Sanders: Do you really want to get into it with a 4 star General

Penelope

Diamond Member
Jul 15, 2014
60,260
15,767
2,210
Yes he works for us, we pay his salary and also yours. She seems to really have a rod stuck up her butt, as she is very rude to the press media.

We pay her salary, and we pay his salary. So yes we want to get into it. He can back his words or apologize to Congresswoman Wilson.

Who do these people think they are?
 
Yes he works for us, we pay his salary and also yours. She seems to really have a rod stuck up her butt, as she is very rude to the press media.

We pay her salary, and we pay his salary. So yes we want to get into it. He can back his words or apologize to Congresswoman Wilson.

Who do these people think they are?
Tissue?

Obviously you're to stupid to get what Sanders is trying to tell that moron Wilson. In dumbed down idiot speak it translates to "attacking a decorated 4 star General is a potential career destroyer move on her part".
 
Last edited:
We pay her salary, and we pay his salary. So yes we want to get into it. He can back his words or apologize to Congresswoman Wilson.
Well, yes, we pay both their salaries, though we've paid considerably more to John Kelly than to Rep. Wilson.
The thing is this: citizens -- voters whose interests she's paid to represent -- had a direct say in choosing to put Ms. Wilson on the government payroll. Not nearly as many people had any say in Kelly's being a government employee. As high government officials, are the both subject to public scrutiny? Well, yes.
 
I have little respect for Sanders or Kelly, since they are going to lie for T and defend him no matter how gross.
 
We pay her salary, and we pay his salary. So yes we want to get into it. He can back his words or apologize to Congresswoman Wilson.
Well, yes, we pay both their salaries, though we've paid considerably more to John Kelly than to Rep. Wilson.

Gen. Kelly is worth considerably more than Rep. Hat-rack.
IYNSHO, unless, of course, you have quantifiably demonstrable evidence to the contrary. Be that as it may, which of them is "worth more" isn't relevant to the thread topic which is alluded to in the following statement.
We pay her salary, and we pay his salary. So yes we want to get into it. He can back his words or apologize to Congresswoman Wilson.
 
We pay her salary, and we pay his salary. So yes we want to get into it. He can back his words or apologize to Congresswoman Wilson.
Well, yes, we pay both their salaries, though we've paid considerably more to John Kelly than to Rep. Wilson.

Gen. Kelly is worth considerably more than Rep. Hat-rack.
Rep. Hat-rack.

OT:
Really? Now you've resorted to derisive epithets levied at a woman because of her millenary choices.
 
We pay her salary, and we pay his salary. So yes we want to get into it. He can back his words or apologize to Congresswoman Wilson.
Well, yes, we pay both their salaries, though we've paid considerably more to John Kelly than to Rep. Wilson.

Gen. Kelly is worth considerably more than Rep. Hat-rack.
IYNSHO, unless, of course, you have quantifiably demonstrable evidence to the contrary. Be that as it may, which of them is "worth more" isn't relevant to the thread topic which is alluded to in the following statement.
We pay her salary, and we pay his salary. So yes we want to get into it. He can back his words or apologize to Congresswoman Wilson.

Try reading the independent statement to which I responded. After all, you wrote it.
 
We pay her salary, and we pay his salary. So yes we want to get into it. He can back his words or apologize to Congresswoman Wilson.
Well, yes, we pay both their salaries, though we've paid considerably more to John Kelly than to Rep. Wilson.

Gen. Kelly is worth considerably more than Rep. Hat-rack.
Rep. Hat-rack.

OT:
Really? Now you've resorted to derisive epithets levied at a woman because of her millenary choices.

She's a clown.
 
Well, yes, we pay both their salaries, though we've paid considerably more to John Kelly than to Rep. Wilson.
The thing is this: citizens -- voters whose interests she's paid to represent -- had a direct say in choosing to put Ms. Wilson on the government payroll. Not nearly as many people had any say in Kelly's being a government employee. As high government officials, are the both subject to public scrutiny? Well, yes.

We pay her salary, and we pay his salary. So yes we want to get into it. He can back his words or apologize to Congresswoman Wilson.
Well, yes, we pay both their salaries, though we've paid considerably more to John Kelly than to Rep. Wilson.

Gen. Kelly is worth considerably more than Rep. Hat-rack.
IYNSHO, unless, of course, you have quantifiably demonstrable evidence to the contrary. Be that as it may, which of them is "worth more" isn't relevant to the thread topic which is alluded to in the following statement.
We pay her salary, and we pay his salary. So yes we want to get into it. He can back his words or apologize to Congresswoman Wilson.

Try reading the independent statement to which I responded. After all, you wrote it.
I did write that statement, and in the same post, I answered the central question in the OP, thereby also posting an on-topic response along with the off-topic observation I shared.

That said, do you have quantifiably demonstrable evidence to corroborate your assertion that "Gen. Kelly is worth considerably more than Rep. Hat-rack?" That's what I asked you. You either do or don't.
 
boinee.jpg
Boinnneeeee wants his mommy !
 
We pay her salary, and we pay his salary. So yes we want to get into it. He can back his words or apologize to Congresswoman Wilson.
Well, yes, we pay both their salaries, though we've paid considerably more to John Kelly than to Rep. Wilson.

Gen. Kelly is worth considerably more than Rep. Hat-rack.
Rep. Hat-rack.

OT:
Really? Now you've resorted to derisive epithets levied at a woman because of her millenary choices.
Like calling your President an orange ass?
 
We pay her salary, and we pay his salary. So yes we want to get into it. He can back his words or apologize to Congresswoman Wilson.
Well, yes, we pay both their salaries, though we've paid considerably more to John Kelly than to Rep. Wilson.

Gen. Kelly is worth considerably more than Rep. Hat-rack.
Rep. Hat-rack.

OT:
Really? Now you've resorted to derisive epithets levied at a woman because of her millenary choices.

She's a clown.
She's a rock star. Just ask her.
 
Yes he works for us, we pay his salary and also yours. She seems to really have a rod stuck up her butt, as she is very rude to the press media.

We pay her salary, and we pay his salary. So yes we want to get into it. He can back his words or apologize to Congresswoman Wilson.

Who do these people think they are?







Screw that bitch. She's a grandstanding political whore.
 
We pay her salary, and we pay his salary. So yes we want to get into it. He can back his words or apologize to Congresswoman Wilson.
Well, yes, we pay both their salaries, though we've paid considerably more to John Kelly than to Rep. Wilson.

Gen. Kelly is worth considerably more than Rep. Hat-rack.
Rep. Hat-rack.

OT:
Really? Now you've resorted to derisive epithets levied at a woman because of her millenary choices.

She's a clown.

I prefer rodeo clown with that hat!
 

Forum List

Back
Top