[00:00.000 --> 00:06.000]  The following newsflash is brought to you by the Lone Star Lowdown, providing the jelly
[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 --> 00:29.000]  Markets for the 4th of January 2016 opened over the gold $1075.61 an ounce, silver $13.89
[00:29.000 --> 00:36.000]  an ounce, Texas crude $37.04 a barrel, and Bitcoin is currently sitting at about $433
[00:36.000 --> 00:44.000]  U.S. currency.
[00:44.000 --> 00:50.000]  Today in history, Sunday January 4th, 1903, Topsy, a female Asian elephant, was electrocuted
[00:50.000 --> 00:53.000]  to death at Coney Island New York amusement park.
[00:53.000 --> 01:02.000]  The killer, Thomas Edison and his D.C. Current during the War of Currents campaign.
[01:02.000 --> 01:06.000]  In recent news, Eamon and Ryan Bundy are the apparent leaders of the militia protesters
[01:06.000 --> 01:10.000]  who have taken over and occupied a federal wildlife refuge in Oregon.
[01:10.000 --> 01:14.000]  The patriotic protesters call themselves citizens for constitutional freedom.
[01:14.000 --> 01:19.000]  Their father is the Nevada rancher who was all over the media in 2014 when he and his
[01:19.000 --> 01:23.000]  supporters had the iconic armed standoff with the Federal Bureau of Land Management.
[01:23.000 --> 01:27.000]  Eamon Bundy stated today that violence, if it comes our way, will be because government
[01:27.000 --> 01:29.000]  is wanting their building back.
[01:29.000 --> 01:31.000]  We're putting nobody in harm's way.
[01:31.000 --> 01:32.000]  We're not threatening anybody.
[01:32.000 --> 01:34.000]  We're 30 miles out of the closest town.
[01:34.000 --> 01:36.000]  What's all the fuss about?
[01:36.000 --> 01:41.000]  Dwight Hamond and his son Stephen are facing jail for apparently setting arson fires that
[01:41.000 --> 01:42.000]  spread to government lands.
[01:42.000 --> 01:46.000]  These controlled burns were fully supported by the local ranchers for the purpose of
[01:46.000 --> 01:50.000]  preparing the soil for the upcoming planting and harvesting season.
[01:50.000 --> 01:54.000]  Of course, 69-year-old Clive and Bundy weighed in on the matter stating that the United States
[01:54.000 --> 01:58.000]  Justice Department has no jurisdiction or authority within the state of Oregon.
[01:58.000 --> 02:03.000]  These lands are not under the U.S. treaties of commerce and they are not Article IV territories.
[02:03.000 --> 02:11.000]  Congress does not have unlimited power.
[02:11.000 --> 02:15.000]  President Barack Obama stated today concerning executive orders touching upon increased gun
[02:15.000 --> 02:19.000]  controls that, quote, these are not only recommendations that are well within my legal
[02:19.000 --> 02:24.000]  authority and the executive branch, but they are also ones that an overwhelmingly majority
[02:24.000 --> 02:28.000]  of American people, including gun owners, support and believe in.
[02:28.000 --> 02:32.000]  One of the initiatives currently being considered, an executive order defining who's engaging
[02:32.000 --> 02:36.000]  in the business of selling guns, which would immediately require some private dealers to
[02:36.000 --> 02:39.000]  obtain a license and begin conducting background checks.
[02:39.000 --> 02:42.000]  Critics are concerned with the president this might be setting.
[02:42.000 --> 02:45.000]  The executive simply has no authority to pass new laws.
[02:45.000 --> 02:49.000]  If a majority of Americans support these measures, they would surely be passed in Congress,
[02:49.000 --> 02:56.000]  where the people's representatives are delegated power to legislate in the interests of their constituents.
[02:56.000 --> 03:13.000]  This was your Lowdown for January 4th, 2016.
[03:13.000 --> 03:27.000]  Thank you.
[03:27.000 --> 03:44.000]  Thank you.
[03:44.000 --> 03:58.000]  Thank you.
[03:58.000 --> 04:15.000]  Thank you.
[04:15.000 --> 04:40.000]  All right, folks.
[04:40.000 --> 04:41.000]  Good evening.
[04:41.000 --> 04:45.000]  This is the Monday Night Rule of Law Radio Show with your host, Eddie Craig.
[04:45.000 --> 04:50.000]  It is January 4th, 2016.
[04:50.000 --> 04:56.000]  We are in the new year, and we are on the way to Lord knows where.
[04:56.000 --> 05:03.000]  But so far, I don't see the cliff that's been looming on the horizon receding anytime soon,
[05:03.000 --> 05:07.000]  only growing closer as the days go by.
[05:07.000 --> 05:11.000]  And the reason for that, of course, is because nothing has changed.
[05:11.000 --> 05:18.000]  Whether it be what we're doing or what they're doing, nothing has changed.
[05:18.000 --> 05:25.000]  The reason I know this is because nothing has changed.
[05:25.000 --> 05:31.000]  But I'm hoping to be the one that instigates at least some change.
[05:31.000 --> 05:38.000]  In this particular case here in Texas, dealing with this constitutional challenge motion to the Transportation Code,
[05:38.000 --> 05:45.000]  which, if successful, will balloon into a challenge to every code,
[05:45.000 --> 05:52.000]  because all of them, apparently, were recodified in exactly the same manner as the Transportation Code,
[05:52.000 --> 05:58.000]  which is in direct violation of the Texas Constitution in multiple ways.
[05:58.000 --> 06:04.000]  Now, before we get too far down the path there, I just want to give you an update on what's going on for the past week,
[06:04.000 --> 06:09.000]  except the day last Monday when I had such a bad sinus infection I couldn't hardly see straight,
[06:09.000 --> 06:12.000]  much less been three or two hours on the air talking.
[06:12.000 --> 06:20.000]  I have been working on all the paperwork that I've been talking about going into this as far as the constitutional challenge motion,
[06:20.000 --> 06:25.000]  all the stuff that I talked about the week before last that I was preparing for this.
[06:25.000 --> 06:29.000]  I'm still working on it, and I'll be working on it through the rest of this week.
[06:29.000 --> 06:40.000]  But the money for that, right now I've only had half a dozen people or so get the motion, and that's all well and good.
[06:40.000 --> 06:47.000]  I haven't got a cost yet back on the copies, but they're going to be substantial.
[06:47.000 --> 06:55.000]  That much I do know because what I asked for is literally going to generate dozens to hundreds of pages.
[06:55.000 --> 07:05.000]  But all of it is necessary to make a solid foundation from which this motion cannot be simply wiped away with a shrug.
[07:05.000 --> 07:13.000]  Now, in addition to this, of course, there is the money to carry this forward in an actual lawsuit
[07:13.000 --> 07:19.000]  against the City of Austin and the Austin Police Department, not only for the theft of my cars,
[07:19.000 --> 07:24.000]  but for the enforcement of an unconstitutional statute,
[07:24.000 --> 07:30.000]  and using that statute as the grounds to create an equally unconstitutional ordinance
[07:30.000 --> 07:36.000]  that allows them to steal private property without due process of law.
[07:36.000 --> 07:44.000]  But the problem with funds for a lawsuit is very different than funds for paying for copies of documents
[07:44.000 --> 07:54.000]  in that it would be foolish to initiate a lawsuit that you do not have the money to see all the way through before you begin.
[07:54.000 --> 08:02.000]  Nothing says lame like beginning a lawsuit against an entity that sorely needs to be sued
[08:02.000 --> 08:09.000]  just to let them walk away scot-free because you don't have the money to finish.
[08:09.000 --> 08:17.000]  It goes back to the old adage of don't start building a castle until you know you have the gold in hand to finish building it.
[08:17.000 --> 08:23.000]  Okay? So that's what we're into here, the money for the lawsuit, the donations.
[08:23.000 --> 08:29.000]  While I appreciate all of them that have come in, please, we need more for it.
[08:29.000 --> 08:32.000]  It's only going to cost money. It's not going to be cheap.
[08:32.000 --> 08:38.000]  And while we're on the subject of that, if you make a donation, please be aware of the following.
[08:38.000 --> 08:46.000]  Do not send me a money order or personal check made out to me.
[08:46.000 --> 08:50.000]  I do not have a bank account. I do not use bank accounts.
[08:50.000 --> 08:57.000]  I do not have any more current state IDs of any kind that will allow me to cash them.
[08:57.000 --> 09:05.000]  So if you're going to send them to me, make them out instead to Deborah, Deborah Stevens,
[09:05.000 --> 09:13.000]  or leave who they're made out to blank so I can give them to whoever can get the money for it at the time.
[09:13.000 --> 09:19.000]  But please do not send it to me with my name on it. I have no way to cash it.
[09:19.000 --> 09:29.000]  The problem with that is that when it's a money order, they are no longer allowing you to sign over a money order to another person.
[09:29.000 --> 09:36.000]  In other words, if you made it out to me, I can't just endorse it and give it to someone else to cash or deposit at their bank.
[09:36.000 --> 09:38.000]  The bank won't take it.
[09:38.000 --> 09:45.000]  So right now I've got a money order that was sent to me that I've got to return to the person that sent it
[09:45.000 --> 09:47.000]  because there's nothing we can do with it.
[09:47.000 --> 09:53.000]  They made it out to me, and I can't do anything with it. So I've got to get it sent back.
[09:53.000 --> 10:01.000]  Now that being said, please, if you're going to send actual checks or money orders or things like that, follow those guidelines.
[10:01.000 --> 10:06.000]  If you send actual cash or if you do it online, then it's not a big deal.
[10:06.000 --> 10:15.000]  But if you do it with a check or a money order, that's the way it's got to be because I cannot cash it otherwise.
[10:15.000 --> 10:24.000]  All right. Now, that being said, I'm going to get into a problem that is going on for someone up in Utah.
[10:24.000 --> 10:28.000]  And no, it's not anything to do with oath keepers or anything like that.
[10:28.000 --> 10:34.000]  This is an individual that has been given a speeding ticket and doesn't know how to fight it.
[10:34.000 --> 10:40.000]  And the judge apparently doesn't have a clue what kind of charge it is.
[10:40.000 --> 10:45.000]  And here is the way this is panning out.
[10:45.000 --> 10:56.000]  I can't find any direct information that says whether or not speeding is either a misdemeanor or an infraction in Utah.
[10:56.000 --> 11:06.000]  If anyone listening knows for certain which one it is, please send me an email to eddie at ruleoflawradio.com
[11:06.000 --> 11:10.000]  and let me know where to find the information.
[11:10.000 --> 11:11.000]  Don't just tell me.
[11:11.000 --> 11:19.000]  Please send me a link to whatever information it is that will allow me to know for a fact one way or the other if you know it.
[11:19.000 --> 11:21.000]  And we'll go from there.
[11:21.000 --> 11:30.000]  But here's the scenario as it currently exists without mentioning any names or details to identify the party.
[11:30.000 --> 11:41.000]  The party has appeared in court and been informed by the court that this was an infraction, a civil infraction, not a criminal infraction.
[11:41.000 --> 11:52.000]  And because it was an infraction, the individual was not entitled to a jury trial or to legal counsel under the state law.
[11:52.000 --> 12:00.000]  However, now the individual is being told by the same judge apparently or one of the prosecutors.
[12:00.000 --> 12:03.000]  They didn't clarify as to which source this came from.
[12:03.000 --> 12:07.000]  At least if they did, I missed it.
[12:07.000 --> 12:16.000]  Now they're being told that it's a Class C misdemeanor in Utah to be charged with speeding, though I can't find any confirmation of that.
[12:16.000 --> 12:24.000]  I've looked at several Utah attorneys' websites on traffic citations, and even though it talks about points and everything else,
[12:24.000 --> 12:31.000]  not a single attorney in Utah tells you what the nature and cause is in relation to speeding.
[12:31.000 --> 12:34.000]  They don't tell you if it's criminal or civil infraction.
[12:34.000 --> 12:38.000]  They just don't tell you.
[12:38.000 --> 12:48.000]  So that being said, I need to find out which one it is, because if it is a Class C, a Class C in Utah is not a fine only.
[12:48.000 --> 13:02.000]  You can be charged with up to 90 or convicted and charged with serving up to 90 days in jail and $750 in fines or both.
[13:02.000 --> 13:14.000]  So if it's a jailable offense, then this individual has an absolute right to legal counsel and to a jury trial.
[13:14.000 --> 13:23.000]  And nothing in state law can change that and not run directly afoul of the right of due process protected by the federal Constitution
[13:23.000 --> 13:29.000]  and most likely the state Constitution of Utah.
[13:29.000 --> 13:33.000]  So right now, we have a catch-22 situation.
[13:33.000 --> 13:44.000]  If it's a civil infraction and they are going to deny her counsel and a jury, then that's the rules they have to play by,
[13:44.000 --> 13:50.000]  which leaves us with playing by the civil rules of procedure.
[13:50.000 --> 13:55.000]  Now, if it's criminal, that is a different animal.
[13:55.000 --> 14:08.000]  And as a different animal, they have a right, because they can be incarcerated under a Class C in Utah, to a jury trial.
[14:08.000 --> 14:25.000]  Now, just so the folks that are in the states like Washington, for instance, where 99% of traffic offenses are considered to be civil infractions,
[14:25.000 --> 14:35.000]  I made a post on Facebook that goes over the methods you should employ in relation to that.
[14:35.000 --> 14:42.000]  Now, this is something that's very important, because when they're playing by civil rules in this,
[14:42.000 --> 14:56.000]  that means you have several advantages that they don't, especially if the allegation against you was made through a stop by an officer.
[14:56.000 --> 15:07.000]  So what I'm going to read to you is my post that I did up on Facebook, so that those of you that live in states where these are civil infractions
[15:07.000 --> 15:13.000]  understand exactly what the playing field is and how to use it to your advantage.
[15:13.000 --> 15:17.000]  So pay very close attention to this.
[15:17.000 --> 15:28.000]  When you are stopped and detained by an officer for a civil infraction, the legal facts are that the officer has perpetrated an illegal and unlawful seizure
[15:28.000 --> 15:33.000]  and false arrest or imprisonment the moment he perpetrated the stop.
[15:33.000 --> 15:41.000]  He both could have known and should have known that his actions violated your rights under the law.
[15:41.000 --> 15:50.000]  Therefore, everything he did or discovered during that detainment and seizure of your person and property was illegal
[15:50.000 --> 16:00.000]  and should be challenged and declared as inadmissible facts, testimony, and evidence under the fruit of the poison tree doctor.
[16:00.000 --> 16:06.000]  Now, in order to make this work at trial, these are the types of things you're going to need to file ASAP.
[16:06.000 --> 16:18.000]  You will need to file a motion to dismiss for lack of evidence and jurisdiction as they cannot obtain evidence or jurisdiction using illegal means.
[16:18.000 --> 16:25.000]  The correct answer to the question of could they do that, of course, is no.
[16:25.000 --> 16:33.000]  The request, we're also going to file a request for admissions and interrogatories in a motion for discovery.
[16:33.000 --> 16:37.000]  And I'll go into detail on that on the other side of this break.
[16:37.000 --> 16:47.000]  We've only asked seven interrogatories slash admissions for the civil discovery in this civil infraction case.
[16:47.000 --> 16:54.000]  And now hopefully did it in such a way that they become an affirmative defense for these types of things.
[16:54.000 --> 17:00.000]  So y'all hang on and we'll cover that on the other side.
[17:00.000 --> 17:06.000]  Through advances in technology, our lives have greatly improved, except in the area of nutrition.
[17:06.000 --> 17:11.000]  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 --> 17:58.000]  As a distributor, you can experience improved health, help your friends and family, and increase your income.
[17:58.000 --> 18:00.000]  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 two.
[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 --> 18:41.000]  Personal consultation is available as well.
[18:41.000 --> 18:49.000]  For more information, please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the blue Michael Mears banner, or email michaelmears at yahoo.com.
[18:49.000 --> 19:01.000]  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.
