We did well in Oregon, totals not completely in

[sailingaway]

as in Texas, it appears they don't want precise details out so for right now I've pulled our thread. We still have it though, and when we get it sorted out we can put it back up.

they tried improper adjournment and each CD handled it differently, after the main delegates were elected but before alternates were because they knew we were doing well and wanted to appoint them themselves. We need to get our real delegates, to Tampa since delegate alternates, even when properly voted in, are sure to be challenged since they are claiming they adjourned.

[Jackie Moon]

Thanks, hopefully it won't be too long. I think we can say in general it's good, but they asked for no details or video posted until the lawyers go over it.

[devil21]

So more cheating then. After this last week the Lawyers4RP folks will have to motion to amend their complaint to add a lot more shit. Keep it up GOP. You're passing with flying colors.

[davegod75]

good news. Can't wait for tampa!

[FSP-Rebel]

Godspeed to our delegates and lawyers! and the judge overseeing the case

[ClydeCoulter]

So more cheating then. After this last week the Lawyers4RP folks will have to motion to amend their complaint to add a lot more shit. Keep it up GOP. You're passing with flying colors.

gas? what a stink.

[parocks]

[substance deleted by mod because that is precisely what we aren't supposed to post yet. I know some others havent' pulled theirs yet. Just know each cd acted differently making the legal arguments for each cd different, and the outcome is better in some than others. Sorry for the deletion, but attorneys are concerned casual mischaractorizations by those who don't know the legal implications of minor differences might jeopardize a legal case if quoted, at least that seems to be their reasoning]

[sailingaway]

sorry, parocks.

[Barrex]

Sorry sailingaway. Too late I read it ;)

[tod evans]

Sorry sailingaway. Too late I read it ;)

Drats! I missed it...

[FSP-Rebel]

Sorry sailingaway. Too late I read it ;)
I caught it too, we be insiders now.

[sailingaway]

only on one cd :p

I don't know how much it matters, just that we were asked to take info off social media.

[parocks]

sorry, parocks.

i vaguely understand the rationale for this - someone doesn't like it, right? I don't see how this hurts. Why "what happened" needs to be a secret. The people who were there know what happened. The Romney people in Oregon filed a full report to Romney. No secrets are being spread. It just seems that RPF is supposed to be 100% chaff, with a 0% wheat content. This has happened many times, in many different contexts. The one thing that seems like useful information that will make everyone smarter and more informed about what is going on is moved to hot topics or deleted because in theory the opposing campaigns are so clueless that they can't get their own info from their own sources. The other campaigns can and do get their own info. The people who don't get the info isn't Team Romney but us. We're the ones remaining clueless and in the dark, based on that flawed theory that people don't know what's going on. I can will and do fight argue and discuss things that don't matter, endless blather about Rand Paul, Paul Fest, Adam Kokesh. Is that RPF is supposed to be - pure pointless blather? Is that the measurement? This might be good information - delete. This is clearly the rantings of a crazy person - keep it in grassroots. It doesn't really matter at this point, it would've been more helpful, overall, if RPF was pushed toward excellence, excellent information, excellent projects implemented excellently, as opposed to random pointless jibberjabber.

[sailingaway]

I can only explain with a hypothetical, and this is only my guess as to why the attorneys don't like it:

Suppose a person saw a woman in a blue dress get hit by a dark colored car and her child fly from her arms and cause another car to swerve and hit another car, knocking it into pedestrians.

This person writes up a quick blog on how shocking it was, the woman dead and blood on the street and the baby permanently crippled and the pedestrians taken by ambulence....

but in the fervent write up the person says it was a black car when in fact it was a dark blue car, the person just wasn't really focusing on the car.

People working for the dark blue car driver then say 'see it was black!! Wrong car!!'

Usually that person is just a bystander but if that person is a party to the suit, if any, say a delegate in a suit brought for delegates, that is an ADMISSION and can be admitted into court, and the person writing wasn't really even thinking about the car color, and on thinking about it would say, you know, I'm not really sure what color it was, but it was dark, and it was a bright day....

