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.

 

Obama Ordered CIA to SPY in Another Major Election

page: 6
45
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 28 2018 @ 09:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: Chadwickus
a reply to: network dude

Selective, partisan facts.

I get it.

No you don't actually get it.
"Obama Ordered CIA to SPY in Another Major Election"


There is nothing wrong with partisanship unless it is used and represented unethically and in immoral ways, just like Obama has done RIGHT HERE in this particular manner.

Responding to that is not the immoral and unethical partisanship you want to label it as. It is doing what is correct and right.

Those supporters who have become accustomed to the criminality of the DNC, the Clintons, and Obama's administration don't know any more what is right or wrong, or even what the word "partisan" represents or means. How about the DNC's response to president Nixon's bugging of the Watergate Hotel, was that just being partisan of them? Even most republicans were outraged at Nixon for that, (back when most people knew and cared what right and wrong was).

Do YOU understand the difference between right and wrong, or is that understanding kept on ice until it only affects the team you root for? That is what corrupted partisanship looks like, and you wear it quite well.





posted on May, 28 2018 @ 09:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: Chadwickus
a reply to: network dude

Selective, partisan facts.

I get it.


Lets try this, a theoretical headline:
"ATS' own Chadwicus has been accused of punching kangaroos. We have video:


then Chadwicus responds with "Well, Trump is orange and hits Kangaroos too, I'm sure."

the obvious issue being that proof exists (albeit not real in this case) that Chadwicus did in fact punch a kangaroo. No proof exists that Trump punches kangaroos, though the orangeness is verifiable.

I hope this puts your confusion to rest sir.



posted on May, 28 2018 @ 09:49 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

Methinks you are wasting your breath.

One of the reasons I enjoy ATS is that it gives me a decent cross sectional view of societal attitudes. After all, as we have seen, it is not really evidence and facts that drive political direction, but how those facts are 'spun.' The whole problem with the 2016 election was that the DNC couldn't spin the facts as fast as they came out.

What I see now is a new and disturbing trend that is becoming plainly evident in this thread... the trend of admitting to the illegal behavior, but simply claiming that it is either not illegal or at least that it is completely acceptable. Chadwickus admits that the activity in the OP is illegal, but as a matter of practicality has decided it's not worth pursuing because "everyone does it," including Trump, but of course there is no evidence to support that other than just cynicism. JoshuaCox is trying to pass off "pay for play" as perfectly legal and regular, despite such being specified in the US code as various felonies.

Of course, this tells me that the DNC is in full panic mode behind the scenes. What we hear here are often not personal observations, but rather talking points that are handed down to the masses of believers through the various arms of the MSM. I see it in new threads all the time: a mention on Morning Joe or CNN or Rachal Maddow the night before becomes the basis for a new thread. Occasionally it happens on Fox excerpts as well, but it does appear to be primarily left-leaning at this point in time.

But fear not: I keep remembering a line from my youth. I don't recall if it was part of a song or if it was in a book I read from that era, but I can't seem to get it out of my head:

"The wheels of Justice grind slowly, yet they grind exceedingly small."

TheRedneck



posted on May, 28 2018 @ 10:46 AM
link   
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

WHAT ?!?

A) Pay for play is t legal?!?!


What do you call a lobbiests?!?!

Do you comprehend how a Superpac works???


B) so they just do the forms of insider trading that are legal?!?!

The obama administration put a lot of restrictions on insider trading. Then there was a bi-partisan closed door meeting that undid all the regulations he had put in..


But on Monday, when the president signed a bill reversing big pieces of the law, the emailed announcement was one sentence long. There was no fanfare last week either, when the Senate and then the House passed the bill in largely empty chambers using a fast-track procedure known as unanimous consent. In the House, Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., shepherded the bill through. It was Friday afternoon at 12:52. Many members had already left for the weekend or were on their way out. The whole process took only 30 seconds. There was no debate.

A year ago, President Obama signed the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge Act into law at a celebratory ceremony attended by a bipartisan cast of lawmakers. "I want to thank all the members of Congress who came together and worked to get this done," he said. The law wouldn't just outlaw trading on nonpublic information by members of Congress, the executive branch and their staffs. It would greatly expand financial disclosures and make all of the data searchable so insider trading and conflicts of interest would be easier to detect.


Reverse these two quotes.. they went in backward so 2=1.


C) I loved all your BS assertions about “green lights” and such that mean nothing . Because you dodnt even actually make an allegation . You Just said meaningless garbage that can’t be sourced or checked up on..


“Just take my word for it.”


Lol




edit on 28-5-2018 by JoshuaCox because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 28 2018 @ 11:03 AM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Victim of Blue Pill Syndrome 👆

Sponsored by MSM Farmicuticals

🥁🚬



posted on May, 28 2018 @ 12:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

WHAT ?!?

