ROL_2013-06-21_16k_Hr3-4.timecode

[00:15.600 --> 00:22.600]  June 17, 2013. Gold opened today at $1,384, silver at $21.85, and bitcoin is trading at
[00:24.640 --> 00:29.760]  $101. Support for The Liberty Beat comes from Tomorrow's Meals Today, South Austin,
[00:29.760 --> 00:36.760]  on market days every Saturday from 3-7 p.m. at 10106 Manchac Road. Information at tomorrowsmealstoday.com.
[00:37.480 --> 00:41.720]  And from Capital City Automotive, honest, reliable auto repair for vehicles foreign
[00:41.720 --> 00:48.720]  and domestic, online at capitalcityautoaustin.com. And now the news. Porkfest X is this week
[00:49.320 --> 00:53.880]  starting today and going through Sunday in Lancaster, New Hampshire. Porkfest is short
[00:53.880 --> 00:57.920]  for the Porcupine Freedom Festival and is organized by the Free State Project, an effort
[00:57.920 --> 01:03.320]  to bring 20,000 liberty activists to the state of New Hampshire. The event includes speakers,
[01:03.320 --> 01:07.680]  music, and one of the largest fully functional free markets in the country. Some of the speakers
[01:07.680 --> 01:12.920]  include Jeff Berwick, Dr. Robert Murphy, Antonio Beeler, David Friedman, and others. More
[01:12.920 --> 01:19.920]  information at porkfest.com. A new controversial phone app would allow
[01:22.320 --> 01:27.100]  people to snap a picture of a parking violation and send the photo to police, private parking
[01:27.100 --> 01:32.360]  operators, or city wardens. A police officer could then be dispatched to issue a ticket.
[01:32.360 --> 01:36.580]  The ticket resulted in a fine under the plan. Informants would get a cut deposited into
[01:36.580 --> 01:40.640]  their bank accounts or they could direct the cash to their favorite charities. The Spot
[01:40.640 --> 01:45.360]  Squad app co-founder Chris Johnson says he and his partners haven't yet signed any agreements
[01:45.360 --> 01:49.460]  to give informants a percentage of any ticket fines, but he adds that some private parking
[01:49.460 --> 01:56.460]  lot operators are in fact interested. In response to the recent revelations regarding
[01:58.960 --> 02:04.640]  spying by the NSA, a 28-year-old artist and developer from Brooklyn, New York has found
[02:04.640 --> 02:08.900]  a fun way of warning computer users about potential government surveillance. Justin
[02:08.900 --> 02:13.760]  Blinder released a plug-in for the web browser Firefox this week. His Dark Side of the Prism
[02:13.760 --> 02:18.160]  browser extension alerts web surfers of the possible surveillance by starting up a different
[02:18.160 --> 02:23.080]  song from Pink Floyd's 1973 classic, The Dark Side of the Moon, each time a questionable
[02:23.080 --> 02:30.080]  sight is crossed. Support for the Liberty Beat comes from Brave New Books, free-thinking
[02:30.080 --> 02:37.080]  materials for free-thinking people since 2006. In Austin at 1904, Guadalupe Street. And from
[02:37.220 --> 02:43.640]  Central Texas Gunworks, self-defense training, CHL forces, and firearm sales. In Austin at
[02:43.640 --> 02:50.000]  centraltexasgunworks.com. Jamin Shively, a former Microsoft corporate strategy manager,
[02:50.000 --> 02:54.200]  plans to create the first U.S. national marijuana brand. Shively held a press conference with
[02:54.200 --> 02:58.720]  former president of Mexico, Vicente Fox, announcing that he hopes to eventually import legally
[02:58.720 --> 03:05.720]  from Mexico.
[03:28.720 --> 03:35.720]  Okay, we are back. We're Andy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Real Law Radio, and we're talking
[03:36.880 --> 03:43.440]  to Ed in Texas. And Ed, if you haven't listened to our show a lot, you might not be familiar
[03:43.440 --> 03:50.440]  with what we call the routine. Primarily, what we do is due process. And we have a routine
[03:50.440 --> 03:57.440]  for working over the prosecutor. Ed and I talked earlier today, and I talked about trying
[04:02.840 --> 04:09.840]  to find a way to find remedy in an unfair world. And I'm in the process of building
[04:09.840 --> 04:16.840]  an electronic lawyer for that purpose. But in the meantime, one of the things we do is
[04:17.400 --> 04:24.400]  really hammer public officials. We file bar grievances against them. And bar grievances
[04:27.280 --> 04:31.880]  is one of the most powerful things we can do. We file judicial conduct complaints against
[04:31.880 --> 04:38.880]  the judges. If you file a bar grievance against a lawyer, the state bar association is going
[04:42.880 --> 04:46.880]  to get that grievance, and they're going to throw it in the trash. And they're going to
[04:46.880 --> 04:51.880]  send you a response back saying, we examined into your accusation and find it does not
[04:51.880 --> 04:56.880]  rise to the level of misconduct. And they're going to send you a response saying, we examined
[04:56.880 --> 05:03.880]  into your accusation and find it does not rise to the level of misconduct. Just like
[05:03.880 --> 05:09.880]  Mark said they did to him. Always the same thing. No matter what you accuse him of, they're
[05:09.880 --> 05:16.880]  always going to trash it. And that's a good thing. The reason that's a good thing is
[05:17.880 --> 05:23.880]  their insurance carrier knows they're going to throw it in the trash. So how is the insurance
[05:23.880 --> 05:30.880]  carrier's level of risk? By valid bar grievances? Heck, they throw them all in the trash. By
[05:30.880 --> 05:35.880]  the numbers, one bar grievance your first year of practice, they cancel immediately.
[05:35.880 --> 05:42.880]  Two bar grievances, if you've been practicing 20 years in one year period, they'll cancel.
[05:42.880 --> 05:49.880]  Three, they'll cancel your law firm's malpractice insurance. This drives lawyers wacko. And
[05:49.880 --> 05:58.880]  the worst part for the lawyer is if you file the grievance, they have to notify the insurance
[05:59.880 --> 06:09.880]  carrier, they won't be covered. And once it's filed, the lawyer is forbidden to speak to
[06:09.880 --> 06:16.380]  you about it. So you get to hammering big time and if he says one word about it, you
[06:16.380 --> 06:28.880]  grieve him for that. And all judges, judges are all bonded. And that's insurance. You
[06:29.880 --> 06:37.880]  file a judicial conduct complaint against the judge, his bond rating goes up. So we
[06:37.880 --> 06:46.880]  don't care what the, at the last subcommittee hearings on sunsetting the state commission
[06:46.880 --> 06:52.880]  on judicial conduct, man, I worked them over. But they don't care. They don't care what
[06:52.880 --> 07:00.880]  the judge does. They are not going to do anything to an elected judge. They're just not going
[07:00.880 --> 07:07.880]  to. They don't care what. They're just there as a public relations agency for the judges
[07:07.880 --> 07:15.880]  and the lawyers. Their problem is their insurance carrier doesn't feel that way. The only way
[07:15.880 --> 07:21.880]  I know how to get rid of a judge effectively is get his bond canceled. He can't be bonded,
[07:21.880 --> 07:26.880]  he's history. So does that sound like fun, Ed?
[07:26.880 --> 07:31.880]  There's another board that you can file against, too. And I can't remember the name of it,
[07:31.880 --> 07:38.880]  but I found it the other day that bypassed it. From what I understand, the bar grievances
[07:38.880 --> 07:49.880]  when they go before the bar, the bar doesn't have any power to chastise or castigate their
[07:49.880 --> 07:54.880]  attorneys. They don't have that power. There's another group, and I can't think of the name
[07:54.880 --> 07:59.880]  of it, I wish I knew it, that has the power to do it. And I forgot what it is. It's like
[07:59.880 --> 08:02.880]  the Judicial Conduct Board or something.
[08:02.880 --> 08:09.880]  Okay. This is all under the state bar. There is the Bar Association standards, and then
[08:09.880 --> 08:19.880]  there are the rules of disciplinary procedure. If they find against the lawyer on a grievance,
[08:19.880 --> 08:28.880]  if the bar finds against him, then they'll convene a hearing under the rules of disciplinary
[08:28.880 --> 08:36.880]  conduct. So it's part of the bar, but it's just a different group that they convene to
[08:36.880 --> 08:44.880]  hear the complaint once the bar is accepted. But the bar is not accepted unless there's
[08:44.880 --> 08:51.880]  political pressure on them. Everything is political. So we don't really care what the
[08:51.880 --> 08:58.880]  bar does. That's not something we can fix, but the insurance carrier takes care of what
[08:58.880 --> 09:04.880]  we need taken care of. And that's why I put up the site bargrievance.net. You can go on
[09:04.880 --> 09:14.880]  that site, fill out a bar grievance, and it will let you download and print. And it'll
[09:14.880 --> 09:22.880]  also keep a copy of the bar grievance on the website. So with the name of the file, the
[09:22.880 --> 09:29.880]  concatenated name of the lawyer. So if you do a search on his first name, last name,
[09:29.880 --> 09:37.880]  you'll get a hit right on this bar grievance. That's gonna make them nuts. At least that's
[09:37.880 --> 09:48.880]  the idea. So I did wanna talk about the case on the gun laws.
[09:48.880 --> 09:59.880]  Okay. All right. The name of the case is the District of Columbia versus Heller, and that's
[09:59.880 --> 10:10.880]  H-E-L-L-E-R. And it can be found in volume 554 of the U.S. Supreme Court Reports. Now,
[10:10.880 --> 10:15.880]  it doesn't have a, didn't give the page on the internet what page it's on, but it doesn't
[10:15.880 --> 10:21.880]  matter because if you go to the volume and you look it up, it's 2008 is the case.
[10:21.880 --> 10:25.880]  Okay. It was D.C. versus?
[10:25.880 --> 10:29.880]  Versus Heller, H-E-L-L-E-R.
[10:29.880 --> 10:37.880]  H-E-L-L-E-R. Okay. That should be easy enough. If you do D.C. v. Heller gun control, you'll
[10:37.880 --> 10:40.880]  probably get it. Or gun issues, you'll probably get a hit on it.
[10:40.880 --> 10:47.880]  You can find it. It'll come right up because I found it on justia.com right quick. It came
[10:47.880 --> 10:55.880]  right up. So what I wanna say about the case is to start with, I cannot believe that no
[10:55.880 --> 11:01.880]  one hardly knows about this case, but then again, I can because whenever this case came
[11:01.880 --> 11:11.880]  down, everyone should be aware that the media would not touch it with a 10-foot pole because
[11:11.880 --> 11:17.880]  of what it said. And so nobody heard about it. They might have said in the very beginning
[11:17.880 --> 11:23.880]  that somebody was going up on a gun issue in the very beginning, but just like always,
[11:23.880 --> 11:28.880]  whenever a case comes down that's against the government, then the media is going to
[11:28.880 --> 11:35.880]  treat it like it's a hot potato. They're not going to touch it. And they didn't. So this
[11:35.880 --> 11:42.880]  and the government, because of what was said in this case, the government is flipping completely
[11:42.880 --> 11:48.880]  out right now. That's why they're going after all the guns they can possibly get because
[11:48.880 --> 11:53.880]  they know that because of this decision that if there's always the potential of somebody
[11:53.880 --> 11:59.880]  coming along and saying, hey, I'm gonna test out the law of carrying a gun out in the open
[11:59.880 --> 12:08.880]  in the public because this case allowed for that. And I cannot believe, I do not disagree
[12:08.880 --> 12:13.880]  with one word that was said in the case other than the dissenting opinion, of course. The
[12:13.880 --> 12:19.880]  dissenting opinion is just all wacky. And there was four justice, it was four to five
[12:19.880 --> 12:26.880]  decisions. The ones who were on the winning side, I guess if you want to call it, the
[12:26.880 --> 12:39.880]  majority side, were Justice Scalia, Justice Thomas, even the CJ Roberts, and let's see,
[12:39.880 --> 12:42.880]  Alito and one other.
[12:42.880 --> 12:46.880]  I forgot what the other one's name was. I can't think of his name.
[12:46.880 --> 12:53.880]  Okay, I've got the case up, at least a summary of it. Let me read the summary. Handgun possession
[12:53.880 --> 13:00.880]  is banned under District of Columbia law. The law prohibits the registration of handguns
[13:00.880 --> 13:05.880]  and makes it a crime to carry an unregistered firearm. Furthermore, all lawfully owned firearms
[13:05.880 --> 13:11.880]  must be kept unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock unless they're being
[13:11.880 --> 13:16.880]  used for lawful recreation activities or located in a place of business.
[13:16.880 --> 13:23.880]  Dick Heller, plaintiff, is a special police officer for the District of Columbia. The
[13:23.880 --> 13:28.880]  District refused Heller's application to register a handgun he wished to keep in his home. Heller
[13:28.880 --> 13:33.880]  filed this lawsuit in the Federal District Court for the District of Columbia on Second
[13:33.880 --> 13:38.880]  Amendment grounds. Heller sought an injunction against enforcement of the bar on handgun
[13:38.880 --> 13:43.880]  registration. The licensing requirement prohibiting the carrying of a firearm in the home without
[13:43.880 --> 13:49.880]  a license and the trigger lock requirement insofar as it prohibits the use of functional
[13:49.880 --> 13:54.880]  firearms within the home. The District Court dismissed Heller's complaint. The Court of
[13:54.880 --> 14:00.880]  Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit reversed and directed the Court to enter summary
[14:00.880 --> 14:05.880]  judgment in favor of the District of Columbia. The Court of Appeals construed Heller's
[14:05.880 --> 14:11.880]  complaint as seeking the right to render a firearm operable and carry it in his home
[14:11.880 --> 14:17.880]  only when necessary for self-defense and held that the total ban on handguns violated the
[14:17.880 --> 14:23.880]  individual right to possess firearms under the Second Amendment. The Supreme Court
[14:23.880 --> 14:31.880]  granted certiorari. Issue. What rights are protected by the Second Amendment? Holding
[14:31.880 --> 14:38.880]  and rules Scalia. The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess firearms
[14:38.880 --> 14:44.880]  unconnected with service or in militia and to use that firearm for traditionally lawful
[14:44.880 --> 14:52.880]  purposes such as self-defense within the home. I won't go into all of the text,
[14:52.880 --> 15:00.880]  but it seems to uphold the right to keep the firearm and it doesn't reference
[15:00.880 --> 15:09.880]  registering it here. Ed, you've read the case. Does it go to the requirement to register?
