District 5 Ballot Loses a Candidate

Well, it looks like District 5’s ballot is going to be one candidate shy come election time this November as our prospective progressive/socialist climate warrior neighbor Jose Trinidad Castaneda III didn’t quite make the cut.

If you don’t know – you need 20 registered voters to sign a petition for you to run for city council and they must be valid signatures. 20. Castaneda, with his “deep roots” in District 5 opted to turn in just 23 (leaving the 7 extra spots blank) and a few were disqualified. Apparently Castaneda couldn’t be bothered to do the bare minimum which is to turn in 20 valid signatures.

Socialists of a Feather

Upon finding out that turning in just above the bare minimum number of signatures, despite some bloviating on his campaign Facebook page, wasn’t good enough owing to disqualifications he did what any good socialist does and he sued.

CastanedaSues

And today he lost that lawsuit.

CastanedaWritDenied

Let that sink in for when he runs his write-in campaign or perhaps carpetbags in 2020. He couldn’t be bothered to meet the bare minimum threshold and then sued because he didn’t think the rules should apply to him. This is not a mentality Fullerton needs or can afford and yet the mentality that typically is attracted to our City Council.

It seems that in this 60% Latino District the top two Progressives are a Caucasian Carpetbagger and a Syrian Showman. Which of the race baiting district election supporters saw this coming?

*Editorial Correction – In the original version of this post we said that District 5 lost a candidate. According to Castaneda’s lawyer, Greg Diamond, “Trini” plans on running a write-in campaign. So while he may still be a losing candidate, there will in fact be one-less than anticipated candidate on the ballot.

The original post also stated that Castaneda did the bare minimum. The law is to turn in 20 valid signatures and thus stating that Castaneda did the bare minimum is factually incorrect. Had he met the minimum threshold he would have qualified. He factually did less than the bare minimum and attempted to do just above the bare minimum.

Carpetbaggery Fullerton City Council Candidates Setting The Bar Low Shameless Carpetbagger

132 thoughts on “District 5 Ballot Loses a Candidate

  1. The problem with Castenada’s court case is that he hired Greg Diamond, the absolute worst attorney of all time. There is no better way to guarantee a loss.

  2. Exactly how do you fail to serve the respondent?

    He plunked down $435 on this case plus whatever Gasbag charged him for his time. Further proof that socialist types are complete LOSERS when it comes to money.

    1. I *did* serve the respondents. I didn’t file the proof of service in the rush of things — which didn’t matter given that the respondents had already either filed opposition papers or responded to multiple emails indicated their intention to participate. The judge noted that clerks sometimes look for a non-filed proof of service as an easy way out of a complicated case. Funny, you seem smarter on TV.

        1. Yeah — it was a tough case. Had the Governor signed legislation that has been sitting on his desk before the hearing, as we expected he’d do, I think we’d have had a different result. You’ll disagree, of course, because you don’t know anything about it so ignorant disagreement is your default setting.

            1. Not “wah wah” — I was asked to take a shot at it, I did, and it didn’t work out as hoped. That happens. One can be an adult about setbacks

              Try it sometime!

          1. Tough case?
            You mean there’s a pending law that provide relief for little dummies who can’t scrounge up 20 valid siggies?
            You need to find a better candidate and he needs to find a better lawyer. Where’d you two hook-up? That must have been a fun get together.

            1. The law would arguably have rendered the 20th signature valid. Then he would have been placed on the ballot automatically. Confusing to you, right?

              Seriously, if I thought that you actually care about the law and had a prayer of understanding it, I’d explain it to you. But this place seems to be mostly for phallus waggling, not for productive discussion.

              P.S. Josh, take down the remaining comments that steal my identity.

                1. Clearly, I had underestimated your love of identity theft. Can we agree that at this point my seeking your agreement to take down any future comments that steal my identity is futile, absolving me of the need to issue individual demands?

              1. A few points of fact.

                1) That’s not my name on this post. I’m not shy about what I think and don’t have time for the anonymous commenting so many people are fond of online.

                2) I barely read the comments on my own posts, let alone the posts that don’t have my byline. I have two jobs, a family and hobbies. So you asking me something in this comment thread is futile if I hadn’t commented.

                3) FFFF has never and doesn’t require registration to comment and I can’t be bothered to moderate the comments. I don’t get paid to police stupidity and I don’t run, edit or moderate this site.

  3. Jose Trinidad Castaneda III isn’t afraid to call every white person he sees a racist. He brings just the kind of bigoted divisiveness that we need here in Fullerton.

    1. Hey, what do you think about that “no one in District 5 reads more than you can rite [sic] with a spray can on a bridge abutment” comment — the one that no one here tonight other than me has seen fit to criticize?

      If you made that “isn’t afraid to call every white person he sees *on FFFF* a racist,” then he’d probably have good reason to do so! Or maybe you’re just chickenshits afraid to criticize your own?

  4. Dear minor blog publisher:

    (1) — Take down the comment below that steals my identity. Thanks. You can leave up the ones that are simply stupid.

    (2) — Trini tells me that he will be running as a write-in candidate, so the premise of the story and its title are wrong.

