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.

 

Special counsel is investigating Trump for possible obstruction of justice

page: 22
23
<< 19  20  21    23  24  25 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 16 2017 @ 04:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: introvert

Show me the official statement that the FBI under Mueller is investigating now Trump for obstruction of justice.

I can not find it.



Look at Trump's tweet. He said he was under investigation.


Please provide the official statement that Trump is under investigation from either the DoJ or the SC.


You have nothing to back up you claim - apart from speculation... you who apparently "wait for the facts". Sure. Seems that principal gets thrown out of the window when you get over excited and you can;t control your confirmation bias.


Trump told me via twitter. Unless we believe the unnamed source.



We don't even know if Trump was referring to a SC investigation.


Is the person that told Trump to fire Comey part of the Judiciary committee?




posted on Jun, 16 2017 @ 04:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: UKTruth



Proof please.


You know very well that he is under investigation by the Judiciary committee.



My position is simply that we don't know and the last verifiable information we have is that Trump is not and never has been under investigation.


Yes, we do know. You admitted that he was under investigation yesterday by congress.

Are you now denying that?


This thread is about the SC.

The Judiciary is not investigating any crime and like I said many times - the only avenue open is impeachment. We'll see where Grassley goes with that.


The poster I replied to did not specify SC or JC. Fact is, he's under investigation.


So prove it.
A Trump tweet that has already been questioned as to what he meant is not proof - unless you only believe unnamed sources when it suits... surely not.

I'll wait for the official statement and pass on your propaganda thanks.


You conceded to that fact yesterday that he was under investigation by congress.

Flip flopping on that?

It appears you are believing in unnamed source while criticizing those that believe in unnamed sources.

When it comes to hypocrisy, you have no shame in your game.



posted on Jun, 16 2017 @ 04:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: introvert

Let's not pretend you can say exactly what you mean in 143 character. I will agree that if he can't be specific enough, he should probably not write a tweet about it. Saying he has zero credibility is a little much, especially if you still believe the media with how many times they've been wrong.


The media has nothing to do with Trump's own words and actions. He is responsible for that.

The unnamed source's comment about it referring to the WaPo story does not make sense, given the context of what Trump tweeted.

He specifically referred to who was in charge of the investigation and called it a witch hunt.


Trump has nothing to do with the media extrapolating a 143 character statement without asking if any of their extrapolation was accurate. They're both at fault here. I get you don't wanna admit that cause you hate Trump but the media should have higher standards than they've been displaying lately.



posted on Jun, 16 2017 @ 04:24 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Trump just needs to pardon himself already



posted on Jun, 16 2017 @ 04:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: UKTruth



Proof please.


You know very well that he is under investigation by the Judiciary committee.



My position is simply that we don't know and the last verifiable information we have is that Trump is not and never has been under investigation.


Yes, we do know. You admitted that he was under investigation yesterday by congress.

Are you now denying that?


This thread is about the SC.

The Judiciary is not investigating any crime and like I said many times - the only avenue open is impeachment. We'll see where Grassley goes with that.


The poster I replied to did not specify SC or JC. Fact is, he's under investigation.


So prove it.
A Trump tweet that has already been questioned as to what he meant is not proof - unless you only believe unnamed sources when it suits... surely not.

I'll wait for the official statement and pass on your propaganda thanks.


You conceded to that fact yesterday that he was under investigation by congress.

Flip flopping on that?

It appears you are believing in unnamed source while criticizing those that believe in unnamed sources.

When it comes to hypocrisy, you have no shame in your game.


We're talking about the SC and as yet we have heard nothing from the people who would investigate that they are investigating Trump. A simple fact there you can;t get away from. Which leaves you with your own and others speculation - dressed up as fact. If that is what you meant when congratulating yourself over and over again for 'waiting for the facts' then it explains a lot of your posts.



posted on Jun, 16 2017 @ 04:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: introvert

Let's not pretend you can say exactly what you mean in 143 character. I will agree that if he can't be specific enough, he should probably not write a tweet about it. Saying he has zero credibility is a little much, especially if you still believe the media with how many times they've been wrong.


The media has nothing to do with Trump's own words and actions. He is responsible for that.

The unnamed source's comment about it referring to the WaPo story does not make sense, given the context of what Trump tweeted.

He specifically referred to who was in charge of the investigation and called it a witch hunt.


