Feeds: 
symbol identifies content for paid subscribers only.
CHARGING INTIMIDATION.
One of the important subplots tonight is that Texas has a hybrid primary/caucus. Here's how it works. Clinton might well win the primary, but lose the caucus, and thus end up behind in delegates. Which provides some of the backdrop for the Clinton camp sending out an e-mail saying "The campaign legal hotline has been flooded with calls containing specific accusations of irregularities and voter intimidation against the Obama campaign. This activity is undemocratic, probably illegal, and reflects a wanton disregard for the caucus process." On the one hand, there may really be irregularities. On the other, this looks like they're setting up a way to disregard the caucus results in Texas, and possibly control the media cycle tomorrow. There are always irregularities during votes. This sort of an e-mail, phrased this strongly, sent this early, is pretty unprecedented. Full e-mail after the jump:
March 4, 2008
MEMORANDUM
TO: Interested Parties
FROM: Lyn Utrecht
Campaign Counsel
RE: Caucus Irregularities
The campaign legal hotline has been flooded with calls containing specific accusations of irregularities and voter intimidation against the Obama campaign. This activity is undemocratic, probably illegal, and reflects a wanton disregard for the caucus process.
The three most egregious categories are:
1) Irregularities: Prematurely Taking Precinct Convention Packets by Obama Campaign
Numerous calls have shown that Obama supporters prematurely removed convention packets from polling places. Packets may not legally given out until 7:15 PM or when the last voter has cast a ballot in the primary. The Texas State Party warned the Obama campaign in writing that they may not take these packets early or remove them from the polling locations. The Party directed that these irregularities be reported to law enforcement “since they amount to criminal violations.” The Party stated “removing convention packets . . . will not be tolerated.”
A sampling of the precincts where this occurred are:
659 – Tarrant
709 – Houston
2316 – Tarrant
1205 – Dallas
3127 – Bexar
3082 – Fort Bend
18/224 – Harris
3221 – Dallas
87 – El Paso
851 – Houston
115 - Harris
470 – Galveston
388 – Harris
3000 – Dallas
1214 – Dallas
20 – Medina
205 – Walker
2) Voter Intimidation: Lock-out of Clinton caucus goers by Obama Campaign
Numerous calls have been received that the Obama campaign has taken over caucus sites and locked the doors, excluding Clinton campaign supporters from participating in the caucus. The Clinton supporters have been unable to enter the premises to caucus. In at least one instance, law enforcement was called and forcibly opened the caucus site.
A sampling of the precincts where this occurred are:
4401 – Dallas
2052 – Tarrant
4402 – Dallas
75 – Harris
18 – Hardin
259 – Harris
124 – Nueces
4050 – Tarrant
115 – Harris
6 – Roma County
78 – Jefferson
117 – Denton
3. There are numerous instances of Obama supporters filing out precinct convention sign-in sheets during the day and submitting them as completed vote totals at caucus. This is expressly against the rules. The sign-in sheets were copied by the Obama campaign from the Texas Democratic Party website and taken by supporters to various polling places to sign-up caucus goers prior to the start of the caucuses
COMMENTS (13)
And despite the fact that the Clinton campaign has been pressing indefensible arguments for a month now, the media will gobble this up. Because I'm sure these accusations are completely legit. After all, Bill Clinton warned us days ago this might happen!
Will anyone have the guts to call Clinton on her BS? Doubtful.
Posted by: SDinIA | March 4, 2008 11:18 PM
As one of the people who reported an irregularity in the caucus system in Texas, I certainly hope you acknowledge that we might have legitimate issues.
Posted by: jojo | March 4, 2008 11:38 PM
Funny. MSNBC predicted her campaign would do this.
Posted by: Unapologetic Andrew | March 4, 2008 11:55 PM
Is there a possibility of legitimate issues? Sure.
But I hate to be the one to break it to you, but we were all kind of tipped off that the Clinton campaign might claim "widespread, egregious abuse" (quotes mine) a few days ago when Bill Clinton complained about it before it even happened. And sure enough, abuse is rampant in Texas! How about that!
