Richard Gilbert: Plaintiffs Wanted So We Can Write-In Ron Paul in All 50 States!

[James_Madison_Lives]

Ballot Access News (http://www.ballot-access.org/2008/10/31/the-hazards-of-getting-a-write-in-vote-for-president-counted/) edited by Richard Winger writes:


No group of voters (except for ex-felons and felons, and residents the District of Columbia, and of the U.S. territorial possessions) is treated worse than voters who cast a write-in vote for president, even if the presidential candidate has filed for write-in status.

States don’t tally any write-in votes for president until December, and sometimes January. Certain areas of the country illegally don’t count them at all. Washington, Oregon, Alaska, and the District of Columbia all refuse to provide a tally for the declared write-in candidates. In the case of the District of Columbia, this is especially egregious, since a D.C. court explicitly ordered such tallies for declared write-in presidential candidates, in 1975, in the aftermath of the Kamins v D.C. Board of Elections lawsuit. Also, in the case of Oregon, the State Supreme Court ruled in 1945 that the Oregon Constitution protects write-in votes.

The issue of write-in votes counting is ripe to be revisited. Why shouldn't write-in votes be counted? If a candidate meets the age and US citizenship requirements for an office, why shouldn't I be able to vote for whomever I want? Rather than the choices foisted upon me by a system as corrupt and rotten as what we just saw at the RNC?

Candidate declarations are arbitrary hurdles. I've been written for town selectman lots of times, and only found out when someone told me. If you don't want the office you simply don't accept it, in the unlikely event that you win.

Now Lawyers for Ron Paul is seeking to ask a federal court just that question.

From my email today. Contact emails provided.

For more details go to:
http://jana-murray.com/richard-gilbert-write-in-lawsuit-2012/


Pepper Draper Urgent Action Needed!!
Let's get Dr. Paul on the ballot in ALL 50 states!!

IF you love Ron Paul, THIS needs 2 GO viral right now! Mr. Richard Gilbert, attorney, is drafting a Federal Lawsuit in the 9th Circuit Supreme Court stating that all states must be equal in our rights to "write in" a candidate of our choosing.

You can be part of this, You MUST send an email to richardattorney AT gmail.com or libertybelle2012 AT gmail.com & give Mr. Richard Gilbert/Pepper Draper your contact info. By doing so you will represent your state as a Plaintiff. You only need to be a registered voter in the state you want to represent and nothing more.

He will be filing in the next couple of days and needs names now. Mr. Gilbert is trying to get Dr. Paul on a write in ballot in all 50 states..

PLEASE COPY & PASTE AND PASS THIS ON!...I just did....OUR Country needs REAL hope and change! RON is our hope on earth! Vote Romney and you will get the same or worse results than what we've seen from Obama! BECOME ACTIVE FOR THE GOOD!

[LibertyEagle]

Oh geez.

[LBennett76]

I heard rumblings of this last week but no one could find the source. I came here looking for something about it and this is the first I've seen it mentioned. At least now I can tell the person who heard this where it came from.
I wish write-ins counted though. My state doesn't count them unless registered.

[sailingaway]

I heard rumblings of this last week but no one could find the source. I came here looking for something about it and this is the first I've seen it mentioned. At least now I can tell the person who heard this where it came from.
I wish write-ins counted though. My state doesn't count them unless registered.

All states count the 'undervote' which is the amount between the number that vote for anyone and the number who vote for President. It is a no confidence, or 'none of the above' vote, imho.

[opal]

Contact info sent - Florida

[ClydeCoulter]

I'm not getting involved in this one with him. I spent way too much time researching the last one, found something really good for him, and he didn't even use it.

[James_Madison_Lives]

I'm not getting involved in this one with him. I spent way too much time researching the last one, found something really good for him, and he didn't even use it.

what did you find?

[opal]

Not even basic contact info?

[CPUd]

what did you find?
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?380736-MAJOR-ANNOUNCEMENT-Lawyers-for-Ron-Paul-Lawsuit-NOTE-Having-the-lawsuit-not-up-4-debate

it's all in there ^^^


Based on the court record from his previous cases, I doubt Gilbert is qualified to take this one on; the scope is simply too great.

