Darrell Castle wins the Constitution Party’s presidential nomination

The above image was posted on the Constitution Party’s Facebook page less than an hour ago.

Darrell Castle has won the Constitution Party’s presidential nomination at the party’s national convention in Salt Lake City, Utah, today.

Thanks to Ricardo Davis for the link to the following results from the Constitution Party of Georgia’s Facebook page:

The 2016 vice presidential nominee of the Constitution Party will be chosen later today.



57 thoughts on “Darrell Castle wins the Constitution Party’s presidential nomination

  1. Austin Cassidy

    They ought to nominate someone from the AIP, if that’s possible, in order to secure a California ballot line.

    Outside of Utah, California is the state with the largest actual Mormon population. There are 750,000+ Mormons in the state and they do not like Donald Trump.

  2. NewFederalist

    I totally agree with you, Austin. Let’s hope that delegates are thinking that way.

  3. Richard Winger

    Darrell Castle has a good chance to be on the California November 2016 ballot for president without any help from the AIP. I expect the Independent Party to win its federal lawsuit and be recognized as a political body. And if it has enough registrants in the July 2016 tally, then it will be on the general election ballot for president.

    There is no California law barring a group from calling itself the Independent Party. Other states have had parties recognized as ballot-qualified parties with that name, including Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Hawaii, Maryland, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, South Carolina, Utah, and Vermont.

    As to the claim that “American Independent” is too similar to “Independent”, courts have unanimously struck down state policies that said two parties couldn’t have a common word in their name. 44 states, including California, have at one time or another had two parties on the ballot simultaneously with a common word in both party names. Think of all the elections in which the Socialist Labor Party and the Socialist Party were both on the ballot, or the Socialist Labor and Socialist Workers Party, or the Democratic Party and the Gold Democratic Party (also called National Democratic Party) of 1896, or the American Party and the American Independent Party in the 70’s. And California had Americans Elect and American Independent Party botn on the statewide June 2014 ballot.

    In 1994, Utah had the Independent Party, and the Independent American Party, and the American Party, all on the statewide ballot as recognized parties.

    In 2012 a US District Court struck down a Tennessee law that said no party could be called “Independent Party.”

  4. Trent Hill

    I hope Richard is right. California could use more options.

    I am very interested to see who the aip puts on the ballot. I suspect hoefling.

  5. NewFederalist

    I wonder how many registrants the Independent Party currently has? Even if they win the lawsuit I was under the impression there has to be a fairly large number of registrants. I’m sure Richard knows the number but even the Peace & Freedom Party which has been on the CA ballot since 1968 nearly fell below the threshold.

  6. Mark Seidenberg

    Richard Winger,

    What 2012 TN case are you referring to?

    I do not expect the so-called “Independent Party” to win its lawsuit either by or on or after July 11, 2016. This plan of Deemer, Stevens, & Lussenheide will go down in the Federal Court. Robert Barnes, Esq. has not got it into his head that I would be a required party to such a lawsuit, viz., Chairman of the AIP.

    Barnes filed this lawsuit in the wrong federal court. The case has jurisdiction issues also.

    I hope Darrell stops the Constitution Party effort in voter fraud on the California electors and does the
    proper thing by getting the Constitution Party ballot qualified in California or just run in the AIP
    primary on June 7, 2016.

    Running as the “independent Party” is not a proper way for Darrell to act. It is not a friendly act upon the AIP or the California electorate.

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Chairman, American Independent Party of California

  7. Mark Seidenberg

    New Federalist

    There are about 120,000 electors in California that list “independent” as a party preference.

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Chairman, American Independent Party of California.

  8. Root's Teeth Are Awesome

    It’s widely believed that many voters who register AIP mistakenly believe that they’re registering with no political party.

    I expect that an Independent Party would attract some of these clueless voters from registering for the AIP. So I can well understand that the AIP would be upset. Clueless Voters are a large constituency in CA.

    I welcome an Independent Party on the CA ballot. Why should the American Independent Party be the only party permitted to attract clueless voters?

