ROL_2019-07-29_16k.timecode

[00:10.620 --> 00:18.280]  Gold at $1,429 an ounce, silver, $16.45 an ounce, copper, $2.75 an ounce, oil, Texas
[00:18.280 --> 00:25.560]  crude, $55.63 a barrel, Brent crude, $62.47 a barrel, and cryptos in order of market cap,
[00:25.560 --> 00:37.160]  Bitcoin Core, $10,566.52, Ethereum, $227.26, XRP, Ripple, $0.33, Litecoin, $100.31, and
[00:37.160 --> 00:45.960]  Bitcoin Cash is at $324.10 a crypto coin.
[00:45.960 --> 00:52.280]  Today in history, the year 1916, the Preparedness Day bombing, a timed suitcase bomb, was detonated
[00:52.280 --> 00:57.600]  on Market Street in San Francisco during the World War I Preparedness Day parade, killing
[00:57.600 --> 00:59.600]  10 and injuring 40.
[00:59.600 --> 01:04.600]  Today in history.
[01:04.600 --> 01:09.320]  In recent news, since Governor Greg Abbott signed House Bill 1325, legalizing hemp into
[01:09.320 --> 01:13.960]  Texas law back in June, county prosecutors around the state, including Houston, Austin,
[01:13.960 --> 01:17.920]  and San Antonio, have been dropping marijuana possession charges and even refusing to file
[01:17.920 --> 01:22.600]  new ones since they are stipulating that they do not have the time or the laboratory equipment
[01:22.600 --> 01:24.680]  to test the herb for THC.
[01:24.680 --> 01:28.320]  Margaret Moore, the Travis County District Attorney, announced earlier this month that
[01:28.320 --> 01:32.800]  she was dismissing 32 felony possession and delivery of marijuana cases because of the
[01:32.800 --> 01:33.800]  law.
[01:33.800 --> 01:37.480]  Mr. Abbott and other state officials, including the Attorney General, stipulated in a letter
[01:37.480 --> 01:41.960]  to county district attorneys back on Thursday that marijuana has not been decriminalized
[01:41.960 --> 01:48.120]  in Texas and that these actions demonstrate a misunderstanding of how HB 1325 works.
[01:48.120 --> 01:54.440]  As well as other cities, too, like the District Attorney in El Paso, Jaime Esparza, a Democrat,
[01:54.440 --> 01:58.840]  who also stated earlier this month that the law, quote, will not have an effect on the
[01:58.840 --> 02:01.560]  prosecution of marijuana cases in El Paso.
[02:01.560 --> 02:06.600]  However, the issue was succinctly summarized by Mr. Brandon Ball, an assistant public defender
[02:06.600 --> 02:10.640]  in Harris County, who stated that, quote, the law is constantly changing on what makes
[02:10.640 --> 02:13.360]  something illegal based on its chemical makeup.
[02:13.360 --> 02:17.240]  It's important that if someone is charged with something, the test matches what they're
[02:17.240 --> 02:22.480]  charged with.
[02:22.480 --> 02:27.120]  A paper by Tulane University identified a five and a half inch American pocket shark
[02:27.120 --> 02:32.240]  as the first of its kind in the Gulf of Mexico, the specimen being only the second pocket
[02:32.240 --> 02:37.880]  shark ever captured or recorded with the other one being found way back in 1979 in the East
[02:37.880 --> 02:39.360]  Pacific Ocean.
[02:39.360 --> 02:43.680]  According to the university paper, the shark secretes a luminous fluid from a gland near
[02:43.680 --> 02:49.960]  its front fins for the purpose it is hypothesized to lure and prey who may be drawn into the
[02:49.960 --> 02:50.960]  glow.
[02:50.960 --> 03:20.880]  This is Brooke Rode with your lowdown for July 22nd, 2019.
[03:20.880 --> 03:28.200]  I'm sick of people being victimized by criminal cops, psychopathic predators terrorizing neighborhood
[03:28.200 --> 03:32.160]  blocks, equipped with pepper spray mace cuffs, tasers and glocks, they like serial killers
[03:32.160 --> 03:35.760]  acting out subliminal thoughts, forget what you taught, these cops have got a license
[03:35.760 --> 03:39.680]  to kill, witness intimidation means that they can use it at will, code of silence means
[03:39.680 --> 03:43.040]  that the pigs will never let out a squeal, and if they go to court, they know the judge
[03:43.040 --> 03:46.720]  will make them a deal, for real, that's why they stopping me, locking me up and stopping
[03:46.720 --> 03:51.200]  me, confiscating my property, talking in my demography, making the poor commodities profiting
[03:51.200 --> 03:55.680]  off of poverty, enforcing policies, supporting prison economies, yeah, no one makes money
[03:55.680 --> 03:59.640]  when the violence stops, hating brutality is the way to make a criminal crop, blood
[03:59.640 --> 04:03.440]  in the gut is how to risk whether they bred at the top, and that's why this is what happens
[04:03.440 --> 04:08.200]  when you call the cops, come on, this is what happens when you call the cops, this is what
[04:08.200 --> 04:12.760]  happens when you call the cops, this is what happens when you call the cops, you get your
[04:12.760 --> 04:17.720]  rights violated or you all get shot, this is what happens when you call the cops, alright
[04:17.720 --> 04:21.800]  folks, good evening, this is the Monday night rule of law radio show with your host Eddie
[04:21.800 --> 04:26.520]  Craig, tonight we are going to be discussing just a couple things while the caller board
[04:26.520 --> 04:33.120]  fills up, the call in number is 512646 1984, if you want to get in line and get on the
[04:33.120 --> 04:36.540]  caller board, so if you got any questions or anything like that you want to discuss,
[04:36.540 --> 04:40.760]  we can do that, but before I get that far, there's something I want to get into that
[04:40.760 --> 04:48.360]  I've been trying to get folks to understand about the transportation statutes and why
[04:48.360 --> 04:55.480]  we need a lawsuit, somebody that knows what they're doing needs a lawsuit and standing
[04:55.480 --> 05:02.260]  to get into the courts in order to rectify the problems of the state perpetrating the
[05:02.260 --> 05:09.520]  fraud that it does upon the people of Texas through theft, extortion, false imprisonment,
[05:09.520 --> 05:16.880]  false prosecutions, all of it, Texas has created a revenue stream on the backs of the people
[05:16.880 --> 05:22.140]  by destroying our right to locomotion and to move about the land freely and using our
[05:22.140 --> 05:28.820]  own property, our automobile, the court of criminal appeals is complicit in this criminal
[05:28.820 --> 05:35.260]  conduct because of the way that it does its opinions in order to obfuscate and hide the
[05:35.260 --> 05:41.700]  crimes of the state that are being committed and there is no doubt that they're in on it
[05:41.700 --> 05:50.160]  because everything they write in their opinion is directed at language surrounding a subject
[05:50.160 --> 05:57.880]  matter that the state has not provided one shred of evidence for in any case that it
[05:57.880 --> 06:06.200]  prosecutes under the transportation code and that is the existence of transportation itself.
[06:06.200 --> 06:10.880]  This is the court of criminal appeals, the highest court on the criminal side, which
[06:10.880 --> 06:18.120]  is the Supreme court on the criminal side being complicit in this criminal conduct and
[06:18.120 --> 06:25.160]  cover up. Now, just as an example, some paperwork was filed recently here by someone that's
[06:25.160 --> 06:32.240]  working on a lawsuit in the state of Tennessee and they've got the case law that I've got
[06:32.240 --> 06:37.480]  on record and in my files for going over some of this stuff that I keep trying to tell you
[06:37.480 --> 06:43.600]  folks on this radio show about how the Texas driver's license program is part of a compact
[06:43.600 --> 06:50.640]  between multiple states and how no compact between states can be put into effect and
[06:50.640 --> 06:58.500]  operate without the express consent and approval of the United States Congress. Congress cannot
[06:58.500 --> 07:06.840]  lend its express approval to them except within the domain of the enumerated powers it's given
[07:06.840 --> 07:14.660]  and the only one that applies in this case is the Commerce Clause. So if Congress is
[07:14.660 --> 07:20.600]  giving its blessings to a compact between states, then the blessing can only relate,
[07:20.600 --> 07:28.600]  in this instance, to commerce. Now, how do we know this to be true? Well, besides what
[07:28.600 --> 07:33.680]  the constitutions themselves say on the subject, let's see what the United States Supreme Court
[07:33.680 --> 07:40.020]  had to say on the subject. Accordingly, before a compact between two states can be given
[07:40.020 --> 07:47.400]  effect, it must be approved by Congress. See Virginia versus Maryland, 540 U.S. 56 and
[07:47.400 --> 07:57.120]  66 in 2003. Once a compact receives such approval, it is transformed into a law of the United
[07:57.120 --> 08:05.880]  States. The supremacy clause in Article 6, Clause 2, then ensures that a congressionally
[08:05.880 --> 08:14.540]  approved compact as a federal law preempts any state law that conflicts with the compact.
[08:14.540 --> 08:22.320]  See Fidelity Federal Savings and Loan Association versus Dela Cuesta, 548 U.S. 141, 152 through
[08:22.320 --> 08:36.560]  153 in 1982. Tarrant Regional Water District versus Herman, U.S. 06-13-2013, 11-889, 46
[08:36.560 --> 08:41.200]  U.S. 582. And the cases go on. Congress may control the state laws so far as it may be
[08:41.200 --> 08:47.400]  necessary to control them for the regulation of commerce. That regulation is designed for
[08:47.400 --> 08:57.040]  the entire result. It produces a uniform whole. Gibbons versus Ogden, 22 U.S. 1, 206 and 210.
[08:57.040 --> 09:05.320]  Each person engaged in the business that is being regulated by these acts and these codes
[09:05.320 --> 09:13.640]  are the persons who are exercising a privilege. It is not the people who are not engaging
[09:13.640 --> 09:20.240]  in business upon the highways. Never has been. I have told you that for 12 years now I've
[09:20.240 --> 09:26.960]  been telling you that. 12 years I've been showing you the law and how it works and why
[09:26.960 --> 09:33.920]  it has to work that way. Okay? Now, just in their particular state, they've also got individual
[09:33.920 --> 09:41.080]  state and Supreme Court law dealing with some of the objects relating to these license taxes,
[09:41.080 --> 09:47.600]  registration taxes. These are all taxes and fees associated with a privileged occupation
[09:47.600 --> 09:54.360]  and they don't have a damn thing to do with you and I when we are going about our own
[09:54.360 --> 10:00.920]  personal business and pleasure. Okay? And they stated this very eloquently.
[10:00.920 --> 10:08.120]  Plaintiffs object to the use of tax and business language to restyle use and enjoyment of their
[10:08.120 --> 10:15.680]  chattel property and automobile as operating a motor vehicle. And that right there, ladies
[10:15.680 --> 10:21.660]  and gentlemen, is the perfect description of what the Texas courts at every level and
[10:21.660 --> 10:28.380]  what every court in every state is doing. All you have to do is read their opinions
[10:28.380 --> 10:35.920]  to know this is true. How do we see it? It's very simple. They refuse to address the fact
[10:35.920 --> 10:41.800]  that the court was the trial court never required the admission of any evidence into the record
[10:41.800 --> 10:47.460]  by the state upon the allegation that someone was engaged in an activity regulated under
[10:47.460 --> 10:52.960]  the subject of transportation. They never require the state to prove that element, even
[10:52.960 --> 10:59.880]  though nothing in the charges against the accused can exist without it. They never require
[10:59.880 --> 11:08.680]  that element to be presented nor to be proven. Never. And the primary rule of a criminal
[11:08.680 --> 11:18.160]  case is this. No element of the crime can be presumed. It must be asserted and it must
[11:18.160 --> 11:26.720]  be proven. And yet not once in any case whatsoever in the entire history of its existence in
[11:26.720 --> 11:31.680]  relation to the transportation code laws has the state of Texas ever required that to be
[11:31.680 --> 11:37.440]  the case. Now, why is that? Then you read the opinions themselves. They only cite the
[11:37.440 --> 11:44.000]  language of the statutes or they try to convert the meaning of the common language into the
[11:44.000 --> 11:50.800]  same as that found within the statutes by creating opinions that violate the separation
[11:50.800 --> 11:59.520]  of powers and legislate from the bench when they declare that they can use similar terminology
[11:59.520 --> 12:05.760]  to that found in the law to get a conviction, even though the legislature did not define
[12:05.760 --> 12:13.760]  the term that they are saying can be used as something relevant and relational to transportation
[12:13.760 --> 12:19.280]  like they did the specific term itself, such as vehicle motor vehicle or commercial motor
[12:19.280 --> 12:32.000]  vehicle. Do you understand why that is fraud? Do you really understand why the courts themselves
[12:32.000 --> 12:38.600]  are refusing to recognize language outside of the statute as having a different meaning
[12:38.600 --> 12:45.680]  and purpose for anything that is not applicable to the subject matter? It cannot work any
[12:45.680 --> 12:51.440]  other way, but instead the Texas courts are attempting to legislate from the bench by
[12:51.440 --> 12:59.360]  converting every similar meaning or sounding term into being encompassed by the statute
[12:59.360 --> 13:05.280]  and the subject matter itself, even though that it violates legislative intent, it violates
[13:05.280 --> 13:11.280]  the written word of the law itself, it violates the separation of powers, it violates the
[13:11.280 --> 13:23.040]  prohibition upon the judges doing the very thing they are doing. Now, imagine that the
[13:23.040 --> 13:28.400]  courts themselves complicit in the criminal conduct of the state in order to protect the
[13:28.400 --> 13:35.600]  state from the repercussions should the people ever find out what is really going on. That
[13:35.600 --> 13:41.200]  should tell you right there why it is impossible to get a fair and impartial trial in the courts
[13:41.200 --> 13:47.680]  anywhere. It's impossible to get a fair and impartial trial because the courts themselves
[13:47.680 --> 13:56.440]  are prejudicial against the accused if it requires throwing the state to the dogs in
[13:56.440 --> 14:04.240]  order to be honest about the law. Am I the only one that sees a serious, serious problem
[14:04.240 --> 14:09.720]  with that way of thinking and doing things? Because that is where we're at. That is what
[14:09.720 --> 14:18.440]  we have and there is no question about it. The courts of Texas intentionally subvert
[14:18.440 --> 14:28.240]  the rule of law to create pretend law against pretend crimes and what do they get out of
[14:28.240 --> 14:40.120]  it at the end of the day every single time? More power, more control, and more money.
[14:40.120 --> 14:45.680]  That is the goal. It has always been the goal. This is the problem with having the entire
[14:45.680 --> 14:54.920]  judicial department left to the hands of a single elitist group of people called attorneys.
