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