Saturday, August 1, 2015




What do people think of women who suffer domestic violence and refuse time and time again to speak out? You know there is that modest courage where you take one punch for the team. However, being an enabler of violence begins after awhile to just make you either look like you enjoy it, in which case if its painful to you your a masochist, you're suffering emotional maladies of self esteem ie., battered person syndrome, your sacrificing yourself for gain often referred to as economic abuse, or you are just stupid.

Its not just domestic violence that happens to women, but there is also an unconstitutional political violence. For instance when men who are not qualified for the Office of the President with brute force push a women like Carly Fiorina to the back of the bus and are all to happy to take what would be her spot on the podium. On the August 6th Fox News Republican Debate at 9PM, that is what is scheduled to happen with Rubio, Cruz, and Jindal not even being qualified to be on the Presidential Debate Stage.

People with high-self-esteem focus on growth and improvement, whereas people with low self-esteem focus on not making mistakes in life. Self blame results in feelings of helplessness rather than empowerment. The feeling of being both responsible for and helpless to stop the violence turns often to depression and passivity.

This learned depression and passivity makes it difficult for the abused partner to marshal the resources and support system needed to remedy the circumstances or situation.  Children with low self-esteem rely on coping strategies that are counter-productive such as bullying, quitting, or even cheating, and its not far from the way adults act either.

This brings us to discussion on a particular set of rules that We The People call our UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION and the way in which the 'natural born Citizen' clause is not only being perpetrated by abusers who are using the bullying and cheating methodology, but also to those enablers engaged in passivity or not standing up for their own rights under the United States Constitution.

There comes that time in a person's campaign where you see it go down hill into an abyss of a credit by your name. Hey, for whatever its worth, Mitt Romney and I share the same accolade of  '08 and '12 Candidate for President'- thousands of hours and sacrifice ought to be worth something. (smile). I've been through 5 losses to formulate perspective of when that happens, and I can look at other people's Campaigns with the experiences I've had and see critical turning points also.

Its happening now with Carly Fiorina's Campaign for President and we have not even had our First Debate! The Fox News Debate happening August 6th as just 'Lowered Expectations' to include those polling at 1% into a 5pm Debate which Carly Fiorina is now qualified for, but she is missing the Main Event Debate at 9pm, whereas Rubio and Cruz are going to be included in that one.  I believe Jindal is polling at 1% with Fiorina however it must be taken into consideration he will pull time away from her while being on the same stage.

Being on that Stage at the First Main Event Debate is crucially important. The staggering cost of a full hour of prime time coverage to a Candidate cannot be underestimated as the result is a boost in confidence and contributions immediately following those Debates.
JUDY V. OBAMA 14-9396

You might think its the strangest thing that a little ole candidate like me who has a Case in the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) is having an effect on the Republican Debate Stage, but its true. Often the SCOTUS doesn't like to interfere with political elections. Its called the Political Doctrine Question.

"The political question doctrine holds that some questions, in their nature, are fundamentally political, and not legal, and if a question is fundamentally political ... then the court will refuse to hear that case. It will claim that it doesn't have jurisdiction. And it will leave that question to some other aspect of the political process to settle out."
—John E. Finn, professor of government, 2006
This however does not apply to the 'natural born Citizen' qualification for the Office of the President and VP, that does not apply to Representatives and Senators, because it is a fundamental requirement spelled out in our Constitution and is not a hyperbole of naturalization.

Justice Sotomayor, with a reputation of sticking up for the underdogs in my opinion really stepped out of her own character by denying an Application understood as 15A25 (Over 3,500 Views) understood in Judy v. Obama 14-9396

The Key Provisions of this Application for more Time that was Denied by Justice Sotomayor are as follows and are written about here:

[9- DELAY is detrimental for Petitioner as well as Respondent(s) due in part to the Presidential Election in 2016. Fully six months exist before the Iowa Caucus in January 2016. This case revolves around an interpretation of ‘natural born Citizen’ in U.S.C. Art. II, Sect. 1, Clause 5. , that the Republicans U.S. Senator Ted Cruz, LA. Gov. Bobby Jindal, and U.S. Senator Marco Rubio are in effect in violation of as Candidates for President with no timely recourse or due process available. Without a ruling by the SUPREME COURT, Campaign donations as well as confusion exist among the VOTING PUBLIC. This is siphoning off important support to the Petitioner in contributions necessarily going to unqualified Candidates.]