[14:54.920 --> 15:01.120]  We have completely been disenfranchised of our ability to participate in a meaningful
[15:01.120 --> 15:07.480]  way in an entire department of our own government and the only people that can do so is one
[15:07.480 --> 15:14.780]  specific category of persons who made law to ensure that they had absolute power and
[15:14.780 --> 15:21.680]  control over that department because that department has absolute power and control
[15:21.680 --> 15:27.960]  over the other two through opinion as long as everyone is willing to believe the fantasy
[15:27.960 --> 15:38.100]  that they are acting independently rather than in concert to subvert everything. Why
[15:38.100 --> 15:45.500]  else would the attorneys also occupy every other department of government in violation
[15:45.500 --> 15:51.720]  once again of the Constitution's prohibitions on any person occupying one department of
[15:51.720 --> 15:59.500]  government having any power to operate within or exercise any power of any other office
[15:59.500 --> 16:12.560]  or individual in any other department of government? This was done to give them no accountability
[16:12.560 --> 16:18.960]  for the crimes they commit because now they control the entire three-ring circus and they're
[16:18.960 --> 16:25.040]  the ones cracking the whip and calling the plays and you and I can't do anything but
[16:25.040 --> 16:35.860]  sit back and watch. So they think. But we can't get elected to a judicial position with
[16:35.860 --> 16:42.140]  any power to make any changes. We can't get elected to a judicial position that sets precedent
[16:42.140 --> 16:49.460]  and turns the tide of what they're doing backward like it needs to be and we can't get elected
[16:49.460 --> 16:54.660]  to any high office in the other departments of government if it will interfere with their
[16:54.660 --> 17:02.580]  ability to maintain control over all of them. Think about that. Rule of Law Radio is proud
[17:02.580 --> 17:06.240]  to offer the Rule of Law Traffic Seminar. In today's America we live in an us against
[17:06.240 --> 17:09.700]  them society and if we the people are ever going to have a free society then we're going
[17:09.700 --> 17:13.660]  to have to stand and defend our own rights. Among those rights are the right to travel
[17:13.660 --> 17:17.300]  freely from place to place, the right to act in our own private capacity and most importantly
[17:17.300 --> 17:21.540]  the right to due process of law. Traffic courts afford us the least expensive opportunity
[17:21.540 --> 17:25.900]  to learn how to enforce and preserve our rights through due process. Former sheriff's deputy
[17:25.900 --> 17:29.460]  Eddie Craig in conjunction with Rule of Law Radio has put together the most comprehensive
[17:29.460 --> 17:33.060]  teaching tool available that will help you understand what due process is and how to
[17:33.060 --> 17:36.740]  hold courts to the rule of law. You can get your own copy of this invaluable material
[17:36.740 --> 17:41.100]  by going to RuleOfLawRadio.com and ordering your copy today. By ordering now you'll receive
[17:41.100 --> 17:45.260]  a copy of Eddie's book, The Texas Transportation Code, The Law Versus the Lie, video and audio
[17:45.260 --> 17:49.420]  of the original 2009 seminar, hundreds of research documents and other useful resource
[17:49.420 --> 17:54.140]  material. Learn how to fight for your rights with the help of this material from RuleOfLawRadio.com.
[17:54.140 --> 18:00.700]  Order your copy today and together we can have a free society we all want and deserve.
[18:00.700 --> 18:06.020]  Are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters or even lawsuits?
[18:06.020 --> 18:11.260]  Get debt collectors now with the Michael Meris Proven Method. Michael Meris has won six cases
[18:11.260 --> 18:16.020]  in federal court against debt collectors and now you can win too. You'll get step by step
[18:16.020 --> 18:21.300]  instructions in plain English on how to win in court using federal civil rights statutes,
[18:21.300 --> 18:26.300]  what to do when contacted by phone, mail or court summons, how to answer letters and phone
[18:26.300 --> 18:30.940]  calls, how to get debt collectors out of your credit report, how to turn the financial tables
[18:30.940 --> 18:37.020]  on them and make them pay you to go away. The Michael Meris Proven Method is the solution
[18:37.020 --> 18:41.700]  for how to stop debt collectors. Personal consultation is available as well. For more
[18:41.700 --> 18:47.020]  information, please visit RuleOfLawRadio.com and click on the blue Michael Meris banner
[18:47.020 --> 18:56.020]  or email MichaelMeris at Yahoo.com. That's RuleOfLawRadio.com or email M-I-C-H-A-E-L-M-I-R-R-A-S
[18:56.020 --> 19:03.020]  at Yahoo.com to learn how to stop debt collectors now.
[19:26.020 --> 19:40.020]  Alright folks, we are back. This is Rule of Law Radio. The call in number 512-646-1984.
[19:40.020 --> 19:45.020]  If you want to call and get in line, I've just got a couple more things to go and then
[19:45.020 --> 19:52.260]  we'll start taking your calls. Alright. Now, just to continue on, this by the way is a
[19:52.260 --> 19:58.860]  Sixth Circuit court case and in it it reads, the definition of operate indicates that management
[19:58.860 --> 20:05.060]  or oversight is an essential element of a business operation. United Rentals Inc. v.
[20:05.060 --> 20:14.460]  Kaiser, 355 Federal 3rd, 399, 2004, Federal Appellate, 0005 P, Sixth Circuit. Under the
[20:14.460 --> 20:20.380]  regime of international shoe, we see no difference for jurisdictional purposes between an automobile
[20:20.380 --> 20:26.720]  and any other channel. Worldwide Volkswagen Corporation et al. v. Woodson, 100 Supreme
[20:26.720 --> 20:41.220]  Court, 559, 444 U.S. 286, Footnote 11. Okay. Now, let's look at the other. The essential
[20:41.220 --> 20:47.380]  elements of the definition of privilege is occupation and business and not the ownership
[20:47.380 --> 20:54.380]  simply of property or its possession or keeping it. The taxes on the occupation, business,
[20:54.380 --> 21:00.580]  pursuits, vocation, or calling, it being one in which a profit is supposed to be derived
[21:00.580 --> 21:05.760]  by its exercise from the general public and not a tax on the property itself or the mere
[21:05.760 --> 21:12.420]  ownership of it. The legislature cannot under our constitution declare the simple enjoyment,
[21:12.420 --> 21:18.980]  possession, or ownership of property of any kind a privilege and tax it as such. It may
[21:18.980 --> 21:24.940]  declare the business, occupation, vocation, calling, pursuit, or transaction by which
[21:24.940 --> 21:31.420]  the property is put to a particular use for a profit to be derived from the general public
[21:31.420 --> 21:37.700]  a privilege and tax it as such, but it cannot tax the ownership itself as a privilege. The
[21:37.700 --> 21:44.720]  ownership of the property can only be taxed according to value. That's Phillips v. Lewis.
[21:44.720 --> 21:49.440]  That's actually a Tennessee case, but it still goes to show that this is not the first time
[21:49.440 --> 21:57.100]  this subject has been dealt with. This brings us to the discussion over all of these other
[21:57.100 --> 22:01.780]  cases that people are throwing out there and this thing they call the Supreme Court has
[22:01.780 --> 22:06.100]  already ruled that you don't need a driver's license to drive and blah, blah, blah. That's
[22:06.100 --> 22:12.780]  a misstatement of what the law is. It's a misstatement of what the cases say. However,
[22:12.780 --> 22:19.300]  it doesn't mean the premise itself is incorrect. And let's talk once again about how the attorneys
[22:19.300 --> 22:26.160]  in the courts are manipulating language to reach an objective that is not consistent
[22:26.160 --> 22:32.660]  with individual rights and limitations of government power. In every single one of the
[22:32.660 --> 22:37.660]  cases that exist in that article and that are cited constantly by the right to travel
[22:37.660 --> 22:43.980]  crowd incorrectly because right to travel is not the argument that has to be made here,
[22:43.980 --> 22:49.340]  but that's beside the point for our purposes here. The simple fact of the matter is in
[22:49.340 --> 22:59.020]  every single one of those opinions, the court has always distinguished without any equivocation
[22:59.020 --> 23:05.580]  whatsoever other than they have similarities but are still not the same thing. The court
[23:05.580 --> 23:12.860]  has unequivocally separated the people's rightful use of the highways from the business use
[23:12.860 --> 23:20.540]  itself that is being addressed by the opinion. And yet the courts and the prosecutors and
[23:20.540 --> 23:26.540]  the defense attorneys all sit there and say when it operates in their favor, it's part
[23:26.540 --> 23:31.460]  of the opinion, but when it operates against the way they're doing things, it's merely
[23:31.460 --> 23:38.140]  dicta and should have no influence whatsoever over the decision to be made. Despite the
[23:38.140 --> 23:46.260]  fact that the court has repeatedly, in every instance, knowingly divided the two categories
[23:46.260 --> 23:59.100]  of use, ownership, and privilege versus right. In every single case, and the courts continue
[23:59.100 --> 24:10.160]  to ignore it, hands down, no ifs, no ands, no buts. We lose our cases because we go in
[24:10.160 --> 24:15.420]  unprepared and the lower courts, whenever they can, get away with not doing their job
[24:15.420 --> 24:19.820]  in accordance with the rules, then the higher courts propagate that by covering up for the
[24:19.820 --> 24:26.000]  lower courts when they can tell from the record that you failed to do what was necessary to
[24:26.000 --> 24:34.700]  protect the argument on appeal. And this, ladies and gentlemen, continues all the way
[24:34.700 --> 24:43.180]  to the top of the chain in the courts. They continue to reclassify the individual private
[24:43.180 --> 24:52.420]  use to be the same as the commercial use and thus they are acting legitimately and that
[24:52.420 --> 25:00.300]  is fraud. That is a lie. That is the courts acting outside of their authority to create
[25:00.300 --> 25:06.900]  law and to create an application of that law that is far beyond the power of the legislature
[25:06.900 --> 25:14.620]  and its intent in writing the law in the first place. How many times have you heard me say
[25:14.620 --> 25:19.580]  on this show that when America falls it will be the fact that the attorneys undermined
[25:19.580 --> 25:26.540]  it that caused it to do so? Every major problem we have in this country today can be laid
[25:26.540 --> 25:32.700]  at the feet of an attorney or a group of them because they're the ones that occupy every
[25:32.700 --> 25:40.020]  single position in every single department of government that constantly tries to find
[25:40.020 --> 25:47.300]  an argument and a way to undermine what they were forbidden to ever consider doing in the
[25:47.300 --> 25:58.920]  first place. They are liars. They are successful at their job precisely because they are liars.
[25:58.920 --> 26:06.300]  They are willing to lie. They are unrepentant in their lying and they could care less about
[26:06.300 --> 26:11.380]  whether or not they're doing it right for the people when the only people that matter
[26:11.380 --> 26:15.940]  to them are the ones that keep them in the power that they've got and that is not you
[26:15.940 --> 26:22.580]  and me. It's the people that put money into their election campaigns. It's the people
[26:22.580 --> 26:26.900]  who make sure that the votes are paid for before they ever hit the ballot box. It's
[26:26.900 --> 26:31.400]  the ones who invest in the machines meant to flip the votes to the whatever party they
[26:31.400 --> 26:45.620]  want to give them to. You think this is by accident? Really? Seriously? If so, why am
[26:45.620 --> 26:51.100]  I even here? What is the purpose of me bringing out this information and showing everybody
[26:51.100 --> 26:58.220]  these facts, this verifiable factual information that we are being hosed by those who are supposed
[26:58.220 --> 27:09.100]  to be serving us if no one's going to do anything with it? A handful of us can't stop this.
[27:09.100 --> 27:18.780]  A handful of us cannot fix this. It's going to take a lot more than that this time. A
[27:18.780 --> 27:30.280]  lot more. So where are you? Why aren't you looking for jury duty? Why aren't you educating
[27:30.280 --> 27:35.980]  everybody you talk to about what you know to be right, but why aren't you doing it in
[27:35.980 --> 27:41.700]  a way that they can't argue against? Just simply give them the information. Make sure
[27:41.700 --> 27:50.060]  that they can verify it for themselves. Make it easy because you will not convince someone
[27:50.060 --> 27:55.740]  of something that is outside of their realm of acceptance when they don't want to believe
[27:55.740 --> 28:01.260]  it. You've got to make them want to believe it. You've got to make them want to verify
[28:01.260 --> 28:08.140]  it. You've got to make them want to understand why it's a problem to just let it alone and
[28:08.140 --> 28:17.740]  let it continue. And people are always yelling at me because they accuse me of trying to
[28:17.740 --> 28:23.620]  cause division in the ranks when it comes to all this stuff between the patronuts and
[28:23.620 --> 28:31.120]  their theories and the actual correct law and references materials and everything else
[28:31.120 --> 28:39.420]  that exists. And I'm kind of like, you know what? Nobody needs the hunting dog that fetches
[28:39.420 --> 28:46.380]  the stick of dynamite back after it's been lit and thrown. You throw a stick of dynamite
[28:46.380 --> 28:50.100]  out there and your hunting dog goes and grabs it and starts running right back at the group
[28:50.100 --> 28:56.340]  of people with it, you've got an option here. Let him get there or shoot the dead gum dog
[28:56.340 --> 29:03.020]  or everybody pays the price. Well, that's how I look at the patronut way of doing things.
[29:03.020 --> 29:07.020]  They're the fricking hunting dog that doesn't know better than to leave the damn stick of
[29:07.020 --> 29:14.120]  dynamite where you threw it. Because if it's put in the right place at the right time and
[29:14.120 --> 29:18.980]  used the right way, the dynamite serves a purpose. But when it's picked up by a patronut
[29:18.980 --> 29:24.740]  and taken somewhere other than that, especially right back in a way that harms everybody,
[29:24.740 --> 29:40.040]  then you have a serious fricking problem. Don't you think? How hard is that to understand?
[29:40.040 --> 29:44.860]  That's why I care about the accuracy of the information. That's why I care when somebody
[29:44.860 --> 29:51.180]  puts out bad information. That's why I address it and do not leave it alone. I don't want
[29:51.180 --> 29:55.780]  that dog getting the dynamite back to the middle of the crowd. All right, folks, y'all
[29:55.780 --> 30:02.500]  hang on and I'll start taking your calls. We'll be right back after the break. Burglars
[30:02.500 --> 30:07.860]  are breaking into hotel rooms by effortlessly and silently opening those key card locks.
[30:07.860 --> 30:12.140]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, and I'll be back to tell you how the hackers do it and what
[30:12.140 --> 30:17.900]  it means for you, the traveler, in a moment. Privacy is under attack. When you give up
[30:17.900 --> 30:22.740]  data about yourself, you'll never get it back again. And once your privacy is gone, you'll
[30:22.740 --> 30:28.780]  find your freedoms will start to vanish too. So protect your rights. Say no to surveillance
[30:28.780 --> 30:34.340]  and keep your information to yourself. Privacy, it's worth hanging on to. This message is
[30:34.340 --> 30:39.820]  brought to you by StartPage.com, the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo
[30:39.820 --> 30:46.380]  and Bing. Start over with StartPage. When Janet Wolf returned to her room at the
[30:46.380 --> 30:51.620]  Hyatt in Houston and found her laptop stolen, there was no sign of forced entry, and the
[30:51.620 --> 30:56.980]  housekeeper was ruled out as a suspect. So who done it? A hacker, it turns out, using
[30:56.980 --> 31:02.380]  a digital tool that spoofs the computerized key card locks in place at 4 million hotel
[31:02.380 --> 31:06.140]  rooms. After break-ins across Texas, the lock company
[31:06.140 --> 31:12.260]  Oniti offered a pretty lame solution, plugging the locks with putty. The real solution requires
[31:12.260 --> 31:17.420]  replacing every lock circuit board, something Oniti wants the hotels to pay for. But what
[31:17.420 --> 31:22.180]  if they don't? Well, it may be time to stay somewhere else. Motel 6, anyone?
[31:22.180 --> 31:31.680]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht for StartPage.com, the world's most private search engine.
[31:31.680 --> 31:37.060]  This is Building 7, a 47-story skyscraper that fell on the afternoon of September 11th.
[31:37.060 --> 31:42.500]  The government says that fire brought it down. However, 1,500 architects and engineers concluded
[31:42.500 --> 31:46.020]  it was a controlled demolition. Over 6,000 of my fellow service members have
[31:46.020 --> 31:49.140]  given their lives. Thousands of my fellow first responders are
[31:49.140 --> 31:51.020]  dying. I'm not a conspiracy theorist.
