It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Lawyers For Ron Paul Civil Rights (Voting Rights) Lawsuit FAQ

page: 2
46
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 09:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by TinfoilTP
Ron Paul has stated he would not have voted for the Civil Rights Act back in the 60's.
So there you have it, the ultimate hypocricy. He can't turn around today and scream for his Civil Rights when he has been against giving them to you his entire professional career.




, Paul said he objected to the Civil Rights Act because of its infringement on private property rights. He said that while he would favor repealing Jim Crow laws, the United States “would be better off” without government intruding on and policing personal lives. When Chris Matthews pressed the issue, asking if it should be legal for shop owners to not allow blacks, Paul responded, “That’s ancient history. That’s over and done with.”
it's his personal view of not allowing the federal government how you have to live your life or run your business. he sticks to his guns. even though he doesn't agree with people who are racist he believes the federal government does not have the right to tell people how to run their lives or their business. but you probably already knew that.




posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 09:36 PM
link   
Do they actually have a case?

I highly doubt it, as I have outlined here in this thread I made.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

HEHE it's not like I didn't see this coming.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 09:39 PM
link   
reply to post by TinfoilTP
 


If you think Ron Paul is the ultimate hypocrite you're as deluded as the sheeple you so eloquently mock. If this law suit is truly on behalf of the Ron Paul campaign, i.e. he and/or his campaign organized it, does one political stance change in 40+ years make him 'the ultimate hypocrite'? Look at the talking heads that were and are running for GOP nomination. Look no further than Romney himself, the ultimate flip-flopper.

Your extreme hatred for Dr. Paul begs the question: who will you vote for? Romney or Obama? Voting for either will render you a hypocrite by nature. Obviously you aren't voting for Obama, based on your display picture. So is it Romney who you will endorse in this upcoming election, the man who's entire campaign fund comes from big financial institutions?



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 10:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by TinfoilTP
Ron Paul has stated he would not have voted for the Civil Rights Act back in the 60's.
So there you have it, the ultimate hypocricy. He can't turn around today and scream for his Civil Rights when he has been against giving them to you his entire professional career.



Civil Rights did not come into existence through the Civil Rights Act. The Civil Rights Act merely clarified the intention of the Constitution and in some cases gave more emphasis to divisions amongst skin color. I believe Ron Paul has stated why the Civil Rights Act was unnecessary: The Constitution clearly gives equal rights to all people regardless of skin color. It needed no ACT to enforce that standard. All it took was a President to enforce the Constitution on those states which were in violation of it.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 10:24 PM
link   
rico takes everyone involved down correct?



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 10:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by jjf3rd77
Do they actually have a case?

I highly doubt it, as I have outlined here in this thread I made.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

HEHE it's not like I didn't see this coming.



Quit being so silly.


I love how all of the Ron Paul haters, still, to this day, comes out and hates on anything the Ron Paul movement tries to achieve even if its fighting election fraud.

You guys really do have absolutely no morals.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 11:00 PM
link   
This 'alleged' lawsuit information is making its way slowly around the net. Some of 'us' aren't buying into it and/or will not get excited about it...until 'we' have actual proof that a lawsuit was actually filed. A copy of that document would be nice. RP forums has some information about the 'alleged ' document # and which Judge got the case, but I have yet to see a copy of the lawsuit...

Time will tell...



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 11:07 PM
link   
Was it just me or was there a lot of clicking while she was talking. As if her tongue was bouncing all over her mouth.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 11:10 PM
link   
The Ron Paul army is marching on.

We're fighting for and WINNING the majority of state delegates in many states.

The Revolution WILL be televised.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 11:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by gladtobehere
The Ron Paul army is marching on.

We're fighting for and WINNING the majority of state delegates in many states.

The Revolution WILL be televised.


Hell yes.. Positive things come to positive thinkers. Proven fact. President Paul 2012


I used to keep a thread elsewhere on the voter fraud. Their was plenty enough documented for a case. Maybe not every state but at least 4 or 5 states solid.
edit on 12-6-2012 by yellowsnow because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 01:02 AM
link   
Well this suit still doesn't address what I think is one of the most important things: Evidence of Vote Flipping in GOP Primary Elections



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 01:23 AM
link   
Respectfully folks, there is really not a lot of good caselaw that supports filing and then prevailing in a lawsuit basically saying "I'm a candidate for public office, I'm running behind and I need the court to intervene and take judicial action to prevent me from losing an election". This move is simply a last ditch attempt for Team Ron Paul to try and free up a few more delegates to the Republican National Convention and that's all. And as far as the lawsuit goes, I would be shocked if any judge would even entertain the thought of interfering with a nomination process of a national presidential candidate by slapping a judicial order on it. The suits will get filed and the judges will either dismiss them outright or rule against them on the merits.

I'm sorry but to me this is a legal non-starter....



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 02:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by RisenAngel77
Im surprised this didn't get more attention oO,Where is everyone?

2nd line
edit on 12-6-2012 by RisenAngel77 because: (no reason given)


Helping out with the lawsuit and working to get into local offices.


