ROL_2012-06-22_16k_Hr1-2.timecode

[00:00.000 --> 00:08.600]  Do you drink bottled water? Even those BPA-free plastic containers and metal water bottles
[00:08.600 --> 00:12.120]  could be putting your health at risk. I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht and I'll be back in
[00:12.120 --> 00:17.640]  a moment with three reasons why you may want to switch to a new fangled glass water bottle.
[00:17.640 --> 00:22.000]  Privacy is under attack. When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back
[00:22.000 --> 00:27.600]  again. And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[00:27.600 --> 00:33.240]  So protect your rights. Say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself. Privacy,
[00:33.240 --> 00:38.480]  it's worth hanging on to. This public service announcement is brought to you by StartPage.com,
[00:38.480 --> 00:44.600]  the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing. Start over with StartPage.
[00:44.600 --> 00:50.520]  If you're looking for a healthy alternative to plastic water bottles that contain the chemical
[00:50.520 --> 00:57.160]  bisfinol A or BPA, here are three reasons to consider glass. BPA-free or not, plastic
[00:57.160 --> 01:02.440]  water bottles don't release other chemicals. Metal water bottles often have plastic liners
[01:02.440 --> 01:06.480]  and many are made in China, which worries people like me who know that country's history
[01:06.480 --> 01:11.400]  with tainted products. Finally, metal containers can leech and leave a metallic taste in the
[01:11.400 --> 01:16.400]  water, yuck. Water from glass bottles taste great naturally with no chemicals. And if
[01:16.400 --> 01:20.320]  you're worried about broken glass, the new bottles are made of resilient tempered glass
[01:20.320 --> 01:27.320]  and many have rubberized protective covers.
[01:50.320 --> 01:55.600]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too. So
[01:55.600 --> 02:01.760]  protect your rights. Say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself. Privacy,
[02:01.760 --> 02:06.880]  it's worth hanging on to. This public service announcement is brought to you by StartPage.com,
[02:06.880 --> 02:12.880]  the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing. Start over with StartPage.
[02:12.880 --> 02:19.040]  Why are Americans overweight? We're often told it's because fattening junk food is
[02:19.040 --> 02:24.120]  the only thing low-income families can afford. But let's set the record straight. Processed
[02:24.120 --> 02:29.160]  food is actually way more expensive than food cooked at home. Example, feeding a family
[02:29.160 --> 02:34.360]  of four at Mickey D's costs about $30. At home, a roasted chicken with potatoes and
[02:34.360 --> 02:39.840]  a salad costs less than half that. Plus, it's a lot healthier. Truth is, most people are
[02:39.840 --> 02:44.160]  able to afford real food. It's the cooking we don't like, because we view it as backbreaking
[02:44.160 --> 02:48.800]  work. We need to start appreciating the pleasures of a warm, savory kitchen and the
[02:48.800 --> 02:53.280]  closeness that comes from nourishing our families. I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht. More
[02:53.280 --> 03:19.280]  news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[03:19.280 --> 03:39.720]  All right, folks. Good evening. This is Rule of Law Radio with Randy Kelton, Debra Stevens,
[03:39.720 --> 03:49.040]  Eddie Craig. This is our Friday night four-hour info marathon. We are live tonight. It is
[03:49.040 --> 03:54.880]  my June, if this thing will come up and tell me what the date is here. Well, it's been
[03:54.880 --> 04:00.000]  a little slow about that, but what is the date today, Randy? I can't even remember.
[04:00.000 --> 04:03.920]  Today is the 22nd of June. Yeah, that's what it is.
[04:03.920 --> 04:08.800]  2012. All right, yeah, 22nd of June. All right, well, we'll go from there then.
[04:08.800 --> 04:17.640]  Okay, I've been getting a lot of requests to go over some information regarding, of
[04:17.640 --> 04:26.000]  all things, ordinances and how the cities and the counties are using them against private
[04:26.000 --> 04:34.560]  individuals. So what I would like to do tonight is start off with just some straight up basic
[04:34.560 --> 04:43.240]  knowledge every Texan ought to know and every person in their state ought to know about
[04:43.240 --> 04:50.280]  the rules their government is allowed to operate under. Now, when I say the rules, the government
[04:50.280 --> 04:57.640]  is bound by a specific set of powers and authorities that we delegated them through our political
[04:57.640 --> 05:03.640]  instrument known as the state constitution. Now, that is separate and distinct from the
[05:03.640 --> 05:11.120]  federal constitution. Most people these days, especially the government wants us to go running
[05:11.120 --> 05:17.200]  to the federal constitution to defend our rights. So they can tell us in unofficial
[05:17.200 --> 05:25.680]  language that it doesn't exist and it does nothing to protect our rights. So what I'm
[05:25.680 --> 05:31.880]  looking at here is I'm trying to get people to start looking in their own state constitution
[05:31.880 --> 05:38.520]  for the protection that is rightfully theirs. Now, how do we do this? Well, the first thing
[05:38.520 --> 05:43.480]  is you have to read your constitution and here in Texas that is kind of a chore because
[05:43.480 --> 05:49.680]  our constitution reads more like a statute than it does a constitution. It's 280 plus
[05:49.680 --> 05:56.840]  pages long, 289 I think to be exact. It gets amended whether the people of Texas want the
[05:56.840 --> 06:06.640]  amendment or not, but so what? The problem remains for the government that the constitution
[06:06.640 --> 06:13.320]  does not bind or limit we the people. Not in any state of the Indian does it bind or
[06:13.320 --> 06:20.080]  limit we the people. One of the first things that you will notice when you look at these
[06:20.080 --> 06:29.000]  constitutions is that in every single case, we the people are identified as the sovereign
[06:29.000 --> 06:37.800]  power holders. Okay, we are the state, not the legislature, not the judiciary, not the
[06:37.800 --> 06:46.080]  executive. All of these entities we created through this instrument, all of them are our
[06:46.080 --> 07:00.000]  tools to manage our needs and our administrative tasks. Okay, they are the caretakers of our
[07:00.000 --> 07:05.600]  rights and our property. And I don't know about you, but when somebody that's working
[07:05.600 --> 07:12.280]  for me won't do the job that we've paid them to do, then they don't work for me anymore.
[07:12.280 --> 07:19.160]  They don't get to tell me whether or not I can fire them. They don't get to seek a second
[07:19.160 --> 07:27.760]  opinion. They simply don't work for me anymore. And the problem with most people running
[07:27.760 --> 07:38.160]  for political office is rather than seeing that office as a servant of the people position,
[07:38.160 --> 07:46.520]  they see it as a way to dictate their will upon the people position. And I'll go back
[07:46.520 --> 07:53.880]  to saying what I said all along, that's our fault. It's our fault because we did not take
[07:53.880 --> 08:03.800]  them to task the moment that stupid idea emerged from their lips or from their pen. We didn't
[08:03.800 --> 08:08.480]  take it off the paper, wad it up and shove it right back down their throat saying that's
[08:08.480 --> 08:16.520]  not going to fly. You're not doing that to me. I didn't give you the power to do that
[08:16.520 --> 08:23.080]  to me. I didn't give you that power to do it to my fellow Texans or anybody that just
[08:23.080 --> 08:30.400]  happens to be visiting within our borders. You don't have it because it was never granted.
[08:30.400 --> 08:39.440]  It was never delegated. Now, if it's not delegated, it doesn't exist. Government tends to forget
[08:39.440 --> 08:46.920]  that little part of it too. They only exist by the authority we invest in them through
[08:46.920 --> 08:54.120]  the Constitution and through the laws that act in compliance with the Constitution. And
[08:54.120 --> 09:02.960]  I mean the state, not the federal Constitution. Let's take it for instance here. Now, all
[09:02.960 --> 09:09.240]  of us that have any inkling of common sense that spend any time in the Sunday classes,
[09:09.240 --> 09:19.400]  you'll hear me repeat over and over and over. Ordinances are not law. They cannot be law.
[09:19.400 --> 09:28.920]  I don't care what some judge or executive functionary in the legislature or legislative
[09:28.920 --> 09:35.520]  idiot that wrote the bill tries to tell us it is. It can't be law for a very straight
[09:35.520 --> 09:43.080]  up particular reason. That reason is found in the very document that we put together
[09:43.080 --> 09:49.680]  to govern the government. I mean, just to start this off with, let's look at the very
[09:49.680 --> 09:57.800]  first thing that the Texas Constitution tells us about Texas. Humbly invoking the blessings
[09:57.800 --> 10:05.080]  of Almighty God, the people of the state of Texas do ordain and establish this Constitution.
[10:05.080 --> 10:12.760]  We ordained it. We established it. Not any department of government or any agency or
[10:12.760 --> 10:21.880]  anybody in a government position. We the people. It's ours. It exists because of what we did
[10:21.880 --> 10:31.480]  and what we said, not in any way what government said. Now, we can look at that. Let's go
[10:31.480 --> 10:37.640]  a little bit more. Let's go directly into article one of the Bill of Rights. Now, very
[10:37.640 --> 10:45.040]  first thing that the general, great and essential principles of liberty and free government
[10:45.040 --> 10:54.520]  may be recognized and established. We declare. We once again is designating the people of
[10:54.520 --> 11:04.280]  Texas, not the government. Section one, freedom and sovereignty of state. Texas is a free
[11:04.280 --> 11:09.040]  and independent state. Well, if we're free and independent, that means we don't have
[11:09.040 --> 11:19.960]  to fall down and bow to federal dictates. Okay? We're independent. We are free. But our legislators
[11:19.960 --> 11:27.000]  and our functionaries don't seem to have that registering anywhere. Their entire brain,
[11:27.000 --> 11:36.760]  once they're elected, goes on immediate public service short circuit. Okay? Now, it continues
[11:36.760 --> 11:43.320]  on subject only to the Constitution of the United States. Well, I can prove that that
[11:43.320 --> 11:50.280]  document self-destructed within a hundred years of its inception. And the documentation
[11:50.280 --> 11:57.840]  for it is in the document itself. So, if that doesn't exist anymore, then the Texas Constitution
[11:57.840 --> 12:08.400]  is no longer subject to anything. It is the supreme law of the land in Texas. Okay? And
[12:08.400 --> 12:14.280]  the maintenance of our free institutions and the perpetuity of the union depend upon the
[12:14.280 --> 12:22.120]  preservation of the right of local self-government unimpaired to all the states. That's a re-emphasis
[12:22.120 --> 12:29.520]  of the 10th Amendment to the federal Constitution, which doesn't exist anymore. But it's still
[12:29.520 --> 12:35.360]  declared right here that we are unimpaired and independent, and we have and maintain
[12:35.360 --> 12:43.360]  the right of local self-government. Section two, inherent political power, Republican
[12:43.360 --> 12:50.720]  form of government. This is the linchpin to this whole power structure, folks. Our political
[12:50.720 --> 12:58.200]  power is inherent in the people. Does not say government, does not say any department
[12:58.200 --> 13:05.480]  of government, institution, agency, officer, employee, you name it. It is the people that
[13:05.480 --> 13:13.840]  hold all political power. It is inherent in us, and our state servants, our local servants
[13:13.840 --> 13:22.200]  only can get it from us. They can't create it for themselves. They can't give themselves
[13:22.200 --> 13:32.920]  any more power than we give them politically through the Constitution. And all free governments
[13:32.920 --> 13:42.880]  are founded on their authority and instituted for their benefit. Again, the people's authority,
[13:42.880 --> 13:49.840]  the people's benefit. Not the governments. The city of Austin, for instance, on their
[13:49.840 --> 13:55.120]  little thing about their code enforcement. Let's talk about that for half a second before
[13:55.120 --> 14:00.760]  I get back to this and finish section two of Article I. Code enforcement goes around
[14:00.760 --> 14:09.520]  to private property, unincorporated private property, and presumes to have the power to
[14:09.520 --> 14:19.480]  dictate to the people that own that property that the people must do what the city orders
[14:19.480 --> 14:25.600]  them to do. Now, let's look at how the city through their ordinances has arranged this
[14:25.600 --> 14:34.280]  little process. They create an ordinance. The ordinance allegedly gives some city bureaucratic
[14:34.280 --> 14:42.440]  employee the power to go to private property, tell the owner of that private property that
[14:42.440 --> 14:49.920]  your property must meet our standards. If it doesn't meet our standards, then we will
[14:49.920 --> 14:57.400]  write you a citation and assess you a fine for every day that you don't meet our standards.
[14:57.400 --> 15:06.920]  Now, the only way you can meet our standards is to petition us for a permit before you
[15:06.920 --> 15:16.160]  can attempt to meet our standards. Then, if we decide to deny you that permit, that does
[15:16.160 --> 15:24.200]  not negate our ability to continue to assess fines for not complying with meeting our standards.
[15:24.200 --> 15:34.560]  Now, does anybody see a little catch-22 severe problem with this arrangement? Do it because
[15:34.560 --> 15:41.760]  we said so. You can only do it with our permission and our paperwork and our permits for which
[15:41.760 --> 15:49.960]  you have to pay us for telling you you had a problem, but you have to come to us to get
[15:49.960 --> 15:54.600]  permission to fix the problem we ordered you to fix, or we're going to take more money
[15:54.600 --> 16:02.160]  from you in fines. I can't think of a single kindergartner that would think that arrangement
[16:02.160 --> 16:11.080]  was proper, but we have people in office that allegedly are grown-ups that somehow think
[16:11.080 --> 16:23.520]  this arrangement is A-OK. I don't know whether it's too much hair gel, hairspray, peroxide,
[16:23.520 --> 16:27.560]  wearing their underwear too tight so it cuts off blood flow to the upper extremities. I
[16:27.560 --> 16:33.840]  don't know, but any of you in public office or running for public office out there listening
[16:33.840 --> 16:40.920]  to this, if you think this is the way it ought to be, don't let me get your number.
[16:40.920 --> 16:45.800]  All right, folks, this is really long radio. We're going to go to break. We will be picking
[16:45.800 --> 16:49.800]  this back up on the other side, so any callers we've got on the board, hang in there. It's
[16:49.800 --> 16:53.640]  going to be a little while, but we'll get to you on the other side. This is Eddie Craig,
[16:53.640 --> 17:01.040]  Randy Kelton, Debra Stevens, really long radio. We'll be right back.
