ROL_2014-06-27_16k_Hr1-2.timecode

[00:00.000 --> 00:06.920]  You're listening to the Liberty Beat, your daily source for Liberty news and activist
[00:06.920 --> 00:15.720]  updates online at thelibertybeat.com.
[00:15.720 --> 00:20.520]  This is Justin Arman with your Liberty Beat for June 27th, 2014.
[00:20.520 --> 00:28.800]  Gold opened today at $1,320, silver at $21.12, and Bitcoin is trading at $587.
[00:28.800 --> 00:31.920]  Our source for the Liberty Beat comes from the notorious activist Michael Cargill.
[00:31.920 --> 00:38.360]  He has a new show called Come and Talk It, live Sunday afternoon at 4 p.m. on 1370 a.m.
[00:38.360 --> 00:39.360]  in Austin.
[00:39.360 --> 00:44.000]  That's 1370 a.m. in Austin on Sunday at 4 p.m.
[00:44.000 --> 00:48.120]  And from My Magic Mud, an all-natural teeth whitening and strengthening remedy, go to
[00:48.120 --> 00:52.720]  MyMagicMud.com to hear a short interview with Dr. Griffin Cole or pick up a jar at Brave
[00:52.720 --> 00:54.120]  New Books.
[00:54.120 --> 00:55.680]  And now the news.
[00:55.680 --> 00:59.040]  Plans for accountable governments will be holding their monthly meeting at Sherlock's
[00:59.040 --> 01:00.440]  in Austin, Texas.
[01:00.440 --> 01:03.400]  On the agenda is Ed Heimlich speaking about sovereign immunity.
[01:03.400 --> 01:08.040]  Dana Anz will be discussing plans to bring attention to Liberty candidate Laura Presley,
[01:08.040 --> 01:10.080]  who's running for Austin City Council.
[01:10.080 --> 01:14.460]  Cheyenne from Texas Normal will be speaking about strategic plans for marijuana policy
[01:14.460 --> 01:18.640]  reform and Rachel Kenea will talk about what it takes to get elected.
[01:18.640 --> 01:23.740]  Justin Delosch will be addressing Second Amendment rights and more reasonable self-defense policy
[01:23.740 --> 01:25.320]  for Texans.
[01:25.320 --> 01:28.760]  Plans for accountable government will be forming committees around these issues, which will
[01:28.760 --> 01:31.360]  be led by the best and brightest activists.
[01:31.360 --> 01:35.700]  Come to the meeting and get involved Monday, June 30th at Sherlock's Pub.
[01:35.700 --> 01:38.080]  More information at tagtexas.org.
[01:38.080 --> 01:43.080]  That's tagtexas.org.
[01:43.080 --> 01:44.480]  Big news for Texas.
[01:44.480 --> 01:48.920]  On Thursday, Austin City Council voted to approve medical marijuana.
[01:48.920 --> 01:54.000]  The resolution, which was sponsored by councilmen Bill Spellman and Mike Martinez, supports
[01:54.000 --> 01:57.480]  legislation to legalize the use of medical marijuana.
[01:57.480 --> 02:01.160]  State Representative Elliott Nashtat tried for more than a decade without success to
[02:01.160 --> 02:05.120]  pass a state law regarding patients using medical pot.
[02:05.120 --> 02:08.200]  Marijuana is still illegal under state and federal laws.
[02:08.200 --> 02:12.400]  The Marijuana Policy Project, the same group responsible for helping Colorado pass its
[02:12.400 --> 02:17.520]  recreational pot laws, has set up shop in Austin, hoping to achieve legalization by
[02:17.520 --> 02:20.760]  2019.
[02:20.760 --> 02:25.520]  A report by Bloomberg reveals that hospitals are using detailed consumer data to create
[02:25.520 --> 02:30.780]  profiles on current and even potential patients to identify those most likely to get sick.
[02:30.780 --> 02:35.600]  The information is being provided by data brokers, public records, and credit card transactions.
[02:35.600 --> 02:40.200]  That detail, where a person shops, eats, what they smoke, and much more.
[02:40.200 --> 02:44.760]  The largest hospital chain in the Carolinas is plugging data for two million people in
[02:44.760 --> 02:49.120]  algorithms designed to identify high-risk patients.
[02:49.120 --> 02:54.000]  Report for this program comes from Cabo Boz, now with two locations in Austin, at 500 East
[02:54.000 --> 02:57.560]  Ben White Boulevard and 2828 Rio Grande Boulevard.
[02:57.560 --> 03:23.040]  This is Justin Armand reporting with the Liberty Beat.
[03:23.040 --> 03:30.240]  The movie, and thank you to far-right
[03:30.240 --> 03:31.240] ...
[03:31.240 --> 03:32.240] ...
[03:32.240 --> 03:33.240] ...
[03:33.240 --> 03:34.240] ...
[03:34.240 --> 03:35.240] ...
[03:35.240 --> 03:36.240] ...
[03:36.240 --> 03:41.240]  Whatcha gonna do when they come for you When you were eight and you had bad dreams
[03:41.240 --> 03:46.240]  You go to school and learn the golden rule So why are you acting like a bloody fool
[03:46.240 --> 03:52.240]  If you get hot then you must get cool Bad boys, bad boys, whatcha gonna do
[03:52.240 --> 03:57.240]  Whatcha gonna do when they come for you Bad boys, bad boys, whatcha gonna do
[03:57.240 --> 04:01.240]  Whatcha gonna do when they come for you
[04:01.240 --> 04:09.240]  Good evening everyone, this is Joe Esquivel, Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens at Rule of Law Radio
[04:31.240 --> 04:41.240]  Where do I go next? Procedurally wise
[04:41.240 --> 04:47.240]  So, Randy, you have procedure done pretty good
[04:47.240 --> 04:55.240]  So we have a homeowner and the court has gotten summary judgment against them
[04:55.240 --> 04:58.240]  And they've ordered that the house gets sold
[04:58.240 --> 05:03.240]  Okay, so can you take it from there?
[05:03.240 --> 05:10.240]  Yeah, first I need to know how the court got a summary judgment
[05:10.240 --> 05:22.240]  Generally they'll get a summary judgment when the homeowner doesn't respond to anything that the lender does
[05:22.240 --> 05:27.240]  Is this a judicial state or non-judicial state?
[05:27.240 --> 05:31.240]  Let's go non-judicial and then we'll go judicial afterwards
[05:31.240 --> 05:35.240]  So this is non-judicial and the homeowner hasn't responded
[05:35.240 --> 05:40.240]  Okay, a non-judicial state, technically there is no summary judgment
[05:40.240 --> 05:45.240]  Because the borrower has already confessed a judgment
[05:45.240 --> 05:49.240]  That's what makes it non-judicial
[05:49.240 --> 05:53.240]  The mortgage confesses a claim against the property
[05:53.240 --> 05:59.240]  So that if the lender has to sue, they technically sue the property
[05:59.240 --> 06:03.240]  Otherwise they'd have to sue the person, get a claim against the person
[06:03.240 --> 06:08.240]  Then ask the court to grant a judgment against the property so they could liquidate the property to satisfy the judgment
[06:08.240 --> 06:13.240]  But in a mortgage, you confess that claim against the property
[06:13.240 --> 06:18.240]  So it's effectively an in rim suit in that they sue the property itself
[06:18.240 --> 06:24.240]  In a non-judicial, not only have you granted a claim against the property
[06:24.240 --> 06:27.240]  But you confess the judgment against the property
[06:27.240 --> 06:32.240]  So when they come in non-judicial, they do have to give you notice
[06:32.240 --> 06:44.240]  And with the change in 2009 I believe, they have to offer some type of a modification
[06:44.240 --> 06:50.240]  And of course the banks have not been good about offering those modifications
[06:50.240 --> 06:54.240]  Most people don't know they're required to
[06:54.240 --> 07:00.240]  And if you have tenants in the property, they have to give them 90 days notice
[07:00.240 --> 07:08.240]  But if you have a ticket, we're at the point of unlawful detainer hearing
[07:08.240 --> 07:18.240]  Where someone has purchased the property at auction and is now moving to evict the person from the property
[07:18.240 --> 07:19.240]  Correct
[07:19.240 --> 07:22.240]  Okay
[07:22.240 --> 07:28.240]  Generally if you get started at this point, the first thing you want to do is run down
[07:28.240 --> 07:32.240]  Grab all the paperwork in the county recorder's office
[07:32.240 --> 07:37.240]  And look at all the dates, who did what when
[07:37.240 --> 07:48.240]  The lender, when did MERS do an assignment of the security instrument from one entity to another
[07:48.240 --> 07:54.240]  And if they did, was the original lender out of business when they did that
[07:54.240 --> 07:59.240]  Because MERS is acting for an agent, for a dead guy
[07:59.240 --> 08:05.240]  So the question becomes, who told MERS to do this assignment
[08:05.240 --> 08:10.240]  If MERS is an agent for the dead guy, how did the dead guy tell him to do the assignment
[08:10.240 --> 08:15.240]  There's a lot of things to look at there and it's best, if you're not familiar with it
[08:15.240 --> 08:19.240]  Is get someone who knows how to examine those records
[08:19.240 --> 08:26.240]  And tell you where there appears to be gaps in the chain of title
[08:26.240 --> 08:27.240]  Okay
[08:27.240 --> 08:32.240]  If you can find gaps in the chain of title, if you're in Texas
[08:32.240 --> 08:37.240]  Then you would file a trespass to tri-title action
[08:37.240 --> 08:44.240]  Now when you file a trespass to tri-title, you want to ask the court for a restraining order
[08:44.240 --> 08:53.240]  It's important that you understand the district court where you would file the trespass to tri-title
[08:53.240 --> 08:58.240]  Or a quiet title action if you're in another state
[08:58.240 --> 09:05.240]  One of those cannot restrain the justice of the peace in an unlawful detainer hearing
[09:05.240 --> 09:10.240]  Because the justice of the peace has exclusive jurisdiction
[09:10.240 --> 09:19.240]  What he can do is restrain the litigant, the plaintiff, from pursuing eviction
[09:19.240 --> 09:26.240]  So if you ask for a restraining order, make sure you ask them to restrain the
[09:26.240 --> 09:35.240]  In this case it would be the defendant from pursuing eviction until you can adjudicate title
[09:35.240 --> 09:43.240]  So they would get, they would file a complaint against the new investor or the new purchaser of the property?
[09:43.240 --> 09:48.240]  Yeah, effectively they would do an in rim against the property
[09:48.240 --> 09:55.240]  They file a petition to quiet title against a claim against the property
[09:55.240 --> 10:00.240]  Specifically you would file against the substitute trustees deed
[10:00.240 --> 10:08.240]  If you want to start out by saying on this day there was filed with the counter recorder a warranty deed
[10:08.240 --> 10:14.240]  Granting me exclusive ownership of the property
[10:14.240 --> 10:18.240]  That establishes your title claim
[10:18.240 --> 10:23.240]  And then you say on this day a substitute trustees deed was filed by this person
[10:23.240 --> 10:31.240]  And this substitute trustees deed is void or voidable for these reasons
[10:31.240 --> 10:38.240]  That's essentially, that would be what would go to a trespass to try title
[10:38.240 --> 10:43.240]  There is a distinction in Texas where there isn't in most other states
[10:43.240 --> 10:52.240]  Most other states it would be a quiet title action against a document filed in the record
[10:52.240 --> 11:03.240]  In Texas there's a distinction between a quiet title action addressing a document
[11:03.240 --> 11:13.240]  And a trespass to try title addressing a document that purports to grant title to someone else
[11:13.240 --> 11:20.240]  So the substitute trustees deed purports to grant title to the purchaser
[11:20.240 --> 11:25.240]  And you have a warranty deed that has granted title to you
[11:25.240 --> 11:34.240]  And your trespass to try title claim says my claim is greater than the substitute trustees claim
[11:34.240 --> 11:36.240]  And you show why
[11:36.240 --> 11:43.240]  The difference between trespass to try title and quiet title is not terribly great
[11:43.240 --> 11:54.240]  Other than in a quiet title action you can say there is this purported assignment
[11:54.240 --> 12:01.240]  Of the security instrument in the record and you wish to quiet title as to that assignment
[12:01.240 --> 12:08.240]  So it really doesn't go to holder status of who actually has a right to title to the property
[12:08.240 --> 12:12.240]  But it really goes to a potential claim against the property
[12:12.240 --> 12:20.240]  That would be in the order of quiet title or slander of title
[12:20.240 --> 12:28.240]  So then you would be disputing the legal claim to title is what you would be disputing
[12:28.240 --> 12:36.240]  Exactly, if we're after foreclosure then in order for them to move for an unlawful detainer hearing
[12:36.240 --> 12:41.240]  There would have to be filed in the record a substitute trustees deed
[12:41.240 --> 12:49.240]  We have some here recently where they moved for unlawful detainer and there was no substitute trustees deed filed
[12:49.240 --> 12:52.240]  So first thing is to check for that
[12:52.240 --> 13:03.240]  If it is filed then go back and see how the substitute trustee gained standing
[13:03.240 --> 13:17.240]  To enforce the privilege granted in the security instrument of a claim of a confessed judgment against the property
[13:17.240 --> 13:28.240]  It's important that you think about it that way because that confessed judgment is a covenant of the security instrument
[13:28.240 --> 13:43.240]  And the lender can only enforce the privilege of a confessed judgment if he comes to the table in honor of the contract
[13:43.240 --> 13:48.240]  If he comes to the table in dishonor of any covenant of the contract
[13:48.240 --> 13:57.240]  Then he can't claim the privileges that you granted on the condition that he abide by all of the restrictive covenants
[13:57.240 --> 13:59.240]  Does that make sense Joe?
[13:59.240 --> 14:01.240]  Yes, it's getting there
[14:01.240 --> 14:08.240]  So now would it differ in a mortgage state versus the deed of trust state?
[14:08.240 --> 14:16.240]  The only difference I can see is the mortgage states, Texas is the only one that has trespass to try title
[14:16.240 --> 14:27.240]  Everywhere else you would still challenge the deed that was granted to whoever the property was purchased by
[14:27.240 --> 14:31.240]  So essentially the claim is the same
[14:31.240 --> 14:39.240]  You just don't have to make the specific claim that my claim to title is better than your claim to title
[14:39.240 --> 14:47.240]  But I would suggest any time you do a quiet title action you would structure it exactly the same
[14:47.240 --> 14:56.240]  You would say you got to establish your standing and your standing is I was granted a warranty deed on this day
[14:56.240 --> 14:59.240]  It rests in the record unchallenged
[14:59.240 --> 15:06.240]  So nobody said there's anything wrong with this warranty deed so that grants me uncontested ownership
[15:06.240 --> 15:13.240]  Now we have other claims against the property and I have standing based on this warranty deed
[15:13.240 --> 15:20.240]  And then you challenge the within a non-judicial state, I mean in a judicial state
[15:20.240 --> 15:24.240]  You can challenge anything in there under quiet title
[15:24.240 --> 15:33.240]  Okay, all right so as long as they have not been evicted they still have a chance to fight
[15:33.240 --> 15:46.240]  Yes, if you win the quiet title action now you can go to the JP court with a challenge to subject matter jurisdiction
[15:46.240 --> 15:54.240]  You can claim that the petitioner lacks standing to invoke subject matter jurisdiction to the court
[15:54.240 --> 16:02.240]  As he does not come to the table with a valid title claim
[16:02.240 --> 16:12.240]  Okay, now would the civil rules of procedure for district court be similar to the federal rules of civil procedure?
[16:12.240 --> 16:14.240]  Yeah, they're almost the same
[16:14.240 --> 16:20.240]  Most of the states have actually adopted the federal rules of civil procedure
[16:20.240 --> 16:33.240]  Texas hasn't but proper adjudication of cases is relatively consistent
[16:33.240 --> 16:42.240]  If you see something in the Fed and you don't see it in the states you're probably sure it's in there you just haven't found it yet
[16:42.240 --> 16:51.240]  Hang on, Randy Kelton, Debra Stevens, Joe Esquivel, Rue La Radio are called in number 512-646-1984
[16:51.240 --> 17:00.240]  We'll be right back
[17:00.240 --> 17:06.240]  Through advances in technology our lives have greatly improved except in the area of nutrition
[17:06.240 --> 17:11.240]  People feed their pets better than they feed themselves and it's time we changed all that
[17:11.240 --> 17:17.240]  Our primary defense against aging and disease in this toxic environment is good nutrition
[17:17.240 --> 17:25.240]  In a world where natural foods have been irradiated, adulterated, and mutilated, young Jevity can provide the nutrients you need
[17:25.240 --> 17:31.240]  Logos Radio Network gets many requests to endorse all sorts of products, most of which we reject
[17:31.240 --> 17:39.240]  We have come to trust young Jevity so much we became a marketing distributor along with Alex Jones, Ben Fuchs, and many others
[17:39.240 --> 17:47.240]  When you order from LogosRadioNetwork.com your health will improve as you help support quality radio
[17:47.240 --> 17:51.240]  As you realize the benefits of young Jevity you may want to join us
[17:51.240 --> 17:58.240]  As a distributor you can experience improved health, help your friends and family, and increase your income
[17:58.240 --> 18:00.240]  Order now
[18:00.240 --> 18:05.240]  Are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters, or even lawsuits?
