Great line from a great movie...
https://youtu.be/wcMCS_6oung?t=36
As I was following today's episode of Speaker Shitdown, I was puzzled by two striking moments, which simply shouldn't happen during a meeting of the US House of Representives (well, sorta... nobody has actually been seated yet, so we technically don't have a House yet, which makes no sense how members-elect are conducting the House business of choosing a Speaker, but I digress...)
After the 6th ballot failed, a motion was made to adjourn to 8pm EST, so technically a recess. In a simple voice vote, it certainly sounded like the Nays had it. Yet, the clerk (presiding temporarily as chair since there is no Speaker) determined that the Yeas had it. Didn't even ask for a second vote to confirm. Nobody motioned for a role call vote, which was mind numbing given that the Nays very clearly had it.
When the group returned at 8pm, there was a motion to adjourn until tomorrow. This time the voice vote was actually too close to call, though still sounded like Nays had it. Mics were picking up chatter that sounded like somebody instructing the clerk that "the Yeas had it" (I was watching CSPAN, so don't know what other feeds picked up). But thankfully somebody motioned for a role call vote, which after some time and confusion, was conducted. Like with the votes for Speaker, a majority vote is 218. After the votes were given, with several late votes counted (I think they were either via proxy or changed?), the total was read as 216 Yea and 214 Nay and others not voting.
The motion to adjourn to tomorrow FAILED to attain a majority approval (218). Yet the clerk ruled that the motion passed. It didn't. It failed. They should still be there right now.
Either these idiots are indeed actors, and don't actually know what the hell is going on, or they do and just don't care.
In any case, this show needs a better editor to make sure mistakes like this don't make the final cut...
-----------UPDATE-------------
Reviewed tape. Here's the first vote:
https://youtu.be/jERbq_84vHs?t=4881
Fat white dude with glasses to her right appears to be the person literally telling her what to say. There were absolutely calls for a ROLL CALL. They were flat out ignored. Then she says "does a member demand the As and As?" What a clown show!
Now to the second adjournment vote at 8pm EST
https://youtu.be/jERbq_84vHs?t=17628
Again, this lady has to be fed every line and then reading from a script. She has no clue what she is doing. Again, the Nays had the voice vote, but chaos and confusion ensues. Fatty White Dude keeps trying to coach her along. He tells her that SHE has to call it as she "hears it." But she doesn't call it. At 4:54:54 HE tells her to say "the Ayes have it the yeas and nays are ordered," then corrected to "are requested." SHE didn't make the judgement. Fatty White Dude did. Who the hell is he? Does have have any procedural authority? Doubt it!
At 4:55:08 he tells her "continue to read." To read WHAT? Oh, the script right in front of her.
https://youtu.be/jERbq_84vHs?t=18624
When the time expired, Yea-204, Nay-207, NV-23. Motion fails. Yet, votes were continued to be allowed, eventually she has to ask "have all members voted"? With a response of "no." Eventually the graphic gets to Y-209, N-211. She asks if anyone wishes to change their vote. Responses of "no." Are vote changes even allowed?? Votes just keep getting added, eventually Y-216, N-214, NV-4. Again, NO MAJORITY. Script didn't go according to plan... the script she is LITERALLY READING FROM.
after this fiasco...
/End scene.
---------UPDATE 4---------
Having watched video more closely today, it appears I mistook the man in question for Rep Jason Smith. Don't know whoever that guy is, the one basically telling the clerk what to say. I did notice how he didn't have to do that at all today. Maybe they read this thread and put more work into memorizing their lines and script last night? 🤔😂 As for Smith, he is still indeed a MAGA badass, and far less husky than the dude in glasses who was feeding lines. Apologies for the mistake and any confusion it may have caused!
The first vote is incredible. It's very obvious the Nays had it. And she calmly declared Ayes have it, without even a blink.
Very interesting!
Yeah, this part is even more dasting. When the Nays were really loud, the lady basically froze. (Somehow the camera switched to long distance at the same moment). And then pretty much the guy coaching her to continue reading.
It is definitely a SCRIPT !
I’ve been saying since the speeches started on Tuesday after the first vote, that it felt scripted to me. If you listen to each speech by the GOP nominating reps, they are messages to people who have not been following politics before. Democracy is “messy” is one phrase from yesterday.
These people just happened to have these great speeches written and ready to go? White hats are in control!
I happen to know that they do keep speeches, actually more like pieces of speeches, that can and do get used when they are relevant. They know how they feel about whatever they are voting on, and can speak extemporaneously on it well. Add the more personalized part of the speech that's relevant. Voila. They have a binder or file that keeps them all together, and once one gets used it either gets thrown, or put at the bottom to avoid using it again any time soon
Absolutely accurate.