[31:51.020 --> 31:53.380]  I'm a structural engineer. I'm a New York City correction officer.
[31:53.380 --> 31:56.020]  I'm an Air Force pilot. I'm a father who lost his son.
[31:56.020 --> 32:01.180]  We're Americans, and we deserve the truth. Go to RememberBuilding7.org today.
[32:01.180 --> 32:05.300]  Hey, it's Danny here for Hill Country Home Improvements. Did your home receive hail or
[32:05.300 --> 32:08.860]  wind damage from the recent storms? Come on, we all know the government caused
[32:08.860 --> 32:11.780]  it with their chemtrails, but good luck getting them to pay for it.
[32:11.780 --> 32:15.340]  Okay, I might be kidding about the chemtrails, but I'm serious about your roof.
[32:15.340 --> 32:19.340]  That's why you have insurance, and Hill Country Home Improvements can handle the claim for
[32:19.340 --> 32:23.100]  you with little to no out-of-pocket expense. And we accept bitcoin.
[32:23.100 --> 32:27.660]  As a multi-year, A-plus member of the Better Business Bureau with zero complaints, you
[32:27.660 --> 32:32.020]  can trust Hill Country Home Improvements to handle your claim and your roof right the
[32:32.020 --> 32:39.020]  first time. Just call 512-992-8745 or go to hillcountryhomeimprovements.com, mention
[32:39.620 --> 32:44.660]  the crypto show and get $100 off, and we'll donate another $100 to the Logos Radio Network
[32:44.660 --> 32:49.220]  to help continue this programming. So if those out-of-town roofers come knockin',
[32:49.220 --> 32:56.220]  your door should be lockin'. That's 512-992-8745 or hillcountryhomeimprovements.com. Discounts
[32:56.220 --> 33:03.220]  are based on full roof replacement. You may not actually be kidding about chemtrails.
[33:03.700 --> 33:10.700]  Live Free Speech Radio, logosradionetwork.com.
[33:10.700 --> 33:17.700]  All right, folks, we are back. This is Rule of Law Radio. The call-in number 512-646-1984.
[33:29.700 --> 33:34.700]  All right, I've got one little tidbit left, and then I will start taking your calls.
[33:34.700 --> 33:41.700]  All right, now let's see what this case has to say.
[34:04.700 --> 34:11.700]  All right, folks, we are back.
[34:34.700 --> 34:41.700]  Now, folks, this case is important, the Royal case for sure, simply because this goes with
[34:54.100 --> 34:59.500]  any violation of the regulatory rules of the occupation just as it does the paying of the
[34:59.500 --> 35:05.780]  license tax itself. When you don't pay the license tax to get a license to engage in
[35:05.780 --> 35:10.940]  the occupation, then you commit a misdemeanor violation under Texas law by driving while
[35:10.940 --> 35:17.940]  license invalid, okay? And when you violate any of the other rules that coincide with
[35:19.300 --> 35:25.500]  that regulation, whether it be speeding or failure to use a turn signal or any of that,
[35:25.500 --> 35:32.500]  those two are misdemeanors under Texas law, but they are still subject to the privilege
[35:33.900 --> 35:40.900]  surrounding the profession or occupation that is being regulated, i.e. the subject matter
[35:44.140 --> 35:51.140]  of the legislation itself. They are not independent subjects unto themselves, and thus to save
[35:51.140 --> 35:58.140]  them without the existence of the primary element of transportation is fraud. Absolute
[35:59.140 --> 36:06.140]  100% fraud. Any contract attorney could look at the terms of that argument and say, you're
[36:10.140 --> 36:16.140]  right. In fact, I've paid a few to sit down with and talk to to do exactly that, to tell
[36:16.140 --> 36:22.640]  me whether I was right or whether I was wrong. Guess what? Even though these guys aren't
[36:22.640 --> 36:27.140]  going to be representing me in anything, I used them to validate the argument and information
[36:27.140 --> 36:33.380]  I had to prove that what I was saying was correct, and they had no option other than
[36:33.380 --> 36:40.380]  to agree. Because you can't do the one without the existence of the other. That's like saying
[36:40.380 --> 36:47.380]  that I breached a contract that I was never a party to. It is impossible for me to have
[36:48.380 --> 36:53.380]  breached a contract. Now, these are quasi-forms of contracts, so don't, the patronut's listening,
[36:53.380 --> 36:57.380]  don't latch onto that as if I'm saying that you're right, it's all contract law. It's
[36:57.380 --> 37:03.380]  not. That is not the point here. I am simply using it as an easier frame of reference and
[37:03.380 --> 37:10.380]  comparison. But the fact of the matter remains that if I'm not a party, I'm not a participant,
[37:10.380 --> 37:17.380]  then I am not obligated to comply with anything in that agreement. Or that any set of rules
[37:18.380 --> 37:25.380]  attached to that agreement. Period. And the same is true for the transportation code.
[37:25.380 --> 37:31.380]  I am not a party to it. I am not engaging in any activity regulated by it. I have sought
[37:32.380 --> 37:37.380]  no permission to engage in any occupation or profession to which it applies. Why will
[37:38.380 --> 37:45.380]  you not leave me alone? Simple answer, because if I leave you alone, I lose money. So my
[37:45.380 --> 37:54.380]  only purpose here is to coerce and compel your participation in a taxable activity so
[37:55.380 --> 38:01.380]  that I can keep the amount of money up that I can receive. And I have to convince everyone
[38:02.380 --> 38:09.380]  else that they are in exactly the same boat you are, no matter how much fraud I have to
[38:09.380 --> 38:15.380]  commit to make it happen. I'm not worried about the repercussions or penalties for committing
[38:16.380 --> 38:22.380]  the fraud because I control the system that would determine whether or not I was committing
[38:23.380 --> 38:29.380]  fraud. You see how this works? You see how simple it is and elegant in design and thought?
[38:30.380 --> 38:34.380]  We control it. It's the same argument you morons out there make when you want to say
[38:34.380 --> 38:39.380]  that the cops shouldn't be able to police themselves. Then why in the hell are you arguing
[38:40.380 --> 38:46.380]  for the courts to do the same? Because they're not doing it. They're not doing any better
[38:47.380 --> 38:53.380]  of a job than the cops do. And they are doing exactly what the cops do as well. We investigated
[38:54.380 --> 39:00.380]  ourselves and we found we did nothing wrong. And then you wonder why you can't get justice
[39:00.380 --> 39:06.380]  and why the courts cover up for the cops. Because it is the armed cops that keep the
[39:07.380 --> 39:15.380]  court's power intact and protected. It ain't rocket science. It does not require patronut
[39:16.380 --> 39:23.380]  analogies or ways of thinking to come to that conclusion. It just takes very direct, simple
[39:23.380 --> 39:29.380]  logic and examination into the facts of what is and what isn't going on. And it's the only
[39:30.380 --> 39:36.380]  answer that you can boil the construct down to in the long run. That is what it comes
[39:37.380 --> 39:46.380]  down to in its most basic, simple form. Human corruption, given power, and no accountability.
[39:46.380 --> 39:55.380]  Therein is the problem. Alright, I hope that was a good start to the week for you guys
[39:56.380 --> 40:02.380]  because it's something to think about. And I am currently trying to get this information
[40:03.380 --> 40:07.380]  integrated into what will also become the lawsuit I've been working on all this time
[40:08.380 --> 40:12.380]  and to the new seminar material. As you can tell, the research never ends. It is always
[40:12.380 --> 40:18.380]  ongoing and it's always changing because there's always new developments thanks to the criminal
[40:19.380 --> 40:25.380]  courts. If they don't like the way something was, even if it was correct, they want it
[40:26.380 --> 40:29.380]  somehow different, then they will create an opinion that changes it. No matter what else
[40:30.380 --> 40:34.380]  they have to do to hide it or cover it up, but they will try their best to make it legitimate
[40:34.380 --> 40:41.380]  by coming up with some idiotic, terrible explanation that nobody with any logical thinking
[40:42.380 --> 40:47.380]  skills would ever buy. And yet so many people do. Which just proves my whole point about
[40:48.380 --> 40:52.380]  the logical thinking skills. Alright, that's said. Right now we've only got one caller
[40:53.380 --> 40:59.380]  up on the board. That is Kaleeb in Maryland and the call-in number is 512-646-1984.
[40:59.380 --> 41:03.380]  Give us a call, get in line, and let's get some talking going here. I'm going to go back
[41:04.380 --> 41:08.380]  to this diatribe and continue on. In the meantime, however, Kaleeb, I've got three minutes
[41:09.380 --> 41:12.380]  I can give you, or two minutes, and then I've got to take a break. What you got?
[41:13.380 --> 41:17.380]  Hey, what's going on? I was calling just to give you an update. I went to court today for
[41:18.380 --> 41:23.380]  my traffic case. They said that they wanted to postpone it because the officer wasn't there
[41:23.380 --> 41:29.380]  and they said, I had several charges, they dropped it. I was really called into court
[41:30.380 --> 41:34.380]  for the uninsured vehicle, but they dropped it down to, they said they would just accept
[41:35.380 --> 41:40.380]  the driving without tags and I could just pay whatever the judge decided for me to pay
[41:41.380 --> 41:46.380]  for real. But I told them that I wanted to just postpone it and Dr. Cross examined the
[41:46.380 --> 41:52.380]  police officer. But I was reading a couple of different things that I wanted your opinion
[41:53.380 --> 41:56.380]  on because I feel like it might go along with the thing, especially what you just talked about.
[41:57.380 --> 42:00.380]  So I definitely wanted your opinion on that and I guess I just started after the break.
[42:01.380 --> 42:06.380]  But yeah, I went to court today and I know they don't got no case. Like I said, I really
[42:07.380 --> 42:09.380]  appreciate everything that you talk about, everything that you're doing because I'm really
[42:10.380 --> 42:13.380]  starting to, it's starting to be more conscious to me now, everything that you're saying.
[42:13.380 --> 42:18.380]  The only thing I didn't get a chance to check out was the Senate bill. I still need to do that.
[42:19.380 --> 42:22.380]  I'm trying to make my way out of Annapolis now to see if I can get to the library to
[42:23.380 --> 42:28.380]  check out how that bill was passed. I guess I get started since I don't hear the music yet.
[42:29.380 --> 42:34.380]  So I was reading this article and they were explaining how, when a police officer drafts
[42:35.380 --> 42:38.380]  the citation, that it's an unauthorized practice of law.
[42:38.380 --> 42:42.380]  What article is this?
[42:43.380 --> 42:48.380]  This was, well the article was based off of Rhode Island general statutes.
[42:49.380 --> 42:51.380]  Now I don't know the exact title off the top of my head.
[42:52.380 --> 42:57.380]  Was it a legal article written for a university or was this someone's website?
[42:58.380 --> 43:03.380]  I think it was the legal website for a university, if I'm not mistaken.
[43:03.380 --> 43:12.380]  So basically they were saying in Rhode Island how when a citation is drafted,
[43:13.380 --> 43:18.380]  it's considered practice law under the definition of practice law under the Rhode Island general statute.
[43:19.380 --> 43:23.380]  Yeah, it's considered the practice of law in every state if you read the definition of that.
[43:24.380 --> 43:29.380]  Exactly. And I was definitely looking it up in Maryland and I was seeing how it says in the practice law,
[43:29.380 --> 43:36.380]  the definition is, one of the definitions includes preparing any form that is filed with the court.
[43:37.380 --> 43:41.380]  Exactly. And I guess I'll pick that back then the music goes off.
[43:42.380 --> 43:45.380]  Hang on just a second, let me get that done then and we'll finish this on the other side, okay?
[43:46.380 --> 43:52.380]  Alright folks, this is Rule of Law Radio, the call in number 512646 1984.
[43:52.380 --> 43:59.380]  Give us a call, get in line, let's have a discussion. We will be right back after the break.
[44:00.380 --> 44:03.380]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[44:04.380 --> 44:06.380]  Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary.
[44:07.380 --> 44:14.380]  The affordable, easy to understand, 4CD course that will show you how in 24 hours, step by step.
[44:15.380 --> 44:18.380]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing.
[44:18.380 --> 44:21.380]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[44:22.380 --> 44:26.380]  Thousands have won with our step by step course and now you can too.
[44:27.380 --> 44:33.380]  Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case winning experience.
[44:34.380 --> 44:42.380]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand about the principles and practices that control our American courts.
[44:42.380 --> 44:51.380]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases, pro se tactics and much more.
[44:52.380 --> 45:00.380]  Please visit RuleOfLawRadio.com and click on the banner or call toll free 866-LAW-EASY.
[45:01.380 --> 45:09.380]  At Capital Coin and Bullion, our mission is to be your preferred shopping destination by delivering excellent customer service and outstanding value at an affordable price.
[45:09.380 --> 45:14.380]  We provide a wide assortment of favorite products featuring a great selection of high quality coins and precious metals.
[45:15.380 --> 45:19.380]  We cater to beginners in coin collecting as well as large transactions for investors.
[45:20.380 --> 45:24.380]  We believe in educating our customers with resources from top accredited metals dealers and journalists.
[45:25.380 --> 45:27.380]  If we don't have what you're looking for, we can find it.
[45:28.380 --> 45:32.380]  In addition, we carry popular Young Jevity products such as Beyond Tangy Tangerine and Pollenburst.
[45:32.380 --> 45:39.380]  We also offer One World Way, Mountain House Storable Foods, Berkey Water products, ammunition at 10% above wholesale and more.
[45:40.380 --> 45:43.380]  We broker metals IRA accounts and we also accept bitcoins as payment.
[45:44.380 --> 45:46.380]  Call us at 512-646-6440.
[45:47.380 --> 45:51.380]  We're located at 7304 Burnett Road, Suite A, about a half mile south of Anderson.
[45:52.380 --> 45:55.380]  We're open Monday through Friday 10 to 6, Saturdays 10 to 2.
[45:56.380 --> 46:00.380]  Visit us at CapitalCoinandBullion.com or call 512-646-6440.
[46:00.380 --> 46:08.380]  I must have dreamed a thousand dreams, been haunted by a million screams.
[46:09.380 --> 46:16.380]  I can hear them marching feet, they're moving into the street.
[46:17.380 --> 46:20.380]  Now did you read the news today?
[46:20.380 --> 46:29.380]  Alright folks, we are back. This is Rule of Law Radio. The call at 512-646-1984.
[46:30.380 --> 46:32.380]  And we are currently talking to Kaleeb in Maryland.
[46:33.380 --> 46:46.380]  Alright Kaleeb, now as to your statement dealing with the unauthorized practice of law and how this article is talking about that when an officer fills out a citation that he is engaged in the practice of law.
[46:46.380 --> 46:57.380]  And I told you that that is the equivalent meaning in every state and in every state an officer is in violation of unauthorized practice of law according to the unauthorized practice of law statute.
[46:58.380 --> 46:59.380]  Okay?
[47:00.380 --> 47:01.380]  Now, here's the problem.
[47:02.380 --> 47:07.380]  The problem is that every state also has some form of occupations code.
[47:08.380 --> 47:11.380]  Texas, for instance, has an entire code dedicated to occupations.
[47:11.380 --> 47:18.380]  In there, the occupation of peace officer and occupation of private investigator are listed.
[47:18.380 --> 47:41.380]  Within the rules and regulations of those occupations, they are specifically authorized within those terms to conduct such investigations to procure and acquire such evidence to generate such documentation and everything else that can be used to maintain or as evidence in a case in a court of law.
[47:42.380 --> 47:46.380]  Thus nullifying the unauthorized practice of law application.
[47:46.380 --> 47:49.380]  Oh, okay.
