RSS Feed for This PostCurrent Article

A COUP, THROUGH and THROUGH

© 2010 jbjd

Introduction

The Democratic National Committee Services Corporation, disguised as the DNC, installed Barack Obama into the Office of President of the United States of America by committing massive election fraud that played out uniquely during each of these 3 (three) phases of the 2008 Presidential election cycle in relation to the company’s August 2008 Presidential Nominating Convention: 1) pre-Convention; 2) Convention; and 3) post-Convention. The fraud committed both before and after the Convention has been dissected in several articles previously posted here on the “jbjd” blog.

This  three-part series entitled, “A Coup, Through and Through” analyzes the fraud pulled off at the Convention.

Keep in mind, not all fraud is created equal. While the record establishes the D’s committed fraud throughout the general election cycle, my work has remained focused almost exclusively only on that fraudulent conduct which both 1) violated laws explicitly or implicitly proscribing such conduct; and 2) arguably altered the outcome of the 2008 Presidential (Electors) election.

Part 1: Prologue to Fraud

Before Barack Obama could be installed in the Oval Office, interested parties both within and outside of the Democratic National Committee Services Corporation had to ensure he would win the DNC Presidential nomination so that his name could appear next to the D on the general election ballot.  Because, as I have previously opined, while Electors voting in December may elect anyone they want; I could not imagine they would dare to elect a President whose name hadn’t even appeared on the November ballot. NEVER LESS THAN A TREASON (1 of 2) and (2 of 2). (Note:  I recently learned the D’s have been pressing state legislatures to pass the National Popular Vote Initiative (“NPVI”).  If this thing gets through, I believe even a candidate who fails to qualify to get on the ballot in one or more states can still be elected.) (See, HOW ADOPTING the “NATIONAL POPULAR VOTED INITIATIVE” CAN STEAL an ELECTION ‘BY HOOK’ and ‘BY CROOK’.)

But given the several problems they knew were inherent to his candidacy, any one of which, if exposed, could prove fatal to his political aspirations, winning the nomination would require that they clinch the nomination as far as possible in advance of the DNC convention. In this way, they could limit the scope of the public examination of the candidate apt to occur in a protracted battle for the nomination.

They were willing to do whatever it took to accumulate enough pledged delegates during the primary and caucus contests to reach the magic number that long before the convention would ensure at that time, he would be handed the nomination. Manufacture chaos at the caucuses and capitalize on the confusion created? Check. Collude with A.C.O.R.N.? Check. Censor critics with charges of racism? Check. Cultivate a compliant press willing to conceal stories unflattering to either the candidate’s character or, their own complicit conduct on the road to his nomination? Check and check.

When the numbers for Hillary Clinton, his toughest competition in the race for the nomination, placed these two in a virtual dead heat with 3 (three) more months until the primary and caucus contests ended and 5 (five) months until the convention, co-opt the free will of the voters by spreading the meme she has already lost the nomination? Check. Co-opt the free will of the candidate by calling her a sore loser if she doesn’t drop out of the race now and throw her support(ers) to him, for the good of the party? Check.

DNC rules provide if voting at the convention fails to support one candidate over the other then, special super delegates will add their votes to the totals to reach the number required for nomination. So they were also furiously pouring money into the PAC’s and war chests of these super delegates, in return for which the candidate received a public pledge of support positively correlated to the superior size of his financial investment.

But even factoring in the votes of those super delegates already expressing support for Obama, with less than 3 (three) months to go before the convention he still had not achieved the superiority in delegates that would secure his nomination. And the delay had taken its costly and anticipated toll.

Despite their best efforts to control the narrative, one of those ‘problems fatal to his political aspirations,’ known as Rev. Jeremiah Wright, had leaked out. And from the time the public learned of the long close relationship between the candidate and his avowed “spiritual adviser,” he had already lost more than 10 (ten) points in the polls.

To understand what they did next, you need to know the difference between being designated a Clinton pledged delegate and an Obama pledged delegate.

