Here is the original post: https://thelibertycoalition.org/blog/2024/10/17/reply-to-a-fnbook-user/
So what has happened since?
I won’t hold you in suspense nor will I bore you with the gory details.
What I heard yesterday from a trusted source is two of the “offending members” were tossed from the party for refusing to sign the “Oath of Loyalty” or whatever they call it.
I also heard the Politburo, sorry, VA Republican Party leadership was to hold a meeting to dissolve the 5th District – that is MY district, home of soon to be ousted Congressman Bob Good. Also on the chopping block is the Lynchburg unit.
I suppose this last is due to the stink that arouse during the primary where some “hanky panky” was alleged concerning ballot collection and handling. I personally called for a real and transparent investigation, as well as severe treatment of any wrongdoing here. We cannot have ANY question about the integrity of our election officials.
Meanwhile, I’ve had an ongoing email exchange between myself and one “Dennis Free”. He never divulged his part of any of this nor what his stance is within the party. I finally looked him up to discover he is the Chairman of the 2nd District. I also noted where he has served, I’ll assume honorably as I have not information to the contrary, both in the military and in law enforcement where he apparently rose to the rank of Captain. Personal note to Captain Free – thank you for your service.
Free’s service does not excuse him from what I feel is his stonewalling and insulting behavior per our emails. I will not go into specifics here, unless Dennis Free presses the issue himself. At that point I will publish our exchange in its entirety and allow you, the reader, to decide for yourself whether my assessment is accurate. Rather I’ll summarize the exchange. First, I’ll say I was no angel. I spoke my mind but I did my best to refrain from personal attacks. For the most part I was successful. At worst I did refer to part of his response as whining . About that.
I kept asking if he would provide some specifics, as in, what part of the “party plan”, specifically, did these members violate? And what were the specific charges against them. He repeatedly insisted I read the “party plan”. I repeatedly maintained it would do no good unless I had some idea of what I was looking for.
To me it was a simple question. Now that I know of his career in law enforcement, the stark stonewalling is even more apparent. Any savvy member of LE knows one must actually state the charges against the person arrested. And yet rather than simply state: they did this and here is where it is wrong, he did not. Why?
In my opinion he didn’t state any specific wrongdoing because there was none. He knows it. I know it and now you know it. They did nothing wrong save for piss off certain members who have usurped authority they did not have.
In his last email to me, sent yesterday and read this morning, essentially dismissed me, while more or less saying it was too bad I was not capable of understanding the issues involved.
Upon further reflection, I wish I’d responded with a better answer.
As a writer (good, bad, or indifferent) I’ve come to realize that if a reader fails to understand what I’m saying the onus is on me, rather than the reader. This same principle applies to the Virginia Republican Party and their “party plan”.
Sorry guys, but I am still reasonably intelligent enough to comprehend simple concepts plainly stated. What if this was not so? What if I struggled to “get it” when it comes to the rules under which the party operates? Should the party require members to be endowed with a certain standard level of intelligence? What level might that be? 80? 100? (Average) or more? Should potential members be rejected if they cannot understand the rules? OR should the rules be stated plainly enough for a majority of members (at least) to easily comprehend?
I contend the latter is more reasonable. No one should have to exhibit a generous or even average IQ to participate in self-governance. Such is not necessary to vote, why should the average, or even the below average citizen struggle to understand h0w things work.
As it is, I actually do understand this document. Strangely enough, while discussing this with my source, he indicated this party plan provides leadership with a wide latitude to do whatever the hell they want. I disagree.
In fact, the exact opposite is true.
Article One – basically says anyone can ask to join.
SECTION A. Qualifications
1. All legal and qualified voters under the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia, regardless of race, religion, national
origin or sex, who are in accord with the principles of the Republican Party, and who, if requested, express in open
meeting either orally or in writing as may be required their intent to support all of its nominees for public office in the
ensuing election may participate as members of the Republican Party of Virginia in its mass meetings, party canvasses,
conventions, or primaries encompassing their respective election districts.
This is a continuation of Article One – ostensibly granting the party “powers that be” the authority to demand fealty, er, loyalty. The highlighted portions is where I gleaned the pertinent language from.
2. A voter who, subsequent to making a statement of intent, publicly supports a candidate in opposition to a
Republican nominee shall not be qualified for participation in party actions as defined in Article I for a period of four (4)
years.
3. Paragraphs 4 and 5 shall cease having any effect at such time as the Election Laws of the Commonwealth of
Virginia shall provide for party registration, at which time only those registered as Republicans may be deemed to be in
accord with the principles of the Republican Party, unless otherwise stipulated by the appropriate Official Committee.
4. In addition to the foregoing, to be in accord with the principles of the Republican Party, unless otherwise stipulated
by the appropriate Official Committee, a person otherwise qualified hereunder shall not have participated in Virginia in
the nomination process of a party other than the Republican Party with in the last five years.