[17:01.040 --> 17:04.640]  Capital Coin and Bullion is a family-owned business built on the promise to bring you
[17:04.640 --> 17:10.120]  affordable pricing on all coin and bullion products. In addition to coins and bullion,
[17:10.120 --> 17:14.880]  we now offer storeable freeze-dried foods produced by Augustine Farms, ammunition at
[17:14.880 --> 17:19.880]  10 percent above wholesale prices, Berkey water products, gift certificates, and our
[17:19.880 --> 17:25.400]  Silver Pool, a new way to guarantee silver by prepaying at a locked price. We can even
[17:25.400 --> 17:33.280]  help you set up a metals IRA account. Call us at 512-646-644-0 for more details. As always,
[17:33.280 --> 17:38.520]  we buy, sell, and trade precious metals, give appraisals, and cater to those with all sizes
[17:38.520 --> 17:44.280]  of coin collections. We're located at 7304 Burnett Road, Suite A, about half a mile north
[17:44.280 --> 17:48.880]  of Canig next to the Ikebon Sushi and Genie Car Wash. We're open Monday through Friday
[17:48.880 --> 17:57.360]  10-6, Saturdays 10-2. Visit us at capitalcoinandbullion.com or call 512-646-644-0 and say you heard
[17:57.360 --> 18:02.800]  about us on Rule of Law Radio or Texas Liberty Radio. Are you being harassed by debt collectors
[18:02.800 --> 18:08.000]  with phone calls, letters, or even losses? Stop debt collectors now with the Michael
[18:08.000 --> 18:12.760]  Mearris Proven Method. Michael Mearris has won six cases in federal court against debt
[18:12.760 --> 18:17.880]  collectors and now you can win two. You'll get step-by-step instructions in plain English
[18:17.880 --> 18:22.680]  on how to win in court using federal civil rights statutes, what to do when contacted
[18:22.680 --> 18:27.400]  by phones, mail, or court summons, how to answer letters and phone calls, how to get
[18:27.400 --> 18:31.680]  debt collectors out of your credit reports, how to turn the financial tables on them and
[18:31.680 --> 18:37.320]  make them pay you to go away. The Michael Mearris Proven Method is the solution for
[18:37.320 --> 18:42.560]  how to stop debt collectors. Personal consultation is available as well. For more information,
[18:42.560 --> 18:47.720]  please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the blue Michael Mearris banner or email
[18:47.720 --> 18:57.840]  MichaelMearris at yahoo.com. That's ruleoflawradio.com or email m-i-c-h-a-e-l-m-i-r-r-a-s at yahoo.com.
[18:57.840 --> 19:23.840]  You'll learn how to stop debt collectors next.
[19:23.840 --> 19:45.280]  All right folks, we are back. This is rule of law radio. Folks, we see you there on the
[19:45.280 --> 19:49.600]  caller board. Please hang on and be patient. This is going to take a little bit of time
[19:49.600 --> 19:55.520]  to do, but we got four hours tonight, so if you can hang in there, we will get to you.
[19:55.520 --> 20:01.560]  But this is very important. This is going on nationwide, not just in Texas, but our
[20:01.560 --> 20:08.080]  government, as everybody is well aware, is just flat out running a muck, okay? It's
[20:08.080 --> 20:15.200]  time, as Barney Fife used to say, to nip it, nip it in the bud. But you can't do that
[20:15.200 --> 20:21.800]  if you don't know what gives you the power and you don't know how to nip it in the bud.
[20:21.800 --> 20:27.200]  So that's why we're here. We're here to give you information that you can take and use
[20:27.200 --> 20:32.960]  to make things the way they should be, not the way those in power want them to be.
[20:32.960 --> 20:39.160]  All right, let's continue on with section two of article one of the Texas Bill of Rights.
[20:39.160 --> 20:44.720]  The faith of the people of Texas stands pledge to the preservation of a Republican form of
[20:44.720 --> 20:52.960]  government and subject to this limitation only. They have at all times the inalienable
[20:52.960 --> 21:02.080]  right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may think expedient.
[21:02.080 --> 21:11.920]  Once again, people there and they, all the same thing. That's us. We the people have
[21:11.920 --> 21:17.280]  the right to tell every one of these jokers, you're done. We don't want to hold a new election.
[21:17.280 --> 21:25.480]  We just throw you out. You're not recalled. We don't need a petition. You're gone. That
[21:25.480 --> 21:34.120]  article right there gives us the power to do that. It gives us the power to tell any government
[21:34.120 --> 21:40.400]  department. We didn't authorize you. You're done. Your history go away, self-destruct,
[21:40.400 --> 21:46.680]  dissolve, eat each other, go fly into a mountain. I don't care, but don't come on my property
[21:46.680 --> 21:54.480]  and tell me you're here to enforce anything. We never authorized you. We didn't authorize
[21:54.480 --> 22:01.280]  you because we never authorized the legislature to have the power to create you because we
[22:01.280 --> 22:07.400]  never authorized them to regulate the activity they're wanting to regulate, which is simply
[22:07.400 --> 22:18.240]  to care maintenance of our own property. Now, section three is of great interest. Equal
[22:18.240 --> 22:27.240]  rights. All free men, when they form a social compact, have equal rights and no man or set
[22:27.240 --> 22:38.080]  of men is entitled to exclusive, separate, public amalgamates or privileges, but in consideration
[22:38.080 --> 22:50.400]  of public services. Hmm. It's like problem with that. That didn't used to have an S on
[22:50.400 --> 22:59.600]  it. This is how they've managed to sneak in these totally unconstitutional wick Texas
[22:59.600 --> 23:05.640]  card, whatever the heck they're called, all of these social programs that fund those that
[23:05.640 --> 23:17.600]  don't work at the public dime. They have taken what was consideration of public service.
[23:17.600 --> 23:25.240]  That's how it was reading. And now it's suddenly public services. We didn't authorize any public
[23:25.240 --> 23:32.040]  services except for the specific ones delineated within the framework of our constitutional
[23:32.040 --> 23:47.640]  language. And welfare isn't in there. Income augmentation isn't in there. But here's what
[23:47.640 --> 23:56.960]  they're doing. Now, let's go down to section three A. Equality under the law. Equality
[23:56.960 --> 24:02.000]  under the law shall not be denied or abridged because of sex, race, color, creed or national
[24:02.000 --> 24:13.560]  origin. This amendment is self-operative. News again, folks. All of these are self-operative.
[24:13.560 --> 24:20.520]  They're declarations by us to our servants. This is what you can do on what you may not
[24:20.520 --> 24:29.600]  do. Every one of them is self-operative. For instance, that language does not appear
[24:29.600 --> 24:38.120]  in section or article one, section 29. But let any idiot with a law degree or black dress
[24:38.120 --> 24:43.120]  tell me that that section is not self-operative and I will laugh in their face so hard I'll
[24:43.120 --> 24:51.680]  throw up on their shoes. It is the absolute epitome of intellectual stupidity to even
[24:51.680 --> 24:57.240]  begin to try to make such an argument on that side. That it's not self-operative because
[24:57.240 --> 25:07.320]  it doesn't say it is. That's stupid. We intentionally wrote this Constitution to be self-operative
[25:07.320 --> 25:14.800]  and self-enforcing. It shouldn't require a declaration of any court or any statute that,
[25:14.800 --> 25:19.400]  hey, by the way, that constitutional article in section, it's okay to do it the way it
[25:19.400 --> 25:30.240]  reads. We did not authorize any of you to make that determination at any time, anywhere,
[25:30.240 --> 25:38.000]  in any way. If we had, that language would be here. And even if someone had attempted
[25:38.000 --> 25:47.080]  to amend it, that still wouldn't make it so. Why? Because if one part of the people tries
[25:47.080 --> 25:51.360]  to grant you a power that would abridge the rights of the other parts, that activity is
[25:51.360 --> 26:01.760]  no invoid on its face. No man may exercise power over another in any manner that he himself
[26:01.760 --> 26:09.480]  does not possess. He cannot delegate a power that isn't his to delegate. He can't create
[26:09.480 --> 26:14.800]  a power and delegate it if it wasn't his to begin with. And that's especially true in
[26:14.800 --> 26:25.000]  a nation of free, sovereign individuals. My right to swing my fist stops immediately
[26:25.000 --> 26:33.680]  before it connects with your nose. End of story. It's not a terroristic threat for me
[26:33.680 --> 26:38.880]  to threaten to punch you in the mouth for being insulting or trying to pinch my girlfriends
[26:38.880 --> 26:46.880]  behind or anything of that nature. That's not a terroristic threat. A threat is something
[26:46.880 --> 26:53.720]  that is imminent, not just verbal. Again, all these victimless crimes that they've cooked
[26:53.720 --> 27:00.920]  up, they don't exist at the common law, never have. And why do I say common law? Because
[27:00.920 --> 27:05.680]  all of our activities are based upon those principles that were carried over from England
[27:05.680 --> 27:12.560]  on the common law. The common law predates England as itself. It predates us back to
[27:12.560 --> 27:22.840]  the 1200s and even earlier. The Magna Carta was a declaration to the kings of the old
[27:22.840 --> 27:27.160]  historical times that this is the rights of the people. You're going to honor it and
[27:27.160 --> 27:35.320]  if you fail to honor it, we'll be back. And though they tried to, you know, disavow it
[27:35.320 --> 27:43.480]  at every opportunity, every one of them, when they became king, would reassert and reaffirm
[27:43.480 --> 27:49.480]  their dedication to its principles. Because they would have never been able to sit under
[27:49.480 --> 27:55.080]  the crown for long if they didn't. The people would rebel against them. The barons would
[27:55.080 --> 28:02.080]  do it as well because that king was not swearing to uphold the people's rights. So they knew
[28:02.080 --> 28:08.160]  what they were in for if they wouldn't do it. It's kind of like this alleged president
[28:08.160 --> 28:15.960]  of the United States that doesn't know how to salute a flag, take the pledge of allegiance,
[28:15.960 --> 28:26.360]  or even honor Americans for what they do on behalf of this country. But let's go down
[28:26.360 --> 28:32.200]  a minute here in Article 1, Section 29, and let me see what I meant about that section
[28:32.200 --> 28:40.360]  being self-enforcing and all that. Now, actually, before I get to that, I want to go to a different
[28:40.360 --> 28:46.080]  article. Let's get back to the straight-up subject of ordinances versus laws. Now, I
[28:46.080 --> 28:53.120]  teach the people in my class that ordinances are not law. They cannot possibly be law.
[28:53.120 --> 29:00.000]  And there's a reason for that. Our original forefathers here in Texas were actually very
[29:00.000 --> 29:07.400]  astute at telling the government functionaries what they could and could not do. They saw
[29:07.400 --> 29:15.360]  all of that from the very beginning. And the other thing that most folks fail to realize
[29:15.360 --> 29:20.040]  is that everything that's in the previous constitutions dealing with the rights of the
[29:20.040 --> 29:25.240]  people, their right to own property, their right to exercise use of that property, their
[29:25.240 --> 29:29.880]  right to own a business, or any of these other things that may have been written into the
[29:29.880 --> 29:35.360]  original Bill of Rights and they have tried to alter through the years, that didn't go
[29:35.360 --> 29:40.800]  away. It's still just as much in force and effect as if it was written into the one currently
[29:40.800 --> 29:45.640]  because it doesn't regulate us or our rights. All right, folks, this is rule of law. We're
[29:45.640 --> 29:49.680]  going to take another break. Callers, hang in there. We'll get this wrapped up shortly.
[29:49.680 --> 29:53.480]  This is Eddie Craig, Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens. We'll be right back on the other
[29:53.480 --> 30:00.200]  side of the break.
[30:00.200 --> 30:05.600]  This is Building 7, a 47-story skyscraper that fell on the afternoon of September 11th.
[30:05.600 --> 30:10.280]  The government says that fire brought it down. However, 1,500 architects and engineers have
[30:10.280 --> 30:14.560]  concluded it was a controlled demolition. Over 6,000 of my fellow service members have
[30:14.560 --> 30:19.120]  given their lives. Thousands of my fellow force responders are dying. I'm not a conspiracy
[30:19.120 --> 30:22.160]  theorist. I'm a structural engineer. I'm a New York City correction officer. I'm an
[30:22.160 --> 30:27.160]  Air Force pilot. I'm a father who lost his son. We're Americans and we deserve the truth.
[30:27.160 --> 30:30.880]  Go to RememberBuilding7.org today.
[30:30.880 --> 30:37.240]  HempUSA.org has moved and expanded its operations for faster worldwide shipping. Our product
[30:37.240 --> 30:43.040]  line has grown from five to nearly 100 items in less than five years. Our food has grown
[30:43.040 --> 30:48.600]  naturally, always chemical-free, not found in stores, great for daily intake, and perfect
[30:48.600 --> 30:57.880]  for your emergency storage shelter. Call 908-6912608 or visit hempusa.org and see what our powders,
[30:57.880 --> 31:01.120]  seeds, and oil can do for you.
[31:01.120 --> 31:06.080]  It is so enlightening to listen to 90.1 FM, but finding things on the Internet isn't so
[31:06.080 --> 31:09.680]  easy and neither is finding like-minded people to share it with.
[31:09.680 --> 31:12.920]  Oh, well, I guess you haven't heard of Brave New Books then.
[31:12.920 --> 31:13.920]  Brave New Books?
[31:13.920 --> 31:18.520]  Yes, Brave New Books has all the books and DVDs you're looking for by authors like Alex
[31:18.520 --> 31:23.480]  Jones, Ron Paul, and G. Edward Griffin. They even stock inner food, Berkey products, and
[31:23.480 --> 31:24.480]  Calvin Soaps.
[31:24.480 --> 31:27.360]  There's no way a place like that exists.
[31:27.360 --> 31:32.640]  Go check it out for yourself. It's downtown at 1904 Guadalupe Street, just south of UT.
[31:32.640 --> 31:36.920]  Oh, by UT? There's never anywhere to park down there.
[31:36.920 --> 31:41.840]  Actually they now offer a free hour of parking for paying customers at the 500 MLK parking
[31:41.840 --> 31:43.960]  facility just behind the bookstore.
[31:43.960 --> 31:47.720]  It does exist, but when are they open?
[31:47.720 --> 31:52.600]  Monday through Saturday, 11 a.m. to 9 p.m., and 1 to 6 p.m. on Sundays.
[31:52.600 --> 31:58.600]  So get them a call at 512-480-2503, or check out their events page at BraveNewBookstore.com.
[31:58.600 --> 32:15.600]  Yeah, I got a warrant, and I'm going to solve them, to the end of them, prosecute them.
