BREAKING NEWS REPORT – OBAMA’S INELIGIBILITY PRODUCES BIG WIN for BIRTHERS!

FEATURED EDITORIAL: The Post & Email
BREAKING NEWS REPORT – OBAMA’S INELIGIBILITY PRODUCES HISTORIC WIN for BIRTHERS!

Shepard Smith anchor at Fox News complained January 20th, 2015 that the White House had dropped the word ‘News’ from Fox News Placeholders at the State of the Union Lunch Obama held to map out all of their key talking points for his address, hoping no doubt to assure they got it right. Shepard pointed out as he sat next to Brian Williams he noticed his placeholder sign read ‘Brian Williams NBC News’. Then he looked over at David Muir’s from ABC and it read ‘David Muir ABC News’. Both his and fellow anchor from Fox News Bret Baier’s simple read their names with the word “Fox” under it. Remember in 2009 the Obama Administration’s attempt to shut Fox News completely out of the White House Press Core?

Many of the comments over at the NATIONAL REVIEW ONLINE Story defended the sleight of hand story claiming Fox News didn’t report ‘news’ and I quickly thought none of the other networks have either when it comes to the Appeal over at the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, the stories of history are being made, but no one is covering it. No one is writing stories about it. What story you ask? Hummmmm.

Yet another first has happened in American political and judicial History and no one see’s the story? ABC, NBC, CBS, and FOX news have not called in their political and judicial experts to review the fact that two very experienced Justices have just been laced with corruption charges for failing to recuse themselves destroying a whole panels ORDER and JUDGEMENT and causing a shadow of embarrassment for the whole U.S. Court of Appeals 10th Circuit Court. That’s actually the biggest win in the Nation yet for Birthers who have been protesting that the United States Constitution was in jeopardy!

Of course if the United States Constitution is in jeopardy then so is every black robe in every Court including those of the United States Supreme Court under it, as well as every U.S. Representative and U.S. Senator’s seat, I think and hope you get the point of how important the U.S. Constitution is for all of these positions. Without the U.S. Constitution they simply don’t exist. Ask George Washington how many times King George wiped out the Congress or elected spokesman for the people and called for new elections before our Revolution? That was one of the very angering ways decisions by the elected were subverted entirely by the King and what led to our Revolution. Minus that and it might not have ever happened.

What has happened in the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals is by all accounts fascinating for political junkies. Never in all of Birther History for sure has a Judgment and Order by a panel of Judges been wiped out so cleanly. Ok, break it down why is this fascinating?

Well, when you consider how many Birther Cases have gone up to the United States Supreme Court now and been denied. How many? I can think of more than six, maybe even more than a dozen starting with Phil Berg’s case since 2008 I’ll let NBC, CBS, ABC and FOX News work on that details of that one, (Do you feel vindicated now Shepard Smith (smile), you will see that we never see which Justices are involved in the Conferences if a panel is used or whose on the panel? All we have ever received is “No” answer meaning in conference the Justices refused to take it up.

As we take a step down on the decisions or opinion’s rendered to get to the U.S. Supreme Court we are necessarily faced with two general Courts. Those of a State Supreme Court’s often also deciding not to take it up with no opinion; just a denial or a affirmation of the lower Courts decision, or a U.S. Court of Appeals Circuit Court decision.

So out of all the Court’s in the United States rendered on Birther or the Article II Patriot Platform, we have essentially no word from whose decision was “No” on the U.S. Supreme Court cases, and no opinion’s from the U.S. Supreme Court. Further we have a few Court of Appeal’s opinion’s and a few State Court Decisions that basically upheld the lower Court’s Standing arguments against the plaintiff’s or petitioners smashing their cases into a billion pieces. That’s all we have. Probably the most significant of those was in fact the one from the 9th Circuit Court Orly Taitz argued with a candidate for office in toe Allan Keyes Barnett v. Debra Bowen, but this made no claim for damages to a Campaign and was leveled at the California Secretary of State for basically failing to vet Obama.

