[00:00.000 --> 00:06.880]  You're listening to the Liberty Beat, your daily source for Liberty news and activist
[00:06.880 --> 00:15.120]  updates online at thelibertybeat.com.
[00:15.120 --> 00:19.840]  This is Justin Armand with your Liberty Beat for May 29th, 2014.
[00:19.840 --> 00:28.760]  Gold opened today at $1,255, silver at $18.88, bitcoin is trading at $569.
[00:28.760 --> 00:32.640]  These prices were brought to you by Alison Marie, an eager homeschool student interested
[00:32.640 --> 00:33.640]  in live broadcast.
[00:33.640 --> 00:35.440]  Thank you so much, Alison.
[00:35.440 --> 00:39.140]  Support for the Liberty Beat comes from Accountable Authority, now offering a public database
[00:39.140 --> 00:41.360]  of police abuse and misconduct.
[00:41.360 --> 00:47.520]  Take action and join for free to gain community support and protection online at accountableauthority.com.
[00:47.520 --> 00:51.940]  Support also comes from Free the Market, Free Ross Albrecht, a community fundraiser being
[00:51.940 --> 00:55.760]  held this Saturday from 6 to 9 p.m. at Brave New Books.
[00:55.760 --> 01:00.420]  Joining special guest Cody Wilson of Defense Distributed proceeds go to Ross Albrecht's
[01:00.420 --> 01:06.320]  Legal Defense Fund that Saturday, May 31st, 6 to 9 p.m. at Brave New Books.
[01:06.320 --> 01:10.160]  Despite the U.S. government's claim to the contrary, whistleblower Edward Snowden was
[01:10.160 --> 01:13.960]  not just a low-level systems administrator undercover overseas.
[01:13.960 --> 01:18.720]  I was trained as a spy in sort of the traditional sense of the word in that I lived and worked
[01:18.720 --> 01:20.740]  undercover overseas.
[01:20.740 --> 01:25.600]  That clarification came from Snowden during a one-hour interview with NBC's Brian Williams,
[01:25.600 --> 01:27.440]  which aired Wednesday night.
[01:27.440 --> 01:29.800]  I've worked for the Central Intelligence Agency.
[01:29.800 --> 01:34.880]  I've worked for the National Security Agency, and I've worked for the Defense Intelligence
[01:34.880 --> 01:40.720]  Agency as a lecturer at the Joint Counterintelligence Training Academy, where I developed sources
[01:40.720 --> 01:45.440]  and methods for keeping our information and people secure in the most hostile and dangerous
[01:45.440 --> 01:47.560]  environments around the world.
[01:47.560 --> 01:51.600]  So when they say I'm a low-level systems administrator, that I don't know what I'm talking about,
[01:51.600 --> 01:53.560]  I'd say it's somewhat misleading.
[01:53.560 --> 01:56.520]  The NSA has declined to comment on Snowden's statement.
[01:56.520 --> 01:59.960]  The interview was Snowden's first with the U.S. television network, but was conducted
[01:59.960 --> 02:04.200]  in Moscow, where he has remained since the United States revoked his passport and charged
[02:04.200 --> 02:10.960]  him with espionage.
[02:10.960 --> 02:15.180]  Raising money for Ross Albrecht's Legal Defense Fund is the goal Saturday when the Alliance
[02:15.180 --> 02:20.520]  of Austin Agorists hold their sixth networking party at Austin's Brave New Books.
[02:20.520 --> 02:24.760]  The Alliance of Austin Agorists and Brave New Books and Sovereign VTC came together
[02:24.760 --> 02:29.360]  and figured we'd do a fundraiser for Ross Albrecht, the alleged runner of the online
[02:29.360 --> 02:31.560]  black market called the Silk Road.
[02:31.560 --> 02:33.800]  That's Alliance founder Joel Anthony Williamson.
[02:33.800 --> 02:38.200]  We have a counter-economic farmers market for all products, skills, and services.
[02:38.200 --> 02:42.000]  Five percent of the money raised at each vendor is going towards Ross's Legal Defense.
[02:42.000 --> 02:46.160]  Also, we're going to be doing an interview with Ross Albrecht's parents.
[02:46.160 --> 02:48.080]  Harlan District is going to conduct that.
[02:48.080 --> 02:51.560]  We are also going to interview Cody Wilkin.
[02:51.560 --> 02:56.800]  The event is this Saturday, 6 to 10 p.m. at Brave New Books, located at 1904 Guadalupe
[02:56.800 --> 03:22.720]  Street in Austin.
[03:27.440 --> 03:30.360]  Bad Boys, Bad Boys, whatcha gonna do?
[03:30.360 --> 03:32.800]  Whatcha gonna do when they come for you?
[03:32.800 --> 03:35.800]  Bad Boys, Bad Boys, whatcha gonna do?
[03:35.800 --> 03:38.360]  Whatcha gonna do when they come for you?
[03:38.360 --> 03:43.800]  When you were 8 and you had bad traits, you'd go to school and learn the golden rule.
[03:43.800 --> 03:46.640]  So why are you acting like a bloody fool?
[03:46.640 --> 03:49.200]  Get your chicken, I'll skin you, must get cool!
[03:49.200 --> 03:52.080]  Bad Boys, Bad Boys, whatcha gonna do?
[03:52.080 --> 03:54.720]  Whatcha gonna do when they come for you?
[03:54.720 --> 04:00.080]  Bad boys, bad boys, what you gonna do, what you gonna do when they come for you?
[04:00.080 --> 04:01.080]  Howdy, howdy.
[04:01.080 --> 04:10.880]  This is Randy Felton, Deborah Stevens, U of R radio on this May the 29th, Thursday afternoon.
[04:10.880 --> 04:11.880]  Nice to see you all here.
[04:11.880 --> 04:15.000]  And this is a good day for me.
[04:15.000 --> 04:18.500]  This is my brother's birthday.
[04:18.500 --> 04:23.720]  And it always makes me feel better when I think about my brother's birthday and the
[04:23.720 --> 04:27.520]  fact that he's older than me.
[04:27.520 --> 04:31.920]  There aren't many people left in the world that are older than me.
[04:31.920 --> 04:36.840]  I just talked to him the other day and told him how much I appreciated that and he didn't
[04:36.840 --> 04:39.560]  seem to find the humor in it that I did.
[04:39.560 --> 04:42.540]  Oh well, what the heck.
[04:42.540 --> 04:52.960]  One other little news item, I just registered the name of Citizens for Legal Reform and
[04:52.960 --> 04:55.600]  set up a website.
[04:55.600 --> 05:06.240]  If anybody out there is good at WordPress websites, I would appreciate an email or a
[05:06.240 --> 05:11.760]  call to kind of give me the short course.
[05:11.760 --> 05:16.160]  Always the hardest part about doing something like that are all the really basic stuff and
[05:16.160 --> 05:21.440]  I've tried to struggle through it and I get frustrated and delete WordPress every time
[05:21.440 --> 05:22.440]  I try to do it.
[05:22.440 --> 05:27.480]  If there's anybody out there who's familiar with WordPress, I would appreciate a 15-20
[05:27.480 --> 05:34.080]  minute short course on how to basically get things set up.
[05:34.080 --> 05:40.760]  And with that said, we are going to try to bring in Ken Magnuson as a guest today.
[05:40.760 --> 05:50.100]  We're having a little trouble bringing him up, but we want to talk about some work we
[05:50.100 --> 06:02.040]  have been doing with the family law courts here in Dallas-Fort Worth area.
[06:02.040 --> 06:12.760]  Just have been a lot of outrageous stuff going on and Ken is doing some lobbying and talking
[06:12.760 --> 06:23.000]  to different congressmen, US congressmen and state representatives about getting some new
[06:23.000 --> 06:24.000]  laws in.
[06:24.000 --> 06:28.400]  We're even looking at how to get judges impeached.
[06:28.400 --> 06:33.960]  When I get these sites, Citizens for Legal Reform, organized a little better, we're going
[06:33.960 --> 06:41.000]  to put a place on there for comments on some of these local judges and I'm looking at putting
[06:41.000 --> 06:48.640]  a blog on the site for any judge that you've had a problem with, but I can't do it quite
[06:48.640 --> 06:52.840]  yet because I don't have it up quite yet.
[06:52.840 --> 06:58.720]  I don't have it all set up, I just set the sites up today, but we will have those working
[06:58.720 --> 07:04.800]  in the not too distant future, especially if I can get somebody to give me a hand with
[07:04.800 --> 07:14.120]  the WordPress, WordPress has its own dashboard and the hardest thing, problem I had with
[07:14.120 --> 07:19.440]  WordPress was how to figure out how to set up a home page, but anyway, if somebody knows
[07:19.440 --> 07:26.880]  how to do that, the short course on the front end, I can get that thing cranked up for us
[07:26.880 --> 07:35.360]  and would also make a place for people to come on and blog about primarily things we
[07:35.360 --> 07:39.320]  actually need changed.
[07:39.320 --> 07:46.200]  A lot of people complain about what's wrong, but we spend very little time talking about
[07:46.200 --> 07:49.680]  how to fix what's wrong.
[07:49.680 --> 07:54.800]  You know, when a judge or a police officer gives us a hard time, we want to jump up and
[07:54.800 --> 08:02.200]  down and rail in righteous indignation about how bad we're mistreated, but then when that
[08:02.200 --> 08:07.120]  issue is gone, we forget about it and go back to our lives.
[08:07.120 --> 08:16.040]  If we are going to take this system back, we're going to have to remember that they
[08:16.040 --> 08:26.400]  are public servants, they are the servants, we are the masters and we owe it to ourselves
[08:26.400 --> 08:36.200]  and our servants to act like the masters, give them the direction they so badly need.
[08:36.200 --> 08:46.320]  So when you have a problem, if you're in a legal situation and you think something's
[08:46.320 --> 08:53.400]  wrong, see if you can figure out what's wrong, what would it take to fix it?
[08:53.400 --> 08:57.400]  You know, we're looking at the problem with filing criminal complaints against public
[08:57.400 --> 08:58.400]  officials.
[08:58.400 --> 09:05.560]  We're trying to, you know, we have prosecuting attorneys who are just totally ignoring law
[09:05.560 --> 09:12.720]  and what they've essentially done is treated Article 2.03 Code of Criminal Procedure as
[09:12.720 --> 09:16.680]  if it just simply doesn't apply.
[09:16.680 --> 09:25.000]  And prosecutors act as the gatekeeper for the grand jurors.
[09:25.000 --> 09:33.920]  Now we have methods of getting them out of the way, but preach too many fights.
[09:33.920 --> 09:41.600]  So how could we change the law to get around those guys?
[09:41.600 --> 09:44.640]  And we have a couple of suggestions.
[09:44.640 --> 09:53.000]  When you ask a public official, a legislator to change laws, he's going to look at one
[09:53.000 --> 09:55.760]  of two things.
[09:55.760 --> 10:04.280]  How much revenue will the change in the law generate or how much will it cost?
[10:04.280 --> 10:09.160]  Those are the two most important things to our legislators.
[10:09.160 --> 10:12.400]  The right of things and due process and all that stuff.
[10:12.400 --> 10:17.760]  That's really nice to talk about, but in the end it's all about the money.
[10:17.760 --> 10:24.240]  How much money do we have to work with to fund our pet projects?
[10:24.240 --> 10:29.920]  Now that may not be right, but in the real world I live in, it is a reality.
[10:29.920 --> 10:38.840]  And money in political arenas is always short because the officials who are in a position
[10:38.840 --> 10:47.400]  to allocate the funds will allocate out every penny they possibly can to their pet projects
[10:47.400 --> 10:53.400]  and leave the chump change left over for doing what they should do and what is right.
[10:53.400 --> 11:02.240]  I know that sounds cynical and it's certainly not true of all of our public officials, but
[11:02.240 --> 11:11.680]  it is for enough of them that on the surface that is certainly how it appears.
[11:11.680 --> 11:23.960]  So we're going to fix it, we need to look at changes that we can make that will either
[11:23.960 --> 11:28.440]  clarify the position of public officials who are not acting the way they should so that
[11:28.440 --> 11:36.520]  the law is so clear they can't get around it or empower someone else to take their place.
[11:36.520 --> 11:42.800]  And in this case we're looking at the grand jury.
[11:42.800 --> 11:47.640]  Prosecuting attorneys are running interference and trying to be the gatekeeper to the grand
[11:47.640 --> 11:48.640]  jury.
[11:48.640 --> 11:51.960]  If you go try to file a complaint with the grand jury they'll tell you you have to file
[11:51.960 --> 11:54.760]  it with the police department.
[11:54.760 --> 12:00.960]  And that is absolutely untrue.
[12:00.960 --> 12:08.960]  There is nothing in law that directs a criminal complaint to a police officer or a policing
[12:08.960 --> 12:11.200]  agency.
[12:11.200 --> 12:17.080]  There's nothing in law that directs a complaint to a prosecuting attorney.
[12:17.080 --> 12:27.080]  The only thing in law that directs a complaint to any place always directs a complaint to
[12:27.080 --> 12:29.080]  some magistrate.
[12:29.080 --> 12:36.600]  But if you go to these magistrates, including the Chief Justice of the Supreme, they'll
[12:36.600 --> 12:38.680]  just refuse to act on them.
[12:38.680 --> 12:44.480]  I took some complaints to the head criminal district judge for Travis County at the time,
[12:44.480 --> 12:50.720]  it was Bob Perkins, and he was a really nice guy.
[12:50.720 --> 12:54.920]  But when he saw that I had criminal complaints he said, oh, Mr. Kelchran, you really need
[12:54.920 --> 12:59.320]  to take those to a justice of the peace.
[12:59.320 --> 13:04.240]  He said, when I was a justice of the peace, I took criminal complaints.
[13:04.240 --> 13:13.600]  And he said that district judges in Travis County don't take criminal complaints.
[13:13.600 --> 13:17.880]  And I told him, oh, that's okay, Your Honor, I'm not here to invoke your duty as a district
[13:17.880 --> 13:21.360]  judge, I'm here to invoke your duty as a magistrate.
[13:21.360 --> 13:25.080]  And that's a duty from which you may not shield yourself.
[13:25.080 --> 13:28.160]  And that's when he told me I should take him to a justice of the peace.
[13:28.160 --> 13:32.320]  And I told him that I tried that and took him over to Herb, Herb Evans, he's still over
[13:32.320 --> 13:36.880]  there in the courthouse there at Austin.
[13:36.880 --> 13:38.880]  And Herb wouldn't take them.
[13:38.880 --> 13:43.880]  I'd taken them to the district attorney, he wouldn't take them, nobody would take them.
[13:43.880 --> 13:48.800]  I finally convinced Bob Perkins to take them.
[13:48.800 --> 13:51.680]  But it had been a real fight.
[13:51.680 --> 13:53.480]  So how can we fix this?
[13:53.480 --> 14:04.160]  Well, what I was looking at is a provision in chapter 20 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
[14:04.160 --> 14:11.360]  Chapter 20 addresses grand juries, duties and procedures.
[14:11.360 --> 14:24.240]  And what I wanted to add was a provision to 20.10 Texas Code of Criminal Procedure or
[14:24.240 --> 14:35.120]  to 20.09 that would require that the grand jury set aside at least one hour for every
[14:35.120 --> 14:41.000]  meeting to hear complaints from private citizens.
[14:41.000 --> 14:47.520]  Now one hour, two hours don't make much difference and we don't care about that time.
[14:47.520 --> 14:54.960]  But by requiring that the grand jury set aside time to hear complaints by private citizens,
[14:54.960 --> 15:03.720]  that would effectively eliminate any power of the district attorney to be the gatekeeper
[15:03.720 --> 15:06.360]  for the grand jury.
[15:06.360 --> 15:16.280]  But since the grand jury is sitting anyway, and they're paid by the day, not by the hour,
[15:16.280 --> 15:22.400]  and for the most part, nobody would show up so they would never use that time.
[15:22.400 --> 15:27.760]  But on the rare occasions that someone did show up, they would be required simply to
[15:27.760 --> 15:29.720]  hear them.
[15:29.720 --> 15:35.880]  And the prosecuting attorney could not interfere because this would be a statute that would
[15:35.880 --> 15:44.160]  bypass him and clearly designate that citizens can present complaints to grand jurors.
[15:44.160 --> 15:50.480]  That's one of the statutory changes we would like.
[15:50.480 --> 15:56.520]  There are a few others, some that are somewhat more complex.
[15:56.520 --> 16:04.760]  Chapter 14 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure was changed in 65 and I personally believe
[16:04.760 --> 16:13.160]  that a minor change, the addition of 14.01 paragraph B, is what opened the door for a
[16:13.160 --> 16:14.800]  police state.
