[00:00.000 --> 00:07.760]  The following use flash is brought to you by the Lone Star Lowdown, providing your deli
[00:07.760 --> 00:09.960]  bulletins for the commodities market.
[00:09.960 --> 00:23.280]  Today in history, news updates and the inside scoop into the tides of the alternative.
[00:23.280 --> 00:27.400]  Markets for Wednesday, the 10th of August, 2016, are currently trading with gold at $1,346
[00:27.400 --> 00:34.600]  an ounce, silver at $20.13 an ounce, Texas crude at $42.70 a barrel, and Bitcoin is currently
[00:34.600 --> 00:43.240]  sitting at about $596 U.S. currency.
[00:43.240 --> 00:49.920]  Today in history, the year 1920, following World War I, Ottoman Sultan Mehmed VI representatives
[00:49.920 --> 00:54.360]  signed the Treaty of Sèvres, which divided up the Ottoman Empire between the Allies,
[00:54.360 --> 00:58.680]  who then basically mapped out the Middle East as it is today, the surrender and division
[00:58.680 --> 01:05.080]  of the Ottoman Empire today in history.
[01:05.080 --> 01:08.900]  In recent news, the Florida Department of Law Enforcement opened up an investigation
[01:08.900 --> 01:14.000]  after Tuesday's tragic shooting of Mary Knowlton, 73-year-old who was taking part in a shoot-don't-shoot
[01:14.000 --> 01:18.360]  exercise with the Punta Gorda Police Department in Florida when she was accidentally struck
[01:18.360 --> 01:19.640]  by a live round.
[01:19.640 --> 01:23.560]  The police officer who accidentally shot Mary was identified as Lee Cole, who has been with
[01:23.560 --> 01:28.080]  the department since March 17th, 2014, has been placed on administrative leave while
[01:28.080 --> 01:30.000]  the investigation is underway.
[01:30.000 --> 01:33.400]  Police Chief Tom Lewis stated that nobody in their wildest dreams thought there was
[01:33.400 --> 01:34.720]  live ammunition in there.
[01:34.720 --> 01:38.080]  We were unaware that any live ammunition existed for this kind of weapon.
[01:38.080 --> 01:39.760]  We thought only blanks were available.
[01:39.760 --> 01:44.200]  The fatal bullet was fired from a revolver that the officer had used before in earlier
[01:44.200 --> 01:45.600]  exercises.
[01:45.600 --> 01:49.520]  Chief Lewis did assure that the department has protocols in place in order to prevent
[01:49.520 --> 01:59.200]  accidental shootings, but he declined to go into the details citing the ongoing probe.
[01:59.200 --> 02:03.560]  WikiLeaks is offering a $20,000 reward for information on the Democratic National Committee
[02:03.560 --> 02:04.560]  staff members.
[02:04.560 --> 02:09.040]  Seth Richard, a 27-year-old data analyst for the DNC, who was shot and killed early on
[02:09.040 --> 02:13.080]  Sunday morning last month in what police are saying was a robbery gone wrong.
[02:13.080 --> 02:17.760]  Julian Assange in an interview with a Dutch news program implied Seth Rich was the source
[02:17.760 --> 02:22.600]  of the DNC emails, which showed an apparent bias in favor of Hillary Clinton over Bernie
[02:22.600 --> 02:24.600]  Sanders in the Democratic primary.
[02:24.600 --> 02:28.160]  When asked about the reward, WikiLeaks said in the statement, quote, we treat threats
[02:28.160 --> 02:32.440]  towards any suspected source of WikiLeaks with extreme gravity and should not be taken
[02:32.440 --> 02:36.800]  to imply that Seth Rich was a source to WikiLeaks or to imply that his murder is connected to
[02:36.800 --> 02:37.800]  our publications.
[02:37.800 --> 02:42.800]  The Lone Star Lowdown is currently looking for sponsors.
[02:42.800 --> 02:49.800]  If you're applying for a service you'd like to advertise with us, feel free to give me
[02:49.800 --> 02:50.800]  a call at 210-363-2257.
[02:50.800 --> 03:14.280]  We've been Rick Roady with the Lowdown for August 10th, 2016.
[03:20.800 --> 03:49.720]  If you're applying for a service you'd like to advertise with us, feel free to give me
[03:49.720 --> 04:00.460]  Bad boys, bad boys Good boys Bad boys Bad boys
[04:00.460 --> 04:04.340]  You chuck it on that one, you chuck it on this one, you chuck it on your mother and
[04:04.340 --> 04:05.340]  you chuck it on your father.
[04:05.340 --> 04:06.340]  You chuck it on your brother and you chuck it on your sister.
[04:06.340 --> 04:11.340]  You chuck it on that one and you chuck it on me.
[04:11.340 --> 04:12.340]  Okay.
[04:12.340 --> 04:13.340]  Howdy, howdy.
[04:13.340 --> 04:26.220]  Randy Kelton, Debra Stevens, Rule of Law Radio on this Thursday, the 11th day of July, 2016.
[04:26.220 --> 04:27.980]  And we actually have Debra in the background.
[04:27.980 --> 04:34.900]  I might drag her onto the air kicking and screaming before this is over.
[04:34.900 --> 04:39.820]  I do finally have my bar grievance site up.
[04:39.820 --> 04:43.460]  I lost bargrievance.net.
[04:43.460 --> 04:47.780]  Someone picked it up and was going to transfer it to me and it kind of fell through the cracks.
[04:47.780 --> 04:53.180]  So I do have bargrievance.website.
[04:53.180 --> 05:00.260]  So bargrievance.website is up and working, it's not polished yet, I'm working on some
[05:00.260 --> 05:08.260]  of the polish, but it has the links to the questionnaire, which was the big deal.
[05:08.260 --> 05:12.980]  People who've listened for a long time knows that I've been working on a technology that
[05:12.980 --> 05:18.060]  turned out to be rather complex.
[05:18.060 --> 05:25.820]  And I built it for bargrievance, frankly, I don't know how many people out there have
[05:25.820 --> 05:32.620]  gotten the American Bar Association Model Standards and read them.
[05:32.620 --> 05:40.220]  It appears as though when you pull the standards that there's a lot of stuff there, but there's
[05:40.220 --> 05:53.740]  really not, because 90% of what is in the model standards that go to professional ethics
[05:53.740 --> 05:59.780]  are really specific to lawyers and what lawyers do with other lawyers and how lawyers interact
[05:59.780 --> 06:01.660]  with judges.
[06:01.660 --> 06:06.260]  Most of that doesn't have anything to do with lawyer-client relationships.
[06:06.260 --> 06:13.460]  And in terms of us filing bargrievances, most of what we care about is contained in just
[06:13.460 --> 06:16.660]  a couple of sections.
[06:16.660 --> 06:27.900]  So what this questionnaire does is allow you in about four or five questions to get to
[06:27.900 --> 06:32.380]  any grievance in the whole code.
[06:32.380 --> 06:38.580]  It's kind of like playing 20 questions.
[06:38.580 --> 06:46.780]  I can ask you 20 questions and get to just about anything, because the first question
[06:46.780 --> 06:54.340]  is going to isolate 99% of all of the possibilities in the world.
[06:54.340 --> 07:01.140]  It's going to focus me on one particular issue.
[07:01.140 --> 07:02.140]  What's your issue about?
[07:02.140 --> 07:04.860]  You're going to say, well, law, okay.
[07:04.860 --> 07:07.340]  I got all the other stuff in the world eliminated.
[07:07.340 --> 07:09.740]  Well, what area of law?
[07:09.740 --> 07:14.100]  Now I've got another 99% of what's left eliminated.
[07:14.100 --> 07:18.020]  In 20 questions, you can get to about anything.
[07:18.020 --> 07:26.180]  So we've taken that 20 questions concept and applied it to codes.
[07:26.180 --> 07:29.700]  You know, we suggested people read the code.
[07:29.700 --> 07:41.140]  I went to Australia, did some seminars down there, and they were complaining that when
[07:41.140 --> 07:48.820]  they would file a criminal complaint in Australia, it was called a TAN, a criminal appearance
[07:48.820 --> 07:59.060]  notice, because in Australia, unlike here, you have standing in that every citizen is
[07:59.060 --> 08:03.980]  considered a common law public official.
[08:03.980 --> 08:11.220]  So as a common law public official, you could literally initiate a prosecution and issue
[08:11.220 --> 08:15.260]  a summons, and that's what the criminal appearance notice was.
[08:15.260 --> 08:21.980]  Well, if a private citizen filed one, since they're not necessarily knowledgeable in law,
[08:21.980 --> 08:31.380]  the county registrar had to sign off on the criminal appearance notice to make sure that
[08:31.380 --> 08:34.340]  it met all the requirements of law.
[08:34.340 --> 08:40.260]  So I'm in a seminar in Sydney, and I got about 30 of the premier legal researchers
[08:40.260 --> 08:49.140]  in Australia there, and I told them, guys, I'm just a bloody yank, and I'm not going
[08:49.140 --> 08:53.660]  to pretend to know more about Australian law than you do.
[08:53.660 --> 09:04.140]  So tell me, under the New South Wales Act of 19, I think it was 96, what is an element
[09:04.140 --> 09:06.220]  of a crime?
[09:06.220 --> 09:11.660]  And everybody just started with a physical element of a crime, and everybody just sat
[09:11.660 --> 09:18.060]  there and looked at me with their mouths hanging open, and I said, okay, okay, what is a fault
[09:18.060 --> 09:22.780]  element that renders a physical element criminal?
[09:22.780 --> 09:24.700]  And they just sat there.
[09:24.700 --> 09:34.700]  That's the way the elements of a crime were referenced in Australian law.
[09:34.700 --> 09:39.140]  The physical elements were essentially the facts, and the fault elements were how the
[09:39.140 --> 09:41.340]  code applied to the facts.
[09:41.340 --> 09:46.820]  And I said, guys, read the code.
[09:46.820 --> 09:52.180]  Every reason you're not getting your criminal appearance notice assigned is you hadn't read
[09:52.180 --> 09:53.940]  the code.
[09:53.940 --> 10:00.620]  So I got the code out for the purpose of reading, and I had already looked at how to file criminal
[10:00.620 --> 10:04.700]  complaints, but I hadn't really looked at the code.
[10:04.700 --> 10:13.220]  Our, the penal code for the state of Texas is somewhere around 100 pages.
[10:13.220 --> 10:19.340]  The penal code for Australia was 500 pages.
[10:19.340 --> 10:24.500]  Our section on intoxication offenses is about a half a page.
[10:24.500 --> 10:32.620]  The Australian section on intoxicated, intoxicated offenses was over 30 pages.
[10:32.620 --> 10:38.020]  Holy mackerel, no wonder these guys hadn't read this code.
[10:38.020 --> 10:41.580]  And that's when I sat down and said, we have to do something.
[10:41.580 --> 10:44.500]  There has to be a way to make this code available.
[10:44.500 --> 10:53.900]  And then from those considerations, this process of taking the code and where the code makes
[10:53.900 --> 11:01.940]  a proactive assertion, it is a crime for a person to hold himself out as a lawyer.
[11:01.940 --> 11:10.980]  I'm speaking to 38.123 Texas penal code, something I just got shoved at me a couple of weeks
[11:10.980 --> 11:18.260]  ago while I was in court helping somebody else, 38.123 said, it is a crime for a person
[11:18.260 --> 11:26.220]  to hold himself out as a lawyer and represent someone in a personal injury or property damage
[11:26.220 --> 11:27.220]  case.
[11:27.220 --> 11:35.780]  So I turned that around and say, did the person represent themselves as a lawyer?
[11:35.780 --> 11:44.580]  I click on that and behind that, I will list every question that could go to someone representing
[11:44.580 --> 11:45.580]  themselves as a lawyer.
[11:45.580 --> 11:55.020]  And in this case for this statute, did they represent someone in court in a personal injury
[11:55.020 --> 11:56.020]  or property damage case?
[11:56.020 --> 11:59.340]  And you say, no, I'm done with that.
[11:59.340 --> 12:08.020]  Now that's a real simple example, some of these crimes, cases and claims and issues
[12:08.020 --> 12:15.340]  have a lot more elements than that, but you just simply ask for the presence of what needs
[12:15.340 --> 12:18.340]  to be available in the bar grievance section.
[12:18.340 --> 12:28.300]  If you go to bargrievance.website, then you can click a link there to go to the questionnaire
[12:28.300 --> 12:31.540]  link that has a little bit of instructions, just a little clunky.
[12:31.540 --> 12:37.300]  I've got it up and working, but I haven't worked out all of the fancy-snancy formatting.
[12:37.300 --> 12:42.940]  I'll be working on that to make it look prettier in bubbles and beads.
[12:42.940 --> 12:46.900]  But you click on a plus sign and it opens a question.
[12:46.900 --> 12:55.260]  The first one is, is this about your lawyer or a prosecutor?
[12:55.260 --> 12:58.140]  That isolates out two different codes.
[12:58.140 --> 13:02.460]  What I suggest everybody do is go in there and look at this thing.
[13:02.460 --> 13:11.500]  It's not completely dynamic yet in that I will be building a backside output report
[13:11.500 --> 13:18.300]  depending on which of the text boxes in the questionnaire you fill out, because as you
[13:18.300 --> 13:22.980]  answer these questions, it'll take you to one particular text box.
[13:22.980 --> 13:31.300]  It's the grievance or the standard that you want to file a complaint about, and then you
[13:31.300 --> 13:32.660]  fill out that text box.
[13:32.660 --> 13:42.060]  I will be working on this to get it to take what you put in and pull up the form for your
[13:42.060 --> 13:50.260]  state and insert this into the form where this dissertation would go.
[13:50.260 --> 13:53.700]  And also, you could fill out the form online.
[13:53.700 --> 13:58.020]  Then you can download it and just sign and send.
[13:58.020 --> 14:00.500]  Well, look at it.
[14:00.500 --> 14:01.500]  Go through it.
[14:01.500 --> 14:04.460]  You can go forward and go back.
[14:04.460 --> 14:06.200]  Kind of bounce around in there.
[14:06.200 --> 14:12.740]  You will be surprised at the things you can bargain with a lawyer for, but more important
[14:12.740 --> 14:24.060]  than that, you will be surprised at how sophisticated this is in that it was written by lawyers
[14:24.060 --> 14:31.020]  for lawyers, and it addresses all of the things that lawyers do and should do that you may
[14:31.020 --> 14:34.860]  or may not know about, so you should look at this.
[14:34.860 --> 14:41.620]  It'll tell you all of the things your lawyers should be doing, and you will be surprised
[14:41.620 --> 14:45.340]  at how many of those things she is not doing.
[14:45.340 --> 14:56.140]  Now, in these standards, what I have modeled here are the American Bar Association model
[14:56.140 --> 14:57.140]  standards.
[14:57.140 --> 15:02.740]  All but three states have adopted these model standards, and then they made their own adjustments
[15:02.740 --> 15:03.740]  to them.
[15:03.740 --> 15:09.300]  The three states that didn't adopt these model standards have a set of standards that's
[15:09.300 --> 15:14.220]  very close to this.
[15:14.220 --> 15:18.060]  You might look at your state, but in the end, it doesn't matter, because what the courts
[15:18.060 --> 15:27.780]  say is a violation of one of these standards does not create a cause of action.
[15:27.780 --> 15:32.660]  You can't sue a lawyer because he violated these standards.
[15:32.660 --> 15:37.220]  That is song and dance and seltzer down your pants.
[15:37.220 --> 15:43.500]  Oh, yes, you can, and here's how you do that.
[15:43.500 --> 15:50.140]  You don't sue because he violated the standard.
[15:50.140 --> 16:02.840]  You sue for the harm that was caused because he violated what is construed as normal procedure
[16:02.840 --> 16:05.540]  and good faith service.
[16:05.540 --> 16:11.700]  So the standard will tell you where the lawyer does something that could be construed as
[16:11.700 --> 16:15.380]  a lead to harm to you, and based on that, you can sue him.
[16:15.380 --> 16:22.860]  What we will be adding to this page is a tool to develop a malpractice suit.
[16:22.860 --> 16:29.740]  This whole page and everything is going to be part of the lawsociety.net paralegal site.
[16:29.740 --> 16:36.740]  We'll be building a bunch of these tools so that you'll have a place where you can find
[16:36.740 --> 16:39.500]  just about everything you need.
[16:39.500 --> 16:46.940]  This is Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Rule of Law Radio, our call in number 512-646-1984.
[16:46.940 --> 16:47.940]  Call lines are open.
[16:47.940 --> 16:48.940]  They'll be open all night.
[16:48.940 --> 16:49.940]  We have Jeff in Mississippi.
[16:49.940 --> 16:52.460]  Jeff will pick you up when we come back.
[16:52.460 --> 16:57.900]  Oh, my goodness, I'm out of time before I fell off the cliff.
[16:57.900 --> 16:58.900]  We'll be right back.
[16:58.900 --> 17:06.660]  Through advances in technology our lives have greatly improved, except in the area of nutrition.
[17:06.660 --> 17:11.380]  People feed their pets better than they feed themselves, and it's time we changed all that.
[17:11.380 --> 17:17.020]  Our primary defense against aging and disease in this toxic environment is good nutrition.
[17:17.020 --> 17:23.420]  In a world where natural foods have been irradiated, adulterated, and mutilated, young Jevity can
[17:23.420 --> 17:25.700]  provide the nutrients you need.
[17:25.700 --> 17:30.620]  Logos Radio Network gets many requests to endorse all sorts of products, most of which
[17:30.620 --> 17:31.620]  we reject.
[17:31.620 --> 17:36.900]  We have come to trust young Jevity so much, we became a marketing distributor along with
[17:36.900 --> 17:39.740]  Alex Jones, Ben Fuchs, and many others.