[18:05.240 --> 18:09.240]  Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Mears proven method
[18:09.240 --> 18:14.240]  Michael Mears has won six cases in federal court against debt collectors and now you can win two
[18:14.240 --> 18:20.240]  You'll get step-by-step instructions in plain English on how to win in court using federal civil rights statutes
[18:20.240 --> 18:24.240]  What to do when contacted by phone, mail, or court summons
[18:24.240 --> 18:26.240]  How to answer letters and phone calls
[18:26.240 --> 18:29.240]  How to get debt collectors out of your credit reports
[18:29.240 --> 18:33.240]  How to turn the financial tables on them and make them pay you to go away
[18:33.240 --> 18:38.240]  The Michael Mears proven method is the solution for how to stop debt collectors
[18:38.240 --> 18:41.240]  Personal consultation is available as well
[18:41.240 --> 18:46.240]  For more information please visit RuleOfLawRadio.com and click on the blue Michael Mears banner
[18:46.240 --> 18:49.240]  Or email MichaelMears at Yahoo.com
[18:49.240 --> 18:51.240]  That's RuleOfLawRadio.com
[18:51.240 --> 19:00.240]  Or email M-I-C-H-A-E-L-M-I-R-R-A-S at Yahoo.com to learn how to stop debt collectors now
[19:00.240 --> 19:05.240]  You are listening to the Logos Radio Network
[19:05.240 --> 19:31.240]  LogosRadioNetwork.com
[19:31.240 --> 19:46.240]  Okay, we are back. Randy Kelton, Joe Esquivel, Debra Stevens, Rule of Law Radio
[19:46.240 --> 19:52.240]  And we were talking about post foreclosure procedures
[19:52.240 --> 19:55.240]  There's always a lot of things you can do
[19:55.240 --> 19:59.240]  But it's important that you get it in the right order
[19:59.240 --> 20:03.240]  In most states it will be a quiet type action
[20:03.240 --> 20:07.240]  And the very first thing you want to do is go get all the documentation
[20:07.240 --> 20:11.240]  Get it to Joe, have him rip that to pieces for you
[20:11.240 --> 20:21.240]  And show you where you have claims of violations of the covenant of the security instrument
[20:21.240 --> 20:30.240]  It's based on the grants that you provided in the security instrument
[20:30.240 --> 20:36.240]  That's the authority the lender uses to foreclose with
[20:36.240 --> 20:41.240]  But if he has breached covenants of the security instrument
[20:41.240 --> 20:46.240]  Prior to trying to exercise the privilege in the security instrument
[20:46.240 --> 20:50.240]  He has no right to that privilege
[20:50.240 --> 20:56.240]  Now the courts are not great about adjudicating those rights for us
[20:56.240 --> 21:02.240]  But it does get you time if you're right up against an eviction
[21:02.240 --> 21:07.240]  Matter of fact, Steve Skidmore, still in his property
[21:07.240 --> 21:12.240]  Came to me about four days from the eviction hearing
[21:12.240 --> 21:16.240]  And he got something started
[21:16.240 --> 21:21.240]  And what we helped him get started was garbage
[21:21.240 --> 21:24.240]  It was my first one, I hadn't done it before
[21:24.240 --> 21:26.240]  And he filed a suit in the state court
[21:26.240 --> 21:28.240]  And the other side came back and said
[21:28.240 --> 21:32.240]  Your honor, this suit's a piece of crap
[21:32.240 --> 21:36.240]  And the judge looked at it and said, yeah it is, fix it
[21:36.240 --> 21:42.240]  We filed another one, same thing, fix it
[21:42.240 --> 21:46.240]  We finally got one to take, but the point was
[21:46.240 --> 21:52.240]  Once you take an action in your defense, it buys time
[21:52.240 --> 21:55.240]  This stopped the unlawful detainer hearing
[21:55.240 --> 21:58.240]  They went to the unlawful detainer hearing and Steve told them
[21:58.240 --> 22:02.240]  Your honor, I have a claim in the state court against title
[22:02.240 --> 22:04.240]  And the JP said, what are you doing in my courtroom?
[22:04.240 --> 22:08.240]  I don't have jurisdiction, get out of here
[22:08.240 --> 22:12.240]  Now, they're taking jurisdiction
[22:12.240 --> 22:21.240]  A quiet title action does not deny the JP court jurisdiction
[22:21.240 --> 22:24.240]  Some of them think it does, but it doesn't
[22:24.240 --> 22:29.240]  The JP still has jurisdiction and the JP can issue an order
[22:29.240 --> 22:34.240]  You can get a higher court to overturn that order
[22:34.240 --> 22:40.240]  If you can show that the plaintiff lacked standing
[22:40.240 --> 22:45.240]  To invoke the subject matter jurisdiction of the JP court
[22:45.240 --> 22:51.240]  That's where you go to, is you go to the ability of the plaintiff
[22:51.240 --> 22:57.240]  If the plaintiff comes to the court without a favorable claim
[22:57.240 --> 23:01.240]  Then he is unable to bring a controversy to the court
[23:01.240 --> 23:05.240]  Thereby, he's unable to invoke the subject matter jurisdiction of the court
[23:05.240 --> 23:10.240]  Anymore, when we have an unlawful detainer hearing
[23:10.240 --> 23:13.240]  Then the first thing we do is look at the documentation
[23:13.240 --> 23:20.240]  And if we can find a question as to the agency standing
[23:20.240 --> 23:25.240]  Or capacity of the petitioner
[23:25.240 --> 23:31.240]  Then instead of challenging the petitioner's agency standing or capacity
[23:31.240 --> 23:35.240]  We finally challenge the subject matter jurisdiction
[23:35.240 --> 23:43.240]  A lot of times, they very deliberately give you notice at the last moment
[23:43.240 --> 23:48.240]  So you got a couple of days to get something together and get to the court
[23:48.240 --> 23:51.240]  Well, then when you try to get there with it
[23:51.240 --> 23:55.240]  They're going to say it's too late, you needed to have this in earlier
[23:55.240 --> 23:58.240]  Subject matter jurisdiction can be challenged at any time
[23:58.240 --> 24:01.240]  No matter how remote in history
[24:01.240 --> 24:07.240]  So I go in on the day of the hearing and drop a subject matter jurisdiction on them
[24:07.240 --> 24:11.240]  I did one in Collin County and the lawyer said
[24:11.240 --> 24:17.240]  Your Honor, I just got this an hour ago and it was 50 pages
[24:17.240 --> 24:20.240]  You should deny this as untimely
[24:20.240 --> 24:25.240]  And I said Your Honor, counsel knows better than that
[24:25.240 --> 24:28.240]  This is a challenge to subject matter jurisdiction
[24:28.240 --> 24:31.240]  Then the judge said yeah, I know, I know
[24:31.240 --> 24:36.240]  Counsel, we can't deny this for that reason
[24:36.240 --> 24:41.240]  They hate that and a lot of times you will get the JP
[24:41.240 --> 24:46.240]  To rule against you without reading the pleading
[24:46.240 --> 24:50.240]  Okay, yahoo
[24:50.240 --> 24:53.240]  Alright, so I've got another question
[24:53.240 --> 25:01.240]  Okay, now what if the homeowner had filed a quiet title action
[25:01.240 --> 25:09.240]  And this quiet title action had been dismissed by a 12B6
[25:09.240 --> 25:12.240]  How did it get to the Fed?
[25:12.240 --> 25:17.240]  It was moved there through diversity and threshold
[25:17.240 --> 25:19.240]  Here's the problem
[25:19.240 --> 25:23.240]  It can be moved there through diversity and threshold
[25:23.240 --> 25:30.240]  However, if there are state claims including in that pleading
[25:30.240 --> 25:37.240]  The federal court has no jurisdiction to hear the state claims
[25:37.240 --> 25:43.240]  So where they're moving these quiet title and trespass to try title
[25:43.240 --> 25:49.240]  The federal courts were also filing a challenge to subject matter jurisdiction
[25:49.240 --> 25:53.240]  As to the state claims
[25:53.240 --> 26:00.240]  When you file a quiet title or trespass to try title
[26:00.240 --> 26:02.240]  You're only making state claims
[26:02.240 --> 26:04.240]  Correct
[26:04.240 --> 26:12.240]  We're referring to the Federal Venue and Removal Clarification Act
[26:12.240 --> 26:15.240]  It says while you can remove that to the state court
[26:15.240 --> 26:20.240]  I mean the federal court on venue issue
[26:20.240 --> 26:22.240]  Diversity
[26:22.240 --> 26:26.240]  But the court can't hear the state claims
[26:26.240 --> 26:30.240]  They must sever the state claims and send them back
[26:30.240 --> 26:36.240]  Okay, so that's the problem they have and so you do a subject matter jurisdiction
[26:36.240 --> 26:40.240]  Not a motion to remand
[26:40.240 --> 26:45.240]  Subject matter jurisdiction puts the judge on a very, very different dime
[26:45.240 --> 26:53.240]  Okay, what if the court said that you have no standing to challenge an assignment?
[26:53.240 --> 26:56.240]  We have case law
[26:56.240 --> 27:03.240]  We just got a new one out of California that essentially says you do
[27:03.240 --> 27:07.240]  But it generally
[27:07.240 --> 27:11.240]  I go after the
[27:11.240 --> 27:12.240]  Okay, wait a minute
[27:12.240 --> 27:17.240]  If they do that it depends on which jurisdiction you're in because
[27:17.240 --> 27:26.240]  California's ruled you can, Texas ruled you can, Washington, Oregon, Massachusetts
[27:26.240 --> 27:31.240]  I'm trying to give worst case scenarios for the audience out there
[27:31.240 --> 27:33.240]  Okay
[27:33.240 --> 27:43.240]  And that's appropriate because you should expect the court to rule against you out of hand at every turn
[27:43.240 --> 27:45.240]  And that's why we're
[27:45.240 --> 27:48.240]  We just plan on that
[27:48.240 --> 27:52.240]  If they don't, wonderful, the better for you
[27:52.240 --> 28:01.240]  And that's one of the reasons that I've been pushing for getting the declaratory judgment prior to any action
[28:01.240 --> 28:07.240]  Find out the status quo of the parties before you invite them to your quiet title party
[28:07.240 --> 28:16.240]  Well, essentially a quiet title action is a petition for declaratory judgment
[28:16.240 --> 28:22.240]  Make sure your quiet title action is a petition for declaratory judgment
[28:22.240 --> 28:24.240]  And the way you do that
[28:24.240 --> 28:30.240]  You don't tell the judge that the lender's a scoundrel, that he committed fraud, that he's doing this other stuff
[28:30.240 --> 28:32.240]  Judges don't care
[28:32.240 --> 28:37.240]  The only thing that matters, this particular document
[28:37.240 --> 28:41.240]  Does this document meet the statutory filing requirements?
[28:41.240 --> 28:52.240]  And Joe, there's an issue that I got from you that may well be the elephant in the corner
[28:52.240 --> 28:56.240]  You know, I tell people that it's all about politics
[28:56.240 --> 29:00.240]  You're not going to win your case simply because you have the law and the facts on your side
[29:00.240 --> 29:02.240]  To think so is naive
[29:02.240 --> 29:04.240]  You win the case if you have the politics on your side
[29:04.240 --> 29:07.240]  So what is the court going to do when you come in and say
[29:07.240 --> 29:13.240]  Your Honor, this document was electronically filed
[29:13.240 --> 29:22.240]  Therefore you cannot see it as it was not filed in accordance with law
[29:22.240 --> 29:31.240]  As used in 15 U.S. Code 7001, the E-Filing Act authorizes electronic filing of court documents
[29:31.240 --> 29:37.240]  However, 7003 specifically exempts these particular documents
[29:37.240 --> 29:43.240]  Because every state requires that these documents be filed with the clerk
[29:43.240 --> 29:47.240]  With a document with an original signature on it
[29:47.240 --> 29:51.240]  So they are exempted from electronic filing
[29:51.240 --> 29:53.240]  That's the big political deal
[29:53.240 --> 29:54.240]  We'll talk about that when we get back
[29:54.240 --> 30:22.240]  Randy Kelton, Joe Escobel, we'll be right back
[30:24.240 --> 30:50.240]  We all love a bargain, but a new study says we're not so good at spotting one
[30:50.240 --> 30:53.240]  Turns out we're suckers for bigger sizes at regular prices
[30:53.240 --> 30:55.240]  Even when a discount would be better
[30:55.240 --> 30:58.240]  Researchers made two offers on coffee beans
[30:58.240 --> 31:02.240]  33% extra for free or 33% off the price
[31:02.240 --> 31:07.240]  The discount was by far the better deal, but the volunteers saw them as equal
[31:07.240 --> 31:11.240]  So why do shoppers go for the bigger size instead of the size that saves them the most money?
[31:11.240 --> 31:14.240]  Mostly because we're bad at fractions
[31:14.240 --> 31:17.240]  My advice is to compare the unit prices on store shelves
[31:17.240 --> 31:21.240]  Polish your mouth skills and beware of marketers' sneaky tricks
[31:21.240 --> 31:26.240]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht for startpage.com, the world's most private search engine
[31:51.240 --> 31:53.240]  Parasite does the job of 10 products
[31:53.240 --> 31:55.240]  That saves you space, time, and money
[31:55.240 --> 32:01.240]  Call 888-910-4367 only at mqsa.org
[32:01.240 --> 32:05.240]  Rule of Law Radio is proud to offer the rule of law traffic seminar
[32:05.240 --> 32:08.240]  In today's America, we live in an us-against-them society
[32:08.240 --> 32:10.240]  And if we the people are ever going to have a free society
[32:10.240 --> 32:13.240]  Then we're going to have to stand and defend our own rights
[32:13.240 --> 32:16.240]  Among those rights are the right to travel freely from place to place
[32:16.240 --> 32:17.240]  The right to act in our own private capacity
[32:17.240 --> 32:20.240]  And most importantly, the right to due process of law
[32:20.240 --> 32:23.240]  Traffic courts afford us the least expensive opportunity
[32:23.240 --> 32:26.240]  To learn how to enforce and preserve our rights through due process
[32:26.240 --> 32:29.240]  Former Sheriff's Deputy Eddie Craig, in conjunction with Rule of Law Radio
[32:29.240 --> 32:32.240]  Has put together the most comprehensive teaching tool available
[32:32.240 --> 32:34.240]  That will help you understand what due process is
[32:34.240 --> 32:36.240]  And how to hold courts to the rule of law
[32:36.240 --> 32:38.240]  You can get your own copy of this invaluable material
[32:38.240 --> 32:41.240]  By going to ruleoflawradio.com and ordering your copy today
[32:41.240 --> 32:43.240]  By ordering now, you'll receive a copy of Eddie's book
[32:43.240 --> 32:46.240]  The Texas Transportation Code, The Law Versus the Lie
[32:46.240 --> 32:48.240]  Video and audio of the original 2009 seminar
[32:48.240 --> 32:51.240]  Hundreds of research documents and other useful resource materials
[32:51.240 --> 32:53.240]  Learn how to fight for your rights with the help of this material
[32:53.240 --> 32:55.240]  From ruleoflawradio.com
[32:55.240 --> 32:56.240]  Order your copy today
[32:56.240 --> 33:00.240]  And together we can have the free society we all want and deserve
[33:04.240 --> 33:07.240]  You're listening to the Logos Radio Network
[33:07.240 --> 33:11.240]  At logosradionetwork.com
[33:11.240 --> 33:16.240]  Yeah, I got a warrant
[33:16.240 --> 33:19.240]  And I'm gonna solve them
[33:19.240 --> 33:22.240]  To the head government them
[33:22.240 --> 33:24.240]  Prosecute them
[33:24.240 --> 33:26.240]  Okay
[33:26.240 --> 33:30.240]  All set
[33:30.240 --> 33:35.240]  This isn't a race for me to taboo
[33:35.240 --> 33:40.240]  This isn't a race for the teen
[33:40.240 --> 33:43.240]  Well, I need a prosecutor
[33:43.240 --> 33:44.240]  To come and help me
[33:44.240 --> 33:46.240]  Prosecute them wicked leaders
[33:46.240 --> 33:47.240]  Yeah, you see
[33:47.240 --> 33:48.240]  Them murderers are liars
[33:48.240 --> 33:49.240]  Them tellers
[33:49.240 --> 33:51.240]  Them are liars
[33:51.240 --> 33:56.240]  Hi, this is Joe Esquivel, Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Rule of Law Radio
[33:56.240 --> 33:59.240]  And we are talking about procedures
[33:59.240 --> 34:04.240]  We are talking about trespass to quiet to try title
[34:04.240 --> 34:08.240]  We are talking about different remedies
[34:08.240 --> 34:12.240]  Most of them court procedures
[34:12.240 --> 34:14.240]  So, Randy
[34:14.240 --> 34:20.240]  We were talking about politics
[34:20.240 --> 34:21.240]  Correct
[34:21.240 --> 34:24.240]  This is all political
[34:24.240 --> 34:33.240]  And, you know, we're taught in school that we live in a land of law and statute
[34:33.240 --> 34:38.240]  And you can expect the courts to adjudicate your statutory rights
[34:38.240 --> 34:41.240]  Forget that nonsense
[34:41.240 --> 34:45.240]  You'll never win your case simply because you have the law and the facts on your side
[34:45.240 --> 34:47.240]  It is not that way now
[34:47.240 --> 34:51.240]  It never ever has been that way since we've had judges
[34:51.240 --> 34:55.240]  You'll win your case if you have the politics on your side
[34:55.240 --> 35:04.240]  Now, I know we're brought up to have an expectation of just adjudication and this kind of shatters that
[35:04.240 --> 35:07.240]  Well, okay, let's deal with it
[35:07.240 --> 35:13.240]  Just because it's political doesn't mean you don't have tools to work with
[35:13.240 --> 35:18.240]  You don't have tools to work with if you don't understand that it's political
[35:18.240 --> 35:24.240]  So we back up, we look at the law, and then we look at the politics
[35:24.240 --> 35:29.240]  So how do we generate a little politics and all politics is local?
