Obama Eligibility/Forgery Plaintiff Speaks Out on “Contrasts”

“THERE IS NO JUSTICE WITHOUT TRUTH”

by Sharon Rondeau

Cody Robert Judy’s book is available in three formats at Barnes & Noble

(May 2, 2017) — On Monday, The Post & Email published the first part of a new interview with Obama eligibility/forgery plaintiff Cody Robert Judy, who refiled his latest case in January to contain new evidence from the five-year criminal investigation into an image purported to be Barack Hussein Obama’s long-form birth certificate.

Between August 2011 and December 2016, Maricopa County, AZ resident and former New Jersey detective Mike Zullo conducted a continuous probe into the authenticity of the image uploaded to the White House website on April 27, 2011 said to represent Obama’s original birth record from Hawaii.

After approximately six months of scrutiny, Zullo and then-Maricopa County Sheriff Joseph Arpaio held a press conference during which Zullo said that evidence pointed to the long-form birth certificate image likely being a “computer-generated forgery” based on the standard of probable cause.

At a second press conference on July 17, 2012, Zullo confirmed that the standard of probable cause had been surpassed. A third and final briefing occurred on December 15, 2016, when Zullo disclosed that two forensic analysts working in different disciplines without knowledge of one another reached very similar conclusions to his own regarding the birth certificate image.

It was this evidence which Judy included in his refiled lawsuit to the U.S. District Court, District of Utah, in late January.

As a former presidential candidate, Judy believes his legal “standing” to challenge Obama’s eligibility cannot be questioned by the courts. Judy claims that Obama’s candidacy harmed his own presidential campaigns because of Obama’s alleged constitutional ineligibility to occupy the White House.

Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution requires that the president and commander-in-chief be a “natural born citizen,” a term the Framers did not precisely define.

The courts have continued to avoid the Obama “eligibility” issue by denying Judy a hearing.  At present, the case is open at the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals and a response pending from the U.S. Supreme Court.

Judy said his suit has merit because Obama “is still on the payroll,” drawing hundreds of thousands of dollars annually as a former president despite unanswered questions and inconsistencies about his birthplace, youth, citizenship, higher education and passport(s).

Earning less than $16,000 annually from self-employment, Judy has asked the public to assist him in advancing the case, Judy v. Obama 14-9396, on the principle that the Constitution must be upheld, particularly as it pertains to the eligibility of the nation’s chief executive.

Judy said that the “Obots,” or Obama supporters, frequently search for articles covering his criminal case a quarter-century ago.  “They’re going on to the stories written about me when I was in prison and clicking on those so that they are the things that come up when someone searches for my name,” he told us. “Google’s algorithm picks that up.”

More than two years ago, Zullo announced publicly that some “Obots” were discovered to be employed by the Obama regime, specifically within DARPA, a secretive division of the Department of Defense.  They are believed to have hacked websites, harassed and intimidated individuals seeking the truth about Obama’s history, issued death threats, and in some cases, received payment for disseminating false information in order to maintain Obama in office for eight years.

Judy said he has reason to believe that “Obots” have attempted to sabotage his efforts in gaining a hearing on the merits of his case to include the alleged criminal activity of forgery of government documents.

Further to his 1993 prison sentence, Judy said:

It’s of interest, maybe, but if it’s going to be of interest in writing about it, then make sure you understand that evidence was denied to me. The Supreme Court recognized that, and the Constitution says that you have a right to the evidence used against you.  The Supreme Court wrote me back and said, “We understand that issue, but it doesn’t affect enough people for us to look at it.”  Can you imagine that?

Evidence was withheld by LDS church leaders which I never got.  They copyrighted it.  It shows that I was beaten-up worse than Rodney King, and I wanted to show that video in court.  That’s why they never released it.  The state parole department was given a copy of it as well as the district court.

