[00:00.000 --> 00:05.840]  The following use flash is brought to you by the Lone Star Lowdown, providing your jelly
[00:05.840 --> 00:08.360]  bulletins for the commodities market.
[00:08.360 --> 00:21.360]  Today in history, news updates and the inside scoop into the tides of the alternative.
[00:21.360 --> 00:26.600]  Markets for Wednesday, the 5th of October, 2016, are currently trading with gold at $1,266.60
[00:26.600 --> 00:34.080]  an ounce, silver $17.72 an ounce, Texas crude $48.69 a barrel, and Bitcoin is currently
[00:34.080 --> 00:43.320]  sitting at about $613 U.S. currency.
[00:43.320 --> 00:48.360]  Today in history, the year 1947, the first televised White House presidential address
[00:48.360 --> 00:51.560]  is given by then U.S. President Harry S. Truman.
[00:51.560 --> 00:59.760]  Today in history, in recent news, the Paris Climate Agreement is set to take effect next
[00:59.760 --> 01:00.760]  month.
[01:00.760 --> 01:05.840]  Adopted by consensus on December 12, 2015, at the 21st Conference of the Parties of the
[01:05.840 --> 01:12.000]  UNFCCC, or United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in Paris, and open for signatures
[01:12.000 --> 01:17.480]  on the 22nd of April, 2016, Earth Day, and a ceremony in New York City, it is set to
[01:17.480 --> 01:19.080]  take effect on November 4.
[01:19.080 --> 01:23.000]  It is essentially a global agreement for the redirecting of the world economy away from
[01:23.000 --> 01:26.720]  fossil fuels towards more greenhouse-friendly forms of energy.
[01:26.720 --> 01:31.080]  President Obama, speaking from the Rose Garden, talking about the agreement, said that, quote,
[01:31.080 --> 01:35.760]  this gives us the best possible shot to save the one planet we've got, and that one of
[01:35.760 --> 01:39.880]  the reasons I took this office was to make America the leader in this mission.
[01:39.880 --> 01:44.400]  The agreement already has support from major greenhouse gas emitters like China, the United
[01:44.400 --> 01:49.600]  States and India, and in total 72 out of 195 countries have ratified the agreement, according
[01:49.600 --> 01:50.600]  to the UN.
[01:50.600 --> 01:54.580]  Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump opposes the agreement since it lacks the approval
[01:54.580 --> 02:04.280]  of the U.S. Congress, while Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton is a strong supporter.
[02:04.280 --> 02:08.160]  More than 50 correctional officers and inmates inside Maryland's largest state prison were
[02:08.160 --> 02:12.080]  charged by prosecutors Wednesday, today, with bribery and drug conspiracy.
[02:12.080 --> 02:16.080]  Prison guards are accused of smuggling cell phones, tobacco and drugs into the Eastern
[02:16.080 --> 02:20.920]  Shore facility in exchange for money and sex, according to indictments unsealed in a federal
[02:20.920 --> 02:21.920]  investigation.
[02:21.920 --> 02:25.840]  Apparently, prison guards were passing through security with undetected heroin, cocaine and
[02:25.840 --> 02:29.840]  pornographic videos, which were then handed off to inmates in exchange for hundreds of
[02:29.840 --> 02:30.840]  dollars.
[02:30.840 --> 02:34.480]  They were also being accused of warning inmates when prison officials were preparing to search
[02:34.480 --> 02:39.760]  cells and of using force and intimidation to silence inmates who were reporting the smuggling.
[02:39.760 --> 02:43.280]  According to court records, inmates were using the prison phones and their contraband cell
[02:43.280 --> 02:46.240]  phones to pay off correctional officers through PayPal.
[02:46.240 --> 02:51.120]  They were hustling $500 for each package on average and as much as $3,000 a week, according
[02:51.120 --> 02:52.120]  to investigators.
[02:52.120 --> 03:11.120]  This is Brooke Roadie with the Lowdown for October 5th, 2016.
[03:11.120 --> 03:26.520]  6 o'clock news, somebody's been shot, somebody's been abused, somebody blew up a building,
[03:26.520 --> 03:35.520]  somebody stole a car, somebody got away, somebody didn't get too far, yeah, they didn't get
[03:35.520 --> 03:36.520]  too far.
[03:36.520 --> 03:45.520]  Grandpappy told my pappy back in my day's side, a man had to answer for the weed that he
[03:45.520 --> 03:46.520]  dug.
[03:46.520 --> 03:51.520]  Take all the rope in Texas, find a tall old tree, round up all of them bad boys, hang
[03:51.520 --> 03:52.520]  them high on the street, for all the people to see.
[03:52.520 --> 04:03.520]  That justice is the one thing you should always find, you've got to settle up before
[04:03.520 --> 04:06.520]  you've got to draw a hard line.
[04:06.520 --> 04:15.520]  When the guns for settle, we'll sing a victory tune and we'll all meet back at the local
[04:15.520 --> 04:16.520]  zoo.
[04:16.520 --> 04:25.520]  We'll raise up our glasses against evil forces singing, let's get for my man, bear for my
[04:25.520 --> 04:26.520]  horses.
[04:26.520 --> 04:32.520]  Alright folks, good evening, this is the Monday Night Rule of Law Radio Show, it is October
[04:32.520 --> 04:35.520]  17th, 2016.
[04:35.520 --> 04:41.520]  Alright, I would like to apologize at the very beginning for the last two weeks of archives.
[04:41.520 --> 04:46.520]  I have not gone missing, I have not been in jail, I have not been kidnapped, I am not
[04:46.520 --> 04:51.520]  thinking of quitting, I have not run for public office and forgotten all about you or any
[04:51.520 --> 04:53.520]  of those sort of things.
[04:53.520 --> 04:59.520]  I have been eyebrow deep in this felony case and the research on this felony case and some
[04:59.520 --> 05:04.520]  of the constitutional arguments we're going to make in this felony case.
[05:04.520 --> 05:09.520]  Right now there are a couple of statutes that I would like to read to you under Chapter
[05:09.520 --> 05:11.520]  38 of the Texas Penal Code.
[05:11.520 --> 05:16.520]  Now Chapter 38 is all about obstructing governmental operation.
[05:16.520 --> 05:24.520]  Now if you want proof positive that your public servants now deem the delegated powers that
[05:24.520 --> 05:34.520]  we gave them to be superior to and enforceable above and beyond the rights of the people,
[05:34.520 --> 05:38.520]  these statutes are going to be proof positive of that to you.
[05:38.520 --> 05:42.520]  Now we're going to start with 3803.
[05:42.520 --> 05:47.520]  Now 3803 is resisting arrest, search or transportation.
[05:47.520 --> 05:52.520]  This is basically what it reads, it's got an A, B, C and D section, then they're all
[05:52.520 --> 05:53.520]  fairly short.
[05:53.520 --> 05:59.520]  A, a person commits an offense if he intentionally prevents or obstructs a person he knows is
[05:59.520 --> 06:05.520]  a peace officer or a person acting in a peace officer's presence and at his direction from
[06:05.520 --> 06:12.520]  affecting an arrest, search or transportation of the actor or another by using force against
[06:12.520 --> 06:14.520]  a peace officer or another.
[06:14.520 --> 06:24.520]  B, it is no defense to prosecution under this section that the arrest or search was unlawful.
[06:24.520 --> 06:33.520]  C, except as provided in subsection D, an offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor.
[06:33.520 --> 06:39.520]  Subsection D, an offense under this section is a felony of the third degree if the actor
[06:39.520 --> 06:43.520]  uses a deadly weapon to resist the arrest or search.
[06:43.520 --> 06:51.520]  Now folks, right there, we've got two serious considerations to make here.
[06:51.520 --> 06:58.520]  One, everything in this statute is a direct contradiction of United States Supreme Court
[06:58.520 --> 07:03.520]  case decisions on unlawful arrest and excessive use of force.
[07:03.520 --> 07:04.520]  Okay?
[07:04.520 --> 07:11.520]  Now the cases, the two primary cases that are used, one is John Badelk and I think the
[07:11.520 --> 07:18.520]  other is Pew or Plummer or something, but they're the two primary cases the Supreme
[07:18.520 --> 07:24.520]  Court has ruled upon in relation to a cop using excessive force to perfect an arrest
[07:24.520 --> 07:30.520]  that itself was unlawful and that you have the right to resist that use of force even
[07:30.520 --> 07:36.520]  to the point of killing the cop if his actions are unlawful.
[07:36.520 --> 07:42.520]  Now, right here, you have the state trying to create a law that nullifies that Supreme
[07:42.520 --> 07:44.520]  Court opinion.
[07:44.520 --> 07:48.520]  But wait, there's more.
[07:48.520 --> 07:52.520]  When you go down to 3804, you have evading arrest or detention.
[07:52.520 --> 07:57.520]  Subsection A, a person commits an offense if he intentionally flees from a person he
[07:57.520 --> 08:05.520]  knows is a peace officer or a federal special investigator attempting to lawfully to arrest
[08:05.520 --> 08:08.520]  or detain him.
[08:08.520 --> 08:14.520]  Subsection B, an offense under this section is a class aid misdemeanor except that the
[08:14.520 --> 08:20.520]  offense is one, a state jail felony if A, the actor has been previously convicted under
[08:20.520 --> 08:25.520]  this section or B, the actor uses a vehicle or watercraft while the actor is in flight
[08:25.520 --> 08:31.520]  and the actor has not been previously convicted under this section.
[08:31.520 --> 08:39.520]  Subsection B, a felony of the third degree if, to A, the actor uses a vehicle or watercraft
[08:39.520 --> 08:43.520]  while the actor is in flight and the actor has been previously convicted under this section
[08:43.520 --> 08:50.520]  or B, another suffers serious bodily injury as a direct result of an attempt by the officer
[08:50.520 --> 08:54.520]  or investigator from who the actor is fleeing to apprehend the actor while the actor is
[08:54.520 --> 09:00.520]  in flight or three, a felony of the second degree if another suffers death as a direct
[09:00.520 --> 09:05.520]  result of an attempt by an officer or investigator from whom the actor is fleeing to apprehend
[09:05.520 --> 09:07.520]  the actor while the actor is in flight.
[09:07.520 --> 09:13.520]  Now notice what two and three of this, or two, B, and three of this actually do.
[09:13.520 --> 09:20.520]  They try to make it where even if the officer or the other person doing the pursuing fails
[09:20.520 --> 09:26.520]  to exercise due care and kills someone while they're pursuing the person fleeing or the
[09:26.520 --> 09:31.520]  person fleeing kills someone, but let's deal with the first instance here before we get
[09:31.520 --> 09:37.520]  to that, then the crime is elevated, okay?
[09:37.520 --> 09:43.520]  So you can be held responsible for the fact that the officer was pursuing you even if
[09:43.520 --> 09:45.520]  the pursuit was illegal.
[09:45.520 --> 09:53.520]  You can be sent to jail if the officer harms or kills someone, even if his attempt and
[09:53.520 --> 09:57.520]  pursuit of you was illegal and unlawful.
[09:57.520 --> 10:02.520]  Now let's look at something else the legislature in Texas tends to do quite a bit, and that's
[10:02.520 --> 10:09.520]  muddy the waters with multiple revisions of the same statute because there's an amended
[10:09.520 --> 10:11.520]  section to this.
[10:11.520 --> 10:16.520]  Subsection B now reads this way in the amended section.
[10:16.520 --> 10:22.520]  An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor except that the offense is, one,
[10:22.520 --> 10:27.520]  a state jail felony if the actor has been previously convicted under this section, or,
[10:27.520 --> 10:35.520]  two, a felony of the third degree if the actor uses a vehicle while the actor is in flight,
[10:35.520 --> 10:41.520]  or, B, another suffers serious bodily injury as a direct result of an attempt by the officer
[10:41.520 --> 10:45.520]  from whom the actor is fleeing to apprehend the actor while the actor is in flight, or,
[10:45.520 --> 10:50.520]  C, the actor uses a tire deflation device against the officer while the actor is in
[10:50.520 --> 10:56.520]  flight, or, three, a felony of the second degree if, A, another suffers death as a direct
[10:56.520 --> 11:00.520]  result of an attempt by the officer from whom the actor is fleeing to apprehend the actor
[11:00.520 --> 11:05.520]  while the actor is in flight, or, B, another suffers serious bodily injury as a direct
[11:05.520 --> 11:09.520]  result of the actor's use of a tire deflation device while the actor is in flight.
[11:09.520 --> 11:14.520]  C, in this section, now this is the part that's interesting, one, vehicle has the meaning
[11:14.520 --> 11:21.520]  assigned by section 541.201 of the transportation code, all right?
[11:21.520 --> 11:28.520]  Now, subsection D, a person who is subject to prosecution under both this section and
[11:28.520 --> 11:33.520]  another law may be prosecuted under either or both this section and the other law.
[11:33.520 --> 11:40.520]  Now, we previously discussed this statute in conjunction with 545.421 of the transportation
[11:40.520 --> 11:46.520]  code where they are basically the same offense but with very different language and very
[11:46.520 --> 11:48.520]  different levels of punishment.
[11:48.520 --> 11:54.520]  But notice that they took the misdemeanors and converted them into felonies and then
[11:54.520 --> 12:02.520]  converted the felonies into much higher level felonies in this amended section in 2013.
[12:02.520 --> 12:11.520]  Now, we go a little further down and we're going to find, after 3003 and 3804, section
[12:11.520 --> 12:13.520]  38.08.
[12:13.520 --> 12:17.520]  Now listen really carefully, it's really short.
[12:17.520 --> 12:21.520]  Effects of unlawful custody.
[12:21.520 --> 12:30.520]  It is no defense to prosecution under section 3806 or 3807 that the custody was unlawful.
[12:30.520 --> 12:33.520]  Now, let's look at what 3806 and 3807 are.
[12:33.520 --> 12:40.520]  3806 is escape and 3807 is permitting or facilitating escape.
[12:40.520 --> 12:43.520]  Now, let's understand something here.
[12:43.520 --> 12:48.520]  Both the federal constitution and the state constitution have Bill of Rights provisions
[12:48.520 --> 12:58.520]  that says the people have the right to be free from unlawful or, well, unreasonable
[12:58.520 --> 13:01.520]  searches and seizures.
[13:01.520 --> 13:12.520]  Now, I ask you, in any grown, typically thinking individual, is an arrest that is itself
[13:12.520 --> 13:16.520]  unlawful and illegal reasonable?
[13:16.520 --> 13:19.520]  Now, we've had that discussion before too.
[13:19.520 --> 13:24.520]  The answer, of course, in any common sense fashion is absolutely not.
[13:24.520 --> 13:32.520]  It cannot be reasonable to seize someone and violate their rights unlawfully.
[13:32.520 --> 13:37.520]  I don't give a crap what kind of uniform you're wearing.
[13:37.520 --> 13:45.520]  But what the legislature has done here is create a set of statutes that require us to
[13:45.520 --> 13:55.520]  undergo our Fourth Amendment and Article 1 Section 9 provision under the Texas Constitution
[13:55.520 --> 14:03.520]  to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures.
[14:03.520 --> 14:11.520]  These statutes make it where we no longer have the right to resist or avoid unlawful actions
[14:11.520 --> 14:13.520]  by our public servants.
[14:13.520 --> 14:18.520]  Thus, in my opinion, and the argument I'm going to be making, is that these statutes
[14:18.520 --> 14:23.520]  on their face are a violation of the Bill of Rights.
[14:23.520 --> 14:30.520]  They are a violation of constitutionally decided court opinion at the Supreme Court level,
[14:30.520 --> 14:35.520]  at least as far as the use of force goes, because one thing the court has never addressed
[14:35.520 --> 14:41.520]  is whether or not the actual initial arrest itself provides you with the right to resist
[14:41.520 --> 14:46.520]  or to flee when that act is unlawful.
[14:46.520 --> 14:48.520]  They haven't addressed that directly.
[14:48.520 --> 14:53.520]  They've always addressed it as a use of force continuum issue.
[14:53.520 --> 14:57.520]  And that's not the only way it needs to be looked at.
[14:57.520 --> 15:04.520]  If we have the right to be free from these things, how can our public servants create
[15:04.520 --> 15:11.520]  a statute that authorizes them to violate the Bill of Rights by saying we have no right
[15:11.520 --> 15:20.520]  to not be prosecuted for doing the very thing we have a right to do?
[15:20.520 --> 15:24.520]  Yeah, you have the right to be free from that, but you have no right to resist us doing it
[15:24.520 --> 15:28.520]  to you anyway.
[15:28.520 --> 15:36.520]  Does that make any sense to anyone other than those in uniform and in the bureaucracies?
[15:36.520 --> 15:39.520]  Well, if you resist, you're going to get shot.
[15:39.520 --> 15:43.520]  Well, there's a good chance the cop could get shot, too, or any other individual that
[15:43.520 --> 15:49.520]  is performing an unlawful arrest.
[15:49.520 --> 15:53.520]  But you shake your finger at them, and they suddenly fear for their life.
[15:53.520 --> 15:59.520]  It can drop you like a bad habit.
[15:59.520 --> 16:06.520]  Something is seriously wrong with our ability in America to say no.
[16:06.520 --> 16:08.520]  And I'm wondering what that is.
[16:08.520 --> 16:17.520]  How did we get to this point where we are no longer in any way, shape, or form able
[16:17.520 --> 16:25.520]  to exercise our right to defend against unlawful actions against our person and our liberty
[16:25.520 --> 16:33.520]  even when the actor is acting under delegated authority?
[16:33.520 --> 16:39.520]  That's the part they always seem to forget, delegated authority.
[16:39.520 --> 16:48.520]  You cannot elevate a delegated power above the source of that power.
[16:48.520 --> 16:51.520]  All right, folks, we'll be right back after this break.
[16:51.520 --> 16:56.520]  Call in number 512-646-1984 if you want to get in line.
[16:56.520 --> 17:00.520]  We'll be right back.
[17:00.520 --> 17:06.520]  Through advances in technology, our lives have greatly improved, except in the area of nutrition.
[17:06.520 --> 17:11.520]  People feed their pets better than they feed themselves, and it's time we changed all that.