[15:09.880 --> 15:15.880]  Well, in the case, first of all, I want to say this before I get into that. Okay, I want
[15:15.880 --> 15:22.880]  everybody to notice. This is funny. It's hilarious as a matter of fact that when the
[15:22.880 --> 15:30.880]  appellate court, the Court of Appeals found in favor of Heller, the government is taking
[15:30.880 --> 15:36.880]  this case to the United States Supreme Court. So what they did was they really screwed up.
[15:36.880 --> 15:41.880]  The government screwed up big time because they weren't expecting the Supreme Court
[15:41.880 --> 15:47.880]  to do such a great job in favor of the people when they appealed it. But it is the government
[15:47.880 --> 15:52.880]  appealing to the United States Supreme Court, not Heller. Heller got his decision in the
[15:52.880 --> 16:04.880]  Court of Appeals, okay? Anyway, in the case, of course, Heller, he's a 66-year-old police
[16:04.880 --> 16:12.880]  officer who merely wanted to have a gun at home and he didn't like the D.C. rules that
[16:12.880 --> 16:23.880]  practically banned completely anybody having a gun at all in D.C. And this law was passed
[16:23.880 --> 16:33.880]  in 1975, I believe it was, 1975. And so from 1975 to 2008, they've been banning guns in
[16:33.880 --> 16:39.880]  D.C. and nobody has challenged it until now, until 2008. But anyway, he didn't...
[16:39.880 --> 16:44.880]  Okay, okay, hang on, hang on, we're about to go to break. This is Randy Kelton, Deborah
[16:44.880 --> 16:51.880]  Stevens, Rule of Law Radio. Our call-in number, 512-646-1984. Give us a call. The calls generally
[16:51.880 --> 17:10.880]  build up toward the end, so give us a call, get in line, we'll be right back.
[17:21.880 --> 17:35.880]  Wow Tangy, I think I love you. But I want to know for sure. So come on, neutrify me.
[17:35.880 --> 17:38.880]  I love you.
[17:38.880 --> 17:44.880]  Did you know that you can extend your life by as much as 15% by taking longevity products
[17:44.880 --> 17:50.880]  like Tangy Tangerine? My Mrs. lost so much weight by taking Tangy Tangerine, she eventually
[17:50.880 --> 17:58.880]  disappeared, which will probably let me live an extra 15 years. Go to logosradionetwork.com
[17:58.880 --> 18:23.880]  and click the longevity banner.
[18:28.880 --> 18:57.880]  That's ruleoflawradio.com or email michaelemirras at yahoo.com.
[18:58.880 --> 19:01.880]  To learn how to stop debt collectors now.
[19:28.880 --> 19:41.880]  Okay, we are back. Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Rule of Law Radio, and we are talking
[19:41.880 --> 19:50.880]  to Ed in Texas. And hang on just a second, Ed, I have Johnny in Texas. He wanted to
[19:50.880 --> 19:55.880]  add to this conversation and has another case. Johnny, you there?
[19:55.880 --> 19:57.880]  Yep, I'm here.
[19:57.880 --> 20:03.880]  Okay. You had another case to add to the conversation?
[20:03.880 --> 20:10.880]  Well, I actually, Randy, I was going to ask you if you were aware of a particular case.
[20:10.880 --> 20:20.880]  I have about 300 hours of law school lectures that people have recorded. And in one of the
[20:20.880 --> 20:28.880]  lectures, one of the law professors was talking about a case where a guy in Texas was charged
[20:28.880 --> 20:36.880]  and arrested for being too close to a school while he was in possession of a firearm. And
[20:36.880 --> 20:42.880]  when they arrested the guy, they kind of went back and forth as to whether they were going
[20:42.880 --> 20:49.880]  to charge him with state offenses or federal offenses. And they decided to go ahead and
[20:49.880 --> 20:56.880]  charge him under federal statutes. And he was convicted. He appealed it. The appellate
[20:56.880 --> 21:02.880]  court upheld the trial court's decision. He took it all the way to the Supreme Court.
[21:02.880 --> 21:07.880]  And at the Supreme Court level, they reversed it. And they reversed it on the grounds that
[21:07.880 --> 21:17.880]  the federal government only has power to regulate intrastate commerce. And this school was not
[21:17.880 --> 21:22.880]  an intrastate commercial entity and the guy hadn't crossed any state lines or anything
[21:22.880 --> 21:27.880]  like that. I was going to see if you knew what that case was. I can find it again. I'll
[21:27.880 --> 21:31.880]  just have to watch a bunch of those videos and try to figure it out again.
[21:31.880 --> 21:36.880]  No, I don't have that case off the top. I'm not even familiar with that case.
[21:36.880 --> 21:40.880]  Okay. Well, I'll find it again and I'll send it over to you.
[21:40.880 --> 21:49.880]  Okay. That's not one. This is more Larry Weist does a show on gun control. It's more
[21:49.880 --> 21:58.880]  his issue. I personally don't have any guns and I don't like guns. When I was in the
[21:58.880 --> 22:04.880]  military, I was a weapons specialist. But I don't like guns personally and that's
[22:04.880 --> 22:09.880]  because I spent too much time on the sharp end of those things. But when it comes to
[22:09.880 --> 22:13.880]  gun rights, I want everybody to have them because I'm very familiar with the effect
[22:13.880 --> 22:21.880]  of it. Someone sent me a video this morning that showed a guy pull up behind his building,
[22:21.880 --> 22:26.880]  got out, went inside, came back out, locked the door, got in his car and a guy ran around
[22:26.880 --> 22:32.880]  the corner of the building next to him, run up and stuck a gun in his face. The guy reached
[22:32.880 --> 22:38.880]  up and swept the gun aside and shot the guy. Well, he turned to run and he reached out
[22:38.880 --> 22:43.880]  the window and shot him two more times. Another one was coming around the corner with a weapon
[22:43.880 --> 22:50.880]  in his hand. And when he saw this guy blasting away on his buddy, he hit the road.
[22:50.880 --> 22:58.880]  And that goes, that's a great deterrent. This guy's not going to be carjacking anybody
[22:58.880 --> 23:07.880]  else with a weapon. But you know, it's been my experience that a armed society is a polite
[23:07.880 --> 23:16.880]  society and all this stuff the government's pushing because of these shootings. I'm
[23:16.880 --> 23:23.880]  not sure if they're not government orchestrated in any way, but for whatever reason, they're
[23:23.880 --> 23:31.880]  trying to use this to promote gun control. It's not working. Argyle is a small town
[23:31.880 --> 23:35.880]  just north of me. I just heard on the radio recently, they authorized their teachers to
[23:35.880 --> 23:42.880]  carry guns. I listened to a Channel 13 program about two people advocating gun controls.
[23:42.880 --> 23:49.880]  And they were saying that it's just common sense to control guns. There's no such
[23:49.880 --> 23:59.880]  thing. We have been trying to legislate away and eliminate prostitution for about 6000
[23:59.880 --> 24:07.880]  years of human history. How's that working Bubba? We set up this war on drugs to eliminate
[24:07.880 --> 24:12.880]  illegal drugs. How's that working? They got worse. The only thing that slowed down
[24:12.880 --> 24:16.880]  the use of crack with the crack user said, man, that stuff's too dangerous. We need
[24:16.880 --> 24:22.880]  to find something else. And controlling guns is they're not going to keep them out of
[24:22.880 --> 24:28.880]  the hands of the bad guys. And that's all there is to it. So by taking them away from
[24:28.880 --> 24:34.880]  the good guys, you make sure the bad guys have the advantage. It is my opinion. When
[24:34.880 --> 24:41.880]  someone goes to a turkey shoot, they do not want the turkey shooting back. So that's
[24:41.880 --> 24:47.880]  my opinion on that issue. Go ahead, Ed.
[24:47.880 --> 24:59.880]  Can you hear me? Now we can hear you. You kind of crapped out there for a second.
[24:59.880 --> 25:09.880]  Okay. I will say this, though, that the court in this case did use our did that an exception
[25:09.880 --> 25:18.880]  would be around schools, that it's okay for a school to prohibit weapons being around
[25:18.880 --> 25:27.880]  a school, okay. But as far as any other places, the only other exceptions they made were common
[25:27.880 --> 25:36.880]  sense exceptions, like people who are mentally ill or a felon who has, they didn't say,
[25:36.880 --> 25:42.880]  has used a gun before, but that's the way it should be for raw purposes. But that's
[25:42.880 --> 25:48.880]  what they alluded to was that if you've been charged with robbing a store with a gun, then
[25:48.880 --> 25:52.880]  that's a felony and you should be prohibited from having a gun. But I think that's the
[25:52.880 --> 25:59.880]  only person that they would say that could be denied the right to have a gun is someone
[25:59.880 --> 26:02.880]  like that. Not just any felon, for example.
[26:02.880 --> 26:08.880]  And I don't think there's, I don't think anyone would have an objection. That's not
[26:08.880 --> 26:16.880]  a blanket restriction. That's a specific restriction based on specific behavior.
[26:16.880 --> 26:22.880]  Yes, yes. And obvious places where it would be dangerous around kids. I mean, duh. I mean,
[26:22.880 --> 26:29.880]  that's just kind of a duh thing. They have a right to prohibit them in those places.
[26:29.880 --> 26:43.880]  You're kind of breaking up there. Okay. Okay. Hang on just a minute, Ed. My internet's
[26:43.880 --> 26:47.880]  been doing that all day. It's kind of flaking in and out and yours is flaking out from the
[26:47.880 --> 26:49.880]  moment. It should be back in a second.
[26:49.880 --> 26:50.880]  Sorry about that.
[26:50.880 --> 26:52.880]  Okay. Come on back. You're better now.
[26:52.880 --> 26:57.880]  Okay. I promise you that if you had a bazooka on your shoulder and you were walking down
[26:57.880 --> 27:03.880]  the street and you whistled up a cop and it was loaded and you asked the cop what you
[27:03.880 --> 27:09.880]  were going to do about it, this case would cover you because they brought up some issues.
[27:09.880 --> 27:16.880]  In this case, on that very issue that, you know, one specific instance was where they
[27:16.880 --> 27:26.880]  said that some people have said that the only kinds of weapons that the Second Amendment
[27:26.880 --> 27:34.880]  would cover were the types of weapons that they used in the day. And Scalia says that's
[27:34.880 --> 27:41.880]  ridiculous because that's not how we interpret constitutional law, he says. He says, just
[27:41.880 --> 27:45.880]  like they do not interpret, and he went on to say, just like we don't interpret the
[27:45.880 --> 27:51.880]  First Amendment to mean the same speech of the day, that as we have progressed in our
[27:51.880 --> 27:57.880]  society, there's other ways of putting out speech, and we've covered those as well
[27:57.880 --> 28:02.880]  in First Amendment cases, so we're not going to cover the Second Amendment and use such
[28:02.880 --> 28:12.880]  ridiculous elements as that, as saying that only things that were covered were flintlocks
[28:12.880 --> 28:18.880]  and swords and stuff like that. They said that's ridiculous. We don't go by that.
[28:18.880 --> 28:23.880]  We go by the day. And he said, they went on to say, I don't know exactly where they
[28:23.880 --> 28:35.880]  said it, on what page, but they did say that we're not so sure that today that the weapons
[28:35.880 --> 28:40.880]  are the common weapons on the street that are the choice of the citizens, and that's
[28:40.880 --> 28:46.880]  the ones they really pointed to in that case, and that was pistols. He said, I'm not so
[28:46.880 --> 28:53.880]  sure that those are the only ones that would be effective against bombers and tanks. I
[28:53.880 --> 28:58.880]  thought that was interesting, because he brought that up, because that pointed to the fact
[28:58.880 --> 29:04.880]  that even you would have, that he inferred that even a person would have the right to
[29:04.880 --> 29:11.880]  have other types of weapons, okay? Well, he was, and we're about to go to break, he was
[29:11.880 --> 29:18.880]  referring to the reason we have the Second Amendment, and it's not for protection of
[29:18.880 --> 29:24.880]  ourselves. It's to protect ourselves against the government, to overthrow the government
[29:24.880 --> 29:30.880]  if necessary. That was the reason for the Second Amendment, and that's the reason we
[29:30.880 --> 29:34.880]  might need the bazookas and the higher powered weapons.
[29:34.880 --> 29:39.880]  Okay, hang on, we're about to go to break. This is Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Rule
[29:39.880 --> 29:49.880]  of Law Radio, our call-in number, 512-646-1984, give us a call. We're in our third hour, it
[29:49.880 --> 29:54.880]  tends to build up toward the end, so if you want to get on the air, give us a call, get
[29:54.880 --> 30:03.880]  in line. We'll be right back.
[30:03.880 --> 30:07.880]  While the rest of us ooh and aah over what Hollywood stars are wearing on the red carpet,
[30:07.880 --> 30:12.880]  Paco Rostain is up to his elbows in their garbage, literally. I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht,
[30:12.880 --> 30:15.880]  and I'll be back to talk trash in just a moment.
[30:15.880 --> 30:20.880]  Privacy is under attack. When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back
[30:20.880 --> 30:25.880]  again. And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[30:25.880 --> 30:31.880]  So protect your rights, say no to surveillance, and keep your information to yourself. Privacy,
[30:31.880 --> 30:36.880]  it's worth hanging on to. This public service announcement is brought to you by StartPage.com,
[30:36.880 --> 30:44.880]  the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing. Start over with StartPage.
