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's paranoid meltdown

page: 16
43
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 19 2017 @ 11:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: proteus33


THE PEOPLE VOTED HIM IN.


Trump lost the popular vote. The majority of voters did not vote for him. He won the election, but lost the popularity contest



He said the People voted in Trump. He was 100% correct.


Cling to that delusion. If the People voted him in, the People would not be protesting in the street.


Do you even know how crazy you sound. It's not up for debate that the people voted him in. The election happened you know, under your countries' system of govt. That does not mean all people like him, but that extends to every President and leader in history.

Bottom line is that the people put Trump in office, and your need to deny this reality makes me think you need some kind of moral crutch to prop up your increasingly unfounded attacks on the President.


yes, it is the delusional citizens of the united states that voted him in and there is no changing that. The conservatives are more so to blame (or clearly solely the only ones to blame) bc they elected him their candidate over many other more qualified candidates.

So yes, the ignorance of about half of Americans (the conservatives) reflects on America as a whole and we ALL have to suffer and be laughed at by the rest of the world bc of this. Trump will only end up a dark stain on america's history but damn we have to live thru it. I just try to find the good in all things and I really really really enjoy watching him fire up and get paranoid and throw tantrums.

He has proven to be a great psychological study, as well as his delusional lovers and supporters. Still sad for America though.
edit on 19-5-2017 by veracity because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 19 2017 @ 11:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: veracity

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: proteus33


THE PEOPLE VOTED HIM IN.


Trump lost the popular vote. The majority of voters did not vote for him. He won the election, but lost the popularity contest



He said the People voted in Trump. He was 100% correct.


Cling to that delusion. If the People voted him in, the People would not be protesting in the street.


Do you even know how crazy you sound. It's not up for debate that the people voted him in. The election happened you know, under your countries' system of govt. That does not mean all people like him, but that extends to every President and leader in history.

Bottom line is that the people put Trump in office, and your need to deny this reality makes me think you need some kind of moral crutch to prop up your increasingly unfounded attacks on the President.


yes, it is the delusional citizens of the united states that voted him in and there is no changing that. The conservatives are more so to blame (or clearly solely the only ones to blame) bc they elected him their candidate over many other more qualified candidates.

So yes, the ignorance of about half of Americans (the conservatives) reflects on America as a whole and we ALL have to suffer and be laughed at by the rest of the world bc of this. Trump will only end up a dark stain on america's history but damn we have to live thru it. I just try to find the good in all things and I really really really enjoy watching him fire up and get paranoid and throw tantrums.

He has proven to be a great psychological study, as well as his delusional lovers and supporters. Still sad for America though.


Strip away the partisan nonsense in your post and we get to the same conclusion - the people put Trump in office.



posted on May, 19 2017 @ 01:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: veracity

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: proteus33


THE PEOPLE VOTED HIM IN.


Trump lost the popular vote. The majority of voters did not vote for him. He won the election, but lost the popularity contest



He said the People voted in Trump. He was 100% correct.


Cling to that delusion. If the People voted him in, the People would not be protesting in the street.


Do you even know how crazy you sound. It's not up for debate that the people voted him in. The election happened you know, under your countries' system of govt. That does not mean all people like him, but that extends to every President and leader in history.

Bottom line is that the people put Trump in office, and your need to deny this reality makes me think you need some kind of moral crutch to prop up your increasingly unfounded attacks on the President.


yes, it is the delusional citizens of the united states that voted him in and there is no changing that. The conservatives are more so to blame (or clearly solely the only ones to blame) bc they elected him their candidate over many other more qualified candidates.

So yes, the ignorance of about half of Americans (the conservatives) reflects on America as a whole and we ALL have to suffer and be laughed at by the rest of the world bc of this. Trump will only end up a dark stain on america's history but damn we have to live thru it. I just try to find the good in all things and I really really really enjoy watching him fire up and get paranoid and throw tantrums.

He has proven to be a great psychological study, as well as his delusional lovers and supporters. Still sad for America though.


Strip away the partisan nonsense in your post and we get to the same conclusion - the people put Trump in office.


there is no nonsense...im just giving more detail. I personally do not like to be grouped with delusional 4-ever-trumpers.

to say "the people" put Trump into office is more of a stretched truth (especially when more than half of the American people voted for Hilary).


edit on 19-5-2017 by veracity because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 19 2017 @ 01:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: kelbtalfenek

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Vasa Croe



Think about it....this far there has been no evidence of a Trump tie to anything nefarious with Russia. He has publicly stated he is going to drain the swamp. Anyone can say he's an idiot, but I have yet to hear anyone here as successful as he is saying it.

I mean seriously....just think on that for a bit.


Are you serious? You really believe that there is nothing to tie Trump to Russia?

politico source
BBCfortune.com


Trump's server to Russia


That's just 3 articles...and I didn't even search his cabinet appointments or his campaign staff. Are these links to Russia "nefarious?" I have no idea...it could just be "Presidenting for profit." But even then that shows a conflict of interest at worst and complete bumbling at best.