[17:11.520 --> 17:17.520]  Our primary defense against aging and disease in this toxic environment is good nutrition.
[17:17.520 --> 17:22.520]  In a world where natural foods have been irradiated, adulterated, and mutilated,
[17:22.520 --> 17:25.520]  young Jevity can provide the nutrients you need.
[17:25.520 --> 17:31.520]  Logos Radio Network gets many requests to endorse all sorts of products, most of which we reject.
[17:31.520 --> 17:39.520]  We have come to trust young Jevity so much, we became a marketing distributor along with Alex Jones, Ben Fuchs, and many others.
[17:39.520 --> 17:47.520]  When you order from LogosRadioNetwork.com, your health will improve as you help support quality radio.
[17:47.520 --> 17:51.520]  As you realize the benefits of young Jevity, you may want to join us.
[17:51.520 --> 17:58.520]  As a distributor, you can experience improved health, help your friends and family, and increase your income.
[17:58.520 --> 18:00.520]  Order now.
[18:00.520 --> 18:05.520]  Are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters, or even lawsuits?
[18:05.520 --> 18:09.520]  Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Mears Proven Method.
[18:09.520 --> 18:14.520]  Michael Mears has won six cases in federal court against debt collectors, and now you can win two.
[18:14.520 --> 18:20.520]  You'll get step-by-step instructions in plain English on how to win in court using federal civil rights statutes,
[18:20.520 --> 18:26.520]  what to do when contacted by phone, mail, or court summons, how to answer letters and phone calls,
[18:26.520 --> 18:33.520]  how to get debt collectors out of your credit report, how to turn the financial tables on them and make them pay you to go away.
[18:33.520 --> 18:38.520]  The Michael Mears Proven Method is the solution for how to stop debt collectors.
[18:38.520 --> 18:40.520]  Personal consultation is available as well.
[18:40.520 --> 18:49.520]  For more information, please visit RuleOfLawRadio.com and click on the blue Michael Mears banner, or email MichaelMears at yahoo.com.
[18:49.520 --> 19:00.520]  That's RuleOfLawRadio.com, or email M-I-C-H-A-E-L-M-I-R-R-A-S at yahoo.com to learn how to stop debt collectors now.
[19:00.520 --> 19:22.520]  You are listening to the Logos Radio Network, LogosRadioNetwork.com.
[19:22.520 --> 19:49.520]  All right, folks. We are back. This is Rule of Law Radio.
[19:49.520 --> 19:54.520]  The call-in number is 512-646-1984.
[19:54.520 --> 20:00.520]  Again, it is October 17, 2016. We are live tonight.
[20:00.520 --> 20:06.520]  You are not hearing a rerun, so don't not call in because you think you're not going to get in.
[20:06.520 --> 20:09.520]  All right. That being said, we have Sonny in Georgia.
[20:09.520 --> 20:12.520]  Sonny, what can we do for you?
[20:12.520 --> 20:16.520]  Good evening, Eddie. I've got a couple of questions for you.
[20:16.520 --> 20:17.520]  All right.
[20:17.520 --> 20:30.520]  I've got a few citations that I had a hearing on recently where the judge, in looking at my motions,
[20:30.520 --> 20:36.520]  which he just flat-out denied them all, but in looking at them, he said that the U.S. code I used
[20:36.520 --> 20:45.520]  and the United States Supreme Court cases did not apply to what we were dealing with.
[20:45.520 --> 20:49.520]  What United States code did you use?
[20:49.520 --> 20:53.520]  18 U.S.C. 31 with the definition of a motor vehicle.
[20:53.520 --> 21:00.520]  He is 100 percent correct. Why are you using that?
[21:00.520 --> 21:11.520]  Why in the world are you using the federal criminal statutes for a definition in a state statute?
[21:11.520 --> 21:18.520]  Well, I thought that the state, since they were taking federal funds...
[21:18.520 --> 21:25.520]  What does Title 18 have to do with federal funds?
[21:25.520 --> 21:31.520]  Title 18 is all federal criminal statute.
[21:31.520 --> 21:37.520]  What does it have to do with federal funds?
[21:37.520 --> 21:41.520]  Well, I just thought that once the state took federal funds, they're usually...
[21:41.520 --> 21:44.520]  No, no.
[21:44.520 --> 21:49.520]  I already know the answer to this question, but for the edification of others, I'm going to ask it anyway.
[21:49.520 --> 21:57.520]  Where the hell did you get that idea?
[21:57.520 --> 22:04.520]  The only time that the taking of federal funds matters in relation to federal law within the state
[22:04.520 --> 22:08.520]  is if those funds relate to a specific federal program
[22:08.520 --> 22:15.520]  where the state had to create a state-bound act to implement that federal program.
[22:15.520 --> 22:23.520]  Title 18, being a criminal statute, does not implement any programs.
[22:23.520 --> 22:32.520]  Therefore, has no relevancy whatsoever within a state statute that regulates any sort of activity
[22:32.520 --> 22:37.520]  unless it's a federally regulated activity.
[22:37.520 --> 22:41.520]  But then it would only apply in that federally regulated activity
[22:41.520 --> 22:49.520]  if it was a federal crime that was being committed in relation to that activity.
[22:49.520 --> 22:54.520]  Well, I just need to dig back through the Georgia Code until I can find it early enough.
[22:54.520 --> 22:58.520]  No, here's what you need to understand.
[22:58.520 --> 23:03.520]  It's not that there isn't a federal program that implemented all this within the states.
[23:03.520 --> 23:07.520]  There is. You just have to find the leak that proves it.
[23:07.520 --> 23:13.520]  It is Title 49, not Title 18.
[23:13.520 --> 23:14.520]  Okay?
[23:14.520 --> 23:15.520]  Okay.
[23:15.520 --> 23:21.520]  Title 49 is all about commercial transportation.
[23:21.520 --> 23:24.520]  Or not entirely, but a good part of it.
[23:24.520 --> 23:28.520]  Federal Motor Carrier Safety Act.
[23:28.520 --> 23:30.520]  Get that? Motor Carrier.
[23:30.520 --> 23:40.520]  The federal level of the act relating to motor carriers, i.e. interstate commerce.
[23:40.520 --> 23:42.520]  Okay?
[23:42.520 --> 23:43.520]  Okay.
[23:43.520 --> 23:49.520]  You have to find where the state statutes originally implemented Title 49
[23:49.520 --> 23:56.520]  as the basis for the state programs that you're arguing about if you're going to apply federal law.
[23:56.520 --> 24:08.520]  My question is, is why do you think you have to?
[24:08.520 --> 24:16.520]  Probably just because of all of the research and all of the different ideas.
[24:16.520 --> 24:20.520]  I guess from what I found, that just seemed like the right thing to do.
[24:20.520 --> 24:22.520]  Okay, wait a minute. Wait a minute.
[24:22.520 --> 24:24.520]  Now, you're talking about all of this research.
[24:24.520 --> 24:26.520]  There are tons of people that do all kinds of research.
[24:26.520 --> 24:28.520]  It doesn't make it right.
[24:28.520 --> 24:29.520]  Okay?
[24:29.520 --> 24:30.520]  That's true.
[24:30.520 --> 24:35.520]  The question here is, is in this research you're doing, could you logically,
[24:35.520 --> 24:42.520]  and in some sort of actual referential manner, without a whole bunch of theorizing,
[24:42.520 --> 24:49.520]  but doing no more than one level of factual inference from any given fact that you had in your possession,
[24:49.520 --> 24:53.520]  connect the dots between these pieces of information?
[24:53.520 --> 25:01.520]  Because if you couldn't, then it was incorrect to begin with.
[25:01.520 --> 25:05.520]  And if you couldn't because you didn't look, then it may be right,
[25:05.520 --> 25:14.520]  but you're never going to be able to prove it.
[25:14.520 --> 25:18.520]  The problem here is, is everyone keeps looking in the wrong damn place.
[25:18.520 --> 25:21.520]  They are looking for a silver bullet.
[25:21.520 --> 25:25.520]  There is not one.
[25:25.520 --> 25:28.520]  You cannot start at the top and work your way down.
[25:28.520 --> 25:32.520]  You have to start at the bottom and trace it backwards.
[25:32.520 --> 25:36.520]  It's kind of like trying to solve the JFK assassination.
[25:36.520 --> 25:39.520]  You have to figure out where he was and where he got hit
[25:39.520 --> 25:41.520]  and the angle of the bullets and everything else
[25:41.520 --> 25:44.520]  before you can figure out where they came from.
[25:44.520 --> 25:47.520]  They didn't start that analysis in the library window.
[25:47.520 --> 25:50.520]  They started it in the car.
[25:50.520 --> 25:53.520]  Right?
[25:53.520 --> 25:54.520]  Right.
[25:54.520 --> 25:55.520]  There you go.
[25:55.520 --> 25:57.520]  Get into the Georgia statutes.
[25:57.520 --> 25:59.520]  That's the Kennedy car.
[25:59.520 --> 26:05.520]  Now trace it back and maybe you'll find the origin of the bullet.
[26:05.520 --> 26:12.520]  Yeah, I did find that as far as their probable cause,
[26:12.520 --> 26:15.520]  which it was an unsecured load violation,
[26:15.520 --> 26:18.520]  by which he claimed that he pulled me over.
[26:18.520 --> 26:21.520]  And when I traced that back to its origins,
[26:21.520 --> 26:25.520]  it has to do with whether something actually falls off of a trailer
[26:25.520 --> 26:29.520]  and causes an accident, which nothing fell off my trailer
[26:29.520 --> 26:30.520]  and caused any accident.
[26:30.520 --> 26:33.520]  Okay, then all you had to do to beat the case at trial,
[26:33.520 --> 26:36.520]  whether they do the motion or not, is to get the cop to testify
[26:36.520 --> 26:39.520]  that the elements of the statute were never met.
[26:39.520 --> 26:43.520]  Officer, can you please describe the material that fell off the trailer?
[26:43.520 --> 26:47.520]  Officer, can you please describe the make and model of the vehicle
[26:47.520 --> 26:51.520]  the material caused to have an accident or struck?
[26:51.520 --> 26:53.520]  Can you identify the gender of the individual
[26:53.520 --> 27:00.520]  that the material that fell off the trailer impacted and injured in some way?
[27:00.520 --> 27:02.520]  Well, none of that happened.
[27:02.520 --> 27:04.520]  I ask for a directed verdict, Judge.
[27:04.520 --> 27:13.520]  The elements of the statute have not been met.
[27:13.520 --> 27:17.520]  If the statute says that one of the elements is that the load must fall off
[27:17.520 --> 27:21.520]  the transporting trailer and it didn't happen,
[27:21.520 --> 27:24.520]  they don't have that element to prove.
[27:24.520 --> 27:30.520]  And they have to prove it.
[27:30.520 --> 27:32.520]  Right?
[27:32.520 --> 27:33.520]  Yeah.
[27:33.520 --> 27:34.520]  Okay.
[27:34.520 --> 27:40.520]  So what's the question left that you've got to ask now?
[27:40.520 --> 27:45.520]  Well, it's slightly different.
[27:45.520 --> 27:50.520]  It's on recusing a judge as far as what happens to the case if...
[27:50.520 --> 27:56.520]  You don't ever recuse a judge because they get to rule on whether or not they're recused.
[27:56.520 --> 28:00.520]  You disqualify a judge.
[28:00.520 --> 28:02.520]  Okay.
[28:02.520 --> 28:10.520]  And as far as what happens to the case, they'll assign it to a visiting judge most likely.
[28:10.520 --> 28:12.520]  Does it start over?
[28:12.520 --> 28:13.520]  No.
[28:13.520 --> 28:17.520]  It'll pick up from wherever it left off unless the grounds for disqualification
[28:17.520 --> 28:24.520]  was of such a nature that you could demand that everything the prior judge did be vacated,
[28:24.520 --> 28:26.520]  and then they would have to start over.
[28:26.520 --> 28:31.520]  If he issued any orders, made any rulings, such as denying your motions,
[28:31.520 --> 28:45.520]  then if you get those orders vacated, then they have to start from those points again.
[28:45.520 --> 28:49.520]  I'm assuming I would need to file a motion to vacate his orders.
[28:49.520 --> 28:52.520]  You file it with the motion to disqualify.
[28:52.520 --> 28:54.520]  You don't have to file a separate one.
[28:54.520 --> 28:58.520]  When you can cite good legal grounds for disqualifying the judge
[28:58.520 --> 29:03.520]  and show that his actions began ab initio from the beginning,
[29:03.520 --> 29:13.520]  then you can also move as a secondary request to vacate any prior orders or directives
[29:13.520 --> 29:19.520]  or anything else this judge has made as well as demand his disqualification
[29:19.520 --> 29:23.520]  for judicial incompetence, bias, prejudice, violation of judicial canons,
[29:23.520 --> 29:29.520]  and being a general penis with ears.
[29:29.520 --> 29:34.520]  Can I go back and file that after the fact?
[29:34.520 --> 29:40.520]  You can disqualify a judge any time a judge needs disqualifying.
[29:40.520 --> 29:44.520]  The question is whether or not you would want to do it at a particular point.
[29:44.520 --> 29:45.520]  Can it be done?
[29:45.520 --> 29:46.520]  Absolutely.
[29:46.520 --> 29:48.520]  Should it always be done?
[29:48.520 --> 29:50.520]  Not necessarily.
[29:50.520 --> 29:51.520]  All right, hang on just a minute.
[29:51.520 --> 29:53.520]  We've got to take a break here.
[29:53.520 --> 29:55.520]  All right, folks, this is Rule of Law Radio.
[29:55.520 --> 29:58.520]  The call-in number is 512-646-1984.
[29:58.520 --> 30:01.520]  We'll be right back.
[30:01.520 --> 30:05.520]  I'm not a mind reader, but there's a good chance I can guess your password.
[30:05.520 --> 30:08.520]  Most people choose passwords from a limited repertoire,
[30:08.520 --> 30:10.520]  so hacking in is a piece of cake.
[30:10.520 --> 30:38.520]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, and I'll be right back with the solution.
[30:40.520 --> 30:43.520]  Let's start over with Startpage.
[30:43.520 --> 30:46.520]  It's hard to remember a complicated password,
[30:46.520 --> 30:48.520]  but that's no excuse for a pathetic one.
[30:48.520 --> 30:51.520]  Recent security breaches have exposed millions of passwords,
[30:51.520 --> 30:53.520]  so we know what people are choosing.
[30:53.520 --> 30:59.520]  The most common password is 123456, followed by 12345.
[30:59.520 --> 31:01.520]  I love you is also in the top 10.
[31:01.520 --> 31:04.520]  If your password is too easy, beef it up.
[31:04.520 --> 31:08.520]  It takes just a few seconds to guess a password with seven lowercase letters,
[31:08.520 --> 31:11.520]  but add capital letters and numbers, and things get much harder.
[31:11.520 --> 31:14.520]  Add some other character, like a dollar sign,
[31:14.520 --> 31:16.520]  and increase the length to 10 characters,
[31:16.520 --> 31:19.520]  and suddenly cracking your password is virtually impossible,
[31:19.520 --> 31:21.520]  and that's good security.
[31:21.520 --> 31:23.520]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht.
[31:23.520 --> 31:30.520]  More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[31:30.520 --> 31:31.520]  What are you thinking?
[31:31.520 --> 31:34.520]  Micro plant powder with iodine and probiotics
[31:34.520 --> 31:38.520]  for a total body detox for around $10 a month.
[31:38.520 --> 31:41.520]  mqsa.org has 12 formulations of micro plant powder
[31:41.520 --> 31:45.520]  for absorbing and removing toxins from your kidney, liver, blood, lungs,
[31:45.520 --> 31:48.520]  stomach, and colon, and feel better than ever.
[31:48.520 --> 31:52.520]  It alkalizes, oxygenates, kills parasites, does the job of 10 products,
[31:52.520 --> 31:54.520]  that saves you space, time, and money.
[31:54.520 --> 32:01.520]  Call 888-910-4367 only at mqsa.org.
[32:01.520 --> 32:05.520]  Rule of Law Radio is proud to offer the rule of law traffic seminar.
[32:05.520 --> 32:07.520]  In today's America, we live in an us-against-them society,
[32:07.520 --> 32:09.520]  and if we, the people, are ever going to have a free society,
[32:09.520 --> 32:12.520]  then we're going to have to stand and defend our own rights.
[32:12.520 --> 32:15.520]  Among those rights are the right to travel freely from place to place,
[32:15.520 --> 32:17.520]  the right to act in our own private capacity,
[32:17.520 --> 32:19.520]  and most importantly, the right to due process of law.
[32:19.520 --> 32:22.520]  Traffic courts afford us the least expensive opportunity
[32:22.520 --> 32:25.520]  to learn how to enforce and preserve our rights through due process.
[32:25.520 --> 32:28.520]  Former Sheriff's Deputy Eddie Craig, in conjunction with Rule of Law Radio,
[32:28.520 --> 32:31.520]  has put together the most comprehensive teaching tool available
[32:31.520 --> 32:33.520]  that will help you understand what due process is
[32:33.520 --> 32:35.520]  and how to hold courts to the rule of law.
[32:35.520 --> 32:37.520]  You can get your own copy of this invaluable material
[32:37.520 --> 32:40.520]  by going to ruleoflawradio.com and ordering your copy today.
[32:40.520 --> 32:42.520]  By ordering now, you'll receive a copy of Eddie's book,
[32:42.520 --> 32:45.520]  The Texas Transportation Code, The Law Versus the Lie,
[32:45.520 --> 32:47.520]  video and audio of the original 2009 seminar,
[32:47.520 --> 32:50.520]  hundreds of research documents, and other useful resource material.
[32:50.520 --> 32:54.520]  Learn how to fight for your rights with the help of this material from ruleoflawradio.com.
[32:54.520 --> 32:59.520]  Order your copy today, and together we can have the free society we all want and deserve.
[32:59.520 --> 33:11.520]  Live, free speech radio, logosradionetwork.com.
[33:11.520 --> 33:25.520]  Yeah, I got a warrant, and I'm going to solve them, to the health government then, I'll secure them.
[33:25.520 --> 33:29.520]  Okay.
