Posted on 05/28/2016 5:09:23 AM PDT by Kaslin
Your boss is having an affair with your company's chief legal counsel. They both work in your office environment. The counsel has a tremendous amount of influence both over your boss and the CEO. Your coworkers also know about this affair so you all walk on eggshells.
You’re confident the CEO is unaware of the relationship. But, that's not the biggest problem. The worst part of this matter is that the CEO and your boss are married.
Do you feel this affair is in any way an appropriate relationship in your workplace? Do you feel it presents any conflict of interest to the mission of the company? Is there anything positive that can come out of the situation?
Is your boss or the chief legal counsel using good judgment in the workplace?
The CEO nor your boss are equity owners - just employees. You also know that 70% of the Board of Directors are Christian and would not approve of the inappropriate relationships; especially because the chief legal counsel is supposed to be dispensing unbiased advice and directives to the company.
Let me ask you another question. If the Board of Directors discovered these facts, what should they do?
The majority of people will say, “keep the CEO, fire the ‘boss’ and the chief legal counsel,” right? Many will say that, initially, and change their answer after they read the rest of this article.
Allow me to enlighten you. You are on the board of directors. Your position on the board is called ‘voter.’ This happened in the Clinton White House.
Vince Foster, Hillary Clinton, and Bill Clinton had this relationship according to well documented evidence.
When you're told by the Left that we're just dredging up the past and being infantile in looking at the ‘litigated’ record of Hillary and Bill Clinton, just remember this story.
I told this story on my radio show and in social media before I wrote this article and people overwhelmingly agreed that this was inappropriate, damaging and worthy of suspension or termination. Yet, when I add the Clinton name to this scenario, it seems that it's perfectly acceptable for many in this country.
If you look at your neighbors, people in your community and our struggling education system and see the same carnage I see, the explanation is simple. We have a lack of quality in the leaders we accept for our nation. When leaders are clouded by the pursuit of personal gain, power and seedy behavior it's hard to use good judgment in decisions that affect the people you serve.
The totality of the Clinton record, illegal activity and shady behavior is important for voters to investigate again. This may be an uncomfortable truth but it speaks to how and who Hillary Clinton would serve as president.
As conservatives, we must be careful. Opponents of this approach will point out that in the 1990s the Clintons’ poll numbers actually rose after impeachment. This is true. Even during the impeachment hearings only a third of the country was in favor of impeaching their president. It’s been said that you never tell someone how ugly their baby is. In other words, the Clintons survived those attacks because they were our president and first lady. Many Americans do care about the hypocritical, deviant behavior of a potential president less than they care about it after they are president. It’s hard to admit your baby is ugly after it’s ‘your baby.’
It's also important to remember the timeline of events. There were multiple shady escapades by both Clintons, which we discovered after the impeachment hearings. NBC’s bombshell interview with Juanita Broderick exhibited how Clinton sexually assaulted her. The interview was conducted well before the impeachment process and only aired after it was over. There was little investigation following the interview and even less follow-up. If the Clintons’ mutual behavior on this matter is fully investigated for this election cycle, it will have a much greater impact on voters (those who have forgotten and those who don’t remember, particularly).
My advice has been very clear to conservatives. If we focus on the morality of Bill Clinton's sexual escapades, it will have zero effect on the outcome of the elections in 2016. However, it is important to hold Hillary Clinton accountable for her enabling Bill Clinton to continue his ‘war on women.’
If you recall, the Clintons successfully convinced the country that President Clinton's private life should be private. The country bought that argument. Now, Hillary Clinton wants to convince the country that Donald Trump, in his private life, has been a womanizer.
Fortunately, Trump is going to use the Clintons’ own ‘private life’ argument against them. We already know the country will buy it. If he pivots the focus to Hillary's enabling of President Clinton to mistreat women, that argument will resonate with voters in November.
This election won’t be influenced by Bill Clinton’s escapades, but it can be affected by Hillary’s resulting war on Bill’s women.
The clintons live by a different set of rules than normal people. They ignore any law or rule they don’t like.
bill clinton sexually harassed a subordinate during work hours. If a male business manager today comments on a subordinate woman’s dress, he is fired. clinton got away with sexual harassment.
Perhaps future, for all we know.
“Fire or hire? How bout jail?”..
Fire AND jail! Best of all options.
Hillary ended her relationship with Foster, didn’t she?
Yes she did, when she had him killed.
You said it.
I avoid this stuff anymore, because I made a comment to someone a long time ago and it turned out that they had an Open relationship.
They didn’t have relations with each other, just everyone else and then they got off with sharing the tales to each other.
There are some sick puppies out there.
She deserves a looooooooooooooooong prison sentence
To keep the answer withiin the hypothetical office setting, before the digression to the, blech, Clintons:
I’d find a guy who knows where the brake lines are, and monkey with them!
No,I think she like Donna Shalala!
maybe it was S & M
one would have to be a masochist to get anywhere near a relationship with Shrillary, and she is definitely a sadist
I am not convinced that Hubbell was an “affair.” It was maybe more like a deal involving all parties to produce an offspring for Bill who is likely sterile to enhance his political profile. Too bad it was a girl that resulted. A boy that looked like Hubbel might not been regarded generally as ugly.
What does that phrase mean? Can you put it into English?
Unreadable
Ross Perot nailed it: “If your spouse can’t trust you, why should I?”
Neither, I'd have her arrested...
That’s a tortured analogy.
After various readings....I’ve come to the conclusion that the Hubbell-Hillary thing...was mostly free ‘gift’ thing for Hubbell in exchange for introductions or investment advice....nothing more. It’s like looking at the real estate gimmick that the Clintons walked into. I think Hubbell helped to make sure they got a piece of this deal for almost nothing and made a profit in the end. You had to show some kind of appreciation and this was ‘free’ to give him. Beyond that, I don’t think Hillary ever had any real attachment to Hubbell....other than the advice-side.
She realized that she needed a child because that would look good to what she considered the stupid redneck voters in Arkansas, and Slick wouldn't or couldn't make that happen.
That explains Webb/Chelsea, but not Vince.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.