[00:00.000 --> 00:05.500]  The Bill of Rights contains the first ten amendments of our Constitution.
[00:05.500 --> 00:09.500]  They guarantee the specific freedoms Americans should know and protect.
[00:09.500 --> 00:11.000]  Our liberty depends on it.
[00:11.000 --> 00:16.500]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, and I'll be right back with an unforgettable way to remember your First Amendment rights.
[00:16.500 --> 00:18.500]  Privacy is under attack.
[00:18.500 --> 00:22.000]  When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[00:22.000 --> 00:27.000]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[00:27.000 --> 00:32.000]  So protect your rights, say no to surveillance, and keep your information to yourself.
[00:32.000 --> 00:34.500]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[00:34.500 --> 00:38.000]  This public service announcement is brought to you by Startpage.com,
[00:38.000 --> 00:42.000]  the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[00:42.000 --> 00:45.500]  Start over with Startpage.
[00:45.500 --> 00:47.500]  Spar, it's what fighters do.
[00:47.500 --> 00:51.000]  It's also how I remember the five guarantees of the First Amendment.
[00:51.000 --> 00:54.000]  If you plan to take away my rights, I'm going to spar with you.
[00:54.000 --> 01:03.000]  Spar with an extra P. S for speech, P for press, another P for petition, A for assembly, and R for religion.
[01:03.000 --> 01:08.500]  Most Americans are familiar with the First Amendment guarantees of free speech, press, assembly, and religion.
[01:08.500 --> 01:11.000]  But petition for redress is another matter.
[01:11.000 --> 01:14.500]  We have the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
[01:14.500 --> 01:17.500]  It means that if we're unhappy with what's going on in our government,
[01:17.500 --> 01:21.000]  we can spell out the reasons without fear of being thrown into jail.
[01:21.000 --> 01:31.000]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht. More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[01:31.000 --> 01:35.000]  The Bill of Rights contains the first ten amendments of our Constitution.
[01:35.000 --> 01:38.000]  They guarantee the specific freedoms Americans should know and protect.
[01:38.000 --> 01:40.000]  Our liberty depends on it.
[01:40.000 --> 01:46.000]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, and I'll be right back with an unforgettable way to remember one of your constitutional rights.
[01:46.000 --> 01:48.000]  Privacy is under attack.
[01:48.000 --> 01:52.000]  When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[01:52.000 --> 01:56.000]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish, too.
[01:56.000 --> 01:58.000]  So protect your rights.
[01:58.000 --> 02:02.000]  Say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself.
[02:02.000 --> 02:04.000]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[02:04.000 --> 02:08.000]  This public service announcement is brought to you by StartPage.com,
[02:08.000 --> 02:12.000]  the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[02:12.000 --> 02:15.000]  Start over with StartPage.
[02:15.000 --> 02:22.000]  When I think of the Second Amendment, I visualize myself wrapping my two arms around the Bill of Rights in a big old bear hug.
[02:22.000 --> 02:28.000]  It's how I remember that the Second Amendment guarantees us the right to bear arms, arms that embrace our freedoms
[02:28.000 --> 02:30.000]  and won't let anyone take them away without a fight.
[02:30.000 --> 02:34.000]  Get it? Two arms, bear hug, bear arms?
[02:34.000 --> 02:38.000]  The late Senator Hubert Humphrey captured the spirit of the Second Amendment so well when he said,
[02:38.000 --> 02:45.000]  the right of the citizens to bear arms is just one guarantee against arbitrary government, one more safeguard against the tyranny
[02:45.000 --> 02:51.000]  which now appears remote in America, but which historically has proved to always be possible.
[02:51.000 --> 03:09.000]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht. More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[03:09.000 --> 03:26.000]  What? What you want? What you just want? What you gonna do when the rich and the broke come for you? Tell me! What you gonna do? What you gonna do?
[03:26.000 --> 03:39.000]  Bad boys, bad boys, what you gonna do? What you gonna do when they come for you? Bad boys, bad boys, what you gonna do? What you gonna do when they come for you?
[03:39.000 --> 03:47.000]  When you were eight and you had bad traits, you'd go to school and learn the golden rules. So why are you acting like a bloody fool?
[03:47.000 --> 04:00.000]  If you get high and your mouth gets cool, bad boys, bad boys, what you gonna do? What you gonna do when they come for you?
[04:00.000 --> 04:06.000]  You chuck it on that one, you chuck it on this one, you chuck it on your mother and you chuck it on your father.
[04:06.000 --> 04:11.000]  You chuck it on your brother and you chuck it on your sister. You chuck it on that one and you chuck it on me!
[04:11.000 --> 04:33.000]  Bad boys, bad boys, whatcha gonna do? Whatcha gonna do when they come for you?
[04:33.000 --> 05:01.000]  Bad boys, bad boys, whatcha gonna do? Whatcha gonna do when they come for you?
[05:01.000 --> 05:03.000]  Bad boys, bad boys, whatcha gonna do?
[05:32.000 --> 05:35.000]  So, there's something interesting today.
[05:35.000 --> 05:43.000]  Yeah, there's something interesting that I think people may or may not be aware of. I wasn't for a while.
[05:43.000 --> 05:53.000]  Today is the last day of a three-week period that happens in Texas every quarter.
[05:53.000 --> 06:01.000]  A three-week period that our Texas Constitution defines as the county court's term time.
[06:01.000 --> 06:07.000]  So, you know, a court has term time and vacation time.
[06:07.000 --> 06:13.000]  So, they're not always supposed to be 24-7 like we tend to think of it.
[06:13.000 --> 06:15.000]  And they tend to think of it.
[06:15.000 --> 06:25.000]  But there's in our Constitution a provision for the terms of the county court to be held four times per year.
[06:25.000 --> 06:31.000]  And each term says that it may remain in session for three weeks.
[06:31.000 --> 06:33.000]  What do you think about that, Randy?
[06:33.000 --> 06:51.000]  That was interesting. I really didn't understand why the legislature went to the trouble of setting up court sessions unless, I guess, if I go back to the history of the state,
[06:51.000 --> 06:55.000]  there was a time when we had circuit court judges.
[06:55.000 --> 06:58.000]  And they rode the circuit.
[06:58.000 --> 07:09.000]  So, if they set up certain times for them to have court, then one judge can move from one location to another.
[07:09.000 --> 07:19.000]  And then Texas gained so much population that we needed more judges, more courts, more of the time.
[07:19.000 --> 07:24.000]  And instead of going back to the legislature, they just said, heck with it.
[07:24.000 --> 07:29.000]  We'll just stay in session as long as we want to.
[07:29.000 --> 07:40.000]  Maybe. But I see that it's always the same for all counties to be in session at the same time.
[07:40.000 --> 07:45.000]  Yeah. Well, oh, you're saying all counties and all over the state?
[07:45.000 --> 07:46.000]  Right.
[07:46.000 --> 07:56.000]  Now, there is a provision in the Texas Constitution for a county to gather together its little group of county commissioners.
[07:56.000 --> 08:06.000]  And they can decide for that county, they can decide that they want to change the dates or they want to extend the times of each term,
[08:06.000 --> 08:08.000]  the length of each term.
[08:08.000 --> 08:11.000]  And they can even change the number of court terms.
[08:11.000 --> 08:16.000]  They can't decrease. Four is the minimum.
[08:16.000 --> 08:19.000]  But they can add so that there can be more than four.
[08:19.000 --> 08:25.000]  Let's say they get busy in this particular county and instead of having just one every three months,
[08:25.000 --> 08:28.000]  they decide we need to have it every other month.
[08:28.000 --> 08:31.000]  But let's still do three weeks.
[08:31.000 --> 08:37.000]  Or they can add to the three weeks and they can say, we need to increase that to four weeks.
[08:37.000 --> 08:51.000]  But if they don't, Randy, it says until otherwise provided, the terms of the county court shall be the first Mondays in February, May, August and November.
[08:51.000 --> 08:54.000]  And they remain in session three weeks.
[08:54.000 --> 09:02.000]  So right now, today is the Friday, the 20th, and we've just finished out three full Monday through Friday weeks.
[09:02.000 --> 09:09.000]  I suppose it's possible that they could construe that to include the weekend coming up here.
[09:09.000 --> 09:18.000]  So if there were any civil and criminal business, they can do during term time.
[09:18.000 --> 09:23.000]  And if some probate business comes up for the court, they can do that any time.
[09:23.000 --> 09:30.000]  Civil and criminal are relegated to this three week period.
[09:30.000 --> 09:33.000]  Where is this at in the codes?
[09:33.000 --> 09:35.000]  OK, that's in the Texas Constitution.
[09:35.000 --> 09:40.000]  It is Article 5, Section 29.
[09:40.000 --> 09:42.000]  That is interesting.
[09:42.000 --> 09:43.000]  Yeah.
[09:43.000 --> 09:47.000]  I could just read that article if you like, that section.
[09:47.000 --> 09:50.000]  And nobody's following that.
[09:50.000 --> 10:00.000]  Yeah, it seems that they are disregarding the limitations that are there in the Constitution.
[10:00.000 --> 10:08.000]  They do have the option to get their county commissioners together and set up a rhythm that fits them for that county.
[10:08.000 --> 10:10.000]  But nobody's doing that.
[10:10.000 --> 10:11.000]  So disregarding it.
[10:11.000 --> 10:17.000]  And they're doing all of this business of civil and criminal outside of term time.
[10:17.000 --> 10:20.000]  This raises an issue.
[10:20.000 --> 10:21.000]  I agree.
[10:21.000 --> 10:28.000]  If they are not allowed by Constitution to hold courts at these times.
[10:28.000 --> 10:29.000]  Right.
[10:29.000 --> 10:37.000]  How do they justify the expenditure of funds to keep these courts open and pay these judges?
[10:37.000 --> 10:39.000]  That's a really good question.
[10:39.000 --> 10:52.000]  And I raised the question in the process of disqualifying one judge after another who refused to disqualify the previous for obvious bias and lawlessness.
[10:52.000 --> 11:18.000]  And it went all the way up ratcheting to the Texas Supreme Court where the chief justice, Nathan Hecht, decided that rather than addressing these issues that were getting all stacked up on top of my traffic accusation, they just waved their magic wand and the traffic accusation went away.
[11:18.000 --> 11:22.000]  So nobody said anything about all these?
[11:22.000 --> 11:25.000]  I think it's like a pretty easy fix.
[11:25.000 --> 11:31.000]  It's kind of like what they did in this case where we challenged city ordinances.
[11:31.000 --> 11:37.000]  They dismissed it on a different reason.
[11:37.000 --> 11:38.000]  Exactly.
[11:38.000 --> 11:49.000]  Not the issue that was the elephant in the room, but the issue that was more convenient and comfortable for them to address, even if they had to invent it.
[11:49.000 --> 11:52.000]  And that's a real good point for people to take away.
[11:52.000 --> 11:57.000]  You always want to bring an issue that winds up in the elephant in the room.
[11:57.000 --> 12:08.000]  But that brings a problem, statute of limitations, Speedy Trial.
[12:08.000 --> 12:20.000]  The legislative intent of what constitutes Speedy was laid out in the Speedy Trial Act.
[12:20.000 --> 12:26.000]  What is it, 23.02 or 22, I forget.
[12:26.000 --> 12:30.000]  It was ruled unconstitutional, but not on the time limits.
[12:30.000 --> 12:37.000]  It was ruled unconstitutional based on the title, misleading, and some other minor little point.
[12:37.000 --> 12:44.000]  And since it was ruled unconstitutional, the courts have treated the Speedy Trial Act as if it doesn't exist.
[12:44.000 --> 12:53.000]  But the legislature said in there what they considered speedy was 30 days for Class C misdemeanor,
[12:53.000 --> 13:02.000]  60 Class B, 90 Class A, and 120 for felony.
[13:02.000 --> 13:12.000]  That was not changed, and that should still stand under full faith and credit to establish what amounts to speedy.
[13:12.000 --> 13:21.000]  So if the court is not in session, how do they calculate Speedy Trial?
[13:21.000 --> 13:27.000]  These two constitutional provisions seem to be at odds with one another.
[13:27.000 --> 13:31.000]  Well, it would seem that way.
[13:31.000 --> 13:38.000]  Presumably the county commissioners would notice, would see the growth of their county
[13:38.000 --> 13:43.000]  and the growth of civil business and criminal business for the court.
[13:43.000 --> 13:48.000]  And they would recognize that, hey, our schedule is getting pretty full.
[13:48.000 --> 13:51.000]  Let's go ahead and extend our term times.
[13:51.000 --> 13:56.000]  That's one of the things that's constitutionally given to them.
[13:56.000 --> 14:02.000]  That's their prerogative to set that and to extend these.
[14:02.000 --> 14:15.000]  Also, it is given that there can be a county court at law, which is not as limited in its time.
[14:15.000 --> 14:24.000]  So the progression would be, you start with the constitutional one term per quarter as a minimum,
[14:24.000 --> 14:29.000]  that the people have a way to go redress grievances.
[14:29.000 --> 14:37.000]  And the people go to the court and say, here's an issue that the court needs to adjudicate.
[14:37.000 --> 14:41.000]  And the court can't just be closed and unavailable.
[14:41.000 --> 14:47.000]  Everybody knows that per the Constitution, we've got a three-week window
[14:47.000 --> 14:53.000]  that's coming up the first Monday of these four months.
[14:53.000 --> 14:58.000]  And it gets extended if needed, and it gets additional courts added if needed.
[14:58.000 --> 15:06.000]  There's a difference between a constitutional county court and a county court at law.
[15:06.000 --> 15:10.000]  They're both described in there with similar rules and similar restrictions,
[15:10.000 --> 15:15.000]  but this is one way that they differ.
[15:15.000 --> 15:21.000]  So a constitutional county court is created by?
[15:21.000 --> 15:22.000]  By the Constitution.
[15:22.000 --> 15:23.000]  By the Constitution, obviously.
[15:23.000 --> 15:27.000]  But if they need more courts, they can statutorily create more courts.
[15:27.000 --> 15:29.000]  Yes.
[15:29.000 --> 15:31.000]  And those would be county courts at law.
[15:31.000 --> 15:34.000]  Yes.
[15:34.000 --> 15:41.000]  But they all have same time periods, and that seems...
[15:41.000 --> 15:48.000]  No, the ones that say county court at law, they don't have these same restrictions on them.
[15:48.000 --> 15:55.000]  Because if you think about it, the progression would go from you have a minimum in this county,
[15:55.000 --> 16:00.000]  the minimum that the Constitution allows, the people are not going to be without access to courts.
[16:00.000 --> 16:02.000]  You have to have at least this much.
[16:02.000 --> 16:07.000]  And then as the county grows in need for court business,
[16:07.000 --> 16:12.000]  then they extend the county court, the constitutional county court,
[16:12.000 --> 16:22.000]  they extend its terms by way of every year they can make another decision to extend and so forth.
[16:22.000 --> 16:25.000]  And then at some point they can add a new court.
[16:25.000 --> 16:31.000]  We've got counties out to west and southwest Texas, but one county has 30 people in it.
[16:31.000 --> 16:36.000]  So they'll probably be fine with the minimum for a little while.
[16:36.000 --> 16:39.000]  So there could be a problem there.