[33:29.520 --> 33:32.520]  All set.
[33:32.520 --> 33:42.520]  All right, folks, we are back.
[33:42.520 --> 33:49.520]  This is Rule of Law Radio, calling number 512-646-1984.
[33:49.520 --> 33:52.520]  All right, we're talking to Sonny in Georgia still.
[33:52.520 --> 33:55.520]  All right, Sonny, what else we got?
[33:55.520 --> 34:02.520]  On Friday, this past Friday, I filed a judicial conduct complaint against the judge,
[34:02.520 --> 34:06.520]  and put in the petition to disqualify him.
[34:06.520 --> 34:12.520]  But I did not ask to have his ruling vacated.
[34:12.520 --> 34:15.520]  File an amended.
[34:15.520 --> 34:16.520]  File an amendment.
[34:16.520 --> 34:19.520]  Yeah, either file an amended motion to disqualify,
[34:19.520 --> 34:27.520]  or file a separate motion to do what you didn't ask for.
[34:27.520 --> 34:30.520]  They don't have to be together, but you could have done them together.
[34:30.520 --> 34:37.520]  It would have been much easier to do if you'd have done them together.
[34:37.520 --> 34:41.520]  If he recused himself, does he vacate his judgment as well?
[34:41.520 --> 34:42.520]  No.
[34:42.520 --> 34:45.520]  I mean, okay, the other judge would do that?
[34:45.520 --> 34:49.520]  And you would still have to move to vacate his prior rulings.
[34:49.520 --> 34:54.520]  Okay.
[34:54.520 --> 34:55.520]  All right.
[34:55.520 --> 34:56.520]  All right.
[34:56.520 --> 34:57.520]  Well, very good.
[34:57.520 --> 34:58.520]  Thank you, Eddie.
[34:58.520 --> 34:59.520]  You're welcome.
[34:59.520 --> 35:00.520]  Have a good night.
[35:00.520 --> 35:03.520]  All right, now we're going to Richard in Florida.
[35:03.520 --> 35:06.520]  Richard, what can we do for you?
[35:06.520 --> 35:07.520]  Hey, Eddie.
[35:07.520 --> 35:08.520]  Good evening.
[35:08.520 --> 35:09.520]  Good evening.
[35:09.520 --> 35:11.520]  That thing is a noise.
[35:11.520 --> 35:15.520]  Well, so far, so grand.
[35:15.520 --> 35:16.520]  We'll see before the end of the night, though.
[35:16.520 --> 35:17.520]  Yeah, I know.
[35:17.520 --> 35:20.520]  Hey, listen, I have a couple of issues here.
[35:20.520 --> 35:21.520]  Okay.
[35:21.520 --> 35:25.520]  What's her name, and is she cute?
[35:25.520 --> 35:26.520]  It's the court system.
[35:26.520 --> 35:28.520]  Ah, well, then she ain't cute.
[35:28.520 --> 35:31.520]  She's fugly.
[35:31.520 --> 35:38.520]  Well, listen, I had this last case I'm trying to get this with this red light camera.
[35:38.520 --> 35:44.520]  I mentioned this will be my, I guess, third attempt to go to the court.
[35:44.520 --> 35:56.520]  The first time they did set me up with an officer of the court, which I understand they shouldn't do that, which as far as I understand that, that's the administrative hearing.
[35:56.520 --> 35:57.520]  Absolutely.
[35:57.520 --> 35:58.520]  Okay.
[35:58.520 --> 36:05.520]  So have you read the red light camera statute in Florida?
[36:05.520 --> 36:13.520]  You do know that there's a Florida Supreme Court case that said they can't collect on those red light camera tickets.
[36:13.520 --> 36:14.520]  They're on hold.
[36:14.520 --> 36:15.520]  I know.
[36:15.520 --> 36:18.520]  And I submitted that in my motion.
[36:18.520 --> 36:21.520]  But this is after, okay, let me just tell you what happened.
[36:21.520 --> 36:23.520]  I went to the court.
[36:23.520 --> 36:25.520]  They had this officer here.
[36:25.520 --> 36:35.520]  I just wanted to hear what they had to say, and I told him that I object to his ruling and I want trial by jury.
[36:35.520 --> 36:38.520]  He told me that I'm not allowed to have that.
[36:38.520 --> 36:46.520]  And what I quoted to him was the seventh amendment, which gave me the right to have that.
[36:46.520 --> 36:51.520]  They said there are any controversy over $20 preserved the right for me to have trial by jury.
[36:51.520 --> 36:58.520]  He's telling me the law don't say that, and I'm looking at him crazy like, okay, listen, it does say that.
[36:58.520 --> 36:59.520]  Okay, wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute.
[36:59.520 --> 37:00.520]  I want that.
[37:00.520 --> 37:01.520]  Richard, wait a minute.
[37:01.520 --> 37:03.520]  I got to ask you a question.
[37:03.520 --> 37:04.520]  Sure.
[37:04.520 --> 37:08.520]  Why would you set your foot in that bear trap?
[37:08.520 --> 37:16.520]  The moment you go into a meeting with one of these administrative morons, okay, you put your foot in the trap.
[37:16.520 --> 37:19.520]  Why would you do that?
[37:19.520 --> 37:29.520]  Didn't you see that Florida state rep who made the video for you guys that showed you exactly how to handle a red light camera ticket?
[37:29.520 --> 37:33.520]  You take it out in the front yard and set fire to it.
[37:33.520 --> 37:34.520]  Yeah, I didn't see the video.
[37:34.520 --> 37:46.520]  Because there is no authority in Florida law or any other state law that I can find so far that authorizes them to punish you in any way for not paying that damn ticket.
[37:46.520 --> 37:47.520]  Why?
[37:47.520 --> 37:53.520]  Because it is an absolutely unconstitutional bill of pains and penalties.
[37:53.520 --> 38:02.520]  You don't need their opinion on that, especially when they're not qualified to give you an opinion, which that cop most certainly is not.
[38:02.520 --> 38:14.520]  But the moment you go in there and agree to have that meeting, you're basically saying, well, I'm here to really see whether or not this applies to me and what you intend to do to me if it does.
[38:14.520 --> 38:16.520]  Okay.
[38:16.520 --> 38:19.520]  Don't do that.
[38:19.520 --> 38:35.520]  All right, so moreover, I told him I'm not going to pay and he told me to go to some room to pay and I told them I want to see the clerk of court to file for some type of appeal to redo this thing.
[38:35.520 --> 38:43.520]  So I entered my motion and I attached that case law stating that it's unconstitutional.
[38:43.520 --> 38:52.520]  And what they did is reschedule another one with another officer when I did clearly ask trial by jury.
[38:52.520 --> 39:03.520]  So, of course, you know, recently last week they had this hurricane come through my case or my next meeting was that Friday, it came Thursday night.
[39:03.520 --> 39:05.520]  So the court was closed.
[39:05.520 --> 39:06.520]  Okay.
[39:06.520 --> 39:08.520]  So I went.
[39:08.520 --> 39:15.520]  Let me let me stop you right there because we're wasting a lot of time on something I need to be wasting on and let me explain to you why that is for everybody's benefit.
[39:15.520 --> 39:16.520]  Okay.
[39:16.520 --> 39:17.520]  All right.
[39:17.520 --> 39:33.520]  First off, if they're telling you that the activity they're engaging in violates both Supreme Court case law for the state or the federal Supreme Court or a higher authority federal court over the subject matter that they're engaged in at the moment.
[39:33.520 --> 39:35.520]  Why are you arguing with them?
[39:35.520 --> 39:41.520]  They have no authority to do anything to you, period.
[39:41.520 --> 39:57.520]  If they do anything to you, you have all the ammunition you need to sue the crap out of everybody because no one can have immunity for acting illegally when you gave them the evidence that showed they couldn't do what they're doing.
[39:57.520 --> 40:12.520]  The other part of this is that when they are doing something that absolutely violates a constitutional protection, that is a dead set giveaway that whatever they're doing has nothing to do with you.
[40:12.520 --> 40:13.520]  Got it.
[40:13.520 --> 40:15.520]  So just wait to see if they do something.
[40:15.520 --> 40:17.520]  Don't even stress your answer.
[40:17.520 --> 40:27.520]  Well, the thing is there's nothing that they can do. The law gives them no authority to go beyond your voluntary paying the bill.
[40:27.520 --> 40:29.520]  You have to consent to pay it.
[40:29.520 --> 40:39.520]  You have to whip out the money and say here, they have no authority under the state statute to take it or to punish you for not giving it to them.
[40:39.520 --> 40:50.520]  Got it. Because I went back to the court to talk about that retrial that I missed that day and the lady telling me, oh, well, they give you to the 19th pay.
[40:50.520 --> 40:52.520]  I said, I'm not paying that.
[40:52.520 --> 40:53.520]  And I told her that.
[40:53.520 --> 40:56.520]  And I said, okay, deal with this motion.
[40:56.520 --> 41:00.520]  Okay, I'm going to say this for the benefit of everybody in Florida.
[41:00.520 --> 41:02.520]  Get a copy of this case.
[41:02.520 --> 41:05.520]  What's the case reference on there, Richard?
[41:05.520 --> 41:07.520]  The case reference?
[41:07.520 --> 41:12.520]  Now, what is the case that made it unconstitutional for these in Florida?
[41:12.520 --> 41:16.520]  Let me pull it up. I got it on my computer. I need it on my copy.
[41:16.520 --> 41:23.520]  I have it saved here.
[41:23.520 --> 41:32.520]  The judge in that case specifically forbids any state municipality or anybody else from collecting on these tickets.
[41:32.520 --> 41:45.520]  He forbade them to do it. He issued an order to that effect.
[41:45.520 --> 41:56.520]  But anyway, while we're waiting on the case law, once he gives you the case site, if you have one of these tickets, make a copy of the ticket.
[41:56.520 --> 42:02.520]  Make a copy of the case. Put a copy of the case on the ticket.
[42:02.520 --> 42:07.520]  Write F-U in no uncertain terms on the front of the ticket.
[42:07.520 --> 42:09.520]  Fold it up.
[42:09.520 --> 42:18.520]  Put it into an envelope with a stamp and preferably a return receipt card so you can prove that they got it.
[42:18.520 --> 42:27.520]  And send it to whatever moron in whatever police department they're telling you to set up a meeting with.
[42:27.520 --> 42:39.520]  And right after the F-U part put in, any further action by you will result in a lawsuit against you personally for any and all damages incurred.
[42:39.520 --> 42:45.520]  Now you've provided them with proper notice. They're going to get sued if they proceed.
[42:45.520 --> 42:54.520]  They will have no legal coverage for anything they do after that fact.
[42:54.520 --> 43:06.520]  You take them into federal court for a rights violation, there is no way in hell they will win that case.
[43:06.520 --> 43:10.520]  All right. That's really all it takes. So Richard, did you get the case?
[43:10.520 --> 43:16.520]  I found the one for Hollywood, but I'm looking for the one for Miami and that's the one I gave them.
[43:16.520 --> 43:19.520]  That's the one you prefer me to give out.
[43:19.520 --> 43:23.520]  Absolutely, because that's the one that's applicable in Florida for sure.
[43:23.520 --> 43:27.520]  Yeah, well the one in Hollywood, Florida, is still Florida, but I sent the one.
[43:27.520 --> 43:30.520]  Yeah, but which level court?
[43:30.520 --> 43:33.520]  I found it. It is Fairlight County.
[43:33.520 --> 43:37.520]  Okay, well hang on just a second. I've got a break and you can give it out after we get back, okay?
[43:37.520 --> 43:43.520]  All right, folks, y'all hang on. We'll get the case side on the other side and then I'll continue on with our callers.
[43:43.520 --> 43:48.520]  All right, this is Rule of Law Radio, the Monday night show. We are live with your host, Eddie Craig.
[43:48.520 --> 44:00.520]  Y'all hang in there and the call-in number is 512-646-1984. We will be right back.
[44:00.520 --> 44:03.520]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[44:03.520 --> 44:07.520]  Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary, the affordable,
[44:07.520 --> 44:14.520]  easy-to-understand, 4-CD course that will show you how in 24 hours, step-by-step.
[44:14.520 --> 44:18.520]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing.
[44:18.520 --> 44:22.520]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[44:22.520 --> 44:27.520]  Thousands have won with our step-by-step course and now you can too.
[44:27.520 --> 44:33.520]  Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case-winning experience.
[44:33.520 --> 44:38.520]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand
[44:38.520 --> 44:42.520]  about the principles and practices that control our American courts.
[44:42.520 --> 44:48.520]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases,
[44:48.520 --> 45:03.520]  pro se tactics, and much more. Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner or call toll-free 866-LAW-EZ.
[45:03.520 --> 45:08.520]  Hello, my name is Stuart Smith from naturespureorganics.com and I would like to invite you
[45:08.520 --> 45:13.520]  to come by our store at 1904 Guadalupe Street, Suite D here in Austin, Texas,
[45:13.520 --> 45:19.520]  to learn Brave New Books and Chase Bank, to see all our fantastic health and wellness products with your very own eyes.
[45:19.520 --> 45:23.520]  Have a look at our Miracle Healing Clay that started our adventure in alternative medicine.
[45:23.520 --> 45:27.520]  Take a peek at some of our other wonderful products including our Auschelian E-Me oil,
[45:27.520 --> 45:31.520]  lotion candles, olive oil, soaps, and colloidal silver and gold.
[45:31.520 --> 45:44.520]  Call 512-264-4043 or find us online at naturespureorganics.com. That's 512-264-4043, naturespureorganics.com.
[45:44.520 --> 46:02.520]  And you can like us on Facebook for information on events and our products, naturespureorganics.com.
[46:14.520 --> 46:33.520]  All right, folks, we are back. This is Rule of Law Radio.
[46:33.520 --> 46:42.520]  All right, the Hollywood case, City of Hollywood, Florida, that would be the District Court of Appeal of the State of Florida Fourth District.
[46:42.520 --> 46:46.520]  And it is City of Hollywood versus Eric Arum.
[46:46.520 --> 46:47.520]  That's right.
[46:47.520 --> 46:48.520]  Okay.
[46:48.520 --> 46:49.520]  That's correct.
[46:49.520 --> 46:50.520]  And so.
[46:50.520 --> 46:51.520]  What's the one for Miami?
[46:51.520 --> 46:52.520]  Yeah, what's the other one?
[46:52.520 --> 46:57.520]  Miami. The one for Miami is State of Florida.
[46:57.520 --> 47:04.520]  It's a just Steven Leiferman plaintiff versus Louis Torres.
[47:04.520 --> 47:07.520]  That's T-O-R-R-E-S.
[47:07.520 --> 47:15.520]  J-I-M-E-N-E-S.
[47:15.520 --> 47:17.520]  Okay, that's his name.
[47:17.520 --> 47:19.520]  That's the Miami one.
[47:19.520 --> 47:23.520]  And they said that's the red light camera is unconstitutional in that one.
[47:23.520 --> 47:24.520]  Okay.
[47:24.520 --> 47:25.520]  And that's the one I.
[47:25.520 --> 47:27.520]  What is the court?
[47:27.520 --> 47:35.520]  Oh, the court, Lord.
[47:35.520 --> 47:37.520]  District Court of Appeal.
[47:37.520 --> 47:38.520]  That's what it says.
[47:38.520 --> 47:39.520]  Which district?
[47:39.520 --> 47:40.520]  Which district?
[47:40.520 --> 47:41.520]  Third.
[47:41.520 --> 47:45.520]  Okay, so you've got one from the third and one from the fourth.
[47:45.520 --> 47:47.520]  Now, here's the thing.
[47:47.520 --> 47:48.520]  Okay?
[47:48.520 --> 47:53.520]  Neither of these cases that I can see raises the issue of a bill of pains and penalties.
[47:53.520 --> 47:55.520]  Neither of them.
[47:55.520 --> 48:10.520]  They go strictly to the question of whether or not the city can delegate certain powers to the third party contracted entity to do what their officers have to be authorized to do by law.
[48:10.520 --> 48:17.520]  That is not a question of constitutionality per se right there other than the delegation of powers.
[48:17.520 --> 48:26.520]  But no one is raising the issue of these things being completely unconstitutional bills of pains and penalties.
[48:26.520 --> 48:28.520]  No attorney's doing that.
[48:28.520 --> 48:30.520]  Why?
[48:30.520 --> 48:35.520]  Because the attorney can't get paid if they get the whole law thrown out.
[48:35.520 --> 48:41.520]  They have to do this on a case-by-case basis so they can keep the money rolling in.
[48:41.520 --> 48:42.520]  That's why.
[48:42.520 --> 48:44.520]  Do you understand the logic here?
[48:44.520 --> 48:53.520]  Let's argue the statutory meaning and application and all that because if we get rid of the entire law, our money strain stops.
[48:53.520 --> 48:58.520]  So just do it on a case-by-case basis instead of wiping it all out at once.
[48:58.520 --> 49:01.520]  That's exactly how this is set up to work.
[49:01.520 --> 49:08.520]  Remember, like mosquitoes, attorneys only survive on the blood of others.
[49:08.520 --> 49:13.520]  And in this case, your blood is your money.
[49:13.520 --> 49:20.520]  That's exactly why these cases, in my opinion, can't prove it, but I can darn sure make a good argument for it,
[49:20.520 --> 49:32.520]  is because having the law voided in its entirety as an unconstitutional bill of pains and penalties within the gravy train.
[49:32.520 --> 49:36.520]  So I have a question now, now that you say all that.
[49:36.520 --> 49:43.520]  So I did attach that to my case.
[49:43.520 --> 49:47.520]  Well, see, the thing is, is you have already been harmed.
[49:47.520 --> 49:51.520]  By getting that notice, you've already been harmed.
[49:51.520 --> 49:52.520]  Okay?
[49:52.520 --> 50:01.520]  What you can do right now, you need to go find the original case that goes to this opinion and read the pleading on it.
[50:01.520 --> 50:04.520]  But now this is an appeal of a criminal case.
[50:04.520 --> 50:12.520]  Take the information from that and turn it into a civil lawsuit against this officer, his police department,
[50:12.520 --> 50:23.520]  his municipality, and whatever administrative moron in black dress they've got up there aiding and abetting this crap at the municipal level.
