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.
originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: EggZactly
You have to have a minimum of 20 posts before you're able to start your own thread.
originally posted by: EggZactly
originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: EggZactly
You have to have a minimum of 20 posts before you're able to start your own thread.
Must have 20, not meaning to hijack, but got my thread in.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
"There are two groups that have created chaos more than the Russians and that’s the Democrats and the mainstream media,” Gidley asserted on Fox News.
originally posted by: aethertek
Now another quisling character brought to you from the White House, deputy douche Hogan Gidley.
He had this to say,,,
"There are two groups that have created chaos more than the Russians and that’s the Democrats and the mainstream media,” Gidley asserted on Fox News.
So according to this MAGAt the concerted attacks against America on our own soil by a foreign adversary is hunky dory but damn those democrats & independent free press, they're the real problem.
So again the white house will do nothing to counter/denounce this Russian aggression & will instead disparage it's own populace & one of the historic foundations of our republic, the free press.
So 2014 to present how many of the reich-wing racially/politically motivated attacks & murders that have occurred have been induced by the propaganda that the alt-reich absorbed from these Russian sources.
I guess when woman & minorities are attacked & killed it's not chaos but business as usual for the reich-wing.
K~
originally posted by: Harpua
lol at all the Trump apologists who once claimed there was zero truth to russia meddling with the election now you are all claiming its not a big deal.
You guys are pathetic... I call out people on my side of the aisle when they don't live up to their position. I can guarantee you would all be freaking out if Obama was in Trumps position, you'd probably be armed with pitchforks and AKs marching DC as we speak.
originally posted by: aethertek
...
Yes the DNC got hacked, well so did the RNC, where are all those dirty little secrets go that never made the public eye.
No I'm expecting the republicans to do absolutely nothing except spout more mindless BS they know their moronic masses will believe.
originally posted by: aethertek
The really good thing about those recent indictments are the level of detail in the communications, Mueller is letting these scum know that yes your intercepts belong to us.
originally posted by: Greven
Nope, this is all on Mr. Trump.
You've yet to answer "Yes" or "No" by the way.
...
Former Homeland Security secretary Jeh Johnson on Wednesday told lawmakers that the White House held back on responding to Russia because it didn’t want to play into fears, propagated by then-candidate Trump, that the election would be “rigged.”
“One of the candidates, as you'll recall, was predicting that the election was going to be rigged in some way,” Johnson said. “And so we were concerned that, by making the statement, we might in and of itself be challenging the integrity of the election process itself.”
...
A new report suggests the same hacking group believed to have hacked the Democrats during the recent presidential election also targeted Ukrainian artillery units over a two-year period, that if confirmed would add to suspicions they are Russian state operatives.
...
...
Sometime in 2016 I became aware of a hack into systems of the Democratic National Committee. Fresh from the experience with the Office of Personnel Management, I pressed my staff to know whether DHS was sufficiently proactive, and on the scene helping the DNC identify the intruders and patch vulnerabilities. The answer, to the best of my recollection, was not reassuring: the FBI and the DNC had been in contact with each other months before about the intrusion, and the DNC did not feel it needed DHS’s assistance at that time.
...
originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: shooterbrody
No they did not and it's been proven. No one illegally spied on any Americans.
Your big problem is when they looked legally at spies your guy was right there to get caught up
The defense is getting freaked out and scared now.
We all see where it's going.
You elected an unfit individual. This past year of getting nothing done while juggling multiple embarrassing scandals and bumbling ineptitude proves it. The whole world sees it and is confounded by our inability to correct the bad decision which apparently now we know was from a rigged election.( That was a popular claim of his wasn't it? Fits his profile perfectly. Accusing someone of doing exactly what he was doing)
Go Mueller...Go Mueller... Go Mueller...
If it was the GOAL of Russia to create discord, disruption and chaos within the U.S. then, with all of the Committee Hearings, Investigations and Party hatred, they have succeeded beyond their wildest dreams. They are laughing their asses off in Moscow. Get smart America! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 18, 2018
originally posted by: lakenheath24
a reply to: Greven
So you are ok with Trump kicking out illegal aliens then? And hammering cities that dont uphold immigration laws?
originally posted by: Khaleesi
originally posted by: Greven
originally posted by: Khaleesi
originally posted by: Greven
originally posted by: shooterbrody
originally posted by: Greven
originally posted by: Khaleesi
originally posted by: Greven
originally posted by: Khaleesi
originally posted by: Greven
originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Greven
OK, first explain who we are sanctioning and why?
Remember these are 13 Russian citizens and not the Russian government as a whole according to the indictments.
So, are you in favor of sanctioning an entire country for what some of its citizens did on social media?
I indulged your question and you wish to further evade the simple question I've asked instead in hopes of getting away from the answer which is already given by the Constitution of the United States of America.
No more deflections.
"Is it okay for the President of the United States of America to disobey his or her Constitutional duty?"
"Yes" or "No."
What was Obama's constitutional duty in regards to DACA? He did not have the constitutional right to write an EO establishing DACA. Will you vilify him for doing so? Basically, if you can not admit that Obama stepped WAAAAAAY out of bounds when he did that, you have no moral high ground.
Yet another challenger who cannot answer a yes/no question, but wishes instead to deflect to Obama under the mistaken assumption that I am a Democrat.
I've already answered that when ketsuko tried to deflect. Read the thread. So many are not doing that.
Then answer the question:
"Is it okay for the President of the United States of America to disobey his or her Constitutional duty?"
Yes or No
Yes and by your logic Obama should have been impeached for failure to do so.
Perhaps so, but it's a bit late for that.
Answer the question. Yes or No.
ok we get it mr kristol you hate POTUS
don't you have neocon opinion pieces to finish before press time?
Still unable to answer a simple "yes" or "no" I see.
Why should anyone else answer you? You took my answer and tried to twist it into something it wasn't. You don't want an answer out of curiosity. You want something to use to attempt to beat someone over the head with and proclaim yourself the victor.
This is an odd response.
You wrote:
originally posted by: Khaleesi
There are times when the law is wrong. In some instances the president has a moral obligation to disobey the law.
I replied:
originally posted by: Greven
originally posted by: Khaleesi
There are times when the law is wrong. In some instances the president has a moral obligation to disobey the law.
You advocate for a nation where laws are malleable for those with whom you agree.
That is dangerous territory.
The Constitution is the supreme law of the land. By saying that the president sometimes has an obligation to disobey the law, you advocating that the supreme law of the land is malleable.
Who decides the moral circumstance that allows such malleability?
You? Me? Who?
I'm not trying to bash people. I'm pointing out what I believe to be a flaw in your argument. If laws can be malleable for whatever 'moral obligation' means to whomever feels that way - then they are no longer laws.
The law is written by fallible men. Sometimes we get it wrong. On those occasions, I prefer to look at it in the same way Theodore Roosevelt did. Sometimes we need to realize that the right thing may not be what the law says. Plenty of things are or were legal but were still wrong.
Matthew 12: 9-12
9 Now when He had departed from there, He went into their synagogue. 10 And behold, there was a man who had a withered hand. And they asked Him, saying, “Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath?”—that they might accuse Him.
11 Then He said to them, “What man is there among you who has one sheep, and if it falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will not lay hold of it and lift it out? 12 Of how much more value then is a man than a sheep? Therefore it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath.”
Sometimes doing what is right is more important than being literal about the law.