ROL_2017-06-05_16k.timecode

[00:00.000 --> 00:05.460]  The following news flash is brought to you by The Low Star Lowdown.
[00:05.460 --> 00:14.140]  Markets for Friday 2 June 2017 closed off with gold at $1,278.45 an ounce, silver $17.51
[00:14.140 --> 00:20.020]  an ounce, Texas Crude $48.36 a barrel and Bitcoin is still going up sitting at about
[00:20.020 --> 00:30.260]  $2,472 U.S. currency. Today in History, the year 1953, the coronation of Queen Elizabeth
[00:30.260 --> 00:35.380]  II, crowned Queen of the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and her other realms
[00:35.380 --> 00:39.600]  and territories and head of the Commonwealth, marks one of the first major international
[00:39.600 --> 00:49.260]  events to be televised. Today in History In recent years, President Donald Trump announced
[00:49.260 --> 00:54.060]  the U.S. would withdraw from the U.N. Paris Accord on climate change this last Thursday
[00:54.060 --> 00:58.620]  yesterday stating that, quote, the U.S. will withdraw from the Paris Climate Accord but
[00:58.620 --> 01:04.660]  begin negotiations to re-enter either the Paris Accord or a really entirely new transaction
[01:04.660 --> 01:09.700]  on terms that are fair to the United States, its businesses, its workers, its people, its
[01:09.700 --> 01:15.420]  taxpayers. This, as could be predictably expected, had G7, formerly G8 leaders, in
[01:15.420 --> 01:20.980]  a frenzy, notably Chinese dictatorship admiring Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau who
[01:20.980 --> 01:24.980]  in a statement said that, quote, we are deeply disappointed that the United States federal
[01:24.980 --> 01:29.140]  government has decided to withdraw from the Paris Agreement or French Socialist President
[01:29.140 --> 01:34.380]  Emmanuel Macron saying that, quote, a mistake for our planet, wherever we live, whoever
[01:34.380 --> 01:39.060]  we are, we all share the same responsibility to make our planet great again. Along with
[01:39.060 --> 01:44.220]  U.K. Prime Minister Theresa May, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Italian Prime Minister
[01:44.220 --> 01:49.500]  Paolo Gentiloni all stating disapproval as well. Even Russia, 8th in the former G8, stated
[01:49.500 --> 01:54.220]  the great significance it saw in the Paris Agreement hours before Trump made his announcement,
[01:54.220 --> 01:58.940]  not to mention a Vatican spokesman from the Holy See expressed the pontiffs this May at
[01:58.940 --> 02:02.860]  President Trump's decision. Unfortunately, world leaders and media pundits failed to
[02:02.860 --> 02:07.300]  ask the opinions of another more important base, the American taxpayer, because they
[02:07.300 --> 02:12.460]  were never consulted via referendum or congressional vote when President Obama decided to unilaterally
[02:12.460 --> 02:16.580]  sign up the U.S. to an agreement that would have major effects on industry in the United
[02:16.580 --> 02:21.380]  States. Or maybe they should have asked major climate change proponent, American adjunct
[02:21.380 --> 02:27.060]  professor in the Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences at Columbia University, James Hansen.
[02:27.060 --> 02:31.420]  What he thought of the agreement, which he actually called a fraud, really a fake, is
[02:31.420 --> 02:36.500]  just worthless words, mostly because there was no solution to CO2 emissions other than
[02:36.500 --> 02:43.500]  charging more for energy, which would only disproportionately hurt the most vulnerable.
[03:06.500 --> 03:13.500]  This is what happens when you call the cops. This is what happens when you call the cops.
[03:13.500 --> 03:18.500]  You get your rights violated or you all get shot. This is what happens when you call the
[03:18.500 --> 03:22.500]  cops. This is what happens when you call the cops. You get your rights violated or you
[03:22.500 --> 03:23.500]  all get shot.
[03:23.500 --> 03:27.500]  I'm thinking people being victimized by criminal cops. Psychopathic predators, they arrive
[03:27.500 --> 03:31.500]  in neighborhood blocks. They creep with pepper spray, mate, cupcakes and glass. They like
[03:31.500 --> 03:35.500]  serial killers acting out subliminal fucks. Forget what you taught. These cops have got
[03:35.500 --> 03:39.500]  a license to kill. Witness intimidation means that they can use it at will. Code of silence
[03:39.500 --> 03:43.500]  means that the pigs will never let out a squeal. And if they go to court, they know the judge
[03:43.500 --> 03:47.500]  will make them a deal for real. That's why they stoppin' me, lockin' me up and stoppin'
[03:47.500 --> 03:51.500]  me, confiscatin' my property, talkin' in my demographer, makin' the poor commodity, profitin'
[03:51.500 --> 03:55.500]  off of poverty, in court, the policy support, the prison economy, yeah. No one makes money
[03:55.500 --> 03:59.500]  when the violence stops. Hatin' brutality's the way to make a criminal crock. Blood in
[03:59.500 --> 04:03.500]  the gutter's out of rich butter, they bread at the top. That's why this is what happens when
[04:03.500 --> 04:05.500]  you go to court.
[04:05.500 --> 04:10.500]  All right folks, welcome. This is the Monday Night Rule of Law Radio Show. It is June
[04:10.500 --> 04:14.500]  5th, 2017. Yes, we are live tonight, which thankfully, the thunderstorm we had rollin'
[04:14.500 --> 04:21.500]  through here was not particularly focused on preventing. So we have power and internet
[04:21.500 --> 04:25.500]  and everything at the moment. If that changes, it will be due to an act of nature and not
[04:25.500 --> 04:30.500]  of us. So just keep that in mind as you're listening. Now, before I start taking calls
[04:30.500 --> 04:34.500]  tonight, there is something I want to go over based upon a question that was asked on a
[04:34.500 --> 04:40.500]  Facebook post today, and that has to do with the enactment clause or the enacting clause
[04:40.500 --> 04:49.500]  of the various state constitutions and what it means. Now, here in Texas, we have two
[04:49.500 --> 04:56.500]  very important article sections under Article 3, the first one being Section 1, which is
[04:56.500 --> 05:02.500]  for the Senate and House of Representatives, and it tells us this. The legislative power,
[05:02.500 --> 05:12.500]  that means the power to legislate, i.e. to create law, okay? Of this state shall be
[05:12.500 --> 05:22.500]  vested in a Senate and House of Representatives, which together shall, that is a command, folks,
[05:22.500 --> 05:30.500]  shall be styled the legislature of the state of Texas. That article makes it very, very
[05:30.500 --> 05:38.500]  clear that the legislature is the only body in Texas that can make binding public law.
[05:38.500 --> 05:46.500]  Now, we've talked about this aspect of this before, many times, but it is a key foundational
[05:46.500 --> 05:52.500]  point, along with this other clause that I'm going to read to you now, which is Article
[05:52.500 --> 06:00.500]  3, Section 29, in showing exactly where the Texas courts have led us completely astray
[06:00.500 --> 06:10.500]  in order to provide a certain section of the population with added benefits to our detriment,
[06:10.500 --> 06:20.500]  Article 3, Section 29, an acting clause of laws, okay? The enacting clause of all laws
[06:20.500 --> 06:28.500]  shall be, be it enacted by the legislature of the state of Texas, okay? That's very
[06:28.500 --> 06:36.500]  cut and dry. Those two sections of Article 3 are very, very cut and dry. The legislature
[06:36.500 --> 06:42.500]  is the only political body in Texas that can make binding public law, and every law that
[06:42.500 --> 06:49.500]  they create must have an enacting clause stating that the enactment was created by the authority
[06:49.500 --> 06:56.500]  of the legislature and no one else. Now, why is that such a problem? Well, the problem is
[06:56.500 --> 07:06.500]  that is not what the Texas government at any level is actually doing. The legislature is
[07:06.500 --> 07:12.500]  unconstitutionally attempting to delegate its law making power through statutory definitions
[07:12.500 --> 07:19.500]  of the term law, okay? Now, as an example, I'm just going to kind of read to you what
[07:19.500 --> 07:23.500]  I wrote in remarks for this day, and this is going to be notes that I wrote up that are
[07:23.500 --> 07:30.500]  going to the book. Have you ever asked yourself the question, why don't the statutory codes
[07:30.500 --> 07:37.500]  have the enacting clause printed in them? Now, the reason we want to ask that question
[07:37.500 --> 07:44.500]  is if the law is required to have the enacting clause printed with it so that the people
[07:44.500 --> 07:52.500]  understand the authority by which it was made, then why do the codes of statutes not contain
[07:52.500 --> 08:00.500]  the enacting clause? Well, this is my theory on this, and the various information that we
[08:00.500 --> 08:07.500]  have supports this theory very, very well, in fact. This is how it's currently set up to
[08:07.500 --> 08:13.500]  work despite the fact that it's unconstitutional, and we've got the attorneys to thank for this
[08:13.500 --> 08:18.500]  since they are currently in control of every department and branch of government by either
[08:18.500 --> 08:26.500]  being the legal advisor or the one in charge of either of any aspect of it. That too is
[08:26.500 --> 08:32.500]  unconstitutional, but it's currently what we have. This is what's happening. The courts,
[08:32.500 --> 08:38.500]  i.e. the attorneys, because all judges, except for those in courts of no record, are required
[08:38.500 --> 08:44.500]  to be attorneys to sit on the bench, which the legislature of attorneys wrote laws to ensure
[08:44.500 --> 08:50.500]  were the only people that could sit in control of the people's courts in the state of Texas
[08:50.500 --> 08:57.500]  for the purpose of setting precedent. So the attorneys write the laws that the courts then
[08:57.500 --> 09:05.500]  rule upon those laws to set the precedent on what those laws do. So in essence, the legislature
[09:05.500 --> 09:12.500]  has abdicated its legislative power to the decisional power of the courts to interpret the
[09:12.500 --> 09:19.500]  law in ways beyond the Constitution and the language of the law itself. A perfect example
[09:19.500 --> 09:26.500]  is the DUI convictions that Texas is putting up. The statute specifically requires that
[09:26.500 --> 09:33.500]  the individual be operating a motor vehicle while under the influence. The courts have
[09:33.500 --> 09:39.500]  interpreted operating to be something completely different than the way it's defined in the
[09:39.500 --> 09:47.500]  statutes. They define it through nothing more than judicial fiat as the ability to take
[09:47.500 --> 09:55.500]  control of a vehicle in order to be operating that vehicle, when the statute very clearly
[09:55.500 --> 10:05.500]  says that operate means to already be in control of a motor vehicle. So the courts have usurped
[10:05.500 --> 10:10.500]  the legislative authority to rewrite the law consistent with how they wish to interpret
[10:10.500 --> 10:18.500]  it. That's one problem. Now, not only are they ruling through the courts, how this works,
[10:18.500 --> 10:25.500]  but the courts are the ones who have ruled, once again, entirely by judicial fiat, that
[10:25.500 --> 10:35.500]  only the legislative bill must have the enacting clause and not the published statutes. Okay?
[10:35.500 --> 10:42.500]  Now, I understand the Texas Constitution says all laws must have the enacting clause with
[10:42.500 --> 10:54.500]  them. The courts say the statutes do not have to have them. That logic tells us two things,
[10:54.500 --> 11:02.500]  which I'm getting into. This means that if the actual law is required to have the enacting
[11:02.500 --> 11:09.500]  clause and the statutes do not have it, and the courts have declared the statutes don't
[11:09.500 --> 11:17.500]  have to have it because it is not the actual legislative bill, which is what they say does
[11:17.500 --> 11:24.500]  have to have it, then simple logic dictates that the statutes themselves cannot be the
[11:24.500 --> 11:34.500]  actual law. You get that? Now, there's something else about this. This is true when you also
[11:34.500 --> 11:40.500]  come to realize that the statutes are actually written by the administrative agency that has
[11:40.500 --> 11:46.500]  legal responsibility for the particular legislative objects that fall within that particular
[11:46.500 --> 11:51.500]  statutory scheme. For instance, Chapter 521 of the Transportation Code Licensing, the
[11:51.500 --> 11:56.500]  administrative agency in charge of licensing is who? The Texas Department of Public Safety.
[11:56.500 --> 12:01.500]  Financial responsibility, who is the state administrative agency in charge of financial
[12:01.500 --> 12:08.500]  responsibility under Chapter 601 of the Transportation Code, the Department of Public Safety. In
[12:08.500 --> 12:15.500]  Section 201, dealing with markings and signage on state highways, who's responsible for those
[12:15.500 --> 12:26.500]  objects on state highways, the Department of Transportation. You see? Now, if these agencies
[12:26.500 --> 12:33.500]  are the ones making their desired alterations to the statutory scheme, and then they get
[12:33.500 --> 12:40.500]  the legislative branch to approve those changes, which they do by way of fraud because the
[12:40.500 --> 12:48.500]  legislators do not read the bills that the agencies submit to them. That's why they use
[12:48.500 --> 12:56.500]  the suspension clause unconstitutionally on a regular basis so that they do not have to
[12:56.500 --> 13:03.500]  read the bills. And then they enact them anyway. It's as bad as the United States Congress.
[13:03.500 --> 13:11.500]  Okay? So we have an agency rewriting the law the way they want it to work, despite the fact
[13:11.500 --> 13:17.500]  that the underlying bill is the actual law. And then we have a consistency issue between
[13:17.500 --> 13:25.500]  what the statute says and what the actual law says. And the statute is not the law because,
[13:25.500 --> 13:31.500]  one, it has no enacting clause. Two, the court said it is not required to have an enacting
[13:31.500 --> 13:40.500]  clause. And three, the Constitution says that any actual law must have the enacting clause.
[13:40.500 --> 13:49.500]  Okay? Now, I firmly believe that this is the reason why the Texas Secretary of State has
[13:49.500 --> 13:58.500]  not certified a single statute in a single code since at least the mid-'90s. They haven't
[13:58.500 --> 14:06.500]  certified any statute in Texas as being a consistent reflection of the underlying legislative
[14:06.500 --> 14:14.500]  bill. None of them. And that's because they aren't. They are no longer consistent with the
[14:14.500 --> 14:23.500]  original legislation. They are attempting to change scope and purpose of legislation simply
[14:23.500 --> 14:30.500]  by amending the statutes. And that, too, is constitutionally forbidden here in Texas.
