ROL_2018-01-11_16k.timecode

[00:00.000 --> 00:07.920]  The following, these flashes brought to you by the Lone Star Lowdown.
[00:07.920 --> 00:14.080]  Markets for Monday, the 8th of January, 2018, opened with gold at $1,320.02 an ounce, silver
[00:14.080 --> 00:23.000]  $17.20 an ounce, Texas Crude $61.44 a barrel, Bitcoin $16,020.30, while Bitcoin cashed at
[00:23.000 --> 00:35.000]  $2,757.56, finally dash coins at $1,284.36, a crypto coin.
[00:35.000 --> 00:41.000]  Today in history, the year 1835, the United States government national debt is zero for
[00:41.000 --> 00:46.000]  the first time and presumably only time in the government's existence. Zero government
[00:46.000 --> 00:53.000]  today in history. In recent news, the president will undergo a two-hour physical exam which
[00:53.000 --> 00:58.000]  will include urine blood analysis, cardiac evaluation, and some more personal prying with
[00:58.000 --> 01:02.000]  sleeping habits and even his romantic life being discussed with the multi-administration
[01:02.000 --> 01:06.000]  presidential physician. It seems the president may be wanting to later rest the recent lineup
[01:06.000 --> 01:11.000]  of criticisms questioning his mental health and stability. Apparently some of the president's
[01:11.000 --> 01:16.000]  more recent tweets directed towards North Korea's Kim Jong-un and the author of the book Fire
[01:16.000 --> 01:20.000]  and Fury, Michael Wolfe, has many thinking that the president should perhaps be more articulate
[01:20.000 --> 01:23.000]  and less rash with his tweets.
[01:23.000 --> 01:30.000]  U.S. District Court Judge Gloria Nambaro dismissed cases against Nevada rancher Clive and Bundy,
[01:30.000 --> 01:35.000]  two sons and a Montana militiaman today. Judge ruled that the government's lawyers suppressed
[01:35.000 --> 01:41.000]  footage from several cameras that were set up by the FBI around the Bundy's family home
[01:41.000 --> 01:45.000]  that would have been favorable in the defendant's case. When Mr. Bundy was released today Monday
[01:45.000 --> 01:50.000]  after leaving the courthouse, he told reporters that I've been a political prisoner for 700 days.
[01:50.000 --> 01:55.000]  He hadn't seen his wife for nearly two years due to the fact that he had refused any conditional
[01:55.000 --> 02:01.000]  release which required him to forfeit his trial by jury rights.
[02:01.000 --> 02:06.000]  Former Google engineer James Damore filed a class action lawsuit against the Alphabet Corporation
[02:06.000 --> 02:11.000]  on Monday claiming that it discriminates against white men and those with conservative leaning views.
[02:11.000 --> 02:16.000]  Damore was terminated for dismantling a memo essentially questioning the company's diversity
[02:16.000 --> 02:21.000]  policies. The suit is basically arguing that Google employees who express views deviating
[02:21.000 --> 02:27.000]  from corporate sentiments on politics and practices like diversity hiring policies by a sensitivity
[02:27.000 --> 02:34.000]  and social justice were singled out, mistreated and systematically punished and terminated from Google.
[02:34.000 --> 02:38.000]  Google spokesman Tasha Parr sent a response that we look forward to defending against
[02:38.000 --> 02:42.000]  Mr. Damore's lawsuit in court.
[02:42.000 --> 02:46.000]  If you'd like to help out the Lone Star Lowdown with some reporting or advertising, feel free to
[02:46.000 --> 02:57.000]  give me a call at 210-363-2257. This was her crony with your lowdown for January 8th, 2018.
[04:46.000 --> 04:53.000]  Ladies, what are you going to do when we come for you here on the rule of law? This is Thursday,
[04:53.000 --> 05:02.000]  January 11th, 2018. We are back from our break over the holidays and tonight we have a very
[05:02.000 --> 05:09.000]  special show for everyone. We are here with our sponsor and another host on the network,
[05:09.000 --> 05:16.000]  Mr. Michael Cargill, owner of Central Texas Gun Works. He's been the sponsor of our annual
[05:16.000 --> 05:23.000]  fundraiser and gun giveaway for a number of years now and we have completed, finally,
[05:23.000 --> 05:30.000]  our 2017 drawing. It took a while to contact some of the winners. That's why we're having to roll over
[05:30.000 --> 05:36.000]  into 2018 here as far as making the announcements. But tonight we are bringing on Mr. Michael
[05:36.000 --> 05:45.000]  Cargill as a guest and the top two winners as guests. Before I announce the winners and we go to
[05:45.000 --> 05:51.000]  our guest, Michael Cargill, I just wanted to let everyone know just a brief overview of how we hold
[05:51.000 --> 05:58.000]  these drawings. I personally do not conduct the drawing. I want complete transparency and
[05:58.000 --> 06:05.000]  integrity with these drawings just for the sake of everyone involved. I employ the services of
[06:05.000 --> 06:14.000]  a company called random.org. They are highly reputable. They are third-party verified by
[06:14.000 --> 06:23.000]  multiple third-party auditors and actuarial services that can guarantee that the algorithms they
[06:23.000 --> 06:30.000]  use are completely random and they are random.org is used by the casino industry and by the
[06:30.000 --> 06:40.000]  gaming industry worldwide. They are highly reputable. That's who I use to conduct these drawings
[06:40.000 --> 06:47.000]  just to make it clear so everyone knows that this is a legitimate drawing here. The way that it
[06:47.000 --> 06:55.000]  works is you have to submit a list of identifiers to them. What I do is when the fundraiser is
[06:55.000 --> 07:02.000]  wrapped up, I look at how much each person has donated and say if somebody has donated $100,
[07:02.000 --> 07:09.000]  that would be four entries. I would put an identifier for that person four times in the list. I
[07:09.000 --> 07:13.000]  don't want to use e-mail addresses of course because I'm not going to give out everyone's e-mail
[07:13.000 --> 07:21.000]  address to the world. What I do to try to keep things as anonymous as possible but yet still
[07:21.000 --> 07:30.000]  make it verifiable is I will use the person's first name and the first initial of their last
[07:30.000 --> 07:36.000]  name. That way everyone who has donated or who has purchased a seminar or purchased one of
[07:36.000 --> 07:42.000]  Randy's books, what they can do is they can go onto the random.org website and look at the
[07:42.000 --> 07:49.000]  drawing that I held. It's posted on their website and they can look at the list of the
[07:49.000 --> 07:55.000]  identifiers that were submitted for the drawing. They should be able to find themselves in the
[07:55.000 --> 08:02.000]  list the correct number of times. I tell everyone I do everything I can. I double and triple
[08:02.000 --> 08:08.000]  check all the names and all the amounts of the donations before I submit the list. If
[08:08.000 --> 08:14.000]  somebody finds an error that I didn't enter their name in the correct number of times,
[08:14.000 --> 08:20.000]  then I will do what's necessary to make amends. I will give them additional entries in the
[08:20.000 --> 08:25.000]  next drawing or refund or some kind of different prize or something like that. I've never had
[08:25.000 --> 08:32.000]  anyone contact me with any errors. Right now you can go to LogosRadioNetwork.com and on
[08:32.000 --> 08:39.000]  the home page on the left there is a link to the results of the 2017 Logos Gun Giveaway
[08:39.000 --> 08:46.000]  results. It's in red font towards the bottom of the box on the left. That will take you to
[08:46.000 --> 08:52.000]  the public drawing results and the list of identifiers that I have made public on the
[08:52.000 --> 09:01.000]  random.org website. Now to further indicate the transparency and integrity of these drawings,
[09:01.000 --> 09:08.000]  the way that the random.org website works when you hold a drawing with them, when you submit
[09:08.000 --> 09:15.000]  the list of identifiers before they conduct the drawing, you have to indicate whether
[09:15.000 --> 09:21.000]  it's a test or whether the results are to be immediately posted as public and you have
[09:21.000 --> 09:29.000]  to decide that ahead of time. So in other words, there's no way that I could in advance decide
[09:29.000 --> 09:34.000]  that, well, I would like to see a certain person win and I'm just going to hold as many
[09:34.000 --> 09:40.000]  drawings as I need to until the winner comes up that I would prefer. I mean, I would never
[09:40.000 --> 09:46.000]  do such a thing anyway but I'm just trying to show that this has complete and total
[09:46.000 --> 09:52.000]  integrity. When I hit that button that I'm holding the drawing on random.org, those results
[09:52.000 --> 09:59.000]  are immediately posted as public and I can't take it back. It is what it is. So I just
[09:59.000 --> 10:04.000]  wanted to make that clear on how we conduct these drawings here so that I want everyone
[10:04.000 --> 10:09.000]  to know that we're doing this with as much integrity as possible. And just another quick
[10:09.000 --> 10:15.000]  note about the firearms transfer just so everyone knows, I personally am not transferring any
[10:15.000 --> 10:20.000]  firearms. Neither is Randy. Neither is the network as an entity. Okay. What's happening
[10:20.000 --> 10:26.000]  here is Mr. Michael Cargill, owner of Central Texas Gun Works. He is our sponsor. He's the
[10:26.000 --> 10:31.000]  owner of Central Texas Gun Works. He is a licensed federal firearms license dealer. And he is
[10:31.000 --> 10:37.000]  conducting the transfer. Okay. This is not a private transfer. So the winners still have
[10:37.000 --> 10:43.000]  to fill out the background check form and all that. Okay. So this is a completely above
[10:43.000 --> 10:49.000]  board legit scenario here. There's nothing going on here that could be considered shady
[10:49.000 --> 10:55.000]  or any unauthorized illegal transfer of firearms or anything like that. That's all that all
[10:55.000 --> 11:00.000]  of that goes through Mr. Michael Cargill and his organization. So I just wanted to make
[11:00.000 --> 11:05.000]  those notes on how we conduct our drawing and how we transfer the firearms. So at this
[11:05.000 --> 11:10.000]  point in time, I'd like to bring on our sponsor, Mr. Michael Cargill. Thank you for joining
[11:10.000 --> 11:15.000]  us tonight. Absolutely. Thank you for having me. All right. Awesome. And tonight we have
[11:15.000 --> 11:21.000]  the top two winners, the third and fourth place winners, which have to do with the lower
[11:21.000 --> 11:28.000]  receivers from Defense Distributed. We will bring those winners on with Cody Wilson on
[11:28.000 --> 11:32.000]  another show. Right now we're just doing the first and second place with Michael Cargill.
[11:32.000 --> 11:38.000]  So if anyone who wants to go and look at the drawing results, you will see on the random.org
[11:38.000 --> 11:45.000]  website on the results of this drawing, the first winner, just so I can clear everything
[11:45.000 --> 11:53.000]  up, was a Robert P. Now he unfortunately was ineligible to receive the prize due to living
[11:53.000 --> 12:00.000]  in a state that has severe firearms restrictions. Okay. So he was ineligible to receive these
[12:00.000 --> 12:08.000]  prizes. So we moved everyone up by one. And so you'll see number two, who's actually going
[12:08.000 --> 12:14.000]  to be the winner is James C. And the second place winner, who would show up as number
[12:14.000 --> 12:23.000]  three in the list, is Shane R. Now Shane R is actually a friend of Adam W. And Adam
[12:23.000 --> 12:29.000]  W's been calling him for a long time. Adam W purchased Eddie Craig's traffic seminar.
[12:29.000 --> 12:34.000]  But he doesn't have a debit card or PayPal account. So he purchased a seminar through
[12:34.000 --> 12:41.000]  his friend Shane R. And then it came to my knowledge. They explained to me that actually
[12:41.000 --> 12:46.000]  Adam W is the listener. He is the one who purchased the seminar. So he is actually the
[12:46.000 --> 12:51.000]  winner. And so when you see Shane R. in the list, just so everyone knows, and I posted
[12:51.000 --> 12:56.000]  this explanation on my website also, it's actually Adam W. So we have James C. on the
[12:56.000 --> 13:03.000]  line here along with Adam W. So James C., thank you for joining us tonight.
[13:03.000 --> 13:05.000]  Good evening. Thank you for having me.
[13:05.000 --> 13:10.000]  Thank you. And we also have Adam W. Adam, thanks for calling in. Thanks for joining us
[13:10.000 --> 13:13.000]  tonight. Thank you. Glad to be here.
[13:13.000 --> 13:19.000]  All right. These are our winners. All right. So Michael, why don't you tell our winners
[13:19.000 --> 13:24.000]  some about these firearms, and then we'll get a word from our winners, James first
[13:24.000 --> 13:30.000]  and then Adam. So go ahead, Michael. Okay. Yeah, absolutely. So despite the tactical,
[13:30.000 --> 13:37.000]  the winner of that, I tell you, you're really going to love this. It's funny because this
[13:37.000 --> 13:43.000]  firearm is actually has the teeth cut out on the strip lower receiver for the
[13:43.000 --> 13:49.000]  spiked tactical. And it's an awesome firearms, an AR-15. You're just going to
[13:49.000 --> 13:53.000]  love it. So if you're in the ARs, you know what an AR is, you're definitely going to
[13:53.000 --> 13:58.000]  love this gun here. And I like the way it looks. It's just, man, it just, it bites
[13:58.000 --> 14:04.000]  liberty, literally. So you're actually going to love it. And also the winner of the
[14:04.000 --> 14:08.000]  pistol as well. You're going to like that as well. It's a very popular handgun this
[14:08.000 --> 14:15.000]  year. For some reason, 2017, 2018, it's very popular. The Taurus PT-111 Millenium
[14:15.000 --> 14:20.000]  G2. And I don't know why it's so popular, but people love that handgun. I guess
[14:20.000 --> 14:26.000]  because it's a great concealed carry piece. So that one is popular as well. So I'm
[14:26.000 --> 14:31.000]  actually, I'm happy you guys have actually won these two prizes here. I actually
[14:31.000 --> 14:36.000]  wish I could keep them myself because I just, I love, you know, the way these guns
[14:36.000 --> 14:39.000]  actually came out. And they're just beautiful.
[14:39.000 --> 14:44.000]  Excellent. All right, James. So what do you have to say? You're the winner.