[16:14.800 --> 16:22.560]  Sometimes changes in statutes can appear to be innocuous and subtle and have horrendous
[16:22.560 --> 16:25.520]  results and this is one of those that has.
[16:25.520 --> 16:26.520]  And we're about to go to break.
[16:26.520 --> 16:28.680]  We're going to have the phone lines open all night.
[16:28.680 --> 16:35.680]  When we come back, we'll try to have Ken Magnuson up and he will talk more about some of the
[16:35.680 --> 16:39.080]  lobbying efforts that he is doing.
[16:39.080 --> 16:44.040]  But call in number is 512-646-1984.
[16:44.040 --> 16:45.040]  Give us a call.
[16:45.040 --> 16:51.440]  We'll be taking calls on any subject, but I want to give Ken a little time to present
[16:51.440 --> 16:53.560]  his lobbying.
[16:53.560 --> 16:54.560]  Hang on.
[16:54.560 --> 16:55.560]  We'll be right back.
[16:55.560 --> 17:06.760]  Through advances in technology our lives have greatly improved except in the area of nutrition.
[17:06.760 --> 17:11.520]  People feed their pets better than they feed themselves and it's time we changed all that.
[17:11.520 --> 17:17.160]  Our primary defense against aging and disease in this toxic environment is good nutrition.
[17:17.160 --> 17:23.520]  In a world where natural foods have been irradiated, adulterated, and mutilated, young Jevity can
[17:23.520 --> 17:25.800]  provide the nutrients you need.
[17:25.800 --> 17:30.640]  Logos Radio Network gets many requests to endorse all sorts of products, most of which
[17:30.640 --> 17:31.760]  we reject.
[17:31.760 --> 17:37.000]  We have come to trust young Jevity so much we became a marketing distributor along with
[17:37.000 --> 17:39.800]  Alex Jones, Ben Fuchs, and many others.
[17:39.800 --> 17:46.200]  When you order from logosradionetwork.com, your health will improve as you help support
[17:46.200 --> 17:47.200]  quality radio.
[17:47.200 --> 17:51.760]  As you realize the benefits of young Jevity, you may want to join us.
[17:51.760 --> 17:57.360]  As a distributor, you can experience improved health, help your friends and family, and
[17:57.360 --> 17:59.320]  increase your income.
[17:59.320 --> 18:00.640]  Order now.
[18:00.640 --> 18:05.400]  Are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters, or even lawsuits?
[18:05.400 --> 18:09.480]  Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Mears proven method.
[18:09.480 --> 18:13.760]  Michael Mears has won six cases in federal court against debt collectors and now you
[18:13.760 --> 18:14.760]  can win too.
[18:14.760 --> 18:19.680]  You'll get step-by-step instructions in plain English on how to win in court using federal
[18:19.680 --> 18:25.400]  civil rights statutes, what to do when contacted by phone, mail, or court summons, how to answer
[18:25.400 --> 18:29.960]  letters and phone calls, how to get debt collectors out of your credit report, how to turn the
[18:29.960 --> 18:34.160]  financial tables on them and make them pay you to go away.
[18:34.160 --> 18:39.280]  The Michael Mears proven method is the solution for how to stop debt collectors.
[18:39.280 --> 18:41.200]  Personal consultation is available as well.
[18:41.200 --> 18:46.960]  For more information, please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the blue Michael Mears banner
[18:46.960 --> 18:49.880]  or email michaelmears at yahoo.com.
[18:49.880 --> 18:59.000]  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
[18:59.000 --> 19:00.000]  collectors now.
[19:00.000 --> 19:17.320]  Thank you for listening to the Logos Radio Network, logosradio.com.
[19:17.320 --> 19:43.640]  Thank you for listening to the Logos Radio Network, logosradio.com.
[19:43.640 --> 19:55.080]  Okay, we are back, Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Rule of Law Radio, and I really wanted to
[19:55.080 --> 19:57.280]  talk about due process tonight.
[19:57.280 --> 20:06.080]  Last week, I talked about the foreclosure issue, and tonight I wanted to talk about
[20:06.080 --> 20:07.080]  due process.
[20:07.080 --> 20:12.520]  I was hoping I could get Ken on, but we're having some issues trying to bring him in.
[20:12.520 --> 20:22.960]  So we may get him in a little later, but we've been having some issues in family court here
[20:22.960 --> 20:29.640]  in North Texas, and family court is absolutely a horrendous mess.
[20:29.640 --> 20:38.000]  I am amazed at how really screwed up it is and how outrageous these guys are.
[20:38.000 --> 20:49.520]  I had a hearing recently on a woman, her husband has a lot of money, she doesn't have any money,
[20:49.520 --> 20:51.640]  and they've already taken her child from her.
[20:51.640 --> 21:03.320]  Now she is doing hospice for her father who's dying of cancer, so she can't pay the child
[21:03.320 --> 21:13.280]  support because she can't work, and now they told her that if she would give up all of
[21:13.280 --> 21:21.400]  her rights to her child, then they wouldn't throw her in jail, and everything they did
[21:21.400 --> 21:31.520]  has been illegal, and we filed a challenge to subject matter jurisdiction where we accused
[21:31.520 --> 21:32.520]  them of false arrest.
[21:32.520 --> 21:38.480]  They had this woman arrested and beaten up in jail in order to get her to give up her
[21:38.480 --> 21:44.840]  rights, and she wouldn't do it.
[21:44.840 --> 21:49.760]  Then we filed criminal charges against her, we filed a criminal accusations in a challenge
[21:49.760 --> 21:58.020]  subject matter jurisdiction, and still they went into court, and her husband's lawyer
[21:58.020 --> 22:06.280]  told the judge that there was a whole bunch of court watchers there, that he wants to
[22:06.280 --> 22:14.160]  call all of these court watchers as character witnesses, that he wants them all sworn in,
[22:14.160 --> 22:21.880]  and the judge forced them all to swear in and then invoke the rule, threw them all out,
[22:21.880 --> 22:28.120]  so they could have this hearing with nobody there.
[22:28.120 --> 22:35.520]  Problem the judge had is one of the people that was there turned out to be someone I
[22:35.520 --> 22:37.140]  knew.
[22:37.140 --> 22:43.780]  I met him when I was at the subcommittee hearing on the sunsetting the state commission on
[22:43.780 --> 22:46.220]  judicial conduct.
[22:46.220 --> 22:52.520]  He was one of the judges on the commission, and when they threw him out of that courtroom,
[22:52.520 --> 23:00.520]  he was not a happy camper, and he immediately filed a judicial conduct complaint.
[23:00.520 --> 23:04.560]  That might well be helpful.
[23:04.560 --> 23:11.400]  We have someone with some actual clout, and there were a couple of people there that politically
[23:11.400 --> 23:18.120]  had some clout, so it looks like we have Ken up.
[23:18.120 --> 23:19.840]  I'm going to go ahead and bring him in.
[23:19.840 --> 23:20.840]  Hello, Ken.
[23:20.840 --> 23:21.840]  Hey.
[23:21.840 --> 23:22.840]  Okay.
[23:22.840 --> 23:28.600]  Sorry about the difficulty bringing you in.
[23:28.600 --> 23:30.800]  We're having a little technical issues today.
[23:30.800 --> 23:40.720]  Will you kind of give us a synopsis of what you're doing in terms of lobbying and legislation
[23:40.720 --> 23:47.240]  and things to try to change the political and legal climate here in North Texas?
[23:47.240 --> 23:48.240]  Okay.
[23:48.240 --> 23:55.960]  Well, it's an overall plan that has been going on for quite some time to hold judges accountable
[23:55.960 --> 23:59.000]  for abuses on the bench.
[23:59.000 --> 24:05.840]  The biggest problem is that the state commission on judicial conduct is basically either impotent
[24:05.840 --> 24:10.480]  or indifferent to the issues.
[24:10.480 --> 24:15.800]  There has to be some significant changes in the law as far as how judges are handled with
[24:15.800 --> 24:17.880]  regards to abuse of power.
[24:17.880 --> 24:22.220]  When I talk about abuse of power, I'm talking about not just bad rulings.
[24:22.220 --> 24:29.160]  Bad rulings are handled by the appellate court, but when a judge maliciously, indifferently
[24:29.160 --> 24:35.760]  fails to follow statute and does this repeatedly, they're a criminal and should be removed from
[24:35.760 --> 24:39.760]  the bench, and they should be prosecuted and brought to justice.
[24:39.760 --> 24:44.120]  The issue here at this point is to look at the rules and look at the process.
[24:44.120 --> 24:47.160]  One of the problems that we've been having is that a lot of the people that might be
[24:47.160 --> 24:53.080]  listening that listen to rule of law radio are embroiled in a legal battle or conflict.
[24:53.080 --> 24:58.560]  By the time they get their head above water and get a breath of fresh air, they've lost
[24:58.560 --> 25:02.560]  their taste for doing anything legal or political at all.
[25:02.560 --> 25:09.440]  That just allows the system to fester and continue to gain momentum down the wrong path.
[25:09.440 --> 25:14.680]  One of the things that's absolutely essential is a person that has seen not a bad decision,
[25:14.680 --> 25:16.480]  but a failure to follow the law.
[25:16.480 --> 25:19.480]  Let me give you some examples of that.
[25:19.480 --> 25:26.680]  Specifically, pro se litigants have been targeted in many courts across Texas as having no rights,
[25:26.680 --> 25:32.400]  and there's indifference to participate or to allow them to participate in the judicial
[25:32.400 --> 25:34.160]  process.
[25:34.160 --> 25:40.080]  The court coordinators or the clerks for the judges won't provide them with paperwork,
[25:40.080 --> 25:42.400]  won't provide them with calling back.
[25:42.400 --> 25:48.960]  With the newly implemented procedures in Texas for electronic filing, they frequently will
[25:48.960 --> 25:53.920]  not allow their documents to be filed, and since there's no way to go down to the courthouse
[25:53.920 --> 25:59.420]  and file them any longer in many of the jurisdictions, they can essentially eliminate the ability
[25:59.420 --> 26:05.680]  to file any pleadings at all, or require such strict scrutiny over those pleadings as to
[26:05.680 --> 26:08.200]  deny them access to the courts whatsoever.
[26:08.200 --> 26:12.840]  These are things that are being done and have been done for decades, and it's been getting
[26:12.840 --> 26:14.600]  worse.
[26:14.600 --> 26:20.960]  At this point, one of the things that's available is for people to participate in, number one,
[26:20.960 --> 26:24.680]  judicial conduct complaints, and number two, bar complaints and grievances against those
[26:24.680 --> 26:30.040]  attorneys that they feel have not represented them dutifully or have abused their power
[26:30.040 --> 26:36.240]  or aligned with a judge in an ongoing conspiracy to deny due process.
[26:36.240 --> 26:44.040]  As such, the complaints are useful to give me and Randy leverage to talk to the legislators
[26:44.040 --> 26:48.720]  and say, look, here's what's coming down, and here's what judicial conduct has done,
[26:48.720 --> 26:51.320]  which in most cases is nothing.
[26:51.320 --> 26:57.000]  The problem that we're having is that I've been going on the air with Randy for several
[26:57.000 --> 27:02.360]  years now, and I've talked and done lectures to numerous legal reform groups across the
[27:02.360 --> 27:08.240]  state over the last two decades, and I have less than five grievances that were given
[27:08.240 --> 27:12.040]  to me by people who filed them against attorneys or judges.
[27:12.040 --> 27:19.280]  I have a handful, because no one seems to either send them, or they're doing it wrong,
[27:19.280 --> 27:21.200]  or they're not doing it at all.
[27:21.200 --> 27:24.160]  So one of the things that's important is this is part of the process.
[27:24.160 --> 27:28.680]  If the process isn't working, that doesn't mean you just don't do it.
[27:28.680 --> 27:33.280]  You do it to demonstrate that the process doesn't work, and you do that by filing a
[27:33.280 --> 27:36.760]  grievance, making sure we have copies of these grievances.
[27:36.760 --> 27:42.880]  Now, one of the aspects of filing grievances, either against attorneys or judges, is that
[27:42.880 --> 27:46.840]  you have to write a series of facts about the case.
[27:46.840 --> 27:51.040]  We're looking at a lot of family law cases right now in North Texas that are just absolutely
[27:51.040 --> 27:52.320]  abysmal.
[27:52.320 --> 28:00.480]  We're talking about judges that give Attila the Hun a recommendation for judge of the
[28:00.480 --> 28:03.040]  year if he had been on the bench.
[28:03.040 --> 28:11.840]  So the issue at this point is that we're seeing a lot of these failures of abuse of power,
[28:11.840 --> 28:15.840]  and you have to sit down and write exactly what the abuse of power is.
[28:15.840 --> 28:20.280]  The fact that they took your kids away for six months or a year, I know.
[28:20.280 --> 28:24.960]  That's an emotional damage done to you, but that's not the problem.
[28:24.960 --> 28:29.560]  It's how did they remove the kids, and why was it a violation of law?
[28:29.560 --> 28:31.800]  We're not seeing that in the documents that we see.
[28:31.800 --> 28:39.760]  We see people complaining and trying to air the emotional grief that they're feeling,
[28:39.760 --> 28:44.520]  but they're not really looking at the legal reasons why this happened.
[28:44.520 --> 28:46.400]  They're not looking at the abuse of power.
[28:46.400 --> 28:52.200]  They're not looking at the failure to follow statutory law, which is absolutely an imperative.
[28:52.200 --> 28:57.160]  Number two thing is to write a good statement of facts is usually in chronological order,
[28:57.160 --> 28:59.240]  and it follows the case.
[28:59.240 --> 29:03.160]  Recognize there's parts of the facts of what happened in certain filings of documents that
[29:03.160 --> 29:04.160]  are irrelevant.
[29:04.160 --> 29:06.060]  They didn't mean anything specific.
[29:06.060 --> 29:08.680]  They didn't make any major consequences.
[29:08.680 --> 29:13.880]  Those can be admitted from any of these documents because it's unimportant.
[29:13.880 --> 29:20.200]  But the key documents that were filed where there was a statute that was required to be
[29:20.200 --> 29:24.520]  followed by the judge and the parties and the attorneys, and they violated it, that's
[29:24.520 --> 29:28.520]  where you get into the nitty-gritty of the case of here's the statute, here's what they
[29:28.520 --> 29:29.800]  did.
[29:29.800 --> 29:31.280]  That describes the crime.
[29:31.280 --> 29:34.760]  There's other things that occur that are similar to this.
[29:34.760 --> 29:36.520]  Okay, hang on Ken.
[29:36.520 --> 29:38.480]  We're about to go to break.
[29:38.480 --> 29:41.880]  This is Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, rule of our radio.
[29:41.880 --> 29:46.800]  Our call-in number, 512-646-1984.
[29:46.800 --> 29:47.800]  Give us a call.
[29:47.800 --> 29:49.240]  We'll be taking calls all night.
[29:49.240 --> 29:54.320]  While Ken's on, we'd prefer someone on topic if we can get them, so give us a call.
[29:54.320 --> 30:04.000]  We'll be right back.
[30:04.000 --> 30:08.360]  Google is sharing its omniscient knowledge of nearly every human on the planet with the
[30:08.360 --> 30:09.360]  government.
[30:09.360 --> 30:13.840]  Hi, Dr. Catherine Albrecht, and I'll have spooky details on how Google is becoming the
[30:13.840 --> 30:17.280]  new global cyber cop in a moment.
[30:17.280 --> 30:19.000]  Privacy is under attack.
[30:19.000 --> 30:22.600]  When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[30:22.600 --> 30:27.600]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[30:27.600 --> 30:32.760]  So protect your rights, say no to surveillance, and keep your information to yourself.
[30:32.760 --> 30:35.360]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[30:35.360 --> 30:41.040]  This message is brought to you by Startpage.com, the private search engine alternative to Google,
[30:41.040 --> 30:42.720]  Yahoo, and Bing.
[30:42.720 --> 30:46.080]  Start over with Startpage.
[30:46.080 --> 30:47.800]  Are you feeling lucky, punk?
[30:47.800 --> 30:51.880]  I wonder if Clint Eastwood uses Google, because they're using their search engine data to
[30:51.880 --> 30:55.000]  hunt down anyone the government thinks is a bad guy.
[30:55.000 --> 31:00.040]  Yep, Google Ideas, Google's think tank, is working with the Council on Foreign Relations,
[31:00.040 --> 31:05.320]  the DEA, and the Department of Defense, plus some UN agencies, to hunt people down in cyber
[31:05.320 --> 31:06.320]  space.
[31:06.320 --> 31:09.320]  But putting Big Google on the beat makes me nervous.
[31:09.320 --> 31:14.080]  If you search with Google, they know everything about your political views, medical issues,
[31:14.080 --> 31:16.160]  personal interests, and more.
