ROL_2023-07-14_16k_Hr1-2.timecode
[00:00.000 --> 00:05.420] The Bill of Rights contains the first ten amendments of our Constitution.
[00:05.420 --> 00:09.380] They guarantee the specific freedoms Americans should know and protect.
[00:09.380 --> 00:10.860] Our liberty depends on it.
[00:10.860 --> 00:14.800] I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, and I'll be right back with an unforgettable way to remember
[00:14.800 --> 00:16.900] your First Amendment rights.
[00:16.900 --> 00:18.500] Privacy is under attack.
[00:18.500 --> 00:22.100] When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[00:22.100 --> 00:26.860] And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[00:26.860 --> 00:32.000] So protect your rights, say no to surveillance, and keep your information to yourself.
[00:32.000 --> 00:34.640] Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[00:34.640 --> 00:38.920] This public service announcement is brought to you by Startpage.com, the private search
[00:38.920 --> 00:42.460] engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[00:42.460 --> 00:44.720] Start over with Startpage.
[00:44.720 --> 00:47.740] Spar, it's what fighters do.
[00:47.740 --> 00:50.800] It's also how I remember the five guarantees of the First Amendment.
[00:50.800 --> 00:54.480] If you plan to take away my rights, I'm going to spar with you.
[00:54.480 --> 01:01.500] Spar with an extra P, S for speech, P for press, another P for petition, A for assembly,
[01:01.500 --> 01:03.000] and R for religion.
[01:03.000 --> 01:06.980] Most Americans are familiar with the First Amendment guarantees of free speech, press,
[01:06.980 --> 01:10.780] assembly, and religion, but petition for redress is another matter.
[01:10.780 --> 01:14.500] We have the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
[01:14.500 --> 01:18.020] It means that if we're unhappy with what's going on in our government, we can spell out
[01:18.020 --> 01:20.700] the reasons without fear of being thrown into jail.
[01:20.700 --> 01:31.080] I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, more news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[01:31.080 --> 01:34.740] The Bill of Rights contains the first 10 amendments of our Constitution.
[01:34.740 --> 01:38.180] They guarantee the specific freedoms Americans should know and protect.
[01:38.180 --> 01:39.660] Our liberty depends on it.
[01:39.660 --> 01:43.580] I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, and I'll be right back with an unforgettable way to remember
[01:43.580 --> 01:46.700] one of your constitutional rights.
[01:46.700 --> 01:48.300] Privacy is under attack.
[01:48.300 --> 01:51.900] When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[01:51.900 --> 01:56.700] And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[01:56.700 --> 02:01.820] So protect your rights, say no to surveillance, and keep your information to yourself.
[02:01.820 --> 02:04.460] Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[02:04.460 --> 02:08.740] This public service announcement is brought to you by StartPage.com, the private search
[02:08.740 --> 02:12.260] engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[02:12.260 --> 02:15.860] Start over with StartPage.
[02:15.860 --> 02:20.200] When I think of the Second Amendment, I visualize myself wrapping my two arms around the Bill
[02:20.200 --> 02:22.260] of Rights in a big old bear hug.
[02:22.260 --> 02:26.780] It's how I remember that the Second Amendment guarantees us the right to bear arms, arms
[02:26.780 --> 02:30.620] that embrace our freedoms and won't let anyone take them away without a fight.
[02:30.620 --> 02:31.620] Get it?
[02:31.620 --> 02:33.940] Two arms, bear hug, bear arms?
[02:33.940 --> 02:37.540] The late Senator Hubert Humphrey captured the spirit of the Second Amendment so well
[02:37.540 --> 02:43.300] when he said, the right of the citizens to bear arms is just one guarantee against arbitrary
[02:43.300 --> 02:47.820] conduct, one more safeguard against the tyranny which now appears remote in America, but which
[02:47.820 --> 02:50.540] historically has proved to always be possible.
[02:50.540 --> 02:52.420] I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht.
[02:52.420 --> 03:21.180] More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[03:22.420 --> 03:46.980] I'm ready.
[03:46.980 --> 03:47.980] Well we're in.
[03:47.980 --> 03:49.540] I didn't hear the beep, but we're in.
[03:49.540 --> 03:52.620] I didn't hear any background music at all.
[03:52.620 --> 03:55.220] Yep, it's all the way down.
[03:55.220 --> 03:56.220] We're up and online.
[03:56.220 --> 03:57.220] Okay.
[03:57.220 --> 03:58.220] Hello everybody.
[03:58.220 --> 04:02.140] You might have heard us blabbing back and forth.
[04:02.140 --> 04:11.540] We did not hear in our bumper music, so I guess you were online.
[04:11.540 --> 04:22.300] So this is Friday, our four-hour info marathon, Friday, July the 14th, 2023.
[04:22.300 --> 04:28.140] And Brett, when we went out last night, you wanted to talk about notaries.
[04:28.140 --> 04:36.740] Yeah, it's something I was just discovering and learning about, you know, any kind of
[04:36.740 --> 04:38.660] professional conduct complaint.
[04:38.660 --> 04:40.420] There's a little process that goes with it.
[04:40.420 --> 04:46.500] We've got bar grievances and judicial misconduct complaints that we do all the time.
[04:46.500 --> 04:52.260] But then there's also pretty much any, you talked, I think, one time about a medical
[04:52.260 --> 04:59.700] malpractice complaint and how the medical, the review board is pretty hard on those people
[04:59.700 --> 05:01.620] that receive such a complaint.
[05:01.620 --> 05:08.140] Well, with notaries, when you have some notary public that's not doing what they need to
[05:08.140 --> 05:12.500] do, it's just like anything else.
[05:12.500 --> 05:17.900] You feel in your gut, hey, that's not right, and you go find their rules, and sure enough,
[05:17.900 --> 05:22.300] there's a rule that says that they must this or that, they may not this or that, and you
[05:22.300 --> 05:23.540] just find the rule.
[05:23.540 --> 05:26.460] They have a complaint with notaries.
[05:26.460 --> 05:33.700] In Texas, they've got the secretary of state is the one who appoints the notaries, and
[05:33.700 --> 05:41.140] the secretary of state is the one who receives complaints that people will give about some
[05:41.140 --> 05:44.100] notary public not doing their job.
[05:44.100 --> 05:45.580] So it's really easy.
[05:45.580 --> 05:53.060] You download this form 2304, check some boxes, and send it off.
[05:53.060 --> 05:57.220] They even have an email address that you can send it to.
[05:57.220 --> 06:07.220] And what's interesting with notaries, they have a bond, just like with our public officials
[06:07.220 --> 06:15.060] when they get elected or appointed, and right before they start their duties of office or
[06:15.060 --> 06:22.580] assume their duties of office, there's an oath that they swear that they're going to do.
[06:22.580 --> 06:28.460] Some people talk about if they could just get a hold of that oath, then that'll prove
[06:28.460 --> 06:29.460] up.
[06:29.460 --> 06:30.460] It'll be kind of like a magic silver bullet.
[06:30.460 --> 06:38.540] It is no such thing, but it's part of the process that these men and women go through
[06:38.540 --> 06:44.420] as they are stepping into a role that we've defined.
[06:44.420 --> 06:45.940] This is an office.
[06:45.940 --> 06:51.780] It has certain authorities, duties, certain restrictions.
[06:51.780 --> 06:56.340] And when they step into that role, they promise they're going to follow all these rules, right?
[06:56.340 --> 06:59.420] Well, they put up a bond.
[06:59.420 --> 07:07.080] And there's a bonding company that's standing behind every notary public with $10,000 worth
[07:07.080 --> 07:15.580] of indemnification against harm that happens to people because the notary public didn't
[07:15.580 --> 07:17.340] do their job.
[07:17.340 --> 07:23.260] Every notary public does something wrong and financially harms you.
[07:23.260 --> 07:30.820] You can go to that bonding company and say, hey, I need my $10,000 or whatever amount
[07:30.820 --> 07:34.760] you say you are harmed in.
[07:34.760 --> 07:40.140] And if you want more than that, the secretary of state can't help you.
[07:40.140 --> 07:44.540] You're just going to the secretary of state to complain.
[07:44.540 --> 07:55.660] It's only to highlight the failings of the notary public.
[07:55.660 --> 08:01.700] But then if you want more than $10,000, then you're going to have to civilly sue them.
[08:01.700 --> 08:07.540] You need to take them to court, just like anything else.
[08:07.540 --> 08:14.020] But if your harm is less than $10,000 or up to $10,000, then you can go to the bonding
[08:14.020 --> 08:15.800] company.
[08:15.800 --> 08:18.900] So just found that out, thought it was pretty interesting.
[08:18.900 --> 08:24.800] I thought some people might be inclined to go and look up some similar things in their
[08:24.800 --> 08:25.800] own states.
[08:25.800 --> 08:27.900] What do you think?
[08:27.900 --> 08:39.240] Well, if the secretary of state is like these other agencies, we talk about lawyers and
[08:39.240 --> 08:46.180] we talk about judicial conduct and take all the police.
[08:46.180 --> 08:47.180] They don't do anything.
[08:47.180 --> 08:55.780] None of those agencies do anything but try to act as a public relations agency for their
[08:55.780 --> 08:56.780] members.
[08:56.780 --> 08:57.780] Right.
[08:57.780 --> 09:01.300] Calm down and complain it.
[09:01.300 --> 09:07.360] These other oversight agencies actually do their job.
[09:07.360 --> 09:21.140] We had a court reporter who was directed to sit in a hearing and she didn't show up.
[09:21.140 --> 09:25.340] Well, the guy complained because he needed a court reporter there and he couldn't have
[09:25.340 --> 09:28.540] the hearing because the court reporter didn't show up.
[09:28.540 --> 09:32.180] The court reporter said, well, it was the prosecutor who told me not to show up.
[09:32.180 --> 09:34.980] The prosecutor said, no, I didn't.
[09:34.980 --> 09:38.140] They were haggling back and forth.
[09:38.140 --> 09:44.900] The secretary of state, or I think that's who it was that handled this, ordered the
[09:44.900 --> 09:53.660] court reporter to go to Austin and either she could accept the punishment that they
[09:53.660 --> 10:01.660] proclaimed for her or she could go to Austin and stand trial criminally for not showing
[10:01.660 --> 10:07.940] up to do the court reporting.
[10:07.940 --> 10:13.380] The guy filed the complaint and had the prosecutor and the court reporter trying to throw each
[10:13.380 --> 10:15.540] other under the bus.
[10:15.540 --> 10:16.540] It was glorious.
[10:16.540 --> 10:17.540] Wow.
[10:17.540 --> 10:23.980] A friend of mine, a psychologist, a guy filed a complaint against him that was absolutely
[10:23.980 --> 10:30.460] ludicrous and it took Bill six months.
[10:30.460 --> 10:37.260] He had all of his, he had mountains of, every time he's a psychologist and every time he
[10:37.260 --> 10:45.780] has a session, he has to make notes on those sessions and I stopped by his place a lot
[10:45.780 --> 10:51.800] of times and he's steady going, creating all of these notes for every section, extensive
[10:51.800 --> 10:53.660] notes on everything.
[10:53.660 --> 10:57.740] They made him produce everything for some 10 years or so.
[10:57.740 --> 11:03.700] I mean, they really ran him through the coals and then decided that there was nothing to
[11:03.700 --> 11:06.700] it.
[11:06.700 --> 11:17.460] The guy who filed the complaint was a sociopath, a psychopath, a narcissistic sociopath.
[11:17.460 --> 11:26.940] He died a few years ago, but who is the woman, I'll think of her name in a minute, there's
[11:26.940 --> 11:34.180] a woman that does legal reform and stuff, it was her son.
[11:34.180 --> 11:36.220] The guy was pretty whacked out.
[11:36.220 --> 11:44.860] He actually killed himself with one of these machines that they use to clean your blood.
[11:44.860 --> 11:51.580] He had cancer and he was using the machine and they told him, don't use it too much.
[11:51.580 --> 11:52.580] He didn't listen.
[11:52.580 --> 11:54.740] He wanted to make sure he got the cancer.
[11:54.740 --> 11:59.100] Well, he got the cancer and he killed himself.
[11:59.100 --> 12:05.660] He wasn't the sharpest knife in the drawer and his complaint was just ludicrous, but
[12:05.660 --> 12:13.420] they really ran Bill through the wringer and it was really tough on him.
[12:13.420 --> 12:22.260] Point is, these officials, other than police prosecutors and judges, police lawyers and
[12:22.260 --> 12:26.660] judges, they really work.
[12:26.660 --> 12:32.300] Actually, bar grievances work really good.
[12:32.300 --> 12:33.300] Someone on the channel-
[12:33.300 --> 12:35.860] Just not in the way they're designed to.
[12:35.860 --> 12:36.860] Yes.
[12:36.860 --> 12:45.580] Well, sometimes, apparently because some guy on the channel earlier today, I saw it, mentioned
[12:45.580 --> 13:03.540] that his lawyer complained to the judge that he filed a bar agreement against him.
[13:03.540 --> 13:12.380] I suggested that he file a bar grievance against him for that.
[13:12.380 --> 13:17.140] When you file a bar grievance, it's secret.
[13:17.140 --> 13:24.660] The lawyer can't speak to anyone about the bar grievance except the bar.
[13:24.660 --> 13:33.780] He went and tried to unduly influence the judge, so I suggested that he asked for sanctions
[13:33.780 --> 13:37.460] and asked for a mistrial.
[13:37.460 --> 13:40.980] Based on him trying to unduly influence the judge?
[13:40.980 --> 13:42.580] Yes.
[13:42.580 --> 13:49.780] He's not going to get a mistrial, but the judge is not going to be a happy camper.
[13:49.780 --> 13:54.980] It's politics, guys.
[13:54.980 --> 13:58.100] How can you smack him good?
[13:58.100 --> 14:05.460] There was an attorney the other day, I sent off an email to an attorney that had refused
[14:05.460 --> 14:08.540] to meet and confer with me.
[14:08.540 --> 14:12.740] The federal circuit clerk said she wanted me to put in a certificate of conference saying
[14:12.740 --> 14:16.900] that I had attempted to meet and confer.
[14:16.900 --> 14:27.660] Then the attorney refused to do so and refused to say whether or not she had relayed my request
[14:27.660 --> 14:31.540] to meet and confer to her clients.
