ROL_2017-09-01_16k_Hr1-2.timecode

[00:09.640 --> 00:12.720]  Markets for Monday, the 21st of August, 2017,
[00:12.720 --> 00:16.140]  closed with gold at $1,290.99 an ounce,
[00:16.140 --> 00:18.280]  silver, $17.01 an ounce,
[00:18.280 --> 00:20.720]  Texas crude, $48.50 a barrel,
[00:20.720 --> 00:23.520]  bitcoin, $4,021.99,
[00:23.520 --> 00:27.700]  and bitcoin cash is sitting at about 605 US currency.
[00:27.700 --> 00:31.380]  Today in history, the year 1911.
[00:31.380 --> 00:34.580]  The Mona Lisa is stolen by a Louvre employee,
[00:34.580 --> 00:37.080]  with the theft not being discovered until the next day.
[00:37.080 --> 00:40.220]  The Louvre was closed for an entire week during the investigation.
[00:40.220 --> 00:42.660]  French poet Guillaume Apollinaire,
[00:42.660 --> 00:45.860]  who had once called for the Louvre to be burnt down,
[00:45.860 --> 00:48.260]  came under suspicion and was arrested and imprisoned,
[00:48.260 --> 00:50.660]  implicating his friend Pablo Picasso,
[00:50.660 --> 00:52.340]  who was brought in for questioning.
[00:52.340 --> 00:54.260]  Both were eventually later exonerated.
[00:54.260 --> 00:57.700]  Two years later, the thief unmasked himself to be a Louvre employee,
[00:57.700 --> 01:01.380]  Vicenzo Perogia, who had stolen the Mona Lisa by entering the building
[01:01.380 --> 01:04.180]  during regular hours, hiding it in a broom closet,
[01:04.180 --> 01:07.620]  and walking out with it under his coat after the museum had closed.
[01:07.620 --> 01:08.740]  Today in history.
[01:10.740 --> 01:15.620]  In recent news, Spanish police shot dead 22-year-old Islamist Younus Abuyacub,
[01:15.620 --> 01:20.260]  who murdered 13 people with a van in Barcelona's most renowned avenue, Las Ramblas.
[01:20.260 --> 01:23.220]  Thursday of last week, fleeing the scene in a car he hijacked
[01:23.220 --> 01:25.380]  after fatally stabbing and murdering the driver.
[01:25.380 --> 01:26.500]  According to police statements,
[01:26.500 --> 01:28.900]  a bomb squad used a robot to approach his body
[01:28.900 --> 01:31.700]  after tracking him to a rural area near Barcelona.
[01:31.700 --> 01:33.940]  As seems to be routine with these terrorist suspects,
[01:33.940 --> 01:36.660]  police shot and killed him after he held up what looked like
[01:36.660 --> 01:40.980]  what police say appeared to be an explosive belt while shouting Aloua Akbar.
[01:40.980 --> 01:43.140]  The Islamic State is claiming responsibility,
[01:43.140 --> 01:46.740]  and police did indicate they suspect it was planned by a dozen accomplices,
[01:46.740 --> 01:50.820]  including his Moroccan-born brother and two first cousins who are still large.
[01:50.820 --> 01:53.060]  Five were shot hours after the van attacked.
[01:53.060 --> 01:56.100]  Two of which were killed, while another was injured the day before
[01:56.100 --> 01:59.060]  in a blast at the house where they were fabricating explosives.
[01:59.060 --> 02:00.660]  Another three were later arrested.
[02:00.660 --> 02:05.380]  With 13 murdered, 120 injured, and 8 remaining in critical condition at the hospital,
[02:05.380 --> 02:08.820]  this is the deadliest attack in Spain since March of 2004.
[02:08.820 --> 02:11.860]  Our thoughts and prayers go out to all victims of all terrorism.
[02:15.220 --> 02:19.460]  A public petition signed by over 180,000 people in just over four days,
[02:19.460 --> 02:22.260]  hosted on the official whitehouse.gov website,
[02:22.260 --> 02:26.660]  is asking the White House to classify Antifa as a terrorist organization
[02:26.660 --> 02:28.900]  due to its propensity towards violence,
[02:28.900 --> 02:30.820]  with terrorism being defined as, quote,
[02:30.820 --> 02:34.260]  the use of violence and intimidation in pursuit of political aims.
[02:34.260 --> 02:38.900]  The same definition that is applied to ISIS and other groups of terrorist organizations.
[02:38.900 --> 02:41.380]  The White House has to officially respond to petitions
[02:41.380 --> 02:44.420]  that collect over 100,000 signatures within 60 days.
[02:46.580 --> 02:49.700]  The most recorded and viewed solar eclipse, the Great American Eclipse,
[02:49.700 --> 02:51.780]  traversed the continental United States today.
[02:51.780 --> 02:53.780]  Go check out the footage for yourself on YouTube.
[02:53.780 --> 03:21.380]  This was Rick Rodeo with your Lowdown for August 21st, 2017.
[03:23.780 --> 03:40.260]  OK, howdy, howdy. Randy Kelton in Rule of Law Radio on this Friday,
[03:40.260 --> 03:49.460]  the first day of September 2017. Hard to believe we're this far through the year already.
[03:50.660 --> 03:52.420]  Seems to get faster every year.
[03:52.420 --> 03:58.420]  But we have some interesting weather here in Texas.
[03:58.420 --> 04:01.620]  I've been telling everybody that it never rains in Texas.
[04:02.900 --> 04:05.700]  OK, OK, maybe it rains in Texas on occasion.
[04:06.420 --> 04:09.220]  But just a minor little dribble around Houston.
[04:09.220 --> 04:10.420]  No big deal.
[04:10.420 --> 04:12.500]  For Texans, that is no big deal.
[04:14.660 --> 04:15.860]  OK, maybe it's a big deal.
[04:16.500 --> 04:19.860]  It looks like we've got another one out in the Atlantic,
[04:19.860 --> 04:24.500]  and I think that there is a chance that it could head right at us as well.
[04:24.500 --> 04:32.500]  I'm up in Tennessee right now, and gas prices have already jumped about 40 cents.
[04:33.780 --> 04:43.220]  And so I expect that all of the Internet news services are estimating 25 to 30 percent,
[04:43.220 --> 04:46.660]  and I think that is a gross underestimate.
[04:46.660 --> 04:53.380]  And I expect we'll go up $1, $1.50 to $2 before we get all of this, everything back online.
[04:56.100 --> 04:59.060]  But other than that, we do have the phone lines open.
[04:59.060 --> 05:00.180]  They'll be open all night.
[05:01.060 --> 05:02.260]  Let me make sure I got them.
[05:02.260 --> 05:03.460]  OK, they're open.
[05:03.460 --> 05:05.060]  We'll be taking your calls all night.
[05:05.860 --> 05:10.580]  I've got a couple of people I expect to call in with some pretty serious issues.
[05:10.580 --> 05:20.660]  I have one of my listeners sent me a reference to a lawyer, a Texas lawyer who's living in New York.
[05:21.860 --> 05:29.860]  And this guy really sounds like one of us, and I'm hoping that next week we can have him on the show.
[05:29.860 --> 05:35.540]  This is a real-deal lawyer who is taking on lawyers and other judges.
[05:35.540 --> 05:45.380]  So it will be refreshing to bring on a lawyer who's doing what we all say he should do,
[05:45.380 --> 05:46.980]  that lawyers should do.
[05:48.420 --> 05:55.380]  But what they're saying about this guy is that he's either awful dumb or awful brave,
[05:55.380 --> 05:59.540]  because they're literally considering that he's risking his life doing this.
[05:59.540 --> 06:05.460]  And unfortunately, I'm prone to agree with them.
[06:06.420 --> 06:13.780]  These judges we're dealing with are really, really bad guys, and it seems to be endemic.
[06:14.980 --> 06:22.260]  It's all over the country, and judges have carved out official immunity from themselves,
[06:22.260 --> 06:29.300]  or even claiming immunity from criminal prosecution, or I'm sorry, not criminal prosecution,
[06:29.300 --> 06:35.860]  but from suit that's against them for when they commit crimes on the bench.
[06:38.260 --> 06:51.460]  Now, I can't see how they can get there unless they can show that they're doing what they're doing.
[06:51.460 --> 06:57.060]  That committing crimes from the bench is somehow within scope,
[06:58.900 --> 07:06.180]  because as I understand it, official immunity only applies for acts that occur within the scope of
[07:06.180 --> 07:12.100]  your authority. We have a case out of El Paso where a police officer picked up a young woman
[07:12.100 --> 07:18.500]  to transfer from one jail to another and decided to stop on the way and have some recreation and
[07:18.500 --> 07:28.100]  raped her. They filed against him, prosecuted, and when the woman sued him, he claimed official
[07:28.100 --> 07:35.700]  immunity because he was acting in his official capacity. And the court said that he was acting
[07:35.700 --> 07:43.940]  within the scope of his official capacity, and the court said rape is not within scope.
[07:43.940 --> 07:55.780]  So my concern is that when we go after judges, we have to carefully craft our claims
[07:57.060 --> 08:07.300]  so that we word them correctly so as to claim beyond scope. What keeps you in court
[08:07.300 --> 08:15.300]  is not whether or not you can prove up your accusations, but whether you make the correct
[08:15.300 --> 08:25.540]  accusation. If you don't make the claim right, if you make the claim correctly, then the matter of
[08:25.540 --> 08:36.980]  immunity becomes an issue in the court. So it has to go to court to adjudicate whether or not these
[08:36.980 --> 08:42.260]  actions fall within scope. They fall within scope, they have immunity. They fall outside of scope,
[08:42.260 --> 08:48.820]  they don't have immunity. So we have to be careful how we make our claims. I have a couple callers
[08:48.820 --> 08:57.300]  early on. We have Jeff from Mississippi. Hello, Jeff. Hello, Randy. Can you hear me?
[08:58.020 --> 09:05.140]  I can hear you. What do you have going today? Okay. Well, I'm truck driving in the mountains
[09:05.140 --> 09:10.660]  of Montana. So if I happen to drop out, just hang up on me and I'll get you next week.
[09:11.300 --> 09:21.060]  But what I've got is last week I called in, and I'm on appeal. So I've been sending motions and
[09:21.060 --> 09:26.740]  petitions for rehearing, and they've been denying them. And Deborah came on and said,
[09:26.740 --> 09:33.780]  as long as I'm being represented, that they cannot hear my motions and petitions,
[09:33.780 --> 09:42.260]  which is fine. So I sent my public defender a letter firing her, and she came back and said
[09:42.260 --> 09:50.820]  that she dropped out of my case back in April. But when I looked on the docket, there was no
[09:50.820 --> 09:58.180]  motion to withdraw. So that should get a malpractice suit against the lawyer,
[09:58.180 --> 10:04.420]  because she cannot simply drop out of your case. All right.
[10:08.020 --> 10:14.980]  But in any case, then the courts would... Okay, so this creates a conundrum. Was she
[10:16.100 --> 10:25.060]  construed as your counsel by the court, or was she not? In either case, she should get sued
[10:25.060 --> 10:32.180]  big time. Yeah, she was my court appointed public defender,
[10:35.220 --> 10:39.540]  and I guess she sent me a letter saying that she was withdrawing. I don't remember
[10:39.540 --> 10:43.460]  reading that letter, but it's certainly not in the docket at all.
[10:44.740 --> 10:47.380]  She had to file a motion to withdraw with the court,
[10:47.380 --> 10:53.940]  and it's especially frowned on when the matter is a criminal issue.
[10:55.540 --> 10:58.180]  All right. So the court would have had to
[10:58.180 --> 11:03.140]  have had a hearing and given you opportunity to respond.
[11:05.140 --> 11:08.420]  Got it. So you might...
[11:08.420 --> 11:16.740]  Have you claimed insufficient counsel?
[11:18.740 --> 11:22.580]  Well, not yet, because I just found this out. So do I need to write a letter
[11:22.580 --> 11:25.300]  claiming insufficient counsel? Yes.
[11:26.820 --> 11:35.620]  Got it. We actually need to file it. Well, you're kind of late. This will take some thinking to
[11:35.620 --> 11:47.460]  figure out how to address it. Since you didn't know your counsel was not working on your behalf,
[11:50.340 --> 11:58.740]  and there was no motion to withdraw, then the lawyer hasn't withdrawn. And
[11:58.740 --> 12:08.020]  we're dancing here with statute when statute, at the end of the day, is really not gonna
[12:08.020 --> 12:18.740]  carry your case. What's gonna carry your case is politics. And if your lawyer claims to have
[12:18.740 --> 12:27.780]  withdrawn and she didn't, you should really go after your lawyer big time. And then in order
[12:27.780 --> 12:35.780]  to protect your lawyer from you, then the courts will rule in your favor, get you to go away and
[12:35.780 --> 12:39.460]  leave the lawyer alone. Okay.
