California Ballot Challenge

User avatar
Dr. Caligari
Posts: 1122
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2010 6:22 pm

California Ballot Challenge

#776

Post by Dr. Caligari » Wed Jan 14, 2015 11:32 pm

The "natural born Citizen" clause in the U.S. Constitution creates a duty in the California Secretary of State to vet presidential candidates. Good one.



This at least looks like a cert. petition written by a lawyer, unlike anything Taitz ever produced.


J.D., Miskatonic University School of Law

User avatar
Dr. Caligari
Posts: 1122
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2010 6:22 pm

California Ballot Challenge

#777

Post by Dr. Caligari » Wed Jan 14, 2015 11:33 pm





I've been practicing my woo-woo and I have made a psychic prediction:



This petition will be denied by SCOTUS. That decision won't even have a biting dissent - it'll just be listed in the long "cert denied" portion of an upcoming Orders list from the court.







And I'll add to your prediction: the Respondents will waive their right to file an opposition.


J.D., Miskatonic University School of Law

User avatar
bob
Posts: 27375
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

California Ballot Challenge

#778

Post by bob » Wed Jan 14, 2015 11:40 pm

This at least looks like a cert. petition written by a lawyer, unlike anything Taitz ever produced.For those not playing along at home, William Olson (Herb Titus' boss) is listed as counsel of record. Dummett and Noonan's dufus of a counsel from the COAOCA appeal (and SCOCA petition), Nathaniel Oleson, is also listed as counsel, as it Titus (and two others).


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
realist
Posts: 34977
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

California Ballot Challenge

#779

Post by realist » Thu Jan 15, 2015 6:39 am

For those not playing along at home, William Olson (Herb Titus' boss) is listed as counsel of record. Dummett and Noonan's dufus of a counsel from the COAOCA appeal (and SCOCA petition), Nathaniel Oleson, is also listed as counsel, as it Titus (and two others).



Guaranteeing a WIN!! Cuz Titus/Olson are super-duper constitutional birther lawyers.


ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

User avatar
Northland10
Posts: 8612
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 9:19 am
Location: Chicago area - North burbs

California Ballot Challenge

#780

Post by Northland10 » Thu Jan 15, 2015 7:26 am

Question presented, if we present the same case as Keyes v Bowen, will it have different results.



Answer presented, NO.


North-land: of the family 10

UCC 1-106 Plural is Singular, Singular is Plural.

User avatar
Reality Check
Posts: 15898
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

California Ballot Challenge

#781

Post by Reality Check » Thu Jan 15, 2015 10:53 am

Their most significant case citation seems to be from the dissent by kook Roy Moore in the McInnish case in Alabama last year. Can you spell L-O-S-E-R?


"“If you’re not outraged, you’re not paying attention.”

Heather Heyer, November 2016

User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 13034
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

California Ballot Challenge

#782

Post by Notorial Dissent » Thu Jan 15, 2015 11:04 am



Guaranteeing a WIN!! Cuz Titus/Olson are super-duper constitutional birther lawyers.



,,,,, just like Taitz .... :lol:


The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.

User avatar
gupwalla
Posts: 2779
Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:57 pm
Location: The mind of Cassandra

California Ballot Challenge

#783

Post by gupwalla » Thu Jan 15, 2015 11:12 am



This petition will be denied by SCOTUS. That decision won't even have a biting dissent - it'll just be listed in the long "cert denied" portion of an upcoming Orders list from the court.Go for broke: On what day will cert. be denied?

I can't wait to tell Apuzzo that Kerchner was cited (in a footnote).



A Monday.


In a wilderness of mirrors, what will the spider do beyond the circuit of the shuddering Bear in fractured atoms? -TS Eliot (somewhat modified)

All warfare is based on deception. - Sun Tzu

User avatar
Flatpointhigh
Posts: 7956
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 1:05 pm
Location: Hotel California, PH23
Occupation: Voice Actor, Podcaster, I hold a Ph.D in Procrastination.
Contact:

California Ballot Challenge

#784

Post by Flatpointhigh » Sat Jan 17, 2015 7:18 pm

No, it will be Tuesday, as Monday, is Martin Luther King Day.



