[00:00.000 --> 00:06.000]  The following news flash is brought to you by the Lone Star Lowdown, providing the deli
[00:06.000 --> 00:08.000]  bulletins for the commodity market.
[00:08.000 --> 00:17.000]  Today in history, news updates and the inside scoop into the tides of the alternative.
[00:17.000 --> 00:22.000]  Markets for Wednesday, the 26th of October, 2016, are currently treading with gold at
[00:22.000 --> 00:29.000]  $1,266.33 an ounce, silver $17.63 an ounce, Texas crude $49.96 a barrel, and
[00:29.000 --> 00:34.000]  Bitcoin is currently sitting at about $675 U.S. currency.
[00:34.000 --> 00:44.000]  Today in history, the year 2001, then President George W. Bush signs into law
[00:44.000 --> 00:48.000]  the United and Strengthening America by providing appropriate tools required to
[00:48.000 --> 00:52.000]  intercept an obstruct terrorism act, or the USA PATRIOT Act, into law, with
[00:52.000 --> 00:56.000]  controversial provisions concerning surveillance procedures and gathering,
[00:56.000 --> 01:00.000]  anti-money laundering and business records, removing obstacles to investigating
[01:00.000 --> 01:04.000]  terrorism by consolidating agencies, and contentious interrogation techniques.
[01:04.000 --> 01:08.000]  Perhaps the biggest concern raised from civil rights groups was the rapidness in
[01:08.000 --> 01:13.000]  which the 342-page bill was written up, read, and passed by Congress, and then
[01:13.000 --> 01:18.000]  signed into law a little over a month after the September 11 terrorist attacks.
[01:18.000 --> 01:25.000]  Today in history, in recent years, NATO's biggest military proliferation on
[01:25.000 --> 01:29.000]  Russia's border since the Cold War is underway, with Great Britain announcing
[01:29.000 --> 01:33.000]  Wednesday today that it is planning on sending fighter jets to Romania next
[01:33.000 --> 01:37.000]  year, and the United States has vowed troops, tanks, and artillery to Poland,
[01:37.000 --> 01:41.000]  along with Germany, Canada, and other NATO allies also pledging forces at a
[01:41.000 --> 01:44.000]  defense ministers meeting in Brussels.
[01:44.000 --> 01:47.000]  Meanwhile, two Russian warships entered the Baltic Sea between Sweden and
[01:47.000 --> 01:50.000]  Denmark and are said to be armed with cruise missiles.
[01:50.000 --> 01:54.000]  The ships were part of an eight-ship carrier battle group, including Russia's
[01:54.000 --> 01:58.000]  one and only aircraft carrier, the Admiral Kuznestov, which is expected to
[01:58.000 --> 02:02.000]  join around 10 other Russian vessels already off the Syrian coast.
[02:02.000 --> 02:06.000]  We hope and pray these Russian-NATO escalations over engagement in Syria are
[02:06.000 --> 02:09.000]  soon de-escalated and a resolve is figured out.
[02:09.000 --> 02:17.000]  Our thoughts and prayers also go out to the people of Syria as well.
[02:17.000 --> 02:19.000]  Early voting started Monday in Texas.
[02:19.000 --> 02:21.000]  Record turnout is being recorded in many counties.
[02:21.000 --> 02:24.000]  However, some individual voters have been calling foul when voting straight
[02:24.000 --> 02:28.000]  ticket, claiming that the e-voting machines were leaving the presidential bid
[02:28.000 --> 02:31.000]  unchecked when a straight vote for the Republican parties placed.
[02:31.000 --> 02:34.000]  Reminds me of what Joseph Stalin said when he said that it wasn't who voted
[02:34.000 --> 02:36.000]  that counted, but who counted the votes.
[02:36.000 --> 02:40.000]  Early voting in Texas ends four days before the election, so get out there
[02:40.000 --> 02:42.000]  and vote nobody for president.
[02:42.000 --> 02:45.000]  The Lone Star Lowdown is currently looking for sponsors.
[02:45.000 --> 02:48.000]  If you have a product or service you'd like to advertise with us, feel free to
[02:48.000 --> 02:53.000]  give me a call at 210-363-2257.
[02:53.000 --> 02:58.000]  This is Rick Roady with your Lowdown for October 26, 2016.
[02:58.000 --> 03:21.000]  I'm Rick Roady.
[03:21.000 --> 03:36.000]  Okay.
[03:36.000 --> 03:37.000]  We are back.
[03:37.000 --> 03:38.000]  We're in Kelton.
[03:38.000 --> 03:39.000]  We move our radio.
[03:39.000 --> 03:43.000]  We're talking to David in South Dakota.
[03:43.000 --> 03:48.000]  And yeah, I would sue Greg Abbott directly.
[03:48.000 --> 03:53.000]  Okay, but would you start with Greg and come down the line, go to Ingram and
[03:53.000 --> 04:00.000]  then go to the next and then go to the county wherever you voted and then just
[04:00.000 --> 04:05.000]  keep working down and run a private attorney general, which could bring
[04:05.000 --> 04:11.000]  anybody that was in the same boat as you because they could join as well.
[04:11.000 --> 04:14.000]  Well, no, not a private attorney general suit.
[04:14.000 --> 04:23.000]  They don't need to because this is a case where people aren't, it's not like
[04:23.000 --> 04:28.000]  they were physically harmed or they had to pay out a lot of fines.
[04:28.000 --> 04:31.000]  So there's only indirect recovery.
[04:31.000 --> 04:36.000]  And if you file a private attorney general suit, you're not stuck with a
[04:36.000 --> 04:43.000]  class action where they can break the class apart and you get to recover for
[04:43.000 --> 04:46.000]  yourself and all others similarly situated.
[04:46.000 --> 04:51.000]  And it's my opinion that the best kind of suit to do here is declaratory
[04:51.000 --> 04:52.000]  judgment.
[04:52.000 --> 04:57.000]  So assume and ask for declaratory judgment.
[04:57.000 --> 05:02.000]  Now, could you sue in both federal and state since your rights?
[05:02.000 --> 05:03.000]  Absolutely.
[05:03.000 --> 05:06.000]  This is a presidential vote.
[05:06.000 --> 05:07.000]  That's federal.
[05:07.000 --> 05:12.000]  So you have two places to file two separate suits.
[05:12.000 --> 05:16.000]  No, you only get one remedy.
[05:16.000 --> 05:20.000]  So this one should be filed in the Fed.
[05:20.000 --> 05:22.000]  It should be filed in the Fed.
[05:22.000 --> 05:26.000]  Yeah, because the rule said that the rule of thumb is take the state to the
[05:26.000 --> 05:28.000]  Fed and the Fed to the state.
[05:28.000 --> 05:34.000]  So this is the state you want to take Abbott to the Fed and he's likely to
[05:34.000 --> 05:38.000]  get more grief from the Fed than he is the state.
[05:38.000 --> 05:40.000]  I got you.
[05:40.000 --> 05:43.000]  Okay.
[05:43.000 --> 05:48.000]  I think unless you have something else to say about that, that apparently
[05:48.000 --> 05:54.000]  there'll be some kind of legal situations if it continues like it has all
[05:54.000 --> 05:55.000]  week.
[05:55.000 --> 05:56.000]  There's lots of people.
[05:56.000 --> 05:57.000]  Yeah, I hope it does.
[05:57.000 --> 06:03.000]  I hope it does because Deborah and I went to the secretary of state and read
[06:03.000 --> 06:11.000]  the evaluations by the six person team that evaluated the voting machines
[06:11.000 --> 06:16.000]  before the state of Texas bought the last set of voting machines.
[06:16.000 --> 06:21.000]  And they all complained that the machines could not count the vote until
[06:21.000 --> 06:24.000]  they programmed in the result.
[06:24.000 --> 06:29.000]  And they were trying to get them to count 10 votes.
[06:29.000 --> 06:35.000]  And they complained that the Diebold machine had a switch to reverse the
[06:35.000 --> 06:37.000]  votes of minorities.
[06:37.000 --> 06:39.000]  I'll be there.
[06:39.000 --> 06:41.000]  And they bought them anyway.
[06:41.000 --> 06:44.000]  This is right in their own evaluators' reports.
[06:44.000 --> 06:47.000]  And that's public record.
[06:47.000 --> 06:52.000]  So that's evidenced on the four corners of that report.
[06:52.000 --> 06:55.000]  Yes, you can request those.
[06:55.000 --> 06:56.000]  That's what we did.
[06:56.000 --> 06:57.000]  We got all the reports.
[06:57.000 --> 06:59.000]  I know I have them someplace.
[06:59.000 --> 07:01.000]  I just don't know where to look for them.
[07:01.000 --> 07:03.000]  But it's easier just to request those.
[07:03.000 --> 07:05.000]  And those are very damning.
[07:05.000 --> 07:09.000]  They knew right up front what was going to happen.
[07:09.000 --> 07:14.000]  Yeah, I went into court and tried to intervene.
[07:14.000 --> 07:18.000]  And the judge had me tossed out of the building.
[07:18.000 --> 07:20.000]  Today?
[07:20.000 --> 07:22.000]  No, when that was going on.
[07:22.000 --> 07:25.000]  Oh, oh, oh, when that was going on.
[07:25.000 --> 07:28.000]  Yeah.
[07:28.000 --> 07:32.000]  The judge was not accommodating.
[07:32.000 --> 07:36.000]  But anyway, now would be a good time to go back after it.
[07:36.000 --> 07:37.000]  Yep.
[07:37.000 --> 07:38.000]  You got that right.
[07:38.000 --> 07:40.000]  Well, I heard the news.
[07:40.000 --> 07:43.000]  And that's one of the reasons I thought I'd call you.
[07:43.000 --> 07:45.000]  But I have another point.
[07:45.000 --> 07:51.000]  The gentleman that called from somewhere up north of Waco with the situation with the
[07:51.000 --> 07:59.000]  city problem, what I find that helped me a whole lot, and I learned it after the fact,
[07:59.000 --> 08:06.000]  when you file those bar grievances, I use the last dot, dot, dot, the last four numbers
[08:06.000 --> 08:09.000]  of the bar card.
[08:09.000 --> 08:13.000]  He imprints these down on the bottom left of the envelope.
[08:13.000 --> 08:15.000]  You notice the person that you're grieving.
[08:15.000 --> 08:24.000]  You put his last four digits, and then you put the number one of five, and you close
[08:24.000 --> 08:25.000]  your parentheses.
[08:25.000 --> 08:30.000]  Well, when he gets that envelope, he's going to see that and say, this SOB, look at that.
[08:30.000 --> 08:34.000]  He's sending me a bar grievance, and he's going to send me four more.
[08:34.000 --> 08:40.000]  Well, it gets his attention, and if he believes you, he pays attention.
[08:40.000 --> 08:50.000]  And when you send a judicial conduct complaint, you do the same thing to the judge, but I
[08:50.000 --> 08:53.000]  only put one of three, number one of three.
[08:53.000 --> 09:02.000]  I never put one of five because conduct complaints are a little more serious than bar grievances.
[09:02.000 --> 09:04.000]  Yes.
[09:04.000 --> 09:05.000]  Okay.
[09:05.000 --> 09:12.000]  Second point, the gentleman from Arizona.
[09:12.000 --> 09:18.000]  I'm just going to tell you a scenario, and you can answer.
[09:18.000 --> 09:20.000]  You're in a residential home.
[09:20.000 --> 09:22.000]  You call 911.
[09:22.000 --> 09:30.000]  The police come, and you're in your own home, and you're standing there, and they put you
[09:30.000 --> 09:33.000]  under house arrest.
[09:33.000 --> 09:37.000]  You say, well, I want to go to the kitchen and get a drink, or I want to go to the bathroom.
[09:37.000 --> 09:38.000]  They say, no, you stay right there.
[09:38.000 --> 09:43.000]  Do not move, and he's got his gun drawn on you.
[09:43.000 --> 09:49.000]  This goes on for between 30 and 45 minutes.
[09:49.000 --> 09:55.000]  Other things are going on in the home as well, but you haven't moved since they walked in
[09:55.000 --> 09:59.000]  the door, which you opened before they got there knowing they were coming and wanted
[09:59.000 --> 10:01.000]  them to come quickly.
[10:01.000 --> 10:06.000]  Someone's life was at stake.
[10:06.000 --> 10:11.000]  You're basically under house arrest.
[10:11.000 --> 10:19.000]  The JP shows up 45 minutes later and looks at the situation and tells the three police
[10:19.000 --> 10:26.000]  officers holding you at house arrest, gentlemen, you need to go outside and get in your cars,
[10:26.000 --> 10:33.000]  which they do, hesitatingly.
[10:33.000 --> 10:39.000]  Has that arrest, when you call 911, they don't have any reason to think that you need to
[10:39.000 --> 10:40.000]  be arrested?
[10:40.000 --> 10:41.000]  Exactly.
[10:41.000 --> 10:43.000]  They have other information.
[10:43.000 --> 10:45.000]  Have you been under house arrest?
[10:45.000 --> 10:48.000]  Is that an illegal arrest?
[10:48.000 --> 10:49.000]  Absolutely.
[10:49.000 --> 10:56.000]  And you've been under arrest at gunpoint?
[10:56.000 --> 10:57.000]  How?
[10:57.000 --> 11:09.000]  Now, if that were Texas, that is first degree felony aggravated assault, 2202 B2A Texas Penal
[11:09.000 --> 11:10.000]  Code.
[11:10.000 --> 11:17.000]  And you would charge each one of those officers, each one of them separately?
[11:17.000 --> 11:19.000]  Yes, I would.
[11:19.000 --> 11:28.000]  I'm charging my district judge with first degree felony aggravated assault because I
[11:28.000 --> 11:35.000]  gave notice of my intent to challenge the grand jury pool under 19.27 Texas Code of
[11:35.000 --> 11:36.000]  Criminal Procedure.
[11:36.000 --> 11:41.000]  The judge had paneled the pool without giving me opportunity to challenge.
[11:41.000 --> 11:43.000]  I questioned him after he closed the hearing.
[11:43.000 --> 11:48.000]  I questioned him about it and requested that he bring the grand jury back in, reconvene
[11:48.000 --> 11:53.000]  the pool, disband the grand jury, reconvene the pool, give me opportunity to challenge
[11:53.000 --> 11:54.000]  the pool.
[11:54.000 --> 11:57.000]  And he insisted that I'd have to follow the correct procedure.
[11:57.000 --> 12:02.000]  And I assured him that the statute did not contain a procedure, that since he was the
[12:02.000 --> 12:08.000]  district judge holding the hearing, it was his duty to ensure my access to my right.
[12:08.000 --> 12:13.000]  And he said, well, I'll have to determine that I would have to determine the correct
[12:13.000 --> 12:14.000]  procedure.
[12:14.000 --> 12:17.000]  I said, well, we'll see what Travis County has to say about that.
[12:17.000 --> 12:19.000]  And he said, are you threatening me?
[12:19.000 --> 12:22.000]  Mr. Bailey, if he just threatened to be, arrest him.
[12:22.000 --> 12:34.000]  And now the Bailey for the court, Dick something or other, Dick Brown, he stepped back.
[12:34.000 --> 12:38.000]  He was the one that broke my elbow years ago and I didn't go after him.
[12:38.000 --> 12:39.000]  He stepped back.
[12:39.000 --> 12:40.000]  He wouldn't have nothing to do with it.
[12:40.000 --> 12:44.000]  The Sergeant came over and put his hand on my arm.
[12:44.000 --> 12:51.000]  I looked down at his pistol and I said, Mr. Bailey, if I see you're carrying a pistol.
[12:51.000 --> 12:52.000]  Yes, Mr. County, I am.
[12:52.000 --> 12:54.000]  Tell me, Mr. Bailey, is that pistol loaded?
[12:54.000 --> 12:55.000]  Yes, it is.
[12:55.000 --> 12:58.000]  And the judge got it and told the Bailey to back off.
[12:58.000 --> 13:00.000]  There wouldn't be necessary arresting.
[13:00.000 --> 13:03.000]  Sorry, Bubba, too late.
[13:03.000 --> 13:05.000]  Too late.
[13:05.000 --> 13:09.000]  2201, Texas Penal Code, simple assault.
[13:09.000 --> 13:16.000]  If a person commits offensive speech or touching, that's simple assault.
[13:16.000 --> 13:23.000]  And he touched me in a way that was intended to take control of me and in a way that was
[13:23.000 --> 13:26.000]  intended to be offensive.
[13:26.000 --> 13:28.000]  Without, without.
[13:28.000 --> 13:34.000]  And he, and he was prominently displaying a deadly weapon.
[13:34.000 --> 13:38.000]  That is a second degree felony in the state of Texas.
[13:38.000 --> 13:46.000]  Except unless you are a public official acting under the color or pretense of an official
[13:46.000 --> 13:51.000]  capacity, in which case it's a felony of the first degree.
[13:51.000 --> 13:53.000]  First degree felony.
[13:53.000 --> 13:58.000]  So he put his hand on me while prominently displaying a deadly weapon.
[13:58.000 --> 14:03.000]  He didn't commit first degree felony aggravated assault.
[14:03.000 --> 14:05.000]  The judge did.
[14:05.000 --> 14:07.000]  He was the deadly weapon.
[14:07.000 --> 14:09.000]  So I'm charging the judge.
[14:09.000 --> 14:12.000]  He was the, you know, the judge.
[14:12.000 --> 14:15.000]  So you smart mouth, you want to play hardball with me?
[14:15.000 --> 14:18.000]  We'll see how this works out for you.
[14:18.000 --> 14:23.000]  In the scenario that I asked you about originally, would you sue the city, sue the
[14:23.000 --> 14:29.000]  mayor and the city and, and it would come down through the police department?
[14:29.000 --> 14:32.000]  I would sue the officers personally.
[14:32.000 --> 14:33.000]  This was criminal.
[14:33.000 --> 14:35.000]  This is outside of scope.
[14:35.000 --> 14:36.000]  Okay.
[14:36.000 --> 14:37.000]  Criminal.
[14:37.000 --> 14:38.000]  Each one of them.
[14:38.000 --> 14:39.000]  Each one of them.
