Guest views are now limited to 12 pages. If you get an "Error" message, just sign in! If you need to create an account, click here.

Jump to content

  • CRYPTO REWARDS!

    Full endorsement on this opportunity - but it's limited, so get in while you can!

Lawyers For Ron Paul Have Tentatively Won The Lawsuit Against The RNC

Scrumdiddles

By Scrumdiddles,
in Off Topic posts

 Share

Recommended Posts

TPSprayduster Newbie

TPSprayduster

Posted
Posted

The Ron Paul Grassroots "Delegate Lawsuit" Tossed, New Version Filed

Brian Doherty|Aug. 10, 2012 5:47 pm

The lawsuit filed by a Ron Paul grassroots activist lawyer charging the Republican National Committee (RNC) with various shenanigans against Ron Paul delegates and calling for the RNC to admit that no delegate is bound to vote for Romney was dismissed by U.S. District Judge David Carter this week.

Ron Paul's rEVOLution: The Man and the Movement He Inspired

Carter's order to dismiss.

Some relevant language from the order explaining why the Judge didn't think the suit worth going forward:

For example, Plaintiffs’ vague reference to “State Bylaws” gives this Court no inkling as to which of the 50 states and which of the millions of pages of bylaws Plaintiffs refer. Similarly, Plaintiffs’ use of the passive voice renders it impossible to discern who broke the bones of whom, who pointed a gun at whom, and whether any of the more than 100 Defendants were even involved. Finally, Plaintiffs’ vague allegations of voting ballot fraud occurring somewhere at sometime and apparently committed simultaneously by all “Defendants” lacks plausibility. While Plaintiffs make an oblique reference to a voting machine somewhere in Arizona, the lack of clarity in this allegation is insufficient to raise it to a level above mere speculation.Thus, this Court does not accept these allegations as true.

I wrote about that suit both right here at Reason and in the New York Times back in June.

The Paul campaign itself never embraced the suit or supported it--though Ron Paul himself didn't choose to condemn it either. Richard Gilbert, the lawyer who filed it, was ferocious in his insistence it was for the good of the delegates, and the honesty of the Republican primary and caucus process.

From my Reason piece in June:

A press release from Gilbert's group “Lawyers for Ron Paul” claims Paul supporters have launched a “takeover of the campaign. Refusing to be sold downstream for political or monetary gain the REAL Ron Paul R3volution without reservation is 'in it to win it!'”.....

“As we watched people being violently beaten at state conventions, voting machines being rigged, ballots being falsely counted from state to state,” Gilbert says, “we observed the Romney machine was nothing more than a crime syndicate committing fraud at every state convention.” While surprised the Paul campaign did not stand up for itself, he says, “I want to say I don’t represent the campaign and I don’t represent Dr. Paul. I represent the delegates.”

Gilbert is not giving up, and has filed another amended version of his suit, which attempts to get the court to decide whether the federal Voting Rights Act applies to voting at the RNC in Tampa, which Gilbert is trying to have defined as a "federal election" under that law.

If that is so, and if the Voting Rights Act applies to it, if I understand the complaint correctly, Gilbert is claiming any attempt to bind delegates to vote for Romney should be illegitimate.

The order to dismiss and amended complaint via "The Unconventional Conservative."

So why isn't Mr Gilbert on the tube making this breaking news for himself instead of some kid in a seedy nasty looking aprt room with a distorted love picture hanging in the back ground. hmmmmm yeah I really believe this one. :blink:

because they did not tentatively win the lawsuit, just another opinion. I am surprised he was not driving a car and making this video.

  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DiveDeepSix Newbie

DiveDeepSix

Posted
Posted

The Pauler Pot Express can file as many lawsuits as it wants to. Bottom line is not that many people like him, if this wasn't the case why did almost every other candidate beat him in nearly every other state? With Rand now backing Romney, what does Ronny think he will accomplish? From his showing in the primaries it would be a massacre in the general election.

  • Upvote 6
  • Downvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cris Newbie

cris

Posted
Posted

The Ron Paul Grassroots "Delegate Lawsuit" Tossed, New Version Filed

Brian Doherty|Aug. 10, 2012 5:47 pm

The lawsuit filed by a Ron Paul grassroots activist lawyer charging the Republican National Committee (RNC) with various shenanigans against Ron Paul delegates and calling for the RNC to admit that no delegate is bound to vote for Romney was dismissed by U.S. District Judge David Carter this week.

Ron Paul's rEVOLution: The Man and the Movement He Inspired

Carter's order to dismiss.

