Russian Roulette Pt 14: PaGOP Doubles Down On Insatiable Desire To Lose The 2024 Elections

As many readers of the Russian Roulette series are acutely aware, the PaGOP seems to be intent on losing all foreseeable future elections. Although I posted a simple plan to save the Party, the PaGOP seems hellbent on destroying itself with its most recent decision to endorse a candidate for attorney general, once again pre-primary. One would think after its across-the-board statewide losses of its endorsed candidates in the recent 2023 elections – which is historically consistent with its pre-primary endorsements of candidates – that it would reassess…

But instead of listening to a majority of its members that are opposed to pre-primary endorsements, text messages were sent out to all state committee members informing them that, instead of even waiting for the Winter Meeting on February 2-3 meeting in Hershey, a virtual, Zoom meeting would be occurring on January 22nd to endorse a 2024 candidate for attorney general. And it is even better than that…the text message literally tells state committee members – who are elected by us to consider these matters – that if they want to be able to vote on a candidate, they are required to RSVP to receive a link for the Zoom call. 🤔

So the questions become – setting aside members of the Republican Party being vehemently opposed to pre-primary endorsements – why would it decide that it not only needs to endorse pre-primary, but whether such comports with the Bylaws and if so, why it needs to hold a special meeting for purposes of the endorsement, when the Winter meeting is a mere 11 days later…

So, let’s start with the Bylaws. Pursuant to Rule 2.6(c) of the Rules and Bylaws of the Republican Party of Pennsylvania, revised September 19, 2015, the Chairman only has the power to call a special meeting at the “written request of one-fifth of the member of the State Party, which request and call shall state with specificity the business and agenda for such meeting.”

So, who are the one-fifth that allegedly called for the meeting? Will someone move for disclosure of the alleged writing, by one-fifth of State Committee, calling for the meeting? If so, does any such writing exist? If there is no writing requested by one-fifth of State Committee, any vote is void ab initio.

But, let’s say one-fifth of the membership of State Committee in a writing did request a special meeting. In that occasion, per the Rule 2.8 of the Bylaws, notice of any meeting must me provided by “the Secretary depositing the notice of the meeting in the mail, addressed to the State Party members at the address on file with State Party for each member, postage pre-paid, at least fourteen (14) days prior to the date of the meeting. This notice shall be accompanied by an agenda and a summary of the minutes of the previous meeting.”

As the Bylaws do no permit notice by email, text message…etc, the text message notice that some received is insufficient for purposes of the Bylaws and thus results in any vote being void ab initio.

And what allowances do the Bylaws provide for virtual meetings? Well, that’s another troubling issue with this call for a Zoom endorsement vote, as the Bylaws only provide for virtual meetings, where the law imposes a time deadline or where exigent circumstances exist and even then, what the Bylaws refer to as a Remote Access Participation Meeting, is extremely limited. Specifically, Rule 2.8(b) provides:

In this situation, there is neither a time deadline imposed by the law nor an exigent circumstance, especially when considering the Winter Meeting is already scheduled for a mere 11 days later. But even setting these issues aside, the Bylaws only provide for 6 remote locations; not 380+ for each state committee member…

Thus, it would appear that for a multitude of legal reasons, if any vote is taken during the January 22nd Zoom meeting that it would be a nullity.

But why is there this intent to force a virtual vote – especially one that would appear to be deciding the AG vote by voice, instead of roll call, vote? Well, it appears based on calls being made to certain State Committee members that the Establishment wants Kat Copeland, who even after being appointed district attorney in Delaware County, was unable to successfully win election in the following election cycle. So how is it that someone who cannot even win her own county is going to be able to win a statewide election? Or is this more of 2023 all over again, where the powers that be want the candidates who are unlikely to win? As I wrote months ago, and as becomes clearer every day, it appears our party has been infiltrated by the Democratic Party.

In fact, that which is most interesting and disconcerting at the same time, is that in all the Republican strongholds of Pennsylvania of only several decades ago, the Establishment has ensured the complete erosion of that Republican control. Take for example Montgomery County, where Ronald Reagan in 1979, at the Sunnybrook Ballroom in Pottstown, PA, declared that it was “one of the three strongest and winningest GOP counties in the entire United States.” (If you have the time, please take it to read the linked 2011 PhillyMag article about Reagan’s comment and the fall of Republican Party in Montgomery Co). Now, it is Democratic stronghold, thanks to the Establishment and backroom deals that keep those specific Republicans in power and prevent any form of change. And that isn’t the only Republican stronghold that is no more. More recently, in fact, just weeks ago, we saw Cumberland Co Chairman Capozzi (whose antics have been addressed in numerous articles in this series, including removing conservative members and replacing them with at least one individual who was proud of riding the Blue wave) lose Republican control of the Cumberland County Board of Commissioners. But it doesn’t end there..another Establishment Chair, Dave Feidt of Dauphin County, ensured for the first time in 100 years that Dauphin County flipped Democrat…And yet these individuals remain in power, even though in any business or professional setting, they would’ve already been removed, no different than both coaches from the Texas A&M vs Mississippi State football game, as I reviewed in my article proposing my plan to save the Party. But I digress…

While I have been explicitly clear in my opposition to pre-primary endorsements, I believe there is only one candidate, with the experience, ethics, and morality necessary to be AG in the Commonwealth and that is York County District Attorney Dave Sunday. And it is for those reasons, in the event an endorsement vote is taken that I am asking all my State Committee friends to support him.

Writers Note: I apologize to those of you who have been reaching out and inquiring about if/when this article would be written/published. As I have been away since the 11th on my honeymoon/first anniversary, I have not had much time. I want to thank my beautiful and extremely understanding wife for pushing me to write this article, while we are supposed to be focused solely on one another. Jess, you are my rock, my confidant, my best friend, and my biggest supporter and for all of that, not only am I beyond grateful, but words cannot come close to expressing my love for you.