[00:00.000 --> 00:10.480]  Israeli Finance Minister Yuval Steinitz says Israel will have to re-occupy the Gaza Strip
[00:10.480 --> 00:15.160]  to prevent Hamas from re-arming. Tensions along the border with the Strip have risen
[00:15.160 --> 00:20.800]  since a Friday clash in which two members of the Hamas security force and two members
[00:20.800 --> 00:26.880]  of the Israeli military were killed. A top defense official said Sunday, Israel does
[00:26.880 --> 00:32.800]  not plan to offer any concessions regarding its nuclear capability at the Nuclear Security
[00:32.800 --> 00:40.080]  Summit in Washington next month. In Iraq Sunday, several bombs exploded near a house linked
[00:40.080 --> 00:45.200]  to a prominent Sunni figure who ran in this month's parliamentary elections, killing
[00:45.200 --> 00:56.080]  five people and wounding 26 others. The Environmental Protection Agency Friday proposed to hold
[00:56.080 --> 01:01.240]  the largest mountaintop mine in central Appalachia, saying the project would pollute drinking
[01:01.240 --> 01:07.320]  water, harm wildlife, and that damage to the mountains would be irreversible. The EPA's
[01:07.320 --> 01:12.920]  action begins another lengthy process about the controversial mine. In the end, the agency
[01:12.920 --> 01:18.280]  could prohibit the mine altogether or allow it to continue with restrictions. The EPA
[01:18.280 --> 01:23.480]  found that mining the coal at Spruce No. 1 in Logan County, West Virginia would fill
[01:23.480 --> 01:30.240]  six valleys, bury more than seven miles of streams, destroy 2,200 acres of forest, and
[01:30.240 --> 01:35.600]  pollute water in adjacent streams. This is the first time the EPA has proposed to veto
[01:35.600 --> 01:41.120]  a mine that had already received a permit. Mountaintop mining requires blasting hundreds
[01:41.120 --> 01:47.080]  of feet off the tops of mountains to expose coal. The mining has destroyed 2,000 square
[01:47.080 --> 01:57.040]  miles of land in Appalachia and buried more than 2,000 miles of streams. A federal appeals
[01:57.040 --> 02:03.640]  court Friday handed another victory to conservative opponents of campaign finance restrictions,
[02:03.640 --> 02:08.680]  striking down limits on individual contributions to independent groups who want to use the
[02:08.680 --> 02:14.720]  money for or against candidates in federal elections. But in its unanimous decision,
[02:14.720 --> 02:20.620]  the U.S. Court of Appeals also said that a conservative group called SpeechNow.org must
[02:20.620 --> 02:26.240]  disclose its donors and other details of its finances to the Federal Election Commission,
[02:26.240 --> 02:31.840]  a requirement the group had sought to overturn. Paul Ryan, a lawyer at the Campaign Legal
[02:31.840 --> 02:37.440]  Center which favors limits on political spending, called the removal of limits on contributions
[02:37.440 --> 02:42.800]  quote a significant loss for the American public. He also said there is a good chance
[02:42.800 --> 02:48.320]  the Supreme Court, which ignored its own Presidents in issuing the five to four Citizen United
[02:48.320 --> 02:53.320]  ruling, may be eager to address the limits kept in place by Friday's rulings.
[02:53.320 --> 02:56.320]  This news brief brought to you by the International News Net.
[02:56.320 --> 03:11.320]  You are listening to the Rule of Law Radio Network at RuleOfLawRadio.com, live, free
[03:11.320 --> 03:18.320]  speech talk radio at its best.
[03:41.320 --> 03:52.320]  Bad boys, bad boys, whatcha gonna do? Whatcha gonna do when they come for you? Bad boys,
[03:52.320 --> 03:58.320]  bad boys, whatcha gonna do? Whatcha gonna do when they come for you? When you were eight
[03:58.320 --> 04:03.320]  and you had bad traits, you'd go to school and learn the golden rule. So why are you
[04:03.320 --> 04:09.320]  acting like a bloody fool? If you get hot then you must get cool. Bad boys, bad boys,
[04:09.320 --> 04:16.320]  whatcha gonna do? Alright, bad boys, bad boys, what are you gonna do when we come for you?
[04:16.320 --> 04:26.320]  This is the Rule of Law. It's Monday, March 29th, 2010. We've got Randy Kelton, Eddie
[04:26.320 --> 04:32.820]  Craig, and Deborah Stevens. Tonight is Monday nights, which means it's traffic night. We've
[04:32.820 --> 04:39.320]  got some good material coming up for you. But first we have an announcement to make
[04:39.320 --> 04:46.320]  and a guest who's gonna be on just briefly. This is Kaye Beach from Radio Free Oklahoma
[04:46.320 --> 04:51.320]  and Kaye is joining us tonight to make announcements. She's starting a new show on this network.
[04:51.320 --> 04:53.320]  Thanks for joining us, Kaye.
[04:53.320 --> 05:00.320]  Thank you for having me as always. Yes, I got an invitation from your wonderful network
[05:00.320 --> 05:07.320]  to start a radio show and I simply couldn't turn that down. The opportunity to talk and
[05:07.320 --> 05:13.320]  lots of people listen is always a good thing. So we are going to be occupying your slot
[05:13.320 --> 05:19.320]  from six to eight on Friday's Central Standard Time and the show's name is gonna be Axiom
[05:19.320 --> 05:26.320]  for Liberty after my blog that I've had for probably a few years going now covering issues
[05:26.320 --> 05:33.320]  mostly about activism, coalition building. I do a lot of looking at the new paradigm
[05:33.320 --> 05:38.320]  that we're moving into and wondering what exactly the old paradigm was, which I bet
[05:38.320 --> 05:44.320]  you guys have the answer to that. But we're gonna be looking at political maneuvering
[05:44.320 --> 05:53.320]  and the powers and the pitfalls of activism and politics and my favorite always is surveillance
[05:53.320 --> 05:58.320]  and how watching the world changes the world. But I want to have a lot of guests on that
[05:58.320 --> 06:03.320]  are my heroes and that's the everyday people that I know from all over the country that
[06:03.320 --> 06:08.320]  have decided to do something and talk to them and see what they're doing and gain some
[06:08.320 --> 06:14.320]  inspiration from them and make some connections. So I want to thank you guys for the opportunity
[06:14.320 --> 06:20.320]  to have this communication. I appreciate it very much.
[06:20.320 --> 06:26.320]  Axiom for Liberty, I love it. So go ahead.
[06:26.320 --> 06:31.320]  I will give you my website and I will even get this changed to an easier one but it's
[06:31.320 --> 06:41.320]  axiomamuse.wordpress.com. I'm not a webmaster, there's a ton of information on that website
[06:41.320 --> 06:46.320]  there. Lots of information if you want to dig around and maybe we'll get it laid out
[06:46.320 --> 06:50.320]  a little bit better but there's tons of stuff there.
[06:50.320 --> 06:56.320]  Axiom for Liberty, just how free do you want to be? That's the question.
[06:56.320 --> 07:01.320]  That is the question. I love it. I love it and just wanted to make it the announcement.
[07:01.320 --> 07:07.320]  That was the slot that Katie Brewer was occupying from 6 to 8 on Friday evenings central time
[07:07.320 --> 07:13.320]  and we're very sorry to see her go. No drama there or anything like that. She's just very
[07:13.320 --> 07:18.320]  busy. She's got three children and a husband to take care of and she regrets that she has
[07:18.320 --> 07:21.320]  to give up the slot. She just bit off a little bit more than she can chew.
[07:21.320 --> 07:25.320]  She's one of my heroes too, the work that she's done in Austin or down in Texas. Is
[07:25.320 --> 07:28.320]  she in Austin or? Yes, she's in Austin, yes.
[07:28.320 --> 07:34.320]  With the vampire police taking the blood, that girl's been tireless.
[07:34.320 --> 07:39.320]  Absolutely, yes. She's done a lot of good work and we love having her on the network
[07:39.320 --> 07:45.320]  and she's always got an open door whenever she may have time to come back so we're sorry
[07:45.320 --> 07:51.320]  to see her go but we understand it can be very time consuming taking care of a family.
[07:51.320 --> 07:55.320]  I don't have any children. Well, I'll have to get her on as a guest because I love to
[07:55.320 --> 07:58.320]  talk to her about her work down there. Absolutely.
[07:58.320 --> 08:02.320]  She's done great things, tireless. So now we have Kay Beach that's going to be
[08:02.320 --> 08:06.320]  on. Axiom for Liberty, just how free do you want to be? And give out your website one
[08:06.320 --> 08:15.320]  more time, Kay? It is Axiomamuse, A-X-I-O-M-A-M-U-S-E, Axiomamuse at WordPress.com.
[08:15.320 --> 08:18.320]  Wonderful and you're going to be starting this Friday, correct?
[08:18.320 --> 08:22.320]  We're going to do it. I'm going to jump in first. This is another thing that I'm doing
[08:22.320 --> 08:28.320]  that I haven't really done before without some hand holding anyways. My guest, my host
[08:28.320 --> 08:34.320]  on Radio Free Oklahoma has taken me a long way but I'm going to jump in first and I
[08:34.320 --> 08:41.320]  just believe that communication is almost everything. It really is. So I appreciate
[08:41.320 --> 08:42.320]  the opportunity, guys.
[08:42.320 --> 08:45.320]  Sure. Now you still are going to be part of Radio Free Oklahoma, right?
[08:45.320 --> 08:46.320]  Yes.
[08:46.320 --> 08:47.320]  Okay, good.
[08:47.320 --> 08:51.320]  And they'll probably be migrating back. We'll probably migrate back and forth a little
[08:51.320 --> 08:56.320]  bit and there's going to be some evolution there. We're going to see what needs we can
[08:56.320 --> 08:59.320]  meet and how it all fits together. We'll see.
[08:59.320 --> 09:03.320]  All right. Well Kay, thanks for joining us tonight and thanks for coming on the show
[09:03.320 --> 09:04.320]  to give us the announcement.
[09:04.320 --> 09:05.320]  Thank you so much.
[09:05.320 --> 09:07.320]  All right. We'll talk to you on Wednesday night.
[09:07.320 --> 09:08.320]  Okay. Bye-bye.
[09:08.320 --> 09:13.320]  Okay. Bye-bye. All right. That was Kay Beach from Radio Free Oklahoma now for Axiom for
[09:13.320 --> 09:19.320]  Liberty on Friday nights. And before we continue on, I just wanted to read this quick letter
[09:19.320 --> 09:26.320]  from a listener and I have a gift for Randy on the air. He's going to like this. This
[09:26.320 --> 09:33.320]  is from Rick in Virginia. Very generous listener sending a donation. I wanted to read this
[09:33.320 --> 09:39.320]  short letter. It says, Dear Deborah, please accept the enclosed order as a donation for
[09:39.320 --> 09:44.320]  Rule of Law Network. It was a money order. Please accept the enclosed order as a donation
[09:44.320 --> 09:50.320]  for Rule of Law Network to use as you see fit with one exception. You must deposit one
[09:50.320 --> 09:58.320]  shiny coin with the nominal value of one twentieth of a Federal Reserve dollar, also known as
[09:58.320 --> 10:05.320]  a, quote, nickel, end quote, into the account known to the Rule of Law Radio listeners as
[10:05.320 --> 10:08.320]  Randy's Beer Fund.
[10:08.320 --> 10:11.320]  Yahoo! Now I got two nickels.
[10:11.320 --> 10:18.320]  Thank you for all your hard work. Please know that I acknowledge this donation to be but
[10:18.320 --> 10:23.320]  a modest token of an appreciative listener who is indebted to you for freely presenting
[10:23.320 --> 10:29.320]  to all who will listen the valuable knowledge born from your hard work and hard knocks.
[10:29.320 --> 10:33.320]  The continued blessings of the Lord be upon you, Jerry, and the guys at Rule of Law Radio.
[10:33.320 --> 10:35.320]  So, Randy, here you go.
[10:35.320 --> 10:38.320]  Oh, yeah. We're moving into big time now.
[10:38.320 --> 10:40.320]  Did you hear it? Did you hear the nickel drop?
[10:40.320 --> 10:41.320]  Yes, I did.
[10:41.320 --> 10:43.320]  All right. There it is. There's your nickel.
[10:43.320 --> 10:45.320]  Beats the shoe, doesn't it, Randy?
[10:45.320 --> 10:47.320]  Beats the shoe.
[10:47.320 --> 10:49.320]  Thank you very much.
[10:49.320 --> 10:56.320]  All right. So, without any further ado, we've got the second nickel has just been deposited
[10:56.320 --> 11:01.320]  into Randy's Beer Fund. So, we're going on number three now.
[11:01.320 --> 11:05.320]  Yeah, that ought to keep him hungover for a week.
[11:05.320 --> 11:06.320]  Indeed.
[11:06.320 --> 11:08.320]  At least.
[11:08.320 --> 11:14.320]  All righty then. Okay. So, on to the traffic issues since Monday night is traffic night
[11:14.320 --> 11:23.320]  with Eddie, and we have a listener that we are assisting right now with some traffic issues,
[11:23.320 --> 11:29.320]  went to the course, Randy and Eddie's and myself, the traffic seminar,
[11:29.320 --> 11:35.320]  gone through the process, gone through the stages, and of course, as everyone would expect,
[11:35.320 --> 11:41.320]  all the motions got summarily denied, even the motion to disqualify the judge,
[11:41.320 --> 11:45.320]  the judge ruled on it, I mean, all these things, everything, you know, they did everything wrong,
[11:45.320 --> 11:46.320]  of course.
[11:46.320 --> 11:55.320]  Well, in order to appeal in this municipality, first you have to file a motion for retrial
[11:55.320 --> 12:01.320]  and have that get denied, have a retrial be denied before you can actually appeal.
[12:01.320 --> 12:06.320]  And the way, if you got to the appeal, the way the appeal process works is that you have to put down
[12:06.320 --> 12:12.320]  double the amount of the traffic ticket as a bond, all right, for the appeal,
[12:12.320 --> 12:16.320]  and so that's how they get people to just not appeal because it's more expensive,
[12:16.320 --> 12:22.320]  it's twice as expensive to appeal, you know, and I guess eventually you do get the bond money back,
[12:22.320 --> 12:27.320]  but the problem is that they never set a hearing date for the appeal, and so you just lose it,
[12:27.320 --> 12:29.320]  and everything's just kind of in limbo.
[12:29.320 --> 12:32.320]  Well, at any rate, first you have to file a motion for retrial first.
[12:32.320 --> 12:41.320]  So my friend did that, and the clerk would not set a date for a motion hearing,
[12:41.320 --> 12:45.320]  so my friend at the same time, they filed the motion for retrial,
[12:45.320 --> 12:51.320]  filed a written request to have a hearing date set, a motion hearing date set.
[12:51.320 --> 12:56.320]  Well, that was a couple of weeks ago, and nothing's happened yet,
[12:56.320 --> 13:00.320]  and what it looks like they're trying to do is run them out of time,
[13:00.320 --> 13:06.320]  because as of this coming Wednesday, if he doesn't pay the tickets,
[13:06.320 --> 13:09.320]  they're going to issue a warrant for his arrest,
[13:09.320 --> 13:15.320]  and so what we need to know here is what is the step that he's got to take tomorrow,
[13:15.320 --> 13:20.320]  a Wednesday, in order to stop a warrant from being issued,
[13:20.320 --> 13:23.320]  and it's obvious, like I said, that they're trying to run them out of time
[13:23.320 --> 13:30.320]  because he filed a motion for retrial and a written request to set a motion hearing date,
[13:30.320 --> 13:32.320]  and they just ignored it.
[13:32.320 --> 13:39.320]  So I'm thinking that we need to file a petition for a temporary restraining order
[13:39.320 --> 13:46.320]  with the county court barring the municipal court from issuing a warrant
[13:46.320 --> 13:48.320]  and stating the reasons why,
[13:48.320 --> 13:53.320]  and probably even a petition for writ of mandamus ordering the municipal court
[13:53.320 --> 13:58.320]  to set a frequent motion hearing for this motion for retrial.
[13:58.320 --> 14:00.320]  What do you think, guys?
[14:00.320 --> 14:03.320]  What is y'all's feelings on this matter?
[14:03.320 --> 14:08.320]  Because this is the exact situation that most people are going to run into.
[14:08.320 --> 14:11.320]  My thunder.
[14:11.320 --> 14:17.320]  Yeah, that's exactly what I'd suggest is a temporary restraining order
[14:17.320 --> 14:20.320]  to restrict them from issuing the warrant
[14:20.320 --> 14:31.320]  and a writ of mandamus ordering the court to set a date for a hearing on motion to reconsider.
[14:31.320 --> 14:38.320]  Failure to do that, they're denying petitioner the right to petition the court for redress of grievance.
[14:38.320 --> 14:50.320]  Now, should this person go and file this like in the morning and demand that the judge look at this petition
[14:50.320 --> 14:53.320]  for temporary restraining order at some point in time tomorrow
[14:53.320 --> 14:55.320]  and just sit there in court and wait all day?
[14:55.320 --> 14:57.320]  Yes.
[14:57.320 --> 15:02.320]  You take it, they'll most likely have a judge hearing these kinds of things
[15:02.320 --> 15:05.320]  on an emergency restraining order.
[15:05.320 --> 15:09.320]  The only thing that steps in front of an emergency restraining order
[15:09.320 --> 15:13.320]  is a writ of habeas corpus, writ of mandamus.
[15:13.320 --> 15:17.320]  Now, you said normally you want to do this during their motion hearings.
[15:17.320 --> 15:20.320]  What if they're not having a motion hearing tomorrow?
[15:20.320 --> 15:22.320]  This one is different.
[15:22.320 --> 15:29.320]  An emergency restraining order stands in front of everything but habeas corpus mandamus.
[15:29.320 --> 15:33.320]  So if it's a murder trial, this stands in front of it.
[15:33.320 --> 15:36.320]  Now, this would be with the county court, right?
[15:36.320 --> 15:37.320]  Yeah.
[15:37.320 --> 15:38.320]  So this won't be a murder trial.
[15:38.320 --> 15:46.320]  I once stopped a murder trial to get the judge to hear a writ of habeas corpus.
[15:46.320 --> 15:48.320]  He had me thrown out on the street.
[15:48.320 --> 15:52.320]  But he hadn't stopped the murder trial to get it done.
[15:52.320 --> 16:02.320]  So yeah, we go down and emergency restraining order, get it to the judge.
[16:02.320 --> 16:04.320]  And we see what the judge does.
[16:04.320 --> 16:06.320]  Well, let me ask a question here.
[16:06.320 --> 16:07.320]  Go ahead.
[16:07.320 --> 16:13.320]  On these bonds that they require us to file in these cases,
[16:13.320 --> 16:18.320]  what other criminal cases have to post double the bond in order to get an appeal?
[16:18.320 --> 16:19.320]  Yeah, that's a good question.
[16:19.320 --> 16:21.320]  But it hasn't even got to that point yet.
[16:21.320 --> 16:24.320]  He can't even ask for an appeal.