That case did not level a claim of damages against Obama for say the infraction of stating he was qualified under oath for the office he was seeking should he be elected. In defense of The Secretary of State(s) they are more or less either relying on what the Candidate says or what the Party’s nomination form states for the Candidate. Rep. Nancy Pelosi filed two forms for Obama in 2008 one for Hawaii and one for the other 49 states dues to Hawaii’s assertion that it must be known that he was qualified under the U.S. Constitution’s demands and not for simply the parties choice. To my knowledge there has never been damage assessment made from any Campaign accept mine against Obama’s Campaign based on his not being qualified. This figures that a Campaign against Obama has not suffered injury or loss due to the investment of the Campaign including commercials, web pages, travel and on and on and on.

In truth I don’t think Allan Keyes Campaign even made commercials at all and sure didn’t come close to Mitt Romney’s Campaign, my campaign actually kept up and so suffered a much heavier or substantial loss or damage as a result of Obama’s ineligibility. So in a sense you had a big claim for damages but the only real damages was a claim against the office of the President itself. No monetary claim whatsoever.

Now to understand the special circumstances coming out of the loss February 3rd, 2015 of Judy v. Obama et.al., is to look at the real victory that unfolded. Unparalleled in any Birther Case History is a total destruction of a Circuit Court of Appeals opinion which has imploded upon that Court by its own dereliction of Justice. You might even call that a manifestation of the Case’s Merit or else why would the Court lower itself to such an implosion of Court corruption?
Two of the three Justices of that panel have received direct favor from two presidential candidates who I opposed in 2012- Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. The Defendant’s/Appellee’s in this case are Barack Obama his Campaign Corporation(s) and the DNC Officials and the DNC as a Corporation.

Justice Gregory A. Phillips received his nomination from Defendant Obama. Justice Carlos F. Lucero received his nomination from President Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton’s husband. Their very employment in the 10th Circuit Court would not be possible without that favor, so it’s very significant as it encompasses the defendant’s of the case in relation to competitors with or against the Plaintiff, me. If these two Justices would not have their jobs without Obama and Clinton I’d say they favored them and to say otherwise is …what was the words they used to describe my case…wholly incredible, frivolous, and malicious? That fits pretty well actually. Never before in any case against Obama’s eligibility has this happened and it’s a big win! It puts the Court itself on defense, smashes or renders the opinion into a billion pieces and requires the further Action of the Court on the question, “What are they going to do now?”.

To deny that favor exist of which recusal was merited invokes a real claim for corruption that pretty much anyone could comprehend. That’ doesn’t take a legal genius or a great understanding of law. What are the options? Well, they can regroup, form another Panel of three or five they feel has no bias or issue in the Campaign Races and Presidential Appointments of the last decade and render another decision. They could defer the question to the United States Supreme Court for settlement saying “hey, listen we have a problem down here and don’t know the best way to handle it. Could you assist?”

Either way it invokes careful consideration and maybe more eyes on the case itself. In Birther or Article II Patriot Platform history has that ever happened in a U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals? The answer is no, and that means we are in new territory never explored which is for all intensive purposes a victory of progress for we have never been able like this to lay a claim on ‘injustice’ in the Court the population could understand.

Ok so we have established a connection between the Defendant’s and two Justices of the three-Judge- panel. Did their decision reflect that partiality in a reasonable consideration? Let’s break that down.

PART II.

To understand the absurdity of the Justices declaration that “no claim upon which relief could be granted has been made” would be like stating while looking at a dead body with a head chopped off, no murder has taken place upon which the death penalty exist for; or while looking at a recently robbed banks vault that the joker had just emptied and saying, ‘no burglary has taken place upon which a relief exist. I mean you could say that because maybe the murder didn’t happen in our Country or the Joker is a foreigner not subject to our laws, but that really gets into the absurd realms of extremism and the far limbs and twigs of justice. I think with all of the legal experience we do in this nation, all the brilliant legal minds that we have, that we can do better.

The Justices in the panel decision basically said two things upon two different subjects. First, allowing me third person leeway here speaking as my lawyer, regarding Cody’s Civil Rights as a Candidate for the Office of the President they said in so many words that Cody has no right to a fair and equal race that is based upon the rules within the Constitution’s declarations in the qualifications for the Office of the President because there are no penalties that exist or that have been let’s say criminally or congressionally codified. This is not true.

Acknowledging the truth, Cody has stated, well the entire race for my Presidency has cost around this much and those are the damages that have been received upon me personally, and upon my Campaign based on Obama’s Campaign in this particular race. Its’ like an accident and any insurance job that the defendant should be responsible for because of his reckless and irresponsible driving. Obama should have known better. He claims a license of responsibility. I mean if someone comes up and totals your car wouldn’t you want it fixed by his insurance?

