ACTION

court (53)

UNCOVERING OBAMA'S PRIMA-DONNA Orly Taitz- Why do they love to hate her?

Posted by Cody Robert Judy on July 22, 2012 at 7:18pm

4063540907?profile=original

FOR IMMEDIATE PRESS RELEASE:
 
 
 
UNCOVERING OBAMA'S PRIMA-DONNA Orly Taitz- Why do they love to hate her?
 
 
        Wonder why the California attorney Orly Taitz who has been coined "The Birther Queen" and has been featured as spear-heading the Birther Movement at times by most of the main stream media, has asked to be removed from the email list of Cody Robert Judy who is a Presidential Candidate in the Democratic Party who was recently given a case number in the United States Supreme Court in Judy v. Obama case  no. 12-1576  that actually started out in the Georgia Ballot Challenge with Orly Taitz representing?
 
 
          Call it a suspicious twist of irony, that the attorney claiming on her web site to be "The Worlds Leading Obama Eligibility Challenge Web Site" find no interest in a case she actually started that has now reached the United States Supreme Court.
 
 
          The Cody Robert Judy for President 2012 U.S.C. Eligibility Campaign received the following email from Mrs. Taitz email address stating as follows:
 
 
 
From:Orly Taitz (orly.taitz@gmail.com) 
Sent:Sat 7/21/12 6:31 PM
To:cody judy (codyjudy@hotmail.com)
 
Hotmail Active Viewclear.gif
please, take me off your mailing list, I do not wish to get your e-mails
 
You have been removed Mrs. Orly Taitz.
_______________________________________________________________________________
 
 
 
 
        When Cody was asked about this he said it came as no surprise. "Orly Taitz has been a spear-head of distraction to the Birther Movement. She's been a poster child for the main stream media featured in interview after interview. Let's just say they 'love' to hate her and the distraction has been no friend to the cause that the 14th Amendment did not replace the qualifications embedded in Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 of our Constitution demanding a natural born citizen."
 
 
"Clearly the 14th Amendment specifies "Citizen" just as the requirements of a U.S. Representative and a U.S. Senator does in the Constitution, and no where in the 14th Amendment is the words "natural born citizen" or a correction of the qualification demands of our President."
 
 
" One finds it personally revealing Orly would want off an email list that puts out maybe 1 or 2 press releases a week at most, and is so relevant to what her own web site is grandly claiming to be "The Worlds Leading Obama Eligibility Challenge Web Site", that she finds no interest in whatsoever now.
 
 
Cody continued, " I think in the Birther movement it is really about time to take a closer look at what is happening in the 'left field' as a distraction and ask ourselves why the main stream media will only invite Orly Taitz on their programs because I can't recall the main stream media interviewing any other attorney, or petitioner for that matter, representing the eligibility or birther movement quite so much as Orly Taitz."
 
 
"One must ask,'Why do they love to hate her?"
 
 
"Where Mrs. Taitz has worked tirelessly is at being a distraction with a Russian dialect that made the Birther argument foreign to mainstream America. The facts are when Mrs. Taitz got close to what you would say was a goal of the Birther Movement, she actually moved away from  the pursuit. My case in working with her was an excellent example."
 
 
"I started with her as a representative of my own Candidacy for President in the New Hampshire Primary Ballot Challenge which went clear to the New Hampshire Supreme Court early in the Presidential Race. One must ask, "Why an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court was not undertaken right there?". An appeal from a State Supreme Court is the quickest way to the United States Supreme Court"
 
 
"Then we went down to Georgia and in that Ballot Challenge we did get something that the Birther Movement hadn't every received before. An actual opinion from an Administrative Court Judge that specified the 14th Amendment had actually wiped out Article II, Section I, Clause 5's demands for a 'natural born citizen' in so many words. On appeal to the Judicial Branch Superior Court Orly was stopped in her tracks from representing me, and I was forced to pick up the pieces in Farrar-Judy v. Obama.  Surprisingly, Orly refused any assistance whatsoever to questions I had sent her in emails regarding procedure and general advice. It was clearly a blow to the case, and my thoughts of her as genuinely interested in the eligibility issue."
 
 
"One must recall now the Federal 9th Circuit Court of Appeals opinion in Keyes (Barnett) v. Obama , that 'standing' and thus 'jurisdiction' was only attained by a Candidate for President who had actual competitive standing, with the eligibility challenge of the contested candidate, in this case Obama. By the time that case reached the 9th Circuit in 2011, the 2008 election in contest was over and the 'political doctrine question' was in the ground as a pounded stake that could not be dis-lodged"
 
 
Cody Robert Judy offered the Birther Movement one other thing other then his challenge to Obama's eligibility. He offers the Birther Movement in the purest form a Constitutional Stand on the eligibility challenge of Obama because he sued John McCain in 2008 on his eligibility issue being born outside the U.S. Judy v. McCain
 
 
The main stream media has been quick to point out that many of these other candidates for President seem to be racially motivated mainly because of their pass for McCain in 2008.
 
 
While challenges to Obama's eligibility have widened in the 2012 race, what the main stream media will not let anyone forget including flirting presidential candidate Donald Trump was that a challenge to Obama from the any political party is racist if  their was no challenge to McCain by the same party.
 
 
 
 
 
 
"The 'Competitive Doctrine Question' and "competitive standing" are double edge swords in the Judicial arena and I have written about them here:   http://codyjudy.blogspot.com/2012/01/what-are-competitive-standing-and.html
 
 
Excerpt :
"The Political Doctrine Question encourages courts to decline to rule in certain categories of controversial cases. The theory portends, a court acknowledges that the Constitution might have been violated but declines to act in a see-no-evil, hear-no-evil, do-no-evil crouch. It is often described as a type of Judicial restraint, although it can be considered a form of judicial activism against Plaintiffs whose rights have been violated and find their cases dismissed."
 

        Standing requirements

There are three standing requirements:

  1. Injury: The plaintiff must have suffered or imminently will suffer injury—an invasion of a legally protected interest that is concrete and particularized. The injury must be actual or imminent, distinct and palpable, not abstract. This injury could be economic as well as non-economic.
  2. Causation: There must be a causal connection between the injury and the conduct complained of, so that the injury is fairly traceable to the challenged action of the defendant and not the result of the independent action of some third party who is not before the court.
  3. Redressability: It must be likely, as opposed to merely speculative, that a favorable court decision will redress the injury.
 
 
"At that time I wrote that blog entry, I actually encouraged people to contribute to Orly's legal fees in her representation because Georgia's Trial was coming up on January 26th,2012. I can no longer in full faith and credit recommend this to supporters and it has nothing to do with my personal feelings as I have never met Mrs. Taitz, but has to do with the facts she's representing and supporting now."
 
 
WHAT HAPPENED IN GEORGIA STAYS IN GEORGIA
 
 
 
"While I was no longer represented in Georgia by an attorney because Orly had been denied her pro hac vice Motion, David Farrar and I agreed to hang together through the battle in the Superior Court which had been paid for. David didn't no to much about the law and so I drafted the motions and responses in the proceeding and it was here that I was able to on March 2nd, 2012 interject a little nitro into the case by including Sheriff Joe's Cold Case Posse results as evidence after his March 1st, 2012 press release."
 
 
"I felt such gratitude that Sheriff Joe Arpaio's constituency had cared enough to petition their Sheriff to open an investigation on Obama's eligibility and I felt with the 2200 hours of professional investigation that his Cold Case Posse had undertaken, that a step up had been managed from say the private professional investigation field that had been submitted as evidence, and perhaps the Courts would respect even more this legal submission of evidence."
 
 
"That was not to be the case in the Judicial Superior Court and it was at this time that Orly had woo'ed the Plaintiff David Farrar away from including me in the case as a Candidate for President, in favor of his sole citizen representation he represented in the presentation to the Georgia Supreme Court, which made no legal sense at all. As the case begin there was also another Democratic Party Presidential Candidate named Leah Lax and an independent candidate Lori Roth who also received the endorsement of the California Republican 5th place finisher for the U.S. Senate republican nomination candidate Orly Taitz."
 
 
"The problem with that as far as the eligibility question was concerned in the Farrar-Judy v. Obama case was that legally all the other plaintiffs in the case like Lax and Roth were given a chance to continue the case in the Georgia Superior Court and failed to respond and thus were eliminated from the case as litigants officially in a Dis-Joinder Motion."
 
 
"Remember Orly chose as a favored route David Farrar as a Citizen over me, a Presidential Candidate in the Democratic Party positioned perfectly to contend Obama's eligibility with standing and before the Democratic Party National Convention where the 'political doctrine question' would have little effect, in direct contradiction of the Federal 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decision in which she had been Representative Counsel on. How is that not assumed to be 'failing the Birther Movement' when the goal is in site?"
 
