[00:00.000 --> 00:10.240]  In Ecuador, hundreds of police and soldiers protesting a new law that cuts their benefits
[00:10.240 --> 00:15.320]  seized the main airport Thursday and shut off highway access to Quito as well.
[00:15.320 --> 00:21.400]  The police fired tear gas and burned tires after taking over bases in Quito, Aguayaquil
[00:21.400 --> 00:22.680]  and other cities.
[00:22.680 --> 00:30.120]  President Rafael Correa tried to speak but protesters shouted him down.
[00:30.120 --> 00:36.520]  Cholera has killed 420 people over the past several weeks in Cameroon, where only 1 in
[00:36.520 --> 00:42.240]  20 Cameroonians have access to toilets and less than a third have access to clean drinking
[00:42.240 --> 00:43.240]  water.
[00:43.240 --> 00:49.040]  Cholera is an acute intestinal infection caused by contaminated food or water and is fatal
[00:49.040 --> 00:50.240]  for children.
[00:50.240 --> 00:55.280]  Civil society groups blame the government for its failure to draw up an efficient plan
[00:55.280 --> 00:58.480]  to combat the disease.
[00:58.480 --> 01:03.280]  The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has announced it will regulate dental mercury.
[01:03.280 --> 01:07.960]  The move is a blow to the American Dental Association which has lobbied for a voluntary
[01:07.960 --> 01:11.640]  approach to preventing dental mercury pollution.
[01:11.640 --> 01:16.900]  Once dental mercury enters the environment, certain microorganisms can change elemental
[01:16.900 --> 01:23.640]  mercury into methyl mercury, a highly toxic form that builds up in fish, shellfish and
[01:23.640 --> 01:27.480]  animals that eat fish.
[01:27.480 --> 01:32.360]  Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Wednesday most Americans have grown too detached from
[01:32.360 --> 01:38.520]  the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and see military service as something for other people to do.
[01:38.520 --> 01:43.660]  In a speech at Duke University, Gates said this disconnect has imposed a heavy burden
[01:43.660 --> 01:49.640]  on a small segment of society and vastly driven up the cost of maintaining an all-volunteer
[01:49.640 --> 01:50.720]  force.
[01:50.720 --> 01:56.280]  The 2.4 million people serving in the armed forces today represents less than 1 percent
[01:56.280 --> 01:58.440]  of the country's total population.
[01:58.440 --> 02:03.680]  To attract and retain recruits, the Defense Department spends more money including handsome
[02:03.680 --> 02:10.520]  recruiting and retention bonuses and education benefits.
[02:10.520 --> 02:16.080]  Last spring, the U.S. pledged nearly $1.2 billion in emergency aid to Haiti following
[02:16.080 --> 02:22.120]  the massive earthquake that left 250,000 people dead and 1.3 million homeless.
[02:22.120 --> 02:27.920]  Yet the Associated Press reported Monday not a cent of the $1.15 billion the U.S. promised
[02:27.920 --> 02:30.000]  for rebuilding has arrived.
[02:30.000 --> 02:35.880]  This summer, Congress passed a bill that would make $917 million available for Haiti reconstruction
[02:35.880 --> 02:36.880]  aid.
[02:36.880 --> 02:41.200]  But Congress must also pass an authorization bill that directs exactly how the money will
[02:41.200 --> 02:42.200]  be spent.
[02:42.200 --> 02:48.040]  The AP discovered that a single senator, Republican Tom Coburn, was holding up the bill because
[02:48.040 --> 02:52.640]  he objects to the creation of a senior Haiti coordinator while the U.S. currently has
[02:52.640 --> 02:55.640]  an ambassador in the country.
[02:55.640 --> 03:11.120]  You are listening to the Rule of Law Radio Network at ruleoflawradio.com, live free speech
[03:11.120 --> 03:14.120]  talk radio at its best.
[03:14.120 --> 03:37.240]  You are listening to the Rule of Law Radio Network at its best.
[03:37.240 --> 03:55.240]  Bad boys, bad boys, whatcha gonna do? Whatcha gonna do when they come for you?
[03:55.240 --> 04:00.240]  When you were eight and you had bad trees You'd go to school and learn the golden rule
[04:00.240 --> 04:05.240]  So why are you acting like a bloody fool? If you get hot, then you must get cool
[04:05.240 --> 04:16.240]  Bad boys, bad boys, whatcha gonna do? Whatcha gonna do when they come for you?
[04:16.240 --> 04:22.240]  You took it on that one, you took it on this one You took it on your mother and you took it on your father
[04:22.240 --> 04:27.240]  You took it on your brother and you took it on your sister You took it on that one and you took it on this one
[04:27.240 --> 04:32.240]  Alright folks, good evening, this is Rule of Law Radio, this is Eddie Craig and Deborah Stevens
[04:32.240 --> 04:37.240]  Tonight is Thursday night, we are on from 8 to 10 tonight
[04:37.240 --> 04:42.240]  We don't have a whole lot planned, but we do have some material that you might find interesting
[04:42.240 --> 04:49.240]  I have been doing some research this week and thanks to one of our listeners, Larry Nelson, thank you Larry
[04:49.240 --> 04:55.240]  He has been in constant contact with the ladies at the state law library there in Lufkin
[04:55.240 --> 05:03.240]  And he's managed to get these ladies to give him some very interesting information which he has been kind enough to forward to me
[05:03.240 --> 05:12.240]  Now, one of the things that he got them to dig up and to send me was an actual copy of the enrolled bill
[05:12.240 --> 05:19.240]  of the 1995 enactment of the Texas transportation code
[05:19.240 --> 05:28.240]  I have the original enrolled bill and I've been pouring through the individual sections of that bill
[05:28.240 --> 05:32.240]  because it's the entire transportation code published in one large document
[05:32.240 --> 05:36.240]  They wrote the entire transportation code as one act
[05:36.240 --> 05:42.240]  And in that one act, of course, we have all the individual sections that my seminar material covers
[05:42.240 --> 05:53.240]  While going through these sections, I found some very interesting things about how they've changed the statutes
[05:53.240 --> 06:00.240]  Now, this enrolled bill, as luck would have it, has references for each section
[06:00.240 --> 06:09.240]  At the end of that section, it will tell you exactly what part of the old code that section was created from
[06:09.240 --> 06:13.240]  In other words, it is a direct cross-reference
[06:13.240 --> 06:21.240]  And it tells you, go to the old code, look in this section at this particular page in this particular item, and there's where we got it from
[06:21.240 --> 06:30.240]  Well, folks, at the beginning of each of these codes, it has a paragraph that tells us why this code was enacted
[06:30.240 --> 06:39.240]  And it tells us that in the case of the transportation code, it was enacted as a reconstructive process
[06:39.240 --> 06:47.240]  A revision of the statute based upon the Statutory Revision Act from 1963
[06:47.240 --> 06:56.240]  And that it was an act that is performed and administered by the Texas Legislative Council
[06:56.240 --> 07:03.240]  Now, let me give you a quick rundown on who comprises the Legislative Council
[07:03.240 --> 07:12.240]  That is the Lieutenant Governor, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and the Chairman of the Senate
[07:12.240 --> 07:22.240]  Besides those three, there are six members appointed by the Speaker from the House of Representatives
[07:22.240 --> 07:32.240]  And there are five members appointed by the Chairman that are all on this committee, a total of 14 people
[07:32.240 --> 07:43.240]  Now, based upon what I'm reading in the old statutes versus what I'm seeing in the actual enactment, I've been able to come to but one conclusion
[07:43.240 --> 07:57.240]  And that is that 14 men or women have acted to completely alter the laws of this state through fraud
[07:57.240 --> 08:04.240]  And I'll go into a specific section here in a minute to give you an idea of what I'm talking about
[08:04.240 --> 08:18.240]  But what it boils down to is these people are lying to the legislature and to the public about the first paragraph of every code that we've got
[08:18.240 --> 08:26.240]  Which basically says that this code is enacted as a part of the Statutory Revision Program enacted in 1963
[08:26.240 --> 08:34.240]  And involving the Texas Legislative Council, and in the very last part of the very last sentence in that paragraph says
[08:34.240 --> 08:40.240]  That this is done without substantive change to the law
[08:40.240 --> 08:50.240]  Now, what that means is that we are only changing the way that it reads in an effort to make it clearer and more understandable
[08:50.240 --> 09:05.240]  But we are by no means or by any effort attempting to alter the object to which the law itself applies or the meaning of the law and what it encompasses or requires
[09:05.240 --> 09:18.240]  That's what no substantive change means. It doesn't affect anything new. It doesn't introduce anything new. It simply is a rewrite of what already existed and what was affected
[09:18.240 --> 09:31.240]  Now, in one of those particular sections, there is a section under Chapter 501 dealing with particular instances of motor vehicles
[09:31.240 --> 09:40.240]  Now, I'll dig the section up here in a little bit, but I want to read you what the old section had in the old codes
[09:40.240 --> 09:55.240]  This is out of Article 6701D as in Delta. This is section under Article 17 under Section 146 in the old Vernon's annotated civil statutes
[09:55.240 --> 10:02.240]  And it specifically states, and I'm going to read you the title, Offense by Persons Owning or Controlling Vehicles
[10:02.240 --> 10:29.240]  Notice vehicles is plural there. Section 146, it is unlawful for the owner, or any other person, employing or otherwise directing the driver of any vehicle to require or knowingly to permit the operation of such vehicle upon a highway in any manner contrary to law
[10:29.240 --> 10:38.240]  In the new section of the code, there are no commas listed at all of any kind
[10:38.240 --> 10:46.240]  And without the commas, the statute is read in a completely different manner
[10:46.240 --> 10:52.240]  And I'll dig it up here and I'll show you exactly what it is that I'm talking about
[10:52.240 --> 11:04.240]  But in this different manner, let's see, laws, codes, and statutes, without the commas, what it's saying is it's broken it up into a different area here
[11:04.240 --> 11:23.240]  And what the area specifically means in the way that it's written is that if you own a vehicle or if you employ somebody that owns a vehicle or if you just happen to be directing somebody in the operation of a vehicle
[11:23.240 --> 11:31.240]  Without the commas, they've got it all run together where that is the only intent that you can come up with
[11:31.240 --> 11:41.240]  And I'll read that to you here, let me just get it pulled up, and I'll point it out to you
[11:41.240 --> 11:47.240]  Okay, well, actually maybe I won't
[11:47.240 --> 11:53.240]  But anyway, when I find it here, I'll bring it back up after the break when we go to the break and do that
[11:53.240 --> 11:57.240]  And I'll read it to you verbatim as to the way it's written in the original enactment
[11:57.240 --> 12:03.240]  But it is exactly the same way that it reads in the current version of the online statute
[12:03.240 --> 12:17.240]  Okay, so just by doing this, okay, it is section 542.302 of the Texas Transportation Code, offence by person owning or controlling vehicle
[12:17.240 --> 12:22.240]  Now notice it went from vehicles plural to vehicles singular in the title
[12:22.240 --> 12:32.240]  And it reads exactly as follows, a person who owns a vehicle or employs or otherwise directs the operator of a vehicle
[12:32.240 --> 12:41.240]  Commits an offense that the person requires or knowingly permits the operator of the vehicle to operate the vehicle in a manner that violates law
[12:41.240 --> 12:49.240]  And it specifically points us back to Article 6701D, Section 146 of the Old Code
[12:49.240 --> 12:57.240]  Now let me read the Old Code section again with the commaed out portions separate the way they're intended
[12:57.240 --> 13:12.240]  It is unlawful for the owner employing or otherwise directing the driver of any vehicle to require or knowingly to permit the operation of such vehicle upon a highway in any manner contrary to law
[13:12.240 --> 13:23.240]  Okay, notice it goes directly to, it is unlawful for the owner employing or otherwise directing, okay
[13:23.240 --> 13:34.240]  And then it goes any other person employing or otherwise directing, whereas the new one doesn't say that at all
[13:34.240 --> 13:43.240]  The new one simply says if you own it or you employ someone or you otherwise direct
[13:43.240 --> 13:49.240]  It's completely altered the meaning and application of the statute
[13:49.240 --> 13:56.240]  Just by taking out those two commas, it's completely altered what it affects and how
[13:56.240 --> 14:06.240]  The old statutes are actually a lot easier to follow in some places, whereas the new changes actually clarified certain parts of the law better
[14:06.240 --> 14:16.240]  So it's kind of a catch-22 as to what it made less plausible and what it made more plausible and more understandable in certain areas
[14:16.240 --> 14:32.240]  But this is one of several things that I have found in this actual initial introduction of the Transportation Code that makes clearly substantive changes to the law
[14:32.240 --> 14:46.240]  And by misleading both the legislature and the public by stating that the new enactment with the language we're giving you still follows obediently to the original meaning and intent
[14:46.240 --> 14:49.240]  Is completely false upon its face
[14:49.240 --> 14:59.240]  They're telling the legislature, yeah, you go ahead and just pass the bill as we've altered it because it's still true to the meaning and intent of the original laws
[14:59.240 --> 15:06.240]  We've just done what you told us to do and reconstructed it so everything's organized better and it's referenced better
[15:06.240 --> 15:09.240]  But we didn't really change the wording to affect anything
[15:09.240 --> 15:17.240]  Bologna, they most certainly did, unless you want to do Bill Clinton type hair splitting
[15:17.240 --> 15:27.240]  No, they didn't alter the words to give it a different meaning, they simply altered the punctuation to give it a different meaning
[15:27.240 --> 15:32.240]  It's a distinction without a difference, as Randy would say
[15:32.240 --> 15:38.240]  So like I said, there are several places where I'm still researching this through and through
[15:38.240 --> 16:00.240]  But it's becoming easier and easier to prove that the statutes in Texas are being fundamentally altered without authority and by fraud to have them encompass things they never originally or were meant to encompass
[16:00.240 --> 16:09.240]  And I find that extremely revealing about the nature of the people in charge
[16:09.240 --> 16:20.240]  Now, in essence, that would put 14 individuals in charge of writing all of the laws in the state of Texas
[16:20.240 --> 16:33.240]  Since every code is subject to the statutory revision program enacted in 1963, which is one of the things I've got Larry looking to these ladies to get us a copy of right now
[16:33.240 --> 16:40.240]  It's a copy of that original enactment so I can go through it to find out what their scope and purpose actually are
[16:40.240 --> 16:50.240]  Okay, we're about to go to break. This is Eddie Craig, Debra Stevens, Rule of Law Radio. If you folks will hang on, we will be right back
[17:11.240 --> 17:20.240]  The team behind Shentritian believes that supplements should over-deliver on their promises, and Shentritian does just that
[17:20.240 --> 17:27.240]  Shentritian utilizes the ancient healing wisdom of Chinese medicine in conjunction with the science of modern nutrition
[17:27.240 --> 17:41.240]  Adaptogenic herbs serve as the healing component, and organic hemp protein in greens and superfoods act as a balanced nutrient base. Plus, Shentritian tastes great in just water
[17:41.240 --> 17:55.240]  This powder supplement is everything you'd want in a product, and it's all natural. Visit Shentritian.com to order yours or call 1-866-497-7436
[17:55.240 --> 17:59.240]  After you use Shentritian, you'll believe in supplements again
[18:25.240 --> 18:27.240]  Look wrong again
[18:27.240 --> 18:30.240]  And they don't have the answer
[18:30.240 --> 18:32.240]  And so they sleep inside
[18:32.240 --> 18:36.240]  Don't matter what they shoot to see, Lord, how they want, we can take it easy
[18:36.240 --> 18:41.240]  Don't matter what we do politically and them getting mad and angry
[18:41.240 --> 18:46.240]  But they mad standing up and fighting, fighting for the freedom and the freedom
[18:46.240 --> 18:51.240]  And they like them love slavery and get handout from the government
[18:51.240 --> 18:52.240]  Look again
[18:52.240 --> 18:55.240]  We are the Christians
[18:55.240 --> 18:56.240]  Look wrong again
[18:56.240 --> 19:00.240]  And they don't have the answer
[19:00.240 --> 19:02.240]  And so they sleep inside
[19:02.240 --> 19:05.240]  We are the Christians
[19:05.240 --> 19:07.240]  Look wrong again
[19:07.240 --> 19:10.240]  And they don't have the answer
[19:10.240 --> 19:12.240]  And so they sleep inside
[19:12.240 --> 19:22.240]  They don't care about me, they don't care about you, they don't care about me, Lord, they don't care about the country
[19:22.240 --> 19:27.240]  They don't care about the constitution, they don't give a damn about me
[19:27.240 --> 19:32.240]  You don't see how this country, how they lead we, they lead we
[19:32.240 --> 19:35.240]  Like we blind and we crazy, they lead we
[19:35.240 --> 19:37.240]  Alright folks, we are back
[19:37.240 --> 19:42.240]  This is Rule of Law Radio, Eddie Craig, Deborah Stevens, and I am going over some information
[19:42.240 --> 19:50.240]  that I have gleaned from the actual enrolled bill from the 1995 creation of the Texas Transportation Code.
[19:50.240 --> 19:56.240]  Now, one of the other sections that was fairly clear in the old code
[19:56.240 --> 20:04.240]  and is codified in the new 1995 iteration of the transportation code is one you're all familiar with,
[20:04.240 --> 20:09.240]  Section 201.904, dealing with the issue of speed signs.
[20:09.240 --> 20:18.240]  201.904 in the current iteration of the transportation code actually came out of Article 6701F, as in Frank,
[20:18.240 --> 20:21.240]  of the Vernon's annotated civil statutes.
[20:21.240 --> 20:24.240]  And this is how it used to read.
[20:24.240 --> 20:27.240]  It shall be the duty of the State Highway Department,
[20:27.240 --> 20:32.240]  and said department is hereby directed to erect and maintain on the highways and roads of Texas
[20:32.240 --> 20:38.240]  as appropriate signs showing the maximum lawful speed for commercial motor vehicles,
[20:38.240 --> 20:43.240]  truck tractors, trailers, and semi-trailers, and in parentheses it's got trucks,
[20:43.240 --> 20:49.240]  and motor vehicles engaged in the business of transporting passengers for compensation or hire,
[20:49.240 --> 20:52.240]  and in parentheses it's got buses.
[20:52.240 --> 20:57.240]  Now, except for the parentheses in trucks in the very first part of that statement,
[20:57.240 --> 21:05.240]  this is fairly close to how it reads in the new version of the 1995 enactment.
[21:05.240 --> 21:10.240]  But I'll give you a specific of it here.