[16:39.000 --> 16:44.000]  Hang on, we'll pick this up on the other side, Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain, rule of our radio.
[16:44.000 --> 16:50.000]  Our caller page is up, so if you have a question or comment, give us a call.
[16:50.000 --> 16:55.000]  I call in number 512-646-1984.
[16:55.000 --> 17:01.000]  Hang on, we'll be right back.
[17:25.000 --> 17:30.000]  We'll be right back.
[17:55.000 --> 18:01.000]  We'll be right back.
[18:25.000 --> 18:30.000]  We'll be right back.
[18:55.000 --> 19:01.000]  We'll be right back.
[19:25.000 --> 19:44.000]  The world is spinning like it's out of control, on the edge of a hole inside a deep dark bone.
[19:44.000 --> 19:49.000]  I'm always on the lookout for something to soothe my soul.
[19:49.000 --> 20:04.000]  So I sit back and I watch the evidence unfold, and I see justice is the goal, yeah.
[20:04.000 --> 20:09.000]  Justice is the goal.
[20:09.000 --> 20:13.000]  Sometimes we fell a little too far at sea.
[20:13.000 --> 20:21.000]  Okay, we are back, Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain, here's our radio, and I have the phone lines open, I have some callers.
[20:21.000 --> 20:27.000]  Brett, there was one little issue I wanted to address about that that confuses me.
[20:27.000 --> 20:33.000]  Let's say we're in this small county out in southwest Texas.
[20:33.000 --> 20:41.000]  We only got 30 or 40 people, and the court is not allowed to be in session all the time.
[20:41.000 --> 20:45.000]  So let's say the court goes out of session today.
[20:45.000 --> 20:49.000]  How long before it goes back in session?
[20:49.000 --> 20:51.000]  It'll be a little over two months.
[20:51.000 --> 20:53.000]  Two months, so it's 60 days.
[20:53.000 --> 20:57.000]  So I get charged with a class B misdemeanor.
[20:57.000 --> 21:01.000]  Wait a second, how do you get charged?
[21:01.000 --> 21:03.000]  Can they commence a case?
[21:03.000 --> 21:06.000]  Well, JPs don't have that problem.
[21:06.000 --> 21:14.000]  A magistrate could do the probable cause hearing and say, you need to show up over here at this court at this date.
[21:14.000 --> 21:25.000]  But if they only have 60 days, they're going to run out of time before the court opens again.
[21:25.000 --> 21:31.000]  You mean that would be a problem for the speedy trial before the case even commences?
[21:31.000 --> 21:34.000]  Yes.
[21:34.000 --> 21:40.000]  It seems like it could create a constitutional conflict.
[21:40.000 --> 21:47.000]  I don't think it's a deal, but I can see how that could happen.
[21:47.000 --> 21:55.000]  Now, JPs aren't restricted this way and felonies aren't restricted this way because that would go to district court.
[21:55.000 --> 21:56.000]  Correct.
[21:56.000 --> 22:06.000]  They have misdemeanors and misdemeanors have 60 and 90 days, 60 for B, 90 for C, for A.
[22:06.000 --> 22:23.000]  So a B misdemeanor, I get it charged on the day after the court closes or the day the court closes or even the last 30 days of the court.
[22:23.000 --> 22:31.000]  They're not going to have time to get me in and get all of our discovery and motions handled.
[22:31.000 --> 22:35.000]  Their 60 days are going to run out really fast.
[22:35.000 --> 22:38.000]  I believe you're right.
[22:38.000 --> 22:40.000]  It was interesting.
[22:40.000 --> 22:41.000]  Okay.
[22:41.000 --> 22:44.000]  I wanted to make that just because it was interesting.
[22:44.000 --> 22:45.000]  Okay.
[22:45.000 --> 22:54.000]  I have Tina and Elise on and Tina, I promised Elise that I would take her first because she talks nice about us.
[22:54.000 --> 22:57.000]  She's not churlish.
[22:57.000 --> 23:00.000]  Oh my.
[23:00.000 --> 23:05.000]  Tina's going to get me when she gets on.
[23:05.000 --> 23:11.000]  She won't, but she should.
[23:11.000 --> 23:17.000]  She's even had an answer to that on the Telegram channel.
[23:17.000 --> 23:18.000]  Okay.
[23:18.000 --> 23:22.000]  Elise, what do you have for us today?
[23:22.000 --> 23:23.000]  Hi, guys.
[23:23.000 --> 23:26.000]  Thank you for taking my call.
[23:26.000 --> 23:28.000]  A couple of things.
[23:28.000 --> 23:35.000]  So when the, do you remember this was about the lunatic dentist?
[23:35.000 --> 23:40.000]  Say that again about the, this is the dentist, right?
[23:40.000 --> 23:41.000]  Yes, this is the dentist.
[23:41.000 --> 23:51.000]  So when the defendant filed the motion to dismiss, she was specific to say in parentheses that this is the second amended complaint.
[23:51.000 --> 23:54.000]  And let me tell you why very quickly.
[23:54.000 --> 23:56.000]  And there's a point to me telling you this.
[23:56.000 --> 23:59.000]  The case started in small claims.
[23:59.000 --> 24:03.000]  The first lawyer was playing small claims.
[24:03.000 --> 24:05.000]  That's a no-no.
[24:05.000 --> 24:07.000]  I sent in an amended complaint.
[24:07.000 --> 24:10.000]  The first judge, by the way, that recused herself.
[24:10.000 --> 24:18.000]  But the first judge sent back the amended complaint, said that I wasn't allowed to amend the complaint.
[24:18.000 --> 24:24.000]  She approved the first lawyer's venue change.
[24:24.000 --> 24:27.000]  She recused herself.
[24:27.000 --> 24:29.000]  We got to civil.
[24:29.000 --> 24:37.000]  And that's why I filed a motion to leave or amend.
[24:37.000 --> 24:38.000]  I can't remember the name now.
[24:38.000 --> 24:42.000]  My anxiety is rising again.
[24:42.000 --> 24:44.000]  And that's why I filed a motion to leave.
[24:44.000 --> 24:57.000]  If you have a solution for the anxiety issue, what I do when I start having anxiety is I self-medicate with a alcohol tincture.
[24:57.000 --> 25:08.000]  This anxiety is going to be great for my hearing.
[25:08.000 --> 25:15.000]  Anyway, so then I filed a motion to amend to leave.
[25:15.000 --> 25:20.000]  It turns out the first amended complaint is still in the queue.
[25:20.000 --> 25:22.000]  Nothing happened to it.
[25:22.000 --> 25:25.000]  I want to make sure, what do I do about that first one?
[25:25.000 --> 25:28.000]  Do I need to do anything about the first one?
[25:28.000 --> 25:33.000]  The second amended complaint takes the place of the first.
[25:33.000 --> 25:34.000]  Okay.
[25:34.000 --> 25:35.000]  All right.
[25:35.000 --> 25:52.000]  So if they did not respond to the first, then they can't complain about the second because no harm, no foul for the fact that it being the second amended.
[25:52.000 --> 26:00.000]  So what are they saying is the reason to dismiss the second amended complaint?
[26:00.000 --> 26:19.000]  Oh, so this is, okay, so they want either to dismiss the amended complaint or they're asking, they're requiring a preliminary expert opinion affidavit.
[26:19.000 --> 26:20.000]  Wait a minute.
[26:20.000 --> 26:24.000]  Who has to issue an affidavit?
[26:24.000 --> 26:25.000]  I do.
[26:25.000 --> 26:34.000]  The lawyer is using definitions from different rules to make it seem like this is a malpractice suit.
[26:34.000 --> 26:36.000]  She's just, it's rubbish.
[26:36.000 --> 26:40.000]  It's absolutely ridiculous.
[26:40.000 --> 26:46.000]  The motions that you filed, were they verified?
[26:46.000 --> 26:50.000]  Do you have them notarized?
[26:50.000 --> 26:52.000]  My motion?
[26:52.000 --> 26:53.000]  Yes.
[26:53.000 --> 26:56.000]  Notarized by a third party or notary public?
[26:56.000 --> 26:58.000]  Yes.
[26:58.000 --> 26:59.000]  No.
[26:59.000 --> 27:04.000]  But this is my up question to you regarding the motion.
[27:04.000 --> 27:08.000]  While we're on this, here's the deal on motions.
[27:08.000 --> 27:29.000]  If you're filing a motion that has no new facts in it, if you're just filing a motion arguing issues, let's say a complaint's been filed against you and you file a challenge to subject matter jurisdiction,
[27:29.000 --> 27:36.000]  and you state the facts that are already on the record, that does not have to be notarized.
[27:36.000 --> 27:45.000]  But if you're stating new facts, then you have to have it notarized because of the new facts.
[27:45.000 --> 27:53.000]  And a statement of facts that's notarized, well, that's called an affidavit.
[27:53.000 --> 28:03.000]  So anytime you file a motion that has facts in it that are not already before the court, make sure you notarize it.
[28:03.000 --> 28:12.000]  Now, if you notarize a motion or a pleading that does not need to be notarized, no harm, no foul.
[28:12.000 --> 28:14.000]  That's fine.
[28:14.000 --> 28:29.000]  If you fail to notarize a motion or a pleading that needs to be notarized, the other side has to complain about it, and then you are given opportunity to verify the document, and you can do that before the court.
[28:29.000 --> 28:32.000]  You can assert to the court, yes, that is my document.
[28:32.000 --> 28:42.000]  Those facts are true and accurate to the best of my knowledge, and the judge can verify that for you, or the court clerk can do it.
[28:42.000 --> 28:51.000]  This is just some steps because when lawyers start doing sharp practice, they want to play around with little details.
[28:51.000 --> 29:01.000]  The way they generally beat the proceeds is on procedure, and this is one they try to play with just because they think the proceeds don't know any better.
[29:01.000 --> 29:04.000]  Anyway, okay, I'll shut up now.
[29:04.000 --> 29:09.000]  So are you saying that her motion to dismiss should have been notarized?
[29:09.000 --> 29:13.000]  If it had facts in it, facts that were not before the court.
[29:13.000 --> 29:21.000]  If you just argued the facts that were before the court and the legal implications of those facts, no, it doesn't have to be.
[29:21.000 --> 29:31.000]  But even if hers is not notarized, it's a waste of time. If you complain about it, the lawyer will say, oh, Your Honor, look here, it's not notarized.
[29:31.000 --> 29:35.000]  Here, I'll sign this in front of you, and it's done.
[29:35.000 --> 29:38.000]  So it's kind of a nothing issue.
[29:38.000 --> 29:44.000]  There's a lot of patriots that jump up and down and rail in righteous indignation about that, but it doesn't mean much.
[29:44.000 --> 29:53.000]  If it's a criminal complaint or something, it's different. But hang on, about to go to our sponsors, Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain, Wheel of Law Radio.
[29:53.000 --> 30:02.000]  We'll be right back.
[30:02.000 --> 30:07.000]  It's clear cell phones have changed the way we live and work, but have they negatively affected our health?
[30:07.000 --> 30:15.000]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, and I'll be back in just a moment with new findings about how cell phones may actually alter our brain chemistry.
[30:15.000 --> 30:20.000]  Privacy is under attack. When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[30:20.000 --> 30:25.000]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish, too.
[30:25.000 --> 30:30.000]  So protect your rights. Say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself.
[30:30.000 --> 30:40.000]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to. This public service announcement is brought to you by Startpage.com, the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[30:40.000 --> 30:44.000]  Start over with Startpage.
[30:44.000 --> 30:47.000]  Cell phones emit radio frequency energy. It's a fact.
[30:47.000 --> 30:52.000]  But whether it's dangerous to have a phone beaming this kind of radiation near your head has been disputed.
[30:52.000 --> 30:57.000]  Some have blamed it for brain tumors, while cell phone companies have downplayed concerns.
[30:57.000 --> 31:03.000]  Well, now the Journal of the American Medical Association is confirming that cell phones affect brain chemistry.
[31:03.000 --> 31:11.000]  A study of 47 volunteers showed that glucose metabolism in the area of the brain closest to the cell phone antenna increases when the cell phone is on.
[31:11.000 --> 31:16.000]  While researchers aren't sure whether this exposure causes damage, I'm not taking any chances.
[31:16.000 --> 31:20.000]  I always keep the phone far from my body, and I use a corded headset.
[31:20.000 --> 31:30.000]  Look after Catherine Albrecht. More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[31:30.000 --> 31:35.000]  I lost my son, my nephew, my uncle, my son on September 11, 2001.
[31:35.000 --> 31:39.000]  Most people don't know that a third tower fell on September 11.
[31:39.000 --> 31:43.000]  World Trade Center 7, a 47-story skyscraper, was not hit by a plane.
[31:43.000 --> 31:52.000]  Although the official explanation is that fire brought down Building 7, over 1,200 architects and engineers have looked into the evidence and believe there is more to the story.
[31:52.000 --> 31:58.000]  Bring justice to my son, my uncle, my nephew, my son. Go to buildingwatch.org.
[31:58.000 --> 32:01.000]  Why it fell, why it matters, and what you can do.
[32:01.000 --> 32:06.000]  Are you looking to have a closer relationship with God and a better understanding of His Word?
[32:06.000 --> 32:13.000]  Then tune in to LogosRadioNetwork.com on Wednesdays from 8 to 10 p.m. Central Time for Scripture Talk,
[32:13.000 --> 32:18.000]  where Nana and her guests discuss the Scriptures in accord with 2 Timothy 2.15.
[32:18.000 --> 32:25.000]  Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
[32:25.000 --> 32:32.000]  Starting in January, our first hour studies are in the Book of Mark, where we'll go verse by verse and discuss the true Gospel message.
[32:32.000 --> 32:39.000]  Our second hour topical studies will vary each week with discussions on sound doctrine and Christian character development.
[32:39.000 --> 32:44.000]  We wish to reflect God's light and be a blessing to all those with a hearing ear.
[32:44.000 --> 32:50.000]  Our goal is to strengthen our faith and to transform ourselves more into the likeness of our Lord and Savior Jesus.
[32:50.000 --> 33:03.000]  So tune in to Scripture Talk live on LogosRadioNetwork.com Wednesdays from 8 to 10 p.m. to inspire and motivate your studies of the Scriptures.
[33:03.000 --> 33:12.000]  You're listening to the Logos Radio Network at LogosRadioNetwork.com.
[33:12.000 --> 33:25.000]  Yeah, I got a warrant and I'm gonna solve them to the government and prosecute them.
[33:25.000 --> 33:29.000]  Okay.
[33:29.000 --> 33:39.000]  Okay.
[33:39.000 --> 33:42.000]  Okay, we are back.
[33:42.000 --> 33:45.000]  Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain, Blue of Law Radio.
[33:45.000 --> 33:58.000]  And on this, the 20th day of May, this Friday, the 20th day of May, 2022, and we're talking to Elise in Arizona.
[33:58.000 --> 34:10.000]  Okay, Elise, I'll shut up now and let you explain where you're at with the second amended pleading they're trying to get dismissed.
[34:10.000 --> 34:19.000]  Okay, so I have two more items, one of which is what you just asked about.
[34:19.000 --> 34:32.000]  My question is, would it be valid to reply with, this has nothing, obviously I will learn and I will be articulate and eloquent, not like I'm being right now,
[34:32.000 --> 34:45.000]  but is it valid to say that she is the merchant and I'm a consumer and this is a relationship, that is it, it has nothing to do with malpractice?
