33 votes

WARNING Ousted Massachusetts Delegates: Beware Jesse Benton

Dear Massachusetts delegates, The situation is more convoluted than it may at first appear. Jesse Benton is working for Romney. That's right -- Dr Paul has been betrayed and may not even be aware of it. Moreover, in trying to convince ousted delegates to take NO LEGAL ACTION, Benton is attempting to sabotage any chance of Ron Paul's name being put in nomination.

Please watch the video below. Draw your own conclusions. Massachusetts was the 5th State required to implement a Rule 40 nomination. It is imperative that ousted Delegates file their grievances at electionfraudremedy.com. Do not let Mr. Benton convince you otherwise, or we may all have to live with the unfortunate consequence.

http://youtu.be/dX4DdfSGiFs



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

Richard Gilbert ANSWERS THE HARD QUESTIONS

Want to know what’s REALLY going on with Lawyers for Ron Paul (L4RP) and the National Delegates Case filed against the RNC/GOP?

GET YOUR INFORMATION FROM THE HORSE’S MOUTH TODAY!

Join Richard Gilbert, the attorney for the delegates, and David Callihan, Operations Manager for Lawyers for Ron Paul. www.electionfraudremedy.com

Date: June 27, 2012
Time: 9pm EST
CALL IN: 805-399-1200 Access Code: 764355

For more info until then, visit www.ronpaulone.com

Please help spread this info far and wide for Ron Paul supporters that need their questions answered. We have had enough speculation and infighting L4RP understandS your concerns. Please place this wherever you see posts that mean to undermine the delegates' case.
Thank you!

LadyHawk, would you mind

asking these, since I will be unable to attend? Thanks!

1. What is your affiliation, if any, with Liberty Unleashed PAC? Have you received ANY money from that organization?
2. Now that the California judge threw out the lawsuit and basically tossed it to Massachusetts where it should have been filed in the first place, what will be your role going forward since you are not licensed in Massachusetts?
3. What is your political affiliation, and for whom did you vote in the last election?
4. If this case is dismissed by the Massachusetts court, would you appeal? Why or why not?
5. If the case is dismissed, is there precedent for believing that another case regarding voting fraud would be more difficult to get to court?
6. If the case is successful, how will you be paid?

Great Questions! Let's See If I Can Assist

Please understand that I am not an attorney, but here's the way I understand it.

1. This question I can't answer. Dunno!

2. Please be aware that we are talking about a Federal Civil Right Case here. No California judge has thrown it out or has the autority to do so. The case is being heard in Federal Court, not State Court; so California and Massachusetts laws do not apply. Federal Law trumps State law and trumps GOP party "rules." That's the whole of it with this case: (i) to get Paul on the ballot (ii) to get US Marshalls at the convention to upfold Federal Law,(iii) to win the nomination.

3. All the attorneys at L4RP are Ron Paul devotees.

4. N.A., see #2 above.

5. N.A. This is again mixing apples and oranges: State and Federal, two different animals.

6. All attorneys are working on the case "pro bono publico," a Latin phrase used to describe professional work undertaken voluntarily and without payment as a public service.

I hope this helps as I am not willing to "triangulate" and to take on the responsiblity of asking somebody else's questions. Thanks for understanding!

Thanks for understanding? lol,

I understand alright.

Here's a link, hold on while I find it:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/06/19/rnc-calls-fr...

No, that's not it. Let me rummage...

http://ivn.us/2012/06/22/ron-paul-supporters-flawed-lawsuit-...

Closer. At least there is this tidbit, quoted from the article:

Judge Carter will take judicial notice of the fact that there are no true California plaintiffs and probably no plaintiffs from almost all of the states and ergo improper defendants. That being the case, there is no venue for this action in the Central District of California and will ship it to Massachusetts. He is also likely at a minimum to strike 90% of the allegations of the complaint if requested at least as to parties, and may in fact start the monetary sanctions process. Given Judge Carter’s no nonsense demeanor, this action will be moot very quickly.

I Will Post This to the L4RP Forum and See What They Say

And I will do my best to post your questions as well. As soon as I have word, I will let you know. Hold tight! It may have to wait until tomorrow.

Jerry Liberty from Watch the Vote 2012 Replies

So far, no lawyers at L4RP have addressed this particular article or the questions. While the general consensus seems to be: "Call in to the program posted above tonight," Jerry Liberty writes this:

"This biased article was written by Chad Peace and is so full of errors I lost count. He writes as if he is some legal authority and claims Judge Carter will move the case to Massachusetts due to the 17 delegates there that were wronged. He is blowing smoke up everyone's ass. The Massachusetts delegates were not even plaintiffs in the case when he wrote the article and there are plaintiffs from all over the country. So this guy is a deliberate plant for the enemy trying to stir up opposition to the lawsuit. WE CERTAINLY MUST have some people scared.

