[00:00.000 --> 00:04.480]  This news brief brought to you by the International News Net.
[00:04.480 --> 00:10.200]  Pakistan said Thursday it has not decided when to reopen a key border crossing NATO uses
[00:10.200 --> 00:16.120]  to ship supplies to Afghanistan, despite profuse U.S. apologies for a helicopter attack that
[00:16.120 --> 00:18.480]  killed three Pakistani soldiers.
[00:18.480 --> 00:24.000]  Meanwhile, a suspected U.S. missile strike killed three people in northwestern Pakistan,
[00:24.000 --> 00:29.280]  the latest in a surge of such attacks on militant strongholds.
[00:29.280 --> 00:34.940]  In the first civilian trial for a former Guantanamo inmate, a Manhattan judge has barred the testimony
[00:34.940 --> 00:40.920]  of a key witness because the information was extracted at a secret CIA prison in Pakistan.
[00:40.920 --> 00:47.320]  The ruling came at the trial of Ahmed Khalfan Gailani, a Tanzanian allegedly involved in
[00:47.320 --> 00:53.640]  the 1998 bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.
[00:53.640 --> 00:58.680]  Protests were staged across Greece, Macedonia and Bulgaria Thursday over massive cuts in
[00:58.680 --> 01:02.840]  public spending and government plans to raise the retirement age.
[01:02.840 --> 01:08.000]  Christos Kourniotis, a public school teacher marching in Athens, said they have slashed
[01:08.000 --> 01:11.680]  my salary by 20 percent.
[01:11.680 --> 01:17.000]  The CIA has declined to comment on allegations its drones have a targeting margin of error
[01:17.000 --> 01:22.880]  of up to 40 feet, a malfunction that could be contributing to civilian deaths in Afghanistan
[01:22.880 --> 01:24.320]  and Pakistan.
[01:24.320 --> 01:29.320]  The allegations have surfaced in a suit over intellectual property theft in which the developer
[01:29.320 --> 01:35.000]  of the targeting software testified he was surprised to hear the CIA was willing to use
[01:35.000 --> 01:37.520]  untested code in the drones.
[01:37.520 --> 01:42.520]  Richard Zimmerman, chief technology officer for Intelligent Integration Systems said an
[01:42.520 --> 01:48.000]  executive from Netetzer, his company's partner in the venture, told him the CIA was desperate
[01:48.000 --> 01:52.160]  for the software and willing to accept untested code.
[01:52.160 --> 01:58.120]  Zimmerman said IIS would not cooperate in a rush job without some legal immunity, quote,
[01:58.120 --> 02:00.720]  in case that code kills people.
[02:00.720 --> 02:06.160]  IIS later discovered that, quote, an illegally and hastily reverse-engineered version of
[02:06.160 --> 02:11.680]  its software ended up on the CIA's computers.
[02:11.680 --> 02:18.600]  The website Alternet reports telecom companies have stolen $320 billion from U.S. consumers
[02:18.600 --> 02:20.520]  since 1991.
[02:20.520 --> 02:26.440]  Alternet says telecom companies did this through hidden rate hikes, depreciation allowances,
[02:26.440 --> 02:28.720]  write-offs and other schemes.
[02:28.720 --> 02:35.840]  Starting in 1991, Verizon, Quest and what became AT&T told state public utility commissions
[02:35.840 --> 02:40.360]  if they awarded them higher rates and stopped examining their books, the companies would
[02:40.360 --> 02:46.200]  upgrade the telecom infrastructure made of aging copper wiring into high-speed, two-way
[02:46.200 --> 02:48.680]  digital optical fiber networks.
[02:48.680 --> 02:55.000]  By Alternet's most conservative estimate, each U.S. household has been scammed $3,000
[02:55.000 --> 02:59.200]  through deregulation and for a communications upgrade it never received.
[02:59.200 --> 03:03.720]  This news brief brought to you by the International News Net.
[03:03.720 --> 03:11.960]  You are listening to the Rule of Law Radio Network at ruleoflawradio.com, live free speech
[03:11.960 --> 03:18.960]  talk radio at its best.
[03:41.960 --> 04:06.960]  This is a production of the U.S. Department of State.
[04:06.960 --> 04:19.280]  All right, bad boys, bad boys, what are you going to do when we come for you?
[04:19.280 --> 04:28.960]  Tonight is Thursday, October 7, 2010 and tonight we are going to be playing the rest of the
[04:28.960 --> 04:35.200]  audio clip that Eddie recorded at his visit to the JP's office the other day.
[04:35.200 --> 04:39.600]  And before we start I just wanted to make a little comment here, I've been thinking
[04:39.600 --> 04:46.320]  about this clip a lot over the last few days and if you'll notice, if you haven't noticed
[04:46.320 --> 04:55.160]  by now, most of it is an interaction between Eddie and the sheriff's deputy over the statute,
[04:55.160 --> 04:56.160]  over the code.
[04:56.160 --> 04:57.160]  Actually it's the sheriff.
[04:57.160 --> 04:58.160]  Oh, it's the sheriff himself.
[04:58.160 --> 05:04.720]  Okay, so between Eddie and the sheriff over the code, over the statute and only a little
[05:04.720 --> 05:10.280]  bit of it at the beginning, at the end, had to do with any of Eddie's activities at the
[05:10.280 --> 05:15.920]  actual JP's office when he was attempting to file documents with the court.
[05:15.920 --> 05:22.240]  And most of this interaction with the sheriff, Eddie is basically explaining the statute
[05:22.240 --> 05:29.680]  and it was a very tenuous interview in my opinion and we'll hear more in just upcoming
[05:29.680 --> 05:37.440]  but basically my comment is this, this is why it says in the code of criminal procedure
[05:37.440 --> 05:43.440]  that all criminal complaints shall be directed to some magistrate or to a state attorney
[05:43.440 --> 05:50.040]  or directly to the grand jury, okay, because if it were up to law enforcement to interpret
[05:50.040 --> 05:57.000]  the law and try to figure out whether or not somebody, you know, possibly could have broken
[05:57.000 --> 06:00.040]  the law or not, we would never get anywhere, all right.
[06:00.040 --> 06:08.200]  It is not the role of law enforcement to make a determination of probable cause and basically
[06:08.200 --> 06:14.480]  that's what this whole discussion amounts to between Eddie and the sheriff.
[06:14.480 --> 06:21.080]  The point being it is not up to law enforcement to make the investigation to determine whether
[06:21.080 --> 06:24.800]  or not they feel in their opinion a law has been broken.
[06:24.800 --> 06:28.400]  Eddie's already done the research, Eddie's already figured out the law, Eddie's already
[06:28.400 --> 06:30.760]  written up the criminal complaint.
[06:30.760 --> 06:36.080]  Now the time has come for that complaint to be directed to some magistrate and that's
[06:36.080 --> 06:41.880]  what Eddie attempted to do was to go to the magistrate to file the criminal complaint
[06:41.880 --> 06:45.760]  and the magistrate broke the law by saying no, I'm not going to take it, you have to
[06:45.760 --> 06:48.920]  go talk about this with the sheriff.
[06:48.920 --> 06:51.960]  This is exactly what is not supposed to happen.
[06:51.960 --> 06:57.040]  This is contrary to what it says in the Code of Criminal Procedure and this audio clip
[06:57.040 --> 07:04.960]  very clearly explains why, it's self-explanatory because if this is what we would have to go
[07:04.960 --> 07:10.040]  through every time we want to file a criminal complaint, there would never be any criminal
[07:10.040 --> 07:13.840]  complaints filed and everything would be up to the discretion of law enforcement and that's
[07:13.840 --> 07:17.560]  not the way the law is structured.
[07:17.560 --> 07:28.160]  So Randy do you have any comments on that before we play the audio clip here, Randy?
[07:28.160 --> 07:33.280]  I haven't heard the clip so I'll reserve my comments until I've heard the clip.
[07:33.280 --> 07:34.280]  Okay, all right, very good.
[07:34.280 --> 07:40.760]  All right folks without further ado, here is the remainder of the clip of Eddie speaking
[07:40.760 --> 07:46.160]  with the sheriff.
[07:46.160 --> 07:51.080]  Wait one moment, okay here we go.
[07:51.080 --> 07:54.280]  That's true but you're also not required to have a license to do it.
[07:54.280 --> 07:58.120]  That's right, just like I don't have to have a driver's license to get on a Greyhound bus
[07:58.120 --> 08:03.080]  but I'm still using the right of way but the guy driving the bus had to have a license.
[08:03.080 --> 08:04.080]  That's true, okay because.
[08:04.080 --> 08:08.280]  Well the law didn't tell me I couldn't travel on the highway, it just told me I couldn't
[08:08.280 --> 08:12.000]  drive that vehicle unless I was licensed to do so.
[08:12.000 --> 08:15.920]  Back to the pilot's thing here, I can go down there, I don't have a pilot's license, I've
[08:15.920 --> 08:19.480]  taken flying lessons but I've never went and got the license but I can go right down to
[08:19.480 --> 08:23.120]  this airport, be in a plane and go flying anywhere I want to and I don't have to have
[08:23.120 --> 08:26.560]  a license to do that, absolutely none, okay.
[08:26.560 --> 08:30.440]  I can get in a plane and go, any pilot can.
[08:30.440 --> 08:37.000]  They do not have to have a license unless they intend to become employed in that occupation.
[08:37.000 --> 08:38.560]  Then they must get one.
[08:38.560 --> 08:44.960]  The same thing applies to your term on driving, driving, operating and engaging in commerce
[08:44.960 --> 08:47.080]  are all synonymous.
[08:47.080 --> 08:51.680]  Driving is what is done by someone that is being paid to operate that contrivance on
[08:51.680 --> 08:52.680]  the road.
[08:52.680 --> 08:57.280]  A truck driver is a driver.
[08:57.280 --> 08:58.280]  Those definitions.
[08:58.280 --> 09:03.960]  Driving is operating and actually we're saying driving but when you read the code it says
[09:03.960 --> 09:05.960]  operates a motor vehicle.
[09:05.960 --> 09:06.960]  It doesn't say driver.
[09:06.960 --> 09:09.200]  Okay, well let's take it from this approach.
[09:09.200 --> 09:12.200]  We're operating the motor vehicle.
[09:12.200 --> 09:13.640]  In commerce you're right.
[09:13.640 --> 09:16.080]  Well it's in commerce and personal transportation.
[09:16.080 --> 09:23.080]  If you have a colored wagon going down on 225, are you required to have any of this
[09:23.080 --> 09:24.080]  kind of stuff?
[09:24.080 --> 09:25.080]  No.
[09:25.080 --> 09:31.520]  But if you're going to operate that, you don't have to on public road as you're saying but
[09:31.520 --> 09:34.120]  if you operate a motor vehicle.
[09:34.120 --> 09:38.040]  Again, the definition of motor vehicle is what's at issue here.
[09:38.040 --> 09:43.680]  It is very, very clear that a motor vehicle is a vehicle engaging in the transportation
[09:43.680 --> 09:47.400]  of persons and property upon the highways.
[09:47.400 --> 09:54.280]  Transportation by definition in law means movement from one point to another by carrier.
[09:54.280 --> 09:57.360]  Carrier is defined as one engaged in the business.
[09:57.360 --> 10:01.680]  Transportation is defined by this code and that's not what it is.
[10:01.680 --> 10:03.120]  Transportation is not defined in the code.
[10:03.120 --> 10:06.760]  It's absolutely no definition for transportation in any code in Texas.
[10:06.760 --> 10:09.120]  It doesn't exist.
[10:09.120 --> 10:14.120]  Then I would tell you if you don't think that transportation includes just the movement
[10:14.120 --> 10:23.280]  of point A to point B, regardless of those other restrictions, you're going to have a
[10:23.280 --> 10:29.160]  hard time understanding this but you're also going to have a hard time convincing about
[10:29.160 --> 10:34.920]  99% of citizens that that's not transportation.
[10:34.920 --> 10:49.880]  In actuality, I have filed the information I have with every court I've been to and in
[10:49.880 --> 10:52.240]  most cases they'll do one of two things.
[10:52.240 --> 10:57.000]  They either dismiss because they know I'm right and I've proven it with the statutes
[10:57.000 --> 11:02.160]  and I've proven it with the court cases or they simply drop the issue and I never hear
[11:02.160 --> 11:03.160]  from them again.
[11:03.160 --> 11:12.240]  I'm going to tell you, and I mean I respect you, I know, you have a great mind.
[11:12.240 --> 11:20.920]  You dive into this stuff, you educate yourself, you can recall chapters and verses.
[11:20.920 --> 11:31.000]  You have a great mind but as much as I believe that you are 110% sincere on what you think
[11:31.000 --> 11:37.120]  this says, I'm telling you, you're either misunderstanding or you're misreading some
[11:37.120 --> 11:44.400]  of this because it's not all as you're describing.
[11:44.400 --> 11:50.120]  The law requires you to have a license if you operate a vehicle, not if you ride in
[11:50.120 --> 11:53.000]  a vehicle, if you operate the vehicle.
[11:53.000 --> 11:58.160]  You can be a passenger in my vehicle all day long and you don't have to have a driver's
[11:58.160 --> 11:59.160]  license.
[11:59.160 --> 12:06.600]  It's not just moving from point A to point B, it's moving from point A to point B in
[12:06.600 --> 12:12.280]  control of the motor vehicle under operation of it.
[12:12.280 --> 12:18.600]  It specifically says motor vehicle because a bicycle is a vehicle.
[12:18.600 --> 12:25.800]  You get on a bicycle or the wagon or whatever and travel down that same public right of
[12:25.800 --> 12:30.680]  the way and there's still certain traffic laws that apply to you but you don't have
[12:30.680 --> 12:34.680]  to have a driver's license and you don't have to register that vehicle.
[12:34.680 --> 12:40.080]  And I'm not saying that there are all traffic laws that wouldn't apply to someone in a private
[12:40.080 --> 12:42.080]  automobile.
[12:42.080 --> 12:47.000]  For instance, ones dealing specifically with public safety such as the stop signs and the
[12:47.000 --> 12:52.720]  traffic signals and things of that nature, those would apply because they are an immediate
[12:52.720 --> 12:56.120]  and imminent danger to the public.
[12:56.120 --> 13:00.680]  However, there is no immediate and imminent danger for someone to exercise their right
[13:00.680 --> 13:01.760]  to travel.
[13:01.760 --> 13:06.720]  Just the fact that I'm traveling in an automobile behind the wheel does not create a sense of
[13:06.720 --> 13:09.840]  imminent peril to the public.
[13:09.840 --> 13:17.400]  The right to regulate the people is existent only by the legislature in the areas of health
[13:17.400 --> 13:21.280]  and public safety and general welfare.
[13:21.280 --> 13:24.200]  None of the things we're talking about involve those.
[13:24.200 --> 13:29.680]  They have to do with the licensing of a right, which the courts say the right to travel and
[13:29.680 --> 13:33.480]  the right to the use of your property is a protected vested right.
[13:33.480 --> 13:42.160]  Yes, but you're now splitting a hair between the right to travel and the privilege to drive.
[13:42.160 --> 13:49.640]  Nowhere in this code will you find or in the constitution or the other laws will you find
[13:49.640 --> 13:53.640]  that, now you will notice that hair splitting was not me.
[13:53.640 --> 13:56.440]  I didn't split that hair, the sheriff did.
[13:56.440 --> 14:02.520]  Yes, and I will also note here that he's talking, he said a little bit earlier that it's very
[14:02.520 --> 14:07.000]  clear in the code that you have to have a license to operate a motor vehicle.
[14:07.000 --> 14:12.920]  Well he's correct on that, but the point that he's missing, which Eddie already said, was
[14:12.920 --> 14:17.960]  that the definition of the word operate has to do with commerce.
[14:17.960 --> 14:20.640]  As does motor vehicle.
[14:20.640 --> 14:26.040]  As does motor vehicle, both operate, both the word operate and the word, words motor
[14:26.040 --> 14:33.800]  vehicle as defined in the statute have to do with being engaged in commerce and that's
[14:33.800 --> 14:40.760]  the point that the sheriff refuses to see or does see and is just pretending not to
[14:40.760 --> 14:41.760]  see.
[14:41.760 --> 14:45.160]  All right, you want me to continue, Eddie?
[14:45.160 --> 14:46.160]  Yes.
[14:46.160 --> 14:49.440]  You want me to continue that you have a right to drive a motor vehicle.
[14:49.440 --> 14:52.680]  No, but it does agree and stipulate.
[14:52.680 --> 14:55.680]  Privileges can be regulated.
[14:55.680 --> 15:00.760]  You're right, okay, but the difference is what's a right versus a privilege.
[15:00.760 --> 15:06.680]  The state cannot take a right and convert it into a privilege and charge a fee for it,
[15:06.680 --> 15:07.840]  can't do it.
[15:07.840 --> 15:12.680]  The state cannot take a right and demand that a license be obtained in order to exercise
[15:12.680 --> 15:13.680]  it.
[15:13.680 --> 15:16.680]  Court case after court case holds this to be true.
[15:16.680 --> 15:24.320]  And that's why you don't have to have a license if you've got a case to ride in a vehicle,
[15:24.320 --> 15:28.840]  but you do have to have a license to operate a motor vehicle on the public highway.
[15:28.840 --> 15:30.560]  Okay, I'm going to pause here.
[15:30.560 --> 15:38.600]  What this guy's trying to say is that my right to travel is restricted to me being a passenger.
[15:38.600 --> 15:45.320]  That is just absolutely preposterous.
[15:45.320 --> 15:52.720]  So I don't have a right to travel if I'm controlling the helm of my private vehicle on the public
[15:52.720 --> 15:53.720]  roadway.
[15:53.720 --> 15:56.280]  I only have a right to travel if I'm a passenger.
[15:56.280 --> 15:57.400]  I'm sorry.
[15:57.400 --> 15:59.120]  That is not the way it is.
[15:59.120 --> 16:00.720]  That's not what statute says.
[16:00.720 --> 16:02.680]  That's not what the code says.
[16:02.680 --> 16:05.000]  This guy is totally off-leash.
[16:05.000 --> 16:08.840]  He's using commercial terminology even in describing you as a passenger.
[16:08.840 --> 16:09.840]  Exactly.
[16:09.840 --> 16:17.280]  When you're a passenger, you're a paid piece of property in that automobile or taxi cab
[16:17.280 --> 16:21.840]  or bus that is paying to be transported from one point to another.
[16:21.840 --> 16:27.560]  Well, it's very clear from the context of the sheriff's discourse that he has not read
[16:27.560 --> 16:28.560]  the code.
[16:28.560 --> 16:29.560]  I mean, that's clear.
[16:29.560 --> 16:32.080]  Well, I wouldn't go that far.
[16:32.080 --> 16:37.400]  On some of the indication he has read it, the difference is he hasn't researched what
[16:37.400 --> 16:38.400]  he's read.
[16:38.400 --> 16:39.400]  All right.
[16:39.400 --> 16:44.400]  Well, it sounds like he hasn't read the whole thing because he doesn't know, he doesn't
[16:44.400 --> 16:45.400]  understand the definitions.
[16:45.400 --> 16:46.400]  Okay.
