[00:00.000 --> 00:03.000]  Happy New Year!
[00:03.000 --> 00:07.000]  Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain, Wheel of Law Radio, sorry for the delay.
[00:07.000 --> 00:11.000]  We were debating whether we were going to do the show tonight.
[00:11.000 --> 00:22.000]  But doing the show won out cause it is my personal opinion that after 30 years kicking this horse,
[00:22.000 --> 00:26.000]  I've been saying for a long time, I've been kicking this horse for all these years,
[00:26.000 --> 00:30.000]  it ain't dead yet, just don't want to get up.
[00:30.000 --> 00:34.000]  It's in the process of getting up.
[00:34.000 --> 00:37.000]  Won it.
[00:37.000 --> 00:50.000]  And that lawsuit I filed got the courts to blink and now Brett's mopping up the details.
[00:50.000 --> 00:57.000]  We've got examining trials moving back into the system.
[00:57.000 --> 01:02.000]  This for me has been a 30 year odyssey.
[01:02.000 --> 01:10.000]  First 15 years of figuring out what the problem was, next 15 years figuring out how to fix it.
[01:10.000 --> 01:15.000]  And almost nobody really sees it yet.
[01:15.000 --> 01:24.000]  We've got this judge in Houston that's doing these probable cause determinations.
[01:24.000 --> 01:33.000]  While he's doing them all wrong, what they are doing is demonstrating why they're important.
[01:33.000 --> 01:40.000]  Just before the show somebody linked me another one where he brought this guy in and the police,
[01:40.000 --> 01:46.000]  the caption was, why you never believe what the police say.
[01:46.000 --> 01:53.000]  And this judge in Houston is putting his hearings online.
[01:53.000 --> 01:59.000]  And the police come in and make this probable cause statement.
[01:59.000 --> 02:03.000]  And fortunately this particular guy had a lawyer with him and he objected and he said,
[02:03.000 --> 02:08.000]  Your Honor, we would like to get the actual videos.
[02:08.000 --> 02:10.000]  So they canceled that hearing and they had another hearing.
[02:10.000 --> 02:17.000]  They come back to the other hearing and they played the actual body cams.
[02:17.000 --> 02:22.000]  And it completely contravened what the police said.
[02:22.000 --> 02:28.000]  Oh, I thought you were going to say that their lawyers were sharp enough to notice
[02:28.000 --> 02:36.000]  and object that the cop is not authorized to make a probable cause determination.
[02:36.000 --> 02:40.000]  In this one he didn't, the cop just arrested the guy.
[02:40.000 --> 02:45.000]  They can make a statement that's in support of a judge finding a probable cause,
[02:45.000 --> 02:48.000]  but they can't make probable cause determination.
[02:48.000 --> 02:53.000]  And that would be an important distinction if the lawyer would object about that.
[02:53.000 --> 02:57.000]  And they obviously lied to the court.
[02:57.000 --> 02:58.000]  It was obvious from the video.
[02:58.000 --> 03:00.000]  Every day.
[03:00.000 --> 03:09.000]  While this judge did not do a probable cause determination properly, at least he did one.
[03:09.000 --> 03:19.000]  At least he had the police, the prosecution tell the judge why they arrested the guy
[03:19.000 --> 03:21.000]  and they gave the guy the opportunity to rebut.
[03:21.000 --> 03:30.000]  Now that was backwards, but even being backwards, it got the information before the court.
[03:30.000 --> 03:32.000]  Yeah, at least it didn't get skipped.
[03:32.000 --> 03:37.000]  Just assume that there's a problem, assume there's a court case and how do you plead?
[03:37.000 --> 03:40.000]  All we've got to do now is get them to do it right.
[03:40.000 --> 03:42.000]  It's not that much different.
[03:42.000 --> 03:49.000]  It's kind of subtle how it's different, but we've won this thing.
[03:49.000 --> 03:55.000]  I'm going to feel like we won when I have a pile of money in my hand.
[03:55.000 --> 04:05.000]  Once we get them, get that policeman in a position such that he knows
[04:05.000 --> 04:13.000]  that he's going to have to explain himself in front of a judge, that'll change everything.
[04:14.000 --> 04:19.000]  Right now, policemen can charge you with anything they want to
[04:19.000 --> 04:25.000]  and they have no reason to believe that they will ever be questioned before a court.
[04:25.000 --> 04:32.000]  Exactly, and if they arrest somebody, where the heck did you get the idea
[04:32.000 --> 04:35.000]  that you need to throw that person in jail?
[04:35.000 --> 04:41.000]  Exactly, I am about to land on my county with both feet
[04:41.000 --> 04:48.000]  and because the legislature, it wasn't the legislature,
[04:48.000 --> 04:53.000]  who is that you're working with, the municipal court?
[04:53.000 --> 04:59.000]  Texas Justice Court Training Center, TJCTC.
[04:59.000 --> 05:04.000]  That's the one that's kind of changed the rules.
[05:04.000 --> 05:07.000]  It said you had to have a probable cause determination.
[05:07.000 --> 05:16.000]  It's like they said, okay, begrudgingly, we'll stick this little sentence in there.
[05:16.000 --> 05:21.000]  They're the ones that are providing the training materials to the judges
[05:21.000 --> 05:24.000]  and the judges are treating it kind of like Cliff Notes.
[05:24.000 --> 05:30.000]  They don't actually go read what are my responsibilities according to the law,
[05:30.000 --> 05:35.000]  but here's what somebody put together a cute little easy summary of my responsibilities
[05:35.000 --> 05:38.000]  and so I'll just read that.
[05:38.000 --> 05:45.000]  Yeah, so now all we have to do is beat them up a little
[05:45.000 --> 05:51.000]  and we've got that part kind of working already
[05:51.000 --> 05:58.000]  and, you know, I talk to these judges and I talk to judges who hate me
[05:58.000 --> 06:03.000]  and they don't have an objection to do an examining trial.
[06:03.000 --> 06:08.000]  But when I explain how it's supposed to be done, they actually like it.
[06:08.000 --> 06:10.000]  Well, yeah.
[06:10.000 --> 06:17.000]  Because here they are just an inferior court, you know, kind of at the bottom of the rung.
[06:17.000 --> 06:20.000]  The only thing there above is municipal courts
[06:20.000 --> 06:29.000]  and now all of a sudden I'm saying that the sheriff who is the primary enforcer of law in the county,
[06:29.000 --> 06:33.000]  he can't do squat without your permission.
[06:33.000 --> 06:39.000]  And when I tell that to a magistrate, they kind of puff up.
[06:39.000 --> 06:43.000]  They're not just some two-bit inferior court.
[06:43.000 --> 06:47.000]  They are the ones who have the final say.
[06:47.000 --> 06:50.000]  They hold the key to the jailhouse door.
[06:50.000 --> 06:53.000]  Yeah, it's an extremely important role.
[06:53.000 --> 07:00.000]  And from the outside, from where they're at now, it doesn't seem to be very important.
[07:00.000 --> 07:08.000]  But once I can talk to them and get them to understand how important they are,
[07:08.000 --> 07:11.000]  they like being important.
[07:11.000 --> 07:14.000]  I hope that works for us.
[07:14.000 --> 07:20.000]  But because it says there must be a probable cause determination,
[07:20.000 --> 07:27.000]  and it did not say there must be a probable cause determination in families.
[07:27.000 --> 07:29.000]  I didn't say that.
[07:29.000 --> 07:37.000]  This judge that's videotaping his hearings and putting them online, he's a county court judge.
[07:37.000 --> 07:41.000]  I have a county court judge in Weisse County.
[07:41.000 --> 07:47.000]  I really want his videos online.
[07:47.000 --> 07:55.000]  When I told him about this judge and about what the judge was doing, he said to me, he said,
[07:55.000 --> 08:00.000]  Are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters or even lawsuits?
[08:00.000 --> 08:04.000]  Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Mears proven method.
[08:04.000 --> 08:10.000]  Michael Mears has won six cases in federal court against debt collectors, and now you can win two.
[08:10.000 --> 08:16.000]  You'll get step-by-step instructions in plain English on how to win in court using federal civil rights statutes.
[08:16.000 --> 08:20.000]  What to do when contacted by phone, mail or court summons.
[08:20.000 --> 08:22.000]  How to answer letters and phone calls.
[08:22.000 --> 08:24.000]  How to get debt collectors out of your credit report.
[08:24.000 --> 08:29.000]  How to turn the financial tables on them and make them pay you to go away.
[08:29.000 --> 08:34.000]  The Michael Mears proven method is the solution for how to stop debt collectors.
[08:34.000 --> 08:36.000]  Personal consultation is available as well.
[08:36.000 --> 08:42.000]  For more information, please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the blue Michael Mears banner.
[08:42.000 --> 08:45.000]  Or email michaelmears at yahoo.com.
[08:45.000 --> 08:47.000]  That's ruleoflawradio.com.
[08:47.000 --> 08:56.000]  Or email m-i-c-h-a-e-l-m-i-r-r-a-s at yahoo.com to learn how to stop debt collectors now.
[08:56.000 --> 09:01.000]  Are you looking to have a closer relationship with God and a better understanding of His Word?
[09:01.000 --> 09:08.000]  Then tune in to LogosRadioNetwork.com on Wednesdays from 8 to 10 p.m. Central Time for Scripture Talk,
[09:08.000 --> 09:13.000]  where Nana and her guests discuss the Scriptures in accord with 2 Timothy 2.15.
[09:13.000 --> 09:20.000]  Study to show thy self-approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
[09:20.000 --> 09:23.000]  Starting in January, our first-hour studies are in the Book of Mark,
[09:23.000 --> 09:27.000]  where we'll go verse by verse and discuss the true Gospel message.
[09:27.000 --> 09:34.000]  Our second-hour topical studies will vary each week with discussions on sound doctrine and Christian character development.
[09:34.000 --> 09:39.000]  We wish to reflect God's light and be a blessing to all those with a hearing ear.
[09:39.000 --> 09:45.000]  Our goal is to strengthen our faith and to transform ourselves more into the likeness of our Lord and Savior Jesus.
[09:45.000 --> 09:55.000]  So tune in to Scripture Talk live on LogosRadioNetwork.com Wednesdays from 8 to 10 p.m. to inspire and motivate your studies of the Scriptures.
[10:16.000 --> 10:20.000]  Look what we've got
[10:20.000 --> 10:23.000]  Who reacts to questions?
[10:23.000 --> 10:25.000]  Wonder what they are
[10:25.000 --> 10:28.000]  They don't have the answer
[10:28.000 --> 10:30.000]  Open up eyes
[10:30.000 --> 10:33.000]  Who reacts to questions?
[10:33.000 --> 10:35.000]  Look what we've got
[10:35.000 --> 10:38.000]  And they don't have the answer
[10:38.000 --> 10:40.000]  Soap and slip and slide
[10:40.000 --> 10:42.000]  How the world wishes for seed
[10:42.000 --> 10:44.000]  Lord, how they want wheat and take it easy
[10:44.000 --> 10:46.000]  They might talk way too politically
[10:46.000 --> 10:49.000]  And them get them mad and angry
[10:49.000 --> 10:51.000]  But them not standing up and fighting
[10:51.000 --> 10:54.000]  Fight for the freedom and be free
[10:54.000 --> 10:56.000]  And they like them love slavery
[10:56.000 --> 10:57.000]  And get high
[10:57.000 --> 11:01.000]  Okay, howdy, howdy, Randy Keekelson, Brent Fountain, Rule of Law Radio.
[11:01.000 --> 11:08.000]  On this, the second day of January 2025,
[11:08.000 --> 11:11.000]  our first show of the new year.
[11:11.000 --> 11:17.000]  And if I sound excited, it's because I am excited.
[11:17.000 --> 11:29.000]  I have put together this presentation on due process, on how due process was supposed to be done.
[11:29.000 --> 11:39.000]  I start out by talking about how we have had law since, essentially,
[11:39.000 --> 11:49.000]  the law of Hammurabi in 17 something B.C., 1700 B.C.
[11:49.000 --> 11:58.000]  And then it went down through, in England we've had it since the 10th century.
[11:58.000 --> 12:06.000]  And then in the United States since 1785,
[12:06.000 --> 12:09.000]  it was the right year that it all came into place.
[12:09.000 --> 12:21.000]  And then Texas in 1734, the law has been in place for almost 6,000 years.
[12:22.000 --> 12:33.000]  And over that time, there has been ample time to add incredible sophistication to the legal system.
[12:33.000 --> 12:39.000]  And it has become incredibly well structured.
[12:39.000 --> 12:45.000]  The legal system is a very well structured mosaic.
[12:46.000 --> 12:51.000]  Every piece fitting nicely into place.
[12:51.000 --> 12:58.000]  You take one piece out and it corrupts the whole system.
[12:58.000 --> 13:00.000]  That's what happened.
[13:00.000 --> 13:11.000]  That's what happened in 1970 to 1771 when the federal courts issued a ruling in Barker Wingo.
[13:11.000 --> 13:20.000]  Sometimes you make a change that has consequences you didn't anticipate.
[13:20.000 --> 13:34.000]  The courts were trying to figure out how to determine when someone's right to a speedy trial was violated.
[13:34.000 --> 13:40.000]  And because in a speedy trial, the accused doesn't always want a speedy trial.
[13:40.000 --> 13:46.000]  If the accused is dirty as dog do, he really don't want a speedy trial.
[13:46.000 --> 13:50.000]  The longer he's out waiting for trial, the longer he's out.
[13:50.000 --> 13:54.000]  So everybody doesn't always want a speedy trial.
[13:54.000 --> 14:00.000]  So how do you tell when someone has denied their right to a speedy trial?
[14:00.000 --> 14:06.000]  And what the court ruled is in order to enjoy your right to a speedy trial,
[14:06.000 --> 14:11.000]  you must have timely demanded a speedy trial.
[14:11.000 --> 14:17.000]  And you must show harm for your denial of a speedy trial.
[14:17.000 --> 14:20.000]  Read that and said, what?
[14:20.000 --> 14:23.000]  What the hell did you come up with that garbage?
[14:23.000 --> 14:32.000]  When our public officials swore on their oath that they would oppose the Constitution and enforce the laws,
[14:32.000 --> 14:40.000]  they didn't say anything about me, whether I wanted to or not, whether I approved of it or not.
[14:40.000 --> 14:42.000]  They swore they would do it.
[14:42.000 --> 14:55.000]  Well, if you look at the incarceration rate in Texas, the population rate increased relatively steadily.
[14:55.000 --> 15:06.000]  And the incarceration rate increased in lockstep with the population until 1970.
[15:06.000 --> 15:15.000]  Until the ruling in Barcarico, which was picked up by the state of Texas, and they applied it to an examining trials.
[15:15.000 --> 15:18.000]  So they stopped doing timely examining trials.
[15:18.000 --> 15:20.000]  Incarceration rates started up.
[15:20.000 --> 15:32.000]  In 1973, the increase in incarceration rate crossed the increase in population, and it's been increasing logarithmically ever since.
[15:32.000 --> 15:41.000]  That's scalar, not on a relatively straight line, but on an ever-inclining state line.
[15:41.000 --> 15:44.000]  It's almost vertical at this point.
[15:45.000 --> 15:54.000]  Incarceration is absolutely out of control, and the state calls it our mass incarceration problem.
[15:54.000 --> 16:07.000]  I'm saying that happened because they stopped telling the policemen, if you arrest someone for any reason,
[16:07.000 --> 16:14.000]  You have to immediately explain yourself to a magistrate.
