ROL_2010-04-08_16k.timecode

[00:00.000 --> 00:09.120]  Alan Greenspan, former head of the Federal Reserve, defended his role Wednesday in the
[00:09.120 --> 00:14.440]  lead-up to the global financial crisis, blaming investors' appetite for high-risk subprime
[00:14.440 --> 00:18.000]  mortgages for contributing to the economic meltdown.
[00:18.000 --> 00:24.480]  Spain's most high-profile judge, Balthasar Garzón, faces trial on charges of overreaching
[00:24.480 --> 00:29.720]  his powers by launching an inquiry into the regime of General Francisco Franco.
[00:29.720 --> 00:33.560]  A magistrate ruled Wednesday he had acted without jurisdiction.
[00:33.560 --> 00:38.480]  Garzón is famous for targeting Augusto Pinochet and Osama bin Laden.
[00:38.480 --> 00:43.040]  Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke warned Wednesday Americans may have to accept higher
[00:43.040 --> 00:49.360]  taxes or changes in Medicare and Social Security if the nation is to avoid staggering budget
[00:49.360 --> 00:57.000]  deficits that threaten to choke off economic growth.
[00:57.000 --> 01:01.880]  When conservative activists James O'Keefe and Hannah Giles released tapes last fall
[01:01.880 --> 01:07.600]  purporting to show acorn employees advising them how to set up a child prostitution ring,
[01:07.600 --> 01:11.360]  it resulted in Congressional defunding of the anti-poverty group.
[01:11.360 --> 01:14.680]  But it's now clear the O'Keefe expose was a lie.
[01:14.680 --> 01:20.040]  The edited video released by O'Keefe appears to show an acorn employee advising him on
[01:20.040 --> 01:23.200]  how to smuggle underage girls into the U.S.
[01:23.200 --> 01:28.160]  But in the previously unreleased portion of the video, the acorn employee continues asking
[01:28.160 --> 01:32.840]  very detailed questions about O'Keefe's phone number and the exact time and location of
[01:32.840 --> 01:34.520]  the girls' arrival.
[01:34.520 --> 01:38.800]  According to California Attorney General Jerry Brown's report, quote, immediately after the
[01:38.800 --> 01:44.400]  couple left, the employee phoned his cousin, Detective Alejandro Hernandez, at the National
[01:44.400 --> 01:49.520]  City Police Department, saying a self-admitted prostitute had been to the office and was
[01:49.520 --> 01:55.440]  discussing human smuggling.
[01:55.440 --> 02:01.360]  After the worst coal mining disaster in 25 years, Massey Energy CEO Don Blakenship faces
[02:01.360 --> 02:06.000]  scrutiny for his record of putting coal profits over safety and health.
[02:06.000 --> 02:10.020]  Blakenship, a right-wing activist millionaire who sits on the boards of the U.S. Chamber
[02:10.020 --> 02:16.200]  of Commerce and the National Mining Association, used his company's ties to the Bush Administration
[02:16.200 --> 02:21.000]  to paper over Massey's blatant environmental and health violations.
[02:21.000 --> 02:25.960]  Massey rewarded Republicans with massive donations after the company avoided paying billions
[02:25.960 --> 02:32.320]  in fines for a 2,000 coal slurry disaster in Martin County, three times bigger than
[02:32.320 --> 02:34.260]  the Exxon Valdez.
[02:34.260 --> 02:38.800]  After mine inspectors and Massey employees got the message it was more important to quote
[02:38.800 --> 02:45.040]  run coal than to follow safety rules, a deadly fire broke out in the Aracoma-Alma mine in
[02:45.040 --> 02:48.040]  2006, burning two men alive.
[02:48.040 --> 03:07.920]  You are listening to the Rule of Law Radio Network at RuleOfLawRadio.com, live free
[03:07.920 --> 03:09.920]  speech talk radio at its best.
[03:37.920 --> 03:45.200]  All right, folks, this is Rule of Law Radio.
[03:45.200 --> 03:46.280]  This is Eddie Craig.
[03:46.280 --> 03:48.360]  I am flying solo tonight.
[03:48.360 --> 03:52.000]  Debra is out and Randy is out.
[03:52.000 --> 03:57.040]  So it is pretty much just me and you all out there in listener land.
[03:57.040 --> 03:59.960]  I will be opening the phone lines up here in just a little bit.
[03:59.960 --> 04:05.960]  But there are a couple of subjects that I would like to go over before we begin.
[04:05.960 --> 04:10.040]  Starting some of the things that I have had interaction with the last few days and had
[04:10.040 --> 04:12.120]  to look up some information over.
[04:12.120 --> 04:19.480]  Okay, it would appear that the legislature has attempted in their legislative enactments
[04:19.480 --> 04:29.080]  to grant an unconstitutional civil case jurisdiction to justice courts in Texas.
[04:29.080 --> 04:36.320]  Now everybody is going and filing cases in justice courts for any civil suit they have
[04:36.320 --> 04:41.640]  got that is under $10,000 and they are calling this small claims court.
[04:41.640 --> 04:50.400]  However, there is a slight problem with the legislature granting this jurisdiction to the
[04:50.400 --> 04:51.400]  justice courts.
[04:51.400 --> 04:55.040]  And let me explain to you what that problem is.
[04:55.040 --> 04:59.320]  It is Article 5, Section 19 of the Texas Constitution.
[04:59.320 --> 05:03.200]  Now I am going to read that to you here real quick.
[05:03.200 --> 05:11.080]  Section 19 states, justices of the peace, jurisdiction, ex officio notoris public.
[05:11.080 --> 05:16.040]  Justice of the peace courts shall have original jurisdiction in criminal matters of misdemeanor
[05:16.040 --> 05:19.720]  cases punishable by fine only.
[05:19.720 --> 05:29.000]  Executive jurisdiction in civil matters where the amount in controversy is $200 or less.
[05:29.000 --> 05:34.560]  And such other jurisdiction as may be provided by law.
[05:34.560 --> 05:38.720]  Justices of the peace shall be ex officio notoris public.
[05:38.720 --> 05:41.720]  That is all there is to Section 19.
[05:41.720 --> 05:46.680]  Now for those of you out there listening that immediately latched on to the part of the
[05:46.680 --> 05:51.960]  sentence following the $200 where it says and such other jurisdictions as may be provided
[05:51.960 --> 05:52.960]  by law.
[05:52.960 --> 05:58.840]  Here is the problem with that particular part of that granting the authority to the legislature
[05:58.840 --> 06:02.880]  to increase the amount through legislative fiat.
[06:02.880 --> 06:09.240]  And that is that the previous part of that sentence specifically sets a limit on civil
[06:09.240 --> 06:12.240]  cases.
[06:12.240 --> 06:17.120]  That limit is $200.
[06:17.120 --> 06:24.680]  The second part of that cannot be in conflict with the first part of that.
[06:24.680 --> 06:30.520]  Therefore the only reasonable and constitutional interpretation of the second part that says
[06:30.520 --> 06:36.840]  and such other jurisdiction as may be provided by law means they can have jurisdiction over
[06:36.840 --> 06:46.380]  other matters or any other amounts less than the $200.
[06:46.380 --> 06:53.640]  But they can't exceed the $200 because the Constitution has set a specific limit on what
[06:53.640 --> 06:58.920]  that jurisdiction is for civil matters.
[06:58.920 --> 07:04.000]  So for those of you that know the specific location, I haven't had time to look it up
[07:04.000 --> 07:10.720]  today but know the specific location and whatever statute the legislature used to try to grant
[07:10.720 --> 07:18.000]  this authority to justice courts to go over $200, after I open the phones up, please feel
[07:18.000 --> 07:22.200]  free to call in and let me know where to get that so I can review it for everyone on air
[07:22.200 --> 07:25.960]  or even if you wish to do it, we'll discuss it then.
[07:25.960 --> 07:33.240]  But no matter how you look at this, we have a Texas legislature that does not read the
[07:33.240 --> 07:37.880]  Constitution, they just don't.
[07:37.880 --> 07:44.880]  And even if they bother to read it, it's evident they don't understand it, okay?
[07:44.880 --> 07:50.120]  If they did understand it, we wouldn't be in this mess with these people.
[07:50.120 --> 07:59.960]  Now it's beyond me how our legislature believes they have the authority to enact anything
[07:59.960 --> 08:03.800]  whatsoever that they wish to create.
[08:03.800 --> 08:10.440]  So with all that said, how do we elect these people into office?
[08:10.440 --> 08:16.120]  Don't we bother to listen to them during their campaigns and ask questions, at the very least
[08:16.120 --> 08:19.040]  ask questions?
[08:19.040 --> 08:23.240]  How did you get the authority to pass a bill that did such and such when the Texas Constitution
[08:23.240 --> 08:25.520]  specifically states this?
[08:25.520 --> 08:29.680]  And what you propose is in violation of the Texas Constitution.
[08:29.680 --> 08:33.720]  Why is that lawful?
[08:33.720 --> 08:38.440]  You're probably going to get a stupefied stare during the headlights look.
[08:38.440 --> 08:47.560]  So given that, that should be your first clue, don't vote for him.
[08:47.560 --> 08:53.440]  Any politician running for office that isn't prepared to answer the questions, especially
[08:53.440 --> 08:58.960]  if they're trying to remain as an incumbent, that is not prepared to answer questions dealing
[08:58.960 --> 09:06.200]  with the legality or constitutionality of their previous votes in office, shouldn't
[09:06.200 --> 09:09.000]  have been there in the first place.
[09:09.000 --> 09:14.000]  Because they should have made due diligent effort before casting a vote to ensure that
[09:14.000 --> 09:21.720]  the bill before them was constitutional and that the vote they cast ensured that it was
[09:21.720 --> 09:27.520]  for or against what was required in the Constitution.
[09:27.520 --> 09:31.840]  Against for the bill because it is constitutional and the Constitution does allow what the bill
[09:31.840 --> 09:40.280]  contains or against it because it is not something the Constitution, the people created and does
[09:40.280 --> 09:46.440]  not authorize for our legislative folks to do.
[09:46.440 --> 09:49.040]  They've done that in many ways.
[09:49.040 --> 09:54.220]  Many ways have they created legislative acts that are absolutely unconstitutional.
[09:54.220 --> 09:59.200]  We can jump into that just by naming the state bar for one.
[09:59.200 --> 10:02.000]  The state bar, Texas, is illegal.
[10:02.000 --> 10:08.400]  It is unconstitutional in every facet of its being.
[10:08.400 --> 10:14.080]  No matter how the courts or the attorneys or any other government official attempts
[10:14.080 --> 10:19.360]  to argue it, it is a catch-22 constitutional issue for them.
[10:19.360 --> 10:21.160]  Let me explain why that is.
[10:21.160 --> 10:29.400]  It is a catch-22 because, one, the Texas Constitution absolutely forbids monopolies.
[10:29.400 --> 10:33.920]  It makes no distinction as to whether or not it's a government-controlled monopoly or a
[10:33.920 --> 10:36.000]  private monopoly.
[10:36.000 --> 10:41.360]  Monopolies in Texas are forbidden, period.
[10:41.360 --> 10:43.680]  Here's the other problem.
[10:43.680 --> 10:52.120]  If the government and the courts try to claim that the bar association is a valid governmental
[10:52.120 --> 10:58.960]  office, which branch of office is it a valid office of?
[10:58.960 --> 11:01.760]  Or which branch of government is it a valid office of?
[11:01.760 --> 11:05.400]  Is it executive, legislative or judicial?
[11:05.400 --> 11:11.920]  From its function and its purpose, the argument would have to be that it's executive.
[11:11.920 --> 11:18.780]  And if it's an executive office and all of these bar card holders are then executive
[11:18.780 --> 11:28.580]  employees and or officers and or beneficiaries of that government office under the executive
[11:28.580 --> 11:38.160]  branch, then where do they figure that they have constitutional authority to also be officers
[11:38.160 --> 11:41.560]  of the court under the judicial branch?
[11:41.560 --> 11:47.360]  That is a direct violation of Article 2, division of powers.
[11:47.360 --> 11:54.320]  They can't occupy and exercise the powers of two separate government offices or branches.
[11:54.320 --> 11:56.240]  Can't do it.
[11:56.240 --> 12:04.840]  They also cannot occupy and receive public emolument or benefit of any kind for two public
[12:04.840 --> 12:07.780]  offices simultaneously.
[12:07.780 --> 12:15.200]  So if they're going to hold a position that the bar association is some sort of government
[12:15.200 --> 12:22.880]  entity and thus a public office, that's a problem in multiple ways.
[12:22.880 --> 12:26.360]  Now let's flip the coin over and look at the other side.
[12:26.360 --> 12:32.720]  They wish to argue the bar association is not government, even despite the fact that
[12:32.720 --> 12:39.360]  there is government statute law specifically creating, regulating, dealing, and setting
[12:39.360 --> 12:44.960]  the requirements and authority of the bar association, let's argue it's not a government
[12:44.960 --> 12:45.960]  agency.
[12:45.960 --> 12:46.960]  Okay?
[12:46.960 --> 12:53.920]  Now, if it's not a government agency, then they have just admitted that the legislature
[12:53.920 --> 12:59.240]  has created a private corporate monopoly in Texas.
[12:59.240 --> 13:05.800]  Again, an unconstitutional act.
[13:05.800 --> 13:07.840]  Absolutely unconstitutional.
[13:07.840 --> 13:19.940]  There is no way for any reasonable individual to argue that the bar is not unconstitutional
[13:19.940 --> 13:22.240]  as a monopoly.
[13:22.240 --> 13:27.320]  There's no way for them to reasonably argue that it is not a monopoly.
[13:27.320 --> 13:29.400]  And the reason for that is very straightforward.
[13:29.400 --> 13:30.400]  Who can participate?
[13:30.400 --> 13:33.160]  Who can be a member of the bar?
[13:33.160 --> 13:37.600]  Only select classes of individuals that meet very specific criteria and adhere to the rules
[13:37.600 --> 13:42.560]  and regulations set there for within the bar association itself.
[13:42.560 --> 13:49.400]  And anybody that goes into direct competition in the practice of law with the bar association
[13:49.400 --> 13:53.840]  is stomped on by the powers of the state.
[13:53.840 --> 14:02.440]  Now, if it's a private organization, by what authority does the state act on its behalf
[14:02.440 --> 14:11.000]  to prosecute and pursue those allegedly guilty of the unauthorized practice of law?
[14:11.000 --> 14:13.280]  It's a catch-22 argument, people.
[14:13.280 --> 14:17.680]  They can't do it.
[14:17.680 --> 14:21.100]  It's stupid for them to argue otherwise.
[14:21.100 --> 14:28.600]  It proves the level of arrogance, it proves the level of willful ignorance and contempt
[14:28.600 --> 14:34.560]  that these individuals have for the people of Texas, for the people of every state that's
[14:34.560 --> 14:36.040]  got one.
[14:36.040 --> 14:38.120]  They spit on our Constitution.
[14:38.120 --> 14:40.020]  They spit on the rule of law.
[14:40.020 --> 14:48.280]  They spit on the will of the people by ignoring the Constitution and creating an illegal monopoly.
[14:48.280 --> 14:49.420]  And we let them do it.
[14:49.420 --> 14:50.420]  So who's to blame?
[14:50.420 --> 14:53.560]  Not them if we let them get away with it.
[14:53.560 --> 14:58.120]  They're only as accountable as we the people make them.
[14:58.120 --> 15:00.280]  And we aren't making them.
[15:00.280 --> 15:05.120]  We're letting the status quo flow and we're sitting around on our hind ends and we're
[15:05.120 --> 15:07.000]  complaining about everything.
[15:07.000 --> 15:11.400]  We're doing nothing to fix the problem for the most part.
[15:11.400 --> 15:15.760]  And that's easy enough to see because all you got to do is start talking about this
[15:15.760 --> 15:20.680]  to the majority of the public and you'll learn really quickly how many of them don't want
[15:20.680 --> 15:24.200]  to be educated and come out of their cloud of ignorance.
[15:24.200 --> 15:30.040]  They wish to remain ignorant because they feel that gives them some plausible deniability
[15:30.040 --> 15:33.960]  over being accountable for allowing it to go on.
[15:33.960 --> 15:36.600]  That's the only reasoning I can make of it.
[15:36.600 --> 15:40.120]  People don't want to be responsible for anything anymore.
[15:40.120 --> 15:44.560]  They don't want to have to hold someone else's feet to the fire to do what they're supposed
[15:44.560 --> 15:46.880]  to do.
[15:46.880 --> 15:53.320]  So just like in the Revolutionary War, it's going to be a very small portion of the population
[15:53.320 --> 15:59.280]  that actually moves forward and puts forth the effort to correct the situation and the
[15:59.280 --> 16:06.200]  problems that exist on behalf of everybody else too lazy, too scared, or too ignorant
[16:06.200 --> 16:11.040]  and unwilling to do it for themselves.
[16:11.040 --> 16:13.160]  We are definitely in the minority here, people.
