WILL TENTH CIRCUIT EXAMINE “FACTS AND EVIDENCE?”
by Sharon Rondeau
(Jul. 25, 2017) — On Tuesday, The Post & Email published Part 2 of its interview with Cody Robert Judy, who has a case pending in the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals challenging the constitutional eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama and alleging that Judy’s civil rights were violated as a Democratic candidate for president when the DNC proffered an ineligible candidate as its nominee.
Part 1 of the interview is here.
On July 14, a three-judge panel of the Tenth Circuit dismissed Judy’s appeal from the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah as “frivolous” based on the lower court’s ruling, but stated that if he paid the customary filing fee, the court would proceed with a review.
To that time, Judy had been given permission to file his case in forma pauperis (IFP), meaning that he does not have the financial means to pay customary court fees. IFP status is granted in certain instances after a plaintiff demonstrates, by submitting a financial affidavit, to the court where the action is filed.
Judy had challenged Obama’s eligibility before, in 2008, when he also ran for president as a Democrat, and again in 2012 under the same circumstances. Also in 2008, he filed a lawsuit challenging Sen. John McCain’s eligibility on the basis that McCain was born outside of the United States and is not a “natural born Citizen,” as the Constitution requires of the nation’s chief executive.
Judy repeated his quest for the presidency in 2016.
Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution mandates that the president and commander-in-chief of the military be a “natural born Citizen.” The term of art is one of three presidential qualifications included by the Framers during the Constitutional Convention of 1789, the other two being that the person must have resided in the United States for 14 years and be 35 years of age or older at the time of inauguration.
The “grandfather clause” included in Article II allowed any of the Framers to become president while acknowledging that they were not “natural born Citizens.” It is that exception to which many scholars and constitutional experts point when making the case that the Founders intended a difference between the term “citizen” and “natural born Citizen.”
As Judy has stated in previous interviews and his own articles, U.S. representatives and senators are required to be “citizens” in order to qualify for federal office, but the president must be a “natural born Citizen.”
There exists a debate over whether a person born in the United States to parents who are citizens of another country can be considered “natural born.” Similarly, questions have arisen over children born in foreign countries to U.S.-citizen parents, including those serving overseas in the military.
One such child, now an adult in his 60s, last year provided The Post & Email with documentation showing that although born to a U.S. military father serving in Germany, he is considered a “naturalized” citizen and not “natural born.”
The Framers vested Congress with the authority to make law regarding the process of foreigners becoming U.S. citizens, or “naturalizing.”
Judy believes that a “natural born Citizen” is a person born in the United States to two U.S.-citizen parents and nothing less.
Obama claims a birth in Hawaii on August 4, 1961. Both before and during the course of his presidency, several differing life narratives emerged which have not been reconciled, including that Obama is “an immigrant” to the U.S.
Even the most liberal interpretations of the “natural born Citizen” clause do not include naturalized citizens as eligible for the presidency.
On March 1, 2012, a former detective investigating the validity of a “long-form” birth certificate image posted at whitehouse.gov the previous year bearing Obama’s name declared it a “computer-generated forgery.” Also found fraudulent was Obama’s purported Selective Service registration form, which has been mailed to an unknown number of FOIA requesters beginning in late 2008.
The FBI declined to investigate the findings despite admitting knowledge of the reported forgeries.
Over the course of his five-year investigation, the former detective, Mike Zullo, working under the auspices of the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO), held three press conferences to inform the public of his findings: March 1, 2012; July 17, 2012; and December 15, 2016.
Judy took particular note of the final presser in which Zullo divulged that two independent forensic analysts who perform their own examinations of the long-form birth certificate image reached conclusions very similar to Zullo’s own.
The media virtually ignored those revelations and appeared relieved that the investigation would close with Sheriff Joseph Arpaio’s on December 31 following his November 8 election loss to Paul Penzone.
No media outlet nationally or internationally has investigated Zullo’s findings nor asked the former Obama administration for comment. Instead, most major U.S. media have ridiculed and attempted to discredit Arpaio and Zullo for undertaking the task at considerable personal and professional risk.