Trump has nothing to do with the media extrapolating a 143 character statement without asking if any of their extrapolation was accurate. They're both at fault here. I get you don't wanna admit that cause you hate Trump but the media should have higher standards than they've been displaying lately.


Sure, the media sucks. That is not my problem. I'm talking about Trump and what he has said. Instead of sticking to that point, you're trying to introduce a red herring argument about the media.



posted on Jun, 16 2017 @ 04:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: introvert

Let's not pretend you can say exactly what you mean in 143 character. I will agree that if he can't be specific enough, he should probably not write a tweet about it. Saying he has zero credibility is a little much, especially if you still believe the media with how many times they've been wrong.


The media has nothing to do with Trump's own words and actions. He is responsible for that.

The unnamed source's comment about it referring to the WaPo story does not make sense, given the context of what Trump tweeted.

He specifically referred to who was in charge of the investigation and called it a witch hunt.


Trump has nothing to do with the media extrapolating a 143 character statement without asking if any of their extrapolation was accurate. They're both at fault here. I get you don't wanna admit that cause you hate Trump but the media should have higher standards than they've been displaying lately.


These people will parse statements when it suits and take a word for word statement when it suits - the same dishonest people who are 'taking Trump at his word' now are the very same ones who insinuated he called for Clinton's assassination with his second amendment comment. You can't trust a leftist. They lie as a matter of course - it's part of their character. Never under estimate their dishonesty.
edit on 16/6/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 16 2017 @ 04:31 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth



We're talking about the SC and as yet we have heard nothing from the people who would investigate that they are investigating Trump.


I was referring to the JC in response to another poster. Trump is being investigated.



A simple fact there you can;t get away from. Which leaves you with your own and others speculation - dressed up as fact.


Apparently Trump knows. Can we no longer believe what he says?



If that is what you meant when congratulating yourself over and over again for 'waiting for the facts' then it explains a lot of your posts


Fact, Trump said so.

Also, why won't you address your hypocrisy? You have yet to address it.

Flip flopping, dodging tough questions and trying to turn this around on to me when you can't defend yourself.



posted on Jun, 16 2017 @ 04:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: UKTruth



We're talking about the SC and as yet we have heard nothing from the people who would investigate that they are investigating Trump.


I was referring to the JC in response to another poster. Trump is being investigated.



A simple fact there you can;t get away from. Which leaves you with your own and others speculation - dressed up as fact.


Apparently Trump knows. Can we no longer believe what he says?



If that is what you meant when congratulating yourself over and over again for 'waiting for the facts' then it explains a lot of your posts


Fact, Trump said so.

Also, why won't you address your hypocrisy? You have yet to address it.

Flip flopping, dodging tough questions and trying to turn this around on to me when you can't defend yourself.


After your diatribe - and dodging - please point to the DoJ or SC statement that Trump is under investigation.
Simple request.



posted on Jun, 16 2017 @ 04:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: introvert

Let's not pretend you can say exactly what you mean in 143 character. I will agree that if he can't be specific enough, he should probably not write a tweet about it. Saying he has zero credibility is a little much, especially if you still believe the media with how many times they've been wrong.


The media has nothing to do with Trump's own words and actions. He is responsible for that.

The unnamed source's comment about it referring to the WaPo story does not make sense, given the context of what Trump tweeted.

He specifically referred to who was in charge of the investigation and called it a witch hunt.


Trump has nothing to do with the media extrapolating a 143 character statement without asking if any of their extrapolation was accurate. They're both at fault here. I get you don't wanna admit that cause you hate Trump but the media should have higher standards than they've been displaying lately.


These people will parse statements when it suits and take a word for word statement when it suits - the same dishonest people who are 'taking Trump at his word' now are the very same ones who insinuated he called for Clinton's assassination with his second amendment comment. You can't trust a leftist. They lie as a matter of course - it's part of their character. Never under estimate their dishonesty.


You are doing the same. You are parsing words and using unnamed sources as fact while you criticize other for doing the same thing.

Your hypocrisy has reached new level and you are no longer even hiding it. You need to settle down and take a deep breath. You're beginning to step on your own toes.



posted on Jun, 16 2017 @ 04:36 PM
link   
Do we know for sure Trump is being investigated?

Or is it only ALL the people who directly report to Trump who are being investigated? Like his son-in-law, his lawyer, his friends and closest advisors?