 
"Orly Taitz ditched me, the only remaining candidate for President she had when she chose to represent David Farrar without me in the Georgia Supreme Court and told me in a phone conversation I could do it on my own. Talk about stopping just before you score and then looking up and wondering why everyone's calling you 'the best player for the opposing team'? "
 
 
That alone should have stopped any and all contributions to Orly Taitz in the illogical legal sense she was representing. She was in direct contrast to the Federal Court of Appeals Decision and Opinion that she had worked for in Keyes-Barnett v. Obama and was in the site of all the world flipping off the Judges in their opinion of 'standing' and 'the political doctrine question' with her actions at the same time her hand was extended for more contributions in State Ballot Challenges.
 
 
 If your a contributor challenge yourself to make sense of that other then to say, "She's being paid to be a distraction to the Birther Movement and make the whole Constitutional issue seem like foreign food", and she's been well equipped to do just that.
 
 
With her own actions speaking louder than words Orly's case in Farrar v. Obama was dismissed in the Georgia Supreme Court and she has positioned herself in an appeal to a single Justice Clarence Thomas of the U.S. Supreme Court 12A-25 without a presidential candidate which was also dismissed.
 
 
Orly Taitz - You have been dismissed and your title of Birther Queen has been revoked for anti-birther obama's-prima donna - 1
 
 

1-The term "prima donna" has come into common usage in any field denoting someone who behaves in a demanding, often temperamental fashion, revealing an inflated view of themselves, their talent, and their importance. Due to this association, the contemporary meaning of the word has taken on this negative connotation.


 
The Cody Robert Judy for President 2012 U.S.C. Eligibility Campaign
YouTube: Code4Pres
Political Commercials: CRJ TV
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Read more…

Why I took Obama to U.S. Supreme Court Case No. 12-1576 Judy v. Obama

Posted by Cody Robert Judy on July 21, 2012 at 1:30pm

4063539859?profile=original


FOR IMMEDIATE PRESS RELEASE
as seen on:
 
 
Why I took Obama to Court on his Eligibility?
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT DOCKETED CASE NO 12-1576 - NOTICE OF JUDY V. OBAMA
 
 
 
 
Many people have asked me why I took Obama to Court on his eligibility. The demands of the United States Constitution for the Office of President in the United States Constitution demand a ‘natural born citizen’. Determined by the laws of nature and held in the United States Supreme Court as precedent, that means simply,” Born in the United States to citizen parents”.
 
 
The two prong test essentially eliminates “foreign” influence in the Commander-In-Chief’s position.  This has been a thorn in the side of the enemies of the United States since the signing of the Constitution.
 
 
Some would say Obama’s managed okay and he hasn’t done anything wrong.  Many others would look at his record and recognize in his first term a dangerous shadow and foreboding which confronts our national security both economically and militarily if Obama is allowed to propagate the simply lie he told when he witnessed on his “Declaration of Candidacy” that he was a ‘natural born citizen’.
 
 
Through the broad and warm smile of Obama’s polished white teeth is one who makes a lie, laughs, and mocks the truth. In this he defies God, and places promises of his own safety and comforts over and above others and in this the regard for the innocent is completely lost.
 
 
Perhaps Obama himself doesn’t recognize in his own denial the venom perpetrated upon his own children in such, but his own family is a victim of it; and if he’s willing to do such to his own, how much easier is it to do to yours? It certainly appears the philosophy of Obama lies is in the paradox that if you tell the lie long enough that it will become the truth to you.
 
 
I suppose the truth in my suing Obama remains that his lie came home to personally affect me, my campaign for President in 2008 and 2012, and everyone in the United States. Obama’s lie doesn’t simply affect a small pool of people around him, but traverses the entire Untied States, and affects our history, our current state, and our future generations.
 
 
 That kind of a circle is something that even most elected politicians haven’t seen the gravity in ignoring nor heeded the flashing red lights and warning signs they have felt in the pit of their stomach. They have even become callused to the evidence of law enforcement investigations such as Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s Cold Case Posse who’s spent literally thousands of hours dissecting the government docs Obama has chosen to represent himself with.
 
 
The audacity of hope and change has become the audacity of cover-up and scandal in forgery-gate that makes Water-gate look like a ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrjO8JpsL5Q) home-made water fall in contrast with ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hprNwVFF1fU&feature=fvwrel) Niagara Falls.
 
 
 
 
 
Many also have been lulled into a sullied passivism that the enemies of the United States are incapable, incompetent, or have long been vanquished. Many in the United States have even begin holding a grudge against the United State’s goodness in favor of progressivism they hold as a mark of their own bad lot in life compared with their neighbors. The sin of coveting thy neighbor’s property is seen as the justification of spreading the wealth by force and confiscation in giving the government more and more power over the independent lives of the individual.
 
 
When you consider that in combination with the same kind of pressure from those outside the United States who also envy and seek to climb up the economic ladder by pulling someone down, you understand that the United States formidably has many enemies. These are hidden in disguise but I assure you that when the dastardly plan to wreck the United States both economically and militarily doesn’t go according to plan, those enemies will come out of hiding and there will be no further doubt in your mind.
 
 
I have no doubt that if the whole world combines against the United States solid principles of freedom and liberty which has come to be represented in our history and mark in the world, that though we may pay a heavy price for it, the union will stand. We are not built on a lie. The bedrock of the United States is as solid of truth in the eye of divine power as God is God that led the Israelites out of the bondage of Pharos’s Egypt into the bastion of freedom and liberty.
 
 
Though we may walk in the shadow of death, and hell may rage all around us, we shall fear no evil in the hand of our God-Creator clearly represented in arms of Lady Liberty statuette torch and tablets evoking the law that has come to be called the United States Constitution and our independence of July 4th,1776.
 
 
The very first thing I took courage in was seeing “76” in the last two digits of my case number in Judy v. Obama 12-1576 and the representation to me that I was TAKING A STAND for our independence mirroring the title of my book Taking A Stand- The Conservative Independent Voice.
 
 
 
 
As soon as Obama made the decision to become part of something illegal and contrary to our law in the United States Constitution that was as personal as his simple “Declaration of Candidacy”, he made the choice of what side of the line he was standing on. Every opportunity has been given to him to resign his post as a ‘disability’ but he has remained boldly cowardice in his own knowledge that he is not a natural born citizen, representing himself falsely.
 
 
I can speak with all of my faults and frailties weaknesses and imperfections solemnly, that at least I am qualified to be President of the United States of America. I represent myself in truth and there is no lie in my foundation, nor will it crack or crumble for it is eternal and made strong by the fires of Celestial Heavens where corruption and dilapidation have no hold on the vision of our future of real truth and light and where though hell may rage with the gnashing of teeth it hath no power but to bruise my heel.
 
 
Please permit my eternal gratitude to God and the instruments of the eternal promise proclaimated by our Founders, Framers, Sons of the Republic, and our first President George Washington, that this Union of the United States of America shall stand so help us God.
 
 
 
 
Please help me with your contributions to this Campaign that is courageously upholding our United States Constitution here.
 
 
 
 

My sincere condolences go out to those injured and the families of those whom were lost in the tragic shooting in Colorado. May God bless them in their recovery and grief.
Sincerely,

 
Cody Robert Judy
The Cody Robert Judy for President 2012 U.S.C. Eligibility Campaign
YouTube:CODE4PRES
Campaign Commercial :CRJ TV
 
 
 
 
 
Read more…

A Mound-Of-Mitt Judy v. Obama SCOTUS Faces Romney as a Birther Motion & Order

Posted by Cody Robert Judy on July 16, 2012 at 11:25am

4063538380?profile=original

FOR IMMEDIATE PRESS RELEASE-
 
 
A Mound-Of-Mitt Judy v. Obama SCOTUS Faces Romney as a Birther Motion & Order
 
 
 
Why did Mitt Romney become a Birther? Find out how a Mound-of-Mitt could effect the election in the logic before the U.S. Supreme Court submitted in the United States Supreme Court by Cody Robert Judy in Judy v. Obama July 14th,2012.
 
 
See the Motion & Order here.
 
 
 1-EXPARTE SUA SPONTE WAIVER OF TIME RESTRAINT BY PETITIONER, AND SCHEDULED ORDER OF PROCEEDING OF THE COURT
 
 2-WAIVER OF TIME RESTRAINT BY PETITIONER, AND SCHEDULED ORDER OF PROCEEDING OF THE COURT
 
 
Link:
 
 
Excerpt:
 
The affective position of this Motion and ORDER is actually in protection of the Democratic Party Nominee of which it is easily assumed more than half of all Americans have a stake in for election of the next President of the United States.
 
 
 Assuming for instance, the Court does not hear this action, or adopt the Petitioner’s ORDER, the result could substantially affect the election process in the following scenario. Mitt Romney becomes the nominee for the Republican Party, and once he has the nomination, with affective and competitive standing, (just like Petition has right now within the Democratic Party), decides because he is down in the polls to challenge Barack Obama’s eligibility because he is not qualified as a natural born citizen, and wins affectively eliminating the entire Democratic Party chances in the election because it’s too late to reorganize prior the November 6th 2012 election.
 