[16:24.320 --> 16:25.320]  No, I understand that.
[16:25.320 --> 16:31.320]  But what I'm getting at is why is it that once again those charged with Class C misdemeanors
[16:31.320 --> 16:35.320]  or similar misdemeanors, for lack of a better word,
[16:35.320 --> 16:38.320]  are actually having to post double a bond to get an appeal
[16:38.320 --> 16:42.320]  that everyone else can automatically get if there's an error that can be shown?
[16:42.320 --> 16:46.320]  Yeah, no kidding.
[16:46.320 --> 16:49.320]  Sick of it.
[16:49.320 --> 16:51.320]  Okay, we'll be right back.
[16:51.320 --> 16:53.320]  We're going to discuss this a little bit more,
[16:53.320 --> 16:55.320]  and then Eddie has some material he wants to present,
[16:55.320 --> 16:57.320]  and we'll take callers a little bit later.
[16:57.320 --> 17:00.320]  We'll be right back.
[17:00.320 --> 17:03.320]  It is so enlightening to listen to 90.1 FM,
[17:03.320 --> 17:06.320]  but finding things on the Internet isn't so easy,
[17:06.320 --> 17:09.320]  and neither is finding like-minded people to share it with.
[17:09.320 --> 17:12.320]  Oh, well, I guess you haven't heard of Brave New Books, then.
[17:12.320 --> 17:13.320]  Brave New Books?
[17:13.320 --> 17:16.320]  Yes, Brave New Books has all the books and DVDs you're looking for
[17:16.320 --> 17:20.320]  by authors like Alex Jones, Ron Paul, and G. Edward Griffin.
[17:20.320 --> 17:24.320]  They even stock inner food, Berkey products, and Calvin Soaps.
[17:24.320 --> 17:26.320]  There's no way a place like that exists.
[17:26.320 --> 17:28.320]  Go check it out for yourself.
[17:28.320 --> 17:32.320]  It's downtown at 1904 Guadalupe Street, just south of UT.
[17:32.320 --> 17:36.320]  By UT, there's never anywhere to park down there.
[17:36.320 --> 17:38.320]  Actually, they now offer a free hour of parking
[17:38.320 --> 17:42.320]  for paying customers at the 500 MLK parking facility,
[17:42.320 --> 17:44.320]  just behind the bookstore.
[17:44.320 --> 17:47.320]  It does exist, but when are they open?
[17:47.320 --> 17:52.320]  Monday through Saturday, 11 AM to 9 PM, and 1 to 6 PM on Sundays.
[17:52.320 --> 17:56.320]  So give them a call at 512-480-2503,
[17:56.320 --> 17:59.320]  or check out their events page at bravenewbookstore.com.
[18:26.320 --> 18:28.320]  Let's love again
[18:28.320 --> 18:31.320]  How they don't have an answer
[18:31.320 --> 18:33.320]  And so can sleep inside
[18:33.320 --> 18:35.320]  They talk no issues, but see, Lord,
[18:35.320 --> 18:38.320]  how the war within takes it easy
[18:38.320 --> 18:40.320]  They talk way too politically
[18:40.320 --> 18:43.320]  And they're getting mad and angry
[18:43.320 --> 18:45.320]  But they're standing up and fighting
[18:45.320 --> 18:48.320]  Fight for their freedom and be free
[18:48.320 --> 18:50.320]  And they like them love slavery
[18:50.320 --> 18:52.320]  And get handouts from the government
[18:52.320 --> 18:54.320]  Let's love again
[18:54.320 --> 18:56.320]  And we ask the Christians
[18:56.320 --> 19:01.320]  How they don't have an answer
[19:01.320 --> 19:06.320]  And we ask the Christians
[19:06.320 --> 19:08.320]  Let's love again
[19:08.320 --> 19:11.320]  And they don't have an answer
[19:11.320 --> 19:13.320]  And so can sleep inside
[19:13.320 --> 19:15.320]  They're tyrannies, they don't care you
[19:15.320 --> 19:18.320]  They don't care me, Lord, they don't care the country
[19:18.320 --> 19:20.320]  Tyranny, they don't care me
[19:20.320 --> 19:23.320]  They don't care you, and they don't care the country
[19:23.320 --> 19:36.120]  Okay, so Eddie's asking what other court do you have to pay double for the bond?
[19:36.120 --> 19:38.120]  This is outrageous.
[19:38.120 --> 19:41.120]  Randy?
[19:41.120 --> 19:42.920]  No other court do you have to pay double.
[19:42.920 --> 19:47.520]  I didn't think so.
[19:47.520 --> 19:48.520]  This is a good thing.
[19:48.520 --> 19:56.020]  I think when I do mine, I'm going to raise this issue as it is intended to deny access
[19:56.020 --> 19:57.020]  to the court.
[19:57.020 --> 20:02.320]  They're just trying to get money out of people and make it so that they don't appeal it.
[20:02.320 --> 20:04.440]  That's exactly what they're doing.
[20:04.440 --> 20:10.120]  Rake everybody over the coals and commit pure thievery.
[20:10.120 --> 20:11.760]  That's part of what I've been looking at this week.
[20:11.760 --> 20:14.760]  I've gone through the statutes, I've gone through the statutes, and I've gone through
[20:14.760 --> 20:15.760]  the statutes.
[20:15.760 --> 20:22.080]  I can't find where anyone else has to post an appeal bond for an appeal purpose when
[20:22.080 --> 20:27.920]  they can show that the court that held the trial violated the law, the rules, or the
[20:27.920 --> 20:28.920]  rights.
[20:28.920 --> 20:30.920]  This is pure highway robbery.
[20:30.920 --> 20:32.400]  Pun intended.
[20:32.400 --> 20:37.800]  Mandated by the legislature because guess who's sitting in the legislature that controls
[20:37.800 --> 20:38.800]  all this?
[20:38.800 --> 20:44.680]  The very same people that operate within the courts.
[20:44.680 --> 20:46.480]  There are lawyers in the legislature.
[20:46.480 --> 20:50.160]  There are lawyers that control the access to the courts and there are lawyers operating
[20:50.160 --> 20:51.160]  the courts.
[20:51.160 --> 20:56.040]  Why does this not surprise you that these easy methods of taxing the people without
[20:56.040 --> 21:01.360]  any recourse exist because that's all this really is.
[21:01.360 --> 21:06.400]  It's a tax to gain access to your right to adjudicate a false accusation.
[21:06.400 --> 21:17.000]  It's the way it reads to me, and only in traffic.
[21:17.000 --> 21:18.000]  Only where if you-
[21:18.000 --> 21:20.400]  That in court is a fine only offense.
[21:20.400 --> 21:29.100]  If you fight the case, they'll find you guilty out of hand and charge you the maximum amount.
[21:29.100 --> 21:33.920]  If you object to it, they'll charge you double that amount and then never bring it to court
[21:33.920 --> 21:34.920]  and keep your money.
[21:34.920 --> 21:44.720]  So they win if you fight it, they win if you appeal it, they win double.
[21:44.720 --> 21:47.560]  That's just pure extortion at the point of a gun.
[21:47.560 --> 21:55.160]  When I do my next, these tickets I got, that's one of the issues I'm going to raise is that
[21:55.160 --> 22:10.320]  the double the bond is a constitutional violation in that it denies the citizen the right to
[22:10.320 --> 22:18.480]  petition for redress of grievance by making it too costly.
[22:18.480 --> 22:20.960]  That's my story and I'm sticking to it.
[22:20.960 --> 22:25.760]  That would definitely appear to be the intent to prevent the appeal or the motion for a
[22:25.760 --> 22:31.080]  new trial based upon the fact that they know you're going to have to cough up more money
[22:31.080 --> 22:35.680]  in order to do so because they get to say that you have to cough up more money to do
[22:35.680 --> 22:37.080]  so.
[22:37.080 --> 22:38.520]  They always do.
[22:38.520 --> 22:41.600]  There's never a failure for that to occur.
[22:41.600 --> 22:45.320]  If you appeal or you do it, then they're going to demand that you pay double.
[22:45.320 --> 22:48.200]  There's no ifs, ands, or buts on that.
[22:48.200 --> 22:56.200]  The only way around it is if you manage to get in a rift of, a pauper rift.
[22:56.200 --> 23:01.640]  A rift of inability to pay.
[23:01.640 --> 23:04.480]  You don't have to be a pauper.
[23:04.480 --> 23:07.240]  You don't have to be destitute.
[23:07.240 --> 23:18.120]  It just has to be onerous to create a hardship and it would have the effect of denying you
[23:18.120 --> 23:24.880]  your day in court because of excessive costs.
[23:24.880 --> 23:27.240]  All this stuff, we can appeal it.
[23:27.240 --> 23:32.240]  You know the other thing that doesn't make any sense to me, Randy, that if you go and
[23:32.240 --> 23:39.480]  file a lawsuit, you're the one that's required to put down the money to start it.
[23:39.480 --> 23:44.160]  If the state wants to make these accusations against the people using the statutes that
[23:44.160 --> 23:48.600]  we know don't apply to them anyway, why is it the state required to foot the bill for
[23:48.600 --> 23:53.600]  the appeal to initiate the suit when they're the ones that got you into court to begin
[23:53.600 --> 23:54.600]  with?
[23:54.600 --> 24:01.800]  Well, actually, the state did have to foot the bill to get you into court initially,
[24:01.800 --> 24:04.240]  but you're the one asking for the appeal.
[24:04.240 --> 24:10.400]  Yeah, but you're also the one that got beat up with a law that had no applicability because
[24:10.400 --> 24:11.960]  the state misrepresents that.
[24:11.960 --> 24:14.280]  Yeah, but that's a secondary argument.
[24:14.280 --> 24:15.560]  Well, that's true.
[24:15.560 --> 24:16.920]  You don't have to appeal.
[24:16.920 --> 24:20.120]  You can just let them beat you up and take it.
[24:20.120 --> 24:23.120]  Take it like a man.
[24:23.120 --> 24:24.840]  I'd rather dish it out like a man.
[24:24.840 --> 24:25.840]  Thank you very much.
[24:25.840 --> 24:29.960]  Well, that's why you file an appeal, but you proactively take the action.
[24:29.960 --> 24:37.560]  So they're asking you to pay for it, but generally in a criminal case, there is no bond for appeal.
[24:37.560 --> 24:40.760]  That's for a civil.
[24:40.760 --> 24:44.300]  And here they're asking for an appeal bond in a criminal case.
[24:44.300 --> 24:49.920]  So you have to pay to defend yourself against a criminal action.
[24:49.920 --> 24:50.920]  Right.
[24:50.920 --> 24:55.560]  That right there is my biggest problem with it.
[24:55.560 --> 25:01.880]  Well, when I go in, I'm going to take it on, but it'll never get to court because they
[25:01.880 --> 25:05.960]  will never bring it to court.
[25:05.960 --> 25:11.520]  And then it'll sit there for six months and I'll petition to dismiss too old to prosecute.
[25:11.520 --> 25:19.280]  Well, the problem is that in the meantime, they'll have warrants for your arrest.
[25:19.280 --> 25:21.600]  I certainly hope so.
[25:21.600 --> 25:27.120]  Well, I certainly do not hope so because then me and Eddie are going to be running the radio
[25:27.120 --> 25:28.120]  show by ourselves.
[25:28.120 --> 25:31.920]  Well, I don't mind spending, they'll take you down and they'll release you on your own
[25:31.920 --> 25:37.680]  cognizance and I'll sue the crap out of them, which I'm going to already be doing anyway
[25:37.680 --> 25:42.360]  from the last time they drew me in jail.
[25:42.360 --> 25:44.760]  I get paid good.
[25:44.760 --> 25:45.760]  Works for me.
[25:45.760 --> 25:46.760]  Yeah.
[25:46.760 --> 25:51.400]  And I'm not afraid to spend a little time in their jail.
[25:51.400 --> 25:55.640]  You couldn't pay me enough to give up my liberty for one second like that.
[25:55.640 --> 25:57.120]  All right.
[25:57.120 --> 26:05.880]  Well, so do we want to take calls now or Eddie, did you want to do your material first?
[26:05.880 --> 26:09.560]  Well, there's something I wanted to set up and talk about for a few minutes.
[26:09.560 --> 26:10.560]  All right.
[26:10.560 --> 26:11.560]  Let's do that first.
[26:11.560 --> 26:14.840]  Chris, Danny, you guys just hang on the line because Eddie has the material planned.
[26:14.840 --> 26:15.840]  Okay.
[26:15.840 --> 26:16.840]  All right.
[26:16.840 --> 26:20.560]  The thing I want to talk about is what happens when you actually go to trial and have to
[26:20.560 --> 26:22.060]  pick a jury.
[26:22.060 --> 26:24.920]  So let's set the stage for this for a second.
[26:24.920 --> 26:32.000]  One, you're guaranteed a fair and impartial trial by an impartial jury, correct, Randy?
[26:32.000 --> 26:41.680]  No, you're guaranteed a fair trial before a jury of your peers, not necessarily impartial.
[26:41.680 --> 26:45.880]  The idea is impartial, but it's not in the code anywhere.
[26:45.880 --> 26:52.000]  Well, granted, but that being that they are not allowed in a criminal case to have or
[26:52.000 --> 26:59.760]  use preconceived statutory presumptions against you, and I've got case law showing that.
[26:59.760 --> 27:05.180]  Statutory presumption in a criminal case is absolutely forbidden.
[27:05.180 --> 27:09.320]  Every element of every charge must be proven.
[27:09.320 --> 27:13.600]  Nothing about any element can be presumed, okay?
[27:13.600 --> 27:16.580]  So that's part of the stage of what we're sitting here.
[27:16.580 --> 27:22.200]  So when we get this set up, now we want to get the jury in there, and the first thing
[27:22.200 --> 27:26.680]  we want to do when we start voir d'iring to make our jury selection is ask a couple of
[27:26.680 --> 27:30.040]  basic simple questions.
[27:30.040 --> 27:34.400]  And so I've been sitting and thinking, well, not really sitting, but while I've been writing,
[27:34.400 --> 27:38.520]  I've been thinking about exactly which ones we need to be asking.
[27:38.520 --> 27:47.240]  And so what I've got boiled down to initially is, number one, is there anyone that is unfamiliar
[27:47.240 --> 27:50.520]  with the transportation code of Texas?
[27:50.520 --> 27:55.400]  Now you should get everybody's hand up, okay?
[27:55.400 --> 27:59.240]  They may think they know what it is, and so on and so forth.
[27:59.240 --> 28:07.880]  Second question, who has studied the transportation code here in Texas, all right?
[28:07.880 --> 28:19.280]  Third question, who has the belief that the transportation code applies to all the people?
[28:19.280 --> 28:27.080]  On this one, you should get virtually everybody raising their hand up.
[28:27.080 --> 28:31.280]  Now there's a couple of other ones you can put on to facilitate that, but that one right
[28:31.280 --> 28:38.240]  there should be enough to make the indication that, Judge, we have to dismiss this panel.
[28:38.240 --> 28:42.640]  The panel consists of people that are coming into this court with a preconceived notion
[28:42.640 --> 28:45.720]  of guilt, okay?
[28:45.720 --> 28:50.320]  They're coming in and stating that these statutes apply to everyone.
[28:50.320 --> 28:55.440]  And you can follow that question up when you ask it with, how many people believe that
[28:55.440 --> 29:05.680]  the transportation code governs every aspect of travel of everybody, including the accused?
[29:05.680 --> 29:08.280]  And again, they'll raise their hand.
[29:08.280 --> 29:14.920]  And so what you've got is you've got a whole set of jury members here, or possible jury
[29:14.920 --> 29:22.520]  members, that have a preconceived notion that these laws apply to everyone as they're written.
[29:22.520 --> 29:27.240]  You can't get a fair trial in a situation where the jury already has a preconceived notion
[29:27.240 --> 29:28.840]  of applicability.
[29:28.840 --> 29:33.400]  Now there are certain instances where a preconceived notion serves.
[29:33.400 --> 29:36.240]  And we'll cover that in just a minute when we get to the other side here.
[29:36.240 --> 29:37.240]  All right.
[29:37.240 --> 29:43.120]  Like I said, callers, Chris, Danny, y'all just hang on, and we'll get to you as soon
[29:43.120 --> 29:44.600]  as Eddie is done with his material.
[29:44.600 --> 29:45.600]  We'll be right back.
[29:45.600 --> 30:00.360]  This is the rule of law.
[30:00.360 --> 30:05.080]  Are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters, or even lawsuits?
[30:05.080 --> 30:09.160]  Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Mears proven method.
[30:09.160 --> 30:13.560]  Michael Mears has won six cases in federal court against debt collectors, and now you
[30:13.560 --> 30:14.800]  can win too.
[30:14.800 --> 30:19.280]  You'll get step-by-step instructions in plain English on how to win in court using federal
[30:19.280 --> 30:25.160]  civil rights statutes, what to do when contacted by phone, mail, or court summons, how to answer
[30:25.160 --> 30:29.680]  letters and phone calls, how to get debt collectors out of your credit report, how to turn the
[30:29.680 --> 30:33.920]  financial tables on them and make them pay you to go away.
[30:33.920 --> 30:39.040]  The Michael Mears proven method is the solution for how to stop debt collectors.
[30:39.040 --> 30:41.160]  Personal consultation is available as well.
[30:41.160 --> 30:46.680]  For more information, please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the blue Michael Mears banner
[30:46.680 --> 30:49.680]  or email michaelmears at yahoo.com.
[30:49.680 --> 30:58.680]  That's ruleoflawradio.com or email m-i-c-h-a-e-l-m-i-r-r-a-s at yahoo.com to learn how to stop debt
[30:58.680 --> 30:59.680]  collectors now.
[30:59.680 --> 31:12.520]  Okay, we're back.
[31:12.520 --> 31:13.520]  Go ahead, Eddie.
[31:13.520 --> 31:14.520]  Okay.
[31:14.520 --> 31:19.200]  Well, what I was saying about there are certain instances where preconceptions are valid.
[31:19.200 --> 31:25.960]  For instance, you've been called to serve as a jury member on a murder trial, the presupposition
[31:25.960 --> 31:27.560]  being somebody's dead.
[31:27.560 --> 31:29.680]  That's a valid presupposition.
[31:29.680 --> 31:31.900]  That presumption would hold water.
[31:31.900 --> 31:38.920]  But for you to presume the applicability or guilt or innocence or a statutory application
[31:38.920 --> 31:45.200]  of something without any evidence to back it up, that's not acceptable because nothing
[31:45.200 --> 31:52.080]  in the elements has been substantiated with evidence or testimony or any other means.
[31:52.080 --> 31:57.540]  So this actually kind of leaves us up in the air as to how can you get a fair trial when
[31:57.540 --> 32:03.680]  the jury panel itself is already populated entirely by people that have a preconceived
[32:03.680 --> 32:08.800]  notion about things that you know for a fact or false?
[32:08.800 --> 32:22.720]  Well, I can see a judge asking the jury, if you receive evidence in the case that your
[32:22.720 --> 32:29.200]  preconceived belief was not true, would you be willing to change your preconceived belief?