[14:30.500 --> 14:41.500]  Okay? Now, the theory I have is further substantiated by the fact that there are actually 17
[14:41.500 --> 14:48.500]  different definitions of the term law here in Texas across all the codes. And of those
[14:48.500 --> 14:56.500]  17, there are 11 definitions of law that encompasses far more than just legislative bills. And
[14:56.500 --> 15:01.500]  remember, the legislative bills are the only things that are constitutionally authorized to be
[15:01.500 --> 15:08.500]  defined and applied to the public as binding law. Each of these 11 definitions will read
[15:08.500 --> 15:13.500]  something more or less like this. This, for instance, is the definition of law out of the
[15:13.500 --> 15:22.500]  Texas Penal Code, Section 1.07. Definitions. Subsection A, in this code, the definitions
[15:22.500 --> 15:30.500]  in this code, meaning the penal code, shall be this in Item 30 of Section A for the term
[15:30.500 --> 15:42.500]  law. Law means the Constitution or a statute of this state or of the United States. Then
[15:42.500 --> 15:50.500]  it goes on. A written opinion of a court of record. See, there's the attorneys giving the
[15:50.500 --> 16:01.500]  courts the power to create law in violation of Article 3, Section 1 of the Texas Constitution.
[16:01.500 --> 16:10.500]  And they're doing it by simple statutory definition. Then it goes on to a municipal
[16:10.500 --> 16:15.500]  ordinance. Now they're attempting to delegate the power to make binding public law to
[16:15.500 --> 16:23.500]  municipalities, political subdivisions that are not the Texas legislature. Again, by
[16:23.500 --> 16:31.500]  nothing more than a statutory definition. But there's more. An order of a county commissioners
[16:31.500 --> 16:43.500]  court or a rule authorized by and lawfully adopted under a statute. In other words, they're
[16:43.500 --> 16:49.500]  giving every state administrative agency the ability to create law through their policies,
[16:49.500 --> 16:53.500]  procedures, and rule books. We'll continue this discussion on the other side of this
[16:53.500 --> 17:03.500]  break so y'all hang in there and we will be right back.
[17:23.500 --> 17:29.500]  I'm going to throw away these yucky cookies in the trash. I click control, shift, delete,
[17:29.500 --> 17:36.500]  and then scroll down to cookies and clear them. Bye bye yucky cookies. Now I go to LogosRadioNetwork.com
[17:36.500 --> 17:42.500]  and I click on the Amazon box on the upper right hand side, bookmark the link, and I can
[17:42.500 --> 17:48.500]  go to Amazon through this link and order you some yummy new cookies. No cookies for me.
[17:48.500 --> 17:53.500]  Consider it an early Christmas present and every time I order on Amazon, I go through
[17:53.500 --> 17:58.500]  this link and I give a little present to this radio network too. See you for cookies.
[17:58.500 --> 18:27.500]  Bye bye.
[18:28.500 --> 18:54.500]  We'll see you next time.
[18:58.500 --> 19:05.500]  We'll see you next time.
[19:28.500 --> 19:42.500]  Alright folks, we are back. This is Rule of Law Radio. Alright, I should be able to get
[19:42.500 --> 19:46.500]  this wrapped up in this segment and be able to start taking your calls so if you want to
[19:46.500 --> 19:49.500]  go ahead and start calling in and getting in the line, please feel free to go ahead and
[19:49.500 --> 19:54.500]  do that because it's only going to take a couple more minutes here. But now the definition
[19:54.500 --> 19:59.500]  of law that I just read you, okay, that's everything that's in it. The rest of them are
[19:59.500 --> 20:04.500]  very, very similar and they'll add to or take away from it very little, but they'll do one
[20:04.500 --> 20:10.500]  or the other if they're not exactly the same. Now that being said, if you look at all 11
[20:10.500 --> 20:18.500]  of them, the one thing you will notice is that none of these 11 definitions of law ever contain
[20:18.500 --> 20:25.500]  legislative bill as a part of the definition of law, which is the exact opposite of how
[20:25.500 --> 20:31.500]  the Texas Constitution established it requires things to actually work. The legislative bill,
[20:31.500 --> 20:39.500]  once it's signed into law by the governor, is the law. Nothing else is the law. The legal
[20:39.500 --> 20:49.500]  maximum of something similar is never the same comes directly to mind. Now those are the primary
[20:49.500 --> 20:55.500]  facts that provide me with the foundation of my assertion that statutes are not the actual
[20:55.500 --> 21:04.500]  law as the law itself must have the enacting clause and the published statutes do not have
[21:04.500 --> 21:10.500]  one. And the attorneys, via the courts, have unconstitutionally declared that they are
[21:10.500 --> 21:17.500]  not required to have one because they are not the actual law having the form and substance
[21:17.500 --> 21:26.500]  of legislative bills. This logic on their part, however, is self-defeating as you cannot declare
[21:26.500 --> 21:32.500]  that the statutes are not required to comply with the constitutional mandate that all published
[21:32.500 --> 21:39.500]  laws contain an enacting clause because they are not the legislative bill that is the law
[21:39.500 --> 21:45.500]  and then simultaneously claim that the statutes are the actual law when you're trying to prosecute
[21:45.500 --> 21:53.500]  somebody under one or more of them. It is completely contradictory logic. It's not the law when
[21:53.500 --> 22:03.500]  the clause is required. It is the law when we want to use it against you. Anybody else see
[22:03.500 --> 22:10.500]  a logic problem there that cannot be solved with the available information? And there is
[22:10.500 --> 22:18.500]  no amount of reasoning an attorney can come up with that would alter that very substantive
[22:18.500 --> 22:32.500]  fact that it is an absolute unsolvable and a reconcilable contradiction. Okay? So all this
[22:32.500 --> 22:39.500]  crap about city ordinances being binding upon you, this is proof positive that it isn't.
[22:39.500 --> 22:46.500]  Article III, section 29 through 39 of the Texas Constitution says very clearly the process
[22:46.500 --> 22:55.500]  every public law must go through to become a law and to be binding upon anyone, including
[22:55.500 --> 23:01.500]  the public, or even just a particular classification of individuals like the transportation code
[23:01.500 --> 23:13.500]  is. And that process does not occur anywhere except within the Texas legislature. And even
[23:13.500 --> 23:26.500]  then it is not followed in accordance with the Texas Constitution. But are they the ones
[23:26.500 --> 23:33.500]  at fault? Sure they're making the ruling, sure they're doing everything wrong, but who
[23:33.500 --> 23:43.500]  is standing in front of them demanding that they stop doing it? Who? A handful of people
[23:43.500 --> 23:49.500]  while the rest of everybody else just sits back and thinks everything's okay? I know what
[23:49.500 --> 23:59.500]  it's like to play the lone wolf in this fight. I've been doing it too long. If we cannot
[23:59.500 --> 24:07.500]  get everyone to understand what is happening and why, the problem cannot be fixed. This
[24:07.500 --> 24:13.500]  is the biggest problem I have with the patronates is all the crap they're spewing has nothing
[24:13.500 --> 24:21.500]  to do with what's actually happening. It's got nothing to do with law in general as far
[24:21.500 --> 24:29.500]  as how they're trying to apply it. Because it doesn't fit in the scheme of law that they're
[24:29.500 --> 24:34.500]  actually trying to use, which isn't any valid law at all of course, but you kind of get
[24:34.500 --> 24:39.500]  my point. They're trying to criminalize everything you do and then someone is going to sit up
[24:39.500 --> 24:44.500]  there and argue that they can use the UCC to fight a criminal charge that has nothing
[24:44.500 --> 24:51.500]  to do with the UCC. It's idiotic assertions and logic, just like the stuff the courts
[24:51.500 --> 24:56.500]  are coming up with when they say that the statute is a law, it just doesn't have to
[24:56.500 --> 25:00.500]  comply with the constitutional requirements of an actual law. And it can be something
[25:00.500 --> 25:07.500]  other than what the Constitution says a law can actually be. See, it's exactly the same
[25:07.500 --> 25:12.500]  kind of logic the courts are using to create this garbage that the patronates are using
[25:12.500 --> 25:26.500]  to create more garbage. It is disinformation, whether intended or accidental. And as long
[25:26.500 --> 25:31.500]  as people don't know what to believe, they won't believe anything because most of them
[25:31.500 --> 25:39.500]  are too lazy to actually find out for themselves regardless. So they just pick the simplest
[25:39.500 --> 25:50.500]  path and the easiest belief and they follow it. It's very much like religion in that way.
[25:50.500 --> 25:55.500]  While I may use the stuff that they put in place, that doesn't mean I agree with it.
[25:55.500 --> 26:01.500]  That doesn't mean I agree that it's right. But the one thing it gives us that the
[26:01.500 --> 26:09.500]  Internet theories do not is an actual connected dots drawing of the hammer that can be used
[26:09.500 --> 26:16.500]  to break the system. When all the dots are connected in the rules that they've got,
[26:16.500 --> 26:24.500]  it draws a hammer very clearly that we can use to beat them up with. And then when they
[26:24.500 --> 26:32.500]  fail to recognize the existence of their own hammer, they are invalidating their own
[26:32.500 --> 26:39.500]  system. And the more people that see that in action, the more people that come to realize
[26:39.500 --> 26:47.500]  why it's a sham. Now if we can't get beyond that cognitive dissonance and get people
[26:47.500 --> 26:52.500]  woken up and paying attention to this, then that means there's fewer of us to fight.
[26:52.500 --> 26:59.500]  And when there's fewer of us to fight, it always leads to only one course of action.
[26:59.500 --> 27:06.500]  And that's another American Revolution. Because too many people want to sit back
[27:06.500 --> 27:10.500]  and do nothing, it's a chance that they'll lose everything and gain nothing,
[27:10.500 --> 27:19.500]  rather than gain everything, no matter how much they lose.
[27:19.500 --> 27:24.500]  See I don't think the men that fought and died against the British in the American
[27:24.500 --> 27:36.500]  Revolution were fighting for themselves. They did what they did for the sake of those
[27:36.500 --> 27:43.500]  that would follow, not the ones who were there. If they made it out alive, then they
[27:43.500 --> 27:48.500]  were lucky. But I don't think any one of them entered into it thinking that they would
[27:48.500 --> 27:55.500]  come out of it alive. But one thing they knew that if they were victorious, whether
[27:55.500 --> 28:01.500]  they lived or died in the fight, if their fight was victorious, then all those that
[28:01.500 --> 28:08.500]  they left behind and that would come after them would not, most likely, if they paid
[28:08.500 --> 28:15.500]  attention and were diligent, ever have to make that fight themselves and would have
[28:15.500 --> 28:23.500]  something great to show for it. And it is my opinion, and only my opinion, that we
[28:23.500 --> 28:34.500]  have sorely let them down. They gave everything to become free men and to
[28:34.500 --> 28:41.500]  ensure that those they left behind could raise their families and generations of
[28:41.500 --> 28:49.500]  families as free individuals, able to exercise their will however they saw fit as
[28:49.500 --> 28:55.500]  long as it was not to harm another. And that the government would no longer be in
[28:55.500 --> 29:00.500]  control of every part of their lives and taking their livelihood from them in the
[29:00.500 --> 29:12.500]  midst of taxes and abuses. And we have squandered their sacrifice out of sheer laziness
[29:12.500 --> 29:23.500]  and fear. That is the American Revolution we have now, and that is a complete
[29:23.500 --> 29:30.500]  disappointment. Folks, if we can't do better, we've got nothing left to live for. We
[29:30.500 --> 29:39.500]  just don't. And that's a shame. That is a crying shame, because that means that
[29:39.500 --> 29:45.500]  some of us are going to have to one day do it again. A lot sooner than we ever
[29:45.500 --> 29:51.500]  thought was going to be necessary, and yet here we are. So as you can see, if
[29:51.500 --> 29:56.500]  technology advances, it's easier to fall back into old habits. We'll be right back,
[29:56.500 --> 29:57.500]  start taking your calls.
[30:01.500 --> 30:05.500]  Email is a convenient way to send and receive information, but it can also let
[30:05.500 --> 30:10.500]  advertisers snoop on you. Invisible web bugs and email messages could be monitoring
[30:10.500 --> 30:14.500]  your every click. I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, and I'll be back with more in just
[30:14.500 --> 30:15.500]  a moment.
[30:15.500 --> 30:20.500]  Privacy is under attack. When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it
[30:20.500 --> 30:24.500]  back again. And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start
[30:24.500 --> 30:29.500]  to vanish too. So protect your rights. Say no to surveillance and keep your
[30:29.500 --> 30:34.500]  information to yourself. Privacy, it's worth hanging on to. This public service
[30:34.500 --> 30:38.500]  announcement is brought to you by StartPage.com, the private search engine
[30:38.500 --> 30:43.500]  alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing. Start over with StartPage.
[30:44.500 --> 30:49.500]  Web bugs, web beacons, pixel tags, and clear gifts. They have many names, but these
[30:49.500 --> 30:53.500]  tiny invisible image files usually have one purpose only, to track your
[30:53.500 --> 30:57.500]  online behavior. Web bugs are commonly used on web pages, but they can also be
[30:57.500 --> 31:02.500]  embedded in email messages to report exactly when you open a message, the IP
[31:02.500 --> 31:06.500]  address of the computer that read the message, and whether you click on links
[31:06.500 --> 31:10.500]  contained in the message. The best way to fight a web bug invasion is to use a
[31:10.500 --> 31:14.500]  privacy-friendly email service that filters them out. You can also set your
[31:14.500 --> 31:19.500]  email client to block email message images or opt for a text-only email.
[31:19.500 --> 31:45.500]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht. More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[31:49.500 --> 31:59.500]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht. More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[32:19.500 --> 32:22.500]  Traffic courts afford us the least expensive opportunity to learn how to
[32:22.500 --> 32:25.500]  enforce and preserve our rights through due process. Former Sheriff's Deputy
[32:25.500 --> 32:28.500]  Eddie Craig, in conjunction with Rule Law Radio, has put together the most
[32:28.500 --> 32:32.500]  comprehensive teaching tool available that will help you understand what due
[32:32.500 --> 32:35.500]  process is and how to hold courts to the rule law. You can get your own copy of
[32:35.500 --> 32:39.500]  this invaluable material by going to rulelawradio.com and ordering your copy
[32:39.500 --> 32:42.500]  today. By ordering now, you'll receive a copy of Eddie's book, The Texas
[32:42.500 --> 32:45.500]  Transportation Code, The Law vs. the Lie. Video and audio of the original
[32:45.500 --> 32:49.500]  2009 seminar. Hundreds of research documents and other useful resource
[32:49.500 --> 32:52.500]  material. Learn how to fight for your rights with the help of this material
[32:52.500 --> 32:56.500]  from rulelawradio.com. Order your copy today and together we can have the
[32:56.500 --> 33:02.500]  free society we all want and deserve.
[33:02.500 --> 33:11.500]  Live free speech radio, logosradionetwork.com.
[33:11.500 --> 33:27.500]  I'm on the highway to hell, highway to hell, I'm on the highway to hell, highway to
[33:27.500 --> 33:31.500]  hell.
[33:31.500 --> 33:56.500]  Don't stop me, don't stop me.
[33:56.500 --> 34:16.500]  Alright folks, we are back. This is Rule Law Radio. The call in number is 512-646-1984.