[16:13.160 --> 16:14.240]  There ain't no doubt about it.
[16:14.240 --> 16:17.240]  A lot of people in America are waking up, don't get me wrong.
[16:17.240 --> 16:21.760]  A lot of them are waking up, but we could sure use more.
[16:21.760 --> 16:28.160]  This is one of those instances where there is never too many, okay?
[16:28.160 --> 16:33.680]  Our government is about to push us to a point where we're not going to have a lot of ways
[16:33.680 --> 16:35.280]  left to respond.
[16:35.280 --> 16:40.480]  Okay, we have a break coming up, so you folks hang in there.
[16:40.480 --> 16:45.400]  I've got one other issue to go over when we return, and then we will pick back up and
[16:45.400 --> 16:48.200]  open the phones and have you call in.
[16:48.200 --> 16:49.200]  Y'all just hang on.
[16:49.200 --> 16:51.000]  This is Eddie Craig on Rule of Law Radio.
[16:51.000 --> 17:01.280]  We will be right back.
[17:01.280 --> 17:06.240]  It is so enlightening to listen to 90.1 FM, but finding things on the Internet isn't so
[17:06.240 --> 17:10.040]  easy, and neither is finding like-minded people to share it with.
[17:10.040 --> 17:12.880]  Oh, well, I guess you haven't heard of Brave New Books, then.
[17:12.880 --> 17:13.880]  Brave New Books?
[17:13.880 --> 17:18.680]  Yes, Brave New Books has all the books and DVDs you're looking for by authors like Alex
[17:18.680 --> 17:21.240]  Jones, Ron Paul, and G. Edward Griffin.
[17:21.240 --> 17:24.640]  They even stock inner food, Berkey products, and Calvin Soaps.
[17:24.640 --> 17:27.560]  There's no way a place like that exists.
[17:27.560 --> 17:29.040]  Go check it out for yourself.
[17:29.040 --> 17:33.400]  It's downtown at 1904 Guadalupe Street, just south of UT.
[17:33.400 --> 17:36.760]  By UT, there's never anywhere to park down there.
[17:36.760 --> 17:42.000]  Actually, they now offer a free hour of parking for paying customers at the 500 MLK parking
[17:42.000 --> 17:44.080]  facility just behind the bookstore.
[17:44.080 --> 17:47.960]  It does exist, but when are they open?
[17:47.960 --> 17:52.760]  Monday through Saturday, 11 AM to 9 PM, and 1 to 6 PM on Sundays.
[17:52.760 --> 18:13.000]  So give them a call at 512-480-2503, or check out their events page at bravenewbookstore.com.
[18:13.000 --> 18:41.560]  All right, she's our back.
[18:41.560 --> 18:51.600]  Now, the other little thing that I would like to go over for the moment is something else
[18:51.600 --> 18:54.840]  regarding the writ of habeas corpus.
[18:54.840 --> 19:02.840]  Now, for those of you that don't know, the writ of habeas corpus is dealt with specifically
[19:02.840 --> 19:06.560]  in Chapter 11 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
[19:06.560 --> 19:08.120]  Okay?
[19:08.120 --> 19:21.400]  So what we have is by all appearance, the judges here in Texas, only a few of them apparently
[19:21.400 --> 19:28.600]  have ever seen a writ of habeas corpus, much less had one introduced to them to be acted
[19:28.600 --> 19:31.400]  upon.
[19:31.400 --> 19:35.520]  It seems like when you ask them about them, they know what they are.
[19:35.520 --> 19:40.080]  They just can't tell you they've ever actually seen or executed one.
[19:40.080 --> 19:45.480]  Now, I'm going to read a few of the sections out of this area.
[19:45.480 --> 19:50.040]  They're all fairly short, up to a point, but I want everybody out there to have a basic
[19:50.040 --> 19:56.640]  understanding of what the habeas corpus is, who has the authority to act upon one, who
[19:56.640 --> 20:03.240]  has the authority to present one, how they're supposed to be done, and so on and so forth.
[20:03.240 --> 20:05.560]  It's all very short stuff.
[20:05.560 --> 20:10.120]  Okay, Article 11.01, what writ is?
[20:10.120 --> 20:16.000]  The writ of habeas corpus is the remedy to be used when any person is restrained in his
[20:16.000 --> 20:17.000]  liberty.
[20:17.000 --> 20:22.060]  That means incarcerated, imprisoned, or held in any way.
[20:22.060 --> 20:25.320]  Restrained in your liberty is exactly that.
[20:25.320 --> 20:27.840]  You can't go somewhere for something.
[20:27.840 --> 20:31.800]  You do not necessarily have to be in jail.
[20:31.800 --> 20:36.600]  You can be on bond and be restrained in your liberty, because when you're on bond, you're
[20:36.600 --> 20:43.120]  not allowed outside of a particular given area, usually the county in which you're located
[20:43.120 --> 20:46.520]  while the bond is in force, okay?
[20:46.520 --> 20:52.440]  That's a restraint on your liberty, and there are numerous others, but mainly it's used
[20:52.440 --> 20:58.000]  to get those that are imprisoned out of jail and so on and so forth, but it can be used
[20:58.000 --> 21:01.360]  for any restraint upon liberty.
[21:01.360 --> 21:06.840]  It is an order issued by a court or judge of competent jurisdiction, and we will cover
[21:06.840 --> 21:10.440]  in just a minute what competent jurisdiction is.
[21:10.440 --> 21:19.320]  It's directed to anyone having a person in his custody or under his restraint, commanding
[21:19.320 --> 21:26.520]  him to produce such person at a time and place named in the writ and show why he is held
[21:26.520 --> 21:28.520]  in custody or under restraint.
[21:28.520 --> 21:33.040]  In other words, they're going to have to produce a valid reason for having you in custody or
[21:33.040 --> 21:34.960]  for restraining you.
[21:34.960 --> 21:40.480]  They're going to have to produce evidence of that, okay?
[21:40.480 --> 21:47.720]  Article 11.02, to whom directed, the writ runs in the name of the state of Texas.
[21:47.720 --> 21:53.340]  It is addressed to a person having another under restraint or in his custody, describing
[21:53.340 --> 21:59.480]  as near as may be the name of the office, if any, of the person to whom it is directed.
[21:59.480 --> 22:04.440]  For instance, if it's directed to the sheriff, it is directed to the office of the sheriff
[22:04.440 --> 22:11.840]  of county such and such, okay, or something similar, and the name of the person said to
[22:11.840 --> 22:16.400]  be detained, that would be whoever's name is being held, okay?
[22:16.400 --> 22:21.560]  It shall fix the time and place of return and be signed by the judge or by the clerk
[22:21.560 --> 22:26.520]  with his seal were issued by a court, okay?
[22:26.520 --> 22:36.080]  So as you can see, the judge of a particular court or his clerk may sign and seal the writ.
[22:36.080 --> 22:43.600]  Article 11.03, want of form, the writ of habeas corpus is not invalid, nor shall it be disobeyed
[22:43.600 --> 22:49.640]  for any want of form, meaning no matter what it looks like, whether or not it is correctly
[22:49.640 --> 22:56.800]  stated as running in the name of the state, or any other cosmetic deficiencies that it
[22:56.800 --> 23:05.880]  may suffer from, it is not to be ignored or disobeyed, it is not to be considered invalid.
[23:05.880 --> 23:11.360]  If it substantially appear that it is issued by a competent authority and the writ sufficiently
[23:11.360 --> 23:15.880]  show the object of its issuance, now let me read that whole little one again, the writ
[23:15.880 --> 23:21.320]  of habeas corpus is not invalid, nor shall it be disobeyed for any want of form, if it
[23:21.320 --> 23:25.960]  substantially appear that it is issued by competent authority and the writ sufficiently
[23:25.960 --> 23:28.600]  show the object of its issuance.
[23:28.600 --> 23:33.800]  It can't be thrown out for form, it's got to be issued by the competent authority which
[23:33.800 --> 23:41.000]  the seal of the court provides, the writ sufficiently shows on what it is the object being issued
[23:41.000 --> 23:49.840]  for, that is for the release or for the presence of the detained, okay, that's what its issuance
[23:49.840 --> 23:56.560]  is for, 1104 construction, every provision relating to the writ of habeas corpus shall
[23:56.560 --> 24:02.000]  be most favorably construed in order to give effect to the remedy and protect the rights
[24:02.000 --> 24:09.640]  of the person seeking relief under it, okay, every provision relating to the writ is to
[24:09.640 --> 24:17.560]  be construed in favor of the one that is being detained, okay, by whom writ may be
[24:17.560 --> 24:25.320]  granted 11.05, the court of criminal appeals, the district courts, the county courts or
[24:25.320 --> 24:32.480]  any judge of said courts have power to issue the writ of habeas corpus and it is their
[24:32.480 --> 24:42.520]  duty upon proper motion to grant the writ under the rules prescribed by law, 14 or 11.051
[24:42.520 --> 24:49.260]  filing fee prohibited, not withstanding any other law, a clerk of a court may not require
[24:49.260 --> 24:55.120]  a filing fee from an individual who files an application or petition for a writ of habeas
[24:55.120 --> 25:04.640]  corpus, 1106 returnable to any county, before indictment found, the writ may be made returnable
[25:04.640 --> 25:11.000]  to any county in the state, in other words, if you've just being held prisoner and there
[25:11.000 --> 25:17.160]  has been no indictment, the writ can be returned, in other words, can be ordered to direct the
[25:17.160 --> 25:24.440]  one doing the detaining to bring the detainee before the court regardless of where the court
[25:24.440 --> 25:36.360]  is in any county, anybody in any place in Texas can issue the writ, period, 11.07 procedure,
[25:36.360 --> 25:44.720]  okay, that we really don't need to get into, but what we need to get into is the duty of
[25:44.720 --> 25:55.200]  the magistrate who gets it, okay, and when I read this earlier today, it sort of angered me that
[25:55.200 --> 26:03.440]  the judge in particular cases may refuse to get and sign the writ, they'll find a workaround
[26:03.440 --> 26:11.640]  rather than sign the writ, but now the section I just read previously, 11.05, listen to this,
[26:11.640 --> 26:19.400]  any judge of said courts have power to issue the writ of habeas corpus, and it is their
[26:19.400 --> 26:29.120]  duty upon proper motion to grant the writ under the rules prescribed by law, the judge
[26:29.120 --> 26:38.880]  does not have an option of granting the writ, nor do they have the option of choosing to
[26:38.880 --> 26:48.000]  do something other than execute the writ according to this, why, because this statute creates
[26:48.000 --> 27:00.120]  a duty upon the magistrate or in this case the judge to do this thing, and because the
[27:00.120 --> 27:08.840]  judge is required to do this thing, he doesn't have alternative options, he can't just make
[27:08.840 --> 27:16.840]  it up and wing it to find his own solution to the problem and be in compliance with the
[27:16.840 --> 27:24.720]  law, okay, why do we have the legislature or allow the legislature to create laws binding
[27:24.720 --> 27:30.400]  upon our public officials if we're not going to make them be bound by the law, what good
[27:30.400 --> 27:39.880]  is the rule of law when the law is ignored, what good is the rule of law when those responsible
[27:39.880 --> 27:47.960]  for seeing that the law is fulfilled in the manner intended decide to wing it and do it
[27:47.960 --> 27:58.040]  their own way, well, what we have is what constitutes the basis of this show, we have
[27:58.040 --> 28:04.160]  all kinds of people and problems that are brought about and upon the people by those
[28:04.160 --> 28:09.720]  who have failed in their duty and their oath of office to do what they promised to do in
[28:09.720 --> 28:18.320]  upholding the law, and they also have failed to ensure when that law does not comply with
[28:18.320 --> 28:29.000]  the constitutions, just like what the legislature did with the justice courts by creating that
[28:29.000 --> 28:37.520]  $10,000 limit, that is totally unconstitutional, we should have jumped on that with golf shoes
[28:37.520 --> 28:45.280]  and stomped it into a puddle immediately, but we didn't, we just happily go down to
[28:45.280 --> 28:50.800]  the justice court because they're more accessible and we file lawsuits in there that anybody
[28:50.800 --> 29:00.960]  with a brain can have overturned on constitutional basis, so all you people listening out there
[29:00.960 --> 29:08.720]  that got a deficient order in a justice court in a case where the amount exceeded $200 in
[29:08.720 --> 29:17.720]  a civil issue, you can have it overturned because the court had zero jurisdiction, the
[29:17.720 --> 29:25.080]  legislature can't give it to them because it violates the constitution, so if you're
[29:25.080 --> 29:32.400]  in that boat, seek redress, go after the municipal judge who should have known what the constitution
[29:32.400 --> 29:36.080]  said the limit was, not what the legislature said it was.
[29:36.080 --> 29:41.920]  Alright folks, we're on our way to break, I will activate the phones on the other side
[29:41.920 --> 29:47.280]  and we will start taking your calls, so please feel free to call in, bring up your questions
[29:47.280 --> 29:52.240]  and issues and we will go from there, this is Eddie Craig on Rule of Law Radio and we
[29:52.240 --> 30:00.200]  will be right back.
[30:00.200 --> 30:04.400]  My name is Randall Kelton and I co-host on Rule of Law Radio.
[30:04.400 --> 30:09.200]  We specialize in showing people how to strike back against corrupt public officials.
[30:09.200 --> 30:13.600]  With the mortgage crisis worsening, we set our sights on finding a remedy for people
[30:13.600 --> 30:15.760]  who have been cheated by their lenders.
[30:15.760 --> 30:20.040]  If you have a mortgage or have paid years off, you have probably been cheated out of
[30:20.040 --> 30:22.320]  thousands, but there is a remedy.
[30:22.320 --> 30:31.600]  Go to remediesinrealestate.com or call me at 512-430-4140 and find out how to use the
[30:31.600 --> 30:37.180]  consumer protection laws to recover what the lenders have stolen through fraud and deception.
[30:37.180 --> 30:42.080]  We will prepare for you a qualified written request that will expose the fraud and put
[30:42.080 --> 30:43.880]  the lenders on the dime.
[30:43.880 --> 30:47.960]  Lender fraud is bankrupting this country and it's time to fight back.
[30:47.960 --> 30:57.600]  Go to remediesinrealestate.com or call 512-430-4140 and get the information you need to stop the
[30:57.600 --> 31:00.840]  money changers in their tracks.
[31:00.840 --> 31:04.000]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[31:04.000 --> 31:10.760]  Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary, the affordable, easy to understand, 4 CD course
[31:10.760 --> 31:14.600]  that will show you how in 24 hours, step by step.
[31:14.600 --> 31:18.520]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing.
[31:18.520 --> 31:23.240]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[31:23.240 --> 31:28.480]  Thousands have won with our step by step course and now you can too.
[31:28.480 --> 31:33.400]  Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case winning experience.
[31:33.400 --> 31:38.920]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand about the
[31:38.920 --> 31:42.640]  principles and practices that control our American courts.
[31:42.640 --> 31:49.400]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases,
[31:49.400 --> 31:51.920]  pro se tactics and much more.
[31:51.920 --> 31:59.880]  Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner or call toll free 866-LAW-EZ.
[31:59.880 --> 32:13.400]  Yes, Mr. Officer, you're taking me right ahead Won't you follow the law of the land I don't
[32:13.400 --> 32:23.680]  understand This love is too perfect not to serve Not to be a rabbi, not to serve
[32:23.680 --> 32:37.080]  When you're gonna stop abuse, you'll power When you're gonna stop abuse, you'll power
[32:37.080 --> 32:40.880]  When you're gonna stop abuse, you'll power You tell them, Pat, when you're gonna stop
[32:40.880 --> 32:41.880]  abusing your power.
[32:41.880 --> 32:43.880]  That's exactly what we let them get away with.
[32:43.880 --> 32:49.880]  People, it's time to start exercising our power, okay?
[32:49.880 --> 32:58.200]  public servant, not public master. Let's get that through our collective skulls, okay?
[32:58.200 --> 33:06.280]  They work for us. We need to be reminding them of this fact. How do we do that? We get
[33:06.280 --> 33:11.820]  in their face. We file lawsuits. We press criminal charges. That's what we're having
[33:11.820 --> 33:18.240]  to be about these days. How do you hold someone accountable that refuses to be accountable?
[33:18.240 --> 33:23.000]  Well, guess what? That's not how we the people set it up, but they're not going to give
[33:23.000 --> 33:29.440]  it back to us. It's going to have to be taken through some means. Let's hope we can do it
[33:29.440 --> 33:35.200]  non-violently, but we're never going to do it as long as we just sit back and do nothing.
[33:35.200 --> 33:40.840]  Now, the phones are open, so if you want to start calling in, please be my guest. Now,
[33:40.840 --> 33:48.960]  we just have somebody pop up here. This is Danny in Texas, so let's get him on. Hi, Danny.
