POLL: If you ran a company, would you fire this guy?

[miketx]

The Vindman situation is a case of two employees working for a company, and the subordinate finds out that his boss is violating the company's policies and tries to report it, so the boss thinks up a reason to fire him as retribution for the employee's attempt to be loyal to the company.

What policies were those, liar?

 

[Lysistrata]

The Vindman situation is a case of two employees working for a company, and the subordinate finds out that his boss is violating the company's policies and tries to report it, so the boss thinks up a reason to fire him as retribution for the employee's attempt to be loyal to the company.

Good analogy, except that the stockholders said that they lied-)

The only stockholders who said that they lied were the ones who, while under an oath to be impartial, announced their decision before trial in many instances and then refused to hear the witnesses or review the evidence, and, of course, the defendant actively blocked witnesses and evidence, ignoring subpoena after subpoena like the scofflaw that he is.

 

[Uncensored2008]

The Vindman situation is a case of two employees working for a company, and the subordinate finds out that his boss is violating the company's policies and tries to report it, so the boss thinks up a reason to fire him as retribution for the employee's attempt to be loyal to the company.

Vindman was on the NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL and leaked information from it. He is guilty of federal crimes I hope they pulled the passports of these two, otherwise they'll both be in Ukraine by the end of the day to flee prosecution.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

If you owned or ran a company and you found out one of your employees was working with your competition to get you run our of business, would you fire him or keep him on the payroll so he could continue to torpedo your company?

Dimwingers expect Trump to keep this guy on the payroll, and call firing him dictatorial.

Lol, stupid attempt to draw false equivalency.

Back to the drawing board kiddo.

Too funny.

Explain your "false equivalency".

 

[imawhosure]

The Vindman situation is a case of two employees working for a company, and the subordinate finds out that his boss is violating the company's policies and tries to report it, so the boss thinks up a reason to fire him as retribution for the employee's attempt to be loyal to the company.

Good analogy, except that the stockholders said that they lied-)

The only stockholders who said that they lied were the ones who, while under an oath to be impartial, announced their decision before trial in many instances and then refused to hear the witnesses or review the evidence, and, of course, the defendant actively blocked witnesses and evidence, ignoring subpoena after subpoena like the scofflaw that he is.

SPIN, SPIN, SPIN! You aren't convincing anyone but yourself, and I even highly doubt that!

The people who had the vote said--------->no way, Jose!

If you want to whine and cry about the people who had the vote, then point at them, attack them, and quit pointing at Trump.

Notice, while we point at Obama for "if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor," it was NOT him who foisted this upon America; it was YOUR peeps in congress!

Now that Russian collusion/delusion has been proven el Falso, good luck getting your peeps re-elected in 2020-)

Heir Muller gave you the House in 18 by holding back his findings until AFTER the election. This time around, you people are barre a** naked, and will have to deal with what Barr/Durham uncover. Basically, YOUR SCREWED!

 

[BS Filter]

If you owned or ran a company and you found out one of your employees was working with your competition to get you run our of business, would you fire him or keep him on the payroll so he could continue to torpedo your company?

Dimwingers expect Trump to keep this guy on the payroll, and call firing him dictatorial.

Lol, stupid attempt to draw false equivalency.

Back to the drawing board kiddo.

Explain why it's a false equivalency. Go ahead.

 

[Uncensored2008]

The Vindman situation is a case of two employees working for a company, and the subordinate finds out that his boss is violating the company's policies and tries to report it, so the boss thinks up a reason to fire him as retribution for the employee's attempt to be loyal to the company.

Good analogy, except that the stockholders said that they lied-)

The only stockholders who said that they lied were the ones who, while under an oath to be impartial, announced their decision before trial in many instances and then refused to hear the witnesses or review the evidence, and, of course, the defendant actively blocked witnesses and evidence, ignoring subpoena after subpoena like the scofflaw that he is.

Comrade Hysteria, didn't every Stalinist house member declare their intent to impeach the president even before he took office? Vindman was a puppet of the most corrupt criminal traitors to ever infest our congress.

 

[Nostra]

Only one person so far would keep such a person on the payroll. Obviously never ran a company.

