[00:00.000 --> 00:04.400] This news brief brought to you by the International News Net. [00:04.400 --> 00:11.680] A space age power boat, Bolivia's vice president, Alvaro Garcia Lenera, says he refuses to blindly [00:11.680 --> 00:18.960] cater to the economic or political desires of the U.S., adding, we do not want tax preference [00:18.960 --> 00:24.280] in exchange for Americans telling us what must be our economic policy, because that [00:24.280 --> 00:28.560] will make us become a slave and a colony again. [00:28.560 --> 00:33.840] A campaign by syndicated columnist Arianna Huffington for people to move their money [00:33.840 --> 00:40.360] from the giant banks to local community banks and credit unions is going viral. [00:40.360 --> 00:45.360] The campaign says that moving our money will let people vote with their wallets and regain [00:45.360 --> 00:52.080] some control over our economy and our finances. [00:52.080 --> 00:53.080] The T.P. [00:53.080 --> 00:58.360] Speaker website reports a group of moderate Democrats held private meetings this fall with [00:58.360 --> 01:04.760] executives from Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan Chase while in the midst of a successful campaign [01:04.760 --> 01:10.160] to water down legislation to beef up regulation of the financial industry. [01:10.160 --> 01:15.880] In mid-October, members of the NDC, a caucus of pro-business Democrats, met executives [01:15.880 --> 01:18.120] from Goldman and JP Morgan. [01:18.120 --> 01:24.080] Sandwiched between those events was a fundraiser for the NDC, 15 of whose members sit on the [01:24.080 --> 01:29.680] House Financial Services Committee which oversees the financial regulatory overhaul currently [01:29.680 --> 01:31.760] making its way through Congress. [01:31.760 --> 01:37.640] A recent article in Businessweek reported Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan Chase and others [01:37.640 --> 01:41.880] lobbied the NDC to weaken the administration's plan. [01:41.880 --> 01:43.440] The push succeeded. [01:43.440 --> 01:54.760] The recently passed House bill won't require banks to trade derivatives on regulated platforms. [01:54.760 --> 02:00.160] A federal judge in Manhattan has allowed a lawsuit to go forward against IBM, General [02:00.160 --> 02:06.120] Motors, Ford and other corporations over their roles in South Africa's apartheid. [02:06.120 --> 02:12.140] The automakers are accused of providing armored vehicles used to suppress marches and protests [02:12.140 --> 02:18.200] and of assisting security forces tasked with identifying and torturing anti-apartheid leaders. [02:18.200 --> 02:24.860] U.S. District Judge Shira Shindlin also allowed claims against IBM to proceed for providing [02:24.860 --> 02:30.400] the technology that allowed the South African government to carry out geographic segregation [02:30.400 --> 02:32.640] and denationalization. [02:32.640 --> 02:37.280] The lawsuit was filed on behalf of all black South African citizens for the suffering they [02:37.280 --> 02:42.220] endured under the 1960 to 1994 apartheid regime. [02:42.220 --> 02:46.840] In an earlier ruling, Judge Shindlin said the U.S. corporations should be tried over [02:46.840 --> 03:10.440] claims they aided and abetted torture, extrajudicial killing and apartheid. [03:16.840 --> 03:39.040] I said, down, press the man Where you gonna run to, down, press the man [03:39.040 --> 03:58.040] Where you gonna run to, down, press the man I said, where you gonna run to, down, press [03:58.040 --> 04:07.040] the man Where you gonna run to, down, press the man [04:07.040 --> 04:36.380] Where you gonna run to, down, press the man Where you gonna run to, down, press the man [04:36.380 --> 04:40.380] As you run, run to the sea [04:40.380 --> 04:43.380] It will be boiling, I say [04:43.380 --> 04:48.380] Oh, as long as I stay, I stay here [04:51.380 --> 04:55.380] So tell me, down, I press the man [04:55.380 --> 04:58.380] Where you gonna run now? [04:58.380 --> 05:02.380] Down, press the man [05:02.380 --> 05:04.380] I don't know where you gonna run [05:04.380 --> 05:08.380] Down, press the man [05:08.380 --> 05:10.380] Tell me where you gonna run [05:10.380 --> 05:15.380] Oh, as long as I stay here [05:19.380 --> 05:22.380] I wouldn't like to be a flea [05:23.380 --> 05:25.380] Off to your collar [05:25.380 --> 05:29.380] Man, I wouldn't like to be a flea [05:29.380 --> 05:31.380] On beneath your collar, man [05:31.380 --> 05:35.380] I wouldn't like to be a flea [05:35.380 --> 05:38.380] On beneath your collar [05:38.380 --> 05:44.380] Oh, as long as I stay here [05:47.380 --> 05:51.380] You better run, but they cannot hide [05:51.380 --> 05:55.380] The down, presser man [05:55.380 --> 05:58.380] They can run, but they cannot hide [05:58.380 --> 06:01.380] You better run, but they cannot hide [06:01.380 --> 06:26.380] You better run, but they cannot hide [06:31.380 --> 06:33.380] Let me guess [06:33.380 --> 06:35.380] No, you tell us [06:37.380 --> 06:41.380] You might start with a 9 and end with an 11 [06:43.380 --> 06:45.380] Just like [06:47.380 --> 06:51.380] democratically elected president of Chile [06:51.380 --> 06:54.380] was assassinated [06:55.380 --> 06:59.380] Okay, we've been hearing for decades [06:59.380 --> 07:02.380] about Peter Tosh and Bob Marley being assassinated [07:02.380 --> 07:05.380] and I just happened to be looking online last night [07:05.380 --> 07:08.380] looking up some music, looking up some tunes for a change [07:08.380 --> 07:09.380] trying to have a good time [07:09.380 --> 07:12.380] reading articles about Peter Tosh [07:12.380 --> 07:16.380] and come to find out, reminding me [07:16.380 --> 07:22.380] the man was taken out of the world on 9-11-1987 [07:22.380 --> 07:26.380] Now this is just in your face, okay? [07:26.380 --> 07:31.380] They just, they can run, but they can't hide [07:31.380 --> 07:35.380] Anyway, we know what happened [07:35.380 --> 07:36.380] we're going to get into it [07:36.380 --> 07:42.380] but at any rate, I just want to put that out there [07:42.380 --> 07:45.380] because serious stuff going on [07:45.380 --> 07:49.380] and in the meantime, I want to discuss a little bit tonight [07:49.380 --> 07:54.380] concerning the difference between agency [07:54.380 --> 07:57.380] and the agent [07:57.380 --> 08:00.380] Representative authority [08:00.380 --> 08:05.380] acting under color of law and jurisdiction [08:05.380 --> 08:09.380] and I feel like a lot of us have been duped into [08:09.380 --> 08:14.380] feeling like we have the demand of these [08:14.380 --> 08:19.380] purported, alleged agents who purport themselves [08:19.380 --> 08:23.380] to be agents of representing certain governmental authorities [08:23.380 --> 08:26.380] that they are the ones that have jurisdiction [08:26.380 --> 08:29.380] and you know what? No, they don't [08:29.380 --> 08:32.380] There is nothing in statute anywhere that I have seen [08:32.380 --> 08:39.380] that grants any agent jurisdiction of any type [08:39.380 --> 08:42.380] It's the agency that has jurisdiction [08:42.380 --> 08:44.380] the court has jurisdiction [08:44.380 --> 08:46.380] the judge does not have jurisdiction [08:46.380 --> 08:53.380] the judge is an agent, a representative [08:53.380 --> 08:57.380] So I want to address this issue here [08:57.380 --> 09:02.380] because this is a trap that a lot of legal activists get [09:02.380 --> 09:06.380] fallen into [09:06.380 --> 09:08.380] This is something we've been struggling with today [09:08.380 --> 09:19.380] with the FCC documents [09:19.380 --> 09:22.380] You there? Yeah, Randy, go ahead [09:22.380 --> 09:26.380] Anyway, I'll just explain where this came from [09:26.380 --> 09:33.380] We were, Deb and I have been working on a document for the FCC [09:33.380 --> 09:36.380] and that was an issue that came up [09:36.380 --> 09:42.380] about agency as opposed to subject matter jurisdiction [09:42.380 --> 09:46.380] Will you explain your realization? [09:46.380 --> 09:51.380] Well, see, Randy, you're always talking about [09:51.380 --> 09:54.380] challenging subject matter jurisdiction [09:54.380 --> 09:59.380] but what entity are you challenging [09:59.380 --> 10:03.380] when it comes to the challenge of the subject matter jurisdiction? [10:03.380 --> 10:06.380] And I'm looking through all your case law research [10:06.380 --> 10:09.380] and all my statutory research [10:09.380 --> 10:14.380] I'm digging up all the code and the statute [10:14.380 --> 10:16.380] Randy's digging up all the case law [10:16.380 --> 10:21.380] and the fundamental arguments that we have are there [10:21.380 --> 10:25.380] but then I start looking at the in between [10:25.380 --> 10:28.380] the paragraphs in between and the language [10:28.380 --> 10:33.380] and it's like, I'm not just saying it's us [10:33.380 --> 10:37.380] but all these other legal activists start falling into this trap [10:37.380 --> 10:44.380] of thinking that we're challenging the jurisdiction of the agent [10:44.380 --> 10:46.380] and then I just had this epiphany today [10:46.380 --> 10:50.380] it was like, no, wait a minute [10:50.380 --> 10:58.380] an agent, a representative of a governmental entity, a body [10:58.380 --> 11:00.380] can never have jurisdiction [11:00.380 --> 11:03.380] that's just preposterous on its face [11:03.380 --> 11:07.380] I mean, the governmental entity itself [11:07.380 --> 11:10.380] would or would not have jurisdiction [11:10.380 --> 11:15.380] you know, the court has or does not have jurisdiction [11:15.380 --> 11:20.380] you know, the legislature does or does not have jurisdiction [11:20.380 --> 11:24.380] the executive branch does or does not have jurisdiction [11:24.380 --> 11:26.380] okay, you don't ask the question [11:26.380 --> 11:30.380] it's not even a question of does the judge have jurisdiction [11:30.380 --> 11:38.380] no, you ask the question of is the judge an authorized agent [11:38.380 --> 11:47.380] to act in the capacity to represent the authority of the court [11:47.380 --> 11:51.380] is this person, if you want to call it a person [11:51.380 --> 11:53.380] and this all goes to the oath of office [11:53.380 --> 11:56.380] this is where the transition is made [11:56.380 --> 12:00.380] you know, we've been hearing all these years [12:00.380 --> 12:05.380] and people love to write off these legal reformists [12:05.380 --> 12:08.380] legal myths, people talk about oath of office [12:08.380 --> 12:11.380] you know, just a bunch of conspiracy nonsense [12:11.380 --> 12:14.380] no, it's not, I finally understand what's going on now [12:14.380 --> 12:18.380] because agency cannot be proven out of the mouth of the agent [12:18.380 --> 12:22.380] it has to be proven out of the mouth of the principal [12:22.380 --> 12:28.380] and so when you challenge the jurisdiction of the governmental entity [12:28.380 --> 12:33.380] the agent who's purporting to represent the authority [12:33.380 --> 12:38.380] of the governmental entity is responsible for proving up the jurisdiction [12:38.380 --> 12:41.380] of the governmental entity [12:41.380 --> 12:49.380] but you can't ask or demand that the agent prove up his own agency [12:49.380 --> 12:51.380] that's ridiculous [12:51.380 --> 12:57.380] you have to demand of the principal to prove the agency [12:57.380 --> 12:59.380] the representation, you see [12:59.380 --> 13:01.380] and that's where the oath of office comes in [13:01.380 --> 13:06.380] and that's why none of them have it [13:06.380 --> 13:10.380] that's why none of them have it [13:10.380 --> 13:13.380] you following me, Randy? Am I making sense here? [13:13.380 --> 13:17.380] yeah, this was an issue that we had to go through [13:17.380 --> 13:21.380] the entire document that we had written [13:21.380 --> 13:23.380] actually, Deb did [13:23.380 --> 13:31.380] and rewrite it so that we never ask the agent to prove up jurisdiction [13:31.380 --> 13:34.380] well now, wait a minute, no [13:34.380 --> 13:37.380] we do ask the agent to prove up jurisdiction [13:37.380 --> 13:40.380] of the governmental entity [13:40.380 --> 13:42.380] no, that's the whole point [13:42.380 --> 13:45.380] the agent doesn't have jurisdiction [13:45.380 --> 13:49.380] that's the preposterous on his face [13:49.380 --> 13:55.380] the agent has authority [13:55.380 --> 14:03.380] he has a capacity to act under the authority of the entity [14:03.380 --> 14:04.380] the governmental entity [14:04.380 --> 14:10.380] the governmental entity is the one, is the entity that has jurisdiction [14:10.380 --> 14:15.380] the agent who purports to represent himself or herself as an agent [14:15.380 --> 14:21.380] either does or does not have authority to act in the capacity [14:21.380 --> 14:25.380] to represent the governmental entity [14:25.380 --> 14:29.380] so you demand of the agent to prove up jurisdiction [14:29.380 --> 14:34.380] of the principal of the governmental entity [14:34.380 --> 14:38.380] but the agent, him or herself [14:38.380 --> 14:42.380] could never have jurisdiction, I mean that's [14:42.380 --> 14:46.380] that was the point that we had to rewrite the documents [14:46.380 --> 14:52.380] so we weren't asking the agent to do something he couldn't do [14:52.380 --> 14:55.380] we could only address the [14:55.380 --> 14:59.380] and actually we can't even ask the agent to prove up his agency [14:59.380 --> 15:00.380] no, that's right [15:00.380 --> 15:03.380] because agency cannot be proven out of the mouth of the agent [15:03.380 --> 15:04.380] that's where the [15:04.380 --> 15:06.380] it must be proven out of the mouth of the [15:06.380 --> 15:07.380] principal [15:07.380 --> 15:11.380] principal and that's kind of the realization that Deb had [15:11.380 --> 15:16.380] how does the principal prove up agency of the agent [15:16.380 --> 15:21.380] that's where the oath of office comes in [15:21.380 --> 15:23.380] okay, but not only that [15:23.380 --> 15:27.380] going to jurisdiction, okay [15:27.380 --> 15:32.380] it's the entity, it's the governmental entity [15:32.380 --> 15:39.380] that is brought into being by statute or by constitution [15:39.380 --> 15:44.380] that is the entity that either does or does not have jurisdiction [15:44.380 --> 15:48.380] okay, like I said, you ask the question [15:48.380 --> 15:52.380] you ask the question of does the court have jurisdiction or not [15:52.380 --> 15:57.380] you don't ask the question of does the judge have jurisdiction [15:57.380 --> 16:02.380] no, that's not even the right question [16:02.380 --> 16:03.380] you ask the [16:03.380 --> 16:06.380] if you're going to even challenge the [16:06.380 --> 16:12.380] what's going on with the judge, you ask if the judge has authority [16:12.380 --> 16:15.380] to act in the capacity [16:15.380 --> 16:21.380] does he have capacity to act in the authority in the name of the courts [16:21.380 --> 16:26.380] you don't ask if the judge has jurisdiction, you ask if the court has jurisdiction [16:26.380 --> 16:29.380] the court is not the judge, the judge is not the court [16:29.380 --> 16:32.380] that's where, you know, I'm finally understanding this now [16:32.380 --> 16:39.380] this is the blur, the fine line that they've been trying to trip us up with the whole time [16:39.380 --> 16:42.380] the judge is not the court, the court is not the judge [16:42.380 --> 16:45.380] the president is not the presidency [16:45.380 --> 16:51.380] okay, it's two different things [16:51.380 --> 16:54.380] am I making sense here? [16:54.380 --> 