 
 
If the Court somehow believes or is certain Mitt Romney as the Republican nominee would not do such a thing basically all of the lower Court’s decisions that represent dismissals because of Standing are moot, because a parties nominee has affective standing to challenge any other Parties Candidate for eligibility. If for instance Barack Obama won the Democratic Party nomination and went on to win the general election but Mitt Romney had filed a eligibility complaint to this Court having lost in a very close call, Mitt Romney could Constitutionally remove Barack Obama from his general election win, and that could cause a real chaos in the Nation. Hence it is a much better scenario for the Court to hear this challenge now, and procedurally adopt this Motion and grant the ORDER attached.
 
 
 
Link to read entire Motion & Order here
 
 
Check this CRJ Video out and more on YouTube Channel CODE4PRES or www.codyjudy.us CRJ TV
 
 
Politicians Like Romney think the Constitution will kill us
 
 
 
 
 
 
 


Stay Tuned in for further developments in this Case and please realize that Cody Robert Judy needs your assistance now more then ever. Please make a contribution and join Cody in this fight to save our Country and Constitution.

 
 
 
 
The Cody Robert Judy for President 2012 U.S.C. Eligibility Campaign
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

Read more…

JUDY V. OBAMA TRIAL ORDER APPEARS IN U.S. SUPREME COURT HORIZON

Posted by Cody Robert Judy on July 14, 2012 at 7:30pm
4063537645?profile=original

Well folks, what many said would never and could never happen is actually happening. When you read the following letter and see the ORDER Cody Robert Judy has submitted for the United States Supreme Court, you might feel a chill run up your leg if your a Birther.
 
 
If your an anti-birther, for there exist only two planes to catch on this issue regarding the ineligibility of Barack Obama qualified for the Office of the President according to the demands of the United States Constitution ( "Birther" and " Anti-Birther"), you may experience a slight cold dizzy spell for you'll recognize along with the Birthers that this has NEVER happened before!
 
 
Let me write that one more time: This has NEVER happened before!
 
 
100% of the law suits brought against Barack Obama's eligibility have been dismissed either in lower courts or the United States Supreme Court because of "Standing" or "Jurisdiction".
 
 
 
Before the United States Supreme Court now in Judy v. Obama are two Presidential Candidates competing for delegates at the NATIONAL DEMOCRATIC CONVENTION in Charlotte, South Carolina.
 
 
 
In the first movie National Treasure - Actor Nicholas Cage utters as the last word before he found the treasure, could the secret really be that simple, " The secret lies in Charlotte" as he inserts the key and twist unlocking the door to the treasure hidden by Founding Fathers see Trailer here:
 
 
 
 
While our Constitution is our National Treasure, it has never happened that a challenger for President has actually reeled another candidate for President into The UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT, especially before the National Convention of the Democratic Party, where a decision from the Justices could have a legal bearing on the eligibility requirement demanded in the United States Constitution.
 
 
 
It's unheard of. The closest anyone has ever got to this was Diplomat and Reagan appointed Ambassador Alan Keyes running for president as a Republican in 2008 but that wasn't even heard seen in the U.S. Supreme Court until 2011, where the U.S. Supreme Court refused the Petition upholding the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decision that Keyes was not a candidate for President in 2012, nor had he obtained his Parties nomination to represent the Republicans.
 
 
 
This is unprecedented to have a Democratic Candidate for President challenging Barack Obama in the Democratic Party, and to have it hit the U.S. Supreme Court before the Democratic National Convention has taken place is the U.S. Supreme Court in Star Trek's, "Warp-speed Scotty".
 
 
 
Upon hearing the news that he was finally going to get his Case in the U.S. Supreme Court Cody responded with a big grin;
 
 
" Well, this journey has been an uphill battle that felt as if I was being pelted with stones the whole way up the Hill. I've done the best I could with what I had available to me, which wasn't much. It took me about 10 times to make it up the hill resubmitting over and over and over again, I think like 10 times, but it's good... it feels real good. I'm kind of reminded of the song I wrote "Big Things Happen Everyday" ,because this is a pretty big thing happening."https://www.youtube.com/embed/OkjByT7ELfY
 
 
When asked whether he thought the U.S. Supreme Court would hear the Petition the Democratic Party Candidate for President said,
 
"That is not my department, that is the Justices of United States Supreme Court's decision. The only thing I know is I've done what I needed to do to get it to them in time ,they do have time for a decision, and I have "competitive standing" seeking to uphold not only the eligibility requirements of the Office of President in the Constitution, but the Legislative Mandate made so by proposals that the Constitution's demand be changed having never made it out of a Legislative Committee. I suppose at this juncture the U.S. Supreme Court is the check and balance of our Republic."
 
 
 
Judy continued, "I do want to thank everyone who has contributed to my campaign. We haven't got a lot of big contributions or a Super PAC supporting my campaign, however everyone who has contributed from many of the States- Maryland, Arizona, Georgia, New Hampshire, Connecticut, Utah, California, Idaho, Colorado, Nevada, Florida, Wisconsin you Patriots know who you are, have been very appreciated and crucial without which I could not have come this far. I need your help more now then ever before, please log on to www.codyjudy.us and contribute to this Campaign making a stand for our Constitution."
 
 
 
The United States Supreme Court is believed to have a case number in reserve for Judy v. Obama owing to their instruction to Mr. Judy to get to them the Stamped copies of the lower court decisions on track to be released to the public sometime after the 18th of July, 2012.
 
 
 
Continued here:
 
 
CONTRIBUTE TO CODY'S CAMPAIGN HERE:
 
 
Read more…

Breaking News: U.S. Supreme Court Case Needs Your help in Judy v. Obama

Posted by Cody Robert Judy on July 9, 2012 at 6:53pm

4063535697?profile=original

Breaking News: U.S. Supreme Court Case Needs Your help in Judy v. Obama


This is probably going to sound more like a journal entry then a blog piece, but I am moved to express some things that I think are important at this time.

First I do want to thank and pay a tribute to those who are fighting the good fight; those who are raising their voice and going on the record. I know the last week I have received more of Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals treatment #5 (Rule 5: Ridicule is man's most potent weapon) these weeks then I have ever received. It’s nasty, distasteful, and ugly.

Here’s just one example that’s tame enough to print-
“Anyone that makes videos of their self trying to be Pres and claiming Obama is not qualified to be Pres needs help. I hope U get that. Do U have a doc? Mental disorders R not to be made fun of. I hope U don't hear voices but help is there 4 U!”

I do kind of agree with him that ‘I need help’ but its more on the financial side in contributions then from a doctor trying to convince me to abandon the Constitution in favor of Obama’s State of the Union and usurpation.

If anyone could comprehend how many people support Obama and picture them all ganging up on me you’d get some idea of what my mail box looks like in the above times 10,000.

I thinking I’m not sure what’s worse:

The precarious status of the Fukushima Dai-Ichi nuclear units and the risk presented by the enormous inventory of radioactive materials and spent fuel in the event of further earthquake threats with 1,565 fuel rods translating into 460 tons of nuclear fuel stored in a pool in a barely intact building on its third and fourth floors that could result in a catastrophic radiological fire that could wipe out most of the northern hemisphere; certainly it would be a massive civilization-breaking event or Obama’s eligibility going un-checked, ignored and avoided by the U.S. Supreme Court?

I know people in Washington DC don’t think about the most prestigious monument representing our first President George Washington in the cracked Washington monument with a 5.8 magnitude earthquake hitting east of the Rockies for the first time since 1897 or Hurricane Irene blowing through the same geographical area a few days earlier being the first of the Hurricane season showing exactly how bad the cracks were, or the 700 mile storm front that bee-lined from Chicago to Washington DC, causing 3 million to lose power -The very symbolism of losing power in an area like The Beltway is as poignant as it is profound, not to mention Obama's same course from Illinoise to Washington DC being traced; as part of God pointing out Obama’s ineligibility, but if you had to trace God’s finger it’s no stretch of the imagination to say our Founding Fathers are pissed off people!

To read Ann Barnhardt’s sentiments about the situation involving Obama’s ineligibility and the U.S. Supreme Court’s majority ruling which “Ok’d” a tax on every American’s very existence making it a possible crime to be born breathing if you don’t pay, well she said it very well I think:
http://radiopatriot.wordpress.com/2012/07/09/will-it-take-a-junta-if-so-wholl-lead-it/

“I don’t want the people who are living on this continent ten or twenty years from now to be able to whine and deflect responsibility for their sorry, sorry state by claiming that “no one ever told us” or “no one ever explained anything to us.” No, you were told. You were warned. And it wasn’t just me doing the warning and explaining. You will accept your suffering in SILENCE. You will blame nothing and no one except YOURSELVES. You will own the tyranny that you live under, because you begged for it. You bought it with your own stupidity, and you nurtured it with your own squealing cowardice.”

