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.

 

Finally, liberal MSM admits "collusion" doesn't exist

page: 11
52
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 12:47 PM
link   
Let me see if I this STRAIGHT...

1. Trump plans to go after Hillary with "URANIUM ONE"

2. Hillary hires Russia to hack DNC

3. Russia releases emails through Wilikeaks to make Hillary look bad

4. Hillary and DNC use that as EXCUSE to get FISA warrants to "spy on Trump"

5. Trump has to "play dumb" so as to not tip off the DNC...

6. Hillary and DNC LOOSE on purpose so they can claim "Russian collusion", staying AHEAD of Trump's planned uranium story.

I was actually told the above by some right-winger on here.




posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 12:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: JBurns
You think this country is close to civil war now? Try looking at it after the People's President is illegally removed from office - oh boy! A little birdie told me that any attempt to remove him (illegally) from office would result in very bad things happening and the duly elected/lawful government being quickly restored. For some reason, I doubt you'd like the new gov very much though.


LMAO.

It's amusing how scared some of you people are.



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 12:51 PM
link   
a reply to: DanteGaland


I can't make any comment on the above since that isn't my content or even my belief.

What I know is that Clinton conspired with a foreign citizen to influence the election against Trump. Isn't that what they're accusing Trump of doing?

Russia vs UK = no different, interference is interference.

One poster even tried making the claim that Clinton/Steele were somehow engaged in a protected intelligence gathering operation. This is clearly not true.

Manafort & others are responsible for their own actions. No proof Trump directed anyone to do anything. To say otherwise is dishonest, since no evidence exists to suggest that.

Otherwise, corrupt a-holes like Manafort, Clinton, Wasserman, etc should face investigation and punishment, if warranted.



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 12:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: DanteGaland


I can't make any comment ....



...and frankly you should stick to that.



Russia vs UK = no different, interference is interference.

Let me fix it all for you:
Direct Russian communiques vs. Washington D.C. based research firm that outsources data acquisition = huge difference. Glad I could help you out.



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 12:56 PM
link   
a reply to: alphabetaone


That's laughable. I'm quite comfortable with my position in the world, thank you. Everything is going exactly as expected, and my vote had its intended effect. The DNC is a fossil, the establishment is getting punched in the nose daily, corrupt officials are being rooted out from underneat their rocks, American Citizens are being put first by our government and even Dem strategists even admit Trump has a clear path to re-election in 2020. The opposition resorts to parading lies and innuendo as truth & fact, which only demonstrates their extremely weak position.

The future for my family looks bright, and my friends & neighbors have hope again. My country is being taken back by the people, through our soft coup of electing DJT. From where I sit, things are looking pretty good.

But you're free to believe what you like



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 12:58 PM
link   
a reply to: alphabetaone


No thanks, I don't need your correction. I only replace my words with truthful facts and not unsubstantiated opinion


Foreign interference = foreign interference.

Like I said, keep on being a true believer



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 12:59 PM
link   

No proof Trump directed anyone to do anything. To say otherwise is dishonest, since no evidence exists to suggest that.



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 01:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: alphabetaone


No thanks, I don't need your correction. I only replace my words with truthful facts and not unsubstantiated opinion


Foreign interference = foreign interference.

Like I said, keep on being a true believer


Yeah, actually you do as you clearly are lacking sorely and need correction since it seems you can't process a differentiation. Your attempt at conflating opinion with fact is an old and tired ploy that only works with the elderly and even then only with other elderly folks.

But don't worry, I'm not trying to change your mind OR even make you believe a damned thing, like I said, it's amusing to watch you people squirm as your ship sinks.



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 01:07 PM
link   
a reply to: alphabetaone


Sigh. That's what you people said a year ago. Was one false hope after another, eh?

Not one prediction you all have made has come true. I assure you, with every last part of my being, that this too is false hope.

And when Trump is still standing tall after this is over, your false hopes will be realized yet again. I am oh so certain of it.



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 01:10 PM
link   
a reply to: alphabetaone


Trump isn't even running, this is a joke!

Wow, I can't believe he's running. He'll never get the nomination!

Shoot, I can't believe he got the nomination. He'll never win the election!

OMG, I can't believe he won the election. Our electoral college will never vote for him!

WHAT, I can't believe the EC elected him. There has to be some way to hold a do-over of the election!

AH! You mean we can't just "re-do" an election in the US? He'll be impeached by our elected officials!

OMGOMG, You mean there actually has to be a reason to impeach as well as cooperation from the GOP controlled congress? The Russia conspiracy will nab him!

..............and it is looking like that too won't be touching him. So far, nothing has had any connection/anything to do with the President.

But by all means, keep on being a true believer. If you think you can, you can buddy.



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 01:13 PM
link   
a reply to: JBurns

I really appreciate the logical conversation. I feel like I so rarely get that.

You have done as good a job as anyone makeong points and counterpoints.

Well played



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 01:18 PM
link   
a reply to: JBurns

Even a broken clock is right twice a day. It's High Noon in Trumpland.



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 02:47 PM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox


JC, I appreciate that sir although I feel I have failed somewhat by stooping to the level of personal insults. I think everyone is frustrated by the back and forth exchange, and I am no exception.

But I need to continue to make an effort at reining in my opinion/feelings and substituting it with objective facts

edit on 11/2/2017 by JBurns because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 02:49 PM
link   
a reply to: DJW001


True enough, and we will see if that is the case. I have the utmost respect for R. Mueller, and if he indeed determines a crime was committed by the POTUS, I'll be the first to push for criminal charges.

