ROL_2018-10-22_16k.timecode

[00:00.000 --> 00:29.520]  Markets for the 11th of April 2018 close with gold $1,353.22 an ounce.
[00:29.520 --> 00:34.920]  Over $16.68 an ounce. Texas crew $65.51 a barrel.
[00:34.920 --> 00:41.040]  Bitcoins at $6,902.19. Ethereum at $420.80.
[00:41.040 --> 00:55.480]  Bitcoin cash at $652.90 and finally light coins at $114.34 a crypto coin.
[00:55.480 --> 01:02.720]  Today in History, the year 1968, President Lyndon M. Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1968,
[01:02.720 --> 01:08.600]  which prohibited private businesses from discriminating based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.
[01:08.600 --> 01:13.240]  It also prohibited unequal application of voter registration requirements, racial segregation
[01:13.240 --> 01:18.320]  in public schools, in employment, and public accommodations for places of business.
[01:18.320 --> 01:28.760]  In recent news, tensions in Syria seem to reach new levels after a chemical attack on civilians
[01:28.760 --> 01:33.000]  in the city of Douma, which left 40 dead and many injured, an attack which is being blamed
[01:33.000 --> 01:37.600]  on the democratically elected president of Syria, Bashar al-Assad, by the United States
[01:37.600 --> 01:42.120]  and on Israel by Russia, either accusatory narrative without any verified evidence as
[01:42.120 --> 01:47.120]  of yet. President Trump tweeted today Wednesday that if, quote, Russia vows to shoot down any
[01:47.120 --> 01:51.240]  and all missiles fired at Syria, get ready, Russia, because they will be coming in nice
[01:51.240 --> 01:55.840]  and new and smart. Going on to warn Russia that you shouldn't be partners with a gas-filling
[01:55.840 --> 02:00.400]  animal who kills his people and enjoys it. Many in the West, including President Trump,
[02:00.400 --> 02:05.200]  have been quick to conclude that this chemical attack must have been conducted by Assad and
[02:05.200 --> 02:10.120]  his forces. Syria and Russia, on the other hand, have given approval since yesterday
[02:10.120 --> 02:14.120]  for the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons to investigate the sign of
[02:14.120 --> 02:18.720]  the chemical slaughter. Assad has been successful in maintaining rule and support during Syria's
[02:18.720 --> 02:23.720]  seven-year civil war, a civil war that is being fought by the government of Syria and anti-Assad
[02:23.720 --> 02:28.560]  Syrian rebels that are openly being funded by Western governments, with ISIS being one
[02:28.560 --> 02:33.040]  of the more notorious swimmer groups of the American-backed Syrian rebels. Now, surprise
[02:33.040 --> 02:38.480]  then why Russian Foreign Minister Spokeswoman Maria Zakhova posted on Facebook that smart
[02:38.480 --> 02:42.960]  missiles should be fired at terrorists and not at a legitimate government, which has
[02:42.960 --> 02:47.160]  been fighting terrorists. Or is this a trick to destroy all traces with a smart missile
[02:47.160 --> 03:13.160]  strike, and then there will be no evidence for international inspectors to look at?
[03:13.160 --> 03:42.600]  All right, folks, good evening. This is the Monday Night Rule of Law radio show with
[03:42.600 --> 03:49.200]  your host Eddie Craig. It is October 22, 2018. We are live tonight, despite the weather wanting
[03:49.200 --> 03:55.160]  to change on us here in Austin real quick. Now, the intro tonight is going to be fairly
[03:55.160 --> 03:58.600]  short. I'll get the callers here pretty quick, so I'm going to go ahead and turn the phones
[03:58.600 --> 04:03.800]  on, and though I probably won't get the callers until after the first segment. If you want
[04:03.800 --> 04:08.840]  to start calling and getting in line, be my guest. Now, before I start in on taking the
[04:08.840 --> 04:14.720]  callers, first thing up is fundraisers going on. We still need people to donate to keep
[04:14.720 --> 04:21.240]  us going, to pay the bills, so on and so forth. We could really use it as always. Everything
[04:21.240 --> 04:25.320]  around here we do out of our own pockets, and our pockets are extremely shallow to
[04:25.320 --> 04:32.400]  begin with. This is a very hard way of life when it comes to having money to survive on
[04:32.400 --> 04:37.920]  and pay the bills with. Please, please, if you are able, donate. If you don't have the
[04:37.920 --> 04:41.840]  seminar package and you want to learn how to do some of the things, the seminar package
[04:41.840 --> 04:46.960]  is to teach you, then please consider getting that. Like I say, it's not going to give you
[04:46.960 --> 04:53.600]  a price break on the new one when it comes out. A very small price break, if any, because
[04:53.600 --> 04:57.880]  the new one is going to be a lot more involved and a whole lot more in depth, and it's going
[04:57.880 --> 05:03.560]  to be a lot more diverse as to how it works than the previous one. It's going to have
[05:03.560 --> 05:14.000]  less material, I hope, but more useful material and more potent material regardless. Now,
[05:14.000 --> 05:19.640]  that being said, besides doing a lot of CAD work today and some planning for some other
[05:19.640 --> 05:27.080]  projects that are underway and so on and so forth, I also spent the day coming up with
[05:27.080 --> 05:35.200]  some thoughts on a video, someone linked on my timeline, about gun control and how they
[05:35.200 --> 05:42.360]  do it in Iceland. If you watch the video, there's this millennial on there talking about how
[05:42.360 --> 05:48.680]  great Iceland is in its gun management because in Iceland, the government forces you to take
[05:48.680 --> 05:54.680]  a mental health evaluation. The government forces you to purchase a training course.
[05:54.680 --> 06:00.640]  The government forces you to purchase a license. The government forces you with that license
[06:00.640 --> 06:06.000]  for the first year, year and a half that you have it to limit the kind of gun you can actually
[06:06.000 --> 06:11.880]  buy, own and use, and only after a certain period of time may you upgrade that license
[06:11.880 --> 06:17.080]  to get a different type of gun, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. All of this, of course,
[06:17.080 --> 06:24.120]  being paid for with your own money and that of other folks in Iceland. It's all advocating
[06:24.120 --> 06:28.680]  government gun control and licensing and all this other kind of stuff.
[06:28.680 --> 06:34.520]  So it didn't take very long at all really to come up with this, but just the contemplation
[06:34.520 --> 06:39.960]  part of it, so I made sure to address the salient points the video was attempting to
[06:39.960 --> 06:50.080]  make as badly as they were and get them written down. And then I came up with this. First,
[06:50.080 --> 06:55.800]  it's basically title 10 points that prove gun control advocates are stupid. All right.
[06:55.800 --> 07:00.520]  First, the right to keep and bear arms in America is not a privilege that can be licensed
[07:00.520 --> 07:06.040]  by the government as government is neither the source nor regulator of the right. Never
[07:06.040 --> 07:11.520]  have been or never intended to be. That would defeat the entire purpose of the Second Amendment
[07:11.520 --> 07:19.920]  to have government have that authority. There's no way around that. Second, the right to keep
[07:19.920 --> 07:25.640]  and bear arms exists because of the potential for government tyranny and enemy invasion.
[07:25.640 --> 07:30.960]  Not simply self-protection from thieves and burglars or hunting. That was never its intended
[07:30.960 --> 07:36.640]  purpose. That was never its debated purpose. Was not even discussed and had anything to
[07:36.640 --> 07:45.440]  do with hunting, much less anything else. The debate about was how to prevent government
[07:45.440 --> 07:53.600]  from becoming what they had just finished going to war against and taking years to defeat.
[07:53.600 --> 07:59.680]  By keeping guns in the hands of every American individual capable of owning and operating
[07:59.680 --> 08:06.040]  one, they ensured that government could never get a tyranny toe hole that would allow them
[08:06.040 --> 08:12.720]  to do to the people what the king had done to them. That was the point.
[08:12.720 --> 08:20.720]  Third, governmental tyranny is growing daily by leaps and bounds in the USA, worldwide actually
[08:20.720 --> 08:29.080]  in case you weren't paying attention, despite the existence of guns. Why? Because law abiding
[08:29.080 --> 08:34.640]  people are being miseducated on why the right to keep and bear arms was constitutionally
[08:34.640 --> 08:42.560]  protected and insured in the first place. Again, it had nothing to do with thieves, home intruders
[08:42.560 --> 08:49.680]  and hunting as the primary basis for it. They were ancillary to the primary basis. They were
[08:49.680 --> 08:57.120]  just an added thing that the founding fathers knew made it a necessary thing to protect.
[08:57.120 --> 09:04.840]  Fourth, any form of license can be revoked at the whim of the issuer, which in this case,
[09:04.840 --> 09:11.160]  let's not forget, would be the same tyrannical government. Thus, taking away even the privilege
[09:11.160 --> 09:18.160]  of such ownership and the ability of self-preservation against that government's tyranny. All they'd
[09:18.160 --> 09:21.760]  have to do to increase their tyrannies to simply say, we no longer allow you to have
[09:21.760 --> 09:29.960]  a license and it's all gone. There you go. Everyone in Iceland now has to become a died-in-the-wool
[09:29.960 --> 09:34.960]  criminal to remain armed long enough to resist government oppression should the government
[09:34.960 --> 09:42.000]  ever turn on the people. That's simple, just like we would have to do here. This is why
[09:42.000 --> 09:49.440]  allowing them to criminalize gun possession and gun ownership is a very, very bad idea
[09:49.440 --> 09:59.080]  at any level. Fifth, by simply revoking all such licenses at any point and for any reason
[09:59.080 --> 10:04.920]  they wish, those in government could remove our ability to defend ourselves against whatever
[10:04.920 --> 10:10.200]  even greater forms of tyranny they might consider and choose to implement. In case you haven't
[10:10.200 --> 10:16.120]  paid attention, folks, they've implemented quite a few in America these days. Every little
[10:16.120 --> 10:22.280]  bureaucrat and bureaucratic agency and every form of administrative dictate that never
[10:22.280 --> 10:29.440]  was supposed to touch the lives of the people is now being used to steal from us and regulate
[10:29.440 --> 10:37.680]  us and oppress us on a daily basis. You need to understand that and see it for what it
[10:37.680 --> 10:45.000]  is. It's not accidental. Sixth, the knowledge that there are still large numbers of people
[10:45.000 --> 10:51.120]  who do have guns and the fear that they are willing to use them to fight government tyranny
[10:51.120 --> 10:57.720]  is currently the only thing preventing these forms of even greater tyranny from being implemented,
[10:57.720 --> 11:02.800]  whatever forms that tyranny may take. You understand? What would government be willing
[11:02.800 --> 11:11.040]  to do to us once there is nothing that we can do to stop them or to organize to resist
[11:11.040 --> 11:19.840]  them in any meaningful way without a much greater loss of life?
[11:19.840 --> 11:24.360]  How many people will get murdered by cops when there are zero repercussions to the cops
[11:24.360 --> 11:33.520]  ever because we can't stop the government from allowing them to get away with it? What
[11:33.520 --> 11:39.840]  would happen then? What would stop the government from using those same cops to enforce its
[11:39.840 --> 11:47.920]  will against us regardless of how unconstitutional that will is? Think about that.
[11:47.920 --> 11:55.440]  Seventh, guns are not the problem any more than oxygen is the problem. If we think about
[11:55.440 --> 12:02.280]  this reasonably, then we come to the conclusion that after all, using this same misdirected
[12:02.280 --> 12:09.560]  logic as the gun control advocates, if we were to simply license all breathable oxygen
[12:09.560 --> 12:14.320]  while requiring everyone to wear a sealed breathing apparatus, we could prevent all
[12:14.320 --> 12:21.600]  crimes by simply turning off that person's oxygen during their oxygen supply during their
[12:21.600 --> 12:29.400]  criminal act. Just turn off the oxygen until they pass out, crime stopped, and that's that.
[12:29.400 --> 12:35.880]  Instead of prison, we don't just don't turn the oxygen back on again. If the crime was
[12:35.880 --> 12:43.280]  serious enough. I would argue that this is the best method and solution to not only prevent
[12:43.280 --> 12:48.840]  crime, but to end the train of corrupt or career politicians. If they were all forced
[12:48.840 --> 12:53.120]  to get into this sealed breathing apparatus, we could just turn off their oxygen when there's
[12:53.120 --> 13:01.400]  time to get rid of them and they will refuse to go. We fixed that problem. Eighth point,
[13:01.400 --> 13:09.000]  it is an irrefutable fact that 100% of all criminals must use oxygen to commit any sort
[13:09.000 --> 13:15.960]  of crime whatsoever. As many crimes are committed without the use or presence of a gun, while
[13:15.960 --> 13:22.840]  none are committed without the use of oxygen. Therefore, the only logical conclusion to
[13:22.840 --> 13:28.120]  be reached is that it is oxygen that is to blame for crimes that are being committed,
[13:28.120 --> 13:37.960]  not guns. It's the same logic that gun grabbers use. So that's it. We know for a fact that
[13:37.960 --> 13:44.120]  100% of all crimes occur through the use of oxygen and via the means of the use of oxygen.
[13:44.120 --> 13:49.920]  So why not ban oxygen? Ninth, number seven and eight don't sound any
[13:49.920 --> 13:55.200]  dumber of a solution than trying to blame the gun instead of the person using it while
[13:55.200 --> 14:01.200]  disarming and violating the rights of all the law abiding people who didn't harm anyone.
[14:01.200 --> 14:07.120]  Tenth, people like gun control advocates fail at both having a brain that works logically
[14:07.120 --> 14:13.020]  and learning the real and easily repeatable history of why the keeping and bearing of
[14:13.020 --> 14:20.840]  arms was seen and protected as a fundamental individual right in America and not as a government
[14:20.840 --> 14:30.280]  licensed and regulable privilege. How's the saying go? Those who do not know history
[14:30.280 --> 14:37.760]  are doomed to repeat it. So those who do not know the history behind the Second Amendment
[14:37.760 --> 14:44.560]  that are now advocating for gun control are doomed to repeat the same kind of history
[14:44.560 --> 14:53.880]  that led up to the Second Amendment and why the founding fathers thought it a necessary
[14:53.880 --> 15:01.640]  item in the Bill of Rights and why those that refused to ratify the Constitution without
[15:01.640 --> 15:08.920]  a Bill of Rights demanded they be put in there. It goes all right back to that line
[15:08.920 --> 15:16.480]  out of the Mel Gibson movie, The Patriot. Why should I trade one tyrant 3,000 miles
[15:16.480 --> 15:25.520]  away for 3,000 tyrants one mile away? And folks, if you think that line is not accurate,
[15:25.520 --> 15:34.560]  try counting the number of bureaucrats and bureaucratic minions that are running around
[15:34.560 --> 15:41.200]  in whatever city or town you live in. Every government employee, what is the total head
[15:41.200 --> 15:48.400]  count in even your small town? How many county commissioners do you have? How many city council
[15:48.400 --> 15:52.160]  members do you have? How many police do you have? How many sheriff's deputies do you have?