[14:44.000 --> 14:49.000]  Well, sure was surprising to me. It sounds like I won. It sounds like that AR has
[14:49.000 --> 14:53.000]  the mouth line to it. I guess it would be a good way to put that way. You explained
[14:53.000 --> 15:00.000]  it. And, well, I know I can't wait to get it down and try it out. Going a little
[15:00.000 --> 15:06.000]  bit with it and see how good she should. So James, how long, James, how long have
[15:06.000 --> 15:12.000]  you been listening to Rule of Law? Often on for a couple of years.
[15:12.000 --> 15:18.000]  All right. Well, thank you so much for supporting us. And I hope that you've been
[15:18.000 --> 15:23.000]  enjoying the show. Do you have any other comments about any legal issues or anything
[15:23.000 --> 15:29.000]  that you'd like to make before we go to break here? No, other than it just seems
[15:29.000 --> 15:36.000]  like they still can't seem to follow the rules. They still have trouble reading
[15:36.000 --> 15:42.000]  at things. But I appreciate, and a lot of people, we sure appreciate what y'all are
[15:42.000 --> 15:46.000]  doing to help everybody out and all the knowledge that you're bestowing upon
[15:46.000 --> 15:50.000]  everybody. And we really do appreciate it and appreciate, you know, the drawings
[15:50.000 --> 15:56.000]  and everybody that supports y'all. And I hope more people do. And we just would
[15:56.000 --> 16:00.000]  like to say we appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you, James. All right, we're going to
[16:00.000 --> 16:04.000]  go to our second place winner. James, just stay right there. This is Adam W.
[16:04.000 --> 16:08.000]  Adam, thank you for supporting the network. What do you have to say? You're the
[16:08.000 --> 16:14.000]  second place winner of the pistol. Well, I guess I'm going to need to get a license
[16:14.000 --> 16:22.000]  to carry. Does Mr. Carter Gill have those classes? He sure does. I sure do.
[16:22.000 --> 16:29.000]  Well, great. No, I've been listening to Logos since I figured y'all out around
[16:29.000 --> 16:35.000]  2010. And I was listening to Crypto Show and Eddie and all them back then left
[16:35.000 --> 16:42.000]  with the Bitcoin where they're giving them away. So I can't, I don't know, Logos
[16:42.000 --> 16:47.000]  is pretty close to my heart. Like y'all guys, like what y'all do. I think y'all
[16:47.000 --> 16:56.000]  really good. Adam, hold that thought. We're going to break and we'll take it up
[16:56.000 --> 17:21.000]  on the other side. This is the rule of law. We'll be right back.
[17:26.000 --> 17:36.000]  We'll be right back.
[17:56.000 --> 18:06.000]  We'll be right back.
[18:26.000 --> 18:46.000]  We'll be right back.
[18:46.000 --> 19:11.000]  We'll be right back.
[19:11.000 --> 19:21.000]  We'll be right back.
[19:21.000 --> 19:31.000]  We'll be right back.
[19:31.000 --> 19:51.000]  We'll be right back.
[19:51.000 --> 20:20.000]  We'll be right back.
[20:20.000 --> 20:24.000]  All right, we are back. This is the rule of law, Randy Kelton and I'm Debra Stevens.
[20:24.000 --> 20:28.000]  We're here with our very special guest, Mr. Michael Cargill, owner of Central Texas
[20:28.000 --> 20:34.000]  Gunworks. And we are giving away the top two prizes tonight. We just spoke with Mr.
[20:34.000 --> 20:41.000]  James C., the grand prize winner of the AR-15, the Spikes Tactical. And now we are
[20:41.000 --> 20:48.000]  going to get a few more comments from Adam W. And Adam has been a caller for quite
[20:48.000 --> 20:52.000]  a number of years now. And I'm sure you remember him, Randy. And he's also called
[20:52.000 --> 20:58.000]  on the Eddie Show. And I think that we've been able to help Adam quite a bit with
[20:58.000 --> 21:03.000]  some of his legal issues. So, Adam, do you want to make any comments or overview
[21:03.000 --> 21:08.000]  about your situation and how we've been able to help before we go to Michael to
[21:08.000 --> 21:14.000]  discuss his historic lawsuit that he's got going on? Go ahead, Adam.
[21:14.000 --> 21:19.000]  Yeah, well, I guess, you know, it took me a little longer than I should have to
[21:19.000 --> 21:24.000]  actually purchase Eddie's seminar. But once I got a hold of that seminar, I mean,
[21:24.000 --> 21:32.000]  I'm unstoppable. They can't hold me down. So, it's been, I mean, the value of it
[21:32.000 --> 21:37.000]  really, I mean, the knowledge and the confidence given to me, it's almost like
[21:37.000 --> 21:42.000]  a whole other world. I just see the world differently now. And I understand that
[21:42.000 --> 21:47.000]  public servants have a certain place and they're bound by our rules. And I just
[21:47.000 --> 21:52.000]  love it, man. I can't get enough of it to tell you the truth.
[21:52.000 --> 21:57.000]  Well, that's wonderful, Adam. I'm so glad that you're enjoying the seminar and
[21:57.000 --> 22:03.000]  that you're unstoppable now, that we love to hear that. We love to help people.
[22:03.000 --> 22:07.000]  Yeah, and I've got, you know, I'm preaching the word. I got a couple other
[22:07.000 --> 22:12.000]  buddies going on stuff now. So, you know, you aren't the only ones out there. I mean,
[22:12.000 --> 22:18.000]  there's other people that are on board with this mission. So, y'all just keep
[22:18.000 --> 22:22.000]  doing all the good work y'all do and everybody out there, if y'all can, you
[22:22.000 --> 22:29.000]  know, donate to Logos. It's a worthy cause, in my opinion, you know.
[22:29.000 --> 22:38.000]  Yes, Logos' mantra is, Contribute to Randy's Beer Fund.
[22:38.000 --> 22:47.000]  We love to meet y'all in person maybe one day and I'll bring the beer.
[22:47.000 --> 22:54.000]  All right. Okay, well, thank you very much, Adam. Thank you very much for joining
[22:54.000 --> 22:59.000]  us tonight. We really appreciate it. Thank y'all. Glad to have y'all back on
[22:59.000 --> 23:03.000]  some live shows for 2018. Yes, yes, we're glad to be back.
[23:03.000 --> 23:09.000]  All right, so then you and Michael can be in touch off air and discuss how
[23:09.000 --> 23:15.000]  you're going to get your Taurus pistol. Congratulations. Thank you, ma'am.
[23:15.000 --> 23:22.000]  Okay, all righty. And you got his email address, right, Adam?
[23:22.000 --> 23:26.000]  No, I don't have it. Okay, then Adam, Adam, just stay there.
[23:26.000 --> 23:30.000]  We'll talk to you on the break and get y'all hooked up with contact info.
[23:30.000 --> 23:33.000]  Okay, so just stay there, Adam. All right, thanks.
[23:33.000 --> 23:37.000]  Okay. All right, so now we're going to go to our guest, Michael.
[23:37.000 --> 23:43.000]  This is so exciting, Michael. I read these articles that you sent me and I am
[23:43.000 --> 23:49.000]  just floored by the situation with the city of Austin and the open carry and
[23:49.000 --> 23:58.000]  the sign and the no gun, you know, imaging that's like etched into the glass
[23:58.000 --> 24:04.000]  of the window, City Hall and all this stuff. And so you are apparently involved
[24:04.000 --> 24:10.000]  in an historic lawsuit here that's basically been filed by the Attorney General
[24:10.000 --> 24:16.000]  concerning open carry at City Hall in Austin. So, Michael, why don't you tell us
[24:16.000 --> 24:20.000]  some about this? What is the history of this? How did this all start?
[24:20.000 --> 24:26.000]  Bring us all up to date here. Bring us up to speed and let us know where this is at right now.
[24:26.000 --> 24:30.000]  Sure, you know, I tell you, I get my inspiration from the rule of law, first of all.
[24:30.000 --> 24:32.000]  Oh, thank you.
[24:32.000 --> 24:35.000]  You know, to do a lot of this stuff, especially when it comes to dealing with
[24:35.000 --> 24:40.000]  the justice system and going against, you know, a city or state or county
[24:40.000 --> 24:44.000]  municipality or whatever. So what we have in the state of Texas is we have a
[24:44.000 --> 24:52.000]  30.06 sign and a 30.07 sign. The 30.06 sign is the sign that tells you
[24:52.000 --> 24:56.000]  if you can conceal carry a handgun in a particular location or, you know,
[24:56.000 --> 25:02.000]  basically, you can't carry your handgun. The 30.07 sign is the sign that is posted
[25:02.000 --> 25:07.000]  that tells you that you cannot carry, you cannot openly carry your handgun.
[25:07.000 --> 25:12.000]  Alright, so when it comes to cities and municipalities, unless they're having an open
[25:12.000 --> 25:19.000]  meeting, basically, they're having a meeting like city council's meeting or
[25:19.000 --> 25:24.000]  our state legislature's meeting or US congressman's meeting, they can actually
[25:24.000 --> 25:29.000]  prohibit you from carrying at that location, okay? Now, when it comes to city hall,
[25:29.000 --> 25:34.000]  though, where city council's meeting, there's a room off on the left side of the
[25:34.000 --> 25:38.000]  building where they have their meetings and they prohibit licensed holders from
[25:38.000 --> 25:44.000]  carrying there. But then there are other offices that are in that building and so
[25:44.000 --> 25:48.000]  we should be able to carry those other offices or the rest of the building.
[25:48.000 --> 25:52.000]  Now, what the city of Boston has been doing, they've been doing this for years and
[25:52.000 --> 25:57.000]  all of their properties really.
[25:57.000 --> 26:06.000]  Michael, are you still there?
[26:06.000 --> 26:12.000]  Okay, I'm sorry folks. I think we temporarily lost Michael.
[26:12.000 --> 26:17.000]  He may have had an internet dropout. Randy, are you there?
[26:17.000 --> 26:18.000]  I am here.
[26:18.000 --> 26:22.000]  Okay, wait, there he is. There he is. Michael, you dropped out.
[26:22.000 --> 26:27.000]  Okay, sorry about that. So if they were basically violating the law, we have this
[26:27.000 --> 26:32.000]  bill that says, hey, since you're violating the law, a regular citizen can
[26:32.000 --> 26:39.000]  come in. Hold on, Michael. You dropped out when you were just got to the point of
[26:39.000 --> 26:43.000]  we should be able to carry in these other offices.
[26:43.000 --> 26:50.000]  Oh, wow, that's a big drop off there. Yeah, so back up. Yeah, back up quite a bit here.
[26:50.000 --> 26:55.000]  Okay, there. Okay, so we should be able to carry in the other offices.
[26:55.000 --> 27:02.000]  Now, September the 1st, 2015, we had a bill go into effect, a new law go into
[27:02.000 --> 27:07.000]  effect that basically said that a private citizen can bring a complaint against
[27:07.000 --> 27:12.000]  the state, county, city, and municipality when they're violating the law and
[27:12.000 --> 27:17.000]  prohibiting licensors from carrying it. So a regular citizen like you, me, we
[27:17.000 --> 27:22.000]  can bring a complaint and take that complaint to the Texas Attorney General's
[27:22.000 --> 27:29.000]  office and the Attorney General would either inform that city of municipality
[27:29.000 --> 27:34.000]  that you need to comply with the law or they would actually follow a lawsuit
[27:34.000 --> 27:39.000]  against that city of county municipality. So basically what I did was with the
[27:39.000 --> 27:42.000]  city of Austin, they're violating the law. I informed them that they were
[27:42.000 --> 27:47.000]  violating the law. They needed to allow licensors from carrying.
[27:47.000 --> 27:53.000]  So they initially, they took down their sign. They had a 30.06 sign posted.
[27:53.000 --> 27:59.000]  They removed that sign. So then I went back a few days later and tried to go
[27:59.000 --> 28:02.000]  into building carrying and they gave me verbal notice and said, you know what,
[28:02.000 --> 28:06.000]  no, you cannot carry and we're going to give you verbal notice.
[28:06.000 --> 28:09.000]  And so I said, well, why are you giving me verbal notice and said, well,
[28:09.000 --> 28:13.000]  because we're not city hall anymore, we're a courthouse.
[28:13.000 --> 28:17.000]  So now the city of Austin is saying that they're a courthouse. They're not
[28:17.000 --> 28:21.000]  city hall because one day out of the month, the community court that's located
[28:21.000 --> 28:26.000]  on 6th Street in downtown Austin, one day out of the month, that community
[28:26.000 --> 28:31.000]  court holds court in Austin City Hall. And because of that one day out of the
[28:31.000 --> 28:36.000]  month, the entire year, 365 days throughout the year, they're saying that
[28:36.000 --> 28:39.000]  they're a courthouse now. And I said, you know, no, that's not right.
[28:39.000 --> 28:43.000]  That's an event that you have one day out of the month. So that one day out of
[28:43.000 --> 28:47.000]  the month, you can prohibit license holders from carrying only that one day
[28:47.000 --> 28:51.000]  out of the month. But the rest of the month, we should get a carry there.
[28:51.000 --> 28:57.000]  So the, a Texas attorney general agreed with me and then filed a lawsuit
[28:57.000 --> 29:02.000]  against the city of Austin. So through a bunch of different motions and this is
[29:02.000 --> 29:08.000]  like, this is September 1st, 2015. Let's speed forward to 2017 now, two years
[29:08.000 --> 29:16.000]  later. We get to December 22nd of 2017, where this case is in district court.
[29:16.000 --> 29:25.000]  And the judge said, you know what, well, the city of Austin can, yes,
[29:25.000 --> 29:28.000]  can prohibit you from carrying on the day that the community court is there.
[29:28.000 --> 29:34.000]  They can prohibit you from carrying, but they would have to hold to sign or tell
[29:34.000 --> 29:38.000]  you verbally only on that one day. But the rest of the, you know, the rest of the
[29:38.000 --> 29:42.000]  time, there should be no reason why we should be able to carry there. So basically
[29:42.000 --> 29:45.000]  they agreed with me. All right, hold on one second. Hold that thought, Michael,
[29:45.000 --> 29:49.000]  because we are at the bottom of the hour break. This is a real cliffhanger here.
