PDA

View Full Version : Jesse Benton resigns as Mitch McConnell's campaign manager




tsai3904
08-29-2014, 04:12 PM
Mitch McConnell's campaign manager resigns after Iowa bribery scandal deepens

Jesse Benton, the campaign manager for U.S. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, will resign his post as a bribery scandal from the 2012 presidential campaign threatens to envelop Benton and become a major distraction for McConnell's campaign.

Benton told the Herald-Leader that he met with McConnell Friday afternoon and offered his resignation, which McConnell "reluctantly accepted."

Benton said he offered his resignation, effective Saturday, with a "heavy heart."

He maintained his innocence, faulting "inaccurate press accounts and unsubstantiated media rumors."

...

More:
http://www.kentucky.com/2014/08/29/3402571_mitch-mcconnells-campaign-manager.html

Brian4Liberty
08-29-2014, 04:16 PM
The Primary is over.

jjdoyle
08-29-2014, 04:22 PM
The Primary is over.

He's running against a Democrat in the general.

Danke
08-29-2014, 04:29 PM
"reluctantly accepted." haha, suuure.

cajuncocoa
08-29-2014, 04:50 PM
resigned? LOL Most likely "fired"

William Tell
08-29-2014, 04:54 PM
This could well be the end of his career in electoral politics. A staffer should never be a liability.

jjdoyle
08-29-2014, 04:57 PM
It's a shame we couldn't get this after the Iowa and New Hampshire losses instead. We would have saved several million dollars, and months of time instead of people like Benton, Hunter, Collins, and others being able to use the campaign to pad their pockets while the campaign was actively lying to supporters about some plan that wasn't really a plan, because somebody had to endorse Romney before the convention, to get a speech.

So much for controlling the "riffraff" when it was within and at the top of Ron Paul 2012, and especially now that 9/11 investigations are being promoted and not buried in "Hot Topics" faster than your average GOP voter changes who they support in the primary. And Ron Paul 2012 continues to look like it was exactly what some of us have been saying it was for years, an inept, incompetent, lying, thieving, corrupt campaign.
STILL sitting on more than $800K as of last month, but I can only imagine how quickly those SUPPORTER funds will vanish in legal fees and FEC fines if this all turns out to be true. Which, I have little doubt it won't turn out true.

RickyJ
08-29-2014, 04:58 PM
This could well be the end of his career in electoral politics. A staffer should never be a liability.
I hope so, he hurt Ron Paul as much as he could, yet Ron Paul managed to do quite well anyway.

William Tell
08-29-2014, 04:59 PM
I hope so, he hurt Ron Paul as much as he could, yet Ron Paul managed to do quite well anyway.

But now he will be known as 'that scandal guy' We shall see how this turns out.

daviddee
08-29-2014, 05:11 PM
...

R.G
08-29-2014, 05:11 PM
McConnell should have said, you can't resign - you're fired! That would look better on Benton's resume.

http://cdn.blackenterprise.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/2010/11/donald-trump-youre-fired.jpg

RickyJ
08-29-2014, 05:18 PM
The Primary is over.

Jesse Benton's career is over. Few care if McConnell or the Dem win.

CPUd
08-29-2014, 05:20 PM
Rand might get him a job phone banking for his Senate campaign.

PaleoPaul
08-29-2014, 05:24 PM
Rand might get him a job phone banking for his Senate campaign.
*rimshot*

phill4paul
08-29-2014, 05:28 PM
But now he will be known as 'that scandal guy' We shall see how this turns out.

I don't think that is how things work. He got Romney anointed. So there is a certain amount of pay back due. He's proven his worth and there will be many other opportunities.

NewRightLibertarian
08-29-2014, 05:44 PM
This could well be the end of his career in electoral politics. A staffer should never be a liability.

We can only hope.

jjdoyle
08-29-2014, 06:09 PM
Peter Schiff predicted all of this here

http://www.internationalman.com/articles/peter-schiff-shares-his-offshore-strategies

Is this link in the right thread? There's nothing in the post about Jesse Benton, or Ron Paul 2012 that I saw. Did I miss it?

Original_Intent
08-29-2014, 06:12 PM
I'll just say this now - my support for Rand is pretty weak - if he gives this snake any position of responsibility in his campaign, I am out. I will support Constitution Party or some independent.

nbruno322
08-29-2014, 06:15 PM
Is this link in the right thread? There's nothing in the post about Jesse Benton, or Ron Paul 2012 that I saw. Did I miss it?

Yeah you are right, I accidentally posted this in the wrong thread. It was supposed to be in the renunciation fee thread. Moving it now.

CPUd
08-29-2014, 06:34 PM
This is his whole statement:



There is no more important cause for both Kentucky, my new home I have come to love, and our country than electing Mitch McConnell Majority Leader of the United States Senate. I believe this deep in my bones, and I would never allow anything or anyone to get in the way.

That includes myself.

Recently, there have been inaccurate press accounts and unsubstantiated media rumors about me and my role in past campaigns that are politically motivated, unfair and, most importantly, untrue. I hope those who know me recognize that I strive to be a man of integrity.

The press accounts and rumors are particularly hurtful because they are false.

However, what is most troubling to me is that they risk unfairly undermining and becoming a distraction to this reelection campaign.

Working for Mitch McConnell is one of the great honors of my life. He is a friend, a mentor and a great man this commonwealth desperately needs. I cannot, and will not, allow any possibility that my circumstances will effect the voters’ ability to hear his message and assess his record. This election is far too important and the stakes way too high.

With a heavy heart, I offered Sen. McConnell my resignation this afternoon and he reluctantly accepted. Effective Saturday, August 30th, I will no longer be the “Team Mitch” campaign manager.
The good news is that most of my work has been done. We have built a top flight team of incredible people that are working tirelessly to ensure Mitch's re-election. They are a finely oiled machine and will not skip a beat without me.

This decision breaks my heart, but I know it is the right thing for Mitch, for Kentucky and for the country.

James 16:33

"I have told you these things, so that in me you may have peace. In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world."

NewRightLibertarian
08-29-2014, 06:42 PM
I still can't believe that there were 'liberty supporters' that actually supported this weasel. More proof that power corrupts, and that politics is a stupid disgusting slimy business.

Cleaner44
08-29-2014, 07:07 PM
This could well be the end of his career in electoral politics. A staffer should never be a liability.

Let's hope that is the case.

RickyJ
08-29-2014, 07:10 PM
He can't even get the bible verse right that he is quoting. It is from John 16:33, not James 16:33. I doubt he opens his Bible much to be so confused between John and James.

NewRightLibertarian
08-29-2014, 07:30 PM
He can't even get the bible verse right that he is quoting. It is from John 16:33, not James 16:33. I doubt he opens his Bible much to be so confused between John and James.

He was a buffoon right down to the final words of his 'resignation' letter in disgrace. At least the guy was consistent!

orenbus
08-29-2014, 07:43 PM
I will be very disappointed if Jesse Benton is a part of Rand Paul 2016

http://cdn.motinetwork.net/demotivationalposters.net/image/demotivational-poster/0811/skeptical-demotivational-poster-1227150109.jpg

phill4paul
08-29-2014, 07:45 PM
...



Anyone who thinks that Jesse Benton will not be a major part in Rand's Campaign is kidding themselves.

HOLLYWOOD
08-29-2014, 07:56 PM
resigns... your politically correct bullshit. Benton has embarrassed on many fronts and hurt the cause(s). Like a rookie doing one shot critical work under OJT.

Keeping Mr Kentucky Kickback in office, McConnell's political entrenchment will span across 7 decades within Washington DC... talk about top "establishment" cronyism.

Weston White
08-29-2014, 08:05 PM
[B]McConnell should have said, you can't resign - you're fired! That would look better on Benton's resume.

Not to one-up you, but:


http://i.imgur.com/57BQK7V.jpg

PaleoPaul
08-29-2014, 08:14 PM
...
I hope Matt Collins was joking when he posted that.

donnay
08-29-2014, 08:24 PM
Very sad...I hope for the sake of Ron Paul's granddaughter he finds another career that will better suit him, like selling cars.

cajuncocoa
08-29-2014, 08:29 PM
http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/736x/54/9f/89/549f89373b26295af1bdd1d00f9ed3c7.jpg

NewRightLibertarian
08-29-2014, 09:42 PM
I hope Matt Collins was joking when he posted that.

He was dead serious. It was a boast.

fr33
08-29-2014, 10:20 PM
Good. Now Rand can get even more serious about winning his campaign without that guy.

green73
08-29-2014, 10:29 PM
I still can't believe that there were 'liberty supporters' that actually supported this weasel. More proof that power corrupts, and that politics is a stupid disgusting slimy business.

And trickles down and poisons the grassroots.

Badger Paul
08-29-2014, 10:34 PM
"I don't think that is how things work. He got Romney anointed. So there is a certain amount of pay back due. He's proven his worth and there will be many other opportunities."

Yeah, I hear there are openings on custodial staff of the Hart Senate Office Building.

Badger Paul
08-29-2014, 10:36 PM
"Anyone who thinks that Jesse Benton will not be a major part in Rand's Campaign is kidding themselves."

How is he going to do that behind bars? Organize a prison caucus?

Got your lawyer yet Collins?

Brian4Liberty
08-29-2014, 11:15 PM
Thank you Reason, for that wonderful headline: :rolleyes:

505500654018654208

green73
08-29-2014, 11:18 PM
Thank you Reason, for that wonderful headline: :rolleyes:

505500654018654208

They're on our side, donchyaknow?

orenbus
08-29-2014, 11:23 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qO0Pgpx_Sms


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLea3x-Iqlg

Brian4Liberty
08-29-2014, 11:33 PM
They're on our side, donchyaknow?

With friends like that...

idiom
08-29-2014, 11:39 PM
http://i.imgur.com/AzSTIEO.gif
http://i.imgur.com/9xuaCvU.gif
http://i.imgur.com/zSq3Qh4.gif

cindy25
08-29-2014, 11:53 PM
after a while he'll end up on Fox or MSNBC

orenbus
08-29-2014, 11:54 PM
Unless Jesse Benton (from his statement today) is saying that the Washington Post is just making it up, it does sound like from their report that the federal investigation is now focusing on Ron Paul 2012 campaign staff in relation to payments made to Kent Sorenson.


One focus by federal prosecutors now appears to be on people involved in Paul’s 2012 operation.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2014/08/28/endorsement-for-play-investigation-that-brought-kent-sorenson-guilty-plea-is-ongoing/

Edit: This story was posted (Thursday) one day before Benton's announcement that he was going to resign.
Edit2: Okay here is the piece in the article that must have prompted Benton to consider resigning:



Jesse Benton, a Republican strategist who is married to Paul’s granddaughter, served as chairman of Paul’s 2012 campaign. He is now running Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s reelection campaign and is expected to play a significant role in a 2016 presidential bid by Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.).

It is unclear if Benton knew about the payments made to Sorenson, but emails published last year by the TheIowaRepublican.com and OpenSecrets.org show that Benton wrote to a Sorenson associate in the fall of 2011, asking if the then-state senator would be “joining our team.”

Neither Benton nor the McConnell campaign returned requests for comment.

extortion17
08-30-2014, 12:07 AM
,,,
Yeah, I hear there are openings on custodial staff of the Hart Senate Office Building.

a perfect job for an operative - keys to every office.

amy31416
08-30-2014, 12:17 AM
Good. Now Rand can get even more serious about winning his campaign without that guy.

And hopefully without Collins. Jesus...birds of a feather.

economics102
08-30-2014, 12:20 AM
Well, this is great news for everyone who was worried Benton would be involved in Rand Paul 2016 -- that seems decidely unlikely now.

amy31416
08-30-2014, 12:21 AM
These fuckheads don't know a goddamned thing about principles...and they don't even know how to fake it. Fat fucking bastard jackasses.

John F Kennedy III
08-30-2014, 12:23 AM
Very sad...I hope for the sake of Ron Paul's granddaughter he finds another career that will better suit him, like selling cars.

Or a lawyer.

John F Kennedy III
08-30-2014, 12:24 AM
He was dead serious. It was a boast.

The only time da collins isn't boasting is when he's begging for money.

orenbus
08-30-2014, 12:30 AM
Just saw Deb's post from the Sorenson plea thread the other day.



Neither Lori Pyeatt, Ron Paul’s granddaughter and the treasurer of his 2012 presidential campaign, nor Jesse Benton, who was Paul’s campaign manager (and is now manager of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s re-election campaign), had responded to requests for comment at the time this post was published.
http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2014/08/former-iowa-senator-pleads-guilty-to-accepting-money-to-back-ron-paul/



This is bad.

The downside here is, you know the media and the feds aren't just going to stop at Jesse Benton, some innocent people are going to get caught up in this. :(

green73
08-30-2014, 12:30 AM
And hopefully without Collins. Jesus...birds of a feather.

Where is Collins when we need his shepherding most?

amy31416
08-30-2014, 12:33 AM
Where is Collins when we need his shepherding most?

I hope he's in prison with his pal Jesse. Wishful thinking.

orenbus
08-30-2014, 12:48 AM
Where is Collins when we need his shepherding most?

Last Activity
08-15-2014 01:01 AM

nobody's_hero
08-30-2014, 10:01 AM
Very sad...I hope for the sake of Ron Paul's granddaughter he finds another career that will better suit him, like selling cars.

For her sake, she probably shouldn't have married the guy in the first place.

NewRightLibertarian
08-30-2014, 10:25 AM
Last Activity
08-15-2014 01:01 AM

Probably lying low as his gravy train sinks. Poor little guy.

Warlord
08-30-2014, 10:37 AM
Probably lying low as his gravy train sinks. Poor little guy.

I hope this is the end of him but some how I doubt it.

cajuncocoa
08-30-2014, 11:22 AM
For old times' sake
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?389767-Tom-Woods-My-Memories-of-Jesse-Benton

puppetmaster
08-30-2014, 11:29 AM
For her sake, she probably shouldn't have married the guy in the first place.

Just because she is related does not make her innocent nor intelligent. Cant just hire all your family and expect them all to be upstanding individuals

PaleoPaul
08-30-2014, 12:17 PM
I hope he's in prison with his pal Jesse. Wishful thinking.


Last Activity
08-15-2014 01:01 AM
He was on Facebook last night talking about some dumb TV show.

pcosmar
08-30-2014, 12:40 PM
Some of us who Supported Ron Paul knew we smelled shit,, we just didn't know who was tracking it in.

Many called this long ago,, and were disparaged for questioning the staff. (it was likely more than one)

It is unfortunate.. but it is history. Ron is not running again.

PaleoPaul
08-30-2014, 12:41 PM
Some of us who Supported Ron Paul knew we smelled shit,, we just didn't know who was tracking it in.

Many called this long ago,, and were disparaged for questioning the staff. (it was likely more than one)

It is unfortunate.. but it is history. Ron is not running again.
But Rand is, and I hope this doesn't hurt him.

jjdoyle
08-30-2014, 12:47 PM
I posted this in another thread on Kent Sorenson pleading guilty yesterday, here it is again for those that don't know and have missed some of the information:

"It's already been reported on some when it originally happened/broke. This is just a continuation of the original story. The FEC is currently investigating the campaign, and there were multiple staffers listed in the complaint to the FEC:
http://theiowarepublican.com/2014/fec-opens-new-investigation-into-ron-paul-2012-campaign-sorenson-payoff/

Which is why I think the campaign is sitting on so much cash still, to probably help fund the defense fund or certain staffers and/or pay any fees/fines. The campaign has been paying one law firm in the D.C. area several thousand dollars every single quarter, SINCE THE CAMPAIGN ENDED. Yet, it refused donation requests by some supporters, and said the amount on hand was over-stated (despite the FEC reports SHOWING us how much they claimed to have). They were lying, and have been lying, for years about a lot. Wasting people's time, and money. So they could get paychecks and nice cushy jobs?

Here are firms that received payment from Ron Paul 2012 just last quarter:
http://www.leclairryan.com/ ($6,000)
http://www.bblawonline.com/ ($19,000)
http://www.arentfox.com/ ($4,900)
http://www.andrewskurth.com/ ($2,900)


NOBODY, and I mean NOBODY, that was in Ron Paul 2012 staff and has continued to defend what was/is a dishonest campaign, should be near Rand in 2016. If anybody wants to listen to an interview, on Ron Paul vs. Ron Paul Inc., here you go:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eh9FbTKRU-E

Not only does he discuss certain individuals by name, but you will also hear how Ron Paul Inc. is trying to filter the "riffraff" at conventions and seminars you may pay to attend. Which is very good to know, BEFORE YOU PAY MONEY, to attend one of them and fill out any paperwork or survey."

The innocents I'm concerned with, are the supporters. Those that gave money and time to a campaign that was helping Mitt Romney win the nomination, after it become apparent they had no chance to win. A campaign that kept begging, pleading, and lying to supporters in emails about what would be done with funds raised. Then having that campaign end abruptly in early June, BEFORE THE CONVENTION. So Rand could endorse Mitt Romney on national TV and get a speaking slot at the RNC?

So, then the Ron Paul 2012 campaign wouldn't even attend PaulFest in Florida, put on by supporters?
So then Jack Hunter could get a job with Rand, after poorly and horribly trying to defend Rand's horrid endorsement of Mitt Romney on RonPaul2012.com, the OFFICIAL campaign website?
So that Jesse Benton could get a job with Mitch McConnell?
So another Ron Paul 2012 staffer could get a job at with the RNC/GOP?

I certainly hope for some that have been banned from RPF over the years for being openly, legitimately, critical of Ron Paul 2012 and those associated with it, that Bryan will now go back and unban those accounts. And try to reach out to those people.
When you have moderators teaming up with people like Matt Collins though, defending him, banning users that called him names, but not banning Matt Collins when he does the exact same in return. It's pathetic.
When you have moderators openly lying about RPF members, name-calling members, deleting posts, not responding to PMs, making false claims about members, and banning members because the moderators apparently hate the truth and can't stand it, or simply don't like the tone of truth. That's pathetic.

At this point, I would actually suggest Bryan rename the forums, or redirect it to LibertyForest or another domain. We have no clue how deep this is going to go, but we do know the names of some being investigated by the FEC, as the first link above shows.

I know some people have absolutely HATED my posts critical about the campaign, but I have been warning about this for a while now.
"Truth will ultimately prevail where there is pains to bring it to light."

CPUd
08-30-2014, 12:53 PM
John Tate too?


Waldron names several people involved in the Paul campaign, directly or indirectly, among those having knowledge of the alleged bribe. They are listed below as they appear in the complaint. PFP 2012 stands for Paul for President 2012:

Jesse Benton, Campaign Chairman, PFP 2012

John Tate, National Campaign Manager

Dimitri Kesari, Deputy National Campaign Manager, PFP 2012

Jedd Coburn, National Communications Director, PFP 2012

Drew Ivers, Iowa Campaign Chairman, PFP 2012

Kevin Wolfswinkel, PFP 2012, Chairperson for Iowa Conservatives Fund PAC

jjdoyle
08-30-2014, 12:55 PM
John Tate too?

Yeah, I also asked in that thread I posted the original comment in, that I wonder if/when he'll resign from C4L because of this?

Carlybee
08-30-2014, 01:20 PM
I posted this in another thread on Kent Sorenson pleading guilty yesterday, here it is again for those that don't know and have missed some of the information:

"It's already been reported on some when it originally happened/broke. This is just a continuation of the original story. The FEC is currently investigating the campaign, and there were multiple staffers listed in the complaint to the FEC:
http://theiowarepublican.com/2014/fec-opens-new-investigation-into-ron-paul-2012-campaign-sorenson-payoff/

Which is why I think the campaign is sitting on so much cash still, to probably help fund the defense fund or certain staffers and/or pay any fees/fines. The campaign has been paying one law firm in the D.C. area several thousand dollars every single quarter, SINCE THE CAMPAIGN ENDED. Yet, it refused donation requests by some supporters, and said the amount on hand was over-stated (despite the FEC reports SHOWING us how much they claimed to have). They were lying, and have been lying, for years about a lot. Wasting people's time, and money. So they could get paychecks and nice cushy jobs?

Here are firms that received payment from Ron Paul 2012 just last quarter:
http://www.leclairryan.com/ ($6,000)
http://www.bblawonline.com/ ($19,000)
http://www.arentfox.com/ ($4,900)
http://www.andrewskurth.com/ ($2,900)


NOBODY, and I mean NOBODY, that was in Ron Paul 2012 staff and has continued to defend what was/is a dishonest campaign, should be near Rand in 2016. If anybody wants to listen to an interview, on Ron Paul vs. Ron Paul Inc., here you go:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eh9FbTKRU-E

Not only does he discuss certain individuals by name, but you will also hear how Ron Paul Inc. is trying to filter the "riffraff" at conventions and seminars you may pay to attend. Which is very good to know, BEFORE YOU PAY MONEY, to attend one of them and fill out any paperwork or survey."

The innocents I'm concerned with, are the supporters. Those that gave money and time to a campaign that was helping Mitt Romney win the nomination, after it become apparent they had no chance to win. A campaign that kept begging, pleading, and lying to supporters in emails about what would be done with funds raised. Then having that campaign end abruptly in early June, BEFORE THE CONVENTION. So Rand could endorse Mitt Romney on national TV and get a speaking slot at the RNC?

So, then the Ron Paul 2012 campaign wouldn't even attend PaulFest in Florida, put on by supporters?
So then Jack Hunter could get a job with Rand, after poorly and horribly trying to defend Rand's horrid endorsement of Mitt Romney on RonPaul2012.com, the OFFICIAL campaign website?
So that Jesse Benton could get a job with Mitch McConnell?
So another Ron Paul 2012 staffer could get a job at with the RNC/GOP?