[34:45.000 --> 34:48.000]  Absolutely.
[34:48.000 --> 34:51.000]  This is strictly a contractual issue.
[34:51.000 --> 34:55.000]  You're not saying that the dentist is a bad dentist.
[34:55.000 --> 35:01.000]  You're not saying that the dentist made a medical error.
[35:01.000 --> 35:04.000]  You're saying you paid her to do something, she didn't do it.
[35:04.000 --> 35:08.000]  Yeah, that keeps it nice and clean.
[35:08.000 --> 35:11.000]  Wonderful, because that's the way I want to keep it.
[35:11.000 --> 35:21.000]  And then finally, same last words, finally, we are currently waiting for a hearing.
[35:21.000 --> 35:28.000]  Everything in the queue allegedly has stopped and the judge is not looking at anything.
[35:28.000 --> 35:33.000]  My motion, a new lawyer came in on May 6th.
[35:33.000 --> 35:42.000]  She finally replied to my motion just a few days ago and was late regarding the rule of you have 10 days.
[35:42.000 --> 35:45.000]  She might have had five days plus or minus.
[35:45.000 --> 35:51.000]  Either way, she was late on all of them.
[35:51.000 --> 35:57.000]  Did she request leave of the court to enter a late filing?
[35:57.000 --> 35:59.000]  Nope.
[35:59.000 --> 36:02.000]  Naughty, naughty.
[36:02.000 --> 36:09.000]  The reason I said that is it is protocol and they understand that lawyers are busy
[36:09.000 --> 36:15.000]  and this is a new lawyer on the case and maybe she was stressed for time
[36:15.000 --> 36:20.000]  and the courts want to give the litigants reasonable time to take care of their issues.
[36:20.000 --> 36:28.000]  And there are procedures because the court, this is a simple case and there can be no surprise.
[36:28.000 --> 36:34.000]  The courts want both parties to have plenty of time to address all the issues.
[36:34.000 --> 36:40.000]  So if you're going to be late, then you need to ask leave of the court.
[36:40.000 --> 36:42.000]  And the court can either grant it or not.
[36:42.000 --> 36:47.000]  She didn't bother to ask leave of the court knowing that she was late.
[36:47.000 --> 36:51.000]  She filed late anyway.
[36:51.000 --> 36:55.000]  That's disrespectful to the court.
[36:55.000 --> 36:58.000]  You should point that out.
[36:58.000 --> 37:03.000]  Prose litigants are not supposed to know that kind of stuff.
[37:03.000 --> 37:08.000]  So ask the court to strike the pleadings because she failed to petition for leave,
[37:08.000 --> 37:14.000]  ask for leave of the court for a late filing.
[37:14.000 --> 37:22.000]  And so my question about all of this, thank you for the information, I wrote all that down.
[37:22.000 --> 37:24.000]  Do I say something about it?
[37:24.000 --> 37:27.000]  So I'm looking for, I'm looking to stutter up.
[37:27.000 --> 37:29.000]  Thank you to you.
[37:29.000 --> 37:32.000]  I'm doing it from my heart, from a very heart-centered space,
[37:32.000 --> 37:38.000]  and trying to find a way to bar grieve for a second time when the time comes,
[37:38.000 --> 37:41.000]  in about two and a half weeks or so.
[37:41.000 --> 37:44.000]  So would that be a bar grieve then?
[37:44.000 --> 37:46.000]  That's my first question.
[37:46.000 --> 37:50.000]  And my second question is, do I really do something about this
[37:50.000 --> 37:55.000]  or leave this in my pocket for when I might need to use this?
[37:55.000 --> 38:00.000]  And let me just say, let me just add a side note.
[38:00.000 --> 38:05.000]  I highly doubt, I'm 99.9% sure I will never be late on anything
[38:05.000 --> 38:07.000]  because that's just my personality.
[38:07.000 --> 38:11.000]  So would I even ever need to use this?
[38:11.000 --> 38:20.000]  I'm going to suggest that this will not harm you, that legally it won't harm you obviously,
[38:20.000 --> 38:27.000]  but in the mind of the judge, this is not about you denying the lawyer
[38:27.000 --> 38:31.000]  the opportunity to file a late filing.
[38:31.000 --> 38:35.000]  This is about the lawyer disrespecting the court
[38:35.000 --> 38:43.000]  and didn't do what the lawyer should have done by requesting leave for short filing,
[38:43.000 --> 38:48.000]  or coming to you and say, would you have an objection to a late filing?
[38:48.000 --> 38:52.000]  And we've had people on here talk about that, where the lawyers have come to them,
[38:52.000 --> 38:57.000]  and sometimes I've suggested that they do, and sometimes I've suggested that they don't,
[38:57.000 --> 39:07.000]  but in all ways, I'm looking at the nature of the filing and how it's going to affect the judge.
[39:07.000 --> 39:12.000]  Now the judge is supposed to be fair and honest, but judges are human beings,
[39:12.000 --> 39:22.000]  and you can annoy them unnecessarily, like this thing about whether the document was notarized.
[39:22.000 --> 39:29.000]  I just annoy the judge, serve no real purpose, and tend to get the judge annoyed at you
[39:29.000 --> 39:36.000]  and make it harder for him to give you the ruling you want, even if he feels like you deserve it.
[39:36.000 --> 39:44.000]  People are affected by these things, so in this case, you're not complaining that it's late.
[39:44.000 --> 39:57.000]  You're complaining that the lawyer owed it to both you and the court to give notice and ask permission.
[39:57.000 --> 39:59.000]  She didn't bother.
[39:59.000 --> 40:02.000]  So no, I don't think this will hurt you a bit.
[40:02.000 --> 40:05.000]  You should stinger for it.
[40:05.000 --> 40:08.000]  It's just good civil practice.
[40:08.000 --> 40:12.000]  It's civility.
[40:12.000 --> 40:19.000]  And that's interesting that you say that because when I replied to her latest email,
[40:19.000 --> 40:21.000]  I was quite stern.
[40:21.000 --> 40:23.000]  I was very proud of myself.
[40:23.000 --> 40:24.000]  Brett helped me.
[40:24.000 --> 40:29.000]  He was very supportive, like many others, and I let her know at the end of the email.
[40:29.000 --> 40:33.000]  I said, next time if you're running late, just let me know, and I just did that intuitively
[40:33.000 --> 40:46.000]  because I just want to be courteous and be as professional as I can during this exhausting litigation.
[40:46.000 --> 40:53.000]  There is a term I need to say before it slips off my mind again.
[40:53.000 --> 40:58.000]  Have you ever heard the term churning?
[40:58.000 --> 41:01.000]  I have, yes.
[41:01.000 --> 41:08.000]  Keep that in mind when this lawyer is filing motions and pleadings.
[41:08.000 --> 41:15.000]  Lawyers churn the case so they can extract more funds from their clients.
[41:15.000 --> 41:20.000]  They file meaningless or frivolous motions.
[41:20.000 --> 41:26.000]  Just to be filing motions, they've got to, for the most part, they have these motions in their files.
[41:26.000 --> 41:31.000]  They just pull them out and change the names on and file them, and then they charge the client
[41:31.000 --> 41:35.000]  for creating the motion they already had created.
[41:35.000 --> 41:38.000]  And that's called churning the case.
[41:38.000 --> 41:43.000]  If the lawyer is filing a pleading that appears to be frivolous,
[41:43.000 --> 41:52.000]  you should include that word somewhere in your response.
[41:52.000 --> 42:02.000]  Does it matter that the response to my motion were all moot?
[42:02.000 --> 42:06.000]  They were valid moot ones.
[42:06.000 --> 42:12.000]  Does that matter in regards to leave of the court and asking to strike pleadings,
[42:12.000 --> 42:15.000]  and am I really going to ask him to strike her pleadings?
[42:15.000 --> 42:17.000]  I mean, that seems so intense.
[42:17.000 --> 42:22.000]  Well, striking the pleading is asking the court to throw the pleading out.
[42:22.000 --> 42:27.000]  That's a bit extreme.
[42:27.000 --> 42:32.000]  You should ask the court to maybe perhaps for sanctions for churning
[42:32.000 --> 42:37.000]  because she filled the document with frivolous arguments.
[42:37.000 --> 42:38.000]  Yeah, say frivolous.
[42:38.000 --> 42:43.000]  That's a great word to use against them.
[42:43.000 --> 42:53.000]  Frivolous arguments that were moot at the beginning simply to churn the litigation.
[42:53.000 --> 42:58.000]  Yeah, for her own financial gain, to the detriment of her client.
[42:58.000 --> 43:03.000]  To the detriment of both clients, of both parties.
[43:03.000 --> 43:09.000]  And to the disdain and disregard of this court's judicial resources.
[43:09.000 --> 43:14.000]  Perfect.
[43:14.000 --> 43:18.000]  Okay, is this getting to me more fun?
[43:18.000 --> 43:19.000]  Yes.
[43:19.000 --> 43:21.000]  You're not picking up on my point.
[43:21.000 --> 43:23.000]  She said yes.
[43:23.000 --> 43:28.000]  You're making the lawyer better.
[43:28.000 --> 43:32.000]  Steel sharpens steel.
[43:32.000 --> 43:37.000]  And to be made better by a pro se, absolutely wonderful.
[43:37.000 --> 43:42.000]  Hang on, Randy Kelton, Wet Fountain Wheel of Our Radio.
[43:42.000 --> 43:47.000]  We have one more space on the call board.
[43:47.000 --> 43:50.000]  So if you have a question or comment, give us a call.
[43:50.000 --> 43:56.000]  I'm hoping that Olivier will call back in.
[43:56.000 --> 43:57.000]  Okay, hang on.
[43:57.000 --> 43:58.000]  We're going to our sponsors.
[43:58.000 --> 44:01.000]  We'll be right back.
[44:01.000 --> 44:05.000]  Through advances in technology, our lives have greatly improved.
[44:05.000 --> 44:10.000]  In the area of nutrition, people feed their pets better than they feed themselves.
[44:10.000 --> 44:12.000]  And it's time we changed all that.
[44:12.000 --> 44:18.000]  Our primary defense against aging and disease in this toxic environment is good nutrition.
[44:18.000 --> 44:23.000]  In a world where natural foods have been irradiated, adulterated, and mutilated,
[44:23.000 --> 44:26.000]  young Jevity can provide the nutrients you need.
[44:26.000 --> 44:32.000]  Logos Radio Network gets many requests to endorse all sorts of products, most of which we reject.
[44:32.000 --> 44:36.000]  We've come to trust young Jevity so much, we became a marketing distributor,
[44:36.000 --> 44:40.000]  along with Alex Jones, Ben Fuchs, and many others.
[44:40.000 --> 44:45.000]  When you order from LogosRadioNetwork.com, your health will improve
[44:45.000 --> 44:48.000]  as you help support quality radio.
[44:48.000 --> 44:52.000]  As you realize the benefits of young Jevity, you may want to join us.
[44:52.000 --> 44:57.000]  As a distributor, you can experience improved health, help your friends and family,
[44:57.000 --> 44:59.000]  and increase your income.
[44:59.000 --> 45:01.000]  Order now.
[45:01.000 --> 45:04.000]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[45:04.000 --> 45:07.000]  Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary,
[45:07.000 --> 45:15.000]  the affordable, easy-to-understand, 4-CD course that will show you how in 24 hours, step-by-step.
[45:15.000 --> 45:19.000]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing.
[45:19.000 --> 45:23.000]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[45:23.000 --> 45:28.000]  Thousands have won with our step-by-step course, and now you can too.
[45:28.000 --> 45:34.000]  Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case-winning experience.
[45:34.000 --> 45:39.000]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand
[45:39.000 --> 45:43.000]  about the principles and practices that control our American courts.
[45:43.000 --> 45:49.000]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases,
[45:49.000 --> 45:52.000]  pro se tactics, and much more.
[45:52.000 --> 45:56.000]  Please visit RuleOfLawRadio.com and click on the banner,
[45:56.000 --> 46:01.000]  or call toll-free, 866-LAW-EZ.
[46:01.000 --> 46:27.000]  Music
[46:27.000 --> 46:37.000]  Music
[46:37.000 --> 46:47.000]  Music
[46:47.000 --> 47:00.000]  Music
[47:00.000 --> 47:04.000]  Okay, we are back into Kelton Brett Fountain with Law Radio,
[47:04.000 --> 47:07.000]  and I'm going to go ahead and address this.
[47:07.000 --> 47:11.000]  No, you go ahead. I've got something I want to address when you're done.
[47:11.000 --> 47:15.000]  Go ahead, Elise. I keep interrupting you.
[47:15.000 --> 47:19.000]  I don't mind your interruption for a nanosecond.
[47:19.000 --> 47:23.000]  I just wanted to bring up one last thing. I did bring it up yesterday.
[47:23.000 --> 47:28.000]  Your answer was that you didn't know. I'm feeling called to try one more time.
[47:28.000 --> 47:35.000]  She replied to my amended complaint with a motion to dismiss,
[47:35.000 --> 47:40.000]  which nullified her counterclaim.
[47:40.000 --> 47:48.000]  Her counterclaim was a big, fat lie, and it bothers me.
[47:48.000 --> 47:55.000]  Is there anything that I can do about the counterclaim to bring that fact up?
[47:55.000 --> 47:58.000]  What is the nature of the counterclaim?
[47:58.000 --> 48:06.000]  She said that I owed her $1,000 when I received $1,000 back
[48:06.000 --> 48:11.000]  for my credit card claim that took six months that she never replied to.
[48:11.000 --> 48:21.000]  I supplied the credit card claim with a lot of evidence showing that she owed me money, and that is it.
[48:21.000 --> 48:28.000]  She has yet to supply any of us one piece of evidence, but anyway, that's just a little side note.
[48:28.000 --> 48:33.000]  But that was the counterclaim that I owed her $1,000.
[48:33.000 --> 48:41.000]  Have you applied to the counterclaim to dismiss for failing to state a claim?
[48:41.000 --> 48:48.000]  I didn't dismiss it to state a claim. I called it.
[48:48.000 --> 48:52.000]  Well, you don't have to use exactly those words.
[48:52.000 --> 48:56.000]  I did respond to the counterclaim.
[48:56.000 --> 49:03.000]  I did respond, and another thing that's very upsetting, and that the defendant responded saying
[49:03.000 --> 49:11.000]  I didn't provide evidence when it shows Exhibit A, Exhibit B, or whatever the case may be,
[49:11.000 --> 49:23.000]  and she said it was moot because she answered my amended complaint with a motion to dismiss.
[49:23.000 --> 49:33.000]  Moot is the wrong term. It's not moot. It's not ripe.
[49:33.000 --> 49:40.000]  It's not ripe for hearing because there is a motion to dismiss.
[49:40.000 --> 49:46.000]  Once the motion to dismiss is heard, then you can move on with the litigation, so it's not moot.
[49:46.000 --> 49:53.000]  And that's it. Lawyers should have known better than that.
[49:53.000 --> 49:57.000]  But that's a nonsense argument.
[49:57.000 --> 50:04.000]  It would only be moot if the judge rules in her favor.
[50:04.000 --> 50:10.000]  Because if the judge rules in her favor, then your claim gets dismissed.