[50:23.520 --> 50:25.520]  And sue them all.
[50:25.520 --> 50:28.520]  Okay.
[50:28.520 --> 50:30.520]  Okay, another thing is I'm going to definitely do that.
[50:30.520 --> 50:37.520]  And you can raise the issue yourself directly as to whether or not it becomes an unconstitutional bill of pains and penalties
[50:37.520 --> 50:43.520]  under this entirely administrative process with no judicial review.
[50:43.520 --> 50:44.520]  Correct.
[50:44.520 --> 50:49.520]  So will I be suing them individually or as the court?
[50:49.520 --> 50:54.520]  Well, you're going to sue the individuals individually, but you're also going to sue their employing agency,
[50:54.520 --> 50:58.520]  in this case the city of and the police department of.
[50:58.520 --> 51:03.520]  So you're going to sue them in both their private and their official capacity.
[51:03.520 --> 51:08.520]  Well, the police department had nothing to do with it, right?
[51:08.520 --> 51:09.520]  The what didn't?
[51:09.520 --> 51:10.520]  The camera ticket.
[51:10.520 --> 51:11.520]  Who didn't?
[51:11.520 --> 51:13.520]  The police department.
[51:13.520 --> 51:14.520]  Really?
[51:14.520 --> 51:17.520]  Didn't you just say that you had to go see an officer?
[51:17.520 --> 51:20.520]  The officer, they call them officer of the court.
[51:20.520 --> 51:22.520]  Yeah, but do you know whether...
[51:22.520 --> 51:23.520]  Okay.
[51:23.520 --> 51:24.520]  All right.
[51:24.520 --> 51:25.520]  Well, let me put it this way.
[51:25.520 --> 51:30.520]  Here in Texas, the officer is actually an officer within that municipality's police department.
[51:30.520 --> 51:34.520]  That's who does your administrative determination of guilt.
[51:34.520 --> 51:38.520]  So be very clear about what they mean by officer.
[51:38.520 --> 51:44.520]  If no police entity, but see the thing is you still have the police department according to the cases right here.
[51:44.520 --> 51:51.520]  The police department is the one that is still taking these citations from the red light camera company.
[51:51.520 --> 51:57.520]  Knowing full well they're illegal under current ruling.
[51:57.520 --> 52:05.520]  Had the police department said do not accept rather than accept according to the way this case from city of Hollywood reads,
[52:05.520 --> 52:08.520]  would you be having to go through all this crap?
[52:08.520 --> 52:09.520]  No.
[52:09.520 --> 52:10.520]  Fine.
[52:10.520 --> 52:17.520]  Then find which officer in that police department is the one that did the review and said accept this citation.
[52:17.520 --> 52:21.520]  And now you've got your scapegoat for the department.
[52:21.520 --> 52:25.520]  Got it.
[52:25.520 --> 52:27.520]  Will do.
[52:27.520 --> 52:28.520]  Okay.
[52:28.520 --> 52:31.520]  I guess that's it for my questions because that's the only thing I had to deal with.
[52:31.520 --> 52:32.520]  All right, man.
[52:32.520 --> 52:33.520]  Good luck.
[52:33.520 --> 52:36.520]  Kick butt, take days, send the donation when you win.
[52:36.520 --> 52:37.520]  Oh, will do.
[52:37.520 --> 52:39.520]  Right now anyway.
[52:39.520 --> 52:40.520]  All right, man.
[52:40.520 --> 52:41.520]  Good luck.
[52:41.520 --> 52:42.520]  Bye-bye.
[52:42.520 --> 52:43.520]  Bye.
[52:43.520 --> 52:44.520]  All right.
[52:44.520 --> 52:46.520]  Now we're going to go to Adam in Texas.
[52:46.520 --> 52:48.520]  Adam, what can we do for you?
[52:48.520 --> 52:49.520]  Good evening, Eddie.
[52:49.520 --> 52:50.520]  How you doing?
[52:50.520 --> 52:52.520]  Doing all right so far.
[52:52.520 --> 52:53.520]  Great.
[52:53.520 --> 52:54.520]  Hey, man.
[52:54.520 --> 52:55.520]  I just got a few questions.
[52:55.520 --> 52:58.520]  I guess the first one would be about trial de novo.
[52:58.520 --> 52:59.520]  Okay.
[52:59.520 --> 53:01.520]  When do I invoke it?
[53:01.520 --> 53:03.520]  Do I want to invoke it?
[53:03.520 --> 53:06.520]  And exactly how does that play out?
[53:06.520 --> 53:15.520]  Trial de novo is when you get an appeal from a trial in a court of no record, whether it be a municipal or justice court.
[53:15.520 --> 53:19.520]  And that means after the full trial with the jury and it's done.
[53:19.520 --> 53:20.520]  Correct.
[53:20.520 --> 53:21.520]  And the judge.
[53:21.520 --> 53:22.520]  Correct.
[53:22.520 --> 53:25.520]  It's your appeal from a court of no record.
[53:25.520 --> 53:35.520]  It's basically a mulligan, a do-over, except this time it's supposed to be in a court of record at the county level.
[53:35.520 --> 53:39.520]  Can I go for a trial de novo before?
[53:39.520 --> 53:47.520]  Sure, but the problem is to do that you have to plead guilty in the first one, which nullifies your right to the appeal for the de novo.
[53:47.520 --> 53:53.520]  The way they've written the statutes, you cannot win this case if you ever plead guilty.
[53:53.520 --> 54:06.520]  Even on a trial de novo, if you follow the rules of procedure the way they're written, your original plea of guilty nullified any opportunity for an appeal.
[54:06.520 --> 54:12.520]  How the hell do you get an appeal from a conviction that you agreed to?
[54:12.520 --> 54:14.520]  Gotcha.
[54:14.520 --> 54:20.520]  Yet that's exactly how they set the statute up in Texas.
[54:20.520 --> 54:22.520]  It's all about that plea.
[54:22.520 --> 54:36.520]  Well, before we get to that, so far I've refused the first judge of original, quote-unquote, jurisdiction, blah, blah, blah, first justice of the peace.
[54:36.520 --> 54:39.520]  He recused himself within 24 hours.
[54:39.520 --> 54:45.520]  Now he's trying to kick me over to the other justice of the peace of the first precinct.
[54:45.520 --> 54:47.520]  I've already found that...
[54:47.520 --> 54:53.520]  I mean, he's trying to move you to a different precinct or he's trying to bring that judge to his precinct?
[54:53.520 --> 54:54.520]  I'm not sure.
[54:54.520 --> 54:56.520]  He didn't specify.
[54:56.520 --> 55:11.520]  But what I've read in the Texas Government Code, he said he had the right to do it under 27.054A, which is just talking about they're allowed to exchange each other for up to five days, blah, blah, blah.
[55:11.520 --> 55:27.520]  But if you go a little further down, in the case of a recusal or disqualification, in the case of a recusal, the county judge has to appoint another justice of the peace.
[55:27.520 --> 55:28.520]  That's correct.
[55:28.520 --> 55:30.520]  They don't get to choose their replacement.
[55:30.520 --> 55:33.520]  They don't get to choose their replacement.
[55:33.520 --> 55:48.520]  I'm not sure if he chose it because in the letter, and that's what happened, Eddie, is once I started fighting, their letters and summons started getting much, much more polite and, you know, non-aggressive.
[55:48.520 --> 55:49.520]  Funny.
[55:49.520 --> 56:05.520]  Anyway, so I guess my first question is, all he said was his court granted my motion for recusal and he's requesting that it be moved to the other justice of the peace.
[56:05.520 --> 56:08.520]  Well, he has to request it of the county court.
[56:08.520 --> 56:12.520]  He can't just request it of the other JP.
[56:12.520 --> 56:19.520]  That's what I was confused on in my waiting now from a letter from the county judge, you know, doing his duty.
[56:19.520 --> 56:22.520]  Well, what you need to do first off is look at the court record.
[56:22.520 --> 56:33.520]  The court record in the JP court where you recuse the judge should reflect the order that that judge sent the request to the county court to get a reassignment to a different judge.
[56:33.520 --> 56:34.520]  Okay.
[56:34.520 --> 56:35.520]  So check the record.
[56:35.520 --> 56:36.520]  Correct.
[56:36.520 --> 56:37.520]  You always check the record.
[56:37.520 --> 56:47.520]  Anything a judge does in relation to an adjudicatory case and file, they have to put into that file.
[56:47.520 --> 56:49.520]  Yeah.
[56:49.520 --> 56:50.520]  Yeah, he might have slipped up.
[56:50.520 --> 56:56.520]  Yeah, I was hoping he'd slip up on his 62-hour timeframe of making the decision, but he didn't need to.
[56:56.520 --> 56:58.520]  It was in 24 or something, but I don't know.
[56:58.520 --> 57:00.520]  Maybe there's another slip up.
[57:00.520 --> 57:02.520]  Well, here's the thing.
[57:02.520 --> 57:12.520]  When you do a motion to recuse rather than a motion to disqualify, you take the head administrative judge out of the picture.
[57:12.520 --> 57:14.520]  Don't do that.
[57:14.520 --> 57:27.520]  Disqualify these buttholes when they won't do what the law requires, because if they get disqualified by that administrative judge, that goes on their record as a disqualification,
[57:27.520 --> 57:32.520]  especially if you file a judicial conduct complaint in conjunction with it.
[57:32.520 --> 57:34.520]  Yes, that was done.
[57:34.520 --> 57:35.520]  Okay.
[57:35.520 --> 57:43.520]  So, and that way, on a disqualification, they have no authority to decide whether or not they're disqualified.
[57:43.520 --> 57:49.520]  They do have the authority to decide whether or not they can recuse or should be recused.
[57:49.520 --> 57:55.520]  He can self-recuse or he can say, nope, I don't think you have grounds to get me recused myself, so no.
[57:55.520 --> 57:57.520]  Don't give them that opportunity.
[57:57.520 --> 58:06.520]  Disqualify them outright when they will not follow law, procedure, and protect your rights in the process.
[58:06.520 --> 58:12.520]  Yeah, but when I started researching it, you know, disqualification versus recusal,
[58:12.520 --> 58:17.520]  it just seemed to me that the most appropriate thing to do at this point was to recuse.
[58:17.520 --> 58:21.520]  I really couldn't find the grounds for disqualification.
[58:21.520 --> 58:23.520]  Absolutely you can.
[58:23.520 --> 58:26.520]  Disqualification, way easier than recusal.
[58:26.520 --> 58:31.520]  It's basically the same grounds, but for more serious considerations.
[58:31.520 --> 58:35.520]  All right, hang on just a second, Adam, and we'll go over that part of this when we get back.
[58:35.520 --> 58:39.520]  All right, folks, this is the Monday Night Rule of Law Radio Show with your host, Eddie Craig.
[58:39.520 --> 58:42.520]  We are live tonight, October 17, 2016.
[58:42.520 --> 58:43.520]  Y'all hang in there.
[58:43.520 --> 58:49.520]  We'll be right back, 512-646-1984.
[58:49.520 --> 58:55.520]  The Bible remains the most popular book in the world, yet countless readers are frustrated
[58:55.520 --> 58:57.520]  because they struggle to understand it.
[58:57.520 --> 59:01.520]  Some new translations try to help by simplifying the text,
[59:01.520 --> 59:06.520]  but in the process can compromise the profound meaning of the Scripture.
[59:06.520 --> 59:08.520]  Enter the recovery version.
[59:08.520 --> 59:12.520]  First, this new translation is extremely faithful and accurate,
[59:12.520 --> 59:17.520]  but the real story is the more than 9,000 explanatory footnotes.
[59:17.520 --> 59:21.520]  Difficult and profound passages are opened up in a marvelous way,
[59:21.520 --> 59:27.520]  providing an entrance into the riches of the Word beyond which you've ever experienced before.
[59:27.520 --> 59:32.520]  Bibles for America would like to give you a free recovery version simply for the asking.
[59:32.520 --> 59:43.520]  This comprehensive yet compact study Bible is yours just by calling us toll free at 1-888-551-0102
[59:43.520 --> 59:47.520]  or by ordering online at freestudybible.com.
[59:47.520 --> 59:50.520]  That's freestudybible.com.
[59:50.520 --> 01:00:00.520]  You are listening to the Logos Radio Network, logosradionetwork.com.
[01:00:00.520 --> 01:00:04.520]  The following use flash is brought to you by the Lone Star Lowdown,
[01:00:04.520 --> 01:00:09.520]  providing the daily bulletins for the commodities market, Today in History,
[01:00:09.520 --> 01:00:20.520]  news updates, and the inside scoop into the tides of the alternative.
[01:00:20.520 --> 01:00:27.520]  Markets for Wednesday, the 5th of October, 2016, are currently trending with gold at $1,266.60 an ounce,
[01:00:27.520 --> 01:00:32.520]  silver at $17.72 an ounce, Texas crude at $48.69 a barrel,
[01:00:32.520 --> 01:00:42.520]  and Bitcoin is currently sitting at about $613 U.S. currency.
[01:00:42.520 --> 01:00:48.520]  Today in history, the year 1947, the first televised White House presidential address
[01:00:48.520 --> 01:00:55.520]  is given by then U.S. President Harry S. Truman, Today in History.
[01:00:55.520 --> 01:00:59.520]  In recent use, the Parrish Climate Agreement is set to take effect next month,
[01:00:59.520 --> 01:01:04.520]  adopted by consensus on December 12, 2015, at the 21st Conference of the Parties
[01:01:04.520 --> 01:01:10.520]  of the UNFCCC or United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in Paris,
[01:01:10.520 --> 01:01:14.520]  and open for signatures on the 22nd of April, 2016, Earth Day,
[01:01:14.520 --> 01:01:16.520]  and a ceremony in New York City.
[01:01:16.520 --> 01:01:18.520]  It is set to take effect on November 4.
[01:01:18.520 --> 01:01:22.520]  It is essentially a global agreement for the redirecting of the world economy
[01:01:22.520 --> 01:01:26.520]  away from fossil fuels towards more greenhouse-friendly forms of energy.
[01:01:26.520 --> 01:01:30.520]  President Obama, speaking from the Rose Garden, talking about the agreement,
[01:01:30.520 --> 01:01:34.520]  said that, quote, this gives us the best possible shot to save the one planet
[01:01:34.520 --> 01:01:37.520]  we've got, and that one of the reasons I took this office
[01:01:37.520 --> 01:01:39.520]  was to make America the leader in this mission.
[01:01:39.520 --> 01:01:43.520]  The agreement already has support from major greenhouse gas emitters
[01:01:43.520 --> 01:01:45.520]  like China, the United States, and India.
[01:01:45.520 --> 01:01:49.520]  And in total, 72 out of 195 countries have ratified the agreement,
[01:01:49.520 --> 01:01:50.520]  according to the UN.
[01:01:50.520 --> 01:01:53.520]  Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump opposes the agreement
[01:01:53.520 --> 01:01:56.520]  since it lacks the approval of the U.S. Congress,
[01:01:56.520 --> 01:02:04.520]  while Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton is a strong supporter.
[01:02:04.520 --> 01:02:07.520]  More than 50 correctional officers and inmates inside Maryland's
[01:02:07.520 --> 01:02:10.520]  largest state prison were charged by prosecutors Wednesday today
[01:02:10.520 --> 01:02:12.520]  with bribery and drug conspiracy.
[01:02:12.520 --> 01:02:15.520]  The guards are accused of smuggling cell phones, tobacco, and drugs
[01:02:15.520 --> 01:02:18.520]  into the Eastern Shore facility in exchange for money and sex,
[01:02:18.520 --> 01:02:21.520]  according to indictments unsealed in a federal investigation.
[01:02:21.520 --> 01:02:23.520]  Apparently, prison guards were passing through security
[01:02:23.520 --> 01:02:26.520]  with undetected heroin, cocaine, and pornographic videos,
[01:02:26.520 --> 01:02:30.520]  which were then handed off to inmates in exchange for hundreds of dollars.
[01:02:30.520 --> 01:02:32.520]  They were also being accused of warning inmates
[01:02:32.520 --> 01:02:34.520]  when prison officials were preparing to search cells
[01:02:34.520 --> 01:02:37.520]  and of using force and intimidation to silence inmates
[01:02:37.520 --> 01:02:39.520]  who were reporting the smuggling.
[01:02:39.520 --> 01:02:42.520]  According to court records, inmates were using the prison phones
[01:02:42.520 --> 01:02:45.520]  and their contraband cell phones to pay off correctional officers through PayPal.
[01:02:45.520 --> 01:02:48.520]  They were hustling $500 for each package on average
[01:02:48.520 --> 01:02:53.520]  and as much as $3,000 a week, according to investigators.
[01:02:53.520 --> 01:03:00.520]  This is Rick Brody with your Lowdown for October 5, 2016.
[01:03:00.520 --> 01:03:27.520]  All right, folks, we are back.
[01:03:27.520 --> 01:03:33.520]  This is Rule of Law Radio, the call-in number 512-646-1984.
[01:03:33.520 --> 01:03:36.520]  We've got an hour to go in the show, and we still have Adam and Don on the line.
[01:03:36.520 --> 01:03:39.520]  We're going to need some more callers before we run out of here.
[01:03:39.520 --> 01:03:44.520]  All right, Adam, now back to the point we were discussing with you.
[01:03:44.520 --> 01:03:46.520]  Get rid of them.
[01:03:46.520 --> 01:03:48.520]  Don't give them any chance.
[01:03:48.520 --> 01:03:51.520]  Yes, sir.
[01:03:51.520 --> 01:03:54.520]  So, our chief is first, our chief is second.
[01:03:54.520 --> 01:03:57.520]  I've already got grounds for disqualifying the other justices of the peace,
[01:03:57.520 --> 01:04:02.520]  which is I presume they're going to try to set me up with,
[01:04:02.520 --> 01:04:05.520]  but I'm going to go ahead and check a record and make sure that the county judge appointed her.
[01:04:05.520 --> 01:04:09.520]  Anyway, she's not qualified under the government code
[01:04:09.520 --> 01:04:11.520]  because she hasn't been just the peace for four and a half years.
