Main Menu

Republican attorney in Pennsylvania sues Cruz over eligibility

Saying he just wants his vote to count, Pennsylvania attorney David Farrell has filed suit in Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court challenging Ted Cruz’ eligibility to appear on Pennsylvania’s Republican Primary ballot, reports Pittsburgh station KDKA. The primary is April 26, and a hearing before Senior Judge Dan Pellegrini is set for March 10. The case is a petition to set aside the nominating petition of Ted Cruz.

Hope springs eternal

imageOne hopes that a legal path exists whereby the definition of “natural born citizen” can be adjudicated. George Gordon speculated on whether it was possible back when George Romney, born in Mexico, was a candidate for president. Romney dropped out early, and nothing got settled.

So far this season the ballot challengers have struck out, largely on technical issues. Elections commissions say that their ballot preparation is ministerial, and that they lack the mandate to validate eligibility. The New York Board of Elections says that delegates, not candidates are on the ballot. The pro se filers have missed deadlines or failed to effect service. The attorney challenger in Texas basically ignored the standing issue.

So we have another attempt. I hope he makes a competent filing, and we’ll wait and see the result.

The case is Docket number 130 MD 2016 styled In Re: Nomination Petition Of Rafael Edward Cruz.

In other news, Cruz says he is eligible, and signed a document to that effect.

Read more:

, , ,

56 Responses to Republican attorney in Pennsylvania sues Cruz over eligibility

  1. avatar
    Scientist February 25, 2016 at 7:34 pm #

    I don’t follow his logic about wanting his vote to count. Any vote cast for someone other than Cruz would count regardless of Cruz’s eligibility.

  2. avatar
    Pete February 25, 2016 at 9:13 pm #

    He’s a birther. Logic is not required. In fact, it’s a major handicap.

  3. avatar
    Arthur B. February 25, 2016 at 10:44 pm #

    Scientist: I don’t follow his logic about wanting his vote to count. Any vote cast for someone other than Cruz would count regardless of Cruz’s eligibility.

    I believe he is speaking of the general election rather than the primary, and his logic is that he plans to vote for the Republican candidate. If he votes for someone who can later be found to be ineligible, he runs the risk that the candidate for whom he voted will be disqualified and his vote won’t count.

    I doubt that the argument has much legal merit — IANAL, but I believe that the “voter standing” burden is a high one to meet. Nevertheless, while his argument may be void of merit, I don’t think it’s entirely void of logic.

  4. avatar
    CRJ February 26, 2016 at 1:38 am #

    And who better qualified to certify his own qualification gold standard.. Ted Cruz. “I’m qualified, because what I say is law”

    Here’s a list of what else you liberal bastards are in for!
    😂

    Don’t you love it when a walking talking violation of the Constitution repeatedly says ” I’m a Constitutionalist!”?

    It’s like the devil saying ” I’m not a Liar you are a Liar” , and then carefully outlines his Tale-Talk that leads you into captivity.

    We witnessed that in tonight’s GOP Debate.

    “I will repeal every unconstitutional executive Order Obama has ever signed” with what?

    ” My own unconstitutional executive Orders”?

    😂😂😂

    One thing for sure.. As the checks and balances are removed from the Judicial Branch and Legislative Branch upon the Executive Branch we are positioned for Dictators aren’t we?

    That’s what evading Art II SECT 1 C 5 has done for you #SCOTUS
    http://codyjudy.blogspot.com/2016/02/breaking-report-democrats-have-secret.html?m=1

  5. avatar
    The Magic M (not logged in) February 26, 2016 at 4:25 am #

    The New York Board of Elections says that delegates, not candidates are on the ballot.

    I think that is an interpretation that would pretty much make it obvious even to a child that only Congress has jurisdiction to deal with a potentially ineligible candidate:

    1. Voters vote for delegates.
    2. There is no legal basis for removing a delegate who pledged his vote to an ineligible candidate. Therefore, ballot challenges are out.
    3. There is no legal basis for enjoining a delegate from voting for an ineligible candidate. Therefore, challenges against the Electoral College are out.
    4. This only leaves Congress and its certification of votes (barring someone arguing SCOTUS could somehow invalidate such certification if the candidate is ineligible).

    Apart from Congress as per the above reasoning, I see two possible alternatives:

    1. State laws requiring the candidate to be eligible for his delegates to be on the ballot. I think that’s what most ballot challenges are about.
    2. As per (4) above, the reasoning that “balance of powers” means SCOTUS has the power to stop a runaway Congress from certifying an ineligible candidate. This is what most birthers believe (and probably the only legal theory I can feel some sympathy for, coming from a country where it happens from time to time to have the highest court invalidate acts of parliament).

  6. avatar
    bovril February 26, 2016 at 6:11 am #

    The ridiculous thing is the Birfoons had the perfect opportunity to actually try and get the SC to deliver some clarity on this via Ankeny v Indiana.

    They could have appealed the FOAD from that states supreme court and who knows, may have been able to get themselves an actual useful definition…..

    Of course, Obama would not have been disqualified under any realistic circumstances which is probably why it was never appealed

  7. avatar
    Scientist February 26, 2016 at 6:41 am #

    bovril: The ridiculous thing is the Birfoons had the perfect opportunity to actually try and get the SC to deliver some clarity on this via Ankeny v Indiana.

    It’s very unlikely that case would have been accepted for review, since the decision was quite unassailably correct,. I actually think it’s kind of wrong-headed to want courts to “settle” the issue. Democracy is supposed to be about that the voters are thinking adults and can decide for themselves who is eligible and who isn’t. And on that, they have spoken, and I don’t necessarily see why the opinion of 5 fallible humans in robes is more valid.

  8. avatar
    bovril February 26, 2016 at 8:49 am #

    Don’t get me wrong, I have no issues whatsoever with the epic fails of Birfoons. It leaves me with a very warm and fuzzy feeling of schadenfreude

    The issue is there IS a potential question around Cruz.

    I personally feel that he is eligible but there is a reasonable question that in many ways needs clarity and the only ones who are permitted to opine with authority are “9/8 fallible humans in robes”/

    As for the democratic process and thinking adults, you are aware of Trump and the far too large a number of Trumpinistas I trust, Idiocracy suddenly is beginning to seem all to real

  9. avatar
    Scientist February 26, 2016 at 9:15 am #

    IMO, the authority to determine presidential eligibility rests with Congress, not the courts. I think both would be loathe to overturn an election, which means the decision rests largely with the voters. So far, that has worked pretty well.

    Idiocracy is quite real. What I dispute is the notion that rules and courts and Constitutions can prevent idiocy from triumphing. History provides little evidence of that. Weimar Germany had an excellent Constitution, one that was considered among the best of its time, yet when the people went collectively bonkers, we all know what happened. What failed in Germany was not the paper documents, but the lack of a deep commitment to democracy and tolerance.

    All one can do is point out idiocy wherever it exists and count on Americans to do the right thing (after exhausting all other possibilities, as Churchill put it).

  10. avatar
    The Magic M (not logged in) February 26, 2016 at 11:17 am #

    Scientist: think both would be loathe to overturn an election

    Indeed. Once that happens, it’s open season for partisan usurpation of the process.

    Just like we see now with the vacant SCOTUS seat; nobody in the GOP cares what that means for SCOTUS’ ability to work properly as long as they can make the process a political issue.

    Can you imagine if Congress or SCOTUS invalidated an election for partisan motives just to have another one? As much as I loathe the Gore vs. Bush decision, it was probably wisest in the long run (and that was a far cry from actually invalidating the end result).

  11. avatar
    CRJ February 26, 2016 at 10:41 pm #

    Scientist: the authority to determine presidential eligibility rests with Congress, not the courts

    There is something unique about the Checks & Balances of the Judicial Branch upon the Executive Branch you’ve missed.

    The Magic M (not logged in): 1. State laws requiring the candidate to be eligible for his delegates to be on the ballot. I think that’s what most ballot challenges are about.
    2. As per (4) above, the reasoning that “balance of powers” means SCOTUS has the power to stop a runaway Congress from certifying an ineligible candidate. This is what most birthers believe (and probably the only legal theory I can feel some sympathy for, coming from a country where it happens from time to time to have the highest court invalidate acts of parliament).

    Right on!

  12. avatar
    Sef February 26, 2016 at 11:21 pm #

    Nitpick on

    Perhaps you are unaware but “Pittsburgh” has an “h” on the end!

    Nitpick off

  13. avatar
    y_p_w February 27, 2016 at 12:26 am #

    Sef:
    Nitpick on

    Perhaps you are unaware but “Pittsburgh” has an “h” on the end!

    Nitpick off

    There is a Pittsburg, California. Doesn’t have a news station though.

  14. avatar
    Sef February 27, 2016 at 9:07 am #

    y_p_w: There is a Pittsburg, California.Doesn’t have a news station though.

    y_p_w: There is a Pittsburg, California.Doesn’t have a news station though.

    Doesn’t have a KDKA, either/

  15. avatar
    y_p_w February 29, 2016 at 7:38 pm #

    The lawsuit against Cruz and Rubio in Arkansas was dismissed based on lack of standing.

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B37O9WdpyKDXcE1XVzBqYkk0WHM/view?usp=sharing

  16. avatar
    Conspiracy or NOT ? March 1, 2016 at 9:53 pm #

    MAYBE THE END OF CRUZ. THE INELIGIBLE PHONY
    In the world there are deceivers. One deceiver is Judge Napolitano on Fox news. Judge Napolitano has on various occasions used a statute identified as 1790 “United States Congress, “An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization” (March 26, 1790).” This statute had the following as an inclusive sentence;

    ” And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens: ”

    Judge Napolitano states the latter phrase on the Megan Kelly show on 29 Feb 2016 @ apx 18:50 to 18:59.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MViKwYKC934

    The above sentence is removed by this altered 1795 statute.

    “An act to establish an uniform rule of Naturalization; and to repeal the act heretofore passed on that subject” (January 29, 1795). (NOTE: Beginning of the 1790 Act “repeal”)

    “SEC. 3. And be it further enacted, that the children of persons duly naturalized, dwelling within the United States, and being under the age of twenty-one years, at the time of such naturalization, and the children of citizens of the United States, born out of the limits and jurisdiction of the United States, shall be considered as citizens of the United States: ”
    NOTE: The 1795 statute removed the “Natural Born Citizen” phrase and declared that person to be a CITIZEN and nothing else dealing with, Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 , “Natural Born Citizen”.

    In addition to the above Senator Cruz has ties to the “Council of Foreign Relations” (CFR) via his own, and his wife’s involvement with Goldman Sachs where Heidi Cruz received a huge promotion AFTER her husband Ted became a senator.

    http://www.wnd.com/2016/02/immigration-watchdog-too-many-establishment-ghosts-haunt-cruz/

    References to both the 1790 and 1795 citizen statutes are here; http://www.indiana.edu/~kdhist/H105-documents-web/week08/naturalization1790.html

  17. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 1, 2016 at 11:34 pm #

    And it is also in the article I wrote comparing the two Acts way back in 2009.

    http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2009/01/the-naturalization-acts-of-1790-and-1795/

    This is a well-worn topic for this blog.

    Conspiracy or NOT ?: References to both the 1790 and 1795 citizen statutes are here;

  18. avatar
    Rickey March 2, 2016 at 2:59 pm #

    Conspiracy or NOT ?:

    In addition to the above Senator Cruz has ties to the “Council of Foreign Relations” (CFR) via his own, and his wife’s involvement with Goldman Sachs where Heidi Cruz received a huge promotion AFTER her husband Ted became a senator.

    I’m no fan of Ted Cruz, but what relevance does that have to his eligibility?

  19. avatar
    bob March 2, 2016 at 3:52 pm #

    Rickey: I’m no fan of Ted Cruz, but what relevance does that have to his eligibility?

    More than one birther believes that the CFR/Bilderbergs/Masons/Templars/etc. secretly control the world. Obama is their current puppet; Cruz is to be the next puppet.

  20. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 3, 2016 at 10:00 pm #

    Librace lawsuit against Cruz dismissed in Arkansas Tuesday:

    http://www.arkansasbusiness.com/article/109929/lr-federal-judge-to-hear-arguments-on-cruz-rubio-eligibility-on-monday

    Looks like a problem with standing.

  21. avatar
    CRJ March 4, 2016 at 2:46 am #

    bob: More than one birther believes that the CFR/Bilderbergs/Masons/Templars/etc. secretly control the world. Obama is their current puppet; Cruz is to be the next puppet.

    Careful, Bob loves, in his defense of ridiculing Birthers, Ted Cruz: and Parking the ELEPHANTBus right under the noses w wild conspiracy theories South just down the CorruptEstablishment East Street.

