It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump on calling Obama the founder of ISIS: They dont get sarcasm

page: 7
10
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 12 2016 @ 06:54 PM
link   
I’m going to tell you the truth though.


I wasn’t at all peeved at Trump’s hyperbolic statement because I know it hurt Obama who I believe greatly botched the ISIS issue and is failing the country on this issue.

Also, there is no doubt that as Trump insidiously insinuates often regarding terrorism and the ME: “There’s something going on.” he's got a point there.


You Goddam right there’s something going on but Trump, unfortunately, IS NOT the man to challenge the elites sinister ME ambitions.



I wish Trump was a serious candidate and did challenge Obama and Hillary’s F___ed up ME foreign policy.

edit on 12-8-2016 by Willtell because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 12 2016 @ 06:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

We have decades of evidence of what Hilary will do in public office. We have zero for Trump.


Trump has never held office so of course you have zero. That's why people are speculating from his other actions and are in most cases, as you know, attacking his character or lack there of.

They attack the other things he's done and said like his businesses, speeches, etc.

Hillary has been in office so you can attack her with that. All that makes sense.

However, if guessing the future for Trump is just prophesy then so is guessing the future for Hillary or anyone else for that matter. You can't have it both ways.



posted on Aug, 12 2016 @ 06:57 PM
link   


You Goddam right there’s something going on but Trump, unfortunately, IS NOT the man to challenge the elites sinister ME ambitions.


He has already challenged the elites, and the Orwellian Two Minutes Hate and the establishment-owned media propaganda is evidence of this.



posted on Aug, 12 2016 @ 06:59 PM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm




Trump has never held office so of course you have zero. That's why people are speculating from his other actions and are in most cases, as you know, attacking his character or lack there of.

They attack the other things he's done and said like his businesses, speeches, etc.

Hillary has been in office so you can attack her with that. All that makes sense.

However, if guessing the future for Trump is just prophesy then so is guessing the future for Hillary or anyone else for that matter. You can't have it both ways.


Yes you can. There is either evidence for prediction or there is not. All you have on Trump is that he says things you do not like, while refusing to take into account his successes. As for the Clinton's, there is a laundry list of red flags.



posted on Aug, 12 2016 @ 07:00 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Well that's because Hillary is a moderate. I know the term "moderate" is like shining light onto a vampire in these days of political extremism, but such things used to be the norm. Compromise wasn't a dirty word either. She has never made this a secret. Yes she has gone to the left in some things, but she also isn't compromising her moderatism either. But no one wants to commend her on that. She's either not liberal enough or in your case, too conservative.

I'm not trying to sound like a cheerleader here either. It's just the truth. Take it or leave it. That is Hillary Clinton, minus the hyperbole. This is why I've said on multiple occasions I'd be ok with her as a President. She isn't perfect, but she knows what she's doing and tries to acquiesce to as many groups as possible. So I can't see any harm in giving her a shot. If she truly is corrupt, so what? She wouldn't be the first, nor the last corrupt President. We'll get another shot in 4 years.
edit on 12-8-2016 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 12 2016 @ 07:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Krazysh0t




Hey. I'm all for ousting out people like Clinton. I'm just not for ousting them for someone like Donald Trump. I was for Bernie Sanders. Remember? I wanted to implement change WITHIN the system, not angrily tear it down because I heard a bunch of hyperbole and slander.


I didn't mean you personally. If only Bernie Sanders had a chance.

Trump has specifically said he is looking to argue to agreement his policies through congress, as opposed to the executive decisions and stale-mates of the current administration. I'm not sure if that means anything to you, but it sounds slightly democratic to my own ears.



Submitting ideas to scrutiny, observing and respecting power checks and balances, a demonstration of a sort of humility and respect. It would do this country a great service to watch the executive branch act in such a way.



posted on Aug, 12 2016 @ 07:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Logarock

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Krazysh0t




Hey. I'm all for ousting out people like Clinton. I'm just not for ousting them for someone like Donald Trump. I was for Bernie Sanders. Remember? I wanted to implement change WITHIN the system, not angrily tear it down because I heard a bunch of hyperbole and slander.


I didn't mean you personally. If only Bernie Sanders had a chance.

Trump has specifically said he is looking to argue to agreement his policies through congress, as opposed to the executive decisions and stale-mates of the current administration. I'm not sure if that means anything to you, but it sounds slightly democratic to my own ears.



Submitting ideas to scrutiny, observing and respecting power checks and balances, a demonstration of a sort of humility and respect. It would do this country a great service to watch the executive branch act in such a way.


I hope you aren't suggesting that Trump would ever display such things like "humility" or "respect"? Because I certainly have NEVER seen him display either of those emotions.



posted on Aug, 12 2016 @ 07:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t




Well that's because Hillary is a moderate. I know the term "moderate" is like shining light onto a vampire in these days of political extremism, but such things used to be the norm. Compromise wasn't a dirty word either. She has never made this a secret. Yes she has gone to the left in some things, but she also isn't compromising her moderatism either. But no one wants to commend her on that. She's either not liberal enough or in your case, too conservative.

