ROL_2010-01-07_16k.timecode

[00:00.000 --> 00:04.400]  This news brief brought to you by the International News Net.
[00:04.400 --> 00:11.680]  A space age power boat, Bolivia's vice president, Alvaro Garcia Lenera, says he refuses to blindly
[00:11.680 --> 00:18.960]  cater to the economic or political desires of the U.S., adding, we do not want tax preference
[00:18.960 --> 00:24.280]  in exchange for Americans telling us what must be our economic policy, because that
[00:24.280 --> 00:28.560]  will make us become a slave and a colony again.
[00:28.560 --> 00:33.840]  A campaign by syndicated columnist Arianna Huffington for people to move their money
[00:33.840 --> 00:40.360]  from the giant banks to local community banks and credit unions is going viral.
[00:40.360 --> 00:45.360]  The campaign says that moving our money will let people vote with their wallets and regain
[00:45.360 --> 00:52.080]  some control over our economy and our finances.
[00:52.080 --> 00:53.080]  The T.P.
[00:53.080 --> 00:58.360]  Speaker website reports a group of moderate Democrats held private meetings this fall with
[00:58.360 --> 01:04.760]  executives from Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan Chase while in the midst of a successful campaign
[01:04.760 --> 01:10.160]  to water down legislation to beef up regulation of the financial industry.
[01:10.160 --> 01:15.880]  In mid-October, members of the NDC, a caucus of pro-business Democrats, met executives
[01:15.880 --> 01:18.120]  from Goldman and JP Morgan.
[01:18.120 --> 01:24.080]  Sandwiched between those events was a fundraiser for the NDC, 15 of whose members sit on the
[01:24.080 --> 01:29.680]  House Financial Services Committee which oversees the financial regulatory overhaul currently
[01:29.680 --> 01:31.760]  making its way through Congress.
[01:31.760 --> 01:37.640]  A recent article in Businessweek reported Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan Chase and others
[01:37.640 --> 01:41.880]  lobbied the NDC to weaken the administration's plan.
[01:41.880 --> 01:43.440]  The push succeeded.
[01:43.440 --> 01:54.760]  The recently passed House bill won't require banks to trade derivatives on regulated platforms.
[01:54.760 --> 02:00.160]  A federal judge in Manhattan has allowed a lawsuit to go forward against IBM, General
[02:00.160 --> 02:06.120]  Motors, Ford and other corporations over their roles in South Africa's apartheid.
[02:06.120 --> 02:12.140]  The automakers are accused of providing armored vehicles used to suppress marches and protests
[02:12.140 --> 02:18.200]  and of assisting security forces tasked with identifying and torturing anti-apartheid leaders.
[02:18.200 --> 02:24.860]  U.S. District Judge Shira Shindlin also allowed claims against IBM to proceed for providing
[02:24.860 --> 02:30.400]  the technology that allowed the South African government to carry out geographic segregation
[02:30.400 --> 02:32.640]  and denationalization.
[02:32.640 --> 02:37.280]  The lawsuit was filed on behalf of all black South African citizens for the suffering they
[02:37.280 --> 02:42.220]  endured under the 1960 to 1994 apartheid regime.
[02:42.220 --> 02:46.840]  In an earlier ruling, Judge Shindlin said the U.S. corporations should be tried over
[02:46.840 --> 03:10.440]  claims they aided and abetted torture, extrajudicial killing and apartheid.
[03:16.840 --> 03:39.040]  I said, down, press the man Where you gonna run to, down, press the man
[03:39.040 --> 03:58.040]  Where you gonna run to, down, press the man I said, where you gonna run to, down, press
[03:58.040 --> 04:07.040]  the man Where you gonna run to, down, press the man
[04:07.040 --> 04:36.380]  Where you gonna run to, down, press the man Where you gonna run to, down, press the man
[04:36.380 --> 04:40.380]  As you run, run to the sea
[04:40.380 --> 04:43.380]  It will be boiling, I say
[04:43.380 --> 04:48.380]  Oh, as long as I stay, I stay here
[04:51.380 --> 04:55.380]  So tell me, down, I press the man
[04:55.380 --> 04:58.380]  Where you gonna run now?
[04:58.380 --> 05:02.380]  Down, press the man
[05:02.380 --> 05:04.380]  I don't know where you gonna run
[05:04.380 --> 05:08.380]  Down, press the man
[05:08.380 --> 05:10.380]  Tell me where you gonna run
[05:10.380 --> 05:15.380]  Oh, as long as I stay here
[05:19.380 --> 05:22.380]  I wouldn't like to be a flea
[05:23.380 --> 05:25.380]  Off to your collar
[05:25.380 --> 05:29.380]  Man, I wouldn't like to be a flea
[05:29.380 --> 05:31.380]  On beneath your collar, man
[05:31.380 --> 05:35.380]  I wouldn't like to be a flea
[05:35.380 --> 05:38.380]  On beneath your collar
[05:38.380 --> 05:44.380]  Oh, as long as I stay here
[05:47.380 --> 05:51.380]  You better run, but they cannot hide
[05:51.380 --> 05:55.380]  The down, presser man
[05:55.380 --> 05:58.380]  They can run, but they cannot hide
[05:58.380 --> 06:01.380]  You better run, but they cannot hide
[06:01.380 --> 06:26.380]  You better run, but they cannot hide
[06:31.380 --> 06:33.380]  Let me guess
[06:33.380 --> 06:35.380]  No, you tell us
[06:37.380 --> 06:41.380]  You might start with a 9 and end with an 11
[06:43.380 --> 06:45.380]  Just like
[06:47.380 --> 06:51.380]  democratically elected president of Chile
[06:51.380 --> 06:54.380]  was assassinated
[06:55.380 --> 06:59.380]  Okay, we've been hearing for decades
[06:59.380 --> 07:02.380]  about Peter Tosh and Bob Marley being assassinated
[07:02.380 --> 07:05.380]  and I just happened to be looking online last night
[07:05.380 --> 07:08.380]  looking up some music, looking up some tunes for a change
[07:08.380 --> 07:09.380]  trying to have a good time
[07:09.380 --> 07:12.380]  reading articles about Peter Tosh
[07:12.380 --> 07:16.380]  and come to find out, reminding me
[07:16.380 --> 07:22.380]  the man was taken out of the world on 9-11-1987
[07:22.380 --> 07:26.380]  Now this is just in your face, okay?
[07:26.380 --> 07:31.380]  They just, they can run, but they can't hide
[07:31.380 --> 07:35.380]  Anyway, we know what happened
[07:35.380 --> 07:36.380]  we're going to get into it
[07:36.380 --> 07:42.380]  but at any rate, I just want to put that out there
[07:42.380 --> 07:45.380]  because serious stuff going on
[07:45.380 --> 07:49.380]  and in the meantime, I want to discuss a little bit tonight
[07:49.380 --> 07:54.380]  concerning the difference between agency
[07:54.380 --> 07:57.380]  and the agent
[07:57.380 --> 08:00.380]  Representative authority
[08:00.380 --> 08:05.380]  acting under color of law and jurisdiction
[08:05.380 --> 08:09.380]  and I feel like a lot of us have been duped into
[08:09.380 --> 08:14.380]  feeling like we have the demand of these
[08:14.380 --> 08:19.380]  purported, alleged agents who purport themselves
[08:19.380 --> 08:23.380]  to be agents of representing certain governmental authorities
[08:23.380 --> 08:26.380]  that they are the ones that have jurisdiction
[08:26.380 --> 08:29.380]  and you know what? No, they don't
[08:29.380 --> 08:32.380]  There is nothing in statute anywhere that I have seen
[08:32.380 --> 08:39.380]  that grants any agent jurisdiction of any type
[08:39.380 --> 08:42.380]  It's the agency that has jurisdiction
[08:42.380 --> 08:44.380]  the court has jurisdiction
[08:44.380 --> 08:46.380]  the judge does not have jurisdiction
[08:46.380 --> 08:53.380]  the judge is an agent, a representative
[08:53.380 --> 08:57.380]  So I want to address this issue here
[08:57.380 --> 09:02.380]  because this is a trap that a lot of legal activists get
[09:02.380 --> 09:06.380]  fallen into
[09:06.380 --> 09:08.380]  This is something we've been struggling with today
[09:08.380 --> 09:19.380]  with the FCC documents
[09:19.380 --> 09:22.380]  You there? Yeah, Randy, go ahead
[09:22.380 --> 09:26.380]  Anyway, I'll just explain where this came from
[09:26.380 --> 09:33.380]  We were, Deb and I have been working on a document for the FCC
[09:33.380 --> 09:36.380]  and that was an issue that came up
[09:36.380 --> 09:42.380]  about agency as opposed to subject matter jurisdiction
[09:42.380 --> 09:46.380]  Will you explain your realization?
[09:46.380 --> 09:51.380]  Well, see, Randy, you're always talking about
[09:51.380 --> 09:54.380]  challenging subject matter jurisdiction
[09:54.380 --> 09:59.380]  but what entity are you challenging
[09:59.380 --> 10:03.380]  when it comes to the challenge of the subject matter jurisdiction?
[10:03.380 --> 10:06.380]  And I'm looking through all your case law research
[10:06.380 --> 10:09.380]  and all my statutory research
[10:09.380 --> 10:14.380]  I'm digging up all the code and the statute
[10:14.380 --> 10:16.380]  Randy's digging up all the case law
[10:16.380 --> 10:21.380]  and the fundamental arguments that we have are there
[10:21.380 --> 10:25.380]  but then I start looking at the in between
[10:25.380 --> 10:28.380]  the paragraphs in between and the language
[10:28.380 --> 10:33.380]  and it's like, I'm not just saying it's us
[10:33.380 --> 10:37.380]  but all these other legal activists start falling into this trap
[10:37.380 --> 10:44.380]  of thinking that we're challenging the jurisdiction of the agent
[10:44.380 --> 10:46.380]  and then I just had this epiphany today
[10:46.380 --> 10:50.380]  it was like, no, wait a minute
[10:50.380 --> 10:58.380]  an agent, a representative of a governmental entity, a body
[10:58.380 --> 11:00.380]  can never have jurisdiction
[11:00.380 --> 11:03.380]  that's just preposterous on its face
[11:03.380 --> 11:07.380]  I mean, the governmental entity itself
[11:07.380 --> 11:10.380]  would or would not have jurisdiction
[11:10.380 --> 11:15.380]  you know, the court has or does not have jurisdiction
[11:15.380 --> 11:20.380]  you know, the legislature does or does not have jurisdiction
[11:20.380 --> 11:24.380]  the executive branch does or does not have jurisdiction
[11:24.380 --> 11:26.380]  okay, you don't ask the question
[11:26.380 --> 11:30.380]  it's not even a question of does the judge have jurisdiction
[11:30.380 --> 11:38.380]  no, you ask the question of is the judge an authorized agent
[11:38.380 --> 11:47.380]  to act in the capacity to represent the authority of the court
[11:47.380 --> 11:51.380]  is this person, if you want to call it a person
[11:51.380 --> 11:53.380]  and this all goes to the oath of office
[11:53.380 --> 11:56.380]  this is where the transition is made
[11:56.380 --> 12:00.380]  you know, we've been hearing all these years
[12:00.380 --> 12:05.380]  and people love to write off these legal reformists
[12:05.380 --> 12:08.380]  legal myths, people talk about oath of office
[12:08.380 --> 12:11.380]  you know, just a bunch of conspiracy nonsense
[12:11.380 --> 12:14.380]  no, it's not, I finally understand what's going on now
[12:14.380 --> 12:18.380]  because agency cannot be proven out of the mouth of the agent
[12:18.380 --> 12:22.380]  it has to be proven out of the mouth of the principal
[12:22.380 --> 12:28.380]  and so when you challenge the jurisdiction of the governmental entity
[12:28.380 --> 12:33.380]  the agent who's purporting to represent the authority
[12:33.380 --> 12:38.380]  of the governmental entity is responsible for proving up the jurisdiction
[12:38.380 --> 12:41.380]  of the governmental entity
[12:41.380 --> 12:49.380]  but you can't ask or demand that the agent prove up his own agency
[12:49.380 --> 12:51.380]  that's ridiculous
[12:51.380 --> 12:57.380]  you have to demand of the principal to prove the agency
[12:57.380 --> 12:59.380]  the representation, you see
[12:59.380 --> 13:01.380]  and that's where the oath of office comes in
[13:01.380 --> 13:06.380]  and that's why none of them have it
[13:06.380 --> 13:10.380]  that's why none of them have it
[13:10.380 --> 13:13.380]  you following me, Randy? Am I making sense here?
[13:13.380 --> 13:17.380]  yeah, this was an issue that we had to go through
[13:17.380 --> 13:21.380]  the entire document that we had written
[13:21.380 --> 13:23.380]  actually, Deb did
[13:23.380 --> 13:31.380]  and rewrite it so that we never ask the agent to prove up jurisdiction
[13:31.380 --> 13:34.380]  well now, wait a minute, no
[13:34.380 --> 13:37.380]  we do ask the agent to prove up jurisdiction
[13:37.380 --> 13:40.380]  of the governmental entity
[13:40.380 --> 13:42.380]  no, that's the whole point
[13:42.380 --> 13:45.380]  the agent doesn't have jurisdiction
[13:45.380 --> 13:49.380]  that's the preposterous on his face
[13:49.380 --> 13:55.380]  the agent has authority
[13:55.380 --> 14:03.380]  he has a capacity to act under the authority of the entity
[14:03.380 --> 14:04.380]  the governmental entity
[14:04.380 --> 14:10.380]  the governmental entity is the one, is the entity that has jurisdiction
[14:10.380 --> 14:15.380]  the agent who purports to represent himself or herself as an agent
[14:15.380 --> 14:21.380]  either does or does not have authority to act in the capacity
[14:21.380 --> 14:25.380]  to represent the governmental entity
[14:25.380 --> 14:29.380]  so you demand of the agent to prove up jurisdiction
[14:29.380 --> 14:34.380]  of the principal of the governmental entity
[14:34.380 --> 14:38.380]  but the agent, him or herself
[14:38.380 --> 14:42.380]  could never have jurisdiction, I mean that's
[14:42.380 --> 14:46.380]  that was the point that we had to rewrite the documents
[14:46.380 --> 14:52.380]  so we weren't asking the agent to do something he couldn't do
[14:52.380 --> 14:55.380]  we could only address the
[14:55.380 --> 14:59.380]  and actually we can't even ask the agent to prove up his agency
[14:59.380 --> 15:00.380]  no, that's right
[15:00.380 --> 15:03.380]  because agency cannot be proven out of the mouth of the agent
[15:03.380 --> 15:04.380]  that's where the
[15:04.380 --> 15:06.380]  it must be proven out of the mouth of the
[15:06.380 --> 15:07.380]  principal
[15:07.380 --> 15:11.380]  principal and that's kind of the realization that Deb had
[15:11.380 --> 15:16.380]  how does the principal prove up agency of the agent
[15:16.380 --> 15:21.380]  that's where the oath of office comes in
[15:21.380 --> 15:23.380]  okay, but not only that
[15:23.380 --> 15:27.380]  going to jurisdiction, okay
[15:27.380 --> 15:32.380]  it's the entity, it's the governmental entity
[15:32.380 --> 15:39.380]  that is brought into being by statute or by constitution
[15:39.380 --> 15:44.380]  that is the entity that either does or does not have jurisdiction
[15:44.380 --> 15:48.380]  okay, like I said, you ask the question
[15:48.380 --> 15:52.380]  you ask the question of does the court have jurisdiction or not
[15:52.380 --> 15:57.380]  you don't ask the question of does the judge have jurisdiction
[15:57.380 --> 16:02.380]  no, that's not even the right question
[16:02.380 --> 16:03.380]  you ask the
[16:03.380 --> 16:06.380]  if you're going to even challenge the
[16:06.380 --> 16:12.380]  what's going on with the judge, you ask if the judge has authority
[16:12.380 --> 16:15.380]  to act in the capacity
[16:15.380 --> 16:21.380]  does he have capacity to act in the authority in the name of the courts
[16:21.380 --> 16:26.380]  you don't ask if the judge has jurisdiction, you ask if the court has jurisdiction
[16:26.380 --> 16:29.380]  the court is not the judge, the judge is not the court
[16:29.380 --> 16:32.380]  that's where, you know, I'm finally understanding this now
[16:32.380 --> 16:39.380]  this is the blur, the fine line that they've been trying to trip us up with the whole time
[16:39.380 --> 16:42.380]  the judge is not the court, the court is not the judge
[16:42.380 --> 16:45.380]  the president is not the presidency
[16:45.380 --> 16:51.380]  okay, it's two different things
[16:51.380 --> 16:54.380]  am I making sense here?
