Police Assault Ron Paul Delegate at LAGOP Convention

It's okay, let the lords lord over their crumbling castles.

Men of integrity have moved on, and they get the pleasure of being witness to it all.

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by macaronicaesar

 

So when the GOP change the rules it's cheating but when Paul supporters try to change the rules to unbind delegates it's fair play?

Please, please tell me you didn't just ask if there was a difference between voters changing the rules at the conventions like they are suppose to and the old guard at the GOP who don't want to be thrown out on the streets or are you simply being obtuse?

There's a huge difference. The Paul supporters are winning the conventions within the rules set out and doing exactly what they should be doing. The GOP officials don't want to lose their corrupt so they're scrambling to save what they can, the difference is a few mountains.

Originally posted by ugie1028
reply to post by TsukiLunar

 

well if you think about it... they kind of did...

the term Blow-Back... the GOP has been pushing the RP folks around... at each and every caucus/state convention...

it was only a matter of time before they started pushing and shoving back...

`

First off, I would like to say that i like you. I have never seen you attack anyone for their political beliefs(not voting Paul) and I respect that and take you seriously because of it.


Now, I don't understand why you are insisting that they were were in the right in trying to subvert the process and take over the GOP. This behavior reflects very poorly on Mr. Paul and I would assume that those serious about supporting him would denounce this kind of behavior. I certainly try to do so as often as possible when someone makes a fool of themselves in the name of my candidate (Obama).

another good thread ruined by outkast and domo, well done

reply to post by TsukiLunar

First off, I would like to say that i like you. I have never seen you attack anyone for their political beliefs(not voting Paul) and I respect that and take you seriously because of it.

Thanks. I try not to attack anyone for their beliefs. It would go against the libertarian principles if I did and in turn make me a hypocrite. (not saying i never have either, I think I have sometimes.. no one is perfect.)

Now, I don't understand why you are insisting that they were were in the right in trying to subvert the process and take over the GOP. This behavior reflects very poorly on Mr. Paul and I would assume that those serious about supporting him would denounce this kind of behavior. I certainly try to do so as often as possible when someone makes a fool of themselves in the name of my candidate (Obama).

I don't think they are entirely subverting the process. they are showing up at these conventions in large numbers and are trying to follow the rules. When the Ron Paul people are trying to change the rules or vote for their slates of delegates they are met with dirty tactics and tricks. Example from the Maine (I think it was Maine) caucus where a fake slate of delegates was being passed around which could of split the RP vote giving the Romney slates chance of winning. That is a dirty tactic.

So when the RP folk try to fight back by following the rules they are accused of being the dirty cheats. There have been more examples of the Romney camp trying to steam roll the Paul camp and everyone expects them to sit there and take it. I dont think so and if I was there... I would also be a thorn in the GOP's side because they do not respect me or the other delegates in the room.

I say let them fight, let them turn the GOP upside down at the conventions and in Tampa... Because 4 years of Obama is better than 8 possible years of Romney (Worse case scenario.)

Maybe RP will win the hearts and minds of the other delegates in Tampa... Best case scenario but unlikely

The injured parties should sue the attackers in civil court. The person who called for the attack is also complicit and should be named in the action as well! When these criminals stand to lose everything, that should be plenty of deterrent for attempting this criminal behavior in the first place!

reply to post by ugie1028
[more

Word on the street is that there was an underground streetfight between him and Mitt later than evening.

Originally posted by ajay59
The injured parties should sue the attackers in civil court. The person who called for the attack is also complicit and should be named in the action as well! When these criminals stand to lose everything, that should be plenty of deterrent for attempting this criminal behavior in the first place!

but in a place called REALITY, the rules had been changed to a 2/3rd vote for removal, they fell just shy of 2/3rd of the vote.

in COURT where the rules matter, it would be seen as they were attempting to overthrow a political function, the cops would be fully justified, and it did not appear that they used excessive force, the old dude just took one for the team and fell. he was trying to be a martyr in other words.

did they need to change it?
yes...

now is it extremely messed up that they changed the rules 1 week beforehand.
yes...

but they did change the rules, and a 2/3rd vote for removal is pretty common.



you are a member of ATS. you have seen hundreds of unjustified police beatings caught on tape.
why is it that you would single out these men to be ruined?

it looked as the police actually did a good job. they enforced the rules with minimal force, the old guy falls, and they allow doctors to look at him from a respectful distance and did not get out of hand even though a great number of people seem to be against them.
i hate police generally, but do not think that these guys were doing anything immoral or out of hand on their part.

