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.

 

Break down the memo for me. I must be stupid

page: 16
88
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 4 2018 @ 11:12 AM
link   
a reply to: introvert

No, I'm asking where the ORIGINAL evidence came from. You're right that there is NO EVIDENCE that we know of at this time. The FBI concluded that already, BTW. So what happened that changed that? One word: DOSSIER.

He's been investigated and cleared once.


Also, you lack logic in saying that "zero evidence" BS. Well, no # no evidence has been presented yet. The investigation is not over yet.


So you think it is right for officials with obvious and provable conflicts of interest to continually investigate their political opponents? Good to know. Can't wait to see the dirty tricks we use against Dems in 2018/2020/20??/????/????

Since the Constitution is so mutable and everything, might as well just install Trump as permanent POTUS right? #### the Constitution, am I right? Lets just waste all day every day and every single news cycle with a host of wasteful investigations motivated out of political anger and simply put: sour grapes


^Obviously that is sarcasm. But do you see the problem with these politically motivated investigations? If there is no evidence to begin with, what in the HELL is Trump under investigation for? That isn't how it works in a Constitutional Republic. A Communist #-hole? Sure. Not in the United States. We're better than those pinkos.
edit on 2/4/2018 by JBurns because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 4 2018 @ 11:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: introvert

No, I'm asking where the ORIGINAL evidence came from. You're right that there is NO EVIDENCE that we know of at this time. The FBI concluded that already, BTW. So what happened that changed that? One word: DOSSIER.

He's been investigated and cleared once.


Also, you lack logic in saying that "zero evidence" BS. Well, no # no evidence has been presented yet. The investigation is not over yet.


So you think it is right for officials with obvious and provable conflicts of interest to continually investigate their political opponents? Good to know. Can't wait to see the dirty tricks we use against Dems in 2018/2020/20??/????/????

Since the Constitution is so mutable and everything, might as well just install Trump as permanent POTUS right? #### the Constitution, am I right? Lets just waste all day every day and every single news cycle with a host of wasteful investigations motivated out of political anger and simply put: sour grapes


Pure deflection.

You posted known BS and shown a severe lack in logic.



posted on Feb, 4 2018 @ 11:21 AM
link   
a reply to: introvert


No. It isn't. Trump was cleared once, with all publically available evidence (and what they had in private) You're scared to answer my questions, because you know it completely deconstructs your false narrative.

Nothing changed after that point. No new revelations, short of the dirty debunked dossier (debunked in that Steele admited he was anti-Trump, and it was obviously a campaign hitjob to begin with = conflict of interest, no credibility) had been released.

So what evidence was used to justify YET ANOTHER investigation of the same matter?

Nothing new came out, save for the dirty dossier. So I ask again, where did the NEW evidence come from justifying yet another investigation? Because as I pointed out, he was cleared by the FBI once already.

That isn't deflection, it is the most relevant question that could be asked at this moment.
edit on 2/4/2018 by JBurns because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 4 2018 @ 11:30 AM
link   
To put it another way, the rumor/innuendo caused one investigation against him while Obama was still in office. Now not only did Obama/Clapper both say that Russians didn't "hack" our election, but they also chastised Trump for even suggesting our elections could be tampered with/rigged. Or does your selective memory not allow that to be remembered

Anyhow, he was investigated by FBI. FBI finds no evidence. Investigation ends.

Dossier is released, but no new evidence comes to light. (this was when Clinton still denied the dossier was her doing)

New investigation begins. Given the fact that no new evidence came to light (remember, he wasn't being investigated at that point, he was already cleared by FBI) one must assume two things about the present investigation:

1) It either started because of the dossier, which means it is absolutely 100% a witch-hunt

2) It started because they didn't like the result of the first one

Clearly, either of which are major problems.



posted on Feb, 4 2018 @ 11:37 AM
link   
Ok.. im still not following

Why does any of this matter if the dirt on Trump is legit.

It is legit.

