[00:00.000 --> 00:06.000]  The following newsflash is brought to you by the Lone Star Lowdown, providing the daily
[00:06.000 --> 00:08.000]  bulletins for the commodities market.
[00:08.000 --> 00:21.000]  Today in history, news updates and the inside scoop into the tides of the alternative.
[00:21.000 --> 00:28.000]  Markets for the 18th of August 2015 opened up with gold at $1,117.42 an ounce.
[00:28.000 --> 00:35.000]  Silver at $14.86 an ounce, Texas crude at $41.87 a barrel, and Bitcoin is currently
[00:35.000 --> 00:43.000]  sitting at about $250 U.S. currency.
[00:43.000 --> 00:49.000]  Today in history, Wednesday, August 18, 1920, the 19th Amendment to the United States Constitution,
[00:49.000 --> 00:54.000]  which prohibits any United States citizen from being denied the right to vote on the basis of sex,
[00:54.000 --> 00:55.000]  was ratified.
[00:55.000 --> 01:01.000]  This amendment was first introduced in Congress in 1878 by Senator Aaron A. Sargent and was
[01:01.000 --> 01:08.000]  the culmination of the women's suffrage movement in the United States.
[01:08.000 --> 01:14.000]  In recent news, a group of Muslim experts from 20 nations agreed on an eight-page declaration
[01:14.000 --> 01:18.000]  urging the world's 1.6 billion Muslims to do more to fight global warming.
[01:18.000 --> 01:22.000]  They wrote that, quote, excessive pollution from fossil fuels threatens to destroy the
[01:22.000 --> 01:27.000]  gifts bestowed on us by God, whom we know as Allah, gifts such as the functioning climate,
[01:27.000 --> 01:30.000]  healthy air debris, regular seasons, and living oceans.
[01:30.000 --> 01:35.000]  It is unclear what weight the Islamic declaration will have for Muslim nations in the political
[01:35.000 --> 01:37.000]  buildup to the upcoming climate summit.
[01:37.000 --> 01:42.000]  Cardinal Peter Turkson, a key collaborator on the papal encyclical on climate change,
[01:42.000 --> 01:45.000]  praised the declaration and promised closer cooperation with Muslims.
[01:45.000 --> 01:51.000]  Christina Figures, head of the UN climate change secretariat, said in a statement, quote,
[01:51.000 --> 01:55.000]  Islam's teachings, which emphasize the duty of humans as stewards of the earth and the
[01:55.000 --> 02:00.000]  teacher's role as an appointed guide to correct behavior, provide guidance to take the right
[02:00.000 --> 02:02.000]  action on climate change.
[02:02.000 --> 02:05.000]  These are just some of the major religious efforts to prepare people for the climate
[02:05.000 --> 02:10.000]  initiatives that may come out of the UN climate change conference in Paris from November 30
[02:10.000 --> 02:17.000]  to December 11.
[02:17.000 --> 02:21.000]  The Athens government has loosed its capital restrictions, which were imposed on June 29,
[02:21.000 --> 02:25.000]  and has increased the amount of money people are allowed to move out of Greece to 500 euros
[02:25.000 --> 02:26.000]  a month.
[02:26.000 --> 02:31.000]  These restrictions initially enforced a daily withdrawal limit of 60 euros from cash machines,
[02:31.000 --> 02:36.000]  though it was later raised to 420 a week as politicians brokered a deal with the country's
[02:36.000 --> 02:37.000]  creditors.
[02:37.000 --> 02:42.000]  According to official Greek documents, citizens can also send up to 5,000 euros out of the
[02:42.000 --> 02:46.000]  country every three months to their children if they're studying abroad, and up to eight
[02:46.000 --> 02:50.000]  thousand euros with documents proving those expenses.
[02:50.000 --> 03:17.000]  This has been your Lowdown for August 18, 2015.
[03:17.000 --> 03:45.000]  Thank you very much.
[03:45.000 --> 04:05.000]  Howdy, howdy.
[04:05.000 --> 04:16.000]  This is Randy Kaufman, David Stevens, Real Law Radio on this Thursday, the 20th day of
[04:16.000 --> 04:17.000]  August, 2015.
[04:17.000 --> 04:18.000]  Welcome everyone.
[04:18.000 --> 04:28.000]  And we're going to start out tonight talking about a case that was brought to me by Mr.
[04:28.000 --> 04:29.000]  Jeff.
[04:29.000 --> 04:37.000]  Jeff listens to the show and he calls in quite a bit, and he brought to my attention a case
[04:37.000 --> 04:47.000]  where a bank in Central Texas, Central East, Central West Texas, from Big Spring.
[04:47.000 --> 04:59.000]  Big Spring is a small little town up in the La Lano Estacado, up toward the Panhandle.
[04:59.000 --> 05:07.000]  And they brought suit against the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, claiming that
[05:07.000 --> 05:09.000]  it was unconstitutional.
[05:09.000 --> 05:12.000]  I guess they're trying to get it shut down altogether.
[05:12.000 --> 05:19.000]  Well, that wasn't what the really big thing about the suit was.
[05:19.000 --> 05:30.000]  The suit itself had a number of lawyers join in with it, had the attorney generals from
[05:30.000 --> 05:45.000]  about 20 states join this suit by this small bank in Northwest Texas.
[05:45.000 --> 05:55.000]  Jeff wasn't sure why so many attorney generals, this suit was joined by the attorney generals
[05:55.000 --> 06:00.000]  of all of these different states.
[06:00.000 --> 06:09.000]  And even after I looked at the suit, I'm still not sure why there were so many joining it.
[06:09.000 --> 06:17.000]  But clearly they're just trying to get rid of the CFPB altogether.
[06:17.000 --> 06:21.000]  Let me go up to the right spot here.
[06:21.000 --> 06:33.000]  Let's see, the suit is State National Bank of Big Spring and others versus Secretary
[06:33.000 --> 06:37.000]  of the Treasury.
[06:37.000 --> 06:46.000]  And they're joined by Patrick Wayne, he's the attorney for the plaintiff.
[06:46.000 --> 06:53.000]  He's joined by the attorney general for the state of Oklahoma, attorney general for the
[06:53.000 --> 07:08.000]  state of South Carolina, the attorney general for the state of Georgia, Michigan, Nebraska,
[07:08.000 --> 07:20.000]  Alabama, Kansas, Montana, Texas, Ohio, and just on and on and on.
[07:20.000 --> 07:31.000]  I've never seen so many attorney generals from so many states join into one suit, especially
[07:31.000 --> 07:38.000]  one that seems as minor as this one, Jeff was listening.
[07:38.000 --> 07:50.000]  Jeff sent me the ruling by the court and he's mentioned the CFPB before and he's remarked
[07:50.000 --> 07:58.000]  on how they're taking these lenders on all over the country.
[07:58.000 --> 08:04.000]  And it appears that the banks are trying to fight back against this agency.
[08:04.000 --> 08:11.000]  According to Jeff, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is primarily staffed by
[08:11.000 --> 08:21.000]  young lawyers, most of whom are trying to pay off large student loan debt.
[08:21.000 --> 08:29.000]  And in going after debt collectors, they're going after debt collectors who are doing
[08:29.000 --> 08:32.000]  to other people what they're actually doing to these guys.
[08:32.000 --> 08:39.000]  So we apparently have a motivated group of lawyers here.
[08:39.000 --> 08:45.000]  But what their claims were, there were four claims.
[08:45.000 --> 08:58.000]  The first one was that the Bureau was unconstitutional because it had a single director and they
[08:58.000 --> 09:05.000]  claimed that the Bureau had to have multiple directors.
[09:05.000 --> 09:13.000]  According to the bank, independent agencies must be headed by multiple members rather
[09:13.000 --> 09:17.000]  than by a single person, that's their first claim.
[09:17.000 --> 09:30.000]  The second claim was that the challenge of constitutionality of the agency because the
[09:30.000 --> 09:43.000]  current director was appointed, the bank alleges Director Cordray's recess appointment
[09:43.000 --> 09:50.000]  and the actions he took before he was confirmed was unlawful because the appointment occurred
[09:50.000 --> 09:56.000]  during an intersession recess of insufficient length.
[09:56.000 --> 10:04.000]  Apparently, before they could appoint this waiter, I don't know, it's too complex, but
[10:04.000 --> 10:09.000]  seems kind of nitpicking like you're clutching straws.
[10:09.000 --> 10:23.000]  And the other two issues had to do with the types of regulation that CFPB was granted
[10:23.000 --> 10:32.000]  permission to pursue and those two, the courts ruled that the banks didn't have standing
[10:32.000 --> 10:40.000]  to raise the issues, that the bank didn't have enough investment in the claim to be
[10:40.000 --> 10:43.000]  able to raise the issue.
[10:43.000 --> 10:54.000]  So, it seems like a regular, a rather minor thing to have so many state's attorneys general
[10:54.000 --> 10:58.000]  joining in on this suit.
[10:58.000 --> 11:05.000]  And if I had my collar page up, I might be able to tell Jeff had called me in to discuss
[11:05.000 --> 11:11.000]  this because I really don't understand why the suit, and there he is.
[11:11.000 --> 11:13.000]  That's Jeff from Mississippi.
[11:13.000 --> 11:18.000]  Okay, anyway, thought this was an interesting issue.
[11:18.000 --> 11:27.000]  The CFPB has been really taking these guys on and pulling some rather large penalties
[11:27.000 --> 11:28.000]  from them.
[11:28.000 --> 11:34.000]  So, it seems as though we get an agency that's actually trying to do the right thing and
[11:34.000 --> 11:36.000]  wind up with everybody after them.
[11:36.000 --> 11:38.000]  We do have Jeff from Mississippi on.
[11:38.000 --> 11:43.000]  I'm going to take Jeff.
[11:43.000 --> 11:49.000]  I was hoping that Jeff Sedgwick would call in and then we'd have a scholarly discussion
[11:49.000 --> 12:00.000]  about why the Big Spring, a small bank, would file this kind of action and how such a small
[12:00.000 --> 12:05.000]  bank in Northwest Texas drew so much support.
[12:05.000 --> 12:07.000]  Anyway, let's go to Jeff from Mississippi.
[12:07.000 --> 12:09.000]  Hello, Jeff.
[12:09.000 --> 12:10.000]  Hey, Randy.
[12:10.000 --> 12:12.000]  Thanks for having me on.
[12:12.000 --> 12:13.000]  You're welcome.
[12:13.000 --> 12:15.000]  What do you have for us today?
[12:15.000 --> 12:22.000]  Okay, well, I think I'm kind of coming to a point of slowing down, but I did have a
[12:22.000 --> 12:23.000]  few questions.
[12:23.000 --> 12:29.000]  I've been listing everything out that I could possibly have a suit on.
[12:29.000 --> 12:41.000]  And so, my first question is if I've got a Title 42, 1983 suit that I could possibly
[12:41.000 --> 12:46.000]  get started, I am right in the process of an appeal.
[12:46.000 --> 12:50.000]  In fact, we're at the beginning and it will probably take about a year.
[12:50.000 --> 12:55.000]  Should I wait for that appeal for me to try to win this appeal?
[12:55.000 --> 13:01.000]  Would that make the 1982 case look better for me or should I go ahead and just start
[13:01.000 --> 13:05.000]  the Title 42 case?
[13:05.000 --> 13:15.000]  I would say start the 1942 case because the case itself is going to take some time.
[13:15.000 --> 13:23.000]  When you file the case, you will almost certainly get a Rule 12 motion to dismiss for failure
[13:23.000 --> 13:25.000]  of state of claim.
[13:25.000 --> 13:28.000]  You can count on that.
[13:28.000 --> 13:30.000]  And then you're going to object to it.
[13:30.000 --> 13:34.000]  You're going to file in opposition to the motion.
[13:34.000 --> 13:36.000]  You're going to have hearings on it.
[13:36.000 --> 13:40.000]  The judge is going to grant the motion.
[13:40.000 --> 13:42.000]  Courts are corrupt.
[13:42.000 --> 13:47.000]  The judge always grants the motion, especially when you've sued the government.
[13:47.000 --> 13:49.000]  And you're going to have to fight that.
[13:49.000 --> 13:55.000]  It's going to take a while anymore.
[13:55.000 --> 14:02.000]  The courts do everything they can or the defendants do everything they can to keep from having
[14:02.000 --> 14:05.000]  to answer your suit, no matter what it is.
[14:05.000 --> 14:09.000]  We've helped 700 people file federal lawsuits.
[14:09.000 --> 14:16.000]  And every one of our suits has drawn a Rule 12 motion to dismiss.
[14:16.000 --> 14:19.000]  You can count on that.
[14:19.000 --> 14:21.000]  It might take a while to get through it.
[14:21.000 --> 14:31.000]  So I certainly would not hold up my federal action waiting for the Court of Appeals to respond on it.
[14:31.000 --> 14:37.000]  I was looking on the Internet, and there is a website that points to Utah.
[14:37.000 --> 14:48.000]  The Utah federal seat has an actual pro se litigants guide, a guide that actually includes a complaint form
[14:48.000 --> 14:51.000]  that you can fill out, and that's your complaint.
[14:51.000 --> 15:01.000]  I found out from doing a little bit of studying that Mississippi is in the same federal district as Texas, District 5.
[15:01.000 --> 15:08.000]  And so my other question was, what is that federal seat, and can I get a hold of them?
[15:08.000 --> 15:13.000]  Would they have a complaint form that they could send me?
[15:13.000 --> 15:19.000]  Very likely every circuit has one.
[15:19.000 --> 15:21.000]  But I've looked at that.
[15:21.000 --> 15:28.000]  As a matter of fact, I'm almost certain the Fifth Circuit does have one.
[15:28.000 --> 15:33.000]  But I would avoid that.
[15:33.000 --> 15:50.000]  You might take their form and look at it and structure your suit to make sure that it has each of the sections or elements that that suit has in it.
[15:50.000 --> 16:08.000]  But just from a strategy perspective, you really don't want the court looking at your action as a pro se action.
[16:08.000 --> 16:17.000]  While they might know it's a pro se action, when they read it, you want it not to say pro se.
[16:17.000 --> 16:23.000]  You want pro se not to jump up out but at them.
[16:23.000 --> 16:26.000]  You want your document to look as though a lawyer wrote it.
[16:26.000 --> 16:33.000]  The only way the judge can tell that a lawyer didn't write it is he doesn't see a lawyer's name at the end of it.
[16:33.000 --> 16:35.000]  Got it.
[16:35.000 --> 16:39.000]  Now that goes to strategy.
[16:39.000 --> 16:52.000]  It goes to more than how to construct the plea, how to make sure you argue each of the elements, how to make sure you get your facts before the court, all those things.
[16:52.000 --> 17:00.000]  It goes to who the person is reading the document.