[34:16.500 --> 34:21.500]  And we are going to start taking your calls now. And the first one up appears to be
[34:21.500 --> 34:26.500]  Truth Raider. Raider, what do you have?
[34:26.500 --> 34:29.500]  Well, good evening, Eddie. Well, I got a bunch of questions for you. I'm sorry to
[34:29.500 --> 34:33.500]  bug you again, but something happens where I just got a ditching question and I
[34:33.500 --> 34:38.500]  got to have it scratched by calling in and having you answer it for me.
[34:38.500 --> 34:42.500]  Whatever on you itches, I'm not the one to be scratching it.
[34:42.500 --> 34:49.500]  Well, yeah, terminology, this is getting to be irritating as all get out and
[34:49.500 --> 34:53.500]  an allergy I like to get rid of once and for all.
[34:53.500 --> 35:02.500]  But I got seized in my liberty two more times during the Long Memorial Day weekend
[35:02.500 --> 35:08.500]  by the same officer who stopped me a little more than a year ago by my own
[35:08.500 --> 35:13.500]  municipality here, the police department here where I live.
[35:13.500 --> 35:20.500]  This guy stopped me back in 2016 on Easter Sunday morning for all days.
[35:20.500 --> 35:24.500]  So you're wondering where their spirit and their heart is at.
[35:24.500 --> 35:31.500]  And I got stopped by him on Sunday right in the middle of the holiday last week.
[35:31.500 --> 35:38.500]  So that all over again, and I informed him I'm exercising my right of liberty
[35:38.500 --> 35:41.500]  through locomotion. We've been through this before.
[35:41.500 --> 35:46.500]  I handed him the ID and let him do his thing.
[35:46.500 --> 35:49.500]  And I try to give him information.
[35:49.500 --> 35:52.500]  I try to let him know where my source is.
[35:52.500 --> 35:56.500]  This is where he is in violation of statutory code.
[35:56.500 --> 35:58.500]  Tried to read the code to him.
[35:58.500 --> 36:04.500]  Let's share the organized statutes of 810.410, paragraph 3, the letter A.
[36:04.500 --> 36:09.500]  A police officer shall not arrest a person for a traffic violation.
[36:09.500 --> 36:11.500]  He wasn't having it.
[36:11.500 --> 36:14.500]  Got in his unit and took off before I had a chance to even finish.
[36:14.500 --> 36:17.500]  So why haven't you filed suit against him?
[36:17.500 --> 36:20.500]  That's all I got to do.
[36:20.500 --> 36:27.500]  I've got one going right now with the sheriff's department from a year and a half ago.
[36:27.500 --> 36:30.500]  So that's one of those things I'm going to have to get on again.
[36:30.500 --> 36:32.500]  But this is what I did in the meantime.
[36:32.500 --> 36:35.500]  You were speaking a few weeks ago.
[36:35.500 --> 36:37.500]  The point I'm making is this.
[36:37.500 --> 36:41.500]  The statute that says what he did was absolutely forbidden.
[36:41.500 --> 36:45.500]  Therefore, there is no level of immunity that will cover him.
[36:45.500 --> 36:47.500]  None.
[36:47.500 --> 36:48.500]  Right.
[36:48.500 --> 36:49.500]  Okay.
[36:49.500 --> 36:53.500]  Well, Dan's reason why he took off.
[36:53.500 --> 36:55.500]  He wasn't going to listen to it.
[36:55.500 --> 36:57.500]  Well, that's the problem.
[36:57.500 --> 36:59.500]  He's not going to listen to you.
[36:59.500 --> 37:05.500]  He's going to listen to the sheriff's that's standing on his front door saying,
[37:05.500 --> 37:11.500]  I'm here to seize your property to pay the debt you lost in court.
[37:11.500 --> 37:13.500]  That's what I'm going to do.
[37:13.500 --> 37:15.500]  I'm trying to be a nice guy.
[37:15.500 --> 37:20.500]  So I don't go after him unless he takes my property, puts me in handcuffs or anything like that.
[37:20.500 --> 37:21.500]  He doesn't do that.
[37:21.500 --> 37:22.500]  Okay.
[37:22.500 --> 37:24.500]  Let me put it this way, people.
[37:24.500 --> 37:32.500]  And Raider, as long as that's your attitude, stop calling me because you're wasting my time.
[37:32.500 --> 37:36.500]  Never stop until you stop it.
[37:36.500 --> 37:37.500]  Right.
[37:37.500 --> 37:39.500]  Well, I tend on doing it this time.
[37:39.500 --> 37:42.500]  For sure this time I'm never going to do it.
[37:42.500 --> 37:46.500]  First, if this judge does the same thing she did last year and set for trial,
[37:46.500 --> 37:50.500]  deny my motion to dismiss immediately the interests of justice with prejudice,
[37:50.500 --> 37:53.500]  I will bar grieve her.
[37:53.500 --> 37:56.500]  Definitely, I'll definitely do that.
[37:56.500 --> 38:00.500]  I'm not going to let her try to take this some quasi-trial that she did last year.
[38:00.500 --> 38:04.500]  Disqualify her for failing to apply the law to the facts.
[38:04.500 --> 38:12.500]  The judge has in her possession evidence the cop committed a crime and a civil tort.
[38:12.500 --> 38:22.500]  The judge has an obligation to throw the case out and suppress all evidence because it was illegally obtained.
[38:22.500 --> 38:23.500]  Correct.
[38:23.500 --> 38:33.500]  So file a motion to suppress and when the judge doesn't rule upon it in your favor, then file a motion to disqualify the judge.
[38:33.500 --> 38:34.500]  All right.
[38:34.500 --> 38:36.500]  We'll do.
[38:36.500 --> 38:42.500]  Now, in the meantime, after the Labor Day, or the Memorial Day, we was over, excuse me.
[38:42.500 --> 39:01.500]  I went down to the police station and filed a misconduct, an officer's misconduct complaint for him being negligent in his office
[39:01.500 --> 39:05.500]  to be able to listen to a citizen and provide service.
[39:05.500 --> 39:10.500]  So it was like a denial of service and negligence of listening to what I had to say.
[39:10.500 --> 39:13.500]  And at the same time, you were talking about this a few years ago.
[39:13.500 --> 39:17.500]  Why would you do something like that?
[39:17.500 --> 39:20.500]  All you're doing is creating paper and nothing else.
[39:20.500 --> 39:22.500]  That's an administrative complaint.
[39:22.500 --> 39:26.500]  The odds of that having any repercussions are slim to none.
[39:26.500 --> 39:27.500]  Right.
[39:27.500 --> 39:31.500]  Why didn't you file criminal complaints against the cop?
[39:31.500 --> 39:40.500]  One for false imprisonment or false arrest, another for aggravated assault, another for terroristic threat.
[39:40.500 --> 39:50.500]  And if Oregon has them, official oppression and abuse of official capacity as well as officer misconduct, actual crimes.
[39:50.500 --> 39:54.500]  Right.
[39:54.500 --> 39:58.500]  I'll do that because I'm getting, I'm getting tired of it.
[39:58.500 --> 40:00.500]  I definitely will do that.
[40:00.500 --> 40:01.500]  Okay.
[40:01.500 --> 40:15.500]  And I also filed in a request for his records, what is called a DPSST, which is kind of the Department of Public Safety and Standards Training Certification Certification.
[40:15.500 --> 40:24.500]  And to see if he is authorized to enforce the Transportation Code of Oregon.
[40:24.500 --> 40:31.500]  And a couple days later, they did kindly respond and sent me an email and sent me all of his records.
[40:31.500 --> 40:35.500]  So he is authorized to do so.
[40:35.500 --> 40:38.500]  But of course, he's got to do it against the right classification of people.
[40:38.500 --> 40:48.500]  Well, the thing is, when you say he's authorized to do so, what specifically is he authorized to do under those statutes?
[40:48.500 --> 40:55.500]  Because here in Texas, it is not a general authority to enforce the code.
[40:55.500 --> 41:05.500]  The certification and training they get from the Department of Public Safety limits their enforcement activities to commercial motor vehicle inspections.
[41:05.500 --> 41:11.500]  They can't stop anyone for anything else.
[41:11.500 --> 41:22.500]  The entire chapter that deals with authorizing the local cops of any kind to enforce the Transportation Code is commercial motor vehicle safety standards.
[41:22.500 --> 41:24.500]  That's the whole chapter.
[41:24.500 --> 41:27.500]  That's the only place they're authorized to operate.
[41:27.500 --> 41:32.500]  And what is involved in commercial motor vehicle safety standards?
[41:32.500 --> 41:38.500]  Equipment inspections.
[41:38.500 --> 41:47.500]  That is it. They can't enforce anything else.
[41:47.500 --> 41:53.500]  So what can they enforce in Oregon?
[41:53.500 --> 41:57.500]  Well, the two documents that I received that...
[41:57.500 --> 41:59.500]  Wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute.
[41:59.500 --> 42:01.500]  I didn't ask you what documents you received.
[42:01.500 --> 42:04.500]  The documents are not the law, are they?
[42:04.500 --> 42:10.500]  The documents are not the administrative code and the statutes, are they?
[42:10.500 --> 42:19.500]  Then you need to go read the statutes and the administrative code about what that authority actually gives them the power to do.
[42:19.500 --> 42:27.500]  Because until you know that, you're guessing, aren't you?
[42:27.500 --> 42:30.500]  And you're assuming, aren't you?
[42:30.500 --> 42:35.500]  I haven't made any conclusions on it. I'm just saying I got two documents back and I have to study them to see if it's...
[42:35.500 --> 42:40.500]  You already made a conclusion when you answered the first part of my question a minute ago.
[42:40.500 --> 42:43.500]  But he is authorized to enforce it.
[42:43.500 --> 42:50.500]  That's a conclusion, Raider.
[42:50.500 --> 42:56.500]  Well, one of the two documents was his affirmation to the Constitution that holds the...
[42:56.500 --> 43:02.500]  Which has what to do with his enforcement authority of the transportation statutes in Oregon?
[43:02.500 --> 43:07.500]  Well, because he stopped me using violation of the Fourth Amendment procedure.
[43:07.500 --> 43:22.500]  Irrelevant to the question at hand as to what his authority to enforce under the statutes dealing with transportation in Oregon actually are, if any.
[43:22.500 --> 43:32.500]  How does his oath of office as a peace officer have anything to directly do with the enforcement of those statutes?
[43:32.500 --> 43:37.500]  Well, that I'm going to have to research more into.
[43:37.500 --> 43:42.500]  But I just got the documents, what they sent to me and I have to study into them and what does it cover.
[43:42.500 --> 43:50.500]  Yeah, but the question I'm asking you is, do you think those documents are even responsive to what you actually asked for if you actually knew what you were asking for?
[43:50.500 --> 43:52.500]  Hang on just a second, we'll go on from there.
[43:52.500 --> 44:21.500]  Alright folks, as the rule of law radio, we'll be right back, so hang in there.
[44:22.500 --> 44:27.500]  Thousands have won with our step-by-step course and now you can too.
[44:27.500 --> 44:33.500]  Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case winning experience.
[44:33.500 --> 44:42.500]  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.
[44:42.500 --> 44:52.500]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases, prosa tactics and much more.
[44:52.500 --> 45:00.500]  Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner or call toll free 866-LAW-EZ.
[45:00.500 --> 45:14.500]  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 behind Brave New Books and J.S.A.
[45:14.500 --> 45:18.500]  to see all our fantastic health and wellness products with your very own eyes.
[45:18.500 --> 45:30.500]  Have a 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 all shallot emu oil, lotion candles, olive oil soaps and colloidal silver and gold.
[45:30.500 --> 45:43.500]  Call 512-264-4043 or find us online at naturespureorganics.com. That's 512-264-4043 naturespureorganics.com.
[45:43.500 --> 45:50.500]  Don't forget to like us on Facebook for information on events and our products naturespureorganics.com.
[46:13.500 --> 46:38.500]  Alright folks, we are back. This is Rule of Law Radio. The calling number is 512-264-4043.
[46:38.500 --> 46:58.500]  Remember folks, the fundraiser is still going on. You can go to logosradionetwork.com. In the big black box of the top left, there is all the information about the fundraiser including the prizes that are being given away in the drawings.
[46:58.500 --> 47:08.500]  Every $25 donation gets you into the drawing for the gun or the lower receivers for the gun, of which I think we are giving away two.
[47:08.500 --> 47:16.500]  But all the details are there on the front page. The traffic seminar, if you purchase that, gets you 10 entries.
[47:16.500 --> 47:30.500]  Buying Randy's book gets you four entries. So remember, every $25 donation helps us stay here and also get you an opportunity to win an AR-15 or a lower receiver for an AR-15.
[47:30.500 --> 47:46.500]  So keep that in mind. Go to the website logosradionetwork.com and take a look at the information there and see if you can donate. Keep us going because money is getting really tight around here as the information goes.
[47:46.500 --> 47:56.500]  And without your support, there is no guarantee that this show is going to be here next week or any of the rest of them. So please keep us in mind for whatever you can as often as you can.
[47:56.500 --> 48:02.500]  Now, being said, let's get back to Truth Raider. Okay, Raider.
[48:02.500 --> 48:12.500]  All right. Thanks, Sandy. I'm looking at a couple of these documents that if you allow me to, I could read a couple of things, what they did send to me.
[48:12.500 --> 48:14.500]  And let me know if there's anything of note.
[48:14.500 --> 48:20.500]  Well, the question isn't what they sent to you. It is what they sent you, what you asked for.
[48:20.500 --> 48:27.500]  All right. All right. What I got this, it looks like a diploma. What it kind of looks like. Looks like a...
[48:27.500 --> 48:32.500]  Okay, so you've got his diploma from Law Enforcement Academy.
[48:32.500 --> 48:44.500]  All right. Department of Public Safety, Standard and Training. As pursuant to the Oregon Revised Statutes and as the code, as his name, Basic Certificate for Certified Police Officer.
[48:44.500 --> 48:45.500]  To do what?
[48:45.500 --> 48:51.500]  To me, that, yeah, Police Officer, Certified Police Officer went under the hands of the SEAL on June 12th, 2012.
[48:51.500 --> 48:57.500]  So that's what, that is his Police Academy diploma. Doesn't have squat to do with the Transportation Statute.
[48:57.500 --> 49:03.500]  Right, okay. And the next one is the Milwaukee Police Department's oath of office.
[49:03.500 --> 49:06.500]  Right, where he's actually working.
[49:06.500 --> 49:10.500]  Yeah. Does, has his name, he does solemnly swear.
[49:10.500 --> 49:13.500]  So what did you actually ask them for?
[49:13.500 --> 49:27.500]  I asked them, what passed in the paperwork of where the documentation is, is where this officer has the authority and is certified to enforce the transportation.