To the extent it is fought in the media those with control of the media (certainly not us) can put mistakes like that together as 'proof' in media spin for the other side.

obviously, I just made up the above, but the principles are true, so when I was told the attorneys were asking stuff not be posted on social media before they had a chance to get unaltered 'testimony' from the actual people there, I assume it is something like that.

and that people can later change 'facts' if questioned by people who want it to go a certain way, and attorneys who know they will have to prove facts against people who also have to prove facts want to get the unaltered testimony to check out and compare with other instances, so they can work out the truth.

All the information will be available to make us smarter, later, once the attorneys have had a chance to get the story straight, as I understand it.

[talkingpointes]

Just thinking about whats out there....


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuPPA4wcj2Q

[Barrex]

Research origins of this:
Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus.
If you wanna have some fun research this one (origin of "testimony"):
"Testis unus, testis nullus"

[WhistlinDave]

Research origins of this:
Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus.
If you wanna have some fun research this one (origin of "testimony"):
"Testis unus, testis nullus"

That last one, "testis nullus" sounds like the libido nullification curse my wife has been wishing upon me for many years now. (It isn't working.)

[parocks]

I can only explain with a hypothetical, and this is only my guess as to why the attorneys don't like it:

Suppose a person saw a woman in a blue dress get hit by a dark colored car and her child fly from her arms and cause another car to swerve and hit another car, knocking it into pedestrians.

This person writes up a quick blog on how shocking it was, the woman dead and blood on the street and the baby permanently crippled and the pedestrians taken by ambulence....

but in the fervent write up the person says it was a black car when in fact it was a dark blue car, the person just wasn't really focusing on the car.

People working for the dark blue car driver then say 'see it was black!! Wrong car!!'

Usually that person is just a bystander but if that person is a party to the suit, if any, say a delegate in a suit brought for delegates, that is an ADMISSION and can be admitted into court, and the person writing wasn't really even thinking about the car color, and on thinking about it would say, you know, I'm not really sure what color it was, but it was dark, and it was a bright day....

To the extent it is fought in the media those with control of the media (certainly not us) can put mistakes like that together as 'proof' in media spin for the other side.

obviously, I just made up the above, but the principles are true, so when I was told the attorneys were asking stuff not be posted on social media before they had a chance to get unaltered 'testimony' from the actual people there, I assume it is something like that.

and that people can later change 'facts' if questioned by people who want it to go a certain way, and attorneys who know they will have to prove facts against people who also have to prove facts want to get the unaltered testimony to check out and compare with other instances, so they can work out the truth.

All the information will be available to make us smarter, later, once the attorneys have had a chance to get the story straight, as I understand it.

Ok, I'm not griping about the specifics and I see the rationale to some degree. The concern is more with the overall trend or policy (not that it really matters at this juncture).

[Barrex]

That last one, "testis nullus" sounds like the libido nullification curse my wife has been wishing upon me for many years now. (It isn't working.)

Well when Roman citizen was giving evidence in court, he would place his hand on his testicles as a sign that he was telling the truth.
testis= witness= testicle.
No balls no witnesses.
1 witness (test ;) ) is like no witnesses.

[parocks]

[deleted by mod]

this one might be deleted as well - so be it - its daily paul video from oregon

[BKom]

There is a clear difference between posting unaltered video of an event and someone's impressions of what happened.

[sailingaway]

this one might be deleted as well - so be it - its daily paul video from oregon

Yeah, I'm thinking about it. They basically have information, accurate and not, plastered all over there. They don't seem to worry about it, but Michael is in China so I am not sure who is making that decision.

[Xenophage]

I was a PCP (similar to a delegate) at the CD1 convention in Oregon. I was running as an alternate delegate to national... but we never got to vote on alternates. However, we did very well in delegate selection.

[Xenophage]

Our slate was definitely compromised at CD1. Some slimy Romney guy snapped multiple photos of it and ran away.

[sailingaway]

I was a PCP (similar to a delegate) at the CD1 convention in Oregon. I was running as an alternate delegate to national... but we never got to vote on alternates. However, we did very well in delegate selection.

apparently there is an open state house seat in oregon, I posted it. Any desire to run? PCPs can vote, but maybe you have to be from that area, I'll find it.