[50:10.000 --> 50:17.000]  Then the motions concerning the claims would be moot.
[50:17.000 --> 50:23.000]  But as it is, the motion still stands. It's just not ripe for hearing.
[50:23.000 --> 50:27.000]  Does that make sense?
[50:27.000 --> 50:31.000]  Yeah, I think so. And, you know, I'm taking ownership. I should get over it.
[50:31.000 --> 50:36.000]  They lie, and I'm just a little bit attaching to it. That's probably just my ego talking.
[50:36.000 --> 50:41.000]  It's just frustrating when there are lies, when you put so much effort into things, and they just lie.
[50:41.000 --> 50:47.000]  They just lie. They just constantly lie. It's baffling. But it is what it is.
[50:47.000 --> 50:56.000]  It's what they do. Expect them to do that and anticipate that they will do that and use it against them.
[50:56.000 --> 51:09.000]  If they have made false statements of material fact, then there's another appellate avenue for you.
[51:09.000 --> 51:20.000]  You can appeal to a grand jury to indict them for aggravated perjury.
[51:20.000 --> 51:27.000]  Lying in those pleadings that you can show is material and untrue.
[51:27.000 --> 51:29.000]  Yeah, hit them hard, fast.
[51:29.000 --> 51:36.000]  That you can go to this court and ask the court to adjudicate this stuff, or you can go to a grand jury and ask them to adjudicate it.
[51:36.000 --> 51:41.000]  Ask them what they think about it.
[51:41.000 --> 51:46.000]  If you're really upset about the lying, this is a really good place to fix them.
[51:46.000 --> 51:55.000]  The judges try to protect lawyers. They all have their snouts in the same trough.
[51:55.000 --> 52:02.000]  Grand juries were the genius of our founders.
[52:02.000 --> 52:08.000]  When you get in front of a judge and he says, if you don't like my ruling, you can appeal it.
[52:08.000 --> 52:22.000]  Yeah, I can appeal it. I can appeal to a court of appeals, which is one of your buddies, or I can appeal to a grand jury to indict you and see how that works for you.
[52:22.000 --> 52:27.000]  Consider that as a matter of course.
[52:27.000 --> 52:36.000]  If they bring up the criminal complaints in this court, you object because this court doesn't have jurisdiction over those complaints.
[52:36.000 --> 52:41.000]  Because these crimes are committed in front of this judge. This judge is a witness.
[52:41.000 --> 52:46.000]  He's disqualified.
[52:46.000 --> 52:50.000]  Okay. Thank you so, so much for everything.
[52:50.000 --> 52:52.000]  Okay. Have fun with this.
[52:52.000 --> 52:54.000]  Both of you. Thank you so much.
[52:54.000 --> 52:59.000]  You are welcome. Okay.
[52:59.000 --> 53:03.000]  Okay. Address that other issue that I wanted to address.
[53:03.000 --> 53:09.000]  Is there something else I was going to address? What did you bring up on the break?
[53:09.000 --> 53:12.000]  Not churning.
[53:12.000 --> 53:18.000]  Yeah, there's a scripture that came to my mind about churning.
[53:18.000 --> 53:26.000]  Like churning milk produces butter and twisting of the nose produces blood.
[53:26.000 --> 53:30.000]  The case produces green.
[53:30.000 --> 53:36.000]  Yeah, there's that too. It produces strife.
[53:36.000 --> 53:39.000]  That's exactly what makes me think about baritory.
[53:39.000 --> 53:49.000]  When you talk about somebody that's stirring up trouble, controversy, fomenting litigation that they would then be paid to litigate.
[53:49.000 --> 53:53.000]  That's exactly what that sounds like to me.
[53:53.000 --> 54:03.000]  And baritory, the only states I know of that have made that criminal are so far New York and Texas. Texas makes a felony.
[54:03.000 --> 54:06.000]  Well, good for New York.
[54:06.000 --> 54:14.000]  Ambulance chasing, that's against the law in Texas. Oh, hey, I'm a lawyer. You can sue that guy. You ought to call me.
[54:14.000 --> 54:19.000]  That would get you in charge of the felony in Texas.
[54:19.000 --> 54:27.000]  Okay, now we're going to go to Sweet Define Tina. Hello, Sweet Tina.
[54:27.000 --> 54:32.000]  Why did you pass that church remark earlier?
[54:32.000 --> 54:38.000]  You forgot about that, right?
[54:38.000 --> 54:45.000]  I thought you were changing in the New Year. You were changing to be sweet to me.
[54:45.000 --> 54:48.000]  Wait, do you have your Bluetooth in?
[54:48.000 --> 54:54.000]  Well, the only problem is he has a little bit of trouble keeping straight about which year it is.
[54:54.000 --> 55:01.000]  So maybe that was the coming year that he's doing.
[55:01.000 --> 55:03.000]  Hey, memory's getting better.
[55:03.000 --> 55:11.000]  My memory is so good that I don't even remember the last time I forgot something.
[55:11.000 --> 55:19.000]  We do.
[55:19.000 --> 55:23.000]  Well, good to talk to you guys again.
[55:23.000 --> 55:25.000]  I wanted to just run something by you.
[55:25.000 --> 55:37.000]  I'm busy trying to file a rebuttal to the attorney's motion to dismiss my motion for reconsideration.
[55:37.000 --> 55:46.000]  This is the motion I filed back in December, and they're just responding to it two weeks before the hearing date.
[55:46.000 --> 55:53.000]  And I want to, you know, they technically I think they have the right to leave it to this late,
[55:53.000 --> 56:03.000]  but they're really just trying to seize a tactical advantage knowing that I don't have a staff of 200 lawyers on hand to write it up and research.
[56:03.000 --> 56:13.000]  So I'm trying to get more on the record ready for the appeal because I'm pretty certain the judge is going to deny my motion
[56:13.000 --> 56:24.000]  because she says everything is barred by res judicata even though this is a completely separate claim and a completely separate party
[56:24.000 --> 56:34.000]  still relating to the property, but this is against the attorney for misrepresentation and fraud.
[56:34.000 --> 56:54.000]  So I'm filing this and what I found, I'm adding stuff that I found on the American Bar Association website where it talks about the privilege, the burden of the lawyer's privilege to practice law.
[56:54.000 --> 57:04.000]  And, you know, I'm bringing it all in because I believe that it, you know, directly goes to their lies to me
[57:04.000 --> 57:15.000]  where they claim that they had no duty to send me the documents and that I was not entitled to them after they promised to send them.
[57:15.000 --> 57:24.000]  And so I've kind of put, you know, here really they cannot possibly claim ignorance of the law, therefore by promising to send the original documents
[57:24.000 --> 57:30.000]  when they actually had no intention of doing so as they admitted to in a letter,
[57:30.000 --> 57:38.000]  they show that it was a very deliberate ruse to deceive and deceive with malicious motive and it is fraud, pure and simple.
[57:38.000 --> 57:46.000]  So for the court to condone and accept such behavior is morally reprehensible when it directly contradicts the rules of professional conduct
[57:46.000 --> 57:54.000]  and shows clear bias towards attorneys by allowing them to violate their oath and rules of conduct with impunity.
[57:54.000 --> 57:58.000]  Oh, you're running me off the cliff, Randy.
[57:58.000 --> 58:01.000]  How many seconds do I have?
[58:01.000 --> 58:04.000]  He would never do that to you.
[58:04.000 --> 58:06.000]  You have about 45 seconds.
[58:06.000 --> 58:16.000]  Okay, and it talks about the American Bar Association says that swearing the lawyer's oath is the admission ticket for the privilege of practicing law
[58:16.000 --> 58:21.000]  and they all swear to support the Constitution of the United States.
[58:21.000 --> 58:34.000]  And then it goes on to say, which points that I've highlighted, an attorney's oath requires active participation and it's unconditional.
[58:34.000 --> 58:39.000]  The lawyer's oath is 24-7.
[58:39.000 --> 58:41.000]  Okay, hold on.
[58:41.000 --> 58:43.000]  And I think you have about 45 seconds.
[58:43.000 --> 58:45.000]  Now we're about to go off the cliff.
[58:45.000 --> 58:50.000]  Randy Kalten, Brett Fountain, we'll be right back.
[58:50.000 --> 58:54.000]  Would you like to make more definite progress in your walk with God?
[58:54.000 --> 59:01.000]  Bibles for America is offering a free study Bible and a set of free Christian books that can really help.
[59:01.000 --> 59:06.000]  The New Testament Recovery Version is one of the most comprehensive study Bibles available today.
[59:06.000 --> 59:13.000]  It's an accurate translation and it contains thousands of footnotes that will help you to know God and to know the meaning of life.
[59:13.000 --> 59:18.000]  The free books are a three-volume set called Basic Elements of the Christian Life.
[59:18.000 --> 59:28.000]  Chapter by chapter, Basic Elements of the Christian Life clearly presents God's plan of salvation, growing in Christ, and how to build up the church.
[59:28.000 --> 59:41.000]  To order your free New Testament Recovery Version and Basic Elements of the Christian Life, call Bibles for America toll-free at 888-551-0102.
[59:41.000 --> 59:45.000]  That's 888-551-0102.
[59:45.000 --> 59:50.000]  Or visit us online at bfa.org.
[59:50.000 --> 01:00:02.000]  Live free speech radio, logosradionetwork.com.
[01:00:02.000 --> 01:00:06.000]  The Bill of Rights contains the first ten amendments of our Constitution.
[01:00:06.000 --> 01:00:09.000]  They guarantee a specific freedoms Americans should know and protect.
[01:00:09.000 --> 01:00:11.000]  Our liberty depends on it.
[01:00:11.000 --> 01:00:17.000]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht and I'll be right back with an unforgettable way to remember one of your constitutional rights.
[01:00:17.000 --> 01:00:19.000]  Privacy is under attack.
[01:00:19.000 --> 01:00:22.000]  When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[01:00:22.000 --> 01:00:27.000]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[01:00:27.000 --> 01:00:29.000]  So protect your rights.
[01:00:29.000 --> 01:00:32.000]  Say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself.
[01:00:32.000 --> 01:00:35.000]  Privacy, it's worth hanging onto.
[01:00:35.000 --> 01:00:42.000]  This public service announcement is brought to you by StartPage.com, the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[01:00:42.000 --> 01:00:46.000]  Start over with StartPage.
[01:00:46.000 --> 01:00:49.000]  Imagine your mom and dad are getting ready for bed.
[01:00:49.000 --> 01:00:52.000]  They pull back the covers and find a third party there.
[01:00:52.000 --> 01:00:55.000]  He announces, I'm with the military and I'm sleeping here tonight.
[01:00:55.000 --> 01:01:01.000]  That shocking image of a third party in my parents' bed reminds me what the Third Amendment was designed to prevent.
[01:01:01.000 --> 01:01:07.000]  It protects us from being forced to share our homes with soldiers, a common demand in the days of our founding fathers.
[01:01:07.000 --> 01:01:09.000]  Third party, Third Amendment, get it?
[01:01:09.000 --> 01:01:13.000]  So if you answer a knock at your door and guys in fatigues demand lodging,
[01:01:13.000 --> 01:01:17.000]  tell them to dust off their copy of the Bill of Rights and reread the Third Amendment.
[01:01:17.000 --> 01:01:32.000]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht. More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[01:01:32.000 --> 01:01:35.000]  The Bill of Rights contains the first ten amendments of our Constitution.
[01:01:35.000 --> 01:01:39.000]  They guarantee it is specific freedoms Americans should know and protect.
[01:01:39.000 --> 01:01:41.000]  Our liberty depends on it.
[01:01:41.000 --> 01:01:47.000]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht and I'll be right back with an unforgettable way to remember one of your constitutional rights.
[01:01:47.000 --> 01:01:49.000]  Privacy is under attack.
[01:01:49.000 --> 01:01:53.000]  When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[01:01:53.000 --> 01:01:57.000]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[01:01:57.000 --> 01:01:59.000]  So protect your rights.
[01:01:59.000 --> 01:02:03.000]  Say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself.
[01:02:03.000 --> 01:02:05.000]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[01:02:05.000 --> 01:02:09.000]  This public service announcement is brought to you by StartPage.com,
[01:02:09.000 --> 01:02:13.000]  the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[01:02:13.000 --> 01:02:16.000]  Start over with StartPage.
[01:02:16.000 --> 01:02:22.000]  Imagine four eyes staring at you through binoculars, a magnifying glass, or a pair of x-ray goggles.
[01:02:22.000 --> 01:02:28.000]  That imagery reminds me that the Fourth Amendment guarantees Americans freedom from unreasonable search and seizure.
[01:02:28.000 --> 01:02:31.000]  Fourth Amendment, four eyes staring at you, get it?
[01:02:31.000 --> 01:02:35.000]  Unfortunately, the government is trampling our Fourth Amendment rights in the name of security.
[01:02:35.000 --> 01:02:40.000]  Case in point, TSA airport scanners that peer under your clothing.
[01:02:40.000 --> 01:02:44.000]  When government employees demand a peep at your privates without probable cause,
[01:02:44.000 --> 01:02:47.000]  I say it's time to sound the constitutional alarm bells.
[01:02:47.000 --> 01:02:50.000]  Join me in asking our representatives to dust off the Bill of Rights
[01:02:50.000 --> 01:02:54.000]  and use their googly eyes to take a gander at the Fourth.
[01:02:54.000 --> 01:03:06.000]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht. More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[01:03:24.000 --> 01:03:41.000]  Okay, we are back. Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain, Rue de la Radio, and we're talking to Tina in California,
[01:03:41.000 --> 01:03:55.000]  and you're constructing your opposition to a motion to deny your motion for reconsideration.
[01:03:55.000 --> 01:03:56.000]  Have I got that right?
[01:03:56.000 --> 01:04:02.000]  Yes, I'm rebutting there and asking for it to be denied.
[01:04:02.000 --> 01:04:16.000]  You know, because basically, you know, one of the first things I've said here is that the defendant alleges, where does it go?
[01:04:16.000 --> 01:04:33.000]  I brought in Trinsey v. Pagliaro, where it, you know, specifically states that statements of counsel in brief or in argument are not facts before the court
[01:04:33.000 --> 01:04:39.000]  and therefore insufficient for a motion to dismiss or for summary judgment.
[01:04:39.000 --> 01:04:46.000]  So where there are no depositions, admissions, or affidavits, the court has no facts to rely on for summary determination.
[01:04:46.000 --> 01:05:03.000]  Does that fit here because they're asking for my motion to be dismissed and they haven't put any depositions, admissions, or affidavits in?
[01:05:03.000 --> 01:05:14.000]  Yeah. Hello? Well, I'm here. Randy, I think you got yourself muted.
[01:05:14.000 --> 01:05:18.000]  Oh, and I was speaking so eloquently.
[01:05:18.000 --> 01:05:21.000]  You were. I'm sure you were.
[01:05:21.000 --> 01:05:22.000]  I was impressed.
[01:05:22.000 --> 01:05:39.000]  It is a great point of law to bring to that will get you to the next court all by itself if they dismiss this in the face of standing law to the contrary.
[01:05:39.000 --> 01:05:43.000]  This is your whole purpose. You're setting the record.
[01:05:43.000 --> 01:05:54.000]  I'm setting the record and, you know, I'm bringing in what the American Bar Association says about the privilege for practicing law.