[17:39.740 --> 17:46.020]  When you order from logosradionetwork.com, your health will improve as you help support
[17:46.020 --> 17:47.020]  quality radio.
[17:47.020 --> 17:51.700]  As you realize the benefits of young Jevity, you may want to join us.
[17:51.700 --> 17:57.260]  As a distributor, you can experience improved health, help your friends and family, and
[17:57.260 --> 17:59.220]  increase your income.
[17:59.220 --> 18:02.020]  Order now.
[18:02.020 --> 18:06.420]  Did you know that the Logos Radio Network is a truly listener-supported radio network?
[18:06.420 --> 18:10.820]  On top of the on-air talents, producers, and other hardworking individuals working behind
[18:10.820 --> 18:14.980]  the scenes, Logos Radio Network is kept on the air by the generous support of listeners
[18:14.980 --> 18:15.980]  like you.
[18:15.980 --> 18:20.580]  And we appreciate our loyal listeners making contributions every year in our annual fundraisers,
[18:20.580 --> 18:23.620]  which help keep the lights on and Logos Radio Network on the air.
[18:23.620 --> 18:27.620]  Head on over to logosradionetwork.com to make your contribution.
[18:27.620 --> 18:32.740]  Every $25 donation enters you for a chance to win prizes from Central Texas Gunworks.
[18:32.740 --> 18:35.580]  First prize being a Spiked Skull Lower Receiver.
[18:35.580 --> 18:37.220]  Second prize being a Taurus Curve.
[18:37.220 --> 18:39.340]  Ten winners will receive gift cards from All About Vapor.
[18:39.340 --> 18:44.060]  And if you donate your $25 contribution early enough, you will also receive a complimentary
[18:44.060 --> 18:46.020]  jar of My Magic Mud.
[18:46.020 --> 18:50.460]  Donations by all major credit cards are accepted, as well as contributions by Bitcoin.
[18:50.460 --> 18:55.380]  To Logos Radio Network Fundraiser, head on over to logosradionetwork.com for more information
[18:55.380 --> 19:22.260]  and to donate to keep Logos Radio Network on the air.
[19:22.260 --> 19:34.900]  Okay, we are back, Randy Calton, Deborah Stevens, Rule of Law Radio, and we're talking to Jeff
[19:34.900 --> 19:35.900]  in Mississippi.
[19:35.900 --> 19:36.900]  Hello, Mr. Jeff.
[19:36.900 --> 19:37.900]  Hi, Randy.
[19:37.900 --> 19:40.900]  Thanks for having me on.
[19:40.900 --> 19:41.900]  Glad to have you.
[19:41.900 --> 19:44.020]  What are you up to lately?
[19:44.020 --> 19:45.020]  Okay.
[19:45.020 --> 19:54.180]  Last time we talked, the judge had dismissed my case, so we were going to do a motion for
[19:54.180 --> 20:02.180]  reconsideration, and I believe that's Rule 60 of the federal rules.
[20:02.180 --> 20:07.740]  That was my first question that I wanted to ask, is Rule 59 asks for a new trial, but
[20:07.740 --> 20:13.420]  Rule 60 asks for relief of the judgment.
[20:13.420 --> 20:14.420]  So is this under Rule 50?
[20:14.420 --> 20:18.380]  No, you're not going under Rule 60, you're going under 59.
[20:18.380 --> 20:24.460]  A motion for reconsideration is a request for a new trial.
[20:24.460 --> 20:27.460]  Oh, it is?
[20:27.460 --> 20:28.460]  Yes.
[20:28.460 --> 20:29.460]  Oh, okay.
[20:29.460 --> 20:30.460]  Okay.
[20:30.460 --> 20:36.100]  Well, last time we spoke, I was going to email you and you were going to send me an example
[20:36.100 --> 20:38.860]  that you had done for that motion.
[20:38.860 --> 20:41.460]  I saw your email.
[20:41.460 --> 20:42.740]  I thought I had done that.
[20:42.740 --> 20:45.180]  I must have got distracted and not.
[20:45.180 --> 20:49.300]  Well, I'll check it again, too, maybe you can send it.
[20:49.300 --> 20:55.300]  I've got one I can send you that Rick just sent me in his case where they did a motion
[20:55.300 --> 21:01.780]  for reconsideration to the Court of Appeals in California.
[21:01.780 --> 21:08.340]  A motion for reconsideration will essentially be your appeal appellate brief.
[21:08.340 --> 21:09.340]  Okay.
[21:09.340 --> 21:15.740]  You say, Your Honor, you made some mistakes.
[21:15.740 --> 21:18.780]  These are the mistakes you made in your appellate brief.
[21:18.780 --> 21:24.340]  You'll claim these are the errors the court made and these are the questions and thus
[21:24.340 --> 21:26.660]  the questions we will bring.
[21:26.660 --> 21:30.660]  Then you brief out those issues.
[21:30.660 --> 21:35.500]  About the only difference is you just changed the headache.
[21:35.500 --> 21:36.500]  Okay.
[21:36.500 --> 21:38.500]  Can I read you my short introduction?
[21:38.500 --> 21:39.500]  Yes.
[21:39.500 --> 21:40.500]  Okay.
[21:40.500 --> 21:42.820]  This is how I do a motion.
[21:42.820 --> 21:48.860]  I do a motion very simple, almost like a caveman, so introduction and this is going to sound
[21:48.860 --> 21:53.580]  pretty crude, but this is the way I correct me if I'm wrong.
[21:53.580 --> 22:01.900]  This court's July 28, 2016 order improperly granted Holmes' motion to dismiss and Morrell's
[22:01.900 --> 22:07.500]  motion for summary judgment because no competent evidence existed establishing grounds to grant
[22:07.500 --> 22:13.340]  a motion to dismiss or summary judgment for the defendant.
[22:13.340 --> 22:17.820]  Instead of ruling on the evidence, the court made the following false statements to base
[22:17.820 --> 22:19.180]  its ruling.
[22:19.180 --> 22:24.060]  These statements need clarification and then I just go one, two, three, you lied here,
[22:24.060 --> 22:27.420]  you lied there, you lied there, three, four, five, six.
[22:27.420 --> 22:28.420]  Perfect.
[22:28.420 --> 22:31.420]  Is that okay?
[22:31.420 --> 22:32.420]  That's perfect.
[22:32.420 --> 22:33.420]  Okay.
[22:33.420 --> 22:39.820]  Keep in mind, the judge don't have to be your buddy.
[22:39.820 --> 22:48.540]  You don't have to stroke his ego and the judge understands that a motion for reconsideration
[22:48.540 --> 22:51.820]  is your appellate brief.
[22:51.820 --> 22:58.980]  So he reads this and thinks, this is what the guy's going to tell the court of appeals.
[22:58.980 --> 23:06.020]  But when I was being prosecuted in Cherokee County, the trial judge referenced the court
[23:06.020 --> 23:16.260]  of appeals and he referred to them as the gods in Tyler indicating he was not happy
[23:16.260 --> 23:17.260]  with these guys.
[23:17.260 --> 23:23.500]  If he felt like these guys thought they were gods and they just tromped all over him, your
[23:23.500 --> 23:26.260]  judge is likely to feel the same way.
[23:26.260 --> 23:27.460]  Okay.
[23:27.460 --> 23:29.460]  I'm pretty brute.
[23:29.460 --> 23:38.860]  So when you're going to them, telling them that this judge lied on his order in order
[23:38.860 --> 23:48.060]  to justify an improper dismissal, he is not likely to be happy about that.
[23:48.060 --> 23:56.420]  And there's no certain form, the judge basically lied on when he cited some case law, he totally
[23:56.420 --> 23:58.060]  got it backwards.
[23:58.060 --> 24:05.580]  So my way of arguing is the first state that judge said this, this and this, Fred Flintstone
[24:05.580 --> 24:11.900]  Humpty Dumpty fell off the wall, but case law, and then I'll come back and say, I'll
[24:11.900 --> 24:16.340]  even quote some of it and then say that the case law actually says the reverse.
[24:16.340 --> 24:19.500]  And it's okay to use that style?
[24:19.500 --> 24:20.500]  Absolutely.
[24:20.500 --> 24:21.500]  Okay.
[24:21.500 --> 24:28.460]  So that's exactly what it's for and it seems like every time I take apart an order, I find
[24:28.460 --> 24:31.420]  exactly that kind of problem.
[24:31.420 --> 24:41.580]  I just prepared an appellate brief for a guy in New York and I looked at the order and
[24:41.580 --> 24:46.980]  when you've, when you're preparing an appellate brief, your order, the order from the judge
[24:46.980 --> 24:52.060]  of the points and authorities is your friend.
[24:52.060 --> 24:57.900]  You don't have to figure out how to structure your brief, just follow that, the order.
[24:57.900 --> 25:03.180]  I just walked down the order, pulled the case law the judge referred to and primarily the
[25:03.180 --> 25:10.820]  case law where he referred to were district court cases, really obscure district court
[25:10.820 --> 25:11.820]  cases.
[25:11.820 --> 25:21.700]  He didn't refer to appellate court or Supreme court cases, which would have been law.
[25:21.700 --> 25:26.620]  He referred to district court cases that were just some district judge issued this ruling
[25:26.620 --> 25:32.740]  and he got it all wrong.
[25:32.740 --> 25:37.900]  He asserted in his order exactly what you said.
[25:37.900 --> 25:44.580]  He said the case said this and when I looked at it, it didn't say that at all.
[25:44.580 --> 25:54.220]  So you can generally just follow down his order and address what he stated wrong and
[25:54.220 --> 25:56.900]  ask the court to rule correctly on it.
[25:56.900 --> 25:59.420]  So you're in good shape.
[25:59.420 --> 26:00.420]  Great.
[26:00.420 --> 26:12.660]  So next is the judge claimed that I did not declare or ask for declarative relief or injunctive
[26:12.660 --> 26:13.660]  relief.
[26:13.660 --> 26:18.220]  Now, this is the case where I sued the court reporter for not giving me my transcripts
[26:18.220 --> 26:23.300]  and I asked for money and I did state that I was damaged from due process.
[26:23.300 --> 26:27.340]  So what does he mean when he says that I didn't ask for injunctive or declarative relief?
[26:27.340 --> 26:35.540]  Okay, okay, look up 28 USC 2201.
[26:35.540 --> 26:40.620]  That's the declaratory judgment statute in the Fed.
[26:40.620 --> 26:51.940]  And in a declaratory judgment issue, you ask the court to declare the rights of the parties.
[26:51.940 --> 27:02.220]  And since I don't know you sued, have you asked the court to rule on the duty of the
[27:02.220 --> 27:08.580]  court reporter to provide those documents in a timely manner and your right to receive
[27:08.580 --> 27:11.500]  those documents in a timely manner?
[27:11.500 --> 27:15.900]  I claim that I did have those rights, but I did not ask the court to rule.
[27:15.900 --> 27:22.660]  I just said rule in favor and give me money.
[27:22.660 --> 27:33.000]  Then technically you did not answer for declaratory relief, but so what?
[27:33.000 --> 27:36.940]  What does that have to do with the claims that you did make?
[27:36.940 --> 27:37.940]  Okay.
[27:37.940 --> 27:48.340]  Now I'm backing up, how did, under what circumstances did he make the claim that you didn't ask
[27:48.340 --> 27:50.420]  for declaratory relief?
[27:50.420 --> 27:53.580]  He didn't say, he just, it was just one sentence.
[27:53.580 --> 27:54.580]  Okay.
[27:54.580 --> 27:57.580]  Here's why he went there.
[27:57.580 --> 28:06.140]  Because in a request for declaratory relief, then you're not making a claim for which relief
[28:06.140 --> 28:08.820]  can be had.
[28:08.820 --> 28:16.620]  You're asking the court to declare the rights of the parties.
[28:16.620 --> 28:23.100]  Had you made a request for declaratory judgment, they couldn't dismiss it under 12b6.
[28:23.100 --> 28:24.100]  Okay.
[28:24.100 --> 28:27.260]  Could you say that one more time?
[28:27.260 --> 28:29.260]  I got confused.
[28:29.260 --> 28:30.520]  Okay.
[28:30.520 --> 28:38.860]  If you did not make, if you asked the court to rule on the rights of the parties, that
[28:38.860 --> 28:46.540]  that's one of the, if that's an issue in the case, that's a 2201 issue.
[28:46.540 --> 28:50.140]  And that issue can't be dismissed under 12b6.
[28:50.140 --> 28:55.220]  12b6 says that you failed to state a claim on which relief can be had.
[28:55.220 --> 29:04.780]  Well, you're not asking for relief in a 2201, you're asking for a declaration of rights.
[29:04.780 --> 29:10.780]  So what he was saying there is I can dismiss this because he failed to state a claim in
[29:10.780 --> 29:18.340]  which recovery can be had, and he did not have a request for declaratory judgment.
[29:18.340 --> 29:26.460]  The declaratory judgment would have stopped it, the dismissal.
[29:26.460 --> 29:27.460]  Okay.
[29:27.460 --> 29:28.780]  Is there anything I can do about that?
[29:28.780 --> 29:37.940]  Not at this point, except you can file a action specifically requesting declaratory judgment
[29:37.940 --> 29:43.820]  and asking the court to declare your statutory rights.
[29:43.820 --> 29:45.380]  That's something they won't be able to toss.
[29:45.380 --> 29:50.020]  So just hold that in the back so you can use that later.
[29:50.020 --> 29:51.020]  You can give back to them.
[29:51.020 --> 29:58.420]  Hang on, about to go to break, Randy Kelton, we'll radio, call in number 512-646-1984,
[29:58.420 --> 29:59.420]  we'll be right back.
[29:59.420 --> 30:03.780]  Are you a Facebook fiasco just waiting to happen?
[30:03.780 --> 30:07.380]  There's a downside to posting everything on your social network, and it just might leave
[30:07.380 --> 30:08.380]  you a sitting duck.
[30:08.380 --> 30:12.220]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, and I'll tell you more in just a moment.
[30:12.220 --> 30:17.540]  Your search engine is watching you, recording all your searches and creating a massive database
[30:17.540 --> 30:19.620]  of your personal information.
[30:19.620 --> 30:20.620]  That's creepy.
[30:20.620 --> 30:22.620]  But it doesn't have to be that way.
[30:22.620 --> 30:25.740]  Startpage.com is the world's most private search engine.
[30:25.740 --> 30:29.860]  Startpage doesn't store your IP address, make a record of your searches, or use tracking
[30:29.860 --> 30:32.140]  cookies, and they're third-party certified.
[30:32.140 --> 30:36.620]  If you don't like big brother spying on you, start over with Startpage.
[30:36.620 --> 30:39.220]  Great search results and total privacy.
[30:39.220 --> 30:42.740]  Startpage.com, the world's most private search engine.
[30:42.740 --> 30:46.460]  Social networking sites may seem like a good way to keep up with friends, relatives, and
[30:46.460 --> 30:49.300]  colleagues, but beware, enemies are watching too.
[30:49.300 --> 30:53.700]  Citizens of Nashua, New Hampshire, learned this the hard way when the Facebook bandits
[30:53.700 --> 30:57.220]  timed break-ins based on their victims' Facebook posts.
[30:57.220 --> 31:01.660]  Local police reported that 50 homes were broken into by tech-savvy criminals.
[31:01.660 --> 31:05.700]  They used Facebook posts to see when victims would be away from home, and they timed their
[31:05.700 --> 31:06.700]  strikes accordingly.
[31:06.700 --> 31:11.380]  To avoid falling prey to Facebook bandits, or worse, use this rule of thumb.
[31:11.380 --> 31:14.700]  If you wouldn't reveal your activities and whereabouts to hardened criminals or total
[31:14.700 --> 31:17.660]  strangers, you shouldn't put them on your social network page either.
[31:17.660 --> 31:19.500]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht.
[31:19.500 --> 31:49.340]  More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[31:49.500 --> 32:12.980]  We're going to have to stand and defend our own rights.
[32:12.980 --> 32:16.020]  Among those rights are the right to travel freely from place to place, the right to act
[32:16.020 --> 32:19.740]  in our own private capacity, and most importantly, the right to due process of law.
[32:19.740 --> 32:23.860]  Traffic courts afford us the least expensive opportunity to learn how to enforce and preserve
[32:23.860 --> 32:25.220]  our rights through due process.
[32:25.220 --> 32:29.220]  Former Sheriff's Deputy Eddie Craig, in conjunction with Rule of Law Radio, has put together the
[32:29.220 --> 32:32.980]  most comprehensive teaching tool available that will help you understand what due process
[32:32.980 --> 32:35.380]  is and how to hold the courts to the rule of law.
[32:35.380 --> 32:39.380]  You can get your own copy of this invaluable material by going to RuleOfLawRadio.com and
[32:39.380 --> 32:40.700]  ordering your copy today.
[32:40.700 --> 32:44.020]  By ordering now, you'll receive a copy of Eddie's book, The Texas Transportation Code,
[32:44.020 --> 32:48.500]  The Law Versus the Lie, video and audio of the original 2009 seminar, hundreds of research
[32:48.500 --> 32:50.420]  documents and other useful resource material.
[32:50.420 --> 32:54.060]  Learn how to fight for your rights with the help of this material from RuleOfLawRadio.com.
[32:54.060 --> 33:02.420]  Order your copy today and together we can have the free society we all want and deserve.
[33:02.420 --> 33:06.020]  Live free speech radio, LogosRadioNetwork.com.
[33:06.020 --> 33:29.500]  Okay, we are back, Randy Kelton, David Stevens, Rule of Law Radio and we're talking to Jeff
[33:29.500 --> 33:30.500]  in Mississippi.
[33:30.500 --> 33:31.500]  Okay, Jeff.
[33:31.500 --> 33:38.300]  I ordered on two more things that I wanted to get through to you.
