[00:00.000 --> 00:06.740] The following news flashes brought to you by The Lowest Star Lowdown. [00:06.740 --> 00:12.560] Markets for Monday the 22nd of July 2019, open with precious metals, gold at $1,429 [00:12.560 --> 00:20.960] an ounce, silver $16.45 an ounce, copper $2.75 an ounce, oil, Texas crude $55.63 a barrel, [00:20.960 --> 00:29.320] Brent crude $62.47 a barrel, and cryptos in order of market cap, Bitcoin Core $10,566.52, [00:29.320 --> 00:40.680] Ethereum $227.26, XRP Ripple $0.33, Litecoin $100.31, and Bitcoin Cash is at $324.10 a [00:40.680 --> 00:41.680] crypto coin. [00:41.680 --> 00:52.400] Today in history, the year 1916, the preparedness day bombing, a tying suitcase bomb, was detonated [00:52.400 --> 00:57.720] on Market Street in San Francisco during the World War I Preparedness Day Parade, killing [00:57.720 --> 01:04.720] 10 and injuring 40. [01:04.720 --> 01:09.400] And recent news, since Governor Greg Abbott signed House Bill 1325 legalizing hemp into [01:09.400 --> 01:14.200] taxes law back in June, county prosecutors around the state, including Houston, Austin, [01:14.200 --> 01:18.040] and San Antonio, have been dropping marijuana possession charges and even refusing to file [01:18.040 --> 01:22.240] new ones, since they are stipulating that they do not have the time or the laboratory [01:22.240 --> 01:24.680] equipment to test the herb for THC. [01:24.680 --> 01:28.400] Margaret Moore, the Travis County District Attorney, announced earlier this month that [01:28.400 --> 01:33.200] she was dismissing 32 felony possession and delivery of marijuana cases because of the [01:33.200 --> 01:34.200] law. [01:34.200 --> 01:37.560] Mr. Abbott and other state officials, including the Attorney General, stipulated in a letter [01:37.560 --> 01:42.080] to county district attorneys back on Thursday that marijuana has not been decriminalized [01:42.080 --> 01:48.240] in Texas and that these actions demonstrate a misunderstanding of how HB 1325 works, as [01:48.240 --> 01:51.200] well as other cities too, like the District Attorney. [01:51.200 --> 01:57.280] In El Paso, Kyma Esparza, a Democrat who also stated earlier this month that the law, quote, [01:57.280 --> 02:01.720] will not have an effect on the prosecution of marijuana cases in El Paso. [02:01.720 --> 02:06.720] However, the issue was succinctly summarized by Mr. Brandon Ball, an assistant public defender [02:06.720 --> 02:10.720] in Harris County, who stated that, quote, the law is constantly changing on what makes [02:10.720 --> 02:13.440] something illegal based on its chemical makeup. [02:13.440 --> 02:17.320] It's important that if someone is charged with something, the test matches what they're [02:17.320 --> 02:22.560] charged with. [02:22.560 --> 02:27.200] A paper by Tulane University identified a five-and-a-half-inch American pocket shark [02:27.200 --> 02:32.320] as the first of its kind in the Gulf of Mexico, the specimen being only the second pocket [02:32.320 --> 02:37.960] shark ever captured or recorded with the other one being found way back in 1979 in the East [02:37.960 --> 02:39.460] Pacific Ocean. [02:39.460 --> 02:43.760] According to the university paper, the shark secretes a luminous fluid from a gland near [02:43.760 --> 02:50.040] its front fins for the purposes hypothesized to lure and prey who may be drawn into the [02:50.040 --> 03:16.880] glow. [03:16.880 --> 03:46.320] And [03:46.320 --> 03:47.320] All right, we are back. [03:47.320 --> 03:53.080] This is the rule of law radio, Randy Kelton, I'm Brett Fountain, and this is the 20th [03:53.080 --> 03:55.080] of August, 2021. [03:55.080 --> 04:00.680] I'm in our Friday night marathon, and we're talking with Ken in New York. [04:00.680 --> 04:07.040] Ken, you were telling us about your property tax issue, where you're challenging the value [04:07.040 --> 04:13.440] of the tax, and you wanted to use an affidavit for that. [04:13.440 --> 04:14.440] Go ahead. [04:14.440 --> 04:20.880] I was wondering whether an affidavit, what I should have said was, could it be useful, [04:20.880 --> 04:25.960] even though I have another party actually doing the grievance for me? [04:25.960 --> 04:30.840] And as for the last thing that Randy brought up, the neighbors downwind for me are the [04:30.840 --> 04:37.640] ones that have the apartment, so then I think they're going to do anything. [04:37.640 --> 04:41.400] I mean, if people come over, they'll leave their shopping carts in their garbage, you [04:41.400 --> 04:42.400] know. [04:42.400 --> 04:43.400] Oh, that's right. [04:43.400 --> 04:44.400] And one drop. [04:44.400 --> 04:46.760] But here's the beauty of this. [04:46.760 --> 04:53.560] When you do this, this suit that's for all others, similarly situated, they don't have [04:53.560 --> 04:55.400] to get involved. [04:55.400 --> 04:56.560] You don't have to know them. [04:56.560 --> 04:57.680] You don't have to talk to them. [04:57.680 --> 05:00.760] They don't have to know about your suit. [05:00.760 --> 05:06.040] You're just suing for yourself and everybody else who has this problem. [05:06.040 --> 05:12.120] And so you can count them up and say, maybe you look up and down the street and you decide [05:12.120 --> 05:17.680] that there's whatever, 20 people that have this same issue and you just put that in there. [05:17.680 --> 05:19.560] You don't have to involve them. [05:19.560 --> 05:21.400] They don't have to join the suit. [05:21.400 --> 05:22.400] Oh, okay. [05:22.400 --> 05:24.400] Does that make sense? [05:24.400 --> 05:27.400] Class action suits suck. [05:27.400 --> 05:32.360] In a class action suit, the lawyer's the only one that wins anything. [05:32.360 --> 05:36.160] If you win anything, the lawyer takes it all. [05:36.160 --> 05:43.160] But with a private attorney general suit, where no individual would tend to consider [05:43.160 --> 05:55.320] it worth the cost of suing, then in order to provide a remedy for systematic small issues [05:55.320 --> 06:03.920] like this, then you can sue in your behalf and the behalf of all other similarly situated. [06:03.920 --> 06:06.280] So they don't have to have anything to do with it. [06:06.280 --> 06:15.440] And so that it would be viable for you to exercise this remedy, you get to collect in [06:15.440 --> 06:20.600] your benefit and in the benefit of all the others. [06:20.600 --> 06:26.200] So it generates enough funding if you can win to make it worthwhile going after the [06:26.200 --> 06:27.200] issue. [06:27.200 --> 06:29.200] Does that make sense, Ken? [06:29.200 --> 06:34.920] Yes, I just don't understand all of the aspects of it. [06:34.920 --> 06:39.000] I mean, it would be me. [06:39.000 --> 06:45.000] I would be conducting the entire action as opposed to me. [06:45.000 --> 06:46.000] Exactly. [06:46.000 --> 06:47.000] Yeah. [06:47.000 --> 06:50.640] And you would be standing in for everybody else. [06:50.640 --> 06:57.880] Let's just say they're charging 25 bucks extra to somebody. [06:57.880 --> 07:03.320] But if you adjudicate this case, it's going to cost you thousands. [07:03.320 --> 07:10.000] Nobody's going to take on a case that costs them thousands to save 25 bucks. [07:10.000 --> 07:16.200] So the court said we need a way to find remedy for these smaller issues. [07:16.200 --> 07:22.560] So say they're charging 5,000 people an extra 25 bucks. [07:22.560 --> 07:28.960] Well, any one of them, it wouldn't be worth arguing over, but one guy can argue for all [07:28.960 --> 07:31.080] of them. [07:31.080 --> 07:33.760] You know where that might be useful, actually? [07:33.760 --> 07:39.640] It might be useful to use that technique to go after, to accuse or rather go after the [07:39.640 --> 07:43.400] politicians. [07:43.400 --> 07:49.760] For example, if it would be the town where I live in and, you know, you're not, I'm [07:49.760 --> 07:54.480] paying a property tax, but I'm basically, I'm not getting my money's worth because [07:54.480 --> 08:01.400] it won't come down and clean up the mess that these other people make, that's a different [08:01.400 --> 08:02.400] aspect of it. [08:02.400 --> 08:05.760] That's not actually part of the tax grievance, but that would be... [08:05.760 --> 08:12.600] No, I was, I was thinking, I'm not saying that, I'm thinking how do we turn that into [08:12.600 --> 08:18.480] a tort or a breach of contract? [08:18.480 --> 08:21.480] You paid for these services, you're not getting those services. [08:21.480 --> 08:22.480] Right. [08:22.480 --> 08:23.480] And what... [08:23.480 --> 08:24.480] Not only... [08:24.480 --> 08:28.360] Okay, you're not, you're not getting 50 bucks worth of services, big deal. [08:28.360 --> 08:36.120] But you got 5,000 people here who are not getting 50 bucks worth of services. [08:36.120 --> 08:39.600] You could sue for all of them and you get to collect it all. [08:39.600 --> 08:41.600] And that makes it a problem. [08:41.600 --> 08:43.760] This is something that's separate. [08:43.760 --> 08:49.040] You've got one issue here of how much tax is an appropriate amount, and the other issue [08:49.040 --> 08:51.560] is whether those people did their job. [08:51.560 --> 08:56.520] Those are two different kinds of suits, right? [08:56.520 --> 09:02.440] I mean, I can't help but just wonder if it would be me, I think I wouldn't be trying [09:02.440 --> 09:04.480] to argue about the amount of the tax. [09:04.480 --> 09:10.160] And I'm not trying to make you deviate from your current, the tax that you're taking, [09:10.160 --> 09:17.840] but maybe just to consider another option, how are they getting to the point of collecting [09:17.840 --> 09:20.000] taxes in the first place? [09:20.000 --> 09:25.240] What makes them say that taxes are due? [09:25.240 --> 09:26.240] Where do they get this? [09:26.240 --> 09:32.400] Is there some commercial activity going on at your property that falls within their purview? [09:32.400 --> 09:33.400] Why are they taxing? [09:33.400 --> 09:34.400] It's your property. [09:34.400 --> 09:38.880] And I think I would probably try to start there. [09:38.880 --> 09:46.640] Yeah, all I know is that when I bought my house, I was told that I had to tip this real [09:46.640 --> 09:51.080] estate agent $75, and I said, what's she doing here? [09:51.080 --> 09:53.160] She's got a big rock on her finger. [09:53.160 --> 09:59.240] I didn't find out until maybe 15 or 17 years later that I think she was the one that went [09:59.240 --> 10:02.680] down to the town hall and signed me up for property taxes. [10:02.680 --> 10:06.880] I think that's how it worked. [10:06.880 --> 10:14.200] I'm not 100% sure, but property taxes are not just there. [10:14.200 --> 10:23.400] You have to, somebody's signing away your rights, as I understand it. [10:23.400 --> 10:30.000] I've heard of getting out of property tax altogether, but I'm not there yet. [10:30.000 --> 10:33.720] I study these things, but it really shouldn't be. [10:33.720 --> 10:35.280] It really shouldn't be a property tax. [10:35.280 --> 10:37.560] I don't have any kids going to school. [10:37.560 --> 10:42.720] I mean, I get deductions because I'm a senior citizen now, but the extra deductions, but [10:42.720 --> 10:47.560] it still doesn't wipe out the things that I don't want, for example, in your property [10:47.560 --> 10:48.560] tax bill. [10:48.560 --> 10:53.040] You're paying for bonds and things that you never voted for. [10:53.040 --> 10:58.160] Taxation without representation? [10:58.160 --> 11:00.400] Say it isn't so. [11:00.400 --> 11:08.680] Yeah, I mean, do I need to pay $650 a year for the police when I got a sheriff? [11:08.680 --> 11:13.160] Do I need $650 a year for a library? [11:13.160 --> 11:25.880] I mean, we're talking about 1,000 square foot house. [11:25.880 --> 11:31.680] Have you looked into a loyalty title? [11:31.680 --> 11:36.560] Well, I haven't worked too deeply into it. [11:36.560 --> 11:41.160] I know what it is, like fee simple, but I still have a mortgage. [11:41.160 --> 11:43.680] I think that's an issue. [11:43.680 --> 11:48.480] And I've looked in my contract already, and I can't find anything in that it requires [11:48.480 --> 11:49.480] me to pay. [11:49.480 --> 11:52.760] You know, this goes back to an old issue we've been talking about a long time ago. [11:52.760 --> 11:58.560] And I just, for a variety of reasons, I haven't been able to get my whole property record [11:58.560 --> 12:03.760] so I could go after the fraud that I found in the HUD 1 settlement. [12:03.760 --> 12:07.600] But that was only, you know, that was only, what, three, four years ago? [12:07.600 --> 12:09.600] I still have $75,000 on the house. [12:09.600 --> 12:14.200] I don't think they're going to give me the house, you know, for whatever the fraud was [12:14.200 --> 12:16.480] in the HUD 1 settlement. [12:16.480 --> 12:21.320] So not right now, anyway. [12:21.320 --> 12:26.200] Okay, have you went after them for that, or have you only considered it? [12:26.200 --> 12:27.200] No. [12:27.200 --> 12:32.720] Oh, I want to do it, but, you know, they think they take time, and I'm just in a position [12:32.720 --> 12:35.560] where I don't have the time to do it. [12:35.560 --> 12:40.360] And it's not something you can, a lawyer's not going to do it for you. [12:40.360 --> 12:43.120] The last person's going to do anything for you, you know. [12:43.120 --> 12:46.080] Yeah, I'm probably the right guy to do that. [12:46.080 --> 12:48.200] I'm just so busy with other things. [12:48.200 --> 12:49.200] Yeah. [12:49.200 --> 12:53.520] I have to follow a whole bunch of those suits. [12:53.520 --> 13:00.400] Yeah, I know, it'll happen someday, but it just ain't going to happen today. [13:00.400 --> 13:02.320] And hopefully it'll happen before I