PDA

View Full Version : MAJOR ANNOUNCEMENT: Lawyers for Ron Paul Lawsuit NOTE: Having the lawsuit not up 4 debate




Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Bryan
10-27-2007, 08:41 PM
There has been a lot of discussion and concern here recently about negativity towards other peoples ideas and projects. It should be noted however that the forum guidelines allow for simple ways to advert issues- the easy way is to take advantage of this forum guideline:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=22

+ Off-topic posts - Posts that do not relate to the threads intent are subject to being deleted.

Thus all that is needed is in your original post to add a comment such as "This is a Q&A and planning thread, the idea is not open for debate". It then makes it clear that any debating or criticism of the idea is off-topic and subject to being deleted (as flagged by the topic starter).

This isn't to say that someone else couldn't start another thread providing constructive criticism of the idea, but this should likely be done in "Hot Topics" and should not violate the guideline:


+ If you are to be critical of another users ideas or message please do so in a respectful manner. It is possible to discuss your points as to why you feel the way you do, ideally you should include alternate suggestions or acknowledge you have none.

The starter of the critical thread can post a link to their thread in the original but the overall net effect is that the people working on the project don't have to wade though a mess of other peoples criticism.

Please bare in mind the following guideline however:


+ No promoting of campaign tactics or other activity that grossly counter the morals or ethics of Dr. Paul.

Ideas that violate this will be deleted, so this isn't an open, free rein of craziness either.


Thanks, hope this pointer helps out. It pays to read the forum guidelines!
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=22

RDM
06-14-2012, 10:23 PM
There was a conference call Thursday evening @ 10pm EST. This call was recorded and I have the link below. Two major announcements were disclosed, one being a update on the lawsuit and the other one I'll let you be surprised by listening.
Here is the link: http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web/audioPop.jsp?episodeId=635553&cmd=apop

---------------------------
Link to post 212 with 3 piece conference call with graphics by RDM:
(http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web/audioPop.jsp?episodeId=635553&cmd=apop)http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...=1#post4497950 (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?380736-MAJOR-ANNOUNCEMENT-Lawyers-for-Ron-Paul-Lawsuit&p=4497950&viewfull=1#post4497950)

Link to post 158 with more detailed info by Barrax:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...=1#post4495638 (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?380736-MAJOR-ANNOUNCEMENT-Lawyers-for-Ron-Paul-Lawsuit&p=4495638&viewfull=1#post4495638)

Link to post 214 with cliffs notes on what this is all about by presence:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...=1#post4498011 (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?380736-MAJOR-ANNOUNCEMENT-Lawyers-for-Ron-Paul-Lawsuit&p=4498011&viewfull=1#post4498011)
(http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web/audioPop.jsp?episodeId=635553&cmd=apop)

specsaregood
06-14-2012, 10:25 PM
come on, sum it up for us, don't make us listen to a conference call in order to get the info. did you actually listen to it?

RDM
06-14-2012, 10:33 PM
come on, sum it up for us, don't make us listen to a conference call in order to get the info. did you actually listen to it?

Not only did I listen, but participated with a question. I'm identified as Ron from PA. I'm sure one of your NON lazy ass friends will sum it up for you.

Eric39
06-14-2012, 10:35 PM
Not only did I listen, but participated with a question. I'm identified as Ron from PA. I'm sure one of your NON lazy ass friends will sum it up for you.


Not everyone has time, the internet connection, etc. so it would be awfully polite/convenient to put it at the top of the thread for those who are on the fly.

The Northbreather
06-14-2012, 10:35 PM
bout gadam time

specsaregood
06-14-2012, 10:35 PM
Not only did I listen, but participated with a question. I'm identified as Ron from PA. I'm sure one of your NON lazy ass friends will sum it up for you.

oh well, if you want the information to go unheard. nobody is gonna listen to that. hell, I can't stand listening to the ones I get paid to listen to.

RDM
06-14-2012, 10:38 PM
oh well, if you want the information to go unheard. nobody is gonna listen to that. hell, I can't stand listening to the ones I get paid to listen to.

Well, you're not alone. Lot of you lazy ass "fake" Ron Paul supporters are slowly coming out of the closet on this forum.

tsai3904
06-14-2012, 10:40 PM
Well, you're not alone. Lot of you lazy ass "fake" Ron Paul supporters are slowly coming out of the closet on this forum.

You're basing someone's level of support of Ron Paul by whether or not they're willing to listen to a one hour conference call?

specsaregood
06-14-2012, 10:41 PM
..

AJ Antimony
06-14-2012, 10:42 PM
Well, you're not alone. Lot of you lazy ass "fake" Ron Paul supporters are slowly coming out of the closet on this forum.

Are you really calling someone with 23,000 posts and who registered in 2007 a "fake" supporter? Just because of that comment, I'm not going to give the slightest damn about your link.

Eric39
06-14-2012, 10:42 PM
Well, you're not alone. Lot of you lazy ass "fake" Ron Paul supporters are slowly coming out of the closet on this forum.

BULLSHIT! Now you're just being an asshole to everyone. Just because you don't want to/have the time to listen to the whole thing says absolutely nothing about whether you're a fake/real liberty supporter... because it's not about Ron Paul. Why do you have to be one of those guys that makes the inside of the movement hostile? It's BS, stop it.

I'm listening to it now, looks like it's a good hour, I'll sum it up for everyone else.

RDM
06-14-2012, 10:43 PM
You're basing someone's level of support of Ron Paul by whether or not they're willing to listen to a one hour conference call?

Just one of many bases.

LostNFoundNTx
06-14-2012, 10:43 PM
Hopefully RDM's participation in this thread is not a reflection on the seriousness/quality of the lawsuit(s).

Britannia
06-14-2012, 10:44 PM
I was hoping for a summary as I can't listen to it 'til later :o

Eric39
06-14-2012, 10:46 PM
I want to remind everyone here there is a reputation button for people like this.

Ender
06-14-2012, 10:46 PM
Good grief.

On most all forums I visit, it is not only considered good manners to sum up, it is required.

Legend1104
06-14-2012, 10:47 PM
The major announcement is that the lawyers for Ron Paul are claiming they are going to unofficially take over the Ron Paul campaign with the intention to strip Romney of his delegates and nominate Ron Paul. There now stop fighting.

Nubraskan
06-14-2012, 10:48 PM
I want to remind everyone here there is a reputation button for people like this.

Noted.

The movement operates more effectively when we don't commit 10,000 man-hours to listening to a call that can be summed up in a few sentences.

blocks
06-14-2012, 10:49 PM
The movement operates more effectively when we don't commit 10,000 man-hours to listening to a call that can be summed up in a few sentences.

This...SMH.

ClydeCoulter
06-14-2012, 10:49 PM
Just one of many bases.

Basis ?

ChristopherShelley
06-14-2012, 10:55 PM
Ok, so can anyone provide some insight into this announcement? How viable is this?

And while I appreciate the op's passion, we need to help forward info. Expediency = productivity.

And thank you for the post. Still listening.

jay_dub
06-14-2012, 10:59 PM
The major announcement is that the lawyers for Ron Paul are claiming they are going to unofficially take over the Ron Paul campaign with the intention to strip Romney of his delegates and nominate Ron Paul. There now stop fighting.

I just heard this, too. Apparently they are saying the campaign has no standing to negotiate on behalf of their clients (delegates) and they are forming an Executive Committee to deal with just that outside of the lawsuit itself.

Edit: Now going into Benton signing the letter giving the RNC permission to violate Rule 11 and Wead's doubts about Ron's success. I think the argument is the campaign is acting in bad faith on the delegates' behalf. They seem to be attempting to empower the delegates outside the campaign's directives. Interesting tack to take.

Edit: Now accusing the Romney campaign of election fraud & committing criminal acts; giving a laundry list of abuses.

ChristopherShelley
06-14-2012, 11:08 PM
This is amazing stuff. Only 20 min in.

economics102
06-14-2012, 11:22 PM
I'm sure one of your NON lazy ass friends will sum it up for you.

What the heck is wrong with you?

-rep

CPUd
06-14-2012, 11:33 PM
They just accused the Romney campaign of being a criminal organization, and said Mitt is not the lesser of 2 evils, he is evil. He also says when the judge renders a positive decision, mitt will have 0 delegates.

ClydeCoulter
06-14-2012, 11:34 PM
Is this for real? Are Ron's delegates getting on board this?

jay_dub
06-14-2012, 11:36 PM
Is this for real? Are Ron's delegates getting on board this?

They are claiming to have affidavits from over 100 delegates.

Pauls' Revere
06-14-2012, 11:37 PM
The major announcement is that the lawyers for Ron Paul are claiming they are going to unofficially take over the Ron Paul campaign with the intention to strip Romney of his delegates and nominate Ron Paul. There now stop fighting.

Thank you!

CPUd
06-14-2012, 11:38 PM
By the time they go into court, the evidence will be 'insurmountable'.

He also made clear that they will fight on behalf of any delegate, even a santorum-bound one who wants to vote for romney.

jay_dub
06-14-2012, 11:45 PM
They're giving addresses to 3 websites they're setting up "as we open up the new campaign". They say they'll be up and running in a few days.

ronpaulgrassrootsrevolution.com

weareallronpaul.com

realgrassrootsrevolution.com

Also, electionfraudremedy.com to join in the lawsuit.

I have to say it wasn't a waste of time to listen to this. These guys seem very serious and very confident.

Edit: To sum it up, their goal is to have every delegate unbound, which will effectively mean no candidate can claim any delegates going in to the convention.

CPUd
06-14-2012, 11:59 PM
Does Ron know he has a new campaign staff ?

ChristopherShelley
06-15-2012, 12:00 AM
That was awesome!

jay_dub
06-15-2012, 12:01 AM
Does Ron know he has a new campaign staff ?

:D :D :D

At least these guys work for free!!

ClydeCoulter
06-15-2012, 12:04 AM
Anyone know any of these "Lawyers for Ron Paul" people?
I know there is a thread researching the website and affiliations, but what is the standing of the lawyers, Richard and David, with grassroots?

RDM
06-15-2012, 12:05 AM
:D :D :D

At least these guys work for free!!

Do you think this time, we'll get our money's worth?:)

RonRules
06-15-2012, 12:09 AM
ronpaulgrassrootsrevolution.com

weareallronpaul.com

realgrassrootsrevolution.com



All three links give me errors like:
Error 403 - Forbidden
You tried to access a document for which you don't have privileges.

Anybody else got this?

jay_dub
06-15-2012, 12:10 AM
Anyone know any of these "Lawyers for Ron Paul" people?
I know there is a thread researching the website and affiliations, but what is the standing of the lawyers, Richard and David, with grassroots?

I haven't seen where they've been independently vetted, but it does seem like the lawsuit has been filed. That's as much as I know at this point. It seems like if they weren't legit, they have already done enough to open themselves up to all kinds of charges.

jay_dub
06-15-2012, 12:11 AM
Do you think this time, we'll get our money's worth?:)

We couldn't do any worse. What's Jesse gonna do now....fetch Ron's laundry?

RDM
06-15-2012, 12:11 AM
All three links give me errors like:
Error 403 - Forbidden
You tried to access a document for which you don't have privileges.

Anybody else got this?

They're not online yet. They said in a few days the sites will be up and running. Patience.

jay_dub
06-15-2012, 12:13 AM
All three links give me errors like:
Error 403 - Forbidden
You tried to access a document for which you don't have privileges.

Anybody else got this?

I didn't try them as they said they would be up and running in a few days. I think the only one up now is the election fraud remedy site.

RDM
06-15-2012, 12:14 AM
We couldn't do any worse. What's Jesse gonna do now....fetch Ron's laundry?

Hopefully he'll be picking up his teeth after Ron "accidently" swings his favorite baseball bat.

Kregisen
06-15-2012, 12:15 AM
Not only did I listen, but participated with a question. I'm identified as Ron from PA. I'm sure one of your NON lazy ass friends will sum it up for you.

Maybe some of us are too busy with a real life instead of insulting people on internet forums?

ClydeCoulter
06-15-2012, 12:16 AM
I have seen other cases where someone was going to do something for us, and then it not happen. Does that cause some of us who would have done their own deep research to stop and let these people do it? What if it doesn't happen?

I remember a certain group that was going to produce a super bowl type professional video for Ron Paul, it didn't happen, at least not before all the primaries were over (I did hear it is yet comming out). Remember them asking everyone to like their proposal video and if they got 2,000 likes it would happen? Didn't.

RDM
06-15-2012, 12:19 AM
I have seen other cases where someone was going to do something for us, and then it not happen. Does that cause some of us who would have done their own deep research to stop and let these people do it? What if it doesn't happen?

I remember a certain group that was going to produce a super bowl type professional video for Ron Paul, it didn't happen, at least not before all the primaries were over (I did hear it is yet comming out). Remember them asking everyone to like their proposal video and if they got 2,000 likes it would happen? Didn't.

I take it you haven't seen the filed court documents yet?

CPUd
06-15-2012, 12:20 AM
I have seen other cases where someone was going to do something for us, and then it not happen. Does that cause some of us who would have done their own deep research to stop and let these people do it? What if it doesn't happen?

I remember a certain group that was going to produce a super bowl type professional video for Ron Paul, it didn't happen, at least not before all the primaries were over (I did hear it is yet comming out). Remember them asking everyone to like their proposal video and if they got 2,000 likes it would happen? Didn't.

At the very least , they are going to have to go in and present a case. Some of the things he said on this interview put him on the hook for defamation.

ChristopherShelley
06-15-2012, 12:21 AM
IMO this is the most important story right now. If these guys can do what they hope to, it would bring the Liberty movement to where it should be, in control. This needs to go viral, like wildfire. F the parties in Tampa, f the rand Benton blah blah blah. F Alex jones and Kokesh and webster tarpley. This is real shit.

What can we do to help?!?!?!?!?

eleganz
06-15-2012, 12:23 AM
IMO this is the most important story right now. If these guys can do what they hope to, it would bring the Liberty movement to where it should be, in control. This needs to go viral, like wildfire. F the parties in Tampa, f the rand Benton blah blah blah. F Alex jones and Kokesh and webster tarpley. This is real shit.

What can we do to help?!?!?!?!?

I've already volunteered myself to help. Just talk to them.

ChristopherShelley
06-15-2012, 12:24 AM
I've already volunteered myself to help. Just talk to them.

Awesome. Contact them through their website?

jay_dub
06-15-2012, 12:25 AM
I have seen other cases where someone was going to do something for us, and then it not happen. Does that cause some of us who would have done their own deep research to stop and let these people do it? What if it doesn't happen?

I remember a certain group that was going to produce a super bowl type professional video for Ron Paul, it didn't happen, at least not before all the primaries were over (I did hear it is yet comming out). Remember them asking everyone to like their proposal video and if they got 2,000 likes it would happen? Didn't.

I don't think anything they're doing prevents us from doing what we need to do, which is amassing more delegates and supporting Dr. Paul through Tampa.

Time is short and I don't see anyone else pursuing a legal remedy. The lawsuit is filed, so let's see what happens. It certainly feels better to think someone is fighting, rather than the defeatism running rampant these days.

