Wednesday, April 1, 2015

PARTY TO PRINCIPLE Part II Restoration Is Necessary


Yesterday this Blog Featured "PARTY TO PRINCIPLE- Birth of the Nation - Announcing U.S. Supreme Court Appeal on Cruz'N Obama Ineligibility" and today we wanted to focus just a little bit more on the key elements of why being a Party to Principle is so important and why a Restoration is indeed necessary for a stabilization of our Nation we hope to begin again with the appeal of Judy v. Obama 14-4136 to the U.S. Supreme Court in a Writ of Certiorari.

Our Nation was Born, and it has grown in leaps and bounds into a young teenager who is gangly, rebellious, and inherently clumsy. It is a natural course. It takes teenagers a good 10 to 15 years to look back and say, "You know Mom and Dad, I want to thank you for teaching me what you did, because I now see the value in it. Stapling this point to the board we need only look around at just how many of us no longer see the U.S. Constitution as preciously valuable.

Our Writ of Certiorari goes into this a little noticing a correlating anthem that is somewhat flat from respected academia. It is very easy for someone who can sing very well to hit some flat notes. All that has to happen is for the voice not to be heard for an instant which scores the great importance of hearing and listening. Amazing is the voice that is in tune and awful is the one that is just a little off. Of course we have honest mistakes that we can bear but the when voice begins to nauseate our stomach we must stop and find out how to best correct it.

We all have weaknesses and we all have strengths. My strength might not be,. let me correct that, is not spelling. Its unfortunate good spelling is considered such an important detail in communication because I feel often like I am in a constant state of apology for misspelling and grammatical errors which seem to come so easily to others I admire. I have and constantly work hard to improve my weaknesses and make them stronger. We are celebrating this week going over 500 post on this Blog and 200,000 views and as you roll back the blog I believe you can see improvement. My point in this is academic professors all though schooled and trained in certain aspects of detail and having great strength in some areas can also be infants in others.

We all know President Elect Barack Obama (U.S.C. Amend. XX Sect. 3 'if the President elect shall have failed to qualify') and Sen. Ted Cruz were once Professors of Constitutional Law and both attended Harvard. In the political arena you'd have to be a recluse to not see the two former Solicitor Generals who have had their Commentary - On the Meaning of “Natural Born Citizen” published in the Harvard Law Review MAR 11, 2015 128 Harv. L. Rev. F. 161,Neal Katyal & Paul Clement, of which Obama was elected as President at one time. An opposing view of the article from notable Mario Appuzzo is here.

I might add here that their may or may not have been a Twenty Million Dollar grant and for sure there was major influence from Saudi Arabia at about the same time.
Saudi Prince Paid for Obama
1987 Bill Ayers solicited Khalid Abdullah Tariq al-Mansour (a.k.a. Donald Warden) to raise money for Obama’s Harvard Law School education. al-Mansour is an orthodox Muslim, a black nationalist, an outspoken enemy of Israel, and mentor to Black Panther Party founder Huey Newton and his cohort, Bobby Seale. At the time al-Mansour associate Percy Sutton was raising money for Obama’s education, al-Mansour was the top financial advisor to mega-billionaire Prince Alwaleed (Alwalid) bin Talal of the Saudi royal family.

1988-1991 Obama attended Harvard Law School.

This brings me to another academically respected Professor teaching at the Columbus School of Law of Catholic University of America Sarah Helene Duggin. She is well noticed of late, because of her research as a Professor who was published Oct. 28th 2013 specifically: Is Sen. Ted Cruz a natural born Citizen eligible to serve as president Constitution Daily's theme is 'Smart conversation from the National Constitution Center', is "The first and only institution in America established by Congress to "disseminate information about the United States Constitution on a non-partisan basis in order to increase the awareness and understanding of the Constitution among the American people."

Now in this article she specifically states that "There are no more Princes wanting to infiltrate America's Presidency which Obama's financed education and adoption is a walking talking repudiation of. She says: "Finally, the natural born citizenship clause is both an anomaly and an anachronism. The way in which the clause differentiates among United States citizens is contrary to the overall spirit of the Constitution; the risk that foreign nobility will infiltrate our government is long past; and place of birth is a poor surrogate for loyalty to one’s homeland in our increasingly mobile society and our ever more interconnected world. The best solution would be to amend the Constitution, as many legislators on both sides of the aisle have proposed over the years. In the absence of an amendment, the clause should be narrowly interpreted."

While admitting "Foreign Influence" was the historical scope of Supreme Court Chief Jay's Letter to President Washington as the check and motive for 'natural born Citizen' in the qualifications for Office of President, she cites the Naturalization Act of 1790 - The Naturalization Act of 1790 probably constitutes the most significant evidence available. Congress enacted this legislation just three years after the drafting of the Constitution, and many of those who voted on it had participated in the Constitutional Convention. The act provided that “children of citizens of the United States, that may be born beyond the sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural-born citizens.”- but does not mention the specific detailed repeal in 1795 of "natural born Citizen" words replaced with "Citizen".