I do think she’s probably right about the Government as it stands now never repealing any part of ACA whether Republican Mitt Romney is in charge or Obama’s ineligibility never meets the U.S. Constitution head on.

She says thoughtfully as Ann always does, Republicans ‘will start referencing the fact that ObamaCare is SCOTUS-approved, and approved by Chief Justice Roberts, no less. They will also start to argue that it would cause “chaos” to repeal it. Day by day, this rhetoric will increase. It will begin on the news channels, then spill over into the faux-conservative blogs like HotAir.com . I wait with bated breath for Ed Morrissey or Allah pundit’s piece on how “sensible folk understand that ObamaCare simply cannot be repealed.” Oh, just you wait. It is coming. I promise you that.”

She continues, “You HAVE to wake up and acknowledge that Romney is a sociopathic liar who is simply bullshitting, and that is the word for it – bullshitting you people in order to raise money. He will say ANYTHING in order to raise money and maybe “get elected.” You are being conned just as sure as the sun rises in the east and sets in the west, and if you aren’t smart enough or mature enough to see when you are being blatantly conned, then you deserve what you get.”

Sadly it appears the payday for politicians exist if they do “lie”, if they don’t tell the “truth”, they are rewarded with what you “hope” they are going to represent. Romney reportedly raised 100 million in June. Well we all know what path that led us with Obama, but somehow we always hold out “hope” for a politician who actually means what he says and does what he says he’ll do.

With history as a guide to Washington DC actually having the power to beat the constitution-swords that go there elected with good intensions who then get beat into plowshares wanting to go to the latest Washington DC cocktail party, you’d think Citizens would understand the best remedy would be to send someone there whose actually done time for ‘Taking A Stand’. I mean is that the kind of courage you want or is that just crazy to you?

If history is a judge of Romney’s path you understand very clearly exactly what Ann (not Romney’s wife) is saying. You gotta give that pack a dynamite Ann credit where credit is due. She’ speaks the truth about the big fish in the race getting contributions for the office their running for, but she still hasn’t got a clue to actually putting her mouth to work for someone who is running for office and could certainly use a little positive support and help out here and we all need to ask ourselves the same question:

How will we respond to these and many of the other upcoming events which are poised to take this world of ours by storm? Who are we supporting and to what extent does our support towards that person represent our making the best decision we can?

Are you ready for some hard answers God has for you? All of those answers can be found within. Now is the time to go inside and ascertain the true meaning for each person in the contemplation of your family’s future.

Of course you want someone who pays for it all for you, who pays the bill, and makes the sacrifices so you don’t have to. But how in the world could you gain any appreciation for what our Constitution actually give you if it was all for FREE?

Indeed your participation in helping build a house makes it YOUR HOME.

You know in the Court cases I’ve represented against Obama about 99.999 percent of you haven’t paid a dime. You haven’t raised a single word of support. I’m not so sure you don’t deserve what you pay for. One thing I am sure of God’s going to give it to you, oh yea, you can count on that. But .. I still find myself wishing.

That brings me to the chapter I read in the Bible last night which was so telling of how things should be, or maybe how things are when they are done right and correctly in 1st Chronicles chapter 28:29 David outlines that not only has he gathered all that he has for the Lord’s Temple but he has himself given his own wealth to the project-

“Besides, in my devotion to the temple of my God I now give my personal treasures of gold and silver for the temple of my God, over and above everything I have provided for this holy temple: three thousand talents of gold (gold of Ophir) and seven thousand talents of refined silver, for the overlaying of the walls of the buildings, 5 for the gold work and the silver work, and for all the work to be done by the craftsmen.”

Then David asks a real simple question? I think its telling, but here he is in charge asking people to give of themselves. He isn’t saying for instance if you breath your taxed as our own ACA is mandating.

David says: “Now, who is willing to consecrate themselves to the LORD today?” The response was incredible and amounted to much more then could have ever been collected in a forced mandated tax, because of a simple few words, “ The people gave willingly”. Wow! How incredible is that power of genuine love?

“Then the leaders of families, the officers of the tribes of Israel, the commanders of thousands and commanders of hundreds, and the officials in charge of the king’s work gave willingly. They gave toward the work on the temple of God five thousand talents[d] and ten thousand darics[e] of gold, ten thousand talents of silver, eighteen thousand talents of bronze and a hundred thousand talents of iron. Anyone who had precious stones gave them to the treasury of the temple of the LORD …”. “The people rejoiced at the willing response of their leaders, for they had given freely and wholeheartedly to the LORD. David the king also rejoiced greatly.”

Please take note of the words “GAVE” to the 4th power or used 4 times in those words, also “FREELY” and “WHOLEHEARTEDLY” associated with the acts of giving and the reward of freedom the Lord had given Israel from bondage, and then not only that but the feeling of “REJOICEING” by everyone at what was accomplished together. Imagine our world if our elected leaders gave so willingly to the Constitution?

All of this “taxing” and “putting people in prison” for stupid stuff, and not standing up for our freedoms and liberties that are inalienable rights given by God is not us. That’s not the United States principled under the United States Constitution.

WE ARE CAPABLE OF SO MUCH MORE and its important not only to us here in the U.S. but its important to the world who sees us as a shining beacon of light on a hill representing what people can do with freedom and liberty. We can’t let this go.

I say as David said, “What “change” have you to give towards REALLY standing up for the Constitution and my campaign for upholding it? Will you send me your change?

If my Campaign is the only one holding up the Constitution’s demand for a ‘natural born citizen’ against all the hatred, and devils crying foul, how much more can you count on me then Mitt Romney or Obama’s lies?

You’ve seen what I have done by myself and given; will you now help me in Taking A Stand?

You can contribute here: 
http://www.codyjudy.us/codyrobertjudyforpresident2012_011.htm

Cody Robert Judy
The Cody Robert Judy for President 2012 U.S.C. Eligibility Campaign
www.codyjudy.us

www.codyjudy.blogspot.com

www.youtube/user/CODE4PRES


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PU4wzF3RLGs&feature=player_embedded

Read more…

WHAT SHERIFF JOE CAN’T DO – CODY CAN!

Posted by Cody Robert Judy on July 6, 2012 at 11:22pm

FOR IMMEDIATE PRESS RELEASE:

4063534688?profile=original

AS SEEN ON: http://codyjudy.blogspot.com/2012/07/what-sheriff-joe-cant-do-cody-can.html

WHAT SHERIFF JOE CAN’T DO – CODY CAN!

 

Things are heating up with the recent published globe article citing Obama’s long form fabrication has been forged and the forgery alleged to have been identified here by Sheriff Arpaio:

BREAKING! Arpaio FINDS MAN who forged Obama Birth Certificate!

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uT_PV-Ptjag

 

The March 1st 2012 Press Conference of Sheriff Joe Arpaio in which a ‘Cold Case Posse’ released some 2200 hours of investigation results finding ‘probable cause’ Obama’s long form birth certificate is really a long formed fabrication as well as Obama’s Draft registration, America is waking up to discover there’s been many a slip between the cup and the lip of their elected representatives.

 

Understanding the fix Republicans found themselves in when in 2008 they signed on to be the employed silencers on Obama’s gun to the Constitution’s demand for a ‘natural born citizen’ with every Republican Senator voting for the Obama/Clinton co-sponsored U.S. Senate Resolution 511, fermenting the security wanted for Sen. John McCain’s 2008 presidential qualification quagmire as Panama’s most famous son.

 

Some have wondered why all those Republican Senators and House Congressmen have been so silent- Well now you know the answer! The elephant was painted into a corner by the jackass and has been afraid to come out owing to their own lack of courage for the Constitution’s demands for the Office of the President repeatedly shot down as a Legislative mandate to encroachment.

 

The fact the Constitution’s demand for a natural born citizen was assaulted some 8-10 times with attempts to change it, just since Obama came into existence on the political stage as a Illinois State Senator is a testimony to the Legislative Mandate secured that the Judicial Branch should not be running rough shod over or avoiding.

 

Americans are catching a glimpse of what one good Sheriff can do as far as using some intelligence in investigation. Lord knows the House and Senate have the same power but are letting the Sheriff do its bidding.

While the Sheriff has been terrific at releasing the results of the investigations of the Cold Case Posse led by lead investigator Michael Zullo in the March 1st,2012 Press Conference, and the upcoming scheduled July 17th,2012 press conference reported to be even more damaging to Obama’s usurpation and identity cover-up, there’s one thing the good sheriff hasn’t done and that is what Cody Robert Judy, Democratic Party Presidential Candidate, can and has done.

 

That is taking the investigation results of the Cold Case Posse to an actual formal legal prosecutor!  

 

The Sheriff’s job is largely outlined as an “enforcer” of the law in the executive branch of local government and investigator of crime, but the actual prosecution of the actions always is relayed to a member of the Judicial Branch known as an Attorney General.