Only those people? Or is it Trump, too?




posted on Jun, 16 2017 @ 04:36 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

Well we were discussing whether the reporting was accurate, it wasn't. Part of that is Trump's fault for putting out an ambiguous statement and part of that is the media's fault for making assumptions and running with it without checking. Either way the reporting wasn't accurate, he didn't acknowledge he was being investigated.



posted on Jun, 16 2017 @ 04:39 PM
link   
a reply to: spiritualzombie

I hope it's everyone, that way when nothing is found we don't have to hear months of "well they should investigate [insert new scapegoat for the loss of the November election]!"



posted on Jun, 16 2017 @ 04:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: UKTruth



We're talking about the SC and as yet we have heard nothing from the people who would investigate that they are investigating Trump.


I was referring to the JC in response to another poster. Trump is being investigated.



A simple fact there you can;t get away from. Which leaves you with your own and others speculation - dressed up as fact.


Apparently Trump knows. Can we no longer believe what he says?



If that is what you meant when congratulating yourself over and over again for 'waiting for the facts' then it explains a lot of your posts


Fact, Trump said so.

Also, why won't you address your hypocrisy? You have yet to address it.

Flip flopping, dodging tough questions and trying to turn this around on to me when you can't defend yourself.


After your diatribe - and dodging - please point to the DoJ or SC statement that Trump is under investigation.
Simple request.


You are in no position to make any request.

I'm taking Trump's word for what it's worth and I have not seen any official retraction or clarification.

We have no reason to believe he meant anything else.

Which leads us back to your hypocrisy...which you refuse to address.

At this point, you no longer have any credibility to criticize others.



posted on Jun, 16 2017 @ 04:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: introvert

Well we were discussing whether the reporting was accurate, it wasn't. Part of that is Trump's fault for putting out an ambiguous statement and part of that is the media's fault for making assumptions and running with it without checking. Either way the reporting wasn't accurate, he didn't acknowledge he was being investigated.


Yes, he did in his tweet. Has there been an official retraction or clarification from the WH?

I haven't seen one. Therefore his statement stands.



posted on Jun, 16 2017 @ 04:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: introvert

Let's not pretend you can say exactly what you mean in 143 character. I will agree that if he can't be specific enough, he should probably not write a tweet about it. Saying he has zero credibility is a little much, especially if you still believe the media with how many times they've been wrong.


The media has nothing to do with Trump's own words and actions. He is responsible for that.

The unnamed source's comment about it referring to the WaPo story does not make sense, given the context of what Trump tweeted.

He specifically referred to who was in charge of the investigation and called it a witch hunt.


Trump has nothing to do with the media extrapolating a 143 character statement without asking if any of their extrapolation was accurate. They're both at fault here. I get you don't wanna admit that cause you hate Trump but the media should have higher standards than they've been displaying lately.


These people will parse statements when it suits and take a word for word statement when it suits - the same dishonest people who are 'taking Trump at his word' now are the very same ones who insinuated he called for Clinton's assassination with his second amendment comment. You can't trust a leftist. They lie as a matter of course - it's part of their character. Never under estimate their dishonesty.


You are doing the same. You are parsing words and using unnamed sources as fact while you criticize other for doing the same thing.

Your hypocrisy has reached new level and you are no longer even hiding it. You need to settle down and take a deep breath. You're beginning to step on your own toes.


Nah, I am reading Trump's tweet in context based on what he has tweeted for months - he is reacting to a story in the paper. He does that a lot. I am using common sense that there is no way in the world that the SC would tell Trump if he WAS under investigation. Most of all I am ignoring the propaganda and waiting for confirmation by the only people that matter - the DoJ and the SC, as they are the ones who would actually carry out such an investigation.

Right now we simply don't know if the SC are investigating Trump - certainly not as fact.

I'll leave it to you to claim 'facts' when there are none to confirm that Trump is under investigation by the SC. I would note that you were claiming this as 'fact' BEFORE any Trump tweet anyway - just more dishonesty. I would have thought you'd still be wiping a years worth of egg off your face from your constant previous claims that Trump was under investigation, but it appears you must like the taste of egg running from your forehead into your mouth. Still, your dishonesty is well known, so I will leave you to your propaganda.
edit on 16/6/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 16 2017 @ 04:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: introvert

Well we were discussing whether the reporting was accurate, it wasn't. Part of that is Trump's fault for putting out an ambiguous statement and part of that is the media's fault for making assumptions and running with it without checking. Either way the reporting wasn't accurate, he didn't acknowledge he was being investigated.


