CCTUC Leaders Cody Quirk and Joshua Fauver Interviewed On The Lesiak Report

On April 27th, yours truly interviewed Joshua Fauver and Cody Quirk on my radio show, The Lesiak Report, which airs on LibertyMovementRadio.com every Saturday at 9 PM CST. Fauver and Quirk are Constitution Party activists who are vice-chairman and chairman of the Clarion Call to Unite Committee (CCTUC), respectfully  The CCTUC is an organization working to bring constitutionalist and right-wing minor parties under one banner, including the CP, American Independent Party (AIP) of California, America’s Party and the Constitution Party of Oregon, among others. Fauver talked in length about the April 20th Constitution Party National Committee meeting in Baltimore, which he attended, and at which the CP rejected any sort of cooperation or support for the CCTUC. The interview is about 1 hour and 6 minutes in length.

18 thoughts on “CCTUC Leaders Cody Quirk and Joshua Fauver Interviewed On The Lesiak Report

  1. Krzysztof Lesiak Post author

    Honestly, since this could be viewed as shameless self-promotion, I probably shouldn’t be posting this but…it does explicitly relate to third parties.

    On my next show, May 4th, I will be interviewing Darryl W. Perry, the first announced candidate for the Libertarian Party’s 2016 presidential nomination. It will be something you guys won’t want to miss. And I will make sure that it will definitively be worth posting to IPR.

  2. Cody Quirk

    Thank you for the interview; I admit, I’m not as great a speaker as I am a writer, or a blogger.

  3. Trent Hill

    The National IAP does not have ballot access in Nevada or New Mexico, as Joshua stated. Those are CP affiliates. The National IAP has no ballot status right now, but is attempting to claim it in Utah–that is it.

    The CP should be aiming to get back ballot access in California, through the AIP, naturally. It should also be looking to get ballot access in Oregon (through the CP there). But all these other parties consist of almost no people/activists/voters/resources. Nothing to be gained.

    CP should focus on ballot access in 2014-2016. California and Oregon are major targets via whatever means it takes (easier said than done). PA, VA, NY, and IL are also major targets because they have long-established parties there in major population states.

  4. Trent Hill

    Also–no one suggested Young Constitutionalists was disbanded because of Joshua’s association with Wells. It was disbanded because the basic paperwork wasn’t done after a number of months, as the creating-resolution demanded. No machinations, no rigged votes, just a simple failure to complete paperwork.

  5. Joshua Fauver

    Trent, as far as your last claim Trent, these are your exact words:

    Trent Hill // Apr 23, 2013 at 4:57 pm
    Cody–my understanding is this resolution about the CCTUC was virtually unanimous. Are any of the pro-unification members of the CP in leadership positions? You DO know that this stems not from a want to unify, but from your placing Robby Wells in leadership?
    It’s the same reason the Young Constitutionalists program was disestablished, clearly. Because Fauver is a Wells-associate.

  6. Cody Quirk

    Wrong Trent, the National IAP does have ballot access in New Mexico, regardless of Jon Barrie being in the CP now.

  7. Trent Hill

    Ok, I’m not sure of the Jon Barrie situation. They might have ballot access, but the activists that got it are now the CP of New Mexico. So, ballot access is pretty useless without anyone to use it.

    They definitely don’t have ballot access in Nevada. That’s the CP affiliate.

    Joshua–yep, that’s from before we heard you didn’t do the basic paperwork. I’ve said since then that it was due to that.

  8. Cody Quirk

    Yes Trent, even if Barrie and his people are in the CP now, the IAP is still on the ballot there, though I wouldn’t be surprised if they found a replacement already.

    However, as they indicated in their resolution against the CCTUC, they have a problem with the current people in charge of the AIP and the other parties that they had past animosity with, so I doubt they would want to work with getting the AIP back, and that’s that.

    And on ballot access- the CP’s finances are in the red currently- they first need to get some big donors out there to help get their finances back into shape before they can work on ballot access again.

  9. Peter Gemma

    Unfortunately, IAP does have ballot access in NM – Jon Barrie made a wrong turn at the beginning of his campaign thinking the IAP vehicle was the only way to get on the ballot. He is of course now heading the CP – which also has ballot access. The nat’l IAP, which exists mainly on paper and on a website (and in the minds of some zealots), did just about zilch for Barrie’s campaign – no bodies, no money, nada – they ain’t got anything to offer. It’ll be curious to see if anyone comes out of the woodwork to steer the moribund NM IAP. Jon Barrie, the most well know Conservative independent/third party dynamo in NM – and his campaign followers (and other CPers) – have coalesced in the CP. There’s no reason to get into the NM IAP coffin.

  10. Cody Quirk

    Geez Peter, you need to get your facts straight. While Jon and his people did up and abandoned the New Mexico IAP- its still on the ballot there, regardless.

