ROL_2010-05-07_16k_Hr1-2.timecode

[00:00.000 --> 00:04.560]  This news brief brought to you by the International News Net.
[00:04.560 --> 00:10.400]  U.S. farmers' use of Monsanto's Weedkiller Roundup has led to the rapid growth of tenacious
[00:10.400 --> 00:15.480]  new superweeds. To fight them, farmers are being forced to spray fields with more toxic
[00:15.480 --> 00:23.000]  herbicides, pull weeds by hand, and return to regular ploughing. As crude oil continued
[00:23.000 --> 00:28.000]  to pour into the Gulf of Mexico Friday, questions were being asked over the relationship between
[00:28.000 --> 00:33.000]  BP and government regulators. The company is alleged to have been allowed to drill the
[00:33.000 --> 00:40.120]  deep water well without filing plans for how it would cope with a major blowout. Israel's
[00:40.120 --> 00:46.840]  ambassador to the U.K., Ron Prosor, claims Israel is being, quote, de-legitimized and
[00:46.840 --> 00:54.520]  demonized by misinformed British public opinion. Faisal Shahzad, the alleged Times Square bomber,
[00:54.520 --> 01:00.840]  was disowned by the Pakistani Taliban Thursday as U.S. politicians call for him to be stripped
[01:00.840 --> 01:06.600]  of his U.S. citizenship so he can be tried by a military tribunal. Shahzad was praised
[01:06.600 --> 01:11.760]  by a Pakistani Taliban spokesman who said, quote, we don't even know him. Hours after
[01:11.760 --> 01:17.960]  Shahzad allegedly left a Nissan Pathfinder near Times Square last Saturday, the Pakistani
[01:17.960 --> 01:23.680]  Taliban appeared to claim responsibility for the failed attack in a YouTube video. However,
[01:23.680 --> 01:29.600]  the spokesman said his organization had been framed for the attack. At the same time, Pakistan's
[01:29.600 --> 01:35.640]  ambassador to Washington, Hussein Haqqani, insisted it was premature to link Shahzad
[01:35.640 --> 01:42.400]  to Qari Hussein Masood, the Pakistani Taliban's chief bomb maker. Pakistan's cooperation in
[01:42.400 --> 01:48.280]  questioning Shahzad's associates and reconstructing his activities is seen in Washington as a
[01:48.280 --> 01:58.680]  vital test of its willingness to crack down on militant groups operating from Waziristan.
[01:58.680 --> 02:04.840]  Four Arrows, co-author of American Assassination, the Strange Death of Senator Paul Wellstone,
[02:04.840 --> 02:11.440]  Thursday reported a conversation in which Senator Barbara Boxer confirmed the 2002 Senator
[02:11.440 --> 02:17.360]  Paul Wellstone plane crash was an assassination. Four Arrows told the Kevin Barrett radio show
[02:17.360 --> 02:22.320]  a friend of his during a conversation with Senator Boxer was surprised when the senator
[02:22.320 --> 02:27.960]  said, quote, the Wellstone assassination was meant as a warning to all of us. Senator Boxer
[02:27.960 --> 02:33.840]  said if asked, she would deny making the statement. Senator Boxer, who other sources report has
[02:33.840 --> 02:39.680]  admitted she knows 9-11 was an inside job, has publicly confirmed she did not trust the
[02:39.680 --> 02:44.920]  9-11 commission's version of events. Senator Boxer said, quote, we need to pursue the truth
[02:44.920 --> 02:50.560]  about 9-11 wherever it leads. According to Four Arrows, Senator Boxer and other high
[02:50.560 --> 02:55.720]  visibility people know that if they cross certain lines, they and all their families
[02:55.720 --> 03:19.080]  will be assassinated.
[03:26.160 --> 03:50.120]  What are you gonna do? What are you gonna do? What are you gonna do when they come for
[03:50.120 --> 03:54.240]  you? What are you gonna do when they come for you? When you were eight and you had bad
[03:54.240 --> 04:16.940]  Bad boys, bad boys, what are you going to do when we come for you?
[04:16.940 --> 04:23.100]  This is the rule of law, Randy Kelton, Eddie Craig, Deborah Stevens.
[04:23.100 --> 04:29.040]  We're doing our four-hour info marathon tonight, Friday night four-hour info marathon.
[04:29.040 --> 04:37.520]  So, callers, if you'd like to call in, 512-646-1984.
[04:37.520 --> 04:42.720]  And tonight, Eddie, you wanted to start off talking about city charters.
[04:42.720 --> 04:49.960]  Yeah, I was doing some research on some things dealing with, you know, where the cities get
[04:49.960 --> 04:55.400]  the authority dealing with the city ordinances and so on and so forth to do what it does
[04:55.400 --> 04:59.240]  and use those against the people that live in that city.
[04:59.240 --> 05:04.960]  Well, everyone that's listened to the show for a while knows my argument that the enacting
[05:04.960 --> 05:15.080]  clause basically prohibits city ordinances from being utilized and authorized and empowered
[05:15.080 --> 05:20.640]  as law because they are not passed by the legislature nor do they have the enacting
[05:20.640 --> 05:27.600]  clause that the Texas Constitution requires them to have in order to be a law.
[05:27.600 --> 05:34.480]  And of course, we know that if it's not a law, it can't be made to apply to the people,
[05:34.480 --> 05:37.440]  not remain constitutional.
[05:37.440 --> 05:41.880]  So that got me to digging around in the city charters and I happened to find the one for
[05:41.880 --> 05:43.720]  the city of Austin.
[05:43.720 --> 05:48.400]  Now, when you go to the city of Austin Charter, it's pretty extensive.
[05:48.400 --> 05:52.240]  It's almost like its own code all by itself.
[05:52.240 --> 05:58.760]  But the city charter of Austin has a Title 12, which is entitled Traffic Regulations.
[05:58.760 --> 06:05.680]  Now, what I would like to read to you is just a couple of small sections out of that particular
[06:05.680 --> 06:06.680]  title.
[06:06.680 --> 06:15.520]  And in Section 12-1-2, it states that compliance is required.
[06:15.520 --> 06:22.240]  Subsection A, a person who performs an act prohibited by this title or fails to perform
[06:22.240 --> 06:25.920]  an act required by this title commits an offense.
[06:25.920 --> 06:32.320]  Now, remember, we're in the traffic regulations of Title 12 of the Austin City Charter.
[06:32.320 --> 06:39.040]  Section B, except as otherwise provided in this title, an offense under this title is
[06:39.040 --> 06:45.720]  a Class C misdemeanor punishable by a fine not to exceed $500.
[06:45.720 --> 06:53.200]  Then you go to Section 12-1-3, Application of Title to Public Employees.
[06:53.200 --> 07:00.820]  This title applies to the driver of a vehicle owned or used by a governmental entity.
[07:00.820 --> 07:06.620]  And then you have 12-1-4, Applicability of State Law.
[07:06.620 --> 07:12.520]  Except as otherwise provided in this title, state law relating to the regulation of pedestrian
[07:12.520 --> 07:17.200]  and motor traffic apply in the city.
[07:17.200 --> 07:24.880]  Now let's talk about just those three sections there for a minute, especially 12-1-3, Application
[07:24.880 --> 07:27.800]  of Title to Public Employees.
[07:27.800 --> 07:37.240]  Now since an offense under this title involves a city ordinance and not a state law, and
[07:37.240 --> 07:45.000]  we've eliminated the possibility of an ordinance being valid law because it's in conflict with
[07:45.000 --> 07:51.080]  Article 5, Section 29 of the state constitution because it lacks an enacting clause.
[07:51.080 --> 07:58.480]  The enacting clause specifically states that it must be passed by the legislature.
[07:58.480 --> 08:07.260]  It would seem like 12-1-3 therefore solidifies my argument that city ordinances can only
[08:07.260 --> 08:16.760]  be utilized and are applicable only to the city employees because they cannot be constitutionally
[08:16.760 --> 08:21.440]  applied to the people.
[08:21.440 --> 08:29.040]  12-1-4 right here separates the applicability of state law from the applicability of the
[08:29.040 --> 08:31.680]  ordinance.
[08:31.680 --> 08:40.480]  By saying in a separate section that state law does apply in the city as if it was possible
[08:40.480 --> 08:46.280]  for the city to state otherwise.
[08:46.280 --> 08:56.120]  So what we appear to have on its face is one section of the law that clarifies my argument
[08:56.120 --> 09:03.680]  that city ordinances don't apply to you and I, never have, absolutely cannot.
[09:03.680 --> 09:10.680]  And then you have another section of that same set of rules stating that the state law
[09:10.680 --> 09:16.360]  however does apply within the city and that would carry force and effect if that law once
[09:16.360 --> 09:20.940]  again applies to you.
[09:20.940 --> 09:26.560]  So what I'd recommend to folks is while you're researching the statutes I would highly recommend
[09:26.560 --> 09:34.720]  that you look up your city charter and find out by what authority the city is doing anything
[09:34.720 --> 09:43.520]  that it's doing because once again a city charter is very much like a state code in
[09:43.520 --> 09:46.800]  relation to that governmental body.
[09:46.800 --> 09:54.440]  It gives them certain powers and authorities but those powers and authorities are limited
[09:54.440 --> 09:59.420]  only to the powers and authorities that the people saw fit to delegate.
[09:59.420 --> 10:02.560]  Now again let's go through that delegation structure.
[10:02.560 --> 10:06.340]  At the very top you have the people.
[10:06.340 --> 10:11.040]  The people create the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
[10:11.040 --> 10:15.880]  Now the Bill of Rights does not grant any rights or privileges.
[10:15.880 --> 10:20.280]  It does not create any rights or privileges.
[10:20.280 --> 10:28.320]  It simply puts them down on paper and then it says all the things we put down on paper
[10:28.320 --> 10:35.240]  are not exhaustive just because it's not listed here does not mean it is not a right belonging
[10:35.240 --> 10:37.120]  to the people.
[10:37.120 --> 10:44.440]  In fact the Constitution is the only rights that we give to the government and if that
[10:44.440 --> 10:53.480]  right is not expressly granted or ancillary to the execution of a power that we did grant
[10:53.480 --> 10:57.920]  then that right power or authority does not exist.
[10:57.920 --> 11:00.320]  In the hands of government.
[11:00.320 --> 11:06.280]  It only exists in the hands of the people.
[11:06.280 --> 11:13.200]  Now the Constitution then sets out the rules and regulations by which government operates.
[11:13.200 --> 11:19.080]  So that means our judiciary, our executive, and our legislative are all on equal footing.
[11:19.080 --> 11:25.360]  They're all on the same level and they're all governed by the same document.
[11:25.360 --> 11:33.600]  With those you have your individual governmental agencies or subdivisions and in this case
[11:33.600 --> 11:42.440]  exactly what is a municipality a subdivision of in relation to the state?
[11:42.440 --> 11:48.240]  Is it a mini body of the same three branches of government?
[11:48.240 --> 11:54.160]  Is a municipality both or all of the legislative, executive, and judicial body in government
[11:54.160 --> 12:03.040]  all of their own as a subdivision of the state or are they something else or are they simply
[12:03.040 --> 12:12.400]  a finger of the hand, a toe on the foot instead of an entire appendage all unto themselves?
[12:12.400 --> 12:18.880]  Those are questions we need to start asking ourselves because if we didn't give the legislature
[12:18.880 --> 12:26.120]  an authority to do something the legislature does not have the power to delegate an authority
[12:26.120 --> 12:30.720]  they themselves don't have.
[12:30.720 --> 12:37.760]  It's just plain common sense but they don't act that way do they?
[12:37.760 --> 12:41.520]  They act like they have all the power and authority in the world to tell us that we
[12:41.520 --> 12:48.800]  can or can't do anything or everything but I for one want you to show me where that was
[12:48.800 --> 12:55.360]  granted to you in the constitution because if you can't show it to me in the constitution
[12:55.360 --> 13:02.920]  then my operative thought process is you don't have it and there's no way for you to acquire
[13:02.920 --> 13:09.960]  it if the constitution doesn't give it to you and the constitution can't give it to
[13:09.960 --> 13:15.680]  you unless the people let the constitution give it to you by writing it in such a way
[13:15.680 --> 13:18.080]  as to give it to you.
[13:18.080 --> 13:24.840]  So either produce it or find a new hobby but get out of my face because you don't have
[13:24.840 --> 13:29.720]  the authority to be here.
[13:29.720 --> 13:37.520]  Again folks it's all about knowing who you are, what your authority is and what their
[13:37.520 --> 13:44.160]  authority isn't and we need to start holding on to that.
[13:44.160 --> 13:48.640]  It's the only way we're going to get control of this runaway government we have at any
[13:48.640 --> 13:53.520]  level federal, state or local.
[13:53.520 --> 13:58.360]  So put your thinking caps on, dig into your city charters, research everything about what
[13:58.360 --> 14:01.560]  your city charter says the city can do.
[14:01.560 --> 14:07.800]  Just for instance if the city charter does not contain a section that allows for the
[14:07.800 --> 14:17.520]  creation and maintenance of a police force then there cannot be a municipal police force
[14:17.520 --> 14:23.000]  because there's no authority in law for them to exist on behalf of the city.
[14:23.000 --> 14:25.200]  See how it works?
[14:25.200 --> 14:37.020]  No lawful authorization, no power, no authority can't exist and can't function.
[14:37.020 --> 14:42.600]  You would think these people would be smart enough to understand this but I guess the
[14:42.600 --> 14:47.800]  hopes are that they hope we aren't.
[14:47.800 --> 14:51.760]  But if you'll go through and look you've got all kinds of different sections in there
[14:51.760 --> 14:56.800]  and you'll see the city has all kinds of rules and regulations but just like the state the
[14:56.800 --> 15:05.800]  city can only exercise authority over those things which it creates.
[15:05.800 --> 15:13.720]  It cannot exercise authority over things that are not within its power and the things not
[15:13.720 --> 15:23.280]  within its power are the people, the people's property or the people's rights.
[15:23.280 --> 15:29.960]  They're just not within the authority of these political subdivisions or of the state and
[15:29.960 --> 15:37.860]  if the state doesn't have it they certainly cannot delegate it.
[15:37.860 --> 15:42.240]  So it's time to get control, it's time to stand on your own two feet, it's time to stand
[15:42.240 --> 15:48.200]  up and say I am not someone over whom you have this authority.
[15:48.200 --> 15:51.800]  I have a constitution that says what you can and cannot do.
[15:51.800 --> 15:57.680]  It doesn't limit me, it limits you, the government.
[15:57.680 --> 16:04.160]  The constitution is your Bible not mine.
[16:04.160 --> 16:10.520]  The only part of that constitution that matters to me is the Bill of Rights and not because
[16:10.520 --> 16:17.520]  it grants me rights but it tells you the government specifically what rights you are forbidden
[16:17.520 --> 16:22.080]  to interfere with in any way shape or form.
[16:22.080 --> 16:31.080]  Yeah and it also says that we have additional rights that are not necessarily enumerated
[16:31.080 --> 16:32.360]  in the Bill of Rights too.
[16:32.360 --> 16:33.360]  That's right.
[16:33.360 --> 16:37.560]  That's why I say it doesn't grant them and what's not listed is not automatically null
[16:37.560 --> 16:38.560]  and void.
[16:38.560 --> 16:39.560]  That's right.
[16:39.560 --> 16:48.200]  All right we're going to break, we have some callers on the line, we see in Montana.
[16:48.200 --> 17:01.800]  Callers if you'd like to call in 512-646-1984 we'll be right back.
[17:01.800 --> 17:06.840]  Capital Coin and Bullion is your local source for rare coins, precious metals and coin supplies
[17:06.840 --> 17:08.720]  in the Austin metro area.
[17:08.720 --> 17:10.760]  We also ship worldwide.
[17:10.760 --> 17:14.800]  We are a family owned and operated business that offers competitive prices on your coin
[17:14.800 --> 17:15.800]  and metals purchases.
[17:15.800 --> 17:21.480]  We buy, sell, trade and consign rare coins, gold and silver coin collections, precious
[17:21.480 --> 17:23.360]  metals and scrap gold.
[17:23.360 --> 17:26.960]  We will purchase and sell gold and jewelry items as well.
[17:26.960 --> 17:29.560]  We offer daily specials on coins and bullion.
[17:29.560 --> 17:35.720]  We're located at 5448 Barnett Road Suite 3 and we're open Monday through Friday 10am
[17:35.720 --> 17:39.520]  to 6pm, Saturdays 10am to 5pm.
[17:39.520 --> 17:42.680]  You are welcome to stop in our shop during regular business hours.