[16:14.000 --> 16:25.000]  If you don't, if the policeman knows that if he arrests you, he's going to take you to jail, the prosecutor is going to offer you a deal.
[16:25.000 --> 16:31.000]  And if you can bail out, you have to come back every month until you take a deal.
[16:31.000 --> 16:37.000]  Or if you're in jail, he'll come to you every month and offer you a deal, and you'll stay there until you take one.
[16:37.000 --> 16:41.000]  Nobody ever questions the policeman.
[16:41.000 --> 16:45.000]  Was your cause sufficient?
[16:45.000 --> 16:47.000]  He knows nobody's going to ask him.
[16:47.000 --> 16:49.000]  He can do anything he wants to.
[16:49.000 --> 16:58.000]  But if the policeman knows, if he arrests me for any reason, then I might use it obnoxiously and demand himself.
[16:58.000 --> 17:10.000]  If he knows he has to get on his cell phone and call the nearest magistrate, and then before he explains anything to the magistrate, he's to hand me the phone.
[17:10.000 --> 17:14.000]  I get to talk to the magistrate first.
[17:14.000 --> 17:19.000]  That will change everything.
[17:19.000 --> 17:21.000]  We won't need any new law.
[17:21.000 --> 17:25.000]  We won't need to be disciplining these policemen.
[17:25.000 --> 17:35.000]  These problems we're having with the police simply go away of their own accord.
[17:35.000 --> 17:38.000]  It's there.
[17:38.000 --> 17:54.000]  That suit that we filed against all the judges in Texas, it forced them to read this, I hate to say my presentation, but it's actually mine and Brett's presentation on due process.
[17:54.000 --> 17:55.000]  That's why I wrote it.
[17:55.000 --> 18:09.000]  I wrote it, Brett's input, put in this presentation on due process, a suit of 20 million bucks apiece, and there are judges and lawyers, so you know they read my suit.
[18:09.000 --> 18:14.000]  Then the Fifth Circuit dismissed it with prejudice, saying it was frivolous.
[18:14.000 --> 18:20.000]  And they wiped their brow because they knew they had no way to answer it.
[18:20.000 --> 18:22.000]  Then they changed the bench book.
[18:22.000 --> 18:29.000]  I don't know if the courts did it or if Texas State University looked at it and realized there was a problem and did it.
[18:29.000 --> 18:34.000]  But in either case, now they've got Brett all over them.
[18:34.000 --> 18:37.000]  He is climbing down their throats.
[18:37.000 --> 18:39.000]  This problem isn't over.
[18:39.000 --> 18:45.000]  They told him how to do an examining trial, a probable cause of determination, but it was all wrong.
[18:45.000 --> 18:47.000]  That's okay.
[18:47.000 --> 18:49.000]  They're doing one.
[18:49.000 --> 18:54.000]  Before this, they said you didn't have a right to an examining trial in a misdemeanor.
[18:54.000 --> 18:55.000]  That's gone.
[18:55.000 --> 18:58.000]  They didn't say that.
[18:58.000 --> 19:03.000]  The due bench book said there has to be a probable cause determination.
[19:03.000 --> 19:08.000]  It did not distinguish between felony or misdemeanor, so we beat that one.
[19:08.000 --> 19:16.000]  Now we've got this county court in Houston doing probable cause determinations.
[19:16.000 --> 19:18.000]  They're not doing it right.
[19:18.000 --> 19:19.000]  That's okay.
[19:19.000 --> 19:21.000]  They're doing it.
[19:21.000 --> 19:28.000]  Now all we have to do is get them to adjust it so it falls in line with the code.
[19:28.000 --> 19:38.000]  Guys, I think we're on the cusp of dramatically changing the criminal justice system in Texas.
[19:38.000 --> 19:41.000]  Everybody benefit by it.
[19:41.000 --> 19:44.000]  Nobody will be unhappy with it.
[19:45.000 --> 19:49.000]  And a great portion of our problems will simply go away.
[19:49.000 --> 20:05.000]  Then you and I and Brett, now we can get to more sophisticated issues that we've had to set aside in order to get a criminal justice system actually worth.
[20:05.000 --> 20:09.000]  That's my story, and I'm sticking to it.
[20:09.000 --> 20:12.000]  We've got about 45 seconds to our sponsors.
[20:12.000 --> 20:15.000]  We've got three callers.
[20:15.000 --> 20:18.000]  Don't know if we'll get to everybody tonight, but I hope so.
[20:18.000 --> 20:24.000]  So I'll shut up on this, but what has happened is so dramatic.
[20:24.000 --> 20:27.000]  I had to waste a lot of your time with it.
[20:27.000 --> 20:31.000]  Guys, we get Texas doing it right.
[20:31.000 --> 20:36.000]  We can port what Texas is doing to everything, everywhere else.
[20:36.000 --> 20:39.000]  We may actually be able to change things.
[20:39.000 --> 20:41.000]  What do you say, Brett?
[20:41.000 --> 20:44.000]  It certainly would be a wonderful thing.
[20:44.000 --> 20:47.000]  I don't know, you got 10 more seconds.
[20:47.000 --> 20:51.000]  All right, you want to take Eric from Massachusetts?
[20:51.000 --> 20:54.000]  Okay, I'll be right back.
[20:56.000 --> 21:01.000]  Businesses ask you for a lot of personal information, and you may trust them to keep it safe.
[21:01.000 --> 21:06.000]  But it turns out that even the most trusted companies may be unwittingly revealing your secrets.
[21:06.000 --> 21:10.000]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, and I'll be right back with details.
[21:10.000 --> 21:12.000]  Privacy is under attack.
[21:12.000 --> 21:16.000]  When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[21:16.000 --> 21:21.000]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[21:21.000 --> 21:26.000]  So protect your rights, say no to surveillance, and keep your information to yourself.
[21:26.000 --> 21:28.000]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[21:28.000 --> 21:32.000]  This public service announcement is brought to you by Startpage.com,
[21:32.000 --> 21:36.000]  the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[21:36.000 --> 21:39.000]  Start over with Startpage.
[21:40.000 --> 21:47.000]  Data privacy is a big deal, so nearly every company has a policy explaining how they handle your personal information.
[21:47.000 --> 21:49.000]  But what happens if it escapes their control?
[21:49.000 --> 21:51.000]  It's not an idle question.
[21:51.000 --> 21:59.000]  According to a recent survey, a shocking 90% of US companies admit their security was breached by hackers in the last year.
[21:59.000 --> 22:03.000]  That's one more reason you should trust your searches to Startpage.com.
[22:03.000 --> 22:07.000]  Unlike other search engines, Startpage doesn't store any data on you.
[22:07.000 --> 22:11.000]  They've never been hacked, but even if they were, there would be nothing for criminals to see.
[22:11.000 --> 22:13.000]  The cupboard would be bare.
[22:13.000 --> 22:16.000]  Too bad other companies don't treat your data the same way.
[22:16.000 --> 22:21.000]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht. More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[22:38.000 --> 22:42.000]  Although the official explanation is that fire brought down Building 7,
[22:42.000 --> 22:46.000]  over 1,200 architects and engineers have looked into the evidence
[22:46.000 --> 22:48.000]  and believe there is more to the story.
[22:48.000 --> 22:51.000]  Bring justice to my son, my uncle, my nephew, my son.
[22:51.000 --> 22:53.000]  Go to buildingwhat.org.
[22:53.000 --> 22:56.000]  Why it fell, why it matters, and what you can do.
[22:56.000 --> 23:00.000]  Rule of Law Radio is proud to offer the Rule of Law traffic seminar.
[23:00.000 --> 23:03.000]  In today's America, we live in an us-against-them society.
[23:03.000 --> 23:05.000]  If we the people are ever going to have a free society,
[23:05.000 --> 23:08.000]  then we're going to have to stand and defend our own rights.
[23:08.000 --> 23:11.000]  Among those rights are the right to travel freely from place to place,
[23:11.000 --> 23:13.000]  the right to act in our own private capacity,
[23:13.000 --> 23:15.000]  and most importantly, the right to due process of law.
[23:15.000 --> 23:18.000]  Traffic courts afford us the least expensive opportunity
[23:18.000 --> 23:21.000]  to learn how to enforce and preserve our rights through due process.
[23:21.000 --> 23:24.000]  Former Sheriff's Deputy Eddie Craig, in conjunction with Rule of Law Radio,
[23:24.000 --> 23:27.000]  has put together the most comprehensive teaching tool available
[23:27.000 --> 23:29.000]  that will help you understand what due process is
[23:29.000 --> 23:31.000]  and how to hold courts to the rule of law.
[23:31.000 --> 23:33.000]  You can get your own copy of this invaluable material
[23:33.000 --> 23:36.000]  by going to ruleoflawradio.com and ordering your copy today.
[23:36.000 --> 23:38.000]  By ordering now, you'll receive a copy of Eddie's book,
[23:38.000 --> 23:41.000]  The Texas Transportation Code, The Law Versus the Lie,
[23:41.000 --> 23:43.000]  video and audio of the original 2009 seminar,
[23:43.000 --> 23:46.000]  hundreds of research documents, and other useful resource material.
[23:46.000 --> 23:50.000]  Learn how to fight for your rights with the help of this material from ruleoflawradio.com.
[23:50.000 --> 23:55.000]  Order your copy today, and together we can have the free society we all want and deserve.
[24:01.000 --> 24:03.000]  Visit ruleoflawradio.com
[24:31.000 --> 24:35.000]  When you're gonna stop abuse, your power
[24:35.000 --> 24:41.000]  When you're gonna stop abuse, your power
[24:41.000 --> 24:46.000]  When you're gonna stop abuse, your power
[24:46.000 --> 24:52.000]  When you're gonna stop abuse, your power
[24:52.000 --> 24:57.000]  So please Mr. Macklin, teach officers not to abuse their power
[24:57.000 --> 24:59.000]  Send a request
[24:59.000 --> 25:01.000]  Okay, we are back.
[25:01.000 --> 25:04.000]  Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain, Rule of Law Radio,
[25:04.000 --> 25:07.000]  and we're going to Eric in Massas, UCEDD.
[25:07.000 --> 25:09.000]  Hello Mayor Eric.
[25:09.000 --> 25:11.000]  What do you have for us today?
[25:11.000 --> 25:13.000]  How are you doing? Happy New Year.
[25:13.000 --> 25:18.000]  What do I have? Well, I'm trying to keep myself out of jail a la Kurt.
[25:18.000 --> 25:20.000]  I don't want to go to jail.
[25:20.000 --> 25:26.000]  So I finally filed that federal case
[25:26.000 --> 25:31.000]  against the recall judges in Massachusetts.
[25:31.000 --> 25:38.000]  So that got kicked out like within 24 hours.
[25:38.000 --> 25:42.000]  And it may have been because I included emergency TRO
[25:42.000 --> 25:47.000]  with the claim that, you know, I have...
[25:47.000 --> 25:50.000]  Oh, wait a minute. I read that suit.
[25:50.000 --> 25:52.000]  You did. You did.
[25:52.000 --> 25:54.000]  Yeah, they were right.
[25:54.000 --> 25:56.000]  No, they weren't right. No, they weren't right.
[25:56.000 --> 26:01.000]  You sued him in the federal court and you made state claims.
[26:01.000 --> 26:06.000]  Yeah, Randy, let's work on how can we find how Eric is right.
[26:06.000 --> 26:13.000]  So let's do that because you and Eddie Craig back in March said,
[26:13.000 --> 26:16.000]  Oh yeah, you do have a federal case here.
[26:16.000 --> 26:18.000]  So let's go that way.
[26:18.000 --> 26:24.000]  You framed your argument in terms of state laws.
[26:24.000 --> 26:27.000]  You should have framed your arguments
[26:27.000 --> 26:31.000]  in terms of them violating 18 U.S. Code 242
[26:31.000 --> 26:35.000]  and conspiring to deny you access to the courts.
[26:35.000 --> 26:38.000]  It wasn't your issue that was wrong.
[26:38.000 --> 26:40.000]  It's how you stated it.
[26:41.000 --> 26:48.000]  Who you go to dictates the language that you have to reference.
[26:48.000 --> 26:55.000]  You can say, if you have a problem with somebody that's on the football team
[26:55.000 --> 27:00.000]  and you talk to their parents instead of the coach,
[27:00.000 --> 27:02.000]  you know what I mean?
[27:02.000 --> 27:05.000]  It depends on what you're complaining about.
[27:05.000 --> 27:10.000]  If you're in Massachusetts and you're saying that Massachusetts says
[27:10.000 --> 27:17.000]  that a retired judge can only serve until he's 70,
[27:17.000 --> 27:19.000]  then that's Massachusetts law.
[27:19.000 --> 27:21.000]  There's nothing in federal law that says that.
[27:21.000 --> 27:24.000]  And even if it was something in federal law,
[27:24.000 --> 27:29.000]  federal law cannot dictate to the state how long their judges can serve.
[27:29.000 --> 27:33.000]  However, I think that we had talked about one time, Randy,
[27:33.000 --> 27:36.000]  if I remember correctly, correct me if I'm wrong, Eric,
[27:36.000 --> 27:42.000]  but I think we had talked about the fact that he has a right to due process
[27:42.000 --> 27:48.000]  and that his state rights were being violated,
[27:48.000 --> 27:53.000]  but that also was a violation of his federally protected rights.
[27:53.000 --> 27:58.000]  And so he was going to go to the feds talking about his federal rights,
[27:58.000 --> 28:01.000]  but instead he kind of blurred the line when he went to the fed.
[28:01.000 --> 28:05.000]  Is that what I'm understanding, Eric?
[28:05.000 --> 28:09.000]  Yeah, that's the way I saw it.
[28:09.000 --> 28:15.000]  I didn't see anything that gave the feds jurisdiction.
[28:15.000 --> 28:20.000]  When I read it, you know, you got to know, Eric, I was on your side,
[28:20.000 --> 28:24.000]  but when I read it, they were right.
[28:24.000 --> 28:29.000]  How do we get this?
[28:29.000 --> 28:34.000]  What we care about is having an amended pleading that works for them.
[28:34.000 --> 28:36.000]  So let's go there. Let's stop talking about how...
[28:36.000 --> 28:39.000]  Yeah, yeah, that's what we want to talk about.
[28:39.000 --> 28:46.000]  How do we craft this complaint so there is a federal issue involved?
[28:46.000 --> 28:48.000]  Now, procedural due process,
[28:48.000 --> 28:53.000]  but even then you're talking about state-related procedural due process.
[28:53.000 --> 28:57.000]  The states are granted the authority to set up their courts
[28:57.000 --> 29:03.000]  the way they want to within as long as they're within the federal guidelines.
[29:03.000 --> 29:05.000]  And they did.
[29:05.000 --> 29:13.000]  This is a very specific issue that goes to how long a judge can sit.
[29:13.000 --> 29:21.000]  So a judge sitting longer than he's technically allowed to,
[29:21.000 --> 29:26.000]  how does that deny you in a federal right?
[29:26.000 --> 29:30.000]  Well, in the previous cases,
[29:30.000 --> 29:33.000]  and I'm not sure if I can exactly make the claim,
[29:33.000 --> 29:38.000]  but in the previous cases both the state and the federal government
[29:38.000 --> 29:40.000]  in those two previous, you know,
[29:40.000 --> 29:44.000]  federal district court and federal first circuit court
[29:44.000 --> 29:51.000]  had basically agreed that we need to question the competency of 70-year-old judges.
