“Dr” Terry Lee LaFleur accuses GOP of sending in “secret agents” to sabotage Constitution party.

Pat Powers

Has the GOP given Lora Hubbel a number…. and taken away her name?

At the Argus Leader this afternoon, “Dr.” Terry Lee LaFleur is accusing the GOP of sending in Lora Hubbel and Gordon Howie of being secret agents sent in to sabotage the Constitution Party.  Really.

LaFleur, who goes by “Dr.” Terry LaFleur because he has a law degree, is accusing Republicans of intentionally meddling with the party, which has fewer than 500 members, because the party does not want him on the ballot against Republican nominee Kristi Noem.

“If I can get on the ballot, I can beat Kristi Noem and I can beat (Democratic nominee) Billie Sutton. Hands down. I can guarantee it,” LaFleur said.

and..

Besides the legal action, LaFleur accuses the GOP of sending in secret agents to sabotage the Constitution Party: Specifically, Lora Hubbel and Gordon Howie. Both Hubbel, from Sioux Falls, and Howie, of Rapid City, are former Republicans who served in the Legislature. Hubbel has also been an on-again, off-again member of the Constitution Party.

Read it all here.

Wow.  Does that sound as bizarre as I think it does? Yes. I believe it does.  The problem with “Dr.” Terry Lee LaFleur’s hypothesis? REPUBLICANS DON’T WANT LORA HUBBEL BACK. EVER!  She’s an awful human being, and an embarrassment.

Unless she’s undercover. Deep, deep under cover. And if so, I think she should keep on her mission for the next 50-60 years. At least.

Otherwise, I really don’t think he’s going to do as well as he thinks.

Of course. You never know. I may be in on it too..

Update: That was quick!

27 thoughts on ““Dr” Terry Lee LaFleur accuses GOP of sending in “secret agents” to sabotage Constitution party.”

  1. Dr. heal thyself. Oh wait you arn’t a doctor. I’m not sure you should be practicing law either.

  3. That would be SDGOP Section 32 and the good doctor would be surprised just how many Section 32 operatives there are within the SDConst and SDDP.

    1. Dan Lederman tells the Argus, “We have laws. If you’re going to be a political party in the state of South Dakota, you should follow the law. It’s that simple. We spend a lot of time and money to make sure things are done correctly.”

      The “simple and boring” truth is that Republicans have been passing and defending these laws for decades because they know it takes “a lot of time and money” to comply, and they know other parties are often unable to afford those compliance costs. If the GOP is so burdened by the amount of time and money it spends to make sure it complies with our ridiculously detailed election statutes, it should stop passing them and start repealing them.

      In the meantime, it should stop clogging up the courts by using them to inflict legal bullying on other parties.

  8. Are shad and Fitzgerald out or did they talk each other into running. Is shad running against Hubbel?

  9. i remember secret agent. if we’re not careful, we’ll wake up in a mysterious seaside village, wear ridiculous black blazers with white accents, and put up with candidates running through the quaint streets shouting “i’m number two! i’m number two!” oh you’re number two alright.

  10. Big announcements coming out on August 14th. Wonderful candidates will enter the races.

    1. Sore losers do not make “wonderful candidates,” and if the CP nominates people who have been rejected by other parties it will continue to be a laughingstock. All press coverage will include descriptions of prior unsuccessful runs. Lead lines will go like this: “Fresh from an unsuccessful campaign to secure the nomination by the Republican Party, today (insert candidate’s name) was nominated for (insert office here) by the Constitution Party. It is not his/her first campaign for the office. He/she ran unsuccessfully in (year)…..”

      The candidates (and the party) will be branded as losers coming out of the gate.

      1. How will anyone even know which convention to go to?

        and I think any candidate risks being a laughing stock of even making the ballot at this point.

        1. Which convention? Well, Terry LaFleur and Lori Stacey are claiming the secretary of state’s office has “lied through their teeth” about their participation in a secret conspiracy to “hijack” the Constitution Party of South Dakota.

          If you think Judge DeVaney is going to find that accusation credible, you should probably go to the LaFleur-Stacey convention at the Governor’s Inn. If you think the judge is more likely to believe the secretary of state’s office is making a good-faith effort to comply with the law, you should probably convene with the rest of the party at the Ramkota.

          There’s additional relevant information in the comments here:
          http://dakotawarcollege.com/robot-bee-lady-faction-of-constitution-party-responds-to-writ-of-prohibition-against-certifying-convention-results-so-how-did-lora-hubbel-take-over-the-cons-party/

          1. you citation is anonymous comments…seriously I pity judge Devaney….