[14:39.000 --> 14:44.000]  I'd file first degree felony aggravated assault against each one of them.
[14:44.000 --> 14:45.000]  Okay.
[14:45.000 --> 14:48.000]  It wouldn't be a suit against the city, it'd be against the assault.
[14:48.000 --> 14:49.000]  Yeah.
[14:49.000 --> 14:50.000]  Then sue the city.
[14:50.000 --> 14:55.000]  But first, that's what it's going to tell the Barrett in Arizona.
[14:55.000 --> 14:58.000]  You go after them criminally first.
[14:58.000 --> 15:05.000]  And when you do, all these people are going to fail to follow law and stand in
[15:05.000 --> 15:10.000]  line to shield these guys from prosecution.
[15:10.000 --> 15:14.000]  Each one of them creates a new tort, a new claim.
[15:14.000 --> 15:18.000]  Just rack them up.
[15:18.000 --> 15:23.000]  Just walk down a straight line, let them flap the tar baby.
[15:23.000 --> 15:24.000]  Exactly.
[15:24.000 --> 15:27.000]  And once you got them all stuck to it and then you take them all to court.
[15:27.000 --> 15:34.000]  Now you go before a jury and say, you guys got to help me.
[15:34.000 --> 15:40.000]  I tried to exercise the criminal remedy, but all of these guys squeezed up behind
[15:40.000 --> 15:46.000]  that thin blue line and protected one another in violation of this law, this law,
[15:46.000 --> 15:49.000]  this law, this law, this law.
[15:49.000 --> 15:52.000]  So my only remedy left is you.
[15:52.000 --> 15:59.000]  Now they've got a good reason to ruin your favor.
[15:59.000 --> 16:00.000]  Yeah.
[16:00.000 --> 16:02.000]  That sounded like more fun.
[16:02.000 --> 16:08.000]  See you in your favor.
[16:08.000 --> 16:12.000]  Yeah. And then you're more likely to get the city to come to the table or somebody
[16:12.000 --> 16:15.000]  to come to the table and make you a deal and pay you to go away and leave them
[16:15.000 --> 16:20.000]  alone.
[16:20.000 --> 16:24.000]  So play the same games they play.
[16:24.000 --> 16:28.000]  They're going to charge you with the highest charge they can come up with so they
[16:28.000 --> 16:31.000]  can deal down to something lesser.
[16:31.000 --> 16:38.000]  So let's let them set themselves up and then let's bang them big time.
[16:38.000 --> 16:42.000]  And if it was me, I'd work my way up all the way to the top.
[16:42.000 --> 16:47.000]  It's the chief justice of the Texas Supreme.
[16:47.000 --> 16:49.000]  He'll refuse to take a complaint.
[16:49.000 --> 16:50.000]  He'll sue him as well.
[16:50.000 --> 16:51.000]  Hang on.
[16:51.000 --> 16:52.000]  About to go to break.
[16:52.000 --> 16:54.000]  Randy Kelton, Rio La Radio.
[16:54.000 --> 17:00.000]  We'll be right back.
[17:00.000 --> 17:04.000]  Are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters, or even
[17:04.000 --> 17:05.000]  lawsuits?
[17:05.000 --> 17:09.000]  Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Mears Proven Method.
[17:09.000 --> 17:13.000]  Michael Mears has won six cases in federal court against debt collectors and now
[17:13.000 --> 17:14.000]  you can win two.
[17:14.000 --> 17:18.000]  You'll get step-by-step instructions in plain English on how to win in court
[17:18.000 --> 17:23.000]  using federal civil rights statutes, what to do when contacted by phones, mail,
[17:23.000 --> 17:27.000]  or court summons, how to answer letters and phone calls, how to get debt
[17:27.000 --> 17:31.000]  collectors out of your credit report, how to turn the financial tables on them
[17:31.000 --> 17:33.000]  and make them pay you to go away.
[17:33.000 --> 17:38.000]  The Michael Mears Proven Method is the solution for how to stop debt collectors.
[17:38.000 --> 17:41.000]  Personal consultation is available as well.
[17:41.000 --> 17:45.000]  For more information, please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the blue
[17:45.000 --> 17:49.000]  Michael Mears banner or email michaelmears at yahoo.com.
[17:49.000 --> 17:57.000]  That's ruleoflawradio.com or email m-i-c-h-a-e-l-m-i-r-r-a-s at yahoo.com to
[17:57.000 --> 18:00.000]  learn how to stop debt collectors now.
[18:00.000 --> 18:05.000]  Through advances in technology, our lives have greatly improved except in the
[18:05.000 --> 18:06.000]  area of nutrition.
[18:06.000 --> 18:10.000]  People feed their pets better than they feed themselves and it's time we
[18:10.000 --> 18:11.000]  changed all that.
[18:11.000 --> 18:16.000]  Our primary defense against aging and disease in this toxic environment is
[18:16.000 --> 18:17.000]  good nutrition.
[18:17.000 --> 18:22.000]  In a world where natural foods have been irradiated, adulterated and mutilated,
[18:22.000 --> 18:25.000]  young Jevity can provide the nutrients you need.
[18:25.000 --> 18:30.000]  Logos Radio Network gets many requests to endorse all sorts of products, most
[18:30.000 --> 18:31.000]  of which we reject.
[18:31.000 --> 18:36.000]  We have come to trust young Jevity so much we became a marketing distributor
[18:36.000 --> 18:40.000]  along with Alex Jones, Ben Fuchs and many others.
[18:40.000 --> 18:45.000]  When you order from logosradionetwork.com, your health will improve as you
[18:45.000 --> 18:47.000]  help support quality radio.
[18:47.000 --> 18:52.000]  As you realize the benefits of young Jevity, you may want to join us.
[18:52.000 --> 18:56.000]  As a distributor, you can experience improved health, help your friends and
[18:56.000 --> 18:59.000]  family and increase your income.
[18:59.000 --> 19:00.000]  Order now.
[19:00.000 --> 19:12.000]  You are listening to the Logos Radio Network, the logosradionetwork.com.
[19:12.000 --> 19:18.000]  Okay.
[19:18.000 --> 19:19.000]  We are back.
[19:19.000 --> 19:21.000]  Randy Kelton, Root of Law Radio.
[19:21.000 --> 19:24.000]  We're talking to David in South Dakota.
[19:24.000 --> 19:26.000]  Yes, sir.
[19:26.000 --> 19:31.000]  And yeah, the routine works.
[19:31.000 --> 19:33.000]  You run the routine on them.
[19:33.000 --> 19:37.000]  I have done this to the Chief Justice, not the current Chief Justice, but the
[19:37.000 --> 19:39.000]  last one.
[19:39.000 --> 19:41.000]  I walk complaints all the way up.
[19:41.000 --> 19:45.000]  I go to the, I want to go to the lowest level magistrate.
[19:45.000 --> 19:49.000]  A municipal court judge is best.
[19:49.000 --> 19:54.000]  I make a complaint to them and they refuse to act on it.
[19:54.000 --> 20:00.000]  Then I go to the county judge and he refuses to act or I go to the JP judge and
[20:00.000 --> 20:02.000]  the JP refuses to act.
[20:02.000 --> 20:05.000]  Then I go to county, then I go to district.
[20:05.000 --> 20:09.000]  Then I go to the Attorney General.
[20:09.000 --> 20:11.000]  Actually, I also go to the prosecuting attorneys.
[20:11.000 --> 20:14.000]  Prosecuting attorney will always refuse.
[20:14.000 --> 20:18.000]  I go to the prosecuting attorney before I go to the district judge.
[20:18.000 --> 20:20.000]  And this is how I do it.
[20:20.000 --> 20:24.000]  I go to the municipal judge and make the complaint and he refuses to act.
[20:24.000 --> 20:29.000]  So I go to the JP and file a complaint against the municipal judge.
[20:29.000 --> 20:33.000]  Matter of fact, we have a new municipal judge in the town I lived in.
[20:33.000 --> 20:42.000]  Last time I went to court, the next day the JP, the municipal judge retired.
[20:42.000 --> 20:49.000]  He was a good man, an honest man and the lawyer did such a horrible job that I
[20:49.000 --> 20:52.000]  embarrassed him in court and he quit.
[20:52.000 --> 20:54.000]  So we got a new municipal judge.
[20:54.000 --> 20:59.000]  Well, I was talking to the city manager and he asked me if I know Jane Murrow.
[20:59.000 --> 21:01.000]  Oh, Jane Murrow, huh?
[21:01.000 --> 21:04.000]  She was JP in Decatur.
[21:04.000 --> 21:09.000]  Well, the last time I talked to her, I tried to get the district attorney to arrest her.
[21:09.000 --> 21:12.000]  Oh, Mr. Kelton.
[21:12.000 --> 21:15.000]  So I only did that to her once.
[21:15.000 --> 21:18.000]  And that's what I did to her.
[21:18.000 --> 21:24.000]  I went to one JP with complaints against a sheriff's deputy and he threw me out of the court.
[21:24.000 --> 21:28.000]  So I went to Jane Murrow with complaints against the first JP.
[21:28.000 --> 21:32.000]  And she refused to give it to the grand jury or to the prosecuting attorney.
[21:32.000 --> 21:38.000]  So I went to the district attorney because he was right next door and he didn't take it.
[21:38.000 --> 21:41.000]  So I went to the attorney general.
[21:41.000 --> 21:45.000]  Then I went to the chief justice of the Supreme.
[21:45.000 --> 21:48.000]  And he refused to act on it.
[21:48.000 --> 21:52.000]  And they all will, just as a matter of course.
[21:52.000 --> 21:57.000]  So now you've got criminal charges against all of them.
[21:57.000 --> 22:06.000]  Now you can go to the civil court and say, where's my remedy?
[22:06.000 --> 22:11.000]  I exercised due diligence.
[22:11.000 --> 22:14.000]  I went to everybody.
[22:14.000 --> 22:20.000]  And everybody violated law in order to shield these people from prosecution.
[22:20.000 --> 22:23.000]  So where is my remedy?
[22:23.000 --> 22:26.000]  You're the only remedy I have left.
[22:26.000 --> 22:37.000]  David, if you were on a grand jury or a petty jury and I bring this argument to you, what would you think?
[22:37.000 --> 22:48.000]  I would think it would lie in my hands to do the right thing.
[22:48.000 --> 22:55.000]  And this is exactly what I have found from jurors and grand jurors as well.
[22:55.000 --> 22:59.000]  I had a guy call me who was a grand juror in Collin County.
[22:59.000 --> 23:02.000]  He was the foreman.
[23:02.000 --> 23:10.000]  And he was mortified that what the prosecutors and stuff were doing,
[23:10.000 --> 23:17.000]  he said the grand jury didn't believe anything the prosecutor was telling them.
[23:17.000 --> 23:24.000]  These grand jurors were upset and they were forcing the prosecutor to bring them more information
[23:24.000 --> 23:30.000]  because they wanted to do what was right and they were upset at the prosecutors.
[23:30.000 --> 23:38.000]  So this tells me human nature will protect us.
[23:38.000 --> 23:41.000]  They can try to stack these juries.
[23:41.000 --> 23:43.000]  They're not going to get it done.
[23:43.000 --> 23:45.000]  They may get it done once or twice.
[23:45.000 --> 23:58.000]  But if we go in with a really good case, our fellow Silla citizens will do the right thing if there's any possible way they can.
[23:58.000 --> 24:08.000]  And so if we do our job right, and I think stacking them up this way, getting everybody in the whole system engaged,
[24:08.000 --> 24:12.000]  it's real hard for them to argue their way out of it.
[24:12.000 --> 24:17.000]  It's almost like you never get to that last place in front of a jury
[24:17.000 --> 24:20.000]  because they find some way to throw it out before you get there.
[24:20.000 --> 24:29.000]  Well, that's why I'm working on how to carefully craft my complaints.
[24:29.000 --> 24:39.000]  And one of the things I'm looking at, David, instead of suing for damages first, you go in for declaratory judgment.
[24:39.000 --> 24:42.000]  You just want to identify the parties.
[24:42.000 --> 24:43.000]  Yeah.
[24:43.000 --> 24:45.000]  The rights of the parties.
[24:45.000 --> 25:00.000]  And in this case, I would go in for declaratory judgment asking the judge to command the chief justice of the Supreme to perform his duty as a magistrate.
[25:00.000 --> 25:02.000]  That's not a lot.
[25:02.000 --> 25:05.000]  Just hold an examining trial.
[25:05.000 --> 25:13.000]  And when you read the code 2.09, who are magistrates?
[25:13.000 --> 25:25.000]  First one, justices of the Supreme Court, judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals, judges of the Court of Appeals,
[25:25.000 --> 25:35.000]  district judges, county judges, justice of the peace, municipal judges, and recorders, whatever that is.
[25:35.000 --> 25:36.000]  We don't know what that is.
[25:36.000 --> 25:37.000]  Randy.
[25:37.000 --> 25:43.000]  First one they list as the Supreme Court justices.
[25:43.000 --> 25:46.000]  I have a question for you.
[25:46.000 --> 25:47.000]  Go ahead.
[25:47.000 --> 25:56.000]  Before I forget, is the constitutional county judge a magistrate?
[25:56.000 --> 25:57.000]  No.
[25:57.000 --> 26:01.000]  The constitutional judge that's in charge of the road?
[26:01.000 --> 26:03.000]  County Commissioner's Court.
[26:03.000 --> 26:04.000]  Yeah.
[26:04.000 --> 26:06.000]  Is he a magistrate?
[26:06.000 --> 26:07.000]  No.
[26:07.000 --> 26:09.000]  He's not listed.
[26:09.000 --> 26:18.000]  All the judges from the top down to the JP or magistrates except him.
[26:18.000 --> 26:24.000]  Well, he's not exactly a judge in the judicial context.
[26:24.000 --> 26:27.000]  That's merely a title they give him.
[26:27.000 --> 26:32.000]  He's really the chairman of the county commissioner's court.
[26:32.000 --> 26:36.000]  He doesn't have any judicial capacity.
[26:36.000 --> 26:44.000]  It's kind of like the IRS, they have their IRS court.
[26:44.000 --> 26:46.000]  That's not a court.
[26:46.000 --> 26:48.000]  They just call it court.
[26:48.000 --> 27:01.000]  And the county commissioner's court, they call it a court, but it's like a school board or a city council.
[27:01.000 --> 27:03.000]  Yeah, it's a business meeting.
[27:03.000 --> 27:08.000]  Yeah, it's just business, there's no judicial capacity that he has.
[27:08.000 --> 27:12.000]  So no, he's not listed as a magistrate.
[27:12.000 --> 27:17.000]  But he's the highest administrative officer in every county in the state of Texas.
[27:17.000 --> 27:21.000]  Yeah, he is that.
[27:21.000 --> 27:26.000]  And you could consider him an administrative judge.
[27:26.000 --> 27:30.000]  Him and the sheriff together carry the loads.
[27:30.000 --> 27:38.000]  Yeah, but he can't, you know, if they can't bring an accused to him for an examining trial, he can't do that.
[27:38.000 --> 27:42.000]  Cannot do that, okay.
[27:42.000 --> 27:56.000]  But can a visiting judge be a magistrate like if he's available but he's visiting from somewhere else or he's retired but he's visiting to...
[27:56.000 --> 27:59.000]  Attorney General opinion H500.
[27:59.000 --> 28:00.000]  Okay.
[28:00.000 --> 28:10.000]  Addressed to this issue where they arrested someone for a crime in one county, but they arrested him in a different county.
[28:10.000 --> 28:13.000]  And they took him to a magistrate in that county.
[28:13.000 --> 28:22.000]  And then the lawyer raised the issue that this judge didn't have venue.
[28:22.000 --> 28:41.000]  And the attorney general in H500 addressed this that said any magistrate may investigate into any criminal accusation, felony or misdemeanor, state or federal, from anywhere in the state.
[28:41.000 --> 28:48.000]  So every magistrate has statewide jurisdiction for that purpose.
[28:48.000 --> 28:54.000]  So there shouldn't be any reason why if you were arrested that you wouldn't be taken directly to one.
[28:54.000 --> 28:56.000]  Exactly.
[28:56.000 --> 29:00.000]  There shouldn't be any reason.
[29:00.000 --> 29:14.000]  I can't find one and I am in the process of putting together a concerted effort in the county I live in to get everyone to follow law in this regard.
[29:14.000 --> 29:18.000]  I'm even considering running for JP to get it done.
[29:18.000 --> 29:22.000]  Either JP or mayor of this little town I'm in.
[29:22.000 --> 29:26.000]  That might get him to appoint me mayor.
[29:26.000 --> 29:30.000]  Run for whatever office he can get elected to.
[29:30.000 --> 29:32.000]  He'd do a good job.
[29:32.000 --> 29:38.000]  And then I tell the police you arrest someone in this town, you bring him to me.
[29:38.000 --> 29:43.000]  If you fail to do that, I'll have you arrested myself.
[29:43.000 --> 29:44.000]  Okay.
[29:44.000 --> 29:47.000]  Do you have anything else for us, David?
[29:47.000 --> 29:51.000]  No, I think you've covered almost everything.
[29:51.000 --> 29:52.000]  Okay.
[29:52.000 --> 29:53.000]  We're about to go to break.
[29:53.000 --> 29:55.000]  Thank you, David.
[29:55.000 --> 29:57.000]  This is Randy Kelton, Wheel of Law Radio.
[29:57.000 --> 30:01.000]  We'll be right back.
[30:01.000 --> 30:10.000]  The Stasi, East German secret police, used to capture prisoners' scent on pieces of felt stored in glass jars so dogs could hunt them down later.
[30:10.000 --> 30:13.000]  Unfortunately, some things never change.
[30:13.000 --> 30:16.000]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, and I'll be back with more.
[30:16.000 --> 30:18.000]  Privacy is under attack.
[30:18.000 --> 30:22.000]  When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[30:22.000 --> 30:26.000]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[30:26.000 --> 30:28.000]  So protect your rights.
[30:28.000 --> 30:32.000]  Say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself.
[30:32.000 --> 30:34.000]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[30:34.000 --> 30:42.000]  This public service announcement is brought to you by Startpage.com, the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[30:42.000 --> 30:45.000]  Start over with Startpage.