Because Judy viewed the new information Zullo released in December as directly pertinent to his Obama eligibility challenge, he reopened a previous lawsuit, Judy v. Obama, 14-9396, at its point of origin, the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah, in January of this year. In the new filing, Judy included the “new evidence” Zullo conveyed as alleged criminal activity which could be presented directly to a federal judge under the Clayton Act and Sherman Anti-Trust Act.
On April 10, Judge Ted Stewart dismissed the case without requiring the defendants to supply a response, after which Judy appealed to the Tenth Circuit and newly-sworn U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch.
Neither Gorsuch nor the Supreme Court clerk’s office has responded to the filing other than to return proof of delivery to the sender.
Last week, after a public appeal, Judy was able to raise the $505 which the Tenth Circuit required him to pay to the U.S. District Court in order for the Tenth Circuit to move forward. He paid the fee on Friday afternoon and promptly received a receipt in his mail on Saturday from the District Court.
Out of dozens, and perhaps more than 100, eligibility challenges to Obama’s election and occupation of the White House over the last nine years, Judy’s is the only remaining case and the sole one to be filed after Obama left office.
While no eligibility challenge has yet been heard by the courts on its merits, certain individuals who have ridiculed for years the idea that the Obama long-form birth certificate image is not genuine are nevertheless watching Judy’s case very closely.
“It’s very, very significant when you think you have rights and are able to walk into a court and have your constitutional rights upheld,” Judy said. “You hear the Democratic Party and Republican Party say that the Constitution is so important whenever somebody else is in violation, but when they’re in violation, holy cow!”
He continued:
I made that argument from the beginning: just because the two parties are the majority parties doesn’t mean that they both can’t be in the tank as far as being destructive of the Constitution, especially when it’s spelled out pretty clearly to we who recognize that if you were a “citizen” at the time of adoption of the Constitution, it was OK; thereafter, you have to be a “natural born Citizen.” It doesn’t mean “anchor babies.” It doesn’t mean Kim Jong-Un can come over here and have a wife have a baby over here on American soil and get him into the presidency.
That’s why people who think that just being born here is sufficient are wrong. The House Judiciary Committee recognized in their hearings on the issue that it takes time for acclimation to our American principles when you come from a dictatorship or a tyranny-led country. People’s psyche has to completely change, and that takes at least two generations. That’s why I’ve fought for “born in the United States to U.S.-citizen parents.”
Other than me, there is no one over the last nine years who has kept up the prosecution. Others, if they try to jump into court right now, will get a dismissal for failing to prosecute. The legal status just dies. There are a few people who recognize that and know that if my case fails, it’s over. I am very grateful to those who donated to raise the filing fee.
My Motion for Reconsideration specifically named the criminal code and laid it out as plainly and simply as possible. If the courts don’t think when crimes are committed that there are any victims, then they’re not upholding a standard of law. You cannot forge a federal document or make a fake document; it should be obvious to everyone that you can’t usurp the office of the presidency that way. If they don’t bring this out, they’re basically asking for total anarchy.
Trump is reportedly considering Ted Cruz for attorney general, who he said he had standing to sue for not being eligible for the presidency. For all the Republicans, I think it’s important that they be reminded that Trump said he had standing to sue Ted Cruz. That should tell us that presidential candidates have standing. If Trump didn’t sue, it could be because he’s a nice guy, but we could look at the other side of the coin and say, “He realized what’s happening in the judicial branch and didn’t want to take the chance of losing.” But Trump has nothing to worry about as to whether or not he’s a natural born Citizen.
In John Jay’s letter to George Washington, he referred to people inside the government with foreign influence. If Ted Cruz gets in there as AG, do you think there are going to be any prosecutions of foreigners running for president? That’s the risk of letting in someone who has violated the law; they’re going to take it over.
For people to say Obama’s circumstance of qualification is not at odds with every other President in U.S. history is just not dealing with reality. What’s important about that is each president represents a “Case-In-Law” with a precedent.