[16:54.380 --> 16:57.380]  makes sense to me
[16:57.380 --> 17:00.380]  alright, we'll be right back
[17:00.380 --> 17:04.380]  you feel tired when talking about important topics like money and politics?
[17:04.380 --> 17:08.380]  are you confused by words like the constitution or the federal reserve?
[17:08.380 --> 17:13.380]  if so, you may be diagnosed with the deadliest disease known today, stupidity
[17:13.380 --> 17:19.380]  hi, my name is Steve Holt, and like millions of other Americans, I was diagnosed with stupidity at an early age
[17:19.380 --> 17:25.380]  I had no idea that the number one cause of the disease is found in almost every home in America, the television
[17:25.380 --> 17:30.380]  unfortunately, that puts most Americans at risk of catching stupidity, but there is hope
[17:30.380 --> 17:36.380]  the staff at Brave New Books have helped me and thousands of other Foxaholics suffering from sports zombieism recover
[17:36.380 --> 17:43.380]  and because of Brave New Books, I now enjoy reading and watching educational documentaries without feeling tired or uninterested
[17:43.380 --> 17:50.380]  so if you or anybody you know suffers from stupidity, then you need to call 512-480-2503
[17:50.380 --> 17:55.380]  or visit them at 1904guadalupe or bravenewbookstore.com
[17:55.380 --> 17:58.380]  side effects from using Brave New Books products may include discernment and enlarged vocabulary
[17:58.380 --> 18:01.380]  and an overall increase in mental functioning
[18:01.380 --> 18:27.380]  music
[18:27.380 --> 18:48.380]  music
[18:48.380 --> 18:53.380]  okay, we are back, the rule of law
[18:53.380 --> 19:00.380]  okay, so we've got some callers on the line, callers if you'd like to call in, 512-646-1984
[19:00.380 --> 19:05.380]  we've got Jeff from Maryland on the line
[19:05.380 --> 19:08.380]  hey Jeff, thanks for calling in, what's on your mind tonight?
[19:08.380 --> 19:12.380]  well, I thought I was listening to what you were saying about agency
[19:12.380 --> 19:20.380]  and I thought that I would sort of contribute to your conversation and maybe even throw you a little bit of a curve
[19:20.380 --> 19:23.380]  Randy, if you're still there
[19:23.380 --> 19:24.380]  I'm here
[19:24.380 --> 19:30.380]  okay, where do they call people who work for the FBI, carry a badge and a gun?
[19:30.380 --> 19:32.380]  I can't say that on the radio
[19:32.380 --> 19:36.380]  alright, okay, say what you can't say on the radio
[19:36.380 --> 19:37.380]  agents
[19:37.380 --> 19:38.380]  they call them agents
[19:38.380 --> 19:43.380]  no they don't
[19:43.380 --> 19:44.380]  okay
[19:44.380 --> 19:47.380]  they absolutely do not, refer to themselves as agents
[19:47.380 --> 19:49.380]  special agents
[19:49.380 --> 19:51.380]  yeah
[19:51.380 --> 19:54.380]  what does that mean?
[19:54.380 --> 19:57.380]  that means they are agents that are special
[19:57.380 --> 20:00.380]  no, it's got a specific meaning
[20:00.380 --> 20:02.380]  no, I don't know what the specific means
[20:02.380 --> 20:09.380]  and they actually play with your FCC quote agent
[20:09.380 --> 20:16.380]  because they're not FBI agents or not agents
[20:16.380 --> 20:20.380]  no, they're not agents, they're officers
[20:20.380 --> 20:26.380]  special agents, they're officers but there's a liability that goes with that
[20:26.380 --> 20:29.380]  and you need to investigate that because I can't tell you firsthand what it is
[20:29.380 --> 20:34.380]  I've been told and advised on it but that was about 15-20 years ago so I can't call it to mind
[20:34.380 --> 20:43.380]  but since you're rewriting paperwork you may want to investigate that just a little bit to see if it makes a difference in your pleadings
[20:43.380 --> 20:45.380]  special agent
[20:45.380 --> 20:50.380]  because he actually could be, this guy that works for the FCC could actually be a special agent
[20:50.380 --> 20:53.380]  which means he's not an agent at all
[20:53.380 --> 21:00.380]  well our issue with him is he's not an agent of any kind
[21:00.380 --> 21:11.380]  unless he's a simple contract employee from a corporation that's doing business with the government
[21:11.380 --> 21:23.380]  he is not in an official capacity because he purports to render adjudicated decisions or quasi-judicial decisions
[21:23.380 --> 21:30.380]  and to do that you must have an oath of office, a valid oath of office
[21:30.380 --> 21:35.380]  he's got an oath but it's not, we could smell the white ink on it when he sent it to us
[21:35.380 --> 21:39.380]  you mean he just signed it?
[21:39.380 --> 21:42.380]  no signature, it wasn't signed
[21:42.380 --> 21:44.380]  oh it wasn't
[21:44.380 --> 21:47.380]  yeah but I don't think it was dated either, was it a lease?
[21:47.380 --> 21:50.380]  no date, no signature
[21:50.380 --> 21:52.380]  no jurat?
[21:52.380 --> 21:54.380]  no jurat
[21:54.380 --> 22:02.380]  he just found a form and signed it and put his signature on it and sent it
[22:02.380 --> 22:04.380]  and we weren't impressed
[22:04.380 --> 22:08.380]  but if that's the case he just tampered with the government document
[22:08.380 --> 22:13.380]  that's one of my allegations too
[22:13.380 --> 22:20.380]  if he claims to have a valid oath we'll charge him with tampering for sending us that one
[22:20.380 --> 22:28.380]  okay well wait a minute, see the thing is the agent isn't the one that sent the oath
[22:28.380 --> 22:34.380]  you can't charge the agent with that because the agent isn't the one that sent the oath
[22:34.380 --> 22:37.380]  that's the whole point that I was trying to go to earlier
[22:37.380 --> 22:41.380]  the agency under FOIA
[22:41.380 --> 22:45.380]  someone sent the oath
[22:45.380 --> 22:55.380]  some person, a public information officer, a head of an agency
[22:55.380 --> 23:01.380]  whoever is designated the custodian of the record
[23:01.380 --> 23:02.380]  right
[23:02.380 --> 23:07.380]  and that will be the head of the agency unless they have appointed someone
[23:07.380 --> 23:13.380]  and if they have we don't care because in this instance he is respondent superior
[23:13.380 --> 23:14.380]  right
[23:14.380 --> 23:20.380]  so we go for the head of the agency, it's always easier to find him and he's a better target
[23:20.380 --> 23:25.380]  especially if one of his underlings has done something really stupid
[23:25.380 --> 23:31.380]  we don't mess with the underling, we run in and kick the boss right square in his behind
[23:31.380 --> 23:37.380]  and when he gets to the underling he's going to be a real unhappy camper
[23:37.380 --> 23:42.380]  well if this particular purported agent is in fact an agent
[23:42.380 --> 23:50.380]  then whatever transgressions he has perpetrated, the agency has perpetrated
[23:50.380 --> 24:00.380]  because he is as an agent, quote agent, he can sign anything, he can do anything, he can commit anything
[24:00.380 --> 24:08.380]  financially or any other kind of obligation on behalf of the FCC
[24:08.380 --> 24:12.380]  whatever is designated as the scope of his authority
[24:12.380 --> 24:16.380]  if he were in fact a true agent
[24:16.380 --> 24:23.380]  if he's not a true agent and he's out acting in the name of the true agent
[24:23.380 --> 24:29.380]  then respondent, we want to know who his boss is
[24:29.380 --> 24:32.380]  they will put some distance between themselves and him in a hunt
[24:32.380 --> 24:36.380]  oh we're going to close that distance really fast
[24:36.380 --> 24:43.380]  well see one of the problems that they have is that out of having sent you that document
[24:43.380 --> 24:48.380]  they have kind of hooked themselves into him
[24:48.380 --> 24:50.380]  yes they have
[24:50.380 --> 24:54.380]  and the document was invalid so now they can't back up
[24:54.380 --> 24:58.380]  the smart thing to do was ignore the request
[24:58.380 --> 25:01.380]  they can't, it's FOIA
[25:01.380 --> 25:04.380]  I know but then they only have a FOIA charge
[25:04.380 --> 25:12.380]  this way by sending a bogus request they either have a FOIA charge or they have a tampering charge
[25:12.380 --> 25:16.380]  there's going to be multiple tampering charges
[25:16.380 --> 25:24.380]  well the problem was is no matter what they do there was no good outcome in sight here
[25:24.380 --> 25:28.380]  a bad one and a worse one
[25:28.380 --> 25:34.380]  I'm going to tell you how much these people slipped up
[25:34.380 --> 25:40.380]  the respondent superior
[25:40.380 --> 25:46.380]  responded to the FOIA request
[25:46.380 --> 25:50.380]  I can't believe that they did that
[25:50.380 --> 25:54.380]  and then we got his oath and it wasn't good
[25:54.380 --> 25:58.380]  that's what I'm trying to say the original FOIA request
[25:58.380 --> 26:01.380]  on the underling
[26:01.380 --> 26:08.380]  that I FOIA'd to the national headquarters
[26:08.380 --> 26:13.380]  I was expecting just some generic response
[26:13.380 --> 26:19.380]  by the generic FOIA department of the agency
[26:19.380 --> 26:25.380]  now the respondent superior of the Patsy
[26:25.380 --> 26:31.380]  wrote the response to the FOIA
[26:31.380 --> 26:35.380]  tying himself into the whole thing I mean it's just
[26:35.380 --> 26:37.380]  you know what good
[26:37.380 --> 26:39.380]  he's the one that sent us the bogus documents
[26:39.380 --> 26:48.380]  my suggestion to you Deborah is to turn and face the northeast and say thank you
[26:48.380 --> 26:50.380]  oh yeah of course
[26:50.380 --> 26:52.380]  of course
[26:52.380 --> 26:54.380]  and you know what
[26:54.380 --> 26:56.380]  the thing is
[26:56.380 --> 27:02.380]  I'm not even going to that because even if all these oaths of office were valid
[27:02.380 --> 27:06.380]  it doesn't matter because
[27:06.380 --> 27:11.380]  the agency itself has no jurisdiction
[27:11.380 --> 27:14.380]  in the instant cause
[27:14.380 --> 27:16.380]  under statute
[27:16.380 --> 27:18.380]  this is what Randy and I have been going through
[27:18.380 --> 27:20.380]  title 5
[27:20.380 --> 27:21.380]  title 28
[27:21.380 --> 27:24.380]  title 47
[27:24.380 --> 27:30.380]  we've been going over it up and down every which way from sideways
[27:30.380 --> 27:32.380]  I mean
[27:32.380 --> 27:34.380]  even if
[27:34.380 --> 27:39.380]  you don't even have to go to like these specific technical definitions
[27:39.380 --> 27:42.380]  I mean it's ridiculous man
[27:42.380 --> 27:44.380]  it's unbelievable
[27:44.380 --> 27:49.380]  when you start digging into details and you find this little nugget
[27:49.380 --> 27:52.380]  well Deborah found a whole handful of pebbles
[27:52.380 --> 27:54.380]  okay
[27:54.380 --> 27:58.380]  the more we dug the more we found
[27:58.380 --> 27:59.380]  yeah
[27:59.380 --> 28:03.380]  but you know it's like I was telling you earlier Randy when we spoke on the phone
[28:03.380 --> 28:07.380]  you can always tell when there is a lie
[28:07.380 --> 28:13.380]  because the story always starts in the middle
[28:13.380 --> 28:17.380]  yeah explain that that was nicely put
[28:17.380 --> 28:21.380]  oh okay
[28:21.380 --> 28:27.380]  first I'm going to give you a couple of fairy tales and then I'm going to apply it to a case
[28:27.380 --> 28:31.380]  first fairy tale is
[28:31.380 --> 28:35.380]  once upon a time there was a prince who lived in a far far away land
[28:35.380 --> 28:40.380]  many years ago and he lived in a castle and the castle had rooks and spires
[28:40.380 --> 28:42.380]  that's the first fairy tale
[28:42.380 --> 28:44.380]  got a beginning
[28:44.380 --> 28:46.380]  second fairy tale
[28:46.380 --> 28:51.380]  once upon a time Cinderella lost a shoe while running from a ball
[28:51.380 --> 28:54.380]  kind of started in the middle there didn't it
[28:54.380 --> 28:55.380]  it did
[28:55.380 --> 29:00.380]  okay let's use credit cards for instance
[29:00.380 --> 29:06.380]  the pleading that goes into the court that ultimately garners a summon
[29:06.380 --> 29:08.380]  says
[29:08.380 --> 29:12.380]  you have this debt and you haven't paid it
[29:12.380 --> 29:17.380]  well isn't that kind of in the middle
[29:17.380 --> 29:20.380]  objection foundation
[29:20.380 --> 29:27.380]  right where's the beginning Randy
[29:27.380 --> 29:30.380]  so and so applied for a
[29:30.380 --> 29:34.380]  uh uh
[29:34.380 --> 29:36.380]  credit card
[29:36.380 --> 29:38.380]  so and so is issued a credit card
[29:38.380 --> 29:43.380]  no it goes to agency in this case
[29:43.380 --> 29:45.380]  I'll wait
[29:45.380 --> 29:48.380]  okay
[29:48.380 --> 29:51.380]  we'll be back on the other side
[29:51.380 --> 29:53.380]  with the rest of this story
[29:53.380 --> 29:55.380]  alright
[29:55.380 --> 30:00.380]  callers 512-646-1984
[30:00.380 --> 30:03.380]  are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[30:03.380 --> 30:07.380]  win your case without an attorney with Juris Dictionary
[30:07.380 --> 30:13.380]  the affordable easy to understand 4 CD course that will show you how in 24 hours
[30:13.380 --> 30:15.380]  step by step
[30:15.380 --> 30:18.380]  if you have a lawyer know what your lawyer should be doing
[30:18.380 --> 30:22.380]  if you don't have a lawyer know what you should do for yourself
[30:22.380 --> 30:27.380]  thousands have won with our step by step course and now you can too
[30:27.380 --> 30:33.380]  Juris Dictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case winning experience
[30:33.380 --> 30:38.380]  even if you're not in a lawsuit you can learn what everyone should understand
[30:38.380 --> 30:42.380]  about the principles and practices that control our American courts
[30:42.380 --> 30:48.380]  you'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases
[30:48.380 --> 30:51.380]  pro se tactics and much more
[30:51.380 --> 30:55.380]  please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner
[30:55.380 --> 31:00.380]  or call toll free 866-LAW-EZ
[31:26.380 --> 31:28.380]  your power
[31:29.380 --> 31:31.380]  when your gunna stop abuse
[31:31.380 --> 31:34.380]  your power
[31:34.380 --> 31:36.380]  when your gunna stop abuse
[31:36.380 --> 31:39.380]  your power
[31:39.380 --> 31:41.380]  when your gunna stop abuse
[31:42.380 --> 31:45.380]  your power
[31:45.380 --> 31:51.380]  so i need Mr.Mackler, teach officer not to abuse the power
[31:51.380 --> 31:53.380]  send a request to them
[31:53.380 --> 32:13.380]  Okay, we're back. We're here with Jeff.
[32:13.380 --> 32:15.380]  I'm here.
[32:15.380 --> 32:17.380]  Okay, go ahead, Jeff.
[32:17.380 --> 32:19.380]  And they lived happily ever after.
[32:19.380 --> 32:28.380]  Right. The beginning of the story is, I'm an attorney cheater who worked for Dewey Cheatham and Howell law firm.
[32:28.380 --> 32:35.380]  And I'm here representing the master cheater of all banks.
[32:35.380 --> 32:39.380]  And here's my letter from the bank showing that I represent them.
[32:39.380 --> 32:41.380]  Objection.
[32:41.380 --> 32:48.380]  But you understand, that's the beginning of the story.
[32:48.380 --> 32:50.380]  Object to the letter is hearsay.
[32:50.380 --> 32:53.380]  Okay, I understand.
[32:53.380 --> 33:04.380]  You understand that that is the beginning of the story, not where they start, which is, he had an obligation to pay and didn't?
[33:04.380 --> 33:09.380]  Precisely. The first, the agent has to establish standing.
[33:09.380 --> 33:15.380]  He has to lay foundation, and they never do. They always start the story in the beginning.
[33:15.380 --> 33:29.380]  This is what we did to the credit card guy here in Austin, is he failed to have the document that he filed verified.