    (3) — Trini turned in 23 signatures — not 20, as you misreported. (Actually, is it really “reporting” if you just pull an assertion out of your ass?) Five were disqualified, one was reinstated after we challenged the decision, and the final and decisive one, where the signature didn’t match (because the signer was using a clipboard that wasn’t resting on anything and so had the pen slip) was rejected today — even though we could offer proof of identify of the signer. The basis for the decision was case law saying that the Registrar not only NEED not, but COULD not, revise his initial judgment about a signature match despite such evidence. That’s a stupid rule, so maybe your commenters will appreciate it.

    (4) — What you printed as the decision was not the decision. It is what’s called a “tentative ruling,” which the judge confirmed in court was offered by staff attorneys who will at times take the easy way out of a case, such as by hoping that because I had failed to file a proof of service that meant that I had actually not served the respondents. (I had. They confirmed it in court. It was also obvious, in the case of the Registrar, from the fact of their filings, which the Court had.) You don’t lose a case for failing to provide a proof of service, but from actually not serving them. I served Fullerton personally, in fact.

    (5) — The tentative ruling is what would apply *if I had not shown up for the hearing*. I did show up, though — as did the two Respondents, one by phone — and we had a hearing with argument substantive enough that — in contrast to the other cases heard on Friday — the Judge had to go back and deliberate for over an hour before coming to a decision.

    (6) — We did ultimately lose, although we might not have lost had the Governor signed (as we had expected him to do) legislation now on his desk that eliminates the principle that one cannot review initial “ministerial” determinations in the analogous case of signatures on absentee ballot envelopes, which is the “closest rule” that the Registrar cited in making his decision not to consider additional evidence. The case was filed in the expectation that the legislation would be signed before the hearing, though we thought we could still win regardless. (We’ll never know now.)

    (7) I wonder how many of your anonymous commenters are all huffy about the anonymous letter from a supposedly “highly placed administration official” slamming Trump. The criticisms about cowardice there apply just as well here, although (based on their opinions) they have less to fear from me than some Cabinet official does from Trump.

    (8) I presume that your readers — I won’t be mean and say “both of them” — will understand that your anonymous commenters are entitled to even stupid opinions (without which they’d seemingly have none at all) and that the false assertions of fact that they make are the sort of ignorant nonsense you make when you think you can’t be sued.

    (9) Calling NPP Paulette Chaffee a “progressive” shows that you’re out of your mind. Hell, even calling nominal Democrat DOUG Chaffee “progressive” would show that you were bonkers.

    (10) Am I misremembering things, or did your commenters used to be smarter? G’bye,

      1. Josh, please confirm that this brave and foolhardy message is from you. Thanks! (By the way: in a legal proceeding, this is not termed a “request,” but a “demand.”)

        Identity theft is a serious offense. Just because you got away with fooling people into thinking that you were Josh Newman, rather than Josh Ferguson, telling them to vote yes on the Recall doesn’t mean that you can get away with it on your temporarily owned blog.

        To make it as clear as possible, this demand now applies to the following comments:

        Greg Diamond, Esq.
        September 7, 2018 at 7:00 PM
        Gerg Diamond
        September 8, 2018 at 8:23 AM, and
        Gerg Diamond
        September 8, 2018 at 9:01 AM

        [yes, I see the misspelling in the latter two, and the author owes me a dollar, which he can donate to Sharon Quirk-Silva’s campaign, kust for old time’s sake]

        The racist and anti-gay comments — “no one in District 5 reads more than you can rite with a spray can on a bridge abutment.” — are your problem to deal with. (Note to semi-literate poster: “your” is the second-person possessive, “you’re” is the contract of “you are”; and “yore” refers to the days of when FFFF was of any consequence.)

                1. Nothing is easy for you. What have you ever even accomplished? 60 years old and not a pot to piss in.

                2. Sure we do. But demonstrating to you that I do indeed “have a pot to piss in” in a memorable way would be hard to resist.

            1. A demand, just like yours, Gasbag. FFFF told Jones Day to go screw themselves. Maybe you’ll get the message someday.

                1. What is the motive? Stealing your identity doesn’t harm you because your identity isn’t worth anything.

                2. Why should you be afraid? You’re not the blog’s owner!

                  Or … are you? That would explain your liking identity theft!

        1. Actually, no. It wasn’t me.

          Also, “Identify Theft” does not legally constitute using a name that somebody else has online in a comment thread. I think it’s a stupid action but it’s not illegal. Hell, you aren’t even the first Greg Diamond to show up when I type it into Google.

          AND – See above comment about not policing comments.

      1. I’ll move to Fullerton, just in time to establish my ability to run for City Council, if the Chaffees will buy me a nice condo.

        1. Chaffees are right up your alley, tubby. “Progressive” to beat the band. White and properly educated. Just the thing to fight for the oppressed Mexis. Just like you, in fact.

          If your lame puppet gets five hundred votes I’ll pay for your family to fine dine at Denny’s.