[35:29.240 --> 35:43.240]  And one of the things we can do is we go in and say, you know, the way the clerk has been doing all these electronic filings for the last 14 years
[35:43.240 --> 35:48.240]  That is specifically forbidden by statute
[35:48.240 --> 35:54.240]  Therefore, every one of those documents are garbage
[35:54.240 --> 35:58.240]  Well, that's not going to make them happy
[35:58.240 --> 36:13.240]  But if you file the claim in there claiming that this particular document because it was electronically filed in violation of the specific restrictions in the E-filing Act
[36:13.240 --> 36:22.240]  And most of the states have adopted the Federal E-filing Act as the state of Texas has in total
[36:22.240 --> 36:35.240]  Then the filing of documents with the county recorder concerning real property electronically is specifically forbidden
[36:35.240 --> 36:39.240]  Because those documents are required to be originals
[36:39.240 --> 36:44.240]  You have to file the one with the original wedding signature on it
[36:44.240 --> 36:49.240]  And every state has a statute to that effect
[36:49.240 --> 36:54.240]  So you can't file these electronically, but they did file them electronically
[36:54.240 --> 37:03.240]  Here in Texas, at least here in Tarrant County, we had district clerk Wilder, he's been in a long time
[37:03.240 --> 37:07.240]  And he set up the E-filing system
[37:07.240 --> 37:12.240]  But he's a district clerk, he don't get any of these restricted records
[37:12.240 --> 37:16.240]  So it looks like he set this up and didn't pay attention to that part
[37:16.240 --> 37:19.240]  And then he made it available to the county clerks
[37:19.240 --> 37:23.240]  And they just did it the way Wilder set it up
[37:23.240 --> 37:31.240]  And I went down and asked to see the documents that the clerk had for filing for today
[37:31.240 --> 37:33.240]  Oh, we don't have any
[37:33.240 --> 37:38.240]  Well, then how do you file documents? Oh, we get all those electronically
[37:38.240 --> 37:40.240]  Oh, you get those electronically
[37:40.240 --> 37:46.240]  So how do you know what you're getting is actually a true and accurate copy of an original?
[37:46.240 --> 37:53.240]  Oh, well, we have a memorandum of understanding with the company that sends them to him
[37:53.240 --> 37:58.240]  Well, could I go to the company that filed these and get the documents?
[37:58.240 --> 38:01.240]  Oh, we don't get them from the company that filed them
[38:01.240 --> 38:03.240]  Oh, you don't? No, no, no
[38:03.240 --> 38:08.240]  There are companies set up for this purpose that everybody files their documents with this company
[38:08.240 --> 38:11.240]  And then the company files them with us
[38:11.240 --> 38:18.240]  Okay, so how do we know that the documents this company gives are true and accurate copies of the originals?
[38:18.240 --> 38:25.240]  Oh, well, they have a memorandum of understanding with the people who send them to them
[38:25.240 --> 38:27.240]  So I could go to those people and see the originals
[38:27.240 --> 38:33.240]  Oh, no, no, no, there are the title companies
[38:33.240 --> 38:37.240]  And now you're going to tell me they have a memorandum of understanding
[38:37.240 --> 38:42.240]  Well, I don't know about that
[38:42.240 --> 38:46.240]  I said, you're kidding, right?
[38:46.240 --> 38:57.240]  What about 15 U.S. Code 7003, which specifically forbids you to file these electronically
[38:57.240 --> 39:01.240]  And you could hear her swallow her gum
[39:01.240 --> 39:05.240]  So you go into court and you make this accusation
[39:05.240 --> 39:08.240]  And I make it at the top of every one of mine
[39:08.240 --> 39:15.240]  That the judge cannot see this document as the document is not properly filed in the record
[39:15.240 --> 39:21.240]  What happens if they give me a ruling on that?
[39:21.240 --> 39:27.240]  They void everything that's been filed for the last 14 years
[39:27.240 --> 39:34.240]  Rule of law be damned, they're not going to give me that ruling
[39:34.240 --> 39:38.240]  But what happens if they rule against me?
[39:38.240 --> 39:41.240]  I appeal it
[39:41.240 --> 39:49.240]  What are the odds that I might get this before a receptive federal court venue
[39:49.240 --> 39:53.240]  After I appeal it up to the Supreme
[39:53.240 --> 39:58.240]  That they may say you're right, the law specifically forbids this
[39:58.240 --> 40:03.240]  Now the county has 14 years worth of filings that are trash
[40:03.240 --> 40:15.240]  The only way to keep me from doing that is to give me a ruling in my favor on something else
[40:15.240 --> 40:19.240]  Politics has nothing to do with law
[40:19.240 --> 40:23.240]  Look for these kinds of things
[40:23.240 --> 40:32.240]  Look for issues you can bring that will create an onerous condition for the courts
[40:32.240 --> 40:41.240]  The court's judges do not want to render rulings that will change the legal landscape as they know it
[40:41.240 --> 40:45.240]  So in order to keep from having to make a ruling on that
[40:45.240 --> 40:53.240]  All they have to do is give you a positive ruling on something else so you don't appeal their decision
[40:53.240 --> 40:55.240]  Politics
[40:55.240 --> 40:58.240]  Makes sense
[40:58.240 --> 41:02.240]  This is the only way we're going to begin to win these things
[41:02.240 --> 41:05.240]  And there are other things we can do for politics
[41:05.240 --> 41:10.240]  If you're going pro se, you've got all these nasty little things you can do to the judge
[41:10.240 --> 41:17.240]  And the lawyer on the other side, you hammer them with book grievances, motions for sanctions
[41:17.240 --> 41:21.240]  These lawyers never seem to get it right
[41:21.240 --> 41:30.240]  And if you start hammering the judge with judicial conduct complaints or whatever you can do to annoy him
[41:30.240 --> 41:34.240]  He can't come to you and say a word about it
[41:34.240 --> 41:39.240]  But he can go to the lawyers on the other side and tell them you do something with this guy
[41:39.240 --> 41:44.240]  Get him off my butt or I'm going to kick your behind
[41:44.240 --> 41:45.240]  Politics
[41:45.240 --> 41:47.240]  Now let's go back to procedure
[41:47.240 --> 41:52.240]  So that's the first argument I put in is that the filing procedure was improper
[41:52.240 --> 41:55.240]  Therefore the court cannot see this document
[41:55.240 --> 42:00.240]  But
[42:00.240 --> 42:03.240]  First thing you want to do is a quiet title
[42:03.240 --> 42:09.240]  And you can do a quiet title against any document that's in the record
[42:09.240 --> 42:12.240]  Even if it's post foreclosure
[42:12.240 --> 42:16.240]  Now that won't stop them from foreclosing on you
[42:16.240 --> 42:21.240]  So since we were at the point to, I mean sorry, that won't keep you from evicting you
[42:21.240 --> 42:28.240]  The reason for a trespass to try a title or a challenge to the trustee's deed
[42:28.240 --> 42:33.240]  That's the one that will stop them from foreclosing
[42:33.240 --> 42:39.240]  You can file against any document that's been filed and you can do those one at a time
[42:39.240 --> 42:41.240]  One at a time?
[42:41.240 --> 42:42.240]  Oh yeah
[42:42.240 --> 42:45.240]  Because it's declaratory judgment
[42:45.240 --> 42:51.240]  You're saying your honor this particular document has been filed in the record
[42:51.240 --> 42:55.240]  Now there may be other documents filed in the record that you have issues with
[42:55.240 --> 42:57.240]  But this is the only issue you're bringing before the court
[42:57.240 --> 43:04.240]  And there is no requirement for you to bring every issue on every document you can find in there
[43:04.240 --> 43:08.240]  It's bad so you look through the records you find the first thing you find wrong and you sue
[43:08.240 --> 43:11.240]  And they rule against you and you appeal
[43:11.240 --> 43:16.240]  And you jack that one around as long as you can and you come right back with another one
[43:16.240 --> 43:21.240]  It's all about delay and cost in the end, it's all about the money
[43:21.240 --> 43:24.240]  And if you get through all of that
[43:24.240 --> 43:31.240]  Then if you're at, if they're coming to your doorstep to evict you
[43:31.240 --> 43:34.240]  File bankruptcy and claim to property is unsecured
[43:34.240 --> 43:42.240]  But only do that at the very last thing after you have used up all of your other issues
[43:42.240 --> 43:44.240]  We're about to go to break when we come back
[43:44.240 --> 43:49.240]  I'll talk about what you do after you run out of quiet title claims
[43:49.240 --> 43:54.240]  Then you go after the, you sue the person who purchased the property
[43:54.240 --> 43:58.240]  Randy Kelton, Steve Esquivel, we'll be right back
[43:58.240 --> 44:05.240]  Hello, my name is Stuart Smith from naturespureorganics.com
[44:05.240 --> 44:10.240]  And I would like to invite you to come by our store at 1904 Guadalupe Street, Sweet D
[44:10.240 --> 44:13.240]  Here in Austin, Texas, I'm Brave New Books and Jay Pay
[44:13.240 --> 44:17.240]  To see all our fantastic health and wellness products with your very own eyes
[44:17.240 --> 44:21.240]  Have a look at our Miracle Healing Clay that started our adventure in alternative medicine
[44:21.240 --> 44:24.240]  Take a peek at some of our other wonderful products including
[44:24.240 --> 44:29.240]  Our Australian Emu Oil, Lotion Candles, Olive Oil Soaps, and Colloidal Silver and Gold
[44:29.240 --> 44:36.240]  Call 512-264-4043 or find us online at naturespureorganics.com
[44:36.240 --> 44:42.240]  That's 512-264-4043 naturespureorganics.com
[44:42.240 --> 44:46.240]  Don't forget to like us on Facebook for information on events and our products
[44:46.240 --> 45:01.240]  naturespureorganics.com
[45:01.240 --> 45:04.240]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[45:04.240 --> 45:07.240]  Win your case without an attorney with Juris Dictionary
[45:07.240 --> 45:13.240]  The affordable, easy to understand, poor CD course that will show you how in 24 hours
[45:13.240 --> 45:18.240]  step by step If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing
[45:18.240 --> 45:22.240]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself
[45:22.240 --> 45:27.240]  Thousands have won with our step by step course and now you can too
[45:27.240 --> 45:33.240]  Juris Dictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case winning experience
[45:33.240 --> 45:38.240]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand
[45:38.240 --> 45:43.240]  about the principles and practices that control our American courts
[45:43.240 --> 45:49.240]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases
[45:49.240 --> 45:52.240]  pro se tactics, and much more
[45:52.240 --> 45:56.240]  Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner
[45:56.240 --> 46:12.240]  or call toll free 866-LAW-EASY
[46:12.240 --> 46:35.240]  Music
[46:35.240 --> 46:41.240]  Okay, we are back. Brandy Kelton, Joe Esquivel, Deborah Stevens, Rule of Law Radio
[46:41.240 --> 46:45.240]  and we're talking about things that you can do
[46:45.240 --> 46:54.240]  and it's important that you not mix things up, especially when you're doing declaratory judgments
[46:54.240 --> 46:58.240]  You do, you look at one document and there's a problem with this document
[46:58.240 --> 47:06.240]  and you're just doing your duty, you want to keep the public record accurate
[47:06.240 --> 47:11.240]  So you file this action to correct the public record
[47:11.240 --> 47:15.240]  You don't make any claims against any other parties
[47:15.240 --> 47:20.240]  You absolutely do not ask for damages
[47:20.240 --> 47:24.240]  If you ask for damages, it's no longer declaratory judgment
[47:24.240 --> 47:34.240]  You merely ask the court to render a ruling on the validity of a document as it's filed in the record
[47:34.240 --> 47:39.240]  and walk through all of the documents that are in there
[47:39.240 --> 47:44.240]  Once you get through those and the courts rule against you on all of them
[47:44.240 --> 47:49.240]  one of my favorite things to do is sue for fraud
[47:49.240 --> 47:57.240]  Now, here's the deal, if there are documents in the record that are improper
[47:57.240 --> 48:08.240]  and a trustee who doesn't have standing to do the foreclosure does the foreclosure
[48:08.240 --> 48:14.240]  If it's apparent from examining the documents in the record
[48:14.240 --> 48:22.240]  everyone has imputed knowledge of everything that's in the public record
[48:22.240 --> 48:27.240]  So if some jackleg comes along and buys this property at auction
[48:27.240 --> 48:34.240]  it must be presumed that he was well aware of everything that was in the record
[48:34.240 --> 48:40.240]  So he acted with full knowledge of the improprieties that sue him
[48:40.240 --> 48:43.240]  That really makes him unhappy
[48:43.240 --> 48:50.240]  Guy goes to an auction, buys the property and he gets sued for fraud
[48:50.240 --> 48:54.240]  Because he should have had knowledge of what was going on, correct?
[48:54.240 --> 48:59.240]  Yeah, he has knowledge legally whether he has it actually
[48:59.240 --> 49:03.240]  and he can't come to the court and say, I didn't know
[49:03.240 --> 49:06.240]  Sorry, Bubba, life is tough
[49:06.240 --> 49:15.240]  When you sue the buyer, the buyer is immediately going to sue the bank that sold it to him
[49:15.240 --> 49:18.240]  It's all about politics, guys
[49:18.240 --> 49:23.240]  How can we make life miserable for these guys?
[49:23.240 --> 49:28.240]  Now, I never ever suggested you file a federal suit
[49:28.240 --> 49:31.240]  and you never have to
[49:31.240 --> 49:35.240]  These guys screw up so much
[49:35.240 --> 49:39.240]  You will have more, if you look close at the records
[49:39.240 --> 49:45.240]  you'll have more claims you can make against them than you can get to
[49:45.240 --> 49:49.240]  You have more claims than you'll even want to try to adjudicate
[49:49.240 --> 49:52.240]  So you look through the claims
[49:52.240 --> 49:59.240]  and see which claims seem to fall in line one to the other
[49:59.240 --> 50:06.240]  that leads to a particularly heinous conclusion
[50:06.240 --> 50:10.240]  And there may be some claims in there that would lead away from that conclusion
[50:10.240 --> 50:13.240]  We leave those out
[50:13.240 --> 50:18.240]  We just bring in the ones that would help you to convince the jury
[50:18.240 --> 50:22.240]  that these guys are really scoundrels and you did this on purpose
[50:22.240 --> 50:25.240]  And that's really a lot easier to do than you think
[50:25.240 --> 50:32.240]  The way to do that is the first thing you do is write a statement of facts
[50:32.240 --> 50:39.240]  And the best thing to help you with that is if there's been any court cases
[50:39.240 --> 50:44.240]  any court procedures involved, get the docket sheet
[50:44.240 --> 50:47.240]  The docket sheet provides a timeline
[50:47.240 --> 50:51.240]  This was filed, this was filed, this was filed, this was filed
[50:51.240 --> 50:54.240]  And then take that docket sheet and go before this
[50:54.240 --> 50:59.240]  On this date, I contacted a real estate agent on this date
[50:59.240 --> 51:03.240]  I looked at the property on this date, we had a closing
[51:03.240 --> 51:07.240]  Just put down the dates that things happen
[51:07.240 --> 51:13.240]  And then go back and look at them and fill in the spaces in between them
[51:13.240 --> 51:20.240]  I just helped my niece file a petition for a protective order in a divorce issue
[51:20.240 --> 51:23.240]  And that's what we did, we walked out through it
[51:23.240 --> 51:27.240]  And just said, on this date this happened, this date this happened
[51:27.240 --> 51:31.240]  We never said anything negative about the husband
[51:31.240 --> 51:34.240]  We just said on this date he did this, on this date
[51:34.240 --> 51:37.240]  Now some of those things sounded pretty bad
[51:37.240 --> 51:41.240]  But we didn't say they were bad, we just said he did these things
[51:41.240 --> 51:44.240]  Put it all together, take it to court
[51:44.240 --> 51:48.240]  They take it back to the judge, come out, the judge signed it
[51:48.240 --> 51:52.240]  Didn't even talk to her
[51:52.240 --> 51:54.240]  Didn't need to
[51:54.240 --> 51:57.240]  Everything he needed was in there
[51:57.240 --> 52:03.240]  He read the facts and the facts led from one conclusion to the next
[52:03.240 --> 52:07.240]  And it led him to the exact conclusion we wanted him to come through
[52:07.240 --> 52:12.240]  Writing a statement of facts is an art
[52:12.240 --> 52:15.240]  Don't just throw a bunch of facts in there
[52:15.240 --> 52:17.240]  Put in every one of the facts
[52:17.240 --> 52:24.240]  And once you have all the facts in there, then go back and decide what story you want to tell
[52:24.240 --> 52:27.240]  And then look at those facts
[52:27.240 --> 52:34.240]  That point would cause a reasonable person of ordinary prudence in reading these facts
[52:34.240 --> 52:37.240]  To come to this conclusion
[52:37.240 --> 52:40.240]  And that's the conclusion you want him to come to
[52:40.240 --> 52:44.240]  Then when you get to the part where you're asking him to do something
[52:44.240 --> 52:46.240]  And you state the conclusion
[52:46.240 --> 52:49.240]  He'll think you're really smart
[52:49.240 --> 52:53.240]  Because you think just like he does
[52:53.240 --> 52:57.240]  Because you came to the same conclusion he did
[52:57.240 --> 52:59.240]  Does that make sense, Joe?