RDM
06-15-2012, 12:26 AM
IMO this is the most important story right now. If these guys can do what they hope to, it would bring the Liberty movement to where it should be, in control. This needs to go viral, like wildfire. F the parties in Tampa, f the rand Benton blah blah blah. F Alex jones and Kokesh and webster tarpley. This is real shit.

What can we do to help?!?!?!?!?

I say, once the websites go live and when or if possible promotions come into play, get involved as if your life depends on it. After all, it does.

ChristopherShelley
06-15-2012, 12:36 AM
I contacted them through the site that is up right now, electionfraudremedy.com, and told them I will do anything I can to help.

This magnifies the importance of following through with the remainder of the delegate process!

IMO, THIS IS OUR LAST REAL SHOT. WE NEED TO PULL OUR HEADS OUT OF OUR *COLLECTIVE* ASSES!!!

WE NEED TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN!!!!!!!

PHONETOOL
06-15-2012, 12:37 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=PXhY1j3ZAMs#!

eleganz
06-15-2012, 12:53 AM
Awesome. Contact them through their website?

I'm already talking to the leadership about what I can do to help.

Contact them through facebook, the response seem to be fastest there.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/LawyersforRonPaul/

To RPF'ers...you can sit there and wait for the fireworks to burst or you can be on the forefront and make sure this comes to fruition.

WE THE PEOPLE ARE THIS MOVEMENT.

WE THE PEOPLE, ARE RON PAUL.

ChristopherShelley
06-15-2012, 01:00 AM
I cross posted on dp.

http://www.dailypaul.com/240404/everyone-needs-to-listen-to-this

I'll contact them via fb.

RonRules
06-15-2012, 01:02 AM
I think that's our judge!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_O._Carter

Carter is a "Double Bruin," having received both his bachelor's degree (B.A. cum laude 1967) and his law degree (J.D. 1972) from the University of California, Los Angeles.

After graduating from college, Carter accepted a commission in the United States Marine Corps. He was promptly dispatched into service in Vietnam during the Vietnam War where he fought in the Battle of Khe Sahn in 1968. Carter was released as a First Lieutenant following his service in Vietnam. His military awards and decorations include a Bronze Star and a Purple Heart.

Carter began his legal career as an Assistant District Attorney with the Orange County District Attorney's Office in 1972 where he became the senior deputy district attorney in charge of the office's homicide division. Carter filed charges and was the initial prosecutor in the case of serial killer William Bonin, also known as "The Freeway Killer," who became the first person executed by lethal injection in California in 1996.

In addition to his judicial functions, Carter has lectured fellow judges at the California Judges College, the Judicial Criminal Law Institute, and the Ninth Circuit Judicial Conference. He also speaks frequently with judges abroad, including engagements in Brazil, Bosnia, China, the Philippines, and Malawi. Carter also teaches an undergraduate course on international narcotics trade at the University of California, Irvine, where he has received the school's Distinguished Professors Award three times, and has taught at Whittier Law School's Summer Abroad Program.


I'll do everything to attend these court hearings!

RonRules
06-15-2012, 01:03 AM
He was appointed by Bill Clinton. In this situation I'd say that's a great thing:

Carter was nominated by President Bill Clinton on June 25, 1998 to fill a seat vacated by William J. Rea. Carter was confirmed by the United States Senate on October 21, 1998, and received his commission the following day.[1] He now sits in the Southern Division of the Central District of California in Santa Ana, California.[2]

As a jurist, Carter is known for his intellect, courteous judicial demeanor, work ethic, and expertise in complex criminal cases.[3] Although he is assigned to the Central District of California, Carter also regularly sits by designation in the District of Idaho and on occasion in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and in the District of Guam.

ChristopherShelley
06-15-2012, 01:05 AM
My DP post:

Everyone Needs To Listen To This
Submitted by ChristopherShelley on Fri, 06/15/2012 - 02:57
in
Ron Paul 2012
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?380736-MAJOR-ANN...

MAJOR ANNOUNCEMENT: Lawyers for Ron Paul Lawsuit

There was a conference call Thursday evening @ 10pm EST. This call was recorded and I have the link below. Two major announcements were disclosed, one being a update on the lawsuit and the other one I'll let you be surprised by listening.
Here is the link: http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web...35553&cmd=apop

---------- end RPF post

IMO this is the shot we have been waiting for, to take over the movement through legal, non-violent means. To fight for the liberty of the delegates to be able to, by law, vote by their conscience, for whomever they want.

This is what it's all about. If we can't vote for whom we truly feel is the best candidate then we might as well have a monarchy.

These people are fighting for the legal rights of ALL delegates, not just Paul supporters, which is what Ron Paul is all about.

They say, " We are all Ron Paul."

Everyone please listen to the clip. IMO, this is where we take control. We the PEOPLE. This is our movement now. Ron planted the seeds. We need to take control of this NOW!!!!

RonRules
06-15-2012, 01:08 AM
We want Romney in handcuffs BEFORE the convention. That's my goal with the vote flipping stuff.

Do everything you can to make that goal happen.

eleganz
06-15-2012, 01:11 AM
I think that's our judge!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_O._Carter

Carter is a "Double Bruin," having received both his bachelor's degree (B.A. cum laude 1967) and his law degree (J.D. 1972) from the University of California, Los Angeles.

After graduating from college, Carter accepted a commission in the United States Marine Corps. He was promptly dispatched into service in Vietnam during the Vietnam War where he fought in the Battle of Khe Sahn in 1968. Carter was released as a First Lieutenant following his service in Vietnam. His military awards and decorations include a Bronze Star and a Purple Heart.

Carter began his legal career as an Assistant District Attorney with the Orange County District Attorney's Office in 1972 where he became the senior deputy district attorney in charge of the office's homicide division. Carter filed charges and was the initial prosecutor in the case of serial killer William Bonin, also known as "The Freeway Killer," who became the first person executed by lethal injection in California in 1996.

In addition to his judicial functions, Carter has lectured fellow judges at the California Judges College, the Judicial Criminal Law Institute, and the Ninth Circuit Judicial Conference. He also speaks frequently with judges abroad, including engagements in Brazil, Bosnia, China, the Philippines, and Malawi. Carter also teaches an undergraduate course on international narcotics trade at the University of California, Irvine, where he has received the school's Distinguished Professors Award three times, and has taught at Whittier Law School's Summer Abroad Program.


I'll do everything to attend these court hearings!


I think I'm going to visit this guy...after all, near me. We just really don't need the crazies approaching him...

ChristopherShelley
06-15-2012, 01:22 AM
We need to keep this TOTALLY LEGIT. This is no longer a battle of opinion. This is a legitimate legal battle. Let the lawyers do their job. Do what supports them. Nothing else. This is a battle for the rights of ALL OF THE DELEGATES. Not just ours. This is not about Ron Paul supporters. But if we stay true, and not make it about us, but make it about EVERYONE, then people will see we're for real. We are for real, aren't we?

IMO, contact the people in charge and do what they need. We CANNOT turn this into a circus.

IMO, it's either this or nothing. If we screw this up we might not have a paddle to row with anytime soon.

It's either this or hope. And I'm not big on hope.

Hope for Rand, or Alex, or Adam, or whoever.

If this is what it could be, then this is the moment we've been waiting for.

We have to make this happen.

parocks
06-15-2012, 01:28 AM
Noted.

The movement operates more effectively when we don't commit 10,000 man-hours to listening to a call that can be summed up in a few sentences.

yes, operates more effectively.

what a good word "effective". much better than "enjoy".

parocks
06-15-2012, 01:36 AM
They just accused the Romney campaign of being a criminal organization, and said Mitt is not the lesser of 2 evils, he is evil. He also says when the judge renders a positive decision, mitt will have 0 delegates.

The lesser of 2 evils means that both are evil, but the amount of evil in one is less than the amount of evil in the other.

LibertyEagle
06-15-2012, 01:59 AM
It would be exciting if they could pull this off. Godspeed.

No1butPaul
06-15-2012, 02:05 AM
WE THE PEOPLE, ARE RON PAUL.

I AM RON PAUL :D

economics102
06-15-2012, 02:09 AM
These lawyers are our last hope to ever see a President Ron Paul. If they can succeed, 2,400 Americans will have the chance to vote their conscience, and we will see who the real fringe candidates are.

ChristopherShelley
06-15-2012, 02:15 AM
These lawyers are our last hope to ever see a President Ron Paul. If they can succeed, 2,400 Americans will have the chance to vote their conscience, and we will see who the real fringe candidates are.

Bingo.

soulcyon
06-15-2012, 02:26 AM
Did we just have a 7-page argument about whether to listen to a conference call or not?

This forum is just getting ridiculous T_T

@RDM: Why can't you be a bit more understanding and just post a summary?

@anyone else who actually listened: If anyone bothered to listen, could you just please post a summary, as to pick up RDM's lack of thoughtfulness.

edit: 5 minutes, I hear that the Lawyers for Ron Paul are creating an "executive committee" so that they can take over Ron Paul Campaign. "We are going to strip Romney of all his delegates... and that is our goal."

They go over the details and other business, but I didn't have time to listen to it all.

ChristopherShelley
06-15-2012, 02:37 AM
Did we just have a 7-page argument about whether to listen to a conference call or not?

This forum is just getting ridiculous T_T

@RDM: Why can't you be a bit more understanding and just post a summary?

@anyone else who actually listened: If anyone bothered to listen, could you just please post a summary, as to pick up RDM's lack of thoughtfulness.

edit: 5 minutes, I hear that the Lawyers for Ron Paul are creating an "executive committee" so that they can take over Ron Paul Campaign. "We are going to strip Romney of all his delegates... and that is our goal."

They go over the details and other business, but I didn't have time to listen to it all.

We're working on it. It's a lot of f ing info. This is or could be the deal-breaker. I suggest everyone actually listen to it. It would probably take about as long for me to summarize it as for you to listen to it.

soulcyon
06-15-2012, 02:38 AM
I'm going to download the whole audio file and put it through my company's Speech Recognition software - *evil laughter*

John F Kennedy III
06-15-2012, 02:52 AM
So awesome :)

Just Another Genius
06-15-2012, 03:47 AM
I've seen plenty of proof the RNC and Romney broke RNC Rule 11, I have yet to see any proof in regards to any letter Jesse Benton might have signed or when it was signed, why aren't these lawyers filing a case in regards to this and requesting proof that such a letter actually exist. Because I personally believe the RNC and Benton didn't even think of or even considered Rule 11 until posters on sites like this one pointed it out to them, only then did we hear this alleged story from Benton having this agreement with the RNC. If this paper can't be verified between Benton and the RNC then Romney deserves to be disqualified and these delegates shouldn't be required to be bound to Romney based on this reason alone. So why aren't these lawyers pursuing the case from this angle as well if they are serious about protecting these delegates rights and may have an way of getting Romney disqualified and out of the picture all together, imagine being able to take that court order with you to the convention. Jesse Benton says he signed a paper? I want proof. Delegates should be demanding that proof from these lawyers.

ChristopherShelley
06-15-2012, 04:01 AM
I've seen plenty of proof the RNC and Romney broke RNC Rule 11, I have yet to see any proof in regards to any letter Jesse Benton might have signed or when it was signed, why aren't these lawyers filing a case in regards to this and requesting proof that such a letter actually exist. Because I personally believe the RNC and Benton didn't even think of or even considered Rule 11 until posters on sites like this one pointed it out to them, only then did we hear this alleged story from Benton having this agreement with the RNC. If this paper can't be verified between Benton and the RNC then Romney deserves to be disqualified and these delegates shouldn't be required to be bound to Romney based on this reason alone. So why aren't these lawyers pursuing the case from this angle as well if they are serious about protecting these delegates rights and may have an way of getting Romney disqualified and out of the picture all together, imagine being able to take that court order with you to the convention. Jesse Benton says he signed a paper? I want proof. Delegates should be demanding that proof from these lawyers.

You should pursue any questions you have, but please don't demand anything from these guys. You don't know them and they are working really f ing hard it seems so don't talk like they owe you proof or like you know their strategies. Did you listen to the audio? If you like what they're doing, support them. If you have suggestions, contact them. Otherwise, stfu and go do something productive besides bitching about how they're not doing it right. Is no one here happy with anything?

It amazes me to see what's in front of us and people piss all over it. If you have something to contribute then do it. Otherwise get out of the way, ok?

freedomordeath
06-15-2012, 04:40 AM
RONULANS having been roaming the streets LIKE LIONS NOT KNOWING WHAT TO DO AFTER SPENDING MILLIONS..... we have been scattered. NOT ANY MORE RALLY THE TROOPS, LETS HEAD FOR THE TRENCHES. EVEN IF THIS DOESN'T COME THROUGH, WE NEED A RALLY CRY TO REGROUP, REGAIN OUR MOMENNTUM AND BOOST MORALE. LETS MARCH TOGETHER LIKE BROTHERS FACING DEATH ITSELF. LETS FINISH THIS MARATHON LIKE THE GOOD DR TOLD US TO.

spread the news, matlarson10 (youtube) ronpaulflix (youtube), rp4409 (youtube)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qR0Uke2XNI

thanks to the OP for this post, lets put the nastiness of the first couple pages of this thread behind this, I haven't been this happy for a long time, I've been depressed over the last couple days esp getting flak from all my friends for my delusions and I'm not even American lol, really awesome news.

shane77m
06-15-2012, 04:54 AM
Not only did I listen, but participated with a question. I'm identified as Ron from PA. I'm sure one of your NON lazy ass friends will sum it up for you.

-rep for sounding like a d-bag

Paulatized
06-15-2012, 05:37 AM
How could we hope to have an resolution on this in a few short weeks, don't things like this usually take years to play out in the courts?

LarryC213
06-15-2012, 05:59 AM
oh well, if you want the information to go unheard. nobody is gonna listen to that. hell, I can't stand listening to the ones I get paid to listen to.

I listened to it. I am so glad that this is being done. That no-good prick, mitt romney, should be in a federal prison, not being worshipped by the brain dead neocons and faux news watchers!

jhk07
06-15-2012, 06:04 AM
How could we hope to have an resolution on this in a few short weeks, don't things like this usually take years to play out in the courts?



It only took 8 pages for someone to say what I thought to be the obvious......

PHONETOOL
06-15-2012, 06:09 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=KNdjpqUHtvc

cajuncocoa
06-15-2012, 06:16 AM
The major announcement is that the lawyers for Ron Paul are claiming they are going to unofficially take over the Ron Paul campaign with the intention to strip Romney of his delegates and nominate Ron Paul. There now stop fighting.Thank you, and +1 rep for taking one for the team. LOL

JSaindon
06-15-2012, 06:22 AM
A for effort, but the courts move at a snails pace. Good luck trying to get anything done in court by November.

cajuncocoa
06-15-2012, 06:23 AM
Wow, this is the most exciting thing I've heard in a very long time!! :D:D:D

CPUd
06-15-2012, 06:23 AM
It only took 8 pages for someone to say what I thought to be the obvious......

It is mentioned briefly in the complaint. Since they are not seeking damages in $$ amounts(as is the overwhelming majority of civil suits), some of the more time-consuming phases of the case can be bypassed. Add to that, the time-sensitive nature of the case, it meets the criteria of a case that can be fast-tracked.

