Sarah Huckabee Sanders Kicked Out of Virginia Eatery

Yaya said:
Right at the top you're asking me to prove why staub is wrong you dirty liar. YOU cited his claim, YOU show he is right.

It is not my job to prove your cite wrong. And you are the one using circular reasoning, well, staub is right because he is an expert.

That is textbook definition of circular reasoning.
Click to expand...

If everybody took a drink every time you called someone a liar, this board would be full of drunk posters.

Shaub posted from the CFR to make his argument. You claimed he was wrong and refuse to explain why. You fail at debate.

I think we all know who's the dirty liar here.
 
Yaya said:
This was the FOURTH time I explained why she didn't violate the CFRs. Also the FOURTH time I asked Christiecrite why she should have to use her private account when it was a professional issue.

So for Christiecrite to claim I haven't explained myself is a bald face lie.

Saved Christie lies
Click to expand...

No you did NOT explain why, you just made a general statement. You have refused over and over to explain why the CFR info doesn't apply to her, you dirty liar. :D
 
christiefan915 said:
No you did NOT explain why, you just made a general statement. You have refused over and over to explain why the CFR info doesn't apply to her, you dirty liar. :D
Click to expand...

What part of:

1. This was a professional issue.

2. This was a news issue about her profession as press secretary

3. She stated what happened and didn't favor anyone. She didn't violate a single rule and staub had to make up, well, the corollary. Since you clearly do not know what that means, it means she didn't violate a rule so he has to make stuff up by claiming, well the opposite of favor must be true.

4. When have you explained how he is right and how the CFRs apply to her?

5. Since this was about her profession, why should she use her personal account?

6. If this is a press conference, she would say the same thing and would you claim that was an ethical violation?

7. Why do I have to prove staubs claim wrong? He made a claim which you support, yet you can't back it up.

Now watch Christiecrite not answer a single question I asked and dishonestly claim again I havent explained myself.
 
Yaya said:
What part of:

1. This was a professional issue.

2. This was a news issue about her profession as press secretary
Click to expand...
A private dinner with family on her off time is not a professional issue.

3. She stated what happened and didn't favor anyone. She didn't violate a single rule and staub had to make up, well, the corollary. Since you clearly do not know what that means, it means she didn't violate a rule so he has to make stuff up by claiming, well the opposite of favor must be true.
Click to expand...

(8) Employees shall act impartially and not give preferential treatment to any private organization or individual. She singled out the restaurant with a negative comment and made her comment public. That is not impartial treatment, it was intended to fire up trump's base. If she had any class she would have kept this issue private. She is vindictively trying to damage the business under a sanctimonious veneer.

4. When have you explained how he is right and how the CFRs apply to her?
Click to expand...
See #3.

5. Since this was about her profession, why should she use her personal account?
Click to expand...
It was a private family dinner not being held on company time.

6. If this is a press conference, she would say the same thing and would you claim that was an ethical violation?
Click to expand...
She already criticized Amazon at a press conference and I think that was wrong too.

7. Why do I have to prove staubs claim wrong? He made a claim which you support, yet you can't back it up.
Click to expand...

I hate to fall into the same behaviour as you but... you really are dopey. Shaub quoted from the Code of Federal Regulations. They apply to everyone working for the federal government. If you disagree with the code it's incumbent on you to explain why. I don't disagree with him or the code, therefore I have nothing to prove.

Now watch Christiecrite not answer a single question I asked and dishonestly claim again I havent explained myself.
Click to expand...

The usual yurtsie lying and name calling. Just like the sun rises in the east and sets in the west, we can rely on yurt to lie regularly.
 
christiefan915 said:
If everybody took a drink every time you called someone a liar, this board would be full of drunk posters.
Click to expand...

How do you know it isn't?

1283335312_beer-cat.gif
 
Phantasmal said:
She knew Lexington, population 7,000, had voted overwhelmingly against Trump in a county that voted overwhelmingly for him. She knew the community was deeply divided over such issues as Confederate flags. She knew, she said, that her restaurant and its half-dozen servers and cooks had managed to stay in business for 10 years by keeping politics off the menu.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wa...kabee-sanders-to-leave-and-would-do-it-again/

I doubt her business suffers.
Click to expand...

seriously?......49.9 against 45 is overwhelming?......
 
christiefan915 said:
A private dinner with family on her off time is not a professional issue.



(8) Employees shall act impartially and not give preferential treatment to any private organization or individual. She singled out the restaurant with a negative comment and made her comment public. That is not impartial treatment, it was intended to fire up trump's base. If she had any class she would have kept this issue private. She is vindictively trying to damage the business under a sanctimonious veneer.


See #3.

It was a private family dinner not being held on company time.


She already criticized Amazon at a press conference and I think that was wrong too.



I hate to fall into the same behaviour as you but... you really are dopey. Shaub quoted from the Code of Federal Regulations. They apply to everyone working for the federal government. If you disagree with the code it's incumbent on you to explain why. I don't disagree with him or the code, therefore I have nothing to prove.



The usual yurtsie lying and name calling. Just like the sun rises in the east and sets in the west, we can rely on yurt to lie regularly.
Click to expand...

1. What was the reason she was asked to leave? Because of a private dinner or because she is the press secretary for Donald Trump?

2. So it is your contention that she cannot remark on being asked to leave a restaurant solely because of her job? Really? That means every politician in history is guilty of that code. Obama for Fox... That treatment is about favors, not commentating on why she was asked to leave.

3. You are beneath me, you will never be me. You are absolutely so full of shit it is mind boggling. You cite a guy and have repeatedly used him to claim Sanders violated the code, but when called to the floor, all of all a sudden you don't have to prove your claim.

Sorry bucko, you essentially made the claim by citing him as your authority, it is incumbent on YOU to prove it. Not for me to disprove it. And I have repeatedly explained why she didn't. You don't get to make claims and then demand others prove you wrong.

4. Whining about name calling and lying while you insult me and lie about me.

And you wonder why you are called Christiecrite.
 
christiefan915 said:
What does that have to do with Prager?

The pastor wrote "he was an ethics attorney to the Obama administration.......therefore, he wasn't very good at ethics......"

He disregarded that Shaub served under the bush admin starting in 2006 and wasn't appointed as Ethics Director until 2013. He left in 2017 because he was alarmed by trump's ethics breaches. I say that the man served in the office for 11 years and had no problems until he clashed with the grifter-in-chief.

Pmp is being dishonest, but you knew that.
Click to expand...
in order for me to be dishonest, the Obama administration would have had to been ethical under his counsel......I would say the man served in the office and really fucked up the last eight, but certainly fucked up this lame effort to turn the blame on the woman who's crime was wanting to eat.......obviously you are too far gone to realize your error, but it will live on despite your ignorance.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top