Skip to comments.RON PAUL DEFRAUDED BY IOWA STRAW POLL PROCESS -- Part I (LAUGH ALERT)
Posted on 08/17/2007 10:46:03 AM PDT by Chi-townChief
This e-wire / report ultimately makes two points:
1. The voting process at the Iowa Straw Poll was a fraud, wrapped in lies. (Whenever those running any kind of an election use police power to hide all the ballots from the people, and then announce results (?) when supposedly (?) only they have seen the ballots those people are frauds, are acting like Stalin-esque tyrants, and their organization is a fraud.
That award goes in our current drama to the Iowa GOP leadership, namely Ted Sporer, Chuck Laudner, Mary Tiffany, Craig Robinson, and Chairman Ray Hoffman. What they did to Ron Paul and all those who paid $35 to vote in the Iowa Straw Poll, and all those who entered into a contract with them by paying $35 to support the event, is UNCONSCIONABLE!
These KGB/GESTAPO TYPES, groveling before the sinister banking powers in NYC and behind the RNC and the DNC, -- and acting as their enforcers in Iowa -- hid all the EVIDENCE (the ballots) at the Iowa Straw Poll and announced the alleged results based on their assertion alone which the rest of us are supposed to take and believe on blind faith!
I am joined by already thousands of others in saying: WE DONT BELIEVE YOU! You hid the evidence! You have hidden the ballots and now you have had time to switch the ballots! You fronted for crooks, thieves, enemies of America, enemies of honest people everywhere!
The US Supreme Court has ruled twice in the last one hundred years, in U.S v Mosley (1915) and Reynolds v Sims (1964), that our right to vote includes not only the right to cast a ballot, but the right to know that our vote was counted accurately.
There is only one reason to hide the ballots from press, from candidates, and from the people because those so hiding the ballots want to keep open the option to cheat to rig the election.
The evidence is the BALLOTS, which should have been kept in public view all day, and counted in the presence of ALL factions, before said ballots leave the public view.
LONGEST DELAY EVER
In 1995, when the unbelievable tie occurred between CFR favorites Senator Bob Dole and Senator Phil Graham the doors were locked for two solid hours after the voting ended.
As I have said for years, only the GOP leadership was behind the locked doors in 1995, and all of them supported either Dole or Graham. The published results that year were that Buchanan, who by far got the best reception from the crowd, came in second with about 1950 but that Dole and Graham tied for first place at exactly 2501 to 2501.
MANY people were not buying it, and Robert Novak of CNN suggested the next morning that the straw poll vote had been cooked. (By the way, Fred Smart interviewed a person on Saturday who also gave his witness from 1995 that only Dole and Graham people were behind the locked doors in the counting room in 1995.)
Our strong suspicion was that Buchanan came in first in 1995, but this result was unpalatable to the Neo-Cons running the GOP in NYC and D.C. So, the Dole and Graham people wanted to place Buchanan in second place, but neither would give way to the other on first place. Thus, the almost impossible tie was agreed upon.
This year of 2007 saw the longest delay EVER 15 minutes loger than the 1995 delay. In 2007, the Ron Paul year, -- it was 2 hours and 15 minutes before the announcement came from the podium.
THE BEST HUNCH
While we are totally devoid of evidence (the ballots), the best analysis Ive heard is this: that probably Dr. Paul came in second to Romney who spent hundreds of thousands of $$ to bus in people.
However, this result Ron Paul coming in second place in the 2007 Iowa Straw Poll -- was totally unpalatable to the Iowa GOP and their NYC masters and D.C. handlers. Such a result would have shown both the GOP at the state and national level, and the 5 Big TV Networks to be liars and falsifiers of evidence up until the Iowa Straw Poll.
The World Tyranny Ruling Elite needed Paul to appear to finish near the bottom so that they could ignore him completely on the mass media. Therefore, the suspicion is that Ron Pauls vote was partially stolen and distributed to Huckabee, Brownback, and Romney. (Tancredo would not be helped by the Iowa GOP, despite his neo-con outlook on foreign affairs, because his anti-illegal immigration stance is completely unpalatable to the Ruling Elite in NYC and D.C. who dictate to the Iowa GOP, and all other state GOPs.)
As usual in computer-generated elections everything came up smelling like roses for the Neo-con wirepullers behind the scenes of both parties.
THE AFFIDAVITS ARE ESSENTIAL! PLEASE HELP!
