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: 7
19
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 23 2018 @ 07:13 PM
link   
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

tell me smarty pants how is it illegal? You dont know because its not. This is So stupid.... How is it illegal?
edit on 11232018 by Sillyolme because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 23 2018 @ 07:14 PM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

the president is a criminal. He should be worried. Mueller is a danger. A good cop is always a threat to a criminal.



posted on Nov, 23 2018 @ 07:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Zanti Misfit

are you a comedian?



posted on Nov, 24 2018 @ 03:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: BlackJackal
Trump knows that he can't outright fire Mueller thanks to what happened to Nixon when he actually fired his special prosecutor. (Basically it only took two weeks for courts to call this action illegal) So, what is he left to do? Well, he understands that he would have a very tough time getting a loyalist confirmed through the Senate, so instead, he appointed a loyalist as Acting Attorney General.

You see we knew even before the election(As early as August) that Trump planned on firing Sessions after the mid-terms.[1] It has been apparent since July 2017 that Trump has wanted to fire Jeff Sessions.[2] In fact, the only reason he didn't fire Jeff Sessions sooner was due to the fact that Senate Republicans told the President they wouldn't confirm a new Attorney General.[3] Senator Lindsey Graham went to the lengths of saying "There will be holy hell to pay" if Trump fired Jeff Sessions.[4]

Fast forward to today, and Jeff Sessions has been fired and replaced by a controversial Acting Attorney General. So controversial in fact that two former Republican Attorney Generals have spoken out against Whitaker's appointment.[5] So, Trump has been mulling over firing Jeff Sessions for over a year and he still doesn't have a permanent replacement in mind? Yeah, even the Republicans in Congress aren't buying that one either.

Senate Republicans are urging Trump to quickly nominate a permanent Attorney General because they understand that the Whitaker nomination looks very bad.[6] If he would just name a permanent AG it would go a long way to silencing the calls of the Democrats that Whitaker isn't a valid AG and the push for legislation to protect Mueller. However, even with the pushing by his allies in the Senate, Trump has yet to make any move to appoint a permanent AG replacement.

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.


[1] How soon will Donald Trump fire Jeff Sessions? After the midterms, he can get away with it
[2] Reports: Trump discussing firing Attorney General Jeff Sessions
[3] Republicans warn Trump: No confirmation hearing for a Sessions replacement, and no recess appointment either
[4] Graham: 'There will be holy hell to pay' if Sessions fired
[5] Two Republican former AGs raise questions on Trump's naming Matthew Whitaker to lead Justice Department
[6] GOP pushes Trump for new attorney general amid Mueller uproar


You guys are so naive...Neither Trump nor Whitaker are going to touch Mueller...But they have the goods on the deep state cabal that Mueller is protecting...They're going to crash which will expose and de-legitimize Mueller's phony investigation...This is why the deep state Dems and Republicans are trying so desperately to get Whitaker out of there...Starting in December...It's going to be fun to watch...



posted on Nov, 24 2018 @ 03:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: Look2theSacredHeart

originally posted by: 0nsl4u6ht
Of course his cult will continue to scream witchhunt...etc but in the end they are powerless to stop whatever is coming...could be real bad for Trump or not, depends on what Mueller finds.


Don't get too confident. Expect a repeat of Clinton's impeachment. The party in power in the Senate won't hold him accountable even if he's done wrong. He said it himself- he could shoot someone on 5th avenue and get away with it.


Trump didn't say it, he only repeated it...It was said by someone on the Communist News Network as an attack on Trump ...The statement was 'Trump could shoot someone on 5th ave. and his supporters would still support him', or something close to that...

In responding, Trump's public statement was, 'THEY SAID' I could shoot blah, blah, blah, but you guys conveniently leave out 'they said' from Trump's statement...

That's why Trump uses Twitter...You guys twist and turn everything Trump says...



posted on Nov, 24 2018 @ 08:09 AM
link   
Jesus, I should be a professional at these guesses now; once again, I knew who authored the thread before I even clicked on it.