[17:00.000 --> 17:11.000]  Through advances in technology, our lives have greatly improved, except in the area of nutrition. People feed their pets better than they feed themselves, and it's time we changed all that.
[17:11.000 --> 17:17.000]  Our primary defense against aging and disease in this toxic environment is good nutrition.
[17:17.000 --> 17:25.000]  In a world where natural foods have been irradiated, adulterated, and mutilated, young Jevity can provide the nutrients you need.
[17:25.000 --> 17:31.000]  Logos Radio Network gets many requests to endorse all sorts of products, most of which we reject.
[17:31.000 --> 17:39.000]  We have come to trust young Jevity so much, we became a marketing distributor along with Alex Jones, Ben Fuchs, and many others.
[17:39.000 --> 17:47.000]  When you order from logosradionetwork.com, your health will improve as you help support quality radio.
[17:47.000 --> 17:51.000]  As you realize the benefits of young Jevity, you may want to join us.
[17:51.000 --> 18:00.000]  As a distributor, you can experience improved health, help your friends and family, and increase your income. Order now.
[18:00.000 --> 18:05.000]  Are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters, or even lawsuits?
[18:05.000 --> 18:09.000]  Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Mears Proven Method.
[18:09.000 --> 18:14.000]  Michael Mears has won six cases in federal court against debt collectors, and now you can win, too.
[18:14.000 --> 18:21.000]  You'll get step-by-step instructions in plain English on how to win in court using federal civil rights statutes,
[18:21.000 --> 18:26.000]  what to do when contacted by phone, mail, or court summons, how to answer letters and phone calls,
[18:26.000 --> 18:34.000]  how to get debt collectors out of your credit report, how to turn the financial tables on them and make them pay you to go away.
[18:34.000 --> 18:38.000]  The Michael Mears Proven Method is the solution for how to stop debt collectors.
[18:38.000 --> 18:44.000]  Personal consultation is available as well. For more information, please visit ruleoflawradio.com
[18:44.000 --> 18:49.000]  and click on the blue Michael Mears banner, or email michaelmears at yahoo.com.
[18:49.000 --> 19:00.000]  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 collectors now.
[19:00.000 --> 19:09.000]  You are listening to the Logos Radio Network, the LogosRadioNetwork.com.
[19:09.000 --> 19:31.000]  Okay, we are back. Randy Kelton, ruleoflawradio.
[19:31.000 --> 19:35.000]  And Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, ruleoflawradio.
[19:35.000 --> 19:42.000]  It's Randy Kelton, Friday Nights. Anyway, talking to Jeff in Mississippi.
[19:42.000 --> 19:50.000]  And there's something more, something to a basic underlying strategy.
[19:50.000 --> 20:07.000]  Find some 42 U.S. Code 1983 suits. The things for which you can file this particular suit are somewhat restricted.
[20:07.000 --> 20:14.000]  So you're likely to find cases that are similar to yours.
[20:14.000 --> 20:19.000]  Find cases where someone has sued based on abuses of the court or whatever.
[20:19.000 --> 20:32.000]  Look at the structures. Look at how they put the suits together, what sections come first, what the order is.
[20:32.000 --> 20:43.000]  There's a particular styling that the Fed likes, and each Fed circuit has its own peculiarities.
[20:43.000 --> 20:53.000]  But primarily when the judge looks at the document, it will look like a hundred others that he has looked at.
[20:53.000 --> 20:59.000]  You'll have the parties in the same place that the judge would expect to find them.
[20:59.000 --> 21:09.000]  You will find the jurisdiction, and you want the judge to find the case law that he expects to see.
[21:09.000 --> 21:17.000]  As a matter of fact, they don't have a current copy of O'Connor's forms.
[21:17.000 --> 21:29.000]  But I suggest highly that you get O'Connor's litigation guide for the federal court.
[21:29.000 --> 21:35.000]  It has all the fill-in-the-blank stuff you'd want.
[21:35.000 --> 21:46.000]  They'll have a fill-in-the-blanks lawsuit, a federal lawsuit, if not one specifically for a 1983 suit.
[21:46.000 --> 21:59.000]  But yet, this is a format that lawyers will use so that they don't have to do all the details by hand.
[21:59.000 --> 22:07.000]  They've already got a format like O'Connor's has forms for most any motion of pleading you can think of.
[22:07.000 --> 22:13.000]  And there are other litigation guides besides O'Connor's.
[22:13.000 --> 22:21.000]  If you can find a litigation guide specifically geared to Mississippi, it would be even better.
[22:21.000 --> 22:30.000]  We talked about this before. Were you able to find a litigation guide for Mississippi?
[22:30.000 --> 22:35.000]  Oh, hold on, Jeff. Somebody didn't unmute you.
[22:35.000 --> 22:40.000]  There you go, Jeff. Were you able to find a litigation guide for Mississippi?
[22:40.000 --> 22:45.000]  Well, only the rules of court for the state and for county.
[22:45.000 --> 22:50.000]  Okay. A litigation guide would be a private company.
[22:50.000 --> 22:52.000]  No, no, I have not.
[22:52.000 --> 23:01.000]  You might call a couple of lawyers in Mississippi and ask them if Mississippi has a litigation guide.
[23:01.000 --> 23:02.000]  Got it.
[23:02.000 --> 23:10.000]  Is there any company that produces one? See, O'Connor's is a private company, and they produce this.
[23:10.000 --> 23:21.000]  I have Texas O'Connor's civil trials. And once you've looked at that, you'll say, oh, my goodness.
[23:21.000 --> 23:26.000]  You just pick the issue you want to argue. It's in there.
[23:26.000 --> 23:34.000]  They'll tell you how to prepare the motion. They have all the basic case law in there.
[23:34.000 --> 23:46.000]  They will have literally a fill in the blanks. Fill in the blanks, select the paragraph, because in going down through it,
[23:46.000 --> 23:51.000]  they'll list just for a particular motion, all of the things that can be argued under that motion,
[23:51.000 --> 23:56.000]  and you pick the paragraph that suits your situation.
[23:56.000 --> 24:06.000]  Once you've walked through all of their blanks, then you go back in and add in the sections that are peculiar to your suit.
[24:06.000 --> 24:15.000]  That way you have a suit that when the judge gets it in front of him, he's seeing this same format over and over.
[24:15.000 --> 24:19.000]  I'll give you an idea of how powerful this is.
[24:19.000 --> 24:24.000]  Friend of mine is preparing a motion for temporary restraining order.
[24:24.000 --> 24:31.000]  So he watched one up, sends it to me, asked me what I thought. It was Ken Magnuson. I said, he scrapped Ken.
[24:31.000 --> 24:37.000]  He said, well, you think you could do better? So I said, yeah, I do. So I sent him one.
[24:37.000 --> 24:45.000]  He went to court with it. He didn't expect the lawyer on the other side to show up, but he did.
[24:45.000 --> 24:51.000]  They went into court. The judge handed the lawyer his hat, gave Ken the restraining order.
[24:51.000 --> 24:59.000]  And the lawyer came out and he said, Mr. Magnuson, are you an attorney? He said, no, I'm not. My brother is.
[24:59.000 --> 25:07.000]  He said, did you write this? He said, well, I had some help. He said, this is very good.
[25:07.000 --> 25:14.000]  Ken told me that, and I thought, what the heck? What is going on here?
[25:14.000 --> 25:21.000]  That was O'Connor's fill-in-the-blank form. I just filled in the blanks.
[25:21.000 --> 25:28.000]  I didn't tell Ken at the time. I let him think I knew what I was doing, at least for a little while I finally told him.
[25:28.000 --> 25:37.000]  But I thought about that. Why would that lawyer say that? And then it occurred to me.
[25:37.000 --> 25:44.000]  Law firms send young lawyers to handle procès because they're easier to deal with.
[25:44.000 --> 25:57.000]  And this young lawyer gets in there and he sees this motion and he said, holy crap, that looks just exactly like one our law firm uses.
[25:57.000 --> 26:03.000]  Same case law, everything. And he's thinking, how the heck did he do that?
[26:03.000 --> 26:13.000]  He wasn't aware that they were using O'Connor's forms. This makes sense.
[26:13.000 --> 26:20.000]  Do not try to figure all this stuff out yourself.
[26:20.000 --> 26:26.000]  You may get it figured out and you may get it figured out correctly.
[26:26.000 --> 26:37.000]  The problem is, is you won't figure it out in a way that's consistent with other pleadings of the same nature
[26:37.000 --> 26:45.000]  and in a way that the judge won't recognize that you figured it all out.
[26:45.000 --> 26:48.000]  The judge will not be impressed.
[26:48.000 --> 26:58.000]  If you bring the judge 20 cases that he's never seen before on topics that he deals with all the time,
[26:58.000 --> 27:07.000]  he's going to look at this and he's going to say, you think I'm going to read those 20 cases? Eh, denied.
[27:07.000 --> 27:17.000]  Now that may not be right, but at the end of the day, on the other end of the pleading, you're dealing with a human being.
[27:17.000 --> 27:23.000]  You're dealing with someone who's busy, who reads pleadings all day, every day,
[27:23.000 --> 27:30.000]  and they get one of these pleadings that's totally different from anything they've ever seen.
[27:30.000 --> 27:42.000]  Consider if you were the judge. You come in to work today and you've got 20 motions you've got to read before trial starts.
[27:42.000 --> 27:49.000]  And you get this one that's not like anything you've ever seen, obviously written by a pro se.
[27:49.000 --> 27:54.000]  He's got good case law, but it's a case law I've never seen before.
[27:54.000 --> 28:02.000]  Man, I don't want to go look up all these cases. I don't have time for this. Eh, denied.
[28:02.000 --> 28:09.000]  So, this should save you a tremendous amount of work.
[28:09.000 --> 28:22.000]  You develop your primary skill as a pro se researcher. You become an accomplished clitoris.
[28:22.000 --> 28:31.000]  I take it you've done a considerable amount of research on the issues that you're going to collect.
[28:31.000 --> 28:34.000]  I've also done a lot of wrong writing.
[28:34.000 --> 28:38.000]  Say that again, a lot of what?
[28:38.000 --> 28:42.000]  I've done a lot of writing. I've done all my forms, but a lot of them were done incorrectly.
[28:42.000 --> 28:48.000]  They basically kind of made fun of me in court and said, well, this was done wrong and that was done wrong.
[28:48.000 --> 28:51.000]  So, I've learned a lot of good lessons.
[28:51.000 --> 28:59.000]  Good. Well, the best lesson you can learn is the litigation guide.
[28:59.000 --> 29:07.000]  The litigation guide will walk you down through all those details that these guys are complaining about.
[29:07.000 --> 29:08.000]  All right.
[29:08.000 --> 29:14.000]  So, first, make your suit look exactly like someone else's. I guess that's second.
[29:14.000 --> 29:22.000]  First, develop the causes of action you're going to claim. Do you have those listed?
[29:22.000 --> 29:25.000]  Yes.
[29:25.000 --> 29:36.000]  Have you looked up the pattern jury charges for those causes of action?
[29:36.000 --> 29:38.000]  I've never heard of it.
[29:38.000 --> 29:41.000]  Oh, okay.
[29:41.000 --> 29:44.000]  We never talked about that, no.
[29:44.000 --> 29:47.000]  Okay, you're going to like this. This will save you a lot.
[29:47.000 --> 29:52.000]  Hang on, we're about to go to Blake, Randy Kelton, we're with Debra Stevens, we're with our radio.
[29:52.000 --> 30:02.000]  I'll call you number 512-646-1984. We'll be right back.
[30:02.000 --> 30:06.000]  Millions of Americans take medication for temporary relief from arthritis,
[30:06.000 --> 30:11.000]  but now a simple mind's trick is cutting arthritis pain in half without drugs.
[30:11.000 --> 30:16.000]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, back with some fascinating new research. Next.
[30:16.000 --> 30:22.000]  Privacy is under attack. When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[30:22.000 --> 30:27.000]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[30:27.000 --> 30:32.000]  So protect your rights. Say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself.
[30:32.000 --> 30:35.000]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[30:35.000 --> 30:42.000]  This message is brought to you by Startpage.com, the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[30:42.000 --> 30:46.000]  Start over with Startpage.
[30:46.000 --> 30:50.000]  Arthritis or a painful inflammation of the joints affects millions of Americans.
[30:50.000 --> 30:55.000]  There's no cure, only temporary relief through painkillers and physical therapy.
[30:55.000 --> 31:00.000]  But British researchers have discovered a simple optical illusion that eases arthritis pain.
[31:00.000 --> 31:05.000]  Volunteers place their hands into a box with a camera that projects images of their fingers
[31:05.000 --> 31:09.000]  being virtually stretched and shrunk by someone pulling them gently.
[31:09.000 --> 31:14.000]  The images cut patients' pain in half and gave them increased range of motion.
[31:14.000 --> 31:17.000]  For some sufferers, the pain went away entirely.
[31:17.000 --> 31:23.000]  It's amazing, but this simple illusion shows the power of our minds over matter and over pain.
[31:23.000 --> 31:31.000]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht for Startpage.com, the world's most private search engine.
[31:31.000 --> 31:36.000]  This is Building 7, a 47-story skyscraper that fell on the afternoon of September 11.
[31:36.000 --> 31:38.000]  The government says that fire brought it down.
[31:38.000 --> 31:43.000]  However, 1,500 architects and engineers have concluded it was a controlled demolition.
[31:43.000 --> 31:46.000]  Over 6,000 of my fellow service members have given their lives.
[31:46.000 --> 31:49.000]  And thousands of my fellow first responders are dying.
[31:49.000 --> 31:50.000]  I'm not a conspiracy theorist.
[31:50.000 --> 31:51.000]  I'm a structural engineer.
[31:51.000 --> 31:53.000]  I'm a New York City correction office.
[31:53.000 --> 31:54.000]  I'm an Air Force pilot.
[31:54.000 --> 31:55.000]  I'm a father who lost his son.
[31:55.000 --> 31:58.000]  We're Americans, and we deserve the truth.
[31:58.000 --> 32:01.000]  Go to RememberBuilding7.org today.
[32:01.000 --> 32:05.000]  You feel tired when talking about important topics like money and politics?
[32:05.000 --> 32:06.000]  Boring!
[32:06.000 --> 32:09.000]  Are you confused by words like the Constitution or the Federal Reserve?
[32:09.000 --> 32:10.000]  What?
[32:10.000 --> 32:14.000]  If so, you may be diagnosed with the deadliest disease known today, stupidity.
[32:14.000 --> 32:16.000]  Hi, my name is Steve Holt.
[32:16.000 --> 32:20.000]  And like millions of other Americans, I was diagnosed with stupidity at an early age.