[sailingaway]

here you go, it is for seat 26, the convention to elect the nominee, I guess, is July 7 http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?381646-Vacancy-for-House-District-Seat-26-in-Oregon

[devil21]

I wonder if the new GOP establishment plan will be to shut down remaining conventions before alternates can be seated, thus giving the Party the ability to select alternates and then try to prevent the Paul delegates from attending Tampa through credential shenanigans. This of course would seat the Party approved alternates in place of the elected Paulites and give Romney all the more establishment picks.

[Jackie Moon]

Yeah, I'm thinking about it. They basically have information, accurate and not, plastered all over there. They don't seem to worry about it, but Michael is in China so I am not sure who is making that decision.

Yeah, I know that everyone who was there or following along here real time knows what happened. And you can find it on the Daily Paul. But this is what the people here in CD3 are saying so I'm going to wait until I hear differently:


I was asked to pass along the word that we should not make any public statements about what happened at Oregon's district conventions today (June 23rd) or post video until the lawyers have been consulted. This could be pretty cool! :)


Tom Armstrong (state coodinator) and I are getting in touch with the national campaign and compiling reports among the various districts--especially the names and contact info. of our candidates who won in each district because they will likely be contacted directly with further instruction from the national campaign.

In the meantime, send any information you would like them to have to me: jvance444@gmail.com.

After we touch base with the campaign, we will consider moving forward with ORP and/or whatever else. But until we have a united front on how we're going to move forward, hold off on any public communication and even on social media.

All of the info. and footage that we have will not go away--we're simply waiting a short time to decide how to use it most effectively.

And please stay positive and respectful--that's our greatest asset right now. They're the ones who appear improper.

Thanks,
Joe Vance
acting state coordinator
419-631-9283
http://www.facebook.com/groups/ronpaul360/386564561391538

I think of it as why you don't talk to the police before a lawyer. Even if you did nothing wrong and have nothing to hide you may unknowingly say something that they can and will use against you later.

[sailingaway]

Yeah, I know that everyone who was there or following along here real time knows what happened. And you can find it on the Daily Paul. But this is what the people here in CD3 are saying so I'm going to wait until I hear differently:




http://www.facebook.com/groups/ronpaul360/386564561391538

I think of it as why you don't talk to the police before a lawyer. Even if you did nothing wrong and have nothing to hide you may unknowingly say something that they can and will use against you later.

Yeah, I'm on board, then.

[parocks]

Yeah, I'm thinking about it. They basically have information, accurate and not, plastered all over there. They don't seem to worry about it, but Michael is in China so I am not sure who is making that decision.

you're a mod, it's better to have it up and have it taken down than not.

There's a bunch of info over there on daily paul if you want to see it. the numbers over there aren't what we think they might be. CDs where we were thought to have won 10 of 10 of the at larges in that CD didn't give us 3/3 on the CD level. it's all over there if you want to see it.

[sailingaway]

you're a mod, it's better to have it up and have it taken down than not.

There's a bunch of info over there on daily paul if you want to see it. the numbers over there aren't what we think they might be. CDs where we were thought to have won 10 of 10 of the at larges in that CD didn't give us 3/3 on the CD level. it's all over there if you want to see it.

a bunch of it is wrong. by the end we had worked out that the 10 of 10 bit refered to that CDs vote on the at large delegates-- all CDs voted on an entire slate of 10 and the 10 with the most votes total won. Our whole SLATE won but I understand only6 of them were RP supporters, 3 Santa and 1 Grinch. Santa and Grinch have 3 and 1 bound delegates from that state from the primary so we put together a coalition slate vote where they got to fill those seats with actual supporters of the candidates, and we got the three bound to Ron and the three at large bound to Romney the rest were bound to Romney but were filled as to people, CD by CD.

