OK, I just gotta quote this here, in case people don't go read the craziness themselves. This is one for the "wow, where did that come from" books:



I can't actually parse that sentence toward the end, but the gist of the beginning seems to be this: if a woman can have an abortion, you have to hear my case.

How can you argue with logic like that? Checkmate! We're done for!!!!!

Jack Ryan
readcast, and commented


When you become a state you can then sue another state and SCOTUS can take original jurisdiction.

Reply
Freedom&Liberty replied
Can you answer the question I asked the Clerk? Where in the law does it state that the U.S. Supreme Court shall be bound, or have their hands tied up as hostages, by the Court Clerk from hearing a case by a Presidential Candidate by reason of avoiding, extending, and stalling until the National Democratic Convention is over regarding the eligibility of a candidate directly in opposition to U.S.C.?

From Jack's...

...

[...]

It is therefore simply a consideration of Petitioner/Appellant that under GSCR Rule 65 that good cause is shown, Appellant not wanting to waste the Georgia Supreme courts time, for expediting the proceeding in a FINAL ORDER from the Supreme Court that can be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, or that the GA. Supreme Court itself certify the question(s) to the U.S. Supreme Court as a Federal Question to the United States Supreme Court for the 11th Circuit and lend that in behalf of Petitioner that it be unavoidable by that Court as:
I. QUESTIONS OF LAW THAT MIGHT BE DECIDED:

[...]

Cody moves down a step and tries again....

2012-05-29 - GA - JUDY - Amended Notice of Appeal

You know, nothing says "viable presidential candidate" quite like an "Affidavit of Indigency," don't you think?

3. Question - Does evidence provided to the Court by Petitioner of a Sheriff Law Enforcement Report (Appendix pg.16) constituting probable cause of fraud and forgery of Candidate Barack Obama's identity papers for qualification of the Office of President casting reasonable doubt on candidate's qualifications, if avoided by the Court, not constitute reprisal grounds for the release and pardon of all convicted of similar crimes for equal Justice under the law?

It is therefore simply a consideration of Petitioner/Appellant that under GSCR Rule 65 that good cause is shown, Appellant not wanting to waste the Georgia Supreme courts time, for expediting the proceeding in a FINAL ORDER from the Supreme Court that can be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, or that the GA. Supreme Court itself certify the question(s) to the U.S. Supreme Court as a Federal Question to the United States Supreme Court for the 11th Circuit and lend that in behalf of Petitioner that it be unavoidable by that Court as:
I. QUESTIONS OF LAW THAT MIGHT BE DECIDED:

Once he gets his final order of summary denial, he can appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court for the 11th Circuit. (Yes, I'm kidding.)

The Petitioner began his complaint officially in 2012 against the Respondent Barack Obama by petitioning the New Hampshire Ballot Law Commission that Barack Obama was not eligible for the Office of President which he sought in the election of 2012 held in the demands of U.S.C. Article II, Section.1.Clause 5 and U.S. Supreme Court precedent of Minor v. Happersett , and also showing the many instances which provided reasonable and probable cause that the Candidate was not qualified in a list of deficiencies including documents and reports by official agencies of the United States government such as the Social Security Administration and the Selective Service Board that were produced and evidence from former federal government and Scotland Yard investigators, private investigators, computer software experts, scanner experts, typographer experts and forensic document examiners that were made available to the Commission all to have the Commission represent that they had never disqualified a candidate for not being eligible as long as he paid the $1,000 and swore
Page 5
to the eligibility requirements. However, this just wasn‘t true to the record as in 2008 the commission removed Sal Mohamed; who was removed from the ballot because he was not a Natural Born Citizen, being born in Egypt. This decision was appealed to the New Hampshire Supreme Court Taitz v. Obama with no ruling as yet.

The Administrative Court ruled against Petitioner citing U.S.C. Amend. XIV. and a non-binding opinion from an Indiana State Appellate Court to support its conclusion. See Arkeny v. Governor, 916 N.E.2d 678 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) actually violating venerable rules of Constitutional Construction.

SUMMARY OF THE DISCRETIONARY APPLICATION FOR REVEIW

The Petitioner has shown the Court the egregious error of Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp and Barack Obama maliciously hurting his person, his Campaign as a Candidate for President of the United States, and the United States, in such that an exercise of the Court‘s ―supervisory authority‖ is called for in upholding the ‗natural born citizen‘ qualification demand of the Office of the President.

1- The Discretionary Application For Review should be granted;

2- An injunction made by the Court remanding Secretary of State Kemp‘s Certification of the GA. Primary disqualifying Barack Obama thereby freeing up Delegates that are bound in the Democratic Party that can be courted in the Democratic Party National Convention Sept. 2012.