[33:48.960 --> 33:52.560]  This is Danny. Can you hear me? Yeah, you're okay. How are you doing? All right. How are
[33:52.560 --> 33:58.560]  you? All right. Yeah, I got one thing to bring up, but a couple of other little things that
[33:58.560 --> 34:03.160]  came up a long way. I know you were talking there about the Bar Association. If you look
[34:03.160 --> 34:09.200]  in the government code, they're listed in the judicial branch of government. Okay. That's
[34:09.200 --> 34:13.440]  where all the regulations and everything is, just like the courts and everything else.
[34:13.440 --> 34:21.360]  Now, some little thing that's bounced around on the show sometime in the past about the
[34:21.360 --> 34:29.120]  sheriff and constables being executives. Well... Oh, they're not executive. They're judicial.
[34:29.120 --> 34:34.960]  Yeah. Well, I was going to say constitution and government codes are the judicial branch.
[34:34.960 --> 34:42.840]  Yes, they are. Now, the only problem is, as I stated, if they're actually trying to say
[34:42.840 --> 34:49.200]  that the Bar Association is a judicial office, they still have a problem. It's still a government
[34:49.200 --> 34:54.720]  monopoly and it's still unconstitutional. Yeah, I think that's right too and some problems
[34:54.720 --> 35:04.180]  with the passage. I understand the way the Senate, especially the Senate, was structured
[35:04.180 --> 35:10.960]  at the time of the passage of it. Anyway, let me get on to my main point I call in about.
[35:10.960 --> 35:20.720]  Somebody got picked up and got their car impounded and then go getting it back out. Paying for
[35:20.720 --> 35:28.120]  it, that's what it usually ends up, but it really doesn't seem right. What I was thinking
[35:28.120 --> 35:34.440]  is that that's really the city's contract with the tow company and they're having you
[35:34.440 --> 35:42.080]  go out there and pay it and set up that only the registered owner or somebody like that
[35:42.080 --> 35:52.200]  can get it. It's almost like by law you're designated as the agent for the city or whoever
[35:52.200 --> 36:00.560]  made the contract. Okay, well let me ask you this. Where in the Texas statute are law enforcement
[36:00.560 --> 36:11.320]  officers authorized to tow or impound an automobile? Well, the main thing I know I was like on
[36:11.320 --> 36:17.240]  street or highway for safety reasons, I think, something like that. Yeah, but I mean specifically,
[36:17.240 --> 36:24.240]  what statute authorizes that action? Okay, well I still have to go look that up again.
[36:24.240 --> 36:30.640]  I can find only one in Texas and guess what? It deals with commercial motor vehicles having
[36:30.640 --> 36:37.920]  been declared out of service for noncompliance. Okay, yeah. Now, it's true that for public
[36:37.920 --> 36:43.840]  safety they can remove them from the sides of the road, which is exactly why I never
[36:43.840 --> 36:49.560]  pull over on the side of the road. I pull over into some places' parking lot. Yeah,
[36:49.560 --> 36:56.400]  me too. And if they tow the car from there, they're in a world of deep doo-doo because
[36:56.400 --> 37:02.040]  there is no statute allowing the towing of anything other than a commercial motor vehicle
[37:02.040 --> 37:09.760]  that's been declared out of service. If there is, it's well hidden. Let me put it that
[37:09.760 --> 37:23.720]  way. Yeah. Anyway, my thinking on this is we got it out, said, you know, we're coming
[37:23.720 --> 37:31.400]  around the signature line above it for the city of and the city and then by and the person's
[37:31.400 --> 37:38.840]  signature. And now take this as well you completed the contract for the city and now go put a
[37:38.840 --> 37:46.120]  claim in to the city for reimbursement of your expenses. Actually, you can do one better.
[37:46.120 --> 37:52.200]  You can take a bill down to the yard and tell them that you're going to charge them rental
[37:52.200 --> 37:57.600]  fees on the car in the excess amount of whatever amount per day. And for each day they hold
[37:57.600 --> 38:03.040]  it you're going to accrue that amount. And you submit a bill to them and submit a bill
[38:03.040 --> 38:14.600]  to them every five days, tallying up whatever the total amount is owed. I don't pay to get
[38:14.600 --> 38:22.000]  the car out. I make them give it back because they cannot produce any lawful authority or
[38:22.000 --> 38:27.840]  any court order directing them to seize the property. There was no warrant. There was
[38:27.840 --> 38:35.280]  no court order. If they took that car without any lawful authority, they're a car thief.
[38:35.280 --> 38:39.520]  Doesn't matter that they operate a tow truck, they're a car thief. Well, they would say
[38:39.520 --> 38:45.840]  there's authorized by the police. The police can't do it without a court order. How can
[38:45.840 --> 38:51.760]  the police seize evidence? Yeah. They have to have a warrant or a court order unless
[38:51.760 --> 38:56.640]  the evidence is in their plain view. But they didn't seize your car for evidence, right?
[38:56.640 --> 39:03.320]  Right. They ordered a third party to haul it away. So it wasn't seized for evidence.
[39:03.320 --> 39:08.720]  So they can't make that argument. So by what authority did they order the seizure of private
[39:08.720 --> 39:15.360]  property without a warrant or a court order? Mm-hmm. And then the tow company put themselves
[39:15.360 --> 39:23.000]  right in the middle of it by obeying an unlawful order. Yeah. So they're just as subject and
[39:23.000 --> 39:36.320]  liable to suit as the police department is. Okay. Yeah. Kind of good. So as you can see
[39:36.320 --> 39:43.240]  until they can produce lawful authority to steal property, which they believe they have,
[39:43.240 --> 39:50.120]  but they don't, then the tow company is the first question out of that tow truck driver's
[39:50.120 --> 39:56.040]  mouth should always be, is this an impoundment for an out of service motor vehicle or is
[39:56.040 --> 40:04.800]  this a tow because you want me to seize somebody's car? He better know which one he's doing.
[40:04.800 --> 40:15.960]  The fact that he doesn't is not the owner of the automobile's problem. Mm-hmm. So without
[40:15.960 --> 40:22.920]  any statutory authority, even remotely supporting the authority of the officer to have the automobile
[40:22.920 --> 40:28.080]  towed by a third party for no reason other than to be vindictive because that's the
[40:28.080 --> 40:35.000]  only justifiable reason he had if you're pulled over in a private parking lot. What else is
[40:35.000 --> 40:41.800]  there? Yeah. Well, see, when I got stopped in Rockdale, I pulled over in a Car Quest
[40:41.800 --> 40:46.480]  parking lot and when they said they were going to arrest me, I said, well, fine, but what
[40:46.480 --> 40:50.240]  do you intend to do with my car? Oh, we're going to have it towed. Oh, no, you're not.
[40:50.240 --> 40:53.800]  And I didn't say it any different than that. I said, oh, no, you're not. This is my private
[40:53.800 --> 40:58.320]  automobile. It's not a traffic hazard. It is in a private parking lot and you will not
[40:58.320 --> 41:03.040]  tow it because it's the only transportation I have and you will not like the end result
[41:03.040 --> 41:10.440]  if you tow my car. And my car stayed where it was and they even gave me a chauffeured
[41:10.440 --> 41:17.640]  ride back to it, put me in it and let me go my merry way. Despite the fact that they had
[41:17.640 --> 41:25.520]  arrested me for driving the same car. Yeah. Now, tell me there's not some logical problem
[41:25.520 --> 41:29.720]  with this. Yeah, there is. So there they saw you doing the same thing they stopped you
[41:29.720 --> 41:34.560]  for in the first place. That's right. But now they've got me on the hook, they think
[41:34.560 --> 41:40.360]  for a money amount. So they're perfectly willing to let the state try to get more out of me
[41:40.360 --> 41:45.400]  by putting me back on the road and letting me go. So maybe somewhere down the road another
[41:45.400 --> 41:51.840]  state fisherman will get his hooks in you. Yeah. That's really all it's about. It's about
[41:51.840 --> 41:58.480]  the revenue. Nothing else. You didn't commit a crime. You committed a revenue tort. That's
[41:58.480 --> 42:05.240]  all you did. And we need to start treating them that way. Let's teach them exactly what
[42:05.240 --> 42:12.200]  this $200 ticket will cost them in excess revenue. Yeah, you prosecute me for a $200
[42:12.200 --> 42:19.480]  fine. You go right ahead. I'm going to cost you $25,000 before this ever gets out of court.
[42:19.480 --> 42:33.200]  I promise you I will. I will make you cringe to even see my name on a traffic citation.
[42:33.200 --> 42:38.920]  But that being said, you got any other questions for me? Well, it's basically just the same
[42:38.920 --> 42:43.640]  thing. I know you're saying that if they still had the car. Okay. But now we've got the situation
[42:43.640 --> 42:48.520]  doesn't matter. They took the car without lawful authority. They're still guilty of
[42:48.520 --> 42:53.680]  the crime. Doesn't matter that you've got it back. If you got robbed, the guy still
[42:53.680 --> 42:57.640]  committed the crime. Even if you tackled him three blocks away and got your money back,
[42:57.640 --> 43:06.280]  he still robbed you. He's still a criminal. Okay. Well, how do we get the money back from
[43:06.280 --> 43:17.720]  them then? You file suit. Okay. But this was sort of an intermediate step in that direction.
[43:17.720 --> 43:24.360]  I put a claim to the city since they're the ones who requested it. Did you get paid?
[43:24.360 --> 43:29.200]  Well, I haven't done it yet. Just go right ahead. I'll tell you what's going to happen.
[43:29.200 --> 43:35.880]  They're going to ignore you. No. Yeah. Welcome to dry. Then there's a suit. All right, we
[43:35.880 --> 43:42.080]  should go to break. Okay. Okay. So if you have any more or is that going to be it? No,
[43:42.080 --> 43:46.400]  that's it. Okay. Then thanks for calling. And I'll talk to you folks back on the other
[43:46.400 --> 43:51.240]  side of the break. This is Eddie Craig, Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Rule of Law Radio.
[43:51.240 --> 43:56.160]  And we will be right back after the messaging.
[43:56.160 --> 44:05.120]  Special Roast Hemp Coffee from HempUSA.org. Our coffee grows in the dense volcanic rich
[44:05.120 --> 44:10.280]  soil, herbicide and pesticide free, and in the high altitudes of Guatemala in conditions
[44:10.280 --> 44:14.400]  that are ideal for natural growth of this high quality coffee. Try our mellow cup of
[44:14.400 --> 44:19.760]  coffee that is ground and roasted with 25% hemp seed from Canada with a wonderful nutty
[44:19.760 --> 44:25.000]  flavor that contains 18% protein. Our roasters bring a unique flavor that makes this the
[44:25.000 --> 44:30.960]  best cup of coffee you'll ever have. Try our new Special Roast Hemp Coffee from HempUSA.org
[44:30.960 --> 44:35.520]  and wake up your brain without the jitters. Our customers look forward to their next cup
[44:35.520 --> 44:47.160]  of hemp coffee. Visit us at HempUSA.org or call 908-691-2608. That's 908-691-2608 and
[44:47.160 --> 44:51.880]  see if you'll change your mind about drinking coffee again. Taste the difference, feel the
[44:51.880 --> 45:18.880]  difference at HempUSA.org today.
[45:21.880 --> 45:30.400]  All right, we are back. Okay, we've got several other callers on the board here. It looks
[45:30.400 --> 45:34.280]  like we may have also had someone drop off, so if you did, please call back. I'll get
[45:34.280 --> 45:40.240]  to you just as quick as I can. All right, Ken from Texas, how you doing?
[45:40.240 --> 45:46.200]  Hi there, Eddie. Hey, I'm doing great. I have just an idea for you and it's really just
[45:46.200 --> 45:58.120]  more of a seed than anything else, but the forces that are opposing us are real creative
[45:58.120 --> 46:03.840]  and I think we have to be creative as well. Part of that is I think what we need to do
[46:03.840 --> 46:08.920]  is come up with something that they tried a few years ago that the Republicans tried
[46:08.920 --> 46:16.680]  out in America and I think it was like the promise for America or something like that.
[46:16.680 --> 46:21.800]  I don't know if I'm familiar with what you're talking about, but go ahead.
[46:21.800 --> 46:27.320]  Well, Congress basically said, oh, we're going to change everything. Oh, it was the contract
[46:27.320 --> 46:35.520]  with America and Congress came up with this, I think it was 10 or 20 different promises
[46:35.520 --> 46:41.880]  that they were going to make these big changes and while we can't make them come up with
[46:41.880 --> 46:51.360]  those promises, how about if we come up with some type of proposal, call it instead of
[46:51.360 --> 46:58.760]  the new deal, call it the real deal and we say we have proposed this to all governments
[46:58.760 --> 47:04.880]  and it starts with honesty, upholding their oath, upholding the Constitution, maybe just
[47:04.880 --> 47:12.240]  four or five things and then we print up thousands of these and go around and get people to sign
[47:12.240 --> 47:20.400]  them. Would you sign this, even the governors, the politicians, the judges, the cops, would
[47:20.400 --> 47:32.360]  you sign this and I think we can start maybe getting some more movement. Plus, if we can
[47:32.360 --> 47:39.880]  get some people to go to the legislators, if we can get some people to go to various
[47:39.880 --> 47:46.240]  departments of government and get them to sign on, they will act and they will accept
[47:46.240 --> 47:49.400]  this new code, we'll call it, or these promises.
[47:49.400 --> 47:53.240]  Well, if I can interject for just a second, I honestly don't think you're going to get
[47:53.240 --> 47:58.960]  the Texas Governor, Mr. Perry, to sign anything that doesn't involve endorsing his under the
[47:58.960 --> 48:04.040]  table kickbacks. Okay, well, there's one other idea.
[48:04.040 --> 48:08.280]  But it's an idea. You may be right, but I think if it was proposed
[48:08.280 --> 48:14.600]  in a friendly way and it said, you know, look, the people have come up with this idea and
[48:14.600 --> 48:20.920]  would you sign that you support this and you pledge this? Now, they're going to do one
[48:20.920 --> 48:27.040]  of two things, they're going to sign and support it or they're going to fail to sign and support
[48:27.040 --> 48:29.760]  it. Now, the failure of them signing and supporting
[48:29.760 --> 48:36.000]  it now can be used against them in their reelection. Yeah, but again, you're assuming people are
[48:36.000 --> 48:39.280]  actually going to pay attention or you're going to be able to disseminate the information
[48:39.280 --> 48:43.440]  wide enough to make people know that they didn't sign it and so on and so forth.
[48:43.440 --> 48:48.920]  It's not that it's a bad idea. There's only a couple of problems I see with it.
[48:48.920 --> 48:52.480]  First off, in my personal opinion, they've already done this.
[48:52.480 --> 48:58.720]  Well, thanks, Eddie. Well, yeah, I'm not trying to push you off.
[48:58.720 --> 49:03.720]  I'm just trying to interject here a little bit. The problem I see is that they've already
[49:03.720 --> 49:06.480]  allegedly done this. They've already agreed to this.
[49:06.480 --> 49:08.880]  They did this when they took their oath of office.
[49:08.880 --> 49:11.480]  Right. They already agreed to do these things and
[49:11.480 --> 49:15.320]  they're still not doing it. I don't see how being nice and putting another
[49:15.320 --> 49:18.520]  piece of paper in front of their face is going to make any difference to them because they're
[49:18.520 --> 49:22.720]  not nice about trying to steal what they're stealing.
[49:22.720 --> 49:27.520]  I think we've been nice about it far too long. I'm sorry, I didn't mean to go over to you.
[49:27.520 --> 49:33.640]  One of the problems that we have with, well, call it our movement or call it the people
[49:33.640 --> 49:39.880]  that are active like you are and many of the listeners, is that you don't really become
[49:39.880 --> 49:44.840]  active or radicalized until you get involved in some of this injustice.
[49:44.840 --> 49:51.640]  Oh, I agree. I completely agree there. It's a lesson that I hate for anyone to have
[49:51.640 --> 50:00.000]  to go through to become radicalized. You know, in another business I have, what
[50:00.000 --> 50:06.680]  I do is I tell people kind of what, you know, in their situation, what they may expect to
[50:06.680 --> 50:12.120]  have happen. They always disbelieve what is going to happen.
[50:12.120 --> 50:17.680]  I think, like when we talk to people about what's happened with our various trials and
[50:17.680 --> 50:24.400]  tribulations in courts, I don't think it's believable. I mean, they don't believe that
[50:24.400 --> 50:28.280]  maybe it really happened that way and they sure don't believe they're really going to
[50:28.280 --> 50:33.120]  experience that. Well, that's true.
[50:33.120 --> 50:39.080]  So I'm just looking for a way for us to get from where we are to where we want to be and
[50:39.080 --> 50:44.520]  there's got to be a way to not only get more people enrolled in the process, even if it's
[50:44.520 --> 50:52.760]  tiny steps forward, but there's also a way that we need to find a way that we can actually
[50:52.760 --> 50:59.520]  nail down the politicians of all the branches and get them to come on board.
[50:59.520 --> 51:05.920]  Either they sign on to this idea and this contract with America or something like that
[51:05.920 --> 51:11.520]  or they don't sign on and now that can be used against them.
