[00:00.000 --> 00:05.840]  The following use flash is brought to you by the Lone Star Lowdown, providing your daily
[00:05.840 --> 00:13.440]  bulletins for the commodities market, today in history, news updates, and the inside scoop
[00:13.440 --> 00:21.520]  into the tides of the alternative.
[00:21.520 --> 00:28.000]  Markets for Wednesday, March 9, 2016 are currently trending with gold at $1,252.65 an ounce,
[00:28.000 --> 00:34.440]  silver at $13.29 an ounce, Texas crude at $36.50 a barrel, and Bitcoin is currently
[00:34.440 --> 00:38.520]  sitting at about $411 U.S. currency.
[00:38.520 --> 00:48.280]  Today in history, the year 1961, the first animal safely returned from space after completing
[00:48.280 --> 00:53.720]  one full orbit around the earth in Sputnik 9, a doggie named Ternushka or Blackie returned
[00:53.720 --> 00:59.800]  from the heavens, today in history.
[00:59.800 --> 01:04.000]  In recent news, Teyrad Pugh, a U.S. Air Force veteran, was found guilty today of attempting
[01:04.000 --> 01:05.700]  to join the Islamic State.
[01:05.700 --> 01:10.220]  After a week-long trial at a Brooklyn federal court, a jury found Teyrad guilty of attempting
[01:10.220 --> 01:15.320]  to provide material support to ISIS and guilty of obstruction for destroying four e-storage
[01:15.320 --> 01:17.120]  drives after his detention in Turkey.
[01:17.120 --> 01:19.200]  Pugh is set to be sentenced in September.
[01:19.200 --> 01:23.400]  Pugh's defense lawyer is arguing that all he did was express repugnant views about the
[01:23.400 --> 01:27.680]  Islamic State on Facebook and watched dozens of the group's recruitment videos, and that
[01:27.680 --> 01:31.560]  he was only traveling to Turkey to find work, not to become a jihadist.
[01:31.560 --> 01:36.000]  However, prosecutors are presenting a letter he apparently drafted to his Egyptian wife,
[01:36.000 --> 01:39.960]  which was found on his laptop, in which he vowed to fight for Islam.
[01:39.960 --> 01:44.800]  When detained in Istanbul, he apparently had a black face mask, a map depicting Islamic
[01:44.800 --> 01:50.440]  State's stronghold in Syria, and a chart of the border crossings between Turkey and Syria.
[01:50.440 --> 01:56.120]  Pugh served as an avionics specialist in the Air Force from 1986 to 1990, and later worked
[01:56.120 --> 02:05.400]  as an army contractor in Iraq from 2009 to 2010.
[02:05.400 --> 02:09.320]  Toyota recently showed off a new device that could dramatically assist the visually impaired
[02:09.320 --> 02:11.120]  to better navigate their surroundings.
[02:11.120 --> 02:15.240]  Called Project Blade, an informational device to bridge the gap between a cane or a guide
[02:15.240 --> 02:19.640]  dog, Toyota has been testing various prototypes of the wearable device with individuals from
[02:19.640 --> 02:23.120]  the visually impaired community for the past three years, and though the details of the
[02:23.120 --> 02:27.120]  project were released this week, no official timeline has been set for the release.
[02:27.120 --> 02:31.120]  The automaker plans incorporating mapping, object identification, and facial mapping
[02:31.120 --> 02:33.720]  technologies into Blade in the future.
[02:33.720 --> 02:38.680]  Doug Moore, manager of partner robotics at Toyota, told ABC that Toyota is thinking about
[02:38.680 --> 02:42.080]  quality of life for individuals and how to impact society.
[02:42.080 --> 02:46.480]  To debunk our lowdown, it's currently looking to build some ad space, if you have a product
[02:46.480 --> 02:51.480]  or service you'd like to advertise with us, feel free to give me a call at T10-363-2257.
[02:51.480 --> 03:21.240]  This is Rick Roady with your lowdown for March 9th, 2016.
[03:21.240 --> 03:35.520]  Okay, howdy, howdy.
[03:35.520 --> 03:47.880]  This is Randy Kelton, Lula La Radio on this Friday, the 11th day of March 2016, and today
[03:47.880 --> 03:56.000]  we have a very special guest, Mr. Ron Avery, Ron's been on our show before, and around
[03:56.000 --> 04:03.800]  the Austin area, Ron's kind of a legend, and he is in a suit with some of the big guys.
[04:03.800 --> 04:11.640]  Ron, would you kind of introduce yourself and explain to us the suit that you're involved
[04:11.640 --> 04:12.640]  in.
[04:12.640 --> 04:17.520]  Sure, thanks for having me on, Randy.
[04:17.520 --> 04:25.520]  But can you hear me okay, it sounds like I'm getting some feedback or something, you alright?
[04:25.520 --> 04:31.520]  Yes, I'm noticing that, I don't think that's either one of us, it sounds like it.
[04:31.520 --> 04:32.520]  Okay.
[04:32.520 --> 04:37.160]  I'm sure Robert's on it, if it's either of us, he'll figure it out.
[04:37.160 --> 04:38.160]  Okay, okay.
[04:38.160 --> 04:48.600]  Yeah, anyway, I'll tell you what this is about, I filed a lawsuit against the Houston Chronicle
[04:48.600 --> 04:58.840]  and one of the news reporters over there, and Hearst Communications Incorporated, which
[04:58.840 --> 05:08.480]  owns the Houston Chronicle, and they own, I think about 50 newspapers in the United
[05:08.480 --> 05:09.480]  States.
[05:09.480 --> 05:20.820]  But anyway, I sued them for libel, for basically, in a roundabout way, but effectively, calling
[05:20.820 --> 05:30.400]  me a domestic terrorist, worse than Muslim terrorists, and they did this on the 9-11
[05:30.400 --> 05:49.600]  weekend in 2015, and this article they published was written by their news reporter about a
[05:49.600 --> 05:57.360]  meeting that was held at my staff room in McQueenie, Texas, about five months earlier.
[05:57.360 --> 06:04.000]  So they delayed the article about five months, so that they could print the thing on the
[06:04.000 --> 06:08.120]  weekend of 9-11, the memorial weekend.
[06:08.120 --> 06:15.280]  So you know, I thought that was pretty suspicious that you would go to a meeting and hear all
[06:15.280 --> 06:23.040]  about what it was as the Republic of Texas, a group calling themselves the Republic of
[06:23.040 --> 06:30.480]  Texas, were holding one of their congressional sessions, and they wanted to hold it at the
[06:30.480 --> 06:39.320]  tap house at that time, so I let them do that, and I read a paper to them.
[06:39.320 --> 06:44.160]  I'm not a member of that group, by the way, never have been, but I know some of the people
[06:44.160 --> 06:51.480]  in it, and I like them, but I've never really quite got the concept of what they're talking
[06:51.480 --> 06:54.040]  about.
[06:54.040 --> 06:59.840]  But anyway, the result was that I thought they would be interested in the concept of
[06:59.840 --> 07:09.560]  dissolution as related to the union federal government that I learned of by reading John
[07:09.560 --> 07:16.080]  Locke's Second Treatise on Government and his chapter on dissolution.
[07:16.080 --> 07:25.200]  So I wrote a paper and addressed it to them, and I asked permission to read it to them,
[07:25.200 --> 07:26.200]  and I did.
[07:26.200 --> 07:34.440]  But anyway, this news reporter came to that meeting from the Houston Chronicle, and he
[07:34.440 --> 07:42.800]  sat there all day long and heard my 30-minute speech, and then five months later, he called
[07:42.800 --> 07:52.280]  the Republic of Texas a secessionist, and myself a secessionist, and none of us, even
[07:52.280 --> 07:56.200]  the Republic of Texas, is not a secessionist group.
[07:56.200 --> 08:02.000]  They're opposed to it because they think that Texas was never really made a lawful part
[08:02.000 --> 08:07.680]  of the union, it was never really part of the union, so they're not interested in secession
[08:07.680 --> 08:11.440]  because that would be an admission that they want a part of it.
[08:11.440 --> 08:21.040]  So that's pointless to them, and it's pointless to me, too, under the ideology and observation
[08:21.040 --> 08:22.040]  of dissolution.
[08:22.040 --> 08:29.520]  It doesn't make sense to pursue a withdrawal of something that's dissolved.
[08:29.520 --> 08:42.120]  And I think we've done a show before in 2012, I believe it was, on secession compared to
[08:42.120 --> 08:57.560]  dissolution, right here on this show, and anyway, I sued them for libel, and just recently
[08:57.560 --> 09:06.560]  they had a motion to dismiss, and this motion to dismiss comes under something called the
[09:06.560 --> 09:22.640]  Texas Citizen Participation Act, which is codified in the Texas Civil Practice and Humanity
[09:22.640 --> 09:23.640]  Code, Chapter 27.
[09:23.640 --> 09:36.160]  It's a brand new act passed in 2011, and it's a flawed act, and what it really does is lift
[09:36.160 --> 09:46.000]  newspapers off the hook in a fast-track, short-circuited justice situation, and we can maybe talk about
[09:46.000 --> 10:00.440]  that later too, about the impact of that piece of legislation and what that's really doing.
[10:00.440 --> 10:10.400]  So anyway, thank you for having me on to talk about that, because I guess, I don't know
[10:10.400 --> 10:16.480]  if you know Christopher Boland, what he's been doing lately, he's written a book called
[10:16.480 --> 10:25.120]  Solving 9-11, and he's touring the country, he toured it last year, and I had the pleasure
[10:25.120 --> 10:31.280]  of having him in my home for a couple of weeks and working with him and making presentations
[10:31.280 --> 10:41.160]  in Austin, and he says basically that the 9-11 conspiracy continues, it's not something
[10:41.160 --> 10:49.680]  that just happened and it's over, it's an ongoing thing, and I really agree with him,
[10:49.680 --> 10:54.440]  especially when it comes to the major media in the country, because none of the major
[10:54.440 --> 11:03.160]  media will actually do a decent story on the discovery, or even a story at all that I know
[11:03.160 --> 11:09.000]  of, on the discovery of super nano-fermite in all the dust samples in the world trade
[11:09.000 --> 11:13.480]  scene, and that proves that the newspaper, certainly they know about it, because it's
[11:13.480 --> 11:18.040]  all over the internet, people are talking about it, I mean they couldn't be that stupid
[11:18.040 --> 11:24.400]  to never hear anything about super nano-fermite, and then because they don't cover it, they
[11:24.400 --> 11:33.640]  don't know what super nano-fermite means, they're part of an agenda that is...
[11:33.640 --> 11:38.600]  I kind of understand the agenda.
[11:38.600 --> 11:47.840]  I am listed with the Southern Poverty Law Center as an enemy of the United States.
[11:47.840 --> 11:54.080]  Okay, yeah, I see you kind of understand that.
[11:54.080 --> 12:01.400]  Yeah, first I thought I should sue them for that, and then I thought, what the heck, it
[12:01.400 --> 12:04.000]  will just increase my reputation.
[12:04.000 --> 12:05.000]  No, it'll rise.
[12:05.000 --> 12:10.600]  Yeah, exactly, but I understand the difficulty.
[12:10.600 --> 12:20.720]  It seems like the media is bought and paid for, and it's very easy for the media to do
[12:20.720 --> 12:27.920]  an assassination, but I'm familiar with Chapter 27 slap suits.
[12:27.920 --> 12:30.920]  Oh yeah, very good.
[12:30.920 --> 12:37.440]  Yeah, well I didn't know anything about them until I filed this lawsuit.
[12:37.440 --> 12:45.800]  We just had a suit slapped down in the Tarrant County area, the Fort Worth area, where a
[12:45.800 --> 12:53.600]  woman had been really hammering the judges in the family law court, and the primary judge
[12:53.600 --> 13:02.160]  she was working over was running for election, and had two lawyers that he regularly appointed
[13:02.160 --> 13:11.640]  as ad litem attorneys file a suit against her for slandering them, for slandering the judge,
[13:11.640 --> 13:18.840]  and she filed a motion to dismiss it, dismissed it from preferred sanctions against the lawyers,
[13:18.840 --> 13:23.520]  and the judge lost his primary election.
[13:23.520 --> 13:27.480]  We got the food, but...
[13:27.480 --> 13:40.480]  Slap does have its purpose, but I don't see how it can protect someone against libel.
[13:40.480 --> 13:51.920]  That was exactly the claim that was used to strike down the suit, is that the suit itself
[13:51.920 --> 13:52.920]  libeled her.
[13:52.920 --> 13:53.920]  Yes, right, right.
[13:53.920 --> 13:54.920]  There you go.
[13:54.920 --> 13:59.080]  Well, that's what it's really intended for.
[13:59.080 --> 14:08.280]  See, in this case, what you had, as I understand what you're saying, it was just the citizens,
[14:08.280 --> 14:15.600]  and the judge filed a suit against her for slandering him in the election, and maybe
[14:15.600 --> 14:19.800]  causing the loss of the election or something.
[14:19.800 --> 14:28.840]  And that's truly what the Slap, the Texas Citizen Participation Act, was really passed
[14:28.840 --> 14:34.680]  for, at least that's what they said is the purpose of it, is to help protect citizens
[14:34.680 --> 14:35.680]  when they...
[14:35.680 --> 14:43.040]  Let me read this one little chapter, it's 27.02, purpose.
[14:43.040 --> 14:47.440]  The purpose of this chapter is to encourage and safeguard the constitutional rights of
[14:47.440 --> 14:53.720]  persons to petition, speak freely, associate freely, and otherwise participate in government
[14:53.720 --> 14:59.680]  to the maximum extent permitted by law, at the same time protect the rights of a person
[14:59.680 --> 15:06.120]  to file meritorious lawsuits for demonstrable injury.
[15:06.120 --> 15:09.120]  Yes, yes.
[15:09.120 --> 15:17.600]  Well that's exactly what it says, but I will show you some features of it that really aid
[15:17.600 --> 15:28.360]  all newspapers and media, large media companies, because what they do...
[15:28.360 --> 15:39.360]  In the chapter, it defines what communication is and what free speech is, and part of that
[15:39.360 --> 15:46.560]  code says that free speech is any communication having to do with a public event, and then
[15:46.560 --> 15:52.600]  it says communication is any written, stated, or any kind of thing like that.
[15:52.600 --> 16:06.300]  So what happens is the Slapsuit legislation is in three parts, a hearing on using a motion
[16:06.300 --> 16:12.680]  to dismiss, and that's what this statute really creates, it creates something called a motion
[16:12.680 --> 16:20.120]  to dismiss that can be filed by the defendant, and this motion has three parts in it, and
[16:20.120 --> 16:22.040]  so it's a three-part hearing.
[16:22.040 --> 16:31.240]  The first part is to prove that the suit was brought as a result of an exercise of the
[16:31.240 --> 16:39.120]  defendant's freedom of speech, freedom of petition, and freedom of association, and
[16:39.120 --> 16:46.000]  then the second part, once he proves that, it moves to the second part, which the bird
[16:46.000 --> 16:52.200]  shifts to the plaintiff to prove that they have...