[30:45.000 --> 30:55.000]  In Germany, 68-year-old leftist Fritz S. thought he'd seen it all until officials knocked on his door in 2007 demanding something new, his smell.
[30:55.000 --> 31:05.000]  They thought the aging revolutionary might disrupt the G8 summit, so they made him hold little metal tubes in his hands for several minutes to collect his scent just in case.
[31:05.000 --> 31:13.000]  Around that same time, the U.S. government sought research proposals for a similar system to collect human scent for tracking purposes.
[31:13.000 --> 31:21.000]  Those creepy interrogation jars I mentioned can be seen at the Stasi Museum in Berlin, along with other devices of surveillance and state control.
[31:21.000 --> 31:22.000]  Look closely.
[31:22.000 --> 31:24.000]  You may see our future.
[31:24.000 --> 31:25.000]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht.
[31:25.000 --> 31:54.000]  More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[31:55.000 --> 32:02.000]  See what our powder, seeds, and oil can do for you, only at FUSA.org.
[32:02.000 --> 32:05.000]  Rule of Law Radio is proud to offer the rule of law traffic seminar.
[32:05.000 --> 32:08.000]  In today's America, we live in an us-against-them society.
[32:08.000 --> 32:13.000]  If we, the people, are ever going to have a free society, then we're going to have to stand and defend our own rights.
[32:13.000 --> 32:20.000]  Among those rights are the right to travel freely from place to place, the right to act in our own private capacity, and most importantly, the right to due process of law.
[32:20.000 --> 32:26.000]  Traffic courts afford us the least expensive opportunity to learn how to enforce and preserve our rights through due process.
[32:26.000 --> 32:35.000]  Former Sheriff's Deputy Eddie Craig, in conjunction with Rule of Law Radio, has put together the most comprehensive teaching tool available that will help you understand what due process is and how to hold courts to the rule of law.
[32:35.000 --> 32:41.000]  You can get your own copy of this invaluable material by going to ruleoflawradio.com and ordering your copy today.
[32:41.000 --> 32:48.000]  By ordering now, you'll receive a copy of Eddie's book, The Texas Transportation Code, The Law Versus the Lie, video and audio of the original 2009 seminar,
[32:48.000 --> 32:51.000]  hundreds of research documents and other useful resource material.
[32:51.000 --> 32:55.000]  Learn how to fight for your rights with the help of this material from ruleoflawradio.com.
[32:55.000 --> 33:24.000]  Order your copy today and together we can have the free society we all want and deserve.
[33:24.000 --> 33:26.000]  Okay, we are back.
[33:26.000 --> 33:29.000]  Randy Kelton, Rule of Law Radio, and we're going to Olivier in Tennessee.
[33:29.000 --> 33:35.000]  Hello, Olivier.
[33:35.000 --> 33:36.000]  Hello, Olivier.
[33:36.000 --> 33:41.000]  Did I put you to sleep?
[33:41.000 --> 33:44.000]  Hmm.
[33:44.000 --> 33:49.000]  Looks like we either lost him or I put him to sleep.
[33:49.000 --> 33:54.000]  Okay, Olivier, I'll come back to you later, you might be distracted or something.
[33:54.000 --> 33:58.000]  Let's go to Will in New York.
[33:58.000 --> 34:00.000]  Hello, Will.
[34:00.000 --> 34:01.000]  Hey, Olivier.
[34:01.000 --> 34:05.000]  Blessings.
[34:05.000 --> 34:09.000]  Interrupted for your appeal, when is a good time to...
[34:09.000 --> 34:10.000]  Hold on, hold on.
[34:10.000 --> 34:16.000]  Back to mic a little away from your mouth, you're kind of booming into the mic.
[34:16.000 --> 34:18.000]  Hello, how's that?
[34:18.000 --> 34:20.000]  Okay, that sounds a little better.
[34:20.000 --> 34:23.000]  You might move it down by your chin so it's not in front of your mouth.
[34:23.000 --> 34:26.000]  It might not be so loud.
[34:26.000 --> 34:28.000]  Okay, good.
[34:28.000 --> 34:35.000]  Yeah, interlocutory appeal, when is a good time to bring that in?
[34:35.000 --> 34:36.000]  Wait, hold on.
[34:36.000 --> 34:38.000]  Say that all again, I missed something there.
[34:38.000 --> 34:41.000]  Interlocutory appeal, when is a good time to use that?
[34:41.000 --> 34:44.000]  Oh, interlocutory appeal.
[34:44.000 --> 34:56.000]  Interlocutory appeal, for those who don't know, is an appeal that you bring before there is a final adjudication of your case.
[34:56.000 --> 35:02.000]  And interlocutory appeal is limited to certain things.
[35:02.000 --> 35:06.000]  You can't just do an interlocutory for anything.
[35:06.000 --> 35:12.000]  And generally, an interlocutory will go to a dispositive motion.
[35:12.000 --> 35:24.000]  Dispositive meaning that a motion, if ruled in your favor, will dispose of the case, like a motion to dismiss or fail to state a claim.
[35:24.000 --> 35:36.000]  If you get a ruling on that, say you filed that a motion to dismiss or fail to state a claim and the judge rules against you.
[35:36.000 --> 35:40.000]  Then you say, wait a minute, wait a minute.
[35:40.000 --> 35:47.000]  If I get a positive ruling, we don't have to go through discovery, we don't have to go through all these hearings.
[35:47.000 --> 35:50.000]  It will dispose of this case.
[35:50.000 --> 36:06.000]  So in the interest of judicial economy, you would have a right to file an interlocutory so that if you get a pleading in your favor, it saves you all this time and cost of adjudicating the case.
[36:06.000 --> 36:16.000]  So if you get a ruling that's subject to interlocutory appeal, then you can file it at any time.
[36:16.000 --> 36:19.000]  Yeah, I'm pending a re-argument.
[36:19.000 --> 36:24.000]  The case is pending a reconsideration before the final.
[36:24.000 --> 36:25.000]  Right.
[36:25.000 --> 36:26.000]  Okay.
[36:26.000 --> 36:33.000]  No, you can't do, well, on any motion, you can ask for reconsideration.
[36:33.000 --> 36:39.000]  And if you're going to do in an interlocutory appeal, you would certainly want to do that.
[36:39.000 --> 36:44.000]  And for those that don't understand this part, let me explain why I'm saying that.
[36:44.000 --> 36:54.000]  When you file a motion for reconsideration, essentially what you're asking for are points and authorities.
[36:54.000 --> 37:02.000]  When you file a motion for reconsideration, you create findings of fact and conclusions at law.
[37:02.000 --> 37:06.000]  And you say, these are the facts that are before the court.
[37:06.000 --> 37:10.000]  This is the law that applies to those facts.
[37:10.000 --> 37:15.000]  And this is the decision you should have come to.
[37:15.000 --> 37:31.000]  And you ask the court to accept your facts and law or provide you with essentially a judgment, judgment order.
[37:31.000 --> 37:42.000]  If you get a order dismissing your case or denying a motion, you need a judgment as well.
[37:42.000 --> 37:48.000]  A judgment in effect is saying, these are the facts.
[37:48.000 --> 37:50.000]  This is the law.
[37:50.000 --> 37:56.000]  This is how I came to this ruling so that I issued this order.
[37:56.000 --> 38:02.000]  And in the federal courts, a judgment is absolutely mandatory.
[38:02.000 --> 38:04.000]  But lower court?
[38:04.000 --> 38:07.000]  No, in the federal courts.
[38:07.000 --> 38:14.000]  You need that in any court because without it, you don't know how to appeal.
[38:14.000 --> 38:23.000]  So if a judge renders a ruling and he don't tell you how he got to that ruling, how are you supposed to appeal?
[38:23.000 --> 38:26.000]  You have no idea what he did.
[38:26.000 --> 38:30.000]  So you can ask for it.
[38:30.000 --> 38:34.000]  If the judge refuses to give it, then you stop everything.
[38:34.000 --> 38:37.000]  You go for a writ of mandamus.
[38:37.000 --> 38:46.000]  Ask the appeals court to order him to give you findings of fact and conclusions at law because he's denying you your right to appeal.
[38:46.000 --> 38:53.000]  Okay, does that make sense?
[38:53.000 --> 38:57.000]  Without rending a decision without merit, that's not good.
[38:57.000 --> 39:00.000]  That's insufficient.
[39:00.000 --> 39:02.000]  I'm having a bit of trouble understanding you.
[39:02.000 --> 39:04.000]  I'm sorry.
[39:04.000 --> 39:05.000]  No, it's not you.
[39:05.000 --> 39:10.000]  It's the connection is not good.
[39:10.000 --> 39:12.000]  Try to talk a little slower.
[39:12.000 --> 39:14.000]  Will is from New York.
[39:14.000 --> 39:16.000]  You know how those guys in New York are.
[39:16.000 --> 39:19.000]  They talk faster than us rednecks can listen.
[39:19.000 --> 39:20.000]  Yeah, okay.
[39:20.000 --> 39:23.000]  Tell me about it.
[39:23.000 --> 39:36.000]  Now, to render a decision that your case does not, your motion does not have merit is not sufficient for a judge to do that.
[39:36.000 --> 39:43.000]  Well, unless he is specific in why it doesn't have merit.
[39:43.000 --> 39:48.000]  And this is what courts usually do.
[39:48.000 --> 39:53.000]  Harmon Taylor was the one that brought to this to my attention.
[39:53.000 --> 39:57.000]  From his perspective, he used to be a lawyer and he gave up his bar card.
[39:57.000 --> 40:03.000]  From his perspective, the courts are always the judges are always teaching.
[40:03.000 --> 40:10.000]  They will take the pleadings of both sides and they'll say to the plaintiff, this is what's wrong with your pleading.
[40:10.000 --> 40:11.000]  Fix it.
[40:11.000 --> 40:13.000]  Get it back to me.
[40:13.000 --> 40:16.000]  They'll go to the other side and say, this is what's wrong with your pleading.
[40:16.000 --> 40:27.000]  Fix it and get back to me because they want good documents before them so that they can make a good, clean judicial decision.
[40:27.000 --> 40:35.000]  So when you get a ruling from a judge, pay real close attention to it.
[40:35.000 --> 40:48.000]  If the judge did not tell you how he got to the ruling and why he couldn't rule in your favor, then you need to ask him.
[40:48.000 --> 40:50.000]  Because you have to have that.
[40:50.000 --> 40:54.000]  If you think he's wrong, then you need that so you can go to appeal.
[40:54.000 --> 41:03.000]  So always construe what the judge is doing is trying to teach you and show you what's wrong with your case.
[41:03.000 --> 41:11.000]  I've had people come on and they complain because the judge instructed the other side in what was wrong with their case.
[41:11.000 --> 41:13.000]  And they say that's what they're supposed to do.
[41:13.000 --> 41:19.000]  They're not taking sides because they'll generally instruct you as well because that makes sense.
[41:19.000 --> 41:33.000]  So for that judge not to have faith, I think it's an issue of what they call dishonest intelligence.
[41:33.000 --> 41:41.000]  Because the judge feared for if the judge would have made a decision, would probably have made the wrong decision.
[41:41.000 --> 41:45.000]  So instead of making a wrong decision, made no decision really.
[41:45.000 --> 41:49.000]  Made a decision, but it was an empty decision.
[41:49.000 --> 42:02.000]  In that case, you might want to file a complaint against the judge, a judicial conduct complaint.
[42:02.000 --> 42:11.000]  And then petition the court of appeals for mandamus ordering him to give you points and authorities.
[42:11.000 --> 42:15.000]  You have a right to that.
[42:15.000 --> 42:23.000]  If he fails to give you points and authority, he is denying you and your right to appeal.
[42:23.000 --> 42:26.000]  And that's written, that's written in stone too.
[42:26.000 --> 42:31.000]  And keep in mind, the judge doesn't have to be your buddy.
[42:31.000 --> 42:33.000]  He don't have to like you.
[42:33.000 --> 42:34.000]  He can hate you.
[42:34.000 --> 42:36.000]  It doesn't make any difference.
[42:36.000 --> 42:38.000]  That's the least.
[42:38.000 --> 42:41.000]  He's the servant, you're the master.
[42:41.000 --> 42:43.000]  He used to do his job.
[42:43.000 --> 42:45.000]  You don't care if he likes you or not.
[42:45.000 --> 42:49.000]  Often it's better if they don't.
[42:49.000 --> 42:59.000]  You know, I get a lot of people that still think that they have to appeal to the delicate sensibilities of the judge.
[42:59.000 --> 43:01.000]  That's the last thing I want a judge to think.
[43:01.000 --> 43:07.000]  When I walk into court, I want the judge to know we are not buddies.
[43:07.000 --> 43:11.000]  And I'm prepared to land on you like a ton of bricks.
[43:11.000 --> 43:13.000]  So you just do your job.
[43:13.000 --> 43:17.000]  You do your job, you're not going to have a problem from me.
[43:17.000 --> 43:25.000]  The first time I get attitude from a judge, I'm going to ask the judge to get down off the bench.
[43:25.000 --> 43:31.000]  If you have yourself personal passions you can't control, you get off this bench and cause to be appointed
[43:31.000 --> 43:34.000]  the fair and competent jurist I have a right to in the first instance.
[43:34.000 --> 43:37.000]  If it makes you mad, I don't care.
[43:37.000 --> 43:40.000]  Because I assume he's going to rule against me anyway.
[43:40.000 --> 43:43.000]  And if I really get him upset, then he'll rule against me stupid.
[43:43.000 --> 43:45.000]  That'll get a better shot at him.
[43:45.000 --> 43:47.000]  Hang on, about to go to break.
[43:47.000 --> 43:49.000]  Randy Kelton, Rule of Law Radio.
[43:49.000 --> 43:55.000]  Call in number 512-646-1984.
[43:55.000 --> 43:56.000]  My tongue got tongled.
[43:56.000 --> 43:58.000]  We'll be right back.
[43:58.000 --> 44:00.000]  And Olivier, I'll get you.
[44:00.000 --> 44:06.000]  Hello, my name is Stuart Smith from naturespureorganics.com
[44:06.000 --> 44:11.000]  and I would like to invite you to come by our store at 1904 Guadalupe Street Sweet D
[44:11.000 --> 44:14.000]  here in Austin, Texas, buying Brave New Books and J-Pain
[44:14.000 --> 44:18.000]  to see all our fantastic health and wellness products with your very own eyes.
[44:18.000 --> 44:22.000]  Have a look at our Miracle Healing Clay that started our adventure in alternative medicine.
[44:22.000 --> 44:25.000]  Take a peek at some of our other wonderful products including
[44:25.000 --> 44:30.000]  our Australian Emu oil, lotion candles, olive oil, soaps, and colloidal silver and gold.
[44:30.000 --> 44:37.000]  Call 512-264-4043 or find us online at naturespureorganics.com.
[44:37.000 --> 44:43.000]  That's 512-264-4043, naturespureorganics.com.
[44:43.000 --> 44:47.000]  Don't forget to like us on Facebook for information on events and our products.
[44:47.000 --> 45:01.000]  Naturespureorganics.com.
[45:01.000 --> 45:04.000]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[45:04.000 --> 45:07.000]  Win your case without an attorney with Juris Dictionary,
[45:07.000 --> 45:15.000]  the affordable, easy to understand, 4-CD course that will show you how in 24 hours, step by step.
[45:15.000 --> 45:19.000]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing.
[45:19.000 --> 45:23.000]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[45:23.000 --> 45:28.000]  Thousands have won with our step by step course and now you can too.
[45:28.000 --> 45:34.000]  Juris Dictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case winning experience.
[45:34.000 --> 45:39.000]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand
[45:39.000 --> 45:43.000]  about the principles and practices that control our American courts.
[45:43.000 --> 45:49.000]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases,
[45:49.000 --> 45:52.000]  pro se tactics and much more.
[45:52.000 --> 46:02.000]  Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner or call toll free, 866-LAW-EZ.
[46:02.000 --> 46:27.000]  Music
[46:27.000 --> 46:33.000]  Okay, we are back. Randy Kelton, Rule of Law Radio and we're talking to Will in New York.
[46:33.000 --> 46:36.000]  Okay, well one thing I didn't want to say.
[46:36.000 --> 46:42.000]  You sent me some really good information on judicial conduct complaints
[46:42.000 --> 46:47.000]  and the judicial conduct code in New York.
[46:47.000 --> 46:51.000]  I did appreciate that. That was really helpful stuff.
[46:51.000 --> 46:56.000]  Hey, you put out a lot of good stuff. One hand washes the other.
[46:56.000 --> 47:06.000]  Okay, and I'm talking to you because I had a problem getting Oliver Olivier in Tennessee to answer.
[47:06.000 --> 47:15.000]  I would like to look at getting you and Olivier together because you two seem to be a lot alike.
[47:15.000 --> 47:16.000]  Okay.
[47:16.000 --> 47:22.000]  Except you're a Brooklyn Yankee and he's a hillbilly, but we can get by that part.
[47:22.000 --> 47:24.000]  Sure that.
[47:24.000 --> 47:27.000]  Anyway, okay, where were we with you?
[47:27.000 --> 47:38.000]  Another thing, you know, okay, I'm pretty much understanding how that should go with the filing on the judge
[47:38.000 --> 47:48.000]  when the judge failed to sufficiently find the facts and conclusions of law in their reasoning.
[47:48.000 --> 47:56.000]  Another thing I wanted to say that I noticed that the bank all of a sudden stopped paying the taxes.
[47:56.000 --> 47:58.000]  I know I should have been paying it anyhow, but...
[47:58.000 --> 48:06.000]  Yes, I got an email from you on that and that was interesting.
[48:06.000 --> 48:09.000]  It stopped paying and also removed themselves from our court.
[48:09.000 --> 48:15.000]  What is the condition of your mortgage?
[48:15.000 --> 48:17.000]  The condition is...
[48:17.000 --> 48:20.000]  Yeah, are you in foreclosure? Are you up to date?
[48:20.000 --> 48:22.000]  Yes, yes. No, I'm not up to date.
