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.
Breaking: Top FBI Comey Advisor Former Counsel James Baker Resigns
page: 3share:
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Kharron
The text has two interpretations. One is that they wanted to be seen more helpful than the DOJ in getting Clinton off, the other is that they wanted to go super easy on Clinton because even if the DOJ is being harmful Clinton will go after everyone including the FBI if they don't help her.
Either way you interpret it they are clearly saying we need to go easy on Clinton, and it's clear they already know the investigation will not go anywhere because they feel Clinton will be next President.
I am not a legal expert, but it appears they conspired to help Clinton because they hate Trump more and feared Clinton's wrath once she became President. It also appears they conspired with Obama on the Russian collusion stuff against Trump, they worshiped Obama, and their texts made it clear Obama wanted to know everything and was told everything.
Listen, I'm not psychic and I don't think you are either. In fact, I don't know anyone here who is.
So, let's not try to interpret incomplete information because that's all conjecture, right?
Are there more texts we can dig into and dissect and come to our own conclusion, without being told what to think, or is this the extent of it?
a reply to: Kharron
There are a huge number of texts, I just gave you the only two interpretations of the texts I quoted. I can't read minds, and they won't explain them, so I can't tell you which one it is, but it is one of those two, not because I read minds, but because it is necessarily one of those two as there can't be any others.
ETA: Despite knowing they used private devices for messaging the FBI is not going after those messages even though it was requested to do so. So the worst messages may never come to light.
www.foxnews.com...[editb y]edit on 5-5-2018 by OccamsRazor04 because: (no reason given)
There are a huge number of texts, I just gave you the only two interpretations of the texts I quoted. I can't read minds, and they won't explain them, so I can't tell you which one it is, but it is one of those two, not because I read minds, but because it is necessarily one of those two as there can't be any others.
ETA: Despite knowing they used private devices for messaging the FBI is not going after those messages even though it was requested to do so. So the worst messages may never come to light.
www.foxnews.com...[editb y]edit on 5-5-2018 by OccamsRazor04 because: (no reason given)
a reply to: OccamsRazor04
Thanks for that, I just read through them.
Which one do you think is the worst one?
I think this is the worst one - "God Trump is loathsome human."
I agree with it though, he is a despicable human being. I'm not talking about his policies here, I'm just talking about his lack of character, his cheating and lying about it, being dishonest in general and well documented on it. He is not a good human being, he is not nice to be around it would seem, and he is not a good friend to people. He has cheated good, honest Americans out of millions of dollars and never said sorry. I have a problem with that.
Now, we may not agree on this but it is the opinion of many Americans. Is it a crime though?
Thanks for that, I just read through them.
Which one do you think is the worst one?
I think this is the worst one - "God Trump is loathsome human."
I agree with it though, he is a despicable human being. I'm not talking about his policies here, I'm just talking about his lack of character, his cheating and lying about it, being dishonest in general and well documented on it. He is not a good human being, he is not nice to be around it would seem, and he is not a good friend to people. He has cheated good, honest Americans out of millions of dollars and never said sorry. I have a problem with that.
Now, we may not agree on this but it is the opinion of many Americans. Is it a crime though?
The reason I posted in this thread when I almost always choose to remain silent is because I'm trying to illustrate a point. I've done this a few
times over the last few days. If I offended anyone, sorry.
The MSM cannot be trusted and they cannot be used as a source. Using the MSM as a source in a debate is like using the Bible in a debate to prove God exists.
'God exists because it says so right here, in this book.' is the same as 'It's true because (CNN. FOX, MSNBC, etc) says so.'
When we see it and can decide for ourselves it will be true, until then we're being played by a well oiled machine.
The MSM cannot be trusted and they cannot be used as a source. Using the MSM as a source in a debate is like using the Bible in a debate to prove God exists.
'God exists because it says so right here, in this book.' is the same as 'It's true because (CNN. FOX, MSNBC, etc) says so.'
When we see it and can decide for ourselves it will be true, until then we're being played by a well oiled machine.
This is equally bad...
