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: 5
18
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 07:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Lab4Us

Lol. You should actually read the Op-Ed first before moving to kneejerk deflect mode. I'm going to post some excerpts from what was said:

To be clear, ours is not the popular “resistance” of the left. We want the administration to succeed and think that many of its policies have already made America safer and more prosperous.

But we believe our first duty is to this country, and the president continues to act in a manner that is detrimental to the health of our republic.


Don’t get me wrong. There are bright spots that the near-ceaseless negative coverage of the administration fails to capture: effective deregulation, historic tax reform, a more robust military and more.


Does that sound like someone who hates the President and wants him to fail?


It "sounds" like it's another "movement" by the left to discredit the President.

Of course they won't call themselves the "left-resistance", it would lose all "credibility".





posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 07:26 AM
link   
It’s amazing that the leftists here believe that sedition = patriotism...



posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 07:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Lab4Us

“Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the president or any other public official save exactly to the degree in which he himself stands by the country. It is patriotic to support him insofar as he efficiently serves the country. It is unpatriotic not to oppose him to the exact extent that by inefficiency or otherwise he fails in his duty to stand by the country. In either event it is unpatriotic not to tell the truth whether about the president or anyone else.”
-Teddy Roosevelt



posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 07:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: vinifalou

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Lab4Us

Lol. You should actually read the Op-Ed first before moving to kneejerk deflect mode. I'm going to post some excerpts from what was said:

To be clear, ours is not the popular “resistance” of the left. We want the administration to succeed and think that many of its policies have already made America safer and more prosperous.

But we believe our first duty is to this country, and the president continues to act in a manner that is detrimental to the health of our republic.


Don’t get me wrong. There are bright spots that the near-ceaseless negative coverage of the administration fails to capture: effective deregulation, historic tax reform, a more robust military and more.


Does that sound like someone who hates the President and wants him to fail?


It "sounds" like it's another "movement" by the left to discredit the President.

Of course they won't call themselves the "left-resistance", it would lose all "credibility".




Sheesh... The cult is strong in you.



posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 07:33 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Great argument there.

The left is strong in you, too.




posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 07:33 AM
link   
One Word has them convinced eh?

Well why not, they believe Trump colluded with Russia with less evidence than that.



posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 07:35 AM
link   
a reply to: vinifalou

I only say that because of the kneejerk deflection of "this is fake news" you deployed without even considering the content in the article.



posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 07:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Lab4Us

Lol. You should actually read the Op-Ed first before moving to kneejerk deflect mode. I'm going to post some excerpts from what was said:

To be clear, ours is not the popular “resistance” of the left. We want the administration to succeed and think that many of its policies have already made America safer and more prosperous.

But we believe our first duty is to this country, and the president continues to act in a manner that is detrimental to the health of our republic.


Don’t get me wrong. There are bright spots that the near-ceaseless negative coverage of the administration fails to capture: effective deregulation, historic tax reform, a more robust military and more.


Does that sound like someone who hates the President and wants him to fail?


You know how you can tell that my post isn’t “knee jerk deflect mode”? It’s more than two short sentences, doesn’t call people names, and I actually provide a theory (or two) that doesn’t resort to screaming at the sky. Funny too, that you think I didn’t read the “op-ed” just because I didn’t fall for the seditionist trying to justify their actions. I would supect I possess more Patriotism in one of my little toes than the seditionist who wrote that “op-ed’’ will ever possess - and again, that’s if the NYT didn’t come up with it themselves.



posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 07:38 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

It's all fake news until proven otherwise. Do you mind proving me the "content in the article" is real and not just an biased opinion from an, allegedly, employee?

Of course you'll believe any "anonymous source" that says TRUMP'S BAD, REALLY BAD!



posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 07:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: Lab4Us

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Lab4Us

Lol. You should actually read the Op-Ed first before moving to kneejerk deflect mode. I'm going to post some excerpts from what was said:

To be clear, ours is not the popular “resistance” of the left. We want the administration to succeed and think that many of its policies have already made America safer and more prosperous.

But we believe our first duty is to this country, and the president continues to act in a manner that is detrimental to the health of our republic.


Don’t get me wrong. There are bright spots that the near-ceaseless negative coverage of the administration fails to capture: effective deregulation, historic tax reform, a more robust military and more.


Does that sound like someone who hates the President and wants him to fail?


You know how you can tell that my post isn’t “knee jerk deflect mode”? It’s more than two short sentences, doesn’t call people names, and I actually provide a theory (or two) that doesn’t resort to screaming at the sky.

You know why I didn't say that to you and said something else? Because you didn't say what he said.


Funny too, that you think I didn’t read the “op-ed” just because I didn’t fall for the seditionist trying to justify their actions. I would supect I possess more Patriotism in one of my little toes than the seditionist who wrote that “op-ed’’ will ever possess - and again, that’s if the NYT didn’t come up with it themselves.