[17:42.680 --> 17:48.280]  Or call 512-646-6440 with any questions.
[17:48.280 --> 17:53.120]  Ask for Chad and say you've heard about us on Rule of Law Radio or 90.1 SM and get a
[17:53.120 --> 17:54.120]  special discount.
[17:54.120 --> 18:21.120]  That's Capital Coin and Bullion, 512-646-6440.
[18:21.120 --> 18:37.120]  We're open Monday through Friday 10am to 6pm, Saturdays 10am to 5pm, Saturdays 10am to
[18:37.120 --> 18:38.120]  6pm.
[18:38.120 --> 18:57.120]  We're open Monday through Friday 10am to 6pm, Saturdays 10am to 6pm, Saturdays 10am to
[18:57.120 --> 19:09.120]  6pm, Saturdays 10am to 6pm, Saturdays 10am to 6pm.
[19:09.120 --> 19:13.120]  From the man that came all the way from Galilee
[19:13.120 --> 19:16.120]  Well, something's called a safe and warm place to be
[19:16.120 --> 19:19.120]  Where I don't have to work so hard to be free
[19:19.120 --> 19:22.120]  Some guys are trying to rewrite history
[19:22.120 --> 19:25.120]  But they got caught, and now them guys got the plea
[19:25.120 --> 19:32.120]  Looks like justice
[19:32.120 --> 19:38.120]  Looks like justice
[19:38.120 --> 20:05.120]  Yeah, yeah
[20:05.120 --> 20:08.120]  The only way we're going with the corruption of things
[20:08.120 --> 20:11.120]  Is when we finally learn how to police the police
[20:11.120 --> 20:14.120]  The folks were trying to say that we were boiling the seas
[20:14.120 --> 20:16.120]  Next thing you know
[20:16.120 --> 20:18.120]  All right, this is the rule of law
[20:18.120 --> 20:21.120]  Randy Kelton, Eddie Craig, Deborah Stevens
[20:21.120 --> 20:25.120]  We're taking your calls tonight
[20:25.120 --> 20:27.120]  Apparently we have lost Randy
[20:27.120 --> 20:30.120]  It's unclear as to what has happened
[20:30.120 --> 20:35.120]  So we are going to do the best we can at this point in time
[20:35.120 --> 20:39.120]  We've got Reese in Montana
[20:39.120 --> 20:41.120]  Reese, thanks for calling in
[20:41.120 --> 20:43.120]  What's on your mind tonight?
[20:43.120 --> 20:44.120]  Hey, you know what?
[20:44.120 --> 20:45.120]  I just went on the air
[20:45.120 --> 20:46.120]  Let me call you back
[20:46.120 --> 20:49.120]  I wanted to finish following up with you from yesterday
[20:49.120 --> 20:50.120]  Okay, bye-bye
[20:50.120 --> 20:52.120]  Sorry, I got a million things going on over here
[20:52.120 --> 20:54.120]  That's okay, go ahead
[20:54.120 --> 20:57.120]  Yeah, definitely wanted to continue
[20:57.120 --> 21:02.120]  Where I left off from last night in terms of he was going over the pleading
[21:02.120 --> 21:04.120]  Not being begging
[21:04.120 --> 21:07.120]  Because I was concerned about motions and pleadings
[21:07.120 --> 21:12.120]  And coming across that way and not compromising the status
[21:12.120 --> 21:13.120]  So that was where we left off
[21:13.120 --> 21:17.120]  And then since then I've looked in the places where he told me to look
[21:17.120 --> 21:19.120]  And I've taken some of that direction already
[21:19.120 --> 21:20.120]  And boy, he was right
[21:20.120 --> 21:25.120]  There's a plethora of once you see them in their proper light
[21:25.120 --> 21:27.120]  It's all kind of stuff there
[21:27.120 --> 21:32.120]  So I've looked in there and I have some additional questions on that also
[21:32.120 --> 21:35.120]  Okay, looked in where?
[21:35.120 --> 21:40.120]  The Montana annotated code
[21:40.120 --> 21:45.120]  Okay, well, let's figure out where you were and we'll see what we can do
[21:45.120 --> 21:50.120]  Okay, they don't have an actual penal code, but they have a criminal section
[21:50.120 --> 21:51.120]  Right
[21:51.120 --> 21:56.120]  Well, I found a very I mean these people are looking at oh my gosh
[21:56.120 --> 22:02.120]  Millions of dollars in violation
[22:02.120 --> 22:06.120]  Oh, they stole property that was actually our church's
[22:06.120 --> 22:08.120]  It belongs to the church
[22:08.120 --> 22:11.120]  So I'm wondering if when I put these complaints forward
[22:11.120 --> 22:16.120]  Can the church put a separate complaint in apart from my husband?
[22:16.120 --> 22:17.120]  Yes
[22:17.120 --> 22:23.120]  If it was actually property owned by the church and you were using it with permission, yes
[22:23.120 --> 22:25.120]  Okay, so that's one
[22:25.120 --> 22:30.120]  And then also I know you guys say that you're dealing with the pro se litigants
[22:30.120 --> 22:34.120]  Where does the sui juris status come in with your advice that you give?
[22:34.120 --> 22:37.120]  Do you address that at all?
[22:37.120 --> 22:41.120]  All you're doing is identifying how you're standing before the court
[22:41.120 --> 22:43.120]  That's really all you're doing
[22:43.120 --> 22:44.120]  Okay
[22:44.120 --> 22:49.120]  And if you just look in Black's Law for the definition of pro per pro se and sui juris
[22:49.120 --> 22:53.120]  You'll see what the definitions of each of those are
[22:53.120 --> 22:54.120]  Uh-huh
[22:54.120 --> 22:55.120]  Okay
[22:55.120 --> 23:02.120]  And really all they're doing is just identifying the status of which you stand before the court
[23:02.120 --> 23:07.120]  Okay, so it doesn't alter your presentation at all?
[23:07.120 --> 23:09.120]  Well, no, it doesn't
[23:09.120 --> 23:13.120]  Okay, great
[23:13.120 --> 23:26.120]  And the tort letter, actually the notice and demand that he spoke of regarding being an unruly client
[23:26.120 --> 23:32.120]  Is there anywhere we can, how can we connect with that document?
[23:32.120 --> 23:37.120]  You may want to check and see if he's got it posted on his jurisimprudence.com site
[23:37.120 --> 23:44.120]  But really all it is is it's a letter written to the court on behalf of your attorney
[23:44.120 --> 23:55.120]  Letting the court know that the attorney has a client that is going to hold him to his duty
[23:55.120 --> 23:58.120]  Okay
[23:58.120 --> 24:01.120]  Or you can write it directly to the attorney for that purpose
[24:01.120 --> 24:07.120]  Basically, you're just informing them that you intend to ensure the attorney does his job
[24:07.120 --> 24:14.120]  And you're going to ride him like a stock racehorse to make him do it
[24:14.120 --> 24:22.120]  And that's what the attorney's going to tell the court is he's got an unruly client, someone he can't control
[24:22.120 --> 24:25.120]  Okay
[24:25.120 --> 24:28.120]  All right, that sounds good
[24:28.120 --> 24:33.120]  Do we know if Randy does any traveling and handling stuff?
[24:33.120 --> 24:37.120]  Or does he strictly just do the advising or whatever he calls it?
[24:37.120 --> 24:41.120]  Well, I know he has traveled around to help people with some stuff
[24:41.120 --> 24:44.120]  I don't know what his capacity for doing that at the moment is
[24:44.120 --> 24:49.120]  And let's see, the tort letter
[24:49.120 --> 24:53.120]  I guess I should go to his website on that one too, Jurisimprudence
[24:53.120 --> 24:54.120]  I didn't go there yet
[24:54.120 --> 25:05.120]  Well, you need to see what your particular state requires in the area of notice and notice of tort and follow that
[25:05.120 --> 25:11.120]  All a tort letter is is notice to the person or entity you're going to sue
[25:11.120 --> 25:17.120]  That you are making a claim against them and intend to enforce that claim
[25:17.120 --> 25:24.120]  But each state may have different requirements for what that letter must contain
[25:24.120 --> 25:27.120]  Okay
[25:27.120 --> 25:33.120]  It's like each state has its own requirements for what a criminal complaint may contain
[25:33.120 --> 25:37.120]  And if it misses anything that it's supposed to have, it's null and void
[25:37.120 --> 25:39.120]  All right
[25:39.120 --> 25:45.120]  Okay, so is he going to be on tonight at all or is he not coming in tonight?
[25:45.120 --> 25:47.120]  At this point, we don't know
[25:47.120 --> 25:51.120]  I don't know what's going on, we just seem to have lost him
[25:51.120 --> 25:53.120]  Oh, wow, okay
[25:53.120 --> 25:55.120]  That's not a permanent situation
[25:55.120 --> 25:58.120]  Yeah, I know, really
[25:58.120 --> 26:01.120]  Yeah, because I definitely wanted to get his input
[26:01.120 --> 26:06.120]  Because honestly, he definitely has the spirit and the fire to
[26:06.120 --> 26:10.120]  Because like I said, me going in is a different scenario
[26:10.120 --> 26:15.120]  Well, he can't go in and do things for you because he's not an attorney
[26:15.120 --> 26:22.120]  See, we're not attorneys, we can't represent people, we can't actually do things for people
[26:22.120 --> 26:26.120]  We don't give legal advice, we're not authorized to do that
[26:26.120 --> 26:35.120]  We learn the law ourselves and we help other people learn the law and do things themselves
[26:35.120 --> 26:38.120]  But we can't go in and do things for you
[26:38.120 --> 26:44.120]  Well, let me ask you this, do you think it would be advisable to maybe get some security and go in there?
[26:44.120 --> 26:50.120]  Because I don't mind doing it, I have the guts to do it, but it's just I don't trust these people
[26:50.120 --> 26:53.120]  What do you mean by security?
[26:53.120 --> 27:00.120]  Well, I don't know, some people that are going to protect me from malicious engagement by them
[27:00.120 --> 27:05.120]  Well, the problem is you can't go in with your security being armed
[27:05.120 --> 27:10.120]  And the people you're going in to visit have armed people at their beck and call
[27:10.120 --> 27:15.120]  So when you say security, there's two types of security you have when you go in there
[27:15.120 --> 27:19.120]  Self-control and good sense, okay?
[27:19.120 --> 27:27.120]  When you go in to do any dealings with a public servant, you always go in prepared to document everything
[27:27.120 --> 27:32.120]  And there's two ways to do that, and I recommend using them both at every opportunity
[27:32.120 --> 27:37.120]  Take witnesses with you and take a recording device with you
[27:37.120 --> 27:42.120]  Whether it be an audio recorder, a video camera, doesn't matter
[27:42.120 --> 27:48.120]  And usually I would recommend carrying more than one
[27:48.120 --> 27:55.120]  But as long as you can keep accurate documentation of who said what to who and when and everything else
[27:55.120 --> 27:59.120]  Then that's as secure as you're going to make it
[27:59.120 --> 28:05.120]  Because you can't control how somebody else is going to react or do anything, whether it be right or wrong
[28:05.120 --> 28:10.120]  That's the whole problem. I mean, they could just falsely arrest me because they've already done it
[28:10.120 --> 28:14.120]  They've done it to three, four people who are around me. That's the whole reason why I fled from them
[28:14.120 --> 28:19.120]  Well, I'm willing to bet you they've probably done it to several thousand besides you
[28:19.120 --> 28:21.120]  Yeah, exactly, and I don't trust them
[28:21.120 --> 28:24.120]  I just don't trust them not to arrest me if I get too close to them
[28:24.120 --> 28:27.120]  Particularly if I'm going in there to handle some business
[28:27.120 --> 28:32.120]  If you go in and, like I said, keep your self-control
[28:32.120 --> 28:43.120]  Know what they are required to do and what you can and need to ask for when you're in there dealing with them
[28:43.120 --> 28:49.120]  You stand by the law. You make them stand by the law. Nobody should have a problem
[28:49.120 --> 28:57.120]  All you want to do is operate in such a manner as you cannot be held at fault for anything that occurs
[28:57.120 --> 28:59.120]  That's the key
[28:59.120 --> 29:03.120]  That is all we can do, but when people are lawless, it's a whole other story
[29:03.120 --> 29:07.120]  These people have proven to be 100% lawless
[29:07.120 --> 29:15.120]  That's true, but all you're doing at that point by wanting to take in someone that might be willing to be confrontational on your behalf
[29:15.120 --> 29:21.120]  Is up the ante of the number of people that's liable to get hurt
[29:21.120 --> 29:25.120]  So it's better to be smart than forceful
[29:25.120 --> 29:28.120]  Yeah, definitely. I don't disagree with that
[29:28.120 --> 29:31.120]  Now with regard to the police report that they're denying
[29:31.120 --> 29:33.120]  You guys
[29:33.120 --> 29:35.120]  Oh, on that
[29:35.120 --> 29:36.120]  Hold on
[29:36.120 --> 29:39.120]  We're going to break right now
[29:39.120 --> 29:42.120]  Just one moment, and we will be back on the other side
[29:42.120 --> 29:45.120]  This is the rule of law
[29:45.120 --> 29:47.120]  Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Eddie Craig
[29:47.120 --> 29:49.120]  We'll be right back
[30:01.120 --> 30:04.120]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[30:04.120 --> 30:08.120]  Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary
[30:08.120 --> 30:16.120]  An affordable, easy to understand, 4-CD course that will show you how in 24 hours, step-by-step
[30:16.120 --> 30:20.120]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing
[30:20.120 --> 30:24.120]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself
[30:24.120 --> 30:29.120]  Thousands have won with our step-by-step course, and now you can too
[30:29.120 --> 30:35.120]  Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case-winning experience
[30:35.120 --> 30:39.120]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand
[30:39.120 --> 30:43.120]  About the principles and practices that control our American courts
[30:43.120 --> 30:52.120]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases, pro se tactics, and much more
[30:52.120 --> 31:05.120]  Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner, or call toll-free, 866-LAW-EZ
[31:05.120 --> 31:11.120]  Yeah, I got a warrant, and I'm gonna serve them
[31:11.120 --> 31:15.120]  To the head of the government then, prosecute them
[31:15.120 --> 31:19.120]  Okay
[31:19.120 --> 31:41.120]  Alright, we are back, the rule of law
[31:41.120 --> 31:44.120]  We're taking your calls tonight
[31:44.120 --> 31:50.120]  So we're opening up the phone lines, 512-646-1984
[31:50.120 --> 31:53.120]  We've got open phone lines right now
[31:53.120 --> 31:58.120]  Other than Reese from Montana, go ahead, Reese
[31:58.120 --> 32:02.120]  What I was trying to ask about was the police report
[32:02.120 --> 32:07.120]  They're basically saying that I have to subpoena and go through this court rigmarole
[32:07.120 --> 32:12.120]  To just get a copy of the report, the incident report
[32:12.120 --> 32:20.120]  So I was wondering if you had any input on that element at all
[32:20.120 --> 32:26.120]  Well, first off, the police report is supposed to be a public record
[32:26.120 --> 32:31.120]  So there should be no reason why you cannot get a copy of the police report
[32:31.120 --> 32:34.120]  Reese, you have a lot of background noise on your end
[32:34.120 --> 32:35.120]  I do?
[32:35.120 --> 32:36.120]  Yes
[32:36.120 --> 32:39.120]  Sounds like a fan or something
[32:39.120 --> 32:42.120]  That must be my line because I don't have anything going on
[32:42.120 --> 32:43.120]  Okay
[32:43.120 --> 32:51.120]  Yeah, shut some stuff down
[32:51.120 --> 32:54.120]  But being a public record, that police report
[32:54.120 --> 32:56.120]  You should just be able to go in and get a copy of it
[32:56.120 --> 32:59.120]  What I'd do is I'd call down and ask a supervisor
[32:59.120 --> 33:04.120]  Just exactly what is the status of police reports once they've been filed
[33:04.120 --> 33:07.120]  Are they or are they not a matter of public record?
[33:07.120 --> 33:09.120]  Right
[33:09.120 --> 33:14.120]  And if they're a public record, why are they not available to the public?
[33:14.120 --> 33:19.120]  Right, so do you know if there's any other type of way I can put any pressure on in that regard?
[33:19.120 --> 33:20.120]  Is it the same thing?