Yes, he did in his tweet. Has there been an official retraction or clarification from the WH?

I haven't seen one. Therefore his statement stands.


There's been a leak that's just as likely to be real as the leak that WaPo cited that says his tweet didn't mean that. If you choose to believe one but not the other you're being very biased. I don't put great stock in either of them, nor do I think Trump's tweets are always 100% word for word literal. In order for your position to be correct you'd have to believe Trump is always to be taken literally and you'd have to pick and choose which anonymous sources you believe based on whether you like the info or not. Is that really how you want to make your decisions?



posted on Jun, 16 2017 @ 05:20 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth



Nah, I am reading Trump's tweet in context based on what he has tweeted for months - he is reacting to a story in the paper. He does that a lot.


No. You are placing the context you find most desirable on to his tweet. Apparently, because we can't take him for his word.



I am using common sense that there is no way in the world that the SC would tell Trump if he WAS under investigation. Most of all I am ignoring the propaganda and waiting for confirmation by the only people that matter - the DoJ and the SC, as they are the ones who would actually carry out such an investigation.


The FBI told him he was not under investigation, despite their longstanding policy. So it is quite possible.

Also, there may be a leak feeding Trump.

By the way, that is called a common sense logical fallacy.



I'll leave it to you to claim 'facts' when there are none to confirm that Trump is under investigation by the SC. I would note that you were claiming this as 'fact' BEFORE any Trump tweet anyway - just more dishonesty.


Yes, I did state it as fact. It is a foregone conclusion. They have to investigate it.

Sorry for being honest.



I would have thought you'd still be wiping a years worth of egg off your face from your constant previous claims that Trump was under investigation


I never claimed he was under investigation at the FBI. You are making that up. More lies.



but it appears you must like the taste of egg running from your forehead into your mouth. Still, your dishonesty is well known, so I will leave you to your propaganda.


Trying the old "I know you are but what am I" trick, huh?

You made yourself out to look like a hypocritical fool in this thread and you still can't seem to have the least bit of shame or humility. And you still have yet to address the points I brought up. You're afraid to, so you try to turn the attention on to me.

Now that is dishonesty.
edit on 16-6-2017 by introvert because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 16 2017 @ 05:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: introvert

Well we were discussing whether the reporting was accurate, it wasn't. Part of that is Trump's fault for putting out an ambiguous statement and part of that is the media's fault for making assumptions and running with it without checking. Either way the reporting wasn't accurate, he didn't acknowledge he was being investigated.


Yes, he did in his tweet. Has there been an official retraction or clarification from the WH?

I haven't seen one. Therefore his statement stands.


There's been a leak that's just as likely to be real as the leak that WaPo cited that says his tweet didn't mean that. If you choose to believe one but not the other you're being very biased. I don't put great stock in either of them, nor do I think Trump's tweets are always 100% word for word literal. In order for your position to be correct you'd have to believe Trump is always to be taken literally and you'd have to pick and choose which anonymous sources you believe based on whether you like the info or not. Is that really how you want to make your decisions?


I am not taking either one's word. Only Trump's.

It's either I take him for his word or I have to create some context out of thin air. You can't look at his previous tweets for indications because he's used the term witch hunt in regards to many different issues, both in reference to investigations and the media.

To say in this case he meant one and not the other is completely disingenuous and biased.



posted on Jun, 16 2017 @ 05:34 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

You don't have to create context out of thin air. You just have to be familiar with the way Trump speaks, beyond little snippets taken out of context you see on CNN. He utilizes sarcasm a fair bit. It's not very farfetched that the tweet was meant to be sarcastic, especially considering how adamant he's been to date that he's not under investigation.

Actually, if you wanna take his tweet 100% literally word for word, he actually didn't confirm the WaPo story anyway. WaPo reported he's under investigation by Mueller. Trump's tweet was that he's under investigation by the guy who told him to fire Comey. That would be Rosenstein. That doens't even make sense. The Deputy AG doesn't conduct investigations. But that must be what's happening, because we must take Trump's tweet 100% literally, according to you.
edit on 16 6 17 by face23785 because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
23
<< 19  20  21    23  24  25 >>

log in

join