die. [13:02.320 --> 13:05.920] I want to be tax-free before I go down. [13:05.920 --> 13:09.520] That project that I had. [13:09.520 --> 13:12.800] I want to go down, oh, and I'm a fortune. [13:12.800 --> 13:15.880] Yeah, try to collect that, brother. [13:15.880 --> 13:16.880] Yeah. [13:16.880 --> 13:22.600] You know, as I understand it, there really is no, you know, the property tax thing is [13:22.600 --> 13:27.600] really, well, it's unconstitutional, but you can't bring that into court. [13:27.600 --> 13:33.360] No, don't bring the constitution of my court, I'm going to lock you up. [13:33.360 --> 13:38.400] Well, you can bring some issues to lock the judge up. [13:38.400 --> 13:41.800] Who can play at that game? [13:41.800 --> 13:43.840] I've listened to those, yeah. [13:43.840 --> 13:49.960] I've listened to your suggestions, got it. [13:49.960 --> 13:50.960] There is something else. [13:50.960 --> 13:59.200] One other thing is just, it's in the same, when you talk about going in front of a judge [13:59.200 --> 14:05.720] and you have the counselor, the other counselor, would that, I don't know if it'd be the prosecutor [14:05.720 --> 14:12.640] or somebody else's lawyer, would try to blow something off that you're an issue that you're [14:12.640 --> 14:22.800] bringing to court, is that a case where the, either the lawyer or the prosecutor is testifying, [14:22.800 --> 14:25.760] which is, isn't that a big no-no? [14:25.760 --> 14:38.240] Yes, where the lawyer cannot testify to evidence, only witnesses can do that, but lawyers do [14:38.240 --> 14:43.800] that all the time, it's not a challenge, then it goes right by. [14:43.800 --> 14:51.400] That would be a really fun one to do, if I were to court, because the way to handle that [14:51.400 --> 14:56.240] is ask the court to square the lawyer in, if the lawyer wants to testify to facts or [14:56.240 --> 14:59.600] square them in, then I get to cross. [14:59.600 --> 15:05.200] Oh boy, that was, and then when the judge doesn't want to do anything about it, you [15:05.200 --> 15:08.640] motion the sanction, they have to objecting. [15:08.640 --> 15:16.040] Well, when the judge doesn't want, you know, then you file a just conduct complaint, the [15:16.040 --> 15:19.800] whole smear, we got a whole routine for that. [15:19.800 --> 15:23.720] Yeah, I've heard it, I've heard it in the past. [15:23.720 --> 15:27.720] Okay, do you have anything else for us? [15:27.720 --> 15:30.720] Oh no, I'm fine, fine, yeah, I don't want to tie you up anymore. [15:30.720 --> 15:31.720] Thank you. [15:31.720 --> 15:33.120] Okay, thank you, Ken. [15:33.120 --> 15:34.120] Yep. [15:34.120 --> 15:42.640] Okay, now we're going to try, let's see, okay, the 707 number has dropped off. [15:42.640 --> 15:48.040] Now we're going to go to Max in Texas, hello, Max. [15:48.040 --> 15:49.040] Hey, Randy. [15:49.040 --> 15:50.040] Hey, Brett. [15:50.040 --> 15:55.040] What do you have for us today? [15:55.040 --> 16:06.720] Well, I wanted to ask you about the criminal complaint, but the last thing you just did [16:06.720 --> 16:17.040] by most recent hearing, I did object to the lawyer, testifying it out being under oath, [16:17.040 --> 16:22.760] and the judge said, oh, you know, she's not going to testify to anything, and then she [16:22.760 --> 16:32.440] proceeded to testify to, she emailed me the service, but what is the process to, that [16:32.440 --> 16:34.960] would just be a judicial complaint? [16:34.960 --> 16:35.960] Sorry. [16:35.960 --> 16:45.600] I would object right there in the moment, object, and if he overrules your objection, [16:45.600 --> 16:52.600] you raise an exception, and he'll say, noted, so now you've put two flags on the field for [16:52.600 --> 16:53.600] the appellate court to review. [16:53.600 --> 17:00.240] We'll talk about it some more after we come back from listening to our sponsors. [17:00.240 --> 17:05.520] Are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters, or even lawsuits? [17:05.520 --> 17:09.200] Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Mearris proven method. [17:09.200 --> 17:13.400] Michael Mearris has won six cases in federal court against debt collectors, and now you [17:13.400 --> 17:14.400] can win two. [17:14.400 --> 17:19.200] You'll get step-by-step instructions in plain English on how to win in court using federal [17:19.200 --> 17:20.200] civil rights statute. [17:20.200 --> 17:24.520] What to do when contacted by phones, mail, or court summons? [17:24.520 --> 17:26.520] How to answer letters and phone calls? [17:26.520 --> 17:29.120] How to get debt collectors out of your credit reports? [17:29.120 --> 17:33.800] How to turn the financial tables on them and make them pay you to go away? [17:33.800 --> 17:38.920] The Michael Mearris proven method is the solution for how to stop debt collectors. [17:38.920 --> 17:41.040] Personal consultation is available as well. [17:41.040 --> 17:46.600] For more information, please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the blue Michael Mearris banner [17:46.600 --> 17:49.600] or email MichaelMearris at yahoo.com. [17:49.600 --> 17:57.240] It's ruleoflawradio.com or email m-i-c-h-a-e-l-m-i-r-r-a-s at yahoo.com. [17:57.240 --> 18:00.440] To learn how to stop debt collectors next. [18:00.440 --> 18:04.640] Rule of Law Radio is proud to offer the Rule of Law Traffic Seminar. [18:04.640 --> 18:08.240] In today's America, we live in an us against them society, and if we the people are ever [18:08.240 --> 18:12.320] going to have a free society, then we're going to have to stand and defend our own rights. [18:12.320 --> 18:15.440] Among those rights are the right to travel freely from place to place, the right to [18:15.440 --> 18:19.320] act in our own private capacity, and most importantly, the right to due process of law. [18:19.320 --> 18:23.520] Traffic courts afford us the least expensive opportunity to learn how to enforce and preserve [18:23.520 --> 18:25.400] our rights through due process. [18:25.400 --> 18:28.880] Former Sheriff's Deputy, A. Craig, in conjunction with Rule of Law Radio, has put together the [18:28.880 --> 18:32.640] most comprehensive teaching tool available that will help you understand what due process [18:32.640 --> 18:35.040] is and how to hold reports to the rule of law. [18:35.040 --> 18:39.040] You can get your own copy of this invaluable material by going to ruleoflawradio.com and [18:39.040 --> 18:40.360] ordering your copy today. [18:40.360 --> 18:43.680] By ordering now, you'll receive a copy of Eddie's book, The Texas Transportation Code, [18:43.680 --> 18:47.320] The Law vs. the Lie, video and audio of the original 2009 seminar. [18:47.320 --> 18:50.400] Hundreds of research documents and other useful resource material. [18:50.400 --> 18:54.400] Learn how to fight for your rights with the help of this material from ruleoflawradio.com. [18:54.400 --> 19:24.240] Remember your copy today and together we can have pre-society we all want and deserve. [19:24.240 --> 19:25.240] We'll see you in the next video. [19:25.240 --> 19:54.240] Bye-bye. [19:55.240 --> 20:20.360] All right. [20:20.360 --> 20:21.360] We are back. [20:21.360 --> 20:22.800] This is the rule of law radio. [20:22.800 --> 20:29.280] Randy Kelton, I'm Brett Fountain, and we're talking with Max in Texas. [20:29.280 --> 20:35.720] So Max, you were talking about if the prosecutor is trying to testify, and what do you do about [20:35.720 --> 20:36.720] that? [20:36.720 --> 20:44.680] So we were saying that you could raise an objection, which you did, and the judge overrules your [20:44.680 --> 20:45.680] objection. [20:45.680 --> 20:53.520] You just say, I raise an exception, or defense raises an exception, and that's another flag [20:53.520 --> 20:56.040] you've just thrown on the field. [20:56.040 --> 21:02.760] Every time you say I object, that gives an appellate court something to review. [21:02.760 --> 21:06.400] Same thing with an objection. [21:06.400 --> 21:10.240] If you raise an exception, that's like the judge did something wrong. [21:10.240 --> 21:16.480] He's not going to rule on that, but he can just say noted, and he can't really rule on [21:16.480 --> 21:20.920] whether or not your exception is valid, but an appellate court can. [21:20.920 --> 21:29.040] So the judge can rule on when you make a motion, I move the court to do this or that, or I [21:29.040 --> 21:31.200] object to this or that. [21:31.200 --> 21:34.680] He can make a ruling on that. [21:34.680 --> 21:39.400] And when you say I raise an exception, he can't really rule on that, but that's something [21:39.400 --> 21:45.640] that an appellate court can revisit, can visit later, and he knows it. [21:45.640 --> 21:54.160] So he's allowing someone to, if you say, in his courtroom, and you've objected, he's [21:54.160 --> 21:55.560] going to allow it anyway. [21:55.560 --> 21:59.040] He raised an exception. [21:59.040 --> 22:06.840] What you have done is preserved the error for appeal, and you have to do that in order [22:06.840 --> 22:10.600] to preserve the error. [22:10.600 --> 22:14.720] And the judge is not going to like it. [22:14.720 --> 22:16.720] He knows that's what's happening. [22:16.720 --> 22:17.720] He feels it. [22:17.720 --> 22:20.720] He doesn't know if you're going to go through with an appeal or not, but he knows he's going [22:20.720 --> 22:28.160] to look bad if it does go to appeal. [22:28.160 --> 22:34.480] I've had judges get real annoyed at me objecting to everything, and when the judge starts getting [22:34.480 --> 22:43.560] annoyed at you objecting and then noticing an exception to the ruling, then you ask the [22:43.560 --> 22:52.400] court to accept your general objection to everything so that you don't have to keep [22:52.400 --> 22:59.040] annoying the court with all these objections, and generally they will grant that. [22:59.040 --> 23:05.960] So now you've got everything protected for appeal. [23:05.960 --> 23:11.560] I'm sorry, wrong word. [23:11.560 --> 23:15.800] Preserved for appeal, that's what I'm saying. [23:15.800 --> 23:20.520] And sometimes you're in a situation where the judge is just going to railroad you through. [23:20.520 --> 23:21.600] He's going to do whatever. [23:21.600 --> 23:22.760] He doesn't care. [23:22.760 --> 23:28.600] He's very obviously biased against you for the opposite party, and so the only thing [23:28.600 --> 23:35.040] that you do in that moment is I move this court for immediate judicial disqualification [23:35.040 --> 23:40.560] for bias, and that puts a cabos on everything. [23:40.560 --> 23:42.200] He can't do any more. [23:42.200 --> 23:45.000] He can't issue any more rulings. [23:45.000 --> 23:46.000] He can't do anything. [23:46.000 --> 23:49.760] He's got to just stop it right there. [23:49.760 --> 23:55.760] He's being yanked off the bench, and he needs to either, he only gets two choices. [23:55.760 --> 24:01.280] A, he backs away graciously, says, okay, I'm going to let some other judge deal with this [24:01.280 --> 24:09.080] case, or B, he has to take that motion for judicial disqualification and run it up the [24:09.080 --> 24:17.640] chain for an admin judge to assess whether or not he's really being biased. [24:17.640 --> 24:24.240] He doesn't get to continue issuing rulings, even if he wants to. [24:24.240 --> 24:27.240] What do you think about that, Max? [24:27.240 --> 24:29.240] I think that's awesome. [24:29.240 --> 24:30.240] I'll just take notes. [24:30.240 --> 24:32.600] Definitely going to pull that next time. [24:32.600 --> 24:40.160] Yeah, and that's, you're in Texas, so that's rule 18A of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. [24:40.160 --> 24:42.840] That's judges being disqualified. [24:42.840 --> 24:46.840] Rule 18A, and 18B tells the grounds for disqualification. [24:46.840 --> 24:51.000] There's a difference between recusal and disqualification in Texas. [24:51.000 --> 24:54.560] I don't know, in some other states it might be the same, it sounds like one from my research, [24:54.560 --> 24:58.440] it looks like it might be the same in some states, synonymous. [24:58.440 --> 25:04.840] But in Texas, they have a slightly different set of rules that they apply to these two. [25:04.840 --> 25:10.840] So a judge can recuse himself when you move for his disqualification. [25:10.840 --> 25:20.080] He can recuse himself, but you can't recuse, okay, so you can recue, you can move for his [25:20.080 --> 25:30.600] recusal, and he can continue on doing everything, and he doesn't have this stop everything requirement. [25:30.600 --> 25:38.600] But if you move for his disqualification for bias, now he has to stop everything. [25:38.600 --> 25:45.120] That's in rule 18A. [25:45.120 --> 25:46.120] Sound good? [25:46.120 --> 25:47.120] Sounds good. [25:47.120 --> 25:54.520] Yes, if he doesn't, when he's required to, then you get to ask the bailiff to drag him [25:54.520 --> 25:58.000] off the bench. [25:58.000 --> 26:05.240] I hope I get an opportunity to do that one day. [26:05.240 --> 26:12.480] So concerning the criminal complaint, say you got it, you got it filled out, you're [26:12.480 --> 26:15.560] ready to go, you got it signed and authorized. [26:15.560 --> 26:23.240] What is a good strategy for filing them as far as who to go to, considering that if it's [26:23.240 --> 26:30.840] against a judge or somebody that you probably don't want to bring it to, who's the best [26:30.840 --> 26:37.680] one to bring it to in that situation? [26:37.680 --> 26:40.000] You want me to address this, Brett? [26:40.000 --> 26:41.000] Sure. [26:41.000 --> 26:45.040] I've got some ideas, but you're the guru. [26:45.040 --> 26:57.440] Always criminal complaints are addressed to some