[48:22.000 --> 48:26.000]  And they want to act as the creditors. I was lying to them to act as a creditor.
[48:26.000 --> 48:29.000]  They've been a bit more acting as a creditor than objectively.
[48:29.000 --> 48:32.000]  Hold on. You're up to date and they stopped paying the taxes?
[48:32.000 --> 48:35.000]  No, no, no, no, no. I'm not up to date. I'm not up to date at all.
[48:35.000 --> 48:36.000]  Oh, okay.
[48:36.000 --> 48:40.000]  They've been paying it for years. All of a sudden they stopped paying it.
[48:40.000 --> 48:42.000]  That...
[48:42.000 --> 48:44.000]  It's the first time.
[48:44.000 --> 48:55.000]  It has to be an error because a tax lien is superior to a mortgage lien.
[48:55.000 --> 48:59.000]  And, okay, let's talk a little strategy here.
[48:59.000 --> 49:12.000]  If they sold this, if the taxing agency sold this property at a tax sale,
[49:12.000 --> 49:15.000]  the odds are you'll get a whole lot...
[49:15.000 --> 49:23.000]  They'll get bids for a whole lot more that's owed against it in taxes.
[49:23.000 --> 49:36.000]  If they sell it at tax lien, then the mortgage is extinguished because it's an inferior lien.
[49:36.000 --> 49:39.000]  I would never let it get to that point.
[49:39.000 --> 49:42.000]  No, no, listen carefully.
[49:42.000 --> 49:48.000]  The mortgage is extinguished. It's gone.
[49:48.000 --> 49:51.000]  It goes bye-bye.
[49:51.000 --> 49:58.000]  You simply recover the property and the mortgage is gone
[49:58.000 --> 50:02.000]  because the tax lien is superior to the mortgage.
[50:02.000 --> 50:09.000]  So when you said the bank stopped paying the taxes, I'm thinking, what in the world?
[50:09.000 --> 50:19.000]  If they let that thing get sold to taxes, then their mortgage goes in the trash.
[50:19.000 --> 50:23.000]  It becomes void.
[50:23.000 --> 50:29.000]  I had a guy here near the town I live in where my daughter lives.
[50:29.000 --> 50:33.000]  He let a service station get sold for taxes.
[50:33.000 --> 50:38.000]  He had a hundred and something thousand dollar mortgage against it.
[50:38.000 --> 50:44.000]  And it sold for taxes for 35,000.
[50:44.000 --> 50:51.000]  And he went in and recovered and the mortgage was gone.
[50:51.000 --> 50:56.000]  The mortgage company come back and sued and the court said, sorry, Bubba,
[50:56.000 --> 51:02.000]  you could have bought it at the tax sale or you could have paid the taxes, but you didn't.
[51:02.000 --> 51:04.000]  Yeah, but that's what they would do.
[51:04.000 --> 51:09.000]  They would rescue, they would wait probably and know that I could if I let it pile up.
[51:09.000 --> 51:12.000]  And they would do just that.
[51:12.000 --> 51:15.000]  They're very, very tricky.
[51:15.000 --> 51:17.000]  Wait a minute, say that again?
[51:17.000 --> 51:27.000]  I don't pay taxes, to say that also that I may be lacking interest.
[51:27.000 --> 51:35.000]  Did the bank, did the lender notice you that they weren't paying the taxes?
[51:35.000 --> 51:37.000]  Right, yes.
[51:37.000 --> 51:38.000]  Oh, they did.
[51:38.000 --> 51:39.000]  Okay.
[51:39.000 --> 51:41.000]  No, they didn't pay it for the loan.
[51:41.000 --> 51:43.000]  They paid everything for the loan.
[51:43.000 --> 51:48.000]  And I'm not sure that's an interesting question, why they would do that.
[51:48.000 --> 51:54.000]  I mean, if I'm the bank, the amount of the taxes that I would have to pay
[51:54.000 --> 52:04.000]  relative to the value of my mortgage, my claim against the property would be minimal.
[52:04.000 --> 52:07.000]  So now they're asking you to pay it instead of them
[52:07.000 --> 52:11.000]  and I see they don't want to put out any more money on the property.
[52:11.000 --> 52:15.000]  That's correct, that's what I think, that's what I gather.
[52:15.000 --> 52:23.000]  But I tried to figure out what kind of calculation was going on with the bank
[52:23.000 --> 52:27.000]  and I can't find one.
[52:27.000 --> 52:33.000]  I'm thinking for the bank, they're stepping off into deep water here.
[52:33.000 --> 52:36.000]  Right, because if they're debt collected, it was better than an act,
[52:36.000 --> 52:39.000]  because they removed themselves from my credit report.
[52:39.000 --> 52:42.000]  It's supposed to be services, but services don't appear on your credit.
[52:42.000 --> 52:45.000]  Now, as I understand, it's supposed to be the credit,
[52:45.000 --> 52:48.000]  the lender is supposed to appear on the credit report.
[52:48.000 --> 52:50.000]  They removed themselves?
[52:50.000 --> 52:52.000]  Not the services.
[52:52.000 --> 52:59.000]  Okay, I don't know how to evaluate what's going on
[52:59.000 --> 53:02.000]  because I haven't seen what is in the court record.
[53:02.000 --> 53:06.000]  I know you sent me a bunch of documents and I started through them,
[53:06.000 --> 53:11.000]  there were so many, there were so many different loans that gave me a headache.
[53:11.000 --> 53:14.000]  Yeah, I do understand because it was an old case
[53:14.000 --> 53:18.000]  and they were doing a lot of different things.
[53:18.000 --> 53:24.000]  They introduced, you know, they used to throw everything out there
[53:24.000 --> 53:29.000]  and the judge ate it up, obviously.
[53:29.000 --> 53:32.000]  Okay, let me back up.
[53:32.000 --> 53:34.000]  Are you in foreclosure?
[53:34.000 --> 53:37.000]  Have you received a Notice of Acceleration?
[53:37.000 --> 53:40.000]  Some are in judgment, some are in judgment.
[53:40.000 --> 53:42.000]  That's why I did the reconsideration.
[53:42.000 --> 53:44.000]  Okay, that was a...
[53:44.000 --> 53:46.000]  A grant, yeah.
[53:46.000 --> 53:51.000]  Okay, have you filed a Notice of Recision?
[53:51.000 --> 53:53.000]  I did that, yes, I did.
[53:53.000 --> 53:55.000]  I put it on notice.
[53:55.000 --> 53:58.000]  When did you, did you file the Notice of Recision
[53:58.000 --> 54:03.000]  after you received a Notice of Acceleration?
[54:03.000 --> 54:06.000]  Right, after the judgment, actually.
[54:06.000 --> 54:08.000]  Okay.
[54:08.000 --> 54:11.000]  Oh, after the judgment.
[54:11.000 --> 54:13.000]  After the judgment.
[54:13.000 --> 54:15.000]  Hmm.
[54:15.000 --> 54:18.000]  Okay, that raises a question I'm not sure about
[54:18.000 --> 54:24.000]  because did you appeal the judgment?
[54:24.000 --> 54:26.000]  Oh, yeah, no, I didn't.
[54:26.000 --> 54:28.000]  Okay, so, okay, you appealed to the judgment,
[54:28.000 --> 54:31.000]  then the judgment is not a final order.
[54:31.000 --> 54:33.000]  That's not exactly.
[54:33.000 --> 54:35.000]  Okay, so.
[54:35.000 --> 54:38.000]  The introductory appeal, why I'm pending,
[54:38.000 --> 54:41.000]  why my reconsideration is pending.
[54:41.000 --> 54:43.000]  Okay, hold on.
[54:43.000 --> 54:48.000]  If you received, if the court ruled
[54:48.000 --> 54:50.000]  a final judgment in the case,
[54:50.000 --> 54:53.000]  the appeal is not interlocutory.
[54:53.000 --> 54:55.000]  No, that hasn't been done yet.
[54:55.000 --> 54:57.000]  I'm trying to do that.
[54:57.000 --> 55:03.000]  I wanted to do that before, if that was possible.
[55:03.000 --> 55:05.000]  Okay, I'm going to suggest,
[55:05.000 --> 55:08.000]  if you filed a Notice of Recision,
[55:08.000 --> 55:12.000]  and they, did they respond to the Notice of Recision?
[55:12.000 --> 55:14.000]  They did, 20 days.
[55:14.000 --> 55:18.000]  Did they file an opposition in the court?
[55:18.000 --> 55:20.000]  No, I didn't.
[55:20.000 --> 55:24.000]  They had 20 days to file an opposition in the court.
[55:24.000 --> 55:28.000]  You know, I didn't as far as, I just made the judge aware,
[55:28.000 --> 55:31.000]  put it on notice in the court.
[55:31.000 --> 55:34.000]  Okay, here's the deal.
[55:34.000 --> 55:39.000]  You're, the courts, I have found no case law
[55:39.000 --> 55:46.000]  on a Notice of Recision after foreclosure.
[55:46.000 --> 56:00.000]  And 1635H, I'm sorry, 1635I, the Truth in Lending Act,
[56:00.000 --> 56:04.000]  addresses rescission after foreclosure.
[56:04.000 --> 56:07.000]  The judges think that the right to rescind
[56:07.000 --> 56:11.000]  ends three years after the mortgage.
[56:11.000 --> 56:14.000]  I had a federal judge here in Fort Worth say
[56:14.000 --> 56:17.000]  that the right to rescind did not last forever.
[56:17.000 --> 56:22.000]  And I responded, yes, it does.
[56:22.000 --> 56:26.000]  Once there is a Notice of Intent to Foreclose,
[56:26.000 --> 56:29.000]  the right to rescind is reinvigorated,
[56:29.000 --> 56:32.000]  and that one does last forever.
[56:32.000 --> 56:34.000]  So you filed a Notice of Recision,
[56:34.000 --> 56:40.000]  they did not begin the, they did not rescind the note
[56:40.000 --> 56:45.000]  within the 20 days, or file an opposition in the court,
[56:45.000 --> 56:51.000]  file a petition for declaratory judgment
[56:51.000 --> 56:53.000]  to declare the rights of the parties,
[56:53.000 --> 56:58.000]  and ask the court to declare under Jasinowski
[56:58.000 --> 57:02.000]  that rescission was accomplished.
[57:02.000 --> 57:11.000]  And the note is, this case is thereby moot as rescission has occurred,
[57:11.000 --> 57:16.000]  and ask the court to dismiss this case.
[57:16.000 --> 57:21.000]  Regardless of, regardless of any tolling or the three-year statute,
[57:21.000 --> 57:23.000]  that should not be a question.
[57:23.000 --> 57:24.000]  That does not apply here.
[57:24.000 --> 57:26.000]  There's a separate statute.
[57:26.000 --> 57:33.000]  That's 1635F, 1635I, reinvigorates it.
[57:33.000 --> 57:41.000]  If you can show more than $35 in unreported fees,
[57:41.000 --> 57:45.000]  the right to rescind is reinvigorated.
[57:45.000 --> 57:47.000]  And regardless of whether you show that or not,
[57:47.000 --> 57:49.000]  when you give the Notice of Recission,
[57:49.000 --> 57:55.000]  what the Jasinowski case said is rescission is accomplished,
[57:55.000 --> 57:59.000]  and even you cannot repeal it.
[57:59.000 --> 58:01.000]  It's a done deal.
[58:01.000 --> 58:05.000]  That's 1635F, 1635I, right?
[58:05.000 --> 58:06.000]  Yes.
[58:06.000 --> 58:09.000]  Look up the Truth in Lending Act 1635.
[58:09.000 --> 58:13.000]  Read all of 1635.
[58:13.000 --> 58:15.000]  Right.
[58:15.000 --> 58:18.000]  Oh, that did it.
[58:18.000 --> 58:22.000]  You will like it, and then go, and nobody has done this.
[58:22.000 --> 58:23.000]  I've got a couple working,
[58:23.000 --> 58:29.000]  but there are no rulings on 1635H that I can find.
[58:29.000 --> 58:32.000]  Recision after foreclosure.
[58:32.000 --> 58:33.000]  Hang on.
[58:33.000 --> 58:35.000]  About to go to break.
[58:35.000 --> 58:37.000]  Randy Kelton, Rule of Law Radio.
[58:37.000 --> 58:41.000]  Olivier, if you're there, you might try hanging up and calling back,
[58:41.000 --> 58:44.000]  because I tried to take you and couldn't hear you,
[58:44.000 --> 58:47.000]  so we might have a bad connection.
[58:47.000 --> 58:48.000]  Hang on.
[58:48.000 --> 58:50.000]  We'll be right back.
[58:50.000 --> 58:54.000]  Would you like to make more definite progress in your walk with God?
[58:54.000 --> 58:57.000]  Bibles for America is offering a free study Bible
[58:57.000 --> 59:01.000]  and a set of free Christian books that can really help.
[59:01.000 --> 59:04.000]  The New Testament Recovery Version is one of the most comprehensive
[59:04.000 --> 59:06.000]  study Bibles available today.
[59:06.000 --> 59:09.000]  It's an accurate translation, and it contains thousands of footnotes
[59:09.000 --> 59:13.000]  that will help you to know God and to know the meaning of life.
[59:13.000 --> 59:16.000]  The free books are a three-volume set called
[59:16.000 --> 59:18.000]  Basic Elements of the Christian Life.
[59:18.000 --> 59:21.000]  Chapter by chapter, Basic Elements of the Christian Life
[59:21.000 --> 59:24.000]  clearly presents God's plan of salvation,
[59:24.000 --> 59:27.000]  growing in Christ, and how to build up the church.
[59:27.000 --> 59:30.000]  To order your free New Testament Recovery Version
[59:30.000 --> 59:33.000]  and Basic Elements of the Christian Life,
[59:33.000 --> 59:40.000]  call Bibles for America toll-free at 888-551-0102.
[59:40.000 --> 59:44.000]  That's 888-551-0102.
[59:44.000 --> 59:49.000]  Or visit us online at bfa.org.
[59:49.000 --> 59:59.000]  You're listening to the Logos Radio Network at logosradionetwork.com.
[59:59.000 --> 01:00:04.000]  The following news flash is brought to you by the Lone Star Lowdown,
[01:00:04.000 --> 01:00:07.000]  providing your daily bulletins for the commodities market,
[01:00:07.000 --> 01:00:11.000]  Today in History, News Updates,
[01:00:11.000 --> 01:00:16.000]  and the inside scoop into the tides of the alternative.
[01:00:16.000 --> 01:00:20.000]  Markets for Wednesday, the 26th of October, 2016,
[01:00:20.000 --> 01:00:24.000]  are currently trading with gold at $1,266.33 an ounce,
[01:00:24.000 --> 01:00:27.000]  silver at $17.63 an ounce,
[01:00:27.000 --> 01:00:30.000]  Texas crude at $49.96 a barrel,
[01:00:30.000 --> 01:00:39.000]  and Bitcoin is currently sitting at about $675 U.S. currency.
[01:00:39.000 --> 01:00:42.000]  Today in History, the year 2001,
[01:00:42.000 --> 01:00:46.000]  then President George W. Bush signs into law the United and Strengthening America
[01:00:46.000 --> 01:00:50.000]  by providing appropriate tools required to intercept an obstructed Terrorism Act
[01:00:50.000 --> 01:00:52.000]  or the USA PATRIOT Act into law,
[01:00:52.000 --> 01:00:56.000]  with controversial provisions concerning surveillance procedures and gathering,
[01:00:56.000 --> 01:00:58.000]  anti-money laundering, and business records,
[01:00:58.000 --> 01:01:02.000]  removing obstacles to investigating terrorism by consolidating agencies,
[01:01:02.000 --> 01:01:04.000]  and contentious interrogation techniques.
[01:01:04.000 --> 01:01:07.000]  Perhaps the biggest concern raised from civil rights groups
[01:01:07.000 --> 01:01:11.000]  was the rapidness in which the 342-page bill was written up, read,
[01:01:11.000 --> 01:01:14.000]  and passed by Congress and then signed into law,
[01:01:14.000 --> 01:01:18.000]  a little over a month after the September 11 terrorist attacks.
[01:01:18.000 --> 01:01:22.000]  Today in History,
[01:01:22.000 --> 01:01:26.000]  in recent years, NATO's biggest military proliferation on Russia's border
[01:01:26.000 --> 01:01:28.000]  since the Cold War is underway,
[01:01:28.000 --> 01:01:30.000]  with Great Britain announcing Wednesday today
[01:01:30.000 --> 01:01:33.000]  that it is planning on sending fighter jets to Romania next year,
[01:01:33.000 --> 01:01:37.000]  and the United States has vowed troops, tanks, and artillery to Poland,
[01:01:37.000 --> 01:01:41.000]  along with Germany, Canada, and other NATO allies also pledging forces
[01:01:41.000 --> 01:01:44.000]  at a defense ministers meeting in Brussels.
[01:01:44.000 --> 01:01:48.000]  Meanwhile, two Russian warships entered the Baltic Sea between Sweden and Denmark
[01:01:48.000 --> 01:01:50.000]  and are said to be armed with cruise missiles.
[01:01:50.000 --> 01:01:53.000]  The ships were part of an eight-ship carrier battle group,
[01:01:53.000 --> 01:01:57.000]  including Russia's one and only aircraft carrier, the Admiral Kuznestov,
[01:01:57.000 --> 01:02:02.000]  which is expected to join around 10 other Russian vessels already off the Syrian coast.
[01:02:02.000 --> 01:02:06.000]  We hope and pray these Russian-NATO escalations over engagement in Syria
[01:02:06.000 --> 01:02:09.000]  are soon de-escalated and a resolve is figured out.
[01:02:09.000 --> 01:02:13.000]  Our thoughts and prayers also go out to the people of Syria as well.
[01:02:17.000 --> 01:02:19.000]  Early voting started Monday in Texas.
[01:02:19.000 --> 01:02:21.000]  Record turnout is being recorded in many counties.
[01:02:21.000 --> 01:02:25.000]  However, some individual voters have been calling foul when voting straight ticket,
[01:02:25.000 --> 01:02:28.000]  claiming that the e-voting machines are leaving the presidential bid unchecked
[01:02:28.000 --> 01:02:31.000]  when a straight vote for the Republican parties placed.