[33:29.380 --> 33:30.380]  Right.
[33:30.380 --> 33:38.380]  And then he claimed that he purchased this debt from Sears.
[33:38.380 --> 33:40.380]  Oh, geez.
[33:40.380 --> 33:45.380]  The problem is, is I've never heard of a company called Sears.
[33:45.380 --> 33:48.380]  Have you ever heard of a company called Sears?
[33:48.380 --> 33:50.380]  Only in part.
[33:50.380 --> 33:56.380]  Yeah. I've heard of a company called Sears and Roebuck and Company.
[33:56.380 --> 33:57.380]  Right.
[33:57.380 --> 34:00.380]  Never heard of one called Sears.
[34:00.380 --> 34:08.380]  So we hammered him over that one and countersued him for the full amount of the debt, for triple the amount of the debt.
[34:08.380 --> 34:20.380]  In the conversation you and I had earlier on today, the beginning of the story on the traffic ticket for speeding was the foundation of,
[34:20.380 --> 34:26.380]  well, there is a highway survey for this particular area, and it is established what the speed limit is,
[34:26.380 --> 34:31.380]  and then we had to bring in the laws to show that those particular laws apply to you.
[34:31.380 --> 34:34.380]  So that's kind of in the middle.
[34:34.380 --> 34:41.380]  Well, that's kind of at the beginning because what they do with the traffic ticket is they say that you did fail to observe
[34:41.380 --> 34:49.380]  and obey a legitimately placed speed sign or something to that effect,
[34:49.380 --> 34:57.380]  but they never bring anything into court to show that it was a legitimately placed speed sign,
[34:57.380 --> 35:01.380]  it was at the proper speed limit, and that that speed limit applied to you.
[35:01.380 --> 35:05.380]  Well, my first question would be who are they?
[35:05.380 --> 35:07.380]  I understand that.
[35:07.380 --> 35:09.380]  The accuser and the officer.
[35:09.380 --> 35:15.380]  You'll notice that when a prosecutor calls a police officer to the stand,
[35:15.380 --> 35:26.380]  he asks him a lot of preliminary questions about his position, his authority, his training.
[35:26.380 --> 35:30.380]  He's establishing foundation for this officer's testimony.
[35:30.380 --> 35:31.380]  Right.
[35:31.380 --> 35:34.380]  That's part of the beginning of the story.
[35:34.380 --> 35:37.380]  But they never established that.
[35:37.380 --> 35:42.380]  There was a law that established the speed limit, and that the speed limit applied to you.
[35:42.380 --> 35:43.380]  Yes.
[35:43.380 --> 35:46.380]  That's actually up at the front of it all.
[35:46.380 --> 35:50.380]  First, that the traffic laws applied to you.
[35:50.380 --> 35:51.380]  Right.
[35:51.380 --> 36:00.380]  And then that there was, in fact, a properly posted speed limit that he had cause to believe,
[36:00.380 --> 36:05.380]  evidence to indicate that you exceeded that speed limit,
[36:05.380 --> 36:11.380]  and when you exceeded that speed limit, you were subject to the law.
[36:11.380 --> 36:13.380]  Did I say that already?
[36:13.380 --> 36:21.380]  Yes. Let me give you an example of just how valuable that is.
[36:21.380 --> 36:28.380]  Off of 95 running north and south, there is another interstate called 895.
[36:28.380 --> 36:37.380]  895 is about 14, 15 miles in length, and it goes through the harbor tunnel underneath the bay there.
[36:37.380 --> 36:44.380]  For those who don't know, when you have a national highway like 95,
[36:44.380 --> 36:49.380]  and then it has an adjacent highway with a three-digit number, that means it's a loop.
[36:49.380 --> 36:51.380]  Right.
[36:51.380 --> 36:53.380]  Okay.
[36:53.380 --> 36:58.380]  For the last 30 years, the speed limit on that road,
[36:58.380 --> 37:05.380]  or the posted speed limit on that road has been 50 miles an hour.
[37:05.380 --> 37:10.380]  And up until about six months ago,
[37:10.380 --> 37:20.380]  they must have had somewhere around 15 or 20 cruisers on that road on a 24-hour cycle.
[37:20.380 --> 37:30.380]  Then they tagged the wrong person, and he made them bring in the highway survey.
[37:30.380 --> 37:40.380]  And lo and behold, the posted speed limit on 895 went from 50 to 65.
[37:40.380 --> 37:43.380]  Ooh.
[37:43.380 --> 37:47.380]  So for 20 years, or 25 years,
[37:47.380 --> 37:57.380]  the Maryland Transportation Authority has been raking in tens of thousands of dollars in speeding fines.
[37:57.380 --> 38:01.380]  And they did not have subject matter jurisdiction.
[38:01.380 --> 38:05.380]  At no time did they have subject matter jurisdiction.
[38:05.380 --> 38:09.380]  So if you've got an example of how much it changed,
[38:09.380 --> 38:15.380]  we saw that a change on the main road changed 15 miles an hour on the main road,
[38:15.380 --> 38:20.380]  but the speed through the tunnel changed as well.
[38:20.380 --> 38:25.380]  It went from 45 to 50.
[38:25.380 --> 38:34.380]  All because they tagged the wrong person who required them to bring in the highway survey,
[38:34.380 --> 38:41.380]  which they never brought in to begin with to show that the posted speed limit was, in fact, the speed limit.
[38:41.380 --> 38:45.380]  I once had a prosecutor ask me,
[38:45.380 --> 38:56.380]  Mr. Kelton, do you really imagine that everyone can be wrong and you're right?
[38:56.380 --> 38:57.380]  Yes.
[38:57.380 --> 39:00.380]  This goes to prove, yes.
[39:00.380 --> 39:04.380]  As a matter of fact, yes, everyone can be wrong.
[39:04.380 --> 39:11.380]  After all, for a long period of time, the world was flat as a tape top.
[39:11.380 --> 39:15.380]  I was thinking the same thing, Randy.
[39:15.380 --> 39:17.380]  Hey, guys, listen, we have a caller.
[39:17.380 --> 39:19.380]  We've got Mark from Wisconsin.
[39:19.380 --> 39:21.380]  Jeff, you want to stay on the line?
[39:21.380 --> 39:31.380]  I will bow out, but one of the things I want to sort of summarize this whole thing for you is that if you take the judicial canons,
[39:31.380 --> 39:42.380]  the rules of procedure is civil or criminal, the rules of evidence and the rules of the professional conduct of attorneys,
[39:42.380 --> 39:46.380]  they should all mesh together perfectly.
[39:46.380 --> 39:54.380]  If they don't, if there's something wrong, then you need to look to that set of four rules to find where the problem is.
[39:54.380 --> 39:57.380]  You said you were sending me some documents on this issue.
[39:57.380 --> 39:58.380]  Yes.
[39:58.380 --> 40:03.380]  I would like to do, if not a whole show, at least a half a show on this issue.
[40:03.380 --> 40:09.380]  Well, I sent you that motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim in which we painted the judge in the court.
[40:09.380 --> 40:16.380]  In fact, we even told the judge that under the current set of pleadings that have been submitted to the court,
[40:16.380 --> 40:27.380]  he should have never have issued a summons, let alone move forward on it.
[40:27.380 --> 40:31.380]  Good, because that's exactly where I want to start going.
[40:31.380 --> 40:33.380]  That's where we went with this guy in Austin.
[40:33.380 --> 40:37.380]  I sent you that plea, and by the way, that particular case got dismissed.
[40:37.380 --> 40:38.380]  Good.
[40:38.380 --> 40:46.380]  I would like to do a show on this particular issue, on the standing foundation,
[40:46.380 --> 40:50.380]  because especially you guys go in for a ticket and they'll start talking to the prosecutor,
[40:50.380 --> 40:53.380]  Foundation, Your Honor, Foundation, Your Honor.
[40:53.380 --> 40:55.380]  We want to be able to do that.
[40:55.380 --> 41:02.380]  The weird foundation of the highway survey that says that that sign is an actual sign that should be there.
[41:02.380 --> 41:10.380]  Yeah, and the trick is, don't tell them what they need to establish foundation.
[41:10.380 --> 41:12.380]  No, of course not.
[41:12.380 --> 41:18.380]  When they try to enter in some BS, objection, foundation.
[41:18.380 --> 41:19.380]  Right.
[41:19.380 --> 41:26.380]  The things that we need to know to act like attorneys, we need to know when an answer is non-responsive
[41:26.380 --> 41:29.380]  and know how to raise the objection.
[41:29.380 --> 41:33.380]  You can object to your own witness when I'm responsive.
[41:33.380 --> 41:34.380]  Yeah, you can.
[41:34.380 --> 41:39.380]  That means if I ask you a question and you give me an answer to a question I didn't answer,
[41:39.380 --> 41:46.380]  I didn't ask, objection, non-responsive, and I love to do that to police officers.
[41:46.380 --> 41:48.380]  It always puts them off.
[41:48.380 --> 41:57.380]  Yeah, much like a lady I know has requested a collection due process hearing, a face-to-face hearing,
[41:57.380 --> 42:04.380]  and she was granted a face-to-face telephone conference.
[42:04.380 --> 42:06.380]  Something missing there?
[42:06.380 --> 42:09.380]  There seems to be.
[42:09.380 --> 42:17.380]  I don't remember our founders authorizing a telephone conversation.
[42:17.380 --> 42:22.380]  They didn't say you have a right to be telephoned by your accuser.
[42:22.380 --> 42:29.380]  No, there's actual statute that when you meet the four requirements for that particular type of hearing,
[42:29.380 --> 42:34.380]  it is mandated that you will get that, and they try to pull this crap out of it
[42:34.380 --> 42:39.380]  and give you a face-to-face telephone conference, but you can't record it.
[42:39.380 --> 42:44.380]  Well, if you agree to it, then you've agreed to it under contract.
[42:44.380 --> 42:48.380]  That's your problem if you accepted it.
[42:48.380 --> 42:52.380]  Yeah, but what I'm saying to you, Deborah, is that they slide this stuff in there,
[42:52.380 --> 42:55.380]  and it's always at the end of the sentence.
[42:55.380 --> 43:02.380]  You've been granted your hearing, your requested hearing, a face-to-face telephone conference.
[43:02.380 --> 43:05.380]  But as you're scanning down through and reading the letter
[43:05.380 --> 43:11.380]  and not reading each and every single word, you get as far as face-to-face in the letter,
[43:11.380 --> 43:13.380]  and you skip to the next line.
[43:13.380 --> 43:18.380]  Well, I'll tell you what, it wouldn't get any further than the word grant with me
[43:18.380 --> 43:25.380]  because no governmental entity can grant me anything.
[43:25.380 --> 43:30.380]  I grant them authority or not.
[43:30.380 --> 43:32.380]  I have rights.
[43:32.380 --> 43:40.380]  Government agencies and agents who claim to represent governmental entities do not have rights.
[43:40.380 --> 43:44.380]  No public official has a right.
[43:44.380 --> 43:47.380]  They must provide and abide.
[43:47.380 --> 43:55.380]  Okay, they are granted authority that we choose to grant them, if we choose to.
[43:55.380 --> 43:59.380]  All right, we're going to go to Mark as soon as we get back.
[43:59.380 --> 44:04.380]  Are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters, or even lawsuits?
[44:04.380 --> 44:08.380]  Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Mears proven method.
[44:08.380 --> 44:14.380]  Michael Mears has won six cases in federal court against debt collectors, and now you can win two.
[44:14.380 --> 44:20.380]  You'll get step-by-step instructions in plain English on how to win in court using federal civil rights statutes.
[44:20.380 --> 44:24.380]  What to do when contacted by phone, mail, or court summons.
[44:24.380 --> 44:26.380]  How to answer letters and phone calls.
[44:26.380 --> 44:29.380]  How to get debt collectors out of your credit report.
[44:29.380 --> 44:33.380]  How to turn your financial tables on them and make them pay you to go away.
[44:33.380 --> 44:38.380]  The Michael Mears proven method is the jurisdictionary on how to stop debt collectors.
[44:38.380 --> 44:41.380]  Personal consultation is available as well.
[44:41.380 --> 44:49.380]  For more information, please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the blue Michael Mears banner, or email michaelmears at yahoo.com.
[44:49.380 --> 45:13.380]  That's ruleoflawradio.com, or email michaelmearsas at yahoo.com to learn how to stop debt collectors now.
[45:13.380 --> 45:19.380]  If you did not have any problem, where are you going to look for one?
[45:19.380 --> 45:25.380]  If you could not wait any battle too long, would your purpose test be done?
[45:25.380 --> 45:31.380]  Glasses stand around the soldier or warrior of love, scaffolding the key to the peace.
[45:31.380 --> 45:34.380]  All they're taking is a misunderstanding.
[45:34.380 --> 45:36.380]  Somebody calls the police.
[45:36.380 --> 45:40.380]  I'm watching the spotlight.
[45:40.380 --> 45:45.380]  Okay, we're taking your calls. We're going to Mark in Wisconsin.
[45:45.380 --> 45:49.380]  Mark, what's on your mind?
[45:49.380 --> 45:50.380]  Hello.
[45:50.380 --> 45:51.380]  Hey.
[45:51.380 --> 45:56.380]  I was working on a case for a guy in Illinois, just a simple credit card case.
[45:56.380 --> 46:01.380]  And I've got three things that they've done wrong with the pleading.
[46:01.380 --> 46:06.380]  And I'm wondering, when you set that up, what do you do?
[46:06.380 --> 46:09.380]  What do you put as a heading for the motion?
[46:09.380 --> 46:14.380]  Do you make it a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction?
[46:14.380 --> 46:16.380]  No, it's not a motion.
[46:16.380 --> 46:18.380]  That's a pleading.
[46:18.380 --> 46:27.380]  There are three pleadings, challenge to jurisdiction, nuns pro tonk,
[46:27.380 --> 46:33.380]  incorrect or improper venue, and double jeopardy.
[46:33.380 --> 46:35.380]  Those are pleadings.
[46:35.380 --> 46:41.380]  A challenge to the jurisdiction is a pleading that's always titled
[46:41.380 --> 46:43.380]  challenge to jurisdiction.
[46:43.380 --> 46:48.380]  But what's the nature of the challenges that you have?
[46:48.380 --> 46:55.380]  The challenge that plaintiff failed to attach a contract to the pleading,
[46:55.380 --> 46:57.380]  which is against the...
[46:57.380 --> 46:59.380]  Okay, you check local code for that?
[46:59.380 --> 47:05.380]  Because in Texas, there's a special rule in the rules of civil procedure.
[47:05.380 --> 47:10.380]  Ordinarily, when you file a petition, you don't have to have it verified.
[47:10.380 --> 47:15.380]  And you hear all these people say it, demanding verification validation.
[47:15.380 --> 47:21.380]  Well, the code specifically commands it to give them subject matter
[47:21.380 --> 47:23.380]  jurisdiction in the very first instance.
[47:23.380 --> 47:25.380]  Go ahead, I interrupted.
[47:25.380 --> 47:26.380]  Okay, here's the code.
[47:26.380 --> 47:30.380]  Exhibit, if a claim or defense is found upon a written instrument,
[47:30.380 --> 47:35.380]  a copy thereof or so much of the same as is relevant must be attached to
[47:35.380 --> 47:38.380]  the pleading as an exhibit or recited therein,
[47:38.380 --> 47:42.380]  unless the pleader attaches to his or her pleading an affidavit.
[47:42.380 --> 47:49.380]  David's stating facts showing that the instrument is not accessible to him.
[47:49.380 --> 47:51.380]  That'll work.
[47:51.380 --> 47:56.380]  Okay, that's not quite as...actually, that's somewhat different than Texas.
[47:56.380 --> 48:02.380]  Texas has a special rule for a suit on account.
[48:02.380 --> 48:10.380]  It looks like Wisconsin, any suit on a contract requires the contract.
[48:10.380 --> 48:11.380]  This is Illinois.
[48:11.380 --> 48:12.380]  I'm doing this for a guy in Illinois.
[48:12.380 --> 48:13.380]  I'm sorry, Illinois?
[48:13.380 --> 48:15.380]  That is interesting.
[48:15.380 --> 48:24.380]  So if you come in on, say, a mortgage issue and they haven't put the real note
[48:24.380 --> 48:31.380]  into evidence, they don't meet the requirements to invoke subject matter
[48:31.380 --> 48:32.380]  jurisdiction in the court.
[48:32.380 --> 48:34.380]  You go after the judge.
[48:34.380 --> 48:37.380]  Yeah, and I slipped some case law in there, too.