[29:51.000 --> 29:54.000]  So the state made that pleading,
[29:54.000 --> 29:58.000]  and the federal court said, yes, we agree with that pleading.
[29:58.000 --> 30:05.000]  So, or they may have said, well, we agree with that, the Constitution.
[30:05.000 --> 30:10.000]  You know, what the fight was is EEOC ADA age discrimination.
[30:10.000 --> 30:14.000]  And what they said was, maybe what they, let me just finish this.
[30:14.000 --> 30:17.000]  Well, maybe what they said was,
[30:17.000 --> 30:22.000]  your Constitution is allowed to discriminate against age,
[30:22.000 --> 30:27.000]  and ADA does not apply rather than competency.
[30:27.000 --> 30:30.000]  Yeah, excellent distinction.
[30:30.000 --> 30:32.000]  Yeah, that was what I was going to go to.
[30:32.000 --> 30:39.000]  Discriminating based on age, that is not necessarily unreasonable
[30:39.000 --> 30:45.000]  when you're dealing with someone whose judgment is critical.
[30:45.000 --> 30:48.000]  But is there anything...
[30:48.000 --> 30:50.000]  Or for all kinds of things.
[30:50.000 --> 30:58.000]  Anything in the federal law that would restrict any judge
[30:58.000 --> 31:03.000]  from sitting on the bench beyond the age of 70?
[31:03.000 --> 31:13.000]  I went before Judge McBride in Fort Worth, and he was 96.
[31:13.000 --> 31:19.000]  So the feds don't have this restriction.
[31:19.000 --> 31:27.000]  So how are you going to get the feds to attach this restriction to the state
[31:27.000 --> 31:34.000]  from a federal perspective, as opposed to where the state said,
[31:34.000 --> 31:40.000]  over 70, they can't sit on the bench,
[31:40.000 --> 31:43.000]  but that would have to be adjudicated in the state.
[31:43.000 --> 31:49.000]  How do we jump from there to the fed?
[31:49.000 --> 31:53.000]  14th Amendment, equal protection and due process.
[31:53.000 --> 31:58.000]  So someone who's bringing a case as a judge that's not a recall judge
[31:58.000 --> 32:01.000]  and I have a case that is a recall judge.
[32:01.000 --> 32:06.000]  I mean, again, the contention is my point is these aren't judges.
[32:06.000 --> 32:11.000]  Basically, the chief justice of the court is committing a crime.
[32:11.000 --> 32:18.000]  There's no way to reinvigorate these 70-year-old judges.
[32:18.000 --> 32:24.000]  Okay, I got that argument, but that's still a state argument.
[32:24.000 --> 32:28.000]  How do you get that to the fed?
[32:28.000 --> 32:36.000]  Article 4, Section 4, Guarantee Clause, Republican Form of Government, Supremacy Clause.
[32:36.000 --> 32:39.000]  We've got a Republican form of government.
[32:39.000 --> 32:42.000]  We still have everybody there.
[32:42.000 --> 32:45.000]  All the public officials are subject to the voters.
[32:45.000 --> 32:54.000]  Supremacy Clause, the fed is supreme, but the fed doesn't address this.
[32:54.000 --> 33:01.000]  And the fed, they can serve longer than 70 years, so the fed doesn't address that.
[33:01.000 --> 33:03.000]  What else?
[33:03.000 --> 33:05.000]  Let's back up.
[33:05.000 --> 33:08.000]  Article 4, Section 4, Republican Form of Government.
[33:08.000 --> 33:15.000]  The people said no judge shall adjudicate over 70, period.
[33:15.000 --> 33:19.000]  That was the state people said that.
[33:19.000 --> 33:22.000]  The fed didn't say that.
[33:22.000 --> 33:25.000]  So the federal judges are looking at that and going,
[33:25.000 --> 33:29.000]  why didn't he go talk to his state people about that?
[33:29.000 --> 33:41.000]  So why are you going to the medical board complaining about an electric electrician who wasn't properly licensed?
[33:41.000 --> 33:48.000]  Yeah, consider that you're talking to judges who may want to serve after they're 70.
[33:48.000 --> 33:52.000]  Understood, the guy who made the ruling was 80 years old.
[33:52.000 --> 33:59.000]  To get to the Supreme Court, it may take that long.
[33:59.000 --> 34:12.000]  The argument that we had on March 15th with Eddie Craig was that my soonest available remedy is the district court, is the federal district court.
[34:12.000 --> 34:21.000]  This has been ruled on in three other cases, and the justices made an opinion on this that judges cannot serve over 70.
[34:21.000 --> 34:30.000]  So my soonest available, the only remedy I have is already in the federal court.
[34:30.000 --> 34:39.000]  Okay, the federal court ruled that the state of Massachusetts can't have judges over 70.
[34:39.000 --> 34:48.000]  But how did the federal court get to that, get standing to make that ruling?
[34:48.000 --> 34:59.000]  Do you have a business with five employees or more?
[34:59.000 --> 35:03.000]  How would you like to save hundreds of thousands of dollars in FICA taxes?
[35:03.000 --> 35:07.000]  Do you have a major medical plan that nobody can afford to be on?
[35:07.000 --> 35:14.000]  Or how would you like to save in premium costs on a current major medical plan by lowering the claims cost?
[35:14.000 --> 35:29.000]  The CHAMP plan is a section 125 IRS approved preventative health plan that provides your employees with doctors, medications, emergency care, and Teladoc all at zero cost with zero copay.
[35:29.000 --> 35:35.000]  If you are an employee, you also will get a pay raise by paying less in FICA taxes.
[35:35.000 --> 35:41.000]  As an employer, you will save hundreds of thousands of dollars in matching FICA taxes.
[35:41.000 --> 35:47.000]  The CHAMP plan can help add working capital, market resale value, or pay down lines of credit.
[35:47.000 --> 35:56.000]  Call Scott at 214-730-2471 or dallasmms.com.
[35:56.000 --> 35:59.000]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[35:59.000 --> 36:10.000]  Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary, the affordable, easy to understand, 4 CD course that will show you how in 24 hours, step by step.
[36:10.000 --> 36:14.000]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing.
[36:14.000 --> 36:18.000]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[36:18.000 --> 36:23.000]  Thousands have won with our step by step course, and now you can too.
[36:23.000 --> 36:29.000]  Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case winning experience.
[36:29.000 --> 36:38.000]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand about the principles and practices that control our American courts.
[36:38.000 --> 36:47.000]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases, pro se tactics, and much more.
[36:47.000 --> 36:56.000]  Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner or call toll free 866-LAW-EZ.
[37:09.000 --> 37:15.000]  If you did not have any problems, where are you going to look for one?
[37:15.000 --> 37:21.000]  If you could not wage any battle, would your purpose has been done?
[37:21.000 --> 37:27.000]  Such a sentimental soldier, a warrior of love, scuffling to keep the peace.
[37:27.000 --> 37:34.000]  All it takes is a misunderstanding, if somebody calls the police, watch on the spot.
[37:38.000 --> 37:46.000]  Okay, we are back with Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain, Rule of Law Radio, and Eric, we're struggling here.
[37:46.000 --> 37:59.000]  This whole thing about state and federal, how do we get from state law to federal?
[38:00.000 --> 38:08.000]  So I listen to something interesting about common law versus equity.
[38:08.000 --> 38:13.000]  So common law is very law dependent.
[38:13.000 --> 38:20.000]  Whereas when you bring something in equity, supposedly the court is supposed to be a little bit more flexible.
[38:20.000 --> 38:24.000]  And that's what this is, because I'm asking for an injunction.
[38:24.000 --> 38:29.000]  I'm not asking for money, I'm asking for them to consider this.
[38:29.000 --> 38:40.000]  So I do have to figure out how to open the door, because on the other side is clearly some crimes per se or wrongdoings or whatever.
[38:40.000 --> 38:51.000]  I mean, again, if you read, I sent it to you, Brett, if you read it, I talk about how they're allowing judges to work even beyond the statute.
[38:51.000 --> 38:56.000]  So they're so emboldened with that they're allowed to do whatever they're allowed to do.
[38:56.000 --> 39:02.000]  They're allowing the judges to work beyond what the statute allows.
[39:02.000 --> 39:05.000]  And that's from the Supreme Court.
[39:05.000 --> 39:10.000]  The Supreme Court's making that allowance, they're allowing, that's in 1985.
[39:10.000 --> 39:14.000]  That's a conspiracy.
[39:15.000 --> 39:32.000]  Okay, that does bring up an issue where the courts are acting in clear contravention to state law.
[39:32.000 --> 39:41.000]  That sounds like, what's the term, Brett, not insurrection.
[39:41.000 --> 39:43.000]  Sedition?
[39:43.000 --> 39:48.000]  Sedition.
[39:48.000 --> 40:12.000]  If it's clear and unequivocal that the Supreme has ruled, that the State Supreme has ruled in contradiction to the pronouncement of the state legislature, that's sedition.
[40:12.000 --> 40:21.000]  So another statute that's similar to 1985 is 1343A3 and A4.
[40:21.000 --> 40:25.000]  A4, I think, mentions equity.
[40:25.000 --> 40:27.000]  Is that what you've pled?
[40:27.000 --> 40:31.000]  Did you go for 1983?
[40:31.000 --> 40:32.000]  No, I poorly pled it.
[40:32.000 --> 40:34.000]  So we're all in agreement right now.
[40:34.000 --> 40:36.000]  I poorly pled it and I need to rewrite it.
[40:36.000 --> 40:40.000]  I need to rewrite merely the jurisdiction claim.
[40:40.000 --> 40:42.000]  I just need to rewrite the claim for jurisdiction.
[40:42.000 --> 40:47.000]  Probably everything else is reasonably good in that document.
[40:47.000 --> 40:55.000]  As you know, when you're writing something, you get micro-focused and you have to step back and look at all the pieces.
[40:55.000 --> 41:01.000]  Even though it's simple, it's also really complicated.
[41:01.000 --> 41:08.000]  Finally, somebody understands what I struggle with.
[41:08.000 --> 41:11.000]  From a distance, it looks really simple.
[41:11.000 --> 41:17.000]  But when you're down there in the trenches, it's complicated.
[41:17.000 --> 41:28.000]  I mean, I had to explain it basically like a substitute teacher because you have this 90-day part and then you have this two-year contract part.
[41:28.000 --> 41:39.000]  So my analogy is, well, these recall judges, according to the statute, they get a two-year contract which allows them to be a substitute teacher for up to 90 days.
[41:39.000 --> 41:43.000]  And after that, they have to go to a different school, basically.
[41:43.000 --> 41:50.000]  I have to simplify it that much because it's that confusing.
[41:51.000 --> 42:00.000]  I'm thinking. I'm in a state, and this state is a part of the United States.
[42:00.000 --> 42:06.000]  The United States places limits on what the state can do.
[42:06.000 --> 42:10.000]  But my state is breaching those limits.
[42:10.000 --> 42:17.000]  The United States guarantees me due course of law.
[42:17.000 --> 42:18.000]  But I have a state...
[42:18.000 --> 42:24.000]  Either way, it needs to be pled to say we've got state actors violating that right.
[42:24.000 --> 42:31.000]  It's a federally protected right, and these state actors are violating it.
[42:31.000 --> 42:41.000]  The state law in Massachusetts clearly says that I cannot be made to answer to a judge over 70.
[42:41.000 --> 42:44.000]  And I'm going to the highest judges in Texas.
[42:44.000 --> 42:54.000]  They're acting in direct contravention to the laws that the state legislature passed.
[42:54.000 --> 42:57.000]  That looks like sedition.
[42:57.000 --> 43:09.000]  And who will protect me in my state from sedition by high-level members of my state legislature or state judiciary?
[43:09.000 --> 43:15.000]  Yeah, state actors.
[43:15.000 --> 43:17.000]  Does that make sense to you?
[43:17.000 --> 43:22.000]  Yeah, 100%. These are some great way to frame it.
[43:22.000 --> 43:25.000]  And that's all I need is just how do I frame it?
[43:25.000 --> 43:31.000]  How do I make it so that they go, okay, I see that this is how it applies to the federal court.
[43:31.000 --> 43:36.000]  That's all I need. Then the door's open.
[43:36.000 --> 43:43.000]  And that sounds like sedition.
[43:43.000 --> 43:46.000]  But it's not enough.
[43:46.000 --> 43:52.000]  Sedition is kind of a criminal complaint.
[43:52.000 --> 43:55.000]  This is a procedural problem.
[43:55.000 --> 44:02.000]  Yeah, if you don't go off into the criminal stuff, you can just stick straight with that 1983,
[44:02.000 --> 44:05.000]  say the state actors violated my federally protected right.
[44:05.000 --> 44:07.000]  Boom, done.
[44:07.000 --> 44:10.000]  Yeah, but this didn't go to a federal protection.
[44:10.000 --> 44:19.000]  Well, it went to a federally protected right to the due course of the laws, to procedural due process.
[44:19.000 --> 44:20.000]  Yes.
[44:20.000 --> 44:26.000]  Your procedural due process protected you from a 70-year-old judge.
[44:26.000 --> 44:34.000]  While it was a state law that protected you, it was state enacted procedural due process.
[44:34.000 --> 44:43.000]  And when the highest court in Massachusetts is ignoring the pronouncements of the legislature,
[44:43.000 --> 44:51.000]  the only place to go for remedy is the federal court.
[44:51.000 --> 44:54.000]  Does that make sense? I'm not sure what I'm saying here.
[44:54.000 --> 45:03.000]  I'm just trying to find a way to say this that would ring true in a federal venue.
[45:03.000 --> 45:11.000]  Yeah, absolutely. And again, there's a lot of elements here where there is a crime sort of being committed.
[45:11.000 --> 45:17.000]  Again, in my opinion, they can't reinvigorate 70-year-old justice.
[45:17.000 --> 45:28.000]  They don't have the ability to, in the district courts, they don't have a procedure right now to give them a job.
[45:28.000 --> 45:35.000]  And then how are these judges working beyond the 90-day limit? I don't understand that.
[45:35.000 --> 45:40.000]  That may be the way to get to it is procedural due process.
[45:41.000 --> 45:53.000]  You have a right. I went into a traffic court and argued that the law required an examining trial.
[45:53.000 --> 46:00.000]  An examining trial was part of procedural due process.
[46:00.000 --> 46:06.000]  And the judge looked at it and he agreed with it. You know, the feds require an examining trial.
[46:06.000 --> 46:15.000]  And the state didn't give me an examining trial. But how do we get from the state to the fed?
[46:15.000 --> 46:22.000]  And procedural due process was the way I got there.
[46:22.000 --> 46:25.000]  Because the fed guarantees you procedural due process.
[46:25.000 --> 46:35.000]  I have a right to expect that my laws in my state will be enforced as they're written.
[46:35.000 --> 46:44.000]  So we go to the fed and say, my state is not enforcing my laws in accordance with the way they're written.
[46:44.000 --> 46:58.000]  And since the highest court in the state is acting in defiance of the legislature of the state, I have no remedy in the state.
[46:58.000 --> 47:10.000]  I have to move out of the highest court into the federal court to bring the highest court in the state back in line with the Constitution and laws.
[47:10.000 --> 47:13.000]  Does that make sense?
[47:13.000 --> 47:18.000]  Yeah, I did actually plead that. I mean, I did say, hey, look, this is the nearest remedy.
[47:18.000 --> 47:22.000]  This is the closest remedy because they can't make a ruling on that.
[47:22.000 --> 47:30.000]  You're talking about nearest and closest. That doesn't seem to ring like the language that they need to hear you say.
