[00:00.000 --> 00:06.000]  Childhood obesity is a hefty problem, but we don't need bureaucrats to solve it.
[00:06.000 --> 00:10.000]  Parents can help kids maintain a healthy weight by simply sitting down to meals with them.
[00:10.000 --> 00:15.000]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albert, and I'll be back with the benefits of breaking bread with your children.
[00:15.000 --> 00:20.000]  Privacy is under attack. When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[00:20.000 --> 00:25.000]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[00:25.000 --> 00:31.000]  So protect your rights, say no to surveillance, and keep your information to yourself.
[00:31.000 --> 00:33.000]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[00:33.000 --> 00:37.000]  This public service announcement is brought to you by StartPage.com.
[00:37.000 --> 00:41.000]  The private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[00:41.000 --> 00:44.000]  Start over with StartPage.
[00:44.000 --> 00:47.000]  The family that prays together stays together.
[00:47.000 --> 00:49.000]  We've all heard that, and studies show it's true.
[00:49.000 --> 00:56.000]  But there's another family activity that can help kids avoid obesity and eating disorders, sitting down to family meals.
[00:56.000 --> 01:02.000]  Research shows that when families eat meals together, kids are less likely to be overweight or pick out on junk food.
[01:02.000 --> 01:05.000]  Plus they have 34% fewer eating disorders.
[01:05.000 --> 01:08.000]  They also consume healthier foods like fruits and vegetables.
[01:08.000 --> 01:12.000]  Amazingly, it takes just three sit-down meals a week to see the benefits.
[01:12.000 --> 01:16.000]  So take the time to prepare a nutritious family meal and serve lots of veggies.
[01:16.000 --> 01:20.000]  You'll set a good example for the kids, and your own health may improve as well.
[01:20.000 --> 01:22.000]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht.
[01:22.000 --> 01:25.000]  More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[01:32.000 --> 01:38.000]  Okay, take a right turn at the gas station and go two blocks, turn left on Main, and it's the third house.
[01:38.000 --> 01:42.000]  Oh, hi! Catherine Albrecht here, giving driving directions that involve left turns.
[01:42.000 --> 01:44.000]  Well, I still can.
[01:44.000 --> 01:46.000]  Details coming up.
[02:15.000 --> 02:19.000]  A super street is a road where the left-hand turns are rerouted.
[02:19.000 --> 02:23.000]  Drivers instead have to make a right turn and then make a U-turn around a broad median.
[02:23.000 --> 02:25.000]  Well, this may seem silly and time-consuming.
[02:25.000 --> 02:31.000]  Research shows a 20% overall reduction in travel time compared to conventional intersections.
[02:31.000 --> 02:37.000]  What's more, super street intersections have nearly 50% fewer reported automobile collisions,
[02:37.000 --> 02:40.000]  and 63% fewer cases of personal injury.
[02:40.000 --> 02:44.000]  The super street concept has been around for over 20 years,
[02:44.000 --> 02:49.000]  but until now, little research had been done to assess its effectiveness under real-world conditions.
[02:49.000 --> 02:54.000]  Given the latest data, left turns may soon become an endangered species.
[02:54.000 --> 02:56.000]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht.
[02:56.000 --> 03:25.000]  Please use an information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[03:25.000 --> 03:28.000]  Hi, folks. Good evening. This is Rule of Law Radio.
[03:28.000 --> 03:31.000]  This is our Friday night four-hour info marathon.
[03:31.000 --> 03:35.000]  It is March 30, 2012.
[03:35.000 --> 03:37.000]  We are live tonight.
[03:37.000 --> 03:39.000]  This is Eddie Craig with Randy Kelton.
[03:39.000 --> 03:41.000]  Debra Stevens has the night off on Friday nights.
[03:41.000 --> 03:46.000]  Now, what we're going to do tonight is Randy has some more issues he wishes to go into
[03:46.000 --> 03:49.000]  that involve mortgage stuff,
[03:49.000 --> 03:55.000]  and he wants to get into some of the more convoluted details that people need to know
[03:55.000 --> 03:58.000]  or may need to be aware of. Randy, what do you got?
[03:58.000 --> 04:06.000]  Okay. I've been doing research on the mortgage documentation,
[04:06.000 --> 04:15.000]  and we've been hearing from people for quite a while that the paperwork is a horrible mess.
[04:15.000 --> 04:23.000]  That the lenders for the last 15 years have been incredibly lax in handling their paperwork.
[04:23.000 --> 04:32.000]  And as I examine the paperwork in detail, I find that is precisely the case.
[04:32.000 --> 04:37.000]  When we have been helping people file suits,
[04:37.000 --> 04:45.000]  and one of the primary complaints we get back is not enough detail.
[04:45.000 --> 04:49.000]  And we do that on purpose because in the initial suit,
[04:49.000 --> 04:54.000]  what we're actually trying to do is draw the Rule 12 motion.
[04:54.000 --> 05:01.000]  Now, you're always going to get a motion to dismiss for failures to stay to claim
[05:01.000 --> 05:04.000]  on which recovery can be had.
[05:04.000 --> 05:11.000]  Since the Ashcroft decision about five years ago,
[05:11.000 --> 05:17.000]  if you file a lawsuit in the federal court, you're going to get a Rule 12 motion
[05:17.000 --> 05:20.000]  to dismiss for failure to stay to claim on which recovery can be had
[05:20.000 --> 05:26.000]  because the Ashcroft homily decision changed the standard.
[05:26.000 --> 05:32.000]  And while the Supreme Court said they didn't intend to raise the pleading bar,
[05:32.000 --> 05:37.000]  they raised it almost completely out of sight.
[05:37.000 --> 05:42.000]  So no matter what you file, no matter how well pleaded it is,
[05:42.000 --> 05:47.000]  you will get as a matter of course Rule 12 motion to dismiss for failure to stay to claim
[05:47.000 --> 05:49.000]  on which recovery can be had.
[05:49.000 --> 05:55.000]  And that eliminates the need for the defendant to answer the suit.
[05:55.000 --> 06:03.000]  It's created a horrible mess in the courts and just opened the floodgates for court corruption.
[06:03.000 --> 06:14.000]  Now, the federal judges can essentially determine if they want you to be able to seek remedy or not.
[06:14.000 --> 06:28.000]  They will, in the case if you are pro se, you can be absolutely sure that no matter what the defendant claims in his motion to dismiss,
[06:28.000 --> 06:39.000]  if the defendant is represented by counsel and you are not, the judge will dismiss your case out of hand.
[06:39.000 --> 06:46.000]  And that's because they are not just corrupt, they are absolutely corrupt.
[06:46.000 --> 06:50.000]  Well, maybe they're not.
[06:50.000 --> 06:54.000]  But they're close enough.
[06:54.000 --> 07:04.000]  They're close enough that it would behoove you to conduct yourself as if the courts would rule against you out of hand at every turn.
[07:04.000 --> 07:07.000]  And we've done that.
[07:07.000 --> 07:12.000]  We expect them to rule against us out of hand at every turn.
[07:12.000 --> 07:18.000]  It is simply a parameter that we have to deal with.
[07:18.000 --> 07:29.000]  So, in the spirit of Dr. Graves and jurisdictionary, we are setting the record for appeal.
[07:29.000 --> 07:39.000]  Now, since we will draw the Rule 12 motion to dismiss no matter what, we're going to anticipate it.
[07:39.000 --> 07:46.000]  And we're going to try to draw one that we can slam dunk.
[07:46.000 --> 07:55.000]  So, we file a lawsuit that is absolutely bare bones.
[07:55.000 --> 08:09.000]  And one of the primary considerations in preparing the lawsuit is the consideration that one should never stipulate to anything.
[08:09.000 --> 08:23.000]  And in this case, you know, in foreclosures, the lawyers like to claim that they are not debt collectors when they're trying to collect on a mortgage.
[08:23.000 --> 08:35.000]  What they're trying to claim is that they fall under the exclusion of those people who are simply recovering collateral.
[08:35.000 --> 08:54.000]  That exclusion was specifically intended for auto repo and equipment repo where a company is in the business of recovering collateral assets.
[08:54.000 --> 09:09.000]  Lenders, on the other hand, are not in the business of recovering collateral assets. They are in the business of collecting United States money as discharge of debt.
[09:09.000 --> 09:24.000]  If they can't collect United States dollars in discharge of debt, then they will also act to recover the collateral.
[09:24.000 --> 09:33.000]  Unlike a tow truck driver, a towing company that only recovers collateral, they don't try to collect the debt. They're just outside to get the property.
[09:33.000 --> 09:51.000]  The lender, the servicer is the debt collector. So as such, when the debt collector makes a claim of authority to collect on a debt under the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act,
[09:51.000 --> 10:01.000]  he must have authority to take the action he claims to take. Otherwise, that's a violation of 1692 G.
[10:01.000 --> 10:20.000]  And if he has been served with a debt validation letter, a demand that he prove up his agency standing in capacity, and he fails to respond to that demand,
[10:20.000 --> 10:29.000]  and this probably needs a little explanation as I had a specific question on this issue today.
[10:29.000 --> 10:42.000]  Someone said, well, I put in a pleading that a debt validation letter was filed and the lender was non-responsive.
[10:42.000 --> 10:48.000]  And he said, oh, no, no, no, they sent a response. They sent a 38-page response.
[10:48.000 --> 10:56.000]  And we said, yes, they did. But that response did not validate the debt.
[10:56.000 --> 11:09.000]  It's like when you have a witness on the stand and you ask the witness, did you see the offense occur?
[11:09.000 --> 11:17.000]  Well, I arrested you for the offense. Objection, witness is non-responsive.
[11:17.000 --> 11:28.000]  The witness gave an answer to the question, but it was an answer to a different question, not the question that was asked. Therefore, it was non-responsive.
[11:28.000 --> 11:47.000]  We sent out a debt validation letter and made, as a debt validation letter, there are specific requirements within the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act that determine what validation of the debt is.
[11:47.000 --> 11:53.000]  If the answer from the lender fails to meet those requirements, it's not an answer.
[11:53.000 --> 11:59.000]  Oh, it is an answer, but it's not an answer to a debt validation letter. It is non-responsive.
[11:59.000 --> 12:05.000]  So we sent out the debt validation letter. They never probably respond to it.
[12:05.000 --> 12:15.000]  So then we filed suit against the debt collector. And it's important to wrap your head around that part.
[12:15.000 --> 12:28.000]  These guys are trying to collect on the mortgage. You have a mortgage. These guys claim a direct connection to the lender who gave you the mortgage.
[12:28.000 --> 12:35.000]  And they claim to be collecting on a debt for a mortgage at the property you live in.
[12:35.000 --> 12:48.000]  So you tend to presume that they are collecting on the mortgage that you're aware of, the mortgage you have in your head, that you know is there.
[12:48.000 --> 12:54.000]  Well, maybe they are and maybe they're not.
[12:54.000 --> 13:14.000]  It's not your place to make that determination. It's their place to conclusively prove precisely what debt they're attempting to collect and precisely how they have agency, standing, and capacity to collect that debt.
[13:14.000 --> 13:21.000]  Under Fair Debt Collections Practices Act, they are statutorily stopped from any collections.
[13:21.000 --> 13:35.000]  Once a debt validation has been sent and the debt has been disputed, they are statutorily stopped from further collections until they validate the debt.
[13:35.000 --> 13:45.000]  That was the very clear intent of the legislature that the lender be statutorily stopped.
[13:45.000 --> 13:52.000]  But the judges, they don't seem to particularly care about that piece of legislation.
[13:52.000 --> 14:03.000]  And this suit is set up specifically to get the judge to grant the Rule 12 motion to dismiss.
[14:03.000 --> 14:09.000]  And we haven't been disappointed because they granted knee jerk.
[14:09.000 --> 14:29.000]  So we've written the complaint to be extremely narrowly focused so that a close examination by a fair arbiter will say, guys, this is really simple.
[14:29.000 --> 14:34.000]  You maintained you had authority to collect the debt.
[14:34.000 --> 14:39.000]  The plaintiff did not say that you didn't have authority to collect the debt.
[14:39.000 --> 14:42.000]  The plaintiff said he didn't know.
[14:42.000 --> 14:53.000]  And the plaintiff invoked Fair Debt Collections Practices Act, which required that you prove to him that you are the holder of the debt.
[14:53.000 --> 15:07.000]  You did not prove to him that you are, I'm sorry, that you are the holder or agent for the holder of the debt. You did not prove that, therefore, the law is abundantly clear.
[15:07.000 --> 15:19.000]  Not only Fair Debt Collections Practices Act, but also Uniform Commercial Code, which in Texas has been adopted into the business code.
[15:19.000 --> 15:26.000]  And most ever say the union has adopted the Uniform Commercial Code and made minor adjustments to it.
[15:26.000 --> 15:35.000]  But in this case, I've never seen an adjustment made to Section 3-501 or 3-5.0.
[15:35.000 --> 15:57.000]  I think it's 3-3-5-0-8 that says that if the debt collector files a presentment with the debtor and the debtor demands production of the original security instrument,
[15:57.000 --> 16:05.000]  the debt collector must produce the instrument for inspection. He doesn't have to give it to him, but for inspection.
[16:05.000 --> 16:18.000]  If he fails to do so, or actually the code says if he fails, if the lender fails to abide by all the law,
[16:18.000 --> 16:28.000]  the debtor may cease all payment without dishonor. It doesn't say that without dishonor. It says it may cease all payment.