Just because we haven’t had a successful hearing of a presidential candidate against a presidential candidate doesn’t mean that I’m not right or correct in my facts. For some to keep assuming that I haven’t stated a claim upon which relief could be granted, if I can’t challenge someone with the claim of the Constitution of not being a natural born Citizen, as I said, then nobody can. That just opens the executive branch of our government open to foreigners.
Somebody who isn’t a natural born citizen is a foreigner. A “citizen” is a foreigner if he’s in the office of the president.
When The Post & Email asked Judy what he expects the Tenth Circuit to do next, he responded:
What we’re looking to see from the Tenth Circuit is if the District Court ruled unlawfully that my case is frivolous. What they said was, “If the money is paid, then we’ll undertake and look at the evidence to see if the District Court ruling was in error.” So they haven’t ruled that my case is frivolous. The law dictates that they have to rule that the case is frivolous if it’s IFP and the District Court has ruled that it’s frivolous. If the fee is paid, they will look at all of the facts and the evidence and undertake the decision as to whether the District Court ruled unlawfully that it was frivolous.
The appellate court has not said it’s frivolous; they said, “If you pay the fee, we’ll take a look and see if it’s frivolous.” We’re asking, “Was one single judge wrong?” and it’s been proven over and over that often, a judge is wrong. In my case, it’s pretty clear that he was.
At 9:30 a.m. EDT, The Post & Email sent a message to the White House through its contact form:
Good morning, this is a media inquiry regarding an active lawsuit challenging Barack Hussein Obama’s constitutional eligibility as well as alleging criminal activity given that his long-form birth certificate and Selective Service registration form were declared fraudulent by a criminal investigator working under former Maricopa County Sheriff Joseph Arpaio.
In December, the investigator, Mike Zullo, announced in a final press conference that two forensic analysts who are well-respected in their industries each conducted its own examination of the birth certificate image and agreed with Zullo’s findings that it cannot represent a genuine, paper document.
Is the White House following this case? Does the U.S. Justice Department have any intention of investigating Zullo’s conclusions?
Thank you very much.
Update, July 26, 2017, 5:18 p.m. EDT: In a message to The Post & Email, Cody Robert Judy reported:
A little bit of info. Called the Tenth Circuit Court Clerk Team 2. The Clerk said it’s been set for Review. Said he just couldn’t say how long, but noticed a couple of cases ahead of it. I asked if the Tenth Circuit had sessions or went on Summer Break like the SCOTUS. He said , “No, they don’t”. After a Case is set for Review it’s usually 2 to 3 weeks.
As this applies to anti – Birthers we see Obama not being a [natural born Citizen] has de-moralized the US Constitution the single biggest objective for Civil Rights.
SHOCKED! A Professor actually Recognises the Folly of Libs. [ The more the differences between us are emphasized, the less likely I will be to feel outrage at his mistreatment] [Now is the time for liberals to do an immediate about-face and return to articulating their core principles of solidarity and equal protection for all. Never has the country needed it more.] [Black Lives Matter is a textbook example of how not to build solidarity. By publicizing and protesting police mistreatment of African-Americans, the movement delivered a wake-up call to every American with a conscience. But its decision to use this mistreatment to build a general indictment of American society and demand a confession of white sins and public penitence only played into the hands of the Republican right.]
#Democrats lost sites on Civil Rights Liberal CrackUp #TenthCircuit #Utpol #Dems #SCOTUS Trouble #Reporters #Press
https://t.co/JYOa6FIFdR
https://t.co/nYh3Y7DBi8https://twitter.com/CodyRobertJudy/status/896374735528796162
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1635019159866194&id=510896692278452
@TF Bow the ‘live FB video discussion’ covered many of the areas the Appeal/ and Original Complaint Covers , and was not meant to suggest it was submitted to the Court itself. Although it clarifies the extent SCOTUS was informed and provides many incites for educational and informative purposes.
As a Follow-up on China/ NK allied- Tying Trumps Hands from the Bush Doctrine of preemptive strikes.
China sides with NK if a preemptive strike comes from US.
[“If the U.S. and South Korea carry out strikes and try to overthrow the North Korean regime and change the political pattern of the Korean Peninsula, China will prevent them from doing so.”]