You really should be putting all of these in the "General Conspiracy" topic...... Because that's what all of these threads are amounting to..... The ATS version of CNN headlines/updates.

I'll give it to you though, these are highly entertaining to read - both the post and the comments.



posted on Nov, 24 2018 @ 01:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: projectvxn

Wrong The FBI was investigating Russian interference in the election and trump did not want anyone investigating that.
Comey was head of the FBI so he fired him because of the '"rusher thing with trump and Russia" which he said with his own crooked mouth.
Had nothing to do with leaking so dont even go there. And Sessions was only fired because he rightly recused himself from the investigation and trump thought he was getting his own personal defense attorney with the AG through Sessions and he got pissed because he didn't get his Roy Cohen.
At least be honest with yourself and get the order of things correct.


Wow, so much wrong in one post.

How is it even possible?



posted on Nov, 24 2018 @ 01:32 PM
link   


comparing Trump to Nixon is like comparing apples with oranges... oranges haha.


Obama made Nixon look like a amateur.

Apples to apples.

Because it ALL started with the last president and his entire party.



posted on Nov, 25 2018 @ 02:47 PM
link   
If I were Black Jackel I probably wouldn’t get involved in political posts ever again 😂



posted on Nov, 25 2018 @ 08:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: Iscool

originally posted by: Look2theSacredHeart

originally posted by: 0nsl4u6ht
Of course his cult will continue to scream witchhunt...etc but in the end they are powerless to stop whatever is coming...could be real bad for Trump or not, depends on what Mueller finds.


Don't get too confident. Expect a repeat of Clinton's impeachment. The party in power in the Senate won't hold him accountable even if he's done wrong. He said it himself- he could shoot someone on 5th avenue and get away with it.


Trump didn't say it, he only repeated it...It was said by someone on the Communist News Network as an attack on Trump ...The statement was 'Trump could shoot someone on 5th ave. and his supporters would still support him', or something close to that...

In responding, Trump's public statement was, 'THEY SAID' I could shoot blah, blah, blah, but you guys conveniently leave out 'they said' from Trump's statement...

That's why Trump uses Twitter...You guys twist and turn everything Trump says...


I understand that the truth doesn't matter to Trump or his supporters but I'm sorry I'm not going to let you just make up #. Trump was the very first person to utter that comment. No one else.

If you have something valuable to add to the discussion then by all means please do. However, if you are not capable of debating the facts then don't take up space.

LINK



posted on Nov, 25 2018 @ 08:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
Here is a nice summary of what Andrew Whitaker has done to make society better/safer.

www.powerlineblog.com...

Those who are freaking out about him being in the Acting Attorney General position, are afraid. If Whitaker restricts Bob Mueller's witch-hunt, Trump will then be free to release the un-redacted SPYGATE documents.

When those are released, several Democrats/Republicans in Congress, a few MSM News Outlets (TV and Newspapers), along with U.K. Intelligence, will be exposed as law-breakers and co-conspirators.

None of them want to "protect Mueller" because they believe he will reveal anything newsworthy about President Trump or his family/administration.

Their sole motive is to keep the SPYGATE documents classified, and out of the public eye. The DOJ told President Trump, if he forces SPYGATE declassification, while Mueller's probe is active, he will be charged with Obstruction of Justice.


It doesn't matter if he is literally Jesus Christ. What matters is that Trump has had over a year to come up with a permanent replacement for Sessions. However, the best he can come up with is an Acting Attorney General who according to many legal scholars, both Republican and Democrat, is not allowed to be in that position.

Those are the facts. From those facts you can draw any conclusion you would like. The one I believe to me most likely is that Trump wants a loyalist in that position to protect him and his interests from Mueller.



posted on Nov, 25 2018 @ 09:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: projectvxn
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.




Oh my god, you are utterly clueless. So you say that I used appeal to ridicule, seriously? Did you just randomly pick out fallacies and accuse me of using them? Are you that obtuse?

