Jacob In Austin is standing in the exact spot where they started their political career — Congress Avenue and 3rd Street in Austin, Dixie — and they’ve got on a stage with a megaphone.

“The moderate movement isn’t dead!”

“The reason why I say that today is because there have been rumors inside of my party that we might be shutting down and merging into the Democratic Party, and what shocks me? Many of my colleagues are going to go along with this. They want to declare the moderate movement’s time of death as soon as possible.”

“To my fellow Dixians, know this: we will never stop fighting for what’s right and just in our State. We’ve seen a rapid pull from the center on the part of the Democrats and Republicans, and I know that worries you. Sometimes, it keeps me up at night, to know that the hardline Republicans raided the Capital and the hardline Democrats want everyone to have universal healthcare, even when some people’s healthcare might be better than government healthcare.”

“I was talking with a new friend in the halls of the Capital and they said to me, ‘not everything has a government solution.’ Whew, we’re they right. Anyhow, the point is this: everyone who surrounds me in the halls of the Capital and in my own party is too worried about retaining their seat for personal and/or political gain. I, on the other hand, have a mandate: I will support the Constitutions of the United States and of the State of Dixie, and that I will faithfully discharge my duty to represent the interests of the People of the State of Dixie. Not just the people who elected me, but the people who didn’t as well. I am not the Representative of the People Who Agree With Me. I am the Representative of Lower Texas.”

“However, it would appear that all three parties now want me to take orders from them and bite the bullet. They might be the Representatives of the People who agree with them, but I have to represent the interests of this entire State in the Assembly and to voice my opinion. I will admit it, my opinion may have been wrong or maybe misinformed, but you and I all know that I am only human. I try my best to represent the entire State, and you, the People, demand of me that I do so to the best of my ability.”

“I do not think that I could represent you, the People, being either a Democrat or a Republican, and seeing as my party’s leadership is wanting to sell us down the river to the Democratic Party, I hereby resign as the Chairperson of the Civic Labor Party of the State of Dixie, effective immediately. I will be going to the Secretary of State to change my party affiliation to Independent.”

“This means that I will not have a seat in the Assembly for the upcoming term. However, know this: I will be back! I will attempt to do my best to represent the interests of the People outside of the Assembly, and I will seek to be elected as an Independent in the Third Term of the Assembly of the State of Dixie. Thank you.”

Hi everyone, I'll keep this personal meta announcement rather short, but I deemed it necessary and proper to make this announcement in light of recent events, namely my ModelUSGov discord ban.

I was banned for a week from the ModelUSGov Discord as a result of a personal indiscretion that is shocking to me personally and was totally out of character for me. What I did totally goes against who I am as a person, and to the person whom I shall leave unnamed for their privacy, I am sorry.

Nonetheless, however, I am taking a break from ModelUSGov effective immediately until July 12th. I feel that this is necessary for my own mental health, and to ensure that every preparation can be made to relaunch my legal career in ModelUSGov to be better than the drag of a legal career I've had here. After all, I didn't pack my bags in the simulation to go to the Hill Country for "high rent prices".

Thank you.

When VannaValkyrie first joined the Libertarian Party, I knew nothing about her. After hearing that she was a girl, I thought nothing of it, welcoming her to the party like I do for everyone else. Soon after she joined the party she messaged me saying that she had been harassed by a few members of the party. She mentioned two members, those being BillieJoeCobain and NateLooney. I asked her if she wanted me to speak with them to get this settled, me being a member of the party leadership, I was more willing to. She said no and said that she just wanted it to blow over.

Not to long after that, she confronted Nate in the Libertarian Party chat. If I remember correctly, she was calling him names like a child abuser and a pedophile. When asked to provide evidence of this, she presented messages of Nate making jokes not even directed at her and claimed they were. Beyond this, I don’t remember her presenting anything truly damning or that could be considered so. She was very quick to accuse Nate of things and was very hostile to anyone that tried to defend Nate. After he apologized to her, she continued, calling for Nate to be kicked from the party. Many in the party were not so inclined to call for Nate’s departure and as a result, she left the party to join the Civics.