[33:38.300 --> 33:47.700]  I had filed some motions for sanctions against these lawyers twice for completely lying about
[33:47.700 --> 33:54.580]  case law and he did not explain why he ruled on the motions.
[33:54.580 --> 33:59.700]  He just simply put it in one sentence that all other motions from Jeffrey Hill, motions
[33:59.700 --> 34:04.420]  for sanctions against the defendants are dismissed and that's it.
[34:04.420 --> 34:13.780]  Okay, then there essentially is no wing it, those are motions, they're not a part of the
[34:13.780 --> 34:14.780]  pleading itself.
[34:14.780 --> 34:15.780]  Yeah.
[34:15.780 --> 34:22.260]  So, if they were part of the pleading, they would have to be, he would have had to given
[34:22.260 --> 34:24.620]  you points and authorities.
[34:24.620 --> 34:32.580]  So, for those motions, you put in a request for findings of fact and conclusions of law.
[34:32.580 --> 34:33.580]  Okay.
[34:33.580 --> 34:41.020]  Now, that's a little more complex since you're already in the appeals court.
[34:41.020 --> 34:42.460]  Okay.
[34:42.460 --> 34:49.740]  And finally, I put in a request for admissions and a request for production of documents
[34:49.740 --> 34:57.180]  and he sent his order back dismissing my case before the defendants returned the discovery.
[34:57.180 --> 34:58.180]  Okay.
[34:58.180 --> 35:07.340]  He can do that, Suis Ponte, if he determines that you failed to make state of claim which
[35:07.340 --> 35:08.460]  recovery can't be had.
[35:08.460 --> 35:11.420]  That's the point of a rule 12.
[35:11.420 --> 35:23.260]  If someone files a suit, like we had someone file a debt collection suit and fail to include
[35:23.260 --> 35:29.860]  an accounting on the credit card which was a statutory requirement for jurisdiction.
[35:29.860 --> 35:40.980]  So, we found a dispositive motion, a motion to dismiss and that has to be considered before
[35:40.980 --> 35:49.740]  we could be required to go to all of the time, trouble and expense of providing discovery
[35:49.740 --> 36:00.180]  because if the suit itself wasn't sufficient on its face, then there's no need to cause
[36:00.180 --> 36:04.820]  the defendant to have to produce all this discovery since the suit is no good on its
[36:04.820 --> 36:05.820]  face anyway.
[36:05.820 --> 36:06.820]  Okay.
[36:06.820 --> 36:09.420]  And that's what the rule 12 is saying.
[36:09.420 --> 36:15.260]  There's no need to go to discovery because the suit was insufficient on its face.
[36:15.260 --> 36:16.860]  All right.
[36:16.860 --> 36:17.860]  Okay.
[36:17.860 --> 36:20.860]  So, he could do those two things.
[36:20.860 --> 36:21.860]  Yes.
[36:21.860 --> 36:22.860]  Okay.
[36:22.860 --> 36:31.940]  So, but I still having caught red-handed completely lying about case law, can I still move with
[36:31.940 --> 36:38.140]  my motion for reconsideration or have I just pretty much lost this case and need to move
[36:38.140 --> 36:39.140]  on?
[36:39.140 --> 36:41.820]  Well, you only had like 10 days to move.
[36:41.820 --> 36:48.300]  If you're already in the appeals court, no and you only got 10 days to move for a reconsideration.
[36:48.300 --> 36:50.500]  Oh, okay.
[36:50.500 --> 36:53.500]  Well, all right.
[36:53.500 --> 36:58.020]  Have you filed a notice of intent to appeal?
[36:58.020 --> 36:59.020]  Okay.
[36:59.020 --> 37:02.020]  That's the next?
[37:02.020 --> 37:07.860]  That had to be filed within I think 14 days.
[37:07.860 --> 37:12.220]  The notice with intent to appeal has to be filed within 14 days.
[37:12.220 --> 37:13.220]  Yes.
[37:13.220 --> 37:14.220]  Okay.
[37:14.220 --> 37:18.660]  So, I pretty much blown my motion for reconsideration.
[37:18.660 --> 37:20.140]  Just go for notice of appeal.
[37:20.140 --> 37:22.100]  Wait a minute.
[37:22.100 --> 37:25.340]  When did you get the order?
[37:25.340 --> 37:28.340]  The 28th.
[37:28.340 --> 37:29.340]  Of this month?
[37:29.340 --> 37:30.340]  Of July.
[37:30.340 --> 37:31.340]  Oh, July.
[37:31.340 --> 37:32.340]  So, it's been...
[37:32.340 --> 37:36.980]  You didn't file a notice of appeal?
[37:36.980 --> 37:38.380]  No.
[37:38.380 --> 37:41.020]  When I called you, we had talked about motion for reconsideration.
[37:41.020 --> 37:45.100]  Yeah, but you only had 14 days.
[37:45.100 --> 37:46.100]  Okay.
[37:46.100 --> 37:47.100]  You're close.
[37:47.100 --> 37:48.100]  Wait a minute.
[37:48.100 --> 37:49.100]  This is the 11th.
[37:49.100 --> 37:50.100]  28th.
[37:50.100 --> 37:53.100]  1, 2, 3, 2, 1.
[37:53.100 --> 37:54.100]  Monday.
[37:54.100 --> 37:55.100]  Okay.
[37:55.100 --> 38:01.580]  Get a motion for reconsideration in Monday.
[38:01.580 --> 38:04.100]  Oh, the reconsideration.
[38:04.100 --> 38:05.100]  Yes.
[38:05.100 --> 38:06.100]  Okay.
[38:06.100 --> 38:08.100]  What about the notice of appeal?
[38:08.100 --> 38:10.780]  Just do the reconsideration first?
[38:10.780 --> 38:12.140]  Yes.
[38:12.140 --> 38:18.180]  That stops the appeal, the notice, the clock on filing a notice of appeal.
[38:18.180 --> 38:19.180]  Okay.
[38:19.180 --> 38:20.180]  Okay.
[38:20.180 --> 38:21.180]  14 days was yesterday.
[38:21.180 --> 38:22.180]  It was tomorrow.
[38:22.180 --> 38:23.180]  Okay.
[38:23.180 --> 38:24.180]  So, get it in tomorrow.
[38:24.180 --> 38:25.180]  Okay.
[38:25.180 --> 38:26.180]  Even if it's incomplete, get it in.
[38:26.180 --> 38:27.180]  Just get it in.
[38:27.180 --> 38:28.180]  Okay.
[38:28.180 --> 38:29.180]  Yeah.
[38:29.180 --> 38:30.180]  That gets the clock stopped.
[38:30.180 --> 38:41.420]  Now you got time to get to work on your appeal because you knew he's going to deny this.
[38:41.420 --> 38:48.740]  So even though I did not declare my declaratory rights for the parties, like you'd said, just
[38:48.740 --> 38:53.020]  the fact that he's completely lying about the case law, I can still get him on that.
[38:53.020 --> 38:54.020]  Oh, yeah.
[38:54.020 --> 38:55.020]  Okay.
[38:55.020 --> 38:56.020]  Good.
[38:56.020 --> 38:58.460]  So I have life left in this case.
[38:58.460 --> 38:59.460]  Absolutely.
[38:59.460 --> 39:05.340]  But just make sure you get that motion for reconsideration in tomorrow.
[39:05.340 --> 39:06.340]  Got it.
[39:06.340 --> 39:07.340]  Yeah.
[39:07.340 --> 39:09.340]  I'm pretty much done with it.
[39:09.340 --> 39:10.340]  Okay.
[39:10.340 --> 39:11.340]  All right.
[39:11.340 --> 39:15.460]  Last thing I wanted to say is I'm so sorry to hear about Jeff Cedric.
[39:15.460 --> 39:18.460]  Oh, that was a bummer.
[39:18.460 --> 39:22.580]  I was actually on holding when you came out with that.
[39:22.580 --> 39:25.220]  So I wanted to say that.
[39:25.220 --> 39:28.580]  And he's gotten on there and taught me quite a few lessons.
[39:28.580 --> 39:29.580]  Yeah.
[39:29.580 --> 39:30.580]  He was great.
[39:30.580 --> 39:35.180]  The last time I talked to him, he indicated he was dealing with cancer, but he didn't
[39:35.180 --> 39:38.620]  indicate how serious it was.
[39:38.620 --> 39:41.580]  It kind of breaks my heart to lose Jeff.
[39:41.580 --> 39:45.540]  He used to come on the air and work me over.
[39:45.540 --> 39:47.580]  He's worked me over a couple of times.
[39:47.580 --> 39:49.580]  Well, I needed it.
[39:49.580 --> 39:51.580]  Forget the lessons.
[39:51.580 --> 39:52.580]  Okay.
[39:52.580 --> 39:53.580]  Well, I appreciate that.
[39:53.580 --> 39:56.580]  And we're certainly going to miss Jeff.
[39:56.580 --> 39:57.580]  Okay.
[39:57.580 --> 39:58.580]  Thank you.
[39:58.580 --> 40:00.580]  And I'll call you next week.
[40:00.580 --> 40:01.580]  All righty.
[40:01.580 --> 40:02.580]  Okay.
[40:02.580 --> 40:05.580]  Now we're going to go to Sonny in Georgia.
[40:05.580 --> 40:06.580]  Hello, Sonny.
[40:06.580 --> 40:07.580]  Good evening, Randy.
[40:07.580 --> 40:10.580]  How are you doing?
[40:10.580 --> 40:12.580]  I'm doing good.
[40:12.580 --> 40:14.580]  What do you have for us today?
[40:14.580 --> 40:21.580]  Well, I wanted to see if there are any special tools for extracting the boots of judges out
[40:21.580 --> 40:22.580]  of your backside.
[40:22.580 --> 40:30.580]  Yes, there are a lot of tools for that, and Jeff was just talking about a few of them.
[40:30.580 --> 40:33.580]  So I take it that you went to a traffic court yesterday.
[40:33.580 --> 40:34.580]  I did.
[40:34.580 --> 40:35.580]  Was it yesterday?
[40:35.580 --> 40:36.580]  Yes.
[40:36.580 --> 40:37.580]  Okay.
[40:37.580 --> 40:43.580]  How did that go, as if I didn't know already?
[40:43.580 --> 40:55.580]  It was, I was challenging subject matter jurisdiction, and he just, it was supposed to be a status
[40:55.580 --> 41:02.580]  hearing along with these motions, and he sort of switched things around by dealing with
[41:02.580 --> 41:09.580]  all the status hearings things first, and I was just curious as to whether you thought
[41:09.580 --> 41:15.580]  that was one of those judges' tricks to sort of bypass subject matter jurisdiction, but
[41:15.580 --> 41:24.580]  if I didn't object to going ahead with the status hearing and that sort of thing, am
[41:24.580 --> 41:30.580]  I in a way sort of giving him jurisdiction to continue?
[41:30.580 --> 41:31.580]  Okay.
[41:31.580 --> 41:33.580]  I have a suggestion.
[41:33.580 --> 41:41.580]  I want you to appoint me as the judge in your case.
[41:41.580 --> 41:42.580]  Right.
[41:42.580 --> 41:45.580]  You can't do that.
[41:45.580 --> 41:52.580]  You can't give me subject matter jurisdiction if I don't have it.
[41:52.580 --> 41:58.580]  So there is nothing you can do to give that judge subject matter jurisdiction if he doesn't
[41:58.580 --> 41:59.580]  have it.
[41:59.580 --> 42:09.580]  Now, you can give him jurisdiction or impersonal jurisdiction, jurisdiction over yourself, but
[42:09.580 --> 42:12.580]  you can't give him subject matter jurisdiction, period.
[42:12.580 --> 42:19.580]  So there's no trick or shenanigan he can pull that will give him subject matter jurisdiction
[42:19.580 --> 42:22.580]  if he doesn't have it.
[42:22.580 --> 42:23.580]  Okay.
[42:23.580 --> 42:33.580]  Can you challenge, if he rules against me on this challenge of subject matter jurisdiction,
[42:33.580 --> 42:39.580]  can I challenge it again or appeal his decision?
[42:39.580 --> 42:45.580]  You can definitely appeal, and you can sue the judge.
[42:45.580 --> 42:52.580]  This is the only time you can sue a judge where he has no immunity is when he acts with
[42:52.580 --> 42:55.580]  no subject matter jurisdiction.
[42:55.580 --> 43:01.580]  If he doesn't have subject matter jurisdiction, he is not a judge.
[43:01.580 --> 43:08.580]  He's just some dude up there huffing and a puffing.
[43:08.580 --> 43:09.580]  Yeah.
[43:09.580 --> 43:19.580]  I've got a, I think a pretty good duty of a judicial notice and challenge to subject
[43:19.580 --> 43:23.580]  matter jurisdiction, which will lay all this out that I want to go file in.
[43:23.580 --> 43:33.580]  But one of the first things that he did was he lied when I asked him if he had read the
[43:33.580 --> 43:35.580]  documents in the case.
[43:35.580 --> 43:42.580]  He said that he did, but he didn't, and he admitted it later when one of the documents
[43:42.580 --> 43:43.580]  came in.
[43:43.580 --> 43:44.580]  Wonderful.
[43:44.580 --> 43:45.580]  Hang on.
[43:45.580 --> 43:48.580]  We're about to go to break, but we would definitely want to pick this up when we come
[43:48.580 --> 43:49.580]  back.
[43:49.580 --> 43:52.580]  This is Randy Kelton, Dervin Stevens, Rule of Law Radio.
[43:52.580 --> 43:56.580]  Our call in number 512-646-1984.
[43:56.580 --> 44:01.580]  We'll be right back.
[44:01.580 --> 44:02.580]  Hello.
[44:02.580 --> 44:07.580]  My name is Stuart Smith from naturespureorganics.com, and I would like to invite you to come by
[44:07.580 --> 44:11.580]  our store at 1904 Guadalupe Street, Suite D here in Austin, Texas.
[44:11.580 --> 44:15.580]  I'm Brave New Books and Chase Payne to see all our fantastic health and wellness products
[44:15.580 --> 44:17.580]  with your very own eyes.
[44:17.580 --> 44:21.580]  Have a look at our miracle healing clay that started our adventure in alternative medicine.
[44:21.580 --> 44:25.580]  Take a peek at some of our other wonderful products, including our Australian emu oil,
[44:25.580 --> 44:29.580]  lotion candles, olive oil soaps, and colloidal silver and gold.
[44:29.580 --> 44:36.580]  Call 512-264-4043 or find us online at naturespureorganics.com.
[44:36.580 --> 44:42.580]  That's 512-264-4043, naturespureorganics.com.
[44:42.580 --> 44:46.580]  Don't forget to like us on Facebook for information on events and our products.
[44:46.580 --> 45:00.580]  Naturespureorganics.com.
[45:00.580 --> 45:03.580]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[45:03.580 --> 45:09.580]  Win your case without an attorney with Juris Dictionary, the affordable, easy-to-understand
[45:09.580 --> 45:15.580]  4-CD course that will show you how in 24 hours, step-by-step.
[45:15.580 --> 45:18.580]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing.
[45:18.580 --> 45:22.580]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[45:22.580 --> 45:27.580]  Thousands have won with our step-by-step course, and now you can too.
[45:27.580 --> 45:33.580]  Juris Dictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case-winning experience.
[45:33.580 --> 45:38.580]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand
[45:38.580 --> 45:42.580]  about the principles and practices that control our American courts.
[45:42.580 --> 45:48.580]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases,
[45:48.580 --> 45:51.580]  pro se tactics, and much more.
[45:51.580 --> 46:01.580]  Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner or call toll-free, 866-LAW-EZ.
[46:01.580 --> 46:29.580]  Okay, we are back.
[46:29.580 --> 46:38.580]  Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Rule of Law Radio, and we're talking to Sonny in Georgia.
[46:38.580 --> 46:41.580]  I'm a little bit slow because I just picked up another duty,
[46:41.580 --> 46:44.580]  so I'm having to make sure I get everything done right.
[46:44.580 --> 46:48.580]  Okay, Sonny, where were we?
[46:48.580 --> 46:51.580]  I was busy on the break and I lost where we were at.
[46:51.580 --> 46:55.580]  Oh, the judge lied. Oh, that's wonderful.
[46:55.580 --> 47:00.580]  Now you need to file a judicial conduct complaint against the judge
[47:00.580 --> 47:08.580]  and a petition to disqualify for judicial incompetence.
[47:08.580 --> 47:14.580]  Oh, that'll hurt his feelings.
[47:14.580 --> 47:21.580]  They are not used to, especially a pro se, taking them to task.
[47:21.580 --> 47:29.580]  Have you looked at the canons of judicial ethics for Georgia?
[47:29.580 --> 47:31.580]  No.
[47:31.580 --> 47:33.580]  You need to dig those out.
[47:33.580 --> 47:37.580]  You will be surprised at what you'll find in there.
[47:37.580 --> 47:51.580]  And then file a judicial conduct complaint against him and do it in the verbiage of the canons that he violated.
[47:51.580 --> 48:02.580]  And him specifically lying to you about a direct question that goes to the adjudication of the case, that's a pretty big deal.
[48:02.580 --> 48:07.580]  It's a bigger deal for these lower courts.
[48:07.580 --> 48:10.580]  Ken Magnuson, he's on the air on occasion.
[48:10.580 --> 48:18.580]  His brother was a municipal court judge for a while, his brother's an attorney.
[48:18.580 --> 48:36.580]  And he complained that the state commission on judicial conduct never punished elected judges or judges that weren't inferior court judges, that weren't lawyers.
[48:36.580 --> 48:51.580]  That the only time the state commission on judicial conduct disciplined a judge was if it was a justice of the peace or municipal court judge, which were judges of inferior courts which weren't necessarily lawyers.
[48:51.580 --> 48:57.580]  He felt like they used these judges for cannon fodder.
[48:57.580 --> 49:03.580]  And then did everything they could to protect the county and district court judges.