[31:16.160 --> 31:21.240]  To avoid the piercing gaze of Big Brother, make the switch to Startpage.com, add it to
[31:21.240 --> 31:23.560]  your browser, and make it your home page today.
[31:23.560 --> 31:31.720]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht for Startpage.com, the world's most private search engine.
[31:31.720 --> 31:32.720]  What are you thinking?
[31:32.720 --> 31:37.280]  I'm thinking micro plant powder with iodine and probiotics, or a total body detox for
[31:37.280 --> 31:39.480]  around $10 a month.
[31:39.480 --> 31:44.680]  Infusa.org has 12 formulations of micro plant powder for absorbing and removing toxins from
[31:44.680 --> 31:49.320]  your kidney, liver, blood, lung, stomach, and colon, and feel better than ever.
[31:49.320 --> 31:54.360]  It alkalizes, oxygenates, kills parasites, does the job of 10 products, that saves you
[31:54.360 --> 31:56.000]  space, time, and money.
[31:56.000 --> 31:57.000]  Call 888-910-4367.
[31:57.000 --> 32:03.280]  Only at infusa.org.
[32:03.280 --> 32:06.000]  Rule of Law Radio is proud to offer the rule of law traffic seminar.
[32:06.000 --> 32:09.840]  In today's America, we live in an us-against-them society, and if we, the people, are ever going
[32:09.840 --> 32:13.800]  to have a free society, then we're going to have to stand and defend our own rights.
[32:13.800 --> 32:17.000]  Among those rights are the right to travel freely from place to place, the right to act
[32:17.000 --> 32:21.040]  in our own private capacity, and most importantly, the right to due process of law.
[32:21.040 --> 32:24.880]  Traffic courts afford us the least expensive opportunity to learn how to enforce and preserve
[32:24.880 --> 32:26.280]  our rights through due process.
[32:26.280 --> 32:30.240]  Former Sheriff's Deputy Eddie Craig, in conjunction with Rule of Law Radio, has put together the
[32:30.240 --> 32:34.040]  most comprehensive teaching tool available that will help you understand what due process
[32:34.040 --> 32:36.400]  is and how to hold the courts to the rule of law.
[32:36.400 --> 32:40.400]  You can get your own copy of this invaluable material by going to ruleoflawradio.com and
[32:40.400 --> 32:41.760]  ordering your copy today.
[32:41.760 --> 32:45.120]  By ordering now, you'll receive a copy of Eddie's book, The Texas Transportation Code,
[32:45.120 --> 32:49.520]  The Law Versus the Lie, video and audio of the original 2009 seminar, hundreds of research
[32:49.520 --> 32:51.840]  documents, and other useful resource material.
[32:51.840 --> 32:55.800]  Learn how to fight for your rights with the help of this material from ruleoflawradio.com.
[32:55.800 --> 33:02.800]  Order your copy today and together we can have the free society we all want and deserve.
[33:25.800 --> 33:26.800]  Thanks.
[33:26.800 --> 33:27.800]  See you next time.
[33:27.800 --> 33:28.800]  Happy Serving.
[33:28.800 --> 33:29.800]  God bless you.
[33:29.800 --> 33:30.800]  Be Arabs.
[33:30.800 --> 33:31.800]  Be Arabs.
[33:31.800 --> 33:32.800]  God bless you.
[33:32.800 --> 33:33.800]  Be Arabs.
[33:33.800 --> 34:00.840]  Okay, we are back, Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, we have our radio here with our special guest
[34:00.840 --> 34:09.160]  Ken Magnuson and we're talking about things we can do to achieve remedy and when we went
[34:09.160 --> 34:17.320]  out we were talking about statement of facts and that is absolutely crucial. You probably
[34:17.320 --> 34:23.400]  notice now a lot of times when someone comes on and they're talking about an issue, if you listen
[34:23.400 --> 34:28.680]  a lot you'll notice that people tend to go from one emotional high point or low point however you
[34:28.680 --> 34:34.120]  want to think about it to the next, to the next and they really don't fill in the spaces.
[34:35.560 --> 34:43.000]  You really need all these little spaces filled in because the person who's not
[34:43.800 --> 34:52.840]  legally oriented notices the things that seem important to them but the court is looking for
[34:52.840 --> 35:00.280]  things that go to legal elements and in order to get to there you need all of the facts not just
[35:00.280 --> 35:05.880]  the ones you think is important. Go ahead Ken. Well you know Randy makes a good point there,
[35:05.880 --> 35:11.560]  part of this is that almost everybody has been harmed by this. Now there's some legal reformers
[35:11.560 --> 35:16.520]  that I work with out of Nevada that have actually talked to a couple universities and they actually,
[35:17.480 --> 35:22.040]  people who have been abused by the court, they actually call this the court abuse syndrome
[35:22.040 --> 35:28.760]  which is a flavor of post-traumatic stress and what happens is they get focused on the wrong thing,
[35:28.760 --> 35:35.400]  they get focused on the damage, they get focused on who did the damage to them but not why it
[35:35.400 --> 35:41.240]  occurred and many times just in all fairness there's a lot of people that go out and get
[35:41.240 --> 35:47.640]  damaged in this process and don't actually know why it happened. Either their attorney
[35:47.640 --> 35:52.280]  didn't tell them a lot and I'm seeing a lot of cases like that now where their own attorney
[35:52.280 --> 35:58.360]  threw them under the bus. So the issue of anybody that's listening, especially if you're just
[35:58.360 --> 36:03.480]  starting a court proceeding or whatever, don't necessarily trust your own attorney. Go out and
[36:03.480 --> 36:07.640]  do some research, learn the law. I'm going to tell you right now if you're in a family law case,
[36:07.640 --> 36:12.600]  you're thinking about a divorce or whatever like that, do the research before you ever file it.
[36:12.600 --> 36:18.120]  Go out and find the statutes that apply to it. Read some law, talk to some people, get some input
[36:18.120 --> 36:24.200]  on what the process is. If all you're focused on is just that one case, you don't have to learn
[36:24.200 --> 36:30.040]  what they teach lawyers in law school. All you have to learn is the law associated with that one case.
[36:30.040 --> 36:35.400]  This would apply the same thing for a traffic accident case or a traffic ticket or whatever.
[36:35.400 --> 36:40.760]  You're now reduced to only learning one specific part of law and I think almost anybody can do
[36:40.760 --> 36:46.760]  that if you passed high school. So the issue at this point is do that. That's the preventive
[36:47.480 --> 36:52.360]  measure that you can take when you're heading into the system. The other one was, and I know
[36:52.360 --> 36:57.160]  Randy's been using it, my Ken's Four Rules, which is first thing is perception is everything.
[36:58.360 --> 37:02.520]  Number two on this is everything is negotiable and the number three rule, which is why I'm
[37:02.520 --> 37:07.720]  mentioning it right now, is it didn't happen if it's not in writing. Everything has to be done
[37:07.720 --> 37:12.360]  in writing. You don't go down to the court and file stuff. You do it from arm's length. You do
[37:12.360 --> 37:17.640]  it by mail or now you can do it by electronic filing. And for those who are indigent or meet
[37:17.640 --> 37:23.480]  the indigent status can actually get an account for electronic filing in Texas for free by filing
[37:23.480 --> 37:31.400]  an affidavit of indigency under Texas Rules of Civil Procedure 145. So the issue here at this
[37:31.400 --> 37:38.840]  point is that it's about education and getting that education and documenting everything,
[37:38.840 --> 37:43.160]  making sure that what you tell your attorney, if you have a phone call with your attorney,
[37:43.160 --> 37:47.880]  your counselor, even if you trust them, if you have a call and there's three things you're
[37:47.880 --> 37:51.880]  supposed to do and there's three things they're supposed to do, follow it up with a written
[37:51.880 --> 37:56.920]  letter that you send to them. It doesn't have to be by certified mail necessarily, as long as you
[37:56.920 --> 38:02.360]  can call their paralegal up or their office clerk or secretary or whatever and confirm that they
[38:02.360 --> 38:08.200]  got the letter. The bottom of the letter always has to have this phrase or something to the effect of
[38:08.200 --> 38:13.720]  if I've misunderstood, please correct my misunderstanding as to what I'm supposed to do
[38:13.720 --> 38:19.160]  and what you're going to do with regards to my case. Something like that puts the attorney on
[38:19.160 --> 38:28.040]  notice that they have to correct any misinformation. The issue of attorneys on a basic level is that
[38:28.040 --> 38:33.000]  some attorneys can drop the ball because they get too busy and they get focused on another case too
[38:33.000 --> 38:37.320]  much. It may be more interesting or more challenging where they may have dropped the ball and really
[38:37.320 --> 38:44.120]  screwed up and it's CYA time for them. But the idea is the person who does a professional job
[38:44.120 --> 38:49.080]  of doing the written stuff, the attorney is going to notice this and out of all the cases they're
[38:49.080 --> 38:53.000]  going to screw up, it won't be the one where the person is dotting their eyes and crossing their
[38:53.000 --> 38:59.640]  teeth. So having said that, once you understand the rules, the issue is to make sure that you
[38:59.640 --> 39:04.840]  keep a copy of the docket sheet. The docket sheet is what the court does in chronological order.
[39:04.840 --> 39:12.280]  It's the list of the filings that have been filed in the court. It's the orders of the court. It's
[39:12.280 --> 39:17.880]  the transactions when there's any kind of monetary fees paid. And people should, every time they go
[39:17.880 --> 39:22.600]  down to the courthouse, they should get a copy of this. They go down for a hearing, they should get
[39:22.600 --> 39:28.440]  a copy of the docket sheet to make sure that nothing has changed. Don't even tell your attorney
[39:28.440 --> 39:33.640]  you're doing it. Just go and get it. Keep it. It's part of the process. You do it because that's
[39:33.640 --> 39:39.640]  the way you have to do it in order to keep everybody honest. So once you've done all of this or you're
[39:39.640 --> 39:45.160]  doing this process, then you know what the law is. And when your attorney does something wrong or the
[39:45.160 --> 39:49.400]  judge does something wrong, if your attorney says, oh, well, the judge shouldn't have done that,
[39:49.400 --> 39:55.160]  you say, why? There's a rule? There's a law? Ask the attorney the question. Why? You always ask why.
[39:55.160 --> 40:00.360]  I've heard attorneys tell their clients things and the clients sit there like a deer caught
[40:00.360 --> 40:04.680]  in the headlights. Doesn't ask a single question. I mean, the first thing when somebody says the
[40:04.680 --> 40:10.600]  judge can't do that, first thing I want to know is why. Where's the rule? Where's the statute?
[40:10.600 --> 40:15.880]  What's the provisions that say he can't do that or she can't do that? So the issue is, but I've
[40:15.880 --> 40:23.160]  seen people stand there and be given an explanation, which I mean, sometimes sounds like the biggest BS
[40:23.160 --> 40:31.000]  going. And yet, still, they don't ask that question of why. The next question they don't ask is,
[40:31.000 --> 40:35.560]  is there a rule or provision that we can change this? Can we challenge this decision? Is this
[40:35.560 --> 40:41.720]  decision final? Are the things we can do to do something about this? Is there an appeal process?
[40:41.720 --> 40:49.400]  What is it? And many people don't ask that. But those are the processes that make up essentially
[40:49.400 --> 40:54.920]  the facts of the case. What happened? Why something happened? If you're being screwed over in court,
[40:54.920 --> 41:00.600]  it almost always happens that the judge ruled on something because either someone didn't
[41:00.600 --> 41:06.600]  provide the right evidence in the proceedings or make the right argument under the rules,
[41:07.480 --> 41:14.360]  or the judge exceeded his or her authority, or just disregarded the law altogether.
[41:14.360 --> 41:20.280]  And that's the key to judicial complaints. When your attorney fails to protect you against these
[41:20.280 --> 41:27.480]  things or fails to try to remedy them, then they failed to diligently represent you. That's a bar
[41:27.480 --> 41:33.720]  grievance. So once we get to those, you need to have those, then you need to write them and you
[41:33.720 --> 41:39.000]  need to send them to rule of law radio. Randy will make sure I get copies of them because I meet with
[41:39.000 --> 41:46.120]  state legislators all the time. And I'm trying to convince them to change the significant rules
[41:46.120 --> 41:50.760]  about what's going on with the courts in Texas. Now, there is one big thing we did get changed
[41:50.760 --> 41:57.480]  last legislative session. This year sometime announced there are only seven days notice. The
[41:57.480 --> 42:02.440]  secretary of state will announce a public meeting, a public hearing conducted by the
[42:02.440 --> 42:07.400]  state commission on judicial conduct. That hearing will occur someplace to allow the public
[42:07.400 --> 42:12.360]  to air their grievances about what's happening with regards to the judges in this state and why
[42:12.360 --> 42:19.400]  maybe judicial conduct isn't doing anything. At that meeting, I'll be there. Randy will be there.
[42:19.400 --> 42:24.760]  We will be collecting copies of complaints that were not acted upon. We want to make sure people
[42:24.760 --> 42:29.400]  understand that that's the meeting they should go to. If they know somebody that's been screwed
[42:29.400 --> 42:35.320]  over by the courts and judicial conduct turned a blind eye, we need to meet these people. These
[42:35.320 --> 42:40.280]  people are the damaged parties that we need to bring to the state legislature to show the
[42:40.280 --> 42:45.880]  legislature we need to change the law. We need to change this agency and we need to hold judges
[42:45.880 --> 42:52.680]  accountable. That's part of the discussion, but it's one thing for me to tell a story and I can
[42:52.680 --> 42:59.240]  tell a very persuasive story, but it's still not evidence. It's just a story. What I need for
[42:59.240 --> 43:05.400]  evidence is to show judicial conduct complaints or stories written as affidavits about what happened
[43:05.400 --> 43:11.320]  to them and what the judges did so I can bring them in as evidence to the legislature and say,
[43:11.320 --> 43:19.240]  here, here's an example. Then it gives me credibility and gives us the idea that we can change the law
[43:19.240 --> 43:24.600]  and the support will be there from the legislators. That's part of the process. One of the other
[43:24.600 --> 43:29.000]  things that I've talked to who talked about on Randy's show before is also talking to your
[43:29.000 --> 43:35.400]  legislator. Same thing, though. You still have to get it down to the rule of law and the statement
[43:35.400 --> 43:41.240]  of fact. It can't be about they took my kids away for six months. It's got to be about what the law
[43:41.240 --> 43:49.080]  was that was violated. Hang on. We're about to go to break. This is Randy Kelton. This is
[43:49.080 --> 43:53.240]  Deborah Stevens from the rule of our radio here with our special guest, Ken Magnuson.
[43:54.680 --> 43:59.160]  Phone lines are open. Give us a call. 512-646-1984. We'll be right.
[44:02.360 --> 44:07.000]  Hello. My name is Stuart Smith from naturespureorganics.com and I would like to
[44:07.000 --> 44:11.800]  invite you to come by our store at 1904 Guadalupe Street, Sweet D here in Austin,
[44:11.800 --> 44:15.880]  Texas, hiring brave new books and chase things to see all our fantastic health and wellness
[44:15.880 --> 44:20.680]  products with your very own eyes. Have a look at our miracle healing clay that started our
[44:20.680 --> 44:25.080]  adventure in alternative medicine. Take a peek at some of our other wonderful products, including
[44:25.080 --> 44:30.520]  our Australian emu oil, lotion candles, olive oil, soaps, and colloidal silver and gold. Call
[44:30.520 --> 44:40.840]  512-264-4043 or find us online at naturespureorganics.com. That's 512-264-4043,
[44:40.840 --> 44:46.040]  naturespureorganics.com. Don't forget to like us on Facebook for information on events and our
[44:46.040 --> 45:03.640]  products, naturespureorganics.com. Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[45:04.280 --> 45:09.800]  Win your case without an attorney with Juris Dictionary, the affordable, easy to understand,
[45:09.800 --> 45:17.080]  four CD course that will show you how in 24 hours, step-by-step. If you have a lawyer,
[45:17.080 --> 45:21.960]  know what your lawyer should be doing. If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for
[45:21.960 --> 45:29.240]  yourself. Thousands have won with our step-by-step course and now you can too. Juris Dictionary was
[45:29.240 --> 45:35.720]  created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case winning experience. Even if you're not in a
[45:35.720 --> 45:41.160]  lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand about the principles and practices
[45:41.160 --> 45:48.040]  that control our American courts. You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials,
[45:48.040 --> 45:55.240]  forms for civil cases, pro se tactics, and much more. Please visit ruleoflawradio.com
[45:55.240 --> 46:06.600]  and click on the banner or call toll-free 866-LAW-EZ.
[46:17.640 --> 46:23.880]  Okay, we are back. Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Rule of Law Radio here with a special guest,
[46:23.880 --> 46:29.160]  Ken Magnuson. Okay, Ken, where did you want to go from here?