[47:50.380 --> 47:55.380]  Okay, well, I appreciate you clearing that up for me.
[47:56.380 --> 47:59.380]  I was wondering, I was wondering, I was going to try to add that to the...
[48:00.380 --> 48:08.380]  I understand. I started on that same road at some point way back when I was looking at all this and going, wait a minute, how is this not unauthorized practice of law?
[48:09.380 --> 48:13.380]  Well, if it is, then somewhere there's got to be an exception to it or they're screwed.
[48:13.380 --> 48:21.380]  So I went digging, went through the occupations code, found what I did in there, and it was like, well, okay, well, that's that argument. That was not going to fly.
[48:22.380 --> 48:34.380]  Okay. Well, and I was saying, I did see that in the statute it said, except like it was an exception at the beginning of the sentence, except otherwise authorized by law.
[48:35.380 --> 48:41.380]  Exactly. That's their saving language in every statute when it comes to penalizing themselves.
[48:41.380 --> 48:44.380]  Okay.
[48:45.380 --> 48:49.380]  And the second case, the second point I wanted to bring up and I wanted to know your opinion on.
[48:50.380 --> 48:57.380]  So I was reading the article about the jury duty, and I just wanted to make sure that I have the understanding correct.
[48:58.380 --> 49:07.380]  You were saying that you were saying in that article is that we're permanently domiciled in the republic of, well, I guess in my case, Maryland.
[49:07.380 --> 49:18.380]  Permanently domiciled in the republic of Maryland, but it's saying that in order to be, in order to qualify for jury duty, you have to be a resident or a citizen.
[49:19.380 --> 49:20.380]  You have to be a resident.
[49:21.380 --> 49:25.380]  You were saying it's unconstitutional because it allows, it doesn't allow any of us to.
[49:26.380 --> 49:29.380]  It doesn't allow anyone domiciled in the state to participate in jury duty.
[49:29.380 --> 49:37.380]  That's right. Because the specific requirements on the forms for jury duty say that you have to be a resident, not one who is domiciled.
[49:38.380 --> 49:48.380]  And as that article explains through Supreme court opinions over and over and over again, residency and domicile is not the same thing.
[49:49.380 --> 49:57.380]  Though they are often used interchangeably, legally speaking, it is incorrect to do so because they are not the same thing.
[49:57.380 --> 50:00.380]  So when the, and that was the vibe I was getting.
[50:01.380 --> 50:13.380]  Yeah. So when the government creates a limitation by saying that either only the domiciled can do it, which would be proper versus only the residents can do it, which is improper.
[50:14.380 --> 50:22.380]  It disenfranchises those that call that state their permanent home from participation.
[50:23.380 --> 50:24.380]  Okay.
[50:24.380 --> 50:36.380]  And that's not what I'm saying. That's what I, the conclusion I have to draw based upon what the Supreme court said the two terms mean in relation to law and to the people and to how it works.
[50:37.380 --> 50:39.380]  That's the only conclusion that can be reached.
[50:42.380 --> 50:49.380]  Yeah. And that's what I was thinking too. So I was reading that I was kind of able to understand, you know, where you were going, you know, as best as I can.
[50:49.380 --> 51:03.380]  Yeah. Well, it's, it's just like what they do with the voting laws. You can only vote in the place that you call your permanent domicile, because if you are allowed to vote in every place where you have a residence, then you can vote in the same election multiple times, potentially.
[51:04.380 --> 51:05.380]  Right.
[51:06.380 --> 51:13.380]  And that's just not how it's supposed to work. So the court has always drawn a distinction between the two.
[51:13.380 --> 51:24.380]  Okay. So that brings me to, that brings me to another point. I want your opinion. And I just want to know that I was just reading about it now. I was, all right, so let me ask a question before I get started.
[51:25.380 --> 51:37.380]  So would you say that there is, uh, uh, would you say that the Republic is a different jurisdiction of the state? Is that true? Or is that, is it not necessarily?
[51:37.380 --> 51:47.380]  For instance, this Texas is the only state that was an independent Republic before it became a state.
[51:49.380 --> 51:59.380]  All other locations were federal territories before they became a state. Texas was not, it was an independent sovereign nation before it ever became a state.
[51:59.380 --> 52:19.380]  So when you convert a federal territory into a state, the process and repercussions are vastly different than when you try to bring in a sovereign Republic as a state.
[52:19.380 --> 52:28.380]  If I'm not mistaken, that was during the time of the, uh, that was the 1800s. Am I not mistaken?
[52:29.380 --> 52:31.380]  1845 is when we became a state.
[52:32.380 --> 52:33.380]  You said 1845?
[52:34.380 --> 52:35.380]  Yeah.
[52:35.380 --> 52:51.380]  Okay. Yeah. I was thinking, I was reading something about that, how, um, how it started on, how it became a state later, because I was saying that, uh, I guess the federal territories was created during like the 17, like the late 1700. Is that correct?
[52:52.380 --> 52:53.380]  I want to wait, say that again.
[52:53.380 --> 53:05.380]  Uh, it was saying that the, um, the federal, the federal districts were created at the end of the 1700s. Cause I just been doing a lot of research. I want to make sure that all my research was accurate.
[53:06.380 --> 53:13.380]  It says, um, I guess what the creation of the constitution, it says that it created federal districts. If I'm not, I'm gonna try and make sure.
[53:13.380 --> 53:27.380]  Well, the constitution doesn't create districts per se, the constitution authorizes the government to do so, but it doesn't say how it doesn't say how it's done. It doesn't even use the word district that I'm aware of.
[53:30.380 --> 53:30.380]  Okay.
[53:30.380 --> 53:44.380]  But, and, but because of the way that it pluralized the meaning of courts within the document, they took that as a way to divide things up. That's how we wound up with federal district courts.
[53:47.380 --> 53:55.380]  That's why there's a sixth district, a fifth district, a fourth district, a third district, a district from hell, a district from another hell, that type of deal.
[53:55.380 --> 54:19.380]  I understand. Okay. So, um, so all the quote I was reading, um, that's what you're paying. Like I said, so basically I was reading how it kind of ties into your commerce thing. Cause now I'm seeing that since the argument of transportation is based off of commerce, I don't know how this will stand up in court, but I was reading that.
[54:19.380 --> 54:42.380]  It says that in the Bible, I don't know. I don't know. I don't want you to cut me out if I got wrong information, but I was reading that in the Bible. It says that based off the second Corinthians five 20 and Philippians three 20, that basically that defines that we're, that defines the definition of us being ambassadors and foreign ambassadors for real.
[54:42.380 --> 54:52.380]  And when I was researching it, I was trying to parallel what I was reading with the arguments that you were making with the transportation because it all ties into commerce. And I was saying that.
[54:53.380 --> 55:02.380]  Yeah, but how are you tying being an ambassador to commerce? You don't have to be and get, you don't have to be looking for treaties and commerce to be an ambassador to someone else.
[55:02.380 --> 55:12.380]  Say it one more time. I'm sorry. You don't have to be looking to facilitate treaties relative to commerce, to be an ambassador to somewhere else.
[55:13.380 --> 55:24.380]  Well, so how are you tying ambassador to commerce in this argument? Well, it's saying that ambassador basically by, by us being, by basically us being ambassadors.
[55:24.380 --> 55:34.380]  And up in the Bible is saying that we're not allowed to engage in commerce because when we engage in commerce, then we lose our sovereignty.
[55:35.380 --> 55:47.380]  So I was thinking about, okay, cool. If, if you register your car and you get a driver's license, then you're engaged in the commerce and you kind of losing your sovereignty in the same, right? Because you had you losing.
[55:47.380 --> 56:04.380]  Well, that's exactly how it's engineered. Yeah. And he, and the courts, that's exactly why the courts, the Supreme court has said the same thing about the federal government where the federal government ends, enters into any commercial agreement or act.
[56:04.380 --> 56:18.380]  Its sovereignty as a governmental entity is gone. It has no more nor no less rights than any other legal entity engaging in a commercial contract.
[56:18.380 --> 56:33.380]  That's exactly why that guy that just recently sued over the civil war reparations, where they were promised 40 acres and a mule, if they fought on the side of the Yankees and the Yankees never paid them.
[56:33.380 --> 56:48.380]  Well, this guy recently sued and the Supreme court said the federal government's got to pay up. It was a commercial agreement. They can't claim sovereignty and immunity. They've got to pay up because they don't have any in a commercial contract.
[56:48.380 --> 57:05.380]  Yeah. And I was reading it because, I mean, I was saying a parallel because it says that, um, in 28 USC 1604, that by us being, um, by us being an ambassador of a foreign state, that we're immune from prosecution.
[57:06.380 --> 57:09.380]  No, no, that's the wrong way to be reading that in this application.
[57:10.380 --> 57:12.380]  Okay. That's what I wanted to know. You know what?
[57:12.380 --> 57:17.380]  Yeah, I know exactly where that's going to try to go and where that's going to take you. You do not want to be, I promise you.
[57:18.380 --> 57:24.380]  Okay. Okay. You might explain a lot. Just so I mean, I definitely
[57:25.380 --> 57:29.380]  Because foreign state there does not mean the state of the union never has.
[57:29.380 --> 57:49.380]  Go look at the actual definition for what constitutes a foreign state under the law you're reading. I guarantee you there is one and it will not be the several states of the union. They will be nowhere near that definition.
[57:49.380 --> 57:59.380]  No. See, the thing is in a bar now and the reference that I was using as far as being a foreign state, I wouldn't say that.
[58:00.380 --> 58:06.380]  Wait. All right. So let me ask a question with the several states in the union and the republic be the same thing or they two total separate things.
[58:07.380 --> 58:10.380]  Every state of the union is required to be a republic.
[58:10.380 --> 58:22.380]  Okay. But that does not automatically mean that a republic falls within the definition of foreign state under federal law for whatever purpose they're writing that law.
[58:23.380 --> 58:26.380]  Hang on just a second and we'll finish this discussion on the other side.
[58:27.380 --> 58:35.380]  All right, folks. This is Rule of Law Radio 512646. 1984 is a call-in number. Give us a call. Get in line. Let's start a discussion.
[58:35.380 --> 58:39.380]  We'll be right back after this break. So y'all hang in there.
[59:06.380 --> 59:17.380]  Enter the recovery version. First, this new translation is extremely faithful and accurate, but the real story is the more than 9,000 explanatory footnotes.
[59:18.380 --> 59:27.380]  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.
[59:27.380 --> 59:49.380]  Bibles for America would like to give you a free recovery version simply for the asking. This comprehensive yet compact study Bible is yours just by calling us toll-free at 1-888-551-0102 or by ordering online at freestudybible.com. That's freestudybible.com.
[59:49.380 --> 59:59.380]  You are listening to the Logos Radio Network. LogosRadioNetwork.com.
[01:00:00.380 --> 01:00:04.380]  The following newsflash is brought to you by the Lone Star Lowdown.
[01:00:04.380 --> 01:00:22.380]  Markets for Monday, the 22nd of July 2019. Open with precious metals. Gold at $1,429 an ounce. Silver, $16.45 an ounce. Copper, $2.75 an ounce. Oil, Texas crude, $55.63 a barrel. Brent crude, $62.47 a barrel.
[01:00:22.380 --> 01:00:41.380]  And crypto is an order of market cap. Bitcoin Core, $10,566.52. Ethereum, $227.26. XRP, Ripple, $0.33. Litecoin, $100.31. And Bitcoin Cash is at $324.10 a crypto coin.
[01:00:41.380 --> 01:01:00.380]  Today in history, the year 1916. The Preparedness Day bombing. A timed suitcase bomb was detonated on Market Street in San Francisco during the World War I Preparedness Day parade, killing 10 and injuring 40. Today in history.
[01:01:00.380 --> 01:01:23.380]  And recent news. Since Governor Greg Abbott signed House Bill 1325, legalizing hemp in a Texas law back in June, county prosecutors around the state, including Houston, Austin and San Antonio, have been dropping marijuana possession charges and even refusing to file new ones since they are stipulating that they do not have the time or the laboratory equipment to test the herb for THC.
[01:01:23.380 --> 01:01:32.380]  Margaret Moore, the Travis County District Attorney, announced earlier this month that she was dismissing 32 felony possession and delivery of marijuana cases because of the law.
[01:01:33.380 --> 01:01:47.380]  Mr. Abbott and other state officials, including the Attorney General, stipulated in a letter to county district attorneys back on Thursday that marijuana has not been decriminalized in Texas and that these actions demonstrate a misunderstanding of how House Bill 1325 works.
[01:01:47.380 --> 01:02:00.380]  As well as other cities, too, like the District Attorney in El Paso, Jaime Esparza, a Democrat, who also stated earlier this month that the law, quote, will not have an effect on the prosecution of marijuana cases in El Paso.
[01:02:01.380 --> 01:02:12.380]  However, the issue was succinctly summarized by Mr. Brandon Ball, an assistant public defender in Harris County, who stated that, quote, the law is constantly changing on what makes something illegal based on its chemical makeup.
[01:02:12.380 --> 01:02:18.380]  It's important that if someone is charged with something, the test matches what they're charged with.
[01:02:22.380 --> 01:02:38.380]  A paper by Tulane University identified a five-and-a-half-inch American pocket shark as the first of its kind in the Gulf of Mexico, the specimen being only the second pocket shark ever captured or recorded, with the other one being found way back in 1979 in the East Pacific Ocean.
[01:02:38.380 --> 01:02:50.380]  According to the university paper, the shark secretes a luminous fluid from a gland near its front fins for the purpose it is hypothesized to lure and prey who may be drawn into the glow.
[01:02:50.380 --> 01:03:12.380]  This is Luke Rhodey with your Lowdown for July 22, 2019.
[01:03:12.380 --> 01:03:39.380]  All right, folks, we are back. This is Rule of Law Radio, caller number 512646 in 1984, and we are still talking with Kalib in Maryland. All right, Kalib, continue.
[01:03:42.380 --> 01:03:43.380]  Hello?
[01:03:43.380 --> 01:03:44.380]  Yes.
[01:03:44.380 --> 01:03:45.380]  Okay.
[01:03:45.380 --> 01:03:46.380]  Sorry.
[01:03:46.380 --> 01:03:56.380]  All right, so I wanted to pick up from the last conversation, and what I wanted to say was what I've been researching, I just want to know what you think.
[01:03:56.380 --> 01:04:11.380]  So I'm thinking that considering the Bible saying, in the Bible it says that basically we're, what's the best way to put it, our dwelling, it says our dwelling because it says we're not residents.
[01:04:11.380 --> 01:04:14.380]  It says that our dwelling is the kingdom of heaven for real.
[01:04:14.380 --> 01:04:28.380]  Now, the kingdom of heaven would be the foreign state, and it says that states of the union are considered nations under the law of nations, and it says that a nation can't interfere with a sovereign foreign country for real.
[01:04:28.380 --> 01:04:43.380]  Now, the reason why I was bringing that up, because it kind of mirrors or parallels what you're saying, because when you are not engaged in transportation, then the only laws that technically, that law wouldn't apply to you for real.
[01:04:43.380 --> 01:04:49.380]  Okay, well, let's address this real quick. I can make this very short and sweet, okay?
[01:04:49.380 --> 01:05:00.380]  What you're saying goes directly to the exact same argument I just used in relation to the federal government engaging in a commercial contract or agreement, and the loss of sovereignty associated with it.
[01:05:00.380 --> 01:05:13.380]  What is going on here is the automatic presumption that that is what you have done, thus putting you within the jurisdictional sphere of the states themselves and their laws relating to these subjects.
