THREAD #3 / Live Blogging Committee Hearing [Update with notes of Truthteller; Update with Protest Video] »

Let us summarize Obama’s position: we must respect imaginary voters who would have or could have cast votes in Michigan and Florida, for if we do not respect these imaginary voters, we run the risk of disenfranchising voters who may or may not exist. It is a specious argument, especially as the Obama campaign’s victories were in caucus states. Is not his delegate count predicated on the systematic disenfranchisement of voters who would have participated but could not have participated in a caucus? What if those states held primaries? Should we, for example, reallocate the delegates in Nebraska and Washington state in order to reflect the outcomes of their respective primaries? After all, the delegate count as a result of their caucuses does not reflect the desires of the primary voters in those two states.

Obama’s argument hinges on a series of hypotheticals, none of which can be substantiated with incontrovertible evidence. So now we are in the territory of known knowns (votes actually cast), known unknowns (we know people did not cast votes, but we do not know how many there are or why they chose not to participate), unknown knowns (we know write-in ballots exist in Michigan, but we do not know the desires of those voters) and unknown unknowns (the number of people who do not vote for whatever reason in any election). If the Committee restricts itself to evidence that can be viewed and analyzed, they will side with the Clinton campaign. If the Committee chooses to dwell on hypotheticals and on imaginary scenarios, they will side with Obama. Either we uphold democracy, or we undermine it in the name of Obama’s political fantasies.

[UPDATE]: Video of protesters outside the meeting

This is the 3RD THREAD covering the committee hearing. The SECOND THREAD IS HERE, and the FIRST THREAD IS HERE. Comments in earlier threads are closed.

[Truthteller]

5:17 PM EST – Why are they over an hour late? Back room deals of career politicians?

6:04 PM EST – Members of the Rules & Bylaws Committee are slowly filing into the conference room.

6:10 PM EST – Alexis Herman is now present.

6:15 PM EST – The meeting has resumed.

6:17 PM EST – Discussion of FL first. Then a vote. Debate to be limited to 10 minutes per motion.

6:18 PM EST – First matter on FL is Ausman challenge. Alice Huffmann speaks. She asks for full seating of FL.

6:21 PM EST – She desires to uphold the principle of counting every vote. She emphasizes how this is a result of Republican mayhem. she also believes voters in FL were victims, as they are simply people who cast votes in good faith. She understands the rules, but she also understands the importance of Party unity and the importance of motivating Florida Democrats. She desires a full vote for FL without penalty, and she submits her motion.

6:25 PM EST – Uncommitted superdelegate David McDonald disagrees. He cannot claim that the case of good faith of Florida cannot be made to other states and to the DNC. But again, it is not Florida’s fault. His argument is somewhat contradictory. Expect a lot of sanctimony during this debate. He cares about FL, but he does not believe they deserve representation.

6:27 PM EST – Yvonne Gates, also uncommitted, will not support the Huffmann motion. But again, it is not the voters’ fault. Rules are rules, she says, and she invokes the trope of “chaos.”

6:29 PM EST – Flournoy notes that the Huffmann motion will not pass, as the DNC should be the Party of inclusion.

6:30 PM EST – Alice Germond discusses the rules, and she emphasizes their importance as a result of the time and effort invested in their drafting. She believes a 50% penalty is required. She does not support a 100% sanction. She refers to Florida as a “beauty contest.” And now she is attempting to inscribe herself in the Civil Rights tradition. She now claims all 50 states should be respected, including the 48 who adhered to the rules. She regrets that FL and MI cannot gain full representation, but she believes the rules define us as a Party.

6:34 PM EST – Mona Pasquil now speaks. She discusses how rules must be challenged in the name of the family. She fully supports Huffmann, as she desires to be responsible to the FL voters. Now the vote.

6:36 PM EST – Donna Brazile did not vote for it. 12 voted in support. 15 are opposed. Brazile was opposed. Hillary supporters promise to take it to Denver. Motion fails.

6:38 PM EST – Now a vote on the Ausman challenge. Ralph Dawson speaks on behalf of the Ausman challenge. And he cites the Obama campaign as justification of the Ausman challenge. Delegates entitled to cast 1/2 vote.

OBAMA SUPPORTERS APPLAUD DISENFRANCHISING FLORIDA VOTERS.