Dianne
06-15-2012, 06:26 AM
How could we hope to have an resolution on this in a few short weeks, don't things like this usually take years to play out in the courts?

http://www.californiality.com/2012/06/ron-paul-civil-rights-lawsuit.html

'Lawyers for Ron Paul' has filed a federal civil rights lawsuit in California against the Republican National Committee and state GOP chapters for alleged voting rights violations, election fraud and other misconduct at GOP primaries and caucuses in 2012.

In the bombshell lawsuit, the group claims "overwhelming evidence" that the voting rights of Ron Paul Republican delegates and other voters were violated by "nearly every state GOP party and the RNC during the 2012 primary election phase, with utter and blatant disregard for any rule of law."

Other groups are reportedly lining up to join the coalition of lawyers, paralegals, and concerned citizens who filed the civil lawsuit against the GOP.

Case Number SACV 12-00927 was filed at the Ronald Reagan Courthouse in Santa Ana, California, Ninth Federal Circuit. Judge Carter is said to be assigned to the case.

The plaintiff group wants court action to protect delegates attending the 2012 Republican National Convention in Tampa this August, regardless of which presidential candidate each delegate intends to vote for.




Immediately, the petitioning group seeks a federal injunction clarifying that all GOP delegates can vote their conscience at the national convention, unbound."The pattern of abuse is guaranteed to get worse, to the extent that the delegates who attend the national convention will be subjecting themselves to legal and/or physical peril," said the group of attorneys who filed the lawsuit citing actions by the GOP as having "devolved into those of an organized criminal enterprise."

In addition to the civil rights lawsuit, the group also intends to file a RICO lawsuit to expose widespread election fraud and abuse across the nation.

Great numbers of Ron Paul supporters are quickly uniting behind the unprecedented federal lawsuit, as they believe that Congressman Ron Paul has been blatantly cheated out of a potential victory.

All legal services provided for all plaintiffs in the suit are pro bono, provided by Lawyers for Ron Paul. The following lawsuit FAQ video explains the federal civil rights lawsuit against the GOP in extended detail, including instructions on how to participate in the legal action.

Just Another Genius
06-15-2012, 06:34 AM
You should pursue any questions you have, but please don't demand anything from these guys. You don't know them and they are working really f ing hard it seems so don't talk like they owe you proof or like you know their strategies. Did you listen to the audio? If you like what they're doing, support them. If you have suggestions, contact them. Otherwise, stfu and go do something productive besides bitching about how they're not doing it right. Is no one here happy with anything?

It amazes me to see what's in front of us and people piss all over it. If you have something to contribute then do it. Otherwise get out of the way, ok?

I didn't demand anything from these lawyers, so why don't you STFU pal, since you don't know what the F your talking about. I'm just offering suggestions to help their cause in case someone finds these suggestions worthy of consideration. They are known to read these comments so why not discuss ideas which I haven't seen discussed EVER on this site, the Daily Paul site, or the lawyers site. The only person I see bitching around here is you, who seems to want everyone to be sheep followers instead of contributors. The more minds and more opinions are more apt to get you the best answers to a solution instead of just depending upon a handful of opinions. The only opinion you brought to this table is to complain, bitch, and moan about others like me who offered constructive opinions. Perhaps you need to take your own advice and stop pissing on the hard work other people are trying to do to help this cause. If you have nothing valuable to add to the conversation than your bitching then perhaps you need to get out of the way, ok?

SilenceDewgooder
06-15-2012, 06:38 AM
Case Number SACV 12-00927

This is the only legal document I could find at the moment.

http://www.toolsforjustice.com/3_CERTIFICATE_OF_INTERESTED_PARTIES_SACV-12-00927-DOC(JPRx).pdf

jay_dub
06-15-2012, 06:43 AM
I think I'm going to visit this guy...after all, near me. We just really don't need the crazies approaching him...

That seems very improper. Only the attorneys involved should have direct contact with the judge hearing this matter. If, by visit, you mean sit in on a hearing he's conducting in another case, that's different.

kahless
06-15-2012, 06:49 AM
If this case succeeds does that mean the delegates can vote for anyone or just whom is still in the race? For example does this mean they can vote for Santorum, Gingrich or Cain?

We may still have an uphill battle in that regard since you would not want to be replacing Romney with the likes of Santorum.

jay_dub
06-15-2012, 06:56 AM
The most immediate relief they are seeking is an injunction that would allow EVERY delegate to be unbound. Essentially, no candidate would go into Tampa with ANY delegates, including Ron Paul. The convention would then be like sudden-death overtime, to use a football analogy.

SilenceDewgooder
06-15-2012, 06:59 AM
If this case succeeds does that mean the delegates can vote for anyone or just whom is still in the race? For example does this mean they can vote for Santorum, Gingrich or Cain?

We may still have an uphill battle in that regard since you would not want to be replacing Romney with the likes of Santorum.

I would interpret voting for anyone as the choice to vote for anyone. I do not remember reading anything in the RNC by-laws to the effects of a potential nominee's campaign status. And let us remember, all of the contenders never ended their campaigns, they just "suspended" them.

kahless
06-15-2012, 07:00 AM
The most immediate relief they are seeking is an injunction that would allow EVERY delegate to be unbound. Essentially, no candidate would go into Tampa with ANY delegates, including Ron Paul. The convention would then be like sudden-death overtime, to use a football analogy.

With candidates only being Romney and Ron Paul, correct? It does not open the door for them to vote for Santorum, Gingrich, Cain, etc?

jay_dub
06-15-2012, 07:02 AM
With candidates only being Romney and Ron Paul, correct? It does not open the door for them to vote for Santorum, Gingrich, Cain, etc?

I would suppose other rules would still apply, such as having 5 states to place a candidate's name in nomination. That would leave out some, but Santorum would still be eligible, it would seem.

KingNothing
06-15-2012, 07:33 AM
If they're attacking state/local Republican parties who completely ignored accepted rules of order and state laws, this is an excellent move. That pretty much happened everywhere.

Local parties did everything in their power to disregard the process that everyone had agreed to. That shouldn't go unpunished, or, atleast, unacknowledged.

pcosmar
06-15-2012, 07:35 AM
10 pages,,and not posted yet.

http://blogs.ocweekly.com/navelgazing/2012/06/mitt_romney_ron_paul_rnc.php


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=MPt2nlyfmfc#!

Endthefednow
06-15-2012, 07:49 AM
We The People are for Ron Paul ;)

Elwar
06-15-2012, 08:01 AM
So...if Ron Paul's delegates are unbound. Do we have the 1144 delegates to get him elected?

I have seen a few states go toward Ron Paul and a few states send a few RP delegates, but it is a stretch to believe that Ron Paul supporters got into the Romney machine early enough to get nominated as their delegates in order to be stealth candidates.

I could see the announcement by Ron Paul of 200-500 delegates being fairly accurate. Even if it was 600-800 it would still not be enough.

And Gingrich and Santorum supporters would likely make a deal with the "presumed" candidate, Mitt Romney, as opposed to putting themselves out there as being against their party in order to support Dr. Paul.

As a former Libertarian Party member I am used to the party filing lawsuits at the last minute to either stop the ballots from being printed without our candidate's name on it or for defamation or libel as well as many other legitimate lawsuits. What tends to happen is, late November/December the lawsuit wraps up with "ya, you were right but it wouldn't have mattered anyway".

SilenceDewgooder
06-15-2012, 08:15 AM
Judge Carter from a post on Daily Paul in 2009:

Ethics or Intimidation: Birther Judge Carter Stands To Be Recused

David O. Carter (born 1944 in Providence, Rhode Island) is a United States District Court Judge for the Central District of California. Assumed office October 22, 1998, Nominated by Bill Clinton. Carter is hearing the case Barnett vs Obama, questioning the legitimacy of the President's office.

On October 1, just four days before the Motion To Dismiss hearing, Carter hired Siddharth Velamoor to serve as one of his two official clerks, from Oct. 1, 2009, till Sept. 30, 2010. Velamoor is a lawyer who works for a law firm where Robert F. Bauer, one of Obama’s top lawyers is a partner. Bauer’s wife is none other than Anita Dunn, the White House Communication’s Director.

The unethical placement of Velamoor on Judge Carter's staff means the case is extremely flexible, and a waste of time. It does not matter either way the case would go, the whole case is invalid. If the case goes against the plaintiff, Orly Taitz will file motion for Judge Carter's recusal. If it is in favor of the plaintiff, the Judge will have himself recused.

Was this a conspiracy (theory?) right out of the Clinton style politics? Obama/Chicago style strategy? Or, is this how Judge Carter saves face by agreeing to hear the case, but, the outcome is worthless? I guess we'll have to wait for the movie. I'm sure it will baffle even the most dedicated John Grisham fan.

more
http://mossinterest.blogspot.com/2009/10/ethics-or-intimidation-birther-judge.html

I'm not sure if I like what I'm seeing:

Appointed by Clinton
Rule in favor of Lehman Bros vs First Alliance Corp
Barett vs Obama - In 2009, Carter dismissed a lawsuit, Barnett v. Obama, challenging President Barack Obama's election and assumption of office because of the claims that Obama was not a natural born citizen of the United States, commenting that the power to remove a sitting president from office resides with Congress, not the judiciary.

zachrbroussard
06-15-2012, 08:29 AM
So...if Ron Paul's delegates are unbound. Do we have the 1144 delegates to get him elected?

But if we can broker the convention you can change people's minds in the pursuing debates.

Regarding voting for others: wouldn't it be a "all for romney, yay or nay, all for paul yay or nay"? So if they wanted to vote for someone else a move would have to be made from the floor? Not that that's out of the question I guess, but it would be more involved for someone to get that done.

LibertyEagle
06-15-2012, 08:31 AM
We couldn't do any worse. What's Jesse gonna do now....fetch Ron's laundry?

Is it really necessary for you to act like this?

tod evans
06-15-2012, 08:37 AM
10 pages,,and not posted yet.

http://blogs.ocweekly.com/navelgazing/2012/06/mitt_romney_ron_paul_rnc.php



Worth the read!

pcosmar
06-15-2012, 08:43 AM
Judge Carter from a post on Daily Paul in 2009:

That has what to do with this?



Brought by lawyers from Richard Gilbert & Marlowe, which represents the Texas congressman, the suit seeks to "unbound" Paul delegates "to vote their conscience free from any intimidation from any person or entity."


"Plaintiffs come to Federal Court," states the complaint, "to seek the guidance of the court regarding the federal question as to whether plaintiffs are free to vote their conscience on the first and all ballots at the federal election known as the Republican National Convention, or whether plaintiffs are bound to vote for a particular candidate as instructed by defendants' state party bylaws, or state laws, or the preference of political operatives seeking affidavits of loyalty to a particular candidate under penalty of perjury."

The Paul delegates cite federal law that reads: "No person, whether acting under the color of law or otherwise, shall intimidate, threaten, coerce, or attempt to intimidate, threaten, or coerce any other person for the purpose of interfering with the right of such person to vote or to vote as he may choose, or of causing such other person to vote for, or not to vote for, any candidate for the office of president."

jbauer
06-15-2012, 08:50 AM
Unless they undo the 5 state rule you'd have to get that wouldn't you? That would at a minimum knock out grinch. Maybe Santorum?

jay_dub
06-15-2012, 09:06 AM
Is it really necessary for you to act like this?

It was a joke. If it wasn't funny to you, move on.

Was it necessary? No. Was your post necessary? No.

sailingaway
06-15-2012, 09:06 AM
Anyone know any of these "Lawyers for Ron Paul" people?
I know there is a thread researching the website and affiliations, but what is the standing of the lawyers, Richard and David, with grassroots?

I did check Gilbert with the bar, he is clean, in terms of no noted ethical violations, but his background isn't election law. My only question is whether it can backfire, but, heck, someone has to bring all the cheating that was done out, imho.

I wish them well.

sailingaway
06-15-2012, 09:12 AM
Unless they undo the 5 state rule you'd have to get that wouldn't you? That would at a minimum knock out grinch. Maybe Santorum?

Ron should get Iowa. Ron SHOULD have five states. But Romney's folks are threatening credentials challenges basically across the board simply because they don't like that outcome, and they are expected to have most representation on the credentials committee so....

On the other hand, shining the light on WHY our credentials are pure AND THEIRS ARE NOT is precisely what this law suit should do.

jay_dub
06-15-2012, 09:14 AM
Isn't Oklahoma being challenged? We won the rump convention hands down. That should be a state in our column.

SilenceDewgooder
06-15-2012, 09:17 AM
Judge Carter from a post on Daily Paul in 2009:


That has what to do with this?

Case Number SACV 12-00927 was filed at the Ronald Reagan Courthouse in Santa Ana, California, Ninth Federal Circuit. Judge Carter is said to be assigned to the case.

Carlybee
06-15-2012, 09:20 AM
The question is, will it all be resolved before the convention?

jay_dub
06-15-2012, 09:24 AM
The question is, will it all be resolved before the convention?

I don't think it will 'all' be resolved before the convention. The important thing to have an immediate ruling on is the injunction allowing all delegates to vote their conscience. The RICO pursuit will take longer.

FSP-Rebel
06-15-2012, 09:33 AM
News of this should bring some of the softies back to life and strengthen the funding for delegate chipins.

TheGrinch
06-15-2012, 09:38 AM
The thing that pisses me off is that they can't do anything about those who didn't make it to the state conventions and now national, because of their shenanigans. We very nearly had a majority in GA, and might have if not for the Athens slate getting thrown out instead of being ours (best we could have hoped for), as well as in Cobb county and maybe other places... That's what really irks me, is that we might well have the numbers needed otherwise.

Can't complain for the chance to let everyone vote their conscience and see if they maybe can't convince them to do the right thing, but I wouldn't get my hopes up too much and be set up for dissapointment. Not to be a downer, but expectations need to be tempered. If they know they have the numbers to push Mitt through, then expect them to just be more private about their "unity slate".

Not saying it's not worth trying, it certainly is when this will be our best shot, but at this point, I'd probably be just as happy to see real legal action and ousting of all those who did the disenfranchising (though that's just what I'd like to see. It sounds as if it's unlikely from what Doug says, and with what route they've decided to go here).

moonshine5757
06-15-2012, 09:41 AM
meh. good luck with this

libertygrl
06-15-2012, 09:41 AM
I don't have much time and I'm stuggling with major allergies today, but this is just a brief excerpt from what I could transcribe in the beginning so you can get a general idea:

Topic: A civil suit against the RNC

Guests: David Callahan operations director for Lawyers for Ron Paul
Richard Gilbert: Attorney for the delegates to the Republican National Convention, and a member of Lawyers for Ron Paul

On the phone:
"This is Richard Gilbert. I can tell you that a decision has been made by Lawyers for Ron Paul to take over the Ron Paul campaign, without the permission of the Ron Paul Campaign. It is the people's mutiny. We are forming an executive committee, within the Lawyers for Ron Paul group, and we will no longer tolerate negotiations for the surrender of the campaign in exchange for some consession on one or more planks that we find to be meaningless in a platform. And so, we are going to go around the nation and publically announce that the L.F.R.P. and its executive committee, on behalf on the volunteers, ARE FROM NOW ON FORMALLY RUNNING THE RON PAUL CAMPAIGN. WE ARE IN IT TO WIN IT AND NOTHING LESS. WE ARE GOING TO STRIP MITT ROMNEY OF ALL OF HIS DELEGATES AND RON PAUL WILL BE PUT IN NOMINATION AND WIN THE NOMINATION, AND THAT IS OUR GOAL.. AND NOTHING LESS THAN THAT AND THAT'S WHAT OUR MISSION IS.