[29:49.000 --> 29:52.000]  All right, folks, we're here with Mr. Michael Cargill, owner of Central Texas
[29:52.000 --> 29:56.000]  Gun Works, discussing the situation with Austin City Hall. We will be right back
[29:56.000 --> 30:00.000]  on the other side.
[30:00.000 --> 30:07.000]  Get out a hat and sunglasses. In San Diego, law enforcement agents are using
[30:07.000 --> 30:12.000]  video surveillance cameras and facial recognition to pick faces out of crowds.
[30:12.000 --> 30:16.000]  And Dr. Kaepfer and Albrecht, back with details in a moment.
[30:16.000 --> 30:21.000]  Privacy is under attack. When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it
[30:21.000 --> 30:25.000]  back again. And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start
[30:25.000 --> 30:30.000]  to vanish too. So protect your rights. Say no to surveillance and keep your
[30:30.000 --> 30:35.000]  information to yourself. Privacy, it's worth hanging on to. This message is
[30:35.000 --> 30:39.000]  brought to you by StartPage.com, the private search engine alternative to
[30:39.000 --> 30:45.000]  Google, Yahoo, and Bing. Start over with StartPage.
[30:45.000 --> 30:49.000]  Privacy-invading technologies are coming online faster than you can scream
[30:49.000 --> 30:54.000]  Big Brother. And one California company called Face First tops my Spooky List
[30:54.000 --> 30:59.000]  Face First has developed scanners that can sweep a crowd from 100 feet away
[30:59.000 --> 31:04.000]  to record every face and feed those images into a database. People are
[31:04.000 --> 31:09.000]  identified in under a second. Already deployed in Panama, Face First is now
[31:09.000 --> 31:15.000]  being tested on San Diego streets. Imagine the feds, drones, marketers, and
[31:15.000 --> 31:20.000]  stalkers all scanning our faces and identifying us as we walk down the street.
[31:20.000 --> 31:25.000]  Yikes, I'm buying a floppy hat and some sunglasses. I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht
[31:25.000 --> 31:51.000]  for StartPage.com, the world's most private search engine.
[31:55.000 --> 32:00.000]  Let's see what our powder seeds and oil can do for you, only at
[32:00.000 --> 32:26.000]  StartPage.com.
[32:30.000 --> 32:37.000]  You can get your own copy of this invaluable material by going to
[32:37.000 --> 32:42.000]  ruleoflawradio.com and ordering your copy today. By ordering now you'll
[32:42.000 --> 32:46.000]  receive a copy of Eddie's book, The Texas Transportation Code, The Law vs.
[32:46.000 --> 32:50.000]  The Lie. Video and audio of the original 2009 seminar, hundreds of research
[32:50.000 --> 32:53.000]  documents, and other useful resource material. Learn how to fight for your
[32:53.000 --> 32:56.000]  rights with the help of this material from ruleoflawradio.com.
[32:56.000 --> 33:03.000]  Today and together we can have free society we all want and deserve.
[33:26.000 --> 33:30.000]  The job is to put the government service.
[33:30.000 --> 33:32.000]  Not be an abuse.
[33:32.000 --> 33:34.000]  Not be a sir!
[33:35.000 --> 33:40.000]  When you gonna stop abuse, you're gonna have a hard work.
[33:40.000 --> 33:46.000]  When you gonna stop abuse, you're gonna have a hard work.
[33:46.000 --> 33:51.000]  When you gonna stop abuse, you're gonna have a hard work.
[33:51.000 --> 33:57.000]  When you gonna stop abuse, you're gonna have a hard work.
[33:57.000 --> 34:02.000]  So please Mr. Macklin, each officer has to abuse their power.
[34:02.000 --> 34:08.000]  Send a request to the leader to come pick up all officers.
[34:08.000 --> 34:11.000]  Tell them to uphold the law.
[34:11.000 --> 34:13.000]  We're gonna abuse their power.
[34:13.000 --> 34:19.000]  They beat and they beat and they cheat and they cheat and they lie every hour.
[34:19.000 --> 34:24.000]  So Mr. Officer, please stop abusing your power.
[34:24.000 --> 34:27.000]  You're pulling me over.
[34:27.000 --> 34:30.000]  I tell you be silent, sir.
[34:30.000 --> 34:33.000]  I need to speak to my lawyer.
[34:33.000 --> 34:38.000]  Mr. Officer, I feel like you are no judge.
[34:38.000 --> 34:41.000]  You're finding me guilty, sir.
[34:41.000 --> 34:47.000]  So when you gonna stop abuse, you're gonna have a hard work.
[34:47.000 --> 34:52.000]  When you gonna stop abuse, you're gonna have a hard work.
[34:52.000 --> 34:58.000]  When you gonna stop abuse, you're gonna have a hard work.
[34:58.000 --> 35:03.000]  When you gonna stop abuse, you're gonna have a hard work.
[35:03.000 --> 35:06.000]  So Mr. Officer abusing his power.
[35:06.000 --> 35:09.000]  Mr. Macklin helped the officer.
[35:09.000 --> 35:14.000]  So they couldn't understand they should uphold the law instead of abusing the power.
[35:14.000 --> 35:18.000]  Okay, we are back. This is the rule of law, Randy Kelton and Deborah Stevens.
[35:18.000 --> 35:25.000]  Again, tonight is Thursday, January the 11th, 2018.
[35:25.000 --> 35:31.000]  And we just spoke with the top two winners of the Logos Gun Giveaway.
[35:31.000 --> 35:39.000]  And now we are speaking with Michael Cargill about this complaint that he has filed against the city of Austin.
[35:39.000 --> 35:40.000]  Such shenanigans.
[35:40.000 --> 35:47.000]  Okay, so we are, you have brought us up to December 22nd of 2017.
[35:47.000 --> 35:52.000]  There was a ruling that came down from Judge Livingston State District Court regarding the matter.
[35:52.000 --> 35:55.000]  So please go over that.
[35:55.000 --> 35:56.000]  What happened?
[35:56.000 --> 36:05.000]  Because they were trying to, the city of Austin, city halls trying to say that they're actually a court because they have a community court one day a month or something,
[36:05.000 --> 36:10.000]  which is totally ridiculous and the attorney general agreed with you.
[36:10.000 --> 36:11.000]  They filed a lawsuit.
[36:11.000 --> 36:16.000]  And so now please bring us up to speed concerning what the judge has to say about this.
[36:16.000 --> 36:20.000]  So basically the judge agreed with them, you know, agreed with me.
[36:20.000 --> 36:26.000]  This case needs to go forward, needs to go to trial because the city of Austin was trying to get this case dismissed.
[36:26.000 --> 36:29.000]  They wanted to get it dropped on different little motions.
[36:29.000 --> 36:33.000]  So the judge said no, you know, if this case is going to go forward, it can go to trial.
[36:33.000 --> 36:38.000]  And they also try to do a little sneaky thing by saying, well, you know, hold on.
[36:38.000 --> 36:48.000]  We also have little, a little, I don't know what you call it, a little decoration or something in the lobby that's from a school.
[36:48.000 --> 36:51.000]  And that can be considered a school-sponsored activity.
[36:51.000 --> 36:56.000]  And so they say, well, since it's a school-sponsored activity, that also prohibits Lysos from caring.
[36:56.000 --> 36:59.000]  And no, and that's, no, absolutely not.
[36:59.000 --> 37:05.000]  So the judge basically agreed with everything that I said, which is correct, which is what the Texas law says.
[37:05.000 --> 37:09.000]  And so now it's going to go forward, it's going to go to trial.
[37:09.000 --> 37:12.000]  The key here about this is the punishment.
[37:12.000 --> 37:19.000]  When you file a complaint and you move that complaint and lose forth, when you serve that entity,
[37:19.000 --> 37:25.000]  that like, for example, I serve the city of Austin to inform them that they were illegally posting signs.
[37:25.000 --> 37:33.000]  After so many days, then it goes, the Attorney General actually starts, there's a fine that's involved in all this basically.
[37:33.000 --> 37:34.000]  All right.
[37:34.000 --> 37:43.000]  So for the first day, it's $1,000 to $1,500 for the first offense, the first day, that they do not allow Lysos from caring.
[37:43.000 --> 37:51.000]  And then the second day and every day after that is $10,000 to $10,500.
[37:51.000 --> 37:58.000]  This started the beginning of 2016.
[37:58.000 --> 38:01.000]  This is now 2018.
[38:01.000 --> 38:13.000]  So that fine, the max amount of money for that fine is $7.3 million because yesterday it was another $10,000 to $10,500.
[38:13.000 --> 38:21.000]  Tomorrow, when you wake up tomorrow, it's going to be another $10,000 to $10,500 because they are still not allowing Lysos to carry.
[38:21.000 --> 38:24.000]  So every day that fine goes up.
[38:24.000 --> 38:30.000]  So the last time I calculated that fine, the max amount is $7.3 million.
[38:30.000 --> 38:42.000]  The minimum amount, if the judge imposes the minimum fine, it's still $1.1 million that the city of Austin is on the hook for, for violating the law.
[38:42.000 --> 38:46.000]  Now, the bad thing is that comes out of our tax dollars.
[38:46.000 --> 38:53.000]  The good thing is that money goes to fixing our infrastructure, so fixing the roads, our Texas roads.
[38:53.000 --> 38:55.000]  So that's the great thing about that.
[38:55.000 --> 39:09.000]  But it's a problem because you have the city council in Austin, you have the mayor in Austin that are so concerned about allowing illegal immigrants
[39:09.000 --> 39:14.000]  and maybe providing counsel for illegal immigrants.
[39:14.000 --> 39:24.000]  But here we are, licensed holders, law-abiding citizens, and they will not do anything to assist us or to allow us to carry in places that we should be able to carry in.
[39:24.000 --> 39:34.000]  And they will not follow the law for us, but they will definitely make the city of Austin a sanctuary city for people that are not even the citizens of this country.
[39:34.000 --> 39:36.000]  It's just absolutely disgusting.
[39:36.000 --> 39:48.000]  And one thing that came to mind when you're talking about the taxpayers ultimately being on the hook for this in the city of Austin, and maybe this is something Randy and I can hash out later in the show,
[39:48.000 --> 39:51.000]  but just a thought to throw out there.
[39:51.000 --> 39:58.000]  So say the city of Austin ends up getting sanctioned with these millions of dollars of fines.
[39:58.000 --> 40:06.000]  They're going to have to come up with that money somewhere and they're going to take that out of whatever funds they have available.
[40:06.000 --> 40:23.000]  And so my concern is that, well, obviously they're probably not going to be able to, you know, just put a bond up for election to the voters and say, hey, we need $1.7 million or however much it is to pay this fine.
[40:23.000 --> 40:29.000]  Come on, voters approve this bond because of course everyone's going to be like, no.
[40:29.000 --> 40:43.000]  And so what they're going to do is they're just going to probably misallocate funds, misappropriate funds and take it out of money that we've already approved to be spent for something else.
[40:43.000 --> 41:05.000]  And then when they need to repair other infrastructure like the sewer systems or the water systems or whatever, then they're going to go crying to the taxpayers and say, will you guys please vote to approve a bond so that we can repair, you know, the treatment center for water supply here in Austin.
[41:05.000 --> 41:08.000]  Everyone's going to go, oh, well, of course we need to do that.
[41:08.000 --> 41:32.000]  And so we need to figure out a way how to put a break, how to put the breaks on this outlandish extravagant spending that the city of Austin does on programs that are completely unnecessary and immoral, like providing counsel for people who are not in this country legally and paying for us to be a sanctuary city and all of this madness.
[41:32.000 --> 41:47.000]  We've got to figure out how to put the breaks on that sort of spending so that we don't just keep getting hit in the pocketbook every time the city council decides to break the law and gets fined.
[41:47.000 --> 41:48.000]  You know what I'm saying?
[41:48.000 --> 41:53.000]  I mean, there has to be something done here to curb this spending madness.
[41:53.000 --> 42:02.000]  People are saying, well, they're asking me, am I some type of activist? I said, no, in this situation here, I'm not an activist.
[42:02.000 --> 42:05.000]  Your activist is actually coming from the city of Austin.
[42:05.000 --> 42:06.000]  They're the activists.
[42:06.000 --> 42:10.000]  I'm asking them to follow the law, the constitution, the state law.
[42:10.000 --> 42:22.000]  The only ones that actually can regulate the wearing of firearms in the state of Texas is going to be the Texas state legislature, not your city council member, not your mayor, not your city manager.
[42:22.000 --> 42:25.000]  That is the responsibility of the state legislature.
[42:25.000 --> 42:31.000]  And the legislature has spoken and they said that, hey, this is the law when it comes to firearms in the state of Texas.
[42:31.000 --> 42:39.000]  And just because you're a city municipality, just because you're a mayor, city council, you're a city manager, you can't just violate the law.
[42:39.000 --> 42:44.000]  If I go out here and I violate the law, I break the law, I will go to jail.
[42:44.000 --> 42:48.000]  And so I left the officials to follow the law.
[42:48.000 --> 42:52.000]  Yeah, and you know what? I think this brings up a really important point here.
[42:52.000 --> 42:54.000]  This is not about activism.
[42:54.000 --> 43:00.000]  People need to realize that municipalities are not independent little phythomes.
[43:00.000 --> 43:05.000]  Okay, municipalities are not little independent kingdoms or nation states.
[43:05.000 --> 43:08.000]  Okay, we're not in a feudalistic society here.
[43:08.000 --> 43:10.000]  We have a Texas legislature.
[43:10.000 --> 43:22.000]  We're all part of the state of Texas and what the municipal governments can do and cannot do is strictly regulated by the Texas legislature.
[43:22.000 --> 43:25.000]  I think it's a really important point to consider here.
[43:25.000 --> 43:27.000]  Go ahead, Randy.
[43:27.000 --> 43:28.000]  Over the break.
[43:28.000 --> 43:29.000]  Think.
[43:29.000 --> 43:32.000]  Quo warranto.
[43:32.000 --> 43:35.000]  These guys are violating law.