[46:29.160 --> 46:34.040]  Well, from here, what I'd like to do is ask any of the listeners that are out there that have
[46:34.040 --> 46:39.080]  actually sat down and written a judicial conduct complaint for a bar grievance to make sure that
[46:39.080 --> 46:45.160]  they sent a copy and all of the correspondence they got from the agency to Randy at Rule of Law
[46:45.160 --> 46:50.920]  Radio. That's number one. Number two, I want to ask if any of these people have also set up meetings
[46:50.920 --> 46:56.680]  and met with their state legislator, either their state senator or their state representative. Okay,
[46:56.680 --> 47:01.320]  and I'm talking about state. If you're in a state court, you go talk to state representatives, not
[47:01.320 --> 47:08.040]  your congressman or US senator. They don't have anything to do with this. So the issue at this
[47:08.040 --> 47:12.440]  point in time is I talk to a lot of people and they almost never ever talk to their state
[47:12.440 --> 47:16.520]  representative. I know people that I've talked to for four years and I keep reminding them,
[47:16.520 --> 47:20.520]  go make an appointment, set up an appointment with your state representative. I'll come with you.
[47:20.520 --> 47:27.240]  And we'll go talk to them. And they never do. Never do. I mean, Randy and I have gone to a
[47:27.240 --> 47:33.080]  number of interviews that we set up on our own and it's never been by invitation with somebody
[47:33.080 --> 47:39.960]  else that set up a meeting for us and then invited us to come along. Do you remember any, Randy?
[47:39.960 --> 47:49.400]  Never. We go to these subcommittee hearings and we're in a state of 25 million people
[47:50.840 --> 47:58.520]  and nobody shows up. Those few who do show up have a profound influence.
[48:00.120 --> 48:07.080]  So if you really want to influence the laws and the condition of the state,
[48:07.080 --> 48:12.760]  talk to your legislators. They pay attention. They don't get enough feedback from their
[48:12.760 --> 48:16.680]  constituents. So when they do get feedback, they tend to pay attention to it.
[48:18.520 --> 48:23.000]  I can't reiterate that enough. With a part-time legislature, I'm going to tell you most of these
[48:23.000 --> 48:29.240]  guys are, and when I say guys, I mean the women as well, they live in a vacuum. They hear stuff
[48:29.240 --> 48:33.880]  at the last minute. They get barraged with interviews from the press during the legislative
[48:33.880 --> 48:39.560]  session and maybe when they're running in a contentious election. But when all of that
[48:39.560 --> 48:44.760]  dies down, most of the time they don't hear from anybody unless they've got an axe to grind.
[48:45.320 --> 48:50.360]  And that's usually for money. It's usually somebody lobbying them for a bill to get them money for
[48:50.360 --> 48:55.880]  some sort of purpose. And they don't hear from the constituents, the rank and file people that
[48:55.880 --> 49:01.720]  voted them into office. They don't hear from them. But again, it doesn't do you any good to go and
[49:01.720 --> 49:08.040]  talk to them if you don't sit down and prepare. And some of this requires, with a state legislator,
[49:08.040 --> 49:13.800]  usually you count on giving them a three-minute introductory speech. Here's who I am. Here's
[49:13.800 --> 49:19.000]  what's happened. Here's what I'm concerned about. And that three-minute speech isn't to tell your
[49:19.000 --> 49:27.240]  whole life story and the details. It's to entice them to ask questions on the salient points that
[49:27.240 --> 49:33.000]  you made of the problems that you've seen. And when people are preparing for speeches like this
[49:33.000 --> 49:37.960]  or some sort of presentation, generally one page of typewritten text is one minute.
[49:39.400 --> 49:45.720]  So the idea is it's only three pages of text. And then from there, the state legislator will ask you
[49:45.720 --> 49:51.000]  pertinent questions. They'll ask you a few questions which will lead to essentially a
[49:51.000 --> 49:58.920]  subspeech, another three pages or five pages, to describe the details. But that's where it needs
[49:58.920 --> 50:04.040]  to go. Then the last thing that they want, and usually these meetings are set up for 15 minutes,
[50:04.040 --> 50:10.840]  if you manage to be asked to stay longer, great. Add more detail. Embellish on it.
[50:10.840 --> 50:16.760]  You always want to come to one of these meetings with what do you want from this meeting? What is
[50:16.760 --> 50:22.200]  the end result you would like the legislator to do? And if it's about corruption in the court, it's
[50:22.760 --> 50:28.040]  we need some sort of oversight over judicial misconduct that's not the state commission on
[50:28.040 --> 50:35.400]  judicial conduct because they're essentially a paper tiger. And that's one thing. One of the
[50:35.400 --> 50:39.720]  other things that we're trying to get done out there is we're trying to ask for, like they do
[50:39.720 --> 50:45.640]  in the state of Ohio and the state of Kentucky, we want video and audio recordings of all judicial
[50:45.640 --> 50:53.560]  proceedings in the state. That is a great impetus to stop a lot of this manipulation of the process
[50:53.560 --> 50:59.560]  because the judges control the court reporters. So that's one of the big things that we're trying
[50:59.560 --> 51:05.880]  to get. The other thing that we'd like to get is to put initiative and referendum on the ballot
[51:07.080 --> 51:13.640]  or in statute, get this legislature to create it, where we can actually do recall elections on
[51:13.640 --> 51:18.200]  judges. And the recall election on the judge shouldn't be based on how many people live in
[51:18.200 --> 51:25.960]  the county or the particular judicial area. It should be based on say 5% of the votes cast
[51:25.960 --> 51:31.560]  for the judge in the last election. A lot of these judges are elected with five to 6,000 votes.
[51:32.120 --> 51:37.400]  So all you have to do is find 300 people to sign a petition and you got a recall election.
[51:37.400 --> 51:43.560]  And then people aren't voting for, you know, Mark or Steve or Mary and Betty. They're voting
[51:43.560 --> 51:49.160]  whether to keep this judge or not. People that are motivated to get rid of them are very motivated
[51:49.160 --> 51:53.640]  to come out and vote. The other people that really don't care are indifferent, won't come out and vote
[51:53.640 --> 51:59.240]  and won't make any difference. The judge will get recalled and this would be a real good way to do
[51:59.240 --> 52:05.320]  it. And we don't have that availability in Texas. So talking to legislators and knowing what you want,
[52:05.320 --> 52:11.160]  we also want public disclosure on judicial complaints. These people are elected to office.
[52:11.160 --> 52:16.200]  They have a profound effect on our lives when we're dragged in front of the courts. And the issue
[52:16.200 --> 52:21.800]  here is that we should have the ability to know who and what are complaining, why they're
[52:21.800 --> 52:26.760]  complaining about these judges and what they've done. Now, the judges obviously argue, oh,
[52:26.760 --> 52:31.400]  people will, everybody that loses will file a complaint. Well, that's not true. But the issue
[52:31.400 --> 52:37.960]  is, is I think the public is fairly competent to look at a, you know, sour grapes where somebody
[52:37.960 --> 52:43.640]  lost and can't write a salient sentence about why they lost. Whereas the person that comes in there
[52:43.640 --> 52:48.760]  and says, here, here's this statute, this statute, and this statute. Here's the copy of the order
[52:48.760 --> 52:54.760]  from the court and they didn't follow it. And the public can go, oh, we don't want this guy making
[52:54.760 --> 52:59.960]  decisions for our courts anymore and we won't reelect him. That's the only way it's going to
[52:59.960 --> 53:04.520]  happen. The same thing, when I was meeting with state representative Bill Zedler, he asked me
[53:04.520 --> 53:09.080]  about, well, you keep mentioning the bar and we're talking about the judges. And I said, yeah. But
[53:09.080 --> 53:16.840]  the problem is, is bad judges come from bad lawyers and bad lawyers come to that position by the bar
[53:16.840 --> 53:21.960]  not following the rules either. The bar doesn't hold their membership accountable for failing to
[53:21.960 --> 53:28.280]  follow the rules and abuse of power and all sorts of other shady practices, including violent
[53:28.280 --> 53:33.960]  violation of law. And the issue is, is if we knew that the attorney had a long practice record
[53:33.960 --> 53:40.920]  of doing bad things, the public wouldn't elect them to a bench. So with good lawyers running for
[53:40.920 --> 53:46.760]  the bench, we're more likely to get lawyers that get elected to the bench that become good judges
[53:46.760 --> 53:52.760]  because of, well, practice, because they realize that's the only way they get elected. And that's
[53:52.760 --> 53:57.000]  the only way they're going to get reelected. Right now, it's, it's the only way they're going
[53:57.000 --> 53:59.720]  to get reelected. Right now, it's, it's, it's a crap shoot out there.
[54:02.840 --> 54:05.640]  So they've, they worked real hard to keep it that way.
[54:06.440 --> 54:13.560]  I believe so. I believe the Texas legislature over the years has single, has, has built a system
[54:13.560 --> 54:19.960]  within the construct of the constitution, as well as the statutes, which have essentially eroded
[54:19.960 --> 54:25.000]  the public's right to know, as well as the public's right to interfere with the judicial
[54:25.000 --> 54:30.280]  process. And that's where judicial conduct has pretty much come out and said, you know,
[54:30.280 --> 54:34.680]  we're not going to interfere with a judge does on the bench. We're only going to interfere
[54:34.680 --> 54:40.120]  when he gets off the bench and abuses people like sexual misconduct or abuse of his,
[54:40.120 --> 54:43.960]  his administrative capacity. Only when that occurs, will we do anything.
[54:45.320 --> 54:52.600]  The issue with a number of judges in, in, including a judge, David Gibson, that was over in Dallas,
[54:52.600 --> 55:00.360]  who attempted to extort money from Mark Cuban. The attorney filed a complaint and David Gibson
[55:00.360 --> 55:05.800]  was allowed to resign and was never charged with bribery or attempted to solicit bribery.
[55:05.800 --> 55:09.720]  He was never charged with a crime. He went out and became a, you know, a bad lawyer,
[55:09.720 --> 55:14.360]  which is where he was to begin with. So the issue here at this point is that,
[55:15.560 --> 55:20.440]  you know, we're, we're seeing this process where criminal actions are done by judges,
[55:20.440 --> 55:25.160]  and essentially they're never charged, where if somebody even thinks about driving five miles
[55:25.160 --> 55:30.280]  over the limit, they're given a ticket. So, you know, it, there's two different sets of rules.
[55:30.280 --> 55:36.920]  There's the rules for the judges and public officials. And then there's rules for the
[55:36.920 --> 55:41.960]  average American, average citizen in Texas, in which we're held to a higher standard.
[55:41.960 --> 55:47.960]  And the ignorance of the law is no excuse yet. Officials apparently can, you know,
[55:47.960 --> 55:55.000]  abuse their power all they want. A small story that occurred back when there was a gentleman
[55:55.000 --> 56:02.120]  name of Al Adas that ran for the Supreme court position back in 1980, I want to say 1980,
[56:02.680 --> 56:08.920]  I mean, 1991, 1992. And he was running against two incumbents. And I don't remember their names,
[56:08.920 --> 56:14.680]  but both of them were in office already running for a Supreme court position. And they had used
[56:14.680 --> 56:20.280]  their office, which was against election code to solicit money for running for the Supreme court
[56:20.280 --> 56:25.560]  judge. And they essentially came on TV and said, Oh, yeah, our mistake. We'll just give the money
[56:25.560 --> 56:31.080]  back. And there's no harm, no foul. Well, that's essentially the same thing as a bank robber saying,
[56:31.080 --> 56:34.360]  Whoa, you guys caught me. Here's the money back. No harm, no foul.
[56:36.200 --> 56:42.440]  So again, the criminal statutes that apply to the public are enforced and maintained differently
[56:42.440 --> 56:48.200]  than the criminal statutes that apply to judges and public officials. And this has been a problem
[56:48.200 --> 56:53.400]  across the state. And that's the main reason Randy and I know each other, because we're in
[56:53.400 --> 56:59.960]  absolute lockstep over the idea of changing the system. Randy, anything to add?
[57:01.080 --> 57:07.960]  If we're going to get the system changed, we're going to need help. And we're building tools to
[57:07.960 --> 57:17.080]  that effect. But we need your input. Realize that life can get busy and you have other things that
[57:17.080 --> 57:23.960]  are important to you. But there are times when you have opportunities. I mean, you get a ticket.
[57:25.080 --> 57:32.360]  It seems like such a pain in the neck to fight the ticket. But fight the ticket. If you don't
[57:32.360 --> 57:37.880]  fight the ticket, you're going to have to pay the ticket. If you fight the ticket and the courts are
[57:37.880 --> 57:43.720]  corrupt and they do everything wrong, you're going to have to pay the ticket. So in effect,
[57:43.720 --> 57:50.520]  you've got nothing to lose. And this will give you a real good look at what is wrong with the system.
[57:51.480 --> 57:58.360]  If you think you can trust your criminal justice system, you just try fighting a ticket one time,
[57:58.360 --> 58:06.280]  read the law, know the law going in and watch what they do. If you think you're safe in this
[58:06.280 --> 58:14.360]  country, try fighting one ticket. You know, we talk about people, the only people who trust
[58:14.360 --> 58:21.720]  the criminal justice system is the one that's never had anything to do with it. Anytime you go
[58:21.720 --> 58:28.440]  any time you go before it, even if you win, you won't trust it. This is Randy Kelton,
[58:29.240 --> 58:34.520]  Steve, it's Randy, I'm Deborah Stevens. We're here with our special guest,
[58:34.520 --> 58:41.640]  kid Magnuson. I'll call him number 512-646-1984. David, I see you there. I'll take you when we
[58:41.640 --> 58:53.960]  come back on the other side. The Bible remains the most popular book in the world,
[58:53.960 --> 58:57.800]  yet countless readers are frustrated because they struggle to understand it.
[58:58.440 --> 59:04.360]  Some new translations try to help by simplifying the text, but in the process can compromise the
[59:04.360 --> 59:11.080]  profound meaning of the scripture. Enter the recovery version. First, this new translation
[59:11.080 --> 59:17.640]  is extremely faithful and accurate, but the real story is the more than 9,000 explanatory footnotes.
[59:18.280 --> 59:24.120]  Difficult and profound passages are opened up in a marvelous way, providing an entrance into the
[59:24.120 --> 59:29.480]  riches of the word beyond which you've ever experienced before. Bibles for America would
[59:29.480 --> 59:35.240]  like to give you a free recovery version simply for the asking. This comprehensive yet compact
[59:35.240 --> 59:45.480]  study Bible is yours just by calling us toll free at 1-888-551-0102 or by ordering online
[59:45.480 --> 59:55.400]  at freestudybible.com. That's freestudybible.com. You're listening to the Logos Radio Network
[59:55.400 --> 01:00:05.400]  at logosradionetwork.com. You're listening to the Liberty Beat, your daily source for liberty news
[01:00:05.400 --> 01:00:16.280]  and activist updates online at thelibertybeat.com. This is Justin Armand with your Liberty Beat from
[01:00:16.280 --> 01:00:31.240]  May 29th, 2014. Today's prices were brought to you by Alison Marie, an eager homeschool student
[01:00:31.240 --> 01:00:35.720]  interested in live broadcast. Thank you so much, Alison. Support for the Liberty Beat comes from
[01:00:35.720 --> 01:00:40.440]  Accountable Authority, now offering a public database of police abuse and misconduct. Take
[01:00:40.440 --> 01:00:46.360]  action and join for free to gain community support and protection online at AccountableAuthority.com.
[01:00:46.360 --> 01:00:51.720]  Support also comes from Free the Market, Free Ross Albrecht, a community fundraiser being held this
[01:00:51.720 --> 01:00:57.720]  Saturday from 6 to 9 p.m. at Brave New Books. Join special guest Cody Wilson of Defense Distributed.
[01:00:57.720 --> 01:01:04.360]  Proceeds go to Ross Albrecht's Legal Defense Fund. That's Saturday, May 31st, 6 to 9 p.m. at Brave
[01:01:04.360 --> 01:01:09.800]  New Books. Despite the U.S. government's claim to the contrary, whistleblower Edward Snowden was not
[01:01:09.800 --> 01:01:15.160]  just a low-level systems administrator undercover overseas. I was trained as a spy in sort of the
[01:01:15.160 --> 01:01:20.680]  traditional sense of the word, in that I lived and worked undercover, overseas. That clarification
[01:01:20.680 --> 01:01:26.360]  came from Snowden during a one-hour interview with NBC's Brian Williams, which aired Wednesday night.