[parocks]

a bunch of it is wrong. by the end we had worked out that the 10 of 10 bit refered to that CDs vote on the at large delegates-- all CDs voted on an entire slate of 10 and the 10 with the most votes total won. Our whole SLATE won but I understand only6 of them were RP supporters, 3 Santa and 1 Grinch. Santa and Grinch have 3 and 1 bound delegates from that state from the primary so we put together a coalition slate vote where they got to fill those seats with actual supporters of the candidates, and we got the three bound to Ron and the three at large bound to Romney the rest were bound to Romney but were filled as to people, CD by CD.

Thanks for the info. Do we anticipate that the 3 Santas and 1 Grinch will vote for Ron Pauls name to be placed into nomination? Do we think that Oregon will be one of the 5? We'll need, I think, 2 of those 4 to get the 15.

[sailingaway]

I think the precise numbers might be part of what they are holding close to their chest. If the number is close and the bad guys fill all the alternates, though, it is going to be super important to get our delegates to Tampa.

[ClydeCoulter]

I'm going to have to take some asprin. Tampa is such a "mystery" with all that's going on. But I am willing to wait to see the results if it benefits our delegates. But my heart just may need some asprin to get there with all of this suspense. And, I had really told myself some time back to stop hoping (spelling?, hope-ing) about anything in life, but we really do need Ron, so I'll hope for good things to come out of this.

[Jackie Moon]

I think this video is safe to post, it's from a woman that was a PCP in CD1. The video's description is:


"Ron Paul anarchists are seeking to overturn the popular vote of the people across the country and have made it half way to their goal here in Oregon with the election of Ron Paul supporters who's soul goal appears to be to renege on their promise to support the Presidential candidates they have committed to vote for during Oregon's GOP Delegate selection convention on June 23, 2012."

Also pretty sure she admits at the end that their plan was to stall so that the convention wouldn't finish in time, allowing the party to choose the alternates.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZ0nE6F_pMs

[sailingaway]

Do you think she doesn't like us?

[ClydeCoulter]

She claims our people said they were Romney supporters, then revealed later they were for Ron Paul. Do we have people that can reply to that over the internet (like on that youtube channels comments).

[sailingaway]

She claims our people said they were Romney supporters, then revealed later they were for Ron Paul. Do we have people that can reply to that over the internet (like on that youtube channels comments).

OUr people had the vote or her slate would have won. I understand when our guys won the delegates at large slate the people in the CD4 convention went around FOUR TIMES with the Romney slate saying ours was illegitimate and theirs was the right one. I guess initially they hoped it was all a mistake or something.

[RonRules]

Did you guys see this:

Ron Paul Supporter Attacked Trying To Retrieve Stolen Ballots From Oregon CD4 Convention


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

[RonRules]

From the video description:
"Oregon Congressional District 4, Saturday June 23, 2012, Roseburg, Oregon. The convention was shut down improperly by Oregon Republican leaders. The convention was not adjourned and previous motions adopted by the body stated the convention would complete all voting before adjourning for the night. But Republican leaders had their own agenda to complete the voting process of Alternate Delegates by dictatorship of the executive committee. People became furious of the news that the ballots had been stolen from the building, prompting a hunt for the ballots outside. When the ballots were found being loaded into a vehicle a Ron Paul supporter was attacked trying to return the ballots to the building for completion of the voting process."

[parocks]

Did you guys see this:

Ron Paul Supporter Attacked Trying To Retrieve Stolen Ballots From Oregon CD4 Convention


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

awesome. this is one to spread I think.

[RonRules]

awesome. this is one to spread I think.

Like yeah!!!

The actual assault occurred unfortunately off camera. Even with two cameras running the ballot box thief was clearly going to assault again.

[sailingaway]

awesome. this is one to spread I think.

apparently that isn't even the real attack which happened before that. The guy attacked took the best clips he could but had a new phone with preset settings of 30 second video clips so he has to put them together as best he can. This is after the real attack, apparently.

[parocks]

From the video description:
"Oregon Congressional District 4, Saturday June 23, 2012, Roseburg, Oregon. The convention was shut down improperly by Oregon Republican leaders. The convention was not adjourned and previous motions adopted by the body stated the convention would complete all voting before adjourning for the night. But Republican leaders had their own agenda to complete the voting process of Alternate Delegates by dictatorship of the executive committee. People became furious of the news that the ballots had been stolen from the building, prompting a hunt for the ballots outside. When the ballots were found being loaded into a vehicle a Ron Paul supporter was attacked trying to return the ballots to the building for completion of the voting process."