These primaries are technically "government elections" because a candidate is being selected for a federal election. Therefore all of the rules still apply.

Check the FEC website, I have already linked it before and OutKast saw it but doesn't want any of you to see it.

Here is the document straight from the FEC:
Federal Election Laws

§ 431. Definitions When used in this Act: (1) The term “election” means— (A) a general, special, primary, or runoff election; (B) a convention or caucus of a political party which has authority to nominate a candidate; (C) a primary election held for the selection of delegates to a national nominating convention of a political party; and (D) a primary election held for the expression of a preference for the nomination of individuals for election to the office of President.

So basically since I already have shown him this, that means he is knowingly outright lying to you folks in order to trick you into giving up.

Originally posted by baphomet420

Originally posted by ajay59
The injured parties should sue the attackers in civil court. The person who called for the attack is also complicit and should be named in the action as well! When these criminals stand to lose everything, that should be plenty of deterrent for attempting this criminal behavior in the first place!

but in a place called REALITY, the rules had been changed to a 2/3rd vote for removal, they fell just shy of 2/3rd of the vote.

in COURT where the rules matter, it would be seen as they were attempting to overthrow a political function, the cops would be fully justified, and it did not appear that they used excessive force, the old dude just took one for the team and fell. he was trying to be a martyr in other words.

did they need to change it?
yes...

now is it extremely messed up that they changed the rules 1 week beforehand.
yes...

but they did change the rules, and a 2/3rd vote for removal is pretty common.



you are a member of ATS. you have seen hundreds of unjustified police beatings caught on tape.
why is it that you would single out these men to be ruined?

it looked as the police actually did a good job. they enforced the rules with minimal force, the old guy falls, and they allow doctors to look at him from a respectful distance and did not get out of hand even though a great number of people seem to be against them.
i hate police generally, but do not think that these guys were doing anything immoral or out of hand on their part.

Nice job of trying to insinuate cause where it does not exist! My statements go for all ASSAULT and BATTERY cases! The only damages I see in the video are committed by the security and law enforcement people. The victim was where he was supposed to be, doing the thing he was supposed to be doing! Hence, he committed no crime.

"Political Party" Definition:

The term political party means “an association, committee, or organization which nominates a candidate for election to any Federal office whose name appears on the election ballot as the candidate of such association, committee or organization." (2 USCS § 431)

USLegal

Therefore the FEC has jurisdiction over "political parties".
It's not a "private" thing like it's being portrayed.
The government has full authority to regulate the "parties" activities according to Federal Election Law.

not that tis is related but i thought it was pretty funny tell me what you think www.gop.com...

Originally posted by jazzguy
another good thread ruined by outkast and domo, well done

Yea, It's amazing the lengths these people will go to in order to spin reality and justify something that is very obviously wrong.

At some point or another, you have to question the motivation behind it.

Originally posted by ugie1028
Example from the Maine (I think it was Maine) caucus where a fake slate of delegates was being passed around which could of split the RP vote giving the Romney slates chance of winning. That is a dirty tactic.

It happened in both Maine and Nevada those same couple of days, can't remember the exact date, but I was watching the streams. A nice fat pile of the evidence of these underhanded tricks was collected during those two conventions.

One of the guys in Maine was caught red handed passing out fake slates, he was on the Mitt Romney campaign payroll. For $68 nonetheless.

Nevada was overwhelmingly pro-Paul and had one hell of a chairman. The Romney folks were screwing up and stumbling over their feet trying to cheat and trick Ron Paul supporters in the morning hours, didn't take long for that to come out in the open and be addressed by the convention itself.