[33:20.120 --> 33:29.120]  You can look at the statutes there in Montana and see what the statutes say that they're required to do with a police report
[33:29.120 --> 33:40.120]  The statute may specifically allow them to not give out a copy of a police report for a currently ongoing investigation
[33:40.120 --> 33:44.120]  Unless it is to a person involved in the incident
[33:44.120 --> 33:53.120]  But then if it contains information that they think may be necessary to assist them against you, they won't give it to you then either
[33:53.120 --> 34:02.120]  So you need to research and see what the requirements for public access to these police reports are according to the statute
[34:02.120 --> 34:07.120]  Okay, let's see
[34:07.120 --> 34:10.120]  I guess the other question too I had is like the whole
[34:10.120 --> 34:17.120]  I don't know if you guys get into the aspect of being considered or dubbed this corporate entity
[34:17.120 --> 34:23.120]  When you're actually going into the court world and with regard to the status issue again
[34:23.120 --> 34:31.120]  Is there any type of way that you can recommend not falling into that trap so to speak
[34:31.120 --> 34:40.120]  By going in and using these various arguments because you know these attorneys are supposed to be registered as foreign agents when they're in the court
[34:40.120 --> 34:44.120]  And most of them are in there as felons because they're not registered
[34:44.120 --> 34:48.120]  Because they're already guilty of felonies just being there unregistered
[34:48.120 --> 34:51.120]  Okay, can I offer a suggestion?
[34:51.120 --> 34:56.120]  Rethink whatever the research material is you're relying on
[34:56.120 --> 35:00.120]  Okay, there are lots of theories, there are lots of possibilities
[35:00.120 --> 35:07.120]  But like everything else there comes a time when you have to decide what is going to work and what isn't
[35:07.120 --> 35:12.120]  And I can tell you right now those arguments are not going to work
[35:12.120 --> 35:16.120]  They're just not
[35:16.120 --> 35:21.120]  The only status that matters is yours
[35:21.120 --> 35:33.120]  And that they have complied with both the federal constitution, the state constitution, and the laws of the state in general
[35:33.120 --> 35:40.120]  If they are acting as an official government agency they are bound by those rules
[35:40.120 --> 35:45.120]  If they refuse to abide by those rules they have abdicated their office
[35:45.120 --> 35:50.120]  If they have abdicated their office they have no immunity from suit
[35:50.120 --> 35:57.120]  Which means you can sue them for acting without proper jurisdiction and authority
[35:57.120 --> 36:06.120]  Because unless they are acting within the limits of the authority granted they are without jurisdiction
[36:06.120 --> 36:10.120]  When they advocate they kill their own jurisdiction
[36:10.120 --> 36:21.120]  Yeah, it's just like if you walked in as mayor and resigned and then walked out the door and still tried to execute the powers of the office of the mayor
[36:21.120 --> 36:23.120]  Are you breaking the law?
[36:23.120 --> 36:35.120]  Right, so then the whole corporate entity and suey jurists you have to forgo that to exercise these remedies under their constitutional obligations
[36:35.120 --> 36:40.120]  Okay, the theory that you have been converted into a corporation is asinine
[36:40.120 --> 36:52.120]  First off there is no state in the union that allows a corporation to be formulated simply by espousing its existence verbally
[36:52.120 --> 36:59.120]  A corporation can only exist if the proper documentation exists to create it
[36:59.120 --> 37:09.120]  The birth certificate and all this other stuff does not meet that criteria, does not
[37:09.120 --> 37:18.120]  Okay, so that's just plain common sense
[37:18.120 --> 37:24.120]  So that's not even a consideration then when you go in to put forth your remedies under their constitutional obligations
[37:24.120 --> 37:29.120]  So I can preserve my suey jurist status and still exercise these remedies
[37:29.120 --> 37:31.120]  Okay, let me put it this way
[37:31.120 --> 37:48.120]  If they were going to put you in as a corporation wouldn't they have to put after your name, ink, LLC or some type of identification as to exactly what type of corporation they are alleging you to be?
[37:48.120 --> 37:50.120]  That's debatable
[37:50.120 --> 37:55.120]  Well, debatable or not they would have to do it according to the way the name of the corporation is registered
[37:55.120 --> 38:02.120]  And you will see that in virtually any kind of legal documentation when it comes to a corporation
[38:02.120 --> 38:09.120]  That corporation is identified as its type in any corporate business name that deals with its legal paperwork
[38:09.120 --> 38:11.120]  It may not be referenced that way all the time
[38:11.120 --> 38:17.120]  For instance, when you say let's go eat at McDonald's you don't say let's go eat at McDonald's ink
[38:17.120 --> 38:24.120]  But when you look at McDonald's lawyers fill out a contract with somebody, what's the name on the contract?
[38:24.120 --> 38:32.120]  So then your whole concept with the Fourteenth Amendment issues don't touch this, they don't juxtapose
[38:32.120 --> 38:37.120]  The Fourteenth Amendment does not create corporations
[38:37.120 --> 38:41.120]  The Supreme Court is tooting some really heavy cough syrup, okay?
[38:41.120 --> 38:50.120]  The Fourteenth Amendment was written specifically for the benefit of the freed slaves
[38:50.120 --> 38:55.120]  That's exactly who it was written for, not for legal entities
[38:55.120 --> 39:07.120]  The fact that the Supreme Court in an asinine, idiotic determination that has no real operational power of brain capacity behind it
[39:07.120 --> 39:16.120]  States that a non-living, human-created entity can exist as a person is stupid
[39:16.120 --> 39:19.120]  It's just stupid
[39:19.120 --> 39:23.120]  Well it might be, but I mean it's what's on the books, I mean do we really care?
[39:23.120 --> 39:24.120]  I understand it's what's on the books
[39:24.120 --> 39:33.120]  But the fact of the matter is for the person to exist as a corporation, the corporation still must exist in law
[39:33.120 --> 39:37.120]  And in law that requires the proper paperwork
[39:37.120 --> 39:43.120]  Yeah, but then they're calling you a person which is their whole terms of art, you know, legal, juristic person and all of that
[39:43.120 --> 39:47.120]  Have you made the argument stating that you are not the person so named?
[39:47.120 --> 39:50.120]  Hmm
[39:50.120 --> 39:53.120]  I mean that exists right here in Texas law
[39:53.120 --> 40:00.120]  You need to ask them by what definition of person is this court making that presumption?
[40:00.120 --> 40:04.120]  So you just rebut the presumption right off the top
[40:04.120 --> 40:12.120]  Exactly, because here in Texas it's very clear that person does not mean the people
[40:12.120 --> 40:21.120]  Because when you read the statute it specifically says person includes corporation, association, limited liability company, governmental agency, and governmental entity
[40:21.120 --> 40:24.120]  And any other legal entity
[40:24.120 --> 40:27.120]  Right, so they're converting you into that, a person
[40:27.120 --> 40:30.120]  No, they're not converting you
[40:30.120 --> 40:39.120]  They are making a presumption that if you don't rebut it, they're going to allow to stand
[40:39.120 --> 40:45.120]  Okay, it's not that they're converting you, they cannot convert you, okay
[40:45.120 --> 40:49.120]  They could call you Mexican, that doesn't make you Mexican
[40:49.120 --> 40:55.120]  But if you don't say I'm not a Mexican, then it doesn't affect the outcome at all
[40:55.120 --> 40:59.120]  Just because they called you a Mexican and still prosecuted
[40:59.120 --> 41:04.120]  They're converting you into that whole status, so it's not a complete non-issue
[41:04.120 --> 41:11.120]  No, it's not a complete non-issue, but it's a non-issue because they're operating on a presumption
[41:11.120 --> 41:17.120]  And it's a rebuttable presumption if you know what the law defines a person as
[41:17.120 --> 41:27.120]  Which comes from my original question of being sui juris, and so my thing I'm trying to confirm here is that I want to preserve that status
[41:27.120 --> 41:31.120]  Rebut that presumption of any corporate entity or person or whatever
[41:31.120 --> 41:34.120]  And file an affidavit of standing in your case
[41:34.120 --> 41:39.120]  Okay, and then put forth the same remedies with the statutes and the code
[41:39.120 --> 41:49.120]  That's right, show where the code specifies what a person is and how and why you cannot and are not that thing
[41:49.120 --> 41:54.120]  Right, and then that doesn't compromise my claims against them as far as their criminal conduct
[41:54.120 --> 42:07.120]  No, in fact it strengthens them because their criminal conduct against one of the people is not subject to a lack of jurisdiction or an immunity
[42:07.120 --> 42:13.120]  Okay, all right, that's what I need
[42:13.120 --> 42:18.120]  So I'm going to check his site out and I'm going to pray for Brother Randy that he's safe and whatnot
[42:18.120 --> 42:24.120]  And I do appreciate you guys and I'm sure I will be calling back and I will definitely be continuing to listen
[42:24.120 --> 42:25.120]  All right
[42:25.120 --> 42:26.120]  All right, thanks, Reese
[42:26.120 --> 42:29.120]  Thank you, bye-bye
[42:29.120 --> 42:30.120]  Bye-bye
[42:30.120 --> 42:35.120]  Okay, we're going now to Carlos in California
[42:35.120 --> 42:37.120]  Good evening
[42:37.120 --> 42:40.120]  Hey, Carlos, what's on your mind tonight?
[42:40.120 --> 42:42.120]  Fine, thank you
[42:42.120 --> 42:43.120]  Well, I have a question
[42:43.120 --> 42:48.120]  I was hoping I could ask this to Mr. Skelton, but I'll go ahead and ask it anyway
[42:48.120 --> 42:53.120]  Now, yesterday I was hearing a very interesting point when it comes to foreclosures
[42:53.120 --> 43:03.120]  That these two gentlemen were talking about putting a lien on a property or liening the property so that like a UCC lien
[43:03.120 --> 43:05.120]  My question is this to you guys
[43:05.120 --> 43:11.120]  Which one do you know or do you guys care or work with a UCC lien, maritime lien or agricultural lien?
[43:11.120 --> 43:17.120]  Which one's the best in your opinion or does it matter or do you guys care about it?
[43:17.120 --> 43:20.120]  Well, it really depends on what you're trying to do
[43:20.120 --> 43:29.120]  The thing about it is a lien requires very specific things in law to be valid, okay?
[43:29.120 --> 43:34.120]  For instance, here in Texas, the legislature created an act
[43:34.120 --> 43:38.120]  Well, we're going to go to break, but Carlos, if you'll hang on just a minute, I'll pick that up on the other side, okay?
[43:38.120 --> 43:39.120]  Thank you
[43:39.120 --> 43:40.120]  Yeah, hang on, Carlos
[43:40.120 --> 43:41.120]  Thank you, thank you, Ben
[43:41.120 --> 44:00.120]  Okay, we'll be right back
[44:00.120 --> 44:05.120]  Are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters or even lawsuits?
[44:05.120 --> 44:09.120]  Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Mears proven method
[44:09.120 --> 44:15.120]  Michael Mears has won six cases in federal court against debt collectors and now you can win two
[44:15.120 --> 44:21.120]  You'll get step-by-step instructions in plain English on how to win in court using federal civil rights statutes
[44:21.120 --> 44:25.120]  What to do when contacted by phone, mail or court summons
[44:25.120 --> 44:27.120]  How to answer letters and phone calls
[44:27.120 --> 44:29.120]  How to get debt collectors out of your credit report
[44:29.120 --> 44:34.120]  How to turn the financial tables on them and make them pay you to go away
[44:34.120 --> 44:39.120]  The Michael Mears proven method is the solution for how to stop debt collectors
[44:39.120 --> 44:41.120]  Personal consultation is available as well
[44:41.120 --> 44:47.120]  For more information, please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the blue Michael Mears banner
[44:47.120 --> 44:50.120]  Or email michaelmears at yahoo.com
[44:50.120 --> 44:52.120]  That's ruleoflawradio.com
[44:52.120 --> 44:58.120]  Or email m-i-c-h-a-e-l-m-i-r-r-a-s at yahoo.com
[44:58.120 --> 45:05.120]  To learn how to stop debt collectors now
[45:28.120 --> 45:35.120]  For more information, please visit ruleoflawradio.com
[45:58.120 --> 46:02.120]  First I'm crawling, then I'm walking, then I start strutting
[46:02.120 --> 46:07.120]  I'm just so glad to make my living pushing buttons
[46:20.120 --> 46:25.120]  We sat down to play Monopoly, we all wanted to win the game
[46:25.120 --> 46:28.120]  We gave some guy this money supply
[46:28.120 --> 46:31.120]  With nothing I've been thinking in my brain
[46:31.120 --> 46:34.120]  After some time, the worth of my time
[46:34.120 --> 46:38.120]  Got me down to dinner, nothing I might have been doing all day
[46:38.120 --> 46:41.120]  Okay, we are back, this is the rule of law
[46:41.120 --> 46:48.120]  We're taking your calls, 512-646-1984
[46:48.120 --> 46:52.120]  We're speaking with Carlos in California
[46:52.120 --> 46:55.120]  Okay, go ahead, Carlos
[46:55.120 --> 46:59.120]  Yes, we were talking about those liens
[46:59.120 --> 47:05.120]  For instance, here in Texas, they made a law that specifically forbids
[47:05.120 --> 47:08.120]  A private individual to file a lien
[47:08.120 --> 47:13.120]  That was not instituted through a judicial process
[47:13.120 --> 47:17.120]  The reason they did that was because a lot of folks here
[47:17.120 --> 47:21.120]  That were in a political movement called the Republic of Texas
[47:21.120 --> 47:27.120]  Were filing commercial liens against the properties of public officials
[47:27.120 --> 47:32.120]  In order to control the way that they were doing their jobs
[47:32.120 --> 47:35.120]  Not that it was a bad thing to do
[47:35.120 --> 47:37.120]  In fact, it was a powerful thing to do
[47:37.120 --> 47:41.120]  It motivated the legislature to do something else
[47:41.120 --> 47:44.120]  Because these public officials couldn't get out from under these liens
[47:44.120 --> 47:47.120]  The way they were going
[47:47.120 --> 47:51.120]  But by the same token, they made it illegal to implement a lien
[47:51.120 --> 47:55.120]  That didn't follow specific criteria of law
[47:55.120 --> 47:58.120]  So in the case of what you're wanting to do with a lien
[47:58.120 --> 48:01.120]  The first thing you need to do is find out what the requirements
[48:01.120 --> 48:07.120]  And lawful criteria are for a lien of the given type you're thinking of
[48:07.120 --> 48:11.120]  Okay, can't stress that enough
[48:11.120 --> 48:19.120]  But the question is, is on what grounds will you establish the lien?
[48:19.120 --> 48:24.120]  Okay, you don't have an encumbrance against the property
[48:24.120 --> 48:29.120]  At least not the way the law is going to view it
[48:29.120 --> 48:33.120]  Unless you were already the owner of the property
[48:33.120 --> 48:37.120]  And if you had a mortgage on it, then you are not yet the owner, correct?
[48:37.120 --> 48:41.120]  Yes, I understand
[48:41.120 --> 48:43.120]  My real question is this
[48:43.120 --> 48:46.120]  How would you use a lien to protect your property
[48:46.120 --> 48:50.120]  From being robbed from these pretender lenders?
[48:50.120 --> 48:53.120]  As long as it's under a mortgage, you're not
[48:53.120 --> 48:56.120]  Because you're not yet the owner
[48:56.120 --> 48:57.120]  Okay, okay
[48:57.120 --> 49:00.120]  Now, the only way that you would stand a chance that I can see
[49:00.120 --> 49:03.120]  Would be a mechanics lien, but you would have to show
[49:03.120 --> 49:08.120]  That you've got a substantial investment in the property and improvements
[49:08.120 --> 49:12.120]  In other words, you made it more valuable since you've owned it
[49:12.120 --> 49:15.120]  Than it was the day it was sold to you by the company
[49:15.120 --> 49:20.120]  Or the mortgager or the lendy or whoever, okay?
[49:20.120 --> 49:26.120]  But again, you would have to search and see what the contract, the mortgage itself
[49:26.120 --> 49:30.120]  Says is or is not allowed as far as that goes
[49:30.120 --> 49:35.120]  If they said any improvements or additions or anything done to the property
[49:35.120 --> 49:41.120]  Shall not waive the right of the lender to foreclose on that property
[49:41.120 --> 49:45.120]  Then you've already signed a contract blowing that capability right out of the water
[49:45.120 --> 49:47.120]  Right
[49:47.120 --> 49:48.120]  Okay
[49:48.120 --> 49:49.120]  Okay
[49:49.120 --> 49:55.120]  So the first thing is, is find out what the agreement does or does not pertain to
[49:55.120 --> 50:01.120]  Then find out what your ability under law to use a lien for that purpose would be
[50:01.120 --> 50:07.120]  But I just don't see you being able to stop a foreclosure with a lien
[50:07.120 --> 50:17.120]  Because a foreclosure is only valid if there's an amount of money due and owing on the property to someone else
[50:17.120 --> 50:18.120]  Right
[50:18.120 --> 50:25.120]  If you were already the owner, there wouldn't be a foreclosure unless it was a tax foreclosure
[50:25.120 --> 50:34.120]  Yeah, the problem we have in California is the fact that whoever is foreclosing on us is not the holder in due course
[50:34.120 --> 50:35.120]  That's the problem we have
[50:35.120 --> 50:40.120]  Okay, well in California, is it a bank by any chance?