[12:40.500 --> 12:46.740]  Or in the alternative, if your lawyer did withdraw and was allowed to withdraw by the court and you
[12:46.740 --> 12:53.060]  weren't given notice, then you sue the court, because this is a private contract matter.
[12:53.060 --> 12:59.220]  And the constitution forbids the court to interfere with the private contract.
[13:01.940 --> 13:08.740]  Okay. So that part should get interesting. You should start looking at a big time lawsuit
[13:08.740 --> 13:20.260]  against your lawyer. Okay, great. Secondly, my petition for rehearing, I filed a petition
[13:20.260 --> 13:27.700]  for rehearing, and if I don't have a lawyer, then my petition should be read. But I filed
[13:27.700 --> 13:35.860]  a petition for rehearing because I had objected on the grounds of McDonald versus Chicago,
[13:36.660 --> 13:42.900]  my Second Amendment rights, it was never addressed at all in the appeals court. So in my petition
[13:42.900 --> 13:48.660]  for rehearing, I told them, I said that the court never addressed it, the court of appeals
[13:48.660 --> 13:54.580]  never addressed it. So I want to rehear this case addressing McDonald versus Chicago. They
[13:54.580 --> 14:00.820]  sent me back a denial letter, and that's all it said. Petition denied. They never addressed.
[14:00.820 --> 14:04.580]  Okay. Is this a state court or federal? State.
[14:06.180 --> 14:11.140]  Okay. If it's federal, there is no order until there is a judgment.
[14:11.140 --> 14:22.260]  But here, now you can go to the Supreme. There's a good chance the Supreme may overturn
[14:24.100 --> 14:30.580]  because they apparently denied you the right to petition the court for redress of grievance.
[14:30.580 --> 14:38.100]  They accepted your appeal, then ruled on an issue that... What issue did they rule on when
[14:38.100 --> 14:48.900]  they ruled? They didn't address any of my claims. They just claimed that I was, since I was pro se,
[14:48.900 --> 14:55.460]  that I was crazy, reciting Fred Baer allegations and coming up to legal conclusions and frivolous
[14:55.460 --> 14:59.140]  arguments, Ashcroft versus Wombly, and then they just denied me.
[14:59.140 --> 15:06.020]  Oh, so they dismissed for failure to state a claim on which cover can be had.
[15:08.100 --> 15:08.420]  Yes.
[15:09.140 --> 15:14.580]  That directly opens the door for an amended pleading.
[15:17.140 --> 15:17.380]  Okay.
[15:18.340 --> 15:23.300]  So you have this second appeal. You can appeal to the Supreme. Is there
[15:23.300 --> 15:28.580]  any validity to their claim that your arguments were frivolous?
[15:30.180 --> 15:37.140]  No, because, well, for the listeners, I was arrested and charged with a rifle on a college
[15:37.140 --> 15:42.900]  campus. However, I was in some apartments that were across the street and it was private property.
[15:42.900 --> 15:49.220]  So I brought the land title into court that showed private property. They suppressed it,
[15:49.220 --> 15:56.340]  and I got convicted anyway. In my appeal, I claimed once again that the land was private
[15:56.340 --> 16:01.860]  property and that I had a land title. And the court just came back and said that,
[16:01.860 --> 16:06.900]  no, everybody knows it's private property. That's crazy. And then with that, they dismissed it.
[16:06.900 --> 16:09.140]  They never addressed the actual land title.
[16:10.820 --> 16:17.220]  And this is a good thing to put before the Mississippi Supreme, because from that
[16:17.220 --> 16:24.260]  you can go right out to the FED. Okay. Well, that's what I did do with the Mississippi Supreme.
[16:24.260 --> 16:31.300]  That was in my brief, that and McDonald versus Chicago, and they just swept both of them under
[16:31.300 --> 16:44.740]  the rug. So you go to the Feds against the state for denying due process. Okay.
[16:44.740 --> 16:52.340]  All right. My only concern about the Supreme Court is they say that they only accept very few.
[16:52.340 --> 17:16.900]  So I'm- No, no, no. You're talking to state supreme, not-
[17:23.220 --> 17:29.860]  I'm going to throw away these yucky cookies in the trash. I click control, shift, delete,
[17:29.860 --> 17:34.340]  and then scroll down to cookies and clear them. Bye-bye, yucky cookies.
[17:34.340 --> 17:40.580]  Now I go to logosradionetwork.com, and I click on the Amazon box on the upper right-hand side,
[17:40.580 --> 17:47.140]  bookmark the link, and I can go to Amazon through this link and order you some yummy new cookies.
[17:47.140 --> 17:50.740]  New cookies for me? Consider it an early Christmas present.
[17:50.740 --> 17:55.780]  And every time I order on Amazon, I go through this link and I give a little present to this
[17:55.780 --> 17:59.380]  radio network too. C is for cookie. C is for classified.
[18:00.340 --> 18:05.380]  Are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters, or even lawsuits?
[18:05.380 --> 18:11.060]  Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Meris Proven Method. Michael Meris has won six cases
[18:11.060 --> 18:15.860]  in federal court against debt collectors, and now you can win too. You'll get step-by-step
[18:15.860 --> 18:20.900]  instructions in plain English on how to win in court using federal civil rights statutes,
[18:20.900 --> 18:26.580]  what to do when contacted by phone, mail, or court summons, how to answer letters and phone calls,
[18:26.580 --> 18:31.140]  how to get debt collectors out of your credit report, how to turn the financial tables on them
[18:31.140 --> 18:37.300]  and make them pay you to go away. The Michael Meris Proven Method is the solution for how to
[18:37.300 --> 18:42.180]  stop debt collectors. Personal consultation is available as well. For more information,
[18:42.180 --> 18:47.460]  please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the blue Michael Meris banner or email
[18:47.460 --> 18:56.180]  michaelmeris at yahoo.com. That's ruleoflawradio.com or email m-i-c-h-a-e-l-m-i-r-r-a-s
[18:56.180 --> 18:59.780]  at yahoo.com to learn how to stop debt collectors now.
[18:59.780 --> 19:15.540]  If you are listening to the Logos Radio Network, the logosradionetwork.com.
[19:19.300 --> 19:24.900]  Okay, we are back. Randy Kelton, Rule of Law Radio, talking to Jeff in Mississippi.
[19:24.900 --> 19:33.780]  I have to sit down and figure out how do we go after the state of Mississippi
[19:34.900 --> 19:43.940]  for wholesale denial of due process. You filed legitimate claims and the court just
[19:44.580 --> 19:50.660]  denied, essentially, by not ruling on your claims, they denied you and your right to
[19:50.660 --> 19:57.540]  petition the court for redress of grievance. All right. Have you filed any of the
[19:58.660 --> 20:01.860]  financial disclosure documents that have been producing?
[20:05.780 --> 20:12.420]  I filed a couple of them two or three years ago with the comptroller of currency
[20:12.420 --> 20:20.100]  and I never received any information back. Okay, I'm talking about filing
[20:20.100 --> 20:25.300]  for financial disclosure from the judge. No, I have not done that.
[20:26.180 --> 20:29.860]  That's what we need. This is one of the tools we're putting together.
[20:32.100 --> 20:37.300]  We're asking for financial disclosure from the judge and I've written this document
[20:37.300 --> 20:45.780]  to ask questions about issues that other judges have been prosecuted for in terms of money
[20:45.780 --> 20:55.940]  laundering. It goes to how the judges launder the money they collect to rule against folks like us.
[20:55.940 --> 21:07.300]  Did you hear Janet Phelan on our show who talked about this issue?
[21:07.300 --> 21:14.180]  No, last week, no. I was trying to call in and I didn't hear anything. I was just dialing over.
[21:14.180 --> 21:18.900]  Okay, well, I don't think she was on last week. I think she was on the week before.
[21:18.900 --> 21:27.380]  But she researched these issues and she estimates that two-thirds of the federal judges are
[21:28.180 --> 21:35.380]  on the take and they're laundering their money with some specific techniques and we're asking
[21:35.380 --> 21:39.780]  questions that go to those techniques. This should make the judges a little bit crazy.
[21:40.420 --> 21:43.780]  It has nothing to do with law. It has everything to do with politics.
[21:43.780 --> 21:50.260]  It's bad enough they've got a pro se out there they can't control. But when the pro se is
[21:51.060 --> 21:59.060]  digging into the judge's personal finances, which him being the judge gives you standing to do,
[22:00.580 --> 22:06.740]  whether he, and you're asking questions that go to money laundering, whether he's laundering
[22:06.740 --> 22:13.060]  payoff money or not, you poison his well and make it look as though you have reason to believe that
[22:13.060 --> 22:23.780]  he does. It's going to make them crazy. It's going to make them want you out of their courtroom.
[22:23.780 --> 22:31.060]  Sound interesting? Yeah, it does. It sure does.
[22:31.060 --> 22:41.540]  I will send you a copy of this request. I took it from the California code because the California
[22:41.540 --> 22:49.060]  code on disqualification and recusal was the most extensive I can find. About half of it
[22:49.060 --> 22:59.300]  asks for information that this California code on recusal specifically addressed that the court
[22:59.300 --> 23:06.420]  should make public or should reveal. And then I researched different methods of money laundering
[23:07.220 --> 23:12.580]  that have been attributed to judges. And then I asked questions that went to those forms of money
[23:12.580 --> 23:18.660]  laundering. And then I took it from the California code on recusal. And then I took it from the
[23:18.660 --> 23:26.500]  California code on recusal. So this is essentially a subtle accusation that the judge is on the take.
[23:27.620 --> 23:33.220]  And we're looking, we're going to be digging. And if he's got any dirt in his closet,
[23:33.220 --> 23:36.340]  he'll be concerned that we will find it and use it against him.
[23:37.220 --> 23:40.980]  Because you are a pro se, there's not anything he can do to interfere with you.
[23:40.980 --> 23:48.260]  I mean, he doesn't have the political clout with you that he does with lawyers.
[23:51.540 --> 23:57.540]  So I will email you this document and just change your headings and addresses and stuff
[23:58.260 --> 24:04.100]  and send this out and see if this helps any. You might send it to every one of the judges on the
[24:04.100 --> 24:12.020]  panel, on the Court of Appeals panel. Okay, in state court?
[24:12.980 --> 24:14.900]  Yes. Okay.
[24:15.780 --> 24:19.060]  Because if they're dirty, they're not going to want anybody looking.
[24:21.380 --> 24:25.540]  Okay. Okay, do you have anything else for us?
[24:26.500 --> 24:34.020]  Well, just my one concern is, I've heard that the Supreme Court, the federal Supreme Court
[24:34.020 --> 24:37.940]  only hears a small amount of cases. About 3%.
[24:39.860 --> 24:44.180]  Yeah. So as soon as they see Jeff from Mississippi on there, they're going to throw in the trash.
[24:45.140 --> 24:53.380]  Maybe. Depends on the question you ask. And if the question points at something like RICO
[24:54.820 --> 24:59.140]  or a statewide conspiracy, they're not going to want that to get to the feds.
[24:59.140 --> 25:04.420]  At the end of the day, it's all political. Okay.
[25:05.060 --> 25:07.620]  If you want them to hear it, you have to give them a reason.
[25:08.900 --> 25:16.420]  And it's not just because it's good law. And one reason is to keep the feds out of their business.
[25:18.740 --> 25:20.980]  Okay. Where you maintain
[25:20.980 --> 25:28.180]  that the courts fail to address issues that you brought, then you state the accusation
[25:28.180 --> 25:34.260]  in the verbiage of the federal claim. Even though you're in a state court, you don't use federal
[25:35.060 --> 25:39.780]  case law, but you state it in the verbiage that you find in the federal claims, like a
[25:39.780 --> 25:48.260]  42 US Code 1983 suit. Or in RICO verbiage, Predicate Acts Toward an Ongoing Criminal
[25:48.260 --> 25:56.580]  Conspiracy. That's specifically RICO. And if you accuse the judges of participating in
[25:56.580 --> 26:02.740]  Predicate Acts Toward a Criminal Conspiracy to deny you due process, that screams RICO.
[26:04.980 --> 26:15.780]  Okay. So I asked that question to the federal Supreme Court, and they could take it, because
[26:16.260 --> 26:21.860]  I made their then after that file a federal claim, and the Supreme Court doesn't want
[26:21.860 --> 26:24.180]  their hands to get dirty with that. Is that what it is?
[26:24.180 --> 26:28.660]  Right, right. You kind of misspoke there. You said, I make that claim to the federal
[26:28.660 --> 26:32.420]  Supreme Court. You make that claim to the Mississippi Supreme Court.
[26:33.540 --> 26:37.220]  And they're not going to want the feds looking over their shoulder.
[26:39.300 --> 26:49.140]  So I just recently filed a certiorari with the federal Supreme for a guy out of New York.
[26:49.140 --> 26:57.700]  And I had all these claims we could make. But I looked at the claims from the perspective of,
[26:58.580 --> 27:07.860]  what will the court have a political reason to take up? So I'm looking at 3%.