[01:01:26.360 --> 01:01:31.960]  I've worked for the Central Intelligence Agency, I've worked for the National Security Agency,
[01:01:31.960 --> 01:01:36.440]  and I've worked for the Defense Intelligence Agency as a lecturer at the Joint Counterintelligence
[01:01:36.440 --> 01:01:41.800]  Training Academy, where I developed sources and methods for keeping our information and people
[01:01:41.800 --> 01:01:47.800]  secure in the most hostile and dangerous environments around the world. So when they say I'm a low-level
[01:01:47.800 --> 01:01:52.440]  systems administrator, that I don't know what I'm talking about, I'd say it's somewhat misleading.
[01:01:52.440 --> 01:01:56.920]  The NSA has declined to comment on Snowden's statement. The interview was Snowden's first with
[01:01:56.920 --> 01:02:01.000]  the U.S. television network, but was conducted in Moscow, where he has remained since the United
[01:02:01.000 --> 01:02:07.000]  States revoked his passport and charged him with espionage.
[01:02:11.000 --> 01:02:15.000]  Raising money for Ross Albrecht's Legal Defense Fund is the goal Saturday when the Alliance of
[01:02:15.000 --> 01:02:21.000]  Austin Agorists hold their sixth networking party at Austin's Brave New Books. The Alliance of Austin
[01:02:21.000 --> 01:02:27.000]  Agorists and Brave New Books and Sovereign BTC came together and figured we'd do a fundraiser for Ross
[01:02:27.000 --> 01:02:32.040]  Albrecht, the alleged vendor of the online black market called the Silk Road. That's Alliance
[01:02:32.040 --> 01:02:37.320]  founder Joel Anthony Williamson. We have a counter-economic farmers market for all products,
[01:02:37.320 --> 01:02:41.240]  skills, and services. Five percent of the money raised at each vendor is going towards Ross's
[01:02:41.240 --> 01:02:46.280]  Legal Defense. Also, we're going to be doing an interview with Ross Albrecht's parents. Harlan
[01:02:46.280 --> 01:02:52.280]  District is going to conduct that. We are also going to interview Cody Wilkins. The event is this
[01:02:52.280 --> 01:02:58.280]  Saturday, 6 to 10 p.m. at Brave New Books, located at 1904 Guadalupe Street in Austin.
[01:03:22.280 --> 01:03:50.280]  Okay.
[01:03:50.280 --> 01:03:57.560]  Okay. We are back. Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens here with our special guest, Ken Magnuson.
[01:03:58.840 --> 01:04:06.280]  And we have a caller who has a question on point. Hello, Dallas. What do you have for us?
[01:04:07.160 --> 01:04:13.800]  Well, I wanted to make a comment that judicial discretion is not judicial impression.
[01:04:13.800 --> 01:04:21.800]  And when the criminal element in our state court system steps outside of the law that has been
[01:04:21.800 --> 01:04:29.640]  legislated to them, that opens up a whole other can of worms. And I agree with Ken when he says
[01:04:29.640 --> 01:04:37.160]  that, you know, part of what I see with pro se entering our court system is they're usually
[01:04:37.160 --> 01:04:42.040]  already behind the eight ball, and they're usually already so emotional about things,
[01:04:42.040 --> 01:04:49.160]  especially when it's a serious issue like a foreclosure matter or a tax case. And they kind
[01:04:49.160 --> 01:04:59.720]  of grasp at straws, so to speak. And it ends up hurting those of us who attempt to put in a couple
[01:04:59.720 --> 01:05:05.480]  years of study prior to ever entering the court system with our first pro se case.
[01:05:05.480 --> 01:05:13.080]  Yes. So one of the things that I do on a regular basis to try to
[01:05:14.040 --> 01:05:23.080]  overcome that particular issue is we tell people that your only purpose in the trial court
[01:05:23.800 --> 01:05:30.680]  is to set the record for appeal. So you don't care what that judge does. You've got to expect
[01:05:30.680 --> 01:05:37.080]  that the trial judge is going to rule against you out of hand at every turn. Maybe he won't,
[01:05:38.200 --> 01:05:44.040]  but you got to expect that he will. Don't let it bother you because you're only here to get to
[01:05:44.040 --> 01:05:50.920]  set the record for appeal anyway. This way you don't wind up coming away traumatized.
[01:05:51.720 --> 01:05:59.800]  And it reminds you of why you're here. Facts and law, facts and law. That's the only reason
[01:05:59.800 --> 01:06:04.760]  you're here. You're not here to tell the judge a good story. You can tell him a great story
[01:06:05.480 --> 01:06:09.160]  and give the most convincing arguments as to why he should rule in your favor.
[01:06:09.800 --> 01:06:17.240]  He can agree with you, but if you haven't given him facts and laws that relates to those facts,
[01:06:17.960 --> 01:06:22.040]  he has no power to rule in your favor. And he's not going to tell you
[01:06:22.600 --> 01:06:27.720]  that you didn't give him the law and the facts that he needs because he's not your lawyer.
[01:06:27.720 --> 01:06:34.280]  And a lot of times I expect that the judge is sitting there frustrated because he's not
[01:06:34.280 --> 01:06:41.080]  getting anything but emotion from this person. And he realizes the person is in serious emotional
[01:06:41.080 --> 01:06:45.320]  turmoil, but you're not giving me anything I can help you with.
[01:06:49.320 --> 01:06:55.240]  Whoever it is, whether you be the plaintiff or the defendant, if you object timely and you direct
[01:06:55.240 --> 01:07:00.920]  the court to do something in your favor, I mean, this is why I've really focused on the rules
[01:07:00.920 --> 01:07:09.080]  of civil procedure because you have to preserve it for appeal. And you have to know when he's
[01:07:09.080 --> 01:07:16.680]  making those judicial impressionist kind of moves, you have to be able to recognize those
[01:07:16.680 --> 01:07:21.400]  kinds of things because if you don't, it'll just blow by past you and it will never make it to the
[01:07:21.400 --> 01:07:30.600]  appeal stage. That's why we say object quick, object often. Yes. And I wanted to say thank you
[01:07:30.600 --> 01:07:37.320]  guys. I think that rule of law radio, this network and the stuff that you guys do is one of the
[01:07:37.320 --> 01:07:44.760]  premier places to go and be able to have a forum to speak about it and people of like minds can
[01:07:44.760 --> 01:07:48.840]  come together and talk about these things. So thank you. Okay. In that case, Dallas,
[01:07:48.840 --> 01:07:56.200]  I have a complaint. You're obviously knowledgeable. You've studied your subject.
[01:07:57.880 --> 01:08:05.560]  I don't hear you on here often enough sharing your knowledge with those of us who need it.
[01:08:06.520 --> 01:08:12.280]  Well, you have to accept my apologies at this point. I do a lot of reading on my own and I do
[01:08:12.280 --> 01:08:19.320]  a lot of court watching as an observer. And the things that I've seen in my local county courts
[01:08:19.880 --> 01:08:27.160]  are appalling. And I'm going to be there at some point, I can guarantee it. And the things that
[01:08:27.160 --> 01:08:33.160]  these judges do, like taking the people off the record and moving them out of the view of the
[01:08:33.160 --> 01:08:40.520]  court down into another room where this attorney strikes these side deals and I'm disgusted,
[01:08:40.520 --> 01:08:44.760]  you know, and I'm just thinking to myself, and there's 10 people looking straight at the judge
[01:08:44.760 --> 01:08:48.680]  and he's going, well, what we're going to do today is I'm going to call your name and then you're all
[01:08:48.680 --> 01:08:53.960]  going to go out of the view of the court. I mean, not in such words, but then you're all going to
[01:08:53.960 --> 01:08:57.880]  follow this attorney down to this little red room and you're going to strike a deal. And then the
[01:08:57.880 --> 01:09:01.480]  attorney sits across the table from me and tells him there's only two things I want to hear out of
[01:09:01.480 --> 01:09:07.880]  you, when you're going to pay and how you're going to pay it. And I'm just taking it back,
[01:09:07.880 --> 01:09:12.680]  you know, somebody doesn't say, wait a minute, if this is my opportunity to be heard, I object.
[01:09:12.680 --> 01:09:20.680]  I'm here to make a record, you know, can we get this recorded? You know, I feel like it might be
[01:09:20.680 --> 01:09:25.000]  a violation of due process. I mean, I've got notice and opportunity to be heard here is the
[01:09:25.000 --> 01:09:30.280]  first essential element to it. So let's talk about that here. I would all do respect, you know,
[01:09:30.280 --> 01:09:37.240]  nothing that I can say to this attorney off of the record will have anything to do, you know,
[01:09:37.240 --> 01:09:44.520]  with this court. So I apologize for not being on here often enough. Sometimes my work schedule
[01:09:44.520 --> 01:09:51.160]  conflicts and I do enjoy listening to you guys, but I appreciate that. Okay. Thank you for calling.
[01:09:51.160 --> 01:10:00.600]  Yes, sir. Okay. Now we're going to go to Matthew in Texas. Matthew. Hello. Hey, how are you doing?
[01:10:00.600 --> 01:10:09.320]  You have a court issue for us. Yeah. So I have a few questions generally speaking.
[01:10:09.960 --> 01:10:14.520]  What I come to find is when you try to make an argument in a court about,
[01:10:15.720 --> 01:10:20.440]  you kind of stand up for yourself, represent yourself. The judges like to tell me that they're
[01:10:20.440 --> 01:10:25.880]  going to charge me with contempt, take me to jail, et cetera, et cetera, just all kinds of threats.
[01:10:25.880 --> 01:10:34.280]  So generally speaking, when is an individual in contempt? How do I get into that area? I mean,
[01:10:34.280 --> 01:10:39.320]  I can't be told shut up and don't talk. I'm going to tell you what options you have and you have to
[01:10:39.320 --> 01:10:44.440]  select from what I've chosen because I think that violates my right to be heard and provide defense
[01:10:44.440 --> 01:10:51.560]  for myself. So what I'm trying to figure out is how to walk that line where I can do those things
[01:10:51.560 --> 01:10:55.880]  without being in contempt or when they try to threaten me with contempt, tell them, no, sorry,
[01:10:56.520 --> 01:11:00.920]  that's not a contemptible activity or behavior or whatever. You can't do that.
[01:11:01.640 --> 01:11:05.400]  Okay. Let me start out with a suggestion. Then I'll go to Ken on this one.
[01:11:07.960 --> 01:11:15.720]  Object to any oral argument if you're pro se. Prepare your documentation, file your documentation,
[01:11:15.720 --> 01:11:22.760]  insist that the court make his ruling on the documentation. To have oral argument with a
[01:11:22.760 --> 01:11:30.760]  pro se litigant and learning counsel is patently unfair to the pro se litigant and insists that
[01:11:30.760 --> 01:11:37.800]  the court make his ruling based on the documentation. And if the judge refuses and asks you a question,
[01:11:37.800 --> 01:11:43.560]  take out the document. We've had people do this and start reading it. And he'll tell you, well,
[01:11:43.560 --> 01:11:47.400]  we'll go to what I asked you. So I'll get to that in a minute. It's right down here. I'm getting to
[01:11:47.400 --> 01:11:53.320]  it. And just keep reading. You'll get frustrated with that after a while. But it keeps you from
[01:11:53.320 --> 01:11:59.880]  saying anything stupid. I agree. And that's kind of like what I tried to do before the judge asked
[01:11:59.880 --> 01:12:03.720]  me, what do you want to do about it? And I said, well, I filed a motion specifically addressing
[01:12:03.720 --> 01:12:07.160]  the issue. Yeah, I know. But what do you want to do about it? And I said, what do you want to do?
[01:12:07.160 --> 01:12:11.800]  Just read this thing to you because I've already made my point on paper. I agree with that. Well,
[01:12:11.800 --> 01:12:17.000]  then I'll make sure I do that. But, okay. So what does Ken have to say about it?
[01:12:18.120 --> 01:12:23.960]  Okay. Well, first off, as soon as you get that kind of situation, especially if you're in the
[01:12:23.960 --> 01:12:30.840]  court of record, the issue is that your honor, I'm not an attorney. I clearly don't understand
[01:12:30.840 --> 01:12:38.120]  what did I do that's contempt and ask him for it. And then if the judge has this anger towards you
[01:12:38.120 --> 01:12:43.720]  or raises their voice, recognize that in a transcript, you read a transcript, it's dry.
[01:12:45.000 --> 01:12:50.920]  Anger doesn't come across in a transcript. Okay. So if the judge raises his voice,
[01:12:50.920 --> 01:12:55.080]  even just a little bit, you go, excuse me, your honor, I don't understand why you're mad at me.
[01:12:55.080 --> 01:13:03.000]  What did I do wrong? Why are you angry at me? Quit yelling at me. That goes on the record.
[01:13:03.000 --> 01:13:12.680]  And keep in, keep in mind, the judge is a public servant. You, you are the master.
[01:13:14.120 --> 01:13:22.520]  If a judge says anything that would have the effect of preventing you from testifying
[01:13:23.960 --> 01:13:28.040]  under 3605 Texas penal code, that's tampering with witness.
[01:13:28.040 --> 01:13:36.040]  So when he starts talking to you in a way that a reasonable person of ordinary prudence would find
[01:13:36.040 --> 01:13:43.800]  frightening or intimidating, I mean, you're trying to be a witness. Then have you ever asked the
[01:13:43.800 --> 01:13:49.480]  bailiff to arrest the judge? No, I would love to. I got pushed in court last time, the bailiff.
[01:13:50.680 --> 01:13:55.960]  Oh, I have done that a lot of times and I have never had a judge threaten me when I did that.
[01:13:55.960 --> 01:14:00.600]  The judge gets real quiet, but I don't do that in the courtroom anymore. But when I leave the
[01:14:00.600 --> 01:14:05.720]  courtroom, I always ask the bailiff to come with me. And then I asked the bailiff to arrest the
[01:14:05.720 --> 01:14:11.160]  judge and the bailiff is going to refuse. And you tell the bailiff, yeah, life is filled with
[01:14:11.160 --> 01:14:16.360]  little decisions. We all get to make some of your turn. Are you going to perform your duty as
[01:14:16.360 --> 01:14:23.400]  prescribed article 210 code of criminal procedure and shield this judge from prosecution? You go
[01:14:23.400 --> 01:14:27.960]  in there and drag him off the bench and throw him in jail where he belongs. You know, they'll always
[01:14:27.960 --> 01:14:35.560]  refuse. But if we're going to get the judge's attention, this is how we're going to do it.
[01:14:36.600 --> 01:14:45.880]  I did this recently with Judge Hayes in Mansfield, Texas and actually set him up. I asked him if he
[01:14:45.880 --> 01:14:51.960]  had accommodation with hearing impaired because I had a hearing deficiency. And he said, well,
[01:14:51.960 --> 01:14:56.040]  he doesn't. I said, well, will you turn the, uh, you got a sound system. Will you turn it up? No,
[01:14:56.040 --> 01:15:01.880]  I won't. Well, then will you speak up? And he did. He told the bailiff, I didn't sit down and shut up
[01:15:02.840 --> 01:15:08.440]  that he was throwing me out of the courtroom. So when the hearing was over, I ordered the bailiff
[01:15:08.440 --> 01:15:16.280]  to come with me. I didn't politely request. When I got to the bar, I pointed at him, you come with
[01:15:16.280 --> 01:15:22.440]  me. I stomped out of the courtroom. He came out and I wanted to do him to arrest the judge for
[01:15:22.440 --> 01:15:27.640]  failure to provide accommodation for the hearing impaired. And I was stinking to Ken when I did
[01:15:27.640 --> 01:15:36.200]  that. And he said, well, what'd he do? Well, he wouldn't turn the sound system up. And the bailiff
[01:15:36.200 --> 01:15:45.640]  said, well, why didn't you tell him about the, uh, the, uh, the, the, uh, the, uh, the, uh, the, uh,
[01:15:45.640 --> 01:15:51.080]  Americans with Disabilities Act. Yeah. The Americans with Disabilities Act. I said, well,
[01:15:51.080 --> 01:15:57.240]  if I'd have told him about that, he might've turned the sound system up. Yeah. The bailiff just stood
[01:15:57.240 --> 01:16:02.600]  there and looked at me, couldn't believe I set the judge up. Well, I'm the master. He's the servant.
[01:16:02.600 --> 01:16:07.160]  You want to play hardball, bubba? Well, I didn't do shooting. He's deep into the pool.
[01:16:08.040 --> 01:16:11.720]  We see how he likes that. And when the bailiff wouldn't arrest him, they sent me over to the
[01:16:11.720 --> 01:16:17.000]  municipal police and they just jumped up and down and waved their arms and got all excited.
[01:16:17.000 --> 01:16:23.000]  We made a real scene around there and everything comes back to the judge.
