[00:00.000 --> 00:06.360]  Some people count sheep to fall asleep, but clone sheep would be creepy enough to keep
[00:06.360 --> 00:07.360]  you awake nights.
[00:07.360 --> 00:12.160]  Now we could add cloned wildcats to the list of nightmare laboratory animals.
[00:12.160 --> 00:16.040]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht and I'll be back with details.
[00:16.040 --> 00:17.600]  Privacy is under attack.
[00:17.600 --> 00:21.200]  When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[00:21.200 --> 00:26.000]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[00:26.000 --> 00:30.960]  So protect your rights, say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself.
[00:30.960 --> 00:33.760]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[00:33.760 --> 00:38.120]  This public service announcement is brought to you by StartPage.com, the private search
[00:38.120 --> 00:41.600]  engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[00:41.600 --> 00:45.080]  Start over with StartPage.
[00:45.080 --> 00:47.080]  Remember Dolly the clone sheep?
[00:47.080 --> 00:52.800]  It's been 15 years since she made history, but the embryologist who cloned her is back.
[00:52.800 --> 00:57.480]  He now wants to apply his technology to endangered Scottish wildcats.
[00:57.480 --> 01:02.720]  His plan is to create cloned embryos in test tubes and transplant them into domesticated
[01:02.720 --> 01:04.240]  cats for birth.
[01:04.240 --> 01:09.240]  The public strongly opposes animal cloning, and apparently nature does too, since most
[01:09.240 --> 01:11.680]  of these laboratory animals die in infancy.
[01:11.680 --> 01:14.400]  Shouldn't that tell us something?
[01:14.400 --> 01:17.120]  Scientists need to stop playing God with living creatures.
[01:17.120 --> 01:23.120]  There are far better ways to save endangered species than putting them in petri dishes.
[01:23.120 --> 01:32.120]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, more news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[01:32.120 --> 01:36.120]  Remember Facebook's pledge to stop using tracking cookies to spy on users?
[01:36.120 --> 01:39.120]  Well, the cookies are back and creepier than ever.
[01:39.120 --> 01:43.640]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, and I'll tell you how Facebook snoops on users even after
[01:43.640 --> 01:46.040]  they log off next.
[01:46.040 --> 01:47.600]  Privacy is under attack.
[01:47.600 --> 01:51.200]  When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[01:51.200 --> 01:56.000]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[01:56.000 --> 02:01.080]  So protect your rights, say no to surveillance, and keep your information to yourself.
[02:01.080 --> 02:03.760]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[02:03.760 --> 02:08.080]  This public service announcement is brought to you by StartPage.com, the private search
[02:08.080 --> 02:11.560]  engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[02:11.560 --> 02:14.760]  Start over with StartPage.
[02:14.760 --> 02:18.640]  Privacy is our bits of data stored on your computer when you visit websites, and many
[02:18.640 --> 02:21.880]  sites are using them to secretly monitor your browsing.
[02:21.880 --> 02:26.320]  Their privacy poison and favorites of the social networking site, Facebook.
[02:26.320 --> 02:30.400]  When Facebook was caught using tracking cookies a while back, they promised to stop.
[02:30.400 --> 02:35.320]  But an Australian blogger has discovered those tracking cookies are once again watching visitors
[02:35.320 --> 02:40.480]  on Facebook integrated sites, even when the users don't have Facebook accounts.
[02:40.480 --> 02:41.480]  Yikes.
[02:41.480 --> 02:45.120]  The lawsuits are already underway, but if you really want to protect yourself from online
[02:45.120 --> 02:50.840]  data grabs, configure your browser to automatically delete cookies, and beware of Facebook just
[02:50.840 --> 02:52.480]  as you would any other thief.
[02:52.480 --> 03:22.440]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, more news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[03:22.480 --> 03:52.440]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, more news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[03:52.480 --> 04:22.440]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, more news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[04:22.440 --> 04:26.160]  We do have Randy here, and we also have a guest.
[04:26.160 --> 04:30.560]  Okay, Randy, would you please take over and introduce our guest, please?
[04:30.560 --> 04:32.760]  Well, this is Ken Magnuson.
[04:32.760 --> 04:34.600]  We've heard from him before.
[04:34.600 --> 04:40.760]  Ken wanted to come on and talk about the judicial conduct.
[04:40.760 --> 04:46.760]  The Judicial Conduct Commission is up for sunset this term of the legislature, and we
[04:46.760 --> 04:55.560]  would like to do our best, not particularly to eliminate the commission, but to give the
[04:55.560 --> 05:00.480]  commission some teeth and do some major reform.
[05:00.480 --> 05:08.960]  Ken, welcome to the show, and can you kind of give us an opening of what you think the
[05:08.960 --> 05:16.600]  situation is with the Judicial Conduct Commission, and what we need to do to improve it?
[05:16.600 --> 05:22.800]  Well, let's start with the fact that this is an ongoing process.
[05:22.800 --> 05:28.120]  The problem with judicial conduct right now is it seems to be toothless in what it can
[05:28.120 --> 05:35.520]  do to bad judges, and it seems to be lacking any kind of will to actually rein in the corruption
[05:35.520 --> 05:39.600]  that they know or suspect is happening.
[05:39.600 --> 05:46.960]  And to reach an agency is an important aspect of this, but they came under a lot of criticism
[05:46.960 --> 05:53.440]  recently when the Sunset Advisory Commission had a public hearing back in April.
[05:53.440 --> 05:58.720]  As you know, you and I participated in testifying there, and we submitted documents.
[05:58.720 --> 06:04.760]  I submitted one of the longer ones, 10 pages, on what needs to happen with this agency.
[06:04.760 --> 06:10.200]  But this is an ongoing process, because it didn't end just because people didn't participate
[06:10.200 --> 06:14.520]  in the Sunset Advisory Commission and didn't submit some paperwork back in April.
[06:14.520 --> 06:16.440]  It doesn't mean it ends.
[06:16.440 --> 06:22.880]  To get the change of this agency, we need to lobby our state legislators after the elections
[06:22.880 --> 06:29.160]  in November before the beginning of the next legislative session in Austin in order to
[06:29.160 --> 06:35.000]  get them to support the staff recommendation to change the process.
[06:35.000 --> 06:42.400]  The major staff recommendation was to eliminate the secrecy that's their Achilles heel.
[06:42.400 --> 06:47.600]  Now we haven't seen the final recommendation from the commission themselves, but even if
[06:47.600 --> 06:52.200]  the commission goes against this, we want to go against the commission and say that
[06:52.200 --> 06:57.000]  there's staff recommendations, or in fact the right one, and everybody else that says
[06:57.000 --> 07:04.240]  that they don't want to follow that on the commission is just out out to the elite within
[07:04.240 --> 07:11.720]  the judiciary in order to get support for election in November, but we'll play that
[07:11.720 --> 07:12.720]  game later.
[07:12.720 --> 07:13.720]  But this process goes on.
[07:13.720 --> 07:19.120]  I mean, there's going to be public hearings again before the legislature, both the Senate
[07:19.120 --> 07:25.720]  and the House, and at that time, there will be public testimony that will talk about
[07:25.720 --> 07:29.000]  why this agency needs to be retooled.
[07:29.000 --> 07:35.160]  Now my suggestion, and anybody who ought to come to the Sunset Advisory Commission and
[07:35.160 --> 07:41.640]  look at the hearing on April 10th with regards to the Judicial Conduct Commission, and then
[07:41.640 --> 07:45.920]  you see everybody's public comments that were submitted, and you can find my report out there,
[07:45.920 --> 07:48.960]  which I'm going to hit the highlights of right now.
[07:48.960 --> 07:57.440]  The major requirement for this agency is this agency is toothless at this time because its
[07:57.440 --> 08:03.360]  major impetus is not to stand between the judge and the appellate court.
[08:03.360 --> 08:07.600]  So anything that a judge does that reasonably could be done by a judge, they just leave
[08:07.600 --> 08:08.600]  it alone.
[08:08.600 --> 08:13.600]  So how can judicial conduct do these things against judges that are corrupt that are not
[08:13.600 --> 08:19.160]  following the law if that's a judicial process?
[08:19.160 --> 08:23.960]  Well, the only place they can come in is when it's clearly an administrative process or
[08:23.960 --> 08:31.120]  it's clearly outside of the goal of the process involving court participation, like sexual
[08:31.120 --> 08:39.040]  harassment or intimidating witnesses or speaking to those of these witnesses or beating them
[08:39.040 --> 08:44.200]  or threatening them in some way that's outside of the realm of normal judicial process.
[08:44.200 --> 08:48.080]  Any of the house they essentially don't care about, they don't care about that they don't
[08:48.080 --> 08:51.720]  follow the rules, they don't care that they don't apply the rules, that the judicial
[08:51.720 --> 08:56.560]  conduct doesn't care that the appellate court essentially upholds corrupt decisions by
[08:56.560 --> 09:01.160]  lower courts, they don't care, and that's the biggest problem with the agency.
[09:01.160 --> 09:10.200]  The agency needs to be retooled to be an agency that no one has prosecutorial capability.
[09:10.200 --> 09:16.200]  And what they get to do is investigate allegations either brought by the outside or through their
[09:16.200 --> 09:20.520]  only independent investigations of corrupt practices.
[09:20.520 --> 09:26.640]  We heard one of the witnesses down there, an attorney out of Houston, Texas, that talked
[09:26.640 --> 09:31.920]  about a judge that published widely the criminal defense attorneys in Harris County, Texas,
[09:31.920 --> 09:36.120]  and said, it gives order of cost to get your eye off.
[09:36.120 --> 09:41.320]  You want a not guilty plea, you want a dismissal, or you want a right sentence, and the end
[09:41.320 --> 09:46.720]  price is that you had to pay the judge, and it took him three or four years before somebody
[09:46.720 --> 09:52.520]  finally took the impetus to indict this guy and arrest him.
[09:52.520 --> 09:58.560]  But the second problem exists now, the courts are in a really bad shape.
[09:58.560 --> 10:04.000]  Now, I'm going to back up from that for a second and say, there are good judges out
[10:04.000 --> 10:08.520]  there, and the good judges out there, they're not worried about what we're talking about
[10:08.520 --> 10:10.000]  because it's not going to impact them.
[10:10.000 --> 10:15.720]  If they're following the law, they're following the rule, they're being courteous and lawful
[10:15.720 --> 10:21.320]  in the process that they do in their courts, they're not part of the issue.
[10:21.320 --> 10:30.760]  It's the ones that want to corrupt their offices or have an ego, or are mainly maniacs or narcissistic,
[10:30.760 --> 10:35.600]  and a lot of these judges over the years that are, them all of these requirements, I've
[10:35.600 --> 10:40.000]  actually got a few judges that are all of these and want.
[10:40.000 --> 10:43.920]  The attitude is that they can do whatever they want, they're gone, and if you don't
[10:43.920 --> 10:45.920]  believe them, just ask their bailiff.
[10:45.920 --> 10:48.000]  I'm sure they'll tell you.
[10:48.000 --> 10:52.400]  So the issue here is that the Judicial Conduct Commission needs to be structured in order
[10:52.400 --> 10:57.440]  to provide for the ability for judicial conduct on their own impetus or by complaint from
[10:57.440 --> 11:04.920]  the public to go to a grand jury and feed a grand jury, indict a judge, but essentially
[11:04.920 --> 11:11.320]  obey all proceedings in that case, and bring the judge before the court and try and find
[11:11.320 --> 11:18.480]  the majority of the community in Austin, Texas, or wherever we want to give them jurisdiction,
[11:18.480 --> 11:23.560]  and essentially sit down and put a case together to give the public the ability to participate
[11:23.560 --> 11:27.880]  in this process, meaning that if you're the one who brought the complaint, you get to have
[11:27.880 --> 11:30.760]  an equal footing and sit in the courtroom too.
[11:30.760 --> 11:35.480]  The prosecutor doesn't want to ask the tough questions, you get to ask those tough questions
[11:35.480 --> 11:41.440]  or you're a lawyer, or any representative you want to send on your behalf.
[11:41.440 --> 11:45.200]  You have that right, it should have that right.
[11:45.200 --> 11:53.000]  The process for this would require that the agency get more funding, but also there needs
[11:53.000 --> 12:01.560]  to be a process by which the agency itself is made up of a group of people that are selected
[12:01.560 --> 12:04.440]  or elected and not appointed.
[12:04.440 --> 12:09.440]  The political appointment process, going all the way back to the original founders of the
[12:09.440 --> 12:14.920]  United States, found very quickly that having governors appointing United States senators,
[12:14.920 --> 12:18.880]  there were always political cronies and friends of the governor, so that was changed.
[12:18.880 --> 12:25.120]  That's why we now elect U.S. senators from our states to Washington, D.C.
[12:25.120 --> 12:30.480]  So they found out real quick that public appointments are frequently just rewards for being a good
[12:30.480 --> 12:35.680]  politician and supporting the people that need to get elected or did get elected.
[12:35.680 --> 12:42.600]  So electing these commissioners for this agency and setting up where an actual trial
[12:42.600 --> 12:48.880]  is held would give the public a lot of capability of looking at this process.
[12:48.880 --> 12:50.360]  Also the complaints would be public.
[12:50.360 --> 12:56.640]  No judge in this state would be reelectable if they had 35 complaints and the details
[12:56.640 --> 13:02.120]  of the complaints re-liked and taken by the gradient jury, even if the Judicial Conduct
[13:02.120 --> 13:05.240]  Commission didn't do anything, they wouldn't be reelectable.
[13:05.240 --> 13:16.080]  That in and of itself, that public recriminations or potential backlash would end there or significantly
[13:16.080 --> 13:18.600]  stymie their criminal intent.
[13:18.600 --> 13:23.520]  So I'm going to break for a second and let Randy add to any of this if he would like
[13:23.520 --> 13:24.520]  to.
[13:24.520 --> 13:32.800]  Yes, I'd hope to have my Judicial Conduct Complaint site up already so we would have
[13:32.800 --> 13:39.640]  that to waive at them, but with the new technology, we're going to have tools to reinforce what
[13:39.640 --> 13:46.160]  we're asking them to do, and we're hoping that everyone who has the opportunity will
[13:46.160 --> 13:51.840]  follow Judicial Conduct Complaint against judges and begin to participate.
[13:51.840 --> 13:57.880]  Our judges seem to have forgotten that they are public servants.
[13:57.880 --> 14:04.600]  They have forgotten that, like any other public servant, they have a set of duties to perform.
[14:04.600 --> 14:10.120]  And for our trial judges, that is, to develop the facts in accordance with the rules of
[14:10.120 --> 14:16.840]  evidence and apply the law as it comes to them to the facts in the case.
[14:16.840 --> 14:21.920]  We do not authorize these judges to have an attitude.
[14:21.920 --> 14:27.240]  If they have an attitude, they need to leave that at home, just like policemen when they
[14:27.240 --> 14:28.240]  strap on pistols.
[14:28.240 --> 14:33.360]  When they strap the pistol on, they don't get to have an attitude.
[14:33.360 --> 14:43.720]  That stays at home, and judges of all people need to understand that they are men among
[14:43.720 --> 14:47.760]  men and not gods among men.
[14:47.760 --> 14:57.080]  So I'm hoping that we can get some real reform, and my take from the Commission was that they
[14:57.080 --> 15:03.520]  were frustrated because they did not have the tools or the freedom from the political
[15:03.520 --> 15:09.320]  pressures they needed in order to get their jobs done.
[15:09.320 --> 15:17.160]  There was a lot of acrimony in that hearing, but I got the impression the acrimony came
[15:17.160 --> 15:25.400]  more from frustration and anger on the part of these officials from judicial conduct than
[15:25.400 --> 15:35.800]  from anything else, that they were being chastised for not doing their jobs while they're being
[15:35.800 --> 15:42.840]  handcuffed by those officials who don't want them to do their jobs.
[15:42.840 --> 15:51.720]  It was my recommendation that we empower the Commission to actually do its job.