3- For punitive damage a monetary token award of $1,000,000.00 U.S. dollars from Barack Obama and Brian Kemp Secretary of State should be respectfully awarded the Petitioner for an example, and/or the equivalent expense of wire fraud costing Georgia Citizens contributions, the total cost of Georgia‘s State Primary, recompensed by Obama, and or his billion dollar Campaign, divided to the State and Petitioner, whichever the Court deems appropriate.

On the record June 7th Press Release Judy v. Obama docketed in Georgia Supreme Court
http://codyjudy.blogspot.com/2012/06/pr ... ia_07.html
FOR IMMEDIATE PRESS RELEASE:
Three Bullet Points:
1) Cody Robert Judy v. Barack Hussein Obama has been docketed in the Georgia Supreme Court Case No. S12D1584

2) Within the Application for Review is Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s Cold Case Posse which concluded there is probable cause that Obama’s long form birth certificate released by Obama is a forged document as well as Obama’s selective service draft registration.

3) With the three questions asked in the Supreme Court Application the Justices will have a candidate with standing, asking about the precedent of the U.S. Supreme Court on ‘natural born citizen’ and the ground work that a denial basically sets starts precedent for a release of anyone who has committed fraud or forgery.

If the Supreme Court doesn’t act, legal construction exist to free anyone in the Georgia penal system or for that matter the United States, to be set free sentenced by the law on crimes of fraud or forgery, because what’s good for Obama ought to be good for any prisoner convicted or sentenced by the law, if allowed, Obama skirts. That quandary exists in Cody Robert Judy’s 3rd question to the Justices in Georgia.

One whiff of Dr Onaka's letter and Mr. Judy is brunt toast.

They don't need Onaka's letter to toss Cody's BS petition. And, I doubt it will take all that long to do so.

Breaking News on Georgia Supreme Court case Judy v. Obama

http://codyjudy.blogspot.com/2012/06/br ... ng-in.html

“I talked to the Georgia Supreme Court Clerk today and she informed me that a HISTORIC DECISION will be made on July 1st,2012! Is America ready to ride this horse to the finish line? “

- Cody Robert Judy –



Could this be the Sea-biscuit America has been waiting for?

June 13, 2012

Docket Search Results
Case Number: S12D1584
Status: Docketed
Style: Judy v. Obama et al.
Description: Civil - Discretionary Application - Miscellaneous
Docket Date: May 31, 2012
Calendar: September 2012
Oral Argument Date: **This date is not official until the Court Calendar is transmitted to the parties.
County Location: Fulton
Lower Court Numbers: 2012CV211398


Proceedings
Date Filings & Motions Date Orders
May 31, 2012 Discretionary Application
May 31, 2012 Affidavit of Indigency


Disposition


Attorneys
Appellant
3031 So. Ogden Avenue Suite 2
Ogden, Utah 84403 (801) 497-6655

Cam-Anh Le Appellee
LE LAW GROUP, LLC
4852 Jimmy Carter Blvd., Suite D
Norcross, Georgia 30093 (678) 822-5673

Vincent Robert Russo, Jr. Appellee

GEORGIA SECRETARY OF STATE'S OFFICE
Executive Office 214 State Capitol
Atlanta, Georgia 30334 (404) 656-2881

Michael K. Jablonski Appellee
260 Brighton Road, N.E.
Atlanta, Georgia 30309-4908 (404) 885-1725

Samuel S. Olens, A.G. Appellee
Department of Law
40 Capitol Square, S.W.
Atlanta, Georgia 30334

Could this be the Sea-biscuit America has been waiting for?

He may or may not have called and talked to the clerk, but the docket doesn't even hint at July 1, sets it for sometime in Sept., though the sooner it's dismissed the better.

Disposition Date: [whatever], 2012
Application denied
All the Justices concur.

My case Sharon represents a very unique charge to justice simply because I have standing as a Presidential Candidate in the same party, with a viable campaign that is competitive and you could call me “Grandpa” in the Birther Movement. I think it is important to understand that this is not a racial movement and that is indeed about our Constitution.

[...]

You may also recall in 2010 I testified, under oath, as a Presidential Candidate with standing in theCIA COLOMBIA OBAMA SEDITION AND TREASON TRIAL that was a key factor in legally getting a “guilty verdict” in front of a 10th Amendment Jury of Citizens. Without that testimony its very conceivable that the 12 person jury would not have felt compelled to the verdict and while it was a 10th Amendment trial and not a Judicial Branch Trial, it is worth bearing in mind that these citizens that served on that Jury were indeed very conscientious law abiding citizens taking that responsibility very seriously and doing so with no compensation whatsoever. (My Trip back to NY to testify)

[...]

The case will be argued within the Georgia Supreme Court and their decision I should have by July 1st,2012 and then we will proceed according to that decision. The case was Docketed May 31st and a decision will be rendered within 30 days that will allow us to proceed according to the verdict. The good news about that is its happening before the September 2012 National Democratic Convention.

[...]

Seriously folks, I need your help yesterday, so please consider helping any way you can.

"with a viable campaign that is competitive"