[51:11.520 --> 51:20.320]  Maybe somebody with some good political experience could flesh out this idea some more.
[51:20.320 --> 51:26.820]  That was basically more or less the gist of the reason that we talked about that proposed
[51:26.820 --> 51:33.000]  amendment that I did the other night that I adapted from the jail for judges program
[51:33.000 --> 51:39.480]  to actually encompass all public servants because at that point we can once again hold
[51:39.480 --> 51:46.240]  them accountable because we have a grand jury whose specific purpose is to determine what
[51:46.240 --> 51:51.160]  the complaint against that public official is. Did he violate his oath? Did he commit
[51:51.160 --> 51:57.000]  a crime? Did he do anything that would violate the rights of an individual or the people
[51:57.000 --> 52:04.320]  as a whole? If he did, his immunity is removed by that grand jury and he is now prosecutable
[52:04.320 --> 52:12.920]  and suable for his actions. He has no immunity. If everything that that public servant did
[52:12.920 --> 52:19.600]  was valid, was in compliance with the Constitution first and foremost, then it was in compliance
[52:19.600 --> 52:25.960]  with the law and it was not violative of any vested right of the people or the individual
[52:25.960 --> 52:37.760]  within the people, then his immunity is intact. But I sincerely believe it is a mistake to
[52:37.760 --> 52:44.400]  allow the fox to declare itself immune from the shotgun for killing the chickens in the
[52:44.400 --> 52:53.360]  chicken house. That is stupidity of the uttermost magnitude in my book. We have allowed all
[52:53.360 --> 52:58.720]  the branches of government and every public official in it to claim an immunity that cannot
[52:58.720 --> 53:07.040]  be found in the Constitution anywhere. It does not exist. They have usurped it and pulled
[53:07.040 --> 53:12.880]  it over themselves like protective armor and they get to decide if and when they take it
[53:12.880 --> 53:19.440]  off. Even the Supreme Court rulings have come down that says a judge acting in his official
[53:19.440 --> 53:27.960]  capacity is absolutely immune, even if his actions are for malice and they are intentional
[53:27.960 --> 53:36.280]  baloney. That was the most treasonous decision they could ever come up with.
[53:36.280 --> 53:46.800]  Yeah, I actually saw an article, I think it was from a court in Pennsylvania where a judge
[53:46.800 --> 53:57.240]  up there convicted a first time offender who was a juvenile age 16 who had broken a window
[53:57.240 --> 54:05.600]  with a rock, sent him away basically to a work camp for three months and the judge got
[54:05.600 --> 54:11.520]  kickbacks from this work camp. This was all discovered and the judge was exonerated that
[54:11.520 --> 54:14.000]  said that is okay.
[54:14.000 --> 54:19.320]  Yeah, exactly. They were in cahoots to produce this labor camp. I remember reading something
[54:19.320 --> 54:24.840]  similar to that if that's not actually it. But yeah, I completely agree that's exactly
[54:24.840 --> 54:30.040]  what they do. You cannot and it doesn't make a difference that you put the keys in the
[54:30.040 --> 54:39.600]  hands of a different fox. It just doesn't. Common sense says you don't put the fox in
[54:39.600 --> 54:44.360]  charge of the hen house and you don't put his cousin, you don't put his brother in law
[54:44.360 --> 54:50.960]  and you don't put some distant relative twice removed. You just don't do it.
[54:50.960 --> 54:57.200]  Well, Eddie, that's about all I had. I was just hoping that we can all collectively come
[54:57.200 --> 55:00.280]  up with ways to keep getting some traction on this.
[55:00.280 --> 55:05.280]  Well, I'm all for that Ken and I appreciate the call in and the suggestion. Anybody out
[55:05.280 --> 55:10.280]  there got anything to go along with it or to help, please call in and let us know. Thanks,
[55:10.280 --> 55:11.280]  Ken.
[55:11.280 --> 55:12.280]  Thanks, Eddie.
[55:12.280 --> 55:16.280]  All right. Mr. Terry in Michigan, how you doing?
[55:16.280 --> 55:18.280]  Hi, Eddie. Doing good.
[55:18.280 --> 55:20.280]  What can we do for you?
[55:20.280 --> 55:24.360]  Well, when you're talking about the habeas corpus, I don't really understand that but
[55:24.360 --> 55:31.840]  it reminded me that maybe it might apply to something. Back in November, I was up deer
[55:31.840 --> 55:41.520]  hunting and I left my 17-year-old home and where I deer hunt, there's no phone service
[55:41.520 --> 55:48.840]  or anything. Anyway, at the lunchtime, he went off to one of the drive-through restaurants
[55:48.840 --> 55:55.200]  there and he was ordering some food and he had a kid from school that he knew that was
[55:55.200 --> 56:00.680]  about 60 pounds heavier than him come up to the car and give him a hard time about something
[56:00.680 --> 56:07.160]  and he ended up stepping out of the car and the kid punched him in the nose and the guy
[56:07.160 --> 56:12.680]  behind him called the police and the other guy took off. The police got there and they
[56:12.680 --> 56:18.320]  called an ambulance and he had a bloody nose. He wasn't hurt. Told him, I'm okay and of
[56:18.320 --> 56:22.600]  course being 17 and that, well, who was the kid? Oh, I don't know. He knew who it was
[56:22.600 --> 56:28.200]  but they didn't want to squeal at each other. So the police got really pissed at him for
[56:28.200 --> 56:33.200]  not telling them what, you know, who the kid was and squealing and all that kind of stuff
[56:33.200 --> 56:37.480]  but at any rate, they told him, well, you have to, we got the ambulance or you have
[56:37.480 --> 56:40.200]  to get the ambulance to go to the hospital since you can't get a hold of your parents
[56:40.200 --> 56:46.240]  and he said, look, I'm okay. A bloody nose, look, it's not bleeding anymore. I'm all right.
[56:46.240 --> 56:50.680]  Leave me alone and they said, no, you have to go to the hospital and he argued with him
[56:50.680 --> 56:57.360]  for about a half hour and finally they made him get the ambulance and go to the hospital.
[56:57.360 --> 57:01.400]  You should have asked them, do you intend to pay the bill? Well, that's where the problem
[57:01.400 --> 57:10.600]  is right now is that was back in November and it ended up being over a $2,000 bill.
[57:10.600 --> 57:17.080]  I have insurance and it covered about $1,500 and I've been paying $50 here, $30 there,
[57:17.080 --> 57:23.200]  $100 there and now they're still sending me bills. So I challenged them and I said, look,
[57:23.200 --> 57:27.920]  you kidnapped my kid against his will and now you're telling me you want me to give
[57:27.920 --> 57:33.560]  you money and I don't want to pay. I want you to show me the law and they said, well,
[57:33.560 --> 57:38.720]  that's our policy. I said, I don't care about your policy. I want to see a law and they're
[57:38.720 --> 57:46.120]  telling me, hey, that's just the way we do it and I don't know, I want to, you know,
[57:46.120 --> 57:49.440]  is that part of Habeas Corpus or how would I go about?
[57:49.440 --> 57:55.680]  Well, no one's actually incarcerated or at a loss of liberty in this case. What you have
[57:55.680 --> 58:01.600]  is a tort action. They compelled him to go against his will for medical treatment he
[58:01.600 --> 58:09.600]  neither needed nor wanted. They can't do that unless he's actually in their custody and
[58:09.600 --> 58:15.880]  in their care and they would be liable if he didn't get it. But in this case, you've
[58:15.880 --> 58:19.680]  got a tort action to recover your money and make them pay the whole thing and reimburse
[58:19.680 --> 58:20.680]  your insurance company.
[58:20.680 --> 58:24.960]  All right, folks, is that all you got? Terry, do you want to hang on to the other side of
[58:24.960 --> 58:25.960]  the break?
[58:25.960 --> 58:27.960]  Yeah, I'd like to try to get just a little bit more.
[58:27.960 --> 58:32.840]  Okay. All right, hang on and we will be right back. This is Rule of Law Radio. Randy Kelton
[58:32.840 --> 58:38.280]  and Deborah Stevens have the night off. It is me flying solo in more ways than one. I'm
[58:38.280 --> 58:43.080]  trying to run the whole thing remotely here, but if you folks will hang on, we will continue
[58:43.080 --> 58:50.080]  on the other side of these mess. Hang on.
[59:13.080 --> 59:20.080]  All right.
[59:43.080 --> 01:00:04.560]  This news break brought to you by the International News Net.
[01:00:04.560 --> 01:00:11.400]  Former Deputy UN envoy to Kabul, Peter Galbraith, told MSNBC, quote, Afghan President Hamid
[01:00:11.400 --> 01:00:17.400]  Karzai is prone to tirades. He can be very emotional, acts impulsively, adding, quote,
[01:00:17.400 --> 01:00:22.880]  in fact, some of the palace insiders say he has a certain fondness for some of Afghanistan's
[01:00:22.880 --> 01:00:25.680]  most profitable exports.
[01:00:25.680 --> 01:00:31.400]  In Britain, $450 million of taxpayers' money has been wasted on swine flu jabs that were
[01:00:31.400 --> 01:00:36.760]  never needed. The government ordered 90 million doses of a vaccine last year at a cost of
[01:00:36.760 --> 01:00:42.120]  800 million as panic over the illness gripped the country. But as the pandemic failed to
[01:00:42.120 --> 01:00:47.560]  materialize, it soon became clear the order was far too large. The Department of Health
[01:00:47.560 --> 01:00:52.840]  tried to get out of the enormous contract, but the drug firm GlaxoSmithKline refused
[01:00:52.840 --> 01:00:53.840]  to back down.
[01:00:53.840 --> 01:00:58.800]  This news break brought to you by the International News Net.
[01:00:58.800 --> 01:01:04.400]  Opposition leaders in Kyrgyzstan seized power Wednesday, taking control of security headquarters,
[01:01:04.400 --> 01:01:09.040]  big television and government buildings in the capital, Bishkek, after riot police shot
[01:01:09.040 --> 01:01:15.440]  dead up to 100 people. Opposition leader Rosa Otanbayava called for President Kurmanbek
[01:01:15.440 --> 01:01:20.600]  Bakhiyov to resign and said she planned to run an interim government for six months to
[01:01:20.600 --> 01:01:26.400]  draft a new constitution. Bakhiyov, who first came to power in a similar popular uprising
[01:01:26.400 --> 01:01:31.920]  five years ago, was said to have fled to the southern city of Osh. The opposition was called
[01:01:31.920 --> 01:01:37.480]  for the closure of the U.S. airbase in Manas that serves as a key transit point for military
[01:01:37.480 --> 01:01:43.400]  supplies to Afghanistan. Russia has grown frustrated with the Bakhiyov regime, which
[01:01:43.400 --> 01:01:49.040]  it believes has fallen under U.S. influence. Russia's Prime Minister Vladimir Putin denied
[01:01:49.040 --> 01:01:54.560]  Moscow had had a hand in Wednesday's violent events. The uprising was triggered by punitive
[01:01:54.560 --> 01:01:57.640]  increases on tariffs for water and gas.
[01:01:57.640 --> 01:02:02.240]  This news brief brought to you by the International News Net.
[01:02:02.240 --> 01:02:07.000]  A lawsuit filed in the Florida court this week alleges fruit importer Chiquita Brands
[01:02:07.000 --> 01:02:12.120]  provided material support to a terrorist organization by paying protection money and providing weapons
[01:02:12.120 --> 01:02:17.240]  to a Colombian rebel group. Three U.S. citizens who survived a five-year hostage ordeal at
[01:02:17.240 --> 01:02:21.920]  the hands of Colombia's FARC military group and the family of a fourth man who was killed
[01:02:21.920 --> 01:02:26.460]  by FARC rebels say Chiquita owes them damages because it paid hundreds of thousands of dollars
[01:02:26.460 --> 01:02:31.560]  to FARC. The complaint states Chiquita knew FARC was a terrorist organization and that
[01:02:31.560 --> 01:02:36.680]  it kidnapped, killed, and terrorized thousands of people in Colombia but ignored these risks
[01:02:36.680 --> 01:02:43.000]  to further their own business interests. Mark Gonzalez, Thomas Howes, and Keith Stancil,
[01:02:43.000 --> 01:02:47.480]  employees of defense contractor Northbrook-Rumman, were shot down by FARC rebels in Colombia.
[01:02:47.480 --> 01:02:52.480]  They spent five years as FARC hostages before being released in 2008.
[01:02:52.480 --> 01:02:59.480]  For more news and information, visit INNWorldReport.net.
[01:03:22.480 --> 01:03:47.480]  All right, folks. We are going to finish our conversation with Terry in Michigan here.
[01:03:47.480 --> 01:03:54.480]  All right. Let's see. All right, Terry. What else you have?
[01:03:54.480 --> 01:04:00.760]  Well, I was just wondering. You said there wasn't really a loss of liberty, but actually
[01:04:00.760 --> 01:04:07.600]  there was because he missed a half a day of school and, I mean, they took him and he couldn't
[01:04:07.600 --> 01:04:10.840]  do what he wanted. He had to go with them and do what they said.
[01:04:10.840 --> 01:04:16.920]  Well, that's true, but the loss of liberty means that they are still restrained at their
[01:04:16.920 --> 01:04:26.920]  liberty in some form or fashion. He's not. He's not on bond. He's not forbidden to leave
[01:04:26.920 --> 01:04:39.080]  the area. He is not in any way currently restrained. So a habeas doesn't apply in this case. Now,
[01:04:39.080 --> 01:04:44.940]  the problem, like I said, is the simple fact that they do not have the authority unless
[01:04:44.940 --> 01:04:52.160]  they can show that this was a life-threatening situation that they could order him to go
[01:04:52.160 --> 01:04:57.000]  to a hospital or that they could order him to climb into an ambulance and be responsible
[01:04:57.000 --> 01:04:58.000]  for the bill.
[01:04:58.000 --> 01:05:02.320]  And that's what I tried to tell him. They said, well, you know, he was hurt. It's like,
[01:05:02.320 --> 01:05:09.240]  you know, it's a bloody nose. Happens on school grounds every day. And he told him he was
[01:05:09.240 --> 01:05:15.720]  okay. By the time they got there, you know, he put a tissue on his nose. It stopped bleeding.
[01:05:15.720 --> 01:05:19.400]  No big deal. But they forced him to go anyway.
[01:05:19.400 --> 01:05:23.720]  Yeah. So that makes the responsibility for the bill theirs because they took him against
[01:05:23.720 --> 01:05:30.320]  his will. That's just common sense. I would, I would file a notice of tort. These were
[01:05:30.320 --> 01:05:31.320]  municipal officers.
[01:05:31.320 --> 01:05:35.760]  They were, yeah, city police.
[01:05:35.760 --> 01:05:40.040]  Okay. I would file a notice of tort with the mayor of the city, letting him know that his
[01:05:40.040 --> 01:05:46.880]  officers are insisting that people with bloody noses be incarcerated in an ambulance and
[01:05:46.880 --> 01:05:52.800]  hauled to the hospital against their will, even though declaring they do not wish it
[01:05:52.800 --> 01:05:59.840]  nor require it. But it's the officer's policy to box them up and send them anyway.
[01:05:59.840 --> 01:06:06.680]  Okay. So basically that would just be a letter that I would send out telling them that it's
[01:06:06.680 --> 01:06:10.240]  a notice of tort to the mayor of the city.
[01:06:10.240 --> 01:06:15.920]  And you let them know that the basis of the tort is unlawful in restraint or unlawful
[01:06:15.920 --> 01:06:22.520]  imprisonment, whatever the statutes in Michigan represent as being a problem. Okay. If you've
[01:06:22.520 --> 01:06:28.200]  got an abuse of official capacity or an official oppression statute, you mentioned that as
[01:06:28.200 --> 01:06:36.080]  well and let them know that there is a deficiency in your insurance and bank account of whatever
[01:06:36.080 --> 01:06:40.520]  total amount plus penalties and interest for the entire time that you've been paying on
[01:06:40.520 --> 01:06:46.680]  this or had it out of the insurance company's hands and tell them this is what you expect
[01:06:46.680 --> 01:06:53.080]  to be compensated for, plus the additional amount of money of this amount for my son
[01:06:53.080 --> 01:06:56.680]  being unlawfully kidnapped by your officers.
[01:06:56.680 --> 01:07:04.000]  Now you may have a kidnapping and or aggravated kidnapping statute in Michigan. The officers
[01:07:04.000 --> 01:07:06.240]  were wearing guns, right?
[01:07:06.240 --> 01:07:07.240]  Absolutely.
[01:07:07.240 --> 01:07:12.680]  Okay. If the statute says that they have to be displaying a deadly weapon, they've met
[01:07:12.680 --> 01:07:18.440]  the qualifications to be charged with aggravated kidnapping. And if they touched him in any
[01:07:18.440 --> 01:07:22.440]  way to make him get in the ambulance, it's aggravated assault.
