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.

 

Will Republicans Sanction Russia or Prove Their Treason with Inaction

page: 5
53
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 08:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Greven

Some questions asked don't have yes or no answers.




posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 08:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
The Russians should move to a sanctuary state. The leftists will hide them.



well played sir
very well played



posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 08:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Greven

an executive order that is unconstitutional?
or thats not the answer you want?

"Yes" or "No" - those are the options to the question "Is it okay for the President of the United States of America to disobey his or her Constitutional duty?"

Pick one.

daca is BY FAR the most appropriate answer to your question
funny you refuse to acknowledge that



posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 08:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: aethertek
So even though all the intelligence dept. warned of Russian interference the republicans did nothing but try to derail the investigation into Russia's crimes against America.

So now that indictments have been brought against the first foreign agents will the republicans step up to their claims of protecting America or will they be shown for the seditious sellouts we believe them to be.

America is watching Republicans, show us your love of America that you always claim or be proven hypocritical liars interested only in your own power & greed.

K~


The only meddling that matters to you is the one supported by the least amount of evidence. You should break out of your filter bubble before you turn all McCarthy on us.



posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 08:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Greven

Some questions asked don't have yes or no answers.

Article II Section 3 of the Constitution of the United States of America explicitly says of the President:

He shall from time to time give to the Congress information of the state of the union, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in case of disagreement between them, with respect to the time of adjournment, he may adjourn them to such time as he shall think proper; he shall receive ambassadors and other public ministers; he shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed, and shall commission all the officers of the United States.

"Shall" here is imperative. It is not a request. Therefore, this particular question:
Is it okay for the President of the United States of America to disobey his or her Constitutional duty?

... has a YES or NO answer. It's even given. You don't have to look anywhere if you know what the Constitution says.



posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 08:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: aethertek

They already did. All but 5 congressmen voted for it.

Trump decided not to enforce them.


& yet the republicans do nothing to force trump to perform his required duties & implement them because they are just as deep in Russia's attack as Trump is.

K~



posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 08:06 PM
link   
If we are going to punish any country that meddles in the elections of a sovereign nation, then it would be grossly hypocritical, since the US meddles in other nations elections.

Or is it ok for the US, but when your Marxist bitch of a candidate doesn't get in, everyone has a hissy-fit and wants to start WWIII?



posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 08:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Greven

an executive order that is unconstitutional?
or thats not the answer you want?

"Yes" or "No" - those are the options to the question "Is it okay for the President of the United States of America to disobey his or her Constitutional duty?"

Pick one.

daca is BY FAR the most appropriate answer to your question
funny you refuse to acknowledge that


The question was:
"Is it okay for the President of the United States of America to disobey his or her Constitutional duty?"

"DACA" is nonsensical as an answer. "Yes" or "No."
edit on 20Fri, 16 Feb 2018 20:09:39 -0600America/ChicagovAmerica/Chicago2 by Greven because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 08:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Greven

daca is nonsensical i agree
how did it survive for so long
aside from the 9th circuit and hawaiian judges



posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 08:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Greven

DACA.



posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 08:10 PM
link   
lol, you're almost as bad as silly
edit on 16-2-2018 by Jiggly because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 08:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Greven

DACA.

I hope that everyone is watching this thread to see how evasive so-called patriots are in answering a simple yes/no question, one for which the answer is given in the founding documents of our country.

You are evasive because if you were to agree with the Constitution, then you would have to agree that the current President is disobeying his duty under it.

You care more about party than country, yet are too ashamed to unequivocally say you do not agree with the Constitution.
edit on 20Fri, 16 Feb 2018 20:14:50 -0600America/ChicagovAmerica/Chicago2 by Greven because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 08:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Greven

DACA.

I hope that everyone is watching this thread to see how evasive so-called patriots are in answering a simple yes/no question, one for which the answer is given in the founding documents of our country.

You are evasive because if you were to agree with the Constitution, then you would have to agree that the current President is disobeying his duty under it.

You care more about party than country, yet are too ashamed to unequivocally say you do not agree with the Constitution.


Quislings?

K~



posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 08:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Greven

DACA changes the immigration status of people in the country which is a province of the legislative branch and Obama did it unilaterally which is not his province as head of the executive.

So, yes or no, on DACA?



posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 08:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Greven

DACA changes the immigration status of people in the country which is a province of the legislative branch and Obama did it unilaterally which is not his province as head of the executive.

So, yes or no, on DACA?

No.

Now answer the question.



posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 08:22 PM
link   
It's another failed attempt by the leftists to push the narrative that Trump is;

Collusioning with Russia
Sexist
Racist
Mentally unift
Unhealthy
Traitor

FailFailFail

Now it's insulting Trump supporters who don't call Trump treasonous.

Do leftists spend all day fat-shaming Trump-shaming people?



Dear god! What is your platform going to be in 2018?

You losers haven't a god-damned clue!



posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 08:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Greven

DACA.

I hope that everyone is watching this thread to see how evasive so-called patriots are in answering a simple yes/no question, one for which the answer is given in the founding documents of our country.

You are evasive because if you were to agree with the Constitution, then you would have to agree that the current President is disobeying his duty under it.

You care more about party than country, yet are too ashamed to unequivocally say you do not agree with the Constitution.


Yeah right. How about you give us the official explanation, explain why it’s a bad idea, instead of parroting opposing party talking points.



posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 08:24 PM
link   
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?



posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 08:27 PM
link   

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."
edit on 20Fri, 16 Feb 2018 20:28:37 -0600America/ChicagovAmerica/Chicago2 by Greven because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 08:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Greven

DACA.

I hope that everyone is watching this thread to see how evasive so-called patriots are in answering a simple yes/no question, one for which the answer is given in the founding documents of our country.

You are evasive because if you were to agree with the Constitution, then you would have to agree that the current President is disobeying his duty under it.

You care more about party than country, yet are too ashamed to unequivocally say you do not agree with the Constitution.

your assessment is askew
no one is neing evasive
you just dislike the answer
daca is the most relevant answer to your question




top topics



 
53
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join