Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: mazrim on October 09, 2018, 07:51:07 AM
-
Not much info as to why yet. Was unsure about her when first put in the position but one of the best. Did a great job.
-
Thats unfortunate.
My guess is she's preserving her public likability/image. It can only go down from here. Shes golden right now.
She's also probably tired and wants to get away.
-
They made it seem as though she’d been planning to leave six months ago. She also shot down a 2020 run for president. Who knows.
-
Most of these administration position people only last 2 years as there is a ton of stress involved.
-
apparently she gave Trump her resignation letter a week ago (letter is dated October 3rd)
I guess she's just exhausted from so much winning or maybe watching her boss make a jackass out of himself (again) at the UN was just too much even for her.
-
Looking to rest up a bit.
Come back refreshed, jacked and tanned for a 2024 presidential bid.
-
apparently she gave Trump her resignation letter a week ago (letter is dated October 3rd)
I guess she's just exhausted from so much winning or maybe watching her boss make a jackass out of himself (again) at the UN was just too much even for her.
As you mention winning
Can you Let Us Know The outcome of the Vote Last Saturday??
Did Trumps Nomination Win or
Did Your Lot The Democraps Block the Vote & Win ??
-
Now that she's loosened them up at the UN, Bolton can return. ;D
Whatever the reason for leaving she did a great job and is bound to take Lindsey Graham's spot as Senator at some point IMO.
-
As you mention winning
Can you Let Us Know The outcome of the Vote Last Saturday??
Did Trumps Nomination Win or
Did Your Lot The Democraps Block the Vote & Win ??
Last time I checked the Republican controlled the Senate with a plus one from Pence
Has anything changed since the last time I checked
Why are Trump's nominee so weak that they can't even muster 60 votes in the Senate especially when Trump is allegedly so popular
Just for some perspective Ginsberg was confirmed 96 to 3.
Even Bush managed to get 78-22 for Roberts
Trumps other pick was Gorsuch and he only got 54 votes
Bottom line is by putting incredibly weak justices on the court all that Trump has done is water down the influence of the court.
Unpopular activist judges pushing an unpopular right wing agenda will be a fun to watch, especially in red states.
-
Last time I checked the Republican controlled the Senate with a plus one from Pence
Has anything changed since the last time I checked
Why are Trump's nominee so weak that they can't even muster 60 votes in the Senate especially when Trump is allegedly so popular
Just for some perspective Ginsberg was confirmed 96 to 3.
Even Bush managed to get 78-22 for Roberts
Trumps other pick was Gorsuch and he only got 54 votes
Bottom line is by putting incredibly weak justices on the court all that Trump has done is water down the influence of the court.
Unpopular activist judges pushing an unpopular right wing agenda will be a fun to watch, especially in red states.
Seems to me that while this last one was a weak pick, Gorsuch could be explained as the senate being divided and more partisan now than during any other pick in the last 2 decades if not much longer.
But your point is valid about the "winning" Not much to brag about when you confirm a guy who lied at least twice if not 3 times under oath about the Renate Alumnus, knowing Bark O'Kavenaugh was actual him, and Beach Week Ralph Club. And you won because you have a majority... Could have nominated Al Bundy and he would have been confirmed.
-
Last time I checked the Republican controlled the Senate with a plus one from Pence
Has anything changed since the last time I checked
Why are Trump's nominee so weak that they can't even muster 60 votes in the Senate especially when Trump is allegedly so popular
Just for some perspective Ginsberg was confirmed 96 to 3.
Even Bush managed to get 78-22 for Roberts
Trumps other pick was Gorsuch and he only got 54 votes
Bottom line is by putting incredibly weak justices on the court all that Trump has done is water down the influence of the court.
Unpopular activist judges pushing an unpopular right wing agenda will be a fun to watch, especially in red states.
SCOTUS nominations aren't popularity contests nor are they decided by what people in general population want, you dildo.
It's an election year. The Democrats are running to win seats in the House and Senate; ergo, they aren't going to vote for someone who was elected by a President of the opposing party and alienate their own voters, unless their voters are from red states and demand it (like Joe Manchin). Why the fuck would they vote for Kavanaugh? Your argument makes no sense, as usual. Ginsburg was nominated under a different President, so comparing her vote count to a count under Trump, who the media and half the population wants to see fail, is just another canard on your part.
Once the old kike kicks the bucket and those two fat, bulldyke looking ham beasts Sotomayor and Kagan drop dead, the court will finally be cleansed of the liberal stench of the Clinton years.
-
Last time I checked the Republican controlled the Senate with a plus one from Pence
Has anything changed since the last time I checked
Why are Trump's nominee so weak that they can't even muster 60 votes in the Senate especially when Trump is allegedly so popular
Just for some perspective Ginsberg was confirmed 96 to 3.