[43:35.000 --> 43:44.000]  And if we go directly after them for violating law and we get an indictment, we have access to quo warranto removal from office.
[43:44.000 --> 43:49.000]  Yeah, Randy's thinking at it from a criminal perspective.
[43:49.000 --> 43:52.000]  And I'm thinking about court injunctions, too.
[43:52.000 --> 43:55.000]  I want to discuss that on the other side of potential injunctions.
[43:55.000 --> 44:02.000]  We'll be right back with Michael Cargill, Central Texas Gun Works.
[44:02.000 --> 44:06.000]  Hello, my name is Stuart Smith from naturespureorganics.com.
[44:06.000 --> 44:12.000]  And I would like to invite you to come by our store at 1904 Waterloo Street Sweet D here in Austin, Texas.
[44:12.000 --> 44:14.000]  Find brave new books and chase things.
[44:14.000 --> 44:18.000]  To see all our fantastic health and wellness products with your very own eyes.
[44:18.000 --> 44:22.000]  Have a look at our miracle healing clay that started our adventure in alternative medicine.
[44:22.000 --> 44:26.000]  Take a peek at some of our other wonderful products including our all shallot emu oil,
[44:26.000 --> 44:33.000]  lotion candles, olive oil, soaps and colloidal silver and gold. Call 512-264-4043
[44:33.000 --> 44:37.000]  or find us online at naturespureorganics.com.
[44:37.000 --> 44:42.000]  That's 512-264-4043 naturespureorganics.com.
[44:42.000 --> 44:46.000]  Don't forget to like us on Facebook for information on events and our products.
[44:46.000 --> 45:00.000]  naturespureorganics.com
[45:00.000 --> 45:03.000]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[45:03.000 --> 45:07.000]  Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary,
[45:07.000 --> 45:13.000]  the affordable, easy to understand four CD course that will show you how in 24 hours,
[45:13.000 --> 45:19.000]  step by step. If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing.
[45:19.000 --> 45:23.000]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[45:23.000 --> 45:28.000]  Thousands have won with our step by step course and now you can too.
[45:28.000 --> 45:34.000]  Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case winning experience.
[45:34.000 --> 45:39.000]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand
[45:39.000 --> 45:43.000]  about the principles and practices that control our American courts.
[45:43.000 --> 45:49.000]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases,
[45:49.000 --> 45:56.000]  pro se tactics and much more. Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner.
[45:56.000 --> 46:14.000]  Or call toll-free 866-LAW-EZ.
[46:14.000 --> 46:27.000]  If you did not have any problems, where do you want to look for one? If you could not wait any back too long,
[46:27.000 --> 46:48.000]  call toll-free 866-LAW-EZ.
[46:48.000 --> 46:52.000]  Okay, we are back folks. This is the rule of law, Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens.
[46:52.000 --> 46:57.000]  It is Thursday, January 11th, 2018. We are here with Mr. Michael Cargill
[46:57.000 --> 47:03.000]  discussing the situation with the city of Austin and the attorney general of the state of Texas
[47:03.000 --> 47:14.000]  filing this lawsuit concerning the banning of open carry with licensing in violation of state law.
[47:14.000 --> 47:24.000]  And one thing that I just wanted to throw out here quickly, Michael, is injunctive relief also on the table here
[47:24.000 --> 47:31.000]  in this lawsuit, not just filing but actually getting a court order from the state district court
[47:31.000 --> 47:37.000]  ordering the city of Austin to remove the signs and to cease and desist from banning people,
[47:37.000 --> 47:43.000]  prohibiting people from carrying in the city hall. Is that also on the table in the lawsuit?
[47:43.000 --> 47:51.000]  Absolutely. That is the main goal. That is my only goal, actually. The fine is just something to punish the city with
[47:51.000 --> 47:58.000]  but my goal is so that license holders can actually carry, can seal or openly carry inside city hall.
[47:58.000 --> 48:02.000]  Yeah, and I hope that part of the court order is to replace the window.
[48:02.000 --> 48:08.000]  I mean, this is just, when I read that, I just nearly fell out of my chair laughing so hard.
[48:08.000 --> 48:14.000]  It's like these gun grabbers, these liberals, Alex Jones calls them libtards.
[48:14.000 --> 48:23.000]  I think it's the perfect name for them. They got to etch into the window like it's some kind of piece of art or something,
[48:23.000 --> 48:29.000]  a gun with the X across it. It's like, give me a break. Get rid of the window. Come on.
[48:29.000 --> 48:34.000]  I'm sorry. These people are just over the top.
[48:34.000 --> 48:38.000]  Anyway, so I'm glad to know that that is on the table.
[48:38.000 --> 48:47.000]  And so now Randy, you wanted to mention something about Quo Warnto and possible how can we get this into the criminal realm?
[48:47.000 --> 48:49.000]  Get these guys prosecuted.
[48:49.000 --> 48:55.000]  Okay, Michael, you were actually restricted in your right.
[48:55.000 --> 48:58.000]  So you were harmed.
[48:58.000 --> 49:11.000]  You were restricted in your right by public officials exerting or purporting to exert an authority did not expressly have 39.03 Texas penal code calls that official oppression.
[49:11.000 --> 49:23.000]  Now, the likelihood of your getting one of these council members actually prosecuted for official oppression somewhere between little and none.
[49:23.000 --> 49:30.000]  However, the one thing that terrifies all of these guys.
[49:30.000 --> 49:32.000]  It's a grand jury.
[49:32.000 --> 49:38.000]  I walked in my district attorney's office one day and he's sitting there with his head in his hand. He is distraught.
[49:38.000 --> 49:43.000]  He filed complaints against a drug dealer and I have nothing to do with drugs.
[49:43.000 --> 49:51.000]  But I knew this guy's name Joe De Villa, biggest drug dealer in the county caught him with enough to charging with trafficking.
[49:51.000 --> 50:00.000]  And a lawyer who got his bar card had a big party got plopped for DUI on the way home from his bar card party.
[50:00.000 --> 50:06.000]  And Greg said he didn't want to ruin this lawyer's career, but this was his job.
[50:06.000 --> 50:08.000]  He goes to the grand jury.
[50:08.000 --> 50:10.000]  They know build a drug dealer.
[50:10.000 --> 50:12.000]  They to build a lawyer.
[50:12.000 --> 50:22.000]  And Greg said, those darn grand jurors, you never know what they're going to do.
[50:22.000 --> 50:27.000]  And I raised both hands over my head and looked up and said, there is a God.
[50:27.000 --> 50:37.000]  I could not have heard anything better for a prosecuting attorney to say you never know what they're going to do.
[50:37.000 --> 50:45.000]  These city council members and the mayor, they feel the same way.
[50:45.000 --> 50:48.000]  And this is something totally out of their hands.
[50:48.000 --> 51:00.000]  So when you come in there and start making criminal complaint noises, it's sort of like what officials run into when they get a Rico suit.
[51:00.000 --> 51:08.000]  Because the Rico suit can come back on them criminally. The tobacco companies beat the government six times in court.
[51:08.000 --> 51:16.000]  And when they came back with Rico, all these executives said, whoa, wait a minute, they can come back at us criminal.
[51:16.000 --> 51:23.000]  They came to the table and made the largest monetary deal ever in history up to that date.
[51:23.000 --> 51:26.000]  Because they didn't want to go to jail.
[51:26.000 --> 51:33.000]  So what happens if you start making grand jury noises?
[51:33.000 --> 51:40.000]  I got the highest judges in Texas, all 15, the Court of Criminal Appeals put forward grand jury a few years ago.
[51:40.000 --> 51:46.000]  And I guarantee you that got their attention. They didn't get true build.
[51:46.000 --> 51:52.000]  The grand jury no build them, but they sit there four months wondering if their career is going to end tomorrow.
[51:52.000 --> 52:04.000]  So I would suggest you might consider making up a criminal complaint and giving it to the prosecuting attorney and let him refuse to give it to the grand jury.
[52:04.000 --> 52:14.000]  Then you start jumping up and down, railing in righteousness, indignation and file a complaint against the prosecutor for shielding these chunks from prosecution.
[52:14.000 --> 52:18.000]  And everybody will do everything they can to hide these complaints.
[52:18.000 --> 52:29.000]  And while you're going after these higher level officials, they're going to be calling down to this city council and say, what in the heck have you got us into?
[52:29.000 --> 52:32.000]  You'll give them a different calculation to do.
[52:32.000 --> 52:54.000]  Well, and also Randy has managed to successfully get the district attorney's office here in Austin to stop trying to stand in the way, illegally stand in the way when citizens come to give information on knowledge of criminal matters to a grand jury.
[52:54.000 --> 53:03.000]  Because typically the prosecutor is always going to run interference with that. So kudos to Randy for that. So I think it's a great idea.
[53:03.000 --> 53:17.000]  It's definitely something to consider. And even if they didn't get indicted, which they should get indicted, but wouldn't it be something just to have their names up for deliberation of every single one of these city council members for doing this?
[53:17.000 --> 53:25.000]  You know, it might make them think differently about this sort of thing in the future because these fines, they don't come out of their pocket.
[53:25.000 --> 53:37.000]  But I sure would like to figure out a way that we could hit these city council members in their own personal pockets for stuff like this because it just seems like they do this kind of thing with impunity.
[53:37.000 --> 53:43.000]  I mean, why should they care? I mean, if they get a court order against them, okay, then they remove the sign.
[53:43.000 --> 53:56.000]  The judge said if the city of Austin gets fined, it's no skin off their nose. Okay, something has to happen where they are held personally responsible financially and criminally to make them stop this.
[53:56.000 --> 54:05.000]  And so we can talk more about that on the other side, you know, getting into strategies and philosophy and whatnot of how to deal with these.
[54:05.000 --> 54:12.000]  But we only have a few more minutes left of this segment. So I want to go back to our guest, Michael Cargill.
[54:12.000 --> 54:22.000]  So Michael, what is the status now? Has a trial date been set yet? What is next on the table here for this case?
[54:22.000 --> 54:30.000]  Yes, nothing has been set just yet. So it needs to be scheduled for trial is what we're waiting on to see what's going to happen.
[54:30.000 --> 54:36.000]  And then I don't know if it's going to be a jury trial or a judge trial. We're not sure just yet.
[54:36.000 --> 54:47.000]  The important thing for everyone to know, the reason why this is looking so great for us and bad for the city of Austin is because this is judge Livingston.
[54:47.000 --> 55:01.000]  And she is a very liberal judge in Travis County. And for her to give the type of ruling that she gave, this is bad for the city of Austin because when this goes, if this has to go to the next level,
[55:01.000 --> 55:08.000]  then they're going to be all conservative judges. And it's just going to be very bad for them.
[55:08.000 --> 55:17.000]  So if your liberal judge says, hey, the attorney general has married on his case, Michael Cargill has married in what he's saying.
[55:17.000 --> 55:25.000]  So a jury needs to hear this information. That's what she's saying. Then this is a liberal judge.
[55:25.000 --> 55:33.000]  Imagine what's going to happen if it has to go to the next level when it's a conservative who is very pro second amendment.
[55:33.000 --> 55:46.000]  Yeah, that's true because Austin is like a liberal bastion here. It's like an island of just unbelievableness in the midst of this great state of Texas.
[55:46.000 --> 55:56.000]  You know, it's like when I used to go visit my parents up in East Texas, I'd be like, oh my gosh, I'm going up to Redneckville now.
[55:56.000 --> 56:06.000]  But now it's like, oh, boy, I'm finally around some people that are sane. It's like almost afraid to go out of the house around here the way the political climate is and the mindset and everything.
[56:06.000 --> 56:14.000]  So yeah, you got a really good point. If a liberal judge is saying these things, these guys don't stand a chance when it goes to appeal.
[56:14.000 --> 56:23.000]  Okay, or when it goes to the Texas Supreme Court. So hopefully they will get their act together. We shall see.
[56:23.000 --> 56:39.000]  Oh yeah, the city of Austin is in big trouble. And they're in big trouble in the tune of $7.3 million max. To be liberal about it, it's $1.1 million as of right now today. They're in big trouble.
[56:39.000 --> 56:47.000]  Well, Michael, I applaud you in your efforts, standing up for the truth, standing up for everyone's right to bear arms.
[56:47.000 --> 56:55.000]  We all appreciate everything you do. We appreciate your show. I love your show. Love having you as a host on the network.
[56:55.000 --> 57:04.000]  Thank you so much for being a sponsor of the network. And Michael has also said that he is going to, we're going to do it again this year.
[57:04.000 --> 57:14.000]  Absolutely. Yeah, I don't think Michael has decided yet what the prizes are going to be. But get ready, folks, because we are going to have the drawing again this year in 2018.
[57:14.000 --> 57:19.000]  Michael, thank you so much for your support. And thank you for everything you do.
[57:19.000 --> 57:25.000]  Absolutely, not a problem. And I look forward to coming up with some new firearms for 2018.
[57:25.000 --> 57:39.000]  Oh, yes. I think it's just fantastic getting everyone well armed. It's such an important thing here. And taking these public servants to task. We just have to do it.
[57:39.000 --> 57:41.000]  You know, everybody.
[57:41.000 --> 57:44.000]  You know what, Deborah, I'm going to tell you already what one of them is going to be.
[57:44.000 --> 57:46.000]  Oh, wow, okay.
[57:46.000 --> 57:54.000]  One of the items we're going to give away is going to be a bump stop.
[57:54.000 --> 57:56.000]  Oh, okay.
[57:56.000 --> 58:00.000]  That's going to be one of them. That's not even the top prize.
[58:00.000 --> 58:02.000]  I'll tell everyone what that is.
[58:02.000 --> 58:10.000]  Bump stock, that bump stock is a slide fire bump stock. It's just a way of shooting a type of way of shooting.
[58:10.000 --> 58:23.000]  So when you put this device on your air 15 or AK or whatever, then it uses the momentum of the firearm discharging where you can actually pull the trigger and fire faster.
[58:23.000 --> 58:38.000]  The slide fire bump stock, unfortunately, is one of the devices that the madman or whoever, I'm not sure who, but whoever committed the killings in Las Vegas.