[49:27.500 --> 49:33.500]  Here, here's your problem. Okay. First off, that is not a way to ask for information.
[49:33.500 --> 49:48.500]  Public information requests are limited to things that could be considered public record, not legal research. When you say show me where, you're asking them to do your research for you.
[49:48.500 --> 50:05.500]  Okay. What you want to know is please provide me all training certifications and records where this officer has been authorized as a matter of law pursuant this statute, this statute, and this statute to do these specific things.
[50:05.500 --> 50:06.500]  Okay.
[50:06.500 --> 50:10.500]  You're asking for records when you do that.
[50:10.500 --> 50:11.500]  Not research.
[50:11.500 --> 50:18.500]  Records of training, records of training, and specifically the statutes.
[50:18.500 --> 50:19.500]  No.
[50:19.500 --> 50:20.500]  That, okay.
[50:20.500 --> 50:28.500]  I want to know where his certification is for this set of statutes that says he has to be certified to enforce them.
[50:28.500 --> 50:34.500]  Now, don't try to automatically assume that because this is how Texas has it set up, that it's how every state has it set up.
[50:34.500 --> 50:41.500]  It's probably very likely that it is, but you've got to find the statutes to make that true.
[50:41.500 --> 50:47.500]  Okay. All training certifications. Okay.
[50:47.500 --> 50:58.500]  Now, if I pursue a criminal complaint, should I go to the sheriff's department of the county that I'm in, or can I go to...
[50:58.500 --> 51:05.500]  You can file a criminal complaint with any law enforcement agency or prosecutor that's authorized to take that type of complaint.
[51:05.500 --> 51:16.500]  Now, the problem here, though, is in order for you to make that complaint, then you have to know what it is you're complaining about.
[51:16.500 --> 51:24.500]  In order to do that, you need to know what statutes you're actually talking about here and you don't from what I'm gathering.
[51:24.500 --> 51:33.500]  You don't know where the administrative code says that this person has to be specifically trained and certified to do A, B, C, and D, do you?
[51:33.500 --> 51:34.500]  No.
[51:34.500 --> 51:40.500]  Right. So how are you going to make the argument he acted illegally when you're going to make that complaint?
[51:40.500 --> 51:41.500]  I need to find out.
[51:41.500 --> 51:48.500]  Because you haven't asked for the right thing to see whether or not he's required to have a separate certification to do those things.
[51:48.500 --> 51:55.500]  Okay. So I want to demand records once again on his training certification.
[51:55.500 --> 52:02.500]  How are you going to ask for his training until you know what statute you're asking about his training for?
[52:02.500 --> 52:11.500]  Okay. I'll find a statute of what that follows. Okay.
[52:11.500 --> 52:20.500]  Well, this is what happened after I finished my complaint and submitted it to his supervisor.
[52:20.500 --> 52:30.500]  I then finished my business, left peacefully from the safety hall, whatever, at their main station.
[52:30.500 --> 52:40.500]  Got in my conveyance and went up the street and the next thing you know within a couple of seconds, his supervisor was in his unit following me and initiated an additional traffic stop.
[52:40.500 --> 52:45.500]  Okay.
[52:45.500 --> 52:47.500]  A little bit of retaliation, would you say?
[52:47.500 --> 52:49.500]  I don't know. I don't know what was said.
[52:49.500 --> 52:53.500]  I don't know what excuse he used for pulling you over.
[52:53.500 --> 52:54.500]  Anything with him?
[52:54.500 --> 52:55.500]  What?
[52:55.500 --> 53:09.500]  Well, no, it was very peaceful in exchange with him, but he was one of the assisting officers on the traffic stop two days prior.
[53:09.500 --> 53:12.500]  So he recognized my automobile in the parking lot.
[53:12.500 --> 53:14.500]  And?
[53:14.500 --> 53:20.500]  After I went mobile, he decided to follow me to see what I'm doing.
[53:20.500 --> 53:30.500]  He knew that I had allegedly expired commercial tags and suspended plates and license so he decided to.
[53:30.500 --> 53:34.500]  Okay. You've got two things you've got to go on here, Raider.
[53:34.500 --> 53:40.500]  One is the fact that he violated the law that says they shall not arrest for these offenses.
[53:40.500 --> 53:41.500]  Okay.
[53:41.500 --> 53:47.500]  And that seizure that they're doing when they pull you over is an arrest of your liberty.
[53:47.500 --> 53:51.500]  And they're not authorized to do that according to the statute you're reading.
[53:51.500 --> 54:03.500]  Because if these are civil infractions, there is no probable cause or reasonable suspicion that could attach that would make that stop and seizure reasonable.
[54:03.500 --> 54:05.500]  That's a lot of discussion.
[54:05.500 --> 54:06.500]  Right.
[54:06.500 --> 54:08.500]  Okay.
[54:08.500 --> 54:12.500]  So it's a constitutionally protected rights violation.
[54:12.500 --> 54:20.500]  You have a constitutional right, protected right, to be free of any unreasonable searches and seizures.
[54:20.500 --> 54:24.500]  Is that not what the Bill of Rights says?
[54:24.500 --> 54:40.500]  If these are civil infractions, a seizure of your person or property is inherently unreasonable because there is no reasonable suspicion or probable cause to attach.
[54:40.500 --> 54:41.500]  All right.
[54:41.500 --> 54:43.500]  And this is what he told me.
[54:43.500 --> 54:48.500]  Well, okay, if you're going to continue to play this game, I'm going to shoot these citations to you.
[54:48.500 --> 54:54.500]  But if you pull away from here, I'm not allowed to continue to do anything, but you are now a pedestrian, okay?
[54:54.500 --> 54:55.500]  You understand that?
[54:55.500 --> 54:56.500]  You are now a pedestrian.
[54:56.500 --> 54:58.500]  So I suggest you park it and walk.
[54:58.500 --> 55:04.500]  Because if you leave the scene here, and myself or one of my other officers sees you, we're just going to stop you and write you up again.
[55:04.500 --> 55:07.500]  And again and again, until we impound your...
[55:07.500 --> 55:14.500]  So now you've got two officers that are operating conspiratorily to violate the laws of the state of Oregon.
[55:14.500 --> 55:15.500]  Okay.
[55:15.500 --> 55:17.500]  Which part of this is not sinking in?
[55:17.500 --> 55:27.500]  Oh, no, I'm falling along with it, but I'm just letting you know I'm being schemed on again and defrauded.
[55:27.500 --> 55:31.500]  Can I ask you a question?
[55:31.500 --> 55:41.500]  If somebody walks up and says, I'm going to give you $10,000 free money, all you have to do is sue me and I'll pay it, who's getting schemed here?
[55:41.500 --> 55:46.500]  You are looking at this entirely wrong.
[55:46.500 --> 55:53.500]  If these idiots want to be a public ATM by being this stupid, help them out.
[55:53.500 --> 55:55.500]  Yeah.
[55:55.500 --> 55:56.500]  Absolutely.
[55:56.500 --> 55:59.500]  I'm hoping to do that.
[55:59.500 --> 56:00.500]  You bet.
[56:00.500 --> 56:01.500]  All right.
[56:01.500 --> 56:04.500]  So file charges of consuming as any...
[56:04.500 --> 56:06.500]  Sue them, Raider.
[56:06.500 --> 56:08.500]  Sue them.
[56:08.500 --> 56:11.500]  Okay.
[56:11.500 --> 56:12.500]  All right.
[56:12.500 --> 56:14.500]  So I can do that right now.
[56:14.500 --> 56:16.500]  Yes, you can do it right now.
[56:16.500 --> 56:17.500]  Right now.
[56:17.500 --> 56:27.500]  You have a clear violation of Oregon law that's got nothing to do with the charges against you except that they were the precursor to that violation by the cops.
[56:27.500 --> 56:32.500]  Okay.
[56:32.500 --> 56:35.500]  Okay, very good.
[56:35.500 --> 56:41.500]  I'll go down there tomorrow, but I don't know what they're going to do.
[56:41.500 --> 56:44.500]  It's not too far away.
[56:44.500 --> 56:46.500]  I'll walk down.
[56:46.500 --> 56:47.500]  Okay.
[56:47.500 --> 56:48.500]  And file it.
[56:48.500 --> 56:56.500]  Now, anyway, I had a very interesting phone call from somebody, a veteran, military veteran, who's studying all these laws.
[56:56.500 --> 56:58.500]  He wants to send me a lot of information.
[56:58.500 --> 56:59.500]  I don't know.
[56:59.500 --> 57:02.500]  I'll take a look into it, but it was quite fascinating.
[57:02.500 --> 57:10.500]  So he woke me up this afternoon and he's been looking for me for months because he heard my victory that I had with you, that you helped me with.
[57:10.500 --> 57:13.500]  And giving my cases to Smith last year.
[57:13.500 --> 57:16.500]  So, I don't know.
[57:16.500 --> 57:17.500]  It goes a little bit deeper.
[57:17.500 --> 57:23.500]  It goes into the aspect of the land and our fights.
[57:23.500 --> 57:29.500]  And here, God's given rights and are given to us by our creator.
[57:29.500 --> 57:37.500]  And that's what you have to take to court to tell them this is our law and your violation of God's law by doing what you're doing.
[57:37.500 --> 57:49.500]  Well, you're assuming that despite the constitutional requirement in Texas that they believe in a supreme being, most of these people here that control everything are completely Godless.
[57:49.500 --> 57:52.500]  Yeah, I agree.
[57:52.500 --> 57:54.500]  Absolutely.
[57:54.500 --> 57:55.500]  Okay.
[57:55.500 --> 57:56.500]  That was interesting.
[57:56.500 --> 57:57.500]  Very interesting call.
[57:57.500 --> 57:58.500]  Okay.
[57:58.500 --> 57:59.500]  Okay, I will do those things.
[57:59.500 --> 58:02.500]  I'm going to get back to you a little bit later on.
[58:02.500 --> 58:07.500]  I got a break to take here, Raider.
[58:07.500 --> 58:08.500]  Okay.
[58:08.500 --> 58:09.500]  All right.
[58:09.500 --> 58:10.500]  I'll finish up on the other side.
[58:10.500 --> 58:12.500]  No, I got other callers to take too.
[58:12.500 --> 58:14.500]  You've been on here for two segments.
[58:14.500 --> 58:15.500]  Okay.
[58:15.500 --> 58:16.500]  All right.
[58:16.500 --> 58:19.500]  I'll talk to you next round.
[58:19.500 --> 58:20.500]  Okay.
[58:20.500 --> 58:21.500]  All right.
[58:21.500 --> 58:24.500]  All right, folks, we're at the top of the hour break here.
[58:24.500 --> 58:26.500]  So y'all hang in there.
[58:26.500 --> 58:29.500]  We're going to be gone for about four or five minutes, but we will be right back.
[58:29.500 --> 58:34.500]  So all of you callers that are up on the board hang in there and I'll get started with y'all as soon as I get back.
[58:34.500 --> 58:40.500]  For those of you still listening and want to talk 512-646-1984.
[58:40.500 --> 58:41.500]  Give us a call.
[58:41.500 --> 58:42.500]  Get in line.
[58:42.500 --> 58:50.500]  We will be right back.
[58:50.500 --> 58:55.500]  The Bible remains the most popular book in the world, yet countless readers are frustrated
[58:55.500 --> 58:58.500]  because they struggle to understand it.
[58:58.500 --> 59:06.500]  Some new translations try to help by simplifying the text, but in the process can compromise the profound meaning of the Scripture.
[59:06.500 --> 59:09.500]  Enter the recovery version.
[59:09.500 --> 59:18.500]  First, this new translation is extremely faithful and accurate, but the real story is the more than 9,000 explanatory footnotes.
[59:18.500 --> 59:27.500]  Difficult and profound passages are opened up in a marvelous way, providing an entrance into the riches of the word beyond which you've ever experienced before.
[59:27.500 --> 59:32.500]  Bibles for America would like to give you a free recovery version simply for the asking.
[59:32.500 --> 59:43.500]  This comprehensive yet compact study Bible is yours just by calling us toll free at 1-888-551-0102
[59:43.500 --> 59:47.500]  or by ordering online at freestudybible.com.
[59:47.500 --> 59:50.500]  That's freestudybible.com.
[59:50.500 --> 01:00:00.500]  You are listening to the Logos Radio Network. LogosRadioNetwork.com
[01:00:00.500 --> 01:00:04.500]  The following news flash is brought to you by The Lone Star Lowdown.
[01:00:04.500 --> 01:00:14.500]  Markets for Friday 2 June 2017 closed off with gold at $1,278.45 an ounce, silver $17.51 an ounce,
[01:00:14.500 --> 01:00:25.500]  Texas Crude, $48.36 a barrel, and Bitcoin is still going up, sitting at about $2,472 U.S. currency.
[01:00:25.500 --> 01:00:34.500]  Today in History, the year 1953, the coronation of Queen Elizabeth II, crowned Queen of the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand,
[01:00:34.500 --> 01:00:41.500]  and her other realms and territories, and head of the Commonwealth, marks one of the first major international events to be televised.
[01:00:41.500 --> 01:00:46.500]  Today in History.
[01:00:46.500 --> 01:00:54.500]  In recent news, President Donald Trump announced the U.S. would withdraw from the U.N. Paris Accord on climate change this last Thursday yesterday,
[01:00:54.500 --> 01:01:02.500]  stating that, quote, the U.S. will withdraw from the Paris Climate Accord but begin negotiations to reenter either the Paris Accord
[01:01:02.500 --> 01:01:10.500]  or a really entirely new transaction on terms that are fair to the United States, its businesses, its workers, its people, its taxpayers.
[01:01:10.500 --> 01:01:20.500]  This, as could be predictably expected, had G7, formerly G8 leaders, and a frenzy, notably Chinese dictatorship admiring Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau,
[01:01:20.500 --> 01:01:27.500]  who in a statement said that, quote, we are deeply disappointed that the United States federal government has decided to withdraw from the Paris Agreement
[01:01:27.500 --> 01:01:34.500]  or French Socialist President Emmanuel Macron saying that it's, quote, a mistake for our planet, wherever we live, whoever we are,
[01:01:34.500 --> 01:01:40.500]  we all share the same responsibility to make our planet great again, along with U.K. Prime Minister Theresa May,
[01:01:40.500 --> 01:01:46.500]  German Chancellor Angela Merkel, and Italian Prime Minister Paolo Gentiloni all stating disapproval as well.
[01:01:46.500 --> 01:01:53.500]  Even Russia, eighth in the former G8, stated the great significance it saw in the Paris Agreement hours before Trump made his announcement,
[01:01:53.500 --> 01:02:00.500]  not to mention a Vatican spokesman from the Holy See expressed the pontiffs this May at President Trump's decision.