I certainly hope for some that have been banned from RPF over the years for being openly, legitimately, critical of Ron Paul 2012 and those associated with it, that Bryan will now go back and unban those accounts. And try to reach out to those people.
When you have moderators teaming up with people like Matt Collins though, defending him, banning users that called him names, but not banning Matt Collins when he does the exact same in return. It's pathetic.
When you have moderators openly lying about RPF members, name-calling members, deleting posts, not responding to PMs, making false claims about members, and banning members because the moderators apparently hate the truth and can't stand it, or simply don't like the tone of truth. That's pathetic.

At this point, I would actually suggest Bryan rename the forums, or redirect it to LibertyForest or another domain. We have no clue how deep this is going to go, but we do know the names of some being investigated by the FEC, as the first link above shows.

I know some people have absolutely HATED my posts critical about the campaign, but I have been warning about this for a while now.
"Truth will ultimately prevail where there is pains to bring it to light."

I recall getting lambasted as well when all that went down. I stopped donating to C4L shortly after that too.

jjdoyle
08-30-2014, 01:31 PM
I recall getting lambasted as well when all that went down. I stopped donating to C4L shortly after that too.

Cursed at. Banned. Lied about. Name-called. George Washington was correct (if the quote is from him as I think), "Truth will ultimately prevail where there is pains to bring it to light."
Moderators repeatedly making false statements, deleting posts, sending PMs making false claims. Telling me what I do/don't support, like they're mind readers (about as accurate as mind readers). Despite all that, I continued. And will, until Ron Paul 2012 starts giving refunds to supporters like they should have long ago when asked.

I should have added John Tate to my list though:
Jack Hunter gets job with Rand, after using RonPaul2012.com to defend a horrid endorsement of Mitt Romney.
Jesse Benton gets job with Mitch McConnell.
John Tate gets job at C4L.
Another RonPaul2012 staffer got a job with the GOP/RNC.

Doug Wead is the only one near the top of the campaign that apparently didn't get some cush job after the campaign, did he? Doug Wead was also one of the few staffers (the only one I'm actually aware of now), to interact with supporters, answer emails, etc.

DevilsAdvocate
08-30-2014, 02:19 PM
One of the major problems I had with Ron Paul is that he couldn't lead very well; part of being a leader is being able to manage people. In a way the primaries serve as a test for the leadership capabilities of the respective candidates and their ability to effectively manage an organization. Ron Paul allowed himself to be surrounded with family friends, and less than trustworthy individuals taking advantage of him. In fact, some of the best stuff that was done for the Paul campaign was done by independent activists unaffiliated with the mismanaged central campaign. Jesse Benton was a major symptom of this weakness.

Rand Paul seems like he's better. Although he doesn't have very much leadership experience from his professional career, the guy is a natural. Clearly he knows how to organize people somewhat, although to what extent remains to be seen. I suppose the real test will be seeing the quality of his organization come 2016.

nobody's_hero
08-30-2014, 03:04 PM
Cursed at. Banned. Lied about. Name-called. George Washington was correct (if the quote is from him as I think), "Truth will ultimately prevail where there is pains to bring it to light."
Moderators repeatedly making false statements, deleting posts, sending PMs making false claims. Telling me what I do/don't support, like they're mind readers (about as accurate as mind readers). Despite all that, I continued. And will, until Ron Paul 2012 starts giving refunds to supporters like they should have long ago when asked.

Any time we'd question Jessie Benton's actions, I distinctly remember Matt Collins repeatedly telling people, "Oh you don't know how politics works." —Like there was some great fucking master plan to infiltrate the GOP by playing the game and rubbing elbows and high-fiving and chest bumping every statist politician in Washington.

Well, Benton ain't gonna be doing much elbow-rubbing in a jail cell, and any alleged 'benefit'** he was doing the liberty movement by working for Mitch McConnell has just been shot to hell and back.


In regards to the 'benefit'**:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SvGYCvUmzyw

PaleoPaul
08-30-2014, 03:54 PM
Looks like we can kiss a Mitch endorsement of Rand in 2016 goodbye.

Hope you're happy with yourself, Benton.

cajuncocoa
08-30-2014, 04:14 PM
There is only one Ron Paul. I guess it is too much to have expected he could have possibly surrounded himself with men of the same character as himself

There will always be opportunists hanging around anywhere there is potential for opportunity, and they will take advantage of those with integrity. It happens all the time.

idiom
08-30-2014, 08:40 PM
There is only one Ron Paul. I guess it is too much to have expected he could have possibly surrounded himself with men of the same character as himself

If Ron had one blind spot it was the character of those he surrounded himself with.

satchelmcqueen
08-30-2014, 09:01 PM
I'll just say this now - my support for Rand is pretty weak - if he gives this snake any position of responsibility in his campaign, I am out. I will support Constitution Party or some independent.
same here. if benton is in the campaign, im out. no money, no sign hanging, no word of mouth, nothing. ill be done and out.

orenbus
08-30-2014, 09:08 PM
So I guess this means we aren't going to have a money bomb for Jesse's legal defense fund?

orenbus
08-30-2014, 09:18 PM
I'll just say this now - my support for Rand is pretty weak - if he gives this snake any position of responsibility in his campaign, I am out. I will support Constitution Party or some independent.


same here. if benton is in the campaign, im out. no money, no sign hanging, no word of mouth, nothing. ill be done and out.

Hmm you guys are starting to convince me, if Benton is involved in 2016.

Carlybee
08-30-2014, 09:20 PM
So I guess this means we aren't going to have a money bomb for Jesse's legal defense fund?



3011

satchelmcqueen
08-30-2014, 09:27 PM
Hmm you guys are starting to convince me, if Benton is involved in 2016.

after reading this and now listening to the vid posted "https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eh9FbTKRU-E", i AM DONE if benton or any of these others are involved. that includes collins as well. and thats what fucking hurts me. ive defended collins many times here. i thought he got picked at to much. now, not so. and then to read that some of the mods here were involved in directing the conversation of said topics....i AM DONE if these certain people are involved with rand. DONE!

anyone that knows me personally would shit themselves to hear me say this. people here that know me WILL shit themselves when they see that im serious. this will break the camel in fucking half if these people get involved.

i think i may have to take some time off from the forums for a little bit and see how this plays out. fucking better NOT be true.

orenbus
08-30-2014, 09:32 PM
after reading this and now listening to the vid posted "https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eh9FbTKRU-E", i AM DONE if benton or any of these others are involved.

Yea I'm listening to that interview right now while searching for a video where Benton said "we didn't offer him any money."

Anti Federalist
08-30-2014, 09:41 PM
There is only one Ron Paul. I guess it is too much to have expected he could have possibly surrounded himself with men of the same character as himself

There will always be opportunists hanging around anywhere there is potential for opportunity, and they will take advantage of those with integrity. It happens all the time.

Without trying to sound pretentious, I want to say I understand exactly how Ron gets himself into these positions, as I have found myself in them before as well.

Short version: It is VERY hard to be a "leader", to bark orders and make commands and demand that things happen just as you want, when your whole personality is opposed to authoritarianism.

Anti Federalist
08-30-2014, 09:42 PM
So I guess this means we aren't going to have a money bomb for Jesse's legal defense fund?

Burn...

jjdoyle
08-30-2014, 10:02 PM
So I guess this means we aren't going to have a money bomb for Jesse's legal defense fund?

That was already done by Ron Paul 2012 in February 2012, March 2012, April 2012, and May 2012. And it's probably why Ron Paul 2012 has been, and probably still is, paying those firms I linked above:
"Here are firms that received payment from Ron Paul 2012 just last quarter:
http://www.leclairryan.com/ ($6,000)
http://www.bblawonline.com/ ($19,000)
http://www.arentfox.com/ ($4,900)
http://www.andrewskurth.com/ ($2,900)"

CPUd
08-30-2014, 10:28 PM
What about Doug Stafford? Fusaro seemed to think he is all right.

klamath
08-30-2014, 10:31 PM
Just reinforces my gladness that I didn't fall for the 2012 Ron Paul campaign from before it officially started. I always thought it was just piss poor excutive leadership on Ron's part but after he was elbow deep in trying to rip off ronpaul.com, my thoughts are changing. Remember staffers from Ron Paul 1988 went to jail as well. Something stinks about all of Rons business and campaign endevers. Yep I will be taking a closer look at Rand as well not because of his less than pure statements that rile the purists so much but how close he associates with his father and his fathers men. If he starts building a tract record of shady staffers I also might start looking elsewhere.

fr33
08-30-2014, 10:34 PM
Just reinforces my gladness that I didn't fall for the 2012 Ron Paul campaign from before it officially started. I always thought it was just piss poor excutive leadership on Ron's part but after he was elbow deep in trying to rip off ronpaul.com, my thoughts are changing. Remember staffers from Ron Paul 1988 went to jail as well. Something stinks about all of Rons business and campaign endevers. Yep I will be taking a closer look at Rand as well not because of his less than pure statements that rile the purists so much but how close he associates with his father and his fathers men. If he starts building a tract record of shady staffers I also might start looking elsewhere.

The problem with that is you tend to support even shittier people than the Pauls.

CPUd
08-30-2014, 10:36 PM
I think Rand is going to have a lot of former McCain, Romney staffers in the leadership positions. If he gets RP 2012 staffers, I bet they go to his Senate campaign.

jjdoyle
08-30-2014, 10:37 PM
Just reinforces my gladness that I didn't fall for the 2012 Ron Paul campaign from before it officially started. I always thought it was just piss poor excutive leadership on Ron's part but after he was elbow deep in trying to rip off ronpaul.com, my thoughts are changing. Remember staffers from Ron Paul 1988 went to jail as well. Something stinks about all of Rons business and campaign endevers. Yep I will be taking a closer look at Rand as well not because of his less than pure statements that rile the purists so much but how close he associates with his father and his fathers men. If he starts building a tract record of shady staffers I also might start looking elsewhere.

Rand hired Jack Hunter. Jack Hunter tried to basically tell us all we were stupid for not liking or understanding Rand's horrid endorsement of Mitt Romney. Jack Hunter used RonPaul2012.com to defend an endorsement of Mitt Romney. That, is/was PATHETIC.

I didn't know about staffers from Ron's 1988 campaign going to jail. *goes to Google

Found it. Just one staffer apparently, but his campaign manager. Interesting conspiracy theory attached with it:
"
Finally, let me make a couple observations. The liberal media is ferociously attacking Ron this morning, on everything from the Newsletters to his various PACs. I’m amused at how off-base they all are. If they are looking for something that went un-explained after many years, it’s the Nadia Hayes incident from the end of the presidential campaign in 1988. I personally am still a little ticked off by this, and surprised that nobody has ever followed up on it. In brief, Nadia was Ron’s longtime business/campaign manager in the 1980s. On the very last day of the presidential campaign, attorneys, accountants, and even Nassau Bay police dept. investigation officials stormed into our campaign office, sealed everything off, rushed us campaign staffers into the storeroom (literally), and for hours on end ruffled through the entire campaign records, file cabinets, and other papers.

Lew Rockwell and Burton Blumert were there too. We were greatly surprised by this. Nadia was eventually convicted of embezzlement and went to jail for 6 months, plus had to pay $140,000 in restitution to Ron.
There were rumors at the time, and long thereafter, that Lew and Burt had pinned it all on Nadia, and that they had their own reasons for the “coup.” For years afterwards, Rockwell, and Blumert had complete control of Ron’s enterprises through Jean McIver and (former JBS/Jesse Helms fundraiser) David “James” Mertz of northern Virginia.


It was easy to pin it all on Nadia. She lived extravagantly, and her husband who owned a boat repair business in Clear Lake, had recently had some serious financial problems.


Nadia never resurfaced, and was never heard from again.


I will attest, that when campaign consultant Tony Payton died of heart failure, in 2002 I believe, I specifically asked Ron if I could look Nadia up, and contact her to let her know that her longtime friend had died, and he reacted sternly to me, expressing that he did not want me to do that, and if I did, there would be serious consequences. I was shocked. And this was one of the reasons I eventually left his staff."
http://www.rightwingnews.com/election-2012/statement-from-fmr-ron-paul-staffer-on-newsletters-anti-semitism/

klamath
08-30-2014, 10:37 PM
The problem with that is you tend to support even shittier people than the Pauls.I think that is your problem.

fr33
08-30-2014, 11:04 PM
I think that is your problem.

Not really. You spend your time on a forum that supports the Pauls while not supporting them. Go to freerepublic.

fr33
08-31-2014, 12:13 AM
http://i61.tinypic.com/2jfx281.png

Bryan, you and your moderators have banned people like cajuncocoa in the past for saying things similar to what klamath posted (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?458822-Jesse-Benton-resigns-as-Mitch-McConnell-s-campaign-manager&p=5634191&viewfull=1#post5634191). You go right ahead and ban me. I don't care.

orenbus
08-31-2014, 01:17 AM
So looking back in retrospect as I try to bridge what we know now vs. what we knew back then, I notice there was at least one person back in December of 2011 that was asking the right questions at the time, while the rest of us (myself included probably) were drinking the kool-aid and slinging negative remarks and neg rep at him, and that person being KyleJack a forum member from 2007. Morale of the story is, even though we support a side or a person with passion and comittment, sometimes it makes sense to stay objective and at least approach the hard questions in a mature way in the pursuit for truth.

Anyway here is a report following the Kent Sorenson defection that we were looking at in terms of a official response to Bachmann's allegations that Sorenson had been paid off and Benton's response, still looking for another source but this is what I see so far.


Benton responded that the Paul campaign is not paying Sorenson.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/kent-sorenson-bachmanns-iowa-chair-defects-to-paul/2011/12/28/gIQALSDPNP_blog.html

Here are some of KyleJack's comments back in December 28/29th 2011:


I hope the campaign did not do this. There was no need for it when we had the lead. We mustn't look like typical politicians.


Because offering him a job is bad. And could hurt us. Hopefully it's all bogus.


Well, offering him a well-paying position with the campaign might look like a quid pro quo. I really hope it's all crap.



It's getting more complicated because now Sorenson's former campaign chair for his own campaign is saying she was told by Sorenson he was told by someone in the Paul campaign that they were offering him money to switch. Benton is not omniscient and we need to figure out where this information is coming from, and who started it.


Sure. So why's he telling it to his former campaign chair, who isn't the one he was quitting? It's alarming.

Possibilities:
Vast conspiracy intended to hurt Paul
Misguided idiot in the campaign promised things, didn't tell the campaign leadership
something else?

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?343202-Bachmann-responds-to-Kent-Sorenson-defection-to-Ron-Paul-campaign&p=3915586&viewfull=1#post3915586



We have to avoid even the appearance of impropriety. Is the campaign now employing him or not? That's what I want to know.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?343179-Former-Bachmann-IA-Chair-Endorses-Ron-Paul-(State-Sen-Kent-Sorenson)&p=3914771&viewfull=1#post3914771


Some other comments at the time;


Why do I remember Kent's name and not in a favorable fashion? I'm thinking from 2007-2008 timeframe. Maybe I'm mistaken.


It was this year. He apparently wanted a job with the Paul campaign, wasn't given one and joined Bachmann. He trash talked Ron Paul all summer. At least he's come to his senses at the right time!


http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?343179-Former-Bachmann-IA-Chair-Endorses-Ron-Paul-(State-Sen-Kent-Sorenson)&p=3914912&viewfull=1#post3914912

I won't even quote the kool-aid enraged comments at the time, you can read them on your own in those threads, but just a heads up, its not pretty.

extortion17
08-31-2014, 01:55 AM
I posted this in another thread on Kent Sorenson pleading guilty yesterday, here it is again for those that don't know and have missed some of the information:
. . .
Which is why I think the campaign is sitting on so much cash still, to probably help fund the defense fund or certain staffers and/or pay any fees/fines. The campaign has been paying one law firm in the D.C. area several thousand dollars every single quarter, SINCE THE CAMPAIGN ENDED. Yet, it refused donation requests by some supporters, and said the amount on hand was over-stated (despite the FEC reports SHOWING us how much they claimed to have). They were lying, and have been lying, for years about a lot. Wasting people's time, and money. So they could get paychecks and nice cushy jobs?

NOBODY, and I mean NOBODY, that was in Ron Paul 2012 staff and has continued to defend what was/is a dishonest campaign, should be near Rand in 2016. If anybody wants to listen to an interview, on Ron Paul vs. Ron Paul Inc., here you go:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eh9FbTKRU-E

Not only does he discuss certain individuals by name, but you will also hear how Ron Paul Inc. is trying to filter the "riffraff" at conventions and seminars you may pay to attend. Which is very good to know, BEFORE YOU PAY MONEY, to attend one of them and fill out any paperwork or survey."

. . . that gave money and time to a campaign that was helping Mitt Romney win the nomination, . . . campaign end abruptly in early June, BEFORE THE CONVENTION. So Rand could endorse Mitt Romney on national TV and get a speaking slot at the RNC?

So that Jesse Benton could get a job with Mitch McConnell?

So another Ron Paul 2012 staffer could get a job at with the RNC/GOP?

I certainly hope for some that have been banned from RPF over the years . . .

At this point, I would actually suggest Bryan rename the forums, or redirect it to LibertyForest or another domain. We have no clue how deep this is going to go, but we do know the names of some being investigated by the FEC, as the first link above shows.

I know some people have absolutely HATED my posts critical about the campaign, but I have been warning about this for a while now.
"Truth will ultimately prevail where there is pains to bring it to light."


If Ron had one blind spot it was the character of those he surrounded himself with.

RP was a loner too - I remember the jpg that was snapped of RP alone and
waiting for his bags at Reagan Airport to fly in for a congressional vote.

There was a lot of money - it came in faster than even RP might have thought especially initially in 2008 with "Meet Up" groups popping up everywhere.

renaming or consolidating the forums with redirects . . . I dunno

Rand is gonna want to be associated with people at the grassroots level in some ways still - and these forums work . . . I think.
Some will want to come back . . .

liberalnurse
08-31-2014, 08:43 AM
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?423908-Jesse-Benton-I-didn-t-mean-it-was-only-trying-to-appease-quot-hardcore-Ron-Paul-supporter-quot#post5174647 http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?447940-Do-you-want-Jesse-Benton-involved-in-any-capacity-in-Rand-Paul-2016#post5475034

I just re-visited these threads and a few others, re:Benton. Those of us who dared to question Benton were "dividers", "enemies of the Liberty Movement," etc. We were the fringe. We didn't get it. The undesirables. All I can say now is what goes around comes around.

cajuncocoa
08-31-2014, 08:49 AM
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?423908-Jesse-Benton-I-didn-t-mean-it-was-only-trying-to-appease-quot-hardcore-Ron-Paul-supporter-quot#post5174647 http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?447940-Do-you-want-Jesse-Benton-involved-in-any-capacity-in-Rand-Paul-2016#post5475034

I just re-visited these threads and a few others, re:Benton. Those of us who dared to question Benton were "dividers", "enemies of the Liberty Movement," etc. We were the fringe. We didn't get it. The undesirables. All I can say now is what goes around comes around.
Those folks sure are quiet now. :rolleyes:

satchelmcqueen
08-31-2014, 09:34 AM
Without trying to sound pretentious, I want to say I understand exactly how Ron gets himself into these positions, as I have found myself in them before as well.

Short version: It is VERY hard to be a "leader", to bark orders and make commands and demand that things happen just as you want, when your whole personality is opposed to authoritarianism.
very well said. i have been in a few of those myslf. its hard to order people around when that isnt how you are. i think ron and myself and you it sounds like, let trust go as far as it can. then, usually you get bit in the ass. you cannot control people, especially family.

LibertyEagle
08-31-2014, 10:25 AM
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?423908-Jesse-Benton-I-didn-t-mean-it-was-only-trying-to-appease-quot-hardcore-Ron-Paul-supporter-quot#post5174647 http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?447940-Do-you-want-Jesse-Benton-involved-in-any-capacity-in-Rand-Paul-2016#post5475034

I just re-visited these threads and a few others, re:Benton. Those of us who dared to question Benton were "dividers", "enemies of the Liberty Movement," etc. We were the fringe. We didn't get it. The undesirables. All I can say now is what goes around comes around.


Those folks sure are quiet now. :rolleyes:

Nope. Some of us wanted to wait for the truth to come out. Others want to hang them beforehand. Much like a lynch mob. Now, you can applaud yourself for being part of that, but I'm not sure what there is to be proud of.

LibertyEagle
08-31-2014, 10:28 AM
That said, I don't understand why they even wanted Sorenson. He had already stabbed Ron in the back by going with Bachmann's campaign and it was so late in the game, what real benefit was there?

LibertyEagle
08-31-2014, 10:32 AM
You left out the part that you are quoting ERIC DONDERO. He is well known around these parts.


Rand hired Jack Hunter. Jack Hunter tried to basically tell us all we were stupid for not liking or understanding Rand's horrid endorsement of Mitt Romney. Jack Hunter used RonPaul2012.com to defend an endorsement of Mitt Romney. That, is/was PATHETIC.

I didn't know about staffers from Ron's 1988 campaign going to jail. *goes to Google

Found it. Just one staffer apparently, but his campaign manager. Interesting conspiracy theory attached with it:
"Finally, let me make a couple observations. The liberal media is ferociously attacking Ron this morning, on everything from the Newsletters to his various PACs. I’m amused at how off-base they all are. If they are looking for something that went un-explained after many years, it’s the Nadia Hayes incident from the end of the presidential campaign in 1988. I personally am still a little ticked off by this, and surprised that nobody has ever followed up on it. In brief, Nadia was Ron’s longtime business/campaign manager in the 1980s. On the very last day of the presidential campaign, attorneys, accountants, and even Nassau Bay police dept. investigation officials stormed into our campaign office, sealed everything off, rushed us campaign staffers into the storeroom (literally), and for hours on end ruffled through the entire campaign records, file cabinets, and other papers.

