ROL_2014-07-18_16k_Hr1-2.timecode

[00:00.000 --> 00:07.280]  This is the Liberty Beat, your daily source for Liberty News and activist updates online
[00:07.280 --> 00:08.280]  at TheLibertyBeat.com.
[00:08.280 --> 00:13.600]  I'm Brian Hagen with your Liberty Beat for Thursday, July 17, 2014.
[00:13.600 --> 00:16.120]  Gold opens today at $1,303.
[00:16.120 --> 00:18.320]  Silver opens at $20 and 82 cents.
[00:18.320 --> 00:22.320]  And Bitcoin is trading at $617.27.
[00:22.320 --> 00:26.760]  Support for the Liberty Beat comes from GrowYourOwnGroceries.org, now offering an 8-week course
[00:26.760 --> 00:30.280]  where you can learn to treat the most common family ailments with simple medicine so you
[00:30.280 --> 00:32.360]  can grow or easily find.
[00:32.360 --> 00:33.360]  Learn more.
[00:33.360 --> 00:34.360]  GrowYourOwnGroceries.org.
[00:34.360 --> 00:39.320]  And support comes from Bitmain Tech, creators of the newly released Antminer S2 Bitcoin
[00:39.320 --> 00:42.760]  Miner, one tera hash and only 1,000 watts.
[00:42.760 --> 00:47.680]  Order yours online today at bitmaintech.com or call them up at 844-Bitmain.
[00:47.680 --> 00:50.680]  That's 844-248-6246.
[00:50.680 --> 00:55.320]  In the news, the Texas Department of Public Safety is now taking full sets of fingerprints
[00:55.320 --> 01:00.880]  from every Texan old enough to drive, adding them to a statewide criminal history database.
[01:00.880 --> 01:05.440]  Critics say the move is illegal, arguing DPS is misinterpreting a section of the transportation
[01:05.440 --> 01:10.200]  code that allows an applicant's thumb prints or fingerprints to be used for verification.
[01:10.200 --> 01:15.280]  Dallas Morning News columnist Dave Lever also broke the story and says the law is intended
[01:15.280 --> 01:20.240]  to allow only thumbs and index fingerprints to be taken, not the entire set.
[01:20.240 --> 01:24.680]  Donald Jackson, a political science professor at Texas Christian University, is offering
[01:24.680 --> 01:29.560]  legal support to anyone wishing to challenge the new policy in court.
[01:29.560 --> 01:34.720]  The New York Police Department has been hit with a First Amendment lawsuit after a woman
[01:34.720 --> 01:38.840]  alleged her rights were violated when she tried to record police activity last September
[01:38.840 --> 01:41.120]  on the Upper West Side in New York.
[01:41.120 --> 01:45.440]  Plaintiff Deborah Goodman was allegedly pushed by officers to entertain for more than 24
[01:45.440 --> 01:46.440]  hours.
[01:46.440 --> 01:49.800]  Goodman also said officers grabbed her arm and handcuffed her after refusing to provide
[01:49.800 --> 01:50.800]  ID.
[01:50.800 --> 01:55.880]  The lawsuit asked a judge to force the NYPD to allow onlookers to record police publicly,
[01:55.880 --> 02:03.080]  as reported by WCBS TV, the NYPD declined requests for comment.
[02:03.080 --> 02:08.520]  The Obama administration is allocating $50 million towards a luxury Texas hotel equipped
[02:08.520 --> 02:13.800]  with various amenities with intentions to use a resort for housing undocumented children.
[02:13.800 --> 02:18.440]  Baptist Child and Family Services has been contracted to purchase the Palmer Resort and
[02:18.440 --> 02:23.960]  Hotel in Westlaco, a town a few miles north of the Rio Grande in Hidalgo County.
[02:23.960 --> 02:29.960]  KRGV reports the site will house up to 600 children aged 12 to 17 and create jobs for
[02:29.960 --> 02:31.720]  650 people.
[02:31.720 --> 02:36.160]  The charity group said the resort would function as an intake facility and also a hospital.
[02:36.160 --> 02:40.880]  Support for Liberty Beat comes from Affordable Sound, CD and DVD duplication along with posters
[02:40.880 --> 02:42.720]  and promotions materials.
[02:42.720 --> 02:47.400]  Mention promo code Liberty and when you order 10 or more posters, you get 10 brain.
[02:47.400 --> 02:53.200]  Online at affordablesound.com or call them up at 512-459-5253.
[02:53.200 --> 02:57.280]  This is the Liberty Beat for Thursday, July 17, 2014.
[02:57.280 --> 03:26.280]  Check out the website at thelibertybeat.com.
[03:27.280 --> 03:57.080]  This is the Liberty Beat for Thursday, July 17, 2014.
[03:57.080 --> 04:24.600]  Okay, howdy, howdy.
[04:24.600 --> 04:33.480]  This is Randy Kilton here today with Steve Skidmore on our four hour, my tiny skid is
[04:33.480 --> 04:34.640]  getting tumbled up.
[04:34.640 --> 04:46.560]  Ladies and gentlemen, our four hour info marathon will be taking your calls all night and we
[04:46.560 --> 04:49.880]  wanted to start out, Steve and I were...
[04:49.880 --> 04:55.920]  Joe is playing hooky tonight, he's had a long day yesterday, 23 hours of sleep, I talked
[04:55.920 --> 04:59.360]  to him earlier today, he said he's running on 23 hours of sleep and he's got to get
[04:59.360 --> 05:05.200]  up before the sun and head out again, so he will not be with us tonight.
[05:05.200 --> 05:13.880]  And we were talking earlier about some of the things you have to do and know and understand
[05:13.880 --> 05:19.440]  if you're going to represent yourself in court.
[05:19.440 --> 05:25.560]  There are beyond just the bare facts, there are some things we need to understand about
[05:25.560 --> 05:32.680]  representing ourselves in court and we wanted to kind of go through a few of those.
[05:32.680 --> 05:39.640]  Steve, you want to start this off, what is the...your opinion?
[05:39.640 --> 05:40.640]  Well...
[05:40.640 --> 05:43.920]  It's the biggest error that people make.
[05:43.920 --> 05:54.600]  Okay, the biggest error people make are that...well, let's look at what gets the pro se litigant
[05:54.600 --> 05:57.120]  most often in court.
[05:57.120 --> 06:01.800]  And when I say the pro se litigant, I'm not talking about fighting a traffic ticket, anything
[06:01.800 --> 06:08.760]  on the criminal side, I'm talking about civil and usually or generally, fighting a bank
[06:08.760 --> 06:14.040]  or a debt collector of any kind.
[06:14.040 --> 06:22.040]  The downfall of most pro se litigants is federal rules of...federal civil rules of
[06:22.040 --> 06:31.920]  procedure rule 12B6, failure to stay to claim upon which relief can be granted and here's
[06:31.920 --> 06:34.600]  why.
[06:34.600 --> 06:40.800]  Most pro se, most of us pro se, and let's define pro se litigant for those who don't
[06:40.800 --> 06:48.800]  know or who are new to this, a pro se or pro per is an individual who chooses to go to
[06:48.800 --> 06:53.840]  court without representation of counsel, okay?
[06:53.840 --> 06:58.400]  You're going in bare back, it's what lawyers call bare back.
[06:58.400 --> 07:02.000]  You don't have an attorney by your side, you're going to do this yourself.
[07:02.000 --> 07:05.000]  Follow your own lawsuit, so to speak.
[07:05.000 --> 07:12.040]  So, generally, when fighting a bank over a mortgage or fighting a debt collector over
[07:12.040 --> 07:18.880]  an alleged debt, the debt collector or the mortgage company or the mortgage servicer
[07:18.880 --> 07:29.800]  or somebody along the line, an alleged secured party is not a citizen of the state in which
[07:29.800 --> 07:41.960]  the subject property is located, therefore, under an apparent diversity of jurisdiction.
[07:41.960 --> 07:47.640]  The opposing party, usually the bank or their attorneys, will remove your case to the federal
[07:47.640 --> 07:52.880]  venue because we generally file stuff in the state court.
[07:52.880 --> 07:59.680]  Usually here in Texas, most people head and rightly so, straight for the state district
[07:59.680 --> 08:01.800]  court.
[08:01.800 --> 08:11.720]  That is a proper venue for most cases, however, if you're challenging issues of securitization
[08:11.720 --> 08:21.840]  or something like that and you're bringing in Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, some, what do you
[08:21.840 --> 08:34.120]  call it, ambiguous trust, that trust is probably developed under or instituted under either
[08:34.120 --> 08:42.360]  Delaware or New York law, so there's, okay, you got diversity of jurisdiction.
[08:42.360 --> 08:46.320]  The opposing party or the bank, the lawyers from the bank are going to remove your state
[08:46.320 --> 08:49.040]  case to the federal venue.
[08:49.040 --> 08:56.160]  Now, failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
[08:56.160 --> 09:05.320]  Once in the federal venue, Twombly v. Iqbal kicks in and we see state courts starting
[09:05.320 --> 09:14.080]  to lean towards Twombly v. Iqbal, Twombly vs. Iqbal, let's go over that for just a second.
[09:14.080 --> 09:25.800]  Twombly v. Iqbal is a case that was code pleaded or it was a case over the, excuse me, an
[09:25.800 --> 09:33.240]  ancillary issue arose in Twombly v. Iqbal in that a litigant did not plead out, did
[09:33.240 --> 09:38.840]  not successfully or succinctly plead out their case and left a lot of ambiguity and this
[09:38.840 --> 09:42.680]  is generally what pro says do in the state venue.
[09:42.680 --> 09:49.560]  You might state a claim, a state claim, but once it's in the federal venue that the Fed,
[09:49.560 --> 09:57.160]  though it has jurisdiction over state issues as well as federal issues, they don't care
[09:57.160 --> 10:05.360]  if you don't write your pleading succinctly and make absolutely certain that you have
[10:05.360 --> 10:12.120]  stated a cause of action, that being a claim upon which relief can be granted, let's interpret
[10:12.120 --> 10:21.200]  those two as being the same, cause of action, each cause of action has elements.
[10:21.200 --> 10:27.600]  You must satisfy each one of those elements.
[10:27.600 --> 10:33.240]  Let's say fraud, for example, depending on what state you're in, there could be their
[10:33.240 --> 10:44.040]  five, anywhere from five to nine elements of fraud and you must plead out all five through
[10:44.040 --> 10:52.120]  nine, whichever, you know, go to your own state and go to your own state statutes and
[10:52.120 --> 10:56.480]  look up your fraud statutes and count the elements.
[10:56.480 --> 11:02.120]  If you have five elements or nine elements, you've got to satisfy them all.
[11:02.120 --> 11:04.240]  You've got to plead out them all.
[11:04.240 --> 11:14.320]  You've got to show how the other party breached or violated that element and give supporting
[11:14.320 --> 11:19.000]  case law to go along with it.
[11:19.000 --> 11:24.920]  So if you fail to do that in your initial state pleading, once it's in the Fed, now
[11:24.920 --> 11:29.520]  you don't have a cause of action upon which relief can be granted because you didn't tell
[11:29.520 --> 11:31.480]  the court what your gripe was.
[11:31.480 --> 11:40.160]  I redacted and sent Randy earlier a copy of a pleading that was sent to me by a gentleman
[11:40.160 --> 11:43.280]  that I know.
[11:43.280 --> 11:51.360]  He filed in the state of Texas and Randy, he sent it to me in Word, so I did redact it.
[11:51.360 --> 12:00.840]  This gentleman on page four, section five, it says causes of action, okay.
[12:00.840 --> 12:09.360]  Notice analyze this statement, causes of action, causes plural of action, okay.
[12:09.360 --> 12:16.960]  You've got my palate wet, you've got me ready, you've got my appetite for multiple or plural
[12:16.960 --> 12:20.560]  causes of action, more than one.
[12:20.560 --> 12:25.400]  And I read under that and there's not one cause of action.
[12:25.400 --> 12:33.760]  That was section five, section five A should have been something along the line of slander
[12:33.760 --> 12:36.680]  of title, okay.
[12:36.680 --> 12:42.560]  Slander of title, how many elements are there to slander of title, there are four.
[12:42.560 --> 12:47.600]  You must meet them all.
[12:47.600 --> 12:53.960]  Quiet title, how many elements, you must meet them all.
[12:53.960 --> 12:58.640]  But you contract, how many elements, you must meet them all, so on and so forth.
[12:58.640 --> 13:04.520]  Whatever your cause of action is, you've got to count the elements and satisfy them all.
[13:04.520 --> 13:10.000]  If you do not, then you have failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
[13:10.000 --> 13:15.080]  This poor gentleman here, now Randy, you and I were talking about this pleading earlier.
[13:15.080 --> 13:21.440]  What was interesting about this is it was dismissed in the federal venue under rule
[13:21.440 --> 13:28.600]  12B6 for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, but it was dismissed
[13:28.600 --> 13:33.960]  with prejudice.
[13:33.960 --> 13:37.600]  Think about that.
[13:37.600 --> 13:44.880]  If this man failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, that means he did not
[13:44.880 --> 13:56.080]  put a cause of action in his pleading, but his pleading was dismissed with prejudice.
[13:56.080 --> 13:58.160]  What side of offense does this fall on?
[13:58.160 --> 14:05.400]  Can he never file any kind of cause of action or is he free to file any cause of action
[14:05.400 --> 14:11.520]  he pleases because he failed to state a claim?
[14:11.520 --> 14:18.880]  So if you're barred from filing a claim with no cause of action, that's the way I would
[14:18.880 --> 14:21.440]  interpret that.