[32:15.600 --> 32:35.600]  Well, I need a prosecutor to come and help me, prosecute them wicked leaders, you see.
[32:35.600 --> 32:59.960]  All right, folks, we're back once again. This is Rule of Law Radio. This is Eddie Craig
[32:59.960 --> 33:05.760]  with Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, and this is our Friday night for our info marathon.
[33:05.760 --> 33:09.640]  Callers, we will be getting to you hopefully in the next segment or two, so please just
[33:09.640 --> 33:11.440]  hang in there.
[33:11.440 --> 33:18.720]  Now let's go back and talk for a minute about why an ordinance, whether it be county or
[33:18.720 --> 33:28.800]  city, cannot be law. Okay, again, the people hold a political power.
[33:28.800 --> 33:37.400]  So the people designate who can write law, and we did that. We did it beginning in Article
[33:37.400 --> 33:47.000]  3, Section 29 of the Texas Constitution. Section 29 reads, enacting clause of laws.
[33:47.000 --> 33:55.160]  The enacting clause of all laws shall be, be enacted by the legislature of the state
[33:55.160 --> 34:03.840]  of Texas, not the municipality, not the county, the legislature. Every law must have that
[34:03.840 --> 34:09.160]  language. If it doesn't have that language, even if the legislature passed it, it's not
[34:09.160 --> 34:18.720]  a law. Okay? Be enacted by the legislature of the state of Texas. We did not give the
[34:18.720 --> 34:25.840]  legislature any delegatory power in any part of the Constitution to pass lawmaking power
[34:25.840 --> 34:36.720]  down to anyone else. Laws start and end in the legislature. Section 30, laws passed by
[34:36.720 --> 34:47.360]  Bill, not a guy. They passed by Bill, amendments changing purpose. No law shall be passed except
[34:47.360 --> 34:55.280]  by Bill, and no Bill shall be so amended in its passage through either house as to change
[34:55.280 --> 35:03.800]  its original purpose. Okay? Right there it's telling us, no law can be passed in Texas
[35:03.800 --> 35:12.240]  except by a Bill, and a Bill must originate, which we get to in 31, in either house of the
[35:12.240 --> 35:19.120]  legislature, and that Bill must begin with the language being enacted by the legislature
[35:19.120 --> 35:28.360]  of the state of Texas. I don't see municipality or county in that process anywhere. Section
[35:28.360 --> 35:35.520]  31, origination in either house, amendment. Bills may originate in either house, and when
[35:35.520 --> 35:44.560]  passed by such house, may be amended, altered, or rejected by the other. Section 32, reading
[35:44.560 --> 35:51.000]  on three several days suspension of rule. No Bill shall have the force of a law until
[35:51.000 --> 35:57.840]  it has been read on three several days in each house, and free discussion allowed thereon.
[35:57.840 --> 36:04.880]  But four-fifths of the house in which the Bill may be pending may suspend this rule.
[36:04.880 --> 36:10.320]  The yeas and nays being taken on the question of suspension and entered upon the journals.
[36:10.320 --> 36:17.200]  Now, I've read some of these previous Bills here that they've enacted, and out of all
[36:17.200 --> 36:23.080]  the members that are supposed to be in the house, there's only five or six people sometimes
[36:23.080 --> 36:28.760]  that have shown to be the recorded voters on the Bill. The entire house didn't vote
[36:28.760 --> 36:36.240]  on it, just those that were present. And if they're acting as if four-fifths of them
[36:36.240 --> 36:42.080]  are there, and the rule to suspend this, that they can go ahead and pass it even though
[36:42.080 --> 36:49.240]  there's only a small number of the actual total number present. Guess what? That's not
[36:49.240 --> 36:57.080]  what this says. This specifically says it doesn't say four-fifths of a quorum, it doesn't
[36:57.080 --> 37:07.000]  say four-fifths of the members present. It says four-fifths of the house in which the
[37:07.000 --> 37:14.840]  Bill may be pending. That means four-fifths of the total members of that house have to
[37:14.840 --> 37:23.120]  be present to vote to suspend the rule on the three days required reading, and argument
[37:23.120 --> 37:30.880]  on the four over the language of the Bill. So folks, have they illegally passed laws
[37:30.880 --> 37:36.600]  or not? Go back and look at the enrolled Bills. See how many people actually voted on it.
[37:36.600 --> 37:44.080]  See if that number of people constitute four-fifths of the total number of that house, and then
[37:44.080 --> 37:51.240]  see if they voted to suspend the three days reading requirement. If they did all of those
[37:51.240 --> 38:03.160]  things under those conditions, that law is illegal. Now, go down to 33. That deals with
[38:03.160 --> 38:08.320]  revenue Bills. All Bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives.
[38:08.320 --> 38:12.800]  Why? Because the representatives are the ones that come from the people that are supposed
[38:12.800 --> 38:16.680]  to know whether or not we would agree with spending our money on that particular Bill
[38:16.680 --> 38:25.480]  or not, and what that Bill pertains to. Again, most of these people vote on Bills that favor
[38:25.480 --> 38:33.120]  their bank accounts and general view of the world, not ours. Proof of that isn't exactly
[38:33.120 --> 38:37.840]  the way they're doing things. Let's take a simple situation. The City of Austin, City
[38:37.840 --> 38:46.920]  Council. How many of the people of Austin said no TSA scanners? How many people said,
[38:46.920 --> 38:53.680]  or percentages of Austin said no racetrack? And yet, the idiots that worked for those
[38:53.680 --> 38:58.280]  people said, we don't listen to you. We're going to do it because it's how we want to
[38:58.280 --> 39:07.800]  run this city. And I didn't see anybody downtown yanking commissioners out of meetings hollering
[39:07.800 --> 39:14.440]  them outside, tarn and feathering them, and running them to the city limits on a rail.
[39:14.440 --> 39:20.880]  And that should have been exactly what was going on. Because they don't run this city,
[39:20.880 --> 39:28.520]  the people do. But they treat it like their own big version of a computerized SimCity
[39:28.520 --> 39:32.760]  game. Oh, I don't like what that building is. I'll just blot it out and I'll say we'll
[39:32.760 --> 39:37.960]  build a new one. Oh, people are living it. Well, too bad. It's somebody's private property.
[39:37.960 --> 39:46.760]  Oh, well, too bad. This is how the city wants it. Again, what is a city but the power and
[39:46.760 --> 39:53.040]  will of the people that come together to make it? It's not the people in government working
[39:53.040 --> 40:00.800]  in it. It's not even the buildings. It's the people that make the city, the county, the
[40:00.800 --> 40:10.840]  state. Not our flunkies. Section 34, defeated bills and resolutions. After a bill has been
[40:10.840 --> 40:17.120]  considered and defeated by either house of the legislature, no bill containing the same
[40:17.120 --> 40:24.980]  substance shall be passed into a law during the same session. After a resolution has been
[40:24.980 --> 40:30.720]  acted on and defeated, no resolution containing the same substance shall be considered at
[40:30.720 --> 40:38.320]  the same session. Folks, during the time of the TSA bill, they had two parallel bills
[40:38.320 --> 40:43.320]  going through the legislature. So if one got defeated and the other one could get passed,
[40:43.320 --> 40:50.480]  they would still get what they wanted. Scanners. Right here, they were forbidden to do that.
[40:50.480 --> 40:58.880]  The moment the first bill was defeated, the second bill was defeated automatically. That
[40:58.880 --> 41:04.000]  whole process should have immediately stopped. Well, guys, we can't vote on the second bill.
[41:04.000 --> 41:09.000]  The first bill dealing with the same subject and substance got defeated. We're forbidden
[41:09.000 --> 41:15.040]  to go any further on this second bill. Wait, don't tell anybody stupid. Vote on it anyway.
[41:15.040 --> 41:24.800]  Send it in. Backdoor politics. That's what we're dealing with. But we're not paying attention.
[41:24.800 --> 41:32.480]  They get away with it. Section 35, subjects and titles of bills. Subsection A, no bill
[41:32.480 --> 41:37.680]  except general appropriation bills, which may embrace the various subjects and accounts
[41:37.680 --> 41:44.880]  for and on account of which monies are appropriated, shall contain more than one subject. That
[41:44.880 --> 41:56.120]  used to read more than one object. But object is far more limiting than subject. Perfect
[41:56.120 --> 42:06.640]  example, transportation. Transportation is the subject. A commercial driver's license
[42:06.640 --> 42:14.680]  is an object. They would have had to pass the bills at the object level and clearly
[42:14.680 --> 42:25.240]  told us what that specific object was there to do. But that was way too limiting. It slowed
[42:25.240 --> 42:30.560]  down their ability to enact hundreds of walls per session. It slowed down their ability
[42:30.560 --> 42:36.200]  to create the illusion that the state was in charge and the people don't constitute the
[42:36.200 --> 42:48.320]  state. Only the elected officials do. See the problem with that little analogy? Oh, but
[42:48.320 --> 42:55.400]  it gets better. Subsection B, the rules of procedure of each house shall require that
[42:55.400 --> 43:01.960]  the subject of each bill be expressed in its title in a manner that gives the legislature
[43:01.960 --> 43:08.880]  and the public reasonable notice of that subject. The legislature is solely responsible for
[43:08.880 --> 43:15.520]  determining compliance with the rule, meaning that specific rule. Okay? So let's look at
[43:15.520 --> 43:25.040]  transportation again. It doesn't say transportation and right to travel. Transportation and private
[43:25.040 --> 43:34.320]  conveyances, transportation and private ownership or vehicles or any other subject. It is specifically
[43:34.320 --> 43:41.800]  transportation. So there can't be any part of that code that applies to anything except
[43:41.800 --> 43:50.080]  that subject. Get it? All right, folks. This is Eddie Craig, Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens.
[43:50.080 --> 43:53.480]  We'll be right back on the other side. Hang in there, callers. We'll get back to you here
[43:53.480 --> 44:00.480]  in a few minutes. We'll be right back after this break.
[44:00.480 --> 44:06.520]  The Oakland City bombing, top 10 reasons to question the official story. Reason number
[44:06.520 --> 44:12.840]  two, why was the ATF AWOL? Paramedic Tiffany Bible, who was on the scene within five minutes,
[44:12.840 --> 44:17.200]  has stated in an affidavit that agents of the Bureau of Alcohol and Tobacco and Firearms
[44:17.200 --> 44:21.800]  told her that they were not in their office that morning. D&T Catherine Mallet also overheard
[44:21.800 --> 44:27.560]  one agent say to another, close, is that why we got the page to not come in today? Through
[44:27.560 --> 44:33.200]  Shaw, as interviewed on KSLRTV, was also told by ATF agents that they had been paid to not
[44:33.200 --> 44:38.720]  come into work. The ATF initially denied these claims and now variously claim that one of
[44:38.720 --> 44:42.480]  their agents was in a free falling elevator which has been disproven or that they'd been
[44:42.480 --> 44:46.920]  in an all night stick out or that they'd been in a golf tournament. As they try to sort
[44:46.920 --> 44:52.280]  out their lies, all we want to know is, did the ATF receive a warning and if so, why did
[44:52.280 --> 45:01.280]  they not pass it on to others in the world of alcohol? For more information, go to okcbombandtruth.com.
[45:01.280 --> 45:07.520]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit? Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary,
[45:07.520 --> 45:13.960]  the affordable, easy to understand four CD course that will show you how in 24 hours,
[45:13.960 --> 45:19.680]  step by step. If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing. If you don't
[45:19.680 --> 45:24.640]  have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself. Thousands have won with our step
[45:24.640 --> 45:31.800]  by step course and now you can too. Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22
[45:31.800 --> 45:37.200]  years of case winning experience. Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what
[45:37.200 --> 45:43.480]  everyone should understand about the principles and practices that control our American courts.
[45:43.480 --> 45:49.600]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases,
[45:49.600 --> 45:56.400]  pro se tactics and much more. Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner.
[45:56.400 --> 46:22.400]  Or call toll-free 866-LAW-E-Z.
[46:22.400 --> 46:34.320]  Hi folks, we are back. This is rule of law radio and I'm sorry, but this is just something
[46:34.320 --> 46:40.600]  we have to go through. If we don't know what the limits of power on these people are, then
[46:40.600 --> 46:49.240]  they will continue to abuse it on us. Now subsection C of section 35 of article 3, Texas
[46:49.240 --> 46:55.000]  Constitution, a law including a law enacted before the effective date of this subsection
[46:55.000 --> 47:03.280]  may not be held void on the basis of an insufficient title. So we can't have a law declared void
[47:03.280 --> 47:11.880]  because its title is not complete, okay, is basically all that saying. The problem though
[47:11.880 --> 47:19.040]  is that the law itself can't go beyond the powers delegated and even the Constitution
[47:19.040 --> 47:24.760]  can't solve that problem. That we can't give away a power as the people that the people
[47:24.760 --> 47:31.360]  as individuals don't possess. It does not matter whether we're acting as individuals
[47:31.360 --> 47:40.920]  or we're acting as a unified group. No one has the right to arbitrarily and negatively
[47:40.920 --> 47:51.280]  affect the rights and property of anyone else except in the protection or punishment of
[47:51.280 --> 47:59.760]  a violation of rights that has already occurred, okay. We can protect it and prevent it from
[47:59.760 --> 48:06.320]  coming down the pike as long as we can show that it would be an immediate harm if executed
[48:06.320 --> 48:10.920]  such as, you know, the way they used to come and try to burn people off their property
[48:10.920 --> 48:17.320]  by burning down their dwellings and their barns and running off their livestock, okay.
[48:17.320 --> 48:24.640]  That was criminal. So all of these ordinances that say that you, like I was discussing earlier,
[48:24.640 --> 48:29.080]  we're going to accuse you of having something wrong. You have to fix it because we said
[48:29.080 --> 48:37.120]  so. You have to pay us to get our permission to fix the problem that we said you had and
[48:37.120 --> 48:44.080]  then we maintain that we have the right to deny you permission in order to fix that
[48:44.080 --> 48:51.280]  problem, but we're still going to assess fines against you for failing to fix the problem.
