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.
Good god.
No word play. Jim Comey's career was built on being a prosecutor and a successful one.
originally posted by: NotTheCIA
a reply to: jimmyx
Well let's just go straight back into history,
Conservatives are the kings of witch hunts.
They believed in Witches.
Some still do.
Let's get real; they boycott Harry Potter.
originally posted by: Gryphon66
originally posted by: Grambler
So whatever you think he has the right to think is irrelevant.
originally posted by: Grambler
originally posted by: alphabetaone
originally posted by: Grambler
originally posted by: alphabetaone
originally posted by: Grambler
originally posted by: alphabetaone
originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: alphabetaone
Just because he used to be a prosecutor does not mean he should act as one. he is an investigator, not a prosecutor.
I didnt say he should act as one, I said it gives him the right to put himself in a place where he knows what a prosecutor should or should not do.... dont try and add something that isnt there.
No it does not give him that right.
Um yea, it does.
Ok, then I assume I have the right to think as a prosecutor. Show me why I dont have that right.
Are you a prosecutor? Have you ever been one? Can I see your credentials from accredited Law Universities? No? Until you show me your years in the field, with a track record of prosecutions and appropriate schooling and training, you do no share that same right.
So you presume to tell people what they have the right to think?
Wow.
Mr. Teapot, meet Mr. Kettle.
originally posted by: Grambler
originally posted by: Gryphon66
originally posted by: Grambler
So whatever you think he has the right to think is irrelevant.
originally posted by: Grambler
originally posted by: alphabetaone
originally posted by: Grambler
originally posted by: alphabetaone
originally posted by: Grambler
originally posted by: alphabetaone
originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: alphabetaone
Just because he used to be a prosecutor does not mean he should act as one. he is an investigator, not a prosecutor.
I didnt say he should act as one, I said it gives him the right to put himself in a place where he knows what a prosecutor should or should not do.... dont try and add something that isnt there.
No it does not give him that right.
Um yea, it does.
Ok, then I assume I have the right to think as a prosecutor. Show me why I dont have that right.
Are you a prosecutor? Have you ever been one? Can I see your credentials from accredited Law Universities? No? Until you show me your years in the field, with a track record of prosecutions and appropriate schooling and training, you do no share that same right.
So you presume to tell people what they have the right to think?
Wow.
Mr. Teapot, meet Mr. Kettle.
Was that quote from me saying he doesn't have the right to think something?
Oh it wasn't?
Well I guess that would make your statement foolish then wouldn't it.
originally posted by: Gryphon66
originally posted by: Grambler
originally posted by: Gryphon66
originally posted by: Grambler
So whatever you think he has the right to think is irrelevant.
originally posted by: Grambler
originally posted by: alphabetaone
originally posted by: Grambler
originally posted by: alphabetaone
originally posted by: Grambler
originally posted by: alphabetaone
originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: alphabetaone
Just because he used to be a prosecutor does not mean he should act as one. he is an investigator, not a prosecutor.
I didnt say he should act as one, I said it gives him the right to put himself in a place where he knows what a prosecutor should or should not do.... dont try and add something that isnt there.
No it does not give him that right.
Um yea, it does.
Ok, then I assume I have the right to think as a prosecutor. Show me why I dont have that right.
Are you a prosecutor? Have you ever been one? Can I see your credentials from accredited Law Universities? No? Until you show me your years in the field, with a track record of prosecutions and appropriate schooling and training, you do no share that same right.
So you presume to tell people what they have the right to think?
Wow.
Mr. Teapot, meet Mr. Kettle.
Was that quote from me saying he doesn't have the right to think something?
Oh it wasn't?
Well I guess that would make your statement foolish then wouldn't it.