Therefore.. all the "memo" proves is that our government took action when it needed to in order to get a warrant to investigate someone clearly doing something wrong.



posted on Feb, 4 2018 @ 11:39 AM
link   
www.bbc.com...
Nunes memo: Key extracts and what they mean



posted on Feb, 4 2018 @ 11:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: Lucidparadox
Ok.. im still not following

Why does any of this matter if the dirt on Trump is legit.

It is legit.

Therefore.. all the "memo" proves is that our government took action when it needed to in order to get a warrant to investigate someone clearly doing something wrong.


You have no proof that the dirt in trump is legit.

In fact, most people are now saying that the mueller investigation is no longer going after Trump for collusion for russia, but now is going after him for obstruction of justice.

But even if trump was dirty,

we can not allow the sitting presidents FBI to spy on there opponents in shady ways because they know there is dirt on them.

As sure as you are that there is dirt on trump, there are thousands of people sure Hillary is dirty, so should the FBI make stuff up to spy on her and the dnc and the people involved in her campaign.

This would make the country a banana republican.



posted on Feb, 4 2018 @ 11:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: Lucidparadox
Ok.. im still not following

Why does any of this matter if the dirt on Trump is legit.

It is legit.

Therefore.. all the "memo" proves is that our government took action when it needed to in order to get a warrant to investigate someone clearly doing something wrong.


That's a laughable remark. And exactly the kind of cockamamie bull# I'm talking about. You people do nothing but parade your personal opinions as though they were fact. They aren't facts. And most certainly are NOT supported by the evidence at hand. How's it feel to be part of the problem, instead of the solution?

And just where did you get the crystal ball that told you it was legitimate? Proof or it didn't happen...and your opinion frankly isn't good enough.

If you're referring to the dossier, the entire thing must be thrown out due to admitted bias, and no less than THREE conflicts of interest.

Sorry, but nice try though


PROOF, or it never happened
edit on 2/4/2018 by JBurns because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 4 2018 @ 12:02 PM
link   
How about the transcripts of Paul Ryan almost a year before the election saying Trump is being facaded by the Russians.

How about all the ties that have come forth in regards to the people on his campaign and the Russians.

How about the whole situation woth his son and those emails?

Its all very real. Plenty for a warrant.

If the Republican candidate was pretty much anyone but Trump.. this wpuldnt have happened...

Why?

Because the other GOP candidates didnt have Russian toes.

You guys should have chosen Rubio as the GOP candidate.



posted on Feb, 4 2018 @ 12:27 PM
link   
You said" it's all about Transparency in government and people don't want transparancy in our government. "

So that must be why we wanted the memo released, the GOP wanted the memo released, the President wanted the memo released..... and the Intel guys and DOJ did NOT want it to be released. Who wants transparency now and who doesn't ? Oh also the Democrats did not want the memo released. But do carry on, please.



posted on Feb, 4 2018 @ 12:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Lucidparadox


Goodness knows what would have happened if the GOP had Russian toes.... we would have to accuse Trump of colluding with Russians in gene splicing....



posted on Feb, 4 2018 @ 12:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: The GUT
Just wait for the OIG report and things will become MUCH clearer is my guess.


That's the thing.

The right wing said that about the Memo.
And Nunes last announcement.
And a gazillion other things going back years from Obama to Clinton to Benghazi to Email Servers.

JUST WAIT UNTIL....

It seems to me the purpose is the haze of "investigation" and the speculation, conspiracy and headlines it produces.

Not so much the actual conclusions, reports...or MEMOs.
Those never seem to affirm all the claims that precede them.

Answers doesn't seem to be the aim.

The fog of aspersions and smears and less that logical or factual claims seem to be the utility.

AKA Trump doesn't care if the Memo says anything, he just wants cover to stop the investigation.



posted on Feb, 4 2018 @ 12:37 PM
link   
a reply to: amazing

And now this:





Washington (CNN) — South Carolina Republican Rep. Trey Gowdy said the recently released, controversial GOP memo alleging FBI abuses of its surveillance authority does not have "any impact on the Russia probe," and even without the Steele dossier, there would be a Russia investigation.