[49:03.580 --> 49:06.580]  And he was exactly correct.
[49:06.580 --> 49:11.580]  That's precisely what they do.
[49:11.580 --> 49:19.580]  Now it hurts a higher level elected judge if he gets judicial conduct complaints.
[49:19.580 --> 49:28.580]  But they're not as afraid of them as the municipal and justice of the peace court judges are.
[49:28.580 --> 49:30.580]  It kind of terrifies them.
[49:30.580 --> 49:35.580]  Because these are guys way further up the ladder than them.
[49:35.580 --> 49:41.580]  And they feel like they're used for cannon fodder anyway.
[49:41.580 --> 49:47.580]  So you definitely need to file a judicial conduct complaint against them.
[49:47.580 --> 49:49.580]  Okay.
[49:49.580 --> 49:55.580]  To your knowledge, does this guy have a bar card?
[49:55.580 --> 49:57.580]  Probably so.
[49:57.580 --> 50:03.580]  Bar grievance as well.
[50:03.580 --> 50:04.580]  Okay.
[50:04.580 --> 50:07.580]  Check, run his name on your local bar site.
[50:07.580 --> 50:10.580]  See if you can find a bar card number.
[50:10.580 --> 50:15.580]  And go to bargrievance.website.
[50:15.580 --> 50:17.580]  I've got it up.
[50:17.580 --> 50:20.580]  And it has the cannons there.
[50:20.580 --> 50:25.580]  I'm working on a model set of judicial conduct, the judicial cannons.
[50:25.580 --> 50:29.580]  I don't have those converted to a questionnaire yet.
[50:29.580 --> 50:30.580]  It's kind of time consuming.
[50:30.580 --> 50:35.580]  And one of the commodities I have the least of is time.
[50:35.580 --> 50:39.580]  But I'll try to get that up before long.
[50:39.580 --> 50:44.580]  And then you can mine through the cannons and make it a lot easier.
[50:44.580 --> 50:51.580]  But go to bargrievance.website and just go through the questionnaires.
[50:51.580 --> 50:57.580]  And you'll find while he's acting in the capacity of a judge,
[50:57.580 --> 51:06.580]  if he's a lawyer, he's probably only got that position because he did have a bar card.
[51:06.580 --> 51:14.580]  So treat him as if he's acting like a lawyer for the state and stinging good.
[51:14.580 --> 51:20.580]  A bar grievance and judicial conduct complaint will give him apoplexy.
[51:20.580 --> 51:24.580]  Okay, that may not win your case for you.
[51:24.580 --> 51:34.580]  But it's our job to do this so that it might win the case for the next guy.
[51:34.580 --> 51:41.580]  But, okay, and also you might look at filing a civil action against him.
[51:41.580 --> 51:48.580]  This is the one thing they probably won't see coming.
[51:48.580 --> 51:55.580]  Yeah, most of the judges have no idea that they have no judicial immunity
[51:55.580 --> 52:00.580]  when they lack subject matter jurisdiction.
[52:00.580 --> 52:07.580]  What was the nature of your claim concerning subject matter jurisdiction?
[52:07.580 --> 52:21.580]  It was that the United States Code definition of motor vehicle included commerce
[52:21.580 --> 52:23.580]  as part of the definition,
[52:23.580 --> 52:30.580]  and the state code definition did not include the definition of commerce.
[52:30.580 --> 52:37.580]  And so I was saying they did not have subject matter jurisdiction because the officer,
[52:37.580 --> 52:43.580]  there was just no subject because the officer, since I wasn't in commerce,
[52:43.580 --> 52:46.580]  he didn't even have probable cause.
[52:46.580 --> 52:51.580]  Wait a minute, what you said to me contradicted that.
[52:51.580 --> 53:06.580]  What does the Georgia, okay, did Georgia adopt the Model Federal Transportation Code?
[53:06.580 --> 53:08.580]  I don't know.
[53:08.580 --> 53:10.580]  Most all states did.
[53:10.580 --> 53:13.580]  You'd be pretty sure that they did.
[53:13.580 --> 53:22.580]  But you may not get to subject matter jurisdiction based on the definition of the term.
[53:22.580 --> 53:29.580]  You get to subject matter jurisdiction based on your right to travel
[53:29.580 --> 53:43.580]  as opposed to using the highways for commerce, for commercial purposes.
[53:43.580 --> 53:48.580]  And I would have to see the pleading to see if I thought it could actually get there,
[53:48.580 --> 53:52.580]  but it doesn't matter, and that's the good part.
[53:52.580 --> 54:06.580]  Your pleading essentially challenges the authority of the state of Georgia to regulate a right.
[54:06.580 --> 54:11.580]  I take it in your pleading you claimed that travel was a right,
[54:11.580 --> 54:15.580]  and you made the distinction between traveling on the public thoroughfares
[54:15.580 --> 54:20.580]  and using the public thoroughfares for commerce.
[54:20.580 --> 54:24.580]  Yes, I had a judicial notice and a brief in support with that.
[54:24.580 --> 54:27.580]  Okay, so you made that argument.
[54:27.580 --> 54:31.580]  Sue the judge.
[54:31.580 --> 54:34.580]  It's relatively easy.
[54:34.580 --> 54:38.580]  One of the things I'm trying to get to on these sites like bar grievance,
[54:38.580 --> 54:46.580]  the next thing I'll add to bar grievance, is a tool to build a malpractice suit.
[54:46.580 --> 54:51.580]  Because it's relatively easy to sue these guys.
[54:51.580 --> 54:58.580]  And just filing suit stings them big time.
[54:58.580 --> 55:04.580]  We have some other folks on here who have been sued.
[55:04.580 --> 55:09.580]  We got Oliver from Tennessee when he filed suit against the city.
[55:09.580 --> 55:15.580]  And prior to that, as far as they were concerned, he was just a huffing and a puffing.
[55:15.580 --> 55:17.580]  They were not concerned.
[55:17.580 --> 55:24.580]  But when he filed suit against them, all of a sudden everybody snapped to attention.
[55:24.580 --> 55:28.580]  That's when you'll make this serious.
[55:28.580 --> 55:31.580]  So it's easier than you think.
[55:31.580 --> 55:34.580]  You know, if you file suit against a judge,
[55:34.580 --> 55:41.580]  every judge who sees your suit is going to do everything he can to protect that judge
[55:41.580 --> 55:45.580]  from the effect of your lawsuit.
[55:45.580 --> 55:47.580]  Maybe.
[55:47.580 --> 55:55.580]  If he was a county or district judge, that would probably be 100% true.
[55:55.580 --> 55:57.580]  But this guy's not.
[55:57.580 --> 55:59.580]  He's cannon fodder.
[55:59.580 --> 56:05.580]  And there's a chance they'll use him to make it look like they're actually doing their jobs
[56:05.580 --> 56:09.580]  and just throw him right under the bus.
[56:09.580 --> 56:11.580]  So...
[56:11.580 --> 56:14.580]  It's the Superior Court, Judge.
[56:14.580 --> 56:19.580]  Oh, this wasn't a traffic court?
[56:19.580 --> 56:23.580]  I've requested a jury trial.
[56:23.580 --> 56:29.580]  And so since they don't have those in the Superior Court,
[56:29.580 --> 56:32.580]  they transferred it up to the Superior Court.
[56:32.580 --> 56:34.580]  Oh, and you had...
[56:34.580 --> 56:38.580]  Okay, what are the courts in Georgia?
[56:38.580 --> 56:42.580]  In Texas, we have Municipal and Justice of the Peace.
[56:42.580 --> 56:44.580]  Those are inferior courts.
[56:44.580 --> 56:49.580]  Then we have a county court and district court.
[56:49.580 --> 56:50.580]  Okay.
[56:50.580 --> 56:55.580]  In Georgia, we have a magistrate court,
[56:55.580 --> 57:02.580]  which they don't have jury trials and they don't have any type of record or anything.
[57:02.580 --> 57:05.580]  And it's pretty much a small claims court.
[57:05.580 --> 57:12.580]  And then the Superior Court has the general jurisdiction over just about...
[57:12.580 --> 57:14.580]  over everything.
[57:14.580 --> 57:15.580]  So do you...
[57:15.580 --> 57:20.580]  Okay, then you don't have two Superior Courts.
[57:20.580 --> 57:23.580]  You just have one.
[57:23.580 --> 57:24.580]  Just one.
[57:24.580 --> 57:25.580]  Yeah, here we've got two.
[57:25.580 --> 57:28.580]  Okay, so that's even better.
[57:28.580 --> 57:31.580]  He knew better.
[57:31.580 --> 57:33.580]  He's just being arrogant.
[57:33.580 --> 57:36.580]  He probably hates to have to hear tickets,
[57:36.580 --> 57:40.580]  and he's going to hate it even more when you land on him like a ton of bricks.
[57:40.580 --> 57:44.580]  Now, if you file suit against this Superior Court judge,
[57:44.580 --> 57:49.580]  everybody's going to do everything they can to protect it.
[57:49.580 --> 57:52.580]  Who cares?
[57:52.580 --> 57:58.580]  Force them to have to do everything they can to protect it.
[57:58.580 --> 58:01.580]  And they are not going to be happy about it,
[58:01.580 --> 58:07.580]  because you're going to raise his bond rating dramatically.
[58:07.580 --> 58:08.580]  So even...
[58:08.580 --> 58:13.580]  Okay, what we did when we sued a judge claiming he didn't have such a bad jurisdiction,
[58:13.580 --> 58:16.580]  and he got the county to write his answer,
[58:16.580 --> 58:20.580]  we sued the county attorney for misappropriation of public funds.
[58:20.580 --> 58:28.580]  So if the county tries to fall in behind the judge to provide him with legal representation,
[58:28.580 --> 58:33.580]  you file an amended pleading naming the county for misappropriating public funds,
[58:33.580 --> 58:36.580]  and that will make things a whole lot more fun.
[58:36.580 --> 58:41.580]  Hang on, Randy Kelton, Debra Stevens, Rule of Law Radio.
[58:41.580 --> 58:44.580]  I'll call it number 512-646-1984.
[58:44.580 --> 58:50.580]  We'll be right back.
[58:50.580 --> 58:54.580]  The Bible remains the most popular book in the world,
[58:54.580 --> 58:58.580]  and religious readers are frustrated because they struggle to understand it.
[58:58.580 --> 59:02.580]  Some new translations try to help by simplifying the text,
[59:02.580 --> 59:07.580]  but in the process can compromise the profound meaning of the Scripture.
[59:07.580 --> 59:09.580]  Enter the recovery version.
[59:09.580 --> 59:13.580]  First, this new translation is extremely faithful and accurate,
[59:13.580 --> 59:18.580]  but the real story is the more than 9,000 explanatory footnotes.
[59:18.580 --> 59:22.580]  Difficult and profound passages are opened up in a marvelous way,
[59:22.580 --> 59:27.580]  dividing an entrance into the riches of the Word beyond which you've ever experienced before.
[59:27.580 --> 59:33.580]  Bibles for America would like to give you a free recovery version simply for the asking.
[59:33.580 --> 59:43.580]  This comprehensive yet compact study Bible is yours just by calling us toll free at 1-888-551-0102
[59:43.580 --> 59:47.580]  or by ordering online at freestudybible.com.
[59:47.580 --> 59:50.580]  That's freestudybible.com.
[59:50.580 --> 59:59.580]  You're listening to the Logos Radio Network at logosradionetwork.com.
[59:59.580 --> 01:00:06.580]  The following use flash is brought to you by the Lone Star Lowdown,
[01:00:06.580 --> 01:00:09.580]  providing the daily bulletins for the commodities market.
[01:00:09.580 --> 01:00:17.580]  Today in history, news updates, and the inside scoop into the tides of the alternative.
[01:00:17.580 --> 01:00:28.580]  Markets for Wednesday, the 10th of August, 2016, are currently trading with gold at $1,346 an ounce,
[01:00:28.580 --> 01:00:32.580]  silver at $20.13 an ounce, Texas crude at $42.77 a barrel,
[01:00:32.580 --> 01:00:42.580]  and Bitcoin is currently sitting at about $596 U.S. currency.
[01:00:42.580 --> 01:00:47.580]  Today in history, the year 1920, following World War I,
[01:00:47.580 --> 01:00:51.580]  Ottoman Sultan Mehmed VI representatives signed the Treaty Sevres,
[01:00:51.580 --> 01:00:54.580]  which divided up the Ottoman Empire between the Allies,
[01:00:54.580 --> 01:00:57.580]  who then basically mapped out the Middle East as it is today,
[01:00:57.580 --> 01:01:04.580]  the surrender and division of the Ottoman Empire, today in history.
[01:01:04.580 --> 01:01:08.580]  In recent news, the Florida Department of Law Enforcement opened up an investigation
[01:01:08.580 --> 01:01:12.580]  after Tuesday's tragic shooting of Mary Knowlton, a 73-year-old who was taking part
[01:01:12.580 --> 01:01:16.580]  in a shoot-don't-shoot exercise with the Punta Gorda Police Department in Florida
[01:01:16.580 --> 01:01:19.580]  when she was accidentally struck by a live round.
[01:01:19.580 --> 01:01:22.580]  The police officer who accidentally shot Mary was identified as Lee Cole,
[01:01:22.580 --> 01:01:25.580]  who has been with the department since March 17, 2014,
[01:01:25.580 --> 01:01:29.580]  who has been placed on administrative leave while the investigation is underway.
[01:01:29.580 --> 01:01:32.580]  Police Chief Tom Lewis stated that nobody in their wildest dreams
[01:01:32.580 --> 01:01:34.580]  thought there was live ammunition in there.
[01:01:34.580 --> 01:01:37.580]  We were unaware that any live ammunition existed for this kind of weapon.
[01:01:37.580 --> 01:01:39.580]  We thought only blanks were available.
[01:01:39.580 --> 01:01:43.580]  The fatal bullet was fired from a revolver that the officer had used before
[01:01:43.580 --> 01:01:45.580]  in earlier exercises.
[01:01:45.580 --> 01:01:48.580]  Chief Lewis did assure that the department has protocols in place
[01:01:48.580 --> 01:01:50.580]  in order to prevent accidental shootings,
[01:01:50.580 --> 01:01:58.580]  but he declined to go into the details citing the ongoing probe.
[01:01:58.580 --> 01:02:01.580]  WikiLeaks is offering a $20,000 reward for information
[01:02:01.580 --> 01:02:04.580]  on the Democratic National Committee staff members.
[01:02:04.580 --> 01:02:07.580]  Seth Richard, a 27-year-old data analyst for the DNC,
[01:02:07.580 --> 01:02:10.580]  who was shot and killed early on Sunday morning last month
[01:02:10.580 --> 01:02:12.580]  in what police are saying was a robbery gone wrong.
[01:02:12.580 --> 01:02:15.580]  Julian Assange in an interview with a Dutch news program
[01:02:15.580 --> 01:02:18.580]  implied Seth Rich was the source of the DNC emails,
[01:02:18.580 --> 01:02:21.580]  which showed an apparent bias in favor of Hillary Clinton
[01:02:21.580 --> 01:02:24.580]  over Bernie Sanders in the Democratic primary.
[01:02:24.580 --> 01:02:26.580]  When asked about the reward, WikiLeaks said in a statement,
[01:02:26.580 --> 01:02:29.580]  quote, we treat threats towards any suspected source of WikiLeaks
[01:02:29.580 --> 01:02:32.580]  with extreme gravity and should not be taken to imply
[01:02:32.580 --> 01:02:34.580]  that Seth Rich was a source of two WikiLeaks
[01:02:34.580 --> 01:02:40.580]  or to imply that his murder is connected to our publications.
[01:02:40.580 --> 01:02:43.580]  The Lone Star Lowdown is currently done for sponsors.
[01:02:43.580 --> 01:02:45.580]  Still applying for a service you'd like to advertise with us,
[01:02:45.580 --> 01:02:50.580]  feel free to give me a call at 210-363-2257.
[01:02:50.580 --> 01:03:00.580]  This has been Rick Roady with the Lowdown for August 10, 2016.
[01:03:00.580 --> 01:03:23.580]  Okay.
[01:03:23.580 --> 01:03:25.580]  We are back.
[01:03:25.580 --> 01:03:29.580]  Randy Kelton, Debbie Stevens, we need a lot of radio.
[01:03:29.580 --> 01:03:32.580]  And we're talking to Sonny in Georgia.
[01:03:32.580 --> 01:03:37.580]  Okay, Sonny, this is only a traffic ticket.
[01:03:37.580 --> 01:03:45.580]  And this is the best place to learn how to navigate through the legal system.
[01:03:45.580 --> 01:03:48.580]  It's the cheapest education you can get.
[01:03:48.580 --> 01:03:54.580]  And suing a district, a superior court judge,
[01:03:54.580 --> 01:04:00.580]  I guarantee you, when you do that, everybody will snap to attention.
[01:04:00.580 --> 01:04:06.580]  Good chance you won't be getting any more tickets.
[01:04:06.580 --> 01:04:16.580]  Well, one of the things that I was wondering is him lying when I asked him
[01:04:16.580 --> 01:04:18.580]  if he had read the documents and he said yes.
[01:04:18.580 --> 01:04:24.580]  He later admitted that when the district attorney brought up a motion to strike,
[01:04:24.580 --> 01:04:26.580]  and he said, oh, I haven't seen that.
[01:04:26.580 --> 01:04:28.580]  And I confronted him on it right there.
[01:04:28.580 --> 01:04:31.580]  And I said, well, hey, you said you read all the documents in the file.
[01:04:31.580 --> 01:04:35.580]  He said, well, what I meant was I just scanned them.
[01:04:35.580 --> 01:04:40.580]  I just scanned them over.
[01:04:40.580 --> 01:04:46.580]  Okay, if this is a superior court, it will be a court of record.