[27:09.300 --> 27:12.980]  So I'm not going to go in there and tell the court what a bunch of no good rotten scoundrels
[27:12.980 --> 27:22.900]  these guys are. I need to find a point of law that needs clarification. So you write your
[27:25.940 --> 27:36.420]  appeal so that you're asking the Supreme to clarify an issue. When a petitioner brings
[27:36.420 --> 27:44.180]  an issue before the court, does the petitioner have a right to have the issue adjudicated,
[27:44.180 --> 27:51.140]  or can the court simply ignore claims brought before it and pick and choose the claims he
[27:51.140 --> 27:57.940]  wants to rule on? Now, if they answer that, oh yeah, they can just pick and choose, that's
[27:57.940 --> 28:08.420]  going to destabilize the whole system. So you need to ask them a question so that if they answer it
[28:08.420 --> 28:19.060]  wrong, it screws up everything. Here we went to the Supreme and I asked them to distinguish
[28:19.060 --> 28:29.140]  Jasanowski. They filed Jasanowski a few years ago and just clobbered the banks with it. So I
[28:29.140 --> 28:40.660]  asked them to distinguish Jasanowski because we needed guidance concerning a rescission after the
[28:40.660 --> 28:52.180]  statutory time limit had ran out under 1635A, but a foreclosure had begun so that the time limit,
[28:52.180 --> 28:58.420]  the ability to rescind, was reinvigorated by 1635G. And there was no case law on that.
[28:59.300 --> 29:05.860]  So we asked the court to distinguish Jasanowski and make a ruling on paragraph G. This is the
[29:05.860 --> 29:16.180]  kind of things they'll look at. And then I asked them to define the effect of statute of
[29:16.180 --> 29:24.180]  limitations. Does statute of limitations act as a bar to an action or is it an affirmative defense
[29:24.180 --> 29:31.700]  as listed under Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure? They rule against it, then they
[29:31.700 --> 29:41.460]  effectively nullify Rule 8 of the Civil Procedure. You've got to give them something where they can
[29:42.980 --> 29:51.380]  define the law and where if they define it incorrectly, it causes a problem. They've
[29:51.380 --> 29:58.260]  got to have a good reason to do it. And here you've got a state court. The feds don't have
[29:58.260 --> 30:06.900]  the feds don't have. Since 9-11, our government has used invasive measures like warrantless
[30:06.900 --> 30:11.220]  phone taps to keep us safe from terrorists, but too much government surveillance could
[30:11.220 --> 30:15.940]  actually put us at greater risk. I'm Dr. Katherine Albrecht, and I'll be back with the unsettling
[30:15.940 --> 30:22.500]  truth in just a moment. Privacy is under attack. When you give up data about yourself, you'll never
[30:22.500 --> 30:27.860]  get it back again. And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish,
[30:27.860 --> 30:34.580]  too. So protect your rights, say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself. Privacy,
[30:34.580 --> 30:39.780]  it's worth hanging on to. This public service announcement is brought to you by Startpage.com,
[30:39.780 --> 30:45.780]  the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo and Bing. Start over with Startpage.
[30:47.140 --> 30:51.380]  Our greatest threat isn't terrorists, it's government. According to political science
[30:51.380 --> 30:56.980]  professor R.J. Rummel, 20th century governments murdered nearly 300 million of their own citizens,
[30:56.980 --> 31:01.620]  six times more than all the centuries wars combined. And governments that kill have one
[31:01.620 --> 31:06.660]  thing in common, too much power. Surveillance is government power, and historically governments
[31:06.660 --> 31:10.900]  have used surveillance to protect themselves rather than citizens. If you think such abuse
[31:10.900 --> 31:15.620]  couldn't happen in the US, just look back to Watergate. Join me in opposing the Patriot Act,
[31:15.620 --> 31:19.700]  and let's return to the best protection, a federal government with limited powers in
[31:19.700 --> 31:27.460]  accordance with the US Constitution. I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht. More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[31:30.820 --> 31:35.380]  Did you know there are 3 million edible food plants on earth and none have the nutritional
[31:35.380 --> 31:41.060]  value of the hemp plant? HempUSA.org offers you hemp protein powder. It does not contain chemicals
[31:41.060 --> 31:47.620]  or THC, is non-GMO, and is 100% gluten-free. Hemp protein powder burns fat, builds muscle,
[31:47.620 --> 31:54.740]  contains 53% protein, and feeds the body the nutrients it needs. Call 888-910-4367
[31:54.740 --> 32:00.340]  and see what our powder, seeds, and oil can do for you only at hempusa.org.
[32:02.340 --> 32:06.660]  Rule of Law Radio is proud to offer the Rule of Law traffic seminar. In today's America, we live
[32:06.660 --> 32:10.580]  in an us against them society. If we the people are ever going to have a free society, then we're
[32:10.580 --> 32:14.900]  going to have to stand and defend our own rights. Among those rights are the right to travel freely
[32:14.900 --> 32:18.660]  from place to place, the right to act in our own private capacity, and most importantly, the right
[32:18.660 --> 32:23.300]  to due process of law. Traffic courts afford us the least expensive opportunity to learn how to
[32:23.300 --> 32:27.940]  enforce and preserve our rights through due process. Former Sheriff's Deputy Eddie Craig, in conjunction
[32:27.940 --> 32:31.620]  with Rule of Law Radio, has put together the most comprehensive teaching tool available that will
[32:31.620 --> 32:36.180]  help you understand what due process is and how to hold courts to the rule of law. You can get your
[32:36.180 --> 32:40.900]  own copy of this invaluable material by going to ruleoflawradio.com and ordering your copy today.
[32:40.900 --> 32:44.980]  By ordering now, you'll receive a copy of Eddie's book, The Texas Transportation Code, The Law Versus
[32:44.980 --> 32:49.620]  the Lie, video and audio of the original 2009 seminar, hundreds of research documents and other
[32:49.620 --> 32:53.300]  useful resource material. Learn how to fight for your rights with the help of this material from
[32:53.300 --> 32:58.340]  ruleoflawradio.com. Order your copy today and together we can have the free society we all want
[32:58.340 --> 33:12.100]  and deserve. You're listening to the Logos Radio Network at logosradionetwork.com.
[33:28.340 --> 33:37.700]  Okay, we are back. Randy Kelton, Rule of Law Radio, and we're talking to Jeff in Mississippi.
[33:38.260 --> 33:43.860]  And yeah, at the end of the day, Jeff, everything's political. You have to give them a political reason
[33:43.860 --> 33:50.660]  to do what you want. And here, as I was going out and saying that the Supreme, the Federal Supreme
[33:50.660 --> 33:58.660]  has no one to answer to. So they don't really have much in the way of repercussions. The state
[33:58.660 --> 34:09.540]  court does. The state court's not gonna want the feds overruling them. So when you raise an issue
[34:09.540 --> 34:19.140]  that has federal connotations to it, now you give them a reason to give you an adjudication in your
[34:19.140 --> 34:27.140]  favor. Is that making sense, Jeff? Yes, it does. But so far, the Supreme Court has just been
[34:27.140 --> 34:38.100]  throwing my case in the trash and not answering, just to not... Three percent get picked up. So
[34:38.820 --> 34:45.540]  it's hard to get them. I expect them to throw mine in the trash. And I struggled with it.
[34:45.540 --> 34:53.220]  To give them my best shot. And they'll either take it or they won't. But depending on how much
[34:53.220 --> 35:01.220]  you want to go after them, you're not even close to done yet. You might look at suing your lawyer
[35:01.220 --> 35:10.740]  big time for malpractice. Now you've got one of the lawyers in trouble for helping the court
[35:10.740 --> 35:18.660]  screw around to pro se. Now they got another reason. My last case, that's how I got it thrown
[35:18.660 --> 35:24.820]  out. They threw it out to protect my lawyer from me. So you got to know all of these lawyers and
[35:24.820 --> 35:31.460]  judges got their snouts in the same trough. So you start crucifying one of the lawyers
[35:31.460 --> 35:36.660]  for helping those guys screw you around. Now they owe it to the lawyer to bail him out,
[35:36.660 --> 35:50.180]  bail her out. It's all politics. And it's not that much harder. It just takes a mental shift.
[35:51.140 --> 35:58.020]  Once you shift that gear and you're looking for politics as it relates to law, rather than just
[35:58.020 --> 36:02.020]  depending on the rule of law, then you can start making some headway.
[36:02.020 --> 36:14.900]  Okay. Do you have anything else for us? No, I'm done. I will get to work on suing your lawyer.
[36:14.900 --> 36:23.620]  All right. That'll get your attention. Okay. Well, thank you very much. Okay. Thank you, Jeff.
[36:23.620 --> 36:34.820]  Okay. Now we're going to Scott in Texas. We do have a guest we're hoping to get on. We're having
[36:34.820 --> 36:42.020]  a little issues with bringing him up on Skype. He's one of our hosts from another show on the
[36:42.020 --> 36:47.220]  network with some issues that we will try to get him in a little bit later. Now we're going to go
[36:47.220 --> 36:58.020]  to Scott in Texas. Hello, Scott. Howdy, howdy. Well, things are kind of getting a little bit
[36:58.660 --> 37:05.220]  quasi back to normal since we ran out of gas around here yesterday. The prize has already
[37:05.220 --> 37:12.260]  shot up to three bucks a gallon, if you can find it, but they're starting to replenish some of the
[37:12.260 --> 37:19.060]  naturally rock wall, the smallest and richest County in Texas. One of my favorite little towns.
[37:19.060 --> 37:26.260]  They got all there's refilled today was like, cause you can go on GasBuddy.com and actually check
[37:26.260 --> 37:34.660]  and see what your weird, the cheapest gas, gas prices are. But yeah, it was pretty crazy around
[37:34.660 --> 37:40.660]  here for a little bit. It's still not back to normal. And like you said, I bet that gas is
[37:40.660 --> 37:46.500]  going to stay at three bucks a gallon for a while if it don't go a little bit higher. So
[37:47.540 --> 37:54.180]  yeah, it's, I mean, I'm in Tennessee and it's jumped about 30, 30 to 40 cents here.
[37:55.300 --> 38:04.900]  It's up to two 60. Right. Well, yeah, two 60 shoot that then make it all you can get.
[38:04.900 --> 38:11.780]  So, but yeah, it's, and then there's that other hurricane out there, Irma,
[38:11.780 --> 38:19.780]  and they already said in about three or three or four days, it's going to be the size of Texas.
[38:20.900 --> 38:29.540]  And this has 180 mile an hour sustained wind. So there's a high pressure Ridge above it.
[38:29.540 --> 38:36.100]  If the high pressure Ridge intensifies, it will push Irma down into the Bahamas.
[38:37.220 --> 38:44.580]  If that happens, it's going to pass the Bahamas roll out into the Gulf and good chance,
[38:44.820 --> 38:51.540]  because it will be past the high pressure Ridge that it'll begin to turn up North and turn right
[38:51.540 --> 39:00.500]  back into Texas. Yeah. That's one of the models and the spaghetti model. And it's the long shot.
[39:00.500 --> 39:08.580]  It's like all that thing has to do is dip down and we're in for a hell of a ride. That's all I can say.
[39:09.620 --> 39:16.420]  Yeah. So they're hoping that high pressure Ridge doesn't intensify and lets it wrap around.
[39:16.420 --> 39:29.380]  The high pressure Ridge is a big area of spinning air and the spinning air is pushing down against the hurricane and pushing it off and away from it.
[39:29.380 --> 39:37.220]  So if it grows bigger, it pushes it down farther. They're hoping it shrinks and lets the hurricane wrap around it.
[39:37.220 --> 39:43.140]  And if it does that, it'll wrap around it and run up the East coast. Somebody's going to get it from this one.
[39:43.140 --> 39:53.140]  It's much too big, much too fast. It's growing too fast. And it's barreling in on us. Somebody's going to get clobbered from this one. We just hope it's not Texas.
[39:55.140 --> 40:09.140]  Yeah. I mean, yeah, it's still Houston still messed up. So, and you know, the refineries, I don't know if they're online. We hadn't heard yet, but you know, those refineries feed the pipelines all the way up to New York.
[40:09.140 --> 40:15.140]  So any of them up there making fun of Texas better shut up.
[40:15.140 --> 40:33.140]  They're saying that 25% of national production is shut down. All of the refineries from Houston East to Lake Charles are shut down. And that's a quarter of the nation's production is offline.
[40:33.140 --> 40:55.140]  Yeah. So, and then another one coming in a week later. And so, yeah, this is going to be ugly. And, man, everybody better get prepared is all I can say. Because no matter where it hits, somebody is going to get creamed with this one.
[40:55.140 --> 41:09.140]  Good. Anyway. Well, I'm in Tennessee, and it's rained here all day. And this rain is from the hurricane.