[16:28.000 --> 16:42.000]  So that goes to capacity. If they don't abide by all law, according to that, they lose capacity to collect on the debt, even if they are the true and proper holder.
[16:42.000 --> 16:51.000]  This is Randy Kelsen, the embassy with Ada Craig, Ruth Law Radio, our call in number 512-646-1984.
[16:51.000 --> 17:20.000]  Jeff, I see you there. Can you hang on a bit? I'll get you when I get through with this dissertation. We'll be right back.
[17:20.000 --> 17:27.000]  It's about serial hypocrisy. This election is about trust. There's been one true, consistent candidate, and that's Dr. Ron Paul.
[17:27.000 --> 17:32.000]  Ron Paul has been so consistent from the very beginning. He seems like a more honest candidate.
[17:32.000 --> 17:40.000]  He tells the truth about what he believes, whether you like it or not. He's never once voted for a tax increase, never once voted for an unbalanced budget.
[17:40.000 --> 17:44.000]  Ron Paul's plan is bold. Cutting five departments is what we need.
[17:44.000 --> 17:53.000]  When he says he's going to cut a trillion dollars in the first year, I believe it. If you don't like how things are going, if you're tired of politicians, he's something different.
[17:53.000 --> 18:00.000]  Ron Paul is the one we've been looking for. I'm Ron Paul, and I approve this message.
[18:00.000 --> 18:05.000]  Are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters, or even losses?
[18:05.000 --> 18:15.000]  Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Mears proven method. Michael Mears has won six cases in federal court against debt collectors, and now you can win two.
[18:15.000 --> 18:21.000]  You'll get step-by-step instructions in plain English on how to win in court using federal civil rights statutes.
[18:21.000 --> 18:27.000]  What to do when contacted by phones, mail, or court summons? How to answer letters and phone calls?
[18:27.000 --> 18:29.000]  How to get debt collectors out of your credit reports?
[18:29.000 --> 18:34.000]  How to turn the financial tables on them and make them pay you to go away?
[18:34.000 --> 18:39.000]  The Michael Mears proven method is the solution for how to stop debt collectors.
[18:39.000 --> 18:50.000]  Personal consultation is available as well. For more information, please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the blue Michael Mears banner, or email MichaelMears at yahoo.com.
[18:50.000 --> 19:08.000]  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.
[19:20.000 --> 19:33.000]  Okay, we're back. Randy Kelton, David Stevens, and Craig Rule of Law Radio.
[19:33.000 --> 19:43.000]  And we were talking about a strategy for dealing with a corrupt court.
[19:43.000 --> 19:53.000]  And so far, we've been relatively successful. I have a lot of people coming to me and saying, how many wins do you have?
[19:53.000 --> 20:09.000]  And I have to say, well, it depends on how you define win. How many people have we gotten quiet, title, no payments, free and clear, zero?
[20:09.000 --> 20:18.000]  How many people have we kept in their property when they'd otherwise be out on the street? Somewhere near 500.
[20:18.000 --> 20:28.000]  So most that don't just quit and walk away. Most that continue to fight are still in their property.
[20:28.000 --> 20:49.000]  So we can't make any guarantees when you're dealing with a corrupt court. And if you come across someone who offers you guarantees, especially when dealing with a corrupt court or these corrupt banks,
[20:49.000 --> 20:59.000]  I don't suggest that you walk away. I suggest you turn and run because they will be lying to you.
[20:59.000 --> 21:06.000]  But anyway, with that said, we are developing the most effective procedure that we can.
[21:06.000 --> 21:12.000]  And we start by anticipating a Rule 12 motion to dismiss for failure of state acclaimment, which we can't be had.
[21:12.000 --> 21:20.000]  So we give them a suit with only bare minimum facts.
[21:20.000 --> 21:30.000]  We state defendant made a presentment to plaintiff demanding payment.
[21:30.000 --> 21:37.000]  We define defendant a presentment out of the Uniform Commercial Code as a demand for payment.
[21:37.000 --> 21:45.000]  Defendant claimed authority to collect on an alleged debt.
[21:45.000 --> 21:52.000]  Plaintiff does not stipulate to the existence of a debt.
[21:52.000 --> 21:59.000]  Plaintiff doesn't know defendant. Plaintiff never entered into a contract with defendant.
[21:59.000 --> 22:06.000]  Plaintiff never entered into a contract with defendant's principal.
[22:06.000 --> 22:23.000]  We therefore demand that plaintiff, a defendant, prove up his agency to represent the principal and the standing and capacity of the principal to collect the alleged debt.
[22:23.000 --> 22:40.000]  And we stipulate that if said proof is forthcoming, we will withdraw this petition and amend it to name the true holder of the debt instrument.
[22:40.000 --> 22:44.000]  That's it. This is all there is to it.
[22:44.000 --> 22:56.000]  Now, we've put in a few pages of points and authorities showing that that's all we have to do under the real estate settlement procedures act.
[22:56.000 --> 23:02.000]  I'm sorry. Under the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act, that's all we have to do.
[23:02.000 --> 23:15.000]  Oh, I'm sorry. We also put in there that we filed a debt collection. I mean, a debt validation letter with the plaintiff and plaintiff failed to validate the debt.
[23:15.000 --> 23:33.000]  That invokes the statute and invokes the remedy of filing suit to demand a penalty from the debt collector for violating the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act.
[23:33.000 --> 23:36.000]  This is real simple, real straightforward.
[23:36.000 --> 23:53.000]  Essentially, it's what Mike Mears does with the credit card issues, except the banks are far more reluctant to grant anyone anything concerning mortgages or just more money.
[23:53.000 --> 23:59.000]  And it seems as though all the federal judges are bought and paid for.
[23:59.000 --> 24:11.000]  Now, that's my opinion, but since I am a media person, I can have those opinions.
[24:11.000 --> 24:25.000]  And I draw that opinion not based on any facts of any money actually changing hands, but by the obvious outrageous corruption of these courts.
[24:25.000 --> 24:29.000]  With that said, let me move a little further ahead.
[24:29.000 --> 24:47.000]  What we want to do is draw the Rule 12 motion to dismiss claiming, oh, there's this debt and here's the deed of trust and here's the assignment to me and blah, blah, blah.
[24:47.000 --> 24:59.000]  And we found a response stating that the lender's Rule 12 motion is non-responsive.
[24:59.000 --> 25:09.000]  That it's a frivolous pleading as it addresses a note and a debt instrument and a security instrument.
[25:09.000 --> 25:15.000]  There is no debt instrument before this court and neither is there a security instrument before this court.
[25:15.000 --> 25:21.000]  There is only one issue before this court and that's agency.
[25:21.000 --> 25:29.000]  And so far, we have yet to have a single respondent address agency.
[25:29.000 --> 25:32.000]  And that's because they know they have a problem.
[25:32.000 --> 25:34.000]  So they try to avoid it.
[25:34.000 --> 25:39.000]  Now, we haven't yet put our finger on the problem.
[25:39.000 --> 25:44.000]  So they just do a little song and dance, salsa, danza, pads.
[25:44.000 --> 25:56.000]  And when we get the motion to dismiss, that's when we come back with our answer and you say, well, like the one I did today, here is the deed of trust or the mortgage.
[25:56.000 --> 26:03.000]  And the mortgage assigns its beneficiary mortgage electronic registration service.
[26:03.000 --> 26:13.000]  And it shows the lender to be Meribank or something.
[26:13.000 --> 26:41.000]  And then there is an assignment wherein Mer's assigned the security instrument to city mortgage who then use this law firm to make threats against the plaintiff
[26:41.000 --> 26:45.000]  and prosecuted for closure.
[26:45.000 --> 27:04.000]  But we look in the court record and at paragraph 20 of the deed of trust, the deed of trust authorizes the lender or the agent for the lender, which is Mer's.
[27:04.000 --> 27:14.000]  To sell or transfer the note together with the security instrument.
[27:14.000 --> 27:37.000]  It's actually, they all say they're a standard Fannie Mae Freddie Mac form, the deed of trust. They're authorized to sell part or all of the note one or more times together with this security instrument, meaning the deed of trust.
[27:37.000 --> 27:40.000]  Every one of them has that in it.
[27:40.000 --> 27:53.000]  Well, they transferred the deed of trust, but they did not transfer the deed of trust together with the note.
[27:53.000 --> 28:14.000]  That is not something that's authorized by the contract and therefore the transfer is, we will move that the transfer be stricken as void and that the individual to whom the security instrument was transferred then appointed this law firm.
[28:14.000 --> 28:34.000]  And they issued a power of attorney to the law firm, and they gave the law firm the power of attorney to do everything that the alleged servicer was authorized to do, which is nothing.
[28:34.000 --> 28:45.000]  Because the transfer was improper. Now we have reason to believe that this law firm is acting to collect the debt when they have no authority to collect the debt.
[28:45.000 --> 28:53.000]  And in fact, the transfer by Mer's was done by this law firm.
[28:53.000 --> 29:03.000]  But there's nothing in the record to indicate that this law firm was ever granted a power of attorney to act for Mer's.
[29:03.000 --> 29:15.000]  So we have the law firm acting, claiming to transfer the note, the security instrument to some company who then transfers it to them.
[29:15.000 --> 29:24.000]  It appears as though this is extremely self-serving and appears to be fraud on its face.
[29:24.000 --> 29:31.000]  We have three callers up. When we come back on the other side, I'll finish this up quickly and go to college.
[29:31.000 --> 29:39.000]  If we run out of college, I'll come back to it later on. I could probably do eight hours on this subject, so I won't bore everybody to death.
[29:39.000 --> 29:47.000]  But there are a couple other things I'd like to address, so everybody will know what to look for when they look at their loan documents.
[29:47.000 --> 30:00.000]  This is Randy Kelton, David Stevens and Greg Ruzal Radio, our call in number 512-646-1984. We'll be right back.
[30:00.000 --> 30:06.000]  This is Building 7, a 47-story skyscraper that fell on the afternoon of September 11.
[30:06.000 --> 30:13.000]  The government says that fire brought it down. However, 1,500 architects and engineers have concluded it was a controlled demolition.
[30:13.000 --> 30:16.000]  Over 6,000 of my fellow service members have given their lives.
[30:16.000 --> 30:18.000]  And thousands of my fellow force responders are dying.
[30:18.000 --> 30:20.000]  I'm not a conspiracy theorist.
[30:20.000 --> 30:21.000]  I'm a structural engineer.
[30:21.000 --> 30:22.000]  I'm a New York City correction officer.
[30:22.000 --> 30:23.000]  I'm an Air Force pilot.
[30:23.000 --> 30:25.000]  I'm a father who lost his son.
[30:25.000 --> 30:27.000]  We're Americans and we deserve the truth.
[30:27.000 --> 30:30.000]  Go to RememberBuilding7.org today.
[30:57.000 --> 31:01.000]  And see what our powders, sieves and oil can do for you.
[31:01.000 --> 31:06.000]  Attention, listeners. Harlan Dietrich, owner of Brave New Books here with a special announcement.
[31:06.000 --> 31:10.000]  Coding to the Southern Poverty Law Center's new report titled The Year in Hate and Extremism.
[31:10.000 --> 31:15.000]  In the past three years, the number of Patriot groups has grown by 755%.
[31:15.000 --> 31:18.000]  Once again, making the list Brave New Books.
[31:18.000 --> 31:24.000]  Also, congratulations to Austin's own Rule of Law Radio.com for joining the ranks of the SPLC's favorite Patriots.
[31:24.000 --> 31:28.000]  And shout out to Debra Medina's Reed Texans for making the list through well.
[31:28.000 --> 31:32.000]  In order to show our appreciation for helping keep the bookstore on the front lines of the Battle for Liberty,
[31:32.000 --> 31:37.000]  for the whole month of April, mention this ad and we'll take 5% off everything in the store.
[31:37.000 --> 31:41.000]  That's right, you can get 5% off the latest in extremist materials.
[31:41.000 --> 31:47.000]  Get your Ron Paul Yard signed or shirts, one of the last copies of the Oklahoma City Bombing's final report,
[31:47.000 --> 31:50.000]  or Charlotte Izabee's Deliver Dumbing Down of America.
[31:50.000 --> 31:54.000]  So come on down and help further the rise of the Patriot movement.
[31:54.000 --> 31:57.000]  The bookstore is located at 1904 Guadalupe Street.
[31:57.000 --> 32:01.000]  5% discount excludes precious metal sales.
[32:04.000 --> 32:07.000]  Yeah, I got the warrant.
[32:07.000 --> 32:10.000]  And I'm gonna solve them.
[32:10.000 --> 32:13.000]  To the government them.
[32:13.000 --> 32:15.000]  Pursue them.
[32:15.000 --> 32:18.000]  Okay.
[32:18.000 --> 32:21.000]  Oh, sir.
[32:21.000 --> 32:23.000]  The Texans are rich.
[32:23.000 --> 32:26.000]  For most of us.
[32:26.000 --> 32:28.000]  Texans are rich.
[32:28.000 --> 32:30.000]  For the team.
[32:30.000 --> 32:34.000]  Well, I need a prosecutor to come and help me.
[32:34.000 --> 32:36.000]  Prosecute them wicked leaders, you see.
[32:36.000 --> 32:38.000]  They're my mother, a liar.