[15:52.160 --> 16:00.040]  How many people employed by the county do you have? How many different agencies does
[16:00.040 --> 16:08.400]  the county have all within your one little corner of the world? And ask yourself unless
[16:08.400 --> 16:15.480]  your population is completely well below that number, try to figure out what the percentage
[16:15.480 --> 16:22.600]  of the population in that vicinity truly is. And remember now that you have to count the
[16:22.600 --> 16:29.720]  county you're in, not just the city or the town that you're in, because the city or town
[16:29.720 --> 16:34.240]  also has to deal with those that are in the county, so they all affect you, all of them
[16:34.240 --> 16:40.600]  affect you. And then you can worry about which ones at state level tend to interfere with
[16:40.600 --> 16:47.120]  life as you know it where you live. And you'll find out that you really did trade one tyrant
[16:47.120 --> 16:52.680]  for $3,000. All right, folks, we're going to be back on the other side of this break.
[16:52.680 --> 16:56.840]  I'll start taking your calls, so you'll hang on, and we will be right back.
[16:56.840 --> 17:10.360]  It's the 2018 Logos Radio Network annual fundraiser and gun giveaway sponsored by Central Texas
[17:10.360 --> 17:17.600]  Gun Works. Go to logosradionetwork.com and enter to win. Every $25 donation is a chance
[17:17.600 --> 17:23.800]  to win. From Central Texas Gun Works, the grand prize up for grabs is the Spikes Tactical
[17:23.800 --> 17:30.760]  AR-15. More prizes and sponsors to be announced. When you purchase Randy Kelton's e-book,
[17:30.760 --> 17:36.880]  Legal 101, you get four chances to win. Purchase Eddie Craig's traffic seminar and get ten
[17:36.880 --> 17:43.680]  chances to win. And remember, every $25 donation is a chance to win. If you've enjoyed the
[17:43.680 --> 17:48.480]  shows on Logos Radio Network, support our fundraiser so we can keep bringing you the
[17:48.480 --> 17:55.280]  best quality programming on Talk Radio today. We also accept Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies.
[17:55.280 --> 18:02.200]  Go to logosradionetwork.com for details and donate today. Are you being harassed by debt
[18:02.200 --> 18:07.480]  collectors with phone calls, letters, or even lawsuits? Stop debt collectors now with the
[18:07.480 --> 18:12.480]  Michael Mearris Proven Method. Michael Mearris has won six cases in federal court against
[18:12.480 --> 18:17.280]  debt collectors, and now you can win, too. You'll get step-by-step instructions in playing
[18:17.280 --> 18:22.600]  English on how to win in court using federal civil rights statutes. What to do when contacted
[18:22.600 --> 18:27.360]  by phones, mail, or court summons? How to answer letters and phone calls? How to get
[18:27.360 --> 18:31.600]  debt collectors out of your credit report? How to turn the financial tables on them and
[18:31.600 --> 18:37.240]  make them pay you to go away? The Michael Mearris Proven Method is the solution for
[18:37.240 --> 18:42.560]  how to stop debt collectors. Personal consultation is available as well. For more information,
[18:42.560 --> 18:47.640]  please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the blue Michael Mearris banner, or email
[18:47.640 --> 18:57.800]  MichaelMearris at yahoo.com. That's ruleoflawradio.com, or email m-i-c-h-a-e-l-m-i-r-r-a-s at yahoo.com to
[18:57.800 --> 19:14.560]  learn how to stop debt collectors next.
[19:14.560 --> 19:40.520]  Alright folks, we are back. This is rule of law radio. The call that number is 512-646-1984.
[19:40.520 --> 19:47.400]  If you want to call and get in line and ask a question. Right now, first caller up is
[19:47.400 --> 19:52.280]  Allison in Texas, who is a first time caller. Allison, what can we do for you?
[19:52.280 --> 20:00.680]  Hi there, Eddie. Can you hear me? Yes ma'am. Alrighty. Okay, so I have a story. I guess
[20:00.680 --> 20:05.320]  a neighbor of mine down the street who's a big fan of yours, when I was out of town
[20:05.320 --> 20:11.280]  and I saw some permit people, some code permit people outside my house in Austin, Texas,
[20:11.280 --> 20:17.040]  taking pictures and essentially harassing me, which they have been doing, over a work
[20:17.040 --> 20:22.840]  without permit violation. And I was out of town and he took the time to stop and tell
[20:22.840 --> 20:28.680]  me about you, which I'm really excited about. And I have to tell you, I've lost sleep for
[20:28.680 --> 20:34.840]  so many months over this, and then this harassment has been picking up. I did do work without
[20:34.840 --> 20:40.600]  a permit. So technically, I guess I'm in violation. And he said you might have some...
[20:40.600 --> 20:44.920]  No, technically, okay. First off, how can you be in violation of something that never
[20:44.920 --> 20:49.320]  had authority over you to begin with? Well, that's kind of what he was telling me about,
[20:49.320 --> 20:54.760]  but this is a thought line that I had not thought, that I didn't realize. And I'm not,
[20:54.760 --> 21:00.920]  you know, a person that, you know, thinks outside the box with this...
[21:00.920 --> 21:06.280]  Well, trust me, you're not alone in that. So many people prefer their box, but... Okay,
[21:06.280 --> 21:09.000]  did they buy a chance to refer you to my legal blog?
[21:10.600 --> 21:12.600]  They did not, but I would love to see it.
[21:12.600 --> 21:16.280]  That's the first thing you need to go and read and learn about. All you have to do when you
[21:16.280 --> 21:21.720]  get there is type the word ordinance in the search box, and it'll pull up every article
[21:21.720 --> 21:27.560]  that mentions that term. And there are several. You need to read them so that you understand
[21:27.560 --> 21:31.560]  where this subject is coming from and why it is what it is.
[21:32.280 --> 21:32.760]  Okay.
[21:32.760 --> 21:39.720]  Okay. Now, here's where the things are going to get technical and difficult for you.
[21:40.600 --> 21:41.080]  Okay.
[21:41.080 --> 21:47.880]  The only way you're going to use the information that is on that blog or anywhere else for that
[21:47.880 --> 21:55.400]  matter to help you is to sue the living crap out of everybody that works for the city
[21:55.400 --> 21:59.720]  that was on your property and is trying to drag you into their morass of BS.
[22:01.720 --> 22:07.400]  That's the only way you're going to stop them and prevent them from doing this anymore.
[22:07.400 --> 22:12.200]  Otherwise, they're going to harass you and haul you into court and nickel and dime you to death
[22:12.200 --> 22:16.120]  for the rest of your life as long as you're within the territorial boundaries of Austin.
[22:17.560 --> 22:22.440]  Okay. So I'm not a litigious person, so when you say you're going to have to sue them...
[22:22.440 --> 22:27.320]  Well, that means you're going to have to become a litigious person and you're going to have to
[22:27.320 --> 22:32.040]  become a very good litigious person. Okay.
[22:32.040 --> 22:39.960]  Because I will tell you right now, you will not find any attorney that will honestly do the job
[22:40.520 --> 22:46.120]  of doing this for you. They will take your money. They will blow smoke up your honey until it comes
[22:46.120 --> 22:51.640]  out your ears and tell you how hard that worked for you, but they will not do one thing to actually
[22:51.640 --> 22:58.280]  help you and they too will bleed you dry. I understand what you're saying. So let's say
[22:59.000 --> 23:08.520]  I just have to become the expert in the law and be a help of your blog though. And when you say
[23:08.520 --> 23:15.080]  sue the living heck out of them, then I actually do have to go to court and become the expert
[23:15.080 --> 23:21.800]  in code law and argue these loophole points. You don't. You don't. Okay. First off, one thing.
[23:22.920 --> 23:28.360]  Code law is what they're using and it's not law. That's the first problem they have in
[23:28.360 --> 23:36.360]  understanding and the second problem you have in understanding is that their code is not and never
[23:36.360 --> 23:43.640]  will be law. That's what those articles are going to point out to you very vividly on my blog.
[23:43.640 --> 23:49.640]  Great. The Texas legislature is the only body the people of Texas empowered to
[23:49.640 --> 23:58.920]  create binding public law and they cannot delegate that power to anyone, including municipalities
[23:58.920 --> 24:09.480]  and counties. Okay. The state legislature is forbidden under article three, section 56 of
[24:09.480 --> 24:17.400]  the Texas constitution from creating local legislation in a list of very specific areas and
[24:17.400 --> 24:26.040]  subjects. If the legislature is forbidden to do it and there is no constitutional delegation to any
[24:26.040 --> 24:32.360]  other subdivided organization of the state government such as a city or municipality
[24:32.360 --> 24:42.920]  to do it in their stead, then there is no power to do it at all. Got it? Yes, I understand that line
[24:42.920 --> 24:48.600]  is cool. Okay. So the way you are speaking is the first thing you're going to have to learn
[24:48.600 --> 24:56.440]  to correct. Never address what they're doing as law. Never address what they're doing in any context
[24:56.440 --> 25:03.160]  that gives it power, authority and accuracy of application. Don't ever do that because you're
[25:03.160 --> 25:08.760]  underbinding yourself when you do. It's like a con man walking up to you and telling you that he
[25:08.760 --> 25:14.520]  has title of the Golden Gate Bridge and he will make you a sweetheart deal on it if you can put
[25:14.520 --> 25:23.160]  X amount of money down. Got it. I kind of, yeah, I understand that it's about getting your power.
[25:23.160 --> 25:29.560]  Right. So here's the thing. It can actually work in a lot of areas of life actually. Yes,
[25:29.560 --> 25:35.720]  that's true and here's what you're going to have to learn to do if you want this to stop and it's
[25:35.720 --> 25:42.200]  not just true of you, it is true of anyone in the situation you find yourself in. You are going to
[25:42.200 --> 25:49.000]  have to know how to carry on a lawsuit, how to file it after you've written it and how to follow
[25:49.000 --> 25:54.600]  it through once it's in court. That means that not only do you have to understand lawsuits,
[25:54.600 --> 26:00.600]  civil lawsuits in this particular case, but how to convey that lawsuit against a governmental
[26:00.600 --> 26:07.800]  entity which is the most difficult to do. Okay. You're going to have to learn the rules of
[26:07.800 --> 26:12.520]  civil procedure. You're going to have to learn whether or not you can make certain claims at
[26:12.520 --> 26:17.480]  the state level and whether or not you can make certain claims at the federal level and sue them
[26:17.480 --> 26:23.320]  in both venues. You're going to have to know how to overcome what they're going to start
[26:24.040 --> 26:29.880]  going on about which is sovereign immunity, which they don't actually have, but the courts have
[26:29.880 --> 26:35.800]  given them anyway. So you're going to have to know how to overcome that. Okay. Because they're
[26:35.800 --> 26:43.240]  going to use it, but you have to know how to stop it. Okay. So the way I see it is that either
[26:43.240 --> 26:49.480]  it's like the law of energies. What do I have more energy to do? Follow this law or deal with
[26:49.480 --> 26:53.640]  them. It's not just a matter of whether or not you're willing to follow the law
[26:54.360 --> 27:00.920]  because you're still making the same mistake. It's not law. It's not law.
[27:02.120 --> 27:07.640]  They're edicts because that's all they are are illegitimate edicts.
[27:07.640 --> 27:16.360]  Oh, good word. I hear that you had, this is where your, that your journey began. That's what the
[27:16.360 --> 27:22.920]  man said. My journey actually really, truly began with property taxes and fraud through
[27:22.920 --> 27:29.320]  those property taxes that I went after the county for because they were defrauding my mother and I
[27:29.320 --> 27:38.360]  proved it. That's so cool. Well, I'll read up on that. It sounds really interesting. And it was
[27:38.360 --> 27:46.440]  one of those things besides the attack upon me and my business that the state comptroller engaged in
[27:46.440 --> 27:51.560]  that made me come to the conclusion that I was never again going to let this happen to me or
[27:51.560 --> 28:00.280]  anyone else that was willing to listen. Okay. So first thing you need to do is read on my blog.
[28:00.280 --> 28:04.760]  The second thing you need to do is understand that that is not going to be the limit of your
[28:04.760 --> 28:09.720]  reading. You're going to have to learn a lot and you're going to become a completely different person
[28:09.720 --> 28:14.200]  than you are when it comes to knowing how to follow through with this and how determined you
[28:14.200 --> 28:21.320]  are to do so. If you are not willing to do those things, then you are pardoning the expression,
[28:21.320 --> 28:26.200]  pissing up a rope and all that's going to get you as a wet face. Okay.
[28:28.520 --> 28:34.200]  That makes it clear, clear enough to start the journey and at least do a bunch of reading on
[28:34.200 --> 28:49.240]  your blog, which I do appreciate. Yeah. The blog is tau of law, T-A-O-O-F-L-A-W dot wordpress.com.
[28:51.000 --> 28:55.560]  Got it. Tau of law. That's an interesting choice.
[28:55.560 --> 29:02.920]  Okay. And when you read it, you're going to find out the law does not work the way you have been
[29:02.920 --> 29:14.120]  told. Okay. Or watch on TV. That too. It especially does not work the way you watch on TV.
[29:14.920 --> 29:20.760]  Especially. Well, thank you, Eddie, so much for your knowledge and thought process.
[29:20.760 --> 29:27.880]  Yes, ma'am. I'm going to check this out and listen to the rest of the show and I've subscribed to
[29:27.880 --> 29:33.960]  the podcast. All right. Well, thank you very much for all of that. All right. Have a great show.
[29:33.960 --> 29:39.000]  You too. Thanks for calling in and please spread the word to others. Get them listening in as well.
[29:39.000 --> 29:44.920]  We can always use more. Absolutely. Thank you. All right. Thank you, ma'am. Okay. Bye. Bye.
[29:44.920 --> 29:51.240]  Bye. Bye. All right, folks. We're about to take a break. Call in number 512-646-1984.
[29:51.240 --> 29:55.000]  If you want to call and get in line, we will continue taking callers on the other side.
[29:55.000 --> 29:57.320]  So, y'all hang on. We will be right back.
[30:02.920 --> 30:07.960]  A 16-year-old boy made a YouTube video describing how police states threaten freedom.
[30:07.960 --> 30:12.760]  It earned him an A-plus from his high school teacher and a visit from the FBI.
[30:12.760 --> 30:15.640]  I'm Dr. Cameron Albrecht. Back with details in a moment.
[30:16.520 --> 30:22.120]  Privacy is under attack. When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[30:22.120 --> 30:26.520]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[30:27.160 --> 30:33.320]  So protect your rights. Say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself. Privacy,
[30:33.320 --> 30:37.960]  it's worth hanging on to. This message is brought to you by startpage.com,
[30:37.960 --> 30:43.960]  the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing. Start over with start page.
[30:45.560 --> 30:50.360]  In Maine, 16-year-old Justin Holman made a two-minute YouTube video for his American
[30:50.360 --> 30:55.560]  government class. The clip showed military parades in North Korea, military drills in
[30:55.560 --> 31:01.640]  American cities, and TV reporters wondering aloud whether the Republican Party had disenfranchised
[31:01.640 --> 31:08.440]  presidential candidate Ron Paul. Justin got an A-plus, but then he got a visit from FBI agents.
