Arrest at the TX Convention

[Brown Sapper]

I knew it was a matter of time before it would happen? They just arrested someone, but haven't found out why. Try to keep you updated.

 

[Brown Sapper]

Shameless bump

 

[crazyfingers]

What happened? Was it a Ron Paul supporter?

 

[ronpaulhawaii]

I've been waiting for an update...

No idea at all of the circumstances? where did this news come from?

 

[Brown Sapper]

My bro is a delegate and he sending me texts. There should have been someone giving updates but don't know what happened with that.

 

[Brown Sapper]

Supposedly they tried to bring up the delagates from the Rump Convention the chair struck them down cold. People got mad someone took it too far.

 

[Brown Sapper]

They also have changed the Chairs yet either. They are doing a revote again tonight but it will already be too late.

 

[Brown Sapper]

Heading off to the convention now.

 

[libertarian4321]

What happened? Was it a Ron Paul supporter?

Its a pretty safe bet it wasn't one of McCain's supporters.

 

[JK/SEA]

Political prisoner. Call Amnesty International.

 

[The One]

Maybe it was just some dude who thought it was a concert and lit up a joint.

 

[asgardshill]

Maybe it was just some dude who thought it was a concert and lit up a joint.

And bogarted it. Yeah, I'd have him frogmarched off too.

 

[Matt Collins]

Any more details?

 

[IPSecure]

The Gatekeeper

Update, but not on arrest...

Friday, June 13, 2008
The Gatekeeper

The focus of controversy in the RPT State Convention has been and continues to be the Credentials Committee, with more challenges at any time since 1976 when the Reagan conservatives came into the party and asserted their right to participate. In spite of that record number of challenges, the committee did not convene until Wednesday while other substantive committees began on Monday.

The focus of the committee continued to be the egregious actions of Nueces County Party. The Credentials Committee chairman, Judge Diaz, offered his committee's report during the general session of the Convention on Thursday afternoon after the convention was called to order about 4pm. When members of the Credentials Committee presented a minority report to the chairman, seeking to bring the issue of the rump convention and the challenge regarding Nueces County Chairman to the full convention under RPT Rule 24, he decreed it not a valid minority report and thus the convention was not allowed to hear the issue.

The Permanent Credentials Committee, of which I was a member, asked the chairman for an explanation. He said that a minority report must be presented before the end of the committee meeting, which is not supported by the text of Rule 24. He also stated that it could not be valid because the report included the rump convention of Nueces County, which the Credentials Committee had no authority to address. How is it the Credentials Committee had no authority to even hear the case of the delegates who had determined that the original Nueces County Convention was illegal because of rules violations and thus held their own convention? It was, the chairman explained, because he had determined that the Credentials Committee had no "jurisdiction" to hear the case. The Credentials Committee had no jurisdiction to hear the case of a rump convention and determine if their reasons for doing so were legitimate?

The Chairman explained that he was "a gatekeeper" and he listened to the preliminary testimony of the rump convention delegates and determined that it should not be heard! His reasoning was the delegates of the rump convention had not notified each member of the original delegation that they were being challenged. This, indeed, is the rule for individual challenges, but in the 20 years of my experience in the party, this has never been the case for dealing with a rump convention. Such challenges are usually resolved by hearing the testimony of each group and then making a determination of which group should be seated, based on whether or not the original convention was illegal because of rules violations.

So the challengers were denied an opportunity to even present their case because of what can only be described as a technicality, while the delegation - which, by undisputed testimony, added 35 delegates to their roll illegally, denied the participations repeated requests for points of order and were given minutes of the precinct conventions to prove this only after forced to by the Thirteenth Court of Appeals - were all seated with the exception of the credentials committee chairman of the county convention. In fact, a former county chairman from Nueces County testified to the committee that the party had been operating in this manner for over 20 years.

For the first time in my experience in the RPT, a difference was articulated between a "contest" and a "challenge," which heretofore, in my experience, have been used interchangeably. This artful creation was also used to "resolve" many of these rules violations without the final dispostion being made by the delegates at the convention.

The "gatekeeper" made his final ruling in the Permanent Credentials Committee when he decreed that it was not possible for the permanent committee to address anything other than what the temporary committee had reported based on RPT Rule 34a. In other words, it was out of order to discuss Nueces County rump convention or the credentials of the Nueces County Chairman. Nor was it possible to have a minority report on those issues. A motion to appeal his ruling was offered, and the committee upheld the chairman by a vote of 18-12. In subsequent discussion it was pointed out that other subsections of Rule 34 gave the same direction to the Platform Committee and the Rules Committee, and the long time practice of those committees was not to limit the permanent committees only to the work of temporary committees. When the chairman was asked his opinion of whether those committees were likewise limited, he explained that he did not have an opinion on those committees, and it did not matter. It is the view of many members of the credentails committee that the chairman created interpretations of rules to accomplish what he and the Chairman of the RPT desired from the beginning.

This is more evidence, in my opinion, of the reason we need new RPT leadership.

'No Authority' - Seems to be the strategy, including the courts...

 

[MsDoodahs]

Thanks for the update.