[30:44.880 --> 30:49.880]  Your trash speaks volumes about you. Just ask garbage snoop artist Paco Rostain. He
[30:49.880 --> 30:54.880]  profiles luminaries like Madonna and Mel Gibson by analyzing their discards and photographing
[30:54.880 --> 30:59.880]  the evidence. His finds range from the trivial, like Sharon Stone's 12 empty cans of peach
[30:59.880 --> 31:04.880]  halves, to the downright embarrassing, like the adult diaper from Larry King's trash.
[31:04.880 --> 31:10.880]  Larry vehemently denied it was his. The cognoscenti plunked down upwards of $6,000 per framed
[31:10.880 --> 31:15.880]  photo of images like Arnold Schwarzenegger's Cuban cigar stubs. Isn't this illegal? Nope.
[31:15.880 --> 31:19.880]  In most U.S. jurisdictions, it's perfectly legal to go through someone else's curbside
[31:19.880 --> 31:24.880]  trash without permission, even yours. So even if you're not rich and famous, think before
[31:24.880 --> 31:31.880]  you toss. I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht. More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[31:31.880 --> 31:36.880]  This is Building 7, a 47-story skyscraper that fell on the afternoon of September 11th.
[31:36.880 --> 31:42.880]  The government says that fire brought it down. However, 1,500 architects and engineers concluded
[31:42.880 --> 31:46.880]  it was a controlled demolition. Over 6,000 of my fellow service members have given their
[31:46.880 --> 31:50.880]  lives, but thousands of my fellow first responders are dying. I'm not a conspiracy theorist.
[31:50.880 --> 31:54.880]  I'm a structural engineer. I'm a New York City correction officer. I'm an Air Force pilot.
[31:54.880 --> 32:00.880]  I'm a father who lost his son. We're Americans, and we deserve the truth. Go to RememberBuilding7.org
[32:00.880 --> 32:01.880]  today.
[32:01.880 --> 32:07.880]  It is so enlightening to listen to 90.1 FM, but finding things on the Internet isn't so
[32:07.880 --> 32:10.880]  easy, and neither is finding like-minded people to share it with.
[32:10.880 --> 32:13.880]  Oh, well, I guess you haven't heard of Brave New Books, then.
[32:13.880 --> 32:14.880]  Brave New Books?
[32:14.880 --> 32:19.880]  Yes. Brave New Books has all the books and DVDs you're looking for by authors like Alex
[32:19.880 --> 32:24.880]  Jones, Ron Paul, and G. Edward Griffin. They even stock inner food, Berkey products, and
[32:24.880 --> 32:25.880]  Calvin soaps.
[32:25.880 --> 32:28.880]  There's no way a place like that exists.
[32:28.880 --> 32:34.880]  Go check it out for yourself. It's downtown at 1904 Guadalupe Street, just south of UT.
[32:34.880 --> 32:37.880]  By UT, there's never anywhere to park down there.
[32:37.880 --> 32:43.880]  Actually, they now offer a free hour of parking for paying customers at the 500 MLK parking
[32:43.880 --> 32:45.880]  facility, just behind the bookstore.
[32:45.880 --> 32:48.880]  It does exist, but when are they open?
[32:48.880 --> 32:54.880]  Monday through Saturday, 11 AM to 9 PM, and 1 to 6 PM on Sundays. So give them a call
[32:54.880 --> 33:00.880]  at 512-480-2503, or check out their events page at bravenewbookstore.com.
[33:24.880 --> 33:38.880]  Okay, we are back. Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Wheel of Law Radio, and we're talking to Ed
[33:38.880 --> 33:39.880]  in Texas.
[33:39.880 --> 33:47.880]  Okay, Ed, what is your opinion on gun control?
[33:47.880 --> 33:58.880]  Well, gun control, there can be lawful gun control that would come up to the muster of
[33:58.880 --> 34:05.880]  the Second Amendment, and obviously we've already spoken of some, like not allowing
[34:05.880 --> 34:15.880]  anyone under the age of 21 to have a gun, not allowing idiots and lunatics, people who
[34:15.880 --> 34:22.880]  have a mental disorder to have guns, and people who have used guns in the past for unlawful
[34:22.880 --> 34:29.880]  purposes. Those are the things that are common sense that the law should regulate.
[34:29.880 --> 34:40.880]  But when it comes to the law-abiding citizen, and if he has no record of using a gun for
[34:40.880 --> 34:46.880]  unlawful purposes, I believe that he should have any type of weapon that he needs, other
[34:46.880 --> 34:54.880]  than now, and they said in the case, other than dangerous or unusual weapons, like hand
[34:54.880 --> 35:00.880]  grenades or dynamite, walking up and down the street. You're not going to protect yourself
[35:00.880 --> 35:06.880]  against someone. That's not a tool. Protect yourself against someone robbing you or doing
[35:06.880 --> 35:11.880]  something to you and your family on the street. Those are not things you would use. You'd
[35:11.880 --> 35:16.880]  use them in war. But you don't need those kind of things, because they are dangerous
[35:16.880 --> 35:21.880]  to the public. So those kind of things they can regulate. You shouldn't be allowed to
[35:21.880 --> 35:28.880]  carry hand grenades down the street. I agree with that. And also, in our society, the way
[35:28.880 --> 35:39.880]  society is now, not knowing really how guns work, if a person were to go and pick up,
[35:39.880 --> 35:44.880]  get a gun for the first time in their life to protect their family, I believe that it
[35:44.880 --> 35:53.880]  would be a, would come up to the Second Amendment muster for a state to write a regulation that
[35:53.880 --> 36:01.880]  all the citizens who have guns should attend, or should attend a school to learn how to
[36:01.880 --> 36:09.880]  use the gun and find out what's... Okay, okay. Hold on here. Hold on here. Is this what you're
[36:09.880 --> 36:18.880]  speaking to? Is this what you think would be good law or what would be allowable? Well,
[36:18.880 --> 36:22.880]  it would come up to the Second Amendment muster. That's what I'm talking about. If somebody
[36:22.880 --> 36:29.880]  was to challenge, for example, they're forcing everybody in the state to go to school to
[36:29.880 --> 36:33.880]  learn how to use a gun, then the court would turn them down. I know they would. They would
[36:33.880 --> 36:38.880]  say that's just fine. They can't do that, because that's to protect the interest of
[36:38.880 --> 36:43.880]  the public at large, which is not a problem. I don't have a problem with going to a school
[36:43.880 --> 36:49.880]  as long as they don't run the price of the school up so high that you can't afford...
[36:49.880 --> 37:00.880]  My problem with any kind of intrusion of that nature, if there is a requirement that you
[37:00.880 --> 37:07.880]  go to some sort of training, that's going to be in conjunction with some sort of registration.
[37:07.880 --> 37:14.880]  Well, you don't have to have registration, just a receipt that you went to the school.
[37:14.880 --> 37:24.880]  Okay. Where I'm going here is when I hear that, I've got quite a bit of experience with
[37:24.880 --> 37:31.880]  our federal government, especially from being in the military, and they don't handle anything
[37:31.880 --> 37:38.880]  well. They overblow their power. No matter what we give them, they will blow it up as
[37:38.880 --> 37:46.880]  much as they can. And I am concerned about any inroads on the Second Amendment that we
[37:46.880 --> 37:53.880]  allow that aren't specifically authorized by the Second Amendment. And the way I read
[37:53.880 --> 37:57.880]  it, there are no controls authorized.
[37:57.880 --> 38:03.880]  No, there's not. There's not really any controls other than, and when you read the case, you'll
[38:03.880 --> 38:09.880]  see what I'm talking about here. They went back and they looked up all of the possible
[38:09.880 --> 38:14.880]  regulations in the Constitution and in the laws, and God knows, I mean, they went way
[38:14.880 --> 38:22.880]  on back to English law all the way back to Magna Carta. And so what they brought forward
[38:22.880 --> 38:28.880]  was that common sense, this common sense stuck. They didn't bring forward anything that was
[38:28.880 --> 38:35.880]  so lunatic as the dissenting opinion brought up, and the dissenting opinion barely said
[38:35.880 --> 38:41.880]  that the issue of the Second Amendment only goes to the military, that it does not go
[38:41.880 --> 38:47.880]  to the individual citizens in the state, and the federal government can regulate when it
[38:47.880 --> 38:56.880]  comes to guns, effectively regulate the citizenry. But the court rejected that argument and said
[38:56.880 --> 39:00.880]  that that's ludicrous, that's not what the Second Amendment says, and that's not what
[39:00.880 --> 39:12.880]  it means. And they gave a situation where they said, if that was true, then how could
[39:12.880 --> 39:19.880]  you have a militia if the citizens didn't have any guns? They brought that up. So the
[39:19.880 --> 39:28.880]  point is, is that the people had to have guns. The first acts of Congress on those issues
[39:28.880 --> 39:34.880]  about, that were brought up on the regulation of firearms and that kind of thing, and the
[39:34.880 --> 39:38.880]  regulation of the militia, I forgot what the name of it, National Firearm Act, I think
[39:38.880 --> 39:44.880]  it was, and I don't remember what year it was, brought up those facts. And if you look
[39:44.880 --> 39:54.880]  into your own state laws, you'll see that there were requirements for every male citizen
[39:54.880 --> 40:03.880]  above the age of 21. He had to have a gun, and he had to have so much ammunition at all
[40:03.880 --> 40:10.880]  times, so that if Congress at some point in time decided, or there was a problem in some
[40:10.880 --> 40:18.880]  state, and the militia needed to be put together as a unit to fight against some attack, then
[40:18.880 --> 40:25.880]  they could, everybody would already be familiar with the guns used, and all they had to do
[40:25.880 --> 40:29.880]  is just, Congress had to say, okay, we need you guys to get together and go after the
[40:29.880 --> 40:34.880]  enemy, you know, and that's the way it was supposed to be. But the court said that that's,
[40:34.880 --> 40:42.880]  how could that occur? You know, they wouldn't even be familiar with guns if all of a sudden
[40:42.880 --> 40:47.880]  we had a need for the militia, and all of a sudden Congress said, okay, you guys go
[40:47.880 --> 40:52.880]  get them, and nobody had any guns, and weren't familiar with them. If they went to get one,
[40:52.880 --> 40:56.880]  they might shoot each other, you know, so they're going to have to be familiar with
[40:56.880 --> 41:03.880]  them. So they brought all this up in the case showing that the issue of the militia is second
[41:03.880 --> 41:10.880]  to every, I mean, well, it's kind of primary, but it's also secondary to the issue of
[41:10.880 --> 41:22.880]  having guns, because the right really belongs to the individual first, so that he can protect
[41:22.880 --> 41:30.880]  himself, he can hunt and survive. Okay, in those days and times, they had to have a gun
[41:30.880 --> 41:36.880]  to survive. They had to go out and kill their own gang. So that's original intent, all right?
[41:36.880 --> 41:43.880]  And so they said that the citizenry had to have the guns in order to be effective in
[41:43.880 --> 41:46.880]  a militia. So they brought all this stuff up.
[41:46.880 --> 41:51.880]  One of the issues that I was bringing up a while ago, I want to read that section where
[41:51.880 --> 41:57.880]  he talked about that issue, he said, Scalia said, we also recognize another important
[41:57.880 --> 42:03.880]  limitation on the right to keep and carry arms. Miller said, this is a case, Miller
[42:03.880 --> 42:08.880]  versus U.S., I think, said, as we have explained that the sorts of weapons protected were those
[42:08.880 --> 42:15.880]  in common use at the time, end quote, unquote. We think that limitation is fairly supported
[42:15.880 --> 42:22.880]  by the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons.
[42:22.880 --> 42:28.880]  It may be objected to, I mean, I'm sorry, it may be objected that if weapons that are
[42:28.880 --> 42:34.880]  most useful in military service, that is, M16 rifles and the like, may be banned, then
[42:34.880 --> 42:39.880]  the Second Amendment right is completely detached from the prefatory clause, the prefatory
[42:39.880 --> 42:47.880]  clause being the very first part of the Second Amendment. But as we have said, the conception
[42:47.880 --> 42:52.880]  of the militia at the time of the Second Amendment ratification was the body of all citizens
[42:52.880 --> 42:58.880]  capable of military service who would bring the sorts of lawful weapons that they possessed
[42:58.880 --> 43:06.880]  at home to militia duty. It may well be true that today that a militia, to be as effective
[43:06.880 --> 43:12.880]  as militias in the 18th century, would require sophisticated arms. That's highly unusual
[43:12.880 --> 43:18.880]  in society at large. Indeed, it may be true that no amount of small arms could be useful
[43:18.880 --> 43:24.880]  against modern-day bombers and tanks. But the fact that modern developments have limited
[43:24.880 --> 43:29.880]  the degree of it between the prefatory clause and the protective right cannot change our
[43:29.880 --> 43:34.880]  interpretation of right. So you see, they're pointing to the fact that if they're going
[43:34.880 --> 43:40.880]  to say that guns were relegated to the militia and the citizens all have a right to have
[43:40.880 --> 43:44.880]  the types of weapons that's necessary to fight in a war.
[43:44.880 --> 43:49.880]  Okay, hang on. We're about to go to break. Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Wheel of Law
[43:49.880 --> 44:11.880]  Radio are calling number 512-646-1984. We'll be right back.
[44:19.880 --> 44:27.880]  There's no way a place like that exists.
[44:27.880 --> 44:33.880]  Go check it out for yourself. It's downtown at 1904 Guadalupe Street, just south of UT.
[44:33.880 --> 44:36.880]  By UT, there's never anywhere to park down there.
[44:36.880 --> 44:42.880]  Actually, they now offer a free hour of parking for paying customers at the 500 MLK parking
[44:42.880 --> 44:44.880]  facility just behind the bookstore.
[44:44.880 --> 44:47.880]  It does exist. But when are they open?
[44:47.880 --> 44:52.880]  Monday through Saturday, 11 a.m. to 9 p.m. and 1 to 6 p.m. on Sundays.
[44:52.880 --> 45:01.880]  So give them a call at 512-480-2503 or check out their events page at bravenewbookstore.com.