Lew Rockwell and Burton Blumert were there too. We were greatly surprised by this. Nadia was eventually convicted of embezzlement and went to jail for 6 months, plus had to pay $140,000 in restitution to Ron.
There were rumors at the time, and long thereafter, that Lew and Burt had pinned it all on Nadia, and that they had their own reasons for the “coup.” For years afterwards, Rockwell, and Blumert had complete control of Ron’s enterprises through Jean McIver and (former JBS/Jesse Helms fundraiser) David “James” Mertz of northern Virginia.


It was easy to pin it all on Nadia. She lived extravagantly, and her husband who owned a boat repair business in Clear Lake, had recently had some serious financial problems.


Nadia never resurfaced, and was never heard from again.


I will attest, that when campaign consultant Tony Payton died of heart failure, in 2002 I believe, I specifically asked Ron if I could look Nadia up, and contact her to let her know that her longtime friend had died, and he reacted sternly to me, expressing that he did not want me to do that, and if I did, there would be serious consequences. I was shocked. And this was one of the reasons I eventually left his staff."
http://www.rightwingnews.com/election-2012/statement-from-fmr-ron-paul-staffer-on-newsletters-anti-semitism/

LibertyEagle
08-31-2014, 10:35 AM
That was already done by Ron Paul 2012 in February 2012, March 2012, April 2012, and May 2012. And it's probably why Ron Paul 2012 has been, and probably still is, paying those firms I linked above:
"Here are firms that received payment from Ron Paul 2012 just last quarter:
http://www.leclairryan.com/ ($6,000)
http://www.bblawonline.com/ ($19,000)
http://www.arentfox.com/ ($4,900)
http://www.andrewskurth.com/ ($2,900)"

Do you have any proof that any of this money is going to Benton?

jjdoyle
08-31-2014, 10:40 AM
You left out the part that you are quoting ERIC DONDERO. He is well known around these parts.

I didn't leave anything out, liar. I asked about the 1988 staffer going to jail, and the story on it. I even provided the link where I found it. Not my problem you repeatedly defend unrepentant liars and cheats. Stop typing digital diarrhea.

You should stop posting, because you are known for making repeated false claims.
Like Ron Paul 2012 ending with virtually no cash on hand.
Or Ron's daughter being an accountant.

Ron Paul 2012 was a lying, corrupt, dishonest, garbage of a campaign. And you can't accept it. Get over it.

Bryan
08-31-2014, 10:42 AM
http://i61.tinypic.com/2jfx281.png

Bryan, you and your moderators have banned people like cajuncocoa in the past for saying things similar to what klamath posted (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?458822-Jesse-Benton-resigns-as-Mitch-McConnell-s-campaign-manager&p=5634191&viewfull=1#post5634191). You go right ahead and ban me. I don't care.
No one's going to get banned, the +rep was a request to multiple people to keep focused on issues and not get into a flame war here. I am not familiar with all the details with cajuncocoa's case but that was before I took over. As for klamath's post, there are a lot of complicated issues in this, we're not here to dictate a narrative. Our guidelines are just that, guidelines- the situation at hand has to be considered.

jjdoyle
08-31-2014, 10:53 AM
No one's going to get banned, the +rep was a request to multiple people to keep focused on issues and not get into a flame war here. I am not familiar with all the details with cajuncocoa's case but that was before I took over. As for klamath's post, there are a lot of complicated issues in this, we're not here to dictate a narrative. Our guidelines are just that, guidelines- the situation at hand has to be considered.

You still haven't solved the problem, of the moderators.


Do you have any proof that any of this money is going to Benton?

(Mod edit)Jesse Benton was getting paychecks in February 2012, March 2012, April 2012, and May 2012. And did you not notice and COMPREHEND the word "PROBABLY".

There are multiple staffers listed in the FEC investigation that was been linked prior to IN THIS THREAD, that you apparently SKIPPED over to make continued stupid, digital diarrhea posts. I would imagine the money is being spent to fix the lying, corrupt, dishonest, garbage of a campaign's issue. Not that you actually care. You hate the truth. As was apparent when you negative repped me for providing a link last year showing the campaign still had over a million cash-on-hand. After making your false claim it ended with virtually no cash-on-hand.

liberalnurse
08-31-2014, 10:53 AM
Nope. Some of us wanted to wait for the truth to come out. Others want to hang them beforehand. Much like a lynch mob. Now, you can applaud yourself for being part of that, but I'm not sure what there is to be proud of.

For me it was an accumulation of things not just Sorenson. So yeah, I trusted my gut and once again my gut was spot on. Anything that hurts Ron Paul, hurts me. So, no it doesn't make me jump for joy. What it does do is give me a sense of vindication and a sense of peace that now we can move on to getting Rand elected without Benton as a distraction.

PaleoPaul
08-31-2014, 11:04 AM
That said, I don't understand why they even wanted Sorenson. He had already stabbed Ron in the back by going with Bachmann's campaign and it was so late in the game, what real benefit was there?
Not only that, but why would Benton want to bribe a BACHMANN supporter? By December 2011, she was a low-tier candidate. If Benton was going to bribe someone, wouldn't it have made more sense to bribe a Santorum or Romney supporter to switch his/her endorsement to Ron? They were doing quite well around that time.

NewRightLibertarian
08-31-2014, 11:16 AM
Not only that, but why would Benton want to bribe a BACHMANN supporter? By December 2011, she was a low-tier candidate. If Benton was going to bribe someone, wouldn't it have made more sense to bribe a Santorum or Romney supporter to switch his/her endorsement to Ron? They were doing quite well around that time.

Benton wasn't exactly a political genius if you didn't notice. We gotta divorce our movement from all of these corrupt right wingers trying to make a buck before they cause any more damage.

sparebulb
08-31-2014, 11:57 AM
I didn't leave anything out, liar. I asked about the 1988 staffer going to jail, and the story on it. I even provided the link where I found it. Not my problem you repeatedly defend unrepentant liars and cheats. Stop typing digital diarrhea.

You should stop posting, because you are known for making repeated false claims.
Like Ron Paul 2012 ending with virtually no cash on hand.
Or Ron's daughter being an accountant.

Ron Paul 2012 was a lying, corrupt, dishonest, garbage of a campaign. And you can't accept it. Get over it.

The ONLY involvement I had in '08 or '12 was to donate MONEY. I started suspecting something was wrong with the weak/no response to the irregularities with the Iowa caucus. Then, it happened over and over again with weak response. I felt as if something was wrong, but just chalked it up to being part of a super-minority fringe movement that was destined to fail. But I still donated MONEY.

I don't regret supporting Ron. I do wish I had my money back.

I'm going to +rep JJ's post for the his authentic indignation.

jjdoyle
08-31-2014, 12:41 PM
The ONLY involvement I had in '08 or '12 was to donate MONEY. I started suspecting something was wrong with the weak/no response to the irregularities with the Iowa caucus. Then, it happened over and over again with weak response. I felt as if something was wrong, but just chalked it up to being part of a super-minority fringe movement that was destined to fail. But I still donated MONEY.

I don't regret supporting Ron. I do wish I had my money back.

I'm going to +rep JJ's post for the his authentic indignation.

I've posted this a few times before, but you can always try to contact the campaign and see if they'll give you a refund. They already turned down a few refund requests right after the campaign ended, and were basically lying to supporters about how much cash-on-hand they had, despite the FEC reports showing us what they had.

In 2014, when sitting on $800K in funds, the campaign has no phone number or email address to use for contact purposes, so you will have to write a letter to them and address it to:
RON PAUL 2012 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE INC.
837 W Plantation Dr
Clute, Texas 77531You might could try and reason with them and say something like, "Just like when Dr. Paul was a Congressman, and would return some of his congressional office budget back to the government each year instead of wasting it, I am requesting that my donations be refunded since campaign funds are no longer being used to get Ron Paul elected to the White House and are now instead being wasted."

Or, you might have better chances of getting money from the campaign if you instead send them a bill for expenses like Matt Collins did when he "volunteered".

cajuncocoa
08-31-2014, 01:19 PM
Dennis Fusaro via EPJ: An Open Letter to Ron Paul (http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2014/08/an-open-letter-to-ron-paul.html)


Dr. Paul, I respect you, and I supported you in every way I was able to do....but I need to hear a statement from you on this, and I hope we get one soon.

jjdoyle
08-31-2014, 01:32 PM
Dennis Fusaro via EPJ: An Open Letter to Ron Paul (http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2014/08/an-open-letter-to-ron-paul.html)


Dr. Paul, I respect you, and I supported you in every way I was able to do....but I need to hear a statement from you on this, and I hope we get one soon.


Wouldn't hold your breath on him saying anything anytime soon. Why do you think NOW is the time he is bringing a 9/11 issue backup? After it was soooooo taboo for us to talk about it? And ANYTHING here on the forums was buried to Hot Topics?

I said it earlier, I'll say it again: Bryan, you might want to redirect the website url to LibertyForest.com. We don't know how deep this is going to go, but the whole thing stinks. Like it did during the campaign.

klamath
08-31-2014, 01:43 PM
No one's going to get banned, the +rep was a request to multiple people to keep focused on issues and not get into a flame war here. I am not familiar with all the details with cajuncocoa's case but that was before I took over. As for klamath's post, there are a lot of complicated issues in this, we're not here to dictate a narrative. Our guidelines are just that, guidelines- the situation at hand has to be considered.I knew what you meant Bryan and I respect that and I would not throw your polite private request back in your face in public.

mosquitobite
08-31-2014, 01:43 PM
Dennis Fusaro via EPJ: An Open Letter to Ron Paul (http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2014/08/an-open-letter-to-ron-paul.html)


Dr. Paul, I respect you, and I supported you in every way I was able to do....but I need to hear a statement from you on this, and I hope we get one soon.


Good letter and I too hope he responds.

nobody's_hero
08-31-2014, 03:28 PM
I didn't leave anything out, liar. I asked about the 1988 staffer going to jail, and the story on it. I even provided the link where I found it. Not my problem you repeatedly defend unrepentant liars and cheats. Stop typing digital diarrhea.

You should stop posting, because you are known for making repeated false claims.
Like Ron Paul 2012 ending with virtually no cash on hand.
Or Ron's daughter being an accountant.

Ron Paul 2012 was a lying, corrupt, dishonest, garbage of a campaign. And you can't accept it. Get over it.

the 2008 campaign was definitely more exciting, I think. We didn't have people running around telling the grassroots that they didn't know what they were doing, and should shut up and let the pro's handle things. 2012 had more people showing up to conventions for Dr. Paul, but that was tempered by the fact that Jesse Benton and the official campaign had pretty much thrown in the towel over the convention fights and was resigned to bowing to Romney. I felt like the 500 Marines on Wake Island when they knew help wasn't coming, but it was an honor to go down fighting.

mosquitobite
08-31-2014, 04:22 PM
the 2008 campaign was definitely more exciting, I think. We didn't have people running around telling the grassroots that they didn't know what they were doing, and should shut up and let the pro's handle things. 2012 had more people showing up to conventions for Dr. Paul, but that was tempered by the fact that Jesse Benton and the official campaign had pretty much thrown in the towel over the convention fights and was resigned to bowing to Romney. I felt like the 500 Marines on Wake Island when they knew help wasn't coming, but it was an honor to go down fighting.

^ yes.

2008 was way more fun, but way chaotic at times too. People who shouldn't have been leaders were tossed into that role for lack of anyone else.

If Rand runs in 2016 I pray that we here on RPF ignore those who are "smarter" and "better" than the grassroots. I pray we do meet-ups and sign waves and blimps if we want!!! I think we should have our OWN Liberty Forest PAC and decide how it should be spent.

But part of that requires us each to take an active role in our states - possibly even leadership. What can we each promise to do to advance liberty now and beyond?
See my signature...

LibertyEagle
08-31-2014, 05:20 PM
Are you STUPID?! Jesse Benton was getting paychecks in February 2012, March 2012, April 2012, and May 2012. And did you not notice and COMPREHEND the word "PROBABLY".

There are multiple staffers listed in the FEC investigation that was been linked prior to IN THIS THREAD, that you apparently SKIPPED over to make continued stupid, digital diarrhea posts. I would imagine the money is being spent to fix the lying, corrupt, dishonest, garbage of a campaign's issue. Not that you actually care. You hate the truth. As was apparent when you negative repped me for providing a link last year showing the campaign still had over a million cash-on-hand. After making your false claim it ended with virtually no cash-on-hand.

(Mod edit) innuendo with very little proof. And below you infer that Benton is somehow the beneficiary of the payments made to the firms you lined to. I'm merely asking you to provide evidence that he is. It's interesting that it gets you so bent out of shape.

Tell me, (mod edit)


That was already done by Ron Paul 2012 in February 2012, March 2012, April 2012, and May 2012. And it's probably why Ron Paul 2012 has been, and probably still is, paying those firms I linked above:
"Here are firms that received payment from Ron Paul 2012 just last quarter:
http://www.leclairryan.com/ ($6,000)
http://www.bblawonline.com/ ($19,000)
http://www.arentfox.com/ ($4,900)
http://www.andrewskurth.com/ ($2,900)"

LibertyEagle
08-31-2014, 05:27 PM
I didn't leave anything out, liar.

Yes, you most certainly DID. You didn't state that it was Dondero who you were quoting. Everyone who has been here from the beginning know of that little POS. What you did was like quoting Sorcha Faal and not stating who you were quoting.


I asked about the 1988 staffer going to jail, and the story on it. I even provided the link where I found it. Not my problem you repeatedly defend unrepentant liars and cheats. Stop typing digital diarrhea.

You should stop posting, because you are known for making repeated false claims.
Like Ron Paul 2012 ending with virtually no cash on hand.
Or Ron's daughter being an accountant.

Ron Paul 2012 was a lying, corrupt, dishonest, garbage of a campaign. And you can't accept it. Get over it.

(Mod edit) So big deal I called his daughter an accountant. She was their bookkeeper. Close enough. :rolleyes:

And the no cash on hand? Yes, you were right. It was what was told me by someone high up in the campaign. I was not pleased at all when I found it that it wasn't the case.

However, that doesn't make all the stuff you regurgitate over and over again, true, either.

jjdoyle
08-31-2014, 05:30 PM
You are full of innuendo with very little proof. And below you infer that Benton is somehow the beneficiary of the payments made to the firms you lined to. Tell me, are you Dondero, or just act like him?

(Mod edit)Those numbers are from the FEC reports, those things you don't take the time to read, and probably can't even comprehend. Why else is Ron Paul 2012 paying law firms that deal with litigation and trying to get fees reduced?

.

You are WILLFULLY, REPEATEDLY, IGNORANT in regards to Ron Paul 2012. And you have made repeated false claims/LIES to try and make Ron Paul 2012 look better than it was/is. Like saying it ended with no cash-on-hand, and that Lori is a CPA. And neither of those things are true.

(Mod edit).

LibertyEagle
08-31-2014, 05:32 PM
Very little proof, liar? Those numbers are from the FEC reports, those things you don't take the time to read, and probably can't even comprehend. Why else is Ron Paul 2012 paying law firms that deal with litigation and trying to get fees reduced?

You are a snake in the grass, no better than Jesse Benton or Matt Collins. You are a defender of unrepentant liars and a campaign that was the same.

You are WILLFULLY, REPEATEDLY, IGNORANT in regards to Ron Paul 2012. And you have made repeated false claims/LIES to try and make Ron Paul 2012 look better than it was/is. Like saying it ended with no cash-on-hand, and that Lori is a CPA. And neither of those things are true.

Tell me, are you stupid? I know you're a liar from your posts history, and not concerned with the truth.

Because you are inferring at this point. That's all you are doing. Get the proof that it is being spent on Benton and come back with that. If you can, I will be pissed off right along with you.


You are WILLFULLY, REPEATEDLY, IGNORANT in regards to Ron Paul 2012. And you have made repeated false claims/LIES to try and make Ron Paul 2012 look better than it was/is. Like saying it ended with no cash-on-hand, and that Lori is a CPA. And neither of those things are true.

There you go again with your modus operandi. I already responded to these claims once.

Lori was their bookkeeper. Big F'in deal.

Yes, I was a horrible person for repeating what someone I knew high up in the campaign told me that I asked about the money. I wasn't pleased to find out that what was told me was incorrect. Hang me, asshole.

You, on the other hand, joined these forums to run around and make innuendos. There has been some truth, yes, but a whole hell of a lot of innuendo. You have done very little else.

You haven't answered my question. ARE YOU DONDERO, OR JUST BEHAVE LIKE HIM?

LibertyEagle
08-31-2014, 05:43 PM
Dennis Fusaro via EPJ: An Open Letter to Ron Paul (http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2014/08/an-open-letter-to-ron-paul.html)

Dr. Paul, I respect you, and I supported you in every way I was able to do....but I need to hear a statement from you on this, and I hope we get one soon.

The questions are valid, but only Ron Paul supporters would think that posting the request on the internet is a wise choice, rather than sending him a private letter.

alucard13mm
08-31-2014, 05:45 PM
Seems one of the more respectable campaign staff is Doug Wead. He has a way with words and at least tries to talk with the ground people. I hope Doug Wead will join Rand's campaign as a spokesman or public relations type of a position.

LibertyEagle
08-31-2014, 05:48 PM
the 2008 campaign was definitely more exciting, I think. We didn't have people running around telling the grassroots that they didn't know what they were doing, and should shut up and let the pro's handle things. 2012 had more people showing up to conventions for Dr. Paul, but that was tempered by the fact that Jesse Benton and the official campaign had pretty much thrown in the towel over the convention fights and was resigned to bowing to Romney. I felt like the 500 Marines on Wake Island when they knew help wasn't coming, but it was an honor to go down fighting.

Yeah, it was more exciting for sure. Remember the guy who did the bait and switch with our money and ran the ad in, I think it was New Hampshire, with Giuliani in drag? Or when people threw snowballs at Hannity. Or, the RP supporters who were running around the Iowa festival thing handing out literature on vote fraud. Oh, and who can forget the guy who went on the radio in Iowa right before that straw poll, talking about vote fraud out of one side of his mouth and RP out of the other.

Fun stuff to be had by all. But, unfortunately, not too helpful in winning votes.

Face it. We had a blast, but didn't know the first thing about winning elections. We had a lot to learn and still do.

mosquitobite
08-31-2014, 05:50 PM
You are so full of shit. So big deal I called his daughter an accountant. She was their bookkeeper. Close enough. :rolleyes:


Actually it's not. There is no law, that I know of, that says someone must have any accounting training to be the treasurer of a political campaign.

kylejack
08-31-2014, 05:52 PM
What did Jesse Benton know and when did he know it?

jjdoyle
08-31-2014, 05:55 PM
Because you are inferring at this point. That's all you are doing. Get the proof that it is being spent on Benton and come back with that. If you can, I will be pissed off right along with you.

There you go again with your modus operandi. I already responded to these claims once.

Lori was their bookkeeper. Big F'in deal.

Yes, I was a horrible person for repeating what someone I knew high up in the campaign told me that I asked about the money. I wasn't pleased to find out that what was told me was incorrect. Hang me, asshole.

You, on the other hand, joined these forums to run around and make innuendos. There has been some truth, yes, but a whole hell of a lot of innuendo. You have done very little else.

You haven't answered my question. ARE YOU DONDERO, OR JUST BEHAVE LIKE HIM?



Because you are inferring at this point. That's all you are doing. Get the proof that it is being spent on Benton and come back with that. If you can, I will be pissed off right along with you.

Kent Sorenson faces $500,000 in FEES/FINES after pleading guilty (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2014/08/27/former-iowa-state-senator-pleads-guilty-in-ron-paul-endorsement-for-pay-scheme/), what do you think the campaign is going to face?
I haven't been wrong about anything posting here (mod edit) the FACTS regarding the FEC IS investigating Ron Paul 2012 and multiple staffers were listed in the investigation AS I LINKED. Just because you can't add 2+2 and get 4, and instead repeatedly type digital diarrhea to tell us 2+2 = 5 doesn't make it true.

Just because a lying, corrupt, dishonest campaign might finally be appearing in front of your eyes, you can't admit it even now with PROOF. YOU were defending it repeatedly along with Matt Collins (and still trying to give them the benefit of the doubt even now, LOL!), that ISN'T MY PROBLEM. The fact you hate the TRUTH, is disgusting.

And the staffer being jailed issue wasn't mentioned by me. It was mentioned by someone else. I asked for a reference to it, and unlike you taking people at their word, I went and found it. And shared what I found. Do you have proof that the staffer didn't go to jail? Is there more to that story (I actually tried to find the lady via a Google search, but didn't find anything)? I asked for a reference, but went researching on my own. (Mod edit)

(Mod edit), no I'm not Dondero. Not that it has ANYTHING to do with a lying, corrupt, dishonest, garbage of a campaign. Nice try at an ad hominem and trying to change the topic, (mod edit).

Bryan
08-31-2014, 06:05 PM
Let's please drop all of the name calling, it's not adding anything of value to this important discussion.

Also, let's try to be clear what is fact, how it is known and what is speculation or your viewpoint.


Thank you.

jjdoyle
08-31-2014, 06:18 PM
The questions are valid, but only Ron Paul supporters would think that posting the request on the internet is a wise choice, rather than sending him a private letter.

I know comprehension isn't a strong point with you, but my gosh, it's clearly stated in the letter:
"Last year (2013) I sent you the memorialized text message exchange I had with Steve Bierfeldt along with other evidence of your staffer's inappropriate behavior toward others. Did you do anything about it?"

He sent information to Ron in 2013, and apparently hasn't heard anything back. It's not his fault he did exactly what you said should have been done, and hasn't heard anything on it in at least 8 months.

orenbus
08-31-2014, 06:47 PM
the 2008 campaign was definitely more exciting, I think. We didn't have people running around telling the grassroots that they didn't know what they were doing

Yes we did, I forget her name but the campaign had her flying all around the country telling us we were doing it wrong.