[01:05:13.380 --> 01:05:24.380]  They have done what the law itself forbids. They have created a presumption of guilt before a presumption of innocence, which they're not allowed to do, but they are doing.
[01:05:24.380 --> 01:05:33.380]  They are presuming that everyone is guilty of engaging in their commercial activities rather than acting in their own private ones.
[01:05:33.380 --> 01:05:44.380]  Thus, they are automatically guilty of having committed these breaches and offenses in association with that regulated privileged activity, and it isn't true.
[01:05:44.380 --> 01:05:59.380]  Now, from a legal standpoint and using legal terminology, your argument is sound if you couch it the way I've been telling you, which is I was never engaged in the subject matter activity to which the regulation applies.
[01:05:59.380 --> 01:06:25.380]  From a legal perspective, that's exactly the same argument you're trying to make from the religious perspective, but you're not going to get that religious perspective into the courts because then you're trying to make the argument, which they will never go with, that you are exempt from any and all jurisdiction of mankind, no matter where you are, no matter what you're doing, and that's not going to happen.
[01:06:25.380 --> 01:06:32.380]  Okay. Even if it was possible, could you use that as…
[01:06:32.380 --> 01:06:45.380]  Even the members of the tribes of Israel are not exempt from their own laws in relation to what they do and how they do it, even though their kingdom, too, is the kingdom of heaven.
[01:06:45.380 --> 01:06:47.380]  You get that?
[01:06:47.380 --> 01:06:48.380]  Yeah.
[01:06:48.380 --> 01:06:53.380]  It's no different for you and I. Why should it be?
[01:06:53.380 --> 01:06:56.380]  Okay. All right.
[01:06:56.380 --> 01:07:00.380]  So, another thing I wanted to bring up, and thank you for answering that question.
[01:07:00.380 --> 01:07:09.380]  So, another thing I wanted to bring up, I was also researching your article that speaks of include, and I want to make sure I have that correct.
[01:07:09.380 --> 01:07:36.380]  You're saying that your article about includes is stating that the list is joining two different groups of parties together as if they're one, and supposedly that's unconstitutional because it's competing everybody under one jurisdiction versus having all the legal entities under jurisdiction. Do I have that correct?
[01:07:36.380 --> 01:07:38.380]  Not exactly, no.
[01:07:38.380 --> 01:07:44.380]  The includes and including rule when it comes to statutory construction is very straightforward.
[01:07:44.380 --> 01:07:55.380]  The things listed after includes or including have to have some naturally inherent relationship in order to be included within that list.
[01:07:55.380 --> 01:08:06.380]  That relationship can be defined in any number of ways, but it has to be a demonstrable relationship between the objects, okay?
[01:08:06.380 --> 01:08:16.380]  For instance, that's why they say that the laws using includes and including are expansive rather than statutes of limitation.
[01:08:16.380 --> 01:08:26.380]  They're trying to create the impression that they can put anything into that grouping they want, even if it's not listed, but that's not true.
[01:08:26.380 --> 01:08:39.380]  The Supreme Court said that the expansion is limited to only those things that may not be listed but which can be shown to have a direct natural relationship with those that are.
[01:08:39.380 --> 01:08:56.380]  That's why a statute that specifically speaks to citrus fruits, but it doesn't specifically list oranges, grapefruits, kumquats, limes, lemons, or any other type of citrus fruit,
[01:08:56.380 --> 01:09:05.380]  but because it says citrus fruit, any citrus fruit can be held as being applicable to that statute.
[01:09:05.380 --> 01:09:14.380]  That's the expansive part. It went from just citrus fruit to all these specific kinds of fruit, okay?
[01:09:14.380 --> 01:09:21.380]  But what could not be in that list of citrus fruits? An apple, a banana, a watermelon?
[01:09:21.380 --> 01:09:23.380]  Not citrus fruits.
[01:09:23.380 --> 01:09:34.380]  Correct. There is nothing citrusy about those that would allow them to be dependent upon that relationship so as to be included.
[01:09:34.380 --> 01:09:35.380]  Okay.
[01:09:35.380 --> 01:09:46.380]  So, when they're using all these other includes and including, they are including things that have a commercial application and relationship.
[01:09:46.380 --> 01:09:58.380]  Thus, we do not fall within that category, nor does our property, because there is no commercial application or relationship that we are using it for.
[01:09:58.380 --> 01:10:10.380]  So, to put us in that definition creates an instance of trying to include something that is specifically exempt by omission because no such relationship exists.
[01:10:10.380 --> 01:10:15.380]  So, you're putting the non-citrus fruits with the citrus fruits and saying they're all the same?
[01:10:15.380 --> 01:10:16.380]  Exactly.
[01:10:16.380 --> 01:10:17.380]  Got you.
[01:10:17.380 --> 01:10:28.380]  And the reason why I was bringing it up, because I was researching bank loans, and I was seeing that from the Federal Reserve Bank.
[01:10:28.380 --> 01:10:30.380]  I think it was in Modern Money Mechanics.
[01:10:30.380 --> 01:10:40.380]  It was saying that a bank loan is created when a promissory note is exchanged for credit in a borrower's account.
[01:10:40.380 --> 01:10:43.380]  Now, I want to know your opinion on this.
[01:10:43.380 --> 01:10:59.380]  Now, I was bringing up the includes because to my knowledge, and you let me know whether I'm incorrect or correct, I'm thinking that our name is considered the legal entity, and I'm going to explain why.
[01:10:59.380 --> 01:11:01.380]  So, as…
[01:11:01.380 --> 01:11:03.380]  Let me interject.
[01:11:03.380 --> 01:11:07.380]  Are you speaking of the all-caps name?
[01:11:07.380 --> 01:11:08.380]  No.
[01:11:08.380 --> 01:11:09.380]  Okay.
[01:11:09.380 --> 01:11:10.380]  No.
[01:11:10.380 --> 01:11:14.380]  Then how are you concluding your name is the legal entity?
[01:11:14.380 --> 01:11:15.380]  I'm going to definitely explain it.
[01:11:15.380 --> 01:11:16.380]  Okay, cool.
[01:11:16.380 --> 01:11:21.380]  So, if I open a bank account, and I…
[01:11:21.380 --> 01:11:27.380]  Now, mind you, I open a bank account, and the bank account is registered to the name.
[01:11:27.380 --> 01:11:30.380]  So, I deposit, let's say $100.
[01:11:30.380 --> 01:11:32.380]  I deposit $100 in an ATM.
[01:11:32.380 --> 01:11:38.380]  Now, that was a private transaction from an actual person, me depositing $100.
[01:11:38.380 --> 01:11:45.380]  Now, that $100 is exchanged for $100 in credit that's registered to the name.
[01:11:45.380 --> 01:11:57.380]  Now, when I'm looking at the example of bank loan, it's saying that it's accepting a promissory note in exchange for credits for the borrower's account.
[01:11:57.380 --> 01:12:02.380]  So, from my knowledge, I was reading that banks are not allowed to…
[01:12:02.380 --> 01:12:08.380]  Banks can only extend credit because they're not allowed to allow their own credit.
[01:12:08.380 --> 01:12:19.380]  So, it seems like the promissory note is following the same procedure as if you deposit that $100 into the ATM because signing that promissory…
[01:12:19.380 --> 01:12:23.380]  There's something you're doing here that I'm failing to see how you're accomplishing.
[01:12:23.380 --> 01:12:27.380]  Even in your own mind, I don't know how you're accomplishing this.
[01:12:27.380 --> 01:12:33.380]  Did your name walk into the bank and sign the signature card?
[01:12:33.380 --> 01:12:34.380]  No.
[01:12:34.380 --> 01:12:43.380]  Did your name walk into the bank and fill out any other piece of paperwork entirely on its own in order to get that bank account?
[01:12:43.380 --> 01:12:44.380]  No, I didn't.
[01:12:44.380 --> 01:12:45.380]  No.
[01:12:45.380 --> 01:12:55.380]  And what did you use to represent yourself when you went into that bank to fill out those forms and to make that request for application?
[01:12:55.380 --> 01:12:57.380]  My ID.
[01:12:57.380 --> 01:12:59.380]  Which is?
[01:12:59.380 --> 01:13:00.380]  My name.
[01:13:00.380 --> 01:13:02.380]  Bingo.
[01:13:02.380 --> 01:13:13.380]  So, where are you now being able to draw the distinction between everything works this way for the person when I put stuff in, but it only works against the name when I take stuff out?
[01:13:13.380 --> 01:13:16.380]  Where are you getting that concept from?
[01:13:16.380 --> 01:13:28.380]  Okay, now the concept that I was getting was that it seems like the natural person could possibly be an agent because, like you said, my name can't walk in and do anything.
[01:13:28.380 --> 01:13:32.380]  So, the name would just be illegal and it would be on paper.
[01:13:32.380 --> 01:13:36.380]  So, you would need an agent, which would be me, who does all these things.
[01:13:36.380 --> 01:13:41.380]  How can you be an agent for yourself?
[01:13:41.380 --> 01:13:53.380]  Well, when I was listening to the includes example that you was using, it's saying that the citrus fruits would be the legal entities, if I'm not mistaken.
[01:13:53.380 --> 01:13:59.380]  And the non-citrus fruits would be the natural person because we're not engaged in that.
[01:13:59.380 --> 01:14:06.380]  The citrus fruits are the legal objects of which that law can be properly applied.
[01:14:06.380 --> 01:14:18.380]  The non-citrus fruits are the legal objects that are not subject to that law and to which it cannot be applied.
[01:14:18.380 --> 01:14:26.380]  Okay, so basically it's like, all right, so if I have a license or registration, then I'm engaged in transportation.
[01:14:26.380 --> 01:14:29.380]  No, no, no.
[01:14:29.380 --> 01:14:33.380]  It means you are permitted to do so should you choose.
[01:14:33.380 --> 01:14:43.380]  You have paid the necessary fees and gotten the necessary permission, but mere possession alone does not constitute use.
[01:14:43.380 --> 01:14:48.380]  I understand that. I'm sorry. I definitely understand what you're saying. I didn't mean to say that to infer that.
[01:14:48.380 --> 01:14:52.380]  I understand what you're saying. That's what I was trying to, that's what I meant.
[01:14:52.380 --> 01:14:55.380]  I was just saying that, trying to get my thoughts together.
[01:14:55.380 --> 01:15:03.380]  So the reason why I was bringing it up is because if you are.
[01:15:03.380 --> 01:15:07.380]  So basically I have to be engaged in some type of commercial activity in order for me to.
[01:15:07.380 --> 01:15:12.380]  Which the state is required under the burden of proof to prove they most vote.
[01:15:12.380 --> 01:15:22.380]  They must both allege commercial use and then prove commercial use in order to apply a commercial regulatory statute.
[01:15:22.380 --> 01:15:25.380]  That's the whole point of what I've been getting at.
[01:15:25.380 --> 01:15:29.380]  But they fail to do that. They never do that.
[01:15:29.380 --> 01:15:34.380]  And then they try to argue that commerce makes no difference.
[01:15:34.380 --> 01:15:49.380]  Yet there is no evidence in the record showing that it makes no difference when what is in the record directly relates to the subject matter of commerce directly as an object regulated by that subject matter.
[01:15:49.380 --> 01:16:01.380]  This goes back to what I was saying at the beginning about the courts perpetrating fraud by trying to shift the language illegally from where it must be in order to where they have it, where they want it to be.
[01:16:01.380 --> 01:16:07.380]  To hide the real issue of what they're doing.
[01:16:07.380 --> 01:16:12.380]  But I'm still trying to figure out how we got to bank loans from traffic court.
[01:16:12.380 --> 01:16:21.380]  No, I'm sorry. I was just you had so much knowledge, so I just bought another subject. I don't know if you can call this knowledge as you can call it frustration.
[01:16:21.380 --> 01:16:27.380]  I know it's that. Oh, I apologize. No, no, no, I don't mean you as far as asking the questions.
[01:16:27.380 --> 01:16:40.380]  I mean, just I took a lot of time of my life to learn the stuff that I've learned on these subjects and to learn to think rationally and reasonably about how they can or they can't be tied together.
[01:16:40.380 --> 01:16:45.380]  And you'd be surprised the amount of work and time that actually takes.
[01:16:45.380 --> 01:16:52.380]  So you're asking me is not at all the problem. I want people to understand it. The problem comes in how they're doing it.
[01:16:52.380 --> 01:16:59.380]  That's the problem. Hang on just a second. I'll finish this up on the other side.
[01:16:59.380 --> 01:17:14.380]  Are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters or even lawsuits? Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Miras proven method. Michael Miras has won six cases in federal court against debt collectors, and now you can win, too.
[01:17:14.380 --> 01:17:28.380]  You'll get step by step instructions in plain English on how to win in court using federal civil rights statutes, what to do when contacted by phone, mail or court summons, how to answer letters and phone calls, how to get debt collectors out of your credit report.
[01:17:28.380 --> 01:17:33.380]  How to turn the financial tables on them and make them pay you to go away.
[01:17:33.380 --> 01:17:40.380]  The Michael Miras proven method is the solution for how to stop debt collectors. Personal consultation is available as well.
[01:17:40.380 --> 01:17:49.380]  For more information, please visit RuleOfLawRadio.com and click on the blue Michael Miras banner or email MichaelMiras at Yahoo.com.
[01:17:49.380 --> 01:17:56.380]  That's RuleOfLawRadio.com or email M-I-C-H-A-E-L-M-I-R-R-A-S at Yahoo.com.
[01:17:56.380 --> 01:17:59.380]  To learn how to stop debt collectors now.
[01:17:59.380 --> 01:18:04.380]  I love logos. Without the shows on this network, I'd be almost as ignorant as my friends.
[01:18:04.380 --> 01:18:08.380]  I'm so addicted to the truth now that there's no going back. I need my truth fixed.
[01:18:08.380 --> 01:18:12.380]  I'd be lost without logos, and I really want to help keep this network on the air.
[01:18:12.380 --> 01:18:19.380]  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 spend it all on supplements.
[01:18:19.380 --> 01:18:21.380]  How can I help logos?
[01:18:21.380 --> 01:18:27.380]  Well, I'm glad you asked. Whenever you order anything from Amazon, you can help logos.
[01:18:27.380 --> 01:18:31.380]  You can order new supplies or holiday gifts. First thing you do is clear your cookies.
[01:18:31.380 --> 01:18:37.380]  Now, go to LogosRadioNetwork.com. Click on the Amazon logo and bookmark it.
[01:18:37.380 --> 01:18:43.380]  Now, when you order anything from Amazon, you use that link and Logos gets a few pesos.
[01:18:43.380 --> 01:18:44.380]  Do I pay extra?
[01:18:44.380 --> 01:18:45.380]  No.
[01:18:45.380 --> 01:18:47.380]  Do I have to do anything different when I order?
[01:18:47.380 --> 01:18:48.380]  No.
[01:18:48.380 --> 01:18:49.380]  Can I use my Amazon pride?
[01:18:49.380 --> 01:18:50.380]  No.
[01:18:50.380 --> 01:18:51.380]  Then, yes.
[01:18:51.380 --> 01:18:56.380]  Wow. Giving without doing anything or spending any money. This is perfect. Thank you so much.
[01:18:56.380 --> 01:18:58.380]  You're welcome.
[01:18:58.380 --> 01:19:22.380]  Happy Holidays, Logos!
[01:19:22.380 --> 01:19:46.380]  All right, folks. We are back. This is Rule of Law Radio, and we are going to wrap this up with Khalid.
[01:19:46.380 --> 01:19:56.380]  All right. Anyway, what I was meaning by my being frustrated with it is just simply that I do not consider myself to be the smartest guy in the room on any given subject.
