Trump-appointed GSA administrator refusing to work with Biden transition team

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:F**king B. Its complete crap that she's sitting on the transition while looking for a new job because guess what - the man she insists is President for another four years is going to be JOBLESS.

Absolutely maddening. These people hate America.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

How soon can she be arrested and tried for treason after Biden takes office?

[Anonymous]

NP here.

I feel for this woman. I find it completely possible she is trying to follow the law, and that there is no precedent that allows her to violate established precedent. I could fully see her being in a no-win position.

And it doesn't help that she's being pilloried now, and will be pilloried by the other side if she releases the funds.

It is probably terrifying to be her right now.

And the slams on her appearance are completely inexcusable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP here.

I feel for this woman. I find it completely possible she is trying to follow the law, and that there is no precedent that allows her to violate established precedent. I could fully see her being in a no-win position.

And it doesn't help that she's being pilloried now, and will be pilloried by the other side if she releases the funds.

It is probably terrifying to be her right now.

And the slams on her appearance are completely inexcusable.

It really isn't a no-win situation. You do your job and follow the law. If your boss is telling you to do otherwise, you send the letter and then resign. It really isn't that hard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP here.

I feel for this woman. I find it completely possible she is trying to follow the law, and that there is no precedent that allows her to violate established precedent. I could fully see her being in a no-win position.

And it doesn't help that she's being pilloried now, and will be pilloried by the other side if she releases the funds.

It is probably terrifying to be her right now.

And the slams on her appearance are completely inexcusable.

It really isn't a no-win situation. You do your job and follow the law. If your boss is telling you to do otherwise, you send the letter and then resign. It really isn't that hard.

+100- much greater people than her have resigned. In their cases, they were deeply knowledgeable people vs some stooge appointee. She should resign and make it someone else's problem again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP here.

I feel for this woman. I find it completely possible she is trying to follow the law, and that there is no precedent that allows her to violate established precedent. I could fully see her being in a no-win position.

And it doesn't help that she's being pilloried now, and will be pilloried by the other side if she releases the funds.

It is probably terrifying to be her right now.

And the slams on her appearance are completely inexcusable.

Hmmmm such a hard decision: invoke your boss’s wrath and get fired VS. potentially be responsible for the next 9/11

F#ck her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP here.

I feel for this woman. I find it completely possible she is trying to follow the law, and that there is no precedent that allows her to violate established precedent. I could fully see her being in a no-win position.

And it doesn't help that she's being pilloried now, and will be pilloried by the other side if she releases the funds.

It is probably terrifying to be her right now.

And the slams on her appearance are completely inexcusable.

It really isn't a no-win situation. You do your job and follow the law. If your boss is telling you to do otherwise, you send the letter and then resign. It really isn't that hard.

What is the precedent for ascertainment when the opponent has not conceded and the states have not yet done their certifications? Yes, we all know what the math is for the projections that are widely accepted, but what is the clear standard she is supposed to apply. All the rest of government is waiting for her to sign on the dotted line because we know what we can do then, but what is her basis for action?

I am a democrat and on team Biden here but the above poster is not crazy that the GSA Administrator is in a no win situation. I have dealt with Administrator Murphy and she is generally reasonable and an advocate for good government and she received bi partisan approval during her confirmation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP here.

I feel for this woman. I find it completely possible she is trying to follow the law, and that there is no precedent that allows her to violate established precedent. I could fully see her being in a no-win position.

And it doesn't help that she's being pilloried now, and will be pilloried by the other side if she releases the funds.

It is probably terrifying to be her right now.

And the slams on her appearance are completely inexcusable.

It really isn't a no-win situation. You do your job and follow the law. If your boss is telling you to do otherwise, you send the letter and then resign. It really isn't that hard.

What is the precedent for ascertainment when the opponent has not conceded and the states have not yet done their certifications? Yes, we all know what the math is for the projections that are widely accepted, but what is the clear standard she is supposed to apply. All the rest of government is waiting for her to sign on the dotted line because we know what we can do then, but what is her basis for action?

I am a democrat and on team Biden here but the above poster is not crazy that the GSA Administrator is in a no win situation. I have dealt with Administrator Murphy and she is generally reasonable and an advocate for good government and she received bi partisan approval during her confirmation.

Well then she shouldn't be behaving like some GOP hack right now

[Anonymous]

Yes, she is in a no win situation, with no good choices for her, but...
One choice is bad for her
One choice is bad for her AND bad for the entire country.

So, that really should make it a really easy choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP here.

I feel for this woman. I find it completely possible she is trying to follow the law, and that there is no precedent that allows her to violate established precedent. I could fully see her being in a no-win position.

And it doesn't help that she's being pilloried now, and will be pilloried by the other side if she releases the funds.

It is probably terrifying to be her right now.

And the slams on her appearance are completely inexcusable.

I don’t feel for her at all. There is no precedent for what she is doing in our entire Electoral History aside from 2000. The race has been called - Biden is the clear Electoral and Popular Vote winner. It’s always Republicans trying to muck up the order but they’re the first ones crying about a ‘Deep State’.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP here.

I feel for this woman. I find it completely possible she is trying to follow the law, and that there is no precedent that allows her to violate established precedent. I could fully see her being in a no-win position.

And it doesn't help that she's being pilloried now, and will be pilloried by the other side if she releases the funds.

It is probably terrifying to be her right now.

And the slams on her appearance are completely inexcusable.

It really isn't a no-win situation. You do your job and follow the law. If your boss is telling you to do otherwise, you send the letter and then resign. It really isn't that hard.

What is the precedent for ascertainment when the opponent has not conceded and the states have not yet done their certifications? Yes, we all know what the math is for the projections that are widely accepted, but what is the clear standard she is supposed to apply. All the rest of government is waiting for her to sign on the dotted line because we know what we can do then, but what is her basis for action?

I am a democrat and on team Biden here but the above poster is not crazy that the GSA Administrator is in a no win situation. I have dealt with Administrator Murphy and she is generally reasonable and an advocate for good government and she received bi partisan approval during her confirmation.

States have never had to ceritfy before the Transition was started in any of our prior elections. She’s doing this for no reason.

[Anonymous]

What is she worried about? Trump firing her?

[Anonymous]

Yet another profile in courage from a Trump appointee. Weight of the decision give me a break. There is only one right thing to do here. Release the funds and resign. This is a matter of national security.