.
.
.
Which of them was legitimately elected as CDP Chair? Bauman doesn’t want to risk finding out.
Kimberly Ellis … #PressRelease
Bauman Refuses Request for Independent Forensic Audit
OAKLAND, Calif. (June 2, 2017): Eric Bauman has rejected the request by the Ellis campaign for an independent forensic audit, which was formally submitted for consideration on Tuesday through legal counsel. While the Ellis campaign’s review of the ballot is ongoing, initial inspection uncovered alarming discrepancies and an amassing of ineligible voters to change the outcome of the election, warranting a call for an independent expert to intervene and validate the vote.
Because of the magnitude of the concerns, the Ellis campaign firmly believes any allegation raised should be accompanied by verified evidence from a credentialed, independent professional. The Ellis campaign recognizes that their position is not impartial and have requested that an outside independent firm step in and conduct a complete forensic audit so that the voting delegation has confidence in the neutrality of the assessment.
Kaufman Legal Group, which jointly represents Eric Bauman’s campaign and now the California Democratic Party, was provided specific requests, including a formal legal demand for preservation of records. The Ellis campaign continues to seek an inclusive and collaborative remedy to validate the election outcome. Should their efforts towards reconciliation not be returned, the Ellis campaign reserves its right to seek remedy in other venues.
As per the CDP’s Bylaws, the ratification of any officer race is subject to challenge, and no certification can take place until the challenge is resolved. As such, the Ellis campaign requested that an interim Chair serve until the election is certified. Bauman refuted this interpretation and instead has claimed his authority to serve as Chair.
“Eric’s rejection of an independent forensic audit is well beyond troubling. If everything was done on the up-and-up, what is there to hide?,” said Hilary Crosby, immediate past Controller of the CDP. “We’re the largest Democratic Party in the country; are we really saying we don’t know how to run a fair, transparent and impartial election, where the outcome is not in question? Instead of calls for unity, we should be calling for truth, because if we can’t agree on the facts, how can we agree on how to move forward.”
[Editor’s Note: I know that we have a lot of Republican and Libertarian readers here. Your comments, including your pointing and laughing, are welcome. But this will be read by a lot of Democrats statewide, so if I think that you’re just baiting people for partisan reasons rather than expressing your views I may want to have a word with you. But you have substantial freedom to participate here. — GAD]
Shades of the DNC..did they take lessons or get instructions from Tommy…is Debbie WS. in the shadows or Donna B.?
The CDP should learn from their prior experiences with the Bernie Supporters and learn to coexist and embrace their new supporters just as how the Republican Party should of embraced the new Ron Paul supporters who entered around 2008-2012.
Since the elections code helps govern the political parties in our state, maybe we can have minimum guidelines in how state political party organization elections should be ran. Perhaps we could have two tear off pieces of paper, one would be a roll call in who voted, one would also be the ballot. If there are more ballots than the roll call then you know you do not have a clean election.
Stop Lying. You Ellis supporters are sounding like sore losers. But losers just the same.
I can’t stop doing what I’ve never started, Tom. (Or “Tom,” as the case may be.)
I honestly don’t give a squirrel’s fart over what you say you think that we sound like, just like you don’t care that many of us think that you seem like Nixonian thugs in the midst of a cover-up.
I DO care what an independent external audit of the ballots and the eligibility of asserted delegates and assertedly eligible appointed proxies says about their eligibility to have cast their SIGNED (and therefore traceable and disqualifiable) ballots. And if you had a Democratic or democratic bone in your body, you would to.
Oh, and welcome to the blog.
Thank You for the warm welcome.
As you said: Name names. Who was the Assembly staffer Kim alludes too?
That never happened.
Thanks for bringing UGLY attention to our donor base, which Ellis can’t seem to undersand is the life blood of politics.
Winning ugly is still winning loser.
Which criterion do you think should matter more, “Tom”: that the candidate who better pleases the donor base wins — or that the candidate who got the most legitimate votes wins?
Choose only one criterion. They MAY end up being the same person, but don’t presume that here.
Answer honestly, if you can bear it. Your answer will be very revealing about why Ellis supporters believe and behave as they do.
I have no idea who that Assembly staffer might have been. I’m in no position to know.