[16:46.400 --> 16:51.320]  We'll be right back, folks, and we will continue this clip on the other side.
[16:51.320 --> 17:02.560]  This is The Rule of Law.
[17:02.560 --> 17:07.040]  Capital Coin and Bullion is your local source for rare coins, precious metals, and coin
[17:07.040 --> 17:09.600]  supplies in the Austin metro area.
[17:09.600 --> 17:11.640]  We also ship worldwide.
[17:11.640 --> 17:15.680]  We are a family-owned and operated business that offers competitive prices on your coin
[17:15.680 --> 17:16.680]  and metals purchases.
[17:16.680 --> 17:22.400]  We buy, sell, trade, and consign rare coins, gold and silver coin collections, precious
[17:22.400 --> 17:24.280]  metals, and scrap gold.
[17:24.280 --> 17:27.880]  We will purchase and sell gold and jewelry items as well.
[17:27.880 --> 17:30.480]  We offer daily specials on coins and bullion.
[17:30.480 --> 17:36.240]  We're located at 5448 Barnett Road, Suite 3, and we're open Monday through Friday,
[17:36.240 --> 17:40.440]  10 a.m. to 6 p.m., Saturdays, 10 a.m. to 5 p.m.
[17:40.440 --> 17:47.840]  You are welcome to stop in our shop during regular business hours or call 512-646-6440
[17:47.840 --> 17:48.840]  with any questions.
[17:48.840 --> 17:53.960]  Ask for Chad and say you heard about us on Rule of Law Radio or 90.1 FM.
[17:53.960 --> 18:01.000]  That's Capital Coin and Bullion, 512-646-6440.
[18:01.000 --> 18:06.320]  Are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters, or even lawsuits?
[18:06.320 --> 18:09.840]  Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Mears Proven Method.
[18:09.840 --> 18:14.120]  Michael Mears has won six cases in federal court against debt collectors, and now you
[18:14.120 --> 18:15.120]  can win too.
[18:15.120 --> 18:19.960]  You'll get step-by-step instructions in plain English on how to win in court using federal
[18:19.960 --> 18:25.720]  civil rights statutes, what to do when contacted by phone, mail, or court summons, how to answer
[18:25.720 --> 18:30.400]  letters and phone calls, how to get debt collectors out of your credit report, how to turn the
[18:30.400 --> 18:34.560]  financial tables on them and make them pay you to go away.
[18:34.560 --> 18:39.680]  The Michael Mears Proven Method is the solution for how to stop debt collectors.
[18:39.680 --> 18:41.480]  Consultation is available as well.
[18:41.480 --> 18:47.320]  For more information, please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the blue Michael Mears banner
[18:47.320 --> 18:50.320]  or email michaelmears at yahoo.com.
[18:50.320 --> 18:59.320]  That's ruleoflawradio.com or email m-i-c-h-a-e-l-m-i-r-r-a-s at yahoo.com to learn how to stop debt
[18:59.320 --> 19:19.280]  collectors now.
[19:19.280 --> 19:20.280]  Okay folks, we're back.
[19:20.280 --> 19:29.080]  We're playing this clip, and I'll clarify, perhaps this sheriff may have read the code
[19:29.080 --> 19:35.480]  but it sounds like his reading of it was incomplete, like he didn't read the whole thing, specifically
[19:35.480 --> 19:40.240]  it sounds like he didn't read the definitions section, which is probably going to be the
[19:40.240 --> 19:41.240]  most important.
[19:41.240 --> 19:45.640]  I mean, if you don't know the definitions of the terms in the rest of the statute, then
[19:45.640 --> 19:48.760]  you may as well not even read the rest of the statute because you're not going to understand
[19:48.760 --> 19:49.760]  what's going on.
[19:49.760 --> 19:56.120]  He clearly does not understand or have knowledge or he's pretending to not know what the definitions
[19:56.120 --> 19:59.640]  of the words operate and motor vehicle are.
[19:59.640 --> 20:04.000]  That's very clearly defined in the statute as having to do with being engaged in commerce
[20:04.000 --> 20:05.000]  on the road.
[20:05.000 --> 20:08.880]  All right, here we go with the rest of the clip.
[20:08.880 --> 20:13.920]  But again, it's the definition that you're inferring that motor vehicle applies to every
[20:13.920 --> 20:18.200]  form of conveyance on the road even though it's got a motor when it clearly does not,
[20:18.200 --> 20:24.160]  and that's been defined in the case law many, many times, all the way from the original
[20:24.160 --> 20:25.160]  beginning.
[20:25.160 --> 20:29.800]  Certainly case law can be brought up in fact, but you and I know that case law changes over
[20:29.800 --> 20:30.800]  time.
[20:30.800 --> 20:31.800]  Yes, it does.
[20:31.800 --> 20:32.800]  Case law is not 100% definitive.
[20:32.800 --> 20:33.800]  Agree.
[20:33.800 --> 20:40.600]  Case law, every magistrate here in the case has the ability to look at what the case law
[20:40.600 --> 20:47.000]  is, but the way new case law gets set is when a different magistrate makes a ruling that's
[20:47.000 --> 20:48.560]  contrary to the old case.
[20:48.560 --> 20:49.560]  Exactly.
[20:49.560 --> 20:50.560]  So case law changes.
[20:50.560 --> 20:51.560]  Agreed again.
[20:51.560 --> 20:55.960]  In fact, the legislative bodies can change the statutes from time to time.
[20:55.960 --> 21:04.120]  Now that's a whole different process certainly, but when you say case law, what case laws
[21:04.120 --> 21:08.520]  are we referring to and how applicable are they to today's standards?
[21:08.520 --> 21:16.040]  When's the most recent case law ruling been made in the state of Texas that you're referring
[21:16.040 --> 21:17.040]  to?
[21:17.040 --> 21:22.920]  Well, that would be particularly irrelevant if there are superseding Supreme Court cases,
[21:22.920 --> 21:33.880]  because as you well know, there's a hierarchy to regulate commerce in motor vehicles.
[21:33.880 --> 21:34.880]  You're right.
[21:34.880 --> 21:35.880]  There isn't.
[21:35.880 --> 21:36.880]  Okay.
[21:36.880 --> 21:37.880]  There isn't.
[21:37.880 --> 21:42.940]  However, there are many, many that show very clearly that those not engaging in commerce
[21:42.940 --> 21:47.640]  do not fall within the purview of the state in that regard, because the right to travel
[21:47.640 --> 21:53.760]  upon the roads in the conveyance of the day is a right of liberty, and the state may not
[21:53.760 --> 21:56.280]  convert that right into a privilege.
[21:56.280 --> 22:04.640]  But again, now the argument is not your right to travel, but your privilege to operate the
[22:04.640 --> 22:08.600]  motor vehicle that you're traveling in.
[22:08.600 --> 22:12.400]  That's the difference.
[22:12.400 --> 22:21.040]  And if the Supreme Court had ruled that, then all 50 states in the United States wouldn't
[22:21.040 --> 22:25.600]  be requiring driver's licenses today.
[22:25.600 --> 22:35.320]  There's not a state in the United States that does not require a person that I'm aware of,
[22:35.320 --> 22:36.320]  but if they did...
[22:36.320 --> 22:39.760]  But again, for the same things you've already mentioned, which is the operation of a motor
[22:39.760 --> 22:45.760]  vehicle, which has been, as I've pointed out, stated time and time again, is under the realm
[22:45.760 --> 22:51.040]  of commerce, not under the right of liberty or the right to the use of your property because
[22:51.040 --> 22:52.040] ...
[22:52.040 --> 22:53.040]  Stop talking about liberty and property.
[22:53.040 --> 22:59.040]  Well, again, if you want to get in a vehicle and drive it all day long on your personal
[22:59.040 --> 23:04.040]  property, or if your neighbor's property adjoining, you want to drive on his property, that's
[23:04.040 --> 23:05.040]  up to y'all.
[23:05.040 --> 23:06.040]  But that's not liberty.
[23:06.040 --> 23:07.040]  That's not liberty.
[23:07.040 --> 23:09.360]  Sure, it's a liberty to go to and from.
[23:09.360 --> 23:12.400]  To and from only one particular location when the Supreme...
[23:12.400 --> 23:16.400]  Well, are any of those adjoining properties that will allow you that...
[23:16.400 --> 23:20.720]  Actually, I'm allowed egress into and out of any state of the Union.
[23:20.720 --> 23:22.840]  It's right in the Constitution.
[23:22.840 --> 23:24.920]  No citizen shall be denied that right.
[23:24.920 --> 23:25.920]  That's right.
[23:25.920 --> 23:31.320]  But it's not in the Constitution that you're allowed that by operating a motor vehicle.
[23:31.320 --> 23:32.320]  You're right.
[23:32.320 --> 23:33.320]  Motor vehicle's not in there.
[23:33.320 --> 23:34.320]  Right.
[23:34.320 --> 23:40.320]  However, once again, if I purchase an automobile for the use of my private self to travel from
[23:40.320 --> 23:45.440]  here to Carthage to see my dad, I have the right to use the road.
[23:45.440 --> 23:47.880]  I have the right to use my property.
[23:47.880 --> 23:51.680]  I don't have to have someone else use my property for me.
[23:51.680 --> 23:55.660]  I don't have to get anyone's permission to use my property.
[23:55.660 --> 23:57.960]  This is the right we're talking about.
[23:57.960 --> 24:03.040]  The state is attempting to take the right of property and the right of use to that property
[24:03.040 --> 24:07.160]  and convert it into a licensed privilege, and the courts have said time and time again
[24:07.160 --> 24:08.160]  that cannot be done.
[24:08.160 --> 24:14.760]  I have to disagree with you because if the courts have said that time and time again,
[24:14.760 --> 24:20.400]  we wouldn't be here with all these statutes on the books and everybody being regulated
[24:20.400 --> 24:22.200]  for operating...
[24:22.200 --> 24:24.880]  I'm going to pause here.
[24:24.880 --> 24:31.360]  This guy just will not accept that the definition of the words operate and motor vehicle have
[24:31.360 --> 24:36.000]  to do with commerce, and now Eddie and the sheriff are getting into a discussion about
[24:36.000 --> 24:41.600]  case law when really this issue at this point in time doesn't even go down to case law.
[24:41.600 --> 24:46.160]  We're just talking the straight up definitions of statute.
[24:46.160 --> 24:51.840]  Notice that he did admit that if it wasn't for this, all these people wouldn't be being
[24:51.840 --> 24:54.800]  regulated.
[24:54.800 --> 25:01.560]  What he's failed to understand again is that the Texas administrative code under rule 1.11
[25:01.560 --> 25:08.920]  says very clearly who is allowed to be regulated under these codes, and it is someone engaged
[25:08.920 --> 25:13.960]  in commercial or for hire traffic enterprises.
[25:13.960 --> 25:19.840]  All the Department of Public Safety is allowed to regulate, and everybody in Texas is delegated
[25:19.840 --> 25:24.600]  that authority to enforce the traffic statute by that department because they're the one
[25:24.600 --> 25:27.960]  that's in charge of the transportation code for the purpose of regulations.
[25:27.960 --> 25:32.040]  It says it in every single chapter dealing with the subject.
[25:32.040 --> 25:33.200]  You've got a lot of patience, Eddie.
[25:33.200 --> 25:35.840]  I would have been done with that conversation a long time ago.
[25:35.840 --> 25:40.960]  I wouldn't have gotten an argument with him, but after about two or three times of somebody
[25:40.960 --> 25:46.240]  refusing to see logic, then I'm just like, okay, well, this conversation's over.
[25:46.240 --> 25:52.560]  I'll talk to you later because there's just no getting through.
[25:52.560 --> 25:59.000]  Either he refuses to accept reality, or he's just using specious logic to attempt to try
[25:59.000 --> 26:05.360]  to talk circles around you to fool you, and that's obviously not going to happen.
[26:05.360 --> 26:07.360]  Anyway, here's the rest of the clip.
[26:07.360 --> 26:17.160]  If the courts had said that over and over, Eddie, all this stuff wouldn't exist.
[26:17.160 --> 26:19.680]  I disagree with that to a point.
[26:19.680 --> 26:23.800]  You know as well as I do that the average individual is not educated in law.
[26:23.800 --> 26:28.280]  The average individual takes what he's told by his public servant at face value.
[26:28.280 --> 26:31.880]  If you tell me I'm supposed to do this thing, well, then I guess I should be doing this
[26:31.880 --> 26:32.880]  thing.
[26:32.880 --> 26:37.600]  That does not mean the public servant was accurate or correct.
[26:37.600 --> 26:40.840]  It does not mean that such a law exists.
[26:40.840 --> 26:45.920]  It would astound you, Sheriff Curse, how many times I have had a public officer tell me
[26:45.920 --> 26:50.120]  well, the law says this, and that is a blatant lie.
[26:50.120 --> 26:52.320]  What they said is not in law.
[26:52.320 --> 26:57.480]  It's not a law anywhere in Texas, and yet they're insisting that it is.
[26:57.480 --> 27:01.800]  I can go right to the statute that they think they're referring to and show them very clearly
[27:01.800 --> 27:08.480]  it's not, but someone that doesn't know what I know would have taken that individual at
[27:08.480 --> 27:13.600]  face value and thought they were now obligated to do something they weren't.
[27:13.600 --> 27:15.280]  It is that simple.
[27:15.280 --> 27:21.360]  How many times in Nacogdoches alone is someone arrested for failure to identify?
[27:21.360 --> 27:24.480]  Because some police officer walks up to them and says, give me your license.
[27:24.480 --> 27:28.320]  I want to know who you are, and I've had them do it to me.
[27:28.320 --> 27:30.720]  I said, well, it's none of your business who I am.
[27:30.720 --> 27:32.520]  Yes, it is.
[27:32.520 --> 27:35.320]  You have to identify yourself or I'm placing you under arrest.
[27:35.320 --> 27:37.920]  Oh, well, please go right ahead.
[27:37.920 --> 27:43.780]  You go ahead and place me under arrest for failure to identify, and I will own your house
[27:43.780 --> 27:48.840]  because the law very clearly states that failure to identify only applies in the case of a
[27:48.840 --> 27:56.080]  person who has already been lawfully arrested for some offense before you can demand that
[27:56.080 --> 27:58.040]  they have to identify themselves.
[27:58.040 --> 28:00.240]  But these officers around here don't tell you that.
[28:00.240 --> 28:02.040]  They'll lie to your face.
[28:02.040 --> 28:06.680]  In order to get information out of you, they have no authority to get or right to access,
[28:06.680 --> 28:07.680]  and they do it regularly.
[28:07.680 --> 28:08.680]  Well, yeah, you're right.
[28:08.680 --> 28:14.720]  If you're standing on the street corner and I just walk up, there are some circumstances
[28:14.720 --> 28:18.640]  where case law has expanded that just a little bit.
[28:18.640 --> 28:25.200]  But you have to have a legal obligatory right to detain that person for questioning.
[28:25.200 --> 28:30.240]  You have to be able to support that, or you have to already have them under detention
[28:30.240 --> 28:35.160]  before they're obligated to tell you who they are.
[28:35.160 --> 28:41.480]  But now, in these codes right here, there's also a section that says that you have to
[28:41.480 --> 28:47.040]  present your driver's license when you're stopped and asked to do so.
[28:47.040 --> 28:48.040]  If you have one.
[28:48.040 --> 28:49.040]  Correct.
[28:49.040 --> 28:50.040]  Okay.
[28:50.040 --> 28:51.040]  If you have one.
[28:51.040 --> 28:52.040]  If you don't have one, you can't do that.
[28:52.040 --> 28:57.400]  But you're not supposed to be driving without one by these codes.
[28:57.400 --> 29:01.620]  I would concur with that statement only in as far as driving is defined as operating
[29:01.620 --> 29:03.680]  in commerce.
[29:03.680 --> 29:08.160]  But as far as traveling in a private automobile, whether you are the one behind the wheel or
[29:08.160 --> 29:10.760]  not, I would disagree.
[29:10.760 --> 29:16.920]  And I mean, simply because, like I said, this hasn't been something I've jumped into overnight.
[29:16.920 --> 29:18.960]  I've been doing this for a very long time.
[29:18.960 --> 29:19.960]  I understand that.
[29:19.960 --> 29:20.960]  You mean my best conversation.
[29:20.960 --> 29:21.960]  Yes, sir.
[29:21.960 --> 29:26.720]  And I have not only researched Texas, but I've researched numerous other states.
[29:26.720 --> 29:31.800]  And if you actually go to other state codes, California, Washington, you will find that
[29:31.800 --> 29:36.480]  the laws you're referring to on the books requiring driver's licenses, it is very, very
[29:36.480 --> 29:37.480]  clear.
[29:37.480 --> 29:38.480]  All right.
[29:38.480 --> 29:42.280]  We're going to pause right here and we're going to go to break.
[29:42.280 --> 30:00.760]  We will be right back, folks.
[30:00.760 --> 30:20.240]  I gotta go.
[30:20.240 --> 30:23.780]  All right.
[30:23.780 --> 30:28.400]  We'll be right back.
[30:28.400 --> 30:30.080]  Thank you, gentlemen.
[30:30.080 --> 30:55.480]  The Chicago Blackhawks stormed the hockey world by coming out of nowhere, nowhere, nowhere,
[30:55.480 --> 30:59.800]  nowhere, nowhere, nowhere, nowhere, nowhere, nowhere, nowhere, nowhere, nowhere, nowhere,
[30:59.800 --> 31:06.800]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, and I'll be right back to tell you how they did it.
[31:29.800 --> 31:34.040]  StartPage.com doesn't store your IP address, make a record of your searches, or use tracking
[31:34.040 --> 31:36.320]  cookies, and they're third-party certified.
[31:36.320 --> 31:40.800]  If you don't like Big Brother spying on you, start over with StartPage.
[31:40.800 --> 31:43.680]  Great search results and total privacy.
[31:43.680 --> 31:46.880]  StartPage.com, the world's most private search engine.
[31:46.880 --> 31:49.160]  What shot the Blackhawks to victory?
[31:49.160 --> 31:50.000]  Vitamin D!
[31:50.000 --> 31:53.960]  When team members took a daily supplement, they caught fewer colds, recovered faster
[31:53.960 --> 31:55.960]  from injuries, and their game took off.
[31:55.960 --> 31:58.480]  And it's not just athletes who can benefit.
[31:58.480 --> 32:02.880]  Your body makes Vitamin D when sunlight hits your skin, but adults who work indoors, and
[32:02.880 --> 32:07.280]  kids who watch a lot of TV, probably don't get enough, putting them at risk for illness,
[32:07.280 --> 32:09.400]  bone problems, and even heart disease.
[32:09.400 --> 32:14.200]  Be sure you and your kids get 10 to 15 minutes of sun exposure several times a week, or ask
[32:14.200 --> 32:17.640]  your doctor about a daily natural Vitamin D supplement.
[32:17.640 --> 32:21.160]  You can learn more about this amazing vitamin at VitaminDCouncil.org.
[32:21.160 --> 32:28.160]  This is Dr. Catherine Albrecht, more news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[32:52.160 --> 32:59.160]  Okay, folks, we are back.
[32:59.800 --> 33:06.000]  When are you going to stop abusing your power, indeed?
