Paul Ryan Retiring

[TakeYouToTasker]

2 minutes ago, gatorbait said:

I’m not seeing how most of those are noteworthy. The reason is left blank for most of them, and most of the reasons listed are due to a sex scandal or other scandal. Also some on the list have retired or been promoted to chairman. The list seems pretty normal to me aside from all the sex scandal stuff we went through in the last year.

These are large companies with direct ties to the government or to power players within the government.  Many have been "scandaled out" because they opted not to quietly resign.

 

Again, I'm not asking you to believe me.  Time will tell if I am right, or not.

[Tiberius]

49 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

That's like saying Trump is guilty of "collusion."

 

Rumor here is that he's tired of trying to work with Trump. ...just because if I don't blame Hillary, garybusey's head will explode.

And does not want to have to defend the stupid SOB during impeachment proceedings 

[row_33]

38 minutes ago, MILFHUNTER#518 said:

Creature Of The Swamp. NEXT! 

 

the political class is a viable option where it's a lot more fun to be the minority party

 

 

[Warren Zevon]

59 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

These are large companies with direct ties to the government or to power players within the government.  Many have been "scandaled out" because they opted not to quietly resign.

 

Again, I'm not asking you to believe me.  Time will tell if I am right, or not.

 

I work for one of the companies in this list. The CEO resigned. She now has a job at an even bigger company. That is not reflected in this document.

 

I also asked for data that proves any of this is unprecedented. This is simply a list.

 

Can you provide a proper comparison?

[Deranged Rhino]

6 minutes ago, garybusey said:

 

I work for one of the companies in this list. The CEO resigned. She now has a job at an even bigger company. That is not reflected in this document.

 

I also asked for data that proves any of this is unprecedented. This is simply a list.

 

Can you provide a proper comparison?

 

https://www.challengergray.com/press/press-releases/2018-january-ceo-report-most-ceo-changes-february-2010

 

The list Tasker provided is excellent and starts tracking in September of '17 - but it's interesting to note the numbers since November '17 (just five months) in relation to the larger picture of world events (the KSA purge). In just 5 months scores of CEOs (some small, some HUGE) have resigned along side dozens and dozens of state and federal representatives. 

 

Some are normal transfers of power or promotions unquestionably. Like your boss you mentioned. Same with the pols. Some are leaving to run for higher office and aren't part of the purge going on. 

 

But most are not.

 

Most are odd in terms of timing and reasoning. The MeToo movement claims some (cover), but there are plenty of "I want to spend more time with my family" which everyone knows is DC code for they got caught doing something naughty and are leaving before the press ruins their reputation. 

 

The only way to get a handle on it is to go through the list yourself. This isn't being covered in neatly pre-packaged articles by beat reporters. It's an ongoing, unfolding story that has been growing almost exponentially since the KSA purge. 

 

Ask yourself why.

 

1 hour ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

Here's an updated list of noteworthy CEO resignations:  https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1B-95giwldeKgsd0nYiw_sEaSf4kGNLZgEIvEhL2mVAw/edit#gid=0

 

I'll see what I can do about the Senatorial and Congressional stuff at some point today.

 

We are up to over 50 congressional resignations or announcements that they won't be running again by my count since November. Over 100 if you count state officials (who are harder for me to track/discern spin from legit excuse).

 

Of those, three are people who are leaving for governorships or higher office - the rest are in "safe" seats, meaning they were likely to win had they remained in power, and most are on the GOP side of the aisle. 

 

As you are saying - and I'm repeating for the crowd - these people most likely were offered deals to get out now and be spared the public floggings that are coming. 

 

1 hour ago, gatorbait said:

I’m not seeing how most of those are noteworthy. The reason is left blank for most of them, and most of the reasons listed are due to a sex scandal or other scandal. Also some on the list have retired or been promoted to chairman. The list seems pretty normal to me aside from all the sex scandal stuff we went through in the last year.

 

"Sex scandal" covers all matter of sins, does it not? 

 

40% of this purge is public, 60% is being done behind the scenes. By that I mean, there are people saying they're leaving for one reason but the reality is far different. They are being allowed to exit gracefully from the stage by the new powers that be in return either for information (in some cases) or just a promise to stay the hell out of the way of what's to come. That's a BIG claim, I know, but it's backed up by hard evidence if you look.

 

There is a reason the sex scandal broke big in Hollywood and Congress at the same time (almost immediately after November 4th...). There's a reason why that date range is important to world events and why I keep harping on it. The people taken down in the KSA purge were tied directly to western intelligence agencies, Sunni AND Shia terror cells and networks, and high profile transnational corporations including Twitter, CitiBank, the New York Times, and multiple financial institutions. These were the puppet masters - and by their corrupt apparatus was taken down in one night - taking trillions off the table that were being funneled to all manner of wicked puppets, including many CEOs, representatives and legislators.

 

These are the people being run out of office - they're being given a choice: drop out or we (MI) will go public with all the skeletons we know exist in your closet. 

 

This is just getting started. 

[B-Man]

Paul Ryan retiring.......................

 

More Good News.

 

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

3 minutes ago, B-Man said:

Paul Ryan retiring.......................

 

More Good News.

 

 

Yep, every mainline Republican and ANY democrat of any flavor need to be purged by any means possible.

 

[Cugalabanza]

13 minutes ago, joesixpack said:

 

Everybody needs to think exactly the same way I do.  Anyone who doesn't needs to be purged, so we can, like, save democracy.