[32:29.200 --> 32:35.080]  Ah, but in order for that to occur, the judge has to actually let you present the statute,
[32:35.080 --> 32:38.480]  which they never ever do in traffic court.
[32:38.480 --> 32:41.400]  That's why he wouldn't do that.
[32:41.400 --> 32:43.160]  That would be the setup.
[32:43.160 --> 32:44.160]  Yes.
[32:44.160 --> 32:51.480]  So, while he could do that, the idea being that he could use that to create a ruse and
[32:51.480 --> 32:58.040]  force the trial into going on, but the fact of the matter is between him and his compatriot,
[32:58.040 --> 33:02.240]  the prosecutor, they're never going to allow that information to be brought out in open
[33:02.240 --> 33:09.200]  court because it blows their case out of the water.
[33:09.200 --> 33:17.440]  So given that, do you have any way to strengthen or weaken that argument, Randy, when you go
[33:17.440 --> 33:25.220]  into Wadar, a selection of jury members there, because you can ask several questions in relation
[33:25.220 --> 33:30.520]  to that that would set it up so tight where there's no way around the fact that they already
[33:30.520 --> 33:35.920]  have a preconceived notion that you violated the law, you're here because you violated
[33:35.920 --> 33:40.120]  the law, you're guilty, and the law backs it up, and so they're just going to find you
[33:40.120 --> 33:41.120]  that way.
[33:41.120 --> 33:56.640]  I'm thinking, this has kind of caught me off guard, I needed time to trap you.
[33:56.640 --> 34:06.160]  The problem the prosecution has is the prosecution goes first, and when he's done, let me think
[34:06.160 --> 34:07.160]  about that.
[34:07.160 --> 34:09.280]  Does the prosecution go first or do you go, I think he goes first.
[34:09.280 --> 34:12.360]  Yeah, the prosecution goes first and the jury, Wadar.
[34:12.360 --> 34:16.160]  Yeah, and he goes last, so he gets the first shot and the last shot.
[34:16.160 --> 34:18.680]  Well, no, that's during the actual trial.
[34:18.680 --> 34:27.240]  That's something, and the last thing in the trial, yeah, okay, prosecutor goes first,
[34:27.240 --> 34:31.760]  the beginning and the end, so he gets the first say to the jury, you get the last say
[34:31.760 --> 34:33.720]  to the jury.
[34:33.720 --> 34:37.800]  So at the end of the trial, you're the last one to speak to the jury, so at the beginning
[34:37.800 --> 34:42.960]  of the trial, he's the first one to speak to the jury, and we need Robert Fox on, we
[34:42.960 --> 34:51.400]  want to try to have him on next Thursday, and he'll let him address what he was going
[34:51.400 --> 34:55.240]  to do to the jury, what he did to the jury.
[34:55.240 --> 35:00.840]  He asked a bunch of questions that I don't remember exactly what they were, but he wanted
[35:00.840 --> 35:05.280]  to know if they had a social security number, and since he didn't have one, they weren't
[35:05.280 --> 35:06.280]  a jury of his peers.
[35:06.280 --> 35:14.360]  And he asked a number of other questions of this nature and asked to dismiss the jury
[35:14.360 --> 35:15.360]  panel.
[35:15.360 --> 35:22.800]  Of course, the judge didn't, but it gave him more avenues of appeal, so we'll get him on
[35:22.800 --> 35:30.920]  Thursday and get him to go through his, he had some pretty interesting questions.
[35:30.920 --> 35:32.480]  Right now, I'm kind of stuck.
[35:32.480 --> 35:40.160]  I found the prosecutor and I'm stuck, other than objecting, and the only thing he can
[35:40.160 --> 35:43.600]  object to is if you give evidence.
[35:43.600 --> 35:51.720]  So if what you're stating is not evidence, he doesn't have a grounds for objection.
[35:51.720 --> 35:53.720]  And that's kind of what I'm basing this on.
[35:53.720 --> 36:00.140]  The fact is, is you can establish, based upon the jury's response, that you're not going
[36:00.140 --> 36:02.320]  to get a fair trial with this jury.
[36:02.320 --> 36:06.840]  You set up the fact that they have not studied the actual transportation code, just like
[36:06.840 --> 36:09.280]  what Robert was doing with the social security number.
[36:09.280 --> 36:13.640]  They're not a jury of your peers because they have no knowledge of the law dealing with
[36:13.640 --> 36:18.520]  the subject.
[36:18.520 --> 36:22.560]  And on top of that, they've walked into the courtroom with preconceived notions that this
[36:22.560 --> 36:28.480]  is the only way it works, this is who it applies to, and it's everybody, and this is it.
[36:28.480 --> 36:32.480]  And so it's just like that day that little old lady behind me in her car was on the phone
[36:32.480 --> 36:37.280]  just having a cardiac arrest while she was hopping up and down her seat staring at my
[36:37.280 --> 36:41.480]  license plate calling the cops because there was a car driving around with private vehicle
[36:41.480 --> 36:44.120]  on the tag.
[36:44.120 --> 36:48.480]  It was kind of funny and hilarious to watch, and I wanted to be able to just calm her down
[36:48.480 --> 36:51.720]  and explain it to her, but that was not to be.
[36:51.720 --> 36:58.360]  But in any case, I was thinking there's not going to be any way for them to get around
[36:58.360 --> 37:02.840]  this and not make it an appealable issue that I can find.
[37:02.840 --> 37:06.600]  Now, there may be a way for them to do it, but I can't think of one at the moment.
[37:06.600 --> 37:10.400]  But anyway, that's what I wanted to present is to get people thinking about that.
[37:10.400 --> 37:14.880]  What you want to do is come up with a set of questions that shows that the jury has
[37:14.880 --> 37:21.820]  a preconceived mindset about what the outcome of the trial is based upon the facts they're
[37:21.820 --> 37:25.680]  entering the trial with, okay?
[37:25.680 --> 37:32.040]  If they've entered the trial saying you're guilty, there's no way for you to win, okay?
[37:32.040 --> 37:39.560]  Or even if they enter the trial with the notion that certain things apply to you that haven't
[37:39.560 --> 37:47.240]  been proven in the court, preconceived notions, preconceived beliefs.
[37:47.240 --> 37:51.880]  So when you're coming up with a list of what are questions for the jury, keep that in mind,
[37:51.880 --> 37:56.400]  and I would definitely be using that one, okay, or that set, rather.
[37:56.400 --> 38:02.560]  I'd be using all of those to set the jury up to show that I can't get a fair trial with
[38:02.560 --> 38:04.000]  this panel, Judge.
[38:04.000 --> 38:09.640]  We're going to have to vacate the whole panel and select a new set of jurors.
[38:09.640 --> 38:13.800]  Now they probably 99% of the time are not going to do that.
[38:13.800 --> 38:18.400]  But again, you're showing that the court has no intention of providing you with a fair
[38:18.400 --> 38:19.400]  trial.
[38:19.400 --> 38:24.640]  I mean, let's see, when I went to trial on one of these tickets once, the prosecuting
[38:24.640 --> 38:32.280]  attorney is the brother of our current district attorney.
[38:32.280 --> 38:39.340]  And before she was the district attorney, she was selected to be on the jury of my trial
[38:39.340 --> 38:41.000]  where he was the prosecutor.
[38:41.000 --> 38:43.780]  And again, this was when he was a hired gun attorney for the city.
[38:43.780 --> 38:48.040]  He wasn't actually the city attorney, okay?
[38:48.040 --> 38:50.520]  So understand that.
[38:50.520 --> 38:56.400]  I know pretty well a lot of the people in these juries, they're not as randomly selected
[38:56.400 --> 38:59.280]  as they would like you to believe they are.
[38:59.280 --> 39:03.480]  I just looked over at him and I said, you'd think that's a pretty good draw, wouldn't
[39:03.480 --> 39:04.480]  you?
[39:04.480 --> 39:08.680]  He got his own sister on the jury panel.
[39:08.680 --> 39:09.680]  And the judge knew this.
[39:09.680 --> 39:12.520]  I take it you objected to the sister?
[39:12.520 --> 39:16.520]  Oh, I objected big time.
[39:16.520 --> 39:27.480]  The judge was going to allow her on the jury and it was like, no, sorry, not going to happen.
[39:27.480 --> 39:32.420]  And I objected and objected and finally the judge marked them out and then the person
[39:32.420 --> 39:41.600]  they did put on the jury was someone else that actually worked for the police department.
[39:41.600 --> 39:43.480]  So yeah, it's one of those things.
[39:43.480 --> 39:48.440]  They're going to rig the trial any way they can.
[39:48.440 --> 39:50.240]  So folks, just be aware.
[39:50.240 --> 39:53.160]  I would certainly want to see the jury wheel.
[39:53.160 --> 39:54.640]  Yeah, exactly.
[39:54.640 --> 39:57.920]  The process by which the jurors are selected.
[39:57.920 --> 39:58.920]  How is it put out?
[39:58.920 --> 40:03.960]  They'd select the jury the same way that they select the attorney from the prosecution.
[40:03.960 --> 40:09.160]  They have a little piece of software that generates a list and they just go down to
[40:09.160 --> 40:13.280]  the next one in the list, yeah, right, okay?
[40:13.280 --> 40:16.680]  That's about how it works, not where I'm from.
[40:16.680 --> 40:19.560]  I would certainly want to see that software.
[40:19.560 --> 40:27.840]  Well, according to an ex-police officer here, Joe Owens, who retired from the police department
[40:27.840 --> 40:34.360]  and was in it in the 50s and 60s and 70s, he said that according to the way the law
[40:34.360 --> 40:40.060]  was required to work in those days, a jury was selected by court order.
[40:40.060 --> 40:49.200]  They went out and the bailiff was required to collect passerbys off the street.
[40:49.200 --> 40:54.560]  That's how they used to have to collect the jury here in Texas.
[40:54.560 --> 40:58.240]  The bailiff would just go out and start telling people off the street, I need you, I need
[40:58.240 --> 41:02.240]  you, I need you, I need you, and take them into the court.
[41:02.240 --> 41:07.160]  Now, you'd have to admit that would at least be pretty random.
[41:07.160 --> 41:11.040]  Well, unless everybody knew about it and stayed away from the courthouse.
[41:11.040 --> 41:13.040]  Yeah, that would be up your buddies.
[41:13.040 --> 41:19.480]  Yeah, that would be the way to avoid jury duty at all times, don't go near the courthouse.
[41:19.480 --> 41:24.800]  But yeah, that's pretty much exactly what they did.
[41:24.800 --> 41:29.880]  Anyway, that's all I've got to present, Debra, so we can start with the phone call.
[41:29.880 --> 41:30.880]  Okay.
[41:30.880 --> 41:34.960]  All right, let's go to Chris in Texas.
[41:34.960 --> 41:37.440]  Hey, Chris, thanks for calling in.
[41:37.440 --> 41:39.440]  What's your question for us?
[41:39.440 --> 41:50.600]  Well, I was going through a divorce right now and getting kind of, I guess, railroaded.
[41:50.600 --> 41:56.560]  When they figured out her income, they figured out 48 weeks, so I'm trying to do a motion
[41:56.560 --> 42:02.360]  or a trial because if she okayed this, wouldn't it set precedence?
[42:02.360 --> 42:07.160]  I'm in Texas, she's in Missouri, so wouldn't it set precedence that the state of Missouri
[42:07.160 --> 42:11.200]  who collects state income tax, wouldn't they set precedence that they could start figuring
[42:11.200 --> 42:16.720]  everybody's income at 48 weeks plus child support?
[42:16.720 --> 42:18.720]  What did you say 48 what?
[42:18.720 --> 42:22.240]  48 weeks instead of 52.
[42:22.240 --> 42:27.640]  So they're shorting her pay by four weeks a year, so she's getting four weeks a year
[42:27.640 --> 42:33.360]  kind of free that's not accounted for on the court papers.
[42:33.360 --> 42:37.680]  Now where is the case being adjudicated?
[42:37.680 --> 42:41.280]  Hillsboro, Missouri, Jefferson County, just south of St. Louis.
[42:41.280 --> 42:44.400]  Okay, then I don't know.
[42:44.400 --> 42:50.120]  It doesn't matter where you live, it matters where the venue is.
[42:50.120 --> 42:57.120]  Yeah, but whenever they figured out my income, they figured it out at 52 weeks.
[42:57.120 --> 42:58.720]  So who is they?
[42:58.720 --> 43:06.200]  The judge, because I sent a motion in for 30 additional days to file, she said as moat,
[43:06.200 --> 43:10.120]  which to me as moat doesn't it mean that it's already been answered?
[43:10.120 --> 43:13.720]  Wait, moat or moot?
[43:13.720 --> 43:15.680]  Moot, sorry moot.
[43:15.680 --> 43:17.680]  Okay, okay.
[43:17.680 --> 43:23.920]  That would mean, that would seem to mean that it's already been answered.
[43:23.920 --> 43:28.840]  Well, I've never asked a question, so I don't know how to be answered.
[43:28.840 --> 43:33.800]  Okay, the problem here is we don't have enough information to really understand what you're
[43:33.800 --> 43:34.800]  asking us here.
[43:34.800 --> 43:41.000]  Kind of give us little bits and pieces, I don't know enough to be able to give you a
[43:41.000 --> 43:42.000]  coach answer.
[43:42.000 --> 43:43.000]  I have some more questions too.
[43:43.000 --> 43:46.600]  Okay, well hang on the line, we're going to break Chris.
[43:46.600 --> 43:47.600]  All right.
[43:47.600 --> 43:50.840]  All right, we also have Danny from Texas, you're up next.
[43:50.840 --> 43:57.840]  Callers if you'd like to call in, 512-646-1984, we'll be right back.
[43:57.840 --> 44:06.200]  Attention, an important product from hempusa.org, micro plant powder, will change your life
[44:06.200 --> 44:11.280]  by removing all types of positive toxins, such as heavy metals, parasites, bacteria,
[44:11.280 --> 44:16.640]  viruses, and fungus from the digestive tract and stomach wall so you can absorb nutrients.
[44:16.640 --> 44:21.960]  Micro plant powder is 89% silica and packed with a negative charge that attracts positive
[44:21.960 --> 44:25.240]  toxins from the blood, organs, spine, and brain.
[44:25.240 --> 44:30.040]  This product has the ability to rebuild cartilage and bone, which allows synovial fluid to return
[44:30.040 --> 44:31.560]  to the joints.
[44:31.560 --> 44:35.880]  Silica is a precursor to calcium, meaning the body turns silica into calcium and is
[44:35.880 --> 44:37.280]  great for the heart.
[44:37.280 --> 44:42.240]  There is no better time than now to have micro plant powder on your shelf or in your storage
[44:42.240 --> 44:46.480]  shelter, and with an unlimited shelf life, you can store it anywhere.
[44:46.480 --> 44:51.800]  Call 908-691-2608 or visit hempusa.org.
[44:51.800 --> 44:53.880]  It's a great way to change your life.
[44:53.880 --> 45:21.720]  So call 908-691-2608 or visit us at hempusa.org today.
[45:21.720 --> 45:24.000]  Okay we are back.
[45:24.000 --> 45:25.200]  Okay Chris, go ahead.
[45:25.200 --> 45:26.800]  You had another question?
[45:26.800 --> 45:27.800]  Yes.
[45:27.800 --> 45:31.880]  It actually went to court this past Wednesday.
[45:31.880 --> 45:37.600]  I wasn't able to get there, so I got a judgment and the decree, the resolution of marriage.
[45:37.600 --> 45:42.000]  But in the paperwork they sent me, there was a bunch of scratches where they scratched
[45:42.000 --> 45:44.680]  out some stuff, handwritten some stuff in there.
[45:44.680 --> 45:47.040]  Is that legal?
[45:47.040 --> 45:52.760]  On a legal document, anything that is handwritten on the document takes precedence over what
[45:52.760 --> 45:54.800]  is printed on the document.
[45:54.800 --> 45:55.800]  Okay.
[45:55.800 --> 46:04.160]  So long as it is something written and verified, it has to be verified after the handwriting
[46:04.160 --> 46:10.920]  is on there, like it has to be initialed and dated to show that it wasn't put on there
[46:10.920 --> 46:11.920]  after the document is there.
[46:11.920 --> 46:12.920]  Does it have to be notarized?
[46:12.920 --> 46:16.960]  It depends on the nature of the document.
[46:16.960 --> 46:18.760]  Okay.
[46:18.760 --> 46:24.320]  But also the cover page of it states something different than what the actual paperwork says.
[46:24.320 --> 46:30.240]  It says that I owe 1316 per month for two children, but if you actually read the paperwork,
[46:30.240 --> 46:37.200]  it says 1316 per child per month.
[46:37.200 --> 46:39.920]  That's an issue that makes the order ambiguous.
[46:39.920 --> 46:40.920]  Yes.
[46:40.920 --> 46:46.040]  You should challenge the order for a more definite statement.
[46:46.040 --> 46:51.680]  And also according to the Missouri statutes, it says they were supposed to send out a handbook
[46:51.680 --> 46:56.920]  with both parties of what the Supreme Court wrote as each person's rights and everything
[46:56.920 --> 47:01.120]  else and I never got the handbook.
[47:01.120 --> 47:04.400]  Okay.
[47:04.400 --> 47:07.400]  Did you have counsel?
[47:07.400 --> 47:10.040]  No.
[47:10.040 --> 47:17.200]  That's going to depend on, you need to research out the requirement and see if there's any
[47:17.200 --> 47:25.960]  case law attached to that requirement that makes it so that you would have lacked proper
[47:25.960 --> 47:32.640]  notice without the handbook.
[47:32.640 --> 47:37.720]  It may just be that that's a technical issue and they were going to require you to know
[47:37.720 --> 47:43.360]  the law anyway and that's the general case.
[47:43.360 --> 47:49.320]  And okay, when you get a divorce in Missouri, you have to fill out two things, a statement
[47:49.320 --> 47:51.960]  of property, a statement of income and expenses.
[47:51.960 --> 47:58.600]  Her statement of income and expenses is like $300 a month less than what was actually in
[47:58.600 --> 48:06.400]  the court papers and also the statement of property, she had a pickup truck.
[48:06.400 --> 48:09.400]  It shows that her dad is in possession of the pickup truck.
[48:09.400 --> 48:17.080]  It also shows that her monthly automobile insurance is only enough to pay for her car.
[48:17.080 --> 48:20.720]  So therefore, wouldn't it be a reasonable assumption that her dad is also making payments
[48:20.720 --> 48:24.600]  of the truck, the insurance and the truck payment?
[48:24.600 --> 48:29.680]  Yes, and you could move for perjury on the part of her.
[48:29.680 --> 48:35.640]  Well, I was going to do that too for perjury because according to Missouri state law, if
[48:35.640 --> 48:44.200]  you, it's a class D felony if you try to get state funds like through, sorry, food stamps
[48:44.200 --> 48:48.960]  or something, over $500.
[48:48.960 --> 48:55.440]  And would I also have to go over, go after her lawyer for preparing the documents?