[33:06.000 --> 33:12.600]  And one more comment I'm going to make here, just about the language, the verbiage that
[33:12.600 --> 33:14.280]  the sheriff is using.
[33:14.280 --> 33:21.280]  I've heard him say multiple times tonight and on Monday night concerning his right to
[33:22.480 --> 33:27.840]  do this and that, or the government's right to do this and that, or, you know, them as
[33:27.840 --> 33:33.200]  law enforcement officers, they have the right to do this and that.
[33:33.200 --> 33:34.720]  Totally backwards.
[33:34.720 --> 33:39.720]  Public servants, in their capacity as a public servant, have no rights.
[33:39.720 --> 33:42.960]  That's why they're called public servants.
[33:42.960 --> 33:47.640]  Officers themselves do not have rights.
[33:47.640 --> 33:54.360]  We the people have granted authority, limited authority, I might add, very limited authority,
[33:54.360 --> 33:56.160]  to certain offices.
[33:56.160 --> 34:01.560]  We've granted authority to the legislature to enact laws, et cetera.
[34:01.560 --> 34:04.280]  He has authority.
[34:04.280 --> 34:06.120]  His office has authority.
[34:06.120 --> 34:09.280]  The only reason he personally, and even he personally doesn't have authority, it's his
[34:09.280 --> 34:10.800]  office that has authority.
[34:10.800 --> 34:15.240]  The only reason he can exercise that authority of that office as a human being is because
[34:15.240 --> 34:20.280]  he took an oath of office and he was elected legitimately, presumably, we'll presume that
[34:20.280 --> 34:21.360]  for a moment.
[34:21.360 --> 34:26.000]  But he doesn't have the right to do anything as a public servant, okay?
[34:26.000 --> 34:29.320]  He's got the whole mindset backwards.
[34:29.320 --> 34:31.520]  They have authorities.
[34:31.520 --> 34:33.440]  They have duties and responsibilities.
[34:33.440 --> 34:34.680]  They don't have rights.
[34:34.680 --> 34:36.740]  Only we as sovereigns have rights.
[34:36.740 --> 34:38.160]  Only the citizens have rights.
[34:38.160 --> 34:41.640]  Okay, we're going to continue.
[34:41.640 --> 34:42.640]  It says it.
[34:42.640 --> 34:47.560]  Ours used to say it way back in the beginning, but they took the words out over time when
[34:47.560 --> 34:51.060]  they started the statutory revision program in 63.
[34:51.060 --> 34:54.960]  They started altering the law and the direct application of the law.
[34:54.960 --> 34:58.360]  They were lying to the legislators about what they were doing and they were lying to the
[34:58.360 --> 35:04.980]  public because the specific heading of all the revised codes says the law has been revised
[35:04.980 --> 35:10.360]  in order to remove unconstitutional acts, to clear up the language, to make it easier
[35:10.360 --> 35:14.040]  to understand and to make it better organized for reference.
[35:14.040 --> 35:20.760]  But none of the changes are intended or do have any substantive effect upon the law,
[35:20.760 --> 35:26.000]  meaning what it originally was written for should not be changed in the current revision.
[35:26.000 --> 35:28.880]  It still applies to the same thing in the same way.
[35:28.880 --> 35:35.240]  But what they've done is they took the word commercial out of the beginning of motor vehicle.
[35:35.240 --> 35:41.440]  You go to California, you go to Washington State or Oregon, and it says very clearly
[35:41.440 --> 35:47.520]  that persons engaging in occupations for hire or the transportations of goods and services
[35:47.520 --> 35:52.520]  for hire must apply for and receive a driver's license in this state.
[35:52.520 --> 35:54.040]  It's written right in the law.
[35:54.040 --> 35:56.280]  It's very, very clear.
[35:56.280 --> 36:01.120]  Yet you still see them every single day writing traffic citations to people in these states
[36:01.120 --> 36:06.760]  who are not engaging in commerce that are being held accountable under a law that absolutely
[36:06.760 --> 36:07.760]  doesn't apply to them.
[36:07.760 --> 36:08.760]  Well, I don't know that that's the citation that they're being issued or if there's another
[36:08.760 --> 36:09.760]  section of the law that also requires them to have a license to operate a motor vehicle
[36:09.760 --> 36:10.760]  just like these...
[36:10.760 --> 36:25.760]  But again, motor vehicle is clearly defined in their code.
[36:25.760 --> 36:31.200]  Their code says a motor vehicle is a vehicle used...
[36:31.200 --> 36:38.080]  But irregardless, the legislature cannot take away a vested right of the people and the
[36:38.080 --> 36:43.480]  right of me to use my property for my own convenience and pleasure, the right for me
[36:43.480 --> 36:51.320]  to the use of my roads, your roads, his roads, for us to travel, which is what the roads
[36:51.320 --> 36:55.040]  were built for, for the convenience of the people.
[36:55.040 --> 37:00.120]  The people are allowed to go anywhere at any time in any manner they please as long as
[37:00.120 --> 37:07.040]  their actions in so doing do not constitute an immediate imminent danger to the public
[37:07.040 --> 37:11.880]  or is intended for the purpose of causing a harm or danger to the public.
[37:11.880 --> 37:15.960]  In this case, we know very well that's not what's happening here.
[37:15.960 --> 37:18.880]  I'm not being licensed because I'm an imminent danger.
[37:18.880 --> 37:22.560]  I'm being licensed because the state wants to know everything about me.
[37:22.560 --> 37:26.000]  The state wants to know where I am all the time.
[37:26.000 --> 37:30.560]  The state wants me to pay a fee to exercise a right that I have so that they can generate
[37:30.560 --> 37:37.040]  more revenue for things that they're not authorized to spend money on to begin with.
[37:37.040 --> 37:43.080]  They just simply want to control the population and the rights of the people were not meant
[37:43.080 --> 37:44.480]  to be controlled in that way.
[37:44.480 --> 37:49.720]  Now, I will absolutely agree that things that the state legislature has the authority to
[37:49.720 --> 37:55.560]  do is to control the use of the roads for extraordinary uses such as the conduct of
[37:55.560 --> 37:57.240]  business upon them.
[37:57.240 --> 38:04.560]  Truck drivers, wrecker drivers, taxi cabs, shuttle buses, bus lines, those are commercial
[38:04.560 --> 38:07.720]  businesses that fall under these regulations.
[38:07.720 --> 38:10.320]  None of them are exercising a right to anything.
[38:10.320 --> 38:17.120]  Why do you, why do you believe that the state has the right to control those enterprises
[38:17.120 --> 38:23.400]  but does not have the right to also put limitations or controls upon?
[38:23.400 --> 38:26.480]  As you pointed out, what the constitution doesn't contain.
[38:26.480 --> 38:28.600]  In which constitution are we talking about?
[38:28.600 --> 38:29.600]  Either one.
[38:29.600 --> 38:30.600]  Either one in this case.
[38:30.600 --> 38:31.600]  No.
[38:31.600 --> 38:32.600]  But let's deal specifically with Texas.
[38:32.600 --> 38:33.600]  Right.
[38:33.600 --> 38:37.080]  Because, obviously, the 10th Amendment to the United States Constitution...
[38:37.080 --> 38:39.440]  Limits that authority to the states.
[38:39.440 --> 38:40.440]  That's right.
[38:40.440 --> 38:42.480]  Now, what is the state?
[38:42.480 --> 38:46.760]  The state is simply nothing more than the political creation of the people themselves.
[38:46.760 --> 38:48.120]  That's all it is.
[38:48.120 --> 38:49.500]  We created the state.
[38:49.500 --> 38:51.840]  We created the government of the state.
[38:51.840 --> 38:57.240]  Now, in order for us to delegate power and authority to that government, it must be a
[38:57.240 --> 39:00.560]  power and authority that we ourselves possess.
[39:00.560 --> 39:07.280]  We have no authority in Texas to empower the Georgia legislature to do anything, correct?
[39:07.280 --> 39:12.360]  So we can only delegate an authority that we have as the people of Texas.
[39:12.360 --> 39:17.640]  Now, do I, in my private capacity, in any way, shape, or form, have the right to tell
[39:17.640 --> 39:22.160]  you that you can't do anything that you want to do?
[39:22.160 --> 39:26.000]  You cannot... Sheriff Curtin, you can't own a house made out of bricks.
[39:26.000 --> 39:32.160]  In your private capacity, no, but what you have the right to do is cast your ballot to
[39:32.160 --> 39:40.160]  elect those members of the state legislature that convene and craft these laws and adopt
[39:40.160 --> 39:41.160]  them.
[39:41.160 --> 39:42.160]  Granted.
[39:42.160 --> 39:43.160]  Okay.
[39:43.160 --> 39:46.080]  They are the applicable law of the state.
[39:46.080 --> 39:52.160]  But again, you're getting to a point where what authority does a legislator have to create
[39:52.160 --> 39:53.160]  law?
[39:53.160 --> 39:57.000]  If he can only have an authority that I can convey to him, and that's exactly what he's
[39:57.000 --> 40:01.760]  got, is an authority I can convey to him that you can convey.
[40:01.760 --> 40:02.760]  Okay.
[40:02.760 --> 40:10.160]  But if those same conveyances can also be put into law to be modified or changed or
[40:10.160 --> 40:11.160]  expanded or...
[40:11.160 --> 40:12.160]  Agreed.
[40:12.160 --> 40:13.160]  But if I can...
[40:13.160 --> 40:20.920]  I mean, if there was a public uprising today and across the state of Texas, people got
[40:20.920 --> 40:27.160]  together and rallied a battle cry, we can do that, that there should not be a driver's
[40:27.160 --> 40:35.400]  license in existence, and come January 1st, when the legislature reconvenes, if they crafted
[40:35.400 --> 40:41.120]  that into law and it passes the House and the Senate and the governor signs it, it becomes
[40:41.120 --> 40:49.800]  law, this would go away in the exact same nature that it was created.
[40:49.800 --> 40:54.520]  I would suggest that the confusion those creates would go away.
[40:54.520 --> 40:55.520]  Okay.
[40:55.520 --> 41:01.120]  However, back to the scenario I was presenting, that irregardless of my personal or official
[41:01.120 --> 41:06.040]  capacity, I have no authority to tell you, you can't live where you decide to live.
[41:06.040 --> 41:10.600]  I have no authority to tell you what kind of furniture you can have, what you can buy,
[41:10.600 --> 41:11.680]  what you can sell.
[41:11.680 --> 41:13.720]  I have none of that authority.
[41:13.720 --> 41:19.640]  I cannot turn around and say, Michael, let's you and I vote to make Sheriff Curse do this
[41:19.640 --> 41:20.640]  thing.
[41:20.640 --> 41:23.120]  Let's you and I as two to one vote do this.
[41:23.120 --> 41:27.120]  We'll even get your chief deputy over here to agree that it's a good thing.
[41:27.120 --> 41:31.040]  So now all three of us have gotten together and voted, Sheriff Curse, you can't live in
[41:31.040 --> 41:32.040]  this house.
[41:32.040 --> 41:33.400]  We don't want you in this neighborhood.
[41:33.400 --> 41:37.720]  We say you got to live over there, or you can't own this kind of lawnmower, or you can't
[41:37.720 --> 41:39.520]  drive this kind of car.
[41:39.520 --> 41:46.040]  Or you no longer have the right to go to the post office because we don't want you there.
[41:46.040 --> 41:47.040]  Okay?
[41:47.040 --> 41:51.680]  Or you've got to get a permanent license from us before you can go there.
[41:51.680 --> 41:52.960]  We don't have that authority.
[41:52.960 --> 41:56.400]  No matter how many of us vote on it, we can't do it.
[41:56.400 --> 41:58.680]  I don't have the individual authority.
[41:58.680 --> 42:00.320]  Group wise, we don't have that authority.
[42:00.320 --> 42:06.760]  I cannot remove a right from you by vote or by proxy in any way, shape, or form.
[42:06.760 --> 42:09.520]  The legislature is limited to that same authority.
[42:09.520 --> 42:13.320]  They can only do what we've delegated to them via the Constitution.
[42:13.320 --> 42:15.320]  Do we agree?
[42:15.320 --> 42:25.320]  Well, we, right, through the Constitution, we grant them a place in that law, but we
[42:25.320 --> 42:29.200]  don't limit them to only the Constitution.
[42:29.200 --> 42:32.160]  We allow them to create other laws.
[42:32.160 --> 42:35.760]  Within reason and within the powers we gave them.
[42:35.760 --> 42:41.600]  And how can you argue that what they've done here is not unreasonable?
[42:41.600 --> 42:45.720]  Show me the Constitutional reference that says the legislature has the authority to
[42:45.720 --> 42:47.840]  create a Department of Transportation.
[42:47.840 --> 42:49.560]  It doesn't exist, does it?
[42:49.560 --> 42:52.800]  So if we're going to use the argument that it says I don't have the right to use a motor
[42:52.800 --> 42:57.800]  vehicle, then the argument that the Constitution doesn't say that they have the right to create
[42:57.800 --> 43:01.400]  a transportation code would mean they wouldn't have it.
[43:01.400 --> 43:04.800]  Now you're saying that just because they're the legislature, they have the power to do
[43:04.800 --> 43:06.400]  whatever laws they want.
[43:06.400 --> 43:08.440]  I'm arguing that's not possible.
[43:08.440 --> 43:09.440]  Okay.
[43:09.440 --> 43:18.320]  But I'm telling you, just because the Constitution doesn't say they have the right to create
[43:18.320 --> 43:22.840]  driving privileges doesn't mean that that right doesn't exist.
[43:22.840 --> 43:23.840]  Right.
[43:23.840 --> 43:28.000]  So how does he not give me the right to operate?
[43:28.000 --> 43:29.000]  Okay.
[43:29.000 --> 43:30.480]  Now notice what he's done.
[43:30.480 --> 43:36.560]  He has taken this at a point where originally he was saying that I didn't have the right
[43:36.560 --> 43:40.880]  to operate a motor vehicle because the Constitution doesn't give it to me.
[43:40.880 --> 43:45.840]  I can't travel in a motor vehicle because the Constitution doesn't give it to me.
[43:45.840 --> 43:52.080]  Now he's making the argument that just because the Constitution doesn't say that the legislature
[43:52.080 --> 43:57.280]  can't create a Department of Public Safety or a Department of Transportation, that that
[43:57.280 --> 43:59.880]  doesn't mean the power doesn't exist.
[43:59.880 --> 44:00.880]  Yes.
[44:00.880 --> 44:05.200]  Now he has completely flip-flopped in his argument about where the Constitution applies
[44:05.200 --> 44:06.200]  and where it doesn't.
[44:06.200 --> 44:11.600]  And he also, again, keeps talking about rights of governmental entities.
[44:11.600 --> 44:14.800]  And that's how he's able to weasel in this conversation.
[44:14.800 --> 44:19.720]  That's why I always correct people when they start talking about government's rights.
[44:19.720 --> 44:20.720]  No.
[44:20.720 --> 44:21.720]  Governments don't have rights.
[44:21.720 --> 44:25.040]  Governments only have authorities that are granted to them, period.
[44:25.040 --> 44:26.600]  And that usually cuts it off.
[44:26.600 --> 44:27.600]  We'll be right back, folks.
[44:27.600 --> 44:28.600]  This is outrageous.
[44:28.600 --> 44:40.560]  More energy, stronger immune power, improved sense of well-being.
[44:40.560 --> 44:43.600]  How many supplements have you heard boast of these benefits?
[44:43.600 --> 44:50.040]  The team behind Shentrician believes that supplements should over-deliver on their promises.
[44:50.040 --> 44:53.400]  And Shentrician does just that.
[44:53.400 --> 44:58.580]  Shentrician utilizes the ancient healing wisdom of Chinese medicine in conjunction with the
[44:58.580 --> 45:00.680]  science of modern nutrition.
[45:00.680 --> 45:04.040]  Adaptogenic herbs serve as the healing component.
[45:04.040 --> 45:10.200]  And organic hemp protein in greens and superfoods act as a balanced nutrient base.
[45:10.200 --> 45:14.560]  Plus, Shentrician tastes great in just water.
[45:14.560 --> 45:20.080]  This powder supplement is everything you'd want in a product, and it's all natural.
[45:20.080 --> 45:28.800]  Visit Shentrician.com to order yours, or call 1-866-497-7436.
[45:28.800 --> 45:39.840]  After you use Shentrician, you'll believe in supplements again.
[45:39.840 --> 45:47.520]  Aerial spraying, chemtrails, the modified atmosphere, heavy metals and pesticides, carcinogens
[45:47.520 --> 45:51.400]  and chemical fibers all falling from the sky.
[45:51.400 --> 45:54.440]  You have a choice to keep your body clean.
[45:54.440 --> 46:04.160]  Detoxify with micro-plant powder from hempusa.org, or call 908-691-2608.
[46:04.160 --> 46:08.840]  It's odorless and tasteless and used in any liquid or food.
[46:08.840 --> 46:12.840]  Protect your family now with micro-plant powder.
[46:12.840 --> 46:19.480]  Cleaning out heavy metals, parasites and toxins, order it now for daily intake, and stock it
[46:19.480 --> 46:43.880]  now for long-term storage, visit hempusa.org, or call 908-691-2608 today.
[46:43.880 --> 46:46.680]  All right folks, we're going to try to blaze through this clip, we're just barely going
[46:46.680 --> 46:51.200]  to have enough time to finish it with minimal commentary during the show.
[46:51.200 --> 46:55.720]  But yeah, this is why I don't let people get away with talking about governments having
[46:55.720 --> 46:59.600]  rights around me, because this is where the line of reasoning goes.
[46:59.600 --> 47:03.320]  I'm not saying Eddie didn't handle this guy very well, I mean Eddie, you handled this
[47:03.320 --> 47:08.760]  guy excellent, way better than I would have, that's for sure, but this is just an example
[47:08.760 --> 47:13.880]  of this is where the line of reasoning leads when people are allowed to continue to think
[47:13.880 --> 47:17.760]  and reason that governmental entities have rights, okay?
[47:17.760 --> 47:21.080]  Because then they'll start saying, well then they have rights to do, the government has
[47:21.080 --> 47:25.400]  a right to do this and that just because it's not outlined in the Constitution, they could
[47:25.400 --> 47:26.880]  still do it.
[47:26.880 --> 47:33.800]  No, sovereigns have rights to do whatever just because the right may not be enumerated
[47:33.800 --> 47:37.960]  or protected in the Constitution.
[47:37.960 --> 47:43.080]  Governments and government entities have authorities that are delegated to them and granted to
[47:43.080 --> 47:46.880]  them by we the people and the only place that happens is through the Constitution.
[47:46.880 --> 47:51.400]  Of course they're limited to the Constitution, what a preposterous notion, this is outrageous
[47:51.400 --> 47:56.520]  that this guy is saying that they're not limited to the Constitution, of course they are, if
[47:56.520 --> 48:00.720]  not then that means what are they limited by, they wouldn't be limited by anything.
[48:00.720 --> 48:04.040]  And then they would have rights, as he said, this is outrageous, alright we're going to
[48:04.040 --> 48:05.040]  continue.
[48:05.040 --> 48:10.280]  Right, so how does it not, by not giving me the right to operate a motor vehicle, how
[48:10.280 --> 48:13.120]  does it say that that right does not exist?
