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.

 

Laws and law breakers.

page: 3
10
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 24 2018 @ 04:20 PM
link   

originally posteI continue to see some laughable comd by: network dude

So when I see people complain about all the laws Trump has broken, then ask them to elaborate and list them, I get......crickets.

By the same token , when I ask about the laws that previous political figures have broken and not received any punishment, some of those same people will argue that since no punishment was given, there was no wrong being done.

So has the rule of law been re-written? Did the rules change and nobody told the public? Is a law only important if someone is punished?



It's crabs not crickets, see a Dr.

No the rule has always innocent until proven guilty. Trump has been found guilty in court countless times since the 70s to present.




posted on May, 24 2018 @ 04:22 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude



SIgh, again with the need for explanation on your level. Pretend this is in crayon.


The last time you busted out the crayons you looked like a damned fool.

Get your arrogance in check.



People (Trump haters) have been making statements like "Trump is a criminal" and then when asked to back that up, there is no reply.


That seems to be disingenuous. Your first two links are in reference to a conversation you were having with one person. The same member. And the last link shows that they did, in fact, respond with a list. So the "crickets" aspect, again, appears to be disingenuous.



So in conclusion, I wrote this thread asking for those who make those claims to set me straight. I didn't ask for anything else.


Why didn't you just send the one member a PM?



Now, the topic here is what CRIMES has Trump committed. It's not a hard topic to grasp, so please do your best to stick to it.


I thought the topic was crimes Trump was guilty of committing. That's what you said in the OP. What he has committed and what he has been found guilty of are two separate things.



posted on May, 24 2018 @ 04:23 PM
link   
a reply to: bastion




Trump has been found guilty in court countless times since the 70s to present.


For instance?



posted on May, 24 2018 @ 04:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: Kharron

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: Kharron
I see a lot of what you say from both sides, network dude -- biased reporting, making stuff up and defending one side, only to hear crickets when it's the opposite.

For two decades now we've been reading that Obama broke the law, or GW broke the law, or Rumsfeld did, or Hillary did and should be jailed, or that Trump and his people did... and for those two decades not one of them has been held accountable for a single action, for a single one of those hundreds of broken laws.

So either they are all angels or they are all above the law. Being above the law does not mean no crime was committed, it just means the people have no power in this country.

Here's one example of when I hear crickets a lot... when people post what seems to be compelling evidence against Hillary and ask for her arrest, and over the last month I believe I've posed this question four or five times in those threads:

- Why is she not in jail? Why was that promise not kept? Why is someone who has access to all information, can take any step necessary, avoiding prosecuting Hillary or at least appointing a Counsel, or anything really? And thread after thread all I get is... crickets, from both sides.

I simply cannot believe that he cannot find anything wrong in her work to keep that promise... there must be more to it.

So, to wrap up, does Obama, or GW or Hillary not having been charged ever mean that they are innocent?


I Agree that calling someone a criminal with no crimes to be accountable for is wrong. That's kind of why I wrote this thread. So can I count on your to help me out here and admit the same?


Absolutely, I didn't think there was a doubt about me, I'm pretty clear -- I want all these crooks investigated and I'm impatiently waiting to know more. You've never heard me say I want someone arrested or impeached, and I won't until the investigators give us proof it's needed.

So, can we count on you that if investigations into Hillary or Obama or Trump end up calling for removal or imprisonment, you will be equally unbiased and supportive?


I'll be completely honest with you here. If Hillary isn't punished for the crimes Comey laid out in his briefing I listed a bit earlier, I will be angry. I was in the military and subject to those same rules, and I'm quite sure had I broken just one of them, I'd have been punished.

But if an investigation (a real one) lets her off, I will have no choice but to accept the results.
Is that fair enough? (honest question)


It's not fair but there's really not much we can do.


I held a TS clearance as well and remember my polygraphs and days of interviews and hearing years later while I was deployed that family or friends were still called and questioned - a clearance is an ongoing thing , it never stops, as you know.

It makes me mad these politicians aren't held to the same standards, and that they can just bypass all those regulations. And we hear about both sides making the exact same offenses and people just get mad at one side -- drives me crazy.



posted on May, 24 2018 @ 04:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: bastion

originally posteI continue to see some laughable comd by: network dude

So when I see people complain about all the laws Trump has broken, then ask them to elaborate and list them, I get......crickets.

By the same token , when I ask about the laws that previous political figures have broken and not received any punishment, some of those same people will argue that since no punishment was given, there was no wrong being done.

So has the rule of law been re-written? Did the rules change and nobody told the public? Is a law only important if someone is punished?



It's crabs not crickets, see a Dr.

No the rule has always innocent until proven guilty. Trump has been found guilty in court countless times since the 70s to present.


So if you are sued, then you are guilty of a crime? Are you aware of how the justice system works?



posted on May, 24 2018 @ 04:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Kharron

we are in agreement.



posted on May, 24 2018 @ 04:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: bastion




Trump has been found guilty in court countless times since the 70s to present.


For instance?


He has been sued before.



posted on May, 24 2018 @ 04:28 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude

Here is an interesting bit.