          1. I’m the only member of the DPOC who voted against endorsing the very non-progressive Doug Chaffee, you ass-boil, so keep your comments within the range of your competence, like about how snails taste before you cook them.

            1. Hey, slow nite at the law firm? You’ll have to go out and hustle some poor minority into thinking you can actually win a case.

              1. Nah, this is just fun for its own sake, getting out aggression. (Years ago, I could spend all night doing this until the editor deleted everything that was making the site look bad. You won’t survive that sort of purge.)

                1. “I could spend all night doing this”

                  Do you have any idea how pathetic that is? Geez get a friggin’ life man.

                2. Giving shit to people who deserve it? It’s a pleasure.

                  As for exercise, I love playing racquetball and squash. Just try to find a court around here! This county used to be civilized.

                3. I’d tell you that there is a racquet game called “squash” — mostly an East Coast thing — but I don’t want to disturb your apparently blessed ignorance.

                1. I was sent here to check out my identity being stolen. What’s your excuse?

                  Go ahead — just *try* to tell me that it’s for the quicksilver wittiness.

    1. The post has been updated to correct the facts.

      “Trini” did just above the bare minimum. Thanks for the correction.

      1. Point of contention: the “bare minimum” is to collect 20 valid signatures from voters registered in his district. He didn’t do the bare minimum.

          1. It was sort of a thrill, back in 2000 or so, when I was a summer associate who broke open a trademark case. Didn’t have one on my own until I got back from clerking, in 2003 or so. Asylum case — saved someone’s life.

            Most cases settle, though, with no clear winner or loser. You may not know that.

              1. See — you thought that that really was me.

                More ammunition for the “takedown notice” argument. Proprietor! Do your duty!

                1. That’s unfair — do I ask you to prove that your real name is “Getout Fatass”? I just take you at your word. Pronouced “Xheh-TOO Fah-TASS,” right?

                  If you’re the haplass owner/publisher/editor/whateverer here, you can check the IP address associated with my comment, moron.

    2. Excuses are like assholes, Diamond. Everybody’s got one. The difference with you is that your are all asshole and nothing else.

          1. I doubt that she’s senile. Running cover for the cops? If so, still not as much as I’ll bet that Paulette Chaffee will.

    3. Senor Diamante, I’m sorry to inform you pero no one in District 5 reads more than you can rite with a spray can on a bridge abutment.

      1. Yeah, you sure do seem sorry, culo. What does John Ybarra say when you tell him that joke? Hey, Ybarra! Do you like what’s going on here?

        We’ll see how much they can write. I hope that they remember to put the “ñ” in “Castañeda,” just like the one that belongs in “Señor.”

            1. Well you responded in three minutes, chubby, so I guess it worked just fine. For the love of God g get a paying job. Or at least find a friend.

      1. Alright, ladies, try to keep your panties on.

        That joke stopped being funny in 1999. About the same time the Green party was popular.

  5. The more the Democrats engage with these nutty socialists, the more they will lose. What can we do to get Castenada back on the ballot?

        1. Does he have parking tickets? It didn’t come up.

          Man, if there’s one thing assholes can’t abide, it’s people who aren’t rich. So you must be for Paulette, right?

          1. At least Paulette managed to get 20 signatures without help from the governor. Old, white, and here to help. The Democrat’s credo.

            1. The Governor didn’t know that Trini was waiting for him to sign the important voting rights legislation. But really, your unexpected support for Paulette is I’m sure appreciated in her home. Wherever it is.

                1. Seriously? I have to explain carpetbagging and sham residences on FFFF?

                  This wouldn’t be happening if Tony Bushala were alive!

                2. She’s not a Democrat.

                  She was in the past. She was also a Republican. She’s currently NPP.

                  I’m sure the wind will blow a different direction next week.

                3. If that’s the commenter-troll who usually calls himself “OCDEM,” Anon, it has a deep emotional stake in not believing demonstrable facts.

        1. You can criticize them, you know. You can argue that identity theft should be taken down. You can condemn racist attacks on Mexican-Americans. As soon as I saw that happen, I’d leave.

          But you haven’t.

          Anyway, I think that I will pack it in for the night. I hadn’t come here with the intention of gathering fuel to boost Latino turnout, but it looks like that’s what I’m leaving with.

          Someone should have been smarter. Take care, colleague.

            1. Given that my observation about *other* people acting stupidly, such as not condemning that racist comment about the reading and writing ability of 5th District residents, you’re righter than you realize. All I can do is chronicle it so that others can judge. You, I know, are not stupid — but you’re also not in charge.

              1. “All I can do is chronicle it so that others can judge.”

                Anything to avoid getting off the couch.

    1. This is technically true. Judges are attorneys; if I were the last attorney on earth, there would be no one to preside over a case, and no way to win. But if I were the last attorney on earth, I’d be more interested in figuring out what the hell happened to all of the other attorneys.

      Luckily for me, there are still judges in the world, so I do win cases (though cowardly and tiresome anonymous commenters are unaware of this). But (as I’ve said), most cases settle, so talking about “winning and losing” in those instances is misleading.

      Thanks for once again giving me the opportunity to clarify, you dork.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.