[16:52.200 --> 16:54.840]  Hang on, we're about to go to break, we're about to go to break, this is Randy Kelton,
[16:54.840 --> 17:00.480]  RealBlood Radio, I called him number 512-646-1984.
[17:00.480 --> 17:06.520]  Non-GMOsolutions.com is now a proud sponsor of the Logos Radio Network with promo code
[17:06.520 --> 17:07.520]  Logos.
[17:07.520 --> 17:12.120]  We thank you for the opportunity to be your source for new man of food, the leader in
[17:12.120 --> 17:15.080]  high quality food that you will truly enjoy.
[17:15.080 --> 17:20.640]  You'll find gluten-free options, and all products are free from high fructose corn syrup, aspartame,
[17:20.640 --> 17:21.640]  soy, and MSG.
[17:21.640 --> 17:26.920]  Whether you're on a tight budget, looking for options to reduce food costs without compromising
[17:26.920 --> 17:33.720]  health, or securing long-term 25-year storable food for an uncertain future, then Non-GMOsolutions.com
[17:33.720 --> 17:35.720]  is your common sense answer.
[17:35.720 --> 17:39.120]  Take advantage of a 10% discount with promo code Logos.
[17:39.120 --> 17:44.120]  No longer will you compromise taste and quality for full-term shelf life, or eat poor quality
[17:44.120 --> 17:45.120]  food due to cost.
[17:45.120 --> 17:49.960]  Check out our FlexPay options and design a no-contract plan to satisfy your needs.
[17:49.960 --> 17:55.760]  Go to Non-GMOsolutions.com today and get 10% off with promo code Logos.
[17:55.760 --> 18:00.720]  That's Non-GMOsolutions.com with promo code Logos.
[18:00.720 --> 18:04.960]  Did you know that the Logos Radio Network is a truly listener-supported radio network
[18:04.960 --> 18:09.520]  on top of the on-air talent, producers, and other hard-working individuals working behind
[18:09.520 --> 18:10.520]  the scenes?
[18:10.520 --> 18:14.240]  The Logos Radio Network is kept on the air by the generous support of listeners like
[18:14.240 --> 18:15.240]  you.
[18:15.240 --> 18:19.280]  And we appreciate our loyal listeners making contributions every year on our annual fundraisers,
[18:19.280 --> 18:22.520]  which help keep the lights on and Logos Radio Network on the air.
[18:22.520 --> 18:25.840]  The 2016 fundraiser has been extended to March 17th.
[18:25.840 --> 18:29.880]  Head on over to LogosRadioNetwork.com to make your contribution.
[18:29.880 --> 18:34.520]  Every $25 donation enters you for a chance to win prizes from Central Texas Gunworks.
[18:34.520 --> 18:39.280]  First prize being a Spikes Skull Lower Receiver, second prize being a Taurus Curve.
[18:39.280 --> 18:44.040]  And if you donate your $25 contribution early enough, you will also receive a complimentary
[18:44.040 --> 18:46.040]  jar of My Magic Mud.
[18:46.040 --> 18:50.440]  Donations by all major credit cards are accepted, as well as contributions by Bitcoin.
[18:50.440 --> 18:53.720]  The Logos Radio Network fundraiser now through March 17th.
[18:53.720 --> 18:58.080]  Head on over to LogosRadioNetwork.com for more information and to donate to keep the
[18:58.080 --> 19:00.200]  Logos Radio Network on the air.
[19:00.200 --> 19:08.240]  You are listening to the Logos Radio Network, LogosRadioNetwork.com.
[19:08.240 --> 19:13.960]  Thank you.
[19:38.240 --> 19:47.200]  Okay, we are back. Randy Kelton, Louvlaw Radio. We're here with our special guest, Ron Avery.
[19:47.200 --> 19:53.160]  And I know we're getting some background noise. That's not coming from the network. We didn't
[19:53.160 --> 19:58.840]  have this noise on Drake, so at this point we have no idea what that is. Can't do anything
[19:58.840 --> 20:06.560]  about it. We're hoping that it'll go. If it's the FBI listening in, I hope they mute their
[20:06.560 --> 20:11.760]  own mics so we don't have this background noise. And I do apologize for that, but I
[20:11.760 --> 20:19.160]  don't know what we can do about it. The statute is relatively short, so I'm going to read
[20:19.160 --> 20:25.520]  a couple of real short sections here so it'll kind of frame what Ron is talking about. The
[20:25.520 --> 20:32.880]  motion to dismiss. If a legal action is based on, relates to, or is in response to a party's
[20:32.880 --> 20:38.440]  exercise of the right of free speech, the right to petition, or right of association,
[20:38.440 --> 20:44.320]  that party may file a motion to dismiss the legal action. A motion to dismiss the legal
[20:44.320 --> 20:48.680]  action under this section must be filed not later than the 60th day after the date of
[20:48.680 --> 20:53.200]  service of the legal action. The court may extend the time to file a motion under this
[20:53.200 --> 21:00.080]  section on a showing of good cause, except it is provided by section 27006. On the filing
[21:00.080 --> 21:05.400]  of a motion under this section, all discovery in the legal action is suspended until the
[21:05.400 --> 21:11.080]  court has ruled on the motion to dismiss, and that's because it's a dispositive motion.
[21:11.080 --> 21:17.920]  And they want to save the litigants the time and cost of discovery. And I'm going to go
[21:17.920 --> 21:23.720]  down to the ruling, because this is what Ron was just talking about. The court must rule
[21:23.720 --> 21:29.720]  on a motion under section 27003, not later than the 30th day following the date of the
[21:29.720 --> 21:36.640]  hearing on the motion, except as provided by subsection C. On the motion of a party
[21:36.640 --> 21:42.720]  under 27003, the court shall dismiss a legal action against the moving party if the moving
[21:42.720 --> 21:49.440]  party shows by a preponderance of the evidence that the legal action is based on, relates
[21:49.440 --> 21:55.640]  to, or is in response to the party's exercise of the right of free speech, the right to
[21:55.640 --> 22:01.760]  petition, or the right of association. The court may not dismiss the legal action under
[22:01.760 --> 22:08.360]  this section. If the party bringing the legal action establishes by clear and specific evidence
[22:08.360 --> 22:15.240]  a prima facie case for each essential element of the claim in question, notwithstanding
[22:15.240 --> 22:20.360]  the provision of subsection C, the court shall dismiss the legal action against the moving
[22:20.360 --> 22:25.200]  party if the moving party establishes by a preponderance of the evidence each essential
[22:25.200 --> 22:31.440]  element of a valid defense to the movement's claim. I haven't read this whole thing. Does
[22:31.440 --> 22:39.640]  this statute list the elements of the claim and the elements of an affirmative defense?
[22:39.640 --> 22:49.600]  Sure. Here's what happens. You just read all three parts of that, which is the very first
[22:49.600 --> 22:57.640]  part of the hearing. The burden is on the defendant. The lawsuit is in response to the
[22:57.640 --> 23:03.880]  defendant's exercise of one of their liberties that they list, free speech, petition, and
[23:03.880 --> 23:12.640]  association. And then, after he proves that, the burden shifts to the plaintiff, the one
[23:12.640 --> 23:18.440]  that brought the suit, to show every element of whatever suit he brought. In my case, it's
[23:18.440 --> 23:27.080]  libel, so I had to show every element of a lawsuit for libel, which I'm able to do. And
[23:27.080 --> 23:34.600]  then, if I can do that, then they still can't dismiss the suit. And if I fail to do that,
[23:34.600 --> 23:41.520]  they can dismiss the suit right then. But if I am successful at showing every element
[23:41.520 --> 23:50.480]  for a libel suit, then the third step is the burden shifts back to the defendant to prove
[23:50.480 --> 23:57.640]  every element of a valid defense to my lawsuit. Even though I have a good lawsuit of libel,
[23:57.640 --> 24:06.640]  if he can show a valid defense to it, then it will still be dismissed. But I'm going
[24:06.640 --> 24:16.280]  to show you the flaw in this act, as it applies strictly to the newspaper business and the
[24:16.280 --> 24:22.600]  press. This is really not designed to protect the free press or the press in America. We
[24:22.600 --> 24:32.120]  already have constitutions and plenty of case law, U.S. constitutions, even the state constitutions
[24:32.120 --> 24:39.880]  to protect freedom of press. That's exactly what I was thinking when does it define an
[24:39.880 --> 24:46.240]  affirmative defense, because we have a lot of case law on the right of free speech. And
[24:46.240 --> 24:52.960]  what constitutes your right to free speech has been clearly defined. And it's not defined
[24:52.960 --> 25:02.960]  as stating of falsehood. Well, that's true. And I'm going to show you another way in which
[25:02.960 --> 25:11.960]  this fails or should not be applied to the profession of journalism. On my website, I
[25:11.960 --> 25:22.680]  have at postwtc.com, look on there and it has a link to this Avery Seuss Houston Chronicle,
[25:22.680 --> 25:34.080]  or you can just go to postwtc.com forward slash a-b-c dot h-t-m-l, which stands for
[25:34.080 --> 25:44.600]  Avery versus Chronicle dot h-t-m-l. And then if you go to item 17 on the left side, it
[25:44.600 --> 26:00.920]  shows a plaintiff's affidavit, addendum, that's number two. And it shows the ethics, the cardinal
[26:00.920 --> 26:09.480]  rules of journalism when they're covering news. They're forbidden to exercise their
[26:09.480 --> 26:15.840]  own freedoms in anything they cover. They are participants. It's like they're put into
[26:15.840 --> 26:25.000]  a bubble. They are bystanders, they're non-participants. They're observing others that are using their
[26:25.000 --> 26:32.760]  freedoms of speech and petition and association. And even in writing of their articles, they
[26:32.760 --> 26:41.520]  are not to pierce that bubble of non-participation. And if they do that, and if they want it,
[26:41.520 --> 26:47.880]  it's not that they can't do it, but if they do it, they really have to notice the reader
[26:47.880 --> 26:55.360]  or notice the people at the event. They have to essentially say, I'm going to participate
[26:55.360 --> 27:02.040]  in this, or they actually begin to participate. They pick up a sign and they're waving a sign
[27:02.040 --> 27:10.680]  and they're making speeches. That's where a reporter can actually become a citizen participant.
[27:10.680 --> 27:19.960]  But really, a professional journalist covering an event is basically, essentially, forbidden
[27:19.960 --> 27:29.880]  to do any self-participation or expression or any of that. So in a way, this act should
[27:29.880 --> 27:37.600]  not apply to journalists at all, unless they are, in fact, stating their own opinions and
[27:37.600 --> 27:43.560]  they make it clear to the reader that they're stating their own opinions. And in this particular
[27:43.560 --> 27:50.440]  case, this didn't happen. And they should be forced to show, in order to take advantage
[27:50.440 --> 27:57.120]  of this act, that they really were citizen participants, not bystanders and observers
[27:57.120 --> 28:03.320]  reporting facts. Because see, there is no, just as you said, there is no First Amendment
[28:03.320 --> 28:13.280]  right for the protection of printing falsehoods and false facts. And if the only thing a journalist
[28:13.280 --> 28:22.720]  is doing is reporting facts, and he gets those facts wrong, then that's outright liable and
[28:22.720 --> 28:32.440]  is not protected. And it sounds like, in your case, he didn't just get the facts wrong,
[28:32.440 --> 28:45.880]  that he proposed a, I'll use the word, his own determination, his own opinion concerning
[28:45.880 --> 28:53.800]  the facts, he took his opinion and proposed it as a fact. He did not say, in my opinion,
[28:53.800 --> 28:54.800]  Ron Avery is.
[28:54.800 --> 29:04.240]  That is absolutely correct. You have nailed it. That's exactly what he did. He used his
[29:04.240 --> 29:13.320]  own opinion, and even now, even in his pleadings in the lawsuit, he claims I'm a secessionist.
[29:13.320 --> 29:22.440]  And of course, that's ridiculous. I've been opposed to it, and I speak against it at every
[29:22.440 --> 29:23.440]  opportunity.
[29:23.440 --> 29:34.400]  Hold on. In his article, did he define who he met by secessionist, as it sounds to you?
[29:34.400 --> 29:43.120]  Not at all. Not really, not at all. He just simply called us, all the Republic of Texas,
[29:43.120 --> 29:50.480]  me. Now see, the only connection I have to this, to the whole article, is that he had
[29:50.480 --> 29:56.240]  a reference to me by name, on the front page of the Houston Chronicle, because they had
[29:56.240 --> 30:00.360]  a picture of a guy wearing a blue jacket.
[30:00.360 --> 30:04.200]  You've probably heard of WikiLeaks, the website that's released lots of government documents.
[30:04.200 --> 30:09.080]  But have you heard of the granddaddy of leaks, Cryptome.org? I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht,
[30:09.080 --> 30:14.280]  and I'll be back with more about how Cryptome holds governments and corporations accountable.
[30:14.280 --> 30:18.640]  Privacy is under attack. When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back
[30:18.640 --> 30:24.240]  again. And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish, too.
[30:24.240 --> 30:30.400]  So protect your rights, say no to surveillance, and keep your information to yourself. Privacy,
[30:30.400 --> 30:35.520]  it's worth hanging on to. This public service announcement is brought to you by Startpage.com,
[30:35.520 --> 30:42.560]  the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing. Start over with Startpage.
[30:42.560 --> 30:46.960]  The website Cryptome.org has been archiving leaked and whistleblower documents for over
[30:46.960 --> 30:52.680]  14 years to keep governments and big business in check. Back in 2003, the site's owner,
[30:52.680 --> 30:58.560]  John Young, came to my rescue when my spy chips co-author and I dug up explosive confidential
[30:58.560 --> 31:03.600]  documents. They told how businesses like Procter & Gamble planned to pacify consumers who would
[31:03.600 --> 31:09.360]  be outraged by RFID, a new tracking technology. The information was so scandalous, we were
[31:09.360 --> 31:13.400]  sure it would disappear the moment someone found out it was publicly accessible. We were
[31:13.400 --> 31:18.160]  also worried we might be accused of hacking. Cryptome came to our rescue, and the documents
[31:18.160 --> 31:34.000]  are still mirrored there today. I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht. More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[31:34.000 --> 31:38.400]  Did you know there are three million edible food plants on earth, and none have the nutritional
[31:38.400 --> 31:43.600]  value of the hemp plant? HempUSA.org offers you hemp protein powder. It does not contain
[31:43.600 --> 31:49.960]  chemicals or THC, is non-GMO, and is 100% gluten-free. Hemp protein powder burns fat,
[31:49.960 --> 31:57.840]  builds muscle, contains 53% protein, and feeds the body the nutrients it needs. Call 888-910-4367
[31:57.840 --> 32:05.760]  and see what our powder, seeds, and oil can do for you, only at HempUSA.org. Rule of Law
[32:05.760 --> 32:09.800]  Radio is proud to offer the Rule of Law traffic seminar. In today's America, we live in an
[32:09.800 --> 32:13.800]  us-against-them society. If we the people are ever going to have a free society, then we're
[32:13.800 --> 32:17.280]  going to have to stand and defend our own rights. Among those rights are the right to
[32:17.280 --> 32:20.800]  travel freely from place to place, the right to act in our own private capacity, and most
[32:20.800 --> 32:25.000]  importantly, the right to due process of law. Traffic courts afford us the least expensive
[32:25.000 --> 32:29.440]  opportunity to learn how to enforce and preserve our rights through due process. Former Sheriff's
[32:29.440 --> 32:33.520]  Deputy Eddie Craig, in conjunction with Rule of Law Radio, has put together the most comprehensive
[32:33.520 --> 32:37.080]  teaching tool available that will help you understand what due process is and how to
[32:37.080 --> 32:40.720]  hold courts to the rule of law. You can get your own copy of this invaluable material
[32:40.720 --> 32:45.080]  by going to ruleoflawradio.com and ordering your copy today. By ordering now, you'll receive
[32:45.080 --> 32:49.240]  a copy of Eddie's book, The Texas Transportation Code, The Law Versus the Lie, video and audio
[32:49.240 --> 32:53.400]  of the original 2009 seminar, hundreds of research documents, and other useful resource
[32:53.400 --> 32:58.120]  material. Learn how to fight for your rights with the help of this material from ruleoflawradio.com.