[ChristopherShelley]

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?380736-MAJOR-ANNOUNCEMENT-Lawyers-for-Ron-Paul-Lawsuit-NOTE-Having-the-lawsuit-not-up-4-debate

it's all in there ^^^


Based on the court record from his previous cases, I doubt Gilbert is qualified to take this one on; the scope is simply too great.


Yet no one else does. Is that because no one else is actually committed to Paul being president?

Does Gilbert really want him to be president? Is he trying to make it happen and he is incompetent? Or is he "controlled opposition" as some like to say?

Is Paul even interested in being President?

Was he ever? Were either of the campaigns for real?

So many carrots. So many sticks.

[LibertyEagle]

Yet no one else does. Is that because no one else is actually committed to Paul being president?

He's not going to be President. We lost. Badly.

[opal]

He's not going to be President. We lost. Badly.

so.. how does an attempt at ballot access in all 50 states hurt anything?

[Working Poor]

so.. how does an attempt at ballot access in all 50 states hurt anything?

Because it is sucking our energy when we could be focused on the liberty people running for state and local offices

[No1butPaul]

Because it is sucking our energy when we could be focused on the liberty people running for state and local offices

How is that possibly sucking "our" energy ... maybe Gilbert's energy, but he still seems to have a lot. At least enough to make videos.

[PointsOfOrder]

Deleted

[CPUd]

Gilbert can keep suing people for eternity- that's not the issue. The issue is the "getting plaintiffs" part. Between Gilbert's adventures and the incessant pushing for GJ on the other sites (which I believe to be connected), we are beginning to see the results, which include people losing their Committee positions for coming out publicly against the GOP nominee.

I strongly suggest anyone who wishes to maintain their positions in state and local parties to stay far away from this Gilbert character.

[opal]

Because it is sucking our energy when we could be focused on the liberty people running for state and local offices

how much energy does it take to send contact information? A quick email? Gee.. ya think somebody's not gonna get elected because of those 45 seconds

[ChristopherShelley]

Gilbert can keep suing people for eternity- that's not the issue. The issue is the "getting plaintiffs" part. Between Gilbert's adventures and the incessant pushing for GJ on the other sites (which I believe to be connected), we are beginning to see the results, which include people losing their Committee positions for coming out publicly against the GOP nominee.

I strongly suggest anyone who wishes to maintain their positions in state and local parties to stay far away from this Gilbert character.

Why do you believe they are connected? Do you have any evidence, or is your word good enough for everyone else here?


http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?380736-MAJOR-ANNOUNCEMENT-Lawyers-for-Ron-Paul-Lawsuit-NOTE-Having-the-lawsuit-not-up-4-debate

it's all in there ^^^


Based on the court record from his previous cases, I doubt Gilbert is qualified to take this one on; the scope is simply too great.

So you think he's not qualified and he can't get plaintiffs?

What's wrong with supporting Gary Johnson if one believes in him? Or you just don't.

I don't want people to lose any positions they have. I would agree with that. But you are saying there is a clear cut cause/effect from supporting Gilbert or Gary Johnson and people losing their positions? Maybe the GOP is just full of assholes? Or is that not clear to you?

I think, personally, that EVERY FREAKING party, the R, the D and every other letter should be taken over by Liberty people.

I think that all of the criminals in the R and the D should be thrown out.

But, please explain what you are talking about, because if you are going to posit that supporting Gary Johnson or Richard Gilbert is causing people to be removed from the R party, fine, I can accept that. But I won't accept that as an across-the-board reason to support neither of them.

If one wants to not support Richard Gilbert, I completely understand.

If one wants to not support Gary Johnson, I completely understand.

Same for the R take-over strategy.

But why not support them all?

Support GJ to a lesser degree.

Can anyone here actually explain what Gilbert has been doing?

Has he been successful at anything?

At the moment, for me, it certainly doesn't seem like it.

But he is trying. If he is doing something damaging, has it been made clear what that is and to whom?

Why didn't the campaign go after the fraud etc?

There are so many questions and I don't know what good came out of what Gilbert has done. Hopefully to the people who are involved within the R strategy it is obvious that they should not get involved with him, if that is the case.

But for people who aren't, people who aren't running for R seats but who want to see progress in the liberty movement, the liberty movement does not exist only in the R party.