Edit: I remember now, Anita Andrews

Brian4Liberty
08-31-2014, 06:54 PM
I didn't leave anything out, liar. I asked about the 1988 staffer going to jail, and the story on it. I even provided the link where I found it.

It is best to use the quote feature when posting to make it clear what you are writing and what is quoted from another source.

orenbus
08-31-2014, 06:58 PM
What did Jesse Benton know and when did he know it?

kylejack glad to see your still around, +rep for being one of the only ones back in Dec. 2011 that was keeping a level head and asking the right questions at the time.

jjdoyle
08-31-2014, 06:59 PM
It is best to use the quote feature when posting to make it clear what you are writing and what is quoted from another source.

Well, I put the text in "" and just updated it with the quote feature (had never used it before), and even provided the original link to the article where I found it. Clearly, I wasn't trying to leave anything out, and was only looking for what someone else had commented on about a staffer from the 1988 campaign being jailed. She is simply an avid liar, making repeated false accusations, and always trying stir the pot and blame supporters.


kylejack glad to see your still around, +rep for being one of the only ones back in Dec. 2011 that was keeping a level head and asking the right questions at the time.

And even getting negative repped then by LibertyEagle, for making level headed posts. Not much has changed.

kylejack
08-31-2014, 08:06 PM
kylejack glad to see your still around, +rep for being one of the only ones back in Dec. 2011 that was keeping a level head and asking the right questions at the time.

Thanks!

sparebulb
08-31-2014, 09:03 PM
And even getting negative repped then by LibertyEagle, for making level headed posts. Not much has changed.

I've got one up on you. LibertyEagle gave me an infraction on my permanent RPF record when she was a mod.

kylejack
08-31-2014, 09:16 PM
I've got one up on you. LibertyEagle gave me an infraction on my permanent RPF record when she was a mod.
Me too, so we're even.

LibertyEagle
08-31-2014, 09:55 PM
Actually it's not. There is no law, that I know of, that says someone must have any accounting training to be the treasurer of a political campaign.

What's your point? His daughter had done bookkeeping before and he trusted her. It's a no-brainer that she would do it for his campaign.

DevilsAdvocate
08-31-2014, 10:14 PM
I see that there's a lot of infighting here, and there isn't a good reason for it. We are all on the same side people, there's no reason for personal grudges. Remember that political power corrupts, I think we are seeing good evidence of how that happens in this movement.

To the people that hate on the campaign staff, you should realize that handing out 9/11 truth material at a Ron Paul event is not the best course of action. It's best to tailor your message to your audience and make sure that the things you say are balanced and level headed. Rand Paul is a good example of the success of this approach to things, and it's hard to argue with his results. A lot of the people in the campaign were simply trying to effectively spread the message in the best way possible in order to get the man they love elected.

And to people that defend the campaign above all else, you may want to re-evaluate things. We have evidence that the campaign was full of a lot of clearly dishonest people who were pursuing their own agenda. I think the fact that the campaign ended with over $1,000,000 unspent is good evidence of this. Money which was given in good faith that it would be used to elect Ron Paul was diverted to other things. Just look at the current situation we have achieved with all of our political manipulation and sacrifice of good will. Ron Paul was not elected, he never even came close, and all of the energy has been sucked out of the movement he dedicated his life to build.

I myself spoke out against what I saw as unscrupulous financial behavior in the movement back in 2011, and my reward was to be shouted down and banned from the Daily Paul.

But all of this is in the past. I think we should shake hands and remain friends, and work together to focus our energies on what we can build in the future.

jjdoyle
08-31-2014, 10:20 PM
I see that there's a lot of infighting here, and there isn't a good reason for it. We are all on the same side people, there's no reason for personal grudges. Remember that political power corrupts, and I think we are seeing good evidence of how that happens in this movement.

To the people that hate on the campaign staff, you should realize that handing out 9/11 truth material at a Ron Paul event is not the best course of action. It's best to tailor your message to your audience and make sure that the things you say are balanced and level headed. Rand Paul is a good example of the success of this approach to things, and it's hard to argue with his results. A lot of the people in the campaign were simply trying to effectively spread the message in the best way possible in order to get the man they love elected.

And to people that defend the campaign above all else, you may want to re-evaluate things. We have evidence that the campaign was full of a lot of clearly dishonest people who were pursuing their own agenda. I think the fact that the campaign ended with over $1,000,000 unspent is good evidence of this. Money which was given in good faith that it would be used to elect Ron Paul was diverted to other things. Just look at the current situation we have achieved with all of our political manipulation and sacrifice of good will. Ron Paul was not elected, he never even came close, and all of the energy has been sucked out of the movement he dedicated his life to build.

I myself spoke out against what I saw as unscrupulous financial behavior in the movement behavior back in 2012, and my reward was to be shouted down and banned from the Daily Paul.

But all of this is in the past. I think we should shake hands and remain friends, and work together to focus our energies on what we can build in the future.

When someone here is repeatedly lying about posts and articles, that is a good reason to correct them. LibertyEagle just flatout said the guy called Ron Paul an Anti-Semite, despite the article saying the exact opposite.

I don't know any local Ron Paul supporters that were passing out 9/11 truth material at events, and one even rented a booth at our state fair that I helped bring Ron Paul DVDs to pass out to people. For FREE. I agree 100% with tailoring your message to your audience. Some of us during both the 2008 and 2012 campaigns were saying a speech coach should be brought in to help in some areas for that very reason.

LibertyEagle
08-31-2014, 10:23 PM
When someone here is repeatedly lying about posts and articles, that is a good reason to correct them. LibertyEagle just flatout said the guy called Ron Paul an Anti-Semite, despite the article saying the exact opposite.
Big frickin' deal, Doyle. It's a Dondero article. You're trying to change the subject again and deflect what you did. You quoted a DONDERO article, in an effort to substantiate your latest BS, and didn't say who wrote what you quoted. lol


I don't know any local Ron Paul supporters that were passing out 9/11 truth material at events, and one even rented a booth at our state fair that I helped bring Ron Paul DVDs to pass out to people. For FREE. I agree 100% with tailoring your message to your audience. Some of us during both the 2008 and 2012 campaigns were saying a speech coach should be brought in to help in some areas for that very reason.

(Mod edit). But, that's not the point. Most Paul supporters in '08 didn't know the first thing about how to win campaigns. It's not enough to want someone to win, you have to know the steps necessary to help them win. And no, going to rallies and waving signs aren't enough.

DevilsAdvocate
08-31-2014, 10:38 PM
Liberty Eagle, jjdoyle, neither of you is changing each others mind's. Your endless argument is doing nothing except enraging each other and flooding RPF with negativity and contentiousness. You two represent two sides of the coin that is the Liberty movement. I think that you should find some common ground and hug it out.

It's clear that you are both very dedicated to the movement, and you are both stronger if you work together. Each of us separate personalities is like a different color on the spectrum. We can splinter and dissociate and go our own separate ways. Or we can remain together and strong as a beautiful rainbow.

http://i.imgur.com/2pvH5Bh.png

jjdoyle
08-31-2014, 10:46 PM
Big frickin' deal, Doyle. It's a Dondero article. You're trying to change the subject again and deflect what you did. You quoted a DONDERO article, in an effort to substantiate your latest BS, and didn't say who wrote what you quoted. lol

You must have been blind then. But, that's not the point. Most Paul supporters in '08 didn't know the first thing about how to win campaigns. It's not enough to want someone to win, you have to know the steps necessary to help them win. And no, going to rallies and waving signs aren't enough.

Hey (mod edit). Someone else made a claim that a Ron Paul 1988 staffer had been jailed. I asked for the source, and then went and found it myself and posted it. Nothing else to it, stupid repeat liar. And no, I wasn't blind in 2008. I volunteered at the official campaign office in VA, and saw the unprofessional staffers sitting around getting paid to apparently watch CNN news clips.

It's not the supporters that are supposed to win the campaign, it's why in 2008 we donated $20 million to it. And then $40 million in 2012.

jjdoyle
08-31-2014, 10:47 PM
Liberty Eagle, jjdoyle, neither of you is changing each others mind's. Your endless argument is doing nothing except enraging each other and flooding RPF with negativity and contentiousness. You two represent two sides of the coin that is the Liberty movement. I think that you should find some common ground and hug it out.

It's clear that you are both very dedicated to the movement, and you are both stronger if you work together. Each of us separate personalities is like a different color on the spectrum. We can splinter and dissociate and go our own separate ways. Or we can remain together and strong as a beautiful rainbow.

http://i.imgur.com/2pvH5Bh.png

Being an avid, repeat, liar, and defender of unrepentant liars, has nothing to do with Liberty IMO.

orenbus
08-31-2014, 11:21 PM
Well all I know is I hope someone on this forum has some contact with Rand Paul either directly or through someone that can get a message relayed to him (unfiltered) that spells out the concerns about Jesse Benton many (if not most) of us have. And what seems to be a common resolution, that if it even appears that Benton did something illegal he shouldn't get anywhere close to the 2016 campaign. And also that many (if not most) have already resolved in their own minds that regardless if Benton is indicted, if he becomes the 2016 campaign manager, Rand Paul stands to lose a good amount of the most active passionate volunteers and activists Ron Paul had in 08' and 12'.

And before anyone mentions that we are a very small percentage of total supporters I'll point out that the sentiments a lot of people are making here are being echoed on a number of other pro-Paul websites right now (and have been for some time), and those that discuss issues and participate in midterm years are the ones who are going to have circles of influence that extend beyond our computer screens come the presidential election cycle. Also as we've proven with Money Bombs, Events, Support Projects, etc. much of the local organization and coordination effort in previous campaigns begin here, on the internet, this translates to total Donations and Fund-raising, Phone Banking, Voter ID, GOTV, Opposition Research, Media Response, Networking, etc. you know the stuff that wins elections.

Anyway as many here have said, without the grassroots Ron Paul (and Rand Paul for that matter) would never have become as popular as they are today, an argument could be made that the grassroots will have a major role one way or another in Rand Paul's success come 2016, is having Jesse Benton on the team really worth risking that?

kylejack
09-01-2014, 12:52 AM
You must have been blind then. But, that's not the point. Most Paul supporters in '08 didn't know the first thing about how to win campaigns. It's not enough to want someone to win, you have to know the steps necessary to help them win. And no, going to rallies and waving signs aren't enough.
Apparently the professional establishment solution is to bribe someone. Politics as usual? No thanks.

nobody's_hero
09-01-2014, 06:09 AM
Yeah, it was more exciting for sure. Remember the guy who did the bait and switch with our money and ran the ad in, I think it was New Hampshire, with Giuliani in drag? Or when people threw snowballs at Hannity. Or, the RP supporters who were running around the Iowa festival thing handing out literature on vote fraud. Oh, and who can forget the guy who went on the radio in Iowa right before that straw poll, talking about vote fraud out of one side of his mouth and RP out of the other.

Fun stuff to be had by all. But, unfortunately, not too helpful in winning votes.

Face it. We had a blast, but didn't know the first thing about winning elections. We had a lot to learn and still do.

Well, I don't know. You might say 2012's success was due to the fact that so many saw 2008 as a blast they missed out on. Unfortunately for them, the party was crashed by the 'professionals' by the time they got there 4 years later. My hope is that the giant letdown in 2012 won't dissuade people from participating in 2016, but that will be hard to judge. The variables will be different, and chiefly, Ron Paul will not be running for president again. Who knows, though? If Rand Paul were to name drop Ron Paul for say, treasury secretary, I think it would draw a lot of people in, if Ron Paul were interested in coming out of retirement for such a position. Lots of 'conservatives' liked Ron Paul on his fiscal stances, even if they vehemently disagreed on foreign policy.

2008:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uC7A0qwvSFI

2012:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9BX5B9vhw4

jjdoyle
09-01-2014, 09:57 AM
Apparently the professional establishment solution is to bribe someone. Politics as usual? No thanks.

And apparently, it's OUR responsibility to win it. THE SUPPORTERS. The ones that gave Ron Paul 2008 nearly $20 million, and Ron Paul 2012 about $40 million.
All she does is repeatedly belittle, lie, curse at, name-call, and make false claims against supporters and their posts that are critical of what is/was a lying, corrupt, dishonest, garbage of a campaign in 2012.

She has lied about me three times in this very thread, and lied about what an article said. Bryan and corrupt, lying, moderators have allowed her and Matt Collins to stay around for years with THIS EXACT BEHAVIOR.

The guidelines are a waste. She is stupid (dumb on purpose), and a repeat liar. Both facts, proven in this very thread. She is no more concerned with truth, than the Devil IMO.

Badger Paul
09-01-2014, 10:11 AM
"Something stinks about all of Rons business and campaign endevers"

Sadly there's a distructive innoncence about Ron which makes him believe all he has to deliver the "message" and that's it. He doesn't realize the "message" doesn't get heard if the "messenger" is tainted with scandal.

Badger Paul
09-01-2014, 10:22 AM
"Or when people threw snowballs at Hannity. "

Oh come on, you didn't get a good belly-laugh at watching Sean doing his own version of cutting and running? I know I sure did.

Bryan
09-01-2014, 10:51 AM
. Bryan and corrupt, lying, moderators have allowed her and Matt Collins to stay around for years with THIS EXACT BEHAVIOR.
Please flag post if you have an issue and we will address it as best possible. Please mind the guidelines as well. thank you.

Badger Paul
09-01-2014, 10:52 AM
"I don't personally find it very probable. The chairman of the campaign would have no knowledge of $80K going out the door? I doubt it."

Nor would he have quit his job if more stuff wasn't going to eventually come out in the near-future. Remember there are two other grand jury investigations going on right now as well. This whole story broke a year ago and obviously back then Benton didn't think it would be an impediment to being the "front" campaign manager for McConnell (does anyone honestly believe he's actually making decisions?).

I find it interesting the 2012 campaign is paying off legal firms which makes me suspicious that they're basically bankrolling Sorenson's legal defense indirectly. They may well have to pay for Jesse's too


The bottom line is the money was laundered. It was laundered through a front company, probably run by Kesari. You don't launder money that's above board or use for payment for serviced rendered. Why go through all that just to get his endorsement? There was no reason the pay Sorenson a single fricken dime. He betrayed Paul by joining the Bachmann campaign in 2011 and if he wanted to jump ship I would have told him to get in the back of the line. The reason the Bachmann campaign didn't reveal anything after they made their accusations is because they were paying him too, in violation of Iowa law, and this would have been discovered (as it eventually was). Sorenson is basically sleazy little rat looking for a payout. Where Benton comes in is what he knew about the whole scheme to begin with, which I'm sure we'll discover over due course.

What did Ron know? Probably nothing other what Benton told him. "Jesse, did you bribe a state senator?" "No sir." "Good! I'm glad to hear these charges aren't true." What more needed to be asked? Why would he think is grandson-in-law was lying to him? In Ron's world, everyone's an honest fellow because that's the only way the market works: everyone trusts everyone else to do business. Unfortunately he forgot he was dealing with people whose business is politics, where lying is part of the trade.

jjdoyle
09-01-2014, 11:07 AM
Please flag post if you have an issue and we will address it as best possible. Please mind the guidelines as well. thank you.

I did flag a post last night, and had one of my own deleted containing facts to a lying, stupid, response. So, again, your guidelines are crap.

So, perhaps had you and/or your moderator not deleted that post I flagged, and instead banned her, the FULL record would still be showing her as the (mod edit). Based on ACTUAL posts in this thread.

Not my problem you have a problem with the English language. Idiot is 100% accurate, based on her posts in this very thread:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/idiot

Keep sending "infractions" for stating the truth.

Bryan
09-01-2014, 11:36 AM
Your flag led to 5 posts being deleted and other private actions. If you flag a post it's best not to also quote the problem area. Flame wars can be deleted in wholesale, there is no policy that we will parse through what is good vs not.

Otherwise, your use of labels against site members don't help your case, best to stick with what is important here.

Please keep on topic, this is an important matter, no need to get off topic. Thank you.

kylejack
09-01-2014, 11:40 AM
Fusaro has Sorenson on tape saying that Jesse knew about the bribe. http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2014/08/29/mitch_mcconnell_s_campaign_manager_resigns_after_b eing_ensnared_in_iowa.html

kylejack
09-01-2014, 11:50 AM
Here's the phone call where Benton is asked what he knows about the bribe. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60TGUNwHDtw He denies knowing about it and asks Fusaro to send proof. Fusaro sent the proof and leaked the tape 6 months later when Benton allegedly didn't do anything about the evidence he was sent.

nobody's_hero
09-01-2014, 01:42 PM
(Mod edit). But, that's not the point. Most Paul supporters in '08 didn't know the first thing about how to win campaigns. It's not enough to want someone to win, you have to know the steps necessary to help them win. And no, going to rallies and waving signs aren't enough.

You know, you're starting to sound a lot like the Collinz. Please keep in mind that it doesn't do a darn bit of good if you 'know how to win an election' and won't see things through to the end.

I've never supported the truther antics, but I'll readily take 1 truther who would go down fighting to the bitter end, than 1,000,000 people who 'know how to win', yet get within a stone's throw of the finish line and quit trying. How exactly is the latter supposedly any more desirable than the former?

If there was any benefit to 2012, it was that we learned about the convention process. But that's pretty moot now, with all the rules changes the GOP enacted to essentially prevent newcomers from having any shot at becoming future delegates. Furthermore:

In Georgia, and I'm sure other states deemed 'unwinnable' by your beloved 'professionals', we had absolutely no communication with the official campaign leading into the convention. Allegedly the conventions were of some paramount importance. The 'delegate strategy', they called it. *har har pfft*. These grand strategists you adore had told us to train for the delegate process, but had obviously lost their backbone by the time it became necessary to fight. Instead of spending, say, $80,000 to help with things like getting delegates to the convention, or at least having someone from the campaign come in and offer guidance, the campaign spent our donations funneling money to politicians for endorsements, and still sits on three-quarters of a million dollars that didn't do a damn bit of good sitting in an account during the convention fights.

We knew we were going in alone. We had briefings before the convention, and we were told there would be no reinforcements at the convention fight. We were doing this ALONE. And we went down fighting, ALONE. You realize what that does for morale?

So, basically, I say:

From here on out: FUCK people who 'know how to run a campaign.' FUCK Jesse Benton. We don't need spineless 'professionals' when we have do-or-die dedicated amateurs.

cajuncocoa
09-01-2014, 02:13 PM
As the Ron Paul Inc. (http://researchroom.economicpolicyjournal.com/2014/04/ron-paul-inc.html) scandal unfolds for all to see, the question must be asked, how did all this come to pass?

I remain in the camp, until shown otherwise by cold hard facts, that Ron Paul very likely knew nothing about the lunatic shenanigans of Ron Paul Inc. But is there any culpability on Dr. Paul's part?

As an outsider, it always looked to me that RP was more interested in getting the liberty message out than political machinations. And there were certain steps he took which could be viewed as attempting to keep the political operation from getting out of control.

More: http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2014/09/what-ron-paul-did-wrong.html

phill4paul
09-01-2014, 02:23 PM
From here on out: FUCK people who 'know how to run a campaign.' FUCK Jesse Benton. We don't need spineless 'professionals' when we have do-or-die dedicated amateurs.

<insert applause gif> +rep.

Natural Citizen
09-01-2014, 02:29 PM
We don't need spineless 'professionals' when we have do-or-die dedicated amateurs.

There you go. That's the one.

New York For Paul
09-01-2014, 02:56 PM
The FEC always goes after the campaign treasurer. So if there is a problem, that is the fall guy or fall gal. Being treasurer is a very prestigious position fraught with much peril. I hope things go well for her.

klamath
09-01-2014, 03:23 PM
And always that great looming elephant in the room, who were we trying to get elected? It is F this person F that person yet people drop their heads and look away who that person was. They pat themselves on the back on how they could spot the crooks long ago and how they were so courageous for taking the hits for pointing out all the crooks appointed to run the campaign. So people need to ask themselves this question since the campaign staff put together by "that" person can bring frothing rage, what would an administration run by people "that" person appointed, bring? AG Jesse Benton anyone? Press secretary Collin's, anyone? An administration of egotistical, self enriching, pocket lining crooks that the person in the oval office forever has no clue what they are doing because he is so far out in la la land of a libertarian dream world.
God forbid what if the grassroots were successful! :eek:

amy31416
09-01-2014, 07:41 PM
And apparently, it's OUR responsibility to win it. THE SUPPORTERS. The ones that gave Ron Paul 2008 nearly $20 million, and Ron Paul 2012 about $40 million.
All she does is repeatedly belittle, lie, curse at, name-call, and make false claims against supporters and their posts that are critical of what is/was a lying, corrupt, dishonest, garbage of a campaign in 2012.

She has lied about me three times in this very thread, and lied about what an article said. Bryan and corrupt, lying, moderators have allowed her and Matt Collins to stay around for years with THIS EXACT BEHAVIOR.

The guidelines are a waste. She is stupid (dumb on purpose), and a repeat liar. Both facts, proven in this very thread. She is no more concerned with truth, than the Devil IMO.

Listen, just for a moment. LE and Collins are not in the same category. Collins would likely sell out in a second for $2, LE would not. She's been here since the beginning, and we've had our differences, but I don't doubt her sincerity for a moment when it comes to this cause. Is her traditional way better than a non-traditional way? I don't know, but please, she's definitely on our/your side.

We can all get rather grouchy over politics, it's maddening, but we should try to keep things civil and take the high ground.

P.S. I haven't always taken the "high ground," and I do regret that.

LibertyEagle
09-01-2014, 07:49 PM
So, basically, I say:

From here on out: FUCK people who 'know how to run a campaign.' FUCK Jesse Benton. We don't need spineless 'professionals' when we have do-or-die dedicated amateurs.