This case not only shows Cody’s civil rights were violated which are absolutely declared in the Constitution by the rules, and the disregard of those rules comporting a standard of illegality, further by some pretty well known Constitutional Acts of Congress (Sherman & Clayton Acts) that actually spell out penalties for the Court to uphold and declare Cody has a right to spell them out to the Court without an Attorney General doing it. That’s Big! It certainly doesn’t happen often, and perhaps never has been seen in the Court. As such it is really new for the Court’s consideration.

To back that up, the Panel of Three Judges did entertain in their language that Cody could not point to a single case like it, but it was done in more of a mocking way to shall we say scuttle ingenuity and unique creativity afforded to an individual, oh say like the recent plea’s for same sex marriage to be given the same tax breaks as heterosexual marriages? Yes, the Court’s have not upheld that for a very long time, it’s pretty unique and the Court even mentions that in their decision June 25th, 2014 in Kitchen v. Herbert.

To for instance render a decision like the Court’s ORDER and JUDGEMENT gave me to the same-sex marriage Plaintiff’s would be for the Court to tell them they were sick and wrong, needed to repent, and find opposite sex relationships to assist in population growth and the continuation of the species BECAUSE that was normal. I pointed this out to the Court. Just because they haven’t seen a case like this in their lifetime or our American History in the Judicial Branch doesn’t give weight to dismissing the principles and good reason they haven’t – No one’s violated them like this usurper since they have been alive!

Now the Court might say “well, no other candidate for President has come to the Court and asked for recompense.” To which, Cody has stated, “You know what there is a good reason for that? The reason Mitt Romney hasn’t come in is because he was actually made an indirect recipient of good will or favor if he wouldn’t. The evidence of that is in U.S. Sen. Res. 511 where all the Republican U.S. Senators voted for a non-binding resolution that naturalized McCain’s ‘natural born citizenship’ in a similar process that an alien would be naturalized. Yes, the Court received this in my pleadings.

This didn’t go through The House of Representatives and it wasn’t signed by an eligible President so it’s non-binding however, the favors that are attached to it are very binding in support politically for his candidacy for President. Would anyone deny that if Mitt Romney really embarrassed the entire spectrum of Republican Senators exposing their drunkenness at a party they were all involved in that they would support him? Think about every State having two Senators and that body being controlled by Democrats. That means Mitt Romney can’t afford to lose a single U.S. Senator, he needs everyone of their support.

Now it wasn’t Mitt Romney’s fault that every single Republican U.S. Senator in 2008 made a deal with all three candidates in U.S. Sen. Res 511 co-sponsor Hillary Clinton and co-sponsor Barack Obama for Sen. McCain but it sure was the ticket he was running on and he had to procure the favor of support and the compromise to that was not to claim damages against Obama’s Campaign for his not being qualified as a natural born Citizen. He also backed away from McCain in 2008 who he’d lost to and failed to bring it up in-house Republican nomination. I didn’t. I jumped in and sued McCain before Obama in fact like the good little write-in Candidate I was.

To say otherwise, Mitt Romney would have to publically declare he didn’t care or need any Republican U.S. Senator’s support. Then he would also have to declare that he didn’t believe in the U.S. Constitution’s demand and qualifications for the Office of the President and he’d rather subvert them in much the same manner Obama has handed out exemptions for Obamacare and ObamaAmnesty which grants Amnesty by Executive Order refusing to uphold Congressional Legislated laws based on a term referred to as deferred prosecution which amounts to a Presidential Favor or pardon from a particular law, order or judgment. Can you imagine those questions being aired on ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox news and discussed in their panels over coffee?

Some say the Democrats want more naturalization populations in any form possible Amnesty included because they can get people on the political dole by giving them help and support and telling them if they vote Republican they would necessarily have all this help they are receiving taken away. Some say Republicans don’t mind the same process because it attracts people who are hard workers and want also to preserve the opportunity America offers in keeping the fruits of your own labors and private property ownership along with a slew of other civil rights not afforded in other Countries.