magistrate, not to police, not to prosecutors, [26:57.440 --> 26:59.640] but some magistrate. [26:59.640 --> 27:02.040] All judges are magistrates. [27:02.040 --> 27:10.080] Example, I filed a criminal complaint against the governor of the state of Texas with the [27:10.080 --> 27:15.280] district attorney or actually with the Texas grand jury. [27:15.280 --> 27:22.280] I also filed that criminal complaint with the chief justice of the Texas Supreme in [27:22.280 --> 27:25.880] his capacity as a magistrate. [27:25.880 --> 27:31.280] The lowest level judge in the state is a magistrate. [27:31.280 --> 27:36.360] The highest level judge in the state is a magistrate. [27:36.360 --> 27:44.520] If the lowest level magistrate in the state makes a ruling, the highest level magistrate [27:44.520 --> 27:48.480] in the state has no power to interrupt that ruling. [27:48.480 --> 27:55.480] They all stand on the same level as magistrates. [27:55.480 --> 28:02.920] All complaints are directed to some magistrate. [28:02.920 --> 28:11.240] The strategy with criminal complaints is who do you want to give the complaint to? [28:11.240 --> 28:18.040] In my case, I was playing them like a cheap fiddle, and I filed with the highest level [28:18.040 --> 28:24.680] magistrate in the state because I was filing against the highest level member of the executive [28:24.680 --> 28:30.440] branch in the state, but at the end of the day, it didn't make any difference. [28:30.440 --> 28:35.960] I could have been charged in a Class C misdemeanor and filed it with the chief justice, and that [28:35.960 --> 28:44.480] invoked the chief justice's duty, the same as the complaint against the governor did. [28:44.480 --> 28:50.120] The chief justice ignored it, so I filed criminal charges against him. [28:50.120 --> 28:54.880] So look at who's out there. [28:54.880 --> 29:00.040] After that, everything is political. [29:00.040 --> 29:07.560] Who is the most politically sensitive magistrate out there, or judge out there? [29:07.560 --> 29:15.280] Right, you might look at some angles like if you're going after a judge, he's the judge's [29:15.280 --> 29:21.720] the criminal, then maybe there's somebody that ran against him a couple of years ago [29:21.720 --> 29:25.480] and lost, but it was an ugly battle. [29:25.480 --> 29:30.880] And that person is now a magistrate over in a neighboring town. [29:30.880 --> 29:37.600] Or you might look at somebody that he got in trouble, and they're really ready to go [29:37.600 --> 29:46.080] ahead and process this because of the water that's under the bridge, let's say. [29:46.080 --> 29:52.680] I don't know anything about that, but you know that he is a big town guy, and these [29:52.680 --> 29:56.400] other little town guys might want to do something for the little guy, and I guess we'll come [29:56.400 --> 30:01.200] back and talk about that after the break. [30:01.200 --> 30:05.640] Everyone knows that walking is great exercise, but you might not know that the way you walk [30:05.640 --> 30:07.720] could predict how long you're going to live. [30:07.720 --> 30:13.000] I'm Dr. Katherine Albrecht, and I'll be back to tell you more about walking prognostication [30:13.000 --> 30:14.680] in just a moment. [30:14.680 --> 30:16.280] Privacy is under attack. [30:16.280 --> 30:20.680] When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again, and once your privacy [30:20.680 --> 30:24.640] is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too. [30:24.640 --> 30:29.760] So protect your rights, say no to surveillance, and keep your information to yourself. [30:29.760 --> 30:32.400] Privacy, it's worth hanging on to. [30:32.400 --> 30:36.720] This public service announcement is brought to you by StartPage.com, the private search [30:36.720 --> 30:40.240] engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing. [30:40.240 --> 30:43.520] Start over with StartPage. [30:43.520 --> 30:47.960] New research shows how fast you walk could predict how long you're going to live. [30:47.960 --> 30:52.520] The Journal of the American Medical Association reports that older adults who walk one meter [30:52.520 --> 30:55.760] per second or faster live longer than expected. [30:55.760 --> 31:00.160] In case you're wondering, one meter per second is about two and a quarter miles per hour. [31:00.160 --> 31:04.840] A senior's age, gender, and walking speed were as good at predicting life expectancy [31:04.840 --> 31:07.200] as more traditional statistical measures. [31:07.200 --> 31:10.480] Generally speaking, faster walkers live longer. [31:10.480 --> 31:15.400] Walking walking speed is quick and inexpensive, it only takes a stopwatch, some space to walk [31:15.400 --> 31:16.800] in a few minutes. [31:16.800 --> 31:21.120] Researchers say it could help doctors identify older patients who need special care. [31:21.120 --> 31:51.080] I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, more news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com. [31:51.080 --> 32:15.360] Here's [32:15.360 --> 32:20.880] so shine before men that they may see your good works and glorify your Father which is in heaven. [32:20.880 --> 32:27.200] We wish to reflect God's light and be a blessing to all those with a hearing ear. Join Nana and [32:27.200 --> 32:32.920] guests for both verse by verse Bible studies and topical Bible studies designed to provoke unto [32:32.920 --> 32:38.640] love and good works. Our verse by verse Bible studies will begin in the book of Matthew where [32:38.640 --> 32:44.600] we will discuss one chapter per week. Our topical Bible studies will vary each week and will explore [32:44.600 --> 32:49.960] sound doctrine as well as Christian character development. So mark your calendar and join [32:49.960 --> 32:57.680] us live on LogosRadioNetwork.com Wednesdays from 8 to 10 p.m. starting January 8th for an inspiring [32:57.680 --> 33:05.920] and motivating discussion on the scriptures. Live free speech radio LogosRadioNetwork.com. [33:27.680 --> 33:57.100] Okay, we are back. This is the rule of law radio. Randy Kelton. I'm Brad Fountain and we're [33:57.100 --> 34:06.040] talking with Max in Texas. Max, go ahead. I think we love. Cut you off. Did we get your [34:06.040 --> 34:12.680] question answered here? Okay, that's Brad's nice way of saying you forgot what the heck we were [34:12.680 --> 34:19.240] talking about. What were we talking about? Well, I mean, just to give you some a little [34:19.240 --> 34:27.240] specifics, I'm in a, you know, title IVD court here. So it's like administrative court and it's an [34:27.240 --> 34:35.840] associate judge. So they're disappointed. They're not elected. So it might be a little difficult as [34:35.840 --> 34:43.240] far as seeing their politics and, you know, trying to find somebody that's against them and that, [34:43.240 --> 34:49.960] you know, apart from maybe finding another judge that has gone through nasty divorce or [34:49.960 --> 34:56.640] something. But you kind of, you kind of answered enough. The other question I had about criminal [34:56.640 --> 35:06.080] complaint was, you know, do these actually get taken seriously? And is it or is it kind of like [35:06.080 --> 35:14.320] the bar agreement and the judicial complaint where it's just the kind of... Oh, no, a criminal [35:14.320 --> 35:22.320] complaint is a whole other animal. A criminal complaint against a public official in the state [35:22.320 --> 35:32.080] of Texas is required to be forwarded to the foreman of the grand jury. Now, they pretty well [35:32.080 --> 35:40.680] know that for the most part, the grand jury is not going to indict a public official. For the [35:40.680 --> 35:51.080] most part, the problem is, is you have 12 unknowns in there. And for the most part, the unknown, [35:51.080 --> 35:57.560] the 12 unknowns will go along with whatever the prosecutor says unless one of them stands up. [35:57.560 --> 36:09.440] Is one of them going to stand up in your case? So who wants to play Russian roulette with their [36:09.440 --> 36:18.320] career? If you get indicted by a grand jury, under Texas law, you're required to stand down [36:18.320 --> 36:27.280] from your position if you are a public official. Now, just being accused of something is not [36:27.280 --> 36:34.160] sufficient. But if a grand jury finds probable cause, then you're subject to cold war and [36:34.160 --> 36:41.520] tow removal at least until the charges are resolved. Are you familiar with cold war and [36:41.520 --> 36:49.280] tow? I've heard about it, but I'm not very familiar with it. I'm going to file criminal [36:49.280 --> 36:59.320] charges against the Travis County District Attorney because the Travis County District [36:59.320 --> 37:05.920] Attorney has publicly stated that it has no intention of prostituting class A and class B [37:05.920 --> 37:16.960] misdemeanors. Well, that's not what I heard him for. That's not what his contract says. So I'm [37:16.960 --> 37:23.320] going to move for cold war and tow removal, maintaining that the prosecuting attorney is [37:23.320 --> 37:33.280] illegally holding office, that he is standing in the shoes of the prosecutor, accepting monetary [37:33.280 --> 37:41.080] payment for his services, and he has refused to perform those services. He's going to love that. [37:41.080 --> 37:51.760] Yeah, I hope he does. Good luck with that, Bubba. Max, it's all politics at the end of the day. [37:51.760 --> 38:02.000] You start making them look bad. You start holding them up to public ridicule. They will resolve [38:02.000 --> 38:13.160] your case just to get all this to go away. It's not about the facts and the law. We go to a lot [38:13.160 --> 38:21.880] of trouble to develop the facts and the law, but at the end of the day it's all about politics. Go [38:21.880 --> 38:33.560] ahead, Max. Oh, sorry. I was just asking, do you have any experience in the Title IVD courts? No, [38:33.560 --> 38:46.320] Title IVD. Title IVD of what? The tax code. It's the family courts. Is that the alimony stuff [38:46.320 --> 38:58.760] where they say you owe alimony? It's a federal program, but it's kind of contracted out to [38:58.760 --> 39:10.000] different states voluntarily. I think it has something to do with funding, but there's some [39:10.000 --> 39:23.720] kind of weird issues around what exactly a jurisdiction is. It's not necessarily a Texas [39:23.720 --> 39:35.400] court. It's kind of like a federal court, but contracted to the state. Sometimes when I get a [39:35.400 --> 39:41.160] lot of advice from you guys, then it's really great, but then I kind of compare it to other [39:41.160 --> 39:47.640] information with people that are very familiar with the Title IVD courts and they're kind of [39:47.640 --> 39:56.680] conflicting. I'm just trying to understand what might be the differences or the similarities [39:56.680 --> 40:14.200] between the two. I would not know how to answer that. Do you have any idea how to answer that, [40:14.200 --> 40:23.320] Brad? I don't really know. That's interesting about the concept of having something federal that's [40:23.320 --> 40:30.600] subcontracted to state judges. It seems like that would be a misappropriation of public funds. I [40:30.600 --> 40:37.720] don't understand how that could work. How that could be legit. State judges, I think they're [40:37.720 --> 40:48.440] actually administrative judges that are contract through the program. I think they actually do get [40:48.440 --> 40:55.640] a financial benefit from participating in it, which to me sounds like conflict of interest, [40:55.640 --> 41:06.920] sure. It's all done through the office of the Attorney General, not through the actual Attorney [41:06.920 --> 41:20.040] General's Office under this child support division. It's very strange because Title IVD is a social [41:20.040 --> 41:29.720] security thing, which is a federal thing, and yet in Texas we have a family code that references [41:29.720 --> 41:37.320] that. I'm not really sure how that works, but I guess it's a family law, which I don't know a [41:37.320 --> 41:52.600] whole lot about. It's a criminal organization, but it's done through the offices of the General [41:52.600 --> 42:06.120] Welfare of families and children. It's real tough to study this thing because it's [42:07.000 --> 42:15.800] kind of conflicting information as far as what happens in regular county, a municipal court, [42:15.800 --> 42:23.240] and this record, and what's happening in these special family courts. [42:24.440 --> 42:30.520] Yeah, because typically we're dealing with criminal, whether it's somebody trying to defend [42:30.520 --> 42:38.280] themselves against a criminal charge, or whether it's somebody needing to report the crime of [42:38.280 --> 42:46.840] usually a public official, and so those are both in criminal law. This is family law, and it's a [42:46.840 --> 42:56.360] whole separate set of rules and separate, I don't know. It should not be so difficult to sort out [42:56.360 --> 43:05.880] these different issues. I'm working on this tool for each of these areas of law, so I'm hoping [43:05.880 --> 43:10.840] within the next few months I'll have some tools out there that'll help you sort through all of this. [43:13.960 --> 43:20.280] Yeah, so with the civil procedure or even the criminal procedure, there's [43:23.560 --> 43:31.800] somebody withstanding that makes a claim, but in this case, in this family code, [43:31.800 --> 43:39.800] it's a state that makes a claim without standing, without any kind of first-hand [43:39.800 --> 43:47.080] personal knowledge or interview, and they move a case against you, and it's the one thing that [43:47.080 --> 43:56.600] the Texas Civil Procedure says you can't throw out for not having a valid cause of action. [43:56.600 --> 44:04.200] Through advances in technology, our lives have greatly improved, [44:04.200 --> 44:09.160] except in the area of nutrition. People feed their pets better than they feed themselves, [44:09.160 --> 44:15.000] and it's time we changed all that. Our primary defense against aging and disease in this toxic [44:15.000 --> 44:20.200] environment is good nutrition. In a world where natural foods have been irradiated, [44:20.200 --> 44:27.000] adulterated, and mutilated, young Jevity can provide the nutrients you need. Logo Radial Network gets [44:27.000 --> 44:32.520] many requests to endorse all sorts of products, most of which we reject. We have come to trust [44:32.520 --> 44:38.680] young Jevity so much, we became a marketing distributor along with Alex Jones, Ben Fuchs, [44:38.680 --> 44:46.040] and many others. When you order from LogoRadialNetwork.com, your health will improve as you help support [44:46.040 --> 44:51.800] quality radio. As you realize the benefits of young Jevity, you may want to join us. [44:51.800 --> 44:56.920] As a distributor, you can experience improved health, help your friends and family, [44:56.920 --> 45:03.480] and increase your income. Order now. Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit? [45:04.040 --> 45:09.560] Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary, the affordable, easy-to-understand [45:09.560 --> 45:16.840] poor CD course that will show you how in 24 hours, step by step. If you have a lawyer, [45:16.840 --> 45:21.560] know what your lawyer should be doing. If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do [45:21.560 --> 45:28.760] for yourself. Thousands have won with our step by step course, and now you can too. Jurisdictionary [45:28.760 --> 45:35.320] was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case-winning experience. Even if you're not in [45:35.320 --> 45:40.840] a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand about the principles and practices [45:40.840 --> 45:47.160] that control our American courts. You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, [45:47.720 --> 45:54.920] forms for civil cases, pro se tactics, and much more. Please visit Lulavlalradio.com [45:54.920 --> 46:06.520] and click on the banner or call toll-free 866-LAW-EZ. [46:25.640 --> 46:32.920] I must be careful what I'm wishing for. When I'm hungry, I like to know just [46:32.920 --> 46:39.720] what I'm fishing for. I ain't asking for much. I ain't trying to be no glutton. [46:41.160 --> 46:44.520] I'm just here making my living, pushing buttons. [46:44.520 --> 46:55.000] I get my message out when you're wanting to shout in distance. I hope for bravery and against [46:55.000 --> 47:01.960] slavery showing resistance. First I'm crawling, then I'm walking, then I start [47:01.960 --> 47:17.960] strutting. I'm just so glad to make my living, pushing buttons. [47:20.600 --> 47:27.800] When we sat down to play Monopoly, we all wanted to win the game. We gave some guys this money [47:27.800 --> 47:37.800] to supply. We're back. Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain, Lulavlalradio. We're talking to Max [47:37.800 --> 47:47.560] in Texas and Max, the family law issues are tough. I'm building these questionnaires [47:48.440 --> 47:53.960] for legal issues and I've mostly spent most of my time on due process because that's the largest. [47:53.960 --> 48:02.520] As I get that finished up and move away from it, the next area of law I want to map out [48:03.400 --> 48:10.840] is family law. When I got to Australia, I went down there to do some seminars. [48:10.840 --> 48:16.520] They picked me up at the Sydney airport and we were approaching the Sydney Bay Bridge. [48:16.520 --> 48:25.160] As cops everywhere and a guy up on the bridge with these big banners talking about how corrupt [48:25.160 --> 48:35.880] the family law courts are. I thought about that. If you are a family law judge and you're doing [48:35.880 --> 48:44.840] your job right, nobody's going to be happy with you. The fact that everybody's upset at family [48:44.840 --> 48:55.240] law, I get it. But I'm not sure it's because of the judges or family law. It's a lot to do with [48:55.240 --> 49:01.400] the parties involved. If we could build a good effective family law questionnaire, [49:03.640 --> 49:10.840] we may be able to ameliorate some of these issues people are coming to the court with. [49:10.840 --> 49:19.000] And maybe get the judges out of the middle. I'm no fan of judges or prosecutors. [49:20.360 --> 49:26.360] But in this circumstance, it's got to be an extremely difficult job. [49:29.240 --> 49:32.440] Max, what do you think? Am I naive? [49:32.440 --> 49:46.440] I mean, I think it's more nefarious than you think it is. I'm pretty sure it's like an organized [49:46.440 --> 49:54.120] criminal operation. Like human trafficking? Oh, yeah. There's human trafficking. There's [49:54.120 --> 50:04.280] extortion. There's fees sending debtors to prison. There's a lot of really bad criminal activity [50:04.280 --> 50:12.920] that centers around. It sounds like a good thing. You're trying to act in the best interest of a [50:12.920 --> 50:25.640] child or trying to help a family, like a wife that's being left from her rich husband and you [50:25.640 --> 50:33.000] want to make sure it will be taken care of or take care of her children. But that's like the [50:33.000 --> 50:39.400] examples they put out front. Most of the things that are taking place are purposely [50:39.400 --> 50:48.120] not splitting the custody evenly. So then more money needs to be taken out. A lot of people, [50:48.120 --> 50:56.440] you know, they can't pay it because they're already poor and they end up having heavy penalties [50:56.440 --> 51:04.360] because of that. Their license are getting taken away, getting sent to jail. Their money's being [51:04.360 --> 51:11.720] taken out of their paycheck. Okay, okay. We get all of this. You know, this family law is really, [51:11.720 --> 51:18.120] really tough. And it's been my experience that family law judges don't care about you. [51:19.960 --> 51:23.480] They don't care about the wife. The only ones they care about are the children. [51:24.600 --> 51:31.080] No, that's a thing. They don't even care about the children. There's a case law for it that the [51:31.080 --> 51:41.720] interest of the children and the mother are not even primary in the goals of the program. [51:42.440 --> 51:48.680] The goals of the program are to recoup costs for the state of the program. [51:50.840 --> 51:57.640] I'll send you a email about it in front of me. Okay, wait a minute. Take a step back. I missed [51:57.640 --> 52:06.760] something. Specify the program you're speaking to. The title, title 4D program. [52:08.520 --> 52:14.440] Title 4D. And this is for recovering litigation costs for the state? [52:15.880 --> 52:25.240] Well, so if a, say, a mother goes on to some sort of public services, you know, [52:25.240 --> 52:34.920] welfare food stamps, the father is automatically enrolled into child support even if the mother [52:34.920 --> 52:43.240] didn't petition it. So it's okay. That's reasonable. Okay, I got that part. [52:45.480 --> 52:49.080] If what does the program and title that would tend to be [52:49.080 --> 53:00.360] either improper or unconscionable? The vision of custody, you know, there's [53:00.360 --> 53:04.520] case law that it's supposed to be 50-50. Most of the times they don't do that. [53:05.720 --> 53:10.920] They, you know, they give already to the mother, which is understandable during what they call [53:10.920 --> 53:19.480] the tender years, but it'll, it'll continue on even higher. And what that causes is that there [53:19.480 --> 53:26.600] needs to be greater payments. Wait, you said greater payment? [53:27.800 --> 53:32.760] Payment, child support. Yeah, he's talking about the support of the child is, [53:33.480 --> 53:39.880] if it's different on one side, if there's a discrepancy, then it's not 50-50, then somebody has [53:39.880 --> 53:46.040] to pay somebody else. Well, we, there always, there can never actually be 50-50 unless the child [53:46.040 --> 54:03.000] is in separate care, separate from the parents. So if, who's picking up this bill when if the [54:03.000 --> 54:20.040] parents are not required to handle 50-50? What bill? Yep. I'm apparently missing something. [54:22.600 --> 54:31.080] If one, okay, the cost of raising the child is generally separated between the litigants [54:31.080 --> 54:40.120] and whoever gets full custody gets child support to support the child. Are you saying there's [54:41.160 --> 54:45.000] something else in between extracting these funds for some other purpose? [54:46.440 --> 54:55.800] Well, so the, so Sansoski versus Kramer, the, you know, court has ruled that 50-50 is presumed [54:55.800 --> 55:02.760] to be the standard that that's where it should be. That's a nice standard if neither one of the [55:02.760 --> 55:13.000] parents are actually in custody of the children. Is there not a provision for the parent who has [55:13.000 --> 55:25.000] full custody or the parent exercising custody? If I got the kids, you know, I take them to [55:25.000 --> 55:33.720] school every day. I, I buy, I fix their lunches, I buy their clothes, I buy their school supplies, [55:34.680 --> 55:43.320] take care of them when they get home. For the court, for you to say 50-50, then I'm doing much [55:43.320 --> 55:48.040] more than 50-50 way beyond the cost. Is there not a provision for that? [55:48.040 --> 55:55.160] Yeah, well, that's, that's not even the majority of the case. That, that's like the, you know, the [55:55.160 --> 56:00.920] 10%, whatever the smaller percentage that they put out front, but mostly times it's the, you know, [56:00.920 --> 56:05.720] the father. Wait a minute, wait a minute. Are you saying that the vast majority of the cases [56:07.080 --> 56:14.440] have neither parent in custody of the children and they're each required to pay 50% of the child's [56:14.440 --> 56:19.880] cost? Did I miss something here? So you're saying like CPS is taking the children away? [56:21.160 --> 56:26.600] That's what I'm getting that you're going to, for you're calling for 50, for 50 [56:28.840 --> 56:35.560] cost for each parent. Then if one of the parents are taking care of the children, [56:35.560 --> 56:36.840] then that's not equitable. [56:36.840 --> 56:44.200] Yeah, I'm not sure I understand. If CPS, I'm just kidding. [56:44.200 --> 56:50.200] I'm the parent who has custody of the children. I wake them up in the morning. I make sure they [56:50.200 --> 56:56.920] brush their teeth. I take them to school. I make their lunches. I do all these things necessary [56:56.920 --> 57:03.080] to raise these children. And I split 50-50 cost with the husband who sits back and does nothing. [57:03.080 --> 57:07.640] I mean, that's not right. If the husband is doing nothing. [57:08.840 --> 57:15.240] Yeah, so that's what I'm trying to sort out here. Are you going to cases where there's 50-50 [57:15.240 --> 57:23.720] custody? No, what the case is saying is that it's presumed that it should be 50-50 unless [57:23.720 --> 57:30.840] there's some kind of, you know, neglect or some sort of other cause to not be 50-50. [57:30.840 --> 57:33.560] Yeah, is there ever 50-50? [57:35.720 --> 57:40.120] Well, I mean, it'd be impossible to measure it exactly 50-50, but having them. [57:40.120 --> 57:46.680] No, I mean, whoever is taking care of the children and sending them to school and taking them to [57:46.680 --> 57:53.480] baseball games and unless both parents are intimately involved and that almost never happens, [57:53.480 --> 58:02.760] one parent is carrying a high level of burden that the other one is not. Do they have provisions [58:02.760 --> 58:12.200] to measure that? I mean, they have those gals and all that stuff to analyze, you know, what [58:13.960 --> 58:20.440] what kind of interaction, you know, parents having with their child, but, you know, at the very top [58:20.440 --> 58:27.000] of it, the 30 seconds. What right does the state have to butt into that, you know, that business [58:28.360 --> 58:31.960] that should be some sort of private lawsuit between the mother and the father? [58:33.400 --> 58:39.720] That's what family law is about, as I understand. Hang on, Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain, we have [58:39.720 --> 58:48.600] our radio. I do have Leslie Orman on and I do want to get to her that she's on the guest bridge. [58:48.600 --> 58:53.880] Would you like to make more definite progress in your walk with God? [58:53.880 --> 59:00.040] Bibles for America is offering a free study Bible and a set of free Christian books that can really [59:00.040 --> 59:05.240] help. The New Testament recovery version is one of the most comprehensive study Bibles available [59:05.240 --> 59:10.680] today. It's an accurate translation and it contains thousands of footnotes that will help you to know [59:10.680 --> 59:16.840] God and to know the meaning of life. The free books are a three-volume set called Basic Elements of [59:16.840 --> 59:22.200] the Christian Life. Chapter by chapter, Basic Elements of the Christian Life clearly presents [59:22.200 --> 59:28.680] God's plan of salvation, growing in Christ and how to build up the church. To order your free [59:28.680 --> 59:35.560] New Testament recovery version and Basic Elements of the Christian Life, call Bibles for America toll [59:35.560 --> 59:48.920] free at 888-551-0102. That's 888-551-0102 or visit us online at bfa.org. [59:51.960 --> 59:58.120] You're listening to the Logos Radio Network at LogosRadioNetwork.com. [59:58.120 --> 