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.
originally posted by: Arizonaguy
Except that future documents would show that McCarthy was far more right than anybody wanted to admit. There were many Soviet assets working at all levels of our government. Schiff will get no such posthumous vindication.
Why are you lying so much about what really happened....Adan Shiff lied...Hillary Clinton Lied...James Comey Lied.. all of them are wreckless and harmful even if you pretend like this stuff is not real..They do not get arrested over criminal proven broken laws...This kinda stuff is what destroys a country..
originally posted by: ManFromEurope
The usual mix of emotions, nothing of substance in your post.
Be less emotional, more rational and you would see that (a) Flynn himself admitted he lied and (b) this transcript is worth many more quotes and different media source:
Source
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) asserted that the transcripts proved that Russia sought to hurt then-candidate Hillary Clinton’s campaign and help candidate Donald Trump — a point GOP lawmakers on the panel contested.
Source
The transcripts, otherwise, contain mostly old news, long since surpassed by revelations in Robert Mueller's final report
And so on. As usual, the source is much more than the bullet points you and we get fed.
Read them for yourself: all 57 transcripts
originally posted by: ManFromEurope
The usual mix of emotions, nothing of substance in your post.
Be less emotional, more rational and you would see that (a) Flynn himself admitted he lied and (b) this transcript is worth many more quotes and different media source:
Source
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) asserted that the transcripts proved that Russia sought to hurt then-candidate Hillary Clinton’s campaign and help candidate Donald Trump — a point GOP lawmakers on the panel contested.
Source
The transcripts, otherwise, contain mostly old news, long since surpassed by revelations in Robert Mueller's final report
And so on. As usual, the source is much more than the bullet points you and we get fed.
Read them for yourself: all 57 transcripts
originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Xtrozero
Unfortunately, you can “ go on national TV and make things up as he did” if he sticks to he was ensuring national security. And that the concern was not out of malice, but concern for national security.
A public figure is a person, such as a politician, celebrity, social media personality, or business leader, who has a certain social position within a certain scope and a significant influence and so is often widely of concern to the public, can benefit enormously from society, and is closely related to public interests in society.[1]
In the context of defamation actions (libel and slander) as well as invasion of privacy, a public figure cannot succeed in a lawsuit on incorrect harmful statements in the United States unless there is proof that the writer or publisher acted with actual malice by knowing the falsity or by reckless disregard for the truth.[2] The legal burden of proof in defamation actions is thus higher in the case of a public figure than in the case of an ordinary person.
en.m.wikipedia.org...
originally posted by: Sparky63
a reply to: Bloodworth
Schiff was unfortunate enough to be cursed with bug eyes and a pencil neck that make him an easy target for ridicule. He has little control of his physical features, however he has full control of his character and honesty, both of which are in short supply and make him fair game for all the mockery and scorn that can and should be heaped upon him. He willfully spread lie after lie against a duly elected president with a heart filled with hate and a tongue full of falsehood and slander, aided and abetted by an equally dishonest and morally deficient media who long ago shrugged off the mantle of professional journalism to become the mouthpiece for the DNC. I hope there will be real justice and that all involved in this sleazy attack will held fully accountable.....but I'm not holding my breath.
originally posted by: looneylupinsrevenge
Ok, honest question from someone who doesnt know these laws all that well. Would not the fact that he has no evidence and no witnesses at the time he made those statements, work against him in that respect. Wouldnt they show malice towards Trump? The entire time he was making those statements, on tv and in print, he knew full well that he had nothing the back it up, that it was all fantastical lies made up to fool the little people.