[52:59.240 --> 53:02.240]  Yes, that does
[53:02.240 --> 53:05.240]  And when you put this together
[53:05.240 --> 53:12.240]  Be real careful about sounding angry, sounding mistreated
[53:12.240 --> 53:16.240]  You know, no divisive language
[53:16.240 --> 53:20.240]  Just real clear matter of fact because
[53:20.240 --> 53:24.240]  If I say it, it can be a lie
[53:24.240 --> 53:28.240]  If you think it, it's true
[53:28.240 --> 53:31.240]  So we craft our facts
[53:31.240 --> 53:35.240]  So that the judge reads the facts and he comes to
[53:35.240 --> 53:37.240]  Then he thinks it
[53:37.240 --> 53:39.240]  Now he owns it
[53:39.240 --> 53:42.240]  Okay, that's all I'm going to say about statement of facts
[53:42.240 --> 53:44.240]  Once you have that together
[53:44.240 --> 53:49.240]  Now look at the documents in the record
[53:49.240 --> 53:50.240]  How do the document
[53:50.240 --> 53:52.240]  Which one of the documents in the record
[53:52.240 --> 53:54.240]  If you could get it blown out
[53:54.240 --> 53:58.240]  Would screw up everything for them
[53:58.240 --> 54:03.240]  Which one is the one most likely to get blown out
[54:03.240 --> 54:10.240]  And pick your fights based on the documentation you have
[54:10.240 --> 54:11.240]  And look at it
[54:11.240 --> 54:14.240]  Okay, if I file on this one
[54:14.240 --> 54:15.240]  And they rule against me
[54:15.240 --> 54:18.240]  What will be my next claim?
[54:18.240 --> 54:21.240]  It's kind of like playing chess
[54:21.240 --> 54:26.240]  I want to go after an appointment of substitute trustee
[54:26.240 --> 54:28.240]  And they rule against me on that
[54:28.240 --> 54:34.240]  Then I want to back up to the assignment of the security instrument
[54:34.240 --> 54:39.240]  To the party who appointed the substitute trustee
[54:39.240 --> 54:45.240]  And then back all the way up to the security instrument
[54:45.240 --> 54:47.240]  Because in the security instrument
[54:47.240 --> 54:51.240]  Now we start going to contractual issues
[54:51.240 --> 54:56.240]  Once you've done all of the quiet title
[54:56.240 --> 55:02.240]  You can make quiet title claims on the security instrument
[55:02.240 --> 55:05.240]  Based on problems
[55:05.240 --> 55:08.240]  Generic problems with the instrument
[55:08.240 --> 55:11.240]  One of which MERS is named in the instrument
[55:11.240 --> 55:18.240]  But the lender did not affirm the appointment of MERS
[55:18.240 --> 55:22.240]  MERS is named in the definition section
[55:22.240 --> 55:24.240]  As a nominee for the lender
[55:24.240 --> 55:26.240]  But if you look in the county record
[55:26.240 --> 55:34.240]  You won't find the power of attorney file there
[55:34.240 --> 55:38.240]  So while this defies him as their agent
[55:38.240 --> 55:41.240]  There's nothing that appoints him as the agent
[55:41.240 --> 55:42.240]  Okay
[55:42.240 --> 55:45.240]  This document can't appoint him as the agent
[55:45.240 --> 55:48.240]  Because he's not your agent
[55:48.240 --> 55:50.240]  He's the lender's agent
[55:50.240 --> 55:54.240]  So if the lender is saying this appoints MERS
[55:54.240 --> 55:56.240]  Say wait a minute
[55:56.240 --> 55:59.240]  I come in and I say Mr. Linder I don't like your lawyer
[55:59.240 --> 56:01.240]  He's a chump
[56:01.240 --> 56:04.240]  And my security instrument I'm going to fire your agent
[56:04.240 --> 56:07.240]  And I'm going to appoint my brother-in-law
[56:07.240 --> 56:10.240]  How's that going to work for you?
[56:10.240 --> 56:14.240]  Well he's going to tell me I can't do that
[56:14.240 --> 56:18.240]  The only way the security instrument can appoint an agent
[56:18.240 --> 56:23.240]  For the lender is if the lender affirms the appointment
[56:23.240 --> 56:30.240]  And how many lenders have you seen sign the security instrument?
[56:30.240 --> 56:32.240]  None of them is a unilateral contract
[56:32.240 --> 56:33.240]  Correct?
[56:33.240 --> 56:34.240]  Yeah
[56:34.240 --> 56:36.240]  For 200 years they didn't have to
[56:36.240 --> 56:42.240]  Because only the borrower granted concessions
[56:42.240 --> 56:45.240]  But when they put MERS in there
[56:45.240 --> 56:48.240]  And if they claim that MERS
[56:48.240 --> 56:52.240]  The reference to MERS appoints MERS
[56:52.240 --> 56:56.240]  Then they would have to affirm the appointment
[56:56.240 --> 56:59.240]  Or there would have to be power of attorney in the record
[56:59.240 --> 57:02.240]  And then you look at MERS itself
[57:02.240 --> 57:06.240]  If it's a non-judicial state
[57:06.240 --> 57:10.240]  The first paragraph of the contract itself
[57:10.240 --> 57:13.240]  Is the transfer of property rights
[57:13.240 --> 57:16.240]  All the rest of that's just definitions
[57:16.240 --> 57:20.240]  And it purports to transfer legal title to the trustee
[57:20.240 --> 57:23.240]  To hold interest for both parties
[57:23.240 --> 57:26.240]  The very next paragraph
[57:26.240 --> 57:31.240]  And I'm relatively certain that whoever wrote that was high on coke
[57:31.240 --> 57:34.240]  Because it's the together with paragraph
[57:34.240 --> 57:36.240]  That includes any improvements to the property
[57:36.240 --> 57:39.240]  Right in the middle of that they struck a sentence in there
[57:39.240 --> 57:42.240]  That said you understand that MERS is not the beneficiary
[57:42.240 --> 57:46.240]  But merely holds legal title
[57:46.240 --> 57:49.240]  Well how does that work Bubba?
[57:49.240 --> 57:52.240]  If this is a deed of trust
[57:52.240 --> 57:55.240]  The trustee must hold legal title
[57:55.240 --> 57:58.240]  There is equitable title and legal title
[57:58.240 --> 58:00.240]  Beneficiary holds equitable title
[58:00.240 --> 58:03.240]  Trustee holds legal title
[58:03.240 --> 58:05.240]  Then they give it to MERS
[58:05.240 --> 58:07.240]  That makes it a grant
[58:07.240 --> 58:10.240]  A mortgage not a deed of trust
[58:10.240 --> 58:15.240]  In Texas that is specifically forbidden
[58:15.240 --> 58:19.240]  The lender may not require the borrower
[58:19.240 --> 58:24.240]  To transfer their property to the lender
[58:24.240 --> 58:28.240]  The lender's deed of trust void on its face
[58:28.240 --> 58:31.240]  For being in violation of state law
[58:31.240 --> 58:35.240]  Hang on, we're into Kelton, Joe Escobel
[58:35.240 --> 58:37.240]  And I didn't get to bankruptcy
[58:37.240 --> 58:40.240]  Let me just finish with bankruptcy and false fees
[58:40.240 --> 58:43.240]  And then we'll go to callers
[58:43.240 --> 58:46.240]  I think I'm talking too much
[58:46.240 --> 58:49.240]  I'll call it number 512-646-1984
[58:49.240 --> 58:53.240]  Would you like to make more definite progress in your walk with God?
[58:53.240 --> 59:00.240]  Bibles for America is offering a free study Bible and a set of free Christian books that can really help
[59:00.240 --> 59:05.240]  The New Testament Recovery Version is one of the most comprehensive study Bibles available today
[59:05.240 --> 59:12.240]  It's an accurate translation and it contains thousands of footnotes that will help you to know God and to know the meaning of life
[59:12.240 --> 59:17.240]  The free books are a three volume set called Basic Elements of the Christian Life
[59:17.240 --> 59:23.240]  Chapter by chapter, Basic Elements of the Christian Life clearly presents God's plan of salvation
[59:23.240 --> 59:27.240]  Growing in Christ and how to build up the church
[59:27.240 --> 59:33.240]  To order your free New Testament Recovery Version and Basic Elements of the Christian Life
[59:33.240 --> 59:40.240]  Call Bibles for America toll free at 888-551-0102
[59:40.240 --> 59:44.240]  That's 888-551-0102
[59:44.240 --> 59:49.240]  Or visit us online at bfa.org
[01:00:15.240 --> 01:00:19.240]  This is Justin Armand with your Liberty Beat for June 27, 2014
[01:00:19.240 --> 01:00:22.240]  Gold opens today at $1,320
[01:00:22.240 --> 01:00:24.240]  Silver at $21.12
[01:00:24.240 --> 01:00:27.240]  And Bitcoin is trading at $587
[01:00:27.240 --> 01:00:31.240]  Support for the Liberty Beat comes from the notorious activist Michael Cargill
[01:00:31.240 --> 01:00:34.240]  He has a new show called Come and Talk It!
[01:00:34.240 --> 01:00:38.240]  Live Sunday afternoon at 4pm on 1370am in Austin
[01:00:38.240 --> 01:00:43.240]  That's 1370am in Austin on Sunday at 4pm
[01:00:43.240 --> 01:00:47.240]  And from My Magic Mud, an all natural teeth whitening and strengthening remedy
[01:00:47.240 --> 01:00:51.240]  Go to mymagicmud.com to hear a short interview with Dr. Griffin Cole
[01:00:51.240 --> 01:00:53.240]  Or pick up a jar at Brave New Books
[01:00:53.240 --> 01:00:55.240]  And now the news
[01:00:55.240 --> 01:01:00.240]  Texans for Accountable Government will be holding their monthly meeting at Sherlocks in Austin, Texas
[01:01:00.240 --> 01:01:03.240]  On the agenda is Ed Heimlich speaking about Sovereign Immunity
[01:01:03.240 --> 01:01:07.240]  Dana Ames will be discussing plans to bring attention to Liberty candidate Laura Presley
[01:01:07.240 --> 01:01:09.240]  Who's running for Austin City Council
[01:01:09.240 --> 01:01:14.240]  Cheyenne from Texas Normal will be speaking about strategic plans for marijuana policy reform
[01:01:14.240 --> 01:01:18.240]  And Rachel Kenia will talk about what it takes to get elected
[01:01:18.240 --> 01:01:24.240]  Justin Delache will be addressing Second Amendment rights and more reasonable self-defense policy for Texans
[01:01:24.240 --> 01:01:28.240]  Texans for Accountable Government will be forming committees around these issues
[01:01:28.240 --> 01:01:30.240]  Which will be led by the best and brightest activists
[01:01:30.240 --> 01:01:35.240]  Come to the meeting and get involved Monday, June 30 at Sherlocks Pub
[01:01:35.240 --> 01:01:40.240]  More information at tagtexas.org. That's tagtexas.org
[01:01:42.240 --> 01:01:44.240]  Big news for Texas
[01:01:44.240 --> 01:01:48.240]  On Thursday, Austin City Council voted to approve medical marijuana
[01:01:48.240 --> 01:01:53.240]  The resolution, which was sponsored by councilmen Bill Spellman and Mike Martinez
[01:01:53.240 --> 01:01:56.240]  Supports legislation to legalize the use of medical marijuana
[01:01:56.240 --> 01:02:00.240]  State Representative Elliot Nashtat tried for more than a decade without success
[01:02:00.240 --> 01:02:04.240]  To pass a state law regarding patients using medical pot
[01:02:04.240 --> 01:02:07.240]  Marijuana is still illegal under state and federal laws
[01:02:07.240 --> 01:02:13.240]  The Marijuana Policy Project, the same group responsible for helping Colorado pass its recreational pot laws
[01:02:13.240 --> 01:02:18.240]  Has set up shop in Austin, hoping to achieve legalization by 2019
[01:02:20.240 --> 01:02:24.240]  A report by Bloomberg reveals that hospitals are using detailed consumer data
[01:02:24.240 --> 01:02:30.240]  To create profiles on current and even potential patients to identify those most likely to get sick
[01:02:30.240 --> 01:02:35.240]  The information is being provided by data brokers, public records and credit card transactions
[01:02:35.240 --> 01:02:40.240]  That detail where a person shops, eats, what they smoke and much more
[01:02:40.240 --> 01:02:44.240]  The largest hospital chain in the Carolinas is plugging data for 2 million people
[01:02:44.240 --> 01:02:48.240]  In algorithms designed to identify high-risk patients
[01:02:48.240 --> 01:02:51.240]  Support for this program comes from Cabo Bobs
[01:02:51.240 --> 01:02:57.240]  Now with two locations in Austin at 500 East Finwhite Boulevard and 2828 Rio Grande Boulevard
[01:02:57.240 --> 01:03:00.240]  This is Justin Armand reporting with the Liberty Beat
[01:03:17.240 --> 01:03:22.240]  Okay, we are back, Randy Kelton, Joe Esquivel, Steve Skidmore
[01:03:22.240 --> 01:03:27.240]  Here's our radio, Steve made it in
[01:03:27.240 --> 01:03:32.240]  I made it, we had the 4 o'clock Friday freak out
[01:03:32.240 --> 01:03:35.240]  Where everybody thinks their world is flying apart at the seams
[01:03:35.240 --> 01:03:37.240]  Did Chicken Little come into the room soon?
[01:03:37.240 --> 01:03:40.240]  Chicken Little, yeah, the sky was falling and everything
[01:03:40.240 --> 01:03:42.240]  And did you hold it up?
[01:03:42.240 --> 01:03:44.240]  As best I could
[01:03:44.240 --> 01:03:45.240]  That's all it need be
[01:03:45.240 --> 01:03:49.240]  I quit holding it up at 20 after 8, said I got things to do guys
[01:03:49.240 --> 01:03:54.240]  So, yeah, my law firm
[01:03:54.240 --> 01:03:58.240]  Okay, I'm going to finish up this kind of a dissertation thing
[01:03:58.240 --> 01:04:00.240]  And I'm going kind of quickly across it
[01:04:00.240 --> 01:04:02.240]  But there are a lot of things you can do
[01:04:02.240 --> 01:04:08.240]  And those are just a couple of issues you can bring on the security instrument
[01:04:08.240 --> 01:04:10.240]  We've got a whole stack of them
[01:04:10.240 --> 01:04:13.240]  And you make those arguments
[01:04:13.240 --> 01:04:17.240]  Look at your HUD 1 settlement statement
[01:04:17.240 --> 01:04:22.240]  Once you have all the arguments for the documentation adjudicated against you
[01:04:22.240 --> 01:04:25.240]  Now we go to fraud
[01:04:25.240 --> 01:04:27.240]  At closing
[01:04:27.240 --> 01:04:29.240]  You said the F word
[01:04:29.240 --> 01:04:35.240]  Did the lender bring documentation to the table
[01:04:35.240 --> 01:04:41.240]  That showed that the fees charged on the HUD 1 settlement statement
[01:04:41.240 --> 01:04:47.240]  Were fees that were not otherwise forbidden to be charged by law
[01:04:47.240 --> 01:04:52.240]  Were fees for services actually rendered
[01:04:52.240 --> 01:04:55.240]  That the services were necessary
[01:04:55.240 --> 01:04:59.240]  That the services were provided by a bona fide vendor
[01:04:59.240 --> 01:05:03.240]  And not by a front company from one of your fiduciaries
[01:05:03.240 --> 01:05:06.240]  As a bribe to the fiduciary
[01:05:06.240 --> 01:05:12.240]  That the amounts charged were reasonable
[01:05:12.240 --> 01:05:17.240]  And that the lender did not take an undisclosed markup on the fees charged
[01:05:17.240 --> 01:05:20.240]  This walks right down the Truth in Vending Act
[01:05:20.240 --> 01:05:24.240]  Restrictions and requirements on fees charged
[01:05:24.240 --> 01:05:29.240]  Now, I've never had anybody that said, yeah, they brought documentation
[01:05:29.240 --> 01:05:32.240]  They just put amounts on the HUD 1 settlement statement
[01:05:32.240 --> 01:05:37.240]  So how do you know if those amounts are valid?
[01:05:37.240 --> 01:05:40.240]  How do you know that you're sticking something in there?