16:57.380] makes sense to me [16:57.380 --> 17:00.380] alright, we'll be right back [17:00.380 --> 17:04.380] you feel tired when talking about important topics like money and politics? [17:04.380 --> 17:08.380] are you confused by words like the constitution or the federal reserve? [17:08.380 --> 17:13.380] if so, you may be diagnosed with the deadliest disease known today, stupidity [17:13.380 --> 17:19.380] hi, my name is Steve Holt, and like millions of other Americans, I was diagnosed with stupidity at an early age [17:19.380 --> 17:25.380] I had no idea that the number one cause of the disease is found in almost every home in America, the television [17:25.380 --> 17:30.380] unfortunately, that puts most Americans at risk of catching stupidity, but there is hope [17:30.380 --> 17:36.380] the staff at Brave New Books have helped me and thousands of other Foxaholics suffering from sports zombieism recover [17:36.380 --> 17:43.380] and because of Brave New Books, I now enjoy reading and watching educational documentaries without feeling tired or uninterested [17:43.380 --> 17:50.380] so if you or anybody you know suffers from stupidity, then you need to call 512-480-2503 [17:50.380 --> 17:55.380] or visit them at 1904guadalupe or bravenewbookstore.com [17:55.380 --> 17:58.380] side effects from using Brave New Books products may include discernment and enlarged vocabulary [17:58.380 --> 18:01.380] and an overall increase in mental functioning [18:01.380 --> 18:27.380] music [18:27.380 --> 18:48.380] music [18:48.380 --> 18:53.380] okay, we are back, the rule of law [18:53.380 --> 19:00.380] okay, so we've got some callers on the line, callers if you'd like to call in, 512-646-1984 [19:00.380 --> 19:05.380] we've got Jeff from Maryland on the line [19:05.380 --> 19:08.380] hey Jeff, thanks for calling in, what's on your mind tonight? [19:08.380 --> 19:12.380] well, I thought I was listening to what you were saying about agency [19:12.380 --> 19:20.380] and I thought that I would sort of contribute to your conversation and maybe even throw you a little bit of a curve [19:20.380 --> 19:23.380] Randy, if you're still there [19:23.380 --> 19:24.380] I'm here [19:24.380 --> 19:30.380] okay, where do they call people who work for the FBI, carry a badge and a gun? [19:30.380 --> 19:32.380] I can't say that on the radio [19:32.380 --> 19:36.380] alright, okay, say what you can't say on the radio [19:36.380 --> 19:37.380] agents [19:37.380 --> 19:38.380] they call them agents [19:38.380 --> 19:43.380] no they don't [19:43.380 --> 19:44.380] okay [19:44.380 --> 19:47.380] they absolutely do not, refer to themselves as agents [19:47.380 --> 19:49.380] special agents [19:49.380 --> 19:51.380] yeah [19:51.380 --> 19:54.380] what does that mean? [19:54.380 --> 19:57.380] that means they are agents that are special [19:57.380 --> 20:00.380] no, it's got a specific meaning [20:00.380 --> 20:02.380] no, I don't know what the specific means [20:02.380 --> 20:09.380] and they actually play with your FCC quote agent [20:09.380 --> 20:16.380] because they're not FBI agents or not agents [20:16.380 --> 20:20.380] no, they're not agents, they're officers [20:20.380 --> 20:26.380] special agents, they're officers but there's a liability that goes with that [20:26.380 --> 20:29.380] and you need to investigate that because I can't tell you firsthand what it is [20:29.380 --> 20:34.380] I've been told and advised on it but that was about 15-20 years ago so I can't call it to mind [20:34.380 --> 20:43.380] but since you're rewriting paperwork you may want to investigate that just a little bit to see if it makes a difference in your pleadings [20:43.380 --> 20:45.380] special agent [20:45.380 --> 20:50.380] because he actually could be, this guy that works for the FCC could actually be a special agent [20:50.380 --> 20:53.380] which means he's not an agent at all [20:53.380 --> 21:00.380] well our issue with him is he's not an agent of any kind [21:00.380 --> 21:11.380] unless he's a simple contract employee from a corporation that's doing business with the government [21:11.380 --> 21:23.380] he is not in an official capacity because he purports to render adjudicated decisions or quasi-judicial decisions [21:23.380 --> 21:30.380] and to do that you must have an oath of office, a valid oath of office [21:30.380 --> 21:35.380] he's got an oath but it's not, we could smell the white ink on it when he sent it to us [21:35.380 --> 21:39.380] you mean he just signed it? [21:39.380 --> 21:42.380] no signature, it wasn't signed [21:42.380 --> 21:44.380] oh it wasn't [21:44.380 --> 21:47.380] yeah but I don't think it was dated either, was it a lease? [21:47.380 --> 21:50.380] no date, no signature [21:50.380 --> 21:52.380] no jurat? [21:52.380 --> 21:54.380] no jurat [21:54.380 --> 22:02.380] he just found a form and signed it and put his signature on it and sent it [22:02.380 --> 22:04.380] and we weren't impressed [22:04.380 --> 22:08.380] but if that's the case he just tampered with the government document [22:08.380 --> 22:13.380] that's one of my allegations too [22:13.380 --> 22:20.380] if he claims to have a valid oath we'll charge him with tampering for sending us that one [22:20.380 --> 22:28.380] okay well wait a minute, see the thing is the agent isn't the one that sent the oath [22:28.380 --> 22:34.380] you can't charge the agent with that because the agent isn't the one that sent the oath [22:34.380 --> 22:37.380] that's the whole point that I was trying to go to earlier [22:37.380 --> 22:41.380] the agency under FOIA [22:41.380 --> 22:45.380] someone sent the oath [22:45.380 --> 22:55.380] some person, a public information officer, a head of an agency [22:55.380 --> 23:01.380] whoever is designated the custodian of the record [23:01.380 --> 23:02.380] right [23:02.380 --> 23:07.380] and that will be the head of the agency unless they have appointed someone [23:07.380 --> 23:13.380] and if they have we don't care because in this instance he is respondent superior [23:13.380 --> 23:14.380] right [23:14.380 --> 23:20.380] so we go for the head of the agency, it's always easier to find him and he's a better target [23:20.380 --> 23:25.380] especially if one of his underlings has done something really stupid [23:25.380 --> 23:31.380] we don't mess with the underling, we run in and kick the boss right square in his behind [23:31.380 --> 23:37.380] and when he gets to the underling he's going to be a real unhappy camper [23:37.380 --> 23:42.380] well if this particular purported agent is in fact an agent [23:42.380 --> 23:50.380] then whatever transgressions he has perpetrated, the agency has perpetrated [23:50.380 --> 24:00.380] because he is as an agent, quote agent, he can sign anything, he can do anything, he can commit anything [24:00.380 --> 24:08.380] financially or any other kind of obligation on behalf of the FCC [24:08.380 --> 24:12.380] whatever is designated as the scope of his authority [24:12.380 --> 24:16.380] if he were in fact a true agent [24:16.380 --> 24:23.380] if he's not a true agent and he's out acting in the name of the true agent [24:23.380 --> 24:29.380] then respondent, we want to know who his boss is [24:29.380 --> 24:32.380] they will put some distance between themselves and him in a hunt [24:32.380 --> 24:36.380] oh we're going to close that distance really fast [24:36.380 --> 24:43.380] well see one of the problems that they have is that out of having sent you that document [24:43.380 --> 24:48.380] they have kind of hooked themselves into him [24:48.380 --> 24:50.380] yes they have [24:50.380 --> 24:54.380] and the document was invalid so now they can't back up [24:54.380 --> 24:58.380] the smart thing to do was ignore the request [24:58.380 --> 25:01.380] they can't, it's FOIA [25:01.380 --> 25:04.380] I know but then they only have a FOIA charge [25:04.380 --> 25:12.380] this way by sending a bogus request they either have a FOIA charge or they have a tampering charge [25:12.380 --> 25:16.380] there's going to be multiple tampering charges [25:16.380 --> 25:24.380] well the problem was is no matter what they do there was no good outcome in sight here [25:24.380 --> 25:28.380] a bad one and a worse one [25:28.380 --> 25:34.380] I'm going to tell you how much these people slipped up [25:34.380 --> 25:40.380] the respondent superior [25:40.380 --> 25:46.380] responded to the FOIA request [25:46.380 --> 25:50.380] I can't believe that they did that [25:50.380 --> 25:54.380] and then we got his oath and it wasn't good [25:54.380 --> 25:58.380] that's what I'm trying to say the original FOIA request [25:58.380 --> 26:01.380] on the underling [26:01.380 --> 26:08.380] that I FOIA'd to the national headquarters [26:08.380 --> 26:13.380] I was expecting just some generic response [26:13.380 --> 26:19.380] by the generic FOIA department of the agency [26:19.380 --> 26:25.380] now the respondent superior of the Patsy [26:25.380 --> 26:31.380] wrote the response to the FOIA [26:31.380 --> 26:35.380] tying himself into the whole thing I mean it's just [26:35.380 --> 26:37.380] you know what good [26:37.380 --> 26:39.380] he's the one that sent us the bogus documents [26:39.380 --> 26:48.380] my suggestion to you Deborah is to turn and face the northeast and say thank you [26:48.380 --> 26:50.380] oh yeah of course [26:50.380 --> 26:52.380] of course [26:52.380 --> 26:54.380] and you know what [26:54.380 --> 26:56.380] the thing is [26:56.380 --> 27:02.380] I'm not even going to that because even if all these oaths of office were valid [27:02.380 --> 27:06.380] it doesn't matter because [27:06.380 --> 27:11.380] the agency itself has no jurisdiction [27:11.380 --> 27:14.380] in the instant cause [27:14.380 --> 27:16.380] under statute [27:16.380 --> 27:18.380] this is what Randy and I have been going through [27:18.380 --> 27:20.380] title 5 [27:20.380 --> 27:21.380] title 28 [27:21.380 --> 27:24.380] title 47 [27:24.380 --> 27:30.380] we've been going over it up and down every which way from sideways [27:30.380 --> 27:32.380] I mean [27:32.380 --> 27:34.380] even if [27:34.380 --> 27:39.380] you don't even have to go to like these specific technical definitions [27:39.380 --> 27:42.380] I mean it's ridiculous man [27:42.380 --> 27:44.380] it's unbelievable [27:44.380 --> 27:49.380] when you start digging into details and you find this little nugget [27:49.380 --> 27:52.380] well Deborah found a whole handful of pebbles [27:52.380 --> 27:54.380] okay [27:54.380 --> 27:58.380] the more we dug the more we found [27:58.380 --> 27:59.380] yeah [27:59.380 --> 28:03.380] but you know it's like I was telling you earlier Randy when we spoke on the phone [28:03.380 --> 28:07.380] you can always tell when there is a lie [28:07.380 --> 28:13.380] because the story always starts in the middle [28:13.380 --> 28:17.380] yeah explain that that was nicely put [28:17.380 --> 28:21.380] oh okay [28:21.380 --> 28:27.380] first I'm going to give you a couple of fairy tales and then I'm going to apply it to a case [28:27.380 --> 28:31.380] first fairy tale is [28:31.380 --> 28:35.380] once upon a time there was a prince who lived in a far far away land [28:35.380 --> 28:40.380] many years ago and he lived in a castle and the castle had rooks and spires [28:40.380 --> 28:42.380] that's the first fairy tale [28:42.380 --> 28:44.380] got a beginning [28:44.380 --> 28:46.380] second fairy tale [28:46.380 --> 28:51.380] once upon a time Cinderella lost a shoe while running from a ball [28:51.380 --> 28:54.380] kind of started in the middle there didn't it [28:54.380 --> 28:55.380] it did [28:55.380 --> 29:00.380] okay let's use credit cards for instance [29:00.380 --> 29:06.380] the pleading that goes into the court that ultimately garners a summon [29:06.380 --> 29:08.380] says [29:08.380 --> 29:12.380] you have this debt and you haven't paid it [29:12.380 --> 29:17.380] well isn't that kind of in the middle [29:17.380 --> 29:20.380] objection foundation [29:20.380 --> 29:27.380] right where's the beginning Randy [29:27.380 --> 29:30.380] so and so applied for a [29:30.380 --> 29:34.380] uh uh [29:34.380 --> 29:36.380] credit card [29:36.380 --> 29:38.380] so and so is issued a credit card [29:38.380 --> 29:43.380] no it goes to agency in this case [29:43.380 --> 29:45.380] I'll wait [29:45.380 --> 29:48.380] okay [29:48.380 --> 29:51.380] we'll be back on the other side [29:51.380 --> 29:53.380] with the rest of this story [29:53.380 --> 29:55.380] alright [29:55.380 --> 30:00.380] callers 512-646-1984 [30:00.380 --> 30:03.380] are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit? [30:03.380 --> 30:07.380] win your case without an attorney with Juris Dictionary [30:07.380 --> 30:13.380] the affordable easy to understand 4 CD course that will show you how in 24 hours [30:13.380 --> 30:15.380] step by step [30:15.380 --> 30:18.380] if you have a lawyer know what your lawyer should be doing [30:18.380 --> 30:22.380] if you don't have a lawyer know what you should do for yourself [30:22.380 --> 30:27.380] thousands have won with our step by step course and now you can too [30:27.380 --> 30:33.380] Juris Dictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case winning experience [30:33.380 --> 30:38.380] even if you're not in a lawsuit you can learn what everyone should understand [30:38.380 --> 30:42.380] about the principles and practices that control our American courts [30:42.380 --> 30:48.380] you'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases [30:48.380 --> 30:51.380] pro se tactics and much more [30:51.380 --> 30:55.380] please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner [30:55.380 --> 31:00.380] or call toll free 866-LAW-EZ [31:26.380 --> 31:28.380] your power [31:29.380 --> 31:31.380] when your gunna stop abuse [31:31.380 --> 31:34.380] your power [31:34.380 --> 31:36.380] when your gunna stop abuse [31:36.380 --> 31:39.380] your power [31:39.380 --> 31:41.380] when your gunna stop abuse [31:42.380 --> 31:45.380] your power [31:45.380 --> 31:51.380] so i need Mr.Mackler, teach officer not to abuse the power [31:51.380 --> 31:53.380] send a request to them [31:53.380 --> 32:13.380] Okay, we're back. We're here with Jeff. [32:13.380 --> 32:15.380] I'm here. [32:15.380 --> 32:17.380] Okay, go ahead, Jeff. [32:17.380 --> 32:19.380] And they lived happily ever after. [32:19.380 --> 32:28.380] Right. The beginning of the story is, I'm an attorney cheater who worked for Dewey Cheatham and Howell law firm. [32:28.380 --> 32:35.380] And I'm here representing the master cheater of all banks. [32:35.380 --> 32:39.380] And here's my letter from the bank showing that I represent them. [32:39.380 --> 32:41.380] Objection. [32:41.380 --> 32:48.380] But you understand, that's the beginning of the story. [32:48.380 --> 32:50.380] Object to the letter is hearsay. [32:50.380 --> 32:53.380] Okay, I understand. [32:53.380 --> 33:04.380] You understand that that is the beginning of the story, not where they start, which is, he had an obligation to pay and didn't? [33:04.380 --> 33:09.380] Precisely. The first, the agent has to establish standing. [33:09.380 --> 33:15.380] He has to lay foundation, and they never do. They always start the story in the beginning. [33:15.380 --> 33:29.380] This is what we did to the credit card guy here in Austin, is he failed to have the document that he filed verified. [33:29.380 --> 33:30.380] Right. [33:30.380 --> 33:38.380] And then he claimed that he purchased this debt from Sears. [33:38.380 --> 33:40.380] Oh, geez. [33:40.380 --> 33:45.380] The problem is, is I've never heard of a company called Sears. [33:45.380 --> 33:48.380] Have you ever heard of a company called Sears? [33:48.380 --> 33:50.380] Only in part. [33:50.380 --> 33:56.380] Yeah. I've heard of a company called Sears and Roebuck and Company. [33:56.380 --> 33:57.380] Right. [33:57.380 --> 34:00.380] Never heard of one called Sears. [34:00.380 --> 34:08.380] So we hammered him over that one and countersued him for the full amount of the debt, for triple the amount of the debt. [34:08.380 --> 34:20.380] In the conversation you and I had earlier on today, the beginning of the story on the traffic ticket for speeding was the foundation of, [34:20.380 --> 34:26.380] well, there is a highway survey for this particular area, and it is established what the speed limit is, [34:26.380 --> 34:31.380] and then we had to bring in the laws to show that those particular laws apply to you. [34:31.380 --> 34:34.380] So that's kind of in the middle. [34:34.380 --> 34:41.380] Well, that's kind of at the beginning because what they do with the traffic ticket is they say that you did fail to observe [34:41.380 --> 34:49.380] and obey a legitimately placed speed sign or something to that effect, [34:49.380 --> 34:57.380] but they never bring anything into court to show that it was a legitimately placed speed sign, [34:57.380 --> 35:01.380] it was at the proper speed limit, and that that speed limit applied to you. [35:01.380 --> 35:05.380] Well, my first question would be who are they? [35:05.380 --> 35:07.380] I understand that. [35:07.380 --> 35:09.380] The accuser and the officer. [35:09.380 --> 35:15.380] You'll notice that when a prosecutor calls a police officer to the stand, [35:15.380 --> 35:26.380] he asks him a lot of preliminary questions about his position, his authority, his training. [35:26.380 --> 35:30.380] He's establishing foundation for this officer's testimony. [35:30.380 --> 35:31.380] Right. [35:31.380 --> 35:34.380] That's part of the beginning of the story. [35:34.380 --> 35:37.380] But they never established that. [35:37.380 --> 35:42.380] There was a law that established the speed limit, and that the speed limit applied to you. [35:42.380 --> 35:43.380] Yes. [35:43.380 --> 35:46.380] That's actually up at the front of it all. [35:46.380 --> 35:50.380] First, that the traffic laws applied to you. [35:50.380 --> 35:51.380] Right. [35:51.380 --> 36:00.380] And then that there was, in fact, a properly posted speed limit that he had cause to believe, [36:00.380 --> 36:05.380] evidence to indicate that you exceeded that speed limit, [36:05.380 --> 36:11.380] and when you exceeded that speed limit, you were subject to the law. [36:11.380 --> 36:13.380] Did I say that already? [36:13.380 --> 36:21.380] Yes. Let me give you an example of just how valuable that is. [36:21.380 --> 36:28.380] Off of 95 running north and south, there is another interstate called 895. [36:28.380 --> 36:37.380] 895 is about 14, 15 miles in length, and it goes through the harbor tunnel underneath the bay there. [36:37.380 --> 36:44.380] For those who don't know, when you have a national highway like 95, [36:44.380 --> 36:49.380] and then it has an adjacent highway with a three-digit number, that means it's a loop. [36:49.380 --> 36:51.380] Right. [36:51.380 --> 36:53.380] Okay. [36:53.380 --> 36:58.380] For the last 30 years, the speed limit on that road, [36:58.380 --> 37:05.380] or the posted speed limit on that road has been 50 miles an hour. [37:05.380 --> 37:10.380] And up until about six months ago, [37:10.380 --> 37:20.380] they must have had somewhere around 15 or 20 cruisers on that road on a 24-hour cycle. [37:20.380 --> 37:30.380] Then they tagged the wrong person, and he made them bring in the highway survey. [37:30.380 --> 37:40.380] And lo and behold, the posted speed limit on 895 went from 50 to 65. [37:40.380 --> 37:43.380] Ooh. [37:43.380 --> 37:47.380] So for 20 years, or 25 years, [37:47.380 --> 37:57.380] the Maryland Transportation Authority has been raking in tens of thousands of dollars in speeding fines. [37:57.380 --> 38:01.380] And they did not have subject matter jurisdiction. [38:01.380 --> 38:05.380] At no time did they have subject matter jurisdiction. [38:05.380 --> 38:09.380] So if you've got an example of how much it changed, [38:09.380 --> 38:15.380] we saw that a change on the main road changed 15 miles an hour on the main road, [38:15.380 --> 38:20.380] but the speed through the tunnel changed as well. [38:20.380 --> 38:25.380] It went from 45 to 50. [38:25.380 --> 38:34.380] All because they tagged the wrong person who required them to bring in the highway survey, [38:34.380 --> 38:41.380] which they never brought in to begin with to show that the posted speed limit was, in fact, the speed limit. [38:41.380 --> 38:45.380] I once had a prosecutor ask me, [38:45.380 --> 38:56.380] Mr. Kelton, do you really imagine that everyone can be wrong and you're right? [38:56.380 --> 38:57.380] Yes. [38:57.380 --> 39:00.380] This goes to prove, yes. [39:00.380 --> 39:04.380] As a matter of fact, yes, everyone can be wrong. [39:04.380 --> 39:11.380] After all, for a long period of time, the world was flat as a tape top. [39:11.380 --> 39:15.380] I was thinking the same thing, Randy. [39:15.380 --> 39:17.380] Hey, guys, listen, we have a caller. [39:17.380 --> 39:19.380] We've got Mark from Wisconsin. [39:19.380 --> 39:21.380] Jeff, you want to stay on the line? [39:21.380 --> 39:31.380] I will bow out, but one of the things I want to sort of summarize this whole thing for you is that if you take the judicial canons, [39:31.380 --> 39:42.380] the rules of procedure is civil or criminal, the rules of evidence and the rules of the professional conduct of attorneys, [39:42.380 --> 39:46.380] they should all mesh together perfectly. [39:46.380 --> 39:54.380] If they don't, if there's something wrong, then you need to look to that set of four rules to find where the problem is. [39:54.380 --> 39:57.380] You said you were sending me some documents on this issue. [39:57.380 --> 39:58.380] Yes. [39:58.380 --> 40:03.380] I would like to do, if not a whole show, at least a half a show on this issue. [40:03.380 --> 40:09.380] Well, I sent you that motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim in which we painted the judge in the court. [40:09.380 --> 40:16.380] In fact, we even told the judge that under the current set of pleadings that have been submitted to the court, [40:16.380 --> 40:27.380] he should have never have issued a summons, let alone move forward on it. [40:27.380 --> 40:31.380] Good, because that's exactly where I want to start going. [40:31.380 --> 40:33.380] That's where we went with this guy in Austin. [40:33.380 --> 40:37.380] I sent you that plea, and by the way, that particular case got dismissed. [40:37.380 --> 40:38.380] Good. [40:38.380 --> 40:46.380] I would like to do a show on this particular issue, on the standing foundation, [40:46.380 --> 40:50.380] because especially you guys go in for a ticket and they'll start talking to the prosecutor, [40:50.380 --> 40:53.380] Foundation, Your Honor, Foundation, Your Honor. [40:53.380 --> 40:55.380] We want to be able to do that. [40:55.380 --> 41:02.380] The weird foundation of the highway survey that says that that sign is an actual sign that should be there. [41:02.380 --> 41:10.380] Yeah, and the trick is, don't tell them what they need to establish foundation. [41:10.380 --> 41:12.380] No, of course not. [41:12.380 --> 41:18.380] When they try to enter in some BS, objection, foundation. [41:18.380 --> 41:19.380] Right. [41:19.380 --> 41:26.380] The things that we need to know to act like attorneys, we need to know when an answer is non-responsive [41:26.380 --> 41:29.380] and know how to raise the objection. [41:29.380 --> 41:33.380] You can object to your own witness when I'm responsive. [41:33.380 --> 41:34.380] Yeah, you can. [41:34.380 --> 41:39.380] That means if I ask you a question and you give me an answer to a question I didn't answer, [41:39.380 --> 41:46.380] I didn't ask, objection, non-responsive, and I love to do that to police officers. [41:46.380 --> 41:48.380] It always puts them off. [41:48.380 --> 41:57.380] Yeah, much like a lady I know has requested a collection due process hearing, a face-to-face hearing, [41:57.380 --> 42:04.380] and she was granted a face-to-face telephone conference. [42:04.380 --> 42:06.380] Something missing there? [42:06.380 --> 42:09.380] There seems to be. [42:09.380 --> 42:17.380] I don't remember our founders authorizing a telephone conversation. [42:17.380 --> 42:22.380] They didn't say you have a right to be telephoned by your accuser. [42:22.380 --> 42:29.380] No, there's actual statute that when you meet the four requirements for that particular type of hearing, [42:29.380 --> 42:34.380] it is mandated that you will get that, and they try to pull this crap out of it [42:34.380 --> 42:39.380] and give you a face-to-face telephone conference, but you can't record it. [42:39.380 --> 42:44.380] Well, if you agree to it, then you've agreed to it under contract. [42:44.380 --> 42:48.380] That's your problem if you accepted it. [42:48.380 --> 42:52.380] Yeah, but what I'm saying to you, Deborah, is that they slide this stuff in there, [42:52.380 --> 42:55.380] and it's always at the end of the sentence. [42:55.380 --> 43:02.380] You've been granted your hearing, your requested hearing, a face-to-face telephone conference. [43:02.380 --> 43:05.380] But as you're scanning down through and reading the letter [43:05.380 --> 43:11.380] and not reading each and every single word, you get as far as face-to-face in the letter, [43:11.380 --> 43:13.380] and you skip to the next line. [43:13.380 --> 43:18.380] Well, I'll tell you what, it wouldn't get any further than the word grant with me [43:18.380 --> 43:25.380] because no governmental entity can grant me anything. [43:25.380 --> 43:30.380] I grant them authority or not. [43:30.380 --> 43:32.380] I have rights. [43:32.380 --> 43:40.380] Government agencies and agents who claim to represent governmental entities do not have rights. [43:40.380 --> 43:44.380] No public official has a right. [43:44.380 --> 43:47.380] They must provide and abide. [43:47.380 --> 43:55.380] Okay, they are granted authority that we choose to grant them, if we choose to. [43:55.380 --> 43:59.380] All right, we're going to go to Mark as soon as we get back. [43:59.380 --> 44:04.380] Are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters, or even lawsuits? [44:04.380 --> 44:08.380] Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Mears proven method. [44:08.380 --> 44:14.380] Michael Mears has won six cases in federal court against debt collectors, and now you can win two. [44:14.380 --> 44:20.380] You'll get step-by-step instructions in plain English on how to win in court using federal civil rights statutes. [44:20.380 --> 44:24.380] What to do when contacted by phone, mail, or court summons. [44:24.380 --> 44:26.380] How to answer letters and phone calls. [44:26.380 --> 44:29.380] How to get debt collectors out of your credit report. [44:29.380 --> 44:33.380] How to turn your financial tables on them and make them pay you to go away. [44:33.380 --> 44:38.380] The Michael Mears proven method is the jurisdictionary on how to stop debt collectors. [44:38.380 --> 44:41.380] Personal consultation is available as well. [44:41.380 --> 44:49.380] For more information, please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the blue Michael Mears banner, or email michaelmears at yahoo.com. [44:49.380 --> 45:13.380] That's ruleoflawradio.com, or email michaelmearsas at yahoo.com to learn how to stop debt collectors now. [45:13.380 --> 45:19.380] If you did not have any problem, where are you going to look for one? [45:19.380 --> 45:25.380] If you could not wait any battle too long, would your purpose test be done? [45:25.380 --> 45:31.380] Glasses stand around the soldier or warrior of love, scaffolding the key to the peace. [45:31.380 --> 45:34.380] All they're taking is a misunderstanding. [45:34.380 --> 45:36.380] Somebody calls the police. [45:36.380 --> 45:40.380] I'm watching the spotlight. [45:40.380 --> 45:45.380] Okay, we're taking your calls. We're going to Mark in Wisconsin. [45:45.380 --> 45:49.380] Mark, what's on your mind? [45:49.380 --> 45:50.380] Hello. [45:50.380 --> 45:51.380] Hey. [45:51.380 --> 45:56.380] I was working on a case for a guy in Illinois, just a simple credit card case. [45:56.380 --> 46:01.380] And I've got three things that they've done wrong with the pleading. [46:01.380 --> 46:06.380] And I'm wondering, when you set that up, what do you do? [46:06.380 --> 46:09.380] What do you put as a heading for the motion? [46:09.380 --> 46:14.380] Do you make it a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction? [46:14.380 --> 46:16.380] No, it's not a motion. [46:16.380 --> 46:18.380] That's a pleading. [46:18.380 --> 46:27.380] There are three pleadings, challenge to jurisdiction, nuns pro tonk, [46:27.380 --> 46:33.380] incorrect or improper venue, and double jeopardy. [46:33.380 --> 46:35.380] Those are pleadings. [46:35.380 --> 46:41.380] A challenge to the jurisdiction is a pleading that's always titled [46:41.380 --> 46:43.380] challenge to jurisdiction. [46:43.380 --> 46:48.380] But what's the nature of the challenges that you have? [46:48.380 --> 46:55.380] The challenge that plaintiff failed to attach a contract to the pleading, [46:55.380 --> 46:57.380] which is against the... [46:57.380 --> 46:59.380] Okay, you check local code for that? [46:59.380 --> 47:05.380] Because in Texas, there's a special rule in the rules of civil procedure. [47:05.380 --> 47:10.380] Ordinarily, when you file a petition, you don't have to have it verified. [47:10.380 --> 47:15.380] And you hear all these people say it, demanding verification validation. [47:15.380 --> 47:21.380] Well, the code specifically commands it to give them subject matter [47:21.380 --> 47:23.380] jurisdiction in the very first instance. [47:23.380 --> 47:25.380] Go ahead, I interrupted. [47:25.380 --> 47:26.380] Okay, here's the code. [47:26.380 --> 47:30.380] Exhibit, if a claim or defense is found upon a written instrument, [47:30.380 --> 47:35.380] a copy thereof or so much of the same as is relevant must be attached to [47:35.380 --> 47:38.380] the pleading as an exhibit or recited therein, [47:38.380 --> 47:42.380] unless the pleader attaches to his or her pleading an affidavit. [47:42.380 --> 47:49.380] David's stating facts showing that the instrument is not accessible to him. [47:49.380 --> 47:51.380] That'll work. [47:51.380 --> 47:56.380] Okay, that's not quite as...actually, that's somewhat different than Texas. [47:56.380 --> 48:02.380] Texas has a special rule for a suit on account. [48:02.380 --> 48:10.380] It looks like Wisconsin, any suit on a contract requires the contract. [48:10.380 --> 48:11.380] This is Illinois. [48:11.380 --> 48:12.380] I'm doing this for a guy in Illinois. [48:12.380 --> 48:13.380] I'm sorry, Illinois? [48:13.380 --> 48:15.380] That is interesting. [48:15.380 --> 48:24.380] So if you come in on, say, a mortgage issue and they haven't put the real note [48:24.380 --> 48:31.380] into evidence, they don't meet the requirements to invoke subject matter [48:31.380 --> 48:32.380] jurisdiction in the court. [48:32.380 --> 48:34.380] You go after the judge. [48:34.380 --> 48:37.380] Yeah, and I slipped some case