My Name is...
Daffy Duck.. woo hoo!
Cancer broke me

User avatar
bob
Posts: 27375
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

California Ballot Challenge

#785

Post by bob » Sat Jan 17, 2015 7:36 pm

No, it will be Tuesday, as Monday, is Martin Luther King Day.It won't be denied this week, as the response isn't due until Feb. 12 (and no waiver has been filed).So "a Monday," is still a reasonable -- but vague -- guess by Gupwalla.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
GreatGrey
Posts: 9864
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2009 6:06 am
Location: Living in the Anthropocene

California Ballot Challenge

#786

Post by GreatGrey » Sat Jan 17, 2015 9:01 pm

No, it will be Tuesday, as Monday, is Martin Luther King Day.



Or as they call it in Arkansas, Robert E. Lee's birthday.




Attached files


I am not "someone upthread".
Trump needs to be smashed into some kind of inedible orange pâté.

User avatar
Northland10
Posts: 8612
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 9:19 am
Location: Chicago area - North burbs

California Ballot Challenge

#787

Post by Northland10 » Sun Jan 18, 2015 7:48 am









No, it will be Tuesday, as Monday, is Martin Luther King Day.



It won't be denied this week, as the response isn't due until Feb. 12 (and no waiver has been filed).

So "a Monday," is still a reasonable -- but vague -- guess by Gupwalla.









If there is no waiver received, I would predict March 6th conference. An waiver might cause it to be earlier. This is based on distributing the cause upon the expiration of the waiver period (the 12th is a distribution date but they might not be that fast in turn around).



http://www.supremecourt.gov/casedistrib ... edule.aspx


North-land: of the family 10

UCC 1-106 Plural is Singular, Singular is Plural.

User avatar
Orlylicious
Posts: 10451
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 4:02 pm
Location: With Pete Buttigieg and the other "open and defiant homosexuals" --Bryan Fischer AFA
Occupation: "Do Nothing Democrat Savage" -- Donald, 9/28/19 and "Scalawag...Part of an extreme, malicious leftist internet social mob working in concert with weaponized, socialized governments to target and injure political opponents.” -- Walt Fitzpatrick

California Ballot Challenge

#788

Post by Orlylicious » Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:31 am

Victory is Near if Ballot Access News is covering it!



U.S. Supreme Court Again Asked to Rule on Whether States Must Check Presidential Candidate Eligibility Before Putting Them on Ballots

Published on January 25, 2015, by Richard Winger in Uncategorized.

On January 13, 2015, two individuals who had previously run for President filed a petition for cert with the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the Court to rule that California election officials have a constitutional duty to investigate the constitutional qualifications of presidential candidates before listing them on the ballot. The two individuals who filed the case are John Albert Dummett, Jr., and Edward C. Noonan. Dummett had declared for the Republican presidential nomination in 2012 and is also seeking the nomination in 2016. He lives in California. Edward C. Noonan, another Californian, had sought the presidential nomination of the American Independent Party in 2012. The case is Dummett v Padilla, 14-826.

The cert petition takes pains to say that the case is not about President Obama, and that the issue of presidential constitutional qualifications is unsettled law that the Court should settle for the sake of future elections. California’s Secretary of State kept some minor party presidential candidates off the 2012 presidential primary ballots because of constitutional qualification concerns, yet refused to investigate the qualifications of some major party presidential candidates in both 2008 and 2012. The problem for lawsuits like this one is that the U.S. Constitution gives Congress the power to reject electoral votes cast for ineligible presidential candidates. Page 26 of the cert petition says, “After a general election has occurred, it is unrealistic to expect that objections will be lodged by Members of Congress based on the constitutional eligibility of a candidate.”

This particular case was filed in California state courts. The state court of appeals rejected the case last year, and the California Supreme Court refused to hear it on October 15, 2014.



http://www.ballot-access.org/2015/01/u- ... n-ballots/


Photo: Merry Christmas from the titular Mama June. Santa (aka Sugar Bear) and her lovely family!
Hey! Don't miss The Fogbow's Favorite TV Show starring the titular Mama June Shannon -- "Mama June: From Not To Hot!"

User avatar
realist
Posts: 34977
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

California Ballot Challenge

#789

Post by realist » Mon Jan 26, 2015 7:39 am

Victory is Near if Ballot Access News is covering it! U.S. Supreme Court Again Asked to Rule on Whether States Must Check Presidential Candidate Eligibility Before Putting Them on Ballots



WND also too had an article up about the Noonan/Dummett "case" going to SCOTUS. They are of course very optimistic that THIS IS IT!! THIS TIME!! REALLY!! And retroactively Obama will be frogmarched.



As I see it, the Noonan/Dumm ett cases are nothing more than a rehash of prior cases where the courts have ruled and have been upheld re the legal obligations of the SoS. And it's been the same in every case where the SoS has been sued.