[01:04:46.580 --> 01:04:49.580]  Yes.
[01:04:49.580 --> 01:04:51.580]  Oh, wonderful.
[01:04:51.580 --> 01:04:56.580]  You need to request a transcript.
[01:04:56.580 --> 01:04:58.580]  I already ordered the transcript.
[01:04:58.580 --> 01:05:00.580]  I'll have it on Monday.
[01:05:00.580 --> 01:05:04.580]  Oh, wonderful.
[01:05:04.580 --> 01:05:08.580]  You may change law in Georgia, at least in this area.
[01:05:08.580 --> 01:05:11.580]  I'll tell you, this is a big deal.
[01:05:11.580 --> 01:05:18.580]  For a judge to lie on the stand and admit that he didn't bother to read a document,
[01:05:18.580 --> 01:05:23.580]  you might ask some municipal or inferior court judges,
[01:05:23.580 --> 01:05:29.580]  how often do you get a challenge to subject matter jurisdiction filed in your court?
[01:05:29.580 --> 01:05:33.580]  And most of them are going to say, well, I've never heard one,
[01:05:33.580 --> 01:05:37.580]  or it's going to be extremely rare.
[01:05:37.580 --> 01:05:44.580]  So you almost never get anything like this, and you get one, you don't bother to even read it?
[01:05:44.580 --> 01:05:48.580]  Are you kidding me?
[01:05:48.580 --> 01:05:54.580]  Oh, this is, I love it when they feed themselves to you.
[01:05:54.580 --> 01:05:59.580]  This judge served himself up to you on a platter.
[01:05:59.580 --> 01:06:03.580]  Well, I'm also curious as to whether this is a due process violation
[01:06:03.580 --> 01:06:07.580]  because I was relying on his answer not to,
[01:06:07.580 --> 01:06:11.580]  because I would have read all the documents into the record right there.
[01:06:11.580 --> 01:06:16.580]  He denied you in your right to petition the court for redress of grievance.
[01:06:16.580 --> 01:06:20.580]  This is definitely a procedural due process issue.
[01:06:20.580 --> 01:06:27.580]  You file this in the federal court, and they are going to get apoplexy.
[01:06:27.580 --> 01:06:32.580]  Now they have to go to the federal, this judge has to go to the federal court and explain himself.
[01:06:32.580 --> 01:06:40.580]  Plus, since your challenge was to subject matter jurisdiction,
[01:06:40.580 --> 01:06:48.580]  and the court failed to even read the pleading, much less provide a proper rebuttal to it,
[01:06:48.580 --> 01:06:52.580]  then the federal case law is clear.
[01:06:52.580 --> 01:06:57.580]  He doesn't have any subject matter jurisdiction.
[01:06:57.580 --> 01:07:02.580]  Okay, you understand how that works, the presumption.
[01:07:02.580 --> 01:07:08.580]  Let me explain how the presumption of subject matter jurisdiction works.
[01:07:08.580 --> 01:07:15.580]  This court is sitting here, and it has absolute subject matter jurisdiction over certain kinds of issues.
[01:07:15.580 --> 01:07:28.580]  However, it only has subject matter jurisdiction if the plaintiff is able to invoke that subject matter jurisdiction.
[01:07:28.580 --> 01:07:36.580]  When a case is brought to a court, let's say you go down and you file suit in a court,
[01:07:36.580 --> 01:07:45.580]  if the court has general subject matter jurisdiction over the particular type of subject matter,
[01:07:45.580 --> 01:07:51.580]  the presumption is that the court has subject matter jurisdiction.
[01:07:51.580 --> 01:08:00.580]  But it is only a presumption, and the price of presumption will stand until the presumption is challenged.
[01:08:00.580 --> 01:08:08.580]  Once the presumption of jurisdiction is challenged, jurisdiction is lost and must be proven.
[01:08:08.580 --> 01:08:15.580]  And it's not the defendant or the plaintiff who must prove subject matter jurisdiction.
[01:08:15.580 --> 01:08:17.580]  It is the judge.
[01:08:17.580 --> 01:08:31.580]  Now, the judge can rely on the plaintiff to prove up jurisdiction for him, but it's not the plaintiff's duty.
[01:08:31.580 --> 01:08:33.580]  It's the judge's duty.
[01:08:33.580 --> 01:08:41.580]  We had a judge summon this guy to court over a credit card debt collection issue,
[01:08:41.580 --> 01:08:47.580]  and this is the one where they didn't file the necessary documentation that was statutorily required.
[01:08:47.580 --> 01:08:55.580]  So we maintained that the plaintiff was unable to invoke the subject matter jurisdiction of the court.
[01:08:55.580 --> 01:09:04.580]  In your case, you will maintain that the plaintiff was unable to challenge the subject matter jurisdiction of the court.
[01:09:04.580 --> 01:09:11.580]  I'm sorry. The plaintiff was unable to invoke the subject matter jurisdiction of the court
[01:09:11.580 --> 01:09:20.580]  because the complaint did not demonstrate all the elements of the crime.
[01:09:20.580 --> 01:09:29.580]  One of the elements is that you fell within the statutory scheme of operating in commerce on the public surface.
[01:09:29.580 --> 01:09:34.580]  So while the judge may have general subject matter jurisdiction,
[01:09:34.580 --> 01:09:40.580]  the judge does not have the legal competence to rule in this instance.
[01:09:40.580 --> 01:09:49.580]  He doesn't have the legal competence because the plaintiff was unable to invoke his jurisdiction.
[01:09:49.580 --> 01:09:53.580]  Does that make sense?
[01:09:53.580 --> 01:09:55.580]  Sort of.
[01:09:55.580 --> 01:10:03.580]  Okay. When I come to the court, I have to be able to bring a genuine controversy.
[01:10:03.580 --> 01:10:13.580]  I can go to the court and say, Your Honor, I asked this guy to wash my windows, and he didn't wash my windows,
[01:10:13.580 --> 01:10:19.580]  and then I pulled out on the street and whacked into a truck because I couldn't see where I was going.
[01:10:19.580 --> 01:10:28.580]  And the judge is going to say, Huh? Okay. What duty did he have to wash your windows?
[01:10:28.580 --> 01:10:30.580]  Well, I just wanted him to.
[01:10:30.580 --> 01:10:35.580]  And the judge is going to say, You can't invoke my subject matter jurisdiction.
[01:10:35.580 --> 01:10:42.580]  You failed to state a claim on which recovery can be had.
[01:10:42.580 --> 01:10:45.580]  Okay. That makes sense.
[01:10:45.580 --> 01:10:46.580]  Yes.
[01:10:46.580 --> 01:10:50.580]  The other party failed to state a claim on which recovery can be had.
[01:10:50.580 --> 01:10:59.580]  Failed to bring evidence to show that you fell within the regulatory scheme.
[01:10:59.580 --> 01:11:11.580]  So the judge cannot exercise his subject matter jurisdiction because it was never invoked.
[01:11:11.580 --> 01:11:12.580]  Got it.
[01:11:12.580 --> 01:11:15.580]  Got it.
[01:11:15.580 --> 01:11:18.580]  And I had judges say, Well, this is ridiculous.
[01:11:18.580 --> 01:11:23.580]  Of course, I have exclusive subject matter jurisdiction over these issues.
[01:11:23.580 --> 01:11:25.580]  I had a JP in an eviction hearing.
[01:11:25.580 --> 01:11:28.580]  I have exclusive jurisdiction over this.
[01:11:28.580 --> 01:11:30.580]  And he didn't understand.
[01:11:30.580 --> 01:11:33.580]  Yeah, you do have exclusive jurisdiction over that.
[01:11:33.580 --> 01:11:41.580]  But your jurisdiction hasn't been properly invoked, so you don't have it yet.
[01:11:41.580 --> 01:11:48.580]  That is exactly what your claim was in your challenge subject matter jurisdiction.
[01:11:48.580 --> 01:11:50.580]  That it hadn't been invoked.
[01:11:50.580 --> 01:11:55.580]  Now, it was the judge's responsibility to prove it up.
[01:11:55.580 --> 01:11:56.580]  He did not.
[01:11:56.580 --> 01:11:59.580]  He didn't bother to read your pleading.
[01:11:59.580 --> 01:12:07.580]  He knew he had some general subject matter jurisdiction over all of this kind of thing.
[01:12:07.580 --> 01:12:09.580]  So he didn't even bother.
[01:12:09.580 --> 01:12:13.580]  He provided you with your right to petition the court for redress of grievance.
[01:12:13.580 --> 01:12:17.580]  And that is a federal due process violation.
[01:12:17.580 --> 01:12:21.580]  And under Brady, you can sue him.
[01:12:21.580 --> 01:12:22.580]  Is it Brady?
[01:12:22.580 --> 01:12:24.580]  Brady's not the one.
[01:12:24.580 --> 01:12:26.580]  Yeah.
[01:12:26.580 --> 01:12:28.580]  Hayfer Melo, I think it is.
[01:12:28.580 --> 01:12:36.580]  Hayfer Melo is the one that says that you can sue a public official when he acts outside his jurisdiction.
[01:12:36.580 --> 01:12:39.580]  This is five IRS agents who went after this guy.
[01:12:39.580 --> 01:12:41.580]  And he sued them.
[01:12:41.580 --> 01:12:45.580]  And they whined that they couldn't be sued because they were public officials.
[01:12:45.580 --> 01:12:50.580]  And what they did was outside of scope.
[01:12:50.580 --> 01:12:54.580]  And the court said, absolutely, you can sue them when they act outside of scope.
[01:12:54.580 --> 01:13:04.580]  In this case, the judge was outside of scope because his jurisdiction had not been invoked.
[01:13:04.580 --> 01:13:08.580]  Okay. Am I still just rambling or does that make sense?
[01:13:08.580 --> 01:13:10.580]  Yes, it does.
[01:13:10.580 --> 01:13:12.580]  It does make sense.
[01:13:12.580 --> 01:13:21.580]  There was another interesting thing that the next thing that I asked the judge was whether he was under his oath.
[01:13:21.580 --> 01:13:28.580]  And he just flat out told me he wasn't going to tell me whether he was under his oath.
[01:13:28.580 --> 01:13:31.580]  And I would just think that...
[01:13:31.580 --> 01:13:37.580]  That gives you reason to believe that he's not under his oath.
[01:13:37.580 --> 01:13:38.580]  Yes.
[01:13:38.580 --> 01:13:43.580]  So have you requested his oath of office?
[01:13:43.580 --> 01:13:48.580]  Well, he has an oath of office.
[01:13:48.580 --> 01:14:05.580]  But if he's in an administrative or a military tribunal or martial law court of some type, then he's not going to be under his oath.
[01:14:05.580 --> 01:14:10.580]  Because if he was, then he would be committing treason.
[01:14:10.580 --> 01:14:22.580]  Well, this was a case that would normally fall within his statutory jurisdiction.
[01:14:22.580 --> 01:14:24.580]  So he was under his oath.
[01:14:24.580 --> 01:14:27.580]  If he has one file, that's really not an issue.
[01:14:27.580 --> 01:14:30.580]  I wouldn't bring it unless that...
[01:14:30.580 --> 01:14:33.580]  Well, I wouldn't bring it that way.
[01:14:33.580 --> 01:14:36.580]  He's under contract to you.
[01:14:36.580 --> 01:14:39.580]  That's how you get to sue him.
[01:14:39.580 --> 01:14:41.580]  He's under contract to protect all your rights.
[01:14:41.580 --> 01:14:43.580]  That's the first thing.
[01:14:43.580 --> 01:14:46.580]  That upholds the Constitution.
[01:14:46.580 --> 01:14:53.580]  And you have a procedural due process you're taking to the federal Constitution on this.
[01:14:53.580 --> 01:14:55.580]  So he's under contract with you.
[01:14:55.580 --> 01:14:58.580]  Everything essentially is contracted.
[01:14:58.580 --> 01:15:06.580]  We need Harmon Tater to handle the specifics of how everything's contracted.
[01:15:06.580 --> 01:15:11.580]  The judge was under contract, and the Constitution is not his contract.
[01:15:11.580 --> 01:15:15.580]  The oath of office is his contract.
[01:15:15.580 --> 01:15:22.580]  So he didn't have to answer your question, but he's definitely under it, whether he swore to it or not.
[01:15:22.580 --> 01:15:33.580]  Because he's acting in the capacity of someone who would have to be bound by their oath in order to stand in those shoes.
[01:15:33.580 --> 01:15:37.580]  So you can hold him to the oath in any case.
[01:15:37.580 --> 01:15:42.580]  And in this case, he failed to abide by that oath.
[01:15:42.580 --> 01:15:46.580]  So you can take him to task for that.
[01:15:46.580 --> 01:15:51.580]  You sound like you have a great case to sue a judge.
[01:15:51.580 --> 01:15:56.580]  Oh, there's more.
[01:15:56.580 --> 01:16:05.580]  Well, once he got on this roll of denying me, he just said that he denied my motion that subject matter jurisdiction.
[01:16:05.580 --> 01:16:08.580]  And then he just started going through documents in the file.
[01:16:08.580 --> 01:16:12.580]  You know, motion to strike denied discovery.
[01:16:12.580 --> 01:16:14.580]  Okay, hold on, hold on.
[01:16:14.580 --> 01:16:22.580]  Now what you do is you file a motion for reconsideration, like we talked about with Jeff.
[01:16:22.580 --> 01:16:31.580]  And you do a brief and show where he erred, especially show where he erred in not reading the pleadings.
[01:16:31.580 --> 01:16:34.580]  And ask him to reconsider.
[01:16:34.580 --> 01:16:46.580]  And if he fails to reconsider, you know, if he denies that, then you petition for findings of fact and conclusions of law.
[01:16:46.580 --> 01:16:49.580]  That in order to be able to appeal.
[01:16:49.580 --> 01:16:53.580]  Okay, hang on. About to go to break.
[01:16:53.580 --> 01:16:57.580]  I called in number 512-646-1984.
[01:16:57.580 --> 01:17:00.580]  We'll be right back.
[01:17:00.580 --> 01:17:05.580]  Are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters or even lawsuits?
[01:17:05.580 --> 01:17:09.580]  Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Mears proven method.
[01:17:09.580 --> 01:17:14.580]  Michael Mears has won six cases in federal court against debt collectors, and now you can win too.
[01:17:14.580 --> 01:17:20.580]  You'll get step-by-step instructions in plain English on how to win in court using federal civil rights statutes.
[01:17:20.580 --> 01:17:24.580]  What to do when contacted by phone, mail or court summons.
[01:17:24.580 --> 01:17:26.580]  How to answer letters and phone calls.
[01:17:26.580 --> 01:17:28.580]  How to get debt collectors out of your credit report.
[01:17:28.580 --> 01:17:33.580]  How to turn the financial tables on them and make them pay you to go away.
[01:17:33.580 --> 01:17:38.580]  The Michael Mears proven method is the solution for how to stop debt collectors.
[01:17:38.580 --> 01:17:40.580]  Personal consultation is available as well.
[01:17:40.580 --> 01:17:46.580]  For more information, please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the blue Michael Mears banner.
[01:17:46.580 --> 01:17:49.580]  Or email michaelmears at yahoo.com.
[01:17:49.580 --> 01:17:51.580]  That's ruleoflawradio.com.
[01:17:51.580 --> 01:17:57.580]  Or email m-i-c-h-a-e-l-m-i-r-r-a-s at yahoo.com.
[01:17:57.580 --> 01:18:01.580]  To learn how to stop debt collectors now.
[01:18:01.580 --> 01:18:06.580]  Did you know that the Logos Radio Network is a truly listener-supported radio network?
[01:18:06.580 --> 01:18:11.580]  On top of the on-air talents, producers and other hardworking individuals working behind the scenes.
[01:18:11.580 --> 01:18:15.580]  Logos Radio Network is kept on the air by the generous support of listeners like you.
[01:18:15.580 --> 01:18:20.580]  And we appreciate our loyal listeners making contributions every year in our annual fundraisers.
[01:18:20.580 --> 01:18:23.580]  Which help keep the lights on and Logos Radio Network on the air.
[01:18:23.580 --> 01:18:27.580]  Head on over to logosradionetwork.com to make your contribution.
[01:18:27.580 --> 01:18:32.580]  Every $25 donation enters you for a chance to win prizes from Central Texas Gunworks.
[01:18:32.580 --> 01:18:37.580]  First prize being a Spiked Skull Lower Receiver, second prize being a Taurus Curve.
[01:18:37.580 --> 01:18:39.580]  Ten winners will receive gift cards from All About Paper.
[01:18:39.580 --> 01:18:45.580]  And if you donate your $25 contribution early enough, you will also receive a complimentary jar of My Magic Mud.
[01:18:45.580 --> 01:18:50.580]  Donations by all major credit cards are accepted as well as contributions by Bitcoin.
[01:18:50.580 --> 01:18:52.580]  The Logos Radio Network Fundraiser.
[01:18:52.580 --> 01:19:02.580]  Head on over to logosradionetwork.com for more information and to donate to keep the Logos Radio Network on the air.
[01:19:22.580 --> 01:19:35.580]  Well, ain't gonna fool me with that same old trick again.
[01:19:35.580 --> 01:19:40.580]  I was blindsided but now I can see your plan.
[01:19:40.580 --> 01:19:45.580]  You put the fear in my pocket, took the money from my hand.
[01:19:45.580 --> 01:19:53.580]  Ain't gonna fool me with that same old trick again.
[01:19:53.580 --> 01:19:56.580]  Ain't gonna fool me.
[01:19:56.580 --> 01:19:58.580]  Okay, we are back.
[01:19:58.580 --> 01:20:04.580]  Randy Kelton, Debra Stevens, Root of La Radio, and we're talking to Sonny in Georgia.
[01:20:04.580 --> 01:20:08.580]  And I do need to move along because we've got three more callers and we're running out of time.
