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.

 

One Word Has People Convinced Mike Pence Wrote Anonymous New York Times Op-Ed

page: 10
18
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 09:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Swills

So you think Pence is part of the resistance.




Article 25 ...This King is crazy as fk..Long live the new King..all hail King Mike..




posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 10:00 AM
link   
a reply to: avgguy

The essay itself said it was not the left and that they have a desire to see the admin succeed but trump is unfit to do the work. In a nutshell.



posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 10:05 AM
link   
a reply to: angeldoll


So, somehow it's fine for a sitting 'president' to try and 'take out' a newspaper business and interfere with the free market?


So, somehow it's fine for a newspaper to try and take out a sitting President that was elected by the people?



posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 10:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Deetermined

Nixon won in a landslide....and Trump.lost the popular vote.



posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 10:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Simon_Boudreaux

ORRRRRRR they are really desperate to get Trump to act appropriately and trying more extreme measures to accomplish this.

But yeah, OBVIOUSLY it makes more sense for it to be a plant and not an act of desperation after months of failing to get Trump to act Presidential.


I don't recall saying it was a plant and the op-ed reeks of desperation. Someone of noble intent for this nation isn't going to put an opinion piece in the NYT of all places. They would have talked to every MSM outlet.

Only a complete moron would place themselves in such a position as whoever wrote this piece, Orrrrrr believe it's automatically true because it goes against Trump.


When the NYT, or the source, can come forward with some actual proof I can't take the op-ed seriously.



posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 10:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: Simon_Boudreaux

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Simon_Boudreaux

ORRRRRRR they are really desperate to get Trump to act appropriately and trying more extreme measures to accomplish this.

But yeah, OBVIOUSLY it makes more sense for it to be a plant and not an act of desperation after months of failing to get Trump to act Presidential.


I don't recall saying it was a plant and the op-ed reeks of desperation. Someone of noble intent for this nation isn't going to put an opinion piece in the NYT of all places. They would have talked to every MSM outlet.

According to what logic are you basing THIS thought on? Deep Throat only supplied information to WaPo when he was whistleblowing on Nixon.


Only a complete moron would place themselves in such a position as whoever wrote this piece, Orrrrrr believe it's automatically true because it goes against Trump.

Only a complete moron would make up logic on why this isn't true so they don't have to believe it is true.


When the NYT, or the source, can come forward with some actual proof I can't take the op-ed seriously.

It's interesting how this "no proof" claim comes about. The proof is all around us on a daily basis, but you guys dismiss a lot of that as negative media bias against Trump. Even if the media is reporting on something Trump said or did. It's clear where the frustration this senior member of Trump's admin is feeling is coming from and if you don't see it then you don't WANT to see it.
edit on 6-9-2018 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 10:23 AM
link   
a reply to: Simon_Boudreaux


do you think all that regarding Q as well.



posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 10:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: vinifalou
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I'm not surprised you didn't clicked on the link to see the evidences.

You just reached Silly's level.

Put your fingers on your ears and scream LALALALALA now.

But I DID click on the link. That's why I know it was written by some unknown conservative author (who I had to subsequently Google).

Though your Natural News article is offtopic, a whataboutism, and a deflection anyways.
edit on 6-9-2018 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 10:32 AM
link   
a reply to: angeldoll


I don't even know what this means. What campaign are you talking about? What is this about 'spying".
This doesn't make sense to me.


Are you seriously going to tell us that you haven't heard or read about the FBI and DOJ using spying methods and foreign spies in order to trash Trump's campaign and the people associated with it?! Not to mention Hillary Clinton's ties to the whole thing?




edit on 6-9-2018 by Deetermined because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 10:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I don't think it's unreasonable to believe that an anonymous source, writing in a newspaper dedicated to removing Trump from office, is actually fake. I think that is the reasonable position to take, in fact. It could be a real person, but they need to come forward.

Please don't go on about every anonymous source, like deepthroat, that has turned out to be real. Anyone could say the same about Q.. Oh, it's real because deepthroat was real! Nonsense.

This feels to me like a tactic - a new approach of 'giving an official voice' to the crazy rhetoric that has been coming form the main stream media - designed to throw the President off balance as he wonders who it is.

Anyone assuming it's all real and the NYT is playing with a straight bat on this really is a moron.
edit on 6/9/2018 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 10:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I don't think it's unreasonable to believe that an anonymous source, writing in a newspaper dedicated to removing Trump from office, is actually fake. I think that is the reasonable position to take, in fact. It could be a real person, but they need to come forward.

I didn't say to believe it 100%. You can take it with a grain of salt. I'm calling out people who are saying it is unequivocally untrue because it is anonymous.


Please don't go on about every anonymous source, like deepthroat, that has turned out to be real. Anyone could say the same about Q.. Oh, it's real because deepthroat was real! Nonsense.