Again I would like to say that I asked her if she would like me to talk to them, but she declined and went on to do this. I was more than happy to defuse this ordeal, but she took it into her own hands and became hostile.

I write this, not to accuse her of anything, but to show why some of the claims she made I simply cannot subscribe to. I am not a fan of hostility or mud throwing, and I wanted to show why I think the claims she made were false.

All I have seen from Nate in this ordeal was him truly being sympathetic to her for what he had or hadn’t done, even offering to sign a petition for his departure from the party and I am sorry to say that all I saw from VannaValkyrie was her continuing to be hostile to Nate and many members of the sim.

I don’t care what flak I get from this, I told the truth to the best of my knowledge and that is all I have to say.

Nasdaq Slumps as Solicitor General /u/Comped Confirms Sweeping Tech, Political Probes in Federal Court

September 1, 2019 | By Carib Cannibal

Technology stocks tumbled in pre-market trading late Sunday after court filings confirmed the Department of Justice is intensifying a broad antitrust and criminal inquiry into the sector. In repeated motions, the government also named investigations into a nonprofit and protest group, and after allegedly misleading federal judges by denying records on a lawmaker, admitted to a probe involving political activity by a U.S. senator.

Declines in the biggest global companies in the sector punctuated an otherwise quiet Friday on Wall Street. Google, Amazon, Facebook, Apple, Verizon, and AT&T were all trading lower, following testimony by Acting Solicitor General /u/comped that the tech giants are facing unconfirmed accusations of illegality from regulators in the Justice, Treasury, and Education Departments, at a level greater than previously acknowledged.

The statements were made in a Freedom of Information Act suit by the New York Civil Liberties Union, filed after Mr. Comped publicly acknowledged several investigative targets but refused to disclose further records with reporters, allegedly invalidly invoking a Glomar Response to shield himself from scrutiny. The Justice Department previously detailed several investigative records during a public August press conference, but after answering several questions ended its responses early, claiming it “doesn’t comment on ongoing investigations.”

Pre-trial filings by Justice Department civil litigation attorney /u/comped in the Southern District of New York revealed the /u/GuiltyAir cabinet has additionally referred several corporate and private probes across the federal government, including an inquiry into U.S. Senator /u/Ibney00 (R-SR), a decision the Justice Department apparently blamed on the White House’s referral of the nonprofit College Board’s political activities.

The government further confirmed criminal investigations into Dixie resident and billionaire /u/deepfriedhookers acquaintance Leo Shell (criminal accusations against Mr. Shell were conclusively deemed wrong by lawmakers, according to PBS).

In his testimony, Mr. Comped claimed all active investigations across Executive Branch and congressional independent agencies were simultaneously launched under his oversight without prior partnerships. The Solicitor General asserted to the Court that the Federal Trade Commission, Federal Communications Commission, and Securities and Exchange Commission were uncharacteristically uninvolved in the Justice Department’s decision to launch probes covering much of the independent agencies’ entire purview, appearing to ignore longstanding regulations on relations outside of the Executive.

On the day of filing, Solicitor General /u/comped made multiple attempts to dismiss the case with prejudice, sanction the New York Civil Liberties Union, and declare counsel Carib a vexatious litigant. Still, investors reacted to the government accusations clarified in the suit by dumping shares of all four companies. Shares of Facebook, Google’s parent Alphabet, Amazon, and Apple were all expected to open Monday several points lower. The technology-heavy Nasdaq index dropped, bringing another decline from an early May record. The Technology Select Sector SPDR ETF is dropped after-hours after gaining in regular market trading Friday before news of the suit was released.

Also on Sunday, the College Board was rumored to be filing an identity theft complaint with Justice Department partners in its investigations — the Justice Department Office of Inspector General, Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration and the Federal Trade Commission — naming Mr. /u/comped as a proximate cause of increased fraud attempts. The Acting Attorney General released the nonprofit’s specific taxpayer Employer Identification Number during the August presser, accusing the nonprofit of criminal activity prior to completing an inquiry.