 

[scandinaviany3]

too bad this wasnt in writing with signatures on everyones chairs.

Update, but not on arrest...

Friday, June 13, 2008
The Gatekeeper

The focus of controversy in the RPT State Convention has been and continues to be the Credentials Committee, with more challenges at any time since 1976 when the Reagan conservatives came into the party and asserted their right to participate. In spite of that record number of challenges, the committee did not convene until Wednesday while other substantive committees began on Monday.

The focus of the committee continued to be the egregious actions of Nueces County Party. The Credentials Committee chairman, Judge Diaz, offered his committee's report during the general session of the Convention on Thursday afternoon after the convention was called to order about 4pm. When members of the Credentials Committee presented a minority report to the chairman, seeking to bring the issue of the rump convention and the challenge regarding Nueces County Chairman to the full convention under RPT Rule 24, he decreed it not a valid minority report and thus the convention was not allowed to hear the issue.

The Permanent Credentials Committee, of which I was a member, asked the chairman for an explanation. He said that a minority report must be presented before the end of the committee meeting, which is not supported by the text of Rule 24. He also stated that it could not be valid because the report included the rump convention of Nueces County, which the Credentials Committee had no authority to address. How is it the Credentials Committee had no authority to even hear the case of the delegates who had determined that the original Nueces County Convention was illegal because of rules violations and thus held their own convention? It was, the chairman explained, because he had determined that the Credentials Committee had no "jurisdiction" to hear the case. The Credentials Committee had no jurisdiction to hear the case of a rump convention and determine if their reasons for doing so were legitimate?

The Chairman explained that he was "a gatekeeper" and he listened to the preliminary testimony of the rump convention delegates and determined that it should not be heard! His reasoning was the delegates of the rump convention had not notified each member of the original delegation that they were being challenged. This, indeed, is the rule for individual challenges, but in the 20 years of my experience in the party, this has never been the case for dealing with a rump convention. Such challenges are usually resolved by hearing the testimony of each group and then making a determination of which group should be seated, based on whether or not the original convention was illegal because of rules violations.

So the challengers were denied an opportunity to even present their case because of what can only be described as a technicality, while the delegation - which, by undisputed testimony, added 35 delegates to their roll illegally, denied the participations repeated requests for points of order and were given minutes of the precinct conventions to prove this only after forced to by the Thirteenth Court of Appeals - were all seated with the exception of the credentials committee chairman of the county convention. In fact, a former county chairman from Nueces County testified to the committee that the party had been operating in this manner for over 20 years.

For the first time in my experience in the RPT, a difference was articulated between a "contest" and a "challenge," which heretofore, in my experience, have been used interchangeably. This artful creation was also used to "resolve" many of these rules violations without the final dispostion being made by the delegates at the convention.

The "gatekeeper" made his final ruling in the Permanent Credentials Committee when he decreed that it was not possible for the permanent committee to address anything other than what the temporary committee had reported based on RPT Rule 34a. In other words, it was out of order to discuss Nueces County rump convention or the credentials of the Nueces County Chairman. Nor was it possible to have a minority report on those issues. A motion to appeal his ruling was offered, and the committee upheld the chairman by a vote of 18-12. In subsequent discussion it was pointed out that other subsections of Rule 34 gave the same direction to the Platform Committee and the Rules Committee, and the long time practice of those committees was not to limit the permanent committees only to the work of temporary committees. When the chairman was asked his opinion of whether those committees were likewise limited, he explained that he did not have an opinion on those committees, and it did not matter. It is the view of many members of the credentails committee that the chairman created interpretations of rules to accomplish what he and the Chairman of the RPT desired from the beginning.

This is more evidence, in my opinion, of the reason we need new RPT leadership.

'No Authority' - Seems to be the strategy, including the courts...

We really needed these notes on every chair during caucus

The one sheet was ok..but your notes are far, far more compelling.

People didnt even know that there was a 18-12 vote!

Not having to make this fight on the floor could have made the ron paul people look a lot better when they contested issues, too have signed papers of the minority report on people chairs.

 

[newyearsrevolution08]

we will be taking the gop back in the next 4-8 years.

Keep fighting!

 

[NBTxn4RP]

Yes newyearsrevolution08, I believe you're right...I never saw so many old people in one place in my life!

I just hope that everyone else who left feeling disenfranchised will stick in there and keep trying to work within the party...until we own it!

 

[Bryan]

Thanks for the info IPSecure- that is good to know.

As for the arrest- I was right there and saw it, I got some on video too. I doubt there was an arrest, but someone was escorted out by police. Long story short there was a ruckus of a vocal protest of the decision of the chair (keep in mind that it's not easy to be heard in a room of 8000+ when you have no microphone), the dissenting voice approached the podium yelling to be heard and some volunteer sergeant at arms approached as well as the lead, elected sergeant - a moment later right behind the dissenter one of the volunteer sergeant at arms started to repeatably yell that the lead, elected sergeant had assaulted him. He was in a group of serveral other sergeants - two police approached and took him away. I can't see what chargers they'd press against him but don't know.

For sure, it wasn't anything political.

 

[The One]

Was the guy who was arrested eating a hot dog from 7/11?