[48:55.440 --> 48:57.400]  Good call.
[48:57.400 --> 49:00.120]  He's probably the best one to go after.
[49:00.120 --> 49:01.120]  Absolutely.
[49:01.120 --> 49:06.600]  Would I also go after the judge because in the state of Missouri, judges have to be lawyers
[49:06.600 --> 49:10.400]  too for approving this stuff and not looking?
[49:10.400 --> 49:18.600]  Well, yes, if the documentation was inconsistent, then absolutely go after the judge.
[49:18.600 --> 49:25.600]  Okay, because they have a, well, I'm going to assume after I file this motion for a new
[49:25.600 --> 49:30.240]  trial, I'm also going to send a copy to the office of council discipline, excuse me, office
[49:30.240 --> 49:35.240]  of chief discipline council, so it would be like the head office of the bar association
[49:35.240 --> 49:38.640]  for the state of Missouri who that's the discipline.
[49:38.640 --> 49:40.400]  Can I make a suggestion?
[49:40.400 --> 49:41.400]  Sure.
[49:41.400 --> 49:50.560]  As much as I like going after judges and prosecutors, consider carefully what your intended outcome
[49:50.560 --> 49:57.720]  is, what's important to you and make sure, because you have to understand when you go
[49:57.720 --> 50:02.520]  after the judges, the judges are going to come after you.
[50:02.520 --> 50:08.880]  In a perfect world, this wouldn't be a problem, but this is not a perfect world and if this
[50:08.880 --> 50:17.160]  involves your children, you might want to get your best outcome in the divorce first
[50:17.160 --> 50:23.960]  and once that's done, then you can go back after the culprits with relative impunity,
[50:23.960 --> 50:30.800]  but as long as they have an option to rule over your future, I'd suggest you exercise
[50:30.800 --> 50:32.600]  extreme caution.
[50:32.600 --> 50:40.880]  Well, it's not a prosecutor, it's a lawyer, I'm talking about my ex-wife's lawyer, it's
[50:40.880 --> 50:41.880]  a bar preacher.
[50:41.880 --> 50:47.040]  I know, but these guys all tend to protect one another.
[50:47.040 --> 50:55.960]  I would want to get an adjudication, the best adjudication I could in the family court first
[50:55.960 --> 50:58.520]  and you can always go back after these guys later.
[50:58.520 --> 51:05.080]  If you go after them now, they're likely to rule against you at every turn, granted that's
[51:05.080 --> 51:12.400]  illegal and you'll still be put in that position of having to deal with it and this involves
[51:12.400 --> 51:18.680]  your children, so while I really like to go after these guys, I would hate to see you
[51:18.680 --> 51:24.200]  lose access to your children because you did the right thing.
[51:24.200 --> 51:29.800]  Yeah, that kind of stinks.
[51:29.800 --> 51:32.960]  And as far as like what Eddie was talking about with the traffic code and you were talking
[51:32.960 --> 51:38.880]  about if they, since Texas doesn't have a wrongful imprisonment, they only have a kidnapping,
[51:38.880 --> 51:42.720]  have you ever tried to do it under Title 18 USC Section 242?
[51:42.720 --> 51:48.880]  Yeah, but that's, you can do that second, that's the constitutional violation.
[51:48.880 --> 51:54.840]  You can nail them in the state, then nail them in the fed.
[51:54.840 --> 51:58.640]  You can nail them in the state for the state violations and then you nail them in the fed
[51:58.640 --> 52:02.240]  for the constitutional violations, civil rights violations.
[52:02.240 --> 52:05.320]  So yeah, you can do both.
[52:05.320 --> 52:09.200]  I just prefer beating them up in the state first because the state gives me more tort
[52:09.200 --> 52:13.080]  action because they do everything wrong.
[52:13.080 --> 52:16.280]  They give me more claims against them.
[52:16.280 --> 52:21.480]  On a civil trial, how hard is it to subpoena somebody's financial records?
[52:21.480 --> 52:26.840]  It's real easy to subpoena, but they're always going to object to it and it kind of depends
[52:26.840 --> 52:27.840]  on the judge.
[52:27.840 --> 52:31.960]  If they've bought the judge, it's going to be difficult.
[52:31.960 --> 52:36.920]  If you want to subpoena the records, you need to show cause.
[52:36.920 --> 52:40.720]  And if you have a cause, you've got to write to the records.
[52:40.720 --> 52:45.200]  Wouldn't cause on the truck if she said on the paperwork that her dad is in possession
[52:45.200 --> 52:46.200]  of the truck?
[52:46.200 --> 52:50.520]  Absolutely, you have cause.
[52:50.520 --> 52:54.200]  You're looking to subpoena the dad's records if he's insuring the truck?
[52:54.200 --> 52:59.960]  No, well, insuring it plus also making the $385 a month payment, so that would be unaccounted
[52:59.960 --> 53:02.400]  income that she did not report.
[53:02.400 --> 53:07.240]  Yes, that would be, absolutely that would be grounds.
[53:07.240 --> 53:13.120]  And then therefore it would fall under class D felony if she's also, because she actually
[53:13.120 --> 53:15.800]  has so far received.
[53:15.800 --> 53:19.560]  You could also do a little divide and conquer.
[53:19.560 --> 53:26.200]  You accuse the dad of acting in concert and collusion and he's not going to want to be
[53:26.200 --> 53:27.200]  indicted.
[53:27.200 --> 53:32.880]  Yeah, he's 65 or 7 years old, I think his daughter would actually give it up before
[53:32.880 --> 53:35.880]  she would see her dad sitting in jail at 70 years old.
[53:35.880 --> 53:41.320]  Right, so you point, you don't have to charge him with anything, but you kind of use discovery
[53:41.320 --> 53:43.400]  to point the finger at him.
[53:43.400 --> 53:44.400]  Yeah.
[53:44.400 --> 53:49.200]  And you know, that's going to frighten him.
[53:49.200 --> 53:54.400]  And I don't suggest doing that for the wrong reason, but if it's for the right reason,
[53:54.400 --> 53:55.400]  take the best shot.
[53:55.400 --> 54:00.240]  No, because all I'm wanting is, actually I was just wanting to sit down, hash it out
[54:00.240 --> 54:07.680]  person to person, no lawyers, write it out, have two lawyers look at it okay, judge okay.
[54:07.680 --> 54:13.920]  I wish we could actually come to a reasonable agreement, like adults should, instead of
[54:13.920 --> 54:16.840]  all this stupid stuff we have to go through.
[54:16.840 --> 54:19.520]  You were married to a woman, right?
[54:19.520 --> 54:22.520]  Yeah, but actually I got a...
[54:22.520 --> 54:27.200]  He's only saying that because Deb can't use his microphone.
[54:27.200 --> 54:29.200]  Yeah, I'm kidding.
[54:29.200 --> 54:31.320]  Yeah, I know that.
[54:31.320 --> 54:32.320]  I mean...
[54:32.320 --> 54:34.920]  It's one of those things where, you know...
[54:34.920 --> 54:39.680]  It happens both ways around, I mean I was going to say if you guys could sit down and
[54:39.680 --> 54:43.800]  work it out reasonably, you wouldn't be getting a divorce most likely.
[54:43.800 --> 54:47.960]  I mean the same thing happened to me, I mean I don't have any kids, thank God, you know,
[54:47.960 --> 54:53.320]  but I'll tell you, it would have been pretty bad, you know, situation that I went through.
[54:53.320 --> 54:57.800]  It's just like when people decide they're not going to be reasonable, they're just not
[54:57.800 --> 55:03.080]  going to be reasonable and that's why lawyers and courts have to get involved and...
[55:03.080 --> 55:06.280]  The attorneys promote that, they profit from it.
[55:06.280 --> 55:07.280]  That too.
[55:07.280 --> 55:13.520]  And also, I talked to the attorney generals down in Texas, Texas said they have jurisdiction
[55:13.520 --> 55:18.080]  of the children because the children were born here, therefore I would have to pay child
[55:18.080 --> 55:22.760]  support based on Texas laws, but the state of Missouri is trying to get child support
[55:22.760 --> 55:28.400]  out of me and there was something called Universal Child Support Act that all 50 states signed,
[55:28.400 --> 55:29.400]  that way they...
[55:29.400 --> 55:35.600]  Well, there's a slight problem with that, the states are forbidden to sign compacts
[55:35.600 --> 55:36.600]  with each other.
[55:36.600 --> 55:39.600]  Ooh, where is that at?
[55:39.600 --> 55:41.600]  United States Constitution.
[55:41.600 --> 55:42.600]  Oh.
[55:42.600 --> 55:51.200]  Well, there's another problem with that, that's generally part of either a divorce agreement
[55:51.200 --> 55:57.640]  or some kind of custody, a court order and I mean, unless you're like gone through two
[55:57.640 --> 56:02.520]  divorces over the same case in two different states and two different courts, I don't see
[56:02.520 --> 56:05.240]  how it could be that way.
[56:05.240 --> 56:10.400]  Well, the Texas attorney general is full of crap, there's no way that they can maintain
[56:10.400 --> 56:15.440]  jurisdiction over somebody that is not living in the state, child or otherwise.
[56:15.440 --> 56:20.880]  Where they're born is irrelevant, where they are living is all that matters.
[56:20.880 --> 56:26.800]  That's exactly what I told them and they said no, but then I actually read it and somewhere
[56:26.800 --> 56:30.840]  in the state law, that's what it actually says.
[56:30.840 --> 56:31.840]  Let me ask you a question.
[56:31.840 --> 56:32.840]  Go ahead.
[56:32.840 --> 56:38.440]  If the Texas legislature wrote a law that said all Californians have to pay Texas a 15% tax
[56:38.440 --> 56:40.800]  of their income, would it be legal?
[56:40.800 --> 56:41.800]  No.
[56:41.800 --> 56:42.800]  Okay.
[56:42.800 --> 56:52.160]  So, Texas can't write a statute that impacts somebody living in a different state, period.
[56:52.160 --> 56:57.360]  Well, what court has a jurisdiction over the divorce?
[56:57.360 --> 56:58.360]  Missouri.
[56:58.360 --> 57:01.920]  Well, then what does Texas have to do with it?
[57:01.920 --> 57:05.720]  Because the state attorney general up there will send the order down to the state attorney
[57:05.720 --> 57:09.560]  general down here in Texas and they will enforce the order through there.
[57:09.560 --> 57:10.560]  Yes.
[57:10.560 --> 57:11.560]  Are you in Texas?
[57:11.560 --> 57:12.560]  Yes.
[57:12.560 --> 57:13.560]  Okay.
[57:13.560 --> 57:17.600]  That's why they're doing that part of it in Texas, but it does not matter where the children
[57:17.600 --> 57:19.600]  are born, it's where they're living.
[57:19.600 --> 57:20.600]  Where are they?
[57:20.600 --> 57:21.600]  Missouri.
[57:21.600 --> 57:28.800]  Then Texas has nothing Texas can do as far as determining anything about what they do
[57:28.800 --> 57:29.800]  or don't get.
[57:29.800 --> 57:31.880]  I don't even think it matters where the kids live.
[57:31.880 --> 57:37.320]  What matters is what court has jurisdiction over the custody case.
[57:37.320 --> 57:41.960]  Well, but he's not talking about the custody, he's talking about the child support.
[57:41.960 --> 57:46.560]  But that's generally part, that's worked out in the custody case.
[57:46.560 --> 57:53.360]  That will depend on where the children reside when the case is initiated.
[57:53.360 --> 57:54.360]  That's what I'm saying.
[57:54.360 --> 57:55.840]  It doesn't matter where they live now.
[57:55.840 --> 57:59.680]  If they move in the process, there is provision to move jurisdiction.
[57:59.680 --> 58:00.680]  Right.
[58:00.680 --> 58:03.120]  That's what, that was my whole point.
[58:03.120 --> 58:04.120]  Okay.
[58:04.120 --> 58:06.600]  Thank you all very much.
[58:06.600 --> 58:07.600]  Okay.
[58:07.600 --> 58:08.600]  Thank you, Chris.
[58:08.600 --> 58:09.600]  Bye.
[58:09.600 --> 58:10.600]  Yeah.
[58:10.600 --> 58:15.000]  And moving the jurisdiction from one court to another involving the custody and child
[58:15.000 --> 58:17.520]  support arrangement is a big, big deal.
[58:17.520 --> 58:18.520]  They don't like to do that.
[58:18.520 --> 58:19.520]  Of course not.
[58:19.520 --> 58:22.520]  It takes the money to somewhere else.
[58:22.520 --> 58:23.520]  Yeah.
[58:23.520 --> 58:25.000]  That too.
[58:25.000 --> 58:26.240]  Okay.
[58:26.240 --> 58:27.240]  We will be back.
[58:27.240 --> 58:28.240]  We've got Danny from Texas.
[58:28.240 --> 58:29.240]  We've got one more hour.
[58:29.240 --> 58:37.080]  Callers, if you'd like to call in 512-646-1984, we will be back in about three and a half
[58:37.080 --> 58:38.080]  minutes.
[58:38.080 --> 59:05.480]  We've got INN World Report news coming up.
[59:05.480 --> 59:34.040]  We'll be back in about three and a half minutes.
[59:34.040 --> 01:00:02.600]  We'll be back in about three and a half minutes.
[01:00:02.600 --> 01:00:32.320]  We'll be back in about three and a half minutes.
[01:00:32.320 --> 01:00:52.120]  We'll be back in about three and a half minutes.
[01:00:52.120 --> 01:01:16.920]  We'll be back in about three and a half minutes.
[01:01:16.920 --> 01:01:36.720]  We'll be back in about three and a half minutes.
[01:01:36.720 --> 01:02:01.520]  We'll be back in about three and a half minutes.
[01:02:01.520 --> 01:02:30.080]  We'll be back in about three and a half minutes.
[01:02:30.080 --> 01:02:49.880]  We'll be back in about three and a half minutes.
[01:02:49.880 --> 01:03:11.240]  We'll be back in about three and a half minutes.
[01:03:11.240 --> 01:03:39.600]  We'll be back in about three and a half minutes.
[01:03:39.600 --> 01:03:43.920]  Okay, we are back.
[01:03:43.920 --> 01:03:47.400]  We're taking your calls.
[01:03:47.400 --> 01:03:49.400]  We've got Danny in Texas.
[01:03:49.400 --> 01:03:53.920]  Callers, if you'd like to call in 512-646-1984.
[01:03:53.920 --> 01:03:54.920]  Go ahead, Danny.
[01:03:54.920 --> 01:03:55.920]  Thanks for calling in.
[01:03:55.920 --> 01:03:56.920]  What's on your mind tonight?
[01:03:56.920 --> 01:03:57.920]  How are y'all doing tonight?
[01:03:57.920 --> 01:03:58.920]  Pretty good.
[01:03:58.920 --> 01:03:59.920]  Okay.
[01:03:59.920 --> 01:04:00.920]  Just a few little things.
[01:04:00.920 --> 01:04:06.160]  Y'all talked earlier about the bond being doubled and everything and the traffic cases.
[01:04:06.160 --> 01:04:08.480]  Yeah, that's right.
[01:04:08.480 --> 01:04:15.840]  Maybe that's not the way it should be, but a bond is really not money, but paperwork
[01:04:15.840 --> 01:04:19.920]  and it's a promise to perform that you're going to go do whatever it is that the bond
[01:04:19.920 --> 01:04:20.920] ...
[01:04:20.920 --> 01:04:21.920]  Wait a minute.
[01:04:21.920 --> 01:04:22.920]  A bond...
[01:04:22.920 --> 01:04:23.920]  Fail.
[01:04:23.920 --> 01:04:24.920]  A bond is money.
[01:04:24.920 --> 01:04:25.920]  Fail is paperwork.
[01:04:25.920 --> 01:04:35.440]  Well, if you look up, it's talking about a peel bond and the format of it and what...
[01:04:35.440 --> 01:04:36.440]  Oh, okay.
[01:04:36.440 --> 01:04:37.440]  I'm sorry.
[01:04:37.440 --> 01:04:38.440]  You're right.
[01:04:38.440 --> 01:04:42.160]  In this case, you don't have a right to a peel bond, you have a right to bail, and in
[01:04:42.160 --> 01:04:44.680]  this case, it really is a bond.
[01:04:44.680 --> 01:04:45.680]  Right.
[01:04:45.680 --> 01:04:46.680]  I'm sorry.
[01:04:46.680 --> 01:04:47.680]  You're right.
[01:04:47.680 --> 01:04:49.680]  I interrupted ahead of time.
[01:04:49.680 --> 01:04:50.680]  You're right.
[01:04:50.680 --> 01:04:53.680]  It is an insurance policy.
[01:04:53.680 --> 01:04:54.680]  Yeah.
[01:04:54.680 --> 01:04:55.680]  A form of assurance.
[01:04:55.680 --> 01:04:56.680]  Yeah.
[01:04:56.680 --> 01:04:57.680]  Go ahead.
[01:04:57.680 --> 01:04:58.680]  I'll shut up.
[01:04:58.680 --> 01:05:04.680]  It's a promise to perform with a financial penalty if you fail to do so.
[01:05:04.680 --> 01:05:09.360]  That's what it really amounts to.
[01:05:09.360 --> 01:05:17.560]  Earlier Eddie was talking about dealing with the jury and how they try not to let you talk
[01:05:17.560 --> 01:05:19.360]  about the law for the jury.
[01:05:19.360 --> 01:05:23.440]  They talk about that the jury determine the facts and the judge determines the law and
[01:05:23.440 --> 01:05:26.320]  the judge will tell the jury what the law is.
[01:05:26.320 --> 01:05:32.200]  However, there is something in the Constitution which I think would be good to hit on sometime
[01:05:32.200 --> 01:05:38.920]  when you get the opportunity as to with the jury determining the law.
[01:05:38.920 --> 01:05:44.000]  In the Bill of Rights, Article 1, Section 8, it has a number of things, but the last sentence
[01:05:44.000 --> 01:05:49.080]  of it there is that in all indictments for libel, the jury should have the right to determine
[01:05:49.080 --> 01:05:54.600]  the law and the facts under the direction of the court as in other cases.
[01:05:54.600 --> 01:05:55.600]  Okay.
[01:05:55.600 --> 01:06:03.000]  So libel is not considered criminal anymore, it's civil, but still this shows this last
[01:06:03.000 --> 01:06:08.120]  part as in other cases that the jury should determine the law and the facts as in other
[01:06:08.120 --> 01:06:09.120]  cases.
[01:06:09.120 --> 01:06:10.120]  Hold on.
[01:06:10.120 --> 01:06:11.120]  Randy.
[01:06:11.120 --> 01:06:14.400]  Randy, I can't hear what the caller is saying because you've got something going on over
[01:06:14.400 --> 01:06:15.400]  there.
[01:06:15.400 --> 01:06:16.400]  I thought it was mutants.
[01:06:16.400 --> 01:06:17.400]  Okay.
[01:06:17.400 --> 01:06:18.400]  Go ahead, caller.
[01:06:18.400 --> 01:06:19.400]  Sorry.