[48:37.380 --> 48:41.380]  A cause of action for an account stated therefore requires allegation proof
[48:41.380 --> 48:45.380]  that there was a contract between the parties such as a credit card agreement
[48:45.380 --> 48:50.380]  or a contract for sale of goods or services, dryer 227, Illinois.
[48:50.380 --> 48:57.380]  Statement of account was sent to the party thought to be held liable,
[48:57.380 --> 49:01.380]  and the statement was agreed to expressly or by implication.
[49:01.380 --> 49:03.380]  And they have to have that in their pleading, too.
[49:03.380 --> 49:04.380]  They didn't have that.
[49:04.380 --> 49:09.380]  Okay, that's the statement of the cause of action.
[49:09.380 --> 49:10.380]  Right.
[49:10.380 --> 49:11.380]  Good.
[49:11.380 --> 49:14.380]  Well, I don't even have a cause of action, Randy.
[49:14.380 --> 49:16.380]  Here, let me read this to you.
[49:16.380 --> 49:18.380]  This is all that it says.
[49:18.380 --> 49:22.380]  The plaintiff HSBC Household Bank claims as followed.
[49:22.380 --> 49:26.380]  The defendant, blank, is a resident of Winnebago County.
[49:26.380 --> 49:30.380]  The defendant opened an account agreeing to make monthly payments as required
[49:30.380 --> 49:34.380]  by the terms of the agreement for purchase charged to the account.
[49:34.380 --> 49:38.380]  Number three, the defendant did make purchases and charge same to account,
[49:38.380 --> 49:42.380]  but failed to make the monthly payments called for on the account.
[49:42.380 --> 49:44.380]  There is a balance of $2,000.
[49:44.380 --> 49:50.380]  And four, the plaintiff declared defendant to be in default
[49:50.380 --> 49:52.380]  and demands payment of balance.
[49:52.380 --> 49:57.380]  Therefore, the plaintiff HSBC prays for judgment against the defendant
[49:57.380 --> 50:00.380]  in the amount of $2,000.
[50:00.380 --> 50:04.380]  Now, is there a cause of action in there?
[50:04.380 --> 50:08.380]  Actually, that's what he's stating.
[50:08.380 --> 50:10.380]  Okay, so that's a cause of action?
[50:10.380 --> 50:12.380]  Yeah, they don't have to say cause of action,
[50:12.380 --> 50:16.380]  but you state that there was an account,
[50:16.380 --> 50:20.380]  that the person received consideration from the account,
[50:20.380 --> 50:24.380]  that the person agreed to reimburse the consideration,
[50:24.380 --> 50:27.380]  and the person failed to reimburse the consideration.
[50:27.380 --> 50:30.380]  There, he's stating a cause of action.
[50:30.380 --> 50:31.380]  Okay.
[50:31.380 --> 50:42.380]  However, it sounds like he never met the statutory pleading requirements.
[50:42.380 --> 50:47.380]  That means that the judge exercised jurisdiction he didn't have.
[50:47.380 --> 50:52.380]  And this was exactly the issue I raised here in Texas.
[50:52.380 --> 50:57.380]  When it goes to an original pleading,
[50:57.380 --> 51:02.380]  or the judge purports to exercise any authority,
[51:02.380 --> 51:07.380]  the judge must ensure that the pleadings themselves
[51:07.380 --> 51:12.380]  are sufficient to invoke his subject matter jurisdiction.
[51:12.380 --> 51:17.380]  In this case, the magistrate, the JP, when he read the documents,
[51:17.380 --> 51:22.380]  now he's an attorney for 20-year attorneys, so he should know better.
[51:22.380 --> 51:28.380]  He said, it's not my place to determine subject matter jurisdiction, it's yours.
[51:28.380 --> 51:34.380]  And my friend said, no, before you order me to court,
[51:34.380 --> 51:40.380]  you have to make sure you have jurisdiction.
[51:40.380 --> 51:43.380]  That is the fact, Jack.
[51:43.380 --> 51:49.380]  So we cross-complained against the judge and sued the judge personally.
[51:49.380 --> 51:52.380]  Okay. My goal here is we don't want to answer yet.
[51:52.380 --> 51:58.380]  We want to get a couple more FDTPA violations and FDRA violations.
[51:58.380 --> 52:05.380]  Okay. Did he not answer the original pleading?
[52:05.380 --> 52:08.380]  No. We've got two weeks to answer.
[52:08.380 --> 52:10.380]  Okay. Make sure you put in an answer.
[52:10.380 --> 52:17.380]  It is initially sufficient if you simply put in whatever response you give,
[52:17.380 --> 52:23.380]  that you deny all allegations by plaintiff.
[52:23.380 --> 52:31.380]  Generally, what you have to do in an answer is it's proper to do a general denial.
[52:31.380 --> 52:36.380]  Now, what that will do is cover your answer.
[52:36.380 --> 52:44.380]  Now you've made an answer, you've denied everything, so there can't be default.
[52:44.380 --> 52:49.380]  What they can do is come back and ask for a more specific denial,
[52:49.380 --> 52:57.380]  because if they have made specific allegations that are verified,
[52:57.380 --> 53:00.380]  now in this case, if they make specific assertions of fact,
[53:00.380 --> 53:04.380]  they have to verify those facts,
[53:04.380 --> 53:09.380]  then you must deny each of those facts individually.
[53:09.380 --> 53:10.380]  They can't verify anything.
[53:10.380 --> 53:14.380]  They've got a sworn affidavit here from somebody who works at the bank
[53:14.380 --> 53:16.380]  with no personal knowledge.
[53:16.380 --> 53:17.380]  That's their problem.
[53:17.380 --> 53:19.380]  Is it notarized?
[53:19.380 --> 53:21.380]  Yeah, it's notarized.
[53:21.380 --> 53:24.380]  It doesn't necessarily matter.
[53:24.380 --> 53:32.380]  Do they have a full accounting of the amounts they claim that are owned
[53:32.380 --> 53:37.380]  that's affirmed by someone with knowledge under oath?
[53:37.380 --> 53:38.380]  No, they don't.
[53:38.380 --> 53:43.380]  What they've got is an employee who says she can pull the paperwork out of the books
[53:43.380 --> 53:47.380]  and it'll show the account, but that's conclusionary, Randy.
[53:47.380 --> 53:48.380]  Yes.
[53:48.380 --> 53:51.380]  Well, Randy, that's where I was going to when you were saying under oath.
[53:51.380 --> 53:52.380]  That's what I'm talking about.
[53:52.380 --> 53:58.380]  Yeah, it has to be verified, and that's the under oath.
[53:58.380 --> 54:02.380]  But make sure you put in an answer.
[54:02.380 --> 54:09.380]  You're not granting jurisdiction, but you're avoiding the potential of default judgment.
[54:09.380 --> 54:11.380]  Okay, this is what I was thinking about doing,
[54:11.380 --> 54:14.380]  is putting in a couple motions to dismiss so I don't have to answer,
[54:14.380 --> 54:17.380]  so I've got a couple months to get some more violations on them.
[54:17.380 --> 54:26.380]  Well, in the motions to dismiss, you make the assertion that all of the claims
[54:26.380 --> 54:31.380]  by the plaintiff are invalid or whatever.
[54:31.380 --> 54:35.380]  That'll act as an answer.
[54:35.380 --> 54:41.380]  Is this purely a private civil case, Mark?
[54:41.380 --> 54:43.380]  Yeah, credit card.
[54:43.380 --> 54:50.380]  Okay, by putting in an answer, you're not granting jurisdiction.
[54:50.380 --> 54:56.380]  You put in the challenge to jurisdiction and you put in the answer.
[54:56.380 --> 55:00.380]  You never get to the answer until they get past subject matter jurisdiction.
[55:00.380 --> 55:03.380]  If they rule against you on subject matter jurisdiction
[55:03.380 --> 55:08.380]  and you haven't put in an answer, then you're looking at default.
[55:08.380 --> 55:13.380]  So you want to avoid the default.
[55:13.380 --> 55:21.380]  Okay, listen, in Illinois, the cause of action has to have an underlying contract
[55:21.380 --> 55:26.380]  and statement attached to the pleading.
[55:26.380 --> 55:30.380]  Well, you know, that seems reasonable to me because if I was involved
[55:30.380 --> 55:35.380]  in the court proceeding either as a jurist or a judge or whatever,
[55:35.380 --> 55:42.380]  if some litigants were coming to me wanting to ask me to enforce a contract,
[55:42.380 --> 55:48.380]  I think I'd pretty much insist on seeing the contract, you know?
[55:48.380 --> 55:53.380]  Well, I think we're kind of mixing up terms a little bit.
[55:53.380 --> 56:00.380]  When we talk about the petition, we talk about the petition as a cause of action.
[56:00.380 --> 56:07.380]  But then when I'm talking about causes of action, I'm not talking about the petition itself.
[56:07.380 --> 56:10.380]  I was going to say, I don't see how a petition could be a cause of action.
[56:10.380 --> 56:16.380]  Well, it's a cause before the court and I want to make sure we're not mixing up those two terms.
[56:16.380 --> 56:19.380]  The petition creates a cause before the court.
[56:19.380 --> 56:24.380]  But in the petition, there must be stated claims.
[56:24.380 --> 56:31.380]  And the claims must be stated in the forms of a recognizable cause of action.
[56:31.380 --> 56:39.380]  That cause of action is to civil what a penal statute is to criminal.
[56:39.380 --> 56:41.380]  Deb and I were working on that today.
[56:41.380 --> 56:44.380]  We charged common law fraud.
[56:44.380 --> 56:52.380]  We charged fraud by nondisclosure and the one we were discussing was fraud by nondisclosure.
[56:52.380 --> 57:02.380]  The supposed agent sent a document wherein he disclosed certain facts
[57:02.380 --> 57:08.380]  and by the structure of the document and the return address on the document
[57:08.380 --> 57:11.380]  being to the Federal Communications Commission,
[57:11.380 --> 57:17.380]  he gave information that he was an agent for the commission.
[57:17.380 --> 57:19.380]  Or at least he said he was.
[57:19.380 --> 57:26.380]  He stated that these statutes govern this behavior,
[57:26.380 --> 57:36.380]  but he did not give complete disclosure in that it only covered these behaviors under certain circumstances.
[57:36.380 --> 57:43.380]  And if you enter into a contract with someone and someone deliberately offers up information,
[57:43.380 --> 57:49.380]  which you always have to do to enter a contract, then they have a duty to full disclosure.
[57:49.380 --> 57:53.380]  Well, see, there was no contract for one thing.
[57:53.380 --> 57:55.380]  There was no contract.
[57:55.380 --> 58:04.380]  Nobody entered into a contract with any governmental agent or entity in this instance for one thing.
[58:04.380 --> 58:12.380]  And for another thing, these purported agents incorrectly quoted the code in the statute.
[58:12.380 --> 58:15.380]  Yes, that was the point I was getting to.
[58:15.380 --> 58:18.380]  We'll cover this when we get back.
[58:18.380 --> 58:21.380]  There was no contract.
[58:21.380 --> 58:24.380]  There was misquoting.
[58:24.380 --> 58:26.380]  There were no agents.
[58:26.380 --> 58:29.380]  There were no mailboxes, etc.
[58:29.380 --> 58:33.380]  There was no office.
[58:33.380 --> 58:35.380]  The code doesn't even apply.
[58:35.380 --> 58:42.380]  The definition of the word state doesn't even include one of the 50 states of the union.
[58:42.380 --> 58:47.380]  It's ridiculous, man.
[58:47.380 --> 58:56.380]  I mean, what?
[58:56.380 --> 59:24.380]  We'll be right back.
[59:24.380 --> 59:51.380]  Thank you.
[59:51.380 --> 01:00:04.380]  This news brief brought to you by the International News Net.
[01:00:04.380 --> 01:00:10.380]  A space-age powerboat manned by environmental activists harassing Japanese whalers was rammed
[01:00:10.380 --> 01:00:15.380]  and sliced in half on Wednesday, escalating hostilities in the Arctic seas.
[01:00:15.380 --> 01:00:19.380]  The crew was attempting to disrupt the whaler's annual hunt.
[01:00:19.380 --> 01:00:24.380]  The Addie Gill trimmer run sent by the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society is reported
[01:00:24.380 --> 01:00:28.380]  to have received catastrophic damage and was sinking.
[01:00:28.380 --> 01:00:34.380]  All six crew who earlier hurled stink bombs at the whalers were rescued and harmed.
[01:00:34.380 --> 01:00:39.380]  Bolivian President Evo Morales is inviting activist scientists and government officials
[01:00:39.380 --> 01:00:44.380]  from around the world to an alternative climate conference, following the failure of Copenhagen
[01:00:44.380 --> 01:00:46.380]  to produce binding agreements.
[01:00:46.380 --> 01:00:51.380]  The leftist leaders said the April meeting in Cochabamba will include indigenous peoples,
[01:00:51.380 --> 01:00:55.380]  social movements, environmentalists, and scientists, as well as governments,
[01:00:55.380 --> 01:00:57.380]  who want to work with their people.
[01:00:57.380 --> 01:01:04.380]  Opinion polls indicate widespread concerns among Israelis over Tel Aviv's acute image problem,
[01:01:04.380 --> 01:01:08.380]  and unprecedented criticism from international community.
[01:01:08.380 --> 01:01:14.380]  A survey conducted by Kalim Shavim Research Institute at the request of the Ministry
[01:01:14.380 --> 01:01:21.380]  of Public Diplomacy and Aspora Affairs said 91 percent of respondents believe Israel suffers
[01:01:21.380 --> 01:01:26.380]  from an acute or very acute image problem in the world.
[01:01:26.380 --> 01:01:31.380]  Top of the hour news brought to you by INN World Report.
[01:01:31.380 --> 01:01:36.380]  The Attorney General for England and Wales in Northern Ireland, Barrow Scotland of Ashtell,
[01:01:36.380 --> 01:01:42.380]  said the government is determined to protect high-ranking Israeli officials from arrest in the UK.
[01:01:42.380 --> 01:01:47.380]  Speaking at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem today, Patricia Janet Scotland, aka the Baroness,
[01:01:47.380 --> 01:01:53.380]  said Israeli leaders should not face arrest for war crimes under the law of universal jurisdiction.
[01:01:53.380 --> 01:01:58.380]  Scotland's goal to modify British law follows attempts by British lawyers last month to obtain
[01:01:58.380 --> 01:02:02.380]  a warrant for former Israeli Foreign Minister Zippy Livni.
[01:02:02.380 --> 01:02:07.380]  Baroness Scotland said Israel leaders should always be able to travel freely in the UK,
[01:02:07.380 --> 01:02:12.380]  as it emerged that a further visit by Israeli military had been recently cancelled.
[01:02:12.380 --> 01:02:16.380]  Scotland's speech in Israel comes after Israel authorities contacted British authorities
[01:02:16.380 --> 01:02:20.380]  to demand a guarantee that the officers would not be arrested.
[01:02:20.380 --> 01:02:25.380]  The Guardian reported foreign office plans to change the legal process so that the Attorney General
[01:02:25.380 --> 01:02:29.380]  would first approve warrants before suspected war criminals could be arrested.
[01:02:29.380 --> 01:02:34.380]  The safeguards were to apply to all visiting foreign leaders, not just Israelis.
[01:02:34.380 --> 01:02:39.380]  Daniel Machover, a lawyer whose firm obtained an arrest warrant in 2005 for the Israeli general,
[01:02:39.380 --> 01:02:45.380]  Doran Almog said, if there is evidence against Israeli leaders and a judge thinks that there is a case to answer,
[01:02:45.380 --> 01:02:48.380]  then why does the process need to be changed?
[01:02:48.380 --> 01:02:52.380]  Machover added, it is not constitutionally proper to give the Attorney General
[01:02:52.380 --> 01:03:20.380]  involvement at the arrest stage.
[01:03:20.380 --> 01:03:25.380]  They were charged on Babylon and burned down the whole nation.
[01:03:25.380 --> 01:03:27.380]  But they didn't operate the land wrong.
[01:03:27.380 --> 01:03:30.380]  I'm going to spell Republican and they must watch, man.
[01:03:30.380 --> 01:03:32.380]  Then they maimed a libertarian.
[01:03:32.380 --> 01:03:35.380]  They said, we're going to lose, but we're going to do it wrong.
[01:03:35.380 --> 01:04:00.380]  I'm going to do it wrong.
[01:04:00.380 --> 01:04:29.380]  Okay.
[01:04:29.380 --> 01:04:30.380]  Okay, we are back.
[01:04:30.380 --> 01:04:37.380]  We're speaking with Mark in Wisconsin and Randy, you were explaining about causes of action.