[14:31.540 --> 14:37.660] She wouldn't say yes or no to that, and she wouldn't meet, so a bar agreement for that.
[14:37.660 --> 14:43.020] But the next day she was so nice and trying to do something else, she didn't even know
[14:43.020 --> 14:44.020] yet.
[14:44.020 --> 14:45.740] I'm sure she hadn't seen it yet.
[14:45.740 --> 14:52.180] She was trying to get me to agree to her dilatory motion to delay.
[14:52.180 --> 14:58.700] Dilatory is a word we see sometimes, I know you know it, but our listeners may not realize
[14:58.700 --> 15:04.820] that lawyers that want to delay things, that's called a dilatory motion.
[15:04.820 --> 15:05.820] It delays things.
[15:05.820 --> 15:12.820] So she wants me to agree to delay.
[15:12.820 --> 15:19.740] So I wrote back to her and I told her, look, I told you, you could have another 20 days.
[15:19.740 --> 15:23.980] I don't think you're going to be able to come up with anything, you haven't come up with
[15:23.980 --> 15:28.380] anything in six months, so I don't know why you want another 20 days at the last minute,
[15:28.380 --> 15:29.380] but that's okay.
[15:29.380 --> 15:33.860] I just want to make sure you know, though, that my bar grievance didn't have anything
[15:33.860 --> 15:39.420] to do with this, and it didn't have anything to do with the actions and inactions of your
[15:39.420 --> 15:40.420] boss.
[15:40.420 --> 15:44.700] He's your supervisor, so I figure you probably didn't know what he was going to do.
[15:44.700 --> 15:45.700] That's all on him.
[15:45.700 --> 15:51.580] This, my bar grievance is only about the refusal to meet and confer, just wanted to make sure
[15:51.580 --> 15:52.580] you know.
[15:52.580 --> 16:00.580] What do you think she had to say back in response?
[16:00.580 --> 16:04.860] I don't think I can say that on the air.
[16:04.860 --> 16:10.940] Yes, you probably had to delete it instead of hitting send.
[16:10.940 --> 16:12.980] Probably something deletory.
[16:12.980 --> 16:15.740] Some derogatory.
[16:15.740 --> 16:17.340] Yep.
[16:17.340 --> 16:23.540] Deletory, motion, definition, and meanings.
[16:23.540 --> 16:26.980] I'd heard of deletory, but I didn't know what it meant.
[16:26.980 --> 16:35.220] A formal proposal to be discussed and voted on in a debate whose effect is to interrupt
[16:35.220 --> 16:40.100] the business under discussion at the time.
[16:40.100 --> 16:42.620] What the heck does that mean?
[16:42.620 --> 16:45.540] Delay for the sake of delay.
[16:45.540 --> 16:55.700] Okay, no deletory motion, deletory amendment, or amendment not germane shall be in order.
[16:55.700 --> 17:00.180] All right, let's take this up on the other side of the sponsor.
[17:00.180 --> 17:04.780] Are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters, or even lawsuits?
[17:04.780 --> 17:08.980] Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Mears proven method.
[17:08.980 --> 17:13.300] Michael Mears has won six cases in federal court against debt collectors, and now you
[17:13.300 --> 17:14.620] can win too.
[17:14.620 --> 17:19.140] You'll get step-by-step instructions in plain English on how to win in court using federal
[17:19.140 --> 17:20.140] civil rights statutes.
[17:20.140 --> 17:24.460] What to do when contacted by phone, mail, or court summons.
[17:24.460 --> 17:26.500] How to answer letters and phone calls.
[17:26.500 --> 17:29.100] How to get debt collectors out of your credit report.
[17:29.100 --> 17:33.740] How to turn the financial tables on them and make them pay you to go away.
[17:33.740 --> 17:38.860] The Michael Mears proven method is the solution for how to stop debt collectors.
[17:38.860 --> 17:40.980] Personal consultation is available as well.
[17:40.980 --> 17:46.620] For more information, please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the blue Michael Mears banner,
[17:46.620 --> 17:48.900] or email michaelmears at yahoo.com.
[17:48.900 --> 17:58.940] That's ruleoflawradio.com, or email m-i-c-h-a-e-l-m-i-r-r-a-s at yahoo.com to learn how to stop debt
[17:58.940 --> 17:59.940] collectors now.
[17:59.940 --> 18:04.540] Rule of Law Radio is proud to offer the Rule of Law traffic seminar.
[18:04.540 --> 18:08.380] In today's America, we live in an us-against-them society, and if we, the people, are ever going
[18:08.380 --> 18:11.980] to have a free society, then we're going to have to stand and defend our own rights.
[18:11.980 --> 18:15.540] Among those rights are the right to travel freely from place to place, the right to act
[18:15.540 --> 18:19.220] in our own private capacity, and most importantly, the right to due process of law.
[18:19.220 --> 18:23.420] Traffic courts afford us the least expensive opportunity to learn how to enforce and preserve
[18:23.420 --> 18:24.780] our rights through due process.
[18:24.780 --> 18:28.780] Former Sheriff's Deputy Eddie Craig, in conjunction with Rule of Law Radio, has put together the
[18:28.780 --> 18:32.540] most comprehensive teaching tool available that will help you understand what due process
[18:32.540 --> 18:34.940] is and how to hold courts to the rule of law.
[18:34.940 --> 18:38.940] You can get your own copy of this invaluable material by going to ruleoflawradio.com and
[18:38.940 --> 18:40.260] ordering your copy today.
[18:40.260 --> 18:43.540] By ordering now, you'll receive a copy of Eddie's book, The Texas Transportation Code,
[18:43.540 --> 18:48.060] The Law Versus the Lie, video and audio of the original 2009 seminar, hundreds of research
[18:48.060 --> 18:50.380] documents and other useful resource material.
[18:50.380 --> 18:54.340] Learn how to fight for your rights with the help of this material from ruleoflawradio.com.
[18:54.340 --> 19:09.260] Order your copy today, and together we can have the free society we all want and deserve.
[19:09.260 --> 19:39.180] Thanks for watching, I hope you enjoyed this video, and I'll see you in the next one.
[19:39.260 --> 20:07.300] I hope you enjoyed this video, and I'll see you in the next one.
[20:09.260 --> 20:18.740] We were discussing deletory, Brett was very kind and said he was sure that I knew what
[20:18.740 --> 20:19.740] it was.
[20:19.740 --> 20:23.420] I think he was pulling my leg because he wanted me to look it up because he knew I didn't
[20:23.420 --> 20:27.460] know what it was, and he was right, I didn't.
[20:27.460 --> 20:37.340] Okay, deletory, causing or intended to cause delay, characterized by or given to delay
[20:37.340 --> 20:49.500] or slowness, synonym slow, inclined to defer or put off what ought to be done at once given
[20:49.500 --> 20:55.340] the procrastination, delaying, procrastinating, loitering.
[20:55.340 --> 21:07.260] In reading that, I can't imagine me writing a motion using that particular term that could
[21:07.260 --> 21:12.380] be applied to me.
[21:12.380 --> 21:13.380] I think I'm going to find some-
[21:13.380 --> 21:15.380] What do you mean, why could it apply to you?
[21:15.380 --> 21:23.060] Well, if I'm asking for a deletory motion and I'm the one that's slowing things down,
[21:23.060 --> 21:25.380] I don't think I'd call it deletory.
[21:25.380 --> 21:34.460] I would just ask for an extension of time, but I wouldn't accuse myself of procrastinating
[21:34.460 --> 21:36.660] or delaying.
[21:36.660 --> 21:46.500] No, but I pretty much had no problem accusing them of their procrastination and delay.
[21:46.500 --> 21:49.740] These are word crafters.
[21:49.740 --> 21:51.180] What was she thinking?
[21:51.180 --> 21:58.140] You know, in all my time, I've never heard anybody use this verbiage in asking for an
[21:58.140 --> 22:00.460] extension of time.
[22:00.460 --> 22:04.020] Well, I told her-
[22:04.020 --> 22:07.140] Was that a Freudian slip?
[22:07.140 --> 22:09.540] That sounds Freudian.
[22:09.540 --> 22:10.540] What do you mean?
[22:10.540 --> 22:12.220] No, I'm calling her motion deletory.
[22:12.220 --> 22:15.540] Oh, oh, I thought she called it deletory.
[22:15.540 --> 22:17.340] You asked for a deletory motion.
[22:17.340 --> 22:20.580] Well, it is a deletory motion.
[22:20.580 --> 22:21.580] It is.
[22:21.580 --> 22:23.620] Oh, I misunderstood.
[22:23.620 --> 22:26.180] I thought she called it a deletory motion.
[22:26.180 --> 22:32.180] No, I wrote to her and I said, I wanted to make sure that you know that my bar grievance
[22:32.180 --> 22:39.300] on July 5th had nothing to do with your deletory motion or about Mr. Davis making false representations
[22:39.300 --> 22:40.300] to the court.
[22:40.300 --> 22:43.420] It was purely about your refusal to meet and confer.
[22:43.420 --> 22:49.860] Okay, then that was exactly the correct usage of the term.
[22:49.860 --> 22:52.580] I misunderstood.
[22:52.580 --> 22:57.060] I was deletory.
[22:57.060 --> 22:58.060] Maybe not.
[22:58.060 --> 22:59.060] Okay.
[22:59.060 --> 23:00.060] Okay.
[23:00.060 --> 23:01.060] So you called her deletory.
[23:01.060 --> 23:02.060] Perfect.
[23:02.060 --> 23:03.060] Yeah.
[23:03.060 --> 23:04.060] Yeah.
[23:04.060 --> 23:06.620] I told her, I think it's unethical for you to act like you need to delay more.
[23:06.620 --> 23:11.780] I think you know good and well that you didn't have, quote, effectively only two weeks.
[23:11.780 --> 23:18.500] As if my brief initially missing things like a word count somehow prevented you from knowing
[23:18.500 --> 23:20.820] what the issues are.
[23:20.820 --> 23:27.140] You were or should have been fully aware since early November and now in the appeals court,
[23:27.140 --> 23:31.460] we all know you had another full 30 days and you've wasted most of that, but you came to
[23:31.460 --> 23:36.700] me last minute and asked it for another 20 days and I told you I don't oppose that.
[23:36.700 --> 23:49.180] So the 7-5 bar grievance is unrelated to your motion for more delay.
[23:49.180 --> 23:52.580] See the new bar grievance coming.
[23:52.580 --> 23:54.620] I hope she can hear that in between there.
[23:54.620 --> 23:57.860] I hope she could hear it.
[23:57.860 --> 24:00.060] I'm sure she can.
[24:00.060 --> 24:04.580] He's going to grieve me again.
[24:04.580 --> 24:06.700] And she knows I will.
[24:06.700 --> 24:09.860] I've run into her before some years back.
[24:09.860 --> 24:11.620] I was helping somebody with something.
[24:11.620 --> 24:14.500] Oh, it might've been this Lady Patty with her foreclosure.
[24:14.500 --> 24:16.860] Oh, no, that was a different one.
[24:16.860 --> 24:17.860] That's a different company.
[24:17.860 --> 24:22.460] I went through 12 attorneys of a VAT company, but I don't know.
[24:22.460 --> 24:31.860] I don't know what it was, but this company, this law firm, they've tasted me before.
[24:31.860 --> 24:37.700] I suspect it left a bitter taste in their mouth.
[24:37.700 --> 24:40.700] Okay.
[24:40.700 --> 24:43.900] I have the phone lines on.
[24:43.900 --> 24:44.900] Let's see.
[24:44.900 --> 24:48.140] You want to go to callers?
[24:48.140 --> 24:49.140] Yeah.
[24:49.140 --> 24:52.900] It's like we've already got a few.
[24:52.900 --> 24:55.860] We're going to start with John in Kansas.
[24:55.860 --> 24:57.980] Hello, John.
[24:57.980 --> 25:02.060] What do you have for us today?
[25:02.060 --> 25:03.220] Hello.
[25:03.220 --> 25:04.220] I was just calling.
[25:04.220 --> 25:08.900] I just had a call last night late and just wanted to...
[25:08.900 --> 25:16.260] I got a question I want to ask regarding this federal case we have.
[25:16.260 --> 25:24.220] This is in regards to Chris from Missouri, so he got trespassed from the Salvation Army.
[25:24.220 --> 25:30.740] We still have a criminal case that we're going and we filed in federal court in Kansas.
[25:30.740 --> 25:35.060] So we got the Salvation Army Defendants and we have the City of Mission Defendants.
[25:35.060 --> 25:42.420] There's five police officers and we sued the city and the prosecutor and the judge.
[25:42.420 --> 25:51.780] So the Salvation Army Defendants have a motion to dismiss and the City of Mission Defendants
[25:51.780 --> 26:00.500] filed an answer and at the same time filed that motion for judgment on the pleadings.
[26:00.500 --> 26:07.860] And that motion for judgment on the pleadings is improper, it's untimely.
[26:07.860 --> 26:08.860] You know, we obviously...
[26:08.860 --> 26:12.500] No, not that it's not timely.
[26:12.500 --> 26:17.780] The case is not ripe for a motion of the plea, for a ruling on the pleadings.
[26:17.780 --> 26:25.140] Right, where the rules say it's not even possible, they can't do it because the pleadings are
[26:25.140 --> 26:26.140] still open.
[26:26.140 --> 26:29.580] Yeah, that was the whole point.
[26:29.580 --> 26:35.660] The final ruling in the case, that's a ruling on the pleadings.
[26:35.660 --> 26:39.180] And that's the last thing that happens.
[26:39.180 --> 26:47.700] Right, so I think that we can defeat it procedurally because the rules say they can't do it.
[26:47.700 --> 26:48.700] They can't do it.
[26:48.700 --> 26:54.980] And then the second deal is a motion for judgment on the pleadings, there has to be no disputed
[26:54.980 --> 26:57.260] issues of fact, material fact.
[26:57.260 --> 27:01.060] Well, that's not possible.
[27:01.060 --> 27:07.660] So even if they come back and the Salvation Army Defendants, they file an answer and the
[27:07.660 --> 27:12.060] Mission Defendants come back and do a motion for judgment on the pleading, we still defeat
[27:12.060 --> 27:15.780] it because there's never going to be no...