[48:51.280 --> 48:59.440]  And seriously wrong with that outlook, folks. All right. Section 37, 38, 39. You go down
[48:59.440 --> 49:06.080]  through here, folks. This isn't hard. Read this. This is important. This is our limits
[49:06.080 --> 49:14.160]  on government power. We as people and as a state or a republic need to know what's in
[49:14.160 --> 49:23.760]  here because our representatives and our public servants absolutely don't. They prove that
[49:23.760 --> 49:29.760]  every time they open their mouths or put pen to paper. I mean, Randy, what was it when
[49:29.760 --> 49:36.080]  I was done or testified before the subcommittee on those sobriety checkpoints? The idiot representative
[49:36.080 --> 49:41.160]  was sitting up there. Well, the Constitution in Texas only guarantees people protection
[49:41.160 --> 49:49.080]  against unreasonable searches and seizures as if any seizure could be considered anything
[49:49.080 --> 49:58.280]  other than unreasonable when it wasn't backed by any probable cause and a probable warrant.
[49:58.280 --> 50:05.000]  Yet that was his logic. As long as some court will agree it's not unreasonable, then this
[50:05.000 --> 50:09.400]  sobriety checkpoint ought to be fine. We should be able to pull you over whether you want
[50:09.400 --> 50:13.680]  to be pulled over or not. Whether you've done anything wrong or not, we should be able
[50:13.680 --> 50:19.280]  to force you out of your car, make you take a breathalyzer, produce evidence against yourself
[50:19.280 --> 50:23.640]  through the withdrawal of blood so we can also sneak it into the federal DNA database
[50:23.640 --> 50:31.000]  and so on and so forth. That's the level of intelligence of the people being elected
[50:31.000 --> 50:40.240]  to public office. Guaranteed this moron had a stake in something associated with the effects
[50:40.240 --> 50:48.440]  of this bill, insurance company or something along those lines, somewhere he was getting
[50:48.440 --> 50:54.720]  lobbied and paid to be stupid and make an argument that anybody with an active brain
[50:54.720 --> 51:01.280]  cell could have immediately seen through as being completely the reverse of what's proper
[51:01.280 --> 51:07.400]  except for him. It's amazing what the color green when it's got a number associated with
[51:07.400 --> 51:15.280]  it can do to your ability to think clearly and reasonably. Now, people are always asking
[51:15.280 --> 51:20.240]  the same question to me when I start talking about this stuff and that is, why can't they
[51:20.240 --> 51:26.720]  just change the statute so that it governs you and takes away the transportation part?
[51:26.720 --> 51:34.160]  Well, again, if you read the Bill of Rights under Article 1, that is a self-answering question,
[51:34.160 --> 51:44.440]  okay? So, how do we do that? Article 1, Section 29, provisions of Bill of Rights accepted
[51:44.440 --> 51:53.600]  from powers of government to forever remain in violent, to guard against transgressions
[51:53.600 --> 52:02.280]  of the high powers here indeligated. We, again, we being the people, declare that everything
[52:02.280 --> 52:10.160]  in this Bill of Rights is accepted out of the general powers of government and shall forever
[52:10.160 --> 52:20.760]  remain in violent. And all laws, contrary thereto, or to the following provisions shall
[52:20.760 --> 52:26.200]  be void. Well, the following provisions, folks, is not only the remainder of the Bill of
[52:26.200 --> 52:36.040]  Rights, but everything else in the Constitution that follows it. Everything. They simply can't
[52:36.040 --> 52:42.240]  affect it in a detrimental manner. This is exactly my argument to these idiotic judges
[52:42.240 --> 52:49.040]  that say it's a fine-only criminal act so you're not entitled to assistance of counsel.
[52:49.040 --> 52:59.600]  Folks, again, the words that we as the sovereign people put into this Constitution says that
[52:59.600 --> 53:07.960]  that is a bupkis statement. Doesn't hold water at all. Section 10, rights of accused
[53:07.960 --> 53:19.280]  and criminal prosecutions in all criminal prosecutions. That's how that begins. In all
[53:19.280 --> 53:28.960]  criminal prosecutions, okay? And one of the parts in there immediately after that is,
[53:28.960 --> 53:40.960]  the accused shall have the right of being heard by himself or counsel or both. The right
[53:40.960 --> 53:50.040]  to be heard by himself or counsel or both. Since Article I, Section 29, removes any portion
[53:50.040 --> 53:54.440]  of this Bill of Rights from the general powers of government, it doesn't say general powers
[53:54.440 --> 54:00.080]  of the legislature, doesn't say general powers of the executive or the judiciary. It says
[54:00.080 --> 54:08.440]  from government, meaning all departments, agencies, offices, officers, employees or
[54:08.440 --> 54:18.640]  agents they love. It takes it out of all of their hands to affect. Now, if it does that,
[54:18.640 --> 54:27.440]  the court can't say that because it's a certain top of crime, that doesn't apply. Because
[54:27.440 --> 54:32.840]  the language of the Constitution says that court doesn't have the authority to make that
[54:32.840 --> 54:40.480]  determination because we the people said in all criminal cases. And yet, you would think
[54:40.480 --> 54:45.120]  Bill Clinton was serving on all the courts in Texas because they want to argue what
[54:45.120 --> 54:56.760]  all means. What does all mean if not every instance? Randy, you got a separate definition
[54:56.760 --> 55:01.800]  for all that I've never heard of before that would give it a limiting ability rather than
[55:01.800 --> 55:10.600]  an all-encompassing ability. I don't have one every instance without exception. Yep.
[55:10.600 --> 55:15.040]  And that would seem to be exactly what Section 10 is telling us. And this same section is
[55:15.040 --> 55:24.640]  codified in the Code of Criminal Procedure, Article 1, 1.05 of 1. Okay. Right there. Right
[55:24.640 --> 55:34.320]  to representation of counsel. And again, it starts off in all criminal prosecutions.
[55:34.320 --> 55:42.040]  And the courts have no ability to change that. None. The courts have no ability through statute.
[55:42.040 --> 55:49.920]  The legislature has no ability through creation of statute to alter this Constitution. Absolutely
[55:49.920 --> 55:58.120]  none. Yet the majority of people in Texas have no clue that these rules are even here.
[55:58.120 --> 56:01.920]  They go off arguing they're constitutional or they're civil rights and they're yelling
[56:01.920 --> 56:06.360]  and screaming about the federal Constitution and they never look to the protection of their
[56:06.360 --> 56:15.720]  own. And it's the only one that matters. It's the only one that matters. When government
[56:15.720 --> 56:23.320]  acts to violate our rights under color of some perceived authority that we did not grant,
[56:23.320 --> 56:34.680]  that is treason. Straight up, all the way down the line, that is treason. Okay. When these
[56:34.680 --> 56:39.840]  people do not abide by the rules we put down, they shouldn't be allowed to remain where
[56:39.840 --> 56:45.800]  they are. And we're not required, according to this Constitution, to wait for another
[56:45.800 --> 56:52.600]  election. We're not required to do a recall unless that's how we decide to do it. And
[56:52.600 --> 56:58.120]  the courts have no authority to declare, well, the Texas Constitution doesn't have any recall
[56:58.120 --> 57:04.240]  process in it, so you can't do it that way. Baloney. It doesn't have to have it in there
[57:04.240 --> 57:08.960]  because it's already been declared in the Bill of Rights that we may abolish any part
[57:08.960 --> 57:20.640]  of this government in pieces or as a whole by any means we want to. The Constitution
[57:20.640 --> 57:31.040]  doesn't have to speak to it. It doesn't have to already be in there. And yet these bureaucratic
[57:31.040 --> 57:36.120]  boobs just keep moving forward as if they have the authority to do whatever they want
[57:36.120 --> 57:41.160]  under an ordinance. Well, I just proved to you through constitutional language, an ordinance
[57:41.160 --> 57:46.840]  is not law. The legislature didn't enact it, does not have an enacting clause, it's not
[57:46.840 --> 57:51.960]  signed off on by the Secretary of State as being in compliance with any bill of the legislature
[57:51.960 --> 58:01.480]  that's been passed and signed by the governor. It's not a law. It's a freaking corporate
[58:01.480 --> 58:07.600]  rule. And a corporate rule only applies to those that are under the thumb of the corporation
[58:07.600 --> 58:15.600]  as its employees, its contractors, or over other legal entities where it has been granted
[58:15.600 --> 58:24.840]  authority. And that, folks, is not us. Alright, folks, this is Rural Law Radio, calling number
[58:24.840 --> 58:30.840]  512-646-1984. Leslie, Mark, we see you on the board. We will start taking your calls
[58:30.840 --> 58:35.880]  on the other side till you folks have dropped off. Get back in line because here we go.
[58:35.880 --> 58:52.440]  We will catch you folks after the break. Would you like to make more definite progress
[58:52.440 --> 58:58.400]  in your walk with God? Bibles for America is offering a free study Bible and a set of
[58:58.400 --> 59:02.800]  free Christian books that can really help. The New Testament recovery version is one
[59:02.800 --> 59:07.840]  of the most comprehensive study Bibles available today. It's an accurate translation and it
[59:07.840 --> 59:12.200]  contains thousands of footnotes that will help you to know God and to know the meaning
[59:12.200 --> 59:17.480]  of life. The free books are a three-volume set called Basic Elements of the Christian
[59:17.480 --> 59:22.600]  Life. Chapter by chapter, Basic Elements of the Christian Life clearly presents God's
[59:22.600 --> 59:28.640]  plan of salvation, growing in Christ, and how to build up the church. To order your free
[59:28.640 --> 59:35.240]  New Testament recovery version and Basic Elements of the Christian Life, call Bibles for America
[59:35.240 --> 01:00:03.520]  to toll free at 888-551-0102. That's 888-551-0102. Or visit us online at bfa.org.
[01:00:03.520 --> 01:00:14.000]  I'm Dr. Katherine Albrecht and I'll be right back to explain the dangers of paperless receipts
[01:00:14.000 --> 01:00:15.080]  in just a moment.
[01:00:15.080 --> 01:00:44.920]  Privacy is under attack. When you give up data about yourself you'll never get it back again.
[01:00:44.920 --> 01:00:49.480]  First, retailers started asking for your zip code. Next, they wanted your phone number
[01:00:49.480 --> 01:00:54.880]  and now they want your email address to send you receipts electronically rather than handing
[01:00:54.880 --> 01:00:59.640]  you a slip of paper. Companies don't mention what this does to your privacy. Instead, they
[01:00:59.640 --> 01:01:04.720]  claim it's more convenient and hey, it may even save a few trees. But e-receipts link
[01:01:04.720 --> 01:01:09.960]  you to your purchases in a giant database so they can build consumer profiles. Taylor
[01:01:09.960 --> 01:01:15.000]  adds to individual shoppers and sell your information to third parties. Having all your
[01:01:15.000 --> 01:01:20.440]  purchases in an online database sounds like an open invitation to hacking and abuse, not
[01:01:20.440 --> 01:01:25.600]  to mention an onslaught from unscrupulous marketers. I'm Dr. Katherine Albrecht, more
[01:01:25.600 --> 01:01:33.960]  news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[01:01:33.960 --> 01:01:38.800]  Cash used to be king, but now could it land you in jail? Several countries, including
[01:01:38.800 --> 01:01:43.120]  the U.S., are clamping down on paper money. I'm Dr. Katherine Albrecht and I'll tell
[01:01:43.120 --> 01:01:46.600]  you about the attack on cash in just a moment.
[01:01:46.600 --> 01:01:51.080]  Privacy is under attack. When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back
[01:01:51.080 --> 01:01:56.880]  again. And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[01:01:56.880 --> 01:02:02.400]  So protect your rights. Say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself. Privacy,
[01:02:02.400 --> 01:02:08.200]  it's worth hanging on to. This message is brought to you by startpage.com, the private
[01:02:08.200 --> 01:02:15.400]  search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing. Start over with startpage.
[01:02:15.400 --> 01:02:21.880]  Could cash disappear? The U.S. already jailed citizens for large, unreported cash transactions.
[01:02:21.880 --> 01:02:27.920]  Mexico wants to outlaw cash purchases of real estate and high-dollar items, spend 1500 euros
[01:02:27.920 --> 01:02:34.160]  in Greece or 5,000 euros in Italy as of 2011, and risk prison.
[01:02:34.160 --> 01:02:38.640]  Cash and civil liberties are inseparable. In a cashless society, bureaucrats can control
[01:02:38.640 --> 01:02:42.920]  how you spend your money, and that could have a chilling effect on freedom. Decenters could
[01:02:42.920 --> 01:02:48.320]  one day wake up to zero bank balances, unpopular groups could become penniless, and the overweight
[01:02:48.320 --> 01:02:53.360]  might be limited to fat-free foods. So let's all use cash and fight to preserve it. Our
[01:02:53.360 --> 01:02:58.680]  freedom depends on it. I'm Dr. Katherine Albrecht for startpage.com, the world's most private
[01:02:58.680 --> 01:03:04.680]  search engine.
[01:03:04.680 --> 01:03:15.680]  It's all according to the will of the Almighty. I read His book, and it says, the cares come
[01:03:15.680 --> 01:03:23.680]  over the unsightly. These warm-wonders come by that term right here.
[01:03:23.680 --> 01:03:31.680]  Well, folks, we are back. This is Rule of Law Radio. Call in number 512-646-1984. Okay,
[01:03:31.680 --> 01:03:36.680]  Randy, is there anything you want to get into before we start taking our callers here?
[01:03:36.680 --> 01:03:41.680]  No, I think we've held it much longer than I've held it. Especially when it gets to lesbians.
[01:03:41.680 --> 01:03:47.680]  Oh, I like that. Now, when he does it, it's giving information. When I do it, we're holding
[01:03:47.680 --> 01:03:54.680]  it up. I like that. Side track and sandbagged already. All right, you said you wanted to
[01:03:54.680 --> 01:04:01.680]  go to Leslie? Yes. All right, here we go. Miss Leslie, what can we do for you?
[01:04:01.680 --> 01:04:08.680]  Hi, how are you? I'm down in North Carolina this week, and I call it on my cell phone,
[01:04:08.680 --> 01:04:16.680]  so if I run out of power, you'll hear it. But I found out something interesting this week.
[01:04:16.680 --> 01:04:25.680]  And that would be? Quiet title. The way we did it isn't done very often. And our
[01:04:25.680 --> 01:04:32.680]  proponent Terry did not know what to do. When we went and got our default judgment,
[01:04:32.680 --> 01:04:37.680]  there's two of us, the same thing happened. They just put it in the computer and said,
[01:04:37.680 --> 01:04:43.680]  it's done. And we said, well, have you put it into the recorder of deeds? And we tried
[01:04:43.680 --> 01:04:47.680]  to get the recorder of deeds. And they said, oh, the recorder of deeds takes care of it.