law in there, too. [48:37.380 --> 48:41.380] A cause of action for an account stated therefore requires allegation proof [48:41.380 --> 48:45.380] that there was a contract between the parties such as a credit card agreement [48:45.380 --> 48:50.380] or a contract for sale of goods or services, dryer 227, Illinois. [48:50.380 --> 48:57.380] Statement of account was sent to the party thought to be held liable, [48:57.380 --> 49:01.380] and the statement was agreed to expressly or by implication. [49:01.380 --> 49:03.380] And they have to have that in their pleading, too. [49:03.380 --> 49:04.380] They didn't have that. [49:04.380 --> 49:09.380] Okay, that's the statement of the cause of action. [49:09.380 --> 49:10.380] Right. [49:10.380 --> 49:11.380] Good. [49:11.380 --> 49:14.380] Well, I don't even have a cause of action, Randy. [49:14.380 --> 49:16.380] Here, let me read this to you. [49:16.380 --> 49:18.380] This is all that it says. [49:18.380 --> 49:22.380] The plaintiff HSBC Household Bank claims as followed. [49:22.380 --> 49:26.380] The defendant, blank, is a resident of Winnebago County. [49:26.380 --> 49:30.380] The defendant opened an account agreeing to make monthly payments as required [49:30.380 --> 49:34.380] by the terms of the agreement for purchase charged to the account. [49:34.380 --> 49:38.380] Number three, the defendant did make purchases and charge same to account, [49:38.380 --> 49:42.380] but failed to make the monthly payments called for on the account. [49:42.380 --> 49:44.380] There is a balance of $2,000. [49:44.380 --> 49:50.380] And four, the plaintiff declared defendant to be in default [49:50.380 --> 49:52.380] and demands payment of balance. [49:52.380 --> 49:57.380] Therefore, the plaintiff HSBC prays for judgment against the defendant [49:57.380 --> 50:00.380] in the amount of $2,000. [50:00.380 --> 50:04.380] Now, is there a cause of action in there? [50:04.380 --> 50:08.380] Actually, that's what he's stating. [50:08.380 --> 50:10.380] Okay, so that's a cause of action? [50:10.380 --> 50:12.380] Yeah, they don't have to say cause of action, [50:12.380 --> 50:16.380] but you state that there was an account, [50:16.380 --> 50:20.380] that the person received consideration from the account, [50:20.380 --> 50:24.380] that the person agreed to reimburse the consideration, [50:24.380 --> 50:27.380] and the person failed to reimburse the consideration. [50:27.380 --> 50:30.380] There, he's stating a cause of action. [50:30.380 --> 50:31.380] Okay. [50:31.380 --> 50:42.380] However, it sounds like he never met the statutory pleading requirements. [50:42.380 --> 50:47.380] That means that the judge exercised jurisdiction he didn't have. [50:47.380 --> 50:52.380] And this was exactly the issue I raised here in Texas. [50:52.380 --> 50:57.380] When it goes to an original pleading, [50:57.380 --> 51:02.380] or the judge purports to exercise any authority, [51:02.380 --> 51:07.380] the judge must ensure that the pleadings themselves [51:07.380 --> 51:12.380] are sufficient to invoke his subject matter jurisdiction. [51:12.380 --> 51:17.380] In this case, the magistrate, the JP, when he read the documents, [51:17.380 --> 51:22.380] now he's an attorney for 20-year attorneys, so he should know better. [51:22.380 --> 51:28.380] He said, it's not my place to determine subject matter jurisdiction, it's yours. [51:28.380 --> 51:34.380] And my friend said, no, before you order me to court, [51:34.380 --> 51:40.380] you have to make sure you have jurisdiction. [51:40.380 --> 51:43.380] That is the fact, Jack. [51:43.380 --> 51:49.380] So we cross-complained against the judge and sued the judge personally. [51:49.380 --> 51:52.380] Okay. My goal here is we don't want to answer yet. [51:52.380 --> 51:58.380] We want to get a couple more FDTPA violations and FDRA violations. [51:58.380 --> 52:05.380] Okay. Did he not answer the original pleading? [52:05.380 --> 52:08.380] No. We've got two weeks to answer. [52:08.380 --> 52:10.380] Okay. Make sure you put in an answer. [52:10.380 --> 52:17.380] It is initially sufficient if you simply put in whatever response you give, [52:17.380 --> 52:23.380] that you deny all allegations by plaintiff. [52:23.380 --> 52:31.380] Generally, what you have to do in an answer is it's proper to do a general denial. [52:31.380 --> 52:36.380] Now, what that will do is cover your answer. [52:36.380 --> 52:44.380] Now you've made an answer, you've denied everything, so there can't be default. [52:44.380 --> 52:49.380] What they can do is come back and ask for a more specific denial, [52:49.380 --> 52:57.380] because if they have made specific allegations that are verified, [52:57.380 --> 53:00.380] now in this case, if they make specific assertions of fact, [53:00.380 --> 53:04.380] they have to verify those facts, [53:04.380 --> 53:09.380] then you must deny each of those facts individually. [53:09.380 --> 53:10.380] They can't verify anything. [53:10.380 --> 53:14.380] They've got a sworn affidavit here from somebody who works at the bank [53:14.380 --> 53:16.380] with no personal knowledge. [53:16.380 --> 53:17.380] That's their problem. [53:17.380 --> 53:19.380] Is it notarized? [53:19.380 --> 53:21.380] Yeah, it's notarized. [53:21.380 --> 53:24.380] It doesn't necessarily matter. [53:24.380 --> 53:32.380] Do they have a full accounting of the amounts they claim that are owned [53:32.380 --> 53:37.380] that's affirmed by someone with knowledge under oath? [53:37.380 --> 53:38.380] No, they don't. [53:38.380 --> 53:43.380] What they've got is an employee who says she can pull the paperwork out of the books [53:43.380 --> 53:47.380] and it'll show the account, but that's conclusionary, Randy. [53:47.380 --> 53:48.380] Yes. [53:48.380 --> 53:51.380] Well, Randy, that's where I was going to when you were saying under oath. [53:51.380 --> 53:52.380] That's what I'm talking about. [53:52.380 --> 53:58.380] Yeah, it has to be verified, and that's the under oath. [53:58.380 --> 54:02.380] But make sure you put in an answer. [54:02.380 --> 54:09.380] You're not granting jurisdiction, but you're avoiding the potential of default judgment. [54:09.380 --> 54:11.380] Okay, this is what I was thinking about doing, [54:11.380 --> 54:14.380] is putting in a couple motions to dismiss so I don't have to answer, [54:14.380 --> 54:17.380] so I've got a couple months to get some more violations on them. [54:17.380 --> 54:26.380] Well, in the motions to dismiss, you make the assertion that all of the claims [54:26.380 --> 54:31.380] by the plaintiff are invalid or whatever. [54:31.380 --> 54:35.380] That'll act as an answer. [54:35.380 --> 54:41.380] Is this purely a private civil case, Mark? [54:41.380 --> 54:43.380] Yeah, credit card. [54:43.380 --> 54:50.380] Okay, by putting in an answer, you're not granting jurisdiction. [54:50.380 --> 54:56.380] You put in the challenge to jurisdiction and you put in the answer. [54:56.380 --> 55:00.380] You never get to the answer until they get past subject matter jurisdiction. [55:00.380 --> 55:03.380] If they rule against you on subject matter jurisdiction [55:03.380 --> 55:08.380] and you haven't put in an answer, then you're looking at default. [55:08.380 --> 55:13.380] So you want to avoid the default. [55:13.380 --> 55:21.380] Okay, listen, in Illinois, the cause of action has to have an underlying contract [55:21.380 --> 55:26.380] and statement attached to the pleading. [55:26.380 --> 55:30.380] Well, you know, that seems reasonable to me because if I was involved [55:30.380 --> 55:35.380] in the court proceeding either as a jurist or a judge or whatever, [55:35.380 --> 55:42.380] if some litigants were coming to me wanting to ask me to enforce a contract, [55:42.380 --> 55:48.380] I think I'd pretty much insist on seeing the contract, you know? [55:48.380 --> 55:53.380] Well, I think we're kind of mixing up terms a little bit. [55:53.380 --> 56:00.380] When we talk about the petition, we talk about the petition as a cause of action. [56:00.380 --> 56:07.380] But then when I'm talking about causes of action, I'm not talking about the petition itself. [56:07.380 --> 56:10.380] I was going to say, I don't see how a petition could be a cause of action. [56:10.380 --> 56:16.380] Well, it's a cause before the court and I want to make sure we're not mixing up those two terms. [56:16.380 --> 56:19.380] The petition creates a cause before the court. [56:19.380 --> 56:24.380] But in the petition, there must be stated claims. [56:24.380 --> 56:31.380] And the claims must be stated in the forms of a recognizable cause of action. [56:31.380 --> 56:39.380] That cause of action is to civil what a penal statute is to criminal. [56:39.380 --> 56:41.380] Deb and I were working on that today. [56:41.380 --> 56:44.380] We charged common law fraud. [56:44.380 --> 56:52.380] We charged fraud by nondisclosure and the one we were discussing was fraud by nondisclosure. [56:52.380 --> 57:02.380] The supposed agent sent a document wherein he disclosed certain facts [57:02.380 --> 57:08.380] and by the structure of the document and the return address on the document [57:08.380 --> 57:11.380] being to the Federal Communications Commission, [57:11.380 --> 57:17.380] he gave information that he was an agent for the commission. [57:17.380 --> 57:19.380] Or at least he said he was. [57:19.380 --> 57:26.380] He stated that these statutes govern this behavior, [57:26.380 --> 57:36.380] but he did not give complete disclosure in that it only covered these behaviors under certain circumstances. [57:36.380 --> 57:43.380] And if you enter into a contract with someone and someone deliberately offers up information, [57:43.380 --> 57:49.380] which you always have to do to enter a contract, then they have a duty to full disclosure. [57:49.380 --> 57:53.380] Well, see, there was no contract for one thing. [57:53.380 --> 57:55.380] There was no contract. [57:55.380 --> 58:04.380] Nobody entered into a contract with any governmental agent or entity in this instance for one thing. [58:04.380 --> 58:12.380] And for another thing, these purported agents incorrectly quoted the code in the statute. [58:12.380 --> 58:15.380] Yes, that was the point I was getting to. [58:15.380 --> 58:18.380] We'll cover this when we get back. [58:18.380 --> 58:21.380] There was no contract. [58:21.380 --> 58:24.380] There was misquoting. [58:24.380 --> 58:26.380] There were no agents. [58:26.380 --> 58:29.380] There were no mailboxes, etc. [58:29.380 --> 58:33.380] There was no office. [58:33.380 --> 58:35.380] The code doesn't even apply. [58:35.380 --> 58:42.380] The definition of the word state doesn't even include one of the 50 states of the union. [58:42.380 --> 58:47.380] It's ridiculous, man. [58:47.380 --> 58:56.380] I mean, what? [58:56.380 --> 59:24.380] We'll be right back. [59:24.380 --> 59:51.380] Thank you. [59:51.380 --> 01:00:04.380] This news brief brought to you by the International News Net. [01:00:04.380 --> 01:00:10.380] A space-age powerboat manned by environmental activists harassing Japanese whalers was rammed [01:00:10.380 --> 01:00:15.380] and sliced in half on Wednesday, escalating hostilities in the Arctic seas. [01:00:15.380 --> 01:00:19.380] The crew was attempting to disrupt the whaler's annual hunt. [01:00:19.380 --> 01:00:24.380] The Addie Gill trimmer run sent by the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society is reported [01:00:24.380 --> 01:00:28.380] to have received catastrophic damage and was sinking. [01:00:28.380 --> 01:00:34.380] All six crew who earlier hurled stink bombs at the whalers were rescued and harmed. [01:00:34.380 --> 01:00:39.380] Bolivian President Evo Morales is inviting activist scientists and government officials [01:00:39.380 --> 01:00:44.380] from around the world to an alternative climate conference, following the failure of Copenhagen [01:00:44.380 --> 01:00:46.380] to produce binding agreements. [01:00:46.380 --> 01:00:51.380] The leftist leaders said the April meeting in Cochabamba will include indigenous peoples, [01:00:51.380 --> 01:00:55.380] social movements, environmentalists, and scientists, as well as governments, [01:00:55.380 --> 01:00:57.380] who want to work with their people. [01:00:57.380 --> 01:01:04.380] Opinion polls indicate widespread concerns among Israelis over Tel Aviv's acute image problem, [01:01:04.380 --> 01:01:08.380] and unprecedented criticism from international community. [01:01:08.380 --> 01:01:14.380] A survey conducted by Kalim Shavim Research Institute at the request of the Ministry [01:01:14.380 --> 01:01:21.380] of Public Diplomacy and Aspora Affairs said 91 percent of respondents believe Israel suffers [01:01:21.380 --> 01:01:26.380] from an acute or very acute image problem in the world. [01:01:26.380 --> 01:01:31.380] Top of the hour news brought to you by INN World Report. [01:01:31.380 --> 01:01:36.380] The Attorney General for England and Wales in Northern Ireland, Barrow Scotland of Ashtell, [01:01:36.380 --> 01:01:42.380] said the government is determined to protect high-ranking Israeli officials from arrest in the UK. [01:01:42.380 --> 01:01:47.380] Speaking at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem today, Patricia Janet Scotland, aka the Baroness, [01:01:47.380 --> 01:01:53.380] said Israeli leaders should not face arrest for war crimes under the law of universal jurisdiction. [01:01:53.380 --> 01:01:58.380] Scotland's goal to modify British law follows attempts by British lawyers last month to obtain [01:01:58.380 --> 01:02:02.380] a warrant for former Israeli Foreign Minister Zippy Livni. [01:02:02.380 --> 01:02:07.380] Baroness Scotland said Israel leaders should always be able to travel freely in the UK, [01:02:07.380 --> 01:02:12.380] as it emerged that a further visit by Israeli military had been recently cancelled. [01:02:12.380 --> 01:02:16.380] Scotland's speech in Israel comes after Israel authorities contacted British authorities [01:02:16.380 --> 01:02:20.380] to demand a guarantee that the officers would not be arrested. [01:02:20.380 --> 01:02:25.380] The Guardian reported foreign office plans to change the legal process so that the Attorney General [01:02:25.380 --> 01:02:29.380] would first approve warrants before suspected war criminals could be arrested. [01:02:29.380 --> 01:02:34.380] The safeguards were to apply to all visiting foreign leaders, not just Israelis. [01:02:34.380 --> 01:02:39.380] Daniel Machover, a lawyer whose firm obtained an arrest warrant in 2005 for the Israeli general, [01:02:39.380 --> 01:02:45.380] Doran Almog said, if there is evidence against Israeli leaders and a judge thinks that there is a case to answer, [01:02:45.380 --> 01:02:48.380] then why does the process need to be changed? [01:02:48.380 --> 01:02:52.380] Machover added, it is not constitutionally proper to give the Attorney General [01:02:52.380 --> 01:03:20.380] involvement at the arrest stage. [01:03:20.380 --> 01:03:25.380] They were charged on Babylon and burned down the whole nation. [01:03:25.380 --> 01:03:27.380] But they didn't operate the land wrong. [01:03:27.380 --> 01:03:30.380] I'm going to spell Republican and they must watch, man. [01:03:30.380 --> 01:03:32.380] Then they maimed a libertarian. [01:03:32.380 --> 01:03:35.380] They said, we're going to lose, but we're going to do it wrong. [01:03:35.380 --> 01:04:00.380] I'm going to do it wrong. [01:04:00.380 --> 01:04:29.380] Okay. [01:04:29.380 --> 01:04:30.380] Okay, we are back. [01:04:30.380 --> 01:04:37.380] We're