[41:09.140 --> 41:32.140]  Yeah, that's from a Harvey. Yeah. And the thing is, it didn't rain much here in Dallas just off and on just a little bit. But it was, you know, nowhere near like it was, it was kind of odd the way it stalled out the band just kind of barely came around and pelted Dallas.
[41:32.140 --> 41:40.140]  But, yeah, when nothing down like just four hours away, it was just horrendous.
[41:40.140 --> 41:56.140]  Yeah, well, they've got flooding in Memphis, flooding in Kentucky. But I guess we were in one of the empty spaces because we didn't, we got rain, but just minor rained all night and most of the day, but just hit and miss.
[41:56.140 --> 42:06.140]  Okay, you got a response from one of your lawsuits.
[42:06.140 --> 42:26.140]  Yes, I actually found three lawsuits, one on the ski cops, the ski prosecutor and each judge, and file these in state court, and an attorney out of rock wall. If you had plenty of gas, go be able to go bail that thing off.
[42:26.140 --> 42:43.140]  Anyway, he sent me a letter saying that they got special exceptions and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. And their request for disclosure and answer request for disclosure, which ain't going to answer nothing in there, I guess.
[42:43.140 --> 43:02.140]  Well, I read what he wrote, it was about a page and a half. And he claimed special exceptions, except he didn't stipulate any special exceptions, other than he made a claim of official immunity.
[43:02.140 --> 43:14.140]  And there's something I have to check. Is a policeman in Texas considered a part of the judiciary or the executive?
[43:14.140 --> 43:29.140]  I've heard that they're part of the, you would expect them to be part of the executive, but I've heard that they're construed to be part of the judiciary because he claimed judicial immunity for the police officer.
[43:29.140 --> 43:40.140]  And that's something I need to look at because they should have derivative immunity and not judicial immunity.
[43:40.140 --> 43:59.140]  And if that's the case, then his claim that the officer has judicial immunity will fail. And they didn't claim that the officer had derivative immunity or official immunity in his capacity.
[44:10.140 --> 44:16.140]  Go to logosradionetwork.com and enter to win. Every $25 donation is a chance to win.
[44:16.140 --> 44:21.140]  From Central Texas Gunworks, first place, up for grabs, a Spikes Tactical AR-15.
[44:21.140 --> 44:25.140]  Second place, Taurus PT-111 G2 9mm pistol.
[44:25.140 --> 44:30.140]  From Defense Distributed, third place, the AR-308 80% lower.
[44:30.140 --> 44:33.140]  Fourth place, the AR-15 80% lower.
[44:33.140 --> 44:42.140]  From Fat Sal's Deli, fifth place, $100 gift card. From Fat Sal's Deli, every $25 donation is a chance to win. That's logosradionetwork.com.
[44:42.140 --> 44:47.140]  Also, if you purchase Randy Kelton's eBook, Legal 101, you get four chances to win.
[44:47.140 --> 44:51.140]  Purchase Eddie Craig's Traffic Seminar and get ten chances to win.
[44:51.140 --> 44:54.140]  And remember, every $25 donation is a chance to win.
[44:54.140 --> 45:00.140]  Go to logosradionetwork.com for details and donate today.
[45:00.140 --> 45:03.140]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[45:03.140 --> 45:07.140]  Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary.
[45:07.140 --> 45:15.140]  The affordable, easy to understand, 4CD course that will show you how in 24 hours, step by step.
[45:15.140 --> 45:19.140]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing.
[45:19.140 --> 45:22.140]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[45:22.140 --> 45:27.140]  Thousands have won with our step by step course and now you can too.
[45:27.140 --> 45:34.140]  Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case winning experience.
[45:34.140 --> 45:43.140]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand about the principles and practices that control our American courts.
[45:43.140 --> 45:52.140]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases, pro se tactics, and much more.
[45:52.140 --> 46:01.140]  Please visit RuleOfLawRadio.com and click on the banner or call toll free 866-LAW-EASY.
[46:22.140 --> 46:29.140]  Always, I must be careful, what I'm wishing for.
[46:29.140 --> 46:34.140]  When I'm hungry, I like to know just what I'm fishing for.
[46:34.140 --> 46:40.140]  I ain't asking for much, I ain't trying to be no glutton.
[46:40.140 --> 46:43.140]  I'm just here making my living...
[46:43.140 --> 46:49.140]  Okay, we are back. Randy Kelton, Rule of Law Radio and we're talking to Scott in Texas.
[46:49.140 --> 46:58.140]  Okay, so I read his answer and he really didn't answer.
[46:58.140 --> 47:02.140]  He didn't address any of the actual issues that you brought.
[47:02.140 --> 47:07.140]  So what I'm considering is a motion for summary judgment.
[47:07.140 --> 47:15.140]  He did not address your claims of lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
[47:15.140 --> 47:19.140]  He didn't deny your claim of subject matter jurisdiction.
[47:19.140 --> 47:22.140]  He did a general denial.
[47:22.140 --> 47:30.140]  But you made very specific claims and they had a responsibility to answer those claims.
[47:30.140 --> 47:34.140]  So effectively what they filed was a demurrer.
[47:34.140 --> 47:42.140]  And demurrers have been changed in Texas so you can no longer file a demurrer.
[47:42.140 --> 47:45.140]  You have to file a specific answer.
[47:45.140 --> 47:54.140]  So you might want to go for a motion for summary judgment on the issues he didn't address.
[47:54.140 --> 48:02.140]  Oh, that would be a pretty easy little thing to kind of put together then it sounds like.
[48:02.140 --> 48:13.140]  Yeah, it would force him to come in and demonstrate why he should be able to file a nothing answer.
[48:13.140 --> 48:19.140]  And Bar Grieve the lawyer of course, that's a given.
[48:19.140 --> 48:22.140]  To file a frivolous pleading.
[48:22.140 --> 48:31.140]  Yeah, isn't it true that you really don't even have to answer it and you just set it up for a quick date?
[48:31.140 --> 48:34.140]  Right, you don't have to respond to his answer.
[48:34.140 --> 48:37.140]  He had to answer.
[48:37.140 --> 48:38.140]  Right.
[48:38.140 --> 48:40.140]  But you don't have to respond to his answer.
[48:40.140 --> 48:44.140]  You can respond to his answer with a motion for summary judgment.
[48:44.140 --> 48:48.140]  Claiming that the answer was insufficient.
[48:48.140 --> 48:50.140]  And he'd do a little case law on it.
[48:50.140 --> 48:58.140]  But just by generally saying that you made a bunch of claims and we deny all of them.
[48:58.140 --> 48:59.140]  Yeah.
[48:59.140 --> 49:02.140]  What he said was we specifically deny all of them.
[49:02.140 --> 49:05.140]  But he didn't specifically deny all of them.
[49:05.140 --> 49:08.140]  He generally denied all of them.
[49:08.140 --> 49:26.140]  So on the claims that you were very specific about, especially subject matter jurisdiction, he did not deny subject matter jurisdiction and subject matter jurisdiction negates all of the immunity claims.
[49:26.140 --> 49:33.140]  Yeah, because, I mean, it was really simple.
[49:33.140 --> 49:38.140]  I mean, he just said special exception provided an answer.
[49:38.140 --> 49:54.140]  And in his answer, subject to the foregoing special exception, which are not waived nearby, but still insists upon defendant denies generally and especially each and every material allegation of plaintiff's original petition and demands strict proof thereof.
[49:54.140 --> 49:58.140]  The defendant requests a jury on all issues of fact theory.
[49:58.140 --> 50:05.140]  And an affirmative defense asserts the defense of qualified immunity all claims asserted by plaintiffs.
[50:05.140 --> 50:15.140]  And an affirmative defense defines the defendant asserts the defense of absolute judicial immunity to all claims asserted by plaintiffs.
[50:15.140 --> 50:16.140]  Yeah.
[50:16.140 --> 50:25.140]  And so he's just making a general qualified immunity cop deal is like, no, we got this.
[50:25.140 --> 50:27.140]  We just do this because we can.
[50:27.140 --> 50:30.140]  And, you know, it's none of your business.
[50:30.140 --> 50:31.140]  Yeah.
[50:31.140 --> 50:36.140]  And your claim was that the big the actions of the court will be outside scope.
[50:36.140 --> 50:37.140]  Wait a minute.
[50:37.140 --> 50:38.140]  Hold on.
[50:38.140 --> 50:43.140]  I have some case law directly on that.
[50:43.140 --> 50:50.140]  As a matter of fact, I have to go find it, but I have some case law exactly on that.
[50:50.140 --> 50:51.140]  Right.
[50:51.140 --> 50:54.140]  Where I was alleged outside scope.
[50:54.140 --> 51:15.140]  No, it's on a response of this type where there was where the petition claimed that the court acted outside scope and the answer didn't respond, didn't specifically address scope.
[51:15.140 --> 51:21.140]  Address what was actually specifically alleged in the petition.
[51:21.140 --> 51:22.140]  Yes.
[51:22.140 --> 51:23.140]  And they got clobbered for it.
[51:23.140 --> 51:25.140]  I've got that somewhere.
[51:25.140 --> 51:27.140]  I'll have to dig that up.
[51:27.140 --> 51:33.140]  So I'm amazed at how sloppy lawyers get.
[51:33.140 --> 51:38.140]  He's representing these three clients and you've got.
[51:38.140 --> 51:43.140]  Just pages of chapter verse code case law.
[51:43.140 --> 51:47.140]  He literally essentially did a brief here.
[51:47.140 --> 51:53.140]  And this guy does a. One page.
[51:53.140 --> 51:59.140]  Oh, that's all a bunch of nonsense and addresses nothing specifically.
[51:59.140 --> 52:05.140]  This guy dream he must think the coat that he owns the courts.
[52:05.140 --> 52:20.140]  Well, they all do, and that's their whole thing. They figure that they'll get their buddy, the judge to just, you know, oh, yeah, we'll, we'll take this and deny everything for the, for the poor pros, pitiful pros say.
[52:20.140 --> 52:23.140]  And then you have to appeal it and get it up to appeals court.
[52:23.140 --> 52:30.140]  So then an actual real judge will look at it, go, oh, somebody's got a problem here.
[52:30.140 --> 52:40.140]  Have you filed this demand for financial disclosure from the judge?
[52:40.140 --> 52:45.140]  On this particular judge, I don't recall.
[52:45.140 --> 53:03.140]  I'll have to look, you need to, you need to just send you sent you a copy the other day. You need to get that one in file that that puts the judge on notice that you're going to be looking over his shoulder.
[53:03.140 --> 53:08.140]  Right here, he is not going to be happy about that.
[53:08.140 --> 53:13.140]  Oh, no, he's not going to be happy with none of this.
[53:13.140 --> 53:20.140]  So, uh, and by the time I get done bar grieving, oh, Joe C.
[53:20.140 --> 53:27.140]  Tooley out of turtle co rock wall, Texas, I'm going to bar grieve him to donate.
[53:27.140 --> 53:39.140]  He gets, I'll usually send three per, you know, incident. This has got three different, he gets nine right out of the gate.
[53:39.140 --> 53:46.140]  Welcome to the pool. Welcome to the deep end of the pool.
[53:46.140 --> 53:57.140]  Yeah, well, you know, they're over waiting around, you know, come on over here, get on the other side of the little buoy line. Yeah, we're over here in the park now.
[53:57.140 --> 54:05.140]  But yeah, so that's what I need to work on. The end is just put together this summary judgment.
[54:05.140 --> 54:11.140]  And look at look at summary judgment and look at the.
[54:11.140 --> 54:15.140]  Sufficiency of an answer.
[54:15.140 --> 54:18.140]  How specific does an answer have to be?
[54:18.140 --> 54:34.140]  And there is some case law on that where depends on the specificity of the complaint will determine how much specificity the answer has to have in order to be responsive.
[54:34.140 --> 54:43.140]  And in either case, we'll maintain that the answer was non responsive and frivolous.
[54:43.140 --> 54:48.140]  So you're saying that the lawyers and idiotly filed a stupid pleading.
[54:48.140 --> 54:51.140]  So this is going to black his eye.
[54:51.140 --> 55:04.140]  Yeah, politics. And he's not going to be happy. He's not going to want to continue to represent these guys. Now they have to get more expensive counsel.
[55:04.140 --> 55:10.140]  And since you're claiming you want to find out who paid this lawyer.
[55:10.140 --> 55:24.140]  Since your claim is based on a lack of subject matter jurisdiction, the claim is, is that the officer acted in his personal capacity, not in his official capacity, because he didn't have an official capacity.
[55:24.140 --> 55:41.140]  And that the whoever paid this guy, if it wasn't the officer or his and all the officers insurance carrier, then if it was paid by the county or the city, then that's a misappropriation of public funds.
[55:41.140 --> 55:55.140]  We did that to a JP in Austin, and he sued him claiming he lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the petition was insufficient to invoke the subject matter jurisdiction.
