Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. Ollie

    Press Conference: Government Reform

    Ron Jones, CBS Mr. Leader, do you believe that Rep. Williams has the authority to unilaterally make decisions on subpoenas being issued to individuals and organizations without debate, vote or any consultation from the committee as a whole?
  3. Statement on Republican-led Hearing on Ethics Written by Congressman Stephen Roberts There is no denying that nepotism is against the law and that anything resembling nepotism in Congress will only leave bitter taste in the mouth of members of congress from both sides of the aisle. That is why I personally advocated for an investigation into the appointment of Reginald King to chair the House Committee on Judiciary. Congressman Reginald King has since initiated the investigation into his own appointment and recused himself from proceedings related to it: which the Republican Jacky Williams took as a chance to seize power. See, Jacky Williams took Reginald King's recusal as a chance to take and exercise power which she doesn't have, a chance to drag the man's name through the mud, a chance to put on a spectacle in which she herself is the hero of the people and Reginald King the villain. Well, she's deluded. It is my firm belief that the "investigation" led by Jacky Williams is nothing but political theatrics in which she's the lead actor. It's not about finding the facts, it's about power, and she is the Washington politician type that the Republicans so proudly appoint to be the face of this scam investigation. Yes, the hearing so far has been nothing but a scam: an abuse of power, a violation of the rules. Today, it was the Democratic House Leader that was victim to this scam of a hearing, tomorrow it might be other people -- regular Americans who are called into hearing by a fake subpoena that holds no power, held by congress for "as long as is necessary," in her words. Imagine being held as long as is necessary by people with no legal power to hold you: that is precisely what Jacky Williams is doing in this so-called investigation. This hearing was against the law -- if not the laws of the country then the laws of congress. House rules state that hearings -- and yes, subpoenas, must be voted on by members of a committee: none of which happened in this scam of a hearing. The Republicans preach righteousness but apparently to them the rules and the law only apply to Democrats: never to themselves. I urge Congress to look into this matter seriously and properly. I stand by my previous statements that a proper investigation must be done into this appointment, emphasize on proper: an investigation that is actually intent on finding the facts and one that is not led by an incompetent congresswoman.
  4. Today
  5. Ashcroft

    Press Conference: Government Reform

    Nepotism is already explicitly illegal under the current law, but we want to strengthen those rules for Congress specifically regarding all kinds of insider appointments. Nepotism is only the most obvious form of this kind of abuse of office – we want important positions in Congress to be filled by the most qualified, not the most connected, individuals.
  6. Ashcroft

    Local Media Quotes

    Name: Paul Cavalieri Party: Republican Interviewing Agency: (what local newspaper/radio): Orange County Register When the core of your argument is about procedure, rather than substance, you know you've lost. The hearing into the Majority Leader's conduct was fully legal, Ranking Member Williams was clearly given the authority of the Chairman, and the Majority Leader's testimony tells you all you need to know. He knows he committed nepotism, he knows it's wrong, and he did it anyways. That's all there is to it.
  7. Conrad