[01:02:00.500 --> 01:02:06.500]  Unfortunately, world leaders and media pundits failed to ask the opinions of another more important base, the American taxpayer,
[01:02:06.500 --> 01:02:13.500]  because they are never consulted via referendum or congressional vote when President Obama decided to unilaterally sign up the U.S.
[01:02:13.500 --> 01:02:17.500]  to an agreement that would have major effects on industry in the United States,
[01:02:17.500 --> 01:02:25.500]  or maybe they should have asked major climate change proponent, American adjunct professor in the Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences at Columbia University,
[01:02:25.500 --> 01:02:32.500]  James Hansen, what he thought of the agreement, which he actually called a fraud, really a fake, it's just worthless words,
[01:02:32.500 --> 01:02:40.500]  mostly because there was no solution to CO2 emissions other than charging more for energy, which would only disproportionately hurt the most vulnerable.
[01:02:40.500 --> 01:02:58.500]  The low-star lowdown is currently looking for sponsors. If you have a client or a service judge to advertise with us, feel free to give in call at 210-363-2257. This was Rick Roddy with your lowdown for June 2, 2017.
[01:03:11.500 --> 01:03:18.500]  With real good ol' tomatoes and homemade wine and country folks can't survive.
[01:03:18.500 --> 01:03:22.500]  Country folks can't survive.
[01:03:26.500 --> 01:03:30.500]  Because you can't starve a bout and you can't make a run.
[01:03:30.500 --> 01:03:43.500]  Cause wasn't the old boy braised on shotgun. We're afraid, we're afraid, man, that you ain't in the best but don't give a damn.
[01:03:44.500 --> 01:03:50.500]  We came from the West Virginia coal mines and the Rocky Mountains and the West Virginia coal mines and the Rocky Mountains and the West Virginia coal mines and the Rocky Mountains
[01:03:50.500 --> 01:03:59.500]  Alright folks, we are back. This is Rule of Law Radio. The calling number is 512-646-1984.
[01:03:59.500 --> 01:04:04.500]  We have a first-time caller coming up here, Stephen, in Texas. Stephen, what can I do for you?
[01:04:04.500 --> 01:04:07.500]  How you doing this evening, Eddie? Thanks for taking my call.
[01:04:07.500 --> 01:04:08.500]  Sure.
[01:04:08.500 --> 01:04:14.500]  I really appreciate it, and thanks for sharing emails back and forth with me.
[01:04:14.500 --> 01:04:21.500]  So the issue obviously is I've been, you know, learning about this stuff, woke up, you know, recently.
[01:04:21.500 --> 01:04:28.500]  I came down and got to meet you one time. I wish I could come down more and hope you can get the class up and running and all that stuff.
[01:04:28.500 --> 01:04:41.500]  But not to waste any time. I mean, I was going down the road, the sheriff followed me, lit up the lights, you know, you ran my place, you know, for whatever reason.
[01:04:41.500 --> 01:04:48.500]  You know, for the obvious reasons, it was a typical stuff. You know, everything that you talk about is exactly what happened.
[01:04:48.500 --> 01:04:52.500]  Got the dog out there, went through, you know, even found my pistol.
[01:04:52.500 --> 01:05:04.500]  When they were done, they, you know, they just, you know, had me, you know, signed the promise to appear and to be my pistol, my wallet and my phone back,
[01:05:04.500 --> 01:05:09.500]  that they stole out of my back pocket and whatnot and said, okay.
[01:05:09.500 --> 01:05:12.500]  Where did your phone go while they had it?
[01:05:12.500 --> 01:05:16.500]  I'm sure it went to the cruiser.
[01:05:16.500 --> 01:05:18.500]  Right.
[01:05:18.500 --> 01:05:25.500]  And did you see them do anything with it? Like lay it on a pad or anything?
[01:05:25.500 --> 01:05:33.500]  I couldn't see. Whenever they, whenever he asked for my license and I pretty much said, you know, have I committed a crime?
[01:05:33.500 --> 01:05:40.500]  And he said, yeah, you're driving without, you know, you're driving with an expert. I told him, I said, well, I'm invoking my heart.
[01:05:40.500 --> 01:05:46.500]  So he, he yanked my door open, you know, while it wasn't locked, he caught me off guard.
[01:05:46.500 --> 01:05:50.500]  I just put it in park and all the doors on line. He was up on me quick.
[01:05:50.500 --> 01:05:55.500]  So I got out, you know, he pushed me to the back of the car gently.
[01:05:55.500 --> 01:06:01.500]  I mean, granted, he wasn't like mishandling me, but I saw his pistol, so I wasn't trying to put up a fight.
[01:06:01.500 --> 01:06:09.500]  He told me eventually, after I didn't consent any searches and invoked my rights, he said, just sit on the bumper of my car and don't move.
[01:06:09.500 --> 01:06:17.500]  I mean, I went through the whole rigmaroo telling him, you know, just standing on my rights, you know, and I kept asking him questions.
[01:06:17.500 --> 01:06:23.500]  I mean, to the point where he said, hey, you invoked your rights, you can, you can go ahead and keep quiet.
[01:06:23.500 --> 01:06:25.500]  And I said, thanks for that advice.
[01:06:25.500 --> 01:06:34.500]  He said, definitely. But anyway, yeah, he took my phone from me during that process.
[01:06:34.500 --> 01:06:39.500]  So I don't know where he took it, but my phone's encrypted, so I hope he didn't get anything.
[01:06:39.500 --> 01:06:47.500]  Well, what you need to do is file a public information request asking for all records related to the seizure of your phone for that temporary period of time.
[01:06:47.500 --> 01:07:00.500]  And that shows whether or not any data transfer took place from your phone to any device within the control of that sheriff's department.
[01:07:00.500 --> 01:07:04.500]  In other words, it's a new illegal search without a warrant.
[01:07:04.500 --> 01:07:12.500]  And that's what you're wanting evidence of and admission in writing that that's exactly what they tried to do.
[01:07:12.500 --> 01:07:18.500]  Yeah. Yeah, and I got your PIA, your public information request.
[01:07:18.500 --> 01:07:20.500]  I guess I'll reformat it.
[01:07:20.500 --> 01:07:26.500]  Well, don't reformat it. Just rewrite the specific request details, but not the other portions.
[01:07:26.500 --> 01:07:29.500]  Keep the other portions the way they are.
[01:07:29.500 --> 01:07:35.500]  Yeah. So I'll do that. I'm going to know.
[01:07:35.500 --> 01:07:38.500]  So, I mean, my 30 days is coming up.
[01:07:38.500 --> 01:07:44.500]  I mean, everything that I've been learning from your seminar, I finally, I didn't even scrape the money up to get the seminar.
[01:07:44.500 --> 01:07:49.500]  People are going to probably laugh. I wasn't going to pay the money. I was like, man, I got to get this.
[01:07:49.500 --> 01:07:54.500]  I've been trying to get it, but you know, father of four, stuff like that.
[01:07:54.500 --> 01:08:00.500]  Long story short, man, I'm sitting here trying to read everything I can because I have my reasons for fighting this.
[01:08:00.500 --> 01:08:08.500]  You know, when I started learning about this stuff, I first came across all the patronage stuff. It just didn't make sense to me.
[01:08:08.500 --> 01:08:17.500]  When I ran across your Alex Jones presentation, I've just been, I'm telling you, I got so many archives on my cell phone and computer.
[01:08:17.500 --> 01:08:27.500]  It's all I listened to. So I'm sitting here trying to, before I kicked the ball in this game, I'm still pretty confident, but, you know, I've never done it.
[01:08:27.500 --> 01:08:33.500]  Well, that puts you ahead of quite a few that try to jump into that pool without a lifeguard watching.
[01:08:33.500 --> 01:08:41.500]  They don't prepare and learn how to swim or even tread water before they jump in there with lead weights on their ankles.
[01:08:41.500 --> 01:08:48.500]  Well, it feels a little overwhelming. So, you know, I've gotten, I'm going through these things, setting up all these documents.
[01:08:48.500 --> 01:08:59.500]  I haven't sent anything, you know, but I've got the jurisdictional challenges, you know, looking at your pretrial motions and looking at what seems to apply.
[01:08:59.500 --> 01:09:07.500]  You know, I've got criminal complaints. I'm, you know, trying to get formatted and written up and I've got the, I've got the counter complaint.
[01:09:07.500 --> 01:09:14.500]  But what I'm not sure on is like the timing of these things and do I go into the court or do I certify them?
[01:09:14.500 --> 01:09:20.500]  Well, you always have to make your initial appearance in person. That's written straight into the Texas statutes.
[01:09:20.500 --> 01:09:25.500]  Okay. Unless you have an actual attorney who appears for you.
[01:09:25.500 --> 01:09:32.500]  After that, everything else can be done entirely by mail except for the scheduled appearances.
[01:09:32.500 --> 01:09:45.500]  The key to all of this is to force them into doing things the law requires them to do or to document their failure to do it. Okay.
[01:09:45.500 --> 01:09:46.500]  Yeah.
[01:09:46.500 --> 01:09:54.500]  When loser draw is dependent upon how well you play the game as they've got it set up.
[01:09:54.500 --> 01:10:09.500]  The issue here is to always file written objections when they don't do something they're required to do and make sure your written objection states why it harms you in some way for them to not do it,
[01:10:09.500 --> 01:10:16.500]  which is one of the reasons why you have to understand what all the requirements do and why they have to do them.
[01:10:16.500 --> 01:10:27.500]  Okay. And when you don't do that, then you're leaving cracks in your defense that the appeals court is free to gloss over and spackle as if they don't exist.
[01:10:27.500 --> 01:10:29.500]  Okay.
[01:10:29.500 --> 01:10:38.500]  So we make sure they can't, these are cracks they can't fix. They're going to fall into even if they try to jump across them.
[01:10:38.500 --> 01:10:39.500]  Absolutely.
[01:10:39.500 --> 01:10:54.500]  And that's what our written objections and verbal objections, everything we do at some point or other, whether it be in advance or immediately thereafter or preplanned is done in writing.
[01:10:54.500 --> 01:10:59.500]  That's the whole reason, you know, you said everything that I said they do is what they do.
[01:10:59.500 --> 01:11:12.500]  Yeah, I've been at this a while. I've seen every kind of trick they can pull in this crap, whether it be at the stop, in the courtroom, in a conference with the prosecutor, in the chambers with the judge.
[01:11:12.500 --> 01:11:16.500]  I've seen every kind of bull crap thing they can do.
[01:11:16.500 --> 01:11:20.500]  And all of that knowledge is poured into what's in that seminar material.
[01:11:20.500 --> 01:11:26.500]  So when you say that you don't know which order to do things, everything in the seminar is organized by folders.
[01:11:26.500 --> 01:11:31.500]  The folders represent stages that they're supposed to progress through.
[01:11:31.500 --> 01:11:32.500]  Yeah.
[01:11:32.500 --> 01:11:37.500]  So you file whatever you need to for that stage as you're in it.
[01:11:37.500 --> 01:11:44.500]  Okay, I got it. Okay. So when I go to my first appearance, I got this pre, I see what you're talking about.
[01:11:44.500 --> 01:11:50.500]  So I'll have those things so I can go in and follow those as I'm...
[01:11:50.500 --> 01:11:53.500]  File all of those that are relevant. Some might be...
[01:11:53.500 --> 01:11:56.500]  Those that are relevant, faired. Some of them.
[01:11:56.500 --> 01:12:06.500]  Yeah, some of them may not be. Like I say, there are so many ways they can do things wrong, but they may not do everything wrong.
[01:12:06.500 --> 01:12:11.500]  But every way they can do it almost is in there.
[01:12:11.500 --> 01:12:15.500]  And you file the document that corresponds to what they did wrong.
[01:12:15.500 --> 01:12:22.500]  I mean, I tried to make this seminar as part of the expression, idiot-proof as I possibly could.
[01:12:22.500 --> 01:12:26.500]  It pretty much is. I mean, you've got a lot of stuff there and it's pretty laid out.
[01:12:26.500 --> 01:12:33.500]  I mean, I spend a lot of time going through it and I feel pretty confident, but like you said, without that lifeguard.
[01:12:33.500 --> 01:12:38.500]  You know, that's why I'm here. I mean, I've been listening, listening, archiving.
[01:12:38.500 --> 01:12:48.500]  It's funny because I've probably heard your years and Randi's and other folks' voice over the past year and a half, more than 26 thickets.
[01:12:48.500 --> 01:12:57.500]  Anyway, last thing. What about these attorneys that are responding for the Sheriff's Department on those public information requests?
[01:12:57.500 --> 01:12:59.500]  I sent one to the... I guess I didn't attend...
[01:12:59.500 --> 01:13:02.500]  That'll be the county attorney's office.
[01:13:02.500 --> 01:13:07.500]  Yeah. So they're... You know, they... I didn't know they would be the ones responding.
[01:13:07.500 --> 01:13:10.500]  I guess it doesn't matter, but they ain't really responding.
[01:13:10.500 --> 01:13:20.500]  Y'all, your public information request... I sent two to Randi giving me before I got yours. And they construed the 644 language pretty clear,
[01:13:20.500 --> 01:13:27.500]  obviously in my opinion, but I know what they're trying to do. And yours was even more to the point when I sent it.
[01:13:27.500 --> 01:13:35.500]  You know, and then when I got that letter back that said the 30 public information requests, I'm talking about the same thing.
[01:13:35.500 --> 01:13:41.500]  I know it's duplicate. So answer one. And I will withdraw the first two if you like, because yours was the last one.
[01:13:41.500 --> 01:13:47.500]  But that's what I really want to tell you. You know, write them and tell them, but I don't understand what the heck they're saying. I'm too...
[01:13:47.500 --> 01:13:56.500]  Well, that's the thing. You don't have to understand what they're trying to avoid. All you have to understand is that they are avoiding doing what the law requires them to do.
[01:13:56.500 --> 01:13:57.500]  That's true.
[01:13:57.500 --> 01:14:13.500]  If they actually read those chapters, especially 4.13 and 4.14 of the administrative code, if they actually read those, they know exactly what record you're asking for in relation to 644 and all the other statutes.
[01:14:13.500 --> 01:14:17.500]  And there's no legal research in there. That's the laws they got to follow.
[01:14:17.500 --> 01:14:34.500]  You don't know. You've told them exactly. I want the record that shows this deputy has been authorized through these training procedures and documents by the Department of Public Safety to enforce these sections of the transportation code.
[01:14:34.500 --> 01:14:43.500]  If they read the administrative code, there's no way they can misconstrue that, especially as attorneys. So here's what you do.
