POPULARITY
9 episodes with presiding officer
8 episodes with presiding officer
3 episodes with presiding officer
6 episodes with presiding officer
2 episodes with presiding officer
2 episodes with presiding officer
2 episodes with presiding officer
2 episodes with presiding officer
April 21, 2025 ~ Terry Rhadigan Chariman Detroit Sprots Organizing Corp. Presiding Officer for today's event talks to Steve Courtney and Ryan Goldberg in for Paul W Smith.
April 14, 2025 ~ Sandy Pierce, Detroit Economic Club Board Chair and Presiding Officer for today's event joins Tony Michaels and Rachel Stewart in for Paul W Smith.
March 31, 2025 ~ Kimberly Andrews Espy, President Wayne State University is a Presiding Officer for today's event with Senator Gary Peters.
Presiding Officer Alison Johnstone MSP and First Minister John Swinney MSP make a statement to Parliament following the death of Christina McKelvie MSP.
Bernard and Alex chew over:SECUIRTY CRISIS - NATO and Europe in a Security crisis as "strongmen" Trump and Putin carve up the geopolitical map. GENDER - Last week's debate around gender issues and disagreements on the ability to debate them in the Scottish Parliament puts further pressure on First Minister, John Swinney, and the role of the Presiding Officer. SCOTTISH LABOUR - With the Scottish Labour conference underway in Glasgow, what can Anas Sarwar do to stop the party tanking in the polls? Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
Matthew Bannister onNigel McCrery, the former police officer who created the popular TV series “Silent Witness” and “New Tricks”.Andrée Dumon, who rescued many allied service men during the Second World War by escorting them along “The Comet Line” from Brussels to Paris.Lord Elis-Thomas, the former leader of Plaid Cymru and the first Presiding Officer of the National Assembly. Diana Melly, the author known for her unconventional marriage to the jazz singer and art expert George Melly.Interviewee: William Ivory Interviewee: Dr Helen Fry Interviewee: Professor Laura McAllister Interviewee: Kezzie MoynihanProducer: Gareth Nelson-DaviesArchive used: Silent Witness, BBC Promo, 2005 & 2025; Nigel McCrery interview, Saturday Live, BBC Radio 4, 02/11/2024; Nigel McCrery interview, Midweek, BBC Radio 4, 04/11/2013; Nigel McCrery talks about the life of Professor Helen Whitwell, Last Word, BBC Radio 4, 09/08/2024; Silent Witness, Series 1 , Episode 1, BBC ONE, 22/02/1996, Directed by Harry Hook; New Tricks, Promo, BBC Studios, 08/08/2008; Andrée Dumon, a Comète escape line organiser and courier, interview, source: www.legasee.org.uk/veteran/andree-dumon/ ; Dafydd Ellis Thomas elected to the House of Commons, BBC News, 1974; Dafydd Elis Thomas Interview , Good Morning Wales, BBC Radio Wales, 20/06/1972; Dafydd Elis Thomas becomes President of Plaid Cymru and interview, Conference Report, BBC News, 28/10/1984; Presiding Officer address to the National Assembly for Wales, The Second Term, BBC News, 2003, Diana Melly interview, Last Word, BBC Radio 4. 06/07/2007; Diana Melly interview, Private Passions, BBC Radio 3, 15/01/2023;
Podlitical sits down with the Presiding Officer to mark 25 years of Scottish Parliament, Kirsten Campbell talks to the Presiding Officer about how she got her start in politics, and how she nearly didn't put herself forward to be the next Presiding Officer. Alison Johnstone discusses why female representation in the job matters, how she deals with heated debates in Parliament, how she handles protesters interrupting proceedings, and the parts of the job we may not see. As we mark a quarter century of Holyrood, how would the Presiding Officer like to see things done differently in Parliament, and does she think devolution is working as well as it could be?For a range of political interviews, subscribe to Podlitical on BBC Sounds.
May 2, 2024 ~ John Fikany, CEO of the Finkany Group DEC Board Member and Today's Presiding officer for the DEC luncheon.
This is the Catch Up on 3 Things for the Indian Express and I'm Flora Swain.It's the 26th of April and here are the top stories of the week.In the second phase of Lok Sabha elections today, voting took place in 89 seats across 12 states and UTs. By day's end, one-third of the total 543 Lok Sabha seats, including all seats in Kerala, Rajasthan, Manipur, and Tripura, and 14 of the 28 seats in Karnataka, had completed polling. In Outer Manipur, 13 Assembly segments participated in the second phase, while the remaining 15 had voted in the first phase alongside the Inner Manipur seat. Among the 89 seats, 9 are reserved for Scheduled Castes and 7 for Scheduled Tribes.A day after the chairman of Indian Overseas Congress Sam Pitroda was on the receiving end over his comments on the US inheritance tax, he issued a clarification on Wednesday saying that his statements were twisted. He added that the comments had nothing to do with the Congress party or their manifesto for the upcoming Lok Sabha polls. The comments, however, faced the backlash of the BJP with their spokesperson Shehzad Poonawalla saying that the “Congress wants to grab one's hard earned tax paid resources' '.On Tuesday, a Delhi court extended the judicial custody of Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) legislator K Kavitha till 7th of May in the money-laundering case related to the excise policy. Meanwhile, the Municipal Corporation of Delhi elections scheduled to be held today were postponed as the presiding officer was yet to be nominated. This comes after LG VK Saxena wrote to the municipal commissioner, saying that he does not “deem it appropriate to exercise his power as Administrator to appoint the Presiding Officer in absence of inputs from the Chief Minister.The National Investigation Agency on Thursday said they have arrested a man, a resident of the UK, in connection with the violence at the Indian High Commission in London during a protest on March 22 last year. The NIA spokesperson said that the accused, identified as Inderpal Singh Gaba, a resident of Hounslow, UK, has been arrested for carrying out unlawful activities during the protests. The probe revealed that the incidents in London on March 19 and 22 were part of a larger conspiracy to unleash vicious attacks on the Indian missions and its officials.D Gukesh, the 17-year-old from Chennai became the youngest ever winner of the prestigious Candidates tournament in Toronto on Monday. This also made him the youngest ever to compete at the World Chess Championship. All India Chess Federation (AICF) secretary Dev Patel on Thursday said the country will bid for the hosting rights of this year's much-anticipated World Championship clash between Gukesh and defending champion Ding Liren of China.This was the Catch-Up on the 3 Things by The Indian Express.
Have you ever wondered how impeachment really works? As a witness and consultant in the impeachment trials of Bill Clinton and Donald Trump, legal scholar Michael J. Gerhardt has collected a lifetime of scholarly research and firsthand experience. But despite his proximity to such high-profile cases, Gerhardt doesn't advocate for or against the impeachment of specific presidents. Instead, he illuminates the legal and procedural aspects that govern the process, providing a comprehensive overview of impeachment from its origins to present-day practice. His new book, The Law Of Presidential Impeachment, is a nonpartisan exploration that aims to break down the process and offer readers a deeper understanding of how the Constitution holds presidents accountable. In The Law Of Presidential Impeachment, Gerhardt guides us through the historical roots of presidential impeachment, tracing it back to the nation's founding when American colonists, still reflecting on past grievances with their former king, embedded the process in the Constitution. Impeachment recently returned to the forefront of American political discourse during Donald Trump's presidency, but Gerhardt's expertise goes beyond contemporary events to provide a timeless perspective on the constitutional mechanism. If you've ever wanted the chance to peek into the process of presidential impeachments, join us as Gerhardt helps to deepen understanding of our executive branch and the overarching governmental system that shapes our democracy. Michael J. Gerhardt is the Burton Craige Distinguished Professor of Jurisprudence at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Scholar in Residence at the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia, and the foremost scholar on impeachment in the United States. He is one of only two legal scholars to testify in three different presidential impeachment hearings and served as Special Counsel to the Presiding Officer in Donald Trump's second impeachment trial. He is the only legal scholar to address the entire House of Representatives on the law of presidential impeachment was the Order of the Coif Distinguished Visitor in 2020-22 (an honor given only to one legal scholar each year in recognition of their scholarship) and received University of North Carolina's highest award given to a faculty member in recognition of their public service in 2023. Buy the Companion Book The Law of Presidential Impeachment: A Guide for the Engaged Citizen Third Place Books
Welcome to our March 24 roundup of topical clips! Themes catching our eye this month include: 00:01:04 Leo Varadkar resigns after Irish government referendum "drubbing" 00:08:31 Mark Drakeford resigns and Vaughan Gething becomes the new First Minister of Wales 00:12:17 Constitutional Commissions and Conventions 00:28:41 Believe in Scotland ramps up for a summer of activism 00:32:37 Holyrood Muirburn, Hate Crimes and the Presiding Officer gets tough 00:50:00 Controversial new parties and candidates 00:55:45 Westminster - Baroness Jenny Jones sums the UK up perfectly. "Contains information licensed under the Scottish Parliament Copyright Licence". The Scottish Independence Podcasts team produce a NEW podcast episode every Friday search for Scottish Independence Podcasts wherever you get your podcasts. Remember to like and subscribe! Contact Us: indypodcasters@gmail.com Visit our website https://scottishindypod.scot for blogposts, newsletter signup and more episodes Subscribe to our Youtube channel @scottishindypodExtra for more of our video footage and clips
Bill McIntyre talks with Nassau County Legislator Howard J. Kopel, from District 7, who was installed as presiding officer of the Nassau County Legislature back in January, marking the 15th term of the governing body - and was re-elected this past November to the legislature to serve his 8th term. They speak about his new role, the Sands Nassau Coliseum proposal, redistricting, the State of the Union, and more.
Sierra Leone's 1991 Constitution, and the Public Elections Act 2022, forbids the inauguration of a President, Members of Parliament, and representatives of Local Government Councils without properly conducted elections. Under Sierra Leonean law, elections are only considered properly and democratically conducted when all votes in each polling station, in each polling center, and in each district, and in each region have been fully counted, properly tallied, completely verified, and collectively approved by political party agents and the authorized polling staff before they can be sent to the national verification and tallying center for final processing and verification ahead of any public announcement and declaration of winner(s) by the national returning officer. For instance, in order to be considered properly and constitutionally elected for the Office of President, Section 51(1) of Sierra Leone's Public Elections Act 2022 provides that “a Presiding Officer shall, after the expiration of the time fixed for polling, count the votes, polling station by polling station, certify the result of the counting, stating the number of valid votes cast in favor of each presidential candidate to the District Returning Officer, who shall in turn certify the result to the Regional Returning Officer, and the Regional Returning Officer shall in turn certify the result to the National Returning Officer.” Section 51(2) adds that “as soon as possible after receipt of the result of the counting of votes under subsection (1), the Returning Officer shall tally and compute the results certified to him by the various Presiding Officers and shall after that declare the result of the election.” The Sierra Leone elections of June 2023 did not follow this stipulated legal and constitutional procedures for the conduct of a Presidential election. Similarly, the June 2023 elections did not comply with the legislative requirements for the election of representatives of the Local Government Councils, neither did it follow the stipulated requirements for the election of Members of Parliament. The National Returning Officer, Mohamed Konneh did not wait for districts and regions to complete their vote counting and tallying process before announcing alleged winners of the June 2023 presidential, parliamentary, and local government elections. International and local observers who monitored the June 2023 elections collectively agreed that the elections were non-transparent, and were equally fraught with numerous irregularities. The irregularities included the deliberate announcement of election results when vote counting and tallying was still in progress. Thus, if Mohamed Konneh did not wait for districts and regional tallies to be completed, where did ECSL generate the votes and the numbers used to announce alleged winners of the June 2023 presidential, parliamentary, and local government elections? And if regional tallies and national tabulations were still incomplete when ECSL announced the elections results, which numbers and which votes did ECSL relied on to declare Maada Bio, and the various SLPP and APC parliamentary and local council candidates, winners of the June 2023 presidential, parliamentary, and local government elections? In this episode, we provide a further analysis of the legal and political implications of the SLPP and APC's power-sharing agreement that has unprecedentedly inaugurated a President, Members of Parliament, and Local Council representatives in Sierra Leone without a properly conducted election. This episode is part of the VOICE FROM EXILE commentary series of the Africanist Press.
Presiding Officer, Drananda Summons sits with Bay Area designer Marshall Oates in discussion of the power of ethic in 2024. Be Encouraged.