[01:05:54.000 --> 01:06:06.000]  And it says here a lawyer's oath is 24-7. Without a specific limitation, a lawyer must, not should, might, must follow the oath always.
[01:06:06.000 --> 01:06:16.000]  The oath places a burden on all lawyers. Every action a lawyer takes, both personal and professional, must comport with this sworn duty.
[01:06:16.000 --> 01:06:20.000]  And every inaction of a lawyer must comply.
[01:06:20.000 --> 01:06:29.000]  And then it says an attorney's oath requires you to support the Constitution, especially when it's hard.
[01:06:29.000 --> 01:06:39.000]  And it further says there that you are obligated to act in support of the Constitution in all situations, especially where it's the hardest for you.
[01:06:39.000 --> 01:06:47.000]  And I've added here it is obvious that the attorneys involved in this case do not adhere to this and other requirements.
[01:06:47.000 --> 01:07:05.000]  Then it goes on to say when lawyers find their oath for the privilege of practicing law, they accepted the responsibility, challenge, and opportunity to support the U.S. Constitution to the best of their abilities in whatever fashion, most appropriate, all the time.
[01:07:05.000 --> 01:07:18.000]  So I'm questioning as to why they fail to support the U.S. Constitution and think it's okay to lie and violate not only the business and professional rules of conduct, but also the oath they took to practice law.
[01:07:18.000 --> 01:07:35.000]  And I'm stating here plaintiff also questions why the courts condone their unethical and unlawful behavior because by lying to me, by admitting that they were lying, and then coming in and saying, well, you really weren't entitled to this.
[01:07:35.000 --> 01:07:45.000]  Well, you can't plead ignorance of the law. You should have known that if it's true when you told me that you would send me these documents.
[01:07:45.000 --> 01:07:56.000]  So to my mind, they're completely violating their oath, the laws, the business and professional rules, and the court is allowing them to get away with it.
[01:07:56.000 --> 01:08:03.000]  And this really attacks my, goes to the heart of my claim against them.
[01:08:03.000 --> 01:08:23.000]  This is a warning to everyone else in California. One of the ways lawyers get to beat proceeds is they get proceeds to agree to take steps that are procedurally incorrect.
[01:08:23.000 --> 01:08:35.000]  I had a friend that was in court with him for seven years, and he had filed a motion to dismiss over one issue they couldn't get around.
[01:08:35.000 --> 01:08:47.000]  And they got him to agree to do something that when he did, they used that against him and got his whole case thrown out.
[01:08:47.000 --> 01:08:54.000]  Don't trust these lawyers. Don't cut them any slack.
[01:08:54.000 --> 01:09:02.000]  And Brett, I lost my thread of exactly why I was going there. Oh, these lawyers made you a promise.
[01:09:02.000 --> 01:09:11.000]  If a lawyer makes you a promise, if you will do this one thing, I'll do the other, then you should always condition your promise on what you will do.
[01:09:11.000 --> 01:09:19.000]  You hold off what you will do until they do what they said they would do.
[01:09:19.000 --> 01:09:34.000]  If you had this to do over, you would tell them, yeah, we'll wait till you produce that to ask the court for a plenipotent abatement to abate the proceedings until they produce that and not agree to move ahead.
[01:09:34.000 --> 01:09:44.000]  You just can't trust them, apparently, and it's worse in California than anywhere else because the judges seem to condone aggravated perjury.
[01:09:44.000 --> 01:09:49.000]  They've actually codified aggravated perjury.
[01:09:49.000 --> 01:09:59.000]  And I think you're moving very well toward a really nice RICO suit against the state.
[01:09:59.000 --> 01:10:02.000]  That would be good.
[01:10:02.000 --> 01:10:14.000]  When I'm putting in here at the bottom, the plaintiff reminds the court that in California, the rules of professional conduct govern a lawyer's ethical duties.
[01:10:14.000 --> 01:10:22.000]  Lawyers are prohibited from engaging in dishonesty. That's California Business and Professional Code 6106.
[01:10:22.000 --> 01:10:28.000]  Lawyers may only employ such means as are consistent with the truth.
[01:10:28.000 --> 01:10:42.000]  There's Business and Professional Code 6068B. So therefore, when McGinnity and his counsel, Mr. Marino, admitted to having no intention of doing what they said they would do in writing and deliver the plaintiff the original note,
[01:10:42.000 --> 01:10:47.000]  they violated this rule and engaged in dishonesty, pure and simple.
[01:10:47.000 --> 01:11:00.000]  Yet the court says, no problem. You can lie all you want and get away with it. This heinous and appalling behavior reflects a lack of respect for the court, its laws, its rules, and the Constitution.
[01:11:00.000 --> 01:11:05.000]  Sounds good to me.
[01:11:05.000 --> 01:11:11.000]  Well, I'm hoping now the second thing I'm going to be facing, because I know I'm going to have to go to an appeal court.
[01:11:11.000 --> 01:11:19.000]  And remember the last time, Brett, when you were on that call, the order came down that if I kept litigating, they would sanction me.
[01:11:19.000 --> 01:11:27.000]  Now, I remember reading something that they couldn't sanction you for a constitutional right.
[01:11:27.000 --> 01:11:45.000]  And trust number one forwarded me the information about that today. And it says, you know, there can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of this exercise of constitutional right.
[01:11:45.000 --> 01:11:51.000]  So it is my right, correct, to bring suit against someone who has wronged me.
[01:11:51.000 --> 01:12:04.000]  So if I go to appeal on this one, which is completely different to the others, I will be able to bring this in when they say, well, we're going to sanction you because we told you if you kept litigating, we would sanction you.
[01:12:04.000 --> 01:12:09.000]  I would put that in writing, kind of nip it in the bud in advance in writing.
[01:12:09.000 --> 01:12:18.000]  There's been talk of sanctions if I were to exercise my constitutional right. Let me show you why that would be improper.
[01:12:18.000 --> 01:12:23.000]  That should get a federal criminal complaint.
[01:12:23.000 --> 01:12:32.000]  Okay. Well, I'd like to do that against that nasty judge who was, you know, he was berating me and belittling me.
[01:12:32.000 --> 01:12:43.000]  And according to a Washington state case, a judge does not have a First Amendment right to berate or belittle any litigant.
[01:12:43.000 --> 01:12:58.000]  So that should get a federal complaint to the local special agent in charge and run the federal routine on the feds for not pursuing prosecution of the judge.
[01:12:58.000 --> 01:13:16.000]  Okay. And it says here, no state shall convert a liberty into a privilege, license it, and attach a fee to it. What does that mean when you talk about no state shall convert a liberty into a privilege, license it, and attach a fee?
[01:13:16.000 --> 01:13:37.000]  What constitutes a liberty? Because it says if the state converts a liberty into a privilege, the citizen can engage in the right with impunity. Could you explain that sentence and what it means and why we have to pay a fee if we have a right to redress?
[01:13:37.000 --> 01:13:40.000]  Wait, I'm not sure how you asked that.
[01:13:40.000 --> 01:13:56.000]  Well, it says here, no state shall convert a liberty into a privilege, license it, and attach a fee to it. If the state converts a liberty into a privilege, the citizen can engage in the right with impunity.
[01:13:56.000 --> 01:14:09.000]  It further says here that trustingly they can only monitor those who are participating in commerce. This means they have to prove first that you are doing commerce. What does that paragraph mean?
[01:14:09.000 --> 01:14:16.000]  It depends on the context of the paragraph. That sounds like something about the right to travel.
[01:14:16.000 --> 01:14:20.000]  Ah. Could be. Okay.
[01:14:20.000 --> 01:14:33.000]  And that doesn't seem to fit here where we're talking about the right to good faith and fair dealing.
[01:14:33.000 --> 01:14:44.000]  But the claim and exercise of a constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime, smell of the U.S. There can be no sanction or penalty. That would fit here, correct?
[01:14:44.000 --> 01:14:47.000]  Absolutely fit.
[01:14:47.000 --> 01:14:50.000]  Okay. And then it goes on your website.
[01:14:50.000 --> 01:14:56.000]  The reason I should complain, that should go to witness tampering.
[01:14:56.000 --> 01:15:05.000]  Because when you litigate, you're acting as a witness in your own behalf, and they're attempting to chill that and deny your access to the courts.
[01:15:05.000 --> 01:15:09.000]  I guess witness tampering wouldn't be the right one, Brett.
[01:15:09.000 --> 01:15:12.000]  What, obstruction?
[01:15:12.000 --> 01:15:14.000]  When they do which?
[01:15:14.000 --> 01:15:27.000]  When a judge threatens a litigant to prevent the litigant from exercising his right to petition the court for redress of grievance.
[01:15:27.000 --> 01:15:29.000]  Obstruction?
[01:15:29.000 --> 01:15:32.000]  That definitely goes to obstruction.
[01:15:32.000 --> 01:15:37.000]  Not quite retaliation.
[01:15:37.000 --> 01:15:44.000]  I think it's exactly retaliation, a threatened retaliation.
[01:15:44.000 --> 01:15:53.000]  If you do that, I'll do this in order to kill you from doing something you have a right to do, but you have a right to.
[01:15:53.000 --> 01:15:59.000]  And she definitely has a right to petition the court for redress of grievance.
[01:15:59.000 --> 01:16:08.000]  To me, that threat, I didn't, you know, a lot of people would say, oh, my gosh, I can't continue with this because they're going to sanction me.
[01:16:08.000 --> 01:16:10.000]  Now, it doesn't say what the sanctions could be.
[01:16:10.000 --> 01:16:13.000]  Would that be civil or criminal or whatever it is?
[01:16:13.000 --> 01:16:15.000]  Now, that's content.
[01:16:15.000 --> 01:16:20.000]  But, you know, a lot of people, and me included, five years ago, I would have thought, oh, my god, I can't do this.
[01:16:20.000 --> 01:16:22.000]  I've got to cut.
[01:16:22.000 --> 01:16:27.000]  And, you know, but right now in my current situation, I'm like, screw you.
[01:16:27.000 --> 01:16:30.000]  If I want to continue litigating, I will.
[01:16:30.000 --> 01:16:32.000]  What are you going to sanction me for?
[01:16:32.000 --> 01:16:35.000]  I have no money, so I can't pay you anything.
[01:16:35.000 --> 01:16:39.000]  And, you know, it says here the rights belong to the belligerent litigants.
[01:16:39.000 --> 01:16:42.000]  If you want them, you must claim them.
[01:16:42.000 --> 01:16:47.000]  According to Brandon's website, the pro se from hell.
[01:16:47.000 --> 01:16:55.000]  Yeah, I'm about to get that back up.
[01:16:55.000 --> 01:17:00.000]  See, that would definitely make a good criminal complaint against the judge with the feds.
[01:17:26.000 --> 01:17:29.000]  How to get debt collectors out of your credit report.
[01:17:29.000 --> 01:17:34.000]  How to turn the financial tables on them and make them pay you to go away.
[01:17:34.000 --> 01:17:39.000]  The Michael Mears Proven Method is the solution for how to stop debt collectors.
[01:17:39.000 --> 01:17:41.000]  Personal consultation is available as well.
[01:17:41.000 --> 01:17:47.000]  For more information, please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the blue Michael Mears banner.
[01:17:47.000 --> 01:17:50.000]  Or email michaelmears at yahoo.com.
[01:17:50.000 --> 01:17:56.000]  To learn how to stop debt collectors now.
[01:17:56.000 --> 01:17:57.000]  I love logos.
[01:17:57.000 --> 01:18:01.000]  Without the shows on this network, I'd be almost as ignorant as my friends.
[01:18:01.000 --> 01:18:04.000]  I'm so addicted to the truth now that there's no going back.
[01:18:04.000 --> 01:18:05.000]  I need my truth fit.
[01:18:05.000 --> 01:18:07.000]  I'd be lost without logos.
[01:18:07.000 --> 01:18:10.000]  And I really want to help keep this network on the air.
[01:18:10.000 --> 01:18:13.000]  I'd love to volunteer as a show producer, but I'm a bit of a Luddite.
[01:18:13.000 --> 01:18:17.000]  And I really don't have any money to give because I spent it all on supplements.
[01:18:17.000 --> 01:18:20.000]  How can I help logos?
[01:18:20.000 --> 01:18:21.000]  Well, I'm glad you asked.
[01:18:21.000 --> 01:18:24.000]  Whenever you order anything from Amazon, you can help logos.
[01:18:24.000 --> 01:18:26.000]  You can order your supplies or holiday gifts.
[01:18:26.000 --> 01:18:28.000]  First thing you do is clear your cookies.
[01:18:28.000 --> 01:18:32.000]  Now, go to logosradio.network.com.
[01:18:32.000 --> 01:18:35.000]  Click on the Amazon logo and bookmark it.
[01:18:35.000 --> 01:18:40.000]  Now, when you order anything from Amazon, you use that link and logos gets a few pesos.
[01:18:40.000 --> 01:18:42.000]  Do I pay extra? No.
[01:18:42.000 --> 01:18:44.000]  Do I have to do anything different when I order?
[01:18:44.000 --> 01:18:47.000]  No. Can I use my Amazon Prime? No.
[01:18:47.000 --> 01:18:48.000]  I mean, yes.
[01:18:48.000 --> 01:18:51.000]  Wow, giving without doing anything or spending any money.
[01:18:51.000 --> 01:18:53.000]  This is perfect.
[01:18:53.000 --> 01:18:54.000]  Thank you so much.
[01:18:54.000 --> 01:18:55.000]  We are welcome.
[01:18:55.000 --> 01:19:22.000]  Happy holidays, logos.
[01:19:25.000 --> 01:19:36.000]  Well, ain't gonna fool me with that same old trick again.
[01:19:36.000 --> 01:19:59.000]  I was blindsided, but now I can see your plan. You put the beer in my pocket, took the money from my hand.
[01:19:59.000 --> 01:20:06.000]  Okay, because I had a little issue with Brett on the break, so I didn't have time to do a mic check.
[01:20:06.000 --> 01:20:08.000]  Okay.
[01:20:08.000 --> 01:20:26.000]  Where were we when somebody, I'm not going to mention any names, but her initials are Tina Cobruk ran off the cliff.
[01:20:26.000 --> 01:20:30.000]  Where were we when you went into free fall?
[01:20:30.000 --> 01:20:37.000]  Threatening. You were talking about the judges threatening, and I was saying that I'm not threatened anymore.
[01:20:37.000 --> 01:20:45.000]  It doesn't frighten me to go forward, but if they were threatening other people with a little less experience,
[01:20:45.000 --> 01:20:51.000]  this would really put someone off going forward with any claim because they would think, what are they going to do to me?
[01:20:51.000 --> 01:20:59.000]  These are appellate judges. They could maybe put me in jail or something, whatever, because they wouldn't know what the sanction would be.
[01:20:59.000 --> 01:21:04.000]  So it is a threat to stop you from going forward.
[01:21:04.000 --> 01:21:18.000]  This is a denial of your First Amendment right, the right to petition the government for redress of grievance, good federal claim.
[01:21:18.000 --> 01:21:23.000]  The rule is take the state to the Fed, the Fed to the state.
[01:21:23.000 --> 01:21:27.000]  Take the state judge to the Fed.
[01:21:27.000 --> 01:21:35.000]  File a complaint with a special agent in charge of the local FBI, and he'll throw it in the trash.