Well, that would be dandy if there were enough of us. But, there aren't. Not even close. You can't just circle the wagons, you know. So yeah, you have to understand the mechanics; Robert's Rules of Order, getting involved and elected in your local party, etc. That's not selling out. It's making sure you have the tools to win. Again, no one is suggesting that you or anyone else sell out.

klamath
09-01-2014, 07:52 PM
Listen, just for a moment. LE and Collins are not in the same category. Collins would likely sell out in a second for $2, LE would not. She's been here since the beginning, and we've had our differences, but I don't doubt her sincerity for a moment when it comes to this cause. Is her traditional way better than a non-traditional way? I don't know, but please, she's definitely on our/your side.

We can all get rather grouchy over politics, it's maddening, but we should try to keep things civil and take the high ground.

P.S. I haven't always taken the "high ground," and I do regret that.LE is about as loyal as a person can get. She put her loyalty behind Ron Paul and I believe she would die defending him. She is the kind of friend a person would most certainly love to have when their back is against the wall.

amy31416
09-01-2014, 08:03 PM
LE is about as loyal as a person can get. She put her loyalty behind Ron Paul and I believe she would die defending him. She is the kind of friend a person would most certainly love to have when their back is against the wall.

No doubt. There is and upside and downside to that, but I am happy to call her my e-friend. I can't imagine someone putting her into another category with the likes of "he whose name should not be spoken", I would be offended.

Anti Federalist
09-01-2014, 08:07 PM
And always that great looming elephant in the room, who were we trying to get elected? It is F this person F that person yet people drop their heads and look away who that person was. They pat themselves on the back on how they could spot the crooks long ago and how they were so courageous for taking the hits for pointing out all the crooks appointed to run the campaign. So people need to ask themselves this question since the campaign staff put together by "that" person can bring frothing rage, what would an administration run by people "that" person appointed, bring? AG Jesse Benton anyone? Press secretary Collin's, anyone? An administration of egotistical, self enriching, pocket lining crooks that the person in the oval office forever has no clue what they are doing because he is so far out in la la land of a libertarian dream world.
God forbid what if the grassroots were successful! :eek:

I addressed this previously...


Without trying to sound pretentious, I want to say I understand exactly how Ron gets himself into these positions, as I have found myself in them before as well.

Short version: It is VERY hard to be a "leader", to bark orders and make commands and demand that things happen just as you want, when your whole personality is opposed to authoritarianism.

Ron would need a "hard man" at his right hand, to prevent these things from happening.

amy31416
09-01-2014, 08:11 PM
I addressed this previously...



Ron would need a "hard man" at his right hand, to prevent these things from happening.

You're right. I've been griping about his terrible ability to put together a good team for years, and I'd just add that he needs a "hard, ethical man" at his right hand. Someone who knows when the line has been crossed and won't drag him into it, like some of these jokers have done.

jjdoyle
09-01-2014, 08:17 PM
So people need to ask themselves this question since the campaign staff put together by "that" person can bring frothing rage, what would an administration run by people "that" person appointed, bring?

I've already said I never expected Ron to be a very successful President. The only thing I did expect was that he might set a world record for the number of vetoes signed. My expectations were pretty low.

klamath
09-01-2014, 08:20 PM
You're right. I've been griping about his terrible ability to put together a good team for years, and I'd just add that he needs a "hard, ethical man" at his right hand. Someone who knows when the line has been crossed and won't drag him into it, like some of these jokers have done.Unfortunately Ron has NEVER picked a good team. He keeps dragging the same losers with him over and over. As president you can be the greatest philosophic person in the world but if you cannot pick a staff with integrity you could very well be the worst president ever. A man run over by his own staff trying to serve their own interests doesn't bode well for his agenda.

Anti Federalist
09-01-2014, 08:34 PM
Unfortunately Ron has NEVER picked a good team. He keeps dragging the same losers with him over and over. As president you can be the greatest philosophic person in the world but if you cannot pick a staff with integrity you could very well be the worst president ever. A man run over by his own staff trying to serve their own interests doesn't bode well for his agenda.

Well, we're not going to have to worry about it now.

jjdoyle
09-01-2014, 08:47 PM
No doubt. There is and upside and downside to that, but I am happy to call her my e-friend. I can't imagine someone putting her into another category with the likes of "he whose name should not be spoken", I would be offended.

It's because both her and Matt Collins have repeatedly defended a lying, corrupt, dishonest campaign. And given out multiple negative reps, for people stating that very thing and providing evidence that counters what they think they know.

For example, last year when I made a post stating the campaign ended with more than a million cash-on-hand, she told me I was wrong and the campaign had ended with virtually no cash-on-hand. I then went and found, and provided a link to the FEC report showing the campaign still had more than a million cash-on-hand, and she negative repped me for it.

There are only a few that I know repeatedly defend the lying campaign, while repeatedly blaming supporters. LibertyEagle and Matt Collins are two of those RPF members.

Peace&Freedom
09-01-2014, 09:22 PM
You know, you're starting to sound a lot like the Collinz. Please keep in mind that it doesn't do a darn bit of good if you 'know how to win an election' and won't see things through to the end.

I've never supported the truther antics, but I'll readily take 1 truther who would go down fighting to the bitter end, than 1,000,000 people who 'know how to win', yet get within a stone's throw of the finish line and quit trying. How exactly is the latter supposedly any more desirable than the former?

If there was any benefit to 2012, it was that we learned about the convention process. But that's pretty moot now, with all the rules changes the GOP enacted to essentially prevent newcomers from having any shot at becoming future delegates.

The campaign had its shortfalls, the grassroots its internal divisions, but they were the minor key reason why Paul didn't win. The major reason was always the establishment media and Republican leadership, greasing the skids and putting their thumb on the scale, start to finish, to ensure the elite anointed milquetoast moderate won the nomination, while we got marginalized and victimized by blackout coverage, election fraud and dirty tricks, so as to never be in a position to win.

Note how quickly all that "convention delegate" tactical knowledge has become moot, since the leadership simply pulled an etch-a-sketch and changed those rules. Meaning in hindsight, there was no benefit to learning those rules in 2012, since those rules are now dust, and we now know the campaign wasn't trying to win by that strategy anyway.

And good grief, can we cut it with scapegoating "truther antics" when that had nothing to do with the losses, yet it gets blamed for the 2008 and 2012 outcomes? The anti-truth squeaky wheel side got their way, and separated Paul from the issue in 2008---result, Paul didn't win a single primary, followed by the anti-truth folks blaming 9-11 truth for Paul's defeat anyway. The anti-truth side got their way again, and separated Paul from the issue in 2012---result, Paul didn't win a single primary, followed by the anti-truth folks blaming 9-11 truth for Paul's defeat anyway. We tried it their way, twice, so it appears it is the anti-truth side that needs to be held accountable for 'not knowing how to win,' not the truthers.

LibertyEagle
09-01-2014, 09:38 PM
And good grief, can we cut it with scapegoating "truther antics" when that had nothing to do with the losses, yet it gets blamed for the 2008 and 2012 outcomes? The anti-truth squeaky wheel side got their way, and separated Paul from the issue in 2008---result, Paul didn't win a single primary, followed by the anti-truth folks blaming 9-11 truth for Paul's defeat anyway. The anti-truth side got their way again, and separated Paul from the issue in 2012---result, Paul didn't win a single primary, followed by the anti-truth folks blaming 9-11 truth for Paul's defeat anyway. We tried it their way, twice, so it appears it is the anti-truth side that needs to be held accountable for 'not knowing how to win,' not the truthers.

The problem with what you are suggesting is that Ron Paul clearly stated that he did not agree with those who believed the government was involved in the attacks. Or, are you suggesting that just by virtue of you being his supporter, that you have the right to piggyback on his campaign to promote your own agenda? Surely not.

LibertyEagle
09-01-2014, 09:51 PM
It's because both her and Matt Collins have repeatedly defended a lying, corrupt, dishonest campaign. And given out multiple negative reps, for people stating that very thing and providing evidence that counters what they think they know.
I wouldn't be talking, jj. You have given out quite a few neg reps your own self.


For example, last year when I made a post stating the campaign ended with more than a million cash-on-hand, she told me I was wrong and the campaign had ended with virtually no cash-on-hand. I then went and found, and provided a link to the FEC report showing the campaign still had more than a million cash-on-hand, and she negative repped me for it.
We have been over this a million times already, yet you bring it back up over and over again. As I told you many times before, after you proved your point with facts, rather than the usual innuendo, I ceded the point. I also told you that it was someone high up in the campaign that I have known for awhile who told me, when I asked, that they were still paying bills and were going to have nothing left. Again, when you provided proof, I wasn't happy at all for being misled and told the person that. I don't think it was intentional, because people handle different aspects of the campaign. But, maybe I am being naive on that. Time will tell. But, I tend to give people the benefit of the doubt, when they have been absolutely straight up with me in the past.


There are only a few that I know repeatedly defend the lying campaign, w
You group everyone together into one big lump. There were in fact decent, hard-working people in the campaign. I'm sure some were not.


While repeatedly blaming supporters. LibertyEagle and Matt Collins are two of those RPF members.
Only collectivists see everyone as being the same. Actually, both the movement and RP's campaign are made up of individuals. Each one is responsible for their own actions.

Some "supporters" were harmful to Ron Paul's chances of getting elected. Some were quite wonderful. Others were probably benign.

Logical, really.

orenbus
09-01-2014, 10:29 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17TUvp_l9DU

bolil
09-01-2014, 10:32 PM
NOBP. My affections, and loyalties, have always been towards the man, not the organization so I do not feel betrayed. Then again I am supremely naive and can't understand why campaigns are even necessary. I mean, the best choice should be pretty fucking clear.

orenbus
09-01-2014, 10:33 PM
506594136141484032

506599900852006912

jjdoyle
09-01-2014, 10:38 PM
I wouldn't be talking, jj. You have given out quite a few neg reps your own self.

I don't believe I have ever negative repped someone that provided a link, video, or email quotes to show me something I was falsely, repeatedly, claiming. You did just that.
And I also usually explain my negative reps, something you don't do, other than usually just cursing in them in a rage.


We have been over this a million times already, yet you bring it back up over and over again. As I told you many times before, after you proved your point with facts, rather than the usual innuendo, I ceded the point. I also told you that it was someone high up in the campaign that I have known for awhile who told me, when I asked, that they were still paying bills and were going to have nothing left. Again, when you provided proof, I wasn't happy at all for being misled and told the person that. I don't think it was intentional, because people handle different aspects of the campaign. But, maybe I am being naive on that. Time will tell. But, I tend to give people the benefit of the doubt, when they have been absolutely straight up with me in the past.

Can you name that person that told you that information? I know Doug Wead was also apparently misinformed about the funds at the RNC, but that was what he had heard from the other staffers and before the FEC report at the end of the campaign.


You group everyone together into one big lump. There were in fact decent, hard-working people in the campaign. I'm sure some were not.

This is a lie. I am very specific with my points and criticisms, and I don't blame the volunteers and staffers that probably worked for short amounts of time with no knowledge of the campaign's dishonesty. It's the ones listed in the FEC investigation complaint, and Jack Hunter for using RonPaul2012.com to try and defend a horrid endorsement of Mitt Romney, and ones that want to repeatedly tell supporters we are simply stupid, slow, don't understand politics, and the campaign wasn't lying to us.

I even place some blame on Ron, yes, Dr. Paul. Why? It was his campaign, under his name. Dennis Fusaro sent Dr. Paul the information last year about the current issue, and apparently never received a response. Dr. Paul's campaign still had over $800K on hand last month, and while it was turning down a few supporter refund requests, it was also lying to supporters about how much cash-on-hand they had when it ended. At some point, Dr. Paul needs to SPEAK UP about the ENTIRE situation. I'm guessing right now, he can't, because of the investigation. But, I'm not holding my breath for an explanation later either, because of how the campaign ended.


Only collectivists see everyone as being the same. Actually, both the movement and RP's campaign are made up of individuals. Each one is responsible for their own actions.

Some "supporters" were harmful to Ron Paul's chances of getting elected. Some were quite wonderful. Others were probably benign.

Logical, really.

Yeah, well you are the one that continuously lumps us together. For example you said just yesterday you said I was apparently blind and:

"(Mod edit). But, that's not the point. Most Paul supporters in '08 didn't know the first thing about how to win campaigns. It's not enough to want someone to win, you have to know the steps necessary to help them win. And no, going to rallies and waving signs aren't enough."

After I had said:

I don't know any local Ron Paul supporters that were passing out 9/11 truth material at events, and one even rented a booth at our state fair that I helped bring Ron Paul DVDs to pass out to people. For FREE. I agree 100% with tailoring your message to your audience. Some of us during both the 2008 and 2012 campaigns were saying a speech coach should be brought in to help in some areas for that very reason.

Again, it's not the supporters jobs to win the election. Ron Paul supporters went above and beyond when called, and even when not. The supporters gave Ron Paul 2012 the 2nd most amount of cash, behind only Mitt Romney. When Ron Paul 2012 agreed to not attack Mitt Romney in February 2012, they should have closed shop.

Peace&Freedom
09-01-2014, 10:39 PM
The problem with what you are suggesting is that Ron Paul clearly stated that he did not agree with those who believed the government was involved in the attacks. Or, are you suggesting that just by virtue of you being his supporter, that you have the right to piggyback on his campaign to promote your own agenda? Surely not.

Paul has clearly supported an independent investigation to settle the matter as to government involvement, and merely "hadn't studied the issue" enough to conclude the government was involved. That's a position that is clearly open to 9-11 truth, instead of hostile to being associated with it, which is how you keep spinning it. What I am suggesting is you have it completely backwards. Certain Paul supporters here despise or hate 9-11 truth, and have been using the 'protect the Paul campaign' canard to marginalize the subject, and to project their hostility to the subject onto the whole liberty movement. THEY'RE the ones who have used Paul as a vehicle for projecting their views onto him, not the truth side.

LibertyEagle
09-01-2014, 11:51 PM
I don't believe I have ever negative repped someone that provided a link, video, or email quotes to show me something I was falsely, repeatedly, claiming. You did just that.
And I also usually explain my negative reps, something you don't do, other than usually just cursing in them in a rage.

Actually, I usually just am laughing at you.


Can you name that person that told you that information? I know Doug Wead was also apparently misinformed about the funds at the RNC, but that was what he had heard from the other staffers and before the FEC report at the end of the campaign.
Sure I can. But, I won't.


This is a lie.
No, it's quite true. You show it every time you use a broad brush to paint RP's entire campaign as ...

a lying, corrupt, dishonest campaign



I am very specific with my points and criticisms, and I don't blame the volunteers and staffers that probably worked for short amounts of time with no knowledge of the campaign's dishonesty.
No, you're not specific, or you wouldn't need to be saying this. Because what you usually do is paint with a broad brush and insult anyone and everyone.


a lying, corrupt, dishonest campaign



It's the ones listed in the FEC investigation complaint, and Jack Hunter for using RonPaul2012.com to try and defend a horrid endorsement of Mitt Romney
I understood why Hunter did that. It made perfect sense to me why he did. He was trying to calm down those more vociferous folks who were having a meltdown.


and ones that want to repeatedly tell supporters we are simply stupid, slow, don't understand politics,
There you go again with your collectivism. All supporters aren't anything. Each person is an individual with their own thoughts and actions.


and the campaign wasn't lying to us.
Oh, I think someone wasn't straight up with us on a variety of things. Some of those are understandable, given that no one in their right mind is going to blather out their strategy in a public venue. Others are not so understandable and I too take issue with them.

In the end, the buck has to stop with Ron Paul.


I even place some blame on Ron, yes, Dr. Paul. Why? It was his campaign, under his name. Dennis Fusaro sent Dr. Paul the information last year about the current issue, and apparently never received a response.
How did he send it? Any proof that Dr. Paul even received it?


Dr. Paul's campaign still had over $800K on hand last month, and while it was turning down a few supporter refund requests,
They're not going to give refunds. When you donate money, it no longer belongs to you.

Hey, I'd like to get some of my money back. But, that's just the facts of the matter.


it was also lying to supporters about how much cash-on-hand they had when it ended. At some point, Dr. Paul needs to SPEAK UP about the ENTIRE situation. I'm guessing right now, he can't, because of the investigation. But, I'm not holding my breath for an explanation later either, because of how the campaign ended.
Why should he? You've already judged everyone and have the hangman's noose ready.



Yeah, well you are the one that continuously lumps us together. For example you said just yesterday you said I was apparently blind and:
I most certainly don't lump you in with a single soul on these forums.


Again, it's not the supporters jobs to win the election.
Actually, it is. That is if you want the person you are supporting, to win. But, instead of working against the campaign, it's usually helpful to HELP THEM do the things that they have asked you to do. You know, like phone-banking, etc. If you don't trust the candidate's campaign staff that he hired to direct his campaign, then you probably shouldn't be supporting the candidate. Why would you?


Ron Paul supporters went above and beyond when called, and even when not. The supporters gave Ron Paul 2012 the 2nd most amount of cash, behind only Mitt Romney.
Absolutely. And some even worked very hard sending out pamphlets about RP with coffins on the front. As I recall, there was a lot of scrambling not to lose some of the ex-military in Iowa who had so famously supported Dr. Paul. I'm sure the pamphlets were well-intentioned, however. But, likely not too beneficial in getting Paul elected.


When Ron Paul 2012 agreed to not attack Mitt Romney in February 2012, they should have closed shop.
That's your opinion. Others cried in their Post Toasties when he did close shop. Even after he did, some were counting on that colorful attorney to revive it from the dead. If it hadn't been so sad, it would have been rather humorous. Maybe they should have gotten a blimp. Where's Trevor when ya need him?

NewRightLibertarian
09-01-2014, 11:57 PM
Dr.Woods chimes in. Here are his tweets:

"In retrospect, it's a good thing I was purged by these people. They destroy everything they touch"

"@libertyisdead1 McConnell so clueless, thinks he's reaching out to the Tea Party by hiring most loathed operator of all. #DeservesIt"

http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2014/09/tom-woods-comments-on-developing-ron.html


Every true libertarian deserves to take a victory lap or two after this one.

LibertyEagle
09-01-2014, 11:59 PM
Paul has clearly supported an independent investigation to settle the matter as to government involvement, and merely "hadn't studied the issue" enough to conclude the government was involved. That's a position that is clearly open to 9-11 truth, instead of hostile to being associated with it, which is how you keep spinning it. What I am suggesting is you have it completely backwards. Certain Paul supporters here despise or hate 9-11 truth, and have been using the 'protect the Paul campaign' canard to marginalize the subject, and to project their hostility to the subject onto the whole liberty movement. THEY'RE the ones who have used Paul as a vehicle for projecting their views onto him, not the truth side.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhQ8xi312l8

LibertyEagle
09-02-2014, 12:02 AM
Dr.Woods chimes in. Here are his tweets:

There are a number of people who have profited greatly from Ron's campaigns and Woods is right in there with them.

NewRightLibertarian
09-02-2014, 12:10 AM
There are a number of people who have profited greatly from Ron's campaigns and Woods is right in there with them.

But Woods isn't going down in a ball of flames on corruption charges. That's the key difference.

Lord Xar
09-02-2014, 12:43 AM
Sounds like some in this thread are already setting in motion the idea that supporting Rand will lead down the same path..... Such feigned angst, such emotion.... Relax a little, you are letting your agenda spill out too much, too soon. When it is time for this site to get behind a candidate, your intent will avail you not.

jjdoyle
09-02-2014, 01:07 AM
Actually, I usually just am laughing at you.

Actually no, you're not:
http://i.imgur.com/QKqubIC.jpg?1

That's about your typical negative rep, with cursing. I tried to find one without it actually spelling out a curse word. I would guess others can provide more examples like that one as well.


Sure I can. But, I won't.

Well, make sure that person that was spreading false information, isn't near Rand in 2016 if you can.


No, it's quite true. You show it every time you use a broad brush to paint RP's entire campaign as ...

No, you're not specific, or you wouldn't need to be saying this. Because what you usually do is paint with a broad brush and insult anyone and everyone.

Nope. I have talked about specific issues with the campaign. You know that, and have negative repped me on my posts containing specific complaints against the campaign. I can copy/paste my old posts with some of those specifics, that you negative repped me for if you would like? Like Ron Paul 2012 ignoring Rick Santorum in Iowa, and not attacking him until after it in South Carolina. Like Ron Paul 2012 agreeing to not attack Mitt Romney, and helping him win the nomination smoothly instead. Lying to supporters for months after agreeing to not attack Mitt Romney. Not telling supporters that information. I wouldn't expect everybody in the campaign to know these things. So it doesn't apply to them, when I say "Ron Paul 2012" or "the campaign". I have also stated that nobody at the top of Ron Paul 2012 should be near Rand in 2016. I can find you those posts as well, not that you would care.


I understood why Hunter did that. It made perfect sense to me why he did. He was trying to calm down those more vociferous folks who were having a meltdown.

Not the supporters fault the campaign had been lying to them for months about a false strategy, and some saw it end with Rand's national TV endorsement of Mitt Romney and then Jack Hunter tried to defend an endorsement of Mitt Romney on RonPaul2012.com. The same site many had made donations to the campaign through.


There you go again with your collectivism. All supporters aren't anything. Each person is an individual with their own thoughts and actions.

Then stop placing blame on individual supporters that are simply seeking truth, and giving the campaign repeated passes, and instead blaming supporters for the campaign's repeated mistakes. Even now.


Oh, I think someone wasn't straight up with us on a variety of things. Some of those are understandable, given that no one in their right mind is going to blather out their strategy in a public venue. Others are not so understandable and I too take issue with them.