  9. Root's Teeth Are Awesome

    Furthermore, isn’t is customary for courts to click https://www.guidelines.org/blog/thesis-binding-limerick/93/ essay walmart https://tasteofredding.org/9217-watermelon-as-viagra/ money can't buy happiness essay generic viagra 100mg 100 tabs how to write reserch paper http://www.nationalnewstoday.com/medical/does-viagra-work/2/ click custom research papers reviews how to copy a cd onto a macbook pro click here same sex marriage argumentative essay thesis source url follow link https://pittsburghgreenstory.com/newyork/buy-paper-tubes/15/ cheap viagra online pro thesis on sparta hyaluronic acid pills best cover letter writing service https://geneseelandlordassoc.org/category/advanced-higher-english-creative-writing/44/ how do i get mail on my new iphone 8 follow generic viagra dangers http://kerulos.org/18998-pfizer-viagra-direct-to-patient/ dissertation statistics master thesis in bibtex https://groups.csail.mit.edu/cb/paircoil2/?pdf=how-do-you-cite-a-website-in-an-essay online canadian pharmacy no prescription needed priligy http://www.conn29th.org/university/sample-of-an-essay-paper.htm https://creativephl.org/pills/produit-212/33/ fast-track disputes concerning elections? I can easily foresee the courts settling any dispute concerning the Independent Party’s name before November.

  10. George Whitfield

    Congratulations to Darrell Castle. I read his bio on Wikipedia and saw his firm’s website and he sounds like a hard-working, solid and reliable person.

  11. NewFederalist

    “There are about 120,000 electors in California that list “independent” as a party preference.” – Mark Seidenberg

    Thanks for that info, Mark. I now see what all the fuss is about.

  12. Mark Seidenberg

    New Federalist

    A problem is “Independent Party” is part of the party name “American Independent Party”. This can cause
    additional issues with fund raising for the AIP. If the “Independent Party” became qualified we at the
    AIP might need permission from the “Independent Party” to fund raise in California.

    If the Constitution Party wants to be qualified they should just get some new voters to get on the ballot,
    not take part of the AIP party name.

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Chairman, American Independent Party of California.

  13. Richard Winger

    The Socialist Party and the Socialist Labor Party were quite able to function in all the years 1898 through 1958. For all those 60 years, each party was on the ballot in many states, if not most of them. They each had their own newspapers, party memberships, national conventions, election campaigns, etc., etc. It simply isn’t a problem for two different parties to each share a common word in their names.

  14. Gene Berkman

    The Los Angeles Times today has a front page article on voters who think they are independent, but who checked the box for “American Independent Party” on their voter registration form

    The article is pretty in depth, including results of a poll showing most people registered in the AIP don’t have any idea what it stands for. The article notes a number of prominent people who consider themselves independents who acccidentally registered into the American Independent Party. And it gives some background on the party itself, quoting Mark Seidenberg and Markham Robinson on the party’s activities and stands.

  15. Mark SEidenberg

    Richard Winger,

    We are not talking about Socialists here. We are talking about the Constitution Party of California, that what to call themselves the “Independent Party” to confuse California Electors. The Secretary-Treasurer on formation of this cabal calling itself “Independent Party” at the time of formation and designation of its name is a elector of the American Independent Party of California.

    The purported [California] State Chairman is Charles M. Deemer, the treasurer and national committee
    -man of the “Constitution Party of California”. The mailing address {viz., P. O. Box } for both the “Constitution Party of California” and the “Independent Party” is the same.

    The son of the Secretary-Treasurer on the “Independent Party” is a Chairman of the “Constitution Party
    of California”. His name is Gary Odom.

    Then we have Dr. Don Grundmann who ran for President of the United States at the Constitution Party
    Convention in Salt Lake City and lost badly with only six votes received. He also claims he is the
    Chairman of the Constitution Party, but labels himself the “First Chairman”. Mr. Odom labels himself
    “just Chairman”.

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Chairman, American Independent Party of Califronia

  16. Root's Teeth Are Awesome

    Mark Seidenberg: A problem is “Independent Party” is part of the party name “American Independent Party”. This can cause additional issues with fund raising for the AIP.

    The AIP does fund-raising? I’m not aware that the AIP does much of anything.

    * I never see any down-ticket AIP candidates in the Los Angeles area — where close to half the state lives.