Whoa! This is HUGE! Sorry, I can't write more but I'm going to listen to the rest now.

hipposelect
06-15-2012, 09:49 AM
Thank you. Jeez, I've had teeth pulled that came out easier than this.

shishka
06-15-2012, 09:52 AM
I would love to see Ron Paul be the nominee, and I'm not typically pessimistic, but the very-near time will tell whether or not this legel end-around has any chance of succeeding. If it did, I would think the MSM would be all over it in the days to come. But like I said, we'll see very soon.

jay_dub
06-15-2012, 09:53 AM
The thing that pisses me off is that they can't do anything about those who didn't make it to the state conventions and now national, because of their shenanigans. We very nearly had a majority in GA, and might have if not for the Athens slate getting thrown out instead of being ours (best we could have hoped for), as well as in Cobb county and maybe other places... That's what really irks me, is that we might well have the numbers needed otherwise.

Can't complain for the chance to let everyone vote their conscience and see if they maybe can't convince them to do the right thing, but I wouldn't get my hopes up too much and be set up for dissapointment. Not to be a downer, but expectations need to be tempered. If they know they have the numbers to push Mitt through, then expect them to just be more private about their "unity slate".

Not saying it's not worth trying, it certainly is when this will be our best shot, but at this point, I'd probably be just as happy to see real legal action and ousting of all those who did the disenfranchising (though that's just what I'd like to see. It sounds as if it's unlikely from what Doug says, and with what route they've decided to go here).

Some things just can't be undone. We don't get a do-over. This does give us the chance to maximize the hand we've been dealt, though. It might also put the brakes on shenanigans by the Old Guard for the few upcoming state conventions and at Tampa.

I agree....this doesn't give us a lock on anything. What it does is level the playing field. Success in this gives us a fighting chance.

No matter the outcome at Tampa, maybe this case will lead to a more fair process in future elections and that can only be a good thing.

Cowlesy
06-15-2012, 10:02 AM
Why do I foresee this ending badly, with Ron really despising a lot of his own supporters...

shishka
06-15-2012, 10:07 AM
Why do I foresee this ending badly, with Ron really despising a lot of his own supporters...

Yeah, I kinda thought this, too. What if Ron doesn't agree with this approach, and it somehow succeeds. How does he accept the nomination in good faith then?

RDM
06-15-2012, 10:08 AM
Why do I foresee this ending badly, with Ron really despising a lot of his own supporters...

It seems like the NEW meme on these forums as of late is: This movement is bigger and much more important than Ron Paul

Are those "pushing" this NEW meme gonna backtrack now?

Tudo
06-15-2012, 10:16 AM
Hey maybe an online protest will get some support! ( LOL )

jay_dub
06-15-2012, 10:17 AM
Why do I foresee this ending badly, with Ron really despising a lot of his own supporters...

How can this end any worse than the likely outcome we were facing? Nature abhors a vacuum. The campaign, in many ways, brought this on itself. It is not fair to the delegates to ask them to go through the time, expense and effort just to have a campaign that insists on going belly-up.

How can Ron despise the base he built when it decides to to stand its ground, much as he has for the last 30 years? The legal route is certainly preferable to having frustrations vented at Tampa.

I would remind you that injuries have been sustained, arrests have been made, rules have been violated, votes have gone uncounted and myriad shenanigans have been documented on video. In Nevada the Old Guard has formed a shadow party, apparently with the RNC's blessing. Just how much do you think we should be dumped on and remain silent? These lawyers are providing an avenue for redress that the campaign has been unwilling to undertake. I think Ron knows this. He may be surprised, but I don't see him despising anyone for it.

TheGrinch
06-15-2012, 10:17 AM
Why do I foresee this ending badly, with Ron really despising a lot of his own supporters...
I disagree. As much as I've been a staunch defender of Ron and the campaign, they've really put their heads in the sand about all of this disenfranchisement.

When I emailed Wead some time ago about the possibilities for a 3rd party run, one of things he said was that we were going to "expose their corruption". I was even under the impression that some of our donations would be going to support the legal battles, but I've not seen anything come of it, other than Doug paying lip service to it on his blog. I mean, when Rachel Maddow has done more to expose the corruption then they have (just to bash republicans of course), that's not good...

So I think they've pretty much necessitated this by keeping their heads in the sand about it. People have been disenfranchised and should demand justice... And who knows, maybe there are some consciences in all of those other delegates who've seen the scummy lengths that they've gone....

But regardless, if they're successful, this will make headlines, and I'll take whatever bad press we might get on the convention floor to show that they're the ones who've been playing dirty all along.

TheGrinch
06-15-2012, 10:17 AM
How can this end any worse than the likely outcome we were facing? Nature abhors a vacuum. The campaign, in many ways, brought this on itself. It is not fair to the delegates to ask them to go through the time, expense and effort just to have a campaign that insists on going belly-up.

How can Ron despise the base he built when it decides to to stand its ground, much as he has for the last 30 years? The legal route is certainly preferable to having frustrations vented at Tampa.

I would remind you that injuries have been sustained, arrests have been made, rules have been violated, votes have gone uncounted and myriad shenanigans have been documented on video. In Nevada the Old Guard has formed a shadow party, apparently with the RNC's blessing. Just how much do you think we should be dumped on and remain silent? These lawyers are providing an avenue for redress that the campaign has been unwilling to undertake. I think Ron knows this. He may be surprised, but I don't see him despising anyone for it.
You beat me to it. I agree completely.

Also, Ron has said all along that anyone with evidence of disenfranchisement or shenanigans should pursue it.

leslymill
06-15-2012, 10:22 AM
I have listened to it twice.

acptulsa
06-15-2012, 10:28 AM
Basis ?

=singular. Bases=plural, as in more than one basis.

And the fat lady ain't sung yet, folks. Our job is to sell this action as the right thing for both the G.O.P. and the nation. Which shouldn't be all that hard as this happens to be the case.

TrishW
06-15-2012, 10:29 AM
Why do I foresee this ending badly, with Ron really despising a lot of his own supporters...

I think you are wrong. Why would Ron Paul despise people for standing up to injustices? Where has Ron Paul ever chosen his battles on the prospect of winning or losing? You must do what is right, and what is needed to keep America free. Even if in the end there is no justice, you will know that at least you kept fighting. Perhaps, I am wrong, but this is the Ron Paul that I have come to know.

Granted they likely will lose, but more delegates have already shown a interest in signing on to the complaint. They expect many more. Of course its about ousting Romney, but there is also a much bigger picture. Why should the American election not be honest and fair? I am tired of hearing the Republicans are a club. The hell with that! This so called club as a 50% or better chance of producing the next President of the United States! Surely they must be held to a high standard of open and fair elections? If nothing else we need to get that cleared up, not only for now, but for all future elections! Don't you agree?

SilenceDewgooder
06-15-2012, 10:32 AM
I disagree. As much as I've been a staunch defender of Ron and the campaign, they've really put their heads in the sand about all of this disenfranchisement.

When I emailed Wead some time ago about the possibilities for a 3rd party run, one of things he said was that we were going to "expose their corruption". I was even under the impression that some of our donations would be going to support the legal battles, but I've not seen anything come of it, other than Doug paying lip service to it on his blog. I mean, when Rachel Maddow has done more to expose the corruption then they have (just to bash republicans of course), that's not good...

So I think they've pretty much necessitated this by keeping their heads in the sand about it. People have been disenfranchised and should demand justice... And who knows, maybe there are some consciences in all of those other delegates who've seen the scummy lengths that they've gone....

But regardless, if they're successful, this will make headlines, and I'll take whatever bad press we might get on the convention floor to show that they're the ones who've been playing dirty all along.

Did they keep their heads in the sand or was it just bait. The more the GOP "got away" with, the more blatant they became. It's been a while, but the last time I went fishing, I didn't catch anything just using a shiny hook.

Do you think that Dr. Paul can talk about an upcoming war years before it happens (Iraq, 1998) and predict a housing downturn (2002) but yet failed to comprehend the possible actions the GOP would take, especially after the negative 16,000 votes in FL in 2008?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=TtHiA7TJUV0

I am in no way implying Dr. Paul is psychic by any stretch of the imagination, but he simply reads the writing on the wall. And if the information is foreshadowing a certain outcome, then why not strategize against it?

KingNothing
06-15-2012, 10:34 AM
Why do I foresee this ending badly, with Ron really despising a lot of his own supporters...

I doubt this will be effective, but I see no reason not to venture down this path. That said, I predict plenty of complaining mixed with bombastic, overly dramatic rhetoric from our fellow supporters. And I don't think that will offend Paul. Its our MO.

ClydeCoulter
06-15-2012, 10:36 AM
"If the judge rules in our favor, I won't be surprised if three or four new candidates, say Sarah Palin, jump in and say they want to be considered," Gilbert said.

If so, what will Tampa look like?

TrishW
06-15-2012, 10:39 AM
Did they keep their heads in the sand or was it just bait. The more the GOP "got away" with, the more blatant they became. It's been a while, but the last time I went fishing, I didn't catch anything just using a shiny hook.

Do you think that Dr. Paul can talk about an upcoming war years before it happens (Iraq, 1998) and predict a housing downturn (2002) but yet failed to comprehend the possible actions the GOP would take, especially after the negative 16,000 votes in FL in 2008?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=TtHiA7TJUV0

I am in no way implying Dr. Paul is psychic by any stretch of the imagination, but he simply reads the writing on the wall. And if the information is foreshadowing a certain outcome, then why not strategize against it?

Then perhaps he knows what we would do too...

Ron Paul is not destined to quietly ride his white horse into the sunset... He has torched the hills with his ideas. The fire burns, and I think Ron Paul is the last one wanting to put it out.

KingNothing
06-15-2012, 10:39 AM
Why should the American election not be honest and fair? I am tired of hearing the Republicans are a club. The hell with that! This so called club as a 50% or better chance of producing the next President of the United States! Surely they must be held to a high standard of open and fair elections? If nothing else we need to get that cleared up, not only for now, but for all future elections! Don't you agree?


The biggest concern with the Party is that they abide by any contracts they might have. If they found a legal way to nominate a goat or a block of cheese, without violating any contracts, as a private organization why shouldn't they be allowed to do so?

The problems arise when they say "hey, if you give us money and follow these rules, we will do X, Y and Z." In many instances, we've played by the agreed-upon rules but they changed them when they didn't like the results. That's not exactly appropriate, and I think it is entirely reasonable to take legal action against any entity that didn't follow through with their end of the bargain.

RDM
06-15-2012, 10:43 AM
If so, what will Tampa look like?

Good question. But if this lawsuit were to open the door for that scenario, one thing for certain, there should and could be a lot of appreciation for the Ron Paul movement and THAT could create a scenario where WE get rewarded with a special thanks.;)

realtonygoodwin
06-15-2012, 10:49 AM
So, now we are for the government telling a private club/organization how they should be run?

RDM
06-15-2012, 10:52 AM
So, now we are for the government telling a private club/organization how they should be run?

Glad to see you value your right to vote and have it mean something.:rolleyes:

TheGrinch
06-15-2012, 10:52 AM
So, now we are for the government telling a private club/organization how they should be run?
No, its called contract enforcementwhich is a legitimate government function.

Its one thing for them to make up their own rules, but another thing entirely to not follow the rules they set forth to disenfranchised paying members.

realtonygoodwin
06-15-2012, 10:52 AM
Glad to see you value your right to vote and have it mean something.:rolleyes:

So, that's a yes?


No, its called contract enforcementwhich is a legitimate government function.

Its one thing for them to make up their own rules, but another thing entirely to not follow the rules they set forth to disenfranchised paying members.

Do they have signed contracts? I don't know.

TheGrinch
06-15-2012, 11:07 AM
So, that's a yes?



Do they have signed contracts? I don't know.
Contract enforcement in the loose sense, kind of like false advertising... I do not think that an actual contract is required for the participant, it has to do with the written rules that have been laid out by those in charge... Particularly when you have people pay to join, then just like advertising, sales, anything, you're bound to not misrepresent your product or service, under penalty of law... I mean, companies can't sell soda as fruit juice can they? Same thing in my view.

Moreover, when it comes to something having to do with the election process, you should expect that they should be bound to doing what they say they're going to do. Not to say the courts will agree, but they should...

torchbearer
06-15-2012, 11:09 AM
The biggest concern with the Party is that they abide by any contracts they might have. If they found a legal way to nominate a goat or a block of cheese, without violating any contracts, as a private organization why shouldn't they be allowed to do so?

The problems arise when they say "hey, if you give us money and follow these rules, we will do X, Y and Z." In many instances, we've played by the agreed-upon rules but they changed them when they didn't like the results. That's not exactly appropriate, and I think it is entirely reasonable to take legal action against any entity that didn't follow through with their end of the bargain.


good point

TrishW
06-15-2012, 11:13 AM
So, now we are for the government telling a private club/organization how they should be run?

YES! When the private club/organization is a willing participate of fraud... yes. When the private club/organization is utilizing monies from our taxes to finance their primaries... Hell Yes!

Cowlesy
06-15-2012, 11:13 AM
How can this end any worse than the likely outcome we were facing? Nature abhors a vacuum. The campaign, in many ways, brought this on itself. It is not fair to the delegates to ask them to go through the time, expense and effort just to have a campaign that insists on going belly-up.

How can Ron despise the base he built when it decides to to stand its ground, much as he has for the last 30 years? The legal route is certainly preferable to having frustrations vented at Tampa.

I would remind you that injuries have been sustained, arrests have been made, rules have been violated, votes have gone uncounted and myriad shenanigans have been documented on video. In Nevada the Old Guard has formed a shadow party, apparently with the RNC's blessing. Just how much do you think we should be dumped on and remain silent? These lawyers are providing an avenue for redress that the campaign has been unwilling to undertake. I think Ron knows this. He may be surprised, but I don't see him despising anyone for it.

It presupposes that Ron was being disingenuous to us in that he is winding down his campaign, realizing he can't win the nomination. I don't believe he was being disingenuous, so I kind of see all these actions as an attempt to co-opt what he thinks is being wound down, without his knowledge, for some righteous purpose about which Ron is unaware.

I'm not saying don't do it. Go nuts and have fun if you think it's going to make you feel better or somehow, against astronomical odds, make Ron become POTUS.

The thing is, having been around these forums and the campaigns since 2007 for a variety of campaigns, it seems like these types of exercises usually lead to relationship issues between otherwise congenial supporters, and somehow leads to people making pointless donations. I am not saying anyone anywhere in any of this has asked for one red cent, just how things have gone in the past.

Like I said, if it makes you feel good, go for it.

matt0611
06-15-2012, 11:15 AM
Is there a summary of whats going on in this thread? Some of us are at work and can't spend an hour to listen to something. (I don't even have audio)

torchbearer
06-15-2012, 11:17 AM
I just read an article on the suit. I think they can win it by this fact alone, the RNC recieves federal funds to hold its elections/convention, thus making it bound to federal election laws.
In the same way that the private university, Louisiana College, is bound to federal discrimination laws because it recieves federal funding through pell grants and student loans.

summary, an organization is no longer considered private once it recieves federal funding.

if anyone has contact info for the attorneys, i'd love to give them some ideas.

torchbearer
06-15-2012, 11:19 AM
So, now we are for the government telling a private club/organization how they should be run?


see my post above.