"I am riled up. Trump is a f***ing idiot, is unable to provide a coherent answer."
And I agree, it is not classy at all. But if I don't put Strzok next to it, you have no clue if Tillerson said that or any number of other people who don't hold a high opinion of him.
"I am riled up. Trump is a f***ing idiot, is unable to provide a coherent answer."
And I agree, it is not classy at all. But if I don't put Strzok next to it, you have no clue if Tillerson said that or any number of other people who don't hold a high opinion of him.
originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: Kharron
There is no "worst" one.
They all indicate severe conflicts of interest, total partiality, extreme bias and lack of self-integrity.
😉 💡
I'm all for investigating it, that's what I'm saying - let's see them. If they don't release them so we can all see what it's about, one has to assume we're being played, as that is what we all agree the MSM does.
But if it's just people not liking Trump, heck join the club... his disapproval rating is always at least two thirds. It's safe to assume some of those people work in the government.
Not liking someone is not a crime... unless he makes it one? Anything is possible.
edit on 5-5-2018 by Kharron because: (no reason
given)
a reply to: Kharron
How is that worse than We need to go easy on Clinton?
How about ...
Using non work phones for plotting.
Or ...
Conspiracy involving Obama.
or ..
DOJ and FBI working and conspiring together ...
How is that worse than We need to go easy on Clinton?
How about ...
Page – So look, you say we text on that phone when we talk about Hillary because it can’t be traced
Using non work phones for plotting.
Or ...
Strzok – He changed President to "another senior government official."
Conspiracy involving Obama.
or ..
Strzok – Holy cow....nyt breaking Apuozzo, Lync [sic] will accept whatever rec and career prosecutors make. No political appointee input.
Strzok – Lynch. Timing not great, but whatever. Wonder if that's why the coordination language added.
Page – No way. This is a purposeful leak following the airplane snafu.
Strzok – Timing looks like hell. Will appear to be choreographed. All major news networks literally leading with "AG to accept FBI D's recommendation."
Page – Yeah, that is awful timing. Nothing we can do about it.
Strzok – What I meant was, did DOJ tell us yesterday they were doing this, so D added that language.
Strzok – Yep. I told Bill the same thing. Delaying just makes it worse.
Page – And yes. I think we had some warning of it. I know they sent some statement to rybicki, bc he called andy.
Page – And yeah, it's a real profile in couragw [sic], since she knows no charges will be brought.
DOJ and FBI working and conspiring together ...
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Kharron
Page – And yeah, it's a real profile in couragw [sic], since she knows no charges will be brought.
You're right, this one is bad, I missed that.
Which only makes me wonder... if she KNEW no charges would be brought why did the FBI then sabotage her campaign to get Trump elected?
We must not forget that the FBI said they were reopening the investigation barely a week before the election. This can only be seen as the FBI sabotaging her campaign.
Let's say you run for local office and the local sheriff comes on the news a week before the election and say that you are under a new investigation. Would you say that sheriff works for you or against you?
So if they weren't going to bring charges, meaning they are somehow colluding, why kill her chances of winning to get Donny elected?
Hmmm, it's almost as if both candidates were Deep State candidates.
a reply to: Kharron
That was a result of them hushing up the email investigation. Because it was never investigated properly it came back to bite them in the butt. There seems to be conspiracy, but that doesn't mean they all held the same beliefs. They protected Clinton, but many didn't like her either and were not willing to put their careers on the line when it came out new information surfaced they refused to touch.
That was a result of them hushing up the email investigation. Because it was never investigated properly it came back to bite them in the butt. There seems to be conspiracy, but that doesn't mean they all held the same beliefs. They protected Clinton, but many didn't like her either and were not willing to put their careers on the line when it came out new information surfaced they refused to touch.
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Kharron
That was a result of them hushing up the email investigation. Because it was never investigated properly it came back to bite them in the butt. There seems to be conspiracy, but that doesn't mean they all held the same beliefs. They protected Clinton, but many didn't like her either and were not willing to put their careers on the line when it came out new information surfaced they refused to touch.