[48:13.120 --> 48:16.920]  So you're making a compound argument with a distinction between two different parties
[48:16.920 --> 48:19.560]  here, one with more authority than the other.
[48:19.560 --> 48:25.120]  I have far more authority than the legislators do, far more, because all of their power is
[48:25.120 --> 48:36.680]  taken from me by my consent, granted, okay, granted, section two of article one, all political
[48:36.680 --> 48:41.440]  powers inherent in the people, well that's right, but just like the example you gave
[48:41.440 --> 48:45.960]  earlier when you were talking about where you wanted to limit me, now obviously laws
[48:45.960 --> 48:55.520]  are crafted to target specific people by name, but at the same time if you and a majority
[48:55.520 --> 49:00.800]  of all other citizens in the United, or in the state of Texas got together and made a
[49:00.800 --> 49:07.040]  push and said we want our sheriffs across the state to be limited in this scope of authority
[49:07.040 --> 49:13.200]  on the type of home men live in, and those laws are adopted and passed, if it becomes
[49:13.200 --> 49:21.440]  law, well then I have to adhere to that if I choose to be sheriff of any law.
[49:21.440 --> 49:22.440]  Okay, pause it there.
[49:22.440 --> 49:25.560]  And that's kind of the same thing.
[49:25.560 --> 49:30.320]  Okay now just real quick folks, notice what he's done here, he has gone from talking about
[49:30.320 --> 49:38.360]  the right of a citizen, a man, to what the people can dictate to a public officer.
[49:38.360 --> 49:41.640]  Now that's a completely different animal.
[49:41.640 --> 49:46.200]  The people have the right to create law to control the office of the officer.
[49:46.200 --> 49:52.760]  If he wishes to be sheriff, then he has to maintain what he has to do to keep that position,
[49:52.760 --> 49:58.560]  but in our private capacity, any such dictate about where you could live or anything else
[49:58.560 --> 50:00.400]  is absolutely forbidden.
[50:00.400 --> 50:01.400]  It's not allowed.
[50:01.400 --> 50:02.400]  It can't happen.
[50:02.400 --> 50:09.120]  Yeah, he is not making the distinction between the office and the individual sovereign who
[50:09.120 --> 50:14.600]  has taken the oath of office in order to occupy the office and exercise the authority of the
[50:14.600 --> 50:15.600]  office.
[50:15.600 --> 50:22.520]  I mean, no, certainly we could not pass, we the people do not have the authority to grant
[50:22.520 --> 50:31.320]  the legislature to pass laws concerning what kind of house a public servant can or cannot
[50:31.320 --> 50:38.020]  live in, but the legislature certainly could pass laws concerning what kind of building
[50:38.020 --> 50:43.480]  an office the office is, where the office is, like, no, they can't-
[50:43.480 --> 50:46.440]  Yeah, or where he has to live in relation to that office.
[50:46.440 --> 50:52.000]  Right, like no, they can't spend a billion dollars on a mansion for the office of the
[50:52.000 --> 50:53.000]  sheriff.
[50:53.000 --> 50:56.040]  No, no, that can't happen.
[50:56.040 --> 50:57.600]  Certainly we have authority for that.
[50:57.600 --> 51:03.800]  The legislature has that kind of authority regarding appropriations, but not regarding
[51:03.800 --> 51:09.040]  restricting the private activities.
[51:09.040 --> 51:10.040]  You know what?
[51:10.040 --> 51:15.640]  I get the feeling he knows, and he's just coming with his mumbo jumbo.
[51:15.640 --> 51:16.800]  That's what it sounds like to me.
[51:16.800 --> 51:21.880]  Either that, or if he really doesn't know, then boy, are we ever in trouble.
[51:21.880 --> 51:23.480]  Either way, it's trouble.
[51:23.480 --> 51:25.480]  All right, here we go.
[51:25.480 --> 51:28.680]  And that's kind of the same thing.
[51:28.680 --> 51:33.920]  Yeah, there's not going to be a statute that says any Craig has to have a driver's license
[51:33.920 --> 51:35.680]  to operate a motor vehicle.
[51:35.680 --> 51:43.920]  But there is going to be laws that broadly apply to the use of-
[51:43.920 --> 51:48.480]  Again, it doesn't have to be limited to a single individual.
[51:48.480 --> 51:54.220]  The four of us could sit here in this room and say all day long that the county of Nacogdoches
[51:54.220 --> 51:58.440]  and all the people in it have these limitations on them.
[51:58.440 --> 52:00.600]  We don't have the authority to do that.
[52:00.600 --> 52:04.900]  Even if we sat in the legislature, we don't have the authority to do that.
[52:04.900 --> 52:11.000]  We cannot take the authority delegated from the people and then use it to take away the
[52:11.000 --> 52:13.000]  rights of the people.
[52:13.000 --> 52:17.840]  We can't turn around and say that they gave us the authority to make them our subjects
[52:17.840 --> 52:22.320]  and that we can lord over them whatever laws we deem necessary.
[52:22.320 --> 52:27.560]  When you asked where I said that their authority was limited to commerce, the government can
[52:27.560 --> 52:33.080]  regulate anything that we gave it the authority to create or to control.
[52:33.080 --> 52:37.880]  There is no constitutional provision for the government to regulate or control the people,
[52:37.880 --> 52:39.600]  none whatsoever.
[52:39.600 --> 52:46.600]  The inference can't be made that a free people can be handled in that way or we're not free.
[52:46.600 --> 52:51.160]  If I have the right of liberty and I have the right to own and acquire property and
[52:51.160 --> 52:55.840]  I have the right to the use of that property as long as its use is not to the detriment
[52:55.840 --> 53:01.200]  of my neighbors or to their property, no neighbor has a claim against me and no neighbor has
[53:01.200 --> 53:03.240]  a right to tell me I can't use it.
[53:03.240 --> 53:08.900]  It doesn't matter where I use it, as long as I am on my property or as long as I am
[53:08.900 --> 53:13.880]  on property I have full authority to use or full permission to use.
[53:13.880 --> 53:19.840]  By permission I mean someone else's private property but as you pointed out there is community
[53:19.840 --> 53:25.080]  property that belongs to all of the people and I have just as much right to it as he
[53:25.080 --> 53:27.660]  does or he does or you do.
[53:27.660 --> 53:31.600]  No one can deny me access to that property because it belongs to all of us.
[53:31.600 --> 53:33.240]  That is what the roads are.
[53:33.240 --> 53:35.240]  The roads belong to us.
[53:35.240 --> 53:41.240]  The state is the caretaker but as the caretaker the state does not have the right to deprive
[53:41.240 --> 53:43.600]  us of its use, ever.
[53:43.600 --> 53:47.880]  Now they can close it for maintenance, they can close it because the road has become a
[53:47.880 --> 53:52.920]  hazard in and of itself, it caved in, the bridge washed out, anything, those are directly
[53:52.920 --> 53:57.680]  related to the necessity of public safety, completely understandable, completely necessary,
[53:57.680 --> 53:59.840]  no argument whatsoever.
[53:59.840 --> 54:05.640]  But for you to tell me that my private automobile as a piece of property that I own is not within
[54:05.640 --> 54:10.480]  my power to use because I didn't get state permission, I'm going to disagree with that.
[54:10.480 --> 54:16.800]  If you're saying that the state can take at any future date any piece of property I own
[54:16.800 --> 54:20.880]  and tell me that I'm no longer free to use it without state permission, again I'm going
[54:20.880 --> 54:22.440]  to say you're incorrect.
[54:22.440 --> 54:24.440]  It doesn't work that way.
[54:24.440 --> 54:29.960]  You cannot take the authority I give you to do something on my behalf and turn it against
[54:29.960 --> 54:31.920]  me to become my master.
[54:31.920 --> 54:33.320]  You can't do that.
[54:33.320 --> 54:39.560]  As a public servant it's impossible to do that and that's exactly why I say these codes
[54:39.560 --> 54:45.920]  along with the perfectly legitimate reasoning of the courts that have ruled on this subject.
[54:45.920 --> 54:51.600]  These codes very clearly can only apply to a certain classification of individuals, as
[54:51.600 --> 54:57.320]  you know, over which they can write these laws to govern and these classifications are
[54:57.320 --> 55:01.920]  very clear that they are only things over which we gave them authority.
[55:01.920 --> 55:05.040]  We did not give the government authority over us.
[55:05.040 --> 55:09.520]  The purpose that government was created for, it's written in the Declaration of Independence,
[55:09.520 --> 55:12.240]  it's written in the Preamble of the Texas Constitution.
[55:12.240 --> 55:16.360]  The government is created for the purpose of protecting the rights and property of the
[55:16.360 --> 55:17.360]  people.
[55:17.360 --> 55:22.880]  Who do you think created these laws?
[55:22.880 --> 55:23.880]  The people did.
[55:23.880 --> 55:24.880]  That's right.
[55:24.880 --> 55:25.880]  Okay.
[55:25.880 --> 55:33.680]  Again, as the people, no one person or group of people can deny me a right unless I have
[55:33.680 --> 55:39.040]  done something to someone that puts me on trial that my right can be suspended or taken
[55:39.040 --> 55:40.040]  away.
[55:40.040 --> 55:47.440]  Again, what we're doubting, the same thing probably 30 minutes ago we said, is it's your
[55:47.440 --> 55:55.480]  belief, what you believe to be a right versus what the state believes to be a privilege.
[55:55.480 --> 56:03.320]  The right to travel versus the privilege to operate a motor vehicle while traveling is
[56:03.320 --> 56:10.080]  really the whole gist of the difference in our take on this conversation.
[56:10.080 --> 56:17.440]  Nobody in the state is trying to stop you from using the highway, from going from point
[56:17.440 --> 56:23.680]  A to point B, but the state says if you're going to operate the motor vehicle while you're
[56:23.680 --> 56:27.320]  using that highway, you have to comply with these things.
[56:27.320 --> 56:28.320]  Okay.
[56:28.320 --> 56:31.480]  I want to pause right here and make a quick comment.
[56:31.480 --> 56:34.280]  He keeps going back to the same thing.
[56:34.280 --> 56:41.880]  Also, it looks to me like he's trying to twist the point of contention of the argument.
[56:41.880 --> 56:49.080]  It sounds like he is trying to paint this picture in a sense that Eddie is disagreeing
[56:49.080 --> 56:55.640]  with the statute or disagreeing with the state's transportation code, and Eddie is not.
[56:55.640 --> 57:03.360]  As I said last night, big ups and kudos and praise to the state legislature for writing
[57:03.360 --> 57:09.400]  the statute the way that they did at the time because they understood all these principles
[57:09.400 --> 57:16.400]  and there is nothing in the state transportation code that requires someone to have a license
[57:16.400 --> 57:24.280]  from the state in order to control the helm of the private vehicle on the public roadways.
[57:24.280 --> 57:29.040]  There is nothing in state statute that requires that, only if you're going to be engaged in
[57:29.040 --> 57:30.040]  commerce.
[57:30.040 --> 57:32.520]  I mean, this is getting ridiculous.
[57:32.520 --> 57:39.040]  The whole point of it is that because we the people pay taxes, we have the right to travel
[57:39.040 --> 57:47.480]  on the roadways regardless if we're a commercial passenger or just someone that we're getting
[57:47.480 --> 57:53.380]  a ride from someone else, or regardless if we are behind the helm controlling the vehicle,
[57:53.380 --> 57:54.380]  it doesn't matter.
[57:54.380 --> 57:58.480]  If it's in the mode of private travel, we have the right to use the roadways for that
[57:58.480 --> 57:59.480]  purpose.
[57:59.480 --> 58:06.200]  There is nothing in statute that prevents that, and very good praises to the legislature
[58:06.200 --> 58:10.080]  for understanding that and structuring in the code that way, and the reason is because
[58:10.080 --> 58:11.440]  we pay taxes.
[58:11.440 --> 58:14.680]  We have the right to use those roadways to travel on them, whether we're controlling
[58:14.680 --> 58:20.680]  the helm of the vehicle or not, and the people that are required to be licensed are the ones
[58:20.680 --> 58:23.640]  who are engaging in commerce on the roadways.
[58:23.640 --> 58:27.240]  Again, the reason, because we're paying taxes for those roads.
[58:27.240 --> 58:30.920]  They're our roads, and if somebody else is going to use them to make money off of them,
[58:30.920 --> 58:33.880]  then yeah, they're going to have to jump through some hoops.
[58:33.880 --> 58:39.880]  I mean, this guy's line of reasoning is like saying we have to have a license to go sit
[58:39.880 --> 58:46.240]  in the park, okay, or we have to have a license to go hang out at the library.
[58:46.240 --> 58:49.680]  No, that's public property.
[58:49.680 --> 58:52.720]  We have to have a license to go to the courthouse.
[58:52.720 --> 58:59.560]  No, we have a right to be in those places because they are public property.
[58:59.560 --> 59:05.840]  Only if we were going to attempt to set up a commercial business in the park, like a
[59:05.840 --> 59:11.200]  lemonade stand or something, then we may need a license, or we're going to try to sell our
[59:11.200 --> 59:16.280]  own books in the library, well, then we may need a license or permission, but you know,
[59:16.280 --> 59:17.280]  this guy's outrageous.
[59:17.280 --> 59:18.280]  He's absolutely outrageous.
[59:18.280 --> 59:22.720]  All right, we'll be back on the other side with the rest of the clip.
[59:22.720 --> 59:49.120]  This is the rule of law.
[59:49.120 --> 01:00:17.680]  All right, we'll be back on the other side with the rest of the clip.
[01:00:17.680 --> 01:00:37.160]  All right, we'll be back on the other side with the rest of the clip.
[01:00:37.160 --> 01:00:41.840]  France has issued its most extreme warning in recent years about the dangers of visiting
[01:00:41.840 --> 01:00:47.640]  Britain saying a terrorist attack is, quote, very likely, a dramatic statement on the website
[01:00:47.640 --> 01:00:52.640]  of the Ministry for Foreign Affairs adds that visitors need to exercise extreme vigilance,
[01:00:52.640 --> 01:00:58.600]  quote, this is especially so in world-famous sites like London's Trafalgar Square and Piccadilly
[01:00:58.600 --> 01:01:04.080]  Circus and on the capital's public transport system.
[01:01:04.080 --> 01:01:08.640]  Israeli warplanes fired on multiple sites in the central Gaza Strip Thursday, injuring
[01:01:08.640 --> 01:01:09.920]  five people.
[01:01:09.920 --> 01:01:13.680]  The Israeli military said the strike came in response to the rocket that was fired from
[01:01:13.680 --> 01:01:14.940]  the Gaza Strip.
[01:01:14.940 --> 01:01:20.320]  The homemade projectile landed in the Negev Desert, causing no injuries or damage.
[01:01:20.320 --> 01:01:27.040]  The global aid group Oxfam says the world's poorest countries are missing out on aid earmarks
[01:01:27.040 --> 01:01:28.960]  for climate change programs.
[01:01:28.960 --> 01:01:34.720]  Oxfam's analysis of aid controlled by the Global Environment Facility from 1991 to the
[01:01:34.720 --> 01:01:41.240]  present finds $1.2 billion of international money aimed at climate programs went to emerging
[01:01:41.240 --> 01:01:47.320]  superpowers China, India and Brazil, while the world's poorest 49 countries received
[01:01:47.320 --> 01:01:51.440]  just $450 million.
[01:01:51.440 --> 01:01:56.640]  The Nation magazine says former CNN news anchor Lou Dobbs, well known for ranting against
[01:01:56.640 --> 01:02:01.640]  illegal immigration, has for years relied on undocumented labor for the upkeep of his
[01:02:01.640 --> 01:02:05.560]  multi-million dollar estates and thoroughbred horses.
[01:02:05.560 --> 01:02:10.120]  Dobbs has also focused on, quote, the employer who is so shamelessly exploiting the illegal
[01:02:10.120 --> 01:02:13.760]  alien and so shamelessly flouting U.S. law.
[01:02:13.760 --> 01:02:18.840]  The Nation says one Dobbs employee crossed the Yuma desert on foot after being promised
[01:02:18.840 --> 01:02:21.600]  a job grooming Dobbs' horses.
[01:02:21.600 --> 01:02:26.940]  The man worked for Dobbs for two years before receiving a guest worker visa, a visa Dobbs
[01:02:26.940 --> 01:02:32.480]  denounced as, quote, a form of indentured servitude on CNN.
[01:02:32.480 --> 01:02:37.440]  Undocumented workers also worked in Dobbs' gardens, conversing with him in Spanish.
[01:02:37.440 --> 01:02:42.440]  Workers in Dobbs' stables and gardens were never paid overtime for the up to 65 hours
[01:02:42.440 --> 01:02:46.360]  a week they often worked.
[01:02:46.360 --> 01:02:51.440]  A new White House report says the Pakistani military is avoiding direct conflict with
[01:02:51.440 --> 01:02:54.880]  militants near its border with neighboring Afghanistan.
[01:02:54.880 --> 01:03:00.360]  The report sent to Congress by Barack Obama accuses the Pakistani army of pursuing its
[01:03:00.360 --> 01:03:02.880]  own interests in the volatile region.
[01:03:02.880 --> 01:03:08.080]  The report states the Pakistani military continue to avoid military engagements that would put
[01:03:08.080 --> 01:03:14.040]  it in direct conflict with Afghan Taliban or Al-Qaeda forces in North Waziristan.
[01:03:14.040 --> 01:03:20.320]  The report comes as a non-UN sanctioned U.S. strike Wednesday killed at least six people
[01:03:20.320 --> 01:03:23.600]  in the country's troubled northwestern tribal region.
[01:03:23.600 --> 01:03:28.800]  The U.S. has stepped up its non-UN sanctioned drone attacks in recent days, resulting in
[01:03:28.800 --> 01:03:30.600]  significant civilian casualties.
[01:03:30.600 --> 01:04:00.080]  This news brief brought to you by the International News Net.
[01:04:00.080 --> 01:04:01.080]  Okay folks, we're back.
[01:04:01.080 --> 01:04:06.440]  We're playing the clip, the remainder of the clip from Eddie's trip to the J.P. the other
[01:04:06.440 --> 01:04:07.440]  day.
[01:04:07.440 --> 01:04:16.080]  And again, I will note that the sheriff keeps trying to paint a picture or come from a standpoint
[01:04:16.080 --> 01:04:20.960]  that Eddie is disagreeing with the law and saying that the law is unconstitutional and
[01:04:20.960 --> 01:04:24.520]  that's not what Eddie's saying at all.
[01:04:24.520 --> 01:04:28.200]  We're all saying that the law is very well written and that it's written the way it's
[01:04:28.200 --> 01:04:31.880]  supposed to be and it's just that the law is being misapplied.
[01:04:31.880 --> 01:04:39.320]  So you know, it's not true at all that Eddie is disagreeing with the law, but it is clear
[01:04:39.320 --> 01:04:42.000]  that that's the picture that the sheriff is trying to paint.
[01:04:42.000 --> 01:04:43.360]  Okay, we're continuing on.
[01:04:43.360 --> 01:04:47.480]  Right, but see, I see you're very careful to maintain a certain terminology.