    Technical Requests

    Can the permissions be fixed please?
  8. ((Also how many people are supposed to be on the committees? 4-3 or 3-2?))
  9. Seymour pens explosive letter to Armed Forces, Foreign Affairs, and Judiciary Committee A public letter written by South Carolina Democratic Representative Douglas Seymour is creating a firestorm in the case of the King nepotism inquiry. The inquiry is related to the appointment of Reginald King, by his brother, House Majority Leader Augustus King, to the Chairmanship of the House Committee on Armed Services, Foreign Affairs, and Judiciary. The letter essentially argues against the narrative given by Majority Leader King during his recent testimony before the House Standards of Conduct Committee. The letter starts off with his wish to "to establish a clearer timeline of events regarding the internal Democratic Party processes relating to the assignment of members - and in this particular case, the Chairman - of a committee." He several aspects of the Majority Leader's narrative, the first of which being that everyone had a fair chance to serve on the committee. "First, the Majority Leader claims that he gave everyone a 'fair and equal chance to apply.' This may be true, but what was not indicated in this statement was the fact that not everyone had a fair or equal chance to serve on a committee," Seymour said. "Without divulging the inner workings of our Party, I can state that six (6!) members of our caucus expressed interest in chairing the House Committee on the Armed Services, Foreign Affairs, and the Judiciary. I was one of those who applied to serve on this Committee, and who offered to Chair it." Seymour takes offense to the criteria that Majority Leader King used, even saying that he personally was singled out by King. "I also take offence at the so-called criteria used by Majority Leader King, which appear to have been designed to eliminate a single individual - me - from the running of chairing a committee," Seymour said. "Simply running for a leadership position at the start of this Congress does not eliminate my extensive qualifications from potentially chairing a committee." He later even goes on to attack the King "political machine" and offer his testimony before the Standards of Official Conduct committee. "Whether nepotism was involved, I can only indicate that the King political machine appears to be very much alive and well in California, and now - with their taking on the positions of Speaker, Majority Leader, and Chair of this prominent committee - of the United States Congress," Seymour said. "I hope you understand the potential risks that my coming forward have for my own political future. But I believe that nepotism is a serious enough offence - in fact, it is illegal under the laws of our great nation - to make this story heard. I am willing to testify before the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, if that should be deemed necessary." Seymour also spent time in the letter dogging the experience narrative by touting his own experience in Vietnam. House Majority Leader King, when asked for comment by Beltway Insiders, said that he did give everyone a fair chance and is sorry that Seymour feels the way he does. "I am sorry Congressman Seymour feel the way that he did," King said. "I have spoken to him plenty of times regarding setting the agenda for the party and enlisting his help to unite the progressives, bol weevils, and establisment democrats. I gave everyone a fair chance, including those who opted not to run for party leadership. Any accusation of nepotism is false." Republicans have already come out supporting the letter, including the person running the House Official Standards of Conduct inquiry into the matter, Jacky Williams. "Congressman Seymour's letter is a bombshell that confirms our worst fears about the King family and their nepotistic actions - which Lady Jacky believes to be illegal," Williams's Chief of Staff said. "It also exposes Augustus King as a liar before the American people and before the Congress of the United States. Furthermore, it gives insight to the depths that members of the Democratic party have gone to obstruct the truth from coming out - from trying to end this hearing to trying to subvert the rightful and legal subpoena for documents issued via the hearing." Also coming forward to comment on the Republican side was Virginia Republican James Jefferson. "I recently received a copy of the letter that Congressman Seymour wrote to Congressman King and Congresswoman Williams and I applaud Congressman Seymour for shining some much needed light into this whole controversy," Jefferson said. "According to the letter my democratic colleague from the great state of South Carolina wrote, I take it that nepotism did occur during the selection of the Committee chair and that House Majority Leader King did, in fact, not tell the truth to the American people when defending his pick for the chairmanship of such a prestigious and important committee in the House . In my opinion, Congressman Seymour would've been a better choice as Chair, just on experience alone. I'm deeply saddened by what has came to light from the Democratic Party and I hope the Ethics committee investigates further into this and we can move on and get to work." We will continue to keep you updated on this story.
  10. Folks, I've got some updates for everyone: The AB will be ruling on the nepotism issue by tomorrow along with the publishing of the updated IVS. An official OOC calendar for 1987 will be released by Wednesday so players can be made aware of the timing of the round. The offer for applications to join the AB remains open and I'd encourage interested individuals to send a PM to me.
  11. Democrats Divided Over Progressive Takeover In Party Washington - Democrats across the country, as well as 208 Congressman in the House turn heads as in a surprising move attributed to the complete disarray within the Establishment Caucus, members of the Party’s Progressive Faction swept leadership elections, angering the larger conservative factions, as well as Republicans. Representative Dr. Teddy King and his brother Representative Augustus King both ascended to the leadership. Progressives representing California’s Thirteenth and Forty-Fourth District respectively, The Kings are ardent Civil Rights Democrats, coming directly into conflict with the Boll Weevils faction of the party. This conflict came to the forefront when Democrats rallied behind South Carolina Representative Douglas Seymour for Majority Whip in an attempt to balance the effect of the Progressive leadership, but successful whipping by the Kings ensured that another Progressive, Thomas Blackstone (D-MA-2), was elected to the position. While a major coup for the progressive faction, the recent leadership elections have been viewed with anger by the Boll Weevils and a few New Democrats. Progressives make up thirty seats in the House. The Boll Weevils and New Democrats represent Forty and Sixty-five seats respectively. “In no world should this have been possible,” one anonymous source from the Establishment faction of the Party said. “Progressives represent fifteen percent of the House Caucus and many are wondering how they will be adequately represented by the Party left. Boll Weevils, in particular, are stirring not so much at their own lack of presence in leadership, but what they perceive as being left behind by the surprising ascension of the Progressive faction. While Democrats internally are divided, Republican cries are being heard with the conservative base coalescing around Minority Leader Paul Cavalieri in what they view as a hardline takeover of the Democratic Party. Democrats will have to do a great deal to show the American people that they are in fact, representing the whole of the party, and reunite what is not a disincentivized base.
  12. Conrad