[01:20:08.580 --> 01:20:15.580]  I spent a lot of time on this because this is one of the issues that's, in my estimation,
[01:20:15.580 --> 01:20:25.580]  some of the most powerful things we as ordinary individuals can do to repair the system.
[01:20:25.580 --> 01:20:29.580]  We need to remind them that we're the baddest motor scooter in the building.
[01:20:29.580 --> 01:20:31.580]  They forget that sometimes.
[01:20:31.580 --> 01:20:40.580]  Sonny, if you stick these guys with a federal lawsuit against a judge, he is going to get apoplexy.
[01:20:40.580 --> 01:20:45.580]  Okay, you had a couple other things but we need you to move quickly.
[01:20:45.580 --> 01:20:46.580]  Yes.
[01:20:46.580 --> 01:20:51.580]  If he just, one of the things that he did was he just flat out, I asked him for a finding a fact
[01:20:51.580 --> 01:20:57.580]  and conclusion at all at the end and he just flat out said no.
[01:20:57.580 --> 01:21:00.580]  Wonderful.
[01:21:00.580 --> 01:21:06.580]  Okay, always never interfere with someone when they're screwing up.
[01:21:06.580 --> 01:21:14.580]  Since he said no, now you petition the appeals court for writ of mandamus,
[01:21:14.580 --> 01:21:19.580]  ordering him to provide points and authorities.
[01:21:19.580 --> 01:21:27.580]  Otherwise, he will be denying you and your right to an effective appeal.
[01:21:27.580 --> 01:21:34.580]  That makes sense to why I'm asking that, why I'm saying it that way.
[01:21:34.580 --> 01:21:37.580]  Well, I was just curious if I should...
[01:21:37.580 --> 01:21:39.580]  Okay, here, let me explain.
[01:21:39.580 --> 01:21:48.580]  If you don't know precisely why he ruled the way he ruled, how are you going to prepare an appeal?
[01:21:48.580 --> 01:21:49.580]  I can't.
[01:21:49.580 --> 01:21:54.580]  Without findings of fact, you're being denied in your right to appeal.
[01:21:54.580 --> 01:22:02.580]  So you ask the court, the higher court to order him to give you his findings of fact.
[01:22:02.580 --> 01:22:07.580]  He thinks this is just a ticket and you'll just walk away.
[01:22:07.580 --> 01:22:14.580]  And since he is an elected judge, this has really hurt him big time.
[01:22:14.580 --> 01:22:20.580]  That he thinks your minor traffic ticket, bottom of the barrel,
[01:22:20.580 --> 01:22:25.580]  there is nothing better to hammer one of these guys with.
[01:22:25.580 --> 01:22:28.580]  Now, if it's a major case, he can expect some blowback,
[01:22:28.580 --> 01:22:32.580]  but he doesn't expect it from a traffic ticket.
[01:22:32.580 --> 01:22:42.580]  That's the best one, where he looks around him and he says, I didn't see that coming.
[01:22:42.580 --> 01:22:43.580]  Okay.
[01:22:43.580 --> 01:22:46.580]  He threatened to sentence me to jail.
[01:22:46.580 --> 01:22:50.580]  I think he was trying to discourage me from going to the jury trial.
[01:22:50.580 --> 01:22:56.580]  And he just said that he could sentence me to 36 months in jail if I was found guilty.
[01:22:56.580 --> 01:22:59.580]  It doesn't concern me as much as my wife.
[01:22:59.580 --> 01:23:04.580]  That sort of terrifies her, since we have a bunch of kids.
[01:23:04.580 --> 01:23:06.580]  Okay, wait a minute.
[01:23:06.580 --> 01:23:09.580]  Did you consider that...
[01:23:09.580 --> 01:23:17.580]  Okay, I take it this wasn't a Class C misdemeanor then?
[01:23:17.580 --> 01:23:19.580]  It was.
[01:23:19.580 --> 01:23:21.580]  I think they were all misdemeanors.
[01:23:21.580 --> 01:23:28.580]  I didn't produce my license as soon as the officer wanted, so he arrested me.
[01:23:28.580 --> 01:23:32.580]  And then it was not having enough change on a trailer,
[01:23:32.580 --> 01:23:39.580]  on a piece of equipment, and not having enough tread on a tire.
[01:23:39.580 --> 01:23:44.580]  These are all traffic citations.
[01:23:44.580 --> 01:23:50.580]  How could he sentence you to 36 months?
[01:23:50.580 --> 01:23:51.580]  I don't know.
[01:23:51.580 --> 01:23:57.580]  He just said, he said, I can sentence you to 36 months in jail.
[01:23:57.580 --> 01:24:00.580]  He said, I'm not saying I'm going to do that, but he said...
[01:24:00.580 --> 01:24:04.580]  Witness tampering.
[01:24:04.580 --> 01:24:08.580]  That's witness tampering.
[01:24:08.580 --> 01:24:09.580]  Okay.
[01:24:09.580 --> 01:24:16.580]  He's attempting to deny you your access to the courts by threatening you with what he could possibly do.
[01:24:16.580 --> 01:24:19.580]  It makes no difference what he can or cannot do.
[01:24:19.580 --> 01:24:25.580]  If he uses that to try to prevent you from testifying before the court to seek justice,
[01:24:25.580 --> 01:24:31.580]  that's witness tampering.
[01:24:31.580 --> 01:24:32.580]  Okay.
[01:24:32.580 --> 01:24:37.580]  You need to figure out how he got to 36 months in jail.
[01:24:37.580 --> 01:24:39.580]  That is a big deal.
[01:24:39.580 --> 01:24:43.580]  That's like a police officer pulling his pistol on me.
[01:24:43.580 --> 01:24:49.580]  That is a big deal.
[01:24:49.580 --> 01:24:50.580]  Okay.
[01:24:50.580 --> 01:24:52.580]  You really need to research that.
[01:24:52.580 --> 01:24:54.580]  How did he get to 36 months in jail?
[01:24:54.580 --> 01:24:58.580]  These all sound like traffic issues.
[01:24:58.580 --> 01:25:00.580]  Yes.
[01:25:00.580 --> 01:25:02.580]  I'm pretty sure that they're just misdemeanors.
[01:25:02.580 --> 01:25:06.580]  I think he even said that in court.
[01:25:06.580 --> 01:25:07.580]  That's a big deal.
[01:25:07.580 --> 01:25:10.580]  That is a really big deal.
[01:25:10.580 --> 01:25:16.580]  If I point my gun at you and tell you I can shoot you, that's a big deal.
[01:25:16.580 --> 01:25:21.580]  He pointed his legal gun at you and told you he could shoot you and how hard he could shoot you.
[01:25:21.580 --> 01:25:25.580]  That is a big deal.
[01:25:25.580 --> 01:25:27.580]  I would think it's a threat.
[01:25:27.580 --> 01:25:31.580]  That's exactly what I would consider it.
[01:25:31.580 --> 01:25:33.580]  Obstruction of justice.
[01:25:33.580 --> 01:25:37.580]  You're bound to have an obstruction of justice statute and witness tampering.
[01:25:37.580 --> 01:25:40.580]  You're generally right together.
[01:25:40.580 --> 01:25:47.580]  In Texas, it's 3605, 3606, tampering obstruction.
[01:25:47.580 --> 01:25:52.580]  You should definitely look those up.
[01:25:52.580 --> 01:25:53.580]  Okay.
[01:25:53.580 --> 01:25:55.580]  Look them up.
[01:25:55.580 --> 01:25:56.580]  Let us know.
[01:25:56.580 --> 01:25:59.580]  If you have time, call back tomorrow night.
[01:25:59.580 --> 01:26:05.580]  This is a big deal.
[01:26:05.580 --> 01:26:06.580]  I need to get moving.
[01:26:06.580 --> 01:26:09.580]  I've got three more calls and I'm going to run out of time.
[01:26:09.580 --> 01:26:10.580]  Okay.
[01:26:10.580 --> 01:26:11.580]  Thanks so much, Randy.
[01:26:11.580 --> 01:26:12.580]  Okay.
[01:26:12.580 --> 01:26:14.580]  Call us back tomorrow night.
[01:26:14.580 --> 01:26:15.580]  Okay.
[01:26:15.580 --> 01:26:16.580]  All right.
[01:26:16.580 --> 01:26:17.580]  Okay.
[01:26:16.580 --> 01:26:17.580]  Bye-bye.
[01:26:16.580 --> 01:26:17.580]  Good night, Sonny.
[01:26:17.580 --> 01:26:18.580]  Okay.
[01:26:18.580 --> 01:26:19.580]  Now we're going to go to Larry in Arizona.
[01:26:19.580 --> 01:26:20.580]  Hello, Larry.
[01:26:20.580 --> 01:26:22.580]  What do you have for us tonight?
[01:26:22.580 --> 01:26:24.580]  How are you doing, Randy?
[01:26:24.580 --> 01:26:29.580]  I just have a few more questions about filing this federal lawsuit.
[01:26:29.580 --> 01:26:38.580]  I was reading a lot of cases and I read one a couple of nights ago where they were suing
[01:26:38.580 --> 01:26:46.580]  the officer personally and officially, plus the department, all in the same suit.
[01:26:46.580 --> 01:26:49.580]  Yeah, you can do that.
[01:26:49.580 --> 01:26:55.580]  But are you actually stinging the officer personally by doing that?
[01:26:55.580 --> 01:26:56.580]  Yes.
[01:26:56.580 --> 01:26:59.580]  Are you going to take money out of his pocket?
[01:26:59.580 --> 01:27:00.580]  Yes.
[01:27:00.580 --> 01:27:01.580]  You are?
[01:27:01.580 --> 01:27:02.580]  Okay.
[01:27:02.580 --> 01:27:07.580]  I mean, I don't know how the award is divvied up if you get an award.
[01:27:07.580 --> 01:27:12.580]  The jury will tend to do that.
[01:27:12.580 --> 01:27:17.580]  It depends on how egregious the claim is.
[01:27:17.580 --> 01:27:21.580]  The jury has ultimate control over how they do this.
[01:27:21.580 --> 01:27:30.580]  They can say, well, yeah, the officer acted improperly, but we're not going to gig him
[01:27:30.580 --> 01:27:31.580]  very hard.
[01:27:31.580 --> 01:27:35.580]  We're going to assign him, say, 1% liability.
[01:27:35.580 --> 01:27:37.580]  And that's generally what they'll do.
[01:27:37.580 --> 01:27:42.580]  They'll assign percentages of liability.
[01:27:42.580 --> 01:27:50.580]  So if you really don't want to sting the lawyer real hard, I mean, the officer real hard,
[01:27:50.580 --> 01:27:58.580]  you make the claim against him and then don't adjudicate it well.
[01:27:58.580 --> 01:27:59.580]  Okay.
[01:27:59.580 --> 01:28:04.580]  You can adjust that, but we have a due to you and I.
[01:28:04.580 --> 01:28:07.580]  I'm going after the city that I live in and I don't want to.
[01:28:07.580 --> 01:28:12.580]  I know all those guys and for the most part, I like those people.
[01:28:12.580 --> 01:28:18.580]  But they got a Scheister lawyer and the Scheister lawyer screwed it up really bad.
[01:28:18.580 --> 01:28:22.580]  And I told them, you know, I don't mind having this kind of fight, but I don't want to have
[01:28:22.580 --> 01:28:24.580]  it here.
[01:28:24.580 --> 01:28:30.580]  And I'm in a quandary because this is my job.
[01:28:30.580 --> 01:28:36.580]  I don't get to not have this fight just because I don't want to.
[01:28:36.580 --> 01:28:40.580]  That's exactly what I complain about with the government officials.
[01:28:40.580 --> 01:28:41.580]  Do your job.
[01:28:41.580 --> 01:28:44.580]  I don't care what you think about it.
[01:28:44.580 --> 01:28:46.580]  So now it's your turn, Larry.
[01:28:46.580 --> 01:28:48.580]  Do your job.
[01:28:48.580 --> 01:28:49.580]  Okay.
[01:28:49.580 --> 01:28:52.580]  Let the jury decide how much liability the officer should have.
[01:28:52.580 --> 01:28:54.580]  And I'm being presumptuous here.
[01:28:54.580 --> 01:28:58.580]  I don't know if that was really your concern.
[01:28:58.580 --> 01:28:59.580]  Okay.
[01:28:59.580 --> 01:29:02.580]  I was just curious how it got divvied up.
[01:29:02.580 --> 01:29:06.580]  The jury will split that up however they want to.
[01:29:06.580 --> 01:29:07.580]  Okay.
[01:29:07.580 --> 01:29:11.580]  When I was arrested and, you know, I went through asking them if I was going to the
[01:29:11.580 --> 01:29:16.580]  magistrate and things, I also asked this guy if I could take my prescription drugs with
[01:29:16.580 --> 01:29:17.580]  me.
[01:29:17.580 --> 01:29:21.580]  And he said, absolutely not.
[01:29:21.580 --> 01:29:24.580]  Now, is that worth mentioning in my suit?
[01:29:24.580 --> 01:29:26.580]  Absolutely.
[01:29:26.580 --> 01:29:27.580]  Hang on.
[01:29:27.580 --> 01:29:32.580]  Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Rue La Radio will pick this up on the other side.
[01:29:32.580 --> 01:29:37.580]  But if these are drugs that you need on a regular basis, that can be a really,
[01:29:37.580 --> 01:29:40.580]  really big deal.
[01:29:40.580 --> 01:29:41.580]  So hang on.
[01:29:41.580 --> 01:29:43.580]  Oliver, Mike, I see you there.
[01:29:43.580 --> 01:29:45.580]  I'll try to get to everybody.
[01:29:45.580 --> 01:30:00.580]  You'll be right back.
[01:30:00.580 --> 01:30:01.580]  Pain in the neck?
[01:30:01.580 --> 01:30:03.580]  It's ginger to the rescue.
[01:30:03.580 --> 01:30:07.580]  The same herb that puts a zing in your tea and the snap in your ginger snaps can
[01:30:07.580 --> 01:30:09.580]  actually zap your painful muscle aches too.
[01:30:09.580 --> 01:30:13.580]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht and I'll be back in a moment to tell you more.
[01:30:13.580 --> 01:30:17.580]  Your search engine is watching you, recording all your searches and creating a
[01:30:17.580 --> 01:30:20.580]  massive database of your personal information.
[01:30:20.580 --> 01:30:21.580]  That's creepy.
[01:30:21.580 --> 01:30:23.580]  But it doesn't have to be that way.
[01:30:23.580 --> 01:30:26.580]  Startpage.com is the world's most private search engine.
[01:30:26.580 --> 01:30:30.580]  Startpage doesn't store your IP address, make a record of your searches or use
[01:30:30.580 --> 01:30:33.580]  tracking cookies and they're third party certified.
[01:30:33.580 --> 01:30:37.580]  If you don't like big brother spying on you, start over with Startpage.
[01:30:37.580 --> 01:30:40.580]  Great search results and total privacy.
[01:30:40.580 --> 01:30:43.580]  Startpage.com, the world's most private search engine.
[01:30:43.580 --> 01:30:46.580]  Got a nagging ache that just won't go away?
[01:30:46.580 --> 01:30:48.580]  You might want to head for the produce aisle.
[01:30:48.580 --> 01:30:52.580]  Ginger, the herb used in gingerbread cookies and Indian curry, can also put an
[01:30:52.580 --> 01:30:53.580]  end to pain.
[01:30:53.580 --> 01:30:57.580]  Medical studies show ginger relieves pain and inflammation like aspirin and
[01:30:57.580 --> 01:31:00.580]  ibuprofen do, but without the worrisome side effects.
[01:31:00.580 --> 01:31:04.580]  Big pharma remedies can trigger stomach upset, gastrointestinal bleeding and
[01:31:04.580 --> 01:31:05.580]  ulcers.
[01:31:05.580 --> 01:31:06.580]  Ginger?
[01:31:06.580 --> 01:31:07.580]  Well, it just tastes great.
[01:31:07.580 --> 01:31:11.580]  Researchers say one or two teaspoons of ginger daily, raw or heated, can provide
[01:31:11.580 --> 01:31:15.580]  natural relief for even the deep pain of osteoarthritis.
[01:31:15.580 --> 01:31:17.580]  So put down the aspirin bottle and reach for the ginger.
[01:31:17.580 --> 01:31:21.580]  It's natural, it's delicious and it works wonders.
[01:31:21.580 --> 01:31:22.580]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht.
[01:31:22.580 --> 01:31:30.580]  More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[01:31:30.580 --> 01:31:35.580]  This is Building 7, a 47-story skyscraper that fell on the afternoon of
[01:31:35.580 --> 01:31:36.580]  September 11.
[01:31:36.580 --> 01:31:38.580]  The government says that fire brought it down.
[01:31:38.580 --> 01:31:42.580]  However, 1,500 architects and engineers concluded it was a controlled
[01:31:42.580 --> 01:31:43.580]  demolition.
[01:31:43.580 --> 01:31:46.580]  Over 6,000 of my fellow service members have given their lives.
[01:31:46.580 --> 01:31:48.580]  Thousands of my fellow first responders are dying.
[01:31:48.580 --> 01:31:50.580]  I'm not a conspiracy theorist.
[01:31:50.580 --> 01:31:51.580]  I'm a structural engineer.
[01:31:51.580 --> 01:31:52.580]  I'm a New York City correctional.
[01:31:52.580 --> 01:31:53.580]  I'm an Air Force pilot.
[01:31:53.580 --> 01:31:55.580]  I'm a father who lost his son.
[01:31:55.580 --> 01:31:57.580]  We're Americans and we deserve the truth.
[01:31:57.580 --> 01:32:07.580]  Go to RememberBuilding7.org today.
[01:32:27.580 --> 01:32:42.580]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht.