[19:01.000 --> 19:11.000]  You are listening to the Logos Radio Network, the LogosRadioNetwork.com.
[19:32.000 --> 19:36.000]  All right, folks, we are back. This is the Monday Night Rule of Law Radio Show.
[19:36.000 --> 19:40.000]  All right. Now, requests for admissions.
[19:40.000 --> 19:44.000]  There's a couple things to consider about these civil infraction cases.
[19:44.000 --> 19:48.000]  One of them is that you get to use the civil rules rather than the criminal rules.
[19:48.000 --> 19:54.000]  You're entitled to discovery in any case, whether it be civil, administrative, or criminal.
[19:54.000 --> 20:04.000]  So we're going to use that to our advantage, using whatever state rules of civil procedure for discovery for interrogatories and admissions that it covers.
[20:04.000 --> 20:11.000]  And there's one other thing to consider about a civil infraction versus a criminal allegation.
[20:11.000 --> 20:21.000]  If it's a civil infraction, then how can there possibly be someone over there with the job title of prosecutor?
[20:21.000 --> 20:26.000]  Prosecutors only exist in criminal cases.
[20:26.000 --> 20:35.000]  In a civil matter, the side that initiates is called the plaintiff, not the prosecution.
[20:35.000 --> 20:44.000]  So the only thing that can be on the other side in a civil matter is plaintiff's attorney, their counsel.
[20:44.000 --> 20:50.000]  So don't ever refer to them as a prosecutor because they can't be prosecuting. This is civil.
[20:50.000 --> 20:58.000]  If they attempt to use criminal rules in a civil matter, you need to be objecting to that.
[20:58.000 --> 21:05.000]  Now, that being said, in addition to the motion to dismiss, we're also going to file a motion for discovery.
[21:05.000 --> 21:13.000]  And in that motion, we're going to make these interrogatories slash requests for admissions.
[21:13.000 --> 21:28.000]  And there's seven of them. They're very short, sweet, and to the point, but they are specifically worded to create an affirmative defense against the officer's initial seizure.
[21:28.000 --> 21:38.000]  Because remember, this was civil. The officer had no warrant, nor could he obtain the warrant because there was no crime.
[21:38.000 --> 21:50.000]  If there was no crime, he had no authority to seize anyone because there was no probable cause or reasonable suspicion.
[21:50.000 --> 22:00.000]  Those two things are completely inapplicable in a civil matter. They only apply to criminal.
[22:00.000 --> 22:05.000]  So with that understanding, these are our seven interrogatories.
[22:05.000 --> 22:14.000]  Is the allegation being made considered to be a civil infraction under the name of your state law?
[22:14.000 --> 22:20.000]  In this particular case, let's just say Washington. We'll use Washington in this example.
[22:20.000 --> 22:32.000]  Number two, can a warrantless arrest or detention be lawfully perpetrated in relation to a civil matter under Washington state law?
[22:32.000 --> 22:42.000]  Three, may a warrant of arrest be obtained without a valid statement of probable cause under Washington state law?
[22:42.000 --> 22:59.000]  Four, under Washington state law is a statement of probable cause sufficient to obtain a warrant of arrest if it does not allege that an actual crime was perpetrated by the person named therein to be arrested?
[22:59.000 --> 23:18.000]  Five, under Washington state law, did officer so-and-so witness any actual crime that would constitute reasonable suspicion or articulable probable cause authorizing a warrantless detention or arrest of an individual?
[23:18.000 --> 23:40.000]  Six, under Washington state law, did officer so-and-so witness any actual crime that would constitute articulable probable cause providing sufficient grounds for a duly authorized magistrate to issue a warrant of arrest for an individual?
[23:40.000 --> 24:03.000]  Seven, was officer so-and-so in possession of a valid warrant for arrest for a male or female suspect using the name, whatever your name might be, or that contained an adequate physical description that allowed the officer to identify and apprehend the individual accused in this civil infraction?
[24:03.000 --> 24:27.000]  Remember, the point of these seven interrogatories is to show that the warrantless detention or arrest of the individual by the officer was both completely unlawful and illegal, making anything that was obtained or discovered by the officer during the detention or arrest for any purpose inadmissible.
[24:27.000 --> 24:45.000]  Therefore, there is no evidence or testimony that can be made, no proof that can be offered, thus no case of controversy before the court. No case or controversy means no jurisdiction of any kind.
[24:45.000 --> 25:13.000]  So if your state considers these to be civil infractions, I would use discovery through interrogatories or admissions, whatever your state allows, to ask these seven things to prove that the initial seizure by the officer was unconstitutional and illegal, thus resulting in fruit of the poison tree.
[25:13.000 --> 25:31.000]  All right. Now, if Utah turns out to be a civil infraction for speeding, this would be completely applicable in Utah, just like it would be in Washington or any other state where civil infractions are the rule of the day for traffic offenses.
[25:31.000 --> 26:00.000]  Now this, of course, will not work this way in places like Texas where they treat them as criminal, but Texas now has a different solution, entirely capable of getting better results even than this will because there is no valid law for any of them to be acting under, much less properly acting in one place but not in another.
[26:00.000 --> 26:13.000]  So keep that in mind when you're doing these cases wherever you live to know the nature of the cause being an allegation against you.
[26:13.000 --> 26:19.000]  The nature is extremely important. Without it, you don't have anything.
[26:19.000 --> 26:33.000]  All right. Now, that being said, call-in number is 512-646-1984. I've got one person up on the board, which I'm about to start with, and we need more, so y'all call in and get in line.
[26:33.000 --> 26:39.000]  All right. This is Bill in Wisconsin. Bill, what can we do for you?
[26:39.000 --> 27:01.000]  Yes. Hi, Eddie. My wife got put into detention, and then she got released on bond for $1,000. And then she went back for what's called the initial – this was in Minnesota. She went back for the –
[27:01.000 --> 27:05.000]  Hello?
[27:05.000 --> 27:18.000]  Bill? Bill suddenly disappeared. All right. Well, I have to wait for Bill to call back in. All right.
[27:18.000 --> 27:38.000]  Anyway, while I'm waiting for that to happen, in the cases of these civil infractions, once again, go back to that and understand that these affirmative questions that we're asking relating to the officer's lawful authority to seize a person and their property,
[27:38.000 --> 27:53.000]  which is your car and everything in it, without a crime being perpetrated in the officer's presence or view. And if that is the case, that makes it unconstitutional. That makes it illegal.
[27:53.000 --> 28:03.000]  Bill, I see you back up on the board, but I've got right at two minutes before I take the next break, so I'm going to wait and pick you up after the break. So hang in there. Don't go anywhere.
[28:03.000 --> 28:11.000]  I also see the other folks up here that are coming up on the board now. Y'all hang on, and I'll get to y'all as I can after the break as well.
[28:11.000 --> 28:29.000]  So I haven't had anyone yet present anything on the Post regarding any error in my reasoning on this or my legal conclusions based upon what they're doing.
[28:29.000 --> 28:38.000]  So far, no one anywhere has given me anything to say that the concept of what I'm doing here with this is incorrect, legally or otherwise.
[28:38.000 --> 28:54.000]  And I don't see how it could blow up in our face unless they're going to just admit that we're going to do what we want, regardless of the rules, and make it where it's impossible for you to defend yourself.
[28:54.000 --> 29:02.000]  And that opens up a whole new can of worms that's going to cause them even bigger problems in the long term.
[29:02.000 --> 29:18.000]  So with that in mind, I fully believe this to be one of your very best means to fight traffic infractions when they're civil in any state.
[29:18.000 --> 29:29.000]  That would also include, for instance, California, I believe New York, their infractions as well, and so on and so forth.
[29:29.000 --> 29:47.000]  So besides Washington, California, New York and whatever other states, possibly Utah, this is a go-to solution for you in relation to a citation issued by an officer through an actual detention stop.
[29:47.000 --> 29:51.000]  Okay. So y'all hang on, and we'll get back to the callers on the other side when we get back.
[29:51.000 --> 30:06.000]  512-646-1984 is the call-in number. We'll be right back, so y'all hang on.
[30:06.000 --> 30:10.000]  Ever walk into a room to get something and then forget why you went there in the first place?
[30:10.000 --> 30:18.000]  Amazingly, that memory lapse may be the doorway's fault. I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, back with the crazy details in a moment.
[30:18.000 --> 30:24.000]  Privacy is under attack. When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[30:24.000 --> 30:29.000]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[30:29.000 --> 30:34.000]  So protect your rights. Say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself.
[30:34.000 --> 30:44.000]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to. This message is brought to you by StartPage.com, the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo and Bing.
[30:44.000 --> 30:48.000]  Start over with StartPage.
[30:48.000 --> 30:52.000]  How many times have you stood in the middle of a room with no idea why you went there?
[30:52.000 --> 30:55.000]  It may not be forgetfulness. It could be the door.
[30:55.000 --> 31:01.000]  Scientists say our brains use doorways as event boundaries to separate activities and file them away.
[31:01.000 --> 31:06.000]  College students were asked to move objects around a room, and half of them walked through a doorway.
[31:06.000 --> 31:10.000]  Those who passed through the door had a harder time remembering what they had done.
[31:10.000 --> 31:13.000]  And even returning to where they got the instructions didn't help.
[31:13.000 --> 31:20.000]  If avoiding doorways improves your memory, maybe those wacky open classrooms of the 1970s were on to something.
[31:20.000 --> 31:30.000]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht for StartPage.com, the world's most private search engine.
[31:30.000 --> 31:37.000]  What are you thinking? Micro plant powder with iodine and probiotics, or a total body detox for around $10 a month?
[31:37.000 --> 31:48.000]  FUSA.org has 12 formulations of micro plant powder for absorbing and removing toxins from your kidneys, liver, blood, lungs, stomach and colon, and feel better than ever.
[31:48.000 --> 31:57.000]  It alkalizes, oxygenates, kills parasites, does the job of 10 products, that saves you space, time and money. Call 888-910-4367.
[31:57.000 --> 32:01.000]  Only at FUSA.org.
[32:01.000 --> 32:05.000]  Rule of Law Radio is proud to offer the Rule of Law Traffic Seminar.
[32:05.000 --> 32:12.000]  In today's America, we live in an us-against-them society, and if we the people are ever going to have a free society, then we're going to have to stand and defend our own rights.
[32:12.000 --> 32:19.000]  Among those rights are the right to travel freely from place to place, the right to act in our own private capacity, and most importantly, the right to due process of law.
[32:19.000 --> 32:25.000]  Traffic courts afford us the least expensive opportunity to learn how to enforce and preserve our rights through due process.
[32:25.000 --> 32:35.000]  Former Sheriff's Deputy Eddie Craig, in conjunction with Rule of Law Radio, has put together the most comprehensive teaching tool available that will help you understand what due process is and how to hold courts to the rule of law.
[32:35.000 --> 32:40.000]  You can get your own copy of this invaluable material by going to ruleoflawradio.com and ordering your copy today.
[32:40.000 --> 32:50.000]  By ordering now, you'll receive a copy of Eddie's book, The Texas Transportation Code, The Law Versus the Lie, video and audio of the original 2009 seminar, hundreds of research documents and other useful resource material.
[32:50.000 --> 33:01.000]  Learn how to fight for your rights with the help of this material from ruleoflawradio.com. Order your copy today, and together we can have the free society we all want and deserve.
[33:01.000 --> 33:12.000]  Live Free Speech Radio, logosradionetwork.com.
[33:12.000 --> 33:28.000]  Yeah, I got a warrant, and I gonna solve them, to the help of government them, prosecute them. Okay.
[33:28.000 --> 33:57.000]  All right, folks.
[33:57.000 --> 34:07.000]  We are back. This is Rule of Law Radio, and we're going to go back to Bill in Wisconsin. Bill, can you please start that again?
[34:07.000 --> 34:23.000]  Yes. My wife was, you know, put under detention in Minnesota at a stop, and then she was released two days later on a bond, a thousand dollar bond, and then she went to the initial hearing.
[34:23.000 --> 34:35.000]  And then the initial hearing from there, it's now gone to an omnibus hearing. Okay. So the next meeting, the next one is February 11th, it's omnibus.
[34:35.000 --> 34:50.000]  The arresting officer, his name is nowhere, was nowhere on any document. He never read her any rights, you know, until after, you know, they hit her locked down and in the jail.
[34:50.000 --> 34:54.000]  What did they charge her with if they locked her up?
[34:54.000 --> 35:05.000]  Well, there was four counts. They gave four counts. One of them was motor intent to escape tax for motor vehicle registration.
[35:05.000 --> 35:27.000]  The other one was unregistered certificate revoked, you know, motor vehicle registration. The other one was the driver's license, driving without a valid license or vehicle class type, multiple license prohibited.
[35:27.000 --> 35:35.000]  The last one was driver must carry proof of insurance when operating vehicle.
[35:35.000 --> 35:41.000]  Okay. So what is your actual question?
[35:41.000 --> 35:50.000]  Well, you mentioned these motions for discovery for the civil. Is that like a similar process than the criminal or is it different?
[35:50.000 --> 36:04.000]  I can do motions for discovery for criminal. I'm just saying that normally what they don't do in a criminal matter is admissions and interrogatories, at least not that I've seen.
[36:04.000 --> 36:09.000]  They do it in civil all the time.
[36:09.000 --> 36:10.000]  Okay.
[36:10.000 --> 36:19.000]  But you'll need to see what the rules and everything are for Minnesota, since that's where the case is being heard.
[36:19.000 --> 36:27.000]  Now, isn't it against the law to, you know, to put someone under arrest and not read them their rights?
[36:27.000 --> 36:32.000]  Well, that really depends upon what law you're referring to.
[36:32.000 --> 36:45.000]  No, no one has to read someone their rights just to put them under arrest, but they have to read them the rights before they actually take any statements from them.
[36:45.000 --> 36:50.000]  I can make a citizen's arrest for a felony or a breach of the peace committed in my presence review.
[36:50.000 --> 36:57.000]  There is no requirement that I read you your Miranda rights in order to arrest you.
[36:57.000 --> 37:12.000]  But the officer or the magistrate, if they're going to investigate and request information from you that can be used against you in some way, they have to Mirandize you before you answer those questions.
[37:12.000 --> 37:24.000]  But it is not a requirement that it be done just to arrest you.
[37:24.000 --> 37:32.000]  Now, the reason you see it in the cop shows and everything else is because that's the best time for a cop to remember to do it.
[37:32.000 --> 37:54.000]  Always do it the moment you arrest them, then you don't have to worry about forgetting about it later when they're in lockup or somewhere else just to find out later at trial that y'all asked them all kinds of questions they didn't voluntarily give and never read them their rights.
[37:54.000 --> 38:06.000]  But an omnibus hearing is a hearing to determine whether it was an actual valid arrest, I think.
[38:06.000 --> 38:13.000]  Well, I don't know what an omnibus hearing is. We don't have anything like that here. Here it's called a probable cause hearing.
[38:13.000 --> 38:17.000]  It's called an evidentiary hearing.
[38:17.000 --> 38:27.000]  That's where they're supposed to make the determinations of probable cause as to whether or not first and foremost was the arrest and detention lawful if it was done without a warrant.
[38:27.000 --> 38:39.000]  Then if it was probable cause was found to do so, then they move on to whether or not there's probable cause that the charge is valid.
[38:39.000 --> 38:45.000]  That's the way it's supposed to work.
[38:45.000 --> 38:51.000]  So is that your only question is whether or not they had to read her her rights?
[38:51.000 --> 39:12.000]  Well, I'm trying to understand. I thought they were supposed to read the rights to someone before they actually put handcuffs on them, pull them out of the vehicle without proving that the person was in commerce.
[39:12.000 --> 39:17.000]  No, proof is not what they're after right then.
[39:17.000 --> 39:22.000]  Proof is something that's done either at the evidentiary hearing or at trial.
[39:22.000 --> 39:27.000]  The officer has to articulate probable cause. He has to do a thorough investigation.
[39:27.000 --> 39:38.000]  His lack of thorough investigation is what makes it a contestable issue at trial in relation to the facts.