Some relevant language from the order explaining why the Judge didn't think the suit worth going forward:

For example, Plaintiffs’ vague reference to “State Bylaws” gives this Court no inkling as to which of the 50 states and which of the millions of pages of bylaws Plaintiffs refer. Similarly, Plaintiffs’ use of the passive voice renders it impossible to discern who broke the bones of whom, who pointed a gun at whom, and whether any of the more than 100 Defendants were even involved. Finally, Plaintiffs’ vague allegations of voting ballot fraud occurring somewhere at sometime and apparently committed simultaneously by all “Defendants” lacks plausibility. While Plaintiffs make an oblique reference to a voting machine somewhere in Arizona, the lack of clarity in this allegation is insufficient to raise it to a level above mere speculation.Thus, this Court does not accept these allegations as true.

I wrote about that suit both right here at Reason and in the New York Times back in June.

The Paul campaign itself never embraced the suit or supported it--though Ron Paul himself didn't choose to condemn it either. Richard Gilbert, the lawyer who filed it, was ferocious in his insistence it was for the good of the delegates, and the honesty of the Republican primary and caucus process.

From my Reason piece in June:

A press release from Gilbert's group “Lawyers for Ron Paul” claims Paul supporters have launched a “takeover of the campaign. Refusing to be sold downstream for political or monetary gain the REAL Ron Paul R3volution without reservation is 'in it to win it!'”.....

“As we watched people being violently beaten at state conventions, voting machines being rigged, ballots being falsely counted from state to state,” Gilbert says, “we observed the Romney machine was nothing more than a crime syndicate committing fraud at every state convention.” While surprised the Paul campaign did not stand up for itself, he says, “I want to say I don’t represent the campaign and I don’t represent Dr. Paul. I represent the delegates.”

Gilbert is not giving up, and has filed another amended version of his suit, which attempts to get the court to decide whether the federal Voting Rights Act applies to voting at the RNC in Tampa, which Gilbert is trying to have defined as a "federal election" under that law.

If that is so, and if the Voting Rights Act applies to it, if I understand the complaint correctly, Gilbert is claiming any attempt to bind delegates to vote for Romney should be illegitimate.

The order to dismiss and amended complaint via "The Unconventional Conservative."

because they did not tentatively win the lawsuit, just another opinion. I am surprised he was not driving a car and making this video.

Lmfao TP....nice news-hounding :D

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rightsonword Newbie

rightsonword

Posted
Posted

:woot::lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao:

:nothingtoadd:

:rocking-chair:

Wait, so you put an icon that says 'nothing to add' yet you didn't add anything to the thread. Are you instigating or being a hypocrite?

We'll find out soon enough if this is true or not, no need to be rude about it simply because you disagree with it.

AWWWW, someone gave me a neg, I apparently burst someones bubble again by being a realist!! ROFLMAO :moon-from-car:

You're a model X'n . . . .

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DiveDeepSix Newbie

DiveDeepSix

Posted
Posted

Wait, so you put an icon that says 'nothing to add' yet you didn't add anything to the thread. Are you instigating or being a hypocrite?

We'll find out soon enough if this is true or not, no need to be rude about it simply because you disagree with it.

You're a model X'n . . . .

I'm not sure what that means but coming from you I'm sure it's just like the Holiday Inn, Complimentary!!! :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dinar_stud Newbie

dinar_stud

Posted
Posted

I'm not sure what that means but coming from you I'm sure it's just like the Holiday Inn, Complimentary!!! :D

I may be mistaken, but X'n could be Xtian, an abbreviation that I have seen used alot by atheists to denigrate Christians.

As I said I mey be mistaken but, having a atheist family member I have seen it a lot from him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rightsonword Newbie

rightsonword

Posted
Posted (edited)

I may be mistaken, but X'n could be Xtian, an abbreviation that I have seen used alot by atheists to denigrate Christians.

As I said I mey be mistaken but, having a atheist family member I have seen it a lot from him.

It's simply an abbreviation used if you are handwriting notes, specifically in college courses. It's not derogatory, though I suppose it could be depending on the attitude of the person using it.

Edited by rightsonword
Link to comment
Share on other sites
yota691 Grand Master

yota691

Posted
Posted (edited)

So why isn't Mr Gilbert on the tube making this breaking news for himself instead of some kid in a seedy nasty looking aprt room with a distorted love picture hanging in the back ground. hmmmmm yeah I really believe this one. :blink:

Do ya'll feel the

steez-love.jpg

Low introductory price of only!!

1. Select Your Format

Size

36 x 24 in

Product Type

Poster

2. Customize Selection

None

Add a Frame

[From $49.99]

Mount on Wood

[Add $86.00]

Laminate

[Add $15.00]

Canvas Transfer

Edited by yota691
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


  • Testing the Rocker Badge!

    Take This Quiz

  • Live Exchange Rate

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.

  I accept