[32:58.120 --> 33:03.120]  Order your copy today, and together we can have the free society we all want and deserve.
[33:03.120 --> 33:10.120]  You're listening to the Logos Radio Network at logosradionetwork.com.
[33:33.120 --> 33:40.120]  Thank you very much.
[34:04.120 --> 34:11.120]  Okay, we are back. Randy Kelton, Rule of Law Radio, and we're here with our special guest,
[34:18.640 --> 34:25.640]  Ron Avery. And in other shows recently, I've been talking about various kinds of linguistic
[34:25.640 --> 34:32.640]  maneuvers, and one of them is a complex equivalent. Because the term that was applied to Ron was
[34:39.240 --> 34:46.240]  a secessionist. So I thought, what does secessionist really mean? I'm not sure I know. I've got
[34:46.240 --> 34:53.240]  some ideas I can hallucinate and drag up something that I think it means, but I don't know what
[34:57.280 --> 35:04.280]  it really means. One who insists on the importance of a regular succession of events or offices.
[35:04.280 --> 35:11.280]  In religion, one who insists that only apostolic succession is valid. And that doesn't help
[35:17.600 --> 35:18.120]  much.
[35:18.120 --> 35:25.120]  That relates to religion, probably Christianity as to how you become an apostle.
[35:25.120 --> 35:31.120]  And so I, you know, I don't know what that means. Do you have any idea what it means?
[35:31.120 --> 35:38.120]  Well, again, that's what I'm saying. That has to do with the clergy. How one, or even
[35:39.520 --> 35:44.920]  an apostle, and that was talked about in the early church, was that you couldn't become
[35:44.920 --> 35:51.920]  an apostle unless it was moved from one apostle to the other. Kind of like how Matthias became
[35:52.680 --> 35:59.680]  an apostle. It was only after Judas committed suicide and they had to select another one.
[35:59.680 --> 36:06.680]  And so he was in sequence following Judas. First of all, let me say this to simplify
[36:10.000 --> 36:17.000]  some of this. It really doesn't matter what secession means in real technical terms as
[36:17.000 --> 36:24.000]  it relates to a state and the union. Because it doesn't really matter what the news reporter
[36:33.840 --> 36:40.840]  thinks it means. It matters what the people that he's reporting on say about it. If he's
[36:40.840 --> 36:47.840]  reporting on an organization that is opposed to secession, and another person that speaks
[36:50.080 --> 36:57.080]  against it at every opportunity because he observes dissolution and cannot see how it
[36:57.920 --> 37:04.440]  would apply, they are two mutually exclusive things and you can't have both at the same
[37:04.440 --> 37:11.440]  time. So he is required, really, when he talks about what we believe, he can't say it's an
[37:17.720 --> 37:22.720]  organization, a secessionist organization, and that's exactly what he called it, a secessionist
[37:22.720 --> 37:27.720]  organization, the Republic of Texas. Well, there's not a single member of the Republic
[37:27.720 --> 37:34.720]  of Texas that ever has advocated secession because they don't think the state of Texas
[37:38.880 --> 37:45.200]  ever became a state. It has always remained that independent republic. And it's absurd
[37:45.200 --> 37:52.200]  for them to call me that because if you observe dissolution, you certainly don't want to be
[37:52.200 --> 37:57.960]  succeeding from something that really doesn't lawfully exist. And that's just the technical
[37:57.960 --> 38:04.960]  part of it. But even if we were secessionists and got it all wrong and didn't understand
[38:06.240 --> 38:11.840]  it at all, but we called ourselves something else and we were always opposed to it, he
[38:11.840 --> 38:17.200]  would still be required to say that Ron Avery, even though he's an idiot and doesn't understand
[38:17.200 --> 38:24.200]  what secession and dissolution is, he still is opposed to secession. He would have done
[38:25.760 --> 38:32.760]  a lot better if he had said that. But he claims that we are secessionists. How can you do
[38:33.600 --> 38:40.720]  that if the people are constantly talking against it and have never advocated it ever?
[38:40.720 --> 38:47.720]  And so that's where he really messed up. He has the wrong facts. Now there's a reason
[38:48.480 --> 38:55.480]  for him to put in wrong facts. And I'm going to show you kind of what I think he was doing.
[38:56.480 --> 39:03.480]  I talked to another journalist and he called, he gave this thing a name. He said it's fly
[39:03.480 --> 39:10.480]  paper. He said calling us a secessionist was fly paper. And what that meant was he's using
[39:12.120 --> 39:19.120]  it to catch a bunch of other things. He had one article, really how he libeled me was
[39:19.880 --> 39:26.880]  by actually the attachment of other articles in a web article. He connected other articles
[39:26.880 --> 39:33.880]  to his article. And these were to further characterize me and this group. But because
[39:36.600 --> 39:42.680]  of these other articles, he needed something to take us from simply being the Republic
[39:42.680 --> 39:49.680]  of Texas and a guy that just observes dissolution. He needed to take us to the far right radical
[39:50.080 --> 39:55.800]  extreme so that he could say other things about us. And making us secessionists, he
[39:55.800 --> 40:02.800]  was able to do that. And the very first link he has in there is to an article entitled
[40:04.640 --> 40:11.640]  Putin's plot to get Texas to secede. And in there it says that a member, Nathan Smith,
[40:13.640 --> 40:20.640]  a member of the Texas nationalist movement, went to Russia to meet up with a bunch of
[40:20.640 --> 40:27.640]  far right fascists and neo-Nazis. And so that moves the idea of anybody that's a secessionist
[40:32.680 --> 40:38.600]  would be working to break up the United States and maybe even to the point of going to Russia
[40:38.600 --> 40:45.600]  and talking to fascists and the far right extremists and neo-Nazis. That all implies
[40:45.600 --> 40:52.600]  the far right. So now that he's got us looking like the far right extremists, then he connects
[40:52.840 --> 40:59.840]  other articles, one of them being a New York Times article, and the title of that was
[41:00.800 --> 41:07.800]  The Growing Right-Wing Terrorist Threat. And in there the article says that Muslims are
[41:07.800 --> 41:14.800]  no longer the greater threat in America, but it is the far right extremists that are becoming
[41:17.840 --> 41:23.720]  the greater terror threat and already are a greater terror threat. And then, so now
[41:23.720 --> 41:30.720]  that they got that going, they attach even another one to a, this one is to a Department
[41:30.720 --> 41:37.720]  of Homeland Security intelligence and assessment statement that says that the sovereign citizen
[41:42.280 --> 41:49.280]  extremist movement drives violence at home, during travel, and government facilities.
[41:52.400 --> 41:59.400]  So what they've done, they had to, and they're adamant, I mean they're actually lazy about
[41:59.400 --> 42:06.400]  maintaining the idea that I and the public of Texas are secessionists. And the way they've,
[42:10.880 --> 42:17.880]  even in their argument in the lawsuit, they said, well, Avery has really claimed a distinction
[42:21.880 --> 42:28.880]  where there's no difference. If he believes that Texas is independent as a result of dissolution,
[42:28.880 --> 42:35.000]  that's just secession. That means that Texas is not part of the union. But that's absurd.
[42:35.000 --> 42:39.080]  That's like saying, well, you know, a dead man's dead. It doesn't matter whether he was
[42:39.080 --> 42:45.920]  murdered or whether he died from natural causes. He's dead. But that's not, it makes a great
[42:45.920 --> 42:52.920]  difference as to how one becomes dead or how one becomes independent. I mean, that's absurd.
[42:52.920 --> 42:59.920]  But anyway, that's what they're kind of lying on to pull this trick off, you know, and I
[43:00.360 --> 43:03.680]  don't think they're going to be able to do it.
[43:03.680 --> 43:10.680]  These, what you're speaking to are very well-defined techniques for essentially propaganda. The
[43:15.640 --> 43:22.640]  Nazis raised this to an art form, but they're using exactly these sorts of techniques and
[43:22.640 --> 43:27.280]  here, primarily, this is all revolves around poisoning the well.
[43:27.280 --> 43:32.200]  Well, there you go. Poisoning the well, good term. That's right.
[43:32.200 --> 43:39.200]  They make allusions to things that aren't facts. They merely draw things that make,
[43:41.160 --> 43:46.960]  that create negative associations and then attach them to you by proxy. Hang on, about
[43:46.960 --> 43:52.480]  to go to break. Randy Kelton, Real Fly Radio, here with our special guest, Ron Avery. I
[43:52.480 --> 43:59.480]  call it number 512-646-1984. We'll probably turn on the phones in about two more seconds.
[44:01.280 --> 44:08.040]  Hello, my name is Stuart Smith from naturespureorganics.com and I would like to invite you to come by our
[44:08.040 --> 44:13.360]  store at 1904 Guadalupe Street, Sweet D here in Austin, Texas, hiring Brave New Book and
[44:13.360 --> 44:17.480]  Chase Payne to see all our fantastic health and wellness products with your very own eyes.
[44:17.480 --> 44:22.200]  Have a look at our Miracle Healing Clay that started our adventure in alternative medicine.
[44:22.200 --> 44:26.480]  Take a peek at some of our other wonderful products, including our Australian Eme oil,
[44:26.480 --> 44:33.480]  lotion candles, olive oil, soaps, and colloidal silver and gold. Call 512-264-4043 or find
[44:34.640 --> 44:41.640]  us online at naturespureorganics.com. That's 512-264-4043, naturespureorganics.com. Don't
[44:41.640 --> 44:48.640]  forget to like us on Facebook for information on events and our products, naturespureorganics.com.
[45:01.120 --> 45:07.560]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit? Win your case without an attorney with JurisDictionary,
[45:07.560 --> 45:14.560]  the affordable, easy-to-understand, 4-CD course that will show you how in 24 hours, step-by-step.
[45:14.560 --> 45:20.840]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing. If you don't have a lawyer,
[45:20.840 --> 45:26.160]  know what you should do for yourself. Thousands have won with our step-by-step course and
[45:26.160 --> 45:33.160]  now you can too. JurisDictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case-winning
[45:33.160 --> 45:38.920]  experience. Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand
[45:38.920 --> 45:44.440]  about the principles and practices that control our American courts. You'll receive our audio
[45:44.440 --> 45:51.440]  classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases, pro se tactics, and much
[45:51.440 --> 46:04.440]  more. Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner or call toll-free, 866-LAW-EZ.
[46:21.440 --> 46:38.200]  Okay, we are back. Scratches and all. Randy Kelton, Rule of Law Radio, and we're here
[46:38.200 --> 46:44.720]  with our special guest, Ron Avery, and we're talking about some of the linguistic maneuvers
[46:44.720 --> 46:58.360]  that a journalist purportedly reporting facts was in fact using some of the more obnoxious
[46:58.360 --> 47:05.040]  propagandist techniques of the Nazis. Now, we did not call him a Nazi.
[47:05.040 --> 47:16.600]  Let's make that clear. And of course, I'd like to throw in a comment too. None of this
[47:16.600 --> 47:25.520]  has been adjudicated really and so what we're talking about here is my allegations in the
[47:25.520 --> 47:33.440]  position and basically just what I think is going on. This is not professional, exactly
[47:33.440 --> 47:41.240]  professional of anything and it's all about allegations and just what I think about it
[47:41.240 --> 47:51.240]  and so I want to put that into the free speech thing too and so it's just talking about what
[47:51.240 --> 48:00.040]  I think and some of it is in general. It doesn't apply to the Chronicle or to Hearst or even
[48:00.040 --> 48:09.120]  to this report or some of this just relates to society in general and what has been going
[48:09.120 --> 48:17.200]  on so you kind of have to think about that kind of distinction about what we're talking
[48:17.200 --> 48:26.960]  about too. Anyway, what I was going to point out too is that this linguistics, what you
[48:26.960 --> 48:31.680]  were talking about in on break, I think that you might even want to tell the audience about
[48:31.680 --> 48:38.480]  that book that you're talking about called Nonsense but there's plenty of case law too
[48:38.480 --> 48:45.400]  on this very topic about what they've done. You can libel someone by something called
[48:45.400 --> 48:53.080]  juxtaposition of facts. For instance, these three or four links that he made to other
[48:53.080 --> 49:02.560]  articles, he said that they don't apply to me because they don't mention me by name but
[49:02.560 --> 49:11.660]  see that's not the common in case law and that it's the use of facts that may not directly
[49:11.660 --> 49:24.520]  apply to somebody but the juxtaposition of these things tend to cloud the issue or show
[49:24.520 --> 49:33.440]  something, prove something. It's damnation by association. That's right, guilt by association
[49:33.440 --> 49:39.560]  and this, one of the other things about a libel case like this and a bigger article
[49:39.560 --> 49:46.000]  that they write, they also require that you read the whole, you take the article as a
[49:46.000 --> 49:53.880]  whole and get the gist of the whole thing to determine if it's really damaging or if
[49:53.880 --> 50:01.440]  it's really false and all of that. I think when it comes down to get the gist out of
[50:01.440 --> 50:08.120]  this and what it's really saying, I think a jury is easily going to be able to find
[50:08.120 --> 50:19.560]  that this is a damaging, libelous piece taken all together. I had a question. When they
[50:19.560 --> 50:32.520]  claimed that the inference of association wasn't liable, did they make that claim out
[50:32.520 --> 50:39.160]  of their own mouth or did they cite caseload in support? No, what they did was rather kind
[50:39.160 --> 50:50.920]  of clever is what they did is they said, well, putting a link in another article, the person
[50:50.920 --> 50:59.840]  using the link is not liable for using the link but what that really refers to is it's
[50:59.840 --> 51:07.640]  not liable, they're not talking about liability or libel. They're talking about liability
[51:07.640 --> 51:13.920]  for copyright violation and obviously that's true. If you write an article on the internet
[51:13.920 --> 51:21.040]  and you just highlight something in your article and have a link to another article, as long
[51:21.040 --> 51:25.960]  as you don't have it in the same website, you can't do that. You can't bring in somebody's
[51:25.960 --> 51:34.440]  article under the banner of your website but as long as you make that link go straight
[51:34.440 --> 51:44.600]  to the other website, then you're not violating copyright law because whoever wrote it and
[51:44.600 --> 51:50.400]  put it on their website, that's their thing and it's there all the time. Just linking
[51:50.400 --> 52:00.560]  to somebody else's article doesn't make you have liability for copyright violation but
[52:00.560 --> 52:05.920]  we're not talking about a copyright violation, we're talking about the ways of...