[47:30.000 --> 47:33.000]  And just you saying it doesn't mean it's true.
[47:33.000 --> 47:35.000]  I gotcha.
[47:35.000 --> 47:38.000]  We need to cite procedural due process.
[47:38.000 --> 47:47.000]  Federally, federal court cases on procedural due process rights.
[47:47.000 --> 47:51.000]  OK.
[47:51.000 --> 47:57.000]  Should be a nice. This is this is nice. This is kind of stuff I'd like to do.
[47:57.000 --> 48:01.000]  This one's hard. And it's just getting on the other side of the door.
[48:01.000 --> 48:06.000]  Once they open the door for me, you know, it's clear as day.
[48:06.000 --> 48:12.000]  Everybody that I showed to. Oh, yeah. I don't know how you get on the other side of the door, though.
[48:12.000 --> 48:17.000]  It's just this is and I said this to Gary. I was talking to Gary the other day and I said this to him.
[48:17.000 --> 48:29.000]  This is the same kind of garbage that they complain about with sovereign citizens who want to wave a magic wand, magic words and then have things happen.
[48:29.000 --> 48:33.000]  This is the same thing. They know what's going on.
[48:33.000 --> 48:41.000]  Right. But I have to say the magic word to get jurisdiction.
[48:41.000 --> 48:44.000]  Yeah, you're kind of right there.
[48:44.000 --> 48:58.000]  But consider you're talking to federal judges who, in order to reach this level, they have to have been around a while.
[48:58.000 --> 49:11.000]  And if you've got a judge in his early to mid 60s and you're asking him to rule that you that a judge can't sit after 70,
[49:11.000 --> 49:16.000]  whether he means to or not, he's going to be prejudiced.
[49:16.000 --> 49:25.000]  So we have to deal with that. We have to have a much stronger argument than otherwise.
[49:25.000 --> 49:30.000]  You can never expect to win your case simply because you have the law and the facts on your side.
[49:30.000 --> 49:33.000]  You have to find something stronger. Hang on, Randy.
[49:33.000 --> 49:38.000]  I thought you got what you need. Does that cover what you needed?
[49:38.000 --> 49:46.000]  Yeah, close. I mean, you know, I guess I could drop off if you want. We'll be right back.
[49:46.000 --> 49:54.000]  The Bible remains the most popular book in the world, yet countless readers are frustrated because they struggle to understand it.
[49:54.000 --> 50:02.000]  Some new translations try to help by simplifying the text, but in the process can compromise the profound meaning of the scripture.
[50:02.000 --> 50:05.000]  Enter the recovery version.
[50:05.000 --> 50:14.000]  First, this new translation is extremely faithful and accurate, but the real story is the more than 9000 explanatory footnotes.
[50:14.000 --> 50:23.000]  Difficult and profound passages are opened up in a marvelous way, providing an entrance into the riches of the word beyond which you've ever experienced before.
[50:23.000 --> 50:28.000]  Bibles for America would like to give you a free recovery version simply for the asking.
[50:28.000 --> 50:43.000]  This comprehensive yet compact study Bible is yours just by calling us toll free at 1-888-551-0102 or by ordering online at freestudybible.com.
[50:43.000 --> 50:46.000]  That's freestudybible.com.
[50:47.000 --> 50:55.000]  You're listening to the Logos Radio Network at logosradionetwork.com.
[50:57.000 --> 51:01.000]  The Bill of Rights contains the first 10 amendments of our Constitution.
[51:01.000 --> 51:06.000]  They guarantee the specific freedoms Americans should know and protect. Our liberty depends on it.
[51:06.000 --> 51:12.000]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, and I'll be right back with an unforgettable way to remember one of your constitutional rights.
[51:12.000 --> 51:17.000]  Privacy is under attack. When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[51:17.000 --> 51:22.000]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[51:22.000 --> 51:27.000]  So protect your rights, say no to surveillance, and keep your information to yourself.
[51:27.000 --> 51:30.000]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[51:30.000 --> 51:38.000]  This public service announcement is brought to you by Startpage.com, the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[51:38.000 --> 51:40.000]  Start over with Startpage.
[51:41.000 --> 51:47.000]  Imagine your mom and dad are getting ready for bed. They pull back the covers and find a third party there.
[51:47.000 --> 51:50.000]  He announces, I'm with the military and I'm sleeping here tonight.
[51:50.000 --> 51:56.000]  That shocking image of a third party in my parents' bed reminds me what the Third Amendment was designed to prevent.
[51:56.000 --> 52:02.000]  It protects us from being forced to share our homes with soldiers, a common demand in the days of our founding fathers.
[52:02.000 --> 52:05.000]  Third party, Third Amendment? Get it?
[52:05.000 --> 52:13.000]  So if you answer a knock at your door and guys in fatigues demand lodging, tell them to dust off their copy of the Bill of Rights and re-read the Third Amendment.
[52:13.000 --> 52:18.000]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht. More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[52:27.000 --> 52:31.000]  The Bill of Rights contains the first ten amendments of our Constitution.
[52:31.000 --> 52:36.000]  They guarantee the specific freedoms Americans should know and protect. Our liberty depends on it.
[52:36.000 --> 52:42.000]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht and I'll be right back with an unforgettable way to remember one of your constitutional rights.
[52:42.000 --> 52:48.000]  Privacy is under attack. When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[52:48.000 --> 52:53.000]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[52:53.000 --> 52:58.000]  So protect your rights. Say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself.
[52:58.000 --> 53:01.000]  Privacy. It's worth hanging on to.
[53:01.000 --> 53:08.000]  This public service announcement is brought to you by StartPage.com, the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[53:08.000 --> 53:11.000]  Start over with StartPage.
[53:12.000 --> 53:17.000]  Imagine four eyes staring at you through binoculars, a magnifying glass, or a pair of x-ray goggles.
[53:17.000 --> 53:23.000]  That imagery reminds me that the Fourth Amendment guarantees Americans freedom from unreasonable search and seizure.
[53:23.000 --> 53:26.000]  Fourth Amendment? Four eyes staring at you? Get it?
[53:26.000 --> 53:30.000]  Unfortunately, the government is trampling our Fourth Amendment rights in the name of security.
[53:30.000 --> 53:35.000]  Case in point, TSA airport scanners that peer under your clothing.
[53:35.000 --> 53:42.000]  When government employees demand a peep at your privates without probable cause, I say it's time to sound the constitutional alarm bells.
[53:42.000 --> 53:49.000]  Join me in asking our representatives to dust off the Bill of Rights and use their googly eyes to take a gander at the Fourth.
[53:49.000 --> 53:53.000]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht. More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[53:56.000 --> 54:01.000]  Yeah!
[54:01.000 --> 54:03.000]  They want to charge on Babylon.
[54:03.000 --> 54:05.000]  And burn down my whole nation.
[54:05.000 --> 54:08.000]  Both of them operate the land wrong.
[54:08.000 --> 54:11.000]  I'm a self-republican and they're a scratch man.
[54:11.000 --> 54:13.000]  Tell them I'm a libertarian.
[54:13.000 --> 54:15.000]  Them self-reliant to lose, but I'm going to win.
[54:15.000 --> 54:16.000]  Come rap, how are you?
[54:16.000 --> 54:19.000]  Child love, justice and peace.
[54:19.000 --> 54:22.000]  Child love rules this land.
[54:22.000 --> 54:23.000]  How are we set?
[54:23.000 --> 54:25.000]  Child for a worse system.
[54:25.000 --> 54:26.000]  I got me through them.
[54:26.000 --> 54:28.000]  Child down by you.
[54:28.000 --> 54:30.000]  One day you will.
[54:30.000 --> 54:32.000]  Child for justice and peace.
[54:32.000 --> 54:33.000]  Child for a worse system.
[54:33.000 --> 54:35.000]  Child love rules this land.
[54:35.000 --> 54:37.000]  How are we set?
[54:37.000 --> 54:39.000]  Child for a worse system.
[54:39.000 --> 54:41.000]  Child for a worse system.
[54:41.000 --> 54:45.000]  Okay, howdy, howdy, Randy Kelton, Brett Fountainwood Law Radio.
[54:45.000 --> 54:53.000]  On this Thursday, the second day of January 2025.
[54:53.000 --> 54:57.000]  Another year snuck past us, and we have a first-time caller.
[54:57.000 --> 55:00.000]  Joseph, Alex, we see you there.
[55:00.000 --> 55:02.000]  We will try to get to everybody.
[55:02.000 --> 55:04.000]  Let's see, we got one hour.
[55:04.000 --> 55:08.000]  Maybe, if not, if you call back tomorrow, if we don't get to you,
[55:08.000 --> 55:13.000]  we'll take you first tomorrow on our four-hour info marathon.
[55:13.000 --> 55:20.000]  Okay, we have someone in the 407 area code.
[55:20.000 --> 55:23.000]  470.
[55:23.000 --> 55:26.000]  Oh, 470, I was going to say that.
[55:26.000 --> 55:30.000]  If you're in the 470, give us a first name and a state.
[55:30.000 --> 55:35.000]  Hello.
[55:35.000 --> 55:37.000]  Hello.
[55:37.000 --> 55:40.000]  First name and a state.
[55:40.000 --> 55:43.000]  Steve, Georgia.
[55:43.000 --> 55:46.000]  Steve in Georgia.
[55:46.000 --> 55:51.000]  First question I have is I need to get the linguistics down.
[55:51.000 --> 55:54.000]  Steve, are you a hillbilly?
[55:54.000 --> 55:56.000]  No.
[55:56.000 --> 55:58.000]  You're not a hillbilly?
[55:58.000 --> 56:01.000]  It would be okay, because I speak hillbilly.
[56:01.000 --> 56:03.000]  I'm from Tennessee.
[56:03.000 --> 56:05.000]  Okay, enough screwing around.
[56:05.000 --> 56:09.000]  Okay, what do you have for us today?
[56:09.000 --> 56:18.000]  Okay, you were speaking upon the, I got something better in Betterman versus Montana,
[56:18.000 --> 56:24.000]  578 U.S. 437, 2016.
[56:24.000 --> 56:32.000]  That United States Supreme Court said the sole remedy for a violation of one's United
[56:32.000 --> 56:36.000]  States constitutional right to a speedy trout was to smelt the fish.
[56:36.000 --> 56:42.000]  The United States constitutional right to a speedy trout was to smell some of the charges
[56:42.000 --> 56:53.000]  because their written opinion, when an officer makes the arrest, that triggered the start
[56:53.000 --> 56:59.000]  of the clock, meaning for misdemeanors, it's 30 days to bring you to that United States
[56:59.000 --> 57:01.000]  constitutional right for a speedy trout.
[57:01.000 --> 57:03.000]  That all needs to be 70 days.
[57:03.000 --> 57:05.000]  Wait, wait, wait, hold on.
[57:05.000 --> 57:06.000]  30 days?
[57:06.000 --> 57:10.000]  The authorities and police departments are doing it across the country.
[57:10.000 --> 57:15.000]  They're letting the officers do UPL, unlawful practice of law.
[57:15.000 --> 57:18.000]  They're letting them arrest people without...
[57:18.000 --> 57:19.000]  Wait a minute, hold on, hold on.
[57:19.000 --> 57:21.000]  I'm getting lost here.
[57:21.000 --> 57:23.000]  Let's go back again.
[57:23.000 --> 57:25.000]  You started out with speedy trial.
[57:25.000 --> 57:26.000]  What year was that case?
[57:26.000 --> 57:29.000]  What was the case you cited?
[57:29.000 --> 57:33.000]  2016.
[57:33.000 --> 57:41.000]  And it's Betteman, B-E-T-T-E-R-M-A-N versus Montana.
[57:41.000 --> 57:43.000]  Montana.
[57:43.000 --> 57:45.000]  Yeah, I'm seeing that.
[57:45.000 --> 57:48.000]  What was the nature of the case?
[57:48.000 --> 57:51.000]  It's that Supreme Court, the United States Supreme Court.
[57:51.000 --> 57:55.000]  No, no, what was the nature of the case?
[57:55.000 --> 57:56.000]  What was it about?
[57:56.000 --> 57:58.000]  I'm just telling you, let me finish.
[57:58.000 --> 58:02.000]  You don't have to prove how they damaged you.
[58:02.000 --> 58:07.000]  It's already there for you in the United States Constitution.
[58:07.000 --> 58:11.000]  Your assertion, it's already there for you.
[58:11.000 --> 58:12.000]  So you don't have to...
[58:12.000 --> 58:13.000]  Okay, hold on.
[58:13.000 --> 58:20.000]  This seems to be clearly at odds with Barker Wingo.
[58:20.000 --> 58:22.000]  It was better.
[58:22.000 --> 58:23.000]  And Barker Wingo...
[58:23.000 --> 58:24.000]  It does sound better.
[58:24.000 --> 58:26.000]  Okay, let's get that.
[58:26.000 --> 58:29.000]  Betteman v. Montana.
[58:29.000 --> 58:30.000]  The case number.
[58:30.000 --> 58:33.000]  I'm seeing this.
[58:33.000 --> 58:36.000]  I'm seeing a summary here.
[58:36.000 --> 58:39.000]  Give me the case number so I can look it up.
[58:39.000 --> 58:42.000]  Oh, 537 U.S.
[58:42.000 --> 58:47.000]  I'm sorry, 578 U.S. 437.
[58:47.000 --> 58:50.000]  S437?
[58:50.000 --> 58:51.000]  Okay, good.
[58:51.000 --> 58:52.000]  That sounds great.
[58:52.000 --> 58:56.000]  Because Barker Wingo is a real problem.
[58:56.000 --> 59:06.000]  Barker Wingo caused a problem I don't think the feds intended when they ruled on Barker Wingo
[59:06.000 --> 59:17.000]  because the states picked up Barker Wingo and said that in order to be able to exercise your right to a speedy trial,
[59:17.000 --> 59:21.000]  you must timely demand one and you must show harm.
[59:21.000 --> 59:27.000]  So you're saying that...
[59:27.000 --> 59:29.000]  What was it?
[59:29.000 --> 59:33.000]  So in this Betteman v. Montana, Randy, it looks like they're saying,
[59:33.000 --> 59:43.000]  they're holding that the Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial automatically attaches at arrest
[59:43.000 --> 59:48.000]  or formal accusation and detaches upon conviction.
[59:48.000 --> 59:53.000]  So the formal arrest or the formal...
[59:53.000 --> 59:59.000]  I'm sorry, the arrest or the formal accusation makes that speedy trial clock start.
[59:59.000 --> 01:00:02.000]  And let me explain that quickly.
[01:00:02.000 --> 01:00:05.000]  You don't have to be arrested to be accused of a crime.
[01:00:05.000 --> 01:00:08.000]  If I go down to a magistrate and I say, that's no good.
[01:00:08.000 --> 01:00:12.000]  Scoundrel over here committed this crime, blah, blah, blah.
[01:00:12.000 --> 01:00:15.000]  And the judge looks at it and he determines that there's reasonable probable cause.
[01:00:15.000 --> 01:00:20.000]  And he issues a warrant for arrest.
[01:00:20.000 --> 01:00:27.000]  Then the prosecution has commenced even though you haven't been arrested.
[01:00:27.000 --> 01:00:32.000]  So it can commence without you actually being arrested.
[01:00:32.000 --> 01:00:33.000]  Otherwise...
[01:00:33.000 --> 01:00:36.000]  So they better make a probable cause determination real quick.
[01:00:36.000 --> 01:00:38.000]  Yeah, exactly.
[01:00:38.000 --> 01:00:41.000]  Okay, go ahead.
[01:00:41.000 --> 01:00:47.000]  Okay, so under betterment, this is for especially all y'all listeners out there,
[01:00:47.000 --> 01:00:58.000]  Alex, Brett, Randy, all y'all, Tina, Ted, Eric, everybody, Chris.
[01:00:58.000 --> 01:01:03.000]  When that betterment in case, when that officer arrests you,
[01:01:03.000 --> 01:01:09.000]  that triggers this clock right there, that 30-day time clock.
[01:01:09.000 --> 01:01:13.000]  They have to bring you in before a trial.
[01:01:13.000 --> 01:01:19.000]  Does this case specify 30 days?
[01:01:19.000 --> 01:01:20.000]  Okay, well, no.
[01:01:20.000 --> 01:01:27.000]  Okay, this is a Montana case.
[01:01:27.000 --> 01:01:32.000]  Is it speaking to Montana law or is it speaking to federal law?
[01:01:32.000 --> 01:01:36.000]  Supreme Court case with its law all across the country.
[01:01:36.000 --> 01:01:38.000]  So it's not just a state.
[01:01:38.000 --> 01:01:40.000]  No, no, no, no, no, no, no.
[01:01:40.000 --> 01:01:50.000]  Each state has defined what the state construes to be a speedy trial.
[01:01:50.000 --> 01:01:54.000]  And so we need to make sure we don't misconstrue that.
[01:01:54.000 --> 01:01:56.000]  We need to make sure that...
[01:01:56.000 --> 01:02:06.000]  Is the person being charged with a state or a felony or a federal claim?
[01:02:06.000 --> 01:02:08.000]  You have to read it like I just told you.
[01:02:08.000 --> 01:02:10.000]  We need to know what law applies.
[01:02:10.000 --> 01:02:12.000]  I know, I'm trying to finish.
[01:02:12.000 --> 01:02:17.000]  What I'm saying is you have officers committing UPL,
[01:02:17.000 --> 01:02:20.000]  which is unlawful practice of law because...
[01:02:20.000 --> 01:02:23.000]  No, no, don't know if you're going off on a tangent.
[01:02:23.000 --> 01:02:25.000]  They can't prefer charges.
[01:02:25.000 --> 01:02:28.000]  That's a separate issue.
[01:02:28.000 --> 01:02:37.000]  How long does a court in Montana have to bring you to trial?
[01:02:37.000 --> 01:02:42.000]  Is this case about Montana statute of limitations
[01:02:42.000 --> 01:02:47.000]  or I mean about Montana's speedy trial law
[01:02:47.000 --> 01:02:52.000]  or is it about the federal speedy trial law?
[01:02:52.000 --> 01:02:54.000]  I just told you three times.
[01:02:55.000 --> 01:02:57.000]  Mike?
[01:02:57.000 --> 01:03:00.000]  Mike James, is that you, Mike?
[01:03:00.000 --> 01:03:02.000]  It's federal.
[01:03:02.000 --> 01:03:04.000]  I know Mike when I hear him.
[01:03:04.000 --> 01:03:09.000]  Okay, what I'm getting at is he charged with a federal crime
[01:03:09.000 --> 01:03:14.000]  because we have to look to the law that applies.
[01:03:15.000 --> 01:03:20.000]  It also tells you to look at struck versus United States,
[01:03:20.000 --> 01:03:28.000]  412, US, 434, 440, 1973.
[01:03:28.000 --> 01:03:31.000]  Struck versus US, what state?
[01:03:31.000 --> 01:03:33.000]  Okay, that's federal.
[01:03:33.000 --> 01:03:37.000]  For misdemeanors, which is 30 days,
[01:03:37.000 --> 01:03:39.000]  and for felons it's 70 days,
[01:03:39.000 --> 01:03:43.000]  when they don't bring you in before your right to that trial,
[01:03:43.000 --> 01:03:45.000]  Hold on, hold on.
[01:03:45.000 --> 01:03:47.000]  Is in struck versus US,
[01:03:47.000 --> 01:03:51.000]  is he being charged with a federal crime or a state crime?
[01:03:55.000 --> 01:04:00.000]  You have to know what we're dealing with here to know what law applies.
[01:04:00.000 --> 01:04:03.000]  Okay, I guess the betterment versus Montana.
[01:04:03.000 --> 01:04:05.000]  Read it, 578, US, 437.
[01:04:05.000 --> 01:04:07.000]  Betterment is Montana.
[01:04:07.000 --> 01:04:10.000]  What state is struck versus US in?
[01:04:10.000 --> 01:04:14.000]  Stated that the sole remedy for a violation of the Speedy Trial right
[01:04:14.000 --> 01:04:16.000]  is dismissal of the charges.
[01:04:16.000 --> 01:04:21.000]  You're not giving us enough information to understand what you're talking about.
[01:04:21.000 --> 01:04:26.000]  In Betterment versus Montana, since it's Montana,
[01:04:26.000 --> 01:04:33.000]  excuse me, I'm assuming Betterment was arrested under Montana law.
[01:04:34.000 --> 01:04:42.000]  Under struck versus US, is struck being arrested under federal law,
[01:04:42.000 --> 01:04:49.000]  as opposed to Betterment versus Montana being arrested under Montana law.
[01:04:49.000 --> 01:04:54.000]  It's the pre-conviction focus of the due process clause.
[01:04:54.000 --> 01:04:56.000]  When I'm trying to get the point here-
[01:04:56.000 --> 01:04:59.000]  You're not answering my question, you're dodging me.
[01:04:59.000 --> 01:05:03.000]  All across the state, officers are arresting people
[01:05:03.000 --> 01:05:06.000]  without having the authority to arrest people
[01:05:06.000 --> 01:05:08.000]  because they're not licensed.
[01:05:08.000 --> 01:05:11.000]  The authority to arrest is a different issue.
[01:05:11.000 --> 01:05:14.000]  There's a thousand different issues we can argue,
[01:05:14.000 --> 01:05:17.000]  but if we just start throwing issues in a basket,
[01:05:17.000 --> 01:05:20.000]  it just gets mixed up.
[01:05:20.000 --> 01:05:23.000]  We don't know what the heck we're talking about.
[01:05:23.000 --> 01:05:26.000]  Okay, Betterment v. Montana.
[01:05:26.000 --> 01:05:28.000]  What was he charged with?
[01:05:29.000 --> 01:05:31.000]  Read it.
[01:05:31.000 --> 01:05:33.000]  I don't have time to read it on a radio show.
[01:05:33.000 --> 01:05:35.000]  Are you kidding?
[01:05:35.000 --> 01:05:37.000]  You're the one that brought it up.
[01:05:37.000 --> 01:05:39.000]  Tomorrow night, after you read it tonight,
[01:05:39.000 --> 01:05:41.000]  we can bring it up tomorrow and say-
[01:05:41.000 --> 01:05:43.000]  Don't bring it up here on the radio show.
[01:05:43.000 --> 01:05:48.000]  We've got everybody listening and you don't even know what it's about.
[01:05:48.000 --> 01:05:52.000]  How do we determine if in Betterment v. Montana,
[01:05:52.000 --> 01:05:58.000]  the federal court is talking about the application of Montana law?
[01:05:58.000 --> 01:06:03.000]  Or are they talking about the application of federal law?
[01:06:03.000 --> 01:06:05.000]  How many times do I have to tell you?
[01:06:05.000 --> 01:06:06.000]  Ten times.
[01:06:06.000 --> 01:06:07.000]  It's federal.
[01:06:07.000 --> 01:06:11.000]  It's United States Supreme Court federal.
[01:06:11.000 --> 01:06:14.000]  It is a United States court,
[01:06:14.000 --> 01:06:19.000]  but is the court ruling on the application of federal law
[01:06:19.000 --> 01:06:22.000]  to a citizen of Montana?
[01:06:22.000 --> 01:06:28.000]  Or is it ruling on Montana's application of Montana law
[01:06:28.000 --> 01:06:30.000]  to a Montana citizen?
[01:06:33.000 --> 01:06:38.000]  Montana can improperly apply their law to a citizen
[01:06:38.000 --> 01:06:40.000]  that would violate a federal law.
[01:06:40.000 --> 01:06:43.000]  Steve, are you understanding what Randy is saying?
[01:06:43.000 --> 01:06:47.000]  Because you seem to feel like you've been saying things over and over,
[01:06:47.000 --> 01:06:49.000]  but all you do is you're not hearing,
[01:06:49.000 --> 01:06:51.000]  you're not responding to what Randy's saying.
[01:06:51.000 --> 01:06:54.000]  Do you understand the distinction he's making?
[01:06:57.000 --> 01:07:00.000]  We've got to know what we're dealing with.
[01:07:00.000 --> 01:07:03.000]  This is what we're talking about with Eric.
[01:07:03.000 --> 01:07:09.000]  Eric went to the feds because the state of Massachusetts
[01:07:09.000 --> 01:07:14.000]  was improperly applying their law.
[01:07:14.000 --> 01:07:19.000]  Okay, the courts were acting in violation
[01:07:19.000 --> 01:07:23.000]  of the legislative pronouncements.
[01:07:23.000 --> 01:07:26.000]  So you're at the top court in Massachusetts.
[01:07:26.000 --> 01:07:29.000]  There's no higher place to go in Massachusetts,
[01:07:29.000 --> 01:07:31.000]  but the top court in Massachusetts
[01:07:31.000 --> 01:07:36.000]  is improperly applying Massachusetts law.
[01:07:36.000 --> 01:07:38.000]  So where's your remedy?
[01:07:38.000 --> 01:07:41.000]  Now you have to get out of Massachusetts
[01:07:41.000 --> 01:07:43.000]  and go up to the feds.
[01:07:43.000 --> 01:07:45.000]  That's what I'm asking here.
[01:07:45.000 --> 01:07:51.000]  Is Montana improperly applying Montana law
[01:07:51.000 --> 01:07:55.000]  to a veteran in a way?
[01:07:56.000 --> 01:07:59.000]  Are you looking to have a closer relationship with God
[01:07:59.000 --> 01:08:01.000]  and a better understanding of His Word?
[01:08:01.000 --> 01:08:04.000]  Then tune in to LogosRadioNetwork.com on Wednesdays
[01:08:04.000 --> 01:08:07.000]  from 8 to 10 p.m. Central Time for Scripture Talk,
[01:08:07.000 --> 01:08:10.000]  where Nana and her guests discuss the Scriptures
[01:08:10.000 --> 01:08:13.000]  in accord with 2 Timothy 2.15.
[01:08:13.000 --> 01:08:15.000]  Study to show thyself approved unto God,
[01:08:15.000 --> 01:08:17.000]  a workman that needeth not to be ashamed,
[01:08:17.000 --> 01:08:20.000]  rightly dividing the word of truth.
[01:08:20.000 --> 01:08:22.000]  Starting in January, our first hour studies
[01:08:22.000 --> 01:08:25.000]  are in the Book of Mark, where we'll go verse by verse
[01:08:25.000 --> 01:08:27.000]  and discuss the true gospel message.
[01:08:27.000 --> 01:08:30.000]  Our second hour topical studies will vary each week
[01:08:30.000 --> 01:08:32.000]  with discussions on sound doctrine
[01:08:32.000 --> 01:08:34.000]  and Christian character development.
[01:08:34.000 --> 01:08:36.000]  We wish to reflect God's light
[01:08:36.000 --> 01:08:39.000]  and be a blessing to all those with a hearing ear.
[01:08:39.000 --> 01:08:41.000]  Our goal is to strengthen our faith
[01:08:41.000 --> 01:08:43.000]  and to transform ourselves more into the likeness
[01:08:43.000 --> 01:08:45.000]  of our Lord and Savior Jesus.
[01:08:45.000 --> 01:08:49.000]  So tune in to Scripture Talk live on LogosRadioNetwork.com
[01:08:49.000 --> 01:08:51.000]  Wednesdays from 8 to 10 p.m.
[01:08:51.000 --> 01:08:55.000]  to inspire and motivate your studies of the Scriptures.
[01:08:56.000 --> 01:08:58.000]  Are you being harassed by debt collectors
[01:08:58.000 --> 01:09:01.000]  with phone calls, letters, or even lawsuits?
[01:09:01.000 --> 01:09:05.000]  Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Mears proven method.
[01:09:05.000 --> 01:09:07.000]  Michael Mears has won 6 cases in federal court
[01:09:07.000 --> 01:09:10.000]  against debt collectors, and now you can win, too.
[01:09:10.000 --> 01:09:13.000]  You'll get step-by-step instructions in plain English
[01:09:13.000 --> 01:09:16.000]  on how to win in court using federal civil rights statutes,
[01:09:16.000 --> 01:09:20.000]  what to do when contacted by phone, mail, or court summons,
[01:09:20.000 --> 01:09:22.000]  how to answer letters and phone calls,
[01:09:22.000 --> 01:09:25.000]  how to get debt collectors out of your credit report,
[01:09:25.000 --> 01:09:27.000]  how to turn the financial tables on them
[01:09:27.000 --> 01:09:29.000]  and make them pay you to go away.
[01:09:29.000 --> 01:09:32.000]  The Michael Mears proven method is the solution
[01:09:32.000 --> 01:09:34.000]  for how to stop debt collectors.
[01:09:34.000 --> 01:09:36.000]  Personal consultation is available as well.
[01:09:36.000 --> 01:09:40.000]  For more information, please visit RuleOfLawRadio.com
[01:09:40.000 --> 01:09:42.000]  and click on the blue Michael Mears banner
[01:09:42.000 --> 01:09:45.000]  or email MichaelMears at yahoo.com.
[01:09:45.000 --> 01:09:47.000]  That's RuleOfLawRadio.com
[01:09:47.000 --> 01:09:53.000]  or email m-i-c-h-a-e-l-m-i-r-r-a-s at yahoo.com
[01:09:53.000 --> 01:09:55.000]  to learn how to stop debt collectors now.
[01:09:55.000 --> 01:10:02.000]  This is the Logos Logos Radio Network.
[01:10:26.000 --> 01:10:31.000]  Ain't gonna fool me with that same old trick again
[01:10:31.000 --> 01:10:36.000]  I was blindsided but now I can see your plan
[01:10:36.000 --> 01:10:39.000]  You put the fear in my pockets
[01:10:39.000 --> 01:10:41.000]  Took the money from my hand
[01:10:41.000 --> 01:10:47.000]  Ain't gonna fool me with that same old trick again
[01:10:48.000 --> 01:10:52.000]  Ain't gonna...
[01:11:06.000 --> 01:11:11.000]  Ain't gonna drive me with that same old sucker punch
[01:11:11.000 --> 01:11:33.260]  So Thursday, the second day of January 2005, our first show of the year, we're talking
[01:11:33.260 --> 01:11:34.260]  to Steve and George.
[01:11:34.260 --> 01:11:35.260]  Did you say 2005?
[01:11:35.260 --> 01:11:40.400]  Well, I was going to say, I mean, I know time flies.
[01:11:40.920 --> 01:11:42.000]  Yeah, but I'm old.
[01:11:42.000 --> 01:11:45.440]  I remember 2005 like it was yesterday.
[01:11:45.920 --> 01:11:49.840]  2025, I stand corrected.
[01:11:50.800 --> 01:11:53.280]  I made a mistake first time.
[01:11:53.960 --> 01:11:54.320]  Okay.
[01:11:54.440 --> 01:11:59.760]  We're talking to Steve in Georgia and Steve, you remind me somebody else I know.