I didn't see the "attack", but we did see the ballots in the parking lot, and she did return the ballots to the counting room.

[WhistlinDave]

I would like the title of the video a lot more if the attack was caught on camera... Clearly though the guy was agitated and I believe if the camera hadn't been rolling he would've continued.

This is more of the usual... Amazing how they think they can cheat and get away with it.

[RonRules]

I notified the Lawyers for Ron Paul and gave them a link to the video.

If people reading this thread were present and witnessed the attack or other anomalies, please contact David Callihan of Lawyers for RP.

[parocks]

apparently that isn't even the real attack which happened before that. The guy attacked took the best clips he could but had a new phone with preset settings of 30 second video clips so he has to put them together as best he can. This is after the real attack, apparently.

I hadn't heard of the "attack". I think the story of

1) saying "oh, we don't have ballots any more and we have to adjourn"

2) and then just walking right out there and stopping her.

and

3) returning the ballots to a room where they're all clearly counting ballots

really really really tells the story of them being caught cheating. These pictures really tell 1000 words.

I'm not big on the assault angle as much. The story is cheating. And that ballot stealer taking the ballots back. If there was a reason she had the ballots in the parking lot, I'm not sure why she brought them back into the building. I think Ben Swann will like this footage.

[No1butPaul]

FN WOW! WOW, WOW, WOW, WOW, WOW! This just makes me ill. Only a matter of time before someone was caught red-handed like this. I'm so happy about that! GO LFRP!!!!!

[WhistlinDave]

I hadn't heard of the "attack". I think the story of

1) saying "oh, we don't have ballots any more and we have to adjourn"

2) and then just walking right out there and stopping her.

and

3) returning the ballots to a room where they're all clearly counting ballots

really really really tells the story of them being caught cheating. These pictures really tell 1000 words.

I'm not big on the assault angle as much. The story is cheating. And that ballot stealer taking the ballots back. If there was a reason she had the ballots in the parking lot, I'm not sure why she brought them back into the building. I think Ben Swann will like this footage.

I agree completely -- if there was an assault, then I hope the police were called and took a report. The guy doesn't look like he was hurt, so that probably didn't happen. If that's the case, and there was no police report made, then the assault angle is probably more of a waste of time than anything. BUT -- This video clearly shows cheating going on. (Yet again.)

[sailingaway]

I agree completely -- if there was an assault, then I hope the police were called and took a report. The guy doesn't look like he was hurt, so that probably didn't happen. If that's the case, and there was no police report made, then the assault angle is probably more of a waste of time than anything. BUT -- This video clearly shows cheating going on. (Yet again.)

I think the assault was more on the video camera/phone in terms of striking it

[No1butPaul]

I didn't see the "attack", but we did see the ballots in the parking lot, and she did return the ballots to the counting room.

She told Dale that Alan/Allen said to take the ballots back ... so my question, who is Alan??? If he was the one that told them to take the ballots back, he was probably the one that told them to take them away in the first place.

[RonRules]

I agree completely -- if there was an assault, then I hope the police were called and took a report. The guy doesn't look like he was hurt, so that probably didn't happen.

I'm OK with using cheating as the main angle, but:

Technically an assault did occur on video:

Definition: "An assault is carried out by a threat of bodily harm coupled with an apparent, present ability to cause the harm."

"There must be a reasonable fear of injury. The usual test applied is whether the act would induce such apprehension in the mind of a reasonable person."

That all occurred on the video you watched. Couple that with the statement from the videographer that he was assaulted prior to the video footage, there is a strong case for assault here.

This is technically an assault. Touching or harm is not required:
http://i49.tinypic.com/34ga3p3.png

Being that this was related to voting and elections, it's a 5 year Federal prison term for guys that do that. If the situation was turned around and a Ron Paul supporter did that, I guarantee you that the cops would be there and he'd be in jail waiting for sentencing.