01:00:04.280] The following use flash is brought to you by The Lone Star Lowdown. [01:00:06.200 --> 01:00:12.840] Markets for Monday the 22nd of July 2019 open with precious metals, gold at $1,429 an ounce, [01:00:12.840 --> 01:00:20.680] silver $16.45 an ounce, copper $2.75 an ounce, oil Texas crude $55.63 a barrel, [01:00:20.680 --> 01:00:29.000] Brent crude $62.47 a barrel, and cryptos in order of market cap, Bitcoin Core $10,566.52, [01:00:29.000 --> 01:00:41.320] Ethereum $227.26, XRP Ripple $0.33, Litecoin $100.31, and Bitcoin Cash is at $324.10 a crypto coin. [01:00:41.320 --> 01:00:52.280] Today in history the year 1916 the preparedness day bombing a tying suitcase bomb was detonated [01:00:52.280 --> 01:00:58.120] on Market Street in San Francisco during the World War I preparedness day parade killing 10 and [01:00:58.120 --> 01:01:08.360] entering 40. Today in history. In recent news since Governor Greg Abbott signed House Bill 1325 [01:01:08.360 --> 01:01:13.000] legalizing hemp into Texas law back in June. County prosecutors around the state including [01:01:13.000 --> 01:01:17.560] Houston, Austin, and San Antonio have been dropping marijuana possession charges and even refusing [01:01:17.560 --> 01:01:22.200] to file new ones since they are stipulating that they do not have the time or the laboratory [01:01:22.200 --> 01:01:27.400] equipment to test the error for THC. Margaret Moore the Travis County District Attorney announced [01:01:27.400 --> 01:01:32.360] earlier this month that she was dismissing 32 felony possession and delivery of marijuana cases [01:01:32.360 --> 01:01:36.920] because of the law. Mr. Abbott and other state officials including the Attorney General stipulated [01:01:36.920 --> 01:01:41.960] in a letter to county district attorneys back on Thursday that marijuana has not been decriminalized [01:01:41.960 --> 01:01:48.200] in Texas and that these actions demonstrate a misunderstanding of how HB 1325 works as well [01:01:48.200 --> 01:01:54.760] as other cities too like the district attorney in El Paso, Cayma Esparza a Democrat who also [01:01:54.760 --> 01:01:59.560] stated earlier this month that the law quote will not have an effect on the prosecution of [01:01:59.560 --> 01:02:04.920] marijuana cases in El Paso. However the issue was succinctly summarized by Mr. Brandon Ball [01:02:04.920 --> 01:02:10.040] an assistant public defender in Harris County who stated that quote the law is constantly changing [01:02:10.040 --> 01:02:14.360] on what makes something illegal based on its chemical makeup it's important that if someone [01:02:14.360 --> 01:02:23.960] is charged with something the test matches what they're charged with. A paper by Tulane University [01:02:23.960 --> 01:02:29.080] identified a five and a half inch American pocket shark as the first of its kind in the Gulf of [01:02:29.080 --> 01:02:35.160] Mexico the specimen being only the second pocket shark ever captured or recorded with the other [01:02:35.160 --> 01:02:40.360] one being found way back in 1979 in the East Pacific Ocean. According to the university paper [01:02:40.360 --> 01:02:47.320] the shark secretes a lumus fluid from a gland near its front fins for the purpose it is hypothesized [01:02:47.320 --> 01:03:00.520] to lure and prey who may be drawn into the glow. This is Wolf Roadie with the lowdown for July 22nd 2019. [01:03:47.320 --> 01:03:57.560] Okay this is Randy Kelton Brett Fountain Ruevula radio on this Friday the 20th day of August [01:03:58.280 --> 01:04:08.840] not October. Is that right Brad? This is not October. The 20th day of August 2021 and we're [01:04:08.840 --> 01:04:17.880] talking to Max and Texas. Max we're not moving along and I understand this is an issue but [01:04:17.880 --> 01:04:22.440] I've got a whole board full of callers and someone on the caller bridge on the guest [01:04:22.440 --> 01:04:29.960] bridge who I really want to get to. Can you contact us next week if something more focused? [01:04:31.320 --> 01:04:37.960] Yes I'm sorry and I know you're not happy with child support and the way the family courts operate [01:04:37.960 --> 01:04:46.600] but I don't know that anybody ever is. I had thought about that if I was a family law judge [01:04:46.600 --> 01:04:53.480] and I was doing my job well everybody would be po'd at me because nobody would get everything they [01:04:53.480 --> 01:05:03.000] want. Yes uh yeah definitely well I'll come back another day when I've got everything in front of [01:05:03.000 --> 01:05:14.840] me and we can figure out if I'm a little too opinionated about it or if that is nefarious [01:05:14.840 --> 01:05:25.160] so I think. Okay I've seen some indications of nefarious myself. I haven't been involved in [01:05:25.160 --> 01:05:32.280] it personally but it does look like it's messed up. Yeah if Brett would just let me talk to his [01:05:32.280 --> 01:05:37.080] wife I could help him out with that lack of experience in this area. [01:05:39.880 --> 01:05:44.760] My favorite my favorite pastime is less you and her fight. [01:05:47.080 --> 01:05:51.720] Only thing is she doesn't go for that. She can't be told when the fight. She's going to come up [01:05:51.720 --> 01:05:54.520] with it on her own and she can't be told when that's going to be. [01:05:54.520 --> 01:06:03.320] Okay thank you Max. Now we're going to go to what appears to be a first time caller. [01:06:04.440 --> 01:06:16.280] If you are in the 407 area code talk to us. Hello can I hear you? Yes I can hear you. Give us a [01:06:16.280 --> 01:06:30.600] first name and a state. My name is Eliana and I'm from Florida. Eliana? You said Eliana. [01:06:30.600 --> 01:06:47.720] And what state? Florida. Okay Brett will get you in our database so we will [01:06:47.720 --> 01:06:56.120] know who you are next time. What do you have for us today? I have a lawsuit going against [01:06:56.120 --> 01:07:03.800] the mask discrimination in the store. It is my first lawsuit so I'm like totally new being [01:07:04.680 --> 01:07:10.920] just learning everything like a crash course of law. Okay before you go any further are you [01:07:10.920 --> 01:07:23.880] familiar with our telegram channel? Yeah yes it's been very helpful. Okay good good okay and I will [01:07:23.880 --> 01:07:32.280] shut up and quit interrupting. Yeah the store refused me the service that needs to leave [01:07:32.280 --> 01:07:37.400] or not to wear on the mask. I have the recording of everything on the note [01:07:39.320 --> 01:07:48.120] and I filed a lawsuit for most people. So I'm basically like regular case I'm sure you [01:07:48.120 --> 01:07:55.240] showed the button before. At this moment at this stage I have about three weeks to respond [01:07:55.960 --> 01:08:02.440] the notice of the request of production for admission and interrogation. [01:08:04.440 --> 01:08:15.480] Okay I have Leslie on Leslie I've got you on muted. If you want to chime into this Leslie is [01:08:15.480 --> 01:08:22.360] helping us develop a way to go after these guys. So go ahead I wanted to let Leslie know that I [01:08:22.360 --> 01:08:36.840] had a mutator. Okay Randy you have that document that I prepared which is a counter offer to an [01:08:36.840 --> 01:08:46.840] implied or actual contract and it has in it certain elements that are required for an arbitration [01:08:47.960 --> 01:08:59.080] to occur. Okay okay hold on Leslie before we go there where are you in your you found a lawsuit [01:08:59.080 --> 01:09:07.800] what have you claimed as either torts or causes of action in your lawsuit? [01:09:11.960 --> 01:09:16.760] Well I'm mainly talking about the Constitution [01:09:16.760 --> 01:09:31.560] and of course Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Constitution. I also did put in the lawsuit [01:09:31.560 --> 01:09:50.680] that they violate Code 42 US Code 1983 but I did make a mistake in that one it was better to say [01:09:50.680 --> 01:09:58.840] 18 US Code 242, the preservation of rights and the color of law. So I'm debating now if I should [01:09:58.840 --> 01:10:05.800] file the amendment for the lawsuit for the complaint. Okay I'm certain if you filed a [01:10:05.800 --> 01:10:15.080] 42 US Code 1983 suit you got a response in the form of a rule 12b6 motion to dismiss for failure [01:10:15.080 --> 01:10:24.200] to state of claim is that correct? No they didn't do that but in interrogation questions and in [01:10:24.200 --> 01:10:38.280] request admission they did put a lot of points about them not being any governmental organization [01:10:38.280 --> 01:10:48.120] or anything like that that I'm not an officer. So technically I can just admit that and move on [01:10:48.120 --> 01:10:55.240] or I cannot file an amendment. Yeah it sounds like an amendment is in order because that only [01:10:55.240 --> 01:11:02.360] goes to government officials so they'd have to be that if they're not then they can still be [01:11:02.360 --> 01:11:10.760] in violation of this 242 241 241 would be the conspiracy of the 242 right so they could still [01:11:10.760 --> 01:11:18.840] be in violation of that but you got to make sure that you're alleging what you want to prove. Okay [01:11:18.840 --> 01:11:28.280] 42 US Code 1983 is a specific statute that authorizes you to sue government officials. [01:11:29.880 --> 01:11:36.520] If you have someone who is not a government official but is violating a federal [01:11:36.520 --> 01:11:46.920] rule law or right that you have for instance I think it's 42 US Code 2008 is that right correct [01:11:46.920 --> 01:11:57.000] bet or Brett? Yeah 2008. 2008 now that's a restriction that says that any establishment [01:11:57.000 --> 01:12:04.360] that is a public accommodation may not discriminate in certain circumstances but that's not a 42 US [01:12:04.360 --> 01:12:12.440] Code 1983 suit that's just a federal lawsuit. If you file a 42 US Code 1983 suit that only goes to [01:12:12.440 --> 01:12:24.120] public officials and if these guys are company employees enforcing a apparent government edict [01:12:24.120 --> 01:12:30.360] it's questionable you know I'm saying they are quasi public officials in this case [01:12:30.360 --> 01:12:39.000] because they're not enforcing their own personal preference they're not doing what [01:12:39.000 --> 01:12:47.720] they want to do they're enforcing a government edict and in this case the government has no [01:12:47.720 --> 01:12:55.080] power to order you to wear a mask or to take a vaccine so what they've done is gone to these [01:12:55.080 --> 01:13:03.320] companies and said we're going to kick your behind if you don't order the public to do what we cannot [01:13:03.320 --> 01:13:12.680] order them to do so that should create a claim that you can draw the the government back into [01:13:12.680 --> 01:13:30.200] your 1983 suit does that make sense but there may be another way of doing this Leslie I've been [01:13:30.200 --> 01:13:36.920] trying to work out a way to explain this to where it makes sense what Leslie's doing is kind of [01:13:36.920 --> 01:13:48.040] like what the Spooks do did in Vietnam she's kind of like a CIA operative she's sneaking up behind [01:13:48.040 --> 01:13:59.160] them if you Leslie will you explain what you're doing and then then I'll contextualize it when [01:13:59.160 --> 01:14:07.720] you're done okay what we're doing is we're taking an implied contract for instance if there's a [01:14:07.720 --> 01:14:14.680] public accommodation and it has a sign on the door that says you must wear a mask that's a restriction [01:14:15.480 --> 01:14:24.520] or a when they because it's not part of the original implied contract that you could just [01:14:24.520 --> 01:14:37.320] walk in the store hold on just a second uh 42 years code 2000 a says if you are a business [01:14:38.280 --> 01:14:47.560] and you open your doors to the public are a public accommodation now you may no longer [01:14:47.560 --> 01:14:57.480] set specific arbitrary and compretious rules on who can use your facilities and who cannot [01:14:58.200 --> 01:15:02.760] because you are a public accommodation does that make sense [01:15:08.280 --> 01:15:14.760] go ahead now you have an implied contract with this store when you have an implied contract [01:15:14.760 --> 01:15:22.360] like that and they give you additional conditions to the original implied contract which means [01:15:22.360 --> 01:15:31.400] you must wear a mask okay you can you can give them a conditional acceptance and you do that [01:15:31.400 --> 01:15:39.480] by mailing a document to them return receipt requested so somebody has to send a sign for it [01:15:39.480 --> 01:15:48.120] and what that does is it gives them the liability that they're you're saying to them [01:15:48.120 --> 01:15:54.200] wait hold up hold on this is something missing there's something missing here uh okay you have [01:15:54.200 --> 01:16:01.800] a company here who goes into business and this this company will apply for a business license [01:16:01.800 --> 01:16:09.880] and in applying for the business license they're required to abide by all state and federal laws [01:16:11.320 --> 01:16:19.080] that is a contract they entered into a contract with the american public through the united [01:16:19.080 --> 01:16:24.440] states government and the state local state government they entered into this contract [01:16:24.440 --> 01:16:33.160] that said we will allow you to operate this business so long as you operate it in compliance [01:16:33.160 --> 01:16:40.600] with standing there so they issue an order saying we're going to make a requirement that's not [01:16:40.600 --> 01:16:47.880] included in law so that's an offer to alter the contractor will get to that when we come back [01:16:47.880 --> 01:16:56.520] randy kelton