Attorney Bob Bauer, then counsel to the DNC and now WH Counsel, explains the delegate selection process to the federal court in DiMaio v. DNC, a case not material to the fraud laid out here.

The DNC is the governing body of the Democratic Party of the United States and is responsible for promulgating delegate selection rules for the 2008 Democratic National Convention…The nominee of the Democratic Party for President of the United States is chosen by the delegates to the Democratic National Convention held in each presidential election year. The National Convention is organized and run by an arm of the DNC. The delegates from each state are chosen through a process adopted by the state’s Democratic Party. For each presidential election starting in 1976, the DNC has established formal Delegate Selection Rules to govern the selection, in each state, of its delegates to the National Convention. These rules require each State Democratic Party to develop a written delegate selection plan and to submit that plan to the DNC’s Rules and Bylaws Committee (“DNC RBC”) for review and approval. The delegate selection process in each state involves two basic functions: (1) the allocation of delegate positions among presidential candidates, i.e., how many delegates from that state will go to the Convention pledged to each candidate; and (2) the selection of the actual individuals to fill those positions, i.e., the selection of the people who will attend the Convention as delegates and alternates. Generally, state parties use either a primary or a caucus/convention system. In a primary system, the state party uses the state-government run or a party-run primary election to allocate delegate positions, and then a party-run meeting (caucus) to fill those positions. In a caucus system, the state party uses a series of party-run meetings — caucuses — both to allocate delegate positions and to select the persons to fill those positions. A caucus/convention system does not involve use of the state’s electoral machinery. Of the 56 states and territories that sent delegates to the 2008 Democratic National Convention, 20 used party run caucus/convention systems.

http://www-lvs13.net.ohio-state.edu/electionlaw/litigation/documents/Dimaio-Brief-9-19-08.pdf

In short, the numbers of votes a candidate receives in a party primary or caucus contest translates into so many pledged delegates awarded, based on the vote:delegate ratio concocted in advance by the party. When the contest is over, the state party meets to select which party faithful, pledging fealty to one candidate or the other, will fill the slot of pledged delegate for his or her preferred candidate and then cast a vote for that candidate at the national nominating convention.

On May 31, the DNC RBC met to finalize their response to the dilemma presented by FL and MI. Legislatures in both states had moved up their primaries in contradiction to the calendar set by the DNC. As punishment, the DNC indicated it would not seat delegates from either state at the convention. (Accused of “pandering” to Iowa, Obama had pulled his name off the ballot in MI. Clinton did not. She won heavily in both states but, the DNC and their allies in the press not only did not count those pledged delegate numbers in her totals, they did not even credit her with receiving the number of popular votes.) DNC Chairman Howard Dean had said in March, he expected delegates were “eventually going to be seated in Florida and Michigan as soon as we get an agreement between the candidates on how to do that.”  In the meantime, each state party had allocated pledged delegates based on the actual popular vote for the candidates whose names appeared on the ballot, including those delegates who filled the slots represented by the ‘name’ “Uncommitted,” a category that received 40% of the MI vote.

The Committee,  whose members were hand-picked by Chairman Dean, heard from both of the states involved, and from representatives of both of the candidates, and then made their decision.  In FL, where both candidates appeared on the ballot, the Committee awarded delegates in accordance with the popular vote, but gave each delegate only half a vote at the convention. But desperate to bolster Obama’s sagging numbers, his allies on the Committee adopted this solution for MI. First, all delegates would be seated at the convention but with only half a vote each. Second, all votes that had been cast for “Uncommitted” were now deemed to have been cast for Obama; and delegates assigned based on votes cast for “Uncommitted” would be reassigned to delegates loyal to him. Third, 4 (four) of those pledged delegates already assigned to Clinton as the result of votes cast for her; would be taken away and re-gifted to him.

In the eyes of many stalwart Democrats, by second-guessing the voters’ intent in this way, the RBC had abandoned the core principle of “fair reflection” enshrined in the DNC Charter. Harold Ickes, an adviser to the Clinton campaign, pulled no punches. “This motion will hijack, hijack, remove four delegates won by Hillary Clinton and most importantly reflect the preferences of 600,000 Michigan voters. This body of 30 individuals has decided that they are going to substitute their judgment for 600,000 voters.”

