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: 2
13
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 12 2019 @ 09:28 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.



The President: Snipped part of the converstaion to shorten by meThe other thing, There's a lot of talk about Biden's son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it... It sounds horrible to me.
Whitehouse.gov

I understand it could be interpreted in different ways. And I still don't think he should be removed. Do I think this was a dumb move on his part? Yup, because I don't think Biden is an actual threat to his presidency. I also don't think he was doing this out of altruism... So far, drain the swamp has only applied to opponents.

I'm just trying to approach this as honestly as I can. But at the end of the day, I do have bias, and that is I dislike both parties and a vast proportion of politicians equally.... But I'll try my best to give them a fair shake and see it without blinders as I can.




posted on Dec, 12 2019 @ 09:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: Middleoftheroad
a reply to: dfnj2015

I'm still waiting on you to site the laws he broke and provide the proof he broke them.


I posted a couple of links. But what difference does it make when you will just ignore any evidence.



posted on Dec, 12 2019 @ 09:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: Middleoftheroad
a reply to: dfnj2015

I'm still waiting on you to site the laws he broke and provide the proof he broke them.


Not that you will agree:

"14 § 431 et seq. The Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (FECA, Pub. ... § 30101 et seq.) is the primary United States federal law regulating political campaign spending and fundraising. The law originally focused on increased disclosure of contributions for federal campaigns."


+10 more 
posted on Dec, 12 2019 @ 09:29 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

You understand that he is not being charged with any of what you linked to for his impeachment, right? He didnt even get charged with the whole "bribery" thing they have been going on about for months now.


+9 more 
posted on Dec, 12 2019 @ 09:30 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

What did he receive that benefited his campaign?



posted on Dec, 12 2019 @ 09:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: PokeyJoe
a reply to: CriticalStinker

Maybe thats the whole point of this seemingly pointless exercise? Trump becomes a political martyr that is needed to usher in much needed transparency and reform in our government?


Possibly... Or he's part of the game, and this is all theater to create the illusion of a martyr. I'm not sure, and while I have a lean on the thought exercise, it's too early to really say with confidence.

Unfortunately we'll have to judge this like most presidencies, with the benefit of hindsight.


+8 more 
posted on Dec, 12 2019 @ 09:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: silo13
a reply to: dfnj2015

It means the Dem's failed in a traitorous coup and the President and the USA voters are vindicated.

I hope is (also) means there's a bag full of cats that will tossed into the sedition pool.

We'll see.


more winning
are you tired of winning yet?


We now live in an era where putting one's party before the Constitution is the new norm. Again, we now live in a banana Republic. Trump should announce his own Constitution based on a full bloom of Article II powers. Why stop now?

interesting this gets your response but nothing on actual laws broken
not bs like "obstruction of congress" or "abuse of power"
made up house dem bs

yes
clearly winning


+6 more 
posted on Dec, 12 2019 @ 09:32 AM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker




Do I think this was a dumb move on his part? Yup, because I don't think Biden is an actual threat to his presidency. I also don't think he was doing this out of altruism...


You realize this whole ordeal went down before Biden announced his candidacy right? Most of us think he only announced when he did because he thought it would protect his family's crimes in Ukraine from being investigated.

NPR
edit on 12-12-2019 by Middleoftheroad because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 12 2019 @ 09:32 AM
link   
Laws are for the little people.
Trump isn't going to get punished any more than Obama did when he broke many laws by weaponizing several government agencies to try and throw an election, or when Bush wiped his ass with the constitution with the Patriot act, or when Clinton cleaned out the FBI vault to get dirt on everyone to use as blackmail... I could go all day.


+4 more 
posted on Dec, 12 2019 @ 09:34 AM
link   
a reply to: Middleoftheroad

And even so, Biden is NOT Trumps opponent yet. Biden needs to worry about beating Warren, Bernie and whatever other nutjob throws their hat into the ring.



posted on Dec, 12 2019 @ 09:35 AM
link   
a reply to: PokeyJoe

I know right, but what I'm talking about is he wasn't anyone's opponent at the time of the call, so the lefts entire narrative is garbage.



posted on Dec, 12 2019 @ 09:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: Middleoftheroad
a reply to: CriticalStinker




Do I think this was a dumb move on his part? Yup, because I don't think Biden is an actual threat to his presidency. I also don't think he was doing this out of altruism...