[01:19:56.380 --> 01:20:04.380]  Yes, I know a lot. Yes, I can hold my own in a conversation, but I don't think I know everything better than everybody else about everything. I don't.
[01:20:04.380 --> 01:20:22.380]  I know a lot. Yes, but my problem is that because I know what I learned and because I don't consider myself to be that smart guy, I kind of give everybody the benefit of the doubt that they're perfectly capable of knowing everything I already know and probably knew it before I did.
[01:20:22.380 --> 01:20:31.380]  So the frustrating part to me comes down to when you try to explain something to someone logically and they don't get it.
[01:20:31.380 --> 01:20:41.380]  And the reason I said it's a big frustration to me is because that's exactly the problem when you run into the patronets who, by the way, haven't attempted to utilize a lot of the same arguments you're discussing tonight.
[01:20:41.380 --> 01:20:51.380]  But believe me when I tell you, it's not going to get you anywhere. And so that's why I'm trying to show you why logically that argument will fail.
[01:20:51.380 --> 01:21:04.380]  Whereas when you try to show it to these people, all you get is more argument about what you don't know, and yet they haven't listened to a single thing you've told them about what you do know, and they can't see it for what it is.
[01:21:04.380 --> 01:21:08.380]  And that's what I find frustrating. Not you personally for asking the questions. Okay.
[01:21:08.380 --> 01:21:18.380]  Okay. Yeah, because I appreciate you have an open mind. I definitely don't want to get caught in a patronet. So I appreciate I just seen so many parallels and that's why there are parallels.
[01:21:18.380 --> 01:21:24.380]  But that's where that's where reality goes to fiction and opinion over fact.
[01:21:24.380 --> 01:21:31.380]  They take those parallels and they start conjuring up all these theories about why it would be that way.
[01:21:31.380 --> 01:21:37.380]  But what they fail to do is find anything in the law to support the conclusions they're making.
[01:21:37.380 --> 01:21:42.380]  They make one level of inference, then they make another level of inference from that.
[01:21:42.380 --> 01:21:50.380]  And then they build upon those inferences, not a foundation of fact. That's where they go south on so many of the things they try to do.
[01:21:50.380 --> 01:21:56.380]  That's why they wind up wrong. That's why they wind up losing.
[01:21:56.380 --> 01:22:12.380]  Okay. So the way the courts do it and the way it's supposed to be done is you cannot make more than one level of inference from any given fact, and that inference must be based upon the relevance and sensible application and understanding of that fact.
[01:22:12.380 --> 01:22:23.380]  In other words, the inference is that if you let go of a shot put while hanging it over the edge of the Empire State Building, the inference is it will travel downward, right?
[01:22:23.380 --> 01:22:38.380]  Yes. But you cannot from that one single inference infer that it will definitely strike a particular individual or it will definitely exert this many pounds of force and blah, blah, blah, unless you've done all the calculations beforehand to do that.
[01:22:38.380 --> 01:22:48.380]  You can't say that Augusta Wind will carry it 15 feet sideways or anything else. Those are inferences you're making from the simple fact that you dropped it.
[01:22:48.380 --> 01:22:55.380]  They may or may not happen, and you're not basing them on anything except conjecture, and that's the problem.
[01:22:55.380 --> 01:22:58.380]  Okay.
[01:22:58.380 --> 01:22:59.380]  Okay.
[01:22:59.380 --> 01:23:13.380]  Well, I understand. I understand what you're saying for real. I guess I figured I'd bring it up to you because I figured you would be able to, you know, give me an explanation out of it for real. So, well, hopefully it was one that you can take.
[01:23:13.380 --> 01:23:18.380]  Hopefully it was an explanation that you could take it from what it is.
[01:23:18.380 --> 01:23:31.380]  Yeah, I definitely did for real. I just wanted to bring it up to you because I see so many parallels. I was listening to what you were saying earlier, and it kind of like, like I said, I understand, you know, is this is not a direct, you know, effort, effort, effort.
[01:23:31.380 --> 01:23:43.380]  So I understand what you're saying on that point, but it just, it was just merely what you're saying because you were saying that, you know, people try to, you want to get people to understand everything that you're saying.
[01:23:43.380 --> 01:23:51.380]  And it seems like it's difficult because, you know, people don't have the logical capacity to really put certain things together for real.
[01:23:51.380 --> 01:23:58.380]  So I was saying that even from what I was reading, you know, I was hearing the same arguments that you were making.
[01:23:58.380 --> 01:24:06.380]  So that's why I even brought it up to begin with. But yeah, I appreciate you clearing it up, you know, from the, from the legal perspective. Yes, sir.
[01:24:06.380 --> 01:24:15.380]  I do what I can. I appreciate you. Well, I ain't gonna hold you up. I'm gonna keep you updated when I go back to court. I go to court next month.
[01:24:15.380 --> 01:24:24.380]  All right. Well, good luck in your studies and get busy with it. I appreciate you. You enjoy evening. You too. Thanks for calling.
[01:24:24.380 --> 01:24:33.380]  All right. Now we have Marion Stacy. Is it Marion or is it Stacy?
[01:24:33.380 --> 01:24:40.380]  Stacy. Hi, Eddie. Good evening. Hi. Where are you calling us from? I'm calling from Houston.
[01:24:40.380 --> 01:24:48.380]  Okay. So what do you got? Well, my sister has emailed you a couple of times over the past two days.
[01:24:48.380 --> 01:24:54.380]  I was. Yeah, she's well, I'm not email. Sorry. Message Facebook. I don't have it.
[01:24:54.380 --> 01:25:02.380]  Oh, okay. So she's messaged me trying to get some advice. I went to court this morning in Galveston.
[01:25:02.380 --> 01:25:11.380]  I was arrested back in March on a traffic stop and the traffic stop.
[01:25:11.380 --> 01:25:17.380]  He had run my plates through the database and came back and said I had no insurance.
[01:25:17.380 --> 01:25:24.380]  I didn't handle the script very well. It was my first time, but I didn't invoke my right.
[01:25:24.380 --> 01:25:37.380]  But they ended up four police officers broke the window out of my car, drug me out of my car, threw me on top of their SUV.
[01:25:37.380 --> 01:25:42.380]  Put me in jail for 17 hours in Santa Fe before I spoke with a magistrate.
[01:25:42.380 --> 01:25:48.380]  The magistrate, when I saw him, had two probable causes in front of him.
[01:25:48.380 --> 01:25:57.380]  One was for resisting arrest and one was for interfering with a police officer's investigation.
[01:25:57.380 --> 01:26:01.380]  Then I got a court date for today.
[01:26:01.380 --> 01:26:09.380]  Well, when I saw the magistrate, he said, I'm not going to sign the interfering with the officer's ability to fulfill his duties.
[01:26:09.380 --> 01:26:12.380]  But when you get to Galveston, I don't know what will happen.
[01:26:12.380 --> 01:26:15.380]  There's a possibility that the judge there will sign up.
[01:26:15.380 --> 01:26:20.380]  So I was transported to Galveston, took six hours.
[01:26:20.380 --> 01:26:28.380]  And then at about 7 o'clock in the morning, I was taken in for pretrial with about 40 or 50 other people.
[01:26:28.380 --> 01:26:32.380]  The judge spoke to everybody in the room except for me.
[01:26:32.380 --> 01:26:40.380]  When she came into the, I don't know if you call it a courtroom, but when she came in,
[01:26:40.380 --> 01:26:46.380]  she qualified that she was a stand-in judge, that she did not know what she was doing,
[01:26:46.380 --> 01:26:50.380]  and that the court, she was going to be relying on the court clerk.
[01:26:50.380 --> 01:26:57.380]  So in my being processed into Galveston, I was pulled into another room
[01:26:57.380 --> 01:27:07.380]  and spoke with a fellow that said he was from the court to do financial in case I wanted a public defender.
[01:27:07.380 --> 01:27:13.380]  And I've never been arrested. I don't have any accidents. I don't have any tickets.
[01:27:13.380 --> 01:27:19.380]  And so I didn't know what to do except for just basically giving the, just answer his questions.
[01:27:19.380 --> 01:27:22.380]  What kind of questions did he ask you?
[01:27:22.380 --> 01:27:30.380]  He just asked me questions like, where did I live? How much income did I have?
[01:27:30.380 --> 01:27:33.380]  Was I going to be able to afford my own attorney?
[01:27:33.380 --> 01:27:36.380]  And I kept saying, you know, I'm not understanding what's happening to me here.
[01:27:36.380 --> 01:27:38.380]  I don't understand this process.
[01:27:38.380 --> 01:27:42.380]  And he goes, it's nothing.
[01:27:42.380 --> 01:27:49.380]  He goes, I'm just gathering information to find out whether or not you qualify for a public defender.
[01:27:49.380 --> 01:27:54.380]  So then hours later, we went into pretrial.
[01:27:54.380 --> 01:28:01.380]  I was the court clerk after the judge said her spiel.
[01:28:01.380 --> 01:28:09.380]  The court clerk called me up and I tried to explain to her because at one point in time after I spoke to the magistrate,
[01:28:09.380 --> 01:28:13.380]  I finally got a phone call and I talked to my daughter.
[01:28:13.380 --> 01:28:18.380]  And well, when I was arrested, I was in Santa Fe.
[01:28:18.380 --> 01:28:19.380]  I live in Houston.
[01:28:19.380 --> 01:28:23.380]  I was in Santa Fe dropping off my grandson with my daughter-in-law.
[01:28:23.380 --> 01:28:27.380]  So when I got pulled over, I immediately called my daughter-in-law and she came to the scene.
[01:28:27.380 --> 01:28:31.380]  I was just right down the street from her house.
[01:28:31.380 --> 01:28:33.380]  I had seen the police officer go past me.
[01:28:33.380 --> 01:28:35.380]  The speed limit was 50 miles per hour.
[01:28:35.380 --> 01:28:37.380]  I set my cruise control on 47.
[01:28:37.380 --> 01:28:42.380]  He did a U-turn, followed me, ran my plate and then pulled me over.
[01:28:42.380 --> 01:28:44.380]  So when he pulled me over, I called my daughter-in-law.
[01:28:44.380 --> 01:28:48.380]  So she came to the scene and witnessed everything.
[01:28:48.380 --> 01:28:59.380]  But moving back forward to Galveston, when I was called into pretrial, after everybody was gone out of the room,
[01:28:59.380 --> 01:29:03.380]  there were two of us left and the judge looked at the clerk and she said,
[01:29:03.380 --> 01:29:06.380]  how come I haven't spoken to either one of them?
[01:29:06.380 --> 01:29:10.380]  And the clerk looked at me and she said, oh, she's nothing but a financial.
[01:29:10.380 --> 01:29:19.380]  So I never even got to speak with a judge and Galveston was taken back to his cell and was finally bonded out at 4.30 in the afternoon.
[01:29:19.380 --> 01:29:29.380]  So today when I went to court, I was given the option of resetting or being there with my attorney or resetting to hire an attorney,
[01:29:29.380 --> 01:29:35.380]  asking for a public defender or asking to speak with the prosecutor myself.
[01:29:35.380 --> 01:29:40.380]  So I decided that I wanted to speak with the prosecutor myself.
[01:29:40.380 --> 01:29:45.380]  Oh, hang on just a second. Let me take this break and we will be right back.
[01:29:45.380 --> 01:29:49.380]  Hang on just a second. All right, folks, this is Rule of Law Radio.
[01:29:49.380 --> 01:30:02.380]  We got a half an hour to go. So y'all hang in there and we will be right back.
[01:30:02.380 --> 01:30:06.380]  Attention foreign language students, hit the books and get out those dictionaries.
[01:30:06.380 --> 01:30:10.380]  There's major good news about learning a second language.
[01:30:10.380 --> 01:30:15.380]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht back to tell you about a new study on bilingualism after this.
[01:30:15.380 --> 01:30:21.380]  Privacy is under attack. When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[01:30:21.380 --> 01:30:26.380]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish, too.
[01:30:26.380 --> 01:30:31.380]  So protect your rights, say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself.
[01:30:31.380 --> 01:30:34.380]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[01:30:34.380 --> 01:30:41.380]  This message is brought to you by StartPage.com, the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo and Bing.
[01:30:41.380 --> 01:30:44.380]  Start over with StartPage.
[01:30:44.380 --> 01:30:51.380]  Learning a foreign language brings many benefits, but a new study has found a major long-term health benefit to bilingualism.
[01:30:51.380 --> 01:30:54.380]  It may delay the onset of Alzheimer's.
[01:30:54.380 --> 01:30:58.380]  Canadian researchers reviewed hospital records of patients with dementia.
[01:30:58.380 --> 01:31:04.380]  They discovered that bilingual people were diagnosed three to four years later than those who only spoke one language,
[01:31:04.380 --> 01:31:07.380]  even though they had less education and job status.
[01:31:07.380 --> 01:31:12.380]  Though brains of bilingual people still develop Alzheimer's, the scientists said,
[01:31:12.380 --> 01:31:17.380]  speaking another language better prepares their brains to compensate for the onset of the disease,
[01:31:17.380 --> 01:31:20.380]  due to the enhanced brain networks they've developed.
[01:31:20.380 --> 01:31:24.380]  Huh, maybe it's time to brush up on that French, n'est-ce pas?
[01:31:24.380 --> 01:31:29.380]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht for StartPage.com, the world's most private search engine.
[01:31:54.380 --> 01:31:58.380]  My son. My uncle. My nephew. My son. Go to buildingwhat.org.
[01:31:58.380 --> 01:32:01.380]  Why it fell, why it matters, and what you can do.
[01:32:01.380 --> 01:32:05.380]  Rule of Law Radio is proud to offer the Rule of Law Traffic Seminar.
[01:32:05.380 --> 01:32:10.380]  In today's America, we live in an us-against-them society, and if we the people are ever going to have a free society,
[01:32:10.380 --> 01:32:13.380]  then we're going to have to stand and defend our own rights.
[01:32:13.380 --> 01:32:17.380]  Among those rights are the right to travel freely from place to place, the right to act in our own private capacity,
[01:32:17.380 --> 01:32:20.380]  and most importantly, the right to due process of law.
[01:32:20.380 --> 01:32:26.380]  Traffic courts afford us the least expensive opportunity to learn how to enforce and preserve our rights through due process.
[01:32:26.380 --> 01:32:29.380]  Former Sheriff's Deputy Eddie Craig, in conjunction with Rule of Law Radio,
[01:32:29.380 --> 01:32:34.380]  has put together the most comprehensive teaching tool available that will help you understand what due process is
[01:32:34.380 --> 01:32:36.380]  and how to hold the courts to the rule of law.
[01:32:36.380 --> 01:32:41.380]  You can get your own copy of this invaluable material by going to ruleoflawradio.com and ordering your copy today.
[01:32:41.380 --> 01:32:46.380]  By ordering now, you'll receive a copy of Eddie's book, The Texas Transportation Code, The Law Versus the Lie,
[01:32:46.380 --> 01:32:51.380]  and audio of the original 2009 seminar, hundreds of research documents and other useful resource material.
[01:32:51.380 --> 01:32:55.380]  Learn how to fight for your rights with the help of this material from ruleoflawradio.com.
[01:32:55.380 --> 01:32:59.380]  Order your copy today and together we can have the free society we all want and deserve.
[01:32:59.380 --> 01:33:12.380]  You're listening to the Logos Radio Network at LogosRadioNetwork.com
[01:33:29.380 --> 01:33:48.380]  Music
[01:33:48.380 --> 01:33:52.380]  Alright folks, we are back. This is Rule of Law Radio.
