9 votes

*URGENT* Youtube of Jerry Davis - - > No One Can Tell You How To Vote!

This is a recorded discussion with Jerry Davis , the "Lawyers for Ron Paul" guy who advised Ben Swann on the Affidavit from Massachusetts GOP

It is very informative and specific as to the legality of RNC rules in regards to any demands placed on Delegates to commit their vote for who the Party endorses.
They discuss the Affidavit send by the Massachusetts GOP to that State's Delegates demanding they sign it, and under penalty of perjury, vote for Mittens in the first round.
Jerry is on this, and says he'll bring in his Law Firm to consult on a plan of action which he'll announce in about 72 hours (Three days).
As well as the whole "abstain in the first round of voting" strategy.


Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Delegate Afitdavit

MA Delegates Please use the "Strike Through" method on the affidavit. Draw a line through the part about the romney oath and initial and date that "strike-through"

Then Sign and Hand Deliver the signed affidavit affirming that you agree to the contents of the affidavit with the exception of the "Romney oath" section.

This will ensure that the Delegates who were qualified through the process certify themselves by the deadline without agreeing to an oath to vote for Romney which infringes upon their individual liberty as defined by the Constitution and USC 42 1971-1974 and 1983 "Voting Rights" AND by the RNC's own admission, that NO delegates are bound Under rule 38, as the RNC itself stated

"In what may be the most stunning revelation of the ongoing GOP presidential nomination process, it has been discovered that in 2008, the RNC Legal Counsel legally interpreted the RNC rules and concluded that all delegates, regardless of state party rules, could vote for whomever he or she chooses at the Republican National Convention. This legal inquiry by the RNC was the result of a delegate's desire not to vote for a candidate who did not represent his principles. The significance of this legal interpretation by the RNC lawyers is that all delegates are free to vote for any candidate regardless of any such “binding”. Because the RNC was the organization that conducted this legal examination, THEIR RULING TRUMPS ALL STATE GOP RULES."


Conclusively -
- Signing the affidavit as-is and voting for Ron Paul anyway is the only way you can face penalties by the state when you return from tampa. because you have falsely affirmed the contents of the affidavit. however you may defend yourself based on USC 42 1971 which the State party and the State must adhere to.

- Not signing or submitting any affidavit before the deadline can result in being replaced by alternates. Also challenge-able in court.

- Using the "Strike-through" method as described above ensures that you have submitted your certification as a qualified delegate and any denial of certification gives the delegates the upper hand in court as the Romney clause cannot be upheld as it can be viewed as violating individual liberty.

bump for MA

bump for MA

northstar's picture

We don't have much time left

Sometimes I feel like we're being played and this subject has taken far too long to settle. We don't have much time left to be arguing this matter.

Why can't the lawyers for the campaign tell us?
Why is it taking so long to settle what should already be known?
Too many questions, not much time left.

Real eyes realize real lies

We want our country back

Every year is a year for Ron Paul!

If I were the campaign, I wouldn't say anything till we got to

Tampa. That would be the most strategic time, in a speech.

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

northstar's picture

We have to trust our delegates

This is like a game of chess.

Real eyes realize real lies

We want our country back

Every year is a year for Ron Paul!

You asked a bit ago "Why can't the campaign lawyers tell us?"

So I answered you. That is a strategic move.

We have subversives posing as delegate trainers throwing out that the RNC can remove you from the floor per the states request.. Showing no proof of that happening.. They are mixing in some truths with lies and trying to scare us in the direction they want to go.

I'm not having any of it. Yes we need to educate ourselves but many won't take the time and will rely on people who they trust. The problem is that they're shitty at figuring out who is trustworthy and go with their emotions.

Best to trust Dr.Paul, Ben Swann, or our lawyers.

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

What really gets me is how...

...so many people get carried away with the "does a bound delegate have to vote for the bound candidate" discussion and in doing so allowing the sleight of hand to succeed.

That's not the issue people...

The real issue and discussion that the sleight of hand is steering you away from is:

Can a delegate abstain?

Remember people, you can tell people how to vote. You can have rules such as the "binding rules" that tell people how to vote. You can offer only two candidates on a hard ballot that the rules say are the only two...you can offer only one candidate as is often the case with elections for Judges in California...


...you can't make someone take the action of voting to begin with!!!


1. Take the action of voting.
2. Indicate who you are voting for.

If #1 does not happen, #2 by default does not happen either.

That's an abstain - and it counts as a non-vote.

Because abstensions (non-votes) are a possibility, that is why we have convention folks. Just having the delegates in not enough - getting them to actually cast a vote is the actual last hurdle.

Even if Romney gets the magic number, it ain't over. Romney knows this, Paul knows this, and so does the RNC that is panicking ready to push "dark horses" in at the last minute.

All you have to do is go to FreeRepublic and HotAir and just notice how as each week goes with Paul picking up delegates, Romney losing some, and some conventions headed to the courts - the same threads keep coming up over and over:

How about Palin?
How about Rubio?
How about West?
Can Gringrich make a comeback?

They too see how pathetic Romney is as a candidate - it's obvious to anyone with an IQ of 85. If they see it, you know damn well the RNC see it too.


Conservative AND Libertarian!!!

Steve Parent....

...is not welcome here. He is banned. He and his followers befouled the DailyPaul and other Ron Paul forums with hostility towards other Ron Paul supporters. He is banned from the best Ron Paul site in the entire world. His followers, last election cycle, also spammed the other Ron Paul sites and this one with their "radio show". BEWARE (DR)STEVE PARENT. Google his name and SGP (his old handle) to read what happened yourself. RonPaulForums also banned him, the old threads are still there for you to read. There's a very legitimate reason to distrust (DR)STEPHEN GERARD PARENT.

