What kind of background are you looking for? I'm not going to give my life story here or answer question after question about myself. I've had legal training and I've spent much of my time this year helping liberty-minded delegates get to Tampa through organizing, phone banking, creating media products, talking with reporters, working with attorneys, reviewing legal documents, reviewing rules, assisting with challenges, assisting with legal strategy, etc.
But why is that important? It shouldn't be. The facts speak for themselves.
I've been trying to avoid the "take my word for it" approach and focus on the objective evidence (other than when describing my motives).
The materials filed with the court are objective and verifiable, along with yesterday's opinion and the fact that the case has been dismissed.
That statutes and case law are objective. Although predictions about how the law will be interpreted are not objective, some guesses are better than others (with the educated guesses having the highest likelihood of being correct).
The bottom line is, this case is the wrong play legally. It's not just Gilbert (although he's as big problem). The case itself isn't going to win, although it could cause problems for the liberty delegates in Tampa from the various states that are challenging or being challenged. This gets to a second point which is this case is the wrong play politically. The goal should not be to destroy the Republican party but to help it grow - for liberty. My signature should give you enough insight into my position on that.
It's not about making nice with the establishment and joining the good ol' boy's club. We have to gain the trust of people outside the movement if there is to be any hope of some practical success. I understand many of the plaintiffs have been wronged. I think anyone with a legitimate complaint should file it in the appropriate state court or file a challenge in the RNC. They probably wont get much out of the RNC but at least they're showing observers that they're trying to follow the appropriate course of action and not merely going "nuclear" on the party. Better to be a martyr than a madman.
I hope you can see I have a sincere commitment to the movement and that my opposition to Gilbert and his suit are both well intentioned and based on objective, verifiable facts.
The people who went to court are giving us their spin on what was said and how. I can't verify that right now. What can be verified is how Gilbert was mocked by the court in yesterday's opinion and that his case was dismissed.
