I came across this is little story today, it's not breaking news. I suspect that a member of the housekeeping staff knows something about the bomb threat that required the sweep for weapons.
According to police in Secaucus, the bomb threat — which later was determined to be bogus — was called in to Hudson Regional Hospital on July 18. During a search, bomb detection dogs led investigators to an unlocked office closet containing dozens of firearms.
Among the weapons were 11 handguns and 27 rifles or shotguns, according to police. The closet also contained a .45 caliber semi-automatic rifle with a high-capacity magazine that was determined to be an assault rifle, and a 14-round high-capacity handgun magazine.
The arrested the guy the next day.
What the heck do you think this guy was doing? It sounds very ominous that he was keeping those weapons there.
Well then, thank you for adding that context for Beerman, he probably appreciated that.
I responded to your post as you quoted me, not to add context for @Beerman as you suggest. I responded to ask you to clarify your post. In my opinion your question "is it standard practice for the political parties to reprimand members who are under investigation for ethics violations?" should have been directed to the member that posted it and not the member that agreed? Now that you have identified it was intended for the latter, I'm not sure what your intent is.
The Keystone pipeline spill in a creek running through rural pastureland in Washington County, Kansas, about 150 miles (240 kilometers) northwest of Kansas City, also was the biggest in the system’s history, according to U.S. Department of Transportation data. The operator, Canada-based TC Energy, said the pipeline that runs from Canada to Oklahoma lost about 14,000 barrels, or 588,000 gallons.
The spill raised questions for environmentalists and safety advocates about whether TC Energy should keep a federal government permit that has allowed the pressure inside parts of its Keystone system — including the stretch through Kansas — to exceed the typical maximum permitted levels. With Congress facing a potential debate on reauthorizing regulatory programs, the chair of a House subcommittee on pipeline safety took note of the spill Friday.
Quote
The company said Friday that it would conduct a full investigation into the causes of the spill.
The spill caused a brief surge in crude prices Thursday. Benchmark U.S. oil was up more modestly -- about 1% — on Friday morning as fears of a supply disruption were overshadowed by bigger concerns about an economic downturn in the U.S. and other major countries that would reduce demand for oil.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
4 minutes ago, chare said:
I responded to your post as you quoted me, not to add context for @Beerman as you suggest. I responded to ask you to clarify your post. In my opinion your question "is it standard practice for the political parties to reprimand members who are under investigation for ethics violations?" should have been directed to the member that posted it and not the member that agreed? Now that you have identified it was intended for the latter, I'm not sure what your intent is.
OK.
If Beerman is confused by my question and link then I guess he'll either ignore the question or ask for clarification.
Is it standard practice for the political parties to reprimand members who are under investigation for ethics violations?
I don't think it is. Also I don't think the party of the person being investigated says much other than acknowledging it. Nor does the ethics committee comment much on investigations.
Take Geotz for example. The ethics committee said this:
Quote
The Committee is aware of public allegations that Representative Matt Gaetz may have engaged in sexual misconduct and/or illicit drug use, shared inappropriate images or videos on the House floor, misused state identification records, converted campaign funds to personal use, and/or accepted a bribe, improper gratuity, or impermissible gift, in violation of House Rules, laws, or other standards of conduct. The Committee, pursuant to Committee Rule 18(a), has begun an investigation and will gather additional information regarding the allegations.
The Committee notes that the mere fact that it is investigating these allegations, and publicly disclosing its review, does not itself indicate that any violation has occurred, or reflect any judgment on behalf of the Committee. No other public comment will be made on this matter except in accordance with Committee rules.
Since the Federal Investigation is unlikely to produce any charges it's probably a good thing they waited and didn't comment.
I would think think they should wait until the committee presents their findings of their investigation. Who knows, they may clear of any wrong doing.
Yes.
Many here are consistently extolling the virtues of the Democrat Party. So, obviously Nancy Pelosi has met AOC, who was truthful and forthcoming. No doubt, the Speaker has gotten to the bottom of the story.
As such, I am baffled as to why there hasn't either been a slap on the wrist, or an announcement explaining why not.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
25 minutes ago, Beerman said:
Yes.
Many here are consistently extolling the virtues of the Democrat Party. So, obviously Nancy Pelosi has met AOC, who was truthful and forthcoming. No doubt, the Speaker has gotten to the bottom of the story.
As such, I am baffled as to why there hasn't either been a slap on the wrist, or an announcement explaining why not.
Why are you baffled? Is it common for party leadership (of either party) to slap members on the wrist for ethics investigations?
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
1 hour ago, Tweety said:
I don't think it is. Also I don't think the party of the person being investigated says much other than acknowledging it. Nor does the ethics committee comment much on investigations.
Take Geotz for example. The ethics committee said this:
Since the Federal Investigation is unlikely to produce any charges it's probably a good thing they waited and didn't comment.
I think you are correct. Do you think that some are wanting different treatment of AOC?
toomuchbaloney
16,088 Posts
I directed my question to the intended member.