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: 9137
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
#1. To: Deckard (#0)
(Edited)
Ms. Nevada Katie Williams says she was stripped of here crown because of her conservative political beliefs. "I just don't understand how you can censor someone with conservative values when I'm not even really saying anything that's bad," Williams said. It is simple and should be easily understood. The pageant has a statement posted on its website that the pageant is a "No Politics" pageant. Williams signed an agreement to keep her politics separate from her pageant social media page. The pageant statement also says, in part, "Ms. Williams acknowledged both verbally and in writing that she understood these rules before she was accepted into the pageant. The Ms. America Pageant has confirmed that it has removed Williams from their competition. Williams said she didn’t violate her signed agreement – the pageant said she did. The pageant said that Williams was posting her Trump-related political content to the Ms. Nevada Facebook page which is strictly prohibited. Result: Adios, Katie …
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. 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.
Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen. I don't disagree with the pageant. I think these kinds of events should be about their stated activities, not let anyone decide they want to create a platform for their own politics. For that matter, I'd like to see Hollyweird, the music industry, sports use that same standard. People don't want to see politics and don't want to know the politics of competitors. They just want their movies, music and sports. Not more politics being injected to absolutely everything in public life. It surprises me that people don't see this. Americans kinda hate politics and they rarely choose to have more of it mixed in with their entertainment.
Williams claimed - The pageant said - Score: Uh, did you per chance catch the key words “alleged” and “appear?” With that aside, she was not prohibited from taking pictures with anyone while wearing the Miss Nevada sash and crown to be used to promote the pageant. You seem to have many problems, Deckard. A reading assignment for you that should be of great benefit to help with one of those problems: Lesson Two - Accepting Authority.
Normally I would agree with you. I think these kinds of events should be about their stated activities, not let anyone decide they want to create a platform for their own politics. Apparently she was told to run separate social media accounts – one where she could voice her opinions and an ‘apolitical’ one for the contest. It appears that is exactly what she did. In addition, it appears she may have been tricked or duped by the pageant director who she claims "encouraged her to take pictures with President Trump and his son, Donald Trump Jr., while wearing the Miss Nevada sash and crown. " If that is indeed true, and she claims to have screenshots of those communications, seems pretty clear that this is a set-up from the start. I'm not a huge fan of Trump, but Miss Williams should not be punished for supporting him on her personal facebook account. It's not as if she wore a MAGA hat during the swimsuit competition or praised Trump in her acceptance speech.
Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen. It appears that is exactly what she did. In addition, it appears she may have been tricked or duped by the pageant director who she claims "encouraged her to take pictures with President Trump and his son, Donald Trump Jr., while wearing the Miss Nevada sash and crown. " If that is indeed true, and she claims to have screenshots of those communications, seems pretty clear that this is a set-up from the start. Deckard, listen to me – Listen to me, Deckard. STOP AND LISTEN VERY INTENLY TO ME … There, now – Start to read very carefully: DO YOU CLEARLY UNDERSTAND THAT? If what the pageant stated were not true, then Williams could sue the hell out of them, be reinstated and take home a “boat-load of money”. In the situation here – as it is many times with you – It is pure and simple that: Effective communication is a two-way street. When someone is telling another person something and the other person is not paying attention because they are of the type who is going to think “fuck the rules” and “fuck authority” – and then damned well do what they want to do anyway, communication will be ineffective. There are people this way, Deckard, you are one of those people. “Listening” is very simple – however it takes skill and practice in order to perfect it. There is hope for you to learn. Start now …
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. The pageant also said that Williams was posting her Trump-related political content to the Ms. Nevada Facebook page which is strictly prohibited. Proof? Other than the claim made by the "voice of authority"?
Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen. You're wrong you should be a ableto have a personal life too. Nothing she did was wrong.