I'd bet my next house payment that memo from the Clinton campaign was written up days ago in preparation for tonight.
Posted by: SDinIA | March 4, 2008 11:55 PM
jojo, what irregularities did you experience?
In our south Dallas precinct, I'm glad to say that everything went smoothly -- in large part thanks to a chair who knew the rules and did a very good job keeping everything on track.
Elsewhere, it seems that the combination of a large number of new caucusgoers, a constant barrage of often conflicting memos from the state Democratic party, and the total lack of any integral guidance in the caucuses resulted in serious problems. For example, it's likely that some chairs misunderstood the 7:15 start time and ended up barring late caucusgoers from entering the room. These sorts of problems aren't intimidation, just old-fashioned incompetence, and I suspect that's what ruled the day.
Posted by: tWB | March 4, 2008 11:58 PM
The Clintons started complaining about this before it happened. Hell, I bet that email was written last week. It's bullshit. I'd be they were doing the intimidating and doing the Rove trick of accusing your enemy of your own behavior.
Posted by: chris | March 5, 2008 12:06 AM
Rather than ratcheting up the hyperbole on the irregularities with memos to the media--one would almost think they were cynically trying to devalue Texas's significance--maybe they should forward their concerns to the proper authorities for investigation with mild, non-inflammatory language.
Posted by: Unapologetic Andrew | March 5, 2008 12:14 AM
I believe this. Really. The Clintons and their minions always have been straight-shooters and people of their word who have the interests of the nation as their primary interest.
Mathematically, it's going to be very, very hard for her to win this legitimately. And after the FISA capitulation and a thousand other let-downs by the Dems; if the party insiders throw this to Clinton, I'll be damned if I vote for her.
I dream of a day in America where neither the Democrats nor the Republicans can stand their own Presidential candidates.
Posted by: MattD | March 5, 2008 2:52 AM
Hey it worked for Obama in Nevada so Clinton is giving it a try.
From what I have seen on the blogs both campaigns have been pointing out the skulduggery supposedly committed by the other side. I assume there is some truth in each side's claim.
Posted by: barley | March 5, 2008 3:57 AM
There's a couple of reports from Texas caucuses here - see posts 264 and 298. Guess Obama's people forgot to do any intimidation at these caucuses.
Posted by: low-tech cyclist | March 5, 2008 5:37 AM
What barley said. This is hardly unprecedented - it's straight out Obama's playbook, as we saw when Axelrod & Co. masterfully blunted the impact of Clinton's NV win by complaining about intimidation and irregularities before the dust had settled.
Posted by: Trapper John | March 5, 2008 6:49 AM
It was total chaos at my Harris county precinct. Ran out of sign in sheets, one girl announced to the room that if we weren't Obama supporters we were welcome to leave, precinct captains didn't know/understand the rules and were giving people misinformation. It was a hot mess.
Posted by: Young Houstonian | March 5, 2008 10:37 AM
Here's what happened in precinct 421 in Travis County (Austin, TX):
Things were contentious from the start, despite our being a close-knit and friendly neighborhood. It was naturally chaotic, with 460 people lining up behind card tables in the parking lot to sign in. But there was also clear mistrust and division from the beginning, when the vote for caucus chair (a entirely administrative task) immediately became a party-line contest between the two camps. Then a paid Clinton staffer from Florida (as he identified himself to me later) jumped up to demand a head count of folks actually in attendance -- which is, of course, totally irrelevant, since delegates are apportioned according to the sign-ins. Then he started in with allegations that people were allowed to sign in without proper identification, which may have been true given the chaos, but which was not an issue to be determined at the precinct convention. Finally he shut up and things progressed relatively smoothly, although there was a great deal of anger expressed within the Obama crowd about the obviously headquarters-directed challenges.
P.S. The precinct went 69% for Obama.
Posted by: David Siegel | March 5, 2008 1:22 PM