United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: ‘MAGA’ Model Katie Williams Stripped of Miss Nevada 2019 Crown for ‘Being a Conservative’
Source:
Gov't Slaves
URL Source: https://governmentslaves.news/2019/ ... rown-for-being-a-conservative/
Published: Aug 21, 2019
Author: RUSSIAN TROLL
Post Date: 2019-08-23 16:58:52 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 10285
Comments: 92
According to the dethroned beauty queen, the organisers told her to run separate social media accounts – one where she could voice her opinions and an ‘apolitical’ one for the contest. However, despite creating a second Facebook account, she kept getting complaints about her pro-Trump messages and criticism of the group Antifa on her personal page. Miss Nevada State 2019 winner Katie Williams has had her title revoked by the Miss America pageant organisers, and believes she lost her throne due to her conservative political views. Katie Jo Williams, a member of the US Army National Guards and a combat veteran, learned on 18 August that she’d lost the title and been banned from competing in the upcoming Miss America contest. In a statement posted on Instagram, she said the pageant coordinators told her via emails that she was “too political” to be involved, and that the only way to stay in the contest was to delete political posts from her Facebook page. However, she added, the organisers failed to address her requests to clarify what content they found to be in breach of their ‘No Politics’ rules. Williams has created a separate Facebook page for the pageant, devoid of political statements, but she claimed that the organisers continued to voice their disapproval in personal communications of what she was posting on her personal account. These posts, in her words, included a picture of herself wearing a red ‘Trump 2020’ hat as well as expressions of support for the United States and criticism of the leftist political organisation antifa. Williams had regularly received calls from the pageant director, Susan Jeske, but insisted that she would only communicate via email for the sake of her own safety. “I stopped taking your calls because every time you were on the phone with me you told me you agreed with my political opinions and then in writing would softly scold me for them,” she said in a letter to Jeske, according to screenshots she shared on Twitter. Williams has also published alleged screenshots of online exchanges with Jeske, which appear to show that the pageant director encouraged her to take pictures with President Trump and his son, Donald Trump Jr., while wearing the Miss Nevada sash and crown.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-30) not displayed.
.
.
.
#31. To: Gatlin (#29)
Courts Say Man Can Sue Despite Signing Waiver By Avi Salzman https://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/04/nyregion/courts-say-man-can-sue-despite- signing-waiver.html You can always sue. You may not win but you can sue. Comprende?
Williams has created a separate Facebook page for the pageant, devoid of political statements, but she claimed that the organisers continued to voice their disapproval in personal communications of what she was posting on her personal account. F you would like to post about your political positions then create a new FB profile page for pageants only She can sue for breach of contract. You can have a political page if it is separate.
That's a bald faced lie! Story and FOX News report HERE Noah Jennings, Williams' spokesman, told Newsweek that Jeske was allegedly sending "mixed signals” to his client. “Ms. America CEO Susan Jeske, who would encourage Katie over the phone, and then follow that up with emails and screenshots of things she took issue with,” Jennings said. “Katie separated pages, combed through to remove posts, and overall made every effort to comply with the requests of the pageant.”
Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen. What political statements did she make? Can you even name them? I don't think you can. Canning her is a political statement.
Saying that you hate Antifa and one of their thugs murdered 9 people in Dayton Ohio and you wish they would rot in hell. If she said something like that. That is not political. Did any of them say they were queer on their pages? If so that is political and since they were inconsistent breach of contract. My point is there are tons of ways to sue them. Not that she will or necessarily should. But she sure can.
She can also sue them for slander.
Katie Williams was stripped of her title for representing herself as “Ms. Nevada” by wearing the crown and sash when those political statements were made. Since are apparently are so desirous to see those – then you can look them up yourself. You will find the links in Footnote 2 of the REVOCATION OF TITLE LETTER in Post 20. I trust you will have no difficulty in performing that task.
Exactly where did they slander her?
But MAP stated that she could not wear the crown and sash in pictures posted on a political page and she did as shown in nine occasions. She violated here written agreement and she was stripped of her title.
That's a bald faced lie! Oh wait, - I see now – you used this Story and FOX News report to prove it’s a lie. Please now show your factual documentation to prove that Noah Jennings [Williams' spokesman] was telling the truth and that Susan Jeske [“Ms. America CEO] was lying. Hearsay in news stories will not suffice since they cannot adequately substantiated.
She was stripped of here title for wearing the crown and sash in the links in Footnote 2 of the REVOCATION OF TITLE LETTER in Post 20 for political statements Uh, what was your point again?