[01:06:19.400 --> 01:06:26.400]  Anyway, that just now seemed like something to hit on sometime, you want to wrestle with
[01:06:26.400 --> 01:06:31.880]  whether or not the jury gets to determine the law of the case as in the Constitution,
[01:06:31.880 --> 01:06:38.400]  and I've not found any annotations or court cases where that's been brought up, so it's
[01:06:38.400 --> 01:06:43.960]  almost like a first-time thing if somebody could get in the argument and appeal it up
[01:06:43.960 --> 01:06:49.760]  as to whether or not the jury gets to determine the law as well as the facts.
[01:06:49.760 --> 01:06:51.240]  Okay.
[01:06:51.240 --> 01:06:59.760]  I'm thinking of how to get the jury to determine the law as a fact.
[01:06:59.760 --> 01:07:05.920]  No, no, not as a fact, determine the law as well as the facts.
[01:07:05.920 --> 01:07:06.920]  Well...
[01:07:06.920 --> 01:07:11.160]  They can decide whether or not this law is applicable here or not.
[01:07:11.160 --> 01:07:16.240]  Yeah, the court's going to object to that vehemently.
[01:07:16.240 --> 01:07:18.560]  The juries get to nullify law.
[01:07:18.560 --> 01:07:24.320]  Yeah, that's what this is, and it's in the Constitution, in the Bill of Rights, but I
[01:07:24.320 --> 01:07:25.320]  don't...
[01:07:25.320 --> 01:07:29.360]  If they think the law is unconstitutional, they get to nullify the law.
[01:07:29.360 --> 01:07:35.000]  Well, that's an argument we try to make, but that's also something the judges fight against
[01:07:35.000 --> 01:07:40.840]  terribly, and that's a great argument to have in front of the jury.
[01:07:40.840 --> 01:07:48.360]  You get the judge to tell you you can't do something and have the argument right in front
[01:07:48.360 --> 01:07:52.720]  of the jury, and they get to hear it.
[01:07:52.720 --> 01:07:53.720]  Yeah.
[01:07:53.720 --> 01:07:58.880]  Well, if the prosecutor doesn't jump up and ask the jury to be removed where they're supposed
[01:07:58.880 --> 01:07:59.880]  to...
[01:07:59.880 --> 01:08:05.680]  Well, the problem is you get a shot at them before he has time to realize what you're
[01:08:05.680 --> 01:08:16.640]  going to do, and then he can complain that you tainted the jury pool if he wants to.
[01:08:16.640 --> 01:08:19.640]  Life's tough, bubba.
[01:08:19.640 --> 01:08:23.840]  The other thing there, were you talking about the cop years ago, talking about the way they
[01:08:23.840 --> 01:08:27.360]  gathered their jury up, well, they still have that.
[01:08:27.360 --> 01:08:32.840]  I've heard of cases where they ran out of jurors somehow, and they sent the guy out
[01:08:32.840 --> 01:08:37.680]  in the hall or out in the street to bring people in to finish off a jury when they ran
[01:08:37.680 --> 01:08:38.680]  short.
[01:08:38.680 --> 01:08:47.560]  Yes, I've heard of that relatively recently, and they certainly still can do that.
[01:08:47.560 --> 01:08:48.560]  Yeah.
[01:08:48.560 --> 01:08:54.600]  So be careful if you're walking around a courthouse, and you see a bailiff coming at you, run.
[01:08:54.600 --> 01:08:55.600]  Okay.
[01:08:55.600 --> 01:09:03.240]  Well, that was all I had here tonight, I thought it was kind of important for people to realize
[01:09:03.240 --> 01:09:09.800]  that you don't have to put up cash for a bond, that it's really just paperwork, and that's
[01:09:09.800 --> 01:09:10.800]  what I...
[01:09:10.800 --> 01:09:15.000]  Yeah, the problem is the courts insist on cash.
[01:09:15.000 --> 01:09:17.040]  Well, I know.
[01:09:17.040 --> 01:09:21.360]  It would be nice if you sent us a brief on this issue so we could...
[01:09:21.360 --> 01:09:22.360]  Okay.
[01:09:22.360 --> 01:09:28.160]  We might be able to find something, I know a few of us around here have, you know, just
[01:09:28.160 --> 01:09:29.160]  put bonds together.
[01:09:29.160 --> 01:09:34.000]  Sometimes they'll try to require that you have a surety go with you, so you've got to
[01:09:34.000 --> 01:09:39.640]  get somebody else to promise they have at least a twice the amount of bond or something
[01:09:39.640 --> 01:09:42.840]  like that, and profit or something in the county.
[01:09:42.840 --> 01:09:46.440]  Yeah, that goes to bail.
[01:09:46.440 --> 01:09:53.320]  And if we could get a brief that would show that bond in an appeal is equivalent to bail
[01:09:53.320 --> 01:10:03.680]  in a regional accusation, then it goes to a written agreement and not the posting money,
[01:10:03.680 --> 01:10:08.360]  because you have a right to bail, and bail is a written undertaking between you and the
[01:10:08.360 --> 01:10:09.360]  state.
[01:10:09.360 --> 01:10:17.920]  You don't have any assets, you have to maintain that your net worth exclusive of all encumbrances
[01:10:17.920 --> 01:10:26.320]  is worth more than the fines, you have to agree on your failure to abide by the court
[01:10:26.320 --> 01:10:32.040]  to reimburse the state that amount plus the cost of re-incarcerating you.
[01:10:32.040 --> 01:10:37.920]  So technically the court would come out better if they put you on bail, but if you don't
[01:10:37.920 --> 01:10:45.560]  have any property, then you have the option of posting a cash bond in lieu of bail.
[01:10:45.560 --> 01:10:51.000]  So you get to appeal and all of a sudden the bail has gone away and it's turned to bond
[01:10:51.000 --> 01:10:57.560]  straight up.
[01:10:57.560 --> 01:11:00.880]  So it's going to be a nice argument, give me a bunch of them, I've got three tickets
[01:11:00.880 --> 01:11:08.360]  and I'm going to have a great time with them, regardless of what I had for tonight so far.
[01:11:08.360 --> 01:11:09.360]  Okay, thank you Danny.
[01:11:09.360 --> 01:11:10.360]  Okay, bye.
[01:11:10.360 --> 01:11:11.360]  Okay, thanks Danny.
[01:11:11.360 --> 01:11:20.720]  All right, we have open phone lines, callers if you'd like to call in, 512-646-1984, there
[01:11:20.720 --> 01:11:25.440]  was a bunch of callers on the board last week and we kind of ran out of time, so folks call
[01:11:25.440 --> 01:11:26.440]  on in.
[01:11:26.440 --> 01:11:32.320]  Yeah, I've got three tickets and I am looking forward to this.
[01:11:32.320 --> 01:11:38.720]  I'm going to take Eddie's material and we're going to start this from the beginning.
[01:11:38.720 --> 01:11:42.560]  I start out with asking the bailiff to arrest the prosecuting attorney because he doesn't
[01:11:42.560 --> 01:11:46.200]  have a license to practice.
[01:11:46.200 --> 01:11:51.720]  And then when the judge refuses to act against the prosecutor, then I'm going to ask the
[01:11:51.720 --> 01:11:58.400]  bailiff to arrest the judge for acting in concert and collusion with the illegal practice
[01:11:58.400 --> 01:12:01.400]  of law.
[01:12:01.400 --> 01:12:06.600]  I can't nail the judge because in order to be a judge, he doesn't have to have a bar
[01:12:06.600 --> 01:12:13.600]  license or a license to practice, he just has to be in good standing with the bar because
[01:12:13.600 --> 01:12:17.440]  in fact when he's sitting as a judge, he's not practicing.
[01:12:17.440 --> 01:12:22.980]  He may do that when he's not sitting as a judge but he doesn't have to have the license
[01:12:22.980 --> 01:12:23.980]  on the stand.
[01:12:23.980 --> 01:12:29.920]  But if he acts in concert and collusion with the prosecuting attorney and practice the
[01:12:29.920 --> 01:12:34.840]  illegal practice of law, he's equally culpable.
[01:12:34.840 --> 01:12:40.320]  And then I ask the bailiff to arrest them both and when he refuses, I ask the judge
[01:12:40.320 --> 01:12:47.240]  to arrest the bailiff and when he refuses, I ask the judge to disqualify himself.
[01:12:47.240 --> 01:12:52.040]  And it should go downhill from there.
[01:12:52.040 --> 01:12:56.560]  So you got some good suggestions for how to lay this out, Eddie, so I don't miss anything.
[01:12:56.560 --> 01:13:02.680]  Not right off the top of my head but let me think about it.
[01:13:02.680 --> 01:13:03.680]  How would you?
[01:13:03.680 --> 01:13:07.020]  When I go in there, I want to keep first things first.
[01:13:07.020 --> 01:13:08.020]  Who are you?
[01:13:08.020 --> 01:13:13.040]  What authority do you have to sit here in this room?
[01:13:13.040 --> 01:13:16.720]  That approach should be used on everybody, the judge and the prosecutor.
[01:13:16.720 --> 01:13:22.440]  So I go after the prosecutor first and I can use that to hammer the judge with.
[01:13:22.440 --> 01:13:27.320]  Once I nail the prosecutor who I know doesn't have a license, I get the judge to uphold
[01:13:27.320 --> 01:13:34.240]  and I ask the judge to disqualify himself and ask the bailiff to arrest them both.
[01:13:34.240 --> 01:13:39.600]  So now I've got them nailed, first crack out of the hat.
[01:13:39.600 --> 01:13:43.880]  And they'll try to move ahead and I'll object, judge, you're disqualified, you get out off
[01:13:43.880 --> 01:13:44.880]  that bench.
[01:13:44.880 --> 01:13:47.880]  You're a criminal, you belong in prison, you don't belong up on the bench, get out
[01:13:47.880 --> 01:13:48.880]  off there.
[01:13:48.880 --> 01:13:54.680]  And he will probably get pretty excited about that point and make dire threats against my
[01:13:54.680 --> 01:13:55.680]  liberty.
[01:13:55.680 --> 01:14:02.120]  In which case I will object and let the record reflect my objection.
[01:14:02.120 --> 01:14:07.320]  Well actually at that point, Randy, since you've disqualified them as a public servant,
[01:14:07.320 --> 01:14:11.840]  that is now a terroristic threat, that's a criminal charge.
[01:14:11.840 --> 01:14:15.760]  They're threatening to kidnap and incarcerate you at gunpoint with an armed individual.
[01:14:15.760 --> 01:14:22.040]  Yeah, I did that to my district judge once and they wanted to say that a terroristic
[01:14:22.040 --> 01:14:29.360]  threat only applies if they threaten, if they actually exhibit a weapon and point it at
[01:14:29.360 --> 01:14:32.400]  you and make a threat of immediate harm.
[01:14:32.400 --> 01:14:35.880]  Now I've insisted that's not what the statute says.
[01:14:35.880 --> 01:14:39.760]  Nope, and that's not how they treat people that say something in public like I'm going
[01:14:39.760 --> 01:14:43.840]  to kill you and they don't show a weapon, they don't do nothing.
[01:14:43.840 --> 01:14:48.000]  Well yeah, that's what the prosecutor said that that's the only thing they prosecute
[01:14:48.000 --> 01:14:51.960]  and I said well I'm not too concerned about what you want to do, what you don't want
[01:14:51.960 --> 01:14:52.960]  to do.
[01:14:52.960 --> 01:14:59.440]  What I'm concerned about is what the law says and since I'm making accusations against
[01:14:59.440 --> 01:15:05.840]  public officials, I implicate the bailiff as well.
[01:15:05.840 --> 01:15:13.200]  So all of them are going to be well unhappy, but once I get past that, okay I just got
[01:15:13.200 --> 01:15:17.800]  an email that said that municipal courts of record and county court judges are required
[01:15:17.800 --> 01:15:25.240]  to have a license, I don't know that, they're required to be practicing attorneys, I haven't
[01:15:25.240 --> 01:15:26.240]  seen where...
[01:15:26.240 --> 01:15:28.200]  In municipal courts of record they are, yes.
[01:15:28.200 --> 01:15:32.960]  Yeah, but I haven't seen where they have to have a license, a county judge and district
[01:15:32.960 --> 01:15:33.960]  judge...
[01:15:33.960 --> 01:15:39.240]  Wait, wait, wait, they cannot be practicing attorneys without a license.
[01:15:39.240 --> 01:15:44.080]  Yeah, well here's the problem.
[01:15:44.080 --> 01:15:51.280]  If they have practiced as attorneys and the issue hasn't come up, then they will practice
[01:15:51.280 --> 01:15:52.280]  as attorneys.
[01:15:52.280 --> 01:15:58.040]  If they're in good standing with the bar, then my problem is is when they're sitting
[01:15:58.040 --> 01:16:02.960]  on the bench they're not practicing law and a county judge and a district judge, they
[01:16:02.960 --> 01:16:07.680]  don't even have to keep a bar card, but they have to be attorneys, so they have to have
[01:16:07.680 --> 01:16:16.480]  passed the bar, but they no longer have to keep their bar card or license.
[01:16:16.480 --> 01:16:21.360]  So I don't know for certain I can make that accusation.
[01:16:21.360 --> 01:16:26.880]  The fact that he's an attorney, they have to be an attorney, well that doesn't mean
[01:16:26.880 --> 01:16:33.280]  he's licensed or authorized to practice law in the state, but sitting as a judge he's
[01:16:33.280 --> 01:16:38.840]  not practicing law, he's a judge, so he doesn't need it, so I would like to have that shot
[01:16:38.840 --> 01:16:45.320]  at him, but it will be a long shot to get that one, but I can get him for acting in
[01:16:45.320 --> 01:16:48.040]  concert inclusions or get him equally guilty.
[01:16:48.040 --> 01:16:49.040]  Callers are building up...
[01:16:49.040 --> 01:16:54.000]  Yeah, we've got Guy, we've got Jim and Dan, so we'll go to your calls and we'll get back
[01:16:54.000 --> 01:16:55.000]  on the other side.
[01:16:55.000 --> 01:16:56.000]  This is the rule of law.
[01:16:56.000 --> 01:16:57.000]  We'll be right back.
[01:16:57.000 --> 01:17:05.440]  It is so enlightening to listen to 90.1 FM, but finding things on the Internet isn't so
[01:17:05.440 --> 01:17:09.160]  easy, and neither is finding like-minded people to share it with.
[01:17:09.160 --> 01:17:12.080]  Oh, well I guess you haven't heard of Brave New Books then.
[01:17:12.080 --> 01:17:13.080]  Brave New Books?
[01:17:13.080 --> 01:17:17.880]  Yes, Brave New Books has all the books and DVDs you're looking for by authors like Alex
[01:17:17.880 --> 01:17:20.480]  Jones, Ron Paul, and G. Edward Griffin.
[01:17:20.480 --> 01:17:23.800]  They even stock inner food, Berkey products, and Calvin Soaps.
[01:17:23.800 --> 01:17:26.760]  There's no way a place like that exists.
[01:17:26.760 --> 01:17:28.240]  Go check it out for yourself.
[01:17:28.240 --> 01:17:32.600]  It's downtown at 1904 Guadalupe Street, just south of UT.
[01:17:32.600 --> 01:17:35.960]  By UT, there's never anywhere to park down there.
[01:17:35.960 --> 01:17:41.200]  Actually, they now offer a free hour of parking for paying customers at the 500 MLK parking
[01:17:41.200 --> 01:17:44.200]  facility, just behind the bookstore.
[01:17:44.200 --> 01:17:47.160]  It does exist, but when are they open?
[01:17:47.160 --> 01:17:51.960]  Monday through Saturday, 11 AM to 9 PM, and 1 to 6 PM on Sundays.
[01:17:51.960 --> 01:17:58.640]  So give them a call at 512-480-2503, or check out their events page at bravenewbookstore.com.
[01:18:22.280 --> 01:18:30.560]  me with that same old trick again I was blindsided, but now I can see your plans
[01:18:31.040 --> 01:18:35.720]  you put the fear in my pocket took the money from my hand
[01:18:35.720 --> 01:18:40.520]  ain't gonna fool me with that same old trick again
[01:18:40.520 --> 01:19:01.920]  All right, we are back, we're taking your call, we're going to go to Guy in Arkansas.
[01:19:01.920 --> 01:19:05.120]  Guy, thanks for calling in, what's on your mind tonight?
[01:19:05.120 --> 01:19:07.560]  Good evening, beautiful people.
[01:19:07.560 --> 01:19:09.120]  Oh, thank you.
[01:19:09.120 --> 01:19:18.880]  Absolutely, look, I was listening to John Statham on a show today and he had read something
[01:19:18.880 --> 01:19:30.880]  about the FCC, he used to deal with the radio, the pirate stations, and he read something
[01:19:30.880 --> 01:19:38.040]  out of the FCC code, something to do with, I apologize for not being detailed about exactly
[01:19:38.040 --> 01:19:43.720]  what he was reading, I'd have to listen to the archives, they'd pull it out.
[01:19:43.720 --> 01:19:51.040]  But anyway, he says that the Fed has absolutely no jurisdiction in the state when the radio
[01:19:51.040 --> 01:19:56.400]  that you are operating does not extend beyond state boundaries.
[01:19:56.400 --> 01:20:03.840]  The only time that they can get involved is when your radio signal goes beyond the state
[01:20:03.840 --> 01:20:08.800]  boundary into another state, then they can come in and act.
[01:20:08.800 --> 01:20:09.800]  Wait a minute.
[01:20:09.800 --> 01:20:10.800]  That's not exactly true.
[01:20:10.800 --> 01:20:20.640]  What Title 47 says is that when the effects of radio signal either extend beyond the state
[01:20:20.640 --> 01:20:27.800]  and interfere with another signal in another state, or if the effects from another signal
[01:20:27.800 --> 01:20:34.080]  extend into this state, or if the effects of your signal interfere with other signals
[01:20:34.080 --> 01:20:37.320]  from other states communicating with each other.
[01:20:37.320 --> 01:20:45.280]  This is paragraph D of section 301 of Title 47.
[01:20:45.280 --> 01:20:50.080]  He's not wording it correctly, but that's one of the basis of our entire argument.
[01:20:50.080 --> 01:20:53.640]  I've already completely dissected Title 47.
[01:20:53.640 --> 01:20:57.280]  That chump Statham Miller has been reading Deborah's pleading.
[01:20:57.280 --> 01:21:00.720]  Absolutely so, but he's misquoting my work.
[01:21:00.720 --> 01:21:05.760]  What I'm saying is that the punch line to what he was saying was as long as your radio
[01:21:05.760 --> 01:21:13.640]  signal stays within the state, the FCC, the Fed cannot come in and hassle you about your
[01:21:13.640 --> 01:21:14.640]  signal.
[01:21:14.640 --> 01:21:15.800]  Well, that's not exactly true.
[01:21:15.800 --> 01:21:17.180]  That's not what the title says.
[01:21:17.180 --> 01:21:18.760]  That's not what the statute says.