How do you know this? Or are you just thinking out loud on what may have happened?
My thoughts are, things like elections and presidents are decided far, far ahead... these people don't make mistakes like that. She was sabotaged and the FBI helped Trump get elected. Giving her knowledge that she won't be charged shows double collusion from the FBI, confirming what we've been saying all along - two sides of the same coin.
a reply to: Kharron
We know this because that reopening of the case was never supposed to happen. It happened because of the Weiner investigation which had nothing to do with Hillary, but because Hillary didn't care about the rules her classified emails were found on the laptop. Huma blamed her husband for Clinton losing the election.
We know this because that reopening of the case was never supposed to happen. It happened because of the Weiner investigation which had nothing to do with Hillary, but because Hillary didn't care about the rules her classified emails were found on the laptop. Huma blamed her husband for Clinton losing the election.
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Kharron
We know this because that reopening of the case was never supposed to happen. It happened because of the Weiner investigation which had nothing to do with Hillary, but because Hillary didn't care about the rules her classified emails were found on the laptop. Huma blamed her husband for Clinton losing the election.
And how do you know what is and is not supposed to happen? Do you realize that everything you're saying is conjecture?
edit: Come on, give me something concrete so that we can keep talking.
edit on 5-5-2018 by Kharron because: (no reason given)
a reply to: Kharron
Because Hillary is the one who let that info get on that laptop. Weiner was caught. if they wanted to sabotage Clinton they had the excuse already, what you suggest makes no sense. Why would they put their careers in jeopardy to attack Clinton a 2nd time rather than be professional and keep the first investigation going? Risk without reward, makes no sense.
Because Hillary is the one who let that info get on that laptop. Weiner was caught. if they wanted to sabotage Clinton they had the excuse already, what you suggest makes no sense. Why would they put their careers in jeopardy to attack Clinton a 2nd time rather than be professional and keep the first investigation going? Risk without reward, makes no sense.
edit on 5-5-2018 by OccamsRazor04 because: (no reason given)
a reply to: OccamsRazor04
Makes no sense that a man that has been groomed for 30 years by the Rockefeller and Rothschild families has been allowed to take his post? You are aware of that? And that it's been discussed on ATS, articles have been linked to interviews with the gentlemen? Calling him a man of use? Colorful front man?
You are aware they saved him from bankruptcy on numerous occasion? You are aware he would be no one had they not bailed out Resorts International at the beginning of his career? You have read how many of his cabinet are also on Rothschild payroll? How many are proxies through JP Morgan and other banks? Wilbur Ross?
And that exactly around the time this was making news, and a couple of months before he took office - Trump bans the Rothschilds from the Palm Beach Society and they walk out angrily. As if we were 5 years old.
And then the FBI, which is Deep State for sure, sabotages the opponent's candidacy to get him elected. How can one ignore all these connections?
Makes no sense that a man that has been groomed for 30 years by the Rockefeller and Rothschild families has been allowed to take his post? You are aware of that? And that it's been discussed on ATS, articles have been linked to interviews with the gentlemen? Calling him a man of use? Colorful front man?
You are aware they saved him from bankruptcy on numerous occasion? You are aware he would be no one had they not bailed out Resorts International at the beginning of his career? You have read how many of his cabinet are also on Rothschild payroll? How many are proxies through JP Morgan and other banks? Wilbur Ross?
And that exactly around the time this was making news, and a couple of months before he took office - Trump bans the Rothschilds from the Palm Beach Society and they walk out angrily. As if we were 5 years old.
And then the FBI, which is Deep State for sure, sabotages the opponent's candidacy to get him elected. How can one ignore all these connections?
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Kharron
They did not sabotage it, they saved it. But her errors were so egregious they came back into the open. The FBI did and is clearly still sabotaging Trump.
So far, they've only helped him, despite what the MSM will have you think.
I've always said that in the end, when he is no longer 'a man of use' to the them as they've called him, they will get rid of him. Martyr him. FBI may still have a role in that... but so far, they've only helped him get where he is at.
I can see we won't meet on this today... time will tell. Enjoy your Saturday!