[14:21.440 --> 14:25.040]  How about you, Randy?
[14:25.040 --> 14:32.400]  Failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, he genuinely did not state
[14:32.400 --> 14:37.960]  a cause of action in his pleading, but it was dismissed with prejudice.
[14:37.960 --> 14:44.800]  Could he be barred from ever filing any kind of claim or can he refile any claims as long
[14:44.800 --> 14:48.800]  as he meets the tumbly vehicle?
[14:48.800 --> 14:53.600]  He can never file a non-claim again.
[14:53.600 --> 14:56.480]  There you go.
[14:56.480 --> 15:00.000]  You can never file a non-claim again.
[15:00.000 --> 15:07.080]  If you are listening tonight, you know who you are, so don't file another non-claim.
[15:07.080 --> 15:15.880]  And Steve brought that up, and that's something I had not considered, where we have a Rule
[15:15.880 --> 15:29.080]  12 motion and the suit is dismissed with or without prejudice seems to be irrelevant.
[15:29.080 --> 15:34.440]  If they're dismissing under Rule 12, then they're saying you failed to state a claim.
[15:34.440 --> 15:44.200]  If there is no claim, then you have no claim that has ever been dismissed, and any claims
[15:44.200 --> 15:48.400]  that's been dismissed without prejudice you can't bring again.
[15:48.400 --> 15:52.240]  But if he failed to state a claim, then he can bring any claim he wants so long as he
[15:52.240 --> 15:54.240]  pleads it out.
[15:54.240 --> 15:59.240]  Exactly, so what does that mean?
[15:59.240 --> 16:04.360]  I don't know, it's kind of a contradiction, isn't it?
[16:04.360 --> 16:10.600]  It seemed that way to me, but in looking at it that way, then it's not much of a loss.
[16:10.600 --> 16:17.640]  And in these federal courts, they tend to do that, and it's probably just to confuse
[16:17.640 --> 16:26.720]  us for muddle-headed procès or procès.
[16:26.720 --> 16:35.160]  If you're going to file a suit, and we were talking about this earlier, a primary consideration
[16:35.160 --> 16:46.240]  is how you craft the pleading, and since when we're dealing with banks and such, since
[16:46.240 --> 16:54.840]  they for the most part are almost always going to claim diversity, jurisdiction, and remove
[16:54.840 --> 16:55.840]  the case.
[16:55.840 --> 16:59.440]  So all of that thought, Randy, we're coming up to a break real quick, folks will see right
[16:59.440 --> 17:00.440]  now.
[17:00.440 --> 17:06.760]  Through advances in technology, our lives have greatly improved, except in the area of nutrition.
[17:06.760 --> 17:11.520]  People feed their pets better than they feed themselves, and it's time we changed all that.
[17:11.520 --> 17:17.120]  Our primary defense against aging and disease in this toxic environment is good nutrition.
[17:17.120 --> 17:22.640]  In a world where natural foods have been irradiated, adulterated, and mutilated, young
[17:22.640 --> 17:26.000]  Jevity can provide the nutrients you need.
[17:26.000 --> 17:31.760]  Logos Radio Network gets many requests to endorse all sorts of products, most of which we reject.
[17:31.760 --> 17:38.400]  We have come to trust Jevity so much, we became a marketing distributor along with Alex Jones,
[17:38.400 --> 17:39.800]  Ben Fuchs, and many others.
[17:39.800 --> 17:46.120]  When you order from LogosRadioNetwork.com, your health will improve as you help support
[17:46.120 --> 17:47.760]  quality radio.
[17:47.760 --> 17:53.240]  As you realize the benefits of young Jevity, you may want to join us as a distributor.
[17:53.240 --> 17:59.320]  You can experience improved health, help your friends and family, and increase your income.
[17:59.320 --> 18:00.320]  Order now.
[18:00.320 --> 18:06.000]  Are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters, or even lawsuits?
[18:06.000 --> 18:09.680]  Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Mearris Proven Method.
[18:09.680 --> 18:13.800]  Michael Mearris has won six cases in federal court against debt collectors, and now you
[18:13.800 --> 18:14.800]  can win too.
[18:14.800 --> 18:19.680]  You'll get step-by-step instructions in plain English on how to win in court using federal
[18:19.680 --> 18:25.440]  civil rights statute, what to do when contacted by phones, mail, or court summons, how to answer
[18:25.440 --> 18:30.080]  letters and phone calls, how to get debt collectors out of your credit reports, how to turn the
[18:30.080 --> 18:34.280]  financial tables on them and make them pay you to go away.
[18:34.280 --> 18:39.400]  The Michael Mearris Proven Method is the solution for how to stop debt collectors.
[18:39.400 --> 18:41.520]  Personal consultation is available as well.
[18:41.520 --> 18:47.080]  For more information, please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the blue Michael Mearris banner
[18:47.080 --> 18:49.800]  or email michaelmearris at yahoo.com.
[18:49.800 --> 18:59.640]  That's ruleoflawradio.com 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
[18:59.640 --> 19:23.280]  net.
[19:29.640 --> 19:44.640]  I'm standing like it's out of control, on the edge of a hole inside a deep dark dome
[19:44.640 --> 19:50.640]  I'm always on the lookout for something that suits my soul
[19:50.640 --> 20:02.640]  So I sit back and I watch the evidence unfold, and I see justice is the goal
[20:02.640 --> 20:09.640]  Yeah, justice is the goal
[20:09.640 --> 20:15.640]  Sometimes we stand a little too far at sea, and then we gotta get back on course, we don't see
[20:15.640 --> 20:22.640]  So we go on with the heavy advisory, from the man that came all the way from Galilee
[20:22.640 --> 20:28.640]  I'm looking for a safe and warm place to be, where I don't have to work so hard to be free
[20:28.640 --> 20:33.640]  Some guys are trying to rewrite history, but they got caught
[20:33.640 --> 20:48.640]  Now them guys got to flee, looks like justice, looks like justice
[20:48.640 --> 21:05.640]  Yeah
[21:05.640 --> 21:13.640]  Okay, we are back, Randy Kelton, Steve Skidmore, we have our video, and we were talking about how to craft your suit
[21:13.640 --> 21:21.640]  When we went out, we were discussing a strategy for writing your suit
[21:21.640 --> 21:30.640]  If you're dealing with something that, especially it has to do with foreclosure issues or tax issues
[21:30.640 --> 21:40.640]  You can pretty well expect the other side, if you file an action, to remove to the federal courts
[21:40.640 --> 21:51.640]  It's just almost knee-jerk, and as soon as they remove to the federal courts, you can be almost absolutely certain you'll get a rule to a motion to dismiss a fair state of claim
[21:51.640 --> 22:08.640]  So we're suggesting, you wouldn't think quite title, trespass to try title, or trespass to try title is specifically and strictly a state action filed only in Texas
[22:08.640 --> 22:24.640]  You wouldn't expect that to be removed to the federal court, because when you craft the pleading, you tend to craft it under some very specific structural state requirements
[22:24.640 --> 22:33.640]  But as soon as you file that thing, the bank is going to remove it to the Fed, and then it's not going to be sufficient for federal filing
[22:33.640 --> 22:37.640]  And they're going to move to dismiss for a fair state of claim, so we're suggesting
[22:37.640 --> 22:50.640]  If there's any chance your pleading can be removed to the federal court, you write your pleading as if you are crafting a federal pleading
[22:50.640 --> 22:57.640]  Then it will be ready for the removal
[22:57.640 --> 23:19.640]  And there is one issue that I haven't seen taken on, I've talked to Steve about this before, and on the removal issue, Steve have you looked into the federal removal and venue clarification act?
[23:19.640 --> 23:35.640]  I know it, it means, how do they, does the court hold on to a strictly state claim even when there is the diversity of jurisdiction?
[23:35.640 --> 24:01.640]  Because as I read the code, as the code was changed in 2012, regardless of diversity or not, while a case can be removed to the federal that has state issues, the federal court can't hear the state issues, they must sever those from the case
[24:01.640 --> 24:12.640]  And remand those back to the state, is there something that I missed in the diversity of jurisdiction section?
[24:12.640 --> 24:31.640]  The understanding that I have is that the crux of the issue would rest in the term original jurisdiction. Who would have original jurisdiction over any issue in the event of diversity of jurisdiction?
[24:31.640 --> 24:59.640]  I believe that the federal court has jurisdiction over both state and federal issues, however, if there is an issue cause of action or an issue that would be strictly state, then that issue should be severed and remanded back to the state court in which the original petition was filed
[24:59.640 --> 25:17.640]  And that's exactly, that was exactly the position we were taking. When you file a trespass to try title action, or a quiet title action, that is strictly a state claim. If you file for and jump to relief
[25:17.640 --> 25:36.640]  And why is it strictly a state claim? Because it addresses the validity of a document filed in the county recorder's office as that filing relates to the state filing requirements. Nothing federal is implicated there
[25:36.640 --> 25:55.640]  And, every state deals with title issues in a different manner. Exactly, and this is purely a state issue. So, even if that's removed, what we're maintaining is that while the...
[25:55.640 --> 26:18.640]  Clarity did 2012... 2011. Well, it was actually went into effect in 2012. Yes, it went into effect in 2012. You're right, it is the 2011 Jurisdiction and Venue Clarification Act.
[26:18.640 --> 26:44.640]  Right. There was a division between the circuits on whether or not a federal court could hear a state issue. And the way I read that, the federal courts picked up the state issue as a matter of...
[26:44.640 --> 27:07.640]  It was the term judicial efficiency. A judicial economy is the term I was looking for. Since you're already in court on issues and you have a judge adjudicating issues, the courts say, well, if you have an issue and you come to the courts, bring everything you got.
[27:07.640 --> 27:18.640]  Don't come in here and pick one issue at a time. If you have related issues, they all have to be brought at the same time. So, now we've got state and federal issues, all brought at the same time.
[27:18.640 --> 27:38.640]  And in the interest of judicial economy, federal courts ought to be able to hear a state issue if there are federal issues included, because the state cannot, in any case, hear the federal issue. I'm sorry, cannot hear the federal issue.
[27:38.640 --> 27:55.640]  And only the Fed has jurisdiction over that. So, since the Fed has... there's the one that has to hear the federal issues and the states are inextricably inclined, then they should hear them both.
[27:55.640 --> 28:16.640]  That was kind of the reasoning. But in the clarification act, they said, no, that's preemption, that the Fed has no power to rule on a state issue. And I suspect it was all political.
[28:16.640 --> 28:37.640]  They took that away from the federal courts to lighten the load on the federal courts. Because in my personal and totally unsupported and unfounded opinion, the banks had pretty well bought and paid for the federal courts.
[28:37.640 --> 28:47.640]  If it's a matter of discretion, the judge is always going to lean to the banks. And the banks know that.
[28:47.640 --> 29:06.640]  Here in Travis County, in the federal court, there is a judge, Sam Sparks. He knows only one rule. That's rule number one. Well, actually, he knows two rules. Rule one, bank always wins. Rule two, see rule one.
[29:06.640 --> 29:21.640]  And the banks know that. Okay. Now, that may not be true. But if we act as if it is true, we will be better prepared for what's coming.
[29:21.640 --> 29:44.640]  So in looking at this issue, how do we get this out of the hand of the Fed? And what we crafted in some actions we did up here in Travis County where we filed a trespass to try title, we pick up this issue from someone after they have been foreclosed on.
[29:44.640 --> 30:03.640]  They come to us and write us a quick claim deed and transfer any claim they may have had in the property over to us. Not essentially jeopardy.
[30:03.640 --> 30:14.640]  The Indian government may be wiping the smile off of Colgate's face. Activists claim the toothpaste giant patented an ancient Indian recipe they've been using for thousands of years.
[30:14.640 --> 30:35.640]  Alfred Albrecht, I'll be back in a moment to tell you more.
[30:45.640 --> 30:54.640]  Is Colgate a copycat? Indian activists say the company's newly minted patent for tooth powder is an ancient recipe and they plan to fight it.
[30:54.640 --> 31:05.640]  Colgate is brushing this off. It claims a new twist on the traditional formula. The patent calls for red iron oxide instead of red ochre. But red ochre contains iron oxide. Hmm.
[31:05.640 --> 31:18.640]  The threatened patent challenge could have teeth. In 1995, India fought U.S. efforts to patent turmeric, India won. In the meantime, India is documenting 30 million web pages worth of its ancient herbal formulas.
[31:18.640 --> 31:31.640]  Officials hope this step will prevent companies like Colgate from patenting India's age-old recipes. I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht for startpage.com, the world's most private search engine.
[31:31.640 --> 31:38.640]  What are you thinking? Micro-plant powder with iodine and probiotics for a total body detox for around $10 a month.
[31:38.640 --> 31:49.640]  InfUSA.org has 12 formulations of micro-plant powder for absorbing and removing toxins from your kidney, liver, blood, lungs, stomach, and colon, and feel better than ever.
[31:49.640 --> 32:01.640]  Oxygen A kills parasites. Does the job of 10 products. That saves you space, time, and money. Call 888-910-4367 only at infUSA.org.
[32:01.640 --> 32:08.640]  Rule of Law Radio is proud to offer the Rule of Law Traffic Seminar. In today's America, we live in an us against them society.
[32:08.640 --> 32:13.640]  If we, the people, are ever going to have a free society, then we're going to have to stand and defend our own rights.
[32:13.640 --> 32:20.640]  Among those rights are the right to travel freely from place to place, the right to act in our own private capacity, and most importantly, the right to due process of law.