2. We need the affidavits of 1306+ Iowans who voted at the straw poll for Ron Paul in order to prove, if such is the case, that the PUBLISHED count which the Iowa GOP announced was not accurate with regard to Ron Pauls vote. (All who actually voted are welcome to submit affidavits.)
SOME DISTURBING NUMBERS
The comprehensive published results will be in a future report in this series -- view them online here:
-- but at this point the reader may want to know that the Iowa GOP claims that Romney came in first with 4516 votes, and Ron Paul came in 5th with 1305 votes.
Hear ye! Hear ye! The Ron Paul Campaign has confirmed to callers what was repeated at the event itself -- that the campaign bought and gave away 800 tickets. The Adopt an Iowan group (an independent effort) has published that they had collected $22,500 and purchased 643 tickets. (By the way, since the Adopt and Iowan page wont allow you to copy it, I have printed it out to preserve the documentation.)
So now we are being asked to believe that Ron Paul got less votes (1305) than the tickets purchased by the campaign and the Adopt an Iowan campaign (totally 1443) and that NO ONE in Iowa came on their own to pay $35 and vote for Ron Paul !!!!!
The Ron Paul Campaign AND the Adopt an Iowan campaign kept track of who the tickets were given to (I hope). This is enough affidavits to prove that the announced Diebold count was wrong. And we want to find as many other Iowa citizens as possible who paid $35 out of their own pocket to vote so we can get their affidavits also.
This seems to be a smoking gun. This will be the greatest and most irrefutable proof ever that a Diebold computer was used to rig an election!
We need the affidavits of any Iowan who voted for Ron Paul at the Ames, Iowa Straw Poll. If we succeed then we will have the proof that the Diebold computers at the Iowa Straw Poll of 2007 were rigged.
If you voted in the Iowa Straw Poll on August 11, 2007 and if you need an affidavit to make sure your vote counts, and especially if you want to help us prove whether or not the result published for Ron Paul was accurate you can go to:
At the top and bottom of that article is a link to the relevant affidavit. Simply right click on the link, use Save target as and save the word document to your computer where you can find it. You will then have an affidavit to fill out, and get notarized at a bank, Kinkos, etc., and to mail back to us.
A number of affidavits are already in hand.
End of this e-wire.
Jim Condit Jr.
Break out the popcorn...this one’s gonna be good.
Without these guys, where would the laughs be?
The funniest thing I read on some blogs during the straw poll was from Paulites who came from out of State complaining they couldn’t vote and ‘borrowing’ other’s IDs to vote.
This seems to be a smoking gun. This will be the greatest and most irrefutable proof ever that a Diebold computer was used to rig an election!
Keep on slandering..... you're only adding to the damages.
Here is a chance for you to help your hero out.
I’m sending my five bucks to Bev Harris as we speak...
Tell me again what the difference is between a Ron Paul supporter and a leftist moonbat?
Easy: unlike Paulestinians, leftist moonbats enjoy the taste of imported shrimp.
Go sell crazy somewhere else Ron, we got plenty here.
Well.....it might be fun for Paul dectractors but even his strongest critics admit that he has nothing to do with encouraging this complaint, precisely the opposite. Now.....can we actually consider what Paul believes on the issues?
Please provide evidence that “crazy Ron” had anything to do with this. Answer: you can’t because he has denounced this complaint. Now...if you want to smear Ron Paul because someone who supports him is “crazy”....then I suppose you’ll have to smear all the other candidates (including the one you back) in the same way. Are you willing to do this?
Of course he encourages it.
He himself said that "if" there are questions about the voting, then "the questions must be asked."
I like to look at how someone actually votes, not what they 'say'.. so, let's look at how Paul actually votes..
Here are some ‘Conservative(sic)’ votes by Paul:
(of course, Paulites have an excuse for each of these.. something about Paul making a point of State versus Federal or there must be something in the bill he didn' like or the bill smelled like shrimp.. yadda, yadda, yadda.. if they were votes by anyone else, they would use the votes to prove that person was a RINO.)
Voted NO on federal crime to harm fetus while committing other crimes.
Voted NO on forbidding human cloning for reproduction & medical research.
Voted NO on barring transporting minors to get an abortion.
Voted YES on funding for alternative sentencing instead of more prisons.
Voted NO on more prosecution and sentencing for juvenile crime.
Voted NO on military border patrols to battle drugs & terrorism.
Voted NO on allowing school prayer during the War on Terror.
Voted NO on allowing vouchers in DC schools.
Voted NO on passage of the Bush Administration national energy policy.
Voted NO on implementing Bush-Cheney national energy policy.