Michael J. Gerhardt is the Burton Craige Distinguished Professor of Jurisprudence at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Scholar in Residence at the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia, and the foremost scholar on impeachment in the United States. He is one of only two legal scholars to testify in three different presidential impeachment hearings and served as Special Counsel to the Presiding Officer in Donald Trump's second impeachment trial. He is the author of six books, including his latest, THE LAW OF PRESIDENTIAL IMPEACHMENT: A Guide For the Engaged Citizen, is on sale January 9th. Join us for this compelling chat about Donald Trump, his two impeachments, and his ongoing threat to democracy; the Republican-led evidence-free Biden impeachment inquiry and the partisan weaponization of the impeachment process; the Constitution and the history of impeachments; and the motivation for his new book. Got somethin' to say?! Email us at BackroomAndy@gmail.com Leave us a message: 845-307-7446 Twitter: @AndyOstroy Produced by Andy Ostroy, Matty Rosenberg, and Jennifer Hammoud @ Radio Free Rhiniecliff Design by Cricket Lengyel
5:31 - Camp One Clap: Day 30Capture the Congress Crown with Counselor Alexis Worthen, Ep. 5 - Point of Order! Chairing a Congress RoundFor notes and details about this episode, check out the website here:https://www.oneclapspeechanddebate.com/post/camp-one-clap-day-30-capture-the-congress-crown-with-counselor-alexis-worthen-ep-5Watch Professor Graham and Kevin's ABC's of Debate series right here (new episodes all month): https://youtu.be/Z9av5O_I-kMIf you have any ideas or requests for topics to explore on the One Clap Podcast, shoot Lyle an email at lylewiley@gmail.com or check out our blog and social media here:One Clap Website: www.oneclapspeechanddebate.comYouTube: www.youtube.com/channel/UCyvpV56859lLA-X-EvHVYUgFacebook: @oneclappodcastInstagram: @one_clap_podcastTwitter: @OneClapPodcastTikTok: @oneclapspeechanddebateGet your cool One Clap Speech and Debate merchandise here: https://www.bonfire.com/store/one-clap-speech-and-debate/The One Clap August 2023 Newsletter:https://drive.google.com/file/d/19sbvhLwe_0ifrA0BZmfucAkovagZEAZx/view?usp=sharingSupport the show
The Democratic Alliance (DA) is hosting its Gauteng Provincial Congress where the party will elect new leadership ahead of the 2024 General Election. DA Federal Leader, John Steenhuisen, is expected to address delegates on the Moonshot Pact which he believes will usher in a new provincial government in Gauteng after next year's election. Incumbent Solly Msimanga is seeking a second term and he will be up against Nkhumeni Ramulifho for the position of Gauteng leader while Rachel Mathebe and Frederik Nel will battle it out for the Provincial Chairmanship. Sebenzile Nkambule spoke to Werner Horn the Presiding Officer for DA Gauteng Provincial CongreSS...
Suffolk County Presiding Officer Kevin McCaffrey LIVE on LI in the AM w/ Jay Oliver! by JVC Broadcasting
Suffolk County Presiding Officer Kevin McCaffrey LIVE on LI in the AM w/ Jay Oliver! by JVC Broadcasting
Suffolk County Presiding Officer Kevin McCaffrey LIVE on LI in the AM w/ Jay Oliver! by JVC Broadcasting
Kevin and the guys talked about the influx of migrants in our area. Suffolk County does not want immigrants near their kids and neighborhoods.
Alison Johnstone the Presiding Officer of The Scottish Parliament spoke to us about her visit to the US during Tartan Week. --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/edinburgh-reporter/message
Learn how Houston Pilots navigate the ship channel and are addressing maritime workforce needs/opportunities. Connect with Clint on LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/clint-winegar-b1bb5a14 Houston Pilots: http://www.houstonpilots.com/ SUBSCRIBE: https://allianceportregion.com/subscribe-to-podcast/ Produced in the Economic Alliance Houston Port Region Podcast Studio, sponsored by Chevron Pasadena Refinery.
Bill McIntyre talks with Mr. Richard Nicolello, the Presiding Officer of the Nassau County Legislator, who represents the 9th district, which includes parts of New Hyde Park, Garden City Park, Mineola, Williston Park, and other nearby communities. He also recently announced that he is not going to seek re-election later this year, which is one of many topics of discussion.
The January 6th Committee investigation is over and four criminal charges against former President Donald Trump have been referred to the Justice Department by the Committee. In this episode, hear a summary of 23 hours of testimony and evidence presented by the Committee which prove that former President Trump went to extraordinary and illegal lengths to remain President, despite losing the 2020 Election. Please Support Congressional Dish – Quick Links Contribute monthly or a lump sum via PayPal Support Congressional Dish via Patreon (donations per episode) Send Zelle payments to: Donation@congressionaldish.com Send Venmo payments to: @Jennifer-Briney Send Cash App payments to: $CongressionalDish or Donation@congressionaldish.com Use your bank's online bill pay function to mail contributions to: 5753 Hwy 85 North, Number 4576, Crestview, FL 32536. Please make checks payable to Congressional Dish Thank you for supporting truly independent media! View the shownotes on our website at https://congressionaldish.com/cd266-contriving-january-6th Executive Producer Recommended Sources “PREPARED REMARKS: Sanders Files Amendment on Microchip Legislation to Restrict Blank Check Corporate Welfare.” Jul 19, 2022. U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders. Background Sources Recommended Congressional Dish Episodes CD236: January 6: The Capitol Riot CD228: The Second Impeachment Trial of Donald Trump The Final Committee Report “Final Report of the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the Capitol,” [House Report 117-663] 117th Congress Second Session. Dec 22, 2022. U.S. Government Publishing Office. The January 6th Committee “Inside the Jan. 6 Committee.” Robert Draper and Luke Broadwater. Dec 23, 2022. The New York Times Magazine. 2020 Election Litigation “Litigation in the 2020 Election.” Oct 27, 2022. The American Bar Association. “‘Trump Won Two-Thirds of Election Lawsuits Where Merits Considered.'” Daniel Funke. Feb 9, 2021. PolitiFact. January 6th Security Failures “Capitol Attack: The Capitol Police Need Clearer Emergency Procedures and a Comprehensive Security Risk Assessment Process,” [GAO-22-105001] February 2022. U.S. Government Accountability Office. Electors and Vote Certification Process “Who Are Electors And How Do They Get Picked?” Domenico Montanaro. Dec 14, 2020. NPR. “About the Electors.” May 11, 2021. U.S. National Archives. John Eastman “Who is John Eastman, the Trump lawyer at the center of the Jan. 6 investigation?” Deepa Shivaram. Jun 17, 2022. NPR. “About Us.” The Federalist Society. “The Eastman Memo.” Trump and Georgia “The Georgia criminal investigation into Trump and his allies, explained.” Matthew Brown. Nov 22, 2022. The Washington Post. “Here's the full transcript and audio of the call between Trump and Raffensperger.” Amy Gardner and Paulina Firozi. Jan 5, 2021. The Washington Post. AG Bill Barr Interview “In exclusive AP interview, AG Barr says no evidence of widespread election fraud, undermining Trump.” Mike Balsamo. Dec 11, 2020. “Barr tells AP that Justice Dept. hasn't uncovered widespread voting fraud that could have changed 2020 election outcome.” Dec 1, 2020. The Associated Press. Past Electoral Vote Challenges “Post Misleadingly Equates 2016 Democratic Effort to Trump's 2020 ‘Alternate Electors.'” Joseph A. Gambardello. Jun 29, 2022. FactCheck.org. “Democrats challenge Ohio electoral votes.” Ted Barrett. Jan 6, 2005. CNN. Fake Electors “What you need to know about the fake Trump electors.” Amy Sherman. Jan 28, 2022. PolitiFact. “Exclusive: Federal prosecutors looking at 2020 fake elector certifications, deputy attorney general tells CNN.” Evan Perez and Tierney Sneed. Jan 26, 2022. CNN. “American Oversight Obtains Seven Phony Certificates of Pro-Trump Electors.” Mar 2, 2021. American Oversight. Censure of Cheney & Kinzinger “Read the Republican Censure of Cheney and Kinzinger.” Feb 4 2022. The New York Times. Audio Sources 12/19/22 Business Meeting December 19, 2022 House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol 10/13/22 Business Meeting October 13, 2022 House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol Featured speakers: Kayleigh McEnany, Former White House Press Secretary Molly Michael, Former Executive Assistant to the President Pat Cipollone, Former White House Counsel Clips Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY): Why would Americans assume that our Constitution, and our institutions, and our Republic are invulnerable to another attack? Why would we assume that those institutions will not falter next time? A key lesson of this investigation is this: Our institutions only hold when men and women of good faith make them hold, regardless of the political cost. We have no guarantee that these men and women will be in place next time. Any future president inclined to attempt what Donald Trump did in 2020 has now learned not to install people who could stand in the way. And also please consider this: The rulings of our courts are respected and obeyed, because we as citizens pledged to accept and honor them. Most importantly, our President, who has a constitutional obligation to faithfully execute the laws, swears to accept them. What happens when the President disregards the court's rulings is illegitimate. When he disregards the rule of law, that my fellow citizens, breaks our Republic. January 6 Committee Lawyer: To your knowledge, was the president in that private dining room the whole time that the attack on the Capitol was going on? Or did he ever go to, again only to your knowledge, to the Oval Office, to the White House Situation Room, anywhere else? Kayleigh McEnany: The the best of my recollection, he was always in the dining room. January 6 Committee Lawyer: What did they say, Mr. Meadows or the President, at all during that brief encounter that you were in the dining room? What do you recall? Gen. Keith Kellogg: I think they were really watching the TV. January 6 Committee Lawyer: Do you know whether he was watching TV in the dining room when you talked to him on January sixth? Molly Michael: It's my understanding he was watching television. January 6 Committee Lawyer: When you were in the dining room in these discussions, was the violence of capital visible on the screen on the television? Pat Cipollone: Yes. Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL): A federal appeals court in Pennsylvania wrote, quote, "charges require specific allegations and proof. We have neither here." A federal judge in Wisconsin wrote, quote, "the court has allowed the former President the chance to make his case and he has lost on the merits." Another judge in Michigan, called the claims quote, "nothing but speculation and conjecture that votes for President Trump were either destroyed, discarded or switched to votes for Vice President Biden." A federal judge in Michigan sanctioned nine attorneys, including Sidney Powell, for making frivolous allegations in an election fraud case, describing the case as a historic and profound abuse of the judicial process. Recently, a group of distinguished Republican election lawyers, former judges and elected officials issued a report confirming the findings of the courts. In their report entitled "Lost, Not Stolen," these prominent Republicans analyzed each election challenge and concluded this: Donald Trump and his supporters failed to present evidence of fraud or inaccurate results significant enough to invalidate the results of the 2020 Presidential Election. On December 11, Trump's allies lost a lawsuit in the US Supreme Court that he regarded as his last chance of success in the courts. Alyssa Farah: I remember maybe a week after the election was called, I popped into the Oval just to like, give the President the headlines and see how he was doing and he was looking at the TV and he said, "Can you believe I lost to this effing guy?" Cassidy Hutchinson: Mark raised it with me on the 18th and so following that conversation we were in the motorcade ride driving back to the White House, and I said, like, "Does the President really think that he lost?" And he said, "A lot of times he'll tell me that he lost, but he wants to keep fighting it and he thinks that there might be enough to overturn the election, but, you know, he pretty much has acknowledged that he, that he's lost. 07/12/22 Select Committee Hearing July 12, 2022 House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol Witnesses: Jason Van Tatenhove, Former Oath Keepers Spokesperson Stephen Ayres, January 6th Defendant Clips Rep. Stephanie Murphy (D-FL): According to White House visitor logs obtained by the Committee, members of Congress present at the White House on December 21 included Congressmen Brian Babin (TX), Andy Biggs (AZ), Matt Gaetz (FL), Louie Gohmert (TX), Paul Gosar (AZ), Andy Harris (MD), Jody Hice (R-GA), Jim Jordan (OD), and Scott Perry (PA). Then Congresswoman-elect Marjorie Taylor Greene (GA) was also there. Rep. Stephanie Murphy (D-FL): We've asked witnesses what happened during the December 21 meeting and we've learned that part of the discussion centered on the role of the Vice President during the counting of the electoral votes. These members of Congress were discussing what would later be known as the "Eastman Theory," which was being pushed by Attorney John Eastman. 06/28/2022 Select Committee Hearing June 28, 2022 House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol Witnesses: Cassidy Hutchinson, Former Special Assistant to the President and Aide to the Chief of Staff Clips 9:10 Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY): Today's witness, Ms. Cassidy Hutchinson, is another Republican and another former member of President Trump's White House staff. Certain of us in the House of Representatives recall that Ms. Hutchinson once worked for House Republican whip Steve Scalise, but she is also a familiar face on Capitol Hill because she held a prominent role in the White House Legislative Affairs Office, and later was the principal aide to President Trump's Chief of Staff, Mark Meadows. 10:10 Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY): In her role working for the White House Chief of Staff, Miss Hutchinson handled a vast number of sensitive issues. She worked in the West Wing, several steps down the hall from the Oval Office. Miss Hutchinson spoke daily with members of Congress, with high ranking officials in the administration, with senior White House staff, including Mr. Meadows, with White House Counsel lawyers, and with Mr. Tony Ornato, who served as the White House Deputy Chief of Staff. She also worked on a daily basis with members of the Secret Service who were posted in the White House. In short, Miss Hutchinson was in a position to know a great deal about the happenings in the Trump White House. 24:20 Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY): On January 3, the Capitol Police issued a special event assessment. In that document, the Capitol Police noted that the Proud Boys and other groups planned to be in Washington DC on January 6, and indicated that quote, "unlike previous post election protests, the targets of the pro-Trump supporters are not necessarily the counter protesters, as they were previously, but rather, Congress itself is the target on the Sixth. 27:45 Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY): Of course the world now knows that the people who attacked the Capitol on January 6 had many different types of weapons. When a President speaks, the Secret Service typically requires those attending to pass through metal detectors known as magnetometers, or mags for short. Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY): The Select Committee has learned about reports from outside the magnetometers and has obtained police radio transmissions identifying individuals with firearms, including AR-15s near the Ellipse on the morning of January 6. Let's listen. Police Officer #1: Blue jeans and a blue jean jacket and underneath the blue jacket complaintants both saw the top of an AR 15. Police Officer #2: Any white males brown cowboy boots, they had Glock-style pistols in their waistbands. Police Officer #3: 8736 with the message that subject weapon on his right hip. Police Officer #4: Motor one, make sure PPD knows they have an elevated threat in the tree South side of Constitution Avenue. Look for the "Don't tread on me" flag, American flag facemask cowboy boots, weapon on the right side hip. Police Officer #5: I got three men walking down the street in fatigues and carrying AR-15s. Copy at Fourteenth and Independence. Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY): We're going to show now an exchange of texts between you and Deputy Chief of Staff Ornato, and these text messages were exchanged while you were at the Ellipse. In one text, you write, "but the crowd looks good from this vantage point, as long as we get the shot. He was f---ing furious." But could you tell us, first of all, who it is in the text who was furious? Cassidy Hutchinson: The he in that text that I was referring to was the President. Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY): And why was he furious, Miss Hutchinson? Cassidy Hutchinson: He was furious because he wanted the arena that we had on the Ellipse to be maxed out at capacity for all attendees. The advanced team had relayed to him that the mags were free flowing. Everybody who wanted to come in had already come in, but he still was angry about the extra space and wanted more people to come in. Cassidy Hutchinson: And that's what Tony [Ornato] had been trying to relate to him [President Trump] that morning. You know, it's not the issue that we encountered on the campaign. We have enough space. They don't want to come in right now, they have weapons they don't want confiscated by the Secret Service. They're fine on the Mall, they can see you on the Mall and they want to march straight to the Capitol from the Mall. But when we were in the off stage announced tent, I was part of a conversation -- I was in the, I was in the vicinity of a conversation -- where I overheard the President say something to the effect of you know, "I don't think that they have weapons. They're not here to hurt me take the effing mags away. Let my people in, they can march to the Capitol from here. Let the people in, take the effing mags away." Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY): On December 1, 2020, Attorney General Barr said in an interview that the Department of Justice had now not found evidence of widespread election fraud, sufficient to change the outcome of the election. Ms. Hutchinson, how did the President react to hearing that news? Cassidy Hutchinson: I left the office and went down to the dining room, and I noticed that the door was propped open in the valet was inside the dining room changing the tablecloth off of the dining room table. The valet had articulated that the President was extremely angry at the Attorney General's AP interview and had thrown his lunch against the wall. Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY): Miss Hutchinson, Attorney General Barr described to the Committee the President's angry reaction when he finally met with President Trump. Let's listen. Former Attorney General Bill Barr: And I said, "Look, I I know that you're dissatisfied with me and I'm glad to offer my resignation" and then he pounded the table very hard. Everyone sort of jumped and he said "Accepted." Reporter: Leader McCarthy, Do you condemn this violence? Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA): I completely condemn the violence in the Capitol. What we're currently watching unfold is un-American. I'm disappointed, I'm sad. This is not what our country should look like. This is not who we are. This is not the First Amendment. This has to stop and this has to stop now. Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY): Did White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows ever indicate that he was interested in receiving a Presidential Pardon related to January 6? Cassidy Hutchinson: Mr. Meadows did seek that pardon. Yes, ma'am. Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY): While our committee has seen many witnesses, including many Republicans, testify fully and forthrightly, this has not been true of every witness. And we have received evidence of one particular practice that raises significant concern. Our committee commonly asks witnesses connected to Mr. Trump's administration or campaign whether they'd been contacted by any of their former colleagues, or anyone else who attempted to influence or impact their testimony, without identifying any of the individuals involved. Let me show you a couple of samples of answers we received to this question. First, here's how one witness described phone calls from people interested in that witness's testimony. "What they said to me is, as long as I continue to be a team player, they know I'm on the right team, I'm doing the right thing, I'm protecting who I need to protect, you know, I'll continue to stay in good graces in Trump World. And they have reminded me a couple of times that Trump does read transcripts and just keep that in mind as I proceed through my interviews with the committee." Here's another sample in a different context. This is a call received by one of our witnesses. "A person let me know you have your deposition tomorrow. He wants me to let you know that he's thinking about you. He knows you're loyal, and you're going to do the right thing when you go in for your deposition." I think most Americans know that attempting to influence witnesses to testify untruthfully presents very serious concerns. 06/23/22 Select Committee Hearing June 23, 2022 House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol Witnesses: Jeffrey A. Rosen, Former Acting Attorney General Richard Donoghue, Former Acting Deputy Attorney General Steven Engel, Former Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel Eric Herschmann, Former White House Senior Advisor Clips Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS): From the time you took over from Attorney General Barr until January 3, how often did President Trump contact you or the Department to push allegations of election fraud? Former Acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen: So between December 23 and January 3, the president either called me or met with me virtually every day, with one or two exceptions like Christmas Day Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ): Again, I join my colleagues in calling on Attorney General Barr to immediately let us know what he's doing. Rep. Paul Gosar (R-AZ): We're already working on challenging the certified electors. And what about the court? How pathetic are the courts? Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL): January 6, I'm joining with the fighters in the Congress, and we are going to object to electors from states that didn't run clean elections. Democracy is left undefended if we accept the result of a stolen election without fighting with every bit of vigor we can muster. Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH): The ultimate date of significance is January 6. This is how the process works. The ultimate arbiter here, the ultimate check and balance, is the United States Congress. And when something is done in an unconstitutional fashion, which happened in several of these states, we have a duty to step forward and have this debate and have this vote on the 6th of January. Former Acting Deputy Attorney General Richard Donoghue: So both the Acting Attorney General [Rosen] and I tried to explain to the President on this occasion, and on several other occasions that the Justice Department has a very important, very specific, but very limited role in these elections. States run their elections. We are not quality control for the states. We are obviously interested in and have a mission that relates to criminal conduct in relation to federal elections. We also have related civil rights responsibilities. So we do have an important role, but the bottom line was if a state ran their election in such a way that it was defective, that is to the state or Congress to correct. It is not for the Justice Department to step in. And I certainly understood the President, as a layman, not understanding why the Justice Department didn't have at least a civil role to step in and bring suit on behalf of the American people. We tried to explain that to him. The American people do not constitute the client for the United States Justice Department. The one and only client of the United States Justice Department is the United States government. And the United States government does not have standing, as we were repeatedly told by our internal teams. Office of Legal Counsel, led by Steve Engel, as well as the Office of the Solicitor General researched it and gave us thorough clear opinions that we simply did not have standing and we tried to explain that to the President on numerous occasions. Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL): Let's take a look at another one of your notes. You also noted that Mr. Rosen said to Mr. Trump, quote, "DOJ can't and won't snap its fingers and change the outcome of the election." How did the President respond to that, sir? Former Acting Deputy Attorney General Richard Donoghue: He responded very quickly and said, essentially, that's not what I'm asking you to do. What I'm just asking you to do is just say it was corrupt and leave the rest to me and the Republican Congressmen. Former Acting Deputy Attorney General Richard Donoghue: There were isolated instances of fraud. None of them came close to calling into question the outcome of the election in any individual State. January 6 Committee Lawyer: And was representative Gaetz requesting a pardon? Eric Herschmann: Believe so. The general tone was, we may get prosecuted because we were defensive of, you know, the President's positions on these things. A pardon that he was discussing, requesting, was as broad as you could describe, from the beginning of time up until today, for any and all things. He had mentioned Nixon and I said Nixon's pardon was never nearly that broad. January 6 Committee Lawyer: And are you aware of any members of Congress seeking pardons? Cassidy Hutchinson: I guess Mr. Gaetz and Mr. Brooks, I know, both advocated for, there to be a blanket pardon for members involved in that meeting and a handful of other members that weren't at the December 21 meeting as the preemptive pardons. Mr. Gaetz was personally pushing for a pardon and he was doing so since early December. I'm not sure why. Mr. Gaetz had reached out to me to ask if he could have a meeting with Mr. Meadows about receiving a Presidential pardon. January 6 Committee Lawyer: Did they all contact you? Cassidy Hutchinson: Not all of them, but several of them did. January 6 Committee Lawyer: So you'd be mentioned Mr. Gaetz and Mr. Brooks. Cassidy Hutchinson: Mr. Biggs did. Mr. Jordan talks about congressional pardons but he never asked me for one. It was more for an update on whether the White House is going to pardon members of Congress. Mr. Gohmert asked for one as well. Mr. Perry asked for a pardon too, I'm sorry. January 6 Committee Lawyer: Mr. Perry, did he talk to you directly? Cassidy Hutchinson: Yes, he did. Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL): Mr. Clark was the acting head of the Civil Division and head of Environmental and Natural Resources Division at the Department of Justice. Do either of those divisions have any role whatsoever in investigating election fraud, sir? Former Acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen: No. And and to my awareness, Jeff Clark had had no prior involvement of any kind with regard to the work that the department was doing. Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL): Is there a policy that governs who can have contact directly with the White House? Former Acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen: Yes. So across many administrations for a long period of time, there's a policy that particularly with regard to criminal investigations restricts at both the White House and the Justice Department and those more sensitive issues to the highest ranks. So for criminal matters, the policy for a long time has been that only the Attorney General and the Deputy Attorney General from the DOJ side can have conversations about criminal matters with the White House, or the Attorney General and the Deputy Attorney General can authorize someone for a specific item with their permission. But the idea is to make sure that the top rung of the Justice Department knows about it, and is in the thing to control it and make sure only appropriate things are done. Steven Engel: The purpose of these these policies is to keep these communications as infrequent, and at the highest levels as possible, just to make sure that people who are less careful about it who don't really understand these implications, such as Mr. Clark, don't run afoul of those contact policies. Former Acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen: He acknowledged that shortly before Christmas, he had gone to a meeting in the Oval Office with the President. That, of course, surprised me. And I asked him, How did that happen? And he was defensive, he said it had been unplanned, that he had been talking to someone he referred to as "General Perry," but I believe is Congressman Perry, and that, unbeknownst to him, he was asked to go to a meeting and he didn't know it, but it turned out it was at the Oval -- he found himself at the Oval Office. And he was apologetic for that. And I said, Well, you didn't tell me about it. It wasn't authorized. And you didn't even tell me after the fact. You know, this is not not appropriate. But he was contrite and said it had been inadvertent and it would not happen again and that if anyone asked him to go to such a meeting, he would notify [Former Acting Deputy Attorney General] Rich Donohue and me. Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL): On the same day Acting Attorney General Rosen told Mr. Clark to stop talking to the White House, Representative Perry was urging Chief of Staff Mark Meadows to elevate Clark within the Department of Justice. You can now see on the screen behind me a series of tasks between representative Perry and Mr. Meadows. They show that Representative Perry requested that Mr. Clark be elevated within the department. Representative Perry tells Mr. Meadows on December 26, that quote, "Mark, just checking in as time continues to count down, 11 days to January 6 and 25 days to inauguration. We've got to get going!" Representative Perry followed up and says quote, "Mark, you should call Jeff. I just got off the phone with him and he explained to me why the principal deputy won't work especially with the FBI. They will view it as not having the authority to enforce what needs to be done." Mr. Meadows responds with "I got it. I think I understand. Let me work on the deputy position." Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY): Mr. Donohue on December 28, Mr. Clark emailed you and Mr. Rosen a draft letter that he wanted you to sign and send to Georgia State officials. This letter claims that the US Department of Justice's investigations have quote, "identified significant concerns that may have impacted the outcome of the election in multiple States, including the state of Georgia." The letter also said this: quote, "in light of these developments, the Department recommends that the Georgia General Assembly should convene in special session," end quote, and consider approving a new slate of electors. Steven Engel: The States had chosen their electors, the electors had been certified, they'd cast their votes, they had been sent to Washington DC. Neither Georgia nor any of the other States on December 28, or whenever this was, was in a position to change those votes. Essentially, the election had happened. The only thing that hadn't happened was the formal counting of the votes. Former Acting Deputy Attorney General Richard Donoghue: I had to read both the email and the attached letter twice to make sure I really understood what he was proposing because it was so extreme to me, I had a hard time getting my head around it initially. But I read it and I did understand it for what he intended and I had to sit down and sort of compose what I thought was an appropriate response. In my response, I explained a number of reasons this is not the Department's role to suggest or dictate to State legislatures how they should select their electors. But more importantly, this was not based on fact, that this was actually contrary to the facts, as developed by Department investigations over the last several weeks and months. So I responded to that. And for the Department to insert itself into the political process's way, I think would have had grave consequences for the country. It may very well have spiraled us into a Constitutional crisis. And I wanted to make sure that he understood the gravity of the situation because he didn't seem to really appreciate it. Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL): President Trump rushed back early from Mar-a-Lago on December 31, and called an emergency meeting with the Department's leadership. Mr. Donohue, during this meeting, did the President tell you that he would remove you and Mr. Rosen because you weren't declaring there was election fraud? Former Acting Deputy Attorney General Richard Donoghue: Toward the end of the meeting, the President, again was getting very agitated. And he said, "People tell me I should just get rid of both of you. I should just remove you and make a change in the leadership, put Jeff Clark and maybe something will finally get done." Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL): Mr. Rosen during a January 2 meeting with Mr. Clark, did you confront him again about his contact with the President? And if so, can you describe that? Former Acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen: We had -- it was a contentious meeting where we were chastising him that he was insubordinate, he was out of line, he had not honored his own representations of what he would do. And he raised again, that he thought that letter should go out. And we were not receptive to that. Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL): So in that meeting, did Mr. Clark say he would turn down the President's offer if you reversed your position and sign the letter? Former Acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen: Yes. Subsequently, he told me that on the on Sunday the 3rd. He told me that the timeline had moved up, and that the President had offered him the job and that he was accepting it. Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL): White House Call Logs obtained by the Committee show that by 4:19pm, on January 3, the White House had already begun referring to Mr. Clark as the Acting Attorney General. Let's ask about that, what was your reaction to that? Former Acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen: Well, you know, on the one hand, I wasn't going to accept being fired by my subordinate. So I wanted to talk to the President directly. Former Acting Deputy Attorney General Richard Donoghue: So the four of us knew, but no one else, aside from Jeff Clark of course, knew what was going on until late that Sunday afternoon. We chose to keep a close hold, because we didn't want to create concern or panic in the Justice Department leadership. But at this point, I asked the Acting AG [Rosen], what else can I do to help prepare for this meeting in the Oval Office, and he said, You and Pat [Cipollone] should get the Assistant Attorney Generals on the phone, and it's time to let them know what's going on. Let's find out what they may do if there's a change in leadership, because that will help inform the conversation at the Oval Office. We got most, not all, but most of the AAGs on the phone. We very quickly explained to them what the situation was. [They] essentially said they would leave, they would resign en mass if the President made that change in the department leadership. Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL): DOJ leadership arrived at the White House. Former Acting Deputy Attorney General Richard Donoghue: The conversation this point was really about whether the President should remove Jeff Rosen and replace him with Jeff Clark. And everyone in the room, I think, understood that that meant that letter would go out. And at some point, the conversation turned to whether Jeff Clark was even qualified, competent to run the Justice Department, which in my mind, he clearly was not. And it was a heated conversation. I thought it was useful to point out to the President that Jeff Clark simply didn't have the skills, the ability and the experience to run the Department. And so I said, "Mr. President, you're talking about putting a man in that seat who has never tried a criminal case, who's never conducted a criminal investigation, he's telling you that he's going to take charge of the department, 115,000 employees, including the entire FBI, and turn the place on a dime and conduct nationwide criminal investigations that will produce results in a matter of days. It's impossible. It's absurd. It's not going to happen, and it's going to fail. He has never been in front of a trial jury, a grand jury. He's never even been to Chris Wray's office." I said at one point, "if you walked into Chris Wray's office, one, would you know how to get there and, two, if you got there, would he even know who you are? And you really think that the FBI is going to suddenly start following you orders? It's not going to happen. He's not competent." And that's the point at which Mr. Clark tried to defend himself by saying, "Well, I've been involved in very significant civil and environmental litigation. I've argued many appeals and appellate courts and things of that nature." And then I pointed out that, yes, he was an environmental lawyer, and I didn't think that was appropriate background to be running in the United States Justice Department. Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL): Did anybody in there support Mr. Clark? Former Acting Deputy Attorney General Richard Donoghue: No one. Along those lines, he [former President Trump] said, "so suppose I do this, suppose I replace him, Jeff Rosen, with him, Jeff Clark, what would you do?" And I said, "Mr. President, I would resign immediately. I'm not working one minute for this guy [Clark], who I just declared was completely incompetent." And so the President immediately turned to to Mr. Engel. Steven Engel: My recollection is that when the President turned to me and said, "Steve, you wouldn't leave, would you?" I said, "Mr. President, I've been with you through four Attorneys General, including two Acting Attorneys General, but I couldn't be part of this." Former Acting Deputy Attorney General Richard Donoghue: And I said, and we're not the only ones. No one cares if we resign. If Steve and I go, that's fine, it doesn't matter. But I'm telling you what's going to happen. You're gonna lose your entire Department leadership, every single AAG will walk out on you. Your entire Department of leadership will walk out within hours." And I said, "Mr. President, within 24...48...72 hours, you could have hundreds and hundreds of resignations of the leadership of your entire Justice Department because of your actions. What's that going to say about you?" Former Acting Deputy Attorney General Richard Donoghue: And then the other thing that I said was that, you know, look, all anyone is going to sort of think about when they see this...no one is going to read this letter....all anyone is going to think is that you went through two Attorneys General in two weeks until you found the environmental guy to sign this thing. And so the story is not going to be that the Department of Justice has found massive corruption that would have changed results of the election. It's going to be the disaster of Jeff Clark. I think at that point Pat Cipollone said, "Yeah, this is a murder suicide pact, this letter." Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL): Mr. Cipollone, the White House Counsel, told the Committee that Mr. Engels response had a noticeable impact on the President, that this was a turning point in the conversation. Mr. Donohue, towards the end of this meeting, did the President asked you what was going to happen to Mr. Clark? Former Acting Deputy Attorney General Richard Donoghue: He did. When we finally got to, I'd say, the last 15 minutes of the meeting, the President's decision was apparent, he announced it. Jeff Clark tried to scrape his way back and asked the President to reconsider. The President double down said "No, I've made my decision. That's it. We're not going to do it." And then he turned to me and said, "so what happens to him now?" Meaning Mr. Clark. He understood that Mr. Clark reported to me. And I didn't initially understand the question. I said, "Mr. President?" and he said, "Are you going to fire him?" And I said, "I don't have the authority to fire him. He's the Senate confirmed Assistant Attorney General." And he said, "Well, who has the authority to fire him?" And I said, "Only you do, sir." And he said, "Well, I'm not going to fire him." I said, "Alright, well, then we should all go back to work." 06/21/22 Select Committee Hearing June 21, 2022 House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol Witnesses: Rusty Bowers, Arizona House Speaker Brad Raffensperger, Georgia Secretary of State Gabriel Sterling, Georgia Secretary of State Chief Operating Officer Wandrea ArShaye, “Shaye” Moss, former Georgia election worker Ronna Romney McDaniel, RNC Chair Justin Clark, former Trump Campaign lawyer Robert Sinners, former Trump campaign staffer Andrew Hitt, Former Wisconsin Republican Party Chair Laura Cox, Former Michigan Republican Party Chair Josh Roselman, Investigative Counsel for the J6 Committee John Eastman, Former Trump Lawyer Mike Shirkey, Majority Leader of the Michigan Senate Angela McCallum, Trump Campaign caller Rudy Giuliani Clips Josh Roselman: My name is Josh Roselman, I'm an Investigative Counsel for the House Select Committee to investigate the January 6 attack on the United States Capitol. Beginning in late November 2020. The President and his lawyers started appearing before state legislators, urging them to give their electoral votes to Trump, even though he lost the popular vote. This was a strategy with both practical and legal elements. The Select Committee has obtained an email from just two days after the election, in which a Trump campaign lawyer named Cleata Mitchell asked another Trump lawyer, John Eastman, to write a memo justifying the idea. Eastman prepared a memo attempting to justify this strategy, which was circulated to the Trump White House, Rudy Giuliani's legal team, and state legislators around the country and he appeared before the Georgia State Legislature to advocate for it publicly. John Eastman: You could also do what the Florida Legislature was prepared to do, which is to adopt a slate of electors yourself. And when you add in the mix of the significant statistical anomalies in sworn affidavits and video evidence of outright election fraud, I don't think it's just your authority to do that, but quite frankly, I think you have a duty to do that to protect the integrity of the election here in Georgia. Josh Roselman: But Republican officials in several states released public statements recognizing that President Trump's proposal was unlawful. For instance, Georgia Governor Brian Kemp called the proposal unconstitutional, while Arizona House Speaker Rusty Bowers wrote that the idea would undermine the rule of law. The pressure campaign to get state legislators to go along with this scheme intensified when President Trump invited delegations from Michigan and Pennsylvania to the White House. January 6 Committee Lawyer: Either you or speaker Chatfield, did you make the point to the President, that you were not going to do anything that violated Michigan law? Mike Shirkey: I believe we did. Whether or not it was those exact words or not, I think the words that I would have more likely used is, "we are going to follow the law." Josh Roselman: Nevertheless, the pressure continued. The next day President Trump tweeted quote, "hopefully the Courts and/or Legislatures will have the COURAGE to do what has to be done to maintain the integrity of our Elections, and the United States of America itself. THE WORLD IS WATCHING!!!!" He posted multiple messages on Facebook, listing the contact information for state officials and urging his supporters to contact them to quote "demand a vote on decertification." These efforts also involves targeted outreach to state legislators from President Trump's lawyers and from Trump himself. Angela McCallum: Hi, my name is Angela McCallum, I'm calling from Trump campaign headquarters in Washington DC. You do have the power to reclaim your authority and send us a slate of Electors that will support President Trump and Vice President Pence. Josh Roselman: Another legislator, Pennsylvania House Speaker Brian Cutler, received daily voicemails from Trump's lawyers in the last week of November. Cutler felt that the outreach was inappropriate and asked his lawyers to tell Rudy Giuliani to stop calling, but Giuliani continued to reach out. Rudy Giuliani: I understand that you don't want to talk to me now. I just want to bring some facts to your attention and talk to you as a fellow Republican. Josh Roselman: These ads were another element in the effort. The Trump campaign spent millions of dollars running ads online and on television. Commercial Announcer: The evidence is overwhelming. Call your governor and legislators demand they inspect the machines and hear the evidence. Fake electors scheme Casey Lucier: My name is Casey Lucier. I'm an Investigative Counsel for the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6 Attack on the United States Capitol. On November 18, a lawyer working with the Trump campaign named Kenneth Chesebro wrote a memo arguing that the Trump campaign should organize its own electors in the swing states that President Trump had lost. The Select Committee received testimony that those close to President Trump began planning to organize fake electors for Trump in states that Biden won in the weeks after the election. At the President's direct request, the RNC assisted the campaign in coordinating this effort. January 6 Committee Lawyer: What did the President say when he called you? Ronna Romney McDaniel: Essentially, he turned the call over to Mr. Eastman, who then proceeded to talk about the importance of the RNC helping the campaign gather these contingent electors in case any of the legal challenges that were ongoing change the result of any dates, I think more just helping them reach out and assemble them. But the My understanding is the campaign did take the lead, and we just were helping them in that in that role. Casey Lucier: As President Trump and his supporters continued to lose lawsuits, some campaign lawyers became convinced that convening electors in states that Trump lost was no longer appropriate. Justin Clark: I just remember I either replied or called somebody saying, unless we have litigation pending this, like in the states, like, I don't think this is appropriate, or no, this isn't the right thing to do. I'm out. Matt Morgan: At that point, I had Josh Findlay email Mr. Chesebro, politely, to say, "This is your task. You are responsible for the Electoral College issues moving forward". And this was my way of taking that responsibility to zero. Casey Lucier: The Committee learned the White House Counsel's Office also felt the plan was potentially illegal. January 6 Committee Lawyer: And so to be clear, did you hear the White House Counsel's office saying that this plan to have alternate electors meet and cast votes for Donald Trump in states that he had lost was not legally sound? Cassidy Hutchinson: Yes, sir. Casey Lucier: The Select Committee interviewed several of the individual fake electors, as well as Trump campaign staff who helped organize the effort. Robert Sinners: We were just, you know, kind of useful idiots or rubes at that point. You know, a strong part of me really feels that it's just kind of as the road continued, and as that was failure, failure, failure that that got formulated as what do we have on the table? Let's just do it. January 6 Committee Lawyer: And now after what we've told you today about the Select Committee's investigation about the conclusion of the professional lawyers on the campaign staff, Justin Clark, Matt Morgan and Josh Findlay, about their unwillingness to participate in the convening of these electors, how does that contribute to your understanding of these issues? Robert Sinners: I'm angry, I'm angry. Because I think in a sense, you know, no one really cared if people were potentially putting themselves in jeopardy. January 6 Committee Lawyer: Would you have not wanted to participate in this any further, as well? Robert Sinners: I absolutely would not have had I know that the three main lawyers for the campaign that I've spoken to in the past, and were leading up, we're not on board. Yeah. Andrew Hitt: I was told that these would only count if a court ruled in our favor. So that would have been using our electors. Well, it would have been using our electors in ways that we weren't told about and we wouldn't have supported. Casey Lucier: Documents obtained by the Select Committee indicate that instructions were given to the electors in several states that they needed to cast their ballots in complete secrecy. Because the scheme involved fake electors, those participating in certain states had no way to comply with state election laws, like where the electors were supposed to meet. One group of fake electors even considered hiding overnight to ensure that they could access the State Capitol, as required in Michigan. January 6 Committee Lawyer: Did Mr. Norton say who he was working with at all on this effort to have electors meet? Laura Cox: He said he was working with the President's campaign. He told me that the Michigan Republican electors were planning to meet in the Capitol and hide overnight so that they could fulfill the role of casting their vote per law in the Michigan chambers and I told him in no uncertain terms that that was insane and inappropriate. Casey Lucier: In one state, the fake electors even asked for a promise that the campaign would pay their legal fees if they got sued or charged with a crime. Ultimately, fake electors did meet on December 14, 2020 in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, New Mexico, Nevada and Wisconsin. At the request of the Trump campaign, the electors from these battleground states signed documents falsely asserting that they were the quote, "duly elected" electors from their state and submitted them to the National Archives and to Vice President Pence in his capacity as President of the Senate. In an email produced to the Select Committee, Dr. Eastman told the Trump campaign representative that it did not matter that the electors had not been approved by a state authority. Quote, "the fact that we have multiple slates of electors demonstrates the uncertainty of either. That should be enough." He urged that Pence "act boldly and be challenged." Documents produced to the Select Committee show that the Trump campaign took steps to ensure that the physical copies of the fake electors' electoral votes from two states were delivered to Washington for January 6. Text messages exchanged between Republican Party officials in Wisconsin show that on January 4, the Trump campaign asked for someone to fly their fake electors' documents to Washington. A staffer for Wisconsin Senator Ron Johnson texted a staffer for Vice President Pence just minutes before the beginning of the Joint Session. This staffer stated that Senator Johnson wished to hand deliver to the Vice President the fake electors' votes from Michigan and Wisconsin. The Vice President's aide unambiguously instructed them not to deliver the fake votes to the Vice President. Even though the fake elector slates were transmitted to Congress and the Executive Branch, the Vice President held firm and his position that his role was to count lawfully submitted electoral votes. Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS): Brad Raffensperger is the 29th Secretary of State of Georgia, serving in this role since 2019. As an elected official, and a Republican Secretary, Raffensperger is responsible for supervising elections in Georgia and maintaining the state's public records. Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS): Speaker Bowers, thank you for being with us today. You're the speaker of the Arizona House and a self-described conservative Republican. You campaigned for President Trump and with him during the 2020 election. Is it fair to say that you wanted Donald Trump to win a second term in office? Please? Rusty Bowers: Yes, sir. Thank you. Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS): And is it your understanding that President Biden was the winner of the popular vote in Arizona in 2020? Rusty Bowers: Yes, sir. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): Before we begin with the questions that I had prepared for you, I want to ask you about a statement that former President Trump issued, which I received just prior to the hearing. Former President Trump begins by calling you a RINO, Republican in Name Only. He then references a conversation in November 2020, in which he claims that you told him that the election was rigged, and that he had won Arizona. To quote the former President, "during the conversation, he told me the election was rigged and that I won Arizona," unquote. Is that false? Rusty Bowers: Anywhere, anyone, anytime that has said that I said the election was rigged, that would not be true. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): And when the former President, in his statement today, claimed that you told him that he won Arizona, is that also false? Rusty Bowers: That is also false. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): Mr. Bowers, I understand that after the election, you received a phone call from President Trump and Rudy Giuliani, in which they discussed the result of the presidential election in Arizona. If you would, tell us about that call. Rusty Bowers: Mr. Giuliani came on first. And niceties...then Mr. Trump, President Trump, then-President Trump came on. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): During the conversation did you ask Mr. Giuliani for proof of these allegations of fraud that he was making? Rusty Bowers: On multiple occasions, yes. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): And when you asked him for evidence of this fraud, what did he say? Rusty Bowers: He said that they did have proof. And I asked him, "Do you have names?" [He said] for example, we have 200,000 illegal immigrants, some large number, five or six thousand, dead people, etc. And I said, "Do you have their names?" Yes. "Will you give them to me?" Yes. The President interrupted and said, "Give the man what he needs Rudy." He said, "I will." And that happened on at least two occasions, that interchange in the conversation. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): Did you ever receive from him that evidence either during the call, after the call, or to this day? Rusty Bowers: Never. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): What was the ask during this call? Rusty Bowers: The ones I remember, were first, that we would hold -- that I would allow an official committee at at the Capitol so that they could hear this evidence, and that we could take action thereafter. I said, "to what end? To what end the hearing." He said, well, we have heard by an official high up in the Republican legislature that there is a legal theory or a legal ability in Arizona, that you can remove the the electors of President Biden and replace them. And we would like to have the legitimate opportunity, through the committee, to come to that end and and remove that. And I said that's, that's something that's totally new to me. I've never heard of any such thing. And I would never do anything of such magnitude without deep consultation with qualified attorneys. And I said, I've got some good attorneys, and I'm going to give you their names. But you're asking me to do something against my oath and I will not break my oath. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): Did you also receive a call from US Representative Andy Biggs of Arizona on the morning of January 6? Rusty Bowers: I did. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): And what did Mr. Biggs asked you to do? Rusty Bowers: I believe that was the day that the vote was occurring in each state to have certification or to declare the certification of the electors. And he asked if I would sign on both to a letter that had been sent from my State, and/or that I would support the decertification of the electors. And I said I would not. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): Speaking Bowers, did the President call you again later in December? Rusty Bowers: He did, sir. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): Did you tell the president in that second call that you supported him, that you voted for him, but that you are not going to do anything illegal for him? Rusty Bowers: I did, sir. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): Nevertheless, his lawyer John Eastman called you some days later, and what did Dr. Eastman want you to do? Rusty Bowers: That we would, in fact, take a vote to overthrow -- or I shouldn't say overthrow -- that we would decertify the electors, and that we had plenary authority to do so. But I said, "What would you have me do?" And he said, "Just do it and let the court sorted out." And I said, "You're asking me to do something that's never been done in history, the history of the United States. And I'm going to put my state through that without sufficient proof? And that's going to be good enough with me? That I would, I would put us through that, my state that I swore to uphold, both in Constitution and in law? No, sir." Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): I want to look even more deeply at the fake electoral scheme. Every four years, citizens from all over the United States go to the polls to elect the President. Under our Constitution, when we cast our votes for president, we are actually voting to send electors pledged to our preferred candidate to the Electoral College. In December, the electors in each state meet, cast their votes, and send those votes to Washington. There was only one legitimate slate of electors from each state. On the Sixth day of January, Congress meets in a joint session to count those votes, and the winner of the Electoral College vote becomes the president. Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS): Secretary Raffensburger, thank you for being here today. You've been a public servant in Georgia since 2015, serving first as a member of the Georgia House of Representatives, and then since January 2019, as Georgia Secretary of State as a self described conservative Republican. Is it fair to say that you wanted President Trump to win the 2020 election? Brad Raffensperger: Yes, it is. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): Secretary Raffensperger, did Joe Biden win the 2020 presidential election in Georgia and by what margin? Brad Raffensperger: President Biden carried the state of Georgia by approximately 12,000 votes. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): Bear in mind as we discuss this call today that by this point in time, early January, the election in Georgia had already been certified. But perhaps more important, the President of the United States had already been told repeatedly by his own top Justice Department officials that the claims he was about to make to you about massive fraud in Georgia were completely false. 06/16/22 Select Committee Hearing June 16, 2022 House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol Witnesses: Greg Jacob, Former Counsel to Vice President Mike Pence J. Michael Luttig, Retired judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit and informal advisor to Mike Pence Julie Radford, Former Chief of Staff for Ivanka Trump Eric Herschmann, Former White House Senior Advisor Nicholas Luna, Former Assistant to President Trump Gen. Keith Kellogg, Former National Security Advisor to VP Pence Clips 16:45 Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS): Greg Jacob was Counsel to Vice President Pence. He conducted a thorough analysis of the role of the Vice President in the Joint Session of Congress under the Constitution, the Electoral Count Act, and 230 years of historical practice. But he also has firsthand information about the attack on the Capitol because he lived through it. He was with the Vice President and his own life was in danger. 31:05 Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY): Eastman was, at the time, a law professor at Chapman University Law School. He prepared a memo outlining the nonsensical theory that the Vice President could decide the outcome of the election at the Joint Session of Congress on January 6. 32:50 Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY): Dr. Eastman himself admitted in an email that the fake electors had no legal weight. Referring to the fake electors as, quote "dead on arrival in Congress" end quote, because they did not have a certification from their States. 46:40 Greg Jacob: We had a constitutional crisis in 1876 because in that year, multiple slates of electors were certified by multiple slates [sic]. And when it came time to count those votes, the antecedent question of "which ones?" had to be answered. That required the appointment of an independent commission. That commission had to resolve that question. And the purpose of the Electoral Count Act of 1887 had been to resolve those latent ambiguities. Now I'm in complete agreement with Judge Luttig. It is unambiguous that the Vice President does not have the authority to reject electors. There is no suggestion of any kind that it does. There is no mention of rejecting or objecting to electors anywhere in the 12th amendment. And so the notion that the Vice President could do that certainly is not in the text. But the problem that we had and that John Eastman raised in our discussions was, we had all seen that in Congress in 2000, in 2004, in 2016, there had been objections raised to various states. And those had even been debated in 2004. And so, here you have an Amendment that says nothing about objecting or rejecting. And yet we did have some recent practice of that happening within the terms of the Electoral Count Act. So we started with that. 1:20:45 Greg Jacob: He again tried to say, but I don't think the courts will get involved in this. They'll invoke the political question doctrine and so if the courts stay out of it, that will mean that we'll have the 10 days for the States to weigh in and resolve it. And then, you know, they'll send back the Trump slates of electors, and the people will be able to accept that. I expressed my vociferous disagreement with that point, I did not think that this was a political question. Among other things, if the courts did not step in to resolve this, there was nobody else to resolve it. You would be in a situation where you have a standoff between the President of the United States and, counterfactually, the Vice President of the United States saying that we've exercised authorities that, Constitutionally, we think we have by which we have deemed ourselves the winners of the election. You would have an opposed House and Senate disagreeing with that. You would have State legislatures that, to that point, I mean, Republican leaders across those legislatures had put together, had put out statements, and we collected these for the Vice President as well, that the people had spoken in their States and that they had no intention of reversing the outcome of the election. We did receive some signed letters that Mr. Eastman forwarded us by minorities of leaders in those States, but no State had any legislative house that indicated that added any interest in it. So you would have had just a an unprecedented Constitutional jump ball situation with that standoff. And as I expressed to him, that issue might well then have to be decided in the streets. Because if we can't work it out politically, we've already seen how charged up people are about this election. And so it would be a disastrous situation to be in. So I said, I think the courts will intervene. I do not see a commitment in the Constitution of the question, whether the Vice President has that authority to some other actor to resolve there. There's arguments about whether Congress and the Vice President jointly have a Constitutional commitment to generally decide electoral vote issues. I don't think that they have any authority to object or reject them. I don't see it in the 12th Amendment, but nonetheless. And I concluded by saying, "John, in light of everything that we've discussed, can't we just both agree that this is a terrible idea?" And he couldn't quite bring himself to say yes to that. But he very clearly said, "Well, yeah, I see we're not going to be able to persuade you to do this." And that was how the meeting concluded. Rep. Pete Aguilar (D-CA): We understand that the Vice President started his day on January 4 with a rally in Georgia for the Republican candidates in the US Senate runoff. When the Vice President returned to Washington, he was summoned to meet with the President regarding the upcoming Joint Session of Congress. Mr. Jacob, during that meeting between the President and the Vice President, what theories did Dr. Eastman present regarding the role of the Vice President in counting the electoral votes? Greg Jacob: During the meeting on January 4, Mr. Eastman was opining there were two legally viable arguments as to authorities that the Vice President could exercise two days later on January 6. One of them was that he could reject electoral votes outright. The other was that he could use his capacity as Presiding Officer to suspend the proceedings and declare essentially a 10-day recess during which States that he deemed to be disputed, there was a list of five to seven states, the exact number changed from conversation to conversation, but that the Vice President could sort of issue and demand to the State Legislatures in those States to re-examine