[31:08.440 --> 31:13.320]  They grilled him on his hobbies and the video, and then Justin says they tried to recruit him
[31:13.320 --> 31:19.720]  as an informant. He declined. Are federal agents really interrogating suburban kids?
[31:19.720 --> 31:24.920]  Sounds to me like Justin's video on government abuse may have struck a little too close to home.
[31:24.920 --> 31:29.480]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht for startpage.com, the world's most private search engine.
[31:29.480 --> 31:36.440]  This is Building 7, a 47-story skyscraper that fell on the afternoon of September 11.
[31:36.440 --> 31:41.960]  The government says that fire brought it down. However, 1500 architects and engineers concluded
[31:41.960 --> 31:46.280]  it was a controlled demolition. Over 6,000 of my fellow service members have given their lives.
[31:46.280 --> 31:50.440]  And thousands of my fellow force responders have died. I'm not a conspiracy theorist.
[31:50.440 --> 31:52.840]  I'm a structural engineer. I'm a New York City correctional.
[31:52.840 --> 31:55.480]  I'm an Air Force pilot. I'm a father who lost his son.
[31:55.480 --> 32:00.840]  We are Americans, and we deserve the truth. Go to RememberBuilding7.org today.
[32:02.600 --> 32:06.600]  Rule of law radio is proud to offer the rule of law traffic seminar. In today's America,
[32:06.600 --> 32:10.440]  we live in a us against them society, and if we the people are ever going to have a free society,
[32:10.440 --> 32:14.200]  then we're going to have to stand and defend our own rights. Among those rights are the
[32:14.200 --> 32:17.720]  right to travel freely from place to place, the right to act in our own private capacity,
[32:17.720 --> 32:22.280]  and most importantly, the right to due process of law. Traffic courts afford us the least expensive
[32:22.280 --> 32:26.040]  opportunity to learn how to enforce and preserve our rights through due process.
[32:26.040 --> 32:30.120]  Former sheriff's deputy, A. Craig, in conjunction with rule of law radio, has put together the most
[32:30.120 --> 32:33.880]  comprehensive teaching tool available that will help you understand what due process is,
[32:33.880 --> 32:37.960]  and how to hold courts to rule of law. You can get your own copy of this invaluable material
[32:37.960 --> 32:42.040]  by going to ruleoflawradio.com and ordering your copy today. By ordering now, you will
[32:42.040 --> 32:45.720]  receive a copy of Eddie's book, The Texas Transportation Code, the law versus the lie.
[32:45.720 --> 32:50.280]  Video and audio of the original 2009 seminar. Hundreds of research documents and other useful
[32:50.280 --> 32:53.400]  resource material. Learn how to fight for your rights with the help of this material
[32:53.400 --> 32:58.520]  from ruleoflawradio.com. Order your copy today and together we can have free society we all want
[32:58.520 --> 33:21.560]  and deserve. Live free speech radio, logosradionetwork.com.
[33:28.920 --> 33:53.480]  All right, folks, we are back. This is rule of law radio. 512-646. 1984 is the call-in number.
[33:53.480 --> 33:57.960]  Call us up. Get in line if you've got a question or information about something going on in your
[33:57.960 --> 34:02.920]  particular area. That deals with the things that we deal with on this show. All right,
[34:02.920 --> 34:07.000]  that being said, let's get to Mark in Florida. Mark, what can we do for you?
[34:08.040 --> 34:13.000]  Hi, Eddie. How you been? I've been tired till I've been. My dog doesn't care, though.
[34:14.520 --> 34:19.640]  That's exactly the way I've been, too. I got one little quickie for you and then some others.
[34:20.440 --> 34:27.240]  I placed an online order with a new company. It was $62 and changed. This was last Friday.
[34:27.240 --> 34:38.200]  I needed the product sometime this week. They allowed me to ship it to a different address.
[34:38.200 --> 34:45.560]  My billing address is Texas. I'm in Florida. They allowed me to select that option, you know,
[34:45.560 --> 34:51.880]  ship it to a different address, process the order. I charged my debit card and then they
[34:51.880 --> 34:58.760]  notified me that they don't do that on first orders. They don't do what on first orders?
[34:58.760 --> 35:05.400]  Charge you or what? Ship to an address that's not your home billing address.
[35:08.360 --> 35:13.480]  Okay. Now, that's not a problem, but it should have stopped me somewhere in the order process
[35:14.280 --> 35:18.200]  or at the very minimum, they shouldn't have charged me. How are they going to stop you in
[35:18.200 --> 35:21.720]  the middle of the order process since you don't put in the payment information until the last
[35:21.720 --> 35:28.680]  of the process? Well, that's what I'm talking about. When you selected ship to a different
[35:28.680 --> 35:32.280]  address, it should have said, no, you're a first-time customer. We don't do this.
[35:33.240 --> 35:38.920]  Yeah, but we don't know if they have an automated process that just takes the payment and then kicks
[35:38.920 --> 35:43.400]  it out for somebody else to do an actual manual review, in which case that would have delayed
[35:43.400 --> 35:48.920]  things and then getting back to you and saying, no, we don't do that, right? Right, right. Okay.
[35:48.920 --> 35:56.520]  You know, in the meantime, I found this out Saturday. I tried calling them. Of course,
[35:56.520 --> 36:02.040]  they're not working Saturday. So my money's tied up until Monday. I can't order the product from
[36:02.040 --> 36:08.120]  another company to get it here. They called me today and started it out with a big lie. I said,
[36:08.120 --> 36:14.840]  UPS doesn't allow them to do that. And I called them on the lie. UPS doesn't have anything to do
[36:14.840 --> 36:21.640]  with it. Right. I said, why would you start the conversation with a big lie? And I told them,
[36:21.640 --> 36:28.920]  I said, what you did, I believe, is fraudulent. You build me for something you had no intention
[36:28.920 --> 36:36.200]  of shipping. Well, that's going to be awful hard to prove. It's not fraud unless they took your
[36:36.200 --> 36:41.880]  money with the intention of not giving you the product in return. And if they gave you a date
[36:41.880 --> 36:47.000]  and time when you would receive the product, then until that date and time has come and gone and
[36:47.000 --> 36:52.840]  whatever statute of limitations on a grace period that particular state has on that delivery,
[36:52.840 --> 37:00.120]  you would not have grounds to charge fraud. Now, as I said, there are dozens of possible
[37:00.120 --> 37:04.840]  reasons as to why there was a delay between you placing the order and them getting back to you
[37:04.840 --> 37:09.880]  saying we don't do that. And if they have an actual company policy against doing that,
[37:09.880 --> 37:12.920]  then you're not going to prevail in a fraud argument to begin with,
[37:13.720 --> 37:17.560]  because they're just complying with the policy as written by the company they work for.
[37:19.000 --> 37:25.960]  So what exactly is the question? Whether or not it was actually fraud and should I, you know,
[37:25.960 --> 37:32.600]  notify the attorney general? The answer to your question is no. Until that time frame passes
[37:32.600 --> 37:38.760]  and the grace period that the state law allows for them to either refund your money or to ship
[37:38.760 --> 37:45.960]  you the product passes and you've got nothing in either way, only then can you make the allegation
[37:45.960 --> 37:52.200]  of fraud and have any chance of it being taken seriously. Okay. It was kind of a minor issue
[37:52.200 --> 37:57.800]  among everything else I'm trying to do. Just got to take me out. I understand. It can be aggravating,
[37:57.800 --> 38:02.120]  but your aggravation doesn't mean they committed fraud. Okay.
[38:02.120 --> 38:11.000]  Okay. Second question. I've heard a lot about RICO, you know, over the years and everything.
[38:11.000 --> 38:13.480]  Is RICO civil, criminal or both?
[38:15.960 --> 38:20.920]  Well, RICO is criminal. RICO was written for criminal acts.
[38:22.120 --> 38:27.560]  Okay. So the file of RICO, you'd have to go through the...
[38:27.560 --> 38:34.040]  You would have to make criminal allegations of harm, not just civil.
[38:35.320 --> 38:47.800]  Yeah. Okay. RICO may give you civil remedy, but RICO governs acts that are themselves crimes.
[38:48.760 --> 38:54.360]  The remedy it provides you may give you remedy through civil suits because of those crimes,
[38:54.360 --> 39:02.280]  but the person being charged with RICO has to be doing so through criminal activity.
[39:03.480 --> 39:11.800]  Right. I've read that that's the part entitled 18, you know, that defines each different crime.
[39:11.800 --> 39:18.200]  That's, you know, a racketeering and, you know, kidnapping and everything else that ties in to
[39:18.200 --> 39:27.080]  RICO, which is very, very, very informative. I was impressed. But so you'd have to go through the
[39:28.600 --> 39:32.600]  U.S. Attorney General's office or the FBI then.
[39:34.280 --> 39:40.920]  Yeah. I would say that unless you're trying to collect a laugh track for a sitcom, don't bother.
[39:40.920 --> 39:49.560]  Yeah. Yeah, that's kind of the way I'm leaning too. Okay. Some of the arrests,
[39:49.560 --> 39:54.840]  the one talk about some of the arrests I've had in the past, and with everything else I've been
[39:54.840 --> 40:00.600]  doing, you know, beating 10 charges, they got so tired of me winning, they found me guilty on two
[40:00.600 --> 40:09.400]  other charges with no evidence. The state provided no evidence in the court. It was a complete jam,
[40:09.400 --> 40:14.440]  of course, so I'm sure you're used to that. But I've got those both on appeal.
[40:15.960 --> 40:23.480]  Doing a lot of things. And in the meantime, I've allowed myself to be negligent in
[40:26.040 --> 40:34.520]  two of my older cases that I wanted to file suit on have gone past the four-year statute of limitations.
[40:34.520 --> 40:42.680]  As far as from the date of arrest. Well, what do you mean by four-year
[40:42.680 --> 40:47.640]  statute of limitations? Four years for what limitation?
[40:49.960 --> 40:57.080]  Four years to sue. For constitutional violations? Yes. You need to cut that in half.
[40:58.280 --> 41:02.520]  You've got a maximum of two according to the way the federal courts have set it up.
[41:02.520 --> 41:08.360]  Okay. From what I've read in the federal stuff, they go by a state
[41:11.000 --> 41:16.680]  state numbers and the state allows for years. No, because if you're making a claim of a federal
[41:16.680 --> 41:22.520]  rights violation, the state won't have jurisdiction over that aspect. They'll only have it under the
[41:22.520 --> 41:28.760]  state constitution. I agree with that. Okay. I agree with that. So it depends upon how you're
[41:28.760 --> 41:33.800]  filing the suit, in which case the federal rules wouldn't matter if it's strictly within the state.
[41:34.920 --> 41:42.520]  However, you'd better be sure about what you think the state law actually says in that regard,
[41:42.520 --> 41:47.800]  because I don't know of a state that gives you a cause of action beyond the limitation set by
[41:48.360 --> 41:55.480]  the feds, which was two. Yeah. What I was reading was in the fed,
[41:55.480 --> 42:02.680]  you know, I was researching doing a 1983 suit and the... What were you reading that allegedly
[42:02.680 --> 42:08.280]  said this? Oh, I can't, I can't cite it through the ideas a while back. Quite a while back. Yeah,
[42:08.280 --> 42:14.840]  but how far back was what you were reading is my point. Not just how long ago did you read it,
[42:14.840 --> 42:21.720]  but in what year was the thing you read you were reading actually decided or written or enacted?
[42:21.720 --> 42:34.280]  It wasn't that long ago. I mean, you know, it was in modern history,
[42:35.960 --> 42:43.320]  but what basically what it says was the fed looks at what the state law says as far as statute
[42:43.320 --> 42:50.440]  limitations and the fed goes by that. So it would vary or it could vary from state to state.
[42:50.440 --> 42:54.120]  What the fed would allow you to file of that 1983 suit?
[42:57.880 --> 43:03.080]  Well, that's the thing. If you're filing a 1983 suit, you're limited to what the fed's going to
[43:03.080 --> 43:09.640]  do because the fed is where a 1983 suit goes. But this is the fed that's saying they go by
[43:09.640 --> 43:16.680]  what the state allows. No, because that right there would create an immediate problem between
[43:16.680 --> 43:22.280]  people of different states having the same right to suit in the federal courts. There's no way
[43:22.280 --> 43:32.520]  that's true. There's no way that's true. I have to look it up again, but it's extremely positive
[43:32.520 --> 43:39.560]  that that's what I read. They may have written that within the state entirely, they will comply
[43:39.560 --> 43:46.280]  with their rulings on appeal based upon how the state ruled under state law. But when it comes
[43:46.280 --> 43:53.880]  to a federal case, it's going by federal law end of story. All right, hang on just a second. We'll
[43:53.880 --> 44:03.160]  be right back and we'll finish this up there. Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[44:03.720 --> 44:10.040]  Win your case without an attorney with jurisdiction. The affordable, easy to understand four CD
[44:10.040 --> 44:17.160]  courts that will show you how in 24 hours, step by step. If you have a lawyer, know what your
[44:17.160 --> 44:21.960]  lawyer should be doing. If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[44:22.680 --> 44:29.160]  Thousands have won with our step by step course. And now you can too. Jurisdictionary was created
[44:29.160 --> 44:36.040]  by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case winning experience. Even if you're not in a lawsuit,
[44:36.040 --> 44:41.560]  you can learn what everyone should understand about the principles and practices that control our
[44:41.560 --> 44:49.240]  American courts. You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases,
[44:49.240 --> 44:56.040]  prosa tactics, and much more. Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner.
[44:56.040 --> 45:07.320]  Or call toll free 866-LAW-EZ. Hello, my name is Stuart Smith from naturespureorganics.com
[45:07.320 --> 45:11.640]  and I would like to invite you to come by our store at 1904 Waterloo Street,
[45:11.640 --> 45:16.360]  Sweet D here in Austin, Texas. Find brave new books and chase things to see all our fantastic
[45:16.360 --> 45:21.080]  health and wellness products with your very own eyes. Have a look at our miracle healing clay
[45:21.080 --> 45:24.840]  that started our adventure in alternative medicine. Take a peek at some of our other
[45:24.840 --> 45:29.720]  wonderful products including our Australian emu oil, lotion candles, olive oil, soaps,
[45:29.720 --> 45:38.440]  and colloidal silver and gold. Call 512-264-4043 or find us online at naturespureorganics.com.
[45:38.440 --> 45:45.720]  That's 512-264-4043 naturespureorganics.com. Don't forget to like us on Facebook for
[45:45.720 --> 46:01.320]  information on events and our products naturespureorganics.com
[46:15.720 --> 46:35.720]  Alright folks, we are back. This is Rule of Law Radio, the calling number 512-646-1984.