[10- Attending this PRINCIPLE of the U.S. Constitution is vital to the 46% of America’s Voters who are in fact now Independent Voters according to a January 2015 Gallup Poll . The Court avoiding the Issue does not serve them as it affects the race among republicans and democrats and we all look for guidance on the interpretation of the Constitutions’ demanding standards for the Office of the President being different than the “Citizen” standard for Senators and Representatives.
Petitioner then prays that this Motion will be granted in the considerations of the necessity requiring a decision before July 13th, 2015 as instructed by the Court through and by Justice Sotomayer, reviewing Justice for the 10th Circuit.]

We didn't know at the time of this submission that JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR's decision would be playing a key role against women, who are pursuing the Office of the President. Her action in Denying this APPLICATION was a DECISION that not only hurt my fund raising abilities through the Summer, but set the Stage for the Republican Debate. Candidate for President Carly Fiorina's place is actually relegated to a 5pm Debate rather than a PRIME TIME 9PM Debate position, and we see just how she was pushed to the back of the bus by Justice Sotomayor.

Here I am trying to stand up for women's rights and all I get is grief for it? Its a rarity when you see people who are standing up for victims like Mrs. Fiorina and Mrs. Clinton actually get beat up for standing up, but that is actually what the Media is doing by not covering this very important Case happening right now in the Supreme Court.

I have an APPLICATION for a Stay on Sotomayor's Decision  (Over 2,000 Views) times now on SCRIBD right now in the Supreme Court which is a legal maneuver to bar her from her own disastrous decision for women seeking the Office of the President pursuant to her nomination by Obama.


Hillary Clinton has probably found as many pats on the back for standing by her man as she has had the bird flipped at her from women who have found her actions of passivity in what might be termed the philandering abuse of her husband as a disgrace. It would be a different story psychologically speaking if Mrs. Clinton stood up and said Bill and I have agreed to an 'Open Relationship' in our marriage. But she hasn't done that. She hasn't called the women President Bill Clinton has been with sister-wives, or concubines, or anything to do with her family. She's called them bimbos as this HEADLINE indicates:

EXCLUSIVE: Hillary's Camp fears a new Bimbo Eruption will put the Kibosh on Candidacy.
[Linda Tripp, the woman who outed Monica Lewinsky, felt compelled to speak out against Hillary's presidential bid. She broke more than a decade of silence in an exclusive interview with Daily Mail Online in which she described Hillary as forever associated, 'with the lingering taint of scandal and wrongdoing.'
She revealed how Hillary stage-managed and orchestrated the 'bimbo eruptions,' ruthlessly destroying the credibility of the women who came forward and neatly turning herself into First Victim in the process.]

[GENNIFER] ..[Flowers watched that broadcast with 'disgust' convinced that it was Hillary who was behind her former lover's vociferous attempts to disown and discredit her. She has since asserted that she believes the marriage to be tantamount to a 'business arrangement' with Hillary's own pursuit of her political ambitions as the ultimate pay-off for tolerating her husband's numerous infidelities.]

[According to Lucianne Goldberg, Hillary did more than turn a blind eye. She was heavily involved in covering her husband's tracks. She explained: 'She has known it all along. A lot of those women came to me at the time. There were several. Every one of them was a nice woman.
'They all were approached by Hillary's detectives who would take them out to coffee and shove a piece of paper across the table and say, 'Here sign this,' and it was to say they never had anything to do with Bill Clinton.]

These actions are tantamount to the 'cheating', 'bullying', as well as 'passivity' remember that children use who are suffering from low self-esteem. Hillary Clinton has tried not to make mistakes by covering up rather then dealing with the truth. As far as her role in Judy v. Obama 14-9396 she has been repeatedly been extended a hand to file an Amicus Curiae Brief, or friend of the Court brief and let that opportunity go. This might have been her last opportunity to take a stand for the natural born Citizen clause rather than go down in history as 'victim' to it. 

Feb 27thHere was my Tweet to Hillary today. 
Help #Hillary2016 @seanhannity & #tedcruz2016 are walloping me as a #Birther Frgt BO get 2R's Rub&Crz for 2 yrs of BO

March 13- Why Hillary's Excuses do not Exempt her-Now if that proves to be the case and she has not confided it to a Judge as I've asked her to write an Amicus Curiae several times in Tweets to her reported on this blog
May 23-
Not only does a Brief from Hillary signal a home run for destroying gender inequality, to take a stand for the Constitution, it signals the ability to lead both genders in a field of equality.

