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.

 

Trump Tweets NO Transgender in Military

page: 51
78
<< 48  49  50    52  53  54 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 27 2017 @ 01:19 PM
link   
a reply to: RomeByFire




I prefer the term #alternativefacts

I'm just following the suit of the current POTUS by triggering all the delicate snowflakes

Winning11!1!1!1!1


It's not fun getting busted in lies, is it? Especially exactly when you are accusing others of doing the same. Just perfect.




posted on Jul, 27 2017 @ 01:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheTory
a reply to: Deaf Alien




Are you saying that Trump consulted with them before he made his tweet?


You can read what I said.


Deflect deflect deflect.



posted on Jul, 27 2017 @ 01:20 PM
link   
a reply to: RomeByFire

As I said ... a very limited playbook.



posted on Jul, 27 2017 @ 01:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheTory
a reply to: Deaf Alien




Are you saying that Trump consulted with them before he made his tweet?


You can read what I said.

So yes? He consulted them? Ok then give me a source for that please.



posted on Jul, 27 2017 @ 01:21 PM
link   
a reply to: SudoNim




Deflect deflect deflect.


Denial, denial, denial. Accuse others of that which you are guilty.



posted on Jul, 27 2017 @ 01:22 PM
link   
Lies is it?

Like Trumps lies about consulting with Command?

Or the ones about lack of military fitness?

Or the mindless repetition of unfounded percentages?



posted on Jul, 27 2017 @ 01:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Deaf Alien




So yes? He consulted them? Ok then give me a source for that please.


Read his tweet.



posted on Jul, 27 2017 @ 01:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66




Lies is it?

Like Trumps lies about consulting with Command?

Or the ones about lack of military fitness?

Or the mindless repetition of unfounded percentages?


All of these arguments with question marks behind them. How about you consult your talking points to see what the answer is, because making an argument doesn't seem like it will happen here.



posted on Jul, 27 2017 @ 01:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheTory
a reply to: Deaf Alien




So yes? He consulted them? Ok then give me a source for that please.


Read his tweet.

Oh that makes it true.


Besides it makes no sense because they would have said no as they are saying now.



posted on Jul, 27 2017 @ 01:28 PM
link   
a reply to: TheTory

You can't answer questions now?

That didn't stop you with the one I put to Marge that you trolled in on.

Here's the funny thing; you don't realize how dumb your repititous nonsense looks.
edit on 27-7-2017 by Gryphon66 because: Duh



posted on Jul, 27 2017 @ 01:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheTory
a reply to: RomeByFire




I prefer the term #alternativefacts

I'm just following the suit of the current POTUS by triggering all the delicate snowflakes

Winning11!1!1!1!1


It's not fun getting busted in lies, is it? Especially exactly when you are accusing others of doing the same. Just perfect.


It's not a lie, it's an #alternativefact

BIGLY difference




posted on Jul, 27 2017 @ 01:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Deaf Alien




Oh that makes it true.


Besides it makes no sense because they would have said no as they are saying now.


No, but it doesn't make it false either. Because a couple of "US military officials" didn't hear about it doesn't mean that Trump did not speak to his generals and military experts.



posted on Jul, 27 2017 @ 01:29 PM
link   
Guys, the Commander in Chief has made his decision.
To suggest he has not, in 6 months in office, spoken to Mattis or the Joint Chiefs about this is quite a claim. One that must be proven if you are to make the accusation.
I read the link and looked through some linked sources and can not see anyone even suggest they have had no conversations on this.


edit on 27/7/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 27 2017 @ 01:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66




You can't answer questions now?

That didn't stop you with the one I put to Marge that you trolled in on.

Here's the funny thing; you don't realize how dumb your repititous nonsense looks.


I don't trust you can give an accurate assessment of how things look given your tendency for dishonesty.



posted on Jul, 27 2017 @ 01:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheTory
a reply to: Deaf Alien




Oh that makes it true.


Besides it makes no sense because they would have said no as they are saying now.


No, but it doesn't make it false either. Because a couple of "US military officials" didn't hear about it doesn't mean that Trump did not speak to his generals and military experts.

His tweet implied that the generals were ok with it which they are not.



posted on Jul, 27 2017 @ 01:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Deaf Alien




His tweet implied that the generals were ok with it which they are not.


Nowhere did he say they were for or against it. You're making stuff up.



posted on Jul, 27 2017 @ 01:42 PM
link   
a reply to: TheTory

Are you from the UK?.

If so you should know that we allow trans folk to defend our nation.

www.telegraph.co.uk...

Sir Michael Fallon has denounced Donald Trump’s ban on transgender people serving in the military, saying it was “only right” that the military opposed all forms of discrimination.

Asked about the ban, the defence secretary told The Telegraph: "No, we don't support that ban. I want our military to be completely open. It is right that the military should be equally open to anybody, irrespective of their race, their colour, their gender their sexuality. That is only right."

Glad we over here have not lost the plot.
edit on 27-7-2017 by testingtesting because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 27 2017 @ 01:44 PM
link   
a reply to: TheTory

When I care what a pompous ass Trump sycophant "trusts" I'll let you know.



posted on Jul, 27 2017 @ 01:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheTory
a reply to: Deaf Alien




His tweet implied that the generals were ok with it which they are not.


Nowhere did he say they were for or against it. You're making stuff up.

Huh? Do you know what "implied" means?



posted on Jul, 27 2017 @ 01:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66




When I care what a pompous ass Trump sycophant "trusts" I'll let you know.


I won't hold my breath. The moment you care what a "Trump sycophant" thinks is the same moment you derived your thinking orders from wherever you parrot them.



new topics

top topics



 
78
<< 48  49  50    52  53  54 >>

log in

join