[15:51.720 --> 15:58.440]  I got a comment from someone who was watching me that when I told that to the Commission,
[15:58.440 --> 16:08.920]  the Chief Counsel for the Commission was back there high-fiving, yes, that's exactly what
[16:08.920 --> 16:14.360]  we did, gave us an opportunity to do our job at the way things were going, they just could
[16:14.360 --> 16:15.360]  not.
[16:15.360 --> 16:21.680]  We'll pick this up on the other side, this is our Friday Night Info Marathon, so our
[16:21.680 --> 16:31.400]  phone lines are open, if you want to give us a call, our call-in number is 512-646-1984.
[16:31.400 --> 16:38.640]  We'll be open for questions and comments, so this is Randy Kelton, David Stevens,
[16:38.640 --> 16:57.080]  David Craig, and with our radio, we'll be right back.
[16:57.080 --> 17:18.320]  It's
[17:18.320 --> 17:20.160]  is need for economic stimulus.
[17:20.160 --> 17:21.920]  It's about serial hypocrisy.
[17:21.920 --> 17:23.880]  This election is about trust.
[17:23.880 --> 17:26.080]  There's been one true, consistent candidate,
[17:26.080 --> 17:27.240]  and that's Dr. Ron Paul.
[17:27.240 --> 17:30.440]  Ron Paul has been so consistent from the very beginning.
[17:30.440 --> 17:32.360]  He seems like a more honest candidate.
[17:32.360 --> 17:33.960]  He tells the truth about what he believes,
[17:33.960 --> 17:35.080]  whether you like it or not.
[17:35.080 --> 17:37.440]  He's never once voted for a tax increase,
[17:37.440 --> 17:39.840]  never once voted for an unbalanced budget.
[17:39.840 --> 17:43.000]  Ron Paul's plan is full, cut five departments.
[17:43.000 --> 17:43.880]  It's what we need.
[17:43.880 --> 17:45.960]  When he says he's going to cut a trillion dollars
[17:45.960 --> 17:47.600]  in the first year, I believe it.
[17:47.600 --> 17:49.440]  If you don't like how things are going,
[17:49.440 --> 17:51.360]  if you're tired of politicians,
[17:51.360 --> 17:52.960]  he's something different.
[17:52.960 --> 17:53.800]  Ron Paul.
[17:53.800 --> 17:54.640]  Ron Paul.
[17:54.640 --> 17:55.480]  Ron Paul.
[17:55.480 --> 17:56.320]  Ron Paul.
[17:56.320 --> 17:57.960]  He's the one we've been looking for.
[17:57.960 --> 18:00.640]  I'm Ron Paul, and I approve this message.
[18:00.640 --> 18:02.800]  Are you being harassed by debt collectors
[18:02.800 --> 18:05.680]  with phone calls, letters, or even losses?
[18:05.680 --> 18:07.320]  Stop debt collectors now
[18:07.320 --> 18:09.440]  with the Michael Meyers Proven Method.
[18:09.440 --> 18:12.240]  Michael Meyers has won six cases in federal court
[18:12.240 --> 18:15.040]  against debt collectors, and now you can win two.
[18:15.040 --> 18:16.800]  You'll get step-by-step instructions
[18:16.800 --> 18:19.000]  in plain English on how to win in court
[18:19.000 --> 18:21.200]  using federal civil rights statutes.
[18:21.200 --> 18:24.920]  What to do when contacted by phones, mail, or court summons.
[18:24.920 --> 18:26.960]  How to answer letters and phone calls.
[18:26.960 --> 18:29.560]  How to get debt collectors out of your credit reports.
[18:29.560 --> 18:31.480]  How to turn the financial tables on them
[18:31.480 --> 18:34.240]  and make them pay you to go away.
[18:34.240 --> 18:37.160]  The Michael Meyers Proven Method is the solution
[18:37.160 --> 18:39.080]  for how to stop debt collectors.
[18:39.080 --> 18:41.440]  Personal consultation is available as well.
[18:41.440 --> 18:44.840]  For more information, please visit ruleblowradio.com
[18:44.840 --> 18:47.120]  and click on the blue Michael Meyers banner,
[18:47.120 --> 18:49.920]  or email michaelmeyers at yahoo.com.
[18:49.920 --> 18:55.920]  That's ruleblowradio.com, or email m-i-c-h-a-e-l-m-i-r-r-a-s
[18:56.560 --> 19:00.240]  at yahoo.com to learn how to stop debt collectors now.
[19:00.240 --> 19:28.240]  This feels just as good, yeah, whoa, oh, whoa.
[19:28.240 --> 19:35.240]  I'm always on the lookout for something that suits my soul.
[19:35.240 --> 19:42.240]  So I sit back and I watch the evidence unfold.
[19:42.240 --> 19:53.240]  And I see justice is the goal, yeah, justice is the goal.
[19:53.240 --> 20:02.240]  Justice fell a little too far at sea,
[20:02.240 --> 20:05.240]  and then we got to get back on course.
[20:05.240 --> 20:08.240]  We were the leader of every advisory
[20:08.240 --> 20:12.240]  from the man that came all the way from Gallaudet.
[20:12.240 --> 20:13.240]  OK, we're back.
[20:13.240 --> 20:14.240]  We're back.
[20:14.240 --> 20:15.240]  We're back.
[20:15.240 --> 20:16.240]  We're back.
[20:16.240 --> 20:17.240]  We're back.
[20:17.240 --> 20:18.240]  We're back.
[20:18.240 --> 20:19.240]  We're back.
[20:19.240 --> 20:25.240]  And Texas about the state judicial conduct commission,
[20:25.240 --> 20:29.920]  and in fact, the commission's coming up for sunset review this
[20:29.920 --> 20:32.240]  term of the legislature.
[20:32.240 --> 20:37.240]  And we want to give them a vigorous review.
[20:37.240 --> 20:42.240]  OK, Ken, what are your specific suggestions
[20:42.240 --> 20:46.240]  for changes that we should make?
[20:46.240 --> 20:51.880]  The major issues that we've got to address is the fact that the Constitution in Texas
[20:51.880 --> 20:58.400]  has to be changed in order to allow for the public process to occur so that nobody can
[20:58.400 --> 21:04.680]  claim privilege and deny other reviewing agencies and members of the legislature access to
[21:04.680 --> 21:05.680]  information.
[21:05.680 --> 21:09.880]  There's questions of whether or not the agency right now is withholding information that
[21:09.880 --> 21:16.160]  may have a tendency to show that they have been allowing judges to slide for quite a
[21:16.160 --> 21:17.160]  while.
[21:17.160 --> 21:21.320]  That's why the corruption is so widespread in Texas right now.
[21:21.320 --> 21:27.760]  So that's the biggest part of it, the constitutional amendment to make the complaint process public.
[21:27.760 --> 21:31.840]  So that's going to require an effort by people to participate.
[21:31.840 --> 21:35.280]  And one of the things I'm going to rail about a little bit here is I've been involved in
[21:35.280 --> 21:38.080]  this since the early 1990s.
[21:38.080 --> 21:41.360]  And I've gone to public hearings, I've met legislators.
[21:41.360 --> 21:44.520]  This was not my lot in life originally.
[21:44.520 --> 21:47.320]  I was a computer science major.
[21:47.320 --> 21:55.280]  And all of a sudden I found myself in this pool of unlawful government which didn't
[21:55.280 --> 21:59.640]  seem to care about following the rules or even knowing the rules in some cases.
[21:59.640 --> 22:07.560]  For the most part I found that it was incompetent that led them down these paths.
[22:07.560 --> 22:12.840]  The bureaucrats were told and functionaries were told by upper echelon, this is the way
[22:12.840 --> 22:17.400]  we've been doing it so this is what you do and nobody ever questioned it.
[22:17.400 --> 22:25.920]  So I ended up coming to this process and being participatory in reforming the courts basically
[22:25.920 --> 22:29.040]  because I understand how the process works.
[22:29.040 --> 22:30.920]  I went and researched it.
[22:30.920 --> 22:34.400]  I read and read and read.
[22:34.400 --> 22:39.040]  And I looked at the system as a process that has to be fair and equitable for everybody.
[22:39.040 --> 22:43.800]  We can't convict people based on hearsay, we can't convict, same thing with judges.
[22:43.800 --> 22:45.920]  We still have to have evidence to do this.
[22:45.920 --> 22:49.720]  We can't just assume that because they're government officials that they're always
[22:49.720 --> 22:53.600]  lying, they might accidentally tell the truth from time to time.
[22:53.600 --> 22:57.480]  So we have to have actual empirical evidence.
[22:57.480 --> 23:02.000]  Keeping that in mind, I looked at the process and started doing this.
[23:02.000 --> 23:08.360]  So I've been doing this since the early 1990s and the thing that really bothers me is the
[23:08.360 --> 23:15.200]  people that come rushing to me at meetings and seminars and things, asking for help.
[23:15.200 --> 23:21.920]  Yet when we say we need people to help change the legislation, to go to meetings, to write
[23:21.920 --> 23:27.440]  reports, to write letters to the legislators, we find that it's the same group of people
[23:27.440 --> 23:28.840]  doing this.
[23:28.840 --> 23:33.280]  We find very little cooperation with the general public that wants us to fix their problems.
[23:33.280 --> 23:37.560]  And I'm going to just tell those people, you know, this is how the system got the way it
[23:37.560 --> 23:41.360]  is, through indifference.
[23:41.360 --> 23:46.240]  People have to participate in government or you get the government you deserve.
[23:46.240 --> 23:49.720]  And that's pretty much the way it got to where it is now.
[23:49.720 --> 23:52.400]  So what I'm saying is let's dust everybody off.
[23:52.400 --> 23:57.920]  I know everybody's got problems out there, but to the level that you can, you can participate.
[23:57.920 --> 24:02.160]  I don't know anybody that doesn't have an hour from time to time to sit down and write
[24:02.160 --> 24:06.480]  a salient letter about their experiences in court, just one or two pages to your state
[24:06.480 --> 24:11.720]  legislator and say, we need to reform the Judicial Conduct Commission or whatever the
[24:11.720 --> 24:12.720]  issue is.
[24:12.720 --> 24:17.280]  If you had a problem with your lawyer, we need to reform the Bar Association process
[24:17.280 --> 24:21.520]  and then send us a copy of the letter so we have ammunition when we talk to the legislators
[24:21.520 --> 24:23.680]  in Austin.
[24:23.680 --> 24:27.960]  I'm finding less and less that people are participating and that's a problem because
[24:27.960 --> 24:30.200]  it's just going to make the problem worse.
[24:30.200 --> 24:35.960]  The other side feels empowered and feels full when there's nobody out there.
[24:35.960 --> 24:40.440]  But if there suddenly starts to be demonstrations in front of the courthouse with 100 people
[24:40.440 --> 24:45.800]  wearing waving picket signs and so forth and chastising them with news cameras around,
[24:45.800 --> 24:49.720]  all of a sudden now they've got to reconsider what they're doing.
[24:49.720 --> 24:53.360]  And that's the only way we ever get change in this country.
[24:53.360 --> 24:58.720]  It wasn't the revolution against England to get independence in this country, it wasn't
[24:58.720 --> 25:02.640]  just because a couple of guys in Boston decided they were going to do it.
[25:02.640 --> 25:04.480]  It required the 13 colonies.
[25:04.480 --> 25:10.240]  It required many, many, many people to cooperatively put together this nation.
[25:10.240 --> 25:14.240]  And they had to get together and do it as a team.
[25:14.240 --> 25:18.280]  They didn't just have Thomas Jefferson down there saying, hey, yeah, we want to be independent.
[25:18.280 --> 25:19.280]  No.
[25:19.280 --> 25:22.080]  He had a whole slew of people that wanted to be independent with him.
[25:22.080 --> 25:26.880]  And the only way we're going to get control of our courts again is by participating as
[25:26.880 --> 25:28.400]  a group.
[25:28.400 --> 25:33.640]  And it requires that organization.
[25:33.640 --> 25:34.640]  And we're trying to do it.
[25:34.640 --> 25:36.680]  We're trying to put some stuff out online.
[25:36.680 --> 25:42.560]  Randy's trying to put the automated complaint process online so we can collect information
[25:42.560 --> 25:47.080]  to show how these judges are abusing their power and everything.
[25:47.080 --> 25:53.400]  And to some degree, we know everybody came to Randy's rescue when we had the issue in
[25:53.400 --> 25:54.800]  Cherokee County.
[25:54.800 --> 25:59.280]  But the issue of money and moving forward and the cost of gas and getting through and
[25:59.280 --> 26:02.040]  from these hearings and everything, that's out of our pockets.
[26:02.040 --> 26:04.880]  And the issue is we're not paid to do this.
[26:04.880 --> 26:10.280]  We're not actually legislators that were elected and get a salary or a per diem expense to
[26:10.280 --> 26:11.560]  go through and from these.
[26:11.560 --> 26:15.480]  Every time we do these meetings, it costs us money out of our pocket.
[26:15.480 --> 26:21.840]  So that's one of the reasons why contributions, as well as participation, if nothing else,
[26:21.840 --> 26:25.200]  pick up the phone and say, hey, when are you guys going to Austin next?
[26:25.200 --> 26:26.280]  I can drive you there.
[26:26.280 --> 26:30.520]  I can provide the gas or you guys need a ream of paper to print stuff.
[26:30.520 --> 26:36.600]  I can provide a ream of paper, whatever it is that can be contributory that keeps us
[26:36.600 --> 26:38.440]  from having to spend it out of our pocket.
[26:38.440 --> 26:44.280]  One of the most incredible things in the process of coming up to the sunset hearing was one
[26:44.280 --> 26:49.480]  of the legislators out of East Texas called me up and he attempted to intercede and get
[26:49.480 --> 26:52.800]  us more than three minutes of public testimony, which we didn't get.
[26:52.800 --> 26:54.120]  We only got three minutes.
[26:54.120 --> 26:59.080]  We wait 12 years to testify before the sunset commission and only get three minutes.
[26:59.080 --> 27:02.040]  That's because they didn't want to hear the rotten stories.
[27:02.040 --> 27:05.680]  As a matter of fact, when the individual members of the public were testifying before the
[27:05.680 --> 27:09.800]  sunset commission, many of the members of the sunset commission had gotten up and walked
[27:09.800 --> 27:12.760]  out of the meeting.
[27:12.760 --> 27:18.160]  So there was a lot that was said, essentially, they didn't care to hear what we had to say.
[27:18.160 --> 27:20.200]  They had left the meeting already.
[27:20.200 --> 27:24.760]  So this is one of those problems that we had and this legislator essentially made some
[27:24.760 --> 27:25.760]  calls.
[27:25.760 --> 27:26.760]  He went that far.
[27:26.760 --> 27:30.160]  But then when I talked to him on the phone later, he says, well, I can't do anymore.
[27:30.160 --> 27:33.960]  I'm only paid $600 a month.
[27:33.960 --> 27:38.800]  This is a man that wanted to be a state legislator for the entire state.
[27:38.800 --> 27:42.880]  He represents the district, but it's for the interest of the state of Texas, yet he's
[27:42.880 --> 27:47.880]  too busy because he doesn't make enough money to participate in making sure the judicial
[27:47.880 --> 27:51.080]  process works in the state fairly and equitably.
[27:51.080 --> 27:55.880]  So for all those legislators out there that don't think you're paid enough, I may agree
[27:55.880 --> 27:58.840]  with that, but let's change the system.
[27:58.840 --> 28:05.920]  Because if there was a full-time salary that could support anybody to run for legislature,
[28:05.920 --> 28:12.760]  we could actually make these changes anytime the need arose.
[28:12.760 --> 28:13.760]  We don't have that now.
[28:13.760 --> 28:15.560]  We have a part-time legislature.
[28:15.560 --> 28:20.480]  Texas, on its own, I heard at one point in time would be...