I say to people here, support what and whom you think you should support.

If that's Gilbert, fine. If that's GJ, fine. If that's the R strategy, fine. Don't let other people make up your minds for you.

It's a big world out there. The R party is not "The Big Tent."

Be your own tent.

<3

[CPUd]

Here's one to get you started:



http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc7/413807_459034457470645_985420403_o.jpg

[ChristopherShelley]

If liberty is water, water does not deny gravity.

People are the ones that further liberty, and people cannot just sit around waiting for the "right" candidates, the right strategies, etc. all of the time.

If you like a candidate, or a strategy or whatever, support it before it's gone. If you change your mind, then change your mind.

I am SO FREAKING TIRED of people trying to control this "movement", i.e. other people.

If you are inspired, act.

If you find that you no longer support what you once supported, change direction. Do something new.

I am DONE with the talking in code bulls--t.

I am DONE with carrots and sticks.

Unless I figure that they are worth it.

But I am speaking to those who have doubt about their own instincts. Follow them. If you don't find what you like, then do something different. Or don't.

I am so TIRED of speaking with usernames, people who spend hours tearing something down instead of building something. Trying to control other people's opinions and actions. Not listening sincerely to other people.

If liberty is water, then what's with all of the gd beavers????

[ChristopherShelley]

Here's one to get you started:



http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc7/413807_459034457470645_985420403_o.jpg

Thanks.

[ChristopherShelley]

Here's one to get you started:



http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc7/413807_459034457470645_985420403_o.jpg

Thanks.

[ClydeCoulter]

what did you find?

The following very well argumented case that the whole party process to nominate IS part of the general election (which it is).
(I sent it to sailingaway who sent it to Gilbert, he reponded and thanked her for it and said it fit exactly the case then at hand. But he didn't use it, apparently.)

http://www.thegreenpapers.com/PCom/?20120608-0

[No1butPaul]

Richard Gilbert still needs plaintiffs from:

ALASKA
DELAWARE
D.C.

For anyone that's interested, you just need to email him at richardattorney@gmail.com and say that you are willing.

[opal]

I have a question. This suit is to be filed in the 9th Circuit Supreme Court.. might anyone know why they chose to file in the most liberal court in the country?..... also one that has a HUGE state with write in access? Wouldn't it make more sense to file in a district with more states that don't have write in ballot access? Or does that just make too much sense?

[Barrex]

I wish him good luck....

I wish that some people here start (well it is kind of started...maybe get involved in) new "project" regarding these issues....

I wish I wish....

[ClydeCoulter]

I wish him good luck....

I wish that some people here start (well it is kind of started...maybe get involved in) new "project" regarding these issues....

I wish I wish....

Barrex, give me your impression of this article: http://www.thegreenpapers.com/PCom/?20120608-0

[Barrex]

Barrex, give me your impression of this article: http://www.thegreenpapers.com/PCom/?20120608-0

Dont like the color.

wait Ill read it ;)

Edit:
Ok I read few of them (linked one to another). It seems familiar but I dont think I read it before. I agree with his conclusions. Not because of his article. I had same standpoint on this before. He just took time to make well written arguments based on laws and precedents. I didnt know about O'Brien v. Brown
but I read other stuff. I hoped that he will touch on Ray v Blair (constitutional to force pledge on electors& not constitutional/electors are not delegates I know but.../)too... but there are obviously too many precedents and previous cases to include them all.

Were you looking at something specific?

[ClydeCoulter]

Dont like the color.

wait Ill read it ;)

smart a$$ :)

[No1butPaul]

We now have Plaintiffs in ALL 50 States

[ClydeCoulter]

Dont like the color.

wait Ill read it ;)

Edit:
Ok I read few of them (linked one to another). It seems familiar but I dont think I read it before. I agree with his conclusions. Not because of his article. I had same standpoint on this before. He just took time to make well written arguments based on laws and precedents. I didnt know about O'Brien v. Brown
but I read other stuff. I hoped that he will touch on Ray v Blair (constitutional to force pledge on electors& not constitutional/electors are not delegates I know but.../)too... but there are obviously too many precedents and previous cases to include them all.

Were you looking at something specific?