[58:38.000 --> 58:44.000]  Oh, well, you know, that is very tragic, but that should not take away our right to bear arms.
[58:44.000 --> 58:50.000]  All right, folks, thank you so much. We are at the top of the hour. We'll be back on the other side with our callers.
[58:50.000 --> 58:58.000]  The Bible remains the most popular book in the world, yet countless readers are frustrated because they struggle to understand it.
[58:58.000 --> 59:06.000]  Some new translations try to help by simplifying the text, but in the process can compromise the profound meaning of the Scripture.
[59:06.000 --> 59:09.000]  Enter the recovery version.
[59:09.000 --> 59:18.000]  First, this new translation is extremely faithful and accurate, but the real story is the more than 9000 explanatory footnotes.
[59:18.000 --> 59:28.000]  Difficult and profound passages are opened up in a marvelous way, providing an entrance into the riches of the Word beyond which you've ever experienced before.
[59:28.000 --> 59:33.000]  Bibles from America would like to give you a free recovery version simply for the asking.
[59:33.000 --> 59:47.000]  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.
[59:47.000 --> 59:50.000]  That's freestudybible.com.
[59:50.000 --> 59:59.000]  You're listening to the Logos Radio Network at LogosRadioNetwork.com.
[59:59.000 --> 01:00:07.000]  The following is Flash's brought to you by The Low Star Lowdowns.
[01:00:07.000 --> 01:00:26.000]  Markets for Monday, the 8th of January, 2018, open with gold at $1,320.02, silver $17.20, Texas crude $61.44, Bitcoin $16,020.30, while Bitcoin cashed at $2,757.56.
[01:00:26.000 --> 01:00:32.000]  Finally, dashcoins at $1,284.36, a crypto coin.
[01:00:32.000 --> 01:00:45.000]  Today in history, the year 1835, the United States government national debt is zero for the first time and presumably only time in the government's existence.
[01:00:45.000 --> 01:00:47.000]  Zero government debt?
[01:00:47.000 --> 01:00:50.000]  Today in history.
[01:00:50.000 --> 01:01:04.000]  In recent news, the president will undergo a two-hour physical exam which will include urine blood analysis, cardiac evaluation, and some more personal prying with sleeping habits and even his romantic life being discussed with the multi-administration presidential physician.
[01:01:04.000 --> 01:01:10.000]  It seems the president may be wanting to lay to rest the recent lineup of criticisms questioning his mental health and stability.
[01:01:10.000 --> 01:01:26.000]  Apparently, some of the president's more recent tweets directed towards North Korea's Kim Jong-un and the author of the book Fire and Fury, Michael Wolfe, has many thinking that the president should perhaps be more articulate and less rash with his tweets.
[01:01:26.000 --> 01:01:44.000]  The U.S. District Court Judge Gloria Navarro dismissed cases against Nevada Rancher Clive and Bundy, two sons and a Montana militiaman today. Judge ruled that the government's lawyers suppressed footage from several cameras that were set up by the FBI around the Bundy's family home that would have been favorable in the defendant's case.
[01:01:44.000 --> 01:02:01.000]  After Bundy was released today, Monday, after leaving the courthouse, he told reporters that I've been a political prisoner for 700 days. He hadn't seen his wife for nearly two years due to the fact that he had refused any conditional release, which required him to forfeit his trial by jury rights.
[01:02:01.000 --> 01:02:17.000]  Former Google engineer James D'Amore filed a class action lawsuit against the Alphabet Corporation on Monday claiming that it discriminates against white men and those with conservative leaning views. D'Amore was terminated for dismantling a memo essentially questioning the company's diversity policies.
[01:02:17.000 --> 01:02:34.000]  The suit is basically arguing that Google employees who express views deviating from corporate sentiments on politics and practices like diversity hiring policies by a sensitivity and social justice were singled out, mistreated, and systematically punished and terminated from Google.
[01:02:34.000 --> 01:02:59.000]  Google spokesman Tysha Parts said in response that we look forward to defending against Mr. D'Amore's lawsuit in court.
[01:04:04.000 --> 01:04:22.000]  Hey, howdy, howdy. This is Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Rule of Law Radio on this the 11th day of January, 2018, and we are going to go to the calls. We've had some folks that's been waiting a long time. We're going to start with Mark in Wisconsin and Mark, I know you have been causing trouble.
[01:04:22.000 --> 01:04:26.000]  What have you been up to?
[01:04:26.000 --> 01:04:36.000]  Well, not getting escorted out of buildings at gunpoint, so I'm kind of behind the times here for 2018.
[01:04:36.000 --> 01:04:52.000]  Well, you've got a long way to go to catch up with me. The best one is being carried out of the courthouse, picked up, and my face smashed into the concrete. You just haven't lived until you've done that one.
[01:04:52.000 --> 01:05:03.000]  Yeah, yeah. I haven't had the U.S. Marshals follow me around, so I guess I'm not too obnoxious.
[01:05:03.000 --> 01:05:19.000]  Anyway, time's coming quick for another hearing in my fine Wisconsin credit card thing, and I'm thinking about going through the process of remanding the action to federal court.
[01:05:19.000 --> 01:05:31.000]  Now, looking at 28 USC 1441, Removal of Civil Actions, there's a section here.
[01:05:31.000 --> 01:05:47.000]  If a civil action includes a claim arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States, and then a claim not within the original supplemental jurisdiction, blah, blah, blah, that's become something that can be remanded.
[01:05:47.000 --> 01:06:02.000]  Now, the issue here is in preparing at the state level, the state level has this 422-301 requirements of federal act.
[01:06:02.000 --> 01:06:17.000]  In addition to the disclosures required by the Federal Consumer Credit Protection Act, if any, the creditor shall disclose to the customer to whom the tune credit is extended, the information required by the sub-chapter.
[01:06:17.000 --> 01:06:35.000]  With respect to every consumer credit sale installments, upon their no separate finance charges stated or imposed, the creditor shall make disclosures in accordance with Federal Consumer Credit Protection Act to the extent applicable whether or not the act requires such disclosures to be made.
[01:06:35.000 --> 01:06:55.000]  So, at the hearing, I brought up Regulation Z, and Standard Box G, and something they called the Shiller Box, and was pointing out that I'd not gotten any of this.
[01:06:55.000 --> 01:07:18.000]  Shiller Box, yeah, I believe that's what it's called, or Shimmer Box. They have a particular designation for the format, their standard format, so they found that if you threw the stuff in a box, a tabular box,
[01:07:18.000 --> 01:07:26.000]  this is better understood by consumers, so it's therefore the Shiller Box.
[01:07:26.000 --> 01:07:53.000]  In the particular case, the card was canceled in 2013. In 2014, apparently a credit card was sent, but never activated, and nothing was sent in 2015. In 2016, the blank checks were sent and sent to an address that the bank, the credit card issuers,
[01:07:53.000 --> 01:08:20.000]  were never given as an address to send literature to. So, I can see where there was no account because the entities within their computer system to generate the yearly notice were generating a notice for an account that didn't exist.
[01:08:20.000 --> 01:08:29.000]  I tried to bring that up to the judge in the county, the county. He stated that the federal rules don't apply in state.
[01:08:29.000 --> 01:08:41.000]  So, do I just use that straight up and say this is why this needs to be remanded because the state is not applying its rules?
[01:08:41.000 --> 01:08:56.000]  Do I just say I want this remanded and not? Okay, using the terms backwards, this removal to the federal court, remand back to the state court.
[01:08:56.000 --> 01:09:20.000]  The filer of the case has the choice of venue. The filer can choose if there are state and federal issues. He can choose the state or federal court. And the defendant has 30 days in which to move to remove to the Fed.
[01:09:20.000 --> 01:09:21.000]  Okay.
[01:09:21.000 --> 01:09:24.000]  After 30 days, he can no longer remove.
[01:09:24.000 --> 01:09:32.000]  All right, so then I'm kind of stuck on the removal because I did not execute in 30 days.
[01:09:32.000 --> 01:09:35.000]  Right.
[01:09:35.000 --> 01:09:52.000]  Unless some issue comes up that wasn't apparent on the filing of the case, that the federal court would have exclusive jurisdiction over.
[01:09:52.000 --> 01:10:03.000]  Now, there is the 2012 venue and removal clarification act, which essentially changed 200 years of law.
[01:10:03.000 --> 01:10:20.000]  The courts, there was a split in the court's circuits. Some of the circuits said that if an issue has state and federal claims and it's in the Fed, the Fed can hear the state claims under judicial economy.
[01:10:20.000 --> 01:10:27.000]  Some of the other circuits said, no, the feds can't hear the state claims. It's an undue preemption to state law.
[01:10:27.000 --> 01:10:36.000]  So the legislators stepped in to clear up the split and they fell to the side of preemption.
[01:10:36.000 --> 01:10:55.000]  They said that while a case with state and federal issues can be removed to the federal court, that the state claims must be severed and remanded.
[01:10:55.000 --> 01:11:02.000]  Okay.
[01:11:02.000 --> 01:11:11.000]  Yeah, I'm not sure then that's going to get me out.
[01:11:11.000 --> 01:11:14.000]  Boy.
[01:11:14.000 --> 01:11:27.000]  Okay, so you look at it and see if there are any federal claims in there that the feds would have exclusive jurisdiction over.
[01:11:27.000 --> 01:11:41.000]  Most certainly they do under 1693 or 94 where you cannot extend credit that was not asked for.
[01:11:41.000 --> 01:11:51.000]  And a canceled account creates a situation where the subsequent actions would be credit granted that was not asked for.
[01:11:51.000 --> 01:11:54.000]  There is some case law there.
[01:11:54.000 --> 01:12:02.000]  Hold on, hold on. The judge has just said this claim is a federal claim and he can't hear it.
[01:12:02.000 --> 01:12:13.000]  So since you can't remove what you can do is file a federal claim on the claims the judge can't hear.
[01:12:13.000 --> 01:12:14.000]  Okay.
[01:12:14.000 --> 01:12:25.000]  And then move to move for a jointer to join this case to the federal case and that way you get them back in the fed.
[01:12:25.000 --> 01:12:27.000]  Okay.
[01:12:27.000 --> 01:12:39.000]  Move the stuff.
[01:12:39.000 --> 01:12:59.000]  All right. Now, the other interesting tidbit there is the discovery was asked to produce actually before there was a case, it was asked produce the contract the binds.
[01:12:59.000 --> 01:13:01.000]  Nothing was done.
[01:13:01.000 --> 01:13:03.000]  Then the case got started.
[01:13:03.000 --> 01:13:04.000]  That was asked.
[01:13:04.000 --> 01:13:08.000]  Nothing was done.
[01:13:08.000 --> 01:13:14.000]  Well, hold on. Do you have a declaratory judgment in Wisconsin?
[01:13:14.000 --> 01:13:17.000]  Well, that's where I'm going towards here.
[01:13:17.000 --> 01:13:18.000]  Oh, okay.
[01:13:18.000 --> 01:13:42.000]  We have a declaratory, and they'll call it declaratory judgments, a summary judgment as a rule of law. If you have unanswered or the emitter denies create a no, there is no matter here.
[01:13:42.000 --> 01:13:59.000]  There is no challenge here with the emitter denies and you can then for summary judgment at any time get the case tossed.
[01:13:59.000 --> 01:14:20.000]  So I had filed the court acknowledged the filing of the interrogatories. They didn't bother answering the interrogatories and the judge, we went in front of a judge and I said, my discovery is not being answered.
[01:14:20.000 --> 01:14:33.000]  And the judge said, all right, well, answers questions. And if you have a copy of the contract that binds him, get it to him.
[01:14:33.000 --> 01:15:00.000]  And the emitter denies go straight to emitter deny there was no contract buying finding this. And having been ordered by the judge provide the contract. I think I've got a pretty good salad shot on the pretty good and solid shot on the this petition petition for
[01:15:00.000 --> 01:15:05.000]  judgment. Yes.
[01:15:05.000 --> 01:15:18.000]  Since they were ordered to produce it and they did not produce it. Therefore, the only reasonable conclusion is that one either one doesn't exist, or they're in contempt court.
[01:15:18.000 --> 01:15:27.000]  Well, I would say that a third thing, the one that exists doesn't help them. And therefore,
[01:15:27.000 --> 01:15:33.000]  I'm not I'm not going for what I'm doing is going for the legal position.
[01:15:33.000 --> 01:15:39.000]  Right. The legal position is the judge ordered you to produce one. If you had it.
[01:15:39.000 --> 01:15:42.000]  If you didn't produce one.
[01:15:42.000 --> 01:15:48.000]  Then you either didn't have one or you violated a court order.
[01:15:48.000 --> 01:15:56.000]  Legally, in either case, you have a right to summary judgment.
[01:15:56.000 --> 01:16:00.000]  That'll be pushed for.
[01:16:00.000 --> 01:16:05.000]  But then the remanding, then.
[01:16:05.000 --> 01:16:15.000]  I'm not feeling as good about it right now based on your commentary.
[01:16:15.000 --> 01:16:31.000]  The state doesn't consider the federal rules to apply and they say right in the 422 301 that the federal rules apply.
[01:16:31.000 --> 01:16:33.000]  Wait a minute. Yeah, you should.
[01:16:33.000 --> 01:16:43.000]  That's what I started to say that you should research that out because if you're in a state case and there are federal issues.
[01:16:43.000 --> 01:16:54.000]  Either the case would need necessarily need to go to the fed or the state would be obligated to rule on the federal issues.
[01:16:54.000 --> 01:17:00.000]  Otherwise, you denied your remedy.
[01:17:00.000 --> 01:17:02.000]  I love logos without the shows on this network.
[01:17:02.000 --> 01:17:04.000]  I'd be almost as ignorant as my friends.
[01:17:04.000 --> 01:17:07.000]  I'm so addicted to the truth now that there's no going back.
[01:17:07.000 --> 01:17:13.000]  I need my truth pick. I'd be lost without logos and I really want to help keep this network on the air.
[01:17:13.000 --> 01:17:20.000]  I'd love to volunteer as a show producer, but I'm a bit of a Luddite and I really don't have any money to give because I spent it all on supplements.
[01:17:20.000 --> 01:17:22.000]  How can I help logos?