[52:05.920 --> 52:18.160]  Wait a second, something's wrong here. They're taking the term liable, that is a legal term
[52:18.160 --> 52:30.080]  of art and it has a specific meaning and they're juxtaposing an implied meaning of one of the
[52:30.080 --> 52:43.600]  derivatives of the term, liability and they're juxtaposing the two meanings. That comes under
[52:43.600 --> 52:50.120]  failure to speak with candor to the court, that's an outright lie.
[52:50.120 --> 53:00.120]  That's right and actually see they like when I responded to that and the response, I admitted
[53:00.120 --> 53:07.840]  oh yeah well that's right and you don't become liable for having a link to somebody else's
[53:07.840 --> 53:19.440]  article and you can't be held liable for that but that doesn't mean that you can't be liable
[53:19.440 --> 53:25.400]  for coloring somebody, for characterizing them by the use of those facts in somebody
[53:25.400 --> 53:34.640]  else's article and here's what's funny about this, they tried to say we use the article
[53:34.640 --> 53:49.480]  to draw a contrast rather than to characterize and then I, well if you can use it to draw
[53:49.480 --> 53:55.440]  a contrast, you certainly can use it to draw a parallel and it's the use of the language
[53:55.440 --> 54:03.680]  you use around that link in the way you make that link that determines how you use it and
[54:03.680 --> 54:10.040]  they claim that just because they used the phrase that the Republic of Texas is seeking
[54:10.040 --> 54:17.000]  a nonviolent way to escape the union or something like that, that that one statement somewhere
[54:17.000 --> 54:23.720]  that didn't even have a link to anything else makes every link they put in there one that
[54:23.720 --> 54:31.680]  is in contrast too but if you read the language around every link that they use, it's derogatory,
[54:31.680 --> 54:38.640]  it's derogatory about the group and it has the link and that, everyone is just going
[54:38.640 --> 54:43.920]  to draw a parallel not a contrast and they did.
[54:43.920 --> 54:53.040]  What's really bad for them is that it was, this online article they posted had the blog
[54:53.040 --> 55:03.080]  under it and there were about 23 responses and 40% of them, 9 out of the 23 were absolutely
[55:03.080 --> 55:10.960]  terrible and they thought I should be sent to Gitmo and be waterboarded and that's a
[55:10.960 --> 55:19.240]  sign of public hatred and see that's one of the definitions of liable is that if it's
[55:19.240 --> 55:26.560]  wrong, if the facts are wrong and it exposes the person to public hatred then that's called
[55:26.560 --> 55:27.560]  liable.
[55:27.560 --> 55:33.960]  That's wonderful, their own blog you get to cram down their throats as evidence of
[55:33.960 --> 55:36.000]  the effect of the article.
[55:36.000 --> 55:43.200]  Yeah and it was unsolicited, these people provided that on their own, nobody asked them
[55:43.200 --> 55:53.080]  to write anything so there they have the evidence right in their own motion.
[55:53.080 --> 55:59.040]  They copied all that and put it in their own evidence and it doesn't look good, it looks
[55:59.040 --> 56:01.640]  really bad.
[56:01.640 --> 56:08.960]  My rule is never interfere with someone when he's screwing up.
[56:08.960 --> 56:18.360]  Yeah just let them go ahead and do it, don't try to correct them.
[56:18.360 --> 56:25.040]  It sounds like they brought evidence that you can use that you would have probably never
[56:25.040 --> 56:26.040]  found.
[56:26.040 --> 56:29.520]  It wouldn't have occurred to you if you looked in your blog.
[56:29.520 --> 56:35.360]  Well I was kind of dreading the idea of having to copy all this myself and put it in but
[56:35.360 --> 56:40.320]  when I saw their motion and that they had put all of this, they have a hundred and thirty
[56:40.320 --> 56:47.960]  three exhibits or no not that many, they have about maybe twenty exhibits but it consists
[56:47.960 --> 56:53.720]  of about a hundred and thirty three sheets of paper and so it's a huge, their motion
[56:53.720 --> 57:03.040]  is about an inch and a half thick, it's giant and they went to all the trouble to document
[57:03.040 --> 57:08.560]  their whole article plus the links, they copied all the links in there and everything and
[57:08.560 --> 57:13.440]  I think the reason they did that was maybe to look like they're not embarrassed about
[57:13.440 --> 57:15.200]  it that it was all good.
[57:15.200 --> 57:22.840]  I don't think they wanted to go into the motion and be surprised that I put it all in so the
[57:22.840 --> 57:28.880]  idea is we'll put it in first and that way it looks like we're not ashamed or guilty
[57:28.880 --> 57:33.880]  about it and that's pretty smart but it doesn't help them.
[57:33.880 --> 57:39.720]  All that stuff doesn't help them at all.
[57:39.720 --> 57:45.080]  It sounds like they were, they looked for all the things you could use against them
[57:45.080 --> 57:53.440]  and they wanted to get it out there first but it looks like they thought of things that
[57:53.440 --> 57:58.240]  you might not have thought of.
[57:58.240 --> 58:05.840]  I don't know about that, seriously, I don't know, I don't have any way of determining
[58:05.840 --> 58:06.840]  it.
[58:06.840 --> 58:13.120]  I would never, if I was doing, defending a case, I would never give you information that
[58:13.120 --> 58:18.640]  could be construed as used against me, I'm going to wait for you to bring that up.
[58:18.640 --> 58:27.480]  Yes, well there's a merit to that too, what if I didn't think of all that, you know, don't
[58:27.480 --> 58:32.560]  help the other side, definitely not in the law field especially.
[58:32.560 --> 58:36.600]  Okay, hang on, we're about to go to break.
[58:36.600 --> 58:42.680]  This is Randy Kelton, Lula La Radio here with our special guest Ron Avery, and we'll probably
[58:42.680 --> 58:50.280]  turn the phones on after this next segment, so hang on.
[58:50.280 --> 58:54.440]  Would you like to make more definite progress in your walk with God?
[58:54.440 --> 58:59.600]  Bibles for America is offering a free study Bible and a set of free Christian books that
[58:59.600 --> 59:00.960]  can really help.
[59:00.960 --> 59:05.400]  The New Testament Recovery Version is one of the most comprehensive study Bibles available
[59:05.400 --> 59:06.400]  today.
[59:06.400 --> 59:10.320]  It's an accurate translation and it contains thousands of footnotes that will help you
[59:10.320 --> 59:13.400]  to know God and to know the meaning of life.
[59:13.400 --> 59:18.660]  The free books are a three volume set called Basic Elements of the Christian Life.
[59:18.660 --> 59:22.920]  Chapter by chapter, Basic Elements of the Christian Life clearly presents God's plan
[59:22.920 --> 59:27.860]  of salvation, growing in Christ and how to build up the church.
[59:27.860 --> 59:32.880]  To order your free New Testament Recovery Version and Basic Elements of the Christian
[59:32.880 --> 59:45.640]  Life, call Bibles for America toll free at 888-551-0102, that's 888-551-0102, or visit
[59:45.640 --> 01:00:00.680]  us online at bfa.org.
[01:00:00.680 --> 01:00:05.880]  The following news flash is brought to you by the Lone Star Lowdown, providing the daily
[01:00:05.880 --> 01:00:08.520]  bulletins for the commodities market.
[01:00:08.520 --> 01:00:21.560]  Same history, news updates, and the inside scoop into the tides of the alternatives.
[01:00:21.560 --> 01:00:28.120]  Markets for Wednesday, March 9, 2016 are currently trending with gold at $1,252.65 an ounce,
[01:00:28.120 --> 01:00:34.680]  silver $13.29 an ounce, Texas crude $36.50 a barrel, and Bitcoin is currently sitting
[01:00:34.680 --> 01:00:42.800]  about $411 U.S. currency.
[01:00:42.800 --> 01:00:48.320]  Today in history, the year 1961, the first animal safely returned from space after completing
[01:00:48.320 --> 01:00:53.760]  one full orbit around the earth in Sputnik 9, a doggy named Ternushka, or Blackie, returned
[01:00:53.760 --> 01:00:54.760]  from the heavens.
[01:00:54.760 --> 01:00:59.820]  Today in history.
[01:00:59.820 --> 01:01:04.040]  In recent news, Tayrod Pugh, a U.S. Air Force veteran, was found guilty today of attempting
[01:01:04.040 --> 01:01:05.760]  to join the Islamic State.
[01:01:05.760 --> 01:01:10.280]  After a week-long trial at a Brooklyn federal court, a jury found Tayrod guilty of attempting
[01:01:10.280 --> 01:01:15.400]  to provide material support to ISIS and guilty of obstruction for destroying four e-storage
[01:01:15.400 --> 01:01:17.560]  drives after his detention in Turkey.
[01:01:17.560 --> 01:01:19.640]  Pugh is set to be sentenced in September.
[01:01:19.640 --> 01:01:23.480]  Pugh's defense lawyer is arguing that all he did was express repugnant views about the
[01:01:23.480 --> 01:01:27.760]  Islamic State on Facebook and watch dozens of the group's recruitment videos, and that
[01:01:27.760 --> 01:01:31.600]  he was only traveling to Turkey to find work, not to become a jihadist.
[01:01:31.600 --> 01:01:36.080]  However, prosecutors are presenting a letter he apparently drafted to his Egyptian wife,
[01:01:36.080 --> 01:01:40.000]  which was found on his laptop, in which he vowed to fight for Islam.
[01:01:40.000 --> 01:01:44.840]  When detained in Istanbul, he apparently had a black face mask, a map depicting Islamic
[01:01:44.840 --> 01:01:50.000]  State's stronghold in Syria, and a chart of the border crossings between Turkey and
[01:01:50.000 --> 01:01:51.000]  Syria.
[01:01:51.000 --> 01:01:56.160]  Pugh served as an avionics specialist in the Air Force from 1986 to 1990, and later worked
[01:01:56.160 --> 01:02:05.480]  as an army contractor in Iraq from 2009 to 2010.
[01:02:05.480 --> 01:02:09.400]  Toyota recently showed off a new device that could dramatically assist the visually impaired
[01:02:09.400 --> 01:02:11.200]  to better navigate their surroundings.
[01:02:11.200 --> 01:02:15.280]  Called Project Blade an informational device to bridge the gap between a cane or a guide
[01:02:15.280 --> 01:02:19.720]  dog, Toyota has been testing various prototypes of the wearable device with individuals from
[01:02:19.720 --> 01:02:23.160]  the visually impaired community for the past three years, and though the details of the
[01:02:23.160 --> 01:02:27.160]  project were released this week, no official timeline has been set for the release.
[01:02:27.160 --> 01:02:31.200]  The automaker plans incorporating mapping, object identification, and facial mapping
[01:02:31.200 --> 01:02:33.800]  technologies into Blade in the future.
[01:02:33.800 --> 01:02:38.720]  Doug Moore, manager of partner robotics at Toyota, told ABC that Toyota is thinking about
[01:02:38.720 --> 01:02:42.240]  quality of life for individuals and how it impacts society.
[01:02:42.240 --> 01:02:46.600]  The Lowstar Lowdown is currently looking to fill some ad space, so if you have a product
[01:02:46.600 --> 01:02:52.800]  or service you'd like to advertise with us, feel free to give me a call at 210-363-2257.
[01:02:52.800 --> 01:02:57.560]  This is Rick Brody with the Lowdown for March 9th, 2016.
[01:03:22.800 --> 01:03:31.720]  Okay, we are back, Randy Kelton rules my radio.
[01:03:31.720 --> 01:03:38.800]  And on the break we were touching on the agenda, the potential agenda of the press.
[01:03:38.800 --> 01:03:45.920]  And I think that anyone that looks at the press with discernment, it becomes clear that
[01:03:45.920 --> 01:03:51.440]  the press are pushing a political agenda.
[01:03:51.440 --> 01:03:58.680]  And it goes to this police station, that's one of the things Ron wanted to talk about.
[01:03:58.680 --> 01:03:59.680]  Go ahead and address that.
[01:03:59.680 --> 01:04:03.120]  I've got some facts I'll bring in.
[01:04:03.120 --> 01:04:12.360]  Well that's, I think since it's a known fact, it's a matter of historical record really
[01:04:12.360 --> 01:04:24.400]  that the Hearst Corporation back then was printing events in their press that really
[01:04:24.400 --> 01:04:30.080]  never occurred that helped create and bring about the Spanish-American war.
[01:04:30.080 --> 01:04:35.320]  That's a known fact, you can look that up anywhere on the internet.
[01:04:35.320 --> 01:04:40.960]  And then since we know that the news media can do that kind of thing and have an agenda
[01:04:40.960 --> 01:04:52.080]  or something they want to do, if they've advanced now to doing things like, if they're supporting
[01:04:52.080 --> 01:05:04.520]  a police state, the creation of a police state or the maintenance of a police state, I'm
[01:05:04.520 --> 01:05:05.520]  sorry?
[01:05:05.520 --> 01:05:06.520]  Go ahead.
[01:05:06.520 --> 01:05:09.680]  The noise in the background is kind of...
[01:05:09.680 --> 01:05:17.320]  Yeah, I keep hearing it every time I get quiet, but anyway, the idea of domestic terrorism
[01:05:17.320 --> 01:05:24.480]  is one I believe that the newspaper supports and they try to show that this stuff happens.
[01:05:24.480 --> 01:05:39.840]  Paul, let me see if I can, I hope somebody else answers.
[01:05:39.840 --> 01:05:44.760]  They have to go out and create it, I mean they have to create the idea and if they can
[01:05:44.760 --> 01:05:54.440]  get somebody that will accept falling into one of these molds that are one of these articles
[01:05:54.440 --> 01:06:00.640]  I don't think they expected to get sued by that article, but I also think that they knew
[01:06:00.640 --> 01:06:08.480]  that article was way off and I think they're just surprised that somebody sued them for
[01:06:08.480 --> 01:06:09.480]  it.
[01:06:09.480 --> 01:06:14.040]  And they're used to just doing whatever they want to and you've got these journalists out
[01:06:14.040 --> 01:06:17.080]  there, they're all competing for stories.