The NYCLU and Dixie Attorney General /u/deepfriedhookers claim this Mr. Comped’s premature elucidation was contrary to Justice Department regulations. The nonprofit has alleged the Attorney General misconstrued Justice Department Office of Privacy guidance by pointing at the College Board without official findings, and claiming to reporters that the employer number is public information, similar to Social Security Numbers (the Treasury Department disagrees, claiming over $11.4bn in Employer theft used the number from 2013 to 2017).

I get it. It's taken me a while but I finally get it. The common denominator here is Saku. I'm easy to target and a favorite all the way from Riley and Gohte all they way to FC. There's just something about me- maybe it's that I'm annoying. Maybe it's all the dirt AJ uncovered from when I was 13 and pretended it's something it isn't. Maybe it's how sensitive I am. Maybe it's how I genuinely try my best to be nice to everyone. Maybe it's that in every generation someone has done it and it's just tradition. But I am not wanted or welcome here. I am not liked.

I'm not wanted as a moderator. I have precisely one single 48 hour ban in my entire time here, one that was given under heavily dubious circumstances by 3 members of the cabal. I sent a pic of riley that he posted publicly in chat before, was considered doxxing. According to Cinci, it "just wasn't kosher". FC brings back awooing and gets his little posse to harass me every time I say something in chat? Same guy says "what resolution do you want? Just block him."

Even when the chat looks like this https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/205122771749961729/405905508470620160/awo.PNG Now, this isn't perfectly formatted. I'm not waiting 24 hours to make sure this post isn't emotional, and I am 100% sure there are loads of holes that will turn this into memes within hours unlike my carefully written well formatted and evidenced post against AJ (and what do you know? he turned out to be not exactly the world's greatest person), and my reputation still got destroyed and i got harassed out of the sim but he did resign.

I'm a fighter. When something isn't right, I have tried for years to do my best for this sim because for some reason I care. I always care. When main was a shithole of cancer I RAN the cancer-free main that had similar rules to present day discord- except I had no bots or moderation tools and eventually it got destroyed by memesquad. But I did my best for as long as I could. I have been a friend to people who have been spit on and downtrodden and always done my best to see past ideology and as a gay jew befriended KHL. That wasn't fucking easy but I did it because I as much shit as is flung at me, I've always tried to be a nice person. Yeah, I know I'm annoying sometimes and I don't always succeed but I have tried my best over and over for this sim and never backed down from battles like AJ even when the entire sim hated me. I have done my best.

But somehow, despite a doxxing ring and rampant racism, I, Saku, and unpopular public enemy number one. I'm sure there's plenty I've done wrong- I never claimed to be perfect. It just fucking hurts that I place I've poured as much mental energy into as modelusgov just fucking HATES me the way you guys do.

And every person who's genuinely been my friend has warned me this place is toxic and not good for my health and god I wished I'd stopped trying sooner.

So you win, modelusgov. I'm leaving- not just from the reddit, the whole sim. The discord too. Not "asking where I should go from here", not staying in to check back every once in a while, legitimately gone. I give. I get it. I hear you loud and clear. Despite that I used to mod the precursor to discord to keep cancer under control, you dont want me on modteam. Because I'm saku. When people harass me, I should just block them. Because I'm saku. When I go to the socialist party saying that party members are participating in harassing me, I get told to ignore it. Because I'm Saku. Even riley got better treatment than I did.

You win, modelusgov. Now commence the good riddances and picking my post apart from the inside-out because this isn't logically written and a formal argument and comes from a genuine emotional reaction- the kind that the sim seems to think is the best to make fun of.

You win. I give. For anyone that cares about me, you know where to find me. To all the rest, see you in hell.

Good Riddance.