[01:21:18.760 --> 01:21:25.160]  It says when the effects, because it is impossible to completely contain a radio signal.
[01:21:25.160 --> 01:21:27.760]  It is raw plasma energy.
[01:21:27.760 --> 01:21:37.560]  What a radio station is, what that antenna and transmitter really is, is a tiny star.
[01:21:37.560 --> 01:21:45.080]  The colloquialism being on the air is not an accurate description of what we actually
[01:21:45.080 --> 01:21:46.080]  do.
[01:21:46.080 --> 01:21:47.220]  We are not on the air.
[01:21:47.220 --> 01:21:49.240]  We don't need air.
[01:21:49.240 --> 01:21:51.200]  It's not a sound wave.
[01:21:51.200 --> 01:21:53.640]  It is a plasma wave.
[01:21:53.640 --> 01:21:59.000]  It is a very tiny sliver of raw plasma like a star.
[01:21:59.000 --> 01:22:02.600]  A star is like full spectrum plasma energy.
[01:22:02.600 --> 01:22:09.680]  The radio station, the radio signal is raw plasma energy, a tiny sliver of that spectrum.
[01:22:09.680 --> 01:22:17.600]  It goes out into all directions, into the entire universe through the vacuum.
[01:22:17.600 --> 01:22:22.120]  You cannot contain the transmission at all.
[01:22:22.120 --> 01:22:28.000]  It goes out forever and ever and ever into the entire universe.
[01:22:28.000 --> 01:22:38.080]  That's why the way the statute is worded is that the effects of the broadcast cannot extend
[01:22:38.080 --> 01:22:39.520]  beyond the borders of the state.
[01:22:39.520 --> 01:22:41.200]  In other words, you can't cure it.
[01:22:41.200 --> 01:22:46.720]  You can't pick it up through reasonable, normal receivers.
[01:22:46.720 --> 01:22:48.720]  That's not correct, what he's saying.
[01:22:48.720 --> 01:22:51.280]  That's not what the law says.
[01:22:51.280 --> 01:22:57.880]  The effects are defined by field strength, so you can define the effective range of the
[01:22:57.880 --> 01:22:58.880]  transmitter.
[01:22:58.880 --> 01:23:00.800]  That's not what the law says.
[01:23:00.800 --> 01:23:03.720]  The law says it doesn't go that far to specify.
[01:23:03.720 --> 01:23:06.400]  I'll email it to you and you can check it out.
[01:23:06.400 --> 01:23:10.880]  Anyway, the other part of my call tonight is, are you familiar with a gentleman called
[01:23:10.880 --> 01:23:13.880]  Ron Klass, C-L-A-S-S?
[01:23:13.880 --> 01:23:16.880]  Oh yeah.
[01:23:16.880 --> 01:23:19.600]  Rod Klass, are you are familiar with him?
[01:23:19.600 --> 01:23:20.600]  Yes I am.
[01:23:20.600 --> 01:23:21.600]  Okay.
[01:23:21.600 --> 01:23:31.200]  Then you are familiar about his paperwork dealing with the 11th Amendment and some other...
[01:23:31.200 --> 01:23:36.520]  He does real good work, but I have some problems with some of his citations.
[01:23:36.520 --> 01:23:41.520]  I haven't been happy with the case law that he cites.
[01:23:41.520 --> 01:23:46.360]  When I go to the case law, I don't find the verbiage he attributes to it sometimes.
[01:23:46.360 --> 01:23:52.800]  Well, I always bring this up because I just kind of discovered him through someone's email
[01:23:52.800 --> 01:24:00.120]  as listening to his talk show radio shows that he was being interviewed on.
[01:24:00.120 --> 01:24:06.040]  What impresses me about the man is that he's extremely well-versed in his knowledge and
[01:24:06.040 --> 01:24:11.640]  he's gone through the process and through the lawsuits and the appeals and that sort
[01:24:11.640 --> 01:24:12.640]  of stuff.
[01:24:12.640 --> 01:24:19.400]  I thought that since he was...he might have been a gem in the rough that no one's discovered.
[01:24:19.400 --> 01:24:22.040]  Let me restate that.
[01:24:22.040 --> 01:24:27.480]  He is a great researcher and I'm not challenging that at all.
[01:24:27.480 --> 01:24:30.440]  He has done some really interesting research.
[01:24:30.440 --> 01:24:33.920]  Just be careful about quoting his citations.
[01:24:33.920 --> 01:24:37.240]  Sometimes he's not as particular there as he could be.
[01:24:37.240 --> 01:24:39.840]  Well, I'll grant you, none of us are.
[01:24:39.840 --> 01:24:45.360]  I mean, we're not perfect in all ways and manners, but forgive him for whatever faults
[01:24:45.360 --> 01:24:47.360]  he may have.
[01:24:47.360 --> 01:24:54.560]  The email that I got addressed his four documents that he presents, that someone can present
[01:24:54.560 --> 01:25:05.720]  to a court and have the court either declare itself common law or statutory or administrative.
[01:25:05.720 --> 01:25:10.000]  Basically, I haven't looked at his paperwork yet.
[01:25:10.000 --> 01:25:13.960]  I emailed him trying to get copies of it, but just listening to the radio shows that
[01:25:13.960 --> 01:25:21.800]  he's been on, the latest show that he did, some couple who lost their children to family
[01:25:21.800 --> 01:25:29.280]  services used his paperwork and got their kids back in two hours.
[01:25:29.280 --> 01:25:34.760]  He says he doesn't know exactly the paperwork that they used, but it did have to do with
[01:25:34.760 --> 01:25:37.520]  some of the paperwork he has already perspective.
[01:25:37.520 --> 01:25:44.000]  I just thought that he might be a great guest to have on if you can get him on and maybe
[01:25:44.000 --> 01:25:47.280]  you can share some of his knowledge with us.
[01:25:47.280 --> 01:25:48.280]  Yeah.
[01:25:48.280 --> 01:25:53.720]  One of my biggest complaints with him is he's so far over my head I don't understand most
[01:25:53.720 --> 01:25:54.720]  of it.
[01:25:54.720 --> 01:25:57.960]  Well, that's what a great researcher does.
[01:25:57.960 --> 01:26:01.800]  What they say is the devil is in the details and of course the devil as we know him has
[01:26:01.800 --> 01:26:09.000]  made the details so complicated that it takes a genius to read through it.
[01:26:09.000 --> 01:26:13.680]  He is a really good researcher and it's really deep stuff that he does.
[01:26:13.680 --> 01:26:20.240]  I think that he's worth considering and maybe you can utilize some of his documentation
[01:26:20.240 --> 01:26:24.280]  and efforts to increase the power of what you folks are doing.
[01:26:24.280 --> 01:26:26.200]  I think that's all I really have to say tonight.
[01:26:26.200 --> 01:26:27.200]  God bless you all.
[01:26:27.200 --> 01:26:30.840]  Have a great week and I'll be hearing you on the airwaves.
[01:26:30.840 --> 01:26:31.840]  All right.
[01:26:31.840 --> 01:26:32.840]  All right.
[01:26:32.840 --> 01:26:33.840]  Thanks, Guy.
[01:26:33.840 --> 01:26:42.600]  I'm going to read here now Section 301 from Title 47 regarding licenses for radio communications
[01:26:42.600 --> 01:26:45.480]  or transmissions of energy.
[01:26:45.480 --> 01:26:51.680]  This is what it says, �No person shall use or operate any apparatus for the transmission
[01:26:51.680 --> 01:26:57.240]  of energy or communications or signals by radio.� By the way, those are all three
[01:26:57.240 --> 01:27:03.840]  different things which I have also written a brief on that, but at any rate without a
[01:27:03.840 --> 01:27:11.680]  license and here it is, �Paragraph D, within any state when the effects of such use extend
[01:27:11.680 --> 01:27:19.320]  beyond the borders of said state or when interference is caused by such use or operation with the
[01:27:19.320 --> 01:27:26.320]  transmission of such energy communications or signals from within said state to any place
[01:27:26.320 --> 01:27:32.080]  beyond its borders or from any place beyond its borders to any place within said state
[01:27:32.080 --> 01:27:38.920]  or with the transmission or reception of such energy communications signals from and or
[01:27:38.920 --> 01:27:46.200]  to places beyond borders of said state.� Breaking it down, what that means is that
[01:27:46.200 --> 01:27:54.440]  when the effects of the transmission of signals or energy or communications extend beyond
[01:27:54.440 --> 01:27:58.080]  the borders, then you have to have a license.
[01:27:58.080 --> 01:28:09.000]  If the effects cause any interference anywhere outside of the state, then the FCC has jurisdiction
[01:28:09.000 --> 01:28:10.600]  to do something about it.
[01:28:10.600 --> 01:28:19.060]  If the effects cause any interference from another transmission to a place inside that
[01:28:19.060 --> 01:28:21.680]  state, they can do something about it.
[01:28:21.680 --> 01:28:29.040]  If the effects cause interference from transmissions to and from places beyond the borders of the
[01:28:29.040 --> 01:28:31.120]  state, they can do something about it.
[01:28:31.120 --> 01:28:39.280]  I will add that the definition of the word state in Title 47 does not include any of
[01:28:39.280 --> 01:28:40.960]  the 50 states of the Union.
[01:28:40.960 --> 01:28:46.480]  It only includes US territories and possessions in the District of Columbia.
[01:28:46.480 --> 01:28:48.560]  That is even another dimension.
[01:28:48.560 --> 01:28:56.160]  It is not really accurate to say if the radio signal goes beyond the state because, like
[01:28:56.160 --> 01:29:05.120]  I said, it is raw plasma energy extending into all infinity of the universe through
[01:29:05.120 --> 01:29:10.680]  the vacuum just like a star at the speed of light.
[01:29:10.680 --> 01:29:13.720]  You cannot just say it cannot be contained.
[01:29:13.720 --> 01:29:14.720]  It goes everywhere.
[01:29:14.720 --> 01:29:20.200]  Let us also not forget the aspect that commerce has to be affected.
[01:29:20.200 --> 01:29:24.720]  Commerce has to be affected too under the Constitution, yes.
[01:29:24.720 --> 01:29:32.400]  That is what the law says and that is what the case law supports and so that is one of
[01:29:32.400 --> 01:29:34.960]  the foundational pillars of our argument.
[01:29:34.960 --> 01:29:45.320]  I have done lots of research on this, people, of the last six, eight months to quote the
[01:29:45.320 --> 01:29:47.720]  entire Title 47 from memory at this point.
[01:29:47.720 --> 01:29:48.720]  All right.
[01:29:48.720 --> 01:29:50.040]  We are continuing to take your calls.
[01:29:50.040 --> 01:29:52.480]  We have got Jim, Dan and others.
[01:29:52.480 --> 01:29:54.120]  We have got half an hour left.
[01:29:54.120 --> 01:30:00.240]  This is the rule of law.
[01:30:00.240 --> 01:30:04.400]  My name is Randall Kelton and I co-host on Rule of Law Radio.
[01:30:04.400 --> 01:30:09.200]  We specialize in showing people how to strike back against corrupt public officials.
[01:30:09.200 --> 01:30:13.720]  With the mortgage crisis worsening, we set our sights on finding a remedy for people
[01:30:13.720 --> 01:30:15.760]  who have been cheated by their lenders.
[01:30:15.760 --> 01:30:19.960]  If you have a mortgage or have paid yours off, you have probably been cheated out of
[01:30:19.960 --> 01:30:22.320]  thousands, but there is a remedy.
[01:30:22.320 --> 01:30:31.600]  Go to remediesinrealestate.com or call me at 512-430-4140 and find out how to use the
[01:30:31.600 --> 01:30:37.180]  consumer protection laws to recover what the lenders have stolen through fraud and deception.
[01:30:37.180 --> 01:30:42.000]  We will prepare for you a qualified written request that will expose the fraud and put
[01:30:42.000 --> 01:30:43.880]  the lenders on the dime.
[01:30:43.880 --> 01:30:47.960]  Lender fraud is bankrupting this country and it is time to fight back.
[01:30:47.960 --> 01:30:57.620]  Go to remediesinrealestate.com or call 512-430-4140 and get the information you need to stop the
[01:30:57.620 --> 01:31:14.800]  money changers in their tracks.
[01:31:14.800 --> 01:31:15.800]  Okay we are back.
[01:31:15.800 --> 01:31:17.680]  We've got a half an hour left.
[01:31:17.680 --> 01:31:22.840]  Callers if you'd like to call in 512-646-1984.
[01:31:22.840 --> 01:31:24.560]  We're going to go to Jim in Texas now.
[01:31:24.560 --> 01:31:25.560]  Jim, thanks for calling in.
[01:31:25.560 --> 01:31:26.560]  What's on your mind tonight?
[01:31:26.560 --> 01:31:28.080]  How are you tonight?
[01:31:28.080 --> 01:31:29.080]  I have a question.
[01:31:29.080 --> 01:31:36.560]  It's a little bit off point from tonight's topics, but mine is basically on corporations
[01:31:36.560 --> 01:31:46.400]  and I'm curious to know if anybody knows much about the LLC, Limited Liability Company versus
[01:31:46.400 --> 01:31:47.400]  the corporation.
[01:31:47.400 --> 01:31:52.560]  Well an LLC is a corporation.
[01:31:52.560 --> 01:31:56.320]  It stands for Limited Liability Company.
[01:31:56.320 --> 01:31:59.760]  And the limited part is what makes it a corporation.
[01:31:59.760 --> 01:32:03.360]  The state limits their liability for whatever.
[01:32:03.360 --> 01:32:08.480]  It's a privilege granted by the state in accordance with the rules of being an LLC.
[01:32:08.480 --> 01:32:12.120]  All it is is just a different name for another type of corporation.
[01:32:12.120 --> 01:32:18.880]  Okay, so a limited liability company is a corporation.
[01:32:18.880 --> 01:32:23.040]  It doesn't have all the same protections and all the same rules, but it's got enough of
[01:32:23.040 --> 01:32:24.040]  them.
[01:32:24.040 --> 01:32:30.320]  So it gains a benefit from the state for putting itself under that umbrella, for lack of a
[01:32:30.320 --> 01:32:31.320]  better phrase.
[01:32:31.320 --> 01:32:36.520]  Well, I guess what I'm trying to figure out, and it's very vague the way the laws or the
[01:32:36.520 --> 01:32:42.720]  way that the case laws have been and stuff like that, is as far as finding out whether
[01:32:42.720 --> 01:32:50.840]  you are required to go after one of the owners of it is if you have to pierce the corporate
[01:32:50.840 --> 01:32:51.840]  veil.
[01:32:51.840 --> 01:32:53.180]  Yes, you do.
[01:32:53.180 --> 01:32:55.200]  That's what the limited part is all about.
[01:32:55.200 --> 01:32:59.760]  And in some states, you can't even find out who the members are.
[01:32:59.760 --> 01:33:04.240]  They're technically called members, member owners.
[01:33:04.240 --> 01:33:09.280]  In some cases, there's no way to find out who they even are because there are some states
[01:33:09.280 --> 01:33:15.680]  where one of them I know is New Mexico, there are other states that have very, very protective
[01:33:15.680 --> 01:33:22.120]  laws of LLCs and the member owners of the LLC do not even have to register themselves
[01:33:22.120 --> 01:33:26.440]  with the state, so depending on what state you are, it's going to have much different
[01:33:26.440 --> 01:33:27.440]  structures.
[01:33:27.440 --> 01:33:28.440]  Right.
[01:33:28.440 --> 01:33:36.480]  And I'm in Texas, and I mean, it's a really, it's kind of a, they've layered this thing.
[01:33:36.480 --> 01:33:46.720]  It's a company that's got their assumed name, so the LLC is doing business as an assumed
[01:33:46.720 --> 01:33:47.880]  name.
[01:33:47.880 --> 01:33:54.240]  When they registered in the county for the DBA, they said they were doing, the type of
[01:33:54.240 --> 01:34:00.040]  business they were performing was an LLC, which I don't know how you do, but...
[01:34:00.040 --> 01:34:01.920]  Well, that doesn't even make any sense.
[01:34:01.920 --> 01:34:06.320]  I mean, if you're going to set up an LLC, you wouldn't want to do a DBA.
[01:34:06.320 --> 01:34:15.040]  Well, no, they've already done the LLC, and the LLC is doing business as, they have several
[01:34:15.040 --> 01:34:20.560]  different companies that are under this LLC, I guess.
[01:34:20.560 --> 01:34:25.280]  But I know the owner, and I've got the paperwork from the Secretary of State and the paperwork
[01:34:25.280 --> 01:34:35.040]  from the county clerk and recorder as far as the DBA, and I know who the owner is, but
[01:34:35.040 --> 01:34:39.040]  the owner and one of the managers are who I'm going after, so I'm trying to figure out.
[01:34:39.040 --> 01:34:46.000]  I just needed to know whether to, I should have to try to pierce the corporate veil,
[01:34:46.000 --> 01:34:53.800]  and because I've seen law cases that, you know, they've claimed exemptions under failure
[01:34:53.800 --> 01:34:59.120]  to pierce, but sometimes they hold up and sometimes they don't.
[01:34:59.120 --> 01:35:05.280]  Well, if the company has harmed you, why aren't you just going after the company?
[01:35:05.280 --> 01:35:09.760]  Well, you can go after the company all you want, but the company doesn't basically own
[01:35:09.760 --> 01:35:10.760]  anything.
[01:35:10.760 --> 01:35:14.040]  I mean, that's the reason that they do it.
[01:35:14.040 --> 01:35:15.040]  The company's...
[01:35:15.040 --> 01:35:20.880]  You're going to somehow have to pierce that veil or show that these individuals harmed
[01:35:20.880 --> 01:35:21.880]  you personally.
[01:35:21.880 --> 01:35:24.040]  It's just a lot more hassle doing it.
[01:35:24.040 --> 01:35:28.760]  If you could show that they harmed you personally, then that would be another way around it.
[01:35:28.760 --> 01:35:34.080]  Well, I mean, I can prove that they did it with malice, too, so, I mean, it's not a problem.
[01:35:34.080 --> 01:35:39.680]  I just didn't want to have to go through the extra work of going that way if I didn't have
[01:35:39.680 --> 01:35:40.680]  to.
[01:35:40.680 --> 01:35:42.520]  But if it...
[01:35:42.520 --> 01:35:49.400]  I kind of assume that it had the characteristics of a corporation, even though it...
[01:35:49.400 --> 01:35:55.360]  I mean, everything you read on it is a limited liability company.
[01:35:55.360 --> 01:35:58.160]  There's the act that formed the company.
[01:35:58.160 --> 01:36:02.400]  You look up law cases, you find hundreds of them on limited liability companies, and then
[01:36:02.400 --> 01:36:11.200]  a few on limited liability corporations, and that was...
[01:36:11.200 --> 01:36:16.320]  There's a difference, I guess, and Texas has both limited liability corporations and limited
[01:36:16.320 --> 01:36:20.000]  liability companies, which was kind of strange.
[01:36:20.000 --> 01:36:25.400]  Well, yeah, every state is going to have a slightly different setup, and that will be
[01:36:25.400 --> 01:36:28.160]  in the statutes of each state.