[01:04:47.480 --> 01:04:48.480]  Well, you bet.
[01:04:48.480 --> 01:04:49.480]  Okay.
[01:04:49.480 --> 01:04:50.480]  But that's the difference here.
[01:04:50.480 --> 01:04:51.840]  That is the legal difference.
[01:04:51.840 --> 01:04:52.840]  That's right.
[01:04:52.840 --> 01:04:56.680]  The legal difference is whether or not I am operating a motor vehicle.
[01:04:56.680 --> 01:04:57.680]  Correct.
[01:04:57.680 --> 01:05:02.760]  How many times have you ever heard of anybody getting a ticket for not having a driver's
[01:05:02.760 --> 01:05:08.440]  license by riding as a passenger in the back seat of the vehicle?
[01:05:08.440 --> 01:05:10.680]  All depends on the mood of the officer, I guess.
[01:05:10.680 --> 01:05:14.800]  Oh yeah, the officer, once again, will charge them with failure to ID because they won't
[01:05:14.800 --> 01:05:15.800]  give it to them.
[01:05:15.800 --> 01:05:25.400]  No, that's not because they're not regulated for traveling on that public highway.
[01:05:25.400 --> 01:05:31.880]  They're regulated for operating the vehicle, and even though it may not seem it, there
[01:05:31.880 --> 01:05:37.360]  is a public safety necessity in how driver's licenses come about.
[01:05:37.360 --> 01:05:40.360]  Now, sure, there's some regulatory things.
[01:05:40.360 --> 01:05:45.720]  I'm not going to say that the state's not trying to collect some revenue dollars off
[01:05:45.720 --> 01:05:54.360]  of that, but the whole reason we have a driver's education program and a test is to prove that
[01:05:54.360 --> 01:06:03.160]  your capacity to operate that motor vehicle is at a sufficient level that you can hopefully
[01:06:03.160 --> 01:06:09.360]  do so with a relative amount of safety that's not going to endanger not only yourself, but
[01:06:09.360 --> 01:06:10.640]  all those around you.
[01:06:10.640 --> 01:06:12.880]  Not arguing that, and I've never argued that.
[01:06:12.880 --> 01:06:17.960]  But that's where that privilege to regulate that comes from.
[01:06:17.960 --> 01:06:23.760]  That's where it's based from, and the only thing I can tell you, we're going to have
[01:06:23.760 --> 01:06:29.000]  to just agree to disagree on this point, I guess, because I understand you're thoroughly
[01:06:29.000 --> 01:06:32.720]  convinced, and there's probably nothing I'm going to tell you that's going to sway you
[01:06:32.720 --> 01:06:35.720]  any differently.
[01:06:35.720 --> 01:06:41.800]  Although I think you've made some good points in your argument, I still don't believe them
[01:06:41.800 --> 01:06:44.480]  to be the valid points of law.
[01:06:44.480 --> 01:06:50.360]  And if you had those claims and you were able to take them to the courts, to the Supreme
[01:06:50.360 --> 01:06:56.480]  Court in a fashion, and the Supreme Court agreed with you, and they said, you're exactly
[01:06:56.480 --> 01:07:02.680]  right, the state of Texas has over exceeded its legal authority to regulate the operation
[01:07:02.680 --> 01:07:10.160]  of motor vehicles, well then they hand that ruling down and that gets changed.
[01:07:10.160 --> 01:07:15.440]  And in all of my lifetime and beyond, that hasn't happened.
[01:07:15.440 --> 01:07:26.520]  So in the last 60 years or so, if the courts have not overturned that, I think you're going
[01:07:26.520 --> 01:07:34.880]  to have a hard time getting somebody to believe that the state has not enacted a legal right
[01:07:34.880 --> 01:07:40.320]  of regulation on the privilege of driving.
[01:07:40.320 --> 01:07:43.760]  The problem here is the semantics of the wordings of the law.
[01:07:43.760 --> 01:07:45.680]  That's the biggest problem.
[01:07:45.680 --> 01:07:52.920]  The words are intentionally written to give an indication above and beyond their intent.
[01:07:52.920 --> 01:07:56.600]  Take for instance, in those codes, the word person.
[01:07:56.600 --> 01:08:03.760]  When you say every person is required to do this, what in law in Texas is a person?
[01:08:03.760 --> 01:08:10.520]  If you look very carefully in there, you will find person is based on two definitions.
[01:08:10.520 --> 01:08:15.480]  One is out of chapter 311 of the government code, which very clearly states that person
[01:08:15.480 --> 01:08:20.800]  includes corporations, associations, governmental agencies, governmental entities, or any other
[01:08:20.800 --> 01:08:22.920]  legal entity.
[01:08:22.920 --> 01:08:29.160]  It's not a man, it's not a natural anybody, it's all legal fictions, every one of them.
[01:08:29.160 --> 01:08:34.440]  Chapter 311 also specifically states that any code that gives a definition for a term
[01:08:34.440 --> 01:08:42.000]  contrary to the terms used in this chapter, it shall be first a requirement that the definitions
[01:08:42.000 --> 01:08:47.080]  between the two codes be reconciled so as to operate jointly.
[01:08:47.080 --> 01:08:53.640]  And only if it's such a time that that cannot happen, then and only then will the definition
[01:08:53.640 --> 01:08:56.040]  of the section alone control.
[01:08:56.040 --> 01:09:01.720]  Now, Texas Legislative Drafting Manual, the very book that's given to every incumbent
[01:09:01.720 --> 01:09:07.000]  in office in Austin that tells them how to write a law, how to construct a law, very
[01:09:07.000 --> 01:09:12.800]  clearly says that when you look at these statutes, do not presume to know the meaning of the
[01:09:12.800 --> 01:09:16.920]  words, especially the use of the term person.
[01:09:16.920 --> 01:09:23.240]  Person in Texas law isn't intentionally given a fictional meaning.
[01:09:23.240 --> 01:09:26.880]  Intentionally given a fictional meaning, okay?
[01:09:26.880 --> 01:09:32.240]  It does not apply to the average man in that definition.
[01:09:32.240 --> 01:09:36.640]  And if you go through there, you'll find out very quickly that it says that person means
[01:09:36.640 --> 01:09:40.040]  an individual, corporation, association, and so on and so forth.
[01:09:40.040 --> 01:09:45.640]  Well, in this case, the rules that the courts have used to interpret this, there are two.
[01:09:45.640 --> 01:09:52.120]  A justum generis, like things listed together, and inclusio unus, that's exclusio alterius,
[01:09:52.120 --> 01:09:56.400]  meaning the inclusion of one thing is the exclusion of all others, okay?
[01:09:56.400 --> 01:10:02.200]  So when it says the term includes something, what is there is all there is limited to the
[01:10:02.200 --> 01:10:05.120]  classification of the object so listed.
[01:10:05.120 --> 01:10:09.960]  Now, the rule of like things listed together makes it very clear that when they speak of
[01:10:09.960 --> 01:10:14.920]  an individual, the individual, since it is followed by corporations, associations, and
[01:10:14.920 --> 01:10:20.420]  limited liability companies, and other types of legal entities, individual can only pertain
[01:10:20.420 --> 01:10:24.560]  in that context to someone acting on behalf of one of those things.
[01:10:24.560 --> 01:10:25.560]  No, it doesn't.
[01:10:25.560 --> 01:10:26.560]  Actually, it does.
[01:10:26.560 --> 01:10:28.920]  The courts have said that's exactly what it means.
[01:10:28.920 --> 01:10:33.000]  Is there a comma between those two here?
[01:10:33.000 --> 01:10:34.000]  Sure there is.
[01:10:34.000 --> 01:10:35.000]  Exactly.
[01:10:35.000 --> 01:10:36.000]  Okay.
[01:10:36.000 --> 01:10:37.000]  And that comma does what?
[01:10:37.000 --> 01:10:38.000]  It separates them out.
[01:10:38.000 --> 01:10:39.000]  That's right.
[01:10:39.000 --> 01:10:41.040]  And there is a legal definition for individual.
[01:10:41.040 --> 01:10:44.040]  There is, in the Texas Penal Code, most certainly.
[01:10:44.040 --> 01:10:49.400]  However, when the law specifically states that in this section, this meaning shall apply
[01:10:49.400 --> 01:10:55.640]  in this section, or this chapter, or this code, that does not give the interpretation-free
[01:10:55.640 --> 01:11:00.160]  reign to run the codes outside of that unless specifically referenced by that code.
[01:11:00.160 --> 01:11:02.160]  And in this case, it's not.
[01:11:02.160 --> 01:11:03.160]  It specifically isn't.
[01:11:03.160 --> 01:11:04.160]  The code, in fact, says...
[01:11:04.160 --> 01:11:05.160]  It's pretty easy.
[01:11:05.160 --> 01:11:12.520]  And again, I understand you're talking codes, you've thrown out some pretty impressive legal
[01:11:12.520 --> 01:11:19.200]  terminology and a little bit of Latin mixed in there, but the bottom line is you and I
[01:11:19.200 --> 01:11:26.280]  both know that the intent to define a person as an individual and then what an individual
[01:11:26.280 --> 01:11:30.680]  represents in the state of Texas is a pretty basic thing.
[01:11:30.680 --> 01:11:34.880]  Now, it certainly has a legal definition.
[01:11:34.880 --> 01:11:35.880]  If I may.
[01:11:35.880 --> 01:11:36.880]  But...
[01:11:36.880 --> 01:11:37.880]  What is your official job title?
[01:11:37.880 --> 01:11:38.880]  Chief Deputy.
[01:11:38.880 --> 01:11:39.880]  Chief Deputy.
[01:11:39.880 --> 01:11:40.880]  It's an official position, correct?
[01:11:40.880 --> 01:11:41.880]  It's an official title.
[01:11:41.880 --> 01:11:42.880]  Right.
[01:11:42.880 --> 01:11:45.880]  But I mean, official title.
[01:11:45.880 --> 01:11:48.360]  And you hold an official office, correct?
[01:11:48.360 --> 01:11:49.360]  I hold the office.
[01:11:49.360 --> 01:11:50.360]  I appoint.
[01:11:50.360 --> 01:11:56.080]  I understand that, but he still has an official office capacity as Chief Deputy or as a Deputy
[01:11:56.080 --> 01:11:57.080]  Sheriff.
[01:11:57.080 --> 01:11:59.080]  He's in one of those offices, okay?
[01:11:59.080 --> 01:12:06.840]  Well, a Chief Deputy is nothing but a designation of rank in the appointed office.
[01:12:06.840 --> 01:12:13.840]  I understand that, but in any case, the official office is Deputy Sheriff and yours is Sheriff,
[01:12:13.840 --> 01:12:14.840]  okay?
[01:12:14.840 --> 01:12:15.840]  Correct.
[01:12:15.840 --> 01:12:22.760]  You are a man serving as the official person in the capacity of a Deputy Sheriff.
[01:12:22.760 --> 01:12:26.320]  The person is the personification of the office he holds.
[01:12:26.320 --> 01:12:28.120]  He is a person.
[01:12:28.120 --> 01:12:33.800]  He is also, in this particular instance, an individual of your organization, okay?
[01:12:33.800 --> 01:12:38.200]  He is an individual deputy out of the deputies you have.
[01:12:38.200 --> 01:12:43.920]  He is not necessarily acting in a private capacity as that same individual because he
[01:12:43.920 --> 01:12:45.280]  cannot.
[01:12:45.280 --> 01:12:51.320]  He cannot act in a private capacity as an official being.
[01:12:51.320 --> 01:12:52.320]  Can't do it.
[01:12:52.320 --> 01:12:58.000]  He must put on the persona of the office before he may exercise the authority and power in
[01:12:58.000 --> 01:12:59.000]  that office.
[01:12:59.000 --> 01:13:00.000]  Correct.
[01:13:00.000 --> 01:13:01.000]  That's exactly what we're dealing with here.
[01:13:01.000 --> 01:13:02.000]  Well, no.
[01:13:02.000 --> 01:13:07.000]  That's only one half of what you're dealing with here because even though he may be a
[01:13:07.000 --> 01:13:10.080]  Deputy Sheriff, he's also a private citizen.
[01:13:10.080 --> 01:13:12.080]  He didn't give up his rights to vote.
[01:13:12.080 --> 01:13:13.080]  He didn't give up his rights to marry.
[01:13:13.080 --> 01:13:14.080]  That's right.
[01:13:14.080 --> 01:13:20.080]  He didn't give up his rights to go home and hang that uniform up in the closet and become
[01:13:20.080 --> 01:13:22.520]  a husband and a wife and a father.
[01:13:22.520 --> 01:13:24.480]  He's still an individual.
[01:13:24.480 --> 01:13:25.480]  Agreed.
[01:13:25.480 --> 01:13:27.480]  And you can't separate that out.
[01:13:27.480 --> 01:13:28.480]  Okay.
[01:13:28.480 --> 01:13:29.480]  But again.
[01:13:29.480 --> 01:13:34.800]  I have some obligations and authorities that come with my position as Sheriff.
[01:13:34.800 --> 01:13:40.240]  But when I'm not Sheriff anymore, before I was ever Sheriff, before I was ever a Peace
[01:13:40.240 --> 01:13:46.920]  Officer, I was still an individual and I will still retain those rights as an individual.
[01:13:46.920 --> 01:13:47.920]  Okay.
[01:13:47.920 --> 01:13:54.560]  And just because I have taken on certain training and qualifications and requirements that enable
[01:13:54.560 --> 01:14:00.560]  me to now label myself as a Peace Officer and then be elected to the office of Sheriff
[01:14:00.560 --> 01:14:06.680]  or appoint him to the position of a Deputy Sheriff doesn't mean that he all of a sudden
[01:14:06.680 --> 01:14:14.080]  is uninvested of his other privileges as a person or rights as a person to do those private
[01:14:14.080 --> 01:14:15.080]  things.
[01:14:15.080 --> 01:14:16.080]  I agree.
[01:14:16.080 --> 01:14:17.080]  So.
[01:14:17.080 --> 01:14:18.080]  But you're talking.
[01:14:18.080 --> 01:14:21.080]  Saying that you're only an individual when it comes to a corporation.
[01:14:21.080 --> 01:14:22.080]  No, no, no.
[01:14:22.080 --> 01:14:24.040]  Is totally off base.
[01:14:24.040 --> 01:14:28.680]  You might be an individual working for a corporation and you might be an individual out there all
[01:14:28.680 --> 01:14:29.680]  by yourself.
[01:14:29.680 --> 01:14:30.680]  Agreed.
[01:14:30.680 --> 01:14:33.560]  And either one is applicable.
[01:14:33.560 --> 01:14:34.640]  It's not applicable.
[01:14:34.640 --> 01:14:37.920]  It would only be applicable to what the law itself applies to.
[01:14:37.920 --> 01:14:43.520]  And when they say an individual, common, that's pretty darn specific.
[01:14:43.520 --> 01:14:44.520]  Right.
[01:14:44.520 --> 01:14:45.520]  It's one of something.
[01:14:45.520 --> 01:14:46.520]  Okay.
[01:14:46.520 --> 01:14:50.200]  Not one of a body of other people?
[01:14:50.200 --> 01:14:51.200]  Of other somethings.
[01:14:51.200 --> 01:14:52.200]  Okay.
[01:14:52.200 --> 01:14:54.720]  Not necessarily a private citizen.
[01:14:54.720 --> 01:14:55.720]  Okay.
[01:14:55.720 --> 01:15:00.160]  Individual in there does not necessarily mean the capacity of a private citizen to serve
[01:15:00.160 --> 01:15:01.640]  as that individual, does it?
[01:15:01.640 --> 01:15:08.040]  If the law says an individual of a police department or an individual in this instance,
[01:15:08.040 --> 01:15:11.800]  it would have to be somebody the law gave authority to act in that instance, right?
[01:15:11.800 --> 01:15:15.120]  But in that instance, it wouldn't say individual, comma.
[01:15:15.120 --> 01:15:18.360]  It would say individual of.
[01:15:18.360 --> 01:15:19.360]  It might.
[01:15:19.360 --> 01:15:20.360]  It's for the people.
[01:15:20.360 --> 01:15:21.360]  It might.
[01:15:21.360 --> 01:15:22.360]  No, it does.
[01:15:22.360 --> 01:15:23.880]  I've seen it where it doesn't.
[01:15:23.880 --> 01:15:24.880]  But that's beside the point.
[01:15:24.880 --> 01:15:31.960]  I know, but the point here is, when it says individual and then they put that little comma,
[01:15:31.960 --> 01:15:39.880]  that comma is what separates the fact that it was not intended to continue on as a part
[01:15:39.880 --> 01:15:44.040]  of a bigger implication of wording.
[01:15:44.040 --> 01:15:48.240]  But the rule of statutory construction does.
[01:15:48.240 --> 01:15:57.840]  The adjudgment generis does, that is specifically what the courts use for statutory construction.
[01:15:57.840 --> 01:16:04.200]  When it says like things listed together, that's exactly what it means.
[01:16:04.200 --> 01:16:10.440]  These are like things when they are listed together and they are separated by commas.
[01:16:10.440 --> 01:16:17.680]  A corporation and association, though in structure and method of creation are not identical,
[01:16:17.680 --> 01:16:23.360]  but they are both similar in the fact that they are fictional entities created by law,
[01:16:23.360 --> 01:16:26.320]  not by natural anything.
[01:16:26.320 --> 01:16:31.360]  The like things listed together are applying to those fictions.
[01:16:31.360 --> 01:16:36.840]  If the courts have ruled that these like things are listed together and everything listed
[01:16:36.840 --> 01:16:43.560]  there except for your original individual in your interpretation is a fictional entity,
[01:16:43.560 --> 01:16:48.680]  then that takes the word individual out of the area of a like thing.
[01:16:48.680 --> 01:16:51.080]  And according to the courts, that can't happen.
[01:16:51.080 --> 01:16:54.680]  The rule of statutory construction says that these are like things.
[01:16:54.680 --> 01:16:55.680]  Yeah.
[01:16:55.680 --> 01:17:02.520]  When you get to the definition of corporations, certainly individuals have to fall into that
[01:17:02.520 --> 01:17:07.520]  and they can't be excluded from it.
[01:17:07.520 --> 01:17:08.520]  Okay folks.
[01:17:08.520 --> 01:17:13.560]  We'll be right back on the other side.
[01:17:13.560 --> 01:17:14.560]  This is the rule of law.
[01:17:14.560 --> 01:17:34.680]  Randy Kelton, Eddie Craig and Deborah Stevens will be right back.
[01:17:34.680 --> 01:17:38.120]  Capital Coin and Bullion is your local source for rare coins, precious metals and coins
[01:17:38.120 --> 01:17:40.160]  supplies in the Austin metro area.
[01:17:40.160 --> 01:17:41.880]  We also ship worldwide.
[01:17:41.880 --> 01:17:45.560]  We are a family owned and operated business that offers competitive prices on your coin
[01:17:45.560 --> 01:17:46.560]  and metal purchases.
[01:17:46.560 --> 01:17:51.640]  We buy, sell, trade and consign rare coins, gold and silver coin collections, precious
[01:17:51.640 --> 01:17:53.080]  metals and scrap gold.
[01:17:53.080 --> 01:17:55.320]  We purchase and sell gold and jewelry items.
