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.
originally posted by: SaturnFX
Maybe now both right and left will come together and admit Citizens United was a mistake and super pacs should be done away with
Unless the Clinton campaign came up with the entire plan and handed it to the PAC...nothing illegal was done. Just because Creamer may have heard Clinton say she likes the idea, doesn't mean a thing.
This is basically O'Keefe's whole argument...but it's not illegal...and he doesn't even have proof of any collusion. All he has is, "Clinton liked the duck idea". I think it is hilarious how far O'Keefe is stretching for this.
O'Keefe has refused to release broader or unedited footage to ANYONE..cuz it doesn't fit his story.
originally posted by: SaturnFX
Maybe now both right and left will come together and admit Citizens United was a mistake and super pacs should be done away with
originally posted by: kruphix
a reply to: MotherMayEye
No one is disputing that he stepped back because of the video, where did you get that from? It's right there in his released statement.
What the other member claimed is that the Hillary campaign pressured him to step down (which he didn't even do).
So the logical stance is to accept the facts as we know them, which is Creamer stepped back from his campaign activities but with no indicated pressure from the Clinton campaign.
You have proof he 'voluntarily' (sans internal or external pressure) stepped down?
originally posted by: UnifiedSerenity
a reply to: kruphix
This is basically O'Keefe's whole argument...but it's not illegal...and he doesn't even have proof of any collusion. All he has is, "Clinton liked the duck idea". I think it is hilarious how far O'Keefe is stretching for this.
What part of NO communication between candidate and PACS and no paying them do you not get? Hillary broke the law created after Watergate.
Lol...Okay...Creamer wasn't "Let go"...He was actively encouraged "step down" from the camp
originally posted by: kruphix
I'm asking him for proof that Creamer was "actively encouraged to step down".
He has yet to provide that.
originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
Man, the troops are really dug in in their trenches and not budging despite the heavy artillery rolling in.
One question I have, has Disney weighed in?
Pretty sure donald is their trademarked property and they generally take a dim view of that property being used outside of licensed events.
This may be a minor quibble in this circus, but the clowns are running the show and all I have are peanuts to throw.
originally posted by: MotherMayEye
originally posted by: kruphix
I'm asking him for proof that Creamer was "actively encouraged to step down".
He has yet to provide that.
He proved it with prima facie evidence: The active fallout from the Project Veritas videos 'encouraged him to step down.'
Do you have another logical alternate explanation?
originally posted by: kruphix
originally posted by: MotherMayEye
originally posted by: kruphix
I'm asking him for proof that Creamer was "actively encouraged to step down".
He has yet to provide that.
He proved it with prima facie evidence: The active fallout from the Project Veritas videos 'encouraged him to step down.'
Do you have another logical alternate explanation?
LOL.
No, a video can't "encourage" anyone.
You try so hard...but you don't seem to have a firm grasp on logic.
originally posted by: MotherMayEye
I am going to make a prediction...any civil cases resulting from the Project Veritas videos will be rejected or dropped or thrown out. The correct defendants won't be named, there will be no standing under the laws argued, or the legal arguments will be intentionally weak...or something else will cause them to fail.