[21:10.240 --> 21:16.240]  It gives definitions in the section first, and then it goes on to read the department,
[21:16.240 --> 21:19.240]  rather than saying it shall be the duty of the State Highway Department,
[21:19.240 --> 21:23.240]  it gives an abbreviation, or I'm sorry, a definition at the front,
[21:23.240 --> 21:27.240]  and now it just says the department, and then it continues,
[21:27.240 --> 21:32.240]  shall erect and maintain on the highways and roads of this State appropriate signs
[21:32.240 --> 21:36.240]  that show the maximum lawful speed for commercial motor vehicles, truck tractors,
[21:36.240 --> 21:39.240]  see they put the word truck in front of these now,
[21:39.240 --> 21:44.240]  truck trailers, truck semi-trailers, and motor vehicles engaged in the business
[21:44.240 --> 21:50.240]  of transporting passengers for compensation or hire, and in parentheses it's got buses.
[21:50.240 --> 21:55.240]  So in that one they actually did what they should have as far as not altering
[21:55.240 --> 21:59.240]  the application or meaning of the statute.
[21:59.240 --> 22:03.240]  All they really did there was where it just said trailers and semi-trailers,
[22:03.240 --> 22:07.240]  they put the word truck in front of it instead of having it in parentheses
[22:07.240 --> 22:09.240]  at the end of each of those definitions.
[22:09.240 --> 22:14.240]  So that's just some of the examples of what we're talking about here.
[22:14.240 --> 22:20.240]  Now Mark in Michigan, we see you on the caller board.
[22:20.240 --> 22:23.240]  Go ahead and do you have a question?
[22:23.240 --> 22:24.240]  Hey guys, yeah.
[22:24.240 --> 22:31.240]  Now this isn't involving the transportation code, but actually I'm a little lost here.
[22:31.240 --> 22:35.240]  Okay, I tried to send you a copy of this, Eddie.
[22:35.240 --> 22:43.240]  I know Deborah isn't accepting any more Gmail emails, so I don't think that got through.
[22:43.240 --> 22:47.240]  But okay, I'll make it quick.
[22:47.240 --> 22:52.240]  Ten years ago I was arrested for firing a shot in my lawn,
[22:52.240 --> 22:57.240]  and I think I tried to keep you updated through email on this one.
[22:57.240 --> 22:59.240]  Some guys were trying to rob my house.
[22:59.240 --> 23:02.240]  I, you know, long story short, fired a shot in the lawn to chase them off,
[23:02.240 --> 23:08.240]  and I was arrested charged with felonious assault and reckless discharge of a firearm.
[23:08.240 --> 23:16.240]  So I decided to take it back on, and I just filed a motion to vacate
[23:16.240 --> 23:21.240]  and a motion to dismiss the indictment.
[23:21.240 --> 23:25.240]  Okay, until Friday I was heard on that motion.
[23:25.240 --> 23:29.240]  When I got into court, it was actually kind of interesting
[23:29.240 --> 23:36.240]  because I heard the prosecutor and the court clerk talking about it, talking about my motion.
[23:36.240 --> 23:39.240]  I was in a packed courtroom in the city of Detroit,
[23:39.240 --> 23:42.240]  so I was really surprised to hear them talking about it.
[23:42.240 --> 23:46.240]  But the court clerk said, you know, have you seen this motion?
[23:46.240 --> 23:49.240]  And she said, no, but I heard about it.
[23:49.240 --> 23:54.240]  And when I heard them, I thought, oh, crap, I'm in big trouble.
[23:54.240 --> 23:59.240]  Well, you know, and usually the judge waits to call me to laugh,
[23:59.240 --> 24:07.240]  but this morning he actually called me like second or third after he called up all the attorneys.
[24:07.240 --> 24:13.240]  And he said, I read your motion, which is surprising because you guys know how that goes.
[24:13.240 --> 24:16.240]  They never say, I read your motion.
[24:16.240 --> 24:19.240]  They always say, get the crap out of here.
[24:19.240 --> 24:22.240]  You know, you're wasting my time.
[24:22.240 --> 24:25.240]  You know, and so I went on with my dissertation.
[24:25.240 --> 24:30.240]  You know, Your Honor, I brought this motion to vacate forward based on the following things.
[24:30.240 --> 24:36.240]  You know, I had Fourth Amendment, Eighth Amendment, County of Riverside B,
[24:36.240 --> 24:40.240]  Nicolauflin.
[24:40.240 --> 24:46.240]  There was two habeas corpuses that were granted and ignored by the city of Detroit.
[24:46.240 --> 24:49.240]  They were actually scheduled.
[24:49.240 --> 24:52.240]  The magistrate said, bring him to me at this time.
[24:52.240 --> 24:57.240]  The city of Detroit ignored them, and then a number of other things,
[24:57.240 --> 25:02.240]  and one of which was the judge's oath of office.
[25:02.240 --> 25:06.240]  He got a little bit touchy when I brought that incident up.
[25:06.240 --> 25:10.240]  He said, it's a minor infraction if anything.
[25:10.240 --> 25:13.240]  I assure you I am a constitutional judge and blah, blah, blah,
[25:13.240 --> 25:18.240]  but he didn't have an oath of office on record, and I had proof of that.
[25:18.240 --> 25:20.240]  So needless to say, he denied it.
[25:20.240 --> 25:25.240]  He denied my motion and said the appropriate venue to bring this up is in the appeals court
[25:25.240 --> 25:27.240]  and in a lower court.
[25:27.240 --> 25:32.240]  Now this was the way the city of Detroit is branched off.
[25:32.240 --> 25:35.240]  There's a district court and a circuit court.
[25:35.240 --> 25:39.240]  The district court typically takes your misdemeanors,
[25:39.240 --> 25:45.240]  and the circuit court takes your felonies and family matters and things of that nature.
[25:45.240 --> 25:50.240]  Then you go up to the appeals court and then beyond.
[25:50.240 --> 25:59.240]  So when he denied this motion, I prepared two affidavits.
[25:59.240 --> 26:05.240]  Basically one was stating what I had heard that morning about the prosecution
[26:05.240 --> 26:12.240]  saying that she had never seen the motion because she didn't file a response.
[26:12.240 --> 26:18.240]  Then the other one was regarding some records.
[26:18.240 --> 26:23.240]  I started working on the appeal, but beyond that I'm kind of lost.
[26:23.240 --> 26:30.240]  I've never heard of anybody doing what I'm trying to do, which is dismiss an old charge,
[26:30.240 --> 26:32.240]  especially after a plea has been made.
[26:32.240 --> 26:39.240]  They seem to have thrown a number of roadblocks up for me with this one.
[26:39.240 --> 26:43.240]  They said, well, you surrendered a lot of rights when you made that plea,
[26:43.240 --> 26:46.240]  but I actually have a copy of the plea in front of me,
[26:46.240 --> 26:53.240]  and the only thing that you really surrender is the right to be thought innocent.
[26:53.240 --> 26:54.240]  There's a couple other little things,
[26:54.240 --> 27:01.240]  but nothing that would really throw any roadblocks in what I'm arguing.
[27:01.240 --> 27:02.240]  Okay.
[27:02.240 --> 27:04.240]  Well, we've got Randy on the line with us,
[27:04.240 --> 27:10.240]  so I'm going to see if he's got anything he wants to address on that issue first.
[27:10.240 --> 27:13.240]  Randy, are you there?
[27:13.240 --> 27:14.240]  Well, okay.
[27:14.240 --> 27:17.240]  You say they just denied everything out of hand?
[27:17.240 --> 27:18.240]  He did.
[27:18.240 --> 27:20.240]  As a matter of fact, I have the thing.
[27:20.240 --> 27:22.240]  Basically he said this is the wrong venue.
[27:22.240 --> 27:26.240]  You should have sent this up to the appeals court.
[27:26.240 --> 27:28.240]  But we're talking 10 years ago.
[27:28.240 --> 27:31.240]  Any appeals would have been gone.
[27:31.240 --> 27:37.240]  Now, one of the things that I've alleged in here is that they were hiding documentation,
[27:37.240 --> 27:42.240]  you know, that they hid stuff that I came across just by chance.
[27:42.240 --> 27:47.240]  So I think that I can beat that, but I mean, let's be honest.
[27:47.240 --> 27:51.240]  At first watch, they're going to look at this and say your appeals are all gone.
[27:51.240 --> 27:59.240]  Okay, request a rehearing and file a points and authorities memorandum.
[27:59.240 --> 28:04.240]  Now you know you've got the judge's position on these issues.
[28:04.240 --> 28:10.240]  Now file a motion for rehearing and add a memorandum in support
[28:10.240 --> 28:13.240]  that addresses the issues you brought up.
[28:13.240 --> 28:14.240]  Okay.
[28:14.240 --> 28:18.240]  And then if he denies that, then he's right.
[28:18.240 --> 28:20.240]  You get to go to the court of appeals.
[28:20.240 --> 28:24.240]  Now you appeal his ruling, and when he denies that,
[28:24.240 --> 28:29.240]  you ask for findings of fact and conclusions of law,
[28:29.240 --> 28:37.240]  and give him a findings of fact and conclusion that law is your own.
[28:37.240 --> 28:41.240]  And ask him to accept yours or write his own.
[28:41.240 --> 28:46.240]  Gotcha, like a proposed order.
[28:46.240 --> 28:55.240]  Should I write a findings of fact in the denial sense where he denies me based on?
[28:55.240 --> 28:56.240]  Yeah, you write a finding.
[28:56.240 --> 29:01.240]  Actually, essentially you write a memorandum of law that supports your position.
[29:01.240 --> 29:03.240]  Okay.
[29:03.240 --> 29:08.240]  Ask him to accept it, which he's not going to because it supports your position.
[29:08.240 --> 29:15.240]  And then ask him to either accept yours or prepare one of his own.
[29:15.240 --> 29:22.240]  You don't care what he does because that gets your document into the court record.
[29:22.240 --> 29:25.240]  Now I will tell you this, that at the end of the hearing,
[29:25.240 --> 29:28.240]  one of the things that I did buckle down and make him do, I said,
[29:28.240 --> 29:34.240]  Your Honor, are you going to conclude a findings of fact and conclusions of law?
[29:34.240 --> 29:38.240]  Oh, I hear the music.
[29:38.240 --> 29:41.240]  All right, just stay on the line, guys, Mark and Randy,
[29:41.240 --> 29:44.240]  and we will be right back on the other side of this break.
[29:44.240 --> 29:52.240]  Callers, if you'd like to call in and talk to Randy or Eddie or myself, 512-646-1984.
[29:52.240 --> 30:00.240]  We'll be right back, folks.
[30:00.240 --> 30:03.240]  Top 10 Reasons to Question the Official Story of the Oklahoma City Bombing.
[30:03.240 --> 30:06.240]  Reason number 10, what is on the surveillance tapes?
[30:06.240 --> 30:09.240]  There were many video surveillance cameras that recorded the morning of the bombing,
[30:09.240 --> 30:11.240]  yet the few of these that have been released do not show
[30:11.240 --> 30:13.240]  what transpired with the Ryder truck at the Murrah Building.
[30:13.240 --> 30:15.240]  Most recently, the government has claimed that all of the cameras
[30:15.240 --> 30:18.240]  that were in different buildings and maintained by different businesses
[30:18.240 --> 30:22.240]  were all having their tapes changed at the exact same time, 9.02 a.m.
[30:22.240 --> 30:25.240]  This is insulting to the memory of those who perished in the bombing.
[30:25.240 --> 30:26.240]  What is being hidden from us?
[30:26.240 --> 30:29.240]  For more information, please go to okcbombingtruth.com.
[30:29.240 --> 30:33.240]  The Chicago Blackhawks stunned the hockey world by coming out of nowhere
[30:33.240 --> 30:35.240]  to win the Western Conference Finals.
[30:35.240 --> 30:38.240]  Their secret weapon was a readily available health supplement.
[30:38.240 --> 30:41.240]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, and I'll be right back to tell you how they did it.
[30:41.240 --> 30:43.240]  Privacy is under attack.
[30:43.240 --> 30:47.240]  When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[30:47.240 --> 30:52.240]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[30:52.240 --> 30:57.240]  So protect your rights, say no to surveillance, and keep your information to yourself.
[30:57.240 --> 31:00.240]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[31:00.240 --> 31:03.240]  This public service announcement is brought to you by StartPage.com,
[31:03.240 --> 31:07.240]  the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo and Bing.
[31:07.240 --> 31:10.240]  Start over with StartPage.
[31:10.240 --> 31:13.240]  What shot the Blackhawks to victory?
[31:13.240 --> 31:14.240]  Vitamin D.
[31:14.240 --> 31:17.240]  When team members took a daily supplement, they caught fewer colds,
[31:17.240 --> 31:20.240]  recovered faster from injuries, and their game took off.
[31:20.240 --> 31:22.240]  And it's not just athletes who can benefit.
[31:22.240 --> 31:25.240]  Your body makes vitamin D when sunlight hits your skin,
[31:25.240 --> 31:30.240]  but adults who work indoors and kids who watch a lot of TV probably don't get enough,
[31:30.240 --> 31:33.240]  putting them at risk for illness, bone problems, and even heart disease.
[31:33.240 --> 31:38.240]  Be sure you and your kids get 10 to 15 minutes of sun exposure several times a week,
[31:38.240 --> 31:42.240]  or ask your doctor about a daily natural vitamin D supplement.
[31:42.240 --> 31:46.240]  You can learn more about this amazing vitamin at vitamindcouncil.org.
[31:46.240 --> 31:51.240]  This is Dr. Catherine Albrecht. More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[31:51.240 --> 32:20.240]  Music.
[32:20.240 --> 32:42.240]  When you're going to stop abuse, your power.
[32:42.240 --> 32:50.240]  So please, Mr. Michael, teach officers not to abuse their power.
[32:50.240 --> 32:54.240]  Send a request to the leader, the captain of all officers.
[32:54.240 --> 32:59.240]  Tell them to uphold the law, and please don't abuse their power.
[32:59.240 --> 33:04.240]  They beat and they beat and they cheat and they cheat and they lie every hour.
[33:04.240 --> 33:10.240]  So, Mr. Officer, please stop abusing your power.
[33:10.240 --> 33:25.240]  All right, folks, we are back.
[33:25.240 --> 33:27.240]  This is the rule of law.
[33:27.240 --> 33:31.240]  We're speaking with Mark in Michigan right now.
[33:31.240 --> 33:36.240]  Okay, Mark, you were explaining the situation right before we went to break.
[33:36.240 --> 33:38.240]  Please go ahead.
[33:38.240 --> 33:44.240]  Before the end of the hearing, because I knew Randy, and he would ask me about this,
[33:44.240 --> 33:47.240]  I did ask for findings of fact and conclusions of law.
[33:47.240 --> 33:51.240]  Now, he looked kind of stunned and he said, well, I'll add it,
[33:51.240 --> 33:53.240]  but it will be kind of sparse at best.
[33:53.240 --> 34:02.240]  Now, what he did put in here in the order was basically of the effect that it is the opinion of this court
[34:02.240 --> 34:08.240]  that the defendant's claim lack merit since most were waived upon plea of guilty
[34:08.240 --> 34:13.240]  and the remaining claims should be addressed by way of formal appeal
[34:13.240 --> 34:17.240]  to the Court of Appeals rather than by motion in this court.
[34:17.240 --> 34:24.240]  And then the other thing is that I found peculiar is that the prosecutor,
[34:24.240 --> 34:28.240]  obviously she didn't read the motion, but not only did she not read it,
[34:28.240 --> 34:32.240]  but everybody filed a response to it.
[34:32.240 --> 34:38.240]  So I'm filing, at that point, and I know I've rushed this a little bit,
[34:38.240 --> 34:42.240]  but at that point in the hearing, the judge had said, you know, I'm talking now.
[34:42.240 --> 34:44.240]  Let me talk.
[34:44.240 --> 34:49.240]  So I wasn't able to get the objection about the prosecutor's response on the record.
[34:49.240 --> 34:51.240]  So I'm filing a delayed objection,
[34:51.240 --> 34:59.240]  and in that I'm arguing that the judge did the work for the prosecutor.
[34:59.240 --> 35:05.240]  I think that's a really good point in arguing that the judge adjudicated from the bench
[35:05.240 --> 35:12.240]  since the prosecutor raised no objection to the issues you brought to the court.
[35:12.240 --> 35:17.240]  The court had a duty to accept everything you stated as true
[35:17.240 --> 35:24.240]  and rule on it based as if it was true and correct.
[35:24.240 --> 35:29.240]  The irony, and what I cannot figure out, I actually called up there yesterday.
[35:29.240 --> 35:32.240]  I was looking for the transcript of this hearing,
[35:32.240 --> 35:35.240]  and the court clerk, you know, asked me my name and said,
[35:35.240 --> 35:38.240]  oh, you're calling about your motion last Friday.
[35:38.240 --> 35:41.240]  She knew exactly who I was.
[35:41.240 --> 35:46.240]  So apparently through this one motion I've become somewhat of a minor celebrity,
[35:46.240 --> 35:48.240]  and I don't know why.
[35:48.240 --> 35:55.240]  I'm wondering what the heck has transpired that's sent this all the way through them.
[35:55.240 --> 35:58.240]  Now, they had this motion for a month,
[35:58.240 --> 36:04.240]  but there were a lot of people in that courtroom for them to be addressing my issues,
[36:04.240 --> 36:08.240]  you know, and concerned with little old me.
[36:08.240 --> 36:12.240]  Well, listen, Mark, being concerned with little old you,
[36:12.240 --> 36:16.240]  I mean, look, they're the ones that started this prosecution, okay?
[36:16.240 --> 36:18.240]  So yeah, they've got to be concerned with you.
[36:18.240 --> 36:20.240]  That's the way it is.
[36:20.240 --> 36:23.240]  I mean, they're the ones that were concerned with you to begin with
[36:23.240 --> 36:27.240]  because they're the ones that brought you into court and started all this.
[36:27.240 --> 36:31.240]  Yeah, but usually I have to pull a stunt or two, you know,
[36:31.240 --> 36:36.240]  the Randy Kelton method for them to really be riled up about me.
[36:36.240 --> 36:41.240]  But all I ever filed was this one motion.
[36:41.240 --> 36:44.240]  So, you know, I'm very puzzled by that.
[36:44.240 --> 36:52.240]  So I'm thinking that either the prosecution and the judge had a conversation about this.
[36:52.240 --> 36:58.240]  I just don't know if I'm comfortable yet with arguing that,
[36:58.240 --> 37:02.240]  but I mean, certainly arguing that the judge did the work for the prosecutor.
[37:02.240 --> 37:04.240]  But I mean, I've got them on so many things.