[45:01.880 --> 45:04.880]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[45:04.880 --> 45:10.880]  Win your case without an attorney with Juris Dictionary, the affordable, easy to understand
[45:10.880 --> 45:16.880]  4CD course that will show you how in 24 hours, step by step.
[45:16.880 --> 45:19.880]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing.
[45:19.880 --> 45:23.880]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[45:23.880 --> 45:28.880]  Thousands have won with our step by step course and now you can too.
[45:28.880 --> 45:35.880]  Juris Dictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case winning experience.
[45:35.880 --> 45:40.880]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand about the principles
[45:40.880 --> 45:44.880]  and practices that control our American courts.
[45:44.880 --> 45:53.880]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases, pro se tactics and much more.
[45:53.880 --> 46:15.880]  Please visit RuleOfLawRadio.com and click on the banner or call toll free 866-LAW-EASY.
[46:24.880 --> 46:30.880]  Always I must be careful what I'm wishing for.
[46:30.880 --> 46:35.880]  When I'm hungry I like to know just what I'm fishing for.
[46:35.880 --> 46:41.880]  I ain't asking for much, I ain't trying to be no glutton.
[46:41.880 --> 46:47.880]  I'm just here making my living pushing buttons.
[46:47.880 --> 46:53.880]  I get my message out to anyone in shouting distance.
[46:53.880 --> 46:59.880]  I vote for bravery and against slavery showing resistance.
[46:59.880 --> 47:04.880]  First I'm crawling, then I'm walking, then I start strutting.
[47:04.880 --> 47:11.880]  I'm just so glad to make my living pushing buttons.
[47:11.880 --> 47:17.880]  Okay, we are back. Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Wheel of Law Radio, we're talking to Ed in Texas.
[47:17.880 --> 47:20.880]  Ed, we're going to have to move along off this subject.
[47:20.880 --> 47:28.880]  We've got two or three more callers and we're running out of time.
[47:28.880 --> 47:32.880]  Do you have any other comments about this gun control issue?
[47:32.880 --> 47:38.880]  Let me read the end of the case to give you what the court said at the end of the case
[47:38.880 --> 47:42.880]  because that's really the crux of the whole thing.
[47:42.880 --> 47:47.880]  Let's see here if I can find the end of it here.
[47:47.880 --> 47:52.880]  Ooh, let's see.
[47:52.880 --> 47:58.880]  I had it here a second ago and then I lost it.
[47:58.880 --> 48:01.880]  Okay, eight, seven, six, five, four, three, two, one.
[48:01.880 --> 48:05.880]  Okay, should be somewhere close here.
[48:05.880 --> 48:11.880]  Okay, descending, okay.
[48:11.880 --> 48:17.880]  Now I've got to go by the footnotes.
[48:17.880 --> 48:23.880]  Okay, why are you looking for that?
[48:23.880 --> 48:25.880]  Okay, did you find it?
[48:25.880 --> 48:26.880]  Yes.
[48:26.880 --> 48:29.880]  Okay, go ahead.
[48:29.880 --> 48:34.880]  In sum, we hold that the district's ban on handgun possession in the home violates the second amendment.
[48:34.880 --> 48:42.880]  As does its prohibition against rendering any lawful firearm in the home operable for the purpose of immediate self-defense.
[48:42.880 --> 48:47.880]  Assuming that Heller is not disqualified from the exercise of second amendment rights,
[48:47.880 --> 48:53.880]  the district must permit him to register his handgun and must issue him a license to carry it in his home.
[48:53.880 --> 48:55.880]  He didn't challenge that part.
[48:55.880 --> 48:57.880]  They didn't talk about it.
[48:57.880 --> 49:01.880]  So since he didn't challenge it, they didn't talk about it, but it can be challenged.
[49:01.880 --> 49:04.880]  We are aware of the problem of handgun violence in this country,
[49:04.880 --> 49:12.880]  and we take seriously the concerns raised by the many amici who believe that prohibition of handgun ought to shift the solution.
[49:12.880 --> 49:17.880]  The Constitution leaves the District of Columbia a variety of tools for combating that problem,
[49:17.880 --> 49:20.880]  including some measures regulating handguns.
[49:20.880 --> 49:28.880]  But the enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table.
[49:28.880 --> 49:33.880]  These include the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home.
[49:33.880 --> 49:41.880]  Undoubtedly, some think that the second amendment is outmoded in a society where our standing army is the pride of our nation,
[49:41.880 --> 49:48.880]  where well-trained police forces provide personal security, and where gun violence is a serious problem.
[49:48.880 --> 49:50.880]  That is perhaps debatable.
[49:50.880 --> 49:57.880]  But what is not debatable is that it is not the role of this court to pronounce the second amendment extinct.
[49:57.880 --> 50:18.880]  Boy, what a statement he made.
[50:18.880 --> 50:25.880]  I've been talking away and nobody's listening because somebody muted my mic.
[50:25.880 --> 50:30.880]  Okay. Okay. Okay. I think he's dropped. I think Ed dropped off anyway.
[50:30.880 --> 50:38.880]  Okay. Now we're going to Tony in Illinois.
[50:38.880 --> 50:41.880]  Hello, Tony. Are you there?
[50:41.880 --> 50:43.880]  Yeah, I'm here. Can you hear me all right?
[50:43.880 --> 50:45.880]  There you go. Now I got you.
[50:45.880 --> 50:50.880]  I keep clicking the unmute button just as my page refreshes.
[50:50.880 --> 50:51.880]  Okay. Go ahead.
[50:51.880 --> 50:54.880]  Okay. I took you off speakerphone and can you hear me all right now?
[50:54.880 --> 50:56.880]  Yeah, I can hear you pretty good.
[50:56.880 --> 51:08.880]  Okay. Yeah, I don't want to dwell too much on the subject, but I think he's wrong on a few aspects of that issue.
[51:08.880 --> 51:17.880]  For one, that was a pretty well-publicized case, both Heller and the Chicago-related case as well.
[51:17.880 --> 51:30.880]  That was McDonald, I think. Now, I think he said that that would protect you if you're carrying a bazooka down the street.
[51:30.880 --> 51:41.880]  Actually, I think, if I remember correctly, some people were actually upset with Scalia and said that some aspects of his decision,
[51:41.880 --> 51:47.880]  or his opinion rather, would kind of open the door for certain regulations.
[51:47.880 --> 51:52.880]  And, you know, some gun rights people weren't too happy about that.
[51:52.880 --> 52:02.880]  Now, of course, Chicago had a gun ban and the McDonald case dealt with that.
[52:02.880 --> 52:14.880]  Now, just last year, there was another case that basically struck down not allowing a concealed carry here.
[52:14.880 --> 52:23.880]  So, the state of Illinois is currently under a deadline to enact concealed carry and it would be the 50th state to finally do it.
[52:23.880 --> 52:27.880]  And they're supposed to have done it by right about now.
[52:27.880 --> 52:30.880]  I don't know if they're getting an extension on that or whatever.
[52:30.880 --> 52:37.880]  The big debate in the legislature is whether it's going to be shall issue or may issue.
[52:37.880 --> 52:45.880]  And there's some also aspects of whether local communities can have control because, you know,
[52:45.880 --> 52:51.880]  Chicago wants to have more control and not, you know, have to listen to the dictates of the state, you know,
[52:51.880 --> 52:56.880]  because they want to have gun control and basically get around it.
[52:56.880 --> 53:01.880]  But I won't comment too much further on that.
[53:01.880 --> 53:07.880]  Now, it may interest you that I hadn't been down to the recorder's office in a while,
[53:07.880 --> 53:16.880]  but I actually came across two assignments or actually might have been list pendants that involved Washington Mutual.
[53:16.880 --> 53:30.880]  And it was actually listed as the FDIC as receiver or whatever for Washington Mutual.
[53:30.880 --> 53:33.880]  So, they had FDIC in there.
[53:33.880 --> 53:37.880]  And so, maybe they've caught on to the fact that they weren't doing it, right?
[53:37.880 --> 53:43.880]  And now they're including FDIC and these assignments or complaints.
[53:43.880 --> 53:47.880]  Okay. Did you hear the beginning of the show?
[53:47.880 --> 53:50.880]  I did hear a little bit of that.
[53:50.880 --> 53:55.880]  About filing a notice of default?
[53:55.880 --> 53:59.880]  Well, I've heard you speak about that before.
[53:59.880 --> 54:06.880]  Okay, then this may be a way of handling all of that.
[54:06.880 --> 54:15.880]  We go in and file a notice of default, and then we turn this thing on its head.
[54:15.880 --> 54:21.880]  Now, instead of us fighting against them, now they have to come and fight against our filings.
[54:21.880 --> 54:23.880]  And that should fix this problem.
[54:23.880 --> 54:29.880]  There's a question about FDIC.
[54:29.880 --> 54:35.880]  Washington Mutual didn't go into receivership.
[54:35.880 --> 54:38.880]  So, I don't know what the FDIC is having to do with it.
[54:38.880 --> 54:43.880]  The government shut Washington Mutual down.
[54:43.880 --> 54:49.880]  And then they essentially gave all of their assets to JPMorgan Chase.
[54:49.880 --> 54:52.880]  I don't know what FDIC has to do with it.
[54:52.880 --> 54:57.880]  I assume they would have seized it through FDIC.
[54:57.880 --> 55:02.880]  Well, perhaps, but there's no indication that the assets were ever transferred to FDIC.
[55:02.880 --> 55:06.880]  They were transferred from Washington Mutual to JPMorgan Chase.
[55:06.880 --> 55:10.880]  This is not where the bank was insolvent.
[55:10.880 --> 55:17.880]  And the FDCIP had to come in and take over the bank and make it solvent again.
[55:17.880 --> 55:27.880]  The government shut them down for running a money laundering scam with the Mexican and Colombian drug cartels.
[55:27.880 --> 55:35.880]  So, I don't see how the FDCIP is going to get in there.
[55:35.880 --> 55:40.880]  Yeah, I didn't go back and look at what the history was back at the time.
[55:40.880 --> 55:42.880]  But I thought you might find that interesting.
[55:42.880 --> 55:44.880]  Yeah, that is interesting.
[55:44.880 --> 55:54.880]  It's just the fact that there's no real assignment from Washington Mutual to JPMorgan.
[55:54.880 --> 56:04.880]  And I thought, crap, they were getting around that by bringing the FDIC into it and using that as a chain of title.
[56:04.880 --> 56:07.880]  I don't have the actual language in front of me.
[56:07.880 --> 56:13.880]  I mean, I probably have it somewhere here, but I won't be able to find it.
[56:13.880 --> 56:24.880]  But, you know, the JPMorgan has a successor through FDIC as a receiver for Washington Mutual or something like that.
[56:24.880 --> 56:28.880]  You know, I can't remember the exact language.
[56:28.880 --> 56:31.880]  So, they may be switching that up to get around that.
[56:31.880 --> 56:35.880]  I thought you might find that of use.
[56:35.880 --> 56:49.880]  Now, you've discussed, or maybe it was more David, about reopening bankruptcy and putting the note into the bankruptcy unsecured?
[56:49.880 --> 56:54.880]  Yes, if you've been through a bankruptcy, there's a time limit.
[56:54.880 --> 56:57.880]  It's either one or two years.
[56:57.880 --> 57:02.880]  Don't quote me on that, but there is a time limit on how long you have to reopen the bankruptcy.
[57:02.880 --> 57:09.880]  You can reopen it, convert it to a seven, and claim the property as unsecured.
[57:09.880 --> 57:19.880]  Lawyers get real edgy when you ask them to do that, but we've been winning with those because this does the same thing as filing a notice of default in the record.
[57:19.880 --> 57:36.880]  Now, you put the lender in a position or the claimant, whoever's claiming authority to collect, in a position where they would have to come into the bankruptcy court and prove that they have standing to enforce the contract.
[57:36.880 --> 57:39.880]  And for the most part, they haven't been showing up.
[57:39.880 --> 57:51.880]  We had one in Fort Worth where they showed up, and they brought a bunch of paperwork, and they were photocopies of the closing documents, and the woman followed instructions really well.
[57:51.880 --> 57:58.880]  She asked to see the documents and told the court she'd never seen these before.
[57:58.880 --> 58:04.880]  The judge asked her, did you sign those? I didn't sign these. I've never seen these in my life.
[58:04.880 --> 58:15.880]  And said the judge ground on her for quite a while, and then he smiled and turned to the lawyers and said, well, counselor, it seems like she doesn't recognize these documents.
[58:15.880 --> 58:19.880]  You're going to have to bring us in the originals.
[58:19.880 --> 58:28.880]  And I got from that that she gave the judge something he could actually give her a ruling on because she didn't knuckle under under his pressure.
[58:28.880 --> 58:34.880]  Okay, hang on, Tony. We're about to go to break. This is Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Rule of Law Radio.
[58:34.880 --> 58:43.880]  I call in number 512-646-1984. Give us a call. We're going into our last hour, so it generally builds up at the end.
[58:43.880 --> 58:59.880]  Pamela, I see you there. I'll get to you after we've talked to Tony. We'll be right back.
[59:13.880 --> 59:18.880]  The free books are a three-volume set called Basic Elements of the Christian Life.
[59:18.880 --> 59:27.880]  Chapter by chapter, Basic Elements of the Christian Life clearly presents God's plan of salvation, growing in Christ, and how to build up the church.
[59:27.880 --> 59:40.880]  To order your free New Testament recovery version and Basic Elements of the Christian Life, call Bibles for America toll-free at 888-551-0102.
[59:40.880 --> 59:49.880]  That's 888-551-0102. Or, visit us online at BFA.org.
[01:00:10.880 --> 01:00:27.880]  John Bush here with Your Liberty Beat for June 19, 2013. Gold opened today at $1,375, silver at $21.71, and bitcoin is trading at $108.
[01:00:27.880 --> 01:00:33.880]  Support for The Liberty Beat comes from great new books, free-thinking materials, and free-thinking people since 2006.
[01:00:33.880 --> 01:00:44.880]  In Austin and 1904, Guadalupe Street and at Forkfest at Site 26. Also, support comes from Central Texas Gunworks, CHL courses, self-defense training, and firearm sales.