Speech prep is one of many staffer's duties concerning the officials they are subordinate to.
i LOVE the last part of the sentence: "White hats are in control!"...YA' gotta love it!!!!😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎
Return to OP for updates. It appears that the director of the show managing her, was Parliamentrian, Jason Smith, a badass MAGA Republican from Missouri.
Wait, the guy telling her what to say is a MAGA republican?
Huge if true
From what it appears, YES. The guy looks like Jason Smith, the House Parliamentarian since 2020... since 2020... a badass MAGA Republican... SINCE 2020.
Patriots Have Always been in Control
OP updated. Better look at video from today. The guy I'm referring to isn't Smith. No idea who he is. Would love to know. But damn was Smith all over the place during that final adjournment vote, and then with the guy giving the final vote from the balcony. I suspect he had a much more important role in this production
Just watch and listen to her, especially at the second vote, when she's clearly reading a script... it's so blatant!
And none of the people we assumed were good guys noticed any of this.... lol.... they still could be good guys, but not calling this out is sus.
My read is that these people know its all a charade, so its hard for them to differentiate from optics and blooper.
If we are under Martial Law, none of this matters anyways right?
We are working to restore the public of 1877, but it all has to appear organic to the normies. Otherwise:
Interesting take. Several of us posted a four year delta yesterday:
461
04-Jan-2018 12:54:28 AM EST 8ch/pol
What makes a movie GOOD?
GREAT actors?
Q
https://qposts.online/?q=461&s=postnum
Someone also pointed out President Trump had a Truth post yesterday that has GOOD and GREAT in all caps.
Some of these actors have given Oscar worthy performances. Others, have been just terrible... I mean, like high school play rejects.
Oh shit…. He did actually have good and great in all caps and I thought it was odd at the time.
If the NFL incident was staged then Hamlin is one hell of an actor. The way he fell means he had to overcome the instinct to break his fall.
The one peculiar thing about his fall that caught my eye is his hands landed behind his head when he hit the ground. Before he lost consciousness he moved them down to each side of his stomach.
Every pro wrestler has to train to overcome that basic survival instinct to break your fall.
And it is NOT easy. It sometimes takes YEARS to do.
I think what happened was legit.
Also could have been staged, without his knowledge. Tech exists. For whatever reason, he could have just been the unlucky dude to get zapped
I have had the role of running many "official" meetings governed by Roberts Rule of Order. Whenever elections or other serious business happens, I have always scripted out the process to make sure that it's done properly. I have also polled people to get a sense of what is going to happen and have talking tracks based upon the likely scenario. I also have a cheat sheet about RRO with me with definitions and workflows in case somebody really wants to make a challenge for some reason.
In situations where the group may have to vote to suspend rules (say a quorum is present to have a meeting, but not enough member organizations to hold a leadership vote), I generally line up people to make the motion and the second ahead of time to suspend those bylaws. And then I'll explain what is going on to the group so that they understand what decision needs to be made to move the business forward.
It's near impossible to memorize everything. You literally have to eat, breathe, and sleep RRO for a long time to intricately know it by memory. The fact that I've formally participated or run these things ~2 dozen times makes me seem like an expert. But the reality is that I have just enough experience to prepare for the situation ahead of time so it looks way better than I feel it is going. And it's not at all unusual to refer to the Parliamentarian to get a second opinion on how to proceed.
You might be reading into this a little too much. To me it seems like the Clerk is just doing their best to get through a very formal process that doesn't happen all that often. Encouraging NV to change so everybody can go home when the sense of the body is that nothing is going to happen of consequence is a prudent way to do it. I really didn't get a sense that the Clerk was trying to pull a fast one as all objections seemed to be heard in a proper manner.
Notes for the process, cheat sheet, sure. But that's not what was going on. Watch and listen again. At times she's word for word ready from a script with lines already prepared for real time dependant in their outcomes, yet were already written as if predetermined.
She's not just looking to him for an opinion. He's literally telling her exactly what to say, for nearly everything she says that she doesn't read from the paper, and she's repeating it word for word (except for when she fumbled with the "As and As" bit 😂)
Appreciate the perspective from a parliamentarian with situational experience, but what we're watching and hearing in this case, is so blatant. Perhaps you're not reading enough into it...
great post anon. there's even higher quality stuff than normal going up lately.
I don't think he was adjusting his adjective to be PC. I think he was adjusting it to be more respectful in light of new information. You know--like when you stop yourself from saying the f word in front of your Mom or Grandma. :)
Yeah. NEVER call your grandma fat. ;o)
This is correct.
I hear ya. Old habits die hard. I'm actually working at cleaning up my language. I've got grandbabies around who don't need to be hearing that stuff.
Agreed. Fat is fat, whether someone is a 'good' guy or 'bad' guy. Not saying fat-shaming is useful, but neither is fat-coddling.
Ha! Not PC, just trying to make a funny. 😂
I'm actually only 10lbs over weight, so doing fine. Can still be a pretty good golfer and bowler without having to hit the gym every day 😉
I just gave you an up vote when I read "Speaker Shitdown."