[50:40.120 --> 50:41.120]  Yes
[50:41.120 --> 50:42.120]  Okay
[50:42.120 --> 50:49.120]  If it's a bank or a lending institution, the first place you need to go is the California Constitution
[50:49.120 --> 50:58.120]  The California Constitution specifically forbids the existence of any type of credit agency or bank within the state
[50:58.120 --> 51:04.120]  They're absolutely forbidden in the state constitution
[51:04.120 --> 51:06.120]  Right, great, good
[51:06.120 --> 51:21.120]  Which means any type of lending activity occurring in that state by some agency of that type was fraud and illegal on its face the moment it occurred
[51:21.120 --> 51:24.120]  Okay, we know that
[51:24.120 --> 51:31.120]  So that's the first thing I would recommend you do is dig in that state constitution because that's in there, I've seen it
[51:31.120 --> 51:41.120]  Yes, thank you and just to recap or reinforce what she has said, I called the company and I told them I have the money
[51:41.120 --> 51:47.120]  All I need you to prove is that I owe it to you, you're the holder in due course and you're the creditor
[51:47.120 --> 51:52.120]  But I have the money and honestly my dad has the money, $647,000
[51:52.120 --> 51:59.120]  He told me son, make sure everything is in line and I lent you the money, get rid of the problem
[51:59.120 --> 52:02.120]  You know what a RESPA letter is, right?
[52:02.120 --> 52:03.120]  Yes, yes
[52:03.120 --> 52:08.120]  Okay, and you sent a RESPA letter with all the things a RESPA letter requires, right?
[52:08.120 --> 52:09.120]  Yes
[52:09.120 --> 52:14.120]  And have they responded back to that RESPA letter as they are required to do?
[52:14.120 --> 52:15.120]  No
[52:15.120 --> 52:20.120]  Then file for a default judgment against them
[52:20.120 --> 52:26.120]  Right, that's my next step, that's why I was looking for Mr. Skelton
[52:26.120 --> 52:30.120]  But I'm glad I'm asking you this question because I've been wondering about liens
[52:30.120 --> 52:40.120]  and the only thing I can think of if they ever foreclose on me, I can just come back to them for an offer for closures lawsuit, right?
[52:40.120 --> 52:47.120]  Well, like I say, if it's a bank or lending institution that the state constitution has specifically forbidden,
[52:47.120 --> 52:50.120]  they're operating illegally within the state anyway
[52:50.120 --> 52:59.120]  and if they're operating an illegal venture, they have no standing to sue to profit from that illegal venture
[52:59.120 --> 53:02.120]  I know, I know you're talking about marriage
[53:02.120 --> 53:05.120]  All right, I don't want to take any more time from you guys
[53:05.120 --> 53:09.120]  Thank you and I'll kick back and Rachel, I'm glad you guys are around, thank you
[53:09.120 --> 53:11.120]  All right, thank you Carlos
[53:11.120 --> 53:16.120]  Rachel
[53:16.120 --> 53:25.120]  Okay, listeners, if you'd like to call in, 512-646-1984
[53:25.120 --> 53:26.120]  So we got empty phone lines?
[53:26.120 --> 53:30.120]  We have empty phone lines right now, yes
[53:30.120 --> 53:37.120]  All right, well, so what's been going on with you, Deborah, that you would like to discuss on air?
[53:37.120 --> 53:40.120]  Or any new information in the FCC stuff that you've got?
[53:40.120 --> 53:49.120]  Well, right now we are waiting for an answer concerning our petition for writ of mandamus
[53:49.120 --> 53:57.120]  We filed a petition for writ of mandamus with the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals
[53:57.120 --> 54:06.120]  to order, asking them to order the lower courts to remand our case back to the state
[54:06.120 --> 54:15.120]  because we had filed a suit, actually an injunction, petition for injunction
[54:15.120 --> 54:23.120]  We filed a petition for injunction against one of the agents personally
[54:23.120 --> 54:31.120]  and instead of answering the suit personally
[54:31.120 --> 54:37.120]  he got the U.S. Attorney to represent him and remove the case to federal court
[54:37.120 --> 54:42.120]  and then the U.S. Attorney misrepresented our petition
[54:42.120 --> 54:49.120]  as trying to represent that we were suing the federal government in state court
[54:49.120 --> 54:53.120]  and that that's a frivolous case because you can't sue the federal government in state court
[54:53.120 --> 54:59.120]  and so he misrepresented that we were trying to sue the FCC, which we were not
[54:59.120 --> 55:05.120]  and so we basically filed this
[55:05.120 --> 55:10.120]  You filed a bargain against him for perpetrating fraud upon the court, right?
[55:10.120 --> 55:15.120]  Yes, we're doing that and we also filed this mandamus
[55:15.120 --> 55:20.120]  and we're going to ask for sanctions against the U.S. Attorney as well
[55:20.120 --> 55:26.120]  for defrauding the court, for attempting to defraud the court
[55:26.120 --> 55:36.120]  and right now at this point in time we are waiting on an answer to the petition for mandamus
[55:36.120 --> 55:43.120]  from the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and we haven't received an answer at this point in time
[55:43.120 --> 55:51.120]  I'm sorry listeners, I'm having trouble with the phone lines right now
[55:51.120 --> 55:54.120]  Well, it should be an interesting result when we're done with it
[55:54.120 --> 55:56.120]  Yes, it should be
[55:56.120 --> 56:01.120]  Alright folks, feel free to call in, we'll try to deal with any subject you got
[56:01.120 --> 56:05.120]  If you want to do some traffic stuff tonight, I'm here for that
[56:05.120 --> 56:10.120]  If you want to talk about procedure and process, we'll do what we can with that
[56:10.120 --> 56:16.120]  We've got a lot of time tonight, so give us a call and help us fill it in
[56:16.120 --> 56:21.120]  We didn't want to present a lot of material tonight simply because, you know,
[56:21.120 --> 56:26.120]  we have these long Friday nights and this will be the best chance we have to get you folks on the phone
[56:26.120 --> 56:30.120]  to call in with your questions, it gives us a little bit more time to get to you and help you
[56:30.120 --> 56:34.120]  without having to be quite so rushed as we are on the other nights of the week
[56:34.120 --> 56:41.120]  So please, give us a call and let's talk about whatever you got going on
[56:41.120 --> 56:47.120]  Yes, and actually right now I'm going to cut to an early break because I need to deal with the phones
[56:47.120 --> 56:54.120]  We're having some trouble with the phone equipment, so we'll be back after these short messages, folks
[57:17.120 --> 57:22.120]  Thanks for watching!
[57:47.120 --> 57:52.120]  Thanks for watching!
[58:17.120 --> 58:23.120]  Thanks for watching!
[58:47.120 --> 59:06.400]  It is so enlightening to listen to 90.1 FM, but finding things on the internet isn't so
[59:06.400 --> 59:09.960]  easy, and neither is finding like-minded people to share it with.
[59:09.960 --> 59:12.840]  Oh, well, I guess you haven't heard of Brave New Books, then.
[59:12.840 --> 59:13.840]  Brave New Books?
[59:13.840 --> 59:18.760]  Yes, Brave New Books has all the books and DVDs you're looking for by authors like Alex
[59:18.760 --> 59:21.320]  Jones, Ron Paul, and G. Edward Griffin.
[59:21.320 --> 59:24.680]  They even stock inner food, Berkey products, and Calvin Soaps.
[59:24.680 --> 59:27.640]  There's no way a place like that exists.
[59:27.640 --> 59:29.120]  Go check it out for yourself.
[59:29.120 --> 59:33.480]  It's downtown at 1904 Guadalupe Street, just south of UT.
[59:33.480 --> 59:36.800]  By UT, there's never anywhere to park down there.
[59:36.800 --> 59:42.080]  Actually, they now offer a free hour of parking for paying customers at the 500 MLK parking
[59:42.080 --> 59:44.040]  facility just behind the bookstore.
[59:44.040 --> 59:48.040]  It does exist, but when are they open?
[59:48.040 --> 59:52.800]  Monday through Saturday, 11 AM to 9 PM, and 1 to 6 PM on Sundays.
[59:52.800 --> 59:59.200]  So give them a call at 512-480-2503, or check out their events page at bravenewbookstore.com.
[59:59.200 --> 01:00:04.360]  This news brief brought to you by the International News Network.
[01:00:04.360 --> 01:00:09.880]  Two NATO soldiers have been killed in southern Afghanistan, bringing to 181 the number of
[01:00:09.880 --> 01:00:12.440]  foreign troops killed this year.
[01:00:12.440 --> 01:00:18.560]  Attacks against foreign troops have risen in anticipation of NATO's forthcoming offensives.
[01:00:18.560 --> 01:00:24.760]  Romania braced for a wave of protests Friday after President Traian Barcaescu unveiled
[01:00:24.760 --> 01:00:30.160]  austerity cuts in public sector wages and pensions to meet a deficit target set by the
[01:00:30.160 --> 01:00:35.160]  IMF to avoid a Greek emergency scenario.
[01:00:35.160 --> 01:00:39.520]  Leaders of national labor unions and civil rights groups said Thursday they will boycott
[01:00:39.520 --> 01:00:45.520]  Arizona until the state's tough new immigration law is repealed, overturned by the courts,
[01:00:45.520 --> 01:00:47.680]  or superseded by federal reform.
[01:00:47.680 --> 01:00:55.720]  A new poll found 55% of registered Latino voters in Arizona supported a boycott.
[01:00:55.720 --> 01:01:00.720]  The CIA has received secret permission to attack more targets with drones in Pakistan's
[01:01:00.720 --> 01:01:05.840]  border region, including suspected militants whose names are not known.
[01:01:05.840 --> 01:01:10.440]  The expanded authority approved two years ago by the Bush administration and continued
[01:01:10.440 --> 01:01:15.960]  by Barack Obama permits the agency to rely on evidence collected by surveillance cameras
[01:01:15.960 --> 01:01:17.520]  and other sources.
[01:01:17.520 --> 01:01:21.800]  The information is used to target suspected militants even when their full identities
[01:01:21.800 --> 01:01:22.800]  are not known.
[01:01:22.800 --> 01:01:28.440]  Previously, the CIA was restricted in most cases to killing only individuals whose names
[01:01:28.440 --> 01:01:30.200]  were on an approved list.
[01:01:30.200 --> 01:01:35.320]  The rules have transformed the program from a narrow effort aimed at killing top al-Qaeda
[01:01:35.320 --> 01:01:41.440]  and Taliban leaders into a large-scale campaign of airstrikes in which few militants are off
[01:01:41.440 --> 01:01:42.440]  limits.
[01:01:42.440 --> 01:01:47.760]  Critics say permitting the CIA to kill people whose names are unknown increases the risk
[01:01:47.760 --> 01:01:57.960]  of killing innocent civilians, a source of deep anger in Pakistan and Afghanistan.
[01:01:57.960 --> 01:02:02.220]  In Britain, thousands of people were deprived of their right to vote Thursday as polling
[01:02:02.220 --> 01:02:08.280]  stations were swamped and police opened investigations into allegations of electoral fraud.
[01:02:08.280 --> 01:02:13.440]  Election chiefs told the UK Times widespread failures to deal with higher voter turnout
[01:02:13.440 --> 01:02:18.080]  may lead to reruns in the next few weeks which could change the overall outcome.
[01:02:18.080 --> 01:02:24.480]  500 people in Sheffield were turned away in Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg's constituency.
[01:02:24.480 --> 01:02:27.760]  Police removed about 100 people who refused to leave.
[01:02:27.760 --> 01:02:32.040]  That scenario was repeated in dozens of polling stations across the country.
[01:02:32.040 --> 01:02:37.040]  Police forces across Britain were also looking into dozens of allegations of electoral fraud.
[01:02:37.040 --> 01:02:42.120]  Veteran TV personality David Dimbleby, who presented a marathon election program for
[01:02:42.120 --> 01:02:47.280]  the BBC, told viewers, quote, we are meant to know how to do these things, adding, here
[01:02:47.280 --> 01:02:52.680]  we are giving an example which would shame countries that are just starting their democracies.
[01:02:52.680 --> 01:03:03.600]  For more details on these stories, visit INNWorldReport.net You are listening to the Rule of Law Radio
[01:03:03.600 --> 01:03:16.600]  Network at RuleOfLawRadio.com, live free speech talk radio at its best.
[01:03:16.600 --> 01:03:23.600]  It's all according to the will of the Almighty I read this book and it says it cares not
[01:03:23.600 --> 01:03:32.600]  for the unsightly And these warmongers come by that term rightly
[01:03:32.600 --> 01:03:49.600]  I won't pay for the war with my body Ain't gonna pay for the car with my money
[01:03:49.600 --> 01:03:56.600]  I won't pay for the fun with my body Their plans wicked and their logic shoddy
[01:03:56.600 --> 01:04:03.600]  Ain't gonna pay for the oil with my body I won't pay for the boys with my money
[01:04:03.600 --> 01:04:10.600]  Ain't gonna pay for the kids with my body Their whole agenda smells funny
[01:04:10.600 --> 01:04:30.600]  I won't fight in a war of my own Not one would be left accidental I won't pay for the war of my own
[01:04:30.600 --> 01:04:40.600]  They live in glass houses so I can watch them grow bone I won't fight in a war I can win
[01:04:40.600 --> 01:04:47.600]  I can never win the one that they have me in That one I lose long before it begins
[01:04:47.600 --> 01:04:57.600]  I won't pay for a war I can win When I'm fighting in my own war
[01:04:57.600 --> 01:05:11.600]  It's such a peaceful feeling When I'm paying for my own war
[01:05:11.600 --> 01:05:28.600]  I take time for the healing It's all according to the will of the Almighty
[01:05:28.600 --> 01:05:39.600]  I read his book and it says it cares not for the unsightly These fear mongers come by that term rightly
[01:05:39.600 --> 01:05:44.600]  All right, we are back, the rule of law.
[01:05:44.600 --> 01:05:49.600]  Okay, two good pieces of news from over the break.
[01:05:49.600 --> 01:05:51.600]  The songs are working again.
[01:05:51.600 --> 01:05:58.600]  So folks, if you want to call in, 512-646-1984, and we have Randy back.
[01:05:58.600 --> 01:05:59.600]  This is wonderful.
[01:05:59.600 --> 01:06:00.600]  Thanks, Randy.
[01:06:00.600 --> 01:06:05.600]  I'm so glad that you were able to resolve the technical issues.
[01:06:05.600 --> 01:06:09.600]  We're so glad to have you back. The callers have been asking for you.
[01:06:09.600 --> 01:06:10.600]  Okay, I'm back.
[01:06:10.600 --> 01:06:11.600]  Can you hear me?
[01:06:11.600 --> 01:06:13.600]  Yes, we can hear you.
[01:06:13.600 --> 01:06:14.600]  Wonderful.
[01:06:14.600 --> 01:06:15.600]  Okay.
[01:06:15.600 --> 01:06:16.600]  All right.
[01:06:16.600 --> 01:06:18.600]  Let's go to some calls.
[01:06:18.600 --> 01:06:21.600]  We've got Cassie in Missouri.
[01:06:21.600 --> 01:06:23.600]  Cassie, thanks for calling in.
[01:06:23.600 --> 01:06:25.600]  What's on your mind tonight?
[01:06:25.600 --> 01:06:29.600]  Well, you know, I didn't know that I was going to be going live.
[01:06:29.600 --> 01:06:31.600]  You didn't know you were going to be going live?
[01:06:31.600 --> 01:06:34.600]  Okay, well, you're calling into the caller line.
[01:06:34.600 --> 01:06:36.600]  Well, I thought I was calling in just to listen to the show,
[01:06:36.600 --> 01:06:39.600]  because usually when I call in, I just get the call in line and hear the show.
[01:06:39.600 --> 01:06:41.600]  Oh, well, this is the caller line.
[01:06:41.600 --> 01:06:47.600]  The listener line is 512-485-9010.
[01:06:47.600 --> 01:06:54.600]  And we actually ask people to listen on the Internet, on ruleoflawradio.com,
[01:06:54.600 --> 01:06:58.600]  so that we can get our stream numbers up on Shoutcast.