RDM
06-15-2012, 11:31 AM
I just read an article on the suit. I think they can win it by this fact alone, the RNC recieves federal funds to hold its elections/convention, thus making it bound to federal election laws.
In the same way that the private university, Louisiana College, is bound to federal discrimination laws because it recieves federal funding through pell grants and student loans.

summary, an organization is no longer considered private once it recieves federal funding.

if anyone has contact info for the attorneys, i'd love to give them some ideas.

- Address: Richard Gilbert & Associates, 950 W 17th St Ste C D & E, Santa Ana, CA 92706
- Law School: Western State Univ
- Date of State Bar Admission: 5/31/1979
- Telephone: (714) 667-1038

Zarn Solen
06-15-2012, 11:31 AM
I mentioned this in another thread. I wasn't sure if it applied or not. Glad I wasn't the only one thinking it.

Edit: @Torchbearer

TheGrinch
06-15-2012, 11:32 AM
I'm not saying don't do it. Go nuts and have fun if you think it's going to make you feel better or somehow, against astronomical odds, make Ron become POTUS.
While I'm with him on not taking fraud and disenfranchisement lightly, I'm with you on this about tempering expectations that this might somehow magically put us over the top. I don't think that's at all likely, so I hope that most people here view this as serving and publicizing justice (and maybe making the Tampa convention a little more interesting), but not an invitation to cause a most likely futile and damaging ruckus that goes against Ron's wishes.

I really don't like that they're stating getting Dr. Paul the nomination as a primary goal. If that were the result of unbounding delegates and exposing the corruption, then fine, but they should not be getting people's hopes up for another big letdown (and subsequent shitstorm here).

torchbearer
06-15-2012, 11:34 AM
- Address: Richard Gilbert & Associates, 950 W 17th St Ste C D & E, Santa Ana, CA 92706
- Law School: Western State Univ
- Date of State Bar Admission: 5/31/1979
- Telephone: (714) 667-1038

email?


do they have a number for the suit so i can include it for reference?

torchbearer
06-15-2012, 11:35 AM
I mentioned this in another thread. I wasn't sure if it applied or not. Glad I wasn't the only one thinking it.

Edit: @Torchbearer

well the Louisiana College example actually has a previous case attached to it which it makes it very important for this case.
they can show how courts have ruled in the past on this topic.

Louisiana College, many years ago, had a campus rule prohibiting interracial dating/relationships. this rule was overturned by the courts as they sited that since L.C. recieved federal funding it had to abide by federal rules regarding discrimination.

SilenceDewgooder
06-15-2012, 11:38 AM
Contract enforcement in the loose sense, kind of like false advertising... I do not think that an actual contract is required for the participant, it has to do with the written rules that have been laid out by those in charge... Particularly when you have people pay to join, then just like advertising, sales, anything, you're bound to not misrepresent your product or service, under penalty of law... I mean, companies can't sell soda as fruit juice can they? Same thing in my view.

Moreover, when it comes to something having to do with the election process, you should expect that they should be bound to doing what they say they're going to do. Not to say the courts will agree, but they should...

In short, a contract, whether verbal or in writing, is a legally binding agreement enforceable in a court of law. However, not all agreements between two parties are legally binding contracts. For it to be considered a valid contract, certain elements must exist.

- An Offer
- Acceptance
- Consideration

Subfactors - competence (may be an issue ;)), consent and legality

Elwar
06-15-2012, 11:39 AM
Is there a summary of whats going on in this thread? Some of us are at work and can't spend an hour to listen to something. (I don't even have audio)

In summary. You are lazy.

Not my opinion. Just the messenger.

cheapseats
06-15-2012, 11:41 AM
...publicizing justice (and maybe making the Tampa convention a little more interesting)...

I really don't like that they're stating getting Dr. Paul the nomination as a primary goal. If that were the result of unbounding delegates and exposing the corruption, then fine, but they should not be getting people's hopes up for another big letdown (and subsequent shitstorm here).


Ron Paul Supporters SHOULD be able to moderate their OWN expectations by now...or they have learned NOTHING.

Recovery Circuit Wisdom: Expectations are disappointments waiting to happen.

The principled AND the practical reason not to attach this to Ron Paul's candidacy is because, gee whiz, it gives the impression that Justice only becomes an issue whereas it serves Ron Paul and his emotionally/financially invested support.

ChristopherShelley
06-15-2012, 11:46 AM
So, now we are for the government telling a private club/organization how they should be run?

No we're telling a private club that is the government that we run it.

Elwar
06-15-2012, 11:55 AM
So, now we are for the government telling a private club/organization how they should be run?

That private organization has already set up contractual rules and agreements with its members.

When that private organization violates those agreements, it is the right of those members to seek justice through the court system.

FSP-Rebel
06-15-2012, 12:03 PM
That private organization has already set up contractual rules and agreements with its members.

When that private organization violates those agreements, it is the right of those members to seek justice through the court system.
Bam!

jay_dub
06-15-2012, 12:32 PM
While I'm with him on not taking fraud and disenfranchisement lightly, I'm with you on this about tempering expectations that this might somehow magically put us over the top. I don't think that's at all likely, so I hope that most people here view this as serving and publicizing justice (and maybe making the Tampa convention a little more interesting), but not an invitation to cause a most likely futile and damaging ruckus that goes against Ron's wishes.

I really don't like that they're stating getting Dr. Paul the nomination as a primary goal. If that were the result of unbounding delegates and exposing the corruption, then fine, but they should not be getting people's hopes up for another big letdown (and subsequent shitstorm here).

I think you have to take some of what the attorney said as bluster. Nothing wrong with it....it shows confidence, but we shouldn't see that outcome as inevitable. We still have work to do and it's still a long shot. The work ahead does seem a little less futile, though.

I don't think this will lead to a convention ruckus. In fact, it may serve to prevent one as this will be seen as well....having our day in court.

The benefit I see to this is that we all...and I mean all Americans, may see a more fair process in the future from all this. It does no good to wake people up if the process is rigged.

Kind of OT, but I just finished watching "The Last Samurai" for the second time. Very inspiring...the parallels to our struggle are obvious.

ChristopherShelley
06-15-2012, 12:34 PM
Take your opportunities as far as they will go. If it doesn't work, on to the next. There's no point in standing around picking scabs.

jay_dub
06-15-2012, 12:45 PM
well the Louisiana College example actually has a previous case attached to it which it makes it very important for this case.
they can show how courts have ruled in the past on this topic.

Louisiana College, many years ago, had a campus rule prohibiting interracial dating/relationships. this rule was overturned by the courts as they sited that since L.C. recieved federal funding it had to abide by federal rules regarding discrimination.

Prior rulings must be given weight in decisions. The same basis (Federal funding) is why schools must comply with No Child Left Behind, though it has largely been a failure.

Really, on just a common sense basis, it's absurd to think a wholly private entity could conduct a public election.

freedomordeath
06-15-2012, 12:45 PM
TO ALL THE NAYSAYERS AND DOOMSAYERS... this is important not from simply making sure cheating bastards are brought to justice, but also for the future to make sure they don't try this rubbish again. Also Ron and family might be held at gun point for all we know and powerless to do anything, so we DOING THE RIGHT THING, always prosecute the fraud, its like watching someone steal a grannies handbag and sitting back and saying, I don't think Ron Paul would aprove of us running after robber... yeah whatever dude.

ALSO WE NEED A RALLY CRY TO GATHER THE TROOPS, THIS IS IT, THIS IS CALLED NOT GIVING UP FIGHT TIL THE END, WAIT TILL THE PRESS PICK THIS UP THEN POEPLE WILL START GETTING INVOLVED AGAIN.

Barrex
06-15-2012, 12:50 PM
Since I am from Croatia and some people remind me on that when I get involved, in effort to avoid any "bad feelings" can someone else start "OFFICIAL THREAD" and update OP from time to time so that discussion is concentrated and all information can be found on 1 place? Here are all relevant informations so far:

Twitter feed:
USA_Patriot_Press ‏@USA_Free_Press

All legal documents that have been filed with the Ninth Circuit Court are now available for perusal.

Here's the links:

http://www.toolsforjustice.com/3_CER...(JPRx).pdf (http://www.toolsforjustice.com/3_CERTIFICATE_OF_INTERESTED_PARTIES_SACV-12-00927-DOC(JPRx).pdf)

http://www.toolsforjustice.com/1_COM...(JPRx).pdf (http://www.toolsforjustice.com/1_COMPLAINT_SACV-12-00927-DOC(JPRx).pdf)

http://www.toolsforjustice.com/3_CER...(JPRx).pdf (http://www.toolsforjustice.com/3_CERTIFICATE_OF_INTERESTED_PARTIES_SACV-12-00927-DOC(JPRx).pdf)

http://www.toolsforjustice.com/4_NOT...(JPRx).pdf (http://www.toolsforjustice.com/4_NOTICE_OF_ASSIGNMENT_SACV-12-00927-DOC(JPRx).pdf)

http://www.toolsforjustice.com/5_NOT...(JPRx).pdf (http://www.toolsforjustice.com/5_NOTICE_TO_PARTIES_OF_COURT-DIRECTED_ADR_PROGRAM_SACV-12-00927-DOC(JPRx).pdf)
Latest letter to Reince Priebus:
https://docs.google.com/file/d/1P4jAF0TJxxGA7j6uO_P-1NRD24XeTr2QbA_m479Q-FIGgVKaX1vX8F4zVwtT/edit?pli=1


Case Number SACV 12-00927

- Address: Richard Gilbert & Associates, 950 W 17th St Ste C D & E, Santa Ana, CA 92706
- Law School: Western State Univ
- Date of State Bar Admission: 5/31/1979
- Telephone: (714) 667-1038

http://www.gilbertandmarlowe.com/dynamicattorneys.htm

Laws tied with this case:

Title 42 USC Section 1971:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1971

Title 42 USC Section 1983:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1983

11 CFR 100.2 - Election (2 U.S.C. 431(1))
http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/11/100.2

47 CFR 64.803 – Definitions
http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/64.803

Morse v. Republican Party of Va. - 517 U.S. 186 (1995)
http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/517/186


Here's what PACER is showing so far (pertinent text):
8:12-cv-00927-DOC-JPR Delegates to the Republican National Convention et al v. Republican National Committee et al
David O. Carter, presiding
Jean P Rosenbluth, referral
Date filed: 06/11/2012
Date of last filing: 06/11/2012

Cause: 28:1343 Violation of Civil Rights
Docket report:
Date Filed # Docket Text
06/11/2012 1 COMPLAINT against all Defendants. Case assigned to Judge David O. Carter for all further proceedings. Discovery referred to Magistrate Judge Jean P. Rosenbluth.(Filing fee $350 Paid). Filed by all Plaintiffs.(lwag) (Additional attachment(s) added on 6/12/2012: # 1 Part 2) (lwag). (Entered: 06/12/2012)
06/11/2012 2 CERTIFICATION and Notice of Interested Parties filed by all Plaintiffs. (lwag) (lwag). (Entered: 06/12/2012)
06/11/2012 3 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed.(lwag) (Entered: 06/12/2012)
06/11/2012 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint - (Discovery) 1 as to all Defendants. (lwag) (Entered: 06/12/2012)

ElectionFraudRemedy.com (http://www.electionfraudremedy.com/)
http://wtpnetwork.com/

A group of attorneys have come together – “LAWYERS FOR RON PAUL” (https://www.facebook.com/groups/188334154612254/)

https://www.facebook.com/groups/188334154612254/members/
(WELCOME NEW MEMBERS! This group is STRICTLY FOR vote/delegate/election fraud reporting and remedies and related discussions. Off-topic posts will be deleted.)


Interview with people who are in charge:
http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web/audioPop.jsp?episodeId=635553&cmd=apop

http://player.vimeo.com/video/44236240
(it wouldnt be bad if someone would download it so we can have backup. That goes for documents too.)


Quote from that interview :
I wanna be very clear that I am accusing the Romney campaign of organized criminal acts. That includes: altering ballots, rigging voting machines etc.

FAQ:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=MPt2nlyfmfc


FOR THOSE WHO DONT KNOW WHAT RON THINKS ABOUT THIS:
(listen to 0:43 )

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=TtHiA7TJUV0#!
When Ron Paul was asked about election fraud:"I think they have but i dont have the proof:Nevada there is pretty good evidence. I have heard so many stories about how the votes get manipulated but as far as evidence goes and as far as try to prove anything I am having another things to worry about. I am trying to stop another war with Iran now than pursuing that. I WISH SOME PEOPLE WOULD. THE ONES THAT KNOW ABOUT IT. THEY OUGHT TO PURSUE THIS AND THEN SEE IF THEY CAN, WHATEVER THEY CAN DOCUMENT"



Injustice and corruption anywhere harms everyone and everywhere.


I think I'm going to visit this guy...after all, near me. We just really don't need the crazies approaching him...This man is not lesser of 2 evil. This man is evil.

You mean "our" lawyer and not judge? Right?

Maybe it would be better to collect some questions from this forum and then go to them and ask them how people here can help.


*Can someone point out my grammar mistakes in my unusually long first sentence(question)?

ScrambleLight
06-15-2012, 12:58 PM
-1 for being obnoxious.

jemuf
06-15-2012, 01:13 PM
Noted.

The movement operates more effectively when we don't commit 10,000 man-hours to listening to a call that can be summed up in a few sentences.

Amen! What the hell is wrong with RDM?


I'm listening to the audio. So far the announcement to take over the campaign occured between the 5:35 and 6:50 minute marks.

Yep I found the conference call hard to listen to; I made it 1/2 way. The most common phrases are "uh..", "and..", "and, and...", "Oh, thank you for listening to our show. This is WTPN Network...."

ClydeCoulter
06-15-2012, 01:27 PM
Since I am from Croatia and some people remind me on that when I get involved, in effort to avoid any "bad feelings" can someone else start "OFFICIAL THREAD" and update OP from time to time so that discussion is concentrated and all information can be found on 1 place? Here are all relevant informations so far:



All legal documents that have been filed with the Ninth Circuit Court are now available for perusal.

