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 Trolls ABC and George Stephanopoulos

page: 12
50
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 14 2019 @ 02:49 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

You keep repeating the same fallacy, as if its repetition makes a difference. The Clinton Campaign wasn't approached by a foreign government, hoping to influence US policy in return for dirt on her opponent and helping her get elected.




posted on Jun, 14 2019 @ 02:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

lol
ok
if you say so......
denial is not a river in egypt



posted on Jun, 14 2019 @ 02:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: xuenchen

You keep repeating the same fallacy, as if its repetition makes a difference. The Clinton Campaign wasn't approached by a foreign government, hoping to influence US policy in return for dirt on her opponent and helping her get elected.




Clinton did all the approaching herself, and cut deals for hundreds of millions of dollars, plus the dossier was an added side deal.
Her flagrant "I am going to win and it's a done deal" is proof she believed in what she had done working for her. Except it failed.



posted on Jun, 14 2019 @ 04:03 AM
link   
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

WTH are you talking about? I swear you guys just make # up!



Her flagrant "I am going to win and it's a done deal" is proof she believed in what she had done working for her.


What she had done? You mean like being 1st Lady of Arkansas, 1st Lady of the United States, Secretary of State and a Congresswoman for the State of New York? Yeah, I believe that was working for her. She did after all win the popular vote by around 3 million votes.



posted on Jun, 14 2019 @ 04:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

she got you with the hot sauce line didn't she?


you know what....perhaps denial is good for you



posted on Jun, 14 2019 @ 06:41 AM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Who personally met with Putin before the 2016 election? In Putin’s home? Who actually got money transferred from a Russian bank?



posted on Jun, 14 2019 @ 08:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
Now he's admitted that collusion is something he is okay with.

By that argument, Hillary and the DNC are guilty of high Treason, for soliciting, and paying for the creation of false foreign intelligence from Russians and others.

Sorry, Silly, there is nothing whatsoever wrong with what Trump said.

If you disagree, by all means, cite the law that makes it illegal to simply listen to anyone from a foreign government claiming to have dirt on your political opponent.

No sane person could even remotely consider 'If someone from some other government says they have dirt on my political opponent, I'd listen - and if there was anything wrong I'd call the FBI' as a statement that they're ok with collusion.

Also, with probably a few amazing exceptions, every single politician in history has engaged in actively seeking out and even paying for opposition research on their opponents.



posted on Jun, 14 2019 @ 08:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Breakthestreak

I do not think he was trolling.

Sad Silly, very very sad...

Rotflmao!


I think the idiot will just do the same stupid stuff he did before

What stupid stuff is that? Not colluding with Russia?


because he believes he got away with it.

He did get away with not colluding with Russia... yay!


He is for real. Not trolling.

Oh, he is very much both for real, and absolutely trolling.


He would do the same things over again.

I sure hope so... I'm very much looking for his TaxCuts 2.0 (more targeted at individuals and the middle class).



posted on Jun, 14 2019 @ 08:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Lumenari

"
You mean like all the outrage the left has over Hillary actually buying Russian intelligence disinfo and then using it to try to influence the course of a Presidential election?
"

No, not at all. Because that never happened.
Stay on topic for once.

Sorry Silly, this is very much on topic, and in fact is precisely illuminating your blind raging TDS.

It is now common knowledge, and absolutely proven fact, that Hillary and the DNC used assets like Fusion GPS to actively seek out dirt on Trump, and when they couldn't find any, manufactured some. I know you've heard of it - it is called the Steele Dossier.


Its not about Hillary or the election of 2016 except for the example he set during that time that he denied he did.

It never ceases to amaze me that you people can say things like this with a straight face.

You accuse someone else/others of exactly what you yourselves are doing.



posted on Jun, 14 2019 @ 08:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
What was the meaning of insanity again..... Doing the same things over and over expecting different results.

Yeah, sounds like exactly what the dems in Congress are doing... "... this next investigation will finally do it and end Trump!..."

How many investigations showing no crimes no collusion will it take?



posted on Jun, 14 2019 @ 08:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
My fellow ATSers.... he is talking about election interference again. He is saying he is okay with this occurring.

First you have to explain how simply listening to someone from a foreign country who says they have information on your political opponent, equates to 'election interference'?