[01:06:58.600 --> 01:07:02.600]  And so folks out there, please try to listen on the Internet,
[01:07:02.600 --> 01:07:06.600]  even if you hear us on the radio on one of these affiliates.
[01:07:06.600 --> 01:07:11.600]  We're going out on about 20 AM and FM stations around the country.
[01:07:11.600 --> 01:07:16.600]  And so even if you're hearing us on the radio, please, when you can,
[01:07:16.600 --> 01:07:20.600]  if you're at home, when you get home, if you're driving in your car,
[01:07:20.600 --> 01:07:24.600]  log into ruleoflawradio.com and log onto the stream
[01:07:24.600 --> 01:07:26.600]  so we can get our stream numbers up.
[01:07:26.600 --> 01:07:30.600]  And folks who may not have a computer, may not be able to get online,
[01:07:30.600 --> 01:07:39.600]  if you just want to listen, the listener line is 512-485-9010.
[01:07:39.600 --> 01:07:47.600]  And the caller line, to call in and talk to us on the air, is 512-646-1984.
[01:07:47.600 --> 01:07:54.600]  Okay, so we don't have any other callers at this time.
[01:07:54.600 --> 01:07:57.600]  All right, we were discussing before the break,
[01:07:57.600 --> 01:08:01.600]  we were talking about the writ of mandamus that we filed
[01:08:01.600 --> 01:08:08.600]  and how we had to serve it on the U.S. attorney and the district judge.
[01:08:08.600 --> 01:08:12.600]  And we haven't heard any answer back yet.
[01:08:12.600 --> 01:08:16.600]  They get to file answers, at least the U.S. attorney does.
[01:08:16.600 --> 01:08:18.600]  And so that hasn't happened yet.
[01:08:18.600 --> 01:08:21.600]  And Eddie and I were just discussing filing bar grievances
[01:08:21.600 --> 01:08:25.600]  against this U.S. attorney for lying to the court,
[01:08:25.600 --> 01:08:28.600]  telling the court that we were trying to sue the federal government,
[01:08:28.600 --> 01:08:31.600]  which we were not, and that sort of thing.
[01:08:31.600 --> 01:08:35.600]  We're going to ask the court to sanction the U.S. attorney as well.
[01:08:35.600 --> 01:08:37.600]  And so those things are in the works right now.
[01:08:37.600 --> 01:08:40.600]  And now we have a couple of callers on the line.
[01:08:40.600 --> 01:08:42.600]  Now we've got Ken from Texas.
[01:08:42.600 --> 01:08:44.600]  Ken, thanks for calling in.
[01:08:44.600 --> 01:08:45.600]  What's on your mind tonight?
[01:08:45.600 --> 01:08:46.600]  Well, hi there.
[01:08:46.600 --> 01:08:52.600]  I have a question for Randy, and I'm just going to kind of put this question out.
[01:08:52.600 --> 01:08:58.600]  And if it's something of interest, I'll just listen to you as you guys discuss it.
[01:08:58.600 --> 01:09:02.600]  Anyway, I was going through the law book, and I found this thing.
[01:09:02.600 --> 01:09:09.600]  It's a phrase in Black's dictionary called administrative collateral estoppel.
[01:09:09.600 --> 01:09:14.600]  And it says basically principles of this estoppel doctrine apply
[01:09:14.600 --> 01:09:19.600]  when the agency is acting in a judicial capacity
[01:09:19.600 --> 01:09:26.600]  and resolves disputed issues or facts properly before it,
[01:09:26.600 --> 01:09:30.600]  which parties have had adequate opportunity to litigate.
[01:09:30.600 --> 01:09:36.600]  And I just wanted to see if this had any bearing on the Administrative Procedures Act
[01:09:36.600 --> 01:09:42.600]  and the way this ties into possibly licensing or some of our rights.
[01:09:42.600 --> 01:09:45.600]  What definition of what word was that?
[01:09:45.600 --> 01:09:48.600]  Administrative collateral estoppel.
[01:09:48.600 --> 01:09:59.600]  What was it that didn't seem to make sense as I didn't understand what was being stopped?
[01:09:59.600 --> 01:10:03.600]  Estoppel means that somebody is stopped from doing something,
[01:10:03.600 --> 01:10:08.600]  and from the definition, it didn't seem to make sense.
[01:10:08.600 --> 01:10:09.600]  Can you read that again?
[01:10:09.600 --> 01:10:10.600]  Okay.
[01:10:10.600 --> 01:10:19.600]  Principles of this estoppel doctrine apply when agency is acting in a judicial capacity
[01:10:19.600 --> 01:10:24.600]  and resolves disputed issues or facts properly before it,
[01:10:24.600 --> 01:10:29.600]  which parties have had adequate opportunity to litigate.
[01:10:29.600 --> 01:10:30.600]  Okay, agency.
[01:10:30.600 --> 01:10:33.600]  By agency, is that an agency?
[01:10:33.600 --> 01:10:36.600]  Are they referring to some agency?
[01:10:36.600 --> 01:10:44.600]  Or is agency referring to someone standing to represent another party?
[01:10:44.600 --> 01:10:46.600]  From the context, it's the former.
[01:10:46.600 --> 01:10:50.600]  That's what I was thinking, but I hate to...
[01:10:50.600 --> 01:10:54.600]  Once I looked through the dictionary, I had a teacher in school tell me,
[01:10:54.600 --> 01:11:00.600]  if you don't know what a word is, you can generally figure it out from the other words around it.
[01:11:00.600 --> 01:11:03.600]  And I did an experiment and tried that,
[01:11:03.600 --> 01:11:06.600]  and every time I did and then looked up the word, I was wrong.
[01:11:06.600 --> 01:11:15.600]  Well, in this case, it specifically states and resolves disputed issues or facts properly before it,
[01:11:15.600 --> 01:11:18.600]  so that can only be the court.
[01:11:18.600 --> 01:11:20.600]  Or the administrative agency.
[01:11:20.600 --> 01:11:22.600]  Or the administrative agency.
[01:11:22.600 --> 01:11:24.600]  Still, what is a stopped?
[01:11:24.600 --> 01:11:31.600]  Does that mean that the issue is finished here at this court
[01:11:31.600 --> 01:11:35.600]  and they don't have under administrative collateral estoppel
[01:11:35.600 --> 01:11:41.600]  that they can't seek remedy in another court if they don't like the one they got here?
[01:11:41.600 --> 01:11:44.600]  Is that what I'm understanding?
[01:11:44.600 --> 01:11:46.600]  Well, you guys are the experts.
[01:11:46.600 --> 01:11:49.600]  I'm just trying to understand this as well.
[01:11:49.600 --> 01:11:53.600]  There is one more sentence it throws at the end.
[01:11:53.600 --> 01:12:02.600]  Threshold inquiry is whether earlier proceeding is essential equivalent of judicial proceeding.
[01:12:02.600 --> 01:12:13.600]  So when I read this, it maybe ties into the fact that if we're going to be charged with an offense under the traffic code
[01:12:13.600 --> 01:12:18.600]  and we're supposed to have a hearing in Austin,
[01:12:18.600 --> 01:12:26.600]  that is just saying that until we have that hearing in Austin, other agencies are stopped from...
[01:12:26.600 --> 01:12:30.600]  Well, what I got from that, from that last sentence,
[01:12:30.600 --> 01:12:40.600]  that if you're going to a judicial inquiry and there has been an administrative procedure
[01:12:40.600 --> 01:12:48.600]  and the parties had opportunity to adjudicate their matter before the administrative inquiry,
[01:12:48.600 --> 01:12:56.600]  that they are stopped from relitigating before the judicial tribunal.
[01:12:56.600 --> 01:12:57.600]  Okay.
[01:12:57.600 --> 01:13:01.600]  That's what I got from that, but it's just really not very clear.
[01:13:01.600 --> 01:13:08.600]  Yeah, what this would appear to be is this is applicable to the actual judicial court,
[01:13:08.600 --> 01:13:14.600]  not the administrative court, because it's saying agency acting in a judicial capacity
[01:13:14.600 --> 01:13:18.600]  and resolves disputed issues of fact properly before it.
[01:13:18.600 --> 01:13:22.600]  Well, they can only be properly before it if the court currently has jurisdiction,
[01:13:22.600 --> 01:13:27.600]  which until the administrative remedy has been had, they do not.
[01:13:27.600 --> 01:13:28.600]  Okay.
[01:13:28.600 --> 01:13:32.600]  And which parties have had adequate opportunity to litigate,
[01:13:32.600 --> 01:13:35.600]  which you do have at the administrative hearing.
[01:13:35.600 --> 01:13:42.600]  Threshold inquiry is whether earlier proceeding is essential equivalent of judicial proceeding,
[01:13:42.600 --> 01:13:50.600]  which the administrative hearing is, but without the judicial consequences.
[01:13:50.600 --> 01:13:56.600]  So this would appear to be directly applicable to the municipal or justice court
[01:13:56.600 --> 01:14:02.600]  or the county court after the administrative hearing process has occurred.
[01:14:02.600 --> 01:14:09.600]  Yeah, that's what I got, and they're saying if you got a proper airing of your issue
[01:14:09.600 --> 01:14:14.600]  in the administrative court, you can't come back to us,
[01:14:14.600 --> 01:14:21.600]  can't come to the judicial venue and ask us to relitigate it.
[01:14:21.600 --> 01:14:25.600]  Or for that matter, the judicial venue cannot resume jurisdiction over it
[01:14:25.600 --> 01:14:28.600]  and attempt to prosecute you under that same case
[01:14:28.600 --> 01:14:31.600]  when it was already decided in your favor in the administrative hearing.
[01:14:31.600 --> 01:14:33.600]  Yes, I would.
[01:14:33.600 --> 01:14:43.600]  Unless you can bring to the judicial branch an allegation of error in the administrative side,
[01:14:43.600 --> 01:14:46.600]  otherwise you would be stopped from...
[01:14:46.600 --> 01:14:48.600]  Ah, but here's the problem.
[01:14:48.600 --> 01:14:55.600]  Where is the statute allowing for an appeal to a judicial body from an administrative hearing body?
[01:14:55.600 --> 01:15:05.600]  Okay, the way I took this, this was addressing a term that would only have applicability
[01:15:05.600 --> 01:15:13.600]  if there was some potential remedy to appeal from an administrative hearing to a judicial hearing.
[01:15:13.600 --> 01:15:20.600]  And what this principle is saying, you can't just go to administrative hearing,
[01:15:20.600 --> 01:15:26.600]  you don't like your outcome, and then just run to the judiciary and ask them to overrule,
[01:15:26.600 --> 01:15:33.600]  that if you got a reasonable hearing at the administrative level,
[01:15:33.600 --> 01:15:39.600]  you are stopped from trying to choose another venue to rehear your case,
[01:15:39.600 --> 01:15:46.600]  becomes your rest judicata, unless you can show that that administrative hearing was somehow flawed.
[01:15:46.600 --> 01:15:52.600]  So they're giving credibility to the administrative hearing, but I'm certain that it's going to depend
[01:15:52.600 --> 01:16:01.600]  on what the administrative hearing is and if there is option to go to the courts for a relitigation.
[01:16:01.600 --> 01:16:03.600]  Does that make sense?
[01:16:03.600 --> 01:16:06.600]  In a roundabout kind of way, yes.
[01:16:06.600 --> 01:16:10.600]  Well, Guy, does it work the other way around?
[01:16:10.600 --> 01:16:15.600]  And maybe I'm showing my ignorance, but does that mean if we went into a court
[01:16:15.600 --> 01:16:20.600]  where we're really supposed to have an administrative hearing, but we let them have the hearing,
[01:16:20.600 --> 01:16:23.600]  does that mean we can't go back to the administrative hearing?
[01:16:23.600 --> 01:16:24.600]  Absolutely not.
[01:16:24.600 --> 01:16:28.600]  No, because the judicial court had no jurisdiction to begin with.
[01:16:28.600 --> 01:16:32.600]  Subject matter jurisdiction cannot be presumed and it cannot be created.
[01:16:32.600 --> 01:16:34.600]  It either exists or it doesn't.
[01:16:34.600 --> 01:16:36.600]  Yeah, and this is just a singular definition.
[01:16:36.600 --> 01:16:38.600]  We can only treat the definition within the context.
[01:16:38.600 --> 01:16:45.600]  I would like to look at Black's Four and look at the case law that supports that,
[01:16:45.600 --> 01:16:47.600]  and that will probably tell us a whole lot.
[01:16:47.600 --> 01:16:49.600]  Thank you for the discussion.
[01:16:49.600 --> 01:16:51.600]  You're welcome, sir. Good question.
[01:16:51.600 --> 01:16:55.600]  All right.
[01:16:55.600 --> 01:17:00.600]  We'll be right back.
[01:17:00.600 --> 01:17:05.600]  Capital Coin and Bullion is your local source for rare coins, precious metals,
[01:17:05.600 --> 01:17:07.600]  and coin supplies in the Austin metro area.
[01:17:07.600 --> 01:17:09.600]  We also ship worldwide.
[01:17:09.600 --> 01:17:13.600]  We are a family-owned and operated business that offers competitive prices
[01:17:13.600 --> 01:17:15.600]  on your coin and metals purchases.
[01:17:15.600 --> 01:17:20.600]  We buy, sell, trade, and consign rare coins, gold and silver coin collections,
[01:17:20.600 --> 01:17:22.600]  precious metals, and scrap gold.
[01:17:22.600 --> 01:17:26.600]  We will purchase and sell gold and jewelry items as well.
[01:17:26.600 --> 01:17:28.600]  We offer daily specials on coins and bullions.
[01:17:28.600 --> 01:17:32.600]  We're located at 5448 Barnett Road, Suite 3,
[01:17:32.600 --> 01:17:38.600]  and we're open Monday through Friday 10 a.m. to 6 p.m., Saturdays 10 a.m. to 5 p.m.
[01:17:38.600 --> 01:17:41.600]  You are welcome to stop in our shop during regular business hours
[01:17:41.600 --> 01:17:47.600]  or call 512-646-6440 with any questions.
[01:17:47.600 --> 01:17:51.600]  Ask for Chad and say you heard about us on Rule of Law Radio or 90.1 FM
[01:17:51.600 --> 01:17:53.600]  and get a special discount.
[01:17:53.600 --> 01:18:03.600]  That's Capital Coin and Bullion, 512-646-6440.
[01:18:23.600 --> 01:18:40.600]  Not going to fool us with those same old tricks again.
[01:18:40.600 --> 01:18:48.600]  Indeed, words of wisdom from my husband Jerry Stevens.
[01:18:48.600 --> 01:18:53.600]  All right, we're taking your calls, 512-646-1984.
[01:18:53.600 --> 01:18:56.600]  Reece from Montana has called back in to talk to Randy.
[01:18:56.600 --> 01:19:00.600]  Reece, just hang tight one second and we'll get right to you.
[01:19:00.600 --> 01:19:02.600]  I just wanted to go to these other callers who have been waiting on the line.
[01:19:02.600 --> 01:19:05.600]  We've got Ramon in Texas.
[01:19:05.600 --> 01:19:06.600]  Thanks for calling in, Ramon.
[01:19:06.600 --> 01:19:07.600]  What's on your minds?
[01:19:07.600 --> 01:19:09.600]  Hey, guys, just a quick question.
[01:19:09.600 --> 01:19:17.600]  I don't know if you guys saw any of the video where the SWAT team came in in the home
[01:19:17.600 --> 01:19:19.600]  and just arrested this guy.
[01:19:19.600 --> 01:19:24.600]  They started to read him his rights and then they said he didn't respond to that.
[01:19:24.600 --> 01:19:29.600]  And the cop said that I'll take that as a yes.
[01:19:29.600 --> 01:19:34.600]  And I just wanted to give you guys feedback on, you know, like, I mean,
[01:19:34.600 --> 01:19:38.600]  it just seems like who is he to speak on behalf of that defendant?
[01:19:38.600 --> 01:19:41.600]  So I just wanted to see what you guys thought about that as well.
[01:19:41.600 --> 01:19:49.600]  And the course that you guys sell, does it, you know, go over material and how to,
[01:19:49.600 --> 01:19:52.600]  by law, you know, deal with confrontations with law enforcement?
[01:19:52.600 --> 01:19:55.600]  And then I'll just want to listen to that.
[01:19:55.600 --> 01:19:58.600]  Which course are you referring to, the traffic course?
[01:19:58.600 --> 01:20:00.600]  Yes, sir.
[01:20:00.600 --> 01:20:04.600]  Yeah, it talks about things that you do and don't do.