[37:04.240 --> 37:10.240]  Honestly, I've never seen a case this strong, and it just happens to be my own.
[37:10.240 --> 37:13.240]  I've never seen this many issues, this many violations,
[37:13.240 --> 37:16.240]  and I just need to get it to the next step.
[37:16.240 --> 37:19.240]  I just need to get somebody to acknowledge it.
[37:19.240 --> 37:23.240]  The judge didn't even take the position like, you're lying to me.
[37:23.240 --> 37:27.240]  It was like, I believe everything you say.
[37:27.240 --> 37:32.240]  I just want to get this off my desk.
[37:32.240 --> 37:36.240]  Yeah, and he didn't want to break new ground.
[37:36.240 --> 37:40.240]  He just never wanted to break new ground.
[37:40.240 --> 37:44.240]  He doesn't want to dismiss a, how old is this, 10-year-old case?
[37:44.240 --> 37:47.240]  Yeah.
[37:47.240 --> 37:52.240]  And then try to explain to everybody why he dismissed a 10-year-old case.
[37:52.240 --> 37:56.240]  And I bet the reason there were a lot of people there is you had a lot of attorneys
[37:56.240 --> 38:01.240]  that were there to learn something.
[38:01.240 --> 38:03.240]  That could be, that could be.
[38:03.240 --> 38:09.240]  I'm very, I mean, I've got to admit, it was a little disconcerting,
[38:09.240 --> 38:15.240]  because honestly I've never really had anything denied out of hand like this.
[38:15.240 --> 38:20.240]  Usually it goes, you know, I at least get some of what I want.
[38:20.240 --> 38:24.240]  So this has kind of thrown me for a loop.
[38:24.240 --> 38:26.240]  So yeah, I'm a little lost.
[38:26.240 --> 38:31.240]  But these hints and going for the rehearing will certainly help.
[38:31.240 --> 38:36.240]  Now with the rehearing, I know it doesn't normally stop the clock on the appeal,
[38:36.240 --> 38:42.240]  but in this case would it stop the clock because I'd be appealing on the issue?
[38:42.240 --> 38:46.240]  Yeah, the motion for rehearing will stop the clock.
[38:46.240 --> 38:47.240]  Okay.
[38:47.240 --> 38:53.240]  Until the judge denies the motion for rehearing, and then the clock would start again.
[38:53.240 --> 38:54.240]  Okay.
[38:54.240 --> 38:59.240]  Now can I move for summary judgment based on the fact that the prosecutor never,
[38:59.240 --> 39:01.240]  and I know that's more of a civil thing.
[39:01.240 --> 39:07.240]  That's why I've never had to ask for it in the criminal court.
[39:07.240 --> 39:10.240]  That's a good point.
[39:10.240 --> 39:13.240]  When he said the prosecutor didn't respond,
[39:13.240 --> 39:20.240]  I was thinking what are the ramifications of him not responding?
[39:20.240 --> 39:26.240]  Is it necessarily that he defaults if he doesn't respond?
[39:26.240 --> 39:31.240]  I don't think that's the case because this is criminal and not civil.
[39:31.240 --> 39:34.240]  Yeah, I looked through the bench books.
[39:34.240 --> 39:39.240]  You know, every bench book describes the timeframe that they have to respond,
[39:39.240 --> 39:44.240]  but no bench book ever addresses what happens if they don't respond.
[39:44.240 --> 39:46.240]  Nothing.
[39:46.240 --> 39:51.240]  You know, they're blank on the subject, and I'm thinking this is killing me
[39:51.240 --> 39:56.240]  because one of the things I argued in my objection was all that the prosecutor
[39:56.240 --> 40:00.240]  had to do was agree with the judge's position, and that's basically what she did.
[40:00.240 --> 40:03.240]  She chimed in for two sentences, said, Your Honor, you're right.
[40:03.240 --> 40:05.240]  This is not the proper venue.
[40:05.240 --> 40:07.240]  What's that?
[40:07.240 --> 40:12.240]  I've objected to the prosecutor because the prosecutor didn't answer.
[40:12.240 --> 40:16.240]  The prosecutor has no place to speak up now.
[40:16.240 --> 40:19.240]  Okay.
[40:19.240 --> 40:23.240]  These are good.
[40:23.240 --> 40:28.240]  I contacted a woman today, and I shot you guys an email on this because I was
[40:28.240 --> 40:34.240]  thinking about it, but I actually found a woman who has done a co-warrant.
[40:34.240 --> 40:37.240]  And I shot you her contact information.
[40:37.240 --> 40:41.240]  She's actually done a lot of things that we've talked about,
[40:41.240 --> 40:46.240]  and she's gotten it pretty far here in Michigan.
[40:46.240 --> 40:51.240]  Now, I talked to her today, and she said that because he's an elected official,
[40:51.240 --> 40:58.240]  they're going to ask for a recall before they allow a co-warrant to go through.
[40:58.240 --> 41:04.240]  So I don't think that that's an option yet.
[41:04.240 --> 41:06.240]  Ask for a recall.
[41:06.240 --> 41:11.240]  Yeah, because he's an elected official, they expect you to go through your
[41:11.240 --> 41:14.240]  administrative remedies before you can.
[41:14.240 --> 41:17.240]  What you have to do with the co-warrant is you have to petition the attorney
[41:17.240 --> 41:22.240]  general of the state for the co-warrant, though, and then he'll give permission.
[41:22.240 --> 41:27.240]  Now, she's gotten it past that point and actually brought them to court on the
[41:27.240 --> 41:28.240]  matter.
[41:28.240 --> 41:32.240]  I didn't ask her how it turned out, but she's actually done a lot of work on
[41:32.240 --> 41:33.240]  the matter.
[41:33.240 --> 41:36.240]  So very, very sharp.
[41:36.240 --> 41:38.240]  Do that like her on the show.
[41:38.240 --> 41:39.240]  Yeah, yeah.
[41:39.240 --> 41:42.240]  Well, like I said, I sent you her contact information.
[41:42.240 --> 41:45.240]  Headline is possible guest in all caps.
[41:45.240 --> 41:53.240]  So yeah, she's a very sharp, sweet lady, so very unassuming.
[41:53.240 --> 41:58.240]  Mark and Randy and Eddie, I'd like to go back to this point concerning your
[41:58.240 --> 42:03.240]  request or possible moving for summary judgment, and you were making the point
[42:03.240 --> 42:07.240]  that the prosecutor hasn't responded.
[42:07.240 --> 42:11.240]  I think there needs to be some research done on this issue.
[42:11.240 --> 42:15.240]  This may be a good question for Frederick Graves.
[42:15.240 --> 42:17.240]  It's not a civil case.
[42:17.240 --> 42:22.240]  Just because the prosecutor didn't respond doesn't necessarily mean that you
[42:22.240 --> 42:28.240]  are entitled to the court granting your motion.
[42:28.240 --> 42:32.240]  It's not like you're the plaintiff in a civil case where you sue somebody, and
[42:32.240 --> 42:37.240]  if they don't respond, well, then you're basically entitled to the court
[42:37.240 --> 42:39.240]  granting you summary judgment.
[42:39.240 --> 42:44.240]  In a civil case, I don't think the court is obliged necessarily to grant you
[42:44.240 --> 42:50.240]  summary judgment just because the defendant doesn't respond, and I certainly
[42:50.240 --> 42:54.240]  don't think that you're entitled to your wage just because the prosecutor
[42:54.240 --> 42:55.240]  doesn't respond.
[42:55.240 --> 42:58.240]  I don't think that they have to in a criminal case.
[42:58.240 --> 43:01.240]  Randy, do you know anything about this?
[43:01.240 --> 43:02.240]  That's what I'm thinking.
[43:02.240 --> 43:10.240]  In a civil case, the judge must take the statements of the movement as true,
[43:10.240 --> 43:14.240]  so that establishes prima facie.
[43:14.240 --> 43:19.240]  And if the other side, you know, they don't have to answer, but if they don't,
[43:19.240 --> 43:24.240]  then you only have the one side making statements, and the judge has to take
[43:24.240 --> 43:26.240]  his statements as true.
[43:26.240 --> 43:32.240]  So if his statements would amount to a given position, the judge has to go to
[43:32.240 --> 43:33.240]  that position.
[43:33.240 --> 43:34.240]  Yeah, but this is criminal.
[43:34.240 --> 43:35.240]  Criminal.
[43:35.240 --> 43:36.240]  I know.
[43:36.240 --> 43:37.240]  I don't think criminal is quite the case.
[43:37.240 --> 43:38.240]  Yeah.
[43:38.240 --> 43:39.240]  So I can't say for certain.
[43:39.240 --> 43:40.240]  Okay, Mark.
[43:40.240 --> 43:41.240]  Only from the state side.
[43:41.240 --> 43:43.240]  Mark, do you have anything else?
[43:43.240 --> 43:45.240]  We've got some other callers if you don't have anything else.
[43:45.240 --> 43:46.240]  No, guys.
[43:46.240 --> 43:47.240]  Thanks so much.
[43:47.240 --> 43:48.240]  I appreciate it so much.
[43:48.240 --> 43:49.240]  Okay.
[43:49.240 --> 43:50.240]  Thank you, Mark.
[43:50.240 --> 43:53.240]  We've actually got Bruno Brewiler from We Are Change Los Angeles calling in to
[43:53.240 --> 43:56.240]  give us an update on his case and some good news.
[43:56.240 --> 44:00.240]  We'll be right back, folks.
[44:00.240 --> 44:03.240]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[44:03.240 --> 44:07.240]  Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary, the affordable,
[44:07.240 --> 44:14.240]  easy-to-understand 4-CD course that will show you how in 24 hours, step-by-step.
[44:14.240 --> 44:18.240]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing.
[44:18.240 --> 44:22.240]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[44:22.240 --> 44:27.240]  Thousands have won with our step-by-step course, and now you can too.
[44:27.240 --> 44:34.240]  Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case-winning experience.
[44:34.240 --> 44:38.240]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand
[44:38.240 --> 44:43.240]  about the principles and practices that control our American courts.
[44:43.240 --> 44:49.240]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases,
[44:49.240 --> 44:52.240]  pro se tactics, and much more.
[44:52.240 --> 45:01.240]  Please visit wtprn.com and click on the banner, or call toll-free, 866-LAW-EZ.
[45:01.240 --> 45:19.240]  If you did not have any problem, where are you going to look for one?
[45:19.240 --> 45:25.240]  If you could not wage any battle, would you purposefully die?
[45:25.240 --> 45:31.240]  Would you stand up as a soldier, a warrior of love, scuffle and keep the peace?
[45:31.240 --> 45:34.240]  All they're taking is a misunderstanding.
[45:34.240 --> 45:36.240]  Somebody calls the police.
[45:36.240 --> 46:00.240]  Watchin' the sparks fly, watchin' the sparks fly.
[46:00.240 --> 46:16.240]  Okay, folks, we are back.
[46:16.240 --> 46:20.240]  Callers, if you'd like to call in, 512-646-1984.
[46:20.240 --> 46:21.240]  We are taking calls.
[46:21.240 --> 46:25.240]  We're live here, Thursday, September 30th, 2010.
[46:25.240 --> 46:31.240]  We've got Bruno Brewiler on the line from We Are Change Los Angeles to give us an update
[46:31.240 --> 46:32.240]  and some good news.
[46:32.240 --> 46:33.240]  Bruno, thanks for joining us.
[46:33.240 --> 46:36.240]  What do you have for us tonight?
[46:36.240 --> 46:37.240]  I am glad to be here.
[46:37.240 --> 46:38.240]  Hello to everyone.
[46:38.240 --> 46:47.240]  First of all, I want to thank all of you, Debra, Randy, and Eddie, for all your input.
[46:47.240 --> 46:53.240]  You know, for those of us who are just now learning this stuff, it's a bit tough to move forward on things
[46:53.240 --> 46:59.240]  because you just don't know, especially if you're going to court and they're just violating the law.
[46:59.240 --> 47:01.240]  I mean, it's amazing what the courts are doing.
[47:01.240 --> 47:10.240]  It's when you start doing things that show that you know what's going on and you find ways to enforce yourself,
[47:10.240 --> 47:13.240]  enforce your rights, that they start getting worried.
[47:13.240 --> 47:17.240]  And I have to thank you guys for getting some pointers.
[47:17.240 --> 47:23.240]  I started my case, for those of you who don't know, I was originally told to leave the courtroom
[47:23.240 --> 47:26.240]  because I was shaking my head and making facial expressions.
[47:26.240 --> 47:29.240]  I didn't really talk except when the judge talked to me.
[47:29.240 --> 47:33.240]  I responded just as an objection saying that my rights are being violated.
[47:33.240 --> 47:40.240]  I left the courtroom on my own accord and I was arrested outside for asking the deputies for identification,
[47:40.240 --> 47:42.240]  which are required by law to get up.
[47:42.240 --> 47:48.240]  I'm facing three felonies, including two felonies resisting arrest and a felony threat.
[47:48.240 --> 47:49.240]  So that's a quick update.
[47:49.240 --> 47:52.240]  That's a quick what happened in the beginning.
[47:52.240 --> 47:56.240]  The update is I've switched attorneys a couple of times.
[47:56.240 --> 47:59.240]  And yes, I know attorneys, we've got to learn to do this stuff without attorneys.
[47:59.240 --> 48:00.240]  And we are learning.
[48:00.240 --> 48:02.240]  I'm going through jurisdictionary.
[48:02.240 --> 48:05.240]  I've got a group of people I meet together.
[48:05.240 --> 48:07.240]  I've been to Randy's seminar.
[48:07.240 --> 48:11.240]  I advise everyone just keep learning and learning and learning.
[48:11.240 --> 48:13.240]  I'm learning more all the time.
[48:13.240 --> 48:15.240]  So I've got attorneys just as a backup.
[48:15.240 --> 48:19.240]  And I switched attorneys when I realized that they were swirling me.
[48:19.240 --> 48:23.240]  You have to be diligent about that.
[48:23.240 --> 48:25.240]  I had an attorney who was basically, oh, I have a friend.
[48:25.240 --> 48:27.240]  One of the DAs is my friend.
[48:27.240 --> 48:28.240]  And I'm going to cut a deal.
[48:28.240 --> 48:32.240]  Well, it turned out he was cutting a deal by turning me over to them
[48:32.240 --> 48:36.240]  and not listening to what I said was law and what was going on.
[48:36.240 --> 48:40.240]  Well, I found attorneys that are very interested in everything I'm saying.
[48:40.240 --> 48:42.240]  They're trying to help me get what I need to get.
[48:42.240 --> 48:44.240]  And there's a resistance to get these transcripts
[48:44.240 --> 48:49.240]  because these transcripts are very incriminating to all the court officials.
[48:49.240 --> 48:51.240]  So the update is waiting for another hearing.
[48:51.240 --> 48:53.240]  There's going to be more motions.
[48:53.240 --> 48:56.240]  Won't get to the preliminary hearing for a little while longer, which is good.
[48:56.240 --> 48:58.240]  It's giving me time to get my stuff together.
[48:58.240 --> 49:04.240]  I filed bar grievances per Randy's suggestion.
[49:04.240 --> 49:10.240]  I filed actually, I'm starting with the arraignment or the non-arraignment, as I call it.
[49:10.240 --> 49:12.240]  And I'm going to make my way forward.
[49:12.240 --> 49:14.240]  I've got all kinds of bar grievances to file.
[49:14.240 --> 49:18.240]  But I even filed a bar grievance against the judge in the arraignment.
[49:18.240 --> 49:27.240]  I filed three bar grievances, one against the DA, the defense attorney who I never even met.
[49:27.240 --> 49:28.240]  Oh, you know what the guy looks like.
[49:28.240 --> 49:31.240]  He wrongfully said he was my defense attorney.
[49:31.240 --> 49:36.240]  I never contracted with him and the judge for faking the arraignment.
[49:36.240 --> 49:38.240]  In other words, the arraignment in California,
[49:38.240 --> 49:44.240]  it's required that within 48 hours they have to get you to stick your name to the charges,
[49:44.240 --> 49:48.240]  get you to cop a plea, and I think a couple other things.
[49:48.240 --> 49:49.240]  And none of that happened.
[49:49.240 --> 49:50.240]  They faked it.
[49:50.240 --> 49:52.240]  They created minutes saying that all that happened.
[49:52.240 --> 49:58.240]  And I had six witnesses in court, six signed affidavits saying it did not happen.
[49:58.240 --> 50:07.240]  Well, so I filed bar grievances against all of them for fabricating the minutes.
[50:07.240 --> 50:15.240]  Then I filed more bar grievances against all three of them for I forgot what it was exactly,
[50:15.240 --> 50:17.240]  something along faking the arraignment.
[50:17.240 --> 50:19.240]  And I want separate bar grievances for everything.
[50:19.240 --> 50:27.240]  I'm going to file more bar grievances for conspiracy to give me an attorney without due process.
[50:27.240 --> 50:30.240]  Well, now, along with your bar grievances,
[50:30.240 --> 50:36.240]  don't forget your judicial conduct complaints and your actual criminal complaints for what they did,
[50:36.240 --> 50:41.240]  because what you're saying that they did was they falsified the records of the court.
[50:41.240 --> 50:45.240]  That's tampering with a government document.
[50:45.240 --> 50:49.240]  They have tampered with witnesses.
[50:49.240 --> 50:53.240]  Andy, what else would you say they've done based upon what he said so far?
[50:53.240 --> 51:03.240]  Well, aggravated perjury for trying to write this down as you said.
[51:03.240 --> 51:10.240]  Well, they filed a statement on a government document intended to that document be taken as true,
[51:10.240 --> 51:17.240]  and essentially the statements they made were made under oath.
[51:17.240 --> 51:21.240]  Yeah, and Bruno, in California, you can go straight to the grand jury without a problem.
[51:21.240 --> 51:24.240]  It's not really much of a fight.
[51:24.240 --> 51:26.240]  Yeah, I wanted to talk to you about that.
[51:26.240 --> 51:31.240]  That's going to be the next step here in my call is to ask questions about how to do that.
[51:31.240 --> 51:33.240]  That's what we're talking about filing.
[51:33.240 --> 51:36.240]  Yeah, that's what we're talking about right now, filing the criminal complaints.
[51:36.240 --> 51:39.240]  This isn't like going to the police and filling out a police report.
[51:39.240 --> 51:41.240]  That's nonsensical.
[51:41.240 --> 51:46.240]  You swear out an affidavit, a criminal complaint with a statement of probable cause,
[51:46.240 --> 51:48.240]  and you go directly to the grand jury.
[51:48.240 --> 51:50.240]  And in California, it's not a problem.