[27:15.780 --> 27:18.900] There's going to always be issues of material fact.
[27:18.900 --> 27:23.540] Let me talk about Robert Foxx for a minute.
[27:23.540 --> 27:24.620] He's appropriate here.
[27:24.620 --> 27:29.020] He used to have all these weird names for his motions.
[27:29.020 --> 27:33.460] And I was in court with him once in Cherokee County.
[27:33.460 --> 27:38.860] And the judge and the prosecutor were up there trying to figure out what to call this motion.
[27:38.860 --> 27:46.780] Because he had some oddball nondescriptive name for the motion.
[27:46.780 --> 27:51.140] And they said, well, I don't know, maybe we should call it this, maybe we should call
[27:51.140 --> 27:52.700] it that.
[27:52.700 --> 27:59.300] And the point of that was that the name of a motion is not controlling.
[27:59.300 --> 28:07.820] But that was actually kind of smart because it makes them read it.
[28:07.820 --> 28:13.980] I had filed a written in my motion to dismiss the subject matter jurisdiction motion to
[28:13.980 --> 28:14.980] dismiss.
[28:14.980 --> 28:20.700] And they picked this one up and they said, well, this is a motion, a subject matter jurisdiction
[28:20.700 --> 28:21.700] challenge.
[28:21.700 --> 28:24.380] They didn't have to figure out a title to that one.
[28:24.380 --> 28:30.260] But the point was the name, what you titled the motion is not controlling.
[28:30.260 --> 28:35.940] So they tired this, they asked for a motion on the pleadings.
[28:35.940 --> 28:44.180] The judge could interpret that, with that irrespective of the title, as a motion for
[28:44.180 --> 28:47.180] some re-judgment.
[28:47.180 --> 28:48.980] And you would be absolutely correct.
[28:48.980 --> 28:57.580] I was thinking while you were saying this, a motion on the pleading, then it would be
[28:57.580 --> 29:07.660] unnecessary to go to the fact that there were material issues of fact that were in dispute.
[29:07.660 --> 29:14.780] But then I remembered Robert Fox, and the judge could very well treat that as a summary
[29:14.780 --> 29:18.220] judgment motion or a motion to dismiss.
[29:18.220 --> 29:27.260] Either way, the judge could look at this and it could be inferred without the liar having
[29:27.260 --> 29:28.900] to do any more lying.
[29:28.900 --> 29:35.300] It could be inferred that all of the material issues have been settled and agreed on.
[29:35.300 --> 29:36.300] There's nothing left.
[29:36.300 --> 29:45.260] Well, he could be inferred that he's saying that there are no failed to state a claim
[29:45.260 --> 29:47.580] on which recovery can be had.
[29:47.580 --> 29:53.740] But even that, and the reason I'm saying this is make sure you argue all those issues of
[29:53.740 --> 29:58.700] fact in case they want to try to pull a fast one out of your hand, hang on, we're about
[29:58.700 --> 30:02.500] to go to our sponsor.
[30:02.500 --> 30:06.100] It's clear cell phones have changed the way we live and work, but have they negatively
[30:06.100 --> 30:07.100] affected our health?
[30:07.100 --> 30:11.260] I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, and I'll be back in just a moment with new findings about how
[30:11.260 --> 30:15.580] cell phones may actually alter our brain chemistry.
[30:15.580 --> 30:17.180] Privacy is under attack.
[30:17.180 --> 30:20.780] When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[30:20.780 --> 30:25.540] And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish, too.
[30:25.540 --> 30:30.580] So protect your rights, say no to surveillance, and keep your information to yourself.
[30:30.580 --> 30:33.300] Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[30:33.300 --> 30:37.580] This public service announcement is brought to you by StartPage.com, the private search
[30:37.580 --> 30:41.140] engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[30:41.140 --> 30:44.900] Start over with StartPage.
[30:44.900 --> 30:47.060] Cell phones emit radio frequency energy.
[30:47.060 --> 30:48.060] It's a fact.
[30:48.060 --> 30:51.660] Whether it's dangerous to have a phone beaming this kind of radiation near your head has
[30:51.660 --> 30:52.660] been disputed.
[30:52.660 --> 30:57.020] Some have blamed it for brain tumors, while cell phone companies have downplayed concerns.
[30:57.020 --> 31:01.420] Well, now the Journal of the American Medical Association is confirming that cell phones
[31:01.420 --> 31:02.660] affect brain chemistry.
[31:02.660 --> 31:08.060] A study of 47 volunteers showed that glucose metabolism in the area of the brain closest
[31:08.060 --> 31:11.740] to the cell phone antenna increases when the cell phone is on.
[31:11.740 --> 31:15.660] While researchers aren't sure whether this exposure causes damage, I'm not taking any
[31:15.660 --> 31:16.660] chances.
[31:16.660 --> 31:20.100] I always keep the phone far from my body, and I use a corded headset.
[31:20.100 --> 31:22.100] I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht.
[31:22.100 --> 31:30.420] More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[31:30.420 --> 31:31.420] I lost my son.
[31:31.420 --> 31:32.420] My nephew.
[31:32.420 --> 31:33.420] My uncle.
[31:33.420 --> 31:34.420] My son.
[31:34.420 --> 31:35.420] On September 11th, 2001.
[31:35.420 --> 31:38.700] Most people don't know that a third tower fell on September 11th.
[31:38.700 --> 31:42.820] World Trade Center 7, a 47-story skyscraper, was not hit by a plane.
[31:42.820 --> 31:48.700] Although the official explanation is that fire brought down Building 7, over 1,200 architects
[31:48.700 --> 31:52.460] and engineers have looked into the evidence and believe there is more to the story.
[31:52.460 --> 31:53.940] Bring justice to my son.
[31:53.940 --> 31:54.940] My uncle.
[31:54.940 --> 31:55.940] My nephew.
[31:55.940 --> 31:56.940] My son.
[31:56.940 --> 31:57.940] Go to buildingwhat.org.
[31:57.940 --> 32:01.740] Why it fell, why it matters, and what you can do.
[32:01.740 --> 32:06.140] Are you looking to have a closer relationship with God and a better understanding of His
[32:06.140 --> 32:07.140] Word?
[32:07.140 --> 32:12.260] Then tune in to LogosRadioNetwork.com on Wednesdays from 8 to 10 p.m. Central Time for Scripture
[32:12.260 --> 32:18.700] Talk where Nana and her guests discuss the Scriptures in accord with 2 Timothy 2.15.
[32:18.700 --> 32:23.200] Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly
[32:23.200 --> 32:25.620] dividing the word of truth.
[32:25.620 --> 32:29.580] Starting in January, our first hour studies are in the Book of Mark where we'll go verse
[32:29.580 --> 32:32.900] by verse and discuss the true gospel message.
[32:32.900 --> 32:37.540] Our second hour topical studies will vary each week with discussions on sound doctrine
[32:37.540 --> 32:39.260] and Christian character development.
[32:39.260 --> 32:44.420] We wish to reflect God's light and be a blessing to all those with a hearing ear.
[32:44.420 --> 32:48.700] Our goal is to strengthen our faith and to transform ourselves more into the likeness
[32:48.700 --> 32:50.980] of our Lord and Savior Jesus.
[32:50.980 --> 32:57.620] So tune in to Scripture Talk live on LogosRadioNetwork.com Wednesdays from 8 to 10 p.m. to inspire and
[32:57.620 --> 33:00.300] motivate your studies of the Scriptures.
[33:00.300 --> 33:09.500] You're listening to the Logos Radio Network at LogosRadioNetwork.com.
[33:30.300 --> 33:50.220] We're listening to the Logos Radio Network at LogosRadioNetwork.com.
[33:50.220 --> 34:04.780] We're listening to the Logos Radio Network at LogosRadioNetwork.com.
[34:04.780 --> 34:21.220] We're listening to the Logos Radio Network at Logos RadioNetwork.com.
[34:21.220 --> 34:38.700] We're listening to the Logos Radio Network at Logos RadioNetwork.com.
[34:38.700 --> 34:59.460] We're listening to the Logos Radio Network at Logos RadioNetwork.com.
[34:59.460 --> 35:16.300] We're listening to the Logos Radio Network at Logos RadioNetwork.com.
[35:16.300 --> 35:33.900] We're listening to the Logos Radio Network at Logos RadioNetwork.com.
[35:33.900 --> 35:51.460] I wanted to go down there and get a license, a friend of mine had a license from Guatemala,
[35:51.460 --> 35:56.620] David Lewis, and they'd pull him over and he'd give him that license.
[35:56.620 --> 35:57.620] They wouldn't know what to do with him.
[35:57.620 --> 35:58.620] They wouldn't write him any tickets.
[35:58.620 --> 35:59.620] Okay.
[35:59.620 --> 36:00.620] We're talking to John in Kansas.
[36:00.620 --> 36:08.780] We're talking the fact that there were material facts in dispute as that will prevent the
[36:08.780 --> 36:14.260] judge from doing, treating the motion like a summary judgment motion.
[36:14.260 --> 36:17.020] Okay.
[36:17.020 --> 36:21.020] Have we explained everything to perfection for you, John?
[36:21.020 --> 36:29.940] Well, so the motion for judgment on the pleadings is it goes by the rules for 12 v. 6.
[36:29.940 --> 36:34.100] And then, you know, since they filed an answer...
[36:34.100 --> 36:36.100] Wait, wait, stop, stop.
[36:36.100 --> 36:43.820] A motion for judgment on the pleadings goes by the rule for 12 v. 6.
[36:43.820 --> 36:48.740] Then that's, is that in the Kansas Code?
[36:48.740 --> 36:55.780] It must be the Kansas Federal District is, that's the rule.
[36:55.780 --> 36:56.780] Oh, okay.
[36:56.780 --> 37:02.580] So did the court say that it went by the rules for 12 v. 6?
[37:02.580 --> 37:03.580] Yes.
[37:03.580 --> 37:04.580] So that means...
[37:04.580 --> 37:05.580] Okay.
[37:05.580 --> 37:06.580] Then that's...
[37:06.580 --> 37:11.180] That means that it's to go to take the pleadings as true.
[37:11.180 --> 37:18.100] Yes, if they take all, they must take all the pleadings as true and all the facts as
[37:18.100 --> 37:21.380] not as prima facie, but as true.
[37:21.380 --> 37:29.100] And if all the facts were true, would you, would they be able to rule in your favor?
[37:29.100 --> 37:31.100] Right.
[37:31.100 --> 37:36.340] And but because they answered, they filed an answer along with the motion for judgment
[37:36.340 --> 37:45.660] on the pleadings, they forfeited their right to do any 12 v. 12 motions.
[37:45.660 --> 37:47.140] How so?
[37:47.140 --> 37:49.260] Well, they answered.
[37:49.260 --> 37:54.940] You either, you either do your 12, rule 12 motions or you answer?
[37:54.940 --> 38:00.780] They can't do any, they've ruled out, they can't do any 12, rule 12 motions.
[38:00.780 --> 38:03.860] Why not?
[38:03.860 --> 38:04.860] Because they answered.
[38:04.860 --> 38:12.220] Where is it in the rules that says if you file an answer, that an answer and a 12 v.
[38:12.220 --> 38:15.660] 6 cannot be filed simultaneously?
[38:15.660 --> 38:24.300] Well, I don't, I guess I haven't seen it exactly in the rules, but isn't that, I mean, that's...
[38:24.300 --> 38:30.220] Okay, no, I would not go on that presumption.
[38:30.220 --> 38:33.500] I would want to see that absolutely.
[38:33.500 --> 38:41.660] Because if I'm filing a 12 v. 6, then I'm gonna have all of the arguments I need for
[38:41.660 --> 38:44.500] an answer.
[38:44.500 --> 38:51.140] And I don't want to wind up, I got, until the Monday after the 20th day, I don't want
[38:51.140 --> 38:55.860] a problem with this guy saying that I'm not timely in my answer, so let's go ahead and
[38:55.860 --> 38:58.940] file them both at the same time.
[38:58.940 --> 39:02.700] I don't know of anything in the rules that would prevent that.
[39:02.700 --> 39:10.980] Okay, yeah, well, either, okay, I may be wrong on that, yeah, because I definitely can't
[39:10.980 --> 39:13.100] point to the rules that that's the issue.
[39:13.100 --> 39:18.260] I've read some case law, where some similar things have happened, and the judges had real
[39:18.260 --> 39:23.060] pretty well, you had your chance, you did the motion for judgment on the pleadings.
[39:23.060 --> 39:30.100] And so, you know, since this involves qualified immunity, you know, as soon as I, we replied
[39:30.100 --> 39:33.420] to the motion for judgment on the pleadings and told them, you know, you guys aren't gonna
[39:33.420 --> 39:36.420] get away with this, it's procedurally incorrect.
[39:36.420 --> 39:41.700] They went nuts on their response on qualified immunity, well, that's not my problem, that's
[39:41.700 --> 39:44.460] their problem.
[39:44.460 --> 39:53.140] My main question is, we have amendments to be made, so we have Kansas Turnclaim Act amendments
[39:53.140 --> 39:59.900] to make, and we have to make those by August 1st.
[39:59.900 --> 40:13.620] If we amend- Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, hold on, is, if the rules say that if you
[40:13.620 --> 40:22.100] want to amend, you have to amend by a certain day, that day is always going to be subject
[40:22.100 --> 40:24.940] to equitable tolling.
[40:24.940 --> 40:30.980] So, if the other side files a motion to dismiss or failure to state a claim, that's going
[40:30.980 --> 40:35.220] to stop the clock- Oh, really?
[40:35.220 --> 40:38.060] Until that motion's been heard.
[40:38.060 --> 40:39.060] Okay.
[40:39.060 --> 40:45.980] Well, they have it, so the mission defendants would be who we have, you know, we are, on
[40:45.980 --> 40:54.260] the Salvation Army, we did federal claims and then we did two state claims, so for the
[40:54.260 --> 40:59.260] mission defendants, which they're all government officials and employees, so we had to use
[40:59.260 --> 41:02.660] the Kansas Tort Claims Act, and we-
[41:02.660 --> 41:10.780] Whoa, hold on, hold on, whoa, you said you have to use the Tort Claims Act?