[01:17:55.320 --> 01:17:57.840]  We offer daily specials on coins and bullion.
[01:17:57.840 --> 01:18:02.960]  We are located at 5448 Burnett Road, Suite 3 at the corner of Burnett and Shulmark and
[01:18:02.960 --> 01:18:07.040]  we're open Mondays and Fridays 10 to 6, Saturdays 10 to 5.
[01:18:07.040 --> 01:18:12.040]  You are welcome to stop in our shop during regular business hours or call 512-646-6440
[01:18:12.040 --> 01:18:13.040]  with any questions.
[01:18:13.040 --> 01:18:19.240]  Ask for Chad and say you heard about us on rule of law radio or Texas Liberty Radio.
[01:18:19.240 --> 01:18:22.920]  That's Capital Coin and Bullion at the corner of Burnett and Shulmark and we're open Mondays
[01:18:22.920 --> 01:18:26.320]  and Fridays 10 to 6, Saturdays 10 to 5.
[01:18:26.320 --> 01:18:33.280]  That's Capital Coin and Bullion 512-646-6440.
[01:18:33.280 --> 01:18:38.160]  It is so enlightening to listen to 90.1 FM but finding things on the internet isn't
[01:18:38.160 --> 01:18:41.920]  so easy and neither is finding like-minded people to share it with.
[01:18:41.920 --> 01:18:44.880]  Oh well I guess you haven't heard of Brave New Books then.
[01:18:44.880 --> 01:18:45.880]  Brave New Books?
[01:18:45.880 --> 01:18:50.680]  Yes, Brave New Books has all the books and DVDs you're looking for by authors like Alex
[01:18:50.680 --> 01:18:53.240]  Jones, Ron Paul and G. Edward Griffin.
[01:18:53.240 --> 01:18:56.520]  They even stock inner food, Berkey products and Calvin Soaps.
[01:18:56.520 --> 01:18:59.560]  There's no way a place like that exists.
[01:18:59.560 --> 01:19:01.040]  Go check it out for yourself.
[01:19:01.040 --> 01:19:04.960]  It's downtown at 1904 Guadalupe Street just south of UT.
[01:19:04.960 --> 01:19:09.160]  Oh by UT there's never anywhere to park down there.
[01:19:09.160 --> 01:19:14.040]  Actually they now offer a free hour of parking for paying customers at the 500 MLK Parking
[01:19:14.040 --> 01:19:17.040]  Facility just behind the bookstore.
[01:19:17.040 --> 01:19:20.040]  It does exist but when are they open?
[01:19:20.040 --> 01:19:24.800]  Monday through Saturday 11 AM to 9 PM and 1 to 6 PM on Sundays.
[01:19:24.800 --> 01:19:28.680]  So give them a call at 512-480-2503.
[01:19:28.680 --> 01:19:31.600]  Also check out their events page at bravenewbookstore.com.
[01:19:31.600 --> 01:19:50.200]  Okay folks, we are back and we're trying to keep our commentary brief so that we will
[01:19:50.200 --> 01:19:53.840]  have time to finish this clip by the end of the show and have a little time for commentary
[01:19:53.840 --> 01:19:54.840]  at the end.
[01:19:54.840 --> 01:20:02.040]  I want to make a point though, what was a big red flag to me was when the sheriff was
[01:20:02.040 --> 01:20:10.120]  giving the example of say the sheriff's deputy who has, he's acting in the official capacity
[01:20:10.120 --> 01:20:11.320]  of the sheriff's deputy.
[01:20:11.320 --> 01:20:13.520]  He still retains his rights as an individual.
[01:20:13.520 --> 01:20:15.120]  I know what he meant was a sovereign.
[01:20:15.120 --> 01:20:16.120]  I know he meant that.
[01:20:16.120 --> 01:20:17.320]  That's what he really meant.
[01:20:17.320 --> 01:20:22.320]  But then after that he said, and then the sheriff's deputy can go home and take off
[01:20:22.320 --> 01:20:34.120]  his uniform but at that point there's no distinction between the two, between him and his official
[01:20:34.120 --> 01:20:38.520]  capacity as the sheriff's deputy and him as an individual, which what he really meant
[01:20:38.520 --> 01:20:40.520]  was a sovereign.
[01:20:40.520 --> 01:20:45.040]  When he said that I was like whoa Nellie, Katie bar the door.
[01:20:45.040 --> 01:20:48.080]  He's saying there is no distinction between the two.
[01:20:48.080 --> 01:20:50.280]  Hello, yes there is.
[01:20:50.280 --> 01:20:52.440]  That's why it's called an office.
[01:20:52.440 --> 01:20:54.720]  That's why this is called a republic.
[01:20:54.720 --> 01:21:00.880]  The offices are the entities that have authority, not the human being themselves.
[01:21:00.880 --> 01:21:04.920]  That would be a monarchy if the human beings themselves had the authority.
[01:21:04.920 --> 01:21:10.080]  No the office has the authority and that's why these human beings take oaths of office
[01:21:10.080 --> 01:21:16.440]  when they pass into their role of exercising the capacity of the authority of the office.
[01:21:16.440 --> 01:21:22.000]  So I was like okay this is not a good thing here that they think there is no distinction
[01:21:22.000 --> 01:21:23.180]  between the two.
[01:21:23.180 --> 01:21:25.720]  So I just wanted to make that comment quickly.
[01:21:25.720 --> 01:21:27.680]  All right let's continue on.
[01:21:27.680 --> 01:21:30.280]  Eddie did you want to comment on that as well?
[01:21:30.280 --> 01:21:31.280]  No I'm good.
[01:21:31.280 --> 01:21:33.520]  All right here we go.
[01:21:33.520 --> 01:21:39.480]  But in this particular instance individual also represents those office that aren't
[01:21:39.480 --> 01:21:42.860]  a part of a corporation.
[01:21:42.860 --> 01:21:44.360]  And what interpretation though?
[01:21:44.360 --> 01:21:53.160]  That's why you know and I know this is a pretty odd example maybe but if I have a cow over
[01:21:53.160 --> 01:21:59.840]  here in this pasture and I have a herd of cattle over here in this pasture, the fact
[01:21:59.840 --> 01:22:07.680]  that this cow is not a part of this herd does not make it any less a cow.
[01:22:07.680 --> 01:22:08.680]  But it's not a herd is it?
[01:22:08.680 --> 01:22:14.320]  That's right it's not a herd and the fact that I'm an individual regardless of whether
[01:22:14.320 --> 01:22:21.000]  I'm a part of a corporation does not change the fact that I'm still an individual.
[01:22:21.000 --> 01:22:25.480]  I agree and that's exactly why in the law.
[01:22:25.480 --> 01:22:29.720]  Okay now he did not give me the opportunity to do this but he set himself up for the perfect
[01:22:29.720 --> 01:22:34.040]  example to blow him out of the water and that was that when he said when he's got the single
[01:22:34.040 --> 01:22:39.960]  cow in this pasture and the herd of cows over in this pasture that that doesn't make this
[01:22:39.960 --> 01:22:42.080]  cow any less a cow.
[01:22:42.080 --> 01:22:43.080]  Well duh.
[01:22:43.080 --> 01:22:45.720]  No they're still like things aren't they?
[01:22:45.720 --> 01:22:51.400]  There's just one of them now an individual cow instead of a herd of cows but they are
[01:22:51.400 --> 01:22:54.120]  still like things.
[01:22:54.120 --> 01:22:58.760]  Now had you taken a horse and put it in that pasture and had you taken your herd of cows
[01:22:58.760 --> 01:23:03.180]  and put them in this pasture then they would not be like things unless the term you're
[01:23:03.180 --> 01:23:08.480]  defining would be livestock.
[01:23:08.480 --> 01:23:14.840]  In which case they would still be like things would they not?
[01:23:14.840 --> 01:23:16.840]  Okay go ahead.
[01:23:16.840 --> 01:23:22.400]  Very clearly shows that what the definition of individual will be will be in the context
[01:23:22.400 --> 01:23:28.640]  in which the circumstances surround or the law itself defines okay.
[01:23:28.640 --> 01:23:29.640]  Now chapter 311.
[01:23:29.640 --> 01:23:35.800]  That's where we're going to have to differ because I fully believe that the laws that
[01:23:35.800 --> 01:23:45.280]  are in these chapters apply to private individuals the same as they apply to individuals that
[01:23:45.280 --> 01:23:48.080]  are a part of corporations.
[01:23:48.080 --> 01:23:54.400]  Okay if they are engaged in the same activity that the corporation itself would be.
[01:23:54.400 --> 01:23:57.160]  Which is operating the motor vehicle in this instance.
[01:23:57.160 --> 01:23:58.760]  For profit or in commerce.
[01:23:58.760 --> 01:24:00.560]  Just on the public highway.
[01:24:00.560 --> 01:24:07.040]  Okay again as you said we'll agree to disagree there because the courts have specifically
[01:24:07.040 --> 01:24:15.120]  says that irregardless of how the state defines the term it is the use to which the conveyance
[01:24:15.120 --> 01:24:24.200]  is put and it is a question for the jury as to whether or not that conveyance constitutes
[01:24:24.200 --> 01:24:26.000]  a motor vehicle.
[01:24:26.000 --> 01:24:31.480]  And the courts very clearly show that it's the use based upon was it in a private capacity
[01:24:31.480 --> 01:24:34.080]  or was it in a commercial capacity.
[01:24:34.080 --> 01:24:38.040]  If it is in a private capacity it is a private conveyance.
[01:24:38.040 --> 01:24:41.320]  It is something used at the will and liberty of the owner.
[01:24:41.320 --> 01:24:46.280]  If it is used for the purpose of business upon the roadways then it is a motor vehicle
[01:24:46.280 --> 01:24:52.000]  for all intents and purposes and those may be regulated those may be licensed those may
[01:24:52.000 --> 01:24:54.760]  be under the power of the state to control.
[01:24:54.760 --> 01:24:59.200]  Now these are Supreme Court cases United States Supreme Court cases.
[01:24:59.200 --> 01:25:04.680]  They have never been overturned they have never been outdated and if they're not overturned
[01:25:04.680 --> 01:25:07.160]  they're controlling period.
[01:25:07.160 --> 01:25:12.360]  The problem is as I brought up earlier is that these courts down here at the low levels
[01:25:12.360 --> 01:25:17.720]  where everybody gets convicted the reason you never see this go to the court of criminal
[01:25:17.720 --> 01:25:22.400]  appeals or to the Supreme Court of the state is because most people don't have the money
[01:25:22.400 --> 01:25:23.820]  to fight it.
[01:25:23.820 --> 01:25:27.320]  They don't ever get out of these courts because they get railroaded in these courts.
[01:25:27.320 --> 01:25:28.320]  I've watched it.
[01:25:28.320 --> 01:25:32.120]  I've gone to court too many times on both sides of the bar here.
[01:25:32.120 --> 01:25:36.840]  I have watched these judges ignore the law time and time again.
[01:25:36.840 --> 01:25:40.580]  The law says the magistrate must or shall do this.
[01:25:40.580 --> 01:25:42.300]  They refuse to do it.
[01:25:42.300 --> 01:25:46.000]  Just flat won't do it okay.
[01:25:46.000 --> 01:25:50.220]  You go in there and you give them case law that fully controls the actions they're allowed
[01:25:50.220 --> 01:25:52.520]  to proceed upon they ignore it.
[01:25:52.520 --> 01:25:55.680]  They railroad you and do what they want to do.
[01:25:55.680 --> 01:26:00.400]  They do it all in these courts because this is where the money gets generated.
[01:26:00.400 --> 01:26:05.560]  If they can get the money out of your pocket you will never see it again win lose or draw.
[01:26:05.560 --> 01:26:10.560]  You won't get it back.
[01:26:10.560 --> 01:26:21.440]  I'm sorry I really don't know why the judge sent me to you as far as the criminal complaints.
[01:26:21.440 --> 01:26:23.680]  That was what we originally came for.
[01:26:23.680 --> 01:26:31.600]  In one aspect I guess probably because the courts generally don't initiate criminal
[01:26:31.600 --> 01:26:32.600]  complaints.
[01:26:32.600 --> 01:26:42.480]  They start with a law enforcement agency to investigate and then to direct.
[01:26:42.480 --> 01:26:45.640]  You're right with one exception.
[01:26:45.640 --> 01:26:53.640]  2.03 gives specific directives to it specifically deals with an attorney for the state but it
[01:26:53.640 --> 01:26:58.240]  makes it very clear that when the criminal complaint is against a public servant or any
[01:26:58.240 --> 01:27:03.680]  officer that the requirement is that that criminal complaint depending upon felony or
[01:27:03.680 --> 01:27:08.880]  misdemeanor or if it's intermixed then the felony controls.
[01:27:08.880 --> 01:27:14.840]  That attorney for the state is required by law to take that complaint from whoever is
[01:27:14.840 --> 01:27:20.400]  submitting it, law enforcement or otherwise and they are then mandated to give that complaint
[01:27:20.400 --> 01:27:21.960]  to a district judge.
[01:27:21.960 --> 01:27:27.640]  The district judge is then required by that code to seal it up and forward it to the grand
[01:27:27.640 --> 01:27:32.260]  jury and it is up to the grand jury whether or not there is enough evidence and information
[01:27:32.260 --> 01:27:34.600]  to proceed to indict.
[01:27:34.600 --> 01:27:38.960]  It's not up to the judge, it's not up to the prosecutor, okay?
[01:27:38.960 --> 01:27:47.680]  Now technically that could be true but the attorney for the state is either the county
[01:27:47.680 --> 01:27:53.840]  attorney or the district attorney in this case and more often than not those are also
[01:27:53.840 --> 01:27:55.800]  going to be the prosecutor.
[01:27:55.800 --> 01:28:00.600]  But there is nothing in the law that says a criminal complaint must originate in a law
[01:28:00.600 --> 01:28:02.160]  enforcement agency.
[01:28:02.160 --> 01:28:10.520]  In fact the only individual they are told to be sent to is a magistrate.
[01:28:10.520 --> 01:28:14.640]  Everything in the code says that all complaints are directed to magistrates.
[01:28:14.640 --> 01:28:21.680]  But you as an individual are bringing the complaint to this magistrate, not the attorney
[01:28:21.680 --> 01:28:23.480]  representing the state.
[01:28:23.480 --> 01:28:28.840]  So you don't come through a law enforcement agency and you're right, there is not a requirement
[01:28:28.840 --> 01:28:34.640]  of law to do so but that requirement is that you bring it to the attorney representing
[01:28:34.640 --> 01:28:39.000]  the state which in this case if it's a misdemeanor would be our county attorney.
[01:28:39.000 --> 01:28:45.800]  And if the county attorney brings a complaint to that magistrate they don't have the right
[01:28:45.800 --> 01:28:48.280]  to refuse the complaint.
[01:28:48.280 --> 01:28:51.440]  But the statute doesn't say they have to accept the complaint.
[01:28:51.440 --> 01:28:53.440]  Again I agree with you.
[01:28:53.440 --> 01:29:01.760]  Well it says when any person, exactly and I've done that and the attorney for the state
[01:29:01.760 --> 01:29:05.120]  has flat out said I will not take those complaints.
[01:29:05.120 --> 01:29:07.320]  They've never even looked at them.
[01:29:07.320 --> 01:29:14.240]  I've gone up there, I have against, you know what happened to my business I'm sure.
[01:29:14.240 --> 01:29:20.600]  I was raided by the state comptroller who had no warrant, no court order, had never
[01:29:20.600 --> 01:29:23.240]  even bothered to take me to court.
[01:29:23.240 --> 01:29:30.320]  They brought an entire army of municipal police officers with them armed with automatic weapons
[01:29:30.320 --> 01:29:36.840]  and bullet proof gear and raided my shop like I was a major drug factory.
[01:29:36.840 --> 01:29:42.480]  I tried to call you twice to get you to come in there and intervene because they had no
[01:29:42.480 --> 01:29:46.080]  authority to be there, absolutely none.
[01:29:46.080 --> 01:29:49.120]  No warrant, no court order, nothing.
[01:29:49.120 --> 01:29:54.680]  These guys acted entirely on their own authority, nothing else, okay.
[01:29:54.680 --> 01:30:00.280]  I have felony after felony after felony, misdemeanor after misdemeanor against municipal police
[01:30:00.280 --> 01:30:04.040]  officers, state employees, the whole nine yards.
[01:30:04.040 --> 01:30:10.760]  Went straight to the district attorney, 481 criminal complaints.
[01:30:10.760 --> 01:30:15.400]  All right we're going to take a break right here.
[01:30:15.400 --> 01:30:32.640]  We'll be right back with the rest of the clip.
[01:30:32.640 --> 01:30:36.080]  Top ten reasons to question the official story of the Oklahoma City bombing, reason number
[01:30:36.080 --> 01:30:37.080]  five.
[01:30:37.080 --> 01:30:40.440]  As witnessed by millions of viewers, the rescue efforts were interrupted several times due
[01:30:40.440 --> 01:30:42.760]  to the presence of other explosives.
[01:30:42.760 --> 01:30:46.640]  Government log entries indicate and witnesses report that after the initial devastating
[01:30:46.640 --> 01:30:51.400]  blast, a bomb complete with timer was discovered and removed from wreckage by the bomb squad.
[01:30:51.400 --> 01:30:55.120]  Yet we are told it's all due to baseless bomb scares or other contrivances.
[01:30:55.120 --> 01:30:59.400]  So while officials try to sort out their stories, all we ask is who planted these bombs and
[01:30:59.400 --> 01:31:01.320]  why is the government lying about them?
[01:31:01.320 --> 01:31:03.680]  For more information, go to okcbombingtruth.com.
[01:31:03.680 --> 01:31:08.800]  Care for some frankenfruit, how about a modified mango?
[01:31:08.800 --> 01:31:12.400]  Yeah, I think I'll pass too, but you don't have to be in the dark about genetically
[01:31:12.400 --> 01:31:13.800]  modified produce anymore.
[01:31:13.800 --> 01:31:19.760]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, in a moment cracking the code.
[01:31:19.760 --> 01:31:21.360]  Privacy is under attack.
[01:31:21.360 --> 01:31:24.960]  When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[01:31:24.960 --> 01:31:29.720]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[01:31:29.720 --> 01:31:34.880]  So protect your rights, say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself.
[01:31:34.880 --> 01:31:37.500]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[01:31:37.500 --> 01:31:41.800]  This public service announcement is brought to you by Startpage.com, the private search
[01:31:41.800 --> 01:31:45.320]  engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[01:31:45.320 --> 01:31:48.720]  Start over with Startpage.
[01:31:48.720 --> 01:31:52.680]  Food manufacturers don't have to tell you when their ingredients are genetically modified.
[01:31:52.680 --> 01:31:53.680]  Yuck.
[01:31:53.680 --> 01:31:56.920]  But when it comes to fresh fruits and vegetables, you've got an ally.
[01:31:56.920 --> 01:32:01.560]  Those little stickers on everything from apples to zucchini contain a four or five digit number
[01:32:01.560 --> 01:32:04.600]  called a Price Lookup Code, or PLU.