[32:20.640 --> 32:26.640]  Traffic courts afford us the least expensive opportunity to learn how to enforce and preserve our rights through due process.
[32:26.640 --> 32:35.640]  Former Sheriff's Deputy A. Craig, in conjunction with Rule of Law Radio, has put together the most comprehensive teaching tool available that will help you understand what due process is and how to hold courts to the rule of law.
[32:35.640 --> 32:45.640]  You can get your own copy of this invaluable material by going to ruleoflawradio.com and ordering your copy today. By ordering now, you'll receive a copy of Eddie's book, The Texas Transportation Code, The Law vs. the Lie,
[32:45.640 --> 32:51.640]  video and audio of the original 2009 seminar, hundreds of research documents, and other useful resource material.
[32:51.640 --> 32:59.640]  Learn how to fight for your rights with the help of this material from ruleoflawradio.com. Order your copy today and together we can have free society we all want and deserve.
[32:59.640 --> 33:11.640]  You're listening to the Logos Radio Network at LogosRadioNetwork.com.
[33:11.640 --> 33:30.640]  Yeah, I got the warrant and I'm going to solve them, to the head of government them, prosecute them. Okay.
[33:30.640 --> 33:46.640]  Well, I need a prosecutor to come and help me. Prosecute them wicked leader, you see.
[33:46.640 --> 34:01.640]  The mama got a wrong liar, but them tell me, then I'll lie, I'm not tellin' stories.
[34:01.640 --> 34:15.640]  Everybody listen carefully, listen to the words of the judiciary's party.
[34:15.640 --> 34:20.640]  Okay, we are back. Randy Kelton, Steve Skidmore, rule of law radio.
[34:20.640 --> 34:32.640]  And when we went out, we were talking about how to craft your pleadings and how to handle a removal to the federal court.
[34:32.640 --> 34:38.640]  Now, generally, when you get a removal, you've got 30 days to file a motion to remand.
[34:38.640 --> 34:50.640]  But I looked at this with the new 2011 federal jurisdiction and venue removal act.
[34:50.640 --> 34:56.640]  Steve, I'm stumbling here. Federal. Yes, you are.
[34:56.640 --> 35:04.640]  Federal removal and venue clarification act. There you go.
[35:04.640 --> 35:14.640]  It said the court didn't have the jurisdiction to rule on the state issues that they must be remanded.
[35:14.640 --> 35:29.640]  So, instead of filing a petition for removal, for remand, we found a challenge to subject matter jurisdiction as concerns the state issues.
[35:29.640 --> 35:39.640]  And then we leave it up to the court to do exactly what the removal act, the removal clarification act, required them to do.
[35:39.640 --> 35:49.640]  And it specifically stipulates that they shall sever the state claims and remand those to the federal, to the state court.
[35:49.640 --> 36:03.640]  Instead of filing a removal, I mean a remand, you're asking the court to exercise jurisdiction.
[36:03.640 --> 36:11.640]  But if I read the act right, it specifically took away the court's jurisdiction.
[36:11.640 --> 36:20.640]  So, it's inappropriate to ask the court to exercise jurisdiction where it doesn't have jurisdiction.
[36:20.640 --> 36:36.640]  To move to remand appears to go to the, you're asking the court to make a determination in its judicial capacity.
[36:36.640 --> 36:43.640]  And we're saying it doesn't have any. So, the court has no discretion in this matter.
[36:43.640 --> 36:49.640]  And the way to get to the fact that it has no discretion is file subject matter jurisdiction.
[36:49.640 --> 37:01.640]  And the nice thing about that is the only time you can sue a federal judge or any judge is when he acts without subject matter jurisdiction.
[37:01.640 --> 37:08.640]  And we have gotten a positive response on these in that, go ahead.
[37:08.640 --> 37:21.640]  Yeah, there's another facet that, excuse me, when, how can I put this?
[37:21.640 --> 37:30.640]  When you have state issues in the federal court, I lost my train of thought. Go ahead, I'm sorry, I've probably derailed you.
[37:30.640 --> 37:40.640]  But we've got positive, positive outcomes in that the federal court did not immediately dismiss with prejudice.
[37:40.640 --> 37:46.640]  And they had, everyone we had removed the federal court dismissed with prejudice immediately.
[37:46.640 --> 37:52.640]  And this was McBride. McBride is the stinker in Fort Worth.
[37:52.640 --> 38:04.640]  So we had a client, we had a one case where I talked to the lawyer and the lawyer contacted me and said that they had removed it.
[38:04.640 --> 38:14.640]  And I talked to this lawyer about a prior case about removing it and gave him the heads up on the re the clarification act.
[38:14.640 --> 38:18.640]  So he had to know about it and he removed anyway.
[38:18.640 --> 38:26.640]  So he called me because we had a, the judge had requested the scheduling order.
[38:26.640 --> 38:30.640]  And I told him, no, I'm not going to respond to the scheduling order.
[38:30.640 --> 38:35.640]  And he said, well, if you don't, the judge will dismiss. I said, yeah, no, I hope he dismisses.
[38:35.640 --> 38:48.640]  Because we maintained that under the clarification act, the judge has no jurisdiction to rule on the state claims.
[38:48.640 --> 38:53.640]  Therefore has no discretion and no option but to remand those.
[38:53.640 --> 39:03.640]  So if he dismisses them with prejudice the way he has been doing, then we're going to go to the state grand jury with an official oppression charge against him to see how that works for him.
[39:03.640 --> 39:18.640]  And the lawyer said, oh, okay. And I have no doubt that he communicated that to the judge because the judge did not dismiss.
[39:18.640 --> 39:22.640]  He didn't remand either, but he didn't dismiss.
[39:22.640 --> 39:25.640]  And those were his only two choices. What did he do?
[39:25.640 --> 39:29.640]  Nothing. Everything has stopped.
[39:29.640 --> 39:35.640]  And then, then I get noticed. So then there's a state case hanging in limbo in the federal court.
[39:35.640 --> 39:46.640]  Yeah, then I get the, I get notified from other sources that the feds are looking into me and asking questions about me.
[39:46.640 --> 40:01.640]  So I have no doubt that McBride sick feds on me to see if they could find a way to nullify me to prevent me from filing criminal charges against Judge McBride in the state court.
[40:01.640 --> 40:07.640]  Now, these are the things that no lawyer in his right professional mind would ever consider.
[40:07.640 --> 40:20.640]  But fortunately, I'm not a lawyer. And like I told a lawyer in court one time when she asked if I was an attorney and I told her no.
[40:20.640 --> 40:29.640]  There's a lot of judges that wish I was an attorney and to answer your question, I am not here dangling by my bar card.
[40:29.640 --> 40:43.640]  So that's a problem that the courts always have with prosaise. And we maintain that the courts hate prosaise and that they don't hate prosaise because they write stupid bleatings.
[40:43.640 --> 40:46.640]  They like that. It's easy to toss them out.
[40:46.640 --> 41:02.640]  The hate prosaise because every once in a while they come across a prosaise who understands that he's in a different position than a lawyer, that he's not restricted in the way that lawyers are.
[41:02.640 --> 41:09.640]  Lawyers are restricted by unwritten rules.
[41:09.640 --> 41:24.640]  Don't poke the bear. If the bear can add a whim, swallow you whole. Don't poke the bear. This is what lawyers have to deal with.
[41:24.640 --> 41:44.640]  I doubt that there's any lawyer who, before he went to law school, sat down and decided, well, I'm going to go into a profession where I can spend the rest of my professional career kissing some arrogant judges behind.
[41:44.640 --> 41:47.640]  But that's the spot lawyers have put in.
[41:47.640 --> 41:56.640]  Prosaise, for the most part, go to the court feeling as though they're going to the court with their head in their hand.
[41:56.640 --> 42:00.640]  We need to get that fixed.
[42:00.640 --> 42:11.640]  We need to understand, and this is something that I work on all the time, how do I help people understand that?
[42:11.640 --> 42:33.640]  When you walk in the courthouse, the judge, the bailiffs, the clerks, even the lawyers are essentially either public employees, either public servants or quasi-public servants.
[42:33.640 --> 42:50.640]  Now, a lawyer is a quasi-public servant because he comes to the court with special privileges granted through the government itself, and the government is the public servant.
[42:50.640 --> 43:02.640]  You, as to Prosaise, you're not a public servant. You are the master. You're the one that all the others serve.
[43:02.640 --> 43:11.640]  We need to understand that. When I go to the court, I'm not going to the court with my head in my hand.
[43:11.640 --> 43:21.640]  I'm going to the court with my law in my hand, and he's to enforce it. We'll introduce him to consequences.
[43:21.640 --> 43:33.640]  And the system has gotten into a horrible mess because the courts are acting without consequences.
[43:33.640 --> 43:48.640]  They can essentially do anything they want, and for the most part, all you have are lawyers who the lawyers are beholding to the judges.
[43:48.640 --> 43:52.640]  I want suit did county for $11 million.
[43:52.640 --> 43:53.640]  Hey, Randy.
[43:53.640 --> 43:54.640]  Yes.
[43:54.640 --> 43:55.640]  Break time.
[43:55.640 --> 43:56.640]  I'd say.
[43:56.640 --> 43:59.640]  We're listening to rule of law. We'll be right back, folks.
[43:59.640 --> 44:18.640]  Hello, my name is Stuart Smith from naturespureorganics.com, and I would like to invite you to come by our store at 1904 Guadalupe Street, sweet D here in Austin, Texas, find brave new books and chase things to see all our fantastic health and wellness products with your very own eyes.
[44:18.640 --> 44:30.640]  Look at our miracle healing clay that started our adventure in alternative medicine. Take a peek at some of our other wonderful products, including our Australian emu oil, lotion candles, olive oil soaps, and colloidal silver and gold.
[44:30.640 --> 44:43.640]  Call 512-264-4043 or find us online at naturespureorganics.com. That's 512-264-4043 naturespureorganics.com.
[44:43.640 --> 44:49.640]  If you'd like us on Facebook for information on events and our products, naturespureorganics.com.
[45:14.640 --> 45:22.640]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing. If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[45:22.640 --> 45:27.640]  Thousands have won with our step-by-step course, and now you can too.
[45:27.640 --> 45:34.640]  Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case-winning experience.
[45:34.640 --> 45:43.640]  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.
[45:43.640 --> 45:52.640]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases, prosa tactics, and much more.
[45:52.640 --> 46:04.640]  Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner or call toll-free 866-LAW-EZ.
[46:22.640 --> 46:34.640]  Yeah, always, I must be careful what I'm wishing for. When I'm hungry, I like to know just what I'm wishing for.
[46:34.640 --> 46:40.640]  I ask for much, I ain't trying to be no good.
[46:40.640 --> 46:45.640]  Okay, we are back. Randy Kelton, Steve Stigmore, rule of law radio.
[46:45.640 --> 46:59.640]  And I know I might have kind of beat that subject to death, but it's really important that we understand that when we go to court, we are the masters and they are the servants.
[46:59.640 --> 47:06.640]  And we, through our legislators, have laid down a set of law.
[47:06.640 --> 47:23.640]  And it is the duty of the judge when he steps up behind the bench to determine the facts in accordance with the rules of evidence and apply the law as it comes to him to the facts in the case.
[47:23.640 --> 47:37.640]  If the judge has an opinion that doesn't go to facts in law, I'm going to want him to leave that opinion at home because I am not particularly interested in his personal opinions.
[47:37.640 --> 47:43.640]  I'm interested in the facts and I'm interested in the laws that applies to those facts.
[47:43.640 --> 48:01.640]  And anything beyond that is on Provires. We have a contract with him and anything beyond determining the facts and applying the law to the facts that come to him is beyond the scope of the contract we entered into with the court.
[48:01.640 --> 48:25.640]  And in this case, in a removal of a state claim to the federal court, our law says you have no jurisdiction over that claim. You shall remove and remand the fails to do so, especially if he dismisses with or without prejudice.
[48:25.640 --> 48:36.640]  Then he has denied me as a as the master in in my right to petition the court for redress of grievance.
[48:36.640 --> 48:45.640]  And he's done so under the color of an official authority cutter, meaning pretense.
[48:45.640 --> 48:59.640]  And in the process denied, he denied me in a right under the color of an official capacity. And that's a class A misdemeanor in the state of Texas and here's the problem the judge has.
[48:59.640 --> 49:12.640]  The federal courthouse is not a federal enclave. The federal courthouse is not a property that has been ceded to the United States government.
[49:12.640 --> 49:26.640]  If a property has been ceded to the United States government, then the United States government has full control over it, like the federal prisons in Texas.
[49:26.640 --> 49:43.640]  Federal prisons have been ceded to the fed so that the feds can use their own police, their own jail guards in the federal facility, and the state can't come into the federal prison system to tell them how to run it.
[49:43.640 --> 49:50.640]  But in Texas, that's about it. Everything else is Texas. All the courthouses belong to Texas.
[49:50.640 --> 50:03.640]  If a common law crime, and by common law in this case, I mean a crime that is defined in the Texas penal code.
[50:03.640 --> 50:11.640]  If a crime defined by the Texas penal code is committed in the courthouse, that's a state crime. That's not a federal crime.
[50:11.640 --> 50:26.640]  Unless it involves shooting a federal judge or the president after Kennedy was shot in Dallas and the Dallas sheriff threw the feds out because it was a state crime, they made it a federal crime.
[50:26.640 --> 50:32.640]  But other than that, any crime in the courthouse is state, so it'd go to state grand jury.
[50:32.640 --> 50:46.640]  So if these judges want to be bought and paid for and they want to serve their banker masters, let them serve their banker masters before a state grand jury.