the election and declare who had won each of those States. So he said that both of those were legally viable options. He said that he did not recommend, upon questioning, he did not recommend what he called the "more aggressive option," which was reject outright, because he thought that that would be less politically palatable. The imprimatur of State Legislature authority would be necessary to ultimately have public acceptance of an outcome in favor of President Trump. And so he advocated that the preferred course of action would be the procedural route of suspending the Joint Session and sending the election back to the States. And again, the Vice President's first instinct here is so decisive on this question, there's just no way that the framers of the Constitution who divided power and authority, who separated it out, who had broken away from George III, and declared him to be a tyrant, there was no way that they would have put in the hands of one person, the authority to determine who was going to be President of the United States. And then we went to history. We examined every single electoral vote count that had happened in Congress since the beginning of the country. And critically, no Vice President, in 230 years of history, had ever claimed to have that kind of authority, hadn't claimed authority to reject electoral votes, had not claimed authority to return electoral votes back to the States. In the entire history of the United States, not once had a Joint Session, ever returned electoral votes back to the States to be counted. So the history was absolutely decisive. And again, part of my discussion with Mr. Eastman was, if you were right, don't you think Al Gore might have liked to have known in 2000, that he had authority to just declare himself President of the United States? Did you think that the Democrat lawyers just didn't think of this very obvious quirk that he could use to do that? And of course, he acknowledged Al Gore did not and should not have had that authority at that point in time. So at the conclusion of the meeting on the 4th, the President had asked that our office meet with Mr. Eastman the next day to hear more about the positions he had expressed at that meeting, and the Vice President indicated that....offered me up as his counsel, to fulfill that duty. We had an extended discussion an hour and a half to two hours on January 5. What most surprised me about that meeting was that when Mr. Eastman came in, he said, "I'm here to request that you reject the electors." So on the 4th, that had been the path that he had said, "I'm not recommending that you do that." But on the 5th, he came in and expressly requested that. Rep. Pete Aguilar (D-CA): Mr. Jacob did you, Mr. Short, and the Vice President have a call later that day, again, with the President and Dr. Eastman? Greg Jacob: So, yes, we did. Rep. Pete Aguilar (D-CA): And what did Dr. Eastman requested on that call? Greg Jacob: On that phone call, Mr. Eastman stated that he had heard us loud and clear that morning, we were not going to be rejecting electors. But would we be open to considering the other course that we had discussed on the 4th, which would be to suspend the Joint Session and request that State Legislatures reexamine certification of the electoral votes? Rep. Pete Aguilar (D-CA): Trump issued a statement claiming the Vice President had agreed that he could determine the outcome of the election, despite the fact that the Vice President had consistently rejected that position. Mr. Jacob, how did the Vice President's team reacts to the stat
Suffolk County Presiding Officer Kevin McCaffrey LIVE on LI in the AM w/ Jay Oliver! by JVC Broadcasting
Barely a week after this year's midterm elections, in which the much anticipated Republican Red Wave never materialized, former President Trump announced his candidacy for the 2024 presidential election. The only president who succeeded in occupying the White House in two non-consecutive terms was Grover Cleveland. Yet, the story of his comeback is much different than Trump's. In fact, our immediate former president can learn a great deal from Cleveland in how to lose an election and in how to orchestrate his comeback. In addition to Cleveland, Andrew Jackson and Richard Nixon lost their presidential bids. But they stayed in the fight, rallied their support and had their comebacks to win the White House. By the way, when he lost to Kennedy, Nixon gave a brief but beautiful speech before both houses of Congress. Click this link to listen to it: Nixon announces JFK win to Congress 1961. To dig deep into this history, I spoke with Professor Michael Gerhardt of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, where he is a Burton Craig Distinguished Professor of Jurisprudence at the school of law there. If Professor Gerhardt's voice sounds familiar to you, it's because you've seen him on TV, many times. During the Clinton and first Trump impeachment proceedings, Professor Gerhardt served as an impeachment expert for CNN. In the second impeachment trial of President Trump, he was an expert commentator for CNN, Fox, and MSNBC and served as special counsel to the Presiding Officer, Senator Patrick Leahy. In addition to all of that, Professor Gerhardt has testified more than 20 times before Congress, including as the only joint witness in the Clinton impeachment proceedings in the House; speaking behind closed doors to the entire House of Representatives about the history of impeachment in 1998. He also testified as one of the four constitutional scholars called by the House Judiciary Committee during President Trump's impeachment proceedings. He is the author of seven books, including the Forgotten Presidents, and also Lincoln's Mentors, and his forthcoming book is FDR's Mentors. To learn more about Professor Gerhardt, you can visit his academic homepage. In addition, below are links to two other interesting episodes: S2E39: History of America's Polarized Politics?, Dr. David Schultz S2E27: History of America's Election Disputes, Prof. Edwar Foley S2E37: U.S Classified Information - A History, Prof. Heidi Kitrosser I hope you enjoy these episodes. Adel Host of the History Behind News podcast HIGHLIGHTS: get future episode highlights in your inbox. SUPPORT: please click here and join our other supporters in the news peeler community. Thank you.
Suffolk County Presiding Officer Kevin McCaffrey LIVE on LI in the AM w/ Jay Oliver! by JVC Broadcasting
Bill McIntyre has a discussion with Richard J. Nicolello, Legislator in Nassau County's 9th District and the Presiding Officer of the Nassau County Legislature. Together they discuss the midterm election results, the state budget, gerrymandering and more.
Suffolk County Presiding Officer Kevin McCaffrey LIVE on LI in the AM w/ Jay Oliver! by JVC Broadcasting
20221028-2 WASHINGTON COUNCIL OF THE BLIND Convention 20221028-2 Breaking Through the Storm WASHINGTON COUNCIL OF THE BLIND 2022 Convention WCB, BREAKING THROUGH THE STORM! Breaking Through the Storm - Presenter: George Abbott, President and CEO, Lighthouse for the Blind, Inc. George is the President and CEO of Lighthouse for the Blind, Inc., headquartered in Seattle, Washington. He earned a BS in finance and an MS in blind adult rehabilitation from Northern Illinois University. He grew up in the Chicago area. Prior to joining the Lighthouse, he worked in a variety of management positions at the American Foundation for the Blind and Hadley. He started his career teaching access technology at the Idaho Commission for the Blind and Visually Impaired, and the Hines Veterans Affairs Central Blind Rehabilitation Center. Find out more at https://acb-events.pinecast.co
Adam Hugill walks through the Labour Tribunal rules, procedures and what to expect in employment disputes. He references his experience giving practical advice and using real-life examples. Show Notes 01:27 The purpose of the Labour Tribunal 02:52 Type of claims and limitation period 05:08 Transferring claims to other courts 05:54 How does the process work? 08:12 Settlements 09:18 Duration and managing stress 12:00 Some examples of Labour Tribunal trials 14:34 Witness evidence and VCF 18:35 Appeals 21:04 Legal costs and recoverable expenses Learn more & Subscribe: https://www.hugillandip.com/2022/07/podcast-s4e2-employment-labour-tribunal-proceedings/
Suffolk County Presiding Officer Kevin McCaffrey LIVE on LI in the AM w/ Jay Oliver! 6.2.22 by JVC Broadcasting
Our guest on this episode of Crossings Conversations is the Rev. Edwin Johnson '10, an Episcopal priest, rector of St. Mary's Episcopal Church in Dorchester, Massachusetts, and member of the Presiding Officer's Advisory Group on Beloved Community Implementation in the Episcopal Church. The Rev. Johnson spoke with us about Episcopal efforts toward racial justice and racial reconciliation, and how his time at CDSP affected his particular involvement in this ministry.Download full episode transcript hereGuest Bio: The Rev. Edwin Johnson is an Episcopal priest, rector of St. Mary's Episcopal Church in Dorchester, MA, and member of the Presiding Officer's Advisory Group on Beloved Community Implementation in the Episcopal Church. A native of Dorchester, the Rev. Johnson graduated from CDSP in 2010.About the Show: Crossings Conversations is a co-production of Church Divinity School of the Pacific and Trinity Church Wall Street. If you enjoyed the show, please rate and review it on Apple Podcasts or share it with a colleague. You can learn more about the only Episcopal seminary on the West Coast and subscribe to Crossings magazine at cdsp.edu.
Leisa and Patrick chat with Kirah and talk Zodiacal Releasing: a Hellenistic timing technique that divides your life up as though it's a book through lens of the lots. (Tune into Season 2 Episode 10 to learn more about The Lots and Season 2 Episode 1 for Sect - Day & Night Charts. These are great preliminary episodes.) Leisa Schaim is a consulting astrologer, speaker, and researcher based in Denver, Colorado. She finds elections for and co-hosts the Auspicious Elections Podcast, a subscriber benefit for patrons of The Astrology Podcast, and previously co-wrote an electional astrology column for "The Mountain Astrologer" magazine. You can also find her contributions in a fair number of episodes on The Astrology Podcast. Leisa enjoys exploring and illustrating people's life stories using a blend of Hellenistic and modern astrological techniques. She has spent significant time in service to the astrological community: she is a past Presiding Officer and before that, steering committee member, of AFAN, was one of the coordinators for the worldwide United Astrology Conference (UAC) 2018, and received the 2018 Jim Lewis award for community service. Twitter: https://twitter.com/LeisaSchaim (@LeisaSchaim) IG: https://www.facebook.com/leisa.schaim (@leisa.schaim) http://leisaschaim.com/ (http://LeisaSchaim.com) Patrick Watson was born in High Wycombe, UK, on October 23rd 1987 at 1:06 am. He first began his studies in astrology at 15 years old. At 17, he was mentored by astrologers Nick Dagan Best and Chris Brennan and introduced to Hellenistic astrology at Project Hindsight in 2006. In his 20's he blogged about astrology and politics as he earned his BA in Music from the University of Massachusetts Amherst. He began working as a music teacher and part-time astrologer in 2014 and started as a full-time astrologer in 2018, offering natal, electional, horary and rectification services. He is known for his humorous astrological articles, videos and memes. He has been featured on the Astrology Podcast, ABC News, Fox News, the Wall Street Journal and the Washington Post. His research interests include Hellenistic timelord systems, synodic cycles, election prediction and more recently, the astrology of markets and finance. He lives happily in Arizona with his wife and three children. Twitter: https://twitter.com/pwatsonastro (@pwatsonastro) Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/pwatsonastro (@pwatsonastro) Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/patrickwatsonastrologer (@patrickwatsonastrologer) http://patrickwatsonastrology.com/ (http://patrickwatsonastrology.com) Looking to learn astrology? Check out The Strology shop:https://www.thestrology.com/shop (https://www.thestrology.com/shop) Follow us on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/thestrologyshow/ (https://www.instagram.com/thestrologyshow/) Join our mailing list: https://www.thestrology.com/subscribe (https://www.thestrology.com/subscribe) In person Events: https://www.thestrology.com/irl-events (https://www.thestrology.com/irl-events) Check out our next eleventh house workshop: http://thestrology.com/upcoming-workshops (thestrology.com/upcoming-workshops) Download CUSP and check out our new compatibility reports: http://cuspastrology.com/ (cuspastrology.com) Links: https://www.thestrology.com/links (https://www.thestrology.com/links) Be sure to like & subscribe, it helps a lot! xx Kirah
Join the Presiding Officer of the Scottish Parliament, Alison Johnstone MSP, in conversation with Prof Suzanne Simard, Professor of Ecology at the University of British Columbia who is credited as transforming the world's understanding of trees. She was the scientist who discovered that every tree in a forest is linked by underground fungi, allowing them to communicate and build communities around powerful, nurturing Mother Trees.
When we think of politics we probably think of the grand halls of Westminster Palace or the postmodern structure of the Scottish Parliament. With that, we also likely think of key political figures in the main parties. The First Minister, the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition, the Presiding Officer. Cast your mind back to the 2014 referendum, which figures stand out? Probably high-profile people such as Alex Salmond, Alistair Darling, Nicola Sturgeon, Ruth Davidson etc. But it was in the grassroots in which the bulk of the work was done. The leaders' debates in 2014 did very little to change people's minds. Of course, they served a purpose, but a major swing wasn't recorded after any event of this nature. What was recorded, however, is the polling on opinions on independence in the run-up to the 2014 referendum. In January 2012, 32% of people polled supported independence. This rose to 45% in the final vote. Many factors were at play, but the activists pounding the streets and knocking on doors certainly did a lot to change people's minds. Here, we've assembled a group of 3 activists from different walks of life and from different parts of the country to explain why activism is so important. How can one get involved in signing up? What's it like the first time you knock on someone's door? How do you politely disagree with folk? And, most importantly, how can this brand of grassroots activism win people over? All of these issues are discussed in Part 2 of this special episode of Scotland's Choice. Follow our activists on Twitter: Marcus, Danielle, Alan. Listen to other Scotland's Choice episodes here.
Grassroots activism has an extremely important part to play in politics. When we think of politics we probably think of the grand halls of Westminster Palace or the postmodern structure of the Scottish Parliament. With that, we also likely think of key political figures in the main parties. The First Minister, the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition, and the Presiding Officer. Cast your mind back to the 2014 referendum, which figures stand out? Probably high-profile people such as Alex Salmond, Alistair Darling, Nicola Sturgeon, Ruth Davidson etc. But it was in the grassroots in which the bulk of the work was done. The leaders' debates in 2014 did very little to change people's minds. Of course, they served a purpose, but a major swing wasn't recorded after any event of this nature. What was recorded, however, is the polling on opinions on independence in the run-up to the 2014 referendum. In January 2012, 32% of people polled supported independence. This rose to 45% in the final vote. Many factors were at play, but the activists pounding the streets and knocking on doors certainly did a lot to change people's minds. Here, we've assembled a group of 3 activists from different walks of life and from different parts of the country to explain why activism is so important. How can one get involved in signing up? What's it like the first time you knock on someone's door? How do you politely disagree with folk? And, most importantly, how can this brand of activism win people over? All of these issues are discussed in this special episode of Scotland's Choice. Part 2 will be released in a few weeks' time. Follow our activists on Twitter: Marcus, Danielle, Alan. Listen to other Scotland's Choice episodes here.