[01:04:11.520 --> 01:04:15.520]  She's only been in just the peace for three and a third years.
[01:04:15.520 --> 01:04:17.520]  Anyway, I'm going to knock her out.
[01:04:17.520 --> 01:04:22.520]  So, my question is, you know, I knocked out two bears.
[01:04:22.520 --> 01:04:24.520]  You can see that's not a recusal issue.
[01:04:24.520 --> 01:04:26.520]  That's a disqualification issue.
[01:04:26.520 --> 01:04:27.520]  No, exactly.
[01:04:27.520 --> 01:04:28.520]  No, no, no.
[01:04:28.520 --> 01:04:33.520]  The one they're trying to kick me through, I'm going to straight up disqualify
[01:04:33.520 --> 01:04:36.520]  because she hasn't been a JP for four and a half years,
[01:04:36.520 --> 01:04:40.520]  and I'm also going to check and make sure the county judge rightfully appointed her.
[01:04:40.520 --> 01:04:41.520]  I don't know.
[01:04:41.520 --> 01:04:43.520]  I'm going to try to catch them on all that.
[01:04:43.520 --> 01:04:45.520]  Well, the JP's are supposed to be elected.
[01:04:45.520 --> 01:04:50.520]  They're not supposed to be appointed except in times of vacation of an office.
[01:04:50.520 --> 01:04:52.520]  She's the other elected JP.
[01:04:52.520 --> 01:04:54.520]  I recused the first one.
[01:04:54.520 --> 01:04:55.520]  Right.
[01:04:55.520 --> 01:04:59.520]  I got that, but she said appointed, so I'm just going with that.
[01:04:59.520 --> 01:05:00.520]  Well, no.
[01:05:00.520 --> 01:05:04.520]  In the government code, it says that in the case of a recusal,
[01:05:04.520 --> 01:05:09.520]  the county attorney shall appoint another just as a peace-
[01:05:09.520 --> 01:05:11.520]  Oh, the county attorney?
[01:05:11.520 --> 01:05:13.520]  I'm sorry, the county judge.
[01:05:13.520 --> 01:05:14.520]  Sorry.
[01:05:14.520 --> 01:05:15.520]  County judge.
[01:05:15.520 --> 01:05:16.520]  Okay.
[01:05:16.520 --> 01:05:20.520]  The county judge, according to what I read,
[01:05:20.520 --> 01:05:23.520]  the county judge is supposed to appoint another just as a peace,
[01:05:23.520 --> 01:05:26.520]  but the qualification, if you read down on B,
[01:05:26.520 --> 01:05:29.520]  is they have to have been a just as a peace for four and a half years,
[01:05:29.520 --> 01:05:36.520]  and they could have never been convicted of a crime of something, blah, blah, blah.
[01:05:36.520 --> 01:05:41.520]  Yeah, they're not allowed to commit crimes until after they put on the robe and sit on the bench.
[01:05:41.520 --> 01:05:48.520]  What I'm saying is I got her, and I'm going to disqualify her in the next 72 hours.
[01:05:48.520 --> 01:05:49.520]  Okay.
[01:05:49.520 --> 01:05:50.520]  Because she doesn't.
[01:05:50.520 --> 01:05:52.520]  But I'm also going to check her record, like you said, again,
[01:05:52.520 --> 01:05:54.520]  make sure that everything's legit.
[01:05:54.520 --> 01:05:58.520]  So after that, I mean, if I disqualify both JP and the whole county-
[01:05:58.520 --> 01:06:01.520]  They'll bring in more from a different precinct.
[01:06:01.520 --> 01:06:02.520]  Is it?
[01:06:02.520 --> 01:06:03.520]  Okay.
[01:06:03.520 --> 01:06:07.520]  So then my next question is, exactly when do I start bringing up the fact that
[01:06:07.520 --> 01:06:12.520]  what has it cost the taxpayers of the county so far?
[01:06:12.520 --> 01:06:13.520]  You don't.
[01:06:13.520 --> 01:06:14.520]  You don't.
[01:06:14.520 --> 01:06:18.520]  You let them keep wasting time until they go past the point,
[01:06:18.520 --> 01:06:25.520]  which is four months here in Texas, for a speedy trial in a Class C misdemeanor offense.
[01:06:25.520 --> 01:06:27.520]  Okay, it's not six, it's four in Texas.
[01:06:27.520 --> 01:06:28.520]  Yes.
[01:06:28.520 --> 01:06:33.520]  The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals ruled several years ago
[01:06:33.520 --> 01:06:37.520]  that in relation to the Speedy Trial Act, or the Texas Supreme Court, I'm sorry,
[01:06:37.520 --> 01:06:43.520]  in relation to the Speedy Trial Act, an individual in a Class C fine only,
[01:06:43.520 --> 01:06:47.520]  once they file that complaint, things move at a much more rapid pace.
[01:06:47.520 --> 01:06:50.520]  They've got up to two years to file the complaint.
[01:06:50.520 --> 01:06:55.520]  But here's the thing, have you checked the court record?
[01:06:55.520 --> 01:06:59.520]  Once, but it's been eight weeks now, maybe.
[01:06:59.520 --> 01:07:00.520]  Okay.
[01:07:00.520 --> 01:07:03.520]  Was there a complaint in it when you checked it?
[01:07:03.520 --> 01:07:04.520]  Sir?
[01:07:04.520 --> 01:07:06.520]  Was there a complaint in it when you checked it?
[01:07:06.520 --> 01:07:11.520]  Well, there was the initial citation, but we went through that,
[01:07:11.520 --> 01:07:15.520]  and then I made the first JP, you know, give me a formal complaint,
[01:07:15.520 --> 01:07:16.520]  and he did his best.
[01:07:16.520 --> 01:07:19.520]  Still doesn't meet the requirements because he's had no court to select on it,
[01:07:19.520 --> 01:07:21.520]  from what I've read.
[01:07:21.520 --> 01:07:22.520]  However, he's accused.
[01:07:22.520 --> 01:07:23.520]  He's gone.
[01:07:23.520 --> 01:07:25.520]  I'm going to disqualify the other JP.
[01:07:25.520 --> 01:07:27.520]  My question is, who are they going to send after me next?
[01:07:27.520 --> 01:07:29.520]  Well, I don't know who.
[01:07:29.520 --> 01:07:32.520]  That depends on how many JP's are available.
[01:07:32.520 --> 01:07:35.520]  You mean a JP from a bordering county?
[01:07:35.520 --> 01:07:37.520]  Yes.
[01:07:37.520 --> 01:07:41.520]  And they're just going to keep on going with this measly, costly final?
[01:07:41.520 --> 01:07:46.520]  Until you force them to stop, which is what I'm trying to get to here.
[01:07:46.520 --> 01:07:52.520]  The thing is, is they can keep shifting this in and out of visiting judges all day long,
[01:07:52.520 --> 01:07:56.520]  because under their eyes, it doesn't really cost anything.
[01:07:56.520 --> 01:07:59.520]  It's government. Wasteful is their name, okay?
[01:07:59.520 --> 01:08:01.520]  Just by being government.
[01:08:01.520 --> 01:08:02.520]  Correct.
[01:08:02.520 --> 01:08:12.520]  The issue here is the oppression from the impression they leave behind by not letting you go.
[01:08:12.520 --> 01:08:14.520]  So that's all that matters.
[01:08:14.520 --> 01:08:17.520]  Not the money they waste, but the impression they give other people
[01:08:17.520 --> 01:08:23.520]  about how these cases will be handled no matter what.
[01:08:23.520 --> 01:08:29.520]  So the point here being that once they go past four months after filing a valid complaint,
[01:08:29.520 --> 01:08:33.520]  they have violated the speedy trial requirement.
[01:08:33.520 --> 01:08:37.520]  The court said three months is too little, five months is too long.
[01:08:37.520 --> 01:08:40.520]  So four is apparently the sweet spot.
[01:08:40.520 --> 01:08:43.520]  And that's after a valid complaint.
[01:08:43.520 --> 01:08:44.520]  Correct.
[01:08:44.520 --> 01:08:47.520]  Why are you still arguing your complaint is invalid?
[01:08:47.520 --> 01:08:48.520]  Why?
[01:08:48.520 --> 01:08:53.520]  Oh, there's no purpose to that kind.
[01:08:53.520 --> 01:08:55.520]  There's no injured party.
[01:08:55.520 --> 01:08:56.520]  Okay.
[01:08:56.520 --> 01:08:59.520]  I can tell you exactly what the response is going to be.
[01:08:59.520 --> 01:09:02.520]  It's an invalid response, but I can tell you what it's going to be.
[01:09:02.520 --> 01:09:05.520]  The state is the injured party.
[01:09:05.520 --> 01:09:10.520]  See, when you get it like, for instance, this felony case I'm working on, the felony evading,
[01:09:10.520 --> 01:09:15.520]  when you look at the grand jury indictment and the minutes from the grand jury,
[01:09:15.520 --> 01:09:22.520]  right there in the grand jury book, it says injured party, the state.
[01:09:22.520 --> 01:09:26.520]  The state can't suffer an injury.
[01:09:26.520 --> 01:09:30.520]  Yeah, I'm familiar with that argument.
[01:09:30.520 --> 01:09:32.520]  So I guess I should call their invalid complaint.
[01:09:32.520 --> 01:09:34.520]  A valid complaint starts the clock.
[01:09:34.520 --> 01:09:40.520]  No, you can keep arguing it all day long because their argument is it's valid.
[01:09:40.520 --> 01:09:50.520]  If they're arguing it's valid, then the clock is ticking, even while you're saying it's not.
[01:09:50.520 --> 01:09:54.520]  Four months after I made them produce a valid complaint.
[01:09:54.520 --> 01:09:59.520]  You file a motion to dismiss for lack of, to provide a speedy trial.
[01:09:59.520 --> 01:10:04.520]  They'll ignore it, but the trial de novo can't ignore it.
[01:10:04.520 --> 01:10:09.520]  And if they ignore it, the court of appeals certainly won't.
[01:10:09.520 --> 01:10:10.520]  Okay.
[01:10:10.520 --> 01:10:13.520]  So to even get a trial de novo, I have to go through with...
[01:10:13.520 --> 01:10:15.520]  Unless you plead guilty first.
[01:10:15.520 --> 01:10:18.520] ...out of county JP and get...
[01:10:18.520 --> 01:10:24.520]  Unless you plead guilty first, yes, and that's just committing legal suicide to do so.
[01:10:24.520 --> 01:10:28.520]  Yeah, that's not going to happen.
[01:10:28.520 --> 01:10:30.520]  Okay, so that pretty much sums up that.
[01:10:30.520 --> 01:10:33.520]  I guess I have one more topic to discuss.
[01:10:33.520 --> 01:10:34.520]  Okay.
[01:10:34.520 --> 01:10:36.520]  We've got a bunch of callers.
[01:10:36.520 --> 01:10:39.520]  I got one after you.
[01:10:39.520 --> 01:10:44.520]  Okay, we should have time.
[01:10:44.520 --> 01:10:59.520]  Explain to me how a public official who's bound by more than one statute and code, even the Texas Constitution,
[01:10:59.520 --> 01:11:08.520]  if, how can you be a public official in one county who's supposed to be registered to vote
[01:11:08.520 --> 01:11:14.520]  and reside in the Kent District and County in which you are an elected official?
[01:11:14.520 --> 01:11:20.520]  How can you serve in that capacity but actually reside in another county?
[01:11:20.520 --> 01:11:21.520]  You can't.
[01:11:21.520 --> 01:11:25.520]  You have to live in the county where you're an elected official.
[01:11:25.520 --> 01:11:28.520]  That's a requirement.
[01:11:28.520 --> 01:11:34.520]  Now, you can be a visiting official depending upon what the office is.
[01:11:34.520 --> 01:11:44.520]  Judges, for instance, and prosecutors can be moved temporarily to other jurisdictions to assist in cases,
[01:11:44.520 --> 01:11:46.520]  just like what we're talking about here.
[01:11:46.520 --> 01:11:49.520]  What's the time limit on that alteration?
[01:11:49.520 --> 01:11:52.520]  I don't mind understanding your question.
[01:11:52.520 --> 01:11:55.520]  How long can they be there?
[01:11:55.520 --> 01:11:57.520]  How long can they be visiting?
[01:11:57.520 --> 01:12:03.520]  As long as the case to which they're assigned is required to be handled.
[01:12:03.520 --> 01:12:05.520]  So it's case by case, not just like...
[01:12:05.520 --> 01:12:07.520]  Not necessarily.
[01:12:07.520 --> 01:12:09.520]  Not necessarily.
[01:12:09.520 --> 01:12:15.520]  If, for instance, if, let's say, for instance, that one of the judges that's elected there had a heart attack
[01:12:15.520 --> 01:12:18.520]  and couldn't go back to work for six months.
[01:12:18.520 --> 01:12:22.520]  They could assign a visiting judge to that court for six months.
[01:12:22.520 --> 01:12:29.520]  Or they could do an interim election or an interim appointment from someone within the county to fill the position.
[01:12:29.520 --> 01:12:32.520]  They can do either one.
[01:12:32.520 --> 01:12:33.520]  Okay.
[01:12:33.520 --> 01:12:39.520]  Well, what if you had an elected public officer in the county who was doing it by the people and all that stuff,
[01:12:39.520 --> 01:12:47.520]  bumble, moment, whatever, and he was acting as a public officer, not on visiting,
[01:12:47.520 --> 01:12:53.520]  not any special circumstances, anything like that, but he actually resided in another county?
[01:12:53.520 --> 01:13:00.520]  Then you have something that needs to be raised as an issue because that's not the way it's supposed to work.
[01:13:00.520 --> 01:13:07.520]  As an elected representative of the people of that county, now the question is, is did he live there when he got elected?
[01:13:07.520 --> 01:13:08.520]  Yes.
[01:13:08.520 --> 01:13:09.520]  Okay.
[01:13:09.520 --> 01:13:16.520]  If he relocated, does the relocation prevent him from performing his duties in that county?
[01:13:16.520 --> 01:13:19.520]  I don't know, but that shouldn't be the question.
[01:13:19.520 --> 01:13:21.520]  Well, no, that is the question.
[01:13:21.520 --> 01:13:30.520]  That is the question because the requirement is that to run for the office and to be elected, you must live in that county.
[01:13:30.520 --> 01:13:31.520]  Right.
[01:13:31.520 --> 01:13:35.520]  Unless the Constitution doesn't require that you always stay there,
[01:13:35.520 --> 01:13:39.520]  unless the move would interfere with your ability to fulfill those duties.
[01:13:39.520 --> 01:13:44.520]  The law may do the same.
[01:13:44.520 --> 01:13:47.520]  Okay, so I might be in touch with that.
[01:13:47.520 --> 01:13:58.520]  Well, can you be a member of a city council in one town and one county and then reside in that county
[01:13:58.520 --> 01:14:07.520]  and then at the same time reside in another county and be a county attorney?
[01:14:07.520 --> 01:14:12.520]  That depends upon what the requirements for the city council member are in the city charter.
[01:14:12.520 --> 01:14:21.520]  Most city charters require that anyone that operates on the council or as a city employee must live within the city limits,
[01:14:21.520 --> 01:14:25.520]  not even just the county, but within the city limits.
[01:14:25.520 --> 01:14:33.520]  Now, you've got to remember some cities like Austin, for instance, encompass more than one county.
[01:14:33.520 --> 01:14:36.520]  Well, I don't think we're going to have that issue where we are.
[01:14:36.520 --> 01:14:44.520]  I guess what I'm saying is can you be a citizen of multiple counties at one time?
[01:14:44.520 --> 01:14:47.520]  No.
[01:14:47.520 --> 01:14:51.520]  You can't be a resident of multiple counties at one time.
[01:14:51.520 --> 01:14:55.520]  What's the difference between resident and citizen?
[01:14:55.520 --> 01:15:00.520]  A lot, legally speaking.
[01:15:00.520 --> 01:15:04.520]  Resident is the term they use for everything in these statutes.
[01:15:04.520 --> 01:15:12.520]  You've got to remember that the actual definition of resident is temporary, not permanent, like domicile.
[01:15:12.520 --> 01:15:13.520]  Okay.
[01:15:13.520 --> 01:15:15.520]  Okay.
[01:15:15.520 --> 01:15:22.520]  The resident requirement was originally related to the public officials that served in more than one precinct
[01:15:22.520 --> 01:15:26.520]  and or district within the same county or state.
[01:15:26.520 --> 01:15:34.520]  For instance, your state reps that come to the legislature preside over multiple districts and multiple counties.
[01:15:34.520 --> 01:15:35.520]  Understood.
[01:15:35.520 --> 01:15:36.520]  Okay.
[01:15:36.520 --> 01:15:43.520]  So they are residents in every county in that district for the purposes of their position,
[01:15:43.520 --> 01:15:50.520]  but they're only domiciled in one of them, the one in which they live and were elected.
[01:15:50.520 --> 01:15:53.520]  Okay.
[01:15:53.520 --> 01:16:00.520]  How would I prove that they're not domiciled in the county that they're currently serving in?
[01:16:00.520 --> 01:16:05.520]  Well, again, depending upon the position, that may not be a requirement,
[01:16:05.520 --> 01:16:11.520]  but how you would prove it would be look and see what their actual address is.
[01:16:11.520 --> 01:16:16.520]  What do they say is their actual dwelling place?
[01:16:16.520 --> 01:16:18.520]  Like on their driver's license?
[01:16:18.520 --> 01:16:23.520]  Well, no, driver's license doesn't necessarily mean that's your permanent dwelling place.
[01:16:23.520 --> 01:16:27.520]  That's just where you were when you got the license.
[01:16:27.520 --> 01:16:28.520]  What?
[01:16:28.520 --> 01:16:33.520]  Where does someone register their permanent dwelling address?
[01:16:33.520 --> 01:16:35.520]  That depends upon the individual.
[01:16:35.520 --> 01:16:43.520]  Like, for instance, you can come to Texas for seven months out of the year, but your permanent home may be in New York.
[01:16:43.520 --> 01:16:45.520]  Gotcha.