    * The AIP’s website is always years out of date.

    * Their state conventions attract, what, seven or so delegates?

    All this despite being “the third largest political party in the United States in terms of registration,” as they like to keep saying, Not just the third largest in California, but in all the United States!

    And now you’re telling me they actually do fund-raising? Among whom? Among people outside of the few dozen who even know the AIP exists?

  17. Root's Teeth Are Awesome

    Mark Seidenberg: We are not talking about Socialists here. We are talking about the Constitution Party of California, that what [sic] to call themselves the “Independent Party” to confuse California Electors.

    So what? The AIP has been confusing California voters for decades. Why should the AIP be the only political party allowed to confuse voters?

  18. Andy

    I’Ve done lots of petition signature gathering and voter registration in California. It was extremely rare to run into anyone who knew what the American Independent Party was, or who was an actual supporter of that party. The overwellming majority of people who are registered to vote under the American Independent Party banner think that they are registered independents, which in California is Decline To State A Political Party.

  19. Cody Quirk

    Andy is right.

    I used to be a County Chairman for the AIP when I lived in Cali and was able to get and contact most AIP voters that had their contact info on the registered voter rolls for my country; me and my then Vice-Chair Merrill Tew contacted nearly every single one that had their email listed (about little over 4,000) people). And out of all those people we contacted- several asked to be removed from the rolls and only 4 emailed us back and said they were interested in getting involved with the AIP.

    And none of those 4 people came to our county meetings, EVER.

  20. Freudian slip

    We are in the presence of greatness! Wayne Allyn Root makes excellent points above @16:02 and 16:05. Great to see you having an interest in independent politics again.

  21. Andy

    I encountered a lot more people in California who knew about, and/or were supporters of the Libertarian Party and the Green Party as compared the the number of people I encountered who knew about, and/or were supporters on the American Independent Party.

  22. Mark Seidenberg

    Cody Quirk,

    When you left Riverside County, the Riverside County electors were at 13,952 in the AIP. Now it stands at
    26,548 electors in the AIP. We are a fast moving party in registration upward.

    Just last year the Constitution Party registration of electors in California was only 325 electors. In a year
    it went up to 338 electors. Don & his mommy Ida Grundmann are a failure in getting new blood in that

    It is my understand that Dr. Don Grundmann obtained membership on AIP State Central Committee status in 2002 and was off the AIP State Central Committee on September 3, 2008. However, he remained registered AIP until April, 2015. This well after the October 11, 2014 meeting in Fresno, CA.
    of the Constitution Party .

    It was William “Bill” Lussenheide that 2nd the purported affiliation agreement with the Constitution
    Party introduced by Don Grundmnn. At the time Lussenheide seconded the affiliation Resolution
    he was a member of the Republican Party. Therefore, that was an other reason this affiliation never
    was valid, in addition the State Central Committee never approved the meeting location and that
    meeting was called to order by someone not on the State Central Committee.

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Chairman, American Independent Party

    Sincerely, mark Seidenberg, Chairman, American Independent Party.

  23. Mark Seidenberg


    You most have a small circle of friends with out having freinds in the AIP.

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg

  24. Andy

    I gathered I do not know how many thousands of petition signatures and voter registrations in California. I worked in the following counties: San Diego, Orange, Riverside, Los Angeles, San Bernardino, Ventura, Santa Barbara, and Contra Costa. This was over a period of years.

    I think I had a very good sampling of the California electorate, and i can say that real support for the American Independent Party was very low, and that the American Independent Party’s voter registrations are heavily padded by people who have no idea what that party is and who think they are registered independents.

    I actually did know 3 people who were supporters of the American Independent Party. One of them has not been active in the party in years, another moved out of the country, and I do not know what happened to the other one, but I think this person moved out of California. The first one ran for office as an American Independent Party candidate, but I am not sure how high the support level was from the other two.

  25. wolfefan

    Hi Mark – the suggestion that almost all of the growth in the CA AIP is due to voter confusion is given traction by the party’s own website. Out of the tens of thousands of eager and involved people flocking to the party in in CA the party has not been able to find one person both interested enough and competent enough to update the party website since 2011. I also reject your suggestion that Socialists are smart enough to tell the difference between the Socialist, Socialist Labor, and Socialist Workers parties while people supportive of your agenda would be hopelessly confused by American Independent and Independent. I give your supporters more credit than that.

