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.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Should Trump be investigated for High Treason?

page: 5
124
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 24 2016 @ 11:31 AM
link   
a reply to: reldra

Reldra,

The simple fact of the matter is, that the difference between Donald J. Trump and Hilary R. Clinton, is that Donald Trump is a publicly boorish, disgusting, misogynistic oaf with sociopath tendencies, whereas Hilary's misdeeds and inherent tendencies toward an unhealthy psychopathology are kept just outside of public view most of the time, are in fact private.

Now, in any other realm, a persons psychological maladies may well be their own business, unless or until they become a problem for everyone. However, that is not and should not be true of candidates to the presidency. Neither candidate is worth spitting on, neither candidate has any moral fortitude what so ever, and both would be disasters for the United States, worse than any tornado, hurricane, flood, or undersea fuel leak ever was.

With Trump literally crapping all over himself, his party, and everything else in crapping distance on a near weekly basis, the fact is that Wikileaks do not NEED to publish anything on him, for the damage to be done, because he sabotages his own campaign just by way of heading it up. Hilary needs exposing, because she keeps her dirt out of view, which again, would be fine if she was running for a lesser office. But the people of the United States deserve to know that they are buggered both ways round, and that all they can do is vote third, or help it all go to turd.




posted on Oct, 24 2016 @ 11:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: ColdWisdom
a reply to: reldra

So what you're telling me is that - you are ignoring possibilities.


I just hadn't considered it. Trump's employees seem to be fairly unorganized.


Some of trumps workers past and present also have ties to guess where? Mother Russia!!!



posted on Oct, 24 2016 @ 11:32 AM
link   
a reply to: queenofswords

The question is will Trump choose a better middle eastern policy than the worthless immoral Sunni/Wahabbi/Isis side against all other people in the middle east that US is supporting now?

Will Trump make US less of an whore to Babylon (Saudi Arabia and allies) and their oil?

Will Trump be controlled by Soros anyway?



posted on Oct, 24 2016 @ 11:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: WilburnRoach

Wikileaks is producing lies



Really? Because the minute Wikileaks produces their first lie they've lost all integrity, so that's a fairly bold accusation to make with nothing to back it up.



posted on Oct, 24 2016 @ 11:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: keenmachine
a reply to: Annee

well the one side looks pretty bad regardless of what you Speculate the other side contains


Comparisons needed.



posted on Oct, 24 2016 @ 11:34 AM
link   
a reply to: WilburnRoach

No, there is no proof that Trump is funding these cyber-attacks against the USA. There is also no proof that the Russian government is coordinating these attacks either.

It's likely an internal alphabet agency employee(s) that's involved and until proof comes along to the contrary, this makes the most sense to me.

Hillarys baseless Russia-hacking-USA assertion is totally laughable, much like her suitability for POTUS. But, she does make the perfect muppet for the globalists, being molded over the last 25+ years to do their bidding - Trump is way out of his league to compete with her on that.



posted on Oct, 24 2016 @ 11:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: ColdWisdom
a reply to: Annee

Please don't forget to answer my previous question, Annee.


Hillary touted this list of 17 agencies at the last debate but have you looked at that list? One of the agencies was the friggin' Coast Guard for crying out loud.

Let me ask you Annee, what resources does the US Coast Guard have to investigate a cyber attack? Can you even find an instance where they've ever investigated a cyber attack before this (alleged) one?


I eagerly anticipate your response.


I can answer the first part: the US Coast Guard has a pretty robust intelligence capability, to include counterintelligence and investigative services. I know it's fun to dump on the puddle-pirates, but their intelligence capability isn't exactly lacking.



posted on Oct, 24 2016 @ 11:36 AM
link   
Op, are you some kind of moron? Are the WikiLeaks Email drops starting to get to you? Do you realize that absolutely nobody with a brain cell is going to fall for something like this? We All saw Trump's Gettysburg Address and we've all read his 100 days contract and we now know that he is actually a genuinely nice guy.

Can you refute a single one of the Podesta emails?

I didn't think so.

You know, when your house is burning, you might want to get out. Not toss more logs into the fireplace. The only excuse you could possibly have left now for still being for Hillary is that if you yourself were morally bankrupt.




posted on Oct, 24 2016 @ 11:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: WilburnRoach
Are you so ideology ingrained that you will embrace a hostile government over us?


Odd, the US government is far, far more hostile towards the American citizen than the government of Russia is. Where is there any evidence that the released emails have been "altered?" Sorry, but when someone gives you concrete evidence that an individual or group is hosing you, "how did you obtain this evidence?" isn't the real question that needs to be focused on.

Are you do ideology ingrained that you will continue to embrace a government that's screwed you repeatedly?



posted on Oct, 24 2016 @ 11:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sublimecraft
There is also no proof that the Russian government is coordinating these attacks either.


How would you know that?

How would you know what the US intelligence has information on?



posted on Oct, 24 2016 @ 11:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: djz3ro

originally posted by: WilburnRoach

Wikileaks is producing lies



Really? Because the minute Wikileaks produces their first lie they've lost all integrity, so that's a fairly bold accusation to make with nothing to back it up.


Russia hacks emails, hold on to them for some months (IMHO altering them) Then releases them, once trumps check clears, IMO!!!

I think Assange is on trumps payroll, would this be illegal?



posted on Oct, 24 2016 @ 11:37 AM
link   
a reply to: WilburnRoach

Yes he should and I suggest they Hang him from one of his Trump Towers at High Noon!



posted on Oct, 24 2016 @ 11:38 AM
link   
a reply to: ColdWisdom

Sure thing, here you go.

www.uscg.mil...
www.uscg.mil...
cgmix.uscg.mil...

Want more? How the allegation the CG as well as the Navy has stealth hacking ships. You know get close to shore, bend the network from the water.

ETA- I don't make claims willy-nilly. I mess up with a source on occasion. That said I am not BSing you when I tell they should both be in jail.
edit on 24-10-2016 by thesungod because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 24 2016 @ 11:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: searcherfortruth
a reply to: WilburnRoach

Yes he should and I suggest they Hang him from one of his Trump Towers at High Noon!

Only if he is charged and convicted in a court of law, if that happens the White House Lawn would be appropriate.



posted on Oct, 24 2016 @ 11:42 AM
link   
a reply to: WilburnRoach

No not without any proof or evidence.

Hillary however should be re investigated and indicted for the laws she actually did break.

Maybe with evidence Trump can be investigated, but would have to lock Hillary away before doing so. Also imagine how biased the investigation would be on trump compared to the one on Hillary.

All these leaks should have been on state servers and accessible information via foia or subpoena.



posted on Oct, 24 2016 @ 11:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: WilburnRoach

I think Assange is on trumps payroll, would this be illegal?


I think Assange has been influenced.

Could be anything or any one.

He's in a peculiar situation. Which he put himself in.

I think any human being would be looking for a way out.



posted on Oct, 24 2016 @ 11:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: muzzleflash

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: QuietSpeech
a reply to: WilburnRoach

A member since August 31st, 25 Threads all centered around the election and favoring one side heavily. Fixate on Trump much?


It's kind of one side or the other.

Isn't it.

Guess you're on the Trump side.


There are actually third parties in America.

If people weren't so hellbent on defending and promoting criminals, perhaps they could open their perspective a little to realize that.

It is absolutely Not one side or the other, and there is no valid excuse.


Are you voting 3rd party?

What has Wikeleaks released on a third party candidate? In CURRENT election.


Who gives a # what I vote for?
It doesn't matter what wikileaks does!

You said there is only two sides.
I said there is more than two sides.

You responded with "who are you voting for?", focused on the messenger rather than the message, and then ask what leaks came out about third parties?

Are you seriously this incapable of properly responding?

I'll say it again.

Not everything is Red or Blue. There is a wide spectrum in reality.

This is a basic principle. What I do or what others do doesn't detract from that. You are experiencing tunnel vision to such an extent that virtually everything must fit a specific limited paradigm.

It is unbelievable.



posted on Oct, 24 2016 @ 11:44 AM
link   
a reply to: WilburnRoach

There is zero evidence Trump is implicated just pivoted conjecture from the real traitor Clinton to divert from her hot dog fingered emails getting splashed world wide.

I was a fan of wikileaks but when they chose to become one sided, I no longer trust anything they produce. Wikileaks is producing lies, to favor Trump.
When Assange is basically having assassins trying to break into an embassy to kill him and then has the internet cut off by a state organization you know it is not because of lies but because the Establishment is kekking their pants.



posted on Oct, 24 2016 @ 11:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: muzzleflash

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: muzzleflash

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: QuietSpeech
a reply to: WilburnRoach

A member since August 31st, 25 Threads all centered around the election and favoring one side heavily. Fixate on Trump much?


It's kind of one side or the other.

Isn't it.

Guess you're on the Trump side.


There are actually third parties in America.

If people weren't so hellbent on defending and promoting criminals, perhaps they could open their perspective a little to realize that.

It is absolutely Not one side or the other, and there is no valid excuse.


Are you voting 3rd party?

What has Wikeleaks released on a third party candidate? In CURRENT election.



You responded with "who are you voting for?", focused on the messenger rather than the message, and then ask what leaks came out about third parties?

Are you seriously this incapable of properly responding?



I did not ask "who are you voting for?"

You brought up 3rd party. I asked "Are you voting 3rd party?" - - - because (get ready for it) you brought up 3rd party.

Throwing 3rd party into this discussion is deflection.



posted on Oct, 24 2016 @ 11:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: southbeach

When Assange is basically having assassins trying to break into an embassy to kill him and then has the internet cut off by a state organization you know it is not because of lies but because the Establishment is kekking their pants.


Who put Assange where he is?

Who put him in the position he is?

HE DID.



new topics

top topics



 
124
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join