Don't misconstrue my argument. I was directly addressing the point about how someone seeking justice wouldn't just whistleblow at one source. Seeing as how there was a credible whistleblower in the past that did EXACTLY that then that shoots the logic of that argument to hell. That's why I brought up Deep Throat. Your argument here suggests you understood none of that.


This feels to me like a tactic - a new approach of 'giving an official voice' to the crazy rhetoric that has been coming form the main stream media - designed to throw the President off balance as he wonders who it is.

The President is FURIOUS right now.


Anyone assuming it's all real and the NYT is playing with a straight bat on this really is a moron.

Anyone who goes all in on the belief front one way or the other is the moron. That goes for people deciding it is fake just because.
edit on 6-9-2018 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 10:39 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I based it off my opinion as it's what I would do.

You know, an opinion, the same as the person who wrote the op-ed. The op-ed you're automatically taking as fact. What logic are you using to conclude this op-ed is something more than opinion?

I'm not making up anything so I don't have to believe it isn't true. I didn't vote for Trump, nor do I care about him anymore than any other person that's held office. I just don't take opinion as fact without something provable to back it up.



As far as not wanting to see things...You're hatred for Trump is refusing to let you see that this whole piece could be nothing more than political bs. It goes against Trump so it must be true in your eyes.



posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 10:39 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

So you're shooting the messenger instead of looking at the content? You'll only believe when CNN starts reporting it, right?

Well, this is the FOIA request which is being mentioned in the article. Just in case you're feeling like knowing what really happened. Not the garbage the MSM told you.

There's nothing to deflect from here, there's not even content to a discussion about this op-ed. It's a gossip and now it's pointing fingers time.

You're betting on Pence? Respect your opinion and look forward to more evidences to support the theory.

But my money goes to Trump trolling the NYT and the left. He's pretty good at it.



posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 10:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: knoxie
a reply to: Simon_Boudreaux


do you think all that regarding Q as well.


I can only remember posting in a Q thread once. That was to say that while I would like to get behind the whole Q thing but, I can't without seeing something happen first.
edit on 6-9-2018 by Simon_Boudreaux because: freaking emojis



posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 10:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: Simon_Boudreaux
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I based it off my opinion as it's what I would do.

You know, an opinion, the same as the person who wrote the op-ed. The op-ed you're automatically taking as fact. What logic are you using to conclude this op-ed is something more than opinion?

Don't get triggered for me disagreeing with you. Also I never claimed the article was fact. You are welcome to quote me saying exactly that. I said and suggested there is supporting evidence that corroborates the story, but at no point have I said I believe the article and it is factual.


I'm not making up anything so I don't have to believe it isn't true. I didn't vote for Trump, nor do I care about him anymore than any other person that's held office. I just don't take opinion as fact without something provable to back it up.

I don't care about your life story.


As far as not wanting to see things...You're hatred for Trump is refusing to let you see that this whole piece could be nothing more than political bs. It goes against Trump so it must be true in your eyes.

*eye roll*. You look more interested in debating your opinions (ad hominems) about me instead of this article.



posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 10:44 AM
link   
a reply to: vinifalou

Shooting the messager? HAH! Drop the persecution complex. You posted an off topic story. You are at fault here. This topic isn't about Obama. It's about the op-ed penned today in the NY Times. You are deflecting and using whatboutisms right now because you don't like the topic of conversation. If you want to talk about this, go write thread 12489332597854 about how Obama is evil.


You're betting on Pence? Respect your opinion and look forward to more evidences to support the theory.

Actually I never said it was or wasn't Pence. Do you even read the posts of the people who talk to you?


But my money goes to Trump trolling the NYT and the left. He's pretty good at it.

Lol! Now THAT is a funny theory. Where are all the typos and caps lock if Trump wrote it? But mostly, the idea that Trump would write such a thing then blow his lid about it on Twitter and in meetings with people throughout the day is laughable.
edit on 6-9-2018 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 10:55 AM
link   
lmfao. no one wrote this other than some elitist scrub in nyc at some coffee shop.

that is why the times will 'never reveal' the source.

its brilliant, but once you know how television works, you can see right thru this intern-ationalist scam.



posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 11:01 AM
link   
Satire:


edit on 6-9-2018 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 11:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: xuenchen




Trump going along for the PR and laughing


Laughing like a volcano about to erupt.


Laughing on the inside while the tangenteers cry on the outside.




posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 11:11 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Actually the off-topic subject was a set-up to see if you had your blinders on. Feel like a duck.

I won't poke your comfort bubble anymore, I'm sorry if I disrespected or misinterpreted you in any manner.

Enjoy life in Wonderland.





top topics



 
18
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join