A) Pay for play is t legal?!?!


What do you call a lobbiests?!?!

Do you comprehend how a Superpac works???


B) so they just do the forms of insider trading that are legal?!?!

The obama administration put a lot of restrictions on insider trading. Then there was a bi-partisan closed door meeting that undid all the regulations he had put in..


But on Monday, when the president signed a bill reversing big pieces of the law, the emailed announcement was one sentence long. There was no fanfare last week either, when the Senate and then the House passed the bill in largely empty chambers using a fast-track procedure known as unanimous consent. In the House, Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., shepherded the bill through. It was Friday afternoon at 12:52. Many members had already left for the weekend or were on their way out. The whole process took only 30 seconds. There was no debate.

A year ago, President Obama signed the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge Act into law at a celebratory ceremony attended by a bipartisan cast of lawmakers. "I want to thank all the members of Congress who came together and worked to get this done," he said. The law wouldn't just outlaw trading on nonpublic information by members of Congress, the executive branch and their staffs. It would greatly expand financial disclosures and make all of the data searchable so insider trading and conflicts of interest would be easier to detect.


Reverse these two quotes.. they went in backward so 2=1.


C) I loved all your BS assertions about “green lights” and such that mean nothing . Because you dodnt even actually make an allegation . You Just said meaningless garbage that can’t be sourced or checked up on..


“Just take my word for it.”


Lol





so Cohen didn't break any laws? HUH, that's odd, but whatever.



posted on May, 28 2018 @ 09:26 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude

There is actually no proof Obama ordered anything.

Like I keep saying, and you guys keep ignoring, the CIA's procedures remain the same regardless of who the president is.

The president doesn't sit at his desk each day and tell the CIA what to.

It's quite simple.

So unless you can show a direct statement or memo or anything where Obama specifically orders the CIA to monitor the French election, you got nothing.

And before you get too triggered, that same argument has been used against me for Trump in this thread. The difference is, I admit it's only speculation.

But hey, keep patronizing me, it only increases my resolve.



posted on May, 29 2018 @ 06:17 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

The problem is that the claim in the OP is false. Nothing illegal was done, yet the anti-Obama faction refuses to do the minimum amount of due diligence. Trump supporters are fueled by pure fantasy, and it is only a matter of time before they will need to face grim reality.



posted on May, 29 2018 @ 02:08 PM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

Where in the article does it say anything was/is illegal ?

🚬🤷🔑




posted on May, 29 2018 @ 03:23 PM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

I honestly don't know if it is illegal or not. What I do know is:
  • It seems to indicate a pattern of covert intelligence in areas that do not affect national security, which lends more credence to the claim of spying on the Trump campaign.
  • It sort of makes the whole "Russian collusion" story moot. It is fine for us to do it to another country, but if another country does it to us it is sufficient to unseat a sitting President who had nothing to do with it?
That's the big story here: the hypocrisy coming out of DC and the MSM these days.

TheRedneck



posted on May, 30 2018 @ 10:03 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen


Where in the article does it say anything was/is illegal ?


Thank you for admitting Obama did nothing illegal. Why did you post this, then?



posted on May, 30 2018 @ 10:09 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck


It seems to indicate a pattern of covert intelligence in areas that do not affect national security, which lends more credence to the claim of spying on the Trump campaign.


Once again, the intelligence agencies were spying on enemy agents. The Trump campaign was dealing with, even hiring, enemy agents.


It sort of makes the whole "Russian collusion" story moot.


No, it is where the investigation of collusion begins. Please bear in mind that "collusion" is being used as a polite euphemism for "conspiracy." It has been proven that members of the Trump campaign were willing to conspire with Russian agents.


It is fine for us to do it to another country, but if another country does it to us it is sufficient to unseat a sitting President who had nothing to do with it?


It is not "fine" for us to do it to another country, and that is irrelevant. If a sitting president has conspired with a hostile foreign power, he needs to be impeached, removed from office, and tried.
edit on 30-5-2018 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2018 @ 09:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: xuenchen


Where in the article does it say anything was/is illegal ?


Thank you for admitting Obama did nothing illegal. Why did you post this, then?


you're just too clever

😃👋



posted on Jun, 3 2018 @ 06:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: thepixelpusher
a reply to: DJW001

FBI Spying On Trump Started In London, Earlier Than Thought, New Texts Implicate Obama White House


Zerohedge? Bwah-ha-ha! They are making an ally's alerting us to Trump's involvement with Russia look like a bad thing. Oh, and zero evidence the White House was directing anything. The usual zerohege pissing in the well.



posted on Jun, 3 2018 @ 08:23 AM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

Zerohedge is a reputable site. Just because you don't like what they are saying doesn't mean it's wrong.



new topics

top topics



 
45
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join