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.

 

Meanwhile in the real world...

page: 3
50
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 21 2019 @ 09:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: chr0naut


I wasn't suggesting anything was fake. You were.

Bull-Shiff.


They are legislators.

No, they are supposed to be legislators. Legislators pass laws; look it up. Investigators investigate cases. The primary job of the House and Senate is to pass laws, and the House is charged with the sole responsibility for introducing financial legislation.

The House has the authority to investigate and impeach the President in cases of high crimes and misdemeanors. So far, not one single witness has alluded to a high crime or misdemeanor. Every single one has been asked that point blank and all have said no.

My point is that the legislative duties are being overlooked because the legislators are playing investigator when there is obviously nothing to investigate. They need to either do their job or go home.

TheRedneck


The duties of the House are defined in article 1 of the Constitution, as I previously linked.

Please point out the clause where they are required to produce a budget. The last two paragraphs of article 1, section three, clearly give them the sole responsibility of investigation of impeachment and trial of impeachment but where's the budgeting bit?

edit on 21/11/2019 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 21 2019 @ 09:41 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut


I could argue that Congress aren't there to produce budgets.

I could argue that pigs fly. And make more of an argument than you do.

Try reading the actual Constitution.

TheRedneck



posted on Nov, 21 2019 @ 09:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: chr0naut


I could argue that Congress aren't there to produce budgets.

I could argue that pigs fly. And make more of an argument than you do.

Try reading the actual Constitution.

TheRedneck


I have read it. What part do you think mandates that the House produce the budget?

Post the section and paragraph, please.



posted on Nov, 21 2019 @ 09:50 PM
link   
a reply to: new_here


Yeah, I never understood why they are allowed to spend days 'holding court' instead of what they're actually elected to do. Maybe the Supreme Court should handle hearings that decide guilt or innocence? They may be left or right leaning, but they do seem to at least give justice a fighting chance.

It is obviously just the next phase of the Mueller Investigation. We hard the word "IMPEACH!" before the man even took office! Then when he righteously fired Jim Comey, operatives got the Mueller Investigation started to give impeachment ammunition. When that failed to produce reports, the same operatives have picked up this impeachment over a phone call we all have the transcript of.

I saw that before the first witness was called. OK, Congress has the duty to investigate legitimate concerns... let them investigate. But now they have turned it into the most lop-sided circus imaginable, akin to literally any third-world country that one cares to bring up. And in the process, they are ignoring their legislative duties.

I'm serious... dissolve the House. We don't need them if they aren't going to do their duties.

TheRedneck



posted on Nov, 21 2019 @ 09:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: chr0naut


Surely if things are going well, you don't make changes which might destabilize that?

Please explain why it would be it wrong to defer a revision to the budget, in a time of economic stability?

Please educate yourself.

I am not calling for a revision to anything (at least not in this thread; I do believe we could trim a heck of a lot). Without a budget, there is no money to pay the military, defense contractors, government employees, pay government contracts, even provide assistance to the needy. We have laws that force the government to provide the bare minimum services even without a budget, but that does not cover the majority of those who work for the government. The government shuts down.

This potential shutdown, which was delayed with literally less than 6 hours left, is exactly the same thing you were complaining about a year ago. Exactly. The only difference is that this time you can't hang it on Donald Trump.

TheRedneck

Except that they extended the budget's coverage, there is no shutdown and everyone gets paid. Except for those things, it is exactly the same!




posted on Nov, 21 2019 @ 09:53 PM
link   
a reply to: mtnshredder

I don't think I can add anything to that post.

If I show up for work whenever I feel like it, I get fired, and with good reason. If I show up but refuse to do my duties, I get canned... again, with good reason. These worthless pieces of organic trash do both and expect to be treated like kings and queens!

TheRedneck



posted on Nov, 21 2019 @ 09:54 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut


We don't have a transcript, we have a memorandum of the call

That has been debunked so many times it is ridiculous.

You're done... have a nice day.

TheRedneck



posted on Nov, 21 2019 @ 09:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: mtnshredder

I don't think I can add anything to that post.

If I show up for work whenever I feel like it, I get fired, and with good reason. If I show up but refuse to do my duties, I get canned... again, with good reason. These worthless pieces of organic trash do both and expect to be treated like kings and queens!

TheRedneck




Thats why their known as the ruling class



posted on Nov, 21 2019 @ 09:55 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

Have. A. Nice. Day.

TheRedneck



posted on Nov, 21 2019 @ 10:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Lumenari

That makes 4C , well spent!



posted on Nov, 21 2019 @ 10:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: chr0naut


We don't have a transcript, we have a memorandum of the call

That has been debunked so many times it is ridiculous.

You're done... have a nice day.

TheRedneck

It's written on the thing!

... but thank you, the weather is lovely here and it has been a pleasant day.




posted on Nov, 21 2019 @ 10:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: chr0naut

If we did not have the transcript, if we did not have every single first hand witness saying Trump did nothing wrong, if we did not have Ukraine saying Democrats are hindering their corruption investigations ... I would agree.


We don't have a transcript, we have a memorandum of the call, which includes a "Caution" clause in its footer explaining that it is not a verbatim transcript.

Trump's Ukraine call transcript: Read the document - FoxNews

We have Lt Col Alexander Vindman who was a first hand witness, telling Congress that Trump made "inappropriate" political demands of the Ukrainian President. There were others, too.

Did you read the entire cautionary note as to WHY it is there, or did you stop at the first sentence?