They are legal and binding, just like any contract. Certain types of contracts cannot be enforced even if someone is stupid enough to sign them. This isn't one of them.
https://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/04/nyregion/courts-say-man-can-sue-despite- signing-waiver.html I “comprehende” from reading more than enough of the Deckard posted articles that newspapers, other media lie by slanting their headlines – especially shit put out by the NY Times. Since I could not read the story directly, you made me work and it took me a while to get to the bottom of this. Yes, there was an exception in New York State where “if you've been injured due to negligent actions, you can sue – even if you signed a waiver.” Was Katie Williams “injured due to negligent actions” by the MAP? No. You showed me one exception – I will accept that, of course. I ask you to now show factual evidence that can ALWAYS sue after you have signed a covenant not to sue. Can you show me that …
Certain types of contracts cannot be enforced even if someone is stupid enough to sign them. This isn't one of them. Sure you could. You could scour the other contestants pages especially the runner up. Then say something they said is political. Something everyone said is political. Again i'm not saying she should just she could.
Was Katie Williams “injured due to negligent actions” by the MAP? It could be argued that she was injured, emotionally and financially. They singled her out because she supports Trump. She didn't tell anyone to vote for Trump that I know of. Everything is political, or you can make that case. She could say they were being political because she just likes our country and the President. Nothing necessarily political about that. Definition of political 1a : of or relating to government, a government, or the conduct of government
Certain types of contracts cannot be enforced even if someone is stupid enough to sign them. This isn't one of them. Sure you could. You could scour the other contestants pages especially the runner up. Then say something they said is political. Something everyone said is political. Again i'm not saying she should just she could. That will NOT matter. Two or more wrongs will never make the first wrong be right. All that would do would cause other contestants to be stripped of their titles if it were shown they violated their signed agreement. Stone, with all due respect – you are grasping at straws on this one.
She was, no doubt. And she agreed to be subject to the pageant's rules and directives. She was, in essence, applying to be the employee of the pageant for one year if she won the national title. And she signed the contract, knowing that other contestants in previous years had been stripped of titles with no legal recourse. If you sign their contract, you have to abide by their rules.
Sidebar Post to Ask a Question of You: Do you consider this a political statement? A photo of two men embracing posted on Instagram, one with an American flag
Gatlin has been hitting the Sterno again and now he's posting his gay Twitter porn. You know what's likely to come next. : )
Please now show your factual documentation to prove that Noah Jennings [Williams' spokesman] was telling the truth and that Susan Jeske [“Ms. America CEO] was lying.
Yes she can. She man lose but she can sue them.
She can file the paperwork certainly. I'd bet the first time a judge hears the case, she'd throw it out of court. The courts don't have any desire to litigate the role of political partisanship in beauty pageants. I can't imagine any judge wanting that case in their court.
When you say “she can sue” - You are only expressing your personal opinion. It is not a Legal Opinion. I firmly stand behind my many-times stated conviction that Katie Williams cannot sue the MAP for stripping her of her title. In addition to the many other reasons I have stated tp you, I will now add the following: Most contracts end when both parties have fulfilled their contractual obligations, but it's not uncommon for one party to fail to completely fulfill his or her end of the contract agreement. Breach of contract is the most common reason contract disputes are brought to court for resolution. https://www.thebalancesmb.com/breach-of-contract-398138
The worst outcome for Miss Nevada is a judge who decides to make it clear to all the beauty queens out there that they shouldn't try to sue their pageants. In that instance, the judge could admit the case and allow it to proceed for a while instead of dismissing it immediately. Then the judge would toss the case and leave the litigious beauty queen facing the court costs and the defendant's pricey legal team hired by the pageant officials. Then she might face a countersuit as well. Recall how Stormy Daniels was suing under the representation of Creepy Porn Lawyer and found herself owing $300,000 in legal bills? Like that. She'll be stripping from town to town until she's 75yo to pay that off. You don't get to drag the courts into anything if they don't want to be involved. And you have no recourse unless Congress passes some black-letter law to enforce. Just because they could, in theory, counter-sue her doesn't mean they'd be foolish enough to file such a lawsuit. Too much downside, not enough to gain. The pageant wants to stay on defense, for publicity reasons if nothing else.
According to Williams, there was one instance where she thought what she was doing was ok because Jeske told her to take a photo with the president while wearing her sash. Williams then shared screen shots of the text message she received from Jeske. Williams was asked to surrendered her crown and sash, and to never speak of the pageant again, but by the tone of her tweets, this isn’t happening any time soon. *** BTW - This isn't the first time this has happened. Miss World America's State/National/Chief Director accused me of being racist, Islamaphobic, and insensitive. They stripped me of my Miss Michigan title due to my refusal to try on a hijab in 2018, my tweet about black on black gun violence, and "insensitive" statistical tweets.pic.twitter.com/K1Btho0Pgq Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen. You sound liker an ACLU liberal.