[32:20.000 --> 32:26.000]  I had no idea that the number one cause of the disease is found in almost every home in America, the television.
[32:26.000 --> 32:30.000]  Unfortunately, that puts most Americans at risk of catching stupidity.
[32:30.000 --> 32:31.000]  But there is hope.
[32:31.000 --> 32:37.000]  The staff at Brave New Books have helped me and thousands of other foxaholics suffering from sports zombieism recover.
[32:37.000 --> 32:44.000]  And because of Brave New Books, I now enjoy reading and watching educational documentaries without feeling tired or uninterested.
[32:44.000 --> 32:56.000]  So if you or anybody you know suffers from stupidity, then you need to call 512-480-2503 or visit them in 1904 Guadalupe or bravenewbookstore.com.
[32:56.000 --> 33:02.000]  Side effects from using Brave New Books products may include discernment and enlarged vocabulary and an overall increase in mental functioning.
[33:02.000 --> 33:12.000]  Live, free speech radio, logosradionetwork.com.
[33:12.000 --> 33:20.000]  Yeah, Mr. Officer, you're taking the line ahead.
[33:20.000 --> 33:24.000]  Won't you follow the law of the land?
[33:24.000 --> 33:27.000]  I don't understand.
[33:27.000 --> 33:30.000]  Which others do you think are going to serve?
[33:30.000 --> 33:32.000]  Not the Arabs.
[33:32.000 --> 33:35.000]  Officer!
[33:35.000 --> 33:38.000]  When you gonna stop abuse?
[33:38.000 --> 33:41.000]  Your power.
[33:41.000 --> 33:42.000]  Okay, we are back.
[33:42.000 --> 33:47.000]  Randy Kelton with Live Radio and we're talking to Jeff in Mississippi.
[33:47.000 --> 33:52.000]  Okay, Jeff, this is going to make your life very much easier.
[33:52.000 --> 33:59.000]  I just did a search over the break for pattern jury charges Mississippi.
[33:59.000 --> 34:10.000]  First hit I got was Mississippi plain language model jury instructions.
[34:10.000 --> 34:11.000]  Okay.
[34:11.000 --> 34:14.000]  And look that up.
[34:14.000 --> 34:32.000]  At the end of the day, when your both sides are done with everything they're going to present, the judge is going to say to the jury, this is what you must find.
[34:32.000 --> 34:40.000]  That you need to know when you first put into paper.
[34:40.000 --> 34:44.000]  What does the jury have to find?
[34:44.000 --> 35:10.000]  And then as you put together your case, you have to be brutal and no matter how well crafted or how compelling your issues and arguments are, they must always be carefully weighed against the pattern jury charges.
[35:10.000 --> 35:16.000]  Does this go to something the jury must find?
[35:16.000 --> 35:22.000]  You can get into court and argue irrelevant issues all you want to.
[35:22.000 --> 35:30.000]  And we all watch these programs where the lawyer jumps up, objection, relevance.
[35:30.000 --> 35:37.000]  Well, for the most part, the lawyer on the other side is not going to do that.
[35:37.000 --> 35:48.000]  He's going to let you argue all the irrelevant issues you want to and he's not going to say anything because he don't care.
[35:48.000 --> 35:57.000]  Because he knows the judge is sitting up there nodding thoughtfully and he may actually be listening.
[35:57.000 --> 36:00.000]  You may find what you're telling them interesting.
[36:00.000 --> 36:07.000]  But as to the adjudication of the case, it is irrelevant.
[36:07.000 --> 36:15.000]  I once said as a mock judge, a judge in a mock trial against a friend of mine who happens to be in went to prison.
[36:15.000 --> 36:26.000]  I haven't heard whether he's gotten out or not, but he got up there and started arguing all of these patriot mythology issues.
[36:26.000 --> 36:29.000]  And now I'm in a different position.
[36:29.000 --> 36:34.000]  It's like changing sides on a chessboard.
[36:34.000 --> 36:41.000]  Sitting as the judge, I had a whole different calculus.
[36:41.000 --> 36:44.000]  And I'm thinking, you know, all of that's interesting.
[36:44.000 --> 36:54.000]  And, you know, he has to know that I'm on his side and I agree with him how corrupt the courts are and how the courts don't have jurisdiction and blah, blah, blah.
[36:54.000 --> 36:56.000]  Well, OK, that's all cool.
[36:56.000 --> 37:01.000]  But what does that have to do with the issue at hand?
[37:01.000 --> 37:03.000]  And here I'm sitting as the judge.
[37:03.000 --> 37:07.000]  So it's not my place to say you screw with that guy.
[37:07.000 --> 37:12.000]  So being a mock trial, I called a recess.
[37:12.000 --> 37:15.000]  And he had a guy trying to help him.
[37:15.000 --> 37:25.000]  I told him that if you will take this person out behind the building here and shoot him, I will not hold you responsible.
[37:25.000 --> 37:33.000]  But if you let him dictate your arguments in court, you're going to go to jail.
[37:33.000 --> 37:36.000]  But he couldn't get it.
[37:36.000 --> 37:39.000]  And that was a problem for me then.
[37:39.000 --> 37:44.000]  He was he was fighting for his liberty.
[37:44.000 --> 37:55.000]  And we're trying to tell him that the fight you're trying to have is not the fight you need to be having at this time.
[37:55.000 --> 37:56.000]  And he couldn't get it.
[37:56.000 --> 38:01.000]  And I didn't have a way of showing him what else to do aside from what he was doing.
[38:01.000 --> 38:08.000]  But then I come across a pattern of jury charges and bingo.
[38:08.000 --> 38:14.000]  That's what you need to guide all of your arguments.
[38:14.000 --> 38:29.000]  If you have a particular cause of action in civil, all of your causes of action are defined similar to how in criminal all the criminal charges are defined.
[38:29.000 --> 38:34.000]  You understand that criminal is a subset of civil.
[38:34.000 --> 38:44.000]  It's really a civil case, but it's a civil case that's only the state can prosecute.
[38:44.000 --> 38:48.000]  Only the state can be a litigant in this kind of case.
[38:48.000 --> 38:55.000]  But otherwise, they're essentially the same.
[38:55.000 --> 39:01.000]  When you get into the civil action, only argue what must be argued.
[39:01.000 --> 39:08.000]  Only argue the elements of each individually defined cause of action.
[39:08.000 --> 39:15.000]  And if you're filing in the federal court, then you have federal causes of action, which should be relatively easy to locate.
[39:15.000 --> 39:25.000]  If you're filing in a 42 U.S. Code 1983 suit, it should be even easier.
[39:25.000 --> 39:33.000]  Did you do a search while we were talking on jury charges?
[39:33.000 --> 39:37.000]  No, I don't have a computer where I'm standing.
[39:37.000 --> 39:39.000]  So I'm just writing this down.
[39:39.000 --> 39:43.000]  Mississippi jury instructions is what you Googled.
[39:43.000 --> 39:46.000]  Yes.
[39:46.000 --> 39:57.000]  Intentional torts, abusive process, alienation of affection, assault, battery, defamation, false arrest, false imprisonment, fraud.
[39:57.000 --> 40:05.000]  Intentional affliction, emotional distress, invasion of privacy, malicious prosecution.
[40:05.000 --> 40:09.000]  Negligence actions, legal malpractice, medical.
[40:09.000 --> 40:15.000]  It lists all of these causes of action.
[40:15.000 --> 40:24.000]  And then it goes down and it tells you exactly what you have to prove.
[40:24.000 --> 40:33.000]  Each of the elements, just like in a criminal, criminal case has certain elements and all of them have to be proven.
[40:33.000 --> 40:37.000]  Your case will have each cause of action will have a set of elements.
[40:37.000 --> 40:39.000]  This is not so difficult.
[40:39.000 --> 40:42.000]  It's like a tech manual.
[40:42.000 --> 40:46.000]  And it will act as a guiding framework for everything you do.
[40:46.000 --> 40:53.000]  So first off, go find patterned jury charges.
[40:53.000 --> 41:00.000]  Once you have those, now you know all of the issues you have to, all of the elements of what you have to bring.
[41:00.000 --> 41:07.000]  And then go find cases, preferably in Mississippi.
[41:07.000 --> 41:12.000]  If you're filing federal, anywhere in the Fifth Circuit will be good.
[41:12.000 --> 41:22.000]  Find any Fifth Circuit case that goes to the element that you're bringing.
[41:22.000 --> 41:28.000]  Look for a number of them and look at the structure.
[41:28.000 --> 41:31.000]  See how they're put together though.
[41:31.000 --> 41:38.000]  There is a bit of variation and oftentimes there's a lot of variation, but there shouldn't be.
[41:38.000 --> 41:41.000]  These all should be very consistent.
[41:41.000 --> 41:46.000]  I have O'Connor's federal forms.
[41:46.000 --> 41:56.000]  So if you email me off the air, and I think it's 2008, it's kind of old, but the forms themselves don't change much.
[41:56.000 --> 42:03.000]  We might want to try to find a later one.
[42:03.000 --> 42:07.000]  You're in Tennessee?
[42:07.000 --> 42:10.000]  I live in Arkansas. I live right above you.
[42:10.000 --> 42:14.000]  Oh, okay.
[42:14.000 --> 42:25.000]  I'm trying to think of where, if you can locate a litigation guide that's used in your area.
[42:25.000 --> 42:29.000]  Call some attorney firms.
[42:29.000 --> 42:32.000]  I had someone do this in Amarillo.
[42:32.000 --> 42:39.000]  I had her call attorney firms and tell them that she was homeschooling her kids,
[42:39.000 --> 42:46.000]  and she was doing some courses on civics,
[42:46.000 --> 42:51.000]  and that she wanted to give them kind of a basic in law
[42:51.000 --> 42:55.000]  and ask, do you have any old litigation guides laying around?
[42:55.000 --> 42:57.000]  This is how it works.
[42:57.000 --> 43:02.000]  The litigation guide puts together how to write all these motions and pleadings
[43:02.000 --> 43:06.000]  and how to structure them and what case law to use,
[43:06.000 --> 43:11.000]  and every couple of years they will reproduce these,
[43:11.000 --> 43:18.000]  because the lawyer coming before the court wants to quote the latest case law.
[43:18.000 --> 43:28.000]  If one of the cases used in the jurisdictions section of the motion or pleading,
[43:28.000 --> 43:38.000]  if one of those cases has been cited by another case, more recent,
[43:38.000 --> 43:45.000]  they have a set of controlling cases, but they don't want to cite the controlling case,
[43:45.000 --> 43:49.000]  like Scrooge's 1945 case.
[43:49.000 --> 43:52.000]  We don't want to be citing Scrooge's.
[43:52.000 --> 44:00.000]  We want to be citing a case that cites Scrooge's, that used Scrooge's.
[44:00.000 --> 44:15.000]  Hello, my name is Stuart Smith from naturespureorganics.com,
[44:15.000 --> 44:20.000]  and I would like to invite you to come by our store at 1904 Guadalupe Street, Sweet D, here in Austin, Texas.
[44:20.000 --> 44:22.000]  I'm Brave New Books and Chase Payne.
[44:22.000 --> 44:26.000]  To see all our fantastic health and wellness products with your very own eyes,
[44:26.000 --> 44:30.000]  clean the oil, lotion candles, olive oil, soaps, and colloidal silver and gold,
[44:30.000 --> 44:37.000]  call 512-264-4043 or find us online at naturespureorganics.com.
[44:37.000 --> 44:43.000]  That's 512-264-4043, naturespureorganics.com.
[44:43.000 --> 44:47.000]  Don't forget to like us on Facebook for information on events and our products.
[44:47.000 --> 45:01.000]  Naturespureorganics.com.
[45:01.000 --> 45:04.000]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[45:04.000 --> 45:07.000]  Win your case without an attorney with Juris Dictionary,
[45:07.000 --> 45:15.000]  the affordable, easy to understand, 4-CD course that will show you how in 24 hours, step by step.
[45:15.000 --> 45:19.000]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing.
[45:19.000 --> 45:23.000]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[45:23.000 --> 45:28.000]  Thousands have won with our step-by-step course, and now you can too.
[45:28.000 --> 45:34.000]  Juris Dictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case-winning experience.
[45:34.000 --> 45:39.000]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand
[45:39.000 --> 45:43.000]  about the principles and practices that control our American courts.
[45:43.000 --> 45:49.000]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases,
[45:49.000 --> 45:52.000]  pro se tactics, and much more.
[45:52.000 --> 46:02.000]  Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner or call toll-free, 866-LAW-EZ.
[46:02.000 --> 46:21.000]  Music
[46:21.000 --> 46:23.000]  Okay, hey, we are back.
[46:23.000 --> 46:26.000]  Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, rule of law radio.
[46:26.000 --> 46:29.000]  And I ran off the cliff again.
[46:29.000 --> 46:32.000]  I do that on occasion.
[46:32.000 --> 46:38.000]  And running off the cliff is where, when I'm speaking, we have bumper music.
[46:38.000 --> 46:44.000]  We also have a suppressor on the system so that if you're speaking and I'm speaking at the same time,
[46:44.000 --> 46:47.000]  your voice will be pushed below mine.
[46:47.000 --> 46:53.000]  Well, the bumper music gets pushed below my voice when I'm talking, so I don't hear it.
[46:53.000 --> 46:55.000]  And I just talk right to the end of the show.
[46:55.000 --> 47:04.000]  Where I was at is a strategy for building these documents.
[47:04.000 --> 47:14.000]  Always use litigation guides because they will, we don't use them so that we have all the latest case law.
[47:14.000 --> 47:19.000]  Lawyers, they want to have all the latest case law.
[47:19.000 --> 47:27.000]  We have screws, screws is passed in 45, and then it has a whole line of progeny.
[47:27.000 --> 47:32.000]  We don't want to just quote screws straight up.
[47:32.000 --> 47:38.000]  We want a case that's really close to ours that quoted screws.
[47:38.000 --> 47:46.000]  So this case is almost exactly like ours and don't even imagine that you have a case that's unique
[47:46.000 --> 47:50.000]  because none of us do all of these things that we're complaining about.
[47:50.000 --> 47:53.000]  Hundreds of people complain about the same things.
[47:53.000 --> 47:59.000]  So there's going to be cases very, very close to being exactly on your point.
[47:59.000 --> 48:12.000]  So we want case law that's the most current, that cites the case, the controlling cases.
[48:12.000 --> 48:16.000]  And lawyers, they're learning counsel.
[48:16.000 --> 48:18.000]  They absolutely need the latest law.
[48:18.000 --> 48:26.000]  So every time an updated version of the litigation guides comes out, they run out and buy it.
[48:26.000 --> 48:32.000]  I had this woman in Amarillo call around the lawyers, the second lawyer she called.