Voted YES on barring website promoting Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump.
Voted NO on speeding up approval of forest thinning projects.
Voted NO on reforming the UN by restricting US funding.
Voted NO on requiring lobbyist disclosure of bundled donations.
Voted NO on prohibiting lawsuits about obesity against food providers.
Voted NO on prohibiting product misuse lawsuits on gun manufacturers
Voted NO on prohibiting suing gunmakers & sellers for gun misuse.
Voted NO on decreasing gun waiting period from 3 days to 1.
Voted NO on emergency $78B for war in Iraq & Afghanistan.
Voted NO on $266 billion Defense Appropriations bill.
Voted YES on more immigrant visas for skilled workers.
Voted YES on providing $70 million for Section 8 Housing vouchers.
Voted NO on promoting work and marriage among TANF recipients.
Voted NO on treating religious organizations equally for tax breaks.
Let's also not forget Paul's Pork Projects (that he voted for before he voted against when he calls them unconstitutional but he is just playing the game when he submits them because everyone else does it.. yadda yadda yadda..)
Oh, please document that one.
Is this like how he 'denounced' 9/11Truthers yet continues to frequent their radio programs and give them interviews?
Methinks thou are on the wrong thread. This one has much more....well, offerings.
Wrong. The difference between Paul and leftist rightest big government moonbats like Romney, is that Paul has the best record (according to National Taxpayers Union) of voting against spending and taxes than any other member of Congress.
See post 22 for Ron Paul's left wing voting record.
The American Psychiatric Association is considering adding “Ron Paul Derangement Syndrome” as a variant manifestation of Delusional Disorder.
Oh, I long ago stated my opposition to Paul's issues - repeatedly. And my opinions were primarily met with personal insults from the Paulies.
I'm on vacation now. I'm just here for the fun.
You guys can be all serious and stuff if you want.
I'll get the popcorn going.
Ron Paul is only $10 away from winning the Iowa straw poll.
Bump for Entertainment!
Cute but dishonest. Paul is a states righter, therefore he believes, for example, the states not the federal government should define marriage and abortion policy. He also rejects big government compassionate conservatism. Now....you may be an advocate of federal supremacy. That’s fine. Why not just be honest about it? The hard truth is that the National Taxpayers Union rates Paul at 90 percent or higher. Now other candidate in the race comes even close to that record.
RP, Alex Jones, and Kucinich; on the “issues”.
They really are fun, aren't they?
When Paul crashes and burns somewhere early in the primaries, I'm going to kind of miss them.
Kind of like how you miss a nagging tooth that finally gets pulled. ;-)
The Ron Paul loon-a-tics will be bombarding the internet with their vitriol and conspiracies
WE WUZ ROBBED !!!!! !!!!
Personal insults? My message had no personal insults....What is your point? Guilt by association? Believe it or not, not all Paul supporters, nor dare I say all supporters of your candidate, engage in personal insults. We also don’t use that fact to avoid dialogue.
Actually, the National Taxpayer’s Union most recent rating gives Paul a 84% which is below McCain (88%) and about the same as most of the other candidates running (with the exception of Hunter who rated 62%)
Paulites often misrepresent the Percent A’s score (which he is tied with Tancredo on) as his congressional rating. This is more a representation of how long he has been in congress more than being ‘tops’ every year. Considering Paul has been in congress since they started rating in 92 (few of the others have), even with his average percent in the 80s, he is naturally going to have a score for longer..
Fred Thompson is a strong Federalist and his voting record shows it, yet, when some of the same Abortion issues came to his vote, he didn’t quibble with if it was a State or Federal right, he voted Pro-Life. He felt ending abortion was more important than making some point.
When faced with the same choice, Paul chose to not vote Pro-Life and instead, thought it was more important to make some State’s right point than actually do something that would save a life...
The NTU (which consists of about 10 people, BTW), does have some kind of mystical power to decide who is or isn't conservative. They themselves aren't conservatives - their founder is a libertarian, not a conservative.
The NTU gives points to representatives for voting against defense spending, for example.
His NTU rating is one data point which has to be weighed against others - like his defeatism, his treasonous attitude and his liberal voting record.
Presumably you’ve no luck so far in documenting Ron paul’s alleged denunciation of these vote fraud lunatics?
One is known by the company they keep...
Wow. Straight out of the Democrat playbook.
Just talk to anyone in his campaign office. Geez....do I have to do all your work? But....since you can’t I’ll post a link in the next day or so.
Code pink rates him a 96%, so what is your point?