[01:04:37.380 --> 01:04:42.380]  Yeah, I was trying to explain how they work.
[01:04:42.380 --> 01:04:52.380]  In this case, we would never get to anything that went on in the case other than the fact that he sent us this letter.
[01:04:52.380 --> 01:04:58.380]  He gave disclosure in the letter, but he didn't tell us everything.
[01:04:58.380 --> 01:05:07.380]  And under fraud by nondisclosure, we maintain that he was trying to get us to do something.
[01:05:07.380 --> 01:05:12.380]  And in doing that, he didn't tell us everything we needed to know.
[01:05:12.380 --> 01:05:20.380]  Let me read the elements of a cause of action for fraud by nondisclosure
[01:05:20.380 --> 01:05:25.380]  to illustrate how a cause of action is similar to a statute.
[01:05:25.380 --> 01:05:29.380]  In order to plead a cause of action, you have to plead all the elements.
[01:05:29.380 --> 01:05:34.380]  And in this one, the elements of cause of action for fraud by nondisclosure are the following.
[01:05:34.380 --> 01:05:40.380]  The defendant concealed from or failed to disclose certain facts to the plaintiff.
[01:05:40.380 --> 01:05:48.380]  The defendant had a duty to the plaintiff that required the defendant to disclose the facts to plaintiff.
[01:05:48.380 --> 01:05:51.380]  The facts were material.
[01:05:51.380 --> 01:05:55.380]  The defendant knew the plaintiff was ignorant of the facts,
[01:05:55.380 --> 01:05:59.380]  and the plaintiff did not have an equal opportunity to discover the facts.
[01:05:59.380 --> 01:06:07.380]  In this case, the fact is he didn't have an oath of office, so he didn't have authority.
[01:06:07.380 --> 01:06:12.380]  The defendant was deliberately silent when it had a duty to speak.
[01:06:12.380 --> 01:06:23.380]  A lot of you out there are familiar with the case Twiel v. U.S., where it says that it's fraud to fail to speak when you have a duty to speak.
[01:06:23.380 --> 01:06:25.380]  That's not what Twiel actually says.
[01:06:25.380 --> 01:06:34.380]  Twiel says it is only fraud when someone is silent when they have a duty to speak.
[01:06:34.380 --> 01:06:36.380]  So they're not saying it actually is.
[01:06:36.380 --> 01:06:40.380]  They're saying that is the only time silence is fraud.
[01:06:40.380 --> 01:06:46.380]  And in this case, the defendant was deliberately silent when it had a duty to speak.
[01:06:46.380 --> 01:06:55.380]  By failing to disclose the facts, the defendant intended to induce the plaintiff to take some action or refrain from acting.
[01:06:55.380 --> 01:06:59.380]  The plaintiff relied on the defendant's non-disclosure.
[01:06:59.380 --> 01:07:05.380]  The plaintiff was injured as a result of acting without the knowledge of the undisclosed facts.
[01:07:05.380 --> 01:07:30.380]  In this case, the agent disclosed facts to the operator of the radio station, telling him that he was in violation of the federal code.
[01:07:30.380 --> 01:07:37.380]  He didn't disclose the exclusions to the code, and he didn't disclose his lack of agency.
[01:07:37.380 --> 01:07:45.380]  And he intended that the individual act based on his claim of agency.
[01:07:45.380 --> 01:07:50.380]  And he did act on it based on his claim of agency and was harmed by it.
[01:07:50.380 --> 01:07:54.380]  So that's what you look for in a lawsuit.
[01:07:54.380 --> 01:08:02.380]  And, Mark, from what you talked about, what they stated in the beginning, you don't have to say this is a cause of action.
[01:08:02.380 --> 01:08:06.380]  This is how you make your claim.
[01:08:06.380 --> 01:08:09.380]  And they made their claim in the form of a cause of action.
[01:08:09.380 --> 01:08:11.380]  Does that make sense?
[01:08:11.380 --> 01:08:12.380]  Kind of.
[01:08:12.380 --> 01:08:14.380]  Are you saying I should answer it?
[01:08:14.380 --> 01:08:22.380]  Because, see, they've got one procedural error in their pleading, and they've got two that are just blatantly against case law.
[01:08:22.380 --> 01:08:32.380]  And I'm wondering, if I did a motion to dismiss, what would I call that motion, and would I do it like count one, count two, count three separation, or do I have all separate motions?
[01:08:32.380 --> 01:08:33.380]  Yes, exactly.
[01:08:33.380 --> 01:08:41.380]  And exercise care in keeping from mixing all your counts together.
[01:08:41.380 --> 01:08:46.380]  In this one, we don't care what the rest of the facts are.
[01:08:46.380 --> 01:08:50.380]  We're only talking about the fact that this guy didn't tell us everything.
[01:08:50.380 --> 01:08:54.380]  And in this cause of action, we won't address anything else.
[01:08:54.380 --> 01:08:55.380]  So, yeah.
[01:08:55.380 --> 01:09:07.380]  And generally, when you look at a lawsuit, I looked at one on a foreclosure issue, and they had like 18 causes of action.
[01:09:07.380 --> 01:09:20.380]  Each one very focused, honed in on one particular action, and didn't address the others, didn't bring them all together.
[01:09:20.380 --> 01:09:24.380]  You do that, they dismiss one, they dismiss all.
[01:09:24.380 --> 01:09:32.380]  By keeping them very focused and separate, then the court has to adjudicate each one of them.
[01:09:32.380 --> 01:09:46.380]  But on yours, each cause you have, each problem with it, if it goes to subject matter jurisdiction, I would address each one individually.
[01:09:46.380 --> 01:09:57.380]  And the way you do that, you ask them to dismiss the prosecution for this reason, in the alternative, dismiss the prosecution for this reason.
[01:09:57.380 --> 01:10:01.380]  And you just kind of walk down it that way.
[01:10:01.380 --> 01:10:02.380]  Okay.
[01:10:02.380 --> 01:10:05.380]  And what would you title that, motion to dismiss?
[01:10:05.380 --> 01:10:07.380]  Depends on the nature of your challenge.
[01:10:07.380 --> 01:10:08.380]  Yeah.
[01:10:08.380 --> 01:10:17.380]  If it's a challenge to the jurisdiction, you would call it a challenge to the jurisdiction and motion to dismiss.
[01:10:17.380 --> 01:10:21.380]  A challenge to the jurisdiction is always a motion to dismiss.
[01:10:21.380 --> 01:10:27.380]  Because if the judge finds he has no subject matter jurisdiction, there is only one thing he can do.
[01:10:27.380 --> 01:10:29.380]  Actually, there's two.
[01:10:29.380 --> 01:10:35.380]  One thing, as far as the case is concerned, he can only dismiss.
[01:10:35.380 --> 01:10:40.380]  Two, he can file sanctions against the attorney who filed it.
[01:10:40.380 --> 01:10:45.380]  Those are the only two things he can do when he doesn't have subject matter jurisdiction.
[01:10:45.380 --> 01:10:52.380]  So a challenge to jurisdiction is a motion to dismiss, but it won't hurt to put it in there.
[01:10:52.380 --> 01:11:02.380]  Also, you want to move to strike the pleading as insufficient to invoke the subject matter jurisdiction of the court.
[01:11:02.380 --> 01:11:11.380]  If they didn't meet the rules, and that's what you've indicated, they didn't meet the rules for filing the pleading.
[01:11:11.380 --> 01:11:16.380]  Therefore, you ask them to strike the pleading, and the case goes on.
[01:11:16.380 --> 01:11:17.380]  I'm tearing this pleading up.
[01:11:17.380 --> 01:11:21.380]  I found a white paper from Edelman and Combs in Illinois,
[01:11:21.380 --> 01:11:27.380]  and he's got so much case law in there about sham pleadings, about anything about debt.
[01:11:27.380 --> 01:11:30.380]  You would not believe the case sites he's got in there.
[01:11:30.380 --> 01:11:31.380]  It's incredible.
[01:11:31.380 --> 01:11:33.380]  Is it in my email yet?
[01:11:33.380 --> 01:11:35.380]  What's that?
[01:11:35.380 --> 01:11:38.380]  I say, is it in my email yet?
[01:11:38.380 --> 01:11:41.380]  You're going to need it because I've got a foreclosure for you.
[01:11:41.380 --> 01:11:43.380]  Okay, good.
[01:11:43.380 --> 01:11:44.380]  Well, give me that.
[01:11:44.380 --> 01:11:46.380]  Give me the case law.
[01:11:46.380 --> 01:11:49.380]  I'm building up my research folder.
[01:11:49.380 --> 01:11:51.380]  You would not believe this case law.
[01:11:51.380 --> 01:11:52.380]  Oh, my God.
[01:11:52.380 --> 01:11:55.380]  These guys are famous consumer attorneys, and he just laid it out.
[01:11:55.380 --> 01:11:58.380]  He showed you how to tear down a pleading just like that.
[01:11:58.380 --> 01:11:59.380]  It's incredible.
[01:11:59.380 --> 01:12:04.380]  But, Randy, can you ask for a bill of particulars without invoking subject matter jurisdiction?
[01:12:04.380 --> 01:12:05.380]  Yes.
[01:12:05.380 --> 01:12:08.380]  You can always ask for a bill of particulars.
[01:12:08.380 --> 01:12:13.380]  So I should do that too, right?
[01:12:13.380 --> 01:12:14.380]  I don't think so.
[01:12:14.380 --> 01:12:22.380]  I wouldn't want the other side to hate this motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction,
[01:12:22.380 --> 01:12:24.380]  claiming that the pleading is insufficient.
[01:12:24.380 --> 01:12:27.380]  This is really between you and the judge.
[01:12:27.380 --> 01:12:32.380]  You don't want that other guy to even speak.
[01:12:32.380 --> 01:12:38.380]  Is there any way to drive a stake through their heart so they can't bring it back?
[01:12:38.380 --> 01:12:40.380]  Not that I know of.
[01:12:40.380 --> 01:12:48.380]  You can ask the judge to dismiss with prejudice, but, no, I don't think so.
[01:12:48.380 --> 01:13:00.380]  If you file a case and you screw something up, it would be unfair to make it a death sentence,
[01:13:00.380 --> 01:13:05.380]  especially if it's dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
[01:13:05.380 --> 01:13:14.380]  Now, if you want to drive a stake through their heart, then file a countersuit for triple the amount they tried to claim from you.
[01:13:14.380 --> 01:13:16.380]  Because their pleading is fraudulent?
[01:13:16.380 --> 01:13:18.380]  Yes.
[01:13:18.380 --> 01:13:22.380]  It was a fraudulent pleading, and they forced you to answer it.
[01:13:22.380 --> 01:13:29.380]  They invoked the authority of the court to your detriment, and they did so by fraud.
[01:13:29.380 --> 01:13:32.380]  That's exactly what we did here in Austin.
[01:13:32.380 --> 01:13:34.380]  That could get ugly, Randy.
[01:13:34.380 --> 01:13:40.380]  Oh, well, what it does is gives them, just like Mike Mears talked about,
[01:13:40.380 --> 01:13:47.380]  gives them a reason to come to you and say, tell you what, Bubba, let's make a deal.
[01:13:47.380 --> 01:13:52.380]  You drop your countersuit, we'll agree to retire this debt.
[01:13:52.380 --> 01:13:56.380]  And what elements do you need for fraud?
[01:13:56.380 --> 01:14:00.380]  Yes, I would sue them for fraud.
[01:14:00.380 --> 01:14:02.380]  All right.
[01:14:02.380 --> 01:14:06.380]  Now, you upped the stakes for them a little bit.
[01:14:06.380 --> 01:14:10.380]  Okay, and I don't need to ask for a bill of particulars, huh?
[01:14:10.380 --> 01:14:11.380]  No, no, not at this point.
[01:14:11.380 --> 01:14:16.380]  The only bill of particulars is something you do a little bit later.
[01:14:16.380 --> 01:14:23.380]  Okay, I'm going to make the lawyers verify, and then I'm going to get them for continued collection activity, too.
[01:14:23.380 --> 01:14:28.380]  And not only that, their first contact with this man was a summon.
[01:14:28.380 --> 01:14:33.380]  That's against the law, too.
[01:14:33.380 --> 01:14:38.380]  Is there a requirement to exercise all remedy?
[01:14:38.380 --> 01:14:39.380]  Yeah, they didn't do it.
[01:14:39.380 --> 01:14:40.380]  All they did was send them a summon.
[01:14:40.380 --> 01:14:41.380]  That was it.
[01:14:41.380 --> 01:14:45.380]  That was their first and only contact with him.
[01:14:45.380 --> 01:14:48.380]  Oh, geez, I need to put that in my answer, huh, Randy?
[01:14:48.380 --> 01:14:56.380]  Yeah, they failed to exhaust all administrative remedies.
[01:14:56.380 --> 01:14:57.380]  Okay, okay.
[01:14:57.380 --> 01:15:01.380]  Hey, what's the name of your foreclosure website, and does that have an address?
[01:15:01.380 --> 01:15:11.380]  Because he's talked to the title company since he doesn't have the documents, and he's going to be getting those any day now, and I want to send them off as soon as possible.
[01:15:11.380 --> 01:15:17.380]  ForensicFraudFinder.com.
[01:15:17.380 --> 01:15:18.380]  All right.
[01:15:18.380 --> 01:15:19.380]  Hey, thanks a lot.
[01:15:19.380 --> 01:15:27.380]  And have him check—I'll check the registration on it.
[01:15:27.380 --> 01:15:29.380]  Someone tried to register, and it didn't work.
[01:15:29.380 --> 01:15:30.380]  I'll go in and check it.
[01:15:30.380 --> 01:15:33.380]  If it doesn't, just give him my email.
[01:15:33.380 --> 01:15:44.380]  There's a questionnaire in the—there's a menu item to get the RESPA letter, and the RESPA letter's free.
[01:15:44.380 --> 01:15:52.380]  It's a questionnaire that touches on all the RESPA issues, and I'll need that filled out.
[01:15:52.380 --> 01:16:04.380]  And it also has an option where you can fill out the HUD 1, Good Faith Estimate, and Truth in Lending Statement.
[01:16:04.380 --> 01:16:08.380]  And that way, the system will email it to me online.
[01:16:08.380 --> 01:16:14.380]  But I'll need all these documents anyway, because there are questions I'm unable to ask.
[01:16:14.380 --> 01:16:18.380]  I need to look at the actual documents, because there's sometimes—
[01:16:18.380 --> 01:16:21.380]  You're not too busy for a foreclosure right now?
[01:16:21.380 --> 01:16:23.380]  Pardon me?
[01:16:23.380 --> 01:16:25.380]  You're not too busy for a foreclosure right now?
[01:16:25.380 --> 01:16:27.380]  No, no, I'm not too busy for that.
[01:16:27.380 --> 01:16:30.380]  That's my job.
[01:16:30.380 --> 01:16:34.380]  We just got the FCC document pretty well finished.
[01:16:34.380 --> 01:16:38.380]  Hey, I'll send you that case file from Edelman and come, too. You'll fall out of your chair.
[01:16:38.380 --> 01:16:39.380]  Oh, thank you.
[01:16:39.380 --> 01:16:44.380]  All right, thanks.
[01:16:44.380 --> 01:16:46.380]  All right, thanks, Mark. We'll be right back.
[01:16:46.380 --> 01:17:00.380]  We've got Keith from Texas, Dan from Connecticut, and more.
[01:17:00.380 --> 01:17:04.380]  You feel tired when talking about important topics like money and politics?
[01:17:04.380 --> 01:17:08.380]  Are you confused by words like the Constitution or the Federal Reserve?
[01:17:08.380 --> 01:17:13.380]  If so, you may be diagnosed with the deadliest disease known today, stupidity.
[01:17:13.380 --> 01:17:19.380]  Hi, my name is Steve Holt, and like millions of other Americans, I was diagnosed with stupidity at an early age.
[01:17:19.380 --> 01:17:25.380]  I had no idea that the number one cause of the disease is found in almost every home in America, the television.
[01:17:25.380 --> 01:17:30.380]  Unfortunately, that puts most Americans at risk of catching stupidity, but there is hope.
[01:17:30.380 --> 01:17:36.380]  The staff at Brave New Books have helped me and thousands of other foxaholics suffering from sports zombieism recover.
[01:17:36.380 --> 01:17:43.380]  And because of Brave New Books, I now enjoy reading and watching educational documentaries without feeling tired or uninterested.
[01:17:43.380 --> 01:17:54.380]  So if you or anybody you know suffers from stupidity, then you need to call 512-480-2503 or visit them in 1904Guadalupe or bravenewbookstore.com.