[41:10.780 --> 41:15.100] If we want to do state claims, we do.
[41:15.100 --> 41:23.980] Well, only if you claim that the official was acting within the scope of his authority.
[41:23.980 --> 41:31.100] If you claim within scope, then you fall under Tort Claims Act.
[41:31.100 --> 41:38.260] I just sued all the highest judges in Texas, and I did not sue under the Texas Tort Claims
[41:38.260 --> 41:39.260] Act.
[41:39.260 --> 41:43.940] As far as I'm concerned, they wiped it behind with the Texas Tort Claims Act.
[41:43.940 --> 41:51.740] I sued them in their personal capacity, so the Tort Claims Act didn't apply.
[41:51.740 --> 41:57.140] Did you sue these individuals in their official capacity, or did you claim they were acting
[41:57.140 --> 42:01.780] ultra-virus outside the scope of their authority?
[42:01.780 --> 42:04.220] Yes, I did both.
[42:04.220 --> 42:07.140] I sued them both official and personal.
[42:07.140 --> 42:14.100] So when we bring the state claims, I mean, I know we can absolutely prove that they acted
[42:14.100 --> 42:17.140] outside the scope of their authority.
[42:17.140 --> 42:22.460] No reasonable suspicion and no probable cause.
[42:22.460 --> 42:32.020] So I would suggest you leave this state claim out altogether and go after them personally.
[42:32.020 --> 42:38.820] What's gonna happen is, this is political, this is not legal.
[42:38.820 --> 42:43.620] You got all these public officials, I got all the judges of the Texas Court of Criminal
[42:43.620 --> 42:49.860] Appeals sued in their personal capacity.
[42:49.860 --> 42:56.060] I'm looking at 10 million bucks apiece, what I've claimed.
[42:56.060 --> 43:05.020] And I've claimed that their failure to properly administer the law has cost the state billions.
[43:05.020 --> 43:13.300] Now the state is not gonna want all their high judges sued into bankruptcy.
[43:13.300 --> 43:21.660] So what they're likely to do is come in and say, look here, let's make a deal.
[43:21.660 --> 43:25.260] The state has big pockets.
[43:25.260 --> 43:34.540] They could use those big pockets to hire lawyers to drive you into obscurity.
[43:34.540 --> 43:38.360] I filed against these guys in their personal capacity.
[43:38.360 --> 43:44.020] If I get a response from the Texas Attorney General, I'll file an amended complaint and
[43:44.020 --> 43:48.740] name the Texas Attorney General for misappropriation of public funds.
[43:48.740 --> 43:51.300] I sued him in their personal capacity.
[43:51.300 --> 43:53.740] You don't get to use public money.
[43:53.740 --> 44:00.460] Hang on, Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain, we'll be right back.
[44:00.460 --> 44:05.100] Through advances in technology, our lives have greatly improved, except in the area
[44:05.100 --> 44:06.480] of nutrition.
[44:06.480 --> 44:10.300] People feed their pets better than they feed themselves, and it's time we changed all
[44:10.300 --> 44:11.300] that.
[44:11.300 --> 44:17.460] Our primary defense against aging and disease in this toxic environment is good nutrition.
[44:17.460 --> 44:23.220] In a world where natural foods have been irradiated, adulterated, and mutilated, young Jevity can
[44:23.220 --> 44:25.500] provide the nutrients you need.
[44:25.500 --> 44:30.340] Logos Radio Network gets many requests to endorse all sorts of products, most of which
[44:30.340 --> 44:31.460] we reject.
[44:31.460 --> 44:36.700] We have come to trust Young Jevity so much, we became a marketing distributor along with
[44:36.700 --> 44:39.900] Alex Jones, Ben Fuchs, and many others.
[44:39.900 --> 44:45.820] When you order from LogosRadioNetwork.com, your health will improve as you help support
[44:45.820 --> 44:47.460] quality radio.
[44:47.460 --> 44:51.780] As you realize the benefits of Young Jevity, you may want to join us.
[44:51.780 --> 44:57.060] As a distributor, you can experience improved health, help your friends and family, and
[44:57.060 --> 44:59.020] increase your income.
[44:59.020 --> 45:00.020] Order now.
[45:00.020 --> 45:04.140] Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[45:04.140 --> 45:10.900] Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary, the affordable, easy to understand, 4-CD course
[45:10.900 --> 45:14.100] that will show you how in 24 hours, step-by-step.
[45:14.100 --> 45:18.620] If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing.
[45:18.620 --> 45:22.900] If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[45:22.900 --> 45:28.620] Thousands have won with our step-by-step course, and now you can too.
[45:28.620 --> 45:34.540] Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case-winning experience.
[45:34.540 --> 45:39.020] Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand about
[45:39.020 --> 45:43.380] the principles and practices that control our American courts.
[45:43.380 --> 45:49.540] You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases,
[45:49.540 --> 45:52.340] pro se tactics, and much more.
[45:52.340 --> 46:01.020] Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner or call toll-free, 866-LAW-EZ.
[46:22.340 --> 46:50.140] Okay, we are back, Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain, rule of law radio on this, no I won't give
[46:50.140 --> 46:55.700] it up, it's not the top of the hour, so you can guess as to what day it is until the next
[46:55.700 --> 46:56.700] 15 minutes.
[46:56.700 --> 46:57.700] You forgot.
[46:57.700 --> 47:08.860] I didn't forget, I got the calendar right here, okay, okay, anyway I was preaching the
[47:08.860 --> 47:17.940] gospel according to Randy there, but where was I?
[47:17.940 --> 47:25.620] You were accusing me of forgetting, distracted me, now I forgot.
[47:25.620 --> 47:27.580] That's classic.
[47:27.580 --> 47:29.620] This is elder abuse.
[47:29.620 --> 47:36.020] Oh my goodness, we were talking about his motion and it could be treated as summary
[47:36.020 --> 47:37.020] judgment.
[47:37.020 --> 47:45.180] No, no, I went past that, oh no, no, the politics, it's talking about the politics of it.
[47:45.180 --> 47:54.540] If you sue them in their personal capacity, then let them force it back to a tort claim
[47:54.540 --> 47:59.780] if they can, but don't you do it in tort claims act.
[47:59.780 --> 48:06.900] This is all about the way you win is the cost of more money to make your suit harder to
[48:06.900 --> 48:09.540] fight.
[48:09.540 --> 48:20.420] So anyway, that was the strategy I used is if they want to be indemnified by the state,
[48:20.420 --> 48:26.900] let them prove up that they have standing to be indemnified by the state.
[48:26.900 --> 48:31.580] I'm not gonna waive that and just accept it.
[48:31.580 --> 48:37.820] So they have to write pleadings, they have to pay lawyers, and there's a chance they
[48:37.820 --> 48:40.900] could lose.
[48:40.900 --> 48:44.180] They're not gonna want to lose.
[48:44.180 --> 48:50.780] They're not gonna want you to be able to sue their public officials personally and
[48:50.780 --> 48:55.860] get around the limitations for qualified immunity limitations.
[48:55.860 --> 48:59.940] Does that make sense, John?
[48:59.940 --> 49:00.940] It does.
[49:00.940 --> 49:06.420] So will the city, if you sue the police officers in their personal capacity, I get that.
[49:06.420 --> 49:13.980] And so, but the city is not gonna be liable, and the only way they think, what if we sue
[49:13.980 --> 49:19.460] the city as well, but doesn't that have to come under the Tort Claims Act?
[49:19.460 --> 49:21.700] How did it go through the city?
[49:21.700 --> 49:26.680] Well- Let me explain why I asked that question.
[49:26.680 --> 49:34.660] When I sued all these judges, these judges trained, they were required by the legislature
[49:34.660 --> 49:43.640] to develop training curriculum for magistrates in the setting of bail and other duties.
[49:43.640 --> 49:46.340] And I claimed that they did that.
[49:46.340 --> 49:52.860] So if you're going after the city, I would expect that you're going after the city for
[49:52.860 --> 50:01.660] improper training and direction of these officers, directing them to act in a way that was not
[50:01.660 --> 50:06.660] within law.
[50:06.660 --> 50:12.380] So that's what I accused these guys of.
[50:12.380 --> 50:21.060] So instead of saying, you guys did a bad job of training, I said, instead of properly training
[50:21.060 --> 50:29.980] these people to act in accordance with law, you conspired with these people to commit
[50:29.980 --> 50:31.740] criminal acts.
[50:31.740 --> 50:35.940] They're gonna say, no, we didn't do that.
[50:35.940 --> 50:41.780] Yeah, you can't say that I come in and I train your guys to do stuff, and what I train them
[50:41.780 --> 50:44.540] to do is illegal.
[50:44.540 --> 50:50.780] That's not training, that's conspiracy to commit.
[50:50.780 --> 50:57.100] These policemen are required to know the law.
[50:57.100 --> 51:01.660] Before they enforce law, they need to know what it is.
[51:01.660 --> 51:07.180] Because if they act outside law, they're on their own.
[51:07.180 --> 51:15.820] And you have a city here who have trained them to act in variance with standing law.
[51:15.820 --> 51:18.020] That's not training.
[51:18.020 --> 51:25.420] That's a RICO, a criminal enterprise, an ongoing criminal enterprise where they have conspired
[51:25.420 --> 51:30.660] one with the other to act in violation of law and deny citizens informed free access
[51:30.660 --> 51:35.820] to or enjoyment of their rights, and that's criminal.
[51:35.820 --> 51:40.580] And they've sworn on their oath that they'd uphold the constitution, protect the constitution
[51:40.580 --> 51:44.580] to uphold the laws.
[51:44.580 --> 51:47.660] Committing crimes is not within scope.
[51:47.660 --> 51:53.060] Does that make sense, John?
[51:53.060 --> 52:00.260] So I can go ahead and do the state claims and just do it in their personal capacity,
[52:00.260 --> 52:03.780] and then I'm bypassing the Kansas Tort Claims Act.
[52:03.780 --> 52:04.900] Yeah, totally.
[52:04.900 --> 52:12.740] They want the Tort Claims Act, prove that this falls under the Tort Claims Act.
[52:12.740 --> 52:15.300] You don't have to admit to that.
[52:15.300 --> 52:16.300] Okay.
[52:16.300 --> 52:23.100] So what about, here's kind of the issue that, and the main question that I have is, I think
[52:23.100 --> 52:27.060] that we're going to be able to defeat this motion for judgment on the pleadings either
[52:27.060 --> 52:29.460] way, even if we have to do it a second time.
[52:29.460 --> 52:36.340] And if we do an amendment, they get to, you know, kind of reset everything.
[52:36.340 --> 52:37.340] But if we can-
[52:37.340 --> 52:38.340] Okay, hold on.
[52:38.340 --> 52:39.340] Hold on.
[52:39.340 --> 52:41.380] You're in the Fed.
[52:41.380 --> 52:50.060] And when I, I helped someone sue recently in Arizona after Ashcroft, was it Twombly
[52:50.060 --> 52:56.940] or Iqbal, Brett, I think it was Iqbal, Ashcroft v. Iqbal.
[52:56.940 --> 53:00.020] Yeah, Twombly was Bell v. Twombly.
[53:00.020 --> 53:01.020] Bell Twombly.
[53:01.020 --> 53:02.020] Okay.
[53:02.020 --> 53:09.700] It changed the pleading standards, and that's when everybody started filing 12b6 motions.
[53:09.700 --> 53:15.940] Well, it appears as though the courts are getting tired of that, that they opened a
[53:15.940 --> 53:24.060] door they didn't intend to, because now every single civil suit gets a 12b6, and the judges
[53:24.060 --> 53:27.500] have to go through this BS on a 12b6.
[53:27.500 --> 53:36.780] So they required, just like Brett was talking about earlier, that the other party, the party
[53:36.780 --> 53:45.860] intended to file a 12b6, confer with the plaintiff to see if there are any issues that can be
[53:45.860 --> 53:50.940] cured by a amended pleading.
[53:50.940 --> 53:58.940] It's intended and expected that you will file an amended pleading.
[53:58.940 --> 54:09.220] And when I filed the federal suit, I filed it to get an amended pleading, to get a judgment.
[54:09.220 --> 54:10.980] I want to see the judge's judgment.
[54:10.980 --> 54:17.680] I want to see the answer from the other side, and I want a good one.
[54:17.680 --> 54:20.960] And then I want to see the judge's judgment.
[54:20.960 --> 54:24.300] In the Fed, you get a order and a judgment.
[54:24.300 --> 54:31.900] I want to see that judgment, because in there, they will do all your legal research for you.
[54:31.900 --> 54:35.500] They will tell you exactly how to argue this case.
[54:35.500 --> 54:41.500] And once you've read the judgment, then you write an amended pleading, and that's the
[54:41.500 --> 54:43.820] real deal.
[54:43.820 --> 54:46.300] The original petition is just a door opener.
[54:46.300 --> 54:47.300] Right.
[54:47.300 --> 54:48.300] Okay.
[54:48.300 --> 54:53.700] So it doesn't matter if we amend it or not.
[54:53.700 --> 55:00.060] We just thought maybe we could get to discovery quicker if we could win the motion for judgment
[55:00.060 --> 55:01.060] on the pleadings.
[55:01.060 --> 55:06.820] I'm not scared of a motion to dismiss, because I know we can beat them.
[55:06.820 --> 55:10.660] We just thought maybe we could move the case towards discovery, because there's a chance
[55:10.660 --> 55:14.380] that the judge could dismiss the motion for judgment on the pleadings, and then we could
[55:14.380 --> 55:18.780] go to discovery, and they missed their chance for qualified immunity.
[55:18.780 --> 55:26.980] They could do that, but if they treat this as a 12B6, it's in the rules that a 12B6
[55:26.980 --> 55:31.360] stops the clock on the answer.
[55:31.360 --> 55:40.860] They don't have to file an answer until the 12B6 is adjudicated, and they do that together
[55:40.860 --> 55:43.060] more to gain more time.
[55:43.060 --> 55:50.980] Okay, so they filed an answer and a motion for judgment on the pleadings.
[55:50.980 --> 55:55.860] So I feel like they tried to trick us, and they're trying to get us in some procedural,
[55:55.860 --> 56:00.580] you know, I don't know, wrestling match or something, but I don't really know what they're
[56:00.580 --> 56:01.580] doing.