[28:20.480 --> 28:27.720]  It turns out I could lost a kid for a second there.
[28:27.720 --> 28:35.320]  I think I might have lost me for a second there.
[28:35.320 --> 28:39.680]  If you can still hear me and we've lost a kid.
[28:39.680 --> 28:40.680]  We can hear you.
[28:40.680 --> 28:41.680]  Oh, good.
[28:41.680 --> 28:42.680]  Okay.
[28:42.680 --> 28:51.080]  Because there's an issue here, Ken, is saying that we need to participate, and absolutely,
[28:51.080 --> 28:58.200]  we need to participate, and I could certainly use some participation.
[28:58.200 --> 28:59.200]  I've been...
[28:59.200 --> 29:05.320]  So all of us have been struggling financially in Eddie and Deborah to keep this thing on
[29:05.320 --> 29:12.760]  the air, but my needs beginning to pick up a bit, so I've got a few extra bucks to push
[29:12.760 --> 29:18.360]  toward getting the judicial conduct site up.
[29:18.360 --> 29:26.640]  But what I need is some people who can help me put together information for their state.
[29:26.640 --> 29:32.880]  We're about to go to break, and I will talk about what I need when I come back and see
[29:32.880 --> 29:36.720]  if we can get some volunteers from the different states.
[29:36.720 --> 29:41.520]  I've got 50 states, so it'll take me a long time to do it all, but if I can get people
[29:41.520 --> 29:46.080]  to be their own states, we can get a lot of it done and get ahead of the curve.
[29:46.080 --> 29:48.080]  This is Randy Calhoun, Deborah Stevens, Eddie Craig.
[29:48.080 --> 29:52.080]  We have our radio call in number 512-646-1984.
[29:52.080 --> 29:54.080]  We'll be right back.
[29:54.080 --> 30:05.640]  This is Building 7, a 47-story skyscraper that fell on the afternoon of September 11th.
[30:05.640 --> 30:07.840]  The government says that fire brought it down.
[30:07.840 --> 30:12.680]  However, 1,500 architects and engineers have concluded it was a controlled demolition.
[30:12.680 --> 30:16.680]  Over 6,000 of my fellow service members have given their lives, and thousands of my fellow
[30:16.680 --> 30:18.120]  force responders have died.
[30:18.120 --> 30:19.600]  I'm not a conspiracy theorist.
[30:19.600 --> 30:20.600]  I'm a structural engineer.
[30:20.600 --> 30:21.960]  I'm a New York City correctional.
[30:21.960 --> 30:22.960]  I'm an Air Force pilot.
[30:22.960 --> 30:24.600]  I'm a father who lost his son.
[30:24.600 --> 30:27.200]  We're Americans, and we deserve the truth.
[30:27.200 --> 30:30.880]  Go to RememberBuilding7.org today.
[30:30.880 --> 30:36.800]  MPUSA.org has moved and expanded its operations for faster worldwide shipping.
[30:36.800 --> 30:42.320]  Our product line has grown from five to nearly 100 items in less than five years.
[30:42.320 --> 30:46.680]  Our food has grown naturally, always chemical-free, not found in stores.
[30:46.680 --> 30:50.920]  Great for daily intake and perfect for your emergency storage shelter.
[30:50.920 --> 30:59.080]  Call 908-6912608 or visit hempusa.org and see what our powder, seeds, and oil can do
[30:59.080 --> 31:00.080]  for you.
[31:00.080 --> 31:06.080]  It is so enlightening to listen to 90.1 FM, but finding things on the Internet isn't
[31:06.080 --> 31:09.840]  so easy, and neither is finding like-minded people to share it with.
[31:09.840 --> 31:13.000]  Oh, well, I guess you haven't heard of Brave New Books then.
[31:13.000 --> 31:14.000]  Brave New Books?
[31:14.000 --> 31:15.000]  Yes.
[31:15.000 --> 31:19.240]  Brave New Books has all the books and DVDs you're looking for by authors like Alex Jones,
[31:19.240 --> 31:21.200]  Ron Paul, Angie Edward Griffin.
[31:21.200 --> 31:24.520]  They even stock inner food, Berkey products, and Calvin Soaps.
[31:24.520 --> 31:27.520]  There's no way a place like that exists.
[31:27.520 --> 31:29.000]  Go check it out for yourself.
[31:29.000 --> 31:32.960]  It's downtown at 1904 Guadalupe Street, just south of UT.
[31:32.960 --> 31:33.960]  Oh, by UT?
[31:33.960 --> 31:36.600]  There's never anywhere to park down there.
[31:36.600 --> 31:42.000]  Actually, they now offer a free hour of parking for paying customers at the 500 MLK parking
[31:42.000 --> 31:44.000]  facility just behind the bookstore.
[31:44.000 --> 31:47.960]  It does exist, but when are they open?
[31:47.960 --> 31:53.000]  One day through Saturday, 11 a.m. to 9 p.m. and 1 to 6 p.m. on Sundays, so give them
[31:53.000 --> 31:59.000]  a call at 512-480-2503 or check out their events page at bravenewbookstore.com.
[31:59.000 --> 32:13.000]  Yeah, I got that one rent, and I'm going to solve them, to the government then, prosecute
[32:13.000 --> 32:14.000]  them.
[32:14.000 --> 32:15.000]  Okay.
[32:15.000 --> 32:22.000]  Oh, what's up?
[32:22.000 --> 32:31.720]  Okay, we're back, and then we talk to Edward Stevens at Craig, we do the radio, and we're
[32:31.720 --> 32:35.240]  talking about putting together the judicial conduct side.
[32:35.240 --> 32:40.280]  I just talked to my programmer today, he's been out of town, he's back in town.
[32:40.280 --> 32:49.960]  I have in front of him what I need to get the basic side up for bar grievance, and part
[32:49.960 --> 32:56.880]  of my difficulty was getting a basic structure that we could then lay judicial conduct on
[32:56.880 --> 33:04.640]  top of without having to write a whole new program, a whole new website.
[33:04.640 --> 33:12.280]  What I need is, I need people from different states to look at their state.
[33:12.280 --> 33:21.680]  Now, I can go in and look at the judicial conduct site, but I've got 50 states to deal
[33:21.680 --> 33:28.360]  with here, and I have to take each state, look at any forms they have, and for the most
[33:28.360 --> 33:37.600]  part, the forms are static, so I take them and convert them into filling the blank PDFs,
[33:37.600 --> 33:45.040]  and then set up the PDFs so that they transmit the data to the website and build a backside
[33:45.040 --> 33:51.320]  database to accept the data, and then get the programmer to build me an output page.
[33:51.320 --> 33:54.600]  This takes a lot of time.
[33:54.600 --> 33:59.120]  One thing I am very sure of on this time, anybody who's ever tried to get a hold of
[33:59.120 --> 34:09.200]  me will attest to that, that I spent three hours this morning writing four paragraphs,
[34:09.200 --> 34:15.040]  and then the second document, I got it written and got so many calls, I wound up getting rid
[34:15.040 --> 34:19.600]  of all of the pages off my desktop and erased my work.
[34:19.600 --> 34:24.760]  I was not happy, but I just don't have time to do all of that.
[34:24.760 --> 34:26.680]  I need some help.
[34:26.680 --> 34:34.640]  If I could get a few people from different states to construct, to gather up information
[34:34.640 --> 34:43.200]  about what is going on in the courts in their state, I can build a separate page for each
[34:43.200 --> 34:54.680]  state, and we need an explanation for people who are bushwacked by the system.
[34:54.680 --> 35:01.360]  Those of us, for the most part, the people who are listening to this program, understand
[35:01.360 --> 35:03.200]  there's a problem in the system.
[35:03.200 --> 35:10.480]  That's why you're here, but the ones we need are those who have no clue.
[35:10.480 --> 35:17.920]  It's not that they're sheeple, they just haven't ran into this yet, and when they do, they're
[35:17.920 --> 35:21.600]  absolutely bewildered.
[35:21.600 --> 35:27.000]  Everything they have expected and been taught to believe all their lives, they find out
[35:27.000 --> 35:34.760]  is a bunch of horse manure, and we need a site for each state that will kind of give
[35:34.760 --> 35:45.040]  a good explanation and some rational direction on how to secure remedy.
[35:45.040 --> 35:49.360]  If anybody out there has got a little extra time, I would sure appreciate it.
[35:49.360 --> 35:55.280]  Send me an email, and I will let you know what I need depending on what state you're
[35:55.280 --> 35:56.280]  in.
[35:56.280 --> 36:01.280]  I'm hoping that in a couple of months, if they've got the programmer at work, he will
[36:01.280 --> 36:07.840]  have me a basic structure, and I can start dropping these different states on to the
[36:07.840 --> 36:08.840]  site.
[36:08.840 --> 36:13.800]  It will get you to the conduct that can work up and working.
[36:13.800 --> 36:19.960]  We'll start with Texas, because that's where we're at, and we have the most contacts here,
[36:19.960 --> 36:28.360]  but very much would like to see California, Oklahoma, New York, Colorado.
[36:28.360 --> 36:35.520]  These would seem to be the most active states at the moment, but every state, I know I have
[36:35.520 --> 36:41.560]  somebody from Illinois listening that he could get off his lazy duff and write me one for
[36:41.560 --> 36:45.720]  Illinois, and I won't mention any names.
[36:45.720 --> 36:51.560]  Okay, enough begging for help.
[36:51.560 --> 36:59.440]  Back to the issue at hand, if we can get the judicial conduct site up, at least we have
[36:59.440 --> 37:07.200]  something that we can wave in the legislators' faces and say, if you don't do your job,
[37:07.200 --> 37:11.280]  we'll see if we can't do it for you.
[37:11.280 --> 37:14.760]  We're setting one up for bar grievance and judicial conduct.
[37:14.760 --> 37:21.000]  We set one up for our legislators as well, where people can come onto the site and write
[37:21.000 --> 37:28.600]  complaints against our legislators, and we'll make them public, so anybody in Texas who
[37:28.600 --> 37:34.120]  is trying to figure out how to vote, they can come to our site, and we can see real
[37:34.120 --> 37:41.200]  complaints about politicians, what they are doing, what they're not doing, for judges
[37:41.200 --> 37:45.760]  about what they're doing and what they're not doing.
[37:45.760 --> 37:52.080]  Again, it's not what you actually do that's the most powerful.
[37:52.080 --> 37:57.600]  It's what these guys are afraid you might do.
[37:57.600 --> 38:02.960]  It's not the real effect you actually have, but the effect they're afraid it will have.
[38:02.960 --> 38:08.240]  It goes to, what's it, Kim's third law, perception is everything?
[38:08.240 --> 38:09.240]  Kim?
[38:09.240 --> 38:15.240]  Ah, there you go, Kim.
[38:15.240 --> 38:21.240]  Perception is everything is the first law.
[38:21.240 --> 38:22.960]  Oh, okay.
[38:22.960 --> 38:27.120]  Will you recite Kim's forward laws?
[38:27.120 --> 38:28.120]  Perception is everything.
[38:28.120 --> 38:32.280]  How you perceive the world and how the world perceives you is the way it is.
[38:32.280 --> 38:37.000]  Now it may not have anything to do with the truth, but that's the way it is.
[38:37.000 --> 38:39.160]  Number two is everything is negotiable.
[38:39.160 --> 38:40.160]  Kids learn that.
[38:40.160 --> 38:45.200]  You know, I'll eat two helpings of vegetables if you let me have a cookie now, mommy.
[38:45.200 --> 38:47.200]  So they understand that very clearly.
[38:47.200 --> 38:50.120]  Number three, if it's important, document it.
[38:50.120 --> 38:52.720]  If it's not documented, it didn't happen.
[38:52.720 --> 38:55.360]  Number four, everything is political.
[38:55.360 --> 38:59.160]  And I'm not talking Republican, Democrat, Wig, Tory, Communist, Socialist.
[38:59.160 --> 39:04.960]  I'm talking about the politics of small groups, legislator, not a legislator, judge, not a
[39:04.960 --> 39:08.760]  judge, attorney, not an attorney, teacher, not a teacher.
[39:08.760 --> 39:11.120]  That's the politics of small groups.
[39:11.120 --> 39:15.320]  They make bigger differences than the other ones.
[39:15.320 --> 39:23.320]  Yes, that goes to everything's political and all politics is local.
[39:23.320 --> 39:29.840]  The real politics, the politics that makes things happen and change, that's local politics.
[39:29.840 --> 39:36.720]  And we have been working on this show and I've been pushing this for a while for us
[39:36.720 --> 39:44.040]  to stop focusing so much on specifically what the law says while we need to know that and
[39:44.040 --> 39:45.040]  understand that.
[39:45.040 --> 39:53.720]  We also need to know and understand how the law is actually adjudicated because that's
[39:53.720 --> 40:03.000]  the real deal and what the politics of those in positions of power are dealing with.
[40:03.000 --> 40:07.160]  Where do they live, if we understand where they live, we'll better understand how to
[40:07.160 --> 40:08.160]  deal with them.
[40:08.160 --> 40:13.600]  Ken, I know you've had a lot of experience with politics.
[40:13.600 --> 40:21.280]  Yes, from the standpoint of meeting with legislators and talking with them over the
[40:21.280 --> 40:27.720]  last 30 years and the problem that most people don't understand is, and as they see a politician
[40:27.720 --> 40:32.600]  that gets in that they don't like, they immediately turn off and that's not the point.
[40:32.600 --> 40:36.320]  The point of politics is persuasion.
[40:36.320 --> 40:41.480]  The point of politics is being doggedly determined.
[40:41.480 --> 40:46.080]  Learning strategies of writing letters and you don't give up just because you don't get
[40:46.080 --> 40:47.720]  the response you want.
[40:47.720 --> 40:53.240]  You try to find a way to persuade or have the opportunity to persuade.
[40:53.240 --> 40:56.320]  Sometimes it's not persuading the actual legislator.
[40:56.320 --> 41:00.200]  If the only person you can meet with is one of his legislative assistants, you meet with
[41:00.200 --> 41:04.120]  the assistant and convince them of the position.
[41:04.120 --> 41:07.840]  If you do that, that person will convince the legislator.
[41:07.840 --> 41:14.640]  The idea here is about participating and the only point in time in which you quit is when
[41:14.640 --> 41:17.960]  you get the decision you want.
[41:17.960 --> 41:21.480]  That's the adage in politics.
[41:21.480 --> 41:31.240]  We all need to understand that making political change is difficult and it should be difficult.
[41:31.240 --> 41:37.960]  If it weren't difficult, we would be in a much worse mess than we are right now because
[41:37.960 --> 41:44.120]  most of us are living our own lives and doing our own things and there are a few people
[41:44.120 --> 41:51.440]  out there with power and money that see the political system as a springboard to which
[41:51.440 --> 41:57.040]  it's or power and are willing to spend time and money to get what they want and twist
[41:57.040 --> 42:01.240]  in a justice system to what they want the system to be.
[42:01.240 --> 42:04.240]  It should not be easy for them.
[42:04.240 --> 42:13.720]  It is not easy for them and in the same tone, it's not easy for us to make change either
[42:13.720 --> 42:14.720]  and it shouldn't be.
[42:14.720 --> 42:17.560]  So we shouldn't complain about that.
[42:17.560 --> 42:24.440]  It should make us all the more determined because if we can get positive change in place, it
[42:24.440 --> 42:30.200]  will be as hard for the bad guys to undo it as it was for us to do it.
[42:30.200 --> 42:34.360]  Does that make sense to you, Ken?
[42:34.360 --> 42:35.360]  Absolutely.
[42:35.360 --> 42:42.160]  The issue of knowing your local politician, your local state representative, your local
[42:42.160 --> 42:46.640]  state senator having meetings with people in their office, I've met people for the
[42:46.640 --> 42:51.080]  last 20 years that have complained about the legal system and then I ask, well, what letters
[42:51.080 --> 42:53.760]  have you sent to your legislators?
