That sounds cool. What would be nice is a video encompassing much of the video and audio along with images portraying the events from the very outset to the final event where Dr. Paul's delegates sweep the caucus. Then we pimp it until were blue in the face.Originally Posted by TheGrinchWhoStoleDC
“The easiest way to gain control of a population is to carry out acts of terror. [The public] will clamor for such laws if their personal security is threatened”.
- Josef Stalin
You guys need to learn how to shamelessly bump your threads!
Sure. There's certainly a case to be said for a system that attempts to assign delegates proportionately based on the votes received in the primary. But that doesn't mean that the caucus masters can just unilaterally change the rules with no input from the attendees and make it so. If that's what they wanted to do, then they should have had a plan ready to present to the caucus.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_brWibusrf8
Last edited by lurpol; 03-20-2012 at 11:48 AM.
Mr Dokes sounds like a worried man.
So they won.
I agree - that's not acceptable. Can't the kids Mom take him to CUb Scouts?
This is an example of why we absolutely have to get on committees and show up. So many people and so little participation is sad.
Get involved and show up we so we can prevent this crap.
"Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can save it; no constitution, no law, no court can even do much to help it."
James Madison
"It does not take a majority to prevail ... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." - Samuel Adams
Μολὼν λάβε
Dum Spiro, Pugno
Tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito
It wouldn't have mattered. They wouldn't have put him on the subcommittee for the caucus. Sure, it might look bad, but it doesn't excuse their behavior nor could he have prevented it
I wonder how he was treated when he did show up, though - if they spoke to him or even acknowledged his presence? I imagine they intentionally alienate those they want to keep out of the party. So, it t worked with Cynthia Davis - How legal is that?
They already didn't like him. He was our chair for the caucus in 2008 where we won all the delegates and he was also arrested on Saturday when trying to reconvene the caucus which he had every right to according to the rules.I wonder how he was treated when he did show up, though - if they spoke to him or even acknowledged his presence? I imagine they intentionally alienate those they want to keep out of the party. So, it t worked with Cynthia Davis - How legal is that?
This is unbelievable.
Once you go Paul, you see through them all.
Any reason the tube didn't have the entire interview? Just curious
I would've liked to hear the re-cap too.
At 15:15 (it counts down) where they are going into a break..
He calls him Eugene Jokes.... HEHE
Bad speller's of the world .... UNTIE !!!!!
Go to the following link. Go to the March 20th 7am podcast. Interview start about 6 or 7 miutes in
http://www.971talk.com/Allman/Podcasts/Episodes.aspx
Anybody here familiar with the Vietnam era? Dokes was the FNG to put "on point."
Doesn't excuse what happened and Dokes should still go down in flames. Basically, based on this interview, two guys were arrested because the guy placed in charge didn't know the rules and didn't follow the rules.
Well, where were the party leaders who did know the rules? The St. Charles GOP should apologize the the guys arrested and make sure charges are dismissed! This is disgusting.
Last edited by Tyler_Durden; 03-20-2012 at 01:33 PM.
"You can prevent crimes by becoming a Police State. So if you advocate the Police State............the crime then will be against the American People and against Our Freedoms. And we will throw out so much of what Our Revolution was fought for." - Ron Paul, Nov. 22, 2011
You like Ben Swann? Let Raycom Media know!
They knew the rules. We had a completely FAIR caucus when we elected Brent chairman to the caucus in 08. They came having no intent of playing fair as can be witnessed via their appointment of Tom Kuypers to parliamentarian. In the second post on this thread he admits to fixing the 08 caucus by challenging the entire delegation and he sat on the state GOP committee that heard his own challenge!Anybody here familiar with the Vietnam era? Dokes was the FNG to put "on point."
Doesn't excuse what happened and Dokes should still go down in flames. Basically, based on this interview, two guys were arrested because the guy placed in charge didn't know the rules and didn't follow the rules.
Well, where were the party leaders who did know the rules? The St. Charles GOP should apologize the the guys arrested and make sure charges are dismissed! This is disgusting.
direct link,
http://media.971talk.com/Podcasts/116/3-20-12 hr 3.mp3
8:30 - 25:30 = Eugene Dokes (14:24 = "That's Eugene Jokes I mean Dokes")
>>> 25:50 - 29:36 = best part where host Allman explains what happened without the Dokes spin. <<<
Last edited by socal; 03-20-2012 at 02:50 PM.
Why do you select a chairman who freely admits he doesn't know anything about Roberts Rules of Order -- or much else, either, it appears. Basically, the guy was set up as a stooge, which is NOT to let this sucker off the hook; it's just an acknowledgement of the fact that this guy is completely clueless, and doesn't even know how to cover his own ass, because he's just too stupid to realize that he did anything wrong.
Cui bono? Well, Jokes admits that his caucus was designed to prevent the members who showed up from having their way. That the committee had predetermined that delegates would be apportioned proportionally, not to the active members of the actual caucus, but according to the prior straw poll results -- a goal that was decidedly anit-caucus. Who would benefit most from a proportional distribution of delegates, and a subversion of the caucus process? Saton rum!