[01:17:22.000 --> 01:17:24.000]  Well, I'm glad you asked.
[01:17:24.000 --> 01:17:29.000]  Whenever you order anything from Amazon, you can help logos with ordering your supplies or holiday gifts.
[01:17:29.000 --> 01:17:31.000]  First thing you do is clear your cookies.
[01:17:31.000 --> 01:17:37.000]  Now, go to LogosRadioNetwork.com, tick on the Amazon logo and bookmark it.
[01:17:37.000 --> 01:17:43.000]  Now, when you order anything from Amazon, you use that link and logos gets a few pesos.
[01:17:43.000 --> 01:17:44.000]  Do I pay extra?
[01:17:44.000 --> 01:17:45.000]  No.
[01:17:45.000 --> 01:17:47.000]  Do you have to do anything different when I order?
[01:17:47.000 --> 01:17:48.000]  No.
[01:17:48.000 --> 01:17:49.000]  Can I use my Amazon Prime?
[01:17:49.000 --> 01:17:50.000]  No.
[01:17:50.000 --> 01:17:51.000]  I mean, yes.
[01:17:51.000 --> 01:17:54.000]  Wow, giving without doing anything or spending any money.
[01:17:54.000 --> 01:17:55.000]  This is perfect.
[01:17:55.000 --> 01:17:57.000]  Thank you so much.
[01:17:57.000 --> 01:17:58.000]  You're welcome.
[01:17:58.000 --> 01:18:00.000]  Happy holidays, logos.
[01:18:00.000 --> 01:18:05.000]  Are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters, or even lawsuits?
[01:18:05.000 --> 01:18:09.000]  Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Miras Proven Method.
[01:18:09.000 --> 01:18:15.000]  Michael Miras has won six cases in federal court against debt collectors and now you can win two.
[01:18:15.000 --> 01:18:21.000]  You'll get step-by-step instructions in plain English on how to win in court using federal civil rights statutes.
[01:18:21.000 --> 01:18:25.000]  What to do when contacted by phone, mail, or court summons?
[01:18:25.000 --> 01:18:27.000]  How to answer letters and phone calls?
[01:18:27.000 --> 01:18:29.000]  How to get debt collectors out of your credit report?
[01:18:29.000 --> 01:18:34.000]  How to turn the financial tables on them and make them pay you to go away?
[01:18:34.000 --> 01:18:39.000]  The Michael Miras Proven Method is the solution for how to stop debt collectors.
[01:18:39.000 --> 01:18:41.000]  Personal consultation is available as well.
[01:18:41.000 --> 01:18:50.000]  For more information, please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the blue Michael Miras banner or email Michael Miras at yahoo.com.
[01:18:50.000 --> 01:18:57.000]  That's ruleoflawradio.com or email m-i-c-h-a-e-l-m-i-r-r-a-s at yahoo.com.
[01:18:57.000 --> 01:19:00.000]  To learn how to stop debt collectors now.
[01:19:00.000 --> 01:19:29.000]  This is the Logos Radio Network.
[01:19:31.000 --> 01:19:36.000]  You ain't gonna fool me with that same old trick again.
[01:19:36.000 --> 01:19:41.000]  I was blindsided, but now I can see your back.
[01:19:41.000 --> 01:19:46.000]  You put the fear in my pockets, took the money from my hand.
[01:19:46.000 --> 01:19:51.000]  Ain't gonna fool me with that same old trick again.
[01:19:51.000 --> 01:19:53.000]  Okay, we are back.
[01:19:53.000 --> 01:19:59.000]  Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens of Rule of Law Radio on this, the 11th day of January, 2018.
[01:19:59.000 --> 01:20:01.000]  We're talking to Mark in Wisconsin.
[01:20:01.000 --> 01:20:04.000]  Okay, Mark, where were we?
[01:20:04.000 --> 01:20:27.000]  Discussing the remanding, since the judge had stated that, because I was having a zippy and wonderful discussion about regulation Z, and his eyes just glassed over and he hand-weighted and said, well, we don't have a problem.
[01:20:27.000 --> 01:20:33.000]  Do you have comedy in Wisconsin?
[01:20:33.000 --> 01:20:35.000]  Oh, comedy.
[01:20:35.000 --> 01:20:37.000]  You're gonna go make me in the back.
[01:20:37.000 --> 01:20:46.000]  Comedy is where, if you don't have a law, it's good faith and something else.
[01:20:46.000 --> 01:20:48.000]  I keep forgetting the terms.
[01:20:48.000 --> 01:21:16.000]  So you can bring a law in from another jurisdiction where your legislature hasn't considered an issue, but another legislature has that one legislature trusts the integrity of another legislator, so you can bring an out-of-state law into the state where your state hasn't addressed it.
[01:21:16.000 --> 01:21:19.000]  And you should be able to bring the federal law in the same way.
[01:21:19.000 --> 01:21:32.000]  I'm almost certain the Fed, the state can address the federal claims when they're being adjudicated in a state court.
[01:21:32.000 --> 01:22:00.000]  I'm sure they can too, but I'm wanting to see about throwing the, by shifting it over to the Fed, this shifts that the credit card company is going to have to pick different attorneys and the attorneys that they have become witnesses and it creates its own set of hassles for them.
[01:22:00.000 --> 01:22:07.000]  Then you might look in the Fed for a declaratory judgment suit because they cost a chump change.
[01:22:07.000 --> 01:22:13.000]  In Texas, it cost about $250 to $300 to file a civil suit.
[01:22:13.000 --> 01:22:20.000]  But you can file a declaratory judgment suit for $15.
[01:22:20.000 --> 01:22:31.000]  So you petition the Fed for declaratory judgment on an issue that the state court would then have to recognize as res judicata.
[01:22:31.000 --> 01:22:38.000]  And you jerk these lawyers out into the Fed to have to deal with the declaratory judgment suit.
[01:22:38.000 --> 01:22:42.000]  It's all about the money at the end of the day.
[01:22:42.000 --> 01:22:44.000]  Right, right.
[01:22:44.000 --> 01:23:01.000]  Well, that's part of the reason why I would file it in the northern part of the state and let them have a four hour travel time.
[01:23:01.000 --> 01:23:07.000]  That's what they do to you. They expect, they expect to win by attrition.
[01:23:07.000 --> 01:23:11.000]  So we can play the same game with them.
[01:23:11.000 --> 01:23:16.000]  I'm not one who gives up easily.
[01:23:16.000 --> 01:23:18.000]  Let's see.
[01:23:18.000 --> 01:23:29.000]  So do I just stick to the fact that the judge said federal laws don't apply?
[01:23:29.000 --> 01:23:45.000]  Or do I go ahead and X grind and go with things like, I don't think I can get a fair trial in the Wisconsin County Court, what with the chief judge being a criminal with record blocking.
[01:23:45.000 --> 01:23:57.000]  And this guy being a criminal defending a fellow public official from expense with the insurance and, you know, just go down the list.
[01:23:57.000 --> 01:24:02.000]  Or is that X grinding I should avoid?
[01:24:02.000 --> 01:24:06.000]  Why would you want to avoid it?
[01:24:06.000 --> 01:24:13.000]  Well, it's all about giving them a reason to come to the table and cry the uncle.
[01:24:13.000 --> 01:24:18.000]  Have you asked the court to order mediation?
[01:24:18.000 --> 01:24:24.000]  I have not asked the court to order mediation.
[01:24:24.000 --> 01:24:30.000]  They can't come to the table and make you a deal and save face since you're a pro se.
[01:24:30.000 --> 01:24:37.000]  But if you ask the court to order mediation, now they can come to the table and make a deal and save face.
[01:24:37.000 --> 01:24:46.000]  And that might give them plausible deniability so they can make this annoying case just go away.
[01:24:46.000 --> 01:25:03.000]  Yeah, but on the other hand, they produce no contract. They before canceling the account, the account had six months out of 12 where no payment was made or slow payment was made.
[01:25:03.000 --> 01:25:11.000]  And by that time, the company associated with the account had been closed by the state of Wisconsin for a couple of years.
[01:25:11.000 --> 01:25:19.000]  So there's every good reason for my narrative. The account was closed to be the correct one.
[01:25:19.000 --> 01:25:32.000]  And the narrative from them is we're just going to ignore certain things because it makes us look bad.
[01:25:32.000 --> 01:25:38.000]  Then the other strategy then is to drag them into federal court.
[01:25:38.000 --> 01:25:46.000]  Yeah, that's where I'm headed, I believe. I've just got enough to figure out what do I do to do that.
[01:25:46.000 --> 01:25:57.000]  Okay, the declaratory judgment suit. Ask for nothing. No damages of any kind.
[01:25:57.000 --> 01:26:04.000]  Then you're under the Declaratory Judgment Act. If you ask for any damages or even allow the judge to grant you any damages,
[01:26:04.000 --> 01:26:12.000]  then one of the ways they'll screw you around with declaratory judgment is grant you attorney fees or something.
[01:26:12.000 --> 01:26:21.000]  You're ready if you ask for or not because then the attorneys can appeal and get it turned over on appeal because the judge can't grant any damages.
[01:26:21.000 --> 01:26:33.000]  So no damages, no claims against them. You just asked court to declare the rights of the parties or the duties of the parties under law.
[01:26:33.000 --> 01:26:45.000]  And once the judge rules, that becomes Residucata. Now you can take that back to the state court and stuff it down the state court's throat.
[01:26:45.000 --> 01:26:56.000]  Like, can the judge in a state court enforce the Federal Consumer Protection Acts?
[01:26:56.000 --> 01:27:12.000]  Well, the state explicitly says requirements of the Federal Act. In addition to the disclosure requirements by that, if any, blah, blah, blah.
[01:27:12.000 --> 01:27:18.000]  So the Federal Act requirements are supposed to be recognized by the state.
[01:27:18.000 --> 01:27:33.000]  Okay, then go to the state. If it's a county court, you should be able to go to the Court of Appeals with a petition for a writ of mandamus ordering the county court to abide by law.
[01:27:33.000 --> 01:27:41.000]  That's one of the things declaratory judgment is specifically for. I mean, the extraordinary writ is for.
[01:27:41.000 --> 01:27:55.000]  The declaratory judgment. Mandamus. Yeah, I was going to do it as Wisconsin's supervisory writ. But same effects.
[01:27:55.000 --> 01:27:56.000]  Okay.
[01:27:56.000 --> 01:28:02.000]  Well, that would be great. Didn't you stick them in the district court and they have to, I mean, with the appeals court.
[01:28:02.000 --> 01:28:12.000]  I'm assuming it would be the appeals court and that's the way to be in Texas. You wouldn't go to the district court. You'd go straight to the appeals court.
[01:28:12.000 --> 01:28:23.000]  Generally, the rule of thumb is you go for mandamus to the court. This particular case would be appealed to.
[01:28:23.000 --> 01:28:32.000]  We just did that in Texas from a municipal court. We went to the county court for mandamus and the court said they couldn't do a mandamus.
[01:28:32.000 --> 01:28:43.000]  And I went to the judge's handbook and gave him the page and paragraph number that said he could do exactly what we ask him to.
[01:28:43.000 --> 01:28:50.000]  Now the judge is doing a song and dance and seltzer down your pants trying to get around it.
[01:28:50.000 --> 01:28:59.000]  You're going to go to the district court and ask them to do it and tell them that the county court sent us to you said they couldn't do it.
[01:28:59.000 --> 01:29:08.000]  And the district judge will see what he does. But it's winding up. It's binding them. They have to fight us.
[01:29:08.000 --> 01:29:21.000]  You know, you're doing with these attorneys. I don't want to get them in as many places as I could. I would want to annoy as many judges as I could and get them annoyed at these lawyers.
[01:29:21.000 --> 01:29:34.000]  At the point where I ask every judge to vote one of them off the island using Wisconsin law, that's going to annoy a whole bunch of people.
[01:29:34.000 --> 01:29:39.000]  Wait, vote them off the island. Yeah.
[01:29:39.000 --> 01:29:44.000]  Okay, hang on. Let's pick that up on the other side. Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, real law radio.
[01:29:44.000 --> 01:29:51.000]  Call in number 512-646-1984. We'll be right back.
[01:29:51.000 --> 01:30:00.000]  A Virginia company has brainstormed a new idea to house aging relatives, a pre-fab cottage that fits in the backyard of a family's home.
[01:30:00.000 --> 01:30:06.000]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht. Back to tell you about a great idea called Granny Ponds in a moment.
[01:30:06.000 --> 01:30:11.000]  Privacy is under attack. When you give up data about yourself, you'll never know.
[01:30:11.000 --> 01:30:21.000]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too. So protect your rights.
[01:30:21.000 --> 01:30:31.000]  Say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself. Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[01:30:31.000 --> 01:30:42.000]  This message is brought to you by StartPage.com, the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[01:30:42.000 --> 01:30:46.000]  Start over with StartPage.
[01:30:46.000 --> 01:30:52.000]  For the elderly, moving into a nursing home can be devastating, but now a Virginia company is offering an alternative,
[01:30:52.000 --> 01:30:56.000]  compact high-tech cottages that fit in relatives' backyards.
[01:30:56.000 --> 01:31:01.000]  The company N2Care says its Granny Ponds are selling like hotcakes.
[01:31:01.000 --> 01:31:07.000]  These 280-square-foot cottages have everything a hospital room does, safety rails, lighted flooring,
[01:31:07.000 --> 01:31:11.000]  a defibrillator machine, and electronics that monitor vital signs.
[01:31:11.000 --> 01:31:17.000]  The pods can cost up to 125 grants, and you have to get local zoning approval.
[01:31:17.000 --> 01:31:25.000]  But for elderly folks who want to keep family in their lives and still maintain their personal dignity, these pre-fab homes seem pretty fab to me.
[01:31:25.000 --> 01:31:31.000]  Like Dr. Kaepernalbrecht for StartPage.com, the world's most private search engine.
[01:31:31.000 --> 01:31:37.000]  This is Building 7, a 47-story skyscraper that fell on the afternoon of September 11.
[01:31:37.000 --> 01:31:39.000]  The government says that fire brought it down.
[01:31:39.000 --> 01:31:44.000]  However, 1,500 architects and engineers have concluded it was a controlled demolition.