[01:04:47.680 --> 01:04:51.680]  Well, we went over there and she said, what are you talking about? You need a signed order.
[01:04:51.680 --> 01:04:55.680]  So we went back to the proponent Terry and said, we need a signed order. And, you know,
[01:04:55.680 --> 01:05:01.680]  wondering back and forth, it took two days. That's a different story.
[01:05:01.680 --> 01:05:07.680]  Probably wanted to do some of his own research because I think you're right. This is
[01:05:07.680 --> 01:05:16.680]  something that's very unusual. But I suspect that if you demonstrate to the proponent Terry
[01:05:16.680 --> 01:05:22.680]  what you're actually doing and the recorder, that they're going to like this.
[01:05:22.680 --> 01:05:29.680]  Oh, yeah. Well, we had to take in the copy of the Civil Procedure and what was supposed to happen.
[01:05:29.680 --> 01:05:33.680]  And she says, yes, that's right there. The recorder of deeds is supposed to do it.
[01:05:33.680 --> 01:05:38.680]  I said, yes, but she wants people. She wants us to bring the documents.
[01:05:38.680 --> 01:05:44.680]  Just got a stamp on it from the court. You know what?
[01:05:44.680 --> 01:05:49.680]  But so hard about that. But it was that different. That unusual.
[01:05:49.680 --> 01:05:57.680]  Well, did you get it done without a petitioning the judge for an order to force them to do it?
[01:05:57.680 --> 01:06:03.680]  Well, what I did is I sent them a letter on Tuesday finally. I even talked to the solicitor
[01:06:03.680 --> 01:06:09.680]  for the recorder of deeds and he said to call the solicitor for the proponent Terry
[01:06:09.680 --> 01:06:15.680]  and she never returned my call. So I just sent them a letter and a copy of the order that was sent
[01:06:15.680 --> 01:06:21.680]  with the original petition and tell them I appreciate the quiet title, but I still need
[01:06:21.680 --> 01:06:29.680]  something in paper for it to be recorded. The recorder of deeds requires that it be in writing.
[01:06:29.680 --> 01:06:34.680]  Because they were thinking that everything is in the computer, that the recorder of deeds has access to it
[01:06:34.680 --> 01:06:38.680]  and they're supposed to just put it in there somehow.
[01:06:38.680 --> 01:06:41.680]  No.
[01:06:41.680 --> 01:06:47.680]  Okay. So I take it that you did get the proponent Terry. Now, is this a matter of where the
[01:06:47.680 --> 01:06:54.680]  proponent Terry issued the default or did the default come through the court?
[01:06:54.680 --> 01:06:57.680]  The default issued through the proponent Terry.
[01:06:57.680 --> 01:07:01.680]  Yes, that's what I thought because the proponent Terry can do that.
[01:07:01.680 --> 01:07:07.680]  But it probably is extremely rare for them to actually be put in a position to do that.
[01:07:07.680 --> 01:07:12.680]  It is my hope that we get them well trained in the practice.
[01:07:12.680 --> 01:07:18.680]  Right. During this week, I've been doing a lot of work and putting together a package.
[01:07:18.680 --> 01:07:24.680]  I sent you the beginnings of it, I believe, early in the week. But I've gone on my tenth revision
[01:07:24.680 --> 01:07:28.680]  and I've added a lot of stuff. So if anybody wants anything more, they have to do it.
[01:07:28.680 --> 01:07:33.680]  But, you know, I'll send you a copy of what we have done up to date.
[01:07:33.680 --> 01:07:41.680]  And this way, it's PDF and Word in case people can't format the Word. They can copy and paste, paste by page
[01:07:41.680 --> 01:07:46.680]  and put in their own information in their own Word processor.
[01:07:46.680 --> 01:07:54.680]  Yes. If you have Acrobat 10, you can take a PDF and save it as a Word document.
[01:07:54.680 --> 01:07:55.680]  Right.
[01:07:55.680 --> 01:08:02.680]  That is very helpful. It actually does a surprisingly good job.
[01:08:02.680 --> 01:08:12.680]  Yeah. So anyway, I got that ready for you. So I have 105 pages and I've included the entire process that I used.
[01:08:12.680 --> 01:08:21.680]  And I also put in there a foreclosure defense in the event someone comes after you,
[01:08:21.680 --> 01:08:26.680]  after you've got a quiet title, and decides they want to test you.
[01:08:26.680 --> 01:08:29.680]  And it's a motion for dismissal.
[01:08:29.680 --> 01:08:38.680]  Yeah. You might want to look at getting some sort of a lien into the record so that you have more than quiet title.
[01:08:38.680 --> 01:08:44.680]  Oh, yeah. That's part of the package. It's a friendly lien and a friendly mortgage.
[01:08:44.680 --> 01:08:50.680]  And I got all of that. And it's an affidavit, what do you call it?
[01:08:50.680 --> 01:09:01.680]  I did the QWR. I put a QWR in there with a notary presentment kind of thing with the affidavits for the notary to sign that she sent them,
[01:09:01.680 --> 01:09:06.680]  that she got no response, that she got no acknowledgments.
[01:09:06.680 --> 01:09:13.680]  That way they can also go to the federal court and file a lawsuit and get the money from them.
[01:09:13.680 --> 01:09:22.680]  Speaking of that, are you familiar with the program under the Comptroller of the Currency?
[01:09:22.680 --> 01:09:29.680]  This also goes to the Comptroller of the Currency, a copy of the QWR.
[01:09:29.680 --> 01:09:37.680]  You can go on to the Comptroller of the Currencies website and just put Comptroller of the Currency and Foreclosure.
[01:09:37.680 --> 01:09:48.680]  And you get a hit on this. They have a program. From what I can tell so far, it's for those who were foreclosed on in 2009 and 10,
[01:09:48.680 --> 01:09:54.680]  where they got a whole list of banks and services to agree to a settlement.
[01:09:54.680 --> 01:10:06.680]  And you can go in and demonstrate, if you demonstrate that the foreclosure had faulty documents, they'll pay you $15,000.
[01:10:06.680 --> 01:10:14.680]  If you can show that the foreclosure was improper, they'll pay you $125,000.
[01:10:14.680 --> 01:10:19.680]  This is apparently out of the settlement that they made.
[01:10:19.680 --> 01:10:24.680]  Now, does this include people that were just where they were eventually dismissed?
[01:10:24.680 --> 01:10:29.680]  Because what happened is I know someone that was foreclosed. They had a foreclosure.
[01:10:29.680 --> 01:10:36.680]  But when I looked at the papers, I said, let me answer this for you. And he filed whatever it was I answered.
[01:10:36.680 --> 01:10:43.680]  And what had happened was that the bank did not own an assignment at all.
[01:10:43.680 --> 01:10:45.680]  And 10 years later...
[01:10:45.680 --> 01:10:49.680]  So, okay, when you said it was dismissed, who dismissed it?
[01:10:49.680 --> 01:10:59.680]  The bank, because they got a loan modification, which they did not.
[01:10:59.680 --> 01:11:08.680]  Okay, I'm not sure. You can go on. There's about a 30-page questionnaire to fill out and see what they would do.
[01:11:08.680 --> 01:11:12.680]  It really goes to the harm of the improper foreclosure.
[01:11:12.680 --> 01:11:19.680]  So, if they did a portion of the foreclosure, I would suspect that you would still get a claim through them.
[01:11:19.680 --> 01:11:29.680]  Yeah, because it is wrongful. I mean, if you don't own the property, if you don't own the mortgage and you don't own the note, how can you file for foreclosure?
[01:11:29.680 --> 01:11:41.680]  Exactly. And I've been doing these analysis of the court documents, and I have yet to find one that had the documentation correct.
[01:11:41.680 --> 01:11:43.680]  Yeah.
[01:11:43.680 --> 01:11:45.680]  Not a single one.
[01:11:45.680 --> 01:11:53.680]  Well, I'll look into that for them and see if they can sure use some money about now, but, you know, every little bit helps.
[01:11:53.680 --> 01:11:59.680]  Yes, and you might send them to me. I have another program and I'd be able to work with them.
[01:11:59.680 --> 01:12:05.680]  Right now they're in federal court. They filed for a client title, and that's another thing they did.
[01:12:05.680 --> 01:12:18.680]  When they filed for a client title and on the last day where the last day the other people had to answer the bank put it in transfer to the federal court, screaming diversity.
[01:12:18.680 --> 01:12:29.680]  Well, we put in a motion to remand on the ground that they weren't a diverse when they filed for foreclosure. They can't go claim diversity now.
[01:12:29.680 --> 01:12:42.680]  Yeah, the venue on real property is the county in which the property lies, so if someone has business with that property, they have business in that county.
[01:12:42.680 --> 01:12:44.680]  That's fine.
[01:12:44.680 --> 01:12:47.680]  I don't see how they can get through diversity.
[01:12:47.680 --> 01:12:54.680]  And even so, this goes to property rights, that goes to Rucker Feldman.
[01:12:54.680 --> 01:13:00.680]  Right, and I said county. It will almost certainly get remanded.
[01:13:00.680 --> 01:13:07.680]  Oh, I hope so, because I didn't want to have to have to go over to the federal court.
[01:13:07.680 --> 01:13:17.680]  Okay, she should file a motion for sanctions against counsel. Did she go to another state to secure a loan?
[01:13:17.680 --> 01:13:20.680]  No.
[01:13:20.680 --> 01:13:22.680]  No.
[01:13:22.680 --> 01:13:24.680]  Yes or no?
[01:13:24.680 --> 01:13:28.680]  No, she didn't. She got it at her own place, at her own county.
[01:13:28.680 --> 01:13:31.680]  Okay, in the same state that she's in?
[01:13:31.680 --> 01:13:33.680]  Yes.
[01:13:33.680 --> 01:13:49.680]  So she didn't travel to some foreign state, get a note and then come back to her state. Someone, a representative of this company, was doing business in the state and she dealt with them in the state.
[01:13:49.680 --> 01:13:57.680]  That provides sufficient state contacts under the International Shoe Doctrine that they did business in the state.
[01:13:57.680 --> 01:14:18.680]  There would be no grounds in a mortgage to claim diversity jurisdiction unless you were claiming some issue concerning the note that may have been negotiated into a
[01:14:18.680 --> 01:14:22.680]  trust in New York and you're not in New York.
[01:14:22.680 --> 01:14:24.680]  Right.
[01:14:24.680 --> 01:14:34.680]  Then only the issue concerning that note, if there's some entity in New York who dealt with a note in New York and somebody else brought it to New York, that would get you to diversity.
[01:14:34.680 --> 01:14:45.680]  But as far as a loan, these lawyers know they did that in order to incur a delay for delay's sake.
[01:14:45.680 --> 01:14:50.680]  And that's grounds for sanction and certainly grounds for bar grievance.
[01:14:50.680 --> 01:14:58.680]  Oh, I think I'll do that. That's a yes. Absolutely. They only did that to get 20 days.
[01:14:58.680 --> 01:15:09.680]  Yes. And so you might go for sanctions and claim that the motion, that the removal was frivolous.
[01:15:09.680 --> 01:15:16.680]  Did they do that to get 20 days so they had time to do an answer?
[01:15:16.680 --> 01:15:28.680]  They had, you know, that's what I believe. I believe they answered that time because they wanted to go to the federal court and ask for more time when they transferred it in there.
[01:15:28.680 --> 01:15:33.680]  And then I filed for remand and opposition to motion.
[01:15:33.680 --> 01:15:44.680]  And if the, if you can show that the motion was frivolous, that won't tell their time to answer anything that was before the court prior.
[01:15:44.680 --> 01:15:46.680]  Uh, okay.
[01:15:46.680 --> 01:15:52.680]  That's the kind of thing you don't understand. The law is very old.
[01:15:52.680 --> 01:16:05.680]  In around a long time, and all the shenanigans these lawyers can pull, the court's been there, done that, and they pretty well have remedies in place.
[01:16:05.680 --> 01:16:17.680]  So if they do a motion that creates delay for delay's sake, then the reason, the purpose of their delay can be overridden.
[01:16:17.680 --> 01:16:33.680]  And they could be held subject to the original time. Whether you can get the judge to do that or not, you should certainly go for sanctions for filing the frivolous removal and ask for default judgment for whatever answer they would give.
[01:16:33.680 --> 01:16:36.680]  Oh, that's great. I hadn't thought about that.
[01:16:36.680 --> 01:16:47.680]  And if they filed an answer late, asking to strike it, there's not time. Okay, this is Randy Kelton, Deb Stephens, Eddie Craig, and you've low radio.
[01:16:47.680 --> 01:16:59.680]  Call it number 512-646-1984. We'll be talking to Leslie in Pennsylvania. We'll be right back on the other side.
[01:16:59.680 --> 01:17:07.680]  Capital Coin & Bullion is a family-owned business built on the promise to bring you affordable pricing on all coin and bullion products.
[01:17:07.680 --> 01:17:16.680]  In addition to coins and bullions, we now offer storeable freeze-dried foods produced by Augustin Farms, ammunition at 10% above wholesale prices,
[01:17:16.680 --> 01:17:31.680]  Berkey water products, gift certificates, and our Silver Pool, a new way to guarantee silver by prepaying at a locked price. We can even help you set up a metals IRA account. Call us at 512-646-644-0 for more details.
[01:17:31.680 --> 01:17:46.680]  As always, we buy, sell, and trade precious metals, give appraisals, and cater to those with all sizes of coin collections. We're located at 7304 Burnett Road, Suite A, about a half a mile north of Canig next to the Ikebon Sushi and Genie Car Wash.
[01:17:46.680 --> 01:17:59.680]  We're open Monday through Friday, 10 to 6, Saturdays, 10 to 2. Visit us at capitalcoinandbullion.com or call 512-646-644-0 and say you heard about us on Rule of Law Radio or Texas Liberty Radio.
[01:17:59.680 --> 01:18:08.680]  What's been the problem with phone companies? High prices and contracts that lock you in for two years minimum, not freedomtelephones.com.
[01:18:08.680 --> 01:18:20.680]  Freedom Telephones are designed around the concept and reality of patriotism, loyalty, and privacy. With FreedomTelephones.com, there are no contracts, no credit checks, and no social security numbers required.
[01:18:20.680 --> 01:18:30.680]  That's why our name is FreedomTelephones.com. Finally, residential, mobile, and business telephones and plans that are private and never lock you into a long-term contract.