[01:33:52.380 --> 01:33:54.380]  We are now in the last half hour of the show.
[01:33:54.380 --> 01:34:01.380]  512646 1984 is the call-in number. We are currently talking to Stacey in Houston.
[01:34:01.380 --> 01:34:03.380]  Alright Stacey, let's continue this here.
[01:34:03.380 --> 01:34:09.380]  Now you went and talked to the prosecutor. FYI, don't ever do that.
[01:34:09.380 --> 01:34:16.380]  Well, I don't know that it turned out so terrible for me.
[01:34:16.380 --> 01:34:21.380]  Well, wait a minute. Did you say anything? Did you admit to anything? Did you answer any questions?
[01:34:21.380 --> 01:34:33.380]  No, no, no. The only thing that happened is when I sat down to speak to her, she made me sign, she said right away,
[01:34:33.380 --> 01:34:38.380]  anything you say to me, I'm not your attorney, anything that you say to me, I will use against you.
[01:34:38.380 --> 01:34:44.380]  And I said, okay, I understand that. And so then she said, do you understand the charges?
[01:34:44.380 --> 01:34:50.380]  And I said, well, actually, no, I do not. I still don't even know what I was arrested for.
[01:34:50.380 --> 01:34:56.380]  And so she gave me the police officer statement. I read it. It wasn't truthful.
[01:34:56.380 --> 01:35:02.380]  And so I just told her, I said, this isn't the truth. And she said, okay, well,
[01:35:02.380 --> 01:35:08.380]  I haven't had the opportunity to look at the videos yet, so I'm going to have to reset your case.
[01:35:08.380 --> 01:35:18.380]  So she reset my case for September 9th and banished me to the jury box to wait for my reset.
[01:35:18.380 --> 01:35:24.380]  And then when the clerk brought me my little reset form, I said, you know,
[01:35:24.380 --> 01:35:30.380]  can I do I have the opportunity to speak to her again or, you know, I don't understand this process.
[01:35:30.380 --> 01:35:37.380]  I said, but do I am I entitled to a copy of my case? And she kind of was hesitant.
[01:35:37.380 --> 01:35:45.380]  And then she gave me this paper saying discovery. And she said, go downstairs to the prosecutor's office and show them this form.
[01:35:45.380 --> 01:35:55.380]  So the prosecutor's office gave me a copy of my file and told me that I could have a copy of the videos that weren't ready yet.
[01:35:55.380 --> 01:36:02.380]  And if I just brought in three blank CDs or DVDs to them when I pick them up, then that's fine.
[01:36:02.380 --> 01:36:10.380]  But I have my case and it was looking through my case. And I see here that even though the charges,
[01:36:10.380 --> 01:36:18.380]  the paperwork, I never received any paperwork because they they lost my driver's license when they went through my car.
[01:36:18.380 --> 01:36:25.380]  They lost a gun in my wallet and took my driver's license because I never gave them I just invoked my rights.
[01:36:25.380 --> 01:36:31.380]  I never gave them anything. And they lost my driver's license and transport.
[01:36:31.380 --> 01:36:44.380]  And then I later when I was released, went back to the sheriff's, the lieutenant at the police department in Santa Fe and explained to him that Galveston never received my driver's license.
[01:36:44.380 --> 01:36:51.380]  So apparently it was lost in transport. And that's a whole nother day. They were very flippant about the whole thing.
[01:36:51.380 --> 01:36:59.380]  And so they had the wrong address. So the only way I knew was because I was bonded out and I have to call them every month.
[01:36:59.380 --> 01:37:10.380]  They told me I had court on the 29th. So I pulled up the information on the Galveston County website and printed my charges and stuff.
[01:37:10.380 --> 01:37:18.380]  So the charges were resisting arrest and interfering with a police officer's ability to fulfill his duties.
[01:37:18.380 --> 01:37:22.380]  How did they claim that you interfered?
[01:37:22.380 --> 01:37:31.380]  Well, that's the next. But that was my problem was was I don't understand how how can I resist arrest if I don't even know what I'm being arrested for?
[01:37:31.380 --> 01:37:34.380]  So I was reading through my case when I got home today.
[01:37:34.380 --> 01:37:42.380]  That's not exactly what I asked you. What I asked you was, is how did they claim you interfered with them?
[01:37:42.380 --> 01:37:50.380]  Outside of anything relating to the resisting arrest, how are they claiming that you interfered with their investigation?
[01:37:50.380 --> 01:37:53.380]  By refusing to give them any my driver's license.
[01:37:53.380 --> 01:38:00.380]  So here's the problem with that argument on their side. You are not required to provide them with information against yourself.
[01:38:00.380 --> 01:38:09.380]  It's a fundamental right of due process. You cannot interfere with an investigation of yourself when the investigation is criminal.
[01:38:09.380 --> 01:38:18.380]  The only way you could interfere is by physical means resisting their ability to do what they are allowed to do.
[01:38:18.380 --> 01:38:28.380]  And so that's why the judge dropped the interfering. They knew dang good and well that was never going to fly.
[01:38:28.380 --> 01:38:36.380]  But the question is, is how could you resist arrest if you were never told beforehand you were being placed under arrest?
[01:38:36.380 --> 01:38:49.380]  Exactly. That's where the video is going to come in handy. The video is going to tell us whether or not they just tried to arrest you without any information as to why or when.
[01:38:49.380 --> 01:38:54.380]  Right. Do you plan on using an attorney for this?
[01:38:54.380 --> 01:39:14.380]  Well, I don't know because what I just discovered in reading my case was that the assistant criminal district attorney, there's a form in here that says declined to prosecute the charge because of an insufficient stop.
[01:39:14.380 --> 01:39:21.380]  Right. Which is all evidence to get the case dismissed. There was no probable cause to make the stop.
[01:39:21.380 --> 01:39:24.380]  Why did they say they pulled you over?
[01:39:24.380 --> 01:39:31.380]  Because he ran my license plate and said that I didn't have insurance. Financial responsibility.
[01:39:31.380 --> 01:39:33.380]  Did you?
[01:39:33.380 --> 01:39:34.380]  No.
[01:39:34.380 --> 01:39:36.380]  Okay. Well, there's still a problem.
[01:39:36.380 --> 01:39:37.380]  Uh huh.
[01:39:37.380 --> 01:39:43.380]  Okay. The fact that they accessed that information without probable cause.
[01:39:43.380 --> 01:39:52.380]  Right. I printed that information out also and also printed out some case law and had that with me today. But again, I already, you know, I know the rule.
[01:39:52.380 --> 01:40:00.380]  Well, see, the problem is, is that computer-based information under Texas court opinion is hearsay. It is absolutely inadmissible.
[01:40:00.380 --> 01:40:12.380]  If it is inadmissible hearsay, then the officer cannot base his probable cause upon something he got from the computer when he had no probable cause to get it from the computer in the first place.
[01:40:12.380 --> 01:40:14.380]  Correct.
[01:40:14.380 --> 01:40:18.380]  Okay. So there's problem number one.
[01:40:18.380 --> 01:40:22.380]  And they know this. They just try to hope that you don't.
[01:40:22.380 --> 01:40:33.380]  But again, that still doesn't really answer my question on whether or not you plan on using an attorney. Do you feel like you can go in and present this case in a way that they've got to listen to you?
[01:40:33.380 --> 01:40:34.380]  I do.
[01:40:34.380 --> 01:40:45.380]  You do. Okay. Then tell me how you're going to get this done. How are you going to get them to dismiss the case when you go in there?
[01:40:45.380 --> 01:40:53.380]  Well, I believe that my first, okay, I would, I would like to see the video myself and I have my own video.
[01:40:53.380 --> 01:41:02.380]  When they broke my window out, the officer unlocked my doors, took my phone and threw it to the other side of my car.
[01:41:02.380 --> 01:41:05.380]  He interfere with your, with your recording?
[01:41:05.380 --> 01:41:07.380]  Yes. He took my phone away from me.
[01:41:07.380 --> 01:41:11.380]  Okay. That's a violation of Supreme Court ruling.
[01:41:11.380 --> 01:41:20.380]  And then when I turned to see where he threw my phone to, there was a police officer coming in the other side on the passenger side.
[01:41:20.380 --> 01:41:28.380]  And when my head was turned and the police officer reached in, he slid his hand across my hips and unbuckled my seatbelt.
[01:41:28.380 --> 01:41:35.380]  And then that's when he drove me out of the car and then my feet never even touched the ground after that.
[01:41:35.380 --> 01:41:36.380]  The two of them.
[01:41:36.380 --> 01:41:38.380]  All right. Well, interesting story.
[01:41:38.380 --> 01:41:43.380]  What does it have to do with your presentation in court about why the case has to be dismissed?
[01:41:43.380 --> 01:41:49.380]  The case should be dismissed on the grounds that he, that, that my due process was violated.
[01:41:49.380 --> 01:41:53.380]  Which you're going to provide what evidence to prove?
[01:41:53.380 --> 01:41:58.380]  What due process was violated at the time of the stop?
[01:41:58.380 --> 01:42:01.380]  When does due process begin?
[01:42:01.380 --> 01:42:07.380]  What are your rights at the time the stop was initiated versus what it was concluded versus when you went to jail?
[01:42:07.380 --> 01:42:12.380]  Which rights are you going to argue was violated? Which ones are you going to argue were due process?
[01:42:12.380 --> 01:42:17.380]  Well, I guess I'm going to have to study and work on that, Eddie, because that's right.
[01:42:17.380 --> 01:42:23.380]  This is, this is hopefully proving my point about how prepared you aren't.
[01:42:23.380 --> 01:42:28.380]  This is not something you're going to just walk in, throw a few words at and have it go away.
[01:42:28.380 --> 01:42:36.380]  It's not going to work that way. Not unless they realize from their video they are totally screwed on any kind of case.
[01:42:36.380 --> 01:42:40.380]  In which case their smart move would be to get rid of it before you ever got there.
[01:42:40.380 --> 01:42:49.380]  But don't bank on that because they live to put innocent people under bond or in jail so that they can make them pay to get out.
[01:42:49.380 --> 01:42:53.380]  That is always what they're after, to get you under their thumb.
[01:42:53.380 --> 01:43:01.380]  So even if you're right, this is not going to just go away unless they really, really screwed the pooch and the video proves it.
[01:43:01.380 --> 01:43:09.380]  But they're still going to test you to see whether or not you know it before they decide to just drop it.
[01:43:09.380 --> 01:43:10.380]  Guaranteed.
[01:43:10.380 --> 01:43:17.380]  Well then, would my, and I understand that I would have to do the research and find the case law, etc.
[01:43:17.380 --> 01:43:21.380]  But wouldn't my next move to be to file?
[01:43:21.380 --> 01:43:25.380]  You're going to file motions to dismiss. You're going to file motions to quash.
[01:43:25.380 --> 01:43:31.380]  You've got to file a written motion for discovery regardless of the form they gave you.
[01:43:31.380 --> 01:43:37.380]  File the written motion for discovery anyway because you're going to want more than just what they're willing to give you.
[01:43:37.380 --> 01:43:42.380]  Guaranteed they're not going to give you everything they've got.
[01:43:42.380 --> 01:43:44.380]  So you're still going to file a motion for discovery.
[01:43:44.380 --> 01:43:45.380]  It's called a Brady motion.
[01:43:45.380 --> 01:43:46.380]  OK.
[01:43:46.380 --> 01:43:48.380]  And you're going to need to file one.
[01:43:48.380 --> 01:43:49.380]  Hang on just a second.
[01:43:49.380 --> 01:43:52.380]  Let us get this break over and we'll go into the last segment and get this finished.
[01:43:52.380 --> 01:43:53.380]  OK.
[01:43:53.380 --> 01:43:54.380]  Thank you.
[01:43:54.380 --> 01:43:55.380]  Yes, ma'am.
[01:43:55.380 --> 01:43:56.380]  We'll be right back.
[01:43:56.380 --> 01:43:57.380]  All right, folks, y'all hang on.
[01:43:57.380 --> 01:44:00.380]  We shall return.
[01:44:00.380 --> 01:44:06.380]  Through advances in technology, our lives have greatly improved except in the area of nutrition.
[01:44:06.380 --> 01:44:09.380]  People feed their pets better than they feed themselves.
[01:44:09.380 --> 01:44:11.380]  And it's time we changed all that.
[01:44:11.380 --> 01:44:17.380]  Our primary defense against aging and disease in this toxic environment is good nutrition.
[01:44:17.380 --> 01:44:22.380]  In a world where natural foods have been irradiated, adulterated and mutilated,
[01:44:22.380 --> 01:44:25.380]  Younggevity can provide the nutrients you need.
[01:44:25.380 --> 01:44:31.380]  Logos Radio Network gets many requests to endorse all sorts of products, most of which we reject.
[01:44:31.380 --> 01:44:34.380]  We have come to trust Younggevity so much.
[01:44:34.380 --> 01:44:39.380]  We became a marketing distributor along with Alex Jones, Ben Fuchs and many others.
[01:44:39.380 --> 01:44:47.380]  When you order from Logos Radio Network dot com, your health will improve as you help support quality radio.
[01:44:47.380 --> 01:44:52.380]  As you realize the benefits of Younggevity, you may want to join us as a distributor.
[01:44:52.380 --> 01:44:58.380]  You can experience improved health, help your friends and family and increase your income.
[01:44:58.380 --> 01:45:00.380]  Order now.
[01:45:00.380 --> 01:45:03.380]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[01:45:03.380 --> 01:45:14.380]  Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary, the affordable, easy to understand 4CD course that will show you how in 24 hours, step by step.
[01:45:14.380 --> 01:45:18.380]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing.
[01:45:18.380 --> 01:45:22.380]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[01:45:22.380 --> 01:45:27.380]  Thousands have won with our step by step course and now you can too.
[01:45:27.380 --> 01:45:34.380]  Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case winning experience.
[01:45:34.380 --> 01:45:43.380]  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.
[01:45:43.380 --> 01:45:52.380]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases, pro se tactics and much more.
[01:45:52.380 --> 01:46:01.380]  Please visit RuleOfLawRadio.com and click on the banner or call toll free 866-LAW-EASY.
[01:46:23.380 --> 01:46:32.380]  Alright folks, we are back. This is Rule Of Law Radio. We are now in the last segment of the show and we are talking with Stacey in Texas.
[01:46:32.380 --> 01:46:35.380]  Alright Stacey, now.
[01:46:35.380 --> 01:46:36.380]  Sorry.
[01:46:36.380 --> 01:46:38.380]  No, go ahead.
[01:46:38.380 --> 01:46:45.380]  So under the motion for discovery, would that be where I would ask for the officer's certification?
[01:46:45.380 --> 01:46:52.380]  You're going to ask for everything under the sun there. You're going to ask for his personnel file. You're going to ask for his training records.
[01:46:52.380 --> 01:46:59.380]  You're going to ask for the departmental policy on traffic stops and how they're supposed to execute them and blah, blah, blah.
[01:46:59.380 --> 01:47:04.380]  You're going to ask for all that. Doesn't matter whether you use it or not. Put them under the gun and make them give it to you.
[01:47:04.380 --> 01:47:10.380]  Okay. So and then on the motion to quash, would that also be the same as motion to suppress?
[01:47:10.380 --> 01:47:22.380]  No. Motion to suppress is speaking towards any evidence they claim to have had and a motion to quash deals with the indictment, information and complaint that they're required to get.
[01:47:22.380 --> 01:47:30.380]  Now it depends on what level of offense they're trying to charge you with here. If they're trying to charge you with a class C, a B or an A or a felony.
