Jobs & Education4 mins ago
White House Aide Rob Porter Quits As Ex-Wives Allege Abuse
http:// www.bbc .co.uk/ news/wo rld-us- canada- 4298338 7
Will the last person left in the White House, please turn out the lights when they leave ?
Will the last person left in the White House, please turn out the lights when they leave ?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by mikey4444. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.Mikey, I notice you love pointing out when the White House replaces its' staff. But curiously you don't seem to replicate the gleeful finger-pointing when a similar scenario (in fact much more farcical) is playing out over here in the UK.
Are you similarly outraged that 97 members of Jeremy Corbyn's front-bench have either been sacked or resigned since the leader of the opposition took office? That's a third of all Labour MP's! And you have the brass neck to point derisively at the USA.
I doubt there will be any lights left to turn off by the time Corbyn's revolving door grinds to a halt when he has run out of disillussioned Labour MP's.
Oh, and before you say it, no, I'm not changing the subject. It's right on cue, but perhaps just happens to be an "inconvenient truth", (as a failed Presidential contender once said.)
Are you similarly outraged that 97 members of Jeremy Corbyn's front-bench have either been sacked or resigned since the leader of the opposition took office? That's a third of all Labour MP's! And you have the brass neck to point derisively at the USA.
I doubt there will be any lights left to turn off by the time Corbyn's revolving door grinds to a halt when he has run out of disillussioned Labour MP's.
Oh, and before you say it, no, I'm not changing the subject. It's right on cue, but perhaps just happens to be an "inconvenient truth", (as a failed Presidential contender once said.)
Please comment on Clinton and women who were allegedly molested and raped by him.
Get that bit right first, like: were the charges plausible? were they covered up? did Clinton and his wife collude using bribery and threat to dissuade "victims" from prosecuting their case?
Once you've got that bit right please proceed.
Get that bit right first, like: were the charges plausible? were they covered up? did Clinton and his wife collude using bribery and threat to dissuade "victims" from prosecuting their case?
Once you've got that bit right please proceed.
Don't be too hard on mikey. He was a big Hillary fan, bitterly disappointed that she didn't win.
I can't understand it either,
Was it the Russian Uranium Deal?
Was it Wikileaks?
Was it Podesta?
Was it Comey?
Was it having a sexual predator as a husband?
Was it Huma Abedin’s sexual predator husband Anthony Weiner?
Was it because the Clinton Foundation ripped off Haiti?
Was it subpoena violations?
Was it the congressional testimony lies?
Was it the corrupt Clinton Foundation?
Was it the Benghazi fiasco?
Was it pay for play?
Was it being recorded laughing because she got a child rapist off when she was an attorney?
Was it the Travel Gate scandal?
Was it the Whitewater scandal?
Was it the Cattle Gate scandal?
Was it the Trooper-Gate scandal?
OR…. Was it the $15 million for Chelsea’s apartment bought with foundation money?
Or her husband’s interference with Loretta Lynch & the investigation?
Or happily accepting the stolen debate questions given to her?
Or her own secret server in her house and disdain for classified information?
Or deleting 30,000 emails?
Or having cell phones destroyed with hammers?
Was it the Seth Rich murder?
Was it the Vince Foster murder?
Was it the Gennifer Flowers assault & settlement?
Was it the $800,000 Paula Jones settlement?
Was it calling half the United States deplorable?
Was it the underhanded treatment of Bernie Sanders?
Was it Bill’s impeachment?
Was it the lie about being under sniper fire in Bosnia?
Was it the $10 million she got for the pardon of Marc Rich?
Or the $6 BILLION she “lost” when in charge of the State Dept.?
Or because she is a hateful, lying, power-hungry, overly ambitious, greedy, nasty person?
I can't understand it either,
Was it the Russian Uranium Deal?
Was it Wikileaks?
Was it Podesta?
Was it Comey?
Was it having a sexual predator as a husband?
Was it Huma Abedin’s sexual predator husband Anthony Weiner?
Was it because the Clinton Foundation ripped off Haiti?
Was it subpoena violations?
Was it the congressional testimony lies?
Was it the corrupt Clinton Foundation?
Was it the Benghazi fiasco?
Was it pay for play?
Was it being recorded laughing because she got a child rapist off when she was an attorney?
Was it the Travel Gate scandal?
Was it the Whitewater scandal?
Was it the Cattle Gate scandal?
Was it the Trooper-Gate scandal?
OR…. Was it the $15 million for Chelsea’s apartment bought with foundation money?
Or her husband’s interference with Loretta Lynch & the investigation?
Or happily accepting the stolen debate questions given to her?
Or her own secret server in her house and disdain for classified information?
Or deleting 30,000 emails?
Or having cell phones destroyed with hammers?
Was it the Seth Rich murder?
Was it the Vince Foster murder?
Was it the Gennifer Flowers assault & settlement?
Was it the $800,000 Paula Jones settlement?
Was it calling half the United States deplorable?
Was it the underhanded treatment of Bernie Sanders?
Was it Bill’s impeachment?
Was it the lie about being under sniper fire in Bosnia?
Was it the $10 million she got for the pardon of Marc Rich?
Or the $6 BILLION she “lost” when in charge of the State Dept.?
Or because she is a hateful, lying, power-hungry, overly ambitious, greedy, nasty person?
Mikey, in your opinion, is replacing team members a sign of gross incompetence by the leadership, horrendous people skills, or simply the result of trying to run a dictatorship?
(Ignoring the fact that Corbyn has sacked or replaced a mere 97, yes, ninety-seven, of his frontbenchers as this would be "changing the subject").
(Ignoring the fact that Corbyn has sacked or replaced a mere 97, yes, ninety-seven, of his frontbenchers as this would be "changing the subject").
Steg....absolutely nothing ! But this is how The Trumpettes debate.
First, they try to denounce reports like this as "fake news"
If that doesn't work, and it rarely does, then the change the subject, by mentioning Labour or anybody else that have no bearing on the subject under discussion.
Secondly, in addition to the above, they attack the messenger on a personal basis.
Twas ever thus Steg !
First, they try to denounce reports like this as "fake news"
If that doesn't work, and it rarely does, then the change the subject, by mentioning Labour or anybody else that have no bearing on the subject under discussion.
Secondly, in addition to the above, they attack the messenger on a personal basis.
Twas ever thus Steg !
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.