Proof? Other than the claim made by the "voice of authority"? Proof? Other than an unsupported allegation by a dethroned beauty queen, It is Williams made the charge – Ergo, it is Williams who must provide the proof. The burden of proof is always on the person who brings a claim. Right, libertarian …
Does “having a personal life” mean having the right to unilaterally breech a written agreement [contract] and break the terms set forth in such agreement? How do you figure that when it is reported that Williams signed a ”legally binding written agreement” to keep her politics separate from her ”pageant social media page”. It is also reported that the pageant said that Ms. Williams acknowledged both verbally and in writing that she understood these rules before she was accepted into the pageant. It is further reported that the pageant stated that Williams was posting her Trump-related political content to the Ms. Nevada Facebook page which is strictly prohibited. Continued HERE. I ask you ever so kindly to please explain to me how you figure: “nothing she did was wrong.” I am sincerely interested in your rational.
There is no breach of the contract. Show me the part of the contract she broke. You can't it's you speculating what the contract says.
She used her personal facebook account to make political comments Story and FOX News report HERE "Williams claims that she did create a separate social media account, but alleges an official "continued to screenshot my page, my personal page, and email me about how she was disappointed and she didn’t agree with it and that I needed to speak with her on the phone." According to Ms. America CEO Susan Jeske, Williams continued to make mentions of the Ms. America competition on her personal page. "If you're putting pageant stuff on your personal page, then that's a pageant page," Jeske told NBC. 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.” Williams, who did not immediately respond to Yahoo Lifestyle’s requests for comment, told Newsweek: "I was censored for my beliefs. I was excited to compete in this pageant — everything was ready to go for this weekend — and so to have that opportunity taken away from me so quickly feels like a slap in the face. The entire reason I participated in pageants in the first place was to provide young women like my daughter with a strong role model to look up to." Williams was deployed with the Army National Guard to Afghanistan in 2008-09 and is currently a fitness instructor. *** I believe the obfuscation was done deliberately by the pageant director to insure that Miss Williams' title would be revoked when she won.
Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen. I will be off forum for a couple of hours – I will read you reply later.
“However, the Ms. Nevada Facebook Page should be devoid of political content” – It was NOT. “All the pageant asked of Ms. Williams, in writing, is to keep separate social media accounts. (ie: Facebook) One is for politics where she can voice her own opinion as Katie Williams and the other is a new Facebook page for the pageant representing Ms. Nevada State 2019,” the statement reads. “She could be a President Trump supporter on her Personal Facebook page all she wants for everyone to read. However, the Ms. Nevada Facebook Page should be devoid of political content,” it adds. The pageant said it gave Williams a deadline to edit her pages, but that she refused — proving she is “no longer capable of representing this pageant as Ms. Nevada.” https://nypost.com/2019/08/22/ms-nevada-i-was- stripped-of-beauty-crown-because-i-support-trump/.
Certainly, she is entitled to her private life. But she put this on her page(s) as a designated competitor who, in some sense, represents the pageant and its rules of decorum and inclusiveness. However, she undertook certain obligations as a Miss Nevada and as a designated competitor for the national beauty pageant. And that is the standard by which it must be judged. If she wants to be in their pageant under contract as an official Miss Nevada and competing for the national title, then she is obligated to fulfill the rules as the pageant dictates. In competing for the state title and for the national title, there are certain requirements to observe. There can't be any lurid scandal associated with the contestant. There has to be a very direct standard for what the eventual winner will do or not do as the title holder. Even if she won the national title, she would have even more obligations to obey the petty dictates of the pageant committee. As she ascended in the beauty pageant contests, her responsibility to obey the committee in all publicity matters only increases until the day she is no longer a state contestant or until the day after she is no longer the national title holder. She has no recourse to legal action because it's ridiculous to think any state contestant can actually sue their way into winning the national title. And if she can't win the national title, then why even compete since she already has the Miss Nevada title? She may as well sell out and pose for a girlie mag to pay off college debts and call it a day. Her only recourse would be if other contestants were using their social media pages as homage to 0bama or Hitlery or one of the current Dem prez candidates. If the pageant took action against only one contestant and not against others doing the same thing, then there might be a (remote) chance of legal action. As long as the rules are applied uniformly, she doesn't have a legal pot to piss in. Even so, the courts are likely to be reluctant to involve themselves in something as subjective as a beauty pageant. Would you be as willing to demand freedom of speech for a contestant who was carrying water for 0bama or Hitlery or Biden or Warren or some political cause like abortion that you really hate? I think not.