[01:02:31.000 --> 01:02:35.000]  Reminds me of what Joseph Stalin said when he said it wasn't who voted that counted,
[01:02:35.000 --> 01:02:36.000]  but who counted the votes.
[01:02:36.000 --> 01:02:39.000]  Early voting in Texas ends four days before the election,
[01:02:39.000 --> 01:03:02.000]  so get out there and vote nobody for president.
[01:03:09.000 --> 01:03:25.000]  Okay, we are back.
[01:03:25.000 --> 01:03:28.000]  Brandon Kelton from Rue de la Radio.
[01:03:28.000 --> 01:03:30.000]  We're talking to Will in New York.
[01:03:30.000 --> 01:03:32.000]  Okay, Will.
[01:03:32.000 --> 01:03:37.000]  You know, I don't want to spend too much time because other people are going to come in,
[01:03:37.000 --> 01:03:42.000]  but you know, there's a jurisdiction issue there.
[01:03:42.000 --> 01:03:44.000]  Wait, I'm having trouble understanding you.
[01:03:44.000 --> 01:03:46.000]  You're moving into the mic.
[01:03:46.000 --> 01:03:54.000]  Is jurisdiction now is in question for the court to move, continue to move forward, proceed?
[01:03:54.000 --> 01:03:58.000]  How is jurisdiction in question?
[01:03:58.000 --> 01:04:06.000]  Because the mortgage has been rescinded and what are they basing, now what are they basing their claim on?
[01:04:06.000 --> 01:04:10.000]  Exactly, very good.
[01:04:10.000 --> 01:04:21.000]  Yeah, well, subject matter jurisdiction in terms of the competency of the court.
[01:04:21.000 --> 01:04:33.000]  You maintain that while the court has general subject matter jurisdiction over this kind of subject matter,
[01:04:33.000 --> 01:04:40.000]  the petitioner lacks standing to invoke the subject matter jurisdiction of the court.
[01:04:40.000 --> 01:04:47.000]  Therefore, the court is incompetent to hear the issue.
[01:04:47.000 --> 01:04:49.000]  Did that make sense?
[01:04:49.000 --> 01:05:00.000]  Yes, but see, they confuse a lot of times with jurisdiction of the, I guess, the location of the court.
[01:05:00.000 --> 01:05:01.000]  What is that?
[01:05:01.000 --> 01:05:03.000]  That's a venue.
[01:05:03.000 --> 01:05:05.000]  A venue.
[01:05:05.000 --> 01:05:14.000]  Yeah, and this was a problem I had in Wisconsin where the court said, of course I have subject matter jurisdiction.
[01:05:14.000 --> 01:05:23.000]  And I filed a response saying, yes, while you have general jurisdiction over this particular subject matter
[01:05:23.000 --> 01:05:34.000]  and you have exclusive jurisdiction over this subject matter, the petitioner lacked the legal capacity to invoke that jurisdiction.
[01:05:34.000 --> 01:05:42.000]  So that renders the court legally incompetent to hear the issues.
[01:05:42.000 --> 01:05:49.000]  Your petitioner is unable to bring a controversy to the court.
[01:05:49.000 --> 01:05:57.000]  They fail to state a claim.
[01:05:57.000 --> 01:05:58.000]  No?
[01:05:58.000 --> 01:05:59.000]  No.
[01:05:59.000 --> 01:06:05.000]  Not that they fail to state a claim, that they lack legal competency.
[01:06:05.000 --> 01:06:16.000]  They have no power to bring a controversy to the court because while they may have agency and standing,
[01:06:16.000 --> 01:06:33.000]  they're legally stopped from making a claim against the property because their claim has been rendered void by the rescission.
[01:06:33.000 --> 01:06:36.000]  And a challenge subject matter jurisdiction can be brought at any time.
[01:06:36.000 --> 01:06:49.000]  So you can go ahead and craft a subject matter jurisdiction challenge and file it and ask the court to rule on the effect of rescission under Jasinowski.
[01:06:49.000 --> 01:06:54.000]  And Jasinowski is a tough case.
[01:06:54.000 --> 01:06:59.000]  The Supreme stuck it to the banks big time.
[01:06:59.000 --> 01:07:06.000]  But most of these courts, are they really adhering to it?
[01:07:06.000 --> 01:07:18.000]  I haven't found any case where a post foreclosure rescission has been before the courts.
[01:07:18.000 --> 01:07:22.000]  They might have been before the courts, but they didn't get to appeal.
[01:07:22.000 --> 01:07:29.000]  So I suspect that the bank made a deal with them to keep it out of the courts.
[01:07:29.000 --> 01:07:34.000]  That's the last thing they want to happen.
[01:07:34.000 --> 01:07:40.000]  So it sure wouldn't hurt for you to file that.
[01:07:40.000 --> 01:07:52.000]  And one more thing, I hear so much talk about it's been paid, you know, the insurance, the settlements, the co-op.
[01:07:52.000 --> 01:08:00.000]  These banks have been paid more than one time also in a continuing trade.
[01:08:00.000 --> 01:08:04.000]  You trade on your note.
[01:08:04.000 --> 01:08:07.000]  Now, where's the proof?
[01:08:07.000 --> 01:08:11.000]  Do you subpoena them to get the proof?
[01:08:11.000 --> 01:08:13.000]  Oh, wait a minute.
[01:08:13.000 --> 01:08:14.000]  Okay.
[01:08:14.000 --> 01:08:23.000]  You're talking about getting proof that they have negotiated the note to a third party?
[01:08:23.000 --> 01:08:26.000]  Yeah.
[01:08:26.000 --> 01:08:29.000]  Okay.
[01:08:29.000 --> 01:08:31.000]  The way I do that.
[01:08:31.000 --> 01:08:32.000]  That's been satisfied.
[01:08:32.000 --> 01:08:48.000]  Okay. The way I do that is I file a petition to declare the rights of the parties under 28 U.S. Code 2201.
[01:08:48.000 --> 01:08:52.000]  You ask the court to declare the rights of the parties.
[01:08:52.000 --> 01:09:01.000]  And matter of fact, if you'll send me an email asking for it and reminding me, I will send you one I have written
[01:09:01.000 --> 01:09:14.000]  where I claim that the mortgage is void by rescission and ask the court to rule that the claimant lacks,
[01:09:14.000 --> 01:09:21.000]  the claim of the claimant is void as a matter of law.
[01:09:21.000 --> 01:09:23.000]  And that would end it.
[01:09:23.000 --> 01:09:27.000]  One very singular focused issue.
[01:09:27.000 --> 01:09:31.000]  You don't want to get the court too confused. They'll get confused easy.
[01:09:31.000 --> 01:09:39.000]  All you want them to do is rule on the effect of rescission post foreclosure.
[01:09:39.000 --> 01:09:45.000]  And that could end the whole thing.
[01:09:45.000 --> 01:09:53.000]  I couldn't understand that last part.
[01:09:53.000 --> 01:09:55.000]  I'm still having trouble with your...
[01:09:55.000 --> 01:10:02.000]  Yeah, I'm saying it looks like it's going to be a good quick step after all for us.
[01:10:02.000 --> 01:10:04.000]  Your connection is fading.
[01:10:04.000 --> 01:10:05.000]  Yeah, it is.
[01:10:05.000 --> 01:10:09.000]  I've got to get a better head piece.
[01:10:09.000 --> 01:10:10.000]  Okay.
[01:10:10.000 --> 01:10:11.000]  I've been putting my hearing aid in.
[01:10:11.000 --> 01:10:15.000]  I can't understand it.
[01:10:15.000 --> 01:10:20.000]  The one you had in court, that one was not good at all.
[01:10:20.000 --> 01:10:21.000]  Okay.
[01:10:21.000 --> 01:10:26.000]  I haven't pulled that on hearing aid trick on any judges lately.
[01:10:26.000 --> 01:10:27.000]  Okay.
[01:10:27.000 --> 01:10:29.000]  Do you have anything else for us?
[01:10:29.000 --> 01:10:30.000]  No, that's it.
[01:10:30.000 --> 01:10:31.000]  That was good.
[01:10:31.000 --> 01:10:32.000]  Very good.
[01:10:32.000 --> 01:10:33.000]  Okay.
[01:10:33.000 --> 01:10:34.000]  Let me go to Olivier.
[01:10:34.000 --> 01:10:36.000]  He's been waiting a long time.
[01:10:36.000 --> 01:10:38.000]  Thank you, Will.
[01:10:38.000 --> 01:10:40.000]  Okay.
[01:10:40.000 --> 01:10:43.000]  Olivier, can you hear me this time?
[01:10:43.000 --> 01:10:44.000]  Olivier.
[01:10:44.000 --> 01:10:45.000]  All right.
[01:10:45.000 --> 01:10:47.000]  Got you.
[01:10:47.000 --> 01:10:49.000]  Yeah.
[01:10:49.000 --> 01:10:51.000]  Good question.
[01:10:51.000 --> 01:10:56.000]  I submit to the suit against the city and defendants, right?
[01:10:56.000 --> 01:11:03.000]  But I've got this judge where he made a ruling against my motion to do it or not.
[01:11:03.000 --> 01:11:11.000]  And when I came to look at it real closely, I came to look at that the city is basically
[01:11:11.000 --> 01:11:26.000]  representing, the attorneys are representing the city and not the other defendants.
[01:11:26.000 --> 01:11:31.000]  And I was wondering how do I correct that issue or how do I bring that issue up?
[01:11:31.000 --> 01:11:41.000]  Generally, the courts will consider a suit against a municipal police officer as a suit
[01:11:41.000 --> 01:11:49.000]  against the municipality.
[01:11:49.000 --> 01:11:54.000]  Probably won't get past that one.
[01:11:54.000 --> 01:11:56.000]  You could certainly raise the issue.
[01:11:56.000 --> 01:12:04.000]  I'm not sure technically how things work in Tennessee, but in most cases, state and
[01:12:04.000 --> 01:12:11.000]  federal that I've seen, a suit against a municipal employee, primarily a police officer,
[01:12:11.000 --> 01:12:18.000]  is construed to be a suit against the municipality.
[01:12:18.000 --> 01:12:26.000]  Unless you have sued the officer in his personal capacity.
[01:12:26.000 --> 01:12:30.000]  Now, would I have to...
[01:12:30.000 --> 01:12:41.000]  Also, he wrote, I went for a motion for default judgment, but I didn't realize that a dismissal
[01:12:41.000 --> 01:12:47.000]  motion is considered to be a responsive pleading.
[01:12:47.000 --> 01:12:51.000]  A motion to dismiss, yes.
[01:12:51.000 --> 01:12:57.000]  After the original, when you file the original petition, a motion to dismiss is considered
[01:12:57.000 --> 01:13:04.000]  a responsive pleading because if they receive, and generally the motion to dismiss is a dismiss
[01:13:04.000 --> 01:13:07.000]  or failure of state of claim.
[01:13:07.000 --> 01:13:17.000]  A dispositive motion would eliminate the suit and thereby make it unnecessary to file an
[01:13:17.000 --> 01:13:18.000]  answer.
[01:13:18.000 --> 01:13:27.000]  So, the time to file an answer is told from the time the motion to dismiss is filed and
[01:13:27.000 --> 01:13:30.000]  until the motion to dismiss is adjudicated.
[01:13:30.000 --> 01:13:36.000]  If the court rules against the motion to dismiss, when the court enters the ruling, the clock
[01:13:36.000 --> 01:13:40.000]  restarts for filing an answer.
[01:13:40.000 --> 01:13:43.000]  The clock restarts?
[01:13:43.000 --> 01:13:45.000]  No, it doesn't start over.
[01:13:45.000 --> 01:13:47.000]  I'm sorry, I said restarts.
[01:13:47.000 --> 01:13:48.000]  It starts up again.
[01:13:48.000 --> 01:13:51.000]  It continues.
[01:13:51.000 --> 01:14:01.000]  So, if it took them 10 days to file the motion to dismiss, and like in Texas, you got the
[01:14:01.000 --> 01:14:04.000]  Monday after the 20th day, they got 10 days left.
[01:14:04.000 --> 01:14:12.000]  So, as soon as the motion to dismiss is overruled, then they got 10 days left to file an answer.
[01:14:12.000 --> 01:14:13.000]  Okay.
[01:14:13.000 --> 01:14:20.000]  Whatever is left from the date that they submitted it, it continues from there to the 60th day
[01:14:20.000 --> 01:14:21.000]  mark.
[01:14:21.000 --> 01:14:22.000]  Yes.
[01:14:22.000 --> 01:14:23.000]  Okay.
[01:14:23.000 --> 01:14:34.000]  Yeah, because I was reading the reasons that I went and go reread the dismissal, motion
[01:14:34.000 --> 01:14:39.000]  to dismissal, and it was very depressing.
[01:14:39.000 --> 01:14:51.000]  Basically, he went down saying that I failed to state a claim for that I can... I failed
[01:14:51.000 --> 01:15:02.000]  to state a claim for each one of my actions, and also stated that under the GTLA, the Government
[01:15:02.000 --> 01:15:12.000]  of Tort Act, it says that they are not liable underneath the Government of Tort Act.
[01:15:12.000 --> 01:15:21.000]  When I'm going to go look at it, in the general provisions of that Government of Tort Act,
[01:15:21.000 --> 01:15:29.000]  it says that inverse condemnation shall not be affected by this chapter.
[01:15:29.000 --> 01:15:38.000]  So, inverse condemnation is also eminent domain, which is the action for eminent domain.
[01:15:38.000 --> 01:15:50.000]  Once that happens, that negates their immunity, and the city cannot claim immunity.
[01:15:50.000 --> 01:15:53.000]  The municipality cannot claim immunity.
[01:15:53.000 --> 01:16:02.000]  Did the lawyer who filed the motion include points and authorities?
[01:16:02.000 --> 01:16:03.000]  Yes.
[01:16:03.000 --> 01:16:06.000]  Did you read the points and authorities?
[01:16:06.000 --> 01:16:10.000]  The case law that he concluded?
[01:16:10.000 --> 01:16:11.000]  Yes.
[01:16:11.000 --> 01:16:12.000]  No.
[01:16:12.000 --> 01:16:15.000]  You might want to look at it.
[01:16:15.000 --> 01:16:23.000]  If he improperly cited case law, you should go for denial of the motion and sanctions
[01:16:23.000 --> 01:16:34.000]  against the lawyer, because if in fact, the eminent domain is exempted, and he argued
[01:16:34.000 --> 01:16:40.000]  that it wasn't, if he didn't provide good case law, that's real good grounds to sanction
[01:16:40.000 --> 01:16:41.000]  the lawyer.
[01:16:41.000 --> 01:16:44.000]  That'll get a lawyer sanctioned quicker than anything.
[01:16:44.000 --> 01:16:47.000]  It's making a frivolous or improper argument.
[01:16:47.000 --> 01:16:48.000]  Hang on.
[01:16:48.000 --> 01:16:49.000]  Going to break.
[01:16:49.000 --> 01:16:52.000]  Randy Kelton, Little Block Radio.
[01:16:52.000 --> 01:17:00.000]  We'll be right back.
[01:17:00.000 --> 01:17:05.000]  We'll be right back.
[01:17:30.000 --> 01:17:57.000]  We'll be right back.
[01:18:01.000 --> 01:18:04.000]  At Capital Coin and Bullion, our mission is to be your preferred shopping destination
[01:18:04.000 --> 01:18:09.000]  by delivering excellent customer service and outstanding value at an affordable price.
[01:18:09.000 --> 01:18:13.000]  We provide a wide assortment of favorite products featuring a great selection of high quality
[01:18:13.000 --> 01:18:14.000]  coins and precious metals.
[01:18:14.000 --> 01:18:18.000]  We cater to beginners in coin collecting as well as large transactions for investors.
[01:18:18.000 --> 01:18:23.000]  We believe in educating our customers with resources from top accredited metals dealers
[01:18:23.000 --> 01:18:24.000]  and journalists.
[01:18:24.000 --> 01:18:27.000]  If we don't have what you're looking for, we can find it.
[01:18:27.000 --> 01:18:32.000]  In addition, we carry popular longevity products such as Beyond Tangy Tangerine and Polynverse.
[01:18:32.000 --> 01:18:37.000]  We also offer One World Way, Mountain House Storable Foods, Berkey Water Products, ammunition
[01:18:37.000 --> 01:18:39.000]  at 10% above wholesale, and more.
[01:18:39.000 --> 01:18:43.000]  We broke through metals IRA accounts and we also accept Bitcoins as payment.
[01:18:43.000 --> 01:18:46.000]  Call us at 512-646-6440.
[01:18:46.000 --> 01:18:51.000]  We're located at 7304 Burnett Road, Suite A, about a half mile south of Anderson.
[01:18:51.000 --> 01:18:54.000]  We're open Monday through Friday 10 to 6, Saturdays 10 to 2.
[01:18:54.000 --> 01:18:59.000]  Visit us at capitalcoin and bullion.com or call 512-646-6440.
[01:18:59.000 --> 01:19:13.000]  This is the Logos Radio Network.
[01:19:13.000 --> 01:19:18.000]  Oh, come on.
[01:19:18.000 --> 01:19:19.000]  Okay.
[01:19:19.000 --> 01:19:29.000]  We are back, Randy Kelton, Root of Law Radio, and we're talking to Olivier in Tennessee.
[01:19:29.000 --> 01:19:30.000]  Okay.
[01:19:30.000 --> 01:19:36.000]  We were talking about the lawyer claiming that they were immune from suit and actions
[01:19:36.000 --> 01:19:38.000]  under imminent domain.
[01:19:38.000 --> 01:19:50.000]  You know, it says that they're immune from suit underneath the government tort liability
[01:19:50.000 --> 01:19:53.000]  section statute, right?
[01:19:53.000 --> 01:19:56.000]  And when I went and go look, I read the whole chapter, the whole thing.
[01:19:56.000 --> 01:20:03.000]  When I went and started looking at the provisions, in provisions 105, you know, it's about that
[01:20:03.000 --> 01:20:11.000]  100 goes down, 105 before it gets to the part where it says that the city is immune from
[01:20:11.000 --> 01:20:12.000]  suit when they happen.