[39:38.000 --> 39:48.000]  The fact the officer never made the effort to investigate whether or not the person was subject to the rules that they're using, that's a poorly conducted investigation.
[39:48.000 --> 40:00.000]  It was not, it didn't get the necessary evidence to make such a conviction stick here in Texas or in several other places for that matter.
[40:00.000 --> 40:15.000]  But I haven't studied Minnesota statute to see how they've got it worded to cover their behinds.
[40:15.000 --> 40:23.000]  But the answer to your question is no. Miranda rights are not required simply to arrest.
[40:23.000 --> 40:34.000]  They're required if you intend to do anything that would result in the discovery or seizure of evidence.
[40:34.000 --> 40:42.000]  And that evidence in this case can be physical or it can be statements.
[40:42.000 --> 40:52.000]  Yeah, well, I always thought that in order to have probable cause, you had to know that there was a cause of action that was violated.
[40:52.000 --> 40:54.000]  Wait, say that again?
[40:54.000 --> 41:08.000]  Well, I thought in order for an arresting officer to have probable cause, he would have to have some way to show that there was a cause of action, that there was some kind of criminal procedure broken.
[41:08.000 --> 41:29.000]  Okay. In order for him to get probable cause or reasonable suspicion, he has to witness some activity that either is simpatico with a criminal act or is a criminal act.
[41:29.000 --> 41:40.000]  Okay. And that determines which one he has. The simpatico, in other words, you're hiding in a dark alley under an unlocked window in a house you don't live in.
[41:40.000 --> 41:47.000]  Okay. Those are reasonable suspicion acts.
[41:47.000 --> 42:00.000]  Okay. Your acts are consequential to criminal activity usually. Okay. They're normally associated therewith.
[42:00.000 --> 42:10.000]  Whereas probable cause, he sees you hanging halfway out of said window and you don't live there.
[42:10.000 --> 42:14.000]  Okay.
[42:14.000 --> 42:29.000]  Well, yeah, so he's making a probable cause that a private plate is a criminal act, basically.
[42:29.000 --> 42:47.000]  He is making a legal determination that a private plate violates Minnesota statute. The problem there for everyone in every state is that he is not allowed to testify on the stand in relation to legal determinations.
[42:47.000 --> 43:04.000]  Even though by the same consequences, he's allowed to arrest you by making a legal determination that he's not qualified to make in court, but somehow or other is qualified to make outside of court.
[43:04.000 --> 43:13.000]  You see the difference there? He can't testify to his thought process in court.
[43:13.000 --> 43:17.000]  Okay. So neither the prosecutor nor...
[43:17.000 --> 43:32.000]  No, the prosecutor does it for him by asking questions relative to the elements of the offense being made or alleged in order to get his testimony on the facts that he needs to prove it.
[43:32.000 --> 43:37.000]  Well, a probable cause itself is not facts, is it?
[43:37.000 --> 43:47.000]  A probable cause is based upon a set of articulable facts that a crime was about to be, is, or has been committed.
[43:47.000 --> 43:49.000]  Hang on just a second.
[43:49.000 --> 43:51.000]  All right, folks, we're about to take another break.
[43:51.000 --> 44:01.000]  512-646-1984. We'll be right back on the other side, so y'all hang in there.
[44:01.000 --> 44:04.000]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[44:04.000 --> 44:15.000]  Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary, the affordable, easy-to-understand, 4-CD course that will show you how in 24 hours, step-by-step.
[44:15.000 --> 44:23.000]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing. If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[44:23.000 --> 44:28.000]  Thousands have won with our step-by-step course, and now you can too.
[44:28.000 --> 44:34.000]  Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case-winning experience.
[44:34.000 --> 44:43.000]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand about the principles and practices that control our American courts.
[44:43.000 --> 44:52.000]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases, pro se tactics, and much more.
[44:52.000 --> 45:01.000]  Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner or call toll-free, 866-LAW-EZ.
[45:01.000 --> 45:07.000]  Hello. My name is Stuart Smith from naturespureorganics.com.
[45:07.000 --> 45:13.000]  And I would like to invite you to come by our store at 1904 Guadalupe Street, Suite D here in Austin, Texas.
[45:13.000 --> 45:19.000]  I'm Brave New Books and Chase Tank to see all our fantastic health and wellness products with your very own eyes.
[45:19.000 --> 45:23.000]  Have a look at our Miracle Healing Clay that started our adventure in alternative medicine.
[45:23.000 --> 45:31.000]  Take a peek at some of our other wonderful products, including our Alchali and Eme oil, lotion candles, olive oil soaps, and colloidal silver and gold.
[45:31.000 --> 45:38.000]  Call 512-264-4043 or find us online at naturespureorganics.com.
[45:38.000 --> 45:44.000]  That's 512-264-4043, naturespureorganics.com.
[45:44.000 --> 45:48.000]  Don't forget to like us on Facebook for information on events and our products.
[45:48.000 --> 45:51.000]  Naturespureorganics.com.
[46:18.000 --> 46:40.000]  All right, folks, we are back.
[46:40.000 --> 46:44.000]  This is Rule of Law Radio and we are still talking to Bill in Wisconsin.
[46:44.000 --> 46:49.000]  All right, Bill, is there any part of this you're not getting yet?
[46:49.000 --> 46:53.000]  Well, I think that it doesn't seem right.
[46:53.000 --> 46:59.000]  Like the arresting officer, he did not even – he refused to identify himself.
[46:59.000 --> 47:01.000]  His name – he wouldn't even give his name.
[47:01.000 --> 47:03.000]  He wouldn't give a business card.
[47:03.000 --> 47:04.000]  And then his name is –
[47:04.000 --> 47:11.000]  Well, again, is there some state law or federal law that compels him to do so?
[47:11.000 --> 47:17.000]  Well, I would think that the arresting officer would have to identify himself.
[47:17.000 --> 47:18.000]  Okay, wait.
[47:18.000 --> 47:28.000]  Bill, Bill, please show me where what you think was enacted into some law that someone has to obey.
[47:28.000 --> 47:30.000]  Well, it would be in the criminal procedures.
[47:30.000 --> 47:33.000]  No, not necessarily.
[47:33.000 --> 47:37.000]  But if there's a law, that's one thing.
[47:37.000 --> 47:44.000]  If it's just what Bill thinks, that's another. You get it?
[47:44.000 --> 47:47.000]  Well, a valid – I'm pretty sure a valid complaint has to have –
[47:47.000 --> 47:50.000]  We're not talking about a complaint.
[47:50.000 --> 47:56.000]  We're talking about what the cop does or doesn't do when he stops somebody.
[47:56.000 --> 47:59.000]  Well, he has to submit the complaint as part of the detention.
[47:59.000 --> 48:03.000]  Well, he can't submit a complaint that isn't signed or it's not a complaint.
[48:03.000 --> 48:06.000]  It's a piece of paper.
[48:06.000 --> 48:10.000]  Well, that's my point. It was invalid.
[48:10.000 --> 48:14.000]  Again, do you have a copy of it?
[48:14.000 --> 48:15.000]  Yes.
[48:15.000 --> 48:19.000]  Okay, and is it signed?
[48:19.000 --> 48:20.000]  It's not signed for him.
[48:20.000 --> 48:25.000]  There's an electronic signing by a detective who wasn't the arresting officer.
[48:25.000 --> 48:30.000]  The complaints don't have to be signed by the arresting officer.
[48:30.000 --> 48:38.000]  A complaint doesn't even have to be signed by somebody that was there.
[48:38.000 --> 48:42.000]  I don't think that's how it is in Minnesota, though.
[48:42.000 --> 48:44.000]  That's where it is anywhere.
[48:44.000 --> 48:49.000]  Anyone, anywhere can make a criminal allegation.
[48:49.000 --> 48:57.000]  But only someone with firsthand knowledge that was there can testify to it in court.
[48:57.000 --> 49:03.000]  They are two different things.
[49:03.000 --> 49:08.000]  In Minnesota, if you came to me as a friend and told me,
[49:08.000 --> 49:13.000]  my wife waits till I go to bed at night, ties me to the bed with the water hose,
[49:13.000 --> 49:19.000]  and beats me with her high-heeled shoes, I'm scared for my life every night when I fall asleep.
[49:19.000 --> 49:24.000]  I'm so scared I won't even file a criminal complaint against her.
[49:24.000 --> 49:27.000]  You confide that in me.
[49:27.000 --> 49:32.000]  So on your behalf, since I'm not afraid of your wife, I go down and say,
[49:32.000 --> 49:40.000]  hey, I want to file assault and battery criminal charges against this woman for what she's doing to her husband.
[49:40.000 --> 49:54.000]  I can do that because I believed you, and I believe that the facts you gave me related to a crime in the state of Minnesota.
[49:54.000 --> 49:57.000]  I don't have to see it. I don't have to be there for it.
[49:57.000 --> 50:05.000]  I just have to believe the crime occurred, and I can file criminal charges because of it.
[50:05.000 --> 50:16.000]  But when it goes to trial, you are the only one that can go in there and testify to it or someone else that actually saw it happen.
[50:16.000 --> 50:20.000]  You get it?
[50:20.000 --> 50:23.000]  I'm not sure I do get it because it doesn't seem right.
[50:23.000 --> 50:32.000]  Well, if it wasn't right, then no one could be charged with a murder where there are no witnesses, could they?
[50:32.000 --> 50:41.000]  Because the only witness would be the murderer, and he's not going to go in and file charges against himself.
[50:41.000 --> 50:46.000]  Well, the arresting officer is a public servant.
[50:46.000 --> 50:48.000]  You're missing the point.
[50:48.000 --> 50:56.000]  The arresting officer, if you're saying, has to have firsthand knowledge in order to make the complaint, was not there when the murder occurred.
[50:56.000 --> 51:00.000]  Therefore, he couldn't make the complaint, right?
[51:00.000 --> 51:04.000]  That's the logic you're making.
[51:04.000 --> 51:11.000]  Well, my logic is if someone makes a complaint, their name should be on the complaint.
[51:11.000 --> 51:16.000]  The detective put his name on the complaint.
[51:16.000 --> 51:21.000]  The detective never put the arresting officer's name. He refused to identify him.
[51:21.000 --> 51:26.000]  So far, we have a communications gap that's not being bridged.
[51:26.000 --> 51:29.000]  It doesn't matter.
[51:29.000 --> 51:35.000]  The arresting officer is not required to be the one that files the complaint.
[51:35.000 --> 51:42.000]  It works just like I just spelled it out for you, twice.
[51:42.000 --> 51:47.000]  The arresting officer is the only one that can go in and testify to it.
[51:47.000 --> 51:57.000]  But anyone that believes the facts he relates to them relating to a crime are true can make the complaint.
[51:57.000 --> 52:00.000]  This is what the detective did.
[52:00.000 --> 52:06.000]  Yeah, the whole thing smells like that brown stuff that falls out of the back of a...
[52:06.000 --> 52:18.000]  Well, again, like I said, if it didn't work that way, many murders could never be punished because there are no eyewitnesses.
[52:18.000 --> 52:28.000]  Therefore, no one could make a complaint even if they find the dead body and all the evidence in the world about who did it
[52:28.000 --> 52:35.000]  because no one would be eligible to make the complaint under the logic that you're asserting.
[52:35.000 --> 52:44.000]  Well, I mean, our conversation to me would give me no hope to fight it the way that you're presenting it to me.
[52:44.000 --> 52:54.000]  Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, fighting the issue in court is a completely different animal than saying the complaint is invalid
[52:54.000 --> 52:58.000]  because the arresting person didn't sign it.
[52:58.000 --> 53:08.000]  Those are two completely different animals in two completely different pens at two completely different zoos.
[53:08.000 --> 53:15.000]  Well, I'm not convinced that a complaint can be filed by an officer where he doesn't sign it.
[53:15.000 --> 53:19.000]  Okay, well, I'm no longer going to try to convince you.
[53:19.000 --> 53:21.000]  Just be aware of two things.
[53:21.000 --> 53:28.000]  You have the responsibility to prove that they can't do it under Minnesota law and good luck
[53:28.000 --> 53:35.000]  because I'm pretty sure Minnesota law allows it because every state does.
[53:35.000 --> 53:40.000]  And the reason is for exactly what I just told you.
[53:40.000 --> 53:47.000]  If the only person that can make a complaint is an eyewitness with firsthand knowledge,
[53:47.000 --> 53:57.000]  then any crime committed without a witness could never be punished no matter what it is.
[53:57.000 --> 54:05.000]  I'll have to go back and listen to this replay because it just doesn't smell right to me,
[54:05.000 --> 54:09.000]  the whole complaint thing doesn't seem right.
[54:09.000 --> 54:11.000]  Okay, let me try once more.
[54:11.000 --> 54:21.000]  You and I are alone on a desert island, but we're within the territorial jurisdiction of some state of the U.S., okay?
[54:21.000 --> 54:22.000]  But we're alone.
[54:22.000 --> 54:26.000]  We're the only two living beings on this island.
[54:26.000 --> 54:32.000]  And I hit you so hard with a coconut that I kill you.
[54:32.000 --> 54:39.000]  Two days later, someone comes and rescues us off this island and takes me, the living guy,
[54:39.000 --> 54:45.000]  and your dead body back to shore and reports the dead body.
[54:45.000 --> 54:48.000]  The cops come to me and they say, what happened?
[54:48.000 --> 54:53.000]  I'm going, hey, looks like a coconut hit him to me.
[54:53.000 --> 54:57.000]  Oh, well, we're going to charge you with murder because your fingerprints are on the coconut.
[54:57.000 --> 54:59.000]  We went back and looked.
[54:59.000 --> 55:02.000]  I'm like, hey, did you witness it?
[55:02.000 --> 55:03.000]  No.
[55:03.000 --> 55:06.000]  Well, then you can't charge me because you can't file the complaint.
[55:06.000 --> 55:09.000]  We were the only two people there, the only one that could testify
[55:09.000 --> 55:12.000]  and or make a complaint that I killed him with a coconut would be me.
[55:12.000 --> 55:18.000]  And good luck with getting me to ever again to do that.
[55:18.000 --> 55:23.000]  Is there something in this logic that still is not sinking in?
[55:23.000 --> 55:25.000]  Well, I understand your example.
[55:25.000 --> 55:31.000]  But to me, it doesn't seem applicable to someone placing somebody under custodial arrest
[55:31.000 --> 55:38.000]  and then somebody else can make the complaint that didn't see it, that it wasn't applicable to it.
[55:38.000 --> 55:44.000]  How would it make any difference under the example I just gave you?
[55:44.000 --> 55:47.000]  If these people that rescued us happen to be cops
[55:47.000 --> 55:50.000]  who were placing you under arrest for murder,
[55:50.000 --> 55:54.000]  how could they even make a complaint if they didn't witness it?
[55:54.000 --> 55:59.000]  How could they make the arrest if they couldn't be the ones to make the complaint?
[55:59.000 --> 56:01.000]  Do you follow?
[56:01.000 --> 56:07.000]  They are not tied together for a reason.
[56:07.000 --> 56:10.000]  Yeah, well, yeah, I understand your logic.
[56:10.000 --> 56:12.000]  It just doesn't seem.
[56:12.000 --> 56:20.000]  The problem is, is if you keep arguing, no, it doesn't seem, then you're not understanding my logic.
[56:20.000 --> 56:22.000]  No, I think I do understand the logic.
[56:22.000 --> 56:25.000]  I mean, I just don't agree with the conclusion.
[56:25.000 --> 56:30.000]  Well, the problem is you're going to have to find a solution to the conclusion in some other way.
[56:30.000 --> 56:35.000]  And I wish you all kinds of luck.
[56:35.000 --> 56:36.000]  All right.
[56:36.000 --> 56:40.000]  But that being said, man, I've had you on here for two segments and I'm still treading water here.
[56:40.000 --> 56:42.000]  So I'm going to move on to my next caller.
[56:42.000 --> 56:43.000]  Okay.
[56:43.000 --> 56:44.000]  But thanks for calling in, Bill.