If I was a Trump supporter, which I am not (nor was I "all in for Billary,) I would want these links investigated. Honestly I just want to know the truth. Is Trump doing exactly as it appears he is doing? Or is he trying the "back door" approach that works very well with inter-corporate dealings but looks extremely shady in international dealings. Whatever it is, I want to know the truth.



Unless that server is 24ct gold plated, they ain't gots nuttin'.

But Maxine has all the answers.







I don't even know who Maxine is...but I like how you ignored the first two articles.

And again, how about acknowledging that there is the appearance of something shady going on? Or do you have your Trump goggles on?



posted on May, 19 2017 @ 06:15 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

Clearly, you do not understand the American system of government, because I assume you understand what basic English words like "people" and "vote" mean. The people did not elect Donald Trump. Donald Trump lost the popular vote. Due to an outdated technical clause in the Constitution, he carried the Electoral College. This won him the Presidency, fair and square, and I have never claimed otherwise. He won because states that are practically empty of all human occupants still have a few votes in the College. So, no, the people did not elect him, he won on a technicality. If Clinton had lost the popular vote but carried the College, you could safely bet that the Republican Congress's first order of business would be to amend the Constitution to abolish it.



posted on May, 20 2017 @ 04:47 AM
link   
a reply to: allsee4eye

They have obviously found enough evidence to keep the investigation going. Not to mention Flynn talking to the Russians about the Crimean sanctions is a really big piece to the puzzle. the Trump campaign also contacted Russian officials at least 18 times throughout the elections this is not normal behavior. Especially considering they contacted other countries only 1 or 2 times for diplomatic purposes.

Russia has/ had every reason to either payoff or blackmail the administration because of the sanctions and money laundering investigations resulting in billions in fines. Trump has also been trying to get a tower in Russia for decades and has been establishing Russian business ties shady or otherwise the whole time. His own sons admitted to millions flowing in from Russia Nevermind the Russian gangsters operating out of Trump tower that supposedly were the initial cause for the wiretaps. Coincidence? Oh and I just saw this little nugget from back in February right as I was posting this
Trumps "peace" plan that would allow Russia to keep Crimea while also lifting sanctions
If you would like links for everything else i can oblige.

As far as Obama goes the worst thing the right could drudge up on him was that he was a black"Kenyan Muslim terrorist" which hardly warranted investigation, beyond his birth place of course. Hillary is an entirely different story and she should have never been a presidential candidate.
edit on 20-5-2017 by conscientiousobserver because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-5-2017 by conscientiousobserver because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2017 @ 04:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: conscientiousobserver
a reply to: allsee4eye

They have obviously found enough evidence to keep the investigation going. Not to mention Flynn talking to the Russians about the Crimean sanctions is a really big piece to the puzzle. the Trump campaign also contacted Russian officials at least 18 times throughout the elections this is not normal behavior. Especially considering they contacted other countries only 1 or 2 times for diplomatic purposes. Russia has/ had every reason to either payoff or blackmail the administration because of the sanctions and money laundering investigations restoring in billions in fines. Trump has also been trying to get a tower in Russia for decades and has been establishing Russian business ties shady or otherwise the whole time. His own sons admitted to millions flowing in from Russia Nevermind the Russian gangsters operating out of Trump tower that supposedly the initial cause for the wiretaps. Coincidence?


As far as Obama goes the worst thing the right could drudge up on him was that he was a black"Kenyan Muslim terrorist" which hardly warranted investigation, beyond his birth place of course. Hillary is an entirely different story and she should have never been a presidential candidate.


Flynn was cleared by the FBI of any wrong doing wrt talking about the Crimean sanctions, so no it really isn't a big piece of the puzzle.

Why are 18 contacts with Russians a problem and not normal? Can you list the 18 meetings and describe why they are not normal, or more importantly criminal? Where is the source that says they contacted other countries 1 or 2 times only? Which countries? Do you have the full list of all meetings with all countries so that we can compare?

Doing business in Russia, as a business man, is not a crime. Your innuendo is not a platform to state 'they have obviously found enough evidence to keep the investigation going'. Investigations are not continued on the basis of what evidence is found. They are continued on the basis of what avenues are left to explore before reaching a conclusion on whether there is enough / or any evidence to warrant an indictment.



posted on May, 20 2017 @ 04:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: UKTruth

Clearly, you do not understand the American system of government, because I assume you understand what basic English words like "people" and "vote" mean. The people did not elect Donald Trump. Donald Trump lost the popular vote. Due to an outdated technical clause in the Constitution, he carried the Electoral College. This won him the Presidency, fair and square, and I have never claimed otherwise. He won because states that are practically empty of all human occupants still have a few votes in the College. So, no, the people did not elect him, he won on a technicality. If Clinton had lost the popular vote but carried the College, you could safely bet that the Republican Congress's first order of business would be to amend the Constitution to abolish it.