On June 3, the primary / caucus season ended.  Clinton suspended but did not end her campaign.

Once upon a time – March 28, 2008, to be exact – Chairman Dean announced to the press he thought it would be “nice” if by “July 1,” all of the  superdelegates weighed in with the name of the candidate they would support, implicitly acknowledging even back then that neither candidate would secure the requisite number of pledged delegates throughout the remainder of the primary / caucus contests  to ensure the August nomination.  Top Democrat wants party contest decided by July 1. But on June 4, the day after the primaries ended and just 5 (five) days after the RBC issued its controversial shuffling of the MI delegate deck to sweeten Obama’s hand, the following headlines appeared in the L.A. Times:  “BREAKING NEWS:  Dean, Pelosi, Reid set Friday deadline for superdelegates’ choices, move to force end to Clinton bid

According to the article, DNC Chairman Dean; Nancy Pelosi, (Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives and 3rd in line of Presidential succession, acting in a civilian capacity as Chair of the 2008 DNC Services Corporation Presidential Nominating Convention); and Senator Harry Reid jointly issued a “carefully worded statement” which was widely interpreted as “a clear step to force an end to the effort by Clinton,” telling superdelegates to make their candidate choices known “tomorrow.”

Tomorrow? Whatever happened to “by July 1″?  Why this sudden (and rather petulant) rush to memorialize Obama’s coronation?  Probably because those pesky problems with his candidacy were about to derail his political aspirations.

For months now, rumors had been swirling that Obama was not Constitutionally eligible for the job.  Specifically, he is not a “natural born” citizen, one of three requirements listed in Article II, section 1 of the U.S. Constitution.  Then Communications Director Robert Gibbs (now WH Press Secretary) had come up with a seemingly brilliant on-line advertising campaign under the banner, “Fight the Smears,” designed to counter these mounting speculations.  The focal point of the ad campaign was an image of a mock-up “Certification of Live Birth,”  listing Obama’s place of birth as “Hawaii.”  (It was even appropriately redacted so as to give the appearance of protecting the candidate’s privacy.)  Ad copy accompanying the image reassured the public, this proves he is a “native” citizen.  At the bottom of the page, in the footer, appeared the sort of attribution required by the U.S. Code for all political advertising expenditures:  “PAID FOR BY BARACK OBAMA.”

Designing a political ad campaign such as “Fight the Smears” ‘to be used only in case of emergency’ was one thing; but actually rolling it out was another.  Because its success gambled on the truth of this one contemptuous statement:  American voters are too stupid to know that there’s a difference between “natural born”  and “native”; and that “Fight the Smears” is nothing more than a PAID POLITICAL ADVERTISEMENT, anyway.  Understandably, the Obama team held back on the nuclear “Fight the Smears” option for as long as it could.

Yet hard as everyone tried, Clinton just would not abandon the nomination. And why should she? Examining the traditional rubrics of success – total number of pledged delegates; popular votes; likelihood to beat the Republican in the general election – the two contenders remained within the ‘margin of error.’ Besides, neither Clinton nor Obama had amassed the requisite number of pledged delegates to wrap up the nomination on the first call of the roll on the floor of the convention.

The Obama campaign launched “Fight the Smears” on June 12.

Up until this point, the ‘dirty tricks’ carried out by operatives tied to the D Corporation to lie and cheat their man’s way into the D nomination were only sinister and underhanded.  But, with the exception of the allocation of votes:delegates in Texas, technically, they were within the letter of the law. (LULAC v. Texas Democratic Party.) All that changed in the summer months leading up to the convention, when Obama and his champions and converts, now clawing at straws, conspired to literally steal the nomination.