In 1991, one of Trump's casinos in Atlantic City, New Jersey, was found guilty of circumventing state regulations about casino financing when Donald Trump's father bought $3.5 million in chips that he had no plans to gamble. Trump Castle was forced to pay a $30,000 fine under the settlement, according to New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement Director Jack Sweeney. Trump was not disciplined for the illegal advance on his inheritance, which was not confiscated.



posted on May, 24 2018 @ 04:33 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude




He has been sued before.


Guilty verdicts are reserved for criminal cases, not civil ones.

So when someone says: "Trump has been found guilty in court countless times since the 70s to present," he doesn't know what the hell he's talking about.
edit on 24-5-2018 by LesMisanthrope because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 24 2018 @ 04:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Kharron

I don't know which camp you're talking about, help me out please -- the Hillary witch hunt club, the Obama witch hunt club or the Trump witch hunt club?
________________________________________

You'd get a better idea if you read the OP.


Ok, so you're just talking about one of the witch hunt clubs, not all of them. Thank you.



posted on May, 24 2018 @ 04:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Kharron




Ok, so you're just talking about one of the witch hunt clubs, not all of them. Thank you.


There is only one witch hunt going on. You're welcome.
edit on 24-5-2018 by LesMisanthrope because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 24 2018 @ 04:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kharron

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Kharron

I don't know which camp you're talking about, help me out please -- the Hillary witch hunt club, the Obama witch hunt club or the Trump witch hunt club?
________________________________________

You'd get a better idea if you read the OP.


Ok, so you're just talking about one of the witch hunt clubs, not all of them. Thank you.


So when someone says: "There is only one witch hunt going on," he doesn't know what the hell he's talking about.




posted on May, 24 2018 @ 04:45 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert




So when someone says: "There is only one witch hunt going on," he doesn't know what the hell he's talking about.


Talk about all the witch hunts if you want to. Hell, we could go all the way back to Salem. Whatever gives you enough room to deflect.



posted on May, 24 2018 @ 04:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Kharron




Ok, so you're just talking about one of the witch hunt clubs, not all of them. Thank you.


There is only one witch hunt going on. You're welcome.


Wonderful. So, will you promise to stand with network dude and me and be unbiased, and not support ANY witch hunts until charges are filed?

That means not participating in Trump bashing threads, nor Hillary, nor Obama or any other person you can think of unless charges are filed by prosecutors.

In the interest of bringing us closer on these boards, bridging the gap and being consistent when we take to pitchforks.
edit on 24-5-2018 by Kharron because: typo



posted on May, 24 2018 @ 04:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: introvert




So when someone says: "There is only one witch hunt going on," he doesn't know what the hell he's talking about.


Talk about all the witch hunts if you want to. Hell, we could go all the way back to Salem. Whatever gives you enough room to deflect.


Deflect from what? I was trying to highlight exactly what you said, not deflect from it.

This OP and it's premise could be applied to many other people. Including Hillary and Obama.

So to say what you said, seems either dishonest or ignorant.



posted on May, 24 2018 @ 04:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Kharron




Wonderful. So, will you promise to stand with network dude and me and be unbiased, and not support ANY witch hunts until charges are filed?

That means not participating in Trump bashing threads, nor Hillary, nor Obama or any other person you can think of unless charges are filed by prosecutors.

In the interest of bring us closer on these boards, bridging the gap and being consistent when we take to pitchforks.


No, but only because your conditions are ridiculous. I thought we were talking about the witch hunt occurring in Washington, not the petty squabbles going on at ATS.



posted on May, 24 2018 @ 04:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Kharron




Wonderful. So, will you promise to stand with network dude and me and be unbiased, and not support ANY witch hunts until charges are filed?

That means not participating in Trump bashing threads, nor Hillary, nor Obama or any other person you can think of unless charges are filed by prosecutors.

In the interest of bring us closer on these boards, bridging the gap and being consistent when we take to pitchforks.


No, but only because your conditions are ridiculous. I thought we were talking about the witch hunt occurring in Washington, not the petty squabbles going on at ATS.


Now that is a perfect example of deflection.



posted on May, 24 2018 @ 04:51 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert




Deflect from what?

I was trying to highlight exactly what you said, not deflect from it.

This OP and it's premise could be applied to many other people. Including Hillary and Obama. So to say what you said, seems either dishonest or ignorant.


Then go ahead and apply it to many other people. It could be applied to Joan of Arc if you feel like it. But, of course, the argument isn't about any other people.



posted on May, 24 2018 @ 04:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: introvert




So when someone says: "There is only one witch hunt going on," he doesn't know what the hell he's talking about.


Talk about all the witch hunts if you want to. Hell, we could go all the way back to Salem. Whatever gives you enough room to deflect.


Deflect from what? I was trying to highlight exactly what you said, not deflect from it.

This OP and it's premise could be applied to many other people. Including Hillary and Obama.

So to say what you said, seems either dishonest or ignorant.


But you seem to forget that with regards to Ms. Clinton, the former (actual at the time) head of the FBI listed the crimes she was found to have committed. Did you not understand that part?



posted on May, 24 2018 @ 04:53 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert




Now that is a perfect example of deflection.


...but hillary.




top topics



 
10
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join