[46:35.720 --> 46:42.200]  Just another reminder please about the fundraiser. It is still ongoing. We need your financial
[46:42.200 --> 46:49.720]  support. We cannot do what we do without it. And believe me, we are running on fumes around
[46:49.720 --> 46:55.640]  here, myself included. That being said, however, let's see what other problems we can still manage
[46:55.640 --> 47:01.320]  to solve. Let's go back to Mark in Florida. Alright Mark, go ahead. Okay, what if the
[47:03.000 --> 47:09.400]  affidavit was fraudulent on its face? What affidavit? Affidavit is the
[47:09.400 --> 47:17.560]  bet to cop wild. Well, again, how do you prove and assert that it's fraudulent?
[47:19.000 --> 47:26.840]  Okay, let me use you and Deborah as names for examples substitute for the detective and the
[47:26.840 --> 47:34.840]  officer. You being the detective, you stop me, you cuff me. Deborah shows up later as backup.
[47:34.840 --> 47:43.640]  Deborah signs, fills out the affidavit as a resting officer. This is a misdemeanor.
[47:44.360 --> 47:51.560]  She has to witness the crime to arrest me in Florida. Melanie, they don't misdemeanor,
[47:51.560 --> 47:58.360]  they do. She becomes a resting officer. She has to be unduly sworn next to following statement,
[47:58.360 --> 48:06.120]  blah, blah, blah. You sign the statement as being true. Deborah notarizes the statement.
[48:08.760 --> 48:11.480]  You know what I'm saying? The names are all in the wrong places.
[48:12.440 --> 48:17.000]  Not to mention they claim that I've violated a city ordinance that does not exist.
[48:17.000 --> 48:31.400]  Okay, again, in order to prove fraud, you have to prove intent. Okay, now you can move to quash
[48:31.400 --> 48:37.000]  the document because it contains misstatements of facts and it contains allegations of facts
[48:37.000 --> 48:43.720]  that are not factual. The case is over. It was, it went on for about three and a half years and the
[48:43.720 --> 48:49.320]  day of trial, when the trial was called, the state of house no cross. Okay.
[48:50.680 --> 48:54.120]  So, Jeopardy was attached at that point from what I understand.
[48:56.760 --> 49:00.600]  Well, Jeopardy attached when they filed the complaint and got an indictment or
[49:01.480 --> 49:09.480]  started the prosecutorial process. But the fact remains that how long you have to sue
[49:09.480 --> 49:15.480]  for anything they did there that was false, there could be very well a reason why they just let it
[49:15.480 --> 49:22.520]  sat for three years. And it's a twofold one. One, make him give us money by drawing it out to the
[49:22.520 --> 49:28.280]  point where he pays us just to get rid of us. And two, we go until the statute of limitations
[49:28.280 --> 49:34.280]  runs out on the original action. We can defend against the malicious prosecution, but we can't
[49:34.280 --> 49:40.120]  defend against the original action. So, if we let the statute of limitations go by the wayside,
[49:40.680 --> 49:43.000]  then he'll have a harder time bringing it back on us.
[49:44.120 --> 49:48.520]  Yeah. I was one that did the contingencies that was all on me.
[49:50.280 --> 49:54.760]  What does that have to do with the natural statute of limitations the law sets upon the acts?
[49:54.760 --> 50:02.600]  I don't believe it does. Every state has a statute of limitations on these things.
[50:04.600 --> 50:07.240]  Are you familiar with the term continuing harm?
[50:09.080 --> 50:15.000]  Ongoing harm, yeah. Okay. I heard of this continuing harm, I think.
[50:15.000 --> 50:17.400]  Either way, it means the same thing. What's your point?
[50:17.400 --> 50:22.520]  Yeah. Is it continuing harm up until the day of trial?
[50:22.520 --> 50:29.320]  Well, how do you prove you were being harmed? Were you on a bond that prevented you from leaving
[50:29.320 --> 50:36.200]  the state? Were you under house arrest? Were you somehow deprived of a right of liberty to which
[50:36.200 --> 50:41.880]  you were entitled because of the proceedings? Were you punished without consideration before
[50:41.880 --> 50:47.400]  the proceedings were held, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera? What injury do you intend to claim?
[50:47.400 --> 50:53.400]  I was under bond, and I was told by the judge I had job offers. I was told by the judge it was a
[50:53.400 --> 50:59.400]  felony if I left the state, which isn't true. Can you prove that?
[51:01.400 --> 51:07.400]  Yeah. It's the next judge and the prosecutor who said that's not true.
[51:08.360 --> 51:12.520]  That is not what I asked you. I didn't ask you if somebody else confirmed that it was wrong.
[51:12.520 --> 51:19.000]  I asked if you could prove that the judge ever said it. Oh, yes. It's court of record. I got copies.
[51:19.000 --> 51:24.520]  But you've got a copy that says it, that shows it in the record.
[51:26.520 --> 51:30.520]  I have the audio. Again? I have there.
[51:30.520 --> 51:36.520]  Again, you have audio you made or they made? They made.
[51:36.520 --> 51:40.520]  Is it certified as being a true and correct copy? Yes.
[51:40.520 --> 51:46.520]  Okay. And it actually, was it transcribed or is it just audio?
[51:46.520 --> 51:52.520]  I did not get a transcription. Then you aren't going to get anywhere with it?
[51:52.520 --> 51:56.520]  I can't get it. I can't get a transcription still.
[51:56.520 --> 52:00.520]  You would have to get a transcript. You could get transcribed what's in it.
[52:00.520 --> 52:04.520]  The problem is going to be proving who is speaking in it.
[52:04.520 --> 52:10.520]  You get my drift here?
[52:10.520 --> 52:18.520]  The audio is fairly detailed the way they do it.
[52:18.520 --> 52:24.520]  You're missing my point. You're missing my point. You would have to take the audio.
[52:24.520 --> 52:32.520]  You'd have to go back to the original records of the court. You would have to match up all persons present in that court
[52:32.520 --> 52:38.520]  with the voices on the audio. Then you would have to not only, you would either have to get certification
[52:38.520 --> 52:44.520]  from somebody with knowledge of these facts that those are the people speaking in that audio
[52:44.520 --> 52:54.520]  or you would have to get them to transcribe and get them to admit under oath that that is them speaking in the audio.
[52:54.520 --> 53:02.520]  The court reporter does that on the description or whatever of the audio.
[53:02.520 --> 53:06.520]  What do you mean they do that of the audio?
[53:06.520 --> 53:10.520]  If you don't have a transcription of everything being said and who is saying it,
[53:10.520 --> 53:14.520]  how did the court reporter do that for the audio?
[53:14.520 --> 53:18.520]  They have video cameras.
[53:18.520 --> 53:22.520]  You keep going to places we're not talking about here.
[53:22.520 --> 53:30.520]  I said anything about a video camera. You said you did not have a certified copy of a transcription of this recording.
[53:30.520 --> 53:32.520]  True or false?
[53:32.520 --> 53:33.520]  True.
[53:33.520 --> 53:38.520]  Then everything I said stands the way it is.
[53:38.520 --> 53:39.520]  Okay.
[53:39.520 --> 53:47.520]  Because them certifying that this is from such and such proceeding does not solve the problem I'm talking about.
[53:47.520 --> 53:51.520]  Okay.
[53:51.520 --> 54:00.520]  Does me being under bond and I even got arrested, you know, I got picked up on a...
[54:00.520 --> 54:08.520]  In order to prove that your rights were violated, you would have to prove that they had no basis for bringing the action in the first place.
[54:08.520 --> 54:15.520]  Not just that they dropped it, but that they had no legal basis for it from the very beginning.
[54:15.520 --> 54:17.520]  I can do that.
[54:17.520 --> 54:26.520]  Then knock yourself out, provided they don't stomp all over you under a 12b6 or statute of limitations issue.
[54:26.520 --> 54:28.520]  Okay.
[54:28.520 --> 54:31.520]  Because in the process of this...
[54:31.520 --> 54:39.520]  But if you're going to prove it the same way we're talking about proving what's in that transcript, I'm not going to hold my breath for you to win.
[54:39.520 --> 54:44.520]  You better be sure that you can prove it in a way that the court will allow you to get into the record.
[54:44.520 --> 54:49.520]  Because if you can't get your proof into the record, you don't have any.
[54:49.520 --> 54:54.520]  Would you agree, though, that being under bond would be a continuing harm?
[54:54.520 --> 55:02.520]  If you can prove that it caused you harm by being under bond, such as no job offers you weren't able to take, et cetera, et cetera.
[55:02.520 --> 55:03.520]  Yeah.
[55:03.520 --> 55:05.520]  Okay.
[55:05.520 --> 55:14.520]  But again, that will be contingent upon whether or not you can prove that the action itself from the very beginning was absolutely false.
[55:14.520 --> 55:20.520]  Yeah, it exists without resisting an officer without violence.
[55:20.520 --> 55:23.520]  The allegation makes no difference.
[55:23.520 --> 55:31.520]  It's whether or not you can prove the allegation itself had no basis in fact and law, and that it was done with malicious intent.
[55:31.520 --> 55:37.520]  And thus, the bond was done with malicious intent, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
[55:37.520 --> 55:40.520]  And also, a capious was issued sometime later.
[55:40.520 --> 55:45.520]  Again, another fact that is irrelevant without all the proceeding stuff.
[55:45.520 --> 55:47.520]  Okay.
[55:47.520 --> 55:50.520]  All right.
[55:50.520 --> 55:57.520]  The other one had to do with the traffic violation, pedestrian violation.
[55:57.520 --> 56:15.520]  And my motorized house was parked at Walmart parking lot a half a block away, and I towed it after for almost 30 days before I got the sergeant to release it to me without the no charge.
[56:15.520 --> 56:18.520]  And I dropped the case.
[56:18.520 --> 56:22.520]  The rest was completely crazy.
[56:22.520 --> 56:29.520]  Same deal on that one claim continuing harm.
[56:29.520 --> 56:32.520]  Well, same rules apply.
[56:32.520 --> 56:34.520]  Yeah.
[56:34.520 --> 56:38.520]  Let's see my question.
[56:38.520 --> 56:42.520]  Oh, in a 1983 suit.
[56:42.520 --> 56:55.520]  Let's say you're suing everybody, city, county, jail, clerk of court, state of Florida, county prosecutor, you have to name the individuals.
[56:55.520 --> 57:05.520]  Well, you have to sue the persons and their agencies, not the state, in their personal and official capacities.
[57:05.520 --> 57:11.520]  You list them as both personal and private and professional.
[57:11.520 --> 57:18.520]  It depends on how you want to prosecute the suit, what whose pockets you're trying to actually get your hands into.
[57:18.520 --> 57:32.520]  If you're not going to make the state pay for whatever they lose, if they do lose, then you just name them in their private capacity and how they use their official title to create commit crimes while in their private capacity.
[57:32.520 --> 57:33.520]  Okay.
[57:33.520 --> 57:44.520]  But if you want the state to cover it and you actually win, the state's got deeper pockets than the individual does. So you have to name them in their official capacity to get the state involved in it.
[57:44.520 --> 57:46.520]  But don't sue the state.
[57:46.520 --> 57:51.520]  Sue the agency.
[57:51.520 --> 57:53.520]  Which agency?
[57:53.520 --> 57:59.520]  The one they work for, of course.
[57:59.520 --> 58:03.520]  Like the state attorney's office?
[58:03.520 --> 58:13.520]  If you're suing a jailer, you sue the jail. If you're suing a deputy, you sue the sheriff's department. If you're suing a city cop, you sue the police department.
[58:13.520 --> 58:22.520]  If you're suing a city employee, you sue the agency of the city the employee works for, such as public works.
[58:22.520 --> 58:23.520]  Okay.
[58:23.520 --> 58:24.520]  Okay.
[58:24.520 --> 58:34.520]  And suing the city cops, do you name the city mayor or anything like that?
[58:34.520 --> 58:40.520]  Not unless you can prove they had some involvement with what the cops was doing. That would be a mistake.
[58:40.520 --> 58:46.520]  Alright, man. Look, I can't tell you how to prosecute every suit under the sun. I want to take somebody else when we get back from the break, okay?
[58:46.520 --> 58:47.520]  That's all I had, Eddie.
[58:47.520 --> 58:49.520]  Alright, folks, y'all will be right.
[58:49.520 --> 58:57.520]  The Bible remains the most popular book in the world, yet countless readers are frustrated because they struggle to understand it.
[58:57.520 --> 59:06.520]  Some new translations try to help by simplifying the text, but in the process can compromise the profound meaning of the Scripture.
[59:06.520 --> 59:08.520]  Enter the recovery version.
[59:08.520 --> 59:17.520]  First, this new translation is extremely faithful and accurate, but the real story is the more than 9,000 explanatory footnotes.
[59:17.520 --> 59:27.520]  Difficult and profound passages are opened up in a marvelous way, providing an entrance into the riches of the Word beyond which you've ever experienced before.
[59:27.520 --> 59:32.520]  Bibles for America would like to give you a free recovery version simply for the asking.
[59:32.520 --> 59:47.520]  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.
[59:47.520 --> 01:00:02.520]  That's freestudybible.com.
[01:00:02.520 --> 01:00:23.520]  The following news flash is brought to you by The Low Star Lowdown, providing your daily bulletins for the commodities market, today's history, news updates, and the inside scoop into the tides of the alternative.
[01:00:23.520 --> 01:00:49.520]  The markets for the 11th of April 2018 closed with gold at $1,353.22 an ounce, silver $16.68 an ounce, Texas crude $65.51 a barrel, bitcoins at $6,902.19, ethereum at $420.80, bitcoin cash at $652.90, and finding the lite coins at $114.34 a crypto coin.
[01:00:54.520 --> 01:01:08.520]  Today in History, the year 1968, President Lyndon M. Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1968, which prohibited private businesses from discriminating based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.
[01:01:08.520 --> 01:01:18.520]  It also prohibited unequal application of voter registration requirements, racial segregation in public schools, and employment, and public accommodations for places of business.
[01:01:18.520 --> 01:01:38.520]  In recent news, tensions in Syria seem to have reached new levels after a chemical attack on civilians in the city of Douma, which left 40 dead and many injured, an attack which is being blamed on the democratically elected president of Syria, Bashar al-Assad, by the United States, and on Israel by Russia,
[01:01:38.520 --> 01:01:51.520]  either accusatory narrative without any verified evidence as of yet. President Trump tweeted today, Wednesday, that if, quote, Russia vows to shoot down any and all missiles fired at Syria, get ready, Russia, because they will be coming in nice and new and smart.
[01:01:51.520 --> 01:02:05.520]  Going on to warn Russia that you shouldn't be partners with a gas-killing animal who kills his people and enjoys it. Many in the West, including President Trump, have been quick to conclude that this chemical attack must have been conducted by Assad and his forces.
[01:02:05.520 --> 01:02:14.520]  Syria and Russia, on the other hand, have given approval since yesterday for the organization for the prohibition of chemical weapons to investigate the sign of the chemical slaughter.
