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.

 

It is becoming more evident that the Whitaker nomination is purely to stop Mueller

page: 4
19
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 23 2018 @ 10:39 AM
link   
a reply to: BlackJackal




I would counter that whoever he picks to be the AG will be heavily scrutinized and for good reason.


Obviously.

Also, no matter how well equipped for the job, there will be more BS threads.




posted on Nov, 23 2018 @ 10:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: BlackJackal

originally posted by: Jusvistn

originally posted by: BlackJackal

originally posted by: Arnie123
a reply to: BlackJackal

False.

Your explainations do little to aid you. You cherry picked and turned around to accuse me of...cherry picking...?

If "Simple reading comprehension" is all you got, it's much worse than it appears.

Your rebuttal on the AG is crap because any liberal arts college degree holder...hell any degree holder, would know you build an essay, report, and or thesis, its narrative and flow all follow the same basic mechanics in any and all things.

Example, my qoute was at the conclusion of the article, an "all in all" of what it all means. It's conclusion states, that while the AGa have OPINIONS on the issue, the meat and narrative of said piece, it ultimately concludes there isn't any other reason for the acting AG to recuse or step down.

Even at the expressed consent of the DOJ, smacks these two former AGs down.

Yes, it IS all in the reading. This is why I laugh because I know ya'lls world.

You're so easy to dismantle, you know my initial post was all done while I was sitting on the toilet, massive carolina steamer and....naked. That's how easy it was, while crapping to dismantle a crap thread.

Please try a bit harder next time SG 😌

Edit ONE(1): Actually, I take that back, SG was a powerful leftist who wouldn't have fallen for these amatuer narrative pitfalls and premature conclusions, SG had BITE, something worth of a challenge for us...even if such a thing is rare among leftist in general 😌.


Gotcha, you can't actually make a coherent argument so you throw together as much crap as you possibly can in an attempt to make yourself feel knowledgeable.

Let's be clear here, I put forth the premise that Trump has had adequate time to come up with a permanent AG. He is even being asked by other Republicans to hurry up and name a replacement and yet he still hasn't done it. Therefore, I gave two conclusions. Either Trump is incompetent and can't come up with a new AG in a year and a half or he actually wants to keep the Acting Attorney General in place for some purpose. It seems pretty obvious what that purpose actually is.

So, instead of going on tirades, maybe you can consider addressing the core subject matter. That is, if you can.


I would submit the argument that if POTUS were to immediately come out with a replacement AG that the collective scream would be "Collusion that Trump forced AG out to be replaced with (insert name) replacement AG to shut the Mueller investigation down!"

I would conclude, that it would not matter who Trump chose as acting AG or replacement AG, there would still be the same screams heard throughout the land.


So, in your opinion how long should it take Trump to name a replacement? Especially, taking into consideration that the Republicans are already urging him to hurry up.

I would counter that whoever he picks to be the AG will be heavily scrutinized and for good reason. This new AG will oversee the Mueller probe and needs to be impartial in that matter. The new AG will also need to be questioned to ensure that they won't be under Trump's thumb. Wouldn't you agree that those are practical precautions?


I do not disagree with your statements. I am not POTUS and have never been in a position where my every move was scrutinized and decision sued. So I cannot comment on how long it should take to put a replacement in place. Considering the scrutiny POTUS is constantly under, I believe time and care should be given to making the decision.

Personally I do not believe there is collusion or obstruction from Trump or the Trump camp.
Personally I thought the HRC investigation was a sham (though what she did was obviously wrong) and a waste of taxpayer dollars just like the Trump witch hunt is.
Personally I thought Sessions was doing way more than people gave him credit for.
Personally I do not believe that there is a single solitary person that Trump could replace Session with that would not result in a massive collective scream from the left of evidence of Trump wrongdoing and cover up.

I wish as much would have been put towards bummer when he was in office.
edit on 23-11-2018 by Jusvistn because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 23 2018 @ 10:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: BlackJackal




I would counter that whoever he picks to be the AG will be heavily scrutinized and for good reason.


Obviously.

Also, no matter how well equipped for the job, there will be more BS threads.



Until Soros and David Brock are behind bars....yes.



posted on Nov, 23 2018 @ 10:43 AM
link   
a reply to: BlackJackal

Good, stop it. It's nothing. It is a nada investigation.



posted on Nov, 23 2018 @ 10:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: BlackJackal

originally posted by: projectvxn

originally posted by: knoxie
these type threads will all the posters attack the op are priceless.


Would you rather we all show up and ignore the glaring logical pitfalls for some semblance of political peace on ATS?


I find it hilarious that you are calling out glaring logical pitfalls without actually pointing any out. That seems like what someone who doesn't have an actual defense would do. Can't defeat the message, attack the messenger.


You need me to point out where you used logical fallacies?

Here's a helpful guide so you can identify them yourself:
en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Nov, 23 2018 @ 11:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: projectvxn

originally posted by: BlackJackal

originally posted by: projectvxn

originally posted by: knoxie
these type threads will all the posters attack the op are priceless.


Would you rather we all show up and ignore the glaring logical pitfalls for some semblance of political peace on ATS?


I find it hilarious that you are calling out glaring logical pitfalls without actually pointing any out. That seems like what someone who doesn't have an actual defense would do. Can't defeat the message, attack the messenger.


You need me to point out where you used logical fallacies?

Here's a helpful guide so you can identify them yourself:
en.wikipedia.org...


I don't need any help defining them. Since you have accused me of using them in this thread you need to point them out. You know for your credibility.



posted on Nov, 23 2018 @ 11:40 AM
link   
Hey op, does it hurt?