Really the totality of the argument rest upon how big of a swath and how fast it happens because America has always maintained an open door for legal immigration and we are a Country of historical immigrants if you want to walk the trail backwards in every family that has come under the umbrella of the United States Constitution. The problem has been how to handle a rush and break down on the door for those who chose to smash it down or not come through the front door legally. Its’ Congress’s job to decide how big that door is but if they make it the whole border our Nations sovereignty can be placed in jeopardy for a nation without borders is no nation at all and most Nations would agree with that.

If the U.S. all of a sudden decided to not respect borders, oh let’s just say Obama invaded Libya supplied weapons to the gangs taking over the Country killing the President, then pretty soon other nations wouldn’t think very highly of us. Oh I’m sorry, I used an example of Democrats not respecting borders and using our military complex to take over things. That’s kind of a bad example because that’s actually why people want to come to America because they are fleeing oppressive governments and if we are one there’s no reason to come. Maybe that’s what Obama is trying to get across and no one’s printing the story of it? Let’s get back to our discussion as we’ve digressed three paragraphs.

So in theory for the Court, I have argued former Governor Mitt Romney actually has already received his compensation by an award of favor and so he didn’t need to go to Court to get one. I on the other hand have not received any favor from the Republican U.S. Senate and their might be a good reason for that. I sued Sen. McCain in 2008 for not being a ‘natural born Citizen.’ If all of McCain’s U.S. Senator buddies voted for U.S. Sen. Res. 511, and they did, that would necessarily put me on the outside of their favor and I explained this to the Court as a reason they didn’t hear from Gov. Romney as the Republican Nominee in 2012.

The Court cannot simply continue to refuse justice to third parties and independent political stands for fair and equal treatment under the laws. Our Country allows third party candidates allows write-in candidates, and those laws while exercised rarely have claim on precedent cases of the U.S. Supreme Court: Namely Minor v. Happersett which declares a natural born Citizen to be born in the U.S. to Citizen parents! Obama fails this and it’s a decision rendered in a higher court that the lower courts are suppose to uphold!

This panel of Judges in the 10th Circuit Court have not only compromised themselves by not recusing two of the three judges with conflicts of interest favoring the defendant/Appellee, but have set out to flip the bird at the United States Supreme Court precedent case law. It is on those conditions we must at the least recognize this as a big win!

You can read the ORDER and JUDGEMENT here and... you can read my RESPONSE or request for a REHEARING En Blanc here.

Update: Here are the three very important questions I posed to the Court to justify Rehearing if:

Question #1- Does Justice Gregory A. Phillips having ENTERED FOR THE COURT the ORDER AND JUDGEMENT on this case February 3rd,2015 having been considered to the U.S. Senate for Confirmation with the favor of the Appellee/Defendant in this case, Barack Hussein Obama aka Barry Soetoro in the nomination process and thus his very employment as a Justice in the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals constitute an prejudiced dismissal summarily instigated upon the Plaintiff that would seem at best a compromise of judicial discipline in recusal decorum and at worst an impeachable offense?

Question#2- June 25th, 2014 this Court handed down a decision favorable to ‘individual rights’, considered standing and upheld marriage in Kitchen v. Herbert No. 13-4178 and considered the rights of an individual who is unpopular more important per the conflicting referendum of all the people in the entire State of Utah and it’s Constitutional Amendment in the State, which does not come on political easy street; isn’t the ORDER AND JUDGEMENT of this case dismissing it as frivolous a conflict of the Court’s own interest and judgment in that case in the interest of Individual Rights?

Question#3- The conflicting statements in the ORDER and JUDGEMENT asserted by the Court leave criminal mischief, fraud, forgery, and a declaration of the precedent case in Minor v. Happersett regarding a natural born Citizen being “Born in the U.S. to Citizen Parents” by the U.S. Supreme Court undefended and a wreck; and fair elections on equal terms for all the Candidates, per race, per qualifications within the U.S. Constitution in total disarray and the Appellant/Plaintiff without recourse in the infringements of his Civil Rights to a fair race; Does this not deserve the attention of the full Court and the political corrections that might be made for the next general election where the entire U.S. population has a stake and claim for fairness, equal treatment under the law in the considerations of our Republic?

I'll keep you updated as things happen and discuss this more in detail so pass it on and keep checking back. Thanks so much for your help and support needed at this time more then ever.
Yours Truly
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? If you won't defend your children and their future who will you defend?