If simply listening to someone equates to 'election interference', then you, Silly, are guilty of collusion and 'election interference' every time you tune in to CNN or MSNBC.


How many votes did he just lose saying this?

I'm quite sure he gains votes every time he trolls the losers in the MSM and the dems in Congress and they react exactly as desired, just like moths to the flame.



posted on Jun, 14 2019 @ 08:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
I mean, if they had something really bad and it proved something illegal, why not give the info to the proper US agency? Unless, they want something in return?

So you just listened to the talking heads and didn't actually listen to the q & a?

Because if you had, you would already know that he actually said "... and if there was something wrong I'd go maybe to the FBI...." or words to that effect.



posted on Jun, 14 2019 @ 09:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
First of all, oppo research about Trump came from the Never Trumpers' first.

Isn't that to be expected? Oh, you're insinuating that it was Republican 'never trumpers', forgetting that there are far more democrat never trumpers.

Anyway - it was all lies - manufactured to smear him and his entire family.


Secondly, Hillary Clinton wasn't approached by a foreign government,

No, she didn't wait for them to approach h er, she actively sought them out.


offering to help her win the presidency, in exchange for changing foreign "adoption laws".

Neither did Trump or anyone on his campaign. If you claim they did... you're forgetting that little thing called evidence...


Thirdly, Christopher Steele and John McCain DID take the info they had to the FBI.

The info they had? You mean the info t hey manufactured that is all lies?

Yes, they did, and they, and the FBI agents that colluded with them in an attempt to bring down a sitting President will all be going to jail soon - that, or singing like a bird in exchange for a lighter sentence.

Buckle up, Dorothy.
edit on 14-6-2019 by tanstaafl because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 14 2019 @ 09:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
There's a difference between opposition research and being approached by a foreign country

Which is worse... being approached by a foreign government, or approaching agents of a foreign government?


seeking a quid pro quo exchange for the information.

Yeah, how much did Hillary and company pay for the fake dossier?

And how much did Trump pay Russia, in exchange for running $100,000 in ads on facebook?



posted on Jun, 14 2019 @ 09:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: olaru12
If there is solid evidence that the democrats do it; why no indictments?

Because investigations take time? Especially real investigations looking for actual evidence as opposed to trying to manufacture an illusion like Mueller did.


Colluding with foreign govts during an election is TREASON.

Please provide the actual citation to the section of the U.S. Code that defines this crime. I'm serious, because if you are correct, then Hillary will likely hang, since that is precisely what she and others did.



posted on Jun, 14 2019 @ 09:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: xuenchen

First of all that didnt happen.

Awwwww, she's so cuuuuute when she engages her TDS engine!


and second why cant you just address the actual subject of the thread which is trump admitting that he's up for a little collusion with foreign agents and some quid pro quo on foreign policy in the future.

Because he didn't, and he isn't?

He said he would listen, if someone said they had some information.

What, precisely, is wrong with that?



posted on Jun, 14 2019 @ 09:22 AM
link   
Trump wasn't trolling, he was simply telling the truth. And anyone who thinks that there is a person who wouldn't take information on their opponent from any available source is simply being dishonest.



posted on Jun, 14 2019 @ 09:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: proximo

There's a difference between getting information and getting political dirt on your rival from an enemy nation.

Ummm... no, there isn't?

Political dirt is information. And the source is irrelevant. The difference is, is the information true or not, and what is done with the information.



posted on Jun, 14 2019 @ 09:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Who personally met with Putin before the 2016 election? In Putin’s home? Who actually got money transferred from a Russian bank?


I don't know. Who?

Citations please.



posted on Jun, 14 2019 @ 09:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: knowledgehunter0986

"And what makes Russia an enemy nation?"

The memory of gold fish!

They attacked our democratic process and democracy itself.

By placing $100k in facebook ads?


They stole DNC files and passed them to WikiLeaks to be released in coordinated attacks against the Clinton Campaign.

Allowing for ths sake of argument for a moment that Russia did it... how, exactly, is releasing emails to the public the same as 'an attack on our democratic process and democracy itself? I can see an argument that it could be construed as an attack on her campaign', but still, it is the truth, so...?

But, since it is far more likely that Russia didn't in fact hack the DNC, and the email leaks were an inside job, then it is a moot point, no?




top topics



 
50
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join