5. A single exception to Paragraph 4 shall be approved for a voter that renounces affiliation with any other party in
writing, and who expresses in writing that he/she is in accord with the principles of the Republican Party and intends, at
the time of the writing, to support the nominees of the Republican Party in the future. Any voter that utilizes the
foregoing exception, and thereafter participates in the nomination process of a party other than the Republican Party, shall
not have the benefit of the exception identified in this paragraph thereafter. Within 30 days of receipt, the Official
Committee shall provide a copy of this signed renunciation statement to the Republican Party of Virginia, to be
maintained for a period of 5 years.
Note in part 2 above “supports a candidate in opposition to a
Republican nominee“. As Bob Good was being challenged in a Republican Primary, there was no Republican nominee.
Also note the words in part 5 above “any other party”. Both Bob Good and John McGuire are Republicans as far as anyone knows.
SECTION I. Endorsement of Candidates
An Official committee shall not endorse, nor contribute to from its funds, any candidate who is running for a Republican
nomination for public office unless that candidate is unopposed for that nomination. Nothing in this Section shall be
construed to prevent an Official Committee from endorsing a candidate running for public office where there will be no
Republican nominee, nor to prevent a member or officer of an Official Committee, as an individual, from endorsing a
candidate in a contested nomination.
SECTION C. Removal
Any Chairman, except the State Chairman, or any other member of an Official Committee may be removed from office by
the vote of two-thirds (2/3) of the other members of the Committee, after being furnished with notice that such removal
will be sought, with the charges, in writing, signed by not less than one-third (1/3) of the members of the Committee; and
allowing him thirty (30) days within which to appear and defend himself. A copy of the original signatures or evidence of
the electronic signatures may be furnished in lieu of the original signatures. The State Chairman may be removed by a
two-thirds (2/3) vote of a State Convention or by the three-fourths (3/4) vote of the State Central Committee, the action of
said Convention or Committee being subject to the foregoing as to notice and opportunity for defense.
A member of an Official Committee is held to a higher standard of support for nominees of the Republican Party than an
individual who merely participates in a mass meeting, party canvass, convention or primary. Therefore, a member of an
Official Committee is deemed to have resigned his Committee position if he (a) makes a reportable contribution to and/or
(b) knowingly allows his name to be publicly used by and/or (c) makes a written or other public statement supporting the
election of a candidate in opposition to a Republican nominee in a Virginia General or Special Election, and/or (d)
becomes a member or an officer of or makes a reportable contribution to any other political party. A majority of the
elected officers of an official committee are charged with recognizing when this provision is in effect. For members of
multiple official committees, such recognition by a given official committee applies to all subordinate official committees.
Such member may be re-instated by a majority vote of the other members of the Committee.
Nothing in this section pertains to the question at hand, i.e. the members who signed a letter asking Donald Trump to revoke his endorsement of John McGuire and endorsing sitting Congressman Bob Good instead.
The irony of all this is, this entire episode would have gone unnoticed by 99.99% of most Virginians had it never been addressed.
In an earlier response to Dennis Free, I compared this party plan document to one of Kamala Harris’ “word salads” upon retrospect I retract that statement. While it is indeed rather unwieldy and could well use some simplification, Harris is still the unchallenged champion of the word salad world.
My own conclusion is the central committee acted without authority and entirely against the principles of the Republican party, and against the best interests of all of our members. They should resign immediately
SECTION J. Ethical Conduct
1. Voting members of official committees shall exercise their best efforts to conduct the business of the Party
in good faith, with reasonable care, skill, and diligence. They shall hold as confidential all party
information, documents, and communications clearly designated as confidential of for limited dissemination
or use by adopted policy of the committee. They shall refrain from participating in unethical activity,
diminishing the dignity and credibility of the the Party.
Their conduct here is anything but ethical. Under certain circumstances this party plan calls for offending party officials to resign :
SECTION C. Removal (second paragraph)
A member of an Official Committee is held to a higher standard of support for nominees of the Republican Party than an
individual who merely participates in a mass meeting, party canvass, convention or primary. Therefore, a member of an
Official Committee is deemed to have resigned his Committee position if he (a) makes a reportable contribution to and/or
(b) knowingly allows his name to be publicly used by and/or (c) makes a written or other public statement supporting the
election of a candidate in opposition to a Republican nominee in a Virginia General or Special Election, and/or (d)
becomes a member or an officer of or makes a reportable contribution to any other political party
The above is good enough for an official who commits a “public offence”, i.e. endorsing someone running against a Republican candidate. Why shouldn’t it be good enough for senior party officials who knowingly abuse the party rules for their own intents and purposes?
Again, I say… resign.