[01:36:28.160 --> 01:36:34.840]  So you have to first figure out which state this LLC was formed under and look at the
[01:36:34.840 --> 01:36:35.840]  statutes of that state.
[01:36:35.840 --> 01:36:36.840]  Well, they are...
[01:36:36.840 --> 01:36:41.240]  Yeah, everything was here in Texas, and that's why I said it was strange that you have both
[01:36:41.240 --> 01:36:45.680]  limited liability companies and limited liability corporations in the same state.
[01:36:45.680 --> 01:36:47.080]  They have different definitions.
[01:36:47.080 --> 01:36:49.480]  You have to look it up in the statute.
[01:36:49.480 --> 01:36:52.320]  They're going to have different degrees of protection for the member owners.
[01:36:52.320 --> 01:36:54.520]  Yeah, that's what I haven't been able to find, so...
[01:36:54.520 --> 01:37:00.040]  I know that it is a limited liability company because it says that on the Charter for...
[01:37:00.040 --> 01:37:02.560]  That should be on the Secretary of State's website.
[01:37:02.560 --> 01:37:03.560]  Yeah, I've already...
[01:37:03.560 --> 01:37:07.200]  I've gotten the paper from the Secretary of State that shows that.
[01:37:07.200 --> 01:37:16.360]  I just was curious, and I think that's probably what I ought to go through to prove that I
[01:37:16.360 --> 01:37:20.920]  can't pierce the corporate veil and make them personally liable, whether I have to or not.
[01:37:20.920 --> 01:37:24.840]  Hopefully it'll be the safest thing to do, so...
[01:37:24.840 --> 01:37:25.840]  Right.
[01:37:25.840 --> 01:37:26.840]  Okay.
[01:37:26.840 --> 01:37:30.800]  Well, I appreciate it, and you answered my question pretty good.
[01:37:30.800 --> 01:37:31.800]  I appreciate it.
[01:37:31.800 --> 01:37:32.800]  Okay.
[01:37:32.800 --> 01:37:33.800]  Sure, Jim.
[01:37:33.800 --> 01:37:34.800]  Thanks.
[01:37:34.800 --> 01:37:35.800]  Bye.
[01:37:35.800 --> 01:37:36.800]  Bye-bye.
[01:37:36.800 --> 01:37:37.800]  Okay, callers, we've got about 20 minutes left.
[01:37:37.800 --> 01:37:41.160]  If you all want to just call in, 512-646-1984.
[01:37:41.160 --> 01:37:42.800]  We've got Dan from Texas.
[01:37:42.800 --> 01:37:44.160]  Dan, thanks for calling in.
[01:37:44.160 --> 01:37:45.160]  What's on your mind tonight?
[01:37:45.160 --> 01:37:47.160]  Oh, not too much, Deborah.
[01:37:47.160 --> 01:37:52.280]  I just...I was listening to the program, and I actually had a little traffic adventure
[01:37:52.280 --> 01:37:58.240]  myself today, and it was kind of amusing, but, you know, the typical Mickey Mouse.
[01:37:58.240 --> 01:38:03.880]  But I was actually raising the fact that the officer did not specify a time to appear,
[01:38:03.880 --> 01:38:13.600]  like Transportation Code Section 543.006A says, okay, and pursuant to 543.08, I believe
[01:38:13.600 --> 01:38:17.800]  was the right number for violation by officer, I told her that I wanted to swear out a criminal
[01:38:17.800 --> 01:38:24.920]  complaint against the officer, okay, for official misconduct, and her response was that because
[01:38:24.920 --> 01:38:29.880]  that statute says the time specified in the notice to appear must be at least 10 days
[01:38:29.880 --> 01:38:34.800]  after the date of arrest, instead of it says shall be 10 days after the date of arrest,
[01:38:34.800 --> 01:38:39.320]  that it's not mandatory, that the word must is not mandatory in that statute, and therefore
[01:38:39.320 --> 01:38:44.440]  the officer hasn't committed a crime, which I thought was kind of amusing.
[01:38:44.440 --> 01:38:50.560]  Well, what the judge would have had to do is hold an examining trial.
[01:38:50.560 --> 01:38:51.560]  I'm sorry?
[01:38:51.560 --> 01:38:55.040]  She held an examining trial without holding an examining trial.
[01:38:55.040 --> 01:38:57.640]  Well, yeah, they refused to do the examining trial.
[01:38:57.640 --> 01:38:59.640]  I was there to get magistrated by the judge.
[01:38:59.640 --> 01:39:05.120]  I was actually there to...on his jurisdiction also, and I attempted to write some federal
[01:39:05.120 --> 01:39:11.040]  law, and what Lucky said was, and I printed off some stuff from the Cornell website, and
[01:39:11.040 --> 01:39:14.480]  she said, did you graduate from Cornell, and I said, ma'am, I don't have to do a license
[01:39:14.480 --> 01:39:15.480]  to turn out.
[01:39:15.480 --> 01:39:16.480]  I have to graduate.
[01:39:16.480 --> 01:39:17.480]  Dan, you're cutting out really bad.
[01:39:17.480 --> 01:39:18.480]  Well, what?
[01:39:18.480 --> 01:39:19.480]  Can't you hear me?
[01:39:19.480 --> 01:39:20.480]  Barely.
[01:39:20.480 --> 01:39:25.480]  Your cell phone battery is dying, or you're, like, out in the boonies or something.
[01:39:25.480 --> 01:39:28.480]  No, I'm out in the boonies, but usually it works okay.
[01:39:28.480 --> 01:39:29.480]  Can you hear me now?
[01:39:29.480 --> 01:39:30.480]  Yeah, better.
[01:39:30.480 --> 01:39:31.480]  Okay.
[01:39:31.480 --> 01:39:32.480]  I'm sorry.
[01:39:32.480 --> 01:39:33.480]  I moved away.
[01:39:33.480 --> 01:39:36.480]  I thought I had the speakers off, and I thought that would be okay.
[01:39:36.480 --> 01:39:37.480]  Okay.
[01:39:37.480 --> 01:39:40.280]  Well, let me interject here for a second, Dan.
[01:39:40.280 --> 01:39:49.560]  According to Government Code, Chapter 311.016, shall, imposes a duty, must, creates or recognizes
[01:39:49.560 --> 01:39:58.080]  a condition precedent, meaning it must exist before anything that follows can be done.
[01:39:58.080 --> 01:40:04.440]  Well, her position was that it wasn't mandatory, therefore, he didn't violate a duty imposed
[01:40:04.440 --> 01:40:08.360]  upon him, which would be the definition of official misconduct, because I was telling
[01:40:08.360 --> 01:40:10.240]  her he committed official misconduct.
[01:40:10.240 --> 01:40:16.760]  But anyway, I'm going to be back for round two, probably, with these people.
[01:40:16.760 --> 01:40:22.280]  But the thing was, when I was trying to introduce some federal law, basically, I printed it
[01:40:22.280 --> 01:40:26.520]  off the Cornell website, and the lady said that I couldn't validate it.
[01:40:26.520 --> 01:40:30.560]  That I couldn't authenticate it.
[01:40:30.560 --> 01:40:33.480]  And it was actually an article out of the United States Constitution that I was trying
[01:40:33.480 --> 01:40:34.480]  to introduce.
[01:40:34.480 --> 01:40:35.480]  Okay.
[01:40:35.480 --> 01:40:39.120]  Her position was that I wasn't an attorney, and even if I was, I couldn't authenticate
[01:40:39.120 --> 01:40:40.120]  that document.
[01:40:40.120 --> 01:40:41.120]  Okay.
[01:40:41.120 --> 01:40:44.320]  And I felt like telling her, and I was on the verge of telling her, what do you want
[01:40:44.320 --> 01:40:45.320]  me to do?
[01:40:45.320 --> 01:40:47.200]  Dig up the Founding Fathers and have them come in here and testify?
[01:40:47.200 --> 01:40:48.880]  That's what they wrote?
[01:40:48.880 --> 01:40:49.880]  It's available on the Internet.
[01:40:49.880 --> 01:40:53.400]  It's also available in the fall books.
[01:40:53.400 --> 01:40:59.960]  But that's just what you deal with when you deal with these Mickey Mouse J.P. court.
[01:40:59.960 --> 01:41:02.560]  That's why I like to ask the bailiffs to arrest them.
[01:41:02.560 --> 01:41:05.680]  Yeah, Randy, but they're not going to do it.
[01:41:05.680 --> 01:41:06.680]  Not for me.
[01:41:06.680 --> 01:41:07.680]  They may for you, but I don't think that was...
[01:41:07.680 --> 01:41:13.800]  No, they don't arrest them for me either, but then I get to go after the bailiffs.
[01:41:13.800 --> 01:41:15.280]  Then they get more serious.
[01:41:15.280 --> 01:41:20.880]  Well, see, people wonder why my motions are always so long and lengthy.
[01:41:20.880 --> 01:41:27.120]  It's so that there are no loopholes for these morons to try to crawl through.
[01:41:27.120 --> 01:41:28.760]  This was basically just the first round.
[01:41:28.760 --> 01:41:32.760]  I didn't expect much more than that because it's a strange county and they've never dealt
[01:41:32.760 --> 01:41:33.760]  with me before.
[01:41:33.760 --> 01:41:38.960]  The local counties usually don't try to pull that kind of stuff with me, but these people
[01:41:38.960 --> 01:41:43.840]  haven't really been trained very well.
[01:41:43.840 --> 01:41:47.000]  So I take it you'll get them trained pretty good?
[01:41:47.000 --> 01:41:49.080]  Well, I'm going to go down there.
[01:41:49.080 --> 01:41:55.120]  When I already filed a motion to accuse the judge, I went to that hearing, and I filed
[01:41:55.120 --> 01:41:59.240]  my complaint against the officer in the file, and I'm also going to file a complaint against
[01:41:59.240 --> 01:42:02.680]  the prosecutor, even though it's a waste of time with the state bar, and I'm going to
[01:42:02.680 --> 01:42:08.440]  file a complaint against the judge with the Judicial Conduct Committee.
[01:42:08.440 --> 01:42:14.080]  That's not always a waste of time because they need to crucify a judge on occasion and
[01:42:14.080 --> 01:42:19.160]  they'll generally do it to a municipal judge or JP.
[01:42:19.160 --> 01:42:22.960]  They like municipal judge because they're easy marks and it makes them look like they're
[01:42:22.960 --> 01:42:23.960]  doing something.
[01:42:23.960 --> 01:42:28.800]  A friend of mine's brother was a municipal judge and the Judicial Conduct Commission
[01:42:28.800 --> 01:42:29.800]  terrified him.
[01:42:29.800 --> 01:42:34.800]  What I also did was I've already got a kind of printed out handout, but I didn't have
[01:42:34.800 --> 01:42:35.800]  time today.
[01:42:35.800 --> 01:42:38.320]  This was all the way in Fredericksburg and I kind of live outside of Austin, but I told
[01:42:38.320 --> 01:42:42.240]  them that next time I have another day off, I'll be outside there handing out my little
[01:42:42.240 --> 01:42:43.240]  information sheet.
[01:42:43.240 --> 01:42:46.800]  I'll have to fax it to you all one of these times or email it to you, because I like to
[01:42:46.800 --> 01:42:48.720]  start doing it around here in central Texas.
[01:42:48.720 --> 01:42:53.000]  I've got a little information sheet basically pointing out the ticket violates the law,
[01:42:53.000 --> 01:42:57.280]  the officer commits a crime, they have no complaint filed against you when you first go in there,
[01:42:57.280 --> 01:43:02.440]  the judge generates the complaint, and kind of just some bullet points and try to educate
[01:43:02.440 --> 01:43:08.480]  the people, which is something that would be great if we could get some kind of group
[01:43:08.480 --> 01:43:12.840]  together to do that, just go to these courthouses and actually hand out some sheets explaining
[01:43:12.840 --> 01:43:13.840]  how the traffic thing works.
[01:43:13.840 --> 01:43:14.840]  Yeah, that would be great.
[01:43:14.840 --> 01:43:15.840]  I can't...
[01:43:15.840 --> 01:43:16.840]  I tried to arrest you for soliciting.
[01:43:16.840 --> 01:43:17.840]  I enjoyed the program.
[01:43:17.840 --> 01:43:27.000]  I shot you an email, Eddie, a while back, going I'd be curious what you thought about what
[01:43:27.000 --> 01:43:28.000]  I sent you.
[01:43:28.000 --> 01:43:32.040]  Actually, I just saw the email and responded to it.
[01:43:32.040 --> 01:43:37.240]  I don't have you in my address book, so I've never gotten an email from you at the address
[01:43:37.240 --> 01:43:39.320]  you just asked me about.
[01:43:39.320 --> 01:43:42.440]  So I haven't seen the material you're talking about, I don't believe.
[01:43:42.440 --> 01:43:45.120]  If you'll resend it, I'll be happy to look at it.
[01:43:45.120 --> 01:43:47.120]  How can I get it to you?
[01:43:47.120 --> 01:43:51.360]  Well, I mean, I got the email where you're asking me if I'd read it.
[01:43:51.360 --> 01:43:53.560]  Okay, listen, we're going to break.
[01:43:53.560 --> 01:43:54.560]  We're going to break.
[01:43:54.560 --> 01:43:56.560]  Just send it to eddie at ruleoflawradio.com.
[01:43:56.560 --> 01:44:00.120]  Callers, we'll be right back.
[01:44:00.120 --> 01:44:04.800]  Are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters, or even lawsuits?
[01:44:04.800 --> 01:44:08.960]  Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Mears proven method.
[01:44:08.960 --> 01:44:13.280]  Michael Mears has won six cases in federal court against debt collectors, and now you
[01:44:13.280 --> 01:44:14.280]  can win two.
[01:44:14.280 --> 01:44:19.120]  You'll get step-by-step instructions in plain English on how to win in court using federal
[01:44:19.120 --> 01:44:24.880]  civil rights statutes, what to do when contacted by phone, mail, or court summons, how to answer
[01:44:24.880 --> 01:44:29.520]  letters and phone calls, how to get debt collectors out of your credit report, how to turn your
[01:44:29.520 --> 01:44:33.720]  financial tables on them and make them pay you to go away.
[01:44:33.720 --> 01:44:38.840]  The Michael Mears proven method is the solution for how to stop debt collectors.
[01:44:38.840 --> 01:44:40.760]  Financial consultation is available as well.
[01:44:40.760 --> 01:44:46.520]  For more information, please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the blue Michael Mears banner
[01:44:46.520 --> 01:44:49.480]  or email michaelmears at yahoo.com.
[01:44:49.480 --> 01:44:58.480]  That's ruleoflawradio.com or email m-i-c-h-a-e-l-m-i-r-r-a-s at yahoo.com to learn how to stop debt
[01:44:58.480 --> 01:44:59.480]  collectors now.
[01:44:59.480 --> 01:45:23.600]  Hello, oh man, I'm in jail, I'm broken, oh man, I'm broken, something in this world
[01:45:23.600 --> 01:45:34.360]  I will never understand, something I realize fully, somebody's on a police, a policeman,
[01:45:34.360 --> 01:45:38.560]  somebody's on a police, a bully.
[01:45:38.560 --> 01:45:45.920]  There's always a room at the top of the hill, here through the grapevine and it's lonely
[01:45:45.920 --> 01:45:52.840]  left too, they're wishing it was more than opposition to bill, they know that if they
[01:45:52.840 --> 01:46:01.520]  don't do it, somebody will, something in this world I will never understand, something I
[01:46:01.520 --> 01:46:14.480]  realize fully, somebody's on a police, a policeman, somebody's on a police, a bully.
[01:46:14.480 --> 01:46:20.600]  Alright callers, if you'd like to call in 512-646-1984, this is our final segment, we're
[01:46:20.600 --> 01:46:26.480]  going into the home stretch, so we're talking right now about how to handle tickets and
[01:46:26.480 --> 01:46:32.560]  we were just discussing the temporary restraining order against, now Randy, who would this be
[01:46:32.560 --> 01:46:40.280]  against, would it be against the municipal courts from issuing a warrant like in general
[01:46:40.280 --> 01:46:45.520]  or against a specific judge, I mean who would the TRO be against?
[01:46:45.520 --> 01:46:51.600]  We don't have a specific judge because in Austin they play juggle the judges.
[01:46:51.600 --> 01:46:52.600]  Is that even legal?
[01:46:52.600 --> 01:46:54.880]  I don't see how that's legal.
[01:46:54.880 --> 01:47:00.680]  Different issue, I don't think it is either but in any case that's what they do so we
[01:47:00.680 --> 01:47:08.040]  don't have a singular judge to point at, we file it against the municipal court itself.
[01:47:08.040 --> 01:47:11.800]  Okay, that's what I wanted to know.
[01:47:11.800 --> 01:47:15.720]  And Damis to order them to give you a...
[01:47:15.720 --> 01:47:17.080]  To set a motion hearing.
[01:47:17.080 --> 01:47:20.440]  Yeah, set a hearing for...
[01:47:20.440 --> 01:47:28.760]  His motion for a retrial, it's actually for a retrial, for a new trial.
[01:47:28.760 --> 01:47:35.640]  So okay, I go to court, I hammer the district attorney, I mean the prosecuting attorney
[01:47:35.640 --> 01:47:42.280]  and I hammer the judge and ask him to bailiff to arrest both of them, if there's no bailiff
[01:47:42.280 --> 01:47:48.560]  then the officer who is unfortunate enough to write me the ticket, I ask him to arrest
[01:47:48.560 --> 01:47:56.080]  both of them and he's not gonna wanna do that so then I ask the judge or the prosecutor
[01:47:56.080 --> 01:48:03.240]  to have the officer arrested for not arresting them and I've done that before and it really
[01:48:03.240 --> 01:48:07.520]  gets kind of nonsensical.
[01:48:07.520 --> 01:48:12.680]  They tend to not be sure if I'm joking or not joking and they really don't know what
[01:48:12.680 --> 01:48:13.680]  to do.
[01:48:13.680 --> 01:48:20.080]  Then he's gonna refuse and then I'm gonna ask the judge to get a marshal in here, someone
[01:48:20.080 --> 01:48:24.840]  who's a real police officer to take my complaints against all of you guys.
[01:48:24.840 --> 01:48:29.160]  Well, if they knew what they were doing to begin with, we wouldn't have been in the court
[01:48:29.160 --> 01:48:30.680]  but that's a whole nother point.
[01:48:30.680 --> 01:48:39.720]  Okay, once we've done that and the judge has blown off all of that and he wants to continue,
[01:48:39.720 --> 01:48:42.280]  where do I start with them?
[01:48:42.280 --> 01:48:44.760]  Subject matter jurisdiction, first place.
[01:48:44.760 --> 01:48:45.760]  Always.
[01:48:45.760 --> 01:48:49.920]  Where is the first place I start with them?
[01:48:49.920 --> 01:48:54.720]  Well that's what I'm saying, the first place is where is my administrative hearing?