"They call articles like this, especially the 2nd one, 'red herrings'

"By the way, Chad Peace, who authored both these inaccurate articles heads an outfit called IVP Independent Voter Contact which is a FOR SALE outfit that tries to buy independent voters for candidates. So that's a dead give away: Independent Voter Contact.

"Independent Voter Contact specializes in targeting influential voters for our clients. Through time-tested information gathering techniques, professional messaging strategies, and effective marketing campaigns, Independent Voter contact remains at the cutting edge of political strategy. We work with our clients to communicate and educate the fastest growing section of our electorate, the independent voter. We utilize the importance of new technologies in a more interconnected world, and combine them with traditional ‘offline’ approaches that have years of proven efficacy."

This may be why the lawyers at L4RP are not dignifying the article with a response.

Another L4RP Group Member Writes This

"I agree with Jeffrey Liberty, another attempt to plant the misinformation and prejudice seed to people who haven't been following the case. Hang tough people, it's going to get worse. Did you read where obomney is lining up 1000 lawyers to aid in the election fraud?

"Sounds like someone that doesn't have all the facts as we know them is on a fishing expidition."

On the Heels of the IVN Article in the Link you Provided:

There is a followup article at:

http://ivn.us/2012/06/26/ron-paul-delegate-count-rises-from-...

This article is also ber-r-r-r-r-ry inters-s-s-s-sing. Among other things, it says:

"That lawsuit while wrongly brought in California will either be shipped to Massachusetts or a new one will be filed in Massachusetts because of very ill advice by the MA Republican Party, which is now seeking to strip Romney bound Paul supporters of their delegate credentials. Whether the two Massachusetts Paul supporters who were Romney bound delegates were removed is unclear."

Humph! Good find, girl!

I have brought all this to L4RP's attention. Repplies from Jeffrey Liberty and another L4RP group memeber are posted above.

First Reply from a L4RP Group Member, NOT a L4RP Attorney

"Do you have some legal evidence of this or are you just relying on this article?"

Hummmm. . . The IVN network that the article appears on describes itself as "Unfiltered Political News by Independent Contributors," whatever that means.

The lawyers at L4RP will most likely be online tomorrow. We'll see what they have to say then.

Evidence?

I'm not the judge, or the lawyer. Surely L4RP will know the evidence, not those of us who read articles from google search engines.

Good Find Mary1!

We are voicing these concerns to L4RP as we speak. Stay tuned, and we will see what Richard Gilbert, David Callahan and the others have to say. Chances are, however, Jerry Liberty's "red herring" reply above is going to have to suffice for the time being. The lawyers appear to be paying these articles no mind. Theirs are bigger fish to fry.

About criticisms in general, Richard Gilbert has posted this today:

"Does anyone else notice that there is one thing in common that all the critics of our case have about our Plan to rescue Dr Paul and give him a chance to win the nomination? All the critics have No Plan At All!"

Another L4RP group member posted this video:
http://www.youtube.com/​watch?v=UaJo91agb78

Great Questions! Let's See If I Can Assist

Please understand that I am not an attorney, but here's the way I understand it.

1. This question I can't answer. Dunno!

2. Please be aware that we are talking about a Federal Civil Right Case here. No California judge has thrown it out or has the autority to do so. The case is being heard in Federal Court, not State Court; so California and Massachusetts laws do not apply. Federal Law trumps State law and trumps GOP party "rules." That's the whole of it with this case: (i) to get Paul on the ballot (ii) to get US Marshalls at the convention to upfold Federal Law,(iii) to win the nomination.

3. All the attorneys at L4RP are Ron Paul devotees.

4. N.A., see #2 above.

5. N.A. This is again mixing apples and oranges: State and Federal, two different animals.

6. All attorneys are working on the case "pro bono publico," a Latin phrase used to describe professional work undertaken voluntarily and without payment as a public service.

I hope this helps as I am not willing to "triangulate" and to take on the responsiblity of asking somebody else's questions. Thanks for understanding!

Ben Swann Reports (WXIX FOX 19 Cincinnati, Ohio):

"Federal lawsuit over the binding of delegates expected to be heard before U.S. Circuit Court judge the second week of July. This is a letter to Reince Preibus and the heads of state Republican parties to cease intimidation of delegates and to reinstate Masschusetts delegates."

https://docs.google.com/file/d/1P4jAF0TJxxGA7j6uO_P-1NRD24Xe...