[51:50.240 --> 51:55.240]  In most places, the prosecutor runs interference and really gets in the way,
[51:55.240 --> 51:58.240]  and it's almost impossible to get directly to the grand jury.
[51:58.240 --> 52:01.240]  But in California, you can go straight to them.
[52:01.240 --> 52:04.240]  Well, I definitely want more information on that.
[52:04.240 --> 52:07.240]  One of the questions, oh, before we get into that,
[52:07.240 --> 52:11.240]  it's a very important aspect because I am prepared to file a criminal complaint,
[52:11.240 --> 52:19.240]  and I am prepared to file a complaint with the counsel against the judge.
[52:19.240 --> 52:22.240]  And that's just for the non-arrayment.
[52:22.240 --> 52:25.240]  And then more happened after that with a new judge,
[52:25.240 --> 52:30.240]  and so I'm going after them after I get through this first stage.
[52:30.240 --> 52:37.240]  What I do, the good news I want to say is that State Bar actually contacted me,
[52:37.240 --> 52:40.240]  and they want to know what's going on.
[52:40.240 --> 52:45.240]  And I said, well, you know, I'm a little suspicious of you because you're with them.
[52:45.240 --> 52:47.240]  I mean, everyone's working against me here.
[52:47.240 --> 52:49.240]  I'm scared.
[52:49.240 --> 52:51.240]  You guys are, you know, I go to court.
[52:51.240 --> 52:53.240]  I'm getting screwed left and right.
[52:53.240 --> 52:56.240]  And she says, well, you've called the right place.
[52:56.240 --> 53:02.240]  And she called one of my witnesses first because not only did I file bar grievances,
[53:02.240 --> 53:07.240]  I'm getting all my witnesses to file bar grievances against the same people for the same reasons.
[53:07.240 --> 53:12.240]  And it looks like it's kind of thrown up a red flag, and they want to know what's going on.
[53:12.240 --> 53:18.240]  So I have to fax her information tomorrow, and I told her I'm trying to get the minutes,
[53:18.240 --> 53:21.240]  and it's been four months, and I still can't get the minutes.
[53:21.240 --> 53:23.240]  Even my current attorney is having trouble getting the minutes.
[53:23.240 --> 53:26.240]  Well, Bruno, I would just throw this out here.
[53:26.240 --> 53:31.240]  Call me a skeptic, but I don't think the Bar Association really wants to help you.
[53:31.240 --> 53:34.240]  I think this is what's called damage control.
[53:34.240 --> 53:38.240]  I think you're causing problems for them and their little minions,
[53:38.240 --> 53:43.240]  so they want to know what's going on so they can try to figure out a way to get you to calm down here.
[53:43.240 --> 53:45.240]  That's what I think.
[53:45.240 --> 53:48.240]  But hey, whatever their motivation, it doesn't matter.
[53:48.240 --> 53:49.240]  But yeah, you're right.
[53:49.240 --> 53:51.240]  I definitely wouldn't trust them.
[53:51.240 --> 53:54.240]  Yeah, it's not going to calm me down.
[53:54.240 --> 53:56.240]  They're only going to keep getting more bar grievances.
[53:56.240 --> 54:00.240]  And the next step, I've got six witnesses from this.
[54:00.240 --> 54:04.240]  I have 28 from the next, and then 20 from the next hearing.
[54:04.240 --> 54:08.240]  So they're just going to be getting done the bar grievances along the whole way.
[54:08.240 --> 54:11.240]  I'm not going to let anyone get away with anything.
[54:11.240 --> 54:13.240]  The bar grievance is just the first step.
[54:13.240 --> 54:14.240]  I'm preparing.
[54:14.240 --> 54:20.240]  I'm about to send in a complaint for the first judge to the Council on Judicial Performance.
[54:20.240 --> 54:24.240]  And now we can get into, I also want to file a criminal complaint.
[54:24.240 --> 54:29.240]  And here I have friends who are going through foreclosures, and their lawyers,
[54:29.240 --> 54:32.240]  they've already got the penal codes, and I've got penal codes that have been violated,
[54:32.240 --> 54:37.240]  but they've got penal codes that the attorneys and the people from the bank are violating,
[54:37.240 --> 54:41.240]  and they want to file criminal complaints because they've got a civil suit
[54:41.240 --> 54:43.240]  from the bank or the collection agency.
[54:43.240 --> 54:45.240]  They're filing a civil suit against them,
[54:45.240 --> 54:49.240]  but they also want to do a collateral attack with criminal complaints.
[54:49.240 --> 54:57.240]  And I want to know if there's any case law, hopefully specific to California,
[54:57.240 --> 55:03.240]  that we can use when we walk in to hand a criminal complaint to a judge.
[55:03.240 --> 55:06.240]  And I know, Deborah, you're saying go to the grand jury.
[55:06.240 --> 55:13.240]  Even if we go to the grand jury, we would love some kind of references or case law
[55:13.240 --> 55:18.240]  to justify that we can even, we don't want to bring a criminal complaint
[55:18.240 --> 55:20.240]  and they say, hey, you can't do this.
[55:20.240 --> 55:24.240]  Well, the state statutes will tell you who can approach and file with the grand jury,
[55:24.240 --> 55:26.240]  just like they do here in Texas.
[55:26.240 --> 55:28.240]  It specifically says right in the law,
[55:28.240 --> 55:32.240]  any credible person may file a complaint with the grand jury.
[55:32.240 --> 55:35.240]  And it's essentially the same in California.
[55:35.240 --> 55:39.240]  You just need to get your statutory reference and do it.
[55:39.240 --> 55:41.240]  Do you know where that is?
[55:41.240 --> 55:48.240]  You have to look in criminal procedure, duties of officer, or duties of grand jury.
[55:48.240 --> 55:50.240]  I haven't looked that up for California,
[55:50.240 --> 55:57.240]  but I have a staff meeting in the morning and I'll have the paralegals dig that out for me.
[55:57.240 --> 56:00.240]  Now, Randy and Eddie, I wanted to ask you all this.
[56:00.240 --> 56:07.240]  Do you think it would be a reasonable strategy or not for Bruno to go to the district attorney first,
[56:07.240 --> 56:14.240]  just to show an effort of good faith on his part before he does the last resort of going to the grand jury?
[56:14.240 --> 56:19.240]  In this case, that's an impossibility, the complaints against the district attorney.
[56:19.240 --> 56:24.240]  Actually, there are different levels of district attorney.
[56:24.240 --> 56:26.240]  Okay, well, here's the deal.
[56:26.240 --> 56:32.240]  If you go to the district attorney's office with a complaint against the district attorney,
[56:32.240 --> 56:37.240]  the complaint is against the person, not the office.
[56:37.240 --> 56:39.240]  Right.
[56:39.240 --> 56:45.240]  So that puts the prosecutor in a position to where he's required to disqualify himself
[56:45.240 --> 56:51.240]  and appoint an attorney pro tem to hear the complaint.
[56:51.240 --> 56:58.240]  Okay, well, I mean, I'm on my third prosecutor now.
[56:58.240 --> 57:02.240]  Oh, good.
[57:02.240 --> 57:07.240]  Bruno, have you actually gone and read the statute they're trying to charge you under?
[57:07.240 --> 57:08.240]  Oh, yeah.
[57:08.240 --> 57:11.240]  I've seen the original police report.
[57:11.240 --> 57:12.240]  No, no, no, no, no.
[57:12.240 --> 57:14.240]  I'm not talking about the police report.
[57:14.240 --> 57:19.240]  You've gone and read the actual law they're attempting to charge you under.
[57:19.240 --> 57:20.240]  Yes.
[57:20.240 --> 57:24.240]  It's been a while, but I've read it.
[57:24.240 --> 57:25.240]  Okay.
[57:25.240 --> 57:30.240]  And you dissected it to understand to what it applies and what it does not.
[57:30.240 --> 57:36.240]  You know, I mean, what I'm trying to say is their own words contradict the charges.
[57:36.240 --> 57:41.240]  Their own written words on the day up contradict all the charges.
[57:41.240 --> 57:43.240]  They don't have a case.
[57:43.240 --> 57:45.240]  And that is the other good news.
[57:45.240 --> 57:46.240]  They just don't have a case.
[57:46.240 --> 57:47.240]  I'm not going to cop a plea.
[57:47.240 --> 57:48.240]  We're going to trial.
[57:48.240 --> 57:50.240]  They don't have a case.
[57:50.240 --> 57:57.240]  So right now it's about delivering justice to whoever I can.
[57:57.240 --> 58:02.240]  I'm going to use the position I'm in to do some damage.
[58:02.240 --> 58:03.240]  Okay, yeah.
[58:03.240 --> 58:09.240]  And I want to go back to this filing against the district attorney with the district attorney's office.
[58:09.240 --> 58:11.240]  We didn't hear what Randy was saying.
[58:11.240 --> 58:15.240]  I think Randy was saying that since you're on your third prosecutor, Bruno,
[58:15.240 --> 58:21.240]  then you file criminal charges against the first and possibly second prosecutor
[58:21.240 --> 58:28.240]  and you file it with the third prosecutor because that way you're not filing with the same person against the same person.
[58:28.240 --> 58:29.240]  Is that right, Randy?
[58:29.240 --> 58:30.240]  Yes.
[58:30.240 --> 58:31.240]  Okay.
[58:31.240 --> 58:35.240]  And my main question was would it be a reasonable strategy to even do that
[58:35.240 --> 58:40.240]  or should Bruno just cut to the chase and just go to the grand jury with all this other stuff?
[58:40.240 --> 58:46.240]  He needs to ensure he gets a request for admission so he can get in the information out of the statutes that he's trying to prove.
[58:46.240 --> 58:47.240]  Okay, listen, hold on.
[58:47.240 --> 58:48.240]  We're about to go to break.
[58:48.240 --> 58:50.240]  Bruno, everyone stay on the line.
[58:50.240 --> 58:52.240]  We've got Mark and Mike coming up.
[58:52.240 --> 59:12.240]  We'll be right back after the top of the hour news.
[59:22.240 --> 59:47.240]  We'll be right back.
[59:47.240 --> 01:00:04.240]  This news brief brought to you by the International News Network.
[01:00:04.240 --> 01:00:13.240]  Russia's envoy to the UN, Vitaly Churkin, says unilateral sanctions against Iran over its nuclear program run contrary to international law
[01:00:13.240 --> 01:00:19.240]  and undermine the foundation of further joint efforts to resolve Iran's nuclear issue.
[01:00:19.240 --> 01:00:23.240]  After US-engineered UN sanctions were imposed against Iran in June,
[01:00:23.240 --> 01:00:29.240]  the US and the EU followed suit imposing their own unilateral sanctions.
[01:00:29.240 --> 01:00:34.240]  Amid new calls for Washington to attack Iran's nuclear facilities,
[01:00:34.240 --> 01:00:39.240]  if diplomatic efforts at curbing Tehran's uranium enrichment program fail,
[01:00:39.240 --> 01:00:45.240]  the US Wednesday imposed unilateral sanctions against eight senior Iranian officials.
[01:00:45.240 --> 01:00:50.240]  It accused of committing sustained and severe violations of human rights.
[01:00:50.240 --> 01:01:02.240]  The new sanctions include a ban on travel to the US and a freeze on any US-based assets owned by top officers in the Iranian Revolutionary Guard.
[01:01:02.240 --> 01:01:06.240]  Four soldiers from Fort Hood, Texas, committed suicide last weekend.
[01:01:06.240 --> 01:01:10.240]  All were decorated veterans from the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan.
[01:01:10.240 --> 01:01:15.240]  The deaths follow 14 other suicides on the base this year.
[01:01:15.240 --> 01:01:23.240]  The authors of the book, The $3 Trillion War, said Wednesday when they first released their findings two years ago,
[01:01:23.240 --> 01:01:26.240]  their estimates were criticized as being too high.
[01:01:26.240 --> 01:01:29.240]  Now they believe they may have been too low.
[01:01:29.240 --> 01:01:37.240]  Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz and Linda Bilms, a public policy professor at Harvard,
[01:01:37.240 --> 01:01:46.240]  said the number of veterans seeking post-combat medical care and the cost of treating those individuals is 30% higher than they initially estimated.
[01:01:46.240 --> 01:01:52.240]  That, combined with increases in the cost of military medical care and the lagging economy,
[01:01:52.240 --> 01:01:57.240]  will likely push the true long-term cost of the war over $4 trillion.
[01:01:57.240 --> 01:02:03.240]  Pakistan blocked a vital supply route for US and NATO troops in Afghanistan Thursday
[01:02:03.240 --> 01:02:11.240]  in retaliation for an alleged cross-border helicopter strike by the coalition that killed three Pakistani troops.
[01:02:11.240 --> 01:02:19.240]  A permanent stoppage of supply trucks would place massive strains on the relationship between the two countries and hurt the Afghan war effort.
[01:02:19.240 --> 01:02:25.240]  A line of around 100 NATO vehicles was waiting to cross the border into Afghanistan.
[01:02:25.240 --> 01:02:32.240]  NATO said it was investigating Pakistani reports that coalition aircraft had mistakenly attacked its forces.
[01:02:32.240 --> 01:02:37.240]  Over the weekend, NATO helicopters fired on targets in Pakistan at least twice,
[01:02:37.240 --> 01:02:42.240]  killing several suspected insurgents they had pursued over the border from Afghanistan.
[01:02:42.240 --> 01:02:48.240]  Pakistan's government protested the attacks, which came in a month during which there had been an unprecedented number
[01:02:48.240 --> 01:02:56.240]  of US drone missile strikes in the northwest, inflaming already pervasive anti-US sentiment among Pakistanis.
[01:03:19.240 --> 01:03:24.240]  They want to charge up Babylon and burn down the whole nation.
[01:03:24.240 --> 01:03:27.240]  But they don't operate the land right.
[01:03:27.240 --> 01:03:30.240]  I'm going to sell republicans and demonstrate.
[01:03:30.240 --> 01:03:32.240]  Tell them I'm a libertarian.
[01:03:32.240 --> 01:03:34.240]  They'll sell me by truth, but I'll do it.
[01:03:34.240 --> 01:03:35.240]  Come right now.
[01:03:35.240 --> 01:03:38.240]  Child of justice, tell me.
[01:03:38.240 --> 01:03:41.240]  Child of justice, tell me.
[01:03:41.240 --> 01:03:42.240]  I want to research.
[01:03:42.240 --> 01:03:45.240]  Child of justice, tell me.
[01:03:45.240 --> 01:03:47.240]  Child of justice.
[01:03:47.240 --> 01:03:48.240]  One by one.
[01:03:48.240 --> 01:03:50.240]  Child of justice.
[01:03:50.240 --> 01:03:52.240]  Child of justice.
[01:03:52.240 --> 01:03:53.240]  Child of justice.
[01:03:53.240 --> 01:03:54.240]  Child of justice.
[01:03:54.240 --> 01:03:55.240]  Child of justice.
[01:03:55.240 --> 01:03:56.240]  Child of justice.
[01:03:56.240 --> 01:03:57.240]  Child of justice.
[01:03:57.240 --> 01:03:58.240]  Child of justice.
[01:03:58.240 --> 01:03:59.240]  Child of justice.
[01:03:59.240 --> 01:04:00.240]  Child of justice.
[01:04:00.240 --> 01:04:01.240]  Child of justice.
[01:04:01.240 --> 01:04:02.240]  Child of justice.
[01:04:02.240 --> 01:04:03.240]  Child of justice.
[01:04:03.240 --> 01:04:04.240]  Child of justice.
[01:04:04.240 --> 01:04:05.240]  Child of justice.
[01:04:05.240 --> 01:04:06.240]  Child justice of justice.
[01:04:06.240 --> 01:04:07.240]  Child of justice.
[01:04:07.240 --> 01:04:08.240]  Child of justice.
[01:04:08.240 --> 01:04:09.240]  Child of justice.
[01:04:09.240 --> 01:04:10.240]  Child of justice.
[01:04:10.240 --> 01:04:11.240]  Child of justice.
[01:04:11.240 --> 01:04:12.240]  Child of justice.
[01:04:12.240 --> 01:04:15.240]  Child of justice.
[01:04:15.240 --> 01:04:16.240]  Child of justice.
[01:04:16.240 --> 01:04:24.560]  Okay, folks, we are back.
[01:04:24.560 --> 01:04:30.200]  We're speaking with our very special guest tonight, Bruno Brewiler of We Are Change Los
[01:04:30.200 --> 01:04:37.200]  Angeles, and we're talking about how he is going after them like gangbusters.
[01:04:37.200 --> 01:04:42.240]  Okay, Eddie, please finish up your point, and then we're going to go to Randy for his comments.
[01:04:42.240 --> 01:04:47.240]  Yeah, Bruno, the one thing I can tell you you need to make sure you do is to file a request for
[01:04:47.240 --> 01:04:50.240]  admissions from the prosecution.
[01:04:50.240 --> 01:04:54.240]  What you want to do is you want to get them to stipulate to the facts contained in the police
[01:04:54.240 --> 01:04:59.240]  report in contrast to its relation to the statute under which you're being charged, because what
[01:04:59.240 --> 01:05:03.240]  they're going to attempt to do is they're going to let you introduce the information in the police
[01:05:03.240 --> 01:05:08.240]  report maybe, but they're going to do everything possible to keep you from introducing the statute
[01:05:08.240 --> 01:05:13.240]  and the language of the statute to show that there is no correlation between the charges and the
[01:05:13.240 --> 01:05:14.240]  elements.
[01:05:14.240 --> 01:05:19.240]  So if you don't get the facts stipulated to before trial, you're going to get that introduction of
[01:05:19.240 --> 01:05:23.240]  the statute to be a lot harder than it needs to be.
[01:05:23.240 --> 01:05:27.240]  Okay, I mean, I have attorneys right now, so I mean, they wouldn't let me do this.
[01:05:27.240 --> 01:05:29.240]  You tell them you want that done.
[01:05:29.240 --> 01:05:30.240]  Okay.
[01:05:30.240 --> 01:05:31.240]  He is your attorney.
[01:05:31.240 --> 01:05:32.240]  He works for you.
[01:05:32.240 --> 01:05:35.240]  Make him do it.
[01:05:35.240 --> 01:05:36.240]  Okay, and now we're going to go to Randy.
[01:05:36.240 --> 01:05:43.240]  Randy, you started to answer my question right before the break concerning should Bruno even go to
[01:05:43.240 --> 01:05:48.240]  the district attorney's office at all with these criminal charges that he's preparing?