[01:00:44.880 --> 01:00:47.880]  Online at CentralTexasGunworks.com.
[01:00:47.880 --> 01:00:55.880]  And now the news. On Tuesday morning, a group of around 50 Houstonians protested outside the office of U.S. Representative Sheila Jackson Lee.
[01:00:55.880 --> 01:01:00.880]  The group was rallying in support of the Second Amendment, as well as the Armed Citizens Project.
[01:01:00.880 --> 01:01:09.880]  The Armed Citizens Project gained the attention last week when Oak Forest Neighborhood of Houston became the first in the country to experience a free gun giveaway for single mothers.
[01:01:09.880 --> 01:01:17.880]  Sheila Jackson Lee spoke in opposition to the ACP's gun sharing program and in favor of universal background checks for gun purchases.
[01:01:17.880 --> 01:01:30.880]  Kyle Copeland, founder of the Armed Citizens Project, says he believes an educated and armed citizenry is key to reducing crime.
[01:01:30.880 --> 01:01:37.880]  Tuesday, Google filed a legal challenge against gag orders that came with the FISA court orders it received from the FBI and NSA.
[01:01:37.880 --> 01:01:44.880]  Google is arguing that the silence orders infringe upon the company's First Amendment rights to speak freely about the data requests from the government.
[01:01:44.880 --> 01:01:52.880]  According to a court motion filed by Google, they are seeking to release information on the amount of data requests and specific user information.
[01:01:52.880 --> 01:01:58.880]  Currently, under the FISA Act, Google is not allowed to disclose publicly the number of requests it gets for data.
[01:01:58.880 --> 01:02:04.880]  The public requests have only come about in light of recently leaked information regarding the PRISM software,
[01:02:04.880 --> 01:02:15.880]  and after the Director of National Intelligence acknowledged that the service providers have received Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act requests.
[01:02:15.880 --> 01:02:19.880]  São Paulo, Brazil continues to be the scene of another night of protests.
[01:02:19.880 --> 01:02:25.880]  Demonstrators are calling for a more responsive government and have expressed a general anger towards the government financial priorities.
[01:02:25.880 --> 01:02:32.880]  Protests have been organized by university students and a group called the Free Fair Movement, which is called for free public transportation.
[01:02:32.880 --> 01:02:36.880]  Pictures of the scene show protesters clashing with riot police.
[01:02:36.880 --> 01:02:43.880]  These latest clashes come after accusations last week of police brutality and the targeting of journalists.
[01:02:43.880 --> 01:02:47.880]  Support for the Liberty Beat comes from Tomorrow's Meals Today.
[01:02:47.880 --> 01:02:52.880]  South Austin Market Days every Saturday from 3 to 7 p.m. at 10106 Manchac Road.
[01:02:52.880 --> 01:03:02.880]  And from Capital City Automotive, honest, reliable auto care for vehicles foreign and domestic.
[01:03:22.880 --> 01:03:42.880]  By my father's house, until he returns, he has left me with the strength and wisdom to aid my concern.
[01:03:42.880 --> 01:03:52.880]  Yeah, I will. I will find my father's house, until I see his face.
[01:04:12.880 --> 01:04:20.880]  Eating way too much salty snacks and saturated fat and it's clogging the arteries in my brain.
[01:04:20.880 --> 01:04:27.880]  OK, well, I was mixing up FDCPA and FDIC.
[01:04:27.880 --> 01:04:32.880]  Well, I think everybody got it. I'm old. Cut me some slack.
[01:04:32.880 --> 01:04:41.880]  OK, go ahead. I don't think you said FDCPA. I think you just said FDCI once.
[01:04:41.880 --> 01:04:46.880]  Yeah, I was I was getting confused there at the end. I wasn't sure if I was saying it right.
[01:04:46.880 --> 01:04:50.880]  Oh, well, it's getting late. OK.
[01:04:50.880 --> 01:04:53.880]  Sorry. We're actually talking about bankruptcy before the break.
[01:04:53.880 --> 01:04:58.880]  But I want to go back to Washington Mutual because I actually just brought up brought that up.
[01:04:58.880 --> 01:05:01.880]  And it does say this is according to Wikipedia.
[01:05:01.880 --> 01:05:22.880]  But anyway, that on Thursday, September 20, 25th, 2008, the United States Office of Thrift Supervision seized Washington Mutual Bank from Washington Mutual Incorporated and placed it into receivership with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
[01:05:22.880 --> 01:05:33.880]  OK. OK. So they they did bankrupt the bank. Yeah, they did put it under because because they had a bank run.
[01:05:33.880 --> 01:06:02.880]  Yeah, but even then, just because the bank went into receivership, that would not alleviate the necessity of a assignment of note and deed of trust to JPMorgan Chase.
[01:06:02.880 --> 01:06:16.880]  I'm trying to calculate this all out in my head. They transferred the assets that belonged to Washington Mutual Bank at the time.
[01:06:16.880 --> 01:06:25.880]  So what assets belong to Washington Mutual Bank at the time? There are almost none.
[01:06:25.880 --> 01:06:33.880]  Because they sold all the notes. Well, they had this quite a bit of information, actually, and just at the top of this.
[01:06:33.880 --> 01:06:49.880]  Look, you just got to take a look at it because Washington Mutual actually sued the FBI, taking damages of approximately 13 billion dollars for what it claims was unjustified seizure and extremely low sale price to JPMorgan Chase.
[01:06:49.880 --> 01:07:00.880]  You know what the sale price to JPMorgan Chase was? I don't know. Was it a dollar? I saw the transfer.
[01:07:00.880 --> 01:07:13.880]  Zero, not one penny. Well, it actually says here the FBI then sold most of the bank's assets to JPMorgan Chase for one point nine billion dollars in cash.
[01:07:13.880 --> 01:07:26.880]  That's not what the transfer said. I saw the transfer. It was transferred for zero dollars. All of the assets.
[01:07:26.880 --> 01:07:39.880]  Yeah, that's an interesting wrinkle. It looks like they're trying to cover things.
[01:07:39.880 --> 01:07:58.880]  Yeah, yeah. That's what I thought. But back to the bankruptcy. What I was getting at, my question basically is, in a Chapter 7, wouldn't the trustee want the property to liquidate, to satisfy creditors?
[01:07:58.880 --> 01:08:27.880]  Yeah, if you have a lot of, that's the risk, then if you bankrupt for the purpose of the foreclosure, then, OK, if you have a whole lot of other debt that exceeds the amount of the value of the property, I think if it goes to 50 percent of the property, they can liquidate unless it's homesteaded, in which case they can't.
[01:08:27.880 --> 01:08:42.880]  But if your other debt, if you're only bankrupting to stop the foreclosure, you can pick the debt you include in the bankruptcy.
[01:08:42.880 --> 01:08:43.880]  Right.
[01:08:43.880 --> 01:09:05.880]  You know, I bankrupted a number of years ago over a restaurant that I built, and I didn't include my car in the bankruptcy. So in Chapter 7, you can leave anything out of it you want to. So if you just bankrupt the property, then you force the lender to come back in and prove up his position.
[01:09:05.880 --> 01:09:11.880]  And that's the one thing they do not want to have to do.
[01:09:11.880 --> 01:09:27.880]  If they do prove up their position, you're no worse off than you were to start with. As soon as they prove up their position, you can cancel the bankruptcy.
[01:09:27.880 --> 01:09:45.880]  I was reading in one of those NOLO guides, I don't know if you're familiar with those NOLO legal guides, but anyway, I guess it varies from state to state quite a bit how much of your equity you can exclude from bankruptcy, too.
[01:09:45.880 --> 01:09:54.880]  No, no, no, it doesn't. This is federal. Bankruptcy is federal. State doesn't have anything to do with it.
[01:09:54.880 --> 01:10:17.880]  Well, for some reason, maybe I misunderstood it, but it seems like they said in that book that it ranged from as little as $5,000 to as much as $500,000 in Massachusetts, I believe was the $500,000, where you can exclude as far as your property.
[01:10:17.880 --> 01:10:24.880]  Okay, well that may be the different courts.
[01:10:24.880 --> 01:10:30.880]  Yeah, I don't either. We need David on. David is a lot more familiar with that than me. Bankruptcy.
[01:10:30.880 --> 01:10:59.880]  It's kind of a state protection and state law related to that that creditors can't seize your property, but that's just something to consider, and I think also they said if only one file and they have a tendency by the entirety,
[01:10:59.880 --> 01:11:15.880]  I think that's what it's called, then they wouldn't be able to include the property either. That's in certain states as well. That's only like a dozen states, so that's another thing if anybody is trying to use that to keep in mind.
[01:11:15.880 --> 01:11:30.880]  But I want to also ask you about the DOT number. I went to the dot.gov website, and it's not really clear how exactly you get to the non-commercial designation that you have.
[01:11:30.880 --> 01:11:47.880]  It's about in the middle of the form that you fill out. You tell it what type of carrier you are, and in there is included a private carrier not in commerce.
[01:11:47.880 --> 01:11:53.880]  Okay, I don't think I saw not in commerce. I guess I just saw private.
[01:11:53.880 --> 01:12:01.880]  I don't know if it says in commerce. If it says private, you're a private carrier. That means you're not in commerce. That's what private means.
[01:12:01.880 --> 01:12:09.880]  There's one for private operator.
[01:12:09.880 --> 01:12:16.880]  Yeah, I thought a private carrier was just somebody that didn't operate for the general public.
[01:12:16.880 --> 01:12:23.880]  Yeah, that's what it is.
[01:12:23.880 --> 01:12:40.880]  No, private carrier is, say I own a wheat farm, big wheat farm, and I got a half a dozen trucks to haul my product to market. I'm a private carrier. I'm not for hire.
[01:12:40.880 --> 01:12:45.880]  That's what it goes to. That's what it is.
[01:12:45.880 --> 01:13:02.880]  And the reason they need to do that is they're running 18-wheelers, and a DOT officer would look at that 18-wheeler and have, because of the type of vehicle it is, he would have reason to believe that the vehicle is in commerce.
[01:13:02.880 --> 01:13:12.880]  So they put the private carrier designation on there, and he runs the DOT number and says, this guy's not in commerce, so he doesn't fall under.
[01:13:12.880 --> 01:13:24.880]  Exactly the reason I used it is so that the DOT guy would have noticed that I am a private carrier.
[01:13:24.880 --> 01:13:28.880]  Private carrier just means not for hire.
[01:13:28.880 --> 01:13:32.880]  You're in Illinois. You'll see that on doors of trucks all the time, not for hire.
[01:13:32.880 --> 01:13:45.880]  I talked to a guy who was interested in that because his wife didn't want to drive around without plates. I mean, travel without plates. He doesn't have plates, but she doesn't want to go around without them.
[01:13:45.880 --> 01:14:04.880]  Now, also, you've had a caller on the show, Steve from Florida. I don't know if he's called in in a while, but he spoke briefly about getting your property off the tax rolls.
[01:14:04.880 --> 01:14:16.880]  And in a brief discussion on your show, I didn't really see, you know, after looking in the code in Florida, you know, I just briefly browsed it, and I didn't see where he was getting it.
[01:14:16.880 --> 01:14:29.880]  But I actually heard an interview he did on, the hosts are called, are named Bo and Rocco. It's on YouTube. It's about two hours, and he goes into it in more detail.
[01:14:29.880 --> 01:14:38.880]  And it sounds pretty clear cut. And Eddie has, I know Eddie has talked about it for Texas, but this is for Florida.
[01:14:38.880 --> 01:14:44.880]  And I think he might be a good guess because he, I mean, he carried that flower. There's no problem.
[01:14:44.880 --> 01:14:50.880]  And it's not like he can go another two hours talking about other issues that he's had success with as well.
[01:14:50.880 --> 01:14:54.880]  But that's all I know is Steve from Florida. I don't know if he's listening now.
[01:14:54.880 --> 01:15:01.880]  Okay. Don't remember him. Possibly he'll call back in.
[01:15:01.880 --> 01:15:10.880]  Yeah, yeah. He's in Osceola County, I think, he said. And he actually referenced you on the show. He said you have been an influence.
[01:15:10.880 --> 01:15:24.880]  But, yeah, oh, it's Take Your Property Off the Tax Roll. I think that's the title of it. And it's broken up into 15 minutes, the segment.
[01:15:24.880 --> 01:15:34.880]  The YouTube account is Bo Knows Entertainment. If anybody wants to look that up, I highly recommend it, especially if you live in Florida.
[01:15:34.880 --> 01:15:52.880]  And there's another guy named Richard James McDonald in California that I think could go into more detail about the state citizenship versus national citizenship or U.S. citizenship.
[01:15:52.880 --> 01:15:57.880]  I think I actually have his number. I saw him do a presentation as well.
[01:15:57.880 --> 01:16:02.880]  McDonald. Long beard, gray-headed.
[01:16:02.880 --> 01:16:06.880]  No, no, he's gray-haired, but didn't have a beard.
[01:16:06.880 --> 01:16:08.880]  I think I know McDonald.
[01:16:08.880 --> 01:16:12.880]  I'll send you some links and some other information and other stuff.
[01:16:12.880 --> 01:16:19.880]  I was doing some seminars in California and I think I met McDonald. The name is real familiar.
[01:16:19.880 --> 01:16:28.880]  Yeah, he wears glasses, kind of balding, you know, older guy.
[01:16:28.880 --> 01:16:34.880]  OK, well, do you have any kind of links to these guys?
[01:16:34.880 --> 01:16:37.880]  Yeah, I'll send you some information for everything.
[01:16:37.880 --> 01:16:41.880]  OK, good, good, because that's better done off the air. OK, thanks.
[01:16:41.880 --> 01:16:49.880]  We're about to go to break. Thank you, Tony. Pamela, thank you for waiting so long. We'll pick you up when we get back on the other side.
[01:16:49.880 --> 01:16:58.880]  This is Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Rule of Law Radio. A call in number 512-646-1984. We'll be right back.
[01:17:19.880 --> 01:17:24.880]  I feel so good. I don't need so much food.