[01:17:54.380 --> 01:18:00.380]  Side effects from using Brave New Books products may include discernment and enlarged vocabulary and an overall increase in mental functioning.
[01:18:25.380 --> 01:18:30.380]  I was blindsided but now I can see your plans
[01:18:30.380 --> 01:18:33.380]  You put the fear in my pocket
[01:18:33.380 --> 01:18:35.380]  Took the money from my hands
[01:18:35.380 --> 01:18:40.380]  Ain't gonna fool me with that same old trick again
[01:18:40.380 --> 01:19:00.380]  Ain't gonna fool me
[01:19:00.380 --> 01:19:05.380]  Ain't gonna drop me with that same old sucker pun
[01:19:05.380 --> 01:19:10.380]  I get it now but then I must have been out too much
[01:19:10.380 --> 01:19:15.380]  Back then you had room to move but now you're feeling the crunch
[01:19:15.380 --> 01:19:40.380]  Ain't gonna get me with that same old sucker pun
[01:19:40.380 --> 01:19:45.380]  Ain't gonna please me with that same old bad dance song
[01:19:45.380 --> 01:19:50.380]  You thought you were right but now you got it all wrong
[01:19:50.380 --> 01:19:55.380]  It was a weak moment for me but I had the power all along
[01:19:55.380 --> 01:20:10.380]  Ain't gonna please me with that same old bad dance song
[01:20:26.380 --> 01:20:28.380]  It just lays there
[01:20:28.380 --> 01:20:32.380]  You asked the bailiff to arrest the judge
[01:20:32.380 --> 01:20:34.380]  Well, haven't arrested her yet
[01:20:34.380 --> 01:20:40.380]  Did you set the motions for hearing?
[01:20:40.380 --> 01:20:47.380]  I requested with court coordinator a day to hear motions and I never got any response whatsoever
[01:20:47.380 --> 01:20:57.380]  Then file a complaint against the court coordinator for denying you your right to petition the court for redress of grievance
[01:20:57.380 --> 01:21:02.380]  The court coordinator will have a fit when you charge her
[01:21:02.380 --> 01:21:05.380]  She has no immunity of any kind
[01:21:05.380 --> 01:21:08.380]  She is fair game
[01:21:08.380 --> 01:21:12.380]  So you filed a criminal complaint against her for, I'm sorry Ray, what was that?
[01:21:12.380 --> 01:21:19.380]  For denying you in your right to petition the court for redress of grievance
[01:21:19.380 --> 01:21:27.380]  Okay, I'm just writing that down
[01:21:27.380 --> 01:21:31.380]  I've got some other interesting items here
[01:21:31.380 --> 01:21:35.380]  In this particular instance, in this particular judge I got an interesting letter
[01:21:35.380 --> 01:21:42.380]  It sent an open records request to the office of court management for Harris County Courts of Law
[01:21:42.380 --> 01:21:51.380]  And it says this particular judge is not required to file a bond at county court judge
[01:21:51.380 --> 01:21:55.380]  They're probably bonded by the county
[01:21:55.380 --> 01:21:56.380]  Okay
[01:21:56.380 --> 01:22:03.380]  Doesn't matter, the county holds the bond, you make a challenge to the bond, the bond rating goes up
[01:22:03.380 --> 01:22:09.380]  Alright, section 25.1033 Texas Government Code
[01:22:09.380 --> 01:22:13.380]  I assume that's what you mean
[01:22:13.380 --> 01:22:18.380]  Yeah, that was exactly what I mean, what was that again?
[01:22:18.380 --> 01:22:20.380]  I got another interesting case
[01:22:20.380 --> 01:22:23.380]  Wait, what was that one again?
[01:22:23.380 --> 01:22:38.380]  The Texas Government Code, it is section 25.1233 P, or I guess section P of the Texas Government Code
[01:22:38.380 --> 01:22:40.380]  That's interesting
[01:22:40.380 --> 01:22:43.380]  Yeah, it's part of a blanket bond
[01:22:43.380 --> 01:22:48.380]  You would think that a public, I guess a public official is just part of the entire county bond
[01:22:48.380 --> 01:22:55.380]  Yeah, if you start nailing the judge claims on the bond, the bond rating starts going up
[01:22:55.380 --> 01:23:00.380]  The thing about it is, I can't, I don't know that they were taking the claims on the bond
[01:23:00.380 --> 01:23:04.380]  I know who the bonding company is, but I don't
[01:23:04.380 --> 01:23:10.380]  File your complaint with the bonding, your claim with the bonding company, send them a notice of tort
[01:23:10.380 --> 01:23:12.380]  I have
[01:23:12.380 --> 01:23:17.380]  Then that's all you need to do, the bonding company take care of the rest
[01:23:17.380 --> 01:23:28.380]  Yeah, the tort on that particular issue, and I didn't specifically, I assume they know who this particular individual is
[01:23:28.380 --> 01:23:31.380]  When I give the name, you know, the name of the rest
[01:23:31.380 --> 01:23:41.380]  You understand that what the bonding company does is between the county and the insurance company
[01:23:41.380 --> 01:23:44.380]  So you won't know anything about that
[01:23:44.380 --> 01:23:47.380]  That all goes on behind the scenes
[01:23:47.380 --> 01:23:52.380]  But we know what happens, the last thing they're going to do is tell you
[01:23:52.380 --> 01:23:57.380]  Oh yeah, you screwed me royal, that's the last thing they want you to know
[01:23:57.380 --> 01:24:02.380]  Right, yeah, I did send them a tort letter and a tort claim
[01:24:02.380 --> 01:24:09.380]  Yeah, then that'll go against their bond rating
[01:24:09.380 --> 01:24:15.380]  If you can get more people to do that to the judge, they'll remove her from the bench
[01:24:15.380 --> 01:24:22.380]  Because the bonding company will drop this particular person off their bond rating
[01:24:22.380 --> 01:24:27.380]  And the counties have a fit when they get this kind of stuff because it screws up their budget
[01:24:27.380 --> 01:24:29.380]  Oh really?
[01:24:29.380 --> 01:24:35.380]  It makes a big difference, I mean these insurance companies go up quickly when they start getting claims
[01:24:35.380 --> 01:24:37.380]  Right
[01:24:37.380 --> 01:24:42.380]  I mean how often do you file a tort, just once or once a month?
[01:24:42.380 --> 01:24:45.380]  Every time you get an opportunity
[01:24:45.380 --> 01:24:48.380]  I think it's time, it's been a couple of months
[01:24:48.380 --> 01:24:52.380]  Yeah, send another one, the more you hammer them the worse it gets, you know
[01:24:52.380 --> 01:24:58.380]  Russell tells about that attorney coming in complaining that Mr. Mortland filed three bar grievances against him
[01:24:58.380 --> 01:25:04.380]  And the next year their firm almost couldn't get malpractice insurance and when they did it nearly doubled
[01:25:04.380 --> 01:25:06.380]  Oh really?
[01:25:06.380 --> 01:25:11.380]  That doesn't surprise me, because I'm in the same boat, I'm doing the same thing
[01:25:11.380 --> 01:25:14.380]  I made that mistake, I'll never make that mistake again
[01:25:14.380 --> 01:25:18.380]  I will never make that mistake again, I will never ever hire another attorney
[01:25:18.380 --> 01:25:23.380]  That will never happen, if there are any attorneys listed then you guys are slime
[01:25:23.380 --> 01:25:29.380]  Unless you're doing the right thing for people and you're handling the process and you're doing your job
[01:25:29.380 --> 01:25:34.380]  And you're working for the court, you're doing the wrong thing
[01:25:34.380 --> 01:25:39.380]  Get them to appoint you counsel, that's different
[01:25:39.380 --> 01:25:45.380]  The thing about this particular instance, that's what I tried to establish and that never happened
[01:25:45.380 --> 01:25:50.380]  There was no due process in this particular instance whatsoever
[01:25:50.380 --> 01:25:56.380]  Did they at any time force you to come before the court with no counsel?
[01:25:56.380 --> 01:25:58.380]  Oh yes
[01:25:58.380 --> 01:25:59.380]  That's bad news
[01:25:59.380 --> 01:26:00.380]  Many times
[01:26:00.380 --> 01:26:07.380]  That for every time needs a judicial conduct complaint, bar grievance against the prosecutor
[01:26:07.380 --> 01:26:10.380]  Yeah, numerous times, four or five times
[01:26:10.380 --> 01:26:15.380]  That's absolutely forbidden, separate complaint for each time
[01:26:15.380 --> 01:26:19.380]  To the judicial commission and the bar, for the judge and the prosecutor?
[01:26:19.380 --> 01:26:23.380]  Yes, and a claim to the bonds of both
[01:26:23.380 --> 01:26:25.380]  For abuse of process?
[01:26:25.380 --> 01:26:27.380]  Yes
[01:26:27.380 --> 01:26:33.380]  No, that's official oppression
[01:26:33.380 --> 01:26:36.380]  Denying you and your rights, you have a right to counsel
[01:26:36.380 --> 01:26:40.380]  Randy, we talked about this also
[01:26:40.380 --> 01:26:44.380]  I was told directly to my face
[01:26:44.380 --> 01:26:49.380]  That that particular program for public counsel, you know you've been down this road
[01:26:49.380 --> 01:26:55.380]  This particular program, this is an approximation but it's pretty close
[01:26:55.380 --> 01:27:00.380]  That that program didn't exist but they were working on it, might have it in a few months
[01:27:00.380 --> 01:27:02.380]  Literally right to my face
[01:27:02.380 --> 01:27:06.380]  Their problem, not your problem
[01:27:06.380 --> 01:27:08.380]  Exactly, that's what I said
[01:27:08.380 --> 01:27:15.380]  Your problem, your rights do not evaporate because they don't have their administrative procedures in place
[01:27:15.380 --> 01:27:17.380]  Exactly
[01:27:17.380 --> 01:27:23.380]  If you want to run your business here, you need to have all four wheels on the ground
[01:27:23.380 --> 01:27:26.380]  So kick them in the teeth every chance you get
[01:27:26.380 --> 01:27:32.380]  And something else here, if it goes towards, and I know Andy would like this
[01:27:32.380 --> 01:27:39.380]  It goes towards a Texas administrative code, total 37, part one, chapter four, sub-chapter B, rule 413
[01:27:39.380 --> 01:27:46.380]  This particular, my instigator, the deputy, does not have those
[01:27:46.380 --> 01:27:49.380]  He's not qualified
[01:27:49.380 --> 01:27:52.380]  I got that from the Texas Department of Public Safety
[01:27:52.380 --> 01:27:57.380]  If he doesn't have an oath and he's not qualified, he is unable
[01:27:57.380 --> 01:28:01.380]  Oh wait, no, I start to say he's unable to invoke sub-bedroom jurisdiction in the court
[01:28:01.380 --> 01:28:05.380]  But yes he can, he does that as a citizen
[01:28:05.380 --> 01:28:12.380]  Right, no, no, no, this is the Texas administrative code
[01:28:12.380 --> 01:28:15.380]  Oh, he didn't have the qualifications
[01:28:15.380 --> 01:28:17.380]  He doesn't have it
[01:28:17.380 --> 01:28:18.380]  Yes
[01:28:18.380 --> 01:28:23.380]  He didn't have it, I knew he didn't, I mean I'd already spoken to him, now I've got it black and white
[01:28:23.380 --> 01:28:30.380]  What should I do with this, I mean should I
[01:28:30.380 --> 01:28:34.380]  File criminal charges against him
[01:28:34.380 --> 01:28:38.380]  And motion to disqualify, didn't I send you a motion to disqualify the police officer
[01:28:38.380 --> 01:28:43.380]  Well actually yeah, I think I took up, I did, I've done that, I filed that
[01:28:43.380 --> 01:28:46.380]  The thing about it is, they're all ignored
[01:28:46.380 --> 01:28:49.380]  Well, they won't get ignored when you get to the appeals court
[01:28:49.380 --> 01:28:54.380]  What you need to do is file an interlocutory appeal
[01:28:54.380 --> 01:28:56.380]  File an interlocutory appeal with the district court
[01:28:56.380 --> 01:28:59.380]  Yeah
[01:28:59.380 --> 01:29:01.380]  Do you have one of those forms on dearest imprudence
[01:29:01.380 --> 01:29:04.380]  That's not exactly a form
[01:29:04.380 --> 01:29:12.380]  It always depends on what your case is
[01:29:12.380 --> 01:29:16.380]  But no, I don't have an interlocutory appeal form on dearest imprudence
[01:29:16.380 --> 01:29:17.380]  Okay, well I can look that up
[01:29:17.380 --> 01:29:27.380]  Something else I did, I did, and I did get the certified returns that he received for Judge Underwood
[01:29:27.380 --> 01:29:33.380]  And he's in, well he's in Conroe, he is the administrative judge
[01:29:33.380 --> 01:29:35.380]  You're head administrative judge of the district
[01:29:35.380 --> 01:29:38.380]  I'll wait if I can
[01:29:38.380 --> 01:29:42.380]  Okay, that's on your recusal or disqualification motion
[01:29:42.380 --> 01:29:47.380]  It's on the challenge to jurisdiction motion that this man is presiding judge
[01:29:47.380 --> 01:29:48.380]  He's a recruit
[01:29:48.380 --> 01:29:50.380]  Oh, okay, he's a retired
[01:29:50.380 --> 01:29:52.380]  Exactly, you know who I'm talking about
[01:29:52.380 --> 01:29:54.380]  Okay, yep, we'll be right back
[01:29:54.380 --> 01:29:56.380]  Okay
[01:29:56.380 --> 01:29:58.380]  This is Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Wheel of Law
[01:29:58.380 --> 01:30:08.380]  Perfect
[01:30:28.380 --> 01:30:34.380]  This documentary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case winning experience
[01:30:34.380 --> 01:30:43.380]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand about the principles and practices that control our American courts
[01:30:43.380 --> 01:30:52.380]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases, pro se tactics and much more
[01:30:52.380 --> 01:31:00.380]  Visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner or call toll free, 866-LAW-EZ
[01:31:22.380 --> 01:31:38.380]  Okay, Keith, go ahead
[01:31:38.380 --> 01:31:46.380]  Anyway, I was saying that I had sent that information to, he's a judge under Wynton Conroe
[01:31:46.380 --> 01:32:00.380]  He is a recusal judge and I sent over motion or I'm sorry, challenge to jurisdiction of the court and motion to disqualify presiding judge along with an explanation
[01:32:00.380 --> 01:32:03.380]  Okay, wait, wait, wait, it doesn't go to him
[01:32:03.380 --> 01:32:07.380]  You file the motion to disqualify in the court case
[01:32:07.380 --> 01:32:18.380]  And the presiding judge in the case is required to forward the motion to the head administrative judge of the district who appoints the judge to hear the motion
[01:32:18.380 --> 01:32:21.380]  Has done, has done none of that
[01:32:21.380 --> 01:32:24.380]  Did you file it in the case or did you just send it?
[01:32:24.380 --> 01:32:26.380]  Yeah, in my cause
[01:32:26.380 --> 01:32:32.380]  Okay, then has the head administrative judge ruled, appointed a judge to hear the motion?
