Exclusive: Presidential Candidate Files Lawsuit for Damages Against Obama, DNC, Part 2


by Sharon Rondeau

(Jul. 31, 2014) — On July 25, The Post & Email published Part 1 of an interview with presidential candidate Cody Robert Judy, who earlier this month filed a new lawsuit against “Barack Hussein Obama aka Barry Soetoro, his political organization OFA, the DNC and others for monetary damages which Judy claims he incurred from running against Obama in 2008 and 2012.

Judy had sued both Sen. John McCain and Obama in 2008 in separate actions for failing to meet the constitutional requirement of “natural born Citizen” present in Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution.

McCain was born in Panama to two U.S.-citizen parents, while Obama claims he was born in Hawaii to a U.S.-citizen mother and British-citizen father.  In the days of the nation’s founding and beyond, the citizenship of the parents was considered a factor in determining the citizenship and allegiance of a child.  Today, however, many people understand the term “natural born Citizen” to mean simply “born in the United States.”

During 2008, many Americans contacted their respective congressmen to express concern that McCain and Obama might not meet the constitutional requirements to serve as president.  Information available on the internet since 2004 stated that Obama had been born in Kenya, not the United States, which presumably would have disqualified him from eligibility for the presidency. Instead of investigating, members of Congress issued thousands of form letters to constituents in an attempt to convince them that McCain’s birth to citizen parents, although outside the country, and Obama’s alleged birth in Hawaii despite his foreign-citizen father, were both sufficient to satisfy the “natural born Citizen” clause.

Some are now arguing that Sen. Ted Cruz, who was born in Canada to a U.S.-citizen mother and Cuban-citizen father, is eligible for the presidency, while others vehemently disagree.  Several weeks ago, JB Williams raised the question of whether or not Cruz even possesses U.S. citizenship, which is a requirement for a state or federal legislator.  CNN reported in June that Cruz was born with dual citizenship.

Judy believes that Obama’s actions while in office are evidence that he is not constitutionally qualified.  He claims that his civil rights have been infringed upon by having to compete with a candidate in both 2008 and 2012 who is not constitutionally eligible, and he believes that the timing of his lawsuit is key to its success.

“The public is now witnessing, with all of the problems and scandals, a candidate who is not eligible to the office of the president,” Judy said.  He included in the scandals Obama’s alleged crime of “identity fraud,” failing to notify Congress in advance of the Taliban prisoner exchange involving Bowe Bergdahl, and multiple “infringements against the Constitution.”

On Friday, the North American Law Center (NALC) published three Articles of Impeachment which claim that Obama has carried out and covered up “criminal identity fraud” with the assistance of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).  NALC’s lead attorney, Stephen Pidgeon, also calls Obama “Barry Soetoro,” which he believes is Obama’s real identity.

“The Senate is starting to get a big wake-up call that the qualifications for president aren’t just ‘natural born citizen;” it’s a national defense that has protected us throughout our entire history,” Judy told us.  “That’s what I have called the ‘mantle’ of the president…the mantle, or the real, true provenance, the spirit of the office.  Obama does not have that because he’s not qualified.  We are, in a sense, running blindly off the cliff as fast as we can after a guy who has every intention of destroying the United States in the way that he feels is justified based on his roots and colonial understanding.”

Regarding the question of whether or not he has “standing” to sue, Judy believes that the legal argument is very important.  “It’s not just an argument for the presidential race,” he said.  Comparing his candidacy to a car accident, he said, “If you understand ‘standing,’ as far as a car accident happening and people who are witnesses to it, if standing is wiped out, then you understand that every single witness has a right to claim damages for witnessing the horror vs. the people who are actually in the accident with head concussions or other injuries.  Anybody who was in the accident would look at someone wanting to sue because they saw it as crazy…’What are you talking about?!  You weren’t hurt.  You just watched it.  I’m the one with the broken leg!’

“In the judicial argument, it applies to every single accident that ever happens.  So you can understand from that perspective that ‘standing’ has to be there or our legal system would be completely wiped out, overrun,” Judy said.

Judy said he has never used Obama’s birthplace, which has not been positively determined, as the foundation upon which to determine if Obama meets the constitutional requirements of the presidency. “Natural born Citizen, according to the Constitution, is a two-pronged test,” he told us.  “The second prong is that you are born to citizen parents.”  He added that there are age requirements for U.S. representatives, U.S. senators and the presidency:  25 years of age, 30 years of age, and 35 years old, respectively, of which many Americans might not be immediately aware.

“You have to be at least a citizen; you can’t be a foreign citizen and run for representative; you just can’t.  Some people call it ‘discrimination,’ but it’s ‘qualification,'” Judy contended.  “Some states allow 14-year-olds to drive; I got my license when I was 14, but the restriction on that was that I couldn’t drive at night.  In most states you have to be 16, and then you can drive anytime during the day or night.  So these are qualifications based upon ‘good intel’ (laughs) that will help us avoid accidents.  When we start violating those qualifications and an eight-year-old takes off with his dad’s car, and he wants to drive fast, there is a lot more chance for accidents.  I think when people start thinking about the presidential qualifications like that and the wisdom and thought that went into the qualifications for president, they would see and understand a lot better that all of these ‘accidents’ that are happening are like an eight-year-old driving.”