[01:16:45.520 --> 01:16:46.520]  Okay.
[01:16:46.520 --> 01:16:47.520]  All right.
[01:16:47.520 --> 01:16:48.520]  Thanks.
[01:16:48.520 --> 01:16:49.520]  I appreciate it.
[01:16:49.520 --> 01:16:50.520]  All right.
[01:16:50.520 --> 01:16:51.520]  No problem.
[01:16:51.520 --> 01:16:52.520]  All right.
[01:16:52.520 --> 01:16:53.520]  We got two callers on the board, Don and Indiana.
[01:16:53.520 --> 01:16:54.520]  I'll see you there.
[01:16:54.520 --> 01:16:55.520]  I will get you next when we return, so don't go away.
[01:16:55.520 --> 01:16:56.520]  All right, folks.
[01:16:56.520 --> 01:16:57.520]  We'll be right back.
[01:16:57.520 --> 01:17:04.520]  At Capital Coin and Bullion, our mission is to be your preferred shopping destination
[01:17:04.520 --> 01:17:08.520]  by delivering excellent customer service and outstanding value at an affordable price.
[01:17:08.520 --> 01:17:14.520]  We provide a wide assortment of your favorite products featuring a great selection of high-quality coins and precious metals.
[01:17:14.520 --> 01:17:18.520]  We cater to beginners in coin collecting as well as large transactions for investors.
[01:17:18.520 --> 01:17:23.520]  We believe in educating our customers with resources from top accredited metals dealers and journalists.
[01:17:23.520 --> 01:17:26.520]  If we don't have what you're looking for, we can find it.
[01:17:26.520 --> 01:17:31.520]  In addition, we carry popular young Jevity products such as Beyond Tangy Tangerine and Pollenburst.
[01:17:31.520 --> 01:17:38.520]  We also offer One World Way, Mountain House Storable Foods, Berkey Water Products, ammunition at 10% above wholesale, and more.
[01:17:38.520 --> 01:17:42.520]  We broker metals IRA accounts, and we also accept Bitcoins as payment.
[01:17:42.520 --> 01:17:45.520]  Call us at 512-646-6440.
[01:17:45.520 --> 01:17:50.520]  We're located at 7304 Burnett Road, Suite A, about a half mile south of Anderson.
[01:17:50.520 --> 01:17:54.520]  We're open Monday through Friday 10 to 6, Saturdays 10 to 2.
[01:17:54.520 --> 01:17:59.520]  Visit us at capitalcoinandbullion.com or call 512-646-6440.
[01:17:59.520 --> 01:18:06.520]  Through advances in technology, our lives have greatly improved, except in the area of nutrition.
[01:18:06.520 --> 01:18:11.520]  People feed their pets better than they feed themselves, and it's time we changed all that.
[01:18:11.520 --> 01:18:17.520]  Our primary defense against aging and disease in this toxic environment is good nutrition.
[01:18:17.520 --> 01:18:25.520]  In a world where natural foods have been irradiated, adulterated, and mutilated, young Jevity can provide the nutrients you need.
[01:18:25.520 --> 01:18:31.520]  Logos Radio Network gets many requests to endorse all sorts of products, most of which we reject.
[01:18:31.520 --> 01:18:39.520]  We have come to trust young Jevity so much, we became a marketing distributor along with Alex Jones, Ben Fuchs, and many others.
[01:18:39.520 --> 01:18:47.520]  When you order from logosradionetwork.com, your health will improve as you help support quality radio.
[01:18:47.520 --> 01:18:51.520]  As you realize the benefits of young Jevity, you may want to join us.
[01:18:51.520 --> 01:18:58.520]  As a distributor, you can experience improved health, help your friends and family, and increase your income.
[01:18:58.520 --> 01:19:00.520]  Order now.
[01:19:00.520 --> 01:19:10.520]  This is the Logos Radio Network.
[01:19:30.520 --> 01:19:39.520]  All right, folks, we are back.
[01:19:39.520 --> 01:19:45.520]  This is Rule of Law Radio. The call in number is 512-646-1984.
[01:19:45.520 --> 01:19:50.520]  I got, oh, 45 minutes, and I'm going to need some more callers. I can almost guarantee that.
[01:19:50.520 --> 01:19:54.520]  But in the meantime, let's talk to Don in Indiana. Don, what can we do for you?
[01:19:54.520 --> 01:19:57.520]  How are you tonight, Eddie?
[01:19:57.520 --> 01:20:00.520]  I'm good so far.
[01:20:00.520 --> 01:20:02.520]  How's my voice coming through?
[01:20:02.520 --> 01:20:07.520]  It's coming through just fine. How's mine?
[01:20:07.520 --> 01:20:11.520]  It sounds good there where you got it right now. I got a hearing aid in.
[01:20:11.520 --> 01:20:18.520]  Yeah, that's what they told me. So I've got to make sure that I don't either blow it up or make it where you can't hear me.
[01:20:18.520 --> 01:20:20.520]  I can hear you real good there, Eddie.
[01:20:20.520 --> 01:20:21.520]  All right.
[01:20:21.520 --> 01:20:24.520]  I'll tell you what, I got an odd thing here.
[01:20:24.520 --> 01:20:26.520]  Okay.
[01:20:26.520 --> 01:20:35.520]  I got a receipt here. I want to turn my computer on. My computer is on a bum. It's been that way for a long time now.
[01:20:35.520 --> 01:20:36.520]  Okay.
[01:20:36.520 --> 01:20:41.520]  This is a place called BCFix.
[01:20:41.520 --> 01:20:43.520]  Okay.
[01:20:43.520 --> 01:20:57.520]  It says plan, plan, two-year service, date of purchase, 20 July 2016, price $249.99.
[01:20:57.520 --> 01:21:04.520]  Then it says order ref. There's a number there. I don't know if you want that in there.
[01:21:04.520 --> 01:21:11.520]  Okay. And this is in relation to a computer you just bought?
[01:21:11.520 --> 01:21:14.520]  It probably does, I imagine.
[01:21:14.520 --> 01:21:15.520]  Okay.
[01:21:15.520 --> 01:21:17.520]  That BC number?
[01:21:17.520 --> 01:21:22.520]  No, I don't need any of that. What's your question about it?
[01:21:22.520 --> 01:21:32.520]  I got their toll-free number, 1800-720-5146.
[01:21:32.520 --> 01:21:33.520]  Okay.
[01:21:33.520 --> 01:21:42.520]  Yeah. This here says please feel free to call our toll-free number whenever you face any problems in your PC.
[01:21:42.520 --> 01:21:45.520]  We shall be very happy to assist you.
[01:21:45.520 --> 01:21:46.520]  Okay.
[01:21:46.520 --> 01:21:55.520]  So please call us after every two months for regular service and cleanup. Thanks.
[01:21:55.520 --> 01:22:04.520]  And it's got www.fastsupport.com. Below that it's www.teamviewer.com.
[01:22:04.520 --> 01:22:08.520]  I don't know what their regular number is other than their toll-free number.
[01:22:08.520 --> 01:22:10.520]  Well, I know what your question is.
[01:22:10.520 --> 01:22:25.520]  Well, we called them today about 2.30 I think it was this afternoon to see if they would work on my computer.
[01:22:25.520 --> 01:22:27.520]  Evidently they do it right over the computer.
[01:22:27.520 --> 01:22:34.520]  Yeah. That's what the TeamViewer is for. TeamViewer is a remote control utility that they'll get to install on your computer.
[01:22:34.520 --> 01:22:41.520]  You'll give them the access number and the password that's listed on there, and they will log on to your computer.
[01:22:41.520 --> 01:22:47.520]  Now be aware that they have full access to every single thing on that machine.
[01:22:47.520 --> 01:22:58.520]  And they can not only take control of it, but they can remove files, they can transfer files from you to them, all of that stuff.
[01:22:58.520 --> 01:23:05.520]  So when you get one of those type of support agreements, you better make darn sure you're getting it from somebody that's trustworthy.
[01:23:05.520 --> 01:23:11.520]  Yeah. Well, that's why I'm afraid it's a scam here.
[01:23:11.520 --> 01:23:15.520]  Where did you get this service plan?
[01:23:15.520 --> 01:23:20.520]  It was on the computer.
[01:23:20.520 --> 01:23:25.520]  Okay. Where did you buy the computer?
[01:23:25.520 --> 01:23:31.520]  I bought it from TigerDirect.
[01:23:31.520 --> 01:23:39.520]  Okay. So you got this from an online company, TigerDirect, and this service plan came with it.
[01:23:39.520 --> 01:23:46.520]  Did you order that in addition to the computer, or did it come as part of the price of the computer originally?
[01:23:46.520 --> 01:23:48.520]  No, it was back in...
[01:23:48.520 --> 01:23:50.520]  Additional to the computer.
[01:23:50.520 --> 01:23:52.520]  Additional to the computer.
[01:23:52.520 --> 01:23:59.520]  Okay. And did you buy it separate from Tiger, or did you get it directly from whoever's supposed to be providing it?
[01:23:59.520 --> 01:24:07.520]  If so, what's the time difference between when you got the computer and when you got the service plan?
[01:24:07.520 --> 01:24:12.520]  I got the service plan on the 20th of July, 2016.
[01:24:12.520 --> 01:24:13.520]  Okay.
[01:24:13.520 --> 01:24:15.520]  I got it separate from TigerDirect.
[01:24:15.520 --> 01:24:18.520]  How did you get it?
[01:24:18.520 --> 01:24:23.520]  I called them on the phone, I think, or else I got it over the computer.
[01:24:23.520 --> 01:24:30.520]  Okay. But my question is, is where did you get information on this service plan to go get it?
[01:24:30.520 --> 01:24:33.520]  Did it pop up in an ad on your computer?
[01:24:33.520 --> 01:24:37.520]  Did you find it online as a recommended place?
[01:24:37.520 --> 01:24:39.520]  How did you get it?
[01:24:39.520 --> 01:24:43.520]  I picked up. My wife says it just popped up.
[01:24:43.520 --> 01:24:46.520]  Uh-huh. Yeah, you've probably been scammed.
[01:24:46.520 --> 01:24:55.520]  If your computer has been on the blink, most likely it's because of malware, viruses and Internet detritus that gets on there
[01:24:55.520 --> 01:25:02.520]  and takes over your machine and either steals information or gives someone else access to the machine,
[01:25:02.520 --> 01:25:06.520]  including the ability to pop up ads and everything else.
[01:25:06.520 --> 01:25:12.520]  So now here's the next question, and I'm already afraid I know the answer.
[01:25:12.520 --> 01:25:17.520]  You used a credit card online to buy this plan, correct?
[01:25:17.520 --> 01:25:19.520]  Yes.
[01:25:19.520 --> 01:25:26.520]  You better keep a really, really close eye on those credit card transactions.
[01:25:26.520 --> 01:25:34.520]  My wife checked her credit card today, and it shows they took the money out of her account.
[01:25:34.520 --> 01:25:42.520]  Okay, but yeah, but I'm saying that they could use it in other places in other ways, and you need to make sure that they're not doing that.
[01:25:42.520 --> 01:25:47.520]  If it's a scam, that's what they wanted was the credit card information.
[01:25:47.520 --> 01:25:48.520]  Yeah.
[01:25:48.520 --> 01:25:54.520]  Okay. Now, back to the other part about this where you said you tried to call them today.
[01:25:54.520 --> 01:25:55.520]  Let me guess. Yes.
[01:25:55.520 --> 01:25:58.520]  The number didn't work.
[01:25:58.520 --> 01:26:01.520]  Yeah, we had a hard time getting through on it.
[01:26:01.520 --> 01:26:06.520]  Well, that's the way it's set up. They run you in circles till you quit.
[01:26:06.520 --> 01:26:10.520]  It's the same thing with most of these door-to-door insurance policy salesmen.
[01:26:10.520 --> 01:26:17.520]  Sell you a policy, which they call street insurance, and then anytime you try to get in touch with somebody to file a claim,
[01:26:17.520 --> 01:26:22.520]  you will get run in circles till you give up trying.
[01:26:22.520 --> 01:26:26.520]  Yeah. Well, we got this guy on the phone.
[01:26:26.520 --> 01:26:27.520]  Uh-huh.
[01:26:27.520 --> 01:26:29.520]  He sounded like a foreigner from somewhere.
[01:26:29.520 --> 01:26:31.520]  Probably.
[01:26:31.520 --> 01:26:46.520]  And so he asked my wife if he had somebody on the line that he was talking to, or if he could call back later on.
[01:26:46.520 --> 01:26:47.520]  Right.
[01:26:47.520 --> 01:26:51.520]  We've been sitting around. It's about 8 o'clock tonight, and we called again.
[01:26:51.520 --> 01:26:52.520]  Uh-huh.
[01:26:52.520 --> 01:26:53.520]  I can't get him.
[01:26:53.520 --> 01:27:00.520]  Well, do me a favor, Don. Write down, if you've got all the information for this, and it's on something printed,
[01:27:00.520 --> 01:27:09.520]  if you have a scanner, scan it into your computer so I can see it, and email that to me, please, so I can look at it.
[01:27:09.520 --> 01:27:16.520]  And I will see if I can break away a couple minutes to look online to see if there's any information about this company
[01:27:16.520 --> 01:27:19.520]  and who they are and what they do.
[01:27:19.520 --> 01:27:24.520]  Odds are your money's been taken for nothing.
[01:27:24.520 --> 01:27:32.520]  Now, also be aware that many legitimate tech support services have an abysmal service rate.
[01:27:32.520 --> 01:27:38.520]  They can't seem to do anything that you paid them to do, at least not in a timely manner.
[01:27:38.520 --> 01:27:48.520]  I've had numerous people from numerous large end companies that take days to return a phone call, if they ever return a phone call.
[01:27:48.520 --> 01:27:55.520]  So that's not necessarily always an indicator, but if you've got this from an ad that popped up on your machine,
[01:27:55.520 --> 01:28:01.520]  first rule is don't click on those things, ever.
[01:28:01.520 --> 01:28:02.520]  Yeah.
[01:28:02.520 --> 01:28:06.520]  If you didn't ask for it, you don't want it.
[01:28:06.520 --> 01:28:10.520]  Take that from an ex-tech support guy.
[01:28:10.520 --> 01:28:15.520]  If you didn't go find it on your own, you don't want it.
[01:28:15.520 --> 01:28:16.520]  Okay.
[01:28:16.520 --> 01:28:17.520]  All right?
[01:28:17.520 --> 01:28:18.520]  I had no idea.
[01:28:18.520 --> 01:28:21.520]  I thought maybe you could give me some advice on it.
[01:28:21.520 --> 01:28:26.520]  Well, the advice I'm giving you right now is keep a very close eye on your credit card statement.
[01:28:26.520 --> 01:28:35.520]  You see any transaction on there that you don't know immediately what it is, you call the bank and you start reporting it.
[01:28:35.520 --> 01:28:36.520]  Okay.
[01:28:36.520 --> 01:28:37.520]  Finally, we'll watch that for sure.
[01:28:37.520 --> 01:28:41.520]  And I would give these guys another 24 hours to return the phone call.
[01:28:41.520 --> 01:28:54.520]  If not, then what I would do is I would report the $249 transaction and have it refunded and cancel the agreement.
[01:28:54.520 --> 01:28:55.520]  What did you do?
[01:28:55.520 --> 01:28:56.520]  Call the credit card company?
[01:28:56.520 --> 01:29:00.520]  You call the credit card company and tell them that's not a good payment.
[01:29:00.520 --> 01:29:02.520]  You're being scammed.
[01:29:02.520 --> 01:29:06.520]  And so you're not going to pay for that.
[01:29:06.520 --> 01:29:07.520]  Okay.
[01:29:07.520 --> 01:29:08.520]  Well, they've already taken it out.
[01:29:08.520 --> 01:29:14.520]  The credit card company will get it back.
[01:29:14.520 --> 01:29:15.520]  Okay.
[01:29:15.520 --> 01:29:16.520]  I'll try it.
[01:29:16.520 --> 01:29:19.520]  Okay.
[01:29:19.520 --> 01:29:22.520]  Mary says it was a debit card, Eddie.
[01:29:22.520 --> 01:29:25.520]  It doesn't make any difference.
[01:29:25.520 --> 01:29:27.520]  Okay.
[01:29:27.520 --> 01:29:28.520]  Okay.
[01:29:28.520 --> 01:29:29.520]  Thank you very kindly, Eddie.
[01:29:29.520 --> 01:29:30.520]  Yes, sir.
[01:29:30.520 --> 01:29:32.520]  You all have a good evening.
[01:29:32.520 --> 01:29:40.520]  I think I've listened to you forever, the first time I ever heard Randy on.
[01:29:40.520 --> 01:29:42.520]  He was on that program.
[01:29:42.520 --> 01:29:44.520]  It was Life McLeod.
[01:29:44.520 --> 01:29:45.520]  Yeah.
[01:29:45.520 --> 01:29:49.520]  It seems like that was 19N, 98 or something like that.
[01:29:49.520 --> 01:29:52.520]  Well, Don, I hate to interrupt you, but I've got to take a break here.
[01:29:52.520 --> 01:29:54.520]  So we'll be back later, okay?
[01:29:54.520 --> 01:29:55.520]  All right, folks.
[01:29:55.520 --> 01:30:02.520]  This Rule of Law Radio will be right back.
[01:30:02.520 --> 01:30:05.520]  This lemon slice is as sweet as lemon meringue pie.
[01:30:05.520 --> 01:30:08.520]  And these raw cranberries taste like candy.
[01:30:08.520 --> 01:30:09.520]  Am I crazy?
[01:30:09.520 --> 01:30:11.520]  No, but I do have a secret.
[01:30:11.520 --> 01:30:15.520]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, and I'll be right back to tell you what it is.
[01:30:15.520 --> 01:30:17.520]  Privacy is under attack.
[01:30:17.520 --> 01:30:20.520]  When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[01:30:20.520 --> 01:30:25.520]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish, too.
[01:30:25.520 --> 01:30:30.520]  So protect your rights, say no to surveillance, and keep your information to yourself.