Originally posted by muzzleflash
"Political Party" Definition:

The term political party means “an association, committee, or organization which nominates a candidate for election to any Federal office whose name appears on the election ballot as the candidate of such association, committee or organization." (2 USCS § 431)

USLegal

Therefore the FEC has jurisdiction over "political parties".
It's not a "private" thing like it's being portrayed.
The government has full authority to regulate the "parties" activities according to Federal Election Law.

Yea, political parties are not "private clubs" that can do whatever they want, like some people think *cough* outcast searcher *cough*. Even a legitimate private club cannot do whatever it wants in the US, they are exempt from a lot of things even including parts of the civil rights act of 64. Regardless, that is not what a party is and they have their own rules specifically set for them just like everything else.

I guess they aren't familiar with the 12th amendment of our constitution, among other things.

It's pretty sad and un-American that outkast is trying to pass this bs on here:

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
The GOP is a private organization...they can make any rules they want to.

No, they aren't and they can't. This is not North Korea. It's getting more and more like it by the day though with police forcefully detaining our delegates now, I guess this is the world you want to live in huh outkast? You think they are going to be easy on you because you are their internet lapdog?

Stick to what you know, like slandering Ron Paul supporters on the internet.

This guy, Charlie Nejedly:


More information

Fake slate in Maine:


Fake slate in Nevada:


Oh, look what we found:



Somebody's on the Romney payroll, uh oh.

Deny Ignorance. Ron Paul 2012 or no one.

I did'nt see any assault in the video. Looks like another boo hoo i hate cops until i need them thread, with a little bit of paulbot madness thrown in for flags.

reply to post by OutKast Searcher


And we are the crazy one's for following ron paul but following a complete sham as the gop is just sound advice from you guys?
Wow. Seems some people only try to deny others ignorance.

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher

Read these two articles...this convention was well aware of the trouble the Paul supporters were going to try to cause, so they amended the rules to prevent them from doing so.

Well, then the Paul supporters are correct in their statements ...

Making new rules, to "prevent" Paul supporters to get their way ... is "voting" fraud.

reply to post by OutKast Searcher



"...the trouble the Paul folks were planning?"

Citizens engaged in taking government back from Technocratic thugs who serve special interests... how dare they! What do they think... they have rights, or live in a representative democratic republic?

How dare they! They should quit screwing around and just accept the fact that those in power are allowed to change the rules any time they want to prevent citizens from misbehaving. Idiots.

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by b3l13v3

 

They are saying "The Chairman was removed".

Read these two articles...this convention was well aware of the trouble the Paul supporters were going to try to cause, so they amended the rules to prevent them from doing so.

www.nola.com...

www.nola.com...


From what I can tell, the Paul people probably tried to still vote out the sitting chairman...but with the new rules they needed two thirds vote to do so...which they didn't have.

From the video, I would guess the Paul supporters just tried to ignore the new rules and claim they voted out the chairman and put the guy being escorted out as the new chairman. The reason the original chairman is still talking is because he IS the official chairman.


Just more antics from the Paul people that are making Paul look bad...and he specifically asked his supporters not to do this kind of thing.

So what you are saying is the Ron Paul supporters are trying to give Dr. Paul every opportunity to secure as many delegates as possible within the boundaries of the "current" rules. Following the current rules is therefore "causing trouble" as you say. If what RP supporters were doing was against the rules, what would be the reason to change the rules? You, and a lot of other people, seem to have a huge problem with RP supporters conducting business within the context of the current rules. Yet you have no problem with the GOP establishment changing the rules on a whim to protect their "Golden Boy". I try to imagine the outrage if RP supporters tried this tactic. Then again they don't run the GOP so that would be tough. If they are just going to change all the rules whenever they want, why don't they just make a declaration right now that Mitt is their nominee and cancel the convention altogether. Don't want those Paulites to cause a stir now do we?

reply to post by scully222


Why don't they just make the declaration that this country is a new dynamic capitalist oligarchy (or hierarchy would be a better term maybe), that is what it is after all.

Outkast has a secret crush on Ron Paul. It's obvious when you see he's always hanging out and denigrating us. Boy, wouldn't it be great to get to know this person offline, he's such a charmer...

Are any ron paulbots in your Obama threads causing trouble? My guess is no, because we have better things to do with our time.