[01:17:24.880 --> 01:17:30.880]  Ain't I a sight compared to what I used to be?
[01:17:30.880 --> 01:17:38.880]  Calcium, magnesium, selenium and zinc. Take a moment now and think.
[01:17:38.880 --> 01:17:47.880]  If you have a little drink, every day will bring the life that you've been looking for.
[01:17:47.880 --> 01:17:53.880]  Beyond Tangy Tangerine is available at Brave New Books, located at 1904 Guadalupe Street.
[01:17:53.880 --> 01:18:02.880]  The bookstore also carries the works of Dr. Joel Wallach, founder of Young Jevity and creator of Beyond Tangy Tangerine.
[01:18:02.880 --> 01:18:11.880]  At Capital Coin and Bullion, our mission is to be your preferred shopping destination by delivering excellent customer service and outstanding value at an affordable price.
[01:18:11.880 --> 01:18:22.880]  Capital Coin features a great selection of high quality coins and precious metals. In addition to providing the best prices in the nation, we want to bring you the best shopping experience both in store and online.
[01:18:22.880 --> 01:18:29.880]  In addition to coins and bullion, we carry popular Young Jevity products such as Beyond Tangy Tangerine and Pollen Burst.
[01:18:29.880 --> 01:18:36.880]  We offer freeze-dried storable foods by Augustin Farms, Berkey Water products, ammunition at 10% above wholesale and more.
[01:18:36.880 --> 01:18:45.880]  You can lock in a spot price with our Silver Pool and we set up metals IRA accounts. Call us at 512-646-6440 for more details.
[01:18:45.880 --> 01:18:50.880]  We're located at 7304 Burnett Road, Suite A, about a half mile south of Anderson.
[01:18:50.880 --> 01:18:54.880]  We're open Monday through Friday, 10 to 6, Saturdays 10 to 2.
[01:18:54.880 --> 01:19:02.880]  Visit us at CapitalCoinandBullion.com or call 512-646-6440.
[01:19:02.880 --> 01:19:12.880]  This is the Logos Radio Network.
[01:19:33.880 --> 01:19:38.880]  Okay, we are back. Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Rule of Law Radio.
[01:19:38.880 --> 01:19:51.880]  A call-in number, 512-646-1984. Give us a call. We've got three segments left. We're going to Pamela in Texas. Hello, Ms. Pamela.
[01:19:51.880 --> 01:19:53.880]  Hi, Randy.
[01:19:53.880 --> 01:19:56.880]  Howdy. What do you have for us today?
[01:19:56.880 --> 01:20:05.880]  I have an issue with judicial misconduct and corruption that I'm trying to expose.
[01:20:05.880 --> 01:20:12.880]  And I just need some guidance because I can't get any help from any of the local authorities.
[01:20:12.880 --> 01:20:19.880]  Well, that is not surprising. What is the nature of the issue?
[01:20:19.880 --> 01:20:32.880]  Well, I filed a complaint against a judge for contacting me on the phone when I didn't get a notice of a hearing.
[01:20:32.880 --> 01:20:40.880]  And my lawyer at the time is the one that called me and he knew that we didn't get notice.
[01:20:40.880 --> 01:20:49.880]  And when she spoke with me over the phone, she was making some demands that were outside of my order.
[01:20:49.880 --> 01:21:01.880]  And, you know, the local authorities were telling me that I couldn't, you know, adhere to her demands unless a new order was signed by the judge.
[01:21:01.880 --> 01:21:13.880]  And so she had told my attorney that if I didn't do what she instructed me to do that I would pay for it down the road, whatever that means.
[01:21:13.880 --> 01:21:25.880]  And so four months later at my trial, my hearing was heard by another judge and he called her into my hearing
[01:21:25.880 --> 01:21:34.880]  and they were trying to pass off this improper telephone hearing as though I had gotten notice
[01:21:34.880 --> 01:21:41.880]  and I was being belligerent to the court, which, of course, I would never do such a thing.
[01:21:41.880 --> 01:21:53.880]  And so during my trial, I brought in a private recording device because of the judge calling me and the threats that she made.
[01:21:53.880 --> 01:22:00.880]  And, of course, I appealed the ruling that the judge made in my family law case.
[01:22:00.880 --> 01:22:09.880]  And when I requested a copy of my official transcript from the court reporter, when I immediately reviewed it,
[01:22:09.880 --> 01:22:19.880]  I noticed that there was some significant material facts and information that was altered in my transcript.
[01:22:19.880 --> 01:22:28.880]  And so I requested a copy of the court reporter's audio tape from my trial and she declined.
[01:22:28.880 --> 01:22:36.880]  My attorney requested a copy of the audio tape from my trial and the court reporter declined again.
[01:22:36.880 --> 01:22:45.880]  And then I got two orders from the court of appeals ordering the court reporter to produce the audio tape from my trial
[01:22:45.880 --> 01:22:52.880]  and she refused to give me a copy of the original, which is what the order stated.
[01:22:52.880 --> 01:23:01.880]  And so the court of appeals did not allow a resolution on my dispute with the record
[01:23:01.880 --> 01:23:11.880]  and they made a ruling on my appeal with the falsified transcript and I've gone to the local authorities
[01:23:11.880 --> 01:23:20.880]  and I told them I have a private recording and there are clearly statements that are on my private recording
[01:23:20.880 --> 01:23:24.880]  that are missing from the official written transcript.
[01:23:24.880 --> 01:23:34.880]  Okay, that's easy enough. Transcribe the original, your recording, transcribe it,
[01:23:34.880 --> 01:23:43.880]  and it might be better to hire another court reporter to transcribe your recording
[01:23:43.880 --> 01:23:57.880]  and then you take the transcript to a notary and swear to it under oath and file it as an affidavit in the court.
[01:23:57.880 --> 01:24:05.880]  Well, the complicated part about doing that is in February of this year,
[01:24:05.880 --> 01:24:11.880]  my attorney has scheduled a motion of contempt against this court reporter.
[01:24:11.880 --> 01:24:16.880]  Have you filed a professional complaint against a court reporter?
[01:24:16.880 --> 01:24:22.880]  I did with the court reporter certification board and they just dismissed the complaint
[01:24:22.880 --> 01:24:29.880]  and said that they don't get involved in record disputes, although I shared with them that I have proof
[01:24:29.880 --> 01:24:33.880]  and evidence that my transcript was falsified.
[01:24:33.880 --> 01:24:39.880]  Then have you tried filing civil action against the court reporter?
[01:24:39.880 --> 01:24:45.880]  That is what I would like to do, but I cannot find an attorney to help me.
[01:24:45.880 --> 01:24:52.880]  They say that all of this is unusual. They've never heard of a court reporter who hired a lawyer to prevent someone
[01:24:52.880 --> 01:24:59.880]  from getting a copy of the audio tape from their own trial, but no one will help them.
[01:24:59.880 --> 01:25:10.880]  She doesn't dare. If she's changed the transcript, then if that gets produced, she's likely to go to jail. So sue her.
[01:25:10.880 --> 01:25:17.880]  And how can I sue her if I can't find a lawyer to do it on my behalf?
[01:25:17.880 --> 01:25:20.880]  Do it on your own.
[01:25:20.880 --> 01:25:24.880]  OK, we have this special technique that I use.
[01:25:24.880 --> 01:25:29.880]  You know, I'm not a lawyer, but I write legal documents all the time.
[01:25:29.880 --> 01:25:33.880]  Well, I don't actually write legal documents.
[01:25:33.880 --> 01:25:39.880]  I have this one skill that I have honed beyond all others.
[01:25:39.880 --> 01:25:44.880]  I am an accomplished plagiarist.
[01:25:44.880 --> 01:25:52.880]  There is hardly an issue you can ever come up with that has not been adjudicated in the court.
[01:25:52.880 --> 01:26:00.880]  And I get so many people coming to me, telling me about court reporters changing the transcripts,
[01:26:00.880 --> 01:26:06.880]  that there should be a number of cases on that subject.
[01:26:06.880 --> 01:26:13.880]  So, you know, I used to use Westlaw and Lexis.
[01:26:13.880 --> 01:26:16.880]  I don't even bother with those anymore.
[01:26:16.880 --> 01:26:21.880]  I just go on the Internet and do a search.
[01:26:21.880 --> 01:26:26.880]  Like I'm doing now, sue court reporter.
[01:26:26.880 --> 01:26:29.880]  And you'll be surprised what you'll find.
[01:26:29.880 --> 01:26:39.880]  And then you find a suit that addresses your issue, especially if you can find the suit in your state.
[01:26:39.880 --> 01:26:48.880]  Then they'll pretty well give you all the case law and everything you need to bring them into court.
[01:26:48.880 --> 01:26:52.880]  It's not that difficult.
[01:26:52.880 --> 01:26:55.880]  OK.
[01:26:55.880 --> 01:27:01.880]  I also filed, when I filed my complaint with the state commission on judicial conduct,
[01:27:01.880 --> 01:27:08.880]  and one of my allegations was that my transcript was falsified,
[01:27:08.880 --> 01:27:13.880]  the investigator that was inside my complaint,
[01:27:13.880 --> 01:27:23.880]  she misled me and told me that she had gotten copies of all the audio tapes and transcripts that I had participated in.
[01:27:23.880 --> 01:27:29.880]  And so my attorney sent a letter over to the state commission on judicial conduct
[01:27:29.880 --> 01:27:33.880]  asking them to provide him with a copy of that audio tape
[01:27:33.880 --> 01:27:38.880]  because the court reporter just wasn't cooperating and complying with any orders.
[01:27:38.880 --> 01:27:45.880]  And so the executive director of the state commission on judicial conduct wrote a letter back to my attorney
[01:27:45.880 --> 01:27:49.880]  stating that that investigator misled me
[01:27:49.880 --> 01:27:55.880]  and that she didn't get any of the evidence that she claimed to have gotten from the court reporter
[01:27:55.880 --> 01:27:59.880]  to investigate that allegation of my complaint.
[01:27:59.880 --> 01:28:05.880]  And so the executive director said that although she misled you,
[01:28:05.880 --> 01:28:09.880]  we're just going to go ahead and close out your case,
[01:28:09.880 --> 01:28:14.880]  and we're not going to go get the information that this informs you about obtaining.
[01:28:14.880 --> 01:28:21.880]  And so I just can't get any help from any of the governmental entities
[01:28:21.880 --> 01:28:34.880]  who would get the proper authorities involved in investigating my falsified transcript.
[01:28:34.880 --> 01:28:41.880]  And you mentioned that I could file my own lawsuit, but I'm going to be honest with you,
[01:28:41.880 --> 01:28:49.880]  I feel intimidated about doing that because I feel like all these judges are protecting this court reporter
[01:28:49.880 --> 01:28:55.880]  because whenever I schedule a hearing to enforce the orders,
[01:28:55.880 --> 01:29:04.880]  I've got another judge that I went in front of to get the court reporter to comply and turn over her audio tape.
[01:29:04.880 --> 01:29:12.880]  And what that judge did was he just went on a tangent and refused to hear the evidence
[01:29:12.880 --> 01:29:22.880]  and he voided out the order that transferred my case to the new county
[01:29:22.880 --> 01:29:28.880]  and transferred it back to the old county where I'm alleging that these judges
[01:29:28.880 --> 01:29:32.880]  and or court reporters falsified my transcript.
[01:29:32.880 --> 01:29:34.880]  So now my case…
[01:29:34.880 --> 01:29:36.880]  Wait, hold on, we're about to go to break.
[01:29:36.880 --> 01:29:39.880]  You're kind of losing me here.
[01:29:39.880 --> 01:29:44.880]  I'll try to get this sorted out when we come back on the other side.
[01:29:44.880 --> 01:29:52.880]  This is Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Rule of Law Radio, our call-in number 512-646-1984.
[01:29:52.880 --> 01:30:02.880]  We'll be right back.
[01:30:22.880 --> 01:30:27.880]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[01:30:27.880 --> 01:30:32.880]  So protect your rights, say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself.
[01:30:32.880 --> 01:30:35.880]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[01:30:35.880 --> 01:30:38.880]  This public service announcement is brought to you by StartPage.com,
[01:30:38.880 --> 01:30:42.880]  the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo and Bing.
[01:30:42.880 --> 01:30:46.880]  Start over with StartPage.
[01:30:46.880 --> 01:30:51.880]  Neither snow nor rain nor poor financial planning has kept the U.S. Postal Service
[01:30:51.880 --> 01:30:53.880]  from making its rounds so far.
[01:30:53.880 --> 01:30:59.880]  But this privatized government agency has lost billions, $9 billion in 2010 alone.
[01:30:59.880 --> 01:31:01.880]  The U.S. Treasury has been coming to the rescue,
[01:31:01.880 --> 01:31:06.880]  but it looks like the Postal Service will exceed its $15 billion credit line this year,
[01:31:06.880 --> 01:31:08.880]  and that could mean trouble.
[01:31:08.880 --> 01:31:12.880]  The Constitution spells out the federal government's power to establish post offices
[01:31:12.880 --> 01:31:14.880]  and post roads, and for good reason.
[01:31:14.880 --> 01:31:16.880]  Mail service is essential to liberty,
[01:31:16.880 --> 01:31:20.880]  and private companies couldn't financially justify serving everyone.
[01:31:20.880 --> 01:31:26.880]  So let's keep universal postal service alive and demand responsible management of the mails.
[01:31:26.880 --> 01:31:27.880]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht.
[01:31:27.880 --> 01:31:32.880]  More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[01:31:32.880 --> 01:31:34.880]  Here at Zombie Killer Ammo and Guns,
[01:31:34.880 --> 01:31:37.880]  we believe that the Second Amendment guarantees our rights as citizens
[01:31:37.880 --> 01:31:40.880]  to be able to defend ourselves and our loved ones.
[01:31:40.880 --> 01:31:45.880]  We also believe that the right to carry weapons comes with the responsibility of being safe and smart about guns.
[01:31:45.880 --> 01:31:52.880]  If you're going to be in the Corpus Christi area, give us a call at 361-704-6103.