[48:32.000 --> 48:39.000]  He said, do you have a pickup truck or a station wagon?
[48:39.000 --> 48:43.000]  Eddie Craig from the Monday Night Show, she called him. He did that.
[48:43.000 --> 48:45.000]  And that's what they told him.
[48:45.000 --> 48:54.000]  He needs a truck because they repurchase these things every time a new set comes out.
[48:54.000 --> 48:56.000]  They never get around to throwing out the old ones,
[48:56.000 --> 49:02.000]  but they do not want their lawyers using a two-year-old litigation guide.
[49:02.000 --> 49:12.000]  They want their lawyers using litigation guide that's exactly the same and as up to date as the next lawyer.
[49:12.000 --> 49:14.000]  But you're a pro se, you're not that picky.
[49:14.000 --> 49:20.000]  Ninety-nine percent of this basic case law never changes.
[49:20.000 --> 49:26.000]  So the basic structure of your pleading will always be the same.
[49:26.000 --> 49:29.000]  Everybody has to plead jurisdiction.
[49:29.000 --> 49:32.000]  They plead the parties.
[49:32.000 --> 49:42.000]  And every particular type of claim has certain elements that are extremely consistent and they have to be pled.
[49:42.000 --> 49:46.000]  And the litigation guide will show you exactly how to plead them.
[49:46.000 --> 49:55.000]  So call around a few lawyers, ask what litigation guides they use and ask if they have any old ones.
[49:55.000 --> 50:03.000]  And almost certainly you'll find some lawyers that will, especially if you're in the Fifth Circuit and Fed,
[50:03.000 --> 50:07.000]  call around lawyers that do federal pleadings.
[50:07.000 --> 50:12.000]  If they're in the Fifth, they're almost certainly using O'Connor's. O'Connor's is by far the best.
[50:12.000 --> 50:17.000]  Nicole O'Connor was a Texas Supreme Court judge.
[50:17.000 --> 50:21.000]  Anyway, find a litigation guide first.
[50:21.000 --> 50:31.000]  And once you have all of the basic elements down, the basic pleading elements,
[50:31.000 --> 50:34.000]  then pull up each of your causes of action.
[50:34.000 --> 50:40.000]  O'Connor's has federal causes of action.
[50:40.000 --> 50:43.000]  They have a book on it. It is wonderful.
[50:43.000 --> 50:52.000]  If you can, it's only, you can get it for about $120 to $140 for each of their books.
[50:52.000 --> 50:55.000]  It varies around that amount somewhat.
[50:55.000 --> 50:58.000]  You can order it for the most recent from O'Connor's.
[50:58.000 --> 51:07.000]  And with them, if you get the litigation guide, you'll most certainly, almost certainly get their blank forms.
[51:07.000 --> 51:12.000]  So you start out your suit by filling in the blank form.
[51:12.000 --> 51:17.000]  Now all you've got left are your particular arguments.
[51:17.000 --> 51:24.000]  Then go find someone who's argued your issue.
[51:24.000 --> 51:32.000]  Especially, most, you want to find someone who's argued your issue in one.
[51:32.000 --> 51:37.000]  And look at their argument.
[51:37.000 --> 51:44.000]  Look at the opposing side's argument, if you can find it.
[51:44.000 --> 51:48.000]  And then look at the ruling.
[51:48.000 --> 51:52.000]  Now you pull out your plagiarizing tool.
[51:52.000 --> 51:58.000]  And the first thing you want to plagiarize is the order.
[51:58.000 --> 52:09.000]  The orders in courts, especially Supreme Court, I mean the federal court cases, are extremely well written.
[52:09.000 --> 52:20.000]  And they adhere very strongly to the adage, never make a proactive statement of law out of your own mouth.
[52:20.000 --> 52:24.000]  They almost never make a statement of law out of their own mouth.
[52:24.000 --> 52:32.000]  The only time they do is when they're entering a decision that changes law.
[52:32.000 --> 52:40.000]  They only issue a proactive statement of law out of their own mouth when there is no law on the subject.
[52:40.000 --> 52:45.000]  Everything else is, in this case we rule this, in this case we rule that.
[52:45.000 --> 52:57.000]  So I take that out, drop it into my document, and then the only thing I write are connections and transitions.
[52:57.000 --> 53:11.000]  Ninety-five percent of all the work you do producing documents should be connections and transitions, tenses and cases.
[53:11.000 --> 53:18.000]  Change the tense and case of the document so it fits your circumstances.
[53:18.000 --> 53:21.000]  Jeff, am I making sense here?
[53:21.000 --> 53:25.000]  Yeah, yeah, I've got a lot of work ahead of me, but yeah, I'm on the right track.
[53:25.000 --> 53:29.000]  Okay, yeah, this will save you so much time.
[53:29.000 --> 53:33.000]  Almost everything you can think of has been adjudicated.
[53:33.000 --> 53:35.000]  So you want to find what's been adjudicated.
[53:35.000 --> 53:41.000]  I've done all the work for you and plagiarize as much as possible.
[53:41.000 --> 53:50.000]  Anymore, if I'm having to write an argument, that means I haven't done my homework.
[53:50.000 --> 53:58.000]  And one other thing about legal research, I used to depend on Lexis or Westlaw.
[53:58.000 --> 54:04.000]  These are litigation libraries.
[54:04.000 --> 54:08.000]  They are repositories of all the case law.
[54:08.000 --> 54:28.000]  However, they are archaic in that they have reproduced in an electronic format a time-tested method of legal research.
[54:28.000 --> 54:36.000]  We tended to take the way people did research back before we had computers and we had to go down to the legal library
[54:36.000 --> 54:38.000]  and look through all of the case books.
[54:38.000 --> 54:44.000]  I know we've all seen movies where a lawyer, you go into a lawyer's office
[54:44.000 --> 54:50.000]  and these walls are lined with these books and they're all the, the bindings are all the same.
[54:50.000 --> 54:58.000]  Southwest Reporter, Federal Reporter, Pacific Reporter, they have all the case law in them.
[54:58.000 --> 55:04.000]  Well, that was time-tested over hundreds of years.
[55:04.000 --> 55:08.000]  It evolved a way of doing it.
[55:08.000 --> 55:11.000]  But it's archaic.
[55:11.000 --> 55:13.000]  It's not the best way to do it.
[55:13.000 --> 55:15.000]  Lawyers still do it that way.
[55:15.000 --> 55:24.000]  But Google and other search engines, StarterPage and all these others have changed everything.
[55:24.000 --> 55:28.000]  The Internet has changed everything.
[55:28.000 --> 55:34.000]  All of these large volumes of printed case law gone.
[55:34.000 --> 55:39.000]  The last 10 or 15 years, they've been dumping them in the dumps by the truckloads.
[55:39.000 --> 55:44.000]  Nobody in their right mind uses those anymore.
[55:44.000 --> 55:47.000]  Everybody uses an electronic format.
[55:47.000 --> 55:59.000]  But what has happened with search engines because of the way search engines do what they do,
[55:59.000 --> 56:05.000]  it's changed the way you need to look for your case law.
[56:05.000 --> 56:15.000]  Now you search for your case law based on the way an argument is worded
[56:15.000 --> 56:26.000]  because the search engines go in and look at documents and look for strings of verbiage.
[56:26.000 --> 56:35.000]  In programming, strings are a line of characters, and it may be child abuse.
[56:35.000 --> 56:42.000]  They may go look for that series of characters in line.
[56:42.000 --> 56:45.000]  And they'll pull all the documents that has that in it.
[56:45.000 --> 56:50.000]  Well, if you do child abuse, you'll get umpteen million hits.
[56:50.000 --> 56:56.000]  So we need to think creatively.
[56:56.000 --> 57:05.000]  We look at a case, and how is the verbiage in this case peculiar?
[57:05.000 --> 57:11.000]  What part of the verbiage is structured in a peculiar way
[57:11.000 --> 57:19.000]  that only cases of this type would tend to have verbiage structured this way?
[57:19.000 --> 57:23.000]  Or maybe not one string, but more than one string.
[57:23.000 --> 57:28.000]  You can look for this and this and this.
[57:28.000 --> 57:33.000]  And the system will go out and look through everything in the planet just about
[57:33.000 --> 57:36.000]  and look for these strings.
[57:36.000 --> 57:42.000]  And then they will bring you cases that, or either, they'll either bring you cases,
[57:42.000 --> 57:48.000]  and this is all you can get with a Lexus or Westlaw, unless you pay a whole lot of money.
[57:48.000 --> 57:53.000]  Lexus, for $3,000 a month, I can get briefs and pleadings.
[57:53.000 --> 57:56.000]  But that's way too expensive.
[57:56.000 --> 58:01.000]  On the internet, you can get briefs and pleadings.
[58:01.000 --> 58:02.000]  And I'll explain why.
[58:02.000 --> 58:06.000]  We're about to go to break, and I'll explain why on the other side,
[58:06.000 --> 58:10.000]  but just briefly, we've got about 45 seconds.
[58:10.000 --> 58:15.000]  Lawyers get a lot of their work from other lawyers.
[58:15.000 --> 58:21.000]  Lawyers only litigate what they always litigate, so they don't make any mistakes.
[58:21.000 --> 58:25.000]  If something is off point, off what they do a little bit,
[58:25.000 --> 58:28.000]  they want to find somebody that argues exactly that.
[58:28.000 --> 58:32.000]  So they look for other lawyers that specialize in what they need.
[58:32.000 --> 58:35.000]  The way they find it is articles on the internet.
[58:35.000 --> 58:42.000]  I'll come back and explain why the internet is now the best place to do research.
[58:42.000 --> 58:54.000]  The Bible remains the most popular book in the world,
[58:54.000 --> 58:58.000]  yet countless readers are frustrated because they struggle to understand it.
[58:58.000 --> 59:02.000]  Some new translations try to help by simplifying the text,
[59:02.000 --> 59:07.000]  but in the process can compromise the profound meaning of the Scripture.
[59:07.000 --> 59:09.000]  Enter the recovery version.
[59:09.000 --> 59:13.000]  First, this new translation is extremely faithful and accurate,
[59:13.000 --> 59:18.000]  but the real story is the more than 9,000 explanatory footnotes.
[59:18.000 --> 59:22.000]  Difficult and profound passages are opened up in a marvelous way,
[59:22.000 --> 59:28.000]  providing an entrance into the riches of the Word beyond which you've ever experienced before.
[59:28.000 --> 59:33.000]  Bibles for America would like to give you a free recovery version simply for the asking.
[59:33.000 --> 59:44.000]  This comprehensive yet compact study Bible is yours just by calling us toll free at 1-888-551-0102
[59:44.000 --> 59:48.000]  or by ordering online at freestudybible.com.
[59:48.000 --> 59:53.000]  That's freestudybible.com.
[59:53.000 --> 01:00:01.000]  You're listening to the Logos Radio Network at logosradionetwork.com.
[01:00:01.000 --> 01:00:05.000]  You're following these flashes brought to you by the Lone Star Lowdown,
[01:00:05.000 --> 01:00:08.000]  providing your deli bulletins for the commodities market,
[01:00:08.000 --> 01:00:21.000]  today in history, news updates, and the inside scoop into the tides of the alternative.
[01:00:21.000 --> 01:00:28.000]  Markets for the 18th of August 2015 opened up with gold at $1,117.42 an ounce,
[01:00:28.000 --> 01:00:34.000]  silver $14.86 an ounce, Texas crude $41.87 a barrel,
[01:00:34.000 --> 01:00:44.000]  and Bitcoin is currently sitting at about $250 U.S. currency.
[01:00:44.000 --> 01:00:47.000]  Today in history, Wednesday, August 18, 1920,
[01:00:47.000 --> 01:00:50.000]  the 19th Amendment to the United States Constitution,
[01:00:50.000 --> 01:00:56.000]  which prohibits any United States citizen from being denied the right to vote on the basis of sex, was ratified.
[01:00:56.000 --> 01:01:01.000]  The 18th Amendment was first introduced in Congress in 1878 by Senator Aaron A. Sargent
[01:01:01.000 --> 01:01:09.000]  and was the culmination of the women's suffrage movement in the United States.
[01:01:09.000 --> 01:01:15.000]  In recent news, a group of Muslim experts from 20 nations agreed on an eight-page declaration
[01:01:15.000 --> 01:01:19.000]  urging the world's 1.6 billion Muslims to do more to fight global warming.
[01:01:19.000 --> 01:01:22.000]  They wrote that, quote, excessive pollution from fossil fuels
[01:01:22.000 --> 01:01:26.000]  is to destroy the gifts bestowed on us by God, whom we know as Allah,
[01:01:26.000 --> 01:01:31.000]  gifts such as the functioning climate, healthy air to breathe, regular seasons, and living oceans.
[01:01:31.000 --> 01:01:35.000]  It is unclear what weight the Islamic declaration will have for Muslim nations
[01:01:35.000 --> 01:01:38.000]  in the political buildup to the upcoming climate summit.
[01:01:38.000 --> 01:01:42.000]  Cardinal Peter Turkson, a key collaborator on the papal encyclical on climate change,
[01:01:42.000 --> 01:01:46.000]  praised the declaration and promised closer cooperation with Muslims.
[01:01:46.000 --> 01:01:51.000]  Christina Figures, head of the UN climate change secretariat, said in a statement,
[01:01:51.000 --> 01:01:55.000]  Islam's teachings, which emphasize the duty of humans as stewards of the earth
[01:01:55.000 --> 01:01:59.000]  and the teacher's role as an appointed guide to correct behavior,
[01:01:59.000 --> 01:02:02.000]  provide guidance to take the right action on climate change.
[01:02:02.000 --> 01:02:07.000]  These are just some of the major religious efforts to prepare people for the climate initiatives
[01:02:07.000 --> 01:02:17.000]  that may come out of the UN climate change conference in Paris from November 30 to December 11.
[01:02:17.000 --> 01:02:22.000]  The Athens government has loosed its capital restrictions, which were imposed on June 29,
[01:02:22.000 --> 01:02:26.000]  and has increased the amount of money people are allowed to move out of Greece to 500 euros a month.
[01:02:26.000 --> 01:02:31.000]  These restrictions initially enforced a daily withdrawal limit of 60 euros from cash machines,
[01:02:31.000 --> 01:02:37.000]  though it was later raised to 420 a week as politicians brokered a deal with the country's creditors.
[01:02:37.000 --> 01:02:42.000]  According to official Greek documents, citizens can also send up to 5,000 euros
[01:02:42.000 --> 01:02:46.000]  out of the country every three months to their children if they're studying abroad,
[01:02:46.000 --> 01:02:50.000]  and up to 8,000 euros with documents proving those expenses.
[01:02:50.000 --> 01:03:17.000]  This has been your Lowdown for August 18, 2015.