[01:06:17.080 --> 01:06:21.240]  Yes, they're selling newspapers.
[01:06:21.240 --> 01:06:28.000]  And terrorism is the big thing now and we invaded a couple of countries because of terrorism
[01:06:28.000 --> 01:06:39.680]  and primarily that was based on the 9-11 scam and people like you and others close to you
[01:06:39.680 --> 01:06:45.880]  and that may have something to do with why they want to take a shot at you because you've
[01:06:45.880 --> 01:06:51.880]  pretty well helped to debunk their primary reason for pushing the agenda of domestic
[01:06:51.880 --> 01:06:58.880]  terrorism because it was all nonsense to start with, the government created the whole thing
[01:06:58.880 --> 01:07:06.160]  and now they need something to support it and this individual journalist, he's just
[01:07:06.160 --> 01:07:11.760]  got to get some stories and his editors tell him what kind of stories he wants and if he
[01:07:11.760 --> 01:07:16.280]  doesn't have them, he's got to go out and create them.
[01:07:16.280 --> 01:07:21.640]  It's unfortunate, I think it really is unfortunate, the guy that actually wrote the article went
[01:07:21.640 --> 01:07:28.640]  to the meeting and then wrote the article, he's only 24 years old and that's pretty young
[01:07:28.640 --> 01:07:38.280]  to be making statements like he was doing and drawing these parallels and it makes you
[01:07:38.280 --> 01:07:47.840]  wonder was he just incompetent, he didn't know what he was doing, but he's not incompetent.
[01:07:47.840 --> 01:07:53.360]  He sits in a bull fit with other journalists and other newspaper reporters in a big room
[01:07:53.360 --> 01:08:00.720]  and they have a general editor and a general manager and that guy is responsible for everything
[01:08:00.720 --> 01:08:05.200]  that comes out of there and he should have been looking at all that stuff and asking
[01:08:05.200 --> 01:08:10.480]  questions about it and let's say this for sure, they didn't think it was just an idle
[01:08:10.480 --> 01:08:17.360]  thing, it wasn't just a 4th page story back in there, it was front page and it was printed
[01:08:17.360 --> 01:08:26.880]  on the weekend of 9-11 and so they were trying to make the case that yeah, it's years after,
[01:08:26.880 --> 01:08:34.960]  it's 14 years after 9-11 but boy we stood, now we got domestic terrorists and we got
[01:08:34.960 --> 01:08:40.800]  home grown terrorists and we need to be on the alert for this and that and that was just
[01:08:40.800 --> 01:08:44.680]  bumped, they just created that out of nowhere.
[01:08:44.680 --> 01:08:50.400]  They're working hard to create this police state and we talk about this on the air on
[01:08:50.400 --> 01:08:56.840]  occasion about the fact that we are in the worst police state the world has ever seen
[01:08:56.840 --> 01:09:01.080]  and nobody even knows.
[01:09:01.080 --> 01:09:08.200]  There is no country in the world that is as oppressive as this one is right now if you
[01:09:08.200 --> 01:09:18.600]  get accused of a crime in the state of Texas, now Texas I can't specify definitely, average
[01:09:18.600 --> 01:09:31.560]  conviction rate for all criminal accusations across the board, 99.6, if you get accused
[01:09:31.560 --> 01:09:38.760]  of a crime, you're going to take a deal, and that's because it was, I'm not aware of that
[01:09:38.760 --> 01:09:42.640]  personally, I didn't know it was that high, I wouldn't have guessed it was that high for
[01:09:42.640 --> 01:09:43.640]  sure.
[01:09:43.640 --> 01:09:51.840]  It is outrageous and I'm hoping that, I collared Chief Acevedo in a city council meeting in
[01:09:51.840 --> 01:09:57.400]  Austin and stuck the mice in his face and brought that up and his statistician confirmed
[01:09:57.400 --> 01:10:05.160]  it and I presented that to the whole audience and to the board and he didn't get his approval
[01:10:05.160 --> 01:10:13.600]  that he wanted and I hope that had something to do with it but everything has been around
[01:10:13.600 --> 01:10:19.520]  arranged so that if you get accused of a crime you're going to take a deal so this has taken
[01:10:19.520 --> 01:10:27.520]  a long time to craft this way and they're trying to consolidate this into a national
[01:10:27.520 --> 01:10:36.080]  movement to where they're trying to create a total police state and the newspapers are
[01:10:36.080 --> 01:10:40.120]  absolutely in line with it.
[01:10:40.120 --> 01:10:49.760]  I agree with this, I think, now what I'm saying here now is my personal opinion, I maybe couldn't
[01:10:49.760 --> 01:10:57.920]  prove it anywhere, I'm not trying to do that in this suit, but my general opinion is that
[01:10:57.920 --> 01:11:07.240]  the mass media, the big, the real news media giants are actually owned by the people that
[01:11:07.240 --> 01:11:13.680]  in my mind have already overthrown the United States, they've simply overthrown the country
[01:11:13.680 --> 01:11:17.440]  and they actually run the country by the use of the media.
[01:11:17.440 --> 01:11:24.200]  I think the mass media is the strongest weapon they have to defeat the nation, to enslave
[01:11:24.200 --> 01:11:29.560]  the people and keep them enslaved and keep them down and I believe they're using that
[01:11:29.560 --> 01:11:37.800]  tool to the max right now and most people are unaware of that, I believe that most people
[01:11:37.800 --> 01:11:43.480]  are unaware that their country has been overthrown and it's been overthrown by those who own
[01:11:43.480 --> 01:11:53.560]  the media and they're oppressed and kept that way by the media and one of the strongest
[01:11:53.560 --> 01:11:59.720]  things that shows this is the complicity with the cover up of the evidence of 9-11 by the
[01:11:59.720 --> 01:12:05.920]  mass media and if they're willing to cover up the evidence of how 9-11 really took place
[01:12:05.920 --> 01:12:14.400]  and how it really happened and what it was used to do it, you know they would not hesitate
[01:12:14.400 --> 01:12:20.600]  to create the idea and illusion of domestic terrorism and homegrown terrorism and make
[01:12:20.600 --> 01:12:27.520]  the common man and the common citizen into a terrorist and anybody that begins to question
[01:12:27.520 --> 01:12:37.880]  these myths that they created, they turn against them and they try to point that out, if you
[01:12:37.880 --> 01:12:42.160]  don't buy that, you're loony toons.
[01:12:42.160 --> 01:12:52.400]  We're in a country of over 300 million people and there have been how many, about half a
[01:12:52.400 --> 01:13:04.320]  dozen incidents that they could construe as relating to domestic terrorism, in 300 million.
[01:13:04.320 --> 01:13:11.400]  Yeah, that's a lot of people and there's not enough events.
[01:13:11.400 --> 01:13:14.320]  I think they are trying to create those events.
[01:13:14.320 --> 01:13:20.320]  I think in some cases the whole event is created and there's some talk of course that Sandy
[01:13:20.320 --> 01:13:27.480]  Hook was one of them in the Boston Marathon and after looking at the evidence myself and
[01:13:27.480 --> 01:13:34.720]  hearing some of the people speak about it that really did research on it and investigation
[01:13:34.720 --> 01:13:40.480]  is that by gorey they're right, this Sandy Hook thing I believe didn't happen at all.
[01:13:40.480 --> 01:13:46.600]  I think it was an exercise and reported as a news event and it was nothing more than
[01:13:46.600 --> 01:13:47.600]  an exercise.
[01:13:47.600 --> 01:13:57.720]  When I was in Vietnam, we on occasion had to deal with the spooks.
[01:13:57.720 --> 01:14:01.360]  We called them spooks, the CIA.
[01:14:01.360 --> 01:14:06.240]  These were really, really bad guys.
[01:14:06.240 --> 01:14:14.680]  They used guys that were absolutely psychopaths, not just a sociopath, but a narcissistic sociopath
[01:14:14.680 --> 01:14:24.680]  who had absolutely no compassion, these guys would do anything and have zero remorse.
[01:14:24.680 --> 01:14:30.480]  All that is spook for sure, you see, these people would do, they would come in and make
[01:14:30.480 --> 01:14:33.920]  a horrible mess and leave and leave us to clean it up.
[01:14:33.920 --> 01:14:42.120]  But it convinced me that the CIA recruits these kinds of people.
[01:14:42.120 --> 01:14:46.960]  We sit back and think, no, there's no way these people would go into a school and kill
[01:14:46.960 --> 01:14:47.960]  our children.
[01:14:47.960 --> 01:14:57.640]  Well, one spook told me, he said, if you want to take over country, first thing you do is
[01:14:57.640 --> 01:15:02.160]  go in and kill all the women and children, demoralize all the fighters.
[01:15:02.160 --> 01:15:07.280]  So you go into a town and kill all the children.
[01:15:07.280 --> 01:15:10.960]  And that demoralizes everybody, they all give up.
[01:15:10.960 --> 01:15:14.520]  And I told him, you guys are absolutely insane.
[01:15:14.520 --> 01:15:21.840]  He said, maybe, but that's the kind of thing that works, but that was the mindset.
[01:15:21.840 --> 01:15:24.800]  Would they blow up a building and kill 3,000 people?
[01:15:24.800 --> 01:15:25.800]  Absolutely.
[01:15:25.800 --> 01:15:34.440]  Would they torpedo a U.S. troop ship in Havana Harbor and blame it on the Spanish?
[01:15:34.440 --> 01:15:35.440]  Yeah.
[01:15:35.440 --> 01:15:36.440]  Right.
[01:15:36.440 --> 01:15:37.440]  Right.
[01:15:37.440 --> 01:15:42.640]  When Reagan released his, all these secret documents, that's exactly what we did.
[01:15:42.640 --> 01:15:43.640]  Right.
[01:15:43.640 --> 01:15:44.640]  Right.
[01:15:44.640 --> 01:15:46.200]  Would we sacrifice our own troops?
[01:15:46.200 --> 01:15:47.200]  Yep.
[01:15:47.200 --> 01:15:50.880]  Would we blow up a barracks in Lebanon?
[01:15:50.880 --> 01:15:51.880]  Yep.
[01:15:51.880 --> 01:15:59.040]  Unfortunately, absolutely, they would, would we encourage, put the press in a position to
[01:15:59.040 --> 01:16:02.920]  where they have no option but to support this agenda.
[01:16:02.920 --> 01:16:09.920]  This 24 year old kid, he didn't come up with this, he's apparently out of college.
[01:16:09.920 --> 01:16:15.080]  For sure, at least he didn't on his own.
[01:16:15.080 --> 01:16:20.040]  They worked it, and first of all, they knew what I would suspect, at least, I can't imagine
[01:16:20.040 --> 01:16:23.040]  that they didn't know what he was doing.
[01:16:23.040 --> 01:16:26.840]  It's hard to go past an editor.
[01:16:26.840 --> 01:16:33.560]  So I can't, you know, even though it's unfortunate about his age and getting into a deal like
[01:16:33.560 --> 01:16:42.120]  this immediately, but hey, one of the things that I've made known to others, too, is that
[01:16:42.120 --> 01:16:44.960]  I didn't have any option about suing these people.
[01:16:44.960 --> 01:16:45.960]  When you were essentially-
[01:16:45.960 --> 01:16:46.960]  Wait, wait, wait.
[01:16:46.960 --> 01:16:47.960]  Hang on.
[01:16:47.960 --> 01:16:48.960]  We're about to go to break.
[01:16:48.960 --> 01:16:49.960]  Oh, okay.
[01:16:49.960 --> 01:16:55.520]  If you're ready to count and remove La Radio, I'll call it number 512-646-1984.
[01:16:55.520 --> 01:17:00.480]  We'll be right back.
[01:17:00.480 --> 01:17:04.880]  Did you know that the Logos Radio Network is a truly listener-supported radio network?
[01:17:04.880 --> 01:17:09.280]  On top of the on-air talent, producers and other hardworking individuals work behind
[01:17:09.280 --> 01:17:10.280]  the scenes.
[01:17:10.280 --> 01:17:14.440]  Logos Radio Network is kept on the air by the generous support of listeners like you,
[01:17:14.440 --> 01:17:19.040]  and we appreciate our loyal listeners making contributions every year in our annual fund-raisers,
[01:17:19.040 --> 01:17:22.280]  which help keep the lights on and Logos Radio Network on the air.
[01:17:22.280 --> 01:17:25.560]  The 2016 fundraiser has been extended to March 17th.
[01:17:25.560 --> 01:17:29.640]  Head on over to logosradionetwork.com to make your contribution.
[01:17:29.640 --> 01:17:34.800]  Every $25 donation enters you for a chance to win prizes from Central Texas Gunworks.
[01:17:34.800 --> 01:17:39.440]  First prize being a Spikes Skull Lower Receiver, second prize being a Taurus Curve.
[01:17:39.440 --> 01:17:43.840]  And if you donate your $25 contribution early enough, you will also receive a complimentary
[01:17:43.840 --> 01:17:45.820]  jar of My Magic Mud.
[01:17:45.820 --> 01:17:50.240]  Contributions by all major credit cards are accepted, as well as contributions by Bitcoin.
[01:17:50.240 --> 01:17:55.840]  The Logos Radio Network fundraiser now through March 17th, head on over to logosradionetwork.com
[01:17:55.840 --> 01:18:00.560]  for more information and to donate to keep the Logos Radio Network on the air.
[01:18:00.560 --> 01:18:05.280]  Are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters, or even lawsuits?
[01:18:05.280 --> 01:18:09.400]  Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Mears proven method.
[01:18:09.400 --> 01:18:13.680]  Michael Mears has won six cases in federal court against debt collectors, and now you
[01:18:13.680 --> 01:18:14.680]  can win too.
[01:18:14.680 --> 01:18:19.480]  You'll get step-by-step instructions in plain English on how to win in court using federal
[01:18:19.480 --> 01:18:25.240]  civil rights statutes, what to do when contacted by phone, mail, or court summons, how to answer
[01:18:25.240 --> 01:18:29.880]  letters and phone calls, how to get debt collectors out of your credit report, how to turn the
[01:18:29.880 --> 01:18:34.080]  financial tables on them and make them pay you to go away.
[01:18:34.080 --> 01:18:39.200]  The Michael Mears proven method is the solution for how to stop debt collectors.
[01:18:39.200 --> 01:18:41.160]  Personal consultation is available as well.
[01:18:41.160 --> 01:18:46.920]  For more information, please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the blue Michael Mears banner
[01:18:46.920 --> 01:18:49.880]  or email michaelmears at yahoo.com.
[01:18:49.880 --> 01:18:58.880]  That's ruleoflawradio.com or email m-i-c-h-a-e-l-m-i-r-r-a-s at yahoo.com to learn how to stop debt
[01:18:58.880 --> 01:19:01.880]  collectors now.
[01:19:01.880 --> 01:19:21.960]  This is the Logos Radio Network.
[01:19:21.960 --> 01:19:22.960]  We are back.
