the law does not give a clerk the right to make a legal determination of what to file and what not to file. That is the courts duty. However, if he does question you, ask him these three questions;
(1) to show in your states code what his job is. Point out to him the law (it’s the same in every state or close enough for government work); if he still does not record your documents, then
(2) demand a copy of his surety bond and
(3) the name of his insurance carrier for that bond
That will be helpful information for anybody working with a ballot challenge.
Were you following when all that happened with Danny Bickel in the Supreme Court’s treatment of Donofrio v Wells? When Danny Bickel was able to get away with everything he did, Donofrio’s conclusion was that the Supreme Court justices themselves were compromised.
The VERY SAME DAY that SCOTUS refused to hear Donofrio’s case, Chief Justice John Roberts issued an unprecedented invitation to Obama for an ex parte meeting at the Supreme Court before the inauguration. People will tell you that this is a standard courtesy visit, but I have documentation that this is the first time that the COURT ever initiated that meeting, and this is the only time where such a meeting took place when cases about the election were pending.
The conference to decide whether SCOTUS would hear Donofrio’s case was on a Friday and the results were not released to the public until the following Monday. Roberts issued his invitation on Friday so that the public knew of that invitation at the very same time that SCOTUS was conferring about taking Donofrio’s case. The timing was blatant.
Then Roberts biffed the legal oath of office so that Obama never said the correct oath on Jan 20, 2009. They re-did the oath in private, but though it would have been just as easy to videotape as to audiotape, Roberts was never seen on video giving the correct oath to Obama.
On the last day of 2011 Roberts once again broke precedent by including in his year-end report comments about the ethics of the Supreme Court - saying he trusted the justices to know when to recuse themselves (See http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/story/2011-12-31/supreme-court-recusal-policy/52307886/1 ). This came after Kagan and Sotomayor had been asked to recuse themselves from a conference to decide whether to hear an eligibility case in which THEIR VERY POSITIONS AS JUSTICES WAS AT STAKE. Roberts was very conspicuously saying that he had no problem with individual justices deciding cases where their very job stood or fell with the defendant.
I believe Donofrio was right; the Supreme Court itself is compromised. There are plenty of indicators of that.
And retired military generals intervened in the case of Lt Col Terry Lakin, telling him to drop the eligibility issue because the judicial system is compromised and cannot be trusted to give Constitutional decisions. These men - including Paul Vallely - said that CIA operatives had been to Hawaii in search of any birth records for Obama and there simply aren’t any records for him. If these guys are privy to what the CIA and/or other intelligence groups are doing and the information they have, and they say the judicial system is compromised.... I have a tendency to believe them, especially given the blatant outward signs that even I can see.
Factor in the threats that were made to the media on the eligibility issue in October of 2008 and again after the election (right before Roberts made his unprecedented invitation to Obama the same day the SCOTUS conferred over Donofrio’s case), and it suggests to me that maybe Roberts was also threatened.
And now we see the same kinds of unlawful behavior in Georgia, with both Malihi and with the clerk of the superior court that would hear the appeal.
This is a pattern, people. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on ME.