[01:20:12.000 --> 01:20:16.000]  It says that inverse condemnation, not infected.
[01:20:16.000 --> 01:20:23.000]  Inverse condemnation is the action for imminent domain.
[01:20:23.000 --> 01:20:31.000]  You initiate action by suing for inverse condemnation, and then depending on regulatory taking or
[01:20:31.000 --> 01:20:39.000]  physical taking or you could tell which action happened against you.
[01:20:39.000 --> 01:20:47.000]  And then here it says that this chapter shall not apply to any action in imminent domain
[01:20:47.000 --> 01:21:09.000]  initiated by the landowner under 29-16-123 and 29-16-124 nor be construed to implied repeal
[01:21:09.000 --> 01:21:11.000]  those statutes.
[01:21:11.000 --> 01:21:15.000]  So that means it can't affect...
[01:21:15.000 --> 01:21:18.000]  It sounds pretty clear that this is exempted.
[01:21:18.000 --> 01:21:21.000]  Now you want to go to look at his case law.
[01:21:21.000 --> 01:21:32.000]  If his case law only goes to immunity of the city and doesn't address the specific exemption,
[01:21:32.000 --> 01:21:36.000]  then his argument is frivolous.
[01:21:36.000 --> 01:21:48.000]  He also included that I had an inverse condemnation cause of action, which is impossible because
[01:21:48.000 --> 01:21:54.000]  he was saying that that is an action against land.
[01:21:54.000 --> 01:22:04.000]  And I found in the cases where inverse condemnation deals with when it comes to any property,
[01:22:04.000 --> 01:22:11.000]  land or interest to the property or rights, as far as rights regulating over the property
[01:22:11.000 --> 01:22:15.000]  or property being taken.
[01:22:15.000 --> 01:22:16.000]  Okay.
[01:22:16.000 --> 01:22:19.000]  Now this is the suit over the house or the cars?
[01:22:19.000 --> 01:22:20.000]  The cars.
[01:22:20.000 --> 01:22:21.000]  I haven't wrote the house yet.
[01:22:21.000 --> 01:22:25.000]  He may be right because the cars are not the property.
[01:22:25.000 --> 01:22:28.000]  They're real property, but they're separate from...
[01:22:28.000 --> 01:22:34.000]  I mean, they're private property, but I'm sorry, they're personal property as opposed
[01:22:34.000 --> 01:22:35.000]  to real property.
[01:22:35.000 --> 01:22:36.000]  I understand.
[01:22:36.000 --> 01:22:43.000]  I found case law from appeal court decisions and Tennessee and Supreme court decisions
[01:22:43.000 --> 01:22:52.000]  stating that inverse condemnation, you can sue for inverse condemnations for denial of
[01:22:52.000 --> 01:22:56.000]  your rights over property.
[01:22:56.000 --> 01:22:59.000]  And it is...
[01:22:59.000 --> 01:23:00.000]  Property.
[01:23:00.000 --> 01:23:01.000]  Yeah, right.
[01:23:01.000 --> 01:23:06.000]  Real property or personal property or both?
[01:23:06.000 --> 01:23:10.000]  In the description, it described that it's not only land.
[01:23:10.000 --> 01:23:18.000]  It said any interest or authority over any type of property.
[01:23:18.000 --> 01:23:24.000]  I understand the argument that he's trying to make, but I found case law...
[01:23:24.000 --> 01:23:31.000]  It sounds like he's trying to say that because the cars were not real property, that the
[01:23:31.000 --> 01:23:39.000]  taking of the cars off the real property didn't affect your rights as concerns the real property.
[01:23:39.000 --> 01:23:40.000]  Right.
[01:23:40.000 --> 01:23:44.000]  So you would need something addressing personal property.
[01:23:44.000 --> 01:23:45.000]  Right.
[01:23:45.000 --> 01:23:47.000]  I mean, I found plenty...
[01:23:47.000 --> 01:23:49.000]  That's what I'm saying.
[01:23:49.000 --> 01:23:54.000]  That's why I thought it was ridiculous because as I'm writing this through, I found plenty
[01:23:54.000 --> 01:24:06.000]  of plain case law that says that any property that I have rights over to, I have rights
[01:24:06.000 --> 01:24:07.000]  over.
[01:24:07.000 --> 01:24:08.000]  Oh, okay.
[01:24:08.000 --> 01:24:09.000]  So not just real property.
[01:24:09.000 --> 01:24:10.000]  Right.
[01:24:10.000 --> 01:24:11.000]  Yeah.
[01:24:11.000 --> 01:24:15.000]  So any property that I have rights over, as long as whoever's taking it has the power
[01:24:15.000 --> 01:24:22.000]  of eminent domain, that's automatically considered inverse contamination.
[01:24:22.000 --> 01:24:28.000]  Even if they did not go through eminent domain procedures, that's why that the government
[01:24:28.000 --> 01:24:37.000]  cannot be immune from eminent domain procedures because only government has the power of eminent
[01:24:37.000 --> 01:24:38.000]  domain.
[01:24:38.000 --> 01:24:39.000]  Domain.
[01:24:39.000 --> 01:24:45.000]  So they took your personal property under eminent domain.
[01:24:45.000 --> 01:24:47.000]  So that brought you under the statute.
[01:24:47.000 --> 01:24:48.000]  Yes.
[01:24:48.000 --> 01:24:51.000]  There you go.
[01:24:51.000 --> 01:24:54.000]  Look at his arguments carefully.
[01:24:54.000 --> 01:24:57.000]  If he didn't...
[01:24:57.000 --> 01:25:02.000]  He can't just quote case law that's in his favor.
[01:25:02.000 --> 01:25:08.000]  If there's case law that would contradict his argument, he must bring that case law to
[01:25:08.000 --> 01:25:13.000]  light and show why it doesn't apply in this case.
[01:25:13.000 --> 01:25:19.000]  If he didn't do that, you don't have that restriction because you're not learned in
[01:25:19.000 --> 01:25:20.000]  counsel.
[01:25:20.000 --> 01:25:22.000]  He's learned in counsel.
[01:25:22.000 --> 01:25:30.000]  If he cited case law when there was contravening case law and he didn't cite that, then you
[01:25:30.000 --> 01:25:38.000]  ask for sanctions against him and file a grievance against him as well.
[01:25:38.000 --> 01:25:41.000]  A bar grievance under what?
[01:25:41.000 --> 01:25:44.000]  For filing your frivolous pleading.
[01:25:44.000 --> 01:25:45.000]  Frivolous pleading.
[01:25:45.000 --> 01:25:46.000]  Frivolous pleading.
[01:25:46.000 --> 01:25:47.000]  That sounds right.
[01:25:47.000 --> 01:25:52.000]  We spoke to that last night.
[01:25:52.000 --> 01:26:00.000]  A pleading that lacks merit is frivolous.
[01:26:00.000 --> 01:26:06.000]  That's the term they use to describe these particular kinds of pleads.
[01:26:06.000 --> 01:26:07.000]  Yeah.
[01:26:07.000 --> 01:26:15.000]  In there, he said that my complaint was frivolous because all of my actions failed to state
[01:26:15.000 --> 01:26:20.000]  a claim that I could get.
[01:26:20.000 --> 01:26:23.000]  For which recovery could be had?
[01:26:23.000 --> 01:26:24.000]  Yes.
[01:26:24.000 --> 01:26:28.000]  I mean, every point that I put down.
[01:26:28.000 --> 01:26:35.000]  Basically, I never stated a claim in this whole 40-page suit.
[01:26:35.000 --> 01:26:39.000]  That's his job to make that claim.
[01:26:39.000 --> 01:26:46.000]  The judge can't rule in his favor if he doesn't specifically ask him to, so it's kind of like
[01:26:46.000 --> 01:26:56.000]  he's taking his best shot, but if he has mischaracterized case law, that he does not get to do.
[01:26:56.000 --> 01:26:57.000]  Well, okay.
[01:26:57.000 --> 01:26:58.000]  I understand.
[01:26:58.000 --> 01:27:03.000]  But why would you throw empty punches when federal... I'm pro se.
[01:27:03.000 --> 01:27:10.000]  The federal says that the judge is not allowed to rule against pro se plaintiffs for failure
[01:27:10.000 --> 01:27:12.000]  to state a claim.
[01:27:12.000 --> 01:27:26.000]  They have to read it and literally construe the meaning for what the pro se was.
[01:27:26.000 --> 01:27:27.000]  Yeah.
[01:27:27.000 --> 01:27:35.000]  If there's any way to read this in a light where you would have a claim, he must grant
[01:27:35.000 --> 01:27:36.000]  you a claim.
[01:27:36.000 --> 01:27:38.000]  Because that would be too...
[01:27:38.000 --> 01:27:41.000]  He can't rule that you failed to state a claim.
[01:27:41.000 --> 01:27:43.000]  Right, because that would be a due process violation.
[01:27:43.000 --> 01:27:47.000]  The view in light most favorable to plaintiffs.
[01:27:47.000 --> 01:27:53.000]  Wouldn't that consider to be a due process violation if he did that?
[01:27:53.000 --> 01:27:54.000]  Well, no.
[01:27:54.000 --> 01:27:57.000]  The lawyer didn't commit a due process violation.
[01:27:57.000 --> 01:28:00.000]  No, the judge, because I was reading on the...
[01:28:00.000 --> 01:28:01.000]  Okay.
[01:28:01.000 --> 01:28:06.000]  If the judge ruled against you improperly, yes, it could be due process.
[01:28:06.000 --> 01:28:14.000]  Would I include that in my response to his motion to dismiss?
[01:28:14.000 --> 01:28:15.000]  Okay.
[01:28:15.000 --> 01:28:17.000]  That's hard to say.
[01:28:17.000 --> 01:28:21.000]  It depends on the nature of what the judge did.
[01:28:21.000 --> 01:28:29.000]  Well, I mean, he's saying everything, all my accusations, he's saying that those accusations
[01:28:29.000 --> 01:28:33.000]  failed to state a claim because of the municipality.
[01:28:33.000 --> 01:28:34.000]  Okay.
[01:28:34.000 --> 01:28:37.000]  This is where the judge dismissed your case?
[01:28:37.000 --> 01:28:38.000]  No, no, no.
[01:28:38.000 --> 01:28:40.000]  He hasn't dismissed it yet.
[01:28:40.000 --> 01:28:45.000]  The attorney submitted a dismissal instead of an answer.
[01:28:45.000 --> 01:28:47.000]  He submitted the dismissal.
[01:28:47.000 --> 01:28:48.000]  Okay.
[01:28:48.000 --> 01:28:51.000]  So the attorney asked for a dismissal.
[01:28:51.000 --> 01:28:53.000]  So the judge hasn't done anything yet?
[01:28:53.000 --> 01:28:58.000]  No, because it's going to be heard on the 17th.
[01:28:58.000 --> 01:29:02.000]  Definitely don't do anything to the judge yet.
[01:29:02.000 --> 01:29:04.000]  No, no, I'm not doing anything to the judge.
[01:29:04.000 --> 01:29:06.000]  I'm saying because I have all this information.
[01:29:06.000 --> 01:29:16.000]  Do I include this information in my response to the attorney's answer?
[01:29:16.000 --> 01:29:22.000]  Should I put in that failure to state a claim against a pro-state litigant?
[01:29:22.000 --> 01:29:24.000]  Absolutely.
[01:29:24.000 --> 01:29:29.000]  I should put all that information in there stating that it's against federal procedure
[01:29:29.000 --> 01:29:34.000]  and due process violation against the pro-state.
[01:29:34.000 --> 01:29:37.000]  Absolutely.
[01:29:37.000 --> 01:29:39.000]  Okay, I didn't understand where you were going at first,
[01:29:39.000 --> 01:29:43.000]  but yes, absolutely you should put that in there.
[01:29:43.000 --> 01:29:44.000]  Okay.
[01:29:44.000 --> 01:29:45.000]  I have some music.
[01:29:45.000 --> 01:29:47.000]  I got another question.
[01:29:47.000 --> 01:29:48.000]  Okay, hang on.
[01:29:48.000 --> 01:29:49.000]  We'll pick you up on the other side.
[01:29:49.000 --> 01:30:02.000]  This is Randy Kelton, Google Live Radio, and we'll be right back.
[01:30:02.000 --> 01:30:06.000]  There are only 24 hours in a day, and you try to spend them wisely.
[01:30:06.000 --> 01:30:13.000]  Yet every hour you spend doing this activity increases your risk of a heart attack by up to 8%.
[01:30:13.000 --> 01:30:17.000]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, and I'll be right back to tell you what it is.
[01:30:17.000 --> 01:30:19.000]  Privacy is under attack.
[01:30:19.000 --> 01:30:22.000]  When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[01:30:22.000 --> 01:30:27.000]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[01:30:27.000 --> 01:30:32.000]  So protect your rights, say no to surveillance, and keep your information to yourself.
[01:30:32.000 --> 01:30:35.000]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[01:30:35.000 --> 01:30:38.000]  This public service announcement is brought to you by StartPage.com,
[01:30:38.000 --> 01:30:42.000]  the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[01:30:42.000 --> 01:30:45.000]  Start over with StartPage.
[01:30:45.000 --> 01:30:50.000]  You already know that staring flat-jawed at the boob tube makes you feel like a slug,
[01:30:50.000 --> 01:30:55.000]  but it turns out TV may be doing the same thing to your heart that it does to your mind.
[01:30:55.000 --> 01:30:58.000]  Researchers in England examined the television viewing habits
[01:30:58.000 --> 01:31:01.000]  of over 12,000 middle-aged and elderly people.
[01:31:01.000 --> 01:31:05.000]  They found the more TV they watched, the higher their risk of heart disease.
[01:31:05.000 --> 01:31:08.000]  In fact, for each additional hour of TV time,
[01:31:08.000 --> 01:31:14.000]  their risk of heart problems increased 6% to 8% regardless of how much they exercised.
[01:31:14.000 --> 01:31:18.000]  Americans watch an average of five hours of TV a day.
[01:31:18.000 --> 01:31:21.000]  Maybe it's time for a change of heart.
[01:31:21.000 --> 01:31:30.000]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht. More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[01:31:30.000 --> 01:31:36.000]  This is Building 7, a 47-story skyscraper that fell on the afternoon of September 11.
[01:31:36.000 --> 01:31:38.000]  The government says that fire brought it down.
[01:31:38.000 --> 01:31:43.000]  However, 1,500 architects and engineers concluded it was a controlled demolition.
[01:31:43.000 --> 01:31:46.000]  Over 6,000 of my fellow service members have given their lives.
[01:31:46.000 --> 01:31:48.000]  Thousands of my fellow first responders are dying.
[01:31:48.000 --> 01:31:50.000]  I'm not a conspiracy theorist.
[01:31:50.000 --> 01:31:51.000]  I'm a structural engineer.
[01:31:51.000 --> 01:31:52.000]  I'm a New York City correction officer.
[01:31:52.000 --> 01:31:53.000]  I'm an Air Force pilot.
[01:31:53.000 --> 01:31:55.000]  I'm a father who lost his son.
[01:31:55.000 --> 01:31:57.000]  We're Americans, and we deserve the truth.
[01:31:57.000 --> 01:32:00.000]  Go to RememberBuilding7.org today.
[01:32:00.000 --> 01:32:03.000]  Hey, it's Danny here for Hill Country Home Improvements.
[01:32:03.000 --> 01:32:06.000]  Did your home receive hail or wind damage from the recent storms?
[01:32:06.000 --> 01:32:09.000]  Come on, we all know the government caused it with their Kim trails,
[01:32:09.000 --> 01:32:11.000]  but good luck getting them to pay for it.
[01:32:11.000 --> 01:32:14.000]  Hey, I might be kidding about the Kim trails, but I'm serious about your roof.
[01:32:14.000 --> 01:32:17.000]  That's why you have insurance, and Hill Country Home Improvements
[01:32:17.000 --> 01:32:22.000]  can handle the claim for you with little to no out-of-pocket expense, and we accept Bitcoin.
[01:32:22.000 --> 01:32:26.000]  As a multiyear A-plus member of the Better Business Bureau with zero complaints,
[01:32:26.000 --> 01:32:32.000]  you can trust Hill Country Home Improvements to handle your claim and your roof right the first time.
[01:32:32.000 --> 01:32:38.000]  Just call 512-992-8745 or go to hillcountryhomeimprovements.com.
[01:32:38.000 --> 01:32:42.000]  Mention the crypto show and get $100 off, and we'll donate another $100
[01:32:42.000 --> 01:32:45.000]  to the Logos Radio Network to help continue this programming.
[01:32:45.000 --> 01:32:50.000]  So if those out-of-town roofers come knocking, your door should be locking.
[01:32:50.000 --> 01:32:56.000]  That's 512-992-8745 or hillcountryhomeimprovements.com.
[01:32:56.000 --> 01:32:58.000]  Discounts are based on full roof replacement.
[01:32:58.000 --> 01:33:01.000]  May not actually be kidding about Kim trails.
[01:33:01.000 --> 01:33:11.000]  You are listening to the Logos Radio Network, logosradionetwork.com.
[01:33:11.000 --> 01:33:32.000]  Okay, we are back. We're at the Kelton Uniball Radio, and we're talking to Olivier in Tennessee.
[01:33:32.000 --> 01:33:36.000]  Okay, where were we?
[01:33:36.000 --> 01:33:41.000]  We just finished up the state of the claim.
[01:33:41.000 --> 01:33:49.000]  We've got understanding that they can't do that and to include that into the suit.
[01:33:49.000 --> 01:33:56.000]  Now, what I'm trying to iffy on is that I sued the mayor, the attorney,
[01:33:56.000 --> 01:34:02.000]  and then the actors that were in the case, and his argument is that,
[01:34:02.000 --> 01:34:06.000]  and I don't understand why he made the argument because in the beginning,
[01:34:06.000 --> 01:34:10.000]  he's only representing the city.
[01:34:10.000 --> 01:34:17.000]  So then he goes back and says that the claim against these employees should be dismissed
[01:34:17.000 --> 01:34:21.000]  because I failed to properly serve them.