[56:01.580 --> 56:05.300] You know, normally I always thought that the government is going to come back with a summary
[56:05.300 --> 56:12.500] judgment and claim qualified immunity, but they did the motion for judgment on the pleadings.
[56:12.500 --> 56:14.580] I don't even think they can beat the pleadings.
[56:14.580 --> 56:18.740] I mean, I kind of just don't know what they're doing.
[56:18.740 --> 56:23.420] We're kind of like at a loss of why would they would do something like that.
[56:23.420 --> 56:35.900] Well, if the court treats a motion for judgment on the pleadings as a 12B6, then everybody
[56:35.900 --> 56:44.740] files a 12B6, that way they're trying to avoid discovery.
[56:44.740 --> 56:57.060] It's essentially a request for summary judgment, but it doesn't go to facts in dispute.
[56:57.060 --> 57:02.380] It goes to whether or not you have a claim.
[57:02.380 --> 57:05.960] And I think you're right, they can't beat it.
[57:05.960 --> 57:13.300] If you've sued the officers in their personal capacity, claiming they were acting outside
[57:13.300 --> 57:18.820] the scope of their authority, you'll probably get past it.
[57:18.820 --> 57:28.420] But once you have read the judgment, then decide.
[57:28.420 --> 57:36.900] Once the judge throws out their arguments all together, which you probably won't.
[57:36.900 --> 57:45.100] Judges have created immunity that's not legislative, it's judicial.
[57:45.100 --> 57:49.820] And they're going to do everything they can to protect it because they don't want you
[57:49.820 --> 57:53.980] doing it to them.
[57:53.980 --> 57:59.700] So they'll probably rule against you, but that's okay.
[57:59.700 --> 58:04.540] They won't rule against you with prejudice, and then they'll tell you exactly what you
[58:04.540 --> 58:10.380] have to do to fix your plea.
[58:10.380 --> 58:16.140] Very unlikely you're going to get by without an amended plea.
[58:16.140 --> 58:21.620] At least that's my opinion.
[58:21.620 --> 58:26.060] I could be wrong, I was wrong once.
[58:26.060 --> 58:27.060] I thought I hit you.
[58:27.060 --> 58:29.060] Was that when you thought you made a mistake?
[58:29.060 --> 58:31.620] Yeah, but I was mistaken.
[58:31.620 --> 58:33.500] Okay, hang on.
[58:33.500 --> 58:39.020] Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain, and I bet nobody's heard that one before this.
[58:39.020 --> 58:50.180] Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain, Root of the Radio, we'll be right back.
[58:50.180 --> 58:54.340] Would you like to make more definite progress in your walk with God?
[58:54.340 --> 58:59.500] Bibles for America is offering a free study Bible and a set of free Christian books that
[58:59.500 --> 59:00.860] can really help.
[59:00.860 --> 59:05.300] The New Testament Recovery Version is one of the most comprehensive study Bibles available
[59:05.300 --> 59:06.300] today.
[59:06.300 --> 59:10.220] It's an accurate translation and it contains thousands of footnotes that will help you
[59:10.220 --> 59:13.300] to know God and to know the meaning of life.
[59:13.300 --> 59:18.580] The free books are a three volume set called Basic Elements of the Christian Life.
[59:18.580 --> 59:24.300] Here by chapter, Basic Elements of the Christian Life clearly presents God's plan of salvation,
[59:24.300 --> 59:27.780] growing in Christ, and how to build up the Church.
[59:27.780 --> 59:32.780] To order your free New Testament Recovery Version and Basic Elements of the Christian
[59:32.780 --> 59:45.560] Life, call Bibles for America toll free at 888-551-0102, that's 888-551-0102, or visit
[59:45.560 --> 59:49.060] us online at bfa.org.
[59:49.060 --> 01:00:02.220] Live, free speech radio, logosradionetwork.com.
[01:00:02.220 --> 01:00:05.860] The Bill of Rights contains the first ten amendments of our Constitution.
[01:00:05.860 --> 01:00:09.340] They guarantee the specific freedoms Americans should know and protect.
[01:00:09.340 --> 01:00:10.740] Our liberty depends on it.
[01:00:10.740 --> 01:00:14.700] I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht and I'll be right back with an unforgettable way to remember
[01:00:14.700 --> 01:00:17.580] one of your constitutional rights.
[01:00:17.580 --> 01:00:19.180] Privacy is under attack.
[01:00:19.180 --> 01:00:22.780] When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[01:00:22.780 --> 01:00:27.540] And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[01:00:27.540 --> 01:00:32.620] So protect your rights, say no to surveillance, and keep your information to yourself.
[01:00:32.620 --> 01:00:35.300] Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[01:00:35.300 --> 01:00:39.600] This public service announcement is brought to you by Startpage.com, the private search
[01:00:39.600 --> 01:00:43.140] engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[01:00:43.140 --> 01:00:45.220] Start over with Startpage.
[01:00:45.220 --> 01:00:48.940] Imagine your mom and dad are getting ready for bed.
[01:00:48.940 --> 01:00:52.020] They pull back the covers and find a third party there.
[01:00:52.020 --> 01:00:55.220] He announces, I'm with the military and I'm sleeping here tonight.
[01:00:55.220 --> 01:00:59.340] That shocking image of a third party in my parents' bed reminds me what the third amendment
[01:00:59.340 --> 01:01:00.940] was designed to prevent.
[01:01:00.940 --> 01:01:05.140] It protects us from being forced to share our homes with soldiers, a common demand in
[01:01:05.140 --> 01:01:07.280] the days of our founding fathers.
[01:01:07.280 --> 01:01:09.300] Third party, third amendment, get it?
[01:01:09.300 --> 01:01:13.420] So if you answer a knock at your door and guys in fatigues demand lodging, tell them
[01:01:13.420 --> 01:01:17.060] to dust off their copy of the Bill of Rights and reread the third amendment.
[01:01:17.060 --> 01:01:18.740] I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht.
[01:01:18.740 --> 01:01:32.060] More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[01:01:32.060 --> 01:01:35.700] The Bill of Rights contains the first 10 amendments of our Constitution.
[01:01:35.700 --> 01:01:39.160] They guarantee the specific freedoms Americans should know and protect.
[01:01:39.160 --> 01:01:40.620] Our liberty depends on it.
[01:01:40.620 --> 01:01:44.520] I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht and I'll be right back with an unforgettable way to remember
[01:01:44.520 --> 01:01:47.500] one of your constitutional rights.
[01:01:47.500 --> 01:01:49.100] Privacy is under attack.
[01:01:49.100 --> 01:01:52.700] When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[01:01:52.700 --> 01:01:57.460] And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[01:01:57.460 --> 01:02:02.540] So protect your rights, say no to surveillance, and keep your information to yourself.
[01:02:02.540 --> 01:02:05.240] Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[01:02:05.240 --> 01:02:09.540] This public service announcement is brought to you by StartPage.com, the private search
[01:02:09.540 --> 01:02:13.060] engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[01:02:13.060 --> 01:02:16.780] Start over with StartPage.
[01:02:16.780 --> 01:02:22.140] Imagine four eyes staring at you through binoculars, a magnifying glass, or a pair of x-ray goggles.
[01:02:22.140 --> 01:02:26.620] That imagery reminds me that the Fourth Amendment guarantees Americans freedom from unreasonable
[01:02:26.620 --> 01:02:28.100] search and seizure.
[01:02:28.100 --> 01:02:31.220] Fourth Amendment, four eyes staring at you, get it?
[01:02:31.220 --> 01:02:34.580] Unfortunately, the government is trampling our Fourth Amendment rights in the name of
[01:02:34.580 --> 01:02:35.580] security.
[01:02:35.580 --> 01:02:40.100] Case in point, TSA airport scanners that peer under your clothing.
[01:02:40.100 --> 01:02:44.100] When government employees demand a peep at your privates without probable cause, I say
[01:02:44.100 --> 01:02:46.940] it's time to sound the constitutional alarm bells.
[01:02:46.940 --> 01:02:51.220] Join me in asking our representatives to dust off the Bill of Rights and use their googly
[01:02:51.220 --> 01:02:53.460] eyes to take a gander at the Fourth.
[01:02:53.460 --> 01:02:55.300] I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht.
[01:02:55.300 --> 01:03:04.980] More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[01:03:04.980 --> 01:03:30.740] It's all according to the will of the Almighty.
[01:03:30.740 --> 01:03:37.740] I ain't gonna pay for the car with my money. I won't pay for the fun with my body.
[01:03:37.740 --> 01:03:44.740] Their plans wicked and their logic shoddy. Ain't gonna pay for the oil with my body.
[01:03:44.740 --> 01:03:50.740] I won't pay for the boys with my money. Ain't gonna pay for the kids with my body.
[01:03:50.740 --> 01:04:02.740] Okay, we are back. Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain, Wheel of Law Radio on this Friday, the 14th of July, 2023.
[01:04:02.740 --> 01:04:09.740] And Brett, mark that on your chart. I got it right.
[01:04:09.740 --> 01:04:21.740] Okay, we're talking to John in Kansas. And yeah, I really don't think you're gonna get by without filing an amended appeal.
[01:04:21.740 --> 01:04:25.740] I mean, an amended complaint. That's not gonna happen.
[01:04:25.740 --> 01:04:36.740] And if they're treating this like a Rule 12, they may deny the Rule 12, but I doubt it.
[01:04:36.740 --> 01:04:47.740] These judges, they do not want official immunity disturbed. So they're gonna rule against you.
[01:04:47.740 --> 01:04:56.740] And that's okay. The way you win these is by getting them to come to the table and make a deal.
[01:04:56.740 --> 01:05:05.740] You have asked a question that they are not going to want to risk getting to the Supreme.
[01:05:05.740 --> 01:05:13.740] The Supreme has issued some really earth-shattering rulings lately.
[01:05:13.740 --> 01:05:23.740] The one that really stands out in my mind is that you no longer have to wait until a criminal case is completely adjudicated.
[01:05:23.740 --> 01:05:33.740] Neither do you have to have a criminal case adjudicated in your favor before you can file a civil action.
[01:05:33.740 --> 01:05:45.740] That was a really big deal. And my question would have been, who was the moron who let this get before the Supreme?
[01:05:45.740 --> 01:05:47.740] Yeah.
[01:05:47.740 --> 01:05:54.740] Why didn't you deal this out? You don't let that kind of stuff get out there.
[01:05:54.740 --> 01:06:06.740] And now we're asking the courts to rule that when a public official acts in an administrative capacity, he has no immunity.
[01:06:06.740 --> 01:06:14.740] And that's been ruled on repeatedly. That's in the law. It's very clear in the law.
[01:06:14.740 --> 01:06:20.740] They're not going to want this to get to the Court of Appeals or to the Supreme.
[01:06:20.740 --> 01:06:36.740] There's a very good chance they'll get ruled against it. It's because you very carefully craft your pleading so that you only go for the one issue.
[01:06:36.740 --> 01:06:42.740] If you give them an issue that they can screw you with, they'll do that.
[01:06:42.740 --> 01:06:58.740] If they can say that in this case, you can sue the city, but not the employee. And I've seen case law that said a suit against the city employee is a suit against the city.
[01:06:58.740 --> 01:07:08.740] So in this case, John, didn't they tell you that you didn't include the correct party?
[01:07:08.740 --> 01:07:12.740] John?
[01:07:12.740 --> 01:07:16.740] Yeah, I'm sorry. Could you say that again?
[01:07:16.740 --> 01:07:30.740] Did they claim that you did not sue the correct party as you should have sued the jurisdiction, the county, or the city?
[01:07:30.740 --> 01:07:44.740] No, because I, in the pleading and the complaint, I pointed out we're suing the police officers in their official, in their personal capacities, and then we're suing the city.
[01:07:44.740 --> 01:08:04.740] Oh, so you have them both in there? Yes. So they're going to, in their motion for ruling on the pleadings, what did they ask for?
[01:08:04.740 --> 01:08:18.740] They were claiming qualified and absolute immunity, and that they just, and they did try to claim that we had a claim against the city.
[01:08:18.740 --> 01:08:32.740] But, I mean, really, they just want to do, they just want to go straight and have everything ruled in pleadings, but they can't because we haven't seen the materials back.
[01:08:32.740 --> 01:08:47.740] Did they argue that a public official, private capacity, even if he acts outside of scope, did they address that?
[01:08:47.740 --> 01:09:05.740] No. So they were certain that the judges would give them their ruling no matter what. That's what happened when I sued the judge in Victoria County. The judge didn't even read the pleadings, didn't care.
[01:09:05.740 --> 01:09:12.740] He was going to grant them immunity no matter what, and that's what you're going to get.
[01:09:12.740 --> 01:09:20.740] Well, here, but in this situation, the rules say they can't do the motion for judgment on the pleadings, and I kind of have a secret weapon here.
[01:09:20.740 --> 01:09:38.740] So the judge that we have in the 10th District, Kansas Fed, I actually found a case very similar in the situation that we had two defendants, one did a motion to dismiss, didn't file an answer, then the other did a motion for judgment on the pleadings.
[01:09:38.740 --> 01:09:53.740] It's almost exactly the same situation. So our judge in 2021 made the same exact ruling, and I took his order, copied and pasted every single argument that he made, put it into my reply.
[01:09:53.740 --> 01:10:03.740] And so if the judge does rule in favor, then I'm going to throw his own opinion right back in the face.
[01:10:03.740 --> 01:10:10.740] Wait a minute, wait, are you saying that you plagiarized a judge?
[01:10:10.740 --> 01:10:13.740] Absolutely, the same judge.
[01:10:13.740 --> 01:10:16.740] Oh, that is perfect.
[01:10:16.740 --> 01:10:26.740] For everybody else, this is how it's done.
[01:10:26.740 --> 01:10:31.740] Okay, this does sound interesting.
[01:10:31.740 --> 01:10:39.740] So Chris from Missouri, he read my reply to the motion for judgment on the pleadings, he goes, man, that's great.
[01:10:39.740 --> 01:10:43.740] He's like, man, you really did your research.
[01:10:43.740 --> 01:10:56.740] And I told him, well, I only did enough research, but I found a complaint that was exactly the same situation, and I couldn't believe it when I looked to see who the judge was in the same exact judge.