It's sounding like TC and Gatlin like a PC world where your thoughts are forbidden to be thought or shared.
Definitely consider giving the boot to the trite one you used here – it’s so banal. Often times you can be so embarrassingly wrong. This was again one of those ignominious times. That was not “Gatlin posting HIS gay Twitter porn” – smart ass. Please permit me to inform you what you actually saw in Post 50. What you saw was Gatlin reposting Katie Williams’ gay Instagram porn. Here I will do it again for you … […] 4. She’s a Supporter of Gay Rights 1katie_j_williams Instagram 52 Likes Posting a photo of two men embracing on Instagram, one with an American flag skin and the other with a rainbow skin, Williams wrote “Don’t assume my beliefs based on my political party! Everyone has the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness! I will fight for Fairness for everyone regardless of where you fall on the political spectrum.” She doesn’t explicitly call out “gay rights” but the photo and caption indicate that she’s a supporter of rights for all Americans regardless of sexual preference. […] https://heavy.com/news/2019/08/katie-williams/ And I definitely “have your number” …
I find that offensive opinionated people are all about being right and never being wrong, By name-calling and trying to talk down to you they are attempting to intimidate you to the point that you become agreeable – or they will try to infuriate you that they hijack your ability to think clearly and respond rationally. I have no time or patience for dealing with that nonsense. Good day to you, Sir, and I wish you well …
Like I said and you admitted above. She can sue them. That is my only point. You can sue someone if they put a no sue clause in the contract. You are fighting an uphill battle but you can still sue. Then the contract and facts will be reviewed. Or thrown out.
If you said something similar like "you're one of those libertarians" to Deckard. Would that mean you lost the argument?
There are other times it has happened – in addition to the one you pointed out now. And it will happen again - again and again – I can readily assure you. It will happen to all those who act so “stupidly libertarian” as to think they do not have to follow the rules set forth by the organization they desire to associate with or to abide by the agreement they signed. American culture values independence, but sometimes independence can be taken too far. These ladies did – and you have always TRIED to …
She FOLLOWED THE RULES. The pageant director kept arbitrarily changing the rules specifically for her. It was a set-up to get her disqualified, and it's really sad that you can't see that.
Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen. Oh -so now Gatlin the almighty has declared an innocuous image to be "porn"? Will the insanity never end? Of course, you never objected to yukon's posting a link to a disgusting gay porn site. In fact - you DEFENDED him.
Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen. Is that not what you did, since all you had to offer - to no avail - was your personal opinion?
But you are indeed dead wrong in your stating of my assessment. "Gatlin the Almighty" - Damn, I sure do like that. Attaboy, Deckard ...
It was sarcasm, you arrogant, obnoxious ass.
Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen. And I will forever continue to defend any and all who are wrongly, viscously and maliciously charged.
It was sarcasm, you arrogant, obnoxious ass. Sarcasm is a defense mechanism and it definitely is not a very good one because of the inherent negative nature of sarcasm. While you search for a better defense mechanism – you desperately need to try friendly laughter.
Comments (72 - 92) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#32. To: Gatlin (#30)
However, she added, the organisers failed to address her requests to clarify what content they found to be in breach of their ‘No Politics’ rules.
#33. To: Gatlin, A K A Stone (#30)
You can also read where Katie Williams was given ample opportunities to “edit” those posts and she “refused” to do so.
The essential feature of government is the enforcement of its decrees by beating, killing, and imprisoning.
Those who are asking for more government interference are asking ultimately for more compulsion and less freedom.
#34. To: Gatlin (#30)
#35. To: Deckard, Gatlin (#0)
These posts, in her words, included a picture of herself wearing a red ‘Trump 2020’ hat as well as expressions of support for the United States and criticism of the leftist political organisation antifa.
#36. To: Gatlin (#30)
#37. To: A K A Stone (#34)
What political statements did she make?
You obviously have difficulty grasping onto the fact that it was not “what political statements” Katie Williams made – she was not stripped of her title for “making political statements.” Can you even name them [the political statements]?
I have no need, reason, or desire to do so for it would serve absolutely no purpose here since she was not stripped of her title for making political statements. Canning her is a political statement.
There you go again, stating your personal opinion. Which you are of course entitled to do. However, stating your personal opinion changes nothing and will rectify no “alleged wrongs” since Katie Williams was stripped of her title by a “legal action” because she violated – on at least nine stated occasion – an agreement she had signed.