brett fountain we'll be right back [01:17:00.040 --> 01:17:04.600] are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls letters or even lawsuits [01:17:05.160 --> 01:17:10.920] stop debt collectors now with the michael mirris proven method michael mirris has won six cases in [01:17:10.920 --> 01:17:16.200] federal court against debt collectors and now you can win too you'll get step-by-step instructions [01:17:16.200 --> 01:17:21.480] in plain english on how to win in court using federal civil rights statues what to do when [01:17:21.480 --> 01:17:27.000] contacted by phone mail or court summons how to answer letters and phone calls how to get debt [01:17:27.000 --> 01:17:32.680] collectors out of your credit report how to turn the financial tables on them and make them pay you [01:17:32.680 --> 01:17:38.520] to go away the michael mirris proven method is the solution for how to stop debt collectors [01:17:38.520 --> 01:17:43.640] personal consultation is available as well for more information please visit rule of law radio [01:17:43.640 --> 01:17:49.320] dot com and click on the blue michael mirris banner or email michael mirris at yahoo dot com [01:17:49.320 --> 01:17:57.880] that's rule of law radio dot com or email m i c h a e l m i r r a s at yahoo dot com to learn how to [01:17:57.880 --> 01:18:03.880] stop debt collectors now i love logos without the shows on this network i'd be almost as ignorant [01:18:03.880 --> 01:18:08.920] as my friends i'm so addicted to truth now that there's no going back i need my truth pick i'd be [01:18:08.920 --> 01:18:14.280] lost without logos and i really want to help keep this network on the air i'd love to volunteer as a [01:18:14.280 --> 01:18:19.320] show producer but i'm a bit of a lie and i really don't have any money to give because i spend it all [01:18:19.320 --> 01:18:25.880] on supplements how can i help logos well i'm glad you asked whenever you order anything from amazon [01:18:25.880 --> 01:18:30.840] you can help logos but ordering your supplies or holiday gifts first thing you do is clear your [01:18:30.840 --> 01:18:38.200] cookies now go to logo's regular network dot com click on the amazon logo and book market now when [01:18:38.200 --> 01:18:45.160] you order anything from amazon you use that link and logos gets a few pesos do i pay extra no do i [01:18:45.160 --> 01:18:51.960] have to do anything different when i order no can i use my amazon prime no i mean yes wow giving [01:18:51.960 --> 01:18:58.760] without doing anything or spending any money this is perfect thank you so much we are welcome happy [01:18:58.760 --> 01:19:14.680] holidays logos the logos the logo radio oh come on [01:19:28.760 --> 01:19:47.240] okay we are back ready kelton brett fountain rule of law radio here with our special guest [01:19:47.240 --> 01:19:55.880] miss leslie orman uh who we affectionately call bad grandma and it's because you do not want this [01:19:55.880 --> 01:20:05.640] woman after you okay where we're at is the government allows these company to go into business [01:20:06.760 --> 01:20:15.400] under a license and that's a contract and in this case the government is trying to get these [01:20:15.400 --> 01:20:22.760] businesses to do something that the government can't do itself and if they're using this [01:20:22.760 --> 01:20:32.040] license as blackmail to force these public businesses to do something that the government [01:20:32.040 --> 01:20:40.200] can't do and they're asking them to put in a requirement now the public is in contract with [01:20:40.200 --> 01:20:49.560] these businesses based on their license and these government entities are directing them [01:20:49.560 --> 01:20:58.280] to add a condition to the contract so if you buy a car and you offer to to pay so much and then the [01:20:58.280 --> 01:21:05.320] dealership decides to charge you extra for stuff they didn't tell you about you're not going to be [01:21:05.320 --> 01:21:11.080] happy about that and you're going to raise an objection but if they charge you extra and you [01:21:11.080 --> 01:21:21.000] don't raise an objection then they will move ahead claiming that you uh didn't you accepted their [01:21:21.000 --> 01:21:32.840] offer to change the contract by acquiescence your tacit approval exactly so what so here we are with [01:21:32.840 --> 01:21:41.720] leslie they've you have a contract the other side has offered made an offer to change the contract [01:21:43.240 --> 01:21:49.960] so leslie what happens if you you don't say anything well if you don't say anything just [01:21:49.960 --> 01:21:57.400] suck with what they want to do but you can change that by sending them an offer a counter offer but [01:21:57.400 --> 01:22:04.680] and conditional acceptance that means i'll accept you're saying that that's what you want to do [01:22:05.560 --> 01:22:13.240] on the condition that the following things are met on the condition that you are liable if i catch [01:22:13.240 --> 01:22:22.040] a cold or i catch pneumonia or whatever if i have damages because i wore a mask and the liability will [01:22:22.040 --> 01:22:32.680] be uh five hundred dollars and uh you can change the terms and then when they have to accept that [01:22:32.680 --> 01:22:37.560] and in order for them to accept that they put a sign on the door saying oh we're not going to have [01:22:37.560 --> 01:22:43.560] they don't give you a waiver they have a sign on the door oh they accepted your counter offer [01:22:43.560 --> 01:22:55.080] okay yeah let me address this if you don't object then you accept by acquiescence if if you then [01:22:55.080 --> 01:23:02.600] file a counter offer and that's your form of objection and they don't respond to your counter [01:23:02.600 --> 01:23:09.720] offer and move ahead with what they claimed they intended to do then they have accepted your [01:23:09.720 --> 01:23:18.840] counter offer by acquiescence is that correct was it no it's actually an affirmative action is [01:23:18.840 --> 01:23:25.720] required and an affirmative action is the sign on the door or somebody stopping you at the door [01:23:25.720 --> 01:23:31.800] if you don't have a mask on that's affirmative action yeah that's that's what i meant they move [01:23:31.800 --> 01:23:39.640] ahead with what they said they were going to do they take some action right once you have filed a [01:23:39.640 --> 01:23:46.920] counter offer if they if they do nothing they haven't accepted your counter offer but if they do [01:23:46.920 --> 01:23:53.640] something in clearance of what they said they were going to do without objecting to your counter [01:23:53.640 --> 01:24:02.760] offer then they've accepted your counter offer the same way by accept by acquiescence the same [01:24:02.760 --> 01:24:10.200] way you would have accepted their offer if you didn't raise an issue right is that make sense [01:24:13.800 --> 01:24:20.280] actually randy you can't say acquiescence on the part of the counter offer the counter [01:24:20.280 --> 01:24:28.840] offer has to have an affirmative action no no what i'm saying is if you file a counter offer [01:24:28.840 --> 01:24:35.480] and the other side takes an action when they take that action now they've accepted your counter [01:24:35.480 --> 01:24:42.520] offer exactly exactly and in your counter offer you you include all the damages that you will [01:24:42.520 --> 01:24:51.640] they they you expect and what the dollar amount is for each of the damages but there's something [01:24:51.640 --> 01:25:02.120] more important you've got hidden down in there exactly we have we have an arbitration clause [01:25:02.120 --> 01:25:14.840] in this document and in the arbitration clause what that means is if they don't do anything but enforce [01:25:15.560 --> 01:25:22.280] what they already started and they haven't given you a waiver because you're asking for a waiver [01:25:22.280 --> 01:25:29.960] from all of that stuff in this document you're saying if you don't want to have this liability [01:25:29.960 --> 01:25:37.000] and you don't want to accept my counter offer then you have to send me a waiver and if you don't [01:25:37.000 --> 01:25:44.200] send me a waiver and you enforce this this new rule then you have to go to arbitration [01:25:45.240 --> 01:25:53.160] and all of the damages that they that you put in to this arbitration agreement in the list of [01:25:53.160 --> 01:26:00.280] liabilities they will have to pay when they go before an arbitrator now arbitrator will listen [01:26:01.000 --> 01:26:07.160] will will take all of the documents that have been filed and they can listen to both parties [01:26:07.160 --> 01:26:12.280] but the funniest thing is is that lawyers don't know what to do with their arbitration agreement [01:26:13.160 --> 01:26:20.600] they look at that document hold on hold on let me speak to that a moment the the arbitration is [01:26:20.600 --> 01:26:31.960] something that lawyers don't get and in we file the the counter offer and the patriot mythology [01:26:31.960 --> 01:26:41.240] community has for years tried to superimpose uniform commercial code on criminal and all [01:26:41.240 --> 01:26:47.480] these lawyers are familiar with that and they call them patronuts and sovereign citizens and [01:26:47.480 --> 01:26:56.440] they're familiar with those uniform commercial code does not apply to criminal but this is not [01:26:56.440 --> 01:27:06.040] criminal this is civil and the uniform commercial code does apply so we're applying it like the [01:27:06.040 --> 01:27:12.840] patriarch mythologists do and the lawyers look at it that's a bunch of crap and they ignore it [01:27:12.840 --> 01:27:22.520] and that's the idea we suck them in to ignoring it because they've got that arbitration clause [01:27:22.520 --> 01:27:31.080] hidden down in there and Leslie have you ever found any lawyers who understood the arbitration [01:27:31.080 --> 01:27:44.200] clause actually I found lawyers that don't believe it they you know I found lawyers that have but [01:27:44.200 --> 01:27:53.800] they were people that I had to educate but the other lawyers they don't understand it [01:27:53.800 --> 01:27:59.560] but the even the judges don't understand it in a lot of cases except that we've gotten some recent [01:27:59.560 --> 01:28:07.720] rulings in the southern district of New York that said that if there is an affirmative [01:28:09.080 --> 01:28:18.600] action on the part of the of the other party they don't have to sign it so as long as they [01:28:20.520 --> 01:28:26.440] do the affirmative acts that are enlisted in the document they're considered to have [01:28:26.440 --> 01:28:37.480] accepted the arbitration agreement they have accepted your counter offer by acquiescence [01:28:37.480 --> 01:28:45.480] essentially by silence and by taking an affirmative action so now they're stuck with it now they've [01:28:45.480 --> 01:28:53.720] got the arbitration issue in there and they don't know how to handle it and how does the arbitration [01:28:53.720 --> 01:29:03.880] issue work okay what happens is that when when they if they violate which means if they don't [01:29:03.880 --> 01:29:16.760] give you a waiver and they enforce their arbitrary rules then you have a cause and you make a [01:29:16.760 --> 01:29:23.640] complaint similar to what you would put in to a court and you send it to the arbitration services [01:29:26.040 --> 01:29:32.760] provider and in the case of the ones that I have done we have used we have done with them [01:29:32.760 --> 01:29:41.400] and they are familiar with it and they will can give all the notices they will give the the release [01:29:41.400 --> 01:29:47.160] of information on all the arbitrators that will be involved and the arbitrators make a [01:29:48.280 --> 01:29:53.160] they get their 20-day notice for a hearing if the other party doesn't show or doesn't document [01:29:54.200 --> 01:29:59.160] that's too bad they can't come to the hearing if they don't if they don't come to the hearing [01:30:01.400 --> 01:30:07.240] a top cybersecurity expert has a warning for america if you build an electrical smart grid [01:30:07.240 --> 01:30:12.840] the hackers will come and they could cause a catastrophic blackout under catherine albrecht [01:30:12.840 --> 01:30:19.240] back with the shocking details in a moment privacy is under attack when you give up data about [01:30:19.240 --> 01:30:24.600] yourself you'll never get it back again and once your privacy is gone you'll find your freedoms [01:30:24.600 --> 01:30:30.760] will start to vanish too so protect your rights say no to surveillance and keep your information [01:30:30.760 --> 01:30:37.320] to yourself privacy it's worth hanging on to this message is brought to you by start page dot com [01:30:37.320 --> 01:30:43.320] the private search engine alternative to google yahoo and bin start over with start page [01:30:45.320 --> 01:30:50.440] governments love power so it's only natural they'd want to control the power going into your home [01:30:50.440 --> 01:30:55.640] too with a smart grid so they're installing a national network of smart meters to remotely [01:30:55.640 --> 01:31:01.960] monitor electric use for efficiency and avoid grid failure but cybersecurity expert david chalk says [01:31:01.960 --> 01:31:07.240] not so fast if we make the national power grid controllable through the web hackers will have [01:31:07.240 --> 01:31:13.560] a field day working remotely they could tap in and black out the entire nation leaving us vulnerable [01:31:13.560 --> 01:31:20.360] to our enemies i'd want to pose smart meters for privacy and health reasons the catastrophic failures [01:31:20.360 --> 01:31:26.040] caused by hackers there's nothing smart about that i'm dr catherine albrecht