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: 9127
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 (1-52) not displayed.
.
.
.
#53. To: Gatlin (#41)
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.
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]