[01:05:48.240 --> 01:05:54.240]  Is he going to be just creating more criminal charges against more district attorneys, and would
[01:05:54.240 --> 01:05:57.240]  it just be, just take up more of his time?
[01:05:57.240 --> 01:06:02.240]  Should he do it to show good faith, or is there another reason why he should do it, or should he
[01:06:02.240 --> 01:06:06.240]  just not even bother going to the district attorney's office at all with these criminal
[01:06:06.240 --> 01:06:08.240]  complaints and just go straight to the grand jury?
[01:06:08.240 --> 01:06:11.240]  Randy, what is your comment on the strategy here?
[01:06:11.240 --> 01:06:18.240]  He should go to the district attorney and give the district attorney opportunity to screw up.
[01:06:18.240 --> 01:06:24.240]  You want to ask the district attorney to arrest, to take, act on criminal complaints against
[01:06:24.240 --> 01:06:26.240]  another district attorney.
[01:06:26.240 --> 01:06:34.240]  He has a duty to appoint an attorney pro tem because any member of a law firm that is accused
[01:06:34.240 --> 01:06:40.240]  disqualifies all of the members of the law firm, and in this circumstance, all of the members of
[01:06:40.240 --> 01:06:44.240]  the prosecuting attorney's office are all part of essentially the same firm.
[01:06:44.240 --> 01:06:47.240]  So if one is accused, all are disqualified.
[01:06:47.240 --> 01:06:55.240]  They must disqualify themselves and request that the court appoint an attorney pro tem.
[01:06:55.240 --> 01:06:57.240]  Now, he's not going to do that.
[01:06:57.240 --> 01:07:05.240]  So then you go to the district judge and you file against the prosecutor for not acting on
[01:07:05.240 --> 01:07:07.240]  complaints against his buddies.
[01:07:07.240 --> 01:07:09.240]  This makes them look bad.
[01:07:09.240 --> 01:07:14.240]  And then you go against, when the judge refuses to act, the complaint you take to the grand jury
[01:07:14.240 --> 01:07:17.240]  is against the judge.
[01:07:17.240 --> 01:07:22.240]  Now, he's an innocent party, essentially.
[01:07:22.240 --> 01:07:24.240]  How is he innocent, sir?
[01:07:24.240 --> 01:07:27.240]  He told you you needed to file these somewhere else.
[01:07:27.240 --> 01:07:30.240]  In his mind, he's an innocent party.
[01:07:30.240 --> 01:07:31.240]  Oh, I see what you're saying.
[01:07:31.240 --> 01:07:32.240]  Okay.
[01:07:32.240 --> 01:07:33.240]  Hey, man, I didn't do nothing.
[01:07:33.240 --> 01:07:36.240]  Why am I getting in trouble?
[01:07:36.240 --> 01:07:40.240]  So you go to him with the complaints, and when he tells you you should give them to the police
[01:07:40.240 --> 01:07:49.240]  or JP or some other crapola, you say okay, and then you prepare charges against him for refusing
[01:07:49.240 --> 01:07:55.240]  to act in his capacity as a magistrate for the purpose of shielding the prosecutor from
[01:07:55.240 --> 01:07:58.240]  prosecution, and the judge is going to feel bushwhacked.
[01:07:58.240 --> 01:07:59.240]  What did I do?
[01:07:59.240 --> 01:08:01.240]  I didn't do nothing.
[01:08:01.240 --> 01:08:05.240]  This is where my question comes in.
[01:08:05.240 --> 01:08:10.240]  Is there something I can show him that shows that as the duties of the magistrate, he's
[01:08:10.240 --> 01:08:11.240]  required to do something?
[01:08:11.240 --> 01:08:13.240]  Is there some kind of law?
[01:08:13.240 --> 01:08:14.240]  Is there statutes?
[01:08:14.240 --> 01:08:15.240]  Is there face law?
[01:08:15.240 --> 01:08:16.240]  Yeah, absolutely.
[01:08:16.240 --> 01:08:17.240]  Oh, absolutely.
[01:08:17.240 --> 01:08:18.240]  Judicial canons.
[01:08:18.240 --> 01:08:19.240]  Okay.
[01:08:19.240 --> 01:08:24.240]  He's a judge, and he's a magistrate.
[01:08:24.240 --> 01:08:27.240]  As a magistrate, he has two duties.
[01:08:27.240 --> 01:08:30.240]  Actually, they give him a third one.
[01:08:30.240 --> 01:08:32.240]  They allow him to marry people.
[01:08:32.240 --> 01:08:38.240]  But the two primary duties are to hold examining trials and set bail.
[01:08:38.240 --> 01:08:41.240]  Where do I get that information?
[01:08:41.240 --> 01:08:44.240]  Because I'm doing research, and I'm having trouble finding it.
[01:08:44.240 --> 01:08:53.240]  Okay, well, I'll have to research California law to find it.
[01:08:53.240 --> 01:09:03.240]  My other question is, I'd prefer, even with the arresting of Deputy Sheriff, who violated
[01:09:03.240 --> 01:09:08.240]  my right, who broke the law, I'd prefer, I mean, I'd love to get a criminal complaint
[01:09:08.240 --> 01:09:13.240]  filed against him and get that in the works and going forward, because then he can't be
[01:09:13.240 --> 01:09:14.240]  a witness.
[01:09:14.240 --> 01:09:20.240]  Okay, let me give you a strategy to get it there.
[01:09:20.240 --> 01:09:25.240]  If you go with a complaint against the Deputy Sheriff to the grand jury, the prosecuting
[01:09:25.240 --> 01:09:28.240]  attorney is going to intervene.
[01:09:28.240 --> 01:09:31.240]  And to the grand jury, that's going to sound reasonable.
[01:09:31.240 --> 01:09:36.240]  So first, you go in and disqualify the district attorney and disqualify the district judge,
[01:09:36.240 --> 01:09:39.240]  so there's nobody to intervene.
[01:09:39.240 --> 01:09:45.240]  That's why you file against the prosecutor, and when he refuses to act, you take it to
[01:09:45.240 --> 01:09:47.240]  the highest level judge you can find.
[01:09:47.240 --> 01:09:53.240]  And when he refuses to act, you go to the grand jury first with complaints against
[01:09:53.240 --> 01:09:58.240]  the judge for not taking complaints against the prosecutor.
[01:09:58.240 --> 01:10:01.240]  Now they're both implicated.
[01:10:01.240 --> 01:10:08.240]  Anybody steps to either one of them interferes at all, it gets more serious complaints.
[01:10:08.240 --> 01:10:15.240]  They will see this as getting very serious very quickly.
[01:10:15.240 --> 01:10:18.240]  In the end, it's all political.
[01:10:18.240 --> 01:10:26.240]  And when you start bringing an argument against the judge of protecting himself and his acting
[01:10:26.240 --> 01:10:32.240]  criminally to protect himself and his friends from the same law everybody else is subject
[01:10:32.240 --> 01:10:38.240]  to, that's something the grand jury is not going to find humor in.
[01:10:38.240 --> 01:10:41.240]  So you bring them, you have everybody implicated.
[01:10:41.240 --> 01:10:48.240]  Now they're more likely to give you the first one to get you to back off the second two.
[01:10:48.240 --> 01:10:50.240]  It's all politics.
[01:10:50.240 --> 01:10:55.240]  And when you go down there against the prosecutor initially, that's going to go all over the
[01:10:55.240 --> 01:10:58.240]  courthouse.
[01:10:58.240 --> 01:11:02.240]  When you go to Bushwhack a district judge with criminal charges against the prosecutor,
[01:11:02.240 --> 01:11:06.240]  the prosecutor is going to know about that within five minutes.
[01:11:06.240 --> 01:11:10.240]  And then when you come back with criminal charges against the judge, everybody is going
[01:11:10.240 --> 01:11:12.240]  to know about that.
[01:11:12.240 --> 01:11:15.240]  That's the influence that you want.
[01:11:15.240 --> 01:11:20.240]  Now you're telling them, I'm going to end careers here, guys.
[01:11:20.240 --> 01:11:23.240]  I know where your weakness is and I'm willing to exploit it.
[01:11:23.240 --> 01:11:31.240]  Now your different reason to make the original stuff go away would be you go away.
[01:11:31.240 --> 01:11:37.240]  You can go straight to the grand jury and then your argument, you know, they're going
[01:11:37.240 --> 01:11:39.240]  to interfere with you.
[01:11:39.240 --> 01:11:43.240]  They're going to try to stop you and tell you, you should take it here.
[01:11:43.240 --> 01:11:50.240]  And when they try to do that, you know, I did this in Travis County.
[01:11:50.240 --> 01:11:56.240]  I went to the grand jury, gave the bailiff some complaints.
[01:11:56.240 --> 01:12:00.240]  The first thing the bailiff did was call the prosecutor's attorney.
[01:12:00.240 --> 01:12:05.240]  But when Claire Dawson Brown showed up, I told her, Claire, you need to get out of here.
[01:12:05.240 --> 01:12:08.240]  You can't be here.
[01:12:08.240 --> 01:12:12.240]  Well, Mr. Calton, the prosecutor's attorney heads up the grand jury.
[01:12:12.240 --> 01:12:18.240]  So that may be, but you're also the accused in these criminal complaints.
[01:12:18.240 --> 01:12:23.240]  You're going to look really bad coming in here interfering with me filing complaints against you.
[01:12:23.240 --> 01:12:25.240]  You need to get out of here.
[01:12:25.240 --> 01:12:29.240]  See, that's the point place you want to put them in.
[01:12:29.240 --> 01:12:37.240]  That gives them reason to back up and you also give them a plausible deniability.
[01:12:37.240 --> 01:12:38.240]  What can I do?
[01:12:38.240 --> 01:12:39.240]  They've got charges against me.
[01:12:39.240 --> 01:12:42.240]  I can't go down there and say anything.
[01:12:42.240 --> 01:12:44.240]  But that goes to obstruction of justice.
[01:12:44.240 --> 01:12:47.240]  This starts to get really serious.
[01:12:47.240 --> 01:12:53.240]  It's one thing to tell a grand jury that the prosecutor's attorney didn't want to prosecute this public official.
[01:12:53.240 --> 01:13:01.240]  It's quite another, like when I went in front of the grand jury in Johnson County and told them that the district's attorney
[01:13:01.240 --> 01:13:07.240]  shielded criminal complaints against himself for you.
[01:13:07.240 --> 01:13:10.240]  That got high eyebrows.
[01:13:10.240 --> 01:13:13.240]  Where would you go to do that?
[01:13:13.240 --> 01:13:16.240]  Well, first thing you do is go to the prosecutor.
[01:13:16.240 --> 01:13:22.240]  And when he refuses to act, you go to the highest judge you can find.
[01:13:22.240 --> 01:13:23.240]  No, no, I got all that.
[01:13:23.240 --> 01:13:24.240]  I got all that.
[01:13:24.240 --> 01:13:30.240]  You're at the grand jury and let's say the prosecutor still refuses to let you get to the grand jury even though you said hey.
[01:13:30.240 --> 01:13:34.240]  Then you come back with complaints against the prosecutor.
[01:13:34.240 --> 01:13:38.240]  You find out when the grand jury is going to meet and where.
[01:13:38.240 --> 01:13:45.240]  And you come down while they're meeting and there will be a bailiff in front of the door where they meet.
[01:13:45.240 --> 01:13:51.240]  So the bailiff instructs the foreman that I have business with the grand jury.
[01:13:51.240 --> 01:13:55.240]  And they almost always say the same thing.
[01:13:55.240 --> 01:13:58.240]  They'll say may I tell them the nature of the business.
[01:13:58.240 --> 01:14:05.240]  The other thing they might say is well, you need to take these complaints to the prosecuting attorney.
[01:14:05.240 --> 01:14:14.240]  And you say well, that would probably be a bad idea because these are against the prosecuting attorney.
[01:14:14.240 --> 01:14:22.240]  And even a brain dead bailiff can figure out the problem with that one.
[01:14:22.240 --> 01:14:27.240]  And you tell him you interfere with these.
[01:14:27.240 --> 01:14:37.240]  And I will consider that an act of obstructing justice in order to shield the prosecuting attorney from prosecution.
[01:14:37.240 --> 01:14:40.240]  But generally you don't get that.
[01:14:40.240 --> 01:14:48.240]  Because once they figure it out, when they say that you should take it to the prosecutor and you say it's against the prosecutor,
[01:14:48.240 --> 01:14:54.240]  then all these warning buzzers start going off in their pea little brains.
[01:14:54.240 --> 01:15:01.240]  And even their little pea brain can realize these guys set us up.
[01:15:01.240 --> 01:15:08.240]  And if he's setting up the prosecuting attorney, I'm nothing but cannon fodder around here.
[01:15:08.240 --> 01:15:10.240]  It's no big deal anyway.
[01:15:10.240 --> 01:15:17.240]  And Bruno in California, it probably won't even get to that point because from what I understand,
[01:15:17.240 --> 01:15:22.240]  you can go straight to the grand jury without too much problem.
[01:15:22.240 --> 01:15:27.240]  But in most places it is a serious problem.
[01:15:27.240 --> 01:15:34.240]  And with some people it even gets to the point where if the prosecutor is standing outside the door of the grand jury
[01:15:34.240 --> 01:15:41.240]  trying to interfere with you presenting the criminal complaints, then you just have to call 911.
[01:15:41.240 --> 01:15:50.240]  I mean the state of our republic has literally gotten to the point that we have to call 911 outside of the door of the grand jury
[01:15:50.240 --> 01:15:55.240]  because the prosecutor is not letting us submit the complaints.
[01:15:55.240 --> 01:15:58.240]  But in California I don't think it's going to get to that point.
[01:15:58.240 --> 01:16:08.240]  Also to answer your question earlier concerning where do you find the statutes or the laws that require magistrates to do certain things,
[01:16:08.240 --> 01:16:11.240]  what are the duties of magistrates and judges and all these things,
[01:16:11.240 --> 01:16:16.240]  that would be either in the penal code or the code of criminal procedure or both.
[01:16:16.240 --> 01:16:24.240]  And if you go to our website, ruleoflawradio.com, and you look on the left you'll see in the navigation bar statutes by state.
[01:16:24.240 --> 01:16:32.240]  And if you click on that there will be a submenu and you can find all the codes of criminal procedure
[01:16:32.240 --> 01:16:36.240]  and penal codes and rules of civil procedure for every state.
[01:16:36.240 --> 01:16:40.240]  So start there, that's a good resource for you to start there.
[01:16:40.240 --> 01:16:41.240]  Okay Bruno?
[01:16:41.240 --> 01:16:42.240]  Thank you so much.
[01:16:42.240 --> 01:16:45.240]  Do you have anything else for us Bruno?
[01:16:45.240 --> 01:16:47.240]  No, that's all good.
[01:16:47.240 --> 01:16:48.240]  Thank you.
[01:16:48.240 --> 01:16:51.240]  I definitely would like to learn more about the grand jury.
[01:16:51.240 --> 01:16:54.240]  I know that you have seminars and so maybe we can talk about that.
[01:16:54.240 --> 01:16:55.240]  I've got people who want to learn.
[01:16:55.240 --> 01:16:56.240]  Okay.
[01:16:56.240 --> 01:17:01.240]  All right, we'll be right back folks.
[01:17:01.240 --> 01:17:07.240]  Capital Coin and Bullion is your local source for rare coins, precious metals, and coin supplies in the Austin metro area.
[01:17:07.240 --> 01:17:08.240]  We also ship worldwide.
[01:17:08.240 --> 01:17:13.240]  We are a family-owned and operated business that offers competitive prices on your coin and metal purchases.
[01:17:13.240 --> 01:17:20.240]  We buy, sell, trade, and confine rare coins, gold, and silver coin collections, precious metals, and scrap gold.
[01:17:20.240 --> 01:17:22.240]  We purchase and sell gold and jewelry items.
[01:17:22.240 --> 01:17:25.240]  We offer daily specials on coins and bullion.
[01:17:25.240 --> 01:17:30.240]  We are located at 5448 Burnett Road, Suite 3 at the corner of Burnett and Shulmont.
[01:17:30.240 --> 01:17:34.240]  And we're open Mondays and Fridays, 10 to 6, Saturdays 10 to 5.
[01:17:34.240 --> 01:17:41.240]  You are welcome to stop in our shop during regular business hours or call 512-646-6440.
[01:17:41.240 --> 01:17:42.240]  Any questions?
[01:17:42.240 --> 01:17:46.240]  Ask for Chad and say you heard about us on Blue of Law Radio or Texas Liberty Radio.
[01:17:46.240 --> 01:17:53.240]  That's Capital Coin and Bullion at the corner of Burnett and Shulmont, and we're open Mondays and Fridays, 10 to 6, Saturdays 10 to 5.
[01:17:53.240 --> 01:17:58.240]  That's Capital Coin and Bullion, 512-646-6440.
[01:17:58.240 --> 01:18:23.240]  All right, folks, we're back.
[01:18:23.240 --> 01:18:27.240]  We're taking your calls.
[01:18:27.240 --> 01:18:30.240]  We're going now to Mark in Wisconsin.
[01:18:30.240 --> 01:18:32.240]  Mark, thanks for calling in.
[01:18:32.240 --> 01:18:36.240]  What is on your mind tonight?
[01:18:36.240 --> 01:18:37.240]  Well, welcome back.
[01:18:37.240 --> 01:18:40.240]  Well, thank you.
[01:18:40.240 --> 01:18:43.240]  Did you guys get hacked or was it just a computer problem?
[01:18:43.240 --> 01:18:47.240]  No, no, it's just equipment failures.
[01:18:47.240 --> 01:18:48.240]  Hey, I got something going on here.
[01:18:48.240 --> 01:18:53.240]  We had five guys get arrested for openly carrying weapons in public, and it's legal here.
[01:18:53.240 --> 01:19:06.240]  We got the Chief of Police of Madison City putting out memos to his officers, telling his officers to accost people openly carrying in public when it's legal activity.
[01:19:06.240 --> 01:19:09.240]  These five gentlemen were issued citations.
[01:19:09.240 --> 01:19:17.240]  Two were issued citations for obstructing because they refused to give their license, which in Wisconsin you don't have to give your license unless you've broken the law.
[01:19:17.240 --> 01:19:25.240]  So they've dropped those, but they still have, what do they call that?
[01:19:25.240 --> 01:19:27.240]  I'm losing my place here.
[01:19:27.240 --> 01:19:35.240]  They charge them with disturbing the peace or something like that.
[01:19:35.240 --> 01:19:37.240]  Okay, disturbing the peace.
[01:19:37.240 --> 01:19:40.240]  Did you look up what that definition is defined as in the law there?