[01:18:30.680 --> 01:18:43.680]  Want a low price? Residential and business plans started only $14.99 and mobile plans started just $39.99. Plus, every month you pay your bill, FreedomTelephones.com contributes to your favorite programs.
[01:18:43.680 --> 01:18:55.680]  Don't wait. Support the cause and get the highest quality and the lowest prices by calling 1-800-600-5553. That's 800-600-5553.
[01:18:55.680 --> 01:19:14.680]  FreedomTelephones.com. Portable, private, perfect.
[01:19:25.680 --> 01:19:40.680]  I was blindsided, but now I can see your plans. You put the fear in my pockets, took the money from my hands, and you're back with that same old misery.
[01:19:40.680 --> 01:19:55.680]  You sent this letter to Leslie, and I think Leslie dropped off. We lost Leslie, so we're going to Mark in Wisconsin. Good evening. Mark, it has been a while.
[01:19:55.680 --> 01:20:03.680]  Well, hopefully this evening's conversation you'll find interesting and informative, and hopefully you'll give me some ideas here.
[01:20:03.680 --> 01:20:24.680]  First off, under attorney misconduct, I have a situation where the attorney has made an affidavit of what has happened in the case and then self-contradicts himself in his filing to state that 30 days had not passed since the discovery action was filed and therefore was not late.
[01:20:24.680 --> 01:20:39.680]  He points out that on behalf of Mr. Jacklake, he filed a motion to reopen the small claims judgment. He then points out that he received a phone call from the clerk of the courts pointing out the website was wrong, there was no judgment entered, and that Mr. Jacklake should file an answer.
[01:20:39.680 --> 01:20:51.680]  He then points out he files an answer. In his excuse as to why he was not late, he comes to a point three. There cannot be an obligation to respond to the discovery if a judgment has already been entered against Mr. Jacklake.
[01:20:51.680 --> 01:20:58.680]  Upon learning the judgment was removed, Attorney Bozo responded to plaintiffs' pleading within 30 days.
[01:20:58.680 --> 01:21:09.680]  Problem, State of Wisconsin says that the 30-day clock or a 45-day clock starts from serving the defendant, not the attorney.
[01:21:09.680 --> 01:21:27.680]  Now the judge went ahead and said, no, no, no, I believe the attorney. And so I believe I've got basis for overturning that because judge, if he makes an error because of a factual misrepresentation of the law, that is reversible, correct?
[01:21:27.680 --> 01:21:28.680]  Correct.
[01:21:28.680 --> 01:21:38.680]  Did the lawyer knowingly fail to speak with candor to the court?
[01:21:38.680 --> 01:21:56.680]  And that is what I bar-greaved him for. The second part I bar-greaved him for in that same set is I had filed a discovery saying is Mr. Jacklake an owner, was Mr. Jacklake an owner, and there are a request for admitted deny.
[01:21:56.680 --> 01:22:16.680]  I received a phone call from Mr. Bozo saying my client, Mr. Jacklake, will provide you with an affidavit about ownership if you drop the case, which I don't believe is quite the proper response to a pending discovery request.
[01:22:16.680 --> 01:22:22.680]  That is an interesting response, and that would certainly get a bar grievance.
[01:22:22.680 --> 01:22:32.680]  Well, it did, but here's where it gets more fun. The affidavit that I was sent, well, first off I said, you know, in my phone conversation, he filed a paperwork with the court.
[01:22:32.680 --> 01:22:39.680]  He said, I'm not going to file the paperwork with the court. He explicitly pointed out he wasn't going to file the paperwork with the court.
[01:22:39.680 --> 01:22:56.680]  Well, I received the insert air quote affidavit, put another air quote, in the mail. It has a scanned signature of the affiant, a scanned signature of the lawyer, and, as a bonus, a scanned rubber stamp.
[01:22:56.680 --> 01:23:04.680]  And the date is handwritten. So I have a document that is neither fissured nor filed.
[01:23:04.680 --> 01:23:08.680]  Wait, wait, wait, does it have a jurat?
[01:23:08.680 --> 01:23:10.680]  Well, tell me what a jurat is.
[01:23:10.680 --> 01:23:13.680]  A verification by a notary.
[01:23:13.680 --> 01:23:22.680]  The notary is the attorney, and the, you know, it says what to get.
[01:23:22.680 --> 01:23:28.680]  Wait, wait, wait, the notary is an attorney or the notary is also the same attorney?
[01:23:28.680 --> 01:23:30.680]  No, a different attorney.
[01:23:30.680 --> 01:23:39.680]  Okay, it says subscribed. Subscribed is sworn to me on this 11th day of month, 2012.
[01:23:39.680 --> 01:23:48.680]  The signature is a scanned. Notary public state of Wisconsin, my commission expires, expires as crossed out, is permanent.
[01:23:48.680 --> 01:23:57.680]  The expires is also in ink. The permanent is permanent is scanned, and the stamp is scanned.
[01:23:57.680 --> 01:24:02.680]  Bozo attorney's friend, notary public state of Wisconsin.
[01:24:02.680 --> 01:24:07.680]  Okay, when you say they're scanned, are you talking about their scanned, meaning the copy that you got?
[01:24:07.680 --> 01:24:19.680]  No, it's scanned as in the signature composed of dots, as opposed to lines, or a photocopy of an ink signature.
[01:24:19.680 --> 01:24:23.680]  So it's an electronic signature is what you're saying?
[01:24:23.680 --> 01:24:28.680]  It's an electronic signature, yes, and the stamp is also electronic.
[01:24:28.680 --> 01:24:33.680]  No, that's not what he's saying. I'm getting this right.
[01:24:33.680 --> 01:24:43.680]  You're saying that the signature was not placed on the original document by the hand of the assayers,
[01:24:43.680 --> 01:24:48.680]  but rather was printed on the document by electronic means.
[01:24:48.680 --> 01:24:49.680]  Correct.
[01:24:49.680 --> 01:24:54.680]  In which case, how does anyone certify that it's an actual signature by an actual party?
[01:24:54.680 --> 01:25:03.680]  Right. The document where the words are, I do not currently have nor ever had an ownership stake in blah,
[01:25:03.680 --> 01:25:09.680]  those are nicely formed in current letters. There's no dots.
[01:25:09.680 --> 01:25:18.680]  It appears that that was drawn from an electronic document onto the drum of a laser printer and transferred.
[01:25:18.680 --> 01:25:25.680]  The signatures appear to be scanned in signatures from something and inserted into the document,
[01:25:25.680 --> 01:25:32.680]  and the notary stamp is also a scanned in notary stamp. It is not an actual stamp.
[01:25:32.680 --> 01:25:42.680]  So the notary being an attorney, he actually signed off on a contrived document for which no parties were present.
[01:25:42.680 --> 01:25:46.680]  I'm guessing the notary doesn't even know about it yet.
[01:25:46.680 --> 01:25:54.680]  Well, no. From what you're reading, the attorney is, in your state, is also a notary.
[01:25:54.680 --> 01:26:00.680]  Right. But the attorney who's the notary who, you know, subscribed and sworn,
[01:26:00.680 --> 01:26:03.680]  I'm thinking he doesn't even know that this document exists.
[01:26:03.680 --> 01:26:04.680]  That's possible.
[01:26:04.680 --> 01:26:06.680]  I have a suggestion.
[01:26:06.680 --> 01:26:07.680]  Okay.
[01:26:07.680 --> 01:26:20.680]  Send a request to the notary requesting the notary's sequential log for a month before to a month after the date of this affirmation.
[01:26:20.680 --> 01:26:22.680]  Okay.
[01:26:22.680 --> 01:26:24.680]  That should get interesting.
[01:26:24.680 --> 01:26:27.680]  Oh, yes. I hadn't thought of that.
[01:26:27.680 --> 01:26:37.680]  What's interesting is the State of Wisconsin 137 Code 137-2. Let me see here which section it is.
[01:26:37.680 --> 01:26:47.680]  13712-2M says this subchapter, meaning electronic signatures, does not apply to any of the following records or transactions
[01:26:47.680 --> 01:26:49.680]  evidenced by any of the following records.
[01:26:49.680 --> 01:26:54.680]  Records governed by law, returning to adoption, blah, notices provided by the court, doesn't care.
[01:26:54.680 --> 01:26:59.680]  Court orders in D, official court documents, including briefs, pleadings and other writings,
[01:26:59.680 --> 01:27:03.680]  required to be executed in connection with court proceedings.
[01:27:03.680 --> 01:27:09.680]  So is this alleged affidavit become, is that an official court document,
[01:27:09.680 --> 01:27:13.680]  or does it have to be filed with the court to become an official court document?
[01:27:13.680 --> 01:27:17.680]  It has to be filed with the court to become an official court document.
[01:27:17.680 --> 01:27:24.680]  So now I have him explicitly stating he was not going to file this document with the court.
[01:27:24.680 --> 01:27:27.680]  Well, of course he's not going to file it with the court and go to jail.
[01:27:27.680 --> 01:27:29.680]  Right. Right.
[01:27:29.680 --> 01:27:34.680]  So is this document sent to you as discovery?
[01:27:34.680 --> 01:27:38.680]  No. This document was sent to me after a series of communications.
[01:27:38.680 --> 01:27:46.680]  The first communication is my client will send you an affidavit stating ownership issues
[01:27:46.680 --> 01:27:50.680]  if that he's not an owner, if you drop the case.
[01:27:50.680 --> 01:27:54.680]  Okay, wait a minute. We're asking the wrong questions.
[01:27:54.680 --> 01:27:57.680]  If this is sent to you as an affidavit.
[01:27:57.680 --> 01:27:59.680]  Which it was.
[01:27:59.680 --> 01:28:05.680]  Then it's sent to you as an affirmation of truth under oath.
[01:28:05.680 --> 01:28:06.680]  Okay.
[01:28:06.680 --> 01:28:17.680]  It is the notary signature that give it a, not a court document, but an official document stamp.
[01:28:17.680 --> 01:28:21.680]  Because the notary is a court official.
[01:28:21.680 --> 01:28:22.680]  Okay.
[01:28:22.680 --> 01:28:28.680]  So it becomes an official government record, or a government document, although it's my father's government.
[01:28:28.680 --> 01:28:40.680]  The fact that it's an affidavit and verified, then that holds them to a responsibility to give accurate information.
[01:28:40.680 --> 01:28:46.680]  They can't commit perjury on a document just because it's not going to be filed with the court.
[01:28:46.680 --> 01:28:47.680]  Okay.
[01:28:47.680 --> 01:28:51.680]  Now, the other thing in looking at the state, it talks all about electronic signatures.
[01:28:51.680 --> 01:28:58.680]  But when it comes to the Perenn III notary seal or stamp, except it's authorized in 13719,
[01:28:58.680 --> 01:29:02.680]  every notary's public shall provide an engraved official seal, which makes a distinct and legible impression,
[01:29:02.680 --> 01:29:06.680]  or official rubber stamp, which makes a distinct or legible imprint on paper.
[01:29:06.680 --> 01:29:12.680]  The impression of the seal or imprint of the rubber stamp shall be blah, blah, blah.
[01:29:12.680 --> 01:29:17.680]  And the impression of the notary seal upon any instrument or writing upon wafer wax,
[01:29:17.680 --> 01:29:22.680]  or other adhesive substance in a sticks to any instrument or writing shall be deemed
[01:29:22.680 --> 01:29:24.680]  an affixiation of the seal.
[01:29:24.680 --> 01:29:31.680]  And the imprint of the notary rubber stamp upon instrument shall be deemed an affixion of the rubber seal.
[01:29:31.680 --> 01:29:36.680]  It appears that there's nothing that says this electronic stamp is good.
[01:29:36.680 --> 01:29:38.680]  It sure sounds that way.
[01:29:38.680 --> 01:29:39.680]  Okay.
[01:29:39.680 --> 01:29:40.680]  Hang on, Mark.
[01:29:40.680 --> 01:29:42.680]  We'll be right back over to the side.
[01:29:42.680 --> 01:29:47.680]  This is Grant Kalkin, Deborah Stephens, and Greg Rivlin Radio.
[01:29:47.680 --> 01:29:51.680]  Call in number 512-646-1984.
[01:29:51.680 --> 01:29:53.680]  We'll be right back.
[01:29:59.680 --> 01:30:00.680]  A noble lie.
[01:30:00.680 --> 01:30:06.680]  Oklahoma City, 1995 will change forever the way you look at the true nature of terrorism.
[01:30:06.680 --> 01:30:10.680]  Based on the damage patting to the building, but the government says it's impossible.
[01:30:10.680 --> 01:30:14.680]  The grand jury did not want to hear anything I had to say.
[01:30:14.680 --> 01:30:17.680]  The decision was made not to pursue any more of those individuals.
[01:30:17.680 --> 01:30:22.680]  Some of these columns were ripped up, shredded, tossed around.
[01:30:22.680 --> 01:30:26.680]  The people that did the things they did knew doggone well what they were doing.
[01:30:26.680 --> 01:30:31.680]  Expose the cover up now at anoblelie.com.
[01:30:31.680 --> 01:30:37.680]  The Rule of Law Radio Network is proud to present a due process of law seminar hosted by our own Eddie Craig.
[01:30:37.680 --> 01:30:42.680]  He's been a former Nacodotius Sheriff's deputy, and for the past 21 years he's been studying the due process of law
[01:30:42.680 --> 01:30:47.680]  and now offers his knowledge to you at a seminar every Sunday from 2 o'clock to 5 o'clock at Brave New Books,
[01:30:47.680 --> 01:30:50.680]  located at 1904 Guadalupe Street.
[01:30:50.680 --> 01:30:58.680]  Admission is $20, so please make plans to come by and sit with Eddie and learn for yourself what the true intent of law really is.
[01:30:58.680 --> 01:31:04.680]  At hempusa.org, we offer chemical-free products to people around the world,
[01:31:04.680 --> 01:31:08.680]  detoxifying, self-healing while rebuilding the immune system.
[01:31:08.680 --> 01:31:13.680]  We urge our listeners to please consider our largest selling product, micro-plant powder.
[01:31:13.680 --> 01:31:21.680]  Our micro-plant powder is rich in iodine, probiotics, zinc, and silica to help rebuild the immune system
[01:31:21.680 --> 01:31:23.680]  and to create a healthy stomach flora.
[01:31:23.680 --> 01:31:28.680]  Micro-plant powder is excellent for daily intake and is perfect to add to your storage shelter.