The Post & Email asked Judy if, given the numerous Obama regime “scandals,” there is now an opportunity to educate the American public about the presidential eligibility requirements, to which he responded:

 A lot more people are coming into a realization of why those qualifications exist.  All these “scandals” are affecting a lot more people.  I’m talking to people almost every single day now…I know a lot of people in the movie industry, music industry, costume, make-up industries in Utah, and I’m hearing now from them, “Oh, my gosh, Obamacare is just crazy.  It’s costing me so much more than I thought, and I’m not qualified, and here I am subsidizing myself more than I ever thought it would possible.”  It’s just like that girl who said, “Obama’s going to pay for my car, my mortgage…”  Then the realization hits them that Obama is an elitist, and an elitist is typically against the United States Constitution, because the Constitution is a common-man champion.

“Do you think people will begin asking, ‘Was there something about that “eligibility” question back in 2008?'” The Post & Email asked, to which Judy responded:

I think that the biggest thing that people hope for is just like when you hire a contractor to come in and fix something in your house: replace your door, your window or your deck.  People vote en masse during election time, and they’re voting for people who they hope and trust are going to do a job for them just like a contractor.  Representatives and senators take an oath about the work that they are promising to do, and what we saw with the non-binding U.S. Senate Resolution 511 was all the Republicans basically giving up and not doing the work they promised to do.

And they thought, “It’s just a non-binding Senate resolution for our guy” because it was for McCain.  But it totally silenced any opposition on Obama’s eligibility in the Congress.

“And Hillary Clinton and Obama voted ‘yes’ on it.”

They were cosponsors.

“Even Prof. Jonathan Turley, who voted for Obama twice, has opined that Obama has overstepped his authority.  In 2008, Turley wrote an article asking if McCain were eligible for the presidency given his birth in Panama, but he never questioned Obama’s eligibility with a foreign-citizen father, if Barack Obama Sr. is his father.”

I take Obama at his word on that.  You don’t have to take it apart if what he says is illegal.  If he made up the story, it’s worse.

“I notice that you assign certain amounts to damages.  How did you arrive at those?”

I’ve compared the constitutional eligibility argument to a great big circle, and all around that circle are particular doors that had to be opened at times because of timing and others that didn’t work. This is a brand new door, and it’s never been tried.  This door has never been opened during the entire eligibility movement.  One of the biggest problems we have had is that there has been a lot of action, starting with the 2010 trial with Dr. James David Manning to Robert Campbell with the American Grand Jury to Montgomery Blair Sibley and Doug Vogt trying to present the arguments to a grand jury.  The challenge in that particular spectrum is to get someone other than an attorney general to prosecute criminally.  Because Obama appoints the attorney general, Eric Holder, it’s very unlikely that Holder will prosecute Obama.  Another way of bringing a criminal prosecution is that you have a group of citizens in a grand jury who can say, “We’ve looked at this evidence and we find that it’s worthy of a complaint.”  Then it places more burden upon the attorney general to press charges, and if the attorney general doesn’t press charges, he can be impeached.

The very interesting fact about the Sherman Act is that it’s unique.  It has to do with monopolies.  Candidates for president and lesser offices are beginning to incorporate themselves to remove liability against their personal fortunes.  There are laws by which corporations can protect personal property.  There’s a catch-22 with this.  If a candidate incorporates himself, he also becomes subject to the laws which govern corporations.  Obama has a corporation called “Organizing for Action” (OFA), and then there is another corporation which covers the DNC.  They are incorporated.

In a particular diagram, if you’re looking at business monopolies, the biggest one that people can identify with is Microsoft.  When the U.S. government crippled Microsoft or IBM, the telephone companies, a company was able to come in as a corporation and wiped out smaller businesses based on a particular set of standards.  When you apply those to a presidential or a political operation where candidates are incorporating themselves, a corporate standard can be looked at.  That corporate standard to be looked at is a lot more penalizing than if you are just a person.  A violation of the Sherman Act as a monopoly is the formation of an illegal cartel.  That is a profound statement:  an illegal cartel that is prohibiting other businesses can go up to $100,000,000.  That’s called “statute.”

People need to understand the difference between “statute” and monetary damage.  “Statute” is what a judge can authorize.  That’s wide open for a judge to say, “Look, you’ve violated this particular law.  This is the penalty:  I can fine you anything from $2.00 to $100,000,000 based on the nefariousness of the case.  With this presidential race and the fraud and forgery, I can’t think of an illegal cartel that has affected more people in a negative way than Obama’s illegal occupation of the White House in the office of the president.

Within the corporation laws, there are specific clauses that give individuals like me the right to bring criminal actions directly to the judge, without the grand jury and without the attorney general.


The Post & Email’s interview with Cody Robert Judy will be continued in a third and final installment.

One Response to "Exclusive: Presidential Candidate Files Lawsuit for Damages Against Obama, DNC, Part 2"

  1. Code4Pres   Friday, August 1, 2014 at 12:27 AM

    Nice Part II ,Mrs. Rondeau of Interview. DUE DATE for response is this coming Tuesday, Aug. 5th afforded by Summons return service on July 16, 2014.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.