The state parties had specifically chosen delegates to fill the number of slots reserved for Clinton or Obama as the result of votes cast for her or him in the primary or caucus contest, based on their loyalty to either one candidate or the other. But DNC rules only insist that pledged delegates voting at the national convention “in all good conscience reflect the sentiments of those who elected them.” (Emphasis added by jbjd.) http://s3.amazonaws.com/apache.3cdn.net/fb3fa279c88bf1094b_qom6bei0o.pdf, p. 23. In other words, under DNC rules, there is no such thing as a “pledged” delegate. (At one time, the DNC did have such a “robot rule,” which required delegates pledged to a candidate to vote for that candidate at the convention. But they eliminated that rule in 1982.)

Which was a good thing for Obama emissaries who now fanned out across the country and harassed her delegates, in person and by wire, to get them to agree to switch their votes to him, before the convention.

Twisting arms to ‘turn’ pledged delegates before the convention was not only not prohibited under DNC rules but also, in 37 (thirty-seven) states, it wasn’t against the law. As for the other 13 (thirteen) states, well, that was quite a different story.

See, voters in 13 states  – AZ, GA, IN, KY, MA, NH NM, OH, OK, OR, TN, VA, and the delegate mother lode, CA – had enacted this special legislation. ‘In our state, pledged means PLEDGED. This means, delegates pledged to a candidate as the result of votes cast in the political party’s primary or caucus election; must vote for the candidate voters elected them to represent, at the party’s nominating convention.’ (I ‘discovered’ these states in the summer of 2008 and named them “vote binding states.”) In short, extorting Clinton pledged delegates in these 13 vote binding states to commit to switching their votes to Obama before the convention, was against the law.

And they knew what they were doing was illegal.

Because as Mr. Bauer wrote in his submission to the federal court in DiMaio; “[DNC] rules require each State Democratic Party to develop a written delegate selection plan and to submit that plan to the DNC’s Rules and Bylaws Committee (“DNC RBC”) for review and approval.” Id. (The DNC RBC is the same outfit that on May 31 had shuffled the candidate’s delegate count in a blatantly partisan attempt to improve Obama’s numbers and move him closer to the nomination.) And, contained in those DNC delegate selection rules is provision 2.2: Each State Party Committee shall include the following documentation with the submission of its Plan to the RBC:

(I) a copy of all state statutes reasonably related to the delegate selection process. (Emphasis added by jbjd.)

http://s3.amazonaws.com/apache.3cdn.net/e824f455b24c7782dc_jjm6ib44l.pdf

Being “related to the delegate selection process,” the state law that required pledged delegates to vote at the convention for the candidate voters elected them to represent was included in the delegate selection plan each of these 13 states had submitted to and was subsequently approved by the DNC RBC.  In other words, Obama’s agents who began harassing Clinton pledged delegates from vote binding states to switch their votes to him, months before the convention, undoubtedly knew they were breaking the law.

But desperate times called for desperate measures.

(Next:  Part 2:  Lead-up to a Coup)

  • Pingback: “Democratic Pollsters: Obama Should Abandon Run for Second Term” : NO QUARTER

  • Pingback: “Democratic Pollsters: Obama Should Abandon Run for Second Term” « Rabblerouserruminations's Weblog

  • Michelle

    jbjd-FYI
    Google 350,000results (0.29 seconds)Searched as No Quarter-a coup through and throughpart 3 @ 9:15. I got curious about these numbers that change or gobackwords.

  • Pingback: A COUP, THROUGH and THROUGH (2 of 3) : NO QUARTER

  • Pingback: PUT YOUR MONEY WHERE YOUR MOUTH IS « jbjd

  • Deapthrowt

    Don’t forget there was the book that put all the facts on the table about Obama before the election. One could not read it and not know a lot of these things before voting. It hit the best sellers, but Obots even spun The One away from these cold, hard facts staring everyone in the face before it was time for them to vote and seal our fate.

    Obama’s rise in Chicago politics was chilling as you describe and it was all set out in this book. Yet no one could absorb these facts. They were committed to only seeing the fantasy image both he cultivated and voters fertilized. It was a very odd time – a total intellectual disconnect

  • Deapthrowt

    The MSM media still ruled the public debate even in 2008 and set this trainwreck on its tracks every time it stumbled. That was the end of MSM for me.