🀣



posted on Nov, 23 2018 @ 11:41 AM
link   
a reply to: BlackJackal

Yes, the poster who keeps making threads with misrepresented reports is concerned with MY credibility.

Want an example of a logical fallacy?

This post is a red herring. Because you think discussing me is easier than defending the false assertions you made in your original post.

How about the logical fallacies you used in response to your OP? Like the appeal to ridicule fallacy you attempted to use against Arnie to defend an OP filled with things like:


So the argument boils down to this. Either Trump has spent the past year and a half thinking about firing Sessions with no thought for who he was going to replace him with. We can call this argument, defense by incompetence. Or, Trump has no intention of naming a permanent AG replacement and wants Whitaker for one reason, to protect him from Mueller. If it is option two, that is eerily similar to the Nixon playbook and we all know how that turned out.


This entire paragraph actually covers multiple fallacies. like the false equivalence fallacy, begging the question, you've jumped to conclusions, you've painted an entire image here without a reference from life. Basically, all you've done is offer a political diatribe filled with illogical inferences and faulty conclusions based on incomplete data.


Your OP itself is filled with lapses in logic, especially in the way you seem to omit information, or refuse to accept updated information to modify your stance. When this was pointed out to you (by Arnie) you lash out like a toddler.

No one has time for capriciousness.



posted on Nov, 23 2018 @ 11:46 AM
link   
The responses to BlackJackal can be divided between "this thread is negative to Trump, and therefore not to be believed, OMB shill!" and "well, why is the investigation still going on? Because that's a sign they have nothing."

Guys, really- you can do better. Remember the WMD hysteria in 2003? We learned not to accept what the dominant party says at face value. And besides, you can support Trump while not approving of every single action of his.

In my opinion, we gotta wait. And Trump has to be careful not to repeat the same actions that took Nixon down. He has a tendency to act like he's still in the private sector, but he must be cautious about checks and balances.



posted on Nov, 23 2018 @ 11:47 AM
link   
a reply to: Look2theSacredHeart

Nixon went down because he ordered a burglary and lied about it.



posted on Nov, 23 2018 @ 11:53 AM
link   
a reply to: projectvxn

How'd you manage to leave the repeated use of ad-homs off your list?

In practically every thread authored by the OP, the majority of comments the OP posts after the initial opener contain some sort of attack on reading comprehension, intellect, mental capacity, mental stability, etc.

Using one fallacy to attack others while whining about how others are attacking you and not your points is just plain comical.



posted on Nov, 23 2018 @ 11:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Shamrock6




How'd you manage to leave the repeated use of ad-homs off your list?


I acknowledged it with my reference to how the OP responded to Arnie initially. Appeal to Ridicule is a form of Ad hom.




Using one fallacy to attack others while whining about how others are attacking you and not your points is just plain comical.


It's almost as precise in timing as an atomic clock.
edit on 23 11 18 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 23 2018 @ 11:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: Look2theSacredHeart

Nixon went down because he ordered a burglary and lied about it.



"n July 27, 29, and 30, 1974, the Committee approved three articles of impeachment against Nixon, for obstruction of justice, abuse of power, and contempt of Congress, and reported those articles to the House of Representatives. "
Wikipedia Obstruction of justice. Which is what Trump needs to avoid.



posted on Nov, 23 2018 @ 11:58 AM
link   
a reply to: BlackJackal

Its becoming more evident that you're an idiot.

He has had 3 years to finish this damm investigation if he cant get it done in 3 effing years then he is an incompetent moron like the rest of you.

If he is worried about getting shut down then wrap it the ###$ up. 3 years and nothing ,nadda, zilch,000000 ,


edit on 23-11-2018 by notsure1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 23 2018 @ 11:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Look2theSacredHeart

There is no evidence other than accusations from political opponents that Donald Trump is or was attempting to obstruct justice.

This is constantly repeated by people and I have yet to figure out why.



posted on Nov, 23 2018 @ 12:04 PM
link   
a reply to: projectvxn

Touche, good sir, touche.



posted on Nov, 23 2018 @ 12:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Jusvistn

That's why I stopped following the circle-news-jerk not only on ATS but everywhere. We'll always have another excuse or narrative to attack one side or another.

No one will sit down and say: OK, you're right and I was wrong.

The OP is a classic case of this behavior but it's not limited to the left, the right does it as well and many examples are in this thread.

The MSM will keep reporting the news in a way to make Trump look bad, the left will keep falling for the bait and this will keep creating a segregation where both sides will attack the other one, rightfully or not.



posted on Nov, 23 2018 @ 12:11 PM
link   
Medicated Failure

Bueller πŸ˜†Bueller πŸ˜†

The handwriting is on the chalkboard
πŸ˜†



posted on Nov, 23 2018 @ 12:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: Look2theSacredHeart

There is no evidence other than accusations from political opponents that Donald Trump is or was attempting to obstruct justice.

This is constantly repeated by people and I have yet to figure out why.
That's why I said he needs to avoid it.
Firing Comey and Sessions is suspicious, but it's not like he put Mueller in jail for investigating him. Yet.



posted on Nov, 23 2018 @ 12:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: vinifalou
a reply to: Jusvistn

That's why I stopped following the circle-news-jerk not only on ATS but everywhere. We'll always have another excuse or narrative to attack one side or another.

No one will sit down and say: OK, you're right and I was wrong.

The OP is a classic case of this behavior but it's not limited to the left, the right does it as well and many examples are in this thread.

The MSM will keep reporting the news in a way to make Trump look bad, the left will keep falling for the bait and this will keep creating a segregation where both sides will attack the other one, rightfully or not.
Trump did say that fake news is bad for America.

Your post describes that perfectly in regards to this and these types of threads.



new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join