[42:53.760 --> 42:59.800]  What meetings did you have and the few that have done that show me a letter that they
[42:59.800 --> 43:03.960]  didn't like and I said, well, what was your response back to this?
[43:03.960 --> 43:09.600]  And never have I seen a second response saying, excuse me, you misunderstood the point, here's
[43:09.600 --> 43:14.560]  what's going on, here's what you said and I'm wanting to straighten you out, let's
[43:14.560 --> 43:19.160]  see if we can have a meeting, no, no, they just give up and I'm convinced that one of
[43:19.160 --> 43:24.200]  the political strategies of legislators who don't want to participate with the public
[43:24.200 --> 43:29.240]  once they get in office, oh, they want your vote on in November, but once they get in,
[43:29.240 --> 43:33.520]  they don't want to be bothered by the public is that they'll send you letters that are
[43:33.520 --> 43:39.360]  non-sequitur, have nothing to do with your subject or topic and hope you just go away.
[43:39.360 --> 43:40.360]  You can do it.
[43:40.360 --> 43:41.360]  Okay.
[43:41.360 --> 43:42.360]  Okay.
[43:42.360 --> 43:47.680]  This is Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Eddie Craig, Grieble Radio, the call lines are open,
[43:47.680 --> 44:16.680]  call in number 512-646-1984, we'll be right back.
[44:16.680 --> 44:46.500]  Okay.
[44:46.500 --> 44:50.880]  If they try to sort out their lives, all we want to know is, did the ATF receive a warning
[44:50.880 --> 44:55.080]  and if so, why did they not pass it on to others in the mortals?
[44:55.080 --> 44:59.080]  For more information, go to okcfoundmentruth.com.
[44:59.080 --> 45:04.440]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[45:04.440 --> 45:11.200]  Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary, the affordable, easy-to-understand 4-CD course
[45:11.200 --> 45:14.200]  that will show you how in 24 hours, step-by-step.
[45:14.200 --> 45:19.200]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing.
[45:19.200 --> 45:23.200]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[45:23.200 --> 45:28.200]  Thousands have won with our step-by-step course, and now you can too.
[45:28.200 --> 45:34.200]  Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case-winning experience.
[45:34.200 --> 45:39.200]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand about
[45:39.200 --> 45:43.200]  the principles and practices that control our American courts.
[45:43.200 --> 45:49.200]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases,
[45:49.200 --> 45:52.200]  prosay tactics, and much more.
[45:52.200 --> 45:56.200]  Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner.
[45:56.200 --> 46:24.200]  Or call toll-free 866-LAW-E-Z.
[46:24.200 --> 46:30.200]  Always, I must be careful what I'm wishing for.
[46:30.200 --> 46:35.200]  When I'm hungry, I like to know just what I'm fishing for.
[46:35.200 --> 46:41.200]  I ain't asking for much, I ain't trying to be no-bloodin'.
[46:41.200 --> 46:47.200]  I'm just here makin' my livin' pushin' button.
[46:47.200 --> 46:58.200]  Okay, we're back, we're in Kelton, the students at Crape, we've got radio, and we wanted to talk about
[46:58.200 --> 47:04.200]  one of the aspects of judicial conduct is fighting complaints.
[47:04.200 --> 47:08.200]  And there is a concern with fighting complaints.
[47:08.200 --> 47:14.200]  I've been putting together the input forms for all of the Bargaryven sites in the country,
[47:14.200 --> 47:17.200]  and I found a couple of them.
[47:17.200 --> 47:28.200]  One of them, North Carolina, was clearly designed to frighten people into not filing a complaint.
[47:28.200 --> 47:37.200]  And most of the others were so incomplete as to give you no idea how to file,
[47:37.200 --> 47:46.200]  so that when they get a filing, taxes actually directs you not to lose case law.
[47:46.200 --> 47:50.200]  So when I send one in, I just stack it full of case law.
[47:50.200 --> 47:58.200]  But they want you to do a very informal complaint so that they can look at it and say,
[47:58.200 --> 48:09.200]  this complaint does not accuse the lawyer or the judge of violating a specific standard or canon.
[48:09.200 --> 48:12.200]  Therefore, the complaint is frivolous.
[48:12.200 --> 48:21.200]  This is precisely what bars and judicial conduct sites are doing across the country,
[48:21.200 --> 48:26.200]  is using the informal nature of the complaint coming from the public,
[48:26.200 --> 48:29.200]  and then applying a legal standard to it.
[48:29.200 --> 48:36.200]  So we wanted to kind of talk about legal standards and how to write a complaint,
[48:36.200 --> 48:48.200]  so that it's cogent to the point and in a structuring style that will meet a legal scrutiny.
[48:48.200 --> 48:51.200]  Ken, you want to address that for us?
[48:51.200 --> 48:58.200]  Well, before we get to there, one of the things that I think is important with regards to the process
[48:58.200 --> 49:02.200]  of collecting information, and I see this a lot and hear this a lot,
[49:02.200 --> 49:06.200]  and I spend an inordinate amount of time arguing with people about it,
[49:06.200 --> 49:12.200]  is there's a difference between a suspicion and having basic information
[49:12.200 --> 49:19.200]  that would lead one to believe that something bad has happened versus having empirical evidence.
[49:19.200 --> 49:26.200]  So part of writing a proper complaint against an attorney or a judge for failure to do something
[49:26.200 --> 49:30.200]  is that you, number one, have to know the law, the rules that apply to them,
[49:30.200 --> 49:33.200]  and you need to read those, and I find that most people haven't.
[49:33.200 --> 49:45.200]  Number two is you have to know the difference between an actual violation and an abuse of discretion.
[49:45.200 --> 49:51.200]  You have to look at what took place in a particular hearing or at a particular document.
[49:51.200 --> 49:56.200]  Does the judge have standing to do it, or did the attorney have an obligation to do it?
[49:56.200 --> 50:00.200]  You have to collect facts that talk about that.
[50:00.200 --> 50:05.200]  Let's say we have some sort of process that took place and the judge signed the order,
[50:05.200 --> 50:08.200]  yet there wasn't any hearing called.
[50:08.200 --> 50:14.200]  The issue then is if it spins on the issue of whether the judge could sign that order that day or not,
[50:14.200 --> 50:19.200]  depends on whatever rule is available for that particular situation.
[50:19.200 --> 50:25.200]  If you want to challenge it, you're going to have to get factual knowledge, factual material,
[50:25.200 --> 50:29.200]  including the order that was signed on that day, which he couldn't sign.
[50:29.200 --> 50:32.200]  That would prove that he indeed did sign it that day.
[50:32.200 --> 50:37.200]  If you only think that he signed it that day, that's not evidence.
[50:37.200 --> 50:39.200]  That's not empirical evidence.
[50:39.200 --> 50:45.200]  Let's get back to the idea of just collecting information and reading things about case law as well.
[50:45.200 --> 50:50.200]  One aspect of this is that information that's collected, researchers look at this at all times.
[50:50.200 --> 50:57.200]  People that are in the scientific community recognize this better than most people out there in the general public.
[50:57.200 --> 51:05.200]  It's about recognizing that any place you get information from might be subject to mistakes.
[51:05.200 --> 51:07.200]  How can I say that?
[51:07.200 --> 51:13.200]  Well, I can say that because on this planet, for a long time, we thought we had a flat Earth.
[51:13.200 --> 51:15.200]  They were wrong.
[51:15.200 --> 51:19.200]  For a long time, they thought the Earth was the center of the universe.
[51:19.200 --> 51:21.200]  Well, they were wrong.
[51:21.200 --> 51:25.200]  So the issue is that sometimes misinformation occurs.
[51:25.200 --> 51:32.200]  So the question is, is anytime you get information or checking facts, you have to look at the source of the information.
[51:32.200 --> 51:38.200]  There are people that provide information that have a tendency to be more knowledgeable than others,
[51:38.200 --> 51:42.200]  and you give them great credibility and great credence.
[51:42.200 --> 51:45.200]  It doesn't mean they can't be wrong from time to time.
[51:45.200 --> 51:50.200]  But the issue is that that's how you have to gauge where you get the information from.
[51:50.200 --> 51:59.200]  If you go and directly research case law, and you find case law that's directly on point with regards to the kind of case you're involved
[51:59.200 --> 52:06.200]  and the kind of court you're involved, and it's absolutely dead-bang match for what you're looking for,
[52:06.200 --> 52:08.200]  that has very good credibility.
[52:08.200 --> 52:10.200]  That's a very good arguing point.
[52:10.200 --> 52:16.200]  But if somebody tells you about case law or gives you a snippet out of a case law and says,
[52:16.200 --> 52:23.200]  here, this applies to your case, there's questions as to whether or not they may have misinterpreted it,
[52:23.200 --> 52:30.200]  or they themselves were told that this is how it applied, and they were misled,
[52:30.200 --> 52:33.200]  or they might be accurate altogether.
[52:33.200 --> 52:37.200]  But the key is just going and checking and dotting your eyes, crossing your teeth,
[52:37.200 --> 52:40.200]  going and doing the research yourself and collecting that information.
[52:40.200 --> 52:42.200]  You have to have that empirical evidence.
[52:42.200 --> 52:51.200]  You should never, ever cite a case in any material unless you've read the entire case and know its application.
[52:51.200 --> 52:56.200]  And I'm going to raise the issue, I think Randy and I have talked about this before,
[52:56.200 --> 53:02.200]  but there's a case out there where everybody gets into the argument over the United States District Courts
[53:02.200 --> 53:05.200]  and whether or not there are Article III courts or Article IV courts.
[53:05.200 --> 53:09.200]  And there's a case called Balzac out there, and I'm not going to give the exact site
[53:09.200 --> 53:12.200]  because I don't have it in front of my fingertips right now.
[53:12.200 --> 53:17.200]  But they have a quote, there's a paragraph, and you can find it out there on the Internet everywhere
[53:17.200 --> 53:22.200]  because U.S. District Courts are not Article III courts, they're Article IV courts.
[53:22.200 --> 53:26.200]  The problem is, as I've seen that quote in numerous documents,
[53:26.200 --> 53:30.200]  the problem is when you read Balzac you find out the court they were talking about,
[53:30.200 --> 53:35.200]  and the entire case is about the U.S. District Court in San Juan, Puerto Rico.
[53:35.200 --> 53:41.200]  San Juan, Puerto Rico is a territory in the United States and is indeed an Article IV court.
[53:41.200 --> 53:48.200]  The paragraph that's cited all the time as proof that there are no U.S. District Courts that are Article III courts
[53:48.200 --> 53:54.200]  is misleading because they're assuming a quote out of context.
[53:54.200 --> 53:58.200]  Could the judges, when they wrote that, been a little bit more clear?
[53:58.200 --> 54:03.200]  I think so, but when somebody reads the entire case in its entirety,
[54:03.200 --> 54:07.200]  there's no doubt that when you read it you recognize exactly what it says,
[54:07.200 --> 54:11.200]  which is the only court they're talking about is the one in San Juan, Puerto Rico.
[54:11.200 --> 54:15.200]  Let me clarify that just a little.
[54:15.200 --> 54:24.200]  The court in San Juan, Puerto Rico was specific because when they took Puerto Rico as a territory,
[54:24.200 --> 54:34.200]  Puerto Rico was already a democratic legal system, they had a very well-developed legal system,
[54:34.200 --> 54:39.200]  and we didn't go in and trash their legal system.
[54:39.200 --> 54:47.200]  So that court had to work with the Puerto Rican legal system and the federal legal system.
[54:47.200 --> 54:52.200]  No other court in the country had to do that, and that's what Balzac was about
[54:52.200 --> 54:56.200]  and was only referring to that peculiar relationship.
[54:56.200 --> 55:02.200]  And the statement they made about the type of court it was specifically went through that peculiar relationship.
[55:02.200 --> 55:09.200]  And everybody saw a few words in there strung together that looked like what they wanted
[55:09.200 --> 55:16.200]  and reached and grabbed it out of the middle and built a whole patriot mythology around it.
[55:16.200 --> 55:19.200]  Let me be a little bit more pedantic about it.
[55:19.200 --> 55:21.200]  It's even more than that.
[55:21.200 --> 55:26.200]  The actual U.S. District Court in San Juan, Puerto Rico was created under our United States Constitution,
[55:26.200 --> 55:29.200]  Article 4, because it exists in the territory.
[55:29.200 --> 55:32.200]  The argument was they brought a United States citizen.
[55:32.200 --> 55:35.200]  That means from not a citizen based on the territory.
[55:35.200 --> 55:38.200]  He wasn't a citizen of Puerto Rico.
[55:38.200 --> 55:43.200]  He was a citizen of one of the several states, and he was being tried before an Article 4 court.
[55:43.200 --> 55:50.200]  He had a right to be tried in front of an Article 3 court by virtue of being a United States citizen.
[55:50.200 --> 55:53.200]  And that was what the case was entirely about.
[55:53.200 --> 56:00.200]  He put in his favor and said that no, the San Juan, Puerto Rico court could not try it.
[56:00.200 --> 56:06.200]  The guy was a journalist, and it was about the First Amendment.
[56:06.200 --> 56:09.200]  And in Puerto Rico, they didn't have First Amendment.
[56:09.200 --> 56:11.200]  And they were trying to say, well, you don't have it here.
[56:11.200 --> 56:13.200]  And he said, no, no, no.
[56:13.200 --> 56:17.200]  I'm a U.S. citizen, so you can't apply that court to me.
[56:17.200 --> 56:21.200]  You have to give me the same court that I would give if I were in the U.S.
[56:21.200 --> 56:27.200]  Right. The point of that is, is we do have to be really careful.
[56:27.200 --> 56:34.200]  But when we go to filing to do some conduct complaints, we don't have to go quite that far.
[56:34.200 --> 56:42.200]  But what we do need to do, I think the primary thing that people need to learn how to do,
[56:42.200 --> 56:46.200]  is write a statement of facts.
[56:46.200 --> 56:50.200]  And when I talk about that, I offer a strategy for that.
[56:50.200 --> 57:00.200]  It is a real common predilection on people's parts to give a fact
[57:00.200 --> 57:06.200]  and be concerned that you won't understand the significance of that fact.
[57:06.200 --> 57:12.200]  So they give you a lot of argument about why this fact is important.
[57:12.200 --> 57:19.200]  And the effect that has on the reader is the reader feels patronized.
[57:19.200 --> 57:23.200]  When you're reading facts, they want to read facts.
[57:23.200 --> 57:28.200]  When you're reading argument, you want to read argument, especially in the courts,
[57:28.200 --> 57:32.200]  where you have a learned judge here reading your facts
[57:32.200 --> 57:37.200]  and having to dig through all of your arguments to try to find the facts.
[57:37.200 --> 57:46.200]  So what I suggest people do in order to construct a cogent and coherent set of facts
[57:46.200 --> 57:50.200]  is first write a timeline.
[57:50.200 --> 57:53.200]  This happened, and this happened, and this happened, and this happened.
[57:53.200 --> 57:56.200]  I asked someone from California to give me a timeline,
[57:56.200 --> 58:06.200]  and he did. He gave me a 10-page timeline with about 400 separate statements.
[58:06.200 --> 58:14.200]  I cut it out of his document and dropped it right in to a statement of facts in the federal case.
[58:14.200 --> 58:18.200]  That's how well that worked, and I'll explain why that works when we come back
[58:18.200 --> 58:23.200]  and how to develop from that so we have a really good set of facts
[58:23.200 --> 58:27.200]  for the commissioner who everyone is making a complaint to.
[58:27.200 --> 58:30.200]  This is Randy Kelton, David Stevens and Eddie Craig.
[58:30.200 --> 58:35.200]  David, I see you there, and I'd like to spend a little more time on this issue,
[58:35.200 --> 58:39.200]  but hang on, we'll get to you as soon as we're done here.
[58:39.200 --> 58:45.200]  I'll call in number 512-646-1984. We'll be right back.
[59:09.200 --> 59:14.200]  We'll be right back.