[01:19:40.240 --> 01:19:42.240]  No, no, I haven't yet.
[01:19:42.240 --> 01:19:47.240]  What I was doing right now is I was trying to get a hold of all the gentlemen involved.
[01:19:47.240 --> 01:19:48.240]  I sent them an email.
[01:19:48.240 --> 01:20:03.240]  They even have audio where the dispatcher was actually trying to coax the lady who called in about the weapons, trying to get her to say that she was disturbed by these gentlemen carrying weapons in public.
[01:20:03.240 --> 01:20:05.240]  You guys should play that audio tomorrow night.
[01:20:05.240 --> 01:20:07.240]  It's incredible.
[01:20:07.240 --> 01:20:14.240]  Yeah, what he's trying to do is he's trying to get a legal activity where anybody else, if they feel disturbed, they're breaking the law.
[01:20:14.240 --> 01:20:15.240]  That's what's happening, Eddie.
[01:20:15.240 --> 01:20:17.240]  I'm pretty sure you would have a field day on this.
[01:20:17.240 --> 01:20:21.240]  I'll send you an email on this so that you can go through it.
[01:20:21.240 --> 01:20:23.240]  It's pretty crazy.
[01:20:23.240 --> 01:20:24.240]  Actually, I've read that story.
[01:20:24.240 --> 01:20:29.240]  Just like today I was actually reading about Bruno's.
[01:20:29.240 --> 01:20:32.240]  I'm actually familiar with the story you're talking about.
[01:20:32.240 --> 01:20:34.240]  Oh, good, because there's audio on a website.
[01:20:34.240 --> 01:20:36.240]  I can send you that email.
[01:20:36.240 --> 01:20:38.240]  Yes, please do send me the link.
[01:20:38.240 --> 01:20:40.240]  I would love to hear the audio.
[01:20:40.240 --> 01:20:42.240]  Yeah, it's just incredible.
[01:20:42.240 --> 01:20:45.240]  What do you think these officers should be charged with?
[01:20:45.240 --> 01:20:54.240]  I actually called the person in charge of public relations, the professional liar.
[01:20:54.240 --> 01:20:58.240]  He told me, oh, well, we've had a lot of calls to and fro.
[01:20:58.240 --> 01:21:02.240]  I said, well, that would be nice if this was a popularity contest, but it's not.
[01:21:02.240 --> 01:21:04.240]  What we're talking about is the law here.
[01:21:04.240 --> 01:21:05.240]  He goes, well, how do you come into this, sir?
[01:21:05.240 --> 01:21:09.240]  I said, well, I come into this because I'm going to land on the chief of police
[01:21:09.240 --> 01:21:11.240]  like a ton of bricks.
[01:21:11.240 --> 01:21:12.240]  He's breaking the law.
[01:21:12.240 --> 01:21:14.240]  He's sending out memos for his officers to break the law.
[01:21:14.240 --> 01:21:17.240]  I think a jury's in order.
[01:21:17.240 --> 01:21:20.240]  Yeah, well, there's lots of things you could charge them with.
[01:21:20.240 --> 01:21:23.240]  The police officers were carrying guns, were they not?
[01:21:23.240 --> 01:21:24.240]  Yes, sir.
[01:21:24.240 --> 01:21:27.240]  And they were antagonistic toward these individuals?
[01:21:27.240 --> 01:21:29.240]  Yes, sir.
[01:21:29.240 --> 01:21:31.240]  Aggravated assault, sounds like to me.
[01:21:31.240 --> 01:21:35.240]  You also might want to see if there is an abuse of official capacity
[01:21:35.240 --> 01:21:40.240]  or official oppression statute in your state because there definitely is here in Texas.
[01:21:40.240 --> 01:21:42.240]  Yes, there is.
[01:21:42.240 --> 01:21:44.240]  So I would hit them with that.
[01:21:44.240 --> 01:21:49.240]  Filing a false report, I would hit them with that.
[01:21:49.240 --> 01:21:52.240]  For the obstructing and disturbing the peace, right?
[01:21:52.240 --> 01:21:55.240]  Exactly.
[01:21:55.240 --> 01:22:03.240]  And then conspiring to perpetrate a crime by creating a crime that didn't exist.
[01:22:03.240 --> 01:22:07.240]  So you've got criminal conspiracy on that.
[01:22:07.240 --> 01:22:10.240]  Right, right.
[01:22:10.240 --> 01:22:16.240]  And as Randy said earlier, if they actually signed complaints that certain actions took place
[01:22:16.240 --> 01:22:21.240]  that in fact did not occur, then that's aggravated perjury because those complaints were signed
[01:22:21.240 --> 01:22:26.240]  for the express purpose of causing harm and detriment to the individual named.
[01:22:26.240 --> 01:22:27.240]  Right, right.
[01:22:27.240 --> 01:22:30.240]  Well, I told you the dispatcher was trying to get the lady to say
[01:22:30.240 --> 01:22:32.240]  that she was disturbed by the men carrying guns.
[01:22:32.240 --> 01:22:34.240]  Well, she wouldn't do it.
[01:22:34.240 --> 01:22:38.240]  And what the police officers did is they've gone back a week later now, Eddie,
[01:22:38.240 --> 01:22:42.240]  and looked for a witness to find someone who would say that they were disturbed
[01:22:42.240 --> 01:22:44.240]  by these gentlemen carrying weapons.
[01:22:44.240 --> 01:22:45.240]  Well, there was one lady, too.
[01:22:45.240 --> 01:22:50.240]  Well, but the thing is whether or not an individual is disturbed is irrelevant
[01:22:50.240 --> 01:22:56.240]  if the necessary elements of the statute were not achieved.
[01:22:56.240 --> 01:22:59.240]  Someone can be disturbed because you have short hair.
[01:22:59.240 --> 01:23:05.240]  That doesn't mean you did anything wrong by getting a haircut.
[01:23:05.240 --> 01:23:06.240]  Right, right.
[01:23:06.240 --> 01:23:10.240]  So unless the elements of the law were broken,
[01:23:10.240 --> 01:23:15.240]  they could find as many witnesses as they want to say, oh, yeah, I felt disturbed.
[01:23:15.240 --> 01:23:17.240]  Well, big fat hairy deal.
[01:23:17.240 --> 01:23:22.240]  I felt you're ugly, too, but that's beside the point.
[01:23:22.240 --> 01:23:23.240]  I'll send you that audio.
[01:23:23.240 --> 01:23:27.240]  Wisconsin is falling apart at the seams.
[01:23:27.240 --> 01:23:28.240]  It's incredible.
[01:23:28.240 --> 01:23:29.240]  Hey, Randy, I had a question for you.
[01:23:29.240 --> 01:23:31.240]  I got a civil tort going on.
[01:23:31.240 --> 01:23:33.240]  Actually, I just sent out a tort letter.
[01:23:33.240 --> 01:23:38.240]  And I noticed on a lot of federal complaints that they ask for punitive damages,
[01:23:38.240 --> 01:23:44.240]  but they never list any counts or anything to back up the punitive damages.
[01:23:44.240 --> 01:23:48.240]  The company I'm going after right now has been sued probably a hundred times
[01:23:48.240 --> 01:23:50.240]  in the past two years for civil torts.
[01:23:50.240 --> 01:23:53.240]  And I'm wondering, how can I put a bee in their bonnet,
[01:23:53.240 --> 01:23:57.240]  Randy Kelton style, on the complaint?
[01:23:57.240 --> 01:23:59.240]  Can I list a count for punitive damages
[01:23:59.240 --> 01:24:01.240]  and say that they've been sued for almost the same thing
[01:24:01.240 --> 01:24:04.240]  a hundred times in the past two years?
[01:24:04.240 --> 01:24:12.240]  Well, the fact that they've been sued is not probative on its face at all.
[01:24:12.240 --> 01:24:15.240]  That just means that people have made accusations.
[01:24:15.240 --> 01:24:19.240]  Have they lost any?
[01:24:19.240 --> 01:24:23.240]  Well, they settled them all.
[01:24:23.240 --> 01:24:24.240]  Well, they didn't lose any of them.
[01:24:24.240 --> 01:24:27.240]  Yeah, they settled all of them.
[01:24:27.240 --> 01:24:29.240]  That's really hard to get to.
[01:24:29.240 --> 01:24:32.240]  It's like if I come and make an accusation against you,
[01:24:32.240 --> 01:24:39.240]  somebody else can't hold that accusation against you unless it's proved true.
[01:24:39.240 --> 01:24:48.240]  What can I put in there for punitive damages just to make them extend their resources?
[01:24:48.240 --> 01:24:53.240]  Do you have an allegation of fraud?
[01:24:53.240 --> 01:24:55.240]  I could.
[01:24:55.240 --> 01:25:00.240]  If you make an allegation of fraud, you can ask for punitive.
[01:25:00.240 --> 01:25:02.240]  All right.
[01:25:02.240 --> 01:25:03.240]  And one other thing.
[01:25:03.240 --> 01:25:05.240]  I've got a guy here in Wisconsin.
[01:25:05.240 --> 01:25:07.240]  We've got these Luciferian grass police.
[01:25:07.240 --> 01:25:09.240]  They made him tear down his own house.
[01:25:09.240 --> 01:25:14.240]  And they're threatening to make him move all his buildings off his property
[01:25:14.240 --> 01:25:16.240]  if he doesn't settle right now.
[01:25:16.240 --> 01:25:18.240]  And they haven't even charged him with anything, Randy.
[01:25:18.240 --> 01:25:19.240]  I think he's the next caller.
[01:25:19.240 --> 01:25:20.240]  I hope so.
[01:25:20.240 --> 01:25:22.240]  His name is Mike.
[01:25:22.240 --> 01:25:23.240]  Anyway, you have a great night.
[01:25:23.240 --> 01:25:26.240]  Eddie, hey, I'm going to send you that link to the audio.
[01:25:26.240 --> 01:25:27.240]  Maybe you can have fun with it tomorrow night.
[01:25:27.240 --> 01:25:28.240]  Good night.
[01:25:28.240 --> 01:25:29.240]  Thanks a lot.
[01:25:29.240 --> 01:25:30.240]  All right.
[01:25:30.240 --> 01:25:31.240]  Thanks.
[01:25:31.240 --> 01:25:32.240]  All right.
[01:25:32.240 --> 01:25:33.240]  Thanks.
[01:25:33.240 --> 01:25:37.240]  Okay, yeah, and I just wanted to make one quick comment about this issue
[01:25:37.240 --> 01:25:41.240]  of where it seems to be leading that, well, if somebody else feels
[01:25:41.240 --> 01:25:45.240]  that they're being disturbed, well, then it's disturbing the peace.
[01:25:45.240 --> 01:25:53.240]  Just from my personal experience regarding noise, regarding decibel levels,
[01:25:53.240 --> 01:25:58.240]  at least here in Austin, if it's not a commercially zoned area
[01:25:58.240 --> 01:26:03.240]  where you're specifically allowed to have like live music or whatever
[01:26:03.240 --> 01:26:08.240]  up to a certain dB level, a certain distance away from the front door,
[01:26:08.240 --> 01:26:13.240]  when it comes to residential areas, there's no noise ordinance.
[01:26:13.240 --> 01:26:18.240]  And so it really does kind of come down to if somebody feels they're being disturbed,
[01:26:18.240 --> 01:26:22.240]  well, then you might be disturbing the peace.
[01:26:22.240 --> 01:26:25.240]  And it's kind of up to the discretion of the officer
[01:26:25.240 --> 01:26:29.240]  whether you're really being unreasonably loud
[01:26:29.240 --> 01:26:34.240]  for whatever particular time of the day or night it might be.
[01:26:34.240 --> 01:26:39.240]  But that doesn't have anything to do with the content of the sound.
[01:26:39.240 --> 01:26:41.240]  It just has to do with the decibel level.
[01:26:41.240 --> 01:26:48.240]  But certainly when it comes to what you might look like or what you might say
[01:26:48.240 --> 01:26:53.240]  that if you're disturbing somebody because they don't like the shirt you're wearing,
[01:26:53.240 --> 01:26:55.240]  no, no, that's ridiculous.
[01:26:55.240 --> 01:26:59.240]  That starts getting into a lot of these ridiculous hate crimes laws
[01:26:59.240 --> 01:27:05.240]  where if somebody feels that they've been defamed or whatever,
[01:27:05.240 --> 01:27:07.240]  well, then you're breaking the law.
[01:27:07.240 --> 01:27:10.240]  Well, I just go back to the old saying,
[01:27:10.240 --> 01:27:15.240]  sticks and stones may break my bones, but words can never hurt me.
[01:27:15.240 --> 01:27:21.240]  You have to show a specific harm in order to be harmed.
[01:27:21.240 --> 01:27:23.240]  It's kind of a redundant saying.
[01:27:23.240 --> 01:27:26.240]  It's kind of a cyclical thing, but that's the way it is.
[01:27:26.240 --> 01:27:28.240]  There has to be some specific harm.
[01:27:28.240 --> 01:27:33.240]  It can't just be you hurt my feelings because I feel harmed
[01:27:33.240 --> 01:27:36.240]  because I don't like the way you look or I don't like what you said.
[01:27:36.240 --> 01:27:42.240]  But that's a whole different story than emitting a decibel level of sound
[01:27:42.240 --> 01:27:44.240]  from your residence at a certain time of the night
[01:27:44.240 --> 01:27:48.240]  where you're legitimately disturbing somebody who's trying to sleep at 3 in the morning
[01:27:48.240 --> 01:27:50.240]  and they need to get up the next day.
[01:27:50.240 --> 01:27:52.240]  That's a different thing, you see?
[01:27:52.240 --> 01:28:02.240]  Yeah, but what if you're wearing a caliber of pistol I happen to find disturbing?
[01:28:02.240 --> 01:28:03.240]  Too bad.
[01:28:03.240 --> 01:28:06.240]  And obviously I'm not as good a shot as I needed to be.
[01:28:06.240 --> 01:28:09.240]  Eddie.
[01:28:09.240 --> 01:28:13.240]  Again, it goes to specific harm.
[01:28:13.240 --> 01:28:17.240]  You know, you're not disturbing anyone.
[01:28:17.240 --> 01:28:21.240]  You're not really harming anyone unless you pull it out
[01:28:21.240 --> 01:28:25.240]  and stick it in their face or something, you know, threaten to shoot them.
[01:28:25.240 --> 01:28:27.240]  That would be like a threat.
[01:28:27.240 --> 01:28:28.240]  That's different.
[01:28:28.240 --> 01:28:30.240]  You are talking about the gun, right?
[01:28:30.240 --> 01:28:31.240]  Right.
[01:28:31.240 --> 01:28:32.240]  Okay.
[01:28:32.240 --> 01:28:37.240]  This is where clearly they need to go after the officers and the chief
[01:28:37.240 --> 01:28:43.240]  because if you have the memos, then the chief is clearly conspiring to deprive of rights.
[01:28:43.240 --> 01:28:49.240]  This goes directly to 42 U.S. Code 1983.
[01:28:49.240 --> 01:28:52.240]  41, 2, and 3, actually.
[01:28:52.240 --> 01:29:02.240]  This is exactly the kind of thing the Ku Klux Klan was written to prevent.
[01:29:02.240 --> 01:29:09.240]  And 18 U.S. Code 242.
[01:29:09.240 --> 01:29:12.240]  Indeed.
[01:29:12.240 --> 01:29:13.240]  Okay, folks.
[01:29:13.240 --> 01:29:15.240]  We've got some more callers on the line.
[01:29:15.240 --> 01:29:18.240]  We've got Mike from Texas, Dan from Connecticut, Susan from Texas.
[01:29:18.240 --> 01:29:20.240]  We're going to be taking our calls on the other side.
[01:29:20.240 --> 01:29:23.240]  We've got about another half an hour left.
[01:29:23.240 --> 01:29:26.240]  This is the rule of law, rule of law radio network.
[01:29:26.240 --> 01:29:29.240]  Tonight's Thursday, September 30th.
[01:29:29.240 --> 01:29:43.240]  Folks call in 512-646-1984, and we will be right back.
[01:30:00.240 --> 01:30:03.240]  Christ fed the multitudes with only one loaf of bread.
[01:30:03.240 --> 01:30:06.240]  Poor people, there's something for you.
[01:30:06.240 --> 01:30:09.240]  Austin's Own Caribbean, One Love Kitchen.
[01:30:09.240 --> 01:30:10.240]  On the banks of Colorado River.
[01:30:10.240 --> 01:30:14.240]  At 3109 East 1st Street is where you'll find One Love Kitchen.
[01:30:14.240 --> 01:30:16.240]  Jerk chicken, vegetarian restaurant.
[01:30:16.240 --> 01:30:19.240]  Monday through Wednesday, lunch and dinner, $5.
[01:30:19.240 --> 01:30:22.240]  Friday and Saturday, we got late night with Emperor Sound Crew.
[01:30:22.240 --> 01:30:24.240]  Still $5 place.
[01:30:24.240 --> 01:30:28.240]  Jerk chicken and vegetarian place to beat One Love Kitchen.
[01:30:28.240 --> 01:30:30.240]  Austin, Texas.
[01:30:30.240 --> 01:30:34.240]  Have you ever fed your family cornflakes or sent your kid off to school with a juice box?
[01:30:34.240 --> 01:30:35.240]  If so, look out.
[01:30:35.240 --> 01:30:38.240]  You might be sending them off to a lifetime of health problems.
[01:30:38.240 --> 01:30:42.240]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, and I'll identify the culprit in just a moment.
[01:30:42.240 --> 01:30:45.240]  Google is watching you, recording everything you've ever searched for
[01:30:45.240 --> 01:30:49.240]  and creating a massive database of your personal information.
[01:30:49.240 --> 01:30:50.240]  That's creepy.
[01:30:50.240 --> 01:30:52.240]  But it doesn't have to be that way.
[01:30:52.240 --> 01:30:55.240]  Startpage.com is the world's most private search engine.
[01:30:55.240 --> 01:30:59.240]  Startpage.com doesn't store your IP address, make a record of your searches
[01:30:59.240 --> 01:31:02.240]  or use tracking cookies, and they're third party certified.
[01:31:02.240 --> 01:31:06.240]  If you don't like Big Brother spying on you, start over with Startpage.
[01:31:06.240 --> 01:31:09.240]  Great search results and total privacy.
[01:31:09.240 --> 01:31:12.240]  Startpage.com, the world's most private search engine.
[01:31:12.240 --> 01:31:17.240]  Many breakfast cereals, juice drinks and other products contain high fructose corn syrup.
[01:31:17.240 --> 01:31:20.240]  Well, it's no secret that too much sugar will expand your waistline.