[01:31:52.880 --> 01:31:56.880]  Ask for Chris or Portia and mention this radio ad for a 10% discount.
[01:31:56.880 --> 01:31:58.880]  We can ship ammo, parts, and accessories.
[01:31:58.880 --> 01:32:02.880]  Like us on Facebook at Zombie Killers, LLC.
[01:32:02.880 --> 01:32:07.880]  At HempUSA.org, we offer chemical-free products to people around the world,
[01:32:07.880 --> 01:32:11.880]  detoxifying, self-healing, while rebuilding the immune system.
[01:32:11.880 --> 01:32:14.880]  We urge our listeners to please consider our largest selling product,
[01:32:14.880 --> 01:32:16.880]  micro plant powder.
[01:32:16.880 --> 01:32:21.880]  Our micro plant powder is rich in iodine, probiotics, zinc, and silica
[01:32:21.880 --> 01:32:25.880]  to help rebuild the immune system and to create a healthy stomach flora.
[01:32:25.880 --> 01:32:30.880]  Micro plant powder is excellent for daily intake and is perfect to add to your storage shelter.
[01:32:30.880 --> 01:32:34.880]  We urge our listeners to please visit us at HempUSA.org.
[01:32:34.880 --> 01:32:38.880]  And remember, all of our products are chemical-free and healthy to eat.
[01:32:38.880 --> 01:32:43.880]  We constantly strive to give you the best service, highest quality, and rapid shipping anywhere.
[01:32:43.880 --> 01:32:47.880]  And we offer free shipping on orders over $95 in the U.S.
[01:32:47.880 --> 01:32:53.880]  Please visit us at HempUSA.org or call 908-691-2608.
[01:32:53.880 --> 01:32:57.880]  That's 908-691-2608.
[01:32:57.880 --> 01:33:02.880]  See what our powder, seeds, and oil can do for you at HempUSA.org.
[01:33:02.880 --> 01:33:05.880]  You are listening to the Logos Radio Network.
[01:33:05.880 --> 01:33:33.880]  LogosRadioNetwork.com
[01:33:33.880 --> 01:33:35.880]  Okay, we are back.
[01:33:35.880 --> 01:33:39.880]  Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Rule of Law Radio.
[01:33:39.880 --> 01:33:42.880]  And we're talking to Pamela in Texas.
[01:33:42.880 --> 01:33:44.880]  Okay, Pamela.
[01:33:44.880 --> 01:33:51.880]  Probably what we can do for you more than anything else is help you to get an idea of how to organize things.
[01:33:51.880 --> 01:33:59.880]  And one of the things that you need to do if you haven't done it already is create a timeline.
[01:33:59.880 --> 01:34:06.880]  Because you lost me there when you were coming back from a court in another county.
[01:34:06.880 --> 01:34:11.880]  I never did hear about a change of venue to that county.
[01:34:11.880 --> 01:34:17.880]  Have you ever written down a timeline of everything that's happened?
[01:34:17.880 --> 01:34:21.880]  Yes, I have.
[01:34:21.880 --> 01:34:30.880]  And it's a little complicated because the change of venue happened last fall.
[01:34:30.880 --> 01:34:37.880]  And my case got transferred on a technicality to the county in which I live now.
[01:34:37.880 --> 01:34:48.880]  Okay, how did the court have authority to transfer it back to his venue if it was out of his venue?
[01:34:48.880 --> 01:34:51.880]  That's the million dollar question.
[01:34:51.880 --> 01:34:58.880]  I don't know if judges have the authority to board out another judge's order and transfer it back.
[01:34:58.880 --> 01:35:02.880]  As far as I know, they don't.
[01:35:02.880 --> 01:35:08.880]  Will you send me an email? I have someone in Texas who can help you.
[01:35:08.880 --> 01:35:13.880]  What part of Texas are you in? I don't recognize 832.
[01:35:13.880 --> 01:35:15.880]  Houston, Texas.
[01:35:15.880 --> 01:35:18.880]  Houston area. Okay, that's good.
[01:35:18.880 --> 01:35:21.880]  I have someone I can refer you to.
[01:35:21.880 --> 01:35:25.880]  He's not a lawyer. His brother is and his brother gets advice from him.
[01:35:25.880 --> 01:35:28.880]  He may be able to help you here.
[01:35:28.880 --> 01:35:35.880]  He is my go-to guy for civil strategy.
[01:35:35.880 --> 01:35:43.880]  If you're interested, I'll get you in contact with him. He may be able to help you and he may be able to find you a lawyer.
[01:35:43.880 --> 01:35:46.880]  Okay.
[01:35:46.880 --> 01:35:57.880]  Okay, but from where we're at, this thing of court reporters, I'm getting this kind of thing a lot.
[01:35:57.880 --> 01:36:07.880]  And if you've had a case overturned and then you appealed it and they gave you a bad ruling because the court reporter wouldn't get you the information you need,
[01:36:07.880 --> 01:36:13.880]  you need to appeal that on the issue of the failure of the court reporter.
[01:36:13.880 --> 01:36:18.880]  You may be able to get her fired.
[01:36:18.880 --> 01:36:27.880]  And that would be a good thing. Or you may be able to get her to roll over on the judge.
[01:36:27.880 --> 01:36:33.880]  Have you considered filing criminal charges against the court reporter?
[01:36:33.880 --> 01:36:39.880]  When I go to the local authorities, they give me...
[01:36:39.880 --> 01:36:44.880]  No, no, no. We don't do that. I can show you how to do this.
[01:36:44.880 --> 01:36:45.880]  Okay.
[01:36:45.880 --> 01:36:57.880]  Okay. Understand, you will never win your case because you have the law and the facts on your side.
[01:36:57.880 --> 01:37:04.880]  Now, that may not be right, but that's how it works in the world that I live in.
[01:37:04.880 --> 01:37:11.880]  And that is how it has always worked since we've had courts.
[01:37:11.880 --> 01:37:16.880]  That's unfortunate, but that's how it is in the real world.
[01:37:16.880 --> 01:37:21.880]  You will only win your case if you have the politics on your side.
[01:37:21.880 --> 01:37:26.880]  Now, that's something we can do something about.
[01:37:26.880 --> 01:37:30.880]  Lawyers and judges tend to push around their clients.
[01:37:30.880 --> 01:37:35.880]  And lawyers and judges hate pro se litigants.
[01:37:35.880 --> 01:37:40.880]  They don't hate pro se litigants because pro se litigants do stupid stuff.
[01:37:40.880 --> 01:37:44.880]  They like that part. It's easy to screw them around.
[01:37:44.880 --> 01:37:51.880]  They hate pro se litigants because every once in a while they run into the pro se from hell.
[01:37:51.880 --> 01:37:57.880]  The pro se who understands how much power the pro se has.
[01:37:57.880 --> 01:38:00.880]  That we can help you with.
[01:38:00.880 --> 01:38:13.880]  The complaint you wrote against the court reporter, the commission that oversees them, they do nothing.
[01:38:13.880 --> 01:38:23.880]  I can just about assure you that what you did for the court reporter is you doubled her insurance premiums.
[01:38:23.880 --> 01:38:29.880]  And another decent complaint is likely to get her insurance canceled.
[01:38:29.880 --> 01:38:31.880]  That's where the politics is.
[01:38:31.880 --> 01:38:38.880]  And if you now come back and use what we call the routine.
[01:38:38.880 --> 01:38:47.880]  And you make up a criminal complaint against the court reporter and you mail that to the district attorney.
[01:38:47.880 --> 01:38:55.880]  You take the complaint to a notary and have it and swear on your oath to it and have it notarized.
[01:38:55.880 --> 01:38:57.880]  Send it to the prosecuting attorney.
[01:38:57.880 --> 01:39:07.880]  Since the court reporter is acting in a quasi judicial position, she is effectively a public official.
[01:39:07.880 --> 01:39:19.880]  And the prosecuting attorney, when he has it made known to him that a public official is violating law relating to his office, he shall reduce complaint information, submit to the grand jury.
[01:39:19.880 --> 01:39:22.880]  No discretion of any kind.
[01:39:22.880 --> 01:39:28.880]  But they will always exercise discretion and refuse to prosecute.
[01:39:28.880 --> 01:39:44.880]  At least that's what you hope he does, because then you send a verified criminal complaint against the prosecutor to the Texas state attorney general and ask the Texas state attorney general to prosecute the prosecutor.
[01:39:44.880 --> 01:39:47.880]  And he's going to refuse.
[01:39:47.880 --> 01:39:58.880]  And then you prepare a criminal complaint against the Texas state attorney general, file it to the chief justice of the Supreme Court and ask the chief justice to indict the attorney general.
[01:39:58.880 --> 01:40:01.880]  And he's going to refuse.
[01:40:01.880 --> 01:40:12.880]  You file a judicial conduct complaint against the chief justice, you file criminal charges against the chief justice, and you send those to the foreman of the local grand jury.
[01:40:12.880 --> 01:40:14.880]  Registered, restricted.
[01:40:14.880 --> 01:40:19.880]  And the prosecuting attorney will interrupt those complaints.
[01:40:19.880 --> 01:40:30.880]  And then you file a complaint with the local federal court, 18 U.S. Code 1341 tampering with the U.S. mail.
[01:40:30.880 --> 01:40:39.880]  Now, the likelihood of getting any of these people actually prosecuted is very, very slim.
[01:40:39.880 --> 01:40:47.880]  But in the process of doing all this, you're going to have the attorney general really P.O.ed at this prosecutor.
[01:40:47.880 --> 01:40:59.880]  Because the attorney general can be relatively sure his next running mate is going to pull out these criminal complaints and say, see what it takes to get this attorney general to do his job.
[01:40:59.880 --> 01:41:04.880]  People have to file criminal charges against him.
[01:41:04.880 --> 01:41:09.880]  And he's going to say, well, those were all frivolous.
[01:41:09.880 --> 01:41:12.880]  But he knows what we know.
[01:41:12.880 --> 01:41:15.880]  This goes to Ken's four laws.
[01:41:15.880 --> 01:41:18.880]  Ken's the guy I referred you to. He has these four laws.
[01:41:18.880 --> 01:41:21.880]  First law is everything is political.
[01:41:21.880 --> 01:41:23.880]  And all politics is local.
[01:41:23.880 --> 01:41:29.880]  And what we've done by these complaints is created a little local politics.
[01:41:29.880 --> 01:41:36.880]  These guys have refused to do their job and you didn't just run away and feel bad.
[01:41:36.880 --> 01:41:39.880]  Every time one of them didn't do the job, you nailed him.
[01:41:39.880 --> 01:41:45.880]  Now you've got the local prosecutors, got the attorney general crawling down his throat.
[01:41:45.880 --> 01:41:56.880]  Because the attorney general's got Chief Justice Supreme calling down his throat over complaints that you've sent them because they weren't doing their jobs or trying to protect this prosecutor.
[01:41:56.880 --> 01:41:59.880]  Now they're getting in trouble for it.
[01:41:59.880 --> 01:42:03.880]  And this attorney general knows Ken's second law.
[01:42:03.880 --> 01:42:11.880]  First law is everything is political. Second law, perception is everything.
[01:42:11.880 --> 01:42:15.880]  Doesn't matter if these complaints were frivolous or not.
[01:42:15.880 --> 01:42:20.880]  His opponent in the next election is not going to care.
[01:42:20.880 --> 01:42:29.880]  And the last thing the attorney general wants to do is have to explain why citizens are filing criminal charges against him.
[01:42:29.880 --> 01:42:36.880]  So he's going to be back to this prosecutor and he's not going to be a happy camper.
[01:42:36.880 --> 01:42:42.880]  Then we get ourselves a little politics. This is how you win your case.
[01:42:42.880 --> 01:42:46.880]  Probably should not be this way.
[01:42:46.880 --> 01:42:52.880]  But, you know, in a perfect world, we wouldn't have to do anything like this.
[01:42:52.880 --> 01:42:56.880]  But if this were a perfect world, I know I wouldn't be here.
[01:42:56.880 --> 01:43:00.880]  And I know a few other people that probably wouldn't either.
[01:43:00.880 --> 01:43:02.880]  So we have to deal with what we have to deal with.
[01:43:02.880 --> 01:43:07.880]  If you are interested in pursuing this, we can certainly show you how to do this part.
[01:43:07.880 --> 01:43:19.880]  And very good chance you'll get the prosecutor to go to this court reporter and tell the court reporter you better up these records or you're going to wind up in front of a grand jury.
[01:43:19.880 --> 01:43:22.880]  Does that make sense, Pamela?
[01:43:22.880 --> 01:43:30.880]  Yes, it does. The only question that I have about that process to create the politics.
[01:43:30.880 --> 01:43:37.880]  Right now, I've got to I've got rid of mandamus against that Harris County judge who avoided.
[01:43:37.880 --> 01:43:41.880]  OK, OK, hang on, hang on. We're about to go to break.
[01:43:41.880 --> 01:43:49.880]  This is Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Rule of Law Radio, our calling number 512-646-1984.
[01:43:49.880 --> 01:43:54.880]  We're about to go to our last segment. So if you want to get in, call quickly.
[01:43:54.880 --> 01:44:01.880]  We'll be right back.
[01:44:25.880 --> 01:44:28.880]  There's no way a place like that exists.
[01:44:28.880 --> 01:44:33.880]  Go check it out for yourself. It's downtown at 1904 Guadalupe Street, just south of UT.
[01:44:33.880 --> 01:44:37.880]  By UT, there's never anywhere to park down there.
[01:44:37.880 --> 01:44:45.880]  Actually, they now offer a free hour of parking for paying customers at the 500 MLK parking facility just behind the bookstore.
[01:44:45.880 --> 01:44:48.880]  It does exist. But when are they open?
[01:44:48.880 --> 01:44:56.880]  Monday through Saturday, 11 a.m. to 9 p.m. and one to 6 p.m. on Sundays. So give them a call at 512-480-2503.
[01:44:56.880 --> 01:45:01.880]  Or check out their events page at BraveNewBookstore.com.