    Local Media Quotes

    Name: Michael Marshall Party: Republican Interviewing Agency: (what local newspaper/radio): Cherryville Tribune The censure against Jacky Williams has been made based on things that she didn't do. She didn't convene this committee, a member of the Democratic Party did. I think we should base censures on facts and not what you hope to see.
  13. Dear Chairman King and Ranking Member Williams, I am writing to you today as a Member of the United States House of Representatives, a body which I believe is in order to establish a clearer timeline of events regarding the internal Democratic Party processes relating to the assignment of members - and in this particular case, the Chairman - of a committee. This is in relation to the ongoing House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct (comprised of the members of the House Committee on Armed Services, Foreign Affairs, and the Judiciary) into allegations of nepotism by the Speaker, Majority Leader, and Chairman - three Representatives who happen to be closely related. I find a few claims made by the Majority Leader, Mr. Augustus King, to be particularly suspect. First, the Majority Leader claims that he gave everyone a "fair and equal chance to apply." This may be true, but what was not indicated in this statement was the fact that not everyone had a fair or equal chance to serve on a committee. Without divulging the inner workings of our Party, I can state that six (6!) members of our caucus expressed interest in chairing the House Committee on the Armed Services, Foreign Affairs, and the Judiciary. I was one of those who applied to serve on this Committee, and who offered to Chair it. Second, it is factually inaccurate that Chairman King was the first individual to sign up requesting to Chair this Committee. One individual, who I will allow to remain private unless s/he decides to come forward, requested to Chair this committee prior to Chairman King. Third, with all due respect to Chairman King, if pure experience in this chamber, or in private experience, was taken into account, I would present my background as being competitive. I served in the United States Army during the depths of World War II - qualifying myself in the armed services element of this role. I was admitted to practice law in 1952 - three years before Chairman King. Of course, I admit that experience is subjective, but I have also served in this chamber for 6 years prior to Chairman King's first election to the House. I also take offence at the so-called criteria used by Majority Leader King, which appear to have been designed to eliminate a single individual - me - from the running of chairing a committee. Simply running for a leadership position at the start of this Congress does not eliminate my extensive qualifications from potentially chairing a committee. Whether nepotism was involved, I can only indicate that the King political machine appears to be very much alive and well in California, and now - with their taking on the positions of Speaker, Majority Leader, and Chair of this prominent committee - of the United States Congress. I hope you understand the potential risks that my coming forward have for my own political future. But I believe that nepotism is a serious enough offence - in fact, it is illegal under the laws of our great nation - to make this story heard. I am willing to testify before the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, if that should be deemed necessary. Sincerely, /s/ Douglas Seymour Democratic Representative for South Carolina's 3rd District