[01:05:40.240 --> 01:05:44.240]  You're supposed to get disclosures of all the fees and what they're for
[01:05:44.240 --> 01:05:47.240]  And how much they're allowed to charge and all that, aren't you?
[01:05:47.240 --> 01:05:51.240]  If you've got disclosure of what they're allowed to charge and such
[01:05:51.240 --> 01:05:54.240]  And that's all
[01:05:54.240 --> 01:05:56.240]  No
[01:05:56.240 --> 01:05:59.240]  You have disclosure in the form of the Truth in Vending Act
[01:05:59.240 --> 01:06:02.240]  It tells what they can charge
[01:06:02.240 --> 01:06:10.240]  It says that they can charge for extraordinary services
[01:06:10.240 --> 01:06:15.240]  Those things that are the normal part of doing business
[01:06:15.240 --> 01:06:20.240]  Are intended to be taken out of the finance charge
[01:06:20.240 --> 01:06:25.240]  The interest they charge you on the notes
[01:06:25.240 --> 01:06:28.240]  But instead of taking these fees out of the finance charge
[01:06:28.240 --> 01:06:33.240]  They add them to the head of the note and charge your interest on it for 30 years
[01:06:33.240 --> 01:06:35.240]  And the fees themselves
[01:06:35.240 --> 01:06:40.240]  Did you get any invoicing for any of those fees?
[01:06:40.240 --> 01:06:42.240]  Well, wait a minute, wait a minute
[01:06:42.240 --> 01:06:45.240]  If they're charging interest, it's no longer a fee
[01:06:45.240 --> 01:06:49.240]  That's the way it's intended to be
[01:06:49.240 --> 01:06:51.240]  It's intended to be
[01:06:51.240 --> 01:06:56.240]  Where they charge the fee by adding it to the head of the note
[01:06:56.240 --> 01:06:58.240]  So they billed you for it
[01:06:58.240 --> 01:07:02.240]  And then they financed payment of the fee
[01:07:02.240 --> 01:07:05.240]  It was intended that it not be a fee
[01:07:05.240 --> 01:07:10.240]  That it be paid out of the interest
[01:07:10.240 --> 01:07:12.240]  So instead of being paid out of the interest
[01:07:12.240 --> 01:07:15.240]  They charged it to you and added it to the head of the note
[01:07:15.240 --> 01:07:18.240]  Now they're charging interest on the fee
[01:07:18.240 --> 01:07:22.240]  That should have been paid by the interest
[01:07:22.240 --> 01:07:26.240]  If you didn't get any documentation to prove that those were valid
[01:07:26.240 --> 01:07:29.240]  Then you go in and say, hey guys
[01:07:29.240 --> 01:07:32.240]  I think there's some RODASH fees in here
[01:07:32.240 --> 01:07:36.240]  And RODASH was a case out of Florida
[01:07:36.240 --> 01:07:39.240]  Over a $50 fee
[01:07:39.240 --> 01:07:41.240]  And she won it
[01:07:41.240 --> 01:07:44.240]  They couldn't validate the fee
[01:07:44.240 --> 01:07:46.240]  I can assure you
[01:07:46.240 --> 01:07:53.240]  Every hard-won statement that I've looked at has fraudulent fees on it
[01:07:53.240 --> 01:07:55.240]  Talk to anybody who was in the business
[01:07:55.240 --> 01:07:58.240]  When I've got people who were in the business
[01:07:58.240 --> 01:08:00.240]  Who were looking at foreclosure
[01:08:00.240 --> 01:08:03.240]  And I suggested making this claim
[01:08:03.240 --> 01:08:06.240]  They said, don't you dare
[01:08:06.240 --> 01:08:11.240]  Because they were afraid it would come back on them
[01:08:11.240 --> 01:08:17.240]  Because they had done that and they knew full well there were fraudulent fees in there
[01:08:17.240 --> 01:08:21.240]  So what we do is claim all of them are fraudulent
[01:08:21.240 --> 01:08:25.240]  You didn't prove up any of them so they're all fraudulent
[01:08:25.240 --> 01:08:28.240]  And I subtract it from the head of the note
[01:08:28.240 --> 01:08:31.240]  As an overpayment
[01:08:31.240 --> 01:08:35.240]  Just run an amortization on the note
[01:08:35.240 --> 01:08:39.240]  And then on the first payment subtract all of the fees from the head of the note
[01:08:39.240 --> 01:08:42.240]  And then go all the way down to the last payment
[01:08:42.240 --> 01:08:45.240]  It's going to be in red
[01:08:45.240 --> 01:08:49.240]  On Steeze Kidmore's it was $50,000
[01:08:49.240 --> 01:08:52.240]  If I remember right, $50,000.43
[01:08:52.240 --> 01:08:54.240]  It was a little over $42,000 I think
[01:08:54.240 --> 01:08:55.240]  In fees?
[01:08:55.240 --> 01:08:56.240]  Yes
[01:08:56.240 --> 01:08:59.240]  Once the fees were amortized
[01:08:59.240 --> 01:09:02.240]  No, this wasn't in fees
[01:09:02.240 --> 01:09:04.240]  There were $12,000 in fees
[01:09:04.240 --> 01:09:07.240]  $116,000 note
[01:09:07.240 --> 01:09:11.240]  But those fees, if you took them off
[01:09:11.240 --> 01:09:16.240]  He would have overpaid the note by $42,000
[01:09:16.240 --> 01:09:19.240]  On a $116,000 note
[01:09:19.240 --> 01:09:22.240]  Yeah, and when I told them to fix it, they foreclosed
[01:09:22.240 --> 01:09:26.240]  They fixed it, they fixed it alright, yeah
[01:09:26.240 --> 01:09:29.240]  So we sue them for that and we tell them
[01:09:29.240 --> 01:09:35.240]  And I told them if you provide documentation to validate these fees
[01:09:35.240 --> 01:09:39.240]  We will deduct that fee from the calculation
[01:09:39.240 --> 01:09:42.240]  In about 500 suits we filed that way
[01:09:42.240 --> 01:09:46.240]  You got any idea how many fees were proved up?
[01:09:46.240 --> 01:09:48.240]  Zero
[01:09:48.240 --> 01:09:49.240]  Exactly
[01:09:49.240 --> 01:09:50.240]  They took the fees off?
[01:09:50.240 --> 01:09:51.240]  No
[01:09:51.240 --> 01:09:52.240]  Oh
[01:09:52.240 --> 01:09:53.240]  They foreclosed instead
[01:09:53.240 --> 01:09:56.240]  They didn't want to admit to charging me fees they shouldn't have
[01:09:56.240 --> 01:10:00.240]  Or charging me more than they should have on the fees they were allowed
[01:10:00.240 --> 01:10:05.240]  Yeah, so now Steve still has that suit against him
[01:10:05.240 --> 01:10:07.240]  So that suit's never been adjudicated
[01:10:07.240 --> 01:10:10.240]  No, he hadn't found out about it yet
[01:10:10.240 --> 01:10:13.240]  He'll have to bring it to his attention
[01:10:13.240 --> 01:10:17.240]  But you claim all of it and ask them to prove it up
[01:10:17.240 --> 01:10:19.240]  If they prove up one of them, you'll take it off
[01:10:19.240 --> 01:10:22.240]  But they don't prove up any of the reason
[01:10:22.240 --> 01:10:24.240]  If they prove up one
[01:10:24.240 --> 01:10:26.240]  It creates
[01:10:26.240 --> 01:10:28.240]  And they don't prove up another
[01:10:28.240 --> 01:10:32.240]  It creates the adverse inference that the one they didn't prove up
[01:10:32.240 --> 01:10:34.240]  They can't prove up
[01:10:34.240 --> 01:10:39.240]  Because it's exactly what we said it was, a false fee
[01:10:39.240 --> 01:10:42.240]  And so the only way they can prove up one
[01:10:42.240 --> 01:10:44.240]  Is they have to be able to prove up all of them
[01:10:44.240 --> 01:10:46.240]  And they can't
[01:10:46.240 --> 01:10:48.240]  Because it really is fraud
[01:10:48.240 --> 01:10:51.240]  And that'll keep them in court for a long time
[01:10:51.240 --> 01:10:53.240]  But even if you run out all of that
[01:10:53.240 --> 01:10:57.240]  And the constables are about to come to evict you
[01:10:57.240 --> 01:11:01.240]  Then we look at bankruptcy
[01:11:01.240 --> 01:11:03.240]  And if you do a bankruptcy
[01:11:03.240 --> 01:11:06.240]  Keep in mind, in law
[01:11:06.240 --> 01:11:11.240]  Never stipulate to anything
[01:11:11.240 --> 01:11:13.240]  Where the document says
[01:11:13.240 --> 01:11:16.240]  Is the property secured?
[01:11:16.240 --> 01:11:18.240]  No
[01:11:18.240 --> 01:11:21.240]  Now you think it may be secured
[01:11:21.240 --> 01:11:24.240]  Because you entered into a mortgage on it
[01:11:24.240 --> 01:11:27.240]  But you don't know if it's still secured or not
[01:11:27.240 --> 01:11:31.240]  If those guys have screwed something up
[01:11:31.240 --> 01:11:35.240]  That caused the security instrument to be void
[01:11:35.240 --> 01:11:38.240]  And the property's not secured
[01:11:38.240 --> 01:11:42.240]  You don't know for certain, so deny it
[01:11:42.240 --> 01:11:45.240]  Don't stipulate to the fact that it's secured
[01:11:45.240 --> 01:11:47.240]  Make the other side prove it up
[01:11:47.240 --> 01:11:53.240]  Well, you also have BK Rule 3, 001, Subsection G as in Dog
[01:11:53.240 --> 01:11:57.240]  Which states, any party coming forward
[01:11:57.240 --> 01:12:01.240]  With a claimed interest in a security instrument
[01:12:01.240 --> 01:12:04.240]  Or a security certificate
[01:12:04.240 --> 01:12:08.240]  Must be evidenced by a properly perfected lien
[01:12:08.240 --> 01:12:11.240]  And Randy, how do we properly perfect a lien?
[01:12:11.240 --> 01:12:17.240]  With the actual complete chain of title
[01:12:17.240 --> 01:12:20.240]  Through the public record
[01:12:20.240 --> 01:12:23.240]  In intangible form
[01:12:23.240 --> 01:12:26.240]  If it's not in the public record
[01:12:26.240 --> 01:12:29.240]  The court cannot see it
[01:12:29.240 --> 01:12:31.240]  And this is their weakness
[01:12:31.240 --> 01:12:33.240]  This is what they've been unable to do
[01:12:33.240 --> 01:12:36.240]  And this is where we've had most of our wins
[01:12:36.240 --> 01:12:38.240]  And we're going to go to Chris here shortly
[01:12:38.240 --> 01:12:41.240]  And he won just exactly that way
[01:12:41.240 --> 01:12:44.240]  And then the thing that's left is the security instrument
[01:12:44.240 --> 01:12:47.240]  You have to blow out
[01:12:47.240 --> 01:12:52.240]  But if you do a bankruptcy, Chapter 7 and Chapter 13
[01:12:52.240 --> 01:12:54.240]  Claim the property is unsecured
[01:12:54.240 --> 01:12:56.240]  And the bank's going to come running in
[01:12:56.240 --> 01:12:58.240]  Oh, it's secured, it's secured
[01:12:58.240 --> 01:13:00.240]  And you say, yeah, prove it up
[01:13:00.240 --> 01:13:03.240]  We had a woman in Fort Worth
[01:13:03.240 --> 01:13:05.240]  She followed instruction really well
[01:13:05.240 --> 01:13:08.240]  The bankers come in there with all this stack of papers
[01:13:08.240 --> 01:13:10.240]  And they're yakking with the judges
[01:13:10.240 --> 01:13:13.240]  She said, Your Honor, counsel has a big stack of papers there
[01:13:13.240 --> 01:13:15.240]  But could I look at those?
[01:13:15.240 --> 01:13:18.240]  They were shown to her, and it's all of her closing documents
[01:13:18.240 --> 01:13:20.240]  And she looked at them and she said, Your Honor
[01:13:20.240 --> 01:13:23.240]  I've never seen these before
[01:13:23.240 --> 01:13:27.240]  She said, the judge said, isn't that your signature on those?
[01:13:27.240 --> 01:13:30.240]  Oh, no, Your Honor, I did not sign these documents
[01:13:30.240 --> 01:13:32.240]  And she didn't
[01:13:32.240 --> 01:13:34.240]  They were photopopies
[01:13:34.240 --> 01:13:37.240]  That somebody had made of some document
[01:13:37.240 --> 01:13:40.240]  They kind of looked like some that she might have signed
[01:13:40.240 --> 01:13:43.240]  But she definitely had never seen these documents before
[01:13:43.240 --> 01:13:47.240]  And she certainly didn't sign any of these documents
[01:13:47.240 --> 01:13:51.240]  She said, the judge ground on her for about ten minutes
[01:13:51.240 --> 01:13:53.240]  And when she wouldn't back up
[01:13:53.240 --> 01:13:56.240]  He turned to the lawyers and said, well, Counselor
[01:13:56.240 --> 01:14:00.240]  It seems she's never seen these documents
[01:14:00.240 --> 01:14:04.240]  You're going to have to come in with the originals
[01:14:04.240 --> 01:14:07.240]  And she said, the judge smiled at them like
[01:14:07.240 --> 01:14:12.240]  At last, somebody gave me something I could work with
[01:14:12.240 --> 01:14:16.240]  They never showed up with documentation
[01:14:16.240 --> 01:14:23.240]  And she got the note written off
[01:14:23.240 --> 01:14:28.240]  Now she's left with adjudicating the security instrument
[01:14:28.240 --> 01:14:36.240]  And with that said, how about if I bring in Chris from California?
[01:14:36.240 --> 01:14:40.240]  Chris?
[01:14:40.240 --> 01:14:43.240]  Did I put you to sleep, Chris?
[01:14:43.240 --> 01:14:45.240]  No, I'm here
[01:14:45.240 --> 01:14:47.240]  There he is
[01:14:47.240 --> 01:14:53.240]  Tell them about your bankruptcy and how that worked for you
[01:14:53.240 --> 01:15:02.240]  My bankruptcy, we claimed that the note was unsecured
[01:15:02.240 --> 01:15:08.240]  And the judge discharged the debt
[01:15:08.240 --> 01:15:12.240]  So we have the mortgage to work on yet
[01:15:12.240 --> 01:15:20.240]  So what went on in the courtroom during the procedure of discharging the note?