What can I say, I like alliteration. Also, it's pretty much 💩 😂
I had to Qwant that quote.
It's from The Truman Show.
Watching a movie, indeed!
One of the greatest films ever. Absolute brilliance all around. A must watch to help better understand this world we live in, which is one giant Truman Show.
A shame about Jim Carrey, though. But your point remains.
Unless he's acting too, hating Trump
Wait - isn't he playing Biden at the moment?
Maybe, but I was referencing Jim as a person. Go look at his twatter feed if you haven't seen it. Pretty sick 🤢 🤮
Jim Carrey has been quite the gray figure over the years with some incredible films, redpilling films, but then some garbage movies and obviously his outspoken leftist political crap. But two of his performances, Truman Show and The Majestic, are two of the best films over the past 50 years.
I sometimes feel as if my life is the Truman Show.
Ever try to visit Fiji?
No, do people stalk you over there?
I saw that too and was watching Patel Patriot’s channel and they commented that they thought it would have to go to a count & it didn’t which they questioned too. Good points!
A voice vote only goes to a formal roll call vote when a member calls for "Division of the house." No second is needed and no debate is allowed.
The fact that nobody called for Division means that everybody was fine with ending business for the day. You can be an objectionist and be fine with waiting to address the matter at hand tomorrow. If the group wants to be done and you call Division, that's a great way to be thought an Asshole by the majority of the group.
We all need to read the House Rules if we are gonna watch these proceedings with "learning" (I speak southern OK), imho.
I posted a link last night, but then deleted the post.
Here's the link again.
https://rules.house.gov/bill/118/h-res
Edit: download both pdfs, but read the second one first.
Thanks for the link!!
Awesome post, MAGAdeburger. These kinds of posts are why I keep coming here to GW.
What a farce. Can we just get on with destroying this whole crappy government and start over?
u/CHAOS_ACTUAL you might appreciate this. u/NewExpertBread perhaps you might as well.
It takes a majority of those voting to pass. That is true for the election of the speaker or the motion to adjourn.
So if 216 vote to adjourn and 214 vote against it, the motion does pass. When the only options are yay or nay, the result will be one getting a majority or a tie.
The difference with the speaker vote is that there are more than two options so you can end up with no one getting a majority.
Is that actually written into the rules? I don't believe that's actually the case. Fairly sure the rules are majority is based on number of members present, that is number of total possible votes
Good post OP
Great observation!
All that’s changed is who is writing the script
Why can't they just do electronic voting with a list of who voted for what?
That would be nice. When they voted yays and nays for adjournment motions, it was electronic though reported just by party totals. All of the Speaker votes are roll call by name. Would have to listen through it all, watching and listening to this one
Well done
Trying to delay until tomorrow which happens to be January 6th? 🤔
Also, where was Jason Smith when voting for Speaker? He's not listed on GAW as one of the 20 MAGA...
As for how he has been voting in the Speaker vote, I cannot say for sure. I will look up the journal which should have recorded his votes
Before you knew he was MAGA you had only unflattering things to say about him, and most importantly you found him truly suspect because of how your own eyes and ears informed you that he was perhaps breaking rules, or being unethical. Then you find out he's on our team, and so you don't think it's wrong what you witnessed, anymore? I just personally don't feel good about just rooting for Republicans just because they aren't Democrats. I believe there are few differences between the left and the right. But getting rich off of special interests, being what we would consider corrupt, and not getting anything done except to preserve the status quo is something both of them do.
I accurately describe his easily identifiable physical attributes. He is fat, and white, and a dude.
Not necessarily breaking the rules or being unethical, but it is in my nature to be suspicious of everyone at first, and from what was going on, something certainly appeared to be quite unusual. Have you ever seen a House meeting like this where the Parliamentarian is literally telling the presiding officer what to say, or they are reading from a script?
I never claimed what was going on was wrong but inquired as to whether he had any authority to be "coaching" her, because I genuinely didn't know. After figuring out that he was the Parliamentarian, it then made more sense why he was able to be so close to her and directing her. After figuring out who he was, it made more sense of the show we're watching, furthering indicating that it's all being scripted and directed. Knowing that he's MAGA certainly makes me feel more relieved that good guys are in control of this show.
I feel good rooting for good people.
There are a ton of massive ideological differences and they are crucial. However, many of the political strategies and tactics employed are similiar. The Uniparty on the other hand, is different sides if the same coin of unprincipled shitheads.
Correct. Uniparty sucks.
Never have understood or learnt why there are two fasces in the house!
"The fasces as depicted in the logo of the National Fascist Party. It is an axe bound in a bundle of wooden rods, symbolizing a magistrate's power over life or death through the death penalty. In the 20th century, it became the premier fascist symbol."
Can anyone enlighten me on the reasons why they are there? Seems awfully fascist!