Appeal to Ridicule is when you either exaggerate or mock your opponents claim in a negative way to make it look ridiculous.

An example of that may be something like "So now they're telling us that--get this, folks--global warming is caused by cows farting! Priceless!"

So now this is the quote you used to illustrate this point. Now please, point out where I appealed to ridicule?


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.


False Equivalence is when you attempt to make two things equivalent that are not. An example might be "We all bleed red, therefore there isn't much difference between us". Again, I have no idea where you think I used this, but if in your brain you think that it was when I said "that is eerily similar to the Nixon playbook" then let me educate you. I literally said if Trump put Whitaker in place that it was similar to what Nixon did. Guess what Nixon did do the same damn thing. That is what you call a true equivalence.

Begging the Question is when you attempts to validate the conclusion by assuming the initial statement is true. An example might be "The death penalty is wrong because killing people is immoral". I don't have the foggiest where you came up with this one.

As far as not accepting updated information you are simply making up # again. I responded to everyone of Arnie's claims. I showed how he cherry picked data from that article to make his case look better and I also explained that he was attempting to shift the topic to something that didn't pertain to this subject. If you are referring to the news article that he linked, I responded to that as well.

Look man, its ok if you don't like my point of view. I get that. But to make an attempt to discredit someone by using words you don't understand is about as desperate as it comes. It's obvious that you have no clue what you are talking about but maybe your only goal was to look smart in front of the other Trumpers who will believe you to be correct regardless of what you type.

Since you have been a loyal Trumpeteer for the last 2 years it appears that it may have damaged you. You seem to believe that you can just make up definitions for words and that everyone will just accept what you have to say. I'm sorry to inform you that words have meanings and you can't just make # up. You can't just point to someone and say "You're using appeal to ridicule because I don't like what you have to say" and expect that to stick. Truth is, the realm of honest logical debate has no place for someone as morally and intellectually bankrupt as yourself.

Plus, allow me to let you in on a little secret. I have quite a bit of experience in the realm of debate, even being undefeated in the two debate tournaments I entered on this site. I think when it comes to understanding logical fallacies and the proper way to debate I would know quite a bit more than you.



posted on Nov, 25 2018 @ 10:35 PM
link   
a reply to: BlackJackal

Dude all you have done here is stroke your own ego and appeal to your own supposed authority.

When will you answer for the BS you've spouted in this thread?

For this to have any legitimacy you have to stop bull#ting.



posted on Nov, 25 2018 @ 10:58 PM
link   
a reply to: BlackJackal

#firemueller

Or at least choke his investigation into nothingness.



posted on Nov, 25 2018 @ 11:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

Point me to the regulation that makes it legal.



posted on Nov, 25 2018 @ 11:02 PM
link   
a reply to: BlackJackal


Auditioning for a movie or a tenured professor job ?



🎏🧙‍♂️



posted on Nov, 25 2018 @ 11:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

So is mueller. Shall we start an investigation? So is obama. Shall we start an investigation? So are you. Shall we start an investigation? Here's the thing, there was no collusion with russia. It's obvious to anyone with at least half a brain. If they search long enough and deep enough they'll find a crime somewhere in trump's past. Just like they could do with just about every person in the USA, good guys, bad guys, doesn't matter. We've all committed multiple felonies in our lives (see: three felonies a day, which is the estimated number the average person commits).
edit on 25-11-2018 by Dfairlite because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 06:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Wardaddy454

Nothing is wrong in that post and that is what has you guys so upset lately. Lately like for the past two years lol



posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 06:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite

Ha Ha ha right....

No Obama is not a criminal and Mueller is not a criminal.

But trump who is under FBI investigation for criminal behavior is likely a criminal.
I lived in NY when he was a young dufus. Now hes an old dufus but still a dufus.



posted on Nov, 26 2018 @ 06:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite

PS I wont comment on the half a brain part because that would just be cruel to the disabled.







 
19
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join