[56:44.000 --> 56:45.000]  Yep.
[56:45.000 --> 56:46.000]  Bye-bye.
[56:46.000 --> 56:47.000]  Bye-bye.
[56:47.000 --> 56:48.000]  All right.
[56:48.000 --> 56:51.000]  Next person up, Spencer in Washington.
[56:51.000 --> 56:54.000]  Spencer, what can we do for you?
[56:54.000 --> 56:55.000]  Hey, Eddie, how's it going?
[56:55.000 --> 56:57.000]  I've been calling in for a while.
[56:57.000 --> 56:59.000]  I've been wanting to bring up something.
[56:59.000 --> 57:00.000]  Okay.
[57:00.000 --> 57:01.000]  Yeah.
[57:01.000 --> 57:06.000]  And you made some points here today that directly relate to this.
[57:06.000 --> 57:07.000]  I sent you an email with it.
[57:07.000 --> 57:09.000]  I don't know if you've got the link there.
[57:09.000 --> 57:15.000]  But this is RCW 46.61.021.
[57:15.000 --> 57:21.000]  It's a duty to obey law enforcement officers and the authority of officers.
[57:21.000 --> 57:30.000]  It states that any person requested or signaled to stop by a law enforcement officer for a traffic infraction has a duty to stop.
[57:30.000 --> 57:40.000]  Whenever any person is stopped for a traffic infraction, the officer may detain that person for a reasonable period of time necessary to identify the person,
[57:40.000 --> 57:54.000]  check for outstanding warrant, check the status of the person's license, insurance, identification card, and vehicle's registration, and complete and issue a notice of traffic infraction.
[57:54.000 --> 58:05.000]  Okay. The problem here is the legislature has attempted to legalize a personal seizure for a civil matter.
[58:05.000 --> 58:14.000]  This statute could be challenged as unconstitutional on its face because it deprives the person at their liberty without a warrant.
[58:14.000 --> 58:25.000]  Remember, no person or property shall be seized without a warrant duly issued by who?
[58:25.000 --> 58:27.000]  A magistrate.
[58:27.000 --> 58:31.000]  It protects us from unreasonable searches and seizures.
[58:31.000 --> 58:39.000]  And a civil infraction not being a crime would definitely have to be considered unreasonable.
[58:39.000 --> 58:40.000]  All right. Hang on, Spencer.
[58:40.000 --> 58:42.000]  We'll pick this up on the other side.
[58:42.000 --> 58:46.000]  All right, folks. 512-646-1984 is the calling number.
[58:46.000 --> 58:50.000]  We'll be right back, so y'all hang in there.
[58:50.000 --> 58:58.000]  The Bible remains the most popular book in the world, yet countless readers are frustrated because they struggle to understand it.
[58:58.000 --> 59:06.000]  Some new translations try to help by simplifying the text, but in the process can compromise the profound meaning of the Scripture.
[59:06.000 --> 59:09.000]  Enter the recovery version.
[59:09.000 --> 59:18.000]  First, this new translation is extremely faithful and accurate, but the real story is the more than 9,000 explanatory footnotes.
[59:18.000 --> 59:28.000]  Difficult and profound passages are opened up in a marvelous way, 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 --> 59:48.000]  This comprehensive yet compact Study Bible is yours just by calling us toll-free at 1-888-551-0102 or by ordering online at freestudybible.com.
[59:48.000 --> 59:51.000]  That's freestudybible.com.
[59:51.000 --> 01:00:00.000]  You are listening to the Logos Radio Network, logosradionetwork.com.
[01:00:00.000 --> 01:00:08.000]  The following newsflash is brought to you by the Lone Star Lowdown, providing the daily bulletins for the commodity 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 --> 01:00:44.000]  Markets for the 4th of January, 2016, opened up with gold, $1,075.61 an ounce, silver, $13.89 an ounce, Texas crude, $37.04 a barrel, and Bitcoin is currently sitting at about 433 U.S. currency.
[01:00:44.000 --> 01:00:53.000]  Today in history, Sunday, January 4th, 1903, Topsy, a female Asian elephant, was electrocuted to death at Coney Island, New York amusement park.
[01:00:53.000 --> 01:01:02.000]  The killer? Thomas Edison and his D.C. Current during the War of Currents campaign.
[01:01:02.000 --> 01:01:10.000]  In recent news, Eamon and Ryan Bundy are the apparent leaders of the militia protesters who have taken over and occupied a federal wildlife refuge in Oregon.
[01:01:10.000 --> 01:01:14.000]  The patriotic protesters call themselves citizens for constitutional freedom.
[01:01:14.000 --> 01:01:23.000]  Their father is the Nevada rancher who was all over the media in 2014 when he and his supporters had the iconic armed standoff with the Federal Bureau of Land Management.
[01:01:23.000 --> 01:01:29.000]  Eamon Bundy stated today that violence, if it comes our way, will be because government is wanting their building back.
[01:01:29.000 --> 01:01:35.000]  We're putting nobody in harm's way. We're not threatening anybody. We're 30 miles out of the closest town.
[01:01:35.000 --> 01:01:42.000]  What's all the fuss about? Dwight Hamond and his son Stephen are facing jail for apparently setting arson fires that spread to government lands.
[01:01:42.000 --> 01:01:50.000]  These controlled burns were fully supported by the local ranchers for the purpose of preparing the soil for the upcoming planting and harvesting season.
[01:01:50.000 --> 01:01:58.000]  Of course, 69-year-old Cliven Bundy weighed in on the matter, stating that the United States Justice Department has no jurisdiction or authority within the state of Oregon.
[01:01:58.000 --> 01:02:03.000]  These lands are not under the U.S. treaties of commerce, and they are not Article IV territories.
[01:02:03.000 --> 01:02:06.000]  Congress does not have unlimited power.
[01:02:11.000 --> 01:02:16.000]  President Barack Obama stated today concerning executive orders touching upon increased gun controls that,
[01:02:16.000 --> 01:02:21.000]  quote, these are not only recommendations that are well within my legal authority and the executive branch,
[01:02:21.000 --> 01:02:28.000]  but they are also ones that an overwhelmingly majority of American people, including gun owners, support and believe in.
[01:02:28.000 --> 01:02:34.000]  One of the initiatives currently being considered, an executive order defining who's engaging in the business of selling guns,
[01:02:34.000 --> 01:02:40.000]  which would immediately require some private dealers to obtain a license and begin conducting background checks.
[01:02:40.000 --> 01:02:45.000]  Critics are concerned with the president this might be setting. The executive simply has no authority to pass new laws.
[01:02:45.000 --> 01:02:50.000]  If a majority of Americans support these measures, they would surely be passed in Congress,
[01:02:50.000 --> 01:02:56.000]  where the people's representatives are delegated power to legislate in the interests of their constituents.
[01:02:56.000 --> 01:03:00.000]  This was your Lowdown for January 4th, 2016.
[01:03:26.000 --> 01:03:30.000]  All right, folks, we are back. This is Rule of Law Radio.
[01:03:30.000 --> 01:03:36.000]  Call in number 512-646-1984. We're still talking with Spencer in Washington.
[01:03:36.000 --> 01:03:39.000]  All right, Spencer, go ahead.
[01:03:39.000 --> 01:03:46.000]  That pretty much sums up my opinions on that statute they tried to write.
[01:03:46.000 --> 01:03:51.000]  It's unconstitutional, so that really wouldn't hold up too well if they tried to use it.
[01:03:51.000 --> 01:03:56.000]  Not if it was properly challenged. It could be challenged on the reasonableness standard.
[01:03:56.000 --> 01:04:03.000]  If an officer comes up to you in a civil dispute, what's the first thing the officer says?
[01:04:03.000 --> 01:04:07.000]  Hey, I can't help you. Sue him.
[01:04:07.000 --> 01:04:09.000]  Okay, nothing I can do for you.
[01:04:09.000 --> 01:04:14.000]  So here you have the state legislature saying, well, we're going to make this a civil matter,
[01:04:14.000 --> 01:04:22.000]  but since you work for us, you're going to seize that person and hold them there
[01:04:22.000 --> 01:04:27.000]  rather than us having to file the suit that we have to file if it's a civil.
[01:04:27.000 --> 01:04:32.000]  Because when it's civil, it must have a civil suit.
[01:04:32.000 --> 01:04:38.000]  And in a civil suit, there are rules. They have to properly serve you.
[01:04:38.000 --> 01:04:43.000]  The police officer is not a judicial officer. He can't serve process.
[01:04:43.000 --> 01:04:49.000]  That he issues anyway. He can't issue it. He can serve it maybe, but he can't issue it.
[01:04:49.000 --> 01:04:52.000]  And that's what he's doing if that's what this is supposed to be.
[01:04:52.000 --> 01:04:56.000]  Secondly, if you look in the rules of civil procedure in Washington,
[01:04:56.000 --> 01:05:04.000]  you'll probably find that nothing in the citation matches a suit that is required to be filed as civil matter.
[01:05:04.000 --> 01:05:10.000]  You will find over and over again that the citation for a civil case in a court
[01:05:10.000 --> 01:05:17.000]  violates every procedural rule required to state a claim in a civil matter.
[01:05:17.000 --> 01:05:20.000]  So the citation would be invalid on its face.
[01:05:20.000 --> 01:05:30.000]  Therefore, a seizure under a citation for a civil infraction would be unreasonable on its face.
[01:05:30.000 --> 01:05:33.000]  Follow the logic?
[01:05:33.000 --> 01:05:37.000]  Yes, I follow that logic.
[01:05:37.000 --> 01:05:40.000]  And one other thing I wanted to bring up.
[01:05:40.000 --> 01:05:44.000]  This may be a whole other segment for you one day.
[01:05:44.000 --> 01:05:47.000]  We don't need to spend a bunch of time talking about it.
[01:05:47.000 --> 01:05:54.000]  But on the 18th, that was a Friday, that was the last four hour long segment.
[01:05:54.000 --> 01:05:57.000]  I believe Randy does that.
[01:05:57.000 --> 01:06:03.000]  He was talking about, of course, the subject matter of jurisdiction.
[01:06:03.000 --> 01:06:08.000]  How hard that is to actually fight in court.
[01:06:08.000 --> 01:06:11.000]  And it's better to bring that up.
[01:06:11.000 --> 01:06:14.000]  And then they're not going to want to dismiss that.
[01:06:14.000 --> 01:06:20.000]  Because that, of course, basically nullifies any traffic citation they ever write.
[01:06:20.000 --> 01:06:22.000]  And that's their main source of income.
[01:06:22.000 --> 01:06:23.000]  Wait, wait, wait.
[01:06:23.000 --> 01:06:25.000]  Repeat that first part.
[01:06:25.000 --> 01:06:28.000]  I'm not sure I'm following this correctly here.
[01:06:28.000 --> 01:06:32.000]  He's saying don't challenge subject matter jurisdiction?
[01:06:32.000 --> 01:06:38.000]  Do challenge it, but you're likely not going to get far with it
[01:06:38.000 --> 01:06:42.000]  because no court will want to rule that way
[01:06:42.000 --> 01:06:46.000]  because it will nullify just about anything that goes through.
[01:06:46.000 --> 01:06:52.000]  Well, that may be, but the court has a duty to rule on the law as it exists.
[01:06:52.000 --> 01:06:58.000]  They're not free to just shrug their shoulders and walk away as if it doesn't matter.
[01:06:58.000 --> 01:07:06.000]  We are entitled to due process at every stage of every proceeding.
[01:07:06.000 --> 01:07:11.000]  And one of those stages, even at the lowest level of court,
[01:07:11.000 --> 01:07:16.000]  is that the law must be applied to the facts.
[01:07:16.000 --> 01:07:22.000]  When they fail to do that, they are depriving you of due process.
[01:07:22.000 --> 01:07:25.000]  You have a right to challenge jurisdiction.
[01:07:25.000 --> 01:07:36.000]  Therefore, you have a right to have a proper determination of that jurisdiction.
[01:07:36.000 --> 01:07:39.000]  Gotcha.
[01:07:39.000 --> 01:07:41.000]  So when they refuse to do their job,
[01:07:41.000 --> 01:07:48.000]  that's when you move to disqualify for judicial incompetence and bias.
[01:07:48.000 --> 01:07:49.000]  Okay.
[01:07:49.000 --> 01:07:55.000]  Which will stall them in the water just as much as anything else on jurisdiction.
[01:07:55.000 --> 01:07:58.000]  When they will not answer a question of jurisdiction
[01:07:58.000 --> 01:08:01.000]  by putting evidence into the record that they actually have it,
[01:08:01.000 --> 01:08:07.000]  and you move to disqualify the judge for judicial incompetence, prejudice, and bias,
[01:08:07.000 --> 01:08:09.000]  then they have to put in another judge.
[01:08:09.000 --> 01:08:13.000]  And if he repeats the same thing, we repeat the same thing.
[01:08:13.000 --> 01:08:21.000]  So they either run out of judges, dismiss the case, or do their job.
[01:08:21.000 --> 01:08:26.000]  Gotcha.
[01:08:26.000 --> 01:08:28.000]  Just keep repeating it basically.
[01:08:28.000 --> 01:08:29.000]  That's it.
[01:08:29.000 --> 01:08:30.000]  Keep following that same path.
[01:08:30.000 --> 01:08:32.000]  That's it.
[01:08:32.000 --> 01:08:37.000]  And all these motions you called out at the beginning of the show,
[01:08:37.000 --> 01:08:41.000]  these are not something you want to show up in court and throw at them.
[01:08:41.000 --> 01:08:44.000]  These are things that you want to file ahead of time, correct?
[01:08:44.000 --> 01:08:45.000]  Oh, yes.
[01:08:45.000 --> 01:08:49.000]  You want to get them filed as early on as possible,
[01:08:49.000 --> 01:08:54.000]  because what you're going to do there with that list of interrogatories is most states
[01:08:54.000 --> 01:08:58.000]  in civil matters have at least a 30-day window for discovery.
[01:08:58.000 --> 01:09:01.000]  So it's got to be done as far as the motion for discovery for the interrogatories
[01:09:01.000 --> 01:09:04.000]  and admissions would have to be done at least 30 days in advance
[01:09:04.000 --> 01:09:10.000]  or whatever your state requires.
[01:09:10.000 --> 01:09:14.000]  Gotcha.
[01:09:14.000 --> 01:09:16.000]  And if they have a conflict where they're saying,
[01:09:16.000 --> 01:09:21.000]  well, in these cases, we can have you in within 10 days.
[01:09:21.000 --> 01:09:26.000]  Well, if this is a civil matter and you have to have 30 days or more for discovery,
[01:09:26.000 --> 01:09:30.000]  then that is a setup for denial of due process,
[01:09:30.000 --> 01:09:35.000]  because you cannot compel discovery in less than 30 days under state rules,
[01:09:35.000 --> 01:09:37.000]  yet they're taking you into a civil matter
[01:09:37.000 --> 01:09:43.000]  and denying you discovery by preventing you from getting 30 days.
[01:09:43.000 --> 01:09:46.000]  It's a conflict, one that violates rights.
[01:09:46.000 --> 01:09:53.000]  Therefore, it can't be left to stand.
[01:09:53.000 --> 01:09:54.000]  Gotcha.
[01:09:54.000 --> 01:09:57.000]  That sums up everything that I had questions on here today.
[01:09:57.000 --> 01:09:58.000]  All right.
[01:09:58.000 --> 01:09:59.000]  Let's move on to the next person.
[01:09:59.000 --> 01:10:00.000]  Okay.
[01:10:00.000 --> 01:10:02.000]  Thanks for calling in, Spencer.
[01:10:02.000 --> 01:10:03.000]  Thank you, Eddie.
[01:10:03.000 --> 01:10:04.000]  You're welcome.
[01:10:04.000 --> 01:10:05.000]  You have a good night.
[01:10:05.000 --> 01:10:06.000]  Bye-bye.
[01:10:06.000 --> 01:10:07.000]  All right.
[01:10:07.000 --> 01:10:08.000]  All right.