You can't read and understand your own words? Is English syntax suddenly an issue for you? LOL.
originally posted by: Grambler
originally posted by: Gryphon66
originally posted by: Grambler
originally posted by: Gryphon66
originally posted by: Grambler
So whatever you think he has the right to think is irrelevant.
originally posted by: Grambler
originally posted by: alphabetaone
originally posted by: Grambler
originally posted by: alphabetaone
originally posted by: Grambler
originally posted by: alphabetaone
originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: alphabetaone
Just because he used to be a prosecutor does not mean he should act as one. he is an investigator, not a prosecutor.
I didnt say he should act as one, I said it gives him the right to put himself in a place where he knows what a prosecutor should or should not do.... dont try and add something that isnt there.
No it does not give him that right.
Um yea, it does.
Ok, then I assume I have the right to think as a prosecutor. Show me why I dont have that right.
Are you a prosecutor? Have you ever been one? Can I see your credentials from accredited Law Universities? No? Until you show me your years in the field, with a track record of prosecutions and appropriate schooling and training, you do no share that same right.
So you presume to tell people what they have the right to think?
Wow.
Mr. Teapot, meet Mr. Kettle.
Was that quote from me saying he doesn't have the right to think something?
Oh it wasn't?
Well I guess that would make your statement foolish then wouldn't it.
You can't read and understand your own words? Is English syntax suddenly an issue for you? LOL.
"You don't have the right to think that"
vs.
"Your thought is irrelevant" Is this saying that you don't have the right to think something? Nope not at all.
For example, if I said you don't have the right to say something, and someone else says you saying what you want is irrelevant, that doesn't mean that the second person is saying you don't have the right to say it though.
Please stop trying to deflect your own problems with reading comprehension on to others.
originally posted by: Gryphon66
originally posted by: Grambler
originally posted by: Gryphon66
originally posted by: Grambler
originally posted by: Gryphon66
originally posted by: Grambler
So whatever you think he has the right to think is irrelevant.
originally posted by: Grambler
originally posted by: alphabetaone
originally posted by: Grambler
originally posted by: alphabetaone
originally posted by: Grambler
originally posted by: alphabetaone
originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: alphabetaone
Just because he used to be a prosecutor does not mean he should act as one. he is an investigator, not a prosecutor.
I didnt say he should act as one, I said it gives him the right to put himself in a place where he knows what a prosecutor should or should not do.... dont try and add something that isnt there.
No it does not give him that right.
Um yea, it does.
Ok, then I assume I have the right to think as a prosecutor. Show me why I dont have that right.
Are you a prosecutor? Have you ever been one? Can I see your credentials from accredited Law Universities? No? Until you show me your years in the field, with a track record of prosecutions and appropriate schooling and training, you do no share that same right.
So you presume to tell people what they have the right to think?
Wow.
Mr. Teapot, meet Mr. Kettle.
Was that quote from me saying he doesn't have the right to think something?
Oh it wasn't?
Well I guess that would make your statement foolish then wouldn't it.
You can't read and understand your own words? Is English syntax suddenly an issue for you? LOL.
"You don't have the right to think that"
vs.
"Your thought is irrelevant" Is this saying that you don't have the right to think something? Nope not at all.
For example, if I said you don't have the right to say something, and someone else says you saying what you want is irrelevant, that doesn't mean that the second person is saying you don't have the right to say it though.
Please stop trying to deflect your own problems with reading comprehension on to others.
Are you going to properly quote what you said directly above or should I got to the trouble of quoting you again?(which I've already done once.)
For goodness sake's get it together.
originally posted by: alphabetaone
a reply to: Gryphon66
I'll take a stab....because maybe they can't find criminal wrongdoing? *gasp*
originally posted by: proteus33
a reply to: jimmyxfirst off since when are the public usually told about troop engagements and when we take losses? not usually. they did say these guys left on standard mission in region when they were informed that a high value target showed up in region and the mission was changed on the fly and as sometimes happens when you stuck unprepared everything goes to crap.
originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: yuppa
American conservatives have always valued the existing power structures and insisted on obedience to the letter of existing laws and social mores. They are statists, authoritarians, nationalists and traditionalists. They are reactionary and regressive. Refining all that down to "they don't like change" is a blatant oversimplification.