[01:32:32.380 --> 01:32:34.380]  Has not
[01:32:34.380 --> 01:32:37.380]  File a complaint against the judge
[01:32:37.380 --> 01:32:39.380]  I would file criminally against him
[01:32:39.380 --> 01:32:41.380]  He's the head administrative judge of the district
[01:32:41.380 --> 01:32:44.380]  He's not going to like that
[01:32:44.380 --> 01:32:48.380]  And that's going to get him kicked off at this judge
[01:32:48.380 --> 01:32:53.380]  He would be the head administrative judge of the district
[01:32:53.380 --> 01:32:56.380]  I'm trying to figure out because I'm going to lick the guy and give him a call tomorrow
[01:32:56.380 --> 01:32:59.380]  Yeah, he's the head administrative judge of the whole area
[01:32:59.380 --> 01:33:01.380]  He's way on up there
[01:33:01.380 --> 01:33:05.380]  That would be, that would be underwood
[01:33:05.380 --> 01:33:07.380]  Yeah, whoever the head administrative judge is
[01:33:07.380 --> 01:33:13.380]  And you go after him, he's going to be unhappy
[01:33:13.380 --> 01:33:15.380]  He's going to go back to this judge and want something done
[01:33:15.380 --> 01:33:19.380]  What we're talking about is the head administrative judge for the second district
[01:33:19.380 --> 01:33:20.380]  He's over 37 counties
[01:33:20.380 --> 01:33:21.380]  Yeah
[01:33:21.380 --> 01:33:23.380]  That's the guy, he's the guy, he's in Conrad
[01:33:23.380 --> 01:33:26.380]  File against him
[01:33:26.380 --> 01:33:28.380]  I don't know that he has it, but he has it now
[01:33:28.380 --> 01:33:32.380]  His problem, not your problem
[01:33:32.380 --> 01:33:36.380]  I sent it to the clerk of the court in this cause, Randy
[01:33:36.380 --> 01:33:40.380]  The judge was required to send it to the head administrative judge of the district
[01:33:40.380 --> 01:33:43.380]  And he was required to appoint a judge to hear the motion
[01:33:43.380 --> 01:33:47.380]  Now, as far as you're concerned, they did what they were supposed to
[01:33:47.380 --> 01:33:51.380]  No judge was appointed, file against this judge
[01:33:51.380 --> 01:33:56.380]  If he never got it, he is not going to be happy
[01:33:56.380 --> 01:33:58.380]  I'm going to talk to him about it tomorrow because he got it
[01:33:58.380 --> 01:34:00.380]  Don't talk to him about it
[01:34:00.380 --> 01:34:04.380]  He's going to shuck and jive you
[01:34:04.380 --> 01:34:05.380]  File against him
[01:34:05.380 --> 01:34:10.380]  This is how we got the IRS agent fired in Fort Lauderdale
[01:34:10.380 --> 01:34:18.380]  We went to the inspector general of the IRS and accused this agent's boss
[01:34:18.380 --> 01:34:22.380]  His boss's boss and his boss's boss's boss
[01:34:22.380 --> 01:34:26.380]  Of approving this raid she did
[01:34:26.380 --> 01:34:30.380]  When I have no doubt, they never heard of it
[01:34:30.380 --> 01:34:35.380]  And when they got the inspector general of the IRS down there crawling down their throats
[01:34:35.380 --> 01:34:41.380]  Wanting to know why they're approving this kind of a raid
[01:34:41.380 --> 01:34:43.380]  They were not happy
[01:34:43.380 --> 01:34:44.380]  But they were
[01:34:44.380 --> 01:34:48.380]  So when you land on this judge like a ton of bricks
[01:34:48.380 --> 01:34:55.380]  Assuming that he just absolutely refused to perform his duty, 39-03 penal code
[01:34:55.380 --> 01:34:57.380]  Make the allegation against him
[01:34:57.380 --> 01:35:03.380]  And let the prosecutor call him and ask him, why is this guy trying to get me to arrest you?
[01:35:03.380 --> 01:35:06.380]  And he's going to say, what?
[01:35:06.380 --> 01:35:08.380]  What are you talking about?
[01:35:08.380 --> 01:35:11.380]  By the time he gets the answers
[01:35:11.380 --> 01:35:15.380]  There are going to be some judges that are going to be tiptoeing around
[01:35:15.380 --> 01:35:18.380]  Who would I file that complaint with?
[01:35:18.380 --> 01:35:20.380]  District attorney
[01:35:20.380 --> 01:35:25.380]  They're sitting on about 50 of them right now
[01:35:25.380 --> 01:35:29.380]  He's not going to pursue them, but you just keep adding them to him
[01:35:29.380 --> 01:35:33.380]  Have you filed any against the district attorney with the district judge?
[01:35:33.380 --> 01:35:35.380]  I have not
[01:35:35.380 --> 01:35:43.380]  Take the whole thing and send it to the district judge in a petition for court of inquiry
[01:35:43.380 --> 01:35:47.380]  Chapter 52, Code of Criminal Procedure
[01:35:47.380 --> 01:35:51.380]  And include all of these verified criminal affidavits
[01:35:51.380 --> 01:35:56.380]  And then when the judge doesn't act on the affidavits, then you file against the judge
[01:35:56.380 --> 01:36:01.380]  You get the judge in trouble for trying to protect the prosecutor
[01:36:01.380 --> 01:36:03.380]  And he ain't going to be happy about that
[01:36:03.380 --> 01:36:05.380]  Right
[01:36:05.380 --> 01:36:07.380]  Yeah, that's what I've tried to do
[01:36:07.380 --> 01:36:10.380]  It's just been, you know, you've filed so much paperwork
[01:36:10.380 --> 01:36:15.380]  It's kind of hard to juggle it, you get a little bit confused as to what you've done and what you haven't done
[01:36:15.380 --> 01:36:17.380]  It's kind of hard to stay on top of it
[01:36:17.380 --> 01:36:18.380]  You need to keep a log
[01:36:18.380 --> 01:36:23.380]  Yeah, I'm trying to keep a log online as much as possible
[01:36:23.380 --> 01:36:28.380]  But I had something else I wanted to ask you about, but I can't recall what it was now
[01:36:28.380 --> 01:36:33.380]  That's going to get worse, I can assure you
[01:36:33.380 --> 01:36:36.380]  I know what I was going to say, if I could just real briefly
[01:36:36.380 --> 01:36:41.380]  You know what, I could just take this thing to trial by myself
[01:36:41.380 --> 01:36:45.380]  You know, I know enough, and it just rolls off
[01:36:45.380 --> 01:36:49.380]  And these people have absolutely no idea, and they're scared to death
[01:36:49.380 --> 01:36:56.380]  Yes, when you start getting close to trial, that's when they're going to get, what it's going to get serious for
[01:36:56.380 --> 01:36:57.380]  What I've already done
[01:36:57.380 --> 01:37:02.380]  You file an interlocutory appeal, this is really going to get their attention
[01:37:02.380 --> 01:37:08.380]  What I've already done is, I've already demanded examining trial a couple of times
[01:37:08.380 --> 01:37:12.380]  And it was denied because this judge said, although a magistrate said that
[01:37:12.380 --> 01:37:22.380]  I can't do that because there is a Chapter 16 of the Texas statutes prohibits me from doing that
[01:37:22.380 --> 01:37:27.380]  Providing an examining trial or examining into your criminal complaint
[01:37:27.380 --> 01:37:29.380]  And I thought, you've got to be kidding me
[01:37:29.380 --> 01:37:37.380]  I know Chapter 16, front to back, and that is absolutely not true
[01:37:37.380 --> 01:37:43.380]  She handed me the book, and pointed to something, and I said, this is about wiretapping
[01:37:43.380 --> 01:37:50.380]  I started laughing, oh my God, it's that bad
[01:37:50.380 --> 01:37:55.380]  And she didn't want to see me, and frankly I didn't want to see her either because she's a liar
[01:37:55.380 --> 01:38:01.380]  And the last thing I told her, I said, in four different statements, I said, I want a trial
[01:38:01.380 --> 01:38:02.380]  I want a trial
[01:38:02.380 --> 01:38:06.380]  You lied to me, you lied about the process, you lied about attorneys
[01:38:06.380 --> 01:38:09.380]  You haven't responded to motions, you haven't done anything
[01:38:09.380 --> 01:38:15.380]  What have you got to hide? Why are you dragging me back and forth?
[01:38:15.380 --> 01:38:17.380]  Just to try to abuse me
[01:38:17.380 --> 01:38:18.380]  Set a trial
[01:38:18.380 --> 01:38:20.380]  This is what they do
[01:38:20.380 --> 01:38:21.380]  I'm ready, let's go
[01:38:21.380 --> 01:38:27.380]  They try to pull you in, pull you in, until they wear you out
[01:38:27.380 --> 01:38:31.380]  And every time they pull you in, you need to file more against them and raise the stakes
[01:38:31.380 --> 01:38:36.380]  The thing about it is, can't you just demand a trial, let's go
[01:38:36.380 --> 01:38:39.380]  Look, are you not getting it?
[01:38:39.380 --> 01:38:40.380]  Well, no
[01:38:40.380 --> 01:38:47.380]  If they're saying, I don't care what the law says, screw you
[01:38:47.380 --> 01:38:51.380]  You've got to go higher, you can't just keep going back and say
[01:38:51.380 --> 01:38:52.380]  Oh no, I am
[01:38:52.380 --> 01:38:55.380]  Do this, and they say no, do that, they say no
[01:38:55.380 --> 01:38:59.380]  I want to start off the line as fast as I can
[01:38:59.380 --> 01:39:01.380]  I should have gone right to the top
[01:39:01.380 --> 01:39:03.380]  Go right to the top immediately
[01:39:03.380 --> 01:39:08.380]  I'll go tomorrow, I'm going to start working on that, the interrogatory appeal
[01:39:08.380 --> 01:39:10.380]  The interrogatory appeal goes to who?
[01:39:10.380 --> 01:39:11.380]  The district judge
[01:39:11.380 --> 01:39:12.380]  Yeah, district court
[01:39:12.380 --> 01:39:14.380]  District court, that's happening tomorrow
[01:39:14.380 --> 01:39:17.380]  I'm going to look it up, I'm going to get the paperwork, I'm going to get it filled out
[01:39:17.380 --> 01:39:19.380]  And I'm going to get it over to them
[01:39:19.380 --> 01:39:25.380]  Yeah, all interrogatory means is it's while the case is ongoing
[01:39:25.380 --> 01:39:30.380]  And it's going to be, is it more or less like a mandamus?
[01:39:30.380 --> 01:39:34.380]  Tell these people what's going on to get off the snide and do something?
[01:39:34.380 --> 01:39:35.380]  Yes
[01:39:35.380 --> 01:39:37.380]  Okay, all right
[01:39:37.380 --> 01:39:47.380]  Okay, you file an interrogatory appeal on her refusal to provide an examining trial on her denial of counsel
[01:39:47.380 --> 01:39:49.380]  Right
[01:39:49.380 --> 01:39:51.380]  On the recusal
[01:39:51.380 --> 01:39:54.380]  Right
[01:39:54.380 --> 01:39:58.380]  And you could also just, have you tried a mandamus to the district court?
[01:39:58.380 --> 01:39:59.380]  I have not
[01:39:59.380 --> 01:40:02.380]  Mandamus to the district court on the recusal?
[01:40:02.380 --> 01:40:09.380]  The thing about it is, yeah, I should go ahead and do that, I'll do that tomorrow, but like I said, well, end demand trial
[01:40:09.380 --> 01:40:16.380]  And in the meantime, just, I guess just pray and hope and pray for the best, you know, and just keep doing what you do
[01:40:16.380 --> 01:40:24.380]  Yeah, just keep hammering them because they're going to, they're always, everybody, they wear them out
[01:40:24.380 --> 01:40:32.380]  That's the whole deal, but they found out with you each time they come at you, you come back at them harder
[01:40:32.380 --> 01:40:34.380]  And it's not working
[01:40:34.380 --> 01:40:40.380]  They're sitting on about 300 pages of documentation, everything under the sun
[01:40:40.380 --> 01:40:48.380]  Good, you got to understand, making you come back and frustrating you is what they do
[01:40:48.380 --> 01:40:56.380]  That's what they know how to do, and you got to take it so every time they pull some crapolo like that, they get more paperwork
[01:40:56.380 --> 01:40:57.380]  Yeah
[01:40:57.380 --> 01:40:59.380]  The problem gets worse, not better
[01:40:59.380 --> 01:41:05.380]  Can you do me a favor, Randy? I don't know if you'll remember some of this stuff because I've written some of it down and not
[01:41:05.380 --> 01:41:08.380]  If I email over to you, what would you want me to put in the subject line?
[01:41:08.380 --> 01:41:12.380]  And so that maybe you could jot down some things from, you know, this
[01:41:12.380 --> 01:41:15.380]  Okay, just put the subject line in all caps
[01:41:15.380 --> 01:41:18.380]  I'll just put from Keith or something like that
[01:41:18.380 --> 01:41:19.380]  Okay, yeah, that'll work
[01:41:19.380 --> 01:41:21.380]  All right, and then maybe
[01:41:21.380 --> 01:41:23.380]  Okay, yeah, we need to move along, we're running out of time
[01:41:23.380 --> 01:41:25.380]  All right, my friend, thank you
[01:41:25.380 --> 01:41:26.380]  Thank you
[01:41:26.380 --> 01:41:27.380]  Good night
[01:41:27.380 --> 01:41:28.380]  Good night
[01:41:28.380 --> 01:41:32.380]  All right, good night, Keith
[01:41:32.380 --> 01:41:37.380]  All right, we got Dan from Connecticut, Dan, thanks for calling in, what's on your mind?
[01:41:37.380 --> 01:41:40.380]  Nothing much, how's it going with you guys?
[01:41:40.380 --> 01:41:45.380]  Yeah, Dan, you got a lot on your mind?
[01:41:45.380 --> 01:41:54.380]  Yeah, as a matter of fact, I hate to switch the subject slightly, but there are problems in Peter Schiffland up here in Connecticut
[01:41:54.380 --> 01:42:02.380]  I am about to come out with a lot of groundbreaking information on the Connecticut Republican Party
[01:42:02.380 --> 01:42:11.380]  And I was approached by several sources who have a lot of inside information on how, well, basically the long and short of it is this
[01:42:11.380 --> 01:42:16.380]  The nominees have already been selected for federal office
[01:42:16.380 --> 01:42:24.380]  Now, I don't know how you would logically do that without having a convention or a primary, but they're doing it
[01:42:24.380 --> 01:42:32.380]  So what I'm about to say applies to Connecticut as much as it applies to any other Republican Party, and I just want to put out a few pointers
[01:42:32.380 --> 01:42:38.380]  And obviously I will be calling in at a future point to let you know what exactly it is I found out
[01:42:38.380 --> 01:42:40.380]  But here are your tips
[01:42:40.380 --> 01:42:47.380]  First of all, read your Republican town committee's rules, know them back and forth
[01:42:47.380 --> 01:42:52.380]  The second thing I want to say is check the attendance records
[01:42:52.380 --> 01:42:56.380]  Now, what you will find may disturb you
[01:42:56.380 --> 01:42:58.380]  Now, the records may not be there
[01:42:58.380 --> 01:43:04.380]  The records may indicate that people that are on your particular town committee do not reside in that town
[01:43:04.380 --> 01:43:10.380]  Your town committee's records may reflect that people that are on the town committee are in fact deceased
[01:43:10.380 --> 01:43:13.380]  And a bunch of other things
[01:43:13.380 --> 01:43:22.380]  On top of that, be mindful of any action taken without a quorum because it's already happening in Connecticut
[01:43:22.380 --> 01:43:34.380]  We already have town committees getting together and trying to choose delegates, but there's a lot of stuff that is actually being done without a quorum
[01:43:34.380 --> 01:43:37.380]  All right, Dan, you want to stay on the line?
[01:43:37.380 --> 01:43:39.380]  Oh, sure thing, there's just a little more
[01:43:39.380 --> 01:43:44.380]  Okay, great. All right, we'll be right back. This is the rule of law
[01:43:44.380 --> 01:43:49.380]  Randy Kelton and Deborah Stevens, Eddie Craig, we'll be right back with Dan
[01:43:49.380 --> 01:44:18.380]  Aerial spraying, chemtrails, the modified atmosphere, heavy metals and pesticides, carcinogens and chemical fibers all falling from the sky
[01:44:18.380 --> 01:44:21.380]  You have a choice to keep your body clean
[01:44:21.380 --> 01:44:31.380]  Detoxify with micro plant powder from hempusa.org or call 908-691-2608
[01:44:31.380 --> 01:44:36.380]  It's odorless and tasteless and used in any liquid or food
[01:44:36.380 --> 01:44:39.380]  Protect your family now with micro plant powder
[01:44:39.380 --> 01:44:48.380]  Cleaning out heavy metals, parasites and toxins. Order it now for daily intake and stock it now for long-term storage
[01:44:48.380 --> 01:44:56.380]  Visit hempusa.org or call 908-691-2608 today
[01:44:56.380 --> 01:45:15.380]  Hello? Oh, man, you're in jail? You got busted, man? Oh, man, I'm broke, man
[01:45:15.380 --> 01:45:25.380]  Something in this world I will never understand
[01:45:25.380 --> 01:45:29.380]  Something I realize fully
[01:45:29.380 --> 01:45:34.380]  Somebody's gonna police that policeman
[01:45:34.380 --> 01:45:37.380]  Somebody's gonna police the police
[01:45:37.380 --> 01:45:42.380]  There's always a room at the top of the hill
[01:45:42.380 --> 01:45:46.380]  I hear through the grapevine that it's lonely
[01:45:46.380 --> 01:45:49.380]  Okay, we are back. Dan?
[01:45:49.380 --> 01:45:50.380]  Yes
[01:45:50.380 --> 01:45:56.380]  Okay, so what's going on here? The fix is in?