[32:38.000 --> 32:39.000]  Them tell me.
[32:39.000 --> 32:40.000]  Them are liars.
[32:40.000 --> 32:41.000]  And I tell six stories.
[32:41.000 --> 32:42.000]  Me and a billy.
[32:42.000 --> 32:43.000]  Me and a billy.
[32:43.000 --> 32:44.000]  Me and a billy.
[32:44.000 --> 32:46.000]  3% of America vote for motion.
[32:46.000 --> 32:48.000]  So how do they get the president?
[32:48.000 --> 32:51.000]  That's why we have a warrant for him.
[32:51.000 --> 32:53.000]  Everybody listen carefully.
[32:53.000 --> 32:55.000]  Listen to the words of the Jewish who's passing.
[32:55.000 --> 32:57.000]  Texans are rich.
[32:57.000 --> 32:59.000]  For most of us.
[32:59.000 --> 33:01.000]  For most of us.
[33:01.000 --> 33:04.000]  For most of us.
[33:04.000 --> 33:07.000]  For most of us.
[33:07.000 --> 33:09.000]  For most of us.
[33:09.000 --> 33:11.000]  For most of us.
[33:11.000 --> 33:14.000]  For most of us.
[33:14.000 --> 33:16.000]  Well, nothing that comes,
[33:16.000 --> 33:18.000]  for you, warrant for you.
[33:18.000 --> 33:21.000]  All the tests for you.
[33:21.000 --> 33:22.000]  Okay.
[33:22.000 --> 33:23.000]  Okay, we're back to go.
[33:23.000 --> 33:24.000]  Sorry for that.
[33:24.000 --> 33:25.000]  Sorry for that delay.
[33:25.000 --> 33:29.000]  We have a little bit of a glitch.
[33:29.000 --> 33:36.000]  Okay, talking about
[33:36.000 --> 33:39.000]  What to look for in your documentation.
[33:39.000 --> 33:51.880]  the lender or the debt collector, so that he'll send us a Rule 12 motion that only has one minor
[33:51.880 --> 33:59.080]  little issue to attack and for the most part they will just ignore that issue and go on to try to
[33:59.080 --> 34:06.200]  address the note loan itself. And then once we get to Rule 12 then we come back for sanctions.
[34:06.200 --> 34:14.600]  The motion to strike is non-responsive and a frivolous pleading. And my suggestion is always a
[34:14.600 --> 34:20.280]  bar grievous to go along with it just to let them know we mean business. And then we start putting
[34:20.280 --> 34:32.360]  in these details and look closely at your documents. Who signed each document? When did they sign it?
[34:32.360 --> 34:39.880]  Look at the notaries. The notaries are turning out to be a really, really big deal.
[34:43.000 --> 34:52.520]  What it appears that the law firms have been doing for years and just as a matter of practice,
[34:52.520 --> 34:57.880]  they will have a notary coming in. Well, that's as they use notaries in their own office.
[34:57.880 --> 35:08.840]  And they pull out these blank forms and have the notary sign a whole bunch of them,
[35:10.520 --> 35:17.720]  but they don't date them. And whenever they need a form, they just pull it out and
[35:18.840 --> 35:25.960]  print a document out with the dates on it. Some are more behind than others because as we look at
[35:25.960 --> 35:36.520]  older notes, we see where instead of the date of the notary and the name of the notary being
[35:37.240 --> 35:44.440]  printed in with a printer, it's stamped in with a rubber stamp. And that's because at the time,
[35:44.440 --> 35:52.200]  if it was back in the early 2000, not everybody had the fast printers we have now because they
[35:52.200 --> 35:58.440]  hadn't updated yet. And the ink jabs that were around for the most part were relatively expensive
[35:58.440 --> 36:06.520]  to use. So they just built a standard form with blanks for dates and such in it. And then when
[36:06.520 --> 36:12.520]  they pulled out the form, they would take these forms and have a notary to sign a whole bunch of
[36:12.520 --> 36:17.800]  them. And then when they needed one, they pulled one out and stamp in the date and stamp in the
[36:17.800 --> 36:27.000]  notary's written signature, a written name below the signature. I find this on a lot of documents,
[36:27.000 --> 36:36.520]  I don't know the older ones. The newer ones have the date printed in. And some of them don't have
[36:36.520 --> 36:44.520]  the notary's name printed at all. They just use the notary seal stamp for that. But look at the
[36:44.520 --> 36:51.640]  document. The document will have a creation date on it that's often different than the date of the
[36:51.640 --> 37:01.560]  notary. That makes the document, or at least the juror at the notary, void on its face.
[37:03.080 --> 37:11.800]  Because the notary is testifying that he personally witnessed the individual sign the document.
[37:11.800 --> 37:19.800]  And what they would have you accept is that the notary came in two days earlier and witnessed
[37:19.800 --> 37:25.640]  the signing. And then two days later put the juror at on the paper. Well, that's not reasonable.
[37:26.600 --> 37:34.920]  And that is enough for prima facie evidence that the juror at is invalid, that the document
[37:34.920 --> 37:44.200]  is a fraudulent document. And you cannot depend on it for being valid. You will find
[37:45.720 --> 37:53.800]  notaries that where the juror at itself doesn't attest to anything. It just says
[37:54.520 --> 38:01.000]  that it was notarized on this date. Or it will have like one sentence, I have some
[38:01.000 --> 38:08.760]  jurors that are ten lines long. It very clearly states what the notary is supposed to do. But
[38:09.880 --> 38:17.480]  lawyers just got more and more lazy. So there was extremely lackadaisical
[38:18.360 --> 38:23.400]  in producing these documents. Now, this was three, four, five, six years ago.
[38:23.400 --> 38:31.240]  Up to 10 or 15 years ago. And they had, they did this for years and years. Nobody ever raised an
[38:31.240 --> 38:38.840]  issue. Now all of a sudden the skies are getting to fall in on them. And they have all these documents
[38:38.840 --> 38:48.040]  filed. And there is no way to unfile them. And what one of the things we especially want to do
[38:48.040 --> 38:54.600]  is look at the signatures on the documents and check them against the known robo signers.
[38:57.560 --> 39:01.720]  Which brings it, I'll use up this segment then we'll go to callers.
[39:02.920 --> 39:10.520]  Because there's a little bit more here when it goes to the robo signers. We've mostly heard
[39:10.520 --> 39:18.920]  these stories about the lenders contracting with MERS, filing the paperwork with MERS.
[39:18.920 --> 39:27.720]  The MERS would take their paperwork and shred it. They would scan it into their system and then
[39:27.720 --> 39:32.200]  shred it. Well, when I first heard that, that sounded absolutely ridiculous.
[39:32.200 --> 39:40.840]  You know, you've probably heard me say on the show a number of times, how could they be that stupid?
[39:43.000 --> 39:53.800]  It just didn't fit. And the more research I do, the more clear it becomes that that is not what
[39:53.800 --> 40:05.480]  happened. That's the story they wanted to give us. What it appears actually happened is that the
[40:05.480 --> 40:15.880]  lender intended your note to go into a pool that the lender created. And then the lender would sell
[40:15.880 --> 40:24.760]  that pool into a PSA or into a large trust that encompassed a great number of pools.
[40:27.400 --> 40:34.200]  Each pool that the lender creates can only have notes with a single interest rate in them.
[40:35.560 --> 40:41.320]  So for every different interest rate the lender has, it has to have separate pool.
[40:41.320 --> 40:52.200]  So he has lots of pools. And I looked at that and we've been looking for the pools and it turns
[40:52.200 --> 41:01.560]  out they're right there all the time. So they're not hard to find at all. And when I looked at it,
[41:01.560 --> 41:09.480]  I thought, man, this is a prescription for fraud. We were thinking that the lender went to the
[41:09.480 --> 41:16.520]  investors and sold them the note several different times or they sold the note to several different
[41:16.520 --> 41:24.760]  investors. Well, they didn't need to do that. All they had to do is change the interest rate
[41:24.760 --> 41:32.280]  slightly and drop it in another pool and go on the derivatives market and buy another
[41:33.160 --> 41:37.240]  private mortgage insurance policy attached to it and stick it in the pool.
[41:37.240 --> 41:43.240]  They could stick it in as many as they wanted to and then sell it as many times as they wanted to.
[41:46.360 --> 41:52.840]  The problem is they have is if the pool is backed by Ginny May,
[41:54.920 --> 42:02.600]  the Ginny May has some very specific requirements. Ginny May requires that the lender who is the
[42:02.600 --> 42:12.280]  issuer of the security engage a document custodium to hold all the records. In the document,
[42:12.840 --> 42:18.840]  the lender must give all the records to the document custodium and the document custodium
[42:18.840 --> 42:26.680]  being a separate company must verify to Ginny May that the loan meets all of the requirements of
[42:26.680 --> 42:35.400]  the pool and then the document custodium is required to maintain possession of those documents
[42:36.040 --> 42:45.320]  throughout until the termination of the loan. So, when the lender start coming up with this
[42:45.320 --> 42:55.400]  bogus documentation, I'm wondering what in the heck is going on here? Well, we know exactly where
[42:55.400 --> 43:06.040]  that note is. The document custodium is commanded to have it. So, why isn't the lender asking them
[43:06.040 --> 43:13.000]  for it? They're not asking them for it because if they do and that document custodium puts that
[43:13.000 --> 43:19.160]  property address in their computer and the lender has put the note in more than one pool,
[43:19.160 --> 43:28.360]  the document custodium is going to get a number of hits and then they're going to go to the courts
[43:28.360 --> 43:35.480]  and say, what is going on here? Now, we've been implicated in this fraud and they're likely to
[43:35.480 --> 43:40.520]  turn on the lender. That's why the lender doesn't go after the original documents. This is Randy
[43:40.520 --> 43:45.720]  Kelton, Debussy, David Craig, who moved on radio. Jeff, we will pay your call when we come back on
[43:45.720 --> 43:54.520]  the other side. Their call in number is 512-646-1984. We'll be right back.
[44:02.040 --> 44:06.120]  The Oakland City bombing, top 10 reasons to question the official story.
[44:06.120 --> 44:12.440]  Reason number two, why was the ATF AWOL? Paramedic Tiffany Bible, who was on the scene within five
[44:12.440 --> 44:17.400]  minutes, has stated in an affidavit that agents of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms,
[44:17.400 --> 44:22.120]  told her that they were not in the office that morning. EMT Catherine Mallant, also overheard
[44:22.120 --> 44:26.520]  one agent say to another, is that why we got the page to not come in today?
[44:27.560 --> 44:32.520]  Crew Shaw, as interviewed on KS4RTV, was also told by ATF agents that they had been
[44:32.520 --> 44:38.520]  paid to not come into work. The ATF initially denied these claims and now variously claim
[44:38.520 --> 44:42.520]  that one of their agents was in a free-falling elevator which has been disproven, or that they
[44:42.520 --> 44:47.000]  had been in an all-night stakeout, or that they had been in a golf tournament. As they tried to
[44:47.000 --> 44:52.520]  sort out their lies, all we want to know is, did the ATF receive a warning, and if so, why did
[44:52.520 --> 44:59.000]  they not pass it on to others in the mobile? For more information, go to okcfoundandtruth.com.
[45:01.240 --> 45:06.120]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit? Win your case without an attorney,
[45:06.120 --> 45:14.040]  with Jurisdictionary, the affordable, easy-to-understand 4-CD course that will show you how in 24 hours,
[45:14.040 --> 45:20.920]  step-by-step. If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing. If you don't have a lawyer,
[45:20.920 --> 45:26.760]  know what you should do for yourself. Thousands have won with our step-by-step course, and now
[45:26.760 --> 45:33.400]  you can too. Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case-winning
[45:33.400 --> 45:39.160]  experience. Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand
[45:39.160 --> 45:44.760]  about the principles and practices that control our American courts. You'll receive our audio
[45:44.760 --> 45:52.440]  classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases, prosa tactics, and much more.
[45:52.440 --> 46:03.960]  Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner or call toll-free 866-LAW-EV.
[46:22.440 --> 46:49.640]  Okay, we're back. Randy Kelton, Deputy Deputy Craig of Ruleoflaw Radio, and we're going to Jeff
[46:49.640 --> 46:56.840]  in Texas. Now, Jeff, I'm not going to be talking to you. I'm going to be talking to Jeff. We've
[46:56.840 --> 47:04.440]  got a Jeff in Texas. We've got a Jeff in area code 301. So, Jeff, I'm not going to be talking to
[47:04.440 --> 47:11.880]  you. I'm going to be talking to Jeff. Are you confused? I'm confused. Jeff in Texas. What do
[47:11.880 --> 47:17.080]  you have for us? All right, Randy. Thanks, you guys. Thanks for all you do. I had a bad day today.
[47:17.080 --> 47:25.960]  I got pulled over for doing 46 and a 40 in Sunset Valley, and the officer was extremely rude right
[47:25.960 --> 47:34.600]  from the beginning. I don't really mind the 46 and the 40, but I do, but it's not that big a deal.
