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.

 

What does it mean if Trump gets off Scott free

page: 11
13
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 15 2019 @ 09:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: PokeyJoe
a reply to: CriticalStinker

The thing with the whole "asking for an investigation into Biden" thing is that Trump never ONCE mentioned Joe or Hunter Biden when speaking about investigations. He talked about Burisma specifically. Considering Burisma IS corrupt as hell, I would say it was a valid line of questioning.


jesus, trump said it on live TV...what's wrong with you people?.....he sided with putin at Helsinki over every other American intelligence service...what's wrong with you people?...




posted on Dec, 15 2019 @ 09:54 AM
link   
a reply to: Alien Abduct

He literally can't see it and if we are being honest with each other -- most of us can't "see it." We are designed by the maker to mistake the big for the small and the small for the big.

Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff have sold their political souls. Rather than govern (and let's face it -- 95-percent of congress is unfit to actually govern, lacks the vision for it or is co-opted completely by either the left or right call-out team "machine") they work continuously to find a pretext for undermining anything the president does to weaken their own enemies politically.

It has been decades since our legislators have drafted a working budget. They literally have zero shame. They will let an "employment dispute" rage on for weeks re Federal employees in the most public way possible and smile for the camera.

They refuse to declare war and can't explain how any of them are funded. They can't be bothered to regulate or even understand giant social media platforms who earn their billions through tracking, manipulating, controlling, packaging and selling bundled cohorts of US consumers to the highest bidder in an international proxy-propaganda war for the human mind.

Trump preens around like a cracked-out parakeet, shoots from the hip on Twitter and refuses to honor or even recognize longstanding NeoCon/NeoLib under-the-table agreements put in place by generations of sneaky little frauds like Nancy Pelosi who knows nothing important but wrote the book on everything else.

They don't like his position on Syria because it undermines theirs. They don't appreciate him sticking his nose in their
Ukraine, undermining their wholly legitimate interests in the region with his own "ideas" and efforts.

If they can't nail him on this, they will try to nail him on something else. Over and over until he leaves office or keels over. Like a sick little pack of bloodthirsty chickens with team logos and corporate sponsorships on their tiny little jerseys.

edit on 15-12-2019 by 0zzymand0s because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 15 2019 @ 11:01 AM
link   
in three years, trump has been convicted of fraud twice...2016 December, he paid a 25 million dollar fine for cheating students at his fake university, and this year, a 1.7 million dollar fine conviction for cheating his fake charity....he was pissed about a young girl getting time's person of the year award, that his insulted her in a tweet...what an f'in baby....you right-wingers are following a child...both of you, grow the f up



posted on Dec, 15 2019 @ 11:09 AM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker




It's cynically funny that Trump has done far less than his two predecessors while the narrative is he's somehow the worst we've had in history.


Amusing, isn't it? As you say, in a cynical sort of way...and they don't even see it, either. All the impeachment water-carriers are so blinded by their ideological hatred of Trump.




If Trump goes down, all I ask is that we start holding all politicians accountable going forward... Take a guess on my faith level that happens.


Yeah, it's probably at about the same level as mine.



posted on Dec, 15 2019 @ 12:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Alien Abduct

Perhaps I could, but first I would rather come to an understanding of your stated ''FACT'' that the phone call came before Biden's announcement of candidacy. Until we can establish how ''your fact'' does not conform to the reality that Biden's announcement came three months BEFORE the phone call I just can't see how we can continue this discussion.



posted on Dec, 15 2019 @ 02:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: watchitburn

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: MachineMan
a reply to: dfnj2015

Not a single witness said he broke the law.


Witnesses generally don't say whether or not a law was broken, they simply state—testify to—what they, um, witnessed.


That's even more puzzling, since none of the witnesses witnessed anything.


Vindman and Morrison were present for the call. They are direct fact witnesses.

