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.

 

Trump Wanted to Order Justice Dept. to Prosecute Comey and Clinton

page: 11
29
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 20 2018 @ 09:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Willtell

Well whoop-tee-frick'n-do 🍋




posted on Nov, 20 2018 @ 09:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

You started the abuse, not me.

I just respond. I hold up a mirror

I speak to people on their level and can only determine their level by their written responses.


If your so anti-Trump then why hide it


Abuse??? Lol what the actual eff????? Abuse?

Good god look at this victim stance lol

2. I don't hide anything I disagree and call him out when he's wrong, and I give him kudos when he's right.

I also defend him when the accusations are bogus and just as easily call for justice if they arnt....

It's called not being a Muppet and looking at things w as little bias as possible and following facts not feelings....

Give it a go



posted on Nov, 20 2018 @ 09:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Willtell




The truth is Trump has done another potential impeachable act and your lack of seeing that is problematic


No, he hasn't.

Wanting to do something, even looking into its legality and feasibility are what his lawyer is there for. You have not yet made your case as to why this is an impeachable offense, what law has demonstrably been broken by wanting to do something, and lastly why this is should be a problem when the Justice Department is an Executive department. All you have done is lie about how incredibly "fair" you are by extolling some lightweight examples of your "unbias" existence and using logical fallacies in the process of castigating everyone for their lack of supposed "logic", as defined by you and you alone.

You need to quit while you're behind.
edit on 20 11 18 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 20 2018 @ 09:04 PM
link   
a reply to: JinMI

You're certifiably wrong. What you write has no value. Your just copying off me because you have nothing valid, original or relevant to say



posted on Nov, 20 2018 @ 09:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: JinMI

You're certifiably wrong. What you write has no value. Your just copying off me because you have nothing valid, original or relevant to say


I know, I know. I should make more Trump threads eh?

Coming from you, this is a compliment of the highest regard, and I thank you.



posted on Nov, 20 2018 @ 09:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: JinMI

You're certifiably wrong. What you write has no value. Your just copying off me because you have nothing valid, original or relevant to say


Admit it dude, you are wrong!




posted on Nov, 20 2018 @ 09:05 PM
link   
So let me get this right. The paper wrote an article telling you what they believed Trump was thinking. But yet he took none of the actions he was supposed to be thinking of doing? So our mind readers in the article not only knew what he was thinking but doesn't bother to use their psychic powers to tell us why he did not.

If this isn't media bias they have hit the point where they are telling you what he was thinking wow.



posted on Nov, 20 2018 @ 09:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

Your just ignoring the facts and the truth. You have some problem buddy.

Your mask has fallen off


Trump's own WH lawyer told him he was in dangerous territory.


Sure I am........

Oh PS, if you actually took the time to look at my "Threads authored page" you would see quite a few threads against Trump on there......

But i know your question was disingenuous ........because you have no want for actual Truth



posted on Nov, 20 2018 @ 09:07 PM
link   
a reply to: projectvxn

Trumps WH lawyers said it was potentially impeachable.
www.nytimes.com...



The lawyers laid out a series of consequences. For starters, Justice Department lawyers could refuse to follow Mr. Trump’s orders even before an investigation began, setting off another political firestorm. If charges were brought, judges could dismiss them. And Congress, they added, could investigate the president’s role in a prosecution and begin impeachment proceedings.



posted on Nov, 20 2018 @ 09:07 PM
link   
Obama ordered the DOJ to investigate journalists who wrote negative stories against him and no one said a thing.

Trump wants an investigation into supposed crimes committed by Hillary and Comey and everyone loses their damned minds.



posted on Nov, 20 2018 @ 09:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: JinMI

You're certifiably wrong. What you write has no value. Your just copying off me because you have nothing valid, original or relevant to say


How is he copying off you if what hes saying is different?

Also If he IS copying off you, wouldn that mean you have nothing valid or relevant to say?



posted on Nov, 20 2018 @ 09:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Willtell

I'm betting you still can't see why that quote and your post don't quite jive eh?

Either way, it's fun watching you attempt to make the leap.



posted on Nov, 20 2018 @ 09:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: projectvxn

Trumps WH lawyers said it was potentially impeachable.
www.nytimes.com...



The lawyers laid out a series of consequences. For starters, Justice Department lawyers could refuse to follow Mr. Trump’s orders even before an investigation began, setting off another political firestorm. If charges were brought, judges could dismiss them. And Congress, they added, could investigate the president’s role in a prosecution and begin impeachment proceedings.


IF they were to have done it.......which they didnt.....which HE didnt.....so theres nothing to impeach on, so your whole premise is sunk......so your accusations are......

you guessed it.......bullsnip



posted on Nov, 20 2018 @ 09:09 PM
link   
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

Then tell me why are you so hostile. What's your problem.

I'm willing to consider the possibility of your reasonability but you're not reflecting that in your responses.



posted on Nov, 20 2018 @ 09:09 PM
link   
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

G'dammit BMTM.

Why can't you let stupid just be.

That's why you get NO PM's!

Runnin round here pointing out common sense and logic. Even attempting to use it!



posted on Nov, 20 2018 @ 09:11 PM
link   
pMFG this is definitely thread of the week right here!!! Somebody throw a chair!



posted on Nov, 20 2018 @ 09:11 PM
link   
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

Stop using all of those dots in an ellipsis
Use 3 for a continuation and 4 for a new sentence.



posted on Nov, 20 2018 @ 09:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

Then tell me why are you so hostile. What's your problem.

I'm willing to consider the possibility of your reasonability but you're not reflecting that in your responses.


Calling out BS and a lie isnt hostile.......

It only seems hostile to the person whose doing it.......

You also made an accusation about me being a Trumpster, to which i thoroughly debunked , which was also not hostile.

Youre the one telling me im being abusive , calling me names earlier , along with attacking and calling other people names........

Youre the one thats hostile here, so if I were you expect hostility back ........

If you cant stand the heat stay out of the kitchen


edit on 11/20/2018 by ManBehindTheMask because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 20 2018 @ 09:12 PM
link   
So hypothetically, let's say there was absolute, undeniable proof of Hillary Clinton committing a crime. Caught on video, DNA evidence, murder weapon found on her person. Would she have a get out of jail free card because she was once a "rival"? I mean, we would want her prosecuted, right? So the thing is, we should not be worried about whether she was once a rival. We should only be concerned with whether or not she committed crimes.

It reminds me of the email leak (yes, it was a leak, not a hack). The democrats continued to try and shift the focus to who and how the emails were hacked (leaked), but never ever addressed the content of the emails. Again, I wasn't too worried about where they came from, I was more interested in what was in them.



posted on Nov, 20 2018 @ 09:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

Stop using all of those dots in an ellipsis
Use 3 for a continuation and 4 for a new sentence.


Figures thats about as much as you could muster.........



new topics

top topics



 
29
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join