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.

 

Donald Trump has just directly accused Obama of wiretapping Trump residence.

page: 278
158
<< 275  276  277    279  280  281 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 09:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: UKTruth

Or we will confirm that no such thing ever happened, that trump is a pathological liar, that he got his info from a fake news source and that he is severely handicapped by mental paranoia.


I just read about the request.
The House Intelligence Committee is seeking evidence, which is what they are supposed to be doing.
I doubt the conclusion will be anything like your over emotional and mentally unstable conclusion.


That's just a pathetic ad hominem statement. It does nothing for the argument.


The 'argument' was that:

we will confirm that no such thing ever happened, that trump is a pathological liar, that he got his info from a fake news source and that he is severely handicapped by mental paranoia.


Anyone who thinks that will be the conclusion if Trump does not provide evidence on Monday is being overly emotional and showing signs of mental instability.


The ad homeinem fallacy was this:



I doubt the conclusion will be anything like your over emotional and mentally unstable conclusion.


Totally unnecessary to your point and invalidates your argument. Once again.


Once again?

Sounds like you are still smarting from you difficult time on this thread, what with your ridiculous statements being disproved repeatedly.
Still, whatever... carry on.


And now you resort to ridiculous ad hominem regarding me. Is your argument really that weak?




posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 09:13 AM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe

I don't make up stories.
They're giving him a deadline.
Of course what happens when that passes and he offers nothing is anybody's guess.
Teflon.
Paving the way for the next asinine movement by trump and bannon.



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 09:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: UKTruth

Or we will confirm that no such thing ever happened, that trump is a pathological liar, that he got his info from a fake news source and that he is severely handicapped by mental paranoia.


I just read about the request.
The House Intelligence Committee is seeking evidence, which is what they are supposed to be doing.
I doubt the conclusion will be anything like your over emotional and mentally unstable conclusion.


That's just a pathetic ad hominem statement. It does nothing for the argument.


The 'argument' was that:

we will confirm that no such thing ever happened, that trump is a pathological liar, that he got his info from a fake news source and that he is severely handicapped by mental paranoia.


Anyone who thinks that will be the conclusion if Trump does not provide evidence on Monday is being overly emotional and showing signs of mental instability.


The ad homeinem fallacy was this:



I doubt the conclusion will be anything like your over emotional and mentally unstable conclusion.


Totally unnecessary to your point and invalidates your argument. Once again.


Once again?

Sounds like you are still smarting from you difficult time on this thread, what with your ridiculous statements being disproved repeatedly.
Still, whatever... carry on.


And now you resort to ridiculous ad hominem regarding me. Is your argument really that weak?


Seems you are unable to take what you dish out. Maybe it's time for you to have a break?



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 09:14 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

Exactly.



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 09:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: UKTruth

Stop it.
I won't play your stupid games .
The house intel committee investigating this lie that trump tweeted is demanding he prove it.
Put up or shut up.


No they aren't demanding anything and actually can't demand it. They have asked nicely...thats all they can do.

The reason he may have to keep from releasing it to them is because it could also be a part of a separate DoJ investigation that would be compromised should the info be released.

He basically gave them enough info to scramble and is likely watching who is covering up what at this point. He has been doing it this way for a while and people just don't seem to get it.

Either way...why are the people that are supposed to be doing this job asking him to do their job for them? I mean, the are part of the House Intel Committee right? There has been no denial that the request for this tap was put in...so I guess these guys don't have the clearance to see the evidence? Wouldn't that suggest it was classified WAY above their heads or part of a special program? And if that's the case, there are only literally a handful of people that can do that.

I'm guessing Obama's team is scrambling for a fall guy at this point...trying to buy time.



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 09:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: UKTruth

Or we will confirm that no such thing ever happened, that trump is a pathological liar, that he got his info from a fake news source and that he is severely handicapped by mental paranoia.


I just read about the request.
The House Intelligence Committee is seeking evidence, which is what they are supposed to be doing.
I doubt the conclusion will be anything like your over emotional and mentally unstable conclusion.


That's just a pathetic ad hominem statement. It does nothing for the argument.


The 'argument' was that:

we will confirm that no such thing ever happened, that trump is a pathological liar, that he got his info from a fake news source and that he is severely handicapped by mental paranoia.