[01:47:30.380 --> 01:47:33.380]  The worst one. A, I think. Is it worst?
[01:47:33.380 --> 01:47:36.380]  A is a year up to a year in jail.
[01:47:36.380 --> 01:47:38.380]  Yes, A.
[01:47:38.380 --> 01:47:46.380]  Yeah. So this is why I highly recommend that you don't go this alone if you don't really know what you're doing.
[01:47:46.380 --> 01:47:55.380]  If they've got information in a document you've got that says that the stop itself was handled badly and it's recorded that way as far as the documentation,
[01:47:55.380 --> 01:48:01.380]  then a decent attorney could get that dismissed. It's still going to cost you a handful of money, though.
[01:48:01.380 --> 01:48:08.380]  But the odds of them listening to you without you making a really good argument of it up front and showing that you know what you're doing,
[01:48:08.380 --> 01:48:16.380]  they're going to try to sidestep you and take you from an alternative route.
[01:48:16.380 --> 01:48:20.380]  Do you have any idea what that alternative route would be?
[01:48:20.380 --> 01:48:34.380]  No, they will pull any dirty trick that comes to mind to get what they want out of this, which is you either on parole or paying a fine or going to jail.
[01:48:34.380 --> 01:48:36.380]  That's so awful.
[01:48:36.380 --> 01:48:41.380]  It is, but it is what you're dealing with.
[01:48:41.380 --> 01:48:51.380]  Well, thank you. I'm so excited I finally got to talk to you because I'm listening to you for quite a while and I completely have been 24 hour and up for a while.
[01:48:51.380 --> 01:48:53.380]  But thank you.
[01:48:53.380 --> 01:48:56.380]  Well, you're welcome. And hopefully it was useful.
[01:48:56.380 --> 01:48:58.380]  But absolutely.
[01:48:58.380 --> 01:48:59.380]  Okay.
[01:48:59.380 --> 01:49:00.380]  Okay.
[01:49:00.380 --> 01:49:02.380]  All right. Thanks for calling in.
[01:49:02.380 --> 01:49:03.380]  Bye.
[01:49:03.380 --> 01:49:04.380]  Bye bye.
[01:49:04.380 --> 01:49:12.380]  All right. Now I have another caller here. It just says U.S. Cellular area code 5 8 0. Who am I talking to?
[01:49:12.380 --> 01:49:15.380]  Hi, this is Jacob Browning.
[01:49:15.380 --> 01:49:17.380]  This is who?
[01:49:17.380 --> 01:49:19.380]  My name is Jacob Browning.
[01:49:19.380 --> 01:49:21.380]  Jake?
[01:49:21.380 --> 01:49:22.380]  Yeah, Jacob.
[01:49:22.380 --> 01:49:24.380]  Okay, Jacob.
[01:49:24.380 --> 01:49:27.380]  Okay, what can we do for you, Jacob?
[01:49:27.380 --> 01:49:34.380]  I need you to talk into your phone, man. You get skewed when you talk away from it.
[01:49:34.380 --> 01:49:35.380]  Okay. Can you hear me all right?
[01:49:35.380 --> 01:49:37.380]  Yes.
[01:49:37.380 --> 01:49:49.380]  I would recommend to give you all the call by email, but basically I'm in foreclosure process and I believe I'm more in the.
[01:49:49.380 --> 01:49:55.380]  Okay. Foreclosures are not on my list of things to do. Foreclosures are Randy on Thursday or Friday.
[01:49:55.380 --> 01:49:56.380]  Okay.
[01:49:56.380 --> 01:50:03.380]  And I also think I have a difference around by police officers also on a different bill.
[01:50:03.380 --> 01:50:07.380]  Okay. How so?
[01:50:07.380 --> 01:50:11.380]  I've been my wife's car.
[01:50:11.380 --> 01:50:13.380]  Come on stolen.
[01:50:13.380 --> 01:50:26.380]  And when she was staying at the friend's house and I was home, they was having a little movie night or whatever, and I was at home with my son.
[01:50:26.380 --> 01:50:27.380]  He's like six months old.
[01:50:27.380 --> 01:50:34.380]  Anyways, the next day, she called me and thought, you know, are you playing joke on me?
[01:50:34.380 --> 01:50:35.380]  Did you keep my car or something?
[01:50:35.380 --> 01:50:37.380]  I said, well, no, of course I didn't.
[01:50:37.380 --> 01:50:42.380]  Long story short, she left her keys in there, whatever, and then her car was gone.
[01:50:42.380 --> 01:50:44.380]  All right.
[01:50:44.380 --> 01:50:49.380]  Then, oddly enough, the next day she went to make a report out with the county sheriff's office.
[01:50:49.380 --> 01:50:50.380]  Right.
[01:50:50.380 --> 01:51:02.380]  And the next day, which would have been on a Saturday, the cops, the deputy himself come driving up in our driveway with her car.
[01:51:02.380 --> 01:51:06.380]  He said it was abandoned down the road from our house.
[01:51:06.380 --> 01:51:07.380]  Right.
[01:51:07.380 --> 01:51:12.380]  And actually drove it, the deputy drove it to our property, according to my wife.
[01:51:12.380 --> 01:51:14.380]  I wasn't there at the time.
[01:51:14.380 --> 01:51:21.380]  And they immediately asked where I was at and said that he had searched the house.
[01:51:21.380 --> 01:51:25.380]  So they came in my house and searched my house, looking for me, threatening my wife.
[01:51:25.380 --> 01:51:28.380]  Did you say they could search the house?
[01:51:28.380 --> 01:51:29.380]  No, I didn't know about it.
[01:51:29.380 --> 01:51:30.380]  None of it.
[01:51:30.380 --> 01:51:32.380]  No.
[01:51:32.380 --> 01:51:35.380]  Who gave them consent to enter and search the house?
[01:51:35.380 --> 01:51:41.380]  They said my wife did, but she says if she was scared, they threatened her.
[01:51:41.380 --> 01:51:47.380]  They were going to take her to jail if she was hiding a fugitive or whatever.
[01:51:47.380 --> 01:51:51.380]  At the time, I had no charge or anything on me.
[01:51:51.380 --> 01:51:54.380]  I mean, the whole thing is just kind of preposterous.
[01:51:54.380 --> 01:52:04.380]  But by the time I got home, they were gone, but they pilfered all through the house and she had her daughter and her son, you know, which was six months old or so.
[01:52:04.380 --> 01:52:06.380]  She was terrified.
[01:52:06.380 --> 01:52:08.380]  When I got there, she was scared.
[01:52:08.380 --> 01:52:10.380]  She never saw a cop.
[01:52:10.380 --> 01:52:13.380]  Did they have a warrant to search the house?
[01:52:13.380 --> 01:52:14.380]  No, not at all.
[01:52:14.380 --> 01:52:15.380]  Not at all.
[01:52:15.380 --> 01:52:22.380]  They told her that I had a warrant out for my arrest, which I immediately looked up and whatnot, and I didn't have a warrant out for my arrest.
[01:52:22.380 --> 01:52:26.380]  Then you need to file a complaint against these cops.
[01:52:26.380 --> 01:52:28.380]  Okay.
[01:52:28.380 --> 01:52:35.380]  You need to make sure you file a duplicate complaint with the U.S. Attorney's Office and the DOJ.
[01:52:35.380 --> 01:52:39.380]  Okay.
[01:52:39.380 --> 01:52:44.380]  Yeah, because that same cop has pretty much harassed me the last two years.
[01:52:44.380 --> 01:52:59.380]  Well, anyways, yeah, every opportunity he can to harass me, he knows.
[01:52:59.380 --> 01:53:00.380]  And they actually took me to jail over it.
[01:53:00.380 --> 01:53:03.380]  They ended up getting a warrant a whole week later, right?
[01:53:03.380 --> 01:53:05.380]  And I was at work.
[01:53:05.380 --> 01:53:17.380]  I'm a plumbing contractor, and I was working for a customer in an industrial area, which was real hidden from where the public view was just because that's the nature of the job, not because I was hiding out for anybody.
[01:53:17.380 --> 01:53:24.380]  But nevertheless, they showed up exactly where I was, which I thought was extremely odd because no one knew where I was at but my wife.
[01:53:24.380 --> 01:53:26.380]  So I almost think they pinged my location.
[01:53:26.380 --> 01:53:35.380]  But anyway, they came there and arrested me and reposed my vehicle and said that they had a repo notice for my vehicle.
[01:53:35.380 --> 01:53:39.380]  Cops don't do repos.
[01:53:39.380 --> 01:53:41.380]  Yeah, he made me force me to get out of my vehicle.
[01:53:41.380 --> 01:53:43.380]  I never saw any paperwork.
[01:53:43.380 --> 01:53:47.380]  I never got a letter from the bank, never got anything served or anything.
[01:53:47.380 --> 01:54:02.380]  And the person later after I got out, when I was at my house looking for me that same day, I guess there were some papers in the shelves in my garage where they came out to my door.
[01:54:02.380 --> 01:54:03.380]  My wife said she never saw them.
[01:54:03.380 --> 01:54:08.380]  It was almost like they just put them on a shelf in my garage when they walked up to knock on the door.
[01:54:08.380 --> 01:54:12.380]  This is a week after or four days after.
[01:54:12.380 --> 01:54:28.380]  And I happened to find those after spending a week in jail over, well, they originally said it was because I stole my wife's car, which I told what proof for probable cause or anything you have on that.
[01:54:28.380 --> 01:54:45.380]  And then later when you get out of jail and see the judge, it was a possession of stolen property, which the vehicle was.
[01:54:45.380 --> 01:54:49.380]  Okay. How does where the vehicle is implicate you?
[01:54:49.380 --> 01:55:01.380]  I mean, don't worry about my property was that the charge I ended up with, but when he took me to jail, he said he was stealing my wife's car.
[01:55:01.380 --> 01:55:05.380]  And at the same time, he took me to jail for this bogus thing.
[01:55:05.380 --> 01:55:22.380]  He also reposted my vehicle. And, uh, yeah, he didn't even have a, uh, all they had was a, uh, a notice that was changed. Basically they're straddling the order not to, uh, move the property or, or, you know, vandalize it or move the road to the county.
[01:55:22.380 --> 01:55:24.380]  Actually he had a repossessed it.
[01:55:24.380 --> 01:55:26.380]  Order.
[01:55:26.380 --> 01:55:28.380]  Like I said, I had no need to do that.
[01:55:28.380 --> 01:55:29.380]  I was behind on it.
[01:55:29.380 --> 01:55:40.380]  But it's a big mess with, you know, resolve in jail for a whole week was because there's a, a county next to our county.
[01:55:40.380 --> 01:55:53.380]  And, uh, I had a charge over in that county that I hadn't even been to the county in two or three years, uh, and actually only ever dropped it without ever going to court.
[01:55:53.380 --> 01:56:00.380]  You know, so it's almost like when he was taking me to jail, he said, uh, he said, we're going to have fun, uh, Monday.
[01:56:00.380 --> 01:56:01.380]  And this was on a Friday.
[01:56:01.380 --> 01:56:02.380]  He was taking me to jail.
[01:56:02.380 --> 01:56:05.380]  He said, Monday's, uh, President's Day.
[01:56:05.380 --> 01:56:08.380]  We should be here for three days.
[01:56:08.380 --> 01:56:10.380]  And I was like, yeah, I could probably bond out.
[01:56:10.380 --> 01:56:12.380]  I was leaving, so I pulled myself back.
[01:56:12.380 --> 01:56:17.380]  But sure enough, when I was getting there for four or five days, I was able to get out.
[01:56:17.380 --> 01:56:22.380]  So it's almost like they got a, a hold on me so I couldn't even get out and bond out.
[01:56:22.380 --> 01:56:29.380]  Well, like I said, you need to file a complaint against the cops that showed up and illegally searched your house, took your car.
[01:56:29.380 --> 01:56:34.380]  And you need to file the same complaints with the U.S. Attorney's Office and the Department of Justice.
[01:56:34.380 --> 01:56:38.380]  Okay.
[01:56:38.380 --> 01:56:40.380]  Again, you're not talking into your phone.
[01:56:40.380 --> 01:56:41.380]  I can't hear that.
[01:56:41.380 --> 01:56:42.380]  Okay.
[01:56:42.380 --> 01:56:49.380]  I'm sorry.
[01:56:49.380 --> 01:56:51.380]  Not the State Attorney General, the U.S. Attorney.
[01:56:51.380 --> 01:56:52.380]  Right.
[01:56:52.380 --> 01:56:53.380]  I'm with you.
[01:56:53.380 --> 01:56:54.380]  I'm with you now.
[01:56:54.380 --> 01:56:55.380]  Yes, sir.
[01:56:55.380 --> 01:57:04.380]  You know, one thing I thought was odd, it said some witnesses on, on the, uh, on the front of the judge the first time for possession of stolen property.
[01:57:04.380 --> 01:57:12.380]  And I thought it was kind of odd that the officer who came with you, I mean, he didn't appear on, on there as a witness.
[01:57:12.380 --> 01:57:15.380]  He didn't appear on anything, uh, on any document or whatever.
[01:57:15.380 --> 01:57:25.380]  And my wife said the two officers came in my house, uh, Michael and Todd, basically one of them cursed the house and the other one, uh, just stood there.
[01:57:25.380 --> 01:57:32.380]  And, uh, she said that he was saying, I don't think this, I don't, you know, I don't think it's a good idea, you know, whatever.
[01:57:32.380 --> 01:57:38.380]  Which my wife said, one cop was having, you know, second thoughts about it, another cop was going through my stuff.
[01:57:38.380 --> 01:57:46.380]  He was saying he was looking for me, but he wasn't up for it completely and he was going through the doors and all kinds of stuff as well.
[01:57:46.380 --> 01:57:47.380]  Okay.
[01:57:47.380 --> 01:57:51.380]  Well, like I say, this, that's the next steps you need to take from where I'm sitting.
[01:57:51.380 --> 01:57:53.380]  Okay.
[01:57:53.380 --> 01:57:55.380]  All right, sir.
[01:57:55.380 --> 01:57:56.380]  All right.
[01:57:56.380 --> 01:57:58.380]  Well, I appreciate you calling in and I wish you luck with it.
[01:57:58.380 --> 01:57:59.380]  Okay.
[01:57:59.380 --> 01:58:00.380]  Thank you, sir.
[01:58:00.380 --> 01:58:01.380]  Yes, sir.
[01:58:01.380 --> 01:58:02.380]  You have a good night.
[01:58:02.380 --> 01:58:03.380]  All right.
[01:58:03.380 --> 01:58:05.380]  Other caller on the board, Mary, and I'm sorry, I'm not going to have time to get to you.
[01:58:05.380 --> 01:58:07.380]  I appreciate you calling in though.
[01:58:07.380 --> 01:58:14.380]  If you really need help with something right away, please email me at eddie at rule of law radio.com.
[01:58:14.380 --> 01:58:17.380]  All right, folks, this has been another Monday night show with your host, JD Craig.
[01:58:17.380 --> 01:58:20.380]  I want to thank you all for listening and for all the people that called in.
[01:58:20.380 --> 01:58:22.380]  I hope you all have a great week.
[01:58:22.380 --> 01:58:50.380]  Good night and God bless.
[01:58:50.380 --> 01:59:19.380]  Thank you.
[01:59:20.380 --> 01:59:49.380]  Thank you.
[01:59:51.380 --> 01:59:52.380]  Looking for some truth?
[01:59:52.380 --> 01:59:53.380]  You found it.
[01:59:53.380 --> 02:00:22.380]  Logosradionetwork.com