MAJOR ANNOUNCEMENT: Lawyers for Ron Paul Lawsuit NOTE: Having the lawsuit not up 4 debate

So the "surrogate" made it happen, but you know Paul told him/her to do it?

They didn't exactly involve me in the discussion, so I can't give you the play by play. But Ron Paul is in control of his campaign and is working with the RNC as the convention approaches. Between Ron Paul, his campaign managers, and his lawyers, a deal was worked in this dispute. Whether or not Ron Paul was personally there when the deal was made, he approved it. His team isn't just running around making deals that he is completely opposed to.
 
They didn't exactly involve me in the discussion, so I can't give you the play by play. But Ron Paul is in control of his campaign and is working with the RNC as the convention approaches. Between Ron Paul, his campaign managers, and his lawyers, a deal was worked in this dispute. Whether or not Ron Paul was personally there when the deal was made, he approved it. His team isn't just running around making deals that he is completely opposed to.

Ok, well that was ALL speculation on your part and you didn't answer my question, so... boom goes the ignore button.
 
They didn't exactly involve me in the discussion, so I can't give you the play by play. But Ron Paul is in control of his campaign and is working with the RNC as the convention approaches. Between Ron Paul, his campaign managers, and his lawyers, a deal was worked in this dispute. Whether or not Ron Paul was personally there when the deal was made, he approved it. His team isn't just running around making deals that he is completely opposed to.

you have no idea.
 
USA_Patriot_Press ‏@USA_Free_Press

Our delegates are selling us out. We must never let them hold public office


7:12 PM - 21 Aug 12 via web


Ron Paul - Real Hope ‏@tweetAmiracle

@USA_Free_Press Which delegates are selling out?


USA_Patriot_Press

8:51 PM - 21 Aug 12 via web


USA_Patriot_Press ‏@USA_Free_Press

@tweetAmiracle I have an estimate of 60 delegates as of 4 pm. There will be more. Hawaii is likely to sellout. The Iowa Chairman also

8:52 PM - 21 Aug 12 via web
 
I wonder if he means withdrawing as plaintiffs rather than what is happening at RNC?

If some think his posture might lose they may just not want to be hit with 'dismissal with prejudice. That isn't the same as selling out Ron. But I'm not clear what he is talking about.
 
I wonder if he means withdrawing as plaintiffs rather than what is happening at RNC?

If some think his posture might lose they may just not want to be hit with 'dismissal with prejudice. That isn't the same as selling out Ron. But I'm not clear what he is talking about.

It's possible. It could very well affect an individual's chances of suing the RNC in the future if they have sued every state chairman and already lost.
 
please read the first post in this thread. Off topic posts will be removed. Repeated off topic posts after being warned subjects you to being banned.

I'm one of at least 3 people talking about this subject, and I'm the one being extremely positive about it regarding Ron Paul and what he is doing right now. I haven't been negative at all about Ron's strategy in Louisiana. I feel it's relevant to the thread because that's what Richard Gilbert is talking about right now, and because he feels it relates to the lawsuit. But I'll stop discussing it since you asked.
 
I wonder if he means withdrawing as plaintiffs rather than what is happening at RNC?

If some think his posture might lose they may just not want to be hit with 'dismissal with prejudice. That isn't the same as selling out Ron. But I'm not clear what he is talking about.

I'm not either. And if I understand you correctly, you mean that if we had lost the case there might have been consequences that would have been worse than if it had never been filed? IOW, we would have just fought to win delegates?

I don't know. I wish I did. But I am worried that this was an orchestrated sabotage of the case by the RNC (and any rats within the Paul campaign) to take away any pro-Paul effect that the ruling would have had, if it had been given before "deals" were made.

Now let's say that the ruling is given and the delegates are ruled to be unbound. Then I don't see how any deals would be negative unless we wound up at the RNC with less delegates than we would have had if we could have gotten more to the RNC without making any deals.

People would be able to vote their conscience, but we would have less of our people there.

I'm spitballing here, but I really have a problem with the events that have happened in the last 24 hours, namely that RG tweeted he had to take an important phone call last night:

USA_Patriot_Press ‏@USA_Free_Press

I will be back later. Important call

9:43 PM - 20 Aug 12 via web


Then we all wait to see what happens at 9 this morning, then all of a sudden there is a *report* of deals being made that included a statement that an announcement would be made this afternoon (Tuesday):

"The deal, which is expected to be announced Tuesday afternoon" - http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.co...s-set-to-strike-deal-with-rnc/comment-page-1/

The announcement as far as I know was never made.

What I am afraid of is that this has been an attempt to try and undermine any pro-Paul effect that winning the case might have.

Now, we could still win the case.

But I'm afraid that delegates are being shepherded here towards accepting that there really is NO chance of Paul becoming president.

Now, if that is what Paul wants, then there is really nothing anyone can do about it.

I'm not going to try and read the mind of Ron Paul, who I trust. And if he does NOT become president, then I will not give up on HIM. I trust his guidance.

My own personal opinion was and still is that he needs to be president.

But if Paul has a plan, I don't want to get in the way of it.

The fact is, I don't know.

I am putting my faith in Ron Paul. I will put my faith in my own belief that he knows what is going on.

I am trying to make sense of it all. I just have my own fears.
 
I'd rather we didn't just guess. I don't know how much Ron has turned this over to others or what he has been told. I have faith in Ron and I support our delegates, regardless of their decision regarding this suit. The are the ones who have to make the judgment calls.
 
I'd rather we didn't just guess. I don't know how much Ron has turned this over to others or what he has been told. I have faith in Ron and I support our delegates, regardless of their decision regarding this suit. The are the ones who have to make the judgment calls.

Right, which is why I don't want to get in the way of anything. But at the same time, I want to try and help out if I can, and if I see something that looks off, I am at least going to point it out.

I want progress along the lines of what I believe Paul is about. And when it comes to the presidential election, for me it's a no-brainer. But I believe that he can lead even if he is not president.

I do not want to get in the way. But I'm not always sure if I am or not because I'm trying to figure out what the heck is going on.

But yeah, when it comes down to it, when Paul speaks, from his own mouth, I will shut up and listen.
 
But I will say this. I believe in Richard Gilbert. Some people listen to their gut, which I do as well, but I have listened to his heart and to me it rings true. I could be wrong of course, but I haven't seen anything of substance to make me believe that he is doing what he does other than because he loves people, he loves his country, and he loves the freedoms that we all have a right to. That's my take, but like I said, I haven't seen anything that says otherwise.
 
What would be the point of making a deal to be seated if they couldn't vote for Ron Paul -- I just don't get that. What an epic disappointment.
 
Back
Top