[01:32:04.600 --> 01:32:09.080]  That helps the cashier figure out if that thing in your hand is a kohlrabi or a cardoon.
[01:32:09.080 --> 01:32:13.080]  Organic vanilla produce grown with chemical pesticides and fertilizer has a code that
[01:32:13.080 --> 01:32:14.640]  begins with a four.
[01:32:14.640 --> 01:32:18.320]  Think four is a boar, snore, that's conventional produce.
[01:32:18.320 --> 01:32:21.120]  Organic produce starts with a nine, nine is fine.
[01:32:21.120 --> 01:32:24.280]  And genetically modified produce begins with the number eight.
[01:32:24.280 --> 01:32:26.600]  Personally, I hate eight.
[01:32:26.600 --> 01:32:30.400]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, more news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[01:32:30.400 --> 01:32:55.280]  Okay, folks, we are back, we're going to continue on with the clip.
[01:32:55.280 --> 01:33:00.560]  I don't know why this sheriff thinks that criminal complaints originated by citizens
[01:33:00.560 --> 01:33:01.840]  have to go through law enforcement.
[01:33:01.840 --> 01:33:07.840]  There's nothing that says that in law, but, you know, again, this is just why our state
[01:33:07.840 --> 01:33:11.680]  of affairs in this country is as messed up as it is.
[01:33:11.680 --> 01:33:14.920]  We're continuing on with the clip.
[01:33:14.920 --> 01:33:19.040]  And she refused to take them in violation of law.
[01:33:19.040 --> 01:33:22.080]  Just flat refused and never looked at the first one.
[01:33:22.080 --> 01:33:23.080]  Okay.
[01:33:23.080 --> 01:33:26.360]  And went to the county attorney immediately afterwards.
[01:33:26.360 --> 01:33:27.360]  Okay.
[01:33:27.360 --> 01:33:28.360]  Who is it?
[01:33:28.360 --> 01:33:29.360]  The swear engine?
[01:33:29.360 --> 01:33:33.960]  Well, I know who he is, but I mean, his chief investigator.
[01:33:33.960 --> 01:33:36.080]  Is it swear engine or?
[01:33:36.080 --> 01:33:43.880]  Well, that's who it was, Shotwell, okay.
[01:33:43.880 --> 01:33:44.880]  Absolutely refused.
[01:33:44.880 --> 01:33:49.160]  He wouldn't even let me talk to the county attorney, said, I'm not taking any criminal
[01:33:49.160 --> 01:33:50.160]  complaints from you.
[01:33:50.160 --> 01:33:52.240]  Neither will he go away.
[01:33:52.240 --> 01:33:53.240]  Okay.
[01:33:53.240 --> 01:33:59.480]  So, again, if these are the laws, why aren't the ones that are specifically bound by them
[01:33:59.480 --> 01:34:00.840]  obeying them?
[01:34:00.840 --> 01:34:01.840]  Okay.
[01:34:01.840 --> 01:34:06.280]  I mean, not just traffic, but just criminal procedure in general.
[01:34:06.280 --> 01:34:09.480]  But you also understand, and again, I apologize for that.
[01:34:09.480 --> 01:34:10.480]  I know.
[01:34:10.480 --> 01:34:11.480]  I understand.
[01:34:11.480 --> 01:34:12.480]  Sure.
[01:34:12.480 --> 01:34:20.360]  But in those cases, if you believe that they're not doing what they have an obligation to
[01:34:20.360 --> 01:34:24.400]  do, then there are other people you can list your complaints with.
[01:34:24.400 --> 01:34:30.840]  Or that's why the law also is separated into the additional part of the civil side.
[01:34:30.840 --> 01:34:38.960]  And if you brought civil suit and you're victorious in that, then it's going to put punitive action
[01:34:38.960 --> 01:34:41.960]  in place for them not following.
[01:34:41.960 --> 01:34:44.800]  But it doesn't do anything for the crimes they committed.
[01:34:44.800 --> 01:34:45.800]  Absolutely nothing.
[01:34:45.800 --> 01:34:49.400]  I mean, why should my ability?
[01:34:49.400 --> 01:34:50.400]  You can't tell me.
[01:34:50.400 --> 01:34:53.800]  Now, I do understand what you're saying up to a point.
[01:34:53.800 --> 01:34:59.640]  It may not put someone in jail or something like that, but you can't tell me that civil
[01:34:59.640 --> 01:35:05.720]  suits throughout the history of America haven't done things for crimes that have been committed.
[01:35:05.720 --> 01:35:07.200]  I absolutely agree.
[01:35:07.200 --> 01:35:08.200]  Okay.
[01:35:08.200 --> 01:35:09.200]  I'm sorry.
[01:35:09.200 --> 01:35:10.200]  I got to stop here.
[01:35:10.200 --> 01:35:15.160]  What this guy is saying is that when it comes to public servants committing crimes, we should
[01:35:15.160 --> 01:35:17.920]  just handle that in the civil realm.
[01:35:17.920 --> 01:35:21.080]  But when it comes to sovereigns committing crimes, that should be handled in the criminal
[01:35:21.080 --> 01:35:22.080]  realm.
[01:35:22.080 --> 01:35:23.080]  That's what it sounds like this guy's saying.
[01:35:23.080 --> 01:35:31.080]  Our country has been shaped today for rulings that were civil.
[01:35:31.080 --> 01:35:37.040]  And I took that case to three different attorneys.
[01:35:37.040 --> 01:35:43.400]  Every single one of them wouldn't touch it without $50,000 cash up front.
[01:35:43.400 --> 01:35:50.480]  Every one of them would refuse to process anything in that case other than abuse of
[01:35:50.480 --> 01:35:51.480]  process.
[01:35:51.480 --> 01:35:55.360]  That's the only charge they were going to levy for a cause of action.
[01:35:55.360 --> 01:35:57.480]  I've gone through the causes of action in Texas.
[01:35:57.480 --> 01:36:00.400]  I'm writing the lawsuit myself.
[01:36:00.400 --> 01:36:05.440]  I've got three dozen causes of action these attorneys didn't even consider, yet every
[01:36:05.440 --> 01:36:07.760]  one is valid.
[01:36:07.760 --> 01:36:12.880]  And as far as the criminal complaint process, not to sound like this is a personal attack,
[01:36:12.880 --> 01:36:18.880]  but I went to the courthouse the day that I took those criminal complaints to the district
[01:36:18.880 --> 01:36:19.880]  attorney.
[01:36:19.880 --> 01:36:24.160]  Two of the deputies from this office escorted me up there.
[01:36:24.160 --> 01:36:29.880]  At my request, I asked them, I said, look, I fully expect to deliver these to the prosecuting
[01:36:29.880 --> 01:36:34.980]  attorney for the state, and I fully expect her to refuse to accept them in violation
[01:36:34.980 --> 01:36:35.980]  of law.
[01:36:35.980 --> 01:36:42.700]  And the law says very clear under 38.05, hindering apprehension or prosecution, that any individual
[01:36:42.700 --> 01:36:49.760]  that prevents the apprehension or prosecution of someone charged or with a warrant for a
[01:36:49.760 --> 01:36:57.280]  criminal act is guilty of one lesser offense grade than the criminal act itself.
[01:36:57.280 --> 01:37:02.880]  Now she committed felonies by refusing to take those complaints, and I asked your deputies
[01:37:02.880 --> 01:37:05.160]  to witness those complaints on my behalf.
[01:37:05.160 --> 01:37:11.480]  And again, Eddie, I would disagree with you on your application or interpretation, I guess.
[01:37:11.480 --> 01:37:13.280]  2.03, right there.
[01:37:13.280 --> 01:37:26.400]  I'm aware of the statute, but the fact that you bring a charge to someone still does not
[01:37:26.400 --> 01:37:32.320]  negate the fact that people accepted those charges, and we do it every day, don't have
[01:37:32.320 --> 01:37:39.600]  a right to examine the circumstances and determine whether or not they believe the law has been
[01:37:39.600 --> 01:37:40.600]  violated.
[01:37:40.600 --> 01:37:46.560]  And thank goodness that those rights exist, because you wouldn't want somebody to just
[01:37:46.560 --> 01:37:54.920]  walk in here and say, you know, Eddie Craig's guilty of such and such without any, well,
[01:37:54.920 --> 01:38:01.040]  but if people don't accuse other people of being guilty of something, then we wouldn't
[01:38:01.040 --> 01:38:02.040]  have any business arresting them.
[01:38:02.040 --> 01:38:03.040]  You're right.
[01:38:03.040 --> 01:38:08.320]  But you want us to at least, I would say, investigate it enough to determine if there
[01:38:08.320 --> 01:38:12.080]  are any merits on individual citizens.
[01:38:12.080 --> 01:38:14.080]  You're absolutely correct.
[01:38:14.080 --> 01:38:21.200]  But 2.03 is very clear that when it involves a public officer, there is no discretion on
[01:38:21.200 --> 01:38:22.860]  the part of the attorney.
[01:38:22.860 --> 01:38:29.080]  The attorney is required by law to take that complaint and send it to a district magistrate.
[01:38:29.080 --> 01:38:31.480]  They're not allowed to do anything else.
[01:38:31.480 --> 01:38:34.360]  It says it right there, plain English.
[01:38:34.360 --> 01:38:38.480]  The attorney for the state shall take the complaint.
[01:38:38.480 --> 01:38:44.240]  But now you're back to what complaint and who do they have to accept those complaints
[01:38:44.240 --> 01:38:47.240]  from and what nature of the complaint.
[01:38:47.240 --> 01:38:48.240]  Okay.
[01:38:48.240 --> 01:38:49.240]  As it says, any person...
[01:38:49.240 --> 01:38:53.520]  Well, I can tell you, we're not going to have time today to discuss that, but...
[01:38:53.520 --> 01:38:54.960]  Well, let me ask you this.
[01:38:54.960 --> 01:39:00.040]  If I brought that same stack of criminal complaints to you, what would you do with them?
[01:39:00.040 --> 01:39:03.520]  Because they're all signed and certified just like they're required to be in accordance
[01:39:03.520 --> 01:39:05.760]  with statute, every last one of them.
[01:39:05.760 --> 01:39:15.400]  Well, when you say the complaints, as far as I'm concerned, what you're bringing is allegations
[01:39:15.400 --> 01:39:16.400]  of violations.
[01:39:16.400 --> 01:39:21.880]  And we would have to examine those to determine whether or not we believe the elements of
[01:39:21.880 --> 01:39:26.040]  laws have been met to create a violation.
[01:39:26.040 --> 01:39:29.780]  And each one is on its own merit, as you know.
[01:39:29.780 --> 01:39:33.960]  Every law has a certain set of elements to it.
[01:39:33.960 --> 01:39:40.520]  And you read down through there and some may say this and this and some say this or this.
[01:39:40.520 --> 01:39:49.880]  And depending on how those are styled, we determine, you know, does this meet this set
[01:39:49.880 --> 01:39:50.880]  of elements?
[01:39:50.880 --> 01:39:57.320]  And if it does, well, then it indicates there is a violation of law and we proceed.
[01:39:57.320 --> 01:40:04.800]  If the elements are not met, then we see where we don't believe the elements are satisfied
[01:40:04.800 --> 01:40:05.800]  and we stop.
[01:40:05.800 --> 01:40:06.800]  Okay.
[01:40:06.800 --> 01:40:09.840]  Well, the elements that they said that gave them authority was Chapter 111.
[01:40:09.840 --> 01:40:10.840]  Okay.
[01:40:10.840 --> 01:40:14.440]  Now, here's the problem with his analysis of that.
[01:40:14.440 --> 01:40:19.080]  What has happened is instead of the grand jury making the determination as to whether
[01:40:19.080 --> 01:40:26.040]  or not the elements of the crime have been met, which is what their entire job is, he
[01:40:26.040 --> 01:40:30.880]  is now saying that it is only up to the law enforcement agency's job to determine whether
[01:40:30.880 --> 01:40:36.880]  or not the individual elements have been met and that I didn't take proper consideration
[01:40:36.880 --> 01:40:39.680]  of what the elements are of the charges I'm making.
[01:40:39.680 --> 01:40:46.640]  Now, there is absolutely nothing in law that defines who may submit a complaint, nothing.
[01:40:46.640 --> 01:40:52.360]  From my understanding of what it says, anyone that has been harmed makes a complaint.
[01:40:52.360 --> 01:40:56.840]  When you go in and sign a statement at the police station, all you're really doing is
[01:40:56.840 --> 01:41:04.040]  signing a story, then what they do is they, if they bother to investigate it at all, is
[01:41:04.040 --> 01:41:08.360]  then they will go and check and see and okay, well, we agree something here happened so
[01:41:08.360 --> 01:41:11.040]  we'll go ahead and get a complaint written up.
[01:41:11.040 --> 01:41:15.840]  But if you already know what the elements are and you have already got the evidence
[01:41:15.840 --> 01:41:20.800]  necessary to show that those elements were violated by the actions of the individual
[01:41:20.800 --> 01:41:29.560]  accused, there's not anything left to do other than for them to take that information
[01:41:29.560 --> 01:41:35.640]  to a magistrate to get a warrant to bring that person in and to establish the probable
[01:41:35.640 --> 01:41:38.280]  cause of what's in the complaint.
[01:41:38.280 --> 01:41:41.360]  The judge at that point can say, did you do this?
[01:41:41.360 --> 01:41:43.280]  Were you in this place at this time?
[01:41:43.280 --> 01:41:46.040]  Did you commit these acts?
[01:41:46.040 --> 01:41:49.120]  It's not up to the law enforcement agency.
[01:41:49.120 --> 01:41:54.200]  It's up to either the magistrate at a probable cause hearing or it is up to the grand jury
[01:41:54.200 --> 01:41:55.960]  to do an indictment upon.
[01:41:55.960 --> 01:42:02.680]  Now they may very well go out and send the law enforcement agency out to do the investigation,
[01:42:02.680 --> 01:42:07.160]  but the facts and evidence are still brought back to the grand jury and they will use that
[01:42:07.160 --> 01:42:13.280]  to see whether or not it supports an indictment, not the law enforcement agency.
[01:42:13.280 --> 01:42:21.200]  This is an example of one public service or servant office having the capability to determine
[01:42:21.200 --> 01:42:24.200]  whether or not they wish to go after another.
[01:42:24.200 --> 01:42:29.160]  And that's exactly what the grand juries and the probable cause hearings were put in place
[01:42:29.160 --> 01:42:30.520]  to prevent.
[01:42:30.520 --> 01:42:32.000]  Exactly.
[01:42:32.000 --> 01:42:38.400]  And he's also either pretending or doesn't know or refusing to accept the difference
[01:42:38.400 --> 01:42:44.080]  between someone coming in and filing a police report and the difference between that and
[01:42:44.080 --> 01:42:46.800]  an actual criminal complaint.
[01:42:46.800 --> 01:42:51.600]  And he's also either pretending or glossing over or refusing to accept that section of
[01:42:51.600 --> 01:42:56.520]  the law, which he claims he has read and he claims that, yes, I've read this concerning
[01:42:56.520 --> 01:43:03.720]  the fact that any credible person is allowed to, it's not just allowed, but we have the
[01:43:03.720 --> 01:43:09.000]  right, and that right is enumerated in statute, to go directly to the grand jury and that
[01:43:09.000 --> 01:43:15.920]  any credible person presenting a criminal complaint to a state attorney, when that happens,
[01:43:15.920 --> 01:43:20.480]  the state attorney, if it's against a public official, the state attorney is required to
[01:43:20.480 --> 01:43:22.840]  submit that complaint to the grand jury.
[01:43:22.840 --> 01:43:27.280]  He's like not wanting to discuss that little aspect of it either.
[01:43:27.280 --> 01:43:32.120]  Okay, we're going to continue and I'm going to skip this break for the sake of time.
[01:43:32.120 --> 01:43:41.520]  Chapter 11 of the tax code, which specifically states that the comptroller and its employees
[01:43:41.520 --> 01:43:47.960]  may not create or utilize any regulation or rule that is violative of the Constitution
[01:43:47.960 --> 01:43:52.480]  of the United States or the state of Texas or the laws thereof, okay, says it right in
[01:43:52.480 --> 01:43:55.480]  the very first section of Chapter 111.
[01:43:55.480 --> 01:43:59.760]  Chapter 111 also specifically states that before any enforcement procedures may be had
[01:43:59.760 --> 01:44:05.840]  under that chapter, that the attorney general must file suit against the individual.
[01:44:05.840 --> 01:44:11.640]  Not only must he file suit, he must prevail and only upon the issuance of a court order
[01:44:11.640 --> 01:44:16.920]  may collection actions proceed when those collection actions involve the seizure of
[01:44:16.920 --> 01:44:17.920]  property.
[01:44:17.920 --> 01:44:21.880]  Now, what these people did, they did without any of that.
[01:44:21.880 --> 01:44:25.780]  The other problem they have is Chapter 111 specifically states that in any provision
[01:44:25.780 --> 01:44:31.560]  of this code for which there is specification for the course of action, that provision prevails.
[01:44:31.560 --> 01:44:37.800]  Well, the sales tax that they were accusing me of not paying or collecting in this case
[01:44:37.800 --> 01:44:42.400]  was under Chapter 151 of the tax code and it has provisions.
[01:44:42.400 --> 01:44:48.600]  In 151, it says the comptroller must file suit, the comptroller must prevail, the comptroller
[01:44:48.600 --> 01:44:52.320]  must get a court order before any collection action can occur.
[01:44:52.320 --> 01:44:55.360]  Again, that didn't happen either.
[01:44:55.360 --> 01:45:02.040]  I put in writing, I demanded an administrative hearing before this ever occurred.
[01:45:02.040 --> 01:45:06.960]  Three days before this occurred, I called down to verify the date and location of the
[01:45:06.960 --> 01:45:07.960]  hearing.
[01:45:07.960 --> 01:45:09.720]  I was told the hearing had been canceled.
[01:45:09.720 --> 01:45:11.320]  Well, who canceled it?
[01:45:11.320 --> 01:45:15.840]  The two officers that came down and seized my property canceled it without even telling
[01:45:15.840 --> 01:45:17.000]  me.
[01:45:17.000 --> 01:45:19.720]  I never got an administrative hearing of any kind.
[01:45:19.720 --> 01:45:21.160]  I never got anything.
[01:45:21.160 --> 01:45:30.120]  I was simply raided at gunpoint and had my property stolen twice, once in 95 and once
[01:45:30.120 --> 01:45:33.320]  last year.
[01:45:33.320 --> 01:45:38.200]  They're being assisted in both cases by the municipal police department.
[01:45:38.200 --> 01:45:41.640]  It's my understanding under the laws of Texas, the Department of Sheriff is the only one
[01:45:41.640 --> 01:45:46.360]  that's allowed to perform civil seizures, not the municipal police department.
[01:45:46.360 --> 01:45:54.400]  Well, as far as seizures, well, constables can also, but as far as a seizure goes, that
[01:45:54.400 --> 01:45:55.400]  may be true.
[01:45:55.400 --> 01:46:04.440]  But as far as them escorting or going with other individuals from a public safety standpoint,
[01:46:04.440 --> 01:46:06.800]  they're certainly entitled to do that.