[59:40.200 --> 59:44.200]  That's 888-551-0102.
[59:44.200 --> 01:00:10.200]  Or visit us online at bfa.org.
[01:00:14.200 --> 01:00:16.200]  I'll give you the yummy news.
[01:00:45.200 --> 01:00:49.200]  If you're allergic and wind up in the hospital for eating just one peanut,
[01:00:49.200 --> 01:00:51.200]  if I got sweet news,
[01:00:51.200 --> 01:00:56.200]  a careful regimen of chocolate mixed with peanut flour may reduce your allergy.
[01:00:56.200 --> 01:01:01.200]  British researchers monitored 22 kids and teenagers with severe peanut reactions.
[01:01:01.200 --> 01:01:07.200]  By feeding them chocolate with small but increasing quantities of peanuts over a period of 3 years,
[01:01:07.200 --> 01:01:12.200]  nearly all of the allergy sufferers were able to work their way up to 5 peanuts a day.
[01:01:12.200 --> 01:01:14.200]  If you're allergic to nuts,
[01:01:14.200 --> 01:01:17.200]  I'm not sure you'll be eating peanut butter sandwiches anytime soon,
[01:01:17.200 --> 01:01:19.200]  but an occasional nut in a cookie?
[01:01:19.200 --> 01:01:20.200]  Someday you may.
[01:01:20.200 --> 01:01:22.200]  Reese's Peanut Butter Cups, anyone?
[01:01:22.200 --> 01:01:33.200]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht for startpage.com, the world's most private search engine.
[01:01:33.200 --> 01:01:37.200]  Women have far scarier nightmares than men.
[01:01:37.200 --> 01:01:41.200]  Dreams so intense we can describe them in terrifying detail when we jolt awake.
[01:01:41.200 --> 01:01:46.200]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht and I'll tell you how sleep experts explain this in a moment.
[01:02:12.200 --> 01:02:18.200]  A giant monster is gaining on you.
[01:02:18.200 --> 01:02:22.200]  Its jaws are opening, you see its fangs, then bam, you're awake.
[01:02:22.200 --> 01:02:27.200]  Phew, not to worry, you just had one of those Friday the 13th nightmares again.
[01:02:27.200 --> 01:02:29.200]  Nightmares, everybody gets them.
[01:02:29.200 --> 01:02:34.200]  But one study in England finds that women have twice as many terrifying dreams as men.
[01:02:34.200 --> 01:02:35.200]  Why the disparity?
[01:02:35.200 --> 01:02:40.200]  Scientists say it's because women have trouble switching off emotions when they go to bed.
[01:02:40.200 --> 01:02:44.200]  For them, dreaming is a subconscious way to prepare for bad stuff ahead.
[01:02:44.200 --> 01:02:48.200]  So guys, the next time your wife wakes up in a cold sweat, cut her some slack.
[01:02:48.200 --> 01:02:51.200]  A little extra TLC might be in order.
[01:02:51.200 --> 01:03:10.200]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, more news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[01:03:21.200 --> 01:03:28.200]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht and I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht.
[01:03:51.200 --> 01:04:15.200]  Alright folks, we are back.
[01:04:15.200 --> 01:04:17.200]  This is Rural Law Radio.
[01:04:17.200 --> 01:04:19.200]  David, we do see you there on the board.
[01:04:19.200 --> 01:04:21.200]  Please hang on just a moment.
[01:04:21.200 --> 01:04:25.200]  We've got some stuff that's going to finish up here and then we're going to get on to the college.
[01:04:25.200 --> 01:04:29.200]  Alright Randy, all yours.
[01:04:29.200 --> 01:04:31.200]  I guess you're not all theirs.
[01:04:31.200 --> 01:04:34.200]  What else do you have for us, Ken?
[01:04:34.200 --> 01:04:39.200]  Well, some of the information we were talking about was about, you know, collecting information
[01:04:39.200 --> 01:04:47.200]  and making sure that you don't go out and do research and try to twist the law to fit your situation.
[01:04:47.200 --> 01:04:51.200]  The idea is to look at the law as a template that's pretty much fixed
[01:04:51.200 --> 01:04:54.200]  and you got to see whether or not it fits your situation.
[01:04:54.200 --> 01:04:57.200]  If it doesn't, then it's not the case you need.
[01:04:57.200 --> 01:05:01.200]  But I find a lot of people who go out there and they've got an agenda.
[01:05:01.200 --> 01:05:07.200]  They want to look for that basically that silver bullet as we talk about
[01:05:07.200 --> 01:05:11.200]  which essentially eliminates all of the jurisdiction or whatever
[01:05:11.200 --> 01:05:15.200]  and they'll reach into a case and take it out of context.
[01:05:15.200 --> 01:05:18.200]  They'll find a paragraph or two and that's what we were talking about with Balzac.
[01:05:18.200 --> 01:05:25.200]  That was one of the premier cases that I had researched in depth to find out why everybody was quoting this case.
[01:05:25.200 --> 01:05:28.200]  And it turns out, you know, I went in with an open mind.
[01:05:28.200 --> 01:05:32.200]  I mean, I went in and do researches. It could go either way. It doesn't matter to me.
[01:05:32.200 --> 01:05:34.200]  I just want to find the facts.
[01:05:34.200 --> 01:05:41.200]  And when I read the case, there was no doubt in my mind that it was absolutely only applicable to the district court in San Juan, Puerto Rico.
[01:05:41.200 --> 01:05:48.200]  So that means the argument that was being exaggerated beyond the scope of that case.
[01:05:48.200 --> 01:05:54.200]  And that's what people need to be aware of because you just make the problem in court worse for other people
[01:05:54.200 --> 01:05:59.200]  if you come in and argue things that are not firmly established in law.
[01:05:59.200 --> 01:06:04.200]  There's arguments I get into all the time where people say, well, that's the law.
[01:06:04.200 --> 01:06:08.200]  Well, that may be a legal argument. The law is what the courts say it is.
[01:06:08.200 --> 01:06:11.200]  Now, have the courts been wrong on occasion? Well, yeah.
[01:06:11.200 --> 01:06:14.200]  Can they make bad decisions?
[01:06:14.200 --> 01:06:16.200]  Yes.
[01:06:16.200 --> 01:06:20.200]  But the issue is that's the only thing we have.
[01:06:20.200 --> 01:06:25.200]  We, you know, separate but equal was the rule of law in this country for a long time.
[01:06:25.200 --> 01:06:27.200]  Was it wrong? Yes, it was wrong.
[01:06:27.200 --> 01:06:30.200]  But the issue was that was the law.
[01:06:30.200 --> 01:06:34.200]  There were legal arguments against it and there are legal arguments against a lot of things that are going on.
[01:06:34.200 --> 01:06:41.200]  But you can't say, oh, it's the law if it's only a legal argument and people need to be very careful
[01:06:41.200 --> 01:06:46.200]  between the difference between legal theory and a good legal argument that's supported by case law
[01:06:46.200 --> 01:06:51.200]  and law that's well established.
[01:06:51.200 --> 01:06:59.200]  This is a problem that we talk about quite a bit on this show is this legal mythology.
[01:06:59.200 --> 01:07:05.200]  I have a patriot mythology and we have a problem with patriot mythology where people will come on
[01:07:05.200 --> 01:07:10.200]  and say, well, the law says this and the law says that and the law says it's over here.
[01:07:10.200 --> 01:07:15.200]  Therefore, this force thing is true.
[01:07:15.200 --> 01:07:18.200]  We tend to wind up saying, well, hold on.
[01:07:18.200 --> 01:07:20.200]  Wait a minute.
[01:07:20.200 --> 01:07:26.200]  We're engineers here and all we do is connect the dots.
[01:07:26.200 --> 01:07:31.200]  You connected some dots together and then you made this big leap.
[01:07:31.200 --> 01:07:33.200]  I can't leap.
[01:07:33.200 --> 01:07:35.200]  I can only connect dots.
[01:07:35.200 --> 01:07:46.200]  And when we're talking about developing a statement of facts, this is why I suggest that we start out with a timeline.
[01:07:46.200 --> 01:07:54.200]  When you are involved in a situation, especially if the situation affects you personally,
[01:07:54.200 --> 01:07:58.200]  there's going to be a lot of emotional involvement.
[01:07:58.200 --> 01:08:07.200]  Emotional involvement tends to focus your attention on some things to the exclusion of others.
[01:08:07.200 --> 01:08:21.200]  So we've all seen the studies done on witnesses where the college professor will set up an incident in a classroom
[01:08:21.200 --> 01:08:29.200]  and then ask each of the people who witnessed the incident what occurred and they'll all have different stories.
[01:08:29.200 --> 01:08:35.200]  And that's because they all have different emotional reactions and we tend to focus on different issues.
[01:08:35.200 --> 01:08:40.200]  So our job is to get around that.
[01:08:40.200 --> 01:08:44.200]  And the first way to start getting around that is write a timeline.
[01:08:44.200 --> 01:08:48.200]  This happened and this happened and this happened and this happened.
[01:08:48.200 --> 01:08:52.200]  Then you go back and look at it and you'll say,
[01:08:52.200 --> 01:08:59.200]  now wait a minute, something happened right in this spot and in this spot you start figuring in those gaps.
[01:08:59.200 --> 01:09:07.200]  And if you only put what happened, then you have statement of facts.
[01:09:07.200 --> 01:09:10.200]  Now there is an art to writing statement of facts.
[01:09:10.200 --> 01:09:15.200]  You just don't put in every fact that was in there and this is what we suggest.
[01:09:15.200 --> 01:09:24.200]  Is you look at the facts and how they lined out and you could probably come up with thousands of facts that have nothing to do with anything.
[01:09:24.200 --> 01:09:28.200]  And you tend not to put those in there.
[01:09:28.200 --> 01:09:37.200]  And we're going to suggest that you look at the facts and consider the place you want the reader to go,
[01:09:37.200 --> 01:09:42.200]  the conclusion you want the reader to come to
[01:09:42.200 --> 01:09:52.200]  and lead you reader there with the facts that you present before him and the sequence that you present to him.
[01:09:52.200 --> 01:10:04.200]  So that he reads this fact and this fact and this fact that a normal person of ordinary prudence in reading these facts would tend to come to this conclusion.
[01:10:04.200 --> 01:10:11.200]  And then in your argument in support, you take those same facts and you tie them together.
[01:10:11.200 --> 01:10:17.200]  And if you tie them together, the way you read or tie them together,
[01:10:17.200 --> 01:10:24.200]  he's going to think that you think like he does and therefore you must be pretty smart.
[01:10:24.200 --> 01:10:34.200]  So if you write your facts and argue your position at the same time,
[01:10:34.200 --> 01:10:38.200]  you're going to get your reader struggling against you
[01:10:38.200 --> 01:10:47.200]  because he's going to feel like you tried to bully him into accepting your perception of what went on.
[01:10:47.200 --> 01:10:57.200]  If you give him well-structured facts first and kind of leading there, you'll have a lot better result in the end.
[01:10:57.200 --> 01:11:09.200]  And you'll also have the story a lot more coherent in your own mind so you don't wind up getting tripped up.
[01:11:09.200 --> 01:11:14.200]  And this did lead to one other thing that I wanted to address.
[01:11:14.200 --> 01:11:20.200]  And when we come back on the other side, we'll go to David, he's helped for quite a while.
[01:11:20.200 --> 01:11:30.200]  The other thing I wanted to address was you need to make sure that what you're complaining about
[01:11:30.200 --> 01:11:39.200]  is a legitimate improper act on the part of the judge.
[01:11:39.200 --> 01:11:45.200]  People tend to be emotionally involved in the issues in front of them.
[01:11:45.200 --> 01:11:50.200]  And when the judge doesn't give them the rooting they want or think they should have,
[01:11:50.200 --> 01:11:53.200]  then they want to complain against the judge.
[01:11:53.200 --> 01:11:59.200]  And while I want to draw a lot of jitter-chiconda complaints,
[01:11:59.200 --> 01:12:06.200]  we need to draw well-constructed complaints and legitimate complaints.
[01:12:06.200 --> 01:12:11.200]  That is not a hard thing to do because these judges are such scoundrels.
[01:12:11.200 --> 01:12:18.200]  And even the ones that aren't scoundrels are so lackadaisical
[01:12:18.200 --> 01:12:25.200]  that they'll give you ample opportunity to hammer them properly and with good cause.
[01:12:25.200 --> 01:12:33.200]  I was talking to someone recently, they were upset at a judge over an issue in the family court.
[01:12:33.200 --> 01:12:39.200]  And it took me a while to explain to them, this judge don't care about you.
[01:12:39.200 --> 01:12:41.200]  He doesn't care about your wife.
[01:12:41.200 --> 01:12:43.200]  He cares about these kids.
[01:12:43.200 --> 01:12:48.200]  And most likely when he's done, if he's done his job right,
[01:12:48.200 --> 01:12:56.200]  neither one of you are going to be happy because both of you want something that's unreasonable.
[01:12:56.200 --> 01:12:59.200]  It's not necessarily the best interest of the child.
[01:12:59.200 --> 01:13:00.200]  The judge cares about the child.
[01:13:00.200 --> 01:13:04.200]  So if he does his job right, everybody's going to be unhappy at him.
[01:13:04.200 --> 01:13:06.200]  But that's his job.
[01:13:06.200 --> 01:13:11.200]  So we shouldn't file a complaint against the judge just because he doesn't give us what we want.
[01:13:11.200 --> 01:13:14.200]  But go in and look at the judicial canons.
[01:13:14.200 --> 01:13:16.200]  I have them.
[01:13:16.200 --> 01:13:18.200]  I don't have them posted on my website.
[01:13:18.200 --> 01:13:19.200]  I didn't even post it.
[01:13:19.200 --> 01:13:22.200]  If I can get some help with the states, I'll have the canons for each state.
[01:13:22.200 --> 01:13:25.200]  And go through the canons.
[01:13:25.200 --> 01:13:33.200]  And if you make a complaint against the judge, make it based on one of the canons.
[01:13:33.200 --> 01:13:40.200]  Look at the canon that most closely reflects what the judge did.
[01:13:40.200 --> 01:13:46.200]  And then go back and look at your facts and see the structure.
[01:13:46.200 --> 01:13:57.200]  Give the commission those facts that would lead an ordinary person of reasonable prudence
[01:13:57.200 --> 01:14:03.200]  to come to the conclusion that, yes, indeed, he did breach this canon.
[01:14:03.200 --> 01:14:08.200]  These will be far more effective and far more satisfying when you get done with it.
[01:14:08.200 --> 01:14:14.200]  Ken, you have a comment on that?
[01:14:14.200 --> 01:14:17.200]  Oh, looks like Ken dropped off at the moment.
[01:14:17.200 --> 01:14:25.200]  But this has been a problem with the Bar Association especially.
[01:14:25.200 --> 01:14:34.200]  It has been a problem in that the bar for the most part, if you send him in a bar complaint,
[01:14:34.200 --> 01:14:50.200]  and that bar complaint doesn't state the case in terms of a breach of a bar standard.
[01:14:50.200 --> 01:14:54.200]  They'll just call it frivolous and refuse to act on it.
[01:14:54.200 --> 01:14:56.200]  It's not on purpose.
[01:14:56.200 --> 01:14:58.200]  I don't have enough.
[01:14:58.200 --> 01:15:05.200]  We don't get as much output from the Judicial Conduct Commission to really know how they address their issues,
[01:15:05.200 --> 01:15:08.200]  because they're a lot more secretive.
[01:15:08.200 --> 01:15:18.200]  But from looking at their record, they seem to only file complaints against low-level judges.
[01:15:18.200 --> 01:15:25.200]  No district or county judges seem to ever have any sanctions against them, no matter what you file.
[01:15:25.200 --> 01:15:29.200]  The Commission always dismisses it.
[01:15:29.200 --> 01:15:44.200]  So we need to give them grievances and complaints so that it will be harder to defend not taking action.