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
www.codyjudy.us

CONTRIBUTION REVOLUTION



The Commercial is simply called "America"


Join the new CODY ROBERT JUDY FOR PRES 2016 FB SITE Here

Part III. Obama/ Holder FED's OPEN FIRE on Utah Governor's Declaration to State Agencies to HAULT 1300 SAME-SEX Marriages

Part III. Obama/ Holder FED's OPEN FIRE on Utah Governor's Declaration to State Agencies to HAULT 1300 SAME-SEX Marriages

The great shake-up continued in Utah today with the same-sex marriage war as Attorney General Eric Holder under the executive hand of Obama at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue representing the Federal Government just said the 1300 marriages performed, that the Governor of Utah stated yesterday would not be recognized by his state agencies, would be recognized by the Federal Government. Video here of the announcement.


Rush Limbaugh just featured it on his show comparing the Feds engaging in executive orders of this kind, like Obama would, basically waving a magic wond saying the Governors words in his own state should be “moot”. The Governors of the individual States represent the executive branch of the State, as Obama represents the executive branch of the Federal Government and typically it falls on the executive branch to be the “enforcer of the law” while the Judicial Branch represents the “interpetation” of the law and the legislative branch represents the “law makers”.

Jan 8th,2014, the State Representative LaVar Christensen, original sponsor of Utah's Amendment 3 that actually became part of Utah's Constitution Rod Arquette show made the argument that Utah’s Referendum passed in 2004 declaring “marriage” to be only between a man and women was simply an insurance policy of the inalienable rights assured under the laws of nature that God had given as was previously discussed in Part I and Part II of this saga.

That the ‘marriage’ statute of the State was not given by man, but was a right given by God was the argument Utah State Rep. Christensen made, basically stating it was well within the State's right to legislate morality and it did. He mentioned the Creator in the Declaration of Independence, "Under God" in the pledge of allegiance as examples of our Nation being a Christian centered nation with the laws of morality coming as inalienable rights. Of course the Constitution says very little about “married couples”, but says a whole lot about protecting ‘individual rights’ regardless of race, color, or previous conditions of servitude.

Citizen(s) is/are determined to be those born or naturalized in the United States, which takes ‘gender’ out of the discrimination line ,Amendment 19, and it does say in Amendment 14, Sect 1. , that “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States, nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protections of the laws.” The protections of the laws or benefits to ‘married couples’ then must be equally accessible to every citizen without a bias of religion or gender. “Marriage” of course has nothing to do with the rights of procreation under inalienable rights. God has granted the rights of a women to get pregnant within a marriage contract or without, which we then would ascribe as a ‘natural law’ verses say a state statute of marriage.

The word “Marriage” has been used for thousands of years to describe a union of a man and women where the wife would represent the female part of that marriage, however, concubine also goes back thousands of years to describe a union of a man and a women as in Abraham’s time in the Bible as the the legislature brought the “moral” aspect of the Biblical Christian nature of our nation was founded upon into his interview with Mr. Arquette.

As I’ve listened to Rod Arquette on his shows about this issue, as he has admitted himself, this issue is to him about like stuffing a whole chicken down his throat with the feathers on. He is compassionate to all people, but really guards that word “marriage” to be only used by a man and a women. There is nothing however in the words “Same-Sex Marriage” that is shared with “Hetrosexual Marriage” accept the word “marriage”. Sodomy, Adultry, Fornication, and intercourse all share in their communication or understanding the word “Sex” depending upon who’s saying it to whom. The abbreviation of the word Book Of Mormon (B.O.M) does not infringe upon the word BOMB. The point of course is it wouldn't be the first time the State of Utah as represented by authorities was wrong, mistaken, or in other words had just hooked up the cinch to the bridle of the horse. Yeah, it doesn't go there.

If you were anti-mormon you could say the B.O.M. was a flop or wasn’t considered a cannon in your religious opinon, or if you were mormon you might say the B.O.M. was dynomite in your opinion and argue it was a cannon of religion. Of course if this were argued in a church meeting the factual evidence would declare the truth, but you have to understand the State of Utah has in more then one instance denied facts like these and in a completely dillusional state of mind incarcerated a person(s) before, for over eight years.