The campaign was lying to supporters in emails about the fake delegate strategy. John Tate, Rand Paul, and Ron Paul sent emails pushing that idea to supporters. Jesse Benton was mentioned by Doug Wead in an interview about it.


In the end, the buck has to stop with Ron Paul.

I agree, and I hope he speaks about it. But I don't think he can/will right now with the investigation ongoing.


How did he send it? Any proof that Dr. Paul even received it?

Why don't you ask Dennis Fusaro. I am not him. But it is already apparent from your posts over the last year, you don't like him. "Snake in the grass." and worse, is how you have repeatedly described him.


They're not going to give refunds. When you donate money, it no longer belongs to you.

They can 100% give refunds. I know for a fact one past presidential campaign did that very thing. It's not like every single donor was asking Ron Paul 2012 for a refund. But when a few did, they were not only denied a refund, but they were lied to. One fellow RPF member provided their email correspondence with the campaign they had received upon asking for a refund a few months back.



Why should he? You've already judged everyone and have the hangman's noose ready.

Why? Because his campaign is still sitting on several hundred thousand dollars, and it could help clear the air for Rand into 2016.


I most certainly don't lump you in with a single soul on these forums.

GOOD. I certainly wouldn't want to be lumped with the likes of Matt Collins or yourself.


Absolutely. And some even worked very hard sending out pamphlets about RP with coffins on the front. As I recall, there was a lot of scrambling not to lose some of the ex-military in Iowa who had so famously supported Dr. Paul. I'm sure the pamphlets were well-intentioned, however. But, likely not too beneficial in getting Paul elected.

The Super Brochure? Technicalities I know, but was the coffin on the front, or the inside (I did a google search, and it looked like the inside, was there another)? Either way, that was a grassroots deal, and I don't trust your recollection. Sorry. You have proven repeatedly the last 2 days you don't even read articles linked when posted. So, I'm not sure without a link from you, if there is proof the brochure did/didn't help Ron Paul.


That's your opinion. Others cried in their Post Toasties when he did close shop. Even after he did, some were counting on that colorful attorney to revive it from the dead. If it hadn't been so sad, it would have been rather humorous. Maybe they should have gotten a blimp. Where's Trevor when ya need him?

The reason some of those might have cried, is because they had been repeatedly lied to for months in fundraising emails from the campaign. Not their fault they were lied to for months. The campaign could have handled it much better than it did. So you having issues with some supporters being upset with the way it ended, isn't their fault. That is on the campaign.

And the blimp? You have a problem with the blimp?! I would take the blimp, over Rick Santorum Sasquatch attack ads that were apparently designed for nothing more than to help Mitt Romney win the nomination.

LibertyEagle
09-02-2014, 05:45 AM
Mod note: Some of the claims in this post and thread are in dispute. The reader is advised to consider all viewpoints and available facts.




Actually no, you're not:
http://i.imgur.com/QKqubIC.jpg?1

That's about your typical negative rep, with cursing. I tried to find one without it actually spelling out a curse word. I would guess others can provide more examples like that one as well.

True. When you were (mod edit) Rand's subforum, it rather pissed me off. However, since Bryan now owns the forum, you haven't been allowed to do that as you once did.


Well, make sure that person that was spreading false information, isn't near Rand in 2016 if you can.
(Mod edit) I'm not sure they intended to give out false information. It wasn't their area and they told me what they thought. I won't be forgetting it though.



Nope. I have talked about specific issues with the campaign. You know that, and have negative repped me on my posts containing specific complaints against the campaign. I can copy/paste my old posts with some of those specifics, that you negative repped me for if you would like? Like Ron Paul 2012 ignoring Rick Santorum in Iowa, and not attacking him until after it in South Carolina. Like Ron Paul 2012 agreeing to not attack Mitt Romney, and helping him win the nomination smoothly instead. Lying to supporters for months after agreeing to not attack Mitt Romney. Not telling supporters that information.
I doubt they felt that was something they could just announce publicly. However, once they decided that, I agree that they shouldn't have kept asking for money under the guise that Ron had any chance at all of winning. That was not cool at all.


I wouldn't expect everybody in the campaign to know these things. So it doesn't apply to them, when I say "Ron Paul 2012" or "the campaign".
But it does when you refer to them in that way.


I have also stated that nobody at the top of Ron Paul 2012 should be near Rand in 2016. I can find you those posts as well, not that you would care.
Uh huh? You say things like the campaign helped Romney win the election, but I haven't seen you provide any proof of that. Just inferences that you expound upon and draw conclusion from.


Not the supporters fault the campaign had been lying to them for months about a false strategy,
I think at the beginning, and actually for awhile, the strategy was there. But, not after Santorum dropped out for sure.


and some saw it end with Rand's national TV endorsement of Mitt Romney and then Jack Hunter tried to defend an endorsement of Mitt Romney on RonPaul2012.com. The same site many had made donations to the campaign through.
You mean the same site that Ron Paul hired Jack Hunter to post a column on? That one?


Then stop placing blame on individual supporters that are simply seeking truth, and giving the campaign repeated passes,

I don't like lynch mobs. Never have and never will. You say you want "truth", well so do I. To get to that there has to be facts known. Not just inferences and leaps in logic, but facts.


and instead blaming supporters for the campaign's repeated mistakes. Even now.

"Supporters" are not some big collective lump, like you keep claiming. Some did stupid things and were harmful to Ron and some were fantastic.


The campaign was lying to supporters in emails about the fake delegate strategy. John Tate, Rand Paul, and Ron Paul sent emails pushing that idea to supporters. Jesse Benton was mentioned by Doug Wead in an interview about it.
Do you have proof that it wasn't their strategy for some period of time? I agree that it was carried on too long though.


I agree, and I hope he speaks about it. But I don't think he can/will right now with the investigation ongoing.
He probably will at some point. Especially, since he's not going to run for anything again. All he has to worry about is not giving the media anything that they can sling around to hurt Rand.


Why don't you ask Dennis Fusaro. I am not him. But it is already apparent from your posts over the last year, you don't like him. "Snake in the grass." and worse, is how you have repeatedly described him.
I'm not the one who has put a hangman's noose around Ron's campaign. (Mod edit). You'd think you'd want to know all the facts first, before you ordained yourself the judge, jury and executioner.



They can 100% give refunds. I know for a fact one past presidential campaign did that very thing. It's not like every single donor was asking Ron Paul 2012 for a refund. But when a few did, they were not only denied a refund, but they were lied to. One fellow RPF member provided their email correspondence with the campaign they had received upon asking for a refund a few months back.
Lied to, how? About what?


Why? Because his campaign is still sitting on several hundred thousand dollars, and it could help clear the air for Rand into 2016.
Honestly, I don't think it would change one thing about how you behave.


GOOD. I certainly wouldn't want to be lumped with the likes of Matt Collins or yourself.
Works for me.

By the way, nor, would I want to be lumped in with the likes of you and Dondero.

See, two can play your game. :p



The Super Brochure? Technicalities I know, but was the coffin on the front, or the inside (I did a google search, and it looked like the inside, was there another)? Either way, that was a grassroots deal, and I don't trust your recollection. Sorry.
It was way more than a "technicality". The whole brochure was complete fail. The coffin was just the final nail. ha ha. The people who designed it meant well. I feel sure of that. I spoke to them several times. But, it was a bad idea. Marketing 101 is to target people with the specific issues they are concerned with. Not the entire kitchen sink and the garbage pail too. Oh, and then there was the matter of some of the videos they linked to in their brochure. Not what they intended. Oopsy. I'd have to go find the threads to remember the actual videos. Some were choice. lol. And this stuff was being blanketed around the country. :rolleyes: Luckily, the owners of the brochure didn't intend that and were open to suggestions for how to rectify. They meant well, but it wasn't a good idea at all.


You have proven repeatedly the last 2 days you don't even read articles linked when posted. So, I'm not sure without a link from you, if there is proof the brochure did/didn't help Ron Paul.
Yeah, and I don't read articles by Sorcha Faal anymore, either. If you had been around in the first election, you would have gotten more than sick of reading that little slimy creature's, also known as Dondero, blatherings. I'm glad you enjoy reading them though and quote them here to further your stances. :p Extremely telling.


The reason some of those might have cried, is because they had been repeatedly lied to for months in fundraising emails from the campaign. Not their fault they were lied to for months. The campaign could have handled it much better than it did. So you having issues with some supporters being upset with the way it ended, isn't their fault. That is on the campaign.
It's not being upset that it ended that was the issue. It was trying to blame everyone and their dog when it did end and grasp onto straws, like the attorney, and strike out with venom against anyone who questioned it. It's about being tethered to reality. And you should appreciate this. People were actually being banned if they questioned what the attorney was claiming.


And the blimp? You have a problem with the blimp?! I would take the blimp,
No, if people wanted to donate to Trevor, they could. It just would have been simpler to get direct deposit setup is all, rather than go through all the silly blimp stuff for the few days it was actually in the air. lol


over Rick Santorum Sasquatch attack ads that were apparently designed for nothing more than to help Mitt Romney win the nomination.
There you go with your inferences and leaps of logic. You know nothing of the sort. You have suspicions. Suspicions that you want everyone to agree with you on. I want the truth and that requires way more than inferences. There is plenty of time to hang someone out to dry.

extortion17
09-02-2014, 06:13 AM
And the blimp? You have a problem with the blimp?! I would take the blimp
No, if people wanted to donate to Trevor, they could. It just would have been simpler to get direct deposit setup is all,
rather than go through all the silly blimp stuff for the few days it was actually in the air. lol
.

Global attention to the zeppelin that was aloft for only a few days . . . lol - best money spent - very effective really imho.

"Pimp the blimp!"

http://i372.photobucket.com/albums/oo161/sunblush/12onpaulblimp01.jpg (http://s372.photobucket.com/user/sunblush/media/12onpaulblimp01.jpg.html)

.

For real . . .

http://i372.photobucket.com/albums/oo161/sunblush/RonPaulBlimp.jpg (http://s372.photobucket.com/user/sunblush/media/RonPaulBlimp.jpg.html)


.

jjdoyle
09-02-2014, 06:36 AM
True. When you were trolling Rand's subforum, it rather pissed me off. However, since Bryan now owns the forum, you haven't been allowed to do that as you once did.

I'm sorry you find the truth as trolling.



Uh huh? You say things like the campaign helped Romney win the election, but I haven't seen you provide any proof of that. Just inferences that you expound upon and draw conclusion from.
Ron Paul 2012 was working with Romney's campaign as far back as January 2012, this we know. Ron Paul 2012 agreed in February 2012 to not attack Mitt Romney, and never ran one single Romney only TV attack ad when/where it would have mattered. Virginia. Maine. New Hampshire. Even possibly Iowa.



I think at the beginning, and actually for awhile, the strategy was there. But, not after Santorum dropped out for sure.
You can't have a real delegate strategy, while agreeing to not attack the only candidate polling in 1st and ahead of your candidate the entire time basically. Again, Ron Paul 2012 helped destroy forward momentum, with their own actions.


You mean the same site that Ron Paul hired Jack Hunter to post a column on? That one?

Considering that Ron Paul didn't endorse Mitt Romney, and that John Tate, Jesse Benton, and Rand were associated with the campaign, I don't know who hired Jack Hunter. But, it doesn't matter who hired him, it was a pathetic defense, of a pathetic endorsement.



I don't like lynch mobs. Never have and never will. You say you want "truth", well so do I. To get to that there has to be facts known. Not just inferences and leaps in logic, but facts.
There are many facts we already know. Ron Paul 2012 never running on single Mitt Romney only TV attack ad. Ron Paul 2012 working with Mitt Romney's campaign as far back as January 2012. Ron Paul 2012 agreeing to not attack Mitt Romney. Ron Paul 2012 lying to supporters in February, March, April, and May about the fake delegate strategy, then abandoning supporters when it mattered.



"Supporters" are not some big collective lump, like you keep claiming. Some did stupid things and were harmful to Ron and some were fantastic.
I never claimed supporters are some big collective lump. I said you lump us together. There is a difference. And you already showed you ignore facts, when they go against what you want to believe.


Do you have proof that it wasn't their strategy for some period of time? I agree that it was carried on too long though.
Yes. When they agreed to not attack Mitt Romney, and based on every single campaign action after that, that is proof their "strategy" was a lie. February 2012. March 2012. April 2012. May 2012. Repeated emails, pitching the delegate strategy. Saying it was about the delegates. Not the votes.

Then Ron Paul 2012 campaign abandoning the Louisiana delegation, and others, as has been repeatedly stated by supporters in those states on this very site.


I'm not the one who has put a hangman's noose around Ron's campaign. You are. You'd think you'd want to know all the facts first, before you ordained yourself the judge, jury and executioner.
Stop blaming me for the campaign committing suicide. I didn't put the rope around their neck and force them to jump, they did it themselves. You have ordained yourself judge, jury, and executioner over Dennis Fusaro, and any RPF member that dares question the campaign's decision, or even Rand Paul's repeat issues. I do want the facts, you don't and you repeatedly ignore them and make things up with no evidence. You have presented nothing that shows Ron Paul 2012 wasn't lying to supporters.



Lied to, how? About what?
About how much cash they had.




By the way, nor, would I want to be lumped in with the likes of you and Dondero.

See, two can play your game. :p

Is Dondero a member here, are you just continuing false claims? As you repeatedly have ignored the facts of what led to me finding and posting the link.


It was way more than a "technicality". The whole brochure was complete fail. The coffin was just the final nail. ha ha. The people who designed it meant well. I feel sure of that. I spoke to them several times. But, it was a bad idea. Marketing 101 is to target people with the specific issues they are concerned with. Not the entire kitchen sink and the garbage pail too. Oh, and then there was the matter of some of the videos they linked to in their brochure. Not what they intended. Oopsy.

You said the coffin was on the front, that was the technicality I was talking about. Was the coffin on the front as you claimed, or on the inside? Do you have proof that the brochure hurt Ron, or just people at the campaign saying it?


Yeah, and I don't read articles by Sorcha Faal anymore, either. If you had been around in the first election, you would have gotten more than sick of reading that little slimy creature's, also known as Dondero, blatherings. I'm glad you enjoy reading them though and quote them here to further your stances. :p Extremely telling.
Just because you repeatedly lie, doesn't make it true. I never said I enjoyed reading it, but you lied about what it actually said. And about why it was posted. It is a fact you lied more than once in regards to why it was posted, and even lied about the article linked said.


It's not being upset that it ended that was the issue. It was trying to blame everyone and their dog when it did end and grasp onto straws, like the attorney, and strike out with venom against anyone who questioned it. It's about being tethered to reality. And you should appreciate this. People were actually being banned if they questioned what the attorney was claiming.

No, if people wanted to donate to Trevor, they could. It just would have been simpler to get direct deposit setup is all, rather than go through all the silly blimp stuff for the few days it was actually in the air. lol

There you go with your inferences and leaps of logic. You know nothing of the sort. You have suspicions. Suspicions that you want everyone to agree with you on. I want the truth and that requires way more than inferences. There is plenty of time to hang someone out to dry.

So the blimp was for Trevor to raise money, and not actually fly the blimp? Or, what exactly was the problem with it? And you are saying the blimp flew for only a few days?
I have more than enough proof the Rick Santorum Sasquatch attack ad, was designed to get Rick Santorum out of the way:
http://thehill.com/video/campaign/211743-pauls-latest-michigan-ad-santorum-sent-billions-to-dictators

It was run in Michigan, a state Ron Paul had NO chance of winning, and was between Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum. We know Ron Paul 2012 agreed to not attack Mitt Romney, BEFORE Michigan. Had Mitt Romney lost Michigan, the entire race would have opened up as a bloodbath, as I have detailed before. And we would have had an actual chance at a brokered convention.

nobody's_hero
09-02-2014, 07:21 AM
The campaign had its shortfalls, the grassroots its internal divisions, but they were the minor key reason why Paul didn't win. The major reason was always the establishment media and Republican leadership, greasing the skids and putting their thumb on the scale, start to finish, to ensure the elite anointed milquetoast moderate won the nomination, while we got marginalized and victimized by blackout coverage, election fraud and dirty tricks, so as to never be in a position to win.

Note how quickly all that "convention delegate" tactical knowledge has become moot, since the leadership simply pulled an etch-a-sketch and changed those rules. Meaning in hindsight, there was no benefit to learning those rules in 2012, since those rules are now dust, and we now know the campaign wasn't trying to win by that strategy anyway.

And good grief, can we cut it with scapegoating "truther antics" when that had nothing to do with the losses, yet it gets blamed for the 2008 and 2012 outcomes? The anti-truth squeaky wheel side got their way, and separated Paul from the issue in 2008---result, Paul didn't win a single primary, followed by the anti-truth folks blaming 9-11 truth for Paul's defeat anyway. The anti-truth side got their way again, and separated Paul from the issue in 2012---result, Paul didn't win a single primary, followed by the anti-truth folks blaming 9-11 truth for Paul's defeat anyway. We tried it their way, twice, so it appears it is the anti-truth side that needs to be held accountable for 'not knowing how to win,' not the truthers.

I wasn't blaming the truthers. I was actually pointing out that they are some of the most dedicated people in the movement. Sometimes, though, they're also the loudest and most prominent when the media needs someone to pick on, which is unfortunate, but even so, I'd rather have one of them by my side than 1,000,000 Jessie Bentons.

And certainly we had all the factors you mention against us. But I expect the GOP leadership to be against us. I expect the media to spew lies. What I didn't expect was for the official campaign to build our whole game plan around being clever delegates and then suddenly halfway through the summer of 2012 say, 'oh well, we can't win this, let's just kiss Romney's butt so he doesn't tell everyone we're bad people.' I was expecting the knife to come at me from the front, not the back.

We were well-trained . . . for a fight that never happened.

sparebulb
09-02-2014, 07:42 AM
I don't like lynch mobs. Never have and never will.

Street level justice never leads to anything good. It certainly never leads to accountability or better government.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4f/Philip_Dawe_%28attributed%29%2C_The_Bostonians_Pay ing_the_Excise-man%2C_or_Tarring_and_Feathering_%281774%29_-_02.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7c/Huck_Finn_Travelling_by_Rail.jpg

orenbus
09-02-2014, 08:18 AM
http://www.earlyamerica.com/image/review/fall96/sonsfire.jpg

Christian Liberty
09-02-2014, 01:24 PM
Paul has clearly supported an independent investigation to settle the matter as to government involvement, and merely "hadn't studied the issue" enough to conclude the government was involved. That's a position that is clearly open to 9-11 truth, instead of hostile to being associated with it, which is how you keep spinning it. What I am suggesting is you have it completely backwards. Certain Paul supporters here despise or hate 9-11 truth, and have been using the 'protect the Paul campaign' canard to marginalize the subject, and to project their hostility to the subject onto the whole liberty movement. THEY'RE the ones who have used Paul as a vehicle for projecting their views onto him, not the truth side.

Its worth getting marginalized for principle. Its not worth getting marginalized over a conspiracy theory which one doesn't actually even know that much about, but is nonetheless certain to make you look "nuts" to your audience. I basically guarantee that's how Ron was thinking.

mosquitobite
09-02-2014, 01:25 PM
And certainly we had all the factors you mention against us. But I expect the GOP leadership to be against us. I expect the media to spew lies. What I didn't expect was for the official campaign to build our whole game plan around being clever delegates and then suddenly halfway through the summer of 2012 say, 'oh well, we can't win this, let's just kiss Romney's butt so he doesn't tell everyone we're bad people.' I was expecting the knife to come at me from the front, not the back.

We were well-trained . . . for a fight that never happened.

YES!

Christian Liberty
09-02-2014, 01:42 PM
Street level justice never leads to anything good. It certainly never leads to accountability or better government.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4f/Philip_Dawe_%28attributed%29%2C_The_Bostonians_Pay ing_the_Excise-man%2C_or_Tarring_and_Feathering_%281774%29_-_02.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7c/Huck_Finn_Travelling_by_Rail.jpg

Unfortunately, the more I read about the US Revolution, the more I'm beginning to wonder if it was in many ways a legendary event. I've always found myself arguing for it simply out of opposition to this idea that its somehow immoral to revolt against the government per say, but I am beginning to wonder if in reality the British government was actually that bad.

Two articles I read recently:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/2003/07/john-attarian/hurrah-for-king-george/

http://www.lewrockwell.com/2010/02/jonathan-m-kolkey/did-king-george-iii-deserve-to-be-overthrown/

Mind you, as an ancap I believe all governments are "that bad' but I'm trying to put things into perspective, and as far as it goes it seems like USA 2014 is FAR more oppressive than the colonies in 1776.

orenbus
09-02-2014, 02:07 PM
Mind you, as an ancap I believe all governments are "that bad' but I'm trying to put things into perspective, and as far as it goes it seems like USA 2014 is FAR more oppressive than the colonies in 1776.

It's an interesting point.

Well one issue I know that was a big deal back then was the ability for colonials to settle new lands beyond the original colonies basically restricting movement and settlement while there was lots of free land to be had and developed. Although it could be said that today's government has large swathes of land that is also restricted for use and ability to settle, there is still a lot of land that can be purchased at relatively low cost from others as opposed to not having the choice at all to obtain land. I think the bigger issue would be the reaction to taxation and what type of direct impact that had on people's livelihoods.

I have a question for anyone that can answer. Prior to the Stamp Act, was there any direct taxes at all on the American Colonist by the British Government?