[01:21:35.000 --> 01:21:42.000]  Then file a criminal complaint against a special agent in charge for shielding from prosecution or obstruction,
[01:21:42.000 --> 01:21:46.000]  and send it to the grand jury by way of the U.S. Attorney.
[01:21:46.000 --> 01:21:50.000]  And the U.S. Attorney will intercept it and throw it in the trash,
[01:21:50.000 --> 01:21:58.000]  and probably threaten you for trying to reach the grand jury.
[01:21:58.000 --> 01:22:04.000]  They did that to me in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, where we were going after an IRS agent.
[01:22:04.000 --> 01:22:10.000]  He told me if I tried to reach the grand jury again, he would charge me with jury tampering.
[01:22:10.000 --> 01:22:15.000]  I said, well, knock yourself out. You charge me with jury tampering, I'll charge you with obstruction.
[01:22:15.000 --> 01:22:18.000]  We'll see how this works out for you. Click.
[01:22:18.000 --> 01:22:22.000]  The next day, they fired the IRS agent.
[01:22:22.000 --> 01:22:29.000]  You did it after this judge, and who's going to go out and throw himself under the bus for this judge?
[01:22:29.000 --> 01:22:35.000]  Think this U.S. Attorney's going to do that?
[01:22:35.000 --> 01:22:40.000]  At the very least, the judge will get some U.S. Marshals coming down there,
[01:22:40.000 --> 01:22:43.000]  wanting to know what in the heck is going on.
[01:22:43.000 --> 01:22:50.000]  Why are we getting in trouble because of you, Bubba?
[01:22:50.000 --> 01:22:54.000]  You up to it, Tina?
[01:22:54.000 --> 01:22:57.000]  If I get the time to write it, I'm up to doing it.
[01:22:57.000 --> 01:23:02.000]  No problem at all, as long as I get someone to help me write it really well.
[01:23:02.000 --> 01:23:07.000]  I can get Brett to do it.
[01:23:07.000 --> 01:23:11.000]  I'd like to get Brett more work. Brett doesn't have enough to do.
[01:23:11.000 --> 01:23:14.000]  Oh, no. Sure he doesn't.
[01:23:14.000 --> 01:23:18.000]  Just ask my wife about that.
[01:23:18.000 --> 01:23:20.000]  It would be wonderful to do it.
[01:23:20.000 --> 01:23:27.000]  You told me I should do something like that with the fact that the state is allowing litigation privilege
[01:23:27.000 --> 01:23:33.000]  and sanctioning lawyers to lie, and we should take that to the Fed to say, hey, this is wrong,
[01:23:33.000 --> 01:23:37.000]  because it completely goes against their oath of office.
[01:23:37.000 --> 01:23:43.000]  That's different. That's the RICO suit.
[01:23:43.000 --> 01:23:45.000]  That will make a great RICO suit.
[01:23:45.000 --> 01:23:51.000]  This is a straight-up criminal complaint against the judge for denying you a federal right.
[01:23:51.000 --> 01:23:53.000]  This is not suiting him.
[01:23:53.000 --> 01:23:59.000]  This is filing criminal charges against him. You want him indicted.
[01:23:59.000 --> 01:24:04.000]  Okay, I like that.
[01:24:04.000 --> 01:24:08.000]  I will get this done, and I'll let you go to other callers.
[01:24:08.000 --> 01:24:12.000]  Thank you, because I've got to file this early next week.
[01:24:12.000 --> 01:24:15.000]  Okay, have fun with it.
[01:24:15.000 --> 01:24:17.000]  I will. You know I will.
[01:24:17.000 --> 01:24:24.000]  Thank you, sweet, nice, sweet, nice, unchurlish Tina.
[01:24:24.000 --> 01:24:28.000]  There you go. Thank you. You did well there.
[01:24:28.000 --> 01:24:31.000]  Have I redeemed myself?
[01:24:31.000 --> 01:24:34.000]  Okay. Thank you, Tina.
[01:24:34.000 --> 01:24:40.000]  Now we're going to go to what looks like a first-time caller.
[01:24:40.000 --> 01:24:47.000]  If you are in the 718 area code, it says New York.
[01:24:47.000 --> 01:24:54.000]  Talk to us.
[01:24:54.000 --> 01:24:59.000]  Well, that does not working so good.
[01:24:59.000 --> 01:25:02.000]  Okay, it looks like that one's not working.
[01:25:02.000 --> 01:25:05.000]  So I'll try them later.
[01:25:05.000 --> 01:25:09.000]  Let's go to Joel in Ohio.
[01:25:09.000 --> 01:25:12.000]  Okay, Joel, what do you have?
[01:25:12.000 --> 01:25:15.000]  You were on last night, weren't you?
[01:25:15.000 --> 01:25:19.000]  No, I was on a couple months ago.
[01:25:19.000 --> 01:25:22.000]  You were on telegram. Okay.
[01:25:22.000 --> 01:25:25.000]  Yeah, yeah, yeah.
[01:25:25.000 --> 01:25:35.000]  So to kind of summarize what I've worked on so far,
[01:25:35.000 --> 01:25:42.000]  this has to do with a hospital, it's a nonprofit hospital.
[01:25:42.000 --> 01:25:52.000]  They, under the typical consumer protection laws and whatnot, federal and state,
[01:25:52.000 --> 01:25:55.000]  they've got certain things they've got to do.
[01:25:55.000 --> 01:26:04.000]  But the IRS has some rules for them to follow as well.
[01:26:04.000 --> 01:26:14.000]  And they haven't updated any of their policies to match that.
[01:26:14.000 --> 01:26:22.000]  What had happened is I went to the emergency room, got the bill,
[01:26:22.000 --> 01:26:26.000]  notified them that I needed help with the bill by email.
[01:26:26.000 --> 01:26:28.000]  So I had record.
[01:26:28.000 --> 01:26:30.000]  They never responded.
[01:26:30.000 --> 01:26:32.000]  I went to their collections department.
[01:26:32.000 --> 01:26:34.000]  I sent them a validation letter.
[01:26:34.000 --> 01:26:36.000]  They didn't validate it.
[01:26:36.000 --> 01:26:42.000]  They, like, the day they got it, all they did was send back a picture of my bill
[01:26:42.000 --> 01:26:47.000]  from the hospital and me signing their paper when I went in.
[01:26:47.000 --> 01:26:51.000]  So they didn't even call the hospital to try to validate it.
[01:26:51.000 --> 01:26:54.000]  So that's another issue.
[01:26:54.000 --> 01:27:01.000]  And then I contacted them after that by phone.
[01:27:01.000 --> 01:27:06.000]  The collection explained to them what was going on.
[01:27:06.000 --> 01:27:09.000]  And they're really rude.
[01:27:09.000 --> 01:27:14.000]  I wasn't getting anywhere with them, so I called the hospital right after that.
[01:27:14.000 --> 01:27:23.000]  She, the lady in their billing department, was not very receptive until I told her
[01:27:23.000 --> 01:27:26.000]  that they never responded to my email.
[01:27:26.000 --> 01:27:30.000]  And she looked at it, and sure enough, she had it on her screen.
[01:27:30.000 --> 01:27:35.000]  And she's like, oh, I got to talk to my manager, blah, blah, call me back.
[01:27:35.000 --> 01:27:38.000]  And then basically they said, sorry, there's nothing we can do.
[01:27:38.000 --> 01:27:41.000]  You just got to deal with collections.
[01:27:41.000 --> 01:27:47.000]  And that's basically what's bringing my suit about.
[01:27:47.000 --> 01:27:55.000]  They are required in the IRS rules that if they make a mistake like that
[01:27:55.000 --> 01:28:00.000]  and it's brought to their attention, that they have to pull it back from their collection,
[01:28:00.000 --> 01:28:05.000]  back into their control, and fix the error.
[01:28:05.000 --> 01:28:13.000]  So basically what I'm dealing with is we got a breach of contract.
[01:28:13.000 --> 01:28:18.000]  We've got negligence.
[01:28:18.000 --> 01:28:23.000]  And I think it's on the level of gross negligence because it was brought to their attention.
[01:28:23.000 --> 01:28:29.000]  And they said, sorry, we're not going to do anything about it.
[01:28:29.000 --> 01:28:32.000]  And I've got pretty much...
[01:28:32.000 --> 01:28:37.000]  Do you also bring the rule to their attention?
[01:28:37.000 --> 01:28:41.000]  The rule that mandates that they do that once they've been notified?
[01:28:41.000 --> 01:28:44.000]  Well, you don't have to, but I was just wondering if you did.
[01:28:44.000 --> 01:28:46.000]  I don't think I did. I don't think I did.
[01:28:46.000 --> 01:28:49.000]  I had already known about it at that time.
[01:28:49.000 --> 01:28:57.000]  And I was basically kind of hoping they would respond the way they did.
[01:28:57.000 --> 01:29:00.000]  Oh, one of these, Randy.
[01:29:00.000 --> 01:29:02.000]  He's happy to beat them up.
[01:29:02.000 --> 01:29:09.000]  Yeah, no, I was looking at his stuff on the channel.
[01:29:09.000 --> 01:29:13.000]  Never ask them to do what you want them to do.
[01:29:13.000 --> 01:29:15.000]  Okay, so where are you at now?
[01:29:15.000 --> 01:29:19.000]  Have you got anything in the works yet?
[01:29:19.000 --> 01:29:24.000]  Yeah, I've got most of my complaints done.
[01:29:24.000 --> 01:29:26.000]  I'm running into an issue though.
[01:29:26.000 --> 01:29:32.000]  So most of the stuff I would bring them in on,
[01:29:32.000 --> 01:29:36.000]  I was thinking the federal court is the best option.
[01:29:36.000 --> 01:29:43.000]  And the problem is I don't have any actual economic damages yet
[01:29:43.000 --> 01:29:48.000]  because the bill is still up in the air.
[01:29:48.000 --> 01:29:51.000]  And then when we come back, I'll...
[01:29:51.000 --> 01:29:56.000]  Wait, wait, wait. No damages have...
[01:29:56.000 --> 01:30:02.000]  We're about to run off the cliff. We'll be right back.
[01:30:02.000 --> 01:30:06.000]  Sorry, soft drink lovers. Even diet drinks can make you fat.
[01:30:06.000 --> 01:30:09.000]  A new study shows that diet soda drinkers gain much more weight
[01:30:09.000 --> 01:30:11.000]  than people who avoid the stuff.
[01:30:11.000 --> 01:30:13.000]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, and I'll be back in a moment
[01:30:13.000 --> 01:30:17.000]  with a scoop on supposedly skinny sodas.
[01:30:17.000 --> 01:30:19.000]  Privacy is under attack.
[01:30:19.000 --> 01:30:22.000]  When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[01:30:22.000 --> 01:30:24.000]  And once your privacy is gone,
[01:30:24.000 --> 01:30:27.000]  you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[01:30:27.000 --> 01:30:30.000]  So protect your rights, say no to surveillance,
[01:30:30.000 --> 01:30:32.000]  and keep your information to yourself.
[01:30:32.000 --> 01:30:35.000]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[01:30:35.000 --> 01:30:38.000]  This public service announcement is brought to you by StartPage.com,
[01:30:38.000 --> 01:30:42.000]  the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[01:30:42.000 --> 01:30:46.000]  Start over with StartPage.
[01:30:46.000 --> 01:30:50.000]  Artificial sweeteners cut the calories and help you lose weight, right?
[01:30:50.000 --> 01:30:51.000]  Wrong.
[01:30:51.000 --> 01:30:55.000]  Researchers at UT San Antonio followed hundreds of diet soda drinkers
[01:30:55.000 --> 01:30:56.000]  for nearly a decade.
[01:30:56.000 --> 01:30:59.000]  They found that regularly drinking diet soda
[01:30:59.000 --> 01:31:03.000]  expanded people's waistlines five times more than no soda at all.
[01:31:03.000 --> 01:31:06.000]  The study's authors say artificial sweeteners trigger the appetite,
[01:31:06.000 --> 01:31:10.000]  but unlike regular sugars, don't deliver anything to squelch it.
[01:31:10.000 --> 01:31:13.000]  Waking up hunger without satisfying it leads to cravings,
[01:31:13.000 --> 01:31:16.000]  which can result in a larger overall calorie intake.
[01:31:16.000 --> 01:31:19.000]  So use natural sweeteners to maintain a healthy weight,
[01:31:19.000 --> 01:31:21.000]  and if you need to shed some pounds,
[01:31:21.000 --> 01:31:24.000]  avoid the sweet stuff altogether and drink water instead.
[01:31:24.000 --> 01:31:26.000]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht.
[01:31:26.000 --> 01:31:30.000]  More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[01:31:30.000 --> 01:31:36.000]  This is Building 7, a 47-story skyscraper that fell on the afternoon of September 11.
[01:31:36.000 --> 01:31:38.000]  The government says that fire brought it down.
[01:31:38.000 --> 01:31:43.000]  However, 1,500 architects and engineers concluded it was a controlled demolition.
[01:31:43.000 --> 01:31:46.000]  Over 6,000 of my fellow service members have given their lives.
[01:31:46.000 --> 01:31:49.000]  Thousands of my fellow first responders are dying.
[01:31:49.000 --> 01:31:50.000]  I'm not a conspiracy theorist.
[01:31:50.000 --> 01:31:51.000]  I'm a structural engineer.
[01:31:51.000 --> 01:31:52.000]  I'm a New York City correction officer.
[01:31:52.000 --> 01:31:53.000]  I'm an Air Force pilot.
[01:31:53.000 --> 01:31:55.000]  I'm a father who lost his son.
[01:31:55.000 --> 01:31:58.000]  We're Americans, and we deserve the truth.
[01:31:58.000 --> 01:32:02.000]  Go to RememberBuilding7.org today.
[01:32:02.000 --> 01:32:05.000]  Rule of Law Radio is proud to offer the Rule of Law traffic seminar.
[01:32:05.000 --> 01:32:07.000]  In today's America, we live in an us-against-them society.
[01:32:07.000 --> 01:32:09.000]  And if we, the people, are ever going to have a free society,
[01:32:09.000 --> 01:32:12.000]  then we're going to have to stand and defend our own rights.
[01:32:12.000 --> 01:32:15.000]  Among those rights are the right to travel freely from place to place,
[01:32:15.000 --> 01:32:17.000]  the right to act in our own private capacity,
[01:32:17.000 --> 01:32:19.000]  and most importantly, the right to due process of law.
[01:32:19.000 --> 01:32:23.000]  Traffic courts afford us the least expensive opportunity to learn how to enforce
[01:32:23.000 --> 01:32:25.000]  and preserve our rights through due process.
[01:32:25.000 --> 01:32:28.000]  Former Sheriff's Deputy A. Craig, in conjunction with Rule of Law Radio,
[01:32:28.000 --> 01:32:31.000]  has put together the most comprehensive teaching tool available
[01:32:31.000 --> 01:32:33.000]  that will help you understand what due process is
[01:32:33.000 --> 01:32:35.000]  and how to hold courts to the rule of law.
[01:32:35.000 --> 01:32:38.000]  You can get your own copy of this invaluable material by going to
[01:32:38.000 --> 01:32:41.000]  ruleoflawradio.com and ordering your copy today.