Why no cameras? Was this a standing rule, or a new rule introduced to help obscure the stated goals of the committee? According to Chairman Jokes, the no camera rule was a new rule introduced by the committee, to help achieve their goal of subverting the caucus process. Of course, Jokes doesn't state it this way, and it's doubtful that he even clearly understands what happened, but he does admit that the no camera rule was to make secure the "privacy" of the caucus, which he admits was designed by the committee to subvert the caucus process. No duh, there.
1) Jokes is a complete novice to the process and admits his cluelessness about parliamentary procedure.
2) Jokes was advised by more experienced party member (whom he neglected to name) that he needed to establish a rules committee, so that new rules could be devised, to prevent Ron Paul supporters from dominating the caucus.
3) Because of Jokes' inexperience and gullibility, he allowed others to persuade him that it was alright to implement the new rules without challenge or open vote.
4) Jokes was also convinced that it was alright to ignore the Ron Paul supporters present, because they "weren't really Republicans, anyway [I'd stack my GOP credentials up against Jokes', any day]," and to instead push through a pre-approved (by a committee devoid of any Ron Paul supporters) slate of delegates heavily stacked in Saton rum's favor.
Was anyone else reminded by Jokes' interview of Lee Harvey Oswald's plea to the cameras that he was "just a patsy."
Last edited by Voluntary Man; 03-20-2012 at 02:37 PM.
Lawsuit possibility hear or not?
Next hour has a good summary between 6:52 - 9:56. This would make a good YouTube clip, brief and to the point:
http://media.971talk.com/Podcasts/116/3-20-12 hr 4.mp3
Is this confirmed?
has this been linked to Tylers thread on Dokes?
Delegates Matter MORE than the Popular Vote Find Out Why
2012 GOP Nominating Process (Demystified)
"The true danger is when Liberty is nibbled away, for expedients and by parts.... The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men do nothing."
CVRP connecting the troops, and those who support them, to grassroots action. Join Us
Mr Dokes also sounds like a stupid man.
He really won caucus in 2008?
We swept St. Charles County and we had a fair caucus. The same people that were our opposition and screwed us after the caucus were involved this time around, too. They know how a fair caucus is run, but they knew they would lose again and they made contingency plans
Also, we are supposed to be contacting our governor tomorrow and there is word the feds will be investigating.
Last edited by Liberty Rebellion; 03-20-2012 at 11:46 PM.
Why is the FBI not investigating what happened in the St Charles Caucus?
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investig...lection-crimes
Federal Election Crimes
In democratic societies like the United States, the voting process is a means by which citizens hold their government accountable, conflicts are channeled into resolutions, and power transfers peacefully. Our system of representative government works only when honest ballots are not diluted by fraudulent ballots. When elections become corrupted, democracy becomes threatened.
The FBI has a limited role in ensuring fair and free elections in the United States. Election crimes become federal cases when:
- The ballot includes one or more federal candidates;
- The crime involves an election official abusing his duties;
- The crime pertains to fraudulent voter registration;
- Voters are not U.S. citizens.
Federal election crimes fall into three broad categories:
- Campaign finance crimes
- Voter/ballot fraud
- Civil rights violations
Potential Federal Offenses
1. Campaign finance
- A person gives more than $4,600 to a federal candidate (various limits apply for donations to and from committees and groups);
- A donor asks a friend to give money to a federal candidate, promising to reimburse the friend; the friend makes the donation and the real donor reimburses him;
- A corporation gives corporate money to a federal candidate;
- A person who is neither a citizen nor a green card holder gives money to a federal, state, or local candidate.
2. Voter/ballot fraud
- A voter intentionally gives false information when registering to vote;
- A voter receives money or something of value in exchange for voting in a federal election or registering to vote;
- Someone votes more than once in a federal election (e.g., someone mails in absentee ballots in the names of dead people);
- An election official corrupts his or her office to benefit a candidate or party (e.g., lets unqualified voters cast ballots).
3. Civil rights violations
- Someone threatens a voter with physical or economic harm unless the voter casts his ballot in a particular way;
- Someone tries to prevent qualified voters from getting to the polls in a federal election;
- A scheme exists to prevent minorities from voting.
If you think an election crime is occurring, call the election crimes coordinator at your local FBI office.
presence
Last edited by presence; 03-22-2012 at 05:32 PM.
'We endorse the idea of voluntarism; self-responsibility: Family, friends, and churches to solve problems, rather than saying that some monolithic government is going to make you take care of yourself and be a better person. It's a preposterous notion: It never worked, it never will. The government can't make you a better person; it can't make you follow good habits.' - Ron Paul 1988
Awareness is the Root of Liberation Revolution is Action upon Revelation
'Resistance and Disobedience in Economic Activity is the Most Moral Human Action Possible' - SEK3
Flectere si nequeo superos, Acheronta movebo.
...the familiar ritual of institutional self-absolution...
...for protecting them, by mock trial, from punishment...
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Connect With Us