[01:10:56.740 --> 01:11:01.740] We can't.
[01:11:01.740 --> 01:11:04.740] It will be interesting.
[01:11:04.740 --> 01:11:09.740] And so that's where we're at. I think we can win on the motion for judgment on the pleadings.
[01:11:09.740 --> 01:11:18.740] And so if we amend, won't that reset everything? And should we do that? And just go ahead, because we have really good claims, you know, 1983.
[01:11:18.740 --> 01:11:31.740] No, if you win judgment on the plea, the judgment on the pleadings, then absolutely do not amend.
[01:11:31.740 --> 01:11:35.740] Because you're right, it would reset everything.
[01:11:35.740 --> 01:11:39.740] But if you lose, then you amend.
[01:11:39.740 --> 01:11:49.740] And make the adjustments that the court directs you to make. Pay close attention to what they tell you.
[01:11:49.740 --> 01:11:58.740] Right. I agree with that. Well, that's my question. Right now, that is my question.
[01:11:58.740 --> 01:12:06.740] As long as you're winning, don't amend.
[01:12:06.740 --> 01:12:10.740] Okay. That's what I've been telling Chris.
[01:12:10.740 --> 01:12:17.740] I mean, because we have a couple extra claims, but they're just state claims that would be matching the federal claims that we already have.
[01:12:17.740 --> 01:12:20.740] So we can win on our federal claims.
[01:12:20.740 --> 01:12:29.740] So then that's what I told him. I said, let's not reset the whole case just because we want to add a couple claims.
[01:12:29.740 --> 01:12:37.740] Exactly. I would agree. I would agree with you exactly.
[01:12:37.740 --> 01:12:44.740] Well, that's good. But that's what I think. And if Randy Kelton thinks, then I think I'm on the right track.
[01:12:44.740 --> 01:12:50.740] That's all I can do. That's good.
[01:12:50.740 --> 01:12:56.740] Now I feel like you just shoved a dime up under my feet.
[01:12:56.740 --> 01:13:02.740] Well, I'll just close. I'll let you get to the other callers. I mean, that answers my question.
[01:13:02.740 --> 01:13:05.740] Okay.
[01:13:05.740 --> 01:13:12.740] So Chris from Missouri, he was in that store and he really didn't like the things that he said.
[01:13:12.740 --> 01:13:18.740] And of course, they ignore all the stuff the other people said. And then my reply to the motion to dismiss,
[01:13:18.740 --> 01:13:23.740] they made it seem like he was a horrible person and said all these mean things.
[01:13:23.740 --> 01:13:31.740] And my first quote on my reply was, sticks and stones break my bones, but words have never hurt me.
[01:13:31.740 --> 01:13:38.740] Well, I don't know. This is court. Sometimes they can.
[01:13:38.740 --> 01:13:44.740] I did put in a plea once that the
[01:13:44.740 --> 01:13:54.740] probably this is about the prosecutor has been saying all these bad things about me. He's going to hurt my feelings.
[01:13:54.740 --> 01:14:01.740] Well, it doesn't hurt. It doesn't hurt to lighten things up on occasion.
[01:14:01.740 --> 01:14:09.740] Right. So that's what I did. And so they complained, you know, so they called they called 911 in less than a second.
[01:14:09.740 --> 01:14:16.740] He asked them why they wanted him to leave the store and they called 911 within less than a second.
[01:14:16.740 --> 01:14:23.740] And so, you know, I said, you know, you know, in the past, you know, criminal trespass, the law does not say,
[01:14:23.740 --> 01:14:33.740] and this is something that you said, the law does not say when you get asked to leave a place that you have to turn and sprint to the door.
[01:14:33.740 --> 01:14:40.740] So I said that and, you know, they're like, oh, well, you know, that's a flippant response or flippant comment or whatever.
[01:14:40.740 --> 01:14:48.740] And so to that, I wrote, you know, well, the law doesn't say again that he has to turn and sprint to the door.
[01:14:48.740 --> 01:14:54.740] It's as if they expected him to have a teleporter and just leave, you know, immediately.
[01:14:54.740 --> 01:15:11.740] And then I put and everybody knows that that's not possible because it takes five to 10 seconds to activate your teleportation device.
[01:15:11.740 --> 01:15:15.740] OK, well, I think you're in good shape, John.
[01:15:15.740 --> 01:15:20.740] Great. Well, I appreciate you guys taking the call and and I appreciate it, Brett and Randy.
[01:15:20.740 --> 01:15:24.740] I appreciate all y'all's help. OK, thank you, John.
[01:15:24.740 --> 01:15:30.740] Now we're going to go to Roger in Wisconsin. Hello, Roger.
[01:15:30.740 --> 01:15:45.740] Yes. Hello. And thank you for providing a forum for the common masses of how to protect themselves without an attorney and the potential for abuses of court corruption.
[01:15:45.740 --> 01:15:53.740] This is right. Yeah. Yeah. We we preached all you deplorables out there.
[01:15:53.740 --> 01:16:02.740] Yeah. This if you recall, I'm from your old neck and woods, Randy, the far north side, you know.
[01:16:02.740 --> 01:16:29.740] But anyways, Mike, upon distillatory motion, you guys were speaking of my correct and saying that the judge has to have a hearing upon that motion and do to get it, whether it could be used or have a bearing on the case.
[01:16:29.740 --> 01:16:34.740] Does the judge have to have a hearing on the motion?
[01:16:34.740 --> 01:16:42.740] Are you saying you want to know whether or not you can rule on it without having a hearing?
[01:16:42.740 --> 01:16:47.740] Yeah, well, I mean, what would you say?
[01:16:47.740 --> 01:16:49.740] Wait, wait, wait. Hang on. We're about to go to our sponsors.
[01:16:49.740 --> 01:16:54.740] We'll pick this up on the other side, but we'll need to know what kind of motion it is to know if you can rule.
[01:16:54.740 --> 01:16:59.740] It's responding. We'll be right back.
[01:16:59.740 --> 01:17:04.740] Are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters or even lawsuits?
[01:17:04.740 --> 01:17:08.740] Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Mears proven method.
[01:17:08.740 --> 01:17:13.740] Michael Mears has won six cases in federal court against debt collectors, and now you can win, too.
[01:17:13.740 --> 01:17:19.740] You'll get step by step instructions in plain English on how to win in court using federal civil rights statutes.
[01:17:19.740 --> 01:17:25.740] What to do when contacted by phone, mail or court summons. How to answer letters and phone calls.
[01:17:25.740 --> 01:17:28.740] How to get debt collectors out of your credit report.
[01:17:28.740 --> 01:17:32.740] How to turn the financial tables on them and make them pay you to go away.
[01:17:32.740 --> 01:17:37.740] The Michael Mears proven method is the solution for how to stop debt collectors.
[01:17:37.740 --> 01:17:40.740] Personal consultation is available as well.
[01:17:40.740 --> 01:17:48.740] For more information, please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the blue Michael Mears banner or email michaelmears at yahoo.com.
[01:17:48.740 --> 01:17:59.740] That's ruleoflawradio.com or email m-i-c-h-a-e-l-m-i-r-r-a-s at yahoo.com to learn how to stop debt collectors now.
[01:17:59.740 --> 01:18:04.740] I love logos. Without the shows on this network, I'd be almost as ignorant as my friends.
[01:18:04.740 --> 01:18:08.740] I'm so addicted to the truth now that there's no going back. I need my truth fixed.
[01:18:08.740 --> 01:18:12.740] I'd be lost without logos, and I really want to help keep this network on the air.
[01:18:12.740 --> 01:18:15.740] I'd love to volunteer as a show producer, but I'm a bit of a Luddite,
[01:18:15.740 --> 01:18:19.740] and I really don't have any money to give because I spend it all on supplements.
[01:18:19.740 --> 01:18:21.740] How can I help logos?
[01:18:21.740 --> 01:18:26.740] Well, I'm glad you asked. Whenever you order anything from Amazon, you can help logos.
[01:18:26.740 --> 01:18:28.740] You can order your supplies or holiday gifts.
[01:18:28.740 --> 01:18:30.740] First thing you do is clear your cookies.
[01:18:30.740 --> 01:18:36.740] Now, go to logosradionetwork.com. Click on the Amazon logo and bookmark it.
[01:18:36.740 --> 01:18:42.740] Now, when you order anything from Amazon, you use that link, and logos gets a few pesos.
[01:18:42.740 --> 01:18:43.740] Do I pay extra?
[01:18:43.740 --> 01:18:44.740] No.
[01:18:44.740 --> 01:18:46.740] Do I have to do anything different when I order?
[01:18:46.740 --> 01:18:47.740] No.
[01:18:47.740 --> 01:18:48.740] Can I use my Amazon Prime?
[01:18:48.740 --> 01:18:50.740] No. I mean, yes.
[01:18:50.740 --> 01:18:56.740] Wow. Giving without doing anything or spending any money. This is perfect. Thank you so much.
[01:18:56.740 --> 01:18:57.740] We are welcome.
[01:18:57.740 --> 01:19:14.740] Happy holidays, logos.
[01:19:14.740 --> 01:19:29.740] Thank you.
[01:19:29.740 --> 01:19:44.740] Thank you.
[01:19:44.740 --> 01:20:12.740] Thank you.
[01:20:12.740 --> 01:20:17.740] Thank you.
[01:20:17.740 --> 01:20:25.740] And we're talking to Roger in Wisconsin, and it depends on what kind of motion it is.
[01:20:25.740 --> 01:20:39.740] If there are material facts in dispute, then it's generally not appropriate for the judge to rule without hearing.
[01:20:39.740 --> 01:20:49.740] If the parties request oral argument, then generally the judge needs to hold oral argument.
[01:20:49.740 --> 01:20:52.740] Okay. Thank you for that.
[01:20:52.740 --> 01:21:21.740] The second question is a defendant in a criminal case files judicial complaints, a couple against two judges, and then the state Supreme Court, which addresses the validity of these judicial bar agreements as well as bar agreements for attorneys, usually responds that they have found no just cause for action on their part as far as sanctions or criminal charges, etc.
[01:21:21.740 --> 01:21:28.740] Additionally, it is possible to file for a period of 10 years, correct?
[01:21:28.740 --> 01:21:51.740] Well, not in Texas. Okay, let me split this between law and politics. The law, like in Texas, it says that you have to file a bar grievance within a year, Brett.
[01:21:51.740 --> 01:21:53.740] I haven't seen any limits.
[01:21:53.740 --> 01:22:13.740] Yeah, it's in there somewhere. But in the real world, someone just talked to me about that, about filing them, and they had filed one, and the bar stated that it was over a certain time, and I think they said a year.
[01:22:13.740 --> 01:22:23.740] And that's kind of reasonable because people forget witnesses move away, and if it gets too old, it's hard to figure things out.
[01:22:23.740 --> 01:22:31.740] Okay, with that said, the real reason we file bar grievances is to steam their insurance.
[01:22:31.740 --> 01:22:37.740] And I don't think the insurance company cares about how old it is.
[01:22:37.740 --> 01:22:48.740] You got an agent whose job it is to charge his client as much as possible and avoid any claims.
[01:22:48.740 --> 01:22:57.740] So he's not going to care how old it is. It's going to give him an excuse to raise the premium.
[01:22:57.740 --> 01:23:01.740] So I would say if it's 20 years old, file it.
[01:23:01.740 --> 01:23:08.740] Okay. But in Wisconsin, it is 10 years, last I've read.
[01:23:08.740 --> 01:23:33.740] But as you've mentioned many times, the bar grievances or judicial conduct complaints against the judge, the state Supreme Court, which oversees all of that, basically denies the validity of it,
[01:23:33.740 --> 01:23:40.740] unless it is just so far over the top that their hands are tied.
[01:23:40.740 --> 01:23:54.740] And just like you've always said, the Supreme Court is just going to poo poo it, anything that comes across the desk, basically,
[01:23:54.740 --> 01:24:03.740] unless it is just so undoubtedly criminal or something, but mostly financial.
[01:24:03.740 --> 01:24:16.740] I've seen whereas the financial aspect takes precedence over pretty much on anything else in that regard.
[01:24:16.740 --> 01:24:29.740] It seems like they get picky about lawyers who lie to the review board when the review board is trying to get to the bottom of something and the lawyer lies, then they have a hard time with that.
[01:24:29.740 --> 01:24:47.740] Or if the issue that you're bar grieving about is already out in the news, it's in the media and everybody's seen it, it's kind of high profile, oh, then that's their one that they need to make an example out of something.
[01:24:47.740 --> 01:25:02.740] Okay, then a defendant in a criminal court, which has an SPD, state public defender, basically has his or her mouthpiece. There's no ability to file motions or even speak in open court.
[01:25:02.740 --> 01:25:17.740] Upon the judge allowing a defendant's attorney to withdraw, the defendant took the opportunity to file motions that the prior attorney wouldn't.
[01:25:17.740 --> 01:25:37.740] They were denied by the judge in addition to all motions of prior SPD and subsequently during this time in between the defendant's first counsel withdrawing and defendant filing motions and also exculpatory evidence, all of which were denied.
[01:25:37.740 --> 01:25:53.740] The victim sent voicemail correspondence stating, don't piss off the judge. Is that considered witness tampering?
[01:25:53.740 --> 01:25:56.740] Who told them that?
[01:25:56.740 --> 01:26:25.740] The supposed victim in a criminal case involving domestic abuse, where there is a no contact order, contacts the defendant and leaves a voicemail, which was recorded by the defendant, stating, don't piss off the judge by filing motions in between the withdrawal of the first
[01:26:25.740 --> 01:26:34.740] SPD and a subsequent one assigned. Would that be considered witness tampering?
[01:26:34.740 --> 01:26:39.740] I would consider it witness tampering. Absolutely.
[01:26:39.740 --> 01:26:40.740] Yes, sir.
[01:26:40.740 --> 01:26:51.740] That should get criminal charges locally and a motion for sanctions with the court.
[01:26:51.740 --> 01:27:20.740] The judge denied 500 voicemails, communicates via email and text messages to be, how should I say, they were sent to the prosecutor district attorney to the clerk by all the I's and T's dotted and everything.