[sailingaway]

I'm OK with using cheating as the main angle, but:

Technically an assault did occur on video:

Definition: "An assault is carried out by a threat of bodily harm coupled with an apparent, present ability to cause the harm."

"There must be a reasonable fear of injury. The usual test applied is whether the act would induce such apprehension in the mind of a reasonable person."

That all occurred on the video you watched. Couple that with the statement from the videographer that he was assaulted prior to the video footage, there is a strong case for assault here.

This is technically an assault. Touching or harm is not required:
http://i49.tinypic.com/34ga3p3.png

Being that this was related to voting and elections, it's a 5 year Federal prison term for guys that do that. If the situation was turned around and a Ron Paul supporter did that, I guarantee you that the cops would be there and he'd be in jail waiting for sentencing.

What you are quoting is the tort, civil definition. That is what you use to sue someone.

The criminal definition required contact, I believe.

[Pisces]

From what I remember from the Business Law class I took in college, threatening bodily harm is assault. Actually making contact and causing bodily harm is battery.

[devil21]

Battery is physical harm. Assault can be aggressive behavior, usually with a verbal aspect. Sometimes it's even verbal actions alone. (Pisces above beat me to it by moments)

Glad that video made it to the net. That's the first time I've seen a video of the cheaters caught red handed. Definitely make sure that video gets saved many times offline.

Im still trying to understand exactly what happened on that video. Is the aggressive man the state GOP rep the chair was talking about? Or was it the woman in the yellow shirt as the state GOP rep? Either one must be pretty high up the GOP ladder in Oregon so this could get interesting. Especially if it's the man.

[RonRules]

What you are quoting is the tort, civil definition. That is what you use to sue someone.

The criminal definition required contact, I believe.

I was thinking in terms of the criminal definition. I looked up the California definition:

Penal Code 240 PC

California law defines an "assault" under Penal Code 240 PC as an unlawful attempt... coupled with a present ability...to commit a violent injury upon another person.

Simply put, it means performing an act that is likely to result in the application of force to another person.

Because California assault law doesn't require an actual injury, it's easy for people to be falsely accused of (and wrongfully arrested for) this offense. As former prosecutors and law enforcement officers, we understand exactly how to investigate...and, more importantly, defend...against these types of bogus assault charges.

Someone look up Oregon law!

[Jackie Moon]

She told Dale that Alan/Allen said to take the ballots back ... so my question, who is Alan??? If he was the one that told them to take the ballots back, he was probably the one that told them to take them away in the first place.

I'm pretty sure she is talking about Allen Alley, Oregon Republican Party Chairman.

http://mittromneycentral.com/uploads/Romney-listens-to-OR-GOP-Chairmian-allen-alley-at-fundraiser-at-home-of-John-and-Kim-bradley-West-Hills-OR-Photo-by-Rom-supporter-Rep-Shawn-Lindsay-R-Hillsboro-July-11-2011.jpg


I wonder who he supports?


Mitt Romney listens to Oregon GOP Chairman Allen Alley at a Romney fundraiser held at the home of John & Kim Bradley (West Hills, OR) on July 11, 2011.

This is from part of a letter to him from Sharlyn Tipton, PCP from Roseburg in CD4:


Next, we find out that the ballots are gone! OK, fine. We are at a college. We can find blank paper and hand write the names of our chosen delegates. Come to find out not just the blank ballots are gone, but the completed ballots with all of our previous votes have been taken by Terri Moffett of the ORP.

I was in shock! How dare she take our ballots when we are still in session? Who gave her the right to remove those votes? I stood up and asked Fred Dayton, Jr. Vice-Chair of CD4, “Under whose authority did she take our ballots?” Fred answered that she is the liaison to CD4 from the ORP and that her boss told her to take the ballots. I then asked Fred a follow-up question, “Who is her boss?” His answer was, “Allen Alley.” I thanked Fred and sat down.

[sailingaway]

I was thinking in terms of the criminal definition. I looked up the California definition:

Penal Code 240 PC

California law defines an "assault" under Penal Code 240 PC as an unlawful attempt... coupled with a present ability...to commit a violent injury upon another person.

Simply put, it means performing an act that is likely to result in the application of force to another person.