[47:34.600 --> 47:41.720]  He said I didn't signal I did, but the big deal with this is I was using an international driver
[47:41.720 --> 47:50.280]  permit, and he just went high and right on me because I was using one of those. I had been
[47:50.280 --> 47:56.280]  using it for years. I'd been pulled over once before, and I think 2008 by a Texas state trooper
[47:56.280 --> 48:02.280]  that just sent me on my way, didn't give me any trouble. I'd used it to rent cars from Hertz,
[48:02.280 --> 48:13.560]  just solely. I never had any problem, but this guy decided me for DWLI. DW. Driving While License
[48:13.560 --> 48:20.600]  Invalid. Yeah, go ahead, Eddie. File criminal charges against him. If he wants to dance, dance
[48:20.600 --> 48:26.200]  with him, especially if he's got attitude. This will help adjust his attitude.
[48:26.200 --> 48:35.880]  Well, the problem with Driving While License Invalid charges are that the license, that charge,
[48:35.880 --> 48:41.400]  can only apply to a license that has been suspended for a DUI conviction.
[48:43.800 --> 48:52.200]  Okay. That's exactly the way it's written into the statute. His ticket is an act of
[48:52.200 --> 48:58.120]  falsifying the government document 3710 penal code, and that's a felony in Texas.
[49:02.200 --> 49:09.240]  Yeah. I mean, you really need to rack this guy up. Okay. What are my resources here? I mean,
[49:09.240 --> 49:16.280]  should I get a lawyer or I mean? Nah, look at a lawyer. All he'll do is take whatever money you
[49:16.280 --> 49:23.880]  don't get and push you into making the same deal you could have made yourself to start with.
[49:27.960 --> 49:33.240]  But I let you know. Resource is a Sunday class. That's your first resource. Yeah.
[49:36.680 --> 49:43.480]  Do you have a lawyer for a son-in-law? No. Okay. You're screwed. Yeah.
[49:43.480 --> 49:50.920]  Okay. We hate to say don't get a lawyer, but you know, this is not a murder case or a case where
[49:50.920 --> 50:00.840]  you're going to go to prison or anything. There's been a traffic. No lawyer is going to risk costing
[50:00.840 --> 50:11.800]  the city money than annoying the judges to help you. They're not going to risk the judge coming
[50:11.800 --> 50:18.440]  after them to help you. So you can do this. It's a lot more fun by yourself. Anyway,
[50:18.440 --> 50:23.880]  especially if you've got a cop, you know, does something really stupid like this. Right.
[50:24.840 --> 50:32.840]  Yeah, you should. I'm going to suggest a tactic I've been working up is you file your motion to
[50:32.840 --> 50:39.880]  dismiss and you include with your motion to dismiss a statement of probable cause verified
[50:39.880 --> 50:50.920]  and a verified criminal affidavit. Okay. And when the judge fails to act on that as a magistrate,
[50:52.200 --> 50:59.080]  then you prepare a criminal charge against the judge and send it to the district attorney and
[50:59.080 --> 51:06.760]  ask the district attorney to have the judge indicted. And the district attorney is not going
[51:06.760 --> 51:12.040]  to do that, but he is going to send his investigator to talk to the judge to find out what's going
[51:12.040 --> 51:19.560]  on so that he can say he investigated. And this is all going to keep him jumping up and down.
[51:19.560 --> 51:25.480]  And then when the prosecutor refuses to give it to the grand jury, then you prepare your
[51:25.480 --> 51:30.440]  criminal complaint against the prosecutor and made it to a judge. And the judge,
[51:30.440 --> 51:36.520]  I just sent you back this very pleasant letter telling you how he appreciates you are notifying
[51:36.520 --> 51:44.040]  him at this problem, but you really should file this with the police department. And you get that
[51:44.040 --> 51:53.560]  and you say, is that a fact? Jack? Because nowhere in the code is a complaint directed to the police
[51:53.560 --> 52:05.160]  department. Everywhere in the code complaints are directed to some magistrate. And the district
[52:05.160 --> 52:14.360]  judges are all magistrates. So then you take that letter and you attach it to a criminal complaint
[52:14.360 --> 52:23.800]  against the district judge for not accusing him of official oppression, for not prosecuting the
[52:23.800 --> 52:29.960]  district attorney, and you send that to the district attorneys, to the head of the,
[52:29.960 --> 52:35.000]  former of the grand jury care of the district attorney's office. And the district attorney will
[52:35.000 --> 52:40.440]  get that and open it and he'll say, this guy's been listening to rule of law radio and he set
[52:40.440 --> 52:49.640]  me up again. Do you recommend that? Is that something to be avoided?
[52:51.800 --> 52:59.320]  Eddie? I asked that question again. What's your take on the whole use of the international
[52:59.320 --> 53:04.840]  driver permit? Is that something? The international driver's permit is only valid if you have an
[53:04.840 --> 53:13.160]  actual license from the country in which you originated. To use it otherwise is to put yourself
[53:13.160 --> 53:20.040]  in a state of being charged with fraud. Okay? Because you're using an international permit
[53:20.040 --> 53:26.200]  that the rules specifically say has to be based on an existing license. Again, by using that,
[53:26.200 --> 53:35.320]  you've put yourself under the umbrella of transportation. Okay? It wouldn't matter whether
[53:35.320 --> 53:39.480]  you gave him a driver's license or that. The result is going to wind up being the same.
[53:41.560 --> 53:46.200]  The problem here is, is the charge he tried to put against you rather than just
[53:46.200 --> 53:51.880]  driving without a license, driving while license invalid when he had no evidence of that.
[53:51.880 --> 53:58.120]  Unless it turns out that your license has been previously suspended because of a DUI conviction.
[53:58.840 --> 54:04.200]  He said it was suspended by the use of years. I've never had a DWI or a DUI or anything of
[54:04.200 --> 54:09.320]  the sort. Well, then the way to find out is to call a Department of Public Safety and have them
[54:09.320 --> 54:17.320]  send you a copy of your driving record from past, from that license under a Freedom of Information
[54:17.320 --> 54:22.040]  Act request or just a public information request. However, they'll do it. Since it's your license
[54:22.040 --> 54:28.200]  or your ex license, it shouldn't be a problem of getting it. But it'll state whether or not the
[54:28.200 --> 54:35.480]  license shows that it's been suspended. If it hasn't, and you take that document to court,
[54:35.480 --> 54:41.320]  this officer will do one of two things. He will not show up for trial because he knows the charge
[54:41.320 --> 54:47.800]  was bogus. Or if he shows up for trial, he's going to get up and try to testify that, yeah,
[54:47.800 --> 54:54.520]  your license is suspended and you've got documented proof that it isn't. Provided, of course, that
[54:54.520 --> 55:05.400]  is what the record shows. Got it. So the first thing you do, start with the DPS, get a driving
[55:05.400 --> 55:18.360]  history and make sure you want everything dealing with the license. Got it. I don't understand the
[55:18.920 --> 55:28.760]  bad attitude of these cops. What's the cops name? It's Zajak. Yeah, Zajak. Yeah, a friend of mine
[55:28.760 --> 55:35.320]  is very familiar with this particular cop and he would have made a really good penis for somebody
[55:35.320 --> 55:41.080]  glued ears on him. Yeah. Yeah, that was the impression I got. I don't understand the attitude
[55:41.080 --> 55:48.040]  because I'm not going to give my restaurant spending or gas money dollars to the Sunset Valley
[55:48.040 --> 55:57.160]  area anymore. Well, that won't matter if you can, if the record is in your favor on this for this
[55:57.160 --> 56:03.080]  charge, then what you're going to want to do is sue the cop in Sunset Valley and I guarantee you
[56:03.080 --> 56:13.320]  this cop's head will be on the block. But you sue them in federal court for this
[56:13.320 --> 56:18.680]  and they aren't going to have a whole lot of ways to go. Provided, of course, you put on the proper
[56:18.680 --> 56:31.400]  defense. Okay, I'll go to the Sunday class as well. Thanks, gentlemen. Yes, sir. All right, Randy,
[56:31.400 --> 56:39.320]  who we got next, the other just who we got next, right? Yes, the other Jeff. All right, Jeff in 301.
[56:39.320 --> 56:51.480]  I'm unmuted. Yes, you are. Okay. Hold on. Hold on. Are you unmuted, Jeff? I hope so.
[56:51.480 --> 57:00.840]  Okay, good. Good. My screen wasn't. Okay. Well, first off, where have you been all this time?
[57:00.840 --> 57:05.640]  I've been busy, but I do want to thank you for what you've been doing for Robert.
[57:05.640 --> 57:14.120]  Oh, yeah. Robert is in the hospital. Is he? Yes, he is. Did that occur during the trial?
[57:15.480 --> 57:24.200]  Yes, it did. He was trying to defend himself and he just could not.
[57:26.280 --> 57:34.120]  And we forced him to go get an exam and listen to his heart and put him in the hospital.
[57:34.120 --> 57:43.000]  He's having congestive heart failure. Oh, dear. And his legs are swelling up. This is not good.
[57:44.680 --> 57:51.880]  Now, I'm going to go, I'm going to prepare a bar grievance against the district attorney.
[57:53.480 --> 58:01.080]  And I'm going to make this available online and I'm going to ask everybody who cares about
[58:01.080 --> 58:08.040]  justice in any way to pull this thing down, fill it out, and send it to the bar. This
[58:08.680 --> 58:15.480]  prosecutor would have killed Robert just to punish him for standing up for his rights.
[58:15.480 --> 58:20.280]  I'm going to get music coming up. Yes, this, this is top of the art, so it'll be a bit too
[58:20.280 --> 58:25.960]  minute break. We'll get a little bit more time. Hang on, Jeff. I've got some really interesting
[58:25.960 --> 58:33.080]  questions for you on the other side. Oh, God. This is Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens,
[58:33.080 --> 58:43.000]  Eddie Craig with Radio. I'll call in number 312-312. I'll call in number 512-646-1984.
[58:43.000 --> 58:55.480]  We'll be right back taking your calls on the other side.
[59:00.520 --> 59:04.440]  Would you like to make more definite progress in your walk with God?
[59:04.440 --> 59:10.040]  Bibles for America is offering a free study Bible and a set of free Christian books that
[59:10.040 --> 59:14.760]  can really help. The New Testament recovery version is one of the most comprehensive study
[59:14.760 --> 59:20.200]  Bibles available today. It's an accurate translation and it contains thousands of footnotes that
[59:20.200 --> 59:25.880]  will help you to know God and to know the meaning of life. The free books are a three-volume set
[59:25.880 --> 59:30.920]  called Basic Elements of the Christian Life. Chapter by chapter, Basic Elements of the
[59:30.920 --> 59:37.000]  Christian Life clearly presents God's plan of salvation, growing in Christ, and how to build
[59:37.000 --> 59:43.320]  up the church. To order your free New Testament recovery version and Basic Elements of the Christian
[59:43.320 --> 59:59.400]  Life, call Bibles for America toll-free at 888-551-0102. That's 888-551-0102. Or visit us online at bfa.org.
[59:59.400 --> 01:00:10.920]  Ah, that new car smell. Well, maybe it's not so great after all. In fact, it could be downright
[01:00:10.920 --> 01:00:30.440]  bad for your health. I'm Dr. Catherine Albright and I'll be right back to tell you why it stinks.
[01:00:41.800 --> 01:00:50.600]  There's nothing quite like that new car smell, but it turns out it's actually the smell of some
[01:00:50.600 --> 01:00:57.800]  very toxic chemicals. The 250 pounds of plastic adhesive and foam in every new car release toxic
[01:00:57.800 --> 01:01:02.920]  benzene, acetone, and formaldehyde. These chemicals can cause cancer and are linked to
[01:01:02.920 --> 01:01:08.360]  birth defects, impaired learning, and premature births. One recent study looked at the air inside
[01:01:08.360 --> 01:01:14.040]  of six new cars and found more than 20 times the safe amount of those chemicals. Fortunately,
[01:01:14.040 --> 01:01:19.240]  they decay at the rate of about 20% a week, reaching normal indoor air quality levels in
[01:01:19.240 --> 01:01:25.720]  about six months. So buy your next car used or at least roll down the windows. I'm Dr. Catherine
[01:01:25.720 --> 01:01:34.200]  Albright. More news and information at CatherineAlbright.com. Hold it right there, bucko. That photo
[01:01:34.200 --> 01:01:39.480]  was poorly lit and your composition is all wrong. Those could be the last words you hear before
[01:01:39.480 --> 01:01:44.120]  police confiscate your camera. I'm Dr. Catherine Albright and I'll be back with the scoop.
[01:01:45.640 --> 01:01:51.080]  Privacy is under attack. When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[01:01:51.080 --> 01:01:56.600]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too. So protect
[01:01:56.600 --> 01:02:02.600]  your rights. Say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself. Privacy, it's worth
[01:02:02.600 --> 01:02:07.880]  hanging on to. This public service announcement is brought to you by StartPage.com, the private
[01:02:07.880 --> 01:02:13.240]  search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing. Start over with StartPage.
[01:02:15.080 --> 01:02:20.200]  Police are detaining people for taking perfectly legal pictures. They've apparently become art
[01:02:20.200 --> 01:02:25.320]  critics with instructions to determine whether people's photos have, quote, a parent aesthetic
[01:02:25.320 --> 01:02:30.840]  value. The idea is to stop terrorists, though what a terrorist could do armed with just a camera is
[01:02:30.840 --> 01:02:36.040]  beyond me. One innocent photographer got stopped for taking pictures of a refinery in Long Beach,
[01:02:36.040 --> 01:02:41.720]  California. Another got a full patdown for filming the outside of the courthouse. In addition to
[01:02:41.720 --> 01:02:46.760]  judging people's photos, cops are harassing anyone with a camera who doesn't look like, quote, a
[01:02:46.760 --> 01:02:52.680]  regular tourist. So next time you visit Long Beach, wear a big Hawaiian shirt and make sure your photos
[01:02:52.680 --> 01:03:01.640]  are gorgeous. I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht. More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[01:03:22.680 --> 01:03:37.480]  Okay, we're back. Randy Tocke, everybody's doing great. We have LaRio, and we're talking to Jeff,
[01:03:38.440 --> 01:03:42.040]  some whore on the east coast where they talk funny.
