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: 28
23
<< 25  26  27   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 19 2017 @ 06:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: UKTruth


The only FACT is that we just don't know.


Exactly the goal of Russia's disinformation program.


What? Facts are Russian disinformation? lol.


No; the deliberate confusion caused by "alternative facts."




posted on Jun, 19 2017 @ 07:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: UKTruth


The only FACT is that we just don't know.


Exactly the goal of Russia's disinformation program.


What? Facts are Russian disinformation? lol.


No; the deliberate confusion caused by "alternative facts."


Perhaps you should stop trying to deliberately confuse then.

Here are the facts - we don't know if the SC is investigating Trump. WaPo published an article about unnamed sources saying that some interviews had been set up.




posted on Jun, 19 2017 @ 08:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler



Are you actually claiming that there is no proof that these illegal leaks are coming from the intelligence community?


That is not what I said.

I think the point is completely going over your head.



posted on Jun, 19 2017 @ 08:41 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth



Trump's legal counsel has confirmed that Trump's tweet was in response to the WaPo story and that no one has told Trump he is under investigation - just like i told you. That was pretty obvious to any objective person.


It appears his legal counsel contradicted himself. Therefore the confusion.



Let's not forget you claimed as fact that Trump was under investigation and now you have egg on your face - again.


Trump is, in fact, under investigation.



I knew you would entrench yourself further and continue to spread propaganda, but you are only making yourself look silly.


What propaganda am I spreading by giving my opinion? You're then one spreading propaganda through unnamed sources.

You picked up the narrative immediately.



posted on Jun, 19 2017 @ 08:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: theultimatebelgianjoke
a reply to: DJW001

Trump Attorney Insists President Is Not Under Investigation

Lawyer: Trump will address mystery of the tapes by Friday



I doubt there is much mystery to the tapes - I suspect Trump was thinking aloud on twitter as he often does, including about the WaPo story. Not surprising at all that he would think there might be tapes given he knows he has been spied on, as have tens of thousands of other Americans.


Thinking out loud?

Where I am from, that's called talking out of your ass.

But you keep the narrative going. You're doing a fine job.



posted on Jun, 19 2017 @ 08:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: theultimatebelgianjoke
a reply to: DJW001

Trump Attorney Insists President Is Not Under Investigation

Lawyer: Trump will address mystery of the tapes by Friday



I doubt there is much mystery to the tapes - I suspect Trump was thinking aloud on twitter as he often does, including about the WaPo story. Not surprising at all that he would think there might be tapes given he knows he has been spied on, as have tens of thousands of other Americans.


Thinking out loud?

Where I am from, that's called talking out of your ass.

But you keep the narrative going. You're doing a fine job.


I see you still can't admit your mistake

Tough for you when the facts don't actually match your narrative.
Keep digging though.
Quite a bad few days for you - but do go ahead and make it worse.

edit on 19/6/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 19 2017 @ 09:07 AM
link   
a reply to: introvert

I watched about three or four of the interviews with the lawyer yesterday..
the only interview that he contradicted himself on was the fox news ironically..
and, I kind of think what happened was that the lawyer wasn't speaking clearly enough for the interviewer to not be able to twist his words, so the interviewer jumped at the chance to create the confusion...
I don't know if that is an art the fox news crew learned from the conservatives on sites like ATS or if the conservatives picked it up from Fox news...
but the lawyer did get rather "triggered" by the end....


edit on 19-6-2017 by dawnstar because: (no reason given)



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



I see you still can't admit your mistake Tough for you when the facts don't actually match your narrative. Keep digging though. Quite a bad few days for you - but do go ahead and make it worse.


It's actually been quite nice. Everything is coming together, as we expected it would.

There still has not been an official retraction from Trump or the WH. I do not have to admit any mistake.



posted on Jun, 19 2017 @ 09:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: introvert

I watched about three or four of the interviews with the lawyer yesterday..
the only interview that he contradicted himself on was the fox news ironically..
and, I kind of think what happened was that the lawyer wasn't speaking clearly enough for the interviewer to not be able to twist his words, so the interviewer jumped at the chance to create the confusion...
I don't know if that is an art the fox news crew learned from the conservatives on sites like ATS or if the conservatives picked it up from Fox news...
but the lawyer did get rather "triggered" by the end....



It can be a bit confusing. Trump is creating a mess, saying things on twitter without clarity, and his staff has to play damage control by spitting-out a specific narrative that was hastily concocted.



posted on Jun, 19 2017 @ 10:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: introvert

I watched about three or four of the interviews with the lawyer yesterday..
the only interview that he contradicted himself on was the fox news ironically..
and, I kind of think what happened was that the lawyer wasn't speaking clearly enough for the interviewer to not be able to twist his words, so the interviewer jumped at the chance to create the confusion...
I don't know if that is an art the fox news crew learned from the conservatives on sites like ATS or if the conservatives picked it up from Fox news...
but the lawyer did get rather "triggered" by the end....



It can be a bit confusing. Trump is creating a mess, saying things on twitter without clarity, and his staff has to play damage control by spitting-out a specific narrative that was hastily concocted.



Yep, imagine trying to protect a guilty man who makes the mess bigger with his own tweets every day.



posted on Jun, 19 2017 @ 07:18 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth


Tough for you when the facts don't actually match your narrative.


Unfortunately, Kellyanne Conway has given the game away. The lawyer wisely talked in circles. Conway explained that Trump was speaking "ironically." In other words, Trump does not think someone he appointed would be so disloyal as to investigate him. Comey was correct. Trump establishes patronage and puts loyalty above the duty to enforce the law.
edit on 19-6-2017 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 19 2017 @ 07:35 PM
link   
To tell you the truth, I don't know how much longer Bob will be SC.
You see, he's has been the talk of the town all day inside the beltway.
People have been wondering over the last 7 years or so how HC got her hooks into him and well....
It seems that some kind soul took that info to a certain information sharing site for the world to see.

Alright boys, its due diligence time.

Buck
edit on 19-6-2017 by flatbush71 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 19 2017 @ 08:06 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth


WaPo published an article about unnamed sources saying that some interviews had been set up.


So where does that imply the leak is? Who are the interviewees? Why are they not named? (Get the picture yet?)



posted on Jun, 19 2017 @ 08:53 PM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

Well, so far it has been proven to be fake news. The DoJ has denied that any such action or decision has been made.

But it's only logical to assume such leaks (if they were true) would be coming from the originator of the information, which in this case, is the mueller team.



posted on Jun, 19 2017 @ 09:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite


Well, so far it has been proven to be fake news.


What, exactly, has been "proven to be fake news?" Where is this proven? Why do you believe this source?



posted on Jun, 19 2017 @ 09:59 PM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

"What, exactly, has been "proven to be fake news?""

The idea that trump is under investigation.

"Where is this proven?"
www.youtube.com...
www.cnn.com...

"Why do you believe this source?"
Because it makes a lot more sense than the WaPo article, which was followed up by an official statement by mueller saying not to believe anonymous sourced articles.
www.nytimes.com...



new topics

top topics



 
23
<< 25  26  27   >>

log in

join