[01:31:28.680 --> 01:31:32.680]  We urge our listeners to please visit us at hempusa.org.
[01:31:32.680 --> 01:31:36.680]  And remember, all of our products are chemical-free and healthy to eat.
[01:31:36.680 --> 01:31:41.680]  We constantly strive to give you the best service, highest quality, and rapid shipping anywhere.
[01:31:41.680 --> 01:31:45.680]  And we offer free shipping on orders over $95 in the US.
[01:31:45.680 --> 01:31:51.680]  Please visit us at hempusa.org or call 908-6912608.
[01:31:51.680 --> 01:31:54.680]  That's 908-6912608.
[01:31:54.680 --> 01:32:23.680]  See what our powder, seeds, and oil can do for you at hempusa.org.
[01:32:23.680 --> 01:32:24.680]  Okay, you're back.
[01:32:24.680 --> 01:32:26.680]  I'm Michael and I will see you today.
[01:32:26.680 --> 01:32:27.680]  Great.
[01:32:27.680 --> 01:32:28.680]  We have the radio.
[01:32:28.680 --> 01:32:29.680]  See you.
[01:32:29.680 --> 01:32:33.680]  Welcome to Mark in Wisconsin.
[01:32:33.680 --> 01:32:34.680]  Okay.
[01:32:34.680 --> 01:32:44.680]  My next question on this would be, if I'm going to take this and sue the insurance company of the lawyers,
[01:32:44.680 --> 01:32:50.680]  that way I make sure the insurance company becomes aware of this malfeasance.
[01:32:50.680 --> 01:32:54.680]  Plus, in theory, that's who would be paying this, correct?
[01:32:54.680 --> 01:32:55.680]  Correct.
[01:32:55.680 --> 01:32:56.680]  All right.
[01:32:56.680 --> 01:33:00.680]  Would I need to file that in federal court?
[01:33:00.680 --> 01:33:13.680]  And should I file it as a John Doe and then notice every possible insurance company to then have them identify if these people are a customer?
[01:33:13.680 --> 01:33:18.680]  That's an interesting question.
[01:33:18.680 --> 01:33:24.680]  You would go towards a notifying the insurance company that you like doing.
[01:33:24.680 --> 01:33:30.680]  It would go towards making sure every insurance company is aware.
[01:33:30.680 --> 01:33:43.680]  From what I understand, there are only nine underwriters of malpractice insurance in the country and they all are underwritten by Lloyds of London.
[01:33:43.680 --> 01:33:54.680]  So if you just notified those nine underwriters and request from them whether or not they have underwritten a policy for this lawyer,
[01:33:54.680 --> 01:33:56.680]  you'll get everybody notified.
[01:33:56.680 --> 01:33:58.680]  Okay.
[01:33:58.680 --> 01:34:02.680]  Excellent.
[01:34:02.680 --> 01:34:09.680]  Suggestions on other than, you know, sending off a little note to the law firm asking for the one lawyer's logbook.
[01:34:09.680 --> 01:34:12.680]  Any other suggestions on this?
[01:34:12.680 --> 01:34:16.680]  I was thinking about that as you were talking.
[01:34:16.680 --> 01:34:22.680]  There is a special provision for lawyers to act in a notary capacity.
[01:34:22.680 --> 01:34:24.680]  Correct.
[01:34:24.680 --> 01:34:32.680]  So I'm not certain if the lawyer is required to keep the notarial ledger.
[01:34:32.680 --> 01:34:34.680]  You might check that.
[01:34:34.680 --> 01:34:35.680]  Okay.
[01:34:35.680 --> 01:34:46.680]  Ask for it anyway and let him explain to the court how he doesn't keep a notarial ledger because he's not required to.
[01:34:46.680 --> 01:34:56.680]  And that will effectively serve your purpose to show that there's no way to verify the notary.
[01:34:56.680 --> 01:35:00.680]  Okay.
[01:35:00.680 --> 01:35:01.680]  All right.
[01:35:01.680 --> 01:35:04.680]  Just making a note here.
[01:35:04.680 --> 01:35:20.680]  I'll call the state and ask if, you know, what provisions talk about the notary ledger because I didn't see that in 137 having read through 137.
[01:35:20.680 --> 01:35:21.680]  Yeah.
[01:35:21.680 --> 01:35:23.680]  There's almost certainly has to be.
[01:35:23.680 --> 01:35:28.680]  Otherwise, there would be no way to verify a notary.
[01:35:28.680 --> 01:35:29.680]  Right.
[01:35:29.680 --> 01:35:32.680]  Right.
[01:35:32.680 --> 01:35:42.680]  Do you have any idea on how damaged this is as far as a dollar amount where it would be a good settlement idea?
[01:35:42.680 --> 01:35:43.680]  I have no idea.
[01:35:43.680 --> 01:35:45.680]  How much is the case worth?
[01:35:45.680 --> 01:35:49.680]  Well, the case is only worth $3,000.
[01:35:49.680 --> 01:35:51.680]  Then three times that.
[01:35:51.680 --> 01:35:52.680]  Okay.
[01:35:52.680 --> 01:35:54.680]  It's a nice place to start punitive.
[01:35:54.680 --> 01:36:01.680]  Ask for exemplary damages for the intent to defraud.
[01:36:01.680 --> 01:36:05.680]  For a fraud, you don't claim the amount you were actually defrauded of.
[01:36:05.680 --> 01:36:11.680]  You claim the amount that the perpetrator, perpetrator intended to defraud you of.
[01:36:11.680 --> 01:36:17.680]  And then you ask for exemplary damages, which can be three times that.
[01:36:17.680 --> 01:36:18.680]  Okay.
[01:36:18.680 --> 01:36:23.680]  But not to worry, you'll cost him a whole lot more than that.
[01:36:23.680 --> 01:36:26.680]  It's about practice insurance.
[01:36:26.680 --> 01:36:28.680]  Yes.
[01:36:28.680 --> 01:36:30.680]  All right then.
[01:36:30.680 --> 01:36:32.680]  I think that covers everything.
[01:36:32.680 --> 01:36:38.680]  I was going to ask about the NOVO hearing, but I found in the state they have a form for that.
[01:36:38.680 --> 01:36:46.680]  I've managed to find in this case a tax or a bankruptcy filing where they claim that the company had no money,
[01:36:46.680 --> 01:36:50.680]  they had no books and no bookkeeper for two years.
[01:36:50.680 --> 01:36:58.680]  Even though I have a filing, an affidavit from a person who signed or was labeled as the president of the company
[01:36:58.680 --> 01:37:07.680]  saying that when the locks got changed, they lost approximately $500 for that half a day of not selling their product.
[01:37:07.680 --> 01:37:11.680]  So there's issues regarding their bookkeeping.
[01:37:11.680 --> 01:37:12.680]  Ah, good.
[01:37:12.680 --> 01:37:16.680]  So in one case, they claim they don't have the books.
[01:37:16.680 --> 01:37:22.680]  And in the other, they try to claim that according to their books, they had this loss.
[01:37:22.680 --> 01:37:23.680]  Right.
[01:37:23.680 --> 01:37:26.680]  That goes to collateral estoppals.
[01:37:26.680 --> 01:37:27.680]  Okay.
[01:37:27.680 --> 01:37:32.680]  They take one position.
[01:37:32.680 --> 01:37:37.680]  The collateral estoppals from taking a diametrically opposed position.
[01:37:37.680 --> 01:37:38.680]  Okay.
[01:37:38.680 --> 01:37:47.680]  Now, of course, they didn't actually sign the bankruptcy saying that the attorney who filed it did sign it.
[01:37:47.680 --> 01:37:48.680]  Good.
[01:37:48.680 --> 01:37:50.680]  Then he's responsible.
[01:37:50.680 --> 01:37:51.680]  Hmm.
[01:37:51.680 --> 01:37:52.680]  Okay.
[01:37:52.680 --> 01:37:57.680]  So the attorney, attorney may not accept the veracity of his client.
[01:37:57.680 --> 01:38:06.680]  The attorney must do his own investigation to ensure that the claim the attorney makes is in the name of the client,
[01:38:06.680 --> 01:38:10.680]  is a claim the client has the power to make.
[01:38:10.680 --> 01:38:11.680]  Okay.
[01:38:11.680 --> 01:38:20.680]  And then finally, what do you think of the idea that because the state of Wisconsin code for lawyers
[01:38:20.680 --> 01:38:26.680]  says that the lawyers are to treat other lawyers and the judge with respect,
[01:38:26.680 --> 01:38:31.680]  but doesn't say anything about a no, nothing beach bomb pro se litigant.
[01:38:31.680 --> 01:38:42.680]  What do you think of the idea of taking this document and its features and sending a copy of that to the head justice in every court in the state
[01:38:42.680 --> 01:38:52.680]  and point out that after their assistance in lobbying the Wisconsin Bar Association and changing that particular rule,
[01:38:52.680 --> 01:38:57.680]  that they are also to speak with candor and treat with respect.
[01:38:57.680 --> 01:39:01.680]  You know, us, no, nothing pro se.
[01:39:01.680 --> 01:39:02.680]  Oh, wait.
[01:39:02.680 --> 01:39:04.680]  All opposing party bimmers.
[01:39:04.680 --> 01:39:05.680]  Wait a minute.
[01:39:05.680 --> 01:39:06.680]  You're not.
[01:39:06.680 --> 01:39:08.680]  You are a counsel.
[01:39:08.680 --> 01:39:09.680]  Oh, I am.
[01:39:09.680 --> 01:39:11.680]  Yes, you are.
[01:39:11.680 --> 01:39:15.680]  You are acting as counsel for yourself.
[01:39:15.680 --> 01:39:17.680]  They have that same requirement.
[01:39:17.680 --> 01:39:20.680]  All right.
[01:39:20.680 --> 01:39:22.680]  Okay.
[01:39:22.680 --> 01:39:29.680]  It was more to let everybody know what had happened, but okay.
[01:39:29.680 --> 01:39:34.680]  It still sounds like you're having way too much fun with this stuff.
[01:39:34.680 --> 01:39:37.680]  Oh, this guy is a real peach.
[01:39:37.680 --> 01:39:46.680]  He has history, he'll get involved with the case, he'll let it go to default, complain that he didn't get it, deny everything.
[01:39:46.680 --> 01:39:53.680]  As soon as it looks like he's losing, he just goes limp and stops showing up and even sometimes his attorney's shop's showing up.
[01:39:53.680 --> 01:40:02.680]  One of his attorneys went so far as to say, I want to drop this guy as a client because he's not communicative and here's the money shop and I'm not being paid.
[01:40:02.680 --> 01:40:21.680]  And under piercing his corporate veil, one of his arguments on one lawsuit was we object to the lawsuit because we don't have the tens of thousands of dollars to pay for the plaintiff's complaint.
[01:40:21.680 --> 01:40:32.680]  Which under piercing corporate veil, one of the ways in which it's pierced is if you lack collateral to actually run your business.
[01:40:32.680 --> 01:40:34.680]  Is this guy a debt collector?
[01:40:34.680 --> 01:40:40.680]  No, this guy's been running this scam, I mean, a fine business for 40 years.
[01:40:40.680 --> 01:40:42.680]  He was the original creator.
[01:40:42.680 --> 01:40:44.680]  This would be the third round.
[01:40:44.680 --> 01:40:47.680]  The first round had 20 plus stores and was driven into the ground.
[01:40:47.680 --> 01:41:00.680]  The second round had just one store and ultimately he did jail time when he said to the state, oh, I didn't realize that collecting sales tax and not turning it over was illegal.
[01:41:00.680 --> 01:41:03.680]  Oh, he must have forgot about it.
[01:41:03.680 --> 01:41:22.680]  Yeah, he didn't realize that was illegal. And I mean, he's a real peach. He was also in one court filing. He's noticed that if the matter is coverable by small claims, the DA will not prosecute for fraud.
[01:41:22.680 --> 01:41:34.680]  And so the court record is filled with various small claim actions against him, of which he's had some success getting him tossed and others not.
[01:41:34.680 --> 01:41:36.680]  And he tries to...
[01:41:36.680 --> 01:41:39.680]  Yeah, I think fraud goes to salinity.
[01:41:39.680 --> 01:41:41.680]  Right.
[01:41:41.680 --> 01:41:48.680]  And so he's aware that the DA won't do anything for you. You have to go through small claims.
[01:41:48.680 --> 01:41:58.680]  And he's got a series of these companies where he forms a company, doesn't send the state any paperwork, the state ages them out, and then he forms another one.
[01:41:58.680 --> 01:42:05.680]  The best one, though, is on the ninth day of a particular month.
[01:42:05.680 --> 01:42:19.680]  The Milwaukee County Court said, you owe $13,000, sucker. And he went, whoa, whoa, on the 10th day of that month, they removed the registered agent from the one company.
[01:42:19.680 --> 01:42:24.680]  On the 11th day of the month, they formed a new company.
[01:42:24.680 --> 01:42:26.680]  That's cool.
[01:42:26.680 --> 01:42:37.680]  Yeah, yeah. And, of course, the address for the companies all go to one where they were evicted from.
[01:42:37.680 --> 01:42:43.680]  Wait a minute, that didn't make sense. It goes to an address from which they were evicted.
[01:42:43.680 --> 01:42:51.680]  Right. So these companies, these shell companies, all point to an address, a physical address, where they were evicted.
[01:42:51.680 --> 01:42:57.680]  So the state requires that you have a physical location and a physical age, you know, a person.
[01:42:57.680 --> 01:43:06.680]  So both of any of these shell companies now scale the state's requirement of a physical location and a physical person.
[01:43:06.680 --> 01:43:09.680]  Oh, this guy sounds like a really fun guy.
[01:43:09.680 --> 01:43:21.680]  Oh, yeah, yeah. And the judge is complaining about the amount of paperwork I've produced. And you can well imagine I've produced a bit of paperwork here.
[01:43:21.680 --> 01:43:27.680]  However, every one of the small claims court cases is at least an inch thick and one of them is two inches thick.
[01:43:27.680 --> 01:43:35.680]  Well, maybe the judge will just start ruling in your favor so he doesn't have to read all the documents.
[01:43:35.680 --> 01:43:42.680]  That might be. Do I have a shock at holdover?
[01:43:42.680 --> 01:43:48.680]  Yes, dude, we've only got one more caller so we're not crowded at the moment.
[01:43:48.680 --> 01:43:55.680]  So hang on, we will pick you up on the other side. Chris, we see you there. We'll pick you up as soon as we're done.