            Prediction neither slate is seated and GOP wins

            1. Honest question–do the by laws of the constitution party provide a mechanism for removal of chair?

        2. Response to “seriously asking” @1:29 p.m.

          No, the party bylaws don’t provide a mechanism for removal of the chair. They explicitly state that the vacancy in that office after Lora Hubbel’s resignation “shall be filled by the vice Chairman [Joel Bergan] who shall serve the remaining unexpired term [through 2020] of the vacating State Chairman.”

          The vacancy in the office of vice-chair is then to be filled by appointment of the chair (again, Joel Bergan). The bylaws call for the state central committee to meet to fill vacancies only “[i]f offices of both the State Chairman and State vice Chairman become vacant.”

          Now compare those bylaws to Lori Stacey’s post on the state party website immediately after Lora Hubbel resigned:
          **********
          The State Central Committee met on Thursday evening, February 2, 2017 to fill vacancies due to State Chairman’s resignation.

          Joel Bergan will remain State Party Vice-Chairman.

          Kurt Evans has become the new State Party Secretary.

          Lori Stacey will resume duties as State Party Chairman and remain Treasurer.
          **********
          http://constitutionpartysd.blogspot.com/2017/02/new-party-officers.html

          So the secretary-treasurer (Lori Stacey) called a “meeting” (by phone, from her residence outside the state) that wasn’t authorized in the bylaws and immediately declared that, in direct contradiction of the bylaws, Joel Bergan would “remain” vice-chair and she’d “resume” duties as chair.

          As duly elected state secretary when the “meeting” began, Lori Stacey would be responsible for any missing minutes. Joel Bergan has told me she never even mentioned the appointment of a new secretary. He’s also told me that when he informed her on February 3 (the following day) that he’d decided to take the chair, she told him it was “too late.”

          The only mechanism for Lori Stacey to “resume” the chair would have been for Joel Bergan to (1) appoint her vice-chair and (2) resign himself. Neither of those things happened.

          I’m pretty sure the party’s position is that there was no need for a mechanism to remove Lori Stacey from the chair, because she’d never legally assumed it after Lora Hubbel resigned. The fact that she never submitted the required filing pursuant to SDCL 12-5-24 supports that position.

          2. Point 13 in Terry LaFleur’s legal motion this week claims Joel Bergan held a meeting in his official capacity as central committee chair and appointed Lori Stacey interim chair “[o]n or about February 6, 2017.”

            Based on Lori Stacey’s February 2 post to the state party website (quoted and linked above), LaFleur’s claim is an obvious lie. Based on the party bylaws, he probably sees that lie as his only longshot chance to get Lori Stacey legally recognized as chair.

      2. Keep talking, you know everyone is concerned about who’s running and what they have to say.

      3. “All press coverage will include descriptions of prior unsuccessful runs.”

        Thanks for helping us better understand the Establishment’s press.

        1. Steve are you now a member of the CP? I’m sure they will find their footing and grow as a party. There needs to be more options out there for voters and would like to see more party options.

          1. No not a member of the CP, but I do support the idea that we need more than the 2-party system. That makes it too easy for the Oligarchy to implement their divide and conquer agenda by creating a false dichotomy. The Oligarchy has control of the Establishments of both Republican and Democratic parties. They split various issues in order to get us to fight among ourselves, while the common goal is more government. Sadly democracy is used to give us the false sense that we are in control. Instead we are all victims of propaganda. Establishment Republicans are not truly for smaller government, and Establishment Democrats are not truly for the disadvantaged.

            With all of that said, I am not sure if we can get enough members of both parties to realize they are being lied to and come together to form a powerful challenge to the Oligarchy via another political party.

    2. So…. people we have never heard of before? Surely you can’t be talking about anyone involved in this mess now – they are all…. not wonderful in any way.

  11. Hope they all get it sorted out. We all need more options out there and need even more.

  12. Pat or Dan Lederman come on fess up. Do either of you have certain inflammatory well known commenters on Dakota Free Press on the SDGOP covert operations Section 32 payroll? If you look at the threads and posts they are offending plenty of voters in certain districts that were never political that are now being motivated to make sure their local Dem legislative candidates do not win. That includes the owner of that blog. Those voters are mad!

    It is no wonder the SDDP is losing registered voters month after month going on for years.

Comments are closed.