  26. Root's Teeth Are Awesome

    It’s like the AIP knows that most of their registered members are ignorant of, and do not support, the AIP’s agenda. So they keep a low profile — no activism, no candidates, no campaigns, no campus recruitment, no media interviews — because the best way to “grow the party” is to do nothing with it.

    All of the AIP’s activism is done by the California Secretary of State, who distributes those AIP-friendly voter registration forms to libraries, post offices, DMV offices, etc.

    Even the Peace and Freedom Party, with far fewer registrants, leaves a bigger footprint. They’ve attracted celebrity candidates (e.g., Rosanne Barr, and that peace activist woman who was famous a decade or so ago). I’ve seen notices for local P&F meetings in the print edition of Change Links, and another Venice newspaper, which are left around local stores: http://change-links.org/

    But the AIP is the Invisible Man. They make no visible effort toward doing something with their permanent ballot status. All of their activism — which is infinitesimal — is devoted to factional infighting, and ensuring that the same tiny group of insiders remain in control of their moribund party.

    The AIP is like a Communist country. A tiny Politburo, full of pomp and self-congratulation, plus the occasional purge, while ruling a bankrupt wasteland.

  27. Root's Teeth Are Awesome

    Freudian slip, I am not Wayne Allyn Root. I am merely his awesomely magical teeth, gifted with a life and mind and will of my own.

    WAR is currently shilling for the GOP, dentures firmly in place.

  28. JamesT

    I watched his acceptance speech. It was solid. I think if the LP nominate one of the more buffoonish candidates I would vote for him. Despite certain planks of CP platform.

  29. Jeremy Siple

    “The CA AIP is due to voter confusion is given traction by the party’s own website. Out of the tens of thousands of eager and involved people flocking to the party in in CA the party has not been able to find one person both interested enough and competent enough to update the party website since 2011.”

    This. The AIP’s website sucks.

  30. Cody Quirk

    Wow! Look at this exchange between Floyd Whitley and Peter Gemma on BAN!

    “Peter Gemma on April 18, 2016 at 2:44 pm said:
    There were no back room deals at the convention – if all the candidates except JR were to withdraw, Castle would have won by a larger margin.

    As usual, there are malcontents (Idaho is in fine tradition) – every small third party has them. I go back to there old AIP with Bill Shearer (who must be rolling in his grave over what happened with his AIP) … The breakaway American Party devolved into religious zealots and tin foil hats. Not sure what the future of the CP will bring.

    JR – you’re edging toward conspiracy land. I told you Darrell was running multiple times, and I told you he was going to win – multiple times. I urged you to ruin for Senate where you would have impact and grow the party. The official draft booth was in line with Darrell’s position that he had to be nominated by draft – I don’t know how that strategy helped the party, but he’s the nominee. Period.

    “Floyd Whitley on April 18, 2016 at 4:55 pm said:
    @ Gemma

    “As usual, there are malcontents (Idaho is in fine tradition)”.

    Too rich, that. This “malcontent” you insult is a state party that turned out 21.2% of its registered base to a primary! We have grown CP-Idaho ~nine times in number…from 256 in 2012 to 2,295 this month. Tell me, “Guru,” has the national party (absent Idaho) grown at that rate yet?

    The “malcontents” you insult, mister, are in fact 485 Idaho citizens who turned out to the polls–actual real flesh and blood citizens, not some fabrications ginned up by a horseless and spur-less PR middleman (such as yourself) to inflate your self advertised “worth”.

    Basically, your post admits to the executive clique of elitists about which I spoke…” I told you he was going to win – multiple times”…when was this. Supposedly he was not running as late as a week prior, and at the the time of the Joe Miller approach. that indicates clearly enough that there was an insider “cabal”…or clique. You unwittingly confirm it.

    In contrast, you seem to believe that you can insult actual Constitution Party registered voters. So, you’re so flush with surplus Constitution Party voters that you can afford to disfranchise an entire state’s registered voters, are ye?