    I’m pleased to announce the near3 week test is complete in SCOTUS maintaining the Motion to Re Open and Reconsider the Motion for forma pauperis.
    in Judy v. Obama 14-9396.

    I’m reading “CRJ CRIMINAL COMPLAINT/Ltr. Clerk following the February 11, 2016” on Scribd. Read more: http://scribd.com/doc/299578126
    I’m reading “SCOTUS LTR from Clerk Feb 11,2016 Judy v. Obama 14-9396” on Scribd. Read more: http://scribd.com/doc/299578125

  22. avatar
    bob March 4, 2016 at 11:50 am #

    CRJ: Careful, Bob loves, in his defense of ridiculing Birthers

    If birthers don’t want to be ridiculed, they shouldn’t be so ridiculous.

    I’m pleased to announce the near3 week test is complete in SCOTUS maintaining the Motion to Re Open and Reconsider the Motion for forma pauperis.
    in Judy v. Obama 14-9396.

    Judy can look forward to a lifetime of being ignored.

  23. avatar
    Rickey March 4, 2016 at 12:37 pm #

    CRJ:
    I’m pleased to announce the near3 week test is complete in SCOTUS maintaining the Motion to Re Open and Reconsider the Motion for forma pauperis.
    in Judy v. Obama 14-9396.

    Translation: It has been three weeks since CRJ was informed that SCOTUS is never, ever going to reopen his case.

    In addition, it has been more than 60 days since Joseph DiGenova claimed that Hillary Clinton was going to be indicted in 60 days.

  24. avatar
    gorefan March 4, 2016 at 12:49 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy: Librace lawsuit

    In Florida’s Voeltz case, Rubio’s attorney filed a Notice of Supplemental Authority and submitted the Court’s order in Liberace v. Martin.

  25. avatar
    gorefan March 4, 2016 at 1:49 pm #

    Also in Voeltz:

    Voeltz voluntarily dismissed the SoS as party to the lawsuit. Strange move.

    Rubio filed a 27 page reply memorandum in support of motion to dismiss. Reasons to dismiss:

    a) standing
    b) res judicata. Voeltz’s filed same claim against President Obama and lost.
    c) political question
    d) Rubio natural born citizen. Minor is dicta and Wong is precedent because why else would Chief Justice Fuller say that majority made Wong eligible. The explanation of Minor has a new twist based on the article “a”.

  26. avatar
    y_p_w March 4, 2016 at 1:58 pm #

    Voeltz’s case in Florida was dismissed. Lack of standing.

    http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/broward/article64022392.html

  27. avatar
    Northland10 March 4, 2016 at 4:37 pm #

    Rickey: Translation: It has been three weeks since CRJ was informed that SCOTUS is never, ever going to reopen his case.

    In addition, it has been more than 60 days since Joseph DiGenova claimed that Hillary Clinton was going to be indicted in 60 days.

    And more than 6 years since Orly announced she’d have Obama out of office in 30 days.

  28. avatar
    aarrgghh March 5, 2016 at 12:03 am #

    Northland10: And more than 6 years since Orly announced she’d have Obama out of office in 30 days.

    to be fair, she never said which 30 days …

  29. avatar
    bob March 5, 2016 at 1:13 pm #

    Birthers this week filed in the Supreme Court of Texas some yuuuuge petition … that was dismissed three days later.

  30. avatar
    gorefan March 5, 2016 at 2:14 pm #

    bob:
    Birthers this week filed in the Supreme Court of Texas some yuuuuge petition … that was dismissed three days later.

    Wasn’t that Ed Sunderland’s lawsuit?

    I think he said that they would take it to the SCOTUS. Birthers seem to enjoy failure.

  31. avatar
    bob March 5, 2016 at 7:20 pm #

    It was, he did say that, and yes they do.

  32. avatar
    Hermitian March 5, 2016 at 9:11 pm #

    Here’s an interesting well-written article on “LOWELL P. WEICKER, JR” who was born in Paris of two U.S. citizen parents. He sought a legal challenge to his eligibility for the office of President.


    NEWLY DISCOVERED EVIDENCE OF TECHNICAL

    AND LEGAL HURDLES FOR PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE

    DEFENDING THE CONSTITUTION FROM USURPATION

    EXPOSE: LOWELL P. WEICKER, JR.

