Monday, August 3, 2015


Will Trumps Tough Talk Translate into Action?

"It has to be one of the most painful things a Candidate has to do when running for Office, especially for President of the United States", Cody said, as he spoke of running for President against the incumbent Mr. Obama in 2012 in the Democratic Party but Cody passed that test. Now the same burden falls on Mr. Donald Trump for the rhetoric of 2011 against Obama. As a Citizen Mr. Trump didn't have standing, but all of that has changed now with Mr. Trump's declaration as a Candidate for President.

They say with great knowledge comes responsibility and the Courts have said repeatedly in what Obama has credited himself with as over 200 wins in Court against the Birthers now, that you have to have 'Standing' in order to challenge another Candidate's Qualifications.

 Citizens that challenged Obama based on their voting rights were denied Court Hearings on the matter due to their failure to produce what the Court asserts are legal damages. Obama's own lawyers attested to that legal maneuver in 2008 California Case Barnett v. Obama that ended in the 9th Circuit Court from Judge Carter the former marine many had hoped would decide the issue of Obama's ineligibility to the Constitution's major demands that only a 'natural born Citizen' devolve upon the Office of the President and VP. Representatives and Senators endure a more minor "Citizen" Qualifications in the Constitution.

Mr. Judy took on the burden in 2008 suing McCain/ Obama and again took the Principle to Obama in 2012 from the very beginning with State Ballot Challenges in New Hampshire and Georgia that ended through the States Supreme Courts in the United States Supreme Court in Judy v. Obama 12-5376 starting July 2, 2012 and running through the 2012 Election to Jan 7th 2013.

Many People don't understand, Cody said, that when you run for President there is a very big burden upon you to represent the public with your standing against any illegality especially concerning the qualifications of your opponents in the race. Of course there is a lot of pressure to be civil and nice", he referred to Reagan's 11 Commandment- Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican, 'but when it comes to 'standing' and the Constitution one much consider the duty to the oath you would take as President to 'preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States' from foreign and domestic enemies.'

The usurpation of the Office of the President is really the worst case scenario nightmare you can think of. Anyone not qualified is of course a usurper of that office.


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]

D- 2016 Candidate for President Cody Robert Judy replied:

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.  ]

There is no doubt that Mr. Trump as a Citizen challenged Obama on his eligibility publicly, but Mr. Trump was not an official Candidate in 2012, so he had latitude in basically what he stated was a Citizens' effort that produced Obama's long form birth certificate after 3 long years. Here's the Clip that showed Mr. Trump stating he was "very proud of himself for accomplishing what no one else has been able to accomplish." Referring to this link of April 27th, 2011 Obama releasing his Long Form Birth Certificate.



 Of course it was a little bit of a chagrin for myself as a Candidate in 2012 who had been pressing since 2008 for Mr. Trump to come up and swallow the credit for what I had been working very hard for since 2008 in standing up for the principles of the natural born Citizen clause in Court. Mr. Trump of course had the name recognition that I did not even come close to, but in Court that is not suppose to matter.

In the Court of Public Opinion different story, Mr. Trump has the respect of being a very wealthy and successful businessman, but I still had the responsibility to shoulder the legal hurdle I did in Court which if you summarized in DC Legal Fees would have been millions of dollars up to that point. So Yes, Mr. Trump took my gravy a little bit. 

Now in the 2016 Election there is a whole new political landscape taking shape and it has again a lot to do with the Republican Party and their three unqualified Candidates running now. Mr. Cruz the Republican U.S. Senator from Texas - Mr. Rubio the Republican U.S. Senator from Florida, and of course Mr. Governor Bobby Jindal from Louisiana.  You might say we have an even bigger problem this election than we did in 2008 or 2012. 

 Mr. Trump as a declared Candidate in the Republican Party, as are the three stated illegal Candidates who are not 'natural born Citizen(s) ie., Born in the U.S. to Citizen Parents. He  has immediate standing against his colleagues just as I did in 2012 with Mr. Obama. So it follows the burden to bring the issue to Court falls upon Mr. Trumps shoulders.

The August 6th Debate at Fox News lands two of the three mentioned illegal Candidates on the stage with Mr. Trump. This is significant in accumulating competitive damages. The Debate is set to bring in millions of dollars in Campaign Donations and Support to those who do well and drain for a loss of those same campaign dollars those who do not do well. 

Having Mr. Cruz- Texas 38 ECV and Mr. Rubio-29 ECV, from two very influential States in the Presidential Electoral College is very big and posed quite a loss for Mr. Trumps Campaign. He can decide to be 'nice' or 'polite', but is that what you are looking for in a President who has got to make tough decisions sometimes about the people closest to him? Does Mr. Trump have the courage to stand up for the United States Constitution as well as bring America's Jobs Back?

Mr. Trump has repeated in his stump speeches "there is no one tougher in the Military then him", but if we can't count on him to file a simple paper in Court against Rubio and Cruz's illegal qualifications how do we expect him to stand up against ISIS?

And the worst part of this is, if Mr. Trump gave Obama such a hard time in 2011 and is seen in giving Mr. Cruz and Mr. Rubio a pass because they are members of the same Party on the Prime Time Debate Stage without an Emergency Injunction to the Court to have them removed off the Stage as unqualified Candidates, is Mr. Trump doing so based on race? Does this implicate Mr. Trump is bigger on Party then he is on Principle and how does that bode for him with the American People wanting their Constitutional Rights upheld?

For my own part as a 2016 Presidential Candidate I have worked tirelessly for the Principle over the Party. I have filed with the United States Supreme Court two Applications that specifically named Cruz, Rubio, and Jindal as siphoning off campaign funds that needed to be stopped immediately. 
Application 1 over 3500 views June 29th, 2015
Application 2 over 2000 views July 15th, 2015
I think I've done my duty as far as I can without having direct and immediate standing with either Mr. Cruz, Mr. Rubio, or Mr. Jindal unless I win the nomination of the Democratic Party and one of them wins the nomination of the Republican Party. Such is not the case with Mr. Trump who because he is in competitive competition with them now in the same party for the same nomination has immediate standing.  

I suppose we will see if Mr. Trump indeed has the courage and will to back up his Candidacy. Mr. Trump may have a little taste of what I had to choke down in 2012 and I certainly wish him as Gentleman's the best of luck.

 Mr. Trump can be rest assured if he were to win the Nomination and choose either Mr. Cruz or Mr. Rubio as a Vice Presidential Running Mate and I were to win the Democratic Party Nomination that he would be receiving Summons to appear in Court based upon the Constitution's demand that the Vice President also be a 'natural born Citizen' just as the President.

As a matter of house keeping we would really like to thank you for pushing us over the 275,500 mark today!

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. Congress defined 14A in 8USC1401 circa 1952 and later amended it. That is your hurdle.

  2. Thanks for your Comment Mr. Gerry Nance. This Title is not a hurdle as it concerns 'aliens and nationals' in the form of those who qualify for 'Naturalization' under U.S.C Amendment 14. If you notice the only status missing from that is 'Natural Born Citizen- ie Born in the U.S. to Citizen Parents. This is the testament that a "natural born Citizen" does not need to be defined by Congress in a process that is called naturalization.

    This is included in Judy v. Obama 14-9396 as a witness of the difference.

    Thanks again.