[01:20:04.600 --> 01:20:07.600]  It also includes a written notice,
[01:20:07.600 --> 01:20:11.600]  which we are actually going to be converting into a written tort letter.
[01:20:11.600 --> 01:20:15.600]  So instead of actually handing a judicial notice to the officer,
[01:20:15.600 --> 01:20:19.600]  we're going to make it where the first thing the officer is presented with during a traffic stop
[01:20:19.600 --> 01:20:24.600]  is going to be a tort letter that he has committed a crime and violated your rights
[01:20:24.600 --> 01:20:30.600]  and he is about to ensue a liability for those actions.
[01:20:30.600 --> 01:20:39.600]  And then we let him go back to the city manager and explain how he got the city sued today.
[01:20:39.600 --> 01:20:43.600]  But yes, it does contain information relevant to that.
[01:20:43.600 --> 01:20:46.600]  And you said you're located where?
[01:20:46.600 --> 01:20:47.600]  Austin.
[01:20:47.600 --> 01:20:48.600]  In Austin?
[01:20:48.600 --> 01:20:51.600]  Yeah, it definitely deals with Texas, straight up front.
[01:20:51.600 --> 01:20:56.600]  Okay, let me make a suggestion on how to deal with police officers.
[01:20:56.600 --> 01:20:57.600]  Yes, sir.
[01:20:57.600 --> 01:21:05.600]  Keep in mind that a police officer spends 90% of his time dealing with criminals.
[01:21:05.600 --> 01:21:11.600]  And after there was a time I spent about a week in jail once, I really kicked him off.
[01:21:11.600 --> 01:21:15.600]  But it gave me a different perspective.
[01:21:15.600 --> 01:21:19.600]  Most of those guys in there were different than we were.
[01:21:19.600 --> 01:21:26.600]  90% of the crime is committed by some 10% of the people.
[01:21:26.600 --> 01:21:29.600]  These same guys keep getting in trouble over and over.
[01:21:29.600 --> 01:21:32.600]  And there were two particular guys in jail.
[01:21:32.600 --> 01:21:36.600]  They were being transferred from one facility to another.
[01:21:36.600 --> 01:21:41.600]  And there were two things they talked about all day.
[01:21:41.600 --> 01:21:47.600]  They talked about what they were going to have for their next meal.
[01:21:47.600 --> 01:21:54.600]  And they talked about the caper they were going to pull when they got out of jail.
[01:21:54.600 --> 01:22:02.600]  And in listening to these guys, it was clear that they don't use the language the way we use the language.
[01:22:02.600 --> 01:22:07.600]  Generally, we are people of some kind of integrity and honor.
[01:22:07.600 --> 01:22:12.600]  And when we form words with our mouth, we intend that they have meaning.
[01:22:12.600 --> 01:22:15.600]  These guys aren't like that.
[01:22:15.600 --> 01:22:19.600]  Everything they do is for effect.
[01:22:19.600 --> 01:22:22.600]  Truth and lie, it's all the same to them.
[01:22:22.600 --> 01:22:33.600]  And the police deal with these people so much that when they encounter one of us that does have integrity and is not a criminal,
[01:22:33.600 --> 01:22:36.600]  they don't make the change up well.
[01:22:36.600 --> 01:22:41.600]  And for the most part, the police are taught to follow policy.
[01:22:41.600 --> 01:22:48.600]  And 99% of the people they encounter do not have a clue as to what the law is.
[01:22:48.600 --> 01:23:01.600]  So when one guy out of 100 gets in his face and starts reading him the riot act and letting him know how to cow each cabbage,
[01:23:01.600 --> 01:23:04.600]  don't expect him to be understanding.
[01:23:04.600 --> 01:23:12.600]  And I'm not sticking up for the policeman other than to help you give an idea of where this guy lives.
[01:23:12.600 --> 01:23:15.600]  He thinks we're all perps.
[01:23:15.600 --> 01:23:21.600]  So if you get in an argument with a policeman on the street, you're going to lose that argument.
[01:23:21.600 --> 01:23:25.600]  He doesn't care about logic, reason, law, anything else.
[01:23:25.600 --> 01:23:27.600]  That's not what his training is.
[01:23:27.600 --> 01:23:38.600]  So don't try to reason with the policeman on the street if he doesn't show a willingness to reason.
[01:23:38.600 --> 01:23:40.600]  You should always lose that battle.
[01:23:40.600 --> 01:23:46.600]  The way to get to him is when you get to his boss.
[01:23:46.600 --> 01:23:50.600]  Now, you can work his boss over really good,
[01:23:50.600 --> 01:23:56.600]  and you won't have the kind of problem you will if you try to argue with the policeman on the street.
[01:23:56.600 --> 01:23:57.600]  I hope that makes sense.
[01:23:57.600 --> 01:24:00.600]  Let's take our arguments where they work best,
[01:24:00.600 --> 01:24:09.600]  and don't ask a policeman on the street to do what he's not trained to do and what he's really not equipped to do,
[01:24:09.600 --> 01:24:15.600]  and that's to act with reason and deference to reasonable human beings.
[01:24:15.600 --> 01:24:17.600]  Yeah, I don't intend to.
[01:24:17.600 --> 01:24:22.600]  Yeah, I really don't mean that as a criticism to the police officers.
[01:24:22.600 --> 01:24:25.600]  It's just this is where they live all the time,
[01:24:25.600 --> 01:24:31.600]  and this is what they deal with all day, every day, and it becomes a routine.
[01:24:31.600 --> 01:24:34.600]  And when somebody comes and breaks out of the routine,
[01:24:34.600 --> 01:24:38.600]  their natural reaction is to cram them back into the routine.
[01:24:38.600 --> 01:24:46.600]  So we tend to get negative reactions when we push too hard on the street.
[01:24:46.600 --> 01:24:53.600]  The only thing I tell the police officers, take me directly to the nearest magistrate.
[01:24:53.600 --> 01:24:57.600]  And when they say, no, they're going to take me to jail, I said, well, that's okay.
[01:24:57.600 --> 01:25:00.600]  I had to ask, and you had to refuse.
[01:25:00.600 --> 01:25:05.600]  So we're cool, and I don't press anymore.
[01:25:05.600 --> 01:25:10.600]  I save my flight for later.
[01:25:10.600 --> 01:25:11.600]  Does that make sense?
[01:25:11.600 --> 01:25:12.600]  Oh, yeah, absolutely.
[01:25:12.600 --> 01:25:15.600]  Yeah, I mean, that just becomes more evident every day, you know,
[01:25:15.600 --> 01:25:22.600]  the understanding, you know, the interface between law enforcement and the public.
[01:25:22.600 --> 01:25:28.600]  That's exactly the reason that I want every policeman,
[01:25:28.600 --> 01:25:33.600]  if he arrests someone, no matter what the reason, with or without a warrant,
[01:25:33.600 --> 01:25:40.600]  take him directly to the nearest magistrate and explain himself.
[01:25:40.600 --> 01:25:45.600]  It changes the whole dynamic.
[01:25:45.600 --> 01:25:47.600]  Everything is different then.
[01:25:47.600 --> 01:25:50.600]  In New York, they do that.
[01:25:50.600 --> 01:25:54.600]  In New York, they take you to jail, hold you just long enough to appoint counsel,
[01:25:54.600 --> 01:25:59.600]  and then they go before the court, the prosecutor and the policeman,
[01:25:59.600 --> 01:26:03.600]  who and the attorney they appointed for you.
[01:26:03.600 --> 01:26:13.600]  When I was in New York, frankly, I was astounded at how the police interacted with the public.
[01:26:13.600 --> 01:26:19.600]  They were far more tolerant and accepting.
[01:26:19.600 --> 01:26:21.600]  You could even joke with them.
[01:26:21.600 --> 01:26:25.600]  I mean, they were like normal human beings, and for New York City,
[01:26:25.600 --> 01:26:27.600]  I absolutely did not expect it.
[01:26:27.600 --> 01:26:30.600]  But these guys, if they arrested you,
[01:26:30.600 --> 01:26:33.600]  they were going to have to go straight to the judge and explain themselves.
[01:26:33.600 --> 01:26:38.600]  So it dramatically changed their demeanor.
[01:26:38.600 --> 01:26:42.600]  And this is why I'm trying to get that here.
[01:26:42.600 --> 01:26:50.600]  If they have to explain in front of a judge, they're going to be more careful with us.
[01:26:50.600 --> 01:26:52.600]  That doesn't make sense.
[01:26:52.600 --> 01:26:56.600]  At least that's the idea.
[01:26:56.600 --> 01:26:59.600]  Do we answer your question?
[01:26:59.600 --> 01:27:01.600]  Yes.
[01:27:01.600 --> 01:27:04.600]  Like I said, I don't know if you guys had a chance to look at the video or not.
[01:27:04.600 --> 01:27:07.600]  It doesn't really matter really what the video was.
[01:27:07.600 --> 01:27:10.600]  But at any time, if an officer is reading someone's rights
[01:27:10.600 --> 01:27:12.600]  and they're placing them under arrest,
[01:27:12.600 --> 01:27:15.600]  and the question is, do you have the right to remain silent?
[01:27:15.600 --> 01:27:17.600]  And at some point, I believe in those rights.
[01:27:17.600 --> 01:27:20.600]  They're asking, do you understand this?
[01:27:20.600 --> 01:27:23.600]  Do you understand what I'm telling you or saying to you?
[01:27:23.600 --> 01:27:29.600]  And if that person does not respond and the officer says, well, I'll just take that as a yes,
[01:27:29.600 --> 01:27:32.600]  it seems to me like that's completely out of order.
[01:27:32.600 --> 01:27:36.600]  But I just wonder what you guys think, what kind of implications that would have.
[01:27:36.600 --> 01:27:38.600]  I just want to hear your response from there.
[01:27:38.600 --> 01:27:39.600]  I'm just listening.
[01:27:39.600 --> 01:27:40.600]  Okay.
[01:27:40.600 --> 01:27:42.600]  He can say anything he wants.
[01:27:42.600 --> 01:27:52.600]  And as far as reading your rights, that only counts if they subsequently extract information from you
[01:27:52.600 --> 01:27:55.600]  and attempt to use that in court.
[01:27:55.600 --> 01:27:59.600]  So a lot of people, they say, well, they never read me my rights.
[01:27:59.600 --> 01:28:03.600]  And well, it don't make any difference if they're not questioning you
[01:28:03.600 --> 01:28:08.600]  and intending to use your responses to the questions as evidence.
[01:28:08.600 --> 01:28:10.600]  They don't make any difference.
[01:28:10.600 --> 01:28:15.600]  But there is one response to have.
[01:28:15.600 --> 01:28:20.600]  When they read you your rights and ask if you understand these rights,
[01:28:20.600 --> 01:28:27.600]  you say, I demand counsel.
[01:28:27.600 --> 01:28:30.600]  That's the response to have.
[01:28:30.600 --> 01:28:38.600]  When you demand counsel, the rule is no more questions.
[01:28:38.600 --> 01:28:46.600]  And that's the one that will protect you no matter what they do.
[01:28:46.600 --> 01:28:51.600]  Someone told me today that I was talking to him on the phone out of Oregon,
[01:28:51.600 --> 01:28:56.600]  and she has a little card that when a policeman pulls over, she hands him that card.
[01:28:56.600 --> 01:28:59.600]  It's a little like a business size card.
[01:28:59.600 --> 01:29:05.600]  And it says, I demand my right to counsel.
[01:29:05.600 --> 01:29:08.600]  And that's all the argument you need to do to the police officer.
[01:29:08.600 --> 01:29:12.600]  And I thought that was very elegant.
[01:29:12.600 --> 01:29:19.600]  And that is the best way to tell the officer, I know the routine bubba.
[01:29:19.600 --> 01:29:22.600]  You don't have to impress him with how much you know the law.
[01:29:22.600 --> 01:29:29.600]  If the first thing you say is I want counsel, then they know you know.
[01:29:29.600 --> 01:29:37.600]  And I liked it because it avoided confrontation.
[01:29:37.600 --> 01:29:39.600]  Okay.
[01:29:39.600 --> 01:29:41.600]  I hope that got that covered.
[01:29:41.600 --> 01:29:43.600]  We're going to break.
[01:29:43.600 --> 01:29:45.600]  Do you have any more questions, Ramel?
[01:29:45.600 --> 01:29:46.600]  I'm done.
[01:29:46.600 --> 01:29:47.600]  Thanks, folks.
[01:29:47.600 --> 01:29:48.600]  Thanks so much.
[01:29:48.600 --> 01:29:49.600]  I appreciate it.
[01:29:49.600 --> 01:29:50.600]  I'll let some other people take some time.
[01:29:50.600 --> 01:29:51.600]  Okay, great.
[01:29:51.600 --> 01:29:52.600]  Thank you so much for your time.
[01:29:52.600 --> 01:29:53.600]  I appreciate you guys.
[01:29:53.600 --> 01:29:54.600]  Thank you.
[01:29:54.600 --> 01:29:55.600]  All right.
[01:29:55.600 --> 01:29:56.600]  We'll be right back.
[01:29:56.600 --> 01:30:01.600]  We've got Reese on the line.
[01:30:01.600 --> 01:30:06.600]  Are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters, or even lawsuits?
[01:30:06.600 --> 01:30:10.600]  Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Mears proven method.
[01:30:10.600 --> 01:30:13.600]  Michael Mears has won six cases in federal court against debt collectors,
[01:30:13.600 --> 01:30:15.600]  and now you can win two.
[01:30:15.600 --> 01:30:19.600]  You'll get step-by-step instructions in plain English on how to win in court
[01:30:19.600 --> 01:30:23.600]  using federal civil rights statutes, what to do when contacted by phone,
[01:30:23.600 --> 01:30:27.600]  mail, or court summons, how to answer letters and phone calls,
[01:30:27.600 --> 01:30:29.600]  how to get debt collectors out of your credit report,
[01:30:29.600 --> 01:30:34.600]  how to turn the financial tables on them and make them pay you to go away.
[01:30:34.600 --> 01:30:39.600]  The Michael Mears proven method is the solution for how to stop debt collectors.
[01:30:39.600 --> 01:30:41.600]  Personal consultation is available as well.
[01:30:41.600 --> 01:30:44.600]  For more information, please visit ruleoflawradio.com
[01:30:44.600 --> 01:30:49.600]  and click on the blue Michael Mears banner or email michaelmears at yahoo.com.
[01:30:49.600 --> 01:30:57.600]  That's ruleoflawradio.com or email m-i-c-h-a-e-l-m-i-r-r-a-s at yahoo.com
[01:30:57.600 --> 01:31:26.600]  to learn how to stop debt collectors now.
[01:31:26.600 --> 01:31:31.600]  The wicked come with temptations
[01:31:31.600 --> 01:31:36.600]  They're trying to buy the whole place
[01:31:36.600 --> 01:31:42.600]  They wanna fall into the nation
[01:31:42.600 --> 01:31:47.600]  Because they're falling from grace
[01:31:47.600 --> 01:31:53.600]  I will not drink from that cup
[01:31:53.600 --> 01:31:58.600]  I just can't act out of way
[01:31:58.600 --> 01:32:03.600]  They got this problem they're dreaming of
[01:32:03.600 --> 01:32:08.600]  And I won't be the slave come what may
[01:32:08.600 --> 01:32:23.600]  Because I'm going to come back and be content
[01:32:23.600 --> 01:32:27.600]  Because I'm going to be self-reliant and might be one
[01:32:27.600 --> 01:32:29.600]  You don't try to go against the will of time
[01:32:29.600 --> 01:32:31.600]  You're going to come down with your heart and feel the beat
[01:32:31.600 --> 01:32:33.600]  You look at the world and you're loving badly
[01:32:33.600 --> 01:32:38.600]  Because I'm going to come back and be content
[01:32:38.600 --> 01:32:40.600]  Okay, we are back. We're taking your calls.
[01:32:40.600 --> 01:32:44.600]  512-646-1984.
[01:32:44.600 --> 01:32:47.600]  And we are going to go back to Reese in Montana briefly.
[01:32:47.600 --> 01:32:49.600]  She called back in to talk to Randy.
[01:32:49.600 --> 01:32:51.600]  And then we're going to George in Nebraska.
[01:32:51.600 --> 01:32:52.600]  Go ahead, Reese.
[01:32:52.600 --> 01:32:54.600]  Yeah, sorry about that. Hi, Randy.
[01:32:54.600 --> 01:32:56.600]  Glad you made it back. Good to hear you.
[01:32:56.600 --> 01:32:57.600]  Thank you.