#38. To: A K A Stone (#36)
She can also sue them for slander.
#39. To: A K A Stone (#32)
She can sue for breach of contract.
How did MAP breach the contract? You can have a political page if it is separate.
MAP stated that she could and she had one.
#40. To: Deckard (#33)
You can also read where Katie Williams was given ample opportunities to “edit” those posts and she “refused” to do so.
Is it now? How did you prove it to be? Noah Jennings, Williams' spokesman, told ...
That is no proof.
#41. To: A K A Stone (#35)
These posts, in her words, included a picture of herself wearing a red ‘Trump 2020’ hat as well as expressions of support for the United States and criticism of the leftist political organisation antifa.
That being the case, then she was obviously not stripped of her title for the posts she is referring to here. Saying that you hate Antifa and one of their thugs murdered 9 people in Dayton Ohio and you wish they would rot in hell. If she said something like that. That is not political.
An irrelevant supposition which never took place and there is no valid reason to discuss this hypothetical here. Did any of them say they were queer on their pages? If so that is political and since they were inconsistent breach of contract.
Same answer as stated above. My point is there are tons of ways to sue them.
There is no way she can sue them for stripping her of the title since she signed a “covenant not to sue.” [See Post 29]. Not that she will or necessarily should. But she sure can.
She CANNOT sue them for stripping here of the title since she signed a “covenant not to sue.” [See Post 29].
#42. To: A K A Stone (#26)
Those clauses are illegitimate and you can sue anyway.
#43. To: A K A Stone (#31)
Courts Say Man Can Sue Despite Signing Waiver By Avi Salzman
Upon going to your link, I could not read about the case because this was posted: Keep reading The Times by creating a free account or logging in.
So all that you furnished me was a HEADLINE. You can always sue. You may not win but you can sue. Comprende?
No, I don’t “comprende” – because you cannot ALWAYS sue.
#44. To: Deckard (#2)
Williams has created a separate Facebook page for the pageant, devoid of political statements, but she claimed that the organisers continued to voice their disapproval in personal communications of what she was posting on her personal account.
Katie Williams didn’t “tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth.” Katie Williams neglected to state that the MAP was voicing the disapproval because she was posting pictures [9, at least] of her in the Ms. Nevada crown and sash where political material was presented – which was a flagrant violation of the agreement Katie Williams signed with the MAP.
#45. To: Tooconservative (#42)
They are legal and binding, just like any contract.
#46. To: Gatlin (#43)
Yes, there was an exception in New York State where “if you've been injured due to negligent actions, you can sue – even if you signed a waiver.”
#47. To: A K A Stone (#45)
They are legal and binding, just like any contract.
#48. To: A K A Stone (#46)
It could be argued that she was injured, emotionally and financially.
If she ever could get it filed, then she could be counter sued for “abuse of process.” That is to say for bringing a lawsuit for an “improper purpose.” Based on the evidence presented in Post 20, I really – REALLY – think she would be even more stupid to try that. They singled her out because she supports Trump.
Whom she supported is of no consequence. It has no bearing on the resulting action. She violated the written agreement not for supporting anyone, but for wearing her crown and sash on political statements posted in Facebook. She didn't tell anyone to vote for Trump that I know of.
That makes no difference. She could have shouted to the world by any and all means to vote for Trump. She however could not be involved in political activity while wearing the crown and sash. She was at least 9 times and she was stripped of her title Everything is political, or you can make that case.
But you can’t be a MAP contestant and wear the crown and sash while “making that case.” She could say they were being political because she just likes our country and the President. Nothing necessarily political about that.
The old “could-would-should.” But she dis say that. She wore here crown and sash in at least 9 pictures where political statements were made and she was legally stripped of her title for doing that. Definition of political 1a : of or relating to government, a government, or the conduct of government
What is this supposed to mean?
#49. To: A K A Stone, Gatlin (#46)
It could be argued that she was injured, emotionally and financially.
#50. To: A K A Stone (#48)
skin and the other with a rainbow skin. “Don’t assume my beliefs based on my
political party! Everyone has the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness!
I will fight for Fairness for everyone regardless of where you fall on the political
spectrum.”
#51. To: A K A Stone, Gatlin (#50)
#52. To: Deckard (#40)
#53. To: Gatlin (#41)
She CANNOT sue them for stripping here of the title since she signed a “covenant not to sue.” [See Post 29]. Uh, what was your point again?
#54. To: A K A Stone, Gatlin (#53)
She may lose but she can sue them.
#55. To: A K A Stone (#53)
Yes [Katie Williams] can [sue the MAP for stripping her title].