 

Cody Robert Judy is the conduit of Sheriff’s Joe’s investigation result to the Solicitor General of the United States Supreme Court currently held by Donald B. Verrilli Jr.    

http://www.justice.gov/osg/meet-osg.html

 

The task of the Office of the Solicitor General is to supervise and conduct government litigation in the United States Supreme Court. Virtually all such litigation is channeled through the Office of the Solicitor General and is actively conducted by the Office. The United States is involved in approximately two-thirds of all the cases the U.S. Supreme Court decides on the merits each year.

 

As a Candidate for President of the United States in the Democratic Party, Cody Robert Judy has a very unique and tangible standing that has been used to dismiss nearly 95% of the eligibility cases from the judicial branch.

The employment of the Solicitor General’s requirement is found in an organ of the United States Government called the Federal Election Commission , (FEC) , and what that Federal sponsored commission might be doing that is undermining the Republic?

 

See the first question on Cody’s Petition for Writ of Certiorari for the U.S. Supreme Court found on page ii outlines the office of the FEC as a culprit that amounts to aiding and abetting candidates who are not qualified in Federal election races according to the demands of the Constitution,as well as the Mailing Declaration found after page 38 showing the Solicitor General address.

 

Whenever a federal agency’s policies are called into question in a Petition for Writ of Certiorari the Petitioner must file a copy with the Solicitor General as is noted by U.S. Supreme Court Rule 29(4)(b) and also the Act of Congress that certified Obama’s eligibility by the Electorate.

 

This amounts to Government protection of unqualified candidates by securing for those unqualified candidates Government cover, especially in the solicitation of campaign contributions to those trusting citizens contributing under a false pretense of a Candidates qualification or eligibility to run, not to mention the Republics peril.

 

http://www.scribd.com/doc/98883410/Judy-v-Obama-U-S-Supreme-Crt-Petition-for-Writ-of-Certiorari-July-2012

 

At the heart of America is a Constitutional Republic that represents a very unique form of Democracy where ‘We The People’ are represented as ‘individuals’ who can stand up against the mob and win. Might isn’t right, when it comes to trampling individual rights and if each individual’s rights are not stood up for very quickly ‘We The People’ are subverted to another form of Government such as a fascism-dictatorial government, or an elite Oligarchy much more associated with totalitarianism or despotism.

 

As an example the rich in America are about to find out that Tax- Mandates that run into Health Care insuring 45 million new consumers all at once will soon be found a strategy to stay poor rather than an incentive to progress which has always been the problem in varying degrees of socialism. Unwilling to yield the claim that it works, ultimately the frustration goes to war as the diversion.

 

So .. first they try to insure you with socialism, then they kill you when it doesn’t work, one way or the other. I think Donald Trump recognizes this with his claim that Obama will start a war before or to win the election. The result will be catastrophic loss of life that socialist were so worried in a false pretense of insuring, not to mention the complete disregard of passing on the debt to future generations who can’t vote right now.

 

http://www.wnd.com/2012/07/trump-obama-will-start-iran-war-to-win-election/

 

Taking A Stand is not always the easiest thing to do, but Cody Robert Judy has done it, Taking A Stand for the Constitution’s demands for a ‘natural born citizen’.

Originating out of a “Georgia Administrative Court” Cody received the first ruling by a Judge on the merits of ‘natural born citizen’ that he appealed directly to the Superior Court. Three other petitioners emerged out of that Ballot Challenge also, but Cody’s complaint was the only one to include Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s Cold Case Posse 2200 hour investigation and probable cause results.

 

In a spectacular timing coincidence Sheriff Joe released the results of the Cold Case Posse March 1st,2012 and Cody’s response to Obama’s Motion to Dismiss was due March 2nd,2012. Cody was able to use Sheriff Joe’s Cold Case Posse results in the first Judicial Branch Court, the results of which made the investigations findings very appealable to every higher Court.

 

Cody’s case begin in 2008 as a Presidential Candidate who filed in Federal court against McCain and Obama, in 2010 testifying at the CIA COLUMBIA OBAMA SEDITION AND TREASON TRIAL in New York, and he continues in 2012 his appeal as a Presidential Candidate in the Democratic Party from New Hampshire’s Ballot Challenge to New Hampshire’s Supreme Court and into the Georgia Ballot Challenge, Georgia’s Superior Court then on to the Georgia Supreme Court- the first State Supreme Court to have the findings of the Cold Case Posse results included!

 

Today, the process of appeal was finalized in the highest court of the land. Sheriff Joe’s Cold Case Posse results have entered the U.S. Supreme Court through Cody Robert Judy’s Petition for Writ of Certiorari and have been appropriately glued into the weavers beam of the Solicitor General’s Office (as integral as Goliath’s spear was to Goliath), a  person appointed to represent the federal government of the United States before the Supreme Court of the United States. 

 

You can help by spreading the intricate word that forms the pattern formed by the loom of which the weavers beam is associated and help Cody as a modern day David fighting the Goliath of the eligibility silence of the U.S. House and Senate ultimately through the U.S. Supreme Court!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PU4wzF3RLGs&feature=player_embedded

 

 

Help Cody’s campaign now to broadcast the commercials and strengthen the campaign with your contributions that have the first and most devastating chances of not only eliminating Obama from the 2012 Presidential contest, but repealing Obamacare based on it not being signed by a legitimate President of the United States, and most importantly securing Obama’s usurpation in the history books as exactly what it was, illegitimate, ineligible, and a constitutional crying shame in the history books as an example for us all to remember to uphold our United States Constitution.

 

Contribute to Cody’s campaign here: http://www.codyjudy.us/codyrobertjudyforpresident2012_011.htm

Sincerely,

 

The Cody Robert Judy for President 2012 U.S.C. Eligibility Campaign



Read more…

Breaking News Report on Judy v. Obama U.S. Supreme Court Washington DC - Pony Express did their job

Posted by Cody Robert Judy on July 6, 2012 at 1:23pm
4063534479?profile=original
4063534563?profile=original
FOR IMMEDIATE PRESS RELEASE:
As seen on:

http://codyjudy.blogspot.com/2012/07/us-supreme-court-received-judy-v-obama.html

Breaking News Report on Judy v. Obama U.S. Supreme Court Washington DC
Due to the 4th of July Holiday and United States Postal Service schedule, the legal pleadings of Judy v. Obama in the United States Supreme Court 'petition for writ of certiorari' were delivered as follows:
Tracking at www.usps.com
U.S. Supreme Court Writ of Cert.- July 6th, 2012 11:03AM
Tracking number- 0310 3490 0000 1696 2655
Solicitor General of United States - July 6th,2012 - 11:01AM
Tracking number- 0310 3490 0000 1696 2648 
Mr. Michael Jablonski Esq. Counsel for Barack Obama Georgia - July 5th,2012 8:33AM
Tracking number- 0310 3490 0000 1696 2624 
Mr. Brian Kemp SOS of Georgia Counsel Russo/ July 5th,2012 10:12AM
Tracking number - 0310 3490 0000 1696 2631 
Here is the document they have received as per Mailing Certificate on approx Page 39 (page 1) of the below linked document; of course the U.S. Supreme Court received 11 copies of the some 80 pages therein:
Stay tuned, the Campaign will keep you updated here with any breaking news.
The Cody Robert Judy for President 2012 U.S.C. Eligibility Campaign
Read more…

May 20th 2012 Ltr. to U.S. Supreme Court Clerk Judy v. Obama http://www.scribd.com/doc/94233641/Judy-v-O

Posted by Cody Robert Judy on May 20, 2012 at 4:17pm

May 20th 2012 Ltr. to U.S. Supreme Court Clerk Judy v. Obama

http://www.scribd.com/doc/94233641/Judy-v-Obama-U-S-Supreme-Crt-Clerk-Ltr-May-20-2012

CODY ROBERT JUDY                                                                                                                             3031 So. Ogden Ave. Suite #2,                                                                                                                        Ogden UT. 84401                                                                                                                                                  801-497-6655   www.codyjudy.us

-          -     -     -

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES                                                                                         Mr. WILLIAM D. SUTER -Office of the Clerk                                                                                              1 First Street N.E. Washington DC 20543-0001

RE:  Your May 17th, 2012 letter in re: Judy v. Obama

Dear Mr. Suter:                                                                                       May 20,2012

          Thank you for your letter and attention May 17th, 2012 in which you stated : “ Dear Mr. Judy: The enclosed papers were received again on May 17th, 2012 , and are herewith returned for the reasons stated in my letter dated April 10th,2012. Until and unless you receive a decision from a United States Court of Appeals or highest state court within which a decision could be had this Court does not have jurisdiction of your case. Sincerely, William K. Suter, Clerk by: Gail Johnson (202) 479-3038.

            Sir, I understand what you’re alluding to, however your statement is just not true and please, follow me as I explain because I do feel, while it is unusual, that the Court has Original Jurisdiction in my case. Now keep reading.. don’t stop there. Please Sir, Let me explain this as I understand it.