I'm not trying to sound like a cheerleader here either. It's just the truth. Take it or leave it. That is Hillary Clinton, minus the hyperbole. This is why I've said on multiple occasions I'd be ok with her as a President. She isn't perfect, but she knows what she's doing and tries to acquiesce to as many groups as possible. So I can't see any harm in giving her a shot. If she truly is corrupt, so what? She wouldn't be the first, nor the last corrupt President. We'll get another shot in 4 years.


My point is, this is how she sounds, but not how she acts. It's not populism or moderation. A plastic smile, demagoguery, but behind closed doors, corruption. Look at Bernie Sanders, who was a populist like Trump. She put on a mask, then it was revealed she was backdoor dealing. This is the Clintons in a nutshell. I have to say once again, this is political triangulation, the use of populism by elitism, to sway the public for the purposes of retaining power.



posted on Aug, 12 2016 @ 07:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

Yes you can. There is either evidence for prediction or there is not. All you have on Trump is that he says things you do not like, while refusing to take into account his successes. As for the Clinton's, there is a laundry list of red flags.


You're supporting a double standard. So we can predict what Hillary will do in the future but not Trump. That's a double standard.

It's also more than just things Trump says that I don't like. That is just you making light of it. I'm looking at more than just the things he says. You're also not including his Failures along with those successes nor are you including Hillary's successes along with her failures.

Nobody is saying they can predict exactly what will happen, but to say you can't predict Trump's future actions but you can Hillary's based off what they've done in the past is just false. If it works for one it will work for the other. Trump isn't f*cking magic.



posted on Aug, 12 2016 @ 07:10 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Who is maintaining power? Hillary hasn't been working for the government for something like 3 and a half years now. Are we talking about the elites and their money? The same elites and money that will outlast any Presidency, no matter how long they are in office? Yeah I'm pretty sure if your conspiracy theories go as deep as you usually suggest they do that neither Trump nor Hillary are any threat to their power structure.



posted on Aug, 12 2016 @ 07:11 PM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm



You're supporting a double standard. So we can predict what Hillary will do in the future but not Trump. That's a double standard.


No you can predict what Trump will do, but it will be without evidence.



posted on Aug, 12 2016 @ 07:12 PM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm


You know folks talk about roads and bridges, both Trump and Hillary do, and Obama doesn't harp about it but crap loads of road work ect got funded under Obama.

Ok so it was the long drawn out soaking the deal sort of road work but hay. lol

You could probably call Obama the "Orange barrel" president.



posted on Aug, 12 2016 @ 07:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

No you can predict what Trump will do, but it will be without evidence.


Depends on the prediction.

There was certainly plenty of evidence to predict him being in the news again today saying something stupid.



posted on Aug, 12 2016 @ 07:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t




Who is maintaining power? Hillary hasn't been working for the government for something like 3 and a half years now. Are we talking about the elites and their money? The same elites and money that will outlast any Presidency, no matter how long they are in office? Yeah I'm pretty sure if your conspiracy theories go as deep as you usually suggest they do that neither Trump nor Hillary are any threat to their power structure.


The Clintons. Do you really believe they're in it to make the world better? Your conspiracy theory is worse than mine.

The Clinton's have used the white house, which is owned by the American public, as a hotel for tycoons and donors (source). The Oval office was Bill's personal sex couch. This is the American people's tax dollars at work.
edit on 12-8-2016 by LesMisanthrope because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 12 2016 @ 07:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Well unless trump looks like he will bypass one network so to speak and use another. Different road work contracts, closer scrutiny of tax money spending in a verity of areas. This alone could be downright disturbing to many.



posted on Aug, 12 2016 @ 07:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Logarock
ETA: You responded to a different post.

Anyways. That is all wishful thinking. There will always be rich people and they will always wield a lop-sided amount of power over people with less money. You take one down, someone will replace them. That is how our society is built. We practically WORSHIP capitalism and you are suggesting that Trump is going to somehow put a wrench in money's influence in politics? Get real! He's only going to accomplish pissing off everyone he deals with.
edit on 12-8-2016 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 12 2016 @ 07:19 PM
link   
Self Edit.

That was off topic and didn't belong here so I removed my comment.

If only I could punish myself too and take away some point, I'd be just like a mod.
edit on 12-8-2016 by mOjOm because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 12 2016 @ 11:19 PM
link   
That seems to be a perfectly acceptable maneuver that Trump has down pat. He makes a ludicrous accusation, and then follows it up after a couple of days that "haha just sarcasm." And.. everything is OK again.

Either way I don't want this guy in office - either he is serious and thus horribly misinformed but still makes these comments, or he really is that sarcastic. I don't want the POTUS to be either of those things.



posted on Aug, 13 2016 @ 12:24 AM
link   
The Pentagon warned Obama about his cockamamie ideas..www.wnd.com...



posted on Aug, 13 2016 @ 12:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
The Pentagon warned Obama about his cockamamie ideas..www.wnd.com...


Now if only we could trust WND.com as a valid source for anything you might have something there. But we can't.

Besides, Obama can't really be the founder of ISIS. Trump said it was satire and just a joke remember???

Interesting how he claims to be serious one day and not the next while the Conservative Media also can't seem to make up their mind either. Half of them saying he was just joking and the other half saying he's right.

Propaganda at it's best and it's working pretty well for him so far.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join