speaking with Mark in Wisconsin and Randy, you were explaining about causes of action. [01:04:37.380 --> 01:04:42.380] Yeah, I was trying to explain how they work. [01:04:42.380 --> 01:04:52.380] In this case, we would never get to anything that went on in the case other than the fact that he sent us this letter. [01:04:52.380 --> 01:04:58.380] He gave disclosure in the letter, but he didn't tell us everything. [01:04:58.380 --> 01:05:07.380] And under fraud by nondisclosure, we maintain that he was trying to get us to do something. [01:05:07.380 --> 01:05:12.380] And in doing that, he didn't tell us everything we needed to know. [01:05:12.380 --> 01:05:20.380] Let me read the elements of a cause of action for fraud by nondisclosure [01:05:20.380 --> 01:05:25.380] to illustrate how a cause of action is similar to a statute. [01:05:25.380 --> 01:05:29.380] In order to plead a cause of action, you have to plead all the elements. [01:05:29.380 --> 01:05:34.380] And in this one, the elements of cause of action for fraud by nondisclosure are the following. [01:05:34.380 --> 01:05:40.380] The defendant concealed from or failed to disclose certain facts to the plaintiff. [01:05:40.380 --> 01:05:48.380] The defendant had a duty to the plaintiff that required the defendant to disclose the facts to plaintiff. [01:05:48.380 --> 01:05:51.380] The facts were material. [01:05:51.380 --> 01:05:55.380] The defendant knew the plaintiff was ignorant of the facts, [01:05:55.380 --> 01:05:59.380] and the plaintiff did not have an equal opportunity to discover the facts. [01:05:59.380 --> 01:06:07.380] In this case, the fact is he didn't have an oath of office, so he didn't have authority. [01:06:07.380 --> 01:06:12.380] The defendant was deliberately silent when it had a duty to speak. [01:06:12.380 --> 01:06:23.380] A lot of you out there are familiar with the case Twiel v. U.S., where it says that it's fraud to fail to speak when you have a duty to speak. [01:06:23.380 --> 01:06:25.380] That's not what Twiel actually says. [01:06:25.380 --> 01:06:34.380] Twiel says it is only fraud when someone is silent when they have a duty to speak. [01:06:34.380 --> 01:06:36.380] So they're not saying it actually is. [01:06:36.380 --> 01:06:40.380] They're saying that is the only time silence is fraud. [01:06:40.380 --> 01:06:46.380] And in this case, the defendant was deliberately silent when it had a duty to speak. [01:06:46.380 --> 01:06:55.380] By failing to disclose the facts, the defendant intended to induce the plaintiff to take some action or refrain from acting. [01:06:55.380 --> 01:06:59.380] The plaintiff relied on the defendant's non-disclosure. [01:06:59.380 --> 01:07:05.380] The plaintiff was injured as a result of acting without the knowledge of the undisclosed facts. [01:07:05.380 --> 01:07:30.380] In this case, the agent disclosed facts to the operator of the radio station, telling him that he was in violation of the federal code. [01:07:30.380 --> 01:07:37.380] He didn't disclose the exclusions to the code, and he didn't disclose his lack of agency. [01:07:37.380 --> 01:07:45.380] And he intended that the individual act based on his claim of agency. [01:07:45.380 --> 01:07:50.380] And he did act on it based on his claim of agency and was harmed by it. [01:07:50.380 --> 01:07:54.380] So that's what you look for in a lawsuit. [01:07:54.380 --> 01:08:02.380] And, Mark, from what you talked about, what they stated in the beginning, you don't have to say this is a cause of action. [01:08:02.380 --> 01:08:06.380] This is how you make your claim. [01:08:06.380 --> 01:08:09.380] And they made their claim in the form of a cause of action. [01:08:09.380 --> 01:08:11.380] Does that make sense? [01:08:11.380 --> 01:08:12.380] Kind of. [01:08:12.380 --> 01:08:14.380] Are you saying I should answer it? [01:08:14.380 --> 01:08:22.380] Because, see, they've got one procedural error in their pleading, and they've got two that are just blatantly against case law. [01:08:22.380 --> 01:08:32.380] And I'm wondering, if I did a motion to dismiss, what would I call that motion, and would I do it like count one, count two, count three separation, or do I have all separate motions? [01:08:32.380 --> 01:08:33.380] Yes, exactly. [01:08:33.380 --> 01:08:41.380] And exercise care in keeping from mixing all your counts together. [01:08:41.380 --> 01:08:46.380] In this one, we don't care what the rest of the facts are. [01:08:46.380 --> 01:08:50.380] We're only talking about the fact that this guy didn't tell us everything. [01:08:50.380 --> 01:08:54.380] And in this cause of action, we won't address anything else. [01:08:54.380 --> 01:08:55.380] So, yeah. [01:08:55.380 --> 01:09:07.380] And generally, when you look at a lawsuit, I looked at one on a foreclosure issue, and they had like 18 causes of action. [01:09:07.380 --> 01:09:20.380] Each one very focused, honed in on one particular action, and didn't address the others, didn't bring them all together. [01:09:20.380 --> 01:09:24.380] You do that, they dismiss one, they dismiss all. [01:09:24.380 --> 01:09:32.380] By keeping them very focused and separate, then the court has to adjudicate each one of them. [01:09:32.380 --> 01:09:46.380] But on yours, each cause you have, each problem with it, if it goes to subject matter jurisdiction, I would address each one individually. [01:09:46.380 --> 01:09:57.380] And the way you do that, you ask them to dismiss the prosecution for this reason, in the alternative, dismiss the prosecution for this reason. [01:09:57.380 --> 01:10:01.380] And you just kind of walk down it that way. [01:10:01.380 --> 01:10:02.380] Okay. [01:10:02.380 --> 01:10:05.380] And what would you title that, motion to dismiss? [01:10:05.380 --> 01:10:07.380] Depends on the nature of your challenge. [01:10:07.380 --> 01:10:08.380] Yeah. [01:10:08.380 --> 01:10:17.380] If it's a challenge to the jurisdiction, you would call it a challenge to the jurisdiction and motion to dismiss. [01:10:17.380 --> 01:10:21.380] A challenge to the jurisdiction is always a motion to dismiss. [01:10:21.380 --> 01:10:27.380] Because if the judge finds he has no subject matter jurisdiction, there is only one thing he can do. [01:10:27.380 --> 01:10:29.380] Actually, there's two. [01:10:29.380 --> 01:10:35.380] One thing, as far as the case is concerned, he can only dismiss. [01:10:35.380 --> 01:10:40.380] Two, he can file sanctions against the attorney who filed it. [01:10:40.380 --> 01:10:45.380] Those are the only two things he can do when he doesn't have subject matter jurisdiction. [01:10:45.380 --> 01:10:52.380] So a challenge to jurisdiction is a motion to dismiss, but it won't hurt to put it in there. [01:10:52.380 --> 01:11:02.380] Also, you want to move to strike the pleading as insufficient to invoke the subject matter jurisdiction of the court. [01:11:02.380 --> 01:11:11.380] If they didn't meet the rules, and that's what you've indicated, they didn't meet the rules for filing the pleading. [01:11:11.380 --> 01:11:16.380] Therefore, you ask them to strike the pleading, and the case goes on. [01:11:16.380 --> 01:11:17.380] I'm tearing this pleading up. [01:11:17.380 --> 01:11:21.380] I found a white paper from Edelman and Combs in Illinois, [01:11:21.380 --> 01:11:27.380] and he's got so much case law in there about sham pleadings, about anything about debt. [01:11:27.380 --> 01:11:30.380] You would not believe the case sites he's got in there. [01:11:30.380 --> 01:11:31.380] It's incredible. [01:11:31.380 --> 01:11:33.380] Is it in my email yet? [01:11:33.380 --> 01:11:35.380] What's that? [01:11:35.380 --> 01:11:38.380] I say, is it in my email yet? [01:11:38.380 --> 01:11:41.380] You're going to need it because I've got a foreclosure for you. [01:11:41.380 --> 01:11:43.380] Okay, good. [01:11:43.380 --> 01:11:44.380] Well, give me that. [01:11:44.380 --> 01:11:46.380] Give me the case law. [01:11:46.380 --> 01:11:49.380] I'm building up my research folder. [01:11:49.380 --> 01:11:51.380] You would not believe this case law. [01:11:51.380 --> 01:11:52.380] Oh, my God. [01:11:52.380 --> 01:11:55.380] These guys are famous consumer attorneys, and he just laid it out. [01:11:55.380 --> 01:11:58.380] He showed you how to tear down a pleading just like that. [01:11:58.380 --> 01:11:59.380] It's incredible. [01:11:59.380 --> 01:12:04.380] But, Randy, can you ask for a bill of particulars without invoking subject matter jurisdiction? [01:12:04.380 --> 01:12:05.380] Yes. [01:12:05.380 --> 01:12:08.380] You can always ask for a bill of particulars. [01:12:08.380 --> 01:12:13.380] So I should do that too, right? [01:12:13.380 --> 01:12:14.380] I don't think so. [01:12:14.380 --> 01:12:22.380] I wouldn't want the other side to hate this motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, [01:12:22.380 --> 01:12:24.380] claiming that the pleading is insufficient. [01:12:24.380 --> 01:12:27.380] This is really between you and the judge. [01:12:27.380 --> 01:12:32.380] You don't want that other guy to even speak. [01:12:32.380 --> 01:12:38.380] Is there any way to drive a stake through their heart so they can't bring it back? [01:12:38.380 --> 01:12:40.380] Not that I know of. [01:12:40.380 --> 01:12:48.380] You can ask the judge to dismiss with prejudice, but, no, I don't think so. [01:12:48.380 --> 01:13:00.380] If you file a case and you screw something up, it would be unfair to make it a death sentence, [01:13:00.380 --> 01:13:05.380] especially if it's dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. [01:13:05.380 --> 01:13:14.380] Now, if you want to drive a stake through their heart, then file a countersuit for triple the amount they tried to claim from you. [01:13:14.380 --> 01:13:16.380] Because their pleading is fraudulent? [01:13:16.380 --> 01:13:18.380] Yes. [01:13:18.380 --> 01:13:22.380] It was a fraudulent pleading, and they forced you to answer it. [01:13:22.380 --> 01:13:29.380] They invoked the authority of the court to your detriment, and they did so by fraud. [01:13:29.380 --> 01:13:32.380] That's exactly what we did here in Austin. [01:13:32.380 --> 01:13:34.380] That could get ugly, Randy. [01:13:34.380 --> 01:13:40.380] Oh, well, what it does is gives them, just like Mike Mears talked about, [01:13:40.380 --> 01:13:47.380] gives them a reason to come to you and say, tell you what, Bubba, let's make a deal. [01:13:47.380 --> 01:13:52.380] You drop your countersuit, we'll agree to retire this debt. [01:13:52.380 --> 01:13:56.380] And what elements do you need for fraud? [01:13:56.380 --> 01:14:00.380] Yes, I would sue them for fraud. [01:14:00.380 --> 01:14:02.380] All right. [01:14:02.380 --> 01:14:06.380] Now, you upped the stakes for them a little bit. [01:14:06.380 --> 01:14:10.380] Okay, and I don't need to ask for a bill of particulars, huh? [01:14:10.380 --> 01:14:11.380] No, no, not at this point. [01:14:11.380 --> 01:14:16.380] The only bill of particulars is something you do a little bit later. [01:14:16.380 --> 01:14:23.380] Okay, I'm going to make the lawyers verify, and then I'm going to get them for continued collection activity, too. [01:14:23.380 --> 01:14:28.380] And not only that, their first contact with this man was a summon. [01:14:28.380 --> 01:14:33.380] That's against the law, too. [01:14:33.380 --> 01:14:38.380] Is there a requirement to exercise all remedy? [01:14:38.380 --> 01:14:39.380] Yeah, they didn't do it. [01:14:39.380 --> 01:14:40.380] All they did was send them a summon. [01:14:40.380 --> 01:14:41.380] That was it. [01:14:41.380 --> 01:14:45.380] That was their first and only contact with him. [01:14:45.380 --> 01:14:48.380] Oh, geez, I need to put that in my answer, huh, Randy? [01:14:48.380 --> 01:14:56.380] Yeah, they failed to exhaust all administrative remedies. [01:14:56.380 --> 01:14:57.380] Okay, okay. [01:14:57.380 --> 01:15:01.380] Hey, what's the name of your foreclosure website, and does that have an address? [01:15:01.380 --> 01:15:11.380] Because he's talked to the title company since he doesn't have the documents, and he's going to be getting those any day now, and I want to send them off as soon as possible. [01:15:11.380 --> 01:15:17.380] ForensicFraudFinder.com. [01:15:17.380 --> 01:15:18.380] All right. [01:15:18.380 --> 01:15:19.380] Hey, thanks a lot. [01:15:19.380 --> 01:15:27.380] And have him check—I'll check the registration on it. [01:15:27.380 --> 01:15:29.380] Someone tried to register, and it didn't work. [01:15:29.380 --> 01:15:30.380] I'll go in and check it. [01:15:30.380 --> 01:15:33.380] If it doesn't, just give him my email. [01:15:33.380 --> 01:15:44.380] There's a questionnaire in the—there's a menu item to get the RESPA letter, and the RESPA letter's free. [01:15:44.380 --> 01:15:52.380] It's a questionnaire that touches on all the RESPA issues, and I'll need that filled out. [01:15:52.380 --> 01:16:04.380] And it also has an option where you can fill out the HUD 1, Good Faith Estimate, and Truth in Lending Statement. [01:16:04.380 --> 01:16:08.380] And that way, the system will email it to me online. [01:16:08.380 --> 01:16:14.380] But I'll need all these documents anyway, because there are questions I'm unable to ask. [01:16:14.380 --> 01:16:18.380] I need to look at the actual documents, because there's sometimes— [01:16:18.380 --> 01:16:21.380] You're not too busy for a foreclosure right now? [01:16:21.380 --> 01:16:23.380] Pardon me? [01:16:23.380 --> 01:16:25.380] You're not too busy for a foreclosure right now? [01:16:25.380 --> 01:16:27.380] No, no, I'm not too busy for that. [01:16:27.380 --> 01:16:30.380] That's my job. [01:16:30.380 --> 01:16:34.380] We just got the FCC document pretty well finished. [01:16:34.380 --> 01:16:38.380] Hey, I'll send you that case file from Edelman and come, too. You'll fall out of your chair. [01:16:38.380 --> 01:16:39.380] Oh, thank you. [01:16:39.380 --> 01:16:44.380] All right, thanks. [01:16:44.380 --> 01:16:46.380] All right, thanks, Mark. We'll be right back. [01:16:46.380 --> 01:17:00.380] We've got Keith from Texas, Dan from Connecticut, and more. [01:17:00.380 --> 01:17:04.380] You feel tired when talking about important topics like money and politics? [01:17:04.380 --> 01:17:08.380] Are you confused by words like the Constitution or the Federal Reserve? [01:17:08.380 --> 01:17:13.380] If so, you may be diagnosed with the deadliest disease known today, stupidity. [01:17:13.380 --> 01:17:19.380] Hi, my name is Steve Holt, and like millions of other Americans, I was diagnosed with stupidity at an early age. [01:17:19.380 --> 01:17:25.380] I had no idea that the number one cause of the disease is found in almost every home in America, the television. [01:17:25.380 --> 01:17:30.380] Unfortunately, that puts most Americans at risk of catching stupidity, but there is hope. [01:17:30.380 --> 01:17:36.380] The staff at Brave New Books have helped me and thousands of other foxaholics suffering from sports zombieism recover. [01:17:36.380 --> 01:17:43.380] And because of Brave New Books, I now enjoy reading and watching educational documentaries without feeling tired or uninterested. [01:17:43.380 --> 01:17:54.380] So if you or anybody you know suffers from stupidity, then you need to call 512-480-2503 or visit them in 1904Guadalupe or bravenewbookstore.com. [01:17:54.380 --> 01:18:00.380] Side effects from using Brave New Books products may include discernment and enlarged vocabulary and an overall increase in mental functioning. [01:18:25.380 --> 01:18:30.380] I was blindsided but