The others were witnesses regarding the circumstances surrounding the call, and the aid being withheld.
edit on 15-12-2019 by Liquesence because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 15 2019 @ 06:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence

Okay, let us know how that holds up during the trial.



posted on Dec, 15 2019 @ 06:34 PM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

you posted nothing, u posted a rant from a leftwing hack job. U have to provide the crime, the law, and the proof.



posted on Dec, 15 2019 @ 07:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: seedofchucky
a reply to: dfnj2015
Please show us what law he broke ? Because none of the witnesses could. Democrats havn't shown it . All they are doing is making up laws he broke "inferred" This is nothing more than a coup attempt . Democrats have weaponized the fbi and c.i.a . Every american should be behind trump right now in these dark times. He isn't getting away with anything , he is protecting future presidents from this scam.


Obviously, you are completely jaded in your assessment. Anyone with a reasonable thinking skills can clearly see Trump broke the law and his oath of office.

Here are two articles summarizing what laws he broke.

THE ACTUAL LAWS TRUMP HAS BROKEN, JUST WITH THE UKRAINE AND CHINA AFFAIRS, COULD LAND HIM 10 YEARS IN PRISON

OJ & FEC Complaints Filed Against President Trump, Rudy Giuliani and Others for Illegal Solicitation of Contribution from Ukrainian President

You can choose to ignore it. But Regardless, the result is our Constitution has become complete worthless. Trump should just announce the Constitution is no longer the law and start arresting Democrats for not having loyalty to his office.

People hate Congress. Maybe's it's time we have dictatorship so we can appreciate what it means to have a democracy again.


LMAO

You must have gone to the Schiffty School of Law.

The evidence you provide to remove an elected president is:

A. An Opinion Editorial at the Intercept, which describes its own reporting as "adversarial journalism" .

B. A registered complaint from a George Soros mouth piece.

Obviously neither piece is any reason to consider any of Trump's actions as the downfall of the republic.

That said, if the there is no reprisal for this obvious attempt to remove the will of the people using these phony kangaroo BS allegations, allegations that have obviously demoralized the voting base and the OP being evidence exhibit A of that fact, then yes, the republic is in distress and it's time to fly the flag upside down.

It really is unbelievable that there's people dumb enough not to see the scam the DNC and their representatives have conducted. A giant majority of the left is incapable of reading the tea leaves, and it's going to lead them headlong into starting a war where they become the canon fodder of the Masters that have manipulated their gullibility.

That's Schiff's, Pelosi's, and the rest of the left's plan for the OP and like kind.



posted on Dec, 15 2019 @ 08:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015
I understand there is a lot of partisan siding on the Trump impeachment. The thing is from my perspective, from the witnesses, it really does look like Trump broke the law and his oath of office.

Even though there is a constant barrage of propaganda saying it's all made up, Trump is innocent, the Democrats are just playing politics, it seems to me there really is something bad going on here.

Even so, Republicans in the Senate already have said regardless of the evidence and what the House does they will acquit Trump no matter what. So all you Republicans can be HAPPY again and be smug about how much better you are than the Democrats.

But for me, I just feel if Trump gets off Scott free from breaking the law and his oath of office the Constitution is done. We now live in an Article II dictatorship. We might as well flush the Constitution down the drain and start arresting Democrats for not having loyalty to the President. I think Trump getting off Scott free may be the end of our US Constitution and the end of our government.

Because what comes next is complete and total lawlessness by the President without any checks-and-balances. The US is or will be officially be a banana Republic.




You would first have to be guilty of something in order to "get off Scott free" so what did he do? What has he been convicted of? What crime has the court said he did and has to serve time for?

Please list any PROVEN IN A COURT OF LAW illegal activity so I can make a fair assessment of how he will get off Scott free or not get off Scott free.

You say "Seems to be something bad going on here" but you have not cared to explain what exactly is going on. just a bunch of oh he did something, other people say so, it's on TV, doesn't matter what he did but I know he did it but the real question is, how is he going to get out of whatever bad thing i cant prove he did? But he had to have done it.

LMFAO

Please provide requested info and I will provide a fair unbiased opinion.


edit on 15-12-2019 by jidnum because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 15 2019 @ 08:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: watchitburn
a reply to: Liquesence

Okay, let us know how that holds up during the trial.



We'll see about that, even if any witnesses are even called.

But you said witnesses didn't witness anything. I pointed out that according to their testimony they did.



posted on Dec, 15 2019 @ 10:12 PM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

You go from having some feelings that you can't verify with facts to the constitution is now broken faster than it takes Nancy Pelosi to down her first shot of vodka in the morning.