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-missiles-china-media-idUSKBN1AR005
A Facebook video from 2016 about Judy’s beliefs is not new evidence, was not submitted to the courts, and does not explain how 42 U.S.C. sec. 1983, the Sherman Act, or the Clayton Act applied to the 2012 election.
1Yr REVIEW of NEW EVIDENCE in Case under Review by Tenth Circuit.
The following Review was made 1 Year ago. After the SCOTUS refused to consider the new evidence of Sheriff Joe’s Cold Case Posse, I submitted it to the District Court, and now it’s under Review by the 10th Circuit.
The video made on FB details the disrespect the Courts are giving to Foreign Parents and the Respect honoring “Born in the US to Citizen Parents” gives to [ natural born Citizen].
#SCOTUS #SCOTUS #TENTHCIRCUIT #BIRTHER #JusticeAlito #Justice #LawReview #Courts @realDonaldTrump #impeach
https://t.co/UwMpyYhmAr
https://twitter.com/CodyRobertJudy/status/895690832354844672
VIDEO ON FB
https://m.facebook.com/CodyRobertJudyForPresident2016/posts/1633220406712736
SANCTIONS AGAINST NORTH KOREA have already Failed to “Deter” miniaturization of nuclear warheads and ICBM Missiles. WHY WE SHOULD PULL BACK 3RD CARRIER GROUP?
They have them ( nuke-miniturization & ICBM Capability) Deteriants are meant to employ a tactic, but when the tactic has failed to employ the results, the continuation only serves as a negative. This leaves the Question of “deterrent” open and unsatisfied for recent /or current UN Sanctions , accept to unifie animosity against the USA.
The Question now is Why anger NK with a Sanction equivalent to 1/3rd of their Economy and in such their Sovereignty?
The U.N. unified Sanctions seems more a Ploy to draw out the US, which is why Russia and China agreed and the U.N. agreed so readily to push America in that direction.
If Trump pulled back the 3rd Carrier Group I think the Plot would be undercut. It would be the most unexpected and unpredictable move for our Military, especially if it was redeployed towards the South America’s West Coast suring up a defense from the more vulnerable State of Texas strategically in The Humboldt Current and coastal transition zone (CTZ).
It would show as a matter of Diplomacy the NK People that any further provocations ultimately comes unwarranted and at the head of their own Tyrannical Regime and wedge the populous against it own regime if an “offense” were undertaken by Kim Jong Un.
It also would curtail any ultimatums under consideration by Russia or China’s ruminations . If we simply backed away showing respect for what ultimately could not have happened without their unofficial enabling of and for NK; it would save President Donald Trump what could be a real embarrassment of unwarranted provocation.
That “respect” in “wisdom” would also prove a foil to the moral highground the foreign Countries may seek against the USA.
Since when has the U.N. really sought the USA’s INTEREST? Their underhandedness is well documented in the Obama Administration’s 8 yr. usurpation of the Office of President.
The de-escalation would REWARD Trump where sanctions and a build up of now 3 Carrier Groups plays into the enemies hands and serves very little in real function as a deterient from something already accomplished.
But.. who listens to me?
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1632426916792085&id=510896692278452
OH I FORGOT “OBAMA DEFERALS & Subsidies”
(?) So many have forgotten Obama Deferred Big Companies [and] Small Company 50+ Mandates to OBAMA CARE from early 2010 until after 2016 Election BOOM! Lay it on Trump for Obama-Care-Crash?
[The company will need to offer coverage to at least 450 hourly employees (and their dependents) to meet the 95% requirement to be treated as offering coverage. … As of January 1, 2016, the employer mandate is effective for all employers with 50 or more full- time and/or FTE employees.] Whose been paying harshly? Who DID NOT get Deferrals and Subsidized? The Working Class and Common-Man Tax-Payer.
OOPS…Sorry?
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2014/02/10/delayed-obamacares-employer-mandate-for-small-businesses.html
https://twitter.com/CodyRobertJudy/status/893906859869880320
WOW! UNEXPECTED REALIZATION FROM NY TIMES. The Results in on Obama’s Paranoia of being unseated because of his Lack of Constitutional Qualification that led to Obama’s War On First Amendment ie. Free Press !