  14. I usually do not try to criticize the AB publicly, but I think the last 24-72 hours have shown us that there are some things which need to be fixed. I think there is an AB backlog which needs to be resolved ASAP. Today's issues would have been made a lot better if there was an AB member there to provide guidance on how to handle this situation. I understand Baudin is on LOA right now, so I am not blaming him as he has a legitimate reason to be away. Not to mention, there are things we are still waiting on from the AB which have been requested for. A game calendar, IVS (the House already has votes which need tallied, so this needs to be a top priority), and technical requests are among those things. We have players literally going on rage LOA due to the AB backlog. We should be lucky they aren't ragequitting. Again, I do not want to criticize you guys and I do understand you have a real life, but I am afraid things are just starting to fall a little too far behind right now. Thank you for taking the time to read this and resolving the issues.
  15. Source: O'Brien wants apology, censure against Williams filed A source close to the office of Wisconsin Republican Ted O'Brien has told Beltway Insiders that the congressman reportedly would like an apology from California Representative Jacky Williams for apparently saying O'Brien "committed treason." "If Jacky Williams is a lady as she claims, then she would apologize for the error in the fact that a Vietnam veteran betrayed his country," the source said. Also developing now is a censure officially being filed by Nebraska Democratic Representative Robert Lawson in the behavior of Williams during her running of the King nepotism inquiry. "Jacky Williams convened a House Select Committee with neither a proper motion nor following proper parliamentary procedure," the censure reads. "She also blatantly ruled proper motions out of order, convened hearings without proper authority, and issued potentially illegal subpoenas." There are no co-sponsors to the censure as of yet, but that is expected to change. The Chief of Staff to Representative Williams, in the meantime, has commented on the censure calling it a "distraction". "The censure motion is nothing more than an element of distraction in the broader scheme to obstruct proceedings in order to save Augustus King from himself," the Chief of Staff said. "It's unfortunate that when the rubber met the road, King chose to cower and refused to answer questions." In the Standards of Conduct committee, a vote is now taking place on whether to end the nepotism hearing. So far as of writing, the vote is 2-1 on party lines with Democrats leading to end the hearing. We will keep you updated as more unfolds.
  16. TexAgRepublican

    Technical Requests

    Republican leadership masking
  17. FULL NAME: MALCOLM GARVEY STATE/DISTRICT: MD 7 POSITION: Member
  18. Representative Lawson, for himself, submits the following A RESOLUTION To censure Representative Jacky Williams Section 1: Short Title: A. This resolution shall be referred to as the “Censure of Representative Williams” Section 2: Findings A. That Congresswoman Jacky Williams convened a House Select Committee with neither a proper motion nor following proper parliamentary procedure. She also blatantly ruled proper motions out of order, convened hearings without proper authority, and issued potentially illegal subpoenas. She also maliciously maligned and sullied the good character of her fellow Representatives including Augustus King, Reginald King, and Ted O’Brien. B. Per House rules, all motions must be debated and voted upon, all proper motions must be recognized by the Chair, and subpoenas must fit the three guidelines outlined by the Supreme Court. C. None of these actions are becoming of a United States Representative , the United States House of Representatives, or the United States of America. Section 3: Censure A. Be it resolved, Representative Jacky Williamsare hereby censured by the United States House of Representatives. B. Nothing in this censure shall be construed as an act of judicial punishment, nor shall it absolve them of any legal liability for their actions.
  19. Is this a second? If so, 24 hrs for voting on the motion to adjourn. Nay
  20. Representative Williams: The motion to adjourn is recognized. 24 hrs for a second. Raps gavel.
  1. Load more activity
×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.