[01:15:44.200 --> 01:15:52.200]  It will be in a much better position. If we can get a lot of these filed, and I hope to have the site up soon,
[01:15:52.200 --> 01:16:01.200]  and we have posted them on the site to make them public anyway, that would be the leverage we need to get some changes made.
[01:16:01.200 --> 01:16:06.200]  If we fill up the site with a lot of complaints that people are just complaining about,
[01:16:06.200 --> 01:16:12.200]  judges, when the judges are doing what they're supposed to, will have the opposite effect on us.
[01:16:12.200 --> 01:16:17.200]  Okay, this is Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Eddie Craig.
[01:16:17.200 --> 01:16:20.200]  We have our radio. We're about to go to break.
[01:16:20.200 --> 01:16:24.200]  It looks like a call of me have dropped off the board.
[01:16:24.200 --> 01:16:30.200]  But we hope that they'll be back when we get back on the other side.
[01:16:30.200 --> 01:16:36.200]  We're going to go to a call, so get in line, give us a call, get on the board.
[01:16:36.200 --> 01:16:43.200]  We've got almost three hours left. We will try to get to everybody's call.
[01:16:43.200 --> 01:17:09.200]  It's Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Eddie Craig with our radio. We'll be right back.
[01:17:09.200 --> 01:17:16.200]  We'll be right back.
[01:17:39.200 --> 01:17:44.200]  We're located at 7304 Burnett Road, Suite A, about half a mile north of Canig,
[01:17:44.200 --> 01:17:47.200]  next to the Ichiban Sushi and Genie Car Watch.
[01:17:47.200 --> 01:17:51.200]  We're open Monday through Friday, 10 to 6, Saturdays, 10 to 2.
[01:17:51.200 --> 01:17:56.200]  Visit us at CapitalCoinandBullion.com or call 512-646-6440
[01:17:56.200 --> 01:18:00.200]  and say you heard about us on Rule of Law Radio or Texas Liberty Radio.
[01:18:00.200 --> 01:18:06.200]  What's been the problem with phone companies, high prices and contracts that lock you in for two years minimum,
[01:18:06.200 --> 01:18:14.200]  not FreedomTelephones.com. Freedom Telephones are designed around the concept and reality of patriotism, loyalty and privacy.
[01:18:14.200 --> 01:18:21.200]  With FreedomTelephones.com, there are no contracts, no credit checks and no social security numbers required.
[01:18:21.200 --> 01:18:24.200]  That's why our name is FreedomTelephones.com.
[01:18:24.200 --> 01:18:31.200]  Finally, residential, mobile and business telephones and plans that are private and never lock you into a long-term contract.
[01:18:31.200 --> 01:18:38.200]  When a low price, residential and business plans started only $14.99 and mobile plans started just $39.99.
[01:18:38.200 --> 01:18:43.200]  Plus, every month you pay your bill, FreedomTelephones.com contributes to your favorite programs.
[01:18:43.200 --> 01:18:52.200]  Don't wait. Support the cause and get the highest quality and the lowest prices by calling 1-800-600-5553.
[01:18:52.200 --> 01:19:02.200]  That's 800-600-5553. FreedomTelephones.com. Portable, private, perfect.
[01:19:22.200 --> 01:19:42.200]  Okay, we're back.
[01:19:42.200 --> 01:19:51.200]  We're here with our special guest, Gil Magnuson, talking about judicial conduct
[01:19:51.200 --> 01:19:54.200]  and we're going to go to David in Ohio.
[01:19:54.200 --> 01:20:02.200]  He has felt quite a while and I understand you have a question about EEOC.
[01:20:02.200 --> 01:20:08.200]  What do you got for us, David?
[01:20:08.200 --> 01:20:11.200]  David, did we lose you?
[01:20:11.200 --> 01:20:12.200]  Okay, looks like we've lost David.
[01:20:12.200 --> 01:20:16.200]  David, are you there?
[01:20:16.200 --> 01:20:21.200]  I really said that part, Eddie.
[01:20:21.200 --> 01:20:25.200]  I'm trying to make sure just in case he didn't hear you.
[01:20:25.200 --> 01:20:36.200]  Okay, we have another caller coming in so we will go to the callers in a moment.
[01:20:36.200 --> 01:20:46.200]  We were talking about how to write a well-crafted complaint.
[01:20:46.200 --> 01:20:55.200]  We talk about this a lot on the show, how to separate what we think from what we know facts from opinion.
[01:20:55.200 --> 01:20:59.200]  Sometimes it's really a hard thing to do.
[01:20:59.200 --> 01:21:04.200]  I look at a lot of this so-called patriot mythology.
[01:21:04.200 --> 01:21:14.200]  These guys make really good-sounding stories, but in the end, they turn out only to be stories.
[01:21:14.200 --> 01:21:31.200]  I did a spot on Winston Shrout's show once and asked him where he got all this information or this structure that he was presenting, where he got it from.
[01:21:31.200 --> 01:21:41.200]  He started telling me about the 1931 bankruptcy in the United States and how we could no longer pay our debt.
[01:21:41.200 --> 01:21:46.200]  We could only discharge our debt because it took in all the gold and silver.
[01:21:46.200 --> 01:21:53.200]  I said, wait a minute, where did you get this?
[01:21:53.200 --> 01:21:58.200]  He said, well, I figured it out.
[01:21:58.200 --> 01:22:03.200]  I said, so you're telling me you made it up?
[01:22:03.200 --> 01:22:10.200]  And he thought for a minute, apparently, and he said, well, yes, as a matter of fact, I did.
[01:22:10.200 --> 01:22:15.200]  And I told him, well, Winston, I'm a creature of statute.
[01:22:15.200 --> 01:22:19.200]  I can't go into court with I made it up.
[01:22:19.200 --> 01:22:22.200]  I need law to get there.
[01:22:22.200 --> 01:22:30.200]  I have to give Winston credit. He relatively admitted he did not have law to take us there.
[01:22:30.200 --> 01:22:34.200]  And that's where we can't go.
[01:22:34.200 --> 01:22:49.200]  We can't go in and say that the judge is a no good rotten scoundrel unless we say he's a no good rotten scoundrel because he violated this particular canon of judicial ethics.
[01:22:49.200 --> 01:22:52.200]  And this is how he violated that canon.
[01:22:52.200 --> 01:22:55.200]  That's what will get us traction.
[01:22:55.200 --> 01:23:01.200]  That's what will give the commission a tool to work with.
[01:23:01.200 --> 01:23:09.200]  If we send them a complaint that's just a tirade against the judges, there will be much they can do with it.
[01:23:09.200 --> 01:23:15.200]  Let's go back and see if we can bring David up. Dave, are you there?
[01:23:15.200 --> 01:23:17.200]  Yeah, I'm here.
[01:23:17.200 --> 01:23:19.200]  Alright, we got you.
[01:23:19.200 --> 01:23:22.200]  Okay, you had an EEOC question.
[01:23:22.200 --> 01:23:27.200]  Well, my EEOC, I got the letter confirming they're going to take the case.
[01:23:27.200 --> 01:23:32.200]  We've already been through the 90 minute interview going over the facts.
[01:23:32.200 --> 01:23:34.200]  Oh, wait a minute. Hold on. Hold on.
[01:23:34.200 --> 01:23:36.200]  Don't start in the middle.
[01:23:36.200 --> 01:23:41.200]  Give us some background so we kind of know what you're talking about.
[01:23:41.200 --> 01:23:48.200]  Okay, in 2005, I asked for hour modification with my old boss.
[01:23:48.200 --> 01:23:53.200]  He retired in July of 2011.
[01:23:53.200 --> 01:23:59.200]  Okay, my new boss came in and I got two new bosses at the time.
[01:23:59.200 --> 01:24:04.200]  A supervisor with administrative ability or administrative duties.
[01:24:04.200 --> 01:24:16.200]  And then I got a worker at the campus boss who immediately started gouging me about changing my hours to go with everyone else.
[01:24:16.200 --> 01:24:24.200]  And then from Christmas time, my campus boss changed my hours.
[01:24:24.200 --> 01:24:26.200]  I couldn't get him to reconsider.
[01:24:26.200 --> 01:24:42.200]  So I called the supervisor who is a big boss with authority and he refused to check on my medical files that he delegated it to my campus boss.
[01:24:42.200 --> 01:24:45.200]  And then I got sick.
[01:24:45.200 --> 01:24:48.200]  Okay, hold on. Hold on.
[01:24:48.200 --> 01:24:54.200]  I'm sure you know how all these facts fit together.
[01:24:54.200 --> 01:25:01.200]  But you're not giving us anywhere near enough facts to have a clue as to what you're talking about.
[01:25:01.200 --> 01:25:16.200]  Okay, well, the ADL requires better employers with over 14 employees grant hour modification, but they can do so.
[01:25:16.200 --> 01:25:19.200]  And my boss granted one in 2005.
[01:25:19.200 --> 01:25:21.200]  Oh, wait. Hold on. Hold on.
[01:25:21.200 --> 01:25:35.200]  You're saying that a employer is required to just arbitrarily grant our modifications to anybody who wants it.
[01:25:35.200 --> 01:25:38.200]  No, he's talking about under the ADA Americans.
[01:25:38.200 --> 01:25:40.200]  I understand.
[01:25:40.200 --> 01:25:42.200]  I'm trying to get some work.
[01:25:42.200 --> 01:25:44.200]  You're presuming stuff.
[01:25:44.200 --> 01:25:47.200]  We don't have this information.
[01:25:47.200 --> 01:25:50.200]  I'm listening to what you said you said it is required to.
[01:25:50.200 --> 01:26:03.200]  You haven't told us how you're disabled, how that goes to your need for reasonable accommodation in hours.
[01:26:03.200 --> 01:26:05.200]  I don't want to misinform.
[01:26:05.200 --> 01:26:15.200]  This sounds like if you make a claim under ADA, the employer has to do whatever you want.
[01:26:15.200 --> 01:26:20.200]  Can you give us enough information so we kind of understand what's going on?
[01:26:20.200 --> 01:26:27.200]  Yeah, I have a nervous anxiety disability and a sleep disorder.
[01:26:27.200 --> 01:26:34.200]  I worked third shift for over 30 years driving a truck with erratic hours.
[01:26:34.200 --> 01:26:42.200]  And at first, the modification was done at the request of the boss because he was in construction.
[01:26:42.200 --> 01:26:48.200]  After two years, the doctor noticed my health improved so much, I got all my drugs.
[01:26:48.200 --> 01:26:59.200]  So I asked for a modification and he said bring in doctor request and I'll grant it.
[01:26:59.200 --> 01:27:08.200]  And that went on till he retired in a UIA last year.
[01:27:08.200 --> 01:27:13.200]  Now that makes all of this make a whole lot more sense.
[01:27:13.200 --> 01:27:26.200]  So you had had this granted under a doctor's advisement and your new supervisors came in and ignored that.
[01:27:26.200 --> 01:27:29.200]  So now they're putting your health in jeopardy.
[01:27:29.200 --> 01:27:31.200]  You're driving a truck?
[01:27:31.200 --> 01:27:35.200]  No, I used to have a trucking business.
[01:27:35.200 --> 01:27:41.200]  And that's where I messed myself up.
[01:27:41.200 --> 01:27:45.200]  No, he actually refused.
[01:27:45.200 --> 01:27:53.200]  And so on January 5th, 2012, I was diagnosed with hypertension.
[01:27:53.200 --> 01:28:03.200]  And since then, it's just been ever increasing harassment with a lot of little stuff in between.
[01:28:03.200 --> 01:28:05.200]  Okay.
[01:28:05.200 --> 01:28:11.200]  So what is your specific issue that you're bringing to us?
[01:28:11.200 --> 01:28:13.200]  Okay.
[01:28:13.200 --> 01:28:21.200]  From my understanding, I cannot file a civil as long as the administrative is going on.
[01:28:21.200 --> 01:28:26.200]  But I would like to file a criminal against this guy.
[01:28:26.200 --> 01:28:28.200]  Am I allowed to do that?
[01:28:28.200 --> 01:28:30.200]  I don't think so.
[01:28:30.200 --> 01:28:33.200]  Ken, though it looks like Ken has dropped off again.
[01:28:33.200 --> 01:28:35.200]  We're having a problem with his life.
[01:28:35.200 --> 01:28:39.200]  But Ken is disabled and he has a lot of knowledge on ADA.
[01:28:39.200 --> 01:28:42.200]  But no, this is all civil.
[01:28:42.200 --> 01:28:46.200]  We have an employee-employer relationship.
[01:28:46.200 --> 01:28:55.200]  And EEOC and Americans with Disabilities, those are civil statutes and they go to civil remedies.
[01:28:55.200 --> 01:29:04.200]  So far as I know, there's no criminal action indicated here.
[01:29:04.200 --> 01:29:11.200]  Well, he's the public officer who refused to do a duty that he is responsible to do.
[01:29:11.200 --> 01:29:12.200]  Okay.
[01:29:12.200 --> 01:29:15.200]  Are you working for a government agency?
[01:29:15.200 --> 01:29:18.200]  I'm working for a public school.
[01:29:18.200 --> 01:29:20.200]  Okay.
[01:29:20.200 --> 01:29:30.200]  And even so, he is, you're talking about rules and not laws.
[01:29:30.200 --> 01:29:32.200]  And there's a big difference.
[01:29:32.200 --> 01:29:37.200]  A rule applies to the employees of the agency.
[01:29:37.200 --> 01:29:40.200]  And that doesn't go to 3903 criminal code.
[01:29:40.200 --> 01:29:42.200]  Hang on, we'll pick this back up on the other side.
[01:29:42.200 --> 01:29:45.200]  This is Randy Kelton, big students at Greg.
[01:29:45.200 --> 01:29:51.200]  The radio, our calling number is 512-646-1984.
[01:29:51.200 --> 01:30:00.200]  We'll be right back.
[01:30:00.200 --> 01:30:07.200]  A noble lie, Oklahoma City, 1995 will change forever the way you look at the true nature of terrorism.
[01:30:07.200 --> 01:30:11.200]  Based on the damage pattern to the building, but the government says it's impossible.
[01:30:11.200 --> 01:30:14.200]  The grand jury did not want to hear anything I had to say.
[01:30:14.200 --> 01:30:18.200]  The decision was made not to pursue any more of those individuals.
[01:30:18.200 --> 01:30:22.200]  Some of these columns were ripped up, shredded, tossed around.
[01:30:22.200 --> 01:30:26.200]  The people that did the things they did knew doggone well what they were doing.
[01:30:26.200 --> 01:30:30.200]  Expose the cover up now at anobleye.com.
[01:30:30.200 --> 01:30:38.200]  HempUSA.org has a revolutionary wonder food for detoxing the body and rebuilding the immune system.
[01:30:38.200 --> 01:30:44.200]  Micro plant powder can help unclog arteries and soften heart valves while removing heavy metals,
[01:30:44.200 --> 01:30:47.200]  virus, fungus, bacteria and parasites.
[01:30:47.200 --> 01:30:50.200]  Plus it cleans and purifies the blood, lungs, stomach and colon.
[01:30:50.200 --> 01:30:54.200]  Keep your body clean with micro plant powder.
[01:30:54.200 --> 01:31:01.200]  Visit us at HempUSA.org or call 908-6912608 today.
[01:31:01.200 --> 01:31:08.200]  More energy, stronger immune power, improved sense of well-being.
[01:31:08.200 --> 01:31:10.200]  How many supplements have you heard?
[01:31:10.200 --> 01:31:12.200]  Most of these benefits.
[01:31:12.200 --> 01:31:18.200]  The team behind Centrition believes that supplements should over-deliver on their promises.
[01:31:18.200 --> 01:31:21.200]  And Centrition does just that.
[01:31:21.200 --> 01:31:25.200]  Centrition utilizes the ancient healing wisdom of Chinese medicine.
