trump Tower setup: that foreign and domestic actors were asked to arrange these meetings in order to provide, or create, corroboration and evidence for the FBI, and now Mueller, investigations. My opinion on these meetings is that, true to Cohen’s earlier admission, they were set up by moles such as Cohen, Goldstone, and Avenatti, who certainly don’t answer to the President and, well, don’t even like him.

In the case of the Russian Veselnitskaya meeting, RCP writes:

 “The purpose of the meeting,” one congressional investigator told RCI, “was to substantiate the Clinton-funded dossier alleging that Trump was taking dirt on his rivals from the Russians.”


This means that any of the Trump Tower meetings being a complete set-up would be a matter of precedence.

In this Q drop (#120), from 11/6/2017, Q says:

Note that the title of this drop, given by the anon who runs is “Controlling the Narrative.” I’m fairly certain that we’ll see this name couldn’t be more accurate. Now, check out the highlighted bit in the image above – “Qatar.” This bit of the drop is asking about Qatar’s reference in the WL email leak. That may not be applicable to this post, or court case docket, but further down, this line is very, very relevant:

Why is Adm R so important?

Who wanted him fired?

Why wasn’t Adm R replaced by POTUS when taking office?

Why is this relevant?

We know that Admiral Rogers is important because he informed POTUS that Trump Tower was bugged and that all of POTUS’s meetings were being recorded. This drop is vital, as it’s describing one of the key pieces of POTUS’s early Presidency: the “bubble” of the Liberal intelligence community, those who control them, and those who are controlled BY them.

Process the connection that Q is trying to nudge us towards here in light of this breaking news regarding this Mueller case.

Deep State (who funds ISIS?) > ISIS > SA/Qatar > HRC = Media < Intelligence Community/DoJ Leaking (how is the narrative communicated?)

Here you will find the backbone of what is going on in this case.

Your Thoughts

%d bloggers like this: