Yeah, it should be pointed out that I didn't notice the typo in which I meant it WOULDN"T stop her from appearing, but should stop her from being a paid board member, etc. ... I woke up from a bad acid reflux attack, sat the keys for awhile until it went away, and wrote the above during that time period.
Baking soda is your friend.
I took some, actually, but for me it takes awhile for the general ickiness which accompanies to go away. So I sit up, drag myself to the keys (my bed isn't great for sitting up and looking at a tablet) and kill 15-20 minutes before I feel like curling back into bed. I've adjusted my diet and sleep regimen such that I only hit one of these every 2 to 3 months now, so I think I'm good ... but this week I did a staycation, took leave from work, and completely trashed my diet, so things happen.
Story of my life, but add joint and muscle pains to the reflux for the reason to be up chopping at the words in the middle of the night.
A Member . . . [or an] officer, or employee of the House [paid at or above the “senior staff” rate], may not –
(a) receive compensation for affiliating with or being employed by a firm, partnership, association, corporation, or other entity that provides professional services involving a fiduciary relationship, except for the practice of medicine;
(b) permit his name to be used by such a firm, partnership, association, corporation, or other entity;
(c) receive compensation for practicing a profession that involves a fiduciary relationship, except for the practice of medicine;
(d) serve for compensation as an officer or member of the board of an association, corporation, or other entity; or
(e) receive compensation for teaching, without the prior notification and approval of the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct. [House Rule 25, clause 2. See also 5 U.S.C. app. 4 § 502(a).]
This is just one little section, but it goes on and on and on with loopholes wide enough to cruise a battleship through. To me it looks like you can't practice law, can't be a fiduciary, serve on a board, can't teach without permission and can't receive advanced royalties on books or other publications. But say, running farm, or a construction company or a car dealership (that does not sell to the government) are all things that I know they are doing now or have done in the past.
So, apparently the Senate ethics rules are different, since Felito offered to argue a case on tRump's behalf before the Supremes. Or is arguing before the Supreme Court not considered the practice of law?
Marjorie Taylor Greene [R - Deliverance Country]
Posted: Sat Nov 05, 2022 5:11 pm
by tek
humblescribe wrote: ↑Sat Nov 05, 2022 3:27 pm
So, apparently the Senate ethics rules are different, since Felito offered to argue a case on tRump's behalf before the Supremes. Or is arguing before the Supreme Court not considered the practice of law?
3.) Anything Ted Cruz does is not considered the practice of law.
Marjorie Taylor Greene [R - Deliverance Country]
Posted: Sat Nov 05, 2022 11:58 pm
by Gregg
He didn't do it, he said he would, which he wouldn't but it made a good sound bite and also let TFG know that even after all they had been through, he still was willing to suffer any indignity to publicly suck up to him.
Marjorie Taylor Greene [R - Deliverance Country]
Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2022 8:56 pm
by northland10
During the Georgia court process for hearing the challenge against MTG to disqualify her from the ballot, she filed for a preliminary injunction in federal court. It was denied, and she appealed. The 11th finally ruled on it recently and dismissed the case because they found that it was now moot since the challenge is long finished. Her counsel argued it was not moot because it falls under the capable of repetition but evading review doctrine.* The court was not impressed.
There was a concurring opinion. A justice agreed it was moot but thought the district court's ruling was in error. I have not bothered to read it so have no opinions.
* Some may remember this argument was tried with birther cases but failed because it would not evade review if those filing cases knew how to follow rules and be on time with filings.
Marjorie Taylor Greene [R - Deliverance Country]
Posted: Wed Nov 09, 2022 11:42 am
by pipistrelle
She won 66% to 34%. To which I can say only:
Marjorie Taylor Greene [R - Deliverance Country]
Posted: Wed Nov 09, 2022 1:29 pm
by noblepa
pipistrelle wrote: ↑Wed Nov 09, 2022 11:42 am
She won 66% to 34%. To which I can say only:
There are organizations that track how many federal dollars each state gets. It would be interesting to see if the amount that Georgia gets has gone down in the two years that emptygee has been "representing" the state.