I'm not a huge fan of Trump as you may know, nor am I a fan of any of the Dems you mentioned, but this just stinks. None of those contestants would have been stripped of the title had they won. The would have been praised and exalted, by the pageant and the medi.. Double standard. I still contend that she did everything possible to abide by the rules, but the pageant director kept moving the goalposts specifically for her. "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. They've stripped others of their titles before. Quite a few times actually. If you are in their pageant and you have signed their contract, you'd better obey their rules. They have all the power and you should know it by the time you have won a state pageant and sign up for the national pageant by signing the contracts. Their pageant, their rules. Just as the contract says pretty plainly. You keep saying this or implying it but I have yet to see you provide any proof that other state title holders are doing the same thing on their pages. If it is true, provide some evidence.
I do believe she followed their rules - it seems clear to me that this was a set-up all along. You keep saying this or implying it but I have yet to see you provide any proof that other state title holders are doing the same thing on their pages. It would be naive to think that they didn't.
Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen. "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." - Hanlon's razor And the pageant may be taking a more anti-politics stance here, given how sick people are of hearing politics in every sphere of life. I know I don't watch hardly anything any more because I'm so sick of all the politics in everything. Sports, music, movies, TV, and now beauty pageants. These hirelings need to keep their fucking opinions to themselves. Not a single person in America craves more politics in their entertainment.
I will continue … I trust the following will address all three of your charges. ALL the pageant asked of Ms. Williams, in writing, is to keep separate social media accounts. (ie: Facebook) One is for politics where she can voice her own opinion as Katie Williams and the other is a new Facebook page for the pageant representing Ms. Nevada State 2019. None of this had to do with her personal political views. They are immaterial. She has her Personal Facebook page to voice her political views. She could be a President Trump supporter on her Personal Facebook page all she wants for everyone to read. However, the Ms. Nevada Facebook Page should be devoid of political content. ________________ The Ms. America Pageant is a No Politics pageant. It is in our Rules & Regulations as posted on the pageant website and therefore available to read before applying to the pageant. It is also included in our contracts and requires handwritten initials and signatures acknowledging that you have read and understood the pageants rules. Ms. Williams acknowledged both verbally and in writing that she understood these rules before she was accepted into the pageant. Nothing on her Facebook Page had any political statements at the time she was accepted into the pageant. The purpose for these Rules and Regulations is that the Ms. America Pageant does not want to be seen as endorsing any political candidate or political cause. Thru many emails starting in July she claimed she could not comprehend keeping pageant and politics separate on her Facebook pages. The pageant made many attempts to speak to her over the phone to try to resolve this issue. Many times we wrote to her to try to set up an appointment to have a telephone conference, all of which she consistently refuse to do. The pageant believes that a telephone conversation is a reasonable request and was willing to speak to her at any time that was convenient for her schedule. The pageant gave her a final deadline to edit the Facebook pages which she refused to do. This leads the pageant to believe that she is no longer capable of representing this pageant as Ms. Nevada State 2019, and she is no longer eligible to participate in the 2019 national pageant. Her title has been revoked. The pageant offered her a full refund on her entry fee and refund on one ticket that she purchased to the pageant after she fulfilled requirements of returning crown and sash and removal of the title Ms. Nevada State 2019 from all social media and the Internet. ________________ PAGEANT WEBSITE OF RULES AND REGULATIONS ________________ AGREEMENT HAND SIGNED BY KATIE WILLIAMS ________________ REVOCATION OF TITLE LETTER ________________ ________________ https://msamericapageant.com/page.php?groupingID=miscellaneous16
Yeah, quit being to so long winded. Moreover, what did you do to yukon?
Nice document inclusion. The key phrase that sticks out is the one which declares MAP as the sole arbiter of acceptable conduct and participation and that there is no venue for appeal or for suing the pageant. I think it would be hard to get into court with a civil suit. No judge wants to wade into that by setting aside contractual obligations expressed in straightforward legalese. If only sports/movies/TV and other venues would embrace the same standard. I'm sick of the politics, especially liberal politics, being injected into everything. If you want to show your tits and ass in a swimsuit, then just do it. Spare us your political lectures and promotional branding nonsense. After all, we only cared about the tits and ass to begin with.
In Post 20 , you will find in a letter from Susan Jeske, CEO Ms. America Pageant, to Katie Jo Williams [dated August 18, 2019] where Susan Jeske enumerated 9 instances in Footnote 2 where Katie Williams violated her signed agreement. Can you dispute Susan Jeske’s findings or show where Katie Williams did not violate the signed agreement in those instances? Again I ask, “what is the basis for you to “believe that Katie Williams followed their rules? You said it “would be naïve” to think that “other state title holders didn’t do the same thing on their pages.” It appears that you are just “thinking” that they are – while you have absolutely no proof that they are. When you're thinking something is happening and there is no proof that it is, then you're imagining it. You need to stop conjuring up these wildly strong justifications to substantiate your weak positions.
jussie swoleTT injury scam arTisTs The liberal gold mine To fund Their queerdom gods - hell - supersTaTe love ps liberTarians have Their overloaded kook cave sasquaTch - deckard buckeroo - toolconservaTive to fund theirs Too
If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !
liberTarians 2 MuCh ObsErvng PaulTuRd liberTarians dickHead – buckerRoot toolconservaTive - PinhEad Kan cAus devout KristIAnS to almost belV as A theory oriGins of biological Dvsrty. salute
Those clauses are illegitimate and you can sue anyway.
Point Q renders the contract null and void. It violate her free speech rights. You cannot be forced to give up a constitutional right in a contract.
Oh so you can talk about politics.
You are expressing your personal opinion here. In reality you will find that when you try to sue after you have signed a “covenant not to sue” – you will quickly learn that the “suit in law" you desire to have heard in a court of law ”will never go before a court of law.” This is true since “covenants not to sue are used to settle specific legal issues "outside of the court system”.
Oh so you [Katie Williams] can talk about politics. You will see in Post 20, a letter from Susan Jeske, CEO Ms. America Pageant, to Katie Jo Williams [dated August 18, 2019] where Susan Jeske enumerated 9 instances in Footnote 2 where Katie Williams violated her signed agreement. You can also read where Katie Williams was given ample opportunities to “edit” those posts and she “refused” to do so. It was never about her not being able to “talk politics” – it was always about her not representing herself as “Ms. Nevada” by wearing the crown and sash while “talking politics” and she violated her sign agreement by doing that on at least 9 occasions. So, Katie, say “goodbye” to your title …
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.
That I did, and so ever courageously. That you appear to be proud of that fact only further displays your lack of character. And I will forever continue to defend any and all who are wrongly, viscously and maliciously charged. Yeah sure Parsons - he was "hacked", or so you claimed.
Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen. Yada,yada,yada.
Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen. The CEO of MAP linked to 9 different instances she did not. So she alleged and provided no supporting factual documentation to that effect. The agreement she signed NEVER changed. It specifically stated “NO POLITICS.” [See Post 20] This an unsubstantiated claim by you. She signed the rules and she violated the rule stating ”no politics” on at least 9 specific occasions. [See links in Post 20].
Yada,yada,yada.
...towards perverts like your man-crush yukon.
Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen. Not at all. I am very much a free speech guy. However, if you are competing for a chance at scholarships, paid travel, maybe a chance at modeling or in video journalism and you are entering some beauty pageant to try to open those doors, that is essentially a job application to become their employee and reap those benefits. If they restrict something like politics (or appearing in porn) by contract, that is their right as the owners of the pageant and as a brand that is used to attract worthwhile candidates to their pageant. In that case, the rules are what they say they are and can be arbitrary (by design). It's their pageant. And she read and signed their contract. She further has knowledge that both state pageant winners and even a few national pageant winners have had their titles taken away for somewhat arbitrary reasons not involving illegal behavior by a contestant. And once she had won the state title, the state pageant director is increasingly unimportant (even if she urged her to get pictures with the Trumps) and the CEO and national director and pageant board are in control. When they told her "no politics", she should have cleared every bit of political content off her pages, both personal pages and pageant pages. Because if she didn't do that, they would have legal cause to strip her title and she would have no legal recourse. People do sign away their free speech rights every single day in non-disclosure agreements. They sign away their right to apply to work for the competitors of their current employer via non-compete clauses in their contracts. They sign away their intellectual property rights for their inventions in employment contracts that say that anything they produce while employed by a company belongs to that company even if their invention is not directly related to their work product at that company. Pageants have always been a shady operation, run by scumbags. You'd better understand up front before you ever apply for one exactly what you're getting into. It doesn't help this former Miss Nevada that beauty pageants are, by definition, stupid. And clearly arbitrary in choosing winners. The ex-Miss Nevada is very unlikely to find a sympathetic court to hear her claims.
At least you admit that the application of the rules in this case was arbitrary. And stupid.
Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen. But I love those crutches. They're LP and LF memes that are very popular. Establish a room full of people and they may never agree on who they like. But they will always find someone to hate. Online forums reflect that basic truth. LOL. Gotcha! And it is gay porn. Clearly a rainbowed black man hugging a stars-n-stripes white man, both with shaved heads (eliminates racial attributes of hair texture/color). The photo is strongly suggestive that both are entirely nude and that their genitals are touching each other's hips. Notice that White Uncle Sam is cradling his head on Black Rainbow's shoulder in a submissive and emotively receptive attitude toward Black Rainbow. This is a message, clearly. And my description of it is way too honest for Twitter to allow to be peddled on their little propaganda venue. The photo is, in fact, a cheesy ripoff of Mapplethorpe's photography but without the charm of a bullwhip rammed up his butt and snapshotted for posterity. Anyway, it's totally gay. And you posted it. Thank you. Apparently my consistency has finally helped you learn at least a few things over the years. It's very rewarding.
And stupid. When did I deny it? I didn't say I agreed with the policy.
Only a libertarian would ever see defending a malicious injustice as being a “man-crush.” You presented such a shameful display of anosognosia – a malady most commonly found in all libertarians.
I don’t know how this thread got on to discussing “can she sue – or can she not sue” and got off the point of the original discussion which began where I stated in Post 1: “It is simple and should be easily understood.” I then proceed to factually document – many times over – the evidence MAP presented to show the violations by Williams. Nowhere has Williams – or anyone on this thread – ever shown that Williams did not violate the agreement when she posed with her crown and sash on at least 9 instances doing political discussions. Please ping me when you can do that … Thank you …
Prove it. While you're at it, prove that Miss Nevada isn't just using all this as a publicity stunt, perhaps so she can go on a college speaking tour at conservative and Christian colleges and private schools. Maybe Miss Nevada knew she had 2% (or less) chance of winning the title/scholarships/travel/resume but that she could garner some free publicity and an opening for a chance at something a lot more rewarding to her financially than trying to win to win a booby prize like Miss Congeniality. I think it is clear that they are all playing a lot of publicity games and have been all along. I take none of it at face value. Except that contract that she signed. Toss everything else out of court and the key fact is that she still voluntarily signed that contract and knew that rules can and will be enforced on contestants and especially on the winner.
I did appreciate your effort to bring some evidence to bear so we were not in a fact-free dispute, as we so often are on LF threads where you get a lot more arguments and bickering than facts. I would say that nolu is still a little better at it, more consistent, perhaps has better resources on legal topics. But you're no slouch at adducing facts to support your argument.
I will say that you are the only libertarian I have ever known to possess and display at least some sort of small human intelligence on various isolated occasions. This was not "name calling" Stone - This is to be considered a compliment.
His presentations are great - I only wish they were shorter and get to the point more quickly and directly.
[I gathered this last night, forgot to hit Post on it. This sheds some light on their organizational structure at local/state/national levels and also on their grievance processes.] To get an idea of the organizational structure, let's look at the grievance policy from their website. Scope: Address Local & State Organization Concerns. Purpose: Receive and facilitate the resolution of unresolved Local and State grievances. A fair process to resolve real issues of fact-based grievances which were unable to be resolved at the State Organization level. This does not replace your existing process for resolving local and state grievance concerns. Should a grievance remain unresolved in your state, this is another avenue for resolution. A State Organization may adopt this process if preferred, but it is not necessary to change what is already working for your organization. Policy & Procedure Grievance Notification: After unsuccessful resolution attempts with State Organization, Grievant can file an online submission to MAO’s Office of the CEO/President at https://form.jotform.com/80935860335158. Depending on the nature of the grievance, it may be required to be turned over to legal counsel. Submission to include detailed attempt(s) for resolution, as well as details of the complaint, including social media posts, emails, etc. Submission is confidential in nature and grievant must agree to confidentiality. Identity of grievant may be shared with interested parties to properly investigate grievance and obtain resolution. Multiple grievants will file individually, however they may be bundled during the investigative process. Grievance Committee: to review and investigate grievance. Random selection of three (3) members from Licensee State EDs and MASTA members for each occurrence, it is not a standing committee: Grievance against ED or volunteer – two (2) State EDs and one (1) MASTA member Grievance against Titleholder – two (2) MASTA members and one (1) State ED Selected panel is required to sign Conflict of Interest Disclosure Form before proceeding. Grievance Committee Proceedings: first committee meeting to be held within ten (10) days of MAO’s notification that grievance is accepted. At conclusion of investigation, the randomly selected Grievance Committee will make recommendation for any appropriate corrective or disciplinary action to Miss America Board of Trustees within thirty (30) days.
I say the same thing about my own posts. Too long. I need to work more on conveying more info, more concisely and unambiguously.
Legally, the CEO was dotting i's and crossing t's. The pageant does anticipate lawsuits. That kind of documentation is prep work for a possible disqualification.
I am here to testify to that fact with an – AMEN - shout out. In fact, you speak so freely that I can truly say you are without a doubt the most loquacious person on LF. And I am in second place while trailing along right behind you – following in your footsteps.
I've been bored lately and a little hyper. So after being gone from the site for months and posting nothing, I find myself posting a lot more, maybe just from boredom. I think I'm losing my ability to watch TV and find it entertaining. Or even interesting enough to try to follow the details of a story or a news program. Even stuff I would normally like. It's troubling because you start to wonder what you'll do with that time you'd normally waste on entertainment and news. I considered a new hobby, maybe 3d printing or flying a drone. Just not that appealing or something I could really spend much time at.
Williams 0 - Pageant 1.
Pageant wins.
#2. To: Gatlin (#1)
(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.
#3. To: Deckard (#0)
#4. To: Deckard (#2)
(Edited)
… that the organisers continued to voice their disapproval in personal communications of what she was posting on her personal account.
… that Williams was posting her Trump-related political content to the Ms. Nevada Facebook page which is strictly prohibited.
Williams 0 – Pageant 1.
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.
“No Harm – No Foul.”
Williams was prohibited from posting her Trump-related political content to the Ms. Nevada Facebook page and she posted her Trump-related political content to the Ms. Nevada Facebook page. When there is a foul committed by breaking a rule there can be an ejection. “Williams broke a rule – The pageant ejected her.”