[01:34:21.000 --> 01:34:29.000]  He's saying that I should have served them individually also after I served them
[01:34:29.000 --> 01:34:34.000]  as I served the municipalities.
[01:34:34.000 --> 01:34:38.000]  So basically, they never will serve properly.
[01:34:38.000 --> 01:34:41.000]  You served them at their place of employment.
[01:34:41.000 --> 01:34:45.000]  You need to check service, but I think that's going to be a frivolous argument.
[01:34:45.000 --> 01:34:55.000]  And you might raise the issue that he lacks standing to bring this argument
[01:34:55.000 --> 01:35:04.000]  concerning the employees because he's representing the city and not the employees.
[01:35:04.000 --> 01:35:06.000]  Okay, I understand that.
[01:35:06.000 --> 01:35:08.000]  But now, how do I attack that?
[01:35:08.000 --> 01:35:19.000]  Well, how do I attack that the employees or the towing company have not obtained counsel
[01:35:19.000 --> 01:35:22.000]  to be represented in court?
[01:35:22.000 --> 01:35:23.000]  That's what I'm saying.
[01:35:23.000 --> 01:35:30.000]  You say that the lawyer doesn't have agency to represent these parties.
[01:35:30.000 --> 01:35:36.000]  So you ask the court to strike the arguments concerning these parties.
[01:35:36.000 --> 01:35:37.000]  No, I understand that.
[01:35:37.000 --> 01:35:38.000]  I understand that.
[01:35:38.000 --> 01:35:40.000]  Then I don't know what you're asking.
[01:35:40.000 --> 01:35:46.000]  I'm saying, like, how do I fight the issue that the judge has not said anything
[01:35:46.000 --> 01:35:53.000]  about auto transport, the towing company not being in the court, or the defendants
[01:35:53.000 --> 01:35:55.000]  not showing the court with attorneys?
[01:35:55.000 --> 01:36:00.000]  Have you filed a motion for summary judgment against them?
[01:36:00.000 --> 01:36:01.000]  Not yet.
[01:36:01.000 --> 01:36:05.000]  I was thinking about, I was going through, because it was first a lawsuit
[01:36:05.000 --> 01:36:08.000]  and then I was going through the ropes.
[01:36:08.000 --> 01:36:14.000]  And once I found out that this denial, this dismissal was a response to pleading,
[01:36:14.000 --> 01:36:18.000]  then my mind got kicked on to answering that.
[01:36:18.000 --> 01:36:23.000]  Then I realized, well, after I answered that and showed all this frivolous stuff,
[01:36:23.000 --> 01:36:28.000]  then I should go ahead and also file summary judgment.
[01:36:28.000 --> 01:36:31.000]  Summary judgment against the ones who failed to answer.
[01:36:31.000 --> 01:36:35.000]  How did you serve the towing company?
[01:36:35.000 --> 01:36:37.000]  How did I serve them?
[01:36:37.000 --> 01:36:39.000]  A personal servant.
[01:36:39.000 --> 01:36:41.000]  Oh, good.
[01:36:41.000 --> 01:36:44.000]  Can you do that in Tennessee?
[01:36:44.000 --> 01:36:45.000]  Yes.
[01:36:45.000 --> 01:36:46.000]  Okay.
[01:36:46.000 --> 01:36:47.000]  Then what about the employees?
[01:36:47.000 --> 01:36:50.000]  Did you serve them directly?
[01:36:50.000 --> 01:36:53.000]  I served the city.
[01:36:53.000 --> 01:37:01.000]  I served the state, the city attorney.
[01:37:01.000 --> 01:37:06.000]  I don't think he's going to be able to make the claim that you have to separately
[01:37:06.000 --> 01:37:16.000]  serve them, but maybe you might want to do personal service on them just in case.
[01:37:16.000 --> 01:37:20.000]  But you have personal service on the towing company,
[01:37:20.000 --> 01:37:25.000]  so you can win everything from the towing company.
[01:37:25.000 --> 01:37:29.000]  And I have personal service on the municipality, correct?
[01:37:29.000 --> 01:37:34.000]  I thought because they worked for the municipality
[01:37:34.000 --> 01:37:40.000]  and it was a cause of their action that once I submitted it to the municipality
[01:37:40.000 --> 01:37:43.000]  and asked for everything conclusive in that suit,
[01:37:43.000 --> 01:37:47.000]  I wouldn't be, because I thought I would have to actually write the suit up.
[01:37:47.000 --> 01:37:52.000]  Yeah, there's almost no way that they can support that claim.
[01:37:52.000 --> 01:38:01.000]  It's not enough to say you didn't give me proper service.
[01:38:01.000 --> 01:38:07.000]  And the court's going to say, well, did you know that you had been sued?
[01:38:07.000 --> 01:38:11.000]  Well, yeah, but he didn't give me proper notice.
[01:38:11.000 --> 01:38:15.000]  The court's going to say you have substantive notice.
[01:38:15.000 --> 01:38:18.000]  You can't claim you don't have notice.
[01:38:18.000 --> 01:38:23.000]  You work for the city, you serve the city, and your names were on it.
[01:38:23.000 --> 01:38:26.000]  Are you saying that no one came to you and asked you
[01:38:26.000 --> 01:38:31.000]  and gave you notice that this suit was filed against you?
[01:38:31.000 --> 01:38:36.000]  And he's going to say, what a mayor, my boss, blah, blah, blah.
[01:38:36.000 --> 01:38:39.000]  You have notice. They're not going to be.
[01:38:39.000 --> 01:38:46.000]  They won't get past that one unless the court just intends to ruin their favor.
[01:38:46.000 --> 01:38:56.000]  Definitely do. If the judge does rule against you, then you just serve them.
[01:38:56.000 --> 01:38:58.000]  Can I serve them?
[01:38:58.000 --> 01:39:04.000]  Yeah, just go ahead and take a copy of the suit and say,
[01:39:04.000 --> 01:39:08.000]  you guys get a copy of the suit. Here, you need a copy.
[01:39:08.000 --> 01:39:11.000]  Give it to them. Now they're served.
[01:39:11.000 --> 01:39:19.000]  You don't have to tell them that you're serving them. Just give them a copy.
[01:39:19.000 --> 01:39:21.000]  How does that play with the time cloud?
[01:39:21.000 --> 01:39:25.000]  Then after they get a copy, do they have six days from that date?
[01:39:25.000 --> 01:39:29.000]  Yep, from that day.
[01:39:29.000 --> 01:39:33.000]  You might come up with a reason to want to talk to them and say,
[01:39:33.000 --> 01:39:37.000]  did you get a copy of this? I need to give you a copy just in case.
[01:39:37.000 --> 01:39:42.000]  You want to ask them a question about...
[01:39:42.000 --> 01:39:46.000]  My personal server has to serve them. I can't serve them.
[01:39:46.000 --> 01:39:48.000]  Okay, you can't do it. Okay.
[01:39:48.000 --> 01:39:51.000]  Yeah, personal server has to do it.
[01:39:51.000 --> 01:39:54.000]  If the judge rules that they weren't properly served,
[01:39:54.000 --> 01:39:59.000]  then you send your server out to serve them.
[01:39:59.000 --> 01:40:02.000]  I thought from what you said that you could serve them yourself,
[01:40:02.000 --> 01:40:04.000]  but you have to have someone else do it.
[01:40:04.000 --> 01:40:09.000]  That's the same here. Anyone can serve someone in Texas except the plaintiff.
[01:40:09.000 --> 01:40:13.000]  Okay. The towing company has been served.
[01:40:13.000 --> 01:40:18.000]  On the 17th, I could file against the towing company saying that,
[01:40:18.000 --> 01:40:22.000]  hey, they're not represented by...
[01:40:22.000 --> 01:40:28.000]  Ask for summary judgment and ask for the full claim.
[01:40:28.000 --> 01:40:30.000]  Against everyone, right?
[01:40:30.000 --> 01:40:34.000]  No, just against the towing company. Ask the towing company.
[01:40:34.000 --> 01:40:40.000]  Ask for summary judgment for the entire claim against the towing company.
[01:40:40.000 --> 01:40:42.000]  Okay.
[01:40:42.000 --> 01:40:48.000]  Whoever got the money pays.
[01:40:48.000 --> 01:40:55.000]  Now, after summary judgment, can I enter recovery of my property also?
[01:40:55.000 --> 01:41:00.000]  Oh, yeah. Is that in your suit? Is that part of the claim?
[01:41:00.000 --> 01:41:04.000]  Yeah.
[01:41:04.000 --> 01:41:13.000]  You asked the court to enforce the entire claim against the towing company.
[01:41:13.000 --> 01:41:15.000]  Okay.
[01:41:15.000 --> 01:41:22.000]  And I can also ask summary judgment against the city also because I'm answering their response,
[01:41:22.000 --> 01:41:26.000]  which is frivolous with all the information that I have.
[01:41:26.000 --> 01:41:33.000]  Yeah. You answer theirs, but if you have grounds for summary judgment, you can ask for it.
[01:41:33.000 --> 01:41:40.000]  But where the towing company did not respond, you have no answer default against them,
[01:41:40.000 --> 01:41:45.000]  and you can ask for the full amount from them.
[01:41:45.000 --> 01:41:48.000]  Then your suit is done.
[01:41:48.000 --> 01:41:55.000]  Oh, and I should also do the...I should also do that against the defendants that worked for that,
[01:41:55.000 --> 01:42:00.000]  or for the criminal defense because they failed to respond, too.
[01:42:00.000 --> 01:42:07.000]  Yeah. Well, whoever didn't respond, whoever was served and didn't respond,
[01:42:07.000 --> 01:42:15.000]  if the towing company and the individual do them both and ask for a default judgment against them
[01:42:15.000 --> 01:42:22.000]  for failure to answer and ask for the full amount.
[01:42:22.000 --> 01:42:27.000]  And if you get it, you can only get recovery once, so now the suit goes away,
[01:42:27.000 --> 01:42:36.000]  and good chance the court will give it to you to get the city off the hook.
[01:42:36.000 --> 01:42:41.000]  But is the city on the hook? Don't I want the city?
[01:42:41.000 --> 01:42:47.000]  You don't care who pays you.
[01:42:47.000 --> 01:42:49.000]  This is a civil action.
[01:42:49.000 --> 01:42:53.000]  If you want to take criminal action or something against the city, that's different,
[01:42:53.000 --> 01:42:57.000]  but you're asking to be compensated for harm.
[01:42:57.000 --> 01:43:04.000]  Once you're compensated for harm, it's over.
[01:43:04.000 --> 01:43:08.000]  Do you care who compensates you?
[01:43:08.000 --> 01:43:15.000]  Well, I figure since it was considered that they acted under the color of law,
[01:43:15.000 --> 01:43:19.000]  it was individual suits against the city and the actors.
[01:43:19.000 --> 01:43:28.000]  Listen, once you have recovery, you no longer have a claim.
[01:43:28.000 --> 01:43:35.000]  If you say, I was harmed for $10,000, and they default one of the parties
[01:43:35.000 --> 01:43:39.000]  and force him to pay you $10,000, you're done.
[01:43:39.000 --> 01:43:46.000]  You have your remedy. You cannot seek more remedy.
[01:43:46.000 --> 01:43:49.000]  I understand that.
[01:43:49.000 --> 01:43:51.000]  Once you're done, you're done.
[01:43:51.000 --> 01:43:54.000]  And then you get to use their money to go back and go after the city
[01:43:54.000 --> 01:43:56.000]  if you're knocking your house down.
[01:43:56.000 --> 01:43:57.000]  Hang on. Back to Go To Break.
[01:43:57.000 --> 01:44:07.000]  We'll be right back.
[01:44:27.000 --> 01:44:30.000]  They are different varieties of the same species.
[01:44:30.000 --> 01:44:33.000]  HempUSA.org wants the world to know these basic facts
[01:44:33.000 --> 01:44:36.000]  and to help people understand that hemp protein powder
[01:44:36.000 --> 01:44:39.000]  is the best kept health secret you need to know about.
[01:44:39.000 --> 01:44:44.000]  Remember, hemp protein powder contains 53% protein, is gluten-free,
[01:44:44.000 --> 01:44:48.000]  anti-inflammatory, non-GMO, and is loaded with nutrients.
[01:44:48.000 --> 01:44:53.000]  Call 888-910-4367, 888-910-4367,
[01:44:53.000 --> 01:44:57.000]  and see what our powder, seeds, and oil can do for you.
[01:44:57.000 --> 01:45:01.000]  Only at HempUSA.org.
[01:45:01.000 --> 01:45:04.000]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[01:45:04.000 --> 01:45:08.000]  Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary,
[01:45:08.000 --> 01:45:11.000]  the affordable, easy-to-understand, 4-CD course
[01:45:11.000 --> 01:45:16.000]  that will show you how in 24 hours, step-by-step.
[01:45:16.000 --> 01:45:19.000]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing.
[01:45:19.000 --> 01:45:23.000]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[01:45:23.000 --> 01:45:28.000]  Thousands have won with our step-by-step course, and now you can too.
[01:45:28.000 --> 01:45:31.000]  Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney
[01:45:31.000 --> 01:45:34.000]  with 22 years of case-winning experience.
[01:45:34.000 --> 01:45:39.000]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand
[01:45:39.000 --> 01:45:43.000]  about the principles and practices that control our American courts.
[01:45:43.000 --> 01:45:48.000]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials,
[01:45:48.000 --> 01:45:53.000]  forms for civil cases, pro se tactics, and much more.
[01:45:53.000 --> 01:45:57.000]  Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner,
[01:45:57.000 --> 01:46:02.000]  or call toll-free, 866-LAW-EZ.
[01:46:02.000 --> 01:46:18.000]  Music
[01:46:18.000 --> 01:46:19.000]  Okay, we are back.
[01:46:19.000 --> 01:46:21.000]  Randy Kelton, Rule of Law Radio.
[01:46:21.000 --> 01:46:24.000]  And do you have anything else, Oliver?
[01:46:24.000 --> 01:46:27.000]  No, everything makes sense.
[01:46:27.000 --> 01:46:32.000]  The sanction part, what avenue would you send me down
[01:46:32.000 --> 01:46:37.000]  to investigate how to pull out sanctions or remedies,
[01:46:37.000 --> 01:46:40.000]  the sanctions for frivolous pleading?
[01:46:40.000 --> 01:46:44.000]  Oh, just check his case law.
[01:46:44.000 --> 01:46:53.000]  And if his case law is not correct or he failed to show
[01:46:53.000 --> 01:46:56.000]  the case law that refuted his position,
[01:46:56.000 --> 01:47:03.000]  then just ask the judge for sanctions in an amount the judge deems appropriate.
[01:47:03.000 --> 01:47:06.000]  Because you really don't get to ask for a certain amount of sanctions.
[01:47:06.000 --> 01:47:09.000]  That's clearly up to the judge.
[01:47:09.000 --> 01:47:12.000]  And sanctions, is that some type of monetary or is that...
[01:47:12.000 --> 01:47:16.000]  That's monetary, generally.
[01:47:16.000 --> 01:47:21.000]  So the judge would tell the attorney to pay me money because of...
[01:47:21.000 --> 01:47:23.000]  Not you, they paid the court money.
[01:47:23.000 --> 01:47:27.000]  The sanctions go to the court unless the court orders otherwise,
[01:47:27.000 --> 01:47:30.000]  and they almost never do.
[01:47:30.000 --> 01:47:32.000]  Oh, okay, okay.
[01:47:32.000 --> 01:47:38.000]  Okay, you might have the case won because the other party didn't answer.
[01:47:38.000 --> 01:47:42.000]  Yes, they didn't answer.
[01:47:42.000 --> 01:47:46.000]  They thought that they were represented by the city,
[01:47:46.000 --> 01:47:56.000]  but the response clearly shows that they are not representing the towing company
[01:47:56.000 --> 01:48:01.000]  or the mayor and everybody else is just representing the city.
[01:48:01.000 --> 01:48:02.000]  Okay, wonderful.
[01:48:02.000 --> 01:48:10.000]  Then ask for default judgments against anybody who wasn't, who didn't answer.
[01:48:10.000 --> 01:48:11.000]  Okay.
[01:48:11.000 --> 01:48:13.000]  And let the court rule.
[01:48:13.000 --> 01:48:19.000]  They may use the towing company to get rid of this suit.
[01:48:19.000 --> 01:48:21.000]  And that would be great.
[01:48:21.000 --> 01:48:22.000]  Okay, I do need to move on.
[01:48:22.000 --> 01:48:26.000]  I got another caller and I've only got this last segment.
[01:48:26.000 --> 01:48:27.000]  All right.
[01:48:27.000 --> 01:48:28.000]  Okay, thank you, Olivier.
[01:48:28.000 --> 01:48:31.000]  Okay, now we're going to Dennis in Pennsylvania.
[01:48:31.000 --> 01:48:32.000]  Hello, Dennis.
[01:48:32.000 --> 01:48:33.000]  Hello, Randy.
[01:48:33.000 --> 01:48:35.000]  Good evening.
[01:48:35.000 --> 01:48:39.000]  I have a question for you, all right.
[01:48:39.000 --> 01:48:45.000]  Do you know what you think that it means if on video a law enforcement agent,
[01:48:45.000 --> 01:48:50.000]  where there's a situation where there's somebody's handcuffed in a blood draw room
[01:48:50.000 --> 01:48:54.000]  or somebody is going to urine to do a DUI sample, right,
[01:48:54.000 --> 01:49:01.000]  if they're standing in one corner, okay, another cop in the room at some kind of like table, right,
[01:49:01.000 --> 01:49:08.000]  and you see the cop on the video, put his right hand over his gun, unsnap the holster,
[01:49:08.000 --> 01:49:12.000]  and then kind of like give a signal to the other cop with his left hand, you know.
[01:49:12.000 --> 01:49:16.000]  Next thing you know, he walks over to the person who's handcuffed to the wall
[01:49:16.000 --> 01:49:22.000]  to give him the cup, the pin, and he goes, go for the gun, go for the gun.
[01:49:22.000 --> 01:49:24.000]  And I was wondering what you thought that would mean.