[01:31:44.000 --> 01:31:47.000]  Over 6,000 of my fellow service members have given their lives.
[01:31:47.000 --> 01:31:50.000]  Thousands of my fellow first responders have died.
[01:31:50.000 --> 01:31:51.000]  I'm not a conspiracy theorist.
[01:31:51.000 --> 01:31:52.000]  I'm a structural engineer.
[01:31:52.000 --> 01:31:53.000]  I'm a New York City correction officer.
[01:31:53.000 --> 01:31:54.000]  I'm an Air Force pilot.
[01:31:54.000 --> 01:31:56.000]  I'm a father who lost his son.
[01:31:56.000 --> 01:31:58.000]  We're Americans, and we deserve the truth.
[01:31:58.000 --> 01:32:27.000]  Go to RememberBuilding7.org today.
[01:32:29.000 --> 01:32:39.000]  To handle your claim and your roof right the first time, just call 512-992-8745 or go to HillCountryHomeImprovings.com.
[01:32:39.000 --> 01:32:46.000]  Mention the crypto show and get $100 off, and we'll donate another $100 to the Logos radio network to help continue this programming.
[01:32:46.000 --> 01:32:51.000]  So if those out-of-town roofers come knocking, your door should be locked in.
[01:32:51.000 --> 01:32:57.000]  That's 512-992-8745 or HillCountryHomeImprovings.com.
[01:32:57.000 --> 01:32:59.000]  Discounts are based on full roof replacement.
[01:32:59.000 --> 01:33:02.000]  I mean, I actually be kidding about chemtrails.
[01:33:02.000 --> 01:33:28.000]  You are listening to the Logos Radio Network. LogosRadioNetwork.com.
[01:33:28.000 --> 01:33:33.000]  Okay, we are back. Randy Kelton, RealVlog Radio. Mark, are we done?
[01:33:33.000 --> 01:33:34.000]  I really need to move along.
[01:33:34.000 --> 01:33:41.000]  We've got two more callers and only two segments left.
[01:33:41.000 --> 01:33:43.000]  Oh, there we go.
[01:33:43.000 --> 01:33:45.000]  We can hear you better if I mute you.
[01:33:45.000 --> 01:33:47.000]  All right.
[01:33:47.000 --> 01:33:55.000]  In all counties, the appointments of supplementary judges shall be subject to the approval of the majority of the circuit judges for the county appointment.
[01:33:55.000 --> 01:33:59.000]  The appointment shall be in writing and shall be filed with the office of the clerk of the court.
[01:33:59.000 --> 01:34:09.000]  And then later it says the appointment judge, appointing judge may remove at will and without cause any supplemental court commissioner appointed by the judge, et cetera.
[01:34:09.000 --> 01:34:19.000]  So that situation where the CEO of that law firm that I have the issues with is a supplementary judge.
[01:34:19.000 --> 01:34:38.000]  When I drag in that he was, his law firm was busy running, putting forward documents against their client and may have ultimately gave the legal advice of, you know,
[01:34:38.000 --> 01:34:46.000]  just form new corporations to take the daily pill from the old corporations and shove that in there.
[01:34:46.000 --> 01:34:50.000]  There could be some problems with that.
[01:34:50.000 --> 01:34:57.000]  The CEO is allowing your staff to go off and do that kind of thing.
[01:34:57.000 --> 01:35:02.000]  And the CEO is the respondee of superior.
[01:35:02.000 --> 01:35:04.000]  You betcha.
[01:35:04.000 --> 01:35:11.000]  In addition, since they were bar grieved over their conduct, the CEO had to know about it.
[01:35:11.000 --> 01:35:13.000]  Exactly.
[01:35:13.000 --> 01:35:19.000]  So I, that's what I meant with tossing them off the island.
[01:35:19.000 --> 01:35:22.000]  Oh, okay. Good.
[01:35:22.000 --> 01:35:27.000]  So, okay, if you have some more, let's do it tomorrow night when I've got four hours.
[01:35:27.000 --> 01:35:31.000]  Yeah, I think I'm, I think I'm going to be pretty good.
[01:35:31.000 --> 01:35:33.000]  Then this gives me enough.
[01:35:33.000 --> 01:35:37.000]  I guess I won't go with the federal declaratory judgment.
[01:35:37.000 --> 01:35:45.000]  I'll just go with the straight up, ask the appellate court to step in and don't select some of these people around.
[01:35:45.000 --> 01:35:47.000]  Good.
[01:35:47.000 --> 01:35:49.000]  Okay, keep us up to date.
[01:35:49.000 --> 01:35:50.000]  Thank you, sir.
[01:35:50.000 --> 01:35:52.000]  You're Jeff and a scholar.
[01:35:52.000 --> 01:35:54.000]  Okay, thank you.
[01:35:54.000 --> 01:35:56.000]  Now we're going to Jeff and Miss Sippy.
[01:35:56.000 --> 01:35:58.000]  Jeff, what do you have for us today?
[01:35:58.000 --> 01:36:02.000]  Hey, Randy, thanks for having me on.
[01:36:02.000 --> 01:36:04.000]  So what do you have?
[01:36:04.000 --> 01:36:09.000]  I had lost my appeal the last time I called in.
[01:36:09.000 --> 01:36:15.000]  I had, had lost my appeal for my gun charge on the campus.
[01:36:15.000 --> 01:36:23.000]  And you had asked me to write a writ of surf.
[01:36:23.000 --> 01:36:38.000]  And I wrote the writ of surf. It was denied. After it was denied, then I spoke to you and you said to write a motion for findings and facts of facts and conclusions that law on the writ of surf.
[01:36:38.000 --> 01:36:59.000]  And I did. And I got back that Hills, Jeff, Jeff's present file, the nature of a motion for reconsidering and will be reconsideration and will be treated as such as reconsideration of decisions on petition for writ of
[01:36:59.000 --> 01:37:08.000]  surf surgery are not permitted. The undersigned judge finds the motion should be dismissed.
[01:37:08.000 --> 01:37:11.000]  I've never heard of that before, so I was going to ask you about it.
[01:37:11.000 --> 01:37:27.000]  Okay, I didn't, I don't remember telling you to do that on a cert because the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court, your appeal is not a matter of right.
[01:37:27.000 --> 01:37:41.000]  The Court, you have a right to petition for an appeal, but the Court of Appeals or the Supreme have no duty to accept your appeal.
[01:37:41.000 --> 01:37:48.000]  So finding the facts and conclusions or reconsideration would not be indicated.
[01:37:48.000 --> 01:37:58.000]  Oh, it's cool. It's cool to do anyway. And now's the time to move to the Fed. That's where you may actually get your action.
[01:37:58.000 --> 01:38:00.000]  All right.
[01:38:00.000 --> 01:38:14.000]  Second question is I had heard you mentioned before is that when you file a motion that the opposition has 30 days to respond to that motion.
[01:38:14.000 --> 01:38:22.000]  That's a that's a general rule. Most everywhere I've looked, that's the case, but it could be somewhat different in a different state.
[01:38:22.000 --> 01:38:30.000]  Similar enough to do a search on that Mississippi time to reply to motion.
[01:38:30.000 --> 01:38:38.000]  Okay, well, I had filed my motions probably about 90 days before my trial.
[01:38:38.000 --> 01:38:58.000]  And when I went to my trial, this is where I made a mistake, possibly is when I went to my trial, they had emotions hearing right before the trial and I got up and argued the motions, and I should have gotten up and argued that the prosecutor just never replied to my motions at all.
[01:38:58.000 --> 01:39:02.000]  And this is a question I'm working on right now.
[01:39:02.000 --> 01:39:21.000]  If I file a motion in a criminal case, must they prosecute or respond to the motion is is the prosecution subject to some re judgment, if or the presumption of waiver of claims, if the prosecutor doesn't answer.
[01:39:21.000 --> 01:39:26.000]  It's a question I haven't gotten answered yet.
[01:39:26.000 --> 01:39:31.000]  Because I've had judges say prosecutor doesn't have to answer.
[01:39:31.000 --> 01:39:38.000]  So then this was a traffic case and the prosecutor got up and started to argue the issue of objection.
[01:39:38.000 --> 01:39:48.000]  Prosecution had Apple time to make this argument before court, bringing it into court at the last minute amounts to surprise.
[01:39:48.000 --> 01:39:50.000]  And that took the judge back.
[01:39:50.000 --> 01:39:56.000]  It took him a few minutes to figure out what to do, but it really hadn't left the prosecutor move ahead.
[01:39:56.000 --> 01:39:59.000]  So that brought up the question.
[01:39:59.000 --> 01:40:08.000]  Do I have a right to have my claims in a motion answered by the prosecution?
[01:40:08.000 --> 01:40:12.000]  Or must I be subjected to surprise in the in the court?
[01:40:12.000 --> 01:40:19.000]  Now, you can't do surprise in civil.
[01:40:19.000 --> 01:40:24.000]  The prosecutor is not supposed to be able to do surprise in criminal.
[01:40:24.000 --> 01:40:28.000]  Only the defendant can do surprise in criminal.
[01:40:28.000 --> 01:40:31.000]  That's been the rule of thumb.
[01:40:31.000 --> 01:40:35.000]  But I haven't found the case law to support it yet.
[01:40:35.000 --> 01:40:37.000]  Oh, okay.
[01:40:37.000 --> 01:40:47.000]  And last question is right before my trial, my attorney wanted to do a motion to have herself removed.
[01:40:47.000 --> 01:40:57.000]  And during that hearing, she got up and said that I had filed bar grievances against her.
[01:40:57.000 --> 01:41:05.000]  This was in an open hearing and had also told her some stuff when we were in private.
[01:41:05.000 --> 01:41:12.000]  So did she, but at the time I wasn't smart enough to stand up and object.
[01:41:12.000 --> 01:41:20.000]  And did she, did she was she specific on what you told her?
[01:41:20.000 --> 01:41:22.000]  Yes.
[01:41:22.000 --> 01:41:28.000]  Then that is definitely grounds to get her disbarred.
[01:41:28.000 --> 01:41:30.000]  Okay, but I didn't object at the time.
[01:41:30.000 --> 01:41:33.000]  I didn't know any better.
[01:41:33.000 --> 01:41:39.000]  Can I go back and file a claim against her or file some kind of.
[01:41:39.000 --> 01:41:41.000]  Absolutely.
[01:41:41.000 --> 01:41:44.000]  File a malpractice suit against her.
[01:41:44.000 --> 01:41:45.000]  Okay.
[01:41:45.000 --> 01:41:51.000]  And when she claimed that I had told the judge that I filed a couple of bar complaints against her.
[01:41:51.000 --> 01:41:54.000]  Can I go back and claim tampering with a witness?
[01:41:54.000 --> 01:41:59.000]  No, I guess you could, but that's kind of iffy.
[01:41:59.000 --> 01:42:05.000]  It is the bar that forbade her to do that.
[01:42:05.000 --> 01:42:15.000]  But as far as criminal witness tampering, no, the judge is not a witness.
[01:42:15.000 --> 01:42:25.000]  I'm not sure what claim I could get for her attempting to improperly influence the judge.
[01:42:25.000 --> 01:42:31.000]  That's going to go to a judge to the discretion of whoever the trier is.
[01:42:31.000 --> 01:42:44.000]  And the trier is going to say that saying the wrong thing to a judge will not improperly influence the judge because the judge will know it's improper and give it no credence.
[01:42:44.000 --> 01:42:45.000]  Oh, okay.
[01:42:45.000 --> 01:42:50.000]  But it is a state bar that tells them they're not supposed to mention it.
[01:42:50.000 --> 01:42:56.000]  And you could go back in bar griever and also malpractice suit against her.
[01:42:56.000 --> 01:43:00.000]  Okay, so I do have a malpractice suit.
[01:43:00.000 --> 01:43:02.000]  Yes.
[01:43:02.000 --> 01:43:13.000]  This brings me back to the time that you've said that if you bring a complaint against a policeman and after you file the complaint, they say anything to you or if they say anything in court.
[01:43:13.000 --> 01:43:22.000]  That, oh, Mr. Kelton filed a T-close against me last month, that that could be considered as witness tampering?
[01:43:22.000 --> 01:43:25.000]  Yes, and retaliation.
[01:43:25.000 --> 01:43:27.000]  I feel threatened by that.
[01:43:27.000 --> 01:43:32.000]  And he's used the fact that I did my duty and reported crime against me.
[01:43:32.000 --> 01:43:35.000]  That's retaliation.
[01:43:35.000 --> 01:43:37.000]  Okay.
[01:43:37.000 --> 01:43:43.000]  In Texas, the retaliation statute is also the obstruction of justice statute.
[01:43:43.000 --> 01:43:45.000]  Got it.
[01:43:45.000 --> 01:43:47.000]  Okay, I'll move on. Thank you.
[01:43:47.000 --> 01:43:49.000]  Okay, thank you, Jeff.
[01:43:49.000 --> 01:43:55.000]  Okay, now we're going to Ramadan, Arizona.
[01:43:55.000 --> 01:43:57.000]  Oh.
[01:43:57.000 --> 01:44:00.000]  Oh, we got five seconds.
[01:44:00.000 --> 01:44:09.000]  Nutritious food is real body armor. It builds muscle, burns fat, improves digestion and feeds the entire body the nutrients it needs.
[01:44:09.000 --> 01:44:17.000]  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?
[01:44:17.000 --> 01:44:23.000]  People have been confused about this plant for over 80 years and many still don't know what hemp is.
[01:44:23.000 --> 01:44:30.000]  So now you know hemp is not marijuana and marijuana is not hemp. They are different varieties of the same species.
[01:44:30.000 --> 01:44:39.000]  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.
[01:44:39.000 --> 01:45:01.000]  Remember, hemp protein powder contains 53% protein, is gluten free, anti-inflammatory, non-GMO and is loaded with nutrients. Call 888-910-4367. 888-910-4367 and see what our powder seeds and oil can do for you only at hempUSA.org.
[01:45:01.000 --> 01:45:15.000]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit? Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary, the affordable, easy to understand four CD course that will show you how in 24 hours, step by step.