[55:55.140 --> 56:03.140]  He got the county attorney to answer. So we sued the county attorney for misappropriation of public funds.
[56:03.140 --> 56:08.140]  Oh, that was so much fun.
[56:08.140 --> 56:11.140]  Nice.
[56:11.140 --> 56:26.140]  Anyway, look at that because of the nature of your claim, your claim asserted lack of authority of the officer to invoke the subject matter jurisdiction of the court.
[56:26.140 --> 56:40.140]  So no body has immunity. And it's not whether or not you can prove your claim that keeps you in court. It is the nature of the claim.
[56:40.140 --> 56:53.140]  The nature of your claim was that there was no subject matter jurisdiction. Therefore, if you hit a claim that the officer acted within scope, that he would automatically have immunity.
[56:53.140 --> 57:07.140]  But when you claim the acted outside of scope, it becomes a question of fact and law that must be adjudicated. So they can't capriciously and arbitrarily throw the case out.
[57:07.140 --> 57:16.140]  It's all about the sufficiency of the pleading and not the sufficiency of the proof. Does that make sense, Scott?
[57:16.140 --> 57:23.140]  Yeah, vaguely. I'm taking some notes here.
[57:23.140 --> 57:43.140]  In order to keep your suit in the court on the front end, you don't have to prove up everything. You have to make a claim that in order to grant or deny immunity, they would have to dispel your claim.
[57:43.140 --> 58:01.140]  So they can't do that summarily. You're claiming no subject matter jurisdiction and they're saying, yeah, we do have subject matter jurisdiction. That creates a fact matter for the court.
[58:01.140 --> 58:06.140]  So they can't toss it because they have to adjudicate the fact matter.
[58:06.140 --> 58:29.140]  If you had said the officer acting under would pull me over and he was abusive and he denied me in due process, then they would have granted him immunity because he's acting within scope, even though he's acting improperly within scope, still within scope.
[58:29.140 --> 58:39.140]  If you're claiming he didn't have any scope, then he's out of there. Hang on. About to go to break. Randy Kelton. We love radio. I'm trying to find a way to make this make more sense.
[58:39.140 --> 59:00.140]  I'll see if I can figure that out over the break. We'll be right back.
[59:09.140 --> 59:19.140]  We'll be right back.
[59:39.140 --> 59:49.140]  888-551-0102. That's 888-551-0102. Or visit us online at BFA.org.
[01:00:09.140 --> 01:00:29.140]  Markets for Monday, the 21st of August, 2017, closed with gold at $1,290.99 an ounce, silver $17.01 an ounce, Texas crude $48.50 a barrel, Bitcoin $4,021.99, and Bitcoin cash is sitting at about 605 U.S. currency.
[01:00:29.140 --> 01:00:40.140]  Today in history, the year 1911. The Mona Lisa is stolen by a Louvre employee, with the theft not being discovered until the next day. The Louvre was closed for an entire week during the investigation.
[01:00:40.140 --> 01:00:52.140]  French poet Guillaume Apollinaire, who had once called for the Louvre to be burnt down, came under suspicion and was arrested and imprisoned, implicating his friend, Pablo Picasso, who was brought in for questioning.
[01:00:52.140 --> 01:01:08.140]  Both were eventually later exonerated. Two years later, the thief unmasked himself to be a Louvre employee, Vicenzo Perogia, who had stolen the Mona Lisa by entering the building during regular hours, hiding it in a broom closet, and walking out with it under his coat after the museum had closed.
[01:01:08.140 --> 01:01:10.140]  Today in history.
[01:01:10.140 --> 01:01:25.140]  In recent news, Spanish police shot dead 22-year-old Islamist Younis Abou Yaqub, who murdered 13 people with a van in Barcelona's most renowned avenue, Las Ramblas, Thursday of last week, fleeing the scene in a car he hijacked after fatally stabbing and murdering the driver.
[01:01:25.140 --> 01:01:41.140]  According to police statements, a bomb squad used a robot to approach his body after tracking him to a rural area near Barcelona. As seems to be routine with these terrorist suspects, police shot and killed him after he held up what looked like what police say appeared to be an explosive belt while shouting Aloua Akbar.
[01:01:41.140 --> 01:02:00.140]  The Islamic State is claiming responsibility, and police did indicate they suspect it was planned by a dozen accomplices, including his Moroccan-born brother and two first cousins, who are still at large. Five were shot hours after the van attacked, two of which were killed, while another was injured the day before in a blast at the house where they were fabricating explosives. Another three were later arrested.
[01:02:00.140 --> 01:02:15.140]  With 13 murdered, 120 injured, and 8 remaining in critical condition at the hospital, this is the deadliest attack in Spain since March of 2004. Our thoughts and prayers go out to all victims of all terrorism.
[01:02:15.140 --> 01:02:44.140]  A public petition signed by over 180,000 people in just over four days, hosted on the official whitehouse.gov website, is asking the White House to classify ANTIFA as a terrorist organization due to its propensity towards violence, with terrorism being defined as, quote, the use of violence and intimidation in pursuit of political aims, the same definition that is applied to ISIS and other groups of terrorist organizations. The White House has to officially respond to petitions that collect over 100,000 signatures within 60 days.
[01:02:44.140 --> 01:02:54.140]  The most recorded and viewed solar eclipse, the Great American Eclipse, traversed the continental United States today. Go check out the footage for yourself on YouTube.
[01:02:54.140 --> 01:03:18.140]  This was Rick Rodeo with your Lowdown for August 21, 2017.
[01:03:18.140 --> 01:03:27.140]  These warmongers come by that term rightly.
[01:03:27.140 --> 01:03:52.140]  I won't pay for the war with my body. Ain't gonna pay for the car with my money. I won't pay for the fun with my body. There's plants wicked and their logic shoddy. Ain't gonna pay for the oil with my body. I won't pay for the boys with my money. Ain't gonna pay for the kids with my body.
[01:03:52.140 --> 01:04:15.140]  Their whole agenda smells funny. I wanna fight in a war of my own. That one would be less accidental. I wanna pay for a war of my own.
[01:04:15.140 --> 01:04:42.140]  They live in glass houses so I can watch them grow gone. I wanna fight in a war I can win. I can never win the one that they have me in. That one I lose one before it begins. I wanna pay for a war I can win when I'm fighting in my own war.
[01:04:42.140 --> 01:04:59.140]  I wanna pay for a war I can win when I'm fighting in my own war.
[01:04:59.140 --> 01:05:15.140]  Of course, the first way I would do it was with a class I used to be in, which was a misconduct complaint under 552.353. In the open record, the Open Government Act in Texas, Chapter 552.
[01:05:15.140 --> 01:05:40.140]  He says he cares not for the unsightly. These fear mongers come by that turn right.
[01:05:40.140 --> 01:05:47.140]  He says he cares not for the unsightly.
[01:06:11.140 --> 01:06:16.140]  Hello? Can you hear me?
[01:06:16.140 --> 01:06:24.140]  I can hear you.
[01:06:24.140 --> 01:06:28.140]  Do you want to just join in right now or what?
[01:06:28.140 --> 01:06:32.140]  Yeah. Are we up?
[01:06:32.140 --> 01:06:54.140]  Okay. Sorry folks that we're having some minor issues there on the break. We had a little trouble getting back in. It seems like my VNC crashed and so did the producers. Must be that storm in Texas that's causing all this problem. But anyway, we're back up.
[01:06:54.140 --> 01:06:57.140]  And Scott, do you have any more for us?
[01:06:57.140 --> 01:06:59.140]  I'm good.
[01:06:59.140 --> 01:07:16.140]  Okay. Then we have our guest up. We've been trying to get up all evening. We're going to go to Dawn. I don't even know where you're at, Dawn. We'll just call him Dawn from somewhere. Hello, Dawn.
[01:07:16.140 --> 01:07:18.140]  Hello. Can you hear me?
[01:07:18.140 --> 01:07:20.140]  I can hear you.
[01:07:20.140 --> 01:07:24.140]  Alright. I'm in Alabama right now.
[01:07:24.140 --> 01:07:38.140]  I knew it was Alabama and Mississippi. I can speak the language. I'm in Tennessee right now and I am surrounded by hillbillies.
[01:07:38.140 --> 01:07:49.140]  And I'm kin to all of them a couple of times over.
[01:07:49.140 --> 01:07:55.140]  Oh. Well, you learned the language in Alabama.
[01:07:55.140 --> 01:08:03.140]  Yeah. You can go down, but it's hard going up. You know, go down and stay at the station.
[01:08:03.140 --> 01:08:07.140]  I understand you have some issues.
[01:08:07.140 --> 01:08:19.140]  Yeah. I got pulled over for a traffic stop a couple of years ago, 2014, actually. And so I, you know, I fought it and I filed a federal lawsuit for rights violation.
[01:08:19.140 --> 01:08:30.140]  But it's just normal. Nothing fancy lawsuit. It's just looking at the table of contents. It's just a complaint, a petition, a jurisdiction, venue, an introduction.
[01:08:30.140 --> 01:08:40.140]  And then I had eight causes of action, you know, neglect to prevent rights deprivation, loss of liberty, breach of fiduciary duty, stuff like that.
[01:08:40.140 --> 01:08:53.140]  And then just this week, I didn't know, but just this week I got arrested under Alabama law. Call it up.
[01:08:53.140 --> 01:09:01.140]  It's 13... Hold on a second. Come on. Participate with me.
[01:09:01.140 --> 01:09:07.140]  And it's called of Alabama 13A-10-132F.
[01:09:07.140 --> 01:09:20.140]  It says it should be unlawful for a person to falsely assert authority of law in an attempt to intimidate or hinder a state or local official or employee or a law enforcement officer in the discharge of official duty.
[01:09:20.140 --> 01:09:27.140]  By means of threat, harassment, physical abuse, or use of a sham legal process.
[01:09:27.140 --> 01:09:31.140]  The person violating the subsection is guilty of a Class C felony.
[01:09:31.140 --> 01:09:36.140]  And so I'm facing that. They're filing a lawsuit.
[01:09:36.140 --> 01:09:46.140]  Now the lawsuit, I filed it in federal court. The local court, after several months of papers going back and forth, dismissed it.
[01:09:46.140 --> 01:09:53.140]  The state charges he dismissed without prejudice. So I appealed it, but I was out of town.
[01:09:53.140 --> 01:10:02.140]  So I missed a deadline because by the time I got the papers and wrote it and put it in, I had missed a deadline by a day or two.
[01:10:02.140 --> 01:10:04.140]  And so they threw it out.
[01:10:04.140 --> 01:10:10.140]  Did you file a motion for extension of time?
[01:10:10.140 --> 01:10:18.140]  No, I didn't. I didn't do that, probably for a couple of reasons, mainly because I was still working out of town.
[01:10:18.140 --> 01:10:20.140]  And anyway, I should have, but I didn't.
[01:10:20.140 --> 01:10:23.140]  And so I didn't think it was any big deal.
[01:10:23.140 --> 01:10:26.140]  I thought, OK, well, I made my point. They're going to leave me alone.
[01:10:26.140 --> 01:10:37.140]  And to my amazement that somebody had got their feelings hurt, been out of shape, and thought I was threatening, harassing them, or intimidating them.
[01:10:37.140 --> 01:10:41.140]  And trying to claim it was a sham legal process, I guess.
[01:10:41.140 --> 01:10:46.140]  I have not seen the indictment. I have not seen a complaint. They refused to let me see that.
[01:10:46.140 --> 01:10:53.140]  The cops that had arrested me were passing it around. They were laughing at it. They had never heard of such a thing.
[01:10:53.140 --> 01:10:56.140]  I've never heard of such a thing.
[01:10:56.140 --> 01:11:13.140]  If the original petition was not dismissed sua sponte by the court, then there is no standing for a claim of a frivolous lawsuit.
[01:11:13.140 --> 01:11:18.140]  This is heavy federal business.
[01:11:18.140 --> 01:11:29.140]  Are you familiar with 42 U.S. Code 141-41?
[01:11:29.140 --> 01:11:35.140]  No, somebody had mentioned that to me just recently.
[01:11:35.140 --> 01:11:46.140]  OK, what this is, is a statute that authorizes the attorney general to investigate into local law enforcement for abusive practices.
[01:11:46.140 --> 01:11:52.140]  I heard that on your show last night. That's where I heard it. It was a replay, but I heard it on your show.
[01:11:52.140 --> 01:12:12.140]  Yeah, this is a big deal. Now, we've got a guy in Tennessee who went to the local FBI and presented an issue similar to this where they stopped him seven times for invalid driver's license.
[01:12:12.140 --> 01:12:19.140]  But he's got a valid driver's license. Out of Virginia, he's in Tennessee.
[01:12:19.140 --> 01:12:25.140]  And he got it thrown out in one court because he produced a valid license.
[01:12:25.140 --> 01:12:33.140]  And they just kept stopping him every time they saw him, retaliation. And every time they stopped him, he sued him.