Yes, the way he demonstrated how the party process to nominate a nominee is part of the general election process. The argument is for the federal laws to apply to the state and, at minimum, the national convention (ie, 42 USC 1971)

[Barrex]

Yes, the way he demonstrated how the party process to nominate a nominee is part of the general election process. The argument is for the federal laws to apply to the state and, at minimum, the national convention (ie, 42 USC 1971)

Like I said I agree with him on that. It is good basis for any further lawsuit (in unlikely event grassroots start something). On the other hand Supreme Court decided that binding electors (similar) is ok. So Richard would have problems in his attempt to unbind delegates. Problem from the start was lack of time and lack of resources and lack of organization (this is killing me personally). He took enormous task on him self for free, task that would need specialist with army of researchers and assistants so I kept my mouth shut and I wanted him to win that case... He could have asked for help but he didnt (and use what he got). Could have done many things differently but he didnt. Well grassroots could/should have done things differently too. Pursue these things as they arise and not wait for someone to do it for them.... water under the bridge...


Future:
I am strong "believer" that party process IS part of general election and that election laws apply to it. There is more than enough facts to back it up. That article gives good explanation why and how. There are more arguments for "our" position but he did good job explaining it.

There are many ways to start solving this: 1 large lawsuit or many small ones where "local" people sue "local" GOP and those who were involved. Combination etc. Every path people choose got advantages and flaws. The one path that will lead to fail 100% is not doing anything.
How many charges were pressed?
How many lawsuits? I heard of one "local" and those that RG started.


Problem: It seems that people gave up. How to activate people? How to make them act?

Full disclosure: I am somewhat like that guy Monk (private detective). I like my stuff organized so I know where I am, where am I standing, what are my resources etc... Order and organization...everything that this forum is not :D so I often have to remind my self of that fact.

[svf]

so.. how does an attempt at ballot access in all 50 states hurt anything?

What nobody ever seems to mention around here is that Ron Paul apparently does not want to be a write-in candidate for president. If he wanted to launch a national write-in campaign, he and his organization could easily mobilize to do this and fulfill all the various applicable state requirements needed so his write-in votes would actually count. He didn't do this in 2008 and isn't doing this in 2012 either.

And if you recall, in 2008 when the Montana Constitution Party managed to get him on the ballot, Ron Paul actually asked to have his name REMOVED...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul_presidential_campaign,_2008#Post-campaign_activities


Paul requested on September 11 that Montana take his name off the ballot, stating that he did not "seek nor consent" to the Montana Constitution Party's nomination.

What does this tell you, folks? Why are you trying to force the man into something he doesn't apparently want to do? Not very libertarian, is it...?

[opal]

Interesting. That is one question I don't think I've ever heard asked in an interview.. if the good doctor actually WANTS to be president or his campaign was ONLY to open people's eyes to their loss of Liberty.

[ClydeCoulter]

Like I said I agree with him on that. It is good basis for any further lawsuit (in unlikely event grassroots start something). On the other hand Supreme Court decided that binding electors (similar) is ok. So Richard would have problems in his attempt to unbind delegates. Problem from the start was lack of time and lack of resources and lack of organization (this is killing me personally). He took enormous task on him self for free, task that would need specialist with army of researchers and assistants so I kept my mouth shut and I wanted him to win that case... He could have asked for help but he didnt (and use what he got). Could have done many things differently but he didnt. Well grassroots could/should have done things differently too. Pursue these things as they arise and not wait for someone to do it for them.... water under the bridge...


Future:
I am strong "believer" that party process IS part of general election and that election laws apply to it. There is more than enough facts to back it up. That article gives good explanation why and how. There are more arguments for "our" position but he did good job explaining it.

There are many ways to start solving this: 1 large lawsuit or many small ones where "local" people sue "local" GOP and those who were involved. Combination etc. Every path people choose got advantages and flaws. The one path that will lead to fail 100% is not doing anything.
How many charges were pressed?
How many lawsuits? I heard of one "local" and those that RG started.


Problem: It seems that people gave up. How to activate people? How to make them act?

Full disclosure: I am somewhat like that guy Monk (private detective). I like my stuff organized so I know where I am, where am I standing, what are my resources etc... Order and organization...everything that this forum is not :D so I often have to remind my self of that fact.

