deonb
Active Member
Can you please point to the timestamp where Bill Clinton was advocating for deporting/disallowing entry of people who are holding valid visas?
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Can you please point to the timestamp where Bill Clinton was advocating for deporting/disallowing entry of people who are holding valid visas?
X Fan
Active Member
Agreed....moreover, the Murdoch sons are left of center and are not supporters of Trump. In fact, similar to WAPO & NY Times, they attack DT with articles and editorials just about every day
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
NYT. Enough said.
New York Times was the major publication that got the earlier scoop, but here's Washington Post's similar report today:
Acting attorney general declares Justice Department won’t defend Trump’s immigration order
CuriousG
Active Member
He doesn't need to be on the inside. After all, he is the head of cyber security. Surely he's got some 1337 hacking skills. His website that has all kinds of vulnerabilities and years outdated. It must be a honeypot to lure people in.
I've been saying this for years about that clown.
On a side note, I think you and I have found our hair's width sliver of Venn overlap.
CuriousG
Active Member
I don't understand why that is news. A government employee that won't work? Must have been a very slow news day, or they ran out of lost dog articles.
I don't know where you are but you seem to be a bit out of touch because the acting AG was immediately removed because of her comments. In the adult/real world this is what happens when someone defies their bosses wishes.
she decided to play politics than enforce the law.
sadly she was following in lockstep the ineptness and corruption of her two predecessors whose modus operandi was to politicize the justice dept.
if she didn't buy into trump's ideas, she should have resigned rather than grandstand, either way she is now out. I for one am happy to see one more swamp critter out, and there are many more to go.
Let me guess. Paid vacation like the Secret Service regional commander? OWW!!! PLEASE DON'T MAKE ME DRINK UMBRELLA DRINKS IN TAHITI!! Anything but that!!
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
To clarify, I was referring to the details in the article about the case of the Aziz brothers, not the leading story about the AG's decision. Upthread there were suggestions that this was "fake news" and questioning about the New York Times covering this story, so I posted Washington Post's take on the same story.
Working class folk get fired for being vocally insubordinate, and usually we do not have to pay them full unemployment immediately. Government workers get "Paid Administrative Leave" which most of us would consider a paid vacation.
The DNC office holders have never considered the proletariat their equals. This is why the lower class must be helped by the elite, because people's worth is based on who writes their paychecks. England is similar, but at least they are honest and call themselves Lords or other ridiculous names to indicate they are biologically superior to the riff-raff.
I'm no longer a minimum wage worker, or a union member. But I do remember how much contempt was prevalent towards the Appointed Elite when they would be exempted from prosecution, and could get fired for terrible deeds and get paid for it.
And every day there are articles praising Trump, e.g. One praising the executive order he just signed reducing regulations. And there is an article chastising Obama for stepping into the fray. So, what do you consider balanced, The National Review? Breitbart News?
deonb
Active Member
Don't you know?
These days if someone reads an article that they 100% agree with, that article is "fair and balanced". If they disagree with the article in any way, the article is "biased".
the acting attorney general hardly qualifies as working class. she was insubordinate, and played politics in her decision making disregarding the law and her clearly defined legal obligations. while her predecessors acted in a similar fashion they were doing the bidding of a poor leader. Trump has shown that he is keeping his promise to drain the swamp and she is in the first batch to go.
My point is that government appointees should have no more rights than US citizens. Time to get rid of our royalty.
When you get fired for deliberately not doing your job, especially someone tied to public safety duties, you should not get paid for getting fired. But yes, our government often exempts themselves from laws they pass. That is corrupt too, but a different subject.
No, she's a hero for standing up and doing her job despite the pressure from on high. As the top person in DOJ she believed the Executive Order was illegal and it was her responsibility to speak up and do something. That's not insubordination particularly when the DOJ is supposed to have a level of independence in this regard.
Similar threads