Unfortunately, if wouldn't really prove anything, one way or the other. There are 13 other representatives who understand better than she that one of their primary jobs is to steer federal money back to GA. But she certainly isn't helping GA get their piece of the pie.
Marjorie Taylor Greene [R - Deliverance Country]
Posted: Wed Nov 09, 2022 1:50 pm
by Ben-Prime
pipistrelle wrote: ↑Wed Nov 09, 2022 11:42 am
She won 66% to 34%. To which I can say only:
My hot take: At this point, the citizens of her district have told us who they are and no longer get to disclaim otherwise. The ones that didn't vote for her, I feel sorry for them, but I reserve the right to believe unless I actually know them (either personally or, f'rinstance, through this board) that it is more likely than not what type of person they are.
pipistrelle wrote: ↑Wed Nov 09, 2022 11:42 am
She won 66% to 34%. To which I can say only:
My hot take: At this point, the citizens of her district have told us who they are and no longer get to disclaim otherwise. The ones that didn't vote for her, I feel sorry for them, but I reserve the right to believe unless I actually know them (either personally or, f'rinstance, through this board) that it is more likely than not what type of person they are.
I'd say that the odds are about 2:1 that they are who you (and I) think they are.
Marjorie Taylor Greene [R - Deliverance Country]
Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2022 7:43 am
by bill_g
Well, we shall see if she can keep her crazy in check enough to hold a committee assignment this term. Maybe she matured. hahahaha
Marjorie Taylor Greene [R - Deliverance Country]
Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2022 8:38 am
by noblepa
bill_g wrote: ↑Thu Nov 10, 2022 7:43 am
Well, we shall see if she can keep her crazy in check enough to hold a committee assignment this term. Maybe she matured. hahahaha
If the R's take the House, crazy will be a prerequisite for committee assignments.
Only one of the two is doing a lot of quacking right now.
Marjorie Taylor Greene [R - Deliverance Country]
Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2022 2:10 pm
by Frater I*I
Ben-Prime wrote: ↑Wed Nov 09, 2022 1:50 pm
My hot take: At this point, the citizens of her district have told us who they are and no longer get to disclaim otherwise. The ones that didn't vote for her, I feel sorry for them, but I reserve the right to believe unless I actually know them (either personally or, f'rinstance, through this board) that it is more likely than not what type of person they are.
Tinfoil-Greed is exactly what the large majority of north GA people act like...
Even central GA and south GA rural folks think they're a bit "off"....
Marjorie Taylor Greene [R - Deliverance Country]
Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2022 2:41 pm
by Kendra
Does she mean quaking?
Marjorie Taylor Greene [R - Deliverance Country]
Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2022 2:57 pm
by Annrc
Marjorie Taylor Greene [R - Deliverance Country]
Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2022 6:21 pm
by Gregg
Kendra wrote: ↑Thu Nov 10, 2022 2:41 pm
Does she mean quaking?
Could be...
Marjorie Taylor Greene [R - Deliverance Country]
Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2022 9:46 pm
by RTH10260
"If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a follower of Donald ..."
Elon Musk’s Twitter has reinstated the personal account of far-right Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, which was banned in January for violating the platform’s COVID misinformation policies at the time.
Greene’s reinstatement comes after Musk over the weekend reinstated the account of former President Donald Trump, who was banned in the aftermath of the deadly Jan. 6 riots on the Capitol in 2021. Twitter — at the time — feared there was a risk of further incitement to violence if Trump was allowed to remain on the platform. Trump himself has said he won’t return to Twitter and as of Monday had not yet tweeted since the reinstatement, although he also hasn’t deleted his account.
Musk apparently based his decision to allow Trump back on the site on an unscientific Twitter poll he posted on his timeline. There appeared to be no such poll for Greene’s account. Earlier, Musk said he won’t make major decisions about content or restoring banned accounts before setting up a “ content moderation council ” with diverse viewpoints.