[01:07:22.440 --> 01:07:29.040]  Okay. Yeah, I don't think they did that. I think they just more or less told him he's
[01:07:29.040 --> 01:07:30.520]  not going anywhere.
[01:07:30.520 --> 01:07:35.840]  Okay. Well, that's aggravated kidnapping. They ordered him to go with them or to go
[01:07:35.840 --> 01:07:39.760]  with someone else at their behest and they're armed.
[01:07:39.760 --> 01:07:40.760]  Absolutely.
[01:07:40.760 --> 01:07:45.440]  So I would go after it on those grounds.
[01:07:45.440 --> 01:07:46.440]  Yeah.
[01:07:46.440 --> 01:07:47.440]  Okay.
[01:07:47.440 --> 01:07:51.280]  That sounds like at least I've got something to talk about rather than just arguing with
[01:07:51.280 --> 01:07:52.560]  the clerk about...
[01:07:52.560 --> 01:07:57.680]  That's it. File a notice of tort and send it to the mayor. Registered mail, return receipt
[01:07:57.680 --> 01:08:00.840]  requested or certified mail return receipt requested.
[01:08:00.840 --> 01:08:02.440]  Okay. Excellent.
[01:08:02.440 --> 01:08:10.320]  Now also recommended piece of advice here. Keep the original letter. Sign it, get it
[01:08:10.320 --> 01:08:16.800]  notarized, photocopy it. And in fact, if you can, get the notary to photocopy it and staple
[01:08:16.800 --> 01:08:27.360]  it together for you, okay, then you send the copy to the mayor. You always keep your originals
[01:08:27.360 --> 01:08:28.360]  on tort letters.
[01:08:28.360 --> 01:08:29.360]  All right.
[01:08:29.360 --> 01:08:30.360]  Okay.
[01:08:30.360 --> 01:08:31.360]  Okay. Yeah, that makes sense.
[01:08:31.360 --> 01:08:32.360]  All right. Anything else?
[01:08:32.360 --> 01:08:33.360]  Nope. I just get me started on that. Appreciate it.
[01:08:33.360 --> 01:08:34.360]  All right. Yes, sir, Terry. You have a good time.
[01:08:34.360 --> 01:08:35.360]  You too.
[01:08:35.360 --> 01:08:51.000]  All right. Let's go to Robert in Texas.
[01:08:51.000 --> 01:08:52.000]  Hey.
[01:08:52.000 --> 01:08:53.000]  Hey, Robert.
[01:08:53.000 --> 01:09:03.720]  You emailed me a document to send to Linebarger one time on a municipal collection. They were
[01:09:03.720 --> 01:09:10.080]  trying to collect some money from municipal court. You're familiar with Linebarger, the
[01:09:10.080 --> 01:09:11.080]  law firm, right?
[01:09:11.080 --> 01:09:12.080]  I think so.
[01:09:12.080 --> 01:09:20.320]  Well, at any rate, they do a lot of different collection practices, mostly as a third party
[01:09:20.320 --> 01:09:21.320]  debt collector.
[01:09:21.320 --> 01:09:22.320]  Yep.
[01:09:22.320 --> 01:09:27.200]  And they even collect some federal taxes and stuff too. But anyway, I sent that letter,
[01:09:27.200 --> 01:09:33.720]  Yield emailed it to me as a friend of mine that I did this for. And I sent the letter
[01:09:33.720 --> 01:09:39.520]  to Linebarger. We didn't hear anything for a while. And evidently that fixed that deal
[01:09:39.520 --> 01:09:47.760]  because the court, I say fixed it, the court set a trial date 10 months away. The municipal
[01:09:47.760 --> 01:09:53.760]  court did. I'm kind of curious as to why they sent that thing, set that date 10 miles up
[01:09:53.760 --> 01:09:58.920]  the road, but kind of done away with Linebarger anyway.
[01:09:58.920 --> 01:10:03.920]  Well, was that a good thing or a bad thing?
[01:10:03.920 --> 01:10:13.240]  Well, it's one of those things where it give us a little breathing room here to address
[01:10:13.240 --> 01:10:15.320]  that issue and how we're going to address it.
[01:10:15.320 --> 01:10:20.720]  Yeah. These attorneys firms, what they're trying to do is they are trying to act in
[01:10:20.720 --> 01:10:25.200]  the capacity of a collection agency, illegally, of course, because they're not telling you
[01:10:25.200 --> 01:10:30.400]  that they're operating under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. The problem is one,
[01:10:30.400 --> 01:10:36.240]  there has been no adjudication of the issue. There can't be a court ordered amount of money
[01:10:36.240 --> 01:10:42.640]  if the issue's never been adjudicated. So all they're trying to do is to basically do the
[01:10:42.640 --> 01:10:46.640]  same thing you would do if you walked up, plead guilty, pay the fine and left.
[01:10:46.640 --> 01:10:47.640]  Yeah.
[01:10:47.640 --> 01:10:51.200]  You just get to keep the money because if you will notice, the amount of money they're
[01:10:51.200 --> 01:10:55.520]  trying to charge you way exceeds the amount of what the fine is.
[01:10:55.520 --> 01:11:00.200]  Yeah. But this is leading into something else is what I'm telling you.
[01:11:00.200 --> 01:11:02.200]  Okay. What you got?
[01:11:02.200 --> 01:11:07.680]  This same guy, I'm a friend of mine, he's kind of a slow thinker. He's the little handicapped
[01:11:07.680 --> 01:11:13.200]  and he doesn't do good. He's a smart guy, but he doesn't do good in front of people
[01:11:13.200 --> 01:11:24.120]  and stuff when talking because he's so slow. But anyway, he has some oil royalties. Actually,
[01:11:24.120 --> 01:11:34.080]  that's his livelihood. He hadn't been paying property taxes on these oil royalties. So
[01:11:34.080 --> 01:11:40.760]  he gets a letter from, and I didn't know anything about this, but he gets a letter from a line
[01:11:40.760 --> 01:11:49.280]  barter again, the same law firm with intent to sue for the property taxes and they're
[01:11:49.280 --> 01:11:54.120]  representing a county down in South Texas.
[01:11:54.120 --> 01:12:00.840]  And so I called the tax appraiser down there and wanted to work out a deal and try to take
[01:12:00.840 --> 01:12:06.040]  some of this money from the oil reserves and make monthly payments on these taxes and get
[01:12:06.040 --> 01:12:12.480]  them paid off. Well, this has been going on a long time and there's been attorney fees
[01:12:12.480 --> 01:12:18.600]  added on plus penalties and interest and it shoots way the hell up there. And so this
[01:12:18.600 --> 01:12:23.960]  tax appraisal, the chief tax appraisal guy told me that there was nothing he could do
[01:12:23.960 --> 01:12:35.140]  about the penalties and interest or the law firm's fees. It's every month. They automatically
[01:12:35.140 --> 01:12:45.800]  just get a percentage of that money that's due and it looks like that could be stopped.
[01:12:45.800 --> 01:12:52.640]  Well here's the problem, however. One, the tax assessor is not going to be the one that
[01:12:52.640 --> 01:12:57.400]  has the authority to appoint the collections to an attorney. He's going to give it to the
[01:12:57.400 --> 01:13:00.920]  county commissioner's court and the county commissioner's court is going to be responsible
[01:13:00.920 --> 01:13:10.000]  for doing that. So the tax assessor can't answer those questions and he's blowing smoke.
[01:13:10.000 --> 01:13:16.120]  The other problem is that agency cannot be proven from the mouth of the agent. It must
[01:13:16.120 --> 01:13:23.240]  be proven by the principal. So you are going to demand that this attorney's firm proves
[01:13:23.240 --> 01:13:30.800]  up agency. And you're going to send them a letter. I demand that you prove up agency
[01:13:30.800 --> 01:13:38.500]  to act on the behalf of such and such county for these purposes. Now, what they're likely
[01:13:38.500 --> 01:13:46.480]  to do is to send you an affidavit. That's not going to do them any good. What has to
[01:13:46.480 --> 01:13:52.680]  happen is that the county themselves must send you notice that this law firm is acting
[01:13:52.680 --> 01:14:00.760]  on their behalf and then you demand that they prove up to debt. You want an itemized accounting
[01:14:00.760 --> 01:14:07.760]  bill of every single charge they allegedly have accrued or made against your friend in
[01:14:07.760 --> 01:14:20.360]  this matter. And by the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, they have to do it. If they
[01:14:20.360 --> 01:14:24.460]  don't do it, they have a problem. So that's where you really need to have your friend
[01:14:24.460 --> 01:14:29.320]  get his hands on Michael Mears' package dealing with the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.
[01:14:29.320 --> 01:14:32.680]  I'm pretty familiar with that. I've recorded a lot of that and studied it.
[01:14:32.680 --> 01:14:36.920]  Okay. That's what I'd be taking the angle of, then.
[01:14:36.920 --> 01:14:44.000]  Is the IRS is living some of this money also. And they're living, and you may not be familiar
[01:14:44.000 --> 01:14:52.880]  with this, but I've got a sneaky feeling you are, under 6331B. And that has nothing to
[01:14:52.880 --> 01:14:57.840]  do with my friend. But they're doing it anyway. And I didn't know if you had any comments
[01:14:57.840 --> 01:15:02.240]  to make about the end. Okay. Well, I can say in Chapter 51 of the
[01:15:02.240 --> 01:15:08.640]  government code, or I believe it's government code, the legislature passed a law trying
[01:15:08.640 --> 01:15:13.560]  to combat the liens and levies that were being placed on public officials by the folks from
[01:15:13.560 --> 01:15:15.360]  the Republic of Texas. Yeah. Yeah.
[01:15:15.360 --> 01:15:23.680]  So here's the problem. That law does not limit itself as to who it applies to. Any lien or
[01:15:23.680 --> 01:15:30.480]  levy in Texas that does not have an accompanying judicial order by the terms of that law is
[01:15:30.480 --> 01:15:35.760]  absolutely invalid, including an IRS lien or levy.
[01:15:35.760 --> 01:15:41.080]  Right. Okay. The federal rules are very specific on exactly
[01:15:41.080 --> 01:15:50.080]  what the IRS must file in accompaniment to a lien or levy. All they actually file is
[01:15:50.080 --> 01:15:53.640]  the notice of lien or levy. Right.
[01:15:53.640 --> 01:15:59.480]  And they can't do that. The law forbids that. The county clerk is now responsible for taking
[01:15:59.480 --> 01:16:05.560]  a false instrument and converting it into a negotiable instrument.
[01:16:05.560 --> 01:16:06.560]  Yeah. That's wrong.
[01:16:06.560 --> 01:16:12.120]  There's a case in Dallas that went on for quite a while, a few years ago. In fact, Randy
[01:16:12.120 --> 01:16:17.200]  Kelton's got a lot of his documents on his web page. It's that guy that manufactures
[01:16:17.200 --> 01:16:22.320]  that jalapeno ketchup. He went to court and actually got a good ruling, and then they
[01:16:22.320 --> 01:16:27.240]  overturned it. And I don't know whatever happened to it, but it was on that issue, the same
[01:16:27.240 --> 01:16:30.240]  issue of those liens. Yeah.
[01:16:30.240 --> 01:16:34.200]  Well, okay. You give me some good information. I appreciate it, Eddie.
[01:16:34.200 --> 01:16:38.600]  Yes, sir. No problem. All right, folks. We're about to go to break. Gail, you are up next,
[01:16:38.600 --> 01:16:43.160]  so please hang on to the other side and we will pick it up from there. This is Rule of
[01:16:43.160 --> 01:16:48.320]  Law Radio. This is Eddie Craig. Randy Kelton and Deborah Stevens have the night off, so
[01:16:48.320 --> 01:17:00.320]  if y'all can put up with me a little bit longer, we'll be right back.
[01:17:00.320 --> 01:17:05.280]  It is so enlightening to listen to 90.1 FM, but finding things on the Internet isn't so
[01:17:05.280 --> 01:17:08.960]  easy, and neither is finding like-minded people to share it with.
[01:17:08.960 --> 01:17:11.880]  Oh, well, I guess you haven't heard of Brave New Books, then.
[01:17:11.880 --> 01:17:15.400]  Brave New Books? Yes. Brave New Books has all the books and
[01:17:15.400 --> 01:17:20.320]  DVDs you're looking for by authors like Alex Jones, Ron Paul, and G. Edward Griffin. They
[01:17:20.320 --> 01:17:23.400]  even stock inner food, Berkey products, and Calvin Soaps.
[01:17:23.400 --> 01:17:28.720]  There's no way a place like that exists. Go check it out for yourself. It's downtown
[01:17:28.720 --> 01:17:35.160]  at 1904 Guadalupe Street, just south of UT. By UT, there's never anywhere to park down
[01:17:35.160 --> 01:17:38.200]  there. Actually, they now offer a free hour of parking
[01:17:38.200 --> 01:17:43.040]  for paying customers at the 500 MLK parking facility, just behind the bookstore.
[01:17:43.040 --> 01:17:50.400]  It does exist, but when are they open? Monday through Saturday, 11 AM to 9 PM, and 1 to
[01:17:50.400 --> 01:17:58.520]  6 PM on Sundays. So give them a call at 512-480-2503, or check out their events page at bravenewbookstore.com.
[01:17:58.520 --> 01:18:24.120]  Ain't gonna blame me, don't blame me. Well, ain't gonna fool me with that same old trick
[01:18:24.120 --> 01:18:33.320]  again. I was blindsided, but now I can see your plans. You put the fear in my pocket,
[01:18:33.320 --> 01:18:39.000]  took the money from my hands. Ain't gonna fool me with that same old trick again.
[01:18:39.000 --> 01:18:44.400]  All right folks, we are back. This is Eddie Craig, Rule of Law Radio, Radio
[01:18:44.400 --> 01:18:53.320]  Kelvin, Deborah Stevens, having the night off. We are currently taking your calls. 512-646-1984,
[01:18:53.320 --> 01:18:59.200]  folks, if you want to call in. Please, just bear with us. I've got Gail in Minnesota.
[01:18:59.200 --> 01:19:05.400]  Gail, how are you doing? Good evening, sir. I'm doing okay. The ice
[01:19:05.400 --> 01:19:11.080]  is finally all melted off the lake, and even though it's in the 50s, a lot of days, it's
[01:19:11.080 --> 01:19:15.600]  better than iceberg. I'd have to agree with that.
[01:19:15.600 --> 01:19:18.600]  Yep. I'm just not a snow kind of person myself.
[01:19:18.600 --> 01:19:25.960]  Well, you know, it's nice at Christmas time, but then you can pack up the rest of it.
[01:19:25.960 --> 01:19:31.040]  What can we do for you, Ms. Gail? Well, you were talking about Ritehavius corpus,
[01:19:31.040 --> 01:19:39.720]  and I have a question for you about the Ritamandamus. In the case that I'm in, when the contempt
[01:19:39.720 --> 01:19:46.240]  of court orders, when the judge gave his orders on my request for motions for contempt of
[01:19:46.240 --> 01:19:53.160]  court for my husband, the ones he made me refile four different times, he refused to
[01:19:53.160 --> 01:19:58.320]  find my husband in contempt of anything, including even though the spousal maintenance is now
[01:19:58.320 --> 01:20:05.880]  over seven months behind, and even though he admitted willfully not paying child support.
[01:20:05.880 --> 01:20:10.800]  First, he said it was because he had no money, and then it came out that he stopped paying
[01:20:10.800 --> 01:20:16.760]  in September, and he never missed a paycheck until December. So it was a willful decision
[01:20:16.760 --> 01:20:21.160]  to not pay, and there were a number of other ones, too.
[01:20:21.160 --> 01:20:26.240]  Long story short, the judge did not find him in contempt for anything, still left me without
[01:20:26.240 --> 01:20:34.160]  money, took the house property in his court order, told my husband that he could take
[01:20:34.160 --> 01:20:44.880]  over possession of our marital home and not sell it without my cooperation or consent,
[01:20:44.880 --> 01:20:50.560]  which is upsetting, because my name is on the deed, and it's not on the mortgage, and
[01:20:50.560 --> 01:20:53.880]  my husband has just stolen all the rest of the assets.
[01:20:53.880 --> 01:20:59.160]  Well, long story short, after that happened, I filed. I was told it takes a year to two
[01:20:59.160 --> 01:21:05.560]  years to have any results with an appeal, and then very few of them are ever put through.
[01:21:05.560 --> 01:21:14.920]  I was told a writ of habeas corpus, they do not even have to receive. They can decide
[01:21:14.920 --> 01:21:21.040]  not to even accept it. That's very conditional, and so I was told that I needed to do a motion
[01:21:21.040 --> 01:21:27.280]  for reconsideration. I sent in a motion for reconsideration, but it said in the statutes
[01:21:27.280 --> 01:21:32.880]  that it could only be two pages, so I did the motion. The motion was four pages, so
[01:21:32.880 --> 01:21:38.400]  I pulled two pages of it forward for the motion, and then I attached the whole thing as an
[01:21:38.400 --> 01:21:46.160]  affidavit in support of the motion for reconsideration. Filed that. Then I just, when I called to
[01:21:46.160 --> 01:21:54.560]  set the hearing, the clerk from Hastings said that the judge's clerk said that I couldn't
[01:21:54.560 --> 01:22:01.120]  set the hearing, that I needed to send a letter. The clerk said to me, didn't you send the
[01:22:01.120 --> 01:22:07.000]  judge the same thing you sent us? I said, yes, I did. I went back to work, put together
[01:22:07.000 --> 01:22:14.920]  a different motion. It had to be a request, which the other one did, but I thought they
[01:22:14.920 --> 01:22:20.240]  were doing the same thing on this. They did with me on the contempt filing. I redid it.