[01:12:33.140 --> 01:12:39.140]  And finally, I got him to go to the FBI. Now, none of us trust the FBI.
[01:12:39.140 --> 01:12:48.140]  However, they're all lascivious, backstabbing scoundrels.
[01:12:48.140 --> 01:12:53.140]  And while we don't trust them, they're all trying to claw their way to the top.
[01:12:53.140 --> 01:13:01.140]  So you need to take them something that they can use to make themselves look good.
[01:13:01.140 --> 01:13:12.140]  And something, an action of this nature, is just on its face is ludicrous.
[01:13:12.140 --> 01:13:14.140]  Yes.
[01:13:14.140 --> 01:13:26.140]  If the suit had been frivolous, apparently you haven't been designated as a, what do you call it, not a frivolous litigant.
[01:13:26.140 --> 01:13:28.140]  Litigant?
[01:13:28.140 --> 01:13:35.140]  Yeah. So we haven't been, no, vexatious litigant, exactly.
[01:13:35.140 --> 01:13:46.140]  So if you don't have that designation, and you haven't filed multiple lawsuits that have been summarily been dismissed.
[01:13:46.140 --> 01:13:55.140]  And then this case wasn't dismissed until it was adjudicated. I take it there was an answer and responses and discovery.
[01:13:55.140 --> 01:14:11.140]  So this one made it past the front door. So what the state is saying, that if you sue us and you don't win, we're going to come back and retaliate and throw you in jail.
[01:14:11.140 --> 01:14:22.140]  Exactly. Very chilling. Now, I got past their motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. I got past that easily.
[01:14:22.140 --> 01:14:28.140]  So that makes your suit valid. That makes all of this retaliation. Big time.
[01:14:28.140 --> 01:14:30.140]  Exactly.
[01:14:30.140 --> 01:14:53.140]  And this is exactly the kind of thing that's, since Ferguson, Missouri, this is kind of a big deal right now. And the agent in Tennessee apparently took it up because it got real ugly down there. The Supreme Court changed the rules.
[01:14:53.140 --> 01:15:06.140]  They prosecuted this guy, and he appealed, and they denied him, they set an excessive cash bond and denied him bail.
[01:15:06.140 --> 01:15:18.140]  And the law said that his bail on the original charge carried all the way through appeal. So they took this issue up with him.
[01:15:18.140 --> 01:15:30.140]  He went to his state legislature as well, and next time they come to court, the judge notified everybody they hadn't been doing things right. They're going to have to do them different from now on.
[01:15:30.140 --> 01:15:49.140]  That they had to have hearings on every motion. The prosecutor had to write an answer responsive to each motion. They had some pet responses they were filing that weren't responsive to what was actually being filed with the court, and they just blew everything off.
[01:15:49.140 --> 01:16:02.140]  Well, they had to change all that. They had to add three more days a month for these hearings. The next time he was leaving, and the clerk had told him before, we've got some changes you need to come and look at.
[01:16:02.140 --> 01:16:20.140]  The second time the clerk told him that, he was busy and was doing another thing, and the clerk said, no, no, no, no, no. You don't understand. We have some changes you need to look at. And he said, oh, okay.
[01:16:20.140 --> 01:16:37.140]  The Supreme Court of the state of Tennessee changed the rules and made it so that the trial court could no longer demand a bond on appeal.
[01:16:37.140 --> 01:16:47.140]  They eliminated it all together, and that's because he got into the politics.
[01:16:47.140 --> 01:16:53.140]  That's great. That's just sort of like a perfect storm, but I'm not into politics. I don't know any politicians.
[01:16:53.140 --> 01:17:10.140]  Okay. Let me step back here. One of the things that I've come to understand in doing this show and taking these officials on all this time, is I finally come to realize that you'll never win your case simply because you have the law and the facts on your side.
[01:17:10.140 --> 01:17:32.140]  It is not that way now, never has been that way since we have had human beings as judges. You'll win your case if you have the politics on your side, and it's caused me to take a very different tact.
[01:17:32.140 --> 01:17:46.140]  You know what I do, that I'm a creature of statute. I study the law, I follow the law, I use the law, but I came to realize that the law is not enough.
[01:17:46.140 --> 01:17:58.140]  At the end of the day, everything is political, and all politics is local. So I started looking at how do we create some local politics?
[01:17:58.140 --> 01:18:12.140]  One way we create local politics is criminal charges. Everybody involved in this arrest should get charges. Do you have a direct grand jury in Alabama?
[01:18:12.140 --> 01:18:17.140]  Yes, I believe we do. Of course, it's in the pocket of a district attorney.
[01:18:17.140 --> 01:18:34.140]  Okay, let me tell you about that. Austin, Texas. I'm getting the same stuff about the grand jury being in the pocket of the prosecutor. I went down and forced him to provide me with the minutes of the grand jury.
[01:18:34.140 --> 01:18:55.140]  The minutes of the grand jury is what the foreman of the grand jury reads to the court concerning the true bill or no bill. Every single set of minutes, meaning every time a grand jury met, they come to the court and they read in what they did.
[01:18:55.140 --> 01:19:09.140]  In every single one, there were no bills. A couple of them, half of them were no bills. I walked into my district attorney's office, and the district attorney in the county I live in and I are personal friends.
[01:19:09.140 --> 01:19:21.140]  Now if you call him and ask him if I'm crazy, he'll tell you, yeah, I am. But if I tell you the law is a certain way, listen, because I do my homework. So we have this respect.
[01:19:21.140 --> 01:19:35.140]  I walk in his office one day and he's sitting there with his head in his hand and I said, Greg, what's the matter? He said, those darn grand jurors, you never know what they're gonna do.
[01:19:35.140 --> 01:19:54.140]  And I held both hands up and looked up at the ceiling and said, there is a God. I could not have heard anything better. I know people think the prosecutor has the grand jury in his pocket and he may to some degree.
[01:19:54.140 --> 01:20:10.140]  But he doesn't believe he does. He believes those grand jurors are a major pain in his backside and he never knows what they're going to do. So it's not about necessarily getting an indictment.
[01:20:10.140 --> 01:20:28.140]  It's about getting these public officials playing Russian roulette. And another thing, politically, the most powerful thing you can do to a police officer is not file a criminal complaint against him.
[01:20:28.140 --> 01:20:48.140]  It's to file a professional conduct complaint against him. He gets a half a dozen of those and he's out of business because they have a municipality or a county that has a bond. That's their form of insurance.
[01:20:48.140 --> 01:21:11.140]  And they have a bond rating. A policeman gets half a dozen professional conduct complaints, then they've got an insurance agent and it's his job to charge his customer as much as he possibly can and then avoid paying every claim he possibly can.
[01:21:11.140 --> 01:21:25.140]  So he's watching him like a hawk. Officer gets a professional conduct complaint, eh, that's a mark. Ballad, invalid. He don't care. Just like bar grievances, they don't care.
[01:21:25.140 --> 01:21:36.140]  You buy a new car, you go down to Walmart, you go inside, come out, somebody's bashed a fender in. Call the insurance company, they come out, they fix it, they double your premium.
[01:21:36.140 --> 01:21:46.140]  You come back next month, somebody's bashed another one in. You call them, they fix it, they cancel. Your fault, their fault, nobody's fault. They don't care.
[01:21:46.140 --> 01:22:11.140]  You are an unacceptable risk. Same thing. You start filing professional conduct complaints against them, these cops are gonna go ballistic. They get six of them, they not only will get fired from this department because the insurance agent's gonna come say, sorry guys, I gotta raise your bond rating.
[01:22:11.140 --> 01:22:25.140]  So you pay more insurance for everybody. So we don't want that to happen, so Mr. Guy with six, you're toast. And nobody else is gonna hire this guy.
[01:22:25.140 --> 01:22:41.140]  These officers... Scott was on before you, he did that to two officers and when he got back to court, both of them were gone. They quit.
[01:22:41.140 --> 01:22:57.140]  Bar grievances, judicial conduct complaints, if you start filing those, they can't even complain about it.
[01:22:57.140 --> 01:23:21.140]  You have to look up who is the agency that certifies police officers or peace officers in Alabama. It's like the bar, it's like the American Medical Association, there's one of these for plumbers, electricians, everybody who's licensed has one of these.
[01:23:21.140 --> 01:23:32.140]  You find out who does it for the state of Alabama and you start filing with them and the harder it is to find out who this is, the better.
[01:23:32.140 --> 01:23:45.140]  Because that means they're going to a lot of trouble to hide it and they don't get so many because of it. So everyone they get will be even more damning to the officer that gets it.
[01:23:45.140 --> 01:23:52.140]  And then you file criminal charges. You file criminal charges, you don't care if they get indicted or not.
[01:23:52.140 --> 01:24:06.140]  But who here wants to play Russian roulette with their career, with their freedom? I go into court and I notify the court that I want to challenge the grand jury pool.
[01:24:06.140 --> 01:24:20.140]  The prosecutor said, well Mr. Kelton, why do you want to do that? Because the law says I can. Oh, okay. Well, I notify him, I go in, the judge impanels the grand jury without giving me an opportunity to challenge.
[01:24:20.140 --> 01:24:33.140]  So he steps down off the bench and I approach, I said, your honor, you need to bring that grand jury back in here to expand it, reassemble the pool, give me opportunity to challenge the pool, then reassemble the grand jury.
[01:24:33.140 --> 01:24:45.140]  And oh, he got all excited and said that I just have to figure out the right procedure. And I said, well, since you're the judge, it's your duty to ensure my rights, you have to come up with one.
[01:24:45.140 --> 01:24:52.140]  And he said, well, Mr. Kelton, you'll just have to figure it out. And I said, well, I guess we'll see what Austin has to say about that.
[01:24:52.140 --> 01:25:05.140]  He said, are you threatening me? He tells the bailiff, Mr. Kelton threatened me, arrest him. Bailiff came over and put his hand on my arm. And I looked down at him, I said, Mr. Bailiff, I see you're wearing a pistol.
[01:25:05.140 --> 01:25:16.140]  Yes, Mr. Kelton, I am. Tell me, Mr. Bailiff, is that pistol loaded? The judge got it. He knew where I was going. So he said, that's okay, Mr. Bailiff, you can stand down.
[01:25:16.140 --> 01:25:25.140]  Sorry, Bubba, that bail has already been rung. I charged him with first degree felony aggravated assault.
[01:25:25.140 --> 01:25:39.140]  Yeah, the judge, oh, that was so much fun, you won't believe it. And the judge could not believe that this was happening.
[01:25:39.140 --> 01:25:49.140]  If you commit simple assault in the state of Texas, and you are prominently displaying a dead weapon, that is a felony of the second degree.
[01:25:49.140 --> 01:26:04.140]  Unless you are a public official acting under the color of an official capacity, in which case it's a felony of the first degree. He assaulted me with the bailiff.
[01:26:04.140 --> 01:26:13.140]  So I filed first degree felony aggravated assault charges with a Texas Ranger who gave it to the prosecuting attorney. So I filed against a Texas Ranger.
[01:26:13.140 --> 01:26:20.140]  And the director of the Department of Public Safety took them all to the grand jury of the grand jury and don't build them.
[01:26:20.140 --> 01:26:26.140]  So I want to take them back. Well, the judge kind of ruined everything because he up and died on me.
[01:26:26.140 --> 01:26:39.140]  So I kind of ruined the whole thing. But point is, you can file criminal charges against him and there you have the exact same immunity a judge has.
[01:26:39.140 --> 01:26:53.140]  Once you start filing, now you become untouchable. Anything, you poison their will, anything they do can be construed as retaliation.
[01:26:53.140 --> 01:27:05.140]  And the way I do it is I like to file on the guy on the bottom. You file a complaint against one of these police officers with the magistrate. The magistrate will refuse to take it.
[01:27:05.140 --> 01:27:24.140]  See, this goes to another one of my rules. Never ask a public official to do anything you actually want him to do because you never ask a public official to do anything that the law does not command him to do.
[01:27:24.140 --> 01:27:35.140]  And when he doesn't do it, you get to sting him, official his conduct, fail to perform a duty he is required to perform, and in the process deny you the full and free access to her enjoyment right.
[01:27:35.140 --> 01:27:46.140]  That's a crime in every state. So you file against this guy for protecting that guy. This guy's not going to be happy because
[01:27:46.140 --> 01:27:58.140]  It's that tarball you talk about. Pardon me? It's that tarball you talk about. Tar baby. Yeah, I got this little tar baby here. You want to touch it? Go ahead, touch it, touch it.
[01:27:58.140 --> 01:28:09.140]  This works. When you get to the district judge, these chumps down at the bottom, they don't have much sensitivity.
[01:28:09.140 --> 01:28:25.140]  But that district judge, everybody wants his job. And he knows it. He's not particularly afraid of you. He's afraid of the political cannon fodder you're going to create for his next opponent.