If not, then closest parallel (at least in principle) I would imagine would be the types of things the government has tried to do in the past years with internet restrictions, taxation and fees on the internet. During the whole SOPA thing there was widespread outrage, although I doubt it would have generated enough anger to spill out into the streets it's still something that universally people were against regardless of political persuasion. The reason I saw it is somewhat of a parallel in principle is because the perception could be equated as if it's not broke don't "fix it". Meaning the internet is working fine right now, why do we need to add taxes or impose restrictions when none of that will improve the experience people have on the internet right now and if anything will most likely make things worse. Same goes with taxation in 1765, at the time the colonists were being told that the taxes were needed for the American colonial defense, but the colonists had lived nine generations on their own and being able to defend themselves against the American Indians. Sure there was a Indian/French ware that had recently concluded, but at that point it was over there was no need for taxes to fight a ware that wasn't happening. So essential the colonists were saying WE ARE FINE LEAVE US ALONE IN PEACE. Once a people get used to living either tax free or feel like their day to day lives are fine without any additional rules or penalties needing to be imposed and feel that those additional rules would hold a direct threat upon their happiness or the ability to live or function normally that's when the anger begins to generate, but even then that's usually not enough for people to become insurrectionists. It takes bloodshed and thoughts of militarized units coming into their neighborhoods (seeing fellow citizens in other states being treated as such) and seeing foreign military impose life altering controls on them, then people finally reach their breaking point and begin the snowball to revolution.

Because in today's America, many go by day to day in relative happiness I don't think we see the type of anger they had back in 1765 and on, at least not yet. It's not until issues are seen as widespread concerns that American's wake up to mounting problems that are building in the background and then realize something needs to be addressed, case in point militarization of the police/1033 program, if it wasn't for Ferguson protests most people in this country wouldn't have even thought it was an issue that needed to be addressed, it becomes real once they start to see it with their own eyes and perspectives. But to reach a point where violent revolution is the only choice the impacts that generate that anger does not come across as measured or peace meal, instead they become so unbearable and from multiple directions that there is no other choice but to take up arms.

Anyway getting back on topic I think the issue people have with this ongoing saga is basically summed up in what Pcosmar said in another thread:




...

The investigation has led back to dealings with Benton.

For all the talk about "it is just politics" and "this is how it is done",, that is exactly what many people here hate about politics.
It was the Honesty and integrity of Ron Paul that attracted many (myself included).

Dishonesty and backroom deals are why people reject politics. It needs to be cleansed from the Liberty movement and purged from the ranks.
Even the appearance of impropriety should not be tolerated for a second,,, and certainly not defended.

Given the facts as we know them right now I don't think it is unreasonable to have warranted questions of credibility and integrity with some of the staff members of the official campaign, as unfortunate as it may be.

I think even some of our more traditional politic members will agree that a huge event in the liberty movement was when Ron Paul had the Guiliani Debate moment. And why is that? Because in those few seconds he had on stage at that debate he was able to reach out to many of us and show some proof in front of the world that there may be one person in Washington that actually has some honesty and integrity.

Regardless of what some may think about FEC regulations whether they should be broken, bent or not, we rely on the official campaign to stay above board, when that trust is broken of course there is going to be anger and outrage because it spits on all the trust Ron Paul has developed with us and we with ourselves. Without that trust, now we start to attack each other because some will feel they need to defend those in authority/leadership position actions while others feel they need to address why those actions are wrong. I'm really surprised some don't seem to understand this, especially given how intelligent I would consider most of you are.

I guess one way to maybe communicate this is, for the traditional political folks out there you will agree in your minds, that political agendas shouldn't necessarily be attached to a candidate (that isn't part of their core issues) because of potential backlash from certain political spheres that have impact on the general voting public, and the candidate being seen negatively due to political messages that is not part of a controlled delivery of issues. So taking that same premise does it not also stand that we would not want individuals in the official campaign to represent us or the candidate that are found or suspected to have been involved in breaking or bending FEC regulations? The end result is the same negative press for a candidate from individuals that impact the liberty movement in an election, but more importantly threatens the trust through dishonesty and backroom deals that attack the integrity that represents what brought us all together in the first place.

Peace&Freedom
09-02-2014, 02:46 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhQ8xi312l8

That's a premium example that confirms my point, not rebuts it. There are 5-10 videos of Ron speaking sympathetically or open-mindedly about the subject, to every one like the above of him playing politics on advice from his team. Paul did not reach a settled conclusion about 9-11 being an inside job (nor could he, having not studied the issue), so it is misleading to describe him to be "clearly not agreeing" with the truth side about their conclusions. His position is not dogmatic, yet the anti-truth side has been using his sound bites out of context to project their hostility onto the issue for years. And note their silence on my point about how they have blamed 9-11 truth for Paul's defeats, even though his campaign distanced itself from the subject in both campaigns.

jllundqu
09-02-2014, 02:48 PM
If Benton so much as farts in Rand's direction leading up to 2016, there will be a mass exodus of support.

jjdoyle
09-02-2014, 06:17 PM
If Benton so much as farts in Rand's direction leading up to 2016, there will be a mass exodus of support.

You must hate liberty. Please take another plastic chicken dinner course, to learn what you don't know.

LibertyEagle
09-02-2014, 10:34 PM
Global attention to the zeppelin that was aloft for only a few days . . . lol - best money spent - very effective really imho.

http://i372.photobucket.com/albums/oo161/sunblush/12onpaulblimp01.jpg (http://s372.photobucket.com/user/sunblush/media/12onpaulblimp01.jpg.html)


.

Yeah, except that never happened.

LibertyEagle
09-02-2014, 10:43 PM
That's a premium example that confirms my point, not rebuts it. There are 5-10 videos of Ron speaking sympathetically or open-mindedly about the subject, to every one like the above of him playing politics on advice from his team. Paul did not reach a settled conclusion about 9-11 being an inside job (nor could he, having not studied the issue), so it is misleading to describe him to be "clearly not agreeing" with the truth side about their conclusions. His position is not dogmatic, yet the anti-truth side has been using his sound bites out of context to project their hostility onto the issue for years. And note their silence on my point about how they have blamed 9-11 truth for Paul's defeats, even though his campaign distanced itself from the subject in both campaigns.

That was the '08 election. You know as well as I do that Ron didn't take advice from anyone. What he said, he believed.

LibertyEagle
09-03-2014, 05:18 AM
I'm sorry you find the truth as trolling.
You tell some truth, yes, and as stated many times before, what you then do is make large leaps from there to draw conclusions that do not have enough facts to back them up. But, apparently, you believe if you keep repeating the same thing over and over again, you will get enough small intellect people to agree with you.


Ron Paul 2012 was working with Romney's campaign as far back as January 2012, this we know. Ron Paul 2012 agreed in February 2012 to not attack Mitt Romney, and never ran one single Romney only TV attack ad when/where it would have mattered. Virginia. Maine. New Hampshire. Even possibly Iowa.

You can't have a real delegate strategy, while agreeing to not attack the only candidate polling in 1st and ahead of your candidate the entire time basically. Again, Ron Paul 2012 helped destroy forward momentum, with their own actions.

What we know is that Doug Wead said that by the time Romney threatened the campaign, that there was no chance for Ron to win the election. So, they decided it wasn't a good long-term strategic move to have Ron's legacy darkened.


Considering that Ron Paul didn't endorse Mitt Romney, and that John Tate, Jesse Benton, and Rand were associated with the campaign, I don't know who hired Jack Hunter. But, it doesn't matter who hired him, it was a pathetic defense, of a pathetic endorsement.

That's your opinion. Because you were still (mod edit) that Ron Paul hadn't already lost. And since he had, it made strategic sense to change focus to what would further the liberty movement as a whole. You know, losing the battle, but winning the war.

Jack Hunter was pretty damned good and I'm sorry he can no longer be associated with Ron and Rand. He was absolutely FABULOUS at explaining the message in terms that conservatives could understand. So, while at times Ron went off into libertarian la la land, Hunter could bring it back to reality and it was starting to resonate with regular voters. So yeah, that was pretty great.


There are many facts we already know. Ron Paul 2012 never running on single Mitt Romney only TV attack ad. Ron Paul 2012 working with Mitt Romney's campaign as far back as January 2012. Ron Paul 2012 agreeing to not attack Mitt Romney. Ron Paul 2012 lying to supporters in February, March, April, and May about the fake delegate strategy, then abandoning supporters when it mattered.

Because, and as you well know, the plan from the very beginning was for the race to end up being between Ron and Mitt. The others needed to fall by the wayside. No, things didn't work out as planned and in my opinion, the whole strategy was a no-go after Ron didn't win in Iowa. Certainly by the end of New Hampshire. I don't think there was any hope at all after that point. So, no, I didn't appreciate the fundraising letters pretending like there was a chance in hell. On that we agree. But, switching to having Ron make a big a mark as possible so that the liberty movement could be viewed as "here to stay" and also viewed hopefully as not as scary as some in the Republican Party had been made to think, seems pretty rational a move. Again, trying to win the war, even though the battle was lost.


I never claimed supporters are some big collective lump. I said you lump us together. There is a difference. And you already showed you ignore facts, when they go against what you want to believe.
Nope. Wrong again. I will say again. I do not lump you and the likes of Dondero in with any other supporters. Or view you as supporters at all, frankly.


Yes. When they agreed to not attack Mitt Romney, and based on every single campaign action after that, that is proof their "strategy" was a lie. February 2012. March 2012. April 2012. May 2012. Repeated emails, pitching the delegate strategy. Saying it was about the delegates. Not the votes.
Wait. Do you honestly not realize that winning nominations IS about the delegates? Really?


Then Ron Paul 2012 campaign abandoning the Louisiana delegation, and others, as has been repeatedly stated by supporters in those states on this very site.
I have questions about that what happened there too. Thing is, we really don't know the answer at this point. But, apparently, that doesn't stop you from reaching a conclusion. You've got your noose ready.


Stop blaming me for the campaign committing suicide. I didn't put the rope around their neck and force them to jump, they did it themselves. You have ordained yourself judge, jury, and executioner over Dennis Fusaro, and any RPF member that dares question the campaign's decision, or even Rand Paul's repeat issues. I do want the facts, you don't and you repeatedly ignore them and make things up with no evidence. You have presented nothing that shows Ron Paul 2012 wasn't lying to supporters.

Thing is, you have proven very little. You have a few facts around the edge, but then jump from them to a grand conclusion that isn't substantiated.


About how much cash they had.

You have suspicions. But, you have no rational basis to jump to a conclusion.




Is Dondero a member here, are you just continuing false claims? As you repeatedly have ignored the facts of what led to me finding and posting the link.

No, Dondero is a (mad edit). Slime that you quoted without stating who you were quoting. Cute.


You said the coffin was on the front, that was the technicality I was talking about. Was the coffin on the front as you claimed, or on the inside?
The point is that they put pictures of coffins in a brochure bearing RP's name before the Iowa primary and sent it to Iowa voters. Many of the veterans WHO HAD BEEN supporting Ron there were offended as all hell.

It also linked to Truther videos. No, they hadn't intended to do that, but they damn sure did. In a brochure that was sent out across the country, including Iowa. Yeah, that was brilliant :rolleyes:


Do you have proof that the brochure hurt Ron, or just people at the campaign saying it?
Both.

Do you have proof that putting f'ing COFFINS on their brochure helped Ron in Iowa, you propaganda-filled BS artist? :)


Just because you repeatedly lie,
I didn't "lie". I read the blatherings that you posted, without quoting them as belonging to Dondero. People usually refer to that as plagiarizing, but I haven't accused you of that, because I realize you didn't intend to do that.

When I clicked through and saw it was Mr. Dondero, I saw the link which, as I recall, had something about semitism in it, so I just closed it. I've read many articles by Dondero in the past and didn't feel the need to read another.

So, yeah, if he didn't call Ron an anti-semite, I was wrong. But, that was on oversight. Not a lie, as you claim. It certainly wasn't intended, anymore that your intent was to plagiarize Dondero. Of course I know the only reason you are focusing on this is to draw attention away from what YOU did. Most here would typically be repelled and appalled that someone calling themselves a RP supporter would quote Dondero in an effort to substantiate their own views. Birds of a feather, and all that.


doesn't make it true. I never said I enjoyed reading it, but you lied about what it actually said. And about why it was posted. It is a fact you lied more than once in regards to why it was posted, and even lied about the article linked said.

You quoted it, well kinda, in an effort to substantiate your views. Yeah, we know. lol

Every word out of your mouth is contrived and twisted propaganda. You're pretty good at twisting words, repeating bullshit that others have already answered many times before and spouting half-truths. You came to this forum with an agenda and have done nothing else but try to execute it. I have always seen right through you and you hate it. Too bad.


So the blimp was for Trevor to raise money, and not actually fly the blimp? Or, what exactly was the problem with it? And you are saying the blimp flew for only a few days?
I have more than enough proof the Rick Santorum Sasquatch attack ad, was designed to get Rick Santorum out of the way:
http://thehill.com/video/campaign/211743-pauls-latest-michigan-ad-santorum-sent-billions-to-dictators
Yes, much like the RP race car was for raising money to advertise Ron Paul. lolol


It was run in Michigan, a state Ron Paul had NO chance of winning, and was between Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum. We know Ron Paul 2012 agreed to not attack Mitt Romney, BEFORE Michigan. Had Mitt Romney lost Michigan, the entire race would have opened up as a bloodbath, as I have detailed before. And we would have had an actual chance at a brokered convention.
Mistakes were certainly made. Romney's campaign made quite a few too. But, that doesn't prove jack poo. All you still have are suppositions.

orenbus
09-03-2014, 07:00 AM
Hadn't seen this video before, is it true Benton made over half a million dollars from the campaign?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sw_B5bx8GKc

erowe1
09-03-2014, 07:05 AM
Ron Paul 2012 was working with Romney's campaign as far back as January 2012, this we know. Ron Paul 2012 agreed in February 2012 to not attack Mitt Romney, and never ran one single Romney only TV attack ad when/where it would have mattered. Virginia. Maine. New Hampshire. Even possibly Iowa.


Definitely not Iowa. The campaign tried to win there, almost did, and did attack Romney there. But how is any of what you said "working with Romney's campaign" anyway?

And how would running attack ads have mattered? They wouldn't have affected the outcome of those races, and they would have burned bridges with the eventual nominee.

specsaregood
09-03-2014, 07:34 AM
Hadn't seen this video, before, is it true Benton made over half a million dollars from the campaign?

No its not true, if you are talking net. Most of that was reimbursements for expenses.

jjdoyle
09-03-2014, 08:11 AM
You tell some truth, yes, and as stated many times before, what you then do is make large leaps from there to draw conclusions that do not have enough facts to back them up. But, apparently, you believe if you keep repeating the same thing over and over again, you will get enough small intellect people to agree with you.

I have more people on the forums that agree with me, than don't. I base my opinions on facts, and what we know of the actions/non-actions of the campaign. You and Matt Collins have repeatedly for years personally attacked users here that questioned the official campaign. Not me. Nobody that looks at the facts, actions, non-actions of the campaign and concludes it was dishonest, is of small intellect. But nice try at trying to insult me, and those that agree with me.


What we know is that Doug Wead said that by the time Romney threatened the campaign, that there was no chance for Ron to win the election. So, they decided it wasn't a good long-term strategic move to have Ron's legacy darkened.

And? Doesn't change my points any. It proves them. Ron Paul 2012 lied to supporters at least starting in February 2012, all of March 2012, April 2012, and May 2012. They wasted millions of dollars after they agreed to not attack Mitt Romney, and wasted months of time of supporters.


That's your opinion. Because you were still living in la la land that Ron Paul hadn't already lost. And since he had, it made strategic sense to change focus to what would further the liberty movement as a whole. You know, losing the battle, but winning the war.

Actually, you're speaking out of repeated ignorance. I was warning people during the campaign something wasn't right. And there are some members here on the forums that can testify to that. I was in no la la land about Ron winning, like I'm not in some la la land about Rand winning either. And no, the campaign didn't change strategies, they were simply lying to supporters for months. Again, wasting not only their money, but more importantly their time.

The Ron Paul supporters in Louisiana that participated in the delegate process will testify to it. As one member here on the forums has already stated it, multiple times.


Jack Hunter was pretty damned good and I'm sorry he can no longer be associated with Ron and Rand. He was absolutely FABULOUS at explaining the message in terms that conservatives could understand. So, while at times Ron went off into libertarian la la land, Hunter could bring it back to reality and it was starting to resonate with regular voters. So yeah, that was pretty great.

That's your opinion. Ron Paul went off to Constitutional land quite often, but not libertarian la la land. There is a difference. The issue was messaging, and better talking points (things I was saying and even helped with during the campaign). Jack Hunter was not helping in either of those areas from my experience with the 2012 campaign. There was another staffer that did though.


Because, and as you well know, the plan from the very beginning was for the race to end up being between Ron and Mitt. The others needed to fall by the wayside. No, things didn't work out as planned and in my opinion, the whole strategy was a no-go after Ron didn't win in Iowa. Certainly by the end of New Hampshire. I don't think there was any hope at all after that point. So, no, I didn't appreciate the fundraising letters pretending like there was a chance in hell. On that we agree. But, switching to having Ron make a big a mark as possible so that the liberty movement could be viewed as "here to stay" and also viewed hopefully as not as scary as some in the Republican Party had been made to think, seems pretty rational a move. Again, trying to win the war, even though the battle was lost.

I don't know what the plan was. There is no proof of your claim at all of a Mitt Romney vs. Ron Paul idea, based on the actual actions of the campaign. Virginia, the first one-on-one state, there was not one single positive/negative RP ad. Ron Paul 2012 never aired a single Mitt Romney only TV attack ad, in any state. Even after it was just him and Mitt left in the race in April 2012. They ignored Rick Santorum in Iowa, despite him being the last candidate to be getting free positive press. And didn't attack him until outside of Iowa. In South Carolina. Where Ron Paul finished 4th. Then Michigan, where they helped Mitt Romney win the state, by attacking Rick Santorum.

So, after Iowa and New Hampshire, and after Maine and others, they should have closed shop as I have said. Not continue to lie to supporters for months.

And Ron could have had a bigger mark, had the campaign been using funds to address bigger issues with campaign funds. Not simply helping Mitt Romney win the nomination. That has been one of my points in past posts as well. Running an ad like what Herman Cain's campaign put out (after it ended though) on his 9/9/9 plan, but on issues that Ron found important. Like the FED, foreign policy, and others.


Nope. Wrong again. I will say again. I do not lump you and the likes of Dondero in with any other supporters. Or view you as supporters at all, frankly.

I'm not like Dondero, because he doesn't apparently agree with RP's foreign policy. I am much more aligned with a Constitutional foreign policy, than a neocon type. Nice try at another ad hominem personal attack, but failing again. I supported Ron in 2008, donated to the campaign, volunteered at the campaign office near D.C.. I went to events in 2008 and was outside the South Carolina debate where he got much national attention after Rudy went after him in stupid ignorance. I went to our state delegate process then, and voted for RP supporters in the process.

Even did the unthinkable, sign waving.


Wait. Do you honestly not realize that winning nominations IS about the delegates? Really?

Wait, have you missed all the prior posts, even in this thread, about Ron Paul 2012 supporters showing up to become delegates, with no direction from the campaign? Taking over state conventions, like in Iowa, Louisiana, and others, and now losing all that and the campaign abandoning many of them in the process? The delegate process matters less now though, than in 2012, because of the rule changes. So, again, the supporters showed up when asked, and even when not. The campaign abandoned supporters, and had been lying to them for months.



I have questions about that what happened there too. Thing is, we really don't know the answer at this point. But, apparently, that doesn't stop you from reaching a conclusion. You've got your noose ready.

Not true at all. Have you not talked to any Louisiana RP supporters that went through the delegate process? Have you not seen the repeated posts by one here on the forums? Here's a link to one comment on the forums if you want to try and ask them:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?389767-Tom-Woods-My-Memories-of-Jesse-Benton&p=5635456&viewfull=1#post5635456

And again, Ron Paul 2012 committed suicide. As I have said in months past, Rand should have no one like Jesse Benton, John Tate, Jack Hunter, Matt Collins, or even yourself on his staff, if he is serious about winning. Truth and honesty is a must.


Thing is, you have proven very little. You have a few facts around the edge, but then jump from them to a grand conclusion that isn't substantiated.

I have many facts and can find older posts you may have missed, that may help. Outside of just campaign lying fundraising emails. We have Jesse Benton's press call in May 2012, where he stated once again Ron Paul 2012 had been talking with Mitt Romney's campaign. Doug Wead's admission outside the RNC they agreed in February 2012 to not attack Mitt Romney. The campaign abandoning supporters in the delegate process.

The campaign repeatedly lied to supporters, for months. Simply dragging them along for their money, and wasting their time as well.


You have suspicions. But, you have no rational basis to jump to a conclusion.

Facts, based on actions/non-actions, and actual words of staffers is more than rational. There's not even jumping to conclusions, when it is a fact the campaign lied to supporters for months. When it is a fact based on the vote totals and polling prior to Michigan, that Ron Paul 2012 helped Mitt Romney win Michigan, by attacking Rick Santorum there.


No, Dondero is a lying piece of slime. Slime that you quoted without stating who you were quoting. Cute.
AGAIN, I wasn't the one that made the claim. It was another person. Like you claiming the brochure had a coffin on the front, when it didn't. There claim was at least backed up, even if it was by a "lying piece of slime" according to you, though you were the one that lied about what it actually said.


The point is that they put pictures of coffins in a brochure bearing RP's name before the Iowa primary and sent it to Iowa voters. Many of the veterans WHO HAD BEEN supporting Ron there were offended as all hell.

It also linked to Truther videos. No, they hadn't intended to do that, but they damn sure did. In a brochure that was sent out across the country, including Iowa. Yeah, that was brilliant :rolleyes:

The point is, you made a claim it had a coffin on the front. And that it hurt Ron Paul in Iowa. You say you have proof, but provided none. I didn't make that claim. You did.