[01:16:24.760 --> 01:16:30.760]  Ken's second rule. Which rule is it? Everything's political. Everything's political. That's the
[01:16:30.760 --> 01:16:37.480]  fourth rule. Fourth rule. Everything's political. So you create a little local politics. You want
[01:16:37.480 --> 01:16:43.800]  the judge to wonder who the most dangerous person around is. And you want him to think it's the
[01:16:43.800 --> 01:16:49.240]  citizen who's going to run down and try to get him arrested. Hang on. We're about to do the break.
[01:16:49.240 --> 01:16:56.600]  This is Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, with our radio. I call the number 512-646-1984. We'll be
[01:16:56.600 --> 01:17:05.080]  right back. Chances are you've heard of My Magic Mud, but have you used it? Thousands of people
[01:17:05.080 --> 01:17:09.880]  are blown away by the clean and healthy feeling they experience after just one use. Here's what
[01:17:09.880 --> 01:17:14.360]  Harlan Dietrich, owner of Brave New Books, has to say about the product. Hey everybody, this is
[01:17:14.360 --> 01:17:18.760]  Harlan Dietrich, owner of Brave New Books. Just want to tell everybody about My Magic Mud. I use
[01:17:18.760 --> 01:17:23.240]  the product and it makes my teeth feel clean and healthy. I think it makes them stronger and I've
[01:17:23.240 --> 01:17:27.080]  got lots of customers that come in and say the same thing. You can pick yours up at Brave New
[01:17:27.080 --> 01:17:32.200]  Books. If that wasn't enough, Dr. Griffin Cole, DDS, who's been featured on the Alex Jones show,
[01:17:32.200 --> 01:17:36.840]  loves it too. Hi, I'm Dr. Griffin Cole, and I've got to tell you, I really love this Magic Mud
[01:17:36.840 --> 01:17:41.560]  product. Because charcoal is so absorbent, it's very effective at taking off all the sticky plaque
[01:17:41.560 --> 01:17:45.640]  and debris that gets stuck on our teeth every day. I highly recommend My Magic Mud. If you haven't
[01:17:45.640 --> 01:17:51.160]  yet experienced My Magic Mud, it's never too late to brighten your smile and strengthen your teeth.
[01:17:51.160 --> 01:17:56.280]  Get your jar of My Magic Mud today at Brave New Books, located at 1904 Guadalupe Street,
[01:17:56.280 --> 01:18:03.800]  or order online today at MyMagicMud.com. At Capital Coin and Bullion, our mission is to be
[01:18:03.800 --> 01:18:08.120]  your preferred shopping destination by delivering excellent customer service and outstanding value
[01:18:08.120 --> 01:18:12.200]  at an affordable price. We provide a wide assortment of your favorite products featuring
[01:18:12.200 --> 01:18:16.440]  a great selection of high quality coins and precious metals. We cater to beginners in coin
[01:18:16.440 --> 01:18:21.000]  collecting as well as large transactions for investors. We believe in educating our customers
[01:18:21.000 --> 01:18:25.640]  with resources from top accredited metals dealers and journalists. If we don't have what you're
[01:18:25.640 --> 01:18:31.320]  looking for, we can find it. In addition, we carry popular longevity products such as Beyond Tangy
[01:18:31.320 --> 01:18:36.120]  Tangerine and Polynverse. We also offer One World Way, Mountain House Storable Foods,
[01:18:36.120 --> 01:18:41.560]  Birkin Water Products, ammunition at 10% above wholesale, and more. We broker metals IRA accounts
[01:18:41.560 --> 01:18:49.320]  and we also accept Bitcoins as payment. Call us at 512-646-6440. We're located at 7304 Burnet Road,
[01:18:49.320 --> 01:18:53.800]  Suite A, about a half mile south of Anderson. We're open Monday through Friday 10 to 6,
[01:18:53.800 --> 01:18:59.960]  Saturdays 10 to 2. Visit us at capitalcoin and bullion.com or call 512-646-6440.
[01:19:23.800 --> 01:19:35.000]  Okay, we are back. Randy Kelton, David Stephens here with our special guest,
[01:19:35.000 --> 01:19:41.240]  Kim Magnuson. And while we're on the break, Matthew, we were talking about contempt. Kim,
[01:19:41.800 --> 01:19:47.400]  you want to kind of explain. Now, Kim's saying he's not an expert on contempt and I'm not either,
[01:19:48.200 --> 01:19:50.760]  but there are some things to understand. Go ahead, Kim.
[01:19:50.760 --> 01:19:56.600]  The only area that I've been studying recently is the contempt with regards to family court
[01:19:56.600 --> 01:20:01.960]  proceedings. And in any event, there's a provision in there where if it involves jail time,
[01:20:02.520 --> 01:20:06.040]  they have to give you a warning and you have to waive your right to counsel.
[01:20:06.040 --> 01:20:09.640]  One of the things I'm going to tell you right now, despite the fact that you might get
[01:20:09.640 --> 01:20:14.360]  crappy counsel, the issue is you never waive your right to counsel. You never say you understand
[01:20:14.360 --> 01:20:18.680]  your right. Oh, excuse me, Your Honor, I can't possibly understand this. I'm not a trained
[01:20:18.680 --> 01:20:22.760]  lawyer. I didn't go to law school. You know, I'm here doing the best I can under these
[01:20:22.760 --> 01:20:29.480]  circumstances, but you know, the issue here is I need counsel in order to help me. And the idea
[01:20:29.480 --> 01:20:33.400]  is if they, you know, well, are you willing to waive counsel? No, I'm never willing to waive
[01:20:33.400 --> 01:20:39.880]  counsel. That should be out of everybody's mouth immediately. So the idea is that at least from
[01:20:39.880 --> 01:20:44.760]  the perspective of the court, they can't move forward with a contempt hearing to put you in
[01:20:44.760 --> 01:20:51.000]  jail unless you have counsel. So the issue is even if you're pro se in a proceeding, as soon
[01:20:51.000 --> 01:20:55.480]  as they get the contempt in jail, they're supposed to provide you with counsel or the right for
[01:20:55.480 --> 01:21:01.400]  counsel. So only when you waive your rights to counsel, do they move forward and, you know,
[01:21:01.400 --> 01:21:06.200]  do something. Now we're seeing that there's a lot of family courts that just ignore the statute.
[01:21:06.200 --> 01:21:10.360]  And that's one of the problems that I'm having right now with a number of courts in North Texas.
[01:21:10.360 --> 01:21:16.200]  And we've got a number of stories out there where, you know, we're seeing these problems and
[01:21:17.800 --> 01:21:24.920]  we want to do something about that. But the issue is contempt has to be something definite. Okay.
[01:21:24.920 --> 01:21:30.040]  And the bottom line is you can't be afraid of jail. If they make you so afraid of jail,
[01:21:30.040 --> 01:21:34.360]  all they got to do is keep threatening you with contempt and they're going to, you know,
[01:21:34.360 --> 01:21:39.000]  intimidate you into submission. One of the things, one of the points that Randy was making a few
[01:21:39.000 --> 01:21:44.440]  minutes ago was protecting everything for appeal. What this is about is when they say preserving the
[01:21:44.440 --> 01:21:52.440]  error for appeal is you can't waive your rights. Silence in a proceeding, a hearing, a trial,
[01:21:52.440 --> 01:21:57.960]  when you know that the judge has done something wrong is a waiver of your rights. You have to
[01:21:57.960 --> 01:22:02.440]  speak up. You have to be able to start every sentence when there's something wrong going on
[01:22:02.440 --> 01:22:09.080]  saying, I object. Okay. Now, Randy wasn't there, but there was a hearing with regards to the State
[01:22:09.080 --> 01:22:16.680]  Bar of Texas in which, in front of the State Senate in 2003, and I was down there right before
[01:22:16.680 --> 01:22:22.920]  me, the president of the Bar Association testified for 21 minutes and pontificated on how great the
[01:22:22.920 --> 01:22:28.520]  bar was and its membership and the various fundraisers that they had done to help indigent
[01:22:28.520 --> 01:22:34.040]  people. You know, I've never met one indigent person that's been helped by the Texas State Bar.
[01:22:34.040 --> 01:22:40.200]  Okay. Never met one yet. There may be some out there, but I haven't found one. But in any event,
[01:22:41.160 --> 01:22:45.560]  he went on for 20 minutes like this, 20 plus minutes, and I got up there and started telling
[01:22:45.560 --> 01:22:52.120]  the story of the abuse of power by the people in the bar and not holding some of these criminals
[01:22:52.120 --> 01:22:59.320]  accountable. And immediately, there was a motion by one of the state senators on the committee
[01:22:59.320 --> 01:23:05.320]  to limit the testimony to three minutes. And before anybody could say anything, I said, I object.
[01:23:06.200 --> 01:23:10.360]  Now, obviously, I didn't have a right to object, but that doesn't keep me from saying it,
[01:23:10.360 --> 01:23:19.000]  and it's on the record. And the chairman looked at me, who was State Senator Jeff Wentworth,
[01:23:19.000 --> 01:23:23.160]  and he says, Mr. Magnuson, you're not on this committee. I said, I don't care. I want it on
[01:23:23.160 --> 01:23:28.360]  the record that I object to limiting it. You listen to 21 minutes of essentially the State
[01:23:28.360 --> 01:23:34.840]  Bar president essentially pontificating about lies about how great the bar is. And now when
[01:23:34.840 --> 01:23:39.000]  you're about to hear the bad news, you want to limit it. I don't think that's fair. That's not
[01:23:39.000 --> 01:23:44.680]  fair to the public who's waited 12 years to talk about the corruption within the concept of how
[01:23:44.680 --> 01:23:50.280]  the bar operates and how it disciplines its members. I ended up, even though they approved
[01:23:50.280 --> 01:23:56.040]  the three minute limitation, I ended up getting nine minutes, only because I was willing to say
[01:23:56.040 --> 01:24:01.560]  the word objection. You can do the same thing in court. It goes on the record then, I object.
[01:24:01.560 --> 01:24:06.360]  But you also have to understand how to object. If you're having a hearing on a particular issue
[01:24:06.360 --> 01:24:11.800]  with regards to something going on in a court process, you better know the rules about that.
[01:24:11.800 --> 01:24:16.200]  You have to know which way the court's going to rule. You have to know which way, if you've got
[01:24:16.200 --> 01:24:21.720]  the facts and evidence support in your position, you have to know case law, not just the quote of
[01:24:21.720 --> 01:24:28.120]  a case law. So number one complaint I have, and Randy has this complaint as well, is people who
[01:24:28.120 --> 01:24:33.640]  quote a snippet that they find on the internet. Half those snippets on the internet citing some
[01:24:33.640 --> 01:24:42.360]  case, you know, Smith versus Jones or whatever, are wrong. You never cite a case unless you have
[01:24:42.360 --> 01:24:47.640]  the whole case downloaded and you've read it and you know it's on point. It's exactly the issue
[01:24:47.640 --> 01:24:52.200]  you're talking about. That's when you cite it. Then you bring a copy of that case with you,
[01:24:52.200 --> 01:24:56.520]  so if the judge wants to see it, your honor, I have a copy of that off Alexis. Would you like
[01:24:56.520 --> 01:25:01.560]  to see it? May I approach the bench? Then it shows that you've done your research.
[01:25:01.560 --> 01:25:05.560]  And if the judge is going to overrule you for some reason, the issue is until they finally say,
[01:25:05.560 --> 01:25:10.520]  shut up, I've heard enough, I'm going to make my decision. You keep arguing that point until you
[01:25:10.520 --> 01:25:15.080]  keep, until you win your day. The other person starts arguing against it saying, no, that's not
[01:25:15.080 --> 01:25:19.480]  applicable. You know what the other side is going to argue. You know what their position is because
[01:25:19.480 --> 01:25:24.200]  they filed some sort of motion as well. If they don't have the facts and the law to support it,
[01:25:24.200 --> 01:25:30.920]  you show why the facts and laws that they're presenting is in error. So any of these things
[01:25:30.920 --> 01:25:36.040]  so anybody that's walking away from a case where they've lost something, where the judge made an
[01:25:36.040 --> 01:25:42.120]  improper, not just an improper decision, but intentionally violated the law, the statute that
[01:25:42.120 --> 01:25:48.360]  required them to do something, you instantly know that. That's the fact to put down on your sheet
[01:25:48.360 --> 01:25:52.760]  that goes on the judicial complaint. Or if the attorney does something wrong like that,
[01:25:52.760 --> 01:25:56.600]  like you come to the court and the attorney's talking about the case and they're walking out
[01:25:56.600 --> 01:26:02.680]  from the judge's chambers together, that's an ex parte hearing. And the caller Dallas that called
[01:26:02.680 --> 01:26:07.320]  in talking about these deals on the side, that's one of the things we're seeing. We're seeing this
[01:26:07.320 --> 01:26:13.880]  stuff going off record where the judges are not on the record telling client, telling litigants
[01:26:13.880 --> 01:26:19.000]  before the case and their attorneys to go make a deal or I'm going to have a hearing and I'm going
[01:26:19.000 --> 01:26:24.360]  to award attorney's fees to the other side if you don't make a deal. So essentially under duress,
[01:26:24.360 --> 01:26:29.480]  they're forcing people to make deals, but it's not on the record so that there's nothing to go
[01:26:29.480 --> 01:26:35.800]  to the appellate court because you were forced to make a deal. Now, is that legal? Absolutely not.
[01:26:36.760 --> 01:26:40.760]  It's one thing if I'm sitting on the bench and I'm a judge and I look at two parties and say,
[01:26:41.640 --> 01:26:47.800]  guys, I've read both the pleadings here and if it's true what party A says about party B,
[01:26:47.800 --> 01:26:53.560]  party B, you're in a lot of trouble. But if it turns out what party A said doesn't have any
[01:26:53.560 --> 01:26:59.560]  merit to it, party A, you're going to be in a lot of trouble. So you guys go and decide what you want
[01:26:59.560 --> 01:27:06.120]  to do, but we're going to hear this case on its merit based on the evidence. That's what a judge
[01:27:06.120 --> 01:27:13.560]  can do. A judge can't turn around and tell party A, hey, I want you to sign this deal with party B
[01:27:13.560 --> 01:27:21.000]  and if you don't do that, I'm going to give party B attorney's fees. That's entirely illegal. That's
[01:27:21.000 --> 01:27:33.560]  duress. That shows bias. 3606 penal code, obstruction of justice. That's a crime in Texas.
[01:27:34.600 --> 01:27:41.640]  Well, apparently not right at the moment. Well, apparently judges can't commit crimes in Texas.
[01:27:43.480 --> 01:27:46.920]  Kind of like Kissinger, I'm the president and if I do it, it's not illegal.
[01:27:46.920 --> 01:27:53.960]  The judges seem to think if they do it, we need to remind them that it is.
[01:27:57.000 --> 01:28:03.320]  We need to start pushing for grand juries. Everybody needs to learn how to dial 911
[01:28:04.760 --> 01:28:12.840]  quickly. I was outside a family court and the bailiff come out yelling at me because I'd asked
[01:28:12.840 --> 01:28:17.480]  him to take a complaint against the judge and when he refused, I walked out of the court to
[01:28:17.480 --> 01:28:23.480]  find another bailiff. He came out yelling at me. I immediately took out my cell phone, dial 911.
[01:28:24.760 --> 01:28:30.520]  I got a guy with a loaded pistol in an agitated state raising his voice to me,
[01:28:30.520 --> 01:28:36.200]  get somebody down here to arrest this guy. When you call the police on the police,
[01:28:36.200 --> 01:28:42.200]  it gets real interesting. You get to see what we call that little chicken dance where you've
[01:28:42.200 --> 01:28:49.240]  called this policeman down to arrest one of his buddies. Now what does he do? You're a victim.
[01:28:49.240 --> 01:28:55.480]  You're the one that made the 911 call and you got that on recording. But he don't want to arrest
[01:28:55.480 --> 01:29:02.840]  his buddy and then you file against him when he doesn't. And that's even more fun because
[01:29:02.840 --> 01:29:07.240]  now he's getting in trouble for protecting his buddy for the crap his buddy pulled.
[01:29:08.440 --> 01:29:13.880]  They always want to go after the guy who's essentially innocent. He's just trying to
[01:29:13.880 --> 01:29:19.880]  go along to get along instead of doing his job. But we are the masters. We need to remember we're
[01:29:19.880 --> 01:29:26.040]  the masters. Have we pretty well answered your questions, Matthew? Yeah, but I was going to,
[01:29:26.040 --> 01:29:30.760]  yeah, you definitely, that was very thorough. I appreciate it. So my next question kind of like
[01:29:30.760 --> 01:29:36.760]  my next question kind of like we're regarding the attempt is that. Okay, wait, hold on. We're
[01:29:36.760 --> 01:29:41.240]  about to go to break. We will pick this up on the other side. This is Randy Kelton,
[01:29:41.240 --> 01:29:50.920]  Deborah Stevens here with Ken Magnuson. Our call in number 512-646-1984. We've got two more segments.