Here's the links:

http://www.toolsforjustice.com/3_CER...(JPRx).pdf (http://www.toolsforjustice.com/3_CERTIFICATE_OF_INTERESTED_PARTIES_SACV-12-00927-DOC%28JPRx%29.pdf)

http://www.toolsforjustice.com/1_COM...(JPRx).pdf (http://www.toolsforjustice.com/1_COMPLAINT_SACV-12-00927-DOC%28JPRx%29.pdf)

http://www.toolsforjustice.com/3_CER...(JPRx).pdf (http://www.toolsforjustice.com/3_CERTIFICATE_OF_INTERESTED_PARTIES_SACV-12-00927-DOC%28JPRx%29.pdf)

http://www.toolsforjustice.com/4_NOT...(JPRx).pdf (http://www.toolsforjustice.com/4_NOTICE_OF_ASSIGNMENT_SACV-12-00927-DOC%28JPRx%29.pdf)

http://www.toolsforjustice.com/5_NOT...(JPRx).pdf (http://www.toolsforjustice.com/5_NOTICE_TO_PARTIES_OF_COURT-DIRECTED_ADR_PROGRAM_SACV-12-00927-DOC%28JPRx%29.pdf)


Case Number SACV 12-00927

- Address: Richard Gilbert & Associates, 950 W 17th St Ste C D & E, Santa Ana, CA 92706
- Law School: Western State Univ
- Date of State Bar Admission: 5/31/1979
- Telephone: (714) 667-1038

http://www.gilbertandmarlowe.com/dynamicattorneys.htm

Laws tied with this case:

Title 42 USC Section 1971:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1971

Title 42 USC Section 1983:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1983

11 CFR 100.2 - Election (2 U.S.C. 431(1))
http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/11/100.2

47 CFR 64.803 – Definitions
http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/64.803

Morse v. Republican Party of Va. - 517 U.S. 186 (1995)
http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/517/186


Here's what PACER is showing so far (pertinent text):
8:12-cv-00927-DOC-JPR Delegates to the Republican National Convention et al v. Republican National Committee et al
David O. Carter, presiding
Jean P Rosenbluth, referral
Date filed: 06/11/2012
Date of last filing: 06/11/2012

Cause: 28:1343 Violation of Civil Rights
Docket report:
Date Filed # Docket Text
06/11/2012 1 COMPLAINT against all Defendants. Case assigned to Judge David O. Carter for all further proceedings. Discovery referred to Magistrate Judge Jean P. Rosenbluth.(Filing fee $350 Paid). Filed by all Plaintiffs.(lwag) (Additional attachment(s) added on 6/12/2012: # 1 Part 2) (lwag). (Entered: 06/12/2012)
06/11/2012 2 CERTIFICATION and Notice of Interested Parties filed by all Plaintiffs. (lwag) (lwag). (Entered: 06/12/2012)
06/11/2012 3 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed.(lwag) (Entered: 06/12/2012)
06/11/2012 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint - (Discovery) 1 as to all Defendants. (lwag) (Entered: 06/12/2012)

ElectionFraudRemedy.com (http://www.electionfraudremedy.com/)
http://wtpnetwork.com/

A group of attorneys have come together – “LAWYERS FOR RON PAUL” (https://www.facebook.com/groups/188334154612254/)

https://www.facebook.com/groups/188334154612254/members/
(WELCOME NEW MEMBERS! This group is STRICTLY FOR vote/delegate/election fraud reporting and remedies and related discussions. Off-topic posts will be deleted.)


Interview with people who are in charge:
http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web/audioPop.jsp?episodeId=635553&cmd=apop
(it wouldnt be bad if someone would download it so we can have backup. That goes for documents too.)



FAQ:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=MPt2nlyfmfc


FOR THOSE WHO DONT KNOW WHAT RON THINKS ABOUT THIS:
(listen to 0:43 )

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=TtHiA7TJUV0#!
When Ron Paul was asked about election fraud:"I think they have but i dont have the proof:Nevada there is pretty good evidence. I have heard so many stories about how the votes get manipulated but as far as evidence goes and as far as try to prove anything I am having another things to worry about. I am trying to stop another war with Iran now than pursuing that. I WISH SOME PEOPLE WOULD. THE ONES THAT KNOW ABOUT IT. THEY OUGHT TO PURSUE THIS AND THEN SEE IF THEY CAN, WHATEVER THEY CAN DOCUMENT"



Injustice and corruption anywhere harms everyone and everywhere.



You mean "our" lawyer and not judge? Right?

Maybe it would be better to collect some questions from this forum and then go to them and ask them how people here can help.


*Can someone point out my grammar mistakes in my unusually long first sentence(question)?

Thank you, Barrex.

KingNothing
06-15-2012, 01:38 PM
No we're telling a private club that is the government that we run it.

No. This is not true. We are telling them to abide by contracts.

KingNothing
06-15-2012, 01:42 PM
TO ALL THE NAYSAYERS AND DOOMSAYERS... this is important not from simply making sure cheating bastards are brought to justice, but also for the future to make sure they don't try this rubbish again. Also Ron and family might be held at gun point for all we know and powerless to do anything, so we DOING THE RIGHT THING, always prosecute the fraud, its like watching someone steal a grannies handbag and sitting back and saying, I don't think Ron Paul would aprove of us running after robber... yeah whatever dude.

ALSO WE NEED A RALLY CRY TO GATHER THE TROOPS, THIS IS IT, THIS IS CALLED NOT GIVING UP FIGHT TIL THE END, WAIT TILL THE PRESS PICK THIS UP THEN POEPLE WILL START GETTING INVOLVED AGAIN.

I mostly disagree with this entire premise. We don't need a rally cry. And there is no "end" to fight up to.

This is constant. We have to patiently preach liberty, push politicians who will work on our behalf and do our best to unseat those who won't. There is no climactic final battle. There's just the next opportunity and the next obstacle. Leave the drama, bombast, and unseemly emotion out of this. Proceed thoughtfully, optimistically and methodically. That's how win --- intelligence and persistence.

No1butPaul
06-15-2012, 02:08 PM
It seems the MSM isn't going to pick this up and how can they really since they would be opening a can of worms for themselves because of their failure to report on a single allegation of fraud. Their lightening quick responses to certain campaign announcements prove they are aware, but just failing to report. To the extent it is possible, I hope there is an indictment of the media for collusion with the criminal deeds of the RNC and others during the RICO phase of litigation.

freedomordeath
06-15-2012, 02:10 PM
This is constant. We have to patiently preach liberty, push politicians who will work on our behalf and do our best to unseat those who won't. There is no climactic final battle. There's just the next opportunity and the next obstacle. Leave the drama, bombast, and unseemly emotion out of this. Proceed thoughtfully, optimistically and methodically. That's how win --- intelligence and persistence.

yes everything you say is true, BUT TAMPA CONVENTIONS DON'T COME AROUND ALL THAT OFTEN, we still in a race remember and when runers are getting tired, fatigued we need that kick up the backside to getting poeple running again. I even heard of delgates that have siad they not going anymore THATS HOW HOW FCKED UP THIS SITUATION IS, your argument goes out the window if delgates we worked so hard for don't even pitch for the convention. We need good news to get morale up ahead of TAMPA, we NEED TO FINISH THE RACE LIKE THE GOOD DOCTOR TOLD US TO. We'll do all the slow patient team building after the convention, but TAMPA IS WHERE ITS AT THE MOMENT.. we need to start running towards the end, MANY RUN TO WIN not matter how unlikely the win is.

ChristopherShelley
06-15-2012, 02:20 PM
No. This is not true. We are telling them to abide by contracts.

Yeah, ok. Sorry, I was just shooting my mouth off. Too much coffee.

The point is we need to defend the rights of the delegates. If it is their legal right to vote for whom they choose then that is the f ing law, as well as just common gd sense.

So define it however you want. Stick to the point. We need to take this shit over. I'm tired of this bullshit.

Carlybee
06-15-2012, 02:22 PM
So are Lawyers for Ron Paul employed by Ron Paul? The name is throwing me and I havent had time to read all of this.

soulcyon
06-15-2012, 02:28 PM
So are Lawyers for Ron Paul employed by Ron Paul? The name is throwing me and I havent had time to read all of this.Just like this Forum, they are supporters of Ron Paul but they are not paid by Ron Paul or employed by him.

I'm also sure they are trying to 'take over' the official Ron Paul Campaign.

RDM
06-15-2012, 02:32 PM
A message from Attorney Richard Gilbert as posted on the Lawyers for Ron Paul FB page:

I have received hundreds of e mails of support. Thank you. For those of you who wish to keep up with the lawsuit and my views you are welcome to join me at my twitter account @USA_Free_Press I and my twitter followers who are more than 300,000 Ron Paul supporters started preparing the strategy for the lawsuit last November. We believed the Campaign would file the case. When it became obvious the Campaign was not going to help the Delegates who were being systematically attacked, beaten, and subjected to fraud, State after State, we made the decision to file the case on our own. By fate I met the team at ToolsForJustice.com who have been an enormous and indispensible help. Together we formed a legal team to go forward. Jerry, David, and Hope are true Ron Paul volunteers taking real action to seek victory in Tampa.
Bonnie, Nicky and others have done a beautiful job creating this facebook room and maintaining it.
Yesterday some people, just a few, started behaving like the anonymous people on Daily Paul.
As you can see from my tweets to my 300,000 Ron Paul readers on Twitter below, those few from yesterday have a serious comprehension problem. @USA_Free_Press is where you can find me.

USA_Patriot_Press@USA_Free_Press

We will make every effort to convince Doug Wead to join the new campaign

Indy Vidual
06-15-2012, 02:38 PM
...

Edit: To sum it up, their goal is to have every delegate unbound, which will effectively mean no candidate can claim any delegates going in to the convention.

Freedom!

zachrbroussard
06-15-2012, 02:44 PM
Can we get an updated OP with the summation and other important information?

Indy Vidual
06-15-2012, 02:47 PM
http://www.californiality.com/2012/06/ron-paul-civil-rights-lawsuit.html

'Lawyers for Ron Paul' has filed a federal civil rights lawsuit in California against the Republican National Committee and state GOP chapters for alleged voting rights violations, election fraud and other misconduct at GOP primaries and caucuses in 2012.

In the bombshell lawsuit, the group claims "overwhelming evidence" that the voting rights of Ron Paul Republican delegates and other voters were violated by "nearly every state GOP party and the RNC during the 2012 primary election phase, with utter and blatant disregard for any rule of law."

Other groups are reportedly lining up to join the coalition of lawyers, paralegals, and concerned citizens who filed the civil lawsuit against the GOP.

Case Number SACV 12-00927 was filed at the Ronald Reagan Courthouse in Santa Ana, California, Ninth Federal Circuit. Judge Carter is said to be assigned to the case.

The plaintiff group wants court action to protect delegates attending the 2012 Republican National Convention in Tampa this August, regardless of which presidential candidate each delegate intends to vote for.




Immediately, the petitioning group seeks a federal injunction clarifying that all GOP delegates can vote their conscience at the national convention, unbound."The pattern of abuse is guaranteed to get worse, to the extent that the delegates who attend the national convention will be subjecting themselves to legal and/or physical peril," said the group of attorneys who filed the lawsuit citing actions by the GOP as having "devolved into those of an organized criminal enterprise."

In addition to the civil rights lawsuit, the group also intends to file a RICO lawsuit to expose widespread election fraud and abuse across the nation.

Great numbers of Ron Paul supporters are quickly uniting behind the unprecedented federal lawsuit, as they believe that Congressman Ron Paul has been blatantly cheated out of a potential victory.

All legal services provided for all plaintiffs in the suit are pro bono, provided by Lawyers for Ron Paul. The following lawsuit FAQ video explains the federal civil rights lawsuit against the GOP in extended detail, including instructions on how to participate in the legal action.

Hope for America. :)

devil21
06-15-2012, 02:51 PM
Sure wish people would notate the case number correctly. Searching PACER with case number "SACV 12-00927" will not return any case information, because it's wrong. The actual case number is "8:12-CV-00927".

tlw
06-15-2012, 03:35 PM
I am listening to it right now (still have 4 min left) and in a nutshell, lawyers for Ron Paul want to make sure every delegate at the National Convention can vote for whoever they want on the first vote. They also have over 100 criminal cases built up against Romney campaign/RNC.

KerriAnn
06-15-2012, 03:38 PM
//

No1butPaul
06-15-2012, 03:44 PM
OK by me...we will defeat Obama if given the chance.

Excuse me ... when given the chance.

MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2
06-15-2012, 03:53 PM
It seems like the NEW meme on these forums as of late is: This movement is bigger and much more important than Ron Paul

Ron is responsible for that one anyway, circa 2007.

MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2
06-15-2012, 03:56 PM
Is there a summary of whats going on in this thread? Some of us are at work and can't spend an hour to listen to something. (I don't even have audio)

lol. The first 7 pages were fighting about whether every person must listen to a one hour conference call to see what was said and decide inportance. It gets fuzzy after that. But someone in there, did provide a mini-summary finally.

RDM
06-15-2012, 04:00 PM
Thought this was interesting:
While digging around the internet about the lawyers who started this lawsuit, I found some info about David Callahan.
According to wikipedia, he is the co-founder of a US think tank named "Demos", and guess who was a board member of that same small group? Obama!

from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demos_(U.S._think_tank): (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demos_%28U.S._think_tank%29:)

In the late 1990s, Demos was conceptualized by Charles Halpern, President of the Nathan Cummings Foundation (1989–2000). Halpern wanted to create a counter-argument to the growing influence of the many right-wing think tanks and establish a multi-issue organization that would focus on progressive policy development and advocacy. David Callahan, a Fellow at the Century Foundation, and Stephen Heintz, Vice-President of the EastWest Institute, joined Halpern in helping to found Demos. Founding Board members included Arnie Miller, of Isaccson Miller, an executive search firm; David Skaggs, a Colorado Congressman; and Barack Obama, an Illinois State Senator.



interesting.

It would be interesting if the David Calihan that is working with the Lawyers for Ron Paul were the David Callahan you are referencing.

MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2
06-15-2012, 04:00 PM
So are Lawyers for Ron Paul employed by Ron Paul? The name is throwing me and I havent had time to read all of this.

It does not appear that way. I'm naturally suspicious of who they are, but I'll say that about anyone I see in a grocery store parking lot. It's gonna take awhile to figure this all out.

No1butPaul
06-15-2012, 04:05 PM
It would be interesting if the David Calihan that is working with the Lawyers for Ron Paul were the David Callahan you are referencing.

Ha...nice catch

SpiritOf1776_J4
06-15-2012, 04:47 PM
No. This is not true. We are telling them to abide by contracts.

The breaking of those contracts had economic consequences to many GOP voters who paid to finance their candidate. I smell another lawsuit.

TheGrinch
06-15-2012, 05:01 PM
The fact that I just upvoted this thread with 5 stars and it didn't budge from 3 stars should show how many trolls counter-productive of our efforts are among us.

It's one thing to be skeptical about this doing more harm than good (though I'm coming around to the "give 'em hell' side), but sorry, only a troll would dispute that what these lawyers are trying to accomplish isn't admirable after the nasty tactics they've resorted to.

As someone who personally knows some of those in Athens and Cobb, GA who were disenfranchised, I maybe have too personal of a stake in this, but if this can at least draw publicity to how corrupt they all are to try to maintain their power, then it's totally worth it.

The "campaign" might have to be against it for obvious PR reasons, but just like Ron understood that Rand had to do what he had to do, I'm sure he understands that we have to do what we have to do... Let's just do it the right way...

muzzled dogg
06-15-2012, 05:02 PM
Is this major news?

zachrbroussard
06-15-2012, 05:15 PM
Is this major news?

Is a lawsuit against the GOP to unbind delegates a big deal? Are the allegations of large scale voter fraud a big deal? Is it a big deal that this is evidence of large scale voter fraud?