Anyone who thinks that will be the conclusion if Trump does not provide evidence on Monday is being overly emotional and showing signs of mental instability.


The ad homeinem fallacy was this:



I doubt the conclusion will be anything like your over emotional and mentally unstable conclusion.


Totally unnecessary to your point and invalidates your argument. Once again.


Once again?

Sounds like you are still smarting from you difficult time on this thread, what with your ridiculous statements being disproved repeatedly.
Still, whatever... carry on.


And now you resort to ridiculous ad hominem regarding me. Is your argument really that weak?


Seems you are unable to take what you dish out. Maybe it's time for you to have a break?


I've pointed out the flaws in your argument. You're reacting with parroted, emotion-laden (and irrational) statements.

No, I think I'll stay.

The argument here, nearly 6000 comments later, is a repetition of Trump's claim that President Obama ordered unlawful surveillance of Trump and his residence. There is not one shred of proof for that.



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 09:19 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

Prove I'm wrong.

So far his behavior indicates everything I've said is true.

Unstable.
Pathological liar
Morally deficient



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 09:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Vasa Croe

I don't make up stories.
They're giving him a deadline.
Of course what happens when that passes and he offers nothing is anybody's guess.
Teflon.
Paving the way for the next asinine movement by trump and bannon.


You just did by saying there was a deadline. That would suggest there are consequences for not doing so and that isn't the case. It was a request...they can't demand or put deadlines on anything for the President. The story is simply another hyped up crapfest trying to get people to wonder. Well...wonder on...if there is classified info in whatever they want maybe he should demand together clearance to see it...after all, it would have been Obama that classified it....he apparently didn't think they had the credentials to read it either.



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 09:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Your claim that the President couldn't release the supposed proof of his claim to the House and Senate Intelligence Committees seems to be lacking.

The leaders of those committees have sufficient security clearance to receive such information or at least the provenance of such information.

Further, if the President knew that the evidence could not be released, then why did he broadcast it, world-wide, on Twitter?



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 09:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Why wouldn't the President provide proof for his rather extraordinary statement?

Seems like he'd want to get that out of the way quickly and re-establish his validity.


Re establish is validity? Are you saying he is not currently a valid President?
One would think that evidence is being requested from several parties.


Why would you interpret that statement in that way? Does a President stop being a President because he makes an invalid statement?

I am saying that the statement he made is not backed up by anything, and he has provided zero evidence to support what he said at this point. Thus the validity of what he said is in question.

Why must you always attempt to insert words into or misconstrue what others post? That also weakens your arguments.

You said 're-establish his credibility', not the validity of his statement.
Perhaps you should have been more clear.



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 09:23 AM
link   
Attacking President Trump personally adds nothing to any arguments either.



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 09:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: UKTruth

Stop it.
I won't play your stupid games .
The house intel committee investigating this lie that trump tweeted is demanding he prove it.
Put up or shut up.


No they aren't demanding anything and actually can't demand it. .


You're right, they can't. But a court can if Obama decides to file suit. Also the House Ethics can certainly force his hand as well.

But leaving all that aside, if Trump believes he doesn't have to, or if he decides to withhold evidence, as much as the sycophantic demographic (some of which may be among us) wouldn't want to believe this, the majority of Americans including a large degree of staunch Trump supporters will suddenly abandon him.



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 09:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: UKTruth

Prove I'm wrong.

So far his behavior indicates everything I've said is true.

Unstable.
Pathological liar
Morally deficient



I think the burden of proof for those statements are on you.
All you are proving right now is my earlier point.
edit on 12/3/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 09:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Why wouldn't the President provide proof for his rather extraordinary statement?

Seems like he'd want to get that out of the way quickly and re-establish his validity.


Re establish is validity? Are you saying he is not currently a valid President?
One would think that evidence is being requested from several parties.


Why would you interpret that statement in that way? Does a President stop being a President because he makes an invalid statement?

I am saying that the statement he made is not backed up by anything, and he has provided zero evidence to support what he said at this point. Thus the validity of what he said is in question.

Why must you always attempt to insert words into or misconstrue what others post? That also weakens your arguments.

You said 're-establish his credibility', not the validity of his statement.
Perhaps you should have been more clear.


You can't even get my statement right.