HIGHLIGHTS [Obama’s attorney general repeatedly allowed the F.B.I. to use intrusive measures against reporters more often than any time in recent memory.] [ Obama handed him (TRUMP)a road map.”] [Mr. Obama’s record of going after both journalists and their sources has set a dangerous precedent ] [ Obama administration won a ruling from the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in my case that determined that there was no such thing as a “reporter’s privilege”]
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/12/30/opinion/sunday/if-donald-trump-targets-journalists-thank-obama.html?referer=http://www.drudgereport.com/
#Trump take YOUR “nice” pants off on Obama’s Q. #MuellerGrandJury covered for ’08-’12
@realDonaldTrump #MAGA #Utpol
https://t.co/6TworsJ3gc
https://twitter.com/CodyRobertJudy/status/893510699149795329
@Robert Laity
“A “Natural born citizen is one born in the United States to parents who are both US Citizens themselves”-Minor v Happersett, USSCt., (1874).”
No one, not even the most staunch Obama supporter, is saying that people born in the United States to parents who are both US Citizens are not Natural Born Citizens.
The question is, are US citizen parents required for a person born in the US to be a Natural Born Citizen. Minor v. Happersett does not address this issue.
There is no indication that anyone from North Korea celebrated Ankeny, which actually says, “Based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are ‘natural born Citizens’ for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents.” As Obama was born in Hawaii, the court had no problem affirming the dismissal of the lawsuit challenging his eligibility. No court has criticized Ankeny’s analysis, and several have adopted it.
SR 511, which was non-binding, addressed McCain only, and not natural-born citizenship generally.
None of which, of course, is relevant as to why Judy’s case will fail.
@T. F. BOW
” some of those courts have even expressly rejected the argument that Minor compels two U.S. citizen parents at the time of birth.”
The truth is, ALL courts expressly reject the argument that Minor compels two U.S. Citizen parents at the time of birth.
The reason that ALL courts expressly reject the argument that Minor compels two citizen parents at the time of birth is because the Minor Court expressly states that it will not address the issue of whether citizen parents are required for Natural Born Citizenship.
As far as whether citizen parents are required for Natural Born Citizenship, the Minor Court states –
“Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first. For the purposes of this case, it is not necessary to solve these doubts.
SEE Minor v. Happersett 88 U.S. 162 (1874)
@Gary Wilmot
Yes my friend, If Anwar Al-Awaki was born on US soil and the people elect, there is no US law in existence that would stop him from being President of the United States.
People Celebrating Ankeny v. Governor of the State of Indiana included
Ri Sol-ju or Lee Seol-ju is the First Lady of North Korea and the wife of Korean leader Kim Jong-un
https://www.google.com/amp/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3999250/amp/What-going-Kim-Jong-s-wife-spotted-SEVEN-MONTHS-disappearing-public-view.html
(Ankeny v. Governor of the State of Indiana.) In December 2008, Steve Ankeny and Bill Kruse filed a “Petition for Extraordinary Writ of Prohibition” against the Governor of Indiana to block “any popular votes for Barack Obama and Joe Biden for the appointment as Chief Electors [sic]
Of course they couldn’t say Obama was a natural born Citizen and didn’t. But they managed to destroy [natural born Citizen] as included in the 14th Amendment which it is not.
One of the Founding Principles and Doctrines to prevent Judges from destructive construction
upon the Constitution is when two or more Principles collide they [can not] give one doctrine favor while the other is murdered.
The Cracker-Jack toy found in Ankeny was the “State Court’ found itself representing ( naturalization) in the 14th Amendment, and diabelically usurping [ natural born Citizen ] or the Office of President Art. II. Sect 1. C-5 , in their tinker-box into Federal Jurisdiction.
The Legislative Branch was given power by the Constitution to Naturalize Citizens ( naturalization) [not adopt natural born Citizens].
The remote thought of John McCain being resoluted in a naturalization action of and by the Senate a [natural born Citizen] was galactically stupid. I think more and more people realize today the McCain Institute and Clinton Foundation are the sticky [foreign] sugar and carmel in crackerjack.