[01:02:14.520 --> 01:02:31.520]  Assad has been successful in maintaining rule and support during Syria's seven-year civil war, a civil war that is being fought by the government of Syria and anti-Assad Syrian rebels that are openly being funded by Western governments, with ISIS being one of the more notorious splinter groups of the American-backed Syrian rebels.
[01:02:31.520 --> 01:02:43.520]  No surprise, then, why Russian Foreign Minister Spokeswoman Maria Zakoba posted on Facebook that smart missiles should be fired at terrorists and not at a legitimate government, which has been fighting terrorists.
[01:02:43.520 --> 01:02:50.520]  Or is this a trick to destroy all traces with a smart missile strike, and then there will be no evidence for international inspectors to look at?
[01:02:50.520 --> 01:03:02.520]  This was Rick Rody with your lowdown for April 11, 2018.
[01:03:20.520 --> 01:03:47.520]  All right folks, we are back.
[01:03:47.520 --> 01:03:53.520]  This is Rule of Law Radio, the call-in number 512-646-1984.
[01:03:53.520 --> 01:03:58.520]  Next up is Andrew in Pennsylvania, if I can get this mouse to work.
[01:03:58.520 --> 01:04:00.520]  All right, Andrew, go ahead.
[01:04:00.520 --> 01:04:14.520]  Yeah, first of all, I wanted to ask you, has any woman from the Islamic countries that give women grief for using a car that talks to you about your work?
[01:04:14.520 --> 01:04:18.520]  I don't know any Islamic women that I'm aware of.
[01:04:18.520 --> 01:04:46.520]  Okay, I wanted to ask, is the issue in those countries where there's going to arrest women for driving or should I take traveling behind the wheel of a car, does that in any way conflict with the law enforcement personnel have a taste, saying that because you have contracted with a religion that does not allow for it,
[01:04:46.520 --> 01:04:54.520]  we have a legitimate case to arrest you simply because you're a woman and you're the religion that you have agreed to go by in this country that you've agreed to go in.
[01:04:54.520 --> 01:05:03.520]  Are you seriously asking me what the laws of another country dictate in relation to what their population can and cannot do in a car?
[01:05:03.520 --> 01:05:06.520]  This is a contract question.
[01:05:06.520 --> 01:05:16.520]  No, in the U.S. maybe it would be a contract question. You don't know what kind of question it would legally be in the other country.
[01:05:16.520 --> 01:05:22.520]  Oh, okay. I thought when it comes to like religion, you know, going by religion, you find a...
[01:05:22.520 --> 01:05:32.520]  I don't think I've ever seen a Supreme Court or any other court decision of any kind that has ever ruled on a religious issue as one of contract.
[01:05:32.520 --> 01:05:39.520]  It's not, okay.
[01:05:39.520 --> 01:05:44.520]  All right, so it doesn't really apply. It's a completely different...
[01:05:44.520 --> 01:05:49.520]  Well, they're not doing it to you here because of religion, are they?
[01:05:49.520 --> 01:05:50.520]  No.
[01:05:50.520 --> 01:05:55.520]  Okay, then where would religion even begin to come into the issue?
[01:05:55.520 --> 01:06:03.520]  Isn't that the whole basis behind why women are not allowed in the Middle Eastern countries to use cars?
[01:06:03.520 --> 01:06:07.520]  Again, which country are we talking about?
[01:06:07.520 --> 01:06:10.520]  Saudi Arabia is like most of Turkey.
[01:06:10.520 --> 01:06:13.520]  Okay, which is not here, right?
[01:06:13.520 --> 01:06:14.520]  Right.
[01:06:14.520 --> 01:06:21.520]  If I move to Saudi Arabia and have to live there under that crap, then I'll figure it out.
[01:06:21.520 --> 01:06:23.520]  Okay, makes sense.
[01:06:23.520 --> 01:06:28.520]  In other words, don't hold your frickin' breath on getting the answer to that question out of me.
[01:06:28.520 --> 01:06:31.520]  Don't know, don't care, ain't goin'.
[01:06:31.520 --> 01:06:34.520]  Yep. All right.
[01:06:34.520 --> 01:06:36.520]  Fair enough.
[01:06:36.520 --> 01:06:43.520]  Also, Dean Clifford, Love and Hate, I'm listening to a video interview with him recently.
[01:06:43.520 --> 01:06:46.520]  A couple of things he said that really stood out there.
[01:06:46.520 --> 01:06:54.520]  Well, first of all, Randy Felton told me that one of the biggest issues with filing liens against this system is
[01:06:54.520 --> 01:07:03.520]  the reason that is going to get you into a lot more trouble rather than pressing charges or suing the system
[01:07:03.520 --> 01:07:09.520]  is because liens don't have judgments behind them yet in that interview.
[01:07:09.520 --> 01:07:12.520]  Wait, wait, wait. What doesn't have judgments behind them?
[01:07:12.520 --> 01:07:19.520]  A lien. The filing lien against Randy said that the lien does not have a judgment backing it.
[01:07:19.520 --> 01:07:26.520]  Then it's possible for the people you're filing the lien against to say that it's fraudulent,
[01:07:26.520 --> 01:07:31.520]  even if the lien has a legitimate case.
[01:07:31.520 --> 01:07:35.520]  Well, okay, here's the thing.
[01:07:35.520 --> 01:07:44.520]  As of this moment right now in the majority of states of which I am aware, it is illegal to file any sort of lien
[01:07:44.520 --> 01:07:55.520]  against anyone that is not backed by a judicial order with the exception of certain forms of mechanics liens for labor and services.
[01:07:55.520 --> 01:07:57.520]  That's it.
[01:07:57.520 --> 01:08:07.520]  If you file a lien of any kind that does not rely upon state law in relation to a mechanics lien that's allowed for services or labor,
[01:08:07.520 --> 01:08:16.520]  then you are going to get prosecuted for filing it.
[01:08:16.520 --> 01:08:27.520]  All right, all right. Thank you for clarifying that, and yet being said, you know, to someone who's paid paper terrorism and been successful with it,
[01:08:27.520 --> 01:08:29.520]  didn't elaborate on it too much.
[01:08:29.520 --> 01:08:31.520]  I wonder why that is.
[01:08:31.520 --> 01:08:35.520]  Well, I mean, if you're telling the truth, I know you shouldn't have said it.
[01:08:35.520 --> 01:08:40.520]  Well, again, it's the reason I don't tell anyone to assume.
[01:08:40.520 --> 01:08:47.520]  If you didn't make a claim that you know someone who is successful with it, then you should be able not only to name that individual,
[01:08:47.520 --> 01:08:51.520]  but produce the records proving they were successful.
[01:08:51.520 --> 01:09:01.520]  And then we should be able to go and look and see whether or not that success came back to bottom directly in their boudi and put them in jail later.
[01:09:01.520 --> 01:09:04.520]  Yeah, I've heard you say that before.
[01:09:04.520 --> 01:09:12.520]  That's exactly what's going on with all these so-called mortgage fraud gurus that are telling people, hey, sell me your house.
[01:09:12.520 --> 01:09:15.520]  I'll say it got paid off and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
[01:09:15.520 --> 01:09:24.520]  And here after doing this with dozens of people's homes, now they're all going to jail themselves for fraud.
[01:09:24.520 --> 01:09:29.520]  So the entire time they weren't in jail, they were telling everybody, we were successful.
[01:09:29.520 --> 01:09:30.520]  We're doing it right.
[01:09:30.520 --> 01:09:42.520]  Look at us and all these other cheerleaders that they had, like Dean Clifford, then suddenly, all of a sudden, Dean Clifford's got nobody to cheer for because that person is now in jail.
[01:09:42.520 --> 01:09:53.520]  It took a while, but they're there now, and it was for the actions they did then.
[01:09:53.520 --> 01:09:54.520]  Thank you.
[01:09:54.520 --> 01:09:56.520]  Thank you for pointing out the issue there.
[01:09:56.520 --> 01:10:07.520]  And also, you are, I presume, not in any way interested in trying to get on the bandwagon of the private citizen passport thing.
[01:10:07.520 --> 01:10:18.520]  Dean Clifford said he tried to encourage people to get that to eventually at some point in the future replace the government-issued passports, the private citizen passport.
[01:10:18.520 --> 01:10:30.520]  Basically, it takes away the immigration citizenship issue, and a searcher just exercises his right to travel across the borders, yet it doesn't really work in practice.
[01:10:30.520 --> 01:10:40.520]  And all the cases where it says it has worked is because the angels were with the people that tried it and the immigration and customs people didn't really do their job the right way.
[01:10:40.520 --> 01:10:48.520]  I don't know of anyone who can prove to me that that method has worked for them, period.
[01:10:48.520 --> 01:10:54.520]  I know lots of people who said it, but they've never given me anything that gives me reason to believe it.
[01:10:54.520 --> 01:11:02.520]  Now, as Americans, we have the right to exit and re-enter our country, but that's our country.
[01:11:02.520 --> 01:11:12.520]  Whether or not the other country allows us to enter theirs in order to re-enter ours, that's a whole other issue, huh?
[01:11:12.520 --> 01:11:26.520]  And if they say that the only document they will allow you to use to enter their country is a US-issued passport, well then, where does that leave you?
[01:11:26.520 --> 01:11:36.520]  It leaves you either A, not going, or B, becoming an illegal by sticking across the border and going into their country illegally anyway, right?
[01:11:36.520 --> 01:11:38.520]  Right.
[01:11:38.520 --> 01:11:42.520]  So what's the question?
[01:11:42.520 --> 01:11:56.520]  Well, you've already answered it. It's not worth going into because one of the people to the representatives decide who can immigrate on parts of your fort.
[01:11:56.520 --> 01:12:04.520]  Well, the word immigration, to my knowledge, does not appear in the United States Constitution.
[01:12:04.520 --> 01:12:10.520]  Naturalization does, but immigration does not.
[01:12:10.520 --> 01:12:26.520]  In other words, the US government has power to determine how someone that immigrates becomes a naturalized citizen, but not to prevent them from immigrating.
[01:12:26.520 --> 01:12:34.520]  It's basically considering the fact that this entire nation is made up of immigrants.
[01:12:34.520 --> 01:12:42.520]  Right. Yeah, we talked about that when I called you about this before about immigration.
[01:12:42.520 --> 01:12:46.520]  Which is why I'm wondering about how we got here again, but okay.
[01:12:46.520 --> 01:13:08.520]  Okay, yes. So I didn't bring up the whole World Passport thing, but that's obviously not worth trying. Okay. Also, just out of curiosity, where can someone access your, since the Illegal Trader Network forward slash TAO site is down because of the thing with the Illegal Trader Network, where can people access your...
[01:13:08.520 --> 01:13:18.520]  I don't know. That's why I have not posted an event because I don't know what links are working and which links aren't. I don't know.
[01:13:18.520 --> 01:13:32.520]  As far as I know, I don't have any information saying they're not working at the moment from our side of things, but that doesn't mean that those folks out there can get to it, and it's not my area.
[01:13:32.520 --> 01:13:42.520]  That's all stuff that has to go through Deborah. Okay. All right.
[01:13:42.520 --> 01:13:48.520]  Thank you. Thank you for your time. Yes, sir. Thanks for calling. All right. Take care. You too.
[01:13:48.520 --> 01:13:58.520]  All right. Now we're going to Sean in Nebraska. Sean, I can give you two and a half minutes before I got another break, and then we'll pick it up if we're still on after that, okay?
[01:13:58.520 --> 01:14:07.520]  Okay. Sounds good. All right. How are you doing, Eddie? Doing good so far, and you? Good. Not too bad. Weather's pretty nice up here in Nebraska this week.
[01:14:07.520 --> 01:14:18.520]  Good. Just wanted to tell the first caller, I can't remember what her name was, but I wanted, if she's still listening, hopefully, I wanted her to...
[01:14:18.520 --> 01:14:28.520]  I wanted to tell her if you want to learn about lawsuits that are... That jurisdictionary does make it... Does break it down pretty nice. It's worth the money.
[01:14:28.520 --> 01:14:39.520]  It's probably worth way more than you'd ever spend on it. Yeah, I agree. The jurisdictionary is a very good tool about teaching you the basic fundamentals of how to conduct a lawsuit.
[01:14:39.520 --> 01:14:48.520]  My biggest gripe with it is that it does not in any way shape or form address carrying out such a lawsuit against a governmental entity.
[01:14:48.520 --> 01:14:56.520]  That's its biggest failing. The hardest thing in the world to sue, and it doesn't deal with it at all.
[01:14:56.520 --> 01:15:01.520]  Oh, okay. Well, then I'll have to keep that in mind myself.
[01:15:01.520 --> 01:15:10.520]  That's why I say, even if you're studying jurisdictionary, great, you know how you have to watch timelines, you know what you have to file for responses and answers and blah, blah, blah,
[01:15:10.520 --> 01:15:20.520]  but exactly what kind of arguments, content, and specific things you have to address when it's a governmental entity you're suing, it does nothing to tell you that.
[01:15:20.520 --> 01:15:26.520]  So that requires outside study above and beyond the contents of jurisdictionary.
[01:15:26.520 --> 01:15:35.520]  And that's probably not available anywhere. So anyway.
[01:15:35.520 --> 01:15:51.520]  No, it's available online. You could find all kinds of places on it. For instance, one of the first things I recommend to people is if you're going to sue the government, the first thing you do is find out if there have been any successful federal lawsuits filed against that entity.
[01:15:51.520 --> 01:15:57.520]  And by successful, one worthy plaintiff won against the government.
[01:15:57.520 --> 01:16:10.520]  Then you study those pleadings. Every single pleading that was filed in that case from both sides, because you know what the plaintiff had to argue to win, and you know what the other side tried to argue to stop it.
[01:16:10.520 --> 01:16:13.520]  And that's state and federal level?
[01:16:13.520 --> 01:16:18.520]  It's, yeah, it's, yeah, either one, depending upon who you're going to sue, you're going to want to know.
[01:16:18.520 --> 01:16:23.520]  How would you get the entire case in all the pleadings?
[01:16:23.520 --> 01:16:32.520]  Because court records are public information. You can FOIA them at the federal level if you can't find all of them on a particular court website.
[01:16:32.520 --> 01:16:39.520]  For instance, you could find everything on Pacer in a federal lawsuit. You can find everything filed by both parties if you can find the right docket.
[01:16:39.520 --> 01:16:52.520]  But as far as state level, same thing, they're public records. You can either send a request to the court clerk that the case was heard in to get them, or you can go look it up at the court directly if it's closed.
[01:16:52.520 --> 01:16:55.520]  Hang on just a second. We'll finish this up on the other side after this break.
[01:16:55.520 --> 01:16:58.520]  Alright folks, we'll be right back.
[01:16:58.520 --> 01:17:10.520]  It's the 2018 Logos Radio Network Annual Fundraiser and Gun Giveaway, sponsored by Central Texas Gun Works.
[01:17:10.520 --> 01:17:17.520]  Go to logosradionetwork.com and enter to win. Every $25 donation is a chance to win.
[01:17:17.520 --> 01:17:24.520]  From Central Texas Gun Works, the grand prize up for grabs is a Spikes Tactical AR-15.
