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.

 

OMG..HARVEY WEINSTEIN is a Democrat Icon and a Sadistic Animal!.

page: 8
37
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 10 2017 @ 10:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Gryphon66

Answering a question that the OP didn't claim? I believe he used democratic politicians and hollywood. Are you one of those? If not, why the snark?


LOL...aren't you used to Gryphon66's conversation style yet?




posted on Oct, 10 2017 @ 10:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: Willtell
The guy is terrible, he's acting just like a republican.


Hmmm... Bill Clinton, Jeffrey Epstein, Micheal Skakel, Anthony Weiner, John Young, John Wayne Gacy, David Wu, R Kelly, Cee Lo Green, Sean Penn... You fail.


LOL ... really now?

Herman Cain, Christopher Lee, Larry Craig, Dennis Hastert, Mark Foley, Jack Ryan, Rudi Guiliani, Bob Packwood, Buz Lukens, Scott DesJarlis, John Ensign, David Vitter, Ed Schrock, Gary Condit ... and I don't even have to mention Donald Trump.



posted on Oct, 10 2017 @ 10:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Gryphon66

Answering a question that the OP didn't claim? I believe he used democratic politicians and hollywood. Are you one of those? If not, why the snark?


I asked OP a question, you chimed in. If you didn't have an answer, as you don't seem to, that makes no sense.



posted on Oct, 10 2017 @ 10:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Gryphon66

Answering a question that the OP didn't claim? I believe he used democratic politicians and hollywood. Are you one of those? If not, why the snark?


LOL...aren't you used to Gryphon66's conversation style yet?


Oh, hi there. Can you explain why you claim Weinstein is a "Democratic icon"? Your buddy doesn't seem to be able to.



posted on Oct, 10 2017 @ 10:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

I gave you a few answers as they relate to the topic. You chose not to acknowledge them and instead stand on a premise that no one is making.



posted on Oct, 10 2017 @ 10:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Gryphon66

I gave you a few answers as they relate to the topic. You chose not to acknowledge them and instead stand on a premise that no one is making.



You didn't give any answers. You offered what I'm sure you think is clever innuendo. My question is straightforward and directed at the overt claim of the OP as noted IN THE TITLE OF THIS THREAD.

Now, did you have an answer to my rather simple question? Or not?


originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: carewemust

Did you feel any need to prove your claim that Weinstein is a "Democratic Icon?"

I was a registered Democrat for some time ... and I didn't even know who he was.

I know you're just repeating the dredge here ... but please ... demonstrate that the fellow embodies Democratic ideals, ideology, policies, etc.

If not, I submit you're making a dishonest claim.

edit on 10-10-2017 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Oct, 10 2017 @ 11:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

And I responded in showing that he demonstrated democratic ideals, ideology, policies etc by highlighting the fact that he donates and holds fundraisers for the party.

I can not answer to the OP's thinking in the usage of icon.



posted on Oct, 10 2017 @ 11:04 PM
link   
a reply to: JinMI

I'm sorry, I hadn't considered that you don't really know what an Democratic icon is ... it would be a person that embodies the ideals and policies of the Democratic Party to such extent that they are themselves an emblem or symbol or representation of what the party stands for.

Now, armed with that knowledge, can you explain why OP has made the claim that Weinstein qualifies?

ETA: Thanks, question asked and answered ... you can't.


edit on 10-10-2017 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Oct, 10 2017 @ 11:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Gryphon66

And I responded in showing that he demonstrated democratic ideals, ideology, policies etc by highlighting the fact that he donates and holds fundraisers for the party.

I can not answer to the OP's thinking in the usage of icon.



Your evidence is that he gave money? So did Donald Trump.

Next?




During a June 2015 interview, Trump was asked why he donated to the Clinton Foundation and other prominent Democrats, including Hillary Clinton (N.Y.), Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (Nev.), John Kerry (Mass.), and Rahm Emanuel (Ill.), President Obama's White House chief of staff, among others.

HIGHLIGHTS
From 1989 to 2015, Donald Trump has made $1,845,290 worth of political donations. Republicans received $1,150,540, and Democrats received $694,750.
Before 2011, Trump donated more money to Democrats than Republicans.
Between 2011 and 2015, Trump contributed $8,500 to Democrats and $630,150 to Republicans.

Trump replied, “Look, politicians are all talk, they’re no action. They don’t do the job, they don’t know what they’re doing. I know them better than anybody, Howie. I deal with all of them. And, you know, I make contributions to many of them. They’re friends, they’re this. It’s smart. It’s called being an intelligent person and a great business person. ... But the truth is that, you have to be able to get along with—if you’re gonna be a business person, even in the United States, you wanna get along with all sides because you’re gonna need things from everybody. And you wanna get along with all sides, it’s very important.”