Well calling disrespect to the President "Sedition" is laughably stupid. It's not like the op-ed revealed any classified information or anything.
edit on 6-9-2018 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 07:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Lab4Us

“Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the president or any other public official save exactly to the degree in which he himself stands by the country. It is patriotic to support him insofar as he efficiently serves the country. It is unpatriotic not to oppose him to the exact extent that by inefficiency or otherwise he fails in his duty to stand by the country. In either event it is unpatriotic not to tell the truth whether about the president or anyone else.”
-Teddy Roosevelt


Hey, I like how you left the definition of sedition out of your post! By the way, POTUS 45 has done more for the US in less than two years in office than POTUS 44 (who I voted for twice) did in 8...but don’t let facts stand in your way. Those of us who appreciate a strong America understand it.

I also notice someone else’s theory you cut and pasted reads, in part “...it is unpatritic not to tell the truth about the president...”. Where is the evidence your alleged patriot is telling the truth? Oh, that’s right! Unsubstantiated allegations and innuendo from an unidentified source...the usual.



posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 07:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Lab4Us

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Lab4Us

Lol. You should actually read the Op-Ed first before moving to kneejerk deflect mode. I'm going to post some excerpts from what was said:

To be clear, ours is not the popular “resistance” of the left. We want the administration to succeed and think that many of its policies have already made America safer and more prosperous.

But we believe our first duty is to this country, and the president continues to act in a manner that is detrimental to the health of our republic.


Don’t get me wrong. There are bright spots that the near-ceaseless negative coverage of the administration fails to capture: effective deregulation, historic tax reform, a more robust military and more.


Does that sound like someone who hates the President and wants him to fail?


You know how you can tell that my post isn’t “knee jerk deflect mode”? It’s more than two short sentences, doesn’t call people names, and I actually provide a theory (or two) that doesn’t resort to screaming at the sky.

You know why I didn't say that to you and said something else? Because you didn't say what he said.


Funny too, that you think I didn’t read the “op-ed” just because I didn’t fall for the seditionist trying to justify their actions. I would supect I possess more Patriotism in one of my little toes than the seditionist who wrote that “op-ed’’ will ever possess - and again, that’s if the NYT didn’t come up with it themselves.

Well calling disrespect to the President "Sedition" is laughably stupid. It's not like the op-ed revealed any classified information or anything.


Sigh...

se·di·tion
səˈdiSH(ə)n/Submit
noun
conduct or speech inciting people to rebel against the authority of a state or monarch.



posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 07:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Lab4Us


If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 808; July 24, 1956, ch. 678, § 1, 70 Stat. 623; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(N), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2148.)


That is how sedition is defined in the USC. So I guess it comes down to how people want to define "by force."



posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 07:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: Lab4Us
Hey, I like how you left the definition of sedition out of your post! By the way, POTUS 45 has done more for the US in less than two years in office than POTUS 44 (who I voted for twice) did in 8...but don’t let facts stand in your way. Those of us who appreciate a strong America understand it.

Why would I need to post the definition of sedition in a quote from Teddy Roosevelt?

Also, you didn't post any facts... At the most it is your opinion, but comparatively that is a silly statement to make. There is no way Trump has done more in not quite 2 years than Obama did in 8. It's just impossible.


I also notice someone else’s theory you cut and pasted reads, in part “...it is unpatritic not to tell the truth about the president...”. Where is the evidence your alleged patriot is telling the truth? Oh, that’s right! Unsubstantiated allegations and innuendo from an unidentified source...the usual.

You say this like you don't know who Teddy Roosevelt is... Also:
Theodore Roosevelt on Criticizing the President



posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 07:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Lab4Us

Sigh...

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.



posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 07:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: vinifalou

I only say that because of the kneejerk deflection of "this is fake news" you deployed without even considering the content in the article.


It's interesting but means nothing til they name the source. Show your face if you wanna save the country from our elected president.



posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 07:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: vinifalou
a reply to: Krazysh0t

It's all fake news until proven otherwise. Do you mind proving me the "content in the article" is real and not just an biased opinion from an, allegedly, employee?

Yes. I am well aware of the cult reaction to anything negative about Trump.



posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 07:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: JDmOKI

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: vinifalou

I only say that because of the kneejerk deflection of "this is fake news" you deployed without even considering the content in the article.


It's interesting but means nothing til they name the source. Show your face if you wanna save the country from our elected president.


Lol. Yeah right. Deep Throat wasn't named until 2005.



posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 08:06 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

So you can't prove anything and instead you want me to believe that Trump's bad because some anonymous guy said so?

I know you guys have a problem using logic but I never thought it would reach this point.



posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 08:07 AM
link   
a reply to: vinifalou

All I asked was that you read the article and take it into consideration without first knee jerk dismissing it like you are doing. Saying something is fake without even considering it is the height of intellectual dishonesty.







 
18
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join