[01:10:08.000 --> 01:10:10.000]  Now we're going to go to Donna in Texas.
[01:10:10.000 --> 01:10:12.000]  Donna, what can we do for you?
[01:10:12.000 --> 01:10:13.000]  Howdy, Eddie.
[01:10:13.000 --> 01:10:16.000]  When you talked about the request for admission,
[01:10:16.000 --> 01:10:20.000]  you made a comment that we're not to do that in Texas?
[01:10:20.000 --> 01:10:21.000]  No.
[01:10:21.000 --> 01:10:25.000]  The request for admissions and interrogatories is for civil matters.
[01:10:25.000 --> 01:10:29.000]  Texas considers these matters criminal.
[01:10:29.000 --> 01:10:32.000]  So a speeding ticket is criminal?
[01:10:32.000 --> 01:10:33.000]  Yes.
[01:10:33.000 --> 01:10:36.000]  It's a Class C misdemeanor according to them.
[01:10:36.000 --> 01:10:38.000]  Class A misdemeanor.
[01:10:38.000 --> 01:10:41.000]  No, Class C, as in Charlie.
[01:10:41.000 --> 01:10:48.000]  Class C. So what is the position that we take?
[01:10:48.000 --> 01:10:53.000]  How do you do what this interrogatory...
[01:10:53.000 --> 01:10:54.000]  You don't.
[01:10:54.000 --> 01:10:55.000] ...you say for other states...
[01:10:55.000 --> 01:10:57.000]  This has nothing to do with Texas.
[01:10:57.000 --> 01:10:59.000]  That's why I said what I said at the beginning of the show.
[01:10:59.000 --> 01:11:04.000]  Here in Texas, we're doing a constitutional challenge to the entire code
[01:11:04.000 --> 01:11:09.000]  because the entire code was unconstitutionally enacted.
[01:11:09.000 --> 01:11:15.000]  It violates multiple provisions of the Texas Constitution and how it was enacted.
[01:11:15.000 --> 01:11:19.000]  The whole code is invalid, not just parts of it.
[01:11:19.000 --> 01:11:23.000]  But I have a jury trial January 26.
[01:11:23.000 --> 01:11:26.000]  I understand that, and we've talked about that.
[01:11:26.000 --> 01:11:27.000]  Where do I go from here?
[01:11:27.000 --> 01:11:28.000]  Which direction?
[01:11:28.000 --> 01:11:29.000]  I need a...
[01:11:29.000 --> 01:11:35.000]  Right now, you are waiting, just like I am, on the documents from the Secretary of State
[01:11:35.000 --> 01:11:41.000]  that the motion requires in order to have the evidence that makes it irrefutable.
[01:11:41.000 --> 01:11:42.000]  Okay?
[01:11:42.000 --> 01:11:43.000]  Okay.
[01:11:43.000 --> 01:11:49.000]  And they're coming up on the deadline date for having those documents to me,
[01:11:49.000 --> 01:11:54.000]  which is still a good 13 days before the 26th,
[01:11:54.000 --> 01:11:57.000]  which is still more than enough time to get everything filed.
[01:11:57.000 --> 01:12:02.000]  But you said that in order to get that, I have to know it and understand it.
[01:12:02.000 --> 01:12:09.000]  You're going to have to read it and know what to say if they challenge you about anything in it.
[01:12:09.000 --> 01:12:12.000]  I'm slow because I'm old.
[01:12:12.000 --> 01:12:19.000]  Well, I understand that, and that's what they attempt to take advantage of.
[01:12:19.000 --> 01:12:20.000]  Okay?
[01:12:20.000 --> 01:12:21.000]  That's the problem.
[01:12:21.000 --> 01:12:23.000]  They set people up for that intentionally.
[01:12:23.000 --> 01:12:25.000]  They know they're defrauding you.
[01:12:25.000 --> 01:12:27.000]  They know that.
[01:12:27.000 --> 01:12:33.000]  But the more they can make it look like your fault rather than theirs, the better off they are,
[01:12:33.000 --> 01:12:36.000]  and the more deniability they have.
[01:12:36.000 --> 01:12:41.000]  For the sake of argument, if I go to trial without having this, if, you know, plan...
[01:12:41.000 --> 01:12:46.000]  You will lose unless the jury just likes you for some reason.
[01:12:46.000 --> 01:12:52.000]  Well, if the transportation code says that a street sign is to be 30,
[01:12:52.000 --> 01:12:57.000]  and they gave me a ticket for 25, knowing that they said, you know,
[01:12:57.000 --> 01:13:00.000]  ignorance is no excuse for the law, whatever that is.
[01:13:00.000 --> 01:13:04.000]  Well, the thing about it is, where does the citation say it was issued
[01:13:04.000 --> 01:13:09.000]  versus where you say the sign is for the speed limit?
[01:13:09.000 --> 01:13:11.000]  It was in the neighborhood street.
[01:13:11.000 --> 01:13:12.000]  Okay.
[01:13:12.000 --> 01:13:14.000]  Well, again, do both of those agree?
[01:13:14.000 --> 01:13:17.000]  If you go and take a picture of the speed limit sign, for instance,
[01:13:17.000 --> 01:13:20.000]  how are you going to prove where you're at?
[01:13:20.000 --> 01:13:24.000]  It's much better to do it by video rather than photographs.
[01:13:24.000 --> 01:13:25.000]  Okay?
[01:13:25.000 --> 01:13:27.000]  Just in case you're wondering.
[01:13:27.000 --> 01:13:28.000]  You can go videotape it.
[01:13:28.000 --> 01:13:30.000]  I don't understand where you're going with it.
[01:13:30.000 --> 01:13:37.000]  At the entrance of our test 25, it doesn't say anything on that street right there.
[01:13:37.000 --> 01:13:39.000]  Is that what you're asking?
[01:13:39.000 --> 01:13:40.000]  Correct.
[01:13:40.000 --> 01:13:42.000]  Well, correct.
[01:13:42.000 --> 01:13:47.000]  What you have to show is that where you got the ticket is controlled by a particular speed sign.
[01:13:47.000 --> 01:13:50.000]  Wherever that speed sign may be located.
[01:13:50.000 --> 01:13:55.000]  If it's at the entrance to a subdivision or something of that,
[01:13:55.000 --> 01:13:57.000]  or gated community or something like that,
[01:13:57.000 --> 01:14:01.000]  it would be considered applicable to any thoroughfare in it.
[01:14:01.000 --> 01:14:02.000]  Okay?
[01:14:02.000 --> 01:14:09.000]  But you have to make sure that what you're doing in the video for admissibility in court shows all of that.
[01:14:09.000 --> 01:14:11.000]  Here's the gated community, for instance.
[01:14:11.000 --> 01:14:14.000]  Here is the speed sign outside the gated community.
[01:14:14.000 --> 01:14:19.000]  Here is the path into the street and basically the whole way you're videotaping,
[01:14:19.000 --> 01:14:23.000]  all the way into where you were stopped and where the ticket was issued,
[01:14:23.000 --> 01:14:28.000]  show that the citation verifies that the location you're currently at is where the ticket was issued,
[01:14:28.000 --> 01:14:30.000]  and so on and so forth.
[01:14:30.000 --> 01:14:31.000]  In other words...
[01:14:31.000 --> 01:14:32.000]  Hold on.
[01:14:32.000 --> 01:14:35.000]  Now, I was on another street when I actually stopped.
[01:14:35.000 --> 01:14:37.000]  Is that what you're saying?
[01:14:37.000 --> 01:14:45.000]  Okay. Again, when you say another street, where is this street located?
[01:14:45.000 --> 01:14:51.000]  Okay. Let's just say for the sake of argument, the street of the infraction was Meadow Glen.
[01:14:51.000 --> 01:14:53.000]  But they stopped me...
[01:14:53.000 --> 01:14:54.000]  Okay. No, no, no, no, no.
[01:14:54.000 --> 01:14:55.000] ...on another street.
[01:14:55.000 --> 01:15:00.000]  They have to state on the citation where the offense occurred, not where you stopped.
[01:15:00.000 --> 01:15:02.000]  Okay. They did that.
[01:15:02.000 --> 01:15:09.000]  Okay. But what you want to show is what the speed limit was for where the offense is alleged
[01:15:09.000 --> 01:15:14.000]  and where they stopped you at so you can show that there's a connection between the two.
[01:15:14.000 --> 01:15:16.000]  It's not a disjointed discussion.
[01:15:16.000 --> 01:15:19.000]  They said the offense occurred on this street.
[01:15:19.000 --> 01:15:24.000]  When he turned on his lights, I turned right onto this street and I stopped right here.
[01:15:24.000 --> 01:15:28.000]  And it's a continuous video from the speed sign at the beginning of the street
[01:15:28.000 --> 01:15:32.000]  where they alleged you were speeding all the way to where you pulled in.
[01:15:32.000 --> 01:15:33.000]  Okay.
[01:15:33.000 --> 01:15:36.000]  And what point does that serve?
[01:15:36.000 --> 01:15:42.000]  Well, it shows that as long as you get the street signs that show what street you're on
[01:15:42.000 --> 01:15:47.000]  and where the speed limit sign is in relation to those streets and so on and so forth,
[01:15:47.000 --> 01:15:50.000]  it shows what the posted speed sign is.
[01:15:50.000 --> 01:15:52.000]  You said it was 30.
[01:15:52.000 --> 01:15:56.000]  Then you said they issued you a citation for 25?
[01:15:56.000 --> 01:16:04.000]  No, sir. The transportation code states that roads will be 30 miles an hour.
[01:16:04.000 --> 01:16:10.000]  Unless they have a traffic assessment in order to adjust them.
[01:16:10.000 --> 01:16:14.000]  They have to bring that traffic assessment to court.
[01:16:14.000 --> 01:16:18.000]  If they don't, they can't prove their case.
[01:16:18.000 --> 01:16:20.000]  That's what I'm trying to ask.
[01:16:20.000 --> 01:16:27.000]  Okay. So I have to ask when they did a traffic assessment for this street.
[01:16:27.000 --> 01:16:29.000]  Well, you're going to have to ask the officer,
[01:16:29.000 --> 01:16:32.000]  did you bring any evidence with you to court today
[01:16:32.000 --> 01:16:38.000]  that there was a speed assessment done on this street correlating to the alleged speed?
[01:16:38.000 --> 01:16:41.000]  But if you do that, you're blowing yourself up.
[01:16:41.000 --> 01:16:45.000]  Hang on just a second, Donna, and we'll talk about this on the other side.
[01:16:45.000 --> 01:16:51.000]  All right, folks, this is Rule of Law Radio 512-646-1984.
[01:16:51.000 --> 01:17:00.000]  We're going to take a break, but we'll be right back, so y'all hang in there.
[01:17:00.000 --> 01:17:04.000]  At Capital Coin and Bullion, our mission is to be your preferred shopping destination
[01:17:04.000 --> 01:17:08.000]  by delivering excellent customer service and outstanding value at an affordable price.
[01:17:08.000 --> 01:17:11.000]  We provide a wide assortment of your favorite products
[01:17:11.000 --> 01:17:14.000]  featuring a great selection of high quality coins and precious metals.
[01:17:14.000 --> 01:17:18.000]  We cater to beginners in coin collecting as well as large transactions for investors.
[01:17:18.000 --> 01:17:21.000]  We believe in educating our customers with resources
[01:17:21.000 --> 01:17:24.000]  from top accredited metals dealers and journalists.
[01:17:24.000 --> 01:17:27.000]  If we don't have what you're looking for, we can find it.
[01:17:27.000 --> 01:17:32.000]  In addition, we carry popular longevity products such as Beyond Tangy Tangerine and Polynverse.
[01:17:32.000 --> 01:17:35.000]  We also offer One World Way, Mountain House Storable Foods,
[01:17:35.000 --> 01:17:39.000]  Berkey Water Products, ammunition at 10% above wholesale, and more.
[01:17:39.000 --> 01:17:43.000]  We broker metals IRA accounts, and we also accept Bitcoins as payment.
[01:17:43.000 --> 01:17:46.000]  Call us at 512-646-6440.
[01:17:46.000 --> 01:17:51.000]  We're located at 7304 Burnett Road, Suite A, about a half mile south of Anderson.
[01:17:51.000 --> 01:17:54.000]  We're open Monday through Friday 10 to 6, Saturdays 10 to 2.
[01:17:54.000 --> 01:18:00.000]  Visit us at capitalcoinandbullion.com or call 512-646-6440.
[01:18:00.000 --> 01:18:06.000]  Through advances in technology, our lives have greatly improved, except in the area of nutrition.
[01:18:06.000 --> 01:18:11.000]  People feed their pets better than they feed themselves, and it's time we changed all that.
[01:18:11.000 --> 01:18:17.000]  Our primary defense against aging and disease in this toxic environment is good nutrition.
[01:18:17.000 --> 01:18:22.000]  In a world where natural foods have been irradiated, adulterated, and mutilated,
[01:18:22.000 --> 01:18:25.000]  Young Jevity can provide the nutrients you need.
[01:18:25.000 --> 01:18:31.000]  Logos Serial Network gets many requests to endorse all sorts of products, most of which we reject.
[01:18:31.000 --> 01:18:36.000]  We have come to trust Young Jevity so much, we became a marketing distributor
[01:18:36.000 --> 01:18:40.000]  along with Alex Jones, Ben Fuchs, and many others.
[01:18:40.000 --> 01:18:48.000]  When you order from logosradionetwork.com, your health will improve as you help support quality radio.
[01:18:48.000 --> 01:18:52.000]  As you realize the benefits of Young Jevity, you may want to join us.
[01:18:52.000 --> 01:18:59.000]  As a distributor, you can experience improved health, help your friends and family, and increase your income.
[01:18:59.000 --> 01:19:01.000]  Order now.
[01:19:01.000 --> 01:19:11.000]  This is the Logos Radio Network.
[01:19:31.000 --> 01:19:36.000]  Ain't gonna fool me with that same old trick again
[01:19:36.000 --> 01:19:41.000]  I was blindsided, but now I can see your plans
[01:19:41.000 --> 01:19:46.000]  You put the beer in my pocket, took the money from my ass
[01:19:46.000 --> 01:19:55.000]  Ain't gonna fool me with that same old trick again
[01:19:55.000 --> 01:20:06.000]  Ain't gonna fool me
[01:20:06.000 --> 01:20:08.000]  All right, folks, we are back.
[01:20:08.000 --> 01:20:12.000]  This is Rule of Law Radio, and we're still talking with Donna in Texas.
[01:20:12.000 --> 01:20:14.000]  All right, Donna, please continue.
[01:20:14.000 --> 01:20:17.000]  Well, you're going to tell me I'm blowing myself up here.
[01:20:17.000 --> 01:20:18.000]  Yes.
[01:20:18.000 --> 01:20:19.000]  What happened?
[01:20:19.000 --> 01:20:22.000]  When you start arguing the merits of the speeding charge itself,
[01:20:22.000 --> 01:20:26.000]  then you're assuming the burden of disproving their case.
[01:20:26.000 --> 01:20:29.000]  They have the burden of proving it.
[01:20:29.000 --> 01:20:31.000]  Okay?
[01:20:31.000 --> 01:20:36.000]  So rather than argue over merits and facts,
[01:20:36.000 --> 01:20:39.000]  there are several things here that you would need to be aware of,
[01:20:39.000 --> 01:20:42.000]  which I think we discussed in class, but I don't recall for sure.
[01:20:42.000 --> 01:20:47.000]  And that is what speeding is in Texas and what it isn't.
[01:20:47.000 --> 01:20:52.000]  Speeding is not speeding just because someone goes faster than the posted speed sign.
[01:20:52.000 --> 01:20:59.000]  In fact, unless they first prove that the speed sign applies to what the person was in,
[01:20:59.000 --> 01:21:01.000]  it can't possibly occur.