for a start page [01:31:26.040 --> 01:31:34.440] dot com the world's most private search engine this is building seven a 47 story skyscraper [01:31:34.440 --> 01:31:39.160] that fell on the afternoon of september 11 the government says that fire brought it down however [01:31:39.160 --> 01:31:44.520] 1500 architects and engineers have concluded it was a controlled demolition over six thousand [01:31:44.520 --> 01:31:48.760] my fellow service members have given their lives and thousands of my fellow first responders [01:31:48.760 --> 01:31:53.640] are dying i'm not a conspiracy theorist structural engineer new york city correctional i'm an air [01:31:53.640 --> 01:31:59.320] force pilot i'm a father who lost his son we're americans and we deserve the truth go to remember [01:31:59.320 --> 01:32:05.960] building seven dot org today rule of law radio is proud to offer the rule of law traffic seminar [01:32:05.960 --> 01:32:09.720] in today's america we live in a mess against them society and if we the people are ever going to [01:32:09.720 --> 01:32:14.200] have a free society then we're going to have to stand and defend our own rights among those rights [01:32:14.200 --> 01:32:18.040] are the right to travel freely from place to place the right to act in our own private capacity and [01:32:18.040 --> 01:32:22.520] most importantly the right to do process of law traffic courts afford us the least expensive [01:32:22.520 --> 01:32:26.920] opportunity to learn how to enforce and preserve our rights through due process former sheriff's [01:32:26.920 --> 01:32:30.920] deputy kate craig in conjunction with rule of law radio has put together the most comprehensive [01:32:30.920 --> 01:32:34.760] teaching tool available that will help you understand what due process is and how to hold [01:32:34.760 --> 01:32:38.680] courts to the rule of law you can get your own copy of this invaluable material by going to [01:32:38.680 --> 01:32:43.000] rule of law radio dot com and ordering your copy today by ordering now you'll receive a copy of [01:32:43.000 --> 01:32:47.240] eddie's book the texas transportation code the law versus the lie video and audio of the original [01:32:47.240 --> 01:32:52.040] 2009 seminar hundreds of research documents and other useful resource material learn how to fight [01:32:52.040 --> 01:32:56.040] for your rights with the help of this material from rule of law radio dot com order your copy [01:32:56.040 --> 01:33:03.640] today and together we can have the free society we all want and deserve you are listening to the [01:33:03.640 --> 01:33:19.560] logos radio network logos radio network dot com [01:33:34.040 --> 01:33:45.000] okay we are back randy calton brett fountain we love radio and we're talking to andrea in [01:33:45.000 --> 01:33:55.480] florida and we've got andriana okay two ways uh in florida and we've got leslie in in yuma [01:33:55.480 --> 01:34:03.720] arizona where it never rains and we were joking on the on the break about her electric car she [01:34:03.720 --> 01:34:13.080] could put up solar panels and be in good shape anyway uh this is a way of sneaking in underneath [01:34:13.080 --> 01:34:21.960] in them and getting a claim against them without them realizing what is going on uh i've got tina [01:34:21.960 --> 01:34:30.040] that she'll be up next and with tina we had her file a petition for declaratory judgment and told her [01:34:30.040 --> 01:34:37.560] that the judges and the lawyers wouldn't know what it was and she filed it and they didn't know what [01:34:37.560 --> 01:34:46.040] it was this arbitration issue is the same way we can we can kind of trap them into a default [01:34:46.040 --> 01:34:54.600] because they the lawyers don't know what it is go ahead there leslie okay when they when you when [01:34:54.600 --> 01:35:00.760] you create a complaint kind of thing we call it a request for arbitration and you put down what [01:35:00.760 --> 01:35:07.560] your grievance is and how they you know the story of how they uh violated their agreement [01:35:07.560 --> 01:35:15.560] and then you send that to them and they'll see let me explain that you were in an agreement with [01:35:15.560 --> 01:35:23.240] the school board or this university or whatever it was covid come along and they decided they had [01:35:23.240 --> 01:35:31.560] to do something for covid so they added this requirement to you but you didn't agree to that [01:35:31.560 --> 01:35:40.440] requirement that's ultra virus that's adding a covenant to a contract if they add a covenant to [01:35:40.440 --> 01:35:49.400] the contract that requires something of you but doesn't give you something of value in return [01:35:50.200 --> 01:35:57.480] that's an under the uniform commercial code the law of contracts that is an unconscionable contract [01:35:57.480 --> 01:36:07.000] uh provision and it's not uh enforceable so that gives you standing to make a claim so they've [01:36:07.560 --> 01:36:17.160] they've added this condition and as an offer now you get to say okay if you want to add this [01:36:17.160 --> 01:36:25.320] condition in order to make it conscionable then i get this remedy you add this i have to do something [01:36:25.320 --> 01:36:35.400] you pay me this other and if if you ignore if you don't object to their original offer you acquiesce [01:36:36.600 --> 01:36:42.840] if they don't exist a object to your counter offer and move ahead with what they intended to do [01:36:43.480 --> 01:36:52.040] they acquiesce to your counter claim and then you can bring that to arbitration is that fit [01:36:52.040 --> 01:36:58.920] it am i right there leslie or i have i missed something yes yes yes and so you send them a [01:36:58.920 --> 01:37:07.240] notice of a request for arbitration and then you wait like 10 days for them to get back to you [01:37:08.120 --> 01:37:15.560] then you send that notice request to the arbitrator and they will send out a notice of hearing [01:37:15.560 --> 01:37:24.200] along with the disclosures of the arbitrators and then they're going to have a hearing and [01:37:24.200 --> 01:37:29.960] we do it all on skype they they're working on everything on skype so there's nobody that can [01:37:29.960 --> 01:37:38.840] say i can't be there that day and uh when they go on skype and then they have a recording of it [01:37:38.840 --> 01:37:46.520] after you get your award after the the hearing okay hold on the arbitrator you do the skype [01:37:46.520 --> 01:37:54.680] hearing what if the other guys don't show up at the skype hearing they get it but okay what we [01:37:54.680 --> 01:38:03.080] what the arbitrators do is they hear the case anyway they they don't give a default judgment like [01:38:03.080 --> 01:38:09.800] they do in court they want to see what's going on and they they will look at the documents they will [01:38:09.800 --> 01:38:14.760] come to a decision and you will be notified of their decision at the same time the other party's [01:38:14.760 --> 01:38:23.000] notified and when you're notified you also get another copy of the disclosures you get the [01:38:23.000 --> 01:38:33.720] transcripts of the hearing and you get a uh uh when you call it the the actual award and you [01:38:33.720 --> 01:38:42.360] can take that i would recommend you wait three months and you take that to a court and nobody [01:38:42.360 --> 01:38:51.000] after 90 days can have that overturned so you're saying that when they schedule this hearing [01:38:51.000 --> 01:38:56.120] you propose the opposing party doesn't show up they have the hearing anyway [01:38:57.240 --> 01:39:04.440] yeah they question the witness the person that's coming they question them and uh get the answers [01:39:04.440 --> 01:39:12.520] and then they make an intelligent decision and there was nobody how often have you had the [01:39:12.520 --> 01:39:23.160] opposing party show up never the judge the lawyers don't believe it the people that are the [01:39:23.160 --> 01:39:28.280] executives to get this they say well we don't have a contract with that party they don't see it [01:39:29.000 --> 01:39:35.800] they will see it as a regular contract and they and the lawyers don't either they they say well we [01:39:35.800 --> 01:39:42.120] don't have an arbitration contract with these people and they've just thrown away or throw it [01:39:42.120 --> 01:39:51.880] in their file they forget it until they get a copy of the court hearing to have it confirmed [01:39:52.520 --> 01:39:58.840] when that happens then they get in there and they try and file 12 b6 and all this other stuff [01:39:58.840 --> 01:40:06.600] but according to the southern district of new york after the 90 days are off and they have an [01:40:06.600 --> 01:40:14.600] arbitration award that's that's two eight so what is important about the southern district of new [01:40:14.600 --> 01:40:22.360] york i'm not exactly sure but when i was researching them a couple years back it had to do with [01:40:22.360 --> 01:40:28.920] the financial around the world the southern just because that's where the financial center is [01:40:28.920 --> 01:40:35.480] and it they get arbitration that are international even [01:40:38.520 --> 01:40:44.200] so you can file this this arbitration case in the southern district of new york regardless of [01:40:44.200 --> 01:40:56.280] where you're at yes so this is what we're trying to set them up for angriana does that make sense [01:40:56.280 --> 01:41:07.880] to you aliana um aliana i it makes sense and is it done after on student interrogator is or it's [01:41:07.880 --> 01:41:16.840] before or like when i'm uh bug leave in the journey or before i'm on the 90s if the request [01:41:18.840 --> 01:41:24.120] it basically be a separate thing you can send it you can send this document tomorrow [01:41:24.120 --> 01:41:32.520] i have another whole lawsuit going okay so no matter what happens with this lawsuit you have [01:41:32.520 --> 01:41:37.000] you've got the backup for another one and they can't dwell these six you out of it [01:41:38.920 --> 01:41:47.480] mm-hmm and this is going to be totally new case it's not just uh all the change in this form [01:41:47.480 --> 01:41:55.720] it's not the amendment no no no it's a separate separate issue separate the thing [01:41:56.840 --> 01:42:07.480] will you send me an email randy at ruleoflawradio.com and i will forward that to busley so you [01:42:07.480 --> 01:42:14.840] too can talk off the uh off the air so you have more time to discuss this and work this out [01:42:14.840 --> 01:42:21.720] mm-hmm my other question was that in the interrogatories and in the request for production [01:42:22.360 --> 01:42:27.320] uh the defendants attorneys that asked me for absolutely outrageous information [01:42:27.880 --> 01:42:36.040] such as for my medical documentation i've proven that i have a medical mental condition which [01:42:36.040 --> 01:42:43.320] provides like which makes my neighbor wear a mask okay so your issue right now is is production [01:42:43.320 --> 01:42:50.200] that or discovery so production yeah discovery but it's discovery that's completely unreasonable [01:42:50.200 --> 01:42:56.760] they're asking for things that nobody should ask for and that's always the case uh in discovery [01:42:56.760 --> 01:43:03.640] the other lawyer always else asks for outrageous stuff and generally both sides ask for outrageous [01:43:03.640 --> 01:43:10.040] stuff and this happens outside the court so you just do this between one another when you tell [01:43:10.040 --> 01:43:16.200] the party on the other side to go scratch that this is all nonsense that it's it's it's outrageous [01:43:16.200 --> 01:43:21.960] i'm not going to produce it then they have to go to the court and petition the court to [01:43:21.960 --> 01:43:28.680] compel discovery now they have to explain to the court why this discovery is necessary [01:43:28.680 --> 01:43:39.400] and 90 percent of it the court will crash so this is just this is kind of a dance they do it's to be [01:43:39.400 --> 01:43:46.200] expected they ask for outrageous stuff you tell them heck no you'll ask them for outrageous stuff [01:43:46.200 --> 01:44:00.440] they'll say heck no and the judge has settled the dispute in court hang on go into our sponsors we'll be right back [01:44:00.440 --> 01:44:06.360] through advances in technology our lives have greatly improved except in the area of nutrition [01:44:06.360 --> 01:44:11.160] people feed their pets better than they feed themselves and it's time we changed all that [01:44:11.160 --> 01:44:17.480] our primary defense against aging and disease in this toxic environment is good nutrition [01:44:17.480 --> 01:44:22.200] in a world where natural foods have been irradiated, adulterated, and mutilated [01:44:22.200 --> 01:44:28.440] young jevity can provide the nutrients you need. Logo's radio network gets many requests to endorse [01:44:28.440 --> 01:44:34.840] all sorts of products most of which we reject we have come to trust young jevity so much we became [01:44:34.840 --> 01:44:40.840] a marketing distributor along with alex jones bin fuchs and many others when you order from [01:44:40.840 --> 01:44:47.480] logosradio network dot com your health will improve as you help support quality radio [01:44:47.480 --> 01:44:53.320] as you realize the benefits of young jevity you may want to join us as a distributor you can [01:44:53.320 --> 01:44:59.640] experience improved health help your friends and family and increase your income order now [01:44:59.640 --> 01:45:09.640] are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit win your case without an attorney with jurisdictionary [01:45:09.640 --> 01:45:17.000] the affordable easy to understand four cd course that will show you how in 24 hours step