Resolutions on toys in cracker jack boxes might be what the Senate considers it’s prerogative ie. US SEN. Res. 511 Co-Sponsor H. Clinton and Obama- but that doesn’t mean it is not subject to the Dumb Toy and Joke Box.
We may enjoy Cracker-Jack and the toy inside, but when the Constitution and our Branches of Government start acting like them , it’s ridiculous.
The relevant portion of Minor actually says, “The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first. For the purposes of this case, it is not necessary to solve these doubts.”
Every court that has considered the meaning of natural-born citizenship has ruled that birth in the United States is sufficient; some of those courts have even expressly rejected the argument that Minor compels two U.S. citizen parents at the time of birth.
And Justin Trudeau is a natural-born citizen … of Canada. As he was born in Canada (and neither of his parents were U.S. citizens), absolutely no one is making the argument that he is a U.S. citizen (or natural-born citizen of the United States).
None of which, of course, is relevant as to why Judy’s case will fail in the 10th Circuit.
A “Natural born citizen is one born in the United States to parents who are both US Citizens themselves”-Minor v Happersett, USSCt., (1874).
It has reached such a point as to have Justin Trudeau investigating whether or not HE can run for POTUS. That’s unconscionable. The answer is NO!!!!!
Since every court that has considered the matter ruled that birth in the United States is sufficient to confer natural-born citizenship, then Al-Awlaki was eligible. Fortunately, his death later rendered him ineligible.
None of which, of course, is relevant to why Judy’s suit was dismissed as frivolous.
Geeeeez Bendore….yeah right. Anwar Al-Awaki was a Natural Born American citizen eligible to be POTUS. Really?
The U.S. Supreme Court’s denial of Judy’s IFP application was referenced only to show that he unsuccessfully attempted to further appeal his case. Whether Judy believes he correctly filled out that IFP application is not relevant to the current proceedings in the 10th Circuit. And Judy continues to not understand that that the 10th Circuit denied his latest IFP application based on its independent review of the district court’s rulings.
Judy’s quibbles regarding Sherman Act’s and Clayton Act’s “stipulations” in no way explain how those acts apply to the 2012 election. Or excuse Judy’s failure to adequately explain to the courts how they could possibly be applied to an election.
What Mike Zullo might have said at a press conference is hearsay, and no court can entertain such hearsay. Nor does such hearsay possibly explain why Judy failed to adequately explain the applicability 42 U.S.C. sec. 1983, the Sherman Act, or the Clayton Act, which is the only issue that the courts are concerned with in this case. Because Zullo’s press conference in no way explained how these laws might apply to an election, it is irrelevant to the courts’ inquiry.
The prejudice Zullo has brought upon himself and the agency he used to represent is based on his repeated falsehoods and his repeated refusal to share what he claims is relevant information. None of which, however, is relevant to Judy’s case.
Judy is free to ignore any comment he pleases. (“Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time. And it annoys the pig.”) But when the denial in his case is affirmed by the 10th Circuit, will Judy have the courage of character to acknowledge those who correctly predicted the outcome? Because if the 10th Circuit reverses the district court and remands for further proceedings, I will freely admit I was wrong.
“There exists a debate over whether a person born in the United States to parents who are citizens of another country can be considered “natural born.”
Actually, between 2008, and today, when the subject of whether citizen parents are required for a child to be natural born all US Courts who have addressed the issue have cited Ankeny v. Governor of Indiana which states.
“Based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are “natural born Citizens” for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents.”
So although it is true that a debate among the public about this still exists, the courts are well settled on this issue.
@TF Bow ‘s comment is based without Facts on the Principles of Truth.
1- TF Bow has presumed the SCOTUS IFP application was filled out incorrectly without proof.
We have actually now publicly seen an IFP Application filled out correctly and on record at Scripd and reported by The Post & Email, and seen the Tenth Circuit [deny the Motion to proceed] based on a single judge at the District Court’s label of [friviolous], which was mirrored at SCOTUS 14-9396.
Why has TF Bow done this?
2-TF Bow has not reported it is Congresses Act known as the Sherman Act & Clayton Act that stipulates the beginning of Fines against Corporations that form Cartels is 100M and or more as the grossness of the violation is comprehended.
Why has TF Bow done this?
3- TF Bow said “Judy did not present to the court any of Zullo’s findings ” , but I presented evidence in Video Form/Link for the Court of a Lawful Sheriff’s Posse Presentation showing the Facts and Evidence.
What is a Trial and Hearing for if it is not to establish the Expertise to the Courts satisfaction? A Grand Jury of Citizens could be authorized to witness this.
WHY would TF Bow represent such a prejudice towards the evidence of a Lawful Law Enforcement Agency?
With just these three inaccuracies in one comment we can see TF Bow is not a serious person to take advice or consideration from. His comment is thus wholly incredible and frivolous and certainly cannot be taken seriously.
In the following video just one year ago today, we see at the DNC National Convention a blatantly bias damage occurring with the active Candidates The result was corruption found displayed publically of the DNC’s Chair and the nomi ation of a corrupt nominee at the price born of my Campaigns marginalization.
This also happened in the 2008, and 2012 Elections at the behest of criminal acts perpetrated to marginalize my Campaign articulated very well in some 17 other Judicial Cases bearing similar facts and Evidence in several States of the Union.
https://m.facebook.com/CodyRobertJudyForPresident2016/posts/1619723321395778
It seems as a victim of this corruption and resultn crimes articulated plainly, civility has left the building in Civil Rights.
Judy’s case it not difficult to understand. Judy wants $100 million from Obama, the DNC, and OFA. The district originally dismissed Judy’s case because he failed to adequately explain how 42 U.S.C. sec. 1983, the Sherman Act, or the Clayton Act applied to the 2012 election. Judy’s explanation was so lacking that the district court labeled his attempt as frivolous. The 10th Circuit reviewed Judy’s case and agreed with the district court’s ruling, including the frivolous part. (Judy went to the U.S. Supreme Court, but he was denied IFP status because he didn’t properly complete its IFP application, so his case was closed.)
Judy then went back to the district court and filed a motion for relief from judgment, citing Hawaii’s 2008 certification and the fact that Zullo held a press conference (Judy did not present to the court any of Zullo’s findings because Zullo has not released those findings to anyone). The district court again ruled Judy failed to adequately explain how 42 U.S.C. sec. 1983, the Sherman Act, or the Clayton Act applied to the 2012 election; it also denied Judy’s motion for reconsideration.
The 10th Circuit, when reviewing Judy’s IFP application for his second appeal, concluded Judy’s appeal was frivolous, so it denied IFP on that basis.
42 U.S.C. sec. 1983, the Sherman Act, and the Clayton Act have never been used to seek money after an election; it was Judy’s burden to explain why they could be so used; and the courts have repeatedly said Judy’s attempt to do so was so lacking as to be frivolous. Given this track record, it is not difficult to conclude how the 10th Circuit will rule on Judy’s latest appeal.
If I were the 10th Circuit ruling on @Rick Tyler or Rich Damon’s comments ( he “seriously” forgets how or which name is correct) , the underlining factors he represents are:
1- No Presidential Candidate has a civil right or judicial remedy to challenge another’s Constitutional Civil Right protected ability to run a Fair Race under Constitutional Standards.
2- That responsibility to the Law is unaccountable and wholly incredible if it hasn’t happened before.
3- That because I ,as the 10th Circuit, didn’t first place (District Court) in front of the word (Friviolous) [every single time] in the Order that is how I feel about it, as well the Facts in the Case.
4- That when I do refer it as a District Court Ruling it is ignorable., and reflects wholly on my Ruling as the 10th Circuit.
5- That bringing Facts to a Case of implication and circumstances and motive against Law to the Bar of Justice do not necessarily represent a violation or punishable violation.
6- That Obama representing proof of his identification that is ascertained by lawful witness false/Forged/Fraudulent is not really a witness one can seriously bring to the Bar of Justice.
7- That Hawaii’s State Political Certification of a Candidate can be ignored and usurped by a Single Representative of the Political Party ie. Rep. Nancy Pelosi.
