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.

 

Grassley just Cooked the Dems, Read #12

page: 4
48
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 27 2018 @ 10:51 AM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

You are absolutely right. So far nothing has came from any of it. No arrests, prosecutions, evidence release, information release, nothing as of yet.

So what am I missing here? What is the big picture, because admittedly the extreme polarization seems scripted/intentional to me





posted on Jan, 27 2018 @ 11:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: sligtlyskeptical
a reply to: EvidenceNibbler

Been around here for a while. I never remember so many references to one side "getting" the other side.

It is almost seems like you think the goal of the Presidency is to get back at the other side.

Perhaps that train of thought is why we have a President that is never happy.


non-democrats are fed up with democrat malfeasance and hypocrisy.
we want the DOJ to 'get' the dems because they broke the rules, especially wi Hillary's email server and the dossier.
fed up with false accusations (Russian collusion???) and government officials putting politics ahead of their job (Lois Lerner, FBI Agent Strouck).
fed up with DC insiders getting away with EVERYTHING.
great desire for justice out there...not being satisfied.



posted on Jan, 27 2018 @ 11:54 AM
link   
This is like watching the "Watergate" thing unfolding, I was a teenager then and didn`t pay much attention to the news but I remember it dragged on for what seemed like a long time with bits and pieces being uncovered and exposed every week.Then one day the damn burst and we could see how all those bits and pieces fit together.

The big difference between then and now is that, back then it was the media who were doing the digging and exposing while the politicians were doing the covering up, but now it`s the politicians who are doing the digging and exposing while the media is doing the covering up.

2018 promises to be a very interesting year.
edit on 27-1-2018 by bluechevytree because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 07:23 AM
link   
a reply to: EvidenceNibbler

finally, someone might be serious about getting the real criminals out of washington



posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 09:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: EvidenceNibbler

Why are you so happy about this?
Under Section 702, the NSA targets foreign individuals located outside the United States. Predictably, communications written and sent by Americans are also swept up in that collection. Those communications are then stored in a massive database that can be searched by other intelligence agencies, including the FBI and CIA. When those agencies search the data—even when it belongs to U.S. persons—they do not obtain a warrant.


Actually, that is not exactly correct. U.S. persons are masked. They can only be un-masked with a FISA warrant... but here's where the fun begins... there are folks with certain access levels that have the capability to look... but they are breaking the law when they do so.

This is partially how Adm. Rogers knew there was something fishy going on with the Obama FBI and Justice department. Someone told him there was an unusually high level of 702s on Americans passing through as contractor SIGINT access.

He ordered an audit. The audit suggested surveillance abuse. He shut it down. THEN came the FISA warrants directly from DOJ FBI.

Folks seem to be pretty uninformed about the fact that there is a 99 Page Document coming out of the FISC court outlining FISA abuse and unlawful surveillance.

Unlawful = ILLEGAL



posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 10:15 AM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

Sessions is going to make them lie?



posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 10:35 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 10:40 AM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Some people seem to think that just because we haven't seen the smoking gun it means it doesn't exist. Why does it have to be pointed out over and over again that we do not know what Mueller has. He has already surprised us and his interviews are only made public when the Whitehouse leaks it or a journalist obtains public court records.
The sealed indictments of Manafort and Gates shows that he plays close to the vest.
You guys yelling over and over that there is no case is just wishful thinking. When the investigation is concluded we will all know what evidence he has or doesn't have. Until then saying they don't have proof is silly.
edit on 1282018 by Sillyolme because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 10:43 AM
link   
a reply to: EvidenceNibbler

What will happen if the documents are turned over and there is nothing illegal?

Tick tock....



posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 10:49 AM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

a large outcry of cognitive dissonance, likely offset and distracted by some wild riot in a southern city (never let the race flames die down), and then we will move on to the next divisive story.



posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 10:52 AM
link   
I've posted before that the American Press only reports on the top couple of eight or nine layers, of intel. Trump & Co. in Davos, may have shared a couple more levels down, with the World elites. Rich Arabs in Saudi, powerful Jewish Americans, and now diverse Politicians of whatever stripe, are starting to be put down. And some of these powerful politicians hold sway in Federal bureaucracies, beyond holding elected offices. Revolving doors have put some of each, into major corporations, for years.