[01:32:41.000 --> 01:32:43.000]  By ordering now, you'll receive a copy of Eddie's book,
[01:32:43.000 --> 01:32:45.000]  The Texas Transportation Code, The Law Versus the Lie,
[01:32:45.000 --> 01:32:48.000]  video and audio of the original 2009 seminar,
[01:32:48.000 --> 01:32:51.000]  hundreds of research documents, and other useful resource material.
[01:32:51.000 --> 01:32:53.000]  Learn how to fight for your rights with the help of this material from
[01:32:53.000 --> 01:32:55.000]  ruleoflawradio.com.
[01:32:55.000 --> 01:32:58.000]  Order your copy today, and together we can have the free society we all want
[01:32:58.000 --> 01:33:03.000]  and deserve.
[01:33:03.000 --> 01:33:06.000]  Looking for some truth? You found it.
[01:33:06.000 --> 01:33:35.000]  Go to roseradionetwork.com.
[01:33:35.000 --> 01:33:43.000]  Okay, we are back.
[01:33:43.000 --> 01:33:48.000]  Randy Kelton is out in Rule of Law Radio and talking to Joel in Ohio.
[01:33:48.000 --> 01:33:52.000]  Okay, Joel, where were we?
[01:33:52.000 --> 01:34:01.000]  Well, basically, I've got like a whole Easter basket of things that I can
[01:34:01.000 --> 01:34:06.000]  put in my complaint.
[01:34:06.000 --> 01:34:09.000]  Wait, I remember where we were at.
[01:34:09.000 --> 01:34:13.000]  They're claiming that you owe them money.
[01:34:13.000 --> 01:34:14.000]  Yeah.
[01:34:14.000 --> 01:34:15.000]  Is that correct?
[01:34:15.000 --> 01:34:17.000]  And they're trying to collect that money.
[01:34:17.000 --> 01:34:18.000]  Yeah.
[01:34:18.000 --> 01:34:22.000]  Have they put a mark on your credit?
[01:34:22.000 --> 01:34:31.000]  No, it's been December last year is when they sent their collections.
[01:34:31.000 --> 01:34:34.000]  They sent it there early.
[01:34:34.000 --> 01:34:38.000]  They broke their own contracts and the rules that the IRS gave them.
[01:34:38.000 --> 01:34:41.000]  They sent it there early.
[01:34:41.000 --> 01:34:44.000]  So, December, they sent it there, and they still haven't put it in my
[01:34:44.000 --> 01:34:50.000]  collections yet or on my credit report.
[01:34:50.000 --> 01:34:56.000]  Have they came to you and asked you to pay these bills?
[01:34:56.000 --> 01:35:03.000]  Well, yeah, they sent letters, and when I talked to collections, she didn't
[01:35:03.000 --> 01:35:04.000]  like what I had to say.
[01:35:04.000 --> 01:35:09.000]  She said she was going to take me off their phone call list, and they sent me
[01:35:09.000 --> 01:35:17.000]  after I had conversations explaining how they screwed up with both parties,
[01:35:17.000 --> 01:35:23.000]  the collections has sent me two more letters since then.
[01:35:23.000 --> 01:35:28.000]  So have you read the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act?
[01:35:28.000 --> 01:35:36.000]  Yeah, and I've even got basically the exact same thing in Ohio, Consumer
[01:35:36.000 --> 01:35:42.000]  Protection Act, Consumer Sales Protection Act, and it's basically a complete
[01:35:42.000 --> 01:35:52.000]  copy except they allow for trouble damages on top of everything and attorney
[01:35:52.000 --> 01:35:59.000]  fees, and then also if there's something they did that the state of Ohio has
[01:35:59.000 --> 01:36:08.000]  already said is a violation that is on the public record or that the attorney
[01:36:08.000 --> 01:36:17.000]  general put on his list, then it's even a worse offense, and if there's proof
[01:36:17.000 --> 01:36:22.000]  that you can show that they're affecting the community as a whole or multiple
[01:36:22.000 --> 01:36:29.000]  people, you can bring it up as a private attorney general.
[01:36:29.000 --> 01:36:31.000]  Oh, wonderful.
[01:36:31.000 --> 01:36:36.000]  So they actually address the private attorney general aspect.
[01:36:36.000 --> 01:36:38.000]  Yeah, they put it right in there.
[01:36:38.000 --> 01:36:40.000]  Oh, wonderful.
[01:36:40.000 --> 01:36:45.000]  So a private attorney general is perfect.
[01:36:45.000 --> 01:36:47.000]  Okay.
[01:36:47.000 --> 01:36:50.000]  Part I haven't read much about.
[01:36:50.000 --> 01:36:53.000]  If they've tried to collect, if they've just demanded collections, that's
[01:36:53.000 --> 01:36:54.000]  enough.
[01:36:54.000 --> 01:36:58.000]  You don't have to be threatened or anything, and if they've acted in violation
[01:36:58.000 --> 01:37:05.000]  of any law in the process of collecting, you don't have to show that you were
[01:37:05.000 --> 01:37:07.000]  harmed by threats.
[01:37:07.000 --> 01:37:12.000]  You were harmed by this annoyance of being charged money you don't owe.
[01:37:12.000 --> 01:37:14.000]  I mean, you're no deadbeat.
[01:37:14.000 --> 01:37:20.000]  This is horrible to think that you owe money that you can't pay.
[01:37:20.000 --> 01:37:21.000]  That's horrible.
[01:37:21.000 --> 01:37:26.000]  That's going to cause you post-traumatic stress.
[01:37:26.000 --> 01:37:31.000]  It's funny you say that because I was actually searching stuff during the
[01:37:31.000 --> 01:37:40.000]  break, and I mean, this would be loss of consortium, right?
[01:37:40.000 --> 01:37:42.000]  Consortium.
[01:37:42.000 --> 01:37:48.000]  Yeah, different types of damages is what I was looking up again, because that's
[01:37:48.000 --> 01:37:54.000]  where the hurdle is at for me, is most of that stuff that I have in my
[01:37:54.000 --> 01:38:02.000]  complaint for standing is just compensatory damages for my economic losses,
[01:38:02.000 --> 01:38:08.000]  not punitive damages, and I don't know how to argue what my economic losses
[01:38:08.000 --> 01:38:13.000]  are because I haven't paid them anything yet.
[01:38:13.000 --> 01:38:19.000]  Private attorney judgments.
[01:38:19.000 --> 01:38:24.000]  Your loss, the harm is how much they're trying to profit and collect.
[01:38:24.000 --> 01:38:30.000]  You claim that and you also claim damages for yourself and all other
[01:38:30.000 --> 01:38:34.000]  similar situations, so that's going to take a bit of discovery to see how
[01:38:34.000 --> 01:38:40.000]  many people they've tried to screw around, and you get to collect for them.
[01:38:40.000 --> 01:38:46.000]  You know how a private attorney general seat works.
[01:38:46.000 --> 01:38:49.000]  Yeah, that part I'm really green on.
[01:38:49.000 --> 01:38:51.000]  I haven't read enough about that yet.
[01:38:51.000 --> 01:38:53.000]  I just found out about it more recently.
[01:38:53.000 --> 01:38:57.000]  Okay, this is how a private attorney general seat works.
[01:38:57.000 --> 01:39:04.000]  It's generally designed for an issue where the amount of money involved is
[01:39:04.000 --> 01:39:11.000]  not sufficient to warrant costly litigation, like you get a ticket
[01:39:11.000 --> 01:39:21.000]  improperly filed against you or a company robs you for $50.
[01:39:21.000 --> 01:39:24.000]  Just outright cheats you out of $50.
[01:39:24.000 --> 01:39:29.000]  Well, it's going to cost you $10,000 to try to adjudicate that.
[01:39:29.000 --> 01:39:33.000]  So everybody's just going to let them rip them off for $50.
[01:39:33.000 --> 01:39:38.000]  So you consume it for yourself and all others similarly situated, so you
[01:39:38.000 --> 01:39:44.000]  collect for yourself and all these other people, and that makes it valuable
[01:39:44.000 --> 01:39:53.000]  enough so that people will have incentive to right these minor wrongs.
[01:39:53.000 --> 01:39:57.000]  So how many other people have they tried to collect money from in a similar
[01:39:57.000 --> 01:40:03.000]  manner and triple all that?
[01:40:03.000 --> 01:40:07.000]  You get to a pretty big number of prefects.
[01:40:07.000 --> 01:40:16.000]  My repeat offender in that regard, they have been making a killing on their
[01:40:16.000 --> 01:40:18.000]  practices.
[01:40:18.000 --> 01:40:20.000]  I've looked them up.
[01:40:20.000 --> 01:40:23.000]  They've called so many people to claim bankruptcy for not paying their bills,
[01:40:23.000 --> 01:40:26.000]  and they claim to be a nonprofit and helping the community.
[01:40:26.000 --> 01:40:33.000]  They've gotten me, before I knew anything, years ago and got me to pay a debt
[01:40:33.000 --> 01:40:38.000]  that was from when I was still under my dad's insurance, and he claimed
[01:40:38.000 --> 01:40:40.000]  bankruptcy, and it got written off.
[01:40:40.000 --> 01:40:45.000]  And they contacted me years later when they weren't even legally allowed to
[01:40:45.000 --> 01:40:48.000]  collect the debt and tricked me into paying it.
[01:40:48.000 --> 01:40:50.000]  This is how they do it.
[01:40:50.000 --> 01:40:53.000]  They know full well what they're doing is wrong.
[01:40:53.000 --> 01:40:56.000]  It's all a calculation.
[01:40:56.000 --> 01:41:00.000]  Every once in a while, somebody's going to sue the pants off of us, and we're
[01:41:00.000 --> 01:41:02.000]  going to have to write a check.
[01:41:02.000 --> 01:41:04.000]  Okay, we steal $10 million.
[01:41:04.000 --> 01:41:08.000]  Somebody sues us, we have to pay them a couple hundred grand.
[01:41:08.000 --> 01:41:11.000]  That'll work.
[01:41:11.000 --> 01:41:13.000]  They don't care.
[01:41:13.000 --> 01:41:17.000]  What you sue them for is a calculated loss.
[01:41:17.000 --> 01:41:21.000]  So sue them for as much as you can.
[01:41:21.000 --> 01:41:29.000]  I think I've got it narrowed down to a couple questions, and I keep going back
[01:41:29.000 --> 01:41:32.000]  and forth on whether I bring it in state or federal.
[01:41:32.000 --> 01:41:37.000]  I'm thinking federal, especially because I don't trust this region of Ohio that
[01:41:37.000 --> 01:41:39.000]  I would have to bring it in.
[01:41:39.000 --> 01:41:41.000]  Okay, hold on, hold on.
[01:41:41.000 --> 01:41:44.000]  You're missing out on something.
[01:41:44.000 --> 01:41:50.000]  I sued the state of Texas in the state of Texas, and someone on the channel just
[01:41:50.000 --> 01:41:55.000]  asked me, Trust just asked me why I did that.
[01:41:55.000 --> 01:42:01.000]  Well, I did that because I wanted to give the state opportunity to screw up
[01:42:01.000 --> 01:42:07.000]  everything they could before I took them to the Fed.
[01:42:07.000 --> 01:42:15.000]  So if you're in the state and you don't trust the state to properly adjudicate
[01:42:15.000 --> 01:42:18.000]  your case, then sue them in the state and get the state to screw up everything
[01:42:18.000 --> 01:42:21.000]  you can.
[01:42:21.000 --> 01:42:27.000]  Then you take the state and the hospital to the Feds in a RICO suit.
[01:42:27.000 --> 01:42:30.000]  I'm taking on Victoria County.
[01:42:30.000 --> 01:42:36.000]  I went in and asked a justice of the peace to issue a warrant on some criminal
[01:42:36.000 --> 01:42:39.000]  complaints I gave to him, and he refused.
[01:42:39.000 --> 01:42:42.000]  Well, in Texas law, he's commanded to issue a warrant, so I filed criminal
[01:42:42.000 --> 01:42:46.000]  charges against him with the chief of police, and he refused.
[01:42:46.000 --> 01:42:51.000]  So I filed criminal charges against both of them with the district judge, and
[01:42:51.000 --> 01:42:53.000]  he's going to refuse.
[01:42:53.000 --> 01:42:56.000]  Then I'm going to take from that district judge to the next district judge and
[01:42:56.000 --> 01:43:00.000]  file against all three of them with this next district judge.
[01:43:00.000 --> 01:43:06.000]  Then the next one, everybody behind him, he just keeps building up.
[01:43:06.000 --> 01:43:12.000]  Since I'm asking them to do something that they have a statutory duty to do,
[01:43:12.000 --> 01:43:17.000]  they have no immunity, so then I start suing them.
[01:43:17.000 --> 01:43:22.000]  I'll sue the JP first, the chief of police second, the district judge third,
[01:43:22.000 --> 01:43:27.000]  the second district judge fourth, and just walk them through the system.
[01:43:27.000 --> 01:43:35.000]  And then when every court does everything wrong, I'll give them all a
[01:43:35.000 --> 01:43:37.000]  chance to screw up.
[01:43:37.000 --> 01:43:43.000]  Then we take them all to the feds in a RICO suit.
[01:43:43.000 --> 01:43:47.000]  It's something to think about.
[01:43:47.000 --> 01:43:51.000]  If the state's not doing it right, let's see if we can help them out.
[01:43:51.000 --> 01:44:00.000]  Hang on, Randy Kelton, Brett Felton, Rule of Law Radio, we'll be right back.
[01:44:00.000 --> 01:44:05.000]  Through advances in technology, our lives have greatly improved, except in the
[01:44:05.000 --> 01:44:07.000]  area of nutrition.
[01:44:07.000 --> 01:44:10.000]  People feed their pets better than they feed themselves, and it's time we
[01:44:10.000 --> 01:44:12.000]  changed all that.
[01:44:12.000 --> 01:44:16.000]  Our primary defense against aging and disease in this toxic environment is
[01:44:16.000 --> 01:44:18.000]  good nutrition.
[01:44:18.000 --> 01:44:21.000]  In a world where natural fruits have been irradiated, adulterated,
[01:44:21.000 --> 01:44:26.000]  and mutilated, young Jevity can provide the nutrients you need.
[01:44:26.000 --> 01:44:30.000]  Logos Radio Network gets many requests to endorse all sorts of products,
[01:44:30.000 --> 01:44:32.000]  most of which we reject.
[01:44:32.000 --> 01:44:36.000]  We've come to trust young Jevity so much, we became a marketing distributor
[01:44:36.000 --> 01:44:40.000]  along with Alex Jones, Ben Fuchs, and many others.
[01:44:40.000 --> 01:44:45.000]  When you order from LogosRadioNetwork.com, your health will improve as you
[01:44:45.000 --> 01:44:48.000]  help support quality radio.
[01:44:48.000 --> 01:44:52.000]  As you realize the benefits of young Jevity, you may want to join us.
[01:44:52.000 --> 01:44:56.000]  As a distributor, you can experience improved health, help your friends and
[01:44:56.000 --> 01:44:59.000]  family, and increase your income.
[01:44:59.000 --> 01:45:01.000]  Order now.