"There is a Russia investigation without a dossier," Gowdy said in an interview that aired Sunday on CBS's "Face the Nation," days after he announced his decision not to seek re-election.

www.cnn.com...

But I am sure Gowdy is just a secret Democrat sleeper agent.



posted on Feb, 4 2018 @ 12:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Lucidparadox

No, he clearly did not collude with Russia, though it is clear that the DNC colluded with a British spy and a private company to produce a dossier on a Presidential candidate who happened to be the opposition candidate.....
no conflict of interest there right?



posted on Feb, 4 2018 @ 12:45 PM
link   
a reply to: JBurns

Isn't funny JB, that the Libby's call the memo a "dud" because it shows no government misconduct, yet fervently believe that Trump colluded with the Russies and broke the law, when no law was broken? So, I guess a liberal, Harvard law professor was uttering "BS" and "deflecting" when he stated this in May of last year?


Dershowitz explained that even if Democratic theories about Trump and Russia are true — that Trump’s presidential campaign colluded with Russia last year to undermine Hillary Clinton’s campaign and bolster Trump’s chances at winning the White House — it amounts only to “political wrongdoing.”



“Nobody can point me to a statute that would be violated [by the Trump-Russia collusion],” Dershowitz said. “And a prosecutor is only allowed to look for evidence of a federal crime.”



Later in the interview, Dershowitz also destroyed the Democratic claim that Trump committed obstruction of justice when he fired FBI Director James Comey earlier this month. Dershowitz said that Trump isn’t committing obstruction if he’s performing his constitutional duties, which he said involves directing the Department of Justice as head of the executive branch. “I don’t see any crime here at all,” Dershowitz said, referring to Comey’s dismissal.

www.theblaze.com...

Bottom line....this has been nothing more than a "witch hunt" by the Democratic party, because they were totally unprepared that Hillary would lose, which exposed their corruption...corruption that would've been swept under the rug if Hillary was elected president. SURPRISE y'all...you've been exposed!


So in the spirit of the new year, why don’t we all just be honest for a day? The Democrats, and I’m referring to the Obama administration and all its minions, including the Hillary organization, are guilty of treason and subversion against the United States. They are also guilty of a huge cover up of said actions. They are also guilty of using the agencies of the federal government against their political opposition. This abuse of power frighteningly included the intelligence services of the United States, which have been hopelessly politicized.



Trump wasn’t supposed to win. Hillary was supposed to win in their world view. This way she would be able to hide all of this dirt. This is why she apologized to Obama for losing the election. This was supposed to be final nail in the coffin for the American republic and what it has stood for during the last two and a half centuries. The Left would have finally won the war, not just the battle. The Democrats would have been able to continue to sell out the American people and suck the government and the taxpayers dry until the lights went out. That was the plan anyway.

www.washingtontimes.com...



posted on Feb, 4 2018 @ 12:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Lucidparadox
Ok.. im still not following

Why does any of this matter if the dirt on Trump is legit.

It is legit.

Therefore.. all the "memo" proves is that our government took action when it needed to in order to get a warrant to investigate someone clearly doing something wrong.



we can not allow the sitting presidents FBI to spy on there opponents in shady ways because they know there is dirt on them.

As sure as you are that there is dirt on trump, there are thousands of people sure Hillary is dirty, so should the FBI make stuff up to spy on her and the dnc and the people involved in her campaign.

.


It was the FBI conducting (and still conducting) a legitimate investigation.

Running for office should not be a get out of jail card for anyone.

And the conflation of FBI with "President" and subjects of investigation as "Political Opponents" of the FBI?...It's ridiculous.

The FBI investigated Hillary and the State Department under Obama.
Was Hillary President Obama's "Political Opponent"?