British P.M. T. May, didn't look any too happy in those Davos photo Ops, either. Trump just burned some bridges with his putative DACA giveaways, so I believe something very big is just beginning to boil. They are just now surveying their battlefield! And this goes for greater Washington D.C., as well as Riyadh, Saudi.

What I will posit, is that the loss in the mid terms is more that the populace have seen their politicians talk big to get elected and then it's the same old, same old. Whatever else Trump, or Bronze Beard, for you Nosty students, is, it ain't business as usual. And this alone, will drive the political money men completely insane, in regards to the coming mid term elections, here. Just now, both, respective big money procurers, have been forced to resign their posts, in both Democrat and Republican party apparatuses. And for any true troglodytes here, I'm speaking of Mr. Weinstein, and Mr. "Weintraub" Wynn. My granny was a Pennsylvanian Wynn, raised in Camden, N.J., but Stevie W. ain't no relation to our tribe. His dad merely changed his Jewish name, to Wynn.
edit on 28-1-2018 by carpooler because: money knows no party



posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 10:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: DJW001

a large outcry of cognitive dissonance, likely offset and distracted by some wild riot in a southern city (never let the race flames die down), and then we will move on to the next divisive story.


Look at the length of the list. Grassley is throwing a wide net because he has no actual clue as to what might have gone on. The whole thing is a lame attempt to deflect from and discredit the Mueller investigation. The "classified" information that Nunes supposedly used in his still unreleased memo could easily be declassified by the President if it would help his case. Has that happened? No? Why not? National security? If the FBI is corrupt, the public needs to know. No, it is what the FBI discovered that is being withheld from the public.



posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 10:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Some people seem to think that just because we haven't seen the smoking gun it means it doesn't exist. Why does it have to be pointed out over and over again that we do not know what Mueller has. He has already surprised us and his interviews are only made public when the Whitehouse leaks it or a journalist obtains public court records.
The sealed indictments of Manafort and Gates shows that he plays close to the vest.
You guys yelling over and over that there is no case is just wishful thinking. When the investigation is concluded we will all know what evidence he has or doesn't have. Until then saying they don't have proof is silly.


If Mueller finds Trump innocent of all charges, will you accept his findings?

A simple yes or no will suffice.



posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 11:01 AM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy


If Mueller finds Trump innocent of all charges, will you accept his findings?

A simple yes or no will suffice.


No-one has been charged yet, but if Mueller does not provide evidence that Donald Trump is guilty of obstruction I would be stunned. Nevertheless, I would have no problem if he were declared "innocent" of "collusion." It would simply mean that he is as clueless about what is going on with his subordinates as it appears.

Now, if Mueller indicts him for obstruction of justice, will you accept that? What about conspiracy to subvert the electoral process. Will you be okay with that?
edit on 28-1-2018 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 11:02 AM
link   
a reply to: burgerbuddy



Yep, how's the russian collusion matter going?


Probably moving along just fine.
Why subpoena records from Deutsche Bank otherwise? You know about Deutsche Bank right? You know what they were in trouble over don't you?
You remember when no bank would deal with the failing donald trump that little Eric said we have all the money we need out of Russia? You know Deutsche bank was in trouble for laundering money for Russia? You know that trump, his son's, and his son in law have all been recipients of the generosity of the corrupt Deutsche bank? I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the possibility. This much smoke usually means something is burning.



posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 11:02 AM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

Easy question.

Fry his ass if he's guilty.


*shrugs*

Then again, I'm not a hypocritical douche.




posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 11:13 AM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy



Then again, I'm not a hypocritical douche.


Takes one to know one, right?



posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 11:16 AM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

So are the Federalists and the democratic-republicans who were sort of anti federalists.
Hamilton vs Jefferson. It was the first party system.

Edit to add link.
en.m.wikipedia.org...

edit on 1282018 by Sillyolme because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 11:27 AM
link   
a reply to: dasman888

Your source for this? Please don't say Alex Jones.



posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 11:27 AM
link   
a reply to: dasman888

Your source for this? Please don't say Alex Jones.



new topics

top topics



 
48
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join