Clinton 52.5 delegate votes
Edwards 6.5 delegate votes
Obama 33.5 delegate votes

unpledged entitled to cast .5 vote at convention. Rules 5,6,7,12 must be followed.

6:41 PM EST – Huffmann supports the Ausman challenge. “The world is not perfect, but it is good.” And she invokes Party unity. I am not sure if this will unify the party. I am not excited. Someone screamed “you took away votes,” and she responds “we gave you some back.” This is a mess, and no, we will not be unified.

6:43 PM EST – Huffmann: “This is the next best thing to democracy.” That is telling. Welcome to Obamatopia.

6:45 PM EST – Vote on Ausman challenge: 27 votes in support. The vote is unanimous.

6:48 PM EST – To attribute half delegates to each candidate, with Obama receiving all uncommitted delegates. Fowler will support it. He thinks we should support this compromise resolution.

6:50 PM EST – Ickes is opposed. He believes the DNC is violating the rule of fair reflection, which to him is analogous to the First Amendment of the Constitution. It will remove four delegates won by Hillary Clinton, and it not reflect the votes of 600,000 Michigan voters. A body of 30 individuals will substitute their judgement for 600,000 voters. He does not think this is democracy. Ickes is stunned at the gall of the DNC to substitute its judgment for 600,000 voters. “You bet your ass the process was flawed.” All election in US are flawed. “You bet your ass a lot of people did not vote.” The US has one of the lowest participation rates. But this is not an excuse to overturn an election.

Fair reflection is in the Charter: we cannot hijack four delegates from Clinton, and we are converting recognized uncommitted delegates to Obama delegates. According to Ickes, this is a violation of the Constitution of the Party.

And then they invoke unity. Hijacking four delegates to him will not establish Party unity. AND HE IS RIGHT. And Clinton reserves the right to take this to the credentials committee.

6:56 PM EST – Obamabot Hynes gratuitously insults Ickes, and now he claims it is fair. He says it fairly reflects MI. And then Roosevelt claims supports dishonor “their candidate” when they interrupt. Thank you for telling us who “your candidate” is, Roosevelt. And then Hynes congratulates Obama for “making this happen.” WHAT A JOKE.

6:58 PM EST – Mr. Ward now speaks. He supports Obama. And now we move on to autobiography. And we move to 1964. Somehow disenfranchising Clinton voters and the state of Michigan is the latest instantiation of Civil Rights. He cites the rules. And now the rules are irrelevant, for he and others were “locked out of the process.” He now attacks Ickes. And he now claims this is an “opportunity” for Michigan. His logic is tortured, and I do not believe he should have dropped the race card. Someone needs to ask Ward to read the Charter. This man is ridiculous.
And he says Ickes is politically posturing. And what did he just do?

7:03 PM EST – Ms. Smith now speaks after BEGGING for time from Roosevelt, who obviously supports Obama. Machine politics in play. She cannot support the Brewer motion, as the allocation of delegates is flawed. She is a Democrat with a capital D and a small d. The voters rule, as they are the highest government. The compromise, according to her, ignores the will of the voters. This is not unity, she says. But we will be unified at some point. This compromise, for her, will not create unity. GOOD FOR HER.

7:07 PM EST – Now vote on the Brewer compromise. 19 votes in favor. 8 against. Brazile voted for disenfranchising Michigan and Clinton voters in Michigan.

Delegates 34.5 Clinton
29.5 Obama

7:09 PM EST – Obamabot Clark could not hear the vote. She is attempting to make the Clinton supporters in the audience appear unruly.

7:10 PM EST – Fowler thanks the committee for a “job well done.” And now Democrats are cheering for no real reason. They are celebrating disenfranchisement. They are celebrating the violation of democracy. He is not pleased, but he claims this is in the best interest of the Party. Whose Party?

7:12 PM EST – I prefer not to listen to Roosevelt. I guess a report will be issued to the Credentials Committee by 29 JUN.

MACHINE POLITICS WON TODAY. THIS IS THE OBAMABOT PARTY, NOT THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY.

7:14 PM EST – Herman offers platitudes of “common ground” and “unity.”

Now they are thanking each other for disenfranchising voters behind closed doors. Allow me to vomit.

FINI