What did this great man of a president ever do to you?



posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 01:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: Alien Abduct

Perhaps I could, but first I would rather come to an understanding of your stated ''FACT'' that the phone call came before Biden's announcement of candidacy. Until we can establish how ''your fact'' does not conform to the reality that Biden's announcement came three months BEFORE the phone call I just can't see how we can continue this discussion.



Okay the phone call was after Bidens announcement of candidacy. Now show where in the transcript you cited where there is quid pro quo.

Oh and then there is this..... Document reveals Ukraine had already reopened probe of Hunter Biden-linked firm months before Trump phone call



posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 01:35 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

I mean whatta ya mean what does it mean?



posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 03:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: Alien Abduct

Perhaps I could, but first I would rather come to an understanding of your stated ''FACT'' that the phone call came before Biden's announcement of candidacy. Until we can establish how ''your fact'' does not conform to the reality that Biden's announcement came three months BEFORE the phone call I just can't see how we can continue this discussion.



So, I see you got nothing.



posted on Dec, 16 2019 @ 09:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Alien Abduct
Nice that you could admit your false fact. As to my proving or disproving anything more about this whole fiasco I decline to attempt to prove any of it as we have all the information already presented before us. For me to come up with some magic answer that would solve it all for you when all that information has already been presented would be futile.



posted on Dec, 17 2019 @ 06:25 AM
link   
a reply to: TerryMcGuire

That is correct. Your argument is futile and moot.



posted on Dec, 17 2019 @ 07:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: watchitburn
a reply to: Liquesence

Okay, let us know how that holds up during the trial.



We'll see about that, even if any witnesses are even called.

But you said witnesses didn't witness anything. I pointed out that according to their testimony they did.

Yes, and every single witness has cleared Trump of wrongdoing. Please quote what law they claim he broke. The only thing any witness said is how the call gave them bad feels.

“Did anyone ever ask you to bribe or extort anyone at any time during your time in the White House?" House Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Devin Nunes, R-Calif., asked at one point in Tuesday's afternoon hearing.

Former National Security Council (NSC) aide Tim Morrison: "No."

Former U.S. Special Representative for Ukraine Kurt Volker: “No."

"Mr. Morrison, you were on that call, and there was no quid pro quo, correct? No bribery? No extortion?"

"Correct," Morrison replied in response to each question.

"And, Ambassador Volker, I presume you got a readout of the call. ... Was there any reference to withholding aid? Any reference to bribery? Any reference to quid pro quo? Any reference to extortion?"

"No, there was not," Volker replied, again and again.

www.foxnews.com...

Maddow and Democrats made that testimony into a damning against Trump testimony. Democrats are off their rockers.


In one remarkable moment, Volker contradicted a media headline; asked about a Daily Mail story claiming he had "walked back" his testimony and had "now learned" there was a link between U.S. aid and Biden probe, Volker refuted the website outright.


I guess when you can outright lie to people that's what you get.
edit on 17-12-2019 by OccamsRazor04 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2019 @ 07:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: carsforkids
a reply to: dfnj2015

I mean whatta ya mean what does it mean?

This is the law that Democrat rag is saying Trump broke.

“the extraction of anything of value from another person by threatening or placing that person in fear of injury to any person or kidnapping of any person.”


So they are claiming Trump threatened their lives. Hahahahahahahahaha.
Next.



posted on Dec, 17 2019 @ 09:28 AM
link   
a reply to: Alien Abduct

What argument is futile and moot Mr. Abduct ? I looked back in this conversation to try and find what I might have been arguing about.

First I commented to another member about what could be the democrats thinking behind this impeachment. No, I was making no argument there, just commenting on why they might be acting as they are. Remember my comment about the woman I know? No argument there, just commentary.

Then you replied to me and asked me a question based on a fabricated ''fact'' that you seemed to believe. I pointed that out to you and you said you recognized it. You then attempted to engage me in a fact finding spree of who did what when and how kind of thing to which I declined to be involved in.

So, just where is the argument that you find to be futile and moot.? There is none I can find.




top topics



 
13
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join