    Read more at:

    http://www.birtherreport.com/2016/03/historical-newly-discovered-evidence-of.html#w2SAr4RBC0T8atzI.99

    Or:

    http://pixelpatriot.blogspot.com/2016/03/defending-constitution-from-usurpation.html

  33. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 6, 2016 at 8:24 am #

    It’s nice to see the newspaper article regarding Lowell Weicker’s eligibility, but beyond that, the very long research article sheds no new light on the question in general. There is just some guesswork as to what the technical concerns were. I mentioned Weicker back in 2012 along with George Romney citing Jill Pryor’s article on presidential eligibility.

    http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2012/02/alexander-hamilton-on-presidential-eligibility-2/

    Hermitian: NEWLY DISCOVERED EVIDENCE OF TECHNICAL

    AND LEGAL HURDLES FOR PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE

  34. avatar
    CRJ March 6, 2016 at 11:22 am #

    bob: Judy can look forward to a lifetime of being ignored.

    That idea is not that offensive to me in some ways. I don’t mind being left alone with the rights of our Constitution. Look, I do my best to express my feelings. I’m 😠 hurt and angry that the Judicial Branch as a whole has not acted in their capacity and duty of Checks and Balances.

    For my part as a Plaintiff in Judy v. Obama 12-5276 and 14-9396 I’ve sited damages to my person and Campaign(s) and have not received even the courtesy of a Hearing of evidence.

    While I understand completely there are tons of people who voted for an ineligible Candidate in Obama, that doesn’t simply make my represented interpretation of [natural born Citizen] wrong.

    I have reasonably approached the Court for simple compensation of damages. In short stating, Listen you can keep Obama in Office, keep the responsibility of his impeachment or disability in the Legislative Branch, but still act in the courtesy of hearing my case for Damages based on a Standard Principle agreed to at the beginning of the Race.

    By contrast the U.S. Supreme Court has conducted itself in a manner towards me it’s fair to say , that also clearly anyone can see as I’ve shown you with their letter, by lying deceptive utterances on official records.

    These things hurt my feelings and make me angry as normally as that treatment would anyone also treated the same way. None of you would hope in your wildest dreams to be lied to and deceived with fraudulent intent by the U.S. Supreme Court and it’s happened by God multiple times.

    In fact the behavior of the SCOTUS reminds me of the panel of 3 Judges seen in the movie Valkyrie starring Tom Cruise based on a True Story of failed attempts to dislodge Hitler.

    The scene I recollect is of that panel of passive aggressive Judges saying ” Do you mean to say you know better than our Furror “. It was just a classic line representing a departure from Law where everyone as individuals were held accountable to an elitism that is manufactured departing a Republic such as is based on a Standard.

    Indeed, I have never ever heard anyone in this group state regarding the definition of [natural born Citizen ] that someone [ Born in the U.S. to Citizen Parents] was not a [ natural born Citizen].

    To the others there have been disagreements and differences even as the SCOTUS Case Minor v. Happersett indicates. So, with statutes being articulated by Congress for the others in naturalization powers given in the Legislature , what does it say a legislative mandate honoring my definition is ignored and deceptively crafted with out right lies?

    What it says to me, which is the source of my being hurt and angered, is they don’t care about my rights as an individual. They are comfortable with a Bully.. Maybe even like the two GOP Presidential Candidates leading in the delegate count?

    One who is clearly Foreign Born with a Foreign Father and mother by standards of Canada and Cuba seen in Ted Cruz.

    And, one who protest in public court in a Bully pulpit as vehemently as imminent domain suffers someone no compensation whatsoever for the take over of private property we are seeing in Donald Trump refusal to submit to the Judicial Branch in an ELIGIBILITY challenge towards Ted Cruz. This is pure democracy that eventually bullys you out of private property at the desire of the public mob. Might is right mentality.

    I suppose you can judge on which is the better Bully., but in my opinion the Justices of SCOTUS are just asking for the Bully to come in and remove them and the Standard of Law they were instituted for and given Life Tenure to defend.

    Rickey: Translation: It has been three weeks since CRJ was informed that SCOTUS is never, ever going to reopen his case.

    True.
    That is quite a long time considering they usually get back to me within a week.

    aarrgghh: Northland10: And more than 6 years since Orly announced she’d have Obama out of office in 30 days.

    to be fair, she never said which 30 days …

    Oh my gosh, that is funny! I love it when people look for the kernels of truth. It really is refreshing!

  35. avatar
    gorefan March 6, 2016 at 12:33 pm #

    Hermitian: Here’s an interesting well-written article on “LOWELL P. WEICKER, JR” who was born in Paris of two U.S. citizen parents.

    Dr. Conspiracy: I mentioned Weicker back in 2012 along with George Romney citing Jill Pryor’s article on presidential eligibility.

    You also covered George McClellan Jr.

    Obama Conspiracy Theories – Boston Globe – McClellan PDF

    And his eligibility was widely discussed at the time:

    The Bar

    The American Lawyer

    The New York Times

    And McClellan himself weighted in just like Ted Cruz:

    New York Times

  36. avatar
    Rickey March 7, 2016 at 1:58 am #

    CRJ:

    True.
    That is quite a long time considering they usually get back to me within a week.

    You may as well stop counting the weeks, because they have nothing more to say to you

  37. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 7, 2016 at 8:22 am #

    Carmon Elliott from Pittsburgh, who challenged Cruz in New Hampshire, is now challenging Cruz in Pennsylvania. A hearing in state court is scheduled for March 10.

    http://www.wpxi.com/news/news/state-regional/kasich-cruz-ballot-paperwork-challenged-pennsylvan/nqX8R/

  38. avatar
    Rickey March 7, 2016 at 10:41 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    Carmon Elliott from Pittsburgh, who challenged Cruz in New Hampshire, is now challenging Cruz in Pennsylvania. A hearing in state court is scheduled for March 10.

    http://www.wpxi.com/news/news/state-regional/kasich-cruz-ballot-paperwork-challenged-pennsylvan/nqX8R/

    This part is interesting:

    “Seven others filed paperwork to get on Pennsylvania’s ballot for president: Republicans Rubio, Jeb Bush, Ben Carson, and Donald Trump, and Democrats Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders and Roque “Rocky” De La Fuente.”

    Rocky De La Fuente is on Pennsylvania’s ballot, but no Cody Robert Judy?

  39. avatar
    Northland10 March 7, 2016 at 1:10 pm #

    Rickey: This part is interesting:

    “Seven others filed paperwork to get on Pennsylvania’s ballot for president: Republicans Rubio, Jeb Bush, Ben Carson, and Donald Trump, and Democrats Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders and Roque “Rocky” De La Fuente.”

    Rocky De La Fuente is on Pennsylvania’s ballot, but no Cody Robert Judy?

    Rocky De La Fuente is on the Illinois ballot, but no Cody Robert Judy. It would probably be easier to be a candidate if you actually filed to be on the ballot, somewhere.

  40. avatar
    Rickey March 7, 2016 at 2:37 pm #

    Northland10: Rocky De La Fuente is on the Illinois ballot, but no Cody Robert Judy.It would probably be easier to be a candidate if you actually filed to be on the ballot, somewhere.

    Apparently CRJ is spending him campaign funds on Big Macs instead of ballot filing.

  41. avatar
    Scientist March 7, 2016 at 5:10 pm #

    The New York challenge to Ted Cruz’s placement on the ballot was dismissed. The judge didn’t address the merits, because the plaintiff missed the deadline to file their protest.

    http://news10.com/2016/03/07/judge-dismisses-ted-cruz-ballot-challenge-in-ny/

    Typical of birthers to miss deadlines. Then they like to complain that their cases don’t get heard.

  42. avatar
    Notorial Dissent March 7, 2016 at 6:37 pm #

    Actually, I rather suspect that the filing fees to get on the ballot are well outside of Judy’s pocket change these days, if they ever were attainable. IIRC some of those fees are pretty hefty.

  43. avatar
    bob March 7, 2016 at 9:24 pm #

    Hermitian:
    He sought a legal challenge to his eligibility for the office of President.

    How, exactly did Weicker “seek” a legal challenge”?

    * * *

    CRJ: I don’t mind being left alone with the rights of our Constitution.

    Judy opens with a lie: People who actually want to be left alone don’t perennially indulge their egos with vanity campaigns.

    Look, I do my best to express my feelings.

    And only occasionally does Judy do so by claiming to have an explosive device.

    the Judicial Branch as a whole has not acted in their capacity and duty of Checks and Balances.

    If Judy is referring to himself (and he always is), there was nothing wrong with the courts dumping his frivolously lawsuits.

    For my part as a Plaintiff in Judy v. Obama 12-5276 and 14-9396 I’ve sited damages to my person and Campaign(s) and have not received even the courtesy of a Hearing of evidence.

    There was no hearing because Judy’s case was frivolous.

    While I understand completely there are tons of people who voted for an ineligible Candidate in Obama

    No serious person thinks President Obama is ineligible.

    that doesn’t simply make myrepresented interpretation of [natural born Citizen] wrong.

    Judy’s interpretation of natural born citizen is wrong because it is lacking any legal or factual basis.

    I have reasonably approached the Court for simple compensation of damages.

    As Judy was not damaged, the courts dumped his lawsuit.

    still act in the courtesy of hearing my case

    Courts don’t operate on “courtesy”; frivolous cases get dumped so real cases can be heard.

    for Damages based on a Standard Principle agreed to at the beginning of the Race.

    Judy’s word salad was not a “standard principle” that anyone agreed to.

    By contrast the U.S. Supreme Court has conducted itself in a manner towards me it’s fair to say , that also clearly anyone can see as I’ve shown you with their letter, by lying deceptive utterances on official records.

    At most, court personnel made a minor mistake. That would have no effect on anything.

    None of you would hope in your wildest dreams to be lied to and deceived with fraudulent intent by the U.S. Supreme Court and it’s happened by God multiple times.

    A mistake is not lie, nor deception, nor fraudulent intent. Judy’s dramatics is actually him bearing yet more false witness.

    Indeed, I have never ever heard anyone in this group state regarding the definition of [natural born Citizen ] that someone [ Born in the U.S. to Citizen Parents] was not a [ natural born Citizen].

    Because there is no dispute that someone born in the United States to two U.S. citizen parents is a natural born citizen; duh.

    what does it say a legislative mandate honoring my definition is ignored and deceptively crafted with out right lies?

    Because Judy’s definition is crafted from outright lies.

    What it says to me, which is the source of my being hurt and angered, is they don’t care about my rights as an individual.

    Judy exercised his right to petition the government; the answer was no; all of the rights to which he was due were honored.

    I suppose you can judge on which is the better Bully., but in my opinion the Justices of SCOTUS are just asking for the Bully to come in and remove them and the Standard of Law they were instituted for and given Life Tenure to defend.

    Judy is actually advocating unconstitutional acts.

    That is quite a long time considering they usually get back to me within a week.

    Judy fails to understand there’s nothing more for the court to say, as his case is O – V – E – R.

  44. avatar
    CRJ March 7, 2016 at 9:36 pm #

    Notorial Dissent: Actually, I rather suspect that the filing fees to get on the ballot are well outside of Judy’s pocket change these days, if they ever were attainable. IIRC some of those fees are pretty hefty.

    True!
    And many also require actual boots on the ground to collect a number of signatures in addition to upwards of $1,000 times that by 50 States and you start seeing why being cut-out of the Democrats accessible Records steamed Sen. Bernie Sanders into Court against them when he was cut off.

    1- Sanders sues DNC 600,000 per Day http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/dec/18/bernie-sanders-set-to-sue-democratic-national-committee-over-data-access

    2- Has A Candidate Sued The DNC Before? Bernie Sanders Isn’t The First, Technically – Cody Robert Judy
    http://www.bustle.com/articles/130896-has-a-candidate-sued-the-dnc-before-bernie-sanders-isnt-the-first-technically

    The Utah Democratic Party Primary has been changed into a Caucus because the Party lacked the $100,000 to pay for it in addition to the GOP Controlled Legislature denying the 3 Million which would have funded Primaries for all the Parties.

    http://utahpolicy.com/index.php/features/today-at-utah-policy/5176-utah-s-democrats-planning-online-presidential-primary-in-2016

  45. avatar
    Rickey March 7, 2016 at 9:38 pm #

    Notorial Dissent:
    Actually, I rather suspect that the filing fees to get on the ballot are well outside of Judy’s pocket change these days, if they ever were attainable. IIRC some of those fees are pretty hefty.

    In Illinois he would have needed at least 3,000 signatures by registered Democrats to get on the primary ballot, an insurmountable obstacle for Judy. Plus the filing deadline was two months ago.

    In Pennsylvania it’s 2,000 signatures and $200.

  46. avatar
    Rickey March 7, 2016 at 9:52 pm #

    CRJ: True!
    And many also require actual boots on the ground to collect a number of signatures in addition to upwards of $1,000 times that by 50 States and you start seeing why being cut-out of the Democrats accessible Records steamed Sen. Bernie Sanders into Court against them when he was cut off.

    One had nothing to do with the other. The Sanders campaign was temporarily cut off because Sanders staffers had improperly accessed and downloaded proprietary Clinton campaign data. The Sanders lawsuit was resolved within days.

    But since you admit that you have no money to get on the primary ballots, what exactly is your road to the Democratic nomination?

  47. avatar
    Reality Check March 8, 2016 at 9:04 am #

    You are assuming he has raised enough to spring for a Big Mac.

    Rickey: Apparently CRJ is spending him campaign funds on Big Macs instead of ballot filing.

  48. avatar
    Hermitian March 8, 2016 at 10:40 am #

    bob: Hermitian:
    He sought a legal challenge to his eligibility for the office of President.
    How, exactly did Weicker “seek” a legal challenge”?
    * * *

    He mentioned it in a newspaper article.

  49. avatar
    bob March 8, 2016 at 11:34 am #

    It is as if states requiring a hefty fee and a sizable number of signatures are trying to deter frivolous, vanity candidates from cluttering up their ballots….

  50. avatar
    CRJ March 8, 2016 at 7:52 pm #

    bob: It is as if states requiring a hefty fee and a sizable number of signatures are trying to deter frivolous, vanity candidates from cluttering up their ballots….

    Actually a lot of the clutter is being weeded out. 🔊150 Million with Jeb Bushes Campaign. I’ve outlasted D Millionaires Webb and Chafee. With a Big Mac Budget you really can’t be “Frivoulous”.😕

    Rickey: But since you admit that you have no money to get on the primary ballots, what exactly is your road to the Democratic nomination?

    I’m going to listen because I know ❤🎵 Love Will find a way.❤ 🎵

    Some day I will tell you all about the Miracles happening but if I did right now you couldn’t appeciate it nearly the way you will later.

  51. avatar
    Rickey March 8, 2016 at 8:09 pm #

    CRJ:

    Some day I will tell you all about the Miracles happening but if I did right now you couldn’t appeciate it nearly the way you will later.

    I have a better chance of walking on Mars than you have of being the Democratic nominee for president.

  52. avatar
    bob March 8, 2016 at 8:14 pm #

    CRJ: I’ve outlasted D Millionaires Webb and Chafee.

    Judy hasn’t appeared on a single ballot because his “candidacy” consisted of filling out a single FEC form, just like hundreds of other people (and a few fake people). There’s no evidence that anyone has voted for him for the presidency — this year or any other.

    At least fellow birther felon Keith Judd appears on a few ballots. Judd received 44 votes in New Hampshire; Judy wasn’t even listed.

    Yet Judy so delusional that he thinks he is “still” running when in fact he never was. His “campaign” consists of derailing otherwise interesting conversations into ones about himself.

  53. avatar
    Northland10 March 8, 2016 at 8:31 pm #

    CRJ: Some day I will tell you all about the Miracles happening but if I did right now you couldn’t appeciate it nearly the way you will later.

    You are not looking for miracles. You are looking for magic. You will be disappointed.

  54. avatar
    Daniel March 9, 2016 at 4:27 pm #

    CRJ:

    Some day I will…

    …wish upon a star
    And wake up where the clouds are far behind me.
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops,
    Way above the chimney tops,
    That’s where you’ll find me.

    Somewhere over the rainbow, blue birds fly
    Birds fly over the rainbow
    Why then, oh why can’t I?

    God luck with that Cody Robert Judy Garland….

  55. avatar
    Roadscholar March 9, 2016 at 10:12 pm #

    I think Judy’s been hitting the Punch.

  56. avatar
    Crustacean March 10, 2016 at 1:49 pm #

    LOL! 🙂

    It is a slapstick campaign, after all. But I think it’s Judy who’s getting whacked by the stick. Perhaps a few too many blows to the head?

    Roadscholar: I think Judy’s been hitting the Punch.