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.

 

President Trump has Obtained Recordings of Journalists Conspiring Against Him.

page: 10
68
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 31 2018 @ 09:50 AM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

Everyone already knows. Don't play dumb.




posted on Jul, 31 2018 @ 09:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Breakthestreak



I can't wait to see who they're running in 2020. Holy sh#t I can't wait for that announcement. It's gonna be the funniest campaign in a lifetime. Please dems, pleeaase run one the current batsh*t crazies you have in stock. If not then please, please run literally anyone. I mean anyone at all. I'm sure the person you guys choose will be exactly the type of person we expect you to choose. Can't wait.

Did someone mention She-Guevara?

Careful you don't get any of that "blue wave" on ya.



edit on 7 31 2018 by stosh64 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 31 2018 @ 10:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

No, pretty sure the Antifa-supporting liberals here are forum rot and are best repelled like Terminex pests.



posted on Jul, 31 2018 @ 10:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: yuppa

Bull. It's the same exact recording. I heard it on several networks.


The one i hear don ABC cut off at Nonono. Its not bull i heard it 2 minutes after the one on fox. YOU are NOT ME and do not have the same Experiences. so kindly frack off on that.
edit on 18000000ppam by yuppa because: clarification



posted on Jul, 31 2018 @ 11:15 AM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

You have gone full-on Trumpite.

Wild to watch.

You know consistently cite crazy all-out fake news sites, not even pretending to care about veracity.

AND BTW -
"President Trump has Obtained Recordings of Journalists Conspiring Against Him."

Since when is journalists asking questions or looking for a story "Conspiring".

We don't live in Iran.

Maybe you should consider a move.



posted on Jul, 31 2018 @ 11:17 AM
link   
a reply to: soberbacchus

Well there is evidence almost the entire MSM media is teaming up on this. isnt that a conspiracy?



posted on Jul, 31 2018 @ 11:18 AM
link   
Since day one of this administration, claims have been made.

Yet when asked for proof, evidence, something, nothing on some of the claims are given, the topic is often changed.

So if there is this recording, or recordings, then they should at least release it, to back up that claim.



posted on Jul, 31 2018 @ 11:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: howtonhawky

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Chance321

Because he used campaign funds to pay them off. That's against the law.


no it is not...

according to some campaign finance lawyers protecting ones personal relationships is toats cool


Nope.

Remember when John Edwards paid to cover up his affair during his Presidential Campaign?

John Edwards indicted on campaign finance charges
www.nytimes.com...

Anyways - The BIG shoe to drop that Cohen keeps hinting at is that the 1.6 Million Dollar payment to a Playboy Model to get an abortion was not actually for the RNC Finance Chair. There is talk that he isn't even capable of impregnating anyone (Vasectomy). AND the NDA used cited the exact same alias for Trump as the Stormy Daniels NDA.

THAT is what Trump is fearing IMO. He paid a Playboy Model to get an abortion whilst courting the Pro-life voters.



The Wall Street Journal published a story on April 13 revealing the existence of another nondisclosure agreement involving an affair between an adult entertainer and a client of Cohen’s. The NDA employed the pseudonyms David Dennison and Peggy Peterson — the same names used in the Stormy Daniels NDA — and was otherwise very similar to the Trump-Daniels agreement.

nymag.com...

It was Trump who paid off the Playboy Model to get the abortion.

Broidy just ponied up the money for Trump as he has in the past for bribery and payoffs.



Broidy has a history of bribing public officials to enhance the economic prospects of his business ventures. In 2009, he pleaded guilty to bribing New York State Comptroller Alan Hevesi. As part of a plea deal which led to the convictions of seven of his co-conspirators, Broidy admitted he made more than $1 million in illegal payouts and gifts to New York pension authorities.


It is his MO



Broidy paid over $90,000 to the girlfriend of a high-ranking [Office of the New York State Comptroller] official from April 2004 through October 2005. The payments were used to cover the girlfriend’s living expenses and rent. Broidy also covered the girlfriend’s hospital bills. Broidy also agreed to pay $5,500 a month to a relative of the girlfriend beginning in October 2003, for a total of $44,000. These payments were concealed through a sham loan agreement between Broidy and the relative.



Broidy paying off mistresses as a bribe to powerful people is standard operating procedure for him.
edit on 31-7-2018 by soberbacchus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 31 2018 @ 11:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: yuppa
a reply to: soberbacchus

Well there is evidence almost the entire MSM media is teaming up on this. isnt that a conspiracy?


The entire News Media is teaming up to what? Find stories? Report critically on the President of the United States?

Take your Tyrant-Fetish BS to IRAN or North Korea. This OP is sad and ridiculous. People who have let their fear-centers swell so much that they crave tyranny and need a big-daddy fantasy where reporters are accused of "conspiring" for chasing stories or being critical of the Orange Dumpster Fire squatting in our White House.



posted on Jul, 31 2018 @ 11:42 AM
link   
a reply to: soberbacchus




Nope. Remember when John Edwards paid to cover up his affair during his Presidential Campaign? John Edwards indicted on campaign finance charges www.nytimes.com...


YEP
There is a difference in the cases and if you were not clouded by personal desire you would have noticed that john was on the gov. dole at the time and trump was not....just not enough weight to remove a sitting president

the rest of your post is interesting though



posted on Jul, 31 2018 @ 11:47 AM
link   
Haven't we all learned by now that when Trump says he "has something" it usually means "I just made that up"?