now I can see your plans [01:18:30.380 --> 01:18:33.380] You put the fear in my pocket [01:18:33.380 --> 01:18:35.380] Took the money from my hands [01:18:35.380 --> 01:18:40.380] Ain't gonna fool me with that same old trick again [01:18:40.380 --> 01:19:00.380] Ain't gonna fool me [01:19:00.380 --> 01:19:05.380] Ain't gonna drop me with that same old sucker pun [01:19:05.380 --> 01:19:10.380] I get it now but then I must have been out too much [01:19:10.380 --> 01:19:15.380] Back then you had room to move but now you're feeling the crunch [01:19:15.380 --> 01:19:40.380] Ain't gonna get me with that same old sucker pun [01:19:40.380 --> 01:19:45.380] Ain't gonna please me with that same old bad dance song [01:19:45.380 --> 01:19:50.380] You thought you were right but now you got it all wrong [01:19:50.380 --> 01:19:55.380] It was a weak moment for me but I had the power all along [01:19:55.380 --> 01:20:10.380] Ain't gonna please me with that same old bad dance song [01:20:26.380 --> 01:20:28.380] It just lays there [01:20:28.380 --> 01:20:32.380] You asked the bailiff to arrest the judge [01:20:32.380 --> 01:20:34.380] Well, haven't arrested her yet [01:20:34.380 --> 01:20:40.380] Did you set the motions for hearing? [01:20:40.380 --> 01:20:47.380] I requested with court coordinator a day to hear motions and I never got any response whatsoever [01:20:47.380 --> 01:20:57.380] Then file a complaint against the court coordinator for denying you your right to petition the court for redress of grievance [01:20:57.380 --> 01:21:02.380] The court coordinator will have a fit when you charge her [01:21:02.380 --> 01:21:05.380] She has no immunity of any kind [01:21:05.380 --> 01:21:08.380] She is fair game [01:21:08.380 --> 01:21:12.380] So you filed a criminal complaint against her for, I'm sorry Ray, what was that? [01:21:12.380 --> 01:21:19.380] For denying you in your right to petition the court for redress of grievance [01:21:19.380 --> 01:21:27.380] Okay, I'm just writing that down [01:21:27.380 --> 01:21:31.380] I've got some other interesting items here [01:21:31.380 --> 01:21:35.380] In this particular instance, in this particular judge I got an interesting letter [01:21:35.380 --> 01:21:42.380] It sent an open records request to the office of court management for Harris County Courts of Law [01:21:42.380 --> 01:21:51.380] And it says this particular judge is not required to file a bond at county court judge [01:21:51.380 --> 01:21:55.380] They're probably bonded by the county [01:21:55.380 --> 01:21:56.380] Okay [01:21:56.380 --> 01:22:03.380] Doesn't matter, the county holds the bond, you make a challenge to the bond, the bond rating goes up [01:22:03.380 --> 01:22:09.380] Alright, section 25.1033 Texas Government Code [01:22:09.380 --> 01:22:13.380] I assume that's what you mean [01:22:13.380 --> 01:22:18.380] Yeah, that was exactly what I mean, what was that again? [01:22:18.380 --> 01:22:20.380] I got another interesting case [01:22:20.380 --> 01:22:23.380] Wait, what was that one again? [01:22:23.380 --> 01:22:38.380] The Texas Government Code, it is section 25.1233 P, or I guess section P of the Texas Government Code [01:22:38.380 --> 01:22:40.380] That's interesting [01:22:40.380 --> 01:22:43.380] Yeah, it's part of a blanket bond [01:22:43.380 --> 01:22:48.380] You would think that a public, I guess a public official is just part of the entire county bond [01:22:48.380 --> 01:22:55.380] Yeah, if you start nailing the judge claims on the bond, the bond rating starts going up [01:22:55.380 --> 01:23:00.380] The thing about it is, I can't, I don't know that they were taking the claims on the bond [01:23:00.380 --> 01:23:04.380] I know who the bonding company is, but I don't [01:23:04.380 --> 01:23:10.380] File your complaint with the bonding, your claim with the bonding company, send them a notice of tort [01:23:10.380 --> 01:23:12.380] I have [01:23:12.380 --> 01:23:17.380] Then that's all you need to do, the bonding company take care of the rest [01:23:17.380 --> 01:23:28.380] Yeah, the tort on that particular issue, and I didn't specifically, I assume they know who this particular individual is [01:23:28.380 --> 01:23:31.380] When I give the name, you know, the name of the rest [01:23:31.380 --> 01:23:41.380] You understand that what the bonding company does is between the county and the insurance company [01:23:41.380 --> 01:23:44.380] So you won't know anything about that [01:23:44.380 --> 01:23:47.380] That all goes on behind the scenes [01:23:47.380 --> 01:23:52.380] But we know what happens, the last thing they're going to do is tell you [01:23:52.380 --> 01:23:57.380] Oh yeah, you screwed me royal, that's the last thing they want you to know [01:23:57.380 --> 01:24:02.380] Right, yeah, I did send them a tort letter and a tort claim [01:24:02.380 --> 01:24:09.380] Yeah, then that'll go against their bond rating [01:24:09.380 --> 01:24:15.380] If you can get more people to do that to the judge, they'll remove her from the bench [01:24:15.380 --> 01:24:22.380] Because the bonding company will drop this particular person off their bond rating [01:24:22.380 --> 01:24:27.380] And the counties have a fit when they get this kind of stuff because it screws up their budget [01:24:27.380 --> 01:24:29.380] Oh really? [01:24:29.380 --> 01:24:35.380] It makes a big difference, I mean these insurance companies go up quickly when they start getting claims [01:24:35.380 --> 01:24:37.380] Right [01:24:37.380 --> 01:24:42.380] I mean how often do you file a tort, just once or once a month? [01:24:42.380 --> 01:24:45.380] Every time you get an opportunity [01:24:45.380 --> 01:24:48.380] I think it's time, it's been a couple of months [01:24:48.380 --> 01:24:52.380] Yeah, send another one, the more you hammer them the worse it gets, you know [01:24:52.380 --> 01:24:58.380] Russell tells about that attorney coming in complaining that Mr. Mortland filed three bar grievances against him [01:24:58.380 --> 01:25:04.380] And the next year their firm almost couldn't get malpractice insurance and when they did it nearly doubled [01:25:04.380 --> 01:25:06.380] Oh really? [01:25:06.380 --> 01:25:11.380] That doesn't surprise me, because I'm in the same boat, I'm doing the same thing [01:25:11.380 --> 01:25:14.380] I made that mistake, I'll never make that mistake again [01:25:14.380 --> 01:25:18.380] I will never make that mistake again, I will never ever hire another attorney [01:25:18.380 --> 01:25:23.380] That will never happen, if there are any attorneys listed then you guys are slime [01:25:23.380 --> 01:25:29.380] Unless you're doing the right thing for people and you're handling the process and you're doing your job [01:25:29.380 --> 01:25:34.380] And you're working for the court, you're doing the wrong thing [01:25:34.380 --> 01:25:39.380] Get them to appoint you counsel, that's different [01:25:39.380 --> 01:25:45.380] The thing about this particular instance, that's what I tried to establish and that never happened [01:25:45.380 --> 01:25:50.380] There was no due process in this particular instance whatsoever [01:25:50.380 --> 01:25:56.380] Did they at any time force you to come before the court with no counsel? [01:25:56.380 --> 01:25:58.380] Oh yes [01:25:58.380 --> 01:25:59.380] That's bad news [01:25:59.380 --> 01:26:00.380] Many times [01:26:00.380 --> 01:26:07.380] That for every time needs a judicial conduct complaint, bar grievance against the prosecutor [01:26:07.380 --> 01:26:10.380] Yeah, numerous times, four or five times [01:26:10.380 --> 01:26:15.380] That's absolutely forbidden, separate complaint for each time [01:26:15.380 --> 01:26:19.380] To the judicial commission and the bar, for the judge and the prosecutor? [01:26:19.380 --> 01:26:23.380] Yes, and a claim to the bonds of both [01:26:23.380 --> 01:26:25.380] For abuse of process? [01:26:25.380 --> 01:26:27.380] Yes [01:26:27.380 --> 01:26:33.380] No, that's official oppression [01:26:33.380 --> 01:26:36.380] Denying you and your rights, you have a right to counsel [01:26:36.380 --> 01:26:40.380] Randy, we talked about this also [01:26:40.380 --> 01:26:44.380] I was told directly to my face [01:26:44.380 --> 01:26:49.380] That that particular program for public counsel, you know you've been down this road [01:26:49.380 --> 01:26:55.380] This particular program, this is an approximation but it's pretty close [01:26:55.380 --> 01:27:00.380] That that program didn't exist but they were working on it, might have it in a few months [01:27:00.380 --> 01:27:02.380] Literally right to my face [01:27:02.380 --> 01:27:06.380] Their problem, not your problem [01:27:06.380 --> 01:27:08.380] Exactly, that's what I said [01:27:08.380 --> 01:27:15.380] Your problem, your rights do not evaporate because they don't have their administrative procedures in place [01:27:15.380 --> 01:27:17.380] Exactly [01:27:17.380 --> 01:27:23.380] If you want to run your business here, you need to have all four wheels on the ground [01:27:23.380 --> 01:27:26.380] So kick them in the teeth every chance you get [01:27:26.380 --> 01:27:32.380] And something else here, if it goes towards, and I know Andy would like this [01:27:32.380 --> 01:27:39.380] It goes towards a Texas administrative code, total 37, part one, chapter four, sub-chapter B, rule 413 [01:27:39.380 --> 01:27:46.380] This particular, my instigator, the deputy, does not have those [01:27:46.380 --> 01:27:49.380] He's not qualified [01:27:49.380 --> 01:27:52.380] I got that from the Texas Department of Public Safety [01:27:52.380 --> 01:27:57.380] If he doesn't have an oath and he's not qualified, he is unable [01:27:57.380 --> 01:28:01.380] Oh wait, no, I start to say he's unable to invoke sub-bedroom jurisdiction in the court [01:28:01.380 --> 01:28:05.380] But yes he can, he does that as a citizen [01:28:05.380 --> 01:28:12.380] Right, no, no, no, this is the Texas administrative code [01:28:12.380 --> 01:28:15.380] Oh, he didn't have the qualifications [01:28:15.380 --> 01:28:17.380] He doesn't have it [01:28:17.380 --> 01:28:18.380] Yes [01:28:18.380 --> 01:28:23.380] He didn't have it, I knew he didn't, I mean I'd already spoken to him, now I've got it black and white [01:28:23.380 --> 01:28:30.380] What should I do with this, I mean should I [01:28:30.380 --> 01:28:34.380] File criminal charges against him [01:28:34.380 --> 01:28:38.380] And motion to disqualify, didn't I send you a motion to disqualify the police officer [01:28:38.380 --> 01:28:43.380] Well actually yeah, I think I took up, I did, I've done that, I filed that [01:28:43.380 --> 01:28:46.380] The thing about it is, they're all ignored [01:28:46.380 --> 01:28:49.380] Well, they won't get ignored when you get to the appeals court [01:28:49.380 --> 01:28:54.380] What you need to do is file an interlocutory appeal [01:28:54.380 --> 01:28:56.380] File an interlocutory appeal with the district court [01:28:56.380 --> 01:28:59.380] Yeah [01:28:59.380 --> 01:29:01.380] Do you have one of those forms on dearest imprudence [01:29:01.380 --> 01:29:04.380] That's not exactly a form [01:29:04.380 --> 01:29:12.380] It always depends on what your case is [01:29:12.380 --> 01:29:16.380] But no, I don't have an interlocutory appeal form on dearest imprudence [01:29:16.380 --> 01:29:17.380] Okay, well I can look that up [01:29:17.380 --> 01:29:27.380] Something else I did, I did, and I did get the certified returns that he received for Judge Underwood [01:29:27.380 --> 01:29:33.380] And he's in, well he's in Conroe, he is the administrative judge [01:29:33.380 --> 01:29:35.380] You're head administrative judge of the district [01:29:35.380 --> 01:29:38.380] I'll wait if I can [01:29:38.380 --> 01:29:42.380] Okay, that's on your recusal or disqualification motion [01:29:42.380 --> 01:29:47.380] It's on the challenge to jurisdiction motion that this man is presiding judge [01:29:47.380 --> 01:29:48.380] He's a recruit [01:29:48.380 --> 01:29:50.380] Oh, okay, he's a retired [01:29:50.380 --> 01:29:52.380] Exactly, you know who I'm talking about [01:29:52.380 --> 01:29:54.380] Okay, yep, we'll be right back [01:29:54.380 --> 01:29:56.380] Okay [01:29:56.380 --> 01:29:58.380] This is Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Wheel of Law [01:29:58.380 --> 01:30:08.380] Perfect [01:30:28.380 --> 01:30:34.380] This documentary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case winning experience [01:30:34.380 --> 01:30:43.380] Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand about the principles and practices that control our American courts [01:30:43.380 --> 01:30:52.380] You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases, pro se tactics and much more [01:30:52.380 --> 01:31:00.380] Visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner or call toll free, 866-LAW-EZ [01:31:22.380 --> 01:31:38.380] Okay, Keith, go ahead [01:31:38.380 --> 01:31:46.380] Anyway, I was saying that I had sent that information to, he's a judge under Wynton Conroe [01:31:46.380 --> 01:32:00.380] He is a recusal judge and I sent over motion or I'm sorry, challenge to jurisdiction of the court and motion to disqualify presiding judge along with an explanation [01:32:00.380 --> 01:32:03.380] Okay, wait, wait, wait, it doesn't go to him [01:32:03.380 --> 01:32:07.380] You file the motion to disqualify in the court case [01:32:07.380 --> 01:32:18.380] And the presiding judge in the case is required to forward the motion to the head administrative judge of the district who appoints the judge to hear the motion [01:32:18.380 --> 01:32:21.380] Has done, has done none of that [01:32:21.380 --> 01:32:24.380] Did you file it in the case or did you just send it? [01:32:24.380 --> 01:32:26.380] Yeah, in my cause [01:32:26.380 --> 01:32:32.380] Okay, then has the head administrative judge ruled, appointed a judge to hear the motion? [01:32:32.380 --> 01:32:34.380] Has not [01:32:34.380 --> 01:32:37.380] File a complaint against the judge [01:32:37.380 --> 01:32:39.380] I would file criminally against him [01:32:39.380 --> 01:32:41.380] He's the head administrative judge of the district [01:32:41.380 --> 01:32:44.380] He's not going to like that [01:32:44.380 --> 01:32:48.380] And that's going to get him kicked off at this judge [01:32:48.380 --> 01:32:53.380] He would be the head administrative judge of the district [01:32:53.380 --> 01:32:56.380] I'm trying to figure out because I'm going to lick the guy and give him a call tomorrow [01:32:56.380 --> 01:32:59.380] Yeah, he's the head administrative judge of the whole area [01:32:59.380 --> 01:33:01.380] He's way on up there [01:33:01.380 --> 01:33:05.380] That would be, that would be underwood [01:33:05.380 --> 01:33:07.380] Yeah, whoever the head administrative judge is [01:33:07.380 --> 01:33:13.380] And you go after him, he's going to be unhappy [01:33:13.380 --> 01:33:15.380] He's going to go back to this judge and want something done [01:33:15.380 --> 01:33:19.380] What we're talking about is the head administrative judge for the second district [01:33:19.380 --> 01:33:20.380] He's over 37 counties [01:33:20.380 --> 01:33:21.380] Yeah [01:33:21.380 --> 01:33:23.380] That's the guy, he's the guy, he's in Conrad [01:33:23.380 --> 01:33:26.380] File against him [01:33:26.380 --> 01:33:28.380] I don't know that he has it, but he has it now [01:33:28.380 --> 01:33:32.380] His problem, not your problem [01:33:32.380 --> 01:33:36.380] I sent it to the clerk of the court in this cause, Randy [01:33:36.380 --> 01:33:40.380] The judge was required