Likewise here. But I'm not a lawyer. I'm not familiar with cases involving voting rights.

I found that greenpapers article after a whole lot of searching and reading. At first, I almost skipped over it, since it didn't start out talking about case law or voting rights. But for some reason, I kept reading it, and "bam" it included what I had been searching for laid our pretty well. It also included stuff that I had been reading up to that point, but condensed down and logically laid out.

(1) I think what we are after is to keep in tact the delegate/caucus process. We don't need no stinkin' democracy. Which is where it seems things are headed with the "bound delegates" thing. (2) But, also, rules need to be followed. I would not join in on even a simple game that the rules are not solid on, much less an election for offices that make or execute rules/laws.

Do you have any more input that you can give?

[sailingaway]

What nobody ever seems to mention around here is that Ron Paul apparently does not want to be a write-in candidate for president. If he wanted to launch a national write-in campaign, he and his organization could easily mobilize to do this and fulfill all the various applicable state requirements needed so his write-in votes would actually count. He didn't do this in 2008 and isn't doing this in 2012 either.

And if you recall, in 2008 when the Montana Constitution Party managed to get him on the ballot, Ron Paul actually asked to have his name REMOVED...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul_presidential_campaign,_2008#Post-campaign_activities



What does this tell you, folks? Why are you trying to force the man into something he doesn't apparently want to do? Not very libertarian, is it...?

He couldn't do that before all the deadlines ran and still run for GOP nominee. Now that is is over and we are deciding where to vote, those of us who want to vote for Ron would prefer his votes be counted, but none of the above is still a count.

Ron neither encourages nor discourages this. He leaves it up to the individual. In the case of Montana, he had endorsed Chuck Baldwin and the Constitution Party putting Ron on the ballot created a state where Baldwin didn't have ballot access.

[James_Madison_Lives]

He couldn't do that before all the deadlines ran and still run for GOP nominee. Now that is is over and we are deciding where to vote, those of us who want to vote for Ron would prefer his votes be counted, but none of the above is still a count.

Ron neither encourages nor discourages this. He leaves it up to the individual. In the case of Montana, he had endorsed Chuck Baldwin and the Constitution Party putting Ron on the ballot created a state where Baldwin didn't have ballot access.

This is true. Ron doesn't tell people who to vote for. If you want to write him in, write him in.

[James_Madison_Lives]

What nobody ever seems to mention around here is that Ron Paul apparently does not want to be a write-in candidate for president. If he wanted to launch a national write-in campaign, he and his organization could easily mobilize to do this and fulfill all the various applicable state requirements needed so his write-in votes would actually count. He didn't do this in 2008 and isn't doing this in 2012 either.

And if you recall, in 2008 when the Montana Constitution Party managed to get him on the ballot, Ron Paul actually asked to have his name REMOVED...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul_presidential_campaign,_2008#Post-campaign_activities



What does this tell you, folks? Why are you trying to force the man into something he doesn't apparently want to do? Not very libertarian, is it...?

It tells you that was 2008 and this is 2012, after the GOP stole the nomination from Paul, beat his delegates, and changed the every time it looked like he could make headway.

[libertariantexas]

so.. how does an attempt at ballot access in all 50 states hurt anything?

It seems pretty pointless when Ron Paul himself has said time and time again that he is NOT interested.

[No1butPaul]

Ron Paul is one of us, he represents us, therefore our write-in vote for Ron Paul is how we stand up and make our voices heard. Anyway, George Washington did not want to be president either.

[tangent4ronpaul]

(2) But, also, rules need to be followed. I would not join in on even a simple game that the rules are not solid on, much less an election for offices that make or execute rules/laws.


I read ^^^ and my first thought was "Why the hell not?" OK, this is out of the box/devils advocate type stuff, but sometimes playing with dynamic rules yields interesting results. A computer program is a set of rules, so I was instantly reminded of REDCODE/CORE WARS, as well as self-reproducing, self recognizing, self-healing and self modifying code. That and some early worm experiments.