[01:22:20.240 --> 01:22:27.640]  I sent a two-page letter, and it said, letter to request reconsideration motion hearing.
[01:22:27.640 --> 01:22:36.040]  Sent that and filed that, and I also filed a notice to appeal at the same time. Because
[01:22:36.040 --> 01:22:40.240]  I did not want, my husband was threatening to go in and take all my property out and
[01:22:40.240 --> 01:22:45.600]  trash it, which he wouldn't. He would sell it, but I can't afford to have him do that.
[01:22:45.600 --> 01:22:51.240]  Long story short, then I got told I really needed to have an emergency stay of proceedings,
[01:22:51.240 --> 01:22:58.000]  stay of execution, so I also filed that. I filed those three yesterday, because my husband
[01:22:58.000 --> 01:23:03.840]  was threatening to go in today and trash everything. I notified the police. I sent copies to the
[01:23:03.840 --> 01:23:08.800]  police telling them, because I was told once you file a notice to appeal, it's put, stop
[01:23:08.800 --> 01:23:13.600]  the clock. I don't know if that's true, and I'd kind of like to know, because today I
[01:23:13.600 --> 01:23:20.520]  went to file. I called the court again to see if I had to set a hearing for the emergency
[01:23:20.520 --> 01:23:26.160]  stay of execution, so my husband couldn't go steal all the property. The clerk again
[01:23:26.160 --> 01:23:30.960]  called the judge's clerk, and she said, she spoke with the judge, and I'm glad I recorded
[01:23:30.960 --> 01:23:36.840]  what she said. But she said the judge told her that he was not going to change anything
[01:23:36.840 --> 01:23:42.240]  on his order, that he was not changing anything, and if I didn't like his order, that I could
[01:23:42.240 --> 01:23:50.800]  just go file with the State Court of Appeals. Okay. So it's time to give this judge athlete
[01:23:50.800 --> 01:23:59.920]  scouts by going over his head. Start walking on him with hard stomping golf shoes. Go over
[01:23:59.920 --> 01:24:07.120]  his head, file with the State Court of Appeals, and see what happens. I got told it takes
[01:24:07.120 --> 01:24:12.920]  one to two years. It doesn't stop the clock, and they take one out of every one to 200.
[01:24:12.920 --> 01:24:17.840]  What do I do to increase my... Who's above this guy, then, at the current
[01:24:17.840 --> 01:24:23.680]  level? Who's above him? The chief judge, but a congressman I know
[01:24:23.680 --> 01:24:28.680]  had lunch with the chief judge and asked him, you know, can't you do something to help this
[01:24:28.680 --> 01:24:32.520]  case? And the chief judge said that was out of his hand.
[01:24:32.520 --> 01:24:39.400]  It's out of his hands to interfere without cause, but if you file something with him,
[01:24:39.400 --> 01:24:44.000]  he now has a cause. So you're saying file with the chief judge?
[01:24:44.000 --> 01:24:47.400]  Yes. I'll back you up a second, and I'll remind
[01:24:47.400 --> 01:24:54.680]  you two things. One, I already had the first judge on this case recuse because that judge
[01:24:54.680 --> 01:24:59.320]  was ordering me to do illegal things and screamed at me in court and all these other things.
[01:24:59.320 --> 01:25:03.080]  Yes. So I already have the judges in Dakota County
[01:25:03.080 --> 01:25:08.880]  unhappy with me to begin with. Second of all, besides in Minnesota being notorious for being
[01:25:08.880 --> 01:25:14.720]  a good old boys club, it's well known that the worst place at all is Dakota County. I
[01:25:14.720 --> 01:25:18.560]  would love nothing better than to get this out of the county and somewhere else. I don't
[01:25:18.560 --> 01:25:23.840]  know how to do it. Because I'm afraid even if I go to the chief
[01:25:23.840 --> 01:25:26.760]  judge... Okay, you're not limited to the... Who is
[01:25:26.760 --> 01:25:30.760]  above the particular level of court you're in? Is the state court of appeals the only
[01:25:30.760 --> 01:25:33.040]  one above them? I don't know.
[01:25:33.040 --> 01:25:36.880]  Do you not have district courts there in Minnesota?
[01:25:36.880 --> 01:25:39.680]  What, district courts? Yes.
[01:25:39.680 --> 01:25:43.680]  I'm not sure. Okay, you need to find out what your court
[01:25:43.680 --> 01:25:50.480]  hierarchy is. That's number one. Find out who's above the county courts in these issues.
[01:25:50.480 --> 01:25:54.960]  If it's state court of appeals, that's the only thing above them other than the chief
[01:25:54.960 --> 01:26:01.000]  judge. If there is somebody between you and the state court of appeals, you can go to
[01:26:01.000 --> 01:26:09.320]  them and have... Especially on a writ of mandamus. And there also has been made the suggestion
[01:26:09.320 --> 01:26:15.600]  you can do a motion to enforce and submit that with it.
[01:26:15.600 --> 01:26:19.040]  How could it be a motion to enforce if he hasn't ordered anything that he'll allow me
[01:26:19.040 --> 01:26:22.560]  to enforce? No, no, no. He's ordered child support. Your
[01:26:22.560 --> 01:26:26.480]  husband's just not paying it. Right.
[01:26:26.480 --> 01:26:30.920]  So file a motion to enforce and make him pay it.
[01:26:30.920 --> 01:26:36.920]  Okay. And then file... I would still file a criminal
[01:26:36.920 --> 01:26:43.320]  or judicial complaints against this judge and see if I couldn't get him disqualified
[01:26:43.320 --> 01:26:48.080]  as well because if he came in with a chip on his shoulder, which obviously he has, you're
[01:26:48.080 --> 01:26:54.560]  not getting a fair and impartial trial in any way, shape or form. However, again, not
[01:26:54.560 --> 01:27:01.320]  to put a damper on you, but being in Minnesota where the courts are God because the legislature
[01:27:01.320 --> 01:27:07.640]  advocated their authority, Gail, you're really in a crap shoot. If I was you, I would burn
[01:27:07.640 --> 01:27:13.400]  everything and move. I can't. I brought that up today and I was told
[01:27:13.400 --> 01:27:21.640]  by a head of the Women's Battered League project that because of something called Amendment
[01:27:21.640 --> 01:27:26.280]  A, even if you have custody of your kids, you cannot move out of the state without a
[01:27:26.280 --> 01:27:31.160]  court order from a judge, which would have to be the court order from my judge in this
[01:27:31.160 --> 01:27:38.760]  divorce case, which goes right back to the bad apple. I'd be out of here in a heartbeat.
[01:27:38.760 --> 01:27:47.880]  I wouldn't have come home. Well, until the folks in Minnesota get control
[01:27:47.880 --> 01:27:53.480]  of the legislature to regain control of the courts, I don't know what else to suggest
[01:27:53.480 --> 01:27:58.160]  other than what we've done so far is to keep climbing the ladder, but you need to find
[01:27:58.160 --> 01:28:01.680]  out who's above the county. Okay, let me throw this out to you. In the
[01:28:01.680 --> 01:28:07.480]  contempt hearing, I put my life on the line and I put out there even more evidence. I
[01:28:07.480 --> 01:28:16.240]  put into the exhibits the copies of the IRS returns that I had gotten back from the federal
[01:28:16.240 --> 01:28:20.760]  income tax return. Okay, okay. Stop right there.
[01:28:20.760 --> 01:28:26.160]  If you've got a federal offense in your hands that your husband has committed because of
[01:28:26.160 --> 01:28:31.640]  the violations of the lower court and these criminal activities, see about getting this
[01:28:31.640 --> 01:28:35.600]  removed to federal court. See, that's what I want to know how to do.
[01:28:35.600 --> 01:28:42.480]  It is, but I need to know this, it's forgery. He forged my name on at least five IRS return
[01:28:42.480 --> 01:28:47.640]  documents. Oh, but see, here's the deal. Not only can
[01:28:47.640 --> 01:28:53.840]  you get this information into federal court by reporting it to a United States attorney,
[01:28:53.840 --> 01:28:59.240]  but you can also file criminal charges against the judge for collusion because he has been
[01:28:59.240 --> 01:29:05.760]  made aware of the criminal acts your husband committed and aided and abetted in their commission.
[01:29:05.760 --> 01:29:10.560]  Okay, that's what I want to do. Now, with that...
[01:29:10.560 --> 01:29:16.640]  You can hang this judge so far out to dry, they'll think he's a scarecrow in a cornfield.
[01:29:16.640 --> 01:29:21.840]  That's what I want to do. Now, let me ask you this. Is this going to stop the clock
[01:29:21.840 --> 01:29:28.240]  and will it take it back? I have an issue. If you can prove, if they can help you to
[01:29:28.240 --> 01:29:34.640]  prove by this that the judge has been committing fraudulent acts the entire time and covering
[01:29:34.640 --> 01:29:41.200]  up a federal crime, it gets rid of everything this judge has done.
[01:29:41.200 --> 01:29:43.600]  I got a question for you as soon as we come back.
[01:29:43.600 --> 01:29:47.600]  Okay, hang on. We'll pick you back up on the other side. Folks, this is Eddie Craig, Rule
[01:29:47.600 --> 01:30:00.120]  of Law Radio. We will be right back.
[01:30:00.120 --> 01:30:05.520]  My name is Randall Kelton and I co-host on Rule of Law Radio. We specialize in showing
[01:30:05.520 --> 01:30:10.160]  people how to strike back against corrupt public officials. With the mortgage crisis
[01:30:10.160 --> 01:30:14.560]  worsening, we set our sights on finding a remedy for people who have been cheated by
[01:30:14.560 --> 01:30:19.560]  their lenders. If you have a mortgage or have paid yours off, you have probably been cheated
[01:30:19.560 --> 01:30:26.320]  out of thousands, but there is a remedy. Go to remediesinrealestate.com or call me at
[01:30:26.320 --> 01:30:34.440]  512-430-4140 and find out how to use the consumer protection laws to recover what the lenders
[01:30:34.440 --> 01:30:39.920]  have stolen through fraud and deception. We will prepare for you a qualified written request
[01:30:39.920 --> 01:30:45.200]  that will expose the fraud and put the lenders on the dime. Lender fraud is bankrupting this
[01:30:45.200 --> 01:30:55.080]  country and it's time to fight back. Go to remediesinrealestate.com or call 512-430-4140
[01:30:55.080 --> 01:31:10.520]  and get the information you need to stop the money changers in their tracks.
[01:31:10.520 --> 01:31:38.680]  All right, folks. We are back. All right, heel.
[01:31:38.680 --> 01:31:43.640]  Bring it back on. Let's continue on where you were.
[01:31:43.640 --> 01:31:44.640]  Hello?
[01:31:44.640 --> 01:31:46.440]  Yes, go ahead.
[01:31:46.440 --> 01:31:52.920]  Okay. What I wanted to let you know was this judge, the very first time I was before him,
[01:31:52.920 --> 01:31:59.240]  a year ago in May 11th, I took a packet with a criminal complaint against my husband and
[01:31:59.240 --> 01:32:05.120]  the bank and stuff and I had it all sealed for a grand jury. I invoked his duties as
[01:32:05.120 --> 01:32:10.960]  a magistrate and handed him the packet to give to the grand jury for the criminal complaint.
[01:32:10.960 --> 01:32:17.320]  He returned it, said that he was not a magistrate. He was a judge and that he was not that he
[01:32:17.320 --> 01:32:22.760]  could not give that to grand jury. I needed to go through the prosecuting attorney. That
[01:32:22.760 --> 01:32:28.600]  was a year ago. That had four juries in it and it had fraud, bank fraud and four juries
[01:32:28.600 --> 01:32:30.640]  over a year ago.
[01:32:30.640 --> 01:32:33.680]  Take it to a United States attorney.
[01:32:33.680 --> 01:32:35.640]  Okay.
[01:32:35.640 --> 01:32:42.280]  That and everything that you got on this judge in coordination and collusion with your husband
[01:32:42.280 --> 01:32:47.840]  to commit the frauds, to cover up the IRS schemes and everything else that he's done,
[01:32:47.840 --> 01:32:52.840]  take it all to a United States attorney who is obligated by federal law to put it in front
[01:32:52.840 --> 01:32:54.440]  of a federal grand jury.
[01:32:54.440 --> 01:32:59.440]  Okay. So any US attorney has to put it in front of a federal grand jury?
[01:32:59.440 --> 01:33:01.440]  According to federal law, he does.
[01:33:01.440 --> 01:33:10.560]  That was the third time that I requested this judge to call out a grand jury him. I delivered
[01:33:10.560 --> 01:33:15.520]  a packet to him once and then twice requested that he turn this stuff over to the grand
[01:33:15.520 --> 01:33:20.200]  jury and he hasn't done it any time. He's given me a lecture the other two times that
[01:33:20.200 --> 01:33:24.440]  he, you know, how that's outside of him and I've explained this to you before.
[01:33:24.440 --> 01:33:25.440]  Right.
[01:33:25.440 --> 01:33:33.280]  Okay. So, okay, so I would like to do that tomorrow or at least talk to a US attorney
[01:33:33.280 --> 01:33:34.280]  and-
[01:33:34.280 --> 01:33:35.280]  That's right.
[01:33:35.280 --> 01:33:38.280]  That's exactly what I'd recommend you do.
[01:33:38.280 --> 01:33:39.280]  Say again?
[01:33:39.280 --> 01:33:42.800]  Do you think that will stop the clock on my case?
[01:33:42.800 --> 01:33:50.720]  I don't know that it will stop the clock but if you get this judge in hot water and they
[01:33:50.720 --> 01:33:56.920]  prove that he's committed these acts, that's going to make all of his orders null and void.
[01:33:56.920 --> 01:34:01.520]  So no matter what they've done with the property at that point, it's recoverable.
[01:34:01.520 --> 01:34:02.520]  Okay.
[01:34:02.520 --> 01:34:03.520]  Okay.
[01:34:03.520 --> 01:34:07.440]  Just maybe not all my content but I can sue the judge for that problem.
[01:34:07.440 --> 01:34:09.480]  Anything is possible. Never say never.
[01:34:09.480 --> 01:34:13.560]  But I could probably sue him even if that wasn't-
[01:34:13.560 --> 01:34:19.800]  But what you can do is if you give this to the United States attorney, you can request
[01:34:19.800 --> 01:34:27.120]  a federal injunction against this judge and your husband until these issues are dealt
[01:34:27.120 --> 01:34:29.400]  with by the federal grand jury.
[01:34:29.400 --> 01:34:30.400]  Okay.
[01:34:30.400 --> 01:34:34.480]  So you may be able to stop the clock that way.
[01:34:34.480 --> 01:34:35.480]  Say again?
[01:34:35.480 --> 01:34:39.520]  Well, good, what a federal injunction do?
[01:34:39.520 --> 01:34:42.360]  I don't exactly understand that.
[01:34:42.360 --> 01:34:48.640]  Well, if you're showing that they're in violation of federal laws, even in the case of a state
[01:34:48.640 --> 01:34:55.000]  civil divorce, if you can show that the judge is violating constitutionally protected rights,
[01:34:55.000 --> 01:34:59.120]  even that divorce is removable to federal court according to some of the case law I've
[01:34:59.120 --> 01:35:00.120]  read.
[01:35:00.120 --> 01:35:05.840]  Then he would be violating federal rights by ignoring the forgeries of the federal
[01:35:05.840 --> 01:35:07.400]  documents, right?
[01:35:07.400 --> 01:35:10.600]  If it involves theft of your property, yes it would.
[01:35:10.600 --> 01:35:11.600]  Okay.
[01:35:11.600 --> 01:35:13.560]  Well, it is my property.
[01:35:13.560 --> 01:35:15.760]  Your signature is considered your personal property.
[01:35:15.760 --> 01:35:17.440]  Well, not your property.
[01:35:17.440 --> 01:35:20.840]  That fashion, I'm talking about the house and all the other things.
[01:35:20.840 --> 01:35:24.600]  Your name is on the deed, but the judge is taking it and giving it away.
[01:35:24.600 --> 01:35:25.600]  Right.
[01:35:25.600 --> 01:35:26.600]  Okay.
[01:35:26.600 --> 01:35:32.640]  It's not within his power to do that the way he's doing it.
[01:35:32.640 --> 01:35:34.000]  Let's put it that way.
[01:35:34.000 --> 01:35:35.000]  Okay.