to send it to the head administrative judge of the district [01:33:40.380 --> 01:33:43.380] And he was required to appoint a judge to hear the motion [01:33:43.380 --> 01:33:47.380] Now, as far as you're concerned, they did what they were supposed to [01:33:47.380 --> 01:33:51.380] No judge was appointed, file against this judge [01:33:51.380 --> 01:33:56.380] If he never got it, he is not going to be happy [01:33:56.380 --> 01:33:58.380] I'm going to talk to him about it tomorrow because he got it [01:33:58.380 --> 01:34:00.380] Don't talk to him about it [01:34:00.380 --> 01:34:04.380] He's going to shuck and jive you [01:34:04.380 --> 01:34:05.380] File against him [01:34:05.380 --> 01:34:10.380] This is how we got the IRS agent fired in Fort Lauderdale [01:34:10.380 --> 01:34:18.380] We went to the inspector general of the IRS and accused this agent's boss [01:34:18.380 --> 01:34:22.380] His boss's boss and his boss's boss's boss [01:34:22.380 --> 01:34:26.380] Of approving this raid she did [01:34:26.380 --> 01:34:30.380] When I have no doubt, they never heard of it [01:34:30.380 --> 01:34:35.380] And when they got the inspector general of the IRS down there crawling down their throats [01:34:35.380 --> 01:34:41.380] Wanting to know why they're approving this kind of a raid [01:34:41.380 --> 01:34:43.380] They were not happy [01:34:43.380 --> 01:34:44.380] But they were [01:34:44.380 --> 01:34:48.380] So when you land on this judge like a ton of bricks [01:34:48.380 --> 01:34:55.380] Assuming that he just absolutely refused to perform his duty, 39-03 penal code [01:34:55.380 --> 01:34:57.380] Make the allegation against him [01:34:57.380 --> 01:35:03.380] And let the prosecutor call him and ask him, why is this guy trying to get me to arrest you? [01:35:03.380 --> 01:35:06.380] And he's going to say, what? [01:35:06.380 --> 01:35:08.380] What are you talking about? [01:35:08.380 --> 01:35:11.380] By the time he gets the answers [01:35:11.380 --> 01:35:15.380] There are going to be some judges that are going to be tiptoeing around [01:35:15.380 --> 01:35:18.380] Who would I file that complaint with? [01:35:18.380 --> 01:35:20.380] District attorney [01:35:20.380 --> 01:35:25.380] They're sitting on about 50 of them right now [01:35:25.380 --> 01:35:29.380] He's not going to pursue them, but you just keep adding them to him [01:35:29.380 --> 01:35:33.380] Have you filed any against the district attorney with the district judge? [01:35:33.380 --> 01:35:35.380] I have not [01:35:35.380 --> 01:35:43.380] Take the whole thing and send it to the district judge in a petition for court of inquiry [01:35:43.380 --> 01:35:47.380] Chapter 52, Code of Criminal Procedure [01:35:47.380 --> 01:35:51.380] And include all of these verified criminal affidavits [01:35:51.380 --> 01:35:56.380] And then when the judge doesn't act on the affidavits, then you file against the judge [01:35:56.380 --> 01:36:01.380] You get the judge in trouble for trying to protect the prosecutor [01:36:01.380 --> 01:36:03.380] And he ain't going to be happy about that [01:36:03.380 --> 01:36:05.380] Right [01:36:05.380 --> 01:36:07.380] Yeah, that's what I've tried to do [01:36:07.380 --> 01:36:10.380] It's just been, you know, you've filed so much paperwork [01:36:10.380 --> 01:36:15.380] It's kind of hard to juggle it, you get a little bit confused as to what you've done and what you haven't done [01:36:15.380 --> 01:36:17.380] It's kind of hard to stay on top of it [01:36:17.380 --> 01:36:18.380] You need to keep a log [01:36:18.380 --> 01:36:23.380] Yeah, I'm trying to keep a log online as much as possible [01:36:23.380 --> 01:36:28.380] But I had something else I wanted to ask you about, but I can't recall what it was now [01:36:28.380 --> 01:36:33.380] That's going to get worse, I can assure you [01:36:33.380 --> 01:36:36.380] I know what I was going to say, if I could just real briefly [01:36:36.380 --> 01:36:41.380] You know what, I could just take this thing to trial by myself [01:36:41.380 --> 01:36:45.380] You know, I know enough, and it just rolls off [01:36:45.380 --> 01:36:49.380] And these people have absolutely no idea, and they're scared to death [01:36:49.380 --> 01:36:56.380] Yes, when you start getting close to trial, that's when they're going to get, what it's going to get serious for [01:36:56.380 --> 01:36:57.380] What I've already done [01:36:57.380 --> 01:37:02.380] You file an interlocutory appeal, this is really going to get their attention [01:37:02.380 --> 01:37:08.380] What I've already done is, I've already demanded examining trial a couple of times [01:37:08.380 --> 01:37:12.380] And it was denied because this judge said, although a magistrate said that [01:37:12.380 --> 01:37:22.380] I can't do that because there is a Chapter 16 of the Texas statutes prohibits me from doing that [01:37:22.380 --> 01:37:27.380] Providing an examining trial or examining into your criminal complaint [01:37:27.380 --> 01:37:29.380] And I thought, you've got to be kidding me [01:37:29.380 --> 01:37:37.380] I know Chapter 16, front to back, and that is absolutely not true [01:37:37.380 --> 01:37:43.380] She handed me the book, and pointed to something, and I said, this is about wiretapping [01:37:43.380 --> 01:37:50.380] I started laughing, oh my God, it's that bad [01:37:50.380 --> 01:37:55.380] And she didn't want to see me, and frankly I didn't want to see her either because she's a liar [01:37:55.380 --> 01:38:01.380] And the last thing I told her, I said, in four different statements, I said, I want a trial [01:38:01.380 --> 01:38:02.380] I want a trial [01:38:02.380 --> 01:38:06.380] You lied to me, you lied about the process, you lied about attorneys [01:38:06.380 --> 01:38:09.380] You haven't responded to motions, you haven't done anything [01:38:09.380 --> 01:38:15.380] What have you got to hide? Why are you dragging me back and forth? [01:38:15.380 --> 01:38:17.380] Just to try to abuse me [01:38:17.380 --> 01:38:18.380] Set a trial [01:38:18.380 --> 01:38:20.380] This is what they do [01:38:20.380 --> 01:38:21.380] I'm ready, let's go [01:38:21.380 --> 01:38:27.380] They try to pull you in, pull you in, until they wear you out [01:38:27.380 --> 01:38:31.380] And every time they pull you in, you need to file more against them and raise the stakes [01:38:31.380 --> 01:38:36.380] The thing about it is, can't you just demand a trial, let's go [01:38:36.380 --> 01:38:39.380] Look, are you not getting it? [01:38:39.380 --> 01:38:40.380] Well, no [01:38:40.380 --> 01:38:47.380] If they're saying, I don't care what the law says, screw you [01:38:47.380 --> 01:38:51.380] You've got to go higher, you can't just keep going back and say [01:38:51.380 --> 01:38:52.380] Oh no, I am [01:38:52.380 --> 01:38:55.380] Do this, and they say no, do that, they say no [01:38:55.380 --> 01:38:59.380] I want to start off the line as fast as I can [01:38:59.380 --> 01:39:01.380] I should have gone right to the top [01:39:01.380 --> 01:39:03.380] Go right to the top immediately [01:39:03.380 --> 01:39:08.380] I'll go tomorrow, I'm going to start working on that, the interrogatory appeal [01:39:08.380 --> 01:39:10.380] The interrogatory appeal goes to who? [01:39:10.380 --> 01:39:11.380] The district judge [01:39:11.380 --> 01:39:12.380] Yeah, district court [01:39:12.380 --> 01:39:14.380] District court, that's happening tomorrow [01:39:14.380 --> 01:39:17.380] I'm going to look it up, I'm going to get the paperwork, I'm going to get it filled out [01:39:17.380 --> 01:39:19.380] And I'm going to get it over to them [01:39:19.380 --> 01:39:25.380] Yeah, all interrogatory means is it's while the case is ongoing [01:39:25.380 --> 01:39:30.380] And it's going to be, is it more or less like a mandamus? [01:39:30.380 --> 01:39:34.380] Tell these people what's going on to get off the snide and do something? [01:39:34.380 --> 01:39:35.380] Yes [01:39:35.380 --> 01:39:37.380] Okay, all right [01:39:37.380 --> 01:39:47.380] Okay, you file an interrogatory appeal on her refusal to provide an examining trial on her denial of counsel [01:39:47.380 --> 01:39:49.380] Right [01:39:49.380 --> 01:39:51.380] On the recusal [01:39:51.380 --> 01:39:54.380] Right [01:39:54.380 --> 01:39:58.380] And you could also just, have you tried a mandamus to the district court? [01:39:58.380 --> 01:39:59.380] I have not [01:39:59.380 --> 01:40:02.380] Mandamus to the district court on the recusal? [01:40:02.380 --> 01:40:09.380] The thing about it is, yeah, I should go ahead and do that, I'll do that tomorrow, but like I said, well, end demand trial [01:40:09.380 --> 01:40:16.380] And in the meantime, just, I guess just pray and hope and pray for the best, you know, and just keep doing what you do [01:40:16.380 --> 01:40:24.380] Yeah, just keep hammering them because they're going to, they're always, everybody, they wear them out [01:40:24.380 --> 01:40:32.380] That's the whole deal, but they found out with you each time they come at you, you come back at them harder [01:40:32.380 --> 01:40:34.380] And it's not working [01:40:34.380 --> 01:40:40.380] They're sitting on about 300 pages of documentation, everything under the sun [01:40:40.380 --> 01:40:48.380] Good, you got to understand, making you come back and frustrating you is what they do [01:40:48.380 --> 01:40:56.380] That's what they know how to do, and you got to take it so every time they pull some crapolo like that, they get more paperwork [01:40:56.380 --> 01:40:57.380] Yeah [01:40:57.380 --> 01:40:59.380] The problem gets worse, not better [01:40:59.380 --> 01:41:05.380] Can you do me a favor, Randy? I don't know if you'll remember some of this stuff because I've written some of it down and not [01:41:05.380 --> 01:41:08.380] If I email over to you, what would you want me to put in the subject line? [01:41:08.380 --> 01:41:12.380] And so that maybe you could jot down some things from, you know, this [01:41:12.380 --> 01:41:15.380] Okay, just put the subject line in all caps [01:41:15.380 --> 01:41:18.380] I'll just put from Keith or something like that [01:41:18.380 --> 01:41:19.380] Okay, yeah, that'll work [01:41:19.380 --> 01:41:21.380] All right, and then maybe [01:41:21.380 --> 01:41:23.380] Okay, yeah, we need to move along, we're running out of time [01:41:23.380 --> 01:41:25.380] All right, my friend, thank you [01:41:25.380 --> 01:41:26.380] Thank you [01:41:26.380 --> 01:41:27.380] Good night [01:41:27.380 --> 01:41:28.380] Good night [01:41:28.380 --> 01:41:32.380] All right, good night, Keith [01:41:32.380 --> 01:41:37.380] All right, we got Dan from Connecticut, Dan, thanks for calling in, what's on your mind? [01:41:37.380 --> 01:41:40.380] Nothing much, how's it going with you guys? [01:41:40.380 --> 01:41:45.380] Yeah, Dan, you got a lot on your mind? [01:41:45.380 --> 01:41:54.380] Yeah, as a matter of fact, I hate to switch the subject slightly, but there are problems in Peter Schiffland up here in Connecticut [01:41:54.380 --> 01:42:02.380] I am about to come out with a lot of groundbreaking information on the Connecticut Republican Party [01:42:02.380 --> 01:42:11.380] And I was approached by several sources who have a lot of inside information on how, well, basically the long and short of it is this [01:42:11.380 --> 01:42:16.380] The nominees have already been selected for federal office [01:42:16.380 --> 01:42:24.380] Now, I don't know how you would logically do that without having a convention or a primary, but they're doing it [01:42:24.380 --> 01:42:32.380] So what I'm about to say applies to Connecticut as much as it applies to any other Republican Party, and I just want to put out a few pointers [01:42:32.380 --> 01:42:38.380] And obviously I will be calling in at a future point to let you know what exactly it is I found out [01:42:38.380 --> 01:42:40.380] But here are your tips [01:42:40.380 --> 01:42:47.380] First of all, read your Republican town committee's rules, know them back and forth [01:42:47.380 --> 01:42:52.380] The second thing I want to say is check the attendance records [01:42:52.380 --> 01:42:56.380] Now, what you will find may disturb you [01:42:56.380 --> 01:42:58.380] Now, the records may not be there [01:42:58.380 --> 01:43:04.380] The records may indicate that people that are on your particular town committee do not reside in that town [01:43:04.380 --> 01:43:10.380] Your town committee's records may reflect that people that are on the town committee are in fact deceased [01:43:10.380 --> 01:43:13.380] And a bunch of other things [01:43:13.380 --> 01:43:22.380] On top of that, be mindful of any action taken without a quorum because it's already happening in Connecticut [01:43:22.380 --> 01:43:34.380] We already have town committees getting together and trying to choose delegates, but there's a lot of stuff that is actually being done without a quorum [01:43:34.380 --> 01:43:37.380] All right, Dan, you want to stay on the line? [01:43:37.380 --> 01:43:39.380] Oh, sure thing, there's just a little more [01:43:39.380 --> 01:43:44.380] Okay, great. All right, we'll be right back. This is the rule of law [01:43:44.380 --> 01:43:49.380] Randy Kelton and Deborah Stevens, Eddie Craig, we'll be right back with Dan [01:43:49.380 --> 01:44:18.380] Aerial spraying, chemtrails, the modified atmosphere, heavy metals and pesticides, carcinogens and chemical fibers all falling from the sky [01:44:18.380 --> 01:44:21.380] You have a choice to keep your body clean [01:44:21.380 --> 01:44:31.380] Detoxify with micro plant powder from hempusa.org or call 908-691-2608 [01:44:31.380 --> 01:44:36.380] It's odorless and tasteless and used in any liquid or food [01:44:36.380 --> 01:44:39.380] Protect your family now with micro plant powder [01:44:39.380 --> 01:44:48.380] Cleaning out heavy metals, parasites and toxins. Order it now for daily intake and stock it now for long-term storage [01:44:48.380 --> 01:44:56.380] Visit hempusa.org or call 908-691-2608 today [01:44:56.380 --> 01:45:15.380] Hello? Oh, man, you're in jail? You got busted, man? Oh, man, I'm broke, man [01:45:15.380 --> 01:45:25.380] Something in this world I will never understand [01:45:25.380 --> 01:45:29.380] Something I realize fully [01:45:29.380 --> 01:45:34.380] Somebody's gonna police that policeman [01:45:34.380 --> 01:45:37.380] Somebody's gonna police the police [01:45:37.380 --> 01:45:42.380] There's always a room at the top of the hill [01:45:42.380 --> 01:45:46.380] I hear through the grapevine that it's lonely [01:45:46.380 --> 01:45:49.380] Okay, we are back. Dan? [01:45:49.380 --> 01:45:50.380] Yes [01:45:50.380 --> 01:45:56.380] Okay, so what's going on here? The fix is in? [01:45:56.380 --> 01:46:05.380] Yeah, I hate to say it. I will admit, and I've said it before, I'm not too much of a fan of working within the Republican Party [01:46:05.380 --> 01:46:17.380] For many of the reasons I've previously described in the past, this is really looking like the same kind of stuff that happened to Ron Paul in 2008 [01:46:17.380 --> 01:46:19.380] And it's still going on [01:46:19.380 --> 01:46:26.380] Now, the unfortunate part about it is that let's just say somebody like Peter Schiff was to file a suit [01:46:26.380 --> 01:46:32.380] Well, first, you can't just go to court without, you know, exhausting all administrative remedy [01:46:32.380 --> 01:46:37.380] You would basically say, hey, I don't have the rules of the convention, could you give them to me? [01:46:37.380 --> 01:46:44.380] And you would have to give them time to actually reply