Have you ever wanted to run for office? Have you ever wondered what it is like to be a United States Senator? Listen to the story of Ms. Haneefah Khaaliq who fulfilled her lifelong dream of becoming a lawyer and now hopes to bring a difference to the U.S. Senate. Ms. Khaaliq devoted her life to public service at a very young age through volunteering in her community. Now the Executive Director and Presiding Officer for a civil rights agency and human relations commission, Ms. Khaaliq is also an ADA and Title VI Coordinator. Also, she's an adjunct professor at Indiana University. She operates her own social service, providing legal and mental health services to indigent clients nationwide. To connect with Haneefah Khaaliq, visit her website at haneefahkhaaliq.org --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app
We are thrilled to be featuring two esteemed guests on our latest episode which is on the theme of PoSH practices in the healthcare sector. Sharing their insights with us in this episode are Roli Verma, Regional Head Eastern Region, Narayana Health and Sofia Joseph, General Manager Human Resources, Cloudnine Hospitals. Ms. Verma is a member of the Apex PoSH Committee for Narayana Health and Ms.Joseph is the Presiding Officer of the Internal Committee at Cloudnine Hospitals. Both talk about the specific challenges their industry and their Organizations have faced, especially in the pandemic, and share some insightful practices that have worked for them. About our Guests: Ms. Roli Verma is an HR professional with more than 2 decades of rich experience in managing operations and core Human Resource Management functions in highly competitive business scenarios in healthcare. She has been an integral part of senior leadership and business partnership for strategies and focused organizational growth ranging from existing and new projects as well as hospital acquisitions. Ms. Sofia Joseph heads the Human Resources vertical at Cloud nine Group of Hospitals HQ in Bangalore. With over 17 years of experience in varied industries such as Software, Retail and Healthcare, her expertise spans across various specialties of Human Resource Management such as Employee Relations, OD, Talent Management, and HR Strategic Business Partnering. You can catch the episode on Youtube here: https://youtu.be/6x2mF0eF1nA Write to us with your questions and comments at voice@sashaindia.com, we'd love to hear from you. Do also follow us on social media, and share with your friends and colleagues who are interested in this topic as well. We are available on LinkedIn, Facebook, Instagram and Twitter as Voice of SASHA (@voice_of_sasha). If you enjoy reading and are interested to know more about topics like these, do subscribe to us on Substack (voiceofsasha.substack.com/) for our monthly newsletter. You can also listen to our episodes on your favourite podcasting app. Spotify (open.spotify.com/show/5X07p8sT30EJhu5mtzxDi1) Stitcher (https://www.stitcher.com/show/voice-the-sasha-poshcast) Google Podcasts (https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5zb3VuZGNsb3VkLmNvbS91c2Vycy9zb3VuZGNsb3VkOnVzZXJzOjc0MjkyMDYxMy9zb3VuZHMucnNz) Apple Podcasts (https://podcasts.apple.com/in/podcast/voice-the-sasha-poshcast/id1490690835) Happy viewing/listening! #voicethesashaposhcast #posh #workplace #awareness #sexualharassment #prevention #leadership #bestpractices #healthcare #podcast
In this episode, we speak with the Presiding Officer of the Scottish Parliament, Alison Johnstone MSP, about her background and her ambitions for the Scottish Parliament in Session 6. You can follow the Presiding Officer on Twitter at www.twitter.com/POScotParl
Reflecting on his career at the Scottish Parliament since the first election in 1999, and his time in the Presiding Officer's chair, outgoing Presiding Officer Ken Macintosh joins us for this podcast before the May election.
This week we interview the outgoing Presiding Officer of the Scottish Parliament, Ken Macintosh MSP, on his long career in politics and the development of the Parliament since its inception in 1999. Enjoy!
Dan fachlud haul Bae Ceredigion fe gawn ni gwmni un o ferched mwya dylanwadol holl hanes datganoli Cymru, Llywydd y Senedd, Elin Jones. Gyda thonnau'r harbwr yn gwmni a gwres y tân yn llonni'r enaid fe fydd y ddwy yn hel atgofion am fore oes plentyndod yn ardal Llanbedr Pont Steffan, dyddiau cynnar yn gwleidydda i'r Toriaid, a theithio'r wlad fel aelod o un o girl bands cynta Cymru, yr enwog Cwlwm! As the sun sets on Cardigan Bay Elin Fflur will be chatting to one of the most influential women in the history of devolution in Wales, the Presiding Officer, Elin Jones. Who knew that Elin started her political career as a young Tory candidate in Ysgol Tregaron? - And she'll also be looking back on her days as a member of the first girl band in Wales, the famous Cwlwm! Yes, there is more to Elin Jones than the Senedd!
Legacy FMQs Review 090513 Featuring the legendary Alex Grant plus Stewart Lochhead and Norrie Stewart reviewing a typical Alex Salmond FMQs with Joanna Lamont, Ruth Davidson, Willie Rennie and Patrick Harvie. Neil Findlay, Margo McDonald and the un-named Presiding Officer also feature in a period when Sec 30 was under discussion and support for Independence was peaking around 30%+.
Legal Travel Ban It was noisy at the back of the Holyrood chamber during FMQs today but the Presiding Officer was lenient. The consequences of the legal travel ban and the definition of an ‘essential journey’ were highlights and the FM enjoyed quoting the First Minister of Wales back to Richard Leonard @LabourRichard . The fall-out from last Saturday's AUOB Assembly continues with our view of the reactions of @GeorgeKerevan , Mike Small and Peter A Bell @BerthanPete @RichardJMurphy entertains us with a description of a Scottish ‘Young Fabians’ meeting which he attended with Jackie Ballie @jackiebmsp and Kevin Hague @kevverage “I then told them that since the quality of political and economic debate on The Bake Off was bound to be of a higher calibre than that in this meeting that was what I was going to watch, and left the meeting.”
Suffolk Presiding Officer Rob Calarco Live on LI in the AM with Jay Oliver! 11-18-2020 by JVC Broadcasting
In this video episode, we talk to Sukanya Gopinath, Head of Ethics Management, Titan Company Ltd., Tina Vas, Presiding Officer of the IC, Hinduja Global Solutions and Rajini G P, IC member, Robert Bosch Engineering and Business Solutions Ltd. about their organizations' best PoSH practices. Our heartfelt gratitude to Sukanya, Tina and Rajini for sharing their valuable insights. You can watch the video on Youtube here -
Join Mandy Rhodes, editor of Holyrood Magazine, and Liam Kirkaldy, award winning political journalist, as they review the week that was in Scottish Politics... What is on the menu for this weeks episode of Politically Speaking? Can a good week be found amongst all of this turmoil?! Mandy and Liam discuss the communication, or lack thereof, surrounding Coronavirus by the Governments of Westminster and Holyrood Mandy discusses the cancelation of Holyrood's summer break with the Presiding Officer and, will politics become less partisan? Mandy makes Liam prepare for a rant of his own! Remember to Follow and Subscribe wherever you listen to podcasts. You can follow our hosts, Mandy and Liam on Twitter, and you can keep up to date with the latest news from Holyrood online at Holyrood.com, or on our Twitter @HolyroodDaily. Lastly, remember to read the last issue of Holyrood Magazine online here. This show was hosted by Mandy Rhodes and Liam Kirkaldy, produced by Steven Perrie-Clyde, and artwork designed by Aimee Wachtel. This show is brought to you by Holyrood Magazine, ©Holyrood Communications 2020. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/holyrood/message
Evan Pan and Bradley Tidwell, the 2019 NSDA National Runners-up in Public Forum debate, share their advice for succeeding in the debate! Bradley debated at All Saints Episcopal School for two years and was Public Forum Captain his senior year. During his time he qualified to the Texas State tournament, and to the NSDA national tournament both years. He also broke at nearly every TOC tournament he attended this year and broke deep at tournaments such as Bellaire, Plano West, University of Texas, Hockaday, the TFA state tournament, and many more. He also won speaker awards at Bellaire and Colleyville. Finally, outside of PF, he qualified to the tournament of champions in extemporaneous speaking. He attended VBI before his senior season. Public forum debate (PF) is a type of current events debate which is a widespread form of high school debate in the U.S. Individuals give short (2-4 minute) speeches that are interspersed with 3 minute "crossfire" sections, questions and answers between opposed debaters. The winner is determined by a judge who also serves as a referee (timing sections, penalizing incivility, etc). The debate centers around advocating or rejecting a position, or "resolution", which is a proposal of a potential solution to a current events issue. Public forum is designed to be accessible to the average citizen. Nathan Fair has interviewed many National Champions. He has qualified for NSDA Nationals, qualified to NCFL Nationals and served as the presiding officer, and he broke to semifinals at a TOC qualifying tournament. He has placed 2nd at three separate varsity Congressional Debate tournaments. Finally, he served as a Presiding Officer for the Urban Debate League's tournament. His success was garnered after using the skills that are shared in this video.
Nathan Fair, a NSDA National Qualifier, informs people about the skills he used to qualify to the grand tournament in Dallas. Nathan Fair has interviewed many National Champions. He has qualified for NSDA Nationals, qualified to NCFL Nationals and served as the presiding officer, and he broke to semifinals at a TOC qualifying tournament. He has placed 2nd at three separate varsity Congressional Debate tournaments. Finally, he served as a Presiding Officer for the Urban Debate League's tournament. His success was garnered after using the skills that are shared in this video. The National Speech and Debate Association defines Student Congress as: A simulation of the U.S. legislative process, students generate a series of bills and resolutions for debate in Congressional Debate. Debaters alternate delivering speeches for and against the topic in a group setting. An elected student serves as a presiding officer to ensure debate flows smoothly. Students are assessed on their research, argumentation, and delivery skills, as well as their knowledge and use of parliamentary procedure.
Nathan Fair and Genevieve breaks down one of her speeches at NSDA Nationals 2019. Genevieve Cox, the 2020 Tournament of Champions runner-up and 2019 NSDA 6th place congressional debater, shares her advice for student congress members. Genevieve Cox began Speech and Debate in middle school. During her 8th grade year, she won NSDA Middle School Nationals for congressional debate. She has since won Glenbrooks National Tournament and the Harvard National Tournament. She is also a member of the United States World School International Debate team. She has lots of wisdom to share. Genevieve is competing in Congressional Debate and Extemporaneous Speaking for her 6th year. In the 8th grade she qualified for the High School Congressional Debate TOC and won the NSDA Congressional Debate Middle School National Championship. In Congressional Debate as a Freshman she placed 8th at Blue Key, 2nd at UT, 2nd at UIL State, won Churchill and broke to Semi-Finals at the TOC. As a Sophomore she finaled at Yale and Emory, placed 6th at Blue Key, won Katy Taylor, won Churchill for the second time, placed 8th at TFA state, 6th at the NCFL Grand Nationals and 6th in the Senate at the NSDA Nationals. She has 22 lifetime TOC bids and is vice president of her high school debate team. She spends her summers working for Texas Rio Grande Legal Aid and teaching English at a rural school and an orphanage in India near where she was born. She has also played piano since she was 2 and has performed in Carnegie Hall 6 times. In her spare time she enjoys eating mochi and watching detective documentaries. She feels incredibly honored for this opportunity to represent her country on the USA Debate Team. Nathan Fair has interviewed many National Champions. He has qualified for NSDA Nationals, qualified to NCFL Nationals and served as the presiding officer, and he broke to semifinals at a TOC qualifying tournament. He has placed 2nd at three separate varsity Congressional Debate tournaments. Finally, he served as a Presiding Officer for the Urban Debate League's tournament. His success was garnered after using the skills that are shared in this video.
Kevin Ahern and Kyle Ahren, the 2019 NSDA National Champions in Duo Interpretation, share their advice for succeeding in Duo Interpretation. They will be coaches at the Ascend Debate camp this summer! Code ASCENDYOUTH at Ascend Debate Camp: https://www.ascendspeech.org/summer-program Kyle is a senior at Alexander W. Dreyfoos School of the Arts in West Palm Beach, FL, where he has served as Vice President and Speech Captain of his team. In the fall, Kyle will attend the University of Texas at Austin to pursue a degree in journalism. Kyle has competed in all the Interpretation events and has seen out rounds at national and state tournaments in all of them. Mainly competing in Duo and POI, he has championed the NSDA National Tournament, The Florida State Tournament, Florida Blue Key, The University of Texas at Austin’s Longhorn Classic, The Cypress Bay Tradition, and Nova Titan. Kyle also has made several final round appearances at Emory’s Barkley Forum (Duo and POI), The Tournament of Champions (Duo), The New York City Invitational (Duo and POI), George Mason University's Patriot Games (Duo, POI, and OI), and The Sunvitational (Duo and POI). Kyle believes that the interpretation of literature is an exercise in innovation and encourages students to try new things. He hopes to help students create performances that are personally fulfilling, intelligent, and rooted in advocacy. When not competing at tournaments or practicing his speeches, Kyle is an avid consumer of podcasts and films. His favorite movies include Parasite (duh), Little Women, Donnie Darko, and Eighth Grade. Kevin Ahern is a senior at Alexander W. Dreyfoos School of the Arts in Florida, where he serves as his Speech and Debate team’s President. He will be attending the University of Texas at Austin this fall and plans to compete on their forensics team. Kevin has competed in almost all the Interpretation events including Duo Interpretation, Dramatic Interpretation, Oral Interpretation, and Program Oral Interpretation. Most notably, Kevin was named the 2019 NSDA National Champion and final round winner in Duo Interpretation. Other significant accomplishments include championships at the FFL Varsity State Tournament, Patriot Games at George Mason University, the Florida Blue Key Invitational, The University of Texas at Austin’s Longhorn Classic, The Tradition at Cypress Bay, and the Nova Titan Invitational. Kevin has also seen final rounds at the Harvard National Forensics Tournament, the Barkley Forum for High School Students at Emory University, The Tournament of Champions, The Sunvitational, and the New York City Invitational hosted by the Bronx High School of Science. Nathan Fair has interviewed many National Champions. He has qualified for NSDA Nationals, qualified to NCFL Nationals and served as the presiding officer, and he broke to semifinals at a TOC qualifying tournament. He has placed 2nd at three separate varsity Congressional Debate tournaments. Finally, he served as a Presiding Officer for the Urban Debate League's tournament. His success was garnered after using the skills that are shared in this video.