Because California assault law doesn't require an actual injury, it's easy for people to be falsely accused of (and wrongfully arrested for) this offense. As former prosecutors and law enforcement officers, we understand exactly how to investigate...and, more importantly, defend...against these types of bogus assault charges.

Someone look up Oregon law!

I stand corrected. I thought it was threat plus touching, but it is threat plus ATTEMPT. I knew it didn't require damage, but I knew criminal required more than just apparent ability. Huh. I've had that wrong for a long time.... :o

[No1butPaul]

I'm pretty sure she is talking about Allen Alley, Oregon Republican Party Chairman.

Allen is in BIG trouble...and, he looks like a rat.

[devil21]

So that message above says the order came straight from the state party chairman. Nice.

[RonRules]

Allen is in BIG trouble...and, he looks like a rat.

More like a marmot/groundhog:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HzypOnklG60

[parocks]

She told Dale that Alan/Allen said to take the ballots back ... so my question, who is Alan??? If he was the one that told them to take the ballots back, he was probably the one that told them to take them away in the first place.

That would make perfect sense and is likely true.

[No1butPaul]

That would make perfect sense and is likely true.

She is obviously not the sharpest tool in the box to implicate her boss like that ... I mean, even to go along with such a thing in the first place, but then on video saying, come on Dale, Allen says to bring them (the ballots he told us to steal) back. What in the hell was she thinking?


More like a marmot/groundhog:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HzypOnklG60

Very quirky and funny, and it really does look like Allen! But I guess that was either his twin brother or he was calling his own name looking for his conscience or something.

[parocks]

I notified the Lawyers for Ron Paul and gave them a link to the video.

If people reading this thread were present and witnessed the attack or other anomalies, please contact David Callihan of Lawyers for RP.

RonRules you might want to make a special thread just about this footage.

Caught Red Handed Cheating in Oregon plus Assault.

[WhistlinDave]

More like a marmot/groundhog:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HzypOnklG60

HAHAHAHAAAAAAAA That made me laugh so hard!!! Still laughing!!

Regarding the attack or assault or whatever, I don't doubt that something occurred prior to the filming that could be construed as assault. The reason I said pursuing that angle is probably a waste of time--and I'm talking about if this incident is brought in as evidence in the lawsuit--is because I'm assuming there wasn't a police report made. If the police were called, then great! But if the RP supporter wasn't hurt, and if my guess is correct that no police report was made, then in a court of law I would think bringing this up would probably only hurt the plaintiff's credibility.

Judges don't like it when they perceive litigants are trying to exaggerate or make things into more than what they are. I would think most judges would say, "Well if there was an assault, why were the police not called?" I just think it could do more harm than good, and it would probably be more constructive to focus on the cheating, and throw in the minor assault as a "by the way, this guy was getting physical too, nobody was hurt so it wasn't a big deal but I think if I didn't turn my camera on and what's her name wasn't telling Dale to back down, it could've gotten out of hand." Or something along those lines. Just my opinion...

And again this is predicated on my assumption that no police report was made. If that's incorrect, then disregard the rest. Just thinking in terms of all the Judge Judy I've watched over the years.

[RonRules]

Check out the video on post #39. It needs more views, please distribute.

The ballot box thief was caught red handed.

Note, the actual physical assault occurred before the video starts, but there is plenty of intimidation on video form the GOP perpetrators.

[affa]

That video is... heartbreaking and awesome at the same time. I can't believe how low they'll stoop, and it's apparent many of them have no clue how vile they're being. They might even think they're the 'good guys'. Gross. On the other hand, it's always good when we catch them.

That reference to Allen, combined with phone records, would clearly tie the theft to whoever ordered it, imo (aka Allen Alley, Oregon Republican Party Chairman).

[RonRules]

affa, your PM box is full.

[gary w]

Allen Alley is the chairman of the Oregon Republican party

I am not sure about Dale but I believe Terri Moffett who was the lady in the yellow top has a husband named Dale who has a logging company in Junction City Oregon.

[RonRules]

Allen Alley is the chairman of the Oregon Republican party

Who is "Dale" assaulter and the lady with the yellow shirt?