While it is true that the Court may only review "final judgments rendered by the highest court of a state in which a decision could be had" if those judgments involve a question of federal statutory or constitutional law, the Constitution specifies that the Supreme Court may exercise original jurisdiction in cases affecting ambassadors and other diplomats, and in cases in which a state is a party, as well as when a Act of Congress is called into question: See #1 in Jurisdiction Statement. i.e. the Court is hearing the  The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA)- Action by Congress considered in Joint Session is an Action of Congress the Court has jurisdiction to hear in a Direct or Original Appeal as underlined in my Writ.

 I do understand that in most all cases,  the Court has only appellate jurisdiction and that it considers cases based on its original jurisdiction very rarely; while almost all cases are brought to the Supreme Court on appeal and in practice the only original jurisdiction cases heard by the Court are disputes between two or more states, or when an Act of Congress is called into question- my case involves both- two states with two Secretaries of States official capacity in a Federal Election question in which I as a party INDEED CAN RECEIVE RELIEF FROM INJURY with a favorable decision in future primaries of western States, and also in the Democratic Party National Convention where I am free to court delegates who are un- bound in the Primaries of New Hampshire and Georgia by a decision of the U.S. Supreme Court that Barack Obama is not eligible under the U.S. Constitution Art. II, Sect.1, clause 5 referring to us only a ‘Natural Born Citizen’ is eligible for the Office of the President. Arizona’s Secretary State is now in contention of not placing Obama’s name on the Ballot because he’s not eligible. How is this not an Original Jurisdiction moment in our history Sir?

The power of the Supreme Court to consider appeals from state courts, rather than just federal courts, was created by the Judiciary Act of 1789 and upheld early in the Court's history, by its rulings in Martin v. Hunter's Lessee (1816) and Cohens v. Virginia (1821). The Supreme Court is the only federal court that has jurisdiction over direct appeals from state court decisions, although there are several devices that permit so-called "collateral review" of state cases, in my jurisdiction statement I include the act of Congress that also invites original jurisdiction as Joint Session of Congress Action failed to ask for dissention or hear those hands raised in the electorate count of Jan. 8th, 2008.

Since Article Three of the United States Constitution stipulates that federal courts may only entertain "cases" or "controversies", the Supreme Court avoids deciding cases that are moot and does not render advisory opinions, as the supreme courts of some states may do. For example, in DeFunis v. Odegaard, 416 U.S. 312 (1974), the Court dismissed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of a law school affirmative action policy because the plaintiff student had graduated since he began the lawsuit, and a decision from the Court on his claim would not be able to redress any injury he had suffered, however, the mootness exception is not absolute.

If an issue is "capable of repetition yet evading review", the Court will address it even though the party before the Court would not himself be made whole by a favorable result. In Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), and other abortion cases, the Court addresses the merits of claims pressed by pregnant women seeking abortions even if they are no longer pregnant because it takes longer than the typical human gestation period to appeal a case through the lower courts to the Supreme Court, and it is the same with the contention of one Presidential
Candidate against another in the eligibility of a candidate in regards to this very case.

You Sir, are prohibiting the U.S. Supreme Court from acting on a case while the Court still can without desecrating the ‘political doctrine question’ in the 2012 election. As a candidate I have provided the case precedent of the U.S. Supreme Court and the violations of that precedent the NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT, and Georgia lower Courts that with all due diligent conscience could be heard by the 1st Circuit, the 11th Circuit, or the Chief Justice himself in Original Jurisdiction. Original Jurisdiction seems the logical action in my case so I didn’t place “for the 1st Circuit” or “for the 11th Circuit” in the caption of the case.

Regarding your insinuation that action is denied based on a case in which “a decision could be had’, while the Primary is over and a decision from the U.S. Supreme Court cannot undo the results of New Hampshire’s Supreme Court decision, remedy is available by the delegates in the electorate who CAN be unbound with the exclusion of an unqualified candidate especially before the Sep. 2012 Democratic Party National Convention. I remind you Sir, that candidate Obama is NOT elected President 2013, and I am not contending against him as President as your letter blatantly and prejudicially states in the following statement from your letter “RE: Cody Robert Judy v. Barack Hussein Obama, President of the United States.”

Do you see any such mention of my listing him as President of the United States in my action against him? Why have you inserted that if it is not perilously discriminatory to my action? That to me Sir is a blatant representation that you have taken sides actually prohibited by your position and I do note that insertion as insult to my action- Constitutional Authorization of eligibility trumps Declaration by your office.

Yes Sir, this is an unusual case, it’s not normal as far as your regular Appeals from State courts or for that matter U.S. Courts,.. but let me ask you a question Sir:

Where in the law does it state that the U.S. Supreme Court shall be bound, or have their hands tied up as hostages, by the Court Clerk from hearing a case by a Presidential Candidate by reason of avoiding, extending, and stalling until the National Democratic Convention is over regarding the eligibility of a candidate directly in opposition to the Constitution?

That’s the law I need you to please point out for me or I need you to file my case and get me a case number Sir.

If a women by law has a right of choice in an abortion, and she does right now, then I as a Candidate also have a right to be heard before the Democratic Party- a major party in the United States, in which I am running, chooses an ineligible and constitutionally unqualified candidate by those who protect precedent- The United States Supreme Court.

Thank you for your attention to my original jurisdiction argument. Its just amazing to me that I’m having this argument with you in the first place but the American people will see eventually how transparent this has been if you send me my Writ back without a case number and the embarrassment of this argument will undoubtedly last longer than Obama will in any illegal capacity.

Sincerely,

Cody Robert Judy

                                                                                                                                                                                                 The Cody Robert Judy for President 2012 Eligibility Campaign

cc: Scribd link – Media of U.S., all Social Media of United States Citizens

Read more…
ADMIN

ObamaCare Won In Court! What Is Next?

Posted by USA 4ME on June 29, 2011 at 11:13am
U.S. Appeals Court Upholds Obama Health Care Law
The ruling is the first by a federal appeals court on the overhaul
1032.jpg
Yes, I Can

A federal appeals court in Cincinnati has upheld President Obama's health care overhaul. The ruling is the first by a federal appeals court on the overhaul. The three-judge 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel delivered a long opinion Wednesday with disagreement on some issues.

But it affirmed a Michigan federal judge's earlier ruling that Congress can require Americans to have minimum insurance coverage.

A conservative law center had challenged the provision. It said that it was unconstitutional and that Congress was overstepping its powers.

More than 30 legal challenges have been filed. The case is expected to eventually reach the U.S. Supreme Court.  http://teaparty.org/article.php?id=964

 

Read more…

A man wrongfully convicted in Houston Texas seeks justice

Posted by Stanley Bolten on October 19, 2010 at 10:00pm

Author: Brian D. Hill

Source: USWGO Alternative News

Fact Checked by: AWC

Source of the information: America's Wrongfully Convicted

Note: This article is to expose that the criminal justice system needs a overhaul and that we need to expose the light of criminal
justice system corruption in the media. So USWGO Alternative News will
be the first ones to expose innocent people being wrongfully convicted
because the police either failed to fully investigate or other reasons
which should have never happened in a good law system.

Legal Notice: We acknowledge that everything we written is truthful and that all facts have been checked before the publishing of this
article. All information brought forth here has been sourced from the
evidence presented to us by America's Wrongfully Convicted a
organization dedicated to bringing out evidence that proves the
innocence of those wrongfully convicted by the system. We also made sure
that all content in this article is well backed up, plus is 100%
truthful. You also acknowledge that by reading this article since we
aren't the original source of the information that since it IS fact
checked (Means legally we ARE telling the truth) we cannot be held
liable to any emotional damages caused by this article.
http://uswgo.com/wp-content/uploads/HLIC/4c840e1e3c53d207346ba3fbcdcdddef.jpg
Roberts brother's picture

According to the America's Wrongfully Convicted website, a ongoing case battle to help vindicate a disabled man named
Robert McClendon, that was wrongfully convicted of aggravated assault
with a firearm on a family member, then convicted to 5 years on
probation. Also according to my research on the AWC website and various
YouTube Videos it was his, brother, sister, and even his mother that is
helping him with the whole case. This event took place in Houston Texas
from 2005 to now with a trial to come after Christine for lying to the
whole court, and the judge.

Apparently it started in 2005 when Robert's girlfriend had two daughters which one had a mental problem and the other was the one that
plotted to get Robert arrested. What led from one tragic event to
another can be very confusing that it can take a while to exactly learn
about what exactly happened and so I will go ahead and tell you what
exactly happened according to the evidence and the report.

Anyways the people I will be mentioning below are Robert McClendon (A victim of being wrongfully convicted of a crime he never commited),
Sara Trent (The one that had a mental problem and caused trouble for
Robert), Paula Trent (The one that plotted to get Robert arrested), Jose
(The one that ended up in a affair with Paula which caused Emma to
leave Jose), Emma (The victim of having her husband cheat on her), and
Christine the one that helped Paula achieve and succeed in her plot to
set up Robert as a abuser and have him arrested.