to the request and say, okay, well, here are the rules [01:46:44.380 --> 01:46:49.380] Now, by the time that goes on, now, the convention in Connecticut is in May [01:46:49.380 --> 01:46:54.380] Bear in mind, we're rolling up on, you know, the middle of the month in another week [01:46:54.380 --> 01:47:03.380] So the request isn't answered, and I've had my source in particular, he's tried to make this request, too, like via certified mail [01:47:03.380 --> 01:47:05.380] Now, he hasn't gotten anything [01:47:05.380 --> 01:47:12.380] By the time you can actually get a court date and start going through pretrial motions and stuff like that, you're talking a few months [01:47:12.380 --> 01:47:15.380] File an emergency restraining order [01:47:15.380 --> 01:47:17.380] Restraining order? [01:47:17.380 --> 01:47:19.380] Yeah, that'll trick a knot in their shorts [01:47:19.380 --> 01:47:21.380] That's a good idea [01:47:21.380 --> 01:47:35.380] Restrain them from any action until they've complied because it will create a harm that cannot be repaired [01:47:35.380 --> 01:47:37.380] I wasn't thinking about that [01:47:37.380 --> 01:47:48.380] Well, Dan, I mean, aren't there, isn't there some action that you guys can take functioning within the rules of the Republican Party? [01:47:48.380 --> 01:47:52.380] I mean, like, here in Texas, there's a huge movement [01:47:52.380 --> 01:48:05.380] I mean, people are becoming precinct chairs all over the place, uncontested, they're bypassing the whole black box voting issue [01:48:05.380 --> 01:48:12.380] By simply just moving in and taking over and inside the party [01:48:12.380 --> 01:48:14.380] Connecticut's a little different [01:48:14.380 --> 01:48:17.380] Connecticut has what are called superdelegates [01:48:17.380 --> 01:48:20.380] Now, basically, these are pretty much party insiders [01:48:20.380 --> 01:48:28.380] And on top of that, the state central chair has a lot more say than, like, your local town committees [01:48:28.380 --> 01:48:36.380] So basically what they're doing is they already have an idea of what they want and they've already endorsed it [01:48:36.380 --> 01:48:38.380] You know, so they're just going forward [01:48:38.380 --> 01:48:46.380] And in the meantime, they're not really, as far as I can tell, telling anybody what the rules of the convention are going to be [01:48:46.380 --> 01:48:58.380] And by the time we were able to actually get this in court and, you know, really do anything about it, the convention could be long done over [01:48:58.380 --> 01:49:02.380] I mean, bear in mind, this isn't just your average state [01:49:02.380 --> 01:49:07.380] As you may know, Chris Dodd just said, hey, I'm out, I'm retiring [01:49:07.380 --> 01:49:12.380] On top of that, he was considered one of the most vulnerable senators in the country [01:49:12.380 --> 01:49:17.380] So they're really banking a lot on this [01:49:17.380 --> 01:49:20.380] You know, so the fix is definitely in to, you know, create whatever you call it [01:49:20.380 --> 01:49:24.380] So file the restraining order, you will get their attention [01:49:24.380 --> 01:49:37.380] Randy, we were talking about this a year or so ago concerning statutory requirements that could possibly govern political parties [01:49:37.380 --> 01:49:46.380] Because, I mean, when you really break it down, political parties, they are private entities, they're private organizations [01:49:46.380 --> 01:49:48.380] They're only semi-private [01:49:48.380 --> 01:49:51.380] But that's the whole thing, that's what we were determining, they're semi-private [01:49:51.380 --> 01:49:54.380] It's kind of like the Bar Association [01:49:54.380 --> 01:50:01.380] There is some degree of governmental regulation [01:50:01.380 --> 01:50:06.380] And so, like, partial open records requests could apply [01:50:06.380 --> 01:50:12.380] I mean, you don't just have to rely on tort here [01:50:12.380 --> 01:50:16.380] Well, that's what he was saying, he's filing open records requests, he's not getting answers [01:50:16.380 --> 01:50:21.380] At the time you get through all this process, it's going to be too late [01:50:21.380 --> 01:50:28.380] So file a petition for emergency restraining order and pre-litigation discovery [01:50:28.380 --> 01:50:30.380] Yeah, that might be a good idea [01:50:30.380 --> 01:50:34.380] I mean, again, I was approached by a source on this one [01:50:34.380 --> 01:50:38.380] Do you have any, is there any documentation, like on paper? [01:50:38.380 --> 01:50:45.380] I will be receiving that the next week, but he gave me an idea of where to look and what to find [01:50:45.380 --> 01:50:48.380] Now, this is going to go one of two ways [01:50:48.380 --> 01:50:53.380] This is either going to fix the Connecticut Republican Party and make them follow their rules [01:50:53.380 --> 01:50:55.380] Or it's going to completely bring them down [01:50:55.380 --> 01:51:00.380] And again, I'm not even saying everything that's going on [01:51:00.380 --> 01:51:04.380] So I'm kind of like looking at this from two different angles [01:51:04.380 --> 01:51:10.380] You have, on one end, you've got a corrupt political party, which, you know, we all know that [01:51:10.380 --> 01:51:16.380] And on the other end, you've got a really principled candidate who is being shut out [01:51:16.380 --> 01:51:20.380] Now, here's the problem with the superdelegates in the state central committee [01:51:20.380 --> 01:51:25.380] When they make up their mind, the only thing that's left are the Republican town committees [01:51:25.380 --> 01:51:33.380] Now, you need 15% of the delegates to the convention to actually get on the ballot [01:51:33.380 --> 01:51:36.380] Linda McMahon jumped into the race [01:51:36.380 --> 01:51:41.380] And she's pretty much just buying everything up she can see in sight [01:51:41.380 --> 01:51:45.380] Now, of course, they had their minds made up way before in advance [01:51:45.380 --> 01:51:51.380] So between the guy that they're running, Rob Simmons, and Linda McMahon, Peter Schiff [01:51:51.380 --> 01:51:57.380] I would really doubt that he'd even get the 15% nod that he would need to to get into the primary [01:51:57.380 --> 01:52:04.380] And on top of that, there is rumor, you know, or actually a hint of some kind of agreement [01:52:04.380 --> 01:52:08.380] That's going to be put into the convention rules, which, by the way, nobody has [01:52:08.380 --> 01:52:14.380] That will basically say, if you participate in the convention, you agree not to take this to a primary [01:52:14.380 --> 01:52:19.380] Now, I don't think that would wash with the voters well [01:52:19.380 --> 01:52:24.380] I don't think it would wash with the rank-and-file voters that are Republicans very well [01:52:24.380 --> 01:52:29.380] But they've been known to do things like that, and I wouldn't put it past them [01:52:29.380 --> 01:52:36.380] Yeah, but it doesn't matter because this is interpartisan politics rules of a private organization [01:52:36.380 --> 01:52:48.380] I mean, you said something a minute ago, Dan, concerning the town, like the town hall, like meetings, you know [01:52:48.380 --> 01:52:50.380] The Republican town committees [01:52:50.380 --> 01:52:52.380] Yeah, the Republican town committees [01:52:52.380 --> 01:52:59.380] I mean, don't these town committees have any authority or pull or say so within a party? [01:52:59.380 --> 01:53:03.380] They have very little compared to the superdelegates in the state central committee [01:53:03.380 --> 01:53:11.380] It's like, you know, it's almost like they're peasants, but they're kind of still like, you know, pulled and their arms are twisted [01:53:11.380 --> 01:53:17.380] It's nothing, I am sure, like it works down in Texas. I'm positive of it [01:53:17.380 --> 01:53:18.380] Well [01:53:18.380 --> 01:53:23.380] You know, because this party has been a minority for such a long time, you know [01:53:23.380 --> 01:53:27.380] And everything has kind of been just skewed toward the people who have been there all along [01:53:27.380 --> 01:53:30.380] But that's the way they wrote the rules [01:53:30.380 --> 01:53:34.380] Well, who has the power to change the rules? [01:53:34.380 --> 01:53:39.380] Basically, you would have to bring that to the convention, in which case you would have the superdelegates [01:53:39.380 --> 01:53:45.380] which consist of state central committee members and elected Republicans [01:53:45.380 --> 01:53:51.380] And they would basically have, you could consider it two-thirds say [01:53:51.380 --> 01:53:55.380] The other third would end up being Republican town committees [01:53:55.380 --> 01:53:56.380] So [01:53:56.380 --> 01:54:01.380] So by the time the day is all said and done, like let's just say you take over all the Republican town committees [01:54:01.380 --> 01:54:04.380] which I think would be a long shot [01:54:04.380 --> 01:54:10.380] You've still got the other, like the two-thirds just overruling you [01:54:10.380 --> 01:54:16.380] There's a really big problem going on, but the thing that I see, you know, that I've been informed of [01:54:16.380 --> 01:54:21.380] There are definite problems as far as like just keeping basic records, like [01:54:21.380 --> 01:54:26.380] You know, there are people that are still on Republican town committees that do not attend [01:54:26.380 --> 01:54:33.380] Like they're just AWOL, and they've been AWOL for quite some time, but somehow they still sit on these committees [01:54:33.380 --> 01:54:44.380] Well, see, that's the whole crux of the issue where I was going to, I mean, don't underestimate the power of this one-third [01:54:44.380 --> 01:54:51.380] Okay, and like one of the new shows on the network we have here, Richard Reeves [01:54:51.380 --> 01:54:59.380] You know, one of his big issues is taking over these political parties, and there's a lot of purists that disagree [01:54:59.380 --> 01:55:09.380] with the basic philosophy and accuse him of just reinforcing the two-party system or the multiple party system or whatever [01:55:09.380 --> 01:55:15.380] I'm not even going there. I'm not even going there. I'm just looking at the structure as it is here [01:55:15.380 --> 01:55:28.380] I mean, personally, I wouldn't care if it was an R or a D, but I'm just looking at something that is fundamentally rigged [01:55:28.380 --> 01:55:33.380] I mean, which it is here. I mean, and again, this may not apply to other states like Texas [01:55:33.380 --> 01:55:40.380] No, it applies everywhere, Dan, but I mean, they're trying to fundamentally rig everything, okay? [01:55:40.380 --> 01:55:45.380] They are, the powers that be are, they're doing everything they can to fundamentally rig everything [01:55:45.380 --> 01:55:54.380] and to convince us that we don't have any power and that we're the minority or the one-third or the 40% or the 20% or whatever [01:55:54.380 --> 01:56:02.380] but don't believe it. I mean, you just said yourself that there's a lot of these seats that are left open, I mean [01:56:02.380 --> 01:56:08.380] No, they're not left open. They're being filled by people that don't show up [01:56:08.380 --> 01:56:14.380] Well, if they're being filled by people that don't show up, then y'all need to put people in there that will show up [01:56:14.380 --> 01:56:24.380] Yeah, but you need to kick them off somehow and, you know, basically what goes on is the records are just completely gone [01:56:24.380 --> 01:56:31.380] I mean, the whole thing is just bedlam and of course it's there that way for a purpose [01:56:31.380 --> 01:56:38.380] and of course that's just reinforced at the convention by the State Central Committee and the people that are elected Republicans [01:56:38.380 --> 01:56:41.380] I mean, they've already made up their minds [01:56:41.380 --> 01:56:44.380] Well, I mean, Dan, listen, I mean, don't you think that [01:56:44.380 --> 01:56:46.380] I know that sounds crazy and I don't mean to [01:56:46.380 --> 01:56:51.380] No, no, no, it doesn't sound crazy. I mean [01:56:51.380 --> 01:56:56.380] I don't mean to project this like in a light that we're powerless and we can't do anything [01:56:56.380 --> 01:57:06.380] But, Dan, the situation you're describing sounds to me like a situation that is ripe for us to take over, the good guys [01:57:06.380 --> 01:57:16.380] I mean, if they're, you know, records are in bedlam, just totally in a state of disruption [01:57:16.380 --> 01:57:21.380] I mean, we can use these kinds of situations to our advantage [01:57:21.380 --> 01:57:25.380] But it's a private organization, that's the problem [01:57:25.380 --> 01:57:29.380] You know, you can't, it's not a crime in Connecticut to do that [01:57:29.380 --> 01:57:31.380] I checked, I've been all over it [01:57:31.380 --> 01:57:39.380] But when it affects the public, when it affects government, then they can't [01:57:39.380 --> 01:57:48.380] It falls under different types of torts and governmental rules [01:57:48.380 --> 01:57:55.380] It's just like the Bar Association, it's a quasi-governmental organization [01:57:55.380 --> 01:57:58.380] Not in Connecticut [01:57:58.380 --> 01:58:02.380] I mean, in Connecticut, it's considered a private organization [01:58:02.380 --> 01:58:05.380] The Secretary of State has the most say over this [01:58:05.380 --> 01:58:09.380] But the Secretary of State doesn't say your rules have to be such [01:58:09.380 --> 01:58:14.380] And they don't really provide for any penalties for not following those rules [01:58:14.380 --> 01:58:19.380] Those penalties are already set forth in the rules that the party has prescribed [01:58:19.380 --> 01:58:22.380] Okay, we're about out of time [01:58:22.380 --> 01:58:26.380] Yeah, look, there are remedies with these political parties [01:58:26.380 --> 01:58:28.380] There are, but I just haven't found them yet [01:58:28.380 --> 01:58:31.380] Alright, look, you need to contact Richard Reeves [01:58:31.380 --> 01:58:34.380] He's the man when it comes to political parties [01:58:34.380 --> 01:58:36.380] Okay, definitely will do [01:58:36.380 --> 01:58:40.380] Okay, alright, stay tuned for Endless Fraud Detection [01:58:40.380 --> 01:59:00.380] We'll be back tonight [01:59:00.380 --> 01:59:02.380] This is Randall Kelton from Rule of Law Radio [01:59:02.380 --> 01:59:06.380] Many of you have been helped by the informative programming on 90.1 [01:59:06.380 --> 01:59:08.380] Now 90.1 needs your help [01:59:08.380 --> 01:59:13.380] The operators of 90.1 are in a legal battle with the FCC to stay on the air [01:59:13.380 --> 01:59:19.380] And they need letters from your listeners testifying that 90.1 serves the public interest [01:59:19.380 --> 01:59:23.380] By bringing truthful news and information that no other station does [01:59:23.380 --> 01:59:26.380] Brave New Books is not associated with the Austin Micros [01:59:26.380 --> 01:59:29.380] But they have agreed to help by collecting your letters [01:59:29.380 --> 01:59:32.380] Please drop off or mail your letters, too [01:59:32.380 --> 01:59:42.380] Brave New Books, attention, Austin Micros, 90.1, 1904 Guadalupe, Suite B, Austin, Texas, 78705 [01:59:42.380 --> 01:59:45.380] There are also form letters at the bookstore that folks can just sign [01:59:45.380 --> 01:59:51.380] Please help keep 90.1 on the air by getting your letters and Brave New Books as soon as possible [01:59:51.380 --> 01:59:55.380] Let the FCC know that 90.1 serves the public interest [01:59:55.380 --> 02:00:03.380] By bringing truthful news and information that can't be found anywhere else