[01:03:20.000 --> 01:03:30.000]  Okay, we are back.
[01:03:30.000 --> 01:03:35.000]  Randy Kelton here with Jeff from Mississippi,
[01:03:35.000 --> 01:03:42.000]  and we're talking about how to put together a legal plea.
[01:03:42.000 --> 01:03:49.000]  And Jeff, I know that what I'm talking about is relatively basic,
[01:03:49.000 --> 01:03:56.000]  but in the end, 90% of everything we do is relatively basic.
[01:03:56.000 --> 01:04:02.000]  And this will save you more time than you can imagine.
[01:04:02.000 --> 01:04:07.000]  Go to the Internet, search for your issues,
[01:04:07.000 --> 01:04:11.000]  and find cases that are very close to yours,
[01:04:11.000 --> 01:04:17.000]  and then, well, before you get to that, go to your Patagonia Charges.
[01:04:17.000 --> 01:04:22.000]  While we're on break, I've looked up a pattern of jury charges in Mississippi.
[01:04:22.000 --> 01:04:28.000]  Abusive process. Let me read this to you, really short.
[01:04:28.000 --> 01:04:35.000]  Abusive process is when a legal procedure is intentionally used for an improper or illegal purpose,
[01:04:35.000 --> 01:04:38.000]  and it has sources, it has case laws for that.
[01:04:38.000 --> 01:04:43.000]  Abusive process, general instruction and verdict form.
[01:04:43.000 --> 01:04:48.000]  General instruction, name of plaintiff, claims that, name of defendant,
[01:04:48.000 --> 01:04:55.000]  committed an abusive process to establish this claim.
[01:04:55.000 --> 01:05:06.000]  Plaintiff must prove all of the following are more likely than not are true.
[01:05:06.000 --> 01:05:10.000]  Defendant, describe the alleged abusive process,
[01:05:10.000 --> 01:05:17.000]  such as issued a subpoena or took a deposition.
[01:05:17.000 --> 01:05:22.000]  Two, the defendant intentionally used this legal procedure.
[01:05:22.000 --> 01:05:26.000]  Two, then describe what he used it to do.
[01:05:26.000 --> 01:05:29.000]  Three, plaintiff was harmed.
[01:05:29.000 --> 01:05:43.000]  Four, defendant's conduct was a substantial factor in causing plaintiff's harm.
[01:05:43.000 --> 01:05:49.000]  That's what you have to prove for abusive process.
[01:05:49.000 --> 01:05:51.000]  That's what the jury is going to have to find,
[01:05:51.000 --> 01:05:58.000]  and that will instruct you in every step, every argument that you have to make.
[01:05:58.000 --> 01:06:04.000]  Defendant, does that make sense to you?
[01:06:04.000 --> 01:06:06.000]  Did I get you on mute?
[01:06:06.000 --> 01:06:10.000]  There we go, got you.
[01:06:10.000 --> 01:06:15.000]  I'm hoping this will make your job a lot simpler.
[01:06:15.000 --> 01:06:22.000]  You should not be spending your time trying to figure out how to put these documents together.
[01:06:22.000 --> 01:06:23.000]  Okay.
[01:06:23.000 --> 01:06:32.000]  You should be spending your time making good connections and changing cases
[01:06:32.000 --> 01:06:42.000]  and cases and transitions in good legal arguments somebody else has already made for you.
[01:06:42.000 --> 01:06:44.000]  Okay.
[01:06:44.000 --> 01:06:47.000]  If you're a legal researcher like I am,
[01:06:47.000 --> 01:06:57.000]  you're prone to want to write really elegant and compelling prose.
[01:06:57.000 --> 01:07:03.000]  It was hard for me to learn to cut that garbage out.
[01:07:03.000 --> 01:07:12.000]  In law, the only ones who write compelling prose are judges in final orders.
[01:07:12.000 --> 01:07:14.000]  That's compelling prose.
[01:07:14.000 --> 01:07:21.000]  If you're writing it, that means your research is not complete enough.
[01:07:21.000 --> 01:07:22.000]  Okay.
[01:07:22.000 --> 01:07:23.000]  That's my story.
[01:07:23.000 --> 01:07:27.000]  I know I went beyond what you were actually asking,
[01:07:27.000 --> 01:07:34.000]  but I do use every opportunity I can to walk through some of these basics.
[01:07:34.000 --> 01:07:38.000]  As much as I walk through the basics when I start doing the document,
[01:07:38.000 --> 01:07:40.000]  I forget about it myself.
[01:07:40.000 --> 01:07:45.000]  Again, I'm writing all these really eloquent prose.
[01:07:45.000 --> 01:07:50.000]  Then I have to go back and throw it out and replace it with case law.
[01:07:50.000 --> 01:07:52.000]  Okay.
[01:07:52.000 --> 01:07:53.000]  All right.
[01:07:53.000 --> 01:07:56.000]  Well, I'll get on my work and I'll give you a call next week.
[01:07:56.000 --> 01:07:57.000]  Okay.
[01:07:57.000 --> 01:07:58.000]  Thank you, Jeff.
[01:07:58.000 --> 01:08:04.000]  I apologize for using you as a sounding board, but you're always good for content.
[01:08:04.000 --> 01:08:06.000]  Thank you so much.
[01:08:06.000 --> 01:08:08.000]  Thank you, Jeff.
[01:08:08.000 --> 01:08:12.000]  Now we're going to go to Alex in New Jersey, and our phone lines are open.
[01:08:12.000 --> 01:08:16.000]  512-646-1984, give us a call.
[01:08:16.000 --> 01:08:22.000]  If you have a comment or a question, we will be taking your questions all night.
[01:08:22.000 --> 01:08:26.000]  Okay, Alex, what do you have for us today?
[01:08:26.000 --> 01:08:28.000]  Hi.
[01:08:28.000 --> 01:08:29.000]  How are you?
[01:08:29.000 --> 01:08:31.000]  I am good.
[01:08:31.000 --> 01:08:34.000]  Okay.
[01:08:34.000 --> 01:08:52.000]  Well, I have a little case.
[01:08:52.000 --> 01:08:53.000]  Okay.
[01:08:53.000 --> 01:08:56.000]  Is your case criminal or civil?
[01:08:56.000 --> 01:08:58.000]  New York.
[01:08:58.000 --> 01:09:02.000]  I live in New York mostly.
[01:09:02.000 --> 01:09:06.000]  Is your case criminal or a civil case?
[01:09:06.000 --> 01:09:16.000]  He came over and said I threw stuff in the creek, dumped stuff in the creek.
[01:09:16.000 --> 01:09:20.000]  I have no idea what you're saying.
[01:09:20.000 --> 01:09:24.000]  I dumped stuff in the creek, in the river.
[01:09:24.000 --> 01:09:25.000]  Oh, okay.
[01:09:25.000 --> 01:09:26.000]  Illegal dumping.
[01:09:26.000 --> 01:09:28.000]  Dumped things in the river.
[01:09:28.000 --> 01:09:31.000]  Oh, okay.
[01:09:31.000 --> 01:09:34.000]  What – where did this occur?
[01:09:34.000 --> 01:09:36.000]  I see you're in New Jersey.
[01:09:36.000 --> 01:09:37.000]  Is this where the –
[01:09:37.000 --> 01:09:38.000]  Upstate New York.
[01:09:38.000 --> 01:09:42.000]  Well, I'm in New Jersey right now.
[01:09:42.000 --> 01:09:45.000]  So I'm in New Jersey.
[01:09:45.000 --> 01:09:46.000]  Okay.
[01:09:46.000 --> 01:09:48.000]  Is the case out of New Jersey?
[01:09:48.000 --> 01:09:51.000]  No, no, in Upstate New York.
[01:09:51.000 --> 01:09:52.000]  Upstate New York.
[01:09:52.000 --> 01:09:54.000]  Oh, okay.
[01:09:54.000 --> 01:09:56.000]  Okay.
[01:09:56.000 --> 01:10:04.000]  So what is your question or comment about this case?
[01:10:04.000 --> 01:10:08.000]  So, okay.
[01:10:08.000 --> 01:10:15.000]  So the problem is that this is not about dumping the river.
[01:10:15.000 --> 01:10:23.000]  It's about something more different, more sinister.
[01:10:23.000 --> 01:10:42.000]  Anyway, so they get the guy, say that he dumped stuff in the river like a month later.
[01:10:42.000 --> 01:10:56.000]  And so what happened is that I have – I'm not an activist.
[01:10:56.000 --> 01:11:04.000]  I'm on the Internet and posting on Facebook, and I have a few different accounts on Facebook,
[01:11:04.000 --> 01:11:14.000]  posting stuff for the Liberty and Alex Jones and other things like this.
[01:11:14.000 --> 01:11:18.000]  And I just – because I'm not stupid, you know.
[01:11:18.000 --> 01:11:23.000]  I know about all this chemtrails and all this other stuff.
[01:11:23.000 --> 01:11:32.000]  And so I just got posting and, you know, after a while I – I watch all the movies
[01:11:32.000 --> 01:11:37.000]  and I get smarter.
[01:11:37.000 --> 01:11:48.000]  And what happened was I noticed that somebody was messing around with my emails
[01:11:48.000 --> 01:11:53.000]  or some computer stuff, but I noticed something was going on.
[01:11:53.000 --> 01:12:02.000]  So I know that they're starting to listen to me.
[01:12:02.000 --> 01:12:03.000]  Okay.
[01:12:03.000 --> 01:12:06.000]  I'm having a terrible time understanding you.
[01:12:06.000 --> 01:12:08.000]  Yes.
[01:12:08.000 --> 01:12:09.000]  Okay.
[01:12:09.000 --> 01:12:12.000]  I'm trying to explain it.
[01:12:12.000 --> 01:12:19.000]  And so I – so it's like the NSA is listening to me.
[01:12:19.000 --> 01:12:23.000]  And, you know, I notice because they're – somehow they're messing with the Internet
[01:12:23.000 --> 01:12:26.000]  or something, and I'm noticing it.
[01:12:26.000 --> 01:12:35.000]  So I just start talking really, really softly on the – across the laptop, you know, the
[01:12:35.000 --> 01:12:36.000]  whispering.
[01:12:36.000 --> 01:12:42.000]  And then I start yelling at the computer.
[01:12:42.000 --> 01:12:43.000]  Okay.
[01:12:43.000 --> 01:12:44.000]  Wait a minute.
[01:12:44.000 --> 01:12:49.000]  You started out with an issue about dumping in a creek in upstate New York.
[01:12:49.000 --> 01:12:50.000]  Yes.
[01:12:50.000 --> 01:12:54.000]  How does this – is this someone interfering with your email?
[01:12:54.000 --> 01:12:55.000]  Okay.
[01:12:55.000 --> 01:12:56.000]  Okay.
[01:12:56.000 --> 01:12:57.000]  Say your question.
[01:12:57.000 --> 01:12:58.000]  Hello.
[01:12:58.000 --> 01:12:59.000]  Hello.
[01:12:59.000 --> 01:13:00.000]  I'm here.
[01:13:00.000 --> 01:13:13.000]  I'm trying to wait for you to get to the question.
[01:13:13.000 --> 01:13:14.000]  Yes.
[01:13:14.000 --> 01:13:25.000]  I just got – well, the story is a little bit longer, not that short.
[01:13:25.000 --> 01:13:30.000]  So anyway, the NSA is spying on me, and I'm getting mad.
[01:13:30.000 --> 01:13:37.000]  And I sent like a picture out of the jobs.
[01:13:37.000 --> 01:13:38.000]  I drew a picture.
[01:13:38.000 --> 01:13:45.000]  It took me like two weeks and made a silkscreen.
[01:13:45.000 --> 01:13:54.000]  And it's like Obama on a pig on a needle, and they're flying over a FEMA camp.
[01:13:54.000 --> 01:13:55.000]  Okay.
[01:13:55.000 --> 01:13:56.000]  Wait a minute.
[01:13:56.000 --> 01:13:57.000]  Wait a minute.
[01:13:57.000 --> 01:13:58.000]  Hold on.
[01:13:58.000 --> 01:13:59.000]  Something's wrong here.
[01:13:59.000 --> 01:14:00.000]  You're not making any sense.
[01:14:00.000 --> 01:14:02.000]  I'm not a very good explainer.
[01:14:02.000 --> 01:14:04.000]  I'm sorry.
[01:14:04.000 --> 01:14:11.000]  FEMA camps, Alex Jones, what does that have to do with dumping in a creek in upstate New
[01:14:11.000 --> 01:14:12.000]  York?
[01:14:12.000 --> 01:14:15.000]  I'm trying to get to it.
[01:14:15.000 --> 01:14:17.000]  Well, let's go to that.
[01:14:17.000 --> 01:14:26.000]  I'm aware of the majority of the patriot issues that are out there.
[01:14:26.000 --> 01:14:33.000]  And on this show, we primarily stayed with the law as it's written.
[01:14:33.000 --> 01:14:34.000]  Okay.
[01:14:34.000 --> 01:14:35.000]  Okay.
[01:14:35.000 --> 01:14:36.000]  Okay.
[01:14:36.000 --> 01:14:37.000]  I want to get to it.
[01:14:37.000 --> 01:14:38.000]  Okay.
[01:14:38.000 --> 01:15:01.000]  So what I did is I, for the last, like six months ago, they had the disease from Africa.
[01:15:01.000 --> 01:15:06.000]  I don't know what it's called.
[01:15:06.000 --> 01:15:11.000]  And from Africa, everybody was coming over with the disease.
[01:15:11.000 --> 01:15:12.000]  Okay.
[01:15:12.000 --> 01:15:13.000]  Hold on.
[01:15:13.000 --> 01:15:18.000]  We're going to take a very long time just to get to the question.
[01:15:18.000 --> 01:15:23.000]  You need to figure out what it is you want to ask me.
[01:15:23.000 --> 01:15:28.000]  Apparently, you don't have that well formed.
[01:15:28.000 --> 01:15:35.000]  So write down what you want to ask me and then sit down, write down what it is you want
[01:15:35.000 --> 01:15:42.000]  to ask, frame your question in writing, and then call me back when you have it written
[01:15:42.000 --> 01:15:43.000]  out to where it makes sense.
[01:15:43.000 --> 01:15:47.000]  We're using a lot of air time and we're not going anywhere.
[01:15:47.000 --> 01:15:48.000]  Okay.
[01:15:48.000 --> 01:15:52.000]  I'm going to write it down and I'll call you back.
[01:15:52.000 --> 01:15:53.000]  Okay.
[01:15:53.000 --> 01:15:54.000]  Thank you.
[01:15:54.000 --> 01:15:55.000]  Okay.
[01:15:55.000 --> 01:16:02.000]  This is Randy Kelton with Radio, our call in number 512-646-1984.