 

[initforme]

This is comparing an employee making a pittance salary for some cheap as# company to a hand picked person serving for the nation. You somehow mistakenly feel an employee is there to help the company. I have news for you. The employee is there for the paycheck....not to see the company do well. Loyalty has no place in the corporate world.

 

[Meister]

This is comparing an employee making a pittance salary for some cheap as# company to a hand picked person serving for the nation. You somehow mistakenly feel an employee is there to help the company. I have news for you. The employee is there for the paycheck....not to see the company do well. Loyalty has no place in the corporate world.

What? I bet you've been fired a few times, huh?

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

I will make it simple it is Trump right to dismiss whomever he want from his staff even after the Impeachmemt but let be clear this is just him retaliating against those that spoke during the Impeachment Hearings that lead to the failed attempt at removing him...

Again he has the right...

 

[bodecea]

If you owned or ran a company and you found out one of your employees was working with your competition to get you run our of business, would you fire him or keep him on the payroll so he could continue to torpedo your company?

Dimwingers expect Trump to keep this guy on the payroll, and call firing him dictatorial.

You need to go back to school and learn more about equivalencies....you failed that one.

 

[bodecea]

I will make it simple it is Trump right to dismiss whomever he want from his staff even after the Impeachmemt but let be clear this is just him retaliating against those that spoke during the Impeachment Hearings that lead to the failed attempt at removing him...

Again he has the right...

Technically not illegal".....

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

I will make it simple it is Trump right to dismiss whomever he want from his staff even after the Impeachmemt but let be clear this is just him retaliating against those that spoke during the Impeachment Hearings that lead to the failed attempt at removing him...

Again he has the right...

Technically not illegal".....

Oh? Explain.

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

I will make it simple it is Trump right to dismiss whomever he want from his staff even after the Impeachmemt but let be clear this is just him retaliating against those that spoke during the Impeachment Hearings that lead to the failed attempt at removing him...

Again he has the right...

Technically not illegal".....

Well let Schiff and Nadler do another investigation, do another House Impeachment and let the Senate say " what the **** are you smoking " when they acquit again...

 

[initforme]

Let's put it this way. If a guy is working for company a and company b pays him for stuff....heck yeah why would one not take $. This is limited to the corporate world. In that world I would sell out in a heartbeat. But if working for the nation that's a different story.

 

[Crepitus]

If you owned or ran a company and you found out one of your employees was working with your competition to get you run our of business, would you fire him or keep him on the payroll so he could continue to torpedo your company?

Dimwingers expect Trump to keep this guy on the payroll, and call firing him dictatorial.

Lol, stupid attempt to draw false equivalency.

Back to the drawing board kiddo.

Can't stop lying can you?

What is it that you think I'm lying about, Mikey?

 

[Crepitus]

If you owned or ran a company and you found out one of your employees was working with your competition to get you run our of business, would you fire him or keep him on the payroll so he could continue to torpedo your company?

Dimwingers expect Trump to keep this guy on the payroll, and call firing him dictatorial.

Lol, stupid attempt to draw false equivalency.

Back to the drawing board kiddo.

Actually, Vindman was serving at the pleasure of the President....

And Trump wasn't very pleased at how he turned political while in uniform and leaked classified information (both offenses under the UCMJ)...

so, yeah, Trump had every right to fire him!!!

Lol, more excuse making.

 

[miketx]

If you owned or ran a company and you found out one of your employees was working with your competition to get you run our of business, would you fire him or keep him on the payroll so he could continue to torpedo your company?

Dimwingers expect Trump to keep this guy on the payroll, and call firing him dictatorial.

Lol, stupid attempt to draw false equivalency.

Back to the drawing board kiddo.

Can't stop lying can you?

What is it that you think I'm lying about, Mikey?

Whatever you post, usually.

 

[Crepitus]

Lol, stupid attempt to draw false equivalency.

Not at all. What's stupid is expecting they would still work in the White House after this was over. Only an imbecile would keep them in their administration after these events. Why you people are acting so shocked by this is beyond me.

Not shocked.

Everyone knew tRump wasn't gonna do the right thing.