[01:45:15.000 --> 01:45:23.000]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing. If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[01:45:23.000 --> 01:45:34.000]  Thousands have won with our step by step course and now you can too. Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case winning experience.
[01:45:34.000 --> 01:45:43.000]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand about the principles and practices that control our American courts.
[01:45:43.000 --> 01:45:57.000]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases, pro se tactics and much more. Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner.
[01:45:57.000 --> 01:46:16.000]  Our call toll free, 866-LAW-E-Z.
[01:46:16.000 --> 01:46:29.000]  Okay, we are back. We're into Calton Deborah Stevens, rule of law radio and we're going to Ramadan in Arizona. That can't be your name.
[01:46:29.000 --> 01:46:34.000]  Hello, Ramadan, are you there?
[01:46:34.000 --> 01:46:37.000]  Yeah.
[01:46:37.000 --> 01:46:41.000]  Okay, what do you have for us today?
[01:46:41.000 --> 01:46:46.000]  Well, sorry, I lost my train of thought.
[01:46:46.000 --> 01:46:54.000]  Last time I called, I was talking about a case with an unmarked car.
[01:46:54.000 --> 01:47:17.000]  And actually, I found a bar grave, the city prosecutor, because they were just negligent. They were telling me that I had to remind them to pay them back a refund of money that they owe me for like discovery.
[01:47:17.000 --> 01:47:34.000]  Because when I got out of jail, they, they, um, I got a notification of a, they have like a, they were noticing saying like, okay, well, your discovery will be $10 as a prosecution division.
[01:47:34.000 --> 01:47:43.000]  So you go down there, they only charge you five. So I wrote a cashier's check for $5, but they kept it. So, and I said, hey, can I have my money back?
[01:47:43.000 --> 01:47:57.000]  And they said, oh, yeah, sure. You have to remind us tomorrow. I'm like, well, I shouldn't have to remind you. So I just bar grieve the, um, well, before I did that, I wrote the email to them and they didn't respond to the email.
[01:47:57.000 --> 01:48:06.000]  So I just bar grieve the city prosecutor, you know, allowing the paralegal to just, you know, not take care of business like that.
[01:48:06.000 --> 01:48:19.000]  And the, um, but then when it comes to that, um, the judge, he got his criminal conduct complaint coming too. He got his coming.
[01:48:19.000 --> 01:48:29.000]  And then the, uh, but I want to know how to get the, uh, the attorney, the prosecutor that, um, that dealt with my case.
[01:48:29.000 --> 01:48:42.000]  And what he did was he, he took the, um, the motions I had and I doubt he even read it. He just said lack of jurisdiction and he just said, well, George, well, the court does have jurisdiction, blah, blah, blah.
[01:48:42.000 --> 01:48:48.000]  And I'm like, I didn't even mention a word court not one time in a motion.
[01:48:48.000 --> 01:49:05.000]  The subject matter jurisdiction does not go to the prosecutor goes to the judge. And when the judge acts without subject matter jurisdiction, the judge has no immunity from suit.
[01:49:05.000 --> 01:49:14.000]  So you might look at suing the judge for acting without subject matter jurisdiction.
[01:49:14.000 --> 01:49:23.000]  Now, in order for the judge, okay, let me take a step back here.
[01:49:23.000 --> 01:49:36.000]  The immunity is based not on what you can adjudicate in court, but it's based on the claim that you make.
[01:49:36.000 --> 01:49:42.000]  If you claim that the judge abused his discretion, he has immunity for that.
[01:49:42.000 --> 01:49:50.000]  But if you claim that the judge acted without subject matter jurisdiction, he has no immunity for that.
[01:49:50.000 --> 01:49:54.000]  So you bypass the immunity issue.
[01:49:54.000 --> 01:50:00.000]  Now the judge has to come into court and prove that he had jurisdiction.
[01:50:00.000 --> 01:50:07.000]  And once he proves he has jurisdiction, then immunity applies, but not until.
[01:50:07.000 --> 01:50:12.000]  So the judge just doesn't just get them blow off your suit.
[01:50:12.000 --> 01:50:20.000]  Once jurisdiction is challenged, jurisdiction is lost.
[01:50:20.000 --> 01:50:27.000]  And it is the duty of the court to prove jurisdiction, not any of the attorneys.
[01:50:27.000 --> 01:50:30.000]  Does that make sense?
[01:50:30.000 --> 01:50:38.000]  A little bit. The point is, you get a shot directly at the judge.
[01:50:38.000 --> 01:50:43.000]  And it's because of the nature of your claim.
[01:50:43.000 --> 01:50:51.000]  The nature of your claim will determine whether or not the official has immunity.
[01:50:51.000 --> 01:51:01.000]  The claim he acted outside of scope or he acted with no subject matter jurisdiction, the claim gets you in court.
[01:51:01.000 --> 01:51:11.000]  So they can't just file a motion to dismiss for sovereign immunity or qualified immunity.
[01:51:11.000 --> 01:51:20.000]  They can't claim immunity at all because immunity doesn't apply in a subject matter jurisdiction case.
[01:51:20.000 --> 01:51:27.000]  Now you're going to file a suit against the judge and you're going to have another judge adjudicate that suit.
[01:51:27.000 --> 01:51:32.000]  Good luck on winning one of those.
[01:51:32.000 --> 01:51:41.000]  But you can pull them into the courts and beat them up good and put them in a position to where they tell these officers,
[01:51:41.000 --> 01:51:48.000]  don't ever bring that jerk back in my court again or I'll clean your plow.
[01:51:48.000 --> 01:51:54.000]  Yeah, that's what I want done. That's ultimately what I want done. I want him to know who I am.
[01:51:54.000 --> 01:52:00.000]  Like the moment I stop being his eyes trying to get big like, oh man, not this guy again.
[01:52:00.000 --> 01:52:06.000]  That's what will happen when you sue him for no subject matter jurisdiction.
[01:52:06.000 --> 01:52:10.000]  He can't just write a simple motion and get the suit thrown out.
[01:52:10.000 --> 01:52:13.000]  This one sticks.
[01:52:13.000 --> 01:52:22.000]  It sticks until he proves that he had subject matter jurisdiction. And that's what you ask him to do to start with.
[01:52:22.000 --> 01:52:28.000]  Judges really get excited when they get sued.
[01:52:28.000 --> 01:52:43.000]  I was starting to believe that I think like the prosecutor and they colluded together like before trial even began because I put like a month.
[01:52:43.000 --> 01:52:57.000]  I was going to get my case, my trial heard by the presiding judge and the last day, like the day of they had changed the judge.
[01:52:57.000 --> 01:53:02.000]  And then I had the assistant prosecutor. He's the assistant prosecutor.
[01:53:02.000 --> 01:53:10.000]  That's Peterson. They wrote in and I was like, what is going on? They pulling bunnies out of the hat already.
[01:53:10.000 --> 01:53:14.000]  So I knew that up to no good.
[01:53:14.000 --> 01:53:30.000]  Okay, in Texas, if the judge of the court is replaced by another judge, the first judge they're replacing with you can just do him out of hand.
[01:53:30.000 --> 01:53:36.000]  Just because you don't like the way he parts his hair.
[01:53:36.000 --> 01:53:44.000]  So if you think they're setting you up, I believe that's why they put that law in there.
[01:53:44.000 --> 01:53:50.000]  So they can't set you up with a retired judge that's not been elected.
[01:53:50.000 --> 01:53:55.000]  That's just a temporary judge.
[01:53:55.000 --> 01:54:00.000]  He don't care. He's not being elected. He's not worried about the electorate. He's kind of immune.
[01:54:00.000 --> 01:54:04.000]  So they bring those guys in to do their dirty work.
[01:54:04.000 --> 01:54:09.000]  So when I get them assigned another judge, I object to the first one.
[01:54:09.000 --> 01:54:13.000]  That gets them hopping up and down. Now they got to find another one out.
[01:54:13.000 --> 01:54:19.000]  They happen to have two dirty, rotten, stinking, low-down judges that way. They can appoint a second one.
[01:54:19.000 --> 01:54:24.000]  But you generally knock out the worst one.
[01:54:24.000 --> 01:54:29.000]  So you want to check the law in Arizona to see if it's the same there.
[01:54:29.000 --> 01:54:34.000]  I think I was reading something about that a couple of days ago.
[01:54:34.000 --> 01:54:44.000]  But I think I might have came across a fair judge, and this is the one that was by my pre-child conference.
[01:54:44.000 --> 01:54:50.000]  Now tell me if you ever heard a judge do this.
[01:54:50.000 --> 01:54:59.000]  I was standing there before her at a pre-child conference.
[01:54:59.000 --> 01:55:06.000]  And I started to say something, and then she had stopped me and said, stop.
[01:55:06.000 --> 01:55:14.000]  Hold on a second. You do have the right to remain silent, and I do want you to keep that right if you so choose.
[01:55:14.000 --> 01:55:24.000]  And I was like, okay, wow, just stop me in mid-sentence before I even carry it on.
[01:55:24.000 --> 01:55:29.000]  That sounds like the judge was trying to protect you.
[01:55:29.000 --> 01:55:38.000]  The judge can't give you legal advice, and if you have what appears to be an honest judge,
[01:55:38.000 --> 01:55:42.000]  Harmon Taylor is the one that's stressed at this point.
[01:55:42.000 --> 01:55:49.000]  Harmon Taylor treated the judges as if they were always teaching you.
[01:55:49.000 --> 01:55:54.000]  And he used to tell me, pay attention to what the judge says.
[01:55:54.000 --> 01:56:01.000]  The judge is going to tell you what's wrong with your case and what you have to do to fix it.
[01:56:01.000 --> 01:56:08.000]  And then he's going to go to the other side and tell them what's wrong with their case and what they got to do to fix it.
[01:56:08.000 --> 01:56:11.000]  Because the judge doesn't want to rule on trash.
[01:56:11.000 --> 01:56:22.000]  The judge wants to find two parties who have an issue that they're unable to settle.
[01:56:22.000 --> 01:56:31.000]  So he doesn't want to rule on things that could be settled easily if they just paid attention to law.
[01:56:31.000 --> 01:56:41.000]  So he's going to tell both sides what they need to bring him a legitimate question that the judge can answer for them.
[01:56:41.000 --> 01:56:52.000]  And the judge takes both sides and compares the facts to the law and finds a proper legal adjudication.
[01:56:52.000 --> 01:56:57.000]  So he don't want to do it without all the stuff he needs.
[01:56:57.000 --> 01:57:03.000]  So if you didn't give him what he needs, he's going to tell you, this is what I need to be able to do this.
[01:57:03.000 --> 01:57:05.000]  And he's going to tell the other side the same thing.
[01:57:05.000 --> 01:57:11.000]  And then he can give a good, clean ruling that won't get appealed and won't get turned over on appeal.
[01:57:11.000 --> 01:57:14.000]  So pay close attention to what the judge tells you.
[01:57:14.000 --> 01:57:28.000]  It sounds like the judge warned you, be careful which foot you stuffed down your own throat.
[01:57:28.000 --> 01:57:39.000]  I don't know why she advised me that maybe it's stuff because she's seen the, I have five charges and they were like failure to, failure to provide this and failure to provide that.
[01:57:39.000 --> 01:57:48.000]  And maybe she had us stumbled up like, well, maybe this is like, you know, with him giving any kind of information and stuff.
[01:57:48.000 --> 01:57:50.000]  Maybe that would ruin him.
[01:57:50.000 --> 01:57:51.000]  So maybe let me stop him.
[01:57:51.000 --> 01:57:54.000]  I think that was the case with any who did.
[01:57:54.000 --> 01:57:55.000]  I did appreciate that.
[01:57:55.000 --> 01:58:01.000]  I'm like, wow, if a judge actually maybe cares about some people's right.
[01:58:01.000 --> 01:58:09.000]  And I think more judges care than we realize, they just can't tell us I want set as a judge in a mock trial.
[01:58:09.000 --> 01:58:12.000]  And I was amazed at how difficult it was.
[01:58:12.000 --> 01:58:18.000]  These, these Patriots are up there going through all this Patriot mythology crapola.
[01:58:18.000 --> 01:58:21.000]  And I want to tell them just shut up.
[01:58:21.000 --> 01:58:23.000]  Forget all this nonsense.
[01:58:23.000 --> 01:58:27.000]  Give me the facts and the law that related to the relates to the facts.
[01:58:27.000 --> 01:58:31.000]  All this Patriot mythology nonsense is going to get you put in jail.
[01:58:31.000 --> 01:58:33.000]  The guy wound up getting put in jail.
[01:58:33.000 --> 01:58:34.000]  And I'm sorry.
[01:58:34.000 --> 01:58:35.000]  We are out of time.
[01:58:35.000 --> 01:58:36.000]  This is Randy Kelton.
[01:58:36.000 --> 01:58:38.000]  There were Stevens rule of law radio.
[01:58:38.000 --> 01:58:42.000]  We'll be back tomorrow night on our four hour info marathon.
[01:58:42.000 --> 01:58:50.000]  Thank you all for listening and good night.
[01:58:50.000 --> 01:58:58.000]  Bibles for America is offering absolutely free a unique study Bible called the New Testament recovery version.
[01:58:58.000 --> 01:59:05.000]  The New Testament recovery version has over 9000 footnotes that explain what the Bible says verse by verse,
[01:59:05.000 --> 01:59:09.000]  helping you to know God and to know the meaning of life.
[01:59:09.000 --> 01:59:12.000]  Order your free copy today from Bibles for America.
[01:59:12.000 --> 01:59:21.000]  Call us toll free at 888-551-0102 or visit us online at bfa.org.
[01:59:21.000 --> 01:59:26.000]  This translation is highly accurate and it comes with over 13000 cross references,
[01:59:26.000 --> 01:59:30.000]  plus charts and maps and an outline for every book of the Bible.
[01:59:30.000 --> 01:59:33.000]  This is truly a Bible you can understand.
[01:59:33.000 --> 01:59:41.000]  To get your free copy of the New Testament recovery version call us toll free at 888-551-0102.
[01:59:41.000 --> 01:59:49.000]  That's 888-551-0102 or visit us online at bfa.org.