[01:03:47.480 --> 01:03:50.200]  So, what have you been up to?
[01:03:50.200 --> 01:03:55.320]  Oh, I've been helping people sued and collected for fire profit.
[01:03:57.400 --> 01:04:02.920]  Wonderful. Did you listen to my little dissertation earlier?
[01:04:02.920 --> 01:04:10.840]  I did, I did. I was pleased to see you going in that direction.
[01:04:12.440 --> 01:04:17.800]  Yes, I've been going. Somebody told me a long time ago that I should do that, not even listen.
[01:04:17.800 --> 01:04:24.600]  Well, you know, I've been pleased to watch them go in any direction, so round and round
[01:04:24.600 --> 01:04:29.160]  after his tail of this stuff. Yeah, well, sometimes you get locked in on an idea and that's all you
[01:04:29.160 --> 01:04:38.680]  can see. Yeah. And you don't want anybody shifting your focus. But, you know, that does happen.
[01:04:39.800 --> 01:04:43.320]  Yeah, well, this is definitely working a whole lot better.
[01:04:43.320 --> 01:04:51.640]  Right, yeah, we think so. The plan, the plan is, is we expect the judge
[01:04:52.600 --> 01:05:01.960]  to throw out our suit and rule that the lender is a proper agent for a proper holder and they
[01:05:01.960 --> 01:05:10.040]  have capacity. And when they do that, we're going to say, oh, so you're the dirty rotten
[01:05:10.040 --> 01:05:15.320]  scoundrel we've been looking for. But you'll be glad to hear this, Jeff. We're going to come back
[01:05:16.040 --> 01:05:22.760]  with a second suit, an amended suit, and we're only going to claim one issue.
[01:05:24.600 --> 01:05:29.560]  We're not going to Truth and Lending Act, real estate settlement procedures act, none of those.
[01:05:31.240 --> 01:05:35.720]  We're only going to go to the fees they charged and fail to prove up.
[01:05:35.720 --> 01:05:45.560]  Of all of the suits we've ever filed, we've never had a lender touch that with a 10 foot pole.
[01:05:45.560 --> 01:05:51.880]  No, they won't. And I think that's a bigger elephant in the corner than the standing issue.
[01:05:51.880 --> 01:05:54.840]  Are you familiar with Max Gurdner and Niall Lavel?
[01:05:58.040 --> 01:06:05.160]  No. Okay, I will, I will Skype you the two files. They're both audio files.
[01:06:05.160 --> 01:06:12.840]  It's hour one and hour two of their presentation. And they will shed some light on this in ways
[01:06:12.840 --> 01:06:19.800]  that you never dream possible. Because what people are really being a victim of is not
[01:06:19.800 --> 01:06:27.880]  predatory lending, although that's in there too. It's also predatory servicing. And I tell you,
[01:06:27.880 --> 01:06:33.960]  you get ahold of this information and you start going with it. You will shake the earth upon
[01:06:33.960 --> 01:06:40.440]  which we work. Well, wonderful. Because I've looked at the, I have some of the things that the
[01:06:40.440 --> 01:06:46.120]  servicers do. I'll drop these both in the Skype tonight for you. Other than your hands. I'll
[01:06:46.120 --> 01:06:53.000]  be very pleased to see them. Because what they will tell you is just absolutely positively
[01:06:53.000 --> 01:06:59.240]  incredible. Now, if we can revisit for just a moment what you said about what the lawyers are
[01:06:59.240 --> 01:07:06.760]  basing their exemption from the FDCPA. Yes. If you get past the dismissal and they get into
[01:07:06.760 --> 01:07:15.480]  discovery and they send you admissions, admissions and try to get you to stipulate to a document
[01:07:15.480 --> 01:07:23.720]  that's false, guess what? They do sanctions. They go down to the FDCPA.
[01:07:23.720 --> 01:07:34.440]  Okay. Let's say that again. Yes. I'll give you, for instance, a lady out in Las Vegas,
[01:07:34.440 --> 01:07:43.080]  Nevada, got a cluster of admissions and about half of them were getting her to stipulate
[01:07:43.080 --> 01:07:54.040]  to documents that were false. Well, it only takes one of those stipulations for the attorney to fall
[01:07:54.040 --> 01:08:02.440]  in under FDCPA. So you drug him right back into the FDCPA. Okay. Where do we get there?
[01:08:02.440 --> 01:08:11.720]  There's a case on that. Okay. And what I will do is I'll drop another audio file
[01:08:12.920 --> 01:08:21.400]  in addition to the Max Gertner and Nile of L into Skype for you. And I would strongly suggest
[01:08:22.120 --> 01:08:27.480]  that you listen to it very carefully because it will give you information you didn't
[01:08:27.480 --> 01:08:37.880]  know was even possible. Wonderful. Wonderful. Okay. Also, there are three books you should get
[01:08:39.880 --> 01:08:50.280]  from NCLC. Do you mind my mention? Not at all. Go ahead. Okay. One's on the FDCPA. The other's
[01:08:50.280 --> 01:09:04.280]  on the SCRA and the third one's on collection and judgment. Okay. NCRC? NCLC. NCLC. Who is that?
[01:09:07.960 --> 01:09:16.440]  I hate acronyms. They make me nuts. National Consumer Lawyers, something like that. I can't
[01:09:16.440 --> 01:09:25.320]  remember. You would ask, but it's NCLC and I think it's.com. Okay..com. The three books
[01:09:25.320 --> 01:09:34.200]  cost you about 400 bucks. Okay. Maybe five. But here's the thing. They're eight and a half
[01:09:34.200 --> 01:09:38.520]  by 11. They're two columns to a page and they're each about 1200 pages.
[01:09:38.520 --> 01:09:50.360]  Now I'm getting a headache. Okay. You will find information in there that's just as
[01:09:50.360 --> 01:10:01.480]  absolutely positively incredible. That's probably what I need. So I've got a whole lot more than
[01:10:01.480 --> 01:10:09.640]  that in case law and such. That's sort of semi on point. So if this would get me directly on
[01:10:09.640 --> 01:10:14.440]  point, it's certainly worth it. Decisions and you would be hard pressed not to find something that
[01:10:14.440 --> 01:10:24.200]  was not exactly on point. Wonderful. I will have a look at this. And while we're talking about this,
[01:10:24.200 --> 01:10:32.680]  have you been to Ginny May's website? No. Go to Ginny May's website and download their
[01:10:34.040 --> 01:10:42.680]  They have a guide for lenders. That's why I know they didn't destroy the notes.
[01:10:43.880 --> 01:10:52.920]  So of course not. It is very specific what they are to do. And in reading that, it was clear what's
[01:10:52.920 --> 01:10:57.880]  actually going on here. Well, actually, if you think about it, if you're harking back to about a
[01:10:57.880 --> 01:11:07.480]  year ago, it was splashed all over the news that WAMU never transferred any of their mortgages into
[01:11:07.480 --> 01:11:20.040]  these mortgage based securities. They allocated them, which is in support of what you were talking
[01:11:20.040 --> 01:11:32.760]  about earlier on. Allocated. Explain allocated. Well, they send over a copy, a certified copy of
[01:11:33.480 --> 01:11:41.400]  the note. And they send it over to this trust and that trust and the other trust. Whoa, wait a
[01:11:41.400 --> 01:11:50.840]  minute. Okay, hold on, hold on. According to Ginny May, in order for a note to be put into a trust,
[01:11:50.840 --> 01:11:58.920]  not a trust, in order for a note to be put into a pool, all the documentation, including the note,
[01:11:58.920 --> 01:12:06.760]  must be sent to a document custodian. And the document custodian must certify to Ginny May
[01:12:06.760 --> 01:12:14.120]  that the note meets all the requirements of the pool. And then the document custodian,
[01:12:14.120 --> 01:12:20.760]  which is a separate company from the issuer, the lender, must maintain possession of those
[01:12:20.760 --> 01:12:27.000]  documents until termination of the note. Okay, so you're telling me that Fannie Mae and Freddie
[01:12:27.000 --> 01:12:34.280]  Mac don't break the law either? No, no, this is Ginny, this is Ginny May. What I'm saying is,
[01:12:34.280 --> 01:12:39.560]  I don't care who it is. The note is exactly where it's supposed to be.
[01:12:41.560 --> 01:12:51.080]  But the bank, the lender is not asking for it. And the reason he's not asking for it is because
[01:12:51.080 --> 01:12:57.000]  he's afraid that that document custodian will come up with a whole handful of them.
[01:12:57.000 --> 01:13:03.240]  Yes, in different trusts. In different trusts. So he is not even going to that document custodian.
[01:13:03.240 --> 01:13:09.080]  No, no, no. That's why they put out this crappola story about MERS
[01:13:11.160 --> 01:13:18.200]  shredding them. That was nonsense. They know exactly where that note is. And they're afraid
[01:13:18.200 --> 01:13:23.560]  to go try to get out. They got away with this so long that all of those documents are in there,
[01:13:23.560 --> 01:13:30.120]  and that document custodian, you know, he's a separate business. So he's not profiting from
[01:13:30.120 --> 01:13:38.040]  this crappola. And if it comes up, it's going to look like he was a part of it. And I suspect he'd
[01:13:38.040 --> 01:13:44.600]  turn on the bank in a heartbeat. Not only that, but it would also expose the information to the
[01:13:44.600 --> 01:13:55.480]  investors. Absolutely. And the document custodian would do that to allay any potential liability
[01:13:55.480 --> 01:14:02.280]  toward himself. They'd get him to turn on each other. So one of the things we're going after
[01:14:02.920 --> 01:14:09.320]  is document custodian. Yeah. And there's one other thing in Ginny May.
[01:14:11.240 --> 01:14:21.400]  In order for a lender to be a securities issuer for Ginny May, they must provide to the document
[01:14:21.400 --> 01:14:34.440]  custodian a signatory list. Everyone authorized a sign for the issuer must be filed annually,
[01:14:34.440 --> 01:14:38.680]  and it can only be updated once during the year. Oh, that's interesting.
[01:14:39.640 --> 01:14:48.120]  Oh, yes, that one really got my attention. Let's see if Linda Green is on those.
[01:14:48.120 --> 01:14:59.560]  Well, he was talking about the credit cards or even in the case of the mortgages doing a search
[01:14:59.560 --> 01:15:09.160]  for Linda Green robo signer. Well, don't forget to put in the notary's name, robo signer.
[01:15:10.040 --> 01:15:18.040]  Yes, robo notaries. That I was talking about earlier of how to look at the notary. I didn't
[01:15:18.040 --> 01:15:27.800]  go into all of it with the electronic filings. It has opened the door to horrendous fraud.
[01:15:27.800 --> 01:15:34.760]  Oh, yes. Because the original's not in there. Well, if you go back to read paragraph 20,
[01:15:34.760 --> 01:15:40.680]  it tells you in there that they do not have to notice you in advance of a transfer, correct?
[01:15:40.680 --> 01:15:45.880]  Yeah, correct. Oh, that's not in. Yeah, okay, that's right. That's in paragraph 20.
[01:15:45.880 --> 01:15:51.000]  But it does not say that they don't have to tell you at all.
[01:15:52.040 --> 01:16:01.320]  Well, the Reset Settlement Procedures Act requires that you be notified of a transfer of a negotiation
[01:16:01.320 --> 01:16:09.720]  of the note. They're not required to file that with the county registrar. However,
[01:16:09.720 --> 01:16:22.680]  in view of the contractual restriction in paragraph 20, that restricts the Linda from
[01:16:22.680 --> 01:16:34.920]  negotiating the note without doing so together with this security instrument. Right. If he transfers
[01:16:34.920 --> 01:16:41.960]  the security instrument and doesn't document a negotiation of the note, it creates prima facie
[01:16:41.960 --> 01:16:48.600]  inference that the note and lien were bifurcated. This is Rain DeKalb, David Stevens,
[01:16:48.600 --> 01:16:58.040]  Eddie Craig with a radio calling number 512-646-1984. Hang on, Jeff. We'll be right back on the other side.