[01:21:01.000 --> 01:21:05.000]  Secondly, not only does the speed sign have to apply
[01:21:05.000 --> 01:21:09.000]  in order to give proper notice to the individual being charged,
[01:21:09.000 --> 01:21:17.000]  but they have to have an actual palpable injury through a collision with another person or vehicle,
[01:21:17.000 --> 01:21:23.000]  according to 545.351 of the transportation code.
[01:21:23.000 --> 01:21:27.000]  So there's two ways to fight it.
[01:21:27.000 --> 01:21:29.000]  One, not engage in transportation.
[01:21:29.000 --> 01:21:31.000]  Three, actually.
[01:21:31.000 --> 01:21:34.000]  Not engage in transportation, therefore it doesn't apply.
[01:21:34.000 --> 01:21:37.000]  Two, not a commercial motor vehicle, therefore it doesn't apply.
[01:21:37.000 --> 01:21:40.000]  And no collision occurred, therefore it doesn't apply.
[01:21:40.000 --> 01:21:43.000]  Or three, the whole code is unconstitutional.
[01:21:43.000 --> 01:21:47.000]  There is no speeding law, never was a speeding law,
[01:21:47.000 --> 01:21:53.000]  and you guys are now eligible to be sued for bringing me to court under false pretenses.
[01:21:53.000 --> 01:21:58.000]  And I do this all with a jury trial?
[01:21:58.000 --> 01:22:05.000]  As I said, the constitutional challenge, most likely you will never see a jury or go to trial.
[01:22:05.000 --> 01:22:08.000]  Well, no, but it's a jury trial the 26th.
[01:22:08.000 --> 01:22:10.000]  Okay, wait, Donna, listen.
[01:22:10.000 --> 01:22:16.000]  If you file this motion for constitutional challenge,
[01:22:16.000 --> 01:22:23.000]  and they take you into a trial anyway, you can take their house.
[01:22:23.000 --> 01:22:25.000]  You understand?
[01:22:25.000 --> 01:22:26.000]  Got it.
[01:22:26.000 --> 01:22:27.000]  Okay?
[01:22:27.000 --> 01:22:28.000]  Okay.
[01:22:28.000 --> 01:22:36.000]  The odds are, once we make this challenge, this will suddenly go away.
[01:22:36.000 --> 01:22:38.000]  Okay.
[01:22:38.000 --> 01:22:39.000]  Okay?
[01:22:39.000 --> 01:22:40.000]  If it doesn't...
[01:22:40.000 --> 01:22:42.000]  I have to know it, I have to...
[01:22:42.000 --> 01:22:44.000]  Okay, but wait a minute, wait a minute, listen to me now.
[01:22:44.000 --> 01:22:52.000]  But if it doesn't, we're not going to argue anything about the speeding charge, are we clear?
[01:22:52.000 --> 01:22:53.000]  I got it, yes, sir.
[01:22:53.000 --> 01:23:03.000]  We're going to argue constitutionality and only constitutionality and nothing else.
[01:23:03.000 --> 01:23:04.000]  And when the court...
[01:23:04.000 --> 01:23:08.000]  And there's only two things the court's going to be able to do if we stick to that.
[01:23:08.000 --> 01:23:11.000]  They're going to play one of two cards.
[01:23:11.000 --> 01:23:14.000]  A, we don't do the constitution in this court.
[01:23:14.000 --> 01:23:16.000]  It doesn't apply here.
[01:23:16.000 --> 01:23:17.000]  Objection.
[01:23:17.000 --> 01:23:24.000]  I fail to see any law or authority allowing this court to discard the constitutional protections of the accused.
[01:23:24.000 --> 01:23:27.000]  Therefore, Judge, you appear to be judicially incompetent.
[01:23:27.000 --> 01:23:29.000]  I move to disqualify you.
[01:23:29.000 --> 01:23:36.000]  Not only are you judicially incompetent, you're biased, you're prejudiced, and you just committed an act of treason.
[01:23:36.000 --> 01:23:39.000]  Get off the bench.
[01:23:39.000 --> 01:23:40.000]  Second card.
[01:23:40.000 --> 01:23:49.000]  I don't have the authority to decide the constitutionality, so we're just going to go ahead and go to trial, and you can take that issue up on appeal.
[01:23:49.000 --> 01:23:51.000]  Objection.
[01:23:51.000 --> 01:23:54.000]  I move for your disqualification due to judicial incompetence.
[01:23:54.000 --> 01:23:57.000]  I have made a proper constitutional challenge.
[01:23:57.000 --> 01:24:03.000]  I have the right to due process at every stage of every proceeding.
[01:24:03.000 --> 01:24:06.000]  You have an obligation to provide it.
[01:24:06.000 --> 01:24:10.000]  You must provide a response to my challenge.
[01:24:10.000 --> 01:24:16.000]  If you cannot do that, you're judicially incompetent, you're biased, and you're prejudiced.
[01:24:16.000 --> 01:24:17.000]  I move to disqualify.
[01:24:17.000 --> 01:24:20.000]  Get off the bench.
[01:24:20.000 --> 01:24:24.000]  Are all those words going to be in this paper that you're going to have?
[01:24:24.000 --> 01:24:25.000]  No.
[01:24:25.000 --> 01:24:27.000]  These are verbal objections you will have to make.
[01:24:27.000 --> 01:24:29.000]  This is the things that you have to know.
[01:24:29.000 --> 01:24:32.000]  This is why I conduct a class, remember?
[01:24:32.000 --> 01:24:35.000]  I do.
[01:24:35.000 --> 01:24:39.000]  So these are things that you have to know, and you know them by practice.
[01:24:39.000 --> 01:24:41.000]  You practice at home, and you practice in class.
[01:24:41.000 --> 01:24:45.000]  That's why we do it.
[01:24:45.000 --> 01:25:01.000]  This is why only a few attorneys actually go to trials, and everyone else stays in the office and does paperwork, because only a few people are capable of going into court, thinking on their feet, and making a live argument.
[01:25:01.000 --> 01:25:05.000]  The whole goal of my class is to teach you to be one of those people.
[01:25:05.000 --> 01:25:11.000]  I can't say I'm successful with everyone, because not everyone is capable, not even in law school.
[01:25:11.000 --> 01:25:20.000]  So I doubt very seriously if I want to find a majority of them that are off of everyday life, but I have found a few.
[01:25:20.000 --> 01:25:25.000]  Whether or not you're going to be one of them, that's entirely up to you.
[01:25:25.000 --> 01:25:31.000]  Okay.
[01:25:31.000 --> 01:25:32.000]  All right.
[01:25:32.000 --> 01:25:34.000]  So when is the paper going to be ready?
[01:25:34.000 --> 01:25:39.000]  Well, again, that is not within my hands until I get the paperwork from the Secretary of State.
[01:25:39.000 --> 01:25:43.000]  It's not ready without the documentation that proves it.
[01:25:43.000 --> 01:25:44.000]  All right.
[01:25:44.000 --> 01:25:45.000]  And what about a PIR?
[01:25:45.000 --> 01:25:48.000]  Do I want to do any of that ahead of time?
[01:25:48.000 --> 01:25:51.000]  What do you need a PIR for?
[01:25:51.000 --> 01:25:52.000]  Well, I don't know.
[01:25:52.000 --> 01:25:56.000]  To find more information out about- Information about what?
[01:25:56.000 --> 01:25:59.000]  The officers in general.
[01:25:59.000 --> 01:26:01.000]  Why?
[01:26:01.000 --> 01:26:03.000]  To use it against them.
[01:26:03.000 --> 01:26:06.000]  You can do that when you sue them.
[01:26:06.000 --> 01:26:18.000]  You don't need it for this, because if we're challenging the constitutionality, nothing that anyone did was lawful.
[01:26:18.000 --> 01:26:25.000]  So whatever they're doing in relation to the allegation against you doesn't matter,
[01:26:25.000 --> 01:26:32.000]  because all that's doing is providing evidence against them for the lawsuit you're going to have for their continuing forward.
[01:26:32.000 --> 01:26:39.000]  And you'll have plenty of time to do that after they've screwed themselves.
[01:26:39.000 --> 01:26:40.000]  Okay.
[01:26:40.000 --> 01:26:41.000]  All right.
[01:26:41.000 --> 01:26:49.000]  So just help me again. Where should I go to get better understanding of what I need to do?
[01:26:49.000 --> 01:26:55.000]  1904 Guadalupe Street, Sundays 2 to 5.
[01:26:55.000 --> 01:26:58.000]  Why are you so far away?
[01:26:58.000 --> 01:27:01.000]  Carpool. Bring friends.
[01:27:01.000 --> 01:27:03.000]  Divide the cost, whatever it takes.
[01:27:03.000 --> 01:27:09.000]  But the best place to learn it is in a live setting where you can practice.
[01:27:09.000 --> 01:27:11.000]  Can I get a videotape of it?
[01:27:11.000 --> 01:27:15.000]  You can, but that's not going to provide you with any interactive practice.
[01:27:15.000 --> 01:27:20.000]  You're going to have to do the same thing you'd do if you're just sitting there listening to me.
[01:27:20.000 --> 01:27:25.000]  If you're not actually doing it, you're not going to know how and you're not going to remember it when you need to.
[01:27:25.000 --> 01:27:30.000]  That's why people practice to become good at things.
[01:27:30.000 --> 01:27:31.000]  All right.
[01:27:31.000 --> 01:27:34.000]  Well, assuming I cannot get there, what's the next best thing?
[01:27:34.000 --> 01:27:39.000]  Is there any of it online that I can watch and try to osmosis?
[01:27:39.000 --> 01:27:41.000]  Right now we're streaming the class.
[01:27:41.000 --> 01:27:45.000]  All you have to do is buy the link to the class.
[01:27:45.000 --> 01:27:49.000]  It's the same as if you're sitting in class, but you can't ask questions.
[01:27:49.000 --> 01:27:56.000]  You can see what we're doing and follow along, but you can't ask questions because I don't have a way of doing that yet.
[01:27:56.000 --> 01:27:59.000]  How do I get the stream class online?
[01:27:59.000 --> 01:28:04.000]  Well, you'll need to contact the bookstore or look at the web link from the bookstore.
[01:28:04.000 --> 01:28:12.000]  Go to bravenewbookstore.com or bravenewbooks.com, and there will be a link to the Brave New Books TV or Brave New TV.
[01:28:12.000 --> 01:28:18.000]  I forget what exactly they call it on there, but they'll have a link on there for purchasing the class.
[01:28:18.000 --> 01:28:25.000]  All you got to do is click that, pay the 20 bucks, and then at 2 p.m. on class day, the link goes live.
[01:28:25.000 --> 01:28:30.000]  All you got to do is click on it, and the stream will come up in your browser.
[01:28:30.000 --> 01:28:33.000]  Okay, good. Thank you. I wish I had known that. That works.
[01:28:33.000 --> 01:28:34.000]  Okay.
[01:28:34.000 --> 01:28:35.000]  All right. Thank you, Eddie.
[01:28:35.000 --> 01:28:39.000]  You're very welcome. Thanks for calling in, Donna.
[01:28:39.000 --> 01:28:46.000]  All right. Now we're going to go to John in Indiana. John, what can we do for you?
[01:28:46.000 --> 01:29:00.000]  Hey, I guess my call doesn't really have about individual problems. I was kind of wondering about the land grab that's been happening like through the whole west with like the Hammond and Bundy thing.
[01:29:00.000 --> 01:29:01.000]  Right.
[01:29:01.000 --> 01:29:07.000]  Like where would I find to look out like the legalities for that or where it's illegal?
[01:29:07.000 --> 01:29:16.000]  Well, you would have to look at what the federal jurisdiction is and what it isn't and start with the 18 enumerated powers within the Constitution.
[01:29:16.000 --> 01:29:26.000]  Very specifically speaking, Congress and the federal government, any agency thereof is limited to whatever is authorized by the 18 enumerated powers.
[01:29:26.000 --> 01:29:31.000]  Any law Congress makes is limited by the 18 enumerated powers.
[01:29:31.000 --> 01:29:42.000]  The limits of federal jurisdiction have always been limited only to territories owned by the federal government and so on.
[01:29:42.000 --> 01:29:47.000]  But the states are not one of those territories. The states are independent and sovereign.
[01:29:47.000 --> 01:29:53.000]  And the federal government only has jurisdiction in the state on land where they have been ceded the property.
[01:29:53.000 --> 01:29:56.000]  But hang on and we'll get into details on that on the other side.
[01:29:56.000 --> 01:30:02.000]  All right, folks, we'll be right back after this break. So y'all hang on.
[01:30:02.000 --> 01:30:07.000]  Why do Americans order extra large portions of food when smaller servings would suffice?
[01:30:07.000 --> 01:30:15.000]  I'm Dr. Katherine Albrecht and in a moment I'll share an interesting new study that may shed some light on the psychology of overeating.
[01:30:15.000 --> 01:30:20.000]  Privacy is under attack. When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[01:30:20.000 --> 01:30:25.000]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[01:30:25.000 --> 01:30:30.000]  So protect your rights. Say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself.
[01:30:30.000 --> 01:30:33.000]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[01:30:33.000 --> 01:30:40.000]  This public service announcement is brought to you by Startpage.com, the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[01:30:40.000 --> 01:30:44.000]  Start over with Startpage.
[01:30:44.000 --> 01:30:51.000]  Food is one of life's great pleasures, but too much can lead to a host of problems like heart disease and diabetes.
[01:30:51.000 --> 01:30:59.000]  So why do Americans keep opting for enormous food portions? Northwestern University researchers think it has to do with class consciousness.
[01:30:59.000 --> 01:31:04.000]  Like cars and TVs, Americans equate larger food portions with higher social status.
[01:31:04.000 --> 01:31:13.000]  People told researchers that drinking a large coffee meant someone was probably wealthier than someone else drinking a small size, even when the price was the same.
[01:31:13.000 --> 01:31:18.000]  So it follows that people who are feeling poor may try to compensate with bigger portions.
[01:31:18.000 --> 01:31:24.000]  But for enough in experiments, lower income folks were more likely to go for gut buster sizes.
[01:31:24.000 --> 01:31:31.000]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht. More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[01:31:31.000 --> 01:31:36.000]  This is Building 7, a 47-story skyscraper that fell on the afternoon of September 11.
[01:31:36.000 --> 01:31:38.000]  The government says that fire brought it down.
[01:31:38.000 --> 01:31:43.000]  However, 1,500 architects and engineers concluded it was a controlled demolition.
[01:31:43.000 --> 01:31:48.000]  Over 6,000 of my fellow service members have given their lives, but thousands of my fellow first responders are dying.
[01:31:48.000 --> 01:31:53.000]  I'm not a conspiracy theorist. I'm a structural engineer. I'm a New York City correction officer. I'm an Air Force pilot.
[01:31:53.000 --> 01:32:00.000]  I'm a father who lost his son. We're Americans, and we deserve the truth. Go to RememberBuilding7.org today.
[01:32:00.000 --> 01:32:06.000]  Hey, it's Danny here for Hill Country Home Improvements. Did your home receive hail or wind damage from the recent storms?
[01:32:06.000 --> 01:32:11.000]  Come on, we all know the government caused it with their Kim trails, but good luck getting them to pay for it.
[01:32:11.000 --> 01:32:14.000]  Okay, I might be kidding about the Kim trails, but I'm serious about your roof.
[01:32:14.000 --> 01:32:21.000]  That's why you have insurance, and Hill Country Home Improvements can handle the claim for you with little to no out-of-pocket expense.
[01:32:21.000 --> 01:32:26.000]  And we accept Bitcoin as a multi-year A-plus member of the Better Business Bureau with zero complaints.
[01:32:26.000 --> 01:32:32.000]  You can trust Hill Country Home Improvements to handle your claim and your roof right the first time.
[01:32:32.000 --> 01:32:38.000]  Just call 512-992-8745 or go to hillcountryhomeimprovements.com.
[01:32:38.000 --> 01:32:45.000]  Mention the crypto show and get $100 off, and we'll donate another $100 to the Logos Radio Network to help continue this programming.
[01:32:45.000 --> 01:32:50.000]  So if those out-of-town roofers come knocking, your door should be locking.