[01:31:25.200 --> 01:31:32.200]  In conjunction with the science of modern nutrition, adaptogenic herbs serve as the healing component.
[01:31:32.200 --> 01:31:38.200]  And organic hemp protein and greens and superfoods act as a balanced nutrient base.
[01:31:38.200 --> 01:31:42.200]  Plus, Centrition tastes great in just water.
[01:31:42.200 --> 01:31:48.200]  This powder supplement is everything you'd want in a product and it's all natural.
[01:31:48.200 --> 01:31:56.200]  Visit Centrition.com to order yours or call 1-866-497-7436.
[01:31:56.200 --> 01:32:22.200]  After you use Centrition, you'll believe in supplements again.
[01:32:26.200 --> 01:32:34.200]  Okay, we're back.
[01:32:34.200 --> 01:32:44.200]  We're talking to David in Ohio about Americans with Disabilities Act.
[01:32:44.200 --> 01:32:52.200]  When we went out, we were talking about the difference between laws and rules.
[01:32:52.200 --> 01:33:00.200]  If you're working for the agency or whatever it is, you're working for a corporation.
[01:33:00.200 --> 01:33:04.200]  And you're acting under the corporate rules.
[01:33:04.200 --> 01:33:06.200]  That's different.
[01:33:06.200 --> 01:33:11.200]  And when we talk about a public official not being able to do anything that's not authorized to do,
[01:33:11.200 --> 01:33:25.200]  that has to do with the public official exerting or purporting to exert an authority from his position to a private person.
[01:33:25.200 --> 01:33:31.200]  Inside an agency, you're acting under the rules of the agency.
[01:33:31.200 --> 01:33:44.200]  And that doesn't fall under the criminal statute of official oppression, official misconduct that would make them subject to criminal prosecution.
[01:33:44.200 --> 01:33:47.200]  Does that make sense, David?
[01:33:47.200 --> 01:33:49.200]  Yeah, it makes sense.
[01:33:49.200 --> 01:33:57.200]  But can we refuse to do a duty he had responsibility to do?
[01:33:57.200 --> 01:34:02.200]  Okay, this is what we don't get to do.
[01:34:02.200 --> 01:34:09.200]  We don't get to define duty to meaning what we want to.
[01:34:09.200 --> 01:34:16.200]  He had a duty under a rule that not under statute.
[01:34:16.200 --> 01:34:22.200]  And he was not exercising an authority over a private citizen.
[01:34:22.200 --> 01:34:31.200]  He was exercising authority over an employee in a work-related context.
[01:34:31.200 --> 01:34:38.200]  That's only going to go to rules, and it will be strictly civil.
[01:34:38.200 --> 01:34:51.200]  Yeah, I thought that ADL were listed as right, and he was public that he denied me in a right, even though I am an employee, I'm still a citizen.
[01:34:51.200 --> 01:34:58.200]  Okay, that is a good consideration, except for one thing.
[01:34:58.200 --> 01:35:07.200]  The ADA, when the legislature passed the ADA, they created a remedy.
[01:35:07.200 --> 01:35:18.200]  They created a right with a remedy, and the only remedy you have for the right they created is the remedy that they created.
[01:35:18.200 --> 01:35:24.200]  Again, the remedy under ADA is civil, it's not criminal.
[01:35:24.200 --> 01:35:27.200]  So we can't get out from under that.
[01:35:27.200 --> 01:35:38.200]  We run into that issue with the Truth and Lending Act, where the legislature created the Truth and Lending Act, created rights and privileges,
[01:35:38.200 --> 01:35:49.200]  and created a remedy for the violation of those rights and privileges, and limited the exercise of the remedy to two years.
[01:35:49.200 --> 01:35:54.200]  And there's a lot of complaining about that, but the court was very clear.
[01:35:54.200 --> 01:35:57.200]  They said, the legislature created this right.
[01:35:57.200 --> 01:35:59.200]  This is not a constitutional right.
[01:35:59.200 --> 01:36:09.200]  This is a legislative-agreed right, and therefore the legislature could limit the exercise of the right any way they chose.
[01:36:09.200 --> 01:36:15.200]  And this is what they did, and this is what they done in ADA, and I'm afraid we can't get there.
[01:36:15.200 --> 01:36:17.200]  But you can't sue under ADA.
[01:36:17.200 --> 01:36:22.200]  ADA has some real administrative teeth to it.
[01:36:22.200 --> 01:36:33.200]  Oh, okay, because I may never, ever be able to work again. I'm 57, and after the last incident, I believe this is the rest.
[01:36:33.200 --> 01:36:38.200]  I have a store, and we were closed even though the door was unlocked.
[01:36:38.200 --> 01:36:47.200]  He came barging in, and now he's threatening me with termination because he said he'd seen me wait non-customers.
[01:36:47.200 --> 01:36:52.200]  My wife was in the back room. I was out in the store room, and he came in.
[01:36:52.200 --> 01:37:00.200]  He was the only one there. I told him we was closed, and this guy don't listen to me.
[01:37:00.200 --> 01:37:07.200]  He's a new young business school graduate, heard in a position, acting like a thug.
[01:37:07.200 --> 01:37:17.200]  And so now he's allied on paperwork. I got a disciplinary hearing Thursday, and he witnessed me wait non-customers.
[01:37:17.200 --> 01:37:25.200]  Oh, hold on. Hold on. Hold on. That is a different issue.
[01:37:25.200 --> 01:37:33.200]  Okay, what was the nature of the paperwork? Did it go to a hearing of some sort?
[01:37:33.200 --> 01:37:43.200]  No, no. He sent me paperwork of a disciplinary hearing this Thursday for waiting on customers in my closed store.
[01:37:43.200 --> 01:37:53.200]  I was off for my nerves on sick leave, and the doctor said do mundane tasks that keep your mind off work.
[01:37:53.200 --> 01:37:59.200]  And I guess I forgot to lock the door, and he just came barging in.
[01:37:59.200 --> 01:38:03.200]  He pulled me back and beamed.
[01:38:03.200 --> 01:38:09.200]  Oh, okay. I don't understand what the nature of that issue is, but...
[01:38:09.200 --> 01:38:17.200]  Well, he's threatened in termination because I was working at the store instead of doing my job at the store.
[01:38:17.200 --> 01:38:28.200]  But what I was doing at the store was following the doctor's orders exactly why I was off workforce.
[01:38:28.200 --> 01:38:32.200]  Okay, this doesn't make sense. You say you were off work?
[01:38:32.200 --> 01:38:40.200]  Yeah, I was on sick leave. The doctor gave me a week on sick leave. I had bad reaction to blood medication.
[01:38:40.200 --> 01:38:46.200]  Oh, okay. And so he caught you working when you were off on sick leave?
[01:38:46.200 --> 01:38:52.200]  Yeah, except he accused me of waiting on customers we didn't have because the store was closed.
[01:38:52.200 --> 01:39:00.200]  Okay, hold on. Was waiting on customers relevant?
[01:39:00.200 --> 01:39:08.200]  Well, that's the only work he could have seen me doing.
[01:39:08.200 --> 01:39:11.200]  Well, he saw you back and beamed, didn't he?
[01:39:11.200 --> 01:39:18.200]  No, no. I was in there back and beamed. I heard the bell on the door. I walked out front and seen him walk in.
[01:39:18.200 --> 01:39:24.200]  So the point was is that you were off on sick leave and you were engaged in other employment.
[01:39:24.200 --> 01:39:34.200]  Yeah, did it matter that you were doing one thing or another? You had a place of employment while you were off on sick leave?
[01:39:34.200 --> 01:39:37.200]  Is that the case?
[01:39:37.200 --> 01:39:46.200]  Yeah, and I don't really actually work there, Randy. I go over and hit a once in a while. I got a little farm market for the wise.
[01:39:46.200 --> 01:39:48.200]  Just keeping my nerves.
[01:39:48.200 --> 01:39:53.200]  Oh, wait, wait, wait. Is this a personal business that your wife owns?
[01:39:53.200 --> 01:39:56.200]  Yeah, a personal business my wife had.
[01:39:56.200 --> 01:40:03.200]  That's not going to make any difference. Is this something authorized by the doctor?
[01:40:03.200 --> 01:40:12.200]  Yeah, the doctor says he has no grounds on getting me for that. That's exactly what she wanted me to be doing.
[01:40:12.200 --> 01:40:25.200]  Okay, then you need to, if this individual is acting unreasonably, just go to his superiors and make a case of it.
[01:40:25.200 --> 01:40:33.200]  Well, the problem is, I believe he's a friend of his superior and that's why I got the job to begin with.
[01:40:33.200 --> 01:40:49.200]  Go to his superior's boss and when it comes down from up above, they won't be quite so good of friends, especially since this is a government agency.
[01:40:49.200 --> 01:40:57.200]  They have a lot more problems, but that's probably about the best we can offer.
[01:40:57.200 --> 01:41:05.200]  This is not something that you can go after him criminally for. Do you have any other issues?
[01:41:05.200 --> 01:41:15.200]  Not at the moment, even though I still would like to hire Eddie to look into it and find a wedge for me.
[01:41:15.200 --> 01:41:19.200]  If I can write clear enough for him to read.
[01:41:19.200 --> 01:41:27.200]  Well, you'd probably be a lot better off contacting the EEOC and they will investigate it.
[01:41:27.200 --> 01:41:33.200]  Well, they will investigate, but I don't think I get any representation from them.
[01:41:33.200 --> 01:41:43.200]  Actually, you can. The EEOC is the very federal agency that sued on behalf of another Texan regarding the use of a social security number.
[01:41:43.200 --> 01:41:49.200]  There was a gentleman in Texas, EEOC versus information systems consulting.
[01:41:49.200 --> 01:41:57.200]  There was a gentleman in Texas that got fired because he would not give a social security number to the consulting firm he worked for.
[01:41:57.200 --> 01:42:03.200]  The EEOC sued on his behalf and won.
[01:42:03.200 --> 01:42:05.200]  No, no.
[01:42:05.200 --> 01:42:09.200]  So yeah, they can represent you in court.
[01:42:09.200 --> 01:42:17.200]  Yeah, I thought the EEOC was something that was just going to burn up a lot of time and brush break me in.
[01:42:17.200 --> 01:42:21.200]  Well, you never know until you ask, right?
[01:42:21.200 --> 01:42:27.200]  Well, I'm already in there. They've already agreed to take the case.
[01:42:27.200 --> 01:42:35.200]  It would be 60 days before we have the first hearing, but such is life.
[01:42:35.200 --> 01:42:41.200]  Yeah, well, if you've got them working on it, I would go that route first.
[01:42:41.200 --> 01:42:51.200]  And if you could, I'd love if you guys could figure out a way I could join your Internet network because my wife has a PayPal.
[01:42:51.200 --> 01:42:59.200]  I can't use hers and my computer blocks me every time I try to sign up.
[01:42:59.200 --> 01:43:07.200]  So if you could send me an email and tell me where I could mail it to, we could sign me up internally.
[01:43:07.200 --> 01:43:11.200]  Yeah. Okay. Do we have your email?
[01:43:11.200 --> 01:43:15.200]  Eddie just sent me one an hour ago.
[01:43:15.200 --> 01:43:21.200]  Okay. Well, okay. If you have it, Eddie, if not, send us the one to make sure we've got it.
[01:43:21.200 --> 01:43:29.200]  But as far as your computer problem, what you really need for that is a 10-year-old.
[01:43:29.200 --> 01:43:37.200]  Get somebody that knows what they're doing. That's all folks don't know squat.
[01:43:37.200 --> 01:43:41.200]  Okay, hold up. We're going to go to break. We really need to move on, David.
[01:43:41.200 --> 01:43:47.200]  Thank you. And we'll get an email to you. This is Randy Kelton, David Stevens, Eddie Craig.
[01:43:47.200 --> 01:43:59.200]  We'll move on radio. I'll call in number 512-646-1984. We'll be right back.
[01:43:59.200 --> 01:44:03.200]  Hey, did you hear? Ron Paul has announced he's running for president in 2012.
[01:44:03.200 --> 01:44:05.200]  Who's Ron Paul?
[01:44:05.200 --> 01:44:11.200]  Really? Okay. Put down the cell phone for one minute. Your friends really don't care about your Twitter updates on what you had for breakfast.
[01:44:11.200 --> 01:44:13.200]  Oh, but I'd love to make those little smiley faces with punctuation marks.
[01:44:13.200 --> 01:44:20.200]  Of course you do. Now, listen closely. You need to go down to Brave New Books and learn as much as you can about Ron Paul and his message before it's too late.
[01:44:20.200 --> 01:44:23.200]  They have all of his books and many of the books he talks about.
[01:44:23.200 --> 01:44:28.200]  They also have t-shirts, bumper stickers, and yard signs so that you can show your support for him during the campaign.
[01:44:28.200 --> 01:44:31.200]  Brave New Books? Do they have Harry Potter and Twilight?
[01:44:31.200 --> 01:44:37.200]  No, but they do carry a large selection of survival and preparedness books to protect your family in time of emergency.
[01:44:37.200 --> 01:44:39.200]  That sounds like that show on the Discovery Channel.
[01:44:39.200 --> 01:44:46.200]  Yeah, there's even a wilderness survival expert that teaches classes called Earthskill School that you can sign up for on the website BraveNewBookstore.com.
[01:44:46.200 --> 01:44:48.200]  What are you doing?
[01:44:48.200 --> 01:44:53.200]  I'm tweeting all my friends that they should go to BraveNewBookstore.com or down to the bookstore in person. Where's it located?
[01:44:53.200 --> 01:44:55.200]  1904, Guadeloupe Street.
[01:44:55.200 --> 01:44:58.200]  There, it's sent. I even made a smiley face.
[01:44:58.200 --> 01:45:00.200]  Great.
[01:45:00.200 --> 01:45:03.200]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[01:45:03.200 --> 01:45:14.200]  Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary, the affordable, easy-to-understand four-CD course that will show you how in 24 hours, step-by-step.
[01:45:14.200 --> 01:45:18.200]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing.
[01:45:18.200 --> 01:45:22.200]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[01:45:22.200 --> 01:45:27.200]  Thousands have won with our step-by-step course, and now you can too.
[01:45:27.200 --> 01:45:34.200]  Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case-winning experience.
[01:45:34.200 --> 01:45:43.200]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand about the principles and practices that control our American courts.
[01:45:43.200 --> 01:45:52.200]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases, pro se tactics, and much more.
[01:45:52.200 --> 01:46:01.200]  Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner or call toll-free 866-LAW-EZ.
[01:46:23.200 --> 01:46:31.200]  Okay, cut my slur to the run. Come on, sing, Jerry, come on!
[01:46:31.200 --> 01:46:37.200]  As we sow, so shall we reap.
[01:46:37.200 --> 01:46:44.200]  The words of nutrition from so many fruits, the words that put on hold of me.
[01:46:44.200 --> 01:46:52.200]  The words of nutrition from so many fruits, the words that put on hold of me.
[01:46:52.200 --> 01:46:57.200]  The words of nutrition from so many fruits, the words that put on hold of me.
[01:46:57.200 --> 01:47:04.200]  Hi, folks, we are back. This is rule of law radio. This is our Friday night four-hour info marathon.
[01:47:04.200 --> 01:47:11.200]  We have a little over two hours left in the show. Right now we have Breanna in Texas up on the board.
[01:47:11.200 --> 01:47:17.200]  Let's go to Breanna and see what we can do for her. Breanna, how can we help you?
[01:47:17.200 --> 01:47:20.200]  Hi, how's it going this evening?
[01:47:20.200 --> 01:47:23.200]  So far so good.
[01:47:23.200 --> 01:47:31.200]  What it is, is I have a court case coming in. I chose to do one by Jerry, but the long story short, it's a traffic ticket.
[01:47:31.200 --> 01:47:42.200]  It was completely unjust. It's been quite a while, but what happened in between was I was ticketed for failure to stop at a designated point.