[01:45:56.380 --> 01:46:05.380]  Yeah, I hate to say it. I will admit, and I've said it before, I'm not too much of a fan of working within the Republican Party
[01:46:05.380 --> 01:46:17.380]  For many of the reasons I've previously described in the past, this is really looking like the same kind of stuff that happened to Ron Paul in 2008
[01:46:17.380 --> 01:46:19.380]  And it's still going on
[01:46:19.380 --> 01:46:26.380]  Now, the unfortunate part about it is that let's just say somebody like Peter Schiff was to file a suit
[01:46:26.380 --> 01:46:32.380]  Well, first, you can't just go to court without, you know, exhausting all administrative remedy
[01:46:32.380 --> 01:46:37.380]  You would basically say, hey, I don't have the rules of the convention, could you give them to me?
[01:46:37.380 --> 01:46:44.380]  And you would have to give them time to actually reply to the request and say, okay, well, here are the rules
[01:46:44.380 --> 01:46:49.380]  Now, by the time that goes on, now, the convention in Connecticut is in May
[01:46:49.380 --> 01:46:54.380]  Bear in mind, we're rolling up on, you know, the middle of the month in another week
[01:46:54.380 --> 01:47:03.380]  So the request isn't answered, and I've had my source in particular, he's tried to make this request, too, like via certified mail
[01:47:03.380 --> 01:47:05.380]  Now, he hasn't gotten anything
[01:47:05.380 --> 01:47:12.380]  By the time you can actually get a court date and start going through pretrial motions and stuff like that, you're talking a few months
[01:47:12.380 --> 01:47:15.380]  File an emergency restraining order
[01:47:15.380 --> 01:47:17.380]  Restraining order?
[01:47:17.380 --> 01:47:19.380]  Yeah, that'll trick a knot in their shorts
[01:47:19.380 --> 01:47:21.380]  That's a good idea
[01:47:21.380 --> 01:47:35.380]  Restrain them from any action until they've complied because it will create a harm that cannot be repaired
[01:47:35.380 --> 01:47:37.380]  I wasn't thinking about that
[01:47:37.380 --> 01:47:48.380]  Well, Dan, I mean, aren't there, isn't there some action that you guys can take functioning within the rules of the Republican Party?
[01:47:48.380 --> 01:47:52.380]  I mean, like, here in Texas, there's a huge movement
[01:47:52.380 --> 01:48:05.380]  I mean, people are becoming precinct chairs all over the place, uncontested, they're bypassing the whole black box voting issue
[01:48:05.380 --> 01:48:12.380]  By simply just moving in and taking over and inside the party
[01:48:12.380 --> 01:48:14.380]  Connecticut's a little different
[01:48:14.380 --> 01:48:17.380]  Connecticut has what are called superdelegates
[01:48:17.380 --> 01:48:20.380]  Now, basically, these are pretty much party insiders
[01:48:20.380 --> 01:48:28.380]  And on top of that, the state central chair has a lot more say than, like, your local town committees
[01:48:28.380 --> 01:48:36.380]  So basically what they're doing is they already have an idea of what they want and they've already endorsed it
[01:48:36.380 --> 01:48:38.380]  You know, so they're just going forward
[01:48:38.380 --> 01:48:46.380]  And in the meantime, they're not really, as far as I can tell, telling anybody what the rules of the convention are going to be
[01:48:46.380 --> 01:48:58.380]  And by the time we were able to actually get this in court and, you know, really do anything about it, the convention could be long done over
[01:48:58.380 --> 01:49:02.380]  I mean, bear in mind, this isn't just your average state
[01:49:02.380 --> 01:49:07.380]  As you may know, Chris Dodd just said, hey, I'm out, I'm retiring
[01:49:07.380 --> 01:49:12.380]  On top of that, he was considered one of the most vulnerable senators in the country
[01:49:12.380 --> 01:49:17.380]  So they're really banking a lot on this
[01:49:17.380 --> 01:49:20.380]  You know, so the fix is definitely in to, you know, create whatever you call it
[01:49:20.380 --> 01:49:24.380]  So file the restraining order, you will get their attention
[01:49:24.380 --> 01:49:37.380]  Randy, we were talking about this a year or so ago concerning statutory requirements that could possibly govern political parties
[01:49:37.380 --> 01:49:46.380]  Because, I mean, when you really break it down, political parties, they are private entities, they're private organizations
[01:49:46.380 --> 01:49:48.380]  They're only semi-private
[01:49:48.380 --> 01:49:51.380]  But that's the whole thing, that's what we were determining, they're semi-private
[01:49:51.380 --> 01:49:54.380]  It's kind of like the Bar Association
[01:49:54.380 --> 01:50:01.380]  There is some degree of governmental regulation
[01:50:01.380 --> 01:50:06.380]  And so, like, partial open records requests could apply
[01:50:06.380 --> 01:50:12.380]  I mean, you don't just have to rely on tort here
[01:50:12.380 --> 01:50:16.380]  Well, that's what he was saying, he's filing open records requests, he's not getting answers
[01:50:16.380 --> 01:50:21.380]  At the time you get through all this process, it's going to be too late
[01:50:21.380 --> 01:50:28.380]  So file a petition for emergency restraining order and pre-litigation discovery
[01:50:28.380 --> 01:50:30.380]  Yeah, that might be a good idea
[01:50:30.380 --> 01:50:34.380]  I mean, again, I was approached by a source on this one
[01:50:34.380 --> 01:50:38.380]  Do you have any, is there any documentation, like on paper?
[01:50:38.380 --> 01:50:45.380]  I will be receiving that the next week, but he gave me an idea of where to look and what to find
[01:50:45.380 --> 01:50:48.380]  Now, this is going to go one of two ways
[01:50:48.380 --> 01:50:53.380]  This is either going to fix the Connecticut Republican Party and make them follow their rules
[01:50:53.380 --> 01:50:55.380]  Or it's going to completely bring them down
[01:50:55.380 --> 01:51:00.380]  And again, I'm not even saying everything that's going on
[01:51:00.380 --> 01:51:04.380]  So I'm kind of like looking at this from two different angles
[01:51:04.380 --> 01:51:10.380]  You have, on one end, you've got a corrupt political party, which, you know, we all know that
[01:51:10.380 --> 01:51:16.380]  And on the other end, you've got a really principled candidate who is being shut out
[01:51:16.380 --> 01:51:20.380]  Now, here's the problem with the superdelegates in the state central committee
[01:51:20.380 --> 01:51:25.380]  When they make up their mind, the only thing that's left are the Republican town committees
[01:51:25.380 --> 01:51:33.380]  Now, you need 15% of the delegates to the convention to actually get on the ballot
[01:51:33.380 --> 01:51:36.380]  Linda McMahon jumped into the race
[01:51:36.380 --> 01:51:41.380]  And she's pretty much just buying everything up she can see in sight
[01:51:41.380 --> 01:51:45.380]  Now, of course, they had their minds made up way before in advance
[01:51:45.380 --> 01:51:51.380]  So between the guy that they're running, Rob Simmons, and Linda McMahon, Peter Schiff
[01:51:51.380 --> 01:51:57.380]  I would really doubt that he'd even get the 15% nod that he would need to to get into the primary
[01:51:57.380 --> 01:52:04.380]  And on top of that, there is rumor, you know, or actually a hint of some kind of agreement
[01:52:04.380 --> 01:52:08.380]  That's going to be put into the convention rules, which, by the way, nobody has
[01:52:08.380 --> 01:52:14.380]  That will basically say, if you participate in the convention, you agree not to take this to a primary
[01:52:14.380 --> 01:52:19.380]  Now, I don't think that would wash with the voters well
[01:52:19.380 --> 01:52:24.380]  I don't think it would wash with the rank-and-file voters that are Republicans very well
[01:52:24.380 --> 01:52:29.380]  But they've been known to do things like that, and I wouldn't put it past them
[01:52:29.380 --> 01:52:36.380]  Yeah, but it doesn't matter because this is interpartisan politics rules of a private organization
[01:52:36.380 --> 01:52:48.380]  I mean, you said something a minute ago, Dan, concerning the town, like the town hall, like meetings, you know
[01:52:48.380 --> 01:52:50.380]  The Republican town committees
[01:52:50.380 --> 01:52:52.380]  Yeah, the Republican town committees
[01:52:52.380 --> 01:52:59.380]  I mean, don't these town committees have any authority or pull or say so within a party?
[01:52:59.380 --> 01:53:03.380]  They have very little compared to the superdelegates in the state central committee
[01:53:03.380 --> 01:53:11.380]  It's like, you know, it's almost like they're peasants, but they're kind of still like, you know, pulled and their arms are twisted
[01:53:11.380 --> 01:53:17.380]  It's nothing, I am sure, like it works down in Texas. I'm positive of it
[01:53:17.380 --> 01:53:18.380]  Well
[01:53:18.380 --> 01:53:23.380]  You know, because this party has been a minority for such a long time, you know
[01:53:23.380 --> 01:53:27.380]  And everything has kind of been just skewed toward the people who have been there all along
[01:53:27.380 --> 01:53:30.380]  But that's the way they wrote the rules
[01:53:30.380 --> 01:53:34.380]  Well, who has the power to change the rules?
[01:53:34.380 --> 01:53:39.380]  Basically, you would have to bring that to the convention, in which case you would have the superdelegates
[01:53:39.380 --> 01:53:45.380]  which consist of state central committee members and elected Republicans
[01:53:45.380 --> 01:53:51.380]  And they would basically have, you could consider it two-thirds say
[01:53:51.380 --> 01:53:55.380]  The other third would end up being Republican town committees
[01:53:55.380 --> 01:53:56.380]  So
[01:53:56.380 --> 01:54:01.380]  So by the time the day is all said and done, like let's just say you take over all the Republican town committees
[01:54:01.380 --> 01:54:04.380]  which I think would be a long shot
[01:54:04.380 --> 01:54:10.380]  You've still got the other, like the two-thirds just overruling you
[01:54:10.380 --> 01:54:16.380]  There's a really big problem going on, but the thing that I see, you know, that I've been informed of
[01:54:16.380 --> 01:54:21.380]  There are definite problems as far as like just keeping basic records, like
[01:54:21.380 --> 01:54:26.380]  You know, there are people that are still on Republican town committees that do not attend
[01:54:26.380 --> 01:54:33.380]  Like they're just AWOL, and they've been AWOL for quite some time, but somehow they still sit on these committees
[01:54:33.380 --> 01:54:44.380]  Well, see, that's the whole crux of the issue where I was going to, I mean, don't underestimate the power of this one-third
[01:54:44.380 --> 01:54:51.380]  Okay, and like one of the new shows on the network we have here, Richard Reeves
[01:54:51.380 --> 01:54:59.380]  You know, one of his big issues is taking over these political parties, and there's a lot of purists that disagree
[01:54:59.380 --> 01:55:09.380]  with the basic philosophy and accuse him of just reinforcing the two-party system or the multiple party system or whatever
[01:55:09.380 --> 01:55:15.380]  I'm not even going there. I'm not even going there. I'm just looking at the structure as it is here
[01:55:15.380 --> 01:55:28.380]  I mean, personally, I wouldn't care if it was an R or a D, but I'm just looking at something that is fundamentally rigged
[01:55:28.380 --> 01:55:33.380]  I mean, which it is here. I mean, and again, this may not apply to other states like Texas
[01:55:33.380 --> 01:55:40.380]  No, it applies everywhere, Dan, but I mean, they're trying to fundamentally rig everything, okay?
[01:55:40.380 --> 01:55:45.380]  They are, the powers that be are, they're doing everything they can to fundamentally rig everything
[01:55:45.380 --> 01:55:54.380]  and to convince us that we don't have any power and that we're the minority or the one-third or the 40% or the 20% or whatever
[01:55:54.380 --> 01:56:02.380]  but don't believe it. I mean, you just said yourself that there's a lot of these seats that are left open, I mean
[01:56:02.380 --> 01:56:08.380]  No, they're not left open. They're being filled by people that don't show up
[01:56:08.380 --> 01:56:14.380]  Well, if they're being filled by people that don't show up, then y'all need to put people in there that will show up
[01:56:14.380 --> 01:56:24.380]  Yeah, but you need to kick them off somehow and, you know, basically what goes on is the records are just completely gone
[01:56:24.380 --> 01:56:31.380]  I mean, the whole thing is just bedlam and of course it's there that way for a purpose
[01:56:31.380 --> 01:56:38.380]  and of course that's just reinforced at the convention by the State Central Committee and the people that are elected Republicans
[01:56:38.380 --> 01:56:41.380]  I mean, they've already made up their minds
[01:56:41.380 --> 01:56:44.380]  Well, I mean, Dan, listen, I mean, don't you think that
[01:56:44.380 --> 01:56:46.380]  I know that sounds crazy and I don't mean to
[01:56:46.380 --> 01:56:51.380]  No, no, no, it doesn't sound crazy. I mean
[01:56:51.380 --> 01:56:56.380]  I don't mean to project this like in a light that we're powerless and we can't do anything
[01:56:56.380 --> 01:57:06.380]  But, Dan, the situation you're describing sounds to me like a situation that is ripe for us to take over, the good guys
[01:57:06.380 --> 01:57:16.380]  I mean, if they're, you know, records are in bedlam, just totally in a state of disruption
[01:57:16.380 --> 01:57:21.380]  I mean, we can use these kinds of situations to our advantage
[01:57:21.380 --> 01:57:25.380]  But it's a private organization, that's the problem
[01:57:25.380 --> 01:57:29.380]  You know, you can't, it's not a crime in Connecticut to do that
[01:57:29.380 --> 01:57:31.380]  I checked, I've been all over it
[01:57:31.380 --> 01:57:39.380]  But when it affects the public, when it affects government, then they can't
[01:57:39.380 --> 01:57:48.380]  It falls under different types of torts and governmental rules
[01:57:48.380 --> 01:57:55.380]  It's just like the Bar Association, it's a quasi-governmental organization
[01:57:55.380 --> 01:57:58.380]  Not in Connecticut
[01:57:58.380 --> 01:58:02.380]  I mean, in Connecticut, it's considered a private organization
[01:58:02.380 --> 01:58:05.380]  The Secretary of State has the most say over this
[01:58:05.380 --> 01:58:09.380]  But the Secretary of State doesn't say your rules have to be such
[01:58:09.380 --> 01:58:14.380]  And they don't really provide for any penalties for not following those rules
[01:58:14.380 --> 01:58:19.380]  Those penalties are already set forth in the rules that the party has prescribed
[01:58:19.380 --> 01:58:22.380]  Okay, we're about out of time
[01:58:22.380 --> 01:58:26.380]  Yeah, look, there are remedies with these political parties
[01:58:26.380 --> 01:58:28.380]  There are, but I just haven't found them yet
[01:58:28.380 --> 01:58:31.380]  Alright, look, you need to contact Richard Reeves
[01:58:31.380 --> 01:58:34.380]  He's the man when it comes to political parties
[01:58:34.380 --> 01:58:36.380]  Okay, definitely will do
[01:58:36.380 --> 01:58:40.380]  Okay, alright, stay tuned for Endless Fraud Detection
[01:58:40.380 --> 01:59:00.380]  We'll be back tonight
[01:59:00.380 --> 01:59:02.380]  This is Randall Kelton from Rule of Law Radio
[01:59:02.380 --> 01:59:06.380]  Many of you have been helped by the informative programming on 90.1
[01:59:06.380 --> 01:59:08.380]  Now 90.1 needs your help
[01:59:08.380 --> 01:59:13.380]  The operators of 90.1 are in a legal battle with the FCC to stay on the air
[01:59:13.380 --> 01:59:19.380]  And they need letters from your listeners testifying that 90.1 serves the public interest
[01:59:19.380 --> 01:59:23.380]  By bringing truthful news and information that no other station does
[01:59:23.380 --> 01:59:26.380]  Brave New Books is not associated with the Austin Micros
[01:59:26.380 --> 01:59:29.380]  But they have agreed to help by collecting your letters
[01:59:29.380 --> 01:59:32.380]  Please drop off or mail your letters, too
[01:59:32.380 --> 01:59:42.380]  Brave New Books, attention, Austin Micros, 90.1, 1904 Guadalupe, Suite B, Austin, Texas, 78705
[01:59:42.380 --> 01:59:45.380]  There are also form letters at the bookstore that folks can just sign
[01:59:45.380 --> 01:59:51.380]  Please help keep 90.1 on the air by getting your letters and Brave New Books as soon as possible
[01:59:51.380 --> 01:59:55.380]  Let the FCC know that 90.1 serves the public interest
[01:59:55.380 --> 02:00:03.380]  By bringing truthful news and information that can't be found anywhere else