[01:29:50.920 --> 01:30:04.520]  So if you have a question or comment, give us a call. We'll be right back in a recession.
[01:30:04.520 --> 01:30:09.880]  Tightening your belt is usually a good thing, but ladies be advised. A new study finds men
[01:30:09.880 --> 01:30:14.840]  actually prefer larger women during stressful times. I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht and I'll tell
[01:30:14.840 --> 01:30:21.320]  you why that is in a moment. Privacy is under attack. When you give up data about yourself,
[01:30:21.320 --> 01:30:26.440]  you'll never get it back again. And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will
[01:30:26.440 --> 01:30:32.520]  start to vanish too. So protect your rights. Say no to surveillance and keep your information to
[01:30:32.520 --> 01:30:38.920]  yourself. Privacy, it's worth hanging on to. This message is brought to you by startpage.com,
[01:30:38.920 --> 01:30:44.920]  the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo and Bing. Start over with startpage.
[01:30:46.760 --> 01:30:50.920]  Men are said to prefer slimmer women because they appear younger and more fertile,
[01:30:50.920 --> 01:30:56.840]  but a new study finds that during hard times, men were attracted to ladies with larger waistlines.
[01:30:56.840 --> 01:31:02.200]  British researchers split 80 volunteers into two groups. Half were exposed to stress through
[01:31:02.200 --> 01:31:07.720]  mock job interviews and mental math tests. Later, both groups studied pictures of women.
[01:31:07.720 --> 01:31:12.200]  The men in the stress group consistently found normal and overweight women more physically
[01:31:12.200 --> 01:31:18.280]  attractive than the more laid back guys. The researchers conclusion, men view robust females
[01:31:18.280 --> 01:31:23.720]  as more mature and better equipped to cope with rough situations. Huh, in tough times,
[01:31:23.720 --> 01:31:29.160]  maybe size really does matter. I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht for startpage.com, the world's most
[01:31:29.160 --> 01:31:35.880]  private search engine. This is building seven, a 47 story skyscraper that fell on the afternoon
[01:31:35.880 --> 01:31:41.000]  of September 11th. The government says that fire brought it down. However, 1,500 architects and
[01:31:41.000 --> 01:31:46.200]  engineers concluded it was a controlled demolition. Over 6,000 of my fellow service members have given
[01:31:46.200 --> 01:31:51.000]  their lives. Thousands of my fellow first responders are dying. I'm not a conspiracy theorist. I'm a
[01:31:51.000 --> 01:31:55.080]  structural engineer. I'm a New York City correctional officer. I'm an air force pilot. I'm a father who
[01:31:55.080 --> 01:32:01.160]  lost his son. We're Americans and we deserve the truth. Go to rememberbuildingseven.org today.
[01:32:01.160 --> 01:32:08.360]  After work, I'm so tired that I want to be left alone to sleep. Hey, listen to me. Who are you?
[01:32:08.360 --> 01:32:13.080]  I knew years ago when you felt healthy and young and everything worked on your body. Do you remember
[01:32:13.080 --> 01:32:18.440]  that? Yes. I wish I felt like that now. You can feel like that again with a new micro plant
[01:32:18.440 --> 01:32:23.880]  powder formulation called iodine now. It cleans the entire body from head to toe and feeds the
[01:32:23.880 --> 01:32:28.360]  body what it really needs. You'll be in a better mood and you'll find more drive in your romantic
[01:32:28.360 --> 01:32:34.360]  life. Really? I got to try iodine now and feel good again. It also protects you from radiation,
[01:32:34.360 --> 01:32:38.920]  heavy metals, fluoride, chlorine and bromine including cancer and most major diseases. You'll
[01:32:38.920 --> 01:32:44.440]  be amazed. You can be your own doctor. I want to keep you out of the hospital and off pharmaceuticals.
[01:32:44.440 --> 01:32:49.880]  Wow. Why are you so nice to me? Because I'm you. You're out of shape and I need a better looking
[01:32:49.880 --> 01:32:59.720]  future. Call 888-910-4367. That's 888-910-4367 or visit micro plant powder dot com. Micro plant
[01:32:59.720 --> 01:33:23.560]  powder dot com. You are listening to the Logos Radio Network. Logos Radio Network dot com.
[01:33:59.720 --> 01:34:16.440]  Okay. We are back. Randy Kelton and Deborah Stevens here with Ken Magnuson and we're talking
[01:34:16.440 --> 01:34:21.800]  to Matthew in Texas. Okay. You had a question Matthew and I kind of cut you off there.
[01:34:21.800 --> 01:34:33.080]  Yeah. Well, in regards to the way I see it is the content state. In the Texas Constitution,
[01:34:33.080 --> 01:34:39.560]  the Bill of Rights states that I have a right to be heard by myself or by counsel. So when I'm making
[01:34:39.560 --> 01:34:45.160]  an argument that is in my own defense, when they interrupt me with, no, I don't want to hear it,
[01:34:45.160 --> 01:34:53.160]  et cetera, et cetera. That's a violation of my right to be heard because my argument is completely
[01:34:53.160 --> 01:34:58.680]  relevant to what's going on in the case. It's completely salient on topic, whatever. Then that
[01:34:58.680 --> 01:35:02.680]  should have to be addressed by the, or I should be able to address the court with it. I should be able
[01:35:02.680 --> 01:35:09.640]  to express that and they should have to take it into consideration. So is that a good way to kind
[01:35:09.640 --> 01:35:13.800]  of counter the contempt thing? Because what I come to find is that when I start talking about law,
[01:35:13.800 --> 01:35:17.320]  they automatically want to shut me up. Like, no, no, no, don't want to hear it. Stop, stop.
[01:35:17.320 --> 01:35:24.840]  We're not here to do that. You might try, if you don't want to hear the facts and law, get down off
[01:35:24.840 --> 01:35:31.080]  that bench and have yourself replaced with the fair and honest jurist I have a right to in the
[01:35:31.080 --> 01:35:39.240]  first instance. You are the master, they are the servants. Let me address this if I could.
[01:35:39.240 --> 01:35:46.760]  The, the issue with, with judges is every time you go into a courtroom, expect the judge to be a
[01:35:46.760 --> 01:35:53.640]  problem. And that's one of the perspectives in which the judge is biased or unfair. You can sit
[01:35:53.640 --> 01:35:59.720]  down and put a motion to disqualify or refute, recuse the judge. If it's a complex hearing where
[01:35:59.720 --> 01:36:04.600]  there's multitudes of things that the judge can do wrong. I sometimes walk into the courtroom with
[01:36:04.600 --> 01:36:11.320]  four different versions of motions to recuse or motions to disqualify the judge. And what I do is
[01:36:11.320 --> 01:36:16.280]  wait until the judge sticks his head in the noose and say, excuse me, your honor. I don't understand
[01:36:16.280 --> 01:36:21.560]  why I'm not being allowed to pursue this line of arguments since it's salient to the case. And
[01:36:21.560 --> 01:36:27.960]  here's why. And if he keeps interrupting you, that's one of the motions to recuse. And you go ahead
[01:36:27.960 --> 01:36:33.160]  and fill out the date and time. You already have it filled out usually before you get there. And
[01:36:33.160 --> 01:36:36.680]  the idea is you already know the name of the judge. If you don't know the name of the judge
[01:36:36.680 --> 01:36:42.680]  before you go in the courtroom, you've made, you haven't planned to hit. Yeah. So the issue is,
[01:36:42.680 --> 01:36:46.040]  especially if they bring in a visiting judge, if this is a court of record and they're going to
[01:36:46.040 --> 01:36:50.280]  bring in a visiting judge, everybody out there that's in Texas should recognize that under
[01:36:50.280 --> 01:36:56.920]  government code 74.053, you're entitled to strike a visiting judge. You don't have to have a visiting
[01:36:56.920 --> 01:37:04.280]  judge. You don't have to have a visiting judge hear your case. So you can strike them. The government
[01:37:04.280 --> 01:37:14.200]  code, what point? 74.053. 74.053 strike visiting judge. Okay. Striking visiting judge. Now there's
[01:37:14.200 --> 01:37:19.400]  rules on how you do that and everything. And they used to make it that you had to do it before they
[01:37:19.400 --> 01:37:24.680]  sit on the bench. And one of the things in that code is also that part of the code is the assignment
[01:37:24.680 --> 01:37:30.040]  of visiting judges. And what's really interesting is here's an example of how all the way up to the
[01:37:30.040 --> 01:37:37.800]  state Supreme court, they're not following statutory law. And in that code, it flat out says that an
[01:37:37.800 --> 01:37:43.640]  assignment order issued by the administrative judge of the region is supposed to be sent to all
[01:37:43.640 --> 01:37:50.520]  parties. If it's practicable, if it's timely and it is reasonable. Okay. Now if the judge gets sick
[01:37:50.520 --> 01:37:57.240]  this morning and calls in and they replace him and he's assigned, you know, that morning, you don't
[01:37:57.240 --> 01:38:01.960]  have any time to get the assignment. I understand why the assignment isn't sent to you. But if the
[01:38:01.960 --> 01:38:09.320]  assignment is mailed to a judge and the assignment isn't for 30 days, that assignment clearly meets
[01:38:09.320 --> 01:38:13.320]  the requirement of having to be served on everybody. But you know what they're doing? They're
[01:38:13.320 --> 01:38:17.480]  mailing it to the district clerk or the county clerk and they're asking them to post it on a
[01:38:17.480 --> 01:38:23.400]  board for all the attorneys to see, but they're not sending it to the parties. Now there's been
[01:38:23.400 --> 01:38:27.480]  a new case out there, a new case law that came along and said that anytime you get a visiting
[01:38:27.480 --> 01:38:31.480]  judge, first thing you need to do is say, excuse me, you're a visiting judge. I need a motion for
[01:38:31.480 --> 01:38:37.160]  continuance so I can strike you. And there's no discretion on that motion for continuance.
[01:38:37.160 --> 01:38:44.120]  They abuse their discretion as soon as they deny that. All right. That's good. So that's new.
[01:38:44.120 --> 01:38:49.800]  That's new that just came out. But this issue about not sending you the notice because they
[01:38:49.800 --> 01:38:55.720]  don't want to, because they hide behind these, some of the worst cases I've seen have been
[01:38:55.720 --> 01:39:01.400]  set up by visiting judges that have been signed as the case fixer to come in and give the trial
[01:39:01.400 --> 01:39:08.280]  court judge the appearance of being judicial while the visiting judge comes in and makes a whole,
[01:39:08.280 --> 01:39:12.840]  you know, muddy mess of the whole thing. So then if anything comes out in the appellate court,
[01:39:12.840 --> 01:39:16.840]  they blame it on the visiting judge. And the visiting judge says, oh, me a copa,
[01:39:16.840 --> 01:39:22.360]  I didn't understand because I was just a visiting judge. And I'm going to tell you right now,
[01:39:22.360 --> 01:39:27.800]  I'm absolutely convinced that that is orchestrated by the, the administrative judge of the regional
[01:39:27.800 --> 01:39:33.320]  district. And at least it's been done in the past. We had a very notorious one in Dallas for
[01:39:33.320 --> 01:39:38.520]  decades, the name of John Ovart. And this guy, even when he was in judicial conferences,
[01:39:38.520 --> 01:39:45.320]  he would deny motions to recuse by having his clerk stamp them with his stamp. He'd never hear
[01:39:45.320 --> 01:39:50.680]  them, never see it. He just didn't like pro se litigants. And, and they knew this all the way
[01:39:50.680 --> 01:39:55.080]  up to the state Supreme court. And yet the state Supreme court turned a blind eye to all of this.
[01:39:55.960 --> 01:40:00.440]  So, you know, that's part of the problem that we're seeing is that if the appellate court,
[01:40:00.440 --> 01:40:03.560]  the appellate courts and the Supreme court actually followed the law,
[01:40:03.560 --> 01:40:08.120]  we wouldn't have problems at the trial court level. The trial court judges have become emboldened to
[01:40:08.120 --> 01:40:13.160]  abuse their power because the trial courts are being protected by both the judicial conduct
[01:40:13.160 --> 01:40:18.280]  commission and the appellate court. So the issue at this point in time is that this all started
[01:40:18.280 --> 01:40:24.280]  going downhill when the legislature gave the ability for the Supreme court of Texas to have
[01:40:24.280 --> 01:40:31.320]  discretion in hearing cases. Yes. That's, that's where it all went to hell in a handbasket right
[01:40:31.320 --> 01:40:36.280]  then and there. There shouldn't be any discretion with regards to a mandamus with regard, with,
[01:40:36.280 --> 01:40:41.880]  when it addresses an issue where a judge has violated statute. And yet this is happening
[01:40:41.880 --> 01:40:47.560]  regularly. They see a petition and they, they just ignore it. They don't even read them. They
[01:40:47.560 --> 01:40:51.960]  don't even read them. So this is one of the problems we're having. And the only way we can
[01:40:51.960 --> 01:40:57.240]  get past this is judicial conduct complaints for public. You know what? If you're sitting there as
[01:40:57.240 --> 01:41:01.640]  a state Supreme court judge and you get 58 complaints against you because you made bad
[01:41:01.640 --> 01:41:05.640]  decisions while on the bench, you're not going to get reelected when it comes down because the
[01:41:05.640 --> 01:41:10.600]  news media is going to crawl all over that. So you better make proper judicial decisions.
[01:41:10.600 --> 01:41:15.240]  And if you voted not to hear a pro se litigants case, because he's a pro se litigant, they never
[01:41:15.240 --> 01:41:21.640]  say why they just deny certiorari. So, but the issue here is if they're going to do that, then
[01:41:21.640 --> 01:41:24.360]  they're going to, then they're going to get a lot of complaints and they get a lot of complaints.
[01:41:24.360 --> 01:41:29.240]  They won't get reelected. That's what's going to make them accountable to the public and then
[01:41:29.240 --> 01:41:36.840]  recall elections. So that's a big issue. The other issue is the trial courts would be held
[01:41:36.840 --> 01:41:43.560]  accountable if we also get the issue of, you know, the, the ability to make the complaints
[01:41:43.560 --> 01:41:47.800]  public at that level. But to answer your question about the contempt issue, the issue is get it on
[01:41:47.800 --> 01:41:51.960]  the record. Excuse me. I don't understand why you're not letting me argue. Are you saying
[01:41:51.960 --> 01:41:57.320]  I don't have a right to argue? Or are you saying that you don't want to hear my evidence at all?
[01:41:58.040 --> 01:42:02.040]  Try to nail them down to, you don't want to hear this legal argument or you don't want to hear the
[01:42:02.040 --> 01:42:07.000]  evidence. The issue is, is I'm making my legal argument. One of the things that I've seen in
[01:42:07.000 --> 01:42:12.040]  court is the other side will pontificate seemingly endlessly without any kind of interruption.
[01:42:12.840 --> 01:42:17.080]  And then when you start talking, the judge will continually interrupt you. And as soon as they
[01:42:17.080 --> 01:42:21.880]  start doing that, you got an objection. You let the other attorney talk for five minutes without
[01:42:21.880 --> 01:42:28.520]  interrupting him. Can I at least make my, my presentation of my theory of what's gone down
[01:42:28.520 --> 01:42:33.720]  here and argue the law and the facts, and then we can get down to the nitty gritty. But the issue is
[01:42:33.720 --> 01:42:37.640]  if you're going to interrupt me, you're denying me due process. Is that your intent here, your
[01:42:37.640 --> 01:42:41.640]  honor? If your intent is to deny me due process, you need to recuse yourself immediately.
[01:42:41.640 --> 01:42:46.200]  You start putting stuff like that on, uh, one case I wanted to tell you about was a guy that was in
[01:42:46.200 --> 01:42:51.160]  there and the judge looked at him and he started to say objection and the judge knew he was going to
[01:42:51.160 --> 01:42:55.560]  object because that's exactly what the judge was doing and screwing with him. And the judge held
[01:42:55.560 --> 01:43:04.120]  out his hand to stop him. And this guy had been, had been, you know, uh, uh, uh, a student of mine,
[01:43:04.120 --> 01:43:07.720]  so to speak. And he immediately looked at judge and says, excuse me, I don't know what that hand
[01:43:07.720 --> 01:43:13.160]  gesture means. Do you want me not to say anything or do you want me to wait until he, she's finished
[01:43:13.160 --> 01:43:19.080]  and then, then, then introduce my objection? Well, all of that goes on the record now. Hand
[01:43:19.080 --> 01:43:23.400]  gestures don't work. They do a hand gesture. Excuse me, your honor. You want me to steal second. I'm
[01:43:23.400 --> 01:43:25.000]  not familiar with that hand gesture.
[01:43:25.000 --> 01:43:25.800]  Ah, right.