by step [01:45:17.640 --> 01:45:23.480] if you have a lawyer know what your lawyer should be doing if you don't have a lawyer know what you [01:45:23.480 --> 01:45:31.080] should do for yourself thousands have won with our step by step course and now you can too jurisdictionary [01:45:31.080 --> 01:45:37.800] was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case winning experience even if you're not in a [01:45:37.800 --> 01:45:43.960] lawsuit you can learn what everyone should understand about the principles and practices that control [01:45:43.960 --> 01:45:51.000] our american courts you'll receive our audio classroom video seminar tutorials forms for civil [01:45:51.000 --> 01:45:58.600] cases prosa tactics and much more please visit rule of law radio dot com and click on the banner [01:45:58.600 --> 01:46:24.200] are called toll-free 866 law easy [01:46:28.600 --> 01:46:54.200] the [01:46:54.200 --> 01:46:59.200] Okay, we are back, Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain, Ruiz La Radio, and we're running out of time. [01:46:59.200 --> 01:47:04.200] All right, okay, Eliana, did I say that right? [01:47:04.200 --> 01:47:07.200] Oh wait, let me unmute you, you can... [01:47:07.200 --> 01:47:11.200] Brett, let me know I had an A in front and it shouldn't have been. [01:47:11.200 --> 01:47:13.200] Eliana? [01:47:13.200 --> 01:47:15.200] Yes, it's correct. [01:47:15.200 --> 01:47:21.200] Okay, let's get you in touch with Leslie, [01:47:21.200 --> 01:47:25.200] and I know you have some more questions for us, but we're running out of time. [01:47:25.200 --> 01:47:36.200] We've just got one segment left, and Leslie will give you my email so you can send me any questions directly, [01:47:36.200 --> 01:47:42.200] and we can address those off the air, and we'll make sure you've got all your questions answered. [01:47:42.200 --> 01:47:43.200] Okay? [01:47:43.200 --> 01:47:45.200] Thank you so much, I appreciate it. [01:47:45.200 --> 01:47:46.200] I appreciate it. [01:47:46.200 --> 01:47:47.200] Thank you, Randy. [01:47:47.200 --> 01:47:49.200] You are most welcome. [01:47:49.200 --> 01:47:52.200] Now we're going to Tina in California. [01:47:52.200 --> 01:47:54.200] Hello, Ms. Tina. [01:47:54.200 --> 01:47:58.200] Hello, Mr. Randy and Mr. Brett. [01:47:58.200 --> 01:48:02.200] Okay, you made you wait a long time. [01:48:02.200 --> 01:48:05.200] That's okay, I learned a lot while I was listening. [01:48:05.200 --> 01:48:07.200] That's always a good thing. [01:48:07.200 --> 01:48:20.200] It's a pleasure to hear that other people are being helped by your comments, the show, and everyone who comes on. [01:48:20.200 --> 01:48:28.200] I have a question relating to, because I know I talked to you this morning about everything that was going on in different cases of mine, [01:48:28.200 --> 01:48:39.200] the affidavits and such, it's only thinking, my affidavits in higher cases were pretty much ignored. [01:48:39.200 --> 01:48:47.200] I swarmed testimony under oaths that I didn't receive a document, it was ignored. [01:48:47.200 --> 01:49:07.200] I'm wondering how I can use it in my present case and how, if you put such an affidavit of facts in the case, how do you then ensure that the court actually takes notice of it [01:49:07.200 --> 01:49:18.200] and does something with it? Is there something that you can say when you get to the next hearing? How do you address the court? [01:49:18.200 --> 01:49:28.200] Okay, I did have a guy once who was concerned that the judge wasn't reading his pleadings. [01:49:28.200 --> 01:49:41.200] And on the second page, he put in an assertion that the judge's wife was sleeping with the opposing lawyer. [01:49:41.200 --> 01:49:48.200] And when he got into court, he asked the judge if he had read the pleadings and the judge assured him that he had. [01:49:48.200 --> 01:49:54.200] And then he directed the judge to that paragraph. [01:49:54.200 --> 01:49:59.200] He didn't get sanctioned, but he did get the judge's attention. [01:49:59.200 --> 01:50:05.200] How can you ensure that the judge has read your pleadings? [01:50:05.200 --> 01:50:09.200] Good luck with that, I have no idea. [01:50:09.200 --> 01:50:15.200] Well, how do you enforce an affidavit of facts in the case? [01:50:15.200 --> 01:50:28.200] I realize the problem when a judge doesn't read your pleadings, but I'm running through my head on what would be the remedy. [01:50:28.200 --> 01:50:34.200] What I do is a judicial notice. [01:50:34.200 --> 01:50:43.200] And I think you've done that as well, so that's nothing new for you, but that's what I do is it highlights a fact. [01:50:43.200 --> 01:50:51.200] It doesn't establish the fact it's not a sworn thing, but it gives notice and you can point at some evidence. [01:50:51.200 --> 01:51:00.200] So you might give judicial notice of the fact that this is not rez judicata. [01:51:00.200 --> 01:51:02.200] Somebody said it's rez judicata. [01:51:02.200 --> 01:51:05.200] You can say if somebody said that it's rez judicata. [01:51:05.200 --> 01:51:15.200] And then another fact you can give judicial notice of is this has never been brought before a court, for example. [01:51:15.200 --> 01:51:25.200] So then those facts have to be established by some affidavit somewhere and you can reference that. [01:51:25.200 --> 01:51:35.200] That's a thought. How many times can you submit a request for judicial notice? [01:51:35.200 --> 01:51:38.200] I mean, because the last one I submitted was pretty huge. [01:51:38.200 --> 01:51:43.200] Can I submit two more supplements? [01:51:43.200 --> 01:51:46.200] I will see why not. [01:51:46.200 --> 01:51:56.200] And can I put in an affidavit of facts, but in this current case, I would like to say after listening to you all tonight, [01:51:56.200 --> 01:52:06.200] I would like to put in an affidavit saying on this day the attorney stated he would send me the original note. [01:52:06.200 --> 01:52:11.200] On this day the attorney stated he would send me the original note. [01:52:11.200 --> 01:52:19.200] On this date, this other attorney said they had no intention of doing what they said they would do, [01:52:19.200 --> 01:52:26.200] which is a violation of whatever, you know, it could be a felony. [01:52:26.200 --> 01:52:30.200] It could be just a violation of the judicial code of conduct. [01:52:30.200 --> 01:52:31.200] But would that... [01:52:31.200 --> 01:52:34.200] Yeah, that last one you can't say is a fact. [01:52:34.200 --> 01:52:40.200] You can say all those others are a fact, but that last one is a determination or it's a conclusive thing. [01:52:40.200 --> 01:52:43.200] You could say, if you're making a statement of facts, you could say, [01:52:43.200 --> 01:52:50.200] I believe that this behavior is a violation of XYZ. [01:52:50.200 --> 01:52:55.200] But they admitted in writing that they had no intention of doing what they said they would do. [01:52:55.200 --> 01:52:56.200] Right. [01:52:56.200 --> 01:53:01.200] Put that in there as a fact and you could even put quotes around it because that's what they said. [01:53:01.200 --> 01:53:03.200] That's a fact. [01:53:03.200 --> 01:53:05.200] Judicial notice on that. [01:53:05.200 --> 01:53:08.200] You don't have to draw any conclusions. [01:53:08.200 --> 01:53:12.200] But then on another point, if you wanted to say that it's a violation, [01:53:12.200 --> 01:53:15.200] that has to be adjudicated whether or not it really was a violation. [01:53:15.200 --> 01:53:20.200] So you bring the facts, but you can also, if you want to put that in there, [01:53:20.200 --> 01:53:26.200] just make sure you qualify it by saying, I believe this is a violation. [01:53:26.200 --> 01:53:27.200] Okay. [01:53:27.200 --> 01:53:33.200] So you put the word, I believe this is a violation of XYZ. [01:53:33.200 --> 01:53:38.200] Because I'm getting to the point where I figure I just might as well throw every declaration, [01:53:38.200 --> 01:53:46.200] every request for judicial notice, every affidavit that I can in before the November 10th deadline. [01:53:46.200 --> 01:53:50.200] But when they're going to have both points at the same time, [01:53:50.200 --> 01:54:01.200] whether I can have court appointed counsel or whether they're going to agree to strike my claim. [01:54:01.200 --> 01:54:03.200] All on the same date. [01:54:03.200 --> 01:54:06.200] We're having some trouble with your fidelity. [01:54:06.200 --> 01:54:09.200] You're kind of floating in and out there. [01:54:09.200 --> 01:54:13.200] Do you have your head in a toilet? [01:54:13.200 --> 01:54:15.200] It's kind of got that hollow sound. [01:54:15.200 --> 01:54:16.200] I wouldn't want to do that. [01:54:16.200 --> 01:54:18.200] That would not be good. [01:54:18.200 --> 01:54:20.200] Okay. [01:54:20.200 --> 01:54:26.200] I'm in the kitchen, but I'm pushing the earpiece into my ear in case it makes a difference [01:54:26.200 --> 01:54:29.200] because these headsets don't always work great. [01:54:29.200 --> 01:54:31.200] You know, you were getting feedback. [01:54:31.200 --> 01:54:36.200] It was kind of sounding hollow, like the mic was too far from your mouth or something. [01:54:36.200 --> 01:54:38.200] Okay. [01:54:38.200 --> 01:54:43.200] But yeah, these affidavits sound really, really good. [01:54:43.200 --> 01:54:48.200] But every time I've submitted one, they've been completely ignored. [01:54:48.200 --> 01:54:54.200] And they've never, ever been reverted by the other side. [01:54:54.200 --> 01:54:59.200] Yeah, and that was a mistake that I've made many times, I didn't understand it first, [01:54:59.200 --> 01:55:05.200] that just putting the affidavit in there, it's not actually causing something to happen. [01:55:05.200 --> 01:55:12.200] The judge doesn't just look at that and go, oh, here are some new facts that just came to me. [01:55:12.200 --> 01:55:16.200] I'm going to rule on a certain way based on the facts here. [01:55:16.200 --> 01:55:18.200] He doesn't. [01:55:18.200 --> 01:55:26.200] That only happens when you set a motion for hearing and you go in there to the hearing and he hears the motion [01:55:26.200 --> 01:55:32.200] and in the motion you reference some grounds for that motion or whatever facts. [01:55:32.200 --> 01:55:36.200] And part of those facts are the evidence that you established in your affidavit. [01:55:36.200 --> 01:55:42.200] Yes, and you asked the court to take judicial notice of the included facts. [01:55:42.200 --> 01:55:44.200] Yes. [01:55:44.200 --> 01:55:45.200] Otherwise, it doesn't do anything. [01:55:45.200 --> 01:55:47.200] It just sits there. [01:55:47.200 --> 01:55:56.200] And the other attorney is just probably hoping, against hope, that you won't bring that up because it's going to destroy their case. [01:55:56.200 --> 01:56:00.200] And if nobody brings it up, then the judge doesn't act on it, nothing happens. [01:56:00.200 --> 01:56:04.200] It's almost as if it was never submitted. [01:56:04.200 --> 01:56:05.200] Okay. [01:56:05.200 --> 01:56:09.200] Well, that's interesting to know. [01:56:09.200 --> 01:56:21.200] Because I had always been under the false assumption from hearing people say if an affidavit goes unrebudded after 30 days, it stands as truth in the case. [01:56:21.200 --> 01:56:25.200] But obviously, that's not what is right. [01:56:25.200 --> 01:56:29.200] It's not necessarily true. [01:56:29.200 --> 01:56:36.200] In certain circumstances, it will be, but not necessarily. [01:56:36.200 --> 01:56:38.200] The law is complex. [01:56:38.200 --> 01:56:40.200] It is. [01:56:40.200 --> 01:56:43.200] And there's no way to fix that part. [01:56:43.200 --> 01:56:48.200] But there are some things you can do like what Leslie is doing. [01:56:48.200 --> 01:56:57.200] What Leslie is doing is taking advantage of the fact that the law is complex and using it against the lawyers. [01:56:57.200 --> 01:57:04.200] Your problems here in California and California is absolutely corrupt. [01:57:04.200 --> 01:57:07.200] Yes. [01:57:07.200 --> 01:57:10.200] The law is not so complex in California. [01:57:10.200 --> 01:57:20.200] In California, the law is whatever the ones who paid off the judges wants it to be. [01:57:20.200 --> 01:57:21.200] And I hate to say that. [01:57:21.200 --> 01:57:29.200] I hate to say that out loud, that a whole state could be this corrupt. [01:57:29.200 --> 01:57:32.200] Granted, all states are corrupt. [01:57:32.200 --> 01:57:40.200] People get into politics because they want advantage and they are corrupt for that because of that. [01:57:40.200 --> 01:57:48.200] But California, I guess they tend to try to be the best at everything. [01:57:48.200 --> 01:57:54.200] And in regards to corruption, I think they have achieved it. [01:57:54.200 --> 01:57:56.200] I think so too. [01:57:56.200 --> 01:58:03.200] But Leslie, tell us why they should come to our seminar in Arizona. [01:58:03.200 --> 01:58:05.200] We're going to have one in Arizona. [01:58:05.200 --> 01:58:12.200] And Leslie is going to present her issues on how to get a default judgment. [01:58:12.200 --> 01:58:13.200] Yeah. [01:58:13.200 --> 01:58:15.200] You've got 30 seconds to make the pitch. [01:58:15.200 --> 01:58:17.200] What's in my area? [01:58:17.200 --> 01:58:31.200] Well, in Arizona, well, anyway, to get a default judgment, it's too late. [01:58:31.200 --> 01:58:36.200] I put you on this diamond purpose. [01:58:36.200 --> 01:58:39.200] I know you did. [01:58:39.200 --> 01:58:42.200] We are out of time. [01:58:42.200 --> 01:58:45.200] Thank you all for listening. [01:58:45.200 --> 01:58:47.200] Thank you, Tina. [01:58:47.200 --> 01:59:16.200] We'll be in touch during the week. [01:59:17.200 --> 01:59:43.200] We'll be back in a minute. [01:59:43.200 --> 01:59:59.200] We'll be back in a minute.