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?

29 thoughts on “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. SD political memes and Dakota posts are having a field day with both Democrats and Constitution Party BOTH screwing up their conventions.

   I agree pass the popcorn!

2. I like to deal in facts:

   Lora resigned in Feb 2017 and Joel Bergan as vice chair became chair ( I assume per their by laws).

   Did he call a convention 30 days prior to being held? NO

   GAME OVER

   Along with further non-compliance with their by-laws of having a convention within 60 days of the primary.

   1. While the party was working with the secretary of state’s office to determine the legal chair, Lora submitted the convention notice as chair pro tem—with Joel’s full approval—on July 13, which is 32 days prior to August 14. At that point the party bylaws calling for a convention within 60 days of the primary were inconsistent with state law requiring 30 days’ notice. Under those circumstances state law takes precedence.

      More than 12,600 South Dakota voters supported the Constitution Party candidate for public utilities commissioner in 2014, and I’ll be shocked and very disappointed if Judge DeVaney deprives South Dakotans like me of the freedom to vote for any Constitution Party candidates this year based on a technicality this trivial.

      1. Technicalities…. like following the law?

         (I hate when judges make people do that.)

         1. Didn’t the GOP also screw up a vote at its convention? Every officially recognized party has failed to perfectly comply with the state’s ridiculously detailed election statutes this year. The question for Judge DeVaney is whether keeping an entire party off the ballot is an appropriate legal consequence.

            1. No.

               There was a pause to verify the number of people a county had on the floor during one vote. That was an internal convention procedure. Nothing to do with statute. And they determined it was correct once they did a head count.

               Nice try, but just like the other conventions, a failed effort.

               1. Wasn’t the head count repeated because the original count failed to verify compliance with a state statute regarding proportional representation?

                  Does the law authorize a second head count? Maybe we need a judge to take a look at this.

                  1. clearly uninformed

                     1. https://sdlegislature.gov/Statutes/Codified_Laws/DisplayStatute.aspx?Type=Statute&Statute=12-5-18

            2. No.

3. I pity the judge.

4. This is an insane year. We also have a man nominated as attorney general who doesn’t really practice law or has tried a jury trial as a prosecutor. The candidates this year are all insane. Lefleur as governor and Ravnsborg as AG. God help us all.

5. that was an interesting read. If he took out about half of his items he would probably be doing decently. however it would be nice if the cp produced some meeting minutes.

   1. Lori Stacey declared herself state chair immediately after a phone call (“teleconference”) to state vice-chair Joel Bergan on February 2, 2017. At the beginning of that “meeting” she was the state party secretary/treasurer, so in addition to her failure to submit a filing pursuant to SDCL 12-5-24, any missing minutes would also be her responsibility.

      1. Point 13 in LaFleur’s motion above 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.”

         That claim is a ridiculous lie. Lori Stacey had immediately declared herself chair in a post to the state party website on February 2, 2017:
         http://constitutionpartysd.blogspot.com/2017/02/new-party-officers.html

         (Screenshot that quickly, before she deletes it.)

         And for the record, the newly appointed secretary named in that post was never part of any “meeting” or “teleconference” with Joel Bergan, and Bergan has since informed him that Lori Stacey had never even mentioned the appointment of a new secretary.

         1. In point 1, LaFleur claims to have been a registered member of the Constitution Party “at all times relevant to this matter.”

            Um, no.

            1. I see Lori Stacey has added an “Update” to a May 20 post on the former state party website, retroactively recognizing James Bialota as her handpicked and unilaterally appointed party secretary:
               http://constitutionpartysd.blogspot.com/2018/05/state-party-secretary-vacancy.html

               So apparently the LaFleur-Stacey faction has a third member.

         2. Kinda hard for Lori Stacey to hold face-to-face meetings with Joel Bergan or anyone else in the party when she was living outside the state (Ohio?). That’s probably one of the reasons she repeatedly issued dictatorial decisions for the party without calling any actual meetings. Does anyone know what state she’s in now?

6. Mr. laFleur got me to thinking…who called the first Constitution Party Convention?

   It was Lori Stacey as he said…if you look at SOS fiancé records she filed the pre-primary report and listed a $30 convention fee also.