[01:31:20.240 --> 01:31:23.240]  When that sweetener is in the form of high fructose corn syrup,
[01:31:23.240 --> 01:31:25.240]  you put your body at risk for disease.
[01:31:25.240 --> 01:31:28.240]  We're talking high blood pressure, obesity, especially in children,
[01:31:28.240 --> 01:31:32.240]  high cholesterol and insulin resistance that can lead to Type 2 diabetes,
[01:31:32.240 --> 01:31:34.240]  and that's just part of it.
[01:31:34.240 --> 01:31:37.240]  Food manufacturers have to list their ingredients on all packaging,
[01:31:37.240 --> 01:31:40.240]  and fortunately, many are now providing alternatives.
[01:31:40.240 --> 01:31:43.240]  So the next time you reach for the cookies, ketchup or barbecue sauce,
[01:31:43.240 --> 01:31:44.240]  check the label.
[01:31:44.240 --> 01:31:47.240]  The life you save may be your child's.
[01:31:47.240 --> 01:31:48.240]  This is Dr. Catherine Albrecht.
[01:31:48.240 --> 01:32:13.240]  More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[01:32:13.240 --> 01:32:14.240]  Okay, folks, we are back.
[01:32:14.240 --> 01:32:22.240]  We're taking your calls, 512-646-1984.
[01:32:22.240 --> 01:32:26.240]  We're going to go now to Susan in Texas.
[01:32:26.240 --> 01:32:28.240]  Susan, thanks for calling in.
[01:32:28.240 --> 01:32:34.240]  What is your question for us tonight?
[01:32:34.240 --> 01:32:39.240]  Is Susan there?
[01:32:39.240 --> 01:32:41.240]  Okay, Susan may have dropped off the line.
[01:32:41.240 --> 01:32:44.240]  All right, we're going to go now to Dan in Connecticut.
[01:32:44.240 --> 01:32:45.240]  Dan, thanks for calling in.
[01:32:45.240 --> 01:32:47.240]  What's on your mind tonight?
[01:32:47.240 --> 01:32:52.240]  Nothing much, just some basic run-of-the-mill injunctive relief.
[01:32:52.240 --> 01:32:56.240]  I'm not sure if this is too complex for tonight,
[01:32:56.240 --> 01:32:58.240]  but I just wanted to bounce some ideas off of you.
[01:32:58.240 --> 01:33:03.240]  In a nutshell, what happened is we were on the ballot,
[01:33:03.240 --> 01:33:07.240]  and the Secretary of State's office announced to the press that we're on the ballot.
[01:33:07.240 --> 01:33:11.240]  They put us on the official candidate list, all that nine yards.
[01:33:11.240 --> 01:33:17.240]  We received information directly from them via email several weeks later,
[01:33:17.240 --> 01:33:20.240]  and basically they said, oh, by the way,
[01:33:20.240 --> 01:33:24.240]  you have approximately one week to track down all your petition pages,
[01:33:24.240 --> 01:33:27.240]  because we lost a whole bunch of documentation.
[01:33:27.240 --> 01:33:32.240]  So what we have to do is we have to go for injunctive relief,
[01:33:32.240 --> 01:33:34.240]  and I'd indicated that, look, you know,
[01:33:34.240 --> 01:33:38.240]  the request you're making, that's going to take at least
[01:33:38.240 --> 01:33:42.240]  until the end of the first week of October to comply with.
[01:33:42.240 --> 01:33:48.240]  So instead of doing that, we're actually going to sue for injunctive relief.
[01:33:48.240 --> 01:33:50.240]  I called the clerk of the court today.
[01:33:50.240 --> 01:33:55.240]  I have the petition written up, and basically we're going to,
[01:33:55.240 --> 01:33:59.240]  first of all, demonstrate throughout how the last few years
[01:33:59.240 --> 01:34:02.240]  that particular office has lost documentation,
[01:34:02.240 --> 01:34:06.240]  and second of all, we're going to pretty much say there's a compelling state interest,
[01:34:06.240 --> 01:34:10.240]  and we're going to cite Green Party versus Garfield,
[01:34:10.240 --> 01:34:13.240]  which was the case on the Citizens' Elections Program,
[01:34:13.240 --> 01:34:17.240]  and we're going to use the arguments that the state did use
[01:34:17.240 --> 01:34:20.240]  to illustrate compelling state interest,
[01:34:20.240 --> 01:34:24.240]  which one of them is to remove the appearance
[01:34:24.240 --> 01:34:28.240]  or actual presence of corruption in the process.
[01:34:28.240 --> 01:34:36.240]  So I was just wondering what kind of thoughts would you have going into this?
[01:34:36.240 --> 01:34:39.240]  I'm really not sure.
[01:34:39.240 --> 01:34:47.240]  Are you saying that the Secretary of State is saying that you can't be on the ballot
[01:34:47.240 --> 01:34:52.240]  because they lost documentation that they clearly had prior to this point
[01:34:52.240 --> 01:34:55.240]  that qualified you for the ballot?
[01:34:55.240 --> 01:34:57.240]  Yeah, pretty much.
[01:34:57.240 --> 01:34:59.240]  The person that emailed back said,
[01:34:59.240 --> 01:35:01.240]  wow, we don't have enough qualifying signatures here,
[01:35:01.240 --> 01:35:05.240]  and of course that was very strange.
[01:35:05.240 --> 01:35:08.240]  And at first I asked a whole bunch of questions,
[01:35:08.240 --> 01:35:15.240]  and we pretty much established that there is a lack of security at that office,
[01:35:15.240 --> 01:35:22.240]  and the other person couldn't even identify the total amount of petition pages sent in at all.
[01:35:22.240 --> 01:35:24.240]  I've been checking around.
[01:35:24.240 --> 01:35:29.240]  They come up with different counts for the amount of signatures that they should have,
[01:35:29.240 --> 01:35:34.240]  and basically what they did is they decided to take us off the ballot,
[01:35:34.240 --> 01:35:39.240]  and they pretty much said you've got a week to come up with all these pieces of paper
[01:35:39.240 --> 01:35:42.240]  which involves running around the district.
[01:35:42.240 --> 01:35:47.240]  So instead what I figured I'd do is super-injunctive relief, you know, saying,
[01:35:47.240 --> 01:35:49.240]  look, put us on the ballot.
[01:35:49.240 --> 01:35:51.240]  You guys told everyone we were on the ballot,
[01:35:51.240 --> 01:35:56.240]  and you purposely waited until the last minute so you denied us due process.
[01:35:56.240 --> 01:36:03.240]  Dan, do you have proof that you submitted the proper documentation in time?
[01:36:03.240 --> 01:36:08.240]  Well, the problem with it is, you know, we could find it,
[01:36:08.240 --> 01:36:11.240]  but the amount of time that they gave us wasn't sufficient to do that.
[01:36:11.240 --> 01:36:12.240]  Well, wait a minute.
[01:36:12.240 --> 01:36:14.240]  I mean, is this like a court filing?
[01:36:14.240 --> 01:36:19.240]  I mean, do you keep copies of everything with some kind of an official stamp from those guys,
[01:36:19.240 --> 01:36:23.240]  or do you have to turn over like all the original signatures?
[01:36:23.240 --> 01:36:28.240]  I mean, what I'm asking is that, I mean, do you have some kind of proof
[01:36:28.240 --> 01:36:32.240]  that you submitted the proper documentation in time?
[01:36:32.240 --> 01:36:37.240]  So if they come back and say, well, we lost it, well, too bad,
[01:36:37.240 --> 01:36:44.240]  because I've got a file stamp copy here that shows that I submitted such and such and such and such to you
[01:36:44.240 --> 01:36:48.240]  by a such and such date, you know, like when you file a document with court.
[01:36:48.240 --> 01:36:51.240]  Yeah, I mean, I did instruct everybody to retain copies,
[01:36:51.240 --> 01:36:56.240]  but the thing is once they turn them into the town halls, that's pretty much it.
[01:36:56.240 --> 01:37:02.240]  And once they leave the town halls to the Secretary of State's office, that's an entirely different story.
[01:37:02.240 --> 01:37:07.240]  So what would happen, you know, complying with this request would be as follows.
[01:37:07.240 --> 01:37:13.240]  First, we would have to go and collect the copies of the pages that people had submitted.
[01:37:13.240 --> 01:37:19.240]  Then if there were any issues with signature validation, we'd have to go purchase a database of voters
[01:37:19.240 --> 01:37:24.240]  from the Secretary of State's office, and then we would have to validate the signatures.
[01:37:24.240 --> 01:37:31.240]  The other problem is, you know, the pages that were misplaced and, you know, probably weren't counted.
[01:37:31.240 --> 01:37:35.240]  We would have to go through and have the town clerks go through with that.
[01:37:35.240 --> 01:37:39.240]  And there's another problem here, which is why we're going for injunctive relief.
[01:37:39.240 --> 01:37:45.240]  Two weeks before the election, it will be impossible to change the chips in the voting machine.
[01:37:45.240 --> 01:37:48.240]  We ran into this problem last time in 2008.
[01:37:48.240 --> 01:37:56.240]  We had proved that we collected enough signatures, but the trial ran so long, you know, that, I mean,
[01:37:56.240 --> 01:38:05.240]  in the event we would prevail, which we would, it would be too late to change the machines anyway.
[01:38:05.240 --> 01:38:10.240]  So it's kind of a pickle. They basically waited until the last possible minute.
[01:38:10.240 --> 01:38:15.240]  So it's essentially moot, you know, contrived to be that way.
[01:38:15.240 --> 01:38:21.240]  You're going to be on the ballot anyway because it's too late to take you off.
[01:38:21.240 --> 01:38:24.240]  Isn't that the case?
[01:38:24.240 --> 01:38:32.240]  Well, they basically waited until one day before they started printing ballots to make that decision.
[01:38:32.240 --> 01:38:41.240]  So we, we found, they basically waited so long that we couldn't do anything about it, taking that route.
[01:38:41.240 --> 01:38:48.240]  Wait, that doesn't make sense. What does it mean, started punching ballots?
[01:38:48.240 --> 01:38:49.240]  Well, basically-
[01:38:49.240 --> 01:38:50.240]  He said printing.
[01:38:50.240 --> 01:38:51.240]  Printing.
[01:38:51.240 --> 01:38:55.240]  You mean they're printing ballots without your names on them or with you?
[01:38:55.240 --> 01:38:57.240]  Yes, they are.
[01:38:57.240 --> 01:39:02.240]  I mean, it's not too late to fix it that way, but they waited so long.
[01:39:02.240 --> 01:39:05.240]  This is why I wrote them two certified letters in August.
[01:39:05.240 --> 01:39:15.240]  Well, Dan, are they, it looks to me like we need to look at the election code of your state to see what they are required to do.
[01:39:15.240 --> 01:39:23.240]  I mean, if they are required to verify the petitions and verify the signatures by a certain date and they did not do that,
[01:39:23.240 --> 01:39:27.240]  well, then you have a cause of action against them and possibly criminal charges.
[01:39:27.240 --> 01:39:29.240]  I just looked at the election code and here's what I can tell you.
[01:39:29.240 --> 01:39:35.240]  First of all, that process you're describing, that is 9-453.
[01:39:35.240 --> 01:39:46.240]  And in order to get on that list, which I discussed, which is governed by 9-4A, you have to be certified as having qualified under that process.
[01:39:46.240 --> 01:39:51.240]  So there's no way to get on that list unless they went through the process and certified us.
[01:39:51.240 --> 01:39:54.240]  So, I mean, that's kind of a no-brainer.
[01:39:54.240 --> 01:39:58.240]  They pretty much put it on, copies of that list have been saved.
[01:39:58.240 --> 01:40:03.240]  So there's no question that they went through that and everything was all well and good.
[01:40:03.240 --> 01:40:06.240]  And then they told the press, hey, by the way, you've got nine libertarians on the ballot.
[01:40:06.240 --> 01:40:10.240]  So that part is all pretty much squared away.
[01:40:10.240 --> 01:40:20.240]  The other part that is kind of a problem is I asked, what was your statutory authority for removing us from the ballot?
[01:40:20.240 --> 01:40:27.240]  They basically spit back 9-53 and the definitions clause in 9-372.
[01:40:27.240 --> 01:40:34.240]  The problem with those codes and that entire title, that would be Chapter 153,
[01:40:34.240 --> 01:40:39.240]  nothing in Chapter 153 provides for removing a candidate for any reason.
[01:40:39.240 --> 01:40:47.240]  You know, they're basically saying our process for removing you is the process used to put you on.
[01:40:47.240 --> 01:40:52.240]  So it's kind of nonsensical.
[01:40:52.240 --> 01:40:57.240]  Well, yeah, if there's nothing in statute that authorized them to make that decision,
[01:40:57.240 --> 01:41:01.240]  then you've got a cause of action against them.
[01:41:01.240 --> 01:41:07.240]  They can't see, we have to keep in mind the role, the proper role of our government.
[01:41:07.240 --> 01:41:14.240]  They can't just do whatever they want and make whatever decisions they want capriciously or for whatever reason.
[01:41:14.240 --> 01:41:21.240]  They can only do what they're authorized to do under statute and they have to do what's required of them as well.
[01:41:21.240 --> 01:41:29.240]  Yeah, and I pointed out to them numerous times ad nauseam and I even saved the certified mail receipts.
[01:41:29.240 --> 01:41:34.240]  I said, look, this is why I sent you two certified letters in August.
[01:41:34.240 --> 01:41:41.240]  So if this was a problem, we would have time to track everything down and revalidate everything.
[01:41:41.240 --> 01:41:50.240]  They basically waited until the last possible minute and their thought is too late to do anything about it.
[01:41:50.240 --> 01:41:53.240]  So that's one of the things I'm going to be bringing up to the judge
[01:41:53.240 --> 01:42:04.240]  and I'm actually going to bring up the case from 2008 where they did the same exact thing.
[01:42:04.240 --> 01:42:07.240]  Someone should be charged criminally.
[01:42:07.240 --> 01:42:11.240]  As a matter of fact, that's already been taken care of.
[01:42:11.240 --> 01:42:16.240]  I already submitted an affidavit with that and if the state elections enforcement people don't do anything,
[01:42:16.240 --> 01:42:25.240]  I'm going to raise it again in court because basically in order to even get any kind of answer from these guys
[01:42:25.240 --> 01:42:34.240]  or to even start any communication, I had to go to the state elections enforcement people.
[01:42:34.240 --> 01:42:38.240]  It sounds like time for a lawsuit and discovery.
[01:42:38.240 --> 01:42:43.240]  Yeah, after the election I'm thinking, but the problem with a lawsuit,
[01:42:43.240 --> 01:42:50.240]  and this is the case of the Libertarian Party versus BISUIT.
[01:42:50.240 --> 01:42:59.240]  And the case number for that I believe is 3-08-CB1513.
[01:42:59.240 --> 01:43:04.240]  And basically what had happened in that case is they just delayed and delayed and delayed
[01:43:04.240 --> 01:43:08.240]  and went too late to fix the machines.
[01:43:08.240 --> 01:43:13.240]  But fortunately we've already made our record with that.
[01:43:13.240 --> 01:43:19.240]  And in that case we did find that pages went to the wrong towns for validation.
[01:43:19.240 --> 01:43:26.240]  And on top of that I intend to raise the other issues we found with the voter database.
[01:43:26.240 --> 01:43:33.240]  I don't know if you heard about it, but there was a particular issue in that office where the case was...
[01:43:33.240 --> 01:43:34.240]  I hear the music.
[01:43:34.240 --> 01:43:36.240]  Yeah, Dan, listen, we're running out of time here.
[01:43:36.240 --> 01:43:38.240]  This is an in-depth issue.
[01:43:38.240 --> 01:43:42.240]  Can you call back in tomorrow night because we want to get to the rest of our calls before the end of the show?
[01:43:42.240 --> 01:43:43.240]  Okay, I certainly do that.
[01:43:43.240 --> 01:43:45.240]  Okay, all right.
[01:43:45.240 --> 01:43:48.240]  All right, this is an in-depth issue that needs more discussion.
[01:43:48.240 --> 01:43:50.240]  All right, folks, we're going to break.
[01:43:50.240 --> 01:43:53.240]  We've got Susan, Mike, David on the line.
[01:43:53.240 --> 01:43:57.240]  We'll be right back to the final segment, Rule of Law.
[01:44:23.240 --> 01:44:25.240]  We'll be right back.
[01:44:53.240 --> 01:44:56.240]  1-2-6-0-8 today.
[01:45:23.240 --> 01:45:51.240]  Okay, folks, we are back.
[01:45:51.240 --> 01:45:53.240]  We're taking your calls.
[01:45:53.240 --> 01:45:57.240]  Final segment of Rule of Law here on this Thursday night.
[01:45:57.240 --> 01:46:00.240]  We're going to Susan in Texas.
[01:46:00.240 --> 01:46:02.240]  Susan, thanks for calling in.
[01:46:02.240 --> 01:46:04.240]  What is your question for us tonight?
[01:46:04.240 --> 01:46:08.240]  Thank you very much for allowing me to ask you a question.
[01:46:08.240 --> 01:46:14.240]  A friend gave me a car, and I have a driver's license or insurance.
[01:46:14.240 --> 01:46:21.240]  I need to transfer the title into my name. What should I do?
[01:46:21.240 --> 01:46:27.240]  Well, do you plan on getting a driver's license or insurance?
[01:46:27.240 --> 01:46:28.240]  No.
[01:46:28.240 --> 01:46:30.240]  Okay.
[01:46:30.240 --> 01:46:37.240]  When you buy the car, what I did with mine was I had it done on a notarized bill of sale.
[01:46:37.240 --> 01:46:40.240]  I never went and had the title transferred.
[01:46:40.240 --> 01:46:46.240]  I got the title, but attached to it is a notarized bill of sale.
[01:46:46.240 --> 01:46:47.240]  Okay.
[01:46:47.240 --> 01:46:52.240]  Showing that I am now the owner of the property.
[01:46:52.240 --> 01:46:53.240]  Okay.
[01:46:53.240 --> 01:46:59.240]  And basically what I did is I just wrote up a bill of sale that states that I
[01:46:59.240 --> 01:47:03.240]  and the name of the person selling the car do hereby sell the following property,
[01:47:03.240 --> 01:47:12.240]  a 1990 Buick Scowlark blue in color with the following vehicle identification number
[01:47:12.240 --> 01:47:17.240]  and then put the VIN on there, too, and then put the name of who you're selling it to
[01:47:17.240 --> 01:47:24.240]  and relinquish all title and or possession or other rights associated with such property
[01:47:24.240 --> 01:47:28.240]  in this transfer to the individual so named.