The likelihood of SCOTUS taking up this case is somewhere very close to zero.



Incredibly, there was no mention of Tracey Fair's case, which is really the BIG ONE and likely to frogmarch Obama (well outta Maryland anyway). :P


ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

User avatar
Dallasite
Posts: 3089
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 3:38 pm
Location: About 40,000 light years from the center of the Milky Way Galaxy.
Occupation: Senior Scheduling Manager
Chemtrails Program
Human Factors and Behavioral Sciences Division

California Ballot Challenge

#790

Post by Dallasite » Mon Jan 26, 2015 9:45 am

Regardless of what the nutjobs really, really, really want SCOTUS to do, if the Supreme Court actually agreed to grant cert in this case ( I know, not a snowball's chance in hell, but just go with me for a minute), wouldn't they only be ruling on whether there had been an error in the ruling by a lower court and order the case sent back to the lower court? SCOTUS wouldn't be looking at the actual case at all, right?


"I drank what?!?!" - Soctates, 399 BC

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 45324
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

California Ballot Challenge

#791

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Mon Jan 26, 2015 10:49 am

SCOTUS would, under those more than improbable circumstances, order the lower courts to order the Secretary of State to examine the eligibility of various candidates. And, guess what? President Obama would be found to have been eligible.



User avatar
gupwalla
Posts: 2779
Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:57 pm
Location: The mind of Cassandra

California Ballot Challenge

#792

Post by gupwalla » Mon Jan 26, 2015 11:47 am

I hope Noonan and Dummett remembered to request a unicorn pony in their prayer for relief.


In a wilderness of mirrors, what will the spider do beyond the circuit of the shuddering Bear in fractured atoms? -TS Eliot (somewhat modified)

All warfare is based on deception. - Sun Tzu

User avatar
BillTheCat
Posts: 4496
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 4:25 pm

California Ballot Challenge

#793

Post by BillTheCat » Mon Jan 26, 2015 11:49 am

yet refused to investigate the qualifications of some major party presidential candidates in both 2008 and 2012



...but REMEMBER IT'S NOT ABOUT OBAMA. :roll:


'But I don't want to go among mad people,' said Alice. 'Oh, you can't help that,' said the cat. 'We're all mad here.'
-Lewis Carroll

User avatar
Orlylicious
Posts: 10451
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 4:02 pm
Location: With Pete Buttigieg and the other "open and defiant homosexuals" --Bryan Fischer AFA
Occupation: "Do Nothing Democrat Savage" -- Donald, 9/28/19 and "Scalawag...Part of an extreme, malicious leftist internet social mob working in concert with weaponized, socialized governments to target and injure political opponents.” -- Walt Fitzpatrick

California Ballot Challenge

#794

Post by Orlylicious » Tue Jan 27, 2015 2:01 am

Supposedly Dummyy writes ... at the Big BR:



jdummett 6p · 3 hours ago



I a the Republican Presidential candidate that has been dogging that usurper Obama since 2005. I know a lot of people have had their hopes raised only to have them dashed to pieces by the courts that have no intention of calling Obama to the mat. This time is different and here is why. This is the second time I have ran for President of the United States. For the Supreme Court not to hear this case will be seen as avoidance to decide a critical case for the Republic. The Supreme Court can either decide the State of California failed to uphold the United States Constitution or the Secretary of State of California Debra Bowen violated the California Constitution . Since Ted Cruz, Mitt Romney, Bobby Jindal. Mark Rubio and Rick Santorum , are all ineligible due to the fact none of these men are natural born, it is of paramount importance that this case is decided now, before the primaries. In the Writ we are not asking that the natural born citizenship of Obama to be determined, Obama will in fact have to prove his eligibility after the fact. I did it this way to give the Supreme Court a way to save face for blowing it so bad in my six other cases. I truly believe we have them right where we want them. We are a nation of laws guided by the Constitution. If we allow foreigners to lead this nation this nation's soul is gone and it will be the end of republic. http://www.dummett2016.com







Reagans_Ghost 98p · 2 hours ago









Mr. Dummett, do you really think the SC will agree to even hear this case?



http://www.birtherreport.com/2015/01/re ... t945138626



:roll:







Photo: Merry Christmas from the titular Mama June. Santa (aka Sugar Bear) and her lovely family!
Hey! Don't miss The Fogbow's Favorite TV Show starring the titular Mama June Shannon -- "Mama June: From Not To Hot!"