CORE WARS is a programming game where you write a program as does the opposite player and you release them into a virtual memory pool where you can have no control of it. It then goes out and does what you told (programmed) it to do. Both programs take turns executing operations. The ultimate goal is to break your opponents program. This started out kind of like a game of "battleship" where you both have pegboards and ships and try to sink the opponents by calling out F6 or whatever, but in this case writing a location in memory. Then people started copying their programs so there were more than one running at once and all of your programs dying was less likely. Then they started identifying the other code and stealing instructions from it, wrapping it in their own code and seeing if it did anything interesting...

This eventually led to a field called evolutionary computing where you have a program that writes other programs and these programs are tested to see if they give the desired output. Some very fast algorithm have been discovered this way. Usually things that are completely non-intuitive to humans. An important lesson here is that you can paint yourself into a corner. The strategies or genetic code of what you are trying can hit an end branch and must be stepped back from 2-3 cycles sometimes in order to make future progress.

So what does this have to do with campaigning and the political fight? Quite a bit actually... I'm tossing it out there as a Gedankenexperiment. A perspective different than common to think about our current situation from. Remember when our "opposition" adopted what we call "4th generation warfare" and having a standing army was suddenly a detriment? Remember that many of the same mathematical formulas show up in very diverse fields. A good strategy might be predicting when the opposition is about to paint themselves into a corner or recognizing that they already have done so.

To get you started on this mindset:

As to case law or laws enacted by Congress, you can easily see that the country has painted itself into a corner everywhere! Each case/new law placed on the shoulders of a older law, and so on. I mean we have Corporate personhood because of a clerical error!

When we had a bunch of YAL volunteers last cycle and put them up in an unheated summer camp and someone came with the flu... What kind of a strategy/program were we running?

What about when Paul did his own show next door to debates he wasn't invited to? When he basically hijacked their media and audience and upstaged them? What kind of program?

When the RNC was breaking rules and our delegates responded and it went slightly viral and the media ran with some of it - what does that redcode program look like for both sides?

I'm just trying to get people to think about things differently.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Core_War

-t

[ClydeCoulter]

...
...
...
I'm just trying to get people to think about things differently.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Core_War

-t

I read the wiki on CoreWars, and some of the external links. I'll have to let that digest. Thanks.

[ClydeCoulter]

Ron Paul is one of us, he represents us, therefore our write-in vote for Ron Paul is how we stand up and make our voices heard. Anyway, George Washington did not want to be president either.

No1butPaul, do what you think/feel is the best thing for you to do. I fully support it, and others (maybe me too) will be doing the same.

We spend an awful lot of time trying to defend what we want to do, around here. Why? This is the place where we can be who were are, without pressure. Wanna be a rockstar for liberty? Okay. Wanna run for office? Okay. Wanna support someone until there is no chance whatsoever even with a miracle they can win? Depends (what?)

Discussion on why to do something is a good thing. I enjoy opinions and facts being delivered in discussion. It's good to be able to see things from different points of view. But, a lot of times it becomes offense and defense type posts. Once it turns into that, then it is no longer constructive.

I think we are going to have to get to the point we just ignore the nay-sayers. And I'm not saying anyone is "only" a nay-sayer. Some are pro-stay-in-GOP but are nay-sayers about other things, some are pro-get-out-of-GOP and nay-sayers about pro-stay-in-GOP.

Can we just start respecting one another's differences in what we think about or want to do as individuals? Please?

[James_Madison_Lives]

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?380736-MAJOR-ANNOUNCEMENT-Lawyers-for-Ron-Paul-Lawsuit-NOTE-Having-the-lawsuit-not-up-4-debate

it's all in there ^^^


Based on the court record from his previous cases, I doubt Gilbert is qualified to take this one on; the scope is simply too great.

Except Gilbert won his delegates case, asking the court to confirm that all delegates are unbound. So he is one for one. NEWS UPDATE: CASE BEING FILED NOW, ALL 50 STATES REPRESENTED.

[opal]

I could have sworn that I posted yesterday about the case being filed.. wonder which thread I put that in since it's not here.
*facepalm*

[Barrex]

Do you have any more input that you can give?

At this point our problem is not legal in nature it is organizational...Our imaginary lawyer cant prepare case for assault if delegate wasnt assaulted or prepare for x if plaintiff got nothing to do with situation x....

It makes no sense to jump to last step (writing lawsuit) without having any plaintiffs, evidence etc.