 

 

 

 

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

3 minutes ago, Cugalabanza said:

 

 

 

 

[TakeYouToTasker]

5 minutes ago, Cugalabanza said:

 

 

 

 

Would you agree, even if you don't agree that President Trump is the best man for the job (you may think he's the worst man for the job, and that's OK), that Washington DC is one of the most corrupt cities on Earth, and that nearly all major office holders in the Federal government are either directly corrupt themselves, or swim in the current of corruption "as a go along to get along", and that there is a "swamp to be drained"?

[row_33]

what would the world do without a self-righteous phony from the Midwest who can't deliver on 1% of the big promises and threats he made

 

[Cinga]

2 hours ago, Cugalabanza said:

 

 

"Stepping down?"  You mean like from a ladder or something?

 

 

[Cugalabanza]

4 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

 

Would you agree, even if you don't agree that President Trump is the best man for the job (you may think he's the worst man for the job, and that's OK), that Washington DC is one of the most corrupt cities on Earth, and that nearly all major office holders in the Federal government are either directly corrupt themselves, or swim in the current of corruption "as a go along to get along", and that there is a "swamp to be drained"?

 

I agree that DC is one of the most corrupt cities on Earth, yes.

 

I don't like the phrase, "draining the swamp."  One, because it's an awkward analogy.  Of course, I understand where it's apt, but as a phrase it rubs me the wrong way.  More importantly, I just object to the generalization.  We have to judge individuals based on their own merits / failures.

 

I work with a great deal of exceptionally inept morons.  I'm often judged based on the group perception and I hate that.  It's unfair.  It's also a fallacy (Hasty Generalization).

 

 

[row_33]

10 minutes ago, Cugalabanza said:

 

I agree that DC is one of the most corrupt cities on Earth, yes.

 

I don't like the phrase, "draining the swamp."  One, because it's an awkward analogy.  Of course, I understand where it's apt, but as a phrase it rubs me the wrong way.  More importantly, I just object to the generalization.  We have to judge individuals based on their own merits / failures.

 

I work with a great deal of exceptionally inept morons.  I'm often judged based on the group perception and I hate that.  It's unfair.  It's also a fallacy (Hasty Generalization).

 

 

 

DC was built on a southern swamp, it means little more than that.

 

 

[TakeYouToTasker]

5 minutes ago, Cugalabanza said:

 

I agree that DC is one of the most corrupt cities on Earth, yes.

 

I don't like the phrase, "draining the swamp."  One, because it's an awkward analogy.  Of course, I understand where it's apt, but as a phrase it rubs me the wrong way.  More importantly, I just object to the generalization.  We have to judge individuals based on their own merits / failures.

 

I work with a great deal of exceptionally inept morons.  I'm often judged based on the group perception and I hate that.  It's unfair.  It's also a fallacy (Hasty Generalization).

 

 

OK, how would you differentiate?

[Cugalabanza]

10 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

OK, how would you differentiate?

 

Differentiate what?

 

Do you mean, between good and bad?  Between who's valuable and who needs to go?  I already said "based on their own merits / failures."

 

If you're asking me to be more specific, this conversation is going to turn tiresome very fast.

 

The point I was making is simply that it's unwise to make blanket assumptions.  I don't think it's a controversial position.

 

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

1 hour ago, Cugalabanza said:

 

Differentiate what?

 

Do you mean, between good and bad?  Between who's valuable and who needs to go?  I already said "based on their own merits / failures."

 

If you're asking me to be more specific, this conversation is going to turn tiresome very fast.

 

The point I was making is simply that it's unwise to make blanket assumptions.  I don't think it's a controversial position.

 

 

How many members of congress accept NO lobbyist money?

 

 

[Deranged Rhino]

1 hour ago, Cugalabanza said:

 

I agree that DC is one of the most corrupt cities on Earth, yes.

 

I don't like the phrase, "draining the swamp."  One, because it's an awkward analogy.  Of course, I understand where it's apt, but as a phrase it rubs me the wrong way.  More importantly, I just object to the generalization.  We have to judge individuals based on their own merits / failures.

 

I work with a great deal of exceptionally inept morons.  I'm often judged based on the group perception and I hate that.  It's unfair.  It's also a fallacy (Hasty Generalization).

 

 

 

There are (actually/unbelievable) more good than bad in DC. The problem, as Tasker alludes to, is that the good are prohibited from doing good either by lack of access to offices where real change can occur, or by pressure from other corrupt officials who are extorting them into staying in line. 

 

What's happening right now, and has been in full swing since November, is a purging of the corrupt elements so that the majority of decent public servants can do their jobs for their constituents unencumbered by outside influences. It took decades to make DC this corrupt, it's going to take time to clear it away... but the numbers of resignations and decisions not to run are some visible evidence of this ongoing purge. 

 

Over 40 GOP members are not running again... since November. That's a big number (bigger than any other midterm year that I can find so far). The ones who aren't being given deals and allowed to exit with their dignity, will be forced out with indictments or scandal in the coming months. That's the game that's afoot right now.

[Tiberius]

 

The leading Republican running for Paul Ryan's seat is a white ...

VICE News-3 hours ago

A white nationalist is now the frontrunner in the GOP primary in Paul Ryan's district. Longshot candidate and self-described “pro-white” politician Paul Nehlen is now the leading Republican to take over Ryan's Wisconsin seat now that Ryan, the current Speaker of the House, is not running for reelection.

[Cugalabanza]

20 minutes ago, joesixpack said:

 

How many members of congress accept NO lobbyist money?

 

 

 

I don't know.  Is it the exact same subset as your [non-mainline Republicans]?