[01:14:43.500 --> 01:15:01.500]  When you get a request that is obviously there for the purpose of delay or that you can presume to be for the purpose of delay, which I would immediately presume these to be, you take those responses, you write up a complaint, a public information request complaint
[01:15:01.500 --> 01:15:16.500]  against the agency, the sheriff's department, and the county attorney's office, and you file it with the state attorney general. They're the ones responsible for making these agencies comply with Chapter 552 of the government code.
[01:15:16.500 --> 01:15:31.500]  So you file a criminal complaint against the sheriff's department and or the sheriff of the sheriff's department and the county attorney, not his assistant, not the one that signed it, but the actual county attorney, the elected guy.
[01:15:31.500 --> 01:15:49.500]  File criminal complaints against those two elected officials for failing to respond within the required time allowed by law in violation of 552.353 of the Texas Administrative Public Information Act.
[01:15:49.500 --> 01:16:01.500]  Yeah. Okay. Good deal. And that's what I pretty much have read in those two documents you sent me for the public information. Exactly. See, I put everything in my request saying, look, you screw up.
[01:16:01.500 --> 01:16:06.500]  I'm going to complain. And here's the statute that's going to make it possible.
[01:16:06.500 --> 01:16:16.500]  All right. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. You know what? I'm feeling a lot better. I got some things to do here. I'm not going to hold you up because I know you're coming up on break.
[01:16:16.500 --> 01:16:27.500]  Probably then you got other people. Yeah, about 40 seconds at your time. Yeah. All right. Well, I appreciate you calling in. And I've got a billion questions, but I just have to reach out to you later.
[01:16:27.500 --> 01:16:35.500]  Okay. Keep working. All right. Well, good luck with it and keep fighting the good one. Thank you, sir. Appreciate it. All right. Thanks for calling in, Stephen.
[01:16:35.500 --> 01:16:47.500]  All right, folks, this is Rule of Law Radio. We've got three more segments and a few callers on the board here. So guys, if y'all will hang on, we will pick y'all up when we get back after this break, which won't take us too long.
[01:16:47.500 --> 01:16:59.500]  Call in number 512-646-1984 if you want to call and get in line. If the line is busy, keep calling until you find a slot. We'll be right back so y'all hang in there.
[01:16:59.500 --> 01:17:09.500]  I love logos. Without the shows on this network, I'd be almost as ignorant as my friends. I'm so addicted to the truth now that there's no going back. I need my truth pick. I'd be lost without logos.
[01:17:09.500 --> 01:17:21.500]  And I really want to help keep this network on the air. I'd love to volunteer as a show producer, but I'm a bit of a Luddite and I really don't have any money to give because I spent it all on supplements. How can I help logos?
[01:17:21.500 --> 01:17:31.500]  Well, I'm glad you asked. Whenever you order anything from Amazon, you can help logos. With ordering your supplies or holiday gifts, first thing you do is clear your cookies.
[01:17:31.500 --> 01:17:43.500]  Now, go to LogosReguleNetwork.com, tick on the Amazon logo and bookmark it. Now, when you order anything from Amazon, you use that link and Logos gets a few pesos.
[01:17:43.500 --> 01:17:44.500]  Do I pay extra?
[01:17:44.500 --> 01:17:45.500]  No.
[01:17:45.500 --> 01:17:47.500]  Do you have to do anything different when I order?
[01:17:47.500 --> 01:17:48.500]  No.
[01:17:48.500 --> 01:17:49.500]  Can I use my Amazon Prime?
[01:17:49.500 --> 01:17:50.500]  No.
[01:17:50.500 --> 01:17:51.500]  Yes.
[01:17:51.500 --> 01:17:56.500]  Wow. Giving without doing anything or spending any money. This is perfect. Thank you so much.
[01:17:56.500 --> 01:17:58.500]  We are welcome.
[01:17:58.500 --> 01:18:27.500]  Happy Holidays, Logos!
[01:18:28.500 --> 01:18:54.500]  Thank you.
[01:18:54.500 --> 01:19:01.500]  Go to LogosRadioNetwork.com for details and donate today.
[01:19:01.500 --> 01:19:29.500]  LogosRadioNetwork.com
[01:19:29.500 --> 01:19:45.500]  LogosRadioNetwork.com
[01:19:45.500 --> 01:19:55.500]  Alright, folks. We are back. This is Rule of Law Radio with your host, Eddie Craig, calling number 512-646-1984.
[01:19:55.500 --> 01:20:00.500]  Now, that being said, let's get on with our other callers here so I can figure out where my mouse cursor got to.
[01:20:00.500 --> 01:20:05.500]  We have Ralph in Texas. Ralph, what can we do for you?
[01:20:05.500 --> 01:20:15.500]  Hello, Eddie. I have a thought on how we can work together without leaving the house and without spending too much time.
[01:20:15.500 --> 01:20:25.500]  Make a little show of force, so to speak. The Fifth Circuit, let's see, the Fifth Judicial Circuit, that's in Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi.
[01:20:25.500 --> 01:20:36.500]  All the individual courts that I have checked on are preventing people from entering the court with electronics, and that includes audio recorder.
[01:20:36.500 --> 01:20:37.500]  Right.
[01:20:37.500 --> 01:20:47.500]  That means you cannot take notes. You cannot record conversations that just won't allow it into the building.
[01:20:47.500 --> 01:20:48.500]  Right.
[01:20:48.500 --> 01:20:57.500]  So, what I'm thinking is that they need to be sued. I've been pursuing this for many months.
[01:20:57.500 --> 01:21:13.500]  Listening to you and, oh goodness, day champion, a couple weeks ago, I got the idea to call the ACLU, actually get online and file a complaint with the ACLU for the individual courts within the Fifth Circuit, violating my right.
[01:21:13.500 --> 01:21:25.500]  Actually, I had a complaint on my local court for violating my right to bring in the recorder and the words I used were for them overreaching their statutory limitations.
[01:21:25.500 --> 01:21:26.500]  Okay.
[01:21:26.500 --> 01:21:34.500]  So, I think that's a fairly well-clear-cut case if the ACLU wants it.
[01:21:34.500 --> 01:21:50.500]  But I was thinking that if more people file the complaint, went online with the ACLU and filed a complaint in words that, what do you want us to do so you want them to sue the Fifth Circuit or the local court, because you can't sue the local court.
[01:21:50.500 --> 01:21:57.500]  You have to sue the Fifth Circuit to allow you to bring your recorder in so that you can do research.
[01:21:57.500 --> 01:22:05.500]  Well, actually, you could file a suit in the Texas Supreme Court for injunctive relief.
[01:22:05.500 --> 01:22:09.500]  Okay. That sounds good. That sounds good. The problem is my...
[01:22:09.500 --> 01:22:15.500]  Now, it won't do anything with the federal courts, but it would definitely work on the state court.
[01:22:15.500 --> 01:22:26.500]  Well, I don't have any problem with state court. I think all state courts allow you in, because I go in the state court regularly with a camera and a recorder, because when I'm in there, I do research in the law.
[01:22:26.500 --> 01:22:30.500]  Yeah, there are lots of them here that don't. They try to keep them out.
[01:22:30.500 --> 01:22:35.500]  Well, if they get to that where I'm at, I guess I'll try to do something.
[01:22:35.500 --> 01:22:49.500]  But as of right now, I'm hoping that if enough people are listening and want to spend, I would say maybe 30 minutes or an hour calling up a couple of courts or just spend a few minutes calling your one local federal court,
[01:22:49.500 --> 01:22:54.500]  or go online and find out what their local rules and orders are.
[01:22:54.500 --> 01:23:05.500]  And if they're not allowing the recorders any type of electronics in without permission, they say, but that's bogus, because they grant permission to attorneys without them even asking.
[01:23:05.500 --> 01:23:06.500]  Right.
[01:23:06.500 --> 01:23:13.500]  In other words, attorneys can just come in, but they say, you have to ask, and I don't agree with that, because if you ask, you're capitulating, and if they say no, are you stuck with their no?
[01:23:13.500 --> 01:23:16.500]  I don't know, so I'm not going to ask.
[01:23:16.500 --> 01:23:23.500]  So anyway, find out if the court's doing that and then complain to the ACLU.
[01:23:23.500 --> 01:23:39.500]  Yeah, the only reason the court would have any ability at all to say that you have to ask is if you're going to set up like a large camera outfit with a stand and all this kind of stuff, something that would actually potentially interfere with the court's ability to do what it has to do,
[01:23:39.500 --> 01:23:42.500]  or the public to get access.
[01:23:42.500 --> 01:23:47.500]  That's the only way they could legitimately say you have to ask permission.
[01:23:47.500 --> 01:24:03.500]  Well, you know, using common sense, don't know exactly all the nuanced laws about it, but if there was, like, say, a child involved in a case, I could see where the security would limit people and or search people going in to make sure they don't have recorders,
[01:24:03.500 --> 01:24:07.500]  so you don't record a child's name or whatever, you know, any minor child.
[01:24:07.500 --> 01:24:18.500]  So there are exceptions, but just to tell people, though, you can't bring your phone in, you can't bring any electronics, can't bring a computer, I can't even take a computer into the court as a litigant without getting that permission.
[01:24:18.500 --> 01:24:23.500]  And what if I'm going to use my computer in court, you know, it makes no sense at all.
[01:24:23.500 --> 01:24:27.500]  And also what I found out, here's how bogus they are.
[01:24:27.500 --> 01:24:32.500]  What they're doing is they have rules and they have order.
[01:24:32.500 --> 01:24:42.500]  If they create a rule, this is all local stuff, if your local court creates a rule, it has to be put up for public opinion.
[01:24:42.500 --> 01:24:48.500]  So it has to be put in a newspaper and time allowed for the public to put their opinion in on this local rule.
[01:24:48.500 --> 01:24:52.500]  However, what my court's doing is creating a general order.
[01:24:52.500 --> 01:25:02.500]  General orders are just judges finding an order and creating rules for the court and the people in court.
[01:25:02.500 --> 01:25:09.500]  So they cannot create general orders for rules that affect the public, yet that's exactly what they're doing.
[01:25:09.500 --> 01:25:13.500]  So it's a double whammy there, because the general order, they just sign it.
[01:25:13.500 --> 01:25:18.500]  They don't have to have public opinion, there's no waiting period, there's no approval period, they just sign it and it's done.
[01:25:18.500 --> 01:25:24.500]  So there it is. If anybody's interested, it's fairly simple.
[01:25:24.500 --> 01:25:31.500]  Check on your court and then go to ACLU and find out just how easy it is to file a complaint.
[01:25:31.500 --> 01:25:38.500]  The other thing is, if you don't live in the area but you're thinking about coming here, just even thinking about coming to Texas, Louisiana,
[01:25:38.500 --> 01:25:42.500]  or Mississippi and going to the court and doing a little research.
[01:25:42.500 --> 01:25:51.500]  Then let the ACLU know that you have done your homework and you found out that you've done your research and then allowed your research equipment into the courthouse.
[01:25:51.500 --> 01:26:01.500]  We should be able to get, I don't know, two dozen people that will get the interest of ACLU up and they'll say, hey, we need to do something about this.
[01:26:01.500 --> 01:26:04.500]  Yeah, I agree.
[01:26:04.500 --> 01:26:08.500]  Okay, well, I'm glad you agree. I did want your opinion on that.
[01:26:08.500 --> 01:26:16.500]  I have two kind of minor questions here. Okay, I think I know the answer to, but let's see.
[01:26:16.500 --> 01:26:22.500]  All right, how do violations of professional conduct translate into civil actions?
[01:26:22.500 --> 01:26:30.500]  Well, the violation of conduct has to result in a harm to a right, a federally protected right.
[01:26:30.500 --> 01:26:33.500]  Okay, that's what I thought, a due process right.
[01:26:33.500 --> 01:26:44.500]  Now, just due process, any protected right, whether it be the right of free speech, the right to public assembly, it can be a violation of any right.
[01:26:44.500 --> 01:26:49.500]  Well, I'm packing something on to a malicious prosecution.
[01:26:49.500 --> 01:26:58.500]  And I'm thinking that will help because they're mandated to share information that may be that would help the defense.
[01:26:58.500 --> 01:27:10.500]  And if the prosecutor has the performance cruiser recording and does not show or does not share it with the defense and it says, hey, I'm not involved in this.
[01:27:10.500 --> 01:27:17.500]  Well, the thing is the defendant has to request the information. He's not an under an obligation to turn it over unless it's asked for.
[01:27:17.500 --> 01:27:19.500]  Well, it's not the way it is.
[01:27:19.500 --> 01:27:23.500]  Well, that's the way the courts are doing it regardless.
[01:27:23.500 --> 01:27:30.500]  If you want the information before they use it against you at trial, then you have to ask for it.
[01:27:30.500 --> 01:27:36.500]  They're not under an obligation to just throw it at you and say, here's what we got. Have a good day.
[01:27:36.500 --> 01:27:41.500]  Okay, well, I did that myself, but that's a good thing to know then.
[01:27:41.500 --> 01:27:43.500]  Okay, I got one more.
[01:27:43.500 --> 01:27:44.500]  Okay.
[01:27:44.500 --> 01:27:54.500]  I think that this happens a lot. People, troopers and police and deputies are taking people directly to jail instead of to a magistrate.
[01:27:54.500 --> 01:27:59.500]  Yep. And in Texas, that's a lawsuit. That's false imprisonment.
[01:27:59.500 --> 01:28:00.500]  Okay.
[01:28:00.500 --> 01:28:05.500]  And there is tons of Texas cases through the years that the officer cannot win that one.
[01:28:05.500 --> 01:28:14.500]  He had a legal duty under the statute to deliver you immediately before a magistrate or have a dang good reason in the law why he couldn't.
[01:28:14.500 --> 01:28:17.500]  Right. Hurricane, low down.
[01:28:17.500 --> 01:28:32.500]  Natural disaster. Yeah. There is no such thing as unavailability of a magistrate because the case law that exists says he has a duty to even go to the surrounding counties in an effort to locate one.
[01:28:32.500 --> 01:28:34.500]  Right. I remember reading that.
[01:28:34.500 --> 01:28:37.500]  So what happens to the jailer?
[01:28:37.500 --> 01:28:38.500]  They're taking a personal...
[01:28:38.500 --> 01:28:47.500]  Well, but there's a separate issue with the jail. The jail is not authorized by law to incarcerate anyone without a signed commitment order from a magistrate.
[01:28:47.500 --> 01:28:59.500]  So they are aiding and abetting in the false imprisonment. They are just as culpable as the cop. It's a community effort of morons.
[01:28:59.500 --> 01:29:01.500]  A community effort of morons?
[01:29:01.500 --> 01:29:05.500]  It's a community action by the morons.
[01:29:05.500 --> 01:29:06.500]  Oh, okay.
[01:29:06.500 --> 01:29:14.500]  They're all acting in concert and collusion to deprive you of the same right, which is your right of liberty.