While recognizing the problems with getting a Presidential Candidate with standing to repudiate an infringement clear to the U.S. Supreme Court she argues Sen. McCain's case with no mention of Judy v. McCain or past U.S.S.C case Judy v. Obama as if these records were unknown to her enlightenment and research. To her credit she admits the subject is not decided and is in need of U.S. Supreme Court Review, but advises until then that the Constitutional Key of the Office of the President in qualifications be run over or 'narrowly interpreted', assuming the great difficulty that I indeed face in getting to the U.S. Supreme Court properly, and representing a bi-partisan effort, is never going to happen.

The United States Naturalization Act of January 29, 1795 (1 Stat. 414) repealed and replaced the Naturalization Act of 1790. The 1795 Act differed from the 1790 Act by increasing the period of required residence from two to five years in the United States, by introducing the Declaration of Intention requirement, or "first papers", which created a two-step naturalization process, and by conferring the status of citizen and not natural born citizen. The Act specified that naturalized citizenship was reserved only for "free white person[s]." It also changed the requirement in the 1790 Act of "good character" to read "good moral character."

How interesting that the act of 1795 as well changing the absolute conundrum of naturalization with natural law in Citizen and natural born Citizen, as well made the distinction of "good character" and "good moral character". While maintaining as professors 'good character' in their esteemed and respected positions of scholastic reputation a morality of the Constitution is certainly lost as the integrity of boundaries is breached in their assertions that 'time' and 'place' in the term 'natural born Citizen' - Born in the U.S. to Citizen Parents - is worth being narrowly interpreted. Now is it benign or malicious?

What would we as Americans say to someone who says, The time of the Convention Monday, September 17th, 1787 never happened. This nation was never born and the United States of America has no boundaries or place attributing anything considered as opposing that view as 'contrary to the overall spirit of the Constitution'? Wouldn't you say that person is really stupid or is acting as a domestic enemy of the United States?

We are forced to address these issues in the Writ of Certiorari because of the respect our own U.S. Supreme Court Justices indeed have for these men and women. I don't like to have to make it a public record, but they obviously have no hesitation in making their's public and without argument it can indeed become policy. Way down the road it may seem like an obvious mistake which was regretted and would need to be changed just as that Naturalization Act of 1790 which lasted 5 years and was regretted.

Why do we keep going the rounds and dipping and diving on this issue? Its because there is and always will be a hunger in the belly for power, recognition, and fame. If those hungry for it see a boundary against their acquisition they will tend to take the fence down and hope no one notices their prying the squeaky nails out of the boards and pulling the post till the fence is down and then they will say the fence never existed.

This is why a Restoration is necessary and why I feel like I'm in a meat grinder being disposed as frivolous. SHOCKING! When you have a U.S. Supreme Court Justice in a mainstream report headline read, "Antonin Scalia: The Constitution is 'dead', you better believe a restoration is necessary. 'Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia says the Constitution is “dead, dead, dead,” rather than a “living document.”. If he meant that it is cut and dried and should not be added to or taken away from he also dismisses the 2/3rds majority of Congress necessary to change it. (U.S.C. Art. V)If he meant that it is not the U.S. Supreme Law of the Land then he's occupying a office as a Justice De Facto rather than De Jure.

I would like to announce it will be my pleasure to address on The Meat and Potatoes Show, which is great for an Idaho Born spud like me, (smile)some of the detail of this Writ of Certiorari and the importance of the the natural born Citizen clause in our Constitution as a qualifier that we must take a stand for as Born in the U.S. to Citizen Parents.

The issues and hurdles that I have to bring to the attention of the U.S. Supreme Court in this Writ of Certiorari are indeed of great importance to our Nation and the future for our children. One of the most basic cruel critiques of natural born Citizen is that it is some how 'against' the spirit of our Constitution in that it is seen as a discriminating disqualifier like some kind of a nasty racist remark, rather then a wise standard of qualification. For those insinuations a defense must also be made. You never see those who say they want to change or merge the terms 'Citizen' and 'natural born Citizen' say anything about equalizing the qualifications for every office in the Constitution including the varying age requirements and time requirements that differentiate U.S. Representative, U.S. Senator, and U.S. President. This to me is clearly their agreement that age is important and time in the U.S. is important as these two qualifications differ between all three offices.

What they don't see is that 'natural born Citizen' is also an age requirement as it takes more "time" to fully ripen. In fact that's all it is is another time oriented qualifier encapsulating or enveloping two generations. This is a huge crack in their side walk for to rant and rave about one age qualifier and not care about another is self defeating of their own argument. Indeed a maturity is seen in U.S. Reps 25 year age qualifier, a U.S. Senator's 30 year age qualifier and 35 year of age qualifier for U.S. President. The time in the U.S. requirement also is progressive in a different way 7 years a Citizen of the U.S. for Representatives, 9 years a Citizen for U.S. Senators, and 14 years a resident within the U.S. where 'Citizen' is not even mentioned. You don't see eight challenges to these qualifications made since 2003 that have failed, you only see an attack on the 'natural born Citizen' qualifier for President. Its just sad to me that such blatant immorality exist for so many of our elected leaders.