[01:19:22.960 --> 01:19:27.360]  Randy Kelton, Rule of Law Radio, here with our special guest Ron Avery, and we have a
[01:19:27.360 --> 01:19:28.360]  couple of calls on the board.
[01:19:28.360 --> 01:19:29.360]  Hang on, guys.
[01:19:29.360 --> 01:19:31.360]  We'll get to you shortly.
[01:19:31.360 --> 01:19:36.760]  We'll probably finish up in this segment, and then we'll go to calls.
[01:19:36.760 --> 01:19:44.560]  When we went out, we were talking about a situation that has been created.
[01:19:44.560 --> 01:19:52.320]  I have no doubt that this 24-year-old reporter, he's 24, he's probably been out of college
[01:19:52.320 --> 01:20:00.000]  at journalism school maybe a year, he gets a job with Hirsch, and they tell him what
[01:20:00.000 --> 01:20:07.120]  kind of stories they need to fill their space, and they send him out to get one of these
[01:20:07.120 --> 01:20:08.120]  stories.
[01:20:08.120 --> 01:20:14.120]  He's probably been going out to all kinds of different meetings and stuff and taking
[01:20:14.120 --> 01:20:18.680]  notes, and then they come in and they say, we need a story on domestic terrorism.
[01:20:18.680 --> 01:20:27.760]  He goes through his notes, and he finds something that he can construe as maybe possibly domestic
[01:20:27.760 --> 01:20:28.760]  terrorism.
[01:20:28.760 --> 01:20:33.640]  Then he pulls out this story, he says, I've got this one here, I can make some adjustments
[01:20:33.640 --> 01:20:41.160]  to it, and the editors almost certainly directed him in how to shade it.
[01:20:41.160 --> 01:20:44.320]  He files it, and then he gets sued.
[01:20:44.320 --> 01:20:51.480]  First, crack out of the hat, so kind of feeble for the journalist, and we understand that
[01:20:51.480 --> 01:20:59.920]  this is part of the system, that anybody who trusts the popular media now, they're just
[01:20:59.920 --> 01:21:03.360]  not paying attention.
[01:21:03.360 --> 01:21:12.120]  I understand the difficulty, I have a brother-in-law who's up in his 80s, and if I try to tell
[01:21:12.120 --> 01:21:19.760]  him that all this stuff that he's believed all his life about the nature of this country
[01:21:19.760 --> 01:21:21.840]  is all a bunch of hogwash.
[01:21:21.840 --> 01:21:29.680]  He's going to have to give up a lifetime of belief in order to accept what I'm saying,
[01:21:29.680 --> 01:21:35.320]  and this plays right into the hands of those who would miss you, who's to sell you their
[01:21:35.320 --> 01:21:36.320]  brother.
[01:21:36.320 --> 01:21:43.320]  I guess not, we've lost Ron for the moment, he'll be back in a minute.
[01:21:43.320 --> 01:21:51.560]  To take someone and mischaracterize them to this degree, it almost seems like they're
[01:21:51.560 --> 01:22:02.080]  asking to get sued, but the problem with suing someone of this size is they got enough money
[01:22:02.080 --> 01:22:09.480]  that most likely the lawsuit would just increase their circulation instead of hurting them.
[01:22:09.480 --> 01:22:17.840]  It's a conundrum, where our call board is building up, so we're going to go to Mark
[01:22:17.840 --> 01:22:24.240]  in Wisconsin, I know that Mark in Wisconsin would not have called unless he had a comment
[01:22:24.240 --> 01:22:34.520]  directly on point, I got faith in him, even though my call screener told me he didn't
[01:22:34.520 --> 01:22:47.480]  have a comment on point, go ahead Mark, have you got both feet firmly on that dime?
[01:22:47.480 --> 01:22:55.000]  I can give you a comment on point sir, lo and behold in Wisconsin our defamation statute
[01:22:55.000 --> 01:23:03.640]  9-4201, it goes ahead and says that a defamatory matter is anything that exposes another to
[01:23:03.640 --> 01:23:10.080]  hatred, contempt, ridicule, degradation, or disgrace in society, or injury in the other
[01:23:10.080 --> 01:23:13.040]  person's business or occupation.
[01:23:13.040 --> 01:23:19.120]  Then the second part here is this section does not apply if the defamatory matter was
[01:23:19.120 --> 01:23:26.600]  true and was communicated with good motives and for justifiable ends, or if the communication
[01:23:26.600 --> 01:23:31.560]  was otherwise privileged, and of course a privileged communication is purgatory committed
[01:23:31.560 --> 01:23:38.160]  in a judicial proceeding is absolutely privileged, so you could be a hundred percent...
[01:23:38.160 --> 01:23:48.800]  Okay let me explain that one, perjury in a judicial proceeding is privileged, and that's
[01:23:48.800 --> 01:23:57.280]  a special exception, it sounds horrible when you hear it, but if someone, the police, if
[01:23:57.280 --> 01:24:02.120]  they have witnesses, they want the witnesses to come and testify, well the guy on the other
[01:24:02.120 --> 01:24:09.200]  side is going to dispute everything they say, so you can't have someone subject to civil
[01:24:09.200 --> 01:24:20.120]  suit because there are differences of opinion, so if you are called to testify, and even
[01:24:20.120 --> 01:24:26.960]  if you don't mind testifying, if you're called to testify, you are commanded to testify,
[01:24:26.960 --> 01:24:31.280]  you cannot then be sued for your testimony.
[01:24:31.280 --> 01:24:37.800]  Now if you commit aggravated perjury, you can be prosecuted for it, but that would be
[01:24:37.800 --> 01:24:47.400]  an action by the state, which is not your opposing party, even in the...
[01:24:47.400 --> 01:24:58.760]  It sounds like he's basically reading the kind of result of case law on libel, and you
[01:24:58.760 --> 01:25:03.640]  know every state has plenty of case law I'm sure on libel, it's all going to sound pretty
[01:25:03.640 --> 01:25:11.160]  much the same, but many of these states now are passing this slap suit legislation, and
[01:25:11.160 --> 01:25:16.600]  I'm beginning to wonder about who's really pushing this stuff because we have plenty
[01:25:16.600 --> 01:25:26.360]  of law on libel and what it is, libel and slander, and what this slap suit stuff, this
[01:25:26.360 --> 01:25:34.680]  special statute, is it's a short circuit of the real justice system, and it leans in favor
[01:25:34.680 --> 01:25:42.760]  of big media because it makes, anytime they can show that they wrote an article and they
[01:25:42.760 --> 01:25:49.400]  were sued for it, it automatically makes it a slap suit by definition of the statute.
[01:25:49.400 --> 01:25:55.320]  But in reality, a slap suit is engineered to prevent somebody from exercising their
[01:25:55.320 --> 01:25:56.320]  right.
[01:25:56.320 --> 01:26:04.080]  Well I guarantee you, I didn't injure this lawsuit to stop the defendants from exercising
[01:26:04.080 --> 01:26:10.360]  any of their liberties, they are at freedom to write anything they want to about secession
[01:26:10.360 --> 01:26:17.320]  and dissolution and what they think the definition is, as long as they make it their own opinion
[01:26:17.320 --> 01:26:19.640]  and tell everybody it's their opinion.
[01:26:19.640 --> 01:26:26.160]  But they can't be saying that I'm a secessionist and that I believe this and I believe that
[01:26:26.160 --> 01:26:34.680]  as a matter of fact because they simply got their facts wrong, and that's not a slap suit.
[01:26:34.680 --> 01:26:42.920]  And so I'm saying that this legislation is flawed and it's leaning towards the protection
[01:26:42.920 --> 01:26:47.080]  of mass media.
[01:26:47.080 --> 01:26:54.400]  Ron, have you read the libel statute for the state of Texas?
[01:26:54.400 --> 01:26:56.320]  Myself?
[01:26:56.320 --> 01:26:57.320]  What is it?
[01:26:57.320 --> 01:27:03.400]  Because Mark from Wisconsin was reading the libel statute from Wisconsin and that sounds
[01:27:03.400 --> 01:27:04.720]  really good.
[01:27:04.720 --> 01:27:07.600]  Mark, will you go back over that again?
[01:27:07.600 --> 01:27:13.080]  This is what we were addressing, one exception was perjury and I was explaining why you can't
[01:27:13.080 --> 01:27:17.680]  be sued for perjury, that's so you can get on the stand and you can testify without worrying
[01:27:17.680 --> 01:27:19.960]  about being sued.
[01:27:19.960 --> 01:27:24.480]  But everything else, will you read that again, Mark, I was truly pleased with the sound of
[01:27:24.480 --> 01:27:25.480]  that statute.
[01:27:25.480 --> 01:27:34.200]  Sure, this is their defamation statute and I can touch on the libel statute and the decision
[01:27:34.200 --> 01:27:39.840]  from the 1850s with the telegraph operator because that's an interesting bit of law that's
[01:27:39.840 --> 01:27:40.840]  still on the books.
[01:27:40.840 --> 01:27:49.560]  But we'll go through the defamation again, 940201, part two, defamatory matter is anything
[01:27:49.560 --> 01:27:56.240]  which exposes the other to hatred, contempt, ridicule, degradation or disgrace in society
[01:27:56.240 --> 01:28:00.880]  or injury in the other's business or occupation.
[01:28:00.880 --> 01:28:07.960]  Part three, this section does not apply if the defamatory matter was true and was communicated
[01:28:07.960 --> 01:28:13.560]  with good motives and for justifiable ends or if the communication was otherwise privileged.
[01:28:13.560 --> 01:28:20.000]  So you could still be saying something true but if you were communicating this truth because
[01:28:20.000 --> 01:28:27.520]  you wanted to hurt the other party or have people point at them and laugh or some unjustifiable
[01:28:27.520 --> 01:28:30.480]  ends, you could still get nailed for defamation.
[01:28:30.480 --> 01:28:33.760]  What do you think of that?
[01:28:33.760 --> 01:28:38.960]  It's kind of like if you write an article and say that guy's got a web foot, he really
[01:28:38.960 --> 01:28:46.760]  does in fact have a web foot but it exposes him to public ridicule and disgust or hatred
[01:28:46.760 --> 01:28:47.760]  or anything.
[01:28:47.760 --> 01:29:00.720]  So that is also in the law in Texas that exposing one's physical attribute that is not average
[01:29:00.720 --> 01:29:07.800]  also is defamation.
[01:29:07.800 --> 01:29:14.840]  So that sounds like it fits well within your claim against it.
[01:29:14.840 --> 01:29:23.160]  So they're probably going to say that what they were saying was true even if it was true.
[01:29:23.160 --> 01:29:25.200]  Oh, this brings up a funny part.
[01:29:25.200 --> 01:29:31.760]  I'm glad we went here because I want you to hear this.
[01:29:31.760 --> 01:29:32.760]  We going to break now?
[01:29:32.760 --> 01:29:33.760]  I heard the sound.
[01:29:33.760 --> 01:29:34.760]  No, we're good.
[01:29:34.760 --> 01:29:35.760]  Oh no, we're not good.
[01:29:35.760 --> 01:29:36.760]  I'm sorry.
[01:29:36.760 --> 01:29:37.760]  22 seconds.
[01:29:37.760 --> 01:29:38.760]  Hang on.
[01:29:38.760 --> 01:29:46.480]  Randy Kelton, Root of Law Radio, I'll call you at number 512-646-1984 and we'll be right
[01:29:46.480 --> 01:29:47.480]  back.
[01:29:47.480 --> 01:29:54.480]  Oh, Randy.
[01:29:54.480 --> 01:30:05.520]  The Soviets were known for interrogating people in back rooms.
[01:30:05.520 --> 01:30:10.280]  Those days may be past but they gave rise to some high-tech tools being used by Russian
[01:30:10.280 --> 01:30:11.280]  companies today.
[01:30:11.280 --> 01:30:15.520]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht and I'll be back with details.
[01:30:15.520 --> 01:30:17.120]  Privacy is under attack.
[01:30:17.120 --> 01:30:20.720]  When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[01:30:20.720 --> 01:30:25.480]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[01:30:25.480 --> 01:30:31.080]  So protect your rights, say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself.
[01:30:31.080 --> 01:30:33.260]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[01:30:33.260 --> 01:30:37.560]  This public service announcement is brought to you by StartPage.com, the private search
[01:30:37.560 --> 01:30:41.080]  engine alternative to Google, Yahoo and Bing.
[01:30:41.080 --> 01:30:42.880]  Start over with StartPage.
[01:30:42.880 --> 01:30:49.200]  Back in the Cold War days, Agent 007 might have been seduced into giving up his secrets
[01:30:49.200 --> 01:30:54.320]  to a hot Russian spy, but fast forward a few decades and today he might be fussing up to
[01:30:54.320 --> 01:30:58.100]  a cold-hearted machine, an ATM machine to be exact.
[01:30:58.100 --> 01:31:03.640]  The Russian bank, Sperbank, is rolling out a high-tech ATM machine that uses 3D facial
[01:31:03.640 --> 01:31:06.640]  recognition, a passport scanner and voice analysis.
[01:31:06.640 --> 01:31:11.120]  The machine asks questions like, do you have a job or do you have unpaid bills?
[01:31:11.120 --> 01:31:15.160]  Then a lie detector evaluates the customer's voice for nervousness.
[01:31:15.160 --> 01:31:20.400]  Creepily, the voice analysis was developed using recordings of people undergoing police
[01:31:20.400 --> 01:31:21.400]  interrogations.
[01:31:21.400 --> 01:31:23.520]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht.
[01:31:23.520 --> 01:31:30.560]  More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[01:31:30.560 --> 01:31:35.920]  This is Building 7, a 47-story skyscraper that fell on the afternoon of September 11th.
[01:31:35.920 --> 01:31:38.120]  The government says that fire brought it down.
[01:31:38.120 --> 01:31:42.960]  However, 1,500 architects and engineers concluded it was a controlled demolition.
[01:31:42.960 --> 01:31:45.680]  Over 6,000 of my fellow service members have given their lives.
[01:31:45.680 --> 01:31:48.400]  But thousands of my fellow first responders are dying.
[01:31:48.400 --> 01:31:49.760]  I'm not a conspiracy theorist.
[01:31:49.760 --> 01:31:50.760]  I'm a structural engineer.
[01:31:50.760 --> 01:31:52.240]  I'm a New York City correction officer.
[01:31:52.240 --> 01:31:53.240]  I'm an Air Force pilot.
[01:31:53.240 --> 01:31:54.240]  I'm a father who lost his son.
[01:31:54.240 --> 01:31:55.240]  We are Americans.
[01:31:55.240 --> 01:31:56.240]  And we deserve the truth.
[01:31:56.240 --> 01:31:57.240]  Go to RememberBuilding7.org today.
[01:31:57.240 --> 01:31:58.240]  Hey, it's Danny here for Hill Country Home Improvements.
[01:31:58.240 --> 01:31:59.240]  Did your home receive hail or wind damage from the recent storms?