Interesting as we talk about violence against women and focus in on those running for Office of the President that just before Cruz was queried by Hannity in the Feature Post Feb 27th, he actually joked about abuse and bullying against women:
Cruz: No, I have not stopped beating my wife. (Laughs) (Crowd Laughs)

Hannity: Ok ,Your mother was an American citizen, you talked about your Dad coming from Cuba. You were born in Canada. You had dual citizenship There are a bunch of Liberal birthers out there that would try to make the case that your not eligible? Just a quick.. short answer.

Cruz: “Look, I was born in Calgary, my mother was an American citizen by birth. Under federal law, that made me an American citizen by birth. The Constitution requires that you be a natural born citizen.”

Cruz's equating that a 'Citizen by Birth' is the same as 'natural born Citizen' is a fallacy as the qualifications for Senators and Representatives is 'Citizen'.

What happened to Sen. Clinton in her talks and agreements with Sen. Barack Obama may never be known in the 2008 Campaign, but the understanding that comes out of it? Hillary's Campaign Debts are paid or retired (economic abuse), and she scores a Secretary of State job, but also in that must pay homage to Obama, which in no way shape or form includes calling him out on an abuse of the Constitution's principles that the Office of the President only devolve upon a 'natural born Citizen' ie. born in the U.S to Citizen Parents.

Hillary Clinton's political maneuvering into the 'good ole boys' club began as U.S. Senator when the non-binding U.S. Senate Resolution was co-sponsored by her and Obama for McCain. The three Candidates basically controlling the last three elections now if you want to call Mrs. Clinton's 50 Million dollar war chest a head start on the 2016 Election.

The problem with that of course as we have mentioned is it is affecting so many other women's chances in the future to become President by taking a stand for the Constitution rather than taking one against the Constitution. The American People as far as the Constitution have not Amended the 'natural born Citizen' qualification for the Office of the President and it still stands as a distinct and unique qualification for the Office of the President and Vice President not expected of Representatives and Senators as the following video Constitutional Reckoning depicts very succinctly.

While it takes quite some time to get to the SCOTUS on an issue that they see fulfilling the Ripeness Doctrine' , at least I have done it. The Ripeness Doctrine pertains to the readiness of a case for Litigation:
[Without undertaking to survey the intricacies of the ripeness doctrine it is fair to say that its basic rationale is to prevent the courts, through avoidance of premature adjudication, from entangling themselves in abstract disagreements over administrative policies, and also to protect the agencies from judicial interference until an administrative decision has been formalized and its effects felt in a concrete way by the challenging parties. The problem is best seen in a twofold aspect, requiring us to evaluate both the fitness of the issues for judicial decision and the hardship to the parties of withholding court consideration.]

Again, we are seeing the turning points of whole Campaigns based on the 'natural born Citizen' clause not being upheld as Cruz, Rubio, and Jindal gain a foothold over the only female in the Republican Field. My post yesterday reflected a real sadness at the Lowered Expectations that is an abuse to  Carly Fiorina's Campaign as she will suffer a very tough blow by not making the Prime Time Debate at 9PM on August 6th.

The resulting cost should be magnified in front of all of the JUSTICES of SCOTUS as a reflection of abuse of women especially when it comes to the qualifications for the Office of the President coming under their discretion to act or not to act, either way having very big consequences and unintended consequences.

 If we take the combined 'Contribution Dollars' of Cruz, Rubio, and Jindal the night of Aug. 6th as well as any inferred boost of confidence by what will be seen by millions of Americans which has a dollar value, we can safely say we are looking at perhaps even a fifty million dollar [$50,000,000.00] Advantage all at the stake of the Un-Constitutional Violence happening against women that I am taking a stand for.

As you all think long and hard about that between now and then as I do, perhaps you will feel the naught in your stomach and the tears of sadness that burdens me today in standing up against this Un-Constitutional Tragedy and cycle of abuse we are in. Thank you for passing it on, speaking out, and opposing the dereliction of Justice surrounding the Office of the President at this time with me. Together, let our Voices be Heard.

Thank you and may God Bless America.

Have a Great Weekend!
Sincerely your 2016 Candidate for President
Cody Robert Judy
Help Support Cody Robert Judy's Campaign for President Cody is doing what not even Mr Trump or any other Republican Candidate for President can do. Remember - Principle over Party!

Help Support Cody Robert Judy's Campaign for President Cody is doing what not even Mr Trump or any other Republican Candidate for President can do. Remember - Principle over Party!

Cody Robert Judy- Presidential Candidate '08-'12-'16

That's just one story.. I have a lot (smile) Check out my book :
 Taking A Stand- the Conservative Independent Voice.