[50:46.640 --> 50:55.640]  We can do that, as pro says, because you're not going to be bringing a client before this judge that he could screw to get back at you.
[50:55.640 --> 51:05.640]  You can't ask your lawyer to do a thing like that. You can't ask your lawyer to file a judicial conduct complaint against the judge.
[51:05.640 --> 51:19.640]  He wouldn't dare. I mentioned that I filed a $11 million lawsuit against Denton County, and I talked to 60 different lawyers, and I kept a list of them at the time.
[51:19.640 --> 51:30.640]  The last one I talked to is Jerry Cobb. Jerry Cobb was the district attorney prior to Bruce Isaacs, the one I had sued.
[51:30.640 --> 51:38.640]  And I called him and said, hello, Jerry, my name is Randy Kelton, and I have sued Denton County and I need somebody to represent my suit.
[51:38.640 --> 51:51.640]  He said, well, Mr. Kelton, I'm well aware of your suit. You made accusations against judges in there. I can't represent you. I have to represent clients in this county.
[51:51.640 --> 51:58.640]  I said, what's the matter, Jerry? You afraid those judges will screw your next client to get back at you?
[51:58.640 --> 52:06.640]  And he said what every other lawyer told me. You darn right they will.
[52:06.640 --> 52:16.640]  Now, I don't know if that was true or not, but I do know that these lawyers believed it was true.
[52:16.640 --> 52:35.640]  And that was enough. It may as well be true. It may well be that every judge may not be corrupt, and every judge may not retaliate against the lawyer to get back at him if he forces the judge to sit in court and miss his golf game.
[52:35.640 --> 52:50.640]  It's enough that the lawyers believe they will. So you can't ask a professional lawyer who makes his living doing this to risk his livelihood in order to adequately adjudicate your case.
[52:50.640 --> 53:08.640]  And that's okay because you can do this stuff yourself. And as a pro say, even if you have a lawyer, if you have a lawyer, then you owe it to your lawyer to give your lawyer a plausible deniability.
[53:08.640 --> 53:21.640]  Demonstrate that you're the client from hell. We're designing a product. It's a questionnaire and evaluation of a case.
[53:21.640 --> 53:34.640]  And it addresses every legal element in the case. And then we make this available to the lawyer because it's hard for the lawyer to get really good information from his client.
[53:34.640 --> 53:49.640]  But we also make this information available to the client. So now the client knows every motion in pleading that's indicated by the facts in the case, the facts in the law.
[53:49.640 --> 54:04.640]  And he has a lawyer and the lawyer goes out and starts adjudicating the case. And he's got this issue he doesn't want to bring up because the judges immediately don't want to rule on it. And the judges are thumping good if he brings it up.
[54:04.640 --> 54:13.640]  But now he's got a problem. He's got a client who knows what he should be doing and the client's going to clobber him if he doesn't.
[54:13.640 --> 54:22.640]  And then the client goes out and files a judicial conduct complaint against the judge. Never tell your client if you're going to file a judicial conduct complaint or a bar grievance.
[54:22.640 --> 54:31.640]  Never mention a word to him about it. Never let him speak to you about it.
[54:31.640 --> 54:49.640]  He goes to the court and says, I have an unruly client. I can't control this client. He's doing these things without consultation with me. And now he's likely to file bar grievances against me.
[54:49.640 --> 55:02.640]  Protect your client, your lawyer, by giving him plausible inability. But you can't do that unless you understand the facts and the elements in the case.
[55:02.640 --> 55:10.640]  Now, I think I'm kind of getting off point here, but this is a point that's really important that we understand.
[55:10.640 --> 55:33.640]  As the litigant, as the client or the prosaic, we need to understand what we're getting into here. And it was from this understanding that led me to file a challenge subject matter jurisdiction rather than a motion to remand.
[55:33.640 --> 55:39.640]  Does that make sense, Steve? Or have I beat this?
[55:39.640 --> 55:47.640]  Yeah, there's, you can never beat a legal horse to death. But yeah, it's all succinct.
[55:47.640 --> 55:57.640]  Yeah, this is the important understanding. This is the hardest thing to get across. We can say it, and we can think about it.
[55:57.640 --> 56:12.640]  Until we feel it, it won't start altering our behavior in a way that will give us more leverage, because in the end, it's not about the facts and the law.
[56:12.640 --> 56:21.640]  Now, I know I've heard all the rhetoric that says it's supposed to be what is really about the politics.
[56:21.640 --> 56:37.640]  Everything is political and all politics is local. And once you understand the power of your position as the prosaic or as the client, then you can help to shift the politics in your direction.
[56:37.640 --> 56:46.640]  And we do have a caller. I'm going to go to the, go to our caller. And if that's okay, Steve, do you have a comment?
[56:46.640 --> 56:52.640]  No, no, go ahead. Okay, we're going to Willie.
[56:52.640 --> 57:18.640]  Looks like Willie. Hello, Willie. What do you have for us?
[57:18.640 --> 57:28.640]  That's often a good idea, depending on what it is when you contact a politician.
[57:28.640 --> 57:43.640]  It's kind of like when you file a suit in court, when you file a suit in court, you must bring a controversy to the court, which the court has power to adjudicate.
[57:43.640 --> 57:53.640]  When you bring an issue to a politician, you essentially do the same thing you would do in a motion.
[57:53.640 --> 58:01.640]  You ask the politician to do something that he has the power to do.
[58:01.640 --> 58:20.640]  Why would you send your motion to the politician? What effect would you want that he has knowledge of that motion or the court's behavior concerning that motion? What effect would you want that to have?
[58:20.640 --> 58:23.640]  Good question. More awareness.
[58:23.640 --> 58:32.640]  Okay, I know you asked me a general question. Let me, let's pick that back up when we come back on the other side. This is Randy Kelton, Steve Skidmore, rule of law radio.
[58:32.640 --> 58:45.640]  I call in number 512-646-1984. And I would like everybody to mark this. I didn't fall off the cliff this time.
[58:45.640 --> 58:49.640]  The night is young. We'll be right back, folks.
[58:49.640 --> 59:00.640]  Would you like to make more definite progress in your walk with God? Bibles for America is offering a free study Bible and a set of free Christian books that can really help.
[59:00.640 --> 59:12.640]  The New Testament recovery version is one of the most comprehensive study Bibles available today. 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.
[59:12.640 --> 59:27.640]  The free books are a three-volume set called Basic Elements of the Christian Life. Chapter by chapter, Basic Elements of the Christian Life clearly presents God's plan of salvation, growing in Christ, and how to build up the church.
[59:27.640 --> 59:49.640]  To order your free New Testament recovery version and Basic Elements of the Christian Life, call Bibles for America toll free at 888-551-0102. That's 888-551-0102. Or visit us online at bfa.org.
[59:58.640 --> 01:00:12.640]  This is the Liberty Beat, your daily source for Liberty News and activist updates, online at thelibertybeat.com. I'm Brian Hagen with your Liberty Beat for Thursday, July 17, 2014.
[01:00:12.640 --> 01:00:21.640]  Gold opens today at $1,303. Silver opens at $20. Nades is used cents, and Bitcoin is trading at $617.27.
[01:00:21.640 --> 01:00:31.640]  Support for Liberty Beat comes from growyourowngroceries.org. Now offering an eight-week course where you can learn to treat the most common family ailments with simple medicine so you can grow or easily find.
[01:00:31.640 --> 01:00:42.640]  Learn more at growyourowngroceries.org. And support comes from Bitmain Tech, creators of the newly released Antminer S2 Bitcoin Miner, one tera hash and only 1,000 watts.
[01:00:42.640 --> 01:00:50.640]  Order yours online today at bitmainetech.com or call them up at 844-Bitmain. That's 844-248-6246.
[01:00:50.640 --> 01:01:00.640]  In the news, the Texas Department of Public Safety is now taking full sets of fingerprints from every Texan old enough to drive, adding them to a statewide criminal history database.
[01:01:00.640 --> 01:01:09.640]  Critics say the move is illegal, arguing DPS is misinterpreting a section of the transportation code that allows an applicant's thumbprints or fingerprints to be used for verification.
[01:01:09.640 --> 01:01:19.640]  Dallas Morning News columnist Dave Lever also broke the story and says the law is intended to allow only thumbs and index fingerprints to be taken, not the entire set.
[01:01:19.640 --> 01:01:30.640]  Donald Jackson, a political science professor at Texas Christian University, is offering legal support to anyone wishing to challenge the new policy in court.
[01:01:30.640 --> 01:01:40.640]  The New York Police Department has been hit with a First Amendment lawsuit after a woman alleged her rights were violated when she tried to record police activity last September on the Upper West Side in New York.
[01:01:40.640 --> 01:01:50.640]  Plaintiff Deborah Goodman was allegedly pushed by officers and detained for more than 24 hours. Goodman also said officers grabbed her arm and handcuffed her after refusing to provide ID.
[01:01:50.640 --> 01:02:02.640]  The lawsuit asked a judge to force the NYPD to allow onlookers to record police publicly. As reported by WCBS-TV, the NYPD declined requests for comment.
[01:02:02.640 --> 01:02:13.640]  The Obama administration is allocating $50 million towards a luxury Texas hotel equipped with various amenities with intentions to use the resort for housing undocumented children.
[01:02:13.640 --> 01:02:23.640]  Baptist Child and Family Services has been contracted to purchase the Palmer Resort and Hotel in Westlaco, a town a few miles north of the Rio Grande in Hidalgo County.
[01:02:23.640 --> 01:02:35.640]  KRGV reports the site will house up to 600 children aged 12 to 17 and create jobs for 650 people. The charity group said the resort would function as an intake facility and also a hospital.
[01:02:35.640 --> 01:02:41.640]  Support for Liberty Beach comes from Affordable Sound, CD and DVD duplication along with posters and promotions materials.
[01:02:41.640 --> 01:02:52.640]  Mention promo code Liberty and when you order 10 or more posters, you get 10 free online at affordablesound.com or call them up at 512-459-5253.
[01:02:52.640 --> 01:02:59.640]  This is the Liberty Beach for Thursday, July 17, 2014. Check out the website at thelibertybeach.com.
[01:03:22.640 --> 01:03:34.640]  It worked.
[01:03:34.640 --> 01:03:48.640]  We were talking about potential issues on the break there. My system looks like it's messing up, but maybe it's just me, if that's possible.
[01:03:48.640 --> 01:03:50.640]  Operator error? No.
[01:03:50.640 --> 01:03:53.640]  No, not in this life.
[01:03:53.640 --> 01:04:01.640]  No, you're an engineer.
[01:04:01.640 --> 01:04:04.640]  Yeah, you had that problem a lot.
[01:04:04.640 --> 01:04:15.640]  Okay, we were talking to Willie and I think my page is not showing the state, but that was a really good question.
[01:04:15.640 --> 01:04:22.640]  And we discussed on the breaks that somebody actually was listening. That's really nice.
[01:04:22.640 --> 01:04:24.640]  That we marked it down on the calendar.
[01:04:24.640 --> 01:04:34.640]  Yeah, and your question was appropriate because it is good because everything is political.
[01:04:34.640 --> 01:04:41.640]  It wants to be, understand everything's political, then we can see the value of using our public officials.
[01:04:41.640 --> 01:04:51.640]  And one of the things that, I'm working with Ken Magnuson. He was on the show last night and he is the lobby guy.
[01:04:51.640 --> 01:04:54.640]  He's really good at lobbying politicians.
[01:04:54.640 --> 01:05:00.640]  But when you go to a lobby of politicians, you have to ask him to do something.
[01:05:00.640 --> 01:05:09.640]  You have to show him a problem and at the same time bring him a solution.
[01:05:09.640 --> 01:05:21.640]  So before I would send court documents to the politician, I would want to frame a issue, frame a problem.
[01:05:21.640 --> 01:05:35.640]  And not an issue with your court case specifically, but an issue with the behavior of the courts, with the state of the law, with the application of the law,
[01:05:35.640 --> 01:05:41.640]  and say, we're having this particular problem with the courts.
[01:05:41.640 --> 01:05:49.640]  Now you blame it on the courts, blame it on whoever you want to, whatever is appropriate, and say, this is the problem we're having.
[01:05:49.640 --> 01:05:55.640]  And here's an example of that problem. Here's what we can do to fix it.
[01:05:55.640 --> 01:06:09.640]  In that regard, absolutely we should, we could send our documentation to the court, I mean to the politicians, because ultimately the politician can wind up in the same position you're in.
[01:06:09.640 --> 01:06:16.640]  And here recently, Ken's been doing a lot of lobbying about family law issues.
[01:06:16.640 --> 01:06:26.640]  And he has been surprised at the level of interest he's getting from different politicians.
[01:06:26.640 --> 01:06:37.640]  Politicians who's either been raked over the coals in the family court himself or had a family member seriously mistreated with the family court.
[01:06:37.640 --> 01:06:45.640]  So they are getting a lot of interest from our politicians, but you have to keep in mind politicians are really busy.
[01:06:45.640 --> 01:06:56.640]  And they've got a lot of influences, pressures coming at them from different directions to fix all sorts of problems.
[01:06:56.640 --> 01:07:03.640]  So before you go to a politician with a problem, you must have a solution.
[01:07:03.640 --> 01:07:13.640]  And once you have the problem and solution and then sending him examples of the problem is absolutely the right thing to do. Does that make sense, Willie?
[01:07:13.640 --> 01:07:24.640]  Of course, of course, because many of them are aware that many of these foreclosures is happening, illegal foreclosures is happening to constituents in the area.