[01:46:06.800 --> 01:46:08.040]  Just like-
[01:46:08.040 --> 01:46:09.040]  Not arguing that.
[01:46:09.040 --> 01:46:14.720]  The term civil stand-by used a lot, which is just a generic term, but if you have a
[01:46:14.720 --> 01:46:20.520]  domestic dispute, they're not going to go over there and start separating out.
[01:46:20.520 --> 01:46:21.520]  Well, I know.
[01:46:21.520 --> 01:46:24.360]  You answered one out there the night, the girl I was living with.
[01:46:24.360 --> 01:46:31.000]  Again, I thank you very much for your assistance in that with your deputies, which was several
[01:46:31.000 --> 01:46:32.000]  years ago.
[01:46:32.000 --> 01:46:33.960]  But still, I'm fully familiar with the process.
[01:46:33.960 --> 01:46:34.960]  I actually used to work here.
[01:46:34.960 --> 01:46:36.360]  I worked in this jail.
[01:46:36.360 --> 01:46:43.160]  I was a jailer here when Joe Evans was sheriff, which I'm glad to see that doesn't happen
[01:46:43.160 --> 01:46:44.160]  anymore.
[01:46:44.160 --> 01:46:51.000]  But the point here being that I completely agree that they have the right to have somebody
[01:46:51.000 --> 01:46:52.880]  to protect them in the instance.
[01:46:52.880 --> 01:46:55.000]  This was not protection.
[01:46:55.000 --> 01:47:01.400]  They surrounded my shop and in a simultaneous organized manner streamed into my parking
[01:47:01.400 --> 01:47:08.640]  lot, jumped out waving guns, came into my shop wearing body armor with these automatic
[01:47:08.640 --> 01:47:11.760]  weapons in their hands.
[01:47:11.760 --> 01:47:14.840]  From that point on, it was all downhill.
[01:47:14.840 --> 01:47:17.520]  Did they have a search warrant?
[01:47:17.520 --> 01:47:18.520]  No.
[01:47:18.520 --> 01:47:21.400]  They had nothing, absolutely nothing.
[01:47:21.400 --> 01:47:22.400]  Okay.
[01:47:22.400 --> 01:47:29.280]  Then they turn around and arrest me on a traffic warrant issued by the justice of the municipal
[01:47:29.280 --> 01:47:36.440]  court, who had no authority to issue a warrant, absolutely none.
[01:47:36.440 --> 01:47:38.040]  And then what do they do?
[01:47:38.040 --> 01:47:39.040]  They arrest me.
[01:47:39.040 --> 01:47:41.920]  They warrant, of course, they never gave me a copy.
[01:47:41.920 --> 01:47:42.920]  I demanded it.
[01:47:42.920 --> 01:47:44.120]  They never even let me see it.
[01:47:44.120 --> 01:47:46.920]  To this day, they haven't produced that warrant.
[01:47:46.920 --> 01:47:50.240]  But they put me in cuss and took me out of my shop.
[01:47:50.240 --> 01:47:54.400]  And at most on a traffic warrant, the warrant still would have only allowed them to arrest
[01:47:54.400 --> 01:47:58.560]  me, not to seize my building.
[01:47:58.560 --> 01:48:09.000]  So by removing me to give the state the ability to seize my property because I'm absent, that
[01:48:09.000 --> 01:48:11.760]  that's criminal in and of itself.
[01:48:11.760 --> 01:48:12.760]  But then what happens?
[01:48:12.760 --> 01:48:20.160]  They bring me down here, I go into the courtroom, the judge says, we'll let you know when your
[01:48:20.160 --> 01:48:21.160]  case is.
[01:48:21.160 --> 01:48:24.360]  Bangs the gavel, it's over.
[01:48:24.360 --> 01:48:26.240]  And I turn loose.
[01:48:26.240 --> 01:48:31.360]  Their entire thing was just to get me out of my shop so that they could steal my property.
[01:48:31.360 --> 01:48:34.400]  That's all it was.
[01:48:34.400 --> 01:48:38.200]  I have never gone back to court for this alleged warrant.
[01:48:38.200 --> 01:48:39.680]  Never.
[01:48:39.680 --> 01:48:45.280]  I've never gone to court after the first appearance I made for the alleged offenses they were
[01:48:45.280 --> 01:48:51.360]  trying to charge me with then, which, again, were a very similar thing.
[01:48:51.360 --> 01:48:54.560]  But after I submitted my evidence, they didn't prosecute me.
[01:48:54.560 --> 01:48:59.760]  But the judge still, when the state petitioned them to have officers go, the judge still
[01:48:59.760 --> 01:49:04.200]  issued a warrant so they could get me out of the building and allow the seizure to occur
[01:49:04.200 --> 01:49:06.200]  without me being there to say no.
[01:49:06.200 --> 01:49:09.040]  How long ago was this?
[01:49:09.040 --> 01:49:10.040]  Last year.
[01:49:10.040 --> 01:49:12.040]  What was that, the freelance IT?
[01:49:12.040 --> 01:49:13.040]  IT freelancers.
[01:49:13.040 --> 01:49:18.280]  That happened once in 95 they did this, and then last year in March they did this.
[01:49:18.280 --> 01:49:19.280]  I'm sorry.
[01:49:19.280 --> 01:49:22.400]  I know, we need to get out of your hair.
[01:49:22.400 --> 01:49:27.360]  But my point being that on those grounds, if I brought you that stack of criminal complaints,
[01:49:27.360 --> 01:49:28.360]  what would you do with them?
[01:49:28.360 --> 01:49:36.160]  Well, and as I entered previously, I was investigated to see if the elements of the offenses appeared
[01:49:36.160 --> 01:49:37.160]  to be met.
[01:49:37.160 --> 01:49:38.160]  Okay.
[01:49:38.160 --> 01:49:39.480]  Are you going to keep those?
[01:49:39.480 --> 01:49:44.280]  I wish you would and investigate them because they are signed and verified.
[01:49:44.280 --> 01:49:52.200]  Well, it's going to, and I'll read it, it's going to probably take more than just what's
[01:49:52.200 --> 01:50:00.000]  in the complaint to give us an idea of whether those elements are met or not.
[01:50:00.000 --> 01:50:07.120]  A complaint is typically a charging instrument, it's not necessarily intended to support all
[01:50:07.120 --> 01:50:09.520]  the facts of the case.
[01:50:09.520 --> 01:50:10.520]  Right.
[01:50:10.520 --> 01:50:16.720]  And those facts are what really help you determine if you have elements of an offense met or
[01:50:16.720 --> 01:50:17.720]  not.
[01:50:17.720 --> 01:50:25.640]  Well, Article 5, Article 5, Section 12B, Texas Constitution, says there are only two types
[01:50:25.640 --> 01:50:28.120]  of charging instruments, an indictment or information.
[01:50:28.120 --> 01:50:33.520]  Right, but before you get to the charging instrument, we're talking about the investigative
[01:50:33.520 --> 01:50:34.520]  stage here.
[01:50:34.520 --> 01:50:35.520]  Right.
[01:50:35.520 --> 01:50:36.520]  We're not ready to charge.
[01:50:36.520 --> 01:50:41.520]  The bottom line is, if we investigate, if we determine there to be a violation, we will
[01:50:41.520 --> 01:50:45.400]  be drafting the complaint asking for the charging instrument.
[01:50:45.400 --> 01:50:46.400]  Okay.
[01:50:46.400 --> 01:50:54.520]  Okay, that's a part of what we do on a pre-ordinary basis, but we're not at that stage yet.
[01:50:54.520 --> 01:51:00.040]  If I brought the information regarding the complaints that I've written and the statutes
[01:51:00.040 --> 01:51:04.600]  in question down here to you and sat with you and showed you, here's what the provisions
[01:51:04.600 --> 01:51:08.880]  of the law specifically mandates they do, and I know you're perfectly free to go look
[01:51:08.880 --> 01:51:09.880]  at others.
[01:51:09.880 --> 01:51:12.320]  Okay, if you bring us the complaints, we'll look at the provisions of the law.
[01:51:12.320 --> 01:51:14.800]  I don't need you to tell me what it is.
[01:51:14.800 --> 01:51:20.040]  We'll examine it, okay, and then we'll let you know if we think it meets those elements
[01:51:20.040 --> 01:51:21.040]  or not.
[01:51:21.040 --> 01:51:25.560]  I'll tell you, my philosophy is pretty basic, you've known me a long time.
[01:51:25.560 --> 01:51:30.160]  I have as much of an obligation to prove a person's innocence as I do to prove their
[01:51:30.160 --> 01:51:31.160]  guilt.
[01:51:31.160 --> 01:51:37.320]  My determination is not about who you are or what you own or how much I like you.
[01:51:37.320 --> 01:51:43.480]  It's pretty black and white are these elements met or not, and then if they are, what does
[01:51:43.480 --> 01:51:46.800]  the law stipulate in those situations?
[01:51:46.800 --> 01:51:51.960]  If they're not met, and there's a lot of times that we investigate crimes a lot more
[01:51:51.960 --> 01:51:58.480]  serious than this, obviously, where in my heart, I know somebody's guilty of an offense,
[01:51:58.480 --> 01:52:02.880]  but I don't have the elements met to be able to charge them with that offense or prove
[01:52:02.880 --> 01:52:03.880]  it.
[01:52:03.880 --> 01:52:11.720]  Sometimes, I'm not going to tell you that doesn't mean that it's any less of an offense,
[01:52:11.720 --> 01:52:17.840]  but us coming up with the ability to prove that all those elements are met and meet that
[01:52:17.840 --> 01:52:20.840]  standard is not always the same thing.
[01:52:20.840 --> 01:52:26.960]  I certainly appreciate your time, and I hope this doesn't put you off on talking with
[01:52:26.960 --> 01:52:31.960]  me in the future.
[01:52:31.960 --> 01:52:38.280]  I wasn't actually intending to ask to talk to you today, but the judge directed me over
[01:52:38.280 --> 01:52:39.280]  here.
[01:52:39.280 --> 01:52:42.280]  It's important for me to talk to you because she's here, all right.
[01:52:42.280 --> 01:52:44.560]  Okay, I'm going to pause right here, folks.
[01:52:44.560 --> 01:52:47.400]  In the interest of time, we only have a few more minutes left.
[01:52:47.400 --> 01:52:50.640]  Eddie, this is pretty much at the end of your interchange with the sheriff, right?
[01:52:50.640 --> 01:52:52.560]  Yeah, we were walking out of the office right there.
[01:52:52.560 --> 01:52:56.080]  Okay, and so the rest of it is what happened when you got back to the JP's office.
[01:52:56.080 --> 01:52:57.080]  We'll play that there's only-
[01:52:57.080 --> 01:52:59.880]  Right, and that's only about another six or seven minutes worth or so.
[01:52:59.880 --> 01:53:02.760]  Yeah, it's about another, yeah, about another eight minutes.
[01:53:02.760 --> 01:53:04.280]  We'll play that tomorrow night.
[01:53:04.280 --> 01:53:10.560]  So this is a real eye-opener, folks, because this is exactly the reason why it says in
[01:53:10.560 --> 01:53:14.120]  law that criminal complaints are directed to magistrates.
[01:53:14.120 --> 01:53:21.480]  It's not supposed to be up to the law enforcement officer as the sheriff is purporting for them
[01:53:21.480 --> 01:53:24.800]  to decide whether a person gets charged or not.
[01:53:24.800 --> 01:53:26.560]  No, it's too late for that.
[01:53:26.560 --> 01:53:27.920]  It's already gone beyond that.
[01:53:27.920 --> 01:53:30.360]  Eddie's already written up the criminal complaint.
[01:53:30.360 --> 01:53:34.440]  So I was saying this sheriff doesn't seem to know what a criminal complaint is or if
[01:53:34.440 --> 01:53:39.760]  he does, he's pretending not to know or something like that because it's not supposed to be
[01:53:39.760 --> 01:53:47.360]  up to the sheriff or any other law enforcement entity to decide whether or not the charging
[01:53:47.360 --> 01:53:49.760]  instrument should even be created or filed.
[01:53:49.760 --> 01:53:54.480]  I mean, if you're going to go crying to the police or the sheriff about something, well,
[01:53:54.480 --> 01:53:58.000]  then yeah, you're handing over full discretion to them.
[01:53:58.000 --> 01:54:03.440]  That's why the law directs that criminal complaints be filed with a magistrate or grand jury.
[01:54:03.440 --> 01:54:08.680]  It's the grand jury that decides whether there's probable cause and then either hands down
[01:54:08.680 --> 01:54:10.280]  an indictment or not.
[01:54:10.280 --> 01:54:15.080]  It's the magistrate that makes the determination of probable cause at the examining trial.
[01:54:15.080 --> 01:54:19.240]  If it were up to the police and the sheriffs to decide whether or not a crime's been committed,
[01:54:19.240 --> 01:54:23.720]  well then this is exactly what you get, straight up tyranny.
[01:54:23.720 --> 01:54:34.040]  Well, I would have to agree that it certainly is a roadblock to getting justice when they
[01:54:34.040 --> 01:54:38.920]  say that you have to go through a law enforcement agency because once again, they cannot make
[01:54:38.920 --> 01:54:40.920]  a determination of law.
[01:54:40.920 --> 01:54:45.880]  All they can do is investigate and try to come up with the necessary evidence to fulfill
[01:54:45.880 --> 01:54:52.000]  the elements of the charge, but they still can't make the determination of law.
[01:54:52.000 --> 01:54:57.240]  The judge still has to determine, does the evidence fit the elements?
[01:54:57.240 --> 01:54:59.220]  Is the evidence admissible?
[01:54:59.220 --> 01:55:03.600]  Is the person accused of committing this act?
[01:55:03.600 --> 01:55:07.920]  Bring them in here so we can question them and find out what's the evidence of probable
[01:55:07.920 --> 01:55:08.920]  cause here.
[01:55:08.920 --> 01:55:13.920]  I completely agree the law enforcement is necessary for the investigated portion, but
[01:55:13.920 --> 01:55:19.240]  they are not the one responsible for creating the criminal complaint.
[01:55:19.240 --> 01:55:20.360]  They're just not.
[01:55:20.360 --> 01:55:23.440]  Not to mention the fact that you've already done the investigative portion.
[01:55:23.440 --> 01:55:28.120]  I just happen to be a knowledgeable victim.
[01:55:28.120 --> 01:55:32.200]  That's also what the statement of probable cause is all about, that is attached to the
[01:55:32.200 --> 01:55:33.200]  criminal complaint.
[01:55:33.200 --> 01:55:36.480]  Yes, the criminal complaint is a charging instrument and in a sense the sheriff was
[01:55:36.480 --> 01:55:41.400]  right that usually it doesn't have all the elements and all the evidence, but that's
[01:55:41.400 --> 01:55:45.960]  what the statement of probable cause is, that you attach to the criminal complaint.
[01:55:45.960 --> 01:55:49.720]  Well, in all honesty, it is not a charging instrument.
[01:55:49.720 --> 01:55:52.760]  It is what the charging instrument is to be based upon.
[01:55:52.760 --> 01:55:58.000]  The only thing the complaint is good for is the examining trial.
[01:55:58.000 --> 01:56:04.880]  Without that going beyond an examining trial, however, there's no need for an information,
[01:56:04.880 --> 01:56:09.520]  but once the probable cause is established, that information has to be generated or that
[01:56:09.520 --> 01:56:11.800]  indictment has to be handed down.
[01:56:11.800 --> 01:56:17.360]  That is your charging instrument.
[01:56:17.360 --> 01:56:21.840]  Then you're ready to get an arraignment and then you're ready to go to trial after the
[01:56:21.840 --> 01:56:27.480]  arraignment, but at the arraignment and at the trial, there better be an information
[01:56:27.480 --> 01:56:28.480]  and or indictment.
[01:56:28.480 --> 01:56:29.480]  Randy, do you have comments?
[01:56:29.480 --> 01:56:45.600]  I don't know if we lost Randy or not.
[01:56:45.600 --> 01:56:46.600]  Find that mute button, Randy.
[01:56:46.600 --> 01:56:49.840]  Well, at any rate, folks, tomorrow night, we will be back.
[01:56:49.840 --> 01:56:53.840]  We only have about a little less than two minutes left, so tomorrow night, we're going
[01:56:53.840 --> 01:57:02.040]  to play the end of this clip concerning the rest of Eddie's trip to the JP when he goes
[01:57:02.040 --> 01:57:08.360]  back to the JP's office and indeed, it was a very good question at the end, Eddie, where
[01:57:08.360 --> 01:57:12.120]  you said, I don't know why the magistrate sent me over here anyway.
[01:57:12.120 --> 01:57:15.680]  There's really no need for it because you already had the criminal complaint written
[01:57:15.680 --> 01:57:18.240]  up and notarized.
[01:57:18.240 --> 01:57:23.840]  That is directed at the magistrate, so it's kind of-
[01:57:23.840 --> 01:57:28.920]  Yeah, I thought it was good to go, but who am I except just another Joe and the blow
[01:57:28.920 --> 01:57:29.920]  there?
[01:57:29.920 --> 01:57:37.560]  Well, again, I'll say this is exactly why the law is structured so that criminal complaints
[01:57:37.560 --> 01:57:43.280]  are to be directed to some magistrate or the grand jury because it's up to them to decide
[01:57:43.280 --> 01:57:48.800]  to make the finding a probable cause, not a law enforcement entity.
[01:57:48.800 --> 01:57:53.320]  I mean, they got the whole thing backwards here.
[01:57:53.320 --> 01:57:56.640]  This is why everything is so messed up right now.
[01:57:56.640 --> 01:58:05.200]  Well, this will lead into a good scenario tomorrow that I've been working on regarding
[01:58:05.200 --> 01:58:10.800]  exactly what the process is for these traffic stops slash class C misdemeanor cases.
[01:58:10.800 --> 01:58:16.320]  Now, this will apply to more than just a traffic stop, but from what I've been going through,
[01:58:16.320 --> 01:58:22.160]  it's a very good thing that we can use a traffic stop to test this theory because there's no
[01:58:22.160 --> 01:58:28.600]  chance of going to jail, but the legality of what's going on still holds the same legal
[01:58:28.600 --> 01:58:31.440]  merit as if it was a murder trial.
[01:58:31.440 --> 01:58:36.140]  So it'll be very good to walk through this with Randy tomorrow and discussion over how
[01:58:36.140 --> 01:58:40.920]  this process has gotten to the point it has and what we can do about it.
[01:58:40.920 --> 01:58:45.280]  Okay, folks, we'll be back tomorrow night to play the end of the clip and take your
[01:58:45.280 --> 01:58:48.160]  calls and further discussion on this matter.
[01:58:48.160 --> 01:58:49.160]  This is the rule of law.
[01:58:49.160 --> 01:59:06.440]  Randy Kelton, Eddie Craig, Deborah Stevens, we'll be back tomorrow night.
[01:59:06.440 --> 01:59:32.160]  We'll be back tomorrow night with Randy Kelton, Eddie Craig, Deborah Stevens, we'll be back
[01:59:32.160 --> 01:59:57.880]  tomorrow night with Randy Kelton, Eddie Craig, Deborah Stevens, we'll be back tomorrow night
[01:59:57.880 --> 02:00:20.880]  with Randy Kelton.