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.

 

They've Got Trump Now! William Taylor Delivers The Smoking Gun!

page: 4
38
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 04:48 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

LOL, this guy doesn't even understand that ambassadors are appointed by the president. Not the secretary of state. What a tool.





posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 04:50 AM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite

What the hell are you talking about? He states clearly what his position was. And it was not ambassador.

We know that.

Trump seems to like "acting" people.

edit on 10/23/2019 by Phage because: (no reason given)


+1 more 
posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 04:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

I'm talking about how he implies that if the senate had confirmed him he'd be ambassador, but since they didn't he's just the Charge d'Affaires ad interim.

Sorry pal, the SoS can't appoint you to an ambassadorship. And you guys are putting your hopes in this guy? It'd be like if hillary said she should be president because she won the popular vote.



posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 05:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Dfairlite

I guess Carter shouldn't be called president any more.


For current employees, long-standing custom and practice, however, has established a clear tradition in the Department and in the Foreign Service that persons who have served as ambassador after Senate confirmation may continue to use the title after such service in appropriate communications with others, may be referred to in communications and conversations by the title of Ambassador, and may be introduced to public audiences by the title.

2009-2017.state.gov...


You are STILL missing the point.
Whether deliberately or unintentionally, the media are creating the false impression that Taylor is the CURRENT US ambassador. Certainly the BBC did this in this morning's news. It never mentioned that he was NOT the current ambassador. When it is deliberate (as I believe it is with the BBC), the media are doing this to give Trump's accuser credibility. If they merely referred to him as "former ambassador," this would not impress the public as much and they would not take his claims seriously because he would then be just the latest former government employee being used as a tool by the Democratic Party in their attacks on Trump. Yes, past ambassadors CAN be referred to as "ambassador" as you rightly point out, and no doubt this explains SOME of the uses of this title. But the BBC, for example, introduces Taylor in their current news article about his claim simply as "ambassador":

"Ambassador Bill Taylor testified before an impeachment inquiry that he was told Mr Trump wanted Ukraine to probe ex-Vice-President Joe Biden's dealings."

This CLEARLY dupes the readers to think Taylor is the present ambassador, thereby giving him a degree of credibility he no longer deserves, as he ceased being ambassador to the Ukraine in 2009 and only THIS YEAR was appointed chargé d'affaire ad interim to Ukraine, at the same time making readers think he is not another lying, political tool of the Democratic Party. I can understand American media sometimes using this courtesy title. But foreign media organisations like the BBC should be more accurate in their coverage of news, not slavishly following American customs that don't apply in foreign countries. But no, they just ape the American media because they, too, hate Trump, want him impeached and misreport or distort any news item connected with him in order to make him look bad, often to ludicrous, nitpicking levels. It is the latest example of journalistic bias that pervades the BBC from top to bottom. Sometimes it is very overt, sometimes it is subtle (as with this).

So your attempt to defend the US media may be correct, but only in some cases. It fails completely in the case of the BBC.



posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 05:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
Quid pro quo is not really relevant, though it is fuel for the fire.

What the hell is the POTUS doing when bypassing the state department and the DOJ and using his personal lawyer (with his shady connections) to seek foreign assistance for his reelection campaign?

Maybe we'll find out.


maybe he doesn't trust some of the investigators. Is what he did illegal or impeachable?



posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 06:40 AM
link   
a reply to: micpsi

Ironic a good witch-hunt starts with slight of word to set the spell, then moves to smoke and mirrors?



posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 07:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
Quid pro quo is not really relevant, though it is fuel for the fire.

What the hell is the POTUS doing when bypassing the state department and the DOJ and using his personal lawyer (with his shady connections) to seek foreign assistance for his reelection campaign?

Maybe we'll find out.



Did we find out why he was colluding with the Russians yet?



posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 07:13 AM
link   
Just the fact that DNC is playing their new game in hiding behind closed doors shows they have nothing. They are running scared with the report due out soon. They have to something, anything to stop Trump, before he lays waste to the whole DNC. And he will!



posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 07:14 AM
link   
a reply to: visitedbythem

TBF, the reason he bypassed those is probably because those are the same people who tried to frame him for colluding with the russians. So in trying to gather the evidence on those who tried to frame him for it, it's probably wise to avoid letting them know what you're doing and where you are at.

IMO, the entire impeachment charade is their trying to criminalize proving they did it.



posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 07:20 AM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

To hear Eric Swalwell tell it Ratcliff asked a bunch of conspiracy theory based questions that were basically ignored or scorned by other people in the room.
And for the record republicans were in this room right?



posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 07:22 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

Eric we're gonna nuke gun owners swalwell? Lol, and you put trust in him?



posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 07:36 AM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite

TBF????.

The dims have gone so far past that line, they can no longer tell the difference between fair, and rationalized, but irrational hatred.

The MSM's complete, and total bias, have allowed, emboldened, and supported these dim fantasies.

If there were a "fair", unbiased press, we wouldn't see the chicanery we have now.


edit on 10232019 by Mach2 because: (no reason given)

edit on 10232019 by Mach2 because: Sp



posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 07:38 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Didn't Zelenskyy bring up Biden first?
Or am I remembering wrong?



posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 07:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: carewemust

To hear Eric Swalwell tell it Ratcliff asked a bunch of conspiracy theory based questions that were basically ignored or scorned by other people in the room.
And for the record republicans were in this room right?


Oh Dayum...



posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 07:46 AM
link   
Except that's not what happened, that's the story you want to read fine, but please don't bring fictional subjects to a serious discussion on politics... a reply to: Phage



posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 07:51 AM
link   
They've Got Trump Now! William Taylor Delivers The Smoking Gun!

Said the same GD thing about Stormy,Manafort,Russia, and the list goes on.

Their close door impeachment 'inquiry' tells everything everyone needs to know.

Trump haters are full of Snip.



posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 07:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage




I guess Carter shouldn't be called president any more.


Or, Mike Huckabee Governor.



posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 07:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: Phage

They do not retain titles.


General Flynn, not a general anymore. General Mattis, not a general anymore. General Kelly, not a general anymore.
edit on 23-10-2019 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 07:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: visitedbythem
Just the fact that DNC is playing their new game in hiding behind closed doors shows they have nothing. They are running scared with the report due out soon. They have to something, anything to stop Trump, before he lays waste to the whole DNC. And he will!


They are in a S.C.I.F. because they are reviewing classified information.
Both parties were present during his questioning.

As for that report, all we have at this time are declinations to prosecute. Comey, McCabe, Clinton and her emails, I think emails is Hillary's middle name. They are expanding. I know. Most likely because they have not found anything yet and need to try to dig up someone who will lie convincingly to get any of them prosecuted. LOL.
Sorry but no one thinks that investigation is anything but a political move. Find the bias, find the enemies. Sounds like a bunch of paranoia on pres's shoulders. But its his empty hands that matter most and he ain't got nuttin....



posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 08:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: o0oTOPCATo0o
a reply to: Phage

Didn't Zelenskyy bring up Biden first?
Or am I remembering wrong?


Yes, you're remembering wrong. Zelenskyy brought Rudy Giuliani first. Trump mentions the BIdens right after that.

The Transcript: www.politico.com...




top topics



 
38
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join