THE “COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION” IS NOW IN SESSION! Day 2 “Primary or Party”
This post presents the foundation that this case is based upon: the Rules of the Republican Party, as most recently revised at the Republican National Convention in 2016.
In this Court of Public Opinion, Gaslighting Republicans is representing the “plaintiffs”; individual members of political parties who are being DEPRIVED of their First Amendment rights of association; especially their right to NOMINATE candidates for public office at all levels.
“Defendants” in this Court of Public Opinion are all persons, organizations, government actors, and others who act to DEPRIVE, by CONSPIRING with others, the right of individual members of political parties to participate in association with each other and NOMINATE their candidates for public office.
As the Court of Public Opinion enters Day Two:
This case began with the evidence presented in the first day of “Court” (previous post); evidence of collaboration between the media and party leadership that resulted in the labeling of the concept of “delegate freedom to vote their conscience” for candidates at the Republican National Convention as “heresy”, and further labeling this advocate of delegate freedom as a “ heretic”. (Click on blue hyperlinks in previous post for POLITICO article discussed here)
So, plaintiffs here introduce EXHIBIT 1, a book by Sean Parnell and Curly Haugland, entitled “UNBOUND” “The Conscience of a Republican Delegate”. (attached pdf)
This book explains, in detail, how the Rules of the Republican Party, since the first national nominating convention in 1855, have preserved the right of individual members who become delegates to the Republican National Convention to have, “…in all matters before them at the convention, the freedom to vote their conscience and have that vote truly recorded and counted”.
Obviously, any “binding” or forced “pledging” of delegates based on previously held “primary elections” deprives delegates of their freedom to vote as they choose. All delegates to every Republican National Convention, either in the past or in the future, arrive at the convention without any obligation imposed upon them.
The EXHIBITS introduced here allow the “Court” to take “judicial notice” of the Rules of the Republican Party and the complete transcript of the 2016 Republican National Convention Rules Committee.
Exhibit 2, Rules of the Republican Party.
Also introduced as evidence in this “Court of Public Opinion” is the compete transcript of the 2016 Republican National Convention Rules Committee. (Exhibit 3 attached) (click on the small square on the right to open)
These three exhibits contain evidence to prove that delegates to the Republican National Convention can NEVER be bound to vote according to the results of primaries prior to the Convention, and that articles like the Politico piece cited by Ed Kilgore, while labeling me a “heretic”, are part of a continuing conspiracy of Progressive primary advocates to preserve their “golden goose”.
The lead paragraph in the Politico article, published May 9, 2016, more than two months prior to the Republican National Convention, illustrates how a challenge to the BIG REPUBLICAN LIE that primaries choose the nominee draws massive enemy fire!
“Curly Haugland loves the rules. The stubborn…pool supply magnate is North Dakota’s top Republican gadfly, its rule-mongering crank, its official state pain in the ass”, is followed by “he’s been the pedantic curmudgeon, the stubborn speed bump who for years has raised points of order only to watch establishment Republicans stampede over him”.
And that’s just the first paragraph!
Then, quickly, Politico preaches “There is one article of faith in the Republican Party: On the convention’s first ballot, bound delegates are required to vote for a candidate to whom they’re bound”. WITHOUT CITING ANY SOURCE.
Then, “This has long seemed like a crazy cause—who doesn’t want voters to decide?”, Politico squeals.
The fact is that when Politico attacked me on May 9, 2016, there was still time for the Republican National Convention delegates to choose a nominee other than the “presumptive nominee”.
Democratic Party in 2024 proves primaries are a BIG LIE!
The Democratic Party in 2024 proved that the primary voters do NOT, in fact, choose the Presidential nominee for either party.
Mere weeks before the Democratic National Convention, a few Democratic Party leaders took to Zoom calls to ditch Biden…didn’t even wait for the Convention to convene!
Where was the nastiness from Politico?
Remember, “This has long seemed like a crazy cause—-who doesn’t want voters to decide”?
In “UNBOUND” we wrote, “…so long as the 2016 Republican National Convention adopts as standing rules for the convention what are now the temporary rules, or at least does not substantially change Rule 37 (b) and Rule 38, then freedom of delegates to vote their conscience will be preserved.” (p. vi)
And in Chapter 7, page 91: “As long as the 2016 Republican National Convention includes the language of Rule 37(b) in more or less identical form, every delegate arriving in Cleveland is free to vote his or her conscience in any and all matters that require a roll call of the states, including the first and any subsequent ballots for the presidential nomination.”
Back to the Politico hit piece and a momentary touch of reality:
“But Elaine Kamarck, (a DNC member,) a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and author of the new book Primary Politics, calls Haugland’s arguments “very sound.”
“Curly is historically and legally right in saying there is a lot of discretion in the action of delegates,” Kamarck says. “The argument he’s making is that ultimately the decision is a party decision—which is in fact true.” Party activity is protected by the First Amendment right of free association, Kamarck agrees, so state laws binding delegates don’t matter. “The only way delegates will be bound is if, when they vote on the rules of the convention, they vote to bind themselves,” she says. “Otherwise, they’re not.””
While actually finding a credible source for their hit piece, Politico continues to stick with the original lie to this day.
As you review the “evidence” contained in this post:
Understand that the Rules of the Republican Party (Exhibit 2) posted on the GOP.com website are the result of the Rules Committee report that was adopted at the 2016 Republican National Convention.
There was NO Republican National Convention in 2020.
In 2024, the Convention Rules Committee was denied the opportunity to deliberate in the manner of previous conventions.
Obviously, no transcripts are available for 2020. If there is a transcript for 2024, it will be very short.
In one long day, the 2016 Rules Committee reviewed each rule in great detail with most rules changed very little. While the 640 page transcript will do little to excite most readers, those who understand that the resulting Rules of the Republican Party are the HIGHEST AUTHORITY of the private deliberative assembly known as the Republican Party will find proof of the BIG REPUBLICAN LIE within it’s pages.
THIS POST IS NOT THE “EVIDENCE”; JUST WHERE TO FIND IT!
From page 504 to the end, the transcript provides answers to the question: Who Decides, Primaries or Conventions?
The 2016 transcript also provides a rich source of potential witnesses!
National rules govern the party. Period.
National Party Rules are superior to state party rules, and both national party rules and state party rules are superior to any state or local laws.
Any candidate for Congress or state offices who is led to believe that the path to election runs through primaries should take notice.
If a consultant promises that a primary win is necessary to get on a general election ballot, get that in writing. And ask for a written guarantee!
“FIND THE EVIDENCE” CHALLENGE!
Here is a challenge for those of you with a compelling interest in this issue, whether you like primaries, or political parties.
Review these exhibits for “evidence”, either for or against your point of view.
Take notes of evidence you discover to compare with the results GASLIGHTING REPUBLICANS will publish in a future post.
HINT: CAREFULLY READ PREAMBLE FIRST; THEN RULES 16, 37 AND 38.
While this post deals mainly with Presidential Primaries, it does not diminish the fact that ALL PRIMARIES that choose nominees exclusively are unconstitutional.
SPECIAL NOTE TO ALL MEDIA WRITING ABOUT 2026 AND 2028 ELECTIONS
Reporting that “normalizes” primaries and ignores political parties will become “evidence” of bias by omission and qualify you as a potential “defendant” in the “Court of Public Opinion” and possibly a Court of Law as well.
The Court of Public Opinion will stand at recess until the next session of “The Court of Public Opinion” convenes here.