Every dollar counts towards a Campaign willing to take a stand for your individual Civil Rights and having a President like Cody Robert Judy, you can be sure that your Rights are going to be stood up for because he's the one with a Record in Court to prove that actions speak louder than words. Helping him out today is going to help you out Tomorrow.

1) Judy v. McCain Las Vegas, Nevada 2008 U.S. Fed. 2)Judy v. Obama New Hampshire State Ballot Challenge Executive Court 3)Judy v. Obama New Hampshire State Superior Court 4)New Hampshire State Supreme Court 5)Judy v. Obama Georgia Ballot Challenge Executive Court 6)Judy v. Obama Georgia State Superior Court 7)Judy v. Obama Georgia State Supreme Court 8)Judy v. Obama Ballot Challenges United States Supreme Court 12-5276 9)Judy v. Obama Utah U.S. Fed Court 10)Judy v. Obama Utah Division Circuit Court of Appeals (Denver, Colorado) 11.) Judy v. Obama U.S. Supreme Court 14-9396

Other Courts
12-10th Amendment Trial New York witness in the CIA Columbia Obama Sedition and Treason Trial
13-Amicus Curiae Filed in Berg v. Obama 2008
14-Amicus Curiae Filed in Keyes v. Obama Judge Carter case
15-Amicus Curiae Filed in Military Court if Lt. Terry Lakin

The proceeding referenced Court actions have been within the three Presidential Races 2008, 2012, and 2016.

Cody Robert Judy - U.S. President 2016
The 2016 Cody Robert Judy Campaign for U.S. President

CAMPAIGN NEWS FLASH - Please visit a couple more of our Campaign Web Pages that are up, remodeled, and going. First the "Bio of Cody" page is up and also the "NEWS FLASH" page is up which details a news flash about Judy v. Obama 14-9396 in the United States Supreme Court.

INSPIRING - I believe in You



  1. You opine that "Justice Sotomayor, with a reputation of sticking up for the underdogs in (your) my opinion really stepped out of her own character by denying an Application understood as 15A25 (Over 3,500 Views) understood in Judy v. Obama 14-9396." But fail to point out that were Obama's elections to be retroactively abrogated as having taken place in the commission of the crime of fraudulently representing himself as constitutionally eligible to be president while knowingly not so, then Sotomayor's appointment to the Supreme Court, having occured due to Obama's nomination of her, would necessarily have to as well be retroactively abrogated--effectively annulled--as having taken place during the commission of crimes against the Constitution

  2. Thanks for your comment Mr. Chris Farrell- I sure didn't miss it, but you may have missed this SPECIAL REPORT a week ago. Check it out!
    The Court Within The Court

  3. The Proposed Question is: Donald Trump sues Fox News and Ted Cruz asking the court for an emergency injunction preventing Fox from allowing Cruz to participate in the Republican presidential candidate debate August 6. (Fox I seem to recall has said that only eligible candidates may participate). Courts have ruled in favor of competitive standing in the past.

    [Tim Says: Fox is a private corporation. It could invite a Bufflehead duck to the debates and the courts wouldn’t care]
    CRJ comments:
    The question is ‘Has Fox Entered into a ‘binding agreement’ with the Candidates on the Stage in their ‘Qualifying’ rules for the Debate?

    I think they have with this list of Published Qualifiers.

    “Although we are relaxing one component of our entry criteria – the requirement that candidates must score 1% or higher in an average of five most recent national polls – all other components of the criteria remain in effect for the 5 PM/ET debate. Participants must meet all U.S. Constitutional requirements; must announce and register a formal campaign for president; and must file all necessary paperwork with the Federal Election Commission (FEC), including financial disclosure.

    Read more:

    Candidates at the very least are assured of these stipulations in their own appearance invitation. They come and expect a certain criteria to have been enforced as a component of their agreement to participate. The threat of violation seen as an endorsement of the Fox qualification criteria, i.e. setting the Constitutional Standard.

    The reason Fox News invites their Corporation into the mix is based on the interpretation of their saying a Candidate is qualified under the Constitution demand for a natural born Citizen.

    It not only becomes a liability , but a competitive insult to a Candidate, to have someone on that stage who is not qualified, not to mention the ‘public interest’ of the Case which millions of Campaign Dollars might be granted or withheld as an interest.

    I certainly do not think its frivolous and could prove a sticking point for Mr. Trump if he fails to do so now, and then brings it up later on.

    As stated here I think Fiorina is suffering damages being held off the 9PM Primetime Debate Stage. She should take the damages to the Court and get the ruling on Cruz and Rubio who are on at 9PM while she is being held at the 5PM debate.