[01:07:24.640 --> 01:07:38.640]  And who is actually monitoring the, after the consent orders, who is actually taking account, paying the tuition, are these banks actually complying?
[01:07:38.640 --> 01:07:53.640]  Because we know that they always, with these settlements, excusing a lot of their behavior and they go back to business as usual, violating many of the homeowners' right to contract.
[01:07:53.640 --> 01:08:08.640]  And did I see that a lot of these foreclosures and these plaintiffs, minimum, they are de-collected?
[01:08:08.640 --> 01:08:09.640]  That's all they are.
[01:08:09.640 --> 01:08:13.640]  We've just had some recent rulings on that. Are you familiar with those rulings, Steve?
[01:08:13.640 --> 01:08:25.640]  Oh, I can't cite one right now, but yes, there have been Supreme Court rulings showing that a mortgage servicer is a debt collector.
[01:08:25.640 --> 01:08:32.640]  That's all he's doing. He is a third party. He has no vested interest in it.
[01:08:32.640 --> 01:08:51.640]  All he's doing, even if he's the original lender, the original lender would have securitized it. That means that he would have sold his interest into the secondary securities markets, thus divesting himself of any secured interest in the property
[01:08:51.640 --> 01:09:12.640]  or any interest in the mortgage loan instrument outside of making collections. Now, keep in mind, a party entitled to collect is not a party entitled to receive payments on an alleged loan.
[01:09:12.640 --> 01:09:25.640]  Not necessarily. He could be, but not necessarily he may not be.
[01:09:25.640 --> 01:09:33.640]  Well, if he's servicing a mortgage, what he's doing is collecting a debt.
[01:09:33.640 --> 01:09:46.640]  Unless he's servicing his own note that he initiated, and he maintained full ownership of the entire note.
[01:09:46.640 --> 01:09:56.640]  Right, and that's what I'm saying. Upon securitization, he divests himself of any secured interest in either the note or the property attached by the mortgage or deed of trust.
[01:09:56.640 --> 01:10:15.640]  Therefore, he is no longer an interested party, just a debt collector. Now, this is going to be, what, 99.8% of the cases in the years that I worked with private investigation companies specializing in these issues, mortgage fraud, foreclosure fraud,
[01:10:15.640 --> 01:10:31.640]  and secondary securities markets, I've worked for approximately five years for a couple of different companies. And in those years, I finally saw my first enforceable mortgage.
[01:10:31.640 --> 01:10:51.640]  This mortgage was drafted by a credit union. There were zero TLA violations, zero home equity violations, zero real estate settlement procedures act violations.
[01:10:51.640 --> 01:10:57.640]  And they did not securitize the note when the man went to the bank and said, hey, I want to see, I want to see my note.
[01:10:57.640 --> 01:11:03.640]  We'll be right back. Have a seat in that little room over there. They went back to the vault and got it.
[01:11:03.640 --> 01:11:12.640]  He said, can I have a copy of that? I said, yeah, sure. Not a problem ran off a copy of it. He sent it to us. Nothing wrong.
[01:11:12.640 --> 01:11:24.640]  One client out of how many thousands I don't know. I finally had to tell somebody, I'm sorry, sir, but there's nothing I can do for you. You have a good mortgage. Pay it.
[01:11:24.640 --> 01:11:39.640]  Yes. I had one in early on when I started out of Colorado. And at the time the word was there were two banks in the country who did not securitize loans.
[01:11:39.640 --> 01:11:43.640]  And this guy's was one of them. Yeah.
[01:11:43.640 --> 01:11:45.640]  Go ahead, Willie.
[01:11:45.640 --> 01:12:09.640]  Because according to the FBCPA Federal Debt Collection Practicing Act, once a loan or alleged loan, once it's assigned, the assignment, the credit to it no longer owns that loan and it becomes a debt collector's problem.
[01:12:09.640 --> 01:12:10.640]  Right.
[01:12:10.640 --> 01:12:22.640]  Because there's no longer right. There's no longer credit to involve. There's no longer a lender, a mortgagee. It's now in a debt collector's hand.
[01:12:22.640 --> 01:12:32.640]  Willie, I'd like to bring you back to your original question. Your original question being should you send a copy of your pleading to politicians.
[01:12:32.640 --> 01:12:45.640]  There are, I don't know how many thousands of politicians at all different levels, municipal, all the way up to Supreme Court justices. There are all politicians.
[01:12:45.640 --> 01:12:56.640]  So when you say should I send a copy of my pleading to politicians, let's identify politicians and you specify the AG. So let's focus for just a moment on the AG.
[01:12:56.640 --> 01:12:58.640]  Who is the AG?
[01:12:58.640 --> 01:12:59.640]  Hold on, Steve.
[01:12:59.640 --> 01:13:00.640]  Sure.
[01:13:00.640 --> 01:13:07.640]  Willie, what state are you in? I noticed you speak with a strange foreign accent, so you're obviously not from Texas.
[01:13:07.640 --> 01:13:09.640]  New York.
[01:13:09.640 --> 01:13:10.640]  New York.
[01:13:10.640 --> 01:13:22.640]  Definitely our foreigner. The reason I mentioned that is we're in Texas and our attorney general is different than most attorney generals for other states.
[01:13:22.640 --> 01:13:43.640]  Texas, the attorney general has no real prosecutorial power. The only time the attorney general in Texas has prosecutorial power, original prosecutorial power is in a criminal complaint against a prosecuting attorney under the Open Records Act and that's it.
[01:13:43.640 --> 01:14:06.640]  Recently he's been given concurrent jurisdiction with the prosecutor in matters of complaints against public officials. In other states like New York, the prosecutor has direct prosecutorial power so he can go out and initiate and prosecute prosecutions without the permission of the local prosecuting attorney.
[01:14:06.640 --> 01:14:11.640]  And that's criminal issues, right? Not civil.
[01:14:11.640 --> 01:14:23.640]  Both. The attorney general in Texas is generally the lawyer for public officials.
[01:14:23.640 --> 01:14:25.640]  Got you.
[01:14:25.640 --> 01:14:42.640]  Other states tend to be more prosecutorial. The attorney general sees a civil issue involving the government he can prosecute civil or criminal.
[01:14:42.640 --> 01:15:01.640]  The reason I bring this up is because time is valuable, particularly if you're fighting a bank. You want to focus on where you're going to get remedy and leave areas where you're not going to get remedy alone because you've got to delegate your time carefully.
[01:15:01.640 --> 01:15:18.640]  You don't want to waste any of it. The AG is, what is the AG? The AG is the attorney general. Attorney, attorney general. That means that he is the upstream.
[01:15:18.640 --> 01:15:39.640]  Attorney is the ultimate boss of every bar card attorney, every judge, every, the mayor, every local politician, every cop, everybody in that branch of government. He is their ultimate boss.
[01:15:39.640 --> 01:15:58.640]  So if you have a civil issue with a bank, what energy are you willing to put forth in informing all of these politicians, including but not limited to the AG? Let's bring in the governors, the other, the treasurer.
[01:15:58.640 --> 01:16:21.640]  What good would it do to send these politicians your, your pleading? None whatsoever. None. I've known a lot of people who have sent a copy of their pleadings to the AG, to the governor, and they get a nice little letter that, you know, it looks like somebody said,
[01:16:21.640 --> 01:16:34.640]  oh, okay, they need letter number 728, push button 728, and it spits one out, pre-stamped return address envelope, gone. And that's the last you ever hear of it.
[01:16:34.640 --> 01:16:47.640]  And I hear the music in the background. Folks, we'll be right back after these brief messages. 512-646-1984. And I know Randy, write a note. We'll be right back after these brief messages.
[01:16:47.640 --> 01:16:52.640]  Stay tuned and while we're gone, go take care of our sponsors. Folks, we'll be right back.
[01:17:18.640 --> 01:17:27.640]  I use the product and it makes my teeth feel clean and healthy. I think it makes them stronger, and I got lots of customers that come in and say the same thing. You can pick yours up at Brave New Books.
[01:17:27.640 --> 01:17:32.640]  If that wasn't enough, Dr. Griffin Cole, DDS, who's been featured on the Alex Jones show, loves it too.
[01:17:32.640 --> 01:17:44.640]  Hi, I'm Dr. Griffin Cole, and I got to tell you, I really love this Magic Mud product. 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. I highly recommend my Magic Mud.
[01:17:44.640 --> 01:17:50.640]  If you haven't yet experienced my Magic Mud, it's never too late to brighten your smile and strengthen your teeth.
[01:17:50.640 --> 01:17:59.640]  Get your jar of My Magic Mud today at Brave New Books, located at 1904 Guadalupe Street, or order online today at MyMagicMud.com.
[01:17:59.640 --> 01:18:08.640]  At Capital Coin and Bullion, our mission is to be your preferred shopping destination by delivering excellent customer service and outstanding value at an affordable price.
[01:18:08.640 --> 01:18:14.640]  We provide a wide assortment of favorite products featuring a great selection of high quality coins and precious metals.
[01:18:14.640 --> 01:18:18.640]  We cater to beginners in coin collecting as well as large transactions for investors.
[01:18:18.640 --> 01:18:24.640]  We believe in educating our customers with resources from top accredited metal dealers and journalists.
[01:18:24.640 --> 01:18:27.640]  If we don't have what you're looking for, we can find it.
[01:18:27.640 --> 01:18:32.640]  In addition, we carry popular young Jebedee products such as Beyond Tangy Tangerine and Pollen Burks.
[01:18:32.640 --> 01:18:39.640]  We also offer one-world-way, Mountain House storeable foods, Berkey water products, ammunition at 10% above wholesale, and more.
[01:18:39.640 --> 01:18:43.640]  We broker metals IRA accounts, and we also accept big coins as payment.
[01:18:43.640 --> 01:18:46.640]  Call us at 512-646-6440.
[01:18:46.640 --> 01:18:51.640]  We're located at 7304 Burnett Road, sweet A, about a half mile south of Anderson.
[01:18:51.640 --> 01:18:54.640]  We're open Monday through Friday, 10 to 6, Saturdays, 10 to 2.
[01:18:54.640 --> 01:19:03.640]  Visit us at CapitalCoinandBullion.com or call 512-646-6440.
[01:19:24.640 --> 01:19:29.640]  Okay, we are back. Randy Kelton, Steve Skidmore live on radio.
[01:19:29.640 --> 01:19:33.640]  And we're talking to really in New York.
[01:19:33.640 --> 01:19:39.640]  And really, you know, we talk about everything being political,
[01:19:39.640 --> 01:19:46.640]  and we have not utilized our public officials nearly as much as we should.
[01:19:46.640 --> 01:20:00.640]  But when we do that, we need to sit down and primarily give the politician a reason for doing what we want him to do.
[01:20:00.640 --> 01:20:11.640]  One of the issues we're bringing up in Family Court as an example is that the Family Courts in Tarrant County, Fort Worth area,
[01:20:11.640 --> 01:20:17.640]  they are appointing associate judges.
[01:20:17.640 --> 01:20:26.640]  And the associate judges are really a problem because the judges use the associate judges to render all their bogus rulings.
[01:20:26.640 --> 01:20:40.640]  And since the associate judges are not elected, then they have less of an incentive to follow the rules.
[01:20:40.640 --> 01:20:43.640]  So we want to get rid of those associate judges.
[01:20:43.640 --> 01:20:46.640]  We elected the judges to do their jobs.
[01:20:46.640 --> 01:20:54.640]  If we don't have enough judges to get the job done, we need to create more judicial districts and add district judges who are elected.
[01:20:54.640 --> 01:21:05.640]  It was the intent that district judges be elected, not that the elected judges get to appoint these magistrate judges who can do anything they want to.
[01:21:05.640 --> 01:21:14.640]  But how are we going to get the public official to agree with us and be willing to take some action to try to get rid of these guys?
[01:21:14.640 --> 01:21:19.640]  Well, in the end, it's all about the money.
[01:21:19.640 --> 01:21:32.640]  How much money are we spending on these magistrate judges so that the district judges who are elected can spend their evenings playing golf
[01:21:32.640 --> 01:21:37.640]  and doing other things while these magistrate judges are doing the job the district judge should be doing?
[01:21:37.640 --> 01:21:50.640]  How much money can you save from the budget that you can then apply to your pet pork barrel projects?
[01:21:50.640 --> 01:22:09.640]  In the end, that's what the politicians care about more than anything else is money. Money they get to allocate, money they get to pay back favors with, and money they get to fund their special projects.
[01:22:09.640 --> 01:22:14.640]  So in the end, we try to define everything in terms of saving money.
[01:22:14.640 --> 01:22:33.640]  So Willie, in the documents you intended to send to the court, I'm sorry, send to the politicians, was there something in particular that you had in mind?
[01:22:33.640 --> 01:22:40.640]  Are you there Willie? Looks like we may have lost Willie.
[01:22:40.640 --> 01:22:46.640]  So I hope, I think we kind of beat the subject to death anyway.
[01:22:46.640 --> 01:22:53.640]  Yes, we absolutely suggest that we keep in mind that everything's political.
[01:22:53.640 --> 01:23:07.640]  And our politicians are a part of that, but primarily when we're talking about everything being political, we're talking more about the good old-born network.
[01:23:07.640 --> 01:23:18.640]  All of these judges and lawyers are all interconnected, and essentially they all have their snouts in the same trough.
[01:23:18.640 --> 01:23:31.640]  But there are influences to be had from within this structure, and we need to pay attention to how judges and lawyers relate to each other,
[01:23:31.640 --> 01:23:37.640]  how judges and other politicians relate to each other.