    And look at the shambles they are in today, such a short time later. Newsweek gets sold for a dollar. FoxNews is now the go to station for balance and facts – who would have guessed.

  • ripalinsky

    There were MANY people who could have stopped the crime of the 2008 convention – George Bush, John McCain, the Clintons, others in both the Republican and Democratic parties the Supreme Court, etc. None did! Angelo Codevilla tells part of the reason (a large part) in “America’s Ruling Class – And the Perils of Revolution”
    http://spectator.org/archives/2010/07/16/americas-ruling-class-and-the

  • Michelle

    Deapthrowt<img src=”//cdn.js-kit.com/images/icon10-external-url.png”/>
    http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/06/27/grim_proving_ground_for_obamas_housing_policy/
    Grim proving ground for Obama’s housing policyThe candidate endorsed subsidies for private entrepreneurs to build low-income units. But, while he garnered support from developers, many projects in his former district have fallen into disrepair

    Show them this article-lucky me I am a Democrat from Chicago (raised in the suburbs) now Tea Party due to election fraud. I could not vote for Obama because he is a cheap South Side hood from the Cesspool of Corruption Chicago’s South Side. This is after 20 years as a Community Organizer-code for the federal, state and local taxes ear-marked for these folks goes straight into the politicians wallet/war chest. Community Organizer means Crook. Shows these “ladies” Obama at work I don’t think they will think he’s so great after seeing this-remember he had 20 years to improve conditions, now most of his Chicago criminal buddies are in jail or on trial for crimes he had a hand in and/or controlled.

  • KMFD

    “In other words, Obama’s agents who began harassing Clinton pledged delegates from vote binding states to switch their votes to him, months before the convention, undoubtedly knew they were breaking the law.”

    Are there links to state statutes that make this illegal?

  • Deapthrowt

    Can’t tell the story of Obama without:

    1. The Obama Girl jiggling going viral for early buzz
    2. Organized Obama thugs at all the caucuses
    3. Starting the story line Hilary was going to steal the nomination from Obama
    4. SEIU and union money coming in early
    5. Obama’s first official act after stealing the nomination was meeting with SEIU Andy Stern – what did they talk about and why were both smiling
    6. Obama’s Whitehouse meetings with Andy Stern
    7. Funneling money into ACORN
    8. The Fainting Ladies at Obama rallies
    9. The trail of money going to Super delegates and vote switching
    10. George Soros
    11. Bill Ayers and Dreams From My Father authorship
    12. The menacing Obama street thugs taking over the streets of Denver at the DNC
    13. The synchronicity of the Obama meme on TPM, Huffington, and MSM
    14. Jane Fonda and Erica Jong -Hyster-sisters at the 11th hour – why were they soooooo afraid?
    15. The race card played by Obama against Bill Clinton
    16. The anonymous, profane and vicious misogynist blogging against Clinton
    17. The loss of long term female friends who hounded me to vote Obama when they had never been politically active, yet scoured Chirstmas card lists to spread the word against Hilary and for Obama, and then later against Palin – women viciously trashing other women, on some cue and message zeal I have never seen before. Nor have the friendships recovered – just the opposite they state they don’t want to hear anything against Obama ever – they were taken over by some alien force during this campaign where they were willing to throw away decades of freindship to win support for Obama.

  • Deapthrowt

    In March 2008, the fix was already in. They were already threatening violence at the DNC if Hillary “stole” the election from Obama:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rick-perlstein/some-apocalyptic-observat_b_90096.html

    What this dude on the Journolist? Because this oft-repeated story gets some legs here that there would be violence on the streets and 1968 revisited if Obama did not win, and the blame would all be Hillary’s. Damn scary stuff now that we take another look about how it all unfolded. Who started the story – the Obama people’s threats or the DNC rolling over so quickly.

    And the early addition of George Soros money for Obama held a lots of appeal to for the DNC The money from him needs to be tracked more closely in this DNC election rip off too.