Conflating the FBI with the President's Political Agenda?
That definitely appears to be a goal of the Trump Administration, but no...Running for Office does not grant anyone immunity from the FBI. Not Hillary, Not Nixon, Not Trump...and not the thousands of other Politicians over the years that have been investigated and prosecuted or exonerated accordingly.



edit on 4-2-2018 by soberbacchus because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 4 2018 @ 12:47 PM
link   
a reply to: shawmanfromny

Dershowitz clearly works for Trump.

That was clear well over a year ago.

He is the legal PR wing of Trump.



posted on Feb, 4 2018 @ 12:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Pyle

I guess you missed the part about him being biased against Trump....



posted on Feb, 4 2018 @ 12:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Lucidparadox
Ok.. im still not following

Why does any of this matter if the dirt on Trump is legit.

It is legit.

Therefore.. all the "memo" proves is that our government took action when it needed to in order to get a warrant to investigate someone clearly doing something wrong.


Naturally you thought the FBI cleared her on grounds she did nothing wrong.....
we can not allow the sitting presidents FBI to spy on there opponents in shady ways because they know there is dirt on them.

As sure as you are that there is dirt on trump, there are thousands of people sure Hillary is dirty, so should the FBI make stuff up to spy on her and the dnc and the people involved in her campaign.

.


It was the FBI conducting (and still conducting) a legitimate investigation.

Running for office should not be a get out of jail card for anyone.

And the conflation of FBI with "President" and subjects of investigation as "Political Opponents" of the FBI?...It's ridiculous.

The FBI investigated Hillary and the State Department under Obama.
Was Hillary President Obama's "Political Opponent"?

Conflating the FBI with the President's Political Agenda?
That definitely appears to be a goal of the Trump Administration, but no...Running for Office does not grant anyone immunity from the FBI. Not Hillary, Not Nixon, Not Trump...and not the thousands of other Politicians over the years that have been investigated and prosecuted or exonerated accordingly.




Naturally you thought the same FBI who got the FISA warrant on Trump also let Hillary go on grounds she did nothing wrong......
edit on 4-2-2018 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 4 2018 @ 12:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Lucidparadox
Ok.. im still not following

Why does any of this matter if the dirt on Trump is legit.

It is legit.

Therefore.. all the "memo" proves is that our government took action when it needed to in order to get a warrant to investigate someone clearly doing something wrong.


Naturally you thought the FBI cleared her on grounds she did nothing wrong.....
we can not allow the sitting presidents FBI to spy on there opponents in shady ways because they know there is dirt on them.

As sure as you are that there is dirt on trump, there are thousands of people sure Hillary is dirty, so should the FBI make stuff up to spy on her and the dnc and the people involved in her campaign.

.


It was the FBI conducting (and still conducting) a legitimate investigation.

Running for office should not be a get out of jail card for anyone.

And the conflation of FBI with "President" and subjects of investigation as "Political Opponents" of the FBI?...It's ridiculous.

The FBI investigated Hillary and the State Department under Obama.
Was Hillary President Obama's "Political Opponent"?

Conflating the FBI with the President's Political Agenda?
That definitely appears to be a goal of the Trump Administration, but no...Running for Office does not grant anyone immunity from the FBI. Not Hillary, Not Nixon, Not Trump...and not the thousands of other Politicians over the years that have been investigated and prosecuted or exonerated accordingly.




Naturally you thought the same FBI who got the FISA warrant on Trump also let Hillary go on grounds she did nothing wrong......


Where have you read there was a FISA warrant on Trump?

Yes, the same FBI that found insufficient evidence to Prosecute Clinton was the same one that dragged on an investigation during most of the campaign and the same one that publicly announced re-opening it with a couple of weeks until voting day giving Trump material for his "Lock Her UP" chant at every rally.

All whilst not publicly commenting on the apparent investigation they had going on the Trump Campaign.

To claim they were working on Democrats behalf is just stupid and disputed by reality itself.




top topics



 
88
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join