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.

 

The whistleblower

page: 4
15
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 4 2019 @ 12:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
What do you call the testimony of Ambassador Taylor, Fiona Hill, Lt Col Vindman?

You mean the testimony of some TDS suffering never-Trumpers, the full extent of which we have yet to hear?

That 'testimony'?

What do you call the testimony of Viundman's boss, who totally contradicted Vidnmans testimony?




posted on Nov, 4 2019 @ 12:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
Republicans are complaining that written answers will surely be written by, or edited by the whistle blower's attorney, which is entirely plausible. However, that's exactly how President Trump allowed Mueller to interview him, written questions and answers.

Objection: false comparison.

Trump was the target. He was not the claimant. It was totally appropriate for him to do as he did, expecially considering he didn't even have to do that.

The fake whistleblower is the claimant - he is the one making the charge(s).

Apples and oranges.



posted on Nov, 4 2019 @ 12:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
What does that mean? Are you saying they're lying because "orange man bad"?

And Bingo was his name-O.



posted on Nov, 4 2019 @ 12:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015
But there does seem to be pretty good evidence Trump broke the law.

Actually, there is ZERO.


Check out the quotes below from people who have testified. This is not made-up left wing spin. These are actual quotes:

-sigh-


Sullivan: "Soliciting investigations into a domestic political opponent, I don't think that would be in accord with our values"

Never happened.


A week later, Taylor was even more concerned, texting Sondland: "As I said on the phone, I think it's crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign."

Never happened.


Vindman: "I did not think it was proper to demand that a foreign government investigate a U.S. citizen, and I was worried about the implications for the U.S. government’s support of Ukraine"

Nothing wrong with this. Nothing.


Holding back military aid, putting our country and troops at risk for personal political gain

Never happened.



posted on Nov, 4 2019 @ 12:14 PM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015


It seems to me Republicans never answer the real question. If Trump is shown to have broken federal laws should he be held accountable and why not?

This is such BS, you are either lying or incredibly uninformed.
Every Trump supporter on ATS has said if Trump has broken the law he needs to face the consequences.

The #Resistors have failed miserably for 3 years to show Trump has broken any laws.
Most of us have stopped taking the REEEEE seriously, it is like the boy who cried wolf.

IF he has broken the law PROVE it and let him face the consequences.

Most Americans are sick of the progressive globalists new motto of guilty until proven innocent.



posted on Nov, 4 2019 @ 12:17 PM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

I have a story that will remove the elected president of the United States from office, but I'm afraid some people will be mean to me if they see who I am. Yea, I think I'll hide behind Adam Schiff.

there is the 6th amendment, but it applies to criminal cases, and this one is purely partisan politics. But they got Trump on the ropes this time. He's skeert.



posted on Nov, 4 2019 @ 12:40 PM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015
Biden is not currently in an election with POTUS.

NEXT!



posted on Nov, 4 2019 @ 01:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: dfnj2015
But there does seem to be pretty good evidence Trump broke the law.

Actually, there is ZERO.


Sullivan: "Soliciting investigations into a domestic political opponent, I don't think that would be in accord with our values"


Never happened.


A week later, Taylor was even more concerned, texting Sondland: "As I said on the phone, I think it's crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign."


Never happened.


Vindman: "I did not think it was proper to demand that a foreign government investigate a U.S. citizen, and I was worried about the implications for the U.S. government’s support of Ukraine"

Nothing wrong with this. Nothing.


Holding back military aid, putting our country and troops at risk for personal political gain


Never happened.


Contrary to your delusions, the witnesses giving testimony under oath are saying it did happen.



posted on Nov, 4 2019 @ 01:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: PurpleFox
a reply to: dfnj2015
Biden is not currently in an election with POTUS.

NEXT!


Biden running or not has nothing to do with Trump breaking the law.

NEXT!



posted on Nov, 4 2019 @ 01:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: dfnj2015

I have a story that will remove the elected president of the United States from office, but I'm afraid some people will be mean to me if they see who I am. Yea, I think I'll hide behind Adam Schiff.

there is the 6th amendment, but it applies to criminal cases, and this one is purely partisan politics. But they got Trump on the ropes this time. He's skeert.


Let's seen what the hearings produce. Maybe the vote for actual impeachment will never get passed and the members of Senate will not have to have a trial.

But in my opinion He seems guilty. Or lot's of people testifying under oath are going to go to prison for lying.



posted on Nov, 4 2019 @ 01:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: stosh64
a reply to: dfnj2015


It seems to me Republicans never answer the real question. If Trump is shown to have broken federal laws should he be held accountable and why not?

This is such BS, you are either lying or incredibly uninformed.
Every Trump supporter on ATS has said if Trump has broken the law he needs to face the consequences.

The #Resistors have failed miserably for 3 years to show Trump has broken any laws.
Most of us have stopped taking the REEEEE seriously, it is like the boy who cried wolf.

IF he has broken the law PROVE it and let him face the consequences.

Most Americans are sick of the progressive globalists new motto of guilty until proven innocent.


So you think if Trump has been found breaking the law he needs to face the consequences. Well, we agree on something.



posted on Nov, 4 2019 @ 01:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
What do you call the testimony of Ambassador Taylor, Fiona Hill, Lt Col Vindman?

You mean the testimony of some TDS suffering never-Trumpers, the full extent of which we have yet to hear?

That 'testimony'?

What do you call the testimony of Viundman's boss, who totally contradicted Vidnmans testimony?