[01:28:25.140 --> 01:28:39.140]  That's what he's worried about. So I'd like to create lots of cannon fodder. And there is not anything they can do about that. And you're laying a track record.
[01:28:39.140 --> 01:28:55.140]  You're laying a record of these improper practices and procedures, and you're showing how they're going to say, well, how could you imagine that a police officer would do something this corrupt? And say, well, here's why he would do it.
[01:28:55.140 --> 01:29:02.140]  He would do it because the judge wants him to, and he knows the judge is going to protect him. Here, look here. Here's how the judge protected him.
[01:29:02.140 --> 01:29:09.140]  And why would the judge think he could get away with protecting him? Oh, because everybody else is going to protect him. See here how I walk them all up the line?
[01:29:09.140 --> 01:29:20.140]  And everybody's involved in this, thinking in terms of a grand jury of your peers, not their peers.
[01:29:20.140 --> 01:29:38.140]  We're building a story that looks very damning. And you don't really have to get this all to a grand jury, as long as you're making grand jury noises. Now these guys, they look at a freight train coming at them.
[01:29:38.140 --> 01:30:02.140]  I keep telling everybody, people hate pro se's. Their judges hate pro se's. And not because they write stupid pleadings, because that makes them really easy to handle. Hate pro se's because every once in a while they come across the pro se from hell, who understands the politics and understands how to land on them like a ton of bricks.
[01:30:02.140 --> 01:30:14.140]  Now a lawyer wouldn't dare do this kind of stuff. And if you get a court appointed counsel, oh you got that guy. Now you've got somebody you can use.
[01:30:14.140 --> 01:30:22.140]  Even if you get paid counsel, but court appointed counsel is better. Because you get the judge to appoint you counsel.
[01:30:22.140 --> 01:30:35.140]  The first thing you do to counsel is you let the counsel know that you're going to adjudicate every single one of my rights. If you fail to adequately adjudicate a single right, I will bar grieve you for it.
[01:30:35.140 --> 01:30:54.140]  I told that to my lawyer and he said, Mr. Kelton, you would grieve me? And a heart beat. Now he's terrified. What I told him to start with, I had these 19 due process issues that are already filed in the court.
[01:30:54.140 --> 01:31:06.140]  I'm sorry, let me back up. First thing he told me when they appointed him, I didn't ask him to, they just decided to, that he's telling me how things are going to go. And I said, no, they're not going to go that way. Well then how are they going to?
[01:31:06.140 --> 01:31:08.140]  We're on break.
[01:31:08.140 --> 01:31:10.140]  We're on break?
[01:31:10.140 --> 01:31:14.140]  Yes, the timed events didn't get turned back on, so we're on break.
[01:31:14.140 --> 01:31:15.140]  Oh, okay.
[01:31:15.140 --> 01:31:16.140]  I didn't hear the beat.
[01:31:16.140 --> 01:31:18.140]  I just turned them back on.
[01:31:18.140 --> 01:31:29.140]  Okay. Okay. I get to blame Robert. I ran off the cliff every time and it's all Robert's fault.
[01:31:29.140 --> 01:31:36.140]  All right. Well, I'm going to have to go. Anyway, you've got four callers on the line anyway, but you gave me some good ideas, Randy. Thank you.
[01:31:36.140 --> 01:31:50.140]  Okay. Just hope I can help. Just if you need more help, call me, let me know. I've done this a lot. I've got a lot of strategies to give them reason to want to make all this go away.
[01:31:50.140 --> 01:31:59.140]  They're going to be, they're going to threaten you and they're going to huff and puff until they get right up to the courthouse door and then they're going to fold and run for cover.
[01:31:59.140 --> 01:32:09.140]  Pat Baker, if you heard him last week, that's what they did to him for two years. They come after, they got to the courthouse door, they dismissed everything.
[01:32:09.140 --> 01:32:14.140]  Mike Handel, same way.
[01:32:14.140 --> 01:32:26.140]  So they're just making noise trying to scare you out of there, scare you into taking a deal. Once you take the deal, then you are discredited permanently.
[01:32:26.140 --> 01:32:31.140]  I agree. I agree. And it's scary, but no deal.
[01:32:31.140 --> 01:32:43.140]  Okay. Those are the guys who win, the guys who refuse to take a deal. The ones who don't, they get creamed. And I understand, I've been there myself, I know how hard it is.
[01:32:43.140 --> 01:32:46.140]  But I'll give you any help I can.
[01:32:46.140 --> 01:32:48.140]  All right. Thank you, Randy.
[01:32:48.140 --> 01:32:49.140]  Okay.
[01:32:49.140 --> 01:32:50.140]  Good night.
[01:32:50.140 --> 01:32:52.140]  Thank you for coming on.
[01:32:52.140 --> 01:32:56.140]  No problem. I enjoyed it. Thanks.
[01:32:56.140 --> 01:33:01.140]  It was Jeff from Mississippi. Did you finish with him? Because he's still on.
[01:33:01.140 --> 01:33:06.140]  Yeah, I did. Just leave him alone. He's driving across the country in Montana.
[01:33:06.140 --> 01:33:09.140]  Okay. Well, the show is back on now.
[01:33:09.140 --> 01:33:10.140]  Oh, okay.
[01:33:10.140 --> 01:33:11.140]  Ready?
[01:33:11.140 --> 01:33:12.140]  Yes.
[01:33:12.140 --> 01:33:18.140]  Here we go.
[01:33:18.140 --> 01:33:27.140]  Okay. We are back. And I apologize for running off the cliff last time. We had our timed events off, so I didn't know it was coming.
[01:33:27.140 --> 01:33:34.140]  We've got it all straightened out now. We've been having some minor technical issues, but I think we got them straightened out.
[01:33:34.140 --> 01:33:43.140]  And we lost Don, so now we're going to go to Christian in Texas. Hello, Christian.
[01:33:43.140 --> 01:33:45.140]  Hi. Can you hear me?
[01:33:45.140 --> 01:33:47.140]  Yes, I can.
[01:33:47.140 --> 01:33:52.140]  All right. Good. Okay. So I just had a few questions.
[01:33:52.140 --> 01:34:09.140]  I always hear you guys talking about challenging the officer's authority to even enforce the transportation code. That's only for municipal cops, correct?
[01:34:09.140 --> 01:34:14.140]  Well, it depends.
[01:34:14.140 --> 01:34:31.140]  If he charged you with something higher, the question goes to what was his probable cause for approaching you in the first instance.
[01:34:31.140 --> 01:34:46.140]  But subject matter jurisdiction, depending on the circumstances, you can challenge it for anything. What I'm looking at, what I've been doing with traffic tickets is the right to travel has been well adjudicated.
[01:34:46.140 --> 01:35:04.140]  We have a right to travel, but the courts have also said that requiring someone to have a driver's license doesn't interfere with his right to travel. The right goes to ingress and egress from one state to another, and that's not implicated.
[01:35:04.140 --> 01:35:24.140]  What they're saying is the state has an inherent right to regulate how you travel. You can't travel in a way that places other people in danger, so they have an inherent right to put some restrictions on how you travel.
[01:35:24.140 --> 01:35:38.140]  I can't get there, so what I'm looking at is the citation. The citation alleges a violation of the motor vehicle code.
[01:35:38.140 --> 01:36:01.140]  And I see you're in Texas, so the way I read the code, in order to be able to make that stop in the first instance, the officer would either have to be a DPS officer, or he would have to be a sheriff's deputy riding a motorcycle.
[01:36:01.140 --> 01:36:21.140]  And there can only be five in any one county. That's what the code says. So if he's not a sheriff's deputy and or he's not riding a motorcycle, then I have reason to believe that he doesn't have authority to enforce transportation code.
[01:36:21.140 --> 01:36:50.140]  So my first question is, since the transportation code is a code of limited enforcement, in order to establish your subject matter jurisdiction, the first thing that must be in the complaint as an element is the officer's authority to enforce this restricted enforcement code.
[01:36:50.140 --> 01:37:07.140]  But it's not in there. There's not anything about this officer's authority. It is presumed. And it's my assertion that the citation is insufficient on its face to invoke subject matter jurisdiction of the court.
[01:37:07.140 --> 01:37:32.140]  We're not going to do I have a right to travel? Am I in commerce? I'm not going to any of that stuff. I'm saying you're pleading, you're original pleading the complaint is insufficient on his face, because the complaint has to allege all the elements.
[01:37:32.140 --> 01:37:57.140]  And the officer who issues the complaint has to show authority to issue. Now normally in an allegation under the penal laws, anyone can make a accusation under the penal laws, but I can't make an accusation under transportation code.
[01:37:57.140 --> 01:38:10.140]  Only the DPS and five sheriff's deputies can do that. So in order to do that, you have to show that you had authority to do that. Okay, does that make sense?
[01:38:10.140 --> 01:38:35.140]  Yeah, that makes sense. So my question is now, so what if it was a state trooper that had initiated the stop? How would you go about it?
[01:38:35.140 --> 01:38:50.140]  That was a mistake. So I gave him my Texas ID. At the time, you could have both. They just changed that a couple years ago. And it looked just like a driver's license, except it had ID instead of DL in front of the number.
[01:38:50.140 --> 01:39:06.140]  He goes back to his car, comes back. He said, Mr. Kelton, this is a Texas ID. I said, yes, as a matter of fact, it is. He said, do you have a driver's license? I said, yes, I do. But I'm not using it right now.
[01:39:06.140 --> 01:39:32.140]  He said, are you one of those guys? And I said, yes, I am. Here, have a nice day. Okay. The fact that you are driving in a, I know Eddie Craig will bristle at this, in a vehicle that is licensed under the state of Texas for commercial use,
[01:39:32.140 --> 01:39:46.140]  will give an officer reasonable probable cause to believe that you are in operating under the authority of that license for the sufficient for the Terry stop.
[01:39:46.140 --> 01:40:06.140]  Once he makes the stop, now he has to determine whether or not you are actually in commerce because you can use that vehicle in a way that's not in commerce. Now with mine, when they stopped me, I know Eddie didn't like this one bit,
[01:40:06.140 --> 01:40:26.140]  but I am registered with the Federal Department of Transportation as a private operator, not in commerce. So every time I get pulled over for the DPS, first thing I say, did you run my name on the DOT?
[01:40:26.140 --> 01:40:42.140]  And they always say, no, I didn't. Well, you might want to do that. And every single time they've come back with a warning, they know exactly where I'm going and they don't want to have that fight.
[01:40:42.140 --> 01:40:57.140]  So if it's DPS, now you have authority to make the stop, but now you have to show that I fall within the statutory scheme.
[01:40:57.140 --> 01:41:18.140]  They all understand this. All the truck drivers understand it. Truck drivers have a name for it. It's called deadheading. Truck driver goes to a warehouse, drops off a load. He's got to drive two towns over to pick up his next load.
[01:41:18.140 --> 01:41:35.140]  He's not on the log in that time. He's deadheading. He is not in commerce, so he doesn't fall under. That's why he doesn't have to log it, because now he's a private operator. Does that make sense?
[01:41:35.140 --> 01:41:51.140]  You're referring to chapter 644 and 522? Is that what you're referring to? Of the transportation code? I don't have that one memorized. Can you read it to me?
[01:41:51.140 --> 01:42:07.140]  644 is commercial motor vehicle safety standards, and 522 is the commercial driver's license.
[01:42:07.140 --> 01:42:26.140]  It's not an argument I've had to make in quite a while, so I don't have that one memorized. But it's in there. You have to be in commerce. If you're not hauling a load for hire, every truck driver knows this. Every DPS knows it.
[01:42:26.140 --> 01:42:39.140]  Now, he can still stop a commercial vehicle and inspect it, because that was an agreement you made when you filled out the application for the commercial license.
[01:42:39.140 --> 01:42:56.140]  But there's apparently some law in there that stopped them when they stopped a private citizen, because even though they have a driver's license, the courts don't allow them to search without probable cause.
[01:42:56.140 --> 01:43:10.140]  They don't understand it, because they've agreed to that search. They're trying to hide this distinction between private and commercial. Hang on.
[01:43:10.140 --> 01:43:26.140]  Okay, I've got about 40 seconds to the break. I've ran off the cliff every time. Deborah's gonna skin me alive for that. We're trying to upgrade our technology, and I keep running off the cliff.
[01:43:26.140 --> 01:43:40.140]  Anyway, this is Randy Kelton, Rule of Law Radio. Our call-in number is 512-646-1984. Give us a call. We have the phone lines open all night. We'll be right back.
[01:43:56.140 --> 01:44:08.140]  Nutritious food is real body armor. It builds muscle, burns fat, improves digestion, and feeds the entire body the nutrients it needs.
[01:44:08.140 --> 01:44:17.140]  Did you know the U.S. government banned the hemp plant from growing in the United States and classified it as a Schedule 1 drug to hide it behind the marijuana plant?