In closing I would like to say I think Sen. Ted Cruz entering the arena of the race for U.S. President 2016 is probably the best thing to happen because it finally gives a bi-partisan loss or equality to both Republicans and Democrats in the determination rather then being inflammatory to one of the respective major parties. This has a powerful effect upon the Court to be able to say this is a bi-partisan issue that effects all of America and does not necessarily effect one party in favor of another. This in fact neuters the political doctrine question argument which is very encouraging for this Petition.

I hope to empower you with the intelligence necessary to ignore the Media who either deliberately ignores the actions I've taken to stand up for the Constitution's qualifications for President, or who is so enumerated and inundated with information they themselves don't know I exist. It does seem the likelihood of the former is greater than the latter simply because I make it a point to email at least 1 or 2 reporters and editors in 2 to 4 Newspapers in every State of the Union hoping to educate and inform the population if nothing else by a note from them that their are different opinions that do count among us and these scholars of respected institutions.

Enjoy our newly March Released THREE MINUTE infomercial entitled The Birthers and please join us anyway you can in supporting the restoration of our U.S. Constitution along with our Nation and the opportunity we all want. Please understand that however benign you may
attribute a Candidate who is not qualified by being 'Born in the U.S. to Citizen Parents', the very process of dismissing and not honoring the Office of the President with its unique qualification is a process to destroy the umbrella with the Office that sits in the middle of the United States Constitution, as it most important key holder. The compromise on the 'natural born Citizen' clause is a compromise on the Blessings of God our Nation has been protected by, and a witness that time and place included in describing the Birth of our Nation are of no value.

Join us in taking a stand for "this place" and "this time" honored tradition in the United States of America.]

Cody Robert Judy for President 2016 find us on Facebook, Twitter and the Web.

Please visit my web site and study the 3 point platform and 7 point platform.
Thanks You so much!
Cody Robert Judy

We need your help. Will you help us or are the outrageous lies your being told by your elected leaders okay for you and your children? Indeed, it is time to Restore America's Trust Today for a Better America Tomorrow.

We NEED YOUR HELP AMERICA now, to take the 10th Circuit Court's Decision not to hear Cody's Case to the U.S. Supreme Court. We are Taking a Stand for individual Civil Rights and against an unprecedented ASSAULT upon your Constitution and prior decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court! With your help we can make it happen. You are a very important key to this. So its up to you America to help Restore America Today for a Better America Tomorrow. Like, Share, and Help us in the Contribution Revolution.


Get your questions answered by ordering Cody Robert Judy's Book here.

The 2016 Campaign begins now. Please send your contributions and help with the ABC (American Birther Campaign) today and my election for President in 2016 and Join the 257 of us now on my Facebook Cody Robert Judy for U.S. President 2016 site.

Cody Robert Judy for President 2016
3031 So. Ogden Ave. Suite #2
Ogden, Utah 84401

Thank you
Cody Robert Judy
Candidate for United States President 2016


The Commercial is simply called "America"


1 comment:

  1. I wanted to share this comment which is very interesting regarding Cruz. Lorinda Birky Lewis Adrien Nash I've been doing my homework for the past seven years. My mother was born in Canada to parents who were BOTH citizens of the US when she was born and moved back to the US two years later. Her story is very similar to Cruz. Her parents like Cruz' never had her declared a US citizen by filling out the correct paperwork at the US Embassy/Consolate before she turned 18. At the age of 18, her citizenship reverted back to Canada. At the age of 67, she retired and applied for the SS that she had paid into all these years and was told she didn't qualify, she wasn't a US citizen. WHAT??? Her parents as well as herself had always assumed she was a US citizen, because they were. They never did the paperwork to have her declared a US citizen. She filled out the simple paperwork and within a few weeks became a NATURALIZED citizen of the United States. When she asked the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services why she wasn't a natural born, she was told, "you weren't born in the US, you can only be natural born to the country you are born in". Surprisingly, Cruz who is supposedly a Constitutional attorney had to hire an attorney to fill out this simple paperwork and it took months for him to renounce his citizenship. In order for him to renounce his citizenship to Canada he had to prove his citizenship elsewhere, or show proof that he had applied for citizenship elsewhere. Here is where is gets sticky, whatever happened to his citizenship to Cuba? His father was a Cuban citizen at the time Cruz was born and upon his birth became a citizen of Cuba as well. Cuba looks at citizenship of the father, therefore, his Cuban citizenship trumped his mother's citizenship. What if Cruz parents, like my mother, never had him declared a US citizen and at the age of 18 his citizenship reverted back to Canada. He then wouldn't even be eligible to be a Senator as he would only have been a US citizen since his Canadian citizenship was renounced. Even stickier, what if he used his Cuban citizenship to renounce his Canadian citizenship and is not even a citizen of the US? We've not seen any documents proving his US citizenship. What if we were to elect a president who was not even a US citizen? Does Cruz have the possibility of a foreign influence? YES!!! This is exactly what our forefathers were trying to keep from happening. The natural born citizenship is VERY exclusive and excludes many, it was never meant to be all inclusive as people now twist the law and try to make it to be.