8- That Corporations forming to abett the illegal activity as a Cartel, if they are Elected Officials have no accountability to the Law, or Will of the People, because they are the Law over the People in a tyranny of pretended accountability to the Voter as a commodity.
9- That if your name is Cody Robert Judy and he brings all of this to the Bar of Justice, it’s so wholly incredible because the Reputations of all others supersedes his, and reputation of others, especially Elected Officials, is above the Law.
10- That if serious Review unmasked accountability the resulting implication far surpasses the ability of Justice to prevail, so it’s just better to hold tight to “injustice” and hope the people keep financing it.
These are serious implications represented by Rich, or Rick Daman, and his constant reflections in comments. I find them as the 10th Circuit friviolous and wholly incredible.
To have a mirror and have those reflected back at you is no laughing matter. Of course the Tenth Circuit could represent these diabolical standards if it chooses. The clarity of representation is brought to them to choose by Cody Robert Judy.
We The People will watch and see what they choose to represent.
When the Law becomes corrupt and criminal actions affecting many others is ignored by argument and belief in reputations and money, the integrity of law is lost and so the support of it will wonder.
Truth will stand and will be supported by those who haven’t lost their souls to the support of the Lie.
Why would anyone consider Phil Berg reputable? He lost all his cases, and then lost his law license.
There is no evidence that the o42- Social Security Number was issued to someone born in 1890. The only indication is a stray data point in a commercial database that expressly acknowledges its own inaccuracies. And the 1890 birth associated with the 042- number is contradicted by other data in the very same database. Even Mike Zullo acknowledges the unreliability of these databases.
No expert has examined the paper copy of Obama’s long form birth certificate. Zullo’s experts examined a digital image, which, by definition, is not the birth certificate. Zullo has never released his experts’ opinions, and there is no indication that he will ever do so.
With respect to the Selective Service registration, the opinion of people with neither personal knowledge nor particular expertise does not compare to the Selective Service System’s express statements that Obama duly registered.
It is unsurprising that no one has “witnessed” items “A through Q” for Obama because no president — including the current president — has ever released those items.
None of which — yet again — addresses why Judy failed to adequately explain the applicability 42 U.S.C. sec. 1983, the Sherman Act, or the Clayton Act.
Philip Berg was suspended from practicing law for two years and resigned from the PA Bar approximately two years ago:
http://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Supreme/out/1928dd3.pdf#search=%22Philip%20berg%22
http://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Supreme/out/2178dd3%20-%201022516914893350.pdf#search=%22Philip%20berg%22
This discussion has gone off the track by reviving old arguments about Obama’s eligibility.
The real issue at hand is whether Cody Robert Judy’s appeal has any chance of succeeding. I stand by my prior statements that he has no chance of winning his appeal. Both the District Court and the Tenth Circuit have ruled that his lawsuit is frivolous.
What everyone seems to have lost sight of is that Judy’s lawsuit was ruled to be frivolous based upon legal issues, not factual issues. His Complaint argues that he is entitled to damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, and the Clayton Act, but both the District Court and the Tenth Circuit ruled that those statutes do not entitle him to damages. The Tenth Circuit ruled in 2015 “We see no scenario where he [Judy] would be entitled to relief under § 1983, the Sherman Act, or the Clayton Act.”
In that regard nothing has changed. Two weeks ago the Tenth Circuit ruled “We have reviewed Mr. Judy’s ifp motion, his appellate briefs, and the district court record. Mr. Judy has made no serious attempt at showing how the district court erred.”
Furthermore, even allowing for the extremely remote possibility that Judy wins his appeal, the best he can hope for is to have his case sent back to the District Court. The defendants haven’t even made an appearance in the case because the District Court ruled that Judy never filed proper proof of service. In addition, because the alleged actions occurred in 2012, he is barred from filing a new lawsuit because the Federal statute of limitations is four years (28 U.S. Code § 1658).
These are facts, folks. You can argue all you want about birth certificates and Social Security Numbers and Selective Service registrations, but none of that is going to get Judy’s lawsuit reinstated.