[01:15:20.240 --> 01:15:24.240]  Well, we actually had the bank came in
[01:15:24.240 --> 01:15:29.240]  And we were in foreclosure with the bank at the time
[01:15:29.240 --> 01:15:33.240]  And they came in and they asked for a stay
[01:15:33.240 --> 01:15:37.240]  To remove the stay so they could continue foreclosure
[01:15:37.240 --> 01:15:43.240]  And they actually never proved anything up that they even had ownership of it
[01:15:43.240 --> 01:15:51.240]  They never came in and gave anything other than the fact that they had a mortgage listed in the recorder of deeds office
[01:15:51.240 --> 01:15:53.240]  Not good enough
[01:15:53.240 --> 01:16:02.240]  Well, the judge bought it, I guess, and the stay was listed and they were able to continue with the foreclosure
[01:16:02.240 --> 01:16:09.240]  But he discharged the debt under the note
[01:16:09.240 --> 01:16:15.240]  He discharged the debt on your tangible promissory note is what you got discharged
[01:16:15.240 --> 01:16:23.240]  The debt created by the account debtor is the account debtor's debt and that was not discharged
[01:16:23.240 --> 01:16:29.240]  No, the security instrument filed in the record
[01:16:29.240 --> 01:16:34.240]  When it was filed in the record, it was presumed to be valid
[01:16:34.240 --> 01:16:37.240]  And it lay in the record unchallenged
[01:16:37.240 --> 01:16:44.240]  So the court has to look at that unchallenged claim against the property is valid
[01:16:44.240 --> 01:16:50.240]  So in order to get something done with it, we'll have to do wait till we have time
[01:16:50.240 --> 01:16:53.240]  This is Randy Kelton, Steve Skidmore, Joe Esquivel
[01:16:53.240 --> 01:17:00.240]  We'll be right back
[01:17:23.240 --> 01:17:25.240]  We've got lots of customers that come in and say the same thing
[01:17:25.240 --> 01:17:27.240]  You can pick yours up at Brave New Books
[01:17:27.240 --> 01:17:33.240]  If that wasn't enough, Dr. Griffin Cole, DDS, who's been featured on the Alex Jones show, loves it too
[01:17:33.240 --> 01:17:37.240]  Hi, I'm Dr. Griffin Cole, and I gotta tell you, I really love this Magic Mud product
[01:17:37.240 --> 01:17:43.240]  Because charcoal is so absorbent, it's very effective at taking off all the sticky plaque and debris that gets stuck on our teeth every day
[01:17:43.240 --> 01:17:45.240]  I highly recommend my Magic Mud
[01:17:45.240 --> 01:17:51.240]  If you haven't yet experienced my Magic Mud, it's never too late to brighten your smile and strengthen your teeth
[01:17:51.240 --> 01:17:56.240]  Get your jar of my Magic Mud today at Brave New Books, located at 1904 Guadalupe Street
[01:17:56.240 --> 01:18:00.240]  Or order online today at MyMagicMud.com
[01:18:00.240 --> 01:18:05.240]  At Capital Coin and Bullion, our mission is to be your preferred shopping destination
[01:18:05.240 --> 01:18:09.240]  By delivering excellent customer service and outstanding value at an affordable price
[01:18:09.240 --> 01:18:15.240]  We provide a wide assortment of favorite products featuring a great selection of high quality coins and precious metals
[01:18:15.240 --> 01:18:19.240]  We cater to beginners in coin collecting as well as large transactions for investors
[01:18:19.240 --> 01:18:24.240]  We believe in educating our customers with resources from top accredited metals dealers and journalists
[01:18:24.240 --> 01:18:27.240]  If we don't have what you're looking for, we can find it
[01:18:27.240 --> 01:18:32.240]  In addition, we carry popular young Jevity products such as Beyond Tangy Tangerine and Pollenbursts
[01:18:32.240 --> 01:18:39.240]  We also offer One World Way, Mountain House Storable Foods, Berkey Water Products, ammunition at 10% above wholesale, and more
[01:18:39.240 --> 01:18:43.240]  We broker metals IRA accounts and we also accept Bitcoins as payment
[01:18:43.240 --> 01:18:46.240]  Call us at 512-646-6440
[01:18:46.240 --> 01:18:51.240]  We're located at 7304 Burnett Road, Suite A, about a half mile south of Anderson
[01:18:51.240 --> 01:18:54.240]  We're open Monday through Friday 10 to 6, Saturdays 10 to 2
[01:18:54.240 --> 01:19:21.240]  Visit us at capitalcoinandbullying.com or call 512-646-6440
[01:19:24.240 --> 01:19:43.240]  Okay, we are back, Randy Kelton, Joe Esquivel, Steve Skidmore, we have our radio
[01:19:43.240 --> 01:19:49.240]  And I know we were talking about something
[01:19:49.240 --> 01:19:52.240]  We were talking about a security instrument
[01:19:52.240 --> 01:19:57.240]  The security instrument is laying in the court record
[01:19:57.240 --> 01:20:05.240]  It's laying in there unchallenged, so the court must look at that document and presume it to be valid
[01:20:05.240 --> 01:20:13.240]  The fact that the underlying debt has been discharged is not reflected in the court record
[01:20:13.240 --> 01:20:23.240]  So when the lender moves to foreclose on that document, it has the appearance of being valid
[01:20:23.240 --> 01:20:35.240]  If you can get your debt discharged in the bankruptcy court, you need to immediately challenge that security instrument as voidable
[01:20:35.240 --> 01:20:43.240]  It's not void, it was essentially valid until the debt was discharged
[01:20:43.240 --> 01:20:49.240]  Now it's voidable, you need to move for quiet title as to the security instrument
[01:20:49.240 --> 01:21:01.240]  And show that it is unenforceable as there is no claim by which someone can exercise the privilege of foreclosure in the document
[01:21:01.240 --> 01:21:04.240]  Joe, does that make sense or did I miss anything?
[01:21:04.240 --> 01:21:09.240]  I understand what you're saying. For me, would it not make sense?
[01:21:09.240 --> 01:21:15.240]  So we've discharged the debt of the tangible promissory note
[01:21:15.240 --> 01:21:22.240]  The tangible promissory note being the one that the homeowner signed on the closing date
[01:21:22.240 --> 01:21:29.240]  There is still an obligation created by the account debtor or a third party
[01:21:29.240 --> 01:21:36.240]  Using the payment stream, which is your promise to pay a bit, tangible promissory note
[01:21:36.240 --> 01:21:50.240]  And they used that payment stream to create an obligation for an e-note and an e-mortgage that they sold to an intangible obligee
[01:21:50.240 --> 01:21:55.240]  That's the folks that copies of the tangible instruments
[01:21:55.240 --> 01:22:00.240]  There is an obligation, but it is not the homeowner's obligation that was created
[01:22:00.240 --> 01:22:08.240]  They used the homeowner's tangible payment stream, or the payment stream of the tangible promissory note
[01:22:08.240 --> 01:22:18.240]  But once that debt has been discharged, like Randy said, it would behoove you to get a declaratory judgment as to
[01:22:18.240 --> 01:22:27.240]  status quo of the parties now with entitlement to rights lawfully acquired in accordance with law
[01:22:27.240 --> 01:22:30.240]  Well, for one, there's no security interest
[01:22:30.240 --> 01:22:31.240]  None
[01:22:31.240 --> 01:22:34.240]  You would have to have an underlying debt for there to be a security interest
[01:22:34.240 --> 01:22:40.240]  And the underlying debt has been discharged to the homeowner, so there's no
[01:22:40.240 --> 01:22:41.240]  Nothing to attach to
[01:22:41.240 --> 01:22:42.240]  Correct
[01:22:42.240 --> 01:22:55.240]  The only way you can exercise the privilege of foreclosure as named in the security instrument is if the lender fails to make prompt payments
[01:22:55.240 --> 01:23:05.240]  But there are no payments to make, so the lender can no longer default on the security instrument, rendering the security instrument unenforceable
[01:23:05.240 --> 01:23:11.240]  And I've seen instances, Randy, where they have filed assignments after the bankruptcy
[01:23:11.240 --> 01:23:15.240]  Two of them
[01:23:15.240 --> 01:23:24.240]  The instrument, the security instrument, the security instrument on its face is valid
[01:23:24.240 --> 01:23:37.240]  Well, when the court looks in the record, they see a claim against the property that's been filed, not challenged, so it must be presumed to be valid
[01:23:37.240 --> 01:23:55.240]  The issue is that when the bank comes to the table and tries to enforce the privilege granted in the security instrument, they have to do it based on nonpayment
[01:23:55.240 --> 01:23:56.240]  Nonpayment of what?
[01:23:56.240 --> 01:24:00.240]  The debt has been discharged
[01:24:00.240 --> 01:24:04.240]  Exactly, so they have no controversy they can bring
[01:24:04.240 --> 01:24:17.240]  They can't enforce the privilege in the contract based on nonpayment because there's nothing to pay, so the document is not void, but it is avoidable
[01:24:17.240 --> 01:24:28.240]  So you go in and ask the court to rule that this document is unenforceable as it secures no debt
[01:24:28.240 --> 01:24:29.240]  Does that make sense?
[01:24:29.240 --> 01:24:37.240]  Right, I agree because a properly secured instrument would survive a bankruptcy
[01:24:37.240 --> 01:24:42.240]  Again, a properly secured instrument
[01:24:42.240 --> 01:24:49.240]  So now we would go to, if we were in Texas, we'd go to the Texas Business Commerce Code 9312
[01:24:49.240 --> 01:24:58.240]  And that would be under perfection of security interest of the security instrument while afforded a temporary perfection
[01:24:58.240 --> 01:25:02.240]  That temporary perfection is for a period of 20 days
[01:25:02.240 --> 01:25:08.240]  The caller's in California, so you would go to, in his case
[01:25:08.240 --> 01:25:15.240]  California Commercial Code 9312, sections E through H
[01:25:15.240 --> 01:25:18.240]  Chris is in Pennsylvania and that's like another country
[01:25:18.240 --> 01:25:21.240]  It is
[01:25:21.240 --> 01:25:25.240]  In Pennsylvania we still have the same thing
[01:25:25.240 --> 01:25:31.240]  Every state has adopted the UCC into their own statutes
[01:25:31.240 --> 01:25:32.240]  Right
[01:25:32.240 --> 01:25:37.240]  If he's in BK he's going to use the federal statutes
[01:25:37.240 --> 01:25:40.240]  He's done it to BK
[01:25:40.240 --> 01:25:45.240]  Chris, I think you wanted to talk about your law here
[01:25:45.240 --> 01:25:46.240]  Yes
[01:25:46.240 --> 01:25:49.240]  Are you having fun with him?
[01:25:49.240 --> 01:25:52.240]  I'm having a blast with him
[01:25:52.240 --> 01:25:57.240]  Does the word charlatan mean anything to anyone?
[01:25:57.240 --> 01:25:59.240]  It does
[01:25:59.240 --> 01:26:04.240]  I was thinking that might be the most apropos term I could throw out there
[01:26:04.240 --> 01:26:06.240]  I'm glad to say that I don't work for one
[01:26:06.240 --> 01:26:10.240]  Wait a minute, is it charlatan or shyster?
[01:26:10.240 --> 01:26:16.240]  Yes, I think they're both, either way his picture is under the definition
[01:26:16.240 --> 01:26:18.240]  They're interchangeable
[01:26:18.240 --> 01:26:25.240]  The interesting part about all that, the bankruptcy being discharged
[01:26:25.240 --> 01:26:27.240]  We're trying to work on the mortgage
[01:26:27.240 --> 01:26:31.240]  We've gotten some interesting things from the bank in all of this
[01:26:31.240 --> 01:26:39.240]  The bank has actually put in a foreclosure notice to us in September
[01:26:39.240 --> 01:26:42.240]  In October we filed bankruptcy
[01:26:42.240 --> 01:26:47.240]  And in November they took an assignment recorded in the recorder of deeds office
[01:26:47.240 --> 01:26:52.240]  Now we were trying to get it so that we could look at it
[01:26:52.240 --> 01:26:57.240]  Wait, hold on, they took an assignment?
[01:26:57.240 --> 01:27:00.240]  Well, they recorded an assignment of mortgage
[01:27:00.240 --> 01:27:05.240]  Oh, okay, so while you were in bankruptcy
[01:27:05.240 --> 01:27:08.240]  Were you still in bankruptcy at that time?
[01:27:08.240 --> 01:27:12.240]  Correct, bankruptcy wasn't discharged until January
[01:27:12.240 --> 01:27:19.240]  Because you've got the BK362 rule, which is the automatic stay, which forbids the collection of any debt
[01:27:19.240 --> 01:27:25.240]  So they would be unable to do any negotiation transfer and delivery
[01:27:25.240 --> 01:27:29.240]  of any negotiable instrument while you were in BK
[01:27:29.240 --> 01:27:40.240]  Was the transfer or the assignment done prior to the lifting of the stay or after the lifting of the stay?
[01:27:40.240 --> 01:27:45.240]  The assignment was listed after the lifting of the stay
[01:27:45.240 --> 01:27:47.240]  Oh, okay, that's different
[01:27:47.240 --> 01:27:48.240]  That would make sense
[01:27:48.240 --> 01:27:55.240]  Yeah, if they lifted the stay, then it's business as usual
[01:27:55.240 --> 01:28:00.240]  Yeah, they lifted the stay and then they made an assignment in the recorder of deeds
[01:28:00.240 --> 01:28:07.240]  Now, since that period, we've asked for discovery and we're in this foreclosure case
[01:28:07.240 --> 01:28:17.240]  So my attorney is asking for discovery on securities because we got a letter in our QWR response from the bank
[01:28:17.240 --> 01:28:22.240]  telling us they are not the lender, that Fannie Mae is the lender
[01:28:22.240 --> 01:28:28.240]  and they have no knowledge of the information we're requesting because they did not originate the loan
[01:28:28.240 --> 01:28:35.240]  So where is Fannie Mae in all this? Do we have failure to include an indispensable party?
[01:28:35.240 --> 01:28:41.240]  Well, we asked Fannie Mae, we sent a QWR to Fannie Mae as well
[01:28:41.240 --> 01:28:44.240]  Fannie Mae did not respond to our QWR
[01:28:44.240 --> 01:28:49.240]  No, because what they purchased was a beneficial interest of the mortgage loan instrument
[01:28:49.240 --> 01:29:00.240]  You still need to follow, for Pennsylvania, it's going to fall under Title 13, all right, 3203D
[01:29:00.240 --> 01:29:04.240]  Effective transfer of less than the entire instrument
[01:29:04.240 --> 01:29:11.240]  Instead, if the transfer purports to transfer less than the entire instrument, negotiation of the instrument does not occur
[01:29:11.240 --> 01:29:17.240]  The transfer obtains no rights under this division and has only the rights of a partial assignee
[01:29:17.240 --> 01:29:25.240]  So with Fannie Mae purchasing only the beneficial interest of this mortgage loan instrument, they purchase a partial interest
[01:29:25.240 --> 01:29:28.240]  Fannie Mae is not named to the note, I guarantee it
[01:29:28.240 --> 01:29:31.240]  Fannie Mae is not named into public record
[01:29:31.240 --> 01:29:39.240]  So with Fannie Mae not named into public record, Fannie Mae not named into note, there is no agent-principal relationship
[01:29:39.240 --> 01:29:40.240]  Correct
[01:29:40.240 --> 01:29:48.240]  So they have purchased an unsecured obligation created by this third-party account debtor pursuant to 3102
[01:29:48.240 --> 01:29:50.240]  Okay, hang on, we're about to go to break
[01:29:50.240 --> 01:29:54.240]  Randy Kelton, Steve Skidmore, Joe Esquivel, Rue of La Radio
[01:29:54.240 --> 01:30:02.240]  I'll call it number 512-646-1984, we'll be right back
[01:30:02.240 --> 01:30:07.240]  Listen up, brainiacs, chewing gum may not be so good the night before a test
[01:30:07.240 --> 01:30:11.240]  In fact, new research shows it could actually impair your short-term memory
[01:30:11.240 --> 01:30:16.240]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, back to burst your bubblegum bubble right after this
[01:30:16.240 --> 01:30:18.240]  Privacy is under attack
[01:30:18.240 --> 01:30:22.240]  When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again
[01:30:22.240 --> 01:30:27.240]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too
[01:30:27.240 --> 01:30:32.240]  So protect your rights, say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself
[01:30:32.240 --> 01:30:35.240]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to
[01:30:35.240 --> 01:30:42.240]  This message is brought to you by Startpage.com, the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo and Bing
[01:30:42.240 --> 01:30:45.240]  Start over with Startpage
[01:30:45.240 --> 01:30:49.240]  You might have read studies saying that chewing gum improves your memory
[01:30:49.240 --> 01:30:54.240]  Students have taken that to heart gum-chewing nonstop while cramming for final exams
[01:30:54.240 --> 01:31:00.240]  But new research suggests that chewing gum may not help with memory after all and could actually make it worse
[01:31:00.240 --> 01:31:04.240]  British scientists gave volunteers memory challenges with and without gum
[01:31:04.240 --> 01:31:10.240]  They found that gum-chewers had a harder time with tasks like memorizing phone numbers than those who didn't chew gum
[01:31:10.240 --> 01:31:15.240]  One interesting difference, though, is this time around volunteers were given flavorless gum
[01:31:15.240 --> 01:31:22.240]  So if you still insist on chomping before a quiz, pick a tasty flavor and make sure you spit it out once the thrill is gone
[01:31:22.240 --> 01:31:27.240]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht for Startpage.com, the world's most private search engine
[01:31:31.240 --> 01:31:36.240]  This is Building 7, a 47-story skyscraper that fell on the afternoon of September 11
[01:31:36.240 --> 01:31:38.240]  The government says that fire brought it down
[01:31:38.240 --> 01:31:43.240]  However, 1,500 architects and engineers concluded it was a controlled demolition
[01:31:43.240 --> 01:31:46.240]  Over 6,000 of my fellow service members have given their lives
[01:31:46.240 --> 01:31:49.240]  And thousands of my fellow first responders have died
[01:31:49.240 --> 01:31:50.240]  I'm not a conspiracy theorist
[01:31:50.240 --> 01:31:51.240]  I'm a structural engineer
[01:31:51.240 --> 01:31:52.240]  I'm a New York City correction officer
[01:31:52.240 --> 01:31:53.240]  I'm an Air Force pilot
[01:31:53.240 --> 01:31:55.240]  I'm a father who lost his son
[01:31:55.240 --> 01:31:58.240]  We're Americans and we deserve the truth
[01:31:58.240 --> 01:32:01.240]  Go to RememberBuilding7.org today
[01:32:01.240 --> 01:32:05.240]  After work, I'm so tired that I want to be left alone to sleep
[01:32:05.240 --> 01:32:06.240]  Hey, listen to me!
[01:32:06.240 --> 01:32:07.240]  Who are you?
[01:32:07.240 --> 01:32:12.240]  I'm you years ago when you felt healthy and young and everything worked on your body
[01:32:12.240 --> 01:32:13.240]  You remember that?
[01:32:13.240 --> 01:32:15.240]  Yes, I wish I felt like that now
[01:32:15.240 --> 01:32:20.240]  You can feel like that again with a new micro-plant powder formulation called Iodine Now
[01:32:20.240 --> 01:32:25.240]  It cleans the entire body from head to toe and feeds the body what it really needs
[01:32:25.240 --> 01:32:28.240]  You'll be in a better mood and you'll find more drive in your romantic life
[01:32:28.240 --> 01:32:29.240]  Really?
[01:32:29.240 --> 01:32:32.240]  I gotta try iodine now and feel good again
[01:32:32.240 --> 01:32:36.240]  It also protects you from radiation, heavy metals, fluoride, chlorine, and bromine
[01:32:36.240 --> 01:32:38.240]  including cancer and most major diseases
[01:32:38.240 --> 01:32:39.240]  You'll be amazed
[01:32:39.240 --> 01:32:40.240]  You can be your own doctor
[01:32:40.240 --> 01:32:43.240]  I want to keep you out of the hospital and off pharmaceuticals
[01:32:43.240 --> 01:32:46.240]  Wow, why are you so nice to me?