With the score of Williams=0 and the Pageant=1, her “game” association with the pageant “was called” because of “player disqualification.”
#5. To: Tooconservative (#3)
(Edited)
I don't disagree with the pageant.
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.
#6. To: Deckard (#5)
(Edited)
Apparently she was told to run separate social media accounts – one where she could voice her opinions and an ‘apolitical’ one for the contest.
Williams signed an agreement to keep her politics separate from her pageant social media page. The pageant said that Ms. Williams acknowledged both verbally and in writing that she understood these rules before she was accepted into the pageant. The pageant also said that Williams was posting her Trump-related political content to the Ms. Nevada Facebook page which is strictly prohibited.
#7. To: Gatlin (#6)
Williams signed an agreement to keep her politics separate from her pageant social media page. The pageant said that Ms. Williams acknowledged both verbally and in writing that she understood these rules before she was accepted into the pageant
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.
#8. To: Tooconservative (#3)
#9. To: Deckard (#7)
#10. To: A K A Stone (#8)
(Edited)
You're wrong you should be a able to have a personal life too.
Nothing she did was wrong.
A legally binding written agreement is an agreement which is valid and therefore enforceable. It means that the parties who have signed the agreement are expected to fulfil their obligations under the agreement. If they do not, they may be penalised. Although agreements do not have to be written to be legally binding, it is a good idea to have a written record of what you have agreed to. This minimises the risk of a dispute by ensuring you and the other party are on the same page. This article explains the requirements you need to satisfy to have a legally binding written agreement.
#11. To: Gatlin (#10)
#12. To: A K A Stone, Gatlin, Tooconservative (#11)
(Edited)
There is no breach of the contract.
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.
#13. To: A K A Stone (#11)
There is no breach of the contract.
There is a breach of a written agreement [contract]. Show me the part of the contract she broke.
Read: [The written] AGREEMENT [that is] HAND SIGNED BY KATIE WILLIAMS. You can't it's you speculating what the contract says.
I was not speculating. [To TC earlier] - You're wrong you should be a able to have a personal life too.
I politely and kindly ask you once again: Does “having a personal life” mean having the right to unilaterally breech a written agreement [contract] and break the terms set forth in such agreement?
#14. To: Deckard (#12)
She used her personal facebook account to make political comments
Yes she did. In a statement, the Ms. America Pageant said Williams is “distorting the facts” about her disqualification.
Boy, she damned well showed the pageant she can do what she wants to – didn’t she? [/s].
#15. To: A K A Stone, Deckard, Gatlin, nolu chan (#8)
You're wrong you should be a ableto have a personal life too. Nothing she did was wrong.
#16. To: Tooconservative (#15)
Would you be as willing to demand freedom of speech for a contestant who was carrying water for 0bama or Hitlery or Biden or Warren or some political cause like abortion that you really hate?
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.
#17. To: Deckard (#16)
(Edited)
None of those contestants would have been stripped of the title had they won.
Double standard.
#18. To: Tooconservative (#17)
If you are in their pageant and you have signed their contract, you'd better obey their rules.
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.
#19. To: Deckard (#18)
(Edited)
It would be naive to think that they didn't.
#20. To: A K A Stone, Deckard (#11)
I’m sorry that it took longer than expected for me to get back to you. There is no breach of the contract.
Show me the part of the contract she broke.
You can't it's you speculating what the contract says.Katie Williams is distorting the facts.
I have attempted here to show you all the things you asked me to show you.
(See below)
(See her hand written signature below)
(See below disqualifying Email and offering her a full refund)
No Politics 
4-17-19
Agreeing to the NO Politics Rule
Offering her a full refund on her money.
8-18-19
I believe I have done that.
Is there anything else you need from me?
#21. To: Gatlin (#20)
Is there anything else you need from me?
#22. To: Gatlin (#20)
#23. To: Deckard (#18)
I do believe she [Katie Williams] followed their rules -
What is the basis for you to believe that? it seems clear to me that this was a set-up all along.