[01:11:59.760 --> 01:12:14.280]  We get people calling in and, I have a cold and it's smothered me.
[01:12:17.560 --> 01:12:19.200]  That's what happens when you get old.
[01:12:20.440 --> 01:12:25.360]  I didn't, then when some people call in and you get what they're saying stuck in
[01:12:25.360 --> 01:12:34.880]  your car, but I hadn't had my first cold of the year.
[01:12:36.400 --> 01:12:38.040]  First day of the year.
[01:12:38.040 --> 01:12:42.160]  So I guess it's appropriate, but we had this guy, Mike, he keeps calling in and he
[01:12:42.160 --> 01:12:45.800]  kind of misinterpreted what he said.
[01:12:45.800 --> 01:12:55.320]  He would read cases that were specific on a specific issue and then try to generalize
[01:12:55.320 --> 01:12:58.560]  them over much larger issues.
[01:13:00.240 --> 01:13:03.440]  So, and that's why I'm not trying to be pedantic.
[01:13:04.360 --> 01:13:08.640]  I'm just trying to make sure we're both talking about the same thing.
[01:13:10.120 --> 01:13:11.360]  Does that make sense, Steve?
[01:13:17.800 --> 01:13:18.480]  There Steve.
[01:13:20.000 --> 01:13:20.680]  Do we lose him?
[01:13:20.680 --> 01:13:24.440]  Do we lose you?
[01:13:28.440 --> 01:13:29.480]  It's like Steve.
[01:13:31.280 --> 01:13:33.160]  Oh, well, that's not good.
[01:13:33.200 --> 01:13:34.160]  Okay.
[01:13:35.040 --> 01:13:36.000]  Uh, let's see.
[01:13:36.000 --> 01:13:41.120]  How many, we've got 22, we've got three segments.
[01:13:41.120 --> 01:13:42.640]  We've only got one caller left.
[01:13:42.640 --> 01:13:48.040]  It's, well, Steve, maybe Steve is just, uh, eating a beer or something.
[01:13:48.520 --> 01:13:50.720]  Uh, we'll hang a, we'll try them a little bit later.
[01:13:50.720 --> 01:13:51.840]  Maybe he'll get back.
[01:13:52.560 --> 01:13:57.040]  Uh, let's go to Alex in California.
[01:13:57.040 --> 01:13:57.960]  Hello, Alex.
[01:13:59.160 --> 01:14:02.600]  Hi, Randy and happy new year.
[01:14:03.880 --> 01:14:12.840]  Before you start, do you understand what my problem with the problem with Steve was?
[01:14:13.640 --> 01:14:14.320]  Am I clear?
[01:14:14.320 --> 01:14:20.880]  No, I did not, because I didn't fully listen because I was doing some other stuff.
[01:14:22.120 --> 01:14:24.640]  While, and I, oh my goodness.
[01:14:24.640 --> 01:14:26.520]  She wasn't hanging on her every word.
[01:14:27.160 --> 01:14:29.320]  Oh, I'm devastated.
[01:14:31.080 --> 01:14:32.720]  Cut me to the quick.
[01:14:33.920 --> 01:14:40.960]  I thought everybody put my every word except my wife over each other a few times.
[01:14:41.000 --> 01:14:43.760]  And that was very, it was kind of on calm.
[01:14:43.760 --> 01:14:46.480]  So I kind of pulled it down a little bit.
[01:14:47.320 --> 01:14:56.240]  Problems with taking a case in one context and trying to apply it to a different context.
[01:14:56.840 --> 01:15:02.280]  So I was struggling to get, you know, he referenced a case, Ederman B.
[01:15:02.280 --> 01:15:05.800]  Montana, which is really cool.
[01:15:05.800 --> 01:15:06.880]  I'm glad he brought that up.
[01:15:07.360 --> 01:15:11.000]  And the thing is, he was referencing that another case and Randy was asking
[01:15:11.040 --> 01:15:14.480]  him about with what was going on in that case.
[01:15:14.480 --> 01:15:21.400]  Was it about state rights to a speedy trial or federal rights to a speedy trial?
[01:15:22.480 --> 01:15:29.320]  And so, you know, Steve just kept on insisting that because, well, it was heard in a federal court.
[01:15:29.320 --> 01:15:34.520]  I keep telling you it was heard in a federal court, but that doesn't necessarily mean that
[01:15:34.520 --> 01:15:37.720]  the federal court was addressing a federal issue.
[01:15:37.720 --> 01:15:39.800]  It might've been addressing a state issue.
[01:15:40.280 --> 01:15:44.120]  So that was the clarification that Randy was asking for.
[01:15:44.120 --> 01:15:46.320]  And I think Steve just couldn't understand it.
[01:15:48.120 --> 01:15:56.120]  Oh, you know, a lot of times people, people are rather inferring and, and, and guessing
[01:15:56.120 --> 01:16:00.760]  and instead of listening precisely to the words that are spoken.
[01:16:01.600 --> 01:16:04.840]  And that could have been the issue.
[01:16:05.880 --> 01:16:06.600]  Very true.
[01:16:07.120 --> 01:16:09.240]  And that you are dead on point.
[01:16:09.800 --> 01:16:20.000]  Often when we're looking for an answer, we try to, we unintentionally read into what
[01:16:20.000 --> 01:16:24.800]  we're seeing the, what we want to find.
[01:16:26.720 --> 01:16:28.440]  And that's a, that's a mental discipline.
[01:16:28.480 --> 01:16:39.360]  That is exactly what I was trying to get to with Steve is, are you talking about what
[01:16:39.360 --> 01:16:40.600]  you want to find?
[01:16:40.600 --> 01:16:43.400]  Are we talking about what's actually in there?
[01:16:44.200 --> 01:16:46.880]  You're talking about Vetterman v.
[01:16:46.880 --> 01:16:49.800]  Montana and Struck v.
[01:16:49.800 --> 01:16:50.680]  U.S.
[01:16:51.280 --> 01:16:52.160]  Well, Vetterman v.
[01:16:52.160 --> 01:16:58.160]  Montana appears as though it's talking about the application of state law to Vetterman.
[01:16:58.960 --> 01:16:59.640]  And Struck v.
[01:16:59.640 --> 01:17:05.480]  U.S. appears as though it's talking about federal law as applied to Struck.
[01:17:07.000 --> 01:17:13.120]  And I'm trying to get him to be very, very careful in how he reads these things.
[01:17:13.120 --> 01:17:22.480]  So he reads them based on what they are actually saying, as opposed to what he wants them to
[01:17:22.480 --> 01:17:23.200]  be saying.
[01:17:24.320 --> 01:17:24.840]  Yeah.
[01:17:24.880 --> 01:17:34.200]  And I bring that up because I am very familiar with that, because I am prone to that myself.
[01:17:35.760 --> 01:17:37.240]  That's how I know about it.
[01:17:38.600 --> 01:17:43.520]  And it is a discipline we have to exercise if we are to be effective.
[01:17:43.920 --> 01:17:51.960]  And you have demonstrated that you are especially good at making those distinctions.
[01:17:52.960 --> 01:17:55.600]  I'm actually very good at that.
[01:17:55.600 --> 01:17:57.880]  Like, I'm very, very literal.
[01:17:57.880 --> 01:18:06.080]  And that's why, actually, I'm faced with the majority of the people who are not.
[01:18:07.000 --> 01:18:13.680]  So a lot of times it frustrates me because they're rather mind reading and guessing
[01:18:13.680 --> 01:18:20.360]  and assuming instead of just listening to what's coming out of my mouth.
[01:18:20.560 --> 01:18:23.120]  And so that sometimes is a little bit frustrating.
[01:18:23.120 --> 01:18:25.120]  But I think it's best to be a man.
[01:18:25.120 --> 01:18:27.320]  So what is your advice to Steve?
[01:18:28.200 --> 01:18:35.920]  How does he adjust his behavior so that he's more able to listen to what he, to pay attention
[01:18:35.920 --> 01:18:44.960]  to what he's actually seeing, as opposed to taking what he's reading and trying to stuff
[01:18:44.960 --> 01:18:47.800]  it into what he wants it to read?
[01:18:48.760 --> 01:18:53.760]  Well, if that's what he's doing, it seems like he didn't even get the distinction
[01:18:53.760 --> 01:18:59.200]  because you kept asking him and trying to rephrase your question for him.
[01:18:59.760 --> 01:19:06.520]  And his answer kept coming back, insisting, I've already told you ten times.
[01:19:07.040 --> 01:19:13.200]  Well, he's not saying anything in there that gives an answer to the question.
[01:19:13.720 --> 01:19:21.600]  I know, and for me and for Brett and I as radio talk shows, it's kind of our job to
[01:19:21.600 --> 01:19:30.120]  figure out how to get past those kinds of patterns of people that lead them to bad outcomes.
[01:19:31.320 --> 01:19:38.880]  I don't expect Steve to be a sophisticated in linguistics.
[01:19:40.720 --> 01:19:43.120]  We're radio talk shows, that's our job.
[01:19:44.200 --> 01:19:51.240]  Yeah, if you get the feeling that this is what's happening, what if you slow down,
[01:19:51.680 --> 01:20:03.800]  slow down, make him give you your full attention 100% and ask him, please listen to my
[01:20:03.800 --> 01:20:09.520]  question precisely, each word after the other, very, very precisely, because that's the
[01:20:09.520 --> 01:20:11.000]  best way I can help you.
[01:20:11.240 --> 01:20:13.920]  You called in, you would like some advice.
[01:20:13.960 --> 01:20:22.240]  I want to give you that advice, but I need you to give me your full attention so you
[01:20:22.240 --> 01:20:24.880]  can receive what I'm about to give you.
[01:20:27.320 --> 01:20:33.320]  This is a struggle we have doing radio because we have people calling in with issues that
[01:20:33.320 --> 01:20:40.680]  are very important to them and they have dealt with quite a while and have a very
[01:20:41.480 --> 01:20:44.800]  powerful, emotional investment in.
[01:20:46.200 --> 01:20:52.280]  And then they call us in and we just flippantly say, oh, that's crap and all that.
[01:20:52.600 --> 01:20:54.160]  Throw all that out and do something different.
[01:20:58.160 --> 01:21:04.360]  Reality TV, sugar, obesity, jet lag, the list of things that makes us dumber just keeps
[01:21:04.360 --> 01:21:08.240]  on growing. But now researchers say we can add stress to the list.
[01:21:08.520 --> 01:21:11.400]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, back with details in a moment.
[01:21:11.960 --> 01:21:13.760]  Privacy is under attack.
[01:21:14.080 --> 01:21:17.480]  When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[01:21:17.680 --> 01:21:22.120]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish, too.
[01:21:22.680 --> 01:21:27.800]  So protect your rights, say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself.
[01:21:28.000 --> 01:21:30.240]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[01:21:30.440 --> 01:21:35.600]  This message is brought to you by Startpage.com, the private search engine alternative to
[01:21:35.600 --> 01:21:37.280]  Google, Yahoo and Bing.
[01:21:37.560 --> 01:21:39.680]  Start over with Startpage.
[01:21:41.400 --> 01:21:44.280]  Are you always on the go and juggling multiple projects?
[01:21:44.400 --> 01:21:47.840]  If so, you might think that multitasking proves you're smart.
[01:21:48.080 --> 01:21:51.560]  But think again, all that stress might be eating your brain.
[01:21:52.080 --> 01:21:56.320]  A new study finds stress reduces the number of connections between neurons, which
[01:21:56.320 --> 01:21:59.240]  actually makes it harder for people to manage problems.
[01:21:59.800 --> 01:22:04.240]  Researchers at Yale University found that stressed out people have less gray matter
[01:22:04.240 --> 01:22:05.880]  in their prefrontal cortex.
[01:22:06.200 --> 01:22:10.280]  That's the part of the brain that helps us weigh conflicting ideas and regulate our
[01:22:10.280 --> 01:22:13.640]  emotions. So take a deep breath and chill out.
[01:22:13.720 --> 01:22:16.320]  It'll help keep your mind as sharp as a tack.
[01:22:16.960 --> 01:22:21.640]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht for Startpage.com, the world's most private search engine.
[01:22:26.680 --> 01:22:32.160]  This is Building 7, a 47-story skyscraper that fell on the afternoon of September 11.
[01:22:32.160 --> 01:22:34.000]  The government says that fire brought it down.
[01:22:34.040 --> 01:22:39.200]  However, 1,500 architects and engineers concluded it was a controlled demolition.
[01:22:39.200 --> 01:22:42.000]  Over 6,000 of my fellow service members have given their lives.
[01:22:42.000 --> 01:22:44.680]  And thousands of my fellow first responders are dying.
[01:22:44.760 --> 01:22:46.240]  I'm not a conspiracy theorist.
[01:22:46.240 --> 01:22:47.120]  I'm a structural engineer.
[01:22:47.120 --> 01:22:48.600]  I'm a New York City correction officer.
[01:22:48.600 --> 01:22:49.600]  I'm an Air Force pilot.
[01:22:49.600 --> 01:22:51.200]  I'm a father who lost his son.
[01:22:51.200 --> 01:22:53.760]  We're Americans and we deserve the truth.
[01:22:53.800 --> 01:22:56.600]  Go to RememberBuilding7.org today.
[01:22:58.400 --> 01:23:01.400]  Rule of Law Radio is proud to offer the rule of law traffic seminar.
[01:23:01.520 --> 01:23:03.840]  In today's America, we live in an us-against-them society.
[01:23:03.840 --> 01:23:07.000]  And if we, the people, are ever going to have a free society, then we're going to have to
[01:23:07.000 --> 01:23:08.800]  stand and defend our own rights.
[01:23:09.040 --> 01:23:12.320]  Among those rights are the right to travel freely from place to place, the right to act
[01:23:12.320 --> 01:23:15.840]  in our own private capacity, and most importantly, the right to due process of law.
[01:23:16.000 --> 01:23:19.800]  Traffic courts afford us the least expensive opportunity to learn how to enforce and
[01:23:19.800 --> 01:23:21.560]  preserve our rights through due process.
[01:23:21.840 --> 01:23:25.160]  Former Sheriff's Deputy Eddie Craig, in conjunction with Rule of Law Radio, has put
[01:23:25.160 --> 01:23:28.480]  together the most comprehensive teaching tool available that will help you understand
[01:23:28.480 --> 01:23:31.320]  what due process is and how to hold courts to the rule of law.
[01:23:31.640 --> 01:23:35.720]  You can get your own copy of this invaluable material by going to ruleoflawradio.com and
[01:23:35.760 --> 01:23:36.880]  ordering your copy today.
[01:23:36.960 --> 01:23:40.240]  By ordering now, you'll receive a copy of Eddie's book, The Texas Transportation Code,
[01:23:40.400 --> 01:23:44.480]  The Law Versus the Lie, video and audio of the original 2009 seminar, hundreds of
[01:23:44.480 --> 01:23:46.840]  research documents and other useful resource material.
[01:23:47.000 --> 01:23:49.360]  Learn how to fight for your rights with the help of this material from
[01:23:49.360 --> 01:23:50.600]  ruleoflawradio.com.
[01:23:50.920 --> 01:23:54.960]  Order your copy today and together we can have the free society we all want and deserve.
[01:23:58.280 --> 01:24:00.520]  You are listening to the Logos Radio Network.
[01:24:00.520 --> 01:24:03.280]  Logosradionetwork.com.
[01:24:30.520 --> 01:24:48.600]  OK, we are back, Randy Shelton, Bret Fountain, Rule of Law Radio, talking to Alex in California.
[01:24:48.920 --> 01:24:57.240]  OK, Alex, and I apologize for using you, but you were especially appropriate at this time.
[01:24:58.200 --> 01:25:07.160]  Because in dealing with you for the time we have, you're very good at being focused and on point.
[01:25:08.600 --> 01:25:15.480]  And when we kind of hammer you on your issues, you really pay attention and you respond well.
[01:25:17.240 --> 01:25:18.680]  So thank you for that.
[01:25:19.480 --> 01:25:23.320]  OK, what do you have for us today?
[01:25:24.280 --> 01:25:36.840]  I was wondering, OK, so you mentioned in the past that the oath of office is a possibly a contract.
[01:25:37.080 --> 01:25:44.280]  And you are thinking about if it's not followed, it might be a breach of contract.
[01:25:44.840 --> 01:25:52.120]  And I was trying to figure out if I can approach that avenue.
[01:25:52.120 --> 01:25:58.520]  So I was looking into what are the elements of a contract and what is to prove for.
[01:25:58.520 --> 01:26:02.440]  OK, OK, have you looked at the uniformed commercial code?
[01:26:07.240 --> 01:26:09.240]  I guess no, I have.
[01:26:09.240 --> 01:26:10.440]  OK, hold on.
[01:26:10.440 --> 01:26:12.440]  I've been doing this for a long time.
[01:26:12.520 --> 01:26:20.360]  And we have all these hatred mythologists and not so much now, but about 10 or 15 years ago,
[01:26:20.360 --> 01:26:27.640]  they used to come in and do all this song and dance and seltzer down your pants about the uniformed commercial code.
[01:26:28.360 --> 01:26:35.320]  They were trying to take the uniformed commercial code and juxtapose it onto criminal law.
[01:26:35.720 --> 01:26:45.880]  And we struggled for years to get them to cut that nonsense out, that criminal law was different than commercial law.
[01:26:47.240 --> 01:26:51.240]  However, commercial law is still there.
[01:26:52.360 --> 01:26:55.320]  And what you're dealing with is commercial law.
[01:26:56.680 --> 01:26:59.800]  Now the uniformed commercial code is appropriate.
[01:27:00.440 --> 01:27:04.920]  And the uniformed commercial code clearly defines what is a contract.
[01:27:04.920 --> 01:27:08.920]  And it is uniformed commercial code is contract law.
[01:27:08.920 --> 01:27:20.920]  So while we were kind of jaded against the uniformed commercial code, because everybody's trying to bring in the uniformed commercial code into places it doesn't belong.
[01:27:20.920 --> 01:27:22.920]  You're at absolute loss.
[01:27:23.400 --> 01:27:27.800]  Because everybody's trying to bring in the uniformed commercial code into places it doesn't belong.
[01:27:29.000 --> 01:27:31.000]  Here it absolutely belongs.
[01:27:34.280 --> 01:27:36.440]  Contract is not a contract.
[01:27:37.480 --> 01:27:45.800]  Absent a meeting of the minds, a contract is not created until something of value changes hands.
[01:27:47.000 --> 01:27:51.720]  When something of value changes hands, a contract is created.
[01:27:51.720 --> 01:28:03.640]  All of these guys were, during the foreclosure crisis, they were saying that since the lender did not sign the contract, it wasn't a contract.
[01:28:04.840 --> 01:28:06.840]  Yeah, it was.
[01:28:06.840 --> 01:28:08.840]  The lender provided value.
[01:28:10.360 --> 01:28:15.800]  The only one who needed to sign the contract was the one who agreed to pay it back.
[01:28:16.840 --> 01:28:20.760]  Once something of value changes hands, a contract is created.
[01:28:21.800 --> 01:28:23.800]  Read the commercial code.
[01:28:25.160 --> 01:28:28.520]  It is powerful in these kinds of circumstances.
[01:28:29.640 --> 01:28:31.640]  Okay, I'll shut up now on that.
[01:28:31.640 --> 01:28:33.640]  Okay, back where we were.
[01:28:33.640 --> 01:28:44.840]  Yeah, so I have five to seven elements that define the existence of a contract, and I didn't pull them out of the UCC.
[01:28:45.400 --> 01:28:54.280]  So are you saying, if you would argue that, how would you argue to the court that the oath is actually a contract under the UCC?
[01:28:56.280 --> 01:29:03.320]  The first thing that there must be in a contract is there must be a meeting of minds.
[01:29:06.280 --> 01:29:13.000]  Once there is a meeting of minds, then something of value must change hands.
[01:29:15.800 --> 01:29:24.120]  The meeting of minds is the specifications of the contract itself, like in a mortgage issue.
[01:29:24.120 --> 01:29:26.120]  You have a note.
[01:29:27.320 --> 01:29:39.960]  In the note, you agree to pay the lender X amount of dollars at Y amount of interest for Z amount of years.
[01:29:40.920 --> 01:29:54.520]  In a constitutional situation, somebody says that he is going to be elected, and he's going to have this responsibility and that responsibility laid out just the same way.
[01:29:55.640 --> 01:29:57.640]  So there must be a meeting of minds.
[01:29:58.600 --> 01:30:07.400]  The borrower agrees to pay the lender in return for the property.
[01:30:07.400 --> 01:30:12.200]  You signed the property over to me, put it in my name.
[01:30:13.480 --> 01:30:22.520]  If you do that, I agree to pay you this much money at this interest over this period.
[01:30:23.480 --> 01:30:27.480]  Now that is the meeting of minds.
[01:30:27.480 --> 01:30:34.120]  We had all these people say, well, the contract is not a contract because the lender did not sign the contract.
[01:30:34.920 --> 01:30:40.200]  The lender doesn't need to sign the contract because the lender provided value.
[01:30:41.720 --> 01:30:48.120]  Or people balk at it because, oh my goodness, there's no such thing as money, so the lender didn't produce anything.
[01:30:48.120 --> 01:30:56.360]  The lender provided the deed to the property, the warranty deed.
[01:30:57.560 --> 01:31:05.400]  The lender agreed to trade you the warranty deed for your agreement to pay over a certain amount of time.
[01:31:05.400 --> 01:31:07.240]  The lender didn't need to sign anything.
[01:31:09.400 --> 01:31:14.840]  You needed to sign because you did not put anything of value in the contract.
[01:31:15.800 --> 01:31:21.320]  So you needed to sign agreeing to put something of value back into the contract.
[01:31:21.320 --> 01:31:22.760]  There must be a meeting of minds.
[01:31:23.800 --> 01:31:26.920]  Something of value must change hands.
[01:31:30.440 --> 01:31:33.640]  So I got someone who wants to be a public official.
[01:31:35.240 --> 01:31:37.400]  Okay, you want to be a public official.
[01:31:38.280 --> 01:31:39.400]  Here's my contract.
[01:31:39.400 --> 01:31:41.000]  You agree to these things.
[01:31:41.000 --> 01:31:46.520]  And once you sign agreeing to these things, then for your services rendered,
[01:31:46.520 --> 01:31:58.040]  our governmental entity will create this check and give it to you, and you can deposit it in your bank.
[01:31:58.040 --> 01:32:04.840]  When you deposit the first check in your bank, the contract is created.
[01:32:05.240 --> 01:32:12.440]  How did I, the woman named Alex, do that part of the contract?
[01:32:12.440 --> 01:32:17.240]  How can I prove that I agree?
[01:32:17.240 --> 01:32:18.760]  Wait, wait, wait, wait, hold on, hold on.
[01:32:18.760 --> 01:32:23.320]  This is a contract between, you are not a party to this contract.
[01:32:24.200 --> 01:32:27.000]  We're saying a contract is created.
[01:32:27.000 --> 01:32:30.120]  You are not a party to this contract.
[01:32:31.000 --> 01:32:35.000]  We're saying a contract is created.
[01:32:36.120 --> 01:32:44.040]  A contract is created when a public official swears on his oath, he will do this certain thing.
[01:32:44.600 --> 01:32:46.040]  That's the meeting of minds.
[01:32:47.400 --> 01:32:54.040]  And based on your swearing on this oath, we agree to pay you this amount of money
[01:32:54.920 --> 01:32:56.280]  for your services.
[01:32:56.280 --> 01:32:57.320]  That's the contract.
[01:32:58.280 --> 01:33:05.080]  Then when you receive that first remuneration, contract is created.
[01:33:06.040 --> 01:33:07.800]  You're not a party to that contract.
[01:33:08.920 --> 01:33:16.120]  That's a contract between the individual and this fictional entity called the state.
[01:33:17.400 --> 01:33:23.640]  However, you are the intended third party beneficiary of the contract.
[01:33:23.720 --> 01:33:28.120]  You are the only beneficiary of the contract.
[01:33:28.120 --> 01:33:34.760]  You are the only one that has standing to raise an issue as to a breach of the contract.
[01:33:36.040 --> 01:33:37.640]  Now that makes sense now.
[01:33:37.640 --> 01:33:40.920]  Okay, so if I'm the third party beneficiary of the contract,
[01:33:41.720 --> 01:33:48.040]  by I guess construed because I happen to be here in this jurisdiction.
[01:33:48.040 --> 01:33:56.120]  So the contract says that I agree to abide by the constitution and uphold the laws.
[01:33:57.720 --> 01:34:02.360]  And the constitution and the laws are structured to your benefit.
[01:34:03.080 --> 01:34:04.120]  Yeah, we the people.
[01:34:05.560 --> 01:34:07.400]  So he's agreed to that.
[01:34:08.200 --> 01:34:09.640]  You're the beneficiary of that.
[01:34:10.280 --> 01:34:13.640]  The state is not the beneficiary, so the state can't be harmed.
[01:34:14.600 --> 01:34:20.200]  If the public official doesn't abide by his contract, the state is not harmed.
[01:34:21.400 --> 01:34:22.920]  The beneficiary is harmed.
[01:34:25.080 --> 01:34:29.960]  You're the one that has standing to raise a complaint of the contract.
[01:34:36.280 --> 01:34:38.920]  All of it is really well structured.
[01:34:39.000 --> 01:34:42.280]  The law is really well done.
[01:34:43.080 --> 01:34:50.360]  If we can take our personal biases out of it and look at it clinically,
[01:34:50.360 --> 01:34:51.480]  it's really well done.
[01:34:51.480 --> 01:34:52.760]  Hang on, we'll be right back.
[01:34:55.320 --> 01:34:58.680]  Do you have a business with five employees or more?
[01:34:58.680 --> 01:35:02.600]  How would you like to save hundreds of thousands of dollars in FICA taxes?
[01:35:02.600 --> 01:35:06.680]  Do you have a major medical plan that nobody can afford to be on?
[01:35:06.680 --> 01:35:11.800]  Or how would you like to save in premium costs on a current major medical plan
[01:35:11.800 --> 01:35:13.880]  by lowering the claims cost?
[01:35:13.880 --> 01:35:19.480]  The CHAMP plan is a section 125 IRS approved preventative health plan
[01:35:19.480 --> 01:35:24.760]  that provides your employees with doctors, medications, emergency care,
[01:35:24.760 --> 01:35:28.760]  and Teladoc all at zero cost with zero copay.
[01:35:28.760 --> 01:35:34.760]  If you are an employee, you also will get a pay raise by paying less in FICA taxes.
[01:35:34.760 --> 01:35:38.920]  As an employer, you will save hundreds of thousands of dollars
[01:35:38.920 --> 01:35:41.000]  in matching FICA taxes.
[01:35:41.000 --> 01:35:43.960]  The CHAMP plan can help add working capital,
[01:35:43.960 --> 01:35:47.320]  market resale value, or pay down lines of credit.
[01:35:47.320 --> 01:35:55.240]  Call Scott at 214-730-2471 or dallasmms.com.
[01:35:56.440 --> 01:35:58.920]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[01:35:59.560 --> 01:36:02.840]  Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary.
[01:36:02.920 --> 01:36:09.240]  The affordable, easy to understand, 4-CD course that will show you how in 24 hours,
[01:36:09.240 --> 01:36:10.200]  step-by-step.
[01:36:10.920 --> 01:36:14.600]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing.
[01:36:14.600 --> 01:36:17.800]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[01:36:18.520 --> 01:36:23.320]  Thousands have won with our step-by-step course, and now you can too.
[01:36:23.320 --> 01:36:29.320]  Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case-winning experience.
[01:36:29.880 --> 01:36:34.760]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand about the
[01:36:34.760 --> 01:36:38.760]  principles and practices that control our American courts.
[01:36:38.760 --> 01:36:45.000]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases,
[01:36:45.000 --> 01:36:47.640]  pro se tactics, and much more.
[01:36:47.640 --> 01:36:54.680]  Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner or call toll-free 866-LAW-EZ.
[01:37:15.000 --> 01:37:26.440]  Some things in this world I will never understand Some things I realize fully
[01:37:26.440 --> 01:37:34.440]  Somebody's gonna police that policeman Somebody's gonna police the police
[01:37:34.440 --> 01:37:42.840]  There's always a room at the top of the hill Here through the grave mine and his lonely
[01:37:43.400 --> 01:37:48.280]  step-by-step They're wishing it was more than our position to fill
[01:37:48.280 --> 01:37:53.080]  They know that if they don't do it, somebody will
[01:37:53.080 --> 01:37:56.920]  Okay, we are back. Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain,
[01:37:57.800 --> 01:38:04.760]  Rule of Law Radio on our last segment. I still have Steve on the board. Steve, are you there?
[01:38:09.160 --> 01:38:11.880]  Okay, I don't think he's there. I think we put him to sleep.
[01:38:11.880 --> 01:38:16.280]  Okay, I was going to tell him if he's still there, just shut up. We need to talk to Alex
[01:38:16.280 --> 01:38:21.960]  anyway. Okay, Alex, I've used up your time on other things. What do you have for us?
[01:38:27.480 --> 01:38:36.200]  I'm trying to figure out how they could counter. I've only looked up what are the
[01:38:36.200 --> 01:38:41.240]  essential elements to establish the existence of a contract and what are the essential elements
[01:38:41.240 --> 01:38:46.600]  to prove that it was violated. I haven't researched.
[01:38:46.600 --> 01:38:53.160]  Essential elements, there must be a meeting of minds, an agreement. Something of value
[01:38:53.160 --> 01:39:02.200]  must change hands. Once something, once there's an agreement, someone provides a benefit,
[01:39:02.920 --> 01:39:11.960]  someone receives the benefit, someone agrees to take some action as a result of the benefit.
[01:39:13.000 --> 01:39:14.120]  That creates a contract.
[01:39:15.480 --> 01:39:22.840]  Where I'm getting hung up on is to prove that the contract was violated, you need to prove
[01:39:22.840 --> 01:39:29.400]  the existence, okay. The failure to perform, okay. The resulting damages, okay. But also
[01:39:29.960 --> 01:39:36.040]  performance by the plaintiff or some justification for non-performance. You need to prove that you as
[01:39:36.040 --> 01:39:45.000]  the plaintiff, because this relates to a two-party contract basically. In a two-party contract,
[01:39:46.280 --> 01:39:49.880]  the plaintiff needs to prove that he abided by the terms of the contract.
[01:39:50.600 --> 01:39:57.480]  And when I am suing as a damaged or injured third-party beneficiary,
[01:39:58.200 --> 01:40:00.600]  then I cannot prove that element.
[01:40:00.600 --> 01:40:04.920]  Okay, wait a minute, wait a minute. You're a third-party beneficiary.
[01:40:06.680 --> 01:40:08.440]  You have no duty to perform.