[01:29:14.500 --> 01:29:16.500]  So aiding and abetting, so they're also...
[01:29:16.500 --> 01:29:33.500]  You have it against the officer or the false imprisonment from the moment he arrested you, then you have it against the jailers and the jail and the county for keeping you there without a commitment order.
[01:29:33.500 --> 01:29:34.500]  Okay.
[01:29:34.500 --> 01:29:39.500]  They should have never booked you into that jail without a signed commitment order.
[01:29:39.500 --> 01:29:40.500]  Right. Okay.
[01:29:40.500 --> 01:29:44.500]  I'm going to go. You've got other callers. You've helped me quite a bit. Thank you, Eddie.
[01:29:44.500 --> 01:29:46.500]  Yes, sir. Thanks for calling in.
[01:29:46.500 --> 01:30:00.500]  All right, folks. This is Rule of Law Radio. We've got a half an hour left. 512-646-1984. Give us a call. Get in line. We will be right back.
[01:30:00.500 --> 01:30:09.500]  Are you too clean for your own good? According to new research, being too conscientious about dirt and germs could actually make you sick.
[01:30:09.500 --> 01:30:14.500]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht and I'll be back with some antibacterial products you might want to avoid.
[01:30:40.500 --> 01:30:54.500]  A University of Michigan study suggests that antibacterial soaps and hand sanitizers could make your family sick. Many contain the chemical triclosan and antimicrobial.
[01:30:54.500 --> 01:31:00.500]  Young people with higher levels of triclosan in their systems are more likely to be diagnosed with allergies and hay fever.
[01:31:00.500 --> 01:31:12.500]  Scientists believe the chemical may interfere with the body's immune system by mimicking or affecting human hormones. Triclosan may also prevent kids from dealing with everyday germs so they don't develop a natural immunity to them.
[01:31:12.500 --> 01:31:18.500]  So if you want a healthy clean, skip the antibacterial products and wash up with good old-fashioned soap and water.
[01:31:18.500 --> 01:31:30.500]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht. More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[01:31:48.500 --> 01:31:57.500]  I'm not a conspiracy theorist. I'm a structural engineer. I'm a New York City correction officer. I'm an Air Force pilot. I'm a father who lost his son. We're Americans and we deserve the truth.
[01:31:57.500 --> 01:32:21.500]  Go to RememberBuilding7.org today.
[01:32:28.500 --> 01:32:38.500]  To handle your claim and your roof right the first time, just call 512-992-8745 or go to hillcountryhomeimprovements.com.
[01:32:38.500 --> 01:32:45.500]  Mention the crypto show and get $100 off and we'll donate another $100 to the Logos Radio Network to help continue this programming.
[01:32:45.500 --> 01:32:50.500]  So if those out-of-town roofers come knocking, your door should be locked in.
[01:32:50.500 --> 01:32:58.500]  It's 512-992-8745 or hillcountryhomeimprovements.com. Discounts are based on full roof replacement.
[01:32:58.500 --> 01:33:01.500]  I mean, I actually be kidding about chemtrails.
[01:33:01.500 --> 01:33:21.500]  You're listening to the Logos Radio Network at LogosRadioNetwork.com.
[01:33:31.500 --> 01:33:45.500]  Alright folks, we are back. This is Rule of Law Radio.
[01:33:45.500 --> 01:33:55.500]  That group is called Dire Straits and right now that is situational awareness title for America these days. We are in Dire Straits.
[01:33:55.500 --> 01:34:04.500]  Maybe because nobody will wake up and pay attention. Everybody thinks they have the solution and they never actually understood the question for the most part.
[01:34:04.500 --> 01:34:15.500]  And this is something I've gone into with the patronets over and over and over again. All the claims they're making, which you know from experience, does not work the way they're saying.
[01:34:15.500 --> 01:34:21.500]  Well, you just don't show up in their courts and hear everything will be alright. You do this, this and this and they'll just leave you alone.
[01:34:21.500 --> 01:34:36.500]  That may work at the stage you're in, treats everything either administratively or civilly, but in places like Texas where they treat it criminally, I don't think so.
[01:34:36.500 --> 01:34:49.500]  If you've got that solution, then you should be sharing it with everybody because right now everyone I've seen try to do it that way is looking at striped sunshine.
[01:34:49.500 --> 01:34:59.500]  They got people knocking on the door and chasing them down everywhere they go. So I don't see that as a viable option when it comes to solving these problems.
[01:34:59.500 --> 01:35:10.500]  Now, once we get the idea in everyone's head that these problems need to be solved and those that are actually responsible for it, we might actually have a few attorneys looking at striped daylight.
[01:35:10.500 --> 01:35:17.500]  And that would be a nice change of pace along with several judges and legislators, if not all of them.
[01:35:17.500 --> 01:35:23.500]  And we get things to vote righted before it sinks into the ocean and settles on the floor.
[01:35:23.500 --> 01:35:32.500]  Alright, now that being said, who is our next caller in line? Well, that would be Mark in Wisconsin, it looks like. Mark, what can we do for you?
[01:35:32.500 --> 01:35:41.500]  Well, Mr. Eddie Craig, I feel that you are going to be the best person to ask about bail.
[01:35:41.500 --> 01:35:51.500]  Notably, there are three people involved in this bail drama. There's idiot, victim, and idiot's friend.
[01:35:51.500 --> 01:35:52.500]  Ultimately...
[01:35:52.500 --> 01:35:57.500]  Well, women, classify idiot and idiot's friend for me, please.
[01:35:57.500 --> 01:36:08.500]  Well, idiot's friend is the person who went ahead and put forward $2,500 of his own cash to provide bail for idiot.
[01:36:08.500 --> 01:36:15.500]  Now, idiot had a relationship on and off again with victim.
[01:36:15.500 --> 01:36:27.500]  Ultimately, victim was contacting idiot after a no-contact order was issued for idiot contacting victim.
[01:36:27.500 --> 01:36:30.500]  There was no no-contact order in reverse.
[01:36:30.500 --> 01:36:34.500]  Okay, so let me make sure I've got my framework straight before you continue.
[01:36:34.500 --> 01:36:38.500]  Apparently, this is something associated with a domestic issue, correct?
[01:36:38.500 --> 01:36:39.500]  Correct.
[01:36:39.500 --> 01:36:45.500]  And in that domestic issue, idiot is the one accused of assaulting or causing the problem.
[01:36:45.500 --> 01:36:52.500]  And victim is the one that got the restraining order saying, don't come around me or do anything with me anymore.
[01:36:52.500 --> 01:36:58.500]  And idiot's friend is the one that posted a bond to get him out of jail so he could violate the protective order.
[01:36:58.500 --> 01:37:06.500]  Oh, not quite. Not quite. Ultimately, idiot has been convicted but not sentenced yet.
[01:37:06.500 --> 01:37:19.500]  And what had happened is victim was contacting idiot close to 500 times in the course of three to four months in the forms of voicemails,
[01:37:19.500 --> 01:37:28.500]  left text messages, or emails. In the course of the contact, there was drama that went something along the lines of,
[01:37:28.500 --> 01:37:34.500]  I want to continue the relationship. I'm going to be at the public library on this date.
[01:37:34.500 --> 01:37:44.500]  Then victim ran into some person at the library while slightly intoxicated or whatever the situation was.
[01:37:44.500 --> 01:37:51.500]  Victim blew up at random person in the library which ultimately caused the cops to show up.
[01:37:51.500 --> 01:37:58.500]  Then victim was contacting idiot for three to four days going, ha, ha, I have you.
[01:37:58.500 --> 01:38:04.500]  You violated this protective order. You're going down.
[01:38:04.500 --> 01:38:19.500]  Now, victim's friend has this weird idea that somehow he was harmed that his bail money was put at risk because of victim's conduct.
[01:38:19.500 --> 01:38:31.500]  Now, ultimately, it appears victim's friend is getting all of his bail money back so I don't see how he has a cause of action.
[01:38:31.500 --> 01:38:41.500]  Now, idiot may have a cause of action criminally speaking because it's a class G felony in the state of Wisconsin to entice a crime
[01:38:41.500 --> 01:38:48.500]  and it could be argued that victims going ahead and saying, please contact me, then...
[01:38:48.500 --> 01:38:52.500]  And please come physically contact me at this location.
[01:38:52.500 --> 01:38:56.500]  Right. There is a class G felony there.
[01:38:56.500 --> 01:39:02.500]  Of course, idiot, having been informed of this possibility and pointing to the Wisconsin Code,
[01:39:02.500 --> 01:39:19.500]  idiot has taken to say there are over 400 separate things he's taking every call versus there's this one incident with the cops and some random person at the library.
[01:39:19.500 --> 01:39:26.500]  And the reason I was calling is idiot's friend, I don't think's got a leg to stand on.
[01:39:26.500 --> 01:39:38.500]  Do you have any idea of anything that idiot's friend can use based on his $2,500 that he put forward?
[01:39:38.500 --> 01:39:44.500]  Well, idiot's friend doesn't have a cause of action because he can't demonstrate a harm.
[01:39:44.500 --> 01:39:53.500]  The bail money had nothing to do with the violation of the protective order it had to do with skipping out on the appearance bond to the court.
[01:39:53.500 --> 01:40:02.500]  So unless the bond was specifically set for violation of that order and that's what idiot's friend paid, they don't have a cause of action.
[01:40:02.500 --> 01:40:10.500]  The bond would have been for idiot to be released out of jail until he had to make his court appearances,
[01:40:10.500 --> 01:40:19.500]  in case the bond was for appearance, if he didn't violate the appearance and the other person got their bond back, they have no harm.
[01:40:19.500 --> 01:40:26.500]  Now, victim, however, I think would be more aptly labeled idiot in this particular scenario.
[01:40:26.500 --> 01:40:36.500]  By attempting to instigate a crime, that was wherever we're talking about an actual felony, especially in such a way as to mislead the other party.
[01:40:36.500 --> 01:40:55.500]  And then we have the scenario of did anyone bother to record these calls to make sure it was victim's voice doing the enticing and not a text message or something like that where the actual sender could not be specifically identified.
[01:40:55.500 --> 01:41:04.500]  So as you can see, there's lots of facets to how this could play out depending upon what the actual evidence can prove.
[01:41:04.500 --> 01:41:07.500]  She left him as voice mails or emails.
[01:41:07.500 --> 01:41:13.500]  So he has some, he has some level of proof.
[01:41:13.500 --> 01:41:24.500]  Also for your callers, I would like to point out I have an issue, I had an issue in a local court where I was not served, but I showed up.
[01:41:24.500 --> 01:41:34.500]  I said I was showing up as a special appearance and the court insisted that I was showing up in person.
[01:41:34.500 --> 01:41:38.500]  And I have feedback from a local lawyer that they are educated.
[01:41:38.500 --> 01:41:54.500]  So I'm showing up as a special appearance, the court, and everybody varies to immediately assume that they are some kind of posy comatotus slash, as you would say, patron up.
[01:41:54.500 --> 01:41:58.500]  Yeah.
[01:41:58.500 --> 01:41:59.500]  Hello.
[01:41:59.500 --> 01:42:01.500]  Yeah, I'm here.
[01:42:01.500 --> 01:42:04.500]  Was that a question or a statement?
[01:42:04.500 --> 01:42:07.500]  More of it.
[01:42:07.500 --> 01:42:08.500]  Yeah.
[01:42:08.500 --> 01:42:09.500]  Not really bad.
[01:42:09.500 --> 01:42:12.500]  Say it again.
[01:42:12.500 --> 01:42:16.500]  Hello.
[01:42:16.500 --> 01:42:18.500]  Oh, did you drop?
[01:42:18.500 --> 01:42:22.500]  Mark, are you there?
[01:42:22.500 --> 01:42:23.500]  Nope.
[01:42:23.500 --> 01:42:26.500]  He must have got disconnected because he was sputtering and then he was gone.
[01:42:26.500 --> 01:42:27.500]  All right.
[01:42:27.500 --> 01:42:29.500]  I'll wait and see if he comes back on the board.
[01:42:29.500 --> 01:42:32.500]  In the meantime, let's switch over to Jerry in New York.
[01:42:32.500 --> 01:42:35.500]  Jerry, what do you got?
[01:42:35.500 --> 01:42:37.500]  Thank you for taking my call.
[01:42:37.500 --> 01:42:38.500]  Sure.
[01:42:38.500 --> 01:42:43.500]  I drive four higher vehicles in New York City.
[01:42:43.500 --> 01:42:57.500]  And I don't know to what extent some of the things you describe apply to people that drive four higher vehicles because they're trying to use, I guess, public roads and highways for profits, so to speak.
[01:42:57.500 --> 01:43:05.500]  Well, everything applies in one form or another, either it applies because you're regulated or it doesn't apply because you're not regulated.
[01:43:05.500 --> 01:43:15.500]  But in your particular activity, you are being regulated because you're using your roads, a public resource as a place of business for your own private gain.
[01:43:15.500 --> 01:43:16.500]  Okay.
[01:43:16.500 --> 01:43:17.500]  Right.
[01:43:17.500 --> 01:43:26.500]  Now, that being said, what aspect of what we're talking about in relation to the laws and statutes are you referring to as being applicable or not applicable?
[01:43:26.500 --> 01:43:27.500]  Right.
[01:43:27.500 --> 01:43:35.500]  I noticed this one sort of tiny thing when I went for a hearing for a summons, I got for making a turn.
[01:43:35.500 --> 01:43:37.500]  I get that to wait until we come back.
[01:43:37.500 --> 01:43:38.500]  Yeah.
[01:43:38.500 --> 01:43:39.500]  Hang on just a second.
[01:43:39.500 --> 01:43:41.500]  Let me get this break done and I'll finish this up with you on the other side.
[01:43:41.500 --> 01:43:42.500]  Okay.
[01:43:42.500 --> 01:43:43.500]  Okay.
[01:43:43.500 --> 01:43:44.500]  All right.
[01:43:44.500 --> 01:43:46.500]  That being said, we're about to go another break.
[01:43:46.500 --> 01:43:50.500]  We are entering into the last segment and I've got three other people up on the board.
[01:43:50.500 --> 01:43:55.500]  I'm going to try to get to in that last segment, so we'll get this done as quickly as possible.
[01:43:55.500 --> 01:44:00.500]  So, folks, we will be right back.
[01:44:26.500 --> 01:44:28.500]  How to get debt collectors out of your credit report.
[01:44:28.500 --> 01:44:33.500]  How to turn the financial tables on them and make them pay you to go away.
[01:44:33.500 --> 01:44:38.500]  The Michael Mirris proven method is the solution for how to stop debt collectors.
[01:44:38.500 --> 01:44:40.500]  Personal consultation is available as well.
[01:44:40.500 --> 01:44:49.500]  For more information, please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the blue Michael Mirris banner or email Michael Mirris at yahoo.com.