The R3VOLUTION is just getting started.
edit on 13-6-2012 by 27jd because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 02:13 AM
link   
reply to post by 27jd
 


Please update us with case numbers and citations (if it is not too much trouble) so we can follow the lawsuits as they progress...



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 06:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by rickymouse
reply to post by RisenAngel77
 


You know, I think that a law should be created making someone who's campaign practice leads to fraud in voting to be charged with treason. If found guilty they would be put to death. Especially if the fraud is enacted by a high government official. Maybe we could have eliminated a couple of past presidents by a law like this.


I agree and I would like to add any federal figure whether appointed or elected to the list.

During war a soldier can be executed for falling asleep on watch and since 2003 we have been at war due to an obvious fraud. I think it would be a great step if we started there, but I know all of the sheeple would be aghast at such a move since they were the dupes who supported him.

When our public offices are no longer a way of getting rich by changing policies for the corporations who bribe candidates we will see prosperity return to the people. Right now it is a standing joke among politicians that anything can be done and candidates can bury it or lessen the impact and continue to do whatever they like since they are above the law.

So if it is ok to kill a soldier who has decided to lay their life down if needed for the good of the people it seems equally important for lawmakers and elected officials to be held to the same standard.

BTW, I want to thank ATS for not banning people for holding views like ours. I have been banned from another site like this for saying the same thing.



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 06:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by AckAckAttack34
Respectfully folks, there is really not a lot of good caselaw that supports filing and then prevailing in a lawsuit basically saying "I'm a candidate for public office, I'm running behind and I need the court to intervene and take judicial action to prevent me from losing an election". This move is simply a last ditch attempt for Team Ron Paul to try and free up a few more delegates to the Republican National Convention and that's all. And as far as the lawsuit goes, I would be shocked if any judge would even entertain the thought of interfering with a nomination process of a national presidential candidate by slapping a judicial order on it. The suits will get filed and the judges will either dismiss them outright or rule against them on the merits.

I'm sorry but to me this is a legal non-starter....


In order for a person to hold YOUR view they must ignore all of the fraud perpetrated by the RNC leadership. I realize your type is good at avoiding uncomfortable subjects by covering their ears and saying na na na na na I can't hear you, but in this case you really have to be mentally incapacitated to ignore the abuses or else you are a part of the problem.

This is not about a team winning or losing like some high school basketball game. This is about having an election and having the entire process hijacked by some unscrupulous, cheating, desperate, lying, bullying communists. But you go right ahead and call all RP fans whatever you like and minimize the atrocities to some juvenile basketball game so it makes you feel better about being one of the communists.

I bet you wish you could have 2 votes to make up for the retards that want their government to work for them instead of what we have now. Better start checking the obituaries for fresh meat to add to your voter fraud in the general election, but in Florida that will be tougher since they are ignoring federal rule and removing those voters before the election.



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 07:16 AM
link   
reply to post by onecraftydude
 


Can you imagine how much work it must be for the moderators to read all these posts to make sure that there is nothing that the government can use to shut down or investigate the site? It is also important to check for things that may cause the advertisers to stop advertising so the site can continue. I suppose I shouldn't add to their workload by commenting about things that are controversial..



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 08:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by seeker1963
reply to post by TinfoilTP
 



Ron Paul has stated he would not have voted for the Civil Rights Act back in the 60's.
So there you have it, the ultimate hypocricy. He can't turn around today and scream for his Civil Rights when he has been against giving them to you his entire professional career.


Hmmmmm, so a person since making a decision in the 60's, has no room to grow and become a better person in the span of 50 years??? I certainly hope you have changed your views as you grew older and learned from your mistakes! Whoops! Maybe I am wrong! People like you were born perfect and your views NEVER change?????

I think your words pretty much prove why you are here!



Isn't the argument the majority of RP supporters on here come up with is that he never flip flops, never alters his position etc.? Although I agree with your comments and find the concept of never accepting change a little weird, it seems to be a real big thing to his ATS supporters so basically, if he has changed his view then he has flipped and flopped - not my opinion, but judging by the logic his supporters use.



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 09:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by jjf3rd77
This might actually be the smartest thing to come out of Ron Paul supporters' mouths all year!!!!

I respect their right to sue the government if they feel they were being treated unfairly, I hope this thread gets a lot of coverage over the next couple of months so I can keep track of the case.

However, the lack of posts on the thread is telling no? The movement is dead, even on ATS. I have also noticed little postings/actual news over at the dailypaul too!


Hi,

Why would they sue the government? These were party elections were they not? If they have a case against anyone wouldn't it be the Republican party? And even then, as Ron Paul won some areas wouldn't it be even more localised than that?



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 10:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by eLPresidente


I love how all of the Ron Paul haters, still, to this day, comes out and hates on anything the Ron Paul movement tries to achieve even if its fighting election fraud.


Hate? I said this was the smartest thing they have done all year. No hate is coming from me. Questioning if they have a case, yes!



new topics

top topics



 
46
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join