Interview with the NSDA National Champion in Humorous Interpretation in 2017. Evan Eiglarsh helps all Speech students learn the skills and strategies he used to become a champion. Evan Eiglarsh is a Tik Tok (TikTok) influencer with over 320,000 followers! Thanks so much for watching and please share this with someone who will find this interesting or helpful. The piece that won him NSDA Nationals was called: "Tammy: A Coming of Age Story About a Girl Who was Part T-Rex". The National Speech and Debate Association defines humorous interpretation as: Using a play, short story, or other published work, students perform a selection of one or more portions of a piece up to ten minutes in length. Humorous Interpretation is designed to test a student’s comedic skills through script analysis, delivery, timing, and character development. Competitors may portray one or multiple characters. No props or costumes may be used. Performances can also include an introduction written by the student to contextualize the performance and state the title and the author. Nathan Fair has interviewed many National Champions. He has qualified for NSDA Nationals, qualified to NCFL Nationals and served as the presiding officer, and he broke to semifinals at a TOC qualifying tournament. He has placed 2nd at three separate varsity Congressional Debate tournaments. Finally, he served as a Presiding Officer for the Urban Debate League's tournament. His success was garnered after using the skills that are shared in this video.
The Presiding Officer, Ken Macintosh MSP, speaks about the work Parliament has done to ensure MSPs can represent constituents in Parliament during the coronavirus outbreak, and some of the new ways of working coming to Parliament in the next few weeks.
Elected on 1st April 2020 due to the need for a third Deputy Presiding Officer of the Scottish Parliament following changes brought on by the official response to the coronavirus, Lewis Macdonald discusses the circumstances of his election and the challenges the Parliament faces during this unprecedented time.
Astrologer Giulio Pellegrini joined TBA for some long overdo astro-chat. We talked about Giulio's role as the Presiding Officer of the Association for Astrological Networking (AFAN). AFAN has a major event planned as part of International Astrology Day on March 20th https://www.afan.org/international-astrology-day-iad/. Giulio also talked about his excitement about AFAN's role in helping plan the upcoming United Astrology Conference (UAC). Then we caught-up about Giulio's research regarding the first Saturn square and previewed his upcoming talk at NORWAC discussing Pluto's influence on culture. Fina Giulio at https://www.ethericastrology.com/ and on Twitter at @ethericastro
As part of the Parliament's Oral History project, the Presiding Officer, Ken Macintosh MSP, spoke about his career and the past 20 years at Holyrood. You can listen to more interviews from the Oral History project at http://bit.ly/2U2dNtM
Tasha Kama is Presiding Officer Pro Tempore of the Maui County Council, and she holds the Council seat for the Kahului residency area. Writing a description for this episode is extremely difficult, because I don't want to come off as too bias, but it is no secret that I am a fan. Councilmember Kama is not the type of person that immediately comes to mind when you think "politician," but that is what makes her so exceptional in my book. Having raised 11 children on Maui and spent years as an activist and community organizer well before seeking political office, it is undeniable that CM Kama is deeply rooted in the Maui community and is genuinely committed to making Maui a better place. Regardless of whether you agree with CM Kama's approach to politics or not, she is someone who is certainly deserving of respect and admiration. I'm going to go ahead and think of this episode a "Thanksgiving Special," because it felt more like I was getting together with my favorite auntie than conducting an interview. Seriously, after I stopped recording she gave me lemon bars and we chatted about Christmas decorations. I hope you enjoy this episode, and I am thankful for all you folks who keep listening.
Finland is the only country in the EU where homelessness is falling. Now its radical approach is about to be piloted in parts of the UK. Join the Presiding Officer and panellists Sanna Vesikansa, Deputy Mayor of Helsinki; Ewan Aitken, Chief Executive Officer, Cyrenians; Kate Farrell, Mayoral adviser on homelessness, Liverpool City Region; and Mark Johnson, former rough sleeper and User Voice founder, to discuss whether Finland's solution will work in the UK. Recorded at the 2019 Festival of Politics.
In this episode, The Presiding Officer speaks with journalists Brian Taylor, Colin Mackay, Elizabeth Quigley and Katrine Bussey on their experience covering the Scottish Parliament. To find out more about the Scottish Parliament at 20, please visit our website.
In this episode, The Presiding Officer speaks with Former First Minister Henry McLeish, Former Presiding Officer Tricia Marwick, Former Leader of the Scottish Conservatives Baroness Annabel Goldie, and Former MSPs George Lyon and Robin Harper. To find out more about the Scottish Parliament at 20, please visit our website.
The Constitution Line By Line - Article 1 Section 3 Clause 4 Presiding Officer Of The Senate by A Podcast from the McWhiney History Education Group
When President Donald Trump visited Key West late last year, it was the first time in nearly 55 years for a sitting US president to visit Key West. Prior to that, the last time was when John F. Kennedy stopped by to inspect the defenses of Key West and provide some positive publicity for South Florida. And that was in November of 1962, following the Cuban Missile Crisis. Key West's location and climate has a long history of drawing in the top executives, not just from companies but also from the most powerful nation in the world. US presidents have loved Key West for years. One of the most famous visitors was Harry Truman. Harry Truman came to Key West 11 times during his presidency. He always ended up staying at the Navy's officer residence. And that house is now called Truman's Little White House. Ulysses S. Grant was the first US president to visit Key West. He came in 1880, it was 11 years after leaving office, while traveling with Civil War General, Phil Sheridan. They were on a steamship from New Orleans bound for Havana, but had to stop in Key West for the day. That was during the period when Key West was one of the largest cities in Florida and also one of the wealthiest. Another Civil War leader, Jefferson Davis had also visited Key West. He stopped by in 1867, the day after he was released from prison on bail. Key West is a good place to go when you just get out of jail! In his first term as President, Grover Cleveland also stopped by Key West in 1889. He spent a few hours in the city and he was shown around the island in carriages, and there was a public reception held at the Russell House. William Howard Taft came to Key West on Henry Flagler's Overseas Railway. The year was 1912. That was just 11 months after the railway opened and President Taft was on his way to inspect the Panama Canal. But of course he had to come to Key West first and then get on a ship. And Calvin Coolidge also stopped by Key West on his way back from a meeting in Cuba. That year was 1928 and he had just finished speaking at a big conference in Cuba. Franklin Delano Roosevelt visited Key West six times between 1917 and 1939, he was practically a snowbird. His first stop was when he was young Assistant Secretary of the Navy and he was en route to Cuba as well. After Roosevelt was stricken with polio, he spent several winters in the Keys on a houseboat. And then he also came back to Key West as president in 1939. It was a very different ride then as he was coming down the overseas highway, in an open air convertible. And you can be sure that Key West always appreciated this type of attention from the chief executive, as many of our streets in Key West our name for Presidents - there's Truman Avenue, there's Einsenhower and Kennedy Dr. Dwight Eisenhower first came to Key West before he became president. He was the Presiding Officer of the Joint Chiefs of Staff when he came and he spent 21 days at the Little White House, trying to recover from an illness. Guess who recommended that he do that? You got it - Harry Truman. Eisenhower also returned in 1955 when he was recovering from a heart attack. You're seeing the theme here. People love to come to Key West to recuperate from all the ills of the rest of the world. President Kennedy came through a trip on Key West back in March of 1961. And he met the British Prime Minister here in Key West for a summit. So prior to Donald Trump visiting at the end of last year, John F. Kennedy's visit to Key West in 1962 was the last time a sitting president came to Key West. A couple other presidents visited us, but it was after they had left the office. Jimmy Carter came down. Bill Clinton has been here. gGeorge HW Bush had a lovely little fishing hidey hole that he liked to come and do some fishing in Islamorada. We heard a lot about that after he passed away last year many many stories were told about the wonderful interactions people had with him while he was in Islamorada. And it was today, January 17 1928, that President Calvin Coolidge and his wife arrived in Key West uponreturning from the sixth Inter-American Conference held in Havan. They arrived by ship. And once they arrive, the mayor showed him around, showed him the Naval Station, the Army barracks, the airport and then they took a ride along beautiful Ocean Avenue, what we call today, North and South atRoosevelt Boulevard. And that's what happened today in Key West history. Today in Key West History is brought to you by 43 Keys Media. You want to learn all about our illustrious past and even what's going on today in Key West, visit http://43keys. com. You can get this program, as well as others, as an Alexa flash briefing. And you can find this on YouTube and anywhere that you listen to podcasts. So don't forget to subscribe and we'll see you over at http://43keys.com.
About being Presiding Officer for Congressional Debate
The Conveners Group is made up of the Conveners of “each mandatory or subject committee” in the Scottish Parliament, and Chaired by the Presiding Officer (or a deputy). It meets throughout the year, and periodically with the First Minister. These meetings are to “question to First Minister on the Scottish Government’s legislative programme“. The First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon appeared and answered questions for 1h15m. Christine Grahame - Chair (Deputy Presiding Officer) Clare Adamson - Social Security Committee Bruce Crawford - Finance and Constitution Committee Bob Doris - Local Government and Communities Committee James Dornan- Education and Skills Committee Johann Lamont - Public Petitions Committee Gordon Lindhurst - Economy, Jobs and Fair Work Committee Lewis MacDonald - Health and Sport Committee Joan McAlpine- Culture, Tourism, Europe and External Relations Committee Jenny Marra - Public Audit and Post-legislative Scrutiny Committee Christina McKelvie - Equalities and Human Rights Committee Margaret Mitchell - Justice Committee Edward Mountain - Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee Graham Simpson - Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee The transcript of the Conveners Group Meeting with the First Minister. The next FMQs will be Thursday 19th April 2018. Any questions or comments, get in touch: Email: Jack@FMQs.scot Twitter: @FMQsScot www.FMQs.scot This podcast is not produced by The Scottish Parliament, but the all images and audio are reproduced under The Scottish Parliament Copyright Licence.
The second podcast, and the first special! (The next FMQs will be Thursday 26th October 2017) The Conveners Group is made up of the Conveners of "each mandatory or subject committee" in the Scottish Parliament, and Chaired by the Presiding Officer (or a deputy). It meets throughout the year, and periodically with the First Minister. These meetings are to "question to First Minister on the Scottish Government’s legislative programme". Christine Grahame Chair (Deputy Presiding Officer) Clare Adamson - Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee Jackie Baillie - Public Audit and Post-legislative Scrutiny Committee Bruce Crawford - Finance and Constitution Committee Graeme Dey - Environment, Climate Change and Land Reform Committee Bob Doris - Local Government and Communities Committee James Dornan - Education and Skills Committee Neil Findlay - Health and Sport Committee Johann Lamont - Public Petitions Committee Gordon Lindhurst - Economy, Jobs and Fair Work Committee Joan McAlpine - Culture, Tourism, Europe and External Relations Committee Christina McKelvie - Equalities and Human Rights Committee Margaret Mitchell - Justice Committee Edward Mountain - Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee Graham Simpson - Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee Sandra White - Social Security Committee Any questions or comments, get in touch: Jack@FMQs.scot @FMQsScot www.FMQs.scot This podcast is not produced by The Scottish Parliament, but the all images and audio are reproduced under The Scottish Parliament Copyright License.
In this podcast the Scottish Success team are joined by Scotland's first female Presiding Officer Tricia Marwick. We hear how she reached such a position of high office as well as who inspired her success and what challenges she faced throughout her life and career. In May 2011 Tricia Marwick became only the fourth Presiding Officer of Scotland and the first female to hold the role. It was a position of responsibility that the Fife politician could never have imagined when she first started out in grass roots politics in response the miner’s strikes. We caught up with her in Fife where she still lives to discuss her success.
MSP Tricia Marwick introduction to the 2014 of the Edinburgh International Culture Summit
© 2020-2025 Ivy Podcast Discovery LLC