[01:30:30.520 --> 01:30:33.520]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[01:30:33.520 --> 01:30:36.520]  This public service announcement is brought to you by StartPage.com,
[01:30:36.520 --> 01:30:40.520]  the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[01:30:40.520 --> 01:30:44.520]  Start over with StartPage.
[01:30:44.520 --> 01:30:47.520]  It's been called a hallucinogen for the tongue.
[01:30:47.520 --> 01:30:52.520]  Miracle fruit, or Synthepallum dulcificum, is a small red fruit from West Africa.
[01:30:52.520 --> 01:30:57.520]  Eating just one tiny berry makes sour things taste sweet for up to two hours.
[01:30:57.520 --> 01:31:02.520]  The secret is a substance called Miraculin, a protein that binds to the taste buds
[01:31:02.520 --> 01:31:05.520]  to make the sourest of foods taste like they've been dipped in sugar.
[01:31:05.520 --> 01:31:10.520]  Food aficionados have been throwing taste-tripping parties where they eat the fruit,
[01:31:10.520 --> 01:31:15.520]  then sip vinegar, suck lemons, and crunch pickles to experience the amazing effects.
[01:31:15.520 --> 01:31:19.520]  Miracle fruit is safe, legal, and readily available by mail.
[01:31:19.520 --> 01:31:23.520]  Now all we need is a fruit to take the calories out of cheesecake.
[01:31:23.520 --> 01:31:30.520]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht. More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[01:31:30.520 --> 01:31:36.520]  This is Building 7, a 47-story skyscraper that fell on the afternoon of September 11.
[01:31:36.520 --> 01:31:38.520]  The government says that fire brought it down.
[01:31:38.520 --> 01:31:43.520]  However, 1,500 architects and engineers concluded it was a controlled demolition.
[01:31:43.520 --> 01:31:46.520]  Over 6,000 of my fellow service members have given their lives.
[01:31:46.520 --> 01:31:48.520]  Thousands of my fellow first responders are dying.
[01:31:48.520 --> 01:31:50.520]  I'm not a conspiracy theorist.
[01:31:50.520 --> 01:31:51.520]  I'm a structural engineer.
[01:31:51.520 --> 01:31:52.520]  I'm a New York City correction officer.
[01:31:52.520 --> 01:31:53.520]  I'm an Air Force pilot.
[01:31:53.520 --> 01:31:55.520]  I'm a father who lost his son.
[01:31:55.520 --> 01:31:57.520]  We're Americans, and we deserve the truth.
[01:31:57.520 --> 01:32:00.520]  Go to RememberBuilding7.org today.
[01:32:00.520 --> 01:32:03.520]  Hey, it's Danny here for Hill Country Home Improvements.
[01:32:03.520 --> 01:32:06.520]  Did your home receive hail or wind damage from the recent storms?
[01:32:06.520 --> 01:32:09.520]  Come on, we all know the government caused it with their chemtrails,
[01:32:09.520 --> 01:32:11.520]  but good luck getting them to pay for it.
[01:32:11.520 --> 01:32:14.520]  I might be kidding about the chemtrails, but I'm serious about your roof.
[01:32:14.520 --> 01:32:17.520]  That's why you have insurance, and Hill Country Home Improvements
[01:32:17.520 --> 01:32:22.520]  can handle the claim for you with little to no out-of-pocket expense, and we accept Bitcoin.
[01:32:22.520 --> 01:32:26.520]  As a multiyear A-plus member of the Better Business Bureau with zero complaints,
[01:32:26.520 --> 01:32:32.520]  you can trust Hill Country Home Improvements to handle your claim and your roof right the first time.
[01:32:32.520 --> 01:32:38.520]  Just call 512-992-8745 or go to hillcountryhomeimprovements.com.
[01:32:38.520 --> 01:32:42.520]  Mention the crypto show and get $100 off, and we'll donate another $100
[01:32:42.520 --> 01:32:45.520]  to the Logos Radio Network to help continue this programming.
[01:32:45.520 --> 01:32:50.520]  So if those out-of-town roofers come knocking, your door should be locking.
[01:32:50.520 --> 01:32:56.520]  That's 512-992-8745 or hillcountryhomeimprovements.com.
[01:32:56.520 --> 01:32:58.520]  Discounts are based on full roof replacement.
[01:32:58.520 --> 01:33:01.520]  May not actually be kidding about chemtrails.
[01:33:01.520 --> 01:33:11.520]  You're listening to the Logos Radio Network at logosradionetwork.com.
[01:33:31.520 --> 01:33:55.520]  All right, folks, we are back.
[01:33:55.520 --> 01:33:59.520]  This is Rule of Law Radio, and now we're going to Ralph in Texas.
[01:33:59.520 --> 01:34:03.520]  Ralph, what can we do for you?
[01:34:03.520 --> 01:34:04.520]  Hello, Eddie.
[01:34:04.520 --> 01:34:05.520]  Howdy.
[01:34:05.520 --> 01:34:10.520]  I had some issues with my car today, so I didn't get tuned in until after 9 o'clock.
[01:34:10.520 --> 01:34:11.520]  Okay.
[01:34:11.520 --> 01:34:13.520]  So I missed your opening line.
[01:34:13.520 --> 01:34:15.520]  I wish I hadn't, but I didn't miss it.
[01:34:15.520 --> 01:34:17.520]  So welcome back.
[01:34:17.520 --> 01:34:19.520]  You were gone for a little while.
[01:34:19.520 --> 01:34:24.520]  Yeah, I've been really buried into this felony case trying to get this information
[01:34:24.520 --> 01:34:26.520]  and legal research done and these pleadings written.
[01:34:26.520 --> 01:34:32.520]  The motion to quash the complaint is 50 pages plus long right now,
[01:34:32.520 --> 01:34:35.520]  and it's about to grow at least three or four more
[01:34:35.520 --> 01:34:38.520]  when I make the constitutional challenge to this statute.
[01:34:38.520 --> 01:34:43.520]  But I've also got to do several other things in relation to that
[01:34:43.520 --> 01:34:46.520]  and get it all done here over the next couple of days
[01:34:46.520 --> 01:34:51.520]  because our final extended filing date is this Friday,
[01:34:51.520 --> 01:34:54.520]  but everything's got to be in by Wednesday
[01:34:54.520 --> 01:34:57.520]  because they're not going to be there to file it the last two days,
[01:34:57.520 --> 01:35:02.520]  so I've got to get this done ASAP.
[01:35:02.520 --> 01:35:07.520]  Well, now the problem I'm running into with papers in the federal court
[01:35:07.520 --> 01:35:10.520]  is there's a limit, page number limit.
[01:35:10.520 --> 01:35:12.520]  You know, we haven't run into that yet.
[01:35:12.520 --> 01:35:18.520]  Well, the thing is there's a page number limit based upon what you're doing,
[01:35:18.520 --> 01:35:26.520]  but in a response like this where you're trying to invalidate, say, a federal indictment,
[01:35:26.520 --> 01:35:29.520]  they can't limit the number of legal arguments you can make
[01:35:29.520 --> 01:35:31.520]  as long as they're valid arguments.
[01:35:31.520 --> 01:35:35.520]  Now, you may have to make them in different motions, but you can still make them.
[01:35:35.520 --> 01:35:38.520]  Here there's not a particular limit on a challenge of this nature,
[01:35:38.520 --> 01:35:41.520]  so you don't have a page limit to worry about.
[01:35:41.520 --> 01:35:47.520]  All you've got to worry about is the fact that judges are lazy SOBs who don't like to read.
[01:35:47.520 --> 01:35:51.520]  Right, they give it to their law clerk, and you hope that the law clerk's having a good day.
[01:35:51.520 --> 01:35:53.520]  Well, I've run into the motion.
[01:35:53.520 --> 01:35:55.520]  There's a page limit on the motions.
[01:35:55.520 --> 01:35:57.520]  I haven't read anything about the briefs,
[01:35:57.520 --> 01:36:00.520]  so I don't know if a brief can be longer than a motion or what.
[01:36:00.520 --> 01:36:02.520]  There's no limit on the...
[01:36:02.520 --> 01:36:10.520]  I don't believe there's a limit on the evidence or the exhibits.
[01:36:10.520 --> 01:36:15.520]  Well, I really think you hit the nail on the head with this unrebuttable legal presumption.
[01:36:15.520 --> 01:36:19.520]  I want to say that right now while I'm thinking about it.
[01:36:19.520 --> 01:36:21.520]  That's really good.
[01:36:21.520 --> 01:36:26.520]  And I was going to ask you, since I'm in a federal case,
[01:36:26.520 --> 01:36:33.520]  if you've considered bringing Jerry Howe on to grill him on a few questions.
[01:36:33.520 --> 01:36:37.520]  Well, I don't know what you mean by bring him on.
[01:36:37.520 --> 01:36:41.520]  Bring him on the radio. Invite him on.
[01:36:41.520 --> 01:36:43.520]  Okay.
[01:36:43.520 --> 01:36:46.520]  It would help me. I know that.
[01:36:46.520 --> 01:36:51.520]  Well, that's why he has a legal discussion group on Facebook, see?
[01:36:51.520 --> 01:36:54.520]  Well, I'm not a member of Facebook, and I've been...
[01:36:54.520 --> 01:36:56.520]  Well, he's got an email address, too.
[01:36:56.520 --> 01:37:02.520]  I can get you the email address, and I think, well, there's lots of different ways to conference in and talk to him.
[01:37:02.520 --> 01:37:07.520]  And not that I'd mind having him on the show,
[01:37:07.520 --> 01:37:13.520]  but I'd have to work that out as far as what we're going to talk about and how.
[01:37:13.520 --> 01:37:16.520]  Well, if he's already doing stuff, I need to find out about it,
[01:37:16.520 --> 01:37:20.520]  because a little bit I'm able to get on Facebook, I haven't seen anything like that.
[01:37:20.520 --> 01:37:22.520]  So I need to get back into that.
[01:37:22.520 --> 01:37:26.520]  Yeah, he's members of the groups that I'm in, including mine,
[01:37:26.520 --> 01:37:32.520]  and he has me in his Title 42 legal group on Facebook.
[01:37:32.520 --> 01:37:34.520]  Title 42 legal.
[01:37:34.520 --> 01:37:40.520]  Yeah, let's see. Hang on a sec.
[01:37:40.520 --> 01:37:44.520]  The problem is I get on the computer, and I'm not used to those type forms,
[01:37:44.520 --> 01:37:55.520]  and I never seem to see or find the item to click on that got in my mind I should be seeing, but I don't see it.
[01:37:55.520 --> 01:38:02.520]  I'm still having trouble finding some of your stuff on Dow of Law WordPress.
[01:38:02.520 --> 01:38:04.520]  I mean, you're having trouble finding some of my stuff.
[01:38:04.520 --> 01:38:08.520]  There's 50, I think 52 articles published up there right now.
[01:38:08.520 --> 01:38:15.520]  So if you're not seeing 52 articles, then something's wrong, but I'm not sure what it would be.
[01:38:15.520 --> 01:38:22.520]  Well, the one I was looking for was one where you had addressed what the prosecutor,
[01:38:22.520 --> 01:38:28.520]  someone had put some of your paperwork in their case, in their criminal case,
[01:38:28.520 --> 01:38:35.520]  and a prosecutor came back and made an argument without even reading it, and you rebutted her point by point by point.
[01:38:35.520 --> 01:38:38.520]  Oh, that was the constitutional challenge motion.
[01:38:38.520 --> 01:38:44.520]  That's not posted as an article or a pleading on my blog.
[01:38:44.520 --> 01:38:46.520]  Okay, that's on YouTube?
[01:38:46.520 --> 01:38:51.520]  No, it's not on YouTube either, at least not that I'm aware of.
[01:38:51.520 --> 01:38:58.520]  If someone's posting my classes on YouTube, I would like to know that because they're not supposed to be doing that.
[01:38:58.520 --> 01:39:07.520]  But now I've made other arguments where we've done this, and there are articles on there where I have done that.
[01:39:07.520 --> 01:39:13.520]  Yeah, I remember you did say you were going to edit it and put it on YouTube.
[01:39:13.520 --> 01:39:17.520]  Well, the problem is I haven't had time to edit squat.
[01:39:17.520 --> 01:39:20.520]  I couldn't edit a three-minute commercial if I had to right now.
[01:39:20.520 --> 01:39:23.520]  There ain't no way I'm doing a three-hour class.
[01:39:23.520 --> 01:39:27.520]  Right. Okay, well, I'm not going to complain.
[01:39:27.520 --> 01:39:31.520]  Yeah, I mean like I want to put yesterday's class up on YouTube.
[01:39:31.520 --> 01:39:35.520]  Yesterday was a pretty good class, in my opinion, and everybody else seemed to think so.
[01:39:35.520 --> 01:39:41.520]  But again, sitting down and having time to actually put everything together with the equipment I've got and the time I've got,
[01:39:41.520 --> 01:39:45.520]  that's a pain in the butt for three hours' worth.
[01:39:45.520 --> 01:39:48.520]  Right.
[01:39:48.520 --> 01:39:51.520]  Well, look, I'm putting some words together.
[01:39:51.520 --> 01:40:03.520]  I've responded to two motions to dismiss, and if the judge does not dismiss them, I will have a coronary.
[01:40:03.520 --> 01:40:07.520]  Dismiss me, I mean, because that's just what they do.
[01:40:07.520 --> 01:40:09.520]  But I'm hoping that—
[01:40:09.520 --> 01:40:10.520]  Well, here's the thing.
[01:40:10.520 --> 01:40:11.520]  Remember this, Ralph.
[01:40:11.520 --> 01:40:14.520]  You don't go to trial in these lower courts to win.
[01:40:14.520 --> 01:40:16.520]  You go to make the record.
[01:40:16.520 --> 01:40:25.520]  The problem is that you're supposed to be entitled to have justice and due process at every stage, at every level, in every proceeding.
[01:40:25.520 --> 01:40:27.520]  But you don't get that.
[01:40:27.520 --> 01:40:36.520]  Due process, in reality, the way the attorneys have rigged this system, does not start at a minimum until the appellate level.
[01:40:36.520 --> 01:40:41.520]  And that's complete BS, in my opinion.
[01:40:41.520 --> 01:40:43.520]  I agree.
[01:40:43.520 --> 01:40:49.520]  I've been telling that. I've been listening to you guys for over two years now, you mostly and Randy sometimes.
[01:40:49.520 --> 01:40:53.520]  And yeah, what you're doing is building a record for appeal.
[01:40:53.520 --> 01:40:57.520]  It does not matter if you're in the J.P. court or if you're in the district court or the federal court.
[01:40:57.520 --> 01:40:58.520]  It doesn't matter.
[01:40:58.520 --> 01:41:01.520]  You're just building something for the appeals judges.
[01:41:01.520 --> 01:41:03.520]  So that's what I'm doing.
[01:41:03.520 --> 01:41:12.520]  And since I will be putting a brief, and this is looking like a first impression lawsuit, I've been working on clearly established law.
[01:41:12.520 --> 01:41:21.520]  Clearly established law doctrine is only applicable to government actors.
[01:41:21.520 --> 01:41:22.520]  Whoa, whoa, whoa.
[01:41:22.520 --> 01:41:24.520]  Let me – wait, wait, wait.
[01:41:24.520 --> 01:41:30.520]  You're citing Rodriguez, aren't you?
[01:41:30.520 --> 01:41:32.520]  Well, I've seen a lot of them. I don't remember Rodriguez.
[01:41:32.520 --> 01:41:34.520]  No, no, no, no, no.
[01:41:34.520 --> 01:41:36.520]  You need to know the name.
[01:41:36.520 --> 01:41:43.520]  Because if you are citing from Rodriguez with what you just said off the top of your head, that is a bogus site.
[01:41:43.520 --> 01:41:48.520]  It does not exist in the case.
[01:41:48.520 --> 01:41:54.520]  Never, ever cite an Internet blurb in a legal pleading.
[01:41:54.520 --> 01:42:00.520]  You find something that looks like a valid case, you go make sure it is a valid case.
[01:42:00.520 --> 01:42:10.520]  You find the entire opinion from a legitimate website that handles court opinions.
[01:42:10.520 --> 01:42:14.520]  Well, the best I can do right now is Cornell and do the stalling.
[01:42:14.520 --> 01:42:15.520]  Yeah?
[01:42:15.520 --> 01:42:19.520]  And if you can't find it on there, guess what?
[01:42:19.520 --> 01:42:23.520]  Odds are it's probably not a good case site.
[01:42:23.520 --> 01:42:33.520]  If you can find the case – hold on – if you can find the case, but what the site is isn't in it, then it's a bogus site.
[01:42:33.520 --> 01:42:34.520]  Okay.
[01:42:34.520 --> 01:42:36.520]  All right? But you've got to check.
[01:42:36.520 --> 01:42:39.520]  Do not accept this crap on the Internet at face value.
[01:42:39.520 --> 01:42:42.520]  People do this in the patronet community all the damn time.
[01:42:42.520 --> 01:42:52.520]  I am constantly having to pull somebody's fat out of the fire because they went in and cited one of these opinions that has absolutely no validity to it whatsoever.
[01:42:52.520 --> 01:43:00.520]  Well, I was going on what I had read, not remembering exactly which case it was, but are you telling me that that's not right or you're just not –
[01:43:00.520 --> 01:43:08.520]  I'm telling you that that opinion sounds exactly like what is said in Rodriguez, and it's dead wrong.
[01:43:08.520 --> 01:43:14.520]  So clearly established law doctrine applies to citizens as well?
[01:43:14.520 --> 01:43:24.520]  It's not a matter of clearly established law doctrine. Clearly established law applies to anyone to which the law being discussed applies.
[01:43:24.520 --> 01:43:31.520]  That it doesn't say that every law in every instance applies to everyone.
[01:43:31.520 --> 01:43:37.520]  That's not the way the law works, especially when it comes to regulatory law.
[01:43:37.520 --> 01:43:42.520]  It only regulates those that are engaging in the activity being regulated.
[01:43:42.520 --> 01:43:47.520]  That wouldn't apply to someone that isn't in that regulated activity.
[01:43:47.520 --> 01:43:50.520]  Hang on just a second. We'll finish this on the other side.