[01:23:37.640 --> 01:23:44.640]  I got all the highest judges in Texas, a court of criminal appeals put in front of the grand jury a few years ago.
[01:23:44.640 --> 01:23:48.640]  And that taught me a really valuable lesson.
[01:23:48.640 --> 01:23:59.640]  I thought it was because of all of my eloquent oratory and all the pressure I had put on the judges that I had when Bush whacked them in their courts
[01:23:59.640 --> 01:24:04.640]  and dropped criminal complaints on them and just made a nuisance of myself.
[01:24:04.640 --> 01:24:07.640]  Turned out that had nothing to do with it.
[01:24:07.640 --> 01:24:15.640]  Ron Earl, 25-year prosecuting attorney, not running for office again.
[01:24:15.640 --> 01:24:20.640]  He's a Democrat, all 15 of these judges were Republicans.
[01:24:20.640 --> 01:24:33.640]  Ron Earl used my petition to the grand jury as cannon fodder to try to take some of these judges out with him.
[01:24:33.640 --> 01:24:36.640]  It was all political.
[01:24:36.640 --> 01:24:45.640]  So if you have a case, consider that everything's political and all politics is local.
[01:24:45.640 --> 01:24:53.640]  Okay, we're going to go to Deegan or Darlene in 727.
[01:24:53.640 --> 01:24:54.640]  I'm not sure where that's at.
[01:24:54.640 --> 01:25:00.640]  We don't have a call screener tonight, so I have a little difficulty telling who's there.
[01:25:00.640 --> 01:25:03.640]  Dee or Darlene, are you there?
[01:25:03.640 --> 01:25:05.640]  Yes.
[01:25:05.640 --> 01:25:06.640]  Who am I talking to?
[01:25:06.640 --> 01:25:08.640]  This must be Darlene.
[01:25:08.640 --> 01:25:10.640]  Darlene?
[01:25:10.640 --> 01:25:16.640]  Okay, what state and what is your question?
[01:25:16.640 --> 01:25:18.640]  I'm Florida.
[01:25:18.640 --> 01:25:28.640]  What I wanted to ask you, you're talking about the subject matter jurisdiction, but mine is an illegal foreclosure.
[01:25:28.640 --> 01:25:42.640]  And we've talked about this before where the substitute party plaintiff, they presented an unrecorded assignment to the court and they granted them to become the plaintiff to go after me on foreclosure.
[01:25:42.640 --> 01:25:55.640]  But I'm coming to the end of this where I don't get anywhere with the judge and I understand that he's going to deny everything, but I've got to get this prepared for the appellate court.
[01:25:55.640 --> 01:25:59.640]  Okay, hold on.
[01:25:59.640 --> 01:26:08.640]  You prepare this for the appellate court in the adjudication of your state issue?
[01:26:08.640 --> 01:26:27.640]  Well, yeah, because these people did not have any authority to proceed with this and I've tried to get before the judge with an evidentiary hearing on the fraud and he's flat out just refused me. I got an email today from the clerk of the court telling me,
[01:26:27.640 --> 01:26:39.640]  No, the judge says that you can just present this on the hearing July 18 or August 13, which today was a five minute hearing that I was asking them to compel.
[01:26:39.640 --> 01:26:45.640]  Okay, hold on. What is the nature of the hearing?
[01:26:45.640 --> 01:26:49.640]  Foreclosure hearing, forceful retainer hearing, what was the case of hearing?
[01:26:49.640 --> 01:27:10.640]  The one that was for today was a motion to compel plaintiffs to answer the interrogatories and the judge denied it because what the prior judge did was granted them a summary, a final judgment.
[01:27:10.640 --> 01:27:26.640]  The judge had filed for a new trial in the re-hearing because of the fraud, but every time I get before this judge, he will say to me, well, what new evidence have you discovered since that final summary judgment?
[01:27:26.640 --> 01:27:31.640]  And when I try to tell him, he doesn't want to listen.
[01:27:31.640 --> 01:27:38.640]  Wait a minute, hold on. Have you filed this evidence in the form of a motion?
[01:27:38.640 --> 01:27:40.640]  Yes, I did.
[01:27:40.640 --> 01:27:44.640]  Did he give you a ruling on the motion?
[01:27:44.640 --> 01:27:48.640]  On the motion for the evidentiary hearing.
[01:27:48.640 --> 01:28:02.640]  Okay, where I'm going is every time he gives you a ruling that's either positive or negative, you need findings of fact and conclusions at law.
[01:28:02.640 --> 01:28:10.640]  What facts did you determine and what law did you apply to it? Did you get that from him?
[01:28:10.640 --> 01:28:23.640]  No. No, he keeps throwing it back at me and saying to me, well, do you have any rulings from the appellate court after there's been a summary judgment that you can have discovery?
[01:28:23.640 --> 01:28:32.640]  No, the discovery was filed before any summary judgment.
[01:28:32.640 --> 01:28:41.640]  Yeah, but if there is no summary judgment, we'll generally go to an issue where there are no issues in controversy.
[01:28:41.640 --> 01:28:46.640]  Exactly. And that's what I argued when I petitioned for a new hearing.
[01:28:46.640 --> 01:28:54.640]  What was the nature of the summary judgment ruling?
[01:28:54.640 --> 01:29:03.640]  Actually, on that, we never even had a case management. The judge himself just set it up with the plaintiff's attorney.
[01:29:03.640 --> 01:29:09.640]  Well, we're going to just do a summary judgment and I wasn't even aware that that's what they were going in to do.
[01:29:09.640 --> 01:29:18.640]  Wait a minute. Hold on. You're saying that the judge had an ex parte communication with the plaintiff?
[01:29:18.640 --> 01:29:21.640]  Yes, the plaintiff's attorney.
[01:29:21.640 --> 01:29:26.640]  This is a state court petition, right?
[01:29:26.640 --> 01:29:27.640]  Yes.
[01:29:27.640 --> 01:29:38.640]  The reason I asked the question earlier about what was the nature of the ruling, what were the facts that the judge ruled on?
[01:29:38.640 --> 01:29:45.640]  I can tell you exactly. He asked the question of the appellate.
[01:29:45.640 --> 01:29:50.640]  Hold on. We're about to go to break. This is Randy Kelton, Steve Skidmore. We're on radio.
[01:29:50.640 --> 01:29:56.640]  Call it number 512-646-1984. We'll be right back.
[01:29:56.640 --> 01:30:10.640]  Health conscious consumers are ditching plastic food containers worried about leaching chemicals. Are they being health wise or just paranoid?
[01:30:10.640 --> 01:30:15.640]  Dr. Kaepfer and Albrecht are all waiting to the controversy over plastics and health next.
[01:30:15.640 --> 01:30:21.640]  Privacy is under attack. When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[01:30:21.640 --> 01:30:26.640]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[01:30:26.640 --> 01:30:31.640]  So protect your rights. Say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself.
[01:30:31.640 --> 01:30:41.640]  Privacy. It's worth hanging on to. This message is brought to you by StartPage.com, the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[01:30:41.640 --> 01:30:45.640]  Start over with StartPage.
[01:30:45.640 --> 01:30:55.640]  Concern over plastic is rising, prompted by some studies that say compounds in water bottles and food packaging can cause cancer, infertility, and birth defects.
[01:30:55.640 --> 01:31:02.640]  But is ditching plastic a good idea? Most concerns focus on BPA, a compound used in plastic softeners.
[01:31:02.640 --> 01:31:11.640]  Some scientists say these compounds leach into food and drinks, but the plastic industry says otherwise, noting that experimental findings have not been repeated.
[01:31:11.640 --> 01:31:21.640]  Until scientists can agree on plastics, what should we do? Personally, I avoid plastic bottles and packaged meals. After all, fresh food can only do us good.
[01:31:21.640 --> 01:31:30.640]  Help Dr. Kaepfer and Albrecht for StartPage.com, the world's most private search engine.
[01:31:30.640 --> 01:31:36.640]  This is Building 7, a 47-story skyscraper that fell on the afternoon of September 11.
[01:31:36.640 --> 01:31:43.640]  The government says that fire brought it down. However, 1,500 architects and engineers have concluded it was a controlled demolition.
[01:31:43.640 --> 01:31:46.640]  Over 6,000 of my fellow service members have given their lives.
[01:31:46.640 --> 01:31:48.640]  Thousands of my fellow first responders have died.
[01:31:48.640 --> 01:31:50.640]  I'm not a conspiracy theorist.
[01:31:50.640 --> 01:31:51.640]  I'm a structural engineer.
[01:31:51.640 --> 01:31:52.640]  I'm a New York City correction officer.
[01:31:52.640 --> 01:31:53.640]  I'm an Air Force pilot.
[01:31:53.640 --> 01:31:55.640]  I'm a father who lost his son.
[01:31:55.640 --> 01:31:57.640]  We're Americans, and we deserve the truth.
[01:31:57.640 --> 01:32:00.640]  Go to RememberBuilding7.org today.
[01:32:00.640 --> 01:32:05.640]  After work, I'm so tired that I want to be left alone to sleep.
[01:32:05.640 --> 01:32:06.640]  Hey, listen to me.
[01:32:06.640 --> 01:32:07.640]  Who are you?
[01:32:07.640 --> 01:32:11.640]  I knew years ago when you felt healthy and young and everything worked on your body.
[01:32:11.640 --> 01:32:12.640]  Do you remember that?
[01:32:12.640 --> 01:32:14.640]  Yes, I wish I felt like that now.
[01:32:14.640 --> 01:32:19.640]  You can feel like that again with a new micro plant powder formulation called iodine now.
[01:32:19.640 --> 01:32:24.640]  It cleans the entire body from head to toe and feeds the body what it really needs.
[01:32:24.640 --> 01:32:27.640]  You'll be in a better mood and you'll find more drive in your romantic life.
[01:32:27.640 --> 01:32:28.640]  Really?
[01:32:28.640 --> 01:32:31.640]  I gotta try iodine now and feel good again.
[01:32:31.640 --> 01:32:36.640]  It also protects you from radiation, heavy metals, fluoride, chlorine and bromine including
[01:32:36.640 --> 01:32:38.640]  cancer and most major diseases.
[01:32:38.640 --> 01:32:39.640]  You'll be amazed.
[01:32:39.640 --> 01:32:40.640]  You can be your own doctor.
[01:32:40.640 --> 01:32:43.640]  I want to keep you out of the hospital and off pharmaceuticals.
[01:32:43.640 --> 01:32:44.640]  Wow.
[01:32:44.640 --> 01:32:46.640]  Why are you so nice to me?
[01:32:46.640 --> 01:32:47.640]  Because I'm you.
[01:32:47.640 --> 01:33:03.640]  If you're out of shape and I need a better looking future, call 888-910-4367 or visit microplantpowder.com.
[01:33:03.640 --> 01:33:29.640]  If you're looking for some truth, you found it LogosRadioNetwork.com.
[01:33:33.640 --> 01:33:40.640]  Okay, we are back.
[01:33:40.640 --> 01:33:44.640]  Randy Kelton, Steve's Kidmore, Root of Law Radio.
[01:33:44.640 --> 01:33:51.640]  Steve is away for the moment but he'll be back shortly.
[01:33:51.640 --> 01:33:54.640]  We're talking to Dee in Florida.
[01:33:54.640 --> 01:33:55.640]  Hello Dee.
[01:33:55.640 --> 01:33:56.640]  Okay.
[01:33:56.640 --> 01:33:57.640]  Hey.
[01:33:57.640 --> 01:34:00.640]  Here's where I was going.
[01:34:00.640 --> 01:34:11.640]  If there was a default judgment, even though there may be facts you consider to be in contention,
[01:34:11.640 --> 01:34:19.640]  we need to know what facts were actually before the court that the court considered.
[01:34:19.640 --> 01:34:20.640]  Okay.
[01:34:20.640 --> 01:34:24.640]  And were those facts in contention?
[01:34:24.640 --> 01:34:31.640]  Well, the only thing that was presented because I was appearing by telephone because I wasn't aware
[01:34:31.640 --> 01:34:35.640]  this was going to be a summary final judgment.
[01:34:35.640 --> 01:34:43.640]  And he asked of the plaintiff's attorney, when was the last payment the defendant made on this mortgage?
[01:34:43.640 --> 01:34:44.640]  And so he told them.
[01:34:44.640 --> 01:34:53.640]  And he had presented to the judge a supposed to be original mortgage in note on the loan.
[01:34:53.640 --> 01:35:05.640]  Just the night before, they filed with the court to vacate the first statement that they made
[01:35:05.640 --> 01:35:10.640]  that they had the lost note because now the next day they were going to present the original
[01:35:10.640 --> 01:35:11.640]  mortgage in note.
[01:35:11.640 --> 01:35:16.640]  And when he told them when the last payment was made on the mortgage, he just said he
[01:35:16.640 --> 01:35:20.640]  was granting summary judgment with a sale date and 30 days.
[01:35:20.640 --> 01:35:21.640]  Okay.
[01:35:21.640 --> 01:35:22.640]  Hold on.
[01:35:22.640 --> 01:35:23.640]  Okay.
[01:35:23.640 --> 01:35:25.640]  Was they filed a petition?
[01:35:25.640 --> 01:35:28.640]  Did you file an answer?
[01:35:28.640 --> 01:35:30.640]  Oh, definitely.
[01:35:30.640 --> 01:35:34.640]  But I ended up with problems on that because an attorney that I had.
[01:35:34.640 --> 01:35:35.640]  Okay.
[01:35:35.640 --> 01:35:36.640]  Don't when we don't leave this off down.
[01:35:36.640 --> 01:35:37.640]  All right.