For the record, here is the entire text of the cautionary note:


CAUTION: A Memorandum of a Telephone Conversation (TELCOM) is not a verbatim transcript of a discussion. The text in this document records the notes and recollections of Situation Room Duty Officers and NSC policy staff assigned to listen and memorialize the conversation in written form as the conversation takes place. A number of factors can affect the accuracy of the record, including poor telecommunications connections and variations in accent and/or interpretation. The word "inaudible" is used to indicate portions of a conversation that the notetaker was unable to hear.


Now, taking the entire context of the cautionary note into account, it means that more than one person was responsible for ensuring accuracy and agreed upon interpretation in the event of a telecommunications issue (bad connection, bad audio, poor or low speech by one or more of the active parties, etc...). In which case the word "inaudible" would be put in place to avoid assumptions of parts of the conversation by a single reviewer.

Why multiple reviewers? So that we don't have a single person determining what was said, who could be swayed by many factors including personal biases, political biases or even profit.

Was Lt. Col Vindman the only person that was a 1st hand listener who interpreted the word "favor" using his military background as an "order"? Yes. So one person of many listeners was swayed by their own personal bias to interpret a single word on the call with a different interpretation than all the others. President Trump was not a military person before taking office, the other primary party on the call was also not a military person. So, why interpret that single word as an order as if it was part of standard military jargon?? Is it a logical interpretation to apply to someone that was NOT a military person or exposed to that type of use of the word? No, it is not.

Your cherry picking of the word "memorandum" in the document is EXACTLY THE SAME THING that Vindman has done with the word "favor" in the Ukraine call. You took a single word out of context and applied your own biased opinion to its use.

Congratulations on being openly biased and looking to apply that bias and hate to this process.



posted on Nov, 21 2019 @ 10:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Krakatoa


Congratulations on being openly biased and looking to apply that bias and hate to this process.

Which is why I will no longer respond to him in this thread: his constant use of semantics to try and dismiss obvious intent and precedent. That's really all he's got left on this issue, so I suppose it is understandable, but that doesn't mean I will waste my time playing his silly word games. I can get a word game book for 59 cents and it will make more sense than all his posts combined.

That warning is the exact same warning that appears in any technical manual, just to guard against unintentional typos. It was present when I worked as a structural steel detailer using the AISC Steel Manual, on the cover page. Why? Because steel shapes could change before the next edition came out and typos can slip through even the best checks... which was also explained further down. Yet, that one book was our "Bible." It was used so much, most people's copies were loose-leaf before the next edition.

With the transcript of the call, there is an argument (weak and unprovable, but an argument nonetheless) over the meaning of the request for a "favor." Without the transcript of the call, there is absolutely no case because there is no evidence whatsoever. So throw it out and we have two and only two reliable witnesses: Donald Trump and Zelensky. Both have claimed no pressure to tie military aid to any investigations. So no first-hand witnesses = no case, and my point stands even clearer... no reason whatsoever to not pass a full budget.

The guy just destroyed his own argument, and laughingly, doesn't even realize it.

TheRedneck



posted on Nov, 22 2019 @ 02:22 AM
link   
Yes absolutely



posted on Nov, 22 2019 @ 08:22 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

FIRE 'EM ALL!!

(felt this way for a long time now)



posted on Nov, 22 2019 @ 10:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: chr0naut


We don't have a transcript, we have a memorandum of the call

That has been debunked so many times it is ridiculous.

You're done... have a nice day.

TheRedneck


Seriously, you just read that on another rightwing-fringe-site. The rest of the world does not know about some "debunking".

It is a memorandum and you can have a temper tantrum all day long about that.



posted on Nov, 22 2019 @ 10:50 AM
link   
a reply to: Krakatoa

Thats a whole load of subjective issues. Maybe leave out the "would" and the "interpretation" and the "swaying" and we might come to a conclusion.

But not like this. A memorandum is not a verbatim transcript and in this special case it certainly is really not.



posted on Nov, 22 2019 @ 10:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

"Politicians are like diapers. They should be changed often and for the same reason" - Various

I don't think it can be said much better than that....



posted on Nov, 22 2019 @ 10:58 AM
link   
Time for a change, in a big way. Repeal and replace the broken government and then make sure the egregious and intolerable crimes of the day can never possibly be repeated. Only one way to truly make sure of that, and that is at the end of a rope.

Both the far left and the government bureacracy pose the greatest threat to our sovereignty, our dignity, our wealth and our power. Those things must be beaten back mercilessly.

Total. War.
edit on 11/22/2019 by JBurns because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 22 2019 @ 11:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: ManFromEurope

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: chr0naut


We don't have a transcript, we have a memorandum of the call

That has been debunked so many times it is ridiculous.

You're done... have a nice day.

TheRedneck


Seriously, you just read that on another rightwing-fringe-site. The rest of the world does not know about some "debunking".

It is a memorandum and you can have a temper tantrum all day long about that.


Pardon my bluntness and it in no way doubts your veracity or interest but....

Still can't figure out why someone from Germany? and another from New Zealand? or anywhere but America would give a flying flip one way or the other. LOL, whatever happens, no matter how historic, wrong or right is likely to affect your lives one iota LOL hell its likely to not affect my life except irritate me occasionally. I get the big picture and all, and understand the want or need to chime in. But honestly does it change your life one way or another? LOL not saying butt out are it isn't your business but just asking.
edit on 22-11-2019 by putnam6 because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
50
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join