Except Gilbert won his delegates case, asking the court to confirm that all delegates are unbound. So he is one for one. NEWS UPDATE: CASE BEING FILED NOW, ALL 50 STATES REPRESENTED.

Thanks for update.

I wish good luck to Richard.

With lack of any progress it is becoming obvious that he is this movements best chance regarding lawsuit. Not because he is good (or bad) lawyer but because simple fact he is acting while entire grassroots are talking or not even that. I think he got a fair chance. Now he got more time and resources at his disposal. I know that many people are hostile toward him but I really am carefull not to say anything bad about him (and I could) because he is doing his best and doing it for free. That is more than I am doing and it would be (cant find correct word for it:evil, unethical...) from me to spit/criticize him without offering any real alternative or doing anything about it.

[opal]

I am so hoping that this gets on the docket before the end of the month.. I'd even get new boots to go boots on the ground and spread the word. (the old boots make corns)

[No1butPaul]

USA_Patriot_Press ‏@USA_Free_Press

@tweetamiracle We need volunteer process servers for SD WV and TX. Please find volunteers to bring the docs to their AG's office (to serve on Monday 9/24)

[opal]

ruh roh...

Dear Plaintiffs,

We had many of our Committed Volunteer Process Servers who backed out or who have not returned phone calls to serve papers to the Atty Generals. We have these states that need to be served on Monday or these states will have to be dropped from the Lawsuit. There have been offers to pay for a professional server, but when we discussed this lawsuit, it had to be all volunteers who would participate. We compromised on one last week, but we cannot and will not compromise on any more, even though there have been generous offers.


So we need to see if one of you will take the time to print the docs, go down and serve your Atty General's office? Its simple, you just leave the papers at the front desk, asking the name of the person you are leaving them with and note the time. when you are done email me who that person and the time. Done!


You will need to print all the SACV docs from this link

http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cosmic-web.us%2Ffiles%2FAttachments_2012_09_30.zip&h=_AQHUGQkW (http://www.google.com/url?q=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fl.php%3Fu%3D http%253A%252F%252Fwww.cosmic-web.us%252Ffiles%252FAttachments_2012_09_30.zip%26 h%3D_AQHUGQkW&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNHdmNaU-X--CnK2IH-S13133vsJeQ)





Alaska, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Kentucy, Kansas, Massachusetts, Ohio, South Carolina, Utah, Vermont, Wyoming


Whatever state is not done by the end of the day will have to be dropped. so if you cant do it by no someone who will, please send them this info.


Thank you


Richard Gilbert and Pepper Draper

[Barrex]

Shame.

[opal]

I just got this in my email

Dear Plaintiffs,

Richard has received information about the Judge's position on our argument of the Voting Right Act. We have successfully negotiated with 8 states to unconditionally count and record the write-in votes.

contact information was included for about half an hour from now


These are the states we have a full settlement with Iowa, New Hampshire, Oregon, Washington DC, Wyoming, Wisconsin, Maryland, Washington


Richard is asking for the Plaintiffs to be on this very short notice call, if you are able to discuss what we need to do moving forward.

[sailingaway]

I have to say I know for a fact at least a some of those already counted write ins, NH, Iowa, and Washington (but only if it changes the results.) I don't know what he got that wasn't there, on those states, but maybe he will tell you on the phone.

I wish he'd let the CA plaintiffs be electors for Ron though, since that is a sure bet. But maybe he has his reasons not to....?

[ClydeCoulter]

I have to say I know for a fact at least a some of those already counted write ins, NH, Iowa, and Washington (but only if it changes the results.) I don't know what he got that wasn't there, on those states, but maybe he will tell you on the phone.

I wish he'd let the CA plaintiffs be electors for Ron though, since that is a sure bet. But maybe he has his reasons not to....?

You mean he advised the plantiffs in CA _not_ to be delegates for the write-in?

[sailingaway]

You mean he advised the plantiffs in CA _not_ to be delegates for the write-in?

That is my understanding but it is through a longish grapevine and might have lost something in translation.

[ClydeCoulter]

That is my understanding but it is through a longish grapevine and might have lost something in translation.

How many plantiffs in CA? Any idea?