Citation
edit on 10-10-2017 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Oct, 10 2017 @ 11:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

You just answered your own question in how the OP regards the democratic leadership and hollywood as was also in the OP.



posted on Oct, 10 2017 @ 11:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: TheRedneck

Clinton didn't "oversee the deal." Clinton didn't even vote on the measure that 10 Cabinet level departments voted on as well as the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

I've offered direct evidence that all uranium mined in America will end up in America. No one "sold" Uranium to anyone.



And I've offered that you are already wrong.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Unless you believe Canada to be the US that is.
edit on 10/10/17 by Vasa Croe because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 10 2017 @ 11:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Gryphon66

You just answered your own question in how the OP regards the democratic leadership and hollywood as was also in the OP.


No, I didn't answer my own question; that's absurd and you know it. If you can't do better than that, please stop wasting my time.



posted on Oct, 10 2017 @ 11:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

Wasting your time? You choose what to do with your time.

Next

P.S. It's not absurd your just not getting the answer you've somehow come to based on a claim that isn't here in this thread.



posted on Oct, 10 2017 @ 11:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: TheRedneck

Clinton didn't "oversee the deal." Clinton didn't even vote on the measure that 10 Cabinet level departments voted on as well as the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

I've offered direct evidence that all uranium mined in America will end up in America. No one "sold" Uranium to anyone.



And I've offered that you are already wrong.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Unless you believe Canada to be the US that is.


I don't believe Canada to be the US.

What I do know for a fact is that under the Uranium One agreements, the uranium is mined in the US, refined in Canada, and sent back to the US.

One of many references:



Some Republican lawmakers in 2010 did raise concerns about the deal — but they sent their letter to then-Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner. (Treasury chairs the CFIUS.) Final approval was given by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which noted that the mines would remain under the control of U.S. subsidiaries. “Neither Uranium One nor ARMZ [the Russian firm] holds an NRC export license, so no uranium produced at either facility may be exported,” the NRC said. (Some uranium yellowcake is extracted, processed in Canada and returned to the United States.)


Washington Post

So, you got all excited about "breaking a story" that anyone who understands the terms of the deal understood years ago.


edit on 10-10-2017 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Oct, 10 2017 @ 11:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Gryphon66

Wasting your time? You choose what to do with your time.

Next

P.S. It's not absurd your just not getting the answer you've somehow come to based on a claim that isn't here in this thread.


I'm not getting an answer at all. Neither you nor OP have demonstrated how or why Weinstein would be a "Democratic icon" ... in fact, if you're right, Donald J. Trump is one of the BIGGEST Democratic Icons of all. LOL.



posted on Oct, 10 2017 @ 11:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe

And since I'm sure you'll merely damn the source ...



NRC’s review of the transfer of control request determined that the U.S. subsidiaries will remain the licensees, will remain qualified to conduct the uranium recovery operations, and will continue to have the equipment, facilities, and procedures necessary to protect public health and safety and to minimize danger to life or property. The review also determined that the licensees will maintain adequate financial surety for eventual decommissioning of the sites. Neither Uranium One nor ARMZ holds an NRC export license, so no uranium produced at either facility may be exported.


Snopes

Search that text on the Snopes page, and you can locate a link to the NRC document.
edit on 10-10-2017 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Oct, 10 2017 @ 11:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: TheRedneck

Clinton didn't "oversee the deal." Clinton didn't even vote on the measure that 10 Cabinet level departments voted on as well as the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

I've offered direct evidence that all uranium mined in America will end up in America. No one "sold" Uranium to anyone.



And I've offered that you are already wrong.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Unless you believe Canada to be the US that is.


I don't believe Canada to be the US.

What I do know for a fact is that under the Uranium One agreements, the uranium is mined in the US, refined in Canada, and sent back to the US.

One of many references:



Some Republican lawmakers in 2010 did raise concerns about the deal — but they sent their letter to then-Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner. (Treasury chairs the CFIUS.) Final approval was given by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which noted that the mines would remain under the control of U.S. subsidiaries. “Neither Uranium One nor ARMZ [the Russian firm] holds an NRC export license, so no uranium produced at either facility may be exported,” the NRC said. (Some uranium yellowcake is extracted, processed in Canada and returned to the United States.)


Washington Post

So, you got all excited about "breaking a story" that anyone who understands the terms of the deal understood years ago.



Care to give a link to the actual document from a regulatory commission stating such? Like the ones I linked? WaPo isn't exactly trusted and their link itself is 404'd....



posted on Oct, 10 2017 @ 11:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe

ETA: Found it ... NRC.gov
edit on 10-10-2017 by Gryphon66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 10 2017 @ 11:41 PM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

I wonder if Weinstein has a connection to this show:




posted on Oct, 10 2017 @ 11:41 PM
link   
Sorry double post.
edit on 10/10/2017 by starwarsisreal because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
37
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join