[01:31:59.240 --> 01:32:00.240]  Come on, we all know the government caused it with their chemtrails.
[01:32:00.240 --> 01:32:01.240]  But good luck getting them to pay for it.
[01:32:01.240 --> 01:32:02.240]  Okay, I might be kidding about the chemtrails.
[01:32:02.240 --> 01:32:03.240]  But I'm serious about your roof.
[01:32:03.240 --> 01:32:04.240]  That's why you have insurance.
[01:32:04.240 --> 01:32:05.240]  And Hill Country Home Improvements can handle the claim for you with little to no out-of-pocket
[01:32:05.240 --> 01:32:06.240]  expense.
[01:32:06.240 --> 01:32:07.240]  And we accept Bitcoin as a multi-year, eight-month, five-year, five-year, five-year, five-year,
[01:32:07.240 --> 01:32:30.160]  five-year, five-year, five-year, five-year, five-year.
[01:32:30.160 --> 01:32:38.260]  roof right the first time. Just call 512-992-8745 or go to hillcountryhomeimprovements.com.
[01:32:38.260 --> 01:32:42.700]  Mention the crypto show and get $100 off and we'll donate another $100 to the Logos
[01:32:42.700 --> 01:32:48.140]  Radio Network to help continue this programming. So if those out of town roofers come knocking,
[01:32:48.140 --> 01:32:56.860]  your door should be locking. That's 512-992-8745 or hillcountryhomeimprovements.com. Discounts
[01:32:56.860 --> 01:33:03.140]  are based on full roof replacement. Me and I actually be kidding about chemtrails. Looking
[01:33:03.140 --> 01:33:18.600]  for some truth? You found it. Logosradionetwork.com. Okay, we are back. Randy Kelton, Root of
[01:33:18.600 --> 01:33:24.280]  our Radio. We're here with our special guest, Ron Avery, and he had a funny antidote that
[01:33:24.280 --> 01:33:31.220]  we're going to tell who went off the air. Okay, go ahead, Ron. Yeah, I remembered one
[01:33:31.220 --> 01:33:41.140]  of the more humorous aspects of this defense that the first is bringing up. And of course,
[01:33:41.140 --> 01:33:48.420]  it is a, normally this is a part of the defamation law and it's a reasonable part. And that is
[01:33:48.420 --> 01:33:56.860]  that if they tell a falsehood that's, you know, a falsehood and it has to be worse than
[01:33:56.860 --> 01:34:02.340]  the truth. In other words, to tell a falsehood that's not any worse than the truth is not
[01:34:02.340 --> 01:34:08.740]  really defaming. It doesn't hurt you any more than the truth. It's kind of like, well, if
[01:34:08.740 --> 01:34:16.820]  the guy is a bank robber and he's convicted bank robber, you can't say that he's a liar
[01:34:16.820 --> 01:34:24.660]  and damages reputation or whatever because the truth is he's a bank robber. So, but in
[01:34:24.660 --> 01:34:33.380]  this case, they're saying, well, being a secessionist is a lot better, even though it's false, it's
[01:34:33.380 --> 01:34:45.300]  a lot better than what he really is. And they went to one of my websites, which is lawfulgovernment.com
[01:34:45.300 --> 01:34:51.100]  and it's broken into three parts. And they went to the second amendment part and the
[01:34:51.100 --> 01:34:57.180]  militia part, the right of the people to militia and keep and bear arms. And they copied some
[01:34:57.180 --> 01:35:04.540]  of that and they said, this guy is suggesting that people should form militias. But they
[01:35:04.540 --> 01:35:09.460]  were very careful. They knew what they, they knew they were pushing that. They were very
[01:35:09.460 --> 01:35:18.100]  careful to, to actually quote the very language, which I'm always talking about defense and
[01:35:18.100 --> 01:35:24.940]  the right of the people to keep and bear arms for defense from, you know, anything to defend
[01:35:24.940 --> 01:35:31.300]  the state against anything. And so they really can't go anywhere with that. They're trying
[01:35:31.300 --> 01:35:36.700]  to make it out though that I'm some kind of violent guy and I'm, you know, and they said
[01:35:36.700 --> 01:35:43.520]  he wants them to have military style weapons. Well, all that's just, you know, it's clear
[01:35:43.520 --> 01:35:51.300]  that the second amendment covers all that. And, and I used people that wrote the federalist
[01:35:51.300 --> 01:35:58.760]  letters using credible sources all over everything. And so, and you know, we just passed an open
[01:35:58.760 --> 01:36:05.460]  carry law here in Texas. It'd be hard to convince a jury that, you know, everybody in Texas
[01:36:05.460 --> 01:36:14.740]  is a, you know, a militant, whatever, just because, you know, they agree with and advocate
[01:36:14.740 --> 01:36:20.500]  the second amendment. So I just think that they're really grasping. They're trying to
[01:36:20.500 --> 01:36:26.900]  just get hold of anything they can. And I don't, I don't think they're, I don't think
[01:36:26.900 --> 01:36:35.060]  they can do it. I would like to talk about too, the hearing yesterday, because I think
[01:36:35.060 --> 01:36:40.540]  that's rather interesting. Maybe people like to hear about that. They actually flew there.
[01:36:40.540 --> 01:36:46.540]  The lawyers, they didn't hire, they don't hire a firm to defend the Hearst communications.
[01:36:46.540 --> 01:36:53.140]  They have their own in-house lawyers full time. And they're on the 40th floor of their
[01:36:53.140 --> 01:36:59.620]  new skyscraper in New York. Hearst Corporation is headquartered in New York and it's one
[01:36:59.620 --> 01:37:07.100]  of the newer skyscrapers in New York. It's a, it's a 47 story skyscraper. It's built
[01:37:07.100 --> 01:37:12.780]  on top of their old office. They just built it right smack on top of it. And it's a really,
[01:37:12.780 --> 01:37:19.460]  it's a pretty fancy looking building. And, but anyway, they flew their lawyers to Sekeen,
[01:37:19.460 --> 01:37:26.820]  Texas, down here where I sued them. And so they had two New York lawyers and an assistant
[01:37:26.820 --> 01:37:33.380]  lawyer from New Braunfels. And to present this hearing and the hearing, as we've talked
[01:37:33.380 --> 01:37:40.140]  about under the statute is in three parts. You know, the first part, the defendant to
[01:37:40.140 --> 01:37:49.780]  show a suit for exercising the right. Second part is the plaintiff having every element
[01:37:49.780 --> 01:37:57.180]  of his lawsuit. Third part is the defendant having every element of a valid defense. So,
[01:37:57.180 --> 01:38:02.100]  but what the lawyer did, we got in there and there were other people in there too, you
[01:38:02.100 --> 01:38:10.220]  know, that had a hearing scheduled. So when they called Avery versus Hearst, it is the
[01:38:10.220 --> 01:38:17.300]  defense motion. So the defense attorney said, your honor, we'll need 15 minutes. Well, I
[01:38:17.300 --> 01:38:22.900]  thought that was humorous, right? 15 minutes. This is a huge case with multiple elements
[01:38:22.900 --> 01:38:31.700]  all over everything and great burdens at three different steps. And he asked for 15 minutes.
[01:38:31.700 --> 01:38:35.820]  That's kind of like asking, it's kind of like, well, he stole my lawn mower and it's worth
[01:38:35.820 --> 01:38:42.420]  $500. And that's what it's about. I mean, this, this thing is, I mean, it's complicated.
[01:38:42.420 --> 01:38:47.980]  Then the guy asked for 15 minutes. I would have asked for two hours, you know, and, and
[01:38:47.980 --> 01:38:52.940]  when he first put it on, it was just like, he was just going to ramrod this whole thing.
[01:38:52.940 --> 01:38:58.780]  And he didn't go step by step asking the judge to find, you know, step one, so they could
[01:38:58.780 --> 01:39:03.740]  go to them step two and then to step three. No, he just, he just, he just started doing
[01:39:03.740 --> 01:39:09.820]  it. And he'd say, he doesn't have the elements and we have this defense. And then it turned
[01:39:09.820 --> 01:39:16.420]  to me. And first thing I said out of my mouth, and I'm glad I was, I said, your honor, there's,
[01:39:16.420 --> 01:39:22.860]  there's hundreds of pages in this thing. And, and of course the, the judge went on record
[01:39:22.860 --> 01:39:30.220]  by saying, he asked a question in the defense. He said, do you have a, do you have a, a evidence
[01:39:30.220 --> 01:39:38.420]  of the newspaper article? And the defense said, yeah, well that's exhibit A. So you
[01:39:38.420 --> 01:39:42.900]  had it there that the judge had not looked at any of this. He didn't even know exhibit
[01:39:42.900 --> 01:39:51.060]  A of the defendant out of a full alphabet of exhibits. And so he's already on record
[01:39:51.060 --> 01:40:00.100]  as not seeing any of this. And the statute requires the judge to make a ruling based
[01:40:00.100 --> 01:40:06.820]  on all the pleadings and all the affidavits in the, in the exhibit. And it's obvious he
[01:40:06.820 --> 01:40:11.900]  hadn't seen any of it. And so the first thing out of my mouth was, your honor, this is a
[01:40:11.900 --> 01:40:18.140]  huge thing. There's lots of exhibits. And I, I would ask the court that they take this
[01:40:18.140 --> 01:40:24.340]  under advisement and not make any decisions until they've read all the pleadings and affidavits
[01:40:24.340 --> 01:40:32.220]  and exhibits. And sure enough, and he said, well, do you have a, a, a argument to make?
[01:40:32.220 --> 01:40:37.020]  And I, you know, I said, yeah, I sure do, your honor. Yes, I sure do. And I made a little
[01:40:37.020 --> 01:40:42.940]  short brief thing too. And at the end of it, he said, oh, and then the defense got to say
[01:40:42.940 --> 01:40:47.860]  a few more things. He kind of finished it up. And he said, well, I am taking this under
[01:40:47.860 --> 01:40:53.300]  advisement. So I'm not making a ruling today. And I'm not making a rule until I read everything
[01:40:53.300 --> 01:40:58.940]  in this file. And he said, so, and I'll get to that next week and I'll let y'all know
[01:40:58.940 --> 01:41:04.260]  what I come up with. So I was very pleased. It meant those New York lawyers had to get
[01:41:04.260 --> 01:41:09.980]  back on the jet and fly home with nothing. And they wanted a bunch of, see, another thing
[01:41:09.980 --> 01:41:19.060]  about this statute is if they win, if they, if it's dismissed, it's mandatory that I pay
[01:41:19.060 --> 01:41:27.100]  attorney's fees, reasonable attorney's fees. And the judge can also find that I could be
[01:41:27.100 --> 01:41:34.940]  sanctioned to prevent me from filing suits, like slap suits again. But it's, that's kind
[01:41:34.940 --> 01:41:41.860]  of up to the judge. But anyway, it could be bad. I mean, this stuff could be serious and
[01:41:41.860 --> 01:41:50.140]  it's a short circuit of the, of the ordinary judicial system. And I smell a rat in this
[01:41:50.140 --> 01:42:02.820]  legislation. That may well be a very good argument to bring because all of the remedies
[01:42:02.820 --> 01:42:11.340]  that you would need are already in law. That's right. That is exactly right. It's already
[01:42:11.340 --> 01:42:18.500]  there. So what do we need this for? We need this there so we can intimidate anyone who
[01:42:18.500 --> 01:42:27.300]  would attempt to adjudicate their rights. Isn't that, that's exactly my feeling about it.
[01:42:27.300 --> 01:42:35.020]  So to make it harder for us to control these big companies, they send these lawyers out
[01:42:35.020 --> 01:42:41.940]  from New York when it was unnecessary. So they can, and these are New York lawyers going
[01:42:41.940 --> 01:42:49.700]  to be six, $800 an hour. Oh yeah. Yeah. Yeah. And they can really rack up the fee and waive
[01:42:49.700 --> 01:42:56.420]  this over you. When I talk about this being the worst police state in the history of mankind,
[01:42:56.420 --> 01:43:03.540]  it's because the government has so arranged things that if you get accused of crime, they're
[01:43:03.540 --> 01:43:12.740]  going to hold this giant weight over your head and say, if you don't take this deal,
[01:43:12.740 --> 01:43:17.900]  we're going to bring all the weight the government has to bear on you. Cause we're not trying
[01:43:17.900 --> 01:43:26.420]  any cases. We need to try one every once in a while, just to give something to do. And
[01:43:26.420 --> 01:43:30.700]  when we try yours, we're going to use everything we got cause we're never using it. We need
[01:43:30.700 --> 01:43:35.500]  to exercise it. We're going to do it at your expense. And that's, that's why everybody
[01:43:35.500 --> 01:43:41.700]  take to deal. They charge people with outrageous stuff so they can deal them back to less outrageous
[01:43:41.700 --> 01:43:48.260]  stuff and collect a lot of money. Hang on. About to go to break. Randy Kelton, a call
[01:43:48.260 --> 01:43:53.940]  in number 512-646-1984. And Mark, we'll get back to you when we get back on the other
[01:43:53.940 --> 01:44:00.300]  side. We'll be right back.
[01:44:00.300 --> 01:44:05.020]  You feel tired when talking about important topics like money and politics? Are you confused
[01:44:05.020 --> 01:44:09.540]  by words like the constitution or the federal reserve? What? If so, you may be diagnosed
[01:44:09.540 --> 01:44:15.300]  with the deadliest disease known today, stupidity. Hi, my name is Steve Holt. And like millions
[01:44:15.300 --> 01:44:20.700]  of other Americans, I was diagnosed with stupidity at an early age. I had no idea that the number
[01:44:20.700 --> 01:44:26.180]  one cause of the disease is found in almost every home in America, the television. Unfortunately,
[01:44:26.180 --> 01:44:30.860]  that puts most Americans at risk of catching stupidity. But there is hope. The staff at
[01:44:30.860 --> 01:44:34.740]  Brave New Books have helped me and thousands of other foxaholics suffering from sports
[01:44:34.740 --> 01:44:39.980]  zombieism recover. And because of Brave New Books, I now enjoy reading and watching educational
[01:44:39.980 --> 01:44:45.340]  documentaries without feeling tired or uninterested. So if you or anybody you know suffers from
[01:44:45.340 --> 01:44:53.420]  stupidity, then you need to call 512-480-2503 or visit them in 1904 Guadalupe or brave new
[01:44:53.420 --> 01:44:57.100]  bookstore dot com. Side effects when using Brave New Books products may include discernment
[01:44:57.100 --> 01:45:02.260]  and enlarged vocabulary and an overall increase in mental functioning. Are you the plaintiff
[01:45:02.260 --> 01:45:08.540]  or defendant in a lawsuit? Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary, the affordable,
[01:45:08.540 --> 01:45:15.780]  easy to understand, 4-CD course that will show you how in 24 hours, step by step. If
[01:45:15.780 --> 01:45:21.020]  you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing. If you don't have a lawyer, know
[01:45:21.020 --> 01:45:26.300]  what you should do for yourself. Thousands have won with our step by step course and
[01:45:26.300 --> 01:45:32.860]  now you can too. Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case
[01:45:32.860 --> 01:45:38.340]  winning experience. Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should
[01:45:38.340 --> 01:45:43.700]  understand about the principles and practices that control our American courts. You'll
[01:45:43.700 --> 01:45:50.700]  receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases, pro se tactics,
[01:45:50.700 --> 01:45:57.700]  and much more. Please visit LulaVlogRadio.com and click on the banner or call toll free
[01:45:57.700 --> 01:46:20.700]  866-LAW-EZ.