User avatar
everalm
Posts: 1885
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2010 9:45 am

California Ballot Challenge

#795

Post by everalm » Tue Jan 27, 2015 6:41 am

So, according to Dummy, he's has had not one but 6 bites at the cherry..... when 6 courts say FOAD then you really should see WHY they said it and look to craft the next one differently



User avatar
realist
Posts: 34977
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

California Ballot Challenge

#796

Post by realist » Tue Jan 27, 2015 7:36 am





So, according to Dummy, he's has had not one but 6 bites at the cherry..... when 6 courts say FOAD then you really should see WHY they said it and look to craft the next one differently







Yabut for starters dipshit has not had 6 cases.



And even if SCOTUS took up his and Noonan's case (not likely) and held that the SoSCA had to verify/vet/whatever, Obama would be just fine.



Watch for updates from Dummett. If past is prologue, he'll lie several times about the status. He always has, even when shown proof that there were no such filings, no such motions, no such decisions, etc.


ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

User avatar
Dolly
Posts: 14360
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 7:32 pm

California Ballot Challenge

#797

Post by Dolly » Tue Jan 27, 2015 1:10 pm





jdummett 6p · 3 hours ago



I a the Republican Presidential candidate that has been dogging that usurper Obama since [hlyellow]2005[/hlyellow]







Really? since 2005? I don't know much about this guy. Is that statement correct?



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama



United States Senator

from Illinois



In office

January 3, 2005 – November 16, 2008


Avatar by Tal Peleg Art of Makeup https://www.facebook.com/TalPelegMakeUp

User avatar
SueDB
Posts: 27756
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:02 pm
Location: RIP, my friend. - Foggy

California Ballot Challenge

#798

Post by SueDB » Tue Jan 27, 2015 1:11 pm











jdummett 6p · 3 hours ago



I a the Republican Presidential candidate that has been dogging that usurper Obama since [hlyellow]2005[/hlyellow]







Really? since 2005? I don't know much about this guy. Is that statement correct?



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama

United States Senator

from Illinois In office

January 3, 2005 – November 16, 2008







He has quite the fixation, eh?


“If You're Not In The Obit, Eat Breakfast”

Remember, Orly NEVAH disappoints!

User avatar
realist
Posts: 34977
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

California Ballot Challenge

#799

Post by realist » Tue Jan 27, 2015 1:18 pm

Quote jdummett 6p · 3 hours ago I a the Republican Presidential candidate that has been dogging that usurper Obama since 2005



All you need to know about Dummett is that he's an idiot and a pathological liar.



He claimed over and over on his (prior) FB page while "running for president in 2012 :lol: ) that he filed the first lawsuit against Obama for, yanno, usurperin'.



It was posted over and over again that he was lying, and what the first suit was, and that doing searches produced no suit prior with Dummett as a plaintiff. So what did he do? Eventually deleted those posts. Along with all the ones explaining (with docket postings) that the stuff he claimed had been filed, the rulings he claimed had been issued in his "real" lawsuits were also total BS and he was lying to his "followers" who are all on about the same IQ level with Orly's flying monkeys.



Eventually there were "new and improved" FB pages for his big presidential campaigns. He quit responding by his name and made up some poster called "Dummett for President" or something like that. :lol:


ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

User avatar
Northland10
Posts: 8612
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 9:19 am
Location: Chicago area - North burbs

California Ballot Challenge

#800

Post by Northland10 » Tue Jan 27, 2015 9:10 pm



All you need to know about Dummett is that he's an idiot and a pathological liar. He claimed over and over on his (prior) FB page while "running for president in 2012 ) that he filed the first lawsuit against Obama for, yanno, usurperin'.



For completeness, from the Facebook









John Albert Dummett Jr

December 8, 2011 ·



I had a great trip to Arizona. I met with Sheriff Joe Arpaio and then had a meeting with the Arizona Tea Party. [hlyellow]On the next day I served the DNC[/hlyellow] the same suit I already filed in several States. People must spread the word that I was the person to think of keeping Obama off the ballot. I can prove it by the date I filed. The idea has been called a genius act and now Orly Taitz, Phil Berg and a host of others are trying to lay credit to what I figured out and that was how to finally expose Obama. The picture I posted was of me and my campaign in Sheriff Joe Arpaio's office.





Ah, the genius service attempt by throwing papers at some volunteer in a field office.




North-land: of the family 10

UCC 1-106 Plural is Singular, Singular is Plural.

Post Reply

Return to “State Ballot Challenges”