[01:44:49.500 --> 01:44:57.500]  That's ruleoflawradio.com or email m-i-c-h-a-e-l-m-i-r-r-a-s at yahoo.com.
[01:44:57.500 --> 01:45:03.500]  To learn how to stop debt collectors now, are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[01:45:03.500 --> 01:45:15.500]  Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary, the affordable, easy to understand four CD course that will show you how in 24 hours, step by step.
[01:45:15.500 --> 01:45:18.500]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing.
[01:45:18.500 --> 01:45:22.500]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[01:45:22.500 --> 01:45:27.500]  Thousands have won with our step by step course and now you can too.
[01:45:27.500 --> 01:45:33.500]  Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case winning experience.
[01:45:33.500 --> 01:45:42.500]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand about the principles and practices that control our American courts.
[01:45:42.500 --> 01:45:51.500]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases, prosa tactics and much more.
[01:45:51.500 --> 01:46:00.500]  Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner or call toll free 866-LAW-E-Z.
[01:46:00.500 --> 01:46:14.500]  Now on the day I was born, the nurses all gathered round, clickies to the wide window at the joy they had found.
[01:46:14.500 --> 01:46:23.500]  The nurse spoke up, said leave this one alone, she could tell right away, that I was bad as a bone.
[01:46:23.500 --> 01:46:38.500]  Bad as a bone, bad as a bone, bad as a bone, bad as a bone, bad as a bone, bad as a bone, bad as a bone.
[01:46:38.500 --> 01:46:48.500]  I broke a thousand hearts, people I made you, I break a thousand more baby, people I am too.
[01:46:48.500 --> 01:46:57.500]  All right, we are back, this is rule of law radio and we are talking to Jerry in New York in this last segment of the show.
[01:46:57.500 --> 01:47:00.500]  All right, Jerry, go ahead with your question.
[01:47:00.500 --> 01:47:10.500]  Okay, so when I got this summons, I was actually, we have in New York City, I guess, an agency called Taxi and Limits Commission that regulate for hire vehicles.
[01:47:10.500 --> 01:47:13.500]  Yeah, and they're an administrative agency?
[01:47:13.500 --> 01:47:20.500]  They are an administrative agency and they have, when you get a summons, you actually go before a tribunal and they actually call it that.
[01:47:20.500 --> 01:47:23.500]  They say it's a Taxi and Limits Commission Tribunal.
[01:47:23.500 --> 01:47:24.500]  Right.
[01:47:24.500 --> 01:47:32.500]  The judges or administrative hearing officers or whatever name really applies to them are actually independent supposedly based on what I've looked at.
[01:47:32.500 --> 01:47:37.500]  Now, when I received this summons, I did not sign a summons, I wasn't even given a summons.
[01:47:37.500 --> 01:47:43.500]  I thought they're actually letting me go, I made a wrong turn, it was my fault.
[01:47:43.500 --> 01:47:54.500]  And the person with flashing lights on marked car came behind and asked for my PLC license, didn't even ask for my driver's license, and said, oh, you know, it was holiday season.
[01:47:54.500 --> 01:48:00.500]  I said, after five minutes came back and said, okay, you have to see the signs when you drive, have a good holiday.
[01:48:00.500 --> 01:48:03.500]  And then a few weeks later, the summons came in the mail.
[01:48:03.500 --> 01:48:09.500]  Now, I was told by somebody when I went to this PLC tribunal, I wasn't ready.
[01:48:09.500 --> 01:48:12.500]  I wanted to do a little bit more research and I got an adjournment.
[01:48:12.500 --> 01:48:21.500]  When I got an adjournment, I met a police officer there and I asked him a question, not a police officer, I guess another PLC officer.
[01:48:21.500 --> 01:48:25.500]  And I asked him, I said, you know, I noticed there's no PLC officers here.
[01:48:25.500 --> 01:48:27.500]  Aren't you supposed to be present during the hearing?
[01:48:27.500 --> 01:48:38.500]  And he said, can I see your summons? And I showed him my summons and the summons on the bottom said that basically this is sort of like an affidavit under the penalties of perjury by the person who issued the summons.
[01:48:38.500 --> 01:48:43.500]  He said, for your particular summons, we don't have to be, but in some cases we have to be present.
[01:48:43.500 --> 01:48:56.500]  So to make a long story short, when I was asking for my second adjournment, I wanted to bring some photos which I've misplaced to show that it was impossible not to make that violation under the circumstances.
[01:48:56.500 --> 01:49:08.500]  But I noticed the representative for the TLC, I guess the prosecutor, said that they were objecting to my second adjournment since I already had one adjournment.
[01:49:08.500 --> 01:49:12.500]  And it was very interesting that the judge or hearing officer made this statement.
[01:49:12.500 --> 01:49:20.500]  He said, well, being that you don't have a police officer, being that you don't have your officer present here anyway, I don't see how you're prejudiced and I'm going to grant a second adjournment.
[01:49:20.500 --> 01:49:35.500]  My question then is, can I fight this despite what another TLC officer told me that in my particular situation the officer who issued the ticket does not have to be present?
[01:49:35.500 --> 01:49:45.500]  Okay, you have a document that at the bottom says I hereby certify or state under penalty of perjury and then they had to sign it, right?
[01:49:45.500 --> 01:49:46.500]  Yes.
[01:49:46.500 --> 01:49:55.500]  So who is there to swear to and testify the facts that are stated in that document if not the person who signed it?
[01:49:55.500 --> 01:50:02.500]  That's what I initially thought and I also sort of come from some research that I did that said that I could, David, are here to say evidence.
[01:50:02.500 --> 01:50:07.500]  They are until someone can stand there and testify to the facts asserted in them.
[01:50:07.500 --> 01:50:13.500]  But the only person that can do that is someone with firsthand knowledge of the facts that are in it.
[01:50:13.500 --> 01:50:18.500]  And the only person in this case will be the one who signed it, right?
[01:50:18.500 --> 01:50:29.500]  So the question is, is the officer on the document you have the same one that pulled you over in the unmarked car?
[01:50:29.500 --> 01:50:44.500]  Because if someone is signing an affidavit under penalty of perjury about a set of facts that they do not have personal knowledge of, then they just committed perjury.
[01:50:44.500 --> 01:50:57.500]  But now how do I ascertain, number one, if the person who signed that particular affidavit, which is basically Oslo Stamans, was the person who stopped me because I never asked him for his ID?
[01:50:57.500 --> 01:51:04.500]  Then why would you let him stop you to begin with? You said the car was unmarked. Were they wearing a uniform?
[01:51:04.500 --> 01:51:12.500]  Uh, they were they wearing a uniform. I don't, it wasn't, they don't, TLC doesn't really have a uniform.
[01:51:12.500 --> 01:51:16.500]  Then where did they get the authority to pull you over?
[01:51:16.500 --> 01:51:24.500]  Well, I guess it's sort of, I understand what you're saying, but Taxi and Limousine Commission, as I understand, has power to regulate for higher vehicles.
[01:51:24.500 --> 01:51:31.500]  Regulate has nothing to do with seasoned arrest unless they have that authority specifically in law.
[01:51:31.500 --> 01:51:40.500]  And since you're going before an administrative body for this, I'm going to guess they have none.
[01:51:40.500 --> 01:51:46.500]  Now, it would be one thing if he followed you all over town and walked up on you when you were outside the car and having lunch.
[01:51:46.500 --> 01:51:54.500]  It's another thing entirely for him to turn on a set of flashing lights and stop you on the side of the road.
[01:51:54.500 --> 01:51:58.500]  Keep in mind, I'm in a licensed for hire vehicle. This is not a private.
[01:51:58.500 --> 01:52:04.500]  You're missing my point. I don't care if you're on a skateboard with a for hire sign on it.
[01:52:04.500 --> 01:52:19.500]  I'm asking you what law gives these people authority to see someone at their liberty, whether they're working or not, for something that is entirely civil,
[01:52:19.500 --> 01:52:31.500]  for which there can be no probable cause and no reasonable suspicion on which to base such a seizure because there's no crime involved.
[01:52:31.500 --> 01:52:35.500]  You understand yet?
[01:52:35.500 --> 01:52:47.500]  Yes. I guess it's some assumption, which for maybe a wrong reason was made on the side of all the cabbies and all the for hire drivers in the city
[01:52:47.500 --> 01:52:52.500]  that when they are pulled over to sort of submit to the fact that they have to provide their TLC license.
[01:52:52.500 --> 01:52:58.500]  And again, interestingly, TLC sometimes, TLC is not the only body that issues these kind of summons.
[01:52:58.500 --> 01:53:04.500]  But you still missing the point. You didn't get any information from this individual that proved that's who they were.
[01:53:04.500 --> 01:53:09.500]  They were in an unmarked car, no uniform. They provided you with no identification.
[01:53:09.500 --> 01:53:13.500]  They just told you what they wanted you to hear they were.
[01:53:13.500 --> 01:53:26.500]  And that is irrelevant to the fact that they used a set of flashing lights to force you to pull over as if they had some authority to make you pull over.
[01:53:26.500 --> 01:53:30.500]  Are you following me yet?
[01:53:30.500 --> 01:53:38.500]  Yes, but I guess the difficulty I have is that the city gave them the authority.
[01:53:38.500 --> 01:53:43.500]  No, you still not know. You're presuming something again.
[01:53:43.500 --> 01:53:59.500]  How can the city give them the authority to see someone at their liberty in violation of a constitutionally protected right to be free of unreasonable searches and seizures?
[01:53:59.500 --> 01:54:17.500]  By any stretch of the imagination, unreasonable would inherently mean that if without any sort of indication of criminal activity, a seizure without a warrant is unconstitutional and illegal.
[01:54:17.500 --> 01:54:21.500]  And a city cannot empower someone to do it.
[01:54:21.500 --> 01:54:30.500]  Neither could the state because it goes directly against the Bill of Rights, both federal and state, doesn't it?
[01:54:30.500 --> 01:54:37.500]  Yes, that would mean that I actually acquiesce to his so-called power of...
[01:54:37.500 --> 01:54:54.500]  Now, in New York, is there a criminal offense for acting under an appearance of legal authority that you don't actually have the authority to exercise?
[01:54:54.500 --> 01:55:03.500]  See, here in Texas it's called impersonating a public official. It's called abuse of official capacity. It's called official oppression.
[01:55:03.500 --> 01:55:14.500]  It's called misconduct in office. Those are four different crimes that one person commits by doing the very things you're telling me this guy did.
[01:55:14.500 --> 01:55:23.500]  Does New York have a similar set of crimes for public officials that do these things?
[01:55:23.500 --> 01:55:37.500]  Because if they do, then what I'm going to recommend you do is you sue the city, the TLC, and the individual that pulled you over for what they did.
[01:55:37.500 --> 01:55:49.500]  Because if this is entirely administrative, it's entirely civil. If it's entirely civil, there is no arrest power that could survive a constitutional challenge of reasonableness.
[01:55:49.500 --> 01:55:58.500]  Because there can be no articulable facts supporting reasonable suspicion or probable cause.
[01:55:58.500 --> 01:56:09.500]  Now, the problem, I see one problem with this, is that these kind of challenges I've heard have been done before, particularly not even for hire vehicles.
[01:56:09.500 --> 01:56:17.500]  And a lot of them are actually successful. However, they take more than a couple of years to get to that ultimate success level.
[01:56:17.500 --> 01:56:33.500]  And the problem here is when your license expires as a TLC license driver, if you have any outstanding summonses whatsoever, even the ones that are pending, unless they are settled, they do not issue a renewal for your license, thereby preventing you.
[01:56:33.500 --> 01:56:46.500]  And you can seek injunctive relief against them from prohibiting you for that because of it. That would be considered retaliatory. They break the law, you pay the penalty. That's retaliation.
[01:56:46.500 --> 01:56:55.500]  Okay. Now, I hear this, but now I have a hearing. I don't think I will be granted a third adjournment.
[01:56:55.500 --> 01:57:05.500]  So, basically, what I want to ask is how do I basically present to the judge that, number one, how do I know the person signing this document is actually the police officer?
[01:57:05.500 --> 01:57:16.500]  It's actually the TLC officer that asked me. And number two, I can't continue with this sort of defending myself without him being here. There are questions that I need to ask him.
[01:57:16.500 --> 01:57:28.500]  But I already spoke to people that made this exact argument. And the only thing they hear in return is you are talking to me, not even to the prosecutor on the TLC side.
[01:57:28.500 --> 01:57:31.500]  If you believe you're not guilty, I am here to hear.
[01:57:31.500 --> 01:57:44.500]  Okay. This is why I'm telling you this is not a judge. This is not a prosecutor. This is an administrative proceeding. By going in there, you are setting yourself up for failure.
[01:57:44.500 --> 01:57:55.500]  And they're going to ensure that because in an administrative proceeding, there is no due process and you are guilty until they decide you're not.
[01:57:55.500 --> 01:58:03.500]  That's exactly why those things are not supposed to be applicable to the people in any capacity.
[01:58:03.500 --> 01:58:17.500]  I'll tell you what we're going to need to do here. Contact me via email eddyddie at ruleoflawradio.com, provide me with your contact information, and I will try to get with you tomorrow to finish this discussion.
[01:58:17.500 --> 01:58:27.500]  Melissa, Ramadan, I see y'all out there, please email me whatever questions you were going to ask tonight, and I'll try to get to it. Jerry, is that all right with you?
[01:58:27.500 --> 01:58:30.500]  Yes, thank you. Can you just repeat that email again, please?
[01:58:30.500 --> 01:58:36.500]  Eddie, eddie at ruleoflawradio.com.
[01:58:36.500 --> 01:58:38.500]  Thank you very much.
[01:58:38.500 --> 01:58:39.500]  You're welcome.
[01:58:39.500 --> 01:58:50.500]  All right, folks, this has been the Monday Night Rule of Law radio show with your host Eddie Craig. I'm sorry I couldn't get to all of you, but y'all have a great week, good night, and God bless.
[01:58:50.500 --> 01:59:08.500]  Bible for America is offering absolutely free, a unique study Bible called the New Testament Recovery Version. The New Testament Recovery Version has over 9,000 footnotes that explain what the Bible says, verse by verse, helping you to know God and to know the meaning of life.
[01:59:08.500 --> 01:59:20.500]  Order your free copy today from Bibles for America. Call us toll free at 888-551-0102 or visit us online at bfa.org.
[01:59:20.500 --> 01:59:32.500]  This translation is highly accurate and it comes with over 13,000 cross references, plus charts and maps and an outline for every book of the Bible. This is truly a Bible you can understand.
[01:59:32.500 --> 01:59:49.500]  To get your free copy of the New Testament Recovery Version, call us toll free at 888-551-0102. That's 888-551-0102 or visit us online at bfa.org.