   Lori Stacey is listed as the Chair on the Feb 6,2017 paperwork as the chair…Lora Hubbel supporters? how do you get around that?

   1. As Secretary Krebs explained in her July 17 letter, the February 6 paperwork was a campaign finance filing pursuant to SDCL chapter 12-27. Lori Stacey never submitted a filing pursuant to SDCL chapter 12-5, which requires certification of a new chair to the secretary of state’s office. That left state vice-chair Joel Bergan in line to succeed Lora Hubbel as chair.

      1. After Lora Hubbel resigned on February 2, 2017, state party vice-chair Joel Bergan was initially hesitant to assume the chair, but once he’d had a few hours to think it over, he informed Lori Stacey on February 3 that he’d take the position.

         At that point, on a Friday, Lori Stacey told Joel Bergan it was “too late” for him to become chair. Note that she hadn’t submitted the campaign finance filing identifying herself as chair until the following Monday, February 6, and she never submitted a filing pursuant to SDCL 12-5-24 at all.

         1. Ugh. Both references to “SDCL 12-5-24” in these comments should be SDCL 12-5-14.

7. https://cases.justia.com/federal/district-courts/south-dakota/sddce/4:2015cv04111/56831/43/0.pdf?ts=1465561363

   He does make the point that Lori Stacey was the named chair of the Constitution Party in other court filings. If it is determined that she was never the legitimate chair of the CP, or that the party identified in these matters wasn’t the legitimate party, does that open another can of worms?

   1. Lori Stacey was chair when the Constitution Party and Libertarian Party filed the ballot-access lawsuit in 2015, and she was still chair in June 2016 when the document you link was filed. Lora Hubbel was elected to replace her at the state party convention in July 2016. I believe Lori Stacey and Ken Santema both continued to be named on documents in the lawsuit for some time after their terms as chairs of their respective parties had ended. The current controversy doesn’t affect the outcome of that lawsuit.

      There are potentially lots of cans of worms here, but they’re Lori Stacey’s worms. The convention notice Joel Bergan and Lora Hubbel filed on July 13 was a good-faith effort to start cleaning up her messes and complying with the law.

      1. So for a period of time between the primary and the general election, Lora will be registered with the CP, then after the general election she will change her party back to Republican again, make the rounds of the Lincoln Day dinners, and stay there until she loses the next primary, when she will switch to another party for a few months, declare herself chair or nominee for governor again, lather rinse and repeat.
         And the other, more loyal members of these parties she invades are supposed to go along with this? Why? Why is anybody tolerating this? Why are Republican County parties allowing her to speak at Lincoln Day Dinners, knowing that, as soon as she loses the primary, she will join another party and run against their chosen nominee? Why are the minor parties allowing her to hijack their conventions and nominations, knowing that as soon as she loses a general election, she will leave them for the Republican Party again?

         When you allow a person to use and abuse you more than once, you are as guilty as they are.

         1. Lora Hubbel hasn’t ever “invaded” the Constitution Party or “declared herself” chair. She joined the party, voluntarily served as a delegate to the 2016 state convention, and replaced Lori Stacey as chair by winning an uncontested election. Last month Lora agreed to file the party’s August 14 convention notice as chair pro tem during a brief period of uncertainty about who was legally the permanent chair, then voluntarily stepped aside and agreed to serve as state party secretary.

            Lora also didn’t ever “declare herself” the Constitution Party nominee for governor. Nearly the entire party has welcomed her to challenge Terry LaFleur for that nomination, and as far as I know, she’s still campaigning for it.

            Loyal members of the Constitution Party aren’t just “tolerating” this. They’re welcoming it, largely because the Republican establishment has discouraged nearly every other potential candidate from associating with the party. Lora isn’t “abusing” Constitution Party members or “hijacking” their conventions. She’s actually helping them.

            What happens in the Republican Party is generally none of my business, but from the outside looking in, it’s hard to believe Lora Hubbel has abused the GOP more than the GOP abuses her.

            1. She’ll be a Republican again by January you know

               1. Actually I don’t know, but either way I don’t see why anyone would want to get bent out of shape over it.

                  1. LOYALTY or lack of principles…and why don’t you use your real name if you claim to know so much?

Comments are closed.