[01:32:42.580 --> 01:33:04.580]  You are listening to the Logos Radio Network,
[01:33:04.580 --> 01:33:26.580]  LogosRadioNetwork.com.
[01:33:26.580 --> 01:33:27.580]  Okay.
[01:33:27.580 --> 01:33:28.580]  We are back.
[01:33:28.580 --> 01:33:35.580]  Randy Kalten, Denver Stevens, Radio, and we're talking to Larry in Arizona.
[01:33:35.580 --> 01:33:38.580]  Okay, Larry, where were we?
[01:33:38.580 --> 01:33:43.580]  The officer denying me having my prescription drugs.
[01:33:43.580 --> 01:33:51.580]  Oh, you know, I had a grandfather-in-law when I first got married.
[01:33:51.580 --> 01:33:59.580]  My wife's grandfather was arrested for driving while under the influence.
[01:33:59.580 --> 01:34:02.580]  And they threw him in jail.
[01:34:02.580 --> 01:34:04.580]  He almost died.
[01:34:04.580 --> 01:34:12.580]  Somebody walked in there and noticed that he had a sweet smell to him.
[01:34:12.580 --> 01:34:17.580]  And they said, holy crap, this is a diabetes coma.
[01:34:17.580 --> 01:34:22.580]  And they got him to the hospital and they managed to save his life, but he almost died.
[01:34:22.580 --> 01:34:32.580]  If you have prescription drugs that you need to take and these officers, you know,
[01:34:32.580 --> 01:34:37.580]  they've got this war on drugs thing going on and no matter what they are,
[01:34:37.580 --> 01:34:38.580]  they consider them illegal.
[01:34:38.580 --> 01:34:48.580]  I would consider that putting my life in unnecessary jeopardy.
[01:34:48.580 --> 01:34:49.580]  Okay.
[01:34:49.580 --> 01:34:56.580]  But it depends on what the drugs are, if there's something that you have to take.
[01:34:56.580 --> 01:34:58.580]  Blood pressure medication.
[01:34:58.580 --> 01:35:00.580]  Pardon me?
[01:35:00.580 --> 01:35:02.580]  Blood pressure medication.
[01:35:02.580 --> 01:35:11.580]  Oh, then it's not like it's a controlled substance that the other inmates
[01:35:11.580 --> 01:35:15.580]  will want to steal from you and get high on.
[01:35:15.580 --> 01:35:22.580]  I mean, they may get high, but they're just blow a gasket.
[01:35:22.580 --> 01:35:29.580]  Would not taking the blood pressure medicine cause an acute problem?
[01:35:29.580 --> 01:35:32.580]  I'd have to check with an MD for sure.
[01:35:32.580 --> 01:35:36.580]  But yeah, I mean, it keeps it down so you don't have a stroke or something.
[01:35:36.580 --> 01:35:38.580]  Depends on how acute it is.
[01:35:38.580 --> 01:35:48.580]  If it's not something that's immediate, I wouldn't take on an issue just because I can.
[01:35:48.580 --> 01:35:49.580]  Okay.
[01:35:49.580 --> 01:35:50.580]  That's what I wanted to ask you.
[01:35:50.580 --> 01:35:52.580]  I'll pass on that one.
[01:35:52.580 --> 01:35:53.580]  Okay.
[01:35:53.580 --> 01:35:56.580]  One last question here.
[01:35:56.580 --> 01:36:03.580]  This officer testified that no law enforcement in this county abides by the law
[01:36:03.580 --> 01:36:06.580]  of taking you to the magistrate.
[01:36:06.580 --> 01:36:09.580]  Besides going after the sheriff's department,
[01:36:09.580 --> 01:36:14.580]  do I want to list the county board of supervisors in this case?
[01:36:14.580 --> 01:36:19.580]  Well, the question to the officer would be, and this is a question I just asked a clerk today
[01:36:19.580 --> 01:36:23.580]  when she told me that a ticket falls under the Open Records Act.
[01:36:23.580 --> 01:36:29.580]  I said, who told you that?
[01:36:29.580 --> 01:36:32.580]  And she took a big step back.
[01:36:32.580 --> 01:36:37.580]  Well, tickets, it's not in court yet, so it falls under Open Records.
[01:36:37.580 --> 01:36:40.580]  Who told you that?
[01:36:40.580 --> 01:36:50.580]  Will she talk to the attorney general and to some association for municipalities?
[01:36:50.580 --> 01:36:53.580]  Who specifically did you talk to?
[01:36:53.580 --> 01:36:58.580]  And she looked like a deer in the headlights.
[01:36:58.580 --> 01:37:05.580]  She didn't know yet who I was since she was doing song and dance and seltzer down your pants.
[01:37:05.580 --> 01:37:12.580]  I want to know who trained this officer to act improperly.
[01:37:12.580 --> 01:37:14.580]  I don't care what his opinion is about.
[01:37:14.580 --> 01:37:19.580]  I don't care how long he's been doing his job wrong.
[01:37:19.580 --> 01:37:26.580]  That practice may take on the appearance of law, but it never takes on the authority of law.
[01:37:26.580 --> 01:37:32.580]  If he didn't bring you to the magistrate, you want to know who told him not to.
[01:37:32.580 --> 01:37:36.580]  Specifically, not some vague general, oh, blah, blah, blah.
[01:37:36.580 --> 01:37:37.580]  This is how we do things.
[01:37:37.580 --> 01:37:41.580]  Who told you that specifically?
[01:37:41.580 --> 01:37:47.580]  I want that guy because I'm going to fight against him.
[01:37:47.580 --> 01:37:53.580]  And if he doesn't tell you, it's either if he's a sheriff's deputy, it's sheriff.
[01:37:53.580 --> 01:37:57.580]  If he's a municipal officer, it's chief of police.
[01:37:57.580 --> 01:38:01.580]  So you make the specific accusation against the chief of police.
[01:38:01.580 --> 01:38:03.580]  Okay.
[01:38:03.580 --> 01:38:06.580]  How would you construe this?
[01:38:06.580 --> 01:38:22.580]  They continuously violate law and use their activities to generate revenue for the county.
[01:38:22.580 --> 01:38:24.580]  Smacks of Rico to me.
[01:38:24.580 --> 01:38:30.580]  Predicate acts in furtherance of an ongoing criminal conspiracy.
[01:38:30.580 --> 01:38:38.580]  How else do you spice that up?
[01:38:38.580 --> 01:38:40.580]  This is a criminal conspiracy to commit.
[01:38:40.580 --> 01:38:50.580]  Does that change the format that I would sue under instead of going under Title 83 when I go into Rico?
[01:38:50.580 --> 01:38:52.580]  Rico is much more powerful.
[01:38:52.580 --> 01:39:02.580]  It's more difficult to file, but in looking at how local governments do what they do,
[01:39:02.580 --> 01:39:07.580]  Rico always seems more appropriate.
[01:39:07.580 --> 01:39:15.580]  Because in Texas, we have our Rico statute is essentially a street gang statute
[01:39:15.580 --> 01:39:27.580]  where you have a recognizable hierarchy in a group of people who participated in ongoing criminal conspiracy.
[01:39:27.580 --> 01:39:30.580]  It's exactly what this is.
[01:39:30.580 --> 01:39:34.580]  Now, the fact that one of them has been elected as a sheriff and another as a judge,
[01:39:34.580 --> 01:39:39.580]  that doesn't have anything to do with them acting outside the scope of their authority.
[01:39:39.580 --> 01:39:43.580]  And violating law is not within scope.
[01:39:43.580 --> 01:39:50.580]  So you could make the same claim in a 1983 suit,
[01:39:50.580 --> 01:39:58.580]  but Rico opens the door to coming back at them criminally.
[01:39:58.580 --> 01:40:01.580]  We had a federal judge in Oklahoma tell us,
[01:40:01.580 --> 01:40:06.580]  when you file a Rico suit, it's like dropping an atomic bomb.
[01:40:06.580 --> 01:40:09.580]  You scare everybody.
[01:40:09.580 --> 01:40:16.580]  But then it is a lot more difficult to prepare an adjudicated Rico suit.
[01:40:16.580 --> 01:40:17.580]  Okay.
[01:40:17.580 --> 01:40:20.580]  Well, I'll let you get onto your other callers, and I'll give you a call tomorrow.
[01:40:20.580 --> 01:40:24.580]  Because this is, I mean, if I do this as a private attorney general,
[01:40:24.580 --> 01:40:31.580]  I ran the numbers, and the numbers come out to over $5 billion.
[01:40:31.580 --> 01:40:36.580]  That'll work.
[01:40:36.580 --> 01:40:40.580]  But let me talk to you tomorrow, and I'll let you get onto your last two callers here tonight.
[01:40:40.580 --> 01:40:41.580]  Okay.
[01:40:41.580 --> 01:40:42.580]  Thank you, Larry.
[01:40:42.580 --> 01:40:43.580]  Okay.
[01:40:43.580 --> 01:40:44.580]  Now we're going to go to Oliver in Tennessee.
[01:40:44.580 --> 01:40:45.580]  Hello, Oliver.
[01:40:45.580 --> 01:40:48.580]  And sorry to get to you so late.
[01:40:48.580 --> 01:40:49.580]  It's all right.
[01:40:49.580 --> 01:40:53.580]  I know how it is.
[01:40:53.580 --> 01:40:56.580]  When I was a, remember, remember?
[01:40:56.580 --> 01:40:57.580]  Okay.
[01:40:57.580 --> 01:41:10.580]  I went to go see my public defender again, and I got him on tape warning me
[01:41:10.580 --> 01:41:19.580]  about what the DBA is thinking about doing about filing perjury charges against me.
[01:41:19.580 --> 01:41:20.580]  Oh, wonderful.
[01:41:20.580 --> 01:41:21.580]  Okay.
[01:41:21.580 --> 01:41:25.580]  Here's the way I look at that.
[01:41:25.580 --> 01:41:34.580]  If you have reasonable probable cause to believe that I have committed a crime,
[01:41:34.580 --> 01:41:37.580]  file a complaint.
[01:41:37.580 --> 01:41:41.580]  Don't come stand in front of me huffing and puffing and waving your arms
[01:41:41.580 --> 01:41:48.580]  and railing righteous indignation, because I take that as a threat.
[01:41:48.580 --> 01:41:56.580]  So it sounds like someone is threatening you with malicious prosecution in order
[01:41:56.580 --> 01:42:00.580]  to prevent you from exercising your rights.
[01:42:00.580 --> 01:42:03.580]  Is that the way you see this?
[01:42:03.580 --> 01:42:05.580]  Okay.
[01:42:05.580 --> 01:42:06.580]  That's retaliation.
[01:42:06.580 --> 01:42:10.580]  That's a felony in every state.
[01:42:10.580 --> 01:42:11.580]  Right.
[01:42:11.580 --> 01:42:18.580]  You know, if I go to court and I go in there and I do something,
[01:42:18.580 --> 01:42:22.580]  and then I have somebody say to me, oh, man, you really have to be careful.
[01:42:22.580 --> 01:42:25.580]  You can really get in trouble with this.
[01:42:25.580 --> 01:42:27.580]  911.
[01:42:27.580 --> 01:42:29.580]  911 immediately.
[01:42:29.580 --> 01:42:31.580]  You're not giving me fair warning.
[01:42:31.580 --> 01:42:37.580]  You're threatening me, and I don't take threats lately.
[01:42:37.580 --> 01:42:42.580]  When I'm threatened in order to prevent me from adjudicating my rights,
[01:42:42.580 --> 01:42:44.580]  that's obstruction of justice.
[01:42:44.580 --> 01:42:49.580]  Every state has a law against obstruction of justice.
[01:42:49.580 --> 01:42:51.580]  Right.
[01:42:51.580 --> 01:42:56.580]  Who told you this?
[01:42:56.580 --> 01:42:57.580]  Say that again?
[01:42:57.580 --> 01:43:04.580]  Who told you that the prosecuting attorney was considering aggravated
[01:43:04.580 --> 01:43:07.580]  perjury charges?
[01:43:07.580 --> 01:43:09.580]  It's my public defender.
[01:43:09.580 --> 01:43:12.580]  I'm going to wrap it up, though, because my situation has taken up a lot of
[01:43:12.580 --> 01:43:15.580]  time, and I'm going to call you tomorrow so we can get into it.
[01:43:15.580 --> 01:43:18.580]  But I just wanted to let you know that I'm going to be seeing you.
[01:43:18.580 --> 01:43:21.580]  Oh, you public defender.
[01:43:21.580 --> 01:43:23.580]  How wonderful.
[01:43:23.580 --> 01:43:25.580]  Wait, Randy, wait.
[01:43:25.580 --> 01:43:26.580]  Don't go too far.
[01:43:26.580 --> 01:43:29.580]  I'm going to call you tomorrow to go over all of it.
[01:43:29.580 --> 01:43:31.580]  I just want to give you some bombs right quick.
[01:43:31.580 --> 01:43:32.580]  So he told me that.
[01:43:32.580 --> 01:43:34.580]  So I told him, I said, okay, you want to stay with me?
[01:43:34.580 --> 01:43:36.580]  I said, you're playing with the wrong one.
[01:43:36.580 --> 01:43:40.580]  I said, I'm filing another lawsuit tomorrow anyway.
[01:43:40.580 --> 01:43:46.580]  So what I did was I went and filed another lawsuit, and now everybody's going,
[01:43:46.580 --> 01:43:47.580]  like, what?
[01:43:47.580 --> 01:43:48.580]  It was 48.
[01:43:48.580 --> 01:43:49.580]  Okay, wait.
[01:43:49.580 --> 01:43:50.580]  Hold on.
[01:43:50.580 --> 01:43:51.580]  About to go to break.
[01:43:51.580 --> 01:43:54.580]  Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Real Law Radio.
[01:43:54.580 --> 01:44:00.580]  We'll be right back.
[01:44:00.580 --> 01:44:03.580]  At Capital Coin and Bullion, our mission is to be your preferred shopping
[01:44:03.580 --> 01:44:07.580]  destination by delivering excellent customer service and outstanding value at
[01:44:07.580 --> 01:44:08.580]  an affordable price.
[01:44:08.580 --> 01:44:12.580]  We provide a wide assortment of favorite products featuring a great selection of
[01:44:12.580 --> 01:44:14.580]  high quality coins and precious metals.
[01:44:14.580 --> 01:44:17.580]  We cater to beginners in coin collecting as well as large transactions for
[01:44:17.580 --> 01:44:18.580]  investors.
[01:44:18.580 --> 01:44:22.580]  We believe in educating our customers with resources from top accredited metals
[01:44:22.580 --> 01:44:23.580]  dealers and journalists.
[01:44:23.580 --> 01:44:26.580]  If we don't have what you're looking for, we can find it.
[01:44:26.580 --> 01:44:30.580]  In addition, we carry popular Young Jeopardy products such as Beyond Tangy
[01:44:30.580 --> 01:44:31.580]  Tangerine and Polymbers.
[01:44:31.580 --> 01:44:35.580]  We also offer One World Way, Mountain House Storable Foods, Berkey Water
[01:44:35.580 --> 01:44:38.580]  Products, ammunition at 10% above wholesale, and more.
[01:44:38.580 --> 01:44:42.580]  We broker metals, IRA accounts, and we also accept Bitcoins as payment.
[01:44:42.580 --> 01:44:45.580]  Call us at 512-646-6440.
[01:44:45.580 --> 01:44:49.580]  We're located at 7304 Burnett Road, Suite A, about a half mile south of
[01:44:49.580 --> 01:44:50.580]  Anderson.
[01:44:50.580 --> 01:44:53.580]  We're open Monday through Friday 10 to 6, Saturdays 10 to 2.
[01:44:53.580 --> 01:45:00.580]  Visit us at capitalcoinandbullying.com or call 512-646-6440.
[01:45:00.580 --> 01:45:03.580]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[01:45:03.580 --> 01:45:07.580]  Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary, the affordable,
[01:45:07.580 --> 01:45:13.580]  easy to understand, 4-CD course that will show you how in 24 hours,
[01:45:13.580 --> 01:45:14.580]  step by step.
[01:45:14.580 --> 01:45:18.580]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing.
[01:45:18.580 --> 01:45:22.580]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[01:45:22.580 --> 01:45:27.580]  Thousands have won with our step by step course, and now you can too.
[01:45:27.580 --> 01:45:32.580]  Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case
[01:45:32.580 --> 01:45:33.580]  winning experience.
[01:45:33.580 --> 01:45:37.580]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should
[01:45:37.580 --> 01:45:42.580]  understand about the principles and practices that control our American
[01:45:42.580 --> 01:45:43.580]  courts.
[01:45:43.580 --> 01:45:48.580]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for
[01:45:48.580 --> 01:45:52.580]  civil cases, pro se tactics, and much more.
[01:45:52.580 --> 01:45:57.580]  Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner or call toll-free
[01:45:57.580 --> 01:46:00.580]  866-LAW-EZ.
[01:46:00.580 --> 01:46:23.580]  Okay.
[01:46:23.580 --> 01:46:24.580]  We are back.
[01:46:24.580 --> 01:46:28.580]  Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens with Rule of Law Radio, and we're talking to
[01:46:28.580 --> 01:46:30.580]  Oliver in Tennessee.
[01:46:30.580 --> 01:46:31.580]  Hello, Oliver.
[01:46:31.580 --> 01:46:32.580]  Okay.
[01:46:32.580 --> 01:46:34.580]  You're having way too much fun, Oliver.
[01:46:34.580 --> 01:46:36.580]  I'm telling you, man, he threatened me.
[01:46:36.580 --> 01:46:37.580]  I looked at him.
[01:46:37.580 --> 01:46:40.580]  I said, you don't know who you're talking to, do you?
[01:46:40.580 --> 01:46:44.580]  I said, I would have everybody in their momma in court.