Do you have proof that putting f'ing COFFINS on their brochure helped Ron in Iowa, you propaganda-filled BS artist? :)

Again, you made a claim about the brochure, that wasn't true. Propaganda to fit your story? Perhaps. Because I even asked you if you had evidence it hurt Ron, other than from someone in the campaign. But you have provide nothing, and just continue personal attacks.


I didn't "lie". I read the blatherings that you posted, without quoting them as belonging to Dondero. People usually refer to that as plagiarizing, but I haven't accused you of that, because I realize you didn't intend to do that.

You are ignorant of what plagiarism is apparently. That's what Rand was accused of. I sourced my information, with a LINK. From WHERE I FOUND IT. I even put it in "".


When I clicked through and saw it was Mr. Dondero, I saw the link which, as I recall, had something about semitism in it, so I just closed it. I've read many articles by Dondero in the past and didn't feel the need to read another.

So, yeah, if he didn't call Ron an anti-semite, I was wrong. But, that was on oversight. Not a lie, as you claim. It certainly wasn't intended, anymore that your intent was to plagiarize Dondero. Of course I know the only reason you are focusing on this is to draw attention away from what YOU did. Most here would typically be repelled and appalled that someone calling themselves a RP supporter would quote Dondero in an effort to substantiate their own views. Birds of a feather, and all that.

Once again, I didn't plagiarize Dondero. You are ignorant and trying to use that as an attack. I didn't post a link to substantiate my own views, but simply the claim and post of another RPF member in the thread. Somebody else made the claim, not me.

And yes, I even then copied/pasted the direct quote from the article using "" again, where Dondero said Ron Paul WAS NOT AN ANTI-SEMITE after you falsely claimed he said it. You have proven repeatedly over the last several days you don't even read articles when links, and simply jump to conclusions with name-calling.


You quoted it, well kinda, in an effort to substantiate your views. Yeah, we know. lol

How many times are you going to repeat the same lie? Another member made the claim, I went to see if it was true/not true. Found an article with it, and posted it. Quoted it using, "", and provided the link. There is no "kinda" to it. Repeated lies and false claims, like the one you made of brochure having a the coffin on the front to fit your story. I went to look for it myself. Couldn't find one with it on the front. Asked you for it. Now you change it.


Every word out of your mouth is contrived and twisted propaganda. You're pretty good at twisting words, repeating bullshit that others have already answered many times before and spouting half-truths. You came to this forum with an agenda and have done nothing else but try to execute it. I have always seen right through you and you hate it. Too bad.

If knowing the truth is an agenda, and helping members in certain areas is an agenda. So be it. But I do hate your repeated lies, false claims, outright ignorance on purpose, and twisting what people and articles actually do and say. Your charge here, is one against yourself. Not me.

But, considering you find me funny, I wonder why would continuously twist and lie about what is actually said/done, unless you were lying about finding me funny in your latest negative rep as well:
http://i.imgur.com/t1b7Hiw.jpg


Yes, much like the RP race car was for raising money to advertise Ron Paul. lolol

So, you had a problem with the RP race car also? Did it not exist, and not advertise Ron Paul's name? If not, that could be a problem if that's what funds were being stated they were needed for. Like a campaign lying to supporters for months, about why they needed funds. About a fake strategy. And the sort. So yeah, if the RP race car didn't exist, and didn't advertise Ron Paul's name/message as it was stated it would, that is a problem.


Mistakes were certainly made. Romney's campaign made quite a few too. But, that doesn't prove jack poo. All you still have are suppositions.

I didn't support Mitt Romney. Didn't endorse him. Didn't defend an endorsement of him. Didn't vote for him. So, I don't really care if his campaign made mistakes, other than for the purpose of seeing if we could learn from them. But, there is also difference between a mistake, and repeatedly lying to supporters.

jjdoyle
09-03-2014, 08:30 AM
Definitely not Iowa. The campaign tried to win there, almost did, and did attack Romney there. But how is any of what you said "working with Romney's campaign" anyway?

And how would running attack ads have mattered? They wouldn't have affected the outcome of those races, and they would have burned bridges with the eventual nominee.

Ron Paul 2012 never ran one single Mitt Romney only TV attack ad. Ever. Not in Iowa. Not in New Hampshire. Not in Maine. Not in Virginia, the first one-vs-one state with only Mitt Romney and Ron Paul as the choices to vote for.
Ron Paul 2012 in February 2012 agreed to not attack Mitt Romney, so Ron wouldn't be attacked back and "for the future" of the liberty movement. Of course, supporters couldn't be told that information at the time though.

But, Michigan happened at the end of February, after we know Ron Paul 2012 agreed to not attack Mitt Romney. A state Ron Paul had no chance of winning, based on the polls and the final vote totals.
Michigan was a state between Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum. Ron Paul 2012 spent at least $100K on Rick Santorum attack ads in Michigan, which helped Mitt Romney win the state and the nomination.

And if attack ads wouldn't have affected the outcome in those races, why waste money on attack ads at all? Because they work. Look at how Newt Gingrich imploded in Iowa after getting pounded by both Mitt Romney and Ron Paul campaigns (might have just been Mitt's PAC, and not campaign) with attack ads. And no, attacking a candidate doesn't mean burning bridges. It's expected. Rick Santorum got a speaking slot at the RNC, after saying this:

""You win by giving people a choice. You win by giving people the opportunity to see a different vision for our country, not someone who's just going to be a little different than the person in there. If they're going to be a little different, we might as well stay with what we have instead of taking a risk of what may be the Etch A Sketch candidate for the future.""

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2012/03/santorums-gaffe-pick-obama-over-romney.html

cajuncocoa
09-03-2014, 08:32 AM
The Ron Paul supporters in Louisiana that participated in the delegate process will testify to it. As one member here on the forums has already stated it, multiple times.


Not true at all. Have you not talked to any Louisiana RP supporters that went through the delegate process? Have you not seen the repeated posts by one here on the forums? Here's a link to one comment on the forums if you want to try and ask them:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?389767-Tom-Woods-My-Memories-of-Jesse-Benton&p=5635456&viewfull=1#post5635456

I want to make sure this point doesn't get overlooked.

kylejack
09-03-2014, 08:33 AM
Also worth noting that Ron Paul and Mitt Romney were friends. The Romneys had dinner with the Pauls, I recall. I'd post a link, but it might be lost down the memory hole, not finding anything.

CPUd
09-03-2014, 09:04 AM
Reading this thread is like:
http://i.imgur.com/tVyymIU.gif

http://i.imgur.com/qbnslYO.gif

erowe1
09-03-2014, 09:06 AM
Ron Paul 2012 never ran one single Mitt Romney only TV attack ad.

False. It happened. It's just that it was before your 2013 join date.

jjdoyle
09-03-2014, 09:09 AM
False. It happened. It's just that it was before your 2013 join date.

No it didn't, and I was round in both the 2008 and 2012 campaigns.
Provide me one link, to a Mitt Romney only TV attack ad from Ron Paul 2012. You can't.

kylejack
09-03-2014, 09:15 AM
Yeah, the attack ads that included Mitt Romney included other politicians as well, like Herman Cain, Barack Obama, etc.

erowe1
09-03-2014, 09:17 AM
No it didn't, and I was round in both the 2008 and 2012 campaigns.
Provide me one link, to a Mitt Romney only TV attack ad from Ron Paul 2012. You can't.

http://youtu.be/B7RaYbToq7Q

http://youtu.be/jSVi45vfA6o

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/01/03/last-day-ron-paul-ad-is-his-sharpest-anti-romney-attack-yet/

..

erowe1
09-03-2014, 09:17 AM
..

erowe1
09-03-2014, 09:19 AM
Yeah, the attack ads that included Mitt Romney included other politicians as well, like Herman Cain, Barack Obama, etc.

So?

kylejack
09-03-2014, 09:19 AM
http://youtu.be/B7RaYbToq7Q

http://youtu.be/jSVi45vfA6o

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/01/03/last-day-ron-paul-ad-is-his-sharpest-anti-romney-attack-yet/

That's your cue to shut your pie-hole, and go back to lurking until you know what you're talking about.
Those ads all feature other politicians than Romney, so no, they are not Romney only attack ads. The radio ad was the closest, but he asked for TV.

kylejack
09-03-2014, 09:20 AM
So?

"Provide me one link, to a Mitt Romney only TV attack ad from Ron Paul 2012. You can't."

erowe1
09-03-2014, 09:20 AM
Those ads all feature other politicians than Romney, so no, they are not Romney only attack ads. The radio ad was the closest.

What kind of abuse are you trying to do to the English language?

They attack Romney. So, yes, they are Romney attack ads.

kylejack
09-03-2014, 09:22 AM
What kind of abuse are you trying to do to the English language.

They attack Romney. So, yes, they are Romney attack ads.
But not "Mitt Romney only", which is what he/she asked you for.

erowe1
09-03-2014, 09:22 AM
"Provide me one link, to a Mitt Romney only TV attack ad from Ron Paul 2012. You can't."

Fair enough. I missed the stipulation of "only." Probably because it makes no sense, and was not what I had said prior to that, which he denied.

ETA: Never mind. I get it. He was saying only earlier. Makes no sense. But ok.

jjdoyle
09-03-2014, 09:25 AM
http://youtu.be/B7RaYbToq7Q

http://youtu.be/jSVi45vfA6o

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/01/03/last-day-ron-paul-ad-is-his-sharpest-anti-romney-attack-yet/

That's your cue to shut your pie-hole, and go back to lurking until you know what you're talking about.

No. You missed it, again. So, I'll capitalize and bold it this time.

"Provide me one link, to a Mitt Romney ONLY TV attack ad from Ron Paul 2012. You can't."

Ron Paul 2012 produced a Rick Perry only TV attack ad:
<span style="color: rgb(17, 17, 17); background-color: rgb(246, 240, 227);">
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NlbFzuagGE

Ron Paul 2012 produced a Newt Gingrich only TV attack ad:
<span style="color: rgb(17, 17, 17); background-color: rgb(246, 240, 227);">
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Jzi3HBCS2M

Ron Paul 2012 procuded a Rick Santorum only TV attack ad:
<span style="color: rgb(17, 17, 17); background-color: rgb(246, 240, 227);">
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgNJBdTaKE8

And the last link you provided, again, was a radio spot. Not a TV ad.

Your cue, to provide a Mitt Romney only TV attack ad. You can't.

New York For Paul
09-03-2014, 09:26 AM
The blimp was featured in several new marketing and advertising books. It was a historic first in the United States. Length of time in the air is irrelevant, what is relevant was all the national TV coverage and thousand of newspaper articles and blog posts.


Global attention to the zeppelin that was aloft for only a few days . . . lol - best money spent - very effective really imho.

"Pimp the blimp!"

http://i372.photobucket.com/albums/oo161/sunblush/12onpaulblimp01.jpg (http://s372.photobucket.com/user/sunblush/media/12onpaulblimp01.jpg.html)

.

For real . . .

http://i372.photobucket.com/albums/oo161/sunblush/RonPaulBlimp.jpg (http://s372.photobucket.com/user/sunblush/media/RonPaulBlimp.jpg.html)


.

erowe1
09-03-2014, 09:27 AM
No. You missed it, again. So, I'll capitalize and bold it this time.

Yeah, I missed it. And it's irrelevant. How do you say RP was working with Romney and then just discount the obvious point that he attacked him in ads just by saying that he attacked other people in those ads too?

Same thing with saying that only TV ads count and radio ads don't, when he ran a Romney only radio attack ad.

Jamesiv1
09-03-2014, 09:30 AM
wow. I'm thinking somebody needs some Preparation H.

for the hurt....

kylejack
09-03-2014, 09:34 AM
Man, I had forgotten how awesome that Gingrich ad was.

kylejack
09-03-2014, 09:36 AM
Yeah, I missed it. And it's irrelevant. How do you say RP was working with Romney and then just discount the obvious point that he attacked him in ads just by saying that he attacked other people in those ads too?

Same thing with saying that only TV ads count and radio ads don't, when he ran a Romney only radio attack ad.
It's the difference between the scatter shot of a shotgun and the pinpoint accuracy of a sniper rifle.

jjdoyle
09-03-2014, 09:53 AM
Yeah, I missed it. And it's irrelevant. How do you say RP was working with Romney and then just discount the obvious point that he attacked him in ads just by saying that he attacked other people in those ads too?

Same thing with saying that only TV ads count and radio ads don't, when he ran a Romney only radio attack ad.

No, it's relevant. Because it's what the campaign did for Rick Perry, Rick Santorum, and Newt Gingrich. It's what campaigns do. Attack "UP". Ron Paul 2012 never aired one single Mitt Romney only TV attack ad like they did for Rick Perry, Rick Santorum, and Newt Gingrich. Why? Ron Paul and Mitt Romney were the only two candidates on the ballot in Virginia. Not one single positive or negative Ron Paul TV ad in the entire state.

This is what one wrote about Ron Paul 2012 attacking Rick Santorum in Michigan, and rightly called it during the campaign:

"In what could potentially be a big boon to Mitt Romney, Ron Paul is up in Michigan with a scorching new ad attacking Rick Santorum's purported fiscal conservatism. The closing scene tells the story: "Rick Santorum a fiscal conservative?" the narrator says before an image of Big Foot fills the screen. "Fake."James Hohmann reports (http://www.politico.com/morningscore/0212/morningscore536.html) the Paul buy is "low six-figures" in Michigan, but is part "of a multi-ad plan that the Texas congressman is rolling out for Super Tuesday" on March 6.
Romney and Santorum are locked in close combat in Michigan, with Romney attempting to win his home state over Santorum by attacking his fiscal record. The Paul ad is a pretty succinct summary of the Romney message."
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/new-ron-paul-tv-ad-compares-rick-santorum-to-sasquatch

They ran the radio ad for one day. Not for a week. Not for 2 weeks. Not for a month. One day. No Romney only TV ads in New Hampshire where Ron Paul placed 2nd, behind Mitt Romney; but Ron Paul 2012 spent funds running TV ads in South Carolina? A state RP placed 4th in.

Ron Paul 2012 was working with Romney's campaign, from at least February 2012, on, from almost everything I have seen.
Doug Wead told us Ron Paul 2012 agreed to not attack Mitt Romney, so Ron wouldn't be attacked. BEFORE MICHIGAN. And look at what ad they spent at least $100K on in Michigan:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgNJBdTaKE8

Deborah K
09-03-2014, 10:02 AM
They didn't actually "agree" to not attack Romney. They were threatened not to:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbrUPtwIKuk

jjdoyle
09-03-2014, 10:15 AM
They didn't actually "agree" to not attack Romney. They were threatened not to:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbrUPtwIKuk

If someone threatens you and says, "If you attack me, I'll attack you back." And you don't attack them, that's a mutual agreement based on their terms. You agree to not attack them, so they don't attack you.
Ron Paul 2012 could not have agreed, and said, "Sticks and stones! Bring it!" And ran attack ads against Mitt Romney trying to cause a brokered convention, but decided not to "for the future" of the movement.

Which is what I have been saying. At that point, when they agreed/decided/chose to not attack Mitt Romney, they should have closed shop. Instead, they then lied to supporters for months. And based on their actions, they were working hand-in-hand with Romney's campaign. Based on the Michigan Rick Santorum attack ad buy (at least $100K). Not running a single positive/negative ad in Virginia, the only one-on-one state. Jesse Benton in May 2012 saying in a press call they had been talking with Mitt Romney's campaign about platform issues for the RNC. And RonPaul2012.com being used to defend an endorsement of Mitt Romney.

But, the Mitt Romney campaign/PAC Ron Paul attack ad template was done, and it was used against a Ron Paul supporter in one state. AND THE AD WAS BRUTAL.

Deborah K
09-03-2014, 10:45 AM
If someone threatens you and says, "If you attack me, I'll attack you back." And you don't attack them, that's a mutual agreement based on their terms. You agree to not attack them, so they don't attack you.
Ron Paul 2012 could not have agreed, and said, "Sticks and stones! Bring it!" And ran attack ads against Mitt Romney trying to cause a brokered convention, but decided not to "for the future" of the movement.

Which is what I have been saying. At that point, when they agreed/decided/chose to not attack Mitt Romney, they should have closed shop. Instead, they then lied to supporters for months. And based on their actions, they were working hand-in-hand with Romney's campaign. Based on the Michigan Rick Santorum attack ad buy (at least $100K). Not running a single positive/negative ad in Virginia, the only one-on-one state. Jesse Benton in May 2012 saying in a press call they had been talking with Mitt Romney's campaign about platform issues for the RNC. And RonPaul2012.com being used to defend an endorsement of Mitt Romney.

But, the Mitt Romney campaign/PAC Ron Paul attack ad template was done, and it was used against a Ron Paul supporter in one state. AND THE AD WAS BRUTAL.

As Wead states in the tube, acquiescing to the Romney campaign was a big mistake. He clearly was against it.

What ad are you referring to that was brutal?

jjdoyle
09-03-2014, 10:56 AM
As Wead states in the tube, acquiescing to the Romney campaign was a big mistake. He clearly was against it.

What ad are you referring to that was brutal?

I'm YouTube searching now. If I find it, I'll send it your way via PM. It was bad.

orenbus
09-03-2014, 11:07 AM
That Mitt Cray.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XekfAYEgO1w&feature=youtu.be

cajuncocoa
09-03-2014, 12:39 PM
h/t Carlybee:




https://ci5.googleusercontent.com/proxy/taVv17WIwbSt0GD_3YGL05QA9r6rG3sqNvZlHhpbQYP6PU1usr gnVgbcPuzXMakEZWWIflJdzi_ynGVjQBfJpx2-6YoVfVkxFb01lRB-afrH1yOi7wa6DdTksl766B7UvR2-76i3FP920UWQxyV3qhGHHidojqAEuwilbQ=s0-d-e1-ft#http://paracom.paramountcommunication.com/cimages/9e1a03df3a024e863ece9f4018b8c898/RP-Email-Header.jpg




Memorandum



To: Supporters, Interested Parties

From: Jesse Benton, Chief Strategist

Date: May 15, 2012

Re: Paul Campaign Convention Strategy

Every day, I see firsthand how humbled and encouraged Dr. Paul is to have the enthusiastic support of so many who are committed to revitalizing our country.

Let me be very clear. Dr. Paul is NOT dropping out or suspending his campaign.

As Dr. Paul has previously stated, he is in this race all the way to the Republican National Convention in Tampa this August.

And he is deeply grateful for every resource he has been entrusted with to run an historic campaign that continues to defy all expectations.

Looking ahead, our campaign must honor that trust by maximizing our resources to ensure the greatest possible impact at the National Convention.

So while our campaign is no longer investing in the remaining primary states, we will continue to run strong programs at District and State Conventions to win more delegates and alternate delegates to the National Convention.

To this end, our campaign has several positive and realistic goals:
1) Having recently WON Maine, we believe we can win several more states.
2) We will win party leadership positions at both the state and national levels.
3) We will continue to grow our already substantial total of delegates.
We will head to Tampa with a solid group of delegates. Several hundred will be bound to Dr. Paul, and several hundred more, although bound to Governor Romney or other candidates, will be Ron Paul supporters.

Unfortunately, barring something very unforeseen, our delegate total will not be strong enough to win the nomination. Governor Romney is now within 200 delegates of securing the party’s nod. However, our delegates can still make a major impact at the National Convention and beyond.

All delegates will be able to vote on party rules and allow us to shape the process for future liberty candidates.

We are in an excellent position to make sure the Republican Party adds solid liberty issues to the GOP Platform, which our delegates will be directly positioned to approve. Our campaign is presently working to get several items up for consideration, including monetary policy reform, prohibitions on indefinite detention, and Internet freedom.

Finally, by sending a large, respectful, and professional delegation to Tampa, we will show the party and the country that not only is our movement growing and here to stay, but that the future belongs to us.

Dr. Paul will begin this new phase of the campaign this Friday by speaking and holding several events at the Minnesota State Convention. He has also recently accepted an invitation to speak at the Texas Convention, and we are busy scheduling appearances around other State Conventions later this month and into June.

As Dr. Paul stated in his message yesterday, this fight is NOT over. We will continue fighting and expanding, and “we will not stop until we have restored what once made America the greatest country in human history.”

But for Dr. Paul’s efforts in the remaining State Conventions to be successful, and to ensure we get as many Ron Paul delegates to Tampa as we can, he needs you to continue standing with him.

Along those lines, as you probably already know, the grassroots are holding a Money Bomb onThursday, May 17. Any money raised from that Money Bomb will go toward winning delegates and finalizing our plans for Tampa.

As those plans for the National Convention come together, we will make sure all of our delegates, whether bound or unbound, get the information and aid they need.

Your support on May 17 will also help us reach more Americans with the solutions we know can restore our nation. Each person we add to our cause strengthens our movement for the critical work that awaits us beyond Tampa.

Dr. Paul, John Tate, myself, and the entire campaign staff know what incredible sacrifices have been made by each of our supporters.

Thank you for all of your hard work and your dedication to liberty. Together, we will champion Ron Paul and his message in Tampa, and we will lay the groundwork for future victories.

dude58677
09-03-2014, 03:04 PM
This is a sports analogy of the 2012 Ron Paul campaign:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LMgSFqog1Y0

orenbus
09-03-2014, 07:59 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRJAtsuLrLc

jjdoyle
09-04-2014, 09:06 AM
The Ghosts of Ron Paul Haunt His Son

http://time.com/3262890/ron-paul-rand-paul-jesse-benton/ (http://ti.me/1oCzcyF)

"Ron Paul is quickly going from being his son's greatest asset to his worst liability

Late last week, Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell’s campaign manager Jesse Benton quietly resigned (http://www.politico.com/story/2014/08/mitch-mcconnell-campaign-manager-jesse-benton-resigns-110465.html). But the move won’t affect McConnell’s campaign so much as one that has yet to be launched: fellow Kentuckian Rand Paul’s anticipated bid for the White House in 2016."