After the majority of Senators had cast their votes on the Agricultural Subsidies Abolition Bill it had become clear that the bill would fail. Of the seven Senators that had cast their votes at the time of this writing, only one hard cast their vote in favor of the bill, the rest had opposed it. I spoke with four of those who cast their votes against the bill in the hopes of understanding their reasoning for doing so and perhaps changing their mind. What I found was that none of these Senators had a well supported, well researched reason for casting their vote in opposition. What I found was that Senators had either cast their votes based purely on ideology or that they had likely voted Nay just because it seemed probable that the bill would fail anyways.

The first Senator I talked to regarding their Nay vote was /u/Viktard, the Republican Senator and former presidential candidate. When I asked him why he voted Nay, he told me it was because agricultural subsidies helped farmers and that they were, after all, a small part of the population. When I informed him that being in the minority alone was no grounds for subsidy and that the subsidy harmed both America and many poor farmers around the world, the Senator responded by saying he would "consider" changing his vote. As of this writing he had not done so.

The second Senator I talked to was /u/MaThFoBeWiYo, a Democrat and the Majority Leader. I had spoken to him before the vote and was informed by the Senator after I had answered a number of his questions regarding the bill that I had "made a very compelling case for your bill". He then told me it would be wise to lobby other Senators to get them behind the bill too, to ensure that they would not vote Nay for some erroneous reason. Yet when it came time to actually vote the Senator look at the "compelling case" for the bill and voted Nay. When I asked him to inform me why he failed to provide any response at all. My suspicion is that at the time he voted, many a Nay vote had already been cast, so the Senator went with the crowd, rather than with the evidence.

The third Senator I spoke to was /u/PleaseDon'tYell, a Democrat. I had also spoken to this Senator prior to the bill being voted on and he provided no major objections on two occasions, first before the bill had passed the House and second right before he cast his own Nay vote. When I asked him why he voted Nay he informed me it was because my bill "will harm poor people" and that some small farmers must be the recipients of some subsidies, even if the vast majority went to wealthy landowners and farmers. When I informed him that it made little sense to harm the poor, especially some of the poorest people in the world, to help the poor, he found no reason to respond to me, yet his vote remained unchanged.

The fourth and final Senator I spoke to, /u/Cochon101, a Democrat, was perhaps the most egregious example of Senators voting Nay on this bill with no solid reason for doing so. When I first contacted him about his Nay vote he told me, as he said in his comment voting Nay, that a lack of agricultural subsidies is what caused the Dust Bowl and that the Dust Bowl led in part to the Great Depression, implying that getting rid of agricultural subsidies would lead to a massive environmental disaster and possibly an almost unorecedent economic collapse. When I informed the Senator that the Dust Bowl began five years after the depression did and that furthermore, agricultural subsidies were already in existence before both the Great Depression and the Dust Bowl, he quickly changed his argument. He then said he opposed the bill because agricultural subsidies help the environment. When I asked him to provide evidence for this statement he failed to do so, only pointing to a Wikipedia article on the Dust Bowl that said nothing about agricultural subsidies or a lack of them causing the Dust Bowl, instead placing most of the blame on "temperature anomalies". Not only, It appears, did the Senator not do his research prior to being questioned, he couldn't even be bothered to read his own sources after being questioned! When I asked him again to provide evidence for his Dust Bowl argument I was informed that he couldn't be bothered enough with this internet game to provide such sources. The Senator, it would appear, didn't need evidence to know he was right.

The staggering lack of well-reasoned, well-researched arguments for opposing the Agricultural Subsidies Abolition Act and, even worse, the refusal to admit to such lack of an argument when challenged, instead choosing to throw plainly false information at the questioner or to not respond at all, shows that these four Senators, especially /u/Cochon101 are not fit for the office they hold. If Senators cannot either provide a sufficient justification for their votes or admit that they have none, they are not qualified to be Senators. Because of the lack of effort and competence by these Senators and others who voted Nay, America and many of the global poor will be worse off, both in economic terms and in environmental ones. And there is evidence for that.