[01:17:24.520 --> 01:17:33.520]  More prizes and sponsors to be announced. When you purchase Randy Kelton's e-book, Legal 101, you get four chances to win.
[01:17:33.520 --> 01:17:42.520]  Purchase Eddie Craig's Traffic Seminar and get 10 chances to win. And remember, every $25 donation is a chance to win.
[01:17:42.520 --> 01:17:51.520]  If you've enjoyed the shows on Logos Radio Network, support our fundraiser so we can keep bringing you the best quality programming on talk radio today.
[01:17:51.520 --> 01:17:59.520]  We also accept Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. Go to logosradionetwork.com for details and donate today.
[01:17:59.520 --> 01:18:04.520]  I love Logos. Without the shows on this network, I'd be almost as ignorant as my friends.
[01:18:04.520 --> 01:18:10.520]  I'm so addicted to the truth now that there's no going back. I need my truths fit. I'd be lost without Logos.
[01:18:10.520 --> 01:18:13.520]  And I really want to help keep this network on the air.
[01:18:13.520 --> 01:18:20.520]  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.
[01:18:20.520 --> 01:18:22.520]  How can I help Logos?
[01:18:22.520 --> 01:18:29.520]  Well, I'm glad you asked. Whenever you order anything from Amazon, you can help Logos with ordering your supplies or holiday gifts.
[01:18:29.520 --> 01:18:35.520]  First thing you do is clear your cookies. Now, go to logosradionetwork.com.
[01:18:35.520 --> 01:18:43.520]  Click on the Amazon logo and bookmark it. Now, when you order anything from Amazon, you use that link and Logos gets a few pesos.
[01:18:43.520 --> 01:18:44.520]  Do I pay extra?
[01:18:44.520 --> 01:18:45.520]  No.
[01:18:45.520 --> 01:18:47.520]  Do you have to do anything different when I order?
[01:18:47.520 --> 01:18:48.520]  No.
[01:18:48.520 --> 01:18:49.520]  Can I use my Amazon Prime?
[01:18:49.520 --> 01:18:50.520]  No.
[01:18:50.520 --> 01:18:51.520]  I mean yes.
[01:18:51.520 --> 01:18:57.520]  Wow. Giving without doing anything or spending any money. This is perfect. Thank you so much.
[01:18:57.520 --> 01:18:58.520]  We are Logos.
[01:18:58.520 --> 01:19:22.520]  Happy Holidays Logos.
[01:19:22.520 --> 01:19:48.520]  Logos.
[01:19:48.520 --> 01:20:13.520]  All right, folks. We are back. This is Rule of Law Radio and just real quick on the stuff that Andrew was saying in the prior call about the listen links.
[01:20:13.520 --> 01:20:19.520]  Debra just told me, to her knowledge, everything is working just fine at the moment the listen links are running.
[01:20:19.520 --> 01:20:26.520]  If you can get to the website and click on listen at the menu at the top, then you should be able to pick up the stream and go from there.
[01:20:26.520 --> 01:20:38.520]  The only question is whether or not you're selecting the right application on your device, whether it be your computer or your phone or your pad or tablet, to actually get the stream working.
[01:20:38.520 --> 01:20:41.520]  But the stream itself is working.
[01:20:41.520 --> 01:20:47.520]  Okay. Now that being said, let's go back to Shawn in Nebraska. All right, Shawn, go ahead.
[01:20:47.520 --> 01:20:57.520]  I'll just add to what you just said there. I like to call in the call in line or the listen line in or the contact line if I'm calling in to talk to you guys.
[01:20:57.520 --> 01:21:03.520]  Well, we don't actually have a listener line. We only have the call in line that you're on now.
[01:21:03.520 --> 01:21:12.520]  Oh, okay. Well, either way, when I make call, I have this program that automatically records all my phone calls. It's called ACR.
[01:21:12.520 --> 01:21:20.520]  And it's kind of nice. I know people out there doing legal work. It's kind of handy to have something that automatically starts a recording for you.
[01:21:20.520 --> 01:21:28.520]  And you can transcribe it. I haven't gone through that process. You might have to pay for it, but I don't have pop-ups or anything. It's a pretty good little deal.
[01:21:28.520 --> 01:21:36.520]  Anyway, the question I had for you tonight was hopefully simple, but it seems that way, but never is.
[01:21:36.520 --> 01:21:48.520]  Now, in my case that I've talked about before, I've gone through jurisdiction area in Randy Kelton's legal 101, and don't worry, I'm working on getting yours soon.
[01:21:48.520 --> 01:22:01.520]  But I have direct evidence that the investigator and the prosecutor both tampered with the witnesses and witness.
[01:22:01.520 --> 01:22:05.520]  The investigator perjured his statements in his affidavit of probable cause.
[01:22:05.520 --> 01:22:08.520]  Okay. Witness in relation to what?
[01:22:08.520 --> 01:22:13.520]  A false case. I called you about a couple months ago, I think.
[01:22:13.520 --> 01:22:15.520]  Okay.
[01:22:15.520 --> 01:22:23.520]  Well, now, the other thing is, is how does state law where you are defined tampering?
[01:22:23.520 --> 01:22:29.520]  I did look it up, and I can't satisfy the elements of it.
[01:22:29.520 --> 01:22:42.520]  Well, if you didn't look it up, you can't honestly say that, because once again, like any criminal allegation, you cannot meet some of them. You must meet 100% of them.
[01:22:42.520 --> 01:22:52.520]  So until you know how it is defined, you cannot, with any level of certainty, declare you can prove 100% of the elements of tampering.
[01:22:52.520 --> 01:22:54.520]  No, I did look it up.
[01:22:54.520 --> 01:22:57.520]  Oh, okay. I thought you just said you didn't.
[01:22:57.520 --> 01:23:00.520]  No, I did. I did. Yes.
[01:23:00.520 --> 01:23:19.520]  And then the prosecutor also subordinated the perjury of the witness in a deposition. So basically, I have evidence that's in the court record, or should be, of something that was said before, and then the statement made the deposition directly contradicts it.
[01:23:19.520 --> 01:23:23.520]  100% complete opposite statement.
[01:23:23.520 --> 01:23:31.520]  So, and the prosecutor would have been the only person to tell her what to say or not to say.
[01:23:31.520 --> 01:23:41.520]  That might be indirect, but it's circumstantial, and it's one conclusion drawn from that, you know, it's not a, anyways.
[01:23:41.520 --> 01:23:53.520]  Now, my question was, what would you do with that information pending an appeal, or in what, if I failed an appeal on a criminal...
[01:23:53.520 --> 01:23:56.520]  Well, it should be an issue raised for the appeal, for one thing.
[01:23:56.520 --> 01:24:07.520]  Unfortunately, obviously, a public pretender is not going to do that, and it's too late in the process now.
[01:24:07.520 --> 01:24:14.520]  Well, then you can still file criminal complaints against them for falsifying the information and the record in the court.
[01:24:14.520 --> 01:24:17.520]  It's also going to be considered perjury.
[01:24:17.520 --> 01:24:20.520]  Yes.
[01:24:20.520 --> 01:24:31.520]  It'll be, and then again, you still need to get someone to raise the issue on appeal, even if that means you've got to fire the public pretender and do it yourself.
[01:24:31.520 --> 01:24:39.520]  I mean, I'm at sentencing stage in six days, so I don't know...
[01:24:39.520 --> 01:24:42.520]  Oh, there was no appeal?
[01:24:42.520 --> 01:24:44.520]  Not yet. Well, there will be after this.
[01:24:44.520 --> 01:24:50.520]  Then someone needs to file a stay of judgment pending the appeal.
[01:24:50.520 --> 01:24:52.520]  Okay. All right.
[01:24:52.520 --> 01:25:02.520]  And then would an appeals court consider this reasonably discoverable evidence?
[01:25:02.520 --> 01:25:09.520]  Well, it should have been an argument that was raised at trial to preserve it.
[01:25:09.520 --> 01:25:15.520]  Right, and nothing was raised. Nothing, absolutely nothing. I mean, next to nothing.
[01:25:15.520 --> 01:25:19.520]  Then you need to also make the claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.
[01:25:19.520 --> 01:25:23.520]  Yes, that's what one point of my appeal will be.
[01:25:23.520 --> 01:25:25.520]  Yeah, ineffective assistance of counsel.
[01:25:25.520 --> 01:25:36.520]  My defense attorney did not raise appealable issues of fact that the evidence being put into the court record was knowingly and willfully falsified.
[01:25:36.520 --> 01:25:37.520]  Yes.
[01:25:37.520 --> 01:25:39.520]  Et cetera, et cetera.
[01:25:39.520 --> 01:25:52.520]  You can show that your attorney actually undermines your defense, and not only can you fit that into the appeal, but you can sue him for malpractice.
[01:25:52.520 --> 01:26:00.520]  And what's even worse is he's the one that told me that the investigator did this, that he tampered with the witnesses.
[01:26:00.520 --> 01:26:06.520]  Yeah, but did you ask him why did you not raise that as an issue in court?
[01:26:06.520 --> 01:26:09.520]  He won't answer my phone calls now.
[01:26:09.520 --> 01:26:12.520]  Then, there you go.
[01:26:12.520 --> 01:26:19.520]  But the thing is, is did you follow my other piece of advice, which is record your interactions with your attorney?
[01:26:19.520 --> 01:26:21.520]  Yes, I did.
[01:26:21.520 --> 01:26:24.520]  And you have him on record saying that he was aware of this?
[01:26:24.520 --> 01:26:29.520]  This was before I had the ability to record. I was still...
[01:26:29.520 --> 01:26:33.520]  Then the answer to my question actually is no, I don't.
[01:26:33.520 --> 01:26:38.520]  Okay. Okay. Well, I can still get that on the record, though, if I can get him on the phone.
[01:26:38.520 --> 01:26:43.520]  Well, there you go. If he's not taking your calls, that's going to be a tad bit more than difficult, isn't it?
[01:26:43.520 --> 01:26:52.520]  And if you walked in there right now saying, remember when you told me such and such, you don't think he's going to smell a rat and close his lips?
[01:26:52.520 --> 01:26:59.520]  I think there might be a way around that. I'm pretty clever. But you see where you're going with it, but yes.
[01:26:59.520 --> 01:27:08.520]  Now, the other problem you have is what does Nebraska say in relation to recording people without their knowledge?
[01:27:08.520 --> 01:27:10.520]  Is it a one-party state?
[01:27:10.520 --> 01:27:12.520]  Yes, it is. It is a one-party state.
[01:27:12.520 --> 01:27:15.520]  Okay. Then you don't have any issues there?
[01:27:15.520 --> 01:27:18.520]  No.
[01:27:18.520 --> 01:27:37.520]  The other thing is, as far as criminal charges, you're typically going to be grand jury. In this state, a judge can only call a grand jury by judge's direction, or if somebody, an inmate, died in custody...
[01:27:37.520 --> 01:27:45.520]  You don't have to call a grand jury. You just have to send him the information when there's one that's up and running.
[01:27:45.520 --> 01:27:49.520]  So it can be up and running for another purpose, and then I'd have to do it...
[01:27:49.520 --> 01:27:54.520]  Its purpose is to investigate criminal allegations. That's its purpose.
[01:27:54.520 --> 01:28:06.520]  Right. But what I'm saying is, is in Nebraska, they do not have a setting jury any period of time out of the year. It's such a low population state that they only...
[01:28:06.520 --> 01:28:19.520]  It has a grand jury that is there for the purpose of handing down indictments for whatever pool of criminal conduct allegations they have, whatever and however many that may be.
[01:28:19.520 --> 01:28:29.520]  They may have a limited time to sit. That's true. But the fact is, they're not going to convene them for one damn crime a year.
[01:28:29.520 --> 01:28:41.520]  They may convene special grand juries for other crimes that are specific to that grand jury, but the grand jury in general is going to take as many as they can at the time they're there.
[01:28:41.520 --> 01:28:47.520]  Right. Well, what I'm saying is they do not, in this state, do what they do in Texas.
[01:28:47.520 --> 01:29:01.520]  The only time they even call a grand jury at all is for three reasons, and the first two I mentioned, and then the third one was by petition.
[01:29:01.520 --> 01:29:06.520]  How does that change anything I just said?
[01:29:06.520 --> 01:29:22.520]  You can file whatever criminal allegations you have to be sent to whatever grand jury is next formed, or you can send it to whatever grand jury is currently in session anywhere in your entire state.
[01:29:22.520 --> 01:29:25.520]  Okay. Oh, in the whole state?
[01:29:25.520 --> 01:29:26.520]  Yeah.
[01:29:26.520 --> 01:29:30.520]  Grand juries have statewide jurisdiction.
[01:29:30.520 --> 01:29:36.520]  Sorry, I didn't understand that. Okay. I'm with you now.
[01:29:36.520 --> 01:29:38.520]  Okay.
[01:29:38.520 --> 01:29:39.520]  Okay.
[01:29:39.520 --> 01:29:44.520]  All right. And that's why I'd file criminal charges. Otherwise, I'd have to file them with the prosecutor and he can file them.
[01:29:44.520 --> 01:29:50.520]  You can file them with them too, and then if they refuse to do anything, you can file with the grand jury against the prosecutor.
[01:29:50.520 --> 01:29:55.520]  Okay. All right. All right. Now I have a little light there.
[01:29:55.520 --> 01:30:01.520]  All right. Well, hang on just a second, Sean, and we'll wrap this up on the other side. Folks, we'll be right back.
[01:30:01.520 --> 01:30:09.520]  Do you get jittery without your cell phone or iPod? If so, you may be suffering from what scientists now call gadget withdrawal.
[01:30:09.520 --> 01:30:15.520]  I've got your Catherine Albrecht back with details on the study into information deprivation disorder next.
[01:30:15.520 --> 01:30:26.520]  Privacy is under attack. When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again. And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[01:30:26.520 --> 01:30:34.520]  So protect your rights. Say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself. Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[01:30:34.520 --> 01:30:41.520]  This message is brought to you by startpage.com, the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[01:30:41.520 --> 01:30:44.520]  Start over with Start Page.
[01:30:44.520 --> 01:30:52.520]  As parents know, trying to keep a teenager off their computer or cell phone can result in a tantrum. But is it more than just petulance?
[01:30:52.520 --> 01:31:01.520]  A new study suggests young people may actually be experiencing gadget withdrawal, something akin to what drug addicts experience when they go cold turkey.
[01:31:01.520 --> 01:31:08.520]  Researchers had young people turn off cell phones, social networking, the Internet, and TV for 24 hours and keep a diary.
[01:31:08.520 --> 01:31:16.520]  20% described overwhelming cravings, 11% isolation, and 10% confusion and even deep depression.
[01:31:16.520 --> 01:31:22.520]  Digitize minds constantly scanning for a fix? Maybe it's time we pulled the plug on that smartphone.
[01:31:22.520 --> 01:31:30.520]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht for startpage.com, the world's most private search engine.
[01:31:30.520 --> 01:31:33.520]  I lost my son. My uncle. My uncle. My uncle.
