Paul Lukasiak: Documentary Proof of RBC’s “Stop Hillary” Corruption

CROSS-POSTED FROM CORRENTE and THE CONFLUENCE

Submitted by Paul_Lukasiak on Wed, 2008-06-11 19:15.

• Dem on Dem Violence
• 2008 Primaries
• Florida delegation
• Rules and Bylaws Committee

The PROOF of RBC Fraud

A document included as an exhibit in the Nelson vs Dean Lawsuit that was filed in October 2007 in an attempt to force the DNC to seat the Florida delegation provides indisputable proof that the Democratic National Committee’s Rules and Bylaws Committee singled out Florida and Michigan for sanctions, and ignored violations of Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina.

The document is a tentative list of state primaries and caucuses, and is dated September 13, 2007. The listing for Florida says (“P” designates a primary)

1/29/08 Florida P Date of state primary; date violates rules; Non-Complia

But there are also listings for the four pre-window states, that note that these states cannot move their dates before the date set in the Delegate Selection Rules: (“C” designates a caucus)

1/14/08 Iowa…………………C Allowed to go no more than 22 days before 2/5/08
1/19/08 Nevada………………C Allowed to go no more than 17 days before 2/5/08
1/22/08 New Hampshire…P Allowed to go no more than 14 days before 2/5/08
1/29/08 South Carolina….P Allowed to go no more than 7 days before 2/5/08

EXCERPT FROM EXHIBIT B

(The whole page can be seen here. The entire PDF document submitted to the courts (which includes the DNC and RNC delegates selection rules as Exhibits A and C) can be accessed here.)

This document makes it clear that the “pre-window” states were NOT ALLOWED to move their primary/caucus dates under the DNC rules, and by moving them should have been subjected to the automatic loss of 50% of their pledged deleates, and all of their superdelegates, as required by by Rule 20 C 1 a, which, which states

Violation of timing: In the event the Delegate Selection Plan of a state party provides or permits a meeting, caucus, convention or primary which constitutes the first determining stage in the presidential nominating process to be held prior to or after the dates for the state as provided in Rule 11 of these rules…the number of pledged delegates elected in each category allocated to the state pursuant to the Call for the National Convention shall be reduced by fifty (50%) percent, and the number of alternates shall also be reduced by fifty (50%) percent. In addition, none of the members of the Democratic National Committee and no other unpledged delegate allocated pursuant to Rule 8.A. from that state shall be permitted to vote as members of the state’s delegation. [emphasis added]

The words “shall be” means that the penalty is not optional – and the only way that the state can avoid sanctions is by demonstrating that it had taken “provable, positive steps” and acted “in good faith” to comply with the timing provision of the Delegate Selection Rules.

Rule 20 C 1 b, which prohibits campaigning in states penalized because of violations of the timing rule, would also come into play. The rule states:

A presidential candidate who campaigns in a state where the state party is in violation of the timing provisions of these rules, or where a primary or caucus is set by a state’s government on a date that violates the timing provisions of these rules, may not receive pledged delegates or delegate votes from that state Candidates may, however, campaign in such a state after the primary or caucus that violates these rules. [Emphasis added]

It is clear from the language that the rules is designed to entirely prohibit campaigning in states that violate the timing rules – the “may, however” construction makes that clear.

The rule made it impossible for any of the candidates to win delegates in either Iowa, New Hampshire, or South Carolina, and turning those states into mere “beauty contests” for anyone who campaigned there. (Nevada, which held its caucuses as required by the rules on January 19th, would have been the only “pre-Super Tuesday” state to hold a contest in which delegates were at stake.

It is clear that the RBC violated its own rules for political reasons – to stop Hillary Clinton. Without the opportunity to beat Clinton in one of the early states in a meaningful primary or caucus, Clinton’s advantages going into Super- Tuesday would have been impossible to beat. The corrupt officials of the RBC were part of a “stop Hillary” movement, and chose to ignore their own rules in order to make it possible for someone other than Hillary Clinton to get the nomination, and the complete and utter corruption of James Roosevelt, Alexis Herman, Alice Germond and the rest of Obama’s supporters on the RBC is no longer in doubt.