[01:32:46.240 --> 01:32:47.240]  Because I'm you
[01:32:47.240 --> 01:32:49.240]  You're out of shape and I need a better looking future
[01:32:49.240 --> 01:32:52.240]  Call 888-910-4367
[01:32:52.240 --> 01:32:55.240]  That's 888-910-4367
[01:32:55.240 --> 01:32:58.240]  Or visit microplantpowder.com
[01:32:58.240 --> 01:33:01.240]  microplantpowder.com
[01:33:03.240 --> 01:33:04.240]  Looking for some truth?
[01:33:04.240 --> 01:33:05.240]  You found it
[01:33:05.240 --> 01:33:10.240]  logosradionetwork.com
[01:33:36.240 --> 01:33:42.240]  The wicked dumb with temptations
[01:33:42.240 --> 01:33:47.240]  They're trying to buy the whole place
[01:33:47.240 --> 01:33:53.240]  They want to poison the nation
[01:33:53.240 --> 01:33:57.240]  Welcome back to Rule of Law Radio, folks
[01:33:57.240 --> 01:34:00.240]  Pull my call screen back up
[01:34:00.240 --> 01:34:01.240]  We're talking to Chris and P.A.
[01:34:01.240 --> 01:34:05.240]  Chris, I have...
[01:34:05.240 --> 01:34:09.240]  This is not advice, it's just a friendly tip
[01:34:09.240 --> 01:34:12.240]  Do yourself and your attorney a favor and your case a favor
[01:34:12.240 --> 01:34:18.240]  and go to the Internet and download a free program called Audacity
[01:34:18.240 --> 01:34:23.240]  A-U-D-I-C-I-T-Y, Audacity
[01:34:23.240 --> 01:34:28.240]  If you're not familiar with Audacity, this is a recording editing program
[01:34:28.240 --> 01:34:35.240]  Then go to Rule of Law Radio, grab a copy of tonight's archive
[01:34:35.240 --> 01:34:43.240]  Drop that archive into Audacity and isolate the part where you are on air here
[01:34:43.240 --> 01:34:46.240]  Get rid of everything else
[01:34:46.240 --> 01:34:50.240]  You just want to keep the part where your case is concerned
[01:34:50.240 --> 01:34:54.240]  Convert that into an MP3 and send that to your lawyer
[01:34:54.240 --> 01:34:59.240]  Keep in mind, the reason I want you to isolate this
[01:34:59.240 --> 01:35:03.240]  I don't really want you to, but the reason why you might want to
[01:35:03.240 --> 01:35:08.240]  Is that your attorney is going to charge you for every minute that he spends listening to it
[01:35:08.240 --> 01:35:13.240]  So if you narrow this down to just this time that you were on the air
[01:35:13.240 --> 01:35:17.240]  He may have one of those aha moments
[01:35:17.240 --> 01:35:21.240]  And it won't cost you a fortune for him to listen to it
[01:35:21.240 --> 01:35:28.240]  So Chris, when you're looking as to what errors to find
[01:35:28.240 --> 01:35:30.240]  This is what MCI does
[01:35:30.240 --> 01:35:37.240]  MCI does investigations and chain title analysis that points out the errors
[01:35:37.240 --> 01:35:42.240]  That lays down the foundation to any actions going forward
[01:35:42.240 --> 01:35:47.240]  Because the number one problem that is out there today
[01:35:47.240 --> 01:35:51.240]  Is that everyone keeps reinventing the wheel
[01:35:51.240 --> 01:35:53.240]  Trying to
[01:35:53.240 --> 01:35:56.240]  MCI has already created the wheel
[01:35:56.240 --> 01:35:59.240]  So we already go through the documents
[01:35:59.240 --> 01:36:03.240]  We create what was to be done, what was done, what was not done
[01:36:03.240 --> 01:36:07.240]  In accordance with law for all 50 states
[01:36:07.240 --> 01:36:10.240]  Can I stick in a disclaimer?
[01:36:10.240 --> 01:36:12.240]  Jump in
[01:36:12.240 --> 01:36:15.240]  I did not recreate the wheel
[01:36:15.240 --> 01:36:19.240]  I plagiarized shows
[01:36:19.240 --> 01:36:22.240]  There you go
[01:36:22.240 --> 01:36:24.240]  So
[01:36:24.240 --> 01:36:26.240]  But you're doing awesome, Chris
[01:36:26.240 --> 01:36:29.240]  So we're glad that you're in BK, we're glad that you're getting results
[01:36:29.240 --> 01:36:31.240]  Yeah, you're halfway there
[01:36:31.240 --> 01:36:35.240]  So now you need to find every error
[01:36:35.240 --> 01:36:38.240]  And if you can't find them, that's what we're available for
[01:36:38.240 --> 01:36:42.240]  Well, it got even more interesting yesterday
[01:36:42.240 --> 01:36:45.240]  Or a week ago, I should say
[01:36:45.240 --> 01:36:46.240]  A week ago yesterday
[01:36:46.240 --> 01:36:49.240]  I got a letter from the bank again
[01:36:49.240 --> 01:36:53.240]  They continually send me letters telling me what I owe
[01:36:53.240 --> 01:36:55.240]  Isn't that nice?
[01:36:55.240 --> 01:36:57.240]  Thanks for the reminder
[01:36:57.240 --> 01:36:59.240]  Exactly, I like that
[01:36:59.240 --> 01:37:03.240]  I just put it up on the bulletin board and add it to the others
[01:37:03.240 --> 01:37:06.240]  More ammo, brother, it's more ammo
[01:37:06.240 --> 01:37:08.240]  Exactly
[01:37:08.240 --> 01:37:12.240]  They send me a large envelope
[01:37:12.240 --> 01:37:16.240]  Eight and a half by 11 with a letter in it from the home mortgage place
[01:37:16.240 --> 01:37:20.240]  Telling me why they can't give me a modification
[01:37:20.240 --> 01:37:26.240]  The first sentence they give me on this letter
[01:37:26.240 --> 01:37:30.240]  Which is a Wells Fargo letterhead signed by this person
[01:37:30.240 --> 01:37:32.240]  Says, note
[01:37:32.240 --> 01:37:40.240]  We, Wells Fargo, are the servicer for Fannie Mae the investor
[01:37:40.240 --> 01:37:46.240]  Now, how does someone who is a servicer for an investor
[01:37:46.240 --> 01:37:51.240]  Have a mortgage recorded in the recorder of deeds office
[01:37:51.240 --> 01:37:57.240]  Stating they own the property as a mortgagee?
[01:37:57.240 --> 01:38:01.240]  I see where you're going, yeah, that's a contradiction
[01:38:01.240 --> 01:38:04.240]  So, obviously, because only Fannie Mae
[01:38:04.240 --> 01:38:06.240]  Fannie Mae only holds mortgage-backed securities
[01:38:06.240 --> 01:38:07.240]  That's their job
[01:38:07.240 --> 01:38:08.240]  They hold mortgage-backed securities
[01:38:08.240 --> 01:38:09.240]  No, they don't
[01:38:09.240 --> 01:38:11.240]  They hold an interest of
[01:38:11.240 --> 01:38:14.240]  And that's what you need to understand
[01:38:14.240 --> 01:38:21.240]  Fannie Mae purchases interests of mortgage loan instruments
[01:38:21.240 --> 01:38:24.240]  That's what they purchase
[01:38:24.240 --> 01:38:26.240]  Right
[01:38:26.240 --> 01:38:31.240]  We have confirmation from Fannie Mae and this is what we're in discovery of
[01:38:31.240 --> 01:38:35.240]  When we call Fannie Mae and we ask them who owns our note
[01:38:35.240 --> 01:38:38.240]  They tell us that Wells Fargo is the lender
[01:38:38.240 --> 01:38:41.240]  Wells Fargo tells us they're the lender
[01:38:41.240 --> 01:38:48.240]  They also tell us that Fannie Mae sold the note three months after its inception
[01:38:48.240 --> 01:38:49.240]  They sold the
[01:38:49.240 --> 01:38:53.240]  All right, so when you ask the questions, here's what I would do, Chris
[01:38:53.240 --> 01:38:55.240]  Pay very close attention to the language
[01:38:55.240 --> 01:39:01.240]  You are going to say, I'm talking in regards to the tangible promissory note
[01:39:01.240 --> 01:39:06.240]  So when you speak, you need to talk about, are we talking about the E note?
[01:39:06.240 --> 01:39:09.240]  Are we talking about the transferable record?
[01:39:09.240 --> 01:39:11.240]  Are we talking about the E mortgage?
[01:39:11.240 --> 01:39:15.240]  Are we talking about the tangible promissory note?
[01:39:15.240 --> 01:39:17.240]  Are we talking about the
[01:39:17.240 --> 01:39:19.240]  So you want to be very specific
[01:39:19.240 --> 01:39:20.240]  They are not the same
[01:39:20.240 --> 01:39:22.240]  They are definitely not the same
[01:39:22.240 --> 01:39:26.240]  The tangible instrument is the instrument that you signed on closing day
[01:39:26.240 --> 01:39:27.240]  Correct
[01:39:27.240 --> 01:39:31.240]  The scanned copy is the E note
[01:39:31.240 --> 01:39:35.240]  It is also a transferable record
[01:39:35.240 --> 01:39:40.240]  Pursuant to 15 USC 1702, is that correct?
[01:39:40.240 --> 01:39:43.240]  It's also pursuant to Article 8
[01:39:43.240 --> 01:39:44.240]  Okay
[01:39:44.240 --> 01:39:50.240]  So it is not the tangible promissory note, the E note
[01:39:50.240 --> 01:39:54.240]  So when you're, when they're saying, well, they sold a note, what note?
[01:39:54.240 --> 01:39:55.240]  Who sold what?
[01:39:55.240 --> 01:39:57.240]  Yeah, which one?
[01:39:57.240 --> 01:39:58.240]  What are we talking about here?
[01:39:58.240 --> 01:39:59.240]  You know
[01:39:59.240 --> 01:40:00.240]  Right
[01:40:00.240 --> 01:40:05.240]  Because yes, there are conveyances that are made
[01:40:05.240 --> 01:40:07.240]  All right, so my question
[01:40:07.240 --> 01:40:09.240]  The conveyance of what?
[01:40:09.240 --> 01:40:12.240]  Yes, is a sale a conveyance?
[01:40:12.240 --> 01:40:13.240]  Yeah
[01:40:13.240 --> 01:40:15.240]  Of what?
[01:40:15.240 --> 01:40:17.240]  Yes, a sale is a conveyance
[01:40:17.240 --> 01:40:19.240]  Is a conveyance a sale?
[01:40:19.240 --> 01:40:20.240]  No
[01:40:20.240 --> 01:40:22.240]  Depends on if consideration was given
[01:40:22.240 --> 01:40:23.240]  Correct
[01:40:23.240 --> 01:40:28.240]  So when they say, you know, we're doing an assignment
[01:40:28.240 --> 01:40:35.240]  Well, the purpose of an assignment is to memorialize the sale of the tangible promissory note in the acquiring of rights
[01:40:35.240 --> 01:40:39.240]  For the tangible promissory note, it does not cause the action
[01:40:39.240 --> 01:40:41.240]  3-2 or 3-D
[01:40:41.240 --> 01:40:46.240]  Right, so the action is caused by endorsement, transfer and delivery
[01:40:46.240 --> 01:40:52.240]  So, you know, if you take it statutorily, stay away from the case law
[01:40:52.240 --> 01:40:57.240]  Stay away from the citations and just stick to statutory requirements of law
[01:40:57.240 --> 01:41:00.240]  Was it done in accordance with law?
[01:41:00.240 --> 01:41:02.240]  Yes or no?
[01:41:02.240 --> 01:41:04.240]  You don't need to hear
[01:41:04.240 --> 01:41:07.240]  Because they can claim to be a holder
[01:41:07.240 --> 01:41:10.240]  All right, being a holder, Steve could be a holder
[01:41:10.240 --> 01:41:15.240]  Now, is Steve a holder with entitlement to legal rights?
[01:41:15.240 --> 01:41:18.240]  Legally acquired in accordance with law
[01:41:18.240 --> 01:41:20.240]  Let's put this into perspective
[01:41:20.240 --> 01:41:22.240]  You have a soda pop
[01:41:22.240 --> 01:41:24.240]  Your shoe comes untied
[01:41:24.240 --> 01:41:28.240]  You say, here, Steve, hold my soda pop
[01:41:28.240 --> 01:41:35.240]  Does that give me the right to go sell your soda pop or let somebody else take a sip off the top?
[01:41:35.240 --> 01:41:38.240]  Depends on how good of a friend you are
[01:41:38.240 --> 01:41:40.240]  And who takes a sip
[01:41:40.240 --> 01:41:48.240]  My point is that I may be the holder, but I have no right to do anything with what I hold
[01:41:48.240 --> 01:41:51.240]  Right
[01:41:51.240 --> 01:41:56.240]  But my question was for them, who did they sell it to?
[01:41:56.240 --> 01:41:57.240]  What did they sell?
[01:41:57.240 --> 01:41:59.240]  Who did they sell what to? Yeah
[01:41:59.240 --> 01:42:03.240]  What was sold?
[01:42:03.240 --> 01:42:08.240]  You're on point, but you're dancing around the critical issue
[01:42:08.240 --> 01:42:11.240]  This goes to a rule in law
[01:42:11.240 --> 01:42:15.240]  Never use pronouns
[01:42:15.240 --> 01:42:20.240]  Always specify
[01:42:20.240 --> 01:42:22.240]  That's correct
[01:42:22.240 --> 01:42:28.240]  But when I say that you're dancing around the key issue here
[01:42:28.240 --> 01:42:37.240]  Is you've got to keep in mind the difference between what you signed and what they copied and sold
[01:42:37.240 --> 01:42:42.240]  One is a tangible, the other is an intangible
[01:42:42.240 --> 01:42:47.240]  The Xerox copy that they sold to Fannie Mae is the intangible
[01:42:47.240 --> 01:42:51.240]  That evidences the revenue stream, not the note
[01:42:51.240 --> 01:42:55.240]  So when they say, we sold the note
[01:42:55.240 --> 01:42:58.240]  Okay, to sell the note
[01:42:58.240 --> 01:43:06.240]  That's possible, but what that entails is that there was a true, complete, and correct endorsement
[01:43:06.240 --> 01:43:12.240]  Do you have a copy of the note as it exists currently?
[01:43:12.240 --> 01:43:13.240]  Yes
[01:43:13.240 --> 01:43:22.240]  Okay, look on the last page of it, is there a stamp on that last page of the note?
[01:43:22.240 --> 01:43:24.240]  Okay
[01:43:24.240 --> 01:43:31.240]  If there is a stamp, look to see if there is an identified payee
[01:43:31.240 --> 01:43:36.240]  You're familiar with writing checks, when you write a check, it says pay to the order of
[01:43:36.240 --> 01:43:40.240]  And then you put a payee's name in there
[01:43:40.240 --> 01:43:45.240]  Okay, let's say you had a brother, Bob, pay to the order of Bob
[01:43:45.240 --> 01:43:52.240]  If there's no identified payee, then how can somebody act as an agent for an unidentified payee?
[01:43:52.240 --> 01:43:55.240]  Stay there, hang on, back after this break
[01:43:55.240 --> 01:43:59.240]  You're listening to rule of law radio, stay tuned
[01:43:59.240 --> 01:44:03.240]  You feel tired when talking about important topics like money and politics?
[01:44:03.240 --> 01:44:04.240]  Sorry
[01:44:04.240 --> 01:44:07.240]  Are you confused by words like the constitution or the federal reserve?
[01:44:07.240 --> 01:44:08.240]  What?