    Malcontents? As if…Look. The national Constitution Party’s in the red. It’s registered voter membership roles cannot even be located…unless Mr. Winger posts them in a summary table in Ballot Access News for you. You don’t have a clue. As for being in the red, the CP is under a pending FEC RFAI. (Actually, it has been for some time now.) That alone demonstrates your competent “expertise,” sir. And by that, I do mean you, and you personally.

    You, sir, were touted back in…what?…late 2012 early 2013?…as being the “guru” we needed. You were again touted (perhaps confidence was getting shaky) from the podium of the National Convention itself just this past weekend at Salt Lake…a “shrewd strategist” I believe was said of you. “Opportunist,” says I. Your political “plan” was to go to a party insider in a brokered nomination instead of to the registered base? That was your astute plan? The Republicans are burning their registrations in Colorado, sir!…and for that exact same reason! Are you that clueless?

    You “strategized” this party into a negative $2,500 hole…insult state affiliates and expect what? There is a FEC RFAI on the Constitution Party for what amounts to an undisclosed loan. The CP has already imposed a civil penalty fine upon the CP for breaking federal elections code back in January 2015. And that, despite what “you all” said in the executive, that was covered up…for whatever excuses “you” put forward in Albuquerque.

    Worse, it is now likely that “you” will face yet another civil penalty in a matter of days…once the Constitution Party finally accurately reports its Form 3X to the FEC. So, what’s your “shrewd” pitch line, mister? “Please donate so we can pay off our federal civil penalty fines?” Yeah, that ought to work.

    Malcontents? For questioning the sterling “shrewdness” of such professional expertise? Hardly.

    Idaho turned out more citizens in its State PRIMARY than this party had within its so-called National Convention. And I would dare think that very probably in terms of actual flesh and blood ballots…CP-Idaho alone probably had more citizens casting verifiable ballots than did the entire party’s respective states had in total verifiable citizens’ ballots that were supposedly represented in the national convention. Many state affiliates are nothing more than phantom constructions. They are empty of people. And obviously empty of principles, some of them.

    Apparently, you confuse that grownup word (principles) with “pretense”…which bottom line is what you are all about…semblance is not substance. But do go on and buy yer’sef a cowboy hat. I hear it impresses some people, cows or no.

    “Floyd Whitley on April 18, 2016 at 5:01 pm said:

    “The FEC has already imposed a civil penalty fine upon the CP”


    Looks like the fallout from Salt Lake City is getting serious!

  31. Cody Quirk

    I think we’re seeing a possible mass revolt within the ranks of the CP.

    On the same BAN article-

    “Jeff Becker on April 18, 2016 at 8:21 pm said:
    I think the issue that really needs to be addressed is Mr. Castle’s failure (refusal?) to campaign and the lost opportunity for the party by him not doing so. Here are the facts as I understand them:
    1) In 2012, Darrell Castle waited until the day before (day of?) the Nashville convention to announce as a candidate. He came in second to Virgil Goode who had joined and become active with the party the year before.
    2) At the CP spring 2015 meeting in Pittsburgh, after Scott Copeland announced and gave his speech, Mr. Castle was asked if he planned to run and his response was something along the lines of him not yet deciding.
    3) After that meeting (June ’15?), Chairman Frank Fluckiger called me to inform me of the presidential candidate vetting committee and that Darrell had been traveling around speaking with western state affiliates (particularly Utah), discussing the possibility of his campaign. Recall that in ’08, Scott Bradley finished second in the VP convention vote to Darrell.
    4) In the summer, one (1) presidential candidate vetting conference call was held with CP Vice Chair Randy Stufflebeam and other national committee members. By this time, many unknown people had expressed their intention to seek the party’s nomination as evidenced by FEC filings, facebook pages, emails, websites, videos, guest speakers, etc. Many good plans for candidate vetting questionnaires, etc were made on this single conference, but no follow-up calls were held.
    5) By the fall, I made it known to CP National Committee members via email that I would not support any candidate who had not announced by at least Christmas Day.
    6) On or about December 20, Mr. Castle called me on my home land line to inform me of his health problems, that he was recovering/recovered, and expected to announce his formal campaign early in the new year. He asked me for his support at that time.
    7) January came and instead of a campaign announcement from Darrell, he announced that he would not be running.
    8) Around late February, one of my sources informed me that Darrell was in fact going to enter the race at the last minute and that he had been told that the CP ticket was going to be Castle/Bradley, and that it was A DONE DEAL.
    9) A week before the Salt Lake City convention, the “Draft Darrell Castle” facebook page went active again.
    10) April 15/16 – As predicted, it happened.