[01:43:28.760 --> 01:43:32.680]  Okay. Well, I appreciate all that. And then last question.
[01:43:32.680 --> 01:43:38.680]  Wait, wait, wait. We're kind of out of time and we've got one more caller. We've only got one
[01:43:38.680 --> 01:43:44.440]  segment left. We've got a show tomorrow. We've got a four hour show tomorrow. Thank you, Matthew.
[01:43:44.440 --> 01:43:51.880]  This is Randy Kelton, Devin Stevens here with Kid Magnuson. I'll call you number 512-646-1984.
[01:43:51.880 --> 01:44:02.680]  I'll call it number 512-646-1984. We'll be right back. You feel tired when talking about important topics
[01:44:02.680 --> 01:44:07.720]  like money and politics? Are you confused by words like the constitution or the federal reserve?
[01:44:07.720 --> 01:44:11.720]  What? If so, you may be diagnosed with the deadliest disease known today,
[01:44:11.720 --> 01:44:17.320]  stupidity. Hi, my name is Steve Holt. And like millions of other Americans, I was diagnosed
[01:44:17.320 --> 01:44:22.520]  with stupidity at an early age. I had no idea that the number one cause of the disease is found in
[01:44:22.520 --> 01:44:27.720]  almost every home in America, the television. Unfortunately, that puts most Americans at risk
[01:44:27.720 --> 01:44:32.360]  of catching stupidity. But there is hope. The staff at Brave New Books have helped me and
[01:44:32.360 --> 01:44:37.160]  thousands of other foxaholics suffering from sports zombieism recover. And because of Brave
[01:44:37.160 --> 01:44:41.960]  New Books, I now enjoy reading and watching educational documentaries without feeling tired
[01:44:41.960 --> 01:44:47.240]  or uninterested. So if you or anybody you know suffers from stupidity, then you need to call
[01:44:47.240 --> 01:44:55.480]  512-480-2503 or visit them in 1904 Guadalupe or bravenewbookstore.com. Side effects from using
[01:44:55.480 --> 01:44:59.080]  Brave New Books products may include discernment and enlarged vocabulary and an overall increase
[01:44:59.080 --> 01:45:05.480]  in mental functioning. Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit? Win your case without an
[01:45:05.480 --> 01:45:11.800]  attorney with Juris Dictionary, the affordable, easy to understand, four CD course that will show
[01:45:11.800 --> 01:45:19.320]  you how in 24 hours, step by step. If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing.
[01:45:19.320 --> 01:45:24.920]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself. Thousands have won with our step
[01:45:24.920 --> 01:45:32.440]  by step course and now you can too. Juris Dictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years
[01:45:32.440 --> 01:45:38.440]  of case winning experience. Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should
[01:45:38.440 --> 01:45:44.120]  understand about the principles and practices that control our American courts. You'll receive
[01:45:44.120 --> 01:45:51.800]  our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases, pro se tactics and much
[01:45:51.800 --> 01:46:09.080]  more. Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner or call toll free 866-LAW-EZ.
[01:46:21.800 --> 01:46:45.960]  Okay, we are back. Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens here with Ken Magnuson and we're going to Steve
[01:46:45.960 --> 01:46:53.640]  in Texas. I understand you have a bar grievance issue. Yes, and I'm kind of going to ask real
[01:46:53.640 --> 01:47:00.360]  quick if the bargreamers.net site is back up. I'm not having any luck trying to get to it anytime
[01:47:00.360 --> 01:47:09.720]  I type in for that. No, I put it on a site in Iceland and they sent me a bill saying that the
[01:47:09.720 --> 01:47:16.680]  rent was due and I couldn't get in to pay it. We've sent them emails and stuff. They haven't
[01:47:16.680 --> 01:47:24.920]  responded. I'm going to have to build a site somewhere else. But I do have the American
[01:47:24.920 --> 01:47:34.760]  standards on the legalearth.net site. If you open legalearth.net, on the right hand side,
[01:47:34.760 --> 01:47:41.400]  there's three maps that come up at the top of the page. On the right hand side are the American Bar
[01:47:41.400 --> 01:47:46.920]  Association model standards. You can walk through that and find the standard that you're looking
[01:47:46.920 --> 01:47:55.480]  for. But you'll have to download the form from the Texas bar site because they've changed the
[01:47:55.480 --> 01:48:00.600]  form recently. They won't accept the old form. I think they're doing this just to be annoying.
[01:48:00.600 --> 01:48:06.760]  Let me add something to that. One of the problems that they're doing is sometimes you can't download
[01:48:06.760 --> 01:48:13.240]  the form at all. They want you to do it online. We suggest people download the form that's on
[01:48:13.240 --> 01:48:20.680]  there. It's a PDF. It's not saveable locally, but you can save the form locally without anything in
[01:48:20.680 --> 01:48:26.120]  it. Then what you need to do is find somebody that's got a full blown version of Adobe or some sort of
[01:48:26.120 --> 01:48:32.040]  Adobe-like PDF editor to take all the protection out of the file. We're trying to do that right now
[01:48:32.040 --> 01:48:37.640]  and we will post on either Rule of Law Radio or Randy's site, Jurisprudence or some other sites
[01:48:37.640 --> 01:48:43.000]  that we'll put up. We'll make it available, an editable version of either the judicial conduct
[01:48:43.000 --> 01:48:48.600]  complaint or the bar grievance complaint form so that you can save it locally so then you can email
[01:48:48.600 --> 01:48:53.960]  it to other people as either a PDF or a Word document. They've done this intentionally because
[01:48:53.960 --> 01:49:00.600]  if you fill the form out online and your printer screws up, you won't have a copy of the complaint,
[01:49:00.600 --> 01:49:06.520]  which is why they want to do that to keep you from giving a copy to me or Randy so we can't
[01:49:06.520 --> 01:49:13.800]  post it online. Yes, and I hope to have bargrievance.net back up soon. I also hope to have
[01:49:13.800 --> 01:49:24.280]  judicial conduct up soon. Until we do, yeah, if somebody remind me or send me one of those
[01:49:26.840 --> 01:49:33.480]  documents off the site, if you can't download from the site, hit print screen
[01:49:34.920 --> 01:49:42.280]  and save it as an image, then open it up in an image like something like Photoshop or
[01:49:42.280 --> 01:49:51.480]  Grep and then just crop out the document itself and then you can save that and fill it in by hand.
[01:49:51.480 --> 01:49:56.120]  Anything written on a document takes precedent over anything printed on a document so you can
[01:49:56.120 --> 01:50:03.640]  just fill it out by hand and send it to them. Or if you just print out the blank copy and scan it
[01:50:03.640 --> 01:50:09.240]  in as a JPEG, you can move it into Photo Editor of some sort and you can, each individual field,
[01:50:09.240 --> 01:50:14.760]  you can fill out as a text and put it on the end and add it to the image and then save the whole
[01:50:14.760 --> 01:50:19.960]  file. Then it becomes very easy to read because I'm absolutely convinced that people with bad
[01:50:19.960 --> 01:50:27.160]  handwriting, they just throw those complaints out just because they can't read them. Well,
[01:50:27.720 --> 01:50:31.320]  if somebody remind me, I get pretty busy and I forget sometimes, I can download that,
[01:50:31.320 --> 01:50:37.000]  run it through Acrobat and turn it into a fill in the blanks document and I'll post it up on
[01:50:37.000 --> 01:50:49.160]  Jurisprudence or this new site we just put up. What was it, Ken? Citizens for Legal Reform. I
[01:50:49.160 --> 01:50:54.920]  put it up on that site. As soon as I get that one working. But I'll put it on Jurisprudence.
[01:50:56.440 --> 01:50:59.960]  Do you have a grievance against a lawyer?
[01:50:59.960 --> 01:51:11.800]  Yes, I've got one already, but it's for a firm amount of Waco. Go to that LegalEarth.net and
[01:51:11.800 --> 01:51:19.320]  look at the grievance at the American Bar Association standards. You will be surprised
[01:51:19.320 --> 01:51:25.560]  at what you can bar-grieve a lawyer for. Kind of go through some of the links.
[01:51:25.560 --> 01:51:33.640]  Kind of go through some of the links. I can pretty well assure you there were very few guys who were
[01:51:33.640 --> 01:51:39.720]  lawyers who read the American Bar Association standards before they become a lawyer,
[01:51:40.360 --> 01:51:47.080]  but there's also a book by Charles Herring on malpractice. I know they didn't read that one
[01:51:47.960 --> 01:51:55.000]  because you can sue these guys for everything. Another reminder though is if you're going to go
[01:51:55.000 --> 01:51:59.080]  ahead and grieve the bar, the two things to remember is the Bar Association is going to
[01:51:59.080 --> 01:52:05.640]  send you a lot of letters that don't mean anything. The standard letter they've been
[01:52:05.640 --> 01:52:10.920]  sending out for decades has been about your complaint and about the privacy. Then on the
[01:52:10.920 --> 01:52:16.520]  second page they'll talk about how you could talk to your lawyer about this, but it's illegal under
[01:52:16.520 --> 01:52:22.840]  statute to talk to a third party. The statute that they cited is a statute that applies to
[01:52:22.840 --> 01:52:29.080]  the Bar Association, not the public. They've done this deliberately to make people scared to tell
[01:52:29.080 --> 01:52:37.240]  anybody. I've been showing this to state legislators for years. The one thing I say is get a copy of
[01:52:37.240 --> 01:52:43.560]  your complaint, send it to Randy. If you get any mail back from the Bar Association, make copies of
[01:52:43.560 --> 01:52:49.640]  it, scan it, send copies of that to Randy. Randy, we'll make sure I have it so the next time I get
[01:52:49.640 --> 01:52:54.600]  to talk to state legislators, I get to walk in with a bunch of bar complaints and show them how
[01:52:54.600 --> 01:53:03.240]  the bar has essentially abrogated its responsibility to hold attorneys accountable. Even if
[01:53:04.200 --> 01:53:12.360]  it were such that once you filed a grievance, then it became secret. If you send it to me
[01:53:12.360 --> 01:53:21.720]  before you file it, it's not secret by then in any case. When you file it, even if you were required
[01:53:21.720 --> 01:53:29.000]  to keep it secret, I didn't file it, so I'm not so required. That was kind of the purpose of
[01:53:29.000 --> 01:53:37.080]  our agreements.net. Part of the problem we had was low funding. I've got more funding now and I'll get
[01:53:37.080 --> 01:53:44.360]  those things up and working right. Does Texas have its own standards or we still go by the ABA
[01:53:44.360 --> 01:53:51.320]  standards? Well, the American Bar Association standards have been adopted by 47 of 50 states
[01:53:52.760 --> 01:53:59.240]  and then the individual states have made some adjustments to it, but even the three states
[01:53:59.240 --> 01:54:07.880]  that didn't adopt them, their standards are essentially the same. I pretty much use the
[01:54:07.880 --> 01:54:13.240]  American Bar Association model standards because most every state I've looked at,
[01:54:14.200 --> 01:54:21.160]  they caution you against quoting law. If you look at the American Bar Association standards,
[01:54:21.160 --> 01:54:31.240]  the ones I have on LegalRef.net, I've crafted that so that it doesn't specify the statute.
[01:54:32.200 --> 01:54:41.560]  The statute says the lawyer shall not whatever. At the end, when you get to the right standard,
[01:54:41.560 --> 01:54:53.240]  the text box will pop up and it will say, the lawyer did so-and-so as follows. It effectively
[01:54:53.240 --> 01:54:59.880]  writes the complaint in the language of the standard without quoting the standard. By doing
[01:54:59.880 --> 01:55:07.560]  it this way, it doesn't matter which state it is because essentially the standards for all of the
[01:55:07.560 --> 01:55:13.800]  states restrict exactly the same behavior. They may have a different number on it, have it in a
[01:55:13.800 --> 01:55:19.160]  different place, but what's wrong for a lawyer in one state is wrong for a lawyer in another state.
[01:55:19.720 --> 01:55:25.160]  So you can use the American Bar Association standards pretty well with impunity.
[01:55:26.920 --> 01:55:33.160]  This is Ken again. The issue here is that we don't really care from our perspective of which
[01:55:33.160 --> 01:55:37.960]  standards. If the attorney has done something that sounds bad, sounds wrong, it should be in
[01:55:37.960 --> 01:55:43.080]  the complaint only because we can wave it under a state legislator's nose and say, look, the bar is
[01:55:43.080 --> 01:55:49.880]  ignoring this rule because it controls how the rules are made and this is obviously an abuse of
[01:55:49.880 --> 01:55:57.080]  power and we need to change the rules to address this issue. Just because you don't wave the issue
[01:55:57.080 --> 01:56:03.800]  you know, don't wave the issue by failing to put it in there. The Texas Bar Association relatively
[01:56:03.800 --> 01:56:08.920]  speaking isn't going to do anything unless the attorney that you've targeted happens to be one
[01:56:08.920 --> 01:56:14.040]  that's in their crosshairs. There's political attorneys that they are not happy with because
[01:56:14.040 --> 01:56:19.400]  they're causing them problems and they'll go after them for anything. They comb their hair
[01:56:19.400 --> 01:56:24.840]  on the wrong side, they'll get disbarred. So it's a political entity and that's why it needs to go
[01:56:24.840 --> 01:56:31.640]  away. And I want to remind everybody that the Texas Bar comes under sunset review next year.
[01:56:31.640 --> 01:56:37.720]  So there will be hearings sometime next year about the Bar Association and how it conducts itself.
[01:56:37.720 --> 01:56:43.800]  And what we need to do is set up a separate licensing agency that oversees the bar that's
[01:56:43.800 --> 01:56:49.240]  a government agency that has public scrutiny and has the ability to indict these people when they
[01:56:49.240 --> 01:56:59.400]  commit crimes. The bar is the only licensed professional in the state that regulates itself.
[01:57:04.280 --> 01:57:12.200]  Talk about Fox in the handheld. This is of all agencies that should not regulate themselves.
[01:57:12.200 --> 01:57:18.200]  Lawyers should not. Plumbers could regulate themselves. Private investigators could
[01:57:18.200 --> 01:57:25.960]  regulate themselves. But the very one that should not is the one that is allowed to do that.
[01:57:26.840 --> 01:57:31.560]  And the best thing we could do is get the- Well, judicial conduct is kind of too.
[01:57:33.000 --> 01:57:37.160]  Judicial conduct, judges are not licensed professionals.
[01:57:37.720 --> 01:57:45.160]  Right. Yeah. But every licensed profession has a separate board that's not part of their
[01:57:45.160 --> 01:57:52.680]  profession who oversees them. And everything to do with law, the ones that should do it right.
[01:57:53.240 --> 01:57:59.240]  You know, I keep thinking of H.G. Wells' quote in his outline of history,
[01:57:59.240 --> 01:58:03.960]  once speaking to the corruption of the popes during the dark ages. He said,
[01:58:04.760 --> 01:58:12.440]  the giver of the law most owes the law allegiance. He of all beings should behave as though the law
[01:58:12.440 --> 01:58:19.480]  compels him. But it is the universal failing of mankind that what we are given to administer,
[01:58:19.480 --> 01:58:28.760]  we promptly presume we own. And that's it for today. Thank you all for listening. We will be
[01:58:28.760 --> 01:58:35.720]  back tomorrow night on our four hour info marathon. We'll be taking calls all night. We'll have
[01:58:35.720 --> 01:58:42.680]  Joel Esquivel and Steve Skigmore here. And we'll start out with a foreclosure. So tomorrow night's
[01:58:42.680 --> 01:58:47.960]  a good night to play Stump the Chumps. Thank you all for listening and good night.
[01:58:50.360 --> 01:58:56.840]  Bibles for America is offering absolutely free a unique study Bible called the New Testament
[01:58:56.840 --> 01:59:02.280]  Recovery Version. The New Testament Recovery Version has over 9,000 footnotes that explain
[01:59:02.280 --> 01:59:08.360]  what the Bible says verse by verse, helping you to know God and to know the meaning of life.
[01:59:08.360 --> 01:59:16.680]  Order your free copy today from Bibles for America. Call us toll free at 888-551-0102
[01:59:16.680 --> 01:59:25.000]  or visit us online at bfa.org. This translation is highly accurate and it comes with over 13,000
[01:59:25.000 --> 01:59:30.760]  cross references, plus charts and maps and an outline for every book of the Bible. This is
[01:59:30.760 --> 01:59:35.880]  truly a Bible you can understand. To get your free copy of the New Testament Recovery Version,
[01:59:35.880 --> 01:59:49.160]  call us toll free at 888-551-0102. That's 888-551-0102 or visit us online at bfa.org.
[01:59:49.160 --> 02:00:00.200]  You're listening to the Logos Radio Network at logosradionetwork.com.