From bombshell birth certificate news to secret recording of journalists conspiring against him, he seems to never actually have anything he says he has. He's just smart enough to know that a certain segment of his base will accept that he does. I assume the same group still believes he possesses bombshell evidence on Obama's birth certificate, but the rest of us know he just made that up.



posted on Jul, 31 2018 @ 11:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: howtonhawky
a reply to: soberbacchus




Nope. Remember when John Edwards paid to cover up his affair during his Presidential Campaign? John Edwards indicted on campaign finance charges www.nytimes.com...


the rest of your post is interesting though




The size of the payment to Bechard — $1.6 million — is also a little weird.

Broidy was a largely anonymous person in late 2017, when the NDA was signed. His biggest claim to fame at the time was a felony conviction for corruption. Why would a man in his position need to pay $1.6 million to keep Bechard quiet about an affair to which the public at large would be completely indifferent? (And if the explanation for the massive payment is that Broidy was desperate to keep this secret from his family and the RNC, why, as detailed below, did he admit to the affair the very first time a journalist asked him about it?)


What would Broidy get in return for funding the abortion hush money?



In March 2018, the previously obscure Broidy was the subject of a slew of national stories regarding his remarkably aggressive influence-peddling in the wake of Trump’s election. For example, the Journal reported that Broidy was slated to make tens of millions of dollars by getting the Justice Department to drop a probe into a multibillion-dollar bribery scandal involving 1MDB, the Malaysian state investment fund. One email revealed a plan to pay Broidy and his wife $75 million if they could successfully lobby the DOJ to drop the probe into 1MBD.

nymag.com...



posted on Jul, 31 2018 @ 12:01 PM
link   
a reply to: howtonhawky

And more here on Broidy:

www.nytimes.com...



posted on Jul, 31 2018 @ 12:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: howtonhawky
a reply to: soberbacchus




Nope. Remember when John Edwards paid to cover up his affair during his Presidential Campaign? John Edwards indicted on campaign finance charges www.nytimes.com...


YEP
There is a difference in the cases and if you were not clouded by personal desire you would have noticed that john was on the gov. dole at the time and trump was not....just not enough weight to remove a sitting president



We weren't discussing the bar set for impeachment? You were saying it wasn't illegal.

It got John Edwards Indicted.

Experts argue that the case against Trump is actually stronger than Edwards.

www.nbcnews.com...



posted on Jul, 31 2018 @ 04:09 PM
link   
a reply to: soberbacchus

you should question the experts expertise if they really believe that.

actions before taking office of the potus will never be enough fuel to remove a potus.

now if we hear trump had an affair and pay off while in office then public opinion may be swayed enough to cause a successful impeachment vote.

remember removing the potus from office is not a legal issue but a simple popularity contest and the public widely believes that actions before taking office are off the table. Especially if the corporations get fed regularly.

To get half the population to admit they were duped by voting for a potus is not realistic and just filling for the msm.



posted on Jul, 31 2018 @ 05:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: usernameconspiracy
Haven't we all learned by now that when Trump says he "has something" it usually means "I just made that up"?

From bombshell birth certificate news to secret recording of journalists conspiring against him, he seems to never actually have anything he says he has. He's just smart enough to know that a certain segment of his base will accept that he does. I assume the same group still believes he possesses bombshell evidence on Obama's birth certificate, but the rest of us know he just made that up.


Not paying attention, your totally off base. The whole BC started 100% from the Clinton 2008 campaign. Anybody after that was repeating Hillary. She finally backed off and I bet now she wishes she had not. He himself said he was from Kenya leaving people to speculate his fake BC was FAKE regardless of what the liars have been saying it was photoshopped, period!!

I liked him winning the 2008 election, but voted Libertarian since i don't vote D's or RINO's.



posted on Jul, 31 2018 @ 05:49 PM
link   
a reply to: howtonhawky

Who is discussing impeachment?

You said it was not against the law.

Yes, it very much is.

Whether that results in impeachment or not is a different question.

As for popularity insulating the President from Impeachment?

Nixon was ridiculously more popular than Trump...Until he suddenly wasn't.




posted on Jul, 31 2018 @ 06:19 PM
link   
a reply to: soberbacchus

no it is not against the law...

the reason is because of the wording of the law.

any decent lawyer can argue the merit of paying hush money as being allowed by several stipulations in campaign finance law.

You try to use john edwards as an example but the devil is in the details in his case.

i do not feel like going back and forth over an issue that will not go anywhere other than in the minds of the left.



posted on Jul, 31 2018 @ 06:23 PM
link   
a reply to: soberbacchus

impeachment is a vote on popularity

you really have no ground to stand on in this debate

if congress is happy with potus they will not ever remove him

if someone can sway his popularity then a vote could remove him



posted on Jul, 31 2018 @ 07:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: howtonhawky
a reply to: soberbacchus

impeachment is a vote on popularity

you really have no ground to stand on in this debate

if congress is happy with potus they will not ever remove him

if someone can sway his popularity then a vote could remove him


What debate?
You have failed to dispute it was an illegal campaign contribution and instead argued about impeachment, which wasn't your original failed claim.



new topics

top topics



 
68
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join