    Considering all the attention being paid to the wretched GOP and Democrat candidates, just imagine how much attention could have been given the CP if Mr. Castle and Mr. Bradley had indicated their intentions to run nine months ago. Regarding Darrell’s health, consider that most of the events that Scott Copeland and JR Myers participated in were via conference call/Skype. There were only a few scheduled that required travel. Also note that during this time, Mr. Castle had no problems keeping up with his regular Castle Report podcasts.

    Just letting everyone know that I cannot, in good conscience, help Castle/Bradley with ballot access in West Virginia. I did not leave the Constitution Party, the CP left me.

    “Floyd Whitley on April 18, 2016 at 8:33 pm said:
    No, Mr. Phillips. I am not asking that.

    I am asking for a verifiable process, for legitimacy. I am asking the clique “bosses” to demonstrate that they did in fact directly ask for the opinions of their entire state affiliate’s registered voters…not just some delegates hand chosen by the bosses in a circle…”reasoning”. Demonstrable proof–show me–that the rank and file CP voter was included. Where are the ballots? Show me the state standing rules governing their delegations.

    That was not done, of course. The convention’s outcome was already predetermined BECA– USE of the corruption (in just one example) of the national communications and their crude “steering” by report blackout. It took a crowbar to force them to report anything other than the Foregone Conclusion last summer.

    The way I see it, the party could have at least been honest. They could have come out admitted that the rank and file voter doesn’t matter to them. Last year, some of them eventually admitted that they considered “newcomers” to be some sort of lower caste, verging on untouchables. Regardless, had they admitted that the nomination process was bogus, that would have saved everybody who attended SLC some considerable money. Why pretend?

    The gentleman to whom I replied above admitted that a Forgone Conclusion was indeed running, even though said individual’s words claimed otherwise multiple times. That is deception..it wasted a year’s worth of public recognition, it bred bitterness at the reality of filthy practices, and encouraged questions on honesty and keeping one’s word. Tacticallym it basically shot the Foregone Conclusion’s campaign in the foot.

    Mr. Copeland won the Idaho primary. And yes, based on our standing rules published in September last year, our delegates are bound to that winner in the event that some eventual convention nominee ignored CP-Idaho’s voters or was a brokered nominee from some other party using the CP as a matter of egotistical convenience. We learned of the Bradley appointment (by the way) several weeks in front of the convention. Again the nomination process was not ethical. It was back room…the opposite of what we should be. It was…more of the same sheep this party complains about.

    Mr. Copeland took 51.5% of the 485 Idaho ballots; he has our bound support. Whereas the Foregone Conclusion refused to compete in Idaho. The national party knew the rules. The national party forfeited their nominee’s consideration on the Idaho ballot line. CP-Oregon did the same thing previously. So it’s nothing new. Heck of a way to build a party, though.

    Having just spent over $11,000 to get South Dakota back (after South Dakota’s affiliate lost their own ballot access a couple years ago). That’s three potential electoral votes.But, by the utter hubris and indifference, the national CP has lost Idaho with four electoral votes in 2016. To our math that’s a net loss of one electoral vote…and a net cost of $11,000.

    We intend to stand upon principle and upon a clean and honest ballot. We will DO so in Idaho…even if the national party will not. We’re done talking about it in the abstract. Sometimes there are consequences. And this is one of those times.

    “Floyd Whitley on April 18, 2016 at 8:37 pm said:
    Ah, Mr. Becker,

    Thank you sir for keeping me more or less oriented with your factual outline.”

  32. rj

    “I think we’re seeing a possible mass revolt within the ranks of the CP.”

    Because of 2 posts on internet sites with low viewerships?