  • Deapthrowt

    At every step of the way, there was the threat of violence from the Obama people. They were a menacing presence and got the word our early if they did not get their way it would be Chicago 1986 all over again. This is what I think scared the DNC the most — they wanted to avoid doing anything that would ruin their chances after 8 years of Bush. And the threat from the Obama thugs at the DNC if they did not get their way made the Dems and the super-delgates sell out so early and so fast.

    The caucuses all reported threats and menacing people on Obama’s side that moved in and took over and then left with none of the party regulars even knowing who they were. They were a massive organized force dedicated to taking over every option out there.

    Who can forget Obama got started with the jiggling Obama girl luring in the youth anti-establishment vote declaring jiggling dancers made Obama cool and not your daddies Democratic candidate.

    The Obama moved on to the early cheap theater of the Fainting Ladies to give his rallies high hysteria – the same kind he knew worked at black church rallies and most of the planted swooning ladies were black and the One healed them all just by his word as if on cue and script – with the ready toss of a bottle of water from his beneficent hands.

    The whole grotesque farce was finished off with Jane Fonda and Erica Jong crying the streets would run with blood if Obama were not elected. Always, always, always the threat of violence hung on every act of this man through the entire campaign.

    I long suspected all the Obama signs in our upper middle class neighborhood were meant to be protection against the thundering hordes who would rise up and burn down their yuppie lives in case Obama had lost, but they hope with their Obama signs well-planted on their front lawns they would be spared.

    Because if anyone stood for just the opposite of their upper middle class interests it was Obama – so why did they so eagerly publicize their support? The Obama threat of violence took them over too.

    This has to be part of the Obama story too before it gets too sanitized and forgotten. The threat of violence that accompanied every single advantage he got early and late in the game. And the DNC the first to fall to that very threat of Chicago Redux.

  • Diana L. C.

    Of course there were, and young men, too.  I was referring to those old ones who died already and who are old enough now that they may never get the chance to see a woman elected POTUS.

  • Annie Soda Cracker

    LIke you, Deapthrowt, I watched the whole debacle.  The fix was in from the get-go but when the “lunch break” went on to 2 hours, I knew for sure it was done.  I was in tears before it was over.

  • Annie Soda Cracker

    jbjd, I hope many will copy your post and begin to spread it to all sides as we approach 2012 (if he can’t be impeached before that).  If you do decide to do a self-publishing of your info, of course I’d rather promote that.  I have no doubt you will keep us informed about your valuable work..

  • Annie Soda Cracker

    I will never forget my former 60′s male friend who, after Hillary began to win one primary after another, screamed at me ” It’s time for her to step down.  What does the woman want?  I replied “She wants to be President of the United States.”  He never gave up the old 60′s socialist agenda…in other words, never grew emotionally or socially.  And when he found out I left the Dims, he stopped speaking to me…so be it.  I can do without male Democrat vulgarity.

  • Annie Soda Cracker

    I doubt Pelosi will lose her office (CA Dims are too dim) but I pray she will lose the gavel and therefore power with a Republican majority in the House.  She does have a Republican challenger however ( I heard him on local radio yesterday and he shoulded good) so I will be over the moon if he does win.

  • Annie Soda Cracker

    I was just about to add that, carol.  Hillary is staying out of the limelight on this but the State Department  couldn’t make this happen without her.  Not only are we paying for his propaganda tour but apparently we are paying for the building of mosques all over the world.  I heard a convert from Islam on Hannity today (I hope he’ll be on the tv program tonight) who made everything about this Iman perfectly clear.  He doesn’t disguise his agenda in Arabic language papers. 

    As much as I’d like to see the Democrat party restored to sanity and be ruled by ethics, I’m sorry to say that is not synonomous with a Hillary candidacy for me.  I can’t vote for any of them again nor will I re-join the party.

  • Annie Soda Cracker

    Impeachment never sounded so good.  If we can get his opponents in position in the states and federal positions. I say “let it rip” and I don’t give a damn what his people of color supporters think.  The Dims have shown they are not fit to govern.

  • Annie Soda Cracker

    Or even worse, the media conglomerates might buy it and bury it…self publishing is the way to go.  I’d love to see this go viral on the net.

  • Not Likely

    “The fact that she lost through fraud never seems to enter the equation.”

    Generally people try to keep falsehoods out of equations as they tend to mar the final result.

  • Kathleen Wynne

    jbjd,

    Yes.  But I think it’s just another assault on the elections process, disguised as a “solution.” 

    I contend that there is no solution except a return to appropriately administered hand counts, at the precinct on election night.

    Elections MUST be transparent, otherwise, it doesn’t matter what changes they offer, the citizens are still not able to “see” their votes counted.  That is the key to “preventing fraud”. 

    After the fact solutions have been proven time and time again not to work and are just a “dog and pony” show to appease the people.

    Again, as I’ve stated here before, Germany banned any non-transparent couting of the votes because their Constitution considers elections in a democratic republic moot if every citizen cannot see their votes being counted at every phase of the counting process.  The Germans rightfully consider it a “human right” of citizens in a democratic republic to have the ability to see their votes counted without having to depend on some expert or election official to assure them that their votes was counted.

    If the German people recognize the absolute necessity for transparency, whiy can’t the American people agree that the same principles in how votes are counted apply here?

  • Bonnie Jean Burris

    I understand what you are trying to do and I appreciate it very much. Those wounds have never healed and watching the video reminded me of all the questions I had over that two year period. Colorado is a caucus state and I know what happened here was dispicable, but not illegal. I hope the voters in the states you listed learn and will make sure the laws are not violated again. I would like to see my state do away with the system and go to delegates based on a primary, but I doubt that will happen.

  • seattlegonz

    But, I wasn’t talking about the way people voted…I was talking about the fact that any challenges to BO’s name on a ballot, or any other challenge to him was silenced.

    But, again, I don’t disagree with your points. To me it was apparent that the delegates weren’t being allowed to perform their “jobs” in states that required delegate votes to mirror state results, and that no legitimate confirmation of BO’s legitimacy as a ballot candidate had been made available to citizens who requested to view that certification via the freedom of information act.

  • jbjd

    Buttered, the DNC RBC decided the voters of MI did not know what they had in mind when they voted.  But in retrospect, the RBC did.

  • jbjd

    AA, change the law!  Remember, you are not expanding Article II, section 1 eligibility for POTUS.  You are merely defining who is eligible to appear on the ballot.   Whichever candidate or party is aggrieved by that law can take the state to court.  Voila!  You wind up with a legally binding definition of NBC!

  • helenk

    http://www.dailytopseven.com/readmore.php?newsid=MjY2OQ==

    information on benedict backtrack’s early life is getting weirder and weirder.
    Ancestary.com would have a field day.

    The theft of the last three elections is scary. A fair and honest election is one of the things that keeps this country from becoming a banana republic.
    The first two thefts they tried to cover up the last one was screw you and your vote we will install who we want. That has to be corrected and the corupted party dismantled.  Both parties need a major overhaul.

    WOMEN WITH INTELLIGENCE AND EXPERIENCE,MEN WHO SUPPORT THEM AND COUNTRY BEFORE PARTY ALWAYS

    PUMAS,BUBBAS,EQUALISTS AND THOSE CHATTERING  PEOPLE RULE

  • jbjd

    EllenD, first, do not contact TX officials unless you are from TX.  We keep complaining about an overreaching federal government at the same time we bypass state authority to get our way.  State elected officials answer to citizens of the state.  So, the quesiton is, if you are not from TX – and that is the state where I believe the quickest solution to election fraud lies – how can you persuade Texans to act?

    Also, find out whether you are from an applicable state for election fraud.  Read your laws; or phone your SoS.  (I already know AL and MO are; but I need a citizen from each state to contact me so that I can complete the steps requires to draft the complaint.)

  • jbjd

    seattleg, this is true.  Many delegates who filled Clinton slots were Obama devotees.  Many complaints were filed with the party…

  • jbjd

    “The thing that oustands and oustanded me is that the theivery took place out in the open, right before our eyes. There wasn’t even need for intuitive knowing…”

    Not exactly  The fraud you observed was not unlawful.