The meaning is completely clear. This thread is referring to a statement that Mr. Trump made. One wonders why you are so desperate to muddy the water of this discussion with logical fallacies and mistakes/dishonesty.



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 09:24 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

Oh I thought you can't diagnose mental issues remotely...
Or is it just those who oppose your viewpoints that have mental issues?
I've read pages of asinine juvenile arguments from you. Nit picking words, definitions, punctuation. You're all over the place trying to get the narrative to conform to your desired outcome.
Sounds a bit obsessive to me.



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 09:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Your claim that the President couldn't release the supposed proof of his claim to the House and Senate Intelligence Committees seems to be lacking.

The leaders of those committees have sufficient security clearance to receive such information or at least the provenance of such information.

Further, if the President knew that the evidence could not be released, then why did he broadcast it, world-wide, on Twitter?



If they had clearance to see them then they could go look them up on their own. They obviously do not have clearance to see them.

If the evidence is being used in another official investigation then they are not going to release it.

The reason to tweet about it...simple really. You put a statement out that sends those that know of the incident into a frenzy to find out what you know...they start trying to cover their tracks and you get to see who is doing what to better understand who was involved. It is a very old business practice used by many in order to ferret out those that are doing harm and trying to influence others to do the same.



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 09:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Why wouldn't the President provide proof for his rather extraordinary statement?

Seems like he'd want to get that out of the way quickly and re-establish his validity.


Re establish is validity? Are you saying he is not currently a valid President?
One would think that evidence is being requested from several parties.


Why would you interpret that statement in that way? Does a President stop being a President because he makes an invalid statement?

I am saying that the statement he made is not backed up by anything, and he has provided zero evidence to support what he said at this point. Thus the validity of what he said is in question.

Why must you always attempt to insert words into or misconstrue what others post? That also weakens your arguments.

You said 're-establish his credibility', not the validity of his statement.
Perhaps you should have been more clear.


You can't even get my statement right.

The meaning is completely clear. This thread is referring to a statement that Mr. Trump made. One wonders why you are so desperate to muddy the water of this discussion with logical fallacies and mistakes/dishonesty.


They were your words. Your referred to the person, not his statement.
I asked for clarification on what you meant, and you have now removed the mud from the waters by clarifying what you meant. Great.



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 09:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: UKTruth

Stop it.
I won't play your stupid games .
The house intel committee investigating this lie that trump tweeted is demanding he prove it.
Put up or shut up.


No they aren't demanding anything and actually can't demand it. .


You're right, they can't. But a court can if Obama decides to file suit. Also the House Ethics can certainly force his hand as well.

But leaving all that aside, if Trump believes he doesn't have to, or if he decides to withhold evidence, as much as the sycophantic demographic (some of which may be among us) wouldn't want to believe this, the majority of Americans including a large degree of staunch Trump supporters will suddenly abandon him.


I wouldn't hold my breath for Obama to file a suit. If what Trump said is false, where is that suit?

Not releasing them could simply be a clearance issue with another ongoing investigation depending on how broad a net Obama cast with his request.

The requests Obama put in for tapping have so far not been denied by them....so is it the position of the opposition that he just put the requests in for fun or to see if he could get them? What was it...3 times?



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 09:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe

How does it follow that having clearance to see this alleged evidence mean that they "would go look them up"? Look "them" up where?

That's just not the way investigations work. Someone who makes a claim backs it up. That's, like, 101.

The President made an extraordinary claim, and your claim is ... a lot of pro-Trump worship.

If the evidence is being used in another official investigation, it can still be discussed in Congress, or have you forgotten the sideshow with the "investigations" of Hillary Clinton?

So ... your idea is that the President tweeted to destabilize the government and cause chaos? I can't disagree with that.
edit on 12-3-2017 by Gryphon66 because: Spelling



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 09:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: UKTruth

Oh I thought you can't diagnose mental issues remotely...
Or is it just those who oppose your viewpoints that have mental issues?
I've read pages of asinine juvenile arguments from you. Nit picking words, definitions, punctuation. You're all over the place trying to get the narrative to conform to your desired outcome.
Sounds a bit obsessive to me.


We'll soon see if the conclusion of the House Intelligence Committee matches your diagnosis if no evidence if provided. I am betting it won't.
edit on 12/3/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
158
<< 275  276  277    279  280  281 >>

log in

join