[01:46:27.700 --> 01:46:50.700]  We are back, Randy Felton, LulaVlog Radio. We're here with our very special guest, Mr.
[01:46:50.700 --> 01:46:59.700]  Rod Avery. He always has good content. Mark in Wisconsin, I'm going to preempt you for
[01:46:59.700 --> 01:47:05.700]  the moment because I have Mark in Texas and Mark in Texas is very much on point. Hello,
[01:47:05.700 --> 01:47:06.700]  Mark.
[01:47:06.700 --> 01:47:09.700]  Hey, how are you guys doing?
[01:47:09.700 --> 01:47:14.700]  We're doing well and you had some comments on point here.
[01:47:14.700 --> 01:47:20.700]  Well, yeah. Just to enlarge a little bit on the media, I'm a long time reporting myself
[01:47:20.700 --> 01:47:27.700]  if you don't mind my saying with American Free Press. Ron's case is part of a much
[01:47:27.700 --> 01:47:33.700]  larger phenomenon and you'll see this in some magazines that Time Life is bringing out now
[01:47:33.700 --> 01:47:39.700]  in the drug store and grocery store magazine shelves. One of them is called Modern Day
[01:47:39.700 --> 01:47:46.700]  Policy Theories, these big flick coffee table magazines and another is about secret societies
[01:47:46.700 --> 01:47:51.700]  and they're loaded with un-bylined articles where you don't even know who wrote them
[01:47:51.700 --> 01:47:58.700]  and they're meant to set the record straight about how paranoid we are and that the Bilderberg
[01:47:58.700 --> 01:48:05.700]  group is really about international harmony and world brotherhood. They inform us. The
[01:48:05.700 --> 01:48:10.700]  Lateral Commission is just interested in business deals, nothing too nefarious and
[01:48:10.700 --> 01:48:15.700]  nothing to worry about folks. Just settle down. Yes, these big rich people do have a
[01:48:15.700 --> 01:48:20.700]  little bit of clout, but they're with you. They're Americans just like you. They put
[01:48:20.700 --> 01:48:28.700]  their pants on just the same and they have your welfare in mind. The Ron Averys of the
[01:48:28.700 --> 01:48:38.700]  world and whatnot are just seeing chimeras and seeing ghosts. Wait a minute. Ron, you
[01:48:38.700 --> 01:48:48.700]  sounded incredulous. Didn't you buy that story? If you do, I've got some property I want to
[01:48:48.700 --> 01:48:57.700]  show you. That's it. Yeah, they're all on our side. They're going to help us out. Well,
[01:48:57.700 --> 01:49:04.700]  it's all weaponized media. The Houston Chronicle being a little more localized and Time Life,
[01:49:04.700 --> 01:49:10.700]  of course, founded by Henry Loos and Stullen Bones. He was Stullen Bones, but he openly
[01:49:10.700 --> 01:49:15.700]  worked with intelligence figures such as Alan Dulles, who was on the Warren Commission.
[01:49:15.700 --> 01:49:20.700]  The weaponized media has went from the original Randolph Hearst and the Yellow Journalism
[01:49:20.700 --> 01:49:26.700]  days, the Spanish-American War, all through up to and including Ron's case, where the
[01:49:26.700 --> 01:49:32.700]  American media never has been a defender of freedom. That's what my research and some
[01:49:32.700 --> 01:49:37.700]  of Ron's has found out here. They never have been. It's not like they were good once and
[01:49:37.700 --> 01:49:43.700]  went bad. The American media has been a total failure from almost the very beginning. That's
[01:49:43.700 --> 01:49:50.700]  amazing. They are not defenders of freedom. It's not just liberal bias. This is a complete
[01:49:50.700 --> 01:49:57.700]  failed institution that does not do what it's supposed to do and never has.
[01:49:57.700 --> 01:50:10.700]  Ron, Mark, can you supply a good argument to Ron that he could bring to the court on
[01:50:10.700 --> 01:50:15.700]  the standard bias of the media in this capacity?
[01:50:15.700 --> 01:50:21.700]  Well, I'm not sure that he needs it, given the complexity of his case. He's got his side
[01:50:21.700 --> 01:50:28.700]  of it, in my objective opinion, nailed down pretty well. I just think that if he had to
[01:50:28.700 --> 01:50:36.700]  go there, he could show a pattern of bias in the greater media, always naming the potential
[01:50:36.700 --> 01:50:43.700]  domestic enemy, always naming them as being right-wing, always that every time the media
[01:50:43.700 --> 01:50:49.700]  declares there's a menace out there in the hinterland, that it's always cut from the
[01:50:49.700 --> 01:50:55.700]  same cloth. They're always afraid of Second Amendment rights. They're always afraid of
[01:50:55.700 --> 01:51:01.700]  libertarian ideas, maybe to an extent. They're always afraid of populism. In other words,
[01:51:01.700 --> 01:51:09.700]  to the media, the enemy is always the rightist, nevertheless. If you're a constitutionalist,
[01:51:09.700 --> 01:51:15.700]  like the founders, suddenly you're a bad guy, when it used to be that you were a good guy.
[01:51:15.700 --> 01:51:20.700]  He could show a general pattern, but I don't know that he needs that for his case.
[01:51:20.700 --> 01:51:27.700]  What I was thinking about was the politics. You never win your case simply because you
[01:51:27.700 --> 01:51:31.700]  have the law and the facts on your side. You only win your case if you have the politics
[01:51:31.700 --> 01:51:36.700]  on your side. You've got a 24-year-old juror that was sued here, and he's going to be sitting
[01:51:36.700 --> 01:51:42.700]  out there. The judge is going to be looking at this guy just starting out his career,
[01:51:42.700 --> 01:51:47.700]  and he gets whacked with this suit. The judge is not going to want to crucify this young
[01:51:47.700 --> 01:51:56.700]  kid. How do we give the judge somebody else to crucify and take the heat off the kid and
[01:51:56.700 --> 01:52:02.700]  move the blame to somebody else, make it easier for the judge to rule in your favor?
[01:52:02.700 --> 01:52:10.700]  Well, first of all, Hearst is the owner, and they're on the line for all that, and the
[01:52:10.700 --> 01:52:22.700]  judge knows that. I don't know that his youthfulness is going to... Besides, he's almost judgment
[01:52:22.700 --> 01:52:28.700]  proof anyway. He probably doesn't have anything anyhow, so the judge is not worried that this
[01:52:28.700 --> 01:52:33.700]  kid is going to have to cough up something or give up his future or whatever. Hearst
[01:52:33.700 --> 01:52:40.700]  is going to have to take care of that, and they know that. Hearst is on the line. They're
[01:52:40.700 --> 01:52:46.700]  liable, and so he'll be looking at Hearst, and Hearst, with a brand new skyscraper in
[01:52:46.700 --> 01:52:51.700]  New York and flying attorneys around, I don't think he's going to be crying really for Hearst
[01:52:51.700 --> 01:52:59.700]  necessarily. I'm hoping, too, that the judge sees this as everybody is susceptible to this.
[01:52:59.700 --> 01:53:07.700]  Everybody could have this done to them, and everybody ought to be saying, hey, you know
[01:53:07.700 --> 01:53:12.700]  what? That could happen to me. What if somebody wrote some big, giant, bogus article about
[01:53:12.700 --> 01:53:19.700]  me? I couldn't get elected. I couldn't function. I'd lose my job and all that. That's what
[01:53:19.700 --> 01:53:26.700]  they ought to be thinking about. Or I would lose my primary election. That's right. Here
[01:53:26.700 --> 01:53:31.700]  I am a Republican, and all of a sudden they're calling me a communist, and how am I going
[01:53:31.700 --> 01:53:39.700]  to defend myself? The absolute hardest thing to defend against is something that has absolutely
[01:53:39.700 --> 01:53:48.700]  no merit or basis in fact. Yeah. When did you stop beating your wife? How do you defend
[01:53:48.700 --> 01:53:56.700]  against this stuff? I can see where you could put... The judge is supposed to determine
[01:53:56.700 --> 01:54:01.700]  the facts in accordance with the rules of evidence that apply the law as it comes to
[01:54:01.700 --> 01:54:06.700]  him to the facts in the case. In a real world, that's probably how things would work. But
[01:54:06.700 --> 01:54:12.700]  in a real world, the judge is a human being. I can see the judge sitting there thinking,
[01:54:12.700 --> 01:54:18.700]  if I rule against these guys, good chance the next time I run for election, they're
[01:54:18.700 --> 01:54:24.700]  going to crucify me. Well, one good thing about this particular judge is he's retiring.
[01:54:24.700 --> 01:54:31.700]  He's old. He's given it up. Oh, perfect. This is his last year. He may be looking at
[01:54:31.700 --> 01:54:37.700]  this as an interesting thing and regard himself fairly much as untouchable. I don't think
[01:54:37.700 --> 01:54:45.700]  he has any aspiration for any political office at this point in time. I think he's looking
[01:54:45.700 --> 01:54:50.700]  to hang up the hat after this year and head for the house. And he might just do whatever
[01:54:50.700 --> 01:54:59.700]  he wants to do. Absolutely. He might do this to protect the judges that he's leaving behind.
[01:54:59.700 --> 01:55:05.700]  He might just vote his conscience and say, this is not good. I think I'm going to rule
[01:55:05.700 --> 01:55:12.700]  against these guys. I think it'd go down in history. I think he'd have a good... I don't
[01:55:12.700 --> 01:55:19.700]  know if these guys would appeal it or not, but they might. They'd just keep it in court
[01:55:19.700 --> 01:55:26.700]  or something and try to wear somebody out. Here's what I was going to say to a little
[01:55:26.700 --> 01:55:32.700]  earlier is that I feel I have no options other than to sue these guys. Because somebody puts
[01:55:32.700 --> 01:55:41.700]  you on the front page of a newspaper that has a million circulation every day and show
[01:55:41.700 --> 01:55:50.700]  you as a terrorist and puts you online and it's read by I think 30 million people a month
[01:55:50.700 --> 01:55:56.700]  and calling you a... You can't leave that out there as a matter of public record without
[01:55:56.700 --> 01:56:02.700]  responding to it. I'm just glad I even found out about it. And that's another thing that
[01:56:02.700 --> 01:56:09.700]  kind of brought me to sue too, since it was the Houston Chronicle that published it. And
[01:56:09.700 --> 01:56:17.700]  it published it on a day that I had a friend over and he saw the thing in the airport.
[01:56:17.700 --> 01:56:23.700]  And what's the chances of... I don't have that many friends running around all over
[01:56:23.700 --> 01:56:29.700]  the country. This guy's in the airport, picks it up and there's my name on the front page.
[01:56:29.700 --> 01:56:34.700]  I think it was almost a providence saying, Ron, I'm going to give you this one. And so
[01:56:34.700 --> 01:56:39.700]  I went, hey, if you're going to hand it to me, I'm going to take it.
[01:56:39.700 --> 01:56:46.700]  So they contrived to post the article in a location where you were not likely to find
[01:56:46.700 --> 01:56:48.700]  out about it.
[01:56:48.700 --> 01:56:53.700]  Yes, it's possible, very possible. Even though I'm from Houston and I have a lot of friends
[01:56:53.700 --> 01:57:00.700]  around Houston and even in Houston, that doesn't mean they read it. I didn't hear from them,
[01:57:00.700 --> 01:57:05.700]  so I don't know.
[01:57:05.700 --> 01:57:15.700]  That may be part of Hirsch's problem because the hard news is losing tremendous traction
[01:57:15.700 --> 01:57:22.700]  and indistraction to the internet. Now if the hard news is being accused of presenting
[01:57:22.700 --> 01:57:27.700]  propaganda instead of news, this may be a real problem for them.
[01:57:27.700 --> 01:57:29.700]  Yeah, right.
[01:57:29.700 --> 01:57:35.700]  Have you mounted an internet campaign?
[01:57:35.700 --> 01:57:37.700]  Myself?
[01:57:37.700 --> 01:57:46.700]  I have a, there's a caller down the list a bit, Scott from Texas. He's not as old as
[01:57:46.700 --> 01:57:55.700]  we are and these younger guys better understand how to use the media. He got a ticket and
[01:57:55.700 --> 01:58:00.700]  he got pulled over and he was questioning the cop and the cop got all excited and took
[01:58:00.700 --> 01:58:07.700]  out his movie club and busted out his window. Well, it seems that Scott had a camera on
[01:58:07.700 --> 01:58:17.700]  him. He put that on YouTube and got 1.8 million hits. You might consider the social media
[01:58:17.700 --> 01:58:27.700]  because I suspect the Hirsch group is going to be real sensitive to that. And everything
[01:58:27.700 --> 01:58:36.700]  is political. Hang on, Randy Kelton, Radio, call it number 512-646-1984. We're going
[01:58:36.700 --> 01:58:42.700]  to break. Let's see, it's the top of the hour break. We're going to have three minute breaks.
[01:58:42.700 --> 01:58:47.700]  It's a good time to check out our sponsors and help support this network. We'll be right
[01:58:47.700 --> 01:58:49.700]  back.
[01:58:49.700 --> 01:58:55.700]  The Bible remains the most popular book in the world, yet countless readers are frustrated
[01:58:55.700 --> 01:59:00.700]  because they struggle to understand it. Some new translations try to help by simplifying
[01:59:00.700 --> 01:59:06.700]  the text, but in the process can compromise the profound meaning of the scripture. Enter
[01:59:06.700 --> 01:59:13.700]  the recovery version. First, this new translation is extremely faithful and accurate, but the
[01:59:13.700 --> 01:59:19.700]  real story is the more than 9,000 explanatory footnotes. Difficult and profound passages
[01:59:19.700 --> 01:59:24.700]  are opened up in a marvelous way, providing an entrance into the riches of the Word beyond
[01:59:24.700 --> 01:59:27.700]  which you've ever experienced before.
[01:59:27.700 --> 01:59:32.700]  Bibles for America would like to give you a free recovery version simply for the asking.
[01:59:32.700 --> 01:59:42.700]  This comprehensive yet compact study Bible is yours just by calling us toll free at 1-888-551-0102
[01:59:42.700 --> 01:59:50.700]  or by ordering online at freestudybible.com. That's freestudybible.com.
[01:59:50.700 --> 01:59:56.700]  You are listening to the Logos Radio Network. LogosRadioNetwork.com.