[01:16:58.040 --> 01:17:04.760]  Okay. Capital Corn and Bullion is a family-owned business built on the promise to bring you
[01:17:04.760 --> 01:17:10.120]  affordable pricing on all Coin and Bullion products. In addition to Coins and Bullion,
[01:17:10.120 --> 01:17:15.880]  we now offer storeable freeze-dried foods produced by Augustine Farms, ammunition at 10% above
[01:17:15.880 --> 01:17:21.720]  wholesale prices, Berkey Water Products, gift certificates, and our Silver Pool, a new way
[01:17:21.720 --> 01:17:27.080]  to guarantee silver by prepaying at a locked price. We can even help you set up a metals IRA
[01:17:27.080 --> 01:17:35.400]  account. Call us at 512-646-644-0 for more details. As always, we buy, sell, and trade precious
[01:17:35.400 --> 01:17:40.840]  metals, give appraisals, and cater to those with all sizes of coin collections. We're located at
[01:17:40.840 --> 01:17:46.840]  7304 Burnett Road, Suite A, about a half a mile north of Canig, next to the Ikiban Sushi and Genie
[01:17:46.840 --> 01:17:52.120]  Car Wash. We're open Monday through Friday, 10 to 6, Saturdays, 10 to 2. Visit us at
[01:17:52.120 --> 01:17:58.920]  CapitalCoinandBullion.com or call 512-646-644-0 and say you heard about us on Rule of Law radio
[01:17:58.920 --> 01:18:04.920]  or Texas Liberty Radio. What's been the problem with phone companies? High prices and contracts
[01:18:04.920 --> 01:18:10.200]  that lock you in for two years minimum, not FreedomTelephones.com. FreedomTelephones are
[01:18:10.200 --> 01:18:16.920]  designed around the concept and reality of patriotism, loyalty, and privacy. With FreedomTelephones.com,
[01:18:16.920 --> 01:18:22.040]  there are no contracts, no credit checks, and no social security numbers required. That's why
[01:18:22.040 --> 01:18:27.800]  our name is FreedomTelephones.com. Finally, residential, mobile, and business telephones and
[01:18:27.800 --> 01:18:32.760]  plans that are private and never lock you into a long-term contract. Want a low price?
[01:18:32.760 --> 01:18:38.920]  Residential and business plans started only $14.99 and mobile plans started just $39.99,
[01:18:38.920 --> 01:18:44.280]  plus every month you pay your bill, FreedomTelephones.com contributes to your favorite programs.
[01:18:44.280 --> 01:18:48.920]  Don't wait. Support the cause and get the highest quality and the lowest prices
[01:18:48.920 --> 01:18:58.760]  by calling 1-800-600-5553. That's 800-600-5553. FreedomTelephones.com. Portable,
[01:18:58.760 --> 01:18:59.960]  private, perfect.
[01:19:05.240 --> 01:19:06.760]  Ain't gonna fly me
[01:19:06.760 --> 01:19:17.960]  Don't bore me Well
[01:19:21.480 --> 01:19:25.480]  Ain't gonna fool me with that same old trick again
[01:19:26.360 --> 01:19:30.680]  I was blindsided but now I can see your plan
[01:19:30.680 --> 01:19:36.600]  You put the fear in my pocket, took the money from my hand
[01:19:36.600 --> 01:19:40.760]  Ain't gonna fool me with that same old trick again
[01:19:40.760 --> 01:19:56.840]  Ain't gonna fool me
[01:20:01.560 --> 01:20:05.640]  Ain't gonna drive me with that same old sucker pump
[01:20:05.640 --> 01:20:12.760]  Okay, we're back, ready to jump into the break with LaRidio. I'm talking just from there.
[01:20:15.560 --> 01:20:22.760]  Okay, I'm hoping you can help shed some light on the inner workings.
[01:20:25.400 --> 01:20:30.840]  This Jenny May information shed a whole lot of light on it.
[01:20:30.840 --> 01:20:39.400]  I'm not real up on that. Okay, your best bet on that is going to be the Max Gardner, Niola Vell.
[01:20:40.760 --> 01:20:47.720]  Okay, I will go through those because what I read in Jenny May, if you read their manual,
[01:20:47.720 --> 01:20:56.600]  they've got a user's manual or some type of manual, it's online. I was absolutely astounded
[01:20:56.600 --> 01:21:03.800]  that it's a prescription. Once I read it and looked at the structure and then thought,
[01:21:03.800 --> 01:21:09.960]  what if I was a no good rotten corrupt scoundrel? How would I cheat this system?
[01:21:11.960 --> 01:21:19.560]  Heck, that was a piece of cake. The answer to
[01:21:20.760 --> 01:21:25.880]  sell in the note multiple times was just absolutely obvious. All you had to do was
[01:21:25.880 --> 01:21:31.640]  change the interest rate. You send a certified copy of the note over to the trust and they're
[01:21:31.640 --> 01:21:40.280]  sitting ready to rock and roll. Yeah, but no, they can't. Then Jenny May, oh, I see what you're
[01:21:40.280 --> 01:21:49.400]  saying, file it with Jenny May and get it certified by Jenny May and then send the copy to the trust
[01:21:49.400 --> 01:21:59.880]  and modify the copy. Well, the thing is, they have to file a set of documentation for each pool.
[01:22:00.440 --> 01:22:02.840]  Well, they've been filing all kinds of fraudulent documents.
[01:22:03.720 --> 01:22:07.800]  Right, but that would be easy enough. One of us was talking about when we left the technology.
[01:22:07.800 --> 01:22:22.040]  They have to file the original and now I'm seeing that some counties are doing electronic filings,
[01:22:22.920 --> 01:22:28.920]  so the clerk never ever sees the original, but even if they did, they take the original and
[01:22:28.920 --> 01:22:36.760]  scan it in. I'm in a small county north of Fort Worth and they take the original, scan it in,
[01:22:36.760 --> 01:22:44.520]  mail me back the original. So, you know, I'm looking at this from a technological perspective.
[01:22:45.480 --> 01:22:52.680]  I don't have to worry about anything. I can forge everything easily, quickly because they
[01:22:52.680 --> 01:23:00.680]  can't tell. Once they've scanned it in, it turns it into 150 pixels per inch and they do that so
[01:23:00.680 --> 01:23:08.680]  that the documents don't get too large and I can't tell an electronic signature from a real one.
[01:23:08.680 --> 01:23:18.680]  No. So, what I want to do is subpoena the original documents that the lenders filed so I can take
[01:23:18.680 --> 01:23:25.480]  a photograph of them, either with a high definition camera digital or with a 35 millimeter.
[01:23:25.480 --> 01:23:38.520]  If I take a photograph of a document that the the giraffe has been scanned from one document
[01:23:39.080 --> 01:23:46.200]  and then photoshopped and dropped into this document, when I bring up the
[01:23:46.200 --> 01:23:55.800]  signature's name, all I have, I can do this in five minutes, photograph it, drop it into computer,
[01:23:56.680 --> 01:24:05.320]  open it in photoshop and magnify it a few times. If that signature turns into pixels,
[01:24:05.320 --> 01:24:16.360]  these guys got a problem. Well, the other possibility is to drop it into Acrobat and
[01:24:16.360 --> 01:24:22.280]  start removing the layers. Oh, no, they don't even need to do this in layers.
[01:24:24.200 --> 01:24:29.720]  That's a piece of cake. Yeah, but see, Acrobat will spot where it is that they dropped it in.
[01:24:29.720 --> 01:24:38.360]  Uh-huh. It is a layer. I'll have to look at that. I've got Acrobat. I haven't looked at it.
[01:24:38.360 --> 01:24:41.800]  Generally, when I pull these documents, they come up with a single layer.
[01:24:41.800 --> 01:24:48.440]  A special one is not the cheap one you can put on your computer. That's reader. I've got a 10
[01:24:48.440 --> 01:24:56.920]  professional. Okay. But they generally come in with one layer. In saying that, that's not something
[01:24:56.920 --> 01:25:04.840]  I've looked for. So I will certainly go look for layers. Yeah. Oh, that would be wonderful.
[01:25:07.160 --> 01:25:12.040]  But with technology, it is so easy, but the drawback to the technological fraud
[01:25:13.240 --> 01:25:20.040]  is the pixelation. Yeah. If I can get that original document, that's supposedly the original,
[01:25:20.040 --> 01:25:28.120]  and I take a photo of it at 600 dots per inch and then blow it up.
[01:25:29.480 --> 01:25:35.560]  That signature at 150 dots per inch, he's going to blow up into little squares really quickly.
[01:25:35.560 --> 01:25:46.840]  Well, so is the photograph. Not a 35 millimeter. I can take a 35 millimeter and scan it in at
[01:25:46.840 --> 01:25:52.040]  1200 dots per inch and it'll never pixelate. It's still going to show up as pixel. You need film.
[01:25:53.880 --> 01:26:01.480]  Oh, well, well, see, they scan at 150. So if you photograph at 600 or 900,
[01:26:05.960 --> 01:26:13.000]  it'll pixelate very quickly. Okay. And your photograph itself, you could draw a pencil line
[01:26:13.000 --> 01:26:20.520]  across the document and then photograph it. Your pencil line or pen line won't pixelate,
[01:26:21.320 --> 01:26:28.280]  but the signature would. Okay. That would clearly demonstrate the fraud. Nobody scans over 150
[01:26:28.280 --> 01:26:35.400]  because it makes the documents too large. Well, I wouldn't make that rule up. But none of these
[01:26:35.400 --> 01:26:46.040]  clerks will. If somebody is really smart and prepared to take the time, then like if I were
[01:26:46.040 --> 01:26:53.160]  going to forge a notary's cure at, I would scan that thing really deep.
[01:26:55.560 --> 01:27:02.200]  So that if somebody got my original, it would not pixelate quickly. Okay.
[01:27:02.200 --> 01:27:08.200]  Okay. But even then, if it's printed with a dot matrix or a laser printer,
[01:27:09.640 --> 01:27:16.120]  it's going to pixelate. Immediately. Yeah. The hand signature won't
[01:27:17.320 --> 01:27:25.560]  pixelate, but if it's printed at all, it'll pixelate. And they have been so incredibly careless.
[01:27:25.560 --> 01:27:32.760]  Right. On this, on the other thing that you were talking about with the, the lawyer and you're
[01:27:32.760 --> 01:27:41.320]  going to file a bar grievance. Yes. Why don't you take that a couple of steps further?
[01:27:43.480 --> 01:27:48.040]  Practical. Against the judge with your judicial commission, whatever it's called.
[01:27:48.040 --> 01:27:54.680]  And after they have, each one of those two organizations have round filed your complaints.
[01:27:56.760 --> 01:28:00.120]  Now you have ratification of their behavior.
[01:28:02.200 --> 01:28:07.320]  And then file a tort action against the state, naming the state as
[01:28:08.200 --> 01:28:16.360]  responded superior because you now have evidence of it being a procedure, practice and policy
[01:28:16.360 --> 01:28:21.400]  of the state to engage in theft of honest services.
[01:28:24.200 --> 01:28:31.720]  Okay. I have a plan I'm already implementing that's kind of goes there.
[01:28:33.160 --> 01:28:38.760]  I have just prepared a very large set of criminal complaints for Turkey County.
[01:28:38.760 --> 01:28:48.440]  Uh-huh. And I had filed a motion to disqualify the presiding judge. Right.
[01:28:48.440 --> 01:28:53.800]  That, that motion was forwarded to the head administrative judge of the district as it was
[01:28:53.800 --> 01:28:59.960]  required to be. Right. The head administrative judge of the district decided to treat the
[01:28:59.960 --> 01:29:06.280]  motion to disqualify as a motion to recuse and dismissed it because it wasn't verified.
[01:29:06.280 --> 01:29:11.400]  A motion to disqualify cannot be dismissed because it's not verified.
[01:29:12.440 --> 01:29:19.400]  So I filed a second motion to disqualify or refiles it verified and filed a motion to disqualify
[01:29:19.400 --> 01:29:26.760]  the head administrative judge. When that is done, the head administrative judge is required to
[01:29:26.760 --> 01:29:36.920]  notify the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Well, I had no evidence that he had done so, so I did.
[01:29:36.920 --> 01:29:43.000]  I'll give you a little more detail when I come back. Leslie, Leslie, I see you there and I'm
[01:29:43.000 --> 01:29:49.240]  glad you called in. Hang on. And Lee and Jimmy will pick you up on the other side. As soon as we
[01:29:49.240 --> 01:29:56.200]  finish with Jeff, uh, you know how Jeff has long winded just keeping him alive. This is Randy Kelsen,
[01:29:56.200 --> 01:29:58.920]  Steve Tedd Craig with our radio. We'll be right back.
[01:30:00.840 --> 01:30:06.360]  A noble lie, Oklahoma City, 1995 will change forever the way you look at the true nature of
[01:30:06.360 --> 01:30:11.000]  terrorism. Based on the damage patting to the building, but the government seems impossible.
[01:30:11.000 --> 01:30:16.760]  The grand jury did not want to hear anything I had to say. The decision was made not to pursue
[01:30:16.760 --> 01:30:23.240]  any more of those individuals. Some of these columns were ripped up, shredded, tossed around.
[01:30:23.240 --> 01:30:26.920]  The people that did the things they did knew doggone well what they were doing.
[01:30:26.920 --> 01:30:31.480]  Expose the cover up now at anobleye.com.
[01:30:31.480 --> 01:30:38.280]  hempusa.org has a revolutionary wonder food for detoxing the body and rebuilding the immune
[01:30:38.280 --> 01:30:43.880]  system. Micro plant powder can help unclog arteries and soften heart valves while removing
[01:30:43.880 --> 01:30:49.640]  heavy metals, virus, fungus, bacteria, and parasites. Plus it cleans and purifies the blood,
[01:30:49.640 --> 01:30:56.600]  lungs, stomach, and colon. Keep your body clean with micro plant powder. Visit us at hempusa.org
[01:30:56.600 --> 01:31:00.680]  or call 908-69-12608 today.