[01:45:01.000 --> 01:45:04.000]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[01:45:04.000 --> 01:45:08.000]  Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary, the affordable,
[01:45:08.000 --> 01:45:14.000]  easy-to-understand 4-CD course that will show you how in 24 hours,
[01:45:14.000 --> 01:45:16.000]  step-by-step.
[01:45:16.000 --> 01:45:19.000]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing.
[01:45:19.000 --> 01:45:23.000]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[01:45:23.000 --> 01:45:28.000]  Thousands have won with our step-by-step course, and now you can too.
[01:45:28.000 --> 01:45:32.000]  Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of
[01:45:32.000 --> 01:45:34.000]  case-winning experience.
[01:45:34.000 --> 01:45:38.000]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should
[01:45:38.000 --> 01:45:42.000]  understand about the principles and practices that control our American
[01:45:42.000 --> 01:45:43.000]  courts.
[01:45:43.000 --> 01:45:48.000]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for
[01:45:48.000 --> 01:45:52.000]  civil cases, pro se tactics, and much more.
[01:45:52.000 --> 01:45:58.000]  Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner or call toll-free
[01:45:58.000 --> 01:46:01.000]  866-LAW-EZ.
[01:46:01.000 --> 01:46:29.000]  Thank you.
[01:46:29.000 --> 01:46:31.000]  We'll see you next time.
[01:46:59.000 --> 01:47:17.000]  Okay, we are back.
[01:47:17.000 --> 01:47:21.000]  Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain, Rule of Law Radio, and we'll talk to you
[01:47:21.000 --> 01:47:29.000]  soon.
[01:47:51.000 --> 01:47:53.000]  We'll see you next time.
[01:48:22.000 --> 01:48:30.000]  And a private attorney general would be the way to really crank the prices up.
[01:48:30.000 --> 01:48:32.000]  What do you think?
[01:48:32.000 --> 01:48:36.000]  Well, I haven't even told you the best parts yet.
[01:48:36.000 --> 01:48:38.000]  Ohio is newer.
[01:48:38.000 --> 01:48:43.000]  It's fairly recent, all these changes to their consumer protection laws.
[01:48:43.000 --> 01:48:49.000]  They've got a lot of stuff in there that I don't think other states have now.
[01:48:49.000 --> 01:48:57.000]  But first of all, I have an Ohio court decision just from last year.
[01:48:57.000 --> 01:49:03.000]  There's an exemption in the consumer protection laws about position, and the
[01:49:03.000 --> 01:49:09.000]  hospitals think that they're exempt from abiding by those laws.
[01:49:09.000 --> 01:49:15.000]  But this judge just last year, I only think it was a full year ago, ruled that
[01:49:15.000 --> 01:49:20.000]  a individual position is exempt, but hospitals are not.
[01:49:20.000 --> 01:49:25.000]  And so I have that very recent case law to back me up.
[01:49:25.000 --> 01:49:32.000]  But there's some other things in the consumer protection laws.
[01:49:32.000 --> 01:49:43.000]  One is if anybody brings a case under it, they're assumed to be factually
[01:49:43.000 --> 01:49:46.000]  correct right off the bat.
[01:49:46.000 --> 01:49:51.000]  It has to be heard, no ifs, ands, or buts.
[01:49:51.000 --> 01:49:58.000]  And then there's also the part where, like we already said about the private
[01:49:58.000 --> 01:50:08.000]  attorney general, but here recently they added another thing to it, a right to
[01:50:08.000 --> 01:50:11.000]  cure part of it.
[01:50:11.000 --> 01:50:18.000]  So as soon as I bring this case, if they're aware of it, I don't know if they
[01:50:18.000 --> 01:50:26.000]  are, they have 30 days to offer me a settlement before it gets taken any
[01:50:26.000 --> 01:50:29.000]  further right off the bat.
[01:50:29.000 --> 01:50:35.000]  It's a deadline, short deadline, 30 days, make me whole, and this all goes away.
[01:50:35.000 --> 01:50:41.000]  I can deny it, but if I don't win more than what they offer me, the judge is
[01:50:41.000 --> 01:50:44.000]  the only one that gets to see it.
[01:50:44.000 --> 01:50:49.000]  If I don't win more from the case, from the judge or the jury, than what they
[01:50:49.000 --> 01:50:55.000]  offered, then I lose the possibility of treble.
[01:50:55.000 --> 01:50:59.000]  And then there's one more thing.
[01:50:59.000 --> 01:51:04.000]  It had me nervous, but I think we have a good attorney general.
[01:51:04.000 --> 01:51:10.000]  I've listened to him and read some of his opinions, and he seems like he's a
[01:51:10.000 --> 01:51:13.000]  by-the-book kind of guy with the law.
[01:51:13.000 --> 01:51:19.000]  And what happens as soon as somebody brings up one of these cases under that
[01:51:19.000 --> 01:51:25.000]  Act, the clerk is to immediately notify the attorney general about it.
[01:51:25.000 --> 01:51:31.000]  And he examines it and has the opportunity to step in if he decides to.
[01:51:31.000 --> 01:51:40.000]  Then it sounds like you might want to write the suit with the attorney general
[01:51:40.000 --> 01:51:43.000]  in mind.
[01:51:43.000 --> 01:51:49.000]  I was going to ask if you think it would be a good idea for me to try to talk
[01:51:49.000 --> 01:51:51.000]  to him.
[01:51:51.000 --> 01:51:52.000]  No.
[01:51:52.000 --> 01:51:53.000]  My intent.
[01:51:53.000 --> 01:51:55.000]  That would cost him.
[01:51:55.000 --> 01:52:02.000]  You might talk to some of his clerks to look at the current politics.
[01:52:02.000 --> 01:52:06.000]  What is politically convenient for your attorney general?
[01:52:06.000 --> 01:52:11.000]  Where is the attorney general in the election cycle?
[01:52:11.000 --> 01:52:16.000]  And how is his position relative to his voters?
[01:52:16.000 --> 01:52:23.000]  Does he look like his voters are happy with him, or does he have a serious
[01:52:23.000 --> 01:52:29.000]  political challenger where he needs to make some political headway with the
[01:52:29.000 --> 01:52:31.000]  public?
[01:52:31.000 --> 01:52:39.000]  Or does he have backers with big pockets that will get him to rule against
[01:52:39.000 --> 01:52:43.000]  you or throw you under the bus?
[01:52:43.000 --> 01:52:49.000]  We do a lot with law here, but at the end of the day, everything's political.
[01:52:49.000 --> 01:52:54.000]  That's not a problem unless you don't understand that everything is political.
[01:52:54.000 --> 01:53:00.000]  Once you understand it, then you start using the political aspect of law and
[01:53:00.000 --> 01:53:05.000]  you become much more powerful.
[01:53:05.000 --> 01:53:10.000]  So what's the condition of your current attorney general?
[01:53:10.000 --> 01:53:17.000]  He honestly, as far as these political characters go, he's actually really
[01:53:17.000 --> 01:53:19.000]  good, I think.
[01:53:19.000 --> 01:53:21.000]  He's part of the red state.
[01:53:21.000 --> 01:53:23.000]  He's a Republican.
[01:53:23.000 --> 01:53:25.000]  He's done a really good job.
[01:53:25.000 --> 01:53:27.000]  I never heard anybody complain about him.
[01:53:27.000 --> 01:53:31.000]  I think he's up for reelection, and I'm pretty sure it's going to be a
[01:53:31.000 --> 01:53:34.000]  landslide for him.
[01:53:34.000 --> 01:53:41.000]  But he, like I said, I paid pretty close attention to him over the last few
[01:53:41.000 --> 01:53:43.000]  years.
[01:53:43.000 --> 01:53:51.000]  He's the one, when Trump was doing all those election lawsuits and was
[01:53:51.000 --> 01:53:56.000]  wanting to take it back to the states and interfere with the states' decisions,
[01:53:56.000 --> 01:54:02.000]  he was the one that penned the argument that that ain't his authority.
[01:54:02.000 --> 01:54:06.000]  It's the states to decide how they're going to run their elections and
[01:54:06.000 --> 01:54:07.000]  whatnot.
[01:54:07.000 --> 01:54:12.000]  And everybody got mad at him that we're like these big Trump supporters
[01:54:12.000 --> 01:54:14.000]  because they're like, oh, he's against Trump.
[01:54:14.000 --> 01:54:18.000]  Well, no, go read his opinion and read the law.
[01:54:18.000 --> 01:54:26.000]  He's to the T by the book on what it says.
[01:54:26.000 --> 01:54:27.000]  Then good.
[01:54:27.000 --> 01:54:32.000]  Then you might want to give him something he can wave in front of the
[01:54:32.000 --> 01:54:37.000]  public, the hospital cheating poor people, taking all their money, and
[01:54:37.000 --> 01:54:42.000]  doing this because they know they can get away with it and get him to come
[01:54:42.000 --> 01:54:49.000]  in and be the good guy and strike down the mean, rotten, big money people.
[01:54:49.000 --> 01:54:55.000]  If he's up for reelection, it's probably good timing.
[01:54:55.000 --> 01:54:56.000]  All right.
[01:54:56.000 --> 01:54:57.000]  Okay.
[01:54:57.000 --> 01:54:58.000]  So I can't talk to him.
[01:54:58.000 --> 01:55:00.000]  I probably...
[01:55:00.000 --> 01:55:06.000]  You have to be careful because you may compromise him.
[01:55:06.000 --> 01:55:07.000]  All right.
[01:55:07.000 --> 01:55:08.000]  You can talk to him.
[01:55:08.000 --> 01:55:13.000]  You can talk to his clerks for certain and ask them, what can I address with
[01:55:13.000 --> 01:55:19.000]  him that won't put him in a political spot?
[01:55:19.000 --> 01:55:20.000]  Oh, that would be good.
[01:55:20.000 --> 01:55:24.000]  Well, they would really appreciate that question actually.
[01:55:24.000 --> 01:55:25.000]  Okay.
[01:55:25.000 --> 01:55:28.000]  So here's the thing I did want to talk to him about then, tell me what you
[01:55:28.000 --> 01:55:29.000]  think.
[01:55:29.000 --> 01:55:36.000]  It's not real clear how this private attorney general part of this thing works.
[01:55:36.000 --> 01:55:41.000]  It doesn't really discuss it in detail anywhere that I have been able to find.
[01:55:41.000 --> 01:55:48.000]  So my question, whether directly to him or to his staff, is I wanted to have
[01:55:48.000 --> 01:55:53.000]  them clarify for me if somebody were to bring that type of suit that would
[01:55:53.000 --> 01:55:58.000]  justify the private attorney general, how does that process work?
[01:55:58.000 --> 01:55:59.000]  Yeah.
[01:55:59.000 --> 01:56:06.000]  And does the attorney general of the state have standing to step into and
[01:56:06.000 --> 01:56:11.000]  become an intervener in a private attorney general suit?
[01:56:11.000 --> 01:56:13.000]  Right, because they didn't say that either.
[01:56:13.000 --> 01:56:19.000]  It says he has the right to in a case, but it didn't say if I bring it to that
[01:56:19.000 --> 01:56:27.000]  level, whether he has the ability to rule over me.
[01:56:27.000 --> 01:56:32.000]  Does he have that ability in a single case?
[01:56:32.000 --> 01:56:36.000]  Yes, in a typical case brought under it.
[01:56:36.000 --> 01:56:42.000]  This sounds like a whistleblower suit, where the state can come in or the
[01:56:42.000 --> 01:56:48.000]  feds can come in and pick up the action.
[01:56:48.000 --> 01:56:55.000]  But if they do that, then you get a percentage of whatever they win, and they
[01:56:55.000 --> 01:56:57.000]  do all the work.
[01:56:57.000 --> 01:57:00.000]  So that's not necessarily a bad thing.
[01:57:00.000 --> 01:57:03.000]  Yeah, they have it set up that way, the same reason the fed does, because the
[01:57:03.000 --> 01:57:05.000]  money goes on their cover.
[01:57:05.000 --> 01:57:14.000]  It's really a combination of consumer protection and the federal whistleblower
[01:57:14.000 --> 01:57:19.000]  stuff, where they get to look at it right away, decide what they want to do,
[01:57:19.000 --> 01:57:21.000]  let you try to win it.
[01:57:21.000 --> 01:57:23.000]  They can step in at any time.
[01:57:23.000 --> 01:57:28.000]  If they do step in, they take most of the money, but you get a chunk of it.
[01:57:28.000 --> 01:57:33.000]  Yeah, so you might want to look at that aspect.
[01:57:33.000 --> 01:57:39.000]  How can you sell your suit to the attorney general?
[01:57:39.000 --> 01:57:45.000]  If the attorney general steps in, then as far as the hospital is concerned, the
[01:57:45.000 --> 01:57:50.000]  attorney general has really deep pockets.
[01:57:50.000 --> 01:57:54.000]  He's not going to run out of money to fight you with.
[01:57:54.000 --> 01:57:59.000]  And he has much more political power against him.
[01:57:59.000 --> 01:58:03.000]  They'll make him a much better deal.
[01:58:03.000 --> 01:58:13.000]  Yeah, and they even state in there that what the purpose is of it, what the
[01:58:13.000 --> 01:58:18.000]  goal is they're trying to achieve with it, and it says right in there that
[01:58:18.000 --> 01:58:25.000]  they're trying to encourage private individuals to fix a wrong where one has
[01:58:25.000 --> 01:58:31.000]  been done, where they normally wouldn't be able to bring it forward due to
[01:58:31.000 --> 01:58:33.000]  costs or whatever.
[01:58:33.000 --> 01:58:39.000]  And they're trying to fix corruption basically in bad practices.
[01:58:39.000 --> 01:58:40.000]  Well, good.
[01:58:40.000 --> 01:58:46.000]  Look at what they're most interested in, and set these guys up so that they're
[01:58:46.000 --> 01:58:50.000]  a good candidate for the attorney general.
[01:58:50.000 --> 01:58:55.000]  The Bible remains the most popular book in the world, yet countless readers
[01:58:55.000 --> 01:58:58.000]  are frustrated because they struggle to understand it.
[01:58:58.000 --> 01:59:03.000]  Some new translations try to help by simplifying the text, but in the process
[01:59:03.000 --> 01:59:07.000]  can compromise the profound meaning of the scripture.
[01:59:07.000 --> 01:59:09.000]  Enter the recovery version.
[01:59:09.000 --> 01:59:14.000]  First, this new translation is extremely faithful and accurate, but the real
[01:59:14.000 --> 01:59:18.000]  story is the more than 9,000 explanatory footnotes.
[01:59:18.000 --> 01:59:23.000]  Difficult and profound passages are opened up in a marvelous way, providing
[01:59:23.000 --> 01:59:27.000]  an entrance into the riches of the Word beyond which you've ever experienced
[01:59:27.000 --> 01:59:28.000]  before.
[01:59:28.000 --> 01:59:32.000]  Bibles for America would like to give you a free recovery version simply for
[01:59:32.000 --> 01:59:33.000]  the asking.
[01:59:33.000 --> 01:59:38.000]  This comprehensive yet compact study Bible is yours just by calling us toll
[01:59:38.000 --> 01:59:47.000]  free at 1-888-551-0102 or by ordering online at freestudybible.com.
[01:59:47.000 --> 01:59:50.000]  That's freestudybible.com.
[01:59:50.000 --> 02:00:09.000]  You are listening to the Logos Radio Network, logosradionetwork.com.