[01:32:50.000 --> 01:32:56.000]  That's 512-992-8745 or hillcountryhomeimprovements.com.
[01:32:56.000 --> 01:33:01.000]  Discounts are based on full roof replacement. May not actually be kidding about Kim trails.
[01:33:01.000 --> 01:33:11.000]  You're listening to the Logos Radio Network at logosradio.com.
[01:33:31.000 --> 01:33:39.000]  All right, folks, we are back.
[01:33:39.000 --> 01:33:42.000]  We are speaking with John in Indiana.
[01:33:42.000 --> 01:33:45.000]  All right, John, go ahead.
[01:33:45.000 --> 01:33:49.000]  Yeah, I just started reading here about the enumerated powers.
[01:33:49.000 --> 01:33:56.000]  And that seems like a pretty impressive list of where everything can go wrong, huh?
[01:33:56.000 --> 01:34:00.000]  Well, only if you can't read and understand what you're reading.
[01:34:00.000 --> 01:34:07.000]  And most people in Congress obviously can't, even though most of them are attorneys.
[01:34:07.000 --> 01:34:11.000]  They still can't read plain English.
[01:34:11.000 --> 01:34:16.000]  In any case, within those 18 enumerated powers is all that Congress can do.
[01:34:16.000 --> 01:34:26.000]  Congress has never had authority within the territorial boundaries of a state except in the specific areas relating to those 18 enumerated powers.
[01:34:26.000 --> 01:34:43.000]  They have no authority over the land in any state or any resource in that state unless that has been ceded by that state to the federal government through secession.
[01:34:43.000 --> 01:34:47.000]  Okay, and usually that's a documented land transfer.
[01:34:47.000 --> 01:34:52.000]  All right.
[01:34:52.000 --> 01:34:56.000]  So when they say there's a national forest, no, there's not.
[01:34:56.000 --> 01:35:04.000]  There's a forest that they claim is national but actually belongs to whatever states it actually sits in.
[01:35:04.000 --> 01:35:11.000]  And they can either decide to allow the federal government to manage it or they can tell them to take an ever-loving hike.
[01:35:11.000 --> 01:35:13.000]  It ain't theirs.
[01:35:13.000 --> 01:35:14.000]  Yeah.
[01:35:14.000 --> 01:35:23.000]  See, these land issues that you're discussing, they're the fault of the state for not keeping the feds out.
[01:35:23.000 --> 01:35:28.000]  But at the same time, the locals have every right to tell the fed, get out.
[01:35:28.000 --> 01:35:31.000]  You don't belong here.
[01:35:31.000 --> 01:35:34.000]  Absolutely.
[01:35:34.000 --> 01:35:40.000]  Yeah, I just wasn't sure exactly where to find where that was illegal and why.
[01:35:40.000 --> 01:35:46.000]  It's illegal because it's not one of the 18 enumerated powers.
[01:35:46.000 --> 01:35:49.000]  Got that.
[01:35:49.000 --> 01:35:55.000]  And it wasn't given because it wasn't given through a ceded documented land transfer either.
[01:35:55.000 --> 01:35:57.000]  By the state.
[01:35:57.000 --> 01:35:59.000]  The Constitution couldn't do that.
[01:35:59.000 --> 01:36:08.000]  The state would have to do it because that territory belonged to the state.
[01:36:08.000 --> 01:36:14.000]  Yeah.
[01:36:14.000 --> 01:36:16.000]  Sorry, I was just writing that down.
[01:36:16.000 --> 01:36:18.000]  No, that's okay.
[01:36:18.000 --> 01:36:20.000]  Excellent. Excellent. Thanks.
[01:36:20.000 --> 01:36:21.000]  You're welcome.
[01:36:21.000 --> 01:36:28.000]  That gives me a lot to look through and understand because, I mean, there's just – it's a big issue.
[01:36:28.000 --> 01:36:32.000]  And I haven't really understood exactly why it's going on and what's going on.
[01:36:32.000 --> 01:36:41.000]  It's going on because the federal government is trying to steal everything it can get its hands on to enrich those that are in control of the government.
[01:36:41.000 --> 01:36:44.000]  Yeah, I kind of assume that.
[01:36:44.000 --> 01:36:49.000]  It's like Al Gore wanting to sell us freaking oxygen so he can make money.
[01:36:49.000 --> 01:36:52.000]  Who the hell sold him the air to begin with?
[01:36:52.000 --> 01:36:59.000]  Who gave him power over oxygen or CO2 for that matter?
[01:36:59.000 --> 01:37:02.000]  It reminds me of Nestle in the water out in California.
[01:37:02.000 --> 01:37:06.000]  Something like that.
[01:37:06.000 --> 01:37:12.000]  There's also the issue of – I remember with the Bundys, there was – they were trying to take the land.
[01:37:12.000 --> 01:37:15.000]  Supposedly Harry Reid had a deal with the Chinese.
[01:37:15.000 --> 01:37:20.000]  Exactly, but they tried to use a near-extinct tortoise as the grounds for doing it.
[01:37:20.000 --> 01:37:26.000]  Nowhere is the federal government given any authority over animals.
[01:37:26.000 --> 01:37:28.000]  Nowhere.
[01:37:28.000 --> 01:37:36.000]  And while they were protecting those tortoises, they were also killing his livestock and pushing them into holes in the grounds with bulldozers.
[01:37:36.000 --> 01:37:40.000]  So kind of a flip-flop there, too.
[01:37:40.000 --> 01:37:43.000]  I don't know if that's kind of off-topic.
[01:37:43.000 --> 01:37:46.000]  But yeah, I mean, it's pretty wild.
[01:37:46.000 --> 01:37:52.000]  I was just kind of wondering and understanding where to look for beginnings of why exactly that's illegal
[01:37:52.000 --> 01:37:58.000]  because I've had this conversation going on all the time with friends and I don't necessarily understand it.
[01:37:58.000 --> 01:38:02.000]  I know that you're a little bit more knowledgeable than me.
[01:38:02.000 --> 01:38:04.000]  Yeah.
[01:38:04.000 --> 01:38:05.000]  Thanks.
[01:38:05.000 --> 01:38:06.000]  All right.
[01:38:06.000 --> 01:38:07.000]  Appreciate it.
[01:38:07.000 --> 01:38:08.000]  No problem.
[01:38:08.000 --> 01:38:11.000]  Going to be looking into the 18 enumerated powers, trying to understand that a little bit better.
[01:38:11.000 --> 01:38:12.000]  All right.
[01:38:12.000 --> 01:38:13.000]  Well, good luck.
[01:38:13.000 --> 01:38:14.000]  Hey, thank you.
[01:38:14.000 --> 01:38:15.000]  You're welcome.
[01:38:15.000 --> 01:38:16.000]  Bye.
[01:38:16.000 --> 01:38:17.000]  All right.
[01:38:17.000 --> 01:38:20.000]  Now we're going to go to Oliver in Tennessee.
[01:38:20.000 --> 01:38:23.000]  Oliver, what do you got?
[01:38:23.000 --> 01:38:24.000]  How are you doing, Eddie?
[01:38:24.000 --> 01:38:25.000]  I'm doing all right so far.
[01:38:25.000 --> 01:38:27.000]  How about you?
[01:38:27.000 --> 01:38:30.000]  Oh, okay.
[01:38:30.000 --> 01:38:33.000]  That's your seminar estimation, right?
[01:38:33.000 --> 01:38:35.000]  Recently, I had a house fire.
[01:38:35.000 --> 01:38:41.000]  I haven't got the opportunity to get into it in depth because I've been busy dealing with a lot of issues.
[01:38:41.000 --> 01:38:43.000]  Okay.
[01:38:43.000 --> 01:38:53.000]  I've been listening to you for a while, and I've been using some of your messages in court, and I understand how it works and all that.
[01:38:53.000 --> 01:38:59.000]  But so far, I've just listened to you and expressed my views in court as I've been getting charged with dismissal.
[01:38:59.000 --> 01:39:10.000]  But now, it's on a different front because where I got my house burnt down, I was listening about code violations and stuff like that.
[01:39:10.000 --> 01:39:14.000]  So about a year or so ago, they were telling me about my cars and stuff like that.
[01:39:14.000 --> 01:39:18.000]  So I just ignored them, and they sent cops to me.
[01:39:18.000 --> 01:39:24.000]  I dealt with them, and they basically went away because they figured out they couldn't do anything to me.
[01:39:24.000 --> 01:39:35.000]  But now that my house is burnt down, now they're trying to make an issue talking about, well, I have to demolish the home, and I have to do this and that.
[01:39:35.000 --> 01:39:45.000]  I need to get permits to rebuild because I have the ability to rebuild the home and rewire electricity, AC, myself.
[01:39:45.000 --> 01:39:48.000]  And they were saying, well, I couldn't do that, and I had to get permits and all this.
[01:39:48.000 --> 01:39:49.000]  And I'm like, well.
[01:39:49.000 --> 01:39:53.000]  No, that's actually a bunch of bull, and most cities try to do the same thing.
[01:39:53.000 --> 01:39:58.000]  And here's what you will find out if you actually study the permit issue.
[01:39:58.000 --> 01:40:04.000]  The property owner by right can do anything to his property he wants, period.
[01:40:04.000 --> 01:40:05.000]  Mm-hmm.
[01:40:05.000 --> 01:40:06.000]  OK?
[01:40:06.000 --> 01:40:07.000]  Yeah.
[01:40:07.000 --> 01:40:14.000]  The permits are only required for the people that are selling the services to which the permit relates.
[01:40:14.000 --> 01:40:24.000]  For instance, if you hire someone to come in there and rebuild the house, that person is the one that must acquire a permit.
[01:40:24.000 --> 01:40:32.000]  That person is the one liable for purchasing the permit, not the homeowner, not the property owner.
[01:40:32.000 --> 01:40:35.000]  The one selling the service.
[01:40:35.000 --> 01:40:36.000]  OK?
[01:40:36.000 --> 01:40:47.000]  Now, if you wire everything to code, they can't require you in any other way to pay for anything.
[01:40:47.000 --> 01:40:49.000]  They're going to want to come out and inspect it.
[01:40:49.000 --> 01:40:57.000]  And what they're going to try to tell you is that part of that licensing permit fee is to cover the cost of coming out and inspecting it.
[01:40:57.000 --> 01:41:02.000]  And without the inspection, we won't allow you to hook it back up to our electrical grid.
[01:41:02.000 --> 01:41:05.000]  But here's their problem.
[01:41:05.000 --> 01:41:13.000]  If you're not required to have a permit to work on your own property, then how can they deny you the ability,
[01:41:13.000 --> 01:41:20.000]  if you did everything in accordance with code, in getting the inspection in order to make your home habitable again
[01:41:20.000 --> 01:41:25.000]  and then punish you for not being habitable in the first place?
[01:41:25.000 --> 01:41:28.000]  None of that's logical. None of it makes sense, right?
[01:41:28.000 --> 01:41:29.000]  Yes, sir.
[01:41:29.000 --> 01:41:30.000]  OK.
[01:41:30.000 --> 01:41:41.000]  I've talked to the head of the code department, and I expressed myself in that manner and told him where that they were violating issues.
[01:41:41.000 --> 01:41:47.000]  And he said, well, from dealing with me, he understand that I wasn't going to move.
[01:41:47.000 --> 01:41:49.000]  I wasn't going to do what they say.
[01:41:49.000 --> 01:41:56.000]  They were like, well, you know, the issues that I'm bringing up are pretty much over in his head. He doesn't understand what I'm saying.
[01:41:56.000 --> 01:42:01.000]  Right. He's a bureaucrat. He can only do what he believes he's been told to do.
[01:42:01.000 --> 01:42:10.000]  The only way you're going to accomplish what you want is either to let them come after you initially or you're going to have to go after them initially.
[01:42:10.000 --> 01:42:11.000]  Right.
[01:42:11.000 --> 01:42:19.000]  But they sent me to the city attorney, and the city attorney gave me the same still, and I gave him the same still.
[01:42:19.000 --> 01:42:27.000]  I'm going to listen. I'm a property right owner. I have rights. And same thing you were saying.
[01:42:27.000 --> 01:42:35.000]  And then he, after a while, he was like, well, I told him that if they want to, they can do what they want, but I'm going to come after them before it.
[01:42:35.000 --> 01:42:42.000]  And then after he realized that, he was like, well, we should sit down and look over the information.
[01:42:42.000 --> 01:42:45.000]  We should sit down, me, you, the code department.
[01:42:45.000 --> 01:42:52.000]  Come and sit down, go over the information and see if we could come up with some type of resolution.
[01:42:52.000 --> 01:42:56.000]  What he's trying to do is to get you into a statutory argument.
[01:42:56.000 --> 01:42:59.000]  That's what he's trying to do.
[01:42:59.000 --> 01:43:07.000]  Okay. And then he's going to try to convince you through his interpretation and that of the courts who will never have addressed the on-point issue,
[01:43:07.000 --> 01:43:12.000]  because most likely, nobody has raised it properly to be addressed.
[01:43:12.000 --> 01:43:18.000]  So what he's going to try to do is get you in that and beat you black and blue with case law.
[01:43:18.000 --> 01:43:20.000]  Well, he tried that over the phone.
[01:43:20.000 --> 01:43:27.000]  But once I gave him my stand-in, he was like, well, we need to get together so we can see if we can come together.
[01:43:27.000 --> 01:43:29.000]  He tried that over the phone.
[01:43:29.000 --> 01:43:30.000]  Yeah, I understand that.
[01:43:30.000 --> 01:43:36.000]  But that doesn't mean that once he gets some information in his hands, he's not going to do it again.
[01:43:36.000 --> 01:43:37.000]  Okay.
[01:43:37.000 --> 01:43:42.000]  This time, what he's going to do is he's going to come in there armed with a buttload of information already at his fingertips,
[01:43:42.000 --> 01:43:46.000]  something he probably didn't have during the phone call.
[01:43:46.000 --> 01:43:47.000]  Right.
[01:43:47.000 --> 01:43:48.000]  All right. Hang on, Oliver.
[01:43:48.000 --> 01:43:51.000]  We'll pick this up on the other side after this break, okay?
[01:43:51.000 --> 01:43:52.000]  All right.
[01:43:52.000 --> 01:43:53.000]  All right, folks.
[01:43:53.000 --> 01:43:54.000]  This is Rule of Law Radio.
[01:43:54.000 --> 01:43:57.000]  We're coming into the last segment, so y'all hang on.
[01:43:57.000 --> 01:44:00.000]  We'll be right back.
[01:44:00.000 --> 01:44:03.000]  You feel tired when talking about important topics like money and politics?
[01:44:03.000 --> 01:44:04.000]  Sorry.
[01:44:04.000 --> 01:44:07.000]  Are you confused by words like the Constitution or the Federal Reserve?
[01:44:07.000 --> 01:44:08.000]  What?
[01:44:08.000 --> 01:44:12.000]  If so, you may be diagnosed with the deadliest disease known today, stupidity.
[01:44:12.000 --> 01:44:14.000]  Hi, my name is Steve Holt.
[01:44:14.000 --> 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 --> 01:44:30.000]  Unfortunately, that puts most Americans at risk of catching stupidity, 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 --> 01:44:50.000]  So if you or anybody you know suffers from stupidity, then you need to call 512-480-2503
[01:44:50.000 --> 01:44:54.000]  or visit them at 1904Guadalupe or bravenewbookstore.com.
[01:44:54.000 --> 01:44:58.000]  Side effects from using Brave New Books products may include discernment and enlarged vocabulary
[01:44:58.000 --> 01:45:00.000]  and an overall increase in mental functioning.
[01:45:00.000 --> 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 --> 01:45:49.000]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases,
[01:45:49.000 --> 01:45:52.000]  pro se tactics, and much more.
[01:45:52.000 --> 01:46:15.000]  Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner or call toll-free, 866-LAW-EZ.
[01:46:15.000 --> 01:46:32.000]  All right, folks, we are back.