[01:32:57.600 --> 01:33:00.600]  I just wanted to call back because you did request that I call back in today.
[01:33:00.600 --> 01:33:03.600]  Let me tell you, I looked in the statutes and you were absolutely right.
[01:33:03.600 --> 01:33:06.600]  It doesn't say penal code, but it's under crime.
[01:33:06.600 --> 01:33:08.600]  And you couldn't have been more correct.
[01:33:08.600 --> 01:33:15.600]  The body of law there is definitely, when we look at it with the correct vision, you're absolutely right.
[01:33:15.600 --> 01:33:16.600]  There's a lot there to work with.
[01:33:16.600 --> 01:33:21.600]  They've got millions of dollars in damages racked up already.
[01:33:21.600 --> 01:33:25.600]  When I think we wanted to touch on was that you did say yesterday,
[01:33:25.600 --> 01:33:35.600]  I think we were on the point of pleadings and motions and you were clarifying that that wasn't a problem in terms of begging the court.
[01:33:35.600 --> 01:33:36.600]  Exactly.
[01:33:36.600 --> 01:33:37.600]  I don't know if we...
[01:33:37.600 --> 01:33:39.600]  Okay, understand.
[01:33:39.600 --> 01:33:42.600]  You don't ask the court for anything.
[01:33:42.600 --> 01:33:59.600]  When you do your job, the court has a duty to develop the facts in the case and then apply the law as it comes to him to the facts that he developed in the case.
[01:33:59.600 --> 01:34:04.600]  He may not have an opinion as to the law.
[01:34:04.600 --> 01:34:08.600]  That's what the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court is for.
[01:34:08.600 --> 01:34:13.600]  He takes the law they give him and applies it to the facts in the case.
[01:34:13.600 --> 01:34:20.600]  If he fails to do that, he violates a ministerial duty.
[01:34:20.600 --> 01:34:32.600]  So in understanding that point, in order for him to do that, you must present to him the facts in the case,
[01:34:32.600 --> 01:34:43.600]  present to him the law that addresses those facts in the case, and then move the court to do what the court is required to do.
[01:34:43.600 --> 01:34:48.600]  Now, the thing about pleading in prayer, they have nothing to do with religion.
[01:34:48.600 --> 01:34:51.600]  They're simply a term of art.
[01:34:51.600 --> 01:34:55.600]  Prayer means your demand to the court.
[01:34:55.600 --> 01:35:03.600]  You're not praying to the court, you're demanding that the court do what you've demonstrated he has a duty to do.
[01:35:03.600 --> 01:35:05.600]  Here are the facts.
[01:35:05.600 --> 01:35:07.600]  Here is the law.
[01:35:07.600 --> 01:35:10.600]  This is the decision you must render.
[01:35:10.600 --> 01:35:17.600]  A pleading is a special motion.
[01:35:17.600 --> 01:35:27.600]  See, there's three pleadings, pleading an abatement or challenge to jurisdiction, double jeopardy, and there's one other.
[01:35:27.600 --> 01:35:28.600]  That would be four.
[01:35:28.600 --> 01:35:30.600]  It's a special term of art.
[01:35:30.600 --> 01:35:34.600]  It just refers to a special kind of motion.
[01:35:34.600 --> 01:35:37.600]  So you're not pleading with the court for anything.
[01:35:37.600 --> 01:35:40.600]  It's just a term they use to describe it.
[01:35:40.600 --> 01:35:59.600]  But always keep in mind, even if the judge agrees with you, if you tell the judge what your opinion is, he can agree with you 100%, but he does not have authority to follow it.
[01:35:59.600 --> 01:36:01.600]  He must follow law.
[01:36:01.600 --> 01:36:20.600]  So as a maxim and a rule of construction, you can state from your own mouth the facts in the case, but you cannot make a proactive statement of law from your mouth.
[01:36:20.600 --> 01:36:24.600]  You must make that from the mouth of the court.
[01:36:24.600 --> 01:36:35.600]  Either the statute, you say these are the facts, and the statute says you must do this, or the case law says this.
[01:36:35.600 --> 01:36:39.600]  That is law to the judge.
[01:36:39.600 --> 01:36:40.600]  That's what he must do.
[01:36:40.600 --> 01:36:46.600]  If you state your opinion about what that says, he can't pay any attention to that.
[01:36:46.600 --> 01:36:48.600]  He's not allowed to.
[01:36:48.600 --> 01:36:50.600]  Give him the law.
[01:36:50.600 --> 01:36:54.600]  So the way you're approaching it is not going to compromise your status.
[01:36:54.600 --> 01:36:57.600]  I was speaking earlier of wanting to come sui juris versus pro se.
[01:36:57.600 --> 01:36:58.600]  Absolutely.
[01:36:58.600 --> 01:37:14.600]  And one thing, just as a matter of posture, never ever in one of my pleadings will you ever see the term pro se, sui juris, man on the land, none of that stuff.
[01:37:14.600 --> 01:37:16.600]  Ever.
[01:37:16.600 --> 01:37:21.600]  The only way, I am what I am, and I don't have to prove it to him.
[01:37:21.600 --> 01:37:40.600]  And the problem with it is, is so many people, they hear these terms and they misuse them, that when the judge reads the term, it accesses in the mind of the judge a mental set, a mental posture.
[01:37:40.600 --> 01:37:46.600]  And it can create a problem you would not otherwise have.
[01:37:46.600 --> 01:37:57.600]  If he sees this term and he says, oh no, another one of these, pro se, wacko, no nothing, pain's in the neck and he pays no attention to your pleadings.
[01:37:57.600 --> 01:38:11.600]  Now you wind up having to appeal everything he's done, instead of getting a good fair hearing in the first place, and the judge could well do that without intending to.
[01:38:11.600 --> 01:38:14.600]  Yeah, that's already a factor.
[01:38:14.600 --> 01:38:28.600]  Yeah, I try not to, the only way I want the judge to figure out that my motion was not written by an attorney is when he gets to the bottom of it, it's got my signature on it and not the attorney's signature.
[01:38:28.600 --> 01:38:33.600]  I want that to be a surprise to him.
[01:38:33.600 --> 01:38:45.600]  Because when he's reading it, I'm trying real hard not to access any unnecessary or irrelevant issues.
[01:38:45.600 --> 01:38:48.600]  No extra verbiage, keep it to the facts points, yeah.
[01:38:48.600 --> 01:38:51.600]  Exactly, no extra verbiage.
[01:38:51.600 --> 01:38:55.600]  I was going to talk today about how to tell your story.
[01:38:55.600 --> 01:39:00.600]  Tell me what, when, where.
[01:39:00.600 --> 01:39:03.600]  Tell me how or why.
[01:39:03.600 --> 01:39:06.600]  Let me figure that out.
[01:39:06.600 --> 01:39:11.600]  Tell me what happened, tell me when it happened, tell me where it happened.
[01:39:11.600 --> 01:39:18.600]  So even in the case of extenuating circumstances like people having made false allegations prior to that, just leave all that out?
[01:39:18.600 --> 01:39:21.600]  No, leave that out first.
[01:39:21.600 --> 01:39:24.600]  First tell me what happened, trust me.
[01:39:24.600 --> 01:39:27.600]  Trust me to understand.
[01:39:27.600 --> 01:39:40.600]  If you tell me what happened and at the same time try to convince me of how important this is, I'm going to be saying, well, you know, maybe it is, maybe it's not.
[01:39:40.600 --> 01:39:42.600]  I got my own opinions to have.
[01:39:42.600 --> 01:39:48.600]  So when I construct a motion, I try to lay out my facts.
[01:39:48.600 --> 01:39:56.600]  So he reads the first fact and it leads to the next fact and it leads to the next fact.
[01:39:56.600 --> 01:40:01.600]  So the reader will read the facts and try to put these together.
[01:40:01.600 --> 01:40:04.600]  Now there are a lot of facts I leave out.
[01:40:04.600 --> 01:40:18.600]  If the fact won't lead, point toward the outcome I want him to come to, the conclusion I want him to come to, and the fact is not critical, I leave it out.
[01:40:18.600 --> 01:40:21.600]  And I tell him this set of facts.
[01:40:21.600 --> 01:40:26.600]  And then I go to my statement of cause.
[01:40:26.600 --> 01:40:32.600]  I say this fact here is important because of this and I lead it to the next fact.
[01:40:32.600 --> 01:40:46.600]  If I've done that artfully, I'll state the conclusion I got him to come to when he read the facts or at least to say that's a reasonable interpretation of these two facts.
[01:40:46.600 --> 01:40:55.600]  And then from this fact we go to the next and we want the reader to have rapport with us.
[01:40:55.600 --> 01:41:00.600]  Yeah, I can see how he came to this conclusion and this conclusion and this conclusion.
[01:41:00.600 --> 01:41:04.600]  And then you go to your argument and support.
[01:41:04.600 --> 01:41:05.600]  Oh, I'm sorry.
[01:41:05.600 --> 01:41:07.600]  You go to your argument and support.
[01:41:07.600 --> 01:41:21.600]  See, the second one you just state, first you state the facts only. What, when, where. Then you go to the fact and you tell how.
[01:41:21.600 --> 01:41:25.600]  And then in your argument and support you say why.
[01:41:25.600 --> 01:41:43.600]  And you want to bring your reader along each step of the way, not necessarily that he agrees with you, but you want a fair trier of the fact to understand how you could come to this conclusion.
[01:41:43.600 --> 01:41:45.600]  But this is all in one pleading then?
[01:41:45.600 --> 01:41:46.600]  Yes.
[01:41:46.600 --> 01:41:47.600]  Not a separate one.
[01:41:47.600 --> 01:41:58.600]  But people that aren't sophisticated in this try to tell us a fact and they're afraid we won't get it.
[01:41:58.600 --> 01:41:59.600]  Believe it.
[01:41:59.600 --> 01:42:11.600]  Yes, they want to hammer that in right at the front and they don't give us time to put the pieces together and we wind up confused and lacking what's called referential index.
[01:42:11.600 --> 01:42:20.600]  They give me a fact and then they come up with another fact and they try to tie these two together and I'm trying to figure out I don't even know what's going on yet.
[01:42:20.600 --> 01:42:24.600]  And they're trying to give me the closing case.
[01:42:24.600 --> 01:42:34.600]  So we try to start what, when, where. Then we go to how, how all of these fit together.
[01:42:34.600 --> 01:42:37.600]  And then we go to why all this is important.
[01:42:37.600 --> 01:42:39.600]  And that will give us a good, strong pleading.
[01:42:39.600 --> 01:42:41.600]  Okay, fabulous.
[01:42:41.600 --> 01:42:44.600]  And then I looked at your one that had the kidnapping.
[01:42:44.600 --> 01:42:46.600]  I went to your site.
[01:42:46.600 --> 01:42:49.600]  I did that while I was doing the break.
[01:42:49.600 --> 01:43:00.600]  And it doesn't seem to, it just states a fact, but it doesn't say that you're asking or, you know, demanding or whatever to get back in front of the judge.
[01:43:00.600 --> 01:43:04.600]  Is that something that is automatically going to happen by virtue of the filing?
[01:43:04.600 --> 01:43:05.600]  Oh, no.
[01:43:05.600 --> 01:43:07.600]  The criminal complaint.
[01:43:07.600 --> 01:43:13.600]  Okay, I'm not really sure of where you're at, so I need to back up here.
[01:43:13.600 --> 01:43:16.600]  I went into the blank section of your jurisprudence site.
[01:43:16.600 --> 01:43:17.600]  Yes.
[01:43:17.600 --> 01:43:18.600]  And saw the kidnapping complaint.
[01:43:18.600 --> 01:43:19.600]  Yes.
[01:43:19.600 --> 01:43:21.600]  Near the top.
[01:43:21.600 --> 01:43:22.600]  Okay.
[01:43:21.600 --> 01:43:26.600]  And I was reading that and it was just a statement of this is what had happened.
[01:43:26.600 --> 01:43:27.600]  Yeah, these are.
[01:43:27.600 --> 01:43:28.600]  So what can you anticipate?
[01:43:28.600 --> 01:43:30.600]  Because I'm going to have several of these.
[01:43:30.600 --> 01:43:33.600]  I mean, I'm looking at over ten.
[01:43:33.600 --> 01:43:34.600]  Only ten?
[01:43:34.600 --> 01:43:35.600]  Fifteen complaints.
[01:43:35.600 --> 01:43:39.600]  How much did you come up with?
[01:43:39.600 --> 01:43:40.600]  Is Eddie there?
[01:43:40.600 --> 01:43:42.600]  He came up with over 400.
[01:43:42.600 --> 01:43:46.600]  So if you only came up with ten, you haven't looked hard enough.
[01:43:46.600 --> 01:43:48.600]  Yeah, I'm not finished yet.
[01:43:48.600 --> 01:43:49.600]  Okay.
[01:43:49.600 --> 01:43:54.600]  We'll address this a bit when we come back and we may need to go on.
[01:43:54.600 --> 01:43:57.600]  But yeah, I'll address that when I come back on how to do a criminal complaint.
[01:43:57.600 --> 01:44:00.600]  We'll be right back.
[01:44:00.600 --> 01:44:07.600]  Thank you.
[01:44:07.600 --> 01:44:14.600]  Aerial spraying, chemtrails, the modified atmosphere, heavy metals and pesticides,
[01:44:14.600 --> 01:44:19.600]  carcinogens and chemical fibers all falling from the sky.
[01:44:19.600 --> 01:44:22.600]  You have a choice to keep your body clean.
[01:44:22.600 --> 01:44:27.600]  Detoxify with micro plant powder from hempusa.org.
[01:44:27.600 --> 01:44:31.600]  Call 908-691-2608.
[01:44:31.600 --> 01:44:36.600]  It's odorless and tasteless and used in any liquid or food.
[01:44:36.600 --> 01:44:40.600]  Protect your family now with micro plant powder.
[01:44:40.600 --> 01:44:44.600]  Cleaning out heavy metals, parasites and toxins.
[01:44:44.600 --> 01:44:49.600]  Order it now for daily intake and stock it now for long-term storage.
[01:44:49.600 --> 01:45:04.600]  Visit hempusa.org or call 908-691-2608 today.
[01:45:04.600 --> 01:45:23.600]  All right.
[01:45:23.600 --> 01:45:25.600]  We are back.
[01:45:25.600 --> 01:45:28.600]  We're talking to Reese in Montana.
[01:45:28.600 --> 01:45:31.600]  We're taking your calls.
[01:45:31.600 --> 01:45:36.600]  Randy, you were talking about filing, how to construct and file criminal complaints.
[01:45:36.600 --> 01:45:37.600]  And I had a question.
[01:45:37.600 --> 01:45:40.600]  I wanted to go back to, you know, when you finished this,
[01:45:40.600 --> 01:45:45.600]  I had a question concerning leaving out facts that you mentioned earlier.
[01:45:45.600 --> 01:45:51.600]  And so I wanted you to address that issue because I have a question concerning,
[01:45:51.600 --> 01:45:56.600]  you know, if we try to leave out certain facts in order to lead the reader to a
[01:45:56.600 --> 01:46:01.600]  conclusion that we want them to that we should be careful, you know,
[01:46:01.600 --> 01:46:04.600]  I'm just thinking that we should be careful with that sort of thing because if
[01:46:04.600 --> 01:46:09.600]  there's other facts that could lead somebody else to a different conclusion,
[01:46:09.600 --> 01:46:16.600]  could there be problems in the case or could that cause any kind of difficulty?
[01:46:16.600 --> 01:46:18.600]  You are absolutely right.
[01:46:18.600 --> 01:46:27.600]  And I'm glad you brought that up because I didn't intend that you leave out pertinent facts.
[01:46:27.600 --> 01:46:35.600]  It's just when we look at the facts, we look at those that lead to our conclusions.
[01:46:35.600 --> 01:46:39.600]  If a fact is important, we should always put it in there.
[01:46:39.600 --> 01:46:45.600]  We have to think about where our listeners or where our reader is going.
[01:46:45.600 --> 01:46:52.600]  And the worst thing to do is leave out a fact that the reader will be reading and say,
[01:46:52.600 --> 01:46:56.600]  wait a minute, something's missing here.
[01:46:56.600 --> 01:46:59.600]  You'll lose your credibility.
[01:46:59.600 --> 01:47:02.600]  You have to make sure you have all the pertinent facts.
[01:47:02.600 --> 01:47:12.600]  The facts I'm talking about are those that aren't important to leading to the
[01:47:12.600 --> 01:47:21.600]  structure of the case and this thing of the complaint is a good point to explain that.