[01:46:44.580 --> 01:46:47.580]  I said, tell him, good luck.
[01:46:47.580 --> 01:46:48.580]  Try it.
[01:46:48.580 --> 01:46:51.580]  As a matter of fact, I'm going to finish up this lawsuit tonight and file it
[01:46:51.580 --> 01:46:52.580]  tomorrow.
[01:46:52.580 --> 01:46:53.580]  And I looked at him.
[01:46:53.580 --> 01:46:54.580]  He was like, huh?
[01:46:54.580 --> 01:46:56.580]  I said, yeah, I'm on page 36.
[01:46:56.580 --> 01:46:57.580]  He said, page 36.
[01:46:57.580 --> 01:47:00.580]  I said, yeah, page 36 of my lawsuit.
[01:47:00.580 --> 01:47:02.580]  His eyes went up and went down.
[01:47:02.580 --> 01:47:04.580]  He just turned red.
[01:47:04.580 --> 01:47:06.580]  I said, you like another one?
[01:47:06.580 --> 01:47:08.580]  He said, yeah, I have another one.
[01:47:08.580 --> 01:47:10.580]  I'm like, you want to threaten?
[01:47:10.580 --> 01:47:12.580]  I'm like, you think threats mean anything?
[01:47:12.580 --> 01:47:13.580]  Watch what happened tomorrow.
[01:47:13.580 --> 01:47:14.580]  I filed it today.
[01:47:14.580 --> 01:47:17.580]  When I went in there and filed it today, all the clerks in the back were like,
[01:47:17.580 --> 01:47:18.580]  wow.
[01:47:18.580 --> 01:47:20.580]  You know, they never had nothing this big.
[01:47:20.580 --> 01:47:22.580]  You know what I mean?
[01:47:22.580 --> 01:47:24.580]  They all looking at each other like, wow.
[01:47:24.580 --> 01:47:28.580]  You know, they remember me coming up, they're talking about filing these papers
[01:47:28.580 --> 01:47:31.580]  for don't need no license and everything.
[01:47:31.580 --> 01:47:32.580]  And they're looking at me crazy.
[01:47:32.580 --> 01:47:33.580]  Like, everybody need a license.
[01:47:33.580 --> 01:47:36.580]  I'm like, listen, man, okay, just file my paperwork or whatever.
[01:47:36.580 --> 01:47:37.580]  I'm going to take care of this.
[01:47:37.580 --> 01:47:41.580]  So eventually, going through the court system, they see me beat the charges.
[01:47:41.580 --> 01:47:49.580]  They say, now I'm on the other side of the hat, filing $200,000 lawsuits against
[01:47:49.580 --> 01:47:51.580]  the city and officers.
[01:47:51.580 --> 01:47:52.580]  They are passing out.
[01:47:52.580 --> 01:47:53.580]  They're like, wow, what is going on?
[01:47:53.580 --> 01:47:55.580]  You know, I'm a black man, dreadlocked.
[01:47:55.580 --> 01:47:59.580]  They see us going in and out of jail a lot of times just paying fines.
[01:47:59.580 --> 01:48:01.580]  But this one's getting paid.
[01:48:01.580 --> 01:48:03.580]  This is how we do it.
[01:48:03.580 --> 01:48:05.580]  This is how we change the system.
[01:48:05.580 --> 01:48:10.580]  And you're probably the best one because it's the one they least expected to see
[01:48:10.580 --> 01:48:12.580]  it from.
[01:48:12.580 --> 01:48:17.580]  So how do they figure out which one's going to sting them good?
[01:48:17.580 --> 01:48:24.580]  And I'm going to send you an email of the two lawsuits I got for you to play with.
[01:48:24.580 --> 01:48:27.580]  I know how you do.
[01:48:27.580 --> 01:48:28.580]  Wonderful.
[01:48:28.580 --> 01:48:29.580]  I'd like to see them.
[01:48:29.580 --> 01:48:30.580]  Okay.
[01:48:30.580 --> 01:48:31.580]  I'll see you tomorrow.
[01:48:31.580 --> 01:48:32.580]  Okay.
[01:48:32.580 --> 01:48:33.580]  Call back tomorrow night.
[01:48:33.580 --> 01:48:35.580]  I'd very much like to go over this.
[01:48:35.580 --> 01:48:36.580]  All right.
[01:48:36.580 --> 01:48:37.580]  Okay.
[01:48:37.580 --> 01:48:38.580]  Thank you, Oliver.
[01:48:38.580 --> 01:48:39.580]  Okay.
[01:48:39.580 --> 01:48:40.580]  Now we're going to go to Mike in Texas.
[01:48:40.580 --> 01:48:41.580]  Hello, Mike.
[01:48:41.580 --> 01:48:46.580]  And I'm sorry we have only got 10 minutes left, but what do you have for us?
[01:48:46.580 --> 01:48:47.580]  Oh, hey, Randy.
[01:48:47.580 --> 01:48:49.580]  It's Mike from Texas.
[01:48:49.580 --> 01:48:50.580]  Let's see.
[01:48:50.580 --> 01:48:59.580]  I guess I'm trying to still sue the sheriff in Travis County for video evidence of an
[01:48:59.580 --> 01:49:04.580]  arrest and just filed a simple written mandamus.
[01:49:04.580 --> 01:49:11.580]  They tried to dismiss the case for want of prosecution just because they would put visiting
[01:49:11.580 --> 01:49:13.580]  judge upon visiting judge on me.
[01:49:13.580 --> 01:49:21.580]  They refused to acknowledge any of the complaints that I've made.
[01:49:21.580 --> 01:49:28.580]  This has gone from the county declaring that they destroyed the evidence where I decided
[01:49:28.580 --> 01:49:34.580]  that that's a felony offense in each county to where they say it exists and to where now
[01:49:34.580 --> 01:49:39.580]  they claim that they would like to have a quarter of a million dollars in excess of
[01:49:39.580 --> 01:49:41.580]  that for me to have that evidence.
[01:49:41.580 --> 01:49:46.580]  A quarter of a million dollars to produce a video?
[01:49:46.580 --> 01:49:47.580]  Yeah.
[01:49:47.580 --> 01:49:50.580]  $259,000 plus.
[01:49:50.580 --> 01:49:57.580]  Is this for one video or did you ask for a whole bunch of videos?
[01:49:57.580 --> 01:50:04.580]  These are the videos of my arrest, my booking.
[01:50:04.580 --> 01:50:05.580]  Wow.
[01:50:05.580 --> 01:50:09.580]  So what is the claim you have?
[01:50:09.580 --> 01:50:13.580]  Have you filed a claim against them based on this particular charge?
[01:50:13.580 --> 01:50:16.580]  I haven't done that yet.
[01:50:16.580 --> 01:50:21.580]  I went to the attorney general and said that this is extortion for them to demand this
[01:50:21.580 --> 01:50:26.580]  money and the attorney general asked and said, no, we agree with this.
[01:50:26.580 --> 01:50:27.580]  This is fine.
[01:50:27.580 --> 01:50:32.580]  So have you sued the attorney general?
[01:50:32.580 --> 01:50:37.580]  Not yet, but I just had notification today.
[01:50:37.580 --> 01:50:39.580]  I have a new judge.
[01:50:39.580 --> 01:50:41.580]  I don't know who she is.
[01:50:41.580 --> 01:50:43.580]  She's probably another visiting judge.
[01:50:43.580 --> 01:50:51.580]  She's not associated with any court that I'm aware of, but they're trying to change the
[01:50:51.580 --> 01:50:57.580]  process from just a simple writ of mandamus where I'm asking the judge, which is after
[01:50:57.580 --> 01:51:05.580]  I've exhausted all remedy and they refuse to produce to where I'm allowed to sue them
[01:51:05.580 --> 01:51:10.580]  in district court for writ of mandamus just to produce the evidence, now that the judge
[01:51:10.580 --> 01:51:15.580]  is trying to change things to where it's a full blown suit.
[01:51:15.580 --> 01:51:26.580]  So we're supposed to give a schedule where we want discovery to occur pre-trial hearings,
[01:51:26.580 --> 01:51:28.580]  depositions, things like that.
[01:51:28.580 --> 01:51:35.580]  And I think it's kind of interesting that they're trying to permute my case from a
[01:51:35.580 --> 01:51:40.580]  simple writ of mandamus to a full blown lawsuit.
[01:51:40.580 --> 01:51:42.580]  Wait, who is doing this?
[01:51:42.580 --> 01:51:46.580]  This would be, who did you file the mandamus with?
[01:51:46.580 --> 01:51:53.580]  I filed the mandamus with a district court clerk and they assigned a judge.
[01:51:53.580 --> 01:51:57.580]  I've never had that judge in that court.
[01:51:57.580 --> 01:52:00.580]  They've already produced different judges.
[01:52:00.580 --> 01:52:07.580]  I've been bounced around about five or six times and now I'm being ruled upon by someone
[01:52:07.580 --> 01:52:19.580]  else and she is changing it from a writ of mandamus to a full blown lawsuit.
[01:52:19.580 --> 01:52:21.580]  Wait a minute, that doesn't make sense.
[01:52:21.580 --> 01:52:25.580]  I'm not sure what you're saying to me.
[01:52:25.580 --> 01:52:29.580]  They're treating this as an original petition?
[01:52:29.580 --> 01:52:32.580]  They're not treating it as an original petition.
[01:52:32.580 --> 01:52:37.580]  They're treating it as a plaintiff's complaint where I would be opening up suit against the
[01:52:37.580 --> 01:52:40.580]  county and that's not what I'm trying to do.
[01:52:40.580 --> 01:52:47.580]  I'm just trying to get some video evidence.
[01:52:47.580 --> 01:52:56.580]  If you will send me date and time of the video, I'll send an information request for it.
[01:52:56.580 --> 01:52:58.580]  Okay.
[01:52:58.580 --> 01:53:02.580]  And this won't have anything to do with court because I don't have anything to do with the
[01:53:02.580 --> 01:53:07.580]  court and we'll see what they do with that.
[01:53:07.580 --> 01:53:09.580]  Okay, that'd be very interesting.
[01:53:09.580 --> 01:53:14.580]  I'd be interested to hear what that response would be.
[01:53:14.580 --> 01:53:22.580]  On July 1st, a couple years ago, after the district judge announced that I probably knocked
[01:53:22.580 --> 01:53:28.580]  it on the park after he effectively was guilty of witness tampering because he had threatened
[01:53:28.580 --> 01:53:37.580]  me pretty severely in court and actually ordered the sheriff deputy to stand by my side and
[01:53:37.580 --> 01:53:45.580]  ordered him to arrest me if I tried to object to anything that the county attorney was saying.
[01:53:45.580 --> 01:53:50.580]  He denied me due process and my witnesses actually got fairly scared.
[01:53:50.580 --> 01:53:52.580]  Some of them wanted to flee.
[01:53:52.580 --> 01:53:54.580]  They thought they were going to get arrested too.
[01:53:54.580 --> 01:53:56.580]  Did you charge the...
[01:53:56.580 --> 01:53:57.580]  Okay.
[01:53:57.580 --> 01:54:05.580]  I had my local district judge have a bailiff come over and put his hand on my arm.
[01:54:05.580 --> 01:54:12.580]  I now have first degree felony aggravated assault charges against that district judge
[01:54:12.580 --> 01:54:16.580]  in the hands of the district attorney and we're going to meet next week and he's going
[01:54:16.580 --> 01:54:21.580]  to explain to me why he hasn't given them to the grand jury yet.
[01:54:21.580 --> 01:54:23.580]  Oh, that's awesome.
[01:54:23.580 --> 01:54:26.580]  First degree felony aggravated assault.
[01:54:26.580 --> 01:54:33.580]  Our legislature, when they authorized public officials to strap loaded pistols on their
[01:54:33.580 --> 01:54:43.580]  hip, they placed on them an incredibly serious responsibility and they said if you abuse
[01:54:43.580 --> 01:54:51.580]  this authority while you're displaying that deadly weapon, that's a felony of the first
[01:54:51.580 --> 01:54:55.580]  degree, 20 to life.
[01:54:55.580 --> 01:55:02.580]  Nobody has ever been prosecuted under that statute ever.
[01:55:02.580 --> 01:55:09.580]  That's because public officials are trying to protect themselves.
[01:55:09.580 --> 01:55:22.580]  Well, if a judge sends a bailiff over to me, I see that loaded pistol, that's a big deal.
[01:55:22.580 --> 01:55:26.580]  Last week I spent 10 minutes in handcuffs.
[01:55:26.580 --> 01:55:32.580]  The judge is going to get first degree felony aggravated assault because I told him I was
[01:55:32.580 --> 01:55:38.580]  recording his proceedings and now I'm going to get that issued before the court, but when
[01:55:38.580 --> 01:55:44.580]  he sends the bailiff over with that pistol, they need to understand that is a really,
[01:55:44.580 --> 01:55:46.580]  really big deal.
[01:55:46.580 --> 01:55:49.580]  Give me the date of the arrest.
[01:55:49.580 --> 01:55:53.580]  I'm sure I have it somewhere in my records, but I have to do it out.
[01:55:53.580 --> 01:55:59.580]  Give me the date and time and I will put in an information request for all video recordings
[01:55:59.580 --> 01:56:03.580]  over this time period.
[01:56:03.580 --> 01:56:06.580]  Let me see how they respond to it.
[01:56:06.580 --> 01:56:13.580]  They'd like to say that the record for the court is the court reporter, but I have a
[01:56:13.580 --> 01:56:24.580]  number of opinions throughout the US, including Texas, that it is not the stenographer's or
[01:56:24.580 --> 01:56:30.580]  court reporter's recording or court reporter's transcription that is the record of the court.
[01:56:30.580 --> 01:56:34.580]  It is the actual audio recording.
[01:56:34.580 --> 01:56:38.580]  That is the record of the court.
[01:56:38.580 --> 01:56:41.580]  The unredacted audio recording.
[01:56:41.580 --> 01:56:47.580]  Unredacted audio recording is the record of the court, not the transcription, but they
[01:56:47.580 --> 01:56:55.580]  want to say it's the transcription, but I dug those up last night and I'm going to
[01:56:55.580 --> 01:56:58.580]  prepare to use those again.
[01:56:58.580 --> 01:57:00.580]  Okay.
[01:57:00.580 --> 01:57:05.580]  Can you call in tomorrow night because I would like to talk about this.
[01:57:05.580 --> 01:57:07.580]  Sure, I'd be happy to.
[01:57:07.580 --> 01:57:11.580]  I tend to play chess, not checkers.
[01:57:11.580 --> 01:57:15.580]  Mike, how can we set these guys up?
[01:57:15.580 --> 01:57:18.580]  You're in a contentious fight with them.
[01:57:18.580 --> 01:57:25.580]  Okay, let's take a step back and see if we can't develop some res judicata.
[01:57:25.580 --> 01:57:37.580]  Let's take a meaningless nothing case and go in and ask for the actual recording in
[01:57:37.580 --> 01:57:39.580]  a case that doesn't really mean anything.
[01:57:39.580 --> 01:57:45.580]  This way we get a clean ruling and I can go in and ask for it so I don't appear to be
[01:57:45.580 --> 01:57:47.580]  connected with you.
[01:57:47.580 --> 01:57:53.580]  And then we bring up these issues and let the courts rule on these issues where they
[01:57:53.580 --> 01:57:56.580]  don't see any mitigating circumstances.
[01:57:56.580 --> 01:57:59.580]  We should get a good clear ruling.
[01:57:59.580 --> 01:58:06.580]  And if we can get a local court, a recent court to rule that this case law is
[01:58:06.580 --> 01:58:11.580]  accurate, that this is the actual record of the court, now you can come back to
[01:58:11.580 --> 01:58:18.580]  them with res judicata current case and ask them to produce these records or I
[01:58:18.580 --> 01:58:22.580]  can go to that court and ask them to produce the record.
[01:58:22.580 --> 01:58:25.580]  Okay, call us back tomorrow night.
[01:58:25.580 --> 01:58:32.580]  We are out of time tonight, but this sounds like it could be a lot of fun.
[01:58:32.580 --> 01:58:34.580]  Okay, thank you, Mike.
[01:58:34.580 --> 01:58:38.580]  This is Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Rule of Law Radio.
[01:58:38.580 --> 01:58:42.580]  We'll be back tomorrow night with our four-hour info marathon.
[01:58:42.580 --> 01:58:49.580]  Thank you all for listening and good night.
[01:58:49.580 --> 01:58:55.580]  Bibles for America is offering absolutely free a unique study Bible called the
[01:58:55.580 --> 01:58:57.580]  New Testament Recovery Version.
[01:58:57.580 --> 01:59:02.580]  The New Testament Recovery Version has over 9,000 footnotes that explain what the
[01:59:02.580 --> 01:59:07.580]  Bible says verse by verse, helping you to know God and to know the meaning of
[01:59:07.580 --> 01:59:08.580]  life.
[01:59:08.580 --> 01:59:11.580]  Order your free copy today from Bibles for America.
[01:59:11.580 --> 01:59:20.580]  Call us toll free at 888-551-0102 or visit us online at bfa.org.
[01:59:20.580 --> 01:59:25.580]  This translation is highly accurate and it comes with over 13,000 cross references,
[01:59:25.580 --> 01:59:29.580]  plus charts and maps and an outline for every book of the Bible.
[01:59:29.580 --> 01:59:32.580]  This is truly a Bible you can understand.
[01:59:32.580 --> 01:59:36.580]  To get your free copy of the New Testament Recovery Version, call us toll
[01:59:36.580 --> 01:59:41.580]  free at 888-551-0102.
[01:59:41.580 --> 01:59:52.580]  That's 888-551-0102 or visit us online at bfa.org.
[01:59:52.580 --> 02:00:07.580]  Thanks for listening to the Logos Radio Network at logosradionetwork.com.