You realize this whole ordeal went down before Biden announced his candidacy right? Most of us think he only announced when he did because he thought it would protect his family's crimes in Ukraine from being investigated.


Another member has pointed this to me before. And while he didn't officially announce, he's been mulling it over since last election.

From a political standpoint, you also have to act knowing how people will perceive your decisions... Sometimes true motives be damned. I'm not saying I think that's the way things should be, but it is the way they are.

Also, he could have had elements of DOJ quarterback this to buffer himself more. But I've been weighing in on this as whether it was smart or not... Still don't think he should be removed for it.



posted on Dec, 12 2019 @ 09:36 AM
link   
This is not a very patriotic thread.... it has no flags.


+1 more 
posted on Dec, 12 2019 @ 09:37 AM
link   
a reply to: 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.

What appears is you are complaining about the political aspects of this of one side while completely ignoring the political aspects of the other.
NO crime is being accused by the house dems.
Nothing but partisan bs.
yet the accusations of a banana republic?
balderdash!


+2 more 
posted on Dec, 12 2019 @ 09:38 AM
link   
What happens?

We get 4 more years of the left trying to pull stuff out of their azzes and impeach Trump LOL.

What you fail to realize if they had a case there would be an upswell of people calling for him to resign. Its not cause people blindly love Trump, there should have been plenty of independents and republicans willing to call him guilty if the situation warranted it.


+24 more 
posted on Dec, 12 2019 @ 09:38 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

First off, Trump is innocent until proven guilty.

Those laws you said he broke?

What you and the left have done is inferred intent.

You're convicting Trump based on what you think he meant instead of what he actually did.


The authoritarians, the dictators are the ones in the House, Senate, intelligence community who tried to stage a coup against a sitting president.

And you should be ashamed of yourself.



posted on Dec, 12 2019 @ 09:41 AM
link   
a reply to: 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.


Take the partisan blinders off.



The White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) released a new legal memo on Wednesday indicating that the Trump administration’s decision to temporarily hold military assistance to Ukraine was a “routine” practice and that the administration was reviewing whether Ukraine complied with U.S. policy.


Gasp!

Expected Wide Scale defections

Trump. Hold my beer.



posted on Dec, 12 2019 @ 09:43 AM
link   
I appreciate your position here but You are applying your known facts to the wrong party. In this entire fiasco the democrats are accusing the president and associates with the exact crimes they themselves are attempting to cover up by dragging out this fiasco. I know you are earnestly trying to support and defend your position but like the democrats, their position is just not justifiable.
Yes, Trump is the proverbial bull in the china shop but that doesn't mean he is wrong about the democrats. I gave up on the democratic party 20 years ago. My entire family were lifelong registered democrats and I believe I am the first to recognize their treachery and subversive agenda. I wish I could open your eyes to their criminality but I know I probably never will.

Just look at Maxine Waters facial expressions along with all of the other sedition announcing the impeachment process going forward. Can you not see the hate in her expression? I certainly can. And the others. Find that video and look at it several times. Shiff, Nadler, Pelosi and others. You can see it in their faces. Study that video.
edit on 12-12-2019 by CharlesT because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 12 2019 @ 09:44 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

It means that checks and balances plus good ole due process work as they should.



posted on Dec, 12 2019 @ 09:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: Middleoftheroad
a reply to: dfnj2015

I'm still waiting on you to site the laws he broke and provide the proof he broke them.


Not that you will agree:

"14 § 431 et seq. The Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (FECA, Pub. ... § 30101 et seq.) is the primary United States federal law regulating political campaign spending and fundraising. The law originally focused on increased disclosure of contributions for federal campaigns."


Of course, I won't. I believe in innocent until proven guilty.




top topics



 
13
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join