[01:31:02.680 --> 01:31:10.440]  More energy, stronger immune power, improved sense of well-being. How many supplements have you
[01:31:10.440 --> 01:31:16.280]  heard boast of these benefits? The team behind Centrition believes that supplements should
[01:31:16.280 --> 01:31:24.120]  over-deliver on their promises. And Centrition does just that. Centrition utilizes the ancient
[01:31:24.120 --> 01:31:30.200]  healing wisdom of Chinese medicine. In conjunction with the science of modern nutrition, adaptogenic
[01:31:30.200 --> 01:31:36.920]  herbs serve as the healing component. And organic hemp protein in greens and superfoods act as a
[01:31:36.920 --> 01:31:44.600]  balanced nutrient base. Plus, Centrition tastes great in just water. This powder supplement is
[01:31:44.600 --> 01:31:51.480]  everything you'd want in a product and it's all natural. Visit centrition.com to order yours
[01:31:51.480 --> 01:32:07.960]  or call 1-866-497-7436. After you use Centrition, you'll believe in supplements again.
[01:32:21.640 --> 01:32:28.760]  Okay, we're back. Randy talked to us. He said great news on radio.
[01:32:30.920 --> 01:32:41.640]  We're talking to Jeff in Maryland. There we go. Okay, Randy, I want you to sit still for a moment
[01:32:41.640 --> 01:32:47.880]  and listen. Okay. You filed a board grievance. You filed a complaint with the judicial commission.
[01:32:47.880 --> 01:32:56.120]  After they have round filed it, you now have organizations that are part of the state by
[01:32:56.120 --> 01:33:06.840]  way of the judiciary. You filed a tort claim into risk management. Okay. When you do that,
[01:33:06.840 --> 01:33:13.640]  you're no longer dealing with attorneys and judges. You're dealing with insurance adjusters
[01:33:13.640 --> 01:33:22.040]  and they don't like claims. In fact, they don't even like to see a file open. And you know how
[01:33:22.040 --> 01:33:29.000]  you talk about what will happen to an attorney and if he gets three bar complaints? Well, the same
[01:33:29.000 --> 01:33:36.360]  thing will happen to a prosecutor and a judge. Well, this time the state will do it. And instead
[01:33:36.360 --> 01:33:41.800]  of walking into a room and flipping on the overhead light, what you have done is you've taken one of
[01:33:41.800 --> 01:33:50.280]  those six foot wide carbon arc searchlights and shined on them. That is a wonderful idea.
[01:33:51.320 --> 01:34:03.640]  And what I was going to is a way to get a more definite claim against the agency. The claim that
[01:34:03.640 --> 01:34:12.520]  you can get is where the judicial commission and the bar have ratified their actions.
[01:34:12.520 --> 01:34:21.320]  Let me show you where I'm going. This same complaint I'm going to send to the bar.
[01:34:23.160 --> 01:34:31.080]  And when I send it to the bar, I'll use it as a grievance and I have a 50-something page
[01:34:31.080 --> 01:34:41.400]  statement of probable cause. And attached to that in support of my accusations are 38 verified
[01:34:41.400 --> 01:34:52.040]  criminal affidavits. And what's going to happen is the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and the
[01:34:52.040 --> 01:35:00.200]  two judges on the State Commission on Judicial Conduct, why, they're going to forget that
[01:35:00.200 --> 01:35:07.320]  they're also magistrates. And they're not going to perform their duty as a magistrate.
[01:35:08.680 --> 01:35:14.040]  And I'm going to take them to a grand jury. Now I have a claim against them.
[01:35:14.600 --> 01:35:21.080]  Yes, but the problem is I pointed out to you before with what the route that I suggested to you is
[01:35:21.720 --> 01:35:27.080]  you're still dealing with judges and lawyers. Whereas the way I suggested you're dealing
[01:35:27.080 --> 01:35:34.360]  with insurance adjusters. Yes, I agree. I agree. And now I can go and make my claim
[01:35:35.240 --> 01:35:40.680]  and show that these people, they're going to say, well, we examined into your allegation
[01:35:40.680 --> 01:35:46.360]  and found it did not rise to the level of misconduct. And I'm going to say, is that a fact,
[01:35:46.360 --> 01:35:54.680]  Jack, these two judges on this commission acted in clear and direct violation of standing law
[01:35:54.680 --> 01:36:00.760]  for the purpose of shielding this individual from criminal prosecution. And you're telling me
[01:36:01.480 --> 01:36:10.040]  that criminal prosecution did not rise to the level of misconduct. Now I can buy the criminal
[01:36:10.040 --> 01:36:18.280]  complaints against the judges. Now I go make the claim against their bonds. And I have a guy here
[01:36:18.280 --> 01:36:25.160]  in Texas who's researching out exactly how to file these claims against their bonds now. And you
[01:36:25.160 --> 01:36:31.720]  are exactly right. That is absolutely the place to go. You're filing against their bonds. And I'm
[01:36:31.720 --> 01:36:37.880]  suggesting to you, you file it against the state, naming the state as respondent superior, that
[01:36:37.880 --> 01:36:49.240]  they are fully engaged in ratifying and supporting procedures, practices, and policy of theft of
[01:36:49.240 --> 01:37:00.280]  honest service or denying people to honest and fair public administration. And that is probably,
[01:37:00.840 --> 01:37:04.680]  we're going to get you up further down the road and the rat that you're suggesting.
[01:37:04.680 --> 01:37:10.680]  Okay. This is something I brought up earlier. And everybody I talked to kind of nixed it
[01:37:11.800 --> 01:37:20.760]  is I wanted to blame the governor for as a respondent superior for the actions of the
[01:37:20.760 --> 01:37:28.120]  bar and state commission on judicial conduct, that they were acting under his ultimate direction
[01:37:28.120 --> 01:37:36.360]  and his training provided by the state, condoned by the state, the policies are accepted and
[01:37:36.360 --> 01:37:42.280]  condoned by the state. And yes, that's exactly where I wanted to go to the corporate state
[01:37:43.320 --> 01:37:53.640]  as respondent superior, not the constitutional state. So I agree with you 100%. And any information
[01:37:53.640 --> 01:37:59.720]  I can get to help me move down that road. I greatly appreciate it.
[01:37:59.720 --> 01:38:06.600]  You're an individual down in your neck of the woods that has filed a tort claim against
[01:38:07.640 --> 01:38:13.880]  county sheriff, county, state prosecutor, state judge in the state of Kansas.
[01:38:15.800 --> 01:38:20.040]  And here now he in as far as the sheriff in the county is concerned, he's dealing with an
[01:38:20.040 --> 01:38:28.360]  insurance adjuster, not judges and lawyers. We've had to talk about this when we have a lot more
[01:38:28.360 --> 01:38:34.840]  time. This is definitely where I want to go. And before I lose you, I'm going to someone I want
[01:38:34.840 --> 01:38:39.320]  to introduce you to. Further down the road than where you've been getting. That's where I need
[01:38:39.320 --> 01:38:48.040]  is further down the road. Harking back to the FDCPA and nine, 10 months ago, and then give me a call.
[01:38:48.040 --> 01:38:57.320]  Okay. Let me introduce you to someone. Leslie, you there? Yes, I'm here.
[01:38:58.040 --> 01:39:05.320]  Okay. Leslie is a researcher out of Pennsylvania. And she has very quickly become my resident
[01:39:05.320 --> 01:39:15.960]  murder's expert. Oh, okay. Leslie, meet Jeff. Jeff is when people ask me about good researchers,
[01:39:15.960 --> 01:39:24.120]  Jeff is right up there on the top of my list. I'm in touch with good researchers than being one
[01:39:24.120 --> 01:39:37.000]  myself. Well, he's good at sorting the sorting out the trash. Jeff doesn't bring me garbage.
[01:39:38.120 --> 01:39:44.920]  Okay. So he is good people to know. I have a tendency to get to the bottom line. And sometimes
[01:39:44.920 --> 01:39:52.920]  it makes people very uncomfortable. But anyway, you're making me uncomfortable, Jeff. I think we
[01:39:52.920 --> 01:40:00.040]  have met before. We may very well have because there's something about Leslie in Pennsylvania
[01:40:00.040 --> 01:40:08.280]  that sounds familiar. Yes. Were you in draft with the home ownership program before? Yes. Okay.
[01:40:08.280 --> 01:40:16.680]  Yeah. Yeah, that's where I met you. Okay. And the other website that you have?
[01:40:17.960 --> 01:40:25.320]  Void judgments.net. Something like that, yeah. Yeah. And it's still true today, even though I
[01:40:25.320 --> 01:40:34.280]  first published that about eight or nine years ago. Still true today, although there are probably
[01:40:34.280 --> 01:40:39.800]  even more current case sightings that could be put up. But who's got the time?
[01:40:41.240 --> 01:40:44.680]  Exactly. And I might have known you two would know each other.
[01:40:46.920 --> 01:40:51.560]  Okay. Thank you very much, Jeff. And I am definitely going to want to talk to you off the
[01:40:51.560 --> 01:40:57.560]  off the air. Yeah. But not just weekend. I'm kind of busy. I've got four suits to bring up.
[01:40:58.280 --> 01:41:03.000]  Me too. I'm pretty tight up this weekend, but I will try to get in touch with you sometime next
[01:41:03.000 --> 01:41:07.400]  week. Okay. Thank you, Jeff. Bye. Bye. Bye, Eddie.
[01:41:09.160 --> 01:41:14.840]  Howdy, old Jeff. Okay. Now we're going to Leslie in Pennsylvania.
[01:41:18.200 --> 01:41:21.640]  So I have been downloading lots of information from you.
[01:41:21.640 --> 01:41:30.520]  Yes. I haven't had time to go through it yet. I'm similar to Jeff. I've got more to do than
[01:41:30.520 --> 01:41:38.200]  I can get to. Yes. So do you have, what do you have for us tonight?
[01:41:39.560 --> 01:41:45.560]  Bad news. Staying 12B6 me in the federal court, which of course you could figure they would.
[01:41:45.560 --> 01:41:51.400]  Of course. That's standard procedure. Now you get to file a judicial
[01:41:51.400 --> 01:41:57.160]  conduct complaint against the judge for failing to apply the law to, for failing to determine the
[01:41:57.160 --> 01:42:05.240]  facts in accordance with the rules of evidence and then applying the law as it comes to him to
[01:42:05.240 --> 01:42:10.920]  the facts in the case and in the process denying you and your right to petition the court for
[01:42:10.920 --> 01:42:20.840]  a redress of grievance. Okay. 14th Amendment. Right. And that will make the judge real unhappy.
[01:42:22.040 --> 01:42:30.680]  Of course. At least you hope it does. I'm really, like I said, I'm, you know, I have so many backup
[01:42:30.680 --> 01:42:39.400]  plans. Something's got to work. Well, one thing that works is costing the other side money and
[01:42:39.400 --> 01:42:46.200]  there's one thing that you need to start trying. If you have any documents that are filed in the
[01:42:46.200 --> 01:42:56.280]  record and they have the appearance of being incorrect or improper, run the routine on the
[01:42:56.280 --> 01:43:03.640]  prosecutor. If you can get the prosecutor engaged in this and especially if you have a prosecutor
[01:43:03.640 --> 01:43:15.400]  who's up for election, everything is political. In the end, politics is everything and all politics
[01:43:15.400 --> 01:43:26.120]  is local. You hammer your local prosecutor for, for protecting the banks to the detriment of
[01:43:26.120 --> 01:43:34.440]  his constituents. He's going to get real excited, especially if you try to get him prosecuted
[01:43:35.240 --> 01:43:40.200]  for failing to do this job. Hang on, Leslie. We're about to go to break. We'll pick you up
[01:43:40.200 --> 01:43:45.960]  on the other side. This is Randy Calton, Deborah Stevens, Eddie Craig. We live on radio. Our
[01:43:45.960 --> 01:43:55.560]  call in number 512-646-1984. Give us the call. We have a couple more hours in our four-hour
[01:43:55.560 --> 01:44:05.480]  info marathon. Right back. Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit? Win your case without
[01:44:05.480 --> 01:44:11.800]  an attorney with jurisdictionary. The affordable, easy to understand four CD course that will show
[01:44:11.800 --> 01:44:19.400]  you how in 24 hours, step by step. If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing.
[01:44:19.400 --> 01:44:24.680]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself. Thousands have won with our
[01:44:24.680 --> 01:44:31.240]  step by step course. And now you can too. Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney
[01:44:31.240 --> 01:44:37.480]  with 22 years of case winning experience. Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what
[01:44:37.480 --> 01:44:43.560]  everyone should understand about the principles and practices that control our American courts.
[01:44:43.560 --> 01:44:49.800]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases,
[01:44:49.800 --> 01:44:56.600]  prosay tactics, and much more. Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner.
[01:44:56.600 --> 01:45:04.920]  Or call toll free 866-LAW-EZ. Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[01:45:05.480 --> 01:45:11.800]  Win your case without an attorney with jurisdictionary. The affordable, easy to understand four CD
[01:45:11.800 --> 01:45:18.840]  course that will show you how in 24 hours, step by step. If you have a lawyer, know what your
[01:45:18.840 --> 01:45:23.640]  lawyer should be doing. If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[01:45:24.440 --> 01:45:30.840]  Thousands have won with our step by step course. And now you can too. Jurisdictionary was created
[01:45:30.840 --> 01:45:37.720]  by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case winning experience. Even if you're not in a lawsuit,
[01:45:37.720 --> 01:45:43.240]  you can learn what everyone should understand about the principles and practices that control our
[01:45:43.240 --> 01:45:51.000]  American courts. You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases,
[01:45:51.000 --> 01:45:57.800]  prosay tactics, and much more. Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner.