Sara Marie Trent

So first of all Sara Trent started getting out of hand by breaking things,
cursing at everyone including her own mother, Christine, and then
threatening to beat up Roberts own mother who was about 70 years old at
the time. Then she was starting to urinate everywhere in the house,
including the furniture and floors at will. So Robert had no choice
because of the explosive behavior and urine on the furniture and so he
found it necessary to call the police on Sara. So police from the
Montgomery County Sheriff's Department arrived and so they had a talk
with Sara about her behavior. So after the talk the police officer told
both Christine and Robert that Sara was not right in the head and that
she needed psychological counseling. Apparntly it was discovered that
Sara suffers from spina-bifida, a congenital condition, and that she has
had water build up on her brain and so it has to be controlled with a
shunt which drains cerebral spinal fluid from her brain.

Although this did not go well with Christine because she became angered of Roberts call to the police department because it may ruin the
income from the Social Security Administration. So she yelled to Robert
in anger"That is just great! They are going to put Sara in a psych
ward, and I am going to lose Sara’s Social Security check!" (It looks
like she was using the income from Sara because she did not want to work
a regular job). The anger Christine had against Robert stayed all day
for simply calling the police on Sara for her behavior.

Now this story gets even worse then just what happened with sara, the real drama starts up with Paula...

So then on September 14 2005, the oldest daughter of Christine, named Palua, had been having boys coming through her window to her room in
the mobile home the family stayed at. One of those boys is Derek who was
only 15 years of age at the time.

Anyways lets speed it up because a article shouldn't be too long and you can pretty much read the story on Roberts story on AWC.

http://uswgo.com/wp-content/uploads/HLIC/587f52a8cf321be902e85ec5f8754456.jpg
Paula Trent

So anyways Paula is angry that she is not allowed to sneak boys into her
room and so Robert wanted to have a talk with Dereks mother. Also to
make sure no more boys or even grown men could ever be allowed to sneak
through Paula's window to her bed room a lock was installed on her
window since she abused the rights to have her window open.

Then a break in happened and Derek happened to had a reputation to break into homes
in the neighborhood. So after that Robert decided to call the police on
Paula for disobeying Roberts trust sneaking boys through her window, and
for Derek breaking into the mobile home. The police officer had to
explain to Paula that what she was doing was wrong and so her mother
Christine started claiming that since she was 18 and Derek was 15, that
Robert was trying to get her 18- year-old daughter into trouble for
having sex with a 15 year-old-boy (aka sex offender laws where it
prohibits minors from having sex with grown adults, BUT that law doesn't
get enforced in certain cases such as a 17 year old being in love with a
18 yea old), but that wasn't the case either because he never mentioned
the age of Derek to the police. Still Christine got angry again at the
fact that Robert called the police again on her daughters for
misbehaving, and so she told Robert that he had better not ever call
another cop on her kids. According to the law of morals if somebody is
behaving badly to the point where that person has people break into your
house, you have every right to call the police on your girlfriends
daughter and if your girlfriend doesn't like it well then maybe you
shouldn't be around her and her kids if she goes around making your life
a living hell. Anyways enough ranting now back to the story.

This really made Paula Angry so after a church-run in which Robert did some work for
the church for all the times the church has helped him, he got back but
because of his disability his back was hurting, and so he laid on the
bed to get some rest.

Then Paula decided right at that moment while he needed some sleep to turn up the
volume of the music she was listening to very loud to the point where it
was bothering him. So he asked Christine to have a talk with Paula
regarding the loud music then she simply turn the music even louder
after Christine left. So again Robert asked Christine to stop this so
she started running outside while yelling that he never let's her do
anything she wants and so he yelled at her to stop yelling outside in
fear that neighbors would hear her and then asked Christine to get her
to go inside then she for some reason just looked at him and smiled,
then shook her head "no." Then Robert thought that Christine was going
to get Paula but instead Paula fled to the office to call the police on
Robert because all of the sudden the Maintenance man ran into his living
room demanding his guns. After a few more minutes the cops just came in
there and arrested him without a investigation.

Also about the Jose and Emma situation anyways that was pretty much around as well
before the plot by Paula to set up Robert to be arrested. To make a long
story short Paula was paid to take care of Roberts mothers house and
she was not allowed any boys over but yet she betrayed his trust by
going outside and having an affair with a married man named Jose. After
she was caught she then again lied and tried to make out like Jose took
her out back, took off her clothes, then raped her, but then why did she
get upset whenever Robert thought about calling the police or firing
him. Even though Jose cheated on his wife Emma he did knew about Paula's
plot to set up Robert. Anyways onto the court trials...

http://uswgo.com/wp-content/uploads/HLIC/3a3de3149c52223a5619306b9bcf34fb.jpg
Christine Trent

So first Christine and Paula set up a Protective Order Hearing to bar him
from having any access to his personal belongings, then stole all of his
belongings, even drivers license, maybe even his social security card
(Well if they could get his drivers license easily it would be obvious
they may have his other cards as well since he was just whisked off to
jail without collecting his personal ID Cards), and they got completely
away with it at least for now. Then all Roberts brother attempted to
track down who broke Roberts mothers mail box then what Christine and
Paula did was made out like Robert broke his Protective Order to stay
away from them. It was just one bit of hell after another.

Paula and Christine had been caught at each court hearing making different
statements each time changing the story. The fact that the judge and
jury sided with these two lying women proves that there was some
judicial corruption going on.

Anyways here is the audio podcast about the event:

[audio:http://uswgo.com/wp-content/uploads/001_A_010_Anita_090911_002_2009_09_11.mp3|titles=recording - by Americas Wrongfully Convicted]

So right now a legal battle is still going on for Robert to be vindicated, his record expunged, and to lock up the real criminals
(Paula and Christine) that abused the Justice System to their advantage.
Also according to the letter written by Emma Paula and Christine planned to set up Robert.

So for those that want to set things right and are sick of the Injustice in the Justice System check out http://www.americaswrongfullyconvicted.com/

Also here are YouTube Video embeds regarding what Robert is going through:

https://www.youtube.com/v/qpONtxa7Ojg?fs=1&hl=en_US&color1=0x006699&color2=0x54abd6","allowfullscreen":"true";" class="mceItemFlash" src="https://uswgo.com/wp-includes/js/tinymce/plugins/media/img/trans.gif" height="424" width="710">

https://www.youtube.com/v/X831hhjneH8?fs=1&hl=en_US&color1=0x006699&color2=0x54abd6","allowfullscreen":"true";" class="mceItemFlash" src="https://uswgo.com/wp-includes/js/tinymce/plugins/media/img/trans.gif" height="557" width="710">

https://www.youtube.com/v/DzFtvnkhcy4?fs=1&hl=en_US&color1=0x006699&color2=0x54abd6","allowfullscreen":"true";" class="mceItemFlash" src="https://uswgo.com/wp-includes/js/tinymce/plugins/media/img/trans.gif" height="424" width="710">

Read more…

Rajjpuut's Folly: Quo Vadis, Solicitor General Kagan, Quo Vadis?

Posted by Bob VanDeHey on May 14, 2010 at 8:30pm

Barack Obama Sets Another Record for Incompetence

with Elena Kagan Nomination to Supreme Court

With the Sotomayor nomination and now the Elena Kagan nomination to be a United States Supreme Court Justice, Barack Obama is setting a record. Yes, yes he is attempting for the first time to place three women on the nation’s highest court. Yes, yes, for the first time it will be possible that the U.S. Supreme Court will not have a Protestant justice (Kagan is Jewish) . . . but more importantly, for the first time it will be possible that the U.S. Supreme Court would feature two justices who have seen their interpretations of American law overturned by a 9-0 or 8-0 contrary vote (against a Sotomayor judicial decision; and a Kagan advocacy position). The obvious assumption? Kagan, like Sotomayor, is a “living constitutionalist” that is she believes in creating law or attempting to create it from the bench or the advocate's chair or even the Dean's chair rather than making sincere efforts to respect the United States Constitution.

The shocking matter is that both cases featured the two ladies advocating great expansion of government powers against individual liberties. Sotomayor was clearly unqualified for the Supreme Court seat because in her two cause celebre`s one favored affirmative action that took away earned (by test scores) promotion from twenty-some firefighters of mixed races but NO Blacks in favor of affirmative action promotion of Black candidates who failed the test; and in another she sided with the state’s power to force an individual to sell his land over his objection so that a corporation could build a potentially lucrative shopping center. Like Sotomayor, Kagan, also, stands right in the crosshairs of legal philosophy. You’ll recall that Barack Obama insulted the Supreme Court attendees at his state of the union speech by cutting them down for their alignment 8-0 on corporate free speech and campaign donations. Kagan was the lawyer, technically the “solicitor general,” arguing the case for Obama when he tried to shutdown corporate free speech.

