Look, seriously though, you can't just make believe like a situation exists that doesn't, just because it doesn't make your cause look favourable.
With Harman, there's quite clearly been an insurgency locally to have the 'left' dominate while she's painted as 'the right'. And to ask for evidence of Momentum wanting rid of Harman is just ludicrous - of course they bloody do. It's like asking for evidence they want rid of Tom Watson.
Sometimes you've got to just call a spade a spade and stop blindly defending everything regardless of logic or common sense.
The Momentum dominated CLP are threatening Harman with deselection and using the speaker role of impartiality as a false premise to do so. That is a fact.
The only fact in this argument of yours is that most of the officers in the CLP are now from the left.
Everything else - the "
insurgency" (which is an odd way to describe people being elected to positions), the "
Momentum wanting rid of Harman", threatening her with deselection and the claim that the motion which was passed was in fact passed for another reason (even though the reason given actually makes the "hidden" reason impossible) is just what you think, unsupported as it is by any actual evidence that you can share with the forum (though it is in line with your other thinking on this issue).
Personally, I'd have thought that if they really wanted to get rid of her and dominated the CLP to the extent you claim, then they'd either have gone down the vote of no confidence route (as the CLP I am in have done with Hoey, though she jumped before she was pushed) or waited until the trigger ballot process comes around. They might do that, though I have extreme doubts that they would given Harman's profile, the statements from the central party on the Speaker issue, the chance she will win the Speakers election and the fact that even Coyle - who is far more disliked - got past the trigger ballots on the first try.