  33. Antirevolutionary

    Any word from Scott Copeland or his campaign? Did/will he endorse Castle?

  34. Freudian slip

    Coty Einstein, Ph.D: “No, because of your mom”

    Space Cadet Captain Coty Banks Quirk displaying his true 11 year old self for everyone here.

  35. Mark Seidenberg

    Freudian slip,

    Chill out, Cody information is very informative. It should be noted that in Marin, Orange, & Sonoma Counties the ROV did not comply with CA Election Code section 3006(c) on the crossover postcard for the
    POTUS for NPP voters.

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Chairman, American Independent Party of California

  36. Cody Quirk

    You’re already displaying your true dumbass self here, Don.

    So when are you going to hook up with Grundmann?

  37. Don J. Grundmann, D.C.

    Freudian – The Seidenberg/Robinson criminal team was behind the monstrous and horrific attack upon Chelene inclusive of the claims which you note and many many other monstrous attacks against her. Their actions show that, above and beyond their literally criminal actions, they are both truly monstrous imitations of humans. To do such actions against anyone, much less the candidate of their claimed party, gives a glimpse of how demonic and unhuman they truly are.

    Your ” 11 year old ” comment on Quirk ( a Robinson/Seidenberg supporter naturally ) is verified by him time and again. My prediction is that he will never recover. He will ALWAYS be a fool.

  38. Cody Quirk

    “Your ” 11 year old ” comment on Quirk ( a Robinson/Seidenberg supporter naturally ) is verified by him time and again. My prediction is that he will never recover. He will ALWAYS be a fool.”

    You do realize that you are talking to Don Lake, right?
    Don’t you remember who that is? Seriously?

  39. Mark Seidenberg

    Cody Quirk

    It was on September 3, 2006, that the fool Dr. Don Grundmann, gave up a remainder of a six year term on the State Central Committee and County Central Committee to run for a two year term for National Committee of the American Independent Party. Therefore, he lost the prize of a six year membership to
    a two year membership. Because of that his seat was open, so Don Lake got the remainder of Dr.
    Don Grundmann six year term.

    So Dt. Don Grundmann opened his remainder of his six year term for Don Lake getting on the AIP
    State Central Committee untill June, 2012. Therefore, the last day that Dr. Don Grundmann was on
    the State Central Committee of the American Independent Party was on September 2, 2008. That is
    the act of a fool. It also took him off his County Central Committee of the American Independent
    Party, so Mr. Patrick Colglazier was elected County Central Committee Chairman at a meeting with
    Dr. Don Grundmann could not attend, because he gave up this ‘nominee delegate” seat on September 3, 2006.

    Now we have Dr. Don Grundmann losing again this time in Salt Lake City. He got a whole six votes,
    one was a vote from himself. Let see, because of Dr. Don Grundmann leadership of the CP in California
    the whole party electorate stood at 338 electors on January 5, 2016.

    The next event will be the court hearing on May 2, 2016 in Sacramento, CA. That is the unqualified political party named “Independent Party” will lose in court over faulty organization on date that the cabal organized at the October 11, 2014 meeting that C. Nightingale gave her remarks at.

    Did C. Nightingale find a home in the LP. That is good news for the AIP. It is interesting that Don
    Grundmann is such a fool that he took himself off the AIP State and County Central Committee over a
    choice on September 3, 2006. in a run for national committeeman. That same fool act gave an open
    seat for Don Lake to be on the State Central Committee of the AIP.

    We will see what happens in Court in Sacramento, CA in a week, viz., May 2, 2016. I expect that will
    be the end of the “independent Party” in California of Deemer and Stevens (Gary Odom’s mom).

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Chairman, American Independent Party of Califronia

  40. Freudian slip

    Space Cadet Captain Coty Banks Quirk: “You do realize that you are talking to Don Lake, right?
    Don’t you remember who that is? Seriously?”

    Just because I support Citizens for a Better Veterans Home and hold the upmost respect for its founder does not mean I am Don Lake.

    Unfortunately Seidenberg did not answer my question. Did you actually find a beastiality video of Chelene or were you just blowing hot air? And who said Chelene is now in the LP?

Leave a Reply

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