  11. Mark Seidenberg

    Peter Gemma

    But if Cody is correct, and I believe he is. They
    have ballot access in New Mexico. That is a
    natural name for a State that has Spanish as an
    official language.

    Thank you for the suggestion.

    Next, circa August, 2010, the CP of California
    formed in California according to the Election
    Division of the California Department of State.

    I would like to obtain a copy of the By-Law of
    the CP of CA. How could I obtain a copy of those
    by-laws from circa August, 2010.

    From other posts, I am informed that Dr. Don Grundmann is the “1st Chairman of the Constitution Party of California”. The current
    number to be qualified for ballot access is 103,004 California Electors. As of February
    10, 2013 the registration of the California CP
    was at 304. This is 102,700 California Electors
    short of this goal. Back in 2010 the CP in California stood at 72.

    Therefore, please explain to the readers who the
    CP, by December 31, 2013 are going to find an
    additional 102,700 California Electors that will
    follow the 1st Chairman of the Constitution Party
    of California, viz., Dr. Don Grundmann!?

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg. Vice Chairman,
    American Independent Party of California and
    Chairman, Orange County Central Committee
    of the American Independent Party of California

  12. Peter Gemma

    @ 10 & 11
    hello?
    first 8 words of my post … “Unfortunately, IAP does have ballot access in NM”
    got my facts straight thank you
    no apology needed

  13. Joshua Fauver

    Trent, again you said and I quote “Also–no one suggested Young Constitutionalists was disbanded because of Joshua’s association with Wells.” When it was in fact you who suggested it, regardless of when it was stated by you, before or after having knowledge of paperwork, that doesn’t undo the fact that you did in fact suggest Young Constitutionalists was disbanded due to my affiliation with Wells.

  14. John Macy

    Ballot access in NM by itself does not give you very much. There’s a double petition requirement that makes candidates petition to get on the ballot after the party is already qualified for the ballot. If there’s no organization to get them on the ballot it’s a moot point. The candidate petition requirements are significant.

    Seidenberg:

    I am informed that Dr. Don Grundmann is the “1st Chairman of the Constitution Party of California”.

    The correct tense is was, not is, as in “George Washington was the first US president under the constitution.” You would employ the past tense even while General Washington was still alive after he was out of office. Don Grundmann was the first chairman of the CPC, now Mr. Johnson (if I recall the name correctly) is the current chairman.

    Therefore, please explain to the readers who [I think you meant how] the CP, by December 31, 2013 are going to find an additional 102,700 California Electors

    You know as well as everyone else that they can’t do it. So why are you gloating and why are you messing with this tiny inconsequential party? All you are doing is making yourself look bad. You won, it’s over; enjoy the fruits of your hijacking of the AIP and leave the CP alone. Pick on a party your own size!

  15. Mark Seidenberg

    John Macy,

    According to the Election Division of the California Department of State. Dr. Don Grundmann is the Chair of the California Constitution Party. They do not know a Mr. Johnson. All Debra Bowen staff knows in
    Dr. Don Grundmann.

    I am inform that Dr. Don Grundmann claims he
    is the “1st Chairman of the Constitution Party
    of California”.

    I did not “hijack” the AIP. I have been elected
    Vice Chairman of the AIP in 2006. 2008, 2010,
    and 2012. Even Dr. Don Grundmann on September 3, 2006 voted for me as the Vice
    Chairman of AIP.

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman,
    American Independent Party of California, and
    Chairman, Orange County Central Committee
    of the American Independent Party

  16. Mike McDonald

    I am inform that Dr. Don Grundmann claims he
    is the “1st Chairman of the Constitution Party
    of California”.

    He never said he IS the first chairman. He just said he was “first chairman and founder”, which means he was the first guy to be the chairman of the California CP, and was late succeeded by Nathan Johnson.

  17. Mark Seidenberg

    Mike McDonald and John Macy

    Don Grundmann on other post claims he is currently the “1st Chairman of the Constitution Party of California.” This is on other posts in IPR. The California Secretary of State believes
    Grundmann still head the CP of California. This
    is not good news for Nathan Johnson.

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg

  18. John Macy

    Contradiction in terms.

    He was the first chairman, succeeded by N. Johnson. There is no such thing as “is currently the first chairman” since there is no such title. First means he was the first person to be the chairman, and now there is a different chairman. And he hasn’t claimed anywhere that he is currently anything; he has just said he was the firs chairman and founder. You are intentionally twisting this into “first chairman” being some current title, as if there is more than one chairman at a time.

    BTW why do you care? Is the California CP a threat to you? You yourself pointed out that actual joke parties like “We love women” party have more registered voters than California CP; so what gives?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *