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.

 

No, it's not Watergate

page: 3
3
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 10:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

Nixon committed a crime, using CIA to attack his political opposition. Trump was a private citizen in the election. He did no crime.




posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 10:54 AM
link   
a reply to: residentgood

Yeah especially when you hire one that Obama fired because his staff thought he was unstable.
Vetting doesn't seem to be trumps strong point.
Or he's looking for the wrong qualities in his appointees.



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 10:55 AM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

Your ignoring the fact they were spying on the Russians.



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 10:55 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

Obama sure hired a NUCLEAR SCIENTIST to head the DOE. A man who did nothing at the DOE. OVER qualified? Or was it bureaucracy?



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 10:55 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

Impeaching Trump

It’s worth recalling the Nixon chronology. In two years, the idea of impeaching Nixon went from loony-left fantasy, to mainstream, to inevitable.

On May 9, 1972—before the Watergate break-in―my former boss, Congressman William Fitts Ryan of Manhattan, submitted the first resolution to impeach Nixon, H.Res. 975, mainly for the illegal bombing of Cambodia, other war crimes, and spying against American citizens.

The break-in occurred in June 1972. Woodward and Bernstein got busy that summer and fall. The Senate Watergate Committee did not start hearings until May 1973, and the official House impeachment inquiry only began in May 1974. It took time for evidence, public pressure, and political courage to build. Nixon finally resigned in August 1974, more than two years after the break-in.

In October 1973, when removing Nixon from office still seemed a fantasy, the ACLU’s Chuck Morgan published a book-length bill of particulars urging Nixon’s impeachment. It bore a remarkable resemblance to the eventual Articles of Impeachment nearly a year later.

Nixon was a vile president with a creepy personality, but he was also a student of history and a serious person. In the end, even Nixon acceded to court orders to turn over evidence.



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 10:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

How by giving Clinton 3 million more votes than Trump ?

Unless the Russians 'hacked' the EC.

Give a rest.



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 10:59 AM
link   
a reply to: residentgood

I guess that still remains to be seen no?
This is only the beginning .
Sometimes I can correctly guess which elevator car will arrive first and sometimes I pick the right slot machine in a casino but I don't rely on psychic abilities as a rule.



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 10:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: man404
In Watergate, Nixon used his presidential powers to direct CIA to target his political opposition the Democrats. That is against democracy. That was illegal.

Even if Trump / Pence GOP team colluded with Russia to hack DNC and release dirt to the public, that is not illegal. That is informing voters before voting day. THEY did not do the hack, so they did not commit any crime under US law.


It sounds illegal.



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 10:59 AM
link   
Russia hack? BS. If that were the true, French and German election were also hacked. Russia is a loser who lost in Syria. Russia is a loser who can't do anything.



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 11:00 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

Under what law?



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 11:00 AM
link   
a reply to: residentgood

Trump did what?



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 11:00 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

You obviously know little of law when spying
Even if they were legally spying on russians(which would take a fisa warrant which if obamas admin issued there will be hell to pay) the info on the american citizen on american soil can not be released.

Since 50 U.S.C. § 1802(a)(1)(A) of this Act specifically limits warrantless surveillance to foreign powers as defined by 50 U.S.C. §1801(a) (1),(2), (3) and omits the definitions contained in 50 U.S.C. §1801(a) (4),(5),(6) the act does not authorize the use of warrantless surveillance on: groups engaged in international terrorism or activities in preparation therefore; foreign-based political organizations, not substantially composed of United States persons; or entities that are directed and controlled by a foreign government or governments.[16] Under the FISA act, anyone who engages in electronic surveillance except as authorized by statute is subject to both criminal penalties[17] and civil liabilities.

NO WARRENTLESS SURVEILLANCE on foreign based political organizations....like the russian govt

if they got a fisa warrant on trump or his admin katy bar the door it will get really really bad



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 11:00 AM
link   
Trump is the president, people need to get over it, and those that do not, are just supporting the corruption that is behind the attempt to undermine his administration and we know from where it comes from.

The democratic leadership or whatever is left of it.

He will be the president for the next 4 years guarantee and if the democratic party keep been stupid he will be 8 years total.

That is my prediction.



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 11:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Krazysh0t

and you choose to ignore where the info came from and where it was released or leaked from

The US intelligence community? What's wrong with that?


also you choose to ignore why the us citizen in the usa was being spied upon in the first place

Because we listen to ANY conversation that this Russian diplomat has with American people. Then when a man closely connected to the incoming President (and who was vying for the position of National Security advisor at that) communicates with him it raises alerts. All SOP.


as far as ignoring whose decision it was, frankly i dont care
yates is exposed as actively trying to undermine the current potus and the info she had "wanting to give you a heads up" in NO way equates ANY scenario in which national security was in jeopardy

look what flynn did was inappropriate, and he is rightfully no longer employed, but what he did in no way is a national security issue ;to frame it as such is disingenuous

Uh yes... Our National Security advisor being possibly beholden to the Russians is a HUGE national security issue.



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 11:04 AM
link   
Again, it's all about actions. Nixon did that. Trump did nothing.



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 11:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: residentgood
Again, it's all about actions. Nixon did that. Trump did nothing.

How do you know Trump's actions to make that claim?



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 11:07 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

He did not hack DNC. If he did, intelligence community would have found out and NYT / WaPo would have published it after receiving it from unnamed sources, as usual.



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 11:07 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Is very simple, Krazysh0t, only those that wants to see actions, will find them even if they do not exist.



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 11:08 AM
link   
a reply to: marg6043

That don't work. You cannot fabricate evidence. You can't fabricate Trump's voice.



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 11:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Power of the press.
Trump would be wise to heed.
People are already growing tired of the cry of fake news.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join