I think I remember Ron Paul addressing something this woman said

a long time ago, maybe close to a year ago now, about the newsletters. I believe it was her... how many women named Penny worked for him? He did not say her name but referred to a past disgruntled employee's comments; a woman named Penny, a past employee, was quoted in a hit piece and that is what he was being asked about in the interview I am talking about. I trust Ron Paul far further than I trust this woman gossiping, sorry.

RE Rand Paul's endorsement of Romney, sure that pissed me off. However - I think he was fulfilling a campaign promise that he made in the senate race, to endorse the party nominee (we don't see R as the nominee). As in, keeping his word. They might not actually know how many delegates RP really has, or they could be downplaying it.

I think Ron Paul knows what is going on and I trust him to deal with it as needed. I trust him to run his campaign and I trust him to run this country.

That's Right...

Ron Paul is apparently a dumbass who can't tell that one of his key campaign aids over the last five years has actually been an evil spy all along. You heard it here first...

It Has Nothing to Do with Being a Dumbass

The chief feature of psychopaths is that they are extremely convincing. They manage to con even psychiatrists every day of the week -- and the psychaitrists have privy to case files and past histories. Most are even more convincing than people who tell the truth because the psychopath is calculated and exempt of emotion. In that sense, he has the game wired in ways that average, normal people don't even imagine, let alone prepare for.

"He will choose you, disarm you with his words,
and control you with his presence.
He will delight you with his wit and his plans.
He will show you a good time, but you will always get the bill.
He will smile and deceive you, and he will scare you with his eyes.
And when he is through with you -- and he will be through with you --
he will desert you and take with him your innocence and your pride.
You will be left much sadder but not a lot wiser,
and for a long time you will wonder what happened and what you did wrong.
And if another of his kind comes knocking at your door, will you open it?

--from an essay signed, 'A psychopath in prison'"

Without Conscience: The Disturbing World of the Psychopaths Among Us
by Robert D. Hare (1999)

So now Benton is a psychopath.

Where can the delegates sign up to be plaintiffs?

If they weren't before, I am sure they are knocking your door down now.

LOL.

I know this might seem like a rhetorical question but it isn't ...

I really would like an honest response ...

How old are you?

A RHINO is a RHINO is a RHINO

The only valid question is why no one on this forum has managed to call you on your BS earlier.

RHINO (aka: RINO) is an acronym for "Republican In Name Only." It is a pejorative term that refers to a member of the Republican Party whose political views or actions are considered insufficiently conservative (i.e., conforming to liberal positions).

RHINO (aka: RINO) emerged in the 1990s as a charge used in campaigns by Republican conservatives against party moderates and liberals.

There! I am old enough to know a RHINO when I deal with one (especially when he introduces himself as a RHINO), and I have called you out on your name and your views.

Be gone! Poof! You are dust.

I Know You Are, But What Am I..

I Know You Are, But What Am I..I Know You Are, But What Am I..I Know You Are, But What Am I.. :BigTop PeeWee's Great Adventure. LOL!

Which one was that "LadyHawk"?

p.s.Why are you such a Gilbert Shill?

"Beyond the blackened skyline, beyond the smoky rain, dreams never turned to ashes up until.........
...Everything CHANGED !!

In Transactional Analysis. . .

There are four kinds of people in the world -- four postures people take in their interactions with others and the world they live in. The beauty of this method of understanding is that each of us has the responsibility (the ability to respond) and the ability to change (ourselves). Both start with self and are based on the way in which we interact with others and with the world. (I.e., the world is what you think it is.)

The four positions are:
1. I'm OK, and you're NOT OK;
2. I'm NOT OK, and you're NOT OK;
3. I'm NOT OK, and you're OK;
4. I'm OK, and you're OK.

From my brief and limited interaction with several of the posters on this forum, and only because you asked the question, Danton, I offer this bit of psychology:

Questions are accusatory. Many people here on DP enjoy pushing their power around by communicating in questions (the "why" question being the most antagonistic) and insinuation (ex., "If you had bothered to read the article. . ."). This form of posturing is from the first category above (i.e. the category of posturing onself as being right in a world where others are wrong).

This #1 posture is the postion of the bully. It exemplfies a person who stays busy calling attention to everyone else but self in order to distract attention away from self, a person who is on the defensive. Admittedly, most of us tend to go there when confronted with another person who is on the defensive; it's a normal "ab-reaction." But many people in the world these day, and particularly many people on this forum, live in the #1 posture. Finding fault with others and pointing fingers is their primary modus operandi.