I’ve lived with this for 25 years.  I would never have been convicted if that video had been given to me.  It was a fraud; I was framed. It was a fraud to have prosecuted me, and the media did it, too.  Eight years in prison is as long as Obama served as president.

So there are sacrifices I have made, twice, with these last eight years spent trying to expose Obama’s ineligibility.  The in forma pauperis motion is a definition of sacrifice for the Republic.  The reason I decided to make it public is so that people will have a real testimony as to the sacrifices that are being made for truth.  There is no justice without truth.

This morning I wrote the Pledge of Allegiance out and asked myself, “Why?” The Pledge of Allegiance is so important to me. I actually believe it, and if people stop believing it, then it will fade and disappear, and the opposite of what the Pledge of Allegiance stands for and says will happen.  If you write out the Pledge of Allegiance and then write the opposite of all the words, you get “Injustice” and “enslaving the population with injustice,” which is fraud.  It’s really profound if we look at the opposite of what we’re supposed to be standing up for.

I think a lot of people don’t understand that $2.00 or $5.00 will make a difference. I’ve always received exactly what I needed in donations, which is a miracle in and of itself.  I know God has that power of the spirit.

People can also help by going on a video from my YouTube channel and clicking an ad or by sharing a link.  If they’re on the internet, that’s the way that they can help.  They can help by sharing it in their social media circles.  If I had $1.00 for every share of every story you or I have written on this subject, I would be able to fund my case.

I didn’t withhold anything from the court in raising the “natural born Citizen” issue.  I asked the court, “Why in the world do you make me go through all of this with the threat of not giving me justice?”  With everything I’ve done in all 15 cases, Obama and the DNC have it.  They have my in forma pauperis document, but I’ve never had a hearing.

I’ve turned in everything known to man to get justice, and they won’t hear the experts testifying that this is a fraudulent document.  The investigation has nothing to do with Sheriff Joe, but the courts won’t even hear the experts.

The “why” is so important.  Why is Cody standing up?  Why did he run for president?  Why hasn’t any other candidate taken this to the courts when they had all the money.  Why are those who are able not investing in our Republic?  They’re doing just the opposite of what they need to be doing, which is why we have a $20 trillion debt and the whole system is about ready to reset.  A huge explosion threatens to devastate us at any minute.

I think it’s the importance of letting injustice go, and its’ the importance of the law accounting for everybody under the law, “…one nation under God, with liberty and justice for all.”  If there is justice only for the rich people like Hillary Clinton, with the weapons going through and the percentage she was making with the Clinton Foundation…if we start ignoring justice, this will happen to a nation when the rich people are held to a different standard than the very poor people.

If you contrast what I’ve done the last eight years — I haven’t had to work for anybody; I work for myself — I’ve probably spent three-quarters of my time on my presidential run and fighting this in court, so many cases across the country, I think it should raise the question in people’s minds about what’s really going on when Obama has a silver spoon in his mouth.

The bigger story is that there’s supposed to be some success, and there very well could be.  This is the last chance, the last opportunity to bring Obama to justice.  If it happens, it will be huge.  Everybody will try to make the story work for himself; Donald Trump will say, “I started it.”  He has $10 billion, and I don’t think he’s put very much money into this.

The release of the in forma pauperis motion is a little embarrassing, but it shouldn’t be.  Our Founding Fathers were very poor in some cases and went through great suffering while standing up for our Republic.  What is wrong with our country when we see the middle class and the rich people not putting their money into this project or standing up for justice?

There’s a lot of prejudice against poor people; I have felt that.  People say they’re lazy, and that’s why I brought out all the things I’ve done:  750 blog posts, 70 songs, 250 videos, Facebook page, I’ve written a book, 15 cases that have been unjudiciously handled because the courts have flat-out said, “We’re not going to take a look at the experts’ opinions.”