[01:35:37.640 --> 01:35:40.640]  More issues than we can get to all at once.
[01:35:40.640 --> 01:35:47.640]  I'm trying to establish on what the court ruled.
[01:35:47.640 --> 01:35:54.640]  How did the bank establish agency standing and the plaintiff established agency standing
[01:35:54.640 --> 01:35:56.640]  and capacity?
[01:35:56.640 --> 01:36:05.640]  He presented to the court an unrecorded assignment of mortgage and the judge accepted that to
[01:36:05.640 --> 01:36:14.640]  be factual and gave him, gave HSBC the substitute party plaintiff.
[01:36:14.640 --> 01:36:15.640]  Okay.
[01:36:15.640 --> 01:36:17.640]  I went in.
[01:36:17.640 --> 01:36:18.640]  Hold on.
[01:36:18.640 --> 01:36:19.640]  Hold on.
[01:36:19.640 --> 01:36:20.640]  This is women.
[01:36:20.640 --> 01:36:22.640]  This is too complex.
[01:36:22.640 --> 01:36:27.640]  A substitute party complainant.
[01:36:27.640 --> 01:36:33.640]  So was this party not the original plaintiff?
[01:36:33.640 --> 01:36:34.640]  Correct.
[01:36:34.640 --> 01:36:35.640]  Okay.
[01:36:35.640 --> 01:36:38.640]  This is too complex.
[01:36:38.640 --> 01:36:39.640]  Okay.
[01:36:39.640 --> 01:36:42.640]  Who was the original plaintiff?
[01:36:42.640 --> 01:36:45.640]  Indie Mac Bank.
[01:36:45.640 --> 01:36:49.640]  Who was the original lender?
[01:36:49.640 --> 01:36:53.640]  Indie Mac Bank.
[01:36:53.640 --> 01:36:56.640]  Is Indie Mac still in business?
[01:36:56.640 --> 01:36:57.640]  No.
[01:36:57.640 --> 01:36:58.640]  They're not business.
[01:36:58.640 --> 01:36:59.640]  Okay.
[01:36:59.640 --> 01:37:00.640]  Nope.
[01:37:00.640 --> 01:37:08.640]  Is there an, an assignment of the security instrument in the, in the public record from
[01:37:08.640 --> 01:37:15.640]  Indie Mac to, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, who is the current, who was the plaintiff who filed
[01:37:15.640 --> 01:37:18.640]  the petition?
[01:37:18.640 --> 01:37:23.640]  Indie Mac Bank.
[01:37:23.640 --> 01:37:28.640]  Oh, okay.
[01:37:28.640 --> 01:37:37.640]  And there, how did, who is the one that came into the court as a substitute claimant?
[01:37:37.640 --> 01:37:38.640]  HSBC.
[01:37:38.640 --> 01:37:39.640]  Okay.
[01:37:39.640 --> 01:37:57.640]  And did HSBC come into the court on a date after the unfiled assignment?
[01:37:57.640 --> 01:37:59.640]  Yes.
[01:37:59.640 --> 01:38:08.640]  Did you challenge the sufficiency of the assignment?
[01:38:08.640 --> 01:38:14.640]  Well, at that time I had an attorney representing me and I didn't know anything about it.
[01:38:14.640 --> 01:38:17.640]  That wasn't a question.
[01:38:17.640 --> 01:38:21.640]  Did your attorney challenge the sufficiency of the assignment?
[01:38:21.640 --> 01:38:22.640]  No.
[01:38:22.640 --> 01:38:29.640]  Then it sounds like the judge may have made the correct ruling.
[01:38:29.640 --> 01:38:38.640]  There's no, there's nothing before the court challenging the standing of HSBC.
[01:38:38.640 --> 01:38:41.640]  Only what I filed.
[01:38:41.640 --> 01:38:43.640]  Pardon me?
[01:38:43.640 --> 01:38:46.640]  Only what I filed.
[01:38:46.640 --> 01:38:49.640]  Because once I took over.
[01:38:49.640 --> 01:38:50.640]  Okay.
[01:38:50.640 --> 01:38:58.640]  At the time of the default motion, a default ruling, had you filed anything?
[01:38:58.640 --> 01:38:59.640]  Yes.
[01:38:59.640 --> 01:39:01.640]  Or had you, your attorney?
[01:39:01.640 --> 01:39:02.640]  No.
[01:39:02.640 --> 01:39:03.640]  Okay.
[01:39:03.640 --> 01:39:04.640]  It was me.
[01:39:04.640 --> 01:39:05.640]  Okay.
[01:39:05.640 --> 01:39:12.640]  It is really, really hard to get this sorted out when you give me teensy little pieces
[01:39:12.640 --> 01:39:13.640]  at a time.
[01:39:13.640 --> 01:39:14.640]  Okay.
[01:39:14.640 --> 01:39:17.640]  You said you had an attorney?
[01:39:17.640 --> 01:39:18.640]  Yes.
[01:39:18.640 --> 01:39:20.640]  When, okay.
[01:39:20.640 --> 01:39:23.640]  When did you stop having an attorney?
[01:39:23.640 --> 01:39:25.640]  2012.
[01:39:25.640 --> 01:39:29.640]  When was the default motion filed?
[01:39:29.640 --> 01:39:31.640]  In 2012.
[01:39:31.640 --> 01:39:33.640]  Be a little more specific, please.
[01:39:33.640 --> 01:39:37.640]  January 1st, December 31st, somewhere in between.
[01:39:37.640 --> 01:39:42.640]  Well, the motion that I filed was in 2012.
[01:39:42.640 --> 01:39:44.640]  No, listen, listen.
[01:39:44.640 --> 01:39:46.640]  This is confusing.
[01:39:46.640 --> 01:39:51.640]  I'm trying to find out a timeline and who did what when.
[01:39:51.640 --> 01:39:56.640]  Then you're jumping to the end and back to the front and I'm missing all the middle.
[01:39:56.640 --> 01:39:57.640]  Okay.
[01:39:57.640 --> 01:40:02.640]  When was the, what day was the petition filed?
[01:40:02.640 --> 01:40:09.640]  That was December 2008.
[01:40:09.640 --> 01:40:11.640]  December 08.
[01:40:11.640 --> 01:40:14.640]  Okay.
[01:40:14.640 --> 01:40:19.640]  When was HSBC brought into the picture?
[01:40:19.640 --> 01:40:20.640]  Okay.
[01:40:20.640 --> 01:40:23.640]  Let me just see here.
[01:40:23.640 --> 01:40:26.640]  That was in 2012.
[01:40:26.640 --> 01:40:28.640]  A little more specific.
[01:40:28.640 --> 01:40:29.640]  I know.
[01:40:29.640 --> 01:40:30.640]  I'm looking.
[01:40:30.640 --> 01:40:37.640]  I'm trying to find out if they came in the picture before or after you lost your lawyer.
[01:40:37.640 --> 01:40:42.640]  Well, no, he, he, they came in while I had the attorney.
[01:40:42.640 --> 01:40:45.640]  That's what I'm trying to get.
[01:40:45.640 --> 01:40:46.640]  Yeah.
[01:40:46.640 --> 01:40:47.640]  Okay.
[01:40:47.640 --> 01:40:48.640]  Yeah.
[01:40:48.640 --> 01:40:58.640]  Was your documents actually before the court, when the court made its ruling?
[01:40:58.640 --> 01:41:07.640]  Made the ruling to let them be substituted to default.
[01:41:07.640 --> 01:41:09.640]  You've got a default judgment.
[01:41:09.640 --> 01:41:12.640]  I'm trying to figure out how you got the default judgment.
[01:41:12.640 --> 01:41:17.640]  Did you have an attorney when you got the default judgment against you?
[01:41:17.640 --> 01:41:21.640]  I had all those motions filed before the court.
[01:41:21.640 --> 01:41:28.640]  All those motions, those imply something you've already talked about.
[01:41:28.640 --> 01:41:31.640]  What motions?
[01:41:31.640 --> 01:41:38.640]  The, where I had filed a motion for relief from the final judgment, filed a motion for
[01:41:38.640 --> 01:41:39.640]  relief.
[01:41:39.640 --> 01:41:40.640]  Okay.
[01:41:40.640 --> 01:41:42.640]  I'm going to make a suggestion.
[01:41:42.640 --> 01:41:48.640]  If, if you, if you dealt with the court, the way you're dealing with me, I can understand
[01:41:48.640 --> 01:41:52.640]  why you're having a problem.
[01:41:52.640 --> 01:41:59.640]  First rule in legal use, never use pronouns.
[01:41:59.640 --> 01:42:06.640]  Second rule, never make a proactive statement of law out of your own mouth.
[01:42:06.640 --> 01:42:10.640]  You only make a proactive statement of law out of the mouth of the court.
[01:42:10.640 --> 01:42:18.640]  Third rule, never make a statement of fact without supporting evidence.
[01:42:18.640 --> 01:42:26.640]  Now, treat the court as if it is an eighth grader and treat the court.
[01:42:26.640 --> 01:42:33.640]  Each time you file a motion is if they don't know anything about this case and tell the
[01:42:33.640 --> 01:42:41.640]  court everything they need to know to understand the context of the current issue.
[01:42:41.640 --> 01:42:48.640]  I've been trying to extract the context of the current issue, but I can't get there.
[01:42:48.640 --> 01:42:50.640]  Okay.
[01:42:50.640 --> 01:42:52.640]  IndieMac was the original lender.
[01:42:52.640 --> 01:42:57.640]  IndieMac filed the original petition in 08.
[01:42:57.640 --> 01:43:04.640]  HSBC came into the picture in 2012.
[01:43:04.640 --> 01:43:05.640]  Correct.
[01:43:05.640 --> 01:43:06.640]  Okay.
[01:43:06.640 --> 01:43:09.640]  Early 2012, late 2012.
[01:43:09.640 --> 01:43:12.640]  No, this is late 2012.
[01:43:12.640 --> 01:43:13.640]  Late.
[01:43:13.640 --> 01:43:15.640]  You had an attorney.
[01:43:15.640 --> 01:43:16.640]  For the.
[01:43:16.640 --> 01:43:20.640]  When did you, your attorney withdraw?
[01:43:20.640 --> 01:43:25.640]  January 2013.
[01:43:25.640 --> 01:43:32.640]  When was the petition for default judgment filed?
[01:43:32.640 --> 01:43:37.640]  September 2013.
[01:43:37.640 --> 01:43:38.640]  Okay.
[01:43:38.640 --> 01:43:39.640]  So he had nothing to do.
[01:43:39.640 --> 01:43:40.640]  Hello.
[01:43:40.640 --> 01:43:41.640]  About to go to break.
[01:43:41.640 --> 01:43:43.640]  This is Randy Kelton.
[01:43:43.640 --> 01:43:49.640]  Steve Skidmore, Rue Blau Radio, a call in number 512-646-1984.
[01:43:49.640 --> 01:43:50.640]  Give us a call.
[01:43:50.640 --> 01:43:52.640]  We'll be taking your calls all night.
[01:43:52.640 --> 01:43:59.640]  We'll be right back.
[01:44:22.640 --> 01:44:29.640]  Thank you.
[01:44:52.640 --> 01:44:59.640]  Thank you.
[01:45:22.640 --> 01:45:29.640]  Thank you.
[01:45:52.640 --> 01:46:02.640]  Thank you.
[01:46:22.640 --> 01:46:35.640]  Okay.
[01:46:35.640 --> 01:46:37.640]  We are back.
[01:46:37.640 --> 01:46:45.640]  Randy Kelton, Steve Skidmore, Rue Blau Radio, and we're talking to Darlene in Florida.
[01:46:45.640 --> 01:46:46.640]  Okay.
[01:46:46.640 --> 01:46:49.640]  Let me demonstrate where I'm going.
[01:46:49.640 --> 01:46:50.640]  Okay.
[01:46:50.640 --> 01:46:52.640]  Let's go on.
[01:46:52.640 --> 01:47:04.640]  In 2008, I entered into a, Indie Mac filed a foreclosure action in 2008.
[01:47:04.640 --> 01:47:08.640]  Next month's day, 2008.
[01:47:08.640 --> 01:47:09.640]  I'm sorry.
[01:47:09.640 --> 01:47:11.640]  Indie Mac was the original lender.
[01:47:11.640 --> 01:47:17.640]  Indie Mac issued a file of foreclosure action in 2008.
[01:47:17.640 --> 01:47:25.640]  In 2012, Indie Mac was replaced as petitioner by HSBC.
[01:47:25.640 --> 01:47:31.640]  In January 2012, my attorney withdrew.
[01:47:31.640 --> 01:47:39.640]  In September 2012, a petition for default judgment was filed.
[01:47:39.640 --> 01:47:49.640]  That's how long it should take to give the court all the stuff that I've spent the last 15 minutes extracting.
[01:47:49.640 --> 01:48:02.640]  When you file a pleading, assume that the judge doesn't know anything about your case because that could very well often be the case.
[01:48:02.640 --> 01:48:08.640]  Do not expect the judge to remember anything.
[01:48:08.640 --> 01:48:14.640]  If you're at a motion hearing, he may hear 25 motions a day.
[01:48:14.640 --> 01:48:17.640]  No way he's going to remember this stuff.
[01:48:17.640 --> 01:48:24.640]  You have to give him all the salient points that are important to your issue.
[01:48:24.640 --> 01:48:27.640]  Otherwise, he can't rule for you.
[01:48:27.640 --> 01:48:28.640]  Okay.
[01:48:28.640 --> 01:48:29.640]  So we got up to this point.