Who is Vidnman's boss and what did he say? People are going to go to prison if they lie.



posted on Nov, 4 2019 @ 01:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015



But in my opinion He seems guilty. Or lot's of people testifying under oath are going to go to prison for lying.

Yea, suddenly, justice will become important among the political elite? You should check out some posts by a guy with the handle dfnj2015. He makes fun of people who think arrests are coming.



posted on Nov, 4 2019 @ 02:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: dfnj2015
But there does seem to be pretty good evidence Trump broke the law.

Actually, there is ZERO.


Sullivan: "Soliciting investigations into a domestic political opponent, I don't think that would be in accord with our values"


Never happened.


A week later, Taylor was even more concerned, texting Sondland: "As I said on the phone, I think it's crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign."


Never happened.


Vindman: "I did not think it was proper to demand that a foreign government investigate a U.S. citizen, and I was worried about the implications for the U.S. government’s support of Ukraine"

Nothing wrong with this. Nothing.


Holding back military aid, putting our country and troops at risk for personal political gain


Never happened.


Contrary to your delusions, the witnesses giving testimony under oath are saying it did happen.



Other people, who were on the call, and the call transcript itself, say none of it happened.

Let's here from Schiff himself who is leading the closed door testimony sessions:

"Schiff: "I hear what you want. I have a favor I want from you, though. And I'm going to say this only seven times, so you better listen good. I want you to make up dirt on my political opponent. Understand? Lots of it, on this and on that."

Whoops, all lies.



posted on Nov, 4 2019 @ 02:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015
Attorney Mark Zaid tweeted Sunday that the whistleblower would answer questions directly from Republican members "in writing, under oath & penalty of perjury,"


How does one swear in and become subject to penalty of perjury anonymously? Answer me that one, please.



posted on Nov, 4 2019 @ 02:21 PM
link   
a reply to: PurpleFox




Biden is not currently in an election with POTUS.


In Trump's head, he is a political opponent, regardless if he is to become the nominee or not, as is anyone who was a member of the Obama Administration.

Everybody's talking about his obsession with the Bidens. But Trump first asked Zelenskiy to find the Crowdstrike DNC "server" he thinks the Democrats hid in Ukraine. He thinks the Democrats hired Ukrainians to hack the DNC, send the data to WikiLeaks and frame poor innocent Putin and the Russians.

Trump was using the congressional aide package to get Zelenskiy to back up that conspiracy theory and discredit the entire Democratic Committee and the Mueller report as false and corrupt.

All Democrats are Trump's political rivals.



edit on 4-11-2019 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 4 2019 @ 02:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: dfnj2015



But in my opinion He seems guilty. Or lot's of people testifying under oath are going to go to prison for lying.

Yea, suddenly, justice will become important among the political elite? You should check out some posts by a guy with the handle dfnj2015. He makes fun of people who think arrests are coming.


I don't make fun of anyone. I criticize what people say. I have different opinions. But I do my best to avoid any ad hominem attacks. Just look at my posts.

I think people on the right make no distinction between what they a say and a person's worth as a person. People are not what they say.

"political elite" is irrelevant. If a Democrat breaks the laws I expect Republicans to do something about it. I don't understand why Republicans are so shocked by Democrats trying to impeach Trump. I would understand it if there was no credible evidence. But I think there is pretty evidence. It seems to me Republicans are just refusing to accept the evidence and then whining about a political witch hunt.



posted on Nov, 4 2019 @ 02:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha
Zalensky didnt even know aid was being withheld.

WHY ARE YOU SO AGAINST ENDING CORRUPTION IN GOVERNMENT, REGARDLESS OF POLITICAL PARTY?????

You ppl are stupid, incredibly.


edit on 4-11-2019 by PurpleFox because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 4 2019 @ 02:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: jjkenobi

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: dfnj2015
But there does seem to be pretty good evidence Trump broke the law.

Actually, there is ZERO.


Sullivan: "Soliciting investigations into a domestic political opponent, I don't think that would be in accord with our values"


Never happened.


A week later, Taylor was even more concerned, texting Sondland: "As I said on the phone, I think it's crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign."


Never happened.


Vindman: "I did not think it was proper to demand that a foreign government investigate a U.S. citizen, and I was worried about the implications for the U.S. government’s support of Ukraine"

Nothing wrong with this. Nothing.


Holding back military aid, putting our country and troops at risk for personal political gain


Never happened.


Contrary to your delusions, the witnesses giving testimony under oath are saying it did happen.



Other people, who were on the call, and the call transcript itself, say none of it happened.

Let's here from Schiff himself who is leading the closed door testimony sessions:

"Schiff: "I hear what you want. I have a favor I want from you, though. And I'm going to say this only seven times, so you better listen good. I want you to make up dirt on my political opponent. Understand? Lots of it, on this and on that."

Whoops, all lies.



Who are the other people? Do you have a link to a story? Those are strong accusations. What do you have to support them?

Maybe Republicans are right and this is a witch hunt. If it is I imagine it will end badly politically for Democrats. I'm still glad they are having hearings. People under the threat of ending up in jail because of perjury are more willing to tell the truth.



posted on Nov, 4 2019 @ 02:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: ManFromEurope



Wait. Waaaaait.
"FAKE NEWS!" "HEARSAY!" "LIARS!" and so on.

Or your question gets ignored, because it hurts the narrative of some spin docs.


That's the way it works in 'Murica...extremities of free speech allows you to be outlandish and lie so much, you begin to believe it yourself.



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join