[01:49:24.000 --> 01:49:26.000]  Now, there's no sound.
[01:49:26.000 --> 01:49:30.000]  Somebody knocked off the sound.
[01:49:30.000 --> 01:49:38.000]  But the D.C. even admitted that the, you know, the cop did undo his gun, you know.
[01:49:38.000 --> 01:49:43.000]  I would go for official, but depends on what the statute is,
[01:49:43.000 --> 01:49:47.000]  purely official oppression, it'd be official, official oppression in Texas.
[01:49:47.000 --> 01:49:51.000]  I think it's official misconduct in Pennsylvania.
[01:49:51.000 --> 01:49:53.000]  Okay.
[01:49:53.000 --> 01:49:54.000]  All right.
[01:49:54.000 --> 01:49:56.000]  And what do you think about that scenario?
[01:49:56.000 --> 01:49:58.000]  Like what are the cops doing these days
[01:49:58.000 --> 01:50:01.000]  where they're trying to take a relatively younger guy
[01:50:01.000 --> 01:50:05.000]  who's suspecting of smoking marijuana, okay,
[01:50:05.000 --> 01:50:08.000]  and then seriously unsnapping the holster
[01:50:08.000 --> 01:50:11.000]  and going over to the guy to give him the cup and say to him,
[01:50:11.000 --> 01:50:13.000]  go for the gun, go for the gun.
[01:50:13.000 --> 01:50:14.000]  I mean, isn't that kind of like,
[01:50:14.000 --> 01:50:17.000]  with all this stuff going on in this country and in this world,
[01:50:17.000 --> 01:50:20.000]  isn't that kind of sick to try to, you know, put...
[01:50:20.000 --> 01:50:22.000]  Absolutely.
[01:50:22.000 --> 01:50:25.000]  And that should get official misconduct.
[01:50:25.000 --> 01:50:26.000]  Okay.
[01:50:26.000 --> 01:50:28.000]  Well, the DA knows about it, but we don't know what he's going to do
[01:50:28.000 --> 01:50:30.000]  as part of another case.
[01:50:30.000 --> 01:50:32.000]  Heck with the DA.
[01:50:32.000 --> 01:50:35.000]  Anybody can prepare criminal complaints and file them.
[01:50:35.000 --> 01:50:36.000]  Okay.
[01:50:36.000 --> 01:50:39.000]  Here's the deal in Pennsylvania.
[01:50:39.000 --> 01:50:44.000]  Pennsylvania, the district attorney has first blush.
[01:50:44.000 --> 01:50:48.000]  So you file a criminal complaint with the district attorney.
[01:50:48.000 --> 01:50:50.000]  And since it's against a police officer,
[01:50:50.000 --> 01:50:55.000]  the district attorney is going to find that there is no probable cause.
[01:50:55.000 --> 01:50:57.000]  And when he does that,
[01:50:57.000 --> 01:51:04.000]  now you have a right to appeal to the court of common please.
[01:51:04.000 --> 01:51:06.000]  Now, as far as I know,
[01:51:06.000 --> 01:51:15.000]  Pennsylvania is the only state that gives discretion to the prosecuting attorney.
[01:51:15.000 --> 01:51:20.000]  And it seems like they take the power out of the hands of the public,
[01:51:20.000 --> 01:51:22.000]  but they don't.
[01:51:22.000 --> 01:51:25.000]  Because in every other state,
[01:51:25.000 --> 01:51:30.000]  I have a duty to file a criminal complaint,
[01:51:30.000 --> 01:51:34.000]  but once I file it, I have no standing.
[01:51:34.000 --> 01:51:38.000]  You in Pennsylvania, you have standing.
[01:51:38.000 --> 01:51:41.000]  You file to the prosecutor, he refuses to act.
[01:51:41.000 --> 01:51:43.000]  You take it to the court of common please
[01:51:43.000 --> 01:51:47.000]  and appeal the prosecutor's decision to the court of common please.
[01:51:47.000 --> 01:51:48.000]  Okay.
[01:51:48.000 --> 01:51:51.000]  This is what actually happened, okay,
[01:51:51.000 --> 01:51:54.000]  when this thing didn't work out with the urine,
[01:51:54.000 --> 01:51:56.000]  the cop put the handcuffs back on,
[01:51:56.000 --> 01:51:58.000]  and the person said,
[01:51:58.000 --> 01:52:00.000]  the handcuffs are a little too tight,
[01:52:00.000 --> 01:52:02.000]  and he just pulled the guy up,
[01:52:02.000 --> 01:52:03.000]  handcuffed from the back,
[01:52:03.000 --> 01:52:04.000]  pulled him up,
[01:52:04.000 --> 01:52:06.000]  and just railroaded him right out the door real quick
[01:52:06.000 --> 01:52:08.000]  and hurt his wrist pretty bad.
[01:52:08.000 --> 01:52:09.000]  Okay.
[01:52:09.000 --> 01:52:10.000]  Okay.
[01:52:10.000 --> 01:52:12.000]  That's aggravated assault.
[01:52:12.000 --> 01:52:13.000]  Okay.
[01:52:13.000 --> 01:52:14.000]  Well, anyway,
[01:52:14.000 --> 01:52:18.000]  the person complained to the police was directed to a lieutenant in that division there.
[01:52:18.000 --> 01:52:21.000]  And screw all that crap.
[01:52:21.000 --> 01:52:22.000]  Ignore that trash.
[01:52:22.000 --> 01:52:24.000]  Don't pay attention to what the cops say.
[01:52:24.000 --> 01:52:26.000]  Understand.
[01:52:26.000 --> 01:52:28.000]  He went and made the complaint,
[01:52:28.000 --> 01:52:30.000]  and I talked to the DA at the preliminary hearing.
[01:52:30.000 --> 01:52:32.000]  He says, yes, I'm aware of the complaint,
[01:52:32.000 --> 01:52:33.000]  and I'm looking into it.
[01:52:33.000 --> 01:52:35.000]  And I said, by the way, I said, you know,
[01:52:35.000 --> 01:52:38.000]  the cop also said, go for my gun, go for my gun.
[01:52:38.000 --> 01:52:40.000]  He says, you've told me, okay, and I'll look into it.
[01:52:40.000 --> 01:52:42.000]  Now, we haven't heard anything, but that's where it's at.
[01:52:42.000 --> 01:52:43.000]  Okay.
[01:52:43.000 --> 01:52:46.000]  Go to the attorney general
[01:52:46.000 --> 01:52:49.000]  and file official oppression charges
[01:52:49.000 --> 01:52:54.000]  against the district attorney for malfeasance in office.
[01:52:54.000 --> 01:52:57.000]  Now, would that be for unsnapping the holster?
[01:52:57.000 --> 01:52:59.000]  No, no.
[01:52:59.000 --> 01:53:03.000]  File against the district attorney.
[01:53:03.000 --> 01:53:04.000]  Oh, okay.
[01:53:04.000 --> 01:53:05.000]  Sorry.
[01:53:05.000 --> 01:53:11.000]  For failing to prosecute the police officer.
[01:53:11.000 --> 01:53:12.000]  Okay.
[01:53:12.000 --> 01:53:15.000]  So if we find out he's going to do nothing about those incidents,
[01:53:15.000 --> 01:53:16.000]  and then we go to the...
[01:53:16.000 --> 01:53:18.000]  You don't have to wait to find out.
[01:53:18.000 --> 01:53:21.000]  If it's been a week or two and he hasn't done anything,
[01:53:21.000 --> 01:53:24.000]  then go ahead and file.
[01:53:24.000 --> 01:53:25.000]  All right.
[01:53:25.000 --> 01:53:26.000]  Okay.
[01:53:26.000 --> 01:53:29.000]  The attorney general in Pennsylvania has prosecutorial powers,
[01:53:29.000 --> 01:53:33.000]  but he is not going to use it.
[01:53:33.000 --> 01:53:36.000]  At least we hope he doesn't,
[01:53:36.000 --> 01:53:39.000]  because he's another prosecutor.
[01:53:39.000 --> 01:53:41.000]  So you file with the prosecutor,
[01:53:41.000 --> 01:53:44.000]  and the prosecutor is going to shield the police officer
[01:53:44.000 --> 01:53:46.000]  from prosecution.
[01:53:46.000 --> 01:53:47.000]  Okay.
[01:53:47.000 --> 01:53:50.000]  So when, in a week or so,
[01:53:50.000 --> 01:53:55.000]  when you don't have indication that the officer's been charged,
[01:53:55.000 --> 01:53:57.000]  then you go to the attorney general.
[01:53:57.000 --> 01:54:03.000]  Understand, you are the citizen.
[01:54:03.000 --> 01:54:05.000]  They're public servants.
[01:54:05.000 --> 01:54:08.000]  You are the master.
[01:54:08.000 --> 01:54:09.000]  Okay.
[01:54:09.000 --> 01:54:10.000]  Well, then let me ask you this here.
[01:54:10.000 --> 01:54:15.000]  If he said that the officer said go for the gun, go for the gun,
[01:54:15.000 --> 01:54:19.000]  somebody knocked off the sound the whole time in that room,
[01:54:19.000 --> 01:54:23.000]  and so how do you have a successful case that he said go for the gun?
[01:54:23.000 --> 01:54:24.000]  You don't care about that.
[01:54:24.000 --> 01:54:26.000]  You're not going to get a successful case.
[01:54:26.000 --> 01:54:29.000]  What you're going to do is create enough politics.
[01:54:29.000 --> 01:54:30.000]  Okay.
[01:54:30.000 --> 01:54:35.000]  That they're going to kick this police officer's behind,
[01:54:35.000 --> 01:54:38.000]  because you're kicking their behind.
[01:54:38.000 --> 01:54:39.000]  Okay.
[01:54:39.000 --> 01:54:40.000]  You understand.
[01:54:40.000 --> 01:54:41.000]  Good to me.
[01:54:41.000 --> 01:54:45.000]  You are the elephant in the corner.
[01:54:45.000 --> 01:54:49.000]  You're the baddest motor scooter in the building.
[01:54:49.000 --> 01:54:50.000]  Right.
[01:54:50.000 --> 01:54:54.000]  Once you learn how to use it, file with the DA.
[01:54:54.000 --> 01:54:56.000]  He refuses to act.
[01:54:56.000 --> 01:55:01.000]  You appeal to the court of common pleas
[01:55:01.000 --> 01:55:06.000]  and ask the court of common pleas to pursue the prosecution.
[01:55:06.000 --> 01:55:10.000]  And at the same time, you file a complaint with the attorney general
[01:55:10.000 --> 01:55:13.000]  asking him to prosecute the prosecutor.
[01:55:13.000 --> 01:55:14.000]  Okay.
[01:55:14.000 --> 01:55:15.000]  Well, you turn...
[01:55:15.000 --> 01:55:17.000] ...the person into the police station
[01:55:17.000 --> 01:55:19.000]  and with the lieutenant file the report and...
[01:55:19.000 --> 01:55:21.000]  Listen, listen, screw the cops.
[01:55:21.000 --> 01:55:23.000]  Are you kidding me?
[01:55:23.000 --> 01:55:24.000]  All right.
[01:55:24.000 --> 01:55:29.000]  They are not going to do anything.
[01:55:29.000 --> 01:55:30.000]  Okay.
[01:55:30.000 --> 01:55:32.000]  And they're too low on the totem pole.
[01:55:32.000 --> 01:55:34.000]  You don't even care about them chumps.
[01:55:34.000 --> 01:55:37.000]  But the DA is aware of the fact that he filed the report with the police.
[01:55:37.000 --> 01:55:38.000]  He's aware of it.
[01:55:38.000 --> 01:55:39.000]  He said he's looking into it.
[01:55:39.000 --> 01:55:40.000]  Yeah.
[01:55:40.000 --> 01:55:41.000]  He don't care.
[01:55:41.000 --> 01:55:44.000]  He is not going to discipline one of these police.
[01:55:44.000 --> 01:55:46.000]  He's just not going to do it.
[01:55:46.000 --> 01:55:48.000]  He's going to protect them.
[01:55:48.000 --> 01:55:49.000]  All right.
[01:55:49.000 --> 01:55:51.000]  Well, he feels like he has to work with them,
[01:55:51.000 --> 01:55:53.000]  so he has to maintain a relationship.
[01:55:53.000 --> 01:55:56.000]  So what you want to do is create a little politics.
[01:55:56.000 --> 01:55:59.000]  Thought about politics.
[01:55:59.000 --> 01:56:04.000]  You're the one... you being the citizen can do this.
[01:56:04.000 --> 01:56:09.000]  You can go and demand that the attorney general do his job.
[01:56:09.000 --> 01:56:11.000]  And the attorney general is going to refuse.
[01:56:11.000 --> 01:56:13.000]  So when he refuses,
[01:56:13.000 --> 01:56:15.000]  you go back to the court of common police
[01:56:15.000 --> 01:56:19.000]  with the complaint against the district attorney.
[01:56:19.000 --> 01:56:20.000]  Right.
[01:56:20.000 --> 01:56:25.000]  Ask the court of common police to take your complaint against the district attorney.
[01:56:25.000 --> 01:56:27.000]  And they're going to refuse.
[01:56:27.000 --> 01:56:29.000]  And then you take both of the refusals,
[01:56:29.000 --> 01:56:32.000]  the refusal to prosecute the police officer,
[01:56:32.000 --> 01:56:37.000]  the refusal to prosecute the district attorney,
[01:56:37.000 --> 01:56:41.000]  and you appeal that all the way up to the Supreme Court.
[01:56:41.000 --> 01:56:44.000]  You can do that in Pennsylvania.
[01:56:44.000 --> 01:56:48.000]  I can't do that in Texas, but you can in Pennsylvania.
[01:56:48.000 --> 01:56:49.000]  All right.
[01:56:49.000 --> 01:56:53.000]  And then you'll have every court all the way up the line
[01:56:53.000 --> 01:56:57.000]  looking down this police officer's throat and saying,
[01:56:57.000 --> 01:57:03.000]  what in the heck have you got us into, you ignorant chump?
[01:57:03.000 --> 01:57:04.000]  There you go.
[01:57:04.000 --> 01:57:05.000]  That sounds good, Randy.
[01:57:05.000 --> 01:57:09.000]  It's all politics.
[01:57:09.000 --> 01:57:12.000]  You start kicking them up at the high levels,
[01:57:12.000 --> 01:57:18.000]  they are going to be real unhappy by the time it gets down to this chump police officer
[01:57:18.000 --> 01:57:21.000]  when everybody in the state of Pennsylvania
[01:57:21.000 --> 01:57:24.000]  knows what this cop pulled.
[01:57:24.000 --> 01:57:28.000]  I can almost guarantee you there will be memos going around
[01:57:28.000 --> 01:57:31.000]  to every department in the state of Pennsylvania
[01:57:31.000 --> 01:57:36.000]  saying, guys, do not pull this crap.
[01:57:36.000 --> 01:57:38.000]  You'll get us all in trouble.
[01:57:38.000 --> 01:57:39.000]  I agree with you 100%.
[01:57:39.000 --> 01:57:41.000]  Can I make one comment, Randy?
[01:57:41.000 --> 01:57:42.000]  Absolutely.
[01:57:42.000 --> 01:57:47.000]  A friend recommended that I put you on and ask you this question.
[01:57:47.000 --> 01:57:49.000]  And I was listening to the guy on before me,
[01:57:49.000 --> 01:57:51.000]  and he went on and on and on.
[01:57:51.000 --> 01:57:54.000]  But you know, I enjoyed every minute listening to that
[01:57:54.000 --> 01:57:57.000]  because you were so thorough and you helped the guy so much.
[01:57:57.000 --> 01:58:00.000]  It's really a good thing you're doing, Randy.
[01:58:00.000 --> 01:58:04.000]  I'm glad you said that because I do sometimes spend a lot of time,
[01:58:04.000 --> 01:58:07.000]  and that's because I do want to be thorough
[01:58:07.000 --> 01:58:12.000]  and I do want to demonstrate how we develop these things.
[01:58:12.000 --> 01:58:13.000]  Absolutely.
[01:58:13.000 --> 01:58:15.000]  I agree with you.
[01:58:15.000 --> 01:58:18.000]  So I do thank you very much, sir.
[01:58:18.000 --> 01:58:21.000]  Okay, well, the only thing when you start doing this
[01:58:21.000 --> 01:58:23.000]  is you have to be careful.
[01:58:23.000 --> 01:58:28.000]  It can get to be way too much fun.
[01:58:28.000 --> 01:58:30.000]  That's great. That's great.
[01:58:30.000 --> 01:58:32.000]  Okay, thank you, Dennis.
[01:58:32.000 --> 01:58:33.000]  We are out of time.
[01:58:33.000 --> 01:58:37.000]  We'll be back next Thursday at 8 o'clock Central
[01:58:37.000 --> 01:58:40.000]  for our two-hour show, Friday for our next four-hour show.
[01:58:40.000 --> 01:58:42.000]  Thank you all for listening.
[01:58:42.000 --> 01:58:47.000]  And make sure you listen to Eddie Craig Monday nights at 8 on his traffic show.
[01:58:47.000 --> 01:58:49.000]  Thank you all, and good night.
[01:59:17.000 --> 01:59:21.000]  Visit us online at bfa.org.
[01:59:21.000 --> 01:59:23.000]  This translation is highly accurate
[01:59:23.000 --> 01:59:26.000]  and it comes with over 13,000 cross references,
[01:59:26.000 --> 01:59:30.000]  plus charts and maps and an outline for every book of the Bible.
[01:59:30.000 --> 01:59:33.000]  This is truly a Bible you can understand.
[01:59:33.000 --> 01:59:36.000]  To get your free copy of the New Testament Recovery Version,
[01:59:36.000 --> 01:59:41.000]  call us toll free at 888-551-0102.
[01:59:41.000 --> 01:59:45.000]  That's 888-551-0102.
[01:59:45.000 --> 01:59:50.000]  Or visit us online at bfa.org.
[01:59:50.000 --> 01:59:53.000]  Looking for some truth?
[01:59:53.000 --> 01:59:54.000]  You found it.
[01:59:54.000 --> 02:00:22.000]  LogosRadioNetwork.com