That’s not a joke folks, but it was the subject of Jon Stewarts Daily Show in a comedy show here 'Putting the Con back in Congress :



In the 9th Century BC the prophet Elijah proposes a direct test of the powers of Baal and Yahweh. The people of Israel, 450 prophets of Baal, and 400 prophets of Asherah are summoned to Mount Carmel. Two altars are built, one for Baal and one for Yahweh. Wood is laid on the altars. Two oxen are slaughtered and cut into pieces; the pieces are laid on the wood. Elijah then invites the priests of Baal to pray for fire to light the sacrifice. They pray from morning to noon without success. Elijah ridicules their efforts. They respond by cutting themselves and adding their own blood to the sacrifice (such mutilation of the body was strictly forbidden in the Mosaic law). They continue praying until evening without success.

Elijah's offering is consumed by fire from heaven in a stained glass window at St. Matthew's German Evangelical Lutheran Church in Charleston, South Carolina

Elijah now orders that the altar of Yahweh be drenched with water from "four large jars" poured three times (1 Kings 18:33–34). He asks God to accept the sacrifice. Fire falls from the sky, consuming the water, the sacrifice and the stones of the altar itself as well. Elijah seizes the moment and orders the death of the prophets of Baal. Elijah prays earnestly for rain to fall again on the land. Then the rains begin, signaling the end of the famine.

I hope Rod Arquette and the Utah Legislatures and Governor don’t start cutting on themselves and throwing themselves off of tall buildings as the fire from Washington DC in Obama and Holder comes down to them, when they themselves have been unwilling to uphold the United States Constitution in Obama’s eligiblity choosing rather to sacrifice over 2 million dollars in the defense of the referendum of 2004 and certainly all of the money that went in to getting it past as well.

The first amendment certainly guarantees the freedom of speech and it seems Utah’s referendum of 2004 deals more with semantics rather than ‘laws of nature’ which we would consider inalienable rights given by God, so I think there is more in the Constitution that requires the State to recognize the rights of every individual’s preference to a union of our species as citizens under the Constitution or Supreme Law of the Land.

Now, our Constitution includes “Citizens” so I don’t think those people who want to marry their cat or dog or horse should be given a marriage licence with the full benefits of federal and state agency protections under the law. The cat, dog, and horse are not ‘citizens’ upon which the Constitution applies.

Indeed in another analogy Rod Arquette and the State of Utah law makers and Governor have ignored the laws of nature and not had any problem with endorsing Obama as “President” , even though he is not a ‘Natural Born Citizen’ qualified under the Constitution’s demand for the Office of the President which is the only difference actually distinguishing in the Constitution’s language for the Office of the President from U.S. Reps, and U.S. Senators whose designation is "Citizen".

If discrimination is the word for "different age qualifications" use it as you will, there are differences in qualifications afforded to us for very good and well thought out reasons standing as principles of the Constitution. In short, a ‘natural born citizen’ requires two full generations void of alien citizenship to be the commander in chief of the armies and President of the United States. The distinction was put in place to prevent a foreign dictator from placing an heir in the position. A Qualification for an office is indeed a legal discrimination, but if you'll notice it wasn't based on race, color, or previous conditions of servitude, or gender.

If a person is born in the United States to Citizen parents, there is a two generation protection. That protection, considered to be a national security measure, was respected until Obama usurped the office against Laws of Nations mentioned in Article I, Sect. 8 for which Congress is given charge stating : “ and Offenses against the Law of Nations;”. Capitals not paraphrased.

The United States can not afford not to recognize the 'natural born citizen' clause of the demand for the Office of the President regardless of race, color, or previous conditions of servitude or gender. Just because Obama is black doesn't mean that he doesn't have to be a natural born citizen to be president and at least 35 years of age.

Utah’s only defense on the enforcement of the Federal dictation would be that Obama is not a qualified enforcer of federal law that is recognized by the States under the United States Constitution agreed upon by the States in the Union.

This of course would be like throwing the book at Obama who has taken it upon himself to line item veto any part of Obamacare ruling by edict, and it would actually be a recognition of the law of the Constitution upon the Office of the President, void Obamacare, and certainly would be a notable charge for the State’s rights to at least recognize their own authority upon their state agencies.

Of course Governor Gary Herbert could I suppose still authorize the Driver's License bureau in Utah not to change the drivers liscenses of those seeking a change due to the same-sex marriage recognition of 1300 couples as well as insurance policies etc., but that is an uphill fight that I believe he will come out on the losing end of because so much is afforded in individual rights that has not been recognized in Utah.