[01:16:02.000 --> 01:16:04.000]  Our call boards are empty.
[01:16:04.000 --> 01:16:13.000]  So I did want to talk about, I wanted to continue to talk about talking about how to structure
[01:16:13.000 --> 01:16:14.000]  pleadings.
[01:16:14.000 --> 01:16:22.000]  This is of all of the things that proceeds have problems with.
[01:16:22.000 --> 01:16:27.000]  Structuring motions and pleadings is probably our greatest weakness.
[01:16:27.000 --> 01:16:38.000]  And a lot of it is because we really don't understand how it works in legalese, how legalese
[01:16:38.000 --> 01:16:46.000]  is not English, that it's a dialect of English that's actually quite a bit different than
[01:16:46.000 --> 01:16:49.000]  the way we normally use the English language.
[01:16:49.000 --> 01:16:52.000]  So I'll call you back when we come back on the other side.
[01:16:52.000 --> 01:17:01.000]  I'll call you number 512-646-1984 and we'll be right back.
[01:17:01.000 --> 01:17:02.000]  My name is Jessica Armand.
[01:17:02.000 --> 01:17:05.000]  I'm an activist, a GCN listener, and mother of three.
[01:17:05.000 --> 01:17:09.000]  Our drinking water and food are filled with fluoride and other contaminants that harm
[01:17:09.000 --> 01:17:10.000]  our teeth and gums.
[01:17:10.000 --> 01:17:15.000]  To protect my family, I created My Magic Mud, an all-natural teeth whitening and strengthening
[01:17:15.000 --> 01:17:16.000]  remedy.
[01:17:16.000 --> 01:17:20.000]  My Magic Mud is a soft powder that polishes your teeth, reduces sensitivity, and removes
[01:17:20.000 --> 01:17:22.000]  harmful toxins from deep inside your mouth.
[01:17:22.000 --> 01:17:24.000]  You deserve a bright, healthy smile.
[01:17:24.000 --> 01:17:27.000]  Visit MyMagicMud.com and get yours today.
[01:17:27.000 --> 01:17:28.000]  That's MyMagicMud.com.
[01:17:28.000 --> 01:17:29.000]  Hi.
[01:17:29.000 --> 01:17:30.000]  This is Kurt Hildebrand.
[01:17:30.000 --> 01:17:33.000]  I've been using Magic Mud for a while now and I just can't believe how much healthier
[01:17:33.000 --> 01:17:35.000]  my teeth and gums feel.
[01:17:35.000 --> 01:17:36.000]  I love the product.
[01:17:36.000 --> 01:17:38.000]  This is Anna Martin, the libertarian homeschooler.
[01:17:38.000 --> 01:17:40.000]  I homeschool, so I drink coffee.
[01:17:40.000 --> 01:17:42.000]  And I drink coffee, so I use Magic Mud.
[01:17:42.000 --> 01:17:44.000]  It gets my teeth really clean.
[01:17:44.000 --> 01:17:45.000]  Give it a try.
[01:17:45.000 --> 01:17:47.000]  This is John Bush of the Liberty Beat.
[01:17:47.000 --> 01:17:51.000]  My wife and I use My Magic Mud because it brightens our smile, and our daughter uses
[01:17:51.000 --> 01:17:52.000]  it because it makes brushing fun.
[01:17:52.000 --> 01:17:59.000]  To get your can of My Magic Mud, go to Brave New Books or order it online at MyMagicMud.com.
[01:17:59.000 --> 01:18:05.000]  At Capital Coin and Bullion, our mission is to be your preferred shopping destination
[01:18:05.000 --> 01:18:09.000]  by delivering excellent customer service and outstanding value at an affordable price.
[01:18:09.000 --> 01:18:14.000]  We provide a wide assortment of your favorite products, featuring a great selection of high-quality
[01:18:14.000 --> 01:18:15.000]  products and precious metals.
[01:18:15.000 --> 01:18:19.000]  We cater to beginners in coin collecting, as well as large transactions for investors.
[01:18:19.000 --> 01:18:24.000]  We believe in educating our customers with resources from top accredited metals dealers
[01:18:24.000 --> 01:18:25.000]  and journalists.
[01:18:25.000 --> 01:18:28.000]  If we don't have what you're looking for, we can find it.
[01:18:28.000 --> 01:18:32.000]  In addition, we carry popular young Jevity products, such as Beyond Tangy Tangerine and
[01:18:32.000 --> 01:18:33.000]  Pollen Burps.
[01:18:33.000 --> 01:18:38.000]  We also offer One World Way, Mountain House Storable Foods, Berkey Water Products, ammunition
[01:18:38.000 --> 01:18:40.000]  at 10% above wholesale, and more.
[01:18:40.000 --> 01:18:44.000]  We broke through Metals IRA accounts and we also accept Bitcoins as payment.
[01:18:44.000 --> 01:18:47.000]  Call us at 512-646-6440.
[01:18:47.000 --> 01:18:52.000]  We're located at 7304 Burnett Road, Suite A, about a half mile south of Anderson.
[01:18:52.000 --> 01:18:55.000]  We're open Monday through Friday 10 to 6, Saturdays 10 to 2.
[01:18:55.000 --> 01:19:11.000]  Visit us at capitalcoin and bullion.com or call 512-646-6440.
[01:19:25.000 --> 01:19:50.000]  We're open Monday through Friday 10 to 6, Saturdays 10 to 2.
[01:19:50.000 --> 01:20:18.000]  We're open Monday through Friday 10 to 6, Saturdays 10 to 2.
[01:20:18.000 --> 01:20:20.000]  Okay, we are back.
[01:20:20.000 --> 01:20:22.000]  Randy Kelton, Ula Radio.
[01:20:22.000 --> 01:20:27.000]  And we have Jeff Sedgwick on the guest bridge.
[01:20:27.000 --> 01:20:29.000]  Hello, Jeff.
[01:20:29.000 --> 01:20:31.000]  Hello, Randy.
[01:20:31.000 --> 01:20:32.000]  How are you?
[01:20:32.000 --> 01:20:33.000]  I am good.
[01:20:33.000 --> 01:20:39.000]  I started out the show talking about that document you sent me.
[01:20:39.000 --> 01:20:44.000]  While you were sending it, I went and looked it up on the Internet.
[01:20:44.000 --> 01:20:46.000]  Isn't that interesting?
[01:20:46.000 --> 01:20:54.000]  That was interesting, especially when I read the nature of the claims.
[01:20:54.000 --> 01:20:58.000]  They were really lame.
[01:20:58.000 --> 01:21:06.000]  The first claim is they said that they had to have more than one head of the agency.
[01:21:06.000 --> 01:21:10.000]  Well, CFPB is attached to the FTC.
[01:21:10.000 --> 01:21:12.000]  Yeah.
[01:21:12.000 --> 01:21:16.000]  But it's only answerable to the Federal Reserve.
[01:21:16.000 --> 01:21:20.000]  So it really wasn't an agency in and of itself.
[01:21:20.000 --> 01:21:24.000]  They just had a director for this portion of it.
[01:21:24.000 --> 01:21:33.000]  But then all other federal agencies tend to have one director that answers to a committee.
[01:21:33.000 --> 01:21:42.000]  It appears that the CFPB answers to agencies it's created under.
[01:21:42.000 --> 01:21:46.000]  So I didn't understand that argument.
[01:21:46.000 --> 01:21:57.000]  And while the court only ruled that they had standing to argue the issue.
[01:21:57.000 --> 01:21:59.000]  Right, that's all they ruled.
[01:21:59.000 --> 01:22:04.000]  It didn't give any indication they agreed with them, and on the second part,
[01:22:04.000 --> 01:22:09.000]  where this director was appointed in recess,
[01:22:09.000 --> 01:22:17.000]  while they agreed that the bank had standing to raise the issue,
[01:22:17.000 --> 01:22:21.000]  they said they would leave that up to the legislature.
[01:22:21.000 --> 01:22:29.000]  They indicated that the legislature affirmed his actions that he took while they were in recess.
[01:22:29.000 --> 01:22:33.000]  Essentially, it appeared to me as though he was telling them,
[01:22:33.000 --> 01:22:38.000]  yeah, while you can argue this issue, you're not going to win it.
[01:22:38.000 --> 01:22:41.000]  And then the other two argued it.
[01:22:41.000 --> 01:22:43.000]  Go ahead, Jeff.
[01:22:43.000 --> 01:22:45.000]  It occurred to me that that's what he did.
[01:22:45.000 --> 01:22:51.000]  Basically, you can go ahead and argue it, but from what I can see, you don't have a case here.
[01:22:51.000 --> 01:22:58.000]  And then the other two argued about the nature of the regulatory scheme.
[01:22:58.000 --> 01:23:06.000]  We're just finding that if you regulate one company,
[01:23:06.000 --> 01:23:10.000]  that that might somehow affect my company,
[01:23:10.000 --> 01:23:16.000]  and therefore your regulation of that company is unconstitutional.
[01:23:16.000 --> 01:23:30.000]  Well, what I suspect they're after with that is if they close down that particular bank or any other bank,
[01:23:30.000 --> 01:23:38.000]  that their retirement might not get taken care of or distributed the way they want.
[01:23:38.000 --> 01:23:45.000]  But what the court said was in some cases,
[01:23:45.000 --> 01:23:55.000]  you don't have to actually violate a law before you have standing to challenge what you construe to be a bad law.
[01:23:55.000 --> 01:23:56.000]  Right.
[01:23:56.000 --> 01:24:02.000]  But in this case, you don't have any standing to make these arguments.
[01:24:02.000 --> 01:24:04.000]  You do have to have more.
[01:24:04.000 --> 01:24:08.000]  What was the term it used?
[01:24:08.000 --> 01:24:12.000]  You have no injury.
[01:24:12.000 --> 01:24:13.000]  To what way?
[01:24:13.000 --> 01:24:14.000]  I'm sorry.
[01:24:14.000 --> 01:24:15.000]  I missed that.
[01:24:15.000 --> 01:24:17.000]  You have no injury.
[01:24:17.000 --> 01:24:21.000]  Well, they were saying that in a regulatory situation,
[01:24:21.000 --> 01:24:26.000]  you don't have to go violate the law in order to be able to challenge the law.
[01:24:26.000 --> 01:24:32.000]  You can challenge a law that will regulate you without having to go violate it first.
[01:24:32.000 --> 01:24:39.000]  However, you have to have more than just speculation.
[01:24:39.000 --> 01:24:40.000]  Right.
[01:24:40.000 --> 01:24:43.000]  They have to go to the court and they didn't.
[01:24:43.000 --> 01:24:50.000]  They were talking about orderly liquidation was under the Dodd-Frank Act.
[01:24:50.000 --> 01:24:54.000]  They're literally challenging the Dodd-Frank Act.
[01:24:54.000 --> 01:25:11.000]  Third, the bank challenges the constitutionality of the new Financial Stability Oversight Council.
[01:25:11.000 --> 01:25:15.000]  What does that have to do with CFPB?
[01:25:15.000 --> 01:25:20.000]  It was created under the Dodd-Frank Act.
[01:25:20.000 --> 01:25:25.000]  Well, that's Dodd-Frank, but so was CFPB.
[01:25:25.000 --> 01:25:32.000]  This doesn't seem to go after CFPB, but goes after Financial Stability Oversight Council,
[01:25:32.000 --> 01:25:34.000]  created by Dodd-Frank Act.
[01:25:34.000 --> 01:25:38.000]  The council monitors the ability of U.S. financial system
[01:25:38.000 --> 01:25:42.000]  and responds to emerging threats to that system.
[01:25:42.000 --> 01:25:45.000]  The council's voting members include, among others,
[01:25:45.000 --> 01:25:51.000]  Secretary of the Treasury, Chairman of the Federal Reserve, Comptroller of the Currency, and a whole bunch of them.
[01:25:51.000 --> 01:25:54.000]  The council possesses statutory authority to designate certain,
[01:25:54.000 --> 01:26:00.000]  too big to fail as they are locally known, financial companies for additional regulation
[01:26:00.000 --> 01:26:05.000]  in order to minimize the risk that such a company's financial distress
[01:26:05.000 --> 01:26:09.000]  will threaten the stability of the American economy.
[01:26:09.000 --> 01:26:16.000]  The bank argues that the council is unconstitutional under the non-delegation doctrine
[01:26:16.000 --> 01:26:23.000]  and related separation of powers principle because the council has broad and unchecked power
[01:26:23.000 --> 01:26:28.000]  to decide which companies should face additional regulation.
[01:26:28.000 --> 01:26:37.000]  Fourth, the state plaintiff challenged the Dodd-Frank Act's grant of new liquidation authority to the U.S. government.
[01:26:37.000 --> 01:26:40.000]  Neither one of these seem to go to CFPB.
[01:26:40.000 --> 01:26:47.000]  The act gives the Treasury, the Federal Reserve, and the FDIC the necessary authority
[01:26:47.000 --> 01:26:53.000]  to liquidate failing financial companies that pose significant risks of financial stability in the United States.
[01:26:53.000 --> 01:26:57.000]  And then they go on to argue that if you liquidate one of these companies,
[01:26:57.000 --> 01:27:07.000]  it may affect our retirement accounts and change our competitive position.
[01:27:07.000 --> 01:27:15.000]  These last two, the court ruled, you don't have standing to bring these.
[01:27:15.000 --> 01:27:22.000]  I do not know what the underlying game is, but whatever it is,
[01:27:22.000 --> 01:27:30.000]  there's got to be something major in order for it to elicit all those attorneys general.
[01:27:30.000 --> 01:27:36.000]  That was, you know, if everybody listening, you heard what I read.
[01:27:36.000 --> 01:27:48.000]  Did anybody out there hear something that was catastrophic or potentially catastrophic or world-changing?
[01:27:48.000 --> 01:27:54.000]  Well, the CFPB...
[01:27:54.000 --> 01:28:08.000]  The CFPB has won, what, 15, maybe 20 multi-million dollar litigations against debt collectors and some creditors for their bad behavior.
[01:28:08.000 --> 01:28:23.000]  It has launched a lawsuit against Frederick J. Hanna and now has entered an anarchist brief into the Bach versus Pressler and Pressler,
[01:28:23.000 --> 01:28:37.000]  both having to do with three seconds is not sufficient time for an attorney to have reviewed the case before filing the litigation.
[01:28:37.000 --> 01:28:44.000]  So, you know, it could be that what we have here is we have the bar up in arms.
[01:28:44.000 --> 01:28:53.000]  We could have the banks or debt collectors up in arms or we could have all of those people up in arms, funding this whole project.
[01:28:53.000 --> 01:29:04.000]  Because the debt collection industry is going to lose a lot of money if they can't ignore law at every turn.