I started thinking about the way Donald Trump handled his wealth situation, which was brilliant, totally different than the way Mitt Romney handled it. So I started thinking to myself, “I should handle my poverty situation exactly the way Donald Trump handled his “rich” situation by being open, honest and frankly, bragging about the point that I have been using my time for the Republic in which we stand for justice and liberty for all. I understand that if people, and Democrats especially, should gravitate toward anyone, it ought to be someone who understands the poor.  At the same time I haven’t stepped on Republicans’ toes by saying, “I’ve got federal handouts,” and they’re accusing me of being lazy.  I have been self-sufficient.  Not everyone self-employed is making $12,000-$13,000 a year in these times.

But just as my poverty is embarrassing, the complicity in the cover-up of Obama is embarrassing for the mainstream media.  Who’s got all the balls down?  Who’s exposed, and who’s not exposed?  The truth will set you free.

 

5 Responses to "Obama Eligibility/Forgery Plaintiff Speaks Out on “Contrasts”"

  1. Rosemary   Friday, May 5, 2017 at 11:32 AM

    I agree Harry. The framers themselves defined natural born. None of them were born in this country and were not natural born. They stated the first natural born president would take a generation. That is b/c he would be born on this soil to parents who were citizens. Two. They clearly defined 2 parents. Otherwise why wouldn’t they have said “born of mother OR father instead of “parents”. Obama was never eligible and aside from the fact that his posted bc stated father born in Kenya actually shocked me to death. I hope a way can be found to lock him up along with Pelosi and Biden who certified him.

  2. Frank_O'Pinion   Thursday, May 4, 2017 at 8:47 PM

    The definition of ‘Natural Born Citizen’ is whatever those in power what it to mean. Being born in the U.S. to a citizen mother worked for all those traitors that enabled the undocumented alien and unConstitutional POtuS Barack HUSSEIN Obama.

    Tomorrow, it will mean being born anywhere in the world by a purported U.S. citizen mother to enable Rafael E. Cruz usurp the Executive office of the U.S.A.

    Then, it will be defined as born in the U.S. to a test tube.

  3. Jacqlyn Smith   Tuesday, May 2, 2017 at 11:10 PM

    I agree Harry

  4. GARY   Tuesday, May 2, 2017 at 7:04 PM

    @Harry,

    Vatell’s book “The Law of Nations” is not mentioned or referred to anywhere whatsoever in the Constitution.

    Vatell’s book “The law of Nations” is about the ancient Latin philosophy of Natural Law and has nothing whatsoever to do with Piracy on the High Seas as you have suggested.

    The text mentioned in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 10 is-

    “Offenses against the Law of Nations”

    “Offenses against the Law of Nations” is the title of chapter 5 of Blackstones Commentaries on English law which is specifically about International Maritime Law and most specifically about “Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, just as the US Constitution mentions.

    I have seen many of you make this mistake.

    However, for future reference and for your own personal edification, kindly keep in mind that Vatell’s “The Law of Nations”, which is about Natural Law and Blackstone’s “Offenses against the law of nations” are two totally different books about two totally different subjects and while Vatell’s “The Law of Nations is not mentioned anywhere in the Constitution, Blackstone’s “Offenses against the law of Nations” is specifically mentioned by name in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 10 of the US Constitution.

  5. Harry   Tuesday, May 2, 2017 at 4:29 PM

    I am tired of the constant refrain by so many that the definition of a “natural born Citizen” was not precisely defined by the Framers.
    The Framers incorporated the Law of Nations in the U. S. Constitution by reference: Article I; Section 8; Paragraph 10. The definition clearly appears in the referenced Law of Nations: Chapter XIX; Section 212; as follows:
    “The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.”
    The Framers were highly educated men and were very familiar with the Law of Nations. The definition of a “natural born Citizen” is clearly defined by the U.S. Constitution.
    It does not require a battery of Constitutional lawyers and/or the Supreme Court to determine or understand the definition. Common sense of the ordinary Citizen will do.
    Clearly, Obama was not eligible to the Office of the President. Likewise, Cruz, Rubio and Jindal would not be eligible.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.