What is it that gives you a clear picture that Katie Williams “was set-up all along?”
#24. To: Gatlin (#23)
boris
#25. To: BorisY (#24)
(Edited)
ps
Gatlin
#26. To: Tooconservative (#22)
The key phrase that sticks out is the one which declares MAP as the sole arbiter of acceptable conduct and participation and that there is no venue for appeal or for suing the pageant.
#27. To: Gatlin (#20)
#28. To: Gatlin (#20)
IF you would like to post about your political positions then create a new FB profile page for pageants only
#29. To: A K A Stone (#26)
(Edited)
Those [covenants not to sue] clauses are illegitimate and you can sue anyway.
Nope, they are not “illegitimate” – and – Nope, you cannot “sue anyway.” “A covenant ‘not to sue’ legally obliges a party that could initiate a lawsuit not to do so."
Perhaps you will better understand the fallacy of your personal opinion after you read: ”Covenant Not to Sue Defined”.
"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."
#30. To: A K A Stone (#28)
Katie Williams IF you [Katie Williams] would like to post about your political positions then …
Of course, Katie Williams can talk about politics. She was never forbidden to do so. She, however, signed an agreement where she is expressly forbidden to wear her crown and sash when talking politics.
#31. To: Gatlin (#29)
#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.
#72. To: Gatlin (#70)
In fact - you DEFENDED {yukon}.
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.
#73. To: Gatlin (#71)
Sarcasm is a defense mechanism and it definitely is not a very good one because of the inherent negative nature of sarcasm.
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.
#74. To: Deckard (#65)
She FOLLOWED THE RULES.
The pageant director kept arbitrarily changing the rules specifically for her.
It was a set-up to get her disqualified …
#75. To: Deckard (#73)
Sarcasm is a defense mechanism and it definitely is not a very good one because of the inherent negative nature of sarcasm.
#76. To: Deckard (#72)
That you appear to be proud of that fact only further displays your lack of character.
It displays not the lack of character but is displays a quality that defines me as a considerate human being – and along with courage, kindness and friendship, propels me toward the achievement of greatness.
#77. To: Gatlin (#76)
(Edited)
displays a quality that defines me as a considerate human being...
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.
#78. To: A K A Stone, Gatlin (#59)
It's sounding like TC and Gatlin like a PC world where your thoughts are forbidden to be thought or shared.
#79. To: Tooconservative (#78)
It doesn't help this former Miss Nevada that beauty pageants are, by definition, stupid. And clearly arbitrary in choosing winners.
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.
#80. To: Gatlin (#60)
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.
That was not “Gatlin posting HIS gay Twitter porn” – smart ass.
Tooconservative, you are so damned PREDICTABLE – All the way to the core depth of your libertarian being.
#81. To: Deckard (#79)
At least you admit that the application of the rules in this case was arbitrary.
#82. To: Deckard (#77)
#83. To: All (#82)
#84. To: Deckard (#65)
The pageant director kept arbitrarily changing the rules specifically for her.
#85. To: Gatlin (#83)
I don’t know how this thread got on to discussing “can she sue – or can she not sue” and got off the point of the original discussion which began where I stated in Post 1: “It is simple and should be easily understood.” I then proceed to factually document – many times over – the evidence MAP presented to show the violations by Williams.
#86. To: Tooconservative, A K A Stone (#80)
#87. To: Tooconservative, nolu chan (#85)
... nolu is still a little better at it ...
#88. To: Deckard (#57)
#89. To: Gatlin (#87)
His presentations are great - I only wish they were shorter and get to the point more quickly and directly.
#90. To: Gatlin (#74)
The CEO of MAP linked to 9 different instances she did not.
#91. To: Tooconservative, A K A Stone (#78)
(Edited)
Not at all. I am very much a free speech guy.
#92. To: Gatlin (#91)
In fact, you speak so freely that I can truly say you are without a doubt the most loquacious person on LF.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]