[01:47:42.200 --> 01:47:53.200]  And somewhere in the interim between my first court appearance, which was delayed because the officer wasn't there, and my trial coming up,
[01:47:53.200 --> 01:48:03.200]  that was audited, apparently, and it was updated to stop lights, like passing a stop light.
[01:48:03.200 --> 01:48:09.200]  I don't even know how that seemed legal. So I'm going to go...
[01:48:09.200 --> 01:48:17.200]  Well, it's not. They can't charge you for a different offense than the one that they actually started to prosecute under.
[01:48:17.200 --> 01:48:22.200]  They can't prosecute you for one thing when they charged you with something else.
[01:48:22.200 --> 01:48:29.200]  But I didn't see... So apparently the last incident that I had was I was appearing.
[01:48:29.200 --> 01:48:35.200]  I never got, you know, approached by a prosecutor with the state or with the city.
[01:48:35.200 --> 01:48:42.200]  And so this prosecutor is sitting there trying to intimidate me, and I'm like, first of all, it was not a moving violation.
[01:48:42.200 --> 01:48:50.200]  It was a ridiculous, a frivolous, you know, he said that I was blocking an intersection when I didn't even move for two red lights.
[01:48:50.200 --> 01:48:56.200]  What I didn't see was that after a while, the prosecutor was like, well, you know, the law is pretty clear, you know.
[01:48:56.200 --> 01:49:06.200]  And yeah, and, you know, apparently he goes and looks this up, and some kind of auditor looks at the ticket and upgrades this to a failure,
[01:49:06.200 --> 01:49:14.200]  or running a red light when I sat there for two entire red lights and didn't even move into the intersection.
[01:49:14.200 --> 01:49:20.200]  So I'm looking to try to get this dismissed, but I just didn't have enough confidence to...
[01:49:20.200 --> 01:49:25.200]  Okay, what exactly was the situation that kept you in place through two red lights?
[01:49:25.200 --> 01:49:31.200]  Well, what it was is that there's two very choppy short lights, very subsequently after another.
[01:49:31.200 --> 01:49:35.200]  There was traffic, it's a busy day, it's near campus in Texas.
[01:49:35.200 --> 01:49:38.200]  And so I was at a red light behind an individual.
[01:49:38.200 --> 01:49:43.200]  He moved up when I was in a green light at the very onset of a green light.
[01:49:43.200 --> 01:49:50.200]  I had a little bit of momentum because I saw them moving, but basically I didn't commit into the intersection.
[01:49:50.200 --> 01:49:56.200]  And so it pushed me over the, you know, the really thick stop line.
[01:49:56.200 --> 01:50:00.200]  But it didn't commit me completely over the pedestrian walk.
[01:50:00.200 --> 01:50:08.200]  And this is the UC campus area, so that pedestrian walk is very, you know, congested and whatnot.
[01:50:08.200 --> 01:50:15.200]  And so basically, but I was not even barely, I wasn't even in the intersection of pedestrian walk.
[01:50:15.200 --> 01:50:18.200]  Okay, let me make sure I'm understanding what we have here.
[01:50:18.200 --> 01:50:21.200]  This is not an intersection of cross streets.
[01:50:21.200 --> 01:50:28.200]  This is a place where there is a crosswalk for students across the lanes of traffic.
[01:50:28.200 --> 01:50:29.200]  Right.
[01:50:29.200 --> 01:50:43.200]  It's sort of a T-section, T-intersection, and there is an initial stop zone and then there's an extensive amount of a crosswalk in that traffic area.
[01:50:43.200 --> 01:50:51.200]  And so basically it wasn't like as if I was approaching the light and stopped beyond it or any of that.
[01:50:51.200 --> 01:50:52.200]  Nothing happened.
[01:50:52.200 --> 01:50:53.200]  I was barely even moving.
[01:50:53.200 --> 01:50:56.200]  There was little to no momentum in my car.
[01:50:56.200 --> 01:51:02.200]  And so now I'm facing on Wednesday, I picked to have a jury by trial.
[01:51:02.200 --> 01:51:14.200]  When I was asked by the judge of the bench trial, she was like, well, you know, the officer is being paid to be here to testify today and you had plenty of time to get counsel.
[01:51:14.200 --> 01:51:23.200]  And she was like, we could charge you for, you know, if you're found guilty, we could charge you for, you know, the officer being paid today and more fines.
[01:51:23.200 --> 01:51:26.200]  An air full of crap, they can't charge you any such thing.
[01:51:26.200 --> 01:51:29.200]  You need to judiciously conduct, complain that judge.
[01:51:29.200 --> 01:51:30.200]  Okay.
[01:51:30.200 --> 01:51:32.200]  That's a flat out lie.
[01:51:32.200 --> 01:51:33.200]  Yeah.
[01:51:33.200 --> 01:51:34.200]  Yeah.
[01:51:34.200 --> 01:51:37.200]  She was trying to warn me of extra fees.
[01:51:37.200 --> 01:51:39.200]  She was a little frustrated when I...
[01:51:39.200 --> 01:51:43.200]  They are only allowed to charge you the fine plus court costs.
[01:51:43.200 --> 01:51:44.200]  Nothing else.
[01:51:44.200 --> 01:51:45.200]  I see.
[01:51:45.200 --> 01:51:46.200]  Okay.
[01:51:46.200 --> 01:51:47.200]  I never knew that.
[01:51:47.200 --> 01:51:49.200]  I didn't understand that.
[01:51:49.200 --> 01:51:57.200]  Yeah, because they were trying to say that, you know, well, we were paying the officer to be here today to testify and in my opinion...
[01:51:57.200 --> 01:51:59.200]  Well, you should have asked her who is we.
[01:51:59.200 --> 01:52:05.200]  If the court's paying, that means the court is paying state's witness, which means you can't be fair and impartial.
[01:52:05.200 --> 01:52:07.200]  I had to end up missed trial.
[01:52:07.200 --> 01:52:08.200]  Okay.
[01:52:08.200 --> 01:52:10.200]  You see the problem with what they're doing?
[01:52:10.200 --> 01:52:17.200]  When the judge starts acting that way, you need to know what they're trying to do and what to do about it.
[01:52:17.200 --> 01:52:25.200]  If a judge tells you they're paying the witness, then take that as a literal statement and make them prove it up.
[01:52:25.200 --> 01:52:31.200]  Well, if the court's paying the witness, the court's definitely not being impartial, are they?
[01:52:31.200 --> 01:52:32.200]  Right.
[01:52:32.200 --> 01:52:35.200]  Because the witness is the state's witness.
[01:52:35.200 --> 01:52:39.200]  If the court's paying them, the court definitely ain't on your side.
[01:52:39.200 --> 01:52:40.200]  Right, right.
[01:52:40.200 --> 01:52:50.200]  And just to me, the way that I was experiencing it is I was experiencing that she wasn't already basically telling me I was guilty because she wanted to pursue a trial that day.
[01:52:50.200 --> 01:52:53.200]  And I was like, well, no, I don't want to do that.
[01:52:53.200 --> 01:52:54.200]  And then she's like...
[01:52:54.200 --> 01:52:59.200]  And then she got upset with me because she's like, well, you know, when I asked her for...
[01:52:59.200 --> 01:53:02.200]  Because I wanted to step back and either get counsel or get more time.
[01:53:02.200 --> 01:53:05.200]  She's like, you know, you had plenty of time, blah, blah, blah.
[01:53:05.200 --> 01:53:07.200]  And I was like, no, I didn't.
[01:53:07.200 --> 01:53:08.200]  Question.
[01:53:08.200 --> 01:53:09.200]  Let me ask you a question.
[01:53:09.200 --> 01:53:14.200]  Did they ever serve you with a copy of the complaint and a charging instrument?
[01:53:14.200 --> 01:53:17.200]  Copy of the complaint.
[01:53:17.200 --> 01:53:20.200]  Well, I had the ticket with me.
[01:53:20.200 --> 01:53:23.200]  That's not the complaint.
[01:53:23.200 --> 01:53:28.200]  Did they ever serve you with a copy of a document that has two signatures on it?
[01:53:28.200 --> 01:53:36.200]  One by an affiant and one by a verifying witness, probably a clerk of the court in both cases.
[01:53:36.200 --> 01:53:45.200]  And it says at the beginning, state of Texas versus your name in and by the authority of the state of Texas.
[01:53:45.200 --> 01:53:54.200]  And then it goes into this explanation about you did, did in there, operating motor vehicle and violation of blah, blah, blah on a highway of this state.
[01:53:54.200 --> 01:53:57.200]  Did they ever serve you a copy of that document?
[01:53:57.200 --> 01:53:58.200]  No, no, no.
[01:53:58.200 --> 01:54:03.200]  They only served me with a letter by mail that stated my court didn't time, but it didn't tell me.
[01:54:03.200 --> 01:54:08.200]  Okay, then move to dismiss for failure to provide proper notice.
[01:54:08.200 --> 01:54:12.200]  Proper sufficient and timely notice has not occurred.
[01:54:12.200 --> 01:54:20.200]  If you do not have the traffic similar material, you need to be getting that because all of these documents are already in it.
[01:54:20.200 --> 01:54:25.200]  All you got to do is do a little bit of editing and get them filed.
[01:54:25.200 --> 01:54:26.200]  I see.
[01:54:26.200 --> 01:54:28.200]  Okay.
[01:54:28.200 --> 01:54:42.200]  Yeah, I'm looking at this in general and I didn't understand how they, how they, how an auditor can look at a written ticket and say that I, I upgraded ticket from failure to stop at a designated point to.
[01:54:42.200 --> 01:54:44.200]  Okay, wait, hold on, hold on.
[01:54:44.200 --> 01:54:48.200]  What is an auditor?
[01:54:48.200 --> 01:54:50.200]  I have no idea.
[01:54:50.200 --> 01:54:51.200]  I have no idea.
[01:54:51.200 --> 01:54:52.200]  That's a prosecutor.
[01:54:52.200 --> 01:54:57.200]  The prosecutor was kind of nervous when I told him, I was like, wait a minute, this is not even what I was written the ticket for.
[01:54:57.200 --> 01:54:58.200]  Well, let me pick this up.
[01:54:58.200 --> 01:54:59.200]  Well, of course he was nervous.
[01:54:59.200 --> 01:55:03.200]  He knew he was committing fraud by giving it to you.
[01:55:03.200 --> 01:55:04.200]  Right.
[01:55:04.200 --> 01:55:07.200]  Who, who was the auditor?
[01:55:07.200 --> 01:55:08.200]  I don't know.
[01:55:08.200 --> 01:55:12.200]  All I know is he was behind the computer and came back and tried to intimidate me again.
[01:55:12.200 --> 01:55:15.200]  Basically, this auditor says that this is exactly what happened.
[01:55:15.200 --> 01:55:17.200]  So, I don't know.
[01:55:17.200 --> 01:55:18.200]  Really?
[01:55:18.200 --> 01:55:20.200]  The auditor wants to witness?
[01:55:20.200 --> 01:55:21.200]  I'm sorry, Rene.
[01:55:21.200 --> 01:55:22.200]  Go ahead.
[01:55:22.200 --> 01:55:32.200]  Did you speak to the auditor or did the prosecutor go back and purport to relay some communication with an auditor?
[01:55:32.200 --> 01:55:34.200]  No, no, what it was was all he did.
[01:55:34.200 --> 01:55:45.200]  Apparently they have an automated system on there where he could look up and sort of investigate how this got upgraded to this sort of moving violation.
[01:55:45.200 --> 01:55:46.200]  And that's all he did.
[01:55:46.200 --> 01:55:55.200]  He went to his computer, looked it up, and then came back and told me, oh, well, basically, this auditor, you know, states that, you know, this is what happened.
[01:55:55.200 --> 01:55:59.200]  You need, okay, everything's political.
[01:55:59.200 --> 01:56:04.200]  So, if you want your case to go away, you've got to create a little politics.
[01:56:04.200 --> 01:56:15.200]  So, you call down to the prosecutor and say, who was this auditor you spoke about who changed the charges against me?
[01:56:15.200 --> 01:56:16.200]  Right.
[01:56:16.200 --> 01:56:20.200]  And he'll do a little song and dance and sells her down your pants.
[01:56:20.200 --> 01:56:26.200]  And then you say, who was this auditor?
[01:56:26.200 --> 01:56:35.200]  And if he asked you why you want to know, because I'm curious, who was this auditor?
[01:56:35.200 --> 01:56:36.200]  Right.
[01:56:36.200 --> 01:56:49.200]  He's going to make it very uncomfortable because he was lying to you and he will know that you know he was lying to you.
[01:56:49.200 --> 01:56:54.200]  And you absolutely need to file a bar grievance against this attorney.
[01:56:54.200 --> 01:56:58.200]  Well, there's a thing to add to that.
[01:56:58.200 --> 01:57:05.200]  Tell him that you need to know the name of the auditor because you intend to subpoena the auditor to testify in court.
[01:57:05.200 --> 01:57:06.200]  Yeah.
[01:57:06.200 --> 01:57:16.200]  If the auditor knows enough to change the charges, then obviously the auditor is some sort of first hand fact witness, right?
[01:57:16.200 --> 01:57:17.200]  Yeah.
[01:57:17.200 --> 01:57:18.200]  Yeah.
[01:57:18.200 --> 01:57:21.200]  So, you have a right to have that individual in court?
[01:57:21.200 --> 01:57:23.200]  I see.
[01:57:23.200 --> 01:57:27.200]  And this is what this is compared to the trial.
[01:57:27.200 --> 01:57:38.200]  I have had a lot of experiences where public officials, especially prosecutors, do stupid stuff to try to get me convicted.
[01:57:38.200 --> 01:57:39.200]  Right.
[01:57:39.200 --> 01:57:41.200]  And I love it.
[01:57:41.200 --> 01:57:49.200]  It's wonderful because it gives you an opportunity to kick them right square their behinds.
[01:57:49.200 --> 01:57:50.200]  Right.
[01:57:50.200 --> 01:57:59.200]  And we have a special advantage because probably 99% of all the people who get tickets disappear.
[01:57:59.200 --> 01:58:09.200]  The 95% of all of the people who felt like they were treated unjustly, let him pressure them into taking a deal.
[01:58:09.200 --> 01:58:16.200]  It is that 1% of 1% that can change everything.
[01:58:16.200 --> 01:58:20.200]  And you're the right one to do it and decide it's going to cost you the same no matter what.
[01:58:20.200 --> 01:58:25.200]  So you might as well have a little fun with it and get yourself a good education.
[01:58:25.200 --> 01:58:28.200]  This is Randy Keltner, Deborah Stevens, Eddie Craig with the radio.
[01:58:28.200 --> 01:58:31.200]  And going beyond that, we'll be back shortly.
[01:58:31.200 --> 01:58:34.200]  We're going to break and we'll pick you up on the other side.
[01:58:34.200 --> 01:58:35.200]  And Tom, I see you there.
[01:58:35.200 --> 01:58:37.200]  We'll pick you up on the other side.
[01:58:37.200 --> 01:58:41.200]  This is Randy Keltner, Deborah Stevens, Eddie Craig with the radio.
[01:58:41.200 --> 01:58:45.200]  Call in number 512-646-1984.
[01:58:45.200 --> 01:58:47.200]  We'll be right back.
[01:59:15.200 --> 01:59:18.200]  9,000 explanatory footnotes.
[01:59:18.200 --> 01:59:28.200]  Difficult and profound passages are opened up in a marvelous way, providing an entrance into the riches of the word beyond which you've ever experienced before.
[01:59:28.200 --> 01:59:33.200]  Bibles for America would like to give you a free recovery version simply for the asking.
[01:59:33.200 --> 01:59:43.200]  This comprehensive yet compact study Bible is yours just by calling us toll free at 1-888-551-0102.
[01:59:43.200 --> 01:59:47.200]  Or by ordering online at freestudybible.com.
[01:59:47.200 --> 02:00:14.200]  That's freestudybible.com.