Posted on 02/28/2008 9:23:57 PM PST by tcrlaf
AUSTIN, Texas The Texas Democratic Party is warning that its March 4 caucuses could be delayed or disrupted after aides to White House hopeful Hillary Clinton raised the specter of an "imminent" lawsuit over its complicated delegate selection process, officials said Thursday night.
In a letter sent out late Thursday to both the Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama campaigns, Texas Democratic Party lawyer Chad Dunn warned that a lawsuit could ruin the Democrats' effort to re-energize voters just as they are turning out in record numbers.
(SNIP)
It has been brought to my attention that one or both of your campaigns may already be planning or intending to pursue litigation against the Texas Democratic Party," Dunn said in the letter, obtained by the Star-Telegram. "Such action could prove to be a tragedy for a reinvigorated Democratic process."
Democratic sources said representatives from each campaign had made it clear they are keeping all their options open but that the Clinton campaign in particular had warned of an impending lawsuit.
(Snip)
Another Democratic source who was privy to the often intense discussions confirmed that representatives of the New York senator's campaign had issued veiled threats in a telephone call this week.
"Officials from Senator Clinton's campaign at several times throughout the call raised the specter of 'challenging the process,' the official said. "The call consisted of representatives from both campaigns and the Democratic Party."
The source, who did not have authorization to speak about the matter on the record, said Clinton's political director, Guy Cecil, had pointedly raised the possibility of a courtroom battle.
If Hillary is “gone” in March, who is the DNC’s VP?
Hillary
Or maybe Al Gore will step forward to claim his crown, and cruise to an easy win over McCain. He has the most experience of all of them. I was wrong about Edwards being the nominee, so maybe I'm wrong here too.
Of course, it takes two lawyers (Hill and Bill) to conjure up such a maneuver. This will play well with the Obama crowd - NOT!
That would be Howard Wolfson!
Typical lawyer tactics, of course. Gives the other side less time to prepare a response.
But won’t the votes of Texas be really PO?
This sound like a tactic of someone who already knows she has lost.
Howard Wolfson is going to be under oath - http://youtube.com/watch?v=yGNhb4GkqPw
Oh be still my beating heart...
I urge all to vote for Hillary in TX, OH, VT and RI on Tuesday and prop Hillary up a little longer.
One thing Texans don’t abide is some carpetbagger trying to strong-arm them in court.
She’s Toast.
However, here still should be enough Texans with common sense to see that she really is a scheming conniving political hack.
As I have said for some time Hillary Clinton and the Clinton machine would in my opinion stoop to tactics that would make the Jack Booted Brown Shirts blush.
I agree; Hillary! They would have a ready-made campaign slogan: “Vote Obama-Hillary! in 2008, or you’re a racist, sexist pig!”
The Republican Primary process in TX is a lot more straightforward then the one the Democrats in TX use.
In the process the Dems use in TX, only 3/4 of the actual votes cast count towards the candidate, and the other 1/4 are decided by the caucus delegates..so, depending on whether Hillary or Obama has the best turnout at the Precinct Meetings, that 25% may decide who takes TX.
When you look at the Hillary supporters in TX, they tend to be older working class stiffs, heavily hispanic, the Obama crowd is a lot younger, and probably has no problem staying up all night to dominate the local precinct meetings after the polls close next Tuesday.
So it all seems very rigged on the Democratic side in TX as far as the process that is followed.
A serious question:
Name one, just one thing Hillary would NOT stoop to doing to gain or retain power?
Can any of us name just one?
Hillary
I have heard this put forth, but no way Obama wants a 'co-President' and the Clintons around.
Moreover, she would only bring out conservatives in droves to vote against her.
“Even if she LOSES the General, the Clintons continue to be the defacto heads of the Party...”
Maybe so, but just look where their heads are now. In that famous farewell position.
It's as good a theory as any from what I can see, and it has some plausiblity to it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.