Kagan’s most clearly controvrsial actions as Dean of Harvard’s Law School were banning the presence of military recruiters on the campus and her defense of the action by referring to her distaste for “don’t ask don’t tell” standards for soldiers and other military citizens. Conservatives across the board favor denying federal funds to schools that oppose military presence (ROTC programs, recruiters’ visits and guest speakers for the most part) and this alone makes her highly suspect. Voicing her opposition to the policy is totally, OK. Rajjpuut disagrees mightily with her opinion, but free speech is guaranteed. Banning the recruiters is totally out of line . . . she was taken to court on the matter and when it reached the Supreme Court, surprise, surprise, her lower court wins were overturned and the school was denied government funding.

Kagan has been very guarded and even ingenuous about her views. Feigning a belief in constitutional limits regarding one matter in her only semi-open interview, she was pushed later in the interview for clarification and she would only say, she was referring to present status of the law, not necessarily her own views. The Obama administration has not allowed her since then to talk to the press. They engineered a phony-interview with an Obama administration sending her softball question and released that videotaping to the various press outlets apparently fearing another gaffe. So the opponent of free-speech is protected by denying the country a free-speech interchange with the news media??

She’s lived a circumscribed life in Academe and government, never had a real job and has always been aligned with the progressive-left leadership. Every action and word indicates that she’s like all those who in their ivory-towered stupidity believe we must “progress” well beyond the U.S. Constitution . . . ready, perhaps eager, to progress us over every available cliff in search of political correctness and expansion of government. Elena Kagan will definitely NOT exhibit a “principled view of the U.S. Constitution. Nor of common sense . . . she kicks the United States military off her campus and want federal funding for her unilateral UN-American show of political correctness??? Horse Pucky! Peter Beinart, no conservative he, puts it this way:

“On the day he or she is unveiled, conservatives will announce that they are approaching the selection with an open mind. Ten minutes later they will declare, more in sadness than anger, that the nominee has the judicial philosophy of Chairman Mao and the temperament of Dennis Rodman. Ten minutes after that, liberals will rise en masse to defend the nominee as wise, brilliant and humane, a person who restores our faith in humankind. And the kabuki theater will continue like that all summer long.

“I can’t blame my fellow liberals for playing along; if the other side fires, we have to fire back. But there’s one exception. If Solicitor General Elana Kagan gets the nod, conservatives will beat the hell out of her for opposing military recruitment on campus when she was dean of Harvard Law School. And liberals should concede the point; the conservatives will be right.”

Beinart has just committed the ultimate sin of political incorrectness in supporting a conservative argument and been proved right beyond the shadow of a doubt by the U.S. Supreme Court's rejection of Kagan's ugly argument 8-0, If only the United States Senate had Beinart's guts and integrity . . . .

Ya’all live long, strong and ornery,

Rajjpuut

Read more…

OBAMA AND DEMS WITH ADVANTAGE?

Posted by Walt on April 18, 2010 at 12:01pm
Last Sunday morning, as I basked in the sunlight outside a coffee shop with the New York Times, I came upon an op ed piece entitled "Big Money's Alarming Political Edge."

The occasion for naming a new Supreme Court Judge has rekindled the liberal bitterness among some in the media over the Court's Citizens United ruling in January which gave freedom of speech protections to corporations, unions, and non-profits.

Theuse of the word "Alarming" in the article title no doubt meant that theauthor felt republicans would benefit more from the Court's decision.

Any doubts were erased when the article was read.

According to the author of this piece, due to the ruling the US Chamber of Commerce was putting into action its "most aggressive drives ever" to raise money "to favor mainly republicans" in 50 races this fall....

..."most aggressive drives ever" the piece said, while unions were merely "working to keep pace" for their democrat favorites.

Really? Merely "working to keep pace?"

According to data on OpenSecrets.organd provided by the Federal Election Commission as of March 21, 2010,union donations to democrat candidates and causes have amounted to morethan "working to keep pace."

Since 1990, those unions rated in the top 50 of industry donors as ranked by OpenSecrets.org have donated $636 million to democrats while donating $52 million to republicans (92% vs. 8%).

ServiceEmployees International Union President Andy Stern said, "We spent afortune to elect barack obama." To which Joe Biden would later reply," we owe you."

Republicans enjoy no such huge advantage from any industry in OpenSecret's top 50 rankings.

Nosingle industry group on the list donated more than $333 million torepublicans over the same time period when unions were investing over ahalf billion to democrats.

Even the oil and gas industrydonations fell short of the unions while donating a paltry $186 millionto republicans such as Bush/Cheney since 1990.

The writer of the NY Times piece suffers from the same misconception of republicans and big business donations and lobbying efforts as most of the public.

APew Research Center Report in February 2010 found that commondescriptions of the republican party were, "for the rich, corporateinterests and greed."

Democrats were seen in the same report asthe party that "stands for the average person, the middle-class and theworking class."

Asked which party is more influenced bylobbyists and special interests, 40% of respondents said thatrepublicans were, while 32% chose democrats.

Thus, it is not surprising from this report that many across the U.S.A. would incorrectly figure that the Citizen's United ruling would favor republicans.

Excludingunions from the OpenSecrets top 50 industry list, we find that since1990 total industry donations to political campaigns/causes/lobbying ofdemocrats equals $3.959 BILLION, while the same source of donations torepublicans over the same period totaled $3.954 BILLION....virtuallyeven but democrats with slight edge.

If you add the unions backinto that mix, then totals to democrats go to $4.595 BILLION, whilerepublicans increase to $4.006 BILLION (53% VS. 47%), a larger edge todemocrats.

Since Citizens United was the political action groupresponsible for this ruling, let us look at how liberal groups andconservative groups compare over the last 20 years in supporting theirrespective causes/candidates.

Democrat/liberal groups, such as MoveOn.org,have since 1990 donated or invested $141 million in political races andcauses, while republican/conservative groups, such as Citizens Unitedhave given $106 million to their side...again, a slight edge todemocrats.

If we look at just the top 10 industry groups whichhave donated to political causes/campaigns over the last 20 years(includes biggies like lawyers/law firms, securities/investment, realestate, health professionals, insurance, and oil and gas industries),we find that dems lead this top 10 group with $2.45 billion compared tothe $1.99 billion received by republicans...edge to democrats.

Non-profits?

Since1990 non-profit organizations have donated $47 million to democratswhile only $15 million has gone to republicans...edge to democrats.

Thismisconception about big business being in the pocket of republicans isperpetuated by ignorance and false rhetoric from the media and thegovernment.

Chris Good writing for the Atlantic (Jan. 21, 2010)said: "as the pro-business party in US politics, republicans have had aclose relationship with business than have democrats."

Right.

CNN's"legal expert" Jeffrey Toobin said on Mar. 15, 2010: "The politicaleffect of, if not intention for, the decision was clear: Citizens United looks to be a big win for republicans, who are the likely beneficiaries of the newly lubricated corporate largess."

Uh huh.

Democrat Senator Arlen Spector called the Court's decision, "conservative activism."

The Slate'sNathaniel Persily was silly in writing on Jan. 25, 2010: "Corporationmoney will flow in great amounts towards ads supporting republicancandidates. Union money will flow as well, but not as much, so democrats and their causes might be at an disadvantage."

But not as much. horny.gif

A New York Times (Jan22, 2010) story said about the Court's ruling: "A conservative majorityhas distorted teh political system to ensure that republican candidateswill be at an enormous advantage in future elections."

Reporting for the Washington Post (2/17/2010), reporter Dan Eggan stated: "Corporations have traditionally favored republicans in their contribution patterns."

Really?
Read more…

FLORIDA COURT SETS ATHEIST HOLIDAY

Posted by R.T. Hudgins on January 21, 2010 at 1:48pm
FLORIDA COURT SETS ATHEIST HOLY DAY.!!!You must read this...a proper decision by the courts...for a change.FLORIDA COURT SETS ATHEIST HOLIDAYIn Florida, an atheist created a case against the upcoming Easter and Passover Holy days. He hired an attorney to bring a discrimination case against Christians and Jews and observances of their holy days. The argument was that it was unfair that atheists had no such recognized days.The case was brought before a judge. After listening to the passionate presentation by the lawyer, the judge banged his gavel declaring, "Case dismissed!"The lawyer immediately stood objecting to the ruling saying, "Your honor, How can you possibly dismiss this case? The Christians have Christmas, Easter and others. The Jews have Passover, Yom Kippur and Hanukkah, yet my client and all other atheists have no such holidays."The judge leaned forward in his chair saying, "But you do. Your client, counsel, is woefully ignorant."The lawyer said, "Your Honor, we are unaware of any special observance or holiday for atheists."The judge said, "The calendar says April 1st is April Fool’s Day. Psalm 14:1 states, 'The fool says in his heart, there is no God.' Thus, it is the opinion of this court, that if your client says there is no God, then he is a fool. Therefore, April 1st is his day. Court is adjourned."You gotta love a Judge that knows his scripture!
Read more…