[01:46:32.000 --> 01:46:36.000]  This is Rule of Law Radio, and we are talking with Oliver in Tennessee.
[01:46:36.000 --> 01:46:42.000]  All right, but anyway, yeah, what I was saying before the break is he, this is a setup.
[01:46:42.000 --> 01:46:44.000]  Almost guaranteed this is going to be a setup.
[01:46:44.000 --> 01:46:47.000]  Yeah, he may act like he wants to meet with you,
[01:46:47.000 --> 01:46:51.000]  but what he's doing is preparing his ammunition and his landmines.
[01:46:51.000 --> 01:46:54.000]  Right.
[01:46:54.000 --> 01:46:58.000]  So you need to be doing the same thing.
[01:46:58.000 --> 01:47:04.000]  Well, that's why I was calling to try to figure out, because your seminar is kind of in depth,
[01:47:04.000 --> 01:47:08.000]  and I haven't had a lot of time to go through it all the way.
[01:47:08.000 --> 01:47:12.000]  And I was trying to see if there was a section in the seminar that would help me out,
[01:47:12.000 --> 01:47:17.000]  what other documents or parts, what other things I need to be looking at.
[01:47:17.000 --> 01:47:21.000]  Well, here's the kind of questions you can ask him.
[01:47:21.000 --> 01:47:24.000]  Does the city own my property or do I?
[01:47:24.000 --> 01:47:28.000]  If the city owns it, why does the city pay the taxes on it?
[01:47:28.000 --> 01:47:34.000]  If I own it, why is the city charging me taxes for it?
[01:47:34.000 --> 01:47:39.000]  If I own it, what gets you the right to tell me what I can and can't do on it,
[01:47:39.000 --> 01:47:44.000]  as long as what I'm doing isn't hurting anybody?
[01:47:44.000 --> 01:47:47.000]  OK.
[01:47:47.000 --> 01:47:52.000]  If the city is claiming that it has the right to dictate how I can use my property
[01:47:52.000 --> 01:47:56.000]  or what I can do on my property, then I don't really own it, do I?
[01:47:56.000 --> 01:47:58.000]  No.
[01:47:58.000 --> 01:48:01.000]  No, don't answer him. Just get him to answer. OK?
[01:48:01.000 --> 01:48:02.000]  OK.
[01:48:02.000 --> 01:48:07.000]  So you're sitting here saying the city can order me to do this, the city can charge me to do that.
[01:48:07.000 --> 01:48:14.000]  But if I own it, how's that possible?
[01:48:14.000 --> 01:48:22.000]  But now, as far as the permits, look at who is required to actually acquire a permit.
[01:48:22.000 --> 01:48:27.000]  Guaranteed, it will be under some sort of land development code.
[01:48:27.000 --> 01:48:32.000]  And in there, it's going to define what a land developer is.
[01:48:32.000 --> 01:48:39.000]  And the land developer will be the people who actually built the subdivision you live in,
[01:48:39.000 --> 01:48:48.000]  not the people who bought the house that was built, but the ones who built it originally.
[01:48:48.000 --> 01:48:57.000]  It is ludicrous for some city or county to assert that an individual does not have the right to modify
[01:48:57.000 --> 01:49:05.000]  or improve their property without paying the state or the city anything to do so.
[01:49:05.000 --> 01:49:08.000]  It's none of their business.
[01:49:08.000 --> 01:49:12.000]  If it is their business, they need to be kicking in for part of the cost.
[01:49:12.000 --> 01:49:18.000]  Then they have a claim to say you can do that or you can't do that.
[01:49:18.000 --> 01:49:21.000]  OK. All right. So I'm standing with that issue.
[01:49:21.000 --> 01:49:27.000]  I have another issue where I wanted to add on an addition to the house,
[01:49:27.000 --> 01:49:34.000]  and I'm not planning on getting codes or permits to do that either.
[01:49:34.000 --> 01:49:38.000]  What type of – what should I expect?
[01:49:38.000 --> 01:49:42.000]  You should expect that they're going to write you citations and charge you fees
[01:49:42.000 --> 01:49:48.000]  and then try to force you to tear it down or pay them a huge amount of money in fines.
[01:49:48.000 --> 01:49:51.000]  That's what you should expect them to do.
[01:49:51.000 --> 01:49:57.000]  And once they take that step, my step is to take them to court.
[01:49:57.000 --> 01:50:01.000]  Well, you don't necessarily have to let them take it,
[01:50:01.000 --> 01:50:12.000]  but if you can show that they caused you harm by their efforts, you follow?
[01:50:12.000 --> 01:50:20.000]  I don't – yeah, but I don't understand by let them take it. I don't have to let them take it. I do.
[01:50:20.000 --> 01:50:22.000]  Well, I didn't say that they wouldn't manage to.
[01:50:22.000 --> 01:50:30.000]  I'm just saying once they attack you and have no reasonable grounds for doing so, OK,
[01:50:30.000 --> 01:50:35.000]  if you can show any injury from that, whether it be having to pay any money,
[01:50:35.000 --> 01:50:42.000]  hire a lawyer, pay a filing fee, anything in relation to their actions is a harm.
[01:50:42.000 --> 01:50:48.000]  That gives you grounds.
[01:50:48.000 --> 01:50:51.000]  OK.
[01:50:51.000 --> 01:50:56.000]  So does your code say that I can't have an addition of –
[01:50:56.000 --> 01:51:00.000]  No, no, no, no, no. Make sure of what the code says.
[01:51:00.000 --> 01:51:06.000]  Does it say that a land developer may not add on to a house or does it say a home owner
[01:51:06.000 --> 01:51:10.000]  or property owner may not add on to a house?
[01:51:10.000 --> 01:51:18.000]  It doesn't say anything about property owner or it says developer or what you said the first time.
[01:51:18.000 --> 01:51:21.000]  It doesn't say anything about private property owner or owner.
[01:51:21.000 --> 01:51:25.000]  Right. And it never will because it can't.
[01:51:25.000 --> 01:51:31.000]  I bet you dollars to donuts are going to try to tell you that the code they use is the
[01:51:31.000 --> 01:51:36.000]  International Building Code. It's an Agenda 21 code.
[01:51:36.000 --> 01:51:38.000]  He said that. He said that over the phone.
[01:51:38.000 --> 01:51:44.000]  Yeah. The International Building Code is an Agenda 21 code standard being adopted by
[01:51:44.000 --> 01:51:49.000]  municipalities all over. It's probably not even enacted into state law.
[01:51:49.000 --> 01:51:56.000]  It's acted into city ordinance, which isn't law.
[01:51:56.000 --> 01:51:57.000]  OK.
[01:51:57.000 --> 01:52:05.000]  So basically when – basically is it easy to feed them in court because they –
[01:52:05.000 --> 01:52:11.000]  Well, no, no, no, no, no, no. It's never easy because they're all colluding to steal
[01:52:11.000 --> 01:52:15.000]  our property to enrich themselves.
[01:52:15.000 --> 01:52:16.000]  OK.
[01:52:16.000 --> 01:52:21.000]  It's never going to be easy. They will ensure that.
[01:52:21.000 --> 01:52:27.000]  But that's why you've got to know what you have as your right to stand on and what is
[01:52:27.000 --> 01:52:32.000]  superior to what they're asserting.
[01:52:32.000 --> 01:52:40.000]  OK. All right. So is there any information that you could – that I need to go –
[01:52:40.000 --> 01:52:45.000]  Well, again, I've read the land development code because of a case of a friend of mine here.
[01:52:45.000 --> 01:52:49.000]  And it's exactly what I said it is. It's for land developers.
[01:52:49.000 --> 01:52:57.000]  It absolutely does not apply in any way, shape, or form to private homeownership.
[01:52:57.000 --> 01:53:04.000]  Got you. OK. And that's the point I need to make and that's the point I need to stick on.
[01:53:04.000 --> 01:53:05.000]  Absolutely.
[01:53:05.000 --> 01:53:07.000]  Land developer code. Land developer code.
[01:53:07.000 --> 01:53:09.000]  A, it's not state law.
[01:53:09.000 --> 01:53:17.000]  B, ordinances are not state law. They are private law and they are only binding upon employees,
[01:53:17.000 --> 01:53:25.000]  contractors, and legal entities within your territorial jurisdiction, of which I am none of the above.
[01:53:25.000 --> 01:53:32.000]  Nor is my property in any way encumbered for your benefit through any of the means above.
[01:53:32.000 --> 01:53:42.000]  I am not a land developer as defined in your code or your ordinance as spoken of above.
[01:53:42.000 --> 01:53:49.000]  OK. All right. So the information that you're going to show me, I need to find that land developer part.
[01:53:49.000 --> 01:53:51.000]  I understand.
[01:53:51.000 --> 01:53:55.000]  Yeah. It's the exact same thing as not engaging transportation.
[01:53:55.000 --> 01:54:02.000]  Until you can prove your code applies to me as a land developer, then none of the stuff in it,
[01:54:02.000 --> 01:54:06.000]  including your building permits, apply to me.
[01:54:06.000 --> 01:54:13.000]  Wow. All right. You made that very clear. All right.
[01:54:13.000 --> 01:54:18.000]  I mean, it's exactly the same argument, just a different subject.
[01:54:18.000 --> 01:54:21.000]  OK. Thank you, Eddie.
[01:54:21.000 --> 01:54:24.000]  You're very welcome, Oliver. I'm sorry?
[01:54:24.000 --> 01:54:26.000]  I got what I need now.
[01:54:26.000 --> 01:54:30.000]  All right. Well, glad to hear that.
[01:54:30.000 --> 01:54:33.000]  All right. Thanks for calling in, man.
[01:54:33.000 --> 01:54:40.000]  All right. I am down to four minutes and the last caller on the board in line here is Truth Raider.
[01:54:40.000 --> 01:54:43.000]  Raider, do you have a question?
[01:54:43.000 --> 01:54:45.000]  Happy New Year, Sarge.
[01:54:45.000 --> 01:54:46.000]  Happy New Year.
[01:54:46.000 --> 01:54:48.000]  I call you Sarge.
[01:54:48.000 --> 01:54:52.000]  Well, it's ex-Sarge. I was Sargeant, but it's ex.
[01:54:52.000 --> 01:54:57.000]  Yeah. Yeah. Well, you remind me of my TI back in Lackland years ago.
[01:54:57.000 --> 01:55:05.000]  Yeah. Well, that wouldn't work for mine. My TI was five foot nothing and his IQ was even lower than that.
[01:55:05.000 --> 01:55:12.000]  I was lucky. Mine was kind of scary. He looked like Hitler with a black eyebrow that went all the way across.
[01:55:12.000 --> 01:55:19.000]  Well, mine was a little short dude by the name of Kolupka who thought he was all of that in a bag of chips.
[01:55:19.000 --> 01:55:23.000]  Yeah. Well, you probably heard of Rigsby then. You probably knew who Sargeant Rigsby was.
[01:55:23.000 --> 01:55:27.000]  Well, that depends on when you went through there and when I did.
[01:55:27.000 --> 01:55:29.000]  Late 80s.
[01:55:29.000 --> 01:55:32.000]  I went through in April of 84.
[01:55:32.000 --> 01:55:38.000]  Okay. That's a little bit early. I decided to try a little college first, you know, get some credits up to, you know, to go to officers.
[01:55:38.000 --> 01:55:43.000]  Yeah. I tried a very little bit of college too, but, you know.
[01:55:43.000 --> 01:55:50.000]  All right. Well, I got your information and I'm kind of like in the situation where I'm kind of hanging on like a hair in a cheese sandwich.
[01:55:50.000 --> 01:55:58.000]  I've got three days to go. I've got to figure out what, you know, read the script just like you sent me in the emails to supply the correct state.
[01:55:58.000 --> 01:56:03.000]  That's what I'm supposed to do. That applies to this. So I'm still looking that up.
[01:56:03.000 --> 01:56:09.000]  I went to the library, the law library, and the ladies are very nice and they're very helpful.
[01:56:09.000 --> 01:56:17.000]  And they said that, well, they have books, the Black's Law Dictionary, three through ten, but they don't have the second edition.
[01:56:17.000 --> 01:56:20.000]  Why are you after the second edition?
[01:56:20.000 --> 01:56:25.000]  Yeah. This one's editions three through ten. And they said, well, anything that that far back.
[01:56:25.000 --> 01:56:29.000]  The sixth edition is really the only one you need to worry about.
[01:56:29.000 --> 01:56:37.000]  The sixth is the last one they had that contained case law that created the definitions in the dictionary.
[01:56:37.000 --> 01:56:43.000]  All right. All right. Very good. All right. Well, I have I have some facts and things I want to read, but we're down the last minute or so.
[01:56:43.000 --> 01:56:48.000]  So I don't have time to read them out to you. It would take about two or three minutes for them to read my facts.
[01:56:48.000 --> 01:56:54.000]  And the most apparent, I was the conspiracy of the officers who conducted the illegal traffic stop.
[01:56:54.000 --> 01:56:59.000]  OK. Why are you talking about conspiracy as a defense?
[01:56:59.000 --> 01:57:13.000]  That's simple. It's been told and I heard and I don't know if you agree with this or not, but they tend to look for those who are in that are traveling in automobiles that are either dirty, broken down or old.
[01:57:13.000 --> 01:57:19.000]  And they're looking for a particular. OK, that's profiling. What's that got to do with conspiracy?
[01:57:19.000 --> 01:57:23.000]  That's a conspiracy to do after.
[01:57:23.000 --> 01:57:30.000]  Really? How do you know how many officers were involved in the decision to profile?
[01:57:30.000 --> 01:57:33.000]  At least three. How do you know that?
[01:57:33.000 --> 01:57:36.000]  How many was in the car that stopped you?
[01:57:36.000 --> 01:57:39.000]  The one and his two following deputies.
[01:57:39.000 --> 01:57:41.000]  Sergeant and his two deputies.
[01:57:41.000 --> 01:57:45.000]  When you say following, they were all three together at the same time?
[01:57:45.000 --> 01:57:54.000]  No, the following back behind them, they came in within 10 to 15 seconds, so they were around the corner. They were talking to each other and say, we're going to hold in on this guy.
[01:57:54.000 --> 01:57:59.000]  OK. Again, still, how are you going to prove it? Do you have the CAD reports and the radio communications?
[01:57:59.000 --> 01:58:06.000]  I'm going to get that. I'm going to order that because they conveniently don't have their cameras running. I don't know why they don't have their cameras running.
[01:58:06.000 --> 01:58:07.000]  Ah, OK.
[01:58:07.000 --> 01:58:09.000]  See what they conduct and then lawful arrest.
[01:58:09.000 --> 01:58:14.000]  All right. All right, Raider. Well, I want to let you go. I'm out of time, man. Thanks for calling in.
[01:58:14.000 --> 01:58:20.000]  All right, folks, this has been the Monday Night Rule of Law radio show with your host, Eddie Craig.
[01:58:20.000 --> 01:58:24.000]  I want to thank all the callers tonight, all the questions and comments.
[01:58:24.000 --> 01:58:31.000]  Please keep us in your financial considerations here, especially the lawsuit and the new motion.
[01:58:31.000 --> 01:58:39.000]  The new motion is a hundred bucks, but it will be worth it. It's applicable to Texas, but it'll be worth it. I promise you.
[01:58:39.000 --> 01:58:44.000]  All right, folks, I hope you all have a great and blessed week. Good night. God bless.
[01:59:09.000 --> 01:59:21.000]  This is a free copy today from Bibles for America. Call us toll free at 888-551-0102 or visit us online at bfa.org.
[01:59:21.000 --> 01:59:30.000]  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.
[01:59:30.000 --> 01:59:33.000]  This is truly a Bible you can understand.
[01:59:33.000 --> 01:59:41.000]  To get your free copy of the New Testament Recovery Version, call us toll free at 888-551-0102.
[01:59:41.000 --> 01:59:50.000]  That's 888-551-0102 or visit us online at bfa.org.
[01:59:50.000 --> 02:00:03.000]  Looking for some truth? You found it. LogosradioNetwork.com.