Is Hank Wrong??? How Could That Be???

Kangaroo Court to Remove Pritchard to Take Place Tomorrow

This morning, a very good friend wrote me the following:

“Just to inform you, people are saying your Substack is wrong about the executive session. Yes, Robert’s Rules of Order requires all disciplinary hearings against members to be held in Executive Session. It is not optional. This is not a special arrangement for BKP. It’s for everyone for all organizations that use Robert’s Rules, unless the bylaw specify otherwise.”

I thank my friend very much for letting me know what people are saying. I don’t know why people don’t say those things to me directly, and do it as constructively, but that is another subject.

My first, very simple answer, totally refuting any mistake in my recent Substack entitled, “Secret Trial of Brian Pritchard to Enter 'Gulag Mode' If Patriots Do Not Resist” is found in the “draft resolution” sent by Chairman McKoon in his 32-day notice, sent without an approved agenda, calling the State Committee to order. The resolution reads:

A RESOLUTION OF THE STATE COMMITTEE OF THE GEORGIA REPUBLICAN PARTY

WHEREAS, pursuant to Rule 7.5(a) of the Rules of the Georgia Republican Party, charges have been made against the First Vice Chairman of the Georgia Republican Party; and

WHEREAS, notice was issued and served in accordance with Rule 7.5(a) of the Georgia Republican Party upon the First Vice Chairman of a State Committee meeting to consider the charges against him and provide him with an opportunity to be heard; and

WHEREAS, the Rules of the Georgia Republican Party do not specify procedures for the conduct of a trial upon charges brought under Rule 7.5(a); and

WHEREAS, specific procedures should be adopted to conduct the trial as required by the Rules of the Georgia Republican Party;

THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED THAT:

That the trial shall be in executive session;

Thus, if this resolution does not pass by a vote of the State Committee following every procedure I outlined in my previous Substack, executive session cannot be invoked. Furthermore, if this resolution does not pass by a vote of the State Committee, following every procedure I previously outline, there is no business to tend to and any meeting invoked at that time must adjourn. I have proven my point.

But it gets so much worse, especially for the Chairman.

In calling this meeting as he did, Chairman McKoon has made numerous catastrophic errors. And, obviously, he hopes he can slide all those errors by and have the State Committee do all the work skipped over in bringing this action. Regardless the words the Chairman wrote in his notice to State Committee members, this meeting is not authorized under the publicized rules on the GAGOP website, even if all of us, for a short time, consider those rules to be the legitimate Republican Party Rules, which in reality they are not.

First of all, the 32-day notice must provide an agenda. That agenda is not anything the Chairman produces. The agenda is produced by the State Executive Committee, duly-enacted by a resolution under that committee while it is IN SESSION. More on what that means below.

Under Rule 3.1, the authority to determine “when the needs of the GRP require,” which you will find on line 15, resides with the State Executive Committee, not the Chairman. And for the purpose of rendering judgement that “the needs of the GRP require,” unfortunately for Chairman McKoon, a meeting of the State Executive Committee, to direct the him as to that need with a resolution, must be “in session.” The Chairman has never called the State Executive Committee into session to render judgments on any of this. The State Executive Committee must be in session, performing the task of authorizing the Chairman to execute a call of the State Executive Committee, or that call cannot be made. Calling the State Executive Committee into session would take a precious 12-days, which the Chairman does not have, and still accomplish the goal forced on him to remove Brian Pritchard from office BEFORE the State Convention.

Confounding the chairman’s difficulties, in absence of party rules prescribing a procedure to hold a trial to discipline a party official, Robert’s Rules require that first, the “Society,” represented in this case by the State Executive Committee, create by resolution an “Investigation Committee,” (See 63:9). That Investigation Committee must hold meetings to organize the task of gathering evidence against the potential accused. Once gathered, the Investigation Committee must hold a meeting, in session, which requires notice given to all of its members, at which it must pass a resolution to report its findings and recommendations to the Society, once again, the State Executive Committee. Once that occurs, and the State Executive Committee receives a committee resolution recommending a trial of the evidence, the State Executive Committee must authorize the Rules Committee to properly construct rules for the impending trial, duly pass those rules out of committee to the State Executive Committee, for the State Executive Committee to come into session to receive and understand. (63:13-14) Once that happens, the State Executive Committee must approve those trial rules, and subsequently pass a resolution to to notify the accused to appear at a trial (63:15). That resolution would empower the chief executive officer, in this case Josh McKoon, to issue such a notice to the accused, Brian Pritchard.

Now, for the May 10 meeting to enter directly into executive session, without a vote, the resolution authorizing the Chairman to issue the notice to Pritchard would also specify that the meeting shall be conducted in executive session. All that I describe has to be passed by the State Executive Committee. And because none of those procedures were followed, I mean not even ONE of those procedures, Chairman McKoon has somehow invoked authority out of that place to which the sun has no access and done that which I describe, all by his lonesome, including issuing a call for a May 10 meeting ostensibly to conduct a trial of Brian Pritchard. Josh McKoon does not have the authority as Chairman to do any of that. The meeting for tomorrow is a kangaroo court called by the head kangaroo. That’s it. None of this is authorized.

State Committee Members Could Wind Up in Big Trouble

But, look, if the attendees tomorrow are not careful, they could wind up in very big trouble. Because the Chairman has short-circuited every requirement in the book, and every requirement in the rules, apparently he and others in his inner circle, perhaps his general counsel in particular, are hoping they can keep all this silent, and obtain the agreement of the State Committee, once called into session, to ratify McKoon’s usurpations, thus clearing him of responsibility, and roll all of those parliamentary requirements it all into a ball in the form of a single resolution he hopes upon every hope in his body he can get the State Committee to pass. That is the resolution he sent to all State Committee members.

That is what is going on here. As I have written many times now, this charade is a railroad job of epic proportions. Everyone, including Pritchard detractors, has been deceived.

Here’s where everyone involved here, including the Pritchard detractors, potentially get into deep hot water. What no one seems to recognize is that this “political party” thing, if that is what we agree for the moment it is, is a product of LAW, specifically, OCGA 21-2-111. That statute grants authority from the people of the State of Georgia to an entity known at least at one time as the “Georgia Republican Party.” That law creates the authority for those considered among the party to create the rules we are talking about. The problem that could arise for anyone taking part in this marsupial production is that if the ensuing proceedings actually harm Brian Pritchard in ways he can aptly describe in future legal proceedings, every one of them, state officers, State Committee members, Executive members, etc., could be found to have committed civil wrong-doing of Mr.Pritchard, and also found guilty of violating election law by the State Election Board, possibly leading to a referral to the Attorney General. But of course, we don’t really have an operating State Election Board, or an Attorney General who at this point would decide against anyone involved in removing Brian Pritchard from office. I have not looked up the statute of limitations on any of this. But, I expect that would be a good idea for anyone involved to do.

I hope I have been able to clear up any questions remaining from my last Substack. I apologize if anything I wrote was less than clear.