YES

jcannon98188
06-15-2012, 05:16 PM
Is this major news?
A challenge in the 9th district court that could potentially alter the very course of this election, and could result in hundreds of criminal charges being filed against our enemies? Yes, this could be considered major.

muzzled dogg
06-15-2012, 05:20 PM
I did not consider the lawsuits challenging an incumbent president's eligibility to be major news because I knew how they'd turn out

Eisenhower
06-15-2012, 05:22 PM
I did not consider the lawsuits challenging an incumbent president's eligibility to be major news because I knew how they'd turn out

Who are you, Doug Wead?

CPUd
06-15-2012, 05:23 PM
There is also the mutiny takeover of the Ron Paul Campaign.

Eisenhower
06-15-2012, 05:26 PM
There is also the mutiny takeover of the Ron Paul Campaign.

lol

MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2
06-15-2012, 05:34 PM
Who are you, Doug Wead?

Apparently, he's a realist with a track record of 1-0.

As far as this being something "taking over the Paul Campaign," that statement itself makes me suspicious. Why can't they do their thing without claiming they're taking over something that doesn't belong to them? Or why wouldn't they say they are supporting the Paul Campaign or say they are supporting delegates?

Also, they are "taking over the Paul Campaign" and fighting for everyone's delegates? I understand that latter is the right thing to do, but there's no reason to make the former statement if that is your intent.

CPUd
06-15-2012, 05:45 PM
Apparently, he's a realist with a track record of 1-0.

As far as this being something "taking over the Paul Campaign," that statement itself makes me suspicious. Why can't they do their thing without claiming they're taking over something that doesn't belong to them? Or why wouldn't they say they are supporting the Paul Campaign or say they are supporting delegates?

Also, they are "taking over the Paul Campaign" and fighting for everyone's delegates? I understand that latter is the right thing to do, but there's no reason to make the former statement if that is your intent.

I'm still unclear on this at the moment and hoping when they form an executive committee, they will do more to separate campaign efforts from the lawsuit. Their justification for taking over the campaign has to do with recent events that indicated a Presidential Campaign is working detrimental to its purpose - running for President, and disenfranchising delegates in the process.

Barrex
06-15-2012, 05:46 PM
The fact that I just upvoted this thread with 5 stars and it didn't budge from 3 stars should show how many trolls counter-productive of our efforts are among us.

It's one thing to be skeptical about this doing more harm than good (though I'm coming around to the "give 'em hell' side), but sorry, only a troll would dispute that what these lawyers are trying to accomplish isn't admirable after the nasty tactics they've resorted to.

As someone who personally knows some of those in Athens and Cobb, GA who were disenfranchised, I maybe have too personal of a stake in this, but if this can at least draw publicity to how corrupt they all are to try to maintain their power, then it's totally worth it.

The "campaign" might have to be against it for obvious PR reasons, but just like Ron understood that Rand had to do what he had to do, I'm sure he understands that we have to do what we have to do... Let's just do it the right way...

4 stars now ;) and I agree about "counter productive" people...Had major disagreement with one of them in another thread...

For those asking what Ron thinks about this I allready answered in this post there is a video with Ron Paul speaking about fraud and what he wishes people would do:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?380736-MAJOR-ANNOUNCEMENT-Lawyers-for-Ron-Paul-Lawsuit&p=4495638&viewfull=1#post4495638

(post is too long to repost it...)

This is grassroots project and not campaigns or Ron Pauls.... but both campaign and Ron Paul and Mitt (it is not both it is____? throuth? seriously what is it?) know that this lawsuit was coming (in non sexual way).

muzzled dogg
06-15-2012, 05:49 PM
Who are you, Doug Wead?

Not last time I checked. He worked for bush. I despise bush

jemuf
06-15-2012, 06:52 PM
I think there's a major problem with all this "takeover" talk. What if Ron Paul doesn't want to be president? He doesn't have to be sworn in.

And this logic applies to a write-in campaign. I wish Ron Paul would come out with a statement regarding Lawyers for Ron Paul or a write-in campaign.

eleganz
06-15-2012, 07:07 PM
I think there's a major problem with all this "takeover" talk. What if Ron Paul doesn't want to be president? He doesn't have to be sworn in.

And this logic applies to a write-in campaign. I wish Ron Paul would come out with a statement regarding Lawyers for Ron Paul or a write-in campaign.


Are you kidding? Being President is the best way for him to get his message out. He could have a freakin daily liberty class if he wanted to.

Since when was he ever selfish about the development of the movement? He will do anything for this movement, saving this country is something that he'll never back down from.

davidt!
06-15-2012, 07:12 PM
They just accused the Romney campaign of being a criminal organization, and said Mitt is not the lesser of 2 evils, he is evil. He also says when the judge renders a positive decision, mitt will have 0 delegates.

Not according to Rand Paul...

jay_dub
06-15-2012, 07:35 PM
I think there's a major problem with all this "takeover" talk. What if Ron Paul doesn't want to be president? He doesn't have to be sworn in.

And this logic applies to a write-in campaign. I wish Ron Paul would come out with a statement regarding Lawyers for Ron Paul or a write-in campaign.

Well, after 3 tries, he better be ready!!

opinionatedfool
06-15-2012, 07:41 PM
Not last time I checked. He worked for bush. I despise bush

He's definitely a pro liberty person now though.

LibertyEagle
06-15-2012, 07:45 PM
Apparently, he's a realist with a track record of 1-0.

As far as this being something "taking over the Paul Campaign," that statement itself makes me suspicious. Why can't they do their thing without claiming they're taking over something that doesn't belong to them? Or why wouldn't they say they are supporting the Paul Campaign or say they are supporting delegates?

Also, they are "taking over the Paul Campaign" and fighting for everyone's delegates? I understand that latter is the right thing to do, but there's no reason to make the former statement if that is your intent.

I agree. That part bothered me too.

liberty2897
06-15-2012, 08:03 PM
Sorry if this was already posted. I didn't read through every single page of this thread.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7KfvaxMj0YQ

http://electionfraudremedy.com/

I don't know anything more about this other than watching / listening to the video. Sounds interesting.

opinionatedfool
06-15-2012, 08:03 PM
Does Ron know he has a new campaign staff ?

I don't get the whole "taking over the campaign thing. What do they mean? Are they taking over the actual campaign or just metaphorically?

CPUd
06-15-2012, 08:20 PM
I don't get the whole "taking over the campaign thing. What do they mean? Are they taking over the actual campaign or just metaphorically?

They claim they are forming an Executive Committee

opinionatedfool
06-15-2012, 08:34 PM
They claim they are forming an Executive Committee

Lol, whatever that means

No1butPaul
06-15-2012, 08:52 PM
Less than 24 hrs. and more than 14,000 views, yet the msm is silent...it is deafening...we can't report this because we have covered up everything else and couldn't explain it to our viewers/readers. Keeping them honest doesn't apply to us or the RNC.

muh_roads
06-15-2012, 08:59 PM
They said they are taking over the campaign "unofficially" and something to the effect of "whether they like it or not". They firmly believe the Paul campaign was hijacked to make it fall apart.

Tonight's special edition folks is called "Lawyers who love Alex Jones". I'm not going to put too much faith in this really going anywhere.

Ivash
06-16-2012, 12:10 AM
Less than 24 hrs. and more than 14,000 views, yet the msm is silent...it is deafening...we can't report this because we have covered up everything else and couldn't explain it to our viewers/readers. Keeping them honest doesn't apply to us or the RNC.

In today's day and age 14,000 views is nothing. Videos with many, many times that get no notice by the media. I'm sure the media would think this is the act of a group of sore losers rather than anything significant, anyways.

JK/SEA
06-16-2012, 12:54 AM
In today's day and age 14,000 views is nothing. Videos with many, many times that get no notice by the media. I'm sure the media would think this is the act of a group of sore losers rather than anything significant, anyways.

who cares what the media thinks at this point...the main question is, what do you think?

No1butPaul
06-16-2012, 01:52 AM
who cares what the media thinks at this point...the main question is, what do you think?

I know what I know...like miss daisy

b/t/w - why has everything become a matter of confrontation lately on this forum...
aren't we on the same team? I support Ron Paul and liberty, you?

No1butPaul
06-16-2012, 01:59 AM
In today's day and age 14,000 views is nothing. Videos with many, many times that get no notice by the media. I'm sure the media would think this is the act of a group of sore losers rather than anything significant, anyways.

for THIS forum, in 24 hrs, that's a lot and my point wasn't that its viral, but we gots us lookers plenty, including media. But this story, as huge as it is, they can't touch it because they have failed to report on a single incident. I guess they are just going to play dumb, like they did with the crash of 08.

devil21
06-16-2012, 02:06 AM
4 stars now ;) and I agree about "counter productive" people...Had major disagreement with one of them in another thread...


I must have really gotten under your skin.

RDM
06-16-2012, 07:33 PM
UPDATE:

There are now videos available in 3 parts of the conference call that you can share on your websites, blogs or Facebook, etc. Here they are.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPAWE_Q2x0I&feature=relmfu

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXYqpyZEze4&feature=relmfu
Part 3's my favorite because I'm mentioned as Ron from PA.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6adNt2W-l8&feature=player_embedded#!

JK/SEA
06-16-2012, 08:11 PM
I know what I know...like miss daisy

b/t/w - why has everything become a matter of confrontation lately on this forum...
aren't we on the same team? I support Ron Paul and liberty, you?

uh..who rattled your cage?...is your name Ivash?...gtfo..

presence
06-16-2012, 08:12 PM
Cliff's Notes:



A decision has been made to take over the RP campaign without permission: A people's mutiny. We are forming a lawyers committee and we will no longer tolerate injustice.

There was foul play, significant fraud, and misconduct.
Romney will be stripped of all delegates.
Ron paul will get the nomination.
The GOP "club" has violated Title 42 US Section 1971-1974 Voting Rights Law.
100's of lawyers have signed up.
We are accusing the Romney campaign of organized criminal acts including: altering ballots, rigging voting machines, etc.
Binding delegates is illegal.
There are numerous delegate affidavids attesting to fraud.
There is an extremely well founded legal position.


The case will be heard before the convention.




Richard Gilbert & Associates, 950 W 17th St Ste C D & E, Santa Ana, CA 92706
Telephone: (714) 667-1038
The actual case number is "8:12-CV-00927"
9th Circuit Court in California

106 page PDF of case as filed: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B42o0yg7D7tcMHhweFllclkxT0U/edit?pli=1

Short and skinny pages 16-18 and 25-29



Check this link to post 158 by Barrex for more info:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?380736-MAJOR-ANNOUNCEMENT-Lawyers-for-Ron-Paul-Lawsuit&p=4495638&viewfull=1#post4495638

3 piece audio with graphics at post 212:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?380736-MAJOR-ANNOUNCEMENT-Lawyers-for-Ron-Paul-Lawsuit&p=4497950&viewfull=1#post4497950

More info at:

www.ronpaulgrassrootsrevolution.com (http://www.ronpaulgrassrootsrevolution.com)
www.weareronpaul.com (http://www.weareronpaul.com)
www.realgrassrootsrevolution.com (http://www.realgrassrootsrevolution.com)


RDM can we get an updated op with some of this pertinant info?

Badger Paul
06-17-2012, 08:53 AM
Bump...I love mutinies.

No1butPaul
06-17-2012, 09:54 AM
...gtfo..

??? I haven't a clue what is your problem...isn't there another place, outside this thread, where you can direct your hostilities. Thank you.

TrishW
06-17-2012, 10:32 AM
The case will be heard before the convention.

That is very good news!


So are we sure the case will be heard and not simply dismissed?

RDM
06-17-2012, 10:42 AM
The case will be heard before the convention.

That is very good news!


So are we sure the case will be heard and not simply dismissed?

I am not a lawyer, but maybe someone with legal experience wants to weigh in on this they could. IMO, the overwhelming evidence, over 150 sworn testimonies and affidavits and more coming in daily, already precidented case law pertaining to this case and statutes and laws in our favor, I believe there is less than 1% chance this case gets dismissed.

tod evans
06-17-2012, 10:42 AM
The case will be heard before the convention.

So are we sure the case will be heard and not simply dismissed?

This is entirely up to the judge.

WhistlinDave
06-17-2012, 10:49 AM
In today's day and age 14,000 views is nothing. Videos with many, many times that get no notice by the media. I'm sure the media would think this is the act of a group of sore losers rather than anything significant, anyways.

True. I have over 800,000 combined views on my YouTube whistling videos and the MSM hasn't covered me or made me famous yet.

I'm sure they're aware of the lawsuit by now, but I think the bigger issue here, as others have pointed out, is that if all this stuff has been happening all along, and nobody has been reporting any of it (except Ben Swann and Rachel Maddow to some degree), then they all have some serious explaining to do. I wonder how many media outlets are sweating bullets right now figuring out how they are going to deal with this story since it is not going away. Their little plan to rig this primary is about to fall flat on its face and they are going to be exposed for the liars and cheats they are, along with Romney's "unity" folks.

Personally I'd like to see some of the MSM outlets indicted on criminal charges in the RICO trial when that part happens, because I have no doubt there was an organized effort by some of them to keep Ron Paul as invisible as possible, and collusion with the GOP to report the facts incorrectly in order to manipulate the outcome of this primary in favor of Romney. I wish some whistleblowers from inside the MSM would come forward with e-mails from Murdoch, Moonvies, et. al.... It would probably be hard to prove without something like that.

WhistlinDave
06-17-2012, 10:49 AM
Duplicate post... (deleted) :confused:

No1butPaul
06-17-2012, 10:53 AM
True. I have over 800,000 combined views on my YouTube whistling videos and the MSM hasn't covered me or made me famous yet.

I'm sure they're aware of the lawsuit by now, but I think the bigger issue here, as others have pointed out, is that if all this stuff has been happening all along, and nobody has been reporting any of it (except Ben Swann and Rachel Maddow to some degree), then they all have some serious explaining to do. I wonder how many media outlets are sweating bullets right now figuring out how they are going to deal with this story since it is not going away. Their little plan to rig this primary is about to fall flat on its face and they are going to be exposed for the liars and cheats they are, along with Romney's "unity" folks.

Personally I'd like to see some of the MSM outlets indicted on criminal charges in the RICO trial when that part happens, because I have no doubt there was an organized effort by some of them to keep Ron Paul as invisible as possible, and collusion with the GOP to report the facts incorrectly in order to manipulate the outcome of this primary in favor of Romney. I wish some whistleblowers from inside the MSM would come forward with e-mails from Murdoch, Moonvies, et. al.... It would probably be hard to prove without something like that. yeah, I'm pretty sure it was I who brought that up, in a few threads actually.

No1butPaul
06-17-2012, 10:58 AM
It seems the MSM isn't going to pick this up and how can they really since they would be opening a can of worms for themselves because of their failure to report on a single allegation of fraud. Their lightening quick responses to certain campaign announcements prove they are aware, but just failing to report. To the extent it is possible, I hope there is an indictment of the media for collusion with the criminal deeds of the RNC and others during the RICO phase of litigation.

my earlier point

bcreps85
06-17-2012, 11:02 AM
my earlier point

Well said.

Barrex
06-17-2012, 11:02 AM
It seems the MSM isn't going to pick this up and how can they really since they would be opening a can of worms for themselves because of their failure to report on a single allegation of fraud. Their lightening quick responses to certain campaign announcements prove they are aware, but just failing to report. To the extent it is possible, I hope there is an indictment of the media for collusion with the criminal deeds of the RNC and others during the RICO phase of litigation.