    …it was right there, but the press simply denied reality.

    So what?  People have the right to vote for a man who is incapable of governing; and who was chosen to be the nominee of the political party by violating their rules. 

    I don’t mean to sound harsh but, I was blowing the whistle in August about these vote binding laws and the delegate harassment; but this was still ‘a day late and a dollar short.’  And I encountered other front line activists who insisted, no, there aren’t 13 such states, but only 2.  And determined this was not a material solution to the problem of the imminent convention.

  • jbjd

    Senneth, maybe your state has no law requiring the candidate must be qualified for office in order to appear on the state ballot.

  • AbigailAdams

    Here is a copy of the WA state laws concerning “Appearing on the Presidential Ballot in Washington State”

    It is quite possibly the worst position voters could be in — because we basically have no rights to contest anything having to do with who gets on the ballot because it appears anyone the nat’l parties proposes (even giving them the right to choose whichever delegates they want) or whomever the national media (yes!) proposes, is a-ok with the SoS here.

    Read it WA state citizens, and weep:  http://www.secstate.wa.gov/_assets/elections/appearingonthepresidentialballot.pdf

    What’s the word?  Oh, yeah.  Hosed.

  • jbjd

    getfitnow, we could have done that work, too.  Some of us already knew about BO because we checked his associates or, in my case, his advisers in the campaign, because I figured these people would follow him into office.  (For me, the immediate dealbreaker was Samantha Power.) That’s why I don’t blame the press for BO; I blame us.

  • jbjd

    trixta, whoa!  Here’s how that works.  The Texas Open Records Law requires public officials to produce records.  TX law says, the Chair of the political party can be considered a public official when carrying out a public responsibility required by law.  TX law says, Mandamus can be used to get a party officer to carry out a ministerial duty.  Thus, unlike in other states, Chair Richie can be required to produce documents and compellted by the AG (or a citizen, through the court) when he refuses.  Read IDIOMS! http://jbjd.org/2010/04/12/idioms/

  • jbjd

    susiepuma, you should add the link to the legislator so that people ‘get’ the joke.

  • Buttered

    Leaving the un-Democratic Party is a good start.

    Working to end the un-Democratic Party is an even better act.

  • jbjd

    trixta, make sure you understand, what I posted is not a judicial complaint but a generic citizen complaint to a state official.  I advocate individual citizens become their own saviors.

  • Buttered

    I want to know! 

    Who are these 30 people? 

    And I want names for those 30 people!!!!!!!

    “This body of 30 individuals has decided that they are going to substitute their judgment for 600,000 voters.”

  • Buttered

    NEVER FORGET!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Janis

    I just got it — why people have been putting saltine and matzoh and water cracker after their names.  I guess that makes me a pizzelle.  :)

  • Janis

    Because it would be “cool.”  Why did so many little kids neeeeeed a Tickle Me Elmo?

  • jbjd

    KW, those people who used their superior knowledge of our electoral system are citizens, too.  That’s why I say, if all of us are equally knowledgeable about our political system then, any one of with superior knowledge will be unable to steal our power again. 

    (Did you have a chance to read the post on the NPVI I sent you?  If that thing passes, it won’t matter whether you convinced your state to abandon electronic machine voting in place of verifiable hand counted paper ballots!)

  • csuzeq

    John’s not very Smart after all.  He really doesn’t need to give Obama ANY ideas.  Don’t tell the worst POTUS evah what to fake so he can stay.  Send him away now.  the fad is done.  Kaput. Over.  So over.  He had his chance and that is enough!  Sheesh!

  • Janis

    I figure as long as we’re giving them headaches and forcing them to chug maalox, we’re doing our jobs as Americans because there is no other power left to us.  The whole point of this place is that we are an ornery, ungovernable, loudmouthed rabble.  Revel in your cantankerousness!

  • Janis

    Same same same Ellen, and I will never forgive them for it as long as I live.  They can’t go down in flames fast enough for me.  They are 100% pure evil, and I will not shed a tear for them under any circumstances.