[gary w]

The lady in questiion who returned the ballots and mentioned Allen and the other man Dale is Terri Moffett ORP Staff Liaison. Second in charge at the CD4 convention behind Chairman Bob Avery

[sailingaway]

The lady in questiion who returned the ballots and mentioned Allen and the other man Dale is Terri Moffett ORP Staff Liaison. Second in charge at the CD4 convention behind Chairman Bob Avery

thank you.

and welcome to the forums, if I didn't welcome you, a year ago....

[RonRules]

Look at 4:02, where yellow shirt lady Terri Moffett tries to intimidate by saying "I will never let you be privileged enough to work next to me". (Doesn't seem like much of a privilege! :))

This is clearly coercion and retaliation. The guy filming should join the Lawyers for Ron Paul lawsuit!


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

If the Lawyers for Ron Paul lawsuit you'll see this:
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B6Z2CIsa-JfkdVh1ZERjV2hoREk/edit?pli=1
Q: Will there be any legal ramifications or risks for witnesses and plaintiffs in submitting evidence and joining this lawsuit? A: Many delegates have voiced their concerns about retaliation by the state GOP or RNC if they participate in this lawsuit, such as being stripped of delegate, or executive member status or being named in another suit as a defendant. These concerns are FALSE and unfounded. In fact, the opposite is true. Active witnesses and plaintiffs actually can expect much greater legal protections referred to as “litigation privileges” granted under Constitutionally protected rights to due process. With “litigation privileges,” you will have greater immunity, and your delegate or executive member status, and your right to vote as an unbound delegate will have the extra protection from the courts. As a party to this lawsuit, any attempt to violate your rights will be closely scrutinized, and more harshly punished than if you are not a party to the suit. All delegates are obligated to take legal action when they have been informed of criminal misconduct.

[Jackie Moon]

Pretty good article that gives a history of the Oregon Republican Party and a detailed breakdown of what happened at the conventions. Really cool that the Oregonian decided to run this. The author shows how the party's claim that it was all an innocent mistake is false. Hopefully this will help get the real story out.

http://blog.oregonlive.com/myoregon/2012/06/the_ron_paul_revolution_vs_all.html


The Ron Paul Revolution vs. Allen Alley at the Oregon Republican Party's district conventions

The ORP cannot afford another decade long factional struggle like it endured in the 1990s. It also cannot beat this new generation. Look at the age of the average Precinct Committee Person (PCP) outside the Paul faction compared to their new insurgents. Who will outlast whom? Who will outlive whom? Who will out organize whom? The ORP’s present leadership has a choice to make, and last weekend they chose poorly.


Evidence for the claim that at 5pm there was an intentional attempt by the executive leadership of the ORP to stop the voting so that they could at least appoint their own people as alternate delegates is even more interesting to examine. Historically these conventions have gone way over time due to obvious problems in coordination, begging the question why the rush this year?

More interesting is the way the ORP leadership tried to exceed its authority by shutting things down. Evidence of centrally coordinated behavior undermines the notion this was all an innocent mistake. Under the convention rules Allen Alley had no power to unilaterally stop these conventions, but he and his staff did have phones. It appears that two things happened. 1) Each district chair was told that the other districts decided to shut down at five and were told they can no longer vote unless all five districts participated (a claim not supported by a convention rule). This seems to have been a clever ploy to get each district chair to attempt to convince his members to go home. 2) For safe measure, the ORP leadership told its state staff to grab the unused ballots and leave in the confusion.


There was no legitimate reason for the ORP to violate its own rules, engage in obfuscation after the fact, and alienate its only source of demographic growth. If the point of the ORP were to remain a club for rural Oregonians over the age of 50 to complain about Portland and Salem with no power to do anything about it, then perhaps trying to fend off the influence of what conservatives often dismissed as mere “Paulistas” makes sense. If they want to win however, the ORP needs to give college-educated urban professionals a reason to vote R. In that sense, the rise of Ron Paul should be embraced as a blessing.

[affa]

wow. amazing article, event the comment section is enlightening.

[Lindsey]

Great article. Thanks!