[01:31:33.520 --> 01:31:39.520]  On September 11, 2000, most people don't know that a third tower fell on September 11.
[01:31:39.520 --> 01:31:43.520]  World Trade Center 7, a 47-story skyscraper, was not hit by a plane.
[01:31:43.520 --> 01:31:47.520]  Only the official explanation is that fire brought down building 7.
[01:31:47.520 --> 01:31:53.520]  Over 1,200 architects and engineers have looked into the evidence and believed there is more to the story.
[01:31:53.520 --> 01:31:56.520]  Bring justice to my son. My uncle. My nephew. My son.
[01:31:56.520 --> 01:32:01.520]  Go to building what.org. Why it fell, why it matters, and what you can do.
[01:32:01.520 --> 01:32:06.520]  Hey, it's Danny here for Hill Country Home Improvements. Did your home receive hail or wind damage from the recent storms?
[01:32:06.520 --> 01:32:11.520]  Come on, we all know the government caused it with their chemtrails, but good luck getting them to pay for it.
[01:32:11.520 --> 01:32:14.520]  Okay, I might be kidding about the chemtrails, but I'm serious about your roof.
[01:32:14.520 --> 01:32:21.520]  That's why you have insurance, and Hill Country Home Improvements can handle the claim for you with little to no out-of-pocket expense.
[01:32:21.520 --> 01:32:27.520]  And we accept Bitcoin as a multi-year A-plus member of the Better Business Bureau with zero complaints.
[01:32:27.520 --> 01:32:32.520]  We trust Hill Country Home Improvements to handle your claim and your roof right the first time.
[01:32:32.520 --> 01:32:38.520]  Just call 512-992-8745 or go to hillcountryhomeimprovements.com.
[01:32:38.520 --> 01:32:45.520]  Mention the crypto show and get $100 off, and we'll donate another $100 to the Logos Radio Network to help continue this programming.
[01:32:45.520 --> 01:32:50.520]  So if those out-of-town roofers come knocking, your door should be locked in.
[01:32:50.520 --> 01:32:56.520]  That's 512-992-8745 or hillcountryhomeimprovements.com.
[01:32:56.520 --> 01:32:58.520]  Discounts are based on full roof replacement.
[01:32:58.520 --> 01:33:01.520]  I mean, I actually be kidding about chemtrails.
[01:33:01.520 --> 01:33:30.520]  You're listening to the Logos Radio Network at LogosRadioNetwork.com.
[01:33:31.520 --> 01:33:42.520]  All right, folks, we are back.
[01:33:42.520 --> 01:33:44.520]  This is Rule of Law Radio.
[01:33:44.520 --> 01:33:47.520]  Call it number 512-646-1984.
[01:33:47.520 --> 01:33:50.520]  We've got a half an hour left, so get in line while you can.
[01:33:50.520 --> 01:33:51.520]  Let's get back to Sean.
[01:33:51.520 --> 01:33:53.520]  All right, Sean, what else?
[01:33:53.520 --> 01:33:55.520]  All right, two short quick questions.
[01:33:55.520 --> 01:34:02.520]  Can I send a charge like these to a federal grand jury in the state?
[01:34:02.520 --> 01:34:07.520]  If you can show whether a violation of a federally protected right or a federal law, yes.
[01:34:07.520 --> 01:34:08.520]  Okay.
[01:34:08.520 --> 01:34:11.520]  And then also, how do you find where?
[01:34:11.520 --> 01:34:14.520]  I would recommend rather than trying to send it to a federal jury,
[01:34:14.520 --> 01:34:18.520]  you send it copies to the United States Attorney's Office.
[01:34:18.520 --> 01:34:19.520]  Okay.
[01:34:19.520 --> 01:34:21.520]  What about a state grand jury?
[01:34:21.520 --> 01:34:22.520]  Oh, the U.S. Attorney's Office.
[01:34:22.520 --> 01:34:27.520]  All right, I don't know that perjury and so on would be a federal whatever.
[01:34:27.520 --> 01:34:33.520]  If you can show the perjury was done in a court of law for the purpose of defrauding someone of a protected right,
[01:34:33.520 --> 01:34:35.520]  then oh, yeah, you can.
[01:34:35.520 --> 01:34:36.520]  Oh, okay.
[01:34:36.520 --> 01:34:37.520]  Oh, all right.
[01:34:37.520 --> 01:34:41.520]  So I could make it up for both state and federal if I wanted to, I suppose.
[01:34:41.520 --> 01:34:42.520]  Yes.
[01:34:42.520 --> 01:34:46.520]  And then how do you find where to win and where?
[01:34:46.520 --> 01:34:52.520]  Get it up online, United States Attorney's Office, whatever district of Nebraska or state of Nebraska.
[01:34:52.520 --> 01:34:53.520]  Okay.
[01:34:53.520 --> 01:34:59.520]  And then it gives you the form and information where you can mail it and run the routine and all that.
[01:34:59.520 --> 01:35:04.520]  Their website probably will or it'll give you some way to contact them to find out.
[01:35:04.520 --> 01:35:05.520]  All right.
[01:35:05.520 --> 01:35:06.520]  Cool.
[01:35:06.520 --> 01:35:10.520]  Well, shoot, as always, invaluable information.
[01:35:10.520 --> 01:35:13.520]  I appreciate your time and I'll let you get the next caller.
[01:35:13.520 --> 01:35:14.520]  Yes, sir.
[01:35:14.520 --> 01:35:15.520]  Thanks for calling.
[01:35:15.520 --> 01:35:16.520]  You're welcome.
[01:35:16.520 --> 01:35:17.520]  Have a good night.
[01:35:17.520 --> 01:35:18.520]  All right.
[01:35:18.520 --> 01:35:21.520]  Now we have Tina in California.
[01:35:21.520 --> 01:35:24.520]  Tina, what can we do for you?
[01:35:24.520 --> 01:35:25.520]  Hi.
[01:35:25.520 --> 01:35:27.520]  Can you hear me okay?
[01:35:27.520 --> 01:35:28.520]  Yes, ma'am.
[01:35:28.520 --> 01:35:29.520]  Oh, good.
[01:35:29.520 --> 01:35:31.520]  Well, two things.
[01:35:31.520 --> 01:35:36.520]  One, in regard to what you're just telling the last gentleman.
[01:35:36.520 --> 01:35:48.520]  In a case in a federal bankruptcy court that was not my bankruptcy, but my property was supposedly put in there
[01:35:48.520 --> 01:35:57.520]  because the attorneys of the bank claimed that I had fraudulently transferred my property to this other party,
[01:35:57.520 --> 01:36:01.520]  which I had not and I had no knowledge of this other party.
[01:36:01.520 --> 01:36:09.520]  They submitted some forged grant deeds, which they claim I forged my own signature, which is a little incredulous,
[01:36:09.520 --> 01:36:17.520]  but I had a handwriting expert prove it was not my signature and the courts didn't care.
[01:36:17.520 --> 01:36:29.520]  And it's an actual violation of Penal Code 115, 115.5132, just to submit a false document,
[01:36:29.520 --> 01:36:32.520]  whether you had knowledge of that or not.
[01:36:32.520 --> 01:36:37.520]  And an attorney has a duty to check the validity of any documents.
[01:36:37.520 --> 01:36:43.520]  What can I do when the appeals court turned me down and said it didn't really matter anyway?
[01:36:43.520 --> 01:36:47.520]  Well, we have the biggest problem right now of one year in California.
[01:36:47.520 --> 01:36:49.520]  California, yes.
[01:36:49.520 --> 01:36:57.520]  Yeah, there is no bigger area of judicial corruption outside of D.C. and, well, yes, there is.
[01:36:57.520 --> 01:36:58.520]  Yeah.
[01:36:58.520 --> 01:37:02.520]  California just has fewer people that notice or care.
[01:37:02.520 --> 01:37:08.520]  Right now, I've got so many articles I'm reading and researching and trying to do in-depth information,
[01:37:08.520 --> 01:37:12.520]  digging on regarding the corrupt California judiciary.
[01:37:12.520 --> 01:37:15.520]  I'm surprised that California is still standing.
[01:37:15.520 --> 01:37:24.520]  By now, someone should have burned every courthouse and judges' house and prosecutors' house in an entire state to the fricking ground
[01:37:24.520 --> 01:37:29.520]  because every one of them are in bed with each other stealing from everybody.
[01:37:29.520 --> 01:37:32.520]  Everybody, yeah.
[01:37:32.520 --> 01:37:37.520]  And the family courts and the probate courts and the foreclosure courts,
[01:37:37.520 --> 01:37:42.520]  they've all got their hands in these money pots, every last one of them.
[01:37:42.520 --> 01:37:43.520]  Yep.
[01:37:43.520 --> 01:37:45.520]  Yep.
[01:37:45.520 --> 01:37:58.520]  So I don't have a way to answer your question to say this should work because you're having to use the same criminals to solve the problem
[01:37:58.520 --> 01:38:04.520]  that are creating it, and that's never going to be a solution.
[01:38:04.520 --> 01:38:07.520]  Yes, and they like to pop people off if they...
[01:38:07.520 --> 01:38:17.520]  And this goes back to the everything I was saying at the very beginning of the show about why the right to keep and bear arms exists.
[01:38:17.520 --> 01:38:27.520]  And why some place like California is a prime example of why that right should be exercised,
[01:38:27.520 --> 01:38:32.520]  except they've managed to disarm everybody in California so they can,
[01:38:32.520 --> 01:38:40.520]  which also goes right back to the other thing I was saying about why it's not a government-regulable right.
[01:38:40.520 --> 01:38:43.520]  Mm-hmm.
[01:38:43.520 --> 01:38:48.520]  Yes, it's unfortunate, but I don't have a choice of leaving at the moment.
[01:38:48.520 --> 01:38:55.520]  So like I told, I was telling him about the only place you can go from where you are is UP, and UP means federal.
[01:38:55.520 --> 01:39:02.520]  You can complain to the United States Attorney's Office, you can send it to the DOJ directly in Washington, D.C.
[01:39:02.520 --> 01:39:05.520]  You can complain there and see what it gets you.
[01:39:05.520 --> 01:39:10.520]  But I can almost tell you without any reservation whatsoever,
[01:39:10.520 --> 01:39:19.520]  complaining to anyone in California is not going to do anything except make you a bigger target.
[01:39:19.520 --> 01:39:31.520]  Yeah. Yeah, I've already started at the one for the attorneys, the state bar, and they do nothing.
[01:39:31.520 --> 01:39:33.520]  I filed against the judge.
[01:39:33.520 --> 01:39:37.520]  Well, the state bar is controlled by the very people that is doing all of this.
[01:39:37.520 --> 01:39:38.520]  Yes.
[01:39:38.520 --> 01:39:40.520]  Why would they do anything?
[01:39:40.520 --> 01:39:42.520]  I know, but you have to start there.
[01:39:42.520 --> 01:39:45.520]  My next case is the Supreme Court of California.
[01:39:45.520 --> 01:39:48.520]  You don't have to start there if you're going federal.
[01:39:48.520 --> 01:39:55.520]  You do not have to start there if you go over their heads and you make complaints that they're acting corruptly from the get-go.
[01:39:55.520 --> 01:40:02.520]  Yeah, the DA's office in my local area where this heaven, when I sent a letter, they never answered it,
[01:40:02.520 --> 01:40:06.520]  and I finally got through to someone and they said, nobody cares.
[01:40:06.520 --> 01:40:09.520]  And I said, I care.
[01:40:09.520 --> 01:40:12.520]  And they said, I said, who governs the state bar?
[01:40:12.520 --> 01:40:19.520]  It's the Supreme Court, but you're pissing in the wind to excuse my French because nobody cares.
[01:40:19.520 --> 01:40:23.520]  Well, when they say nobody, that doesn't include you.
[01:40:23.520 --> 01:40:25.520]  That's right.
[01:40:25.520 --> 01:40:30.520]  They only care about someone being a somebody that can harm them.
[01:40:30.520 --> 01:40:34.520]  That's the only nobodies they talk about.
[01:40:34.520 --> 01:40:38.520]  And they don't see you as being one of those.
[01:40:38.520 --> 01:40:40.520]  Yeah.
[01:40:40.520 --> 01:40:53.520]  Well, that leads to my second question for you because I've got a huge amount of things I have to file and write and do and everything and work.
[01:40:53.520 --> 01:41:19.520]  Do you have anybody that's been on your show or works, you know, you know, that knows how to effectively write complaints, attorney complaints and make them really good and stand out that I could afford to pay to help me write a couple so that I get to edit myself?
[01:41:19.520 --> 01:41:26.520]  When you say write, what are we talking about writing against an attorney, a complaint or a lawsuit?
[01:41:26.520 --> 01:41:28.520]  A complaint.
[01:41:28.520 --> 01:41:31.520]  A complaint against an attorney is easy.
[01:41:31.520 --> 01:41:33.520]  Just stick to the specific facts.
[01:41:33.520 --> 01:41:36.520]  The attorney represented me in this particular case.
[01:41:36.520 --> 01:41:40.520]  In this particular case, this particular document was submitted.
[01:41:40.520 --> 01:41:43.520]  It's the other side's attorney.
[01:41:43.520 --> 01:41:55.520]  Again, same principle, just state the facts and sum up the facts with the evidence you have supporting that fact, improving it to be true.
[01:41:55.520 --> 01:41:59.520]  Okay, I've done that against the attorney that...
[01:41:59.520 --> 01:42:01.520]  But who did you file it with?
[01:42:01.520 --> 01:42:03.520]  Public officials.
[01:42:03.520 --> 01:42:22.520]  I filed it with the... I went to... I'm trying to think of the names, the... In Texas, there was the DA's office in the area in Texas where it happened because this is where the notaries were, that he coerced not to follow the law and send me their notary ledgers.
[01:42:22.520 --> 01:42:31.520]  And then I went to the next one up, two up and, you know, and I can't remember their exact names because I haven't got it in front of me.
[01:42:31.520 --> 01:42:41.520]  And I don't know where else to go in Texas because these people said, well, it's a private company and so the notaries don't have to do this.
[01:42:41.520 --> 01:42:48.520]  And I'm like, no, that is wrong because a notary does not... Even if the company pays for their bonds...
[01:42:48.520 --> 01:42:50.520]  Notary is a public position.
[01:42:50.520 --> 01:42:53.520]  The notaries' records are public information.
[01:42:53.520 --> 01:42:58.520]  Yes, and they refuse to allow me to file it.
[01:42:58.520 --> 01:43:02.520]  And what did you do when they refused?
[01:43:02.520 --> 01:43:05.520]  I wrote the next step up and they said, no.
[01:43:05.520 --> 01:43:17.520]  What you should have done was write to the Texas Attorney General stating that a Texas notary is refusing to provide their public notary records to individuals who have requested copies of said records.
[01:43:17.520 --> 01:43:19.520]  Okay, so the attorney...
[01:43:19.520 --> 01:43:28.520]  Oh, I'm sorry. Both to the Attorney General and the Secretary of State. The Secretary of State would have yanked their registration as a notary for doing that.
