Jump to content

AG fired


Recommended Posts

  • Platinum Contributing Member
1 minute ago, Zambroski said:

OH MY GOD!!!!!  Seriously!

IMG_1748.JPG

He voted for scrutiny on people from these countries in 2015.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, 02sled said:

I refuse to follow directions from my boss I get fired. Pretty straight forward. 

Yeah, if we have a disagreement on how it should it be done.  ....Your concerns noted, now do your job or hit the door.

I don't know anyone who gets to pick and choose what directions they listen to by their boss.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Mainecat said:

Nooooo. She swore to uphold the Constitution not Trump.

She serves at the pleasure of the president who is her boss. Her boss says this is what I want you to do. She has a couple of choices. Do it, quit or be fired. Pretty simple. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, snoughnut said:

Poor Shitslinger, Mainecunt, ICEFAG, Spin nut etc., it's gonna be a rough 4 years, hopefully 8 for you pussies. Will you guys be having group therapy sessions? :crybaby:

They're all in their safe places. When did this safe place thing ever start getting used for people. I knew if an animal like a dog felt threatened they would retreat to their safe place, but people, this is new 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member
11 hours ago, Snoslinger said:

why do you always try to equate an apple to an orange? 

I never seen him go on TV and cry when Obama banned refugee's from Iraq for 6 months in 2013.   Hypocrites of the highest order.

 

Screenshot_20170130-224750_resized.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Snoslinger said:

trump fires acting AG because she thought travel ban was unlawful and refused to act upon it. the little king no likey.

:lol:

 

 

She deserved to get fired, when you are the AG you serve at the presidents pleasure.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member
8 minutes ago, Mileage Psycho said:

She deserved to get fired, when you are the AG you serve at the presidents pleasure.

Yep.   Should could have easily resigned saying she had reservations about the EO.   Instead she instructed the entire JD to not uphold it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Sleepr2 said:

There it is! Timeshare s go to defense for his double standards:lmao: 

I'm not defending anything. just wondering why highmarket always tries to equate things like scrutiny of people several years ago, to travel bans now? or vetting of refugees years ago to the vetting that occurs now? maybe you can answer?

 

6 minutes ago, Mileage Psycho said:

She deserved to get fired, when you are the AG you serve at the presidents pleasure.

yeah I can't really argue that. I was wondering, however, if she has any legal counterpunches? someone refusing to do something their boss tells them isn't always a legal way to fire someone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Mileage Psycho said:

She deserved to get fired, when you are the AG you serve at the presidents pleasure.

Well, "president's pleasure" isn't the phrase I'd use, but yes.

1 minute ago, Highmark said:

Yep.   Should could have easily resigned saying she had reservations about the EO.   Instead she instructed the entire JD to not uphold it.  

It was just another political grandstanding to obstruct the law and ignore her sworn oath and the constitution.  It is popular with the liberals to do so.  

She's not stupid though, I'm sure she'll be in the Dem "rank and file" system soon.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Zambroski said:

She was extremely derelict of her duties and of her oath to defend the Constitution.

Career ended.  Now she has a lot more time to go protest.

:lmao:

 

that's exactly what I was going too say. She can go join all the pathetic unemployed  libtard protesters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Snoslinger said:

I'm not defending anything. just wondering why highmarket always tries to equate things like scrutiny of people several years ago, to travel bans now? or vetting of refugees years ago to the vetting that occurs now? maybe you can answer?

 

yeah I can't really argue that. I was wondering, however, if she has any legal counterpunches? someone refusing to do something their boss tells them isn't always a legal way to fire someone.

It is when it is CLEARLY in their job description and duties.

Your side being able to claim more of the "gray area" and twist it into your color of the day is hopefully over.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally find this thread an EXTREME GRASP.  Even from the lefties in here.  

This is a no argument termination for someone who outright refused to perform their sword duties in the government based on her personal feelings.

More credibility for the Dems is being lost on every post trying to defend her.  This has NOTHING to do with your feelings on how the election went.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member
6 minutes ago, Snoslinger said:

I'm not defending anything. just wondering why highmarket always tries to equate things like scrutiny of people several years ago, to travel bans now? or vetting of refugees years ago to the vetting that occurs now? maybe you can answer?

 

yeah I can't really argue that. I was wondering, however, if she has any legal counterpunches? someone refusing to do something their boss tells them isn't always a legal way to fire someone.

Dude it was in 2015-2016. :lol:  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member

In a nutshell Obama did something very similar he just went about it differently.  

 

According to the draft copy of Trump's executive order, the countries whose citizens are barred entirely from entering the United States is based on a bill that Obama signed into law in December 2015.

 

Obama signed the Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act as part of an omnibus spending bill. The legislation restricted access to the Visa Waiver Program, which allows citizens from 38 countries who are visiting the United States for less than 90 days to enter without a visa.

Though outside groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union and NIAC Action — the sister organization of the National Iranian American Council — opposed the act, the bipartisan bill passed through Congress with little pushback.

At the initial signing of the restrictions, foreigners who would normally be deemed eligible for a visa waiver were denied if they had visited Iran, Syria, Sudan or Iraq in the past five years or held dual citizenship from one of those countries.

In February 2016, the Obama administration added Libya, Somali and Yemen to the list of countries one could not have visited — but allowed dual citizens of those countries who had not traveled there access to the Visa Waiver Program. Dual citizens of Syria, Sudan, Iraq and Iran are still ineligible, however.

So, in a nutshell, Obama restricted visa waivers for those seven Muslim-majority countries — Iran, Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Somalia, Libya and Yemen — and now, Trump is looking to bar immigration and visitors from the same list of countries.

 

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2017/01/29/news-bulletin-the-list-of-muslim-nations-in-trumps-socalled-muslim-ban-are-ones-obama-choose-n2278021

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Skidooski said:

All the laughing quickly turned to backpedaling after Vince posted :lol:

Fuck.  He seems to be the only Dem with a reasonable thought process.  A bit hacky sometimes IMO, but still, he seems to usually have a fair bead on clear "black and white" situations.  

In other words, he's not a typical lib-tard whiner.  He's one of the exceptionals!  

:lol:

I have a good friend just like him.  We laugh our asses off busting each others chops.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member
4 minutes ago, Zambroski said:

Fuck.  He seems to be the only Dem with a reasonable thought process.  A bit hacky sometimes IMO, but still, he seems to usually have a fair bead on clear "black and white" situations.  

In other words, he's not a typical lib-tard whiner.  He's one of the exceptionals!  

:lol:

I have a good friend just like him.  We laugh our asses off busting each others chops.

 

Vince is kind of like King of the Nerds. :lol:  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Trying to pay the bills, lol

×
×
  • Create New...