This behavior becomes self-perpetuating to the point at which people like this develop no other means of interacting with the world except to criticize and make people, things and events wrong. Then, because of this, because of their "window" into the world, they themselves end up feeling worse and worse; it is self-defeating.

This form osposturing generally catches up with folks by the time they are 57 years old. The human spirit can withstand only so much antagonism. Indeed, we are the sole 24-hour audience to our own movie every day.

The underlying reality is that people in this position (i.e., bullies) feel deep inside that they are NOT OK; so, in an attempt to make themselves feel better, more OK, more self-important, etc., they project an attitude of arrogance and of being OK and make others wrong. Ha! If only it were so easy. That approach does not work. The only way to turn this around is to go inside and to work on the parts of self that do not feel OK in the first place. This is where "simple" and "easy" are NOT the same thing.

In truth, nothing about us as a people will feel better or function properly unless and until at least a majority of us come to the realization and operate from the firm conviction that we are all OK, that each one of us is absolutely correct in our own being and world. That conviction takes a strong inner knowing that "I'm OK, and you're OK." That conviction is worth rippling out.

Unless and until we get to the point of living, breathing and believing that, we as a species are stuck in the outermost layer of the human brain which challenges us to be in an almost constant state of angst, and angst is on the uprise. It is exponential.

All it takes to turn the way of the world around is for people like you and me to change our thinking about self and others, one person at a time -- to develop compassion for self and others, and to stop making people and the world we live in wrong. *Smiles*

To answer your second question, I respect Richard Gilbert for putting his boots where his mouth is and for applying muscle to the cause. Too many of us lolly around these chat areas complaining and antively nothing nothing to better the world. Others spend their time and genious spamming and creating viruses. From what I have been able to tell of Richard Gilbert, he has the power and education to go to bat, and he is using it. (No greater waste than a gift left untouched.) For being a mover and a shaker, I respect him. It's allowed. It's OK.

God bless!

LadyHawk

Is electionfrauderemedy . com, Jerry Davis, his sister Bonnie, We the People Network paying for the Lawsuit?

Yes, Miguel

L4RP is paying all the legal fees "pro bono publico," a Latin phrase used to describe professional work undertaken voluntarily, without payment and as a public service.

Can you provide proof of that

Can you provide proof of that LadyHawk? thannk you for your help

Richard Gilbert ANSWERS THE HARD QUESTIONS

Want to know what’s REALLY going on with Lawyers for Ron Paul and the National Delegates Case filed against the RNC/GOP?

GET YOUR INFORMATION FROM THE HORSE’S MOUTH THIS WEDNESDAY!

Join Richard Gilbert, the attorney for the delegates, and David Callihan, Operations Manager for Lawyers for Ron Paul.
www.electionfraudremedy.com

Date: June 27, 2012
Time: 9pm EST

CALL IN: 805-399-1200 Access Code: 764355

For more info until then, visit www.ronpaulone.com

That's Right!

Richard Gilbert is one of two volunteer lawyers heading the pack at L4RP. He is doing what lawyers do, the way "Graphic Artists for Ron Paul" are doing was graphic artist do, the way that "Veterans for Ron Paul" are doig what veterans do -- all for Liberty, all as a public service. It's called volunteerism. It takes a special person and an exceptional lawyer to volunteer; Gilbert is one on both counts.

If Gilbert Is One;

Who's the other?...and please don't answer with a paralegal's name, that is NOT a Lawyer.

So Who is the other?

"Beyond the blackened skyline, beyond the smoky rain, dreams never turned to ashes up until.........
...Everything CHANGED !!

Gilbert is Attorney for the Delegates

The other two attorneys are Callahan, (David Callahan, Operations Manager) and Nichols.

The FAQ video on the lawsuit can be accessed at:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MPt2nlyfmfc&feature=youtu.bew...

For tonight's "INFO FROM THE HORSE’S MOUTH" Q&A interchange with
Gilbert and Callihan:

CALL IN: 805-399-1200 Access Code: 764355
Date: June 27, 2012
Time: 9pm EST

More information is also available at www.ronpaulone.com

Correction for the record:

David Callihan is OPs manager of the legal team but is not an attorney. Mr. Callihan is supporting the legal team's efforts in operations.

You are telling me that the people who made the video

that features “Attorneys Gilbert, Callihan, and Nichols” and “Lead Attorneys Richard Gilbert and David Callihan” and which has “David Callihan – Attorney” while he is speaking, didn't know that he is not an attorney?