Now I like my Utah Governor Gary Herbert, I sure do. I think him to be an honorable and reasonable man. I believe he works his tail end off for Utah and I believe in his heart he is doing what he believes is the will of the people in Utah. What I do think is missing in this argument is an understanding of the argument for the people.

You get a crowd going in one direction its not likely that each individual has had the time or the argument laid out for them as a Judge might.

That's exactly what happened with Obama in fact, and how we got a usurpation of the Office of the President. The crowd got excited about a first black president, and the media loved the story even more than the wisdom of the law. Its one of the most important aspects of the United States Constitution and Utah's Constitution also, those of the rights of the individual over the mob or crowd.

That is a fundamental paradigm shifts of the power of the United States Citizen that the world has stood in shock over. However, any right can be violated if Good Men do nothing and refuse to take a stand, which is another reason Obama still resides at 16oo Pennsylvania Avenue and our Nation is distressed and stretched domestically so far from the United States Constitution that unlawful prosecutions take place and the rights of many are trampled under foot by those who believe themselves to be appointers of the law but not subjects to the law as has almost become common place in America now days.

What I do know is the days have come when no man can live on barrowed light and that each and every individual must search out for themselves the wisdom of the Constitution which I continually find sound and admire in its simplicity,direction, and course. Our forefathers knew that to have a Nation full of diverse religions wouldn't necessarily be easy, but it would be worth it, and that is why Congress it was said, "must not make any law respecting a particular establishment of religion" and why marriage should be afforded to any consenting citizen according to the age particulars afforded by the States Laws in which they reside, and why I not only think Utah's Referendum was wrong and indeed is unconstitutional, but why the 1887 Edmunds-Tucker Act of the United States Congress is just as equally wrong and unconstitutional. So if Holder feels it necessary to over-turn a Utah Referendum about marriage let him not be a hypocrit and not overturn that Federal Referendum or Act of Congress.

Breaking: Breaking News : Orrin Hatch R - U.S Senator from Utah and Mitch McConnell R- U.S. Senator from Kentcky just requested two sheriffs kits produced by Michael Volin of WheresObamasBirthCertificate.com (WOBC) with the purpose of informing the public and elected officials of the forgery of the long-form birth certificate image posted since April 27, 2011 on the White House website. These kits (Get Yours Free Here) contain the same evidence released in March 1,2012 (and a little more) that I included in my case against Obama that went from Georgia State- Georgia State Supreme- to U.S. Supreme 12-5276 in Judy v. Obama.

Please urge and encourage your Representatives to OPEN AND TRANSPARENT HEARINGS in the House of Representatives on Obama's eligibility as the solution to eliminating Obamacare. These hearings must be held and the evidence must be heard that are in the Sheriff's kits most all of the Representatives have received now.

If these hearings are conducted in the open and reported in the open, the evidence will mount collectively and the U.S. Senate although it has a majority of Democrats will have to concede to the facts and evidences or will be seen as completely unfit for their duties and as incompetent. Utah would most likely see more benefits come from supporting the Candidates like myself, (well, Candidate as myself because there were no other candidates in the entire U.S.A. who stood up for principle regardless of party), fighting for equal protections under the law in pushing for Open and Transparent Hearings in Congress with two million dollars on Obama's Verification Eligibility qualification hearings on the stage to remove him as a disability according to Amend 14, Sec.3 would be a lot faster solution.

Like CODY ROBERT JUDY'S NEW 2016 PAGE ON FACEBOOK HERE
Follow me on Twitter: Official Cody Robert Judy 2016 on Tweeter here

You Can Help Me [ If you would like to help Cody Robert Judy in his bid for upholding the Constitution in “America’s Birther Campaign”, or ABC Campaign ,which highlights the United States Constitution with information and education for voters to understand the tough questions politicians should be answering in 2014, and in the coming 2016 election for the Office of the President please make a contributions here:

Let me now wish everyone a very happy and warm New Year as we pray for the Lord to save our Country and restore America from the dilapidation we now find ourselves and the principles of the Constitution in, for this I am Taking A Stand.

Sincerely, Cody Robert Judy
www.codyjudy.us www.codyjudy.blogspot.com YouTube: CODY JUDY / CODE4PRES TV Get Cody's Book: Taking A Stand