[01:27:20.740 --> 01:27:35.740] And it was just basically denied by the judge. And then the appeal court, the appeals attorney, subsequent to that, found no appealable errors in the whole, within the whole case. And there was many.
[01:27:35.740 --> 01:27:40.740] Have you went to the Supreme yet?
[01:27:40.740 --> 01:27:42.740] No.
[01:27:42.740 --> 01:27:53.740] That's your next step. But in saying this, it sounds like the courts are totally corrupt.
[01:27:53.740 --> 01:28:04.740] But it's been my experience that most of them are not so totally corrupt as it sounds except California.
[01:28:04.740 --> 01:28:15.740] If these are motions and pleadings filed by a pro se, I would want to see the motions and pleadings.
[01:28:15.740 --> 01:28:35.740] To see, because I said as a judge in a mock trial once, and it was disturbing because I had this guy who is into the patriot mythology stuff, and he had a guy helping him.
[01:28:35.740 --> 01:28:48.740] And I'm sitting here as a judge, I need facts, and I need law as it applies to those facts, and he's giving me lots of legal theory.
[01:28:48.740 --> 01:29:00.740] Well, that's really nice. You can give me all that theory you want to, but it's not helpful because I can't rule on all that theory.
[01:29:00.740 --> 01:29:05.740] You have to give me facts and law, and I didn't have it.
[01:29:05.740 --> 01:29:20.740] So it's often a problem with the pro se is they don't always give the judge what they need, what the judge needs in order to adjudicate the case.
[01:29:20.740 --> 01:29:37.740] And it's frustrating because they might be right, the pro se might be right, but the way that they're coming at things, they're offering all these conclusions instead of the facts that will lead someone else to those conclusions.
[01:29:37.740 --> 01:29:52.740] And we've been mostly siding with the pro se and integrating the courts, and I'm beginning to believe that's a bad idea because people get the idea that the courts are totally corrupt and they're really not.
[01:29:52.740 --> 01:30:00.740] Hang on, we'll speak to this when we come back. We're into Kelton Brent Fountain. We'll be right back.
[01:30:00.740 --> 01:30:10.740] Sorry, soft drink lovers. Even diet drinks can make you fat. The new study shows that diet soda drinkers gain much more weight than people who avoid the stuff.
[01:30:10.740 --> 01:30:15.740] I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, and I'll be back in a moment with a scoop on supposedly skinny sodas.
[01:30:15.740 --> 01:30:26.740] Privacy is under attack. When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again. And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish, too.
[01:30:26.740 --> 01:30:31.740] So protect your rights. Say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself.
[01:30:31.740 --> 01:30:41.740] Privacy. It's worth hanging on to. This public service announcement is brought to you by StartPage.com, the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[01:30:41.740 --> 01:30:45.740] Start over with StartPage.
[01:30:45.740 --> 01:30:50.740] Artificial sweeteners cut the calories and help you lose weight, right? Wrong.
[01:30:50.740 --> 01:31:02.740] Researchers at UT San Antonio followed hundreds of diet soda drinkers for nearly a decade. They found that regularly drinking diet soda expanded people's waistlines five times more than no soda at all.
[01:31:02.740 --> 01:31:09.740] The study's authors say artificial sweeteners trigger the appetite, but unlike regular sugars, don't deliver anything to squelch it.
[01:31:09.740 --> 01:31:15.740] Waking up hunger without satisfying it leads to cravings, which can result in a larger overall calorie intake.
[01:31:15.740 --> 01:31:23.740] So use natural sweeteners to maintain a healthy weight, and if you need to shed some pounds, avoid the sweet stuff altogether and drink water instead.
[01:31:23.740 --> 01:31:29.740] I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht. More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[01:31:29.740 --> 01:31:35.740] This is Building 7, a 47-story skyscraper that fell on the afternoon of September 11.
[01:31:35.740 --> 01:31:42.740] The government says that fire brought it down. However, 1,500 architects and engineers concluded it was a controlled demolition.
[01:31:42.740 --> 01:31:45.740] Over 6,000 of my fellow service members have given their lives.
[01:31:45.740 --> 01:31:47.740] Thousands of my fellow first responders are dying.
[01:31:47.740 --> 01:31:49.740] I'm not a conspiracy theorist.
[01:31:49.740 --> 01:31:50.740] I'm a structural engineer.
[01:31:50.740 --> 01:31:51.740] I'm a New York City correction officer.
[01:31:51.740 --> 01:31:52.740] I'm an Air Force pilot.
[01:31:52.740 --> 01:31:54.740] I'm a father who lost his son.
[01:31:54.740 --> 01:31:56.740] We're Americans, and we deserve the truth.
[01:31:56.740 --> 01:32:00.740] Go to RememberBuilding7.org today.
[01:32:00.740 --> 01:32:04.740] Rule of Law Radio is proud to offer the Rule of Law traffic seminar.
[01:32:04.740 --> 01:32:11.740] 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, then we're going to have to stand and defend our own rights.
[01:32:11.740 --> 01:32:18.740] Among those rights are the right to travel freely from place to place, the right to act in our own private capacity, and most importantly, the right to due process of law.
[01:32:18.740 --> 01:32:24.740] Traffic courts afford us the least expensive opportunity to learn how to enforce and preserve our rights through due process.
[01:32:24.740 --> 01:32:34.740] Former Sheriff's Deputy Eddie Craig, in conjunction with Rule of Law Radio, has put together the most comprehensive teaching tool available that will help you understand what due process is and how to hold courts to the rule of law.
[01:32:34.740 --> 01:32:49.740] You can get your own copy of this invaluable material by going to ruleoflawradio.com and ordering your copy today. By ordering now, you'll receive a copy of Eddie's book, The Texas Transportation Code, The Law Versus the Lie, video and audio of the original 2009 seminar, hundreds of research documents, and other useful resource material.
[01:32:49.740 --> 01:32:53.740] Learn how to fight for your rights with the help of this material from ruleoflawradio.com.
[01:32:53.740 --> 01:33:00.740] Order your copy today, and together we can have the free society we all want and deserve.
[01:33:00.740 --> 01:33:10.740] Looking for some truth? You found it. LogosRadioNetwork.com.
[01:33:30.740 --> 01:33:58.740] OK, howdy, howdy, Randy Kalten, Brett Fountain, Rule of Law Radio, and we are talking to Roger in Wisconsin.
[01:34:00.740 --> 01:34:04.740] OK, Roger, where were we?
[01:34:04.740 --> 01:34:16.740] I'd also like to say, I've been in contact with Janet Phelan, a former special guest you've had on the show a couple times. Familiar?
[01:34:16.740 --> 01:34:19.740] Wait, say that again, Janet?
[01:34:19.740 --> 01:34:20.740] Phelan.
[01:34:20.740 --> 01:34:22.740] Janet Phelan?
[01:34:22.740 --> 01:34:26.740] Yeah, she was a special guest on your show, yeah.
[01:34:26.740 --> 01:34:30.740] The one that's in Mexico.
[01:34:30.740 --> 01:34:52.740] Well, yeah, she had to flee the country. She authored a couple books. A recent one was Exile, I believe, and she was an investigative journalist for like New York Times and LA Times, you know, a lot of the big news agencies.
[01:34:52.740 --> 01:35:09.740] And she exposed the court corruption and bribery schemes of judges and teaches a seminar kind of like Eddie Craig with his traffic seminar on how to investigate these judges.
[01:35:09.740 --> 01:35:28.740] But recently she's been like, been reporting like she's at death's door and getting improper health care. So I could just say it, you know, for all people, Christians out there to pray for Janet's good health or recovery.
[01:35:28.740 --> 01:35:35.740] Yeah, she fell and got a concussion or something.
[01:35:35.740 --> 01:35:54.740] Well, apparently something with her legs or extremities where she's having problems walking and just not getting proper health care. It almost seems retaliatory, possibly. She claims that's a possibility.
[01:35:54.740 --> 01:36:20.740] I just, it's just amazing to me how stacked the cards are against a pro se, first of all, and how they could basically deny even no matter how proper dotting the i's and the t's and filing of motions and pleadings and doing everything perfectly.
[01:36:20.740 --> 01:36:31.740] And they just still deny it. And then it goes on down the chain and they know they just buy time. And, you know, there's bribery involved.
[01:36:31.740 --> 01:36:52.740] Just as Janet had said, unbelievably 6,000 ahead, especially prevalent in family court. And sure enough, this judge came up through family court into criminal court proceedings and that amount 6,000 popped up.
[01:36:52.740 --> 01:37:14.740] So, you know, what do you do then? You know, who do you contact? You know, then the, okay, the FBI? Well, you know, it almost seems as though that's a no-win situation as well. They don't follow up on it or whatever. So, you know, where do you take it from there?
[01:37:14.740 --> 01:37:29.740] You ask you, that's the way through general. The courts are corrupt. They've always been corrupt. Always. And from my experience in some 70 years, they're better than they used to be.
[01:37:29.740 --> 01:37:48.740] When I was growing up, the police could arrest you and beat you half to death and nobody would say a thing. I grew up in Chicago and on what they call the mean streets. I grew up in a Puerto Rican neighborhood and it was tough.
[01:37:48.740 --> 01:37:53.740] We were more afraid of the police than we were the criminals.
[01:37:53.740 --> 01:38:12.740] The police were much, much more dangerous. So it's better than it has been. Is it perfect? No, it's not perfect. Is it corrupt? It is corrupt and it always will be corrupt because it's administrated by human beings.
[01:38:12.740 --> 01:38:31.740] So if you expect the laws to create some kind of utopia for you, you can forget that noise. Look back through human history. What is the one thing human beings are absolutely best at?
[01:38:31.740 --> 01:38:46.740] Praying on other human beings. I agree to that. It is in our genes. Don't expect it to go away. In order to defeat it, we have to get better.
[01:38:46.740 --> 01:39:04.740] I just filed a suit in Texas that I've been working on for 30 years to get it right. There's a problem and we have all of these symptoms all over the place.
[01:39:04.740 --> 01:39:17.740] If we don't figure out what the problem is, we're just going to be swatting the symptoms. This is not something you can just do because you're pissed off.
[01:39:17.740 --> 01:39:31.740] I've got a guy in south Texas, west of, near Orange, Texas, who was arrested and they broke his arm and he's pissed off. And he's went after him and he's not having very good luck.
[01:39:31.740 --> 01:39:41.740] You can't do this because you're pissed off. You can't do this because somebody was mistreated at one time or another.
[01:39:41.740 --> 01:39:53.740] I have more horror stories than I can keep track of. I constantly have people telling me, oh, you're not going to believe how horrible this is.
[01:39:53.740 --> 01:40:07.740] I have to tell them, yeah, I am, because I hear so many. It is a mess. If we're going to fix it, we can't do it angry. We've got to get down and get to work.
[01:40:07.740 --> 01:40:14.740] Roger, have you read the Wisconsin Penal Code and Criminal Procedure Code?
[01:40:14.740 --> 01:40:28.740] Yes, it's been about five or six years and I'm sorry, I don't have all of those statutes and everything readily available.
[01:40:28.740 --> 01:40:32.740] Have you been through jurisdictionary?
[01:40:32.740 --> 01:40:34.740] I want to get it. I do.
[01:40:34.740 --> 01:40:49.740] Oh, get that. We can't have a good conversation until you've been through jurisdictionary. I had a caller who used to call all the time and he used to rebroadcast us in Madison, Wisconsin, Mark.
[01:40:49.740 --> 01:40:59.740] And he called up one day and he was talking about his case and I said, well, Mark, you ought to file a petition for real mandamus. Oh, I did that. I did that.
[01:40:59.740 --> 01:41:08.740] Oh, okay. And we talked a little longer. I said, well, man, that should get a petition for real habeas corpus. Oh, I did that. I did that.
[01:41:08.740 --> 01:41:14.740] I said, Mark, have you been through jurisdictionary? Oh, yeah, I've been through jurisdictionary.
[01:41:14.740 --> 01:41:17.740] That's how I could tell.
[01:41:17.740 --> 01:41:25.740] Jurisdictionary is a course that every lawyer should take when they get out of law school.
[01:41:25.740 --> 01:41:27.740] Dr. Graves?
[01:41:27.740 --> 01:41:31.740] Dr. Graves. And he's in Michigan. He's close to you now.
[01:41:31.740 --> 01:41:34.740] It's a great resource. It'll help you a lot.
[01:41:34.740 --> 01:41:38.740] It's like a toolbox.
[01:41:38.740 --> 01:41:43.740] Well, Mark was the one that referred me to rule of law, actually.
[01:41:43.740 --> 01:41:47.740] What happened to him? I hadn't heard from him forever.
[01:41:47.740 --> 01:41:59.740] I don't know. I haven't heard much from him either. Joe Baker, speaking of, thank you very much for coming on the show.
[01:41:59.740 --> 01:42:10.740] I really wanted him to address the issue of the 50 criminal complaints you waged against the governor of Texas Abbott.
[01:42:10.740 --> 01:42:24.740] I wanted to ask you to discuss the matter of what those complaints were, especially the sedition and more.
[01:42:24.740 --> 01:42:30.740] Wait a minute. Are you talking about the complaints I filed or you mentioned Joe Baker?
[01:42:30.740 --> 01:42:38.740] Well, we had you on the show, Joe Baker's remedy report, if you recall.
[01:42:38.740 --> 01:42:44.740] Oh, OK. OK. You're talking about the complaint I filed against the governor.
[01:42:44.740 --> 01:42:46.740] Yeah.
[01:42:46.740 --> 01:42:49.740] Are you on our Telegram channel?
[01:42:49.740 --> 01:42:52.740] Not yet, but I'm going to.
[01:42:52.740 --> 01:43:02.740] OK. Send me an email. I'll send you a link to the Telegram channel and I'll send you a copy of that complaint.
[01:43:02.740 --> 01:43:08.740] Excellent. But I wanted to thank you for being such a great guest upon your interview.
[01:43:08.740 --> 01:43:18.740] But I really wanted Joe to address that issue of your 50 criminal complaints because the way I look at it,
[01:43:18.740 --> 01:43:29.740] you kind of single handedly brought back the industry and commerce normalcy to this country, you know, based on that.