[01:35:35.000 --> 01:35:36.000]  Okay.
[01:35:36.000 --> 01:35:39.640]  So talk to the United States attorney, see what he tells you he can or cannot help you
[01:35:39.640 --> 01:35:41.600]  with and what it will or will not do.
[01:35:41.600 --> 01:35:42.600]  Okay.
[01:35:42.600 --> 01:35:46.660]  Because he's going to be a better source of information on that than I am, but I know
[01:35:46.660 --> 01:35:51.560]  that you can go to him if you've got federal charges that would involve your husband.
[01:35:51.560 --> 01:35:52.560]  Okay.
[01:35:52.560 --> 01:35:59.280]  And also involve this judge cooperating with him to see that they are profitable.
[01:35:59.280 --> 01:36:04.080]  I may pick your brain right before I go in just so I have the right bullet points to
[01:36:04.080 --> 01:36:05.840]  whet his appetite.
[01:36:05.840 --> 01:36:06.840]  Don't pick too hard.
[01:36:06.840 --> 01:36:08.840]  I don't know how much I got left, but I'll do what I can.
[01:36:08.840 --> 01:36:09.840]  Okay.
[01:36:09.840 --> 01:36:10.840]  All right.
[01:36:10.840 --> 01:36:14.760]  Well, don't stay on the line and take up your time, but thanks because it was beginning
[01:36:14.760 --> 01:36:16.640]  to look really bleak.
[01:36:16.640 --> 01:36:17.640]  Yes ma'am.
[01:36:17.640 --> 01:36:18.640]  Will you hang in there and keep fighting?
[01:36:18.640 --> 01:36:19.640]  Thanks a bunch.
[01:36:19.640 --> 01:36:20.640]  Bless your heart.
[01:36:20.640 --> 01:36:21.640]  Love you.
[01:36:21.640 --> 01:36:22.640]  You too.
[01:36:22.640 --> 01:36:23.640]  Bye-bye.
[01:36:23.640 --> 01:36:24.640]  Bye-bye.
[01:36:24.640 --> 01:36:25.640]  All right.
[01:36:25.640 --> 01:36:26.640]  John in Georgia.
[01:36:26.640 --> 01:36:27.640]  We got you on the line.
[01:36:27.640 --> 01:36:28.640]  What can we do for you?
[01:36:28.640 --> 01:36:29.640]  Hey.
[01:36:29.640 --> 01:36:31.640]  I'm just going to take a few minutes of your time.
[01:36:31.640 --> 01:36:41.240]  You know, I'd like to say that you're a great blessing to the, I guess I could say the whole
[01:36:41.240 --> 01:36:48.520]  world because you've done a lot of help for me and what I hear these people talk about,
[01:36:48.520 --> 01:36:54.240]  a lot of them need to tell their friends, you know, to get on this radio talk show and
[01:36:54.240 --> 01:36:55.240]  listen to it.
[01:36:55.240 --> 01:36:58.680]  You know, because that's the biggest thing is get people on and I have sat here and waited
[01:36:58.680 --> 01:37:05.280]  a long time to get on, but that just goes to show how many new people are getting on
[01:37:05.280 --> 01:37:06.280]  page with this.
[01:37:06.280 --> 01:37:10.480]  You know, they're just getting tired of getting beat up and the lady there that just talked
[01:37:10.480 --> 01:37:13.680]  on your show just a minute ago, don't be afraid of them.
[01:37:13.680 --> 01:37:20.600]  I'm a testimonial to that and I've sat there and argued with judges and prosecutors and
[01:37:20.600 --> 01:37:24.240]  threatened them and threatened to sue them and ended up winning my case.
[01:37:24.240 --> 01:37:29.160]  Now, the next step I have to do is go back and sue them for what they did to me, including
[01:37:29.160 --> 01:37:33.080]  what you talked about earlier, which I did exactly what you said.
[01:37:33.080 --> 01:37:34.800]  Do not pull over on the side of the road.
[01:37:34.800 --> 01:37:36.040]  Pull over on the private property.
[01:37:36.040 --> 01:37:40.320]  They towed my vehicle in and I need to go after them for that.
[01:37:40.320 --> 01:37:44.760]  But my issue is I'm going to be real brief and I'm going to get off, is that do not,
[01:37:44.760 --> 01:37:49.160]  you know, these people out here that are listening on this show, tell everybody to get on this
[01:37:49.160 --> 01:37:50.960]  show and listen, because it's very important.
[01:37:50.960 --> 01:37:53.720]  It's the only way we're going to take our rights back.
[01:37:53.720 --> 01:37:59.320]  And in doing so, you'll learn what I've learned, that you do have rights and you can protect
[01:37:59.320 --> 01:38:00.320]  yourself.
[01:38:00.320 --> 01:38:07.320]  And if you don't do it, I can't say you'll be a fool, but it's just stupid not to do
[01:38:07.320 --> 01:38:08.320]  it.
[01:38:08.320 --> 01:38:12.320]  And these people rely on the fact that you're ignorant and they don't think you're smart
[01:38:12.320 --> 01:38:15.160]  enough to be able to learn how to fight against them.
[01:38:15.160 --> 01:38:16.160]  It's very easy.
[01:38:16.160 --> 01:38:18.000]  Listen to what you say.
[01:38:18.000 --> 01:38:21.320]  It's your traffic issue, which I've gotten, and I have to be honest, I only listen to
[01:38:21.320 --> 01:38:25.960]  half of it, but I've won every one of my cases, five out of five, I've only listened to half
[01:38:25.960 --> 01:38:26.960]  of it.
[01:38:26.960 --> 01:38:32.760]  And get out there and let people that you know that are truly your friends, your family,
[01:38:32.760 --> 01:38:35.320]  how to protect themselves, because this is very important.
[01:38:35.320 --> 01:38:38.640]  So, Eddie Craig, I'm going to leave it with that and leave it with you.
[01:38:38.640 --> 01:38:42.920]  And I want to tell you thank you very much, because you saved me from going to jail.
[01:38:42.920 --> 01:38:48.600]  And I just can't thank you enough for what you've done for me.
[01:38:48.600 --> 01:38:49.600]  Well thank you, John.
[01:38:49.600 --> 01:38:53.680]  I appreciate you listening, and I appreciate that testimony for the folks out there.
[01:38:53.680 --> 01:38:56.640]  Really I do, and for me.
[01:38:56.640 --> 01:39:00.160]  I'm here to help as long as I can help, and I want everybody to know that.
[01:39:00.160 --> 01:39:05.040]  I don't do this for money, though having money to pay the bills is nice.
[01:39:05.040 --> 01:39:06.560]  I don't do this for the money.
[01:39:06.560 --> 01:39:12.840]  I do this because I've been where you are, and I didn't like it.
[01:39:12.840 --> 01:39:17.560]  And by the fact that you're out there listening and calling in, you don't like it either.
[01:39:17.560 --> 01:39:20.120]  So let's work together to change it.
[01:39:20.120 --> 01:39:21.120]  That's why we're here.
[01:39:21.120 --> 01:39:27.480]  Right, and everybody out there, let your friends know, you know, listen to this program.
[01:39:27.480 --> 01:39:30.240]  I recommend buying the DVD.
[01:39:30.240 --> 01:39:33.800]  But if you don't, just listen to the program and you'll learn how to protect yourself.
[01:39:33.800 --> 01:39:38.640]  You have to do it, because if you don't think these people will rob you, they'll do it every
[01:39:38.640 --> 01:39:40.440]  single time.
[01:39:40.440 --> 01:39:46.200]  Anyways, you have a blessed day, and thank you so much for being out there for us, okay?
[01:39:46.200 --> 01:39:47.200]  Yes, sir.
[01:39:47.200 --> 01:39:48.200]  Thank you, John.
[01:39:48.200 --> 01:39:49.200]  You have a good night.
[01:39:49.200 --> 01:39:50.200]  Thank you.
[01:39:50.200 --> 01:39:51.200]  You too.
[01:39:51.200 --> 01:39:52.200]  All right.
[01:39:52.200 --> 01:39:54.200]  Let's go to Gary in Georgia.
[01:39:54.200 --> 01:39:55.200]  Gary, how you doing?
[01:39:55.200 --> 01:39:56.200]  Evening, Andy.
[01:39:56.200 --> 01:39:57.200]  Just fine.
[01:39:57.200 --> 01:40:06.840]  I've listened to your program a lot, and I see that you're more or less up on administrative
[01:40:06.840 --> 01:40:13.000]  law, and that's the fourth branch of government, which most people are not familiar with.
[01:40:13.000 --> 01:40:20.160]  And if they were to understand the federal as well as the state APA, then they could
[01:40:20.160 --> 01:40:27.360]  go to all the other agencies that say they have control of our conduct, because we have
[01:40:27.360 --> 01:40:31.840]  a right to privacy and be left alone in peaceful ownership of our property without torches
[01:40:31.840 --> 01:40:33.720]  and affairs from another.
[01:40:33.720 --> 01:40:47.760]  So we come to the issues of traffic and driving, and really, I have in front of me the Title
[01:40:47.760 --> 01:40:53.040]  375 of the Department of Motor Vehicle and Safety Registration.
[01:40:53.040 --> 01:41:03.400]  Anyway, these are rules, and you are the first person that I've heard call, like you spoke
[01:41:03.400 --> 01:41:12.480]  of the Texas Administrative Code, and I have the Georgia Administrative Code, and people
[01:41:12.480 --> 01:41:21.200]  need to understand that when we speak of the State Administrative Code, just like the CFR
[01:41:21.200 --> 01:41:29.520]  is Code of Federal Regulations of APA, because I am very knowledgeable on APA, been an expert
[01:41:29.520 --> 01:41:39.920]  witness in court on APA many years ago, and since I think you're knowledgeable of APA,
[01:41:39.920 --> 01:41:45.120]  you know that only the type of regulations could have force-effective law or legislative
[01:41:45.120 --> 01:41:50.040]  regulations, which carries out the intent of Congress.
[01:41:50.040 --> 01:42:04.400]  As far as the federal regulations go for income taxes, they are, since 1953, they are not
[01:42:04.400 --> 01:42:09.720]  any legislative regulations that have force-effective law on your right.
[01:42:09.720 --> 01:42:15.680]  It's notwithstanding that you must be in a regulated conduct for them to even have jurisdiction.
[01:42:15.680 --> 01:42:26.040]  So, we get that, so anyway, I have conclusive evidence, 7805, 26 U.S.C., second 7805 U.S.
[01:42:26.040 --> 01:42:32.720]  Code, says the Secretary shall make all rules and regulations for enforceable title.
[01:42:32.720 --> 01:42:40.200]  Well, the 7805 is an interpretive regulation, which has no force-effective law, as well
[01:42:40.200 --> 01:42:44.200]  as the liens and levies that you were talking about.
[01:42:44.200 --> 01:42:51.520]  Regulations there is pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 301 Housekeeper Regulations, which George Washington
[01:42:51.520 --> 01:42:53.880]  used to regulate his troops.
[01:42:53.880 --> 01:42:59.640]  That just knocks down liens and levies, but anyway, I wanted to get into the traffic issue
[01:42:59.640 --> 01:43:09.240]  because that's your expertise, and I'm trying to connect in with the regulations for Georgia
[01:43:09.240 --> 01:43:13.080]  where you've got to have driver's license.
[01:43:13.080 --> 01:43:26.000]  So the Georgia Code here, as I said, 375 is title 375 of the Georgia Code Department of
[01:43:26.000 --> 01:43:31.720]  Motor Vehicle Safety Registration and Licensing Vehicle and...
[01:43:31.720 --> 01:43:35.280]  Okay, hang on, Gary, we're about to go to break.
[01:43:35.280 --> 01:43:39.440]  Folks, Jerry in Oregon and Ken in Texas, I see you on the board.
[01:43:39.440 --> 01:43:42.680]  I will try to get to you on the other side of the messages before we run out of time
[01:43:42.680 --> 01:43:47.440]  and get Gary finished up here with what he's got going on, but a few folks will hang in.
[01:43:47.440 --> 01:43:49.560]  We will be right back after these messages.
[01:43:49.560 --> 01:44:06.360]  This is Eddie Craig on Rule of Law Radio, and we'll be right back.
[01:44:06.360 --> 01:44:14.080]  Aerial spraying, chemtrails, the modified atmosphere, heavy metals and pesticides, carcinogens
[01:44:14.080 --> 01:44:17.960]  and chemical fibers all falling from the sky.
[01:44:17.960 --> 01:44:21.000]  You have a choice to keep your body clean.
[01:44:21.000 --> 01:44:30.720]  Detoxify with micro plant powder from hempusa.org or call 908-691-2608.
[01:44:30.720 --> 01:44:35.400]  It's odorless and tasteless and used in any liquid or food.
[01:44:35.400 --> 01:44:39.480]  Protect your family now with micro plant powder.
[01:44:39.480 --> 01:44:46.000]  Cleaning out heavy metals, parasites and toxins, order it now for daily intake and stock it
[01:44:46.000 --> 01:44:48.280]  now for long-term storage.
[01:44:48.280 --> 01:45:16.280]  Visit hempusa.org or call 908-691-2608 today.
[01:45:16.280 --> 01:45:32.720]  All right, we are back folks.
[01:45:32.720 --> 01:45:37.320]  All right, Mr. Gary, please continue.
[01:45:37.320 --> 01:45:43.200]  Okay, Eddie, I'll try to be short because I know you're getting into your program, sure,
[01:45:43.200 --> 01:45:46.520]  go ahead.
[01:45:46.520 --> 01:45:55.600]  Okay, this would be beneficial for all listeners is how can someone direct you to a court of
[01:45:55.600 --> 01:46:04.480]  no record when you're under jurisdiction, say in the case of traffic my state, they
[01:46:04.480 --> 01:46:11.120]  can register Georgia Department of Motor Vehicle and Safety and you never had administrative
[01:46:11.120 --> 01:46:16.200]  hearing which the agency itself is supposed to exhaust its administrative remedies before
[01:46:16.200 --> 01:46:18.320]  you even get the so-called court procedure.
[01:46:18.320 --> 01:46:23.080]  So maybe you can clarify that for me, thank you, sir.
[01:46:23.080 --> 01:46:24.080]  Sure.
[01:46:24.080 --> 01:46:32.840]  Well, here in Texas in the administrative code, Title 37, Chapter 29, it specifically
[01:46:32.840 --> 01:46:39.120]  states that all rules and regulations of the codes under the jurisdiction of the Department
[01:46:39.120 --> 01:46:44.200]  of Public Safety are subject to the Administrative Procedures Act.
[01:46:44.200 --> 01:46:47.920]  It spells that out very, very clearly.
[01:46:47.920 --> 01:46:54.680]  Each chapter of the transportation code dealing with enforcement provisions are supervised,
[01:46:54.680 --> 01:47:01.640]  managed and ruled by the Department of Public Safety.
[01:47:01.640 --> 01:47:08.580]  So here in Texas, it's very, very clear that everything dealing with the transportation
[01:47:08.580 --> 01:47:15.320]  code for the purposes of enforcement must go through the State Office of Administrative
[01:47:15.320 --> 01:47:22.800]  Hearings pursuant Title 37, Chapter 29, Texas Administrative Code.
[01:47:22.800 --> 01:47:24.920]  Couldn't be clearer.
[01:47:24.920 --> 01:47:28.440]  And yet these people insist and argue that the Administrative Code has got nothing to
[01:47:28.440 --> 01:47:36.000]  do with it and wrong answer, read the hierarchy of the laws.
[01:47:36.000 --> 01:47:42.320]  The Administrative Code creates the department and sets up what their authority is.
[01:47:42.320 --> 01:47:47.880]  And then the transportation code documents the exercise of that authority.
[01:47:47.880 --> 01:47:49.320]  Which one has precedent?
[01:47:49.320 --> 01:47:53.320]  The one that created them or the one that simply says, now that you're created, here's
[01:47:53.320 --> 01:47:55.120]  what you can do?
[01:47:55.120 --> 01:47:56.120]  Okay.
[01:47:56.120 --> 01:47:59.120]  So Mike, one last question, sir.
[01:47:59.120 --> 01:48:05.200]  So therefore, what I call a chicken little court where you got the judge, one court,
[01:48:05.200 --> 01:48:10.920]  one judge does it all, sometimes that you have no witness there, it shows an injury.
[01:48:10.920 --> 01:48:18.480]  Anyway, sir, that particular policeman has no standing to even bring you there.
[01:48:18.480 --> 01:48:21.200]  Would you agree or disagree?
[01:48:21.200 --> 01:48:26.680]  Well, the police, here especially, I would agree with that.
[01:48:26.680 --> 01:48:32.000]  Because the policeman is directing you to a court without jurisdiction.
[01:48:32.000 --> 01:48:38.480]  And the section of the law, which is Chapter 543 of the transportation code here in Texas,
[01:48:38.480 --> 01:48:44.560]  tells him that he is commanded to send you to a court having jurisdiction.