[01:43:50.520 --> 01:43:55.520]  All right, folks. This is Rule of Law Radio. We got, oh, our last segment coming up.
[01:43:55.520 --> 01:44:23.520]  We'll try to get these wrapped up and get these callers finished. We'll be right back.
[01:44:26.520 --> 01:44:28.520]  How to get debt collectors out of your credit report.
[01:44:28.520 --> 01:44:33.520]  How to turn the financial tables on them and make them pay you to go away.
[01:44:33.520 --> 01:44:38.520]  The Michael Mears proven method is the solution for how to stop debt collectors.
[01:44:38.520 --> 01:44:40.520]  Personal consultation is available as well.
[01:44:40.520 --> 01:44:49.520]  For more information, please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the blue Michael Mears banner or email michaelmears at yahoo.com.
[01:44:49.520 --> 01:45:00.520]  That's ruleoflawradio.com or email m-i-c-h-a-e-l-m-i-r-r-a-s at yahoo.com to learn how to stop debt collectors now.
[01:45:00.520 --> 01:45:03.520]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[01:45:03.520 --> 01:45:15.520]  Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary, the affordable, easy-to-understand 4-CD course that will show you how in 24 hours, step by step.
[01:45:15.520 --> 01:45:18.520]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing.
[01:45:18.520 --> 01:45:22.520]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[01:45:22.520 --> 01:45:27.520]  Thousands have won with our step-by-step course, and now you can too.
[01:45:27.520 --> 01:45:33.520]  Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case-winning experience.
[01:45:33.520 --> 01:45:42.520]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand about the principles and practices that control our American courts.
[01:45:42.520 --> 01:45:51.520]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases, pro se tactics, and much more.
[01:45:51.520 --> 01:46:10.520]  Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner or call toll-free, 866-LAW-EZ.
[01:46:10.520 --> 01:46:13.520]  All right, folks, we are back.
[01:46:13.520 --> 01:46:19.520]  We're going to try to get this wrapped up real quick, so I'm keeping the bumper music there just a little bit short so we can get into this right away.
[01:46:19.520 --> 01:46:27.520]  All right, Ralph, the article that you're probably thinking of on my blog is the one, Texas Legislature Why Statist Idiots Should Not Be Elected to Public Office.
[01:46:27.520 --> 01:46:33.520]  That one I addressed directly to a state rep and some information she had been putting out.
[01:46:33.520 --> 01:46:44.520]  But now as far as the stuff we were talking about before break, the case law, always find a reputable location to get the entire opinion and check it carefully.
[01:46:44.520 --> 01:46:55.520]  Because a lot of these cases, now some of this stuff that they give for Amjur, Amjur does not cite specific things from a case.
[01:46:55.520 --> 01:47:07.520]  Amjur cites the particular summation of what the cases on that listed subject mean.
[01:47:07.520 --> 01:47:19.520]  So when you get something that says a blurb about the people have the right to use the roads and the automobiles at any other conveyance of the day throughout their use of liberty and blah, blah, blah and all that,
[01:47:19.520 --> 01:47:29.520]  that's not a particular case, that's a summation of the case opinions listed in that constitutional category in Amjur.
[01:47:29.520 --> 01:47:37.520]  But the problem is, is it's not something you can cite verbatim because Amjur is a legal encyclopedia.
[01:47:37.520 --> 01:47:41.520]  It is not an authoritative legal source.
[01:47:41.520 --> 01:47:56.520]  Okay. Well, this clearly established law, with the given officers in unity, that I've read case after case after case,
[01:47:56.520 --> 01:48:06.520]  and the closest I've found that helped me was it said that if the law is written and available, something to the effect,
[01:48:06.520 --> 01:48:11.520]  no way I could find I got 80 items open on my computer right now.
[01:48:11.520 --> 01:48:15.520]  But I said, well, that's good because rule 1.2 is written.
[01:48:15.520 --> 01:48:29.520]  It's in black letter at all, which is what this case was saying that if it's written, in other words, if it's not a case law, if it's actually written law, then it's clearly established.
[01:48:29.520 --> 01:48:34.520]  And I'm going, well, that's great. They're saying that they have immunity.
[01:48:34.520 --> 01:48:36.520]  But here's the problem.
[01:48:36.520 --> 01:48:43.520]  Remember that you're dealing with an occupation of sophistry, the legal profession.
[01:48:43.520 --> 01:48:48.520]  It does not matter to the courts what the statute says.
[01:48:48.520 --> 01:48:52.520]  It doesn't matter to them at all in the long-term discussion of things.
[01:48:52.520 --> 01:49:00.520]  Proof positive of that is this case I'm working on and how the courts ruled upon the right to an examining trial
[01:49:00.520 --> 01:49:06.520]  and said that you don't have the right if they get an indictment before you get the trial done.
[01:49:06.520 --> 01:49:10.520]  That's not what the statute says. It's not even close.
[01:49:10.520 --> 01:49:19.520]  Yet the court opinion in clearly established law is the statute don't mean a damn thing if we say it don't.
[01:49:19.520 --> 01:49:26.520]  So no, the fact that it's in statute does not make it, according to the courts, clearly established law.
[01:49:26.520 --> 01:49:32.520]  What it does make, however, is a clear indication that the courts have gone rogue
[01:49:32.520 --> 01:49:38.520]  and refuse to properly apply the law or to follow it.
[01:49:38.520 --> 01:49:46.520]  That's one thing if they declared the law unconstitutional because it violates a separation of powers encroachment.
[01:49:46.520 --> 01:49:53.520]  It's another thing entirely for them to create a case opinion that says it doesn't matter what the statute says.
[01:49:53.520 --> 01:49:59.520]  We sanction you to do this in violation of the statute.
[01:49:59.520 --> 01:50:01.520]  We're not going to declare it unconstitutional.
[01:50:01.520 --> 01:50:06.520]  We're just going to treat it as if it doesn't mean anything in the long-term.
[01:50:06.520 --> 01:50:09.520]  And that's exactly what they did.
[01:50:09.520 --> 01:50:16.520]  So no, the statement you're making will bite you in the butt. It's not accurate.
[01:50:16.520 --> 01:50:20.520]  Well, all I'm doing is I'm using their own words.
[01:50:20.520 --> 01:50:24.520]  I granted. Granted. What do you think I did?
[01:50:24.520 --> 01:50:31.520]  That's why I call the entire Texas Court of Criminal Appeals a gang of organized criminals.
[01:50:31.520 --> 01:50:36.520]  Well, all right. Here's my philosophy on it.
[01:50:36.520 --> 01:50:43.520]  Clearly established law only becomes clearly established law if and when that law is used.
[01:50:43.520 --> 01:50:50.520]  The prosecutors are the ones who tell law enforcement which laws to use, and then they prosecute them.
[01:50:50.520 --> 01:50:53.520]  Okay. That's how you're interpreting it.
[01:50:53.520 --> 01:50:55.520]  But the courts interpret it this way.
[01:50:55.520 --> 01:51:01.520]  Clearly established law is law upon which we have already ruled.
[01:51:01.520 --> 01:51:07.520]  For instance, if they've ever had a case opinion relative to the statute,
[01:51:07.520 --> 01:51:14.520]  then whatever the issue for that opinion is, that becomes clearly established law in relation to that statute.
[01:51:14.520 --> 01:51:18.520]  That doesn't make the statute clearly established law.
[01:51:18.520 --> 01:51:27.520]  It makes the issue upon which the opinion is based in relation to that statute the clearly established law.
[01:51:27.520 --> 01:51:30.520]  That's how the courts are going to do this.
[01:51:30.520 --> 01:51:39.520]  I know that if the prosecutors never go out and prosecute them, then they will never be seen in the courts.
[01:51:39.520 --> 01:51:45.520]  So what I'm saying is the prosecutor is refusing to take a criminal complaint on law enforcement.
[01:51:45.520 --> 01:51:55.520]  If they're refusing to even take a complaint, how will anybody ever have a case that says this law enforcement officer was found guilty?
[01:51:55.520 --> 01:52:01.520]  Welcome to the world of bogus judicial doctrine.
[01:52:01.520 --> 01:52:04.520]  Welcome to the legal reality of things.
[01:52:04.520 --> 01:52:10.520]  Why do you think my website is learn how the legal system really works?
[01:52:10.520 --> 01:52:14.520]  It doesn't have a damn thing to do with the law.
[01:52:14.520 --> 01:52:16.520]  I understand, but we've got to do something.
[01:52:16.520 --> 01:52:18.520]  Well, I agree.
[01:52:18.520 --> 01:52:28.520]  But you cannot rely upon the courts to be the solution in this case as far as determining what's clearly established law before you attempt to use it.
[01:52:28.520 --> 01:52:30.520]  See, the issue here is this.
[01:52:30.520 --> 01:52:38.520]  If a prosecutor refuses to take a complaint against a public official, even if that public official is a cop,
[01:52:38.520 --> 01:52:48.520]  that doesn't prevent you from trying to sue and raising the issue that there is a criminal statute that covers the officer's actions,
[01:52:48.520 --> 01:52:55.520]  which the prosecutor refused to apply even though all of the necessary elements were met.
[01:52:55.520 --> 01:53:00.520]  And you cite the evidence that would substantiate that element.
[01:53:00.520 --> 01:53:09.520]  Now, you may not be able to go after the prosecutor for illegally protecting a felonious act by a public official, but you can still go after the public official.
[01:53:09.520 --> 01:53:13.520]  You just can't necessarily do it criminally.
[01:53:13.520 --> 01:53:17.520]  But you can use the criminal statute as a basis for your argument.
[01:53:17.520 --> 01:53:21.520]  Now, you can't enforce the criminal statute through a civil lawsuit.
[01:53:21.520 --> 01:53:32.520]  But if they didn't apply that criminal statute for a criminal act that was perpetrated against you, then it gives you a cause of action on the civil side.
[01:53:32.520 --> 01:53:36.520]  But again, that's not the way it ought to work.
[01:53:36.520 --> 01:53:47.520]  We should be able to prosecute any public servant directly ourselves if we have the evidence to back up the allegation, because no one else is going to do it.
[01:53:47.520 --> 01:54:00.520]  You're not going to get a public prosecutor to prosecute any government official if it means political favor or power for them to not do it.
[01:54:00.520 --> 01:54:03.520]  Do you remember the Heian case?
[01:54:03.520 --> 01:54:07.520]  It was a year ago, and you did a monologue on it.
[01:54:07.520 --> 01:54:13.520]  It was where the guy was stopped for having to tail light out whenever the law in North Carolina said he only had to have one.
[01:54:13.520 --> 01:54:14.520]  Yes.
[01:54:14.520 --> 01:54:20.520]  The prosecutor did not know that, and you said that the guy blew it because the guy says, oh, yeah, sure, I got cocaine in it.
[01:54:20.520 --> 01:54:22.520]  I'll go ahead and search it.
[01:54:22.520 --> 01:54:23.520]  Remember?
[01:54:23.520 --> 01:54:26.520]  Yeah, he gave consent to search.
[01:54:26.520 --> 01:54:29.520]  And that's exactly why he lost the case.
[01:54:29.520 --> 01:54:35.520]  Had he not given that consent, that would have been a whole different ballgame.
[01:54:35.520 --> 01:54:36.520]  Right, right.
[01:54:36.520 --> 01:54:40.520]  He shouldn't have been driving around with drugs, but the law is the law.
[01:54:40.520 --> 01:54:47.520]  Not only not driving around with drugs, but he should have never said—now, I brought this up in class yesterday, in fact.
[01:54:47.520 --> 01:54:48.520]  Let's look at this real quick.
[01:54:48.520 --> 01:54:55.520]  You have a guy who's got 30 pounds of cocaine stacked behind the seat of his truck.
[01:54:55.520 --> 01:55:02.520]  Did he think this was some magical freaking hiding place that the cop was just going to overlook?
[01:55:02.520 --> 01:55:08.520]  He's not going to fold a bench seat in a pickup truck forward to see what's behind it?
[01:55:08.520 --> 01:55:10.520]  Sure, go ahead, officer, search the truck.
[01:55:10.520 --> 01:55:12.520]  I got nothing to hide except the shit behind the seat.
[01:55:12.520 --> 01:55:18.520]  Don't look there, moron.
[01:55:18.520 --> 01:55:27.520]  People are their own victims from their own stupidity today.
[01:55:27.520 --> 01:55:33.520]  And public education, being what it is, that doesn't really astound me anymore.
[01:55:33.520 --> 01:55:34.520]  But anyway—
[01:55:34.520 --> 01:55:36.520]  I want to get two things in.
[01:55:36.520 --> 01:55:37.520]  Okay.
[01:55:37.520 --> 01:55:41.520]  One of them is your script.
[01:55:41.520 --> 01:55:45.520]  Your script is laid out very well to invoke the man to protect your rights.
[01:55:45.520 --> 01:55:49.520]  You are giving notice to the officer on the side of the road, and that's all you're doing.
[01:55:49.520 --> 01:55:51.520]  You're not educating him, but you're giving him notice.
[01:55:51.520 --> 01:55:57.520]  You're giving him notice that he's violating the law and you're giving him notice that you're not in transportation.
[01:55:57.520 --> 01:56:04.520]  Now, I'm still hung up on this pre-established law, and that's what leads me to believe because of the—
[01:56:04.520 --> 01:56:12.520]  I'm case, and every other case I see and all these cases I'm reading is that they are immune, right or wrong, just hear me out.
[01:56:12.520 --> 01:56:15.520]  They are immune from law if it's not thoroughly established.
[01:56:15.520 --> 01:56:19.520]  Now, we are not immune from law if it's not thoroughly established.
[01:56:19.520 --> 01:56:21.520]  At least that's the way I have it in my head right now.
[01:56:21.520 --> 01:56:31.520]  So that means by extension, by first-level inference, that we the people have a superior knowledge of the law.
[01:56:31.520 --> 01:56:38.520]  If we the people have a superior knowledge of the law, when we give notice to a public servant, he must take notice,
[01:56:38.520 --> 01:56:41.520]  because that's where I'm at in my lawsuit right now.
[01:56:41.520 --> 01:56:45.520]  They are saying, no, no, no, you do that, you ought to do that, blah, blah, blah.
[01:56:45.520 --> 01:56:50.520]  And I'm going, rule 102, he was given notice, so I'm not in transportation.
[01:56:50.520 --> 01:56:55.520]  And that's what I'm hanging—well, that's my whole case.
[01:56:55.520 --> 01:57:07.520]  Yeah. The thing is, is when you give them rebuttable facts against a legal presumption, they can no longer maintain the presumption.
[01:57:07.520 --> 01:57:13.520]  It's the same thing with presumed consent. All right?
[01:57:13.520 --> 01:57:16.520]  Okay. Those are the kind of words I need. Okay.
[01:57:16.520 --> 01:57:26.520]  They cannot—once you say, I don't consent, the presumption of consent is gone.
[01:57:26.520 --> 01:57:28.520]  One more thing I want to add.
[01:57:28.520 --> 01:57:33.520]  I talked to you earlier, and I told you that just weeks ago that I had said I was not in commerce,
[01:57:33.520 --> 01:57:36.520]  and you said you've got to say transportation.
[01:57:36.520 --> 01:57:41.520]  I got hung up on the commerce because that was in the complaint that the officer wrote, and that was what was in my head.
[01:57:41.520 --> 01:57:47.520]  But I went back on the argument. Forty minutes on the roadside, I told that officer three distinct times,
[01:57:47.520 --> 01:57:51.520]  I'm not in commerce and I'm not engaged in transportation. Okay.
[01:57:51.520 --> 01:57:56.520]  Three distinct times, two minutes in the stop, 20 minutes in the stop, and 30 minutes in the stop.
[01:57:56.520 --> 01:58:04.520]  So I gave him notice, there's no reason after 40 minutes for him to make the rest of the make.
[01:58:04.520 --> 01:58:09.520]  Well, agreed. But that's why you got to go after him.
[01:58:09.520 --> 01:58:16.520]  Now, the DPS, in their motion to dismiss, has conceded that I was not likely subjected to,
[01:58:16.520 --> 01:58:20.520]  or not likely subject to, tell you to identify a rest.
[01:58:20.520 --> 01:58:26.520]  So what I'm saying is, I never had probable cause determined on the seat belt issue,
[01:58:26.520 --> 01:58:32.520]  even if it did apply. However, it did not apply because I'm not engaged in transportation.
[01:58:32.520 --> 01:58:34.520]  I think I've got a pretty good case.
[01:58:34.520 --> 01:58:36.520]  That's a good argument.
[01:58:36.520 --> 01:58:41.520]  All right, Ralph, I hate to cut you off on that though, but I got to hang this up because we're out of time.
[01:58:41.520 --> 01:58:45.520]  All right, Raider and Rodney, I'm sorry. I am out of time to get to you.
[01:58:45.520 --> 01:58:49.520]  I appreciate you calling in and hanging on though. Folks, y'all have a great week. Thanks.
[01:58:49.520 --> 01:58:57.520]  Bibles for America is offering absolutely free a unique study Bible called the New Testament Recovery Version.
[01:58:57.520 --> 01:59:03.520]  The New Testament Recovery Version has over 9,000 footnotes that explain what the Bible says,
[01:59:03.520 --> 01:59:08.520]  verse by verse, helping you to know God and to know the meaning of life.
[01:59:08.520 --> 01:59:11.520]  Order your free copy today from Bibles for America.
[01:59:11.520 --> 01:59:20.520]  Call us toll free at 888-551-0102 or visit us online at bfa.org.
[01:59:20.520 --> 01:59:25.520]  This translation is highly accurate and it comes with over 13,000 cross references,
[01:59:25.520 --> 01:59:30.520]  plus charts and maps and an outline for every book of the Bible.
[01:59:30.520 --> 01:59:33.520]  Bibles for America is truly a Bible you can understand.
[01:59:33.520 --> 01:59:41.520]  To get your free copy of the New Testament Recovery Version, call us toll free at 888-551-0102.
[01:59:41.520 --> 01:59:50.520]  That's 888-551-0102 or visit us online at bfa.org.
[01:59:50.520 --> 02:00:00.520]  Looking for some truth? You found it. LogosRadioNetwork.com