[sailingaway]

How many plantiffs in CA? Any idea?

I think it is only something like 5 in each state. Even so, five is five.

[opal]

ok.. I listened to Richard's remarks and attempted to ask a question. He did a rather lengthy dissortation. <--spelled that word 4 ways.. firefox still doesn't like it.

Evidently, some plaintiff posted the contact call information somewhere for non plaintiffs to call in - and one did.. talked over everybody else.. pissed Richard off (me too - hope it wasn't someone from this board)
Richard had to have the gang muted so he could read this guy raw - wasting time for the rest of us. I attempted several times to ask questions - two very short answer questions and could not get a word in edge wise - this turd called back after being told in no uncertain terms to get out - the call is for plaintiffs not the general public. I had to hang up as Richard ended his second tirade into the same guy.
I'm livid ATM..

general gist of the call Romney is evil.. we must defeat him at all costs. For a few minutes there I thought he was going to suggest voting for Obama. He said a few not so flattering things about GJ - but reeeeeeeeally laid into Romney.

As for the case.. it was hard to follow actual case information over rhetoric and non case experiences.. I think it's we have agreements with 8 states and possibly up to 12 by Tuesday of this week.
The states that have agreed to count RP votes - if won would total 270 electoral votes for RP against 206 for Romney. (Yes.. I wrote those numbers down) There was no mention about Obama winning any electoral votes.. not sure of how those figures came about.

The other thing case related was that the judge granted extensions (evidently illegally) so things in some states won't be taken care of in time for the election.

I guess I didn't completely understand the whole gist of the case - I thought this was not ONLY for this election for Ron Paul write in votes to count, but going forward, for all presidential elections in the future also for write in votes to be tallied and counted. From this call.. I did not get that impression.

[SneakyFrenchSpy]

I was (not so) amazed to find that out for such an ambiguous character, but Richard Gilbert has donated a lot of money to Democrats in the past (DNC, Obama, Franken, Bayh, Baldwin, Udall etc...). Take that info for what it's worth and go look @ the FEC records for Richard Gilbert in San Francisco if you don't believe me.

http://www.fec.gov/finance/disclosure/advindsea.shtml

[WarAnonymous]

I am so confused... All he ever mentions is Romney as if the presidential race is Romney vs. Romney. I asked him about Obama once on one of his calls, why he doesn't ever lay into Obama (who at the time was projected to beat Romney) and I got no response other than the "Romney Crime Syndicate." I am not trying to be a sir negative but realistic... RP is not going to be president in 2012... I also don't know why he started saying GJ is NWO, etc. etc. People need to focus on winnable elections, there is little time.

[Barrex]

I was (not so) amazed to find that out for such an ambiguous character, but Richard Gilbert has donated a lot of money to Democrats in the past (DNC, Obama, Franken, Bayh, Baldwin, Udall etc...). Take that info for what it's worth and go look @ the FEC records for Richard Gilbert in San Francisco if you don't believe me.

http://www.fec.gov/finance/disclosure/advindsea.shtml

Not the same persons. Both are lawyers and both live in same area but not same persons.

I checked it out when original lawsuit was starting.

[PatriotOne]

I just got this in my email

Dear Plaintiffs,

Richard has received information about the Judge's position on our argument of the Voting Right Act. We have successfully negotiated with 8 states to unconditionally count and record the write-in votes.

contact information was included for about half an hour from now


These are the states we have a full settlement with Iowa, New Hampshire, Oregon, Washington DC, Wyoming, Wisconsin, Maryland, Washington


Richard is asking for the Plaintiffs to be on this very short notice call, if you are able to discuss what we need to do moving forward.

Hey Opal. If you participate in the next conferrence call, can you ask Gilbert what brand and model no. of time machine he is using to negotiate allowing voter write-ins with the states? I assume he is using a time machine since voter write ins were already allowed in those states according to their respective Secretary of State literature.

[PatriotOne]

Any word on successful negotiations with the states that didn't already allow write in voting or is Gilbert just been successful negotiating with states that already allowed it? There's only 7 sooooooo.........

Hawaii, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nevada, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and South Dakota.

[opal]

He did say Nevada was not an option thus far. Questions from me were not heard - they were trampped on by a rude non plaintiff