Barrex

Diashi
06-17-2012, 11:11 AM
Apologies if this was already provided, but will there be a twitter feed for the progression of this case?

ChristopherShelley
06-17-2012, 11:14 AM
CORRECTED:

@usa_free_press

ChristopherShelley
06-17-2012, 11:36 AM
CORRECTED:

I listed the wrong handle.


CORRECTED:

@usa_free_press

WhistlinDave
06-17-2012, 11:50 AM
CORRECTED:

@usa_free_press

It's worth noting, when you search on Twitter for @usa_free_press their account comes up and their name is USA_Patriot_Press. Then when you look at it you see their actual Twitter handle is @usa_free_press .

Took me about a minute to figure out it was the right one. (I haven't used Twitter all that much.)

presence
06-17-2012, 11:56 AM
True. I have over 800,000 combined views on my YouTube whistling videos and the MSM hasn't covered me or made me famous yet.

I'm sure they're aware of the lawsuit by now, but I think the bigger issue here, as others have pointed out, is that if all this stuff has been happening all along, and nobody has been reporting any of it[]

Well... in the same way our grassroots have created the legal case. We need a grassroots press release to our liberty-online force, this site lists the top libertarian sites by page hits:

http://toplibertarian.com/

We are the legal team.
We are the PR team.
etc.

WhistlinDave
06-17-2012, 11:56 AM
MSM is going to have to cover this at some point.

They're probably hoping the lawsuit is unsuccessful so then they can report on it in a negative way, like "Well look what those crazy Ron Paul people tried this time. They're a bunch of losers and they keep trying to steal this election any way they can." That's what they're wishing for.

But what they're going to have to say is, "Well no one saw this coming, but apparently there was massive fraud and cheating going on by the Romney folks, and an army of lawyers teamed up to fight on behalf of Ron Paul, and... All of this was kept so secret for so long, it's with great surprise that we tell you today, Romney is NOT the GOP Nominee! You heard right, we just said: Romney is NOT the GOP Nominee! In an unprecedented turn of events, Ron Paul has taken the GOP Nomination and will be facing President Obama in November... And in other news, Michelle Obama reported that she's picked out a nice little house in the suburbs and the Obamas have begun packing their things."

presence
06-17-2012, 12:02 PM
You know... you put this side by side with the whole Obama birth certificate issue and that whole prophecy/conspiracy theory of suspended elections in the US for 2012 becomes easy to write political fiction.

presence

WhistlinDave
06-17-2012, 12:04 PM
Well... in the same way our grassroots have created the legal case. We need a grassroots press release to our liberty-online force, this site lists the top libertarian sites by page hits:

http://toplibertarian.com/

We are the legal team.
We are the PR team.
etc.

I'm with you on that.

I wonder what it would take to get a massive amount of people to participate in a Twitter bomb all on one day at a preplanned time, to make something in the top trending stuff like #RomneyElectionFraudLawsuit or something like that. If we have tens of thousands of people posting on Twitter all at once, each person Tweeting repeatedly over and over, I wonder if it would be enough to get into the top trending results so everybody would say "Wow what's that about?"

ChristopherShelley
06-17-2012, 12:09 PM
It's worth noting, when you search on Twitter for @usa_free_press their account comes up and their name is USA_Patriot_Press. Then when you look at it you see their actual Twitter handle is @usa_free_press .

Took me about a minute to figure out it was the right one. (I haven't used Twitter all that much.)

me neither! yay! more technology!!1! ;-)

Lindsey
06-17-2012, 12:13 PM
#RomneyElectionFraudLawsuit

OK. I tweeted it.

jay_dub
06-17-2012, 12:19 PM
It seems like the few media outlets that have reported on this are all using Courthouse News as their source. The initial news of the case being filed has largely been ignored. There likely won't be any significant developments until the case comes up on the court calendar.

Ben Swann may report on this, but that's probably as far as it will get at this time.

Barrex
06-17-2012, 01:08 PM
I'm with you on that.

I wonder what it would take to get a massive amount of people to participate in a Twitter bomb all on one day at a preplanned time, to make something in the top trending stuff like #RomneyElectionFraudLawsuit or something like that. If we have tens of thousands of people posting on Twitter all at once, each person Tweeting repeatedly over and over, I wonder if it would be enough to get into the top trending results so everybody would say "Wow what's that about?"

You dont need tens of thousands of people. You need about 5000 people re-tweeting from just 1 account. That is all what it takes to dominate hashtags and trends.... There were few attempts to do this but they were unsuccessful.

40oz
06-17-2012, 04:33 PM
You dont need tens of thousands of people. You need about 5000 people re-tweeting from just 1 account. That is all what it takes to dominate hashtags and trends.... There were few attempts to do this but they were unsuccessful.

^^^THIS. We have the numbers to make it a reality. We just need a small amount of coordination.

RDM
06-17-2012, 10:44 PM
Please copy and paste this into your groups and share it far and wide! Thank you!
Please join the lawsuit against the RNC and the GOP. It is necessary to have as many Delegates join the Case as possible. The more delegates, the stronger the case. All Delegates are public record. There is a myth on the Daily Paul that delegates have a secret identity. Every delegate knows that is false. We represent delegates for ALL candidates no matter who they are intending to vote for. If you are a "stealth" delegate we do not need to know that. We never ask that question. You just become a Plaintiff and that's it. If you are bound to Santorum you just say that. It is already a public record. Every delegate has a duty to protect the sanctity of voting your conscience by asking a Federal Judge to order it. No one needs to know if you are stealth.

In addition, all plaintiffs are fully protected by the "Litigation Privilege". This means the Judge will not permit any Plaintiff to be harassed or intimidated in any way. There can be no fine or penalty of any kind and the Judge will protect you. It is my understanding that it is mathematically impossible for Dr. Paul to win without this Case. As of now, Dr. Paul is not having his name in nomination and is not being permitted to speak. If anybody has information otherwise, please let us know. This case can fix that. Please go to www.electionfraudremedy.com (http://www.electionfraudremedy.com) and join us in our effort to make ALL delegates UNBOUND prior to the convention in Tampa! THANK YOU!

devil21
06-18-2012, 12:48 AM
Im trying to help but man I get a fishy feeling about this thing. Just my .02.

row333au
06-18-2012, 04:27 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIP-ibpRYIY&feature=player_embedded

SERIOUSLY

THIS

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsmax/files/51/5131338d-dc49-4f13-a1a7-79b26a3bd6ff.jpg
(Mr Romney spoke from a podium on the 30-yard line of the football field in Detroit, Michigan, as the crowd, mostly men in suits, sat in chairs set up on the artificial turf.)

WILL BEATS THIS

http://www.hangthebankers.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Ron-Paul-crowd-3-1024x768.jpg
( http://mycatbirdseat.com/2012/05/ron-pauls-mega-crowds-no-media-coverage/ )

CONSENSUS WINS OVER ANYTHING.... PUBLIC NUMBERS NOT PARTY INFLUENCE.... NEVER AGAIN

Use the law as they have use the law against us..... public demand is the way to go

presence
06-18-2012, 08:04 AM
Much thanks for the updated OP RDM

;)

NCGOPer_for_Paul
06-18-2012, 08:26 AM
I hate to throw cold water, or maybe ice, on this lawsuit, but as far as this being a FEDERAL issue, there is no case.

See, the RNC cannot bind any delegate to any candidate. The party itself cannot bind a delegate to a candidate. That's already been established.

The problem is that STATE LAW can bind delegates to candidates. The election of the President is not a national election, it is 50+ state elections. Primaries/caucuses are different in every state.

If you are a delegate from a state which had a primary which binds delegates based upon that primary result, your case is with your state. A Federal ruling as no jurisdiction on your state election law. The PARTY isn't forcing you to vote for Romney, your STATE is. Your STATE has delcared that delegates represent the "will of the voters". The PARTY cannot stop you from voting for someone else at the Convention, but you are in violation of STATE LAWS, and depending on state, you can be facing fines of $2,500 - $10,000 as well as jail time. Also, the party then is in violation of STATE law and they have penalties as well...ballot status issues and the like. Hence the reason for PARTY discipline for not voting your forced "pledge".

ClydeCoulter
06-18-2012, 08:27 AM
Im trying to help but man I get a fishy feeling about this thing. Just my .02.

I know, it's like, every time you go to put food into your mouth it gets slapped away, then someone says, hey there's a feast going on and no hand slappers are around, you just kinda...

But let's hope there really aren't hand slappers here with this and don't forget to keep vetting as we go :)

CPUd
06-18-2012, 08:35 AM
http://i.imgur.com/C9lRn.gif

RDM
06-18-2012, 08:35 AM
I hate to throw cold water, or maybe ice, on this lawsuit, but as far as this being a FEDERAL issue, there is no case.

See, the RNC cannot bind any delegate to any candidate. The party itself cannot bind a delegate to a candidate. That's already been established.

The problem is that STATE LAW can bind delegates to candidates. The election of the President is not a national election, it is 50+ state elections. Primaries/caucuses are different in every state.

If you are a delegate from a state which had a primary which binds delegates based upon that primary result, your case is with your state. A Federal ruling as no jurisdiction on your state election law. The PARTY isn't forcing you to vote for Romney, your STATE is. Your STATE has delcared that delegates represent the "will of the voters". The PARTY cannot stop you from voting for someone else at the Convention, but you are in violation of STATE LAWS, and depending on state, you can be facing fines of $2,500 - $10,000 as well as jail time. Also, the party then is in violation of STATE law and they have penalties as well...ballot status issues and the like. Hence the reason for PARTY discipline for not voting your forced "pledge".

Well, the RNC would argue your statement as false:

Evidence of the RNC’s interpretation of its own rule was presented in 2008 when a delegate from Utah refused to vote for John McCain, the winner of the Utah popular vote. The delegate wanted to cast a vote for Mitt Romney. When the matter was referred to the RNC’s general counsel, the response is illuminating and likely relevant to the present Ron Paul controversy. The RNC attorney wrote:
[The] RNC does not recognize a state’s binding of national delegates, but considers each delegate a free agent who can vote for whoever they choose. The national convention allows delegates to vote for the individual of their choice, regardless of whether the person’s name is officially placed into nomination or not.
That is about as clear and definitive a restatement of the RNC position as can be expected. http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/11747-delegates-committed-to-ron-paul-file-federal-lawsuit-against-rnc-seeking-right-to-vote-their-conscience

bcreps85
06-18-2012, 08:44 AM
I hate to throw cold water, or maybe ice, on this lawsuit, but as far as this being a FEDERAL issue, there is no case.

See, the RNC cannot bind any delegate to any candidate. The party itself cannot bind a delegate to a candidate. That's already been established.

The problem is that STATE LAW can bind delegates to candidates. The election of the President is not a national election, it is 50+ state elections. Primaries/caucuses are different in every state.

If you are a delegate from a state which had a primary which binds delegates based upon that primary result, your case is with your state. A Federal ruling as no jurisdiction on your state election law. The PARTY isn't forcing you to vote for Romney, your STATE is. Your STATE has delcared that delegates represent the "will of the voters". The PARTY cannot stop you from voting for someone else at the Convention, but you are in violation of STATE LAWS, and depending on state, you can be facing fines of $2,500 - $10,000 as well as jail time. Also, the party then is in violation of STATE law and they have penalties as well...ballot status issues and the like. Hence the reason for PARTY discipline for not voting your forced "pledge".

Well, a few problems with this analysis.

1. As mentioned above, the GOP would seem to disagree with your assertion.

2. The federal government routinely argues that federal law supersedes state law. Constitutionally, I disagree, but if they chose to actually admit that the state law supersedes federal law in this case, it will be clear cut selective application of the law.

3. If something so simple was going to derail this lawsuit, don't you think that one of the hundred lawyers or thousands of volunteers would have caught it before filing and embarrassing themselves?

Not trying to disrespect you or anything, just saying.

NCGOPer_for_Paul
06-18-2012, 08:53 AM
Well, the RNC would argue your statement as false:

Evidence of the RNC’s interpretation of its own rule was presented in 2008 when a delegate from Utah refused to vote for John McCain, the winner of the Utah popular vote. The delegate wanted to cast a vote for Mitt Romney. When the matter was referred to the RNC’s general counsel, the response is illuminating and likely relevant to the present Ron Paul controversy. The RNC attorney wrote:
[The] RNC does not recognize a state’s binding of national delegates, but considers each delegate a free agent who can vote for whoever they choose. The national convention allows delegates to vote for the individual of their choice, regardless of whether the person’s name is officially placed into nomination or not.
That is about as clear and definitive a restatement of the RNC position as can be expected. http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/11747-delegates-committed-to-ron-paul-file-federal-lawsuit-against-rnc-seeking-right-to-vote-their-conscience

That is EXACTLY what I said.

The RNC CANNOT tell a delegate how to vote. Delegates are NOT bound by the Republican Party, but a delegate can be bound by their State. Does the delegate HAVE to vote the way s/he is bound by their state? NO. BUT, they are subject to criminal and civil penalties, and the PARTY is subject to violations of election law.

The 2008 case becomes an issue between that delegate and the State of Utah.

Is it possible that Ron Paul COULD get the delegates and win the nomination at Convention? YES. However, states where delegates went against the binding LAWS could deny the Republican candidate (Paul) ballot access BECAUSE the delegates at the convention did not represent the will of the people of said state and that state's elections board decrees that (Paul) is a fraudlent candidate.

NCGOPer_for_Paul
06-18-2012, 09:08 AM
Well, a few problems with this analysis.

1. As mentioned above, the GOP would seem to disagree with your assertion.

2. The federal government routinely argues that federal law supersedes state law. Constitutionally, I disagree, but if they chose to actually admit that the state law supersedes federal law in this case, it will be clear cut selective application of the law.

3. If something so simple was going to derail this lawsuit, don't you think that one of the hundred lawyers or thousands of volunteers would have caught it before filing and embarrassing themselves?

Not trying to disrespect you or anything, just saying.

1. The GOP wants an orderly convention. 90% of the people in the GOP will go along with whatever they say, right or wrong.

2. Federal law supersedes state law only in cases where a case has been tried. Not every state has to go along with everything the Feds do. That's established. Some states have elected Lt. Governors, other states don't have them. Heck, County Cororner is an elected office in Pennsylvania. Judges are appointed in New Jersey. Every state has different election laws. The ONLY way Federal law applies here is if each and every state followed the same process for electing delegates. If every state had a caucus run by the PARTY, the lawsuit would be against the RNC, because the RNC controls the state parties. If every state ran a primary where the results of the primary were applied the same nationwide, then the lawsuit is valid. As long as each state elects delegates in a different way, there can be not overreaching Federal decision. What is being asked is if Federal law can trump the decisions made by States to elect their own delegates. If that is to be the case, then the whole parade of caucuses and primaries are basically for naught. Do you want the Feds saying to all States, you will elect delegates THIS WAY?

3. The ramifications of a decision are great. Even a loss can redefine the whole way we do primaries and caucuses. That's why so many lawyers have hopped on board. This could force a National Primary Day, and eliminate National Nominating Conventions.