[01:44:08.240 --> 01:44:12.240]  If so, you may be diagnosed with the deadliest disease known today, stupidity
[01:44:12.240 --> 01:44:19.240]  Hi, my name is Steve Holt, and like millions of other Americans, I was diagnosed with stupidity at an early age
[01:44:19.240 --> 01:44:25.240]  I had no idea that the number one cause of the disease is found in almost every home in America, the television
[01:44:25.240 --> 01:44:30.240]  Unfortunately, that puts most Americans at risk of catching stupidity, but there is hope
[01:44:30.240 --> 01:44:36.240]  The staff at Brave New Books have helped me and thousands of other Foxaholics suffering from sports zombieism recover
[01:44:36.240 --> 01:44:43.240]  And because of Brave New Books, I now enjoy reading and watching educational documentaries without feeling tired or uninterested
[01:44:43.240 --> 01:44:50.240]  So if you or anybody you know suffers from stupidity, then you need to call 512-480-2503
[01:44:50.240 --> 01:44:54.240]  Or visit them at 1904Guadalupe or bravenewbookstore.com
[01:44:54.240 --> 01:44:59.240]  Side effects from using Brave New Books products may include discernment and enlarged vocabulary and an overall increase in mental functioning
[01:44:59.240 --> 01:45:03.240]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[01:45:03.240 --> 01:45:14.240]  Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary, the affordable, easy-to-understand 4-CD course that will show you how in 24 hours, step by step
[01:45:14.240 --> 01:45:18.240]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing
[01:45:18.240 --> 01:45:22.240]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself
[01:45:22.240 --> 01:45:27.240]  Thousands have won with our step-by-step course, and now you can too
[01:45:27.240 --> 01:45:33.240]  Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case-winning experience
[01:45:33.240 --> 01:45:42.240]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand about the principles and practices that control our American courts
[01:45:42.240 --> 01:45:52.240]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases, pro se tactics, and much more
[01:45:52.240 --> 01:46:01.240]  Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner or call toll-free 866-LAW-EZ
[01:46:01.240 --> 01:46:16.240]  When the karma is lurking around the corner, you better watch your step-by-step course, and do it in turn to follow you
[01:46:16.240 --> 01:46:26.240]  Yeah, yeah, yeah, little Jerry, sing reality
[01:46:26.240 --> 01:46:31.240]  When the karma is lurking around the corner, sing Jerry, come back
[01:46:31.240 --> 01:46:41.240]  As we saw, so shall we read
[01:46:41.240 --> 01:46:44.240]  Welcome back to Rule of Law Radio, folks
[01:46:44.240 --> 01:46:50.240]  Joe and I were having a marvelous time over break making fun of Randy's driving skills or lack thereof
[01:46:50.240 --> 01:46:53.240]  I feel disparaged
[01:46:53.240 --> 01:46:58.240]  And you shouldn't, but you shouldn't feel bad because it's all true
[01:46:58.240 --> 01:47:00.240]  But we were talking to
[01:47:00.240 --> 01:47:05.240]  That's the worst part
[01:47:05.240 --> 01:47:07.240]  We had way too much fun over the breaks
[01:47:07.240 --> 01:47:14.240]  You know what, we need to record the breaks and just release them as a CD just to let people know what goes on behind the scenes
[01:47:14.240 --> 01:47:21.240]  Chris in Pennsylvania, have we answered your questions or addressed your comments?
[01:47:21.240 --> 01:47:23.240]  Have we given you food for thought?
[01:47:23.240 --> 01:47:25.240]  You have
[01:47:25.240 --> 01:47:31.240]  The one thing that I wanted to note was the sale was not to Fannie Mae
[01:47:31.240 --> 01:47:34.240]  My mortgage was created through Wachovia
[01:47:34.240 --> 01:47:36.240]  And it was used as the-
[01:47:36.240 --> 01:47:38.240]  Lucky you
[01:47:38.240 --> 01:47:40.240]  Yeah, huh?
[01:47:40.240 --> 01:47:42.240]  That one
[01:47:42.240 --> 01:47:45.240]  And hence where I am
[01:47:45.240 --> 01:47:47.240]  Right
[01:47:47.240 --> 01:48:00.240]  It was created through Wachovia and when we checked to see, call Fannie Mae and asked them where my note would be or who's the owner, who's the lender
[01:48:00.240 --> 01:48:04.240]  Who owns the promissory note, where that might be
[01:48:04.240 --> 01:48:11.240]  They only referred to one thing they have on record was the fact that Fannie Mae sold it, the note
[01:48:11.240 --> 01:48:13.240]  Which I specifically asked them for
[01:48:13.240 --> 01:48:19.240]  They sold it three months after we took the mortgage
[01:48:19.240 --> 01:48:32.240]  So after closing, three months later, what they have on record is that Fannie Mae sold this promissory note in February when it was opened in the end of November
[01:48:32.240 --> 01:48:51.240]  Okay, so what you should be seeing, if it were done correctly, what you should be seeing on the last page of that note is Fannie Mae endorsing the note to whoever they alleged to have sold it to
[01:48:51.240 --> 01:48:57.240]  Well, there needs to be an endorsement to Federal and National Mortgage Association from Wachovia
[01:48:57.240 --> 01:48:59.240]  From Wachovia, right
[01:48:59.240 --> 01:49:06.240]  But again, you have to understand who was the seller to Fannie Mae at the cash window
[01:49:06.240 --> 01:49:07.240]  Right
[01:49:07.240 --> 01:49:08.240]  Was it Wachovia?
[01:49:08.240 --> 01:49:10.240]  To find cash window
[01:49:10.240 --> 01:49:19.240]  When a party sells an obligation to Fannie Mae, they have a number of ways in which they can do it
[01:49:19.240 --> 01:49:20.240]  Okay
[01:49:20.240 --> 01:49:29.240]  However, there are only a select number of parties out there that can sell to Fannie Mae
[01:49:29.240 --> 01:49:40.240]  So this is where MCI comes into play, where we do our investigation and we look at what was sold, who sold what, when was it sold
[01:49:40.240 --> 01:49:49.240]  If something was sold to Fannie Mae, we would look and see, okay, who sold an interest of the mortgage on instrument to Fannie Mae
[01:49:49.240 --> 01:49:54.240]  From Fannie Mae, where was it sold? Where did it go from A to B, B to C?
[01:49:54.240 --> 01:49:56.240]  Because when you do
[01:49:56.240 --> 01:49:57.240]  It's a chain of possession
[01:49:57.240 --> 01:50:10.240]  Right, a sale of the tangible promissory note, at the same time, in tandem, there is an assignment, release of beneficial interest, an assignment of beneficial interest from party A to party B
[01:50:10.240 --> 01:50:25.240]  So in order to keep this perfection of a secured interest in a security instrument, because it's not the security instrument, it's the secured interest of the security interest
[01:50:25.240 --> 01:50:26.240]  Right
[01:50:25.240 --> 01:50:29.240]  Because that falls under Article 9 for personal property
[01:50:29.240 --> 01:50:32.240]  It's like they cut a slice out of it and sell it to someone else
[01:50:32.240 --> 01:50:33.240]  Right, but it's not
[01:50:33.240 --> 01:50:34.240]  Right
[01:50:34.240 --> 01:50:42.240]  Your personal, when they transfer the assignment of beneficial interest, they're assigning personal property, not real property
[01:50:42.240 --> 01:50:43.240]  Correct
[01:50:42.240 --> 01:50:47.240]  And many people have a misunderstanding as to what is actually being bought and sold
[01:50:47.240 --> 01:50:48.240]  They didn't sell your house
[01:50:48.240 --> 01:50:49.240]  Nope
[01:50:49.240 --> 01:50:51.240]  They didn't sell an interest in your house
[01:50:51.240 --> 01:50:52.240]  Nope
[01:50:52.240 --> 01:50:55.240]  They sold an interest in the paper that you signed on closing
[01:50:55.240 --> 01:50:59.240]  They sold an interest in the obligation
[01:50:59.240 --> 01:51:00.240]  Correct
[01:51:00.240 --> 01:51:13.240]  Right, and the other thing that we discovered, and we've talked about this before on the show, is we were trying to determine discovery as the ownership and the chain of title being perfected
[01:51:13.240 --> 01:51:20.240]  When we look on our homeowners insurance, it lists the mortgagee because the policies basically make a claim over $8,000
[01:51:20.240 --> 01:51:24.240]  The mortgagee must be notified in order to verify we don't owe debt to them
[01:51:24.240 --> 01:51:33.240]  So the mortgagee has changed hands from Wachovia to World Savings to IndyMac and so on down the line
[01:51:33.240 --> 01:51:36.240]  None of these being recorded in the Recorder of Deeds office
[01:51:36.240 --> 01:51:37.240]  Oops
[01:51:37.240 --> 01:51:42.240]  Oopsie daisy, somebody forgot something
[01:51:42.240 --> 01:51:53.240]  Well, that's just the other complication that we've ensued here is that we have this knowledge because the insurance company gives us a policy statement every year
[01:51:53.240 --> 01:51:55.240]  telling us who the mortgagee is
[01:51:55.240 --> 01:51:56.240]  Right
[01:51:56.240 --> 01:51:57.240]  Now
[01:51:57.240 --> 01:51:58.240]  Prove it
[01:51:58.240 --> 01:51:59.240]  Is it possible for
[01:51:59.240 --> 01:52:00.240]  Prove it
[01:52:00.240 --> 01:52:06.240]  Exactly, but is it possible for any one of these companies to have ever held it and is my chain of title
[01:52:06.240 --> 01:52:14.240]  Yes it is, it is completely possible, but is that of any consequence if it is not in the public record?
[01:52:14.240 --> 01:52:18.240]  No it is not, it's not of any consequence
[01:52:18.240 --> 01:52:25.240]  Real property and personal property are dealt with differently in the public record
[01:52:25.240 --> 01:52:34.240]  In that real property, any transfer of anything to do with real property must be reflected in the public record
[01:52:34.240 --> 01:52:38.240]  Let's say somebody drives by your house and says, oh I like that house
[01:52:38.240 --> 01:52:43.240]  I think I'll go look that up in the public record and make that guy an offer on that house, I want to buy it
[01:52:43.240 --> 01:52:50.240]  He's got to be able to trust the public record to send him to the right place
[01:52:50.240 --> 01:53:04.240]  So if Fannie Mae is the holder or, now I don't want to say that, let's say at the time Wachovia would have been the true holder
[01:53:04.240 --> 01:53:14.240]  They would have been reflected in the public record, so they would know who holds an interest in the property
[01:53:14.240 --> 01:53:19.240]  They would have to make an offer to them because they would have to buy them out
[01:53:19.240 --> 01:53:26.240]  But if the correct party is not reflected in the public record, who are they to go to to make an offer?
[01:53:26.240 --> 01:53:33.240]  They can go to you, but it's not your decision to sell it
[01:53:33.240 --> 01:53:42.240]  Not completely because somebody else holds an interest in the documentation that went with the house
[01:53:42.240 --> 01:53:50.240]  So without that true, correct and accurate chain of possession, chain of title, the whole deal is off
[01:53:50.240 --> 01:53:59.240]  That creates a cloud on your title and now title cannot be A, transferred or B, insured after transfer
[01:53:59.240 --> 01:54:12.240]  That's why it's so vitally important for the public record to be updated anytime there's a transfer of interests from party A to party B, C, D, E on down the line
[01:54:12.240 --> 01:54:21.240]  When there is a break in that chain, there is also a break in rights to enforce the instruments
[01:54:21.240 --> 01:54:23.240]  Now you're talking about Pete
[01:54:23.240 --> 01:54:25.240]  Now I'm talking about Pete
[01:54:25.240 --> 01:54:28.240]  Who is Pete? Party entitled to enforce
[01:54:28.240 --> 01:54:34.240]  Where is Pete? I'll bet you Pete is in a shallow grave somewhere out by Mexico
[01:54:34.240 --> 01:54:41.240]  Because the lender killed him right after closing, shot him dead square between the eyes right after closing
[01:54:41.240 --> 01:54:44.240]  He's dead, Pete is dead
[01:54:44.240 --> 01:54:51.240]  The party entitled to enforce no longer exists, pursuant to the public record
[01:54:51.240 --> 01:54:53.240]  In Texas
[01:54:53.240 --> 01:54:58.240]  He hasn't existed for three years
[01:54:58.240 --> 01:55:05.240]  In Texas, 13.001 Texas Property Code
[01:55:05.240 --> 01:55:17.240]  A claim against real property not properly acknowledged or proven and filed in the public record is void as to the holder
[01:55:17.240 --> 01:55:27.240]  And every state that has a registrar of deeds is going to have a statute that reflects exactly the same thing
[01:55:27.240 --> 01:55:28.240]  Correct
[01:55:28.240 --> 01:55:40.240]  You can have all the claims you want to, but if you haven't filed them so when I go down and look in record, I can find it, then you can't adjudicate
[01:55:40.240 --> 01:55:43.240]  That's the story, I'm sticking to it
[01:55:43.240 --> 01:55:44.240]  That's a good story
[01:55:44.240 --> 01:55:49.240]  That is, you also have 18 U.S.C. Chapter 47, 1021, which is federal
[01:55:49.240 --> 01:56:00.240]  Which is that anyone that knowingly records or does not record a conveyance made into public record can be found guilty of the crime
[01:56:00.240 --> 01:56:01.240]  What crime?
[01:56:01.240 --> 01:56:04.240]  Fraudulently recording
[01:56:04.240 --> 01:56:06.240]  Oops
[01:56:06.240 --> 01:56:08.240]  That's tampering with government documents
[01:56:08.240 --> 01:56:09.240]  It's a felony
[01:56:09.240 --> 01:56:10.240]  Yes it is
[01:56:10.240 --> 01:56:12.240]  Right
[01:56:12.240 --> 01:56:16.240]  Chris, sounds like you're just having too much fun out there in Pennsylvania
[01:56:16.240 --> 01:56:18.240]  I am, and I'm just
[01:56:18.240 --> 01:56:21.240]  Actually, you've got more fun yet to come
[01:56:21.240 --> 01:56:22.240]  Yes
[01:56:22.240 --> 01:56:23.240]  Oh, yeah
[01:56:23.240 --> 01:56:25.240]  I'm just hoping that with
[01:56:25.240 --> 01:56:28.240]  You are taking notes, aren't you?
[01:56:28.240 --> 01:56:29.240]  I am
[01:56:29.240 --> 01:56:31.240]  No, you're not
[01:56:31.240 --> 01:56:34.240]  That's what archives are for
[01:56:34.240 --> 01:56:37.240]  I've taken notes every time I've called into the show
[01:56:37.240 --> 01:56:39.240]  Good for you, good, good, good
[01:56:39.240 --> 01:56:44.240]  You know, I try to explain this to my Charlotteson friend, but
[01:56:44.240 --> 01:56:49.240]  You know, he quotes me that Pennsylvania law doesn't have any of that
[01:56:49.240 --> 01:56:54.240]  And as Randy pointed out, Pennsylvania is another planet when it comes to the rule of law
[01:56:54.240 --> 01:57:01.240]  It may be, but the laws are on the, the statutes are on the books and they're there for a reason
[01:57:01.240 --> 01:57:02.240]  Right
[01:57:02.240 --> 01:57:07.240]  So send your, so download Audacity
[01:57:07.240 --> 01:57:12.240]  Drop this MP3, drop the archive of this show into Audacity
[01:57:12.240 --> 01:57:16.240]  Isolate this portion and send it to your attorney
[01:57:16.240 --> 01:57:19.240]  Be prepared to pay a bill for him listening to it
[01:57:19.240 --> 01:57:23.240]  But hopefully
[01:57:23.240 --> 01:57:26.240]  Counsel, a light will come on
[01:57:26.240 --> 01:57:28.240]  Yeah
[01:57:28.240 --> 01:57:35.240]  I've already had my, you know, check forwarded from work directly to him, so it just
[01:57:35.240 --> 01:57:38.240]  Whatever time he takes, it really doesn't matter, I just keep working
[01:57:38.240 --> 01:57:41.240]  Yeah, exactly, yeah
[01:57:41.240 --> 01:57:46.240]  Well, if you got anything else you want to put on the table
[01:57:46.240 --> 01:57:49.240]  No, that was about it, thanks so much
[01:57:49.240 --> 01:57:51.240]  Thank you for calling
[01:57:51.240 --> 01:57:53.240]  It was a good call
[01:57:53.240 --> 01:57:59.240]  Keep us updated, call back in next time something happens and let us know how this goes
[01:57:59.240 --> 01:58:07.240]  And also let us know the response of your attorney to the isolated portion of this archive
[01:58:07.240 --> 01:58:12.240]  I'd be kind of interested in hearing about his response
[01:58:12.240 --> 01:58:21.240]  The other interesting thing, the opposing attorney just asked for another 30 days for discovery that he just granted them an okay for
[01:58:21.240 --> 01:58:26.240]  Okay, wonderful, that means they don't have squat and they got a dig to come up with something
[01:58:26.240 --> 01:58:31.240]  That's great, that's good
[01:58:31.240 --> 01:58:34.240]  That's what you want, you want to knock them off guard
[01:58:34.240 --> 01:58:42.240]  Well, Chris, if that's all you got, brother, we're headed into another break, we'll let you go and come into Benny on the other side of this break
[01:58:42.240 --> 01:58:49.240]  You're listening to Rule of Law Radio with Randy Kelton, Joe Espebel and Steve Skidmore, 512-646-1984
[01:58:49.240 --> 01:58:57.240]  The Bible remains the most popular book in the world, yet countless readers are frustrated because they struggle to understand it
[01:58:57.240 --> 01:59:05.240]  Some new translations try to help by simplifying the text, but in the process can compromise the profound meaning of the scripture
[01:59:05.240 --> 01:59:08.240]  Enter the recovery version
[01:59:08.240 --> 01:59:17.240]  First, this new translation is extremely faithful and accurate, but the real story is the more than 9000 explanatory footnotes
[01:59:17.240 --> 01:59:27.240]  Difficult and profound passages are opened up in a marvelous way, providing an entrance into the riches of the word beyond which you've ever experienced before
[01:59:27.240 --> 01:59:32.240]  Bibles for America would like to give you a free recovery version simply for the asking
[01:59:32.240 --> 01:59:47.240]  This comprehensive yet compact study Bible is yours just by calling us toll free at 1-888-551-0102 or by ordering online at freestudybible.com
[01:59:47.240 --> 01:59:50.240]  That's freestudybible.com
[01:59:50.240 --> 02:00:03.240]  You are listening to the Logos Radio Network, logosradionetwork.com