Last updated on August 17, 2022
This is the liveblog of the LNC meeting on Idaho. Comments are at the bottom of the page.
LNC Special Meeting 8/11/2022
42 Comments
Comments are closed.
Last updated on August 17, 2022
This is the liveblog of the LNC meeting on Idaho. Comments are at the bottom of the page.
Comments are closed.
And that’s all, he said. I see where something has to be fixed for live blogs.
Actually, just turn everything back around so that the newest comments are on the bottom, not the top.
Since replies to a comment appear *below* the comment, it would just make sense if everything flowed in the same direction. The first comment to an article appears directly below the article, and everything continues toward the bottom.
We need a special format for live blogs.
Harlos says that the LNC does not need to do anything. We should recognize the LPID state convention decision. The people elected at the April convention are the board.
Imhoff: State central committee gets to call conventions and formulate rules. We agree with Harlos that this is a Bylaw issue. Other parties have conventions after they elect precinct committeemen. This issue has kept us from doing (list of things that are real politics). Evans: Imhoff board did not dot all i’s…matters then become extremely complicated, beyond my ability to live blog.
There were apparently documents asking to appoint Republicans to County Libertarian boards. Sorensen board says this is not an issue. Patrick Ford says this argument has consumed vast numbers of hours of time that could have been done doing real politics. Ford asks people to move over to fighting the duopoly, but will vote for (I think) the Sorensen board because the someone on the other group reported a crime to the FBI.
Question: Were the people being appointed to the county committees registered as Republicans? Answer yes.
Harlos keeps saying that the validity of the
April convention is before you. There is currently no motion on the floor.
move to adjourn.
Various bits of public comment. I urged the LNC that there are rules-based reasons and political-based reasons, and they should do political.
All meetings of minutes of meetings submitted to the April Board on 5/28-29 were convened in violation of Idaho law, and were expected to be accepted at face value… and honored…
With members of the JC expected to rule on the acceptability of their own violations of state law with 2 of the 5 having submitted violations to county clerks.
Nanna says convention was legitimate. Imhoff — convention did not take into account all precinct men and elected county committeemen. Jacobs claims there is no requirement to do this.
Harlos says issue is whether or not the April 2 convention is valid. She claims no one was excluded, because no one was elected in 2020. Claims obvious that the April convention was valid.
Harlos claims hybrid conventions are invalid under Roberts.
Harlos claims the April convention is valid. She also claims that the State Committee officers are voting members of the State Committee because Roberts says so.
Claim that under state law the only authority Corsetti had as state precinctman was to organize a convention.
Considering of recess versus continuing. They are in recess.
Cowen proposes that the two factions should find an agreeable date for a convention and have the members decide.
Sorensen: We ask the LNC to decide who is the legitimate board and the legitimate chair.
Imhoff: We ask you to agree that having a convention is the right answer. We ask you to let matters play out. We welcome the Sorensen group to run for office there.
Clarification by McArdle that the meeting is only investigatory.
Pantke: State law must be settled by a court. I agree with Harlos that our choices are choose a board, do nothing, or disaffiliate the affiliate. If the April convention was valid, then what. I support the convention’s choice of Chair as the Chair.
Corsetti says he and his wife are the State Central Committee as elected in the 2022 state primary. Clarification on comments that there are two State Central Committees. Corsetti says there has never before been a State Central Committee.
You are getting this confusion because the group run by the dues-paying members and the group elected in the primary are not legally completely separate.
Nepomuceno — was the April 2 convention valid. Who scheduled it? SCC.
Imhoff: Had to hold convention early for legal reasons. We didn’t recognize it violated the bylaws. Convention voted that the convention was valid. We later realized that there were issues.
Nepomuceno asks if JC should have fixed things. At the time Idaho had no Judicial Committee. April convention then filled the JC.
Question if Idaho delegates to NatCon were valid. Claim that state law allows delegate elections. Imhoff complains that Sorensen group is appointing non-members, including Republicans, to the State Central Committee.
Jacobs, who lives in Philadelphia: No bylaws requirements on who may be elected to the State Central Committee, not even resident in state.
Nanna: State law lets you runt he convention at any time, and bylaws validate this.
Sorensen side says that the State Convention in April was valid.
Debate as to whether the August convention was properly called. Imhoff says yes. Jacobs says no, because the Sorensen State Committee did not approve it. Claim that the special convention was invalid, not allowed by party bylaws.
Imhoff says that this is not a special convention, this is a regular convention. The 2020 board and a majority of the April 2022 board voted that the 2022 April convention was invalid.
McArdle determines who of the 2022 board voted.
Harlos claims the state did not render an opinion as to who the board is. Harlos claims LNC gets to decide whether the April 2022 was valid. Says that the only question here is deciding who the ID chair is.
Imhoff claims:Both groups agree that the April convention was invalid. The Sorensen group claims that two people control the state central committee. The April convention was held outside of the bylaw dates.
New subthread appears.
Apparently they elected exactly one precinct committeeman, who gets to elect a bunch of people. He elected a county chair and two state committeemen. Corsetti, who was elected, then called a meeting.
Now quoting an 1830 English precedent.
We now turn over to Jennifer Imhoff. The State Committee voted to roll back the state committee to the 2020 board. There was a letter sent to the members. State recognizes the Imhoff group. The Judicial Committee that expelled the Imhoffs was formed by the board that the Imhoff group does not recognize.
Commenter in the meeting claims that the state has not recognized the Imhoff group.
Imhoff group has letters from the state addressing Imhoff as chair. Debate as to whether the state convention in April was legitimate.
We will now so live blog via reply. Easier to follow.
Calling roll.
The motion is to hear the issues surrounding the Idaho debate.
The two Idaho groups will present first. Ten minutes each, then questions.
Sorensen and Jacobs speak first as they asked for the meeting. They elected precinct committeemen in primary, but only person was supposedly elected.
There was then parliamentary and state law back and forth. Some people thought they had been elected, and were not. There was a 6/20 meeting of the state committee which removed the Imhoffs as officers and appointed Sorensen as Chair. At the 6/30 meeting, there was a proposal for mediation. On 8/1 the LPID Judicial Committee noted confusion among officers and members as to what was going on and referred to a structural divide within the national party. Sorenson is clearly reading from something.
Sorensen document is on the business list. Now Jacobs is speaking. He says the Imhoffs have a legitimate claim, but must go through the Judicial Committee or the State Central Committee. He is saying that the Imhoffs used the wrong path to try to fix things.
Jonathan Jacobs appears. He is authorized to speak on behalf of the Sorensen group.
Mr. and Mrs. Imhoff speak. A third party recorded some conversation involving the party, put it up on the internet, and there is now an FBI investigation.
Two people asking for making public comment.
Meeting now livestreamed on YouTube.
Where do replies appear? Testing.
52 people watching. Starting with public comments.
Admitted. Internet of person running the meeting is being refractory.
Waiting to be admitted to the meeting.