[01:48:44.560 --> 01:48:52.600]  Well, he sends you to his city court or his county court or he doesn't send you to the
[01:48:52.600 --> 01:48:55.920]  State Office of Administrative Hearings.
[01:48:55.920 --> 01:48:58.680]  These other courts don't have jurisdiction.
[01:48:58.680 --> 01:49:01.720]  They're not the State Office of Administrative Hearings.
[01:49:01.720 --> 01:49:03.520]  There's only one of those in Texas.
[01:49:03.520 --> 01:49:06.680]  It's located in Austin.
[01:49:06.680 --> 01:49:08.280]  But he ain't directing you there.
[01:49:08.280 --> 01:49:11.760]  No, he has no authority to do that.
[01:49:11.760 --> 01:49:12.760]  I'm sorry.
[01:49:12.760 --> 01:49:13.760]  Say again, Gary?
[01:49:13.760 --> 01:49:21.480]  It's the same thing here in Georgia, which is the capital, and they just got one APA
[01:49:21.480 --> 01:49:24.040]  court there for that purpose.
[01:49:24.040 --> 01:49:26.560]  So you answer my question.
[01:49:26.560 --> 01:49:32.600]  All these other little courts, they arrest you and lock you up and all of that, they
[01:49:32.600 --> 01:49:35.840]  have no standing to do so there for no subject matter jurisdiction.
[01:49:35.840 --> 01:49:37.800]  That's the way I read it.
[01:49:37.800 --> 01:49:39.760]  Our court is with me, sir.
[01:49:39.760 --> 01:49:40.760]  That's the way I read it.
[01:49:40.760 --> 01:49:41.760]  Me too.
[01:49:41.760 --> 01:49:42.760]  Thank you very much.
[01:49:42.760 --> 01:49:43.760]  Have a nice night.
[01:49:43.760 --> 01:49:44.760]  You're welcome, Gary.
[01:49:44.760 --> 01:49:45.760]  Thanks for calling in.
[01:49:45.760 --> 01:49:46.760]  Yes, sir.
[01:49:46.760 --> 01:49:47.760]  All right.
[01:49:47.760 --> 01:49:48.760]  Jerry in Oregon.
[01:49:48.760 --> 01:49:49.760]  Ken, you are up next.
[01:49:49.760 --> 01:49:50.960]  I'm going to try to be fair about this.
[01:49:50.960 --> 01:49:54.440]  Jerry, you got five minutes so I can get to Ken.
[01:49:54.440 --> 01:49:55.920]  I won't even need that long.
[01:49:55.920 --> 01:49:56.920]  All right.
[01:49:56.920 --> 01:49:57.920]  What you got?
[01:49:57.920 --> 01:49:59.720]  I got basically two questions.
[01:49:59.720 --> 01:50:05.840]  One, you called into Jurisdictionary and you were discussing these issues with Dr. Graves
[01:50:05.840 --> 01:50:13.480]  on the show that day, and you were going into the laws and the statutes that proved it as
[01:50:13.480 --> 01:50:17.640]  far as the state of Texas.
[01:50:17.640 --> 01:50:24.560]  Did you ever make plans to get back with Dr. Graves to really inform him?
[01:50:24.560 --> 01:50:29.400]  I don't think Dr. Graves wants to go there from the sound of the arguments.
[01:50:29.400 --> 01:50:36.800]  You heard how astounded he was to hear what I told him the book that the legislature has
[01:50:36.800 --> 01:50:46.840]  to use says about the term person being intentionally created as a fictional entity.
[01:50:46.840 --> 01:50:47.840]  Right.
[01:50:47.840 --> 01:50:48.840]  Yeah.
[01:50:48.840 --> 01:50:49.840]  I understand that completely.
[01:50:49.840 --> 01:50:50.840]  Yeah.
[01:50:50.840 --> 01:50:51.840]  That took him by total surprise.
[01:50:51.840 --> 01:51:00.800]  But we need to follow up on that so he realizes what's going on, because I don't think he's
[01:51:00.800 --> 01:51:08.920]  really fully aware of what you've uncovered, so I was hoping you would get together with
[01:51:08.920 --> 01:51:16.000]  him again on the show and just lay it all out there and give him all of the documentation
[01:51:16.000 --> 01:51:17.840]  to prove it.
[01:51:17.840 --> 01:51:18.840]  Yeah.
[01:51:18.840 --> 01:51:19.840]  I would love to.
[01:51:19.840 --> 01:51:24.800]  I have been trying to... I was hoping that I asked him if he would be willing to discuss
[01:51:24.800 --> 01:51:27.240]  it with me on another show.
[01:51:27.240 --> 01:51:33.480]  I have yet to get a response, but I will be happy to ask him again, because I greatly
[01:51:33.480 --> 01:51:37.240]  respect Dr. Graves and I've called in and talked to him on several different issues,
[01:51:37.240 --> 01:51:42.960]  so I didn't mean to blindside him with the information for sure, but I'd be more than
[01:51:42.960 --> 01:51:48.080]  willing to come back on his show or even have him on ours on a Monday night and let's talk
[01:51:48.080 --> 01:51:52.760]  about this straight up if we can get it scheduled with him, so yeah, I would love to do it.
[01:51:52.760 --> 01:51:53.760]  That would be awesome.
[01:51:53.760 --> 01:51:54.760]  It's just a matter of getting it done.
[01:51:54.760 --> 01:51:55.760]  Okay.
[01:51:55.760 --> 01:52:01.440]  Well, I was just kind of curious about that, and when Gary was talking... when you guys
[01:52:01.440 --> 01:52:07.280]  were covering that, now when they don't exhaust their administrative procedures first and
[01:52:07.280 --> 01:52:13.640]  they circumvent those, they would be open to civil action, would they not?
[01:52:13.640 --> 01:52:18.040]  Yes, they would, because until they've exhausted all administrative remedy, no judicial court
[01:52:18.040 --> 01:52:21.000]  in Texas has jurisdiction.
[01:52:21.000 --> 01:52:24.520]  It's very plain in Chapter 2001 of the Government Code.
[01:52:24.520 --> 01:52:29.560]  The courts are specifically exempted from the definition of a state agency.
[01:52:29.560 --> 01:52:37.520]  Therefore, in an administrative hearing, the courts have no authority to act.
[01:52:37.520 --> 01:52:48.840]  So really, the most successful mechanism to make them pay attention is to go after them
[01:52:48.840 --> 01:52:53.560]  civilly, not criminally, because they're just going to hide all of that stuff.
[01:52:53.560 --> 01:52:58.280]  They're just going to put it on the shelf and flip it over.
[01:52:58.280 --> 01:52:59.280]  I'm sorry.
[01:52:59.280 --> 01:53:00.280]  I didn't mean to over-trump over you.
[01:53:00.280 --> 01:53:05.400]  The beauty of that is, though, is that you can use one to institute the other.
[01:53:05.400 --> 01:53:12.840]  You can go after them civilly, do your discovery, use the information gleaned from your discovery,
[01:53:12.840 --> 01:53:15.840]  and send it up with your criminal accusations.
[01:53:15.840 --> 01:53:16.840]  Right.
[01:53:16.840 --> 01:53:22.640]  So you would advocate that we start going after them civilly?
[01:53:22.640 --> 01:53:23.640]  Oh, yes.
[01:53:23.640 --> 01:53:25.640]  I'd put them in the pocketbook where it hurts.
[01:53:25.640 --> 01:53:26.640]  Yes, sir.
[01:53:26.640 --> 01:53:27.640]  I would.
[01:53:27.640 --> 01:53:28.640]  Yeah.
[01:53:28.640 --> 01:53:29.880]  That's where I'm at with it.
[01:53:29.880 --> 01:53:36.040]  I don't see any point in trying to initially go after them criminally, because I don't
[01:53:36.040 --> 01:53:38.040]  think you're going to get anywhere, quite honestly.
[01:53:38.040 --> 01:53:40.720]  I mean, it's the fox-guard and the henhouse.
[01:53:40.720 --> 01:53:45.880]  Well, that's true, but the basis of the criminal action is, if you can get that in somebody's
[01:53:45.880 --> 01:53:51.040]  hands that actually takes it and files it, it removes that particular individual from
[01:53:51.040 --> 01:53:56.960]  having any capacity to be over you in a case, especially if they're being prejudicial to
[01:53:56.960 --> 01:54:00.640]  begin with, because that would be a conflict of interest.
[01:54:00.640 --> 01:54:04.400]  You've got criminal charges pending against you, filed by the very person whose case you're
[01:54:04.400 --> 01:54:05.400]  hearing.
[01:54:05.400 --> 01:54:07.400]  No chance of impartiality there.
[01:54:07.400 --> 01:54:08.400]  Okay.
[01:54:08.400 --> 01:54:13.960]  Well, wouldn't you want to go after them with the collateral attacks, so you're not having
[01:54:13.960 --> 01:54:17.520]  the same judge adjudicate the civil action, right?
[01:54:17.520 --> 01:54:18.960]  You wouldn't anyway.
[01:54:18.960 --> 01:54:23.600]  A criminal judge would handle one set, and a civil judge would handle the other, and
[01:54:23.600 --> 01:54:25.080]  they would divide the caseload up.
[01:54:25.080 --> 01:54:27.320]  The same judge would not be able to handle both.
[01:54:27.320 --> 01:54:28.320]  Oh, okay.
[01:54:28.320 --> 01:54:35.200]  Well, that's all I had, and I was just looking forward to you and Dr. Graves going back into
[01:54:35.200 --> 01:54:37.800]  all of that, and I'll jump off the line.
[01:54:37.800 --> 01:54:38.800]  All right.
[01:54:38.800 --> 01:54:39.800]  Thank you, Jerry.
[01:54:39.800 --> 01:54:40.800]  All right.
[01:54:40.800 --> 01:54:41.800]  Ken in Texas.
[01:54:41.800 --> 01:54:42.800]  Excellent.
[01:54:42.800 --> 01:54:43.800]  Hi there, Eddie.
[01:54:43.800 --> 01:54:44.800]  Hi.
[01:54:44.800 --> 01:54:45.800]  How you doing?
[01:54:45.800 --> 01:54:46.800]  Great.
[01:54:46.800 --> 01:54:51.880]  Hey, I have this real quick idea I just want to throw out there, and you know, we're talking
[01:54:51.880 --> 01:54:59.360]  about law, and honestly, that's a pretty ethereal thing to all of us, and you know, I could
[01:54:59.360 --> 01:55:06.680]  tell anybody how to program a computer like you can, and you know, but you can't necessarily
[01:55:06.680 --> 01:55:11.080]  tell them how to make a judge act a certain way, so...
[01:55:11.080 --> 01:55:12.080]  This is true.
[01:55:12.080 --> 01:55:19.720]  But what I want to share and just throw out there is I really have empathy for people
[01:55:19.720 --> 01:55:25.800]  that are in some real bad situations, and I want us to all be able to make some headway
[01:55:25.800 --> 01:55:33.160]  with our fight here and any legal and ethical ways we can do that, so what I'm going to
[01:55:33.160 --> 01:55:38.120]  throw out there to everybody listening is, look, what you need to do is focus.
[01:55:38.120 --> 01:55:41.600]  For example, I live in North Texas.
[01:55:41.600 --> 01:55:48.880]  There's about... Within an hour of me, there's about 100 little cities, and we're all fighting
[01:55:48.880 --> 01:55:53.880]  these little municipalities where the judge usually shows up once a week for a couple
[01:55:53.880 --> 01:56:03.560]  hours and finds everybody guilty and rakes in 20 to $50,000 that night, and that's justice,
[01:56:03.560 --> 01:56:04.560]  and...
[01:56:04.560 --> 01:56:06.120]  No, that's just us.
[01:56:06.120 --> 01:56:07.120]  Yeah.
[01:56:07.120 --> 01:56:14.240]  You know, a friend of mine just came from one of those down in Red Oak, and you know,
[01:56:14.240 --> 01:56:19.920]  he was down there fighting to the best of his ability and lost, and you know, what I
[01:56:19.920 --> 01:56:27.120]  want to propose is that we focus, see, as Randy has said, you know, we need to do things
[01:56:27.120 --> 01:56:35.080]  like have these bar grievances, judicial complaints, but that's not the right term, but a complaint
[01:56:35.080 --> 01:56:36.080]  against the judge.
[01:56:36.080 --> 01:56:41.600]  What if, wherever you are, those of you that are interested, you get together and you say,
[01:56:41.600 --> 01:56:45.080]  you know, we're not going to worry about fighting all these cities at once, we're all going
[01:56:45.080 --> 01:56:50.800]  to focus on one of them, the most egregious one, and we're going to get some traction.
[01:56:50.800 --> 01:56:55.040]  Now, on traction, I see that you could do two things.
[01:56:55.040 --> 01:57:00.040]  First of all, I hear a lot from you and others that Michigan is lost.
[01:57:00.040 --> 01:57:04.600]  You know, we need to make a U.S. map without Michigan, right?
[01:57:04.600 --> 01:57:07.120]  Yeah, it's Minnesota, actually.
[01:57:07.120 --> 01:57:09.400]  Minnesota is the one slipping off the deep end.
[01:57:09.400 --> 01:57:10.400]  Yes.
[01:57:10.400 --> 01:57:12.840]  And I wrote down here, Minnesota is lost.
[01:57:12.840 --> 01:57:16.920]  I mean, hey, that's not good for any of us, especially those in Minnesota.
[01:57:16.920 --> 01:57:19.360]  How about wherever you are?
[01:57:19.360 --> 01:57:24.080]  I mean, if you're in Alabama or New York or whatever, you ought to be concerned about
[01:57:24.080 --> 01:57:27.600]  Minnesota, and let's come up with ways to help them.
[01:57:27.600 --> 01:57:31.000]  Write to your congressman and say, listen, I hear about this crap going on in Minnesota.
[01:57:31.000 --> 01:57:36.520]  Okay, now, the other side of that coin is I did some research about getting judges thrown
[01:57:36.520 --> 01:57:44.240]  out, and overall, that's pretty tough, but let me tell you where I've discovered that
[01:57:44.240 --> 01:57:46.960]  they're getting some results with that.
[01:57:46.960 --> 01:57:47.960]  That's in Florida.
[01:57:47.960 --> 01:57:54.280]  There may be other states, but I saw, you know what, here's actual cases where they
[01:57:54.280 --> 01:57:58.080]  have successfully thrown out bad judges.
[01:57:58.080 --> 01:58:00.680]  Cool, they're getting some traction.
[01:58:00.680 --> 01:58:05.280]  Yeah, well, see, that's exactly what that constitutional amendment I was proposing would
[01:58:05.280 --> 01:58:06.960]  help us do.
[01:58:06.960 --> 01:58:07.960]  Yes.
[01:58:07.960 --> 01:58:08.960]  Thanks, Ed.
[01:58:08.960 --> 01:58:09.960]  It's all I had.
[01:58:09.960 --> 01:58:10.960]  All right, Ken.
[01:58:10.960 --> 01:58:13.960]  Well, I appreciate you calling in.
[01:58:13.960 --> 01:58:19.840]  Listeners, thank you so much for hanging around with me and flying this show solo tonight.
[01:58:19.840 --> 01:58:23.880]  I hope I didn't botch things up too bad for y'all out there.
[01:58:23.880 --> 01:58:27.880]  Thank you for the call-ins, for all the support you've given the show.
[01:58:27.880 --> 01:58:30.800]  We really, really appreciate the listeners we have.
[01:58:30.800 --> 01:58:33.280]  We want you to keep coming back.
[01:58:33.280 --> 01:58:35.400]  We also want you to recruit others.
[01:58:35.400 --> 01:58:38.720]  We need to get the word out and the education going, people.
[01:58:38.720 --> 01:58:42.960]  It's time to wake up and stop seeing the ostrich with your head in the sand.
[01:58:42.960 --> 01:58:46.640]  Fictional as that may be, the example is set.
[01:58:46.640 --> 01:58:48.000]  Let's get on our feet.
[01:58:48.000 --> 01:58:49.320]  Let's make some noise.
[01:58:49.320 --> 01:58:51.840]  Let's get back our country and our rights.
[01:58:51.840 --> 01:58:56.400]  This is Rule of Law Radio with Eddie Craig, Randy Kelton, and Deborah Stevens.
[01:58:56.400 --> 01:59:24.960]  Thanks again for listening, and we will see you next time.
[01:59:27.360 --> 01:59:35.760]  I'm like a stepping razor, don't watch my eyes, I'm dangerous, dangerous.
[01:59:35.760 --> 01:59:42.960]  I'm like a stepping razor, don't watch my eyes, I'm dangerous, dangerous.
[01:59:42.960 --> 01:59:45.680]  When you eat, now you want to drink.
[01:59:45.680 --> 01:59:49.120]  Drink, let's drink, let's drink.
[01:59:49.120 --> 01:59:53.040]  Drink, let's drink, let's drink.
[01:59:53.040 --> 01:59:58.560]  Drink, let's drink, let's drink.