No one seems to have ever met him in person, or seen him, only heard his voice via phone. Solicited donations as well.

"I own an international marekting company for the medical industry and have an MD in otolaryngology."
- Internet Phantom calling himself "Dr. Steve Parent", 2/7/2008, Daily Paul

"I am not an MD"
- Internet Phantom calling himself "Dr. Steve Parent", 5/30/2008, RPF

From his old chat room at Revolution Broadcasting... targeting moderators at Ron Paul Forums, planning cyber attacks? Never answered to this.

DrSteveParent- i am doing damage control neil
Rayzer42- steve, surely not the 15 minutes late thing?
VTV- What's up
VTV- damage control?
Rayzer42- neil, we GOTTA get MUSE: http://www.youtube.co...
DrSteveParent- hi ray
DrSteveParent- yes damage control
DrSteveParent- look at this crap
Rayzer42- im not gonna get all pissed off right now lol
Rayzer42- but i will sick em tomorrow
Rayzer42- steve listen to that song I just posted
DrSteveParent- start here
DrSteveParent- http://www.ronpaulfor...
Rayzer42- ok
DrSteveParent- our friend ronpaulhawaii
VTV- Rayzer this guy has got to go.
VTV- Give me the information on the guy who owns this forum.
VTV- I will deal with it calmly and proffessionally
VTV- But this is ridiculous
Rayzer42- you promise?
VTV- Yes
Citizen_Cain- I just launched a Flag Assault on DailyPaul


http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?140590-Steve-Par... (You have to be a member of the website to read this old thread, and it is loooong)

http://www.dailypaul.com/143605/dr-steve-parent-i-will-not-b... (Steve swearing for the 100th time he will never return, but always does, someway)

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?131921-For-Bradl... (Steve Parent attacking a verifiable Doctor/delegate) I think now Chairman!

Do you just link to things and not read comments?

If you read the daily Paul post for example you will see inspirational comments from those people who support Steve Parent. It is sad to see 'Ron Paul supporters' attacking someone who inspires others because some people just want to bully others to make themselves feel better or whatever the chemical imbalance or other motives might be but it really is sad in my opinion. We are all human, and we do make mistakes. From the links that you have posted I do not see anything more than a man who has made mistakes, like anyone, but the difference is that he comes back to face people like you who wish nothing but to destroy him and for what? Why attack someone who says look for yourself and find out the information on your own, what is wrong with that? A shame not everyone on this website is a Ron Paul supporter, because, in my opinion, Ron Paul would not support such ridicule. Best wishes, and go Ron Paul 2012!

But .. He doesn't really mean it, does he.

Look Brian, I presume you're he?
Does he really support Ron Paul's Constitutional message?
In every recording he claims he is trying to teach us how the Conventions work, more specifically Robert's Rules of Parliamentary Procedure - Steve says that. But then states his 'opinion' as if it were a fact he can support based solely on the bylaws and on his 'training', so he knows what he's talking about.
For example;
He spoke with Jerry Davis who told him that it doesn't matter what bylaws the RNC passes, they cannot overrule the Constitution which protects voter rights and, therefore prevents any repercussions or penalties as a result of a person's vote - I heard him say it on the Youtube recording referenced above, and Steve said he agreed with him.

Then, in a subsequent interview he told Tracy Diaz that those delegates listening will face potential penalties and pitfalls if you go against the bylaws which, quite literally, order you to vote a certain way. And proceeded to list a few like monetary damages, etc.

The Constitution overrules a political parties bylaws according to a lawyer that he said he heard, understood and agreed with.
Yet, his bylaws are all he referenced in that interview.

I think he doesn't like his precious bylaws being overruled by the Constitution. And, because of that is giving erroneous information to folks who trust him.
Unless you have a different explanation?

"Trust, but verify"
"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same."
- Ronald Reagan

That is my understanding of

That is my understanding of the recordings also.

I know...

...about the supportive comments. I posted the link to show both sides. I'm not trying to destroy anyone. If you read the rest of the threads, you just may come to a different conclusion. How dare you suggest that anyone questioning Steve Parent is questioning Ron Paul himself. Typical. He hasn't "faced" me at all. It's not about facing "me" anyway. I am glad you went through the trouble of reading some of the links, but it's sad that you suggest I don't care for the cause, just because I feel people should know where Steve Parent came from before they associate with him. If you still choose to do so, fine. Just know what he did in 2008.

What drew doubt on Steve Parent the most in 2008, was also the fact that he and his supporters equated questioning Steve Parent, with questioning Ron Paul and the liberty message. You are digging yourself a hole, stop digging.

There are MANY more threads if one just looks deeper, I posted the tip of the iceberg.
I agree with Steve on one thing; Check for yourself.

Might re-read what was written once again.

Think you should read over what was said once again.

Even Ron Paul has lunch at the FED.


OK, truce.

I'll have lunch with Steve, then.

@ Furious Primate

Thank you! I didn't know he was a subversive who has been banned by pretty much everyone.
From those links you gave he sounds like a vengeful, bullying child who is angry at everything Ron Paul because no one in the forums will take his side.

I removed all reference to him in my post.
Thanks again for "lookin' out" for a Brother!

"Trust, but verify"
"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same."
- Ronald Reagan

Can you, or can you

find someone who can advise Jerry Davis about this 'parent' (hmmmm? 'nanny'???) guy?

If Jerry is in contact with him, he should probably end that association now, no matter how casual it is.

If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.
James Madison


I'll try, but I am not on the inner circle.
All I can do is send a message to the Youtube poster and a message to Ben Swann at his station.
If you are on Facebook,(I'm not. I have no use for that place) send Ben a note on there.

"Trust, but verify"
"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same."
- Ronald Reagan