[01:29:04.000 --> 01:29:11.000]  So they're fighting any type of effective regulation tooth and nail.
[01:29:11.000 --> 01:29:22.000]  The CFPB has been extraordinarily effective on behalf of the consumer, you know, Joe Sixpack, as it were.
[01:29:22.000 --> 01:29:35.000]  It's extraordinarily effective and willing to come out and play in the playground as opposed to FTC that wants at least a thousand or more complaints
[01:29:35.000 --> 01:29:38.000]  against a particular company before they'll take any kind of action.
[01:29:38.000 --> 01:29:45.000]  And even then, it's just writing a letter that says, hey, please correct your ways.
[01:29:45.000 --> 01:29:53.000]  OK, hang on. We're about to go to break. Randy Kelton, Blu Blu Radio, our call in number 512-646-1984.
[01:29:53.000 --> 01:30:02.000]  Give us a call. We'll be right back.
[01:30:02.000 --> 01:30:07.000]  Radio frequency microchips are often used to track products as they make their way to stores.
[01:30:07.000 --> 01:30:09.000]  But would you want them in your socks?
[01:30:09.000 --> 01:30:16.000]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht and I'll tell you about the bizarre privacy invasive new product called Smartsocks Next.
[01:30:16.000 --> 01:30:22.000]  Privacy is under attack. When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[01:30:22.000 --> 01:30:27.000]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish, too.
[01:30:27.000 --> 01:30:32.000]  So protect your rights. Say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself.
[01:30:32.000 --> 01:30:35.000]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[01:30:35.000 --> 01:30:42.000]  This message is brought to you by Startpage.com, the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[01:30:42.000 --> 01:30:46.000]  Start over with Startpage.
[01:30:46.000 --> 01:30:54.000]  Blacksocks, a maker of men's dress socks, is embedding its products with radio frequency microchips or RFID technology.
[01:30:54.000 --> 01:30:58.000]  When scanned, each so-called Smartsock transmits a unique ID number.
[01:30:58.000 --> 01:31:03.000]  The technology helps customers keep track of how many times their socks have been washed,
[01:31:03.000 --> 01:31:07.000]  how black their socks are, and which socks should be paired together.
[01:31:07.000 --> 01:31:14.000]  The cost? $189 for a 10-pack, a scanner, and yes, an iPhone app.
[01:31:14.000 --> 01:31:21.000]  Spy-chip socks may make for scientific sorting, but if you wear them, the floor itself could eventually track you.
[01:31:21.000 --> 01:31:24.000]  To me, that doesn't sound smart. It sounds spooky.
[01:31:24.000 --> 01:31:31.000]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht for Startpage.com, the world's most private search engine.
[01:31:31.000 --> 01:31:36.000]  I lost my son, my nephew, my uncle, my son on September 11, 2001.
[01:31:36.000 --> 01:31:40.000]  Most people don't know that a third tower fell on September 11.
[01:31:40.000 --> 01:31:44.000]  World Trade Center 7, a 47-story skyscraper, was not hit by a plane.
[01:31:44.000 --> 01:31:48.000]  Although the official explanation is that fire brought down Building 7,
[01:31:48.000 --> 01:31:54.000]  over 1,200 architects and engineers have looked into the evidence and believe there is more to the story.
[01:31:54.000 --> 01:31:57.000]  Bring justice to my son, my uncle, my nephew, my son.
[01:31:57.000 --> 01:32:02.000]  Go to buildingwatt.org, why it fell, why it matters, and what you can do.
[01:32:02.000 --> 01:32:08.000]  Nutritious food is real body armor. It builds muscle, burns fat, improves digestion,
[01:32:08.000 --> 01:32:11.000]  and feeds the entire body the nutrients it needs.
[01:32:11.000 --> 01:32:15.000]  Did you know the U.S. government banned the hemp plant from growing in the United States
[01:32:15.000 --> 01:32:19.000]  and classified it as a Schedule I drug to hide it behind a marijuana plant?
[01:32:19.000 --> 01:32:25.000]  People have been confused about this plant for over 80 years, and many still don't know what hemp is.
[01:32:25.000 --> 01:32:29.000]  Now you know hemp is not marijuana, and marijuana is not hemp.
[01:32:29.000 --> 01:32:32.000]  They are different varieties of the same species.
[01:32:32.000 --> 01:32:35.000]  HempUSA.org wants the world to know these basic facts
[01:32:35.000 --> 01:32:41.000]  and to help people understand that hemp protein powder is the best-kept health secret you need to know about.
[01:32:41.000 --> 01:32:50.000]  Remember, hemp protein powder contains 53% protein, is gluten-free, anti-inflammatory, non-GMO, and is loaded with nutrients.
[01:32:50.000 --> 01:33:03.000]  Call 888-910-4367, 888-910-4367, and see what our powder, seeds, and oil can do for you, only at hempUSA.org.
[01:33:03.000 --> 01:33:14.000]  You are listening to the Logos Radio Network, logosradionetwork.com.
[01:33:14.000 --> 01:33:21.000]  Yeah, who you want to chip? Who you take with you? Free Tully. Who you want to chip? Me no free Tully. You can't chip me.
[01:33:21.000 --> 01:33:27.000]  I'm a fact. Don't let them chip you in the morning, chip you in the evening, put a chip in your body.
[01:33:27.000 --> 01:33:32.000]  And anyway, you go computer reading, you can't hide me if I'm nobody.
[01:33:32.000 --> 01:33:34.000]  When you say chip in, I'm your mam. Chip in, I'm your mam.
[01:33:34.000 --> 01:33:37.000]  Okay, we are back. Randy Kelton.
[01:33:37.000 --> 01:33:44.000]  WC with the Logos Radio here with Jeff Sedgwick, and we were having way, way too much fun on the break.
[01:33:44.000 --> 01:33:57.000]  But yeah, we were looking at this case, and the court did make an interesting comment that I hadn't actually seen this before.
[01:33:57.000 --> 01:34:08.000]  Jeff, if I get this right, this only applies to essentially agencies.
[01:34:08.000 --> 01:34:11.000]  It didn't get the last part.
[01:34:11.000 --> 01:34:15.000]  It seems to only apply to regulated agencies.
[01:34:15.000 --> 01:34:23.000]  You know, normally in order for us to go to the court with an issue, we have to, we have been harmed.
[01:34:23.000 --> 01:34:29.000]  We have to bring a legitimate controversy.
[01:34:29.000 --> 01:34:36.000]  And I found it on the break after we find it.
[01:34:36.000 --> 01:34:47.000]  Well, with the court's rule that the regulated agency is trying to challenge the regulation.
[01:34:47.000 --> 01:35:01.000]  And what they're saying is, is they don't have to vet the farm by violating the rule that they think is improper before they can challenge the rule.
[01:35:01.000 --> 01:35:04.000]  I'm looking for, what was that? I lost it.
[01:35:04.000 --> 01:35:08.000]  I thought it was interesting how he's written because, you know, John Rowe was saying.
[01:35:08.000 --> 01:35:14.000]  It's in the last couple, three paragraphs.
[01:35:14.000 --> 01:35:23.000]  I'll find it here in a second. But what they were saying is, is that this agency can, you know,
[01:35:23.000 --> 01:35:33.000]  apparently the question here before the court that this ruling went to was whether or not the,
[01:35:33.000 --> 01:35:46.000]  the plaintiff had standing to raise the issues because undoubtedly this is a ruling on a Rule 12 motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim.
[01:35:46.000 --> 01:35:58.000]  Since Ashcroft-Tombly, this is the standard response to any federal lawsuit.
[01:35:58.000 --> 01:36:10.000]  And anytime you get a Federal lawsuit, you're going to bring a Rule 12 because Ashcroft-Tombly changed the pleading standards.
[01:36:10.000 --> 01:36:14.000]  We've helped several hundred people file federal lawsuits.
[01:36:14.000 --> 01:36:18.000]  Always we get a Rule 12 motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim.
[01:36:18.000 --> 01:36:27.000]  And here they're saying they failed to state a claim because there was no harm.
[01:36:27.000 --> 01:36:30.000]  And I'm speculating, Jeff, that's what the motion claimed.
[01:36:30.000 --> 01:36:42.000]  Well, from what I can see, all four causes were dismissed on 12b1, lack of standing in the district court.
[01:36:42.000 --> 01:36:51.000]  But the appeals court said on cause one and two, you do have standing and on cause three and four, you lack standing.
[01:36:51.000 --> 01:36:55.000]  So that's 12b1, not 12b6.
[01:36:55.000 --> 01:36:59.000]  I'm sorry, my bad.
[01:36:59.000 --> 01:37:02.000]  I found the paragraph I was looking for.
[01:37:02.000 --> 01:37:12.000]  The bank is not challenging an agency rule that regulates its conduct, but rather is challenging the legality of the regulating agency itself.
[01:37:12.000 --> 01:37:16.000]  Still, the same basic laboratory's reasoning applies.
[01:37:16.000 --> 01:37:25.000]  As the Supreme Court stated in the Free Enterprise Fund, it would make little sense to force a regulated entity to violate a law
[01:37:25.000 --> 01:37:33.000]  so that the regulated entity can challenge the constitutionality of the regulating agency.
[01:37:33.000 --> 01:37:39.000]  To use the Supreme Court's words, we normally do not require plaintiffs to bet the farm
[01:37:39.000 --> 01:37:47.000]  by violating the law in order to challenge the constitutionality of the regulating agency.
[01:37:47.000 --> 01:37:56.000]  When I read that, I was wondering, normally do not require plaintiffs to bet the farm.
[01:37:56.000 --> 01:38:13.000]  Somehow, if I look back, if I could find the case law on that, that's not going to just go to one regulated company challenging the regulated agency.
[01:38:13.000 --> 01:38:22.000]  I think back to the Military Commissions Act.
[01:38:22.000 --> 01:38:27.000]  It's horribly, horribly unconstitutional.
[01:38:27.000 --> 01:38:39.000]  But I looked at it and said, well, while it's horribly unconstitutional, because it says that during an emergency, the president can abolish the legislature.
[01:38:39.000 --> 01:38:46.000]  While he is horribly unconstitutional, I can't bring a claim under it until it's been instituted.
[01:38:46.000 --> 01:38:51.000]  But once it's been instituted, there's no place to bring a claim.
[01:38:51.000 --> 01:38:56.000]  That's the legislature and the courts are eliminated. Everything goes to court martial.
[01:38:56.000 --> 01:39:02.000]  So the only time I could bring an issue is after the harm is already done.
[01:39:02.000 --> 01:39:10.000]  Now I need to look more up on normally do not require plaintiffs to bet the farm.
[01:39:10.000 --> 01:39:21.000]  See how we can take on regulations and this says the regulated company can challenge the regulating agency.
[01:39:21.000 --> 01:39:30.000]  If we're a regulated individual, we should be able to challenge the regulating agency.
[01:39:30.000 --> 01:39:32.000]  Would we not, Jeff?
[01:39:32.000 --> 01:39:36.000]  It would seem that way, yeah.
[01:39:36.000 --> 01:39:45.000]  Maybe in the midst of this benaying nonsense here, we may have found a gem,
[01:39:45.000 --> 01:39:59.000]  a way to bring an agency to task without having to inflict the regulatory scheme upon ourselves.
[01:39:59.000 --> 01:40:08.000]  Anyway, the case went on to say that, yeah, you got standing to challenge.
[01:40:08.000 --> 01:40:14.000]  But in reading the way they stated it, good luck on that, Bubba.
[01:40:14.000 --> 01:40:19.000]  Yeah.
[01:40:19.000 --> 01:40:31.000]  That went to the first two about the director having to be more than one person and about the director being appointed in recess.
[01:40:31.000 --> 01:40:38.000]  The second two about the Dodd-Frank Act and that one, they ruled that you don't have standing
[01:40:38.000 --> 01:40:44.000]  because while you don't have to bet the farm, you have to have more than just conjecture
[01:40:44.000 --> 01:40:53.000]  and stating that it is somehow feasible that it could possibly negatively affect you.
[01:40:53.000 --> 01:40:55.000]  You have to have more than that.
[01:40:55.000 --> 01:40:57.000]  Right.
[01:40:57.000 --> 01:41:08.000]  With that in mind, Randy, these people who are representing the bank are not dummies
[01:41:08.000 --> 01:41:17.000]  and they know that they were pleading the last two sessions through speculation.
[01:41:17.000 --> 01:41:21.000]  So I suspect the last two sessions were a smokescreen.
[01:41:21.000 --> 01:41:22.000]  Pardon?
[01:41:22.000 --> 01:41:23.000]  Yeah, yeah, you're right.
[01:41:23.000 --> 01:41:24.000]  It's a smokescreen.
[01:41:24.000 --> 01:41:27.000]  They probably knew this would get tossed.
[01:41:27.000 --> 01:41:28.000]  Right.
[01:41:28.000 --> 01:41:38.000]  I think where they're ultimately after is the CFPB because the CFPB is standing up for the consumer
[01:41:38.000 --> 01:41:48.000]  and it's basically pummeling every bully they take on.
[01:41:48.000 --> 01:41:53.000]  Well, you're taking on a lot of attorney generals.
[01:41:53.000 --> 01:42:00.000]  That in turn begs the question, if that's the case, why are the attorneys general engaged
[01:42:00.000 --> 01:42:04.000]  in attempting to destroy the CFPB?
[01:42:04.000 --> 01:42:09.000]  That was somewhat confusing as well.
[01:42:09.000 --> 01:42:19.000]  It would seem that the attorney general would tend to be in league with CFPB
[01:42:19.000 --> 01:42:26.000]  because attorney general is essentially a regulating agency itself.
[01:42:26.000 --> 01:42:30.000]  It didn't make sense, especially so many.
[01:42:30.000 --> 01:42:39.000]  How about all those foreclosure cases that various attorney generals took on against the banks?
[01:42:39.000 --> 01:42:43.000]  This is not consistent with that in any way, shape, or form, is it?
[01:42:43.000 --> 01:42:47.000]  No, it's not.
[01:42:47.000 --> 01:42:55.000]  The first thing we want to think is money, money, money, money, but these are too many attorney generals.
[01:42:55.000 --> 01:42:58.000]  That's why I say there's something bigger behind this than what appears on the surface,
[01:42:58.000 --> 01:43:04.000]  and I don't know what it is.
[01:43:04.000 --> 01:43:15.000]  Well, I hope it doesn't come back to bite us because I certainly can't tell from what I've seen what it is.
[01:43:15.000 --> 01:43:20.000]  Hang on.
[01:43:20.000 --> 01:43:24.000]  This is Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Rule of Our Radio.
[01:43:24.000 --> 01:43:27.000]  I'll call the number, 512-646-1984.