[01:47:28.240 --> 01:47:31.240]  And then go down and both of you sign it in front of a notary.
[01:47:31.240 --> 01:47:33.240]  Okay, great.
[01:47:33.240 --> 01:47:35.240]  Thank you for your answer.
[01:47:35.240 --> 01:47:36.240]  Yes, ma'am.
[01:47:36.240 --> 01:47:37.240]  Bye.
[01:47:37.240 --> 01:47:38.240]  All right.
[01:47:38.240 --> 01:47:39.240]  Thanks, Susan.
[01:47:39.240 --> 01:47:40.240]  Okay.
[01:47:40.240 --> 01:47:42.240]  We are going now to Mike in Texas.
[01:47:42.240 --> 01:47:44.240]  Mike, thanks for calling in.
[01:47:44.240 --> 01:47:46.240]  What do you got for us tonight?
[01:47:46.240 --> 01:47:47.240]  Hi, guys.
[01:47:47.240 --> 01:47:50.240]  Thank you for taking my call.
[01:47:50.240 --> 01:47:51.240]  Got a couple of quick questions.
[01:47:51.240 --> 01:47:57.240]  I got about a week time worth of time before I have to go to trial.
[01:47:57.240 --> 01:48:00.240]  Let's see.
[01:48:00.240 --> 01:48:05.240]  I'm down to, I guess, filing bar grievances to issue complaints
[01:48:05.240 --> 01:48:10.240]  and if possible indictments.
[01:48:10.240 --> 01:48:12.240]  I have been working at a written mandamus.
[01:48:12.240 --> 01:48:18.240]  That's about six pages right now, but I haven't got input into the justifications yet.
[01:48:18.240 --> 01:48:24.240]  Just mostly most six pages of complaint.
[01:48:24.240 --> 01:48:27.240]  So I'm kind of coming down to the last few things.
[01:48:27.240 --> 01:48:28.240]  Wait a minute, Mike.
[01:48:28.240 --> 01:48:29.240]  Okay.
[01:48:29.240 --> 01:48:32.240]  Listeners, this is about the TSA case with the water bottle.
[01:48:32.240 --> 01:48:43.240]  Okay, Mike, did you file a motion for continuance yet based on the reason that the court reporter has told you
[01:48:43.240 --> 01:48:49.240]  and even given you written documentation that she's not going to be able to get you the transcripts in time for the trial?
[01:48:49.240 --> 01:48:51.240]  Have you filed a motion for continuance left?
[01:48:51.240 --> 01:48:55.240]  Because if your trial is a week away, you need to get that in right now
[01:48:55.240 --> 01:49:01.240]  because generally you can only file documents only up to seven days before the hearing.
[01:49:01.240 --> 01:49:05.240]  Well, yes, I have, and they rejected it summarily.
[01:49:05.240 --> 01:49:13.240]  What's been happening is that all my motions have been going to the head judge, Judge McGee, and she just rejects it out of hand.
[01:49:13.240 --> 01:49:14.240]  They never go to a prosecutor.
[01:49:14.240 --> 01:49:16.240]  A prosecutor never gets a chance to object.
[01:49:16.240 --> 01:49:18.240]  She has just been rejecting it.
[01:49:18.240 --> 01:49:21.240]  Wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute, because this is a complicated case.
[01:49:21.240 --> 01:49:22.240]  I want to clarify.
[01:49:22.240 --> 01:49:28.240]  I know you had filed one motion for continuance.
[01:49:28.240 --> 01:49:29.240]  Yes.
[01:49:29.240 --> 01:49:37.240]  And then they rejected it, but I was talking about filing an additional one because they actually dismissed the previous charges against you.
[01:49:37.240 --> 01:49:40.240]  This is a separate additional new case.
[01:49:40.240 --> 01:49:44.240]  Did you file a motion of continuance, another one, in this case?
[01:49:44.240 --> 01:49:45.240]  Yes.
[01:49:45.240 --> 01:49:47.240]  And they rejected it?
[01:49:47.240 --> 01:49:49.240]  Yes.
[01:49:49.240 --> 01:49:54.240]  And you cited the reason was that the court reporter wasn't going to have time to get the transcripts ready.
[01:49:54.240 --> 01:49:56.240]  Yes.
[01:49:56.240 --> 01:50:00.240]  Did you file a writ of mandamus, a petition for writ of mandamus?
[01:50:00.240 --> 01:50:01.240]  Well, I've been working on a writ.
[01:50:01.240 --> 01:50:07.240]  I've got about six pages of it written, but I haven't been able to get any more.
[01:50:07.240 --> 01:50:13.240]  Actually, I went to, last Tuesday, not this Tuesday, but the week before, I went in.
[01:50:13.240 --> 01:50:18.240]  The Office of Municipal Rules say I'm supposed to get everything in 14 days, not seven.
[01:50:18.240 --> 01:50:23.240]  And so on the 13th or 15th day before trial, I went in.
[01:50:23.240 --> 01:50:30.240]  And just to verify, I had already put in an order for a motion sharing, which they just ignored.
[01:50:30.240 --> 01:50:33.240]  I went in and checked to see if all my motions had been submitted.
[01:50:33.240 --> 01:50:39.240]  And so I actually was able to talk a clerk of courts to let me see a magistrate.
[01:50:39.240 --> 01:50:46.240]  So I saw a magistrate, and she said that she knew that, well, before I even got up,
[01:50:46.240 --> 01:50:53.240]  she said that she told the clerk that she would not reissue the court order to provide audio and video.
[01:50:53.240 --> 01:50:58.240]  And then when I got to the bench, basically she just refused.
[01:50:58.240 --> 01:51:01.240]  She changed her story a number of times.
[01:51:01.240 --> 01:51:04.240]  I mean, she would say I'd ask her one question, and she'd say one thing,
[01:51:04.240 --> 01:51:08.240]  I'd ask her the same question later because it would be confusing if she would change it.
[01:51:08.240 --> 01:51:11.240]  But effectively, she had said that, more than effectively,
[01:51:11.240 --> 01:51:14.240]  she actually said that virtually all my motions have been kicked out,
[01:51:14.240 --> 01:51:16.240]  even though they hadn't been reviewed by the prosecutor.
[01:51:16.240 --> 01:51:20.240]  They're just being rejected by the judge.
[01:51:20.240 --> 01:51:23.240]  And they were being rejected for ticky-tack issues.
[01:51:23.240 --> 01:51:26.240]  One of them she claimed was there was no date on it.
[01:51:26.240 --> 01:51:29.240]  But I know that every page is dated and notarized with a notarized stamp,
[01:51:29.240 --> 01:51:33.240]  plus every page has been stamped by the clerk of courts.
[01:51:33.240 --> 01:51:38.240]  But regardless, after a couple minutes speaking with her, she had said,
[01:51:38.240 --> 01:51:43.240]  well, I asked her, do you want me to refile these motions or are they going to get pulled in?
[01:51:43.240 --> 01:51:46.240]  And she said, well, you know, I've got conflicting issues in that.
[01:51:46.240 --> 01:51:49.240]  And so basically I couldn't get a statement from them,
[01:51:49.240 --> 01:51:54.240]  a written statement that they would pull all these in.
[01:51:54.240 --> 01:51:56.240]  So I said, well, okay, I'll just refile everything.
[01:51:56.240 --> 01:51:57.240]  I'll put a new date on it.
[01:51:57.240 --> 01:51:59.240]  I'll re-stamp it, you know, do all that stuff.
[01:51:59.240 --> 01:52:03.240]  But I was just trying to save the clerk of courts a lot of time, a lot of scanning, et cetera.
[01:52:03.240 --> 01:52:12.240]  And she got upset, and she had me ejected from the courtroom under force of arms.
[01:52:12.240 --> 01:52:15.240]  And then, so I was outside copying.
[01:52:15.240 --> 01:52:17.240]  I was like, okay, you know, I'll just redo it all again.
[01:52:17.240 --> 01:52:22.240]  So I'm making copies for myself, for prosecution, and for the court.
[01:52:22.240 --> 01:52:27.240]  And the officer came in, you know, he ordered me out of the building.
[01:52:27.240 --> 01:52:30.240]  He said, no, what's your cause of action?
[01:52:30.240 --> 01:52:32.240]  And he just kind of sat there for 30 seconds.
[01:52:32.240 --> 01:52:33.240]  He couldn't figure out.
[01:52:33.240 --> 01:52:36.240]  He talked over me to one of the clerks and said, well, you're making too many copies.
[01:52:36.240 --> 01:52:38.240]  You're not allowed to make that many copies.
[01:52:38.240 --> 01:52:40.240]  I said, well, there's no rule against it.
[01:52:40.240 --> 01:52:44.240]  And so eventually they kicked me out, and then they wouldn't let me back in.
[01:52:44.240 --> 01:52:48.240]  And so eventually, you know, I said, well, you know, I want to have a piece of paper.
[01:52:48.240 --> 01:52:49.240]  Why can't I?
[01:52:49.240 --> 01:52:53.240]  I've got time sensitive documents unless you're willing to dismiss charges.
[01:52:53.240 --> 01:52:57.240]  You know, you're obstructing my business or, you know, in the municipal building.
[01:52:57.240 --> 01:52:59.240]  I've got no business in the courtroom.
[01:52:59.240 --> 01:53:02.240]  And so eventually the supervisor came out, and the supervisor did let me in
[01:53:02.240 --> 01:53:04.240]  and did let me make more copies.
[01:53:04.240 --> 01:53:12.240]  But at that point, since they've already rejected my 70, 80 motions I've put in,
[01:53:12.240 --> 01:53:15.240]  I have been trying to do different tacks.
[01:53:15.240 --> 01:53:17.240]  And I have been working at a rhythm in damas.
[01:53:17.240 --> 01:53:20.240]  I've got about six pages, eight pages written.
[01:53:20.240 --> 01:53:26.240]  But since the probability is low, I was almost thinking about filing a lawsuit
[01:53:26.240 --> 01:53:29.240]  because that would automatically, as long as it's over a certain dollar value,
[01:53:29.240 --> 01:53:31.240]  I believe it's $10,000.
[01:53:31.240 --> 01:53:34.240]  Is that correct that that would pop it out of municipal
[01:53:34.240 --> 01:53:39.240]  and automatically put it in the county just because they can't properly
[01:53:39.240 --> 01:53:41.240]  judge it themselves?
[01:53:41.240 --> 01:53:44.240]  No, it would not.
[01:53:44.240 --> 01:53:50.240]  If you file a countersuit in that court that exceeds that court's jurisdiction,
[01:53:50.240 --> 01:53:54.240]  they will dismiss your countersuit immediately.
[01:53:54.240 --> 01:53:56.240]  Oh, okay.
[01:53:56.240 --> 01:54:01.240]  So you would have to file in the proper court that would have jurisdiction
[01:54:01.240 --> 01:54:04.240]  and move for a restraining order against this court.
[01:54:04.240 --> 01:54:08.240]  But to get a restraining order in criminal matter is extremely difficult.
[01:54:08.240 --> 01:54:10.240]  Okay.
[01:54:10.240 --> 01:54:12.240]  And damas is probably your best bet.
[01:54:12.240 --> 01:54:14.240]  Yeah, the rhythm and damas.
[01:54:14.240 --> 01:54:18.240]  And also, okay, I have a question for Randy and Eddie concerning this
[01:54:18.240 --> 01:54:22.240]  and also a comment concerning the refiling.
[01:54:22.240 --> 01:54:25.240]  First off, I want to address the refiling of documents.
[01:54:25.240 --> 01:54:32.240]  Okay, it's not your business or your job or duty to make things easier
[01:54:32.240 --> 01:54:36.240]  on the clerk of the court just because he or she may be, you know,
[01:54:36.240 --> 01:54:38.240]  confused or disorganized.
[01:54:38.240 --> 01:54:41.240]  You never want to refile documents.
[01:54:41.240 --> 01:54:48.240]  If you file a document and you get back an official copy with the clerk's
[01:54:48.240 --> 01:54:53.240]  signature, initials, seal, date, that's it.
[01:54:53.240 --> 01:54:55.240]  You filed the document.
[01:54:55.240 --> 01:55:00.240]  You don't want to refile it because all that's going to do is confuse the
[01:55:00.240 --> 01:55:02.240]  court, all right?
[01:55:02.240 --> 01:55:04.240]  It's going to confuse the whole case.
[01:55:04.240 --> 01:55:10.240]  They could even possibly blow off the original filing and say that you
[01:55:10.240 --> 01:55:15.240]  filed these documents too late and take the second filing as the official
[01:55:15.240 --> 01:55:16.240]  filing.
[01:55:16.240 --> 01:55:18.240]  Don't ever refile documents.
[01:55:18.240 --> 01:55:19.240]  You file a document.
[01:55:19.240 --> 01:55:22.240]  You've got the official copy with the official stamp back.
[01:55:22.240 --> 01:55:23.240]  That's it, all right?
[01:55:23.240 --> 01:55:28.240]  If the clerk has, you know, abused her capacity or been negligent,
[01:55:28.240 --> 01:55:30.240]  then you go after the clerk.
[01:55:30.240 --> 01:55:32.240]  So you don't want to refile the documents.
[01:55:32.240 --> 01:55:34.240]  This isn't like an office, okay?
[01:55:34.240 --> 01:55:39.240]  This is a court, and it all has to do with making the record, all right?
[01:55:39.240 --> 01:55:43.240]  Now, also concerning the fact, I'm very concerned about the fact that this
[01:55:43.240 --> 01:55:47.240]  judge denied your motion for continuance even though you specifically
[01:55:47.240 --> 01:55:54.240]  cited that the court reporter was not able to get the transcripts ready in
[01:55:54.240 --> 01:55:55.240]  time.
[01:55:55.240 --> 01:56:01.240]  Randy, would this be an issue for demanding of the judge or filing for a
[01:56:01.240 --> 01:56:07.240]  finding of facts and conclusions at law to force the judge to explain why he
[01:56:07.240 --> 01:56:11.240]  or she denied this motion for continuance when it's very clear that he
[01:56:11.240 --> 01:56:15.240]  needs this transcript and he's even got proof?
[01:56:15.240 --> 01:56:21.240]  This goes more to read a mandamus, and that's what he's working on.
[01:56:21.240 --> 01:56:28.240]  The mandamus will hire a court to force him to either force the court recorder
[01:56:28.240 --> 01:56:35.240]  to come up with the documents or grant you time, grant you due process.
[01:56:35.240 --> 01:56:37.240]  This is a denial of due process.
[01:56:37.240 --> 01:56:41.240]  The court reporter claims that all the audio equipment is hers.
[01:56:41.240 --> 01:56:46.240]  Therefore, I wonder how Austin can claim that Austin is a court of record
[01:56:46.240 --> 01:56:52.240]  since all their record making equipment is proprietary and not owned by Austin.
[01:56:52.240 --> 01:56:57.240]  So she refuses not only to provide the transcript, but she refuses to provide
[01:56:57.240 --> 01:56:59.240]  any audio recordings also.
[01:56:59.240 --> 01:57:01.240]  Well, wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute.
[01:57:01.240 --> 01:57:06.240]  Is she refusing to provide the transcript altogether or is she just saying she
[01:57:06.240 --> 01:57:09.240]  can't get it to you in time?
[01:57:09.240 --> 01:57:12.240]  Well, it's a little of both.
[01:57:12.240 --> 01:57:17.240]  Do you have any written documentation from her saying specifically that she is
[01:57:17.240 --> 01:57:18.240]  refusing to give you the transcript?
[01:57:18.240 --> 01:57:21.240]  She's not required to give you the audio recording,
[01:57:21.240 --> 01:57:25.240]  but she is required to give you the transcript.
[01:57:25.240 --> 01:57:30.240]  She has doubled her fee because she has been subpoenaed to court along with
[01:57:30.240 --> 01:57:36.240]  her records, and so now she wants to charge $175 for the court records,
[01:57:36.240 --> 01:57:39.240]  but she's had hearing problems in court.
[01:57:39.240 --> 01:57:45.240]  So whenever there is key junctures and depositions that even my witnesses that
[01:57:45.240 --> 01:57:50.240]  are twice or greater can hear have no problem without the aid of any other
[01:57:50.240 --> 01:57:56.240]  augmented auditory equipment, she cannot hear it.
[01:57:56.240 --> 01:57:58.240]  And so she is not recording it.
[01:57:58.240 --> 01:58:02.240]  Even if she did record it, there would be issues because she is leaving large
[01:58:02.240 --> 01:58:04.240]  sections of the transcript blank.
[01:58:04.240 --> 01:58:06.240]  Okay, well, that's a different issue.
[01:58:06.240 --> 01:58:08.240]  She's not denying the...
[01:58:08.240 --> 01:58:14.240]  But she has said that she will not provide the transcripts until 30 days
[01:58:14.240 --> 01:58:15.240]  after trial.
[01:58:15.240 --> 01:58:19.240]  Okay, okay, Mike, listen, we're at the end of the show.
[01:58:19.240 --> 01:58:23.240]  Can you please call in at the beginning of the show tomorrow night,
[01:58:23.240 --> 01:58:27.240]  and I mean right at 8 o'clock, and we'll bring you on the air right away so that
[01:58:27.240 --> 01:58:30.240]  we can finish discussing this issue.
[01:58:30.240 --> 01:58:31.240]  Okay, can I ask you a quick question?
[01:58:31.240 --> 01:58:33.240]  We only have 20 seconds left.
[01:58:33.240 --> 01:58:35.240]  Can I have 10 seconds or 20 seconds?
[01:58:35.240 --> 01:58:36.240]  Hurry, hurry.
[01:58:36.240 --> 01:58:44.240]  What can I do quickly tomorrow to try to make the best advantage of tomorrow?
[01:58:44.240 --> 01:58:45.240]  Call me in the morning.
[01:58:45.240 --> 01:58:46.240]  Okay.
[01:58:46.240 --> 01:58:47.240]  Just hang on the line, Mike.
[01:58:47.240 --> 01:58:49.240]  I'll talk to you off the air.
[01:58:49.240 --> 01:58:50.240]  Okay, sorry about all this.
[01:58:50.240 --> 01:58:53.240]  Okay, all right, folks, we'll be back tomorrow night.
[01:58:53.240 --> 01:58:55.240]  This is the rule of law.
[01:58:55.240 --> 01:59:23.240]  Thank you very much.
[01:59:23.240 --> 01:59:25.240]  Thank you very much.
[01:59:53.240 --> 01:59:56.240]  Thank you very much.