[01:47:21.600 --> 01:47:24.600]  Yeah, because you don't want to lie by omission.
[01:47:24.600 --> 01:47:25.600]  Exactly.
[01:47:25.600 --> 01:47:28.600]  They catch you, then you lose all your credibility.
[01:47:28.600 --> 01:47:37.600]  And if you have things in there that look bad for you, address them.
[01:47:37.600 --> 01:47:40.600]  Never ignore them.
[01:47:40.600 --> 01:47:50.600]  Address them and make your explanation either before the question comes to the mind
[01:47:50.600 --> 01:47:55.600]  of your reader or just after it comes to the mind of your reader.
[01:47:55.600 --> 01:48:02.600]  When I write, I try to think, what is my reader going to think as he's reading this?
[01:48:02.600 --> 01:48:07.600]  Sometimes I deliberately create a question in the mind of my reader.
[01:48:07.600 --> 01:48:14.600]  I create that question because I intend to answer it as soon as it formulates in his mind.
[01:48:14.600 --> 01:48:18.600]  That will give him the impression of rapport.
[01:48:18.600 --> 01:48:25.600]  And in order for me to do that, I have to really sit down and think carefully about what I'm doing.
[01:48:25.600 --> 01:48:30.600]  When I have people read my work, this is what I ask them to do.
[01:48:30.600 --> 01:48:36.600]  Tell me that I create a question in your mind that I didn't answer.
[01:48:36.600 --> 01:48:39.600]  If I did, I'm not doing my job.
[01:48:39.600 --> 01:48:41.600]  I'm not paying attention.
[01:48:41.600 --> 01:48:48.600]  Now, when we come to a criminal complaint, there are elements to the crime.
[01:48:48.600 --> 01:48:55.600]  And in any of these crimes, there are a lot of things that happened, but not all of them are elements.
[01:48:55.600 --> 01:49:02.600]  And when I talk to someone who tells me about the situation, I'm familiar with due process.
[01:49:02.600 --> 01:49:08.600]  I'm looking for those facts that go to due process.
[01:49:08.600 --> 01:49:13.600]  But for the most part, average people, they don't know what goes to due process,
[01:49:13.600 --> 01:49:15.600]  so they have to tell me the whole story.
[01:49:15.600 --> 01:49:18.600]  And I'm listening for those pieces of information that I need.
[01:49:18.600 --> 01:49:21.600]  Anybody who's sat down and told their story to an attorney,
[01:49:21.600 --> 01:49:25.600]  he'll sit there patiently and watch and ask a few questions.
[01:49:25.600 --> 01:49:28.600]  And every once in a while, he'll write something down.
[01:49:28.600 --> 01:49:32.600]  He's writing down the elements that he needs.
[01:49:32.600 --> 01:49:37.600]  When I write a criminal complaint, first thing I do is read the statute,
[01:49:37.600 --> 01:49:42.600]  what constitutes a crime by the statute.
[01:49:42.600 --> 01:49:50.600]  And then I tell those facts that follow right along with the elements of the crime.
[01:49:50.600 --> 01:49:54.600]  And that's all I give in the complaint itself,
[01:49:54.600 --> 01:50:00.600]  only enough to establish an assertion that the facts exist.
[01:50:00.600 --> 01:50:08.600]  Then you can take an affidavit in support and tell the whole story.
[01:50:08.600 --> 01:50:15.600]  But what you've done by that is you've given your listener a model, an outline.
[01:50:15.600 --> 01:50:18.600]  So when they start reading through these facts,
[01:50:18.600 --> 01:50:24.600]  sometimes when we start telling our stories, we drift off in one direction or another.
[01:50:24.600 --> 01:50:27.600]  But he's already read the basic outline,
[01:50:27.600 --> 01:50:31.600]  and if you drift off in one direction or another,
[01:50:31.600 --> 01:50:37.600]  the reader kind of knows where you're at so he doesn't get lost.
[01:50:37.600 --> 01:50:41.600]  Same thing when you file a civil action.
[01:50:41.600 --> 01:50:46.600]  You make your claims in terms of causes of action.
[01:50:46.600 --> 01:50:51.600]  And just like a criminal complaint, the cause of action has elements.
[01:50:51.600 --> 01:50:55.600]  So when you read one of my causes of actions, I walk right down the elements.
[01:50:55.600 --> 01:50:59.600]  I state this element, state this element, state this element.
[01:50:59.600 --> 01:51:01.600]  They sometimes look a little funny,
[01:51:01.600 --> 01:51:06.600]  but these are the elements that the courts have said must be there.
[01:51:06.600 --> 01:51:10.600]  And that's all I want to put in the complaint.
[01:51:10.600 --> 01:51:16.600]  Randy, would you say that it's fair that in general you mostly are wanting to structure your document
[01:51:16.600 --> 01:51:18.600]  to lead the reader to the truth
[01:51:18.600 --> 01:51:22.600]  and not necessarily just lead the reader to where you want them to go?
[01:51:22.600 --> 01:51:24.600]  Oh, absolutely.
[01:51:24.600 --> 01:51:34.600]  In these situations, if you try to lead someone to a false opinion,
[01:51:34.600 --> 01:51:43.600]  human beings are extremely astute at recognizing when they're being manipulated.
[01:51:43.600 --> 01:51:49.600]  We are extremely good at it and we catch you every time.
[01:51:49.600 --> 01:51:54.600]  We've got these automatic things going on in here.
[01:51:54.600 --> 01:51:58.600]  You try to manipulate me, you try to hoodwink me, I catch you.
[01:51:58.600 --> 01:52:04.600]  Now, if it's new to me, when an ordinary person encounters a police officer,
[01:52:04.600 --> 01:52:08.600]  which he almost never does, he doesn't have a clue as to what's going on.
[01:52:08.600 --> 01:52:11.600]  So the officer can do some song and dance.
[01:52:11.600 --> 01:52:15.600]  But we're not talking about someone who doesn't have a clue.
[01:52:15.600 --> 01:52:19.600]  We're talking about legal professionals who do this all the time.
[01:52:19.600 --> 01:52:24.600]  Do not try to lead them to a false outcome.
[01:52:24.600 --> 01:52:29.600]  They deal with people who think they can do that all the time,
[01:52:29.600 --> 01:52:31.600]  and they are very good at catching you.
[01:52:31.600 --> 01:52:35.600]  This is not about misleading someone.
[01:52:35.600 --> 01:52:38.600]  This is about carefully leading them.
[01:52:38.600 --> 01:52:42.600]  You're going to lead them to the facts that support your position.
[01:52:42.600 --> 01:52:47.600]  And if there are facts that tend to lead away from your position,
[01:52:47.600 --> 01:52:50.600]  you need to explain those.
[01:52:50.600 --> 01:52:52.600]  That's in a supporting affidavit.
[01:52:52.600 --> 01:52:54.600]  Yeah, exactly.
[01:52:54.600 --> 01:53:00.600]  Because if you leave a question unanswered, your reader is going to go down
[01:53:00.600 --> 01:53:05.600]  and that question is going to form in his mind, and you've lost him.
[01:53:05.600 --> 01:53:11.600]  And you have to understand, too, that you're not the only one filing documents.
[01:53:11.600 --> 01:53:17.600]  And so even if you construct your documents so that you don't leave a question
[01:53:17.600 --> 01:53:22.600]  in the reader's mind, there's going to be other people filing documents
[01:53:22.600 --> 01:53:25.600]  that are going to raise questions in the reader's mind.
[01:53:25.600 --> 01:53:30.600]  And so you don't want what you're saying to conflict with the facts
[01:53:30.600 --> 01:53:32.600]  that other people are going to tell.
[01:53:32.600 --> 01:53:34.600]  And so that's the point that I was trying to get at.
[01:53:34.600 --> 01:53:39.600]  It's not just about making sure you construct your documents
[01:53:39.600 --> 01:53:41.600]  so that you don't leave a question in the reader's mind,
[01:53:41.600 --> 01:53:46.600]  because there's going to be other documents that are going to raise questions
[01:53:46.600 --> 01:53:48.600]  in the reader's mind, too.
[01:53:48.600 --> 01:53:53.600]  And so you want to make sure that your facts and what you're saying jives
[01:53:53.600 --> 01:53:59.600]  with the other people when they're telling their side of the story, their facts.
[01:53:59.600 --> 01:54:01.600]  That's the point I was trying to get at.
[01:54:01.600 --> 01:54:03.600]  Yeah, that's exactly right.
[01:54:03.600 --> 01:54:08.600]  Because if he's going to raise something negative to you, do not hide from it.
[01:54:08.600 --> 01:54:10.600]  Raise it first.
[01:54:10.600 --> 01:54:11.600]  I get that.
[01:54:11.600 --> 01:54:16.600]  Is the cause of action included in the initial pleading where you're stating the facts?
[01:54:16.600 --> 01:54:17.600]  No, wait, wait, wait.
[01:54:17.600 --> 01:54:18.600]  Okay, cause of action.
[01:54:18.600 --> 01:54:21.600]  Cause of action is civil.
[01:54:21.600 --> 01:54:26.600]  In criminal, you have crimes or criminal statutes.
[01:54:26.600 --> 01:54:29.600]  In civil, you don't have criminal statutes.
[01:54:29.600 --> 01:54:32.600]  You have causes of action.
[01:54:32.600 --> 01:54:37.600]  Okay, so do I put the statutory supports when I'm putting the facts down?
[01:54:37.600 --> 01:54:41.600]  Do I follow it up right there with the statute or where do those come in?
[01:54:41.600 --> 01:54:45.600]  When you start writing the facts down, read.
[01:54:45.600 --> 01:54:52.600]  If you're saying, like, when they stop you and arrest you without a warrant,
[01:54:52.600 --> 01:54:57.600]  read the statute that authorizes them to arrest without a warrant.
[01:54:57.600 --> 01:54:59.600]  Then start writing.
[01:54:59.600 --> 01:55:01.600]  If you get confused, go back and read it again.
[01:55:01.600 --> 01:55:08.600]  So you have that statute clearly in mind, it tells you what they're supposed to do.
[01:55:08.600 --> 01:55:16.600]  And then you walk down the steps that they actually took that either go to show that they did what they were supposed to do
[01:55:16.600 --> 01:55:20.600]  or that they didn't do what they're supposed to do.
[01:55:20.600 --> 01:55:25.600]  The judge, when he reads it, he will recognize that you're doing that.
[01:55:25.600 --> 01:55:28.600]  And that's how he wants it done.
[01:55:28.600 --> 01:55:32.600]  He don't want to hear a lot of stuff that don't have anything to do with anything.
[01:55:32.600 --> 01:55:34.600]  It will give him a headache.
[01:55:34.600 --> 01:55:35.600]  Yeah, I get that part.
[01:55:35.600 --> 01:55:41.600]  Are you available for consultation hiring or how do you work on a personal base?
[01:55:41.600 --> 01:55:50.600]  I can give you just some of my advice, but I just don't have time to hire out to try to help you.
[01:55:50.600 --> 01:55:54.600]  Well, and we can't really give legal advice anyway because we're not attorneys.
[01:55:54.600 --> 01:55:58.600]  I understand that, but consulting is different, I thought.
[01:55:58.600 --> 01:55:59.600]  Yeah, it is.
[01:55:59.600 --> 01:56:02.600]  We're just like paralegals, and we can do that.
[01:56:02.600 --> 01:56:07.600]  But my time is constricted, and I'll give you what time I can.
[01:56:07.600 --> 01:56:16.600]  And frankly, from the first time I talked to you to this time, you're the kind of person I'll give time to.
[01:56:16.600 --> 01:56:18.600]  Oh, thank you so much.
[01:56:18.600 --> 01:56:24.600]  Because you listened to what we spoke to the first time, and clearly in speaking this time,
[01:56:24.600 --> 01:56:29.600]  you paid attention and you came back with good, clear, directed questions.
[01:56:29.600 --> 01:56:32.600]  You're someone I can help.
[01:56:32.600 --> 01:56:33.600]  Oh, well, I appreciate that.
[01:56:33.600 --> 01:56:37.600]  Well, I certainly do have your e-mail address here on your site.
[01:56:37.600 --> 01:56:40.600]  And again, I'm Reese, so I'll be definitely reaching out to you, I'm sure.
[01:56:40.600 --> 01:56:43.600]  But I'm going to go over the site, do the work you've already recommended,
[01:56:43.600 --> 01:56:47.600]  and then I'll be getting back to you to do some more follow-up if we can.
[01:56:47.600 --> 01:56:51.600]  Do you have jurisdictionary?
[01:56:51.600 --> 01:56:52.600]  You know what?
[01:56:52.600 --> 01:56:56.600]  I did, and it got lost in the shuffle of moving, so I'm probably going to have to get it again.
[01:56:56.600 --> 01:57:01.600]  Just e-mail Frederick Graves and tell him he'll have records that you already purchased,
[01:57:01.600 --> 01:57:03.600]  and I'm sure he'll send you another one.
[01:57:03.600 --> 01:57:08.600]  He's not going to make you buy it again if you've already bought it from him.
[01:57:08.600 --> 01:57:09.600]  Oh, good.
[01:57:09.600 --> 01:57:11.600]  Just go through that quickly.
[01:57:11.600 --> 01:57:17.600]  It will give you a really good grounding to how things go.
[01:57:17.600 --> 01:57:22.600]  It will make you be amazed at how much easier all of this will be.
[01:57:22.600 --> 01:57:23.600]  Yeah, okay.
[01:57:23.600 --> 01:57:25.600]  Well, I'm definitely going to do that.
[01:57:25.600 --> 01:57:30.600]  I appreciate you guys so much, and you've got a new listener, and rock on, man.
[01:57:30.600 --> 01:57:31.600]  Thank you.
[01:57:31.600 --> 01:57:33.600]  And you rock on, too.
[01:57:33.600 --> 01:57:35.600]  Good job, Reese.
[01:57:35.600 --> 01:57:36.600]  Appreciate it.
[01:57:36.600 --> 01:57:39.600]  I'll be in touch, Randy.
[01:57:39.600 --> 01:57:41.600]  Okay.
[01:57:41.600 --> 01:57:45.600]  We are coming up on the top-of-the-hour break.
[01:57:45.600 --> 01:57:47.600]  We're just about to go to break.
[01:57:47.600 --> 01:57:52.600]  So when we get back on the other side, we're going to go to George in Nebraska.
[01:57:52.600 --> 01:57:58.600]  We've also got Eddie from Illinois is right after that, and then Ken in Texas.
[01:57:58.600 --> 01:58:06.600]  So listeners, if you'd like to call in, 512-646-1984.
[01:58:06.600 --> 01:58:09.600]  We'll be on the air for another two hours.
[01:58:09.600 --> 01:58:11.600]  Right now, we've got the top-of-the-hour news break.
[01:58:11.600 --> 01:58:37.600]  Ironian World Report, we'll be right back.
[01:58:41.600 --> 01:59:05.600]  It is so enlightening to listen to 90.1 FM, but finding things on the Internet isn't
[01:59:05.600 --> 01:59:09.600]  so easy, and neither is finding like-minded people to share it with.
[01:59:09.600 --> 01:59:12.600]  Oh, well, I guess you haven't heard of Brave New Books, then.
[01:59:12.600 --> 01:59:13.600]  Brave New Books?
[01:59:13.600 --> 01:59:14.600]  Yes.
[01:59:14.600 --> 01:59:18.600]  Brave New Books has all the books and DVDs you're looking for by authors like Alex Jones,
[01:59:18.600 --> 01:59:20.600]  Ron Paul, and G. Edward Griffin.
[01:59:20.600 --> 01:59:24.600]  They even stock inner food, Berkey products, and Calvin Soaps.
[01:59:24.600 --> 01:59:26.600]  There's no way a place like that exists.
[01:59:26.600 --> 01:59:28.600]  Go check it out for yourself.
[01:59:28.600 --> 01:59:32.600]  It's downtown at 1904 Guadalupe Street, just south of UT.
[01:59:32.600 --> 01:59:35.600]  By UT, there's never anywhere to park down there.
[01:59:35.600 --> 01:59:40.600]  Actually, they now offer a free hour of parking for paying customers at the 500 MLK parking
[01:59:40.600 --> 01:59:43.600]  facility, just behind the bookstore.
[01:59:43.600 --> 01:59:46.600]  It does exist, but when are they open?
[01:59:46.600 --> 01:59:51.600]  Monday through Saturday, 11 AM to 9 PM, and 1 to 6 PM on Sundays.
[01:59:51.600 --> 02:00:06.600]  So give them a call at 512-480-2503, or check out their events page at bravenewbookstore.com.