[01:48:54.720 --> 01:48:59.440]  How does this court get jurisdiction in a judicial venue when there's been no administrative
[01:48:59.440 --> 01:49:02.280]  hearing in accordance with the Administrative Procedures Act?
[01:49:02.280 --> 01:49:06.320]  Do you have the citation on that?
[01:49:06.320 --> 01:49:07.960]  I got a whole brief on that.
[01:49:07.960 --> 01:49:10.440]  No, you have it right now so I can write it down.
[01:49:10.440 --> 01:49:11.440]  Oh.
[01:49:11.440 --> 01:49:16.360]  I don't want to read a whole brief to the judge.
[01:49:16.360 --> 01:49:22.240]  Section 2001 Government Code is the Administrative Procedures Act, Chapter 2001.
[01:49:22.240 --> 01:49:26.520]  Okay, now you sound like Ralph Winneroot.
[01:49:26.520 --> 01:49:27.520]  Well no.
[01:49:27.520 --> 01:49:30.880]  I was kind of hoping you'd be a little more specific.
[01:49:30.880 --> 01:49:32.680]  Well here's the problem.
[01:49:32.680 --> 01:49:38.800]  Each and every single chapter and or possible section of the transportation code for which
[01:49:38.800 --> 01:49:44.880]  they're attempting to charge you, each chapter says who is in charge of it and who makes
[01:49:44.880 --> 01:49:48.860]  the rules for it and who is the administrative agency.
[01:49:48.860 --> 01:49:55.720]  So not only would you have to quote the specific 2001 reference for the Administrative Procedures
[01:49:55.720 --> 01:50:05.400]  Act, but you have to say in pursuant, Chapter 521.002, Department means the Department of
[01:50:05.400 --> 01:50:11.600]  Public Safety who is classified as an administrative agency pursuant, Government Code, Chapter
[01:50:11.600 --> 01:50:12.600]  2001.
[01:50:12.600 --> 01:50:14.480]  You see what I'm saying?
[01:50:14.480 --> 01:50:18.600]  They've broken it down that far in each of these individual codes.
[01:50:18.600 --> 01:50:23.200]  Now I'm going to need to read the judge the brief.
[01:50:23.200 --> 01:50:24.200]  Pretty much.
[01:50:24.200 --> 01:50:32.000]  Okay, brief on the Administrative Procedures Act and it requires an administrative hearing
[01:50:32.000 --> 01:50:34.120]  before the court gets subject matter jurisdiction.
[01:50:34.120 --> 01:50:38.840]  It's like we have to put these people through law school, man, this is ridiculous.
[01:50:38.840 --> 01:50:40.200]  Now here's one thing, Randy.
[01:50:40.200 --> 01:50:48.000]  This specific requirement is out of Title 37, Chapter 29 of the Administrative Code.
[01:50:48.000 --> 01:50:52.680]  That is where it specifically states that anything falling under the view of the Department
[01:50:52.680 --> 01:50:53.680]  of Public Safety.
[01:50:53.680 --> 01:50:57.320]  You've just gone from Government Code to Administrative Code.
[01:50:57.320 --> 01:50:58.320]  Right.
[01:50:58.320 --> 01:51:01.280]  The Government Code deals with the Administrative Procedures Act.
[01:51:01.280 --> 01:51:06.160]  Yeah, but which one, how do I lead, which one do I go to first?
[01:51:06.160 --> 01:51:12.720]  The Administrative Code is what spells out that everything except certain specific charges
[01:51:12.720 --> 01:51:15.440]  fall under the Administrative Procedures Act.
[01:51:15.440 --> 01:51:21.680]  That is Title 37, Chapter 29, Department of Public Safety.
[01:51:21.680 --> 01:51:27.280]  Okay, Chapter 29 of Title 37.
[01:51:27.280 --> 01:51:29.280]  And it's a very short chapter.
[01:51:29.280 --> 01:51:32.280]  Okay.
[01:51:32.280 --> 01:51:33.280]  And we also have a caller, guys.
[01:51:33.280 --> 01:51:34.280]  Administrative Code.
[01:51:34.280 --> 01:51:35.280]  Yes.
[01:51:35.280 --> 01:51:36.280]  Okay.
[01:51:36.280 --> 01:51:41.760]  But now all of that is specifically spelled out in my brief.
[01:51:41.760 --> 01:51:42.760]  Okay.
[01:51:42.760 --> 01:51:44.760]  Then I'm going to have to read your brief.
[01:51:44.760 --> 01:51:45.760]  Okay.
[01:51:45.760 --> 01:51:46.760]  Twice.
[01:51:46.760 --> 01:51:47.760]  Robin from Florida.
[01:51:47.760 --> 01:51:48.760]  All right.
[01:51:48.760 --> 01:51:49.760]  Y'all want to go to Robin in Florida?
[01:51:49.760 --> 01:51:50.760]  Here we go.
[01:51:50.760 --> 01:51:51.760]  Okay.
[01:51:51.760 --> 01:51:52.760]  Thanks for calling in.
[01:51:52.760 --> 01:51:53.760]  What's on your mind tonight?
[01:51:53.760 --> 01:51:54.760]  Hey, guys.
[01:51:54.760 --> 01:51:55.760]  Thanks for taking my call.
[01:51:55.760 --> 01:51:57.360]  I'm really glad I found you guys.
[01:51:57.360 --> 01:51:58.360]  You guys are awesome.
[01:51:58.360 --> 01:51:59.360]  I appreciate all the information.
[01:51:59.360 --> 01:52:00.360]  Oh, sure.
[01:52:00.360 --> 01:52:01.360]  Thanks.
[01:52:01.360 --> 01:52:06.760]  I've got a mortgage foreclosure question, if that's okay?
[01:52:06.760 --> 01:52:07.760]  Sure.
[01:52:07.760 --> 01:52:09.000]  We have time.
[01:52:09.000 --> 01:52:10.440]  My question is this.
[01:52:10.440 --> 01:52:16.000]  I'm in foreclosure, obviously, and that's why I sort of found you guys.
[01:52:16.000 --> 01:52:24.800]  I put in a motion to dismiss here in the local court, and I went to a hearing on August,
[01:52:24.800 --> 01:52:30.400]  and I guess it was for the plaintiff called the hearing to present the note and whatnot.
[01:52:30.400 --> 01:52:31.400]  Okay.
[01:52:31.400 --> 01:52:32.400]  Wait, wait.
[01:52:32.400 --> 01:52:33.400]  What was the nature of the hearing?
[01:52:33.400 --> 01:52:41.280]  The nature of the hearing was to dismiss, or what's the word?
[01:52:41.280 --> 01:52:42.840]  My motion to dismiss, basically.
[01:52:42.840 --> 01:52:43.840]  Okay.
[01:52:43.840 --> 01:52:50.080]  What was the nature of the cause?
[01:52:50.080 --> 01:52:51.080]  Were they foreclosing?
[01:52:51.080 --> 01:52:54.040]  Did they have to do judicial foreclosures in Florida?
[01:52:54.040 --> 01:52:55.040]  Correct.
[01:52:55.040 --> 01:52:56.040]  This is a judicial state.
[01:52:56.040 --> 01:52:58.840]  So it was a judicial foreclosure proceeding?
[01:52:58.840 --> 01:52:59.840]  Yes.
[01:52:59.840 --> 01:53:01.840]  So I'm the defendant and the plaintiff-
[01:53:01.840 --> 01:53:02.840]  Okay.
[01:53:02.840 --> 01:53:06.440]  What were the causes for dismissal that you claimed?
[01:53:06.440 --> 01:53:07.440]  Correct.
[01:53:07.440 --> 01:53:10.840]  So my initial plea was a motion to dismiss.
[01:53:10.840 --> 01:53:15.200]  Actually, my attorney gave an answer, but I got rid of the attorney after I'm doing all
[01:53:15.200 --> 01:53:16.200]  this research.
[01:53:16.200 --> 01:53:17.200]  Okay.
[01:53:17.200 --> 01:53:19.840]  So what were the causes for dismissal?
[01:53:19.840 --> 01:53:20.840]  Correct.
[01:53:20.840 --> 01:53:21.840]  August-
[01:53:21.840 --> 01:53:22.840]  No, no, no.
[01:53:22.840 --> 01:53:23.840]  That wasn't-
[01:53:23.840 --> 01:53:24.840]  No, he's asking you a question.
[01:53:24.840 --> 01:53:25.840]  I'm asking a question.
[01:53:25.840 --> 01:53:27.200]  Oh, I'm sorry.
[01:53:27.200 --> 01:53:30.520]  What were the causes for dismissal?
[01:53:30.520 --> 01:53:33.320]  What claim did you make?
[01:53:33.320 --> 01:53:37.240]  That they didn't, first of all, they didn't even put the original note in the pleading
[01:53:37.240 --> 01:53:39.720]  as per the rules of civil procedure here in Florida.
[01:53:39.720 --> 01:53:41.120]  I can't quote the exact rule.
[01:53:41.120 --> 01:53:42.120]  Okay, good.
[01:53:42.120 --> 01:53:44.760]  So they didn't have the note.
[01:53:44.760 --> 01:53:45.760]  They didn't have an assignment.
[01:53:45.760 --> 01:53:52.080]  So they did all this stuff after the fact, which you cannot do as per the rules.
[01:53:52.080 --> 01:53:55.760]  So my motion was to dismiss the case because they had no legal standing.
[01:53:55.760 --> 01:53:56.760]  Perfect.
[01:53:56.760 --> 01:53:57.760]  What was the-
[01:53:57.760 --> 01:53:59.960]  To bring the case.
[01:53:59.960 --> 01:54:02.320]  I'm sort of new at all this, so I didn't know any of this.
[01:54:02.320 --> 01:54:06.680]  I got a guy that's sort of helping me, but that's not really my question.
[01:54:06.680 --> 01:54:12.920]  My question is, my judge is absolutely out of hand, and I found this out in the hearing.
[01:54:12.920 --> 01:54:20.840]  I go in there, August 29th, and I stated my case, and I said they have no right to foreclose.
[01:54:20.840 --> 01:54:23.640]  They didn't have any standing in the beginning.
[01:54:23.640 --> 01:54:24.640]  They don't have a note.
[01:54:24.640 --> 01:54:25.640]  They don't have this.
[01:54:25.640 --> 01:54:26.640]  They don't have that.
[01:54:26.640 --> 01:54:32.800]  I didn't quote all the rules because I'm just new at all this, and he just sort of went
[01:54:32.800 --> 01:54:33.800]  off on me.
[01:54:33.800 --> 01:54:34.800]  How so?
[01:54:34.800 --> 01:54:36.840]  What did he say?
[01:54:36.840 --> 01:54:37.840]  Here's what he did.
[01:54:37.840 --> 01:54:43.560]  He says, all they have to do is show that they had it in December, and if they had it
[01:54:43.560 --> 01:54:46.160]  in December, I'm willing to sanction you.
[01:54:46.160 --> 01:54:49.160]  Then he goes on to say, where did you get this?
[01:54:49.160 --> 01:54:54.320]  In other words, referencing my paperwork, which I had a guy who's helping me prepare
[01:54:54.320 --> 01:54:56.680]  it, and I know it's not junk.
[01:54:56.680 --> 01:55:00.920]  I know he knows what he's doing, and he just tells me it's a bunch of crap.
[01:55:00.920 --> 01:55:02.720]  I mean, he literally- This is all recorded.
[01:55:02.720 --> 01:55:06.680]  I had a court reporter, and then he asked me, when did you pay your mortgage?
[01:55:06.680 --> 01:55:08.480]  I said, Your Honor, that's irrelevant.
[01:55:08.480 --> 01:55:09.480]  He insisted.
[01:55:09.480 --> 01:55:10.480]  He insisted.
[01:55:10.480 --> 01:55:11.480]  Okay.
[01:55:11.480 --> 01:55:12.480]  Okay.
[01:55:12.480 --> 01:55:13.480]  You've got enough.
[01:55:13.480 --> 01:55:14.480]  Move to disqualify the judge.
[01:55:14.480 --> 01:55:16.440]  File a judicial conduct complaint against him.
[01:55:16.440 --> 01:55:17.440]  Sue him personally.
[01:55:17.440 --> 01:55:23.000]  Yeah, and that was my question because I put in a motion to recuse, and-
[01:55:23.000 --> 01:55:25.680]  I recuse, disqualify.
[01:55:25.680 --> 01:55:27.960]  He gets to rule on his own recusal.
[01:55:27.960 --> 01:55:30.800]  He does not get to rule on his own disqualification.
[01:55:30.800 --> 01:55:31.800]  Yeah.
[01:55:31.800 --> 01:55:34.320]  And that was the crux of my question.
[01:55:34.320 --> 01:55:39.640]  Would that just be a motion, or how do I go about doing that?
[01:55:39.640 --> 01:55:42.240]  Motion to disqualify for cause.
[01:55:42.240 --> 01:55:46.480]  And you can actually take that to a judge above him for committing criminal acts from
[01:55:46.480 --> 01:55:47.480]  the bench.
[01:55:47.480 --> 01:55:52.840]  He's adjudicating from the bench, and he's threatening you with sanctions.
[01:55:52.840 --> 01:55:55.560]  That's tampering with a witness.
[01:55:55.560 --> 01:55:56.560]  Yeah.
[01:55:56.560 --> 01:55:58.400]  He said, There's no free rides here.
[01:55:58.400 --> 01:56:01.400]  How about you live there for free for a year and a half?
[01:56:01.400 --> 01:56:06.720]  And he said, he said, the plaintiff will give me an affidavit, and then when they give me
[01:56:06.720 --> 01:56:08.480]  that, I can sanction you.
[01:56:08.480 --> 01:56:12.240]  And normally it takes six months, but I have actually- I have the authority to have this
[01:56:12.240 --> 01:56:14.120]  done in 35 days.
[01:56:14.120 --> 01:56:18.400]  Well, file criminal charges against him, and we'll see how much authority he has.
[01:56:18.400 --> 01:56:21.680]  And file a- find out who carries his bond.
[01:56:21.680 --> 01:56:23.880]  File against his bond.
[01:56:23.880 --> 01:56:29.600]  And look in Florida law, you should have some provision for court warrant or removal.
[01:56:29.600 --> 01:56:35.320]  I think it's chapter 87 government code in Texas.
[01:56:35.320 --> 01:56:43.160]  And the provision for- in Texas, we have a provision for a court of inquiry, petition
[01:56:43.160 --> 01:56:46.960]  a higher court to inquire into the behavior of this court.
[01:56:46.960 --> 01:56:49.080]  Cause him as much difficulty as you can.
[01:56:49.080 --> 01:56:50.560]  You owe him nothing.
[01:56:50.560 --> 01:56:51.560]  Yeah.
[01:56:51.560 --> 01:56:55.800]  He's obviously going to cut you no slack, so don't cut him any slack.
[01:56:55.800 --> 01:57:00.600]  The problem they have with process is, you know, he's made it clear.
[01:57:00.600 --> 01:57:03.280]  He's going to rule against you at every turn.
[01:57:03.280 --> 01:57:04.840]  You've got nothing to lose.
[01:57:04.840 --> 01:57:05.840]  Absolutely.
[01:57:05.840 --> 01:57:07.520]  When you go for his throat-
[01:57:07.520 --> 01:57:09.720]  Motion to disqualify initially.
[01:57:09.720 --> 01:57:10.720]  Yes.
[01:57:10.720 --> 01:57:15.520]  Criminal charges, civil suit.
[01:57:15.520 --> 01:57:18.240]  And civil suit against him personally.
[01:57:18.240 --> 01:57:23.000]  I would counter suit, cross complain in the ongoing case.
[01:57:23.000 --> 01:57:28.720]  Yeah, I do have that in- actually he dismissed my initial counter complaint.
[01:57:28.720 --> 01:57:31.000]  I mean, he just wasn't looking at nothing.
[01:57:31.000 --> 01:57:34.680]  I mean, so I amended a new counter complaint.
[01:57:34.680 --> 01:57:36.640]  File a cross complaint.
[01:57:36.640 --> 01:57:37.640]  Yeah.
[01:57:37.640 --> 01:57:38.640]  I'm sorry.
[01:57:38.640 --> 01:57:45.760]  A counter- it comes in the form of an original petition naming the judge.
[01:57:45.760 --> 01:57:49.520]  You have to have the judge served by the constable.
[01:57:49.520 --> 01:57:50.520]  Okay.
[01:57:50.520 --> 01:57:57.040]  Claiming that he is without subject matter jurisdiction, he is therefore without immunity
[01:57:57.040 --> 01:57:58.040]  of any kind.
[01:57:58.040 --> 01:57:59.040]  Okay.
[01:57:59.040 --> 01:58:00.040]  That'll get him excited.
[01:58:00.040 --> 01:58:01.040]  Great.
[01:58:01.040 --> 01:58:02.040]  Great.
[01:58:02.040 --> 01:58:03.040]  Okay.
[01:58:03.040 --> 01:58:04.040]  Listen, we're out of time.
[01:58:04.040 --> 01:58:05.040]  Thanks-
[01:58:05.040 --> 01:58:06.040]  Thank you so much.
[01:58:06.040 --> 01:58:07.040]  Yes, thank you, Robin.
[01:58:07.040 --> 01:58:08.040]  And I'm one of your soldiers out here.
[01:58:08.040 --> 01:58:09.040]  I'm learning, so-
[01:58:09.040 --> 01:58:10.040]  Thanks, Robin.
[01:58:10.040 --> 01:58:11.040]  We appreciate it.
[01:58:11.040 --> 01:58:12.040]  All right.
[01:58:12.040 --> 01:58:13.040]  Thanks, guys.
[01:58:13.040 --> 01:58:14.040]  Yeah.
[01:58:14.040 --> 01:58:15.040]  Robin, contact me.
[01:58:15.040 --> 01:58:16.040]  Send me an email.
[01:58:16.040 --> 01:58:17.040]  I'll give you some more options.
[01:58:17.040 --> 01:58:26.520]  Okay, Dan from- Sure, Dan from Connecticut, sorry we didn't get to you in time.
[01:58:26.520 --> 01:58:27.520]  Call back Thursday night.
[01:58:27.520 --> 01:58:30.520]  This is the rule of law.
[01:58:30.520 --> 01:58:33.840]  Randy Kelton, Eddie Craig, Deborah Stevens, we'll be back Thursday.
[01:58:33.840 --> 01:58:38.040]  Tomorrow is Iowa Report Radio, Agenda 21 Talk.
[01:58:38.040 --> 01:59:01.000]  Wednesday is Outside of the Box Politics with Richard Rees, Radio Free Oklahoma as well.
[01:59:01.000 --> 01:59:25.680]  I'll see you when we get back.
[01:59:25.680 --> 01:59:35.680]  I'm like a stepping razor, don't watch my sides, I'm dangerous, I'm dangerous
[01:59:35.680 --> 01:59:42.680]  I'm like a stepping razor, don't watch my sides, I'm dangerous, dangerous
[01:59:42.680 --> 01:59:58.680]  I'm like a stepping razor, don't watch my sides, I'm dangerous