[01:43:29.740 --> 01:43:39.740] Because as I read into it, you know, within a short time, 18 states and then subsequent to that, you know,
[01:43:39.740 --> 01:43:47.740] the rest of the states followed suit on rescinding their signatures of the Governor's Emergency Powers Act.
[01:43:47.740 --> 01:43:53.740] I'll address that when I come back. I don't think it was because of my complaint and I'll explain why when we come back.
[01:43:53.740 --> 01:43:59.740] Greene, Kelton, Brett Fountain, Rudy, we'll be right back.
[01:44:23.740 --> 01:44:25.740] Thank you very much.
[01:44:53.740 --> 01:44:58.740] Improved health, help your friends and family and increase your income.
[01:44:58.740 --> 01:45:03.740] Order now. Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[01:45:03.740 --> 01:45:14.740] Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary, the affordable, easy to understand, four CD course that will show you how in 24 hours, step by step.
[01:45:14.740 --> 01:45:22.740] If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing. If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[01:45:22.740 --> 01:45:27.740] Thousands have won with our step by step course and now you can too.
[01:45:27.740 --> 01:45:33.740] Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case winning experience.
[01:45:33.740 --> 01:45:42.740] Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand about the principles and practices that control our American courts.
[01:45:42.740 --> 01:45:51.740] You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases, pro se tactics and much more.
[01:45:51.740 --> 01:46:00.740] Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner or call toll free 866-LAW-EZ.
[01:46:21.740 --> 01:46:48.740] We are back and we're talking to Roger in Wisconsin and Roger, if you keep talking like that, you can just stay on the show all night.
[01:46:48.740 --> 01:47:05.740] Really, what I think happened is the governor was beginning to realize that these executive orders were not such a good idea and Joe Sixpack was not a happy camper.
[01:47:05.740 --> 01:47:12.740] And he was looking at an election coming up and they were likely to throw his behind out office.
[01:47:12.740 --> 01:47:18.740] And when he got my complaints, he had plausible deniability.
[01:47:18.740 --> 01:47:22.740] So he had a reason to get rid of them.
[01:47:22.740 --> 01:47:31.740] And these other states looked at it and said, well, if the governor of Texas can do it, we can do it too, because they were looking at the same problem.
[01:47:31.740 --> 01:47:39.740] The far left, the conservative, what do you call the far left?
[01:47:39.740 --> 01:47:42.740] All kinds of things, but you can't see them on the radio.
[01:47:42.740 --> 01:47:44.740] Yeah, that's what I was trying to think of.
[01:47:44.740 --> 01:47:56.740] Anyway, you know, they were all for this, but the heart of the country is the conservative right.
[01:47:56.740 --> 01:47:59.740] And they were not happy campers.
[01:47:59.740 --> 01:48:09.740] Even the liberals who weren't being allowed to do everything they wanted to do, they weren't happy either, the ones that were working at least.
[01:48:09.740 --> 01:48:14.740] And it wasn't looking good for them, so they used that as an excuse.
[01:48:14.740 --> 01:48:15.740] But that's okay.
[01:48:15.740 --> 01:48:21.740] That's sometimes, that's how we can push things.
[01:48:21.740 --> 01:48:27.740] We don't have the power to go in there and change everything, so we got to take a step back.
[01:48:27.740 --> 01:48:33.740] You know, we do this show, Brett and I, and we're creatures of statute.
[01:48:33.740 --> 01:48:38.740] We only, for the most part, speak to facts and law.
[01:48:38.740 --> 01:48:49.740] But at the end of the day, we understand you can never expect to win your case simply because you have the law and the facts on your side.
[01:48:49.740 --> 01:48:52.740] To think so is naive.
[01:48:52.740 --> 01:49:02.740] You can expect to win your case if you have the politics on your side, and all politics is local, and it all goes to the money at the end of the day.
[01:49:02.740 --> 01:49:17.740] So while you use the rule of law to get you where you want to go, how you use the rule of law is pretty well determined by the politics.
[01:49:17.740 --> 01:49:20.740] So I'm looking at Texas.
[01:49:20.740 --> 01:49:23.740] Everything is done wrong.
[01:49:23.740 --> 01:49:31.740] And I spent years sorting out what was being done wrong and how it should have been done.
[01:49:31.740 --> 01:49:37.740] And always there was this nagging question, how does this happen?
[01:49:37.740 --> 01:49:39.740] You know, I'm an engineer.
[01:49:39.740 --> 01:49:49.740] If you give me a system, and the system's been working, but then it starts to break down generally.
[01:49:49.740 --> 01:49:55.740] It's not just having a problem in one place, it's having a problem everywhere.
[01:49:55.740 --> 01:50:00.740] Then you can't blame the system.
[01:50:00.740 --> 01:50:11.740] And it's not effective to chase after the symptoms and fix little problems as you come to them.
[01:50:11.740 --> 01:50:16.740] You need to take a step back and say, wait a minute.
[01:50:16.740 --> 01:50:27.740] What is the smallest change that could have been made that would propagate into all of these problems that we're having?
[01:50:27.740 --> 01:50:32.740] And I spent 30 years looking for it.
[01:50:32.740 --> 01:50:42.740] And Brett was the one who actually gave it to me in the last legislative session before the one that just ended.
[01:50:42.740 --> 01:50:50.740] They passed a new statute ordering the Court of Criminal Appeals, or better yet,
[01:50:50.740 --> 01:50:57.740] they ordered the Office of Court Administration in consultation with the Court of Criminal Appeals
[01:50:57.740 --> 01:51:04.740] to develop curriculum for the training of magistrates in the setting of bail and other duties.
[01:51:04.740 --> 01:51:16.740] Now, does that sound like something that would be effective over the whole system?
[01:51:16.740 --> 01:51:19.740] It's just a minor little thing.
[01:51:19.740 --> 01:51:25.740] When I looked at that, and I had been asking myself this question.
[01:51:25.740 --> 01:51:31.740] How is it that we have 254 counties in Texas?
[01:51:31.740 --> 01:51:44.740] Each one of them has an independently elected sheriff who independently determines how his office is run.
[01:51:44.740 --> 01:51:52.740] And trying to get 254 elected sheriffs all to do the same thing is like trying to herd cats.
[01:51:52.740 --> 01:52:05.740] So how is it that 254 sheriffs are directing their deputies to do everything wrong?
[01:52:05.740 --> 01:52:15.740] Every step from arrest to trial is not only wrong, it is very specifically against particular law.
[01:52:15.740 --> 01:52:18.740] How the heck does that happen?
[01:52:18.740 --> 01:52:25.740] And then Brett shows me 17.024. Is that what it was, Brett, if I got that right?
[01:52:25.740 --> 01:52:28.740] Yeah, that's the one.
[01:52:28.740 --> 01:52:34.740] I read that and said, holy mackerel, that's how it happens.
[01:52:34.740 --> 01:52:37.740] It's the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure.
[01:52:37.740 --> 01:52:56.740] Yeah, 17.024. It directed the Court of Criminal Appeals to perform an administrative function and develop training for these magistrates.
[01:52:56.740 --> 01:53:04.740] That's how you get 254 sheriffs all doing it wrong the same way.
[01:53:04.740 --> 01:53:07.740] They trained everybody to do it wrong.
[01:53:07.740 --> 01:53:13.740] And with that statute, it points precisely at the Court of Criminal Appeals judges.
[01:53:13.740 --> 01:53:20.740] In Texas, we have two high courts, Supreme for Civil, Court of Criminal Appeals for criminal.
[01:53:20.740 --> 01:53:25.740] That is the highest court in Texas for criminal.
[01:53:25.740 --> 01:53:27.740] They trained them.
[01:53:27.740 --> 01:53:39.740] So I don't believe that these judges deliberately made this horrible mess.
[01:53:39.740 --> 01:53:40.740] They inherited it.
[01:53:40.740 --> 01:53:43.740] It brings to the examining trial.
[01:53:43.740 --> 01:53:45.740] Yeah, examining trial.
[01:53:45.740 --> 01:53:47.740] But it's not just examining trial.
[01:53:47.740 --> 01:53:51.740] The examining trial was the key.
[01:53:51.740 --> 01:54:02.740] When they stopped doing examining trials, then police were free to arrest someone for anything they wanted to.
[01:54:02.740 --> 01:54:05.740] And they did not have to explain themselves.
[01:54:05.740 --> 01:54:09.740] And they didn't take them to a magistrate afterwards either.
[01:54:09.740 --> 01:54:11.740] They just took them to jail.
[01:54:11.740 --> 01:54:17.740] The arrest, they skipped all the steps and went straight to incarceration with no commitment order.
[01:54:17.740 --> 01:54:22.740] Not even any judicial review at all, just straight to a jail.
[01:54:22.740 --> 01:54:30.740] So just plain monopoly, you know, by task go and go directly to jail.
[01:54:30.740 --> 01:54:32.740] Yeah, this is kind of like monopoly.
[01:54:32.740 --> 01:54:35.740] When you play monopoly, it's all about strategy.
[01:54:35.740 --> 01:54:44.740] I don't expect to win a judgment against all the highest judges in Texas in their personal capacity.
[01:54:44.740 --> 01:54:51.740] I am not naive enough to think that the courts will give me that judgment.
[01:54:51.740 --> 01:54:54.740] It's not what I'm after.
[01:54:54.740 --> 01:54:58.740] What I needed to do, I've already got done.
[01:54:58.740 --> 01:55:27.740] I've made up this 150 page brief where I took every step in the criminal justice process and tore it all apart piece by piece and demonstrated how the Constitution, the statutes, the case law, all pointed to a methodology for the criminal justice system.
[01:55:27.740 --> 01:55:32.740] I can't find where anybody's ever done that before.
[01:55:32.740 --> 01:55:37.740] Well, it becomes a matter of public record, court record, correct?
[01:55:37.740 --> 01:55:39.740] Yes, yes, it does.
[01:55:39.740 --> 01:55:41.740] So nobody's ever done that before.
[01:55:41.740 --> 01:55:44.740] These judges, they became lawyers.
[01:55:44.740 --> 01:55:47.740] When they became lawyers, this stuff was going on.
[01:55:47.740 --> 01:55:52.740] And they were trained to do things the way that they've been doing things.
[01:55:52.740 --> 01:55:54.740] This has been going on for 50 years.
[01:55:54.740 --> 01:56:00.740] And then they became judges and they did things the way they've always done things.
[01:56:00.740 --> 01:56:03.740] And then they moved on up the ranks and became the highest judges in Texas.
[01:56:03.740 --> 01:56:08.740] And they are doing things the way they've always done things.
[01:56:08.740 --> 01:56:11.740] Nobody's ever said, wait a minute, wait a minute, hold on.
[01:56:11.740 --> 01:56:18.740] Let's go back to the start and put all these pieces in place.
[01:56:18.740 --> 01:56:24.740] Well, since I sued them in their personal capacity, they're going to read the pleads.
[01:56:24.740 --> 01:56:29.740] These guys are not going to hire a lawyer and just leave it to the lawyer.
[01:56:29.740 --> 01:56:34.740] They're going to read our claims against them.
[01:56:34.740 --> 01:56:39.740] And for my purposes, that's enough.
[01:56:39.740 --> 01:56:49.740] Once someone has put all these pieces in place, stitched them all together so one follows from the other,
[01:56:49.740 --> 01:56:53.740] they can't unlearn it.
[01:56:53.740 --> 01:57:02.740] It's going to be stuck in there and have demonstrated how these adjustments they've made have caused this problem.
[01:57:02.740 --> 01:57:07.740] They're not going to be able to scrape that out of their brains.
[01:57:07.740 --> 01:57:12.740] I called Russell Martlin. He's about six foot four, 400 pounds.
[01:57:12.740 --> 01:57:17.740] I'm sorry it took me so long, but I was taking a shower.
[01:57:17.740 --> 01:57:22.740] Oh, God, Russell, tell me I'm not talking to you naked.
[01:57:22.740 --> 01:57:29.740] Well, that's an image I will never get scraped off the back of my mental eyeballs.
[01:57:29.740 --> 01:57:39.740] I'm hoping. Basically, hundreds or thousands of court cases could potentially be null and void based on what you just said.
[01:57:39.740 --> 01:57:45.740] Yeah. But what I'm telling them is there's no bad guy here.
[01:57:45.740 --> 01:57:52.740] There's not some evil individual that we can condemn beyond all.
[01:57:52.740 --> 01:57:57.740] What's the term, Brett? They're unredeemable.
[01:57:57.740 --> 01:58:02.740] Anyway, we can't fix it. There's not one guy we could blame all this on.
[01:58:02.740 --> 01:58:06.740] There is no bad guy here.
[01:58:06.740 --> 01:58:11.740] There's a bunch of bad guys, but I'm not calling them bad guys.
[01:58:11.740 --> 01:58:21.740] I'm saying there was a minor mistake made that nobody realized how important it was and it caused all these other problems.
[01:58:21.740 --> 01:58:30.740] I played. I did my best to play them like cheap fitness. If we're going to win, if we're going to fix the system, we've got to be smart.
[01:58:30.740 --> 01:58:37.740] We've got to do our homework and we cannot sit back and expect the law to work for us.
[01:58:37.740 --> 01:58:42.740] We got to make it. Hang on. Hang on. Be right back.
[01:58:42.740 --> 01:58:49.740] Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain, Rule of Law Radio. I already said we'll be right back.
[01:58:49.740 --> 01:58:57.740] The Bible remains the most popular book in the world, yet countless readers are frustrated because they struggle to understand it.
[01:58:57.740 --> 01:59:06.740] Some new translations try to help by simplifying the text, but in the process can compromise the profound meaning of the scripture.
[01:59:06.740 --> 01:59:17.740] Enter the recovery version. First, this new translation is extremely faithful and accurate, but the real story is the more than 9000 explanatory footnotes.
[01:59:17.740 --> 01:59:27.740] Difficult and profound passages are opened up in a marvelous way, providing an entrance into the riches of the word beyond which you've ever experienced before.
[01:59:27.740 --> 01:59:32.740] Bibles for America would like to give you a free recovery version simply for the asking.
[01:59:32.740 --> 01:59:47.740] 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.
[01:59:47.740 --> 01:59:50.740] That's freestudybible.com.
[01:59:50.740 --> 02:00:02.740] You are listening to the Logos Radio Network. Logosradionetwork.com.