[01:43:27.000 --> 01:43:28.000]  We've got one segment left.
[01:43:28.000 --> 01:43:32.000]  We're here with our special guest, Jeff Cedric.
[01:43:32.000 --> 01:43:34.000]  We enjoy having one.
[01:43:34.000 --> 01:43:35.000]  He's always...
[01:43:35.000 --> 01:43:36.000]  Oh, my goodness.
[01:43:36.000 --> 01:43:37.000]  Wait a minute.
[01:43:37.000 --> 01:43:40.000]  I have a confession I want to make on the other side.
[01:43:40.000 --> 01:43:43.000]  I made a mistake, Jeff.
[01:43:43.000 --> 01:43:46.000]  I probably could have believed this, but I do.
[01:43:46.000 --> 01:43:47.000]  I'm sorry.
[01:43:47.000 --> 01:43:52.000]  I have to close off because the second is a post-mortem phone call.
[01:43:52.000 --> 01:43:53.000]  Okay.
[01:43:53.000 --> 01:44:01.000]  We'll be right back.
[01:44:01.000 --> 01:44:05.000]  You feel tired when talking about important topics like money and politics?
[01:44:05.000 --> 01:44:08.000]  Are you confused by words like the Constitution or the Federal Reserve?
[01:44:08.000 --> 01:44:09.000]  What?
[01:44:09.000 --> 01:44:13.000]  You may be diagnosed with the deadliest disease known today, stupidity.
[01:44:13.000 --> 01:44:14.000]  Hi.
[01:44:14.000 --> 01:44:15.000]  My name is Steve Holt.
[01:44:15.000 --> 01:44:19.000]  And like millions of other Americans, I was diagnosed with stupidity at an early age.
[01:44:19.000 --> 01:44:25.000]  I had no idea that the number one cause of the disease is found in almost every home in America, the television.
[01:44:25.000 --> 01:44:29.000]  Unfortunately, that puts most Americans at risk of catching stupidity.
[01:44:29.000 --> 01:44:30.000]  But there is hope.
[01:44:30.000 --> 01:44:36.000]  The staff at Brave New Books have helped me and thousands of other Foxaholics suffering from sports zombieism recover.
[01:44:36.000 --> 01:44:43.000]  And because of Brave New Books, I now enjoy reading and watching educational documentaries without feeling tired or uninterested.
[01:44:43.000 --> 01:44:46.000]  So if you or anybody you know suffers from stupidity,
[01:44:46.000 --> 01:44:55.000]  then you need to call 512-480-2503 or visit them in 1904 at Guadalupe or bravenewbookstore.com.
[01:44:55.000 --> 01:44:58.000]  Side effects from using Brave New Books products may include discernment and enlarged vocabulary
[01:44:58.000 --> 01:45:01.000]  and an overall increase in mental functioning.
[01:45:01.000 --> 01:45:04.000]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[01:45:04.000 --> 01:45:07.000]  Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary,
[01:45:07.000 --> 01:45:15.000]  the affordable, easy-to-understand, 4-CD course that will show you how in 24 hours, step-by-step.
[01:45:15.000 --> 01:45:19.000]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing.
[01:45:19.000 --> 01:45:23.000]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[01:45:23.000 --> 01:45:28.000]  Thousands have won with our step-by-step course, and now you can too.
[01:45:28.000 --> 01:45:34.000]  Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case-winning experience.
[01:45:34.000 --> 01:45:39.000]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand
[01:45:39.000 --> 01:45:43.000]  about the principles and practices that control our American courts.
[01:45:43.000 --> 01:45:52.000]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases, pro se tactics, and much more.
[01:45:52.000 --> 01:46:01.000]  Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner or call toll-free, 866-LAW-EZ.
[01:46:23.000 --> 01:46:30.000]  Okay, we are back. Randy Kelton here with Jeff Cedric.
[01:46:30.000 --> 01:46:36.000]  And I've been quoting 18 U.S. Code 242.
[01:46:36.000 --> 01:46:40.000]  And I got an email from someone that told me I was misquoting it.
[01:46:40.000 --> 01:46:47.000]  The quotation I used, I've memorized probably 30 years ago.
[01:46:47.000 --> 01:46:55.000]  And I didn't misquote what I memorized 30 years ago.
[01:46:55.000 --> 01:47:04.000]  But when I pulled up 18 U.S. Code 242 and read it, he was right.
[01:47:04.000 --> 01:47:06.000]  I was misquoting it.
[01:47:06.000 --> 01:47:15.000]  I mean, the substance is the same, but the wording is not the same.
[01:47:15.000 --> 01:47:25.000]  And there's an element in this version of 18 U.S. Code 242 that I don't remember being there.
[01:47:25.000 --> 01:47:37.000]  So my question is, I'm looking at this, and the latest publication was 1996.
[01:47:37.000 --> 01:47:47.000]  And that's about the time, just slightly before that, probably 1991,
[01:47:47.000 --> 01:47:58.000]  is when I really got into researching this part of the law, or maybe the late 80s.
[01:47:58.000 --> 01:48:00.000]  Now it's different. Here's what it says.
[01:48:00.000 --> 01:48:08.000]  Every person who under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage of any state or territory
[01:48:08.000 --> 01:48:13.000]  or the District of Columbia subjects or causes to be subjected,
[01:48:13.000 --> 01:48:18.000]  any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof,
[01:48:18.000 --> 01:48:23.000]  to the deprivation of any rights, privilege, or immunity secured by the Constitutional laws,
[01:48:23.000 --> 01:48:32.000]  shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceedings for which be addressed,
[01:48:32.000 --> 01:48:39.000]  except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or a mission taken in such officer's judicial capacity,
[01:48:39.000 --> 01:48:48.000]  injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory degree was violated or a declaratory relief was unavailable.
[01:48:48.000 --> 01:48:57.000]  Oops, I'm reading, I'm thinking that sounds like 42 S Code 1983, and that's exactly what that is.
[01:48:57.000 --> 01:49:08.000]  I pulled up the wrong one. Let me pull up 18 USC 242.
[01:49:08.000 --> 01:49:11.000]  That was the one that authorizes you to sue them.
[01:49:11.000 --> 01:49:19.000]  Okay, here's the one I'm supposed to be reading. Whoever under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom,
[01:49:19.000 --> 01:49:27.000]  willfully subjects any person in any state, territory, Commonwealth possession, or district
[01:49:27.000 --> 01:49:34.000]  to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunity secured by or protected by the Constitutional laws of the United States
[01:49:34.000 --> 01:49:40.000]  or to different punishments, pains, or penalties on account of such person being an alien
[01:49:40.000 --> 01:49:46.000]  or by reason of his color or race that are prescribed for the punishment of citizens
[01:49:46.000 --> 01:49:51.000]  shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year or both.
[01:49:51.000 --> 01:50:00.000]  That is not the statute that I've learned. This is going to call for some legal research.
[01:50:00.000 --> 01:50:12.000]  It is a concern I've had that the publishers who publish the code sometimes change the verbiage.
[01:50:12.000 --> 01:50:22.000]  I need to research the history of the code. Jeff, are you aware of any changes in 18 USC 242?
[01:50:22.000 --> 01:50:32.000]  Yeah. Because this is definitely not the 18 USC 242 I memorized 30 years ago.
[01:50:32.000 --> 01:50:36.000]  This is very different. It's the one I'm familiar with.
[01:50:36.000 --> 01:50:44.000]  Well, maybe you're familiarized later. No, but you're older than me.
[01:50:44.000 --> 01:51:02.000]  For me, this is distressing. Now, what I quoted is exactly the verbiage of the codification of the Ku Klux Klan Act into state law.
[01:51:02.000 --> 01:51:14.000]  This same verbiage I see all over the country. Under Julius' official misconduct, Texas, the only one has it as official oppression,
[01:51:14.000 --> 01:51:22.000]  but it's almost exactly the same verbiage everywhere. That was the verbiage from the Ku Klux Klan Act.
[01:51:22.000 --> 01:51:32.000]  This is different. The context of the statute, the place it goes to is different.
[01:51:32.000 --> 01:51:42.000]  This doesn't go to official misconduct. This goes strictly to deprivation of rights.
[01:51:42.000 --> 01:51:52.000]  So I am concerned. I do have to correct myself. I have been misquoting it.
[01:51:52.000 --> 01:52:06.000]  I will have to do some research on the statute. In looking at it earlier, I found some explanations of 18 USC 242.
[01:52:06.000 --> 01:52:16.000]  It essentially said the same thing that our code says, but that was the explanation, not the code itself.
[01:52:16.000 --> 01:52:28.000]  So I'll have to do some digging to see. I'm not sure why I got that wrong. There are other statutes.
[01:52:28.000 --> 01:52:42.000]  The one I quote a lot in Texas is Article 2.03. Article 2.03 seems to change regularly in the printed code,
[01:52:42.000 --> 01:52:51.000]  but I was unable to find those changes in the legislature, in the actual public laws.
[01:52:51.000 --> 01:53:02.000]  So I've had a question for a long time about code as opposed to statute, as opposed to public law.
[01:53:02.000 --> 01:53:12.000]  Public law is what the legislature actually passed, but the public law has some session number.
[01:53:12.000 --> 01:53:21.000]  They list them in order. So they didn't pass the whole penal code all at once, originally.
[01:53:21.000 --> 01:53:29.000]  Actually, they did in 1925 in Texas. They passed the penal code intact.
[01:53:29.000 --> 01:53:46.000]  And the statutes say that they can't change this code. Even the latest codes states that it must reflect the substance of the 1925 code,
[01:53:46.000 --> 01:53:55.000]  that that code can't be changed. But when I read it, the language is different and it has the appearance of changing.
[01:53:55.000 --> 01:54:05.000]  Article 2.03 used to require a prosecuting attorney when he was made known that a crime had been committed by a public official.
[01:54:05.000 --> 01:54:11.000]  He must produce a complaint from the information submitted to the grand jury fourth wit.
[01:54:11.000 --> 01:54:19.000]  And then I got a newer version of the code and fourth wit had been taken out.
[01:54:19.000 --> 01:54:26.000]  And I couldn't find anyone in the legislation that took out fourth wit. Just wasn't there.
[01:54:26.000 --> 01:54:44.000]  And there's always been this question about the Article 3 Constitution being different than the original Constitution, and then all of a sudden it just got changed.
[01:54:44.000 --> 01:54:55.000]  So I'm concerned about the publishing as opposed to the public laws.
[01:54:55.000 --> 01:55:01.000]  And I know you have a profound opinion on that, Jeff.
[01:55:01.000 --> 01:55:19.000]  Well, from what I have seen, every time the Secretary of State of various states signed off on their particular code, there are things about that code that have been changed, altered, or modified.
[01:55:19.000 --> 01:55:31.000]  And you can change the meaning of a sentence just by changing a single preposition. I'll give you, for instance, on or by.
[01:55:31.000 --> 01:55:41.000]  Now, did Jesus walk by the water or did he walk on the water?
[01:55:41.000 --> 01:55:44.000]  Quite a distinction. One little preposition.
[01:55:44.000 --> 01:55:56.000]  Yes. And especially in law, because law is so peculiar to definitions.
[01:55:56.000 --> 01:55:58.000]  Yeah.
[01:55:58.000 --> 01:56:00.000]  And so we have to really...
[01:56:00.000 --> 01:56:11.000]  Yeah, and I think you'll also find in law where or is used, it is not preceded by either, then it means and.
[01:56:11.000 --> 01:56:14.000]  Oh, did it? Okay.
[01:56:14.000 --> 01:56:19.000]  Wait, say that again.
[01:56:19.000 --> 01:56:38.000]  According to one legal researcher who has informed me after looking up in a number of different dictionaries, the use of the word or when not preceded by either, it means and, A and D.
[01:56:38.000 --> 01:56:49.000]  So it's not one or the other. It's inclusive.
[01:56:49.000 --> 01:57:01.000]  That's the way some people try to construe it. I don't know that that's actually the way that it is because you get into English grammar on a very high level.
[01:57:01.000 --> 01:57:08.000]  But that's the position that they had maintained as a legal researcher.
[01:57:08.000 --> 01:57:17.000]  Okay. Ken Madison is on and I know he has a comment. We've only got a minute, 40 seconds. Ken, you have a comment on this issue?
[01:57:17.000 --> 01:57:39.000]  Well, the issue of logic and or can be considered one or the other and doesn't have to be specified, but it also could be true, whereas an exclusive or is one or the other, but not both.
[01:57:39.000 --> 01:57:40.000]  Right.
[01:57:40.000 --> 01:57:45.000]  But that gets into the logic definitions of how they use those words.
[01:57:45.000 --> 01:57:47.000]  Okay.
[01:57:47.000 --> 01:57:49.000]  And the structure of the sentence.
[01:57:49.000 --> 01:57:57.000]  Logic definition is not necessarily, doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the legal definition.
[01:57:57.000 --> 01:57:59.000]  Right.
[01:57:59.000 --> 01:58:06.000]  We screw up when we think that logic has something to do with law.
[01:58:06.000 --> 01:58:10.000]  Only definitions have to do with law.
[01:58:10.000 --> 01:58:15.000]  We are out of time. Thank you, Ken, for calling in.
[01:58:15.000 --> 01:58:24.000]  Thank you, Jeff. And tomorrow night, Jeff, I have some questions on consumer credit cards that I would like to address.
[01:58:24.000 --> 01:58:25.000]  Okay.
[01:58:25.000 --> 01:58:30.000]  Call her on that subject. Okay. Thank you all for listening.
[01:58:30.000 --> 01:58:32.000]  Go ahead, Jeff.
[01:58:32.000 --> 01:58:34.000]  I said okay. Good night.
[01:58:34.000 --> 01:58:40.000]  Jeff. Thank you all for listening. We'll be back tomorrow night on our four hour info marathon.
[01:58:40.000 --> 01:58:45.000]  Good night.
[01:58:45.000 --> 01:59:07.000]  Bibles for America is offering absolutely free a unique study Bible called the New Testament Recovery Version.
[01:59:07.000 --> 01:59:16.000]  Call us toll free at 888-551-0102 or visit us online at bfa.org.
[01:59:16.000 --> 01:59:25.000]  This translation is highly accurate and it comes with over 13,000 cross references plus charts and maps and an outline for every book of the Bible.
[01:59:25.000 --> 01:59:28.000]  This is truly a Bible you can understand.
[01:59:28.000 --> 01:59:36.000]  To get your free copy of the New Testament Recovery Version, call us toll free at 888-551-0102.
[01:59:36.000 --> 01:59:45.000]  That's 888-551-0102 or visit us online at bfa.org.
[01:59:45.000 --> 02:00:07.000]  You're listening to the Logos Radio Network at logosradionetwork.com.