[01:43:28.520 --> 01:43:32.520]  They would have made it where they couldn't be a notary.
[01:43:32.520 --> 01:43:41.520]  Well, actually, I wrote to the notary complaint review in Texas and they said, am I falling off the cliff here?
[01:43:41.520 --> 01:43:46.520]  Well, I've got to take a break here so if you'll hang on, we'll finish this up on the other side, okay?
[01:43:46.520 --> 01:43:47.520]  Certainly, okay.
[01:43:47.520 --> 01:43:53.520]  All right, folks, we're coming into the last segment. Y'all hang on and we will be right back.
[01:44:17.520 --> 01:44:22.520]  People have been confused about this plan for over 80 years and many still don't know what hemp is.
[01:44:22.520 --> 01:44:27.520]  So now you know hemp is not marijuana and marijuana is not hemp.
[01:44:27.520 --> 01:44:29.520]  They are different varieties of the same species.
[01:44:29.520 --> 01:44:38.520]  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.
[01:44:38.520 --> 01:44:47.520]  Remember, hemp protein powder contains 53% protein, is gluten-free, anti-inflammatory, non-GMO, and is loaded with nutrients.
[01:44:47.520 --> 01:45:00.520]  Call 888-910-4367. 888-910-4367 and see what our powder seeds and oil can do for you only at hempusa.org.
[01:45:00.520 --> 01:45:15.520]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit? Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary, the affordable, easy-to-understand 4-CD course that will show you how in 24 hours, step-by-step.
[01:45:15.520 --> 01:45:23.520]  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.
[01:45:23.520 --> 01:45:34.520]  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.
[01:45:34.520 --> 01:45:43.520]  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.
[01:45:43.520 --> 01:45:56.520]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases, prosa tactics, and much more. Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner.
[01:45:56.520 --> 01:46:23.520]  Or call toll-free 866-LAW-E-Z.
[01:46:23.520 --> 01:46:34.520]  All right, folks, we are back. This is rule of law radio. We are now in the last segment of the show. Let's get back to Tina and see if we can't get all this wrapped up before we get off the air.
[01:46:34.520 --> 01:46:36.520]  All right, Tina, go ahead.
[01:46:36.520 --> 01:46:56.520]  Okay, so what you're saying is, well, I wrote to the body that governs notaries in Texas, the head body. They did admit that one of the notaries, and they said they could only go against one because the other one had resigned, since resigned her commission,
[01:46:56.520 --> 01:47:16.520]  but she has still not turned in her record to the public office that she should do. The other one, they said she did not do her job properly, and all they gave her was an educational reprimand and said that they couldn't force her to send me the documents that I require.
[01:47:16.520 --> 01:47:28.520]  Well, the Attorney General can under the Public Information Act here in Texas. That's what I'm saying. That's why you do both. You complain to the Secretary of State because they're the ones that commissions notaries.
[01:47:28.520 --> 01:47:40.520]  Then you complain to the Attorney General for the notary's failure to comply with the Public Information Act, which is Chapter 552 of the Texas Government Code.
[01:47:40.520 --> 01:47:47.520]  And the criminal penalty for that is 552.353.
[01:47:47.520 --> 01:47:50.520]  Okay, 552.353.
[01:47:50.520 --> 01:47:56.520]  Yes, that's the criminal penalty for violating the Public Information Act.
[01:47:56.520 --> 01:48:15.520]  I looked up a lot of Texas case law on the notaries and the penalties and everything, and it was very, very clear, even to me as a non-attorney, that they are violating the law and that the records do not belong to the employer.
[01:48:15.520 --> 01:48:26.520]  They belong to the notary who has a duty under the law to share it. So how do I go against the attorney that...
[01:48:26.520 --> 01:48:27.520]  That's a...
[01:48:27.520 --> 01:48:30.520]  I'll list them, and he's in California.
[01:48:30.520 --> 01:48:44.520]  Well, again, that's where you're going to have to go to the federal level and file a complaint against the state bar and the national bar for allowing it to happen and against all the people involved, the attorney, the judges, everybody.
[01:48:44.520 --> 01:48:49.520]  Yep. Okay. Okay.
[01:48:49.520 --> 01:48:50.520]  So I'll just file...
[01:48:50.520 --> 01:48:58.520]  You will never save your population of chickens by allowing a commission of Foxes to determine how to protect them.
[01:48:58.520 --> 01:49:04.520]  I absolutely agree, because I have chickens, too.
[01:49:04.520 --> 01:49:13.520]  Yeah, you're right, but I was thinking that you had to start at that level and let them not do their job to then complain against them.
[01:49:13.520 --> 01:49:17.520]  Well, you want to build a record and a case going upward? Yes.
[01:49:17.520 --> 01:49:21.520]  So you always start at the lowest common denominator and go up from there.
[01:49:21.520 --> 01:49:33.520]  And you show that there is a predilection to commit harm and crime from those who are entrusted to punish those who do so and are, in fact, engaging in it themselves.
[01:49:33.520 --> 01:49:47.520]  Yeah. Would you agree that should I submit articles that have been written by top people about the corruption in our court when I submit...
[01:49:47.520 --> 01:49:55.520]  You can't show that the articles themselves are relevant unless those articles specifically name the judges that are relevant to your issue.
[01:49:55.520 --> 01:50:02.520]  And then that article provides proof of the corruption of that judge in relation to your issue or similar issues.
[01:50:02.520 --> 01:50:09.520]  Articles aren't going to do anything because you can't prove they're relevant to you and your case.
[01:50:09.520 --> 01:50:10.520]  Okay.
[01:50:10.520 --> 01:50:24.520]  The only time those articles will be helpful if you're going to start some sort of political action committee to do, you know, restructuring the judiciary in the state of California.
[01:50:24.520 --> 01:50:27.520]  And you get it enacted by law to do that.
[01:50:27.520 --> 01:50:33.520]  That's the only time those articles are going to give you any impetus and motivational power.
[01:50:33.520 --> 01:50:35.520]  Otherwise, they're irrelevant.
[01:50:35.520 --> 01:50:40.520]  When you're talking about crime and punishment, then you're going to need facts and hard evidence.
[01:50:40.520 --> 01:50:42.520]  Okay.
[01:50:42.520 --> 01:50:45.520]  Well, we're never going to change this law with all the demo rats here.
[01:50:45.520 --> 01:50:47.520]  Well, you don't...
[01:50:47.520 --> 01:50:56.520]  That's not necessarily true unless the only way you're trying to change it is to take it to the demo rats and ask them if they would agree to change it.
[01:50:56.520 --> 01:50:57.520]  Yeah.
[01:50:57.520 --> 01:51:01.520]  If that's the solution you're seeking, then you're right.
[01:51:01.520 --> 01:51:04.520]  I haven't found a...
[01:51:04.520 --> 01:51:10.520]  I haven't found anyone in the other party willing to take up the fight.
[01:51:10.520 --> 01:51:15.520]  Well, of course not because you don't have anybody in the other party in California.
[01:51:15.520 --> 01:51:16.520]  They only...
[01:51:16.520 --> 01:51:19.520]  That's why they call them rhinos, Republican and name only.
[01:51:19.520 --> 01:51:26.520]  They call themselves that, but they're just as Democrat as all the rest of them.
[01:51:26.520 --> 01:51:28.520]  Yeah.
[01:51:28.520 --> 01:51:30.520]  Yeah, we're pretty lost.
[01:51:30.520 --> 01:51:35.520]  I mean, there's a few of us fighting, but it's a real uphill battle.
[01:51:35.520 --> 01:51:40.520]  Well, last time I looked, California's full of hills anyway.
[01:51:40.520 --> 01:51:44.520]  That should not surprise you.
[01:51:44.520 --> 01:51:47.520]  Yeah, it doesn't.
[01:51:47.520 --> 01:51:50.520]  One day I can move right now.
[01:51:50.520 --> 01:51:51.520]  Yeah.
[01:51:51.520 --> 01:51:53.520]  Well, is there anything else, Tina?
[01:51:53.520 --> 01:51:55.520]  I've got one more caller in six minutes to get them.
[01:51:55.520 --> 01:52:03.520]  I appreciate your help, and I'm going to get a letter written and get this started and go up the chain as far as I can.
[01:52:03.520 --> 01:52:04.520]  Okay.
[01:52:04.520 --> 01:52:05.520]  Good luck.
[01:52:05.520 --> 01:52:06.520]  Yes, ma'am.
[01:52:06.520 --> 01:52:07.520]  Thanks.
[01:52:07.520 --> 01:52:09.520]  You have a good night.
[01:52:09.520 --> 01:52:10.520]  All right.
[01:52:10.520 --> 01:52:12.520]  That takes us down to Scott in Texas.
[01:52:12.520 --> 01:52:15.520]  Scott, you got about six minutes.
[01:52:15.520 --> 01:52:17.520]  Okay.
[01:52:17.520 --> 01:52:35.520]  I was in a pure paid county court of law recently and the judge I requested from her a finding on the fact of the conclusion of law in the both orally and in the motions that I had entered.
[01:52:35.520 --> 01:52:58.520]  She did not grant them, she didn't grant any of them, and her clerk sent me a copy of those things that she had denied, and I asked if she was sending a finding on conclusions in fact of law for each of the entered readings she denied and ignored.
[01:52:58.520 --> 01:53:14.520]  And she responded, Mr. Clayton Judge so-and-so would like for you to please cite to her the statute that requires finding a fact and conclusions of law before a final judgment.
[01:53:14.520 --> 01:53:17.520]  There is no statute that says they have to do it.
[01:53:17.520 --> 01:53:24.520]  There is judicial procedure for why you have a right to request it and why they should provide it.
[01:53:24.520 --> 01:53:34.520]  There is no statute that says they must, but in order to show that they're acting fairly and partially in a compliance with law, a judge should be willing to do it.
[01:53:34.520 --> 01:53:42.520]  The ones that aren't are the ones that aren't, which is to say the majority of them.
[01:53:42.520 --> 01:53:54.520]  Yeah, I don't know, I think she's been on the bench for a while, I don't know why she would ask such a thing, like she doesn't know or she's playing with it.
[01:53:54.520 --> 01:54:11.520]  Did you research what Texas requires in relation to finding a fact and conclusions of law when it's proper to ask for it, when it's proper for a judge to deny it, and what motivates a judge to make it in the judge's best interest to provide one?
[01:54:11.520 --> 01:54:13.520]  You should have done all that research.
[01:54:13.520 --> 01:54:23.520]  You should have included the arguments relevant to that research and those conclusions in your demand for the finding a facts and conclusions of law.
[01:54:23.520 --> 01:54:41.520]  What you could have done is say use prior opinions or judgments by that judge to prove that the judge is acting in noncompliance with law, and thus if the judge is going to rule the same way in your case, then you demand the judge providing a facts and conclusions of law, proving that their
[01:54:41.520 --> 01:54:57.520]  ruling is based upon law and not just the outcome they want. In other words, you accuse the judge of acting unfairly, illegally, and outside of their judicial authority to do things the law does not allow.
[01:54:57.520 --> 01:55:09.520]  Therefore, you make it in the judge's best interest to answer with the law.
[01:55:09.520 --> 01:55:21.520]  It's like anything else. The way you arrange the pieces on the board has a lot to do with the outcome of the game.
[01:55:21.520 --> 01:55:25.520]  You follow?
[01:55:25.520 --> 01:55:27.520]  I think so.
[01:55:27.520 --> 01:55:37.520]  Okay. So when you don't do it that way, you leave them too many outs, and too many outs get you nowhere.
[01:55:37.520 --> 01:55:45.520]  Okay.
[01:55:45.520 --> 01:56:06.520]  So if I should file a disqualification, is that the same regional judge that sits over the JP and the municipal courts that would sit over the county court of law?
[01:56:06.520 --> 01:56:13.520]  I don't know if it would be the same. I would think so.
[01:56:13.520 --> 01:56:18.520]  Basically the same process as disqualifying the JP?
[01:56:18.520 --> 01:56:20.520]  Yes.
[01:56:20.520 --> 01:56:22.520]  Okay.
[01:56:22.520 --> 01:56:38.520]  But if this is a county court at law, then they are a court of record with record opinions. So you can actually dig through opinions this judge has written that are specifically the same issue as the one you're facing the court for and show how the judge has ruled and
[01:56:38.520 --> 01:57:05.520]  violation of the actual law in that case on previous occasions and how your demand for a finding of facts and conclusions of law was to prevent the judge from being able to ignore what the law says and just do what she wants.
[01:57:05.520 --> 01:57:11.520]  So it's part of judicial procedures at the judicial canon.
[01:57:11.520 --> 01:57:26.520]  In the judicial canon, the judge must act fairly and impartially. If you can dig up opinions showing the judge has blatantly ignored the law to rule away contradictory to law, then you have a basis for disqualifying that judge for violations of the judicial
[01:57:26.520 --> 01:57:40.520]  canons because you do not believe you can receive a fair and impartial trial, that the judge is not biased and prejudicial, and that the judge complies with the judicial canons of the decorum of the court.
[01:57:40.520 --> 01:57:47.520]  Much less state law, which their opinion proves they did not.
[01:57:47.520 --> 01:58:06.520]  This is why the higher courts are much easier to get into with this because what they do is a matter of record and there they can actually create binding opinions.
[01:58:06.520 --> 01:58:26.520]  Right. And when I mentioned the state law that says that the commercial vehicle that is being asked to be in collision, the ADA responded that there are municipal ordinances in the town.
[01:58:26.520 --> 01:58:30.520]  Which cannot supersede the requirements of state law and they damn well know it.
[01:58:30.520 --> 01:58:32.520]  I told them that.
[01:58:32.520 --> 01:58:37.520]  I'm sorry, but I'm out of time, but that's the way it works. All right, you have a good night. Thanks for calling.
[01:58:37.520 --> 01:58:40.520]  All right, folks, it's been a great show.
[01:58:40.520 --> 01:58:50.520]  At least from this end, y'all have a great week. Good night. God bless.
[01:58:50.520 --> 01:59:08.520]  The Bibles for America is offering absolutely free a unique study Bible called the New Testament recovery version. The New Testament recovery version has over 9000 footnotes that explain what the Bible says verse by verse, helping you to know God and to know the meaning of life.
[01:59:08.520 --> 01:59:20.520]  Order your free copy today from Bibles for America. Call us toll free at 888-551-0102 or visit us online at bfa.org.
[01:59:20.520 --> 01:59:30.520]  This translation is highly accurate and it comes with over 13000 cross references, plus charts and maps and an outline for every book of the Bible.
[01:59:30.520 --> 01:59:41.520]  This is truly a Bible you can understand. To get your free copy of the New Testament recovery version, call us toll free at 888-551-0102.
[01:59:41.520 --> 01:59:51.520]  That's 888-551-0102 or visit us online at bfa.org.
[01:59:51.520 --> 02:00:01.520]  Looking for some truth? You found it. LogosRadioNetwork.com.