She can TRY to file a ridiculously frivolous lawsuit. However, it will be to no avail and she will probably find that she got overly creative with her claims and attempted a lawsuit over laughable causes.
She man lose but she can sue them. A legal opinion refers to a written statement by a court, judicial officer, or legal expert as to the legality or illegality of an action, condition, or intent. ... Explanation by a judge or group of judges of a decision rendered by the court is also termed legal opinion.
I’m sorry to say – and I wish to never offend you – that your personal opinion doesn’t mean diddly squat. You will need to please furnish a Legal Opinion to substantiate and validate your position. Understanding a Covenant Not to Sue -
Furthermore, I substantially believe that the MAP can sue Katie Williams for Breach of Contract.
A covenant not to sue legally obliges a party that could initiate a lawsuit not to do so. The covenant is made explicitly between two parties, and any third party that wants to make a claim is legally allowed to do so. Covenants not to sue are used to settle specific legal issues outside of the court system. Parties may enter into this type of agreement to prevent a protracted, expensive lawsuit. In exchange for the covenant, the party that could seek damages may be provided with compensation or may be given assurances that the other party in the agreement will conduct a specific action.
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/covenant-not-sue.asp Breach of contract is a legal term that describes the violation of a contract or an agreement that occurs when one party fails to fulfill its promises according to the provisions of the agreement. Sometimes it involves interfering with the ability of another party to fulfill his duties. A contract can be breached in whole or in part.
#56. To: Gatlin (#55)
(Edited)
She can TRY to file a ridiculously frivolous lawsuit. However, it will be to no avail and she will probably find that she got overly creative with her claims and attempted a lawsuit over laughable causes.
Furthermore, I substantially believe that the MAP can sue Katie Williams for Breach of Contract.
#57. To: A K A Stone, Tooconservative (#52)
(Edited)
The essential feature of government is the enforcement of its decrees by beating, killing, and imprisoning.
Those who are asking for more government interference are asking ultimately for more compulsion and less freedom.
#58. To: Gatlin (#55)
#59. To: Deckard (#57)
#60. To: Tooconservative, A K A Stone (#51)
Gatlin has been hitting the Sterno again …
If you want people to pay attention to what you have to say, then it’s time to abandon the cliché introductory writing crutches you’ve been relying on for years. You know what's likely to come next.
… he's posting his gay Twitter porn.
Katie Williams: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know
Tooconservative, you are so damned PREDICTABLE – All the way to the core depth of your libertarian being.
Las Vegas, Nevada
1katie_j_williams
#61. To: A K A Stone (#58)
You sound liker an ACLU liberal.
Your argument has now taken the form of a personal attack and name-calling. It is therefore a clear admission that they don’t have anything valid or worthwhile to say. By devolving into name-calling you’ve revealed the bankruptcy of your position.
#62. To: Gatlin (#61)
#63. To: Gatlin (#61)
ou sound liker an ACLU liberal.
#64. To: Deckard (#57)
BTW - This isn't the first time this has happened.
Of course, it isn’t. I already knew about this situation.
#65. To: Gatlin (#64)
(Edited)
to think they do not have to follow the rules set forth by the organization
The essential feature of government is the enforcement of its decrees by beating, killing, and imprisoning.
Those who are asking for more government interference are asking ultimately for more compulsion and less freedom.
#66. To: Gatlin (#60)
(Edited)
What you saw was Gatlin reposting Katie Williams’ gay Instagram porn.
The essential feature of government is the enforcement of its decrees by beating, killing, and imprisoning.
Those who are asking for more government interference are asking ultimately for more compulsion and less freedom.
#67. To: A K A Stone (#63)
If you said something similar like "you're one of those libertarians" to Deckard. Would that mean you lost the argument?
If I had made a futile attempt at an argument and could not support my position by anything other that expressing my personal opinion and then I could only say “you're one of those libertarians" – Yes, it definitely would mean that I lost the argument.
#68. To: Deckard (#66)
Oh -so now Gatlin the almighty has declared an innocuous image to be "porn"?
Oh -so now Gatlin the almighty has declared an innocuous image to be "porn"?
You are definitely correct in respectfully titling me “Gatlin the Almighty.”
#69. To: Gatlin (#68)
(Edited)
"Gatlin the Almighty" - Damn, I sure do like that.
The essential feature of government is the enforcement of its decrees by beating, killing, and imprisoning.
Those who are asking for more government interference are asking ultimately for more compulsion and less freedom.
#70. To: Deckard (#66)
In fact - you DEFENDED {yukon}.
That I did, and so ever courageously.
#71. To: Deckard (#69)
"Gatlin the Almighty" - Damn, I sure do like that.
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]