[01:45:01.880 --> 01:45:04.880]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[01:45:04.880 --> 01:45:08.880]  Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary.
[01:45:08.880 --> 01:45:16.880]  The affordable, easy to understand 4CD course that will show you how in 24 hours, step by step.
[01:45:16.880 --> 01:45:20.880]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing.
[01:45:20.880 --> 01:45:24.880]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[01:45:24.880 --> 01:45:29.880]  Thousands have won with our step by step course and now you can too.
[01:45:29.880 --> 01:45:35.880]  Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case winning experience.
[01:45:35.880 --> 01:45:44.880]  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.
[01:45:44.880 --> 01:45:53.880]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases, pro se tactics and much more.
[01:45:53.880 --> 01:46:15.880]  Please visit RuleOfLawRadio.com and click on the banner or call toll free 866-LAW-EASY.
[01:46:24.880 --> 01:46:34.880]  OK, we are back. Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Rule of Law Radio, and we're talking to Pamela in Texas.
[01:46:34.880 --> 01:46:37.880]  And Pamela, you got a lot going on here.
[01:46:37.880 --> 01:46:40.880]  Mandamus against the judge?
[01:46:40.880 --> 01:46:43.880]  This is cool. This is politics.
[01:46:43.880 --> 01:46:47.880]  What is the nature of the mandamus?
[01:46:47.880 --> 01:46:57.880]  When that Harris County judge refused to hear all the testimony on the content motion against the court reporter and he boarded out my order,
[01:46:57.880 --> 01:47:03.880]  sending my case back to Fort Bend County where I'm alleging all this corruption is taking place.
[01:47:03.880 --> 01:47:13.880]  So the writ of mandamus is pending based on that action that the judge took.
[01:47:13.880 --> 01:47:20.880]  OK. Have you filed a judicial conduct complaint against the judge?
[01:47:20.880 --> 01:47:29.880]  Not yet. And the reason I'm reluctant to do that is because how the state commission handled my first complaint.
[01:47:29.880 --> 01:47:32.880]  I don't. OK, hold on. Don't worry about that.
[01:47:32.880 --> 01:47:38.880]  OK, let's talk about bar grievances and judicial conduct complaints.
[01:47:38.880 --> 01:47:46.880]  If you file a bar grievance against a lawyer in the state of Texas, the state bar will get that grievance.
[01:47:46.880 --> 01:47:54.880]  And then they will send you back a letter that says, we examined into your accusation and find that it does not rise to the level of misconduct.
[01:47:54.880 --> 01:47:58.880]  Early in the show, we had Mark on. He sent a bar grievance in.
[01:47:58.880 --> 01:48:05.880]  And that's exactly the letter he got back in Wisconsin.
[01:48:05.880 --> 01:48:10.880]  They're all the same. And that's a good thing.
[01:48:10.880 --> 01:48:15.880]  The reason it's a good thing is you're in their insurance carrier.
[01:48:15.880 --> 01:48:22.880]  You know, malpractice insurance starts somewhere between twenty five and thirty grand a year.
[01:48:22.880 --> 01:48:29.880]  How is their insurance carrier to gauge their level of risk by valid bar grievances?
[01:48:29.880 --> 01:48:35.880]  Heck, bars and trashes all of them. And insurance carrier knows that.
[01:48:35.880 --> 01:48:43.880]  Just like if you buy a new car and take it down to Wal-Mart and go inside and come out and somebody's bashed a fender in.
[01:48:43.880 --> 01:48:50.880]  Not your fault. You had nothing to do with it. The insurance company, you come out and fix it and double your premium.
[01:48:50.880 --> 01:48:56.880]  You come out next week and bashed in another fender. They come out and fix it and cancel.
[01:48:56.880 --> 01:49:04.880]  Your fault, their fault, nobody's fault. They do not care. You are an unacceptable risk.
[01:49:04.880 --> 01:49:10.880]  Bar grievances, one bar grievance, your first year of practice, they will cancel immediately.
[01:49:10.880 --> 01:49:15.880]  Two bar grievances, any one year of practice, if you've been practicing 20 years, they'll cancel.
[01:49:15.880 --> 01:49:20.880]  Three, they'll cancel your law firm's malpractice insurance.
[01:49:20.880 --> 01:49:25.880]  Bar grievances really hammer lawyers.
[01:49:25.880 --> 01:49:27.880]  Judicial conduct complaints.
[01:49:27.880 --> 01:49:33.880]  Every judge must be bonded. Bonding is insurance.
[01:49:33.880 --> 01:49:35.880]  Same thing.
[01:49:35.880 --> 01:49:40.880]  You file a judicial conduct complaint against a judge, they're going to trash it.
[01:49:40.880 --> 01:49:47.880]  We don't care because we're not interested in that part anyway. We're interested in raising his bond rating.
[01:49:47.880 --> 01:49:52.880]  If we get it high enough and they pull his bond, he's off the bench.
[01:49:52.880 --> 01:49:55.880]  That's why they hate pro se's.
[01:49:55.880 --> 01:50:05.880]  No lawyer in his right professional mind would file a judicial conduct complaint against a judge unless the lawyer's ready to retire.
[01:50:05.880 --> 01:50:13.880]  Because all the other judges are gang up on him, rule against all his clients, put him out of business.
[01:50:13.880 --> 01:50:22.880]  Your lawyer is not going to go in there and adequately adjudicate your case if there's a risk of annoying that judge.
[01:50:22.880 --> 01:50:28.880]  I once sued Denton County for $11 million. I talked to 60 lawyers.
[01:50:28.880 --> 01:50:35.880]  The last one was the prosecuting attorney who had just gotten out of office.
[01:50:35.880 --> 01:50:40.880]  I sued the current prosecuting attorney. I called him. The guy's name was Jerry Cobb.
[01:50:40.880 --> 01:50:48.880]  I said, hello, Jerry, my name's Randy Kelton and I have sued Denton County for $11 million and I need somebody to represent my case.
[01:50:48.880 --> 01:50:52.880]  He said, oh, Mr. Kelton, I'm familiar with your case.
[01:50:52.880 --> 01:50:59.880]  I can't take your case. You made accusations against judges in there and I have to represent clients in this county.
[01:50:59.880 --> 01:51:06.880]  I said, what's the matter, Jerry? You afraid those judges will screw your next client to get back at you?
[01:51:06.880 --> 01:51:13.880]  And he said the same thing every other lawyer did. You darn right they will.
[01:51:13.880 --> 01:51:20.880]  Now, I don't know if that's true or not, but I know your lawyer believes it's true.
[01:51:20.880 --> 01:51:28.880]  So he's not going to adequately adjudicate your case, not if it's going to run the risk of ruining his career.
[01:51:28.880 --> 01:51:36.880]  The only one who's going to really protect your case is you and you are the baddest motor scooter in the building.
[01:51:36.880 --> 01:51:40.880]  I walk into a courthouse. I am absolutely the baddest motor scooter in the building.
[01:51:40.880 --> 01:51:47.880]  And those folks in that building better believe it. I'll introduce them to me real fast.
[01:51:47.880 --> 01:51:53.880]  Bar grievances, judicial conduct complaints. A police officer gave me one ounce of crapola.
[01:51:53.880 --> 01:52:00.880]  I pull out my cell phone, dial 911, ask somebody to come down there and arrest him.
[01:52:00.880 --> 01:52:09.880]  This is easier than you think. And bar grievances and judicial conduct complaints will get you more politics than you will believe.
[01:52:09.880 --> 01:52:16.880]  That judge is going to rule against you out of hand at every turn anyway.
[01:52:16.880 --> 01:52:32.880]  You don't have anything to lose. But what you have to gain is, is them giving you a ruling so to get you off their case before you get their bond canceled.
[01:52:32.880 --> 01:52:37.880]  We shouldn't have to do this. But that's how it works.
[01:52:37.880 --> 01:52:50.880]  And the bar grievances and judicial conduct complaints, once you file them, the judge and the lawyer is forbidden to mention it to you.
[01:52:50.880 --> 01:53:02.880]  And if you have a lawyer and you file against the lawyer on the other side and your lawyer, if he tries to say anything about it, do not let him talk about it.
[01:53:02.880 --> 01:53:08.880]  That gives your lawyer plausible deniability. So when the other side says, hey, man, you're going to do something about your client.
[01:53:08.880 --> 01:53:13.880]  You're beating the crap out of me. And he'll have to tell him she won't talk to me about it.
[01:53:13.880 --> 01:53:18.880]  She refuses. So I got one of these unruly clients I can't control.
[01:53:18.880 --> 01:53:25.880]  Help me out here, guys. Give me something I can give her to get her off all our cases.
[01:53:25.880 --> 01:53:32.880]  That's the next thing she's going to start bar grieving me. Does that make sense, Pam?
[01:53:32.880 --> 01:53:37.880]  Yes, it does. I think I've already gotten just what you've missed.
[01:53:37.880 --> 01:53:46.880]  Yeah. And the thing about the bar grievance and judicial complaints, there's nothing to keep you from doing that as you go along.
[01:53:46.880 --> 01:53:57.880]  I live in a small county and I had a friend that got a job with the tax assessor collector and they put him through the orientation and stuff.
[01:53:57.880 --> 01:54:05.880]  He came later and told me about it. And when they took him to the front counter and showed him how all that worked, they said, now, there's just one thing.
[01:54:05.880 --> 01:54:09.880]  There's this one guy that comes in here. His name is Randy Kelton.
[01:54:09.880 --> 01:54:24.880]  He's always laughing and joking, but watch that S.O.B. He's just trying to get you to do something so he can run down to the sheriff or the district attorney and try to get you arrested.
[01:54:24.880 --> 01:54:31.880]  And that's true. I am. He said that when he was standing there, they didn't know that he knew me.
[01:54:31.880 --> 01:54:43.880]  He's thinking, yeah, that's right. He is. You want them to think that. You want them to think that everything you do is a setup.
[01:54:43.880 --> 01:54:48.880]  You know, I've got this tar baby. I call it my tar baby syndrome.
[01:54:48.880 --> 01:54:55.880]  I got a little tar baby here and I take it up to a public official or a lawyer and I say, here, I got this tar baby.
[01:54:55.880 --> 01:55:01.880]  You want to touch it? Come on, Bubba, touch it. Just fail to do what I ask you to do.
[01:55:01.880 --> 01:55:09.880]  And you stick to my tar baby because then I'm going to be coming after you next and I'm going to take my tar baby to somebody else and get them to stick to it.
[01:55:09.880 --> 01:55:13.880]  And we get everybody stuck to my tar baby and everybody get arguing amongst themselves.
[01:55:13.880 --> 01:55:19.880]  And they want nothing more than to get rid of me.
[01:55:19.880 --> 01:55:27.880]  When I walk into the courthouse where they know me. Well, hello, Mr. Kelton. How are things going? What can we do for you?
[01:55:27.880 --> 01:55:36.880]  These guys are cowards. They screw people around because they can.
[01:55:36.880 --> 01:55:51.880]  Every once in a while, they need to run into somebody who gives it back to them. And the most corrupt area of law of all, by far, is family.
[01:55:51.880 --> 01:56:09.880]  Getting a family law case, you get a lawyer. You got a lawyer on each side. You think they're adjudicating your case. What they're going to do, because they're in business to make money, is they're going to look at the estate from both sides, decide how much money they can extract from the state.
[01:56:09.880 --> 01:56:22.880]  And they're going to set about jerking you around and dancing you around until they've jerked as much money out of you as they think they can. Then they're going to drop you like a hot rock.
[01:56:22.880 --> 01:56:27.880]  That's how it works in the world you and I live in.
[01:56:27.880 --> 01:56:32.880]  May not be right, but that's what we're stuck with.
[01:56:32.880 --> 01:56:57.880]  They'll do that to your hammer. Okay, go ahead. I do have a family law case. Not only do I have a writ of mandamus pending, but I also have a petition pending before the Supreme Court in reference to my appeal and the court of appeals not allowing a resolution on the dispute of the record.
[01:56:57.880 --> 01:57:17.880]  Beautiful. Do you have a lawyer handling that? Yes, I do. And she says that I'm getting screwed over, but every attorney says I'm being screwed over. But it's just like what you said. None of them will help me expose the corruption to really get to the bottom of what's going on.
[01:57:17.880 --> 01:57:31.880]  Okay, you can help yourself. Okay, you can't blame the attorneys. What are they going to do? They're going to end their career, their professional career to help you?
[01:57:31.880 --> 01:57:39.880]  You got to help your attorney out. You got to give the attorney a way to do their job.
[01:57:39.880 --> 01:57:48.880]  And being the pro se from hell is how you do it. The last time I had a DPS officer in Austin knock out one of my teeth and then they charged me.
[01:57:48.880 --> 01:57:54.880]  I was at the Secretary of State Building and they charged me to cover up what he did.
[01:57:54.880 --> 01:58:02.880]  And the judge threw out the case to protect my lawyer from me.
[01:58:02.880 --> 01:58:17.880]  I gave my lawyer plausible deniability so he could fight my case. He went to the judge and said, Your Honor, I'm sorry I have to do my job, but this lousy SOB is going to bar grieve me out of business if I don't.
[01:58:17.880 --> 01:58:23.880]  They threw out my case to keep me from grieving my own attorney.
[01:58:23.880 --> 01:58:35.880]  I'm sorry, we're running out of time, but if you will send me an email to Randy at RuleOfLawRadio.com and send me a timeline, if you would like, I'll get you in touch with Ken.
[01:58:35.880 --> 01:58:38.880]  He can give you some really good information.
[01:58:38.880 --> 01:58:42.880]  Okay, we are out of time. Thank you all for listening.
[01:58:42.880 --> 01:58:47.880]  We'll be back Monday with our traffic show and Thursday and Friday.
[01:58:47.880 --> 01:58:57.880]  Make sure you listen. Thank you.
[01:59:17.880 --> 01:59:23.880]  We'll be right back.
[01:59:47.880 --> 01:59:59.880]  Looking for some truth? You found it. LogosRadioNetwork.com