Even Bush managed to get 78-22 for Roberts
Trumps other pick was Gorsuch and he only got 54 votes
Bottom line is by putting incredibly weak justices on the court all that Trump has done is water down the influence of the court.
Unpopular activist judges pushing an unpopular right wing agenda will be a fun to watch, especially in red states.
All that wriggling & swerving Just to say Democraps Lost
And Trump Won. ;D
-
Seems to me that while this last one was a weak pick, Gorsuch could be explained as the senate being divided and more partisan now than during any other pick in the last 2 decades if not much longer.
But your point is valid about the "winning" Not much to brag about when you confirm a guy who lied at least twice if not 3 times under oath about the Renate Alumnus, knowing Bark O'Kavenaugh was actual him, and Beach Week Ralph Club. And you won because you have a majority... Could have nominated Al Bundy and he would have been confirmed.
Weak argument from you
He or any other nominees from Trump were only going to likey get a Slim Margin
As Democraps are not going to support / vote for a Nominee from Trump.
Pathetic Bunch using every dirty tactic - Oh And how many Times Did Ford lie under oath,
That nonsense story of hers got more holes in it than a colander.
Why didn’t she go to court & prosecute Him - Reason Being they’d Laugh her out of Court.
They Know That - She Knows That & You Know That.
It was just a Dirty Tactic - Disgraceful & I’m surprised you backing it & going with it.
-
Weak argument from you
He or any other nominees from Trump were only going to likey get a Slim Margin
As Democraps are not going to support / vote for a Nominee from Trump.
Pathetic Bunch using every dirty tactic - Oh And how many Times Did Ford lie under oath,
That nonsense story of hers got more holes in it than a colander.
Why didn’t she go to court & prosecute Him - Reason Being they’d Laugh her out of Court.
They Know That - She Knows That & You Know That.
It was just a Dirty Tactic - Disgraceful & I’m surprised you backing it & going with it.
In your mind weak, didn't really give any support
-
Weak argument from you
He or any other nominees from Trump were only going to likey get a Slim Margin
As Democraps are not going to support / vote for a Nominee from Trump.
Pathetic Bunch using every dirty tactic - Oh And how many Times Did Ford lie under oath,
That nonsense story of hers got more holes in it than a colander.
Why didn’t she go to court & prosecute Him - Reason Being they’d Laugh her out of Court.
They Know That - She Knows That & You Know That.
It was just a Dirty Tactic - Disgraceful & I’m surprised you backing it & going with it.
No doubt it wasn't winnable in court. That was not the objective
-
No doubt it wasn't winnable in court. That was not the objective
Bang - :o :o Nail on the head - Exactly Right
Finally you’ve admitted it.
So He Is A Innocent Man
She & The Democraps took the easy option to Slander & Besmirch Him
& his reputation.
How would you like such a thing happen to you ?
Sure you’d be on here backing the said Females weak narrative against you - I think not
She should be charged with slander.
-
Bang - :o :o Nail on the head - Exactly Right
Finally you’ve admitted it.
So He Is A Innocent Man
She & The Democraps took the easy option to Slander & Besmirch Him
& his reputation.
How would you like such a thing happen to you ?
Sure you’d be on here backing the said Females weak narrative against you - I think not
She should be charged with slander.
No...he is presumed innocent until proven guilty of this and any other crimes he may or may not have committed, just as is the case with everyone under the United States Constitution.
A truly innocent person is all but nonexistent.
-
No...he is presumed innocent until proven guilty of this and any other crimes he may or may not have committed, just as is the case with everyone under the United States Constitution.
A truly innocent person is all but nonexistent.
Yep he’s presumed as innocent as you.
Bitch didn’t back her false hole riddled claim up by going to court with it did she.
-
No...he is presumed innocent until proven guilty of this and any other crimes he may or may not have committed, just as is the case with everyone under the United States Constitution.
A truly innocent person is all but nonexistent.
What do you mean by this? Isn’t someone who is wrongfully accused truly innocent?
-
What do you mean by this? Isn’t someone who is wrongfully accused truly innocent?
Ha, You know as well as I do
That Getting a truthful straightforward answer out of Prime is nigh on impossible
Even though the Facts & Evidence are Repeatedly Punching Him in The face.
He still try to twist it / spin it - anything other than admit what everyone else can see,
He’s not alone there are few others Guilty of the same Behaviour.
-
No...he is presumed innocent until proven guilty of this and any other crimes he may or may not have committed, just as is the case with everyone under the United States Constitution.
A truly innocent person is all but nonexistent.
You do know that several people who have been accused and convicted of crimes they did not commit were later released and exonerated on grounds of actual innocence? Of course the government and cops may like to think that there is no innocence, only degrees of guilt and treat people as criminals that just haven't been caught yet.