Interesting that you would cite the popular vote and then accuse me of not understanding your system of govt. Also funny actually. What you are saying is that you don't like the American system, which I knew anyway. Your protestations don't change the fact that the people put President Trump in power and the electoral college decided to uphold the will of the people, as they always do.




posted on May, 20 2017 @ 05:07 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

No the delegates voted him into office. The majority of the people voted for Hillary, but because of gerrymandering those votes were spread out amongst Republican districts. In such a way that the republicans would get the majority. As far as i am concerned the electoral college is antiquated and is far too easy to manipulate.



posted on May, 20 2017 @ 05:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: conscientiousobserver
a reply to: UKTruth

No the delegates voted him into office. The majority of the people voted for Hillary, but because of gerrymandering those votes were spread out amongst Republican districts. In such a way that the republicans would get the majority. As far as i am concerned the electoral college is antiquated and is far too easy to manipulate.


Nope. The majority of people did not vote for Hillary.
The electoral college has always voted according to the will of the people under your system of elections. They did so again this time around.



posted on May, 20 2017 @ 05:12 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

Do you understand how gerrymandering works and how it effected this election?



posted on May, 20 2017 @ 05:12 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

Do you understand how gerrymandering works and how it effected this election?



posted on May, 20 2017 @ 05:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: conscientiousobserver
a reply to: UKTruth

Do you understand how gerrymandering works and how it effected this election?


Do you understand that district boundaries, apart from in 2 states with minimal impact on the overall outcome, are irrelevant to electoral college votes earned to determine the presidential winner? Or are you now saying that state boundaries have been set up for Republicans?



posted on May, 20 2017 @ 06:20 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth


Nope. The majority of people did not vote for Hillary.


The majority of people who voted, voted for Clinton. Deal with it, loser.


The electoral college has always voted according to the will of the people under your system of elections.


Ask Grover Cleveland and Al Gore if that's true.


They did so again this time around.


No, the will of the people was defeated by an archaic, gerrymandered system. There are more voters in some cities than there are in some states, and yet their votes seem to count for nothing now. There is a reason why there is so much anger in populated areas. Ironically, when the downtrodden blue collar workers realize that shrinking the government means shrinking their welfare checks....



posted on May, 20 2017 @ 03:10 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

I Do apologize I seemed to have gotten a bit mixed up and did not explain myself fully. No more 5 am posts for me I guess.

You are correct in that gerrymandering has no direct effect on presidential elections, but it does have an effect on voter turnout and could be considered as a form of voter suppression. As It allows for the dominate party to stay in control of each state and stifles any competition. Thus effecting voter mentality, and in some cases causing members of the minority party to move else where.

You did just point out The biggest problem with the electoral college and everything I previously mentioned. In that almost all states are winner take all during the general elections. Which defeats the whole purpose of the electoral college in the first place.



posted on May, 20 2017 @ 03:12 PM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

The man's as crazy as a road lizard.



posted on May, 20 2017 @ 06:08 PM
link   

edit on 20-5-2017 by ElectricUniverse because: edited for double post



posted on May, 20 2017 @ 06:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

I didn't expect anything coherent from you. Well played.



Riiight, so according to you presenting evidence of collusion between the DNC and the media is incoherent?... Yeah, such a claim had to come from you...

Keep drinking that DNC kool-aide mate....

edit on 20-5-2017 by ElectricUniverse because: add comment.



posted on May, 20 2017 @ 06:24 PM
link   
I say lock him up.
I'm sure the FBI is developing some child size handcuffs as we speak.



posted on May, 20 2017 @ 06:46 PM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

The fact that you consider Americans expressing political opinions to be "colluding" is perplexing. The DNC is not a hostile foreign government. Even if some media outlets portrayed Clinton more favorably than Trump, that is legitimate editorial freedom. Fox was there the whole time biasing the news the other way, so it is not like there was no range of opinion being offered the public.

The issue is: the Russians used a variety of their propaganda organs, including globalresearch.ca and other online "alt-fact" sites to influence the election. As a member of ATS, I hope you could see it happening before your own eyes. Troll after troll posting rumors, lies, and fictional "news" stories from fictional newspapers. Were members of Team Trump actually encouraging this blatant exploitation of the First Amendment?

Some Americans believe that the rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights only apply to American citizens. Do you agree or disagree? Do foreigners have the right to express themselves freely through American media if their intent is to harm the nation?

I believe that rights are universal. The Russians can say anything they want online or through cable and satellite media. The problem is that the American public seems to be losing its ability to think critically about the news. I have repeatedly said that the solution to "fake news" is not to punish those who propagate it, but rather to educate the public so that they do not fall for it. Do you agree or disagree?
edit on 20-5-2017 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
43
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join