[01:44:17.140 --> 01:44:27.140]  People have been confused about this plant for over 80 years, and many still don't know what hemp is. So now you know hemp is not marijuana, and marijuana is not hemp.
[01:44:27.140 --> 01:44:39.140]  They are different varieties of the same species. HempUSA.org wants the world to know these basic facts, and to help people understand that hemp protein powder is the best kept health secret you need to know about.
[01:44:39.140 --> 01:44:48.140]  Remember, hemp protein powder contains 53% protein, is gluten-free, anti-inflammatory, non-GMO, and is loaded with nutrients.
[01:44:48.140 --> 01:45:00.140]  Call 888-910-4367, 888-910-4367, and see what our powder, seeds, and oil can do for you only at hempusa.org.
[01:45:00.140 --> 01:45:10.140]  It's the 2017 Logos Radio Network Annual Fundraiser, sponsored by Central Texas Gunworks, Defense Distributed and Fat Sal's Deli.
[01:45:10.140 --> 01:45:16.140]  Go to LogosRadioNetwork.com and enter to win. Every $25 donation is a chance to win.
[01:45:16.140 --> 01:45:26.140]  From Central Texas Gunworks, first place up for grabs is Spike's Tactical AR-15. Second place, Taurus PT-111 G2 9mm Pistol.
[01:45:26.140 --> 01:45:34.140]  From Defense Distributed, third place, the AR-308 80% lower. Fourth place, the AR-15 80% lower.
[01:45:34.140 --> 01:45:43.140]  From Fat Sal's Deli, fifth place, $100 gift card from Fat Sal's Deli. Every $25 donation is a chance to win. That's LogosRadioNetwork.com.
[01:45:43.140 --> 01:45:51.140]  Also, if you purchase Randy Kelton's eBook, Legal 101, you get 4 chances to win. Purchase Eddie Craig's Traffic Seminar and get 10 chances to win.
[01:45:51.140 --> 01:45:59.140]  And remember, every $25 donation is a chance to win. Go to LogosRadioNetwork.com for details and donate today.
[01:46:22.140 --> 01:46:28.140]  OK, we are back. Randy Kelton with La Radio and we're talking to Christian in Texas.
[01:46:28.140 --> 01:46:44.140]  OK, Christian. When your original question pointed at something more serious than a classy misdemeanor, did that question get answered?
[01:46:44.140 --> 01:46:56.140]  Sort of. I'm still confused on how I'm supposed to attack. Am I supposed to attack the citation still?
[01:46:56.140 --> 01:47:05.140]  The reason I'm asking for a DPS officer is because I was pulled over by a DPS officer. If it was a municipal cop, I would already know what to do.
[01:47:05.140 --> 01:47:19.140]  So this is slightly more difficult. OK, so DPS officer, you attacked the citation for failing to allege the elements of the violation.
[01:47:19.140 --> 01:47:30.140]  And one of the first elements is that you were subject to the statutory scheme. Right. And you can claim in your document that you were deadheading.
[01:47:30.140 --> 01:47:41.140]  And somebody may ask what deadheading is, but I doubt it. Everybody in the courtroom is going to know what that means.
[01:47:41.140 --> 01:48:00.140]  And when you claim you're deadheading, now the petition does not claim that the officer had evidence to indicate that you were acting under the authority of the license.
[01:48:00.140 --> 01:48:13.140]  So therefore, it's insufficient to invoke the subject matter jurisdiction of the court. We always want to go subject matter because subject matter creates a statutory requirement.
[01:48:13.140 --> 01:48:24.140]  Well, actually, let me take a step back. We want to get to subject matter jurisdiction because it puts a duty on the court to prove it up.
[01:48:24.140 --> 01:48:35.140]  Whether they have it or not, if they fail to prove it up, then they don't have it. If they would normally have it and you challenge it and they ignore your challenge.
[01:48:35.140 --> 01:48:55.140]  Okay. Subject matter jurisdiction is presumed until challenged. Once it's challenged, the presumption of regularity is lost. And it is the duty of the court, not the prosecution, to prove up jurisdiction.
[01:48:55.140 --> 01:49:07.140]  So once it's challenged, there's no presumption, jurisdiction is lost, the court must prove it. If the court puts nothing on the record to prove jurisdiction, then they don't have any.
[01:49:07.140 --> 01:49:12.140]  I think they're no longer under the presumption.
[01:49:12.140 --> 01:49:15.140]  And that's with a petition or an information, correct?
[01:49:15.140 --> 01:49:18.140]  Wait, say that again. I missed part of it.
[01:49:18.140 --> 01:49:23.140]  So they get that with a complaint or an information, right?
[01:49:23.140 --> 01:49:33.140]  Right. The information or the complaint. And the information is intended to be a complaint in proper form.
[01:49:33.140 --> 01:49:42.140]  Because complaints are intended to be written by ordinary citizens who don't necessarily understand the intricacies of law.
[01:49:42.140 --> 01:49:57.140]  So when a prosecutor gets a complaint by a private citizen and when a policeman files a complaint, he does so in his capacity as a private citizen, not as a public official.
[01:49:57.140 --> 01:50:07.140]  The prosecutor must take that complaint and render it in proper form. And that's the information. So essentially they're both the same.
[01:50:07.140 --> 01:50:18.140]  Okay. All right. Another thing is I, you know, I hear you talk about a lot about the T. Cole complaint.
[01:50:18.140 --> 01:50:28.140]  So I was looking into that and is it the same for state police officers too? Or does it not matter?
[01:50:28.140 --> 01:50:31.140]  Wait, you broke up there.
[01:50:31.140 --> 01:50:40.140]  The T. Close complaint? So like, is it still a good idea to file one of those?
[01:50:40.140 --> 01:50:50.140]  Oh, yes. That's a wonderful idea. That'll make the officer crazy if you start T. Close to them, especially DPS.
[01:50:50.140 --> 01:50:54.140]  They just glorify traffic cops.
[01:50:54.140 --> 01:51:02.140]  So whenever I'm on a website and I'm looking at it right now, they just ask for you to send them an email.
[01:51:02.140 --> 01:51:13.140]  So are they sending me a document to then file that? Or how does that work? Am I making the complaint and sending it to that email?
[01:51:13.140 --> 01:51:21.140]  Okay. You can get a form off their site. I have a website, trafficticket.website, that you can use it.
[01:51:21.140 --> 01:51:29.140]  You put in the ticket information and download your whole stack of it. But since yours is DPS, mine's not really set up for DPS.
[01:51:29.140 --> 01:51:43.140]  If you will send me an email, I will excise out the fill in the blanks T. Close complaint.
[01:51:43.140 --> 01:51:50.140]  Actually, I'll send you one that's filled out and one that's not so you can see how we do it.
[01:51:50.140 --> 01:51:59.140]  Okay. All right. Okay, cool. I'd also like to get that financial disclosure you've been talking about for the judge and everything, just to make sure.
[01:51:59.140 --> 01:52:06.140]  Oh, okay. So send me an email and ask me for that too and I'll stick it in there. That one's the most fun.
[01:52:06.140 --> 01:52:11.140]  We send that for the annoyance factor.
[01:52:11.140 --> 01:52:23.140]  Yeah, it sounds like when you talk about, you know, you're giving in your stories and stuff like that, it just seems like you're having a heck of a time doing all this, so I just want to get in on that action.
[01:52:23.140 --> 01:52:41.140]  Once you figure it out, most people, when they're charged, they go on the defensive. And especially with a traffic ticket, I mean, they're going to throw the book at you anyway because they don't care if you're guilty or innocent. It's all about the money.
[01:52:41.140 --> 01:53:01.140]  So you got nothing to lose. You can only gain. So when you start, and the best thing you can do is not play the victim. Not just spend your time defending yourself. The first thing you want to do is go after them.
[01:53:01.140 --> 01:53:17.140]  Because when you go into court, you have two hats. You've got your litigant's hat on, but you have another hat. All of these individuals here are public officials. They're public servants.
[01:53:17.140 --> 01:53:39.140]  They're the servants. You're the master. They are never to forget it. When I go into a courthouse and one of my public officials steps across one of my legal lines, I take off my litigant's hat. I put on my master's hat and straighten that guy out to a girl or whatever.
[01:53:39.140 --> 01:53:54.140]  I will not accept my public officials violating my law. And that's all there is to that. And the more minor it is, the more effective it is. Because they really won't see it coming.
[01:53:54.140 --> 01:54:14.140]  I go in and request to see some records. And I structure my requests in a way that are artfully vague. Because I'm trying to get them to say, well, why do you want to see these?
[01:54:14.140 --> 01:54:30.140]  Gotcha. 552.353. You can't ask that question. It's a Class A misdemeanor. Get somebody over here to arrest this person. And they're standing there thinking, what? What'd I do?
[01:54:30.140 --> 01:54:45.140]  Sorry, sorry, Bubba. That bill's already been rung. You can't un-ring that one. That's what I did to the clerk in Randall County when she wouldn't give me some records.
[01:54:45.140 --> 01:55:05.140]  It came out later after I'm trying to file complaints with this lieutenant. And the clerk's got a handful of records. And the lieutenant says something, and I tell him, stop, stop. I can't talk to you. I've called 911 to get an officer out here to arrest the both of you, so it'd be inappropriate for us to have any further conversation.
[01:55:05.140 --> 01:55:14.140]  And the bailiff said, well, she has the record you asked for. Sorry, Bubba. That bill's already been rung.
[01:55:14.140 --> 01:55:32.140]  And the look on the clerk's face was absolutely priceless. And then the next time I came in, I had Eddie Craig with me, and he had never been around me doing this kind of stuff before.
[01:55:32.140 --> 01:55:52.140]  So we go in to see the prosecutor, and I crawled right down that prosecutor's throat and told him I need security. And he said, well, Mr. Kelton, you're perfectly safe here. Well, you're not. I need you arrested. Don't go anywhere.
[01:55:52.140 --> 01:56:08.140]  And I had to give Eddie credit. He didn't back up a half an inch. And I stormed down the hall, pointed at the nearest baby. Yeah, get over here. I dragged him down there, and I'm demanding he arrest the prosecutor.
[01:56:08.140 --> 01:56:29.140]  Oh, that was so much fun. When you take it to him, now all of a sudden they start dancing on your tippy toes. All of a sudden you're not the victim anymore. And they get real unhappy.
[01:56:29.140 --> 01:56:47.140]  What I call it is my chicken dance, because you're trying to get this officer to arrest one of his buddies. Or if you've called 911, I do that all the time. And you get this officer out here, and you ask him to arrest his buddy over here.
[01:56:47.140 --> 01:57:06.140]  And if you're the victim, you've got the 911 tape. He came out to answer your complaint, and you want him to arrest his buddy. So he's shifting from one foot to the other, trying to find a way out of this situation. I call that my little chicken dance.
[01:57:06.140 --> 01:57:25.140]  I really like to see the chicken dance. And for the most part, they know that I'm doing this on purpose. I make sure they know. When the officer says he's not going to arrest him, the first thing I want to tell him is that you need to take your chicken suit off.
[01:57:25.140 --> 01:57:49.140]  That just infuriates them. Sometimes. Sometimes they say if they're older, more mature, they tell me I'm not taking my chicken suit off. But the reason I do that is when you start taking these guys on, what they're going to want to do is accuse you of being agitated.
[01:57:49.140 --> 01:58:10.140]  Once they can say agitated, now you're painted with this brush, and you're completely discredited. Ken Magnussen, he's on the show on occasion. His brother is a lawyer for Mansfield, Texas. Ken called me one day, what were you doing in Mansfield yesterday? Minding my business, Ken.
[01:58:10.140 --> 01:58:29.140]  Well, my brother, Craig, said that that officer told him that you were agitated. Ken asked Craig to ask that officer if I got agitated before I asked him to take his chicken suit off or after.
[01:58:29.140 --> 01:58:49.140]  Ken said, did you say that to him? I always say that to them, because I'm always thinking what will look good before a grand jury of my peers? When the cop accuses me of being agitated?
[01:58:49.140 --> 01:59:06.140]  The Bible remains the most popular book in the world, yet countless readers are frustrated because they struggle to understand it. Some new translations try to help by simplifying the text, but in the process can compromise the profound meaning of the scripture.
[01:59:06.140 --> 01:59:27.140]  Enter the recovery version. First, this new translation is extremely faithful and accurate, but the real story is the more than 9,000 explanatory footnotes. Difficult and profound passages are opened up in a marvelous way, providing an entrance into the riches of the word beyond which you've ever experienced before.
[01:59:27.140 --> 01:59:50.140]  Bibles for America would like to give you a free recovery version simply for the asking. This comprehensive yet compact study Bible is yours just by calling us toll free at 1-888-551-0102 or by ordering online at FreeStudyBible.com. That's FreeStudyBible.com.
[01:59:50.140 --> 02:00:00.140]  You are listening to the Logos Radio Network. LogosRadioNetwork.com.