-
You do know that several people who have been accused and convicted of crimes they did not commit were later released and exonerated on grounds of actual innocence? Of course the government and cops may like to think that there is no innocence, only degrees of guilt and treat people as criminals that just haven't been caught yet.
Of course he does - Though he’s not going to admit to it.
Not without trying to spin & twist a long winded answer
Trying to deflect from flat out answering.
-
Bang - :o :o Nail on the head - Exactly Right
Finally you’ve admitted it.
So He Is A Innocent Man
She & The Democraps took the easy option to Slander & Besmirch Him
& his reputation.
How would you like such a thing happen to you ?
Sure you’d be on here backing the said Females weak narrative against you - I think not
She should be charged with slander.
What I "admitted" you are starting to sound like Alex Jones.. is that it wasn't her intention to bring charges against him. It was her intention to let the Judicial Committee know what had happened to her before they decided to allow him to sit on the Supreme Court. She just didn't realize they wouldn't care. But she achieved her goal of informing them. The rest was up to them
-
What I "admitted" you are starting to sound like Alex Jones.. is that it wasn't her intention to bring charges against him. It was her intention to let the Judicial Committee know what had happened to her before they decided to allow him to sit on the Supreme Court. She just didn't realize they wouldn't care. But she achieved her goal of informing them. The rest was up to them
You stated it wasn’t winnable in court.
She just used the lowest route possible to throw mud.
It MAY of happened to her - It appears Highly unlikely it was him
If she really had the courage of her convictions she would of persued
It in court & let her piers decide who was telling the truth.
Why would anyone care if she doesn’t care enough to go to court.
You’re acting as judge & jury just on her totally holed accusations.
That’s wrong of you & casts a very unpalatable showed over you
As a ex cop.
-
You stated it wasn’t winnable in court.
She just used the lowest route possible to throw mud.
It MAY of happened to her - It appears Highly unlikely it was him
If she really had the courage of her convictions she would of persued
It in court & let her piers decide who was telling the truth.
Why would anyone care if she doesn’t care enough to go to court.
You’re acting as judge & jury just on her totally holed accusations.
That’s wrong of you & casts a very unpalatable showed over you
As a ex cop.
I think your argument is not well thought out. "Why doesn't she take it to court if she feels strongly about it?"
1. She understands it isn't winnable. Why put yourself through something like that, knowing it won't matter? She already can't live in her home due to ass%oles threatening her.
2. She felt the crap she would have to endure coming forward (You know even if she had a video of it, 35% of the Republicans would still attack her. ) was worth it due to the Supreme Court appointment potential.
-
What I "admitted" you are starting to sound like Alex Jones.. is that it wasn't her intention to bring charges against him. It was her intention to let the Judicial Committee know what had happened to her before they decided to allow him to sit on the Supreme Court. She just didn't realize they wouldn't care. But she achieved her goal of informing them. The rest was up to them
Why did she do what she did? There was no obligation to write an anonymous letter or make these unprovable claims. She wanted money and fame, and she got both. This isn't up for discussion as those latter two points are now a matter of record - she's loaded and well-known.
-
I think your argument is not well thought out. "Why doesn't she take it to court if she feels strongly about it?"
1. She understands it isn't winnable. Why put yourself through something like that, knowing it won't matter? She already can't live in her home due to ass%oles threatening her.
2. She felt the crap she would have to endure coming forward (You know even if she had a video of it, 35% of the Republicans would still attack her. ) was worth it due to the Supreme Court appointment potential.
It’s your argument that is weak
She’s quite prepared to derail his career & Throw mud at him hoping some would stick
In the setting of the US Senate - Played out on a world stage & media
Yet it’s not worth going to a criminal court. ::)
Her handlers & her knew exactly what they were doing
The Scumbag Lowlifes.
-
It’s your argument that is weak
She’s quite prepared to derail his career & Throw mud at him hoping some would stick
In the setting of the US Senate - Played out on a world stage & media
Yet it’s not worth going to a criminal court. ::)
Her handlers & her knew exactly what they were doing
The Scumbag Lowlifes.
I think he ghostwrote the talking points on today's episode of "the view"
-
It’s your argument that is weak
She’s quite prepared to derail his career & Throw mud at him hoping some would stick
In the setting of the US Senate - Played out on a world stage & media
Yet it’s not worth going to a criminal court. ::)
Her handlers & her knew exactly what they were doing
The Scumbag Lowlifes.
I think we've covered the ground on this one and I'd just be repeating points hoping you would catch on, and you would be saying things that you've said, hoping I would catch on. Clearly we see it from a different perspective. Yours appears to be "If it happened then she should file charges" Mine is, "If it happened it would be a waste of time to file charges, but worth letting the Senate know about a person they are considering."
-
I think he ghostwrote the talking points on today's episode of "the view"
This piggy sure has nice tits.