[01:43:55.680 --> 01:43:59.680]  It's Mark, this is from Ranger Calvin Diggs, TV Day 3.
[01:43:59.680 --> 01:44:05.680]  It is so enlightening to listen to 90.1 FM, but finding things on the Internet isn't so easy.
[01:44:05.680 --> 01:44:08.680]  And neither is finding like-minded people to share it with.
[01:44:08.680 --> 01:44:11.680]  Oh, well, I guess you haven't heard of Brave New Books then.
[01:44:11.680 --> 01:44:12.680]  Brave New Books?
[01:44:12.680 --> 01:44:19.680]  Yes, Brave New Books has all the books and DVDs you're looking for by authors like Alex Jones, Ron Paul, and G. Edward Griffin.
[01:44:19.680 --> 01:44:23.680]  They even stock inner food, Burkey products, and Calvin's Soaps.
[01:44:23.680 --> 01:44:25.680]  There's no way a place like that exists.
[01:44:25.680 --> 01:44:31.680]  Go check it out for yourself. It's downtown at 1904 Guadalupe Street, just south of UT.
[01:44:31.680 --> 01:44:35.680]  Oh, by UT? There's never anywhere to park down there.
[01:44:35.680 --> 01:44:42.680]  Actually, they now offer a free hour of parking for paying customers at the 500 MLK parking facility just behind the bookstore.
[01:44:42.680 --> 01:44:46.680]  It does exist, but when are they open?
[01:44:46.680 --> 01:44:55.680]  Monday through Saturday, 11 a.m. to 9 p.m. and 1 to 6 p.m. on Sundays. So give them a call at 512-480-2503,
[01:44:55.680 --> 01:45:22.680]  or check out their events page at bravenewbookstore.com.
[01:45:22.680 --> 01:45:27.680]  Thousands have won with our step-by-step course, and now you can too.
[01:45:27.680 --> 01:45:33.680]  Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case-winning experience.
[01:45:33.680 --> 01:45:42.680]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand about the principles and practices that control our American courts.
[01:45:42.680 --> 01:45:52.680]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases, prosa tactics, and much more.
[01:45:52.680 --> 01:46:21.680]  Visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner or call toll-free 866-LAW-EZ.
[01:46:21.680 --> 01:46:26.680]  Okay, with that, we shall proceed to the break.
[01:46:26.680 --> 01:46:30.680]  Martin, I was conscious. Martin, do you have one more question?
[01:46:30.680 --> 01:46:39.680]  This would be the last question on this. How actionable do you think it would be to claim that the attorney and his client
[01:46:39.680 --> 01:46:45.680]  do this strictly to drag out litigation to get the other guys to drop?
[01:46:45.680 --> 01:46:52.680]  I haven't gotten the affidavit, but they engaged in a two-hour mediation session where the dollar amount was agreed,
[01:46:52.680 --> 01:46:58.680]  or Mr. Jack-Oleg went ahead and engaged in that.
[01:46:58.680 --> 01:47:02.680]  And then at the point when it came to write out the check is when he threw up his hands and said,
[01:47:02.680 --> 01:47:15.680]  I'm not interested anymore and stormed out, do you think I could make a claim that the litigation is done just to obstinate and harm?
[01:47:15.680 --> 01:47:21.680]  I think you could absolutely make a claim of delay for delay's sake.
[01:47:21.680 --> 01:47:22.680]  Okay.
[01:47:22.680 --> 01:47:25.680]  You can make the claim, whether you can get the judge to rule for you or not,
[01:47:25.680 --> 01:47:29.680]  and that's a questionable, but you can certainly make the claim.
[01:47:29.680 --> 01:47:31.680]  Okay, great.
[01:47:31.680 --> 01:47:41.680]  Hopefully, if I can get them to get around to a settlement and a portion of the settlement where I no longer speak about this,
[01:47:41.680 --> 01:47:46.680]  be burying this portion of the settlement and seal the court documents,
[01:47:46.680 --> 01:47:50.680]  hopefully I can get them to write you out a check to your beer fund.
[01:47:50.680 --> 01:47:52.680]  Oh, that would be great.
[01:47:52.680 --> 01:47:57.680]  A check from an attorney's office for your beer fund.
[01:47:57.680 --> 01:48:04.680]  That would be fun. I wouldn't even cash it. I'd just hang it up and throw darts at it.
[01:48:04.680 --> 01:48:10.680]  Hey, maybe we can have them make a couple of certified copies with the one lawyer's stamp.
[01:48:10.680 --> 01:48:13.680]  That way you can throw darts at the certified copy.
[01:48:13.680 --> 01:48:16.680]  Exactly.
[01:48:16.680 --> 01:48:17.680]  Okay.
[01:48:17.680 --> 01:48:21.680]  Well, can't we cash that certified copy? Why don't we just keep making copies of it?
[01:48:21.680 --> 01:48:26.680]  Well, no, no, no. You're not the Federal Reserve. You can get away with that.
[01:48:26.680 --> 01:48:28.680]  You can get them to stamp it, see.
[01:48:28.680 --> 01:48:36.680]  Oh, okay. All right. Well, thank you much for the advice on the notary ledger and the collateral estoppel.
[01:48:36.680 --> 01:48:38.680]  Okay, have fun, Mark.
[01:48:38.680 --> 01:48:44.680]  Okay, now we're going to go to Chris in Texas.
[01:48:44.680 --> 01:48:47.680]  Chris, what do you have for us today?
[01:48:47.680 --> 01:48:57.680]  Okay, I've been doing some research trying to find a law that protects the attorney general from being held accountable to the Texas Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.
[01:48:57.680 --> 01:49:02.680]  Is there anything that protects them from that?
[01:49:02.680 --> 01:49:06.680]  That's a good question.
[01:49:06.680 --> 01:49:20.680]  Not that I know of, except, well, yeah, I believe there is that governmental agencies do not fall under.
[01:49:20.680 --> 01:49:30.680]  I know if someone's collecting a student loan, they don't fall under because that's generally a government back loan.
[01:49:30.680 --> 01:49:42.680]  I don't think you'll be able to get to the attorney general through FDCPA, although off the top of my head, I don't remember exactly who it is.
[01:49:42.680 --> 01:49:51.680]  It's one of those things I haven't looked for and briefed out, so I don't have it also on the tip of my tongue here.
[01:49:51.680 --> 01:50:03.680]  The reason I asked is because last night I was doing some research and it just struck me to go over to Dunn and Bradstreet and do a search for the Texas Attorney General.
[01:50:03.680 --> 01:50:06.680]  Turns out they really are a corporation.
[01:50:06.680 --> 01:50:10.680]  Are they still protected under government agencies?
[01:50:10.680 --> 01:50:21.680]  Yes, because when the attorney general is acting in this capacity, he's not acting in the corporate capacity.
[01:50:21.680 --> 01:50:25.680]  He's acting in the statutory or constitutional capacity.
[01:50:25.680 --> 01:50:35.680]  So we've heard a lot of stuff about this, you know, the courts don't have to be incorporated,
[01:50:35.680 --> 01:50:43.680]  they have incorporated in order to handle the administration of the court.
[01:50:43.680 --> 01:50:59.680]  And people have implied that because the courts incorporated themselves, that necessarily meant that everything they did, they did under the auspices of the corporation and that is just not the case.
[01:50:59.680 --> 01:51:09.680]  The attorney general has statutory authority and when he's acting in that statutory authority, they didn't have anything to do with the corporation.
[01:51:09.680 --> 01:51:24.680]  The question actually arose from trying to find out what standing the attorney general comes in front of the court when they claim they're not representing either party.
[01:51:24.680 --> 01:51:33.680]  That is a good question. I didn't know they claimed that because, wait, wait, what is the nature of the case?
[01:51:33.680 --> 01:51:37.680]  That's not a court case.
[01:51:37.680 --> 01:51:39.680]  It's not a court case.
[01:51:39.680 --> 01:51:47.680]  Okay, in this case, they have statutory authority to collect child support.
[01:51:47.680 --> 01:51:53.680]  And they're right, they're not representing either party.
[01:51:53.680 --> 01:52:03.680]  Okay, so they are protected by laws against having them held to the same accountability as a debt collector?
[01:52:03.680 --> 01:52:05.680]  Yes.
[01:52:05.680 --> 01:52:12.680]  They have a statutory duty to collect and a debt collector doesn't.
[01:52:12.680 --> 01:52:25.680]  So all of the public officials doing collections, you know, we talked about that recently over someone collecting for a municipality on traffic issues they don't fall under.
[01:52:25.680 --> 01:52:41.680]  Well, now do consider one aspect for the attorney general, though, under the Texas Constitution, creation and allocation of powers, his powers are civil only and only in the Supreme Court of the state.
[01:52:41.680 --> 01:52:49.680]  That would mean the legislature can't imbue him with powers beyond those assigned by constitutional mandate.
[01:52:49.680 --> 01:52:59.680]  So having him go after somebody as a criminal attorney, even for child support is not something the legislature has the power to authorize.
[01:52:59.680 --> 01:53:10.680]  Well, actually, the legislature has empowered the attorney general to act as a prosecuting attorney in a couple of places.
[01:53:10.680 --> 01:53:16.680]  The legislature has, but the Constitution didn't.
[01:53:16.680 --> 01:53:26.680]  Well, I don't think they created his office, but the Constitution didn't create all of the powers that he has.
[01:53:26.680 --> 01:53:33.680]  This is one of the things that the legislature has been given the power to do.
[01:53:33.680 --> 01:53:49.680]  And what they did was make the attorney general the process, the original prosecutor in a matter of a complaint under the Open Records Act against a district attorney.
[01:53:49.680 --> 01:54:04.680]  Most recently, they gave the prosecuting attorney concurrent jurisdiction on matters of accusations under Chapter 39 of the Penal Code, official oppression, official misconduct.
[01:54:04.680 --> 01:54:15.680]  Well, actually, what I saw there in the Open Records or the Public Information Act now is the complaint is to be filed with the county attorney of the county.
[01:54:15.680 --> 01:54:36.680]  Unless the county or district attorney, unless the complaint is against the county or district attorney, in which case it's to be filed with the attorney general.
[01:54:36.680 --> 01:54:49.680]  And that was up until recently the only time in Texas law where the attorney general was given a authority as a prosecuting attorney.
[01:54:49.680 --> 01:55:11.680]  And now with the addition to 39.01 under 39.015, the prosecutor has concurrent jurisdiction with the district attorney on accusations against public officials under Chapter 39.
[01:55:11.680 --> 01:55:20.680]  I have been down the road with that criminal charges against district attorneys over Open Records.
[01:55:20.680 --> 01:55:27.680]  I told a story about my district judge ordering me to leave the courtroom, courthouse, or he'll have me arrested.
[01:55:27.680 --> 01:55:44.680]  Well, when he did that, I was talking to the bailiff in his courtroom because the sheriff had sent me to talk to the bailiff to file criminal charges against the district attorney for violation of the Open Records Act.
[01:55:44.680 --> 01:56:00.680]  I have a question. Go ahead. If the district attorney is not representing either party, are they given leadway to act as a fact witness for the plaintiff?
[01:56:00.680 --> 01:56:03.680]  I would think so.
[01:56:03.680 --> 01:56:18.680]  I mean, okay, district attorney. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. You're saying that in this case, the attorney general acted as a witness. Right. Oh, yeah. They're prosecuting attorney. I called prosecuting attorneys as witnesses.
[01:56:18.680 --> 01:56:29.680]  And in this case, the attorney general is not the prosecuting attorney in this family law issue.
[01:56:29.680 --> 01:56:34.680]  He merely has authority to collect child support.
[01:56:34.680 --> 01:56:43.680]  And I would think absolutely he would be able to come and testify if it was an issue that was relevant to the court.
[01:56:43.680 --> 01:57:08.680]  Okay. My reason for asking would be that if they're not the client's attorney, then the attorney is given the leadway, I guess, to act as a fact witness, but not as a firsthand knowledge witness.
[01:57:08.680 --> 01:57:16.680]  Well, if he doesn't have firsthand knowledge, you can't be a competent fact witness.
[01:57:16.680 --> 01:57:17.680]  Okay.
[01:57:17.680 --> 01:57:43.680]  So, but, you know, if he has firsthand knowledge of collection activities concerning child support by the attorney general, he could certainly be called to testify in that regard. And as to attorneys being witnesses, an attorney when he's advocating a case cannot testify.
[01:57:43.680 --> 01:57:51.680]  Okay. But an attorney can be called to the stand and placed under oath. Then he could testify.
[01:57:51.680 --> 01:57:54.680]  Okay. All right.
[01:57:54.680 --> 01:58:01.680]  Okay. I hope all that makes sense. Is that all you have for us? If you want to hold on to the other side.
[01:58:01.680 --> 01:58:06.680]  That's all I have for you at the moment. You've answered my question quite thoroughly.
[01:58:06.680 --> 01:58:14.680]  Okay. This is Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Eddie Craig. We will go radio. We're going to our top out top of the hour break.
[01:58:14.680 --> 01:58:24.680]  Our calling number is 512-646-1984. We'll start into our third hour. So this is when it generally starts to pick up.
[01:58:24.680 --> 01:58:31.680]  So if you want to ask us a question, get on the board quickly so we're able to get to you.
[01:58:31.680 --> 01:58:39.680]  Okay. Again, the calling number 512-646-1984. We'll be right back.
[01:58:39.680 --> 01:58:57.680]  The Bible remains the most popular book in the world. Yet countless readers are frustrated because they struggle to understand it.
[01:58:57.680 --> 01:59:05.680]  Some new translations try to help by simplifying the text, but in the process can compromise the profound meaning of the Scripture.
[01:59:05.680 --> 01:59:17.680]  Enter the recovery version. First, this new translation is extremely faithful and accurate, but the real story is the more than 9,000 explanatory footnotes.
[01:59:17.680 --> 01:59:27.680]  Difficult and profound passages are opened up in a marvelous way, providing an entrance into the riches of the Word beyond which you've ever experienced before.
[01:59:27.680 --> 01:59:32.680]  Bibles for America would like to give you a free recovery version simply for the asking.
[01:59:32.680 --> 01:59:47.680]  This comprehensive yet compact study Bible is yours just by calling us toll free at 1-888-551-0102 or by ordering online at freestudybible.com.
[01:59:47.680 --> 02:00:03.680]  That's freestudybible.com. You are listening to the Logos Radio Network. LogosRadioNetwork.com.