[01:45:57.800 --> 01:46:14.040]  Or call toll free 866-LAW-EZ.
[01:46:14.040 --> 01:46:29.320]  Okay, we're back. We're talking to Leslie and Pennsylvania.
[01:46:31.080 --> 01:46:40.120]  When we went out, we were talking about invoking a little politics. And I've done this before in
[01:46:40.120 --> 01:46:49.320]  Pennsylvania and they absolutely are not accustomed to it. Prosecutors tend to think they are immune.
[01:46:50.280 --> 01:47:01.400]  I had a prosecutor in, not Harrisburg, I think of the town in a minute, near New Haven, Lancaster.
[01:47:01.400 --> 01:47:10.280]  I'll just say like that. Deny a open records request because I was a citizen of the state of
[01:47:10.280 --> 01:47:18.600]  Pennsylvania. And I filed criminal charges against him for denying me full faith and credit.
[01:47:20.840 --> 01:47:27.960]  Oh, when I filed that, he got all excited and wanted to discuss the situation with me.
[01:47:27.960 --> 01:47:33.880]  I didn't have time to pursue it, but he wanted to talk about it and I told him,
[01:47:33.880 --> 01:47:40.360]  sorry, Bubba, that bail's already been rung. He wanted to get me the information.
[01:47:43.880 --> 01:47:48.680]  It has a way of getting their attention when you come back at them. And especially
[01:47:49.400 --> 01:47:53.080]  when they think that you set them up so that you could come back at them.
[01:47:53.080 --> 01:47:58.680]  Right. And the trick in Pennsylvania is your attorney general.
[01:48:00.600 --> 01:48:08.040]  We don't have this kind of power here in Texas. In Texas, the prosecuting attorney
[01:48:08.040 --> 01:48:16.600]  under law has no prosecutor or discretion. In Pennsylvania, he does. But because he does,
[01:48:16.600 --> 01:48:25.880]  you have standing to challenge his rule, his decision. So I've worked up a variant of what
[01:48:25.880 --> 01:48:31.800]  I do here in Texas is we send the complaint to the prosecutor. When he refuses to prosecute,
[01:48:32.520 --> 01:48:40.040]  we file an appeal to the court of common police and then we file a complaint with the attorney general
[01:48:40.040 --> 01:48:47.080]  accusing the prosecutor of Ms. Stevenson's office and ask the attorney general to prosecute
[01:48:47.080 --> 01:48:53.320]  the prosecutor. He is not going to prosecute the prosecutor.
[01:48:54.600 --> 01:49:00.520]  Do you think the appealing has no merit or no possibility of success?
[01:49:01.320 --> 01:49:02.760]  Wait, say that again.
[01:49:02.760 --> 01:49:05.320]  Appealing the decision that the judge made.
[01:49:05.320 --> 01:49:11.240]  The court of appeals will just blow it off, almost certainly, but I would appeal it anyway.
[01:49:12.840 --> 01:49:19.320]  Time and money. This is all about the money. Everything I get from the other side,
[01:49:20.040 --> 01:49:23.800]  I would object to it and file a bar grievance from filing a frivolous plea.
[01:49:25.960 --> 01:49:30.760]  The bar is going to gift the grievance and they're going to throw it in the trash and
[01:49:30.760 --> 01:49:38.680]  they're going to send you this letter that says we examine it into your accusation and find that it
[01:49:38.680 --> 01:49:46.120]  does not rise to the level of misconduct. If you accuse him of pushing a truckload of dead
[01:49:46.120 --> 01:49:51.320]  of babies off of a cliff, they would say we examine it into your allocation sign that does
[01:49:51.320 --> 01:50:00.680]  not rise to the level of misconduct. It's what they do. And this is on the one hand
[01:50:00.680 --> 01:50:07.400]  it's the strength and on the other it's the weakness because their insurance company knows
[01:50:07.400 --> 01:50:13.400]  they're going to throw it in the trash. Valid invalid doesn't make any difference.
[01:50:14.760 --> 01:50:24.680]  So they treat them all the same. There are nine underwriters for malpractice insurance in the
[01:50:24.680 --> 01:50:33.640]  country. They are all underwritten by Lloyds of London. They all have the same requirements
[01:50:34.600 --> 01:50:44.600]  just like your automobile insurance. One accident, your rates increase. Two accidents,
[01:50:44.600 --> 01:50:51.720]  they cancel. Your fault, their fault, nobody's fault, they don't care. You're an unacceptable
[01:50:51.720 --> 01:50:58.680]  risk. The lawyers have the same way. So they file the Rule 12 motion. We file a
[01:50:59.480 --> 01:51:05.800]  motion for sanctions, motion to strike as non-responsive, motion for default judgment,
[01:51:05.800 --> 01:51:12.040]  for failure to answer, and bar grievance against them for filing a frivolous pleading.
[01:51:13.880 --> 01:51:18.760]  The bar will get the grievance and send you this letter that says we examine it into your
[01:51:18.760 --> 01:51:23.800]  investigation and find it does not rise to the level of misconduct. Throw it in the trash
[01:51:24.840 --> 01:51:27.960]  and the insurance company will double their malpractice insurance.
[01:51:30.200 --> 01:51:38.840]  Yuck, yuck. And that lets the lawyer know we mean business. You want the lawyer to think he's
[01:51:38.840 --> 01:51:50.200]  dealing with the pro-safe from hell. Because that's exactly what we plan to be. And when you
[01:51:50.200 --> 01:51:56.760]  start hammering the judge with your seconda complaints, he's not going to be able to raise
[01:51:56.760 --> 01:52:03.400]  that issue with you. But he can raise it with the lawyer on the other side.
[01:52:03.400 --> 01:52:19.240]  Get this woman off my case. We had that happen in Utah. I had Brenda Burton call me complaining
[01:52:19.240 --> 01:52:23.320]  about all the junk they're doing. I said, well, are you filing the bar grievances against the
[01:52:23.320 --> 01:52:29.080]  attorney? Well, no. I said, why not? Well, I didn't think about it. Well, think about it.
[01:52:29.080 --> 01:52:34.760]  What about judicial conduct against the judge? Oh, I didn't want to make you mad at me.
[01:52:35.960 --> 01:52:43.880]  Brenda, she's screwing you every way from Sunday. How could he get me worse? She said,
[01:52:43.880 --> 01:52:53.240]  well, you got a point there. 25 bar grievances, seven judicial conduct complaints later they go
[01:52:53.240 --> 01:52:58.920]  into court. And the judge said, you guys can have this court all afternoon. I'm leaving.
[01:53:01.000 --> 01:53:05.880]  But when he said to the lawyers on the other side, but when I come back tomorrow,
[01:53:05.880 --> 01:53:12.520]  you will have made miss Burton an offer she cannot refuse. I do not want to see her face
[01:53:12.520 --> 01:53:23.480]  in my courtroom again. Do I make myself clear? This is the kind of politics we need to start
[01:53:23.480 --> 01:53:32.440]  creating. If we don't start bringing judges to task, this travesty they're perpetrating will
[01:53:32.440 --> 01:53:38.440]  continue. We get a couple of judges removed from the bench. We will get their attention.
[01:53:38.440 --> 01:53:42.280]  But besides, it's fun.
[01:53:43.880 --> 01:53:49.800]  Yeah. Did you think that is what I sent you about bankruptcy and MERS?
[01:53:50.840 --> 01:53:54.680]  Yes. I haven't had time to go suing him yet. I've downloaded him.
[01:53:55.320 --> 01:54:01.320]  Right. Well, they're saying that because there's so many lawsuits by the different
[01:54:01.320 --> 01:54:09.640]  attorneys general and different counties that are filing on behalf of all the counties in
[01:54:09.640 --> 01:54:14.600]  their state, that if any of them wins, they're going to drive MERS into bankruptcy.
[01:54:15.320 --> 01:54:25.400]  But if they do that, then any mortgage that they have the power to assign, which they say all of
[01:54:25.400 --> 01:54:34.840]  them, can be clawed back on behalf of the people that are suing them. They put them into bankruptcy.
[01:54:35.800 --> 01:54:45.080]  Yes. That one, I read part of that and I thought that was interesting. So what does that mean?
[01:54:47.240 --> 01:54:52.120]  Pardon me? It was set up to be bankruptcy remote, but it's not. It isn't.
[01:54:52.120 --> 01:54:58.760]  What? Well, it's because they've done... It's bankruptcy remote from...
[01:54:59.400 --> 01:55:01.000]  The banks, but not from MERS?
[01:55:01.000 --> 01:55:03.000]  Yeah. Yeah, from the bank's perspective.
[01:55:03.560 --> 01:55:03.960]  Right.
[01:55:03.960 --> 01:55:05.480]  But not in their own right.
[01:55:06.280 --> 01:55:06.760]  Right.
[01:55:06.760 --> 01:55:11.400]  It wasn't intended that they become liable in their own right. They were trying to keep
[01:55:11.400 --> 01:55:17.560]  themselves at arm's length, but they just weren't able to do that somehow. They had to
[01:55:17.560 --> 01:55:30.040]  get into places they shouldn't have been. And this stuff of acting as the entity that does the
[01:55:30.040 --> 01:55:37.560]  assignments and such, put them in a position to make errors. And they would have needed errors
[01:55:37.560 --> 01:55:46.280]  and emissions, but when they make errors as a matter of policy, absolutely, I would think
[01:55:46.280 --> 01:55:51.720]  this could be a possibility, but I didn't have time to finish it. But my concern in
[01:55:51.720 --> 01:56:02.040]  considering that possibility, how would that affect the homeowner
[01:56:03.160 --> 01:56:13.320]  if MERS went into bankruptcy? And now we have the investors fighting for the spoils.
[01:56:13.320 --> 01:56:17.640]  And what happens to her note at that point?
[01:56:18.200 --> 01:56:22.680]  If they take the mortgages away from MERS because they are the mortgagee of record,
[01:56:24.280 --> 01:56:29.960]  at least that's the way it reads in mine, and they have the power to assign. So if they have the
[01:56:29.960 --> 01:56:37.640]  power to assign based on what they're saying in their own paperwork, then the bankruptcy
[01:56:37.640 --> 01:56:43.480]  trustee can grab it. And that means they would go to my mortgage and they would have the power
[01:56:43.480 --> 01:56:51.080]  to do whatever they want with it. No, they wouldn't. They wouldn't give the mortgage.
[01:56:52.600 --> 01:57:00.840]  The mortgage has already been assigned to somebody else. They would get the note. That's the only
[01:57:00.840 --> 01:57:10.200]  thing the investor has an investment in. And that's because they bifurcated the two.
[01:57:11.240 --> 01:57:14.760]  So if they get the mortgage without the note, then they wouldn't be able to do anything with it.
[01:57:15.720 --> 01:57:21.880]  Right. The servicer has the mortgage, but he doesn't have the note. The investor has the note.
[01:57:21.880 --> 01:57:29.400]  This is exactly what Landmark v. Kessler, the Supreme Court in Kansas said in Landmark v. Kessler
[01:57:29.400 --> 01:57:36.760]  that the investor holds the note and has a claim against the signator on the note,
[01:57:38.040 --> 01:57:43.000]  but no claim against the property because he does not hold the deed of trust. The deed of
[01:57:43.000 --> 01:57:48.200]  trust has been assigned to somebody else. They hold a claim against the property,
[01:57:49.320 --> 01:57:54.440]  but they can't be harmed. But then we better pray they go into bankruptcy. Then all the
[01:57:54.440 --> 01:58:03.880]  mortgages go, bye-bye. Yeah, well, not exactly. All the deed of trust he has is a shortcut.
[01:58:05.800 --> 01:58:15.160]  As a confessed judgment, the lender could, the holder of the note, could always go back and
[01:58:15.160 --> 01:58:22.680]  sue in the court for a judgment. Right. And he'd just turn a non-judicial state into a judicial
[01:58:22.680 --> 01:58:31.640]  state. But then they have a problem of establishing standing. Hang on, Leslie. We'll be right back.
[01:58:31.640 --> 01:58:36.440]  This is Randy Kelk, Deborah Stevens, Eddie Craig. We'll leave the radio. Our call in
[01:58:36.440 --> 01:58:45.880]  number is 512-646-1984. Give us a call. We have a couple more hours to go. So
[01:58:46.760 --> 01:58:51.400]  get in line and start building up at the end. So make sure you have your spot in line.
[01:58:51.400 --> 01:58:52.920]  We'll be right back.
[01:59:22.280 --> 01:59:32.920]  Call us toll free at 888-551-0102 or visit us online at bfa.org. This translation is highly
[01:59:32.920 --> 01:59:39.320]  accurate and it comes with over 13,000 cross references, plus charts and maps and an outline
[01:59:39.320 --> 01:59:44.840]  for every book of the Bible. This is truly a Bible you can understand. To get your free copy of the
[01:59:44.840 --> 01:59:56.040]  New Testament recovery version, call us toll free at 888-551-0102. That's 888-551-0102 or
[01:59:56.040 --> 02:00:15.400]  visit us online at bfa.org.