I abhor corruption and illegal behavior at all levels of government, and it doesn't matter to me who gets swept up in the probe. As long as it remains a fair and impartial investigation (which by every indication it is), then I totally support its conclusions.

Manafort and the other indictees are a perfect example of corrupt DC insiders who believed they were above the law. When an untouchable like Mueller brings them back to Earth, well... I have to laugh a little bit inside


edit on 11/2/2017 by JBurns because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 03:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: proximo

We do not yet know whether any action came from this meeting, do we? His response does prove intent, however.


Intent to what? Meet with them and hear what the dirt is - ok. So what. If there was real dirt - the most likely scenario is Trump Jr. would have handed the info over to the FBI. Would you not want Hillary punished if she committed illegal acts?

You just assume they would do something nefarious because you always assume the worst of anyone or anything associated with Trump. Maybe you assume that because you are used to rooting for dirtier than pond scum politicians like Hillary who absolutely would do - and probably did do - anything illegal to try and win.

Definition of collusion: secret or illegal cooperation or conspiracy, especially in order to cheat or deceive others.

So first off how is it illegal to give information from Russia to someone - it would not be illegal unless it was classified or stolen - but there was no info so strike that, where is the act to cheat or deceive anyone - where is even that intent in the emails? It does not exist.

Second - even if you are right about all of it - A. Collusion itself is not a crime B. There is zero evidence Donald Trump sr. knew anything about it so it would not affect him anyway.



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 03:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: proximo

BWAHAHAHA

His response was “I love it!”

What part of going to meet with representatives of the Russian government, for the purpose of gaining counter intelligence on hillary do you not understand???

It isn’t even in innuendo.. they literally spell out Russian government more than is even necessary...

Then they went to the meeting lol...with the 3 top campaign members...

Some one says “I’m going to rob that bank!”

Then they get caught breaking into the bank an all the moneys missing..

Why would anyone ever believe they didn’t take the money???

Could you please quote the emails of Hillary,s staff that contain some form of criminal of corrupt activity????

I did for all the accusations you are spouting can you show that is the case AT ALL???


Acquiring dirt on your rival candidate is not remotely similar to robbing a bank. Find the law that does not allow that - it does not exist.

If that law did exist every politician would be in prison.

As far as some incriminating emails from hillary and her campaign - here are a few

Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 10:57 PM

From:John Podesta

On another matter….and not to sound like Lanny, but we are going to have to dump all those emails so better to do so sooner than later
wikileaks link


Re: FARA

From:ha16@hillaryclinton.com
To: re47@hillaryclinton.com
CC: john.podesta@gmail.com
Date: 2015-04-23 15:46
Subject: Re: FARA

she just didnt know that we had decided to accept it
wanted to know who the individuals are and wants to weigh in
karuna sending list for meeting

On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 1:44 PM, Robby Mook wrote:

> She doesn't want to?
>
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 1:25 PM, Huma Abedin
> wrote:
>
>> HRC read in paper that we are taking FARA money
>> We are going to discuss today in Elias meeting
>> talked to Elias
>> Flagging for you
>>

Wikileaks link

Email talking about how chelsea talking to Bush 43 daughter about corruption in Clinton foundation - and Podesta's response

From:john.podesta@gmail.com
To: doug@presidentclinton.com
CC: terry@tdmca.com, cheryl.mills@gmail.com
Date: 2012-01-04 20:00
Subject: Re:

You are perfecting your skills for understatement.

On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 4:43 PM, Doug Band wrote:
> I just received a call from a close friend of wjcs who said that cvc told one of the bush 43 kids that she is conducting an internal investigation of money within the foundation from cgi to the foundation
> The bush kid then told someone else who then told an operative within the republican party
>
> I have heard more and more chatter of cvc and bari talking about lots of what is going on internally to people
>
> Not smart

Wikileaks link



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 04:24 PM
link   
a reply to: JBurns

Yeah, I have to second that. I had never engaged with you here on ATS until this thread...your response(s) to me and those following were so far removed from the ALL CAPS episode, I chalked it up to too much caffeine. No ego-stroking here just wanted to say that you’ve been a good steward of your thread (not some drive-by hit piece, looking to generate cheap heat with stars and flags), and absent a couple digs here and there, stayed on topic with salient and cogent points. Im not ready to call this a big ‘nothing burger’, but damn, I can relate to your perspective (I’m not suggesting you believe it to be a ‘nothing burger’) and zero-tolerance policy on political corruption. Hell, as I was in the store earlier, there was a headline on CNN about corruption and Hillary and the DNC “stealing” the nomination from Bernie Sanders. Has it always been this way and I am just now becoming a bona ride adult and paying attention without some bias? What’s it a function of? Are corruption and politics inextricably linked? It has been since time immemorial and will continue to be?

Thanks for the thread.



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 05:41 PM
link   
a reply to: DanteGaland

That’s kinda the over all rundown of their theories if you actually put them together..

How do people fall for it??



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 05:43 PM
link   
a reply to: BeefNoMeat

Well let’s be honest the OP is a drive by hit piece but he has handled himself admirably since
.



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 05:55 PM
link   
a reply to: proximo

Intent to meet the representative of a hostile government to receive potentially stolen goods. Not only did Donny Jr not inform the FBI as he should have, he failed to report the meeting when filing for security clearances. Both of those are, in fact, crimes.




top topics



 
52
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join