[01:48:29.640 --> 01:48:36.640]  A motion for default judgment was filed in September of 2013.
[01:48:36.640 --> 01:48:37.640]  Right.
[01:48:37.640 --> 01:48:42.640]  Okay.
[01:48:42.640 --> 01:48:52.640]  HSBC, had you filed anything to challenge the agency standing and or capacity of HSBC?
[01:48:52.640 --> 01:48:56.640]  No.
[01:48:56.640 --> 01:48:58.640]  Ooh.
[01:48:58.640 --> 01:48:59.640]  Okay.
[01:48:59.640 --> 01:49:05.640]  When was the default judgment granted?
[01:49:05.640 --> 01:49:09.640]  Well, that was granted September 27, 2013.
[01:49:09.640 --> 01:49:13.640]  Okay.
[01:49:13.640 --> 01:49:20.640]  Did you file a motion objecting to the default judgment?
[01:49:20.640 --> 01:49:22.640]  Yes.
[01:49:22.640 --> 01:49:31.640]  And what were the grounds for your objection or opposition?
[01:49:31.640 --> 01:49:46.640]  I don't have that in front of me, but I had said how the fraud on the way that HSBC had
[01:49:46.640 --> 01:49:52.640]  secured the position of party plaintiff, I cited Florida statutes that the assignment
[01:49:52.640 --> 01:49:54.640]  of mortgage had to be recorded.
[01:49:54.640 --> 01:49:57.640]  It was not.
[01:49:57.640 --> 01:50:00.640]  Okay.
[01:50:00.640 --> 01:50:06.640]  Is this the first time you raised the issue of HSBC standing?
[01:50:06.640 --> 01:50:08.640]  No.
[01:50:08.640 --> 01:50:15.640]  Oh, this is, I just asked you if you challenged this agency standing or capacity and you said
[01:50:15.640 --> 01:50:16.640]  no, you didn't.
[01:50:16.640 --> 01:50:20.640]  I mean, I did in different motions and every time I go before the court.
[01:50:20.640 --> 01:50:21.640]  Now listen.
[01:50:21.640 --> 01:50:26.640]  I don't know the case law at a site because he keeps asking me, well, do you have case
[01:50:26.640 --> 01:50:29.640]  law to support my ruling for this?
[01:50:29.640 --> 01:50:30.640]  Okay.
[01:50:30.640 --> 01:50:32.640]  And from the appellate court.
[01:50:32.640 --> 01:50:36.640]  Have you written down a timeline?
[01:50:36.640 --> 01:50:40.640]  Yes.
[01:50:40.640 --> 01:50:45.640]  Do you have it in front of you?
[01:50:45.640 --> 01:50:51.640]  I have my docket which shows everything that's been filed for it.
[01:50:51.640 --> 01:50:54.640]  No, that's not your timeline.
[01:50:54.640 --> 01:50:58.640]  Do you have a timeline other than the docket sheet?
[01:50:58.640 --> 01:51:01.640]  No, not right in front of me right now.
[01:51:01.640 --> 01:51:02.640]  Okay.
[01:51:02.640 --> 01:51:05.640]  I mean, because this goes on for four years.
[01:51:05.640 --> 01:51:14.640]  That's why the most valuable tool you can have is a timeline.
[01:51:14.640 --> 01:51:24.640]  You need to start from when you first got your note and write down a timeline.
[01:51:24.640 --> 01:51:28.640]  And best to do this in electronic format so you can add stuff to the middle.
[01:51:28.640 --> 01:51:31.640]  I got the note on this date.
[01:51:31.640 --> 01:51:32.640]  This happened.
[01:51:32.640 --> 01:51:33.640]  This happened.
[01:51:33.640 --> 01:51:34.640]  This happened.
[01:51:34.640 --> 01:51:35.640]  No argument.
[01:51:35.640 --> 01:51:36.640]  No evaluation.
[01:51:36.640 --> 01:51:40.640]  Just these things happened on these dates.
[01:51:40.640 --> 01:51:45.640]  Here is why.
[01:51:45.640 --> 01:51:47.640]  You are the litigant.
[01:51:47.640 --> 01:51:50.640]  You've got a dog in this hunt.
[01:51:50.640 --> 01:52:00.640]  This is important to you and you're dealing in an area in which you are not knowledgeable
[01:52:00.640 --> 01:52:02.640]  or competent.
[01:52:02.640 --> 01:52:10.640]  So you wind up having things happen and you don't know how to react or respond to them.
[01:52:10.640 --> 01:52:16.640]  For human beings, this is the most emotionally devastating thing that can happen to us is
[01:52:16.640 --> 01:52:23.640]  to not have something we can do, not know what to do.
[01:52:23.640 --> 01:52:26.640]  Complete pattern interruption.
[01:52:26.640 --> 01:52:30.640]  So you tend to react emotionally.
[01:52:30.640 --> 01:52:36.640]  And then when you go back and try to remember what happened, you tend to move from one emotional
[01:52:36.640 --> 01:52:39.640]  high point to the next to the next to the next.
[01:52:39.640 --> 01:52:42.640]  And you miss the details in between.
[01:52:42.640 --> 01:52:50.640]  Almost always when I talk to someone about their issue, I'm looking for things that they
[01:52:50.640 --> 01:52:53.640]  don't know to pay attention to.
[01:52:53.640 --> 01:53:00.640]  I'm looking for details that happened in between the emotional high points.
[01:53:00.640 --> 01:53:06.640]  But in your memory, in your working memory, you don't have those details because you didn't
[01:53:06.640 --> 01:53:14.640]  provide adequate referential index when these issues were occurring because you tended to
[01:53:14.640 --> 01:53:16.640]  focus on the emotional high points.
[01:53:16.640 --> 01:53:20.640]  So sit down and write a timeline.
[01:53:20.640 --> 01:53:25.640]  And initially you, for the most part, put down the emotional high points.
[01:53:25.640 --> 01:53:28.640]  Just one to the other and to the other and put them all down.
[01:53:28.640 --> 01:53:35.640]  And then go back to the beginning and start asking yourself questions about what went on
[01:53:35.640 --> 01:53:38.640]  from this point to this point.
[01:53:38.640 --> 01:53:46.640]  That will help you to go back in and reconnect to these details of things that happened that
[01:53:46.640 --> 01:53:50.640]  you don't otherwise have access to.
[01:53:50.640 --> 01:53:55.640]  Once you have that down, when I start asking you questions like I've been asking you today,
[01:53:55.640 --> 01:53:58.640]  you can walk right down that timeline.
[01:53:58.640 --> 01:54:01.640]  I was trying to establish a timeline here.
[01:54:01.640 --> 01:54:05.640]  Did you notice how difficult that was?
[01:54:05.640 --> 01:54:06.640]  Right.
[01:54:06.640 --> 01:54:12.640]  So when I go and put this all together, because I need to get statement of facts into the
[01:54:12.640 --> 01:54:19.640]  file for when and if it goes into the appellate court, so would I then from that timeline
[01:54:19.640 --> 01:54:24.640]  be able to do a certified affidavit with that?
[01:54:24.640 --> 01:54:27.640]  No, you're too late.
[01:54:27.640 --> 01:54:35.640]  The appellate court can't hear facts that were not entered into the court.
[01:54:35.640 --> 01:54:41.640]  Now, if, okay, I'm sorry, if your timeline goes back, goes to what actually occurred in
[01:54:41.640 --> 01:54:45.640]  the court, yes, you can do that.
[01:54:45.640 --> 01:54:47.640]  And give me an example.
[01:54:47.640 --> 01:54:52.640]  I had a niece who's in a divorce issue and her husband was really acting out.
[01:54:52.640 --> 01:54:57.640]  So we petitioned for a restraining order or protective order.
[01:54:57.640 --> 01:55:04.640]  They were really frustrated with me because I asked her to write me down a timeline.
[01:55:04.640 --> 01:55:05.640]  Everything happened.
[01:55:05.640 --> 01:55:06.640]  She writes this thing down.
[01:55:06.640 --> 01:55:08.640]  I looked at this piece of trash.
[01:55:08.640 --> 01:55:09.640]  Let's do this again.
[01:55:09.640 --> 01:55:12.640]  We spent three days on this thing.
[01:55:12.640 --> 01:55:18.640]  And they, my in-laws and everybody's all frustrated at me, but I wouldn't let them stop.
[01:55:18.640 --> 01:55:22.640]  We finally got a timeline written down.
[01:55:22.640 --> 01:55:26.640]  We went to the court, handed the petition to the clerk.
[01:55:26.640 --> 01:55:30.640]  The clerk took it into the judge and came out with it signed.
[01:55:30.640 --> 01:55:32.640]  He didn't need to see her.
[01:55:32.640 --> 01:55:34.640]  He didn't need to ask her any questions.
[01:55:34.640 --> 01:55:39.640]  He went down that timeline as a statement of facts and had everything he needed.
[01:55:39.640 --> 01:55:42.640]  He just signed it.
[01:55:42.640 --> 01:55:47.640]  This is how you'll get your pleadings heard.
[01:55:47.640 --> 01:56:02.640]  Get all the facts in place where the court can walk down the facts and succinctly get an idea of how all of these pieces fit together.
[01:56:02.640 --> 01:56:14.640]  Absolutely no argument, no evaluation, no terms that imply, we were talking about this yesterday where
[01:56:14.640 --> 01:56:20.640]  Ken mentioned that you shouldn't say that he assaulted me.
[01:56:20.640 --> 01:56:23.640]  You say he struck me with his left hand.
[01:56:23.640 --> 01:56:24.640]  Explain how.
[01:56:24.640 --> 01:56:27.640]  Don't call it assault because that's an evaluation.
[01:56:27.640 --> 01:56:31.640]  Just tell clearly what happened.
[01:56:31.640 --> 01:56:40.640]  Of all of the things you can do, this will absolutely be the most valuable bar none.
[01:56:40.640 --> 01:56:44.640]  If I'm guaranteed to focus on the other side, don't remember everything that happened.
[01:56:44.640 --> 01:56:46.640]  They don't know what's going on.
[01:56:46.640 --> 01:56:49.640]  They're just guessing.
[01:56:49.640 --> 01:56:59.640]  And once you have all your pieces in place, then you'll be able to lead the appellate court to the decision that you want.
[01:56:59.640 --> 01:57:12.640]  If your emotions don't give a far better description of the state of the case than what I got today, I understand that you have a problem.
[01:57:12.640 --> 01:57:18.640]  So if you would call back in next week.
[01:57:18.640 --> 01:57:21.640]  Send me a timeline first.
[01:57:21.640 --> 01:57:22.640]  Make one up.
[01:57:22.640 --> 01:57:24.640]  Send it to me.
[01:57:24.640 --> 01:57:27.640]  Do not try to make it perfect.
[01:57:27.640 --> 01:57:31.640]  Just go through it and get the details down.
[01:57:31.640 --> 01:57:37.640]  Go through and get the details for which you have a referential index.
[01:57:37.640 --> 01:57:44.640]  And just put them all down and then go back to the start and go through them again and see what details fall into place.
[01:57:44.640 --> 01:57:47.640]  Just do that once or twice and then send it to me.
[01:57:47.640 --> 01:57:52.640]  And then we'll do a discussion on how to construct a statement of facts.
[01:57:52.640 --> 01:58:05.640]  I call it a timeline because a non-legally oriented person better understands what I'm after when I say timeline.
[01:58:05.640 --> 01:58:12.640]  What it really is, if it's done right, it will become a very effective statement of facts.
[01:58:12.640 --> 01:58:15.640]  Here's an idea of how to start.
[01:58:15.640 --> 01:58:22.640]  Number one, always number them. One, such and such a date, sign note and deed of trust.
[01:58:22.640 --> 01:58:28.640]  Two, such and such a date, fell month behind, month delinquent.
[01:58:28.640 --> 01:58:34.640]  Three, such and such a date, bank sent, this statement, this, whatever.
[01:58:34.640 --> 01:58:37.640]  Go ahead and take us out, Randy.
[01:58:37.640 --> 01:58:42.640]  Okay, and the court don't care why you're behind and why you have these problems, just tell them that it happened.
[01:58:42.640 --> 01:58:49.640]  Randy Cowton, Steve Skidmore, Rueville Radio, I call it number 512-626-1984.
[01:58:49.640 --> 01:58:53.640]  The Bible remains the most popular book in the world.
[01:58:53.640 --> 01:58:57.640]  Yet countless readers are frustrated because they struggle to understand it.
[01:58:57.640 --> 01:59:01.640]  Some new translations try to help by simplifying the text,
[01:59:01.640 --> 01:59:06.640]  but in the process can compromise the profound meaning of the Scripture.
[01:59:06.640 --> 01:59:08.640]  Enter the recovery version.
[01:59:08.640 --> 01:59:12.640]  First, this new translation is extremely faithful and accurate,
[01:59:12.640 --> 01:59:17.640]  but the real story is the more than 9,000 explanatory footnotes.
[01:59:17.640 --> 01:59:21.640]  Difficult and profound passages are opened up in a marvelous way,
[01:59:21.640 --> 01:59:27.640]  providing an entrance into the riches of the Word beyond which you've ever experienced before.
[01:59:27.640 --> 01:59:32.640]  Bibles for America would like to give you a free recovery version simply for the asking.
[01:59:32.640 --> 01:59:43.640]  This comprehensive yet compact study Bible is yours just by calling us toll-free at 1-888-551-0102
[01:59:43.640 --> 01:59:47.640]  or by ordering online at freestudybible.com.
[01:59:47.640 --> 02:00:02.640]  That's freestudybible.com.