[01:40:08.440 --> 01:40:10.120]  There's nothing for you to do.
[01:40:11.560 --> 01:40:16.360]  Oh, okay. So I would, okay. I guess I need to figure out.
[01:40:17.240 --> 01:40:25.560]  There is the primary entity and you have someone who has agreed to perform some service
[01:40:26.520 --> 01:40:36.200]  for some payment. If the party does not perform the service subsequent to the payment,
[01:40:36.200 --> 01:40:46.840]  then the entity who was the beneficiary of the service has standing to challenge the contract.
[01:40:50.600 --> 01:40:54.360]  Then there may be some other essential elements that I need to find
[01:40:55.320 --> 01:40:59.000]  if I'm suing as an injured third-party beneficiary.
[01:40:59.960 --> 01:41:07.480]  Yeah, you need to get uniform commercial code. Every state has adopted its own
[01:41:09.160 --> 01:41:15.720]  universal commercial code, but they're all almost the same. The differences are very,
[01:41:15.720 --> 01:41:22.120]  very minor. If you get the universal commercial code and go through it, it's not that big.
[01:41:22.840 --> 01:41:29.640]  It's outlined, so there's a lot of white space. It's not very large at all. Think about seven or
[01:41:29.640 --> 01:41:35.640]  eight different sections, and you can go through them very quickly. And I suggest
[01:41:35.640 --> 01:41:41.240]  you get the uniform commercial code, read through it quickly. Don't try to understand all of it,
[01:41:41.240 --> 01:41:47.960]  just read through it. Go back to the top, read through it again. Second time you read through it,
[01:41:48.280 --> 01:41:56.520]  you start sticking all these pieces together, and then we can come on here and you can educate us.
[01:41:59.880 --> 01:42:08.840]  The best way to learn it is to upgrade mine and Brett's understanding of universal commercial code.
[01:42:11.720 --> 01:42:14.840]  You do that, and you'll know it better than the lawyers do.
[01:42:15.720 --> 01:42:23.800]  The lawyers never read the code. I was talking to my county attorney, and he said,
[01:42:23.800 --> 01:42:28.520]  Mr. Carlton, you have to be careful. You might get charged with illegal practice of law.
[01:42:29.720 --> 01:42:36.600]  I said, no, Greg, legal practice of law 38.123 says that I must hold myself out as an attorney
[01:42:36.600 --> 01:42:43.480]  and represent someone in a property damage or personal injury case. He said, are you sure?
[01:42:43.480 --> 01:42:51.720]  Greg, of course I'm sure, look it up. He looks it up. I said exactly what I said.
[01:42:53.400 --> 01:42:57.560]  I said, Greg, you ought to be ashamed of yourself. When was the last time you read that thing?
[01:42:58.520 --> 01:43:05.640]  He said, I've never read the whole thing. That's pitiful. He said, Mr. Carlton,
[01:43:05.640 --> 01:43:11.000]  I don't know a single attorney who's read the whole code of criminal procedure.
[01:43:12.360 --> 01:43:16.440]  That's pitiful. He said, yeah, it is. That is the truth.
[01:43:18.440 --> 01:43:21.880]  These lawyers, they don't learn this stuff in law school.
[01:43:22.680 --> 01:43:29.560]  They learn how to present and argue legal issues. They don't learn the codes.
[01:43:29.960 --> 01:43:35.640]  If you read those codes twice, you'll know them better than they do.
[01:43:38.680 --> 01:43:44.040]  And read it twice. It's not that big. I've read it. It's been several years.
[01:43:44.760 --> 01:43:48.520]  And because I don't deal with it all the time, you kind of lose all of it.
[01:43:49.880 --> 01:43:56.120]  But read through it twice. It's not that big. And this stuff will become clear.
[01:43:59.720 --> 01:44:03.720]  And then call us back tomorrow, and we'll have a really good conversation.
[01:44:06.440 --> 01:44:08.920]  The kind of conversation I really like to have.
[01:44:14.040 --> 01:44:19.720]  Yeah, I mean, I would love to actually, yeah. I mean, these are good conversations.
[01:44:20.520 --> 01:44:33.080]  But I've been reading the Constitution and looking into the fact that that's the only
[01:44:33.080 --> 01:44:39.800]  instrument where the government actually gets its power from and how it's being totally abused.
[01:44:40.840 --> 01:44:48.440]  And that's a conversation I would love to have. Because that's kind of like what I would base
[01:44:48.920 --> 01:44:54.600]  all my arguments on. Because if they can't provide authority, then how can they even act?
[01:44:56.600 --> 01:44:57.800]  And that's-
[01:44:57.800 --> 01:45:04.680]  You gotta understand lawyers. Lawyers focus on very specific areas of practice.
[01:45:06.280 --> 01:45:12.520]  And they don't understand. They don't have time to read the codes the way you and I do.
[01:45:12.520 --> 01:45:18.840]  They're constantly addressing specific issues for specific clients.
[01:45:20.040 --> 01:45:27.320]  And they get focused on these fine issues. And they just, from my experience,
[01:45:27.320 --> 01:45:34.440]  tend to lose the overall vision of how the law works. And I come into court,
[01:45:35.240 --> 01:45:42.040]  and I start throwing codes at these lawyers. And they hear the code, they recognize it,
[01:45:42.040 --> 01:45:44.600]  they remember they've looked at it at one time or another.
[01:45:45.240 --> 01:45:48.440]  But they don't have it fresh in their mind, and it makes them nuts.
[01:45:50.200 --> 01:45:56.040]  And they have no way of dealing with me. You read that code through twice.
[01:45:56.840 --> 01:46:01.640]  Don't try to understand it the first time, just read through it. The first time you read through,
[01:46:01.640 --> 01:46:08.040]  you're just laying referential index. The second time you read through it, you'll
[01:46:08.040 --> 01:46:14.600]  read this statute and say, wait a minute, that goes to this one way down here,
[01:46:14.600 --> 01:46:19.240]  and that goes to this one up here. And you start stitching together this matrix.
[01:46:20.840 --> 01:46:25.240]  Then when you deal with these lawyers, you will rip them to shreds.
[01:46:27.320 --> 01:46:32.360]  There is nothing I like better than tearing a lawyer to pieces.
[01:46:32.360 --> 01:46:43.640]  And they're low hanging fruit. They're busy trying to turn dollars.
[01:46:44.600 --> 01:46:49.400]  They don't have the time or the overall philosophy of law that we do.
[01:46:51.240 --> 01:47:00.040]  And that puts them at a terrible disadvantage. And lawyers are supposed to know all of this.
[01:47:00.040 --> 01:47:04.440]  So anytime you address something that the lawyer doesn't know,
[01:47:05.560 --> 01:47:11.080]  if you listen closely, you can hear his anal sphincter squeeze shut.
[01:47:11.080 --> 01:47:12.600]  I don't want to hear that.
[01:47:14.840 --> 01:47:23.720]  The worst thing a lawyer can do is being caught not knowing. Being caught with somebody who knows
[01:47:23.720 --> 01:47:29.160]  the law better than they do, it makes them crazy and gets them to do stupid stuff.
[01:47:29.640 --> 01:47:31.160]  Especially when it's a pro se.
[01:47:32.680 --> 01:47:37.320]  Exactly. The worst thing is to have a pro se, wipe the floor with them.
[01:47:39.000 --> 01:47:42.600]  I love it when I get into court. I do the same thing all the time.
[01:47:43.960 --> 01:47:50.440]  And these lawyers never do this. And I come into court and I walk down the code chapter and verse
[01:47:50.440 --> 01:47:55.080]  with them. Boy, it makes these lawyers crazy. They want to find another place to be.
[01:47:55.720 --> 01:47:56.920]  Hmm.
[01:47:56.920 --> 01:48:01.000]  That is so much fun. Brett, tell her. Brett does this.
[01:48:02.600 --> 01:48:12.040]  Yeah, it does get under their skin. In the courtroom, you don't turn to the lawyer and
[01:48:12.040 --> 01:48:18.600]  face them as you embarrass them. You face the judge and you refer to the lawyer in third person.
[01:48:18.600 --> 01:48:20.680]  Hmm.
[01:48:20.680 --> 01:48:27.640]  And you say, your honor, opposing counsel appears to be making things up.
[01:48:30.200 --> 01:48:37.000]  However you put it, you're talking to the judge. And so you kind of glance over there and you see
[01:48:37.000 --> 01:48:43.720]  their faces turning red and they're having a really hard time. And they will gather other
[01:48:43.720 --> 01:48:48.200]  attorneys with them. If you end up in a second hearing, they'll have a cluster of attorneys
[01:48:48.200 --> 01:48:52.280]  over there. They'll bring all their books and they'll be whispering to each other the
[01:48:52.280 --> 01:48:58.040]  whole time. It's kind of fun to watch. Interesting. I can imagine.
[01:49:01.640 --> 01:49:05.720]  The point is these lawyers are so busy with clients constantly,
[01:49:06.440 --> 01:49:09.880]  they don't have the time to do the overview that we have time to do.
[01:49:11.160 --> 01:49:13.640]  And that gives us an incredible advantage.
[01:49:13.640 --> 01:49:21.400]  So, read the code, read it twice, read the uniform commercial code twice,
[01:49:21.400 --> 01:49:25.800]  and then call us back tomorrow and let's talk about this. You can educate us.
[01:49:27.800 --> 01:49:29.400]  Oh, we'll see. We'll see about that.
[01:49:30.840 --> 01:49:37.240]  Thank you very much, Alex, Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain, Wheel of Law Radio. We'll be back
[01:49:37.240 --> 01:49:44.600]  tomorrow night on our four hour info marathon. Thank you all for listening and good night.
[01:50:07.240 --> 01:50:16.120]  Call us toll free at 888-551-0102 or visit us online at bfa.org.
[01:50:16.120 --> 01:50:21.640]  This translation is highly accurate and it comes with over 13,000 cross references,
[01:50:21.640 --> 01:50:27.240]  plus charts and maps and an outline for every book of the Bible. This is truly a Bible you
[01:50:27.240 --> 01:50:32.680]  can understand. To get your free copy of the New Testament Recovery Version, call us toll free
[01:50:32.680 --> 01:50:44.360]  at 888-551-0102. That's 888-551-0102 or visit us online at bfa.org.
[01:50:47.320 --> 01:50:53.480]  You're listening to the Logos Radio Network at logosradionetwork.com.
[01:50:53.560 --> 01:51:01.800]  You're being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters, or even lawsuits?
[01:51:01.800 --> 01:51:07.400]  Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Mears proven method. Michael Mears has won six cases
[01:51:07.400 --> 01:51:12.200]  in federal court against debt collectors, and now you can win too. You'll get step-by-step
[01:51:12.200 --> 01:51:17.240]  instructions in plain English on how to win in court using federal civil rights statutes.
[01:51:17.240 --> 01:51:23.000]  What to do when contacted by phone, mail, or court summons? How to answer letters and phone calls?
[01:51:23.000 --> 01:51:27.560]  How to get debt collectors out of your credit report? How to turn the financial tables on them
[01:51:27.560 --> 01:51:33.720]  and make them pay you to go away? The Michael Mears proven method is the solution for how to
[01:51:33.720 --> 01:51:38.600]  stop debt collectors. Personal consultation is available as well. For more information,
[01:51:38.600 --> 01:51:43.800]  please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the blue Michael Mears banner or email
[01:51:43.880 --> 01:51:53.800]  michaelmears at yahoo.com. That's ruleoflawradio.com or email m-i-c-h-a-e-l-m-i-r-r-a-s at yahoo.com
[01:51:53.800 --> 01:52:00.600]  to learn how to stop debt collectors now. Rule of Law Radio is proud to offer the rule of law
[01:52:00.600 --> 01:52:04.600]  traffic seminar. In today's America, we live in an us-against-them society, and if we the people
[01:52:04.600 --> 01:52:09.000]  are ever going to have a free society, then we're going to have to stand and defend our own rights.
[01:52:09.000 --> 01:52:12.680]  Among those rights are the right to travel freely from place to place, the right to act in our own
[01:52:12.680 --> 01:52:17.080]  private capacity, and most importantly, the right to due process of law. Traffic courts afford us
[01:52:17.080 --> 01:52:21.720]  the least expensive opportunity to learn how to enforce and preserve our rights through due process.
[01:52:21.720 --> 01:52:25.800]  Former Sheriff's Deputy Eddie Craig, in conjunction with Rule of Law Radio, has put together the most
[01:52:25.800 --> 01:52:29.880]  comprehensive teaching tool available that will help you understand what due process is and how
[01:52:29.880 --> 01:52:34.120]  to hold courts to the rule of law. You can get your own copy of this invaluable material by going to
[01:52:34.120 --> 01:52:38.680]  ruleoflawradio.com and ordering your copy today. By ordering now, you'll receive a copy of Eddie's
[01:52:38.680 --> 01:52:42.760]  book, The Texas Transportation Code, The Law Versus the Lie, video and audio of the original
[01:52:42.760 --> 01:52:47.480]  2009 seminar, hundreds of research documents, and other useful resource material. Learn how to fight
[01:52:47.480 --> 01:52:51.800]  for your rights with the help of this material from ruleoflawradio.com. Order your copy today,
[01:52:51.800 --> 01:52:54.840]  and together we can have the free society we all want and deserve.
[01:53:09.400 --> 01:53:13.560]  Well, don't let nothing get to you. Only the father can deliver you.
[01:53:14.360 --> 01:53:19.320]  So don't let bad-minded people hurt you. And tell Satan, get behind you.
[01:53:20.840 --> 01:53:25.640]  Know what I mean? My friend, and all of your children, come.
[01:53:38.680 --> 01:53:49.640]  God, my friend. Tell him your problem, man. Come on and say once again, here we go, you know you are the king.
[01:53:49.640 --> 01:53:55.320]  He is my king, man, he is everything. He's everything to me, that's why I call him.
[01:53:55.320 --> 01:54:01.320]  But not me, me, and I pray to him. Because he's the only one who could answer him.
[01:54:01.320 --> 01:54:06.520]  I've been a business, what we can man say him. Mankind, you know, is this leading me.
[01:54:06.520 --> 01:54:18.120]  God, my friend. Tell him your problem, man. Come on and say once again, here we go, you know you are the king.
[01:54:18.120 --> 01:54:26.760]  Okay, we are ready for part 17 of your saga. Let's see, let's unmute you.
[01:54:27.640 --> 01:54:29.960]  Okay, Joseph.
[01:54:29.960 --> 01:54:43.000]  All right, one last little tidbit here. Actually, I've been meaning to ask something about one of the commercials you guys play on the breaks, but I'll get to that in a second here.
[01:54:43.000 --> 01:54:54.920]  So for the district attorney in this county, I have found 69 entries of other attorneys that work as assistant attorneys to the district attorney.
[01:54:55.720 --> 01:55:10.680]  For 67 of those chumps, I'm going to, for every single infraction that these two attorneys did, I'm going to bar-grieve them and let them know, hey, you have a duty and responsibility to make sure this subordinate doesn't do this thing again.
[01:55:10.680 --> 01:55:16.840]  And here is your congratulatory prize of a bar-grievance for letting them get away with it once.
[01:55:16.840 --> 01:55:24.520]  So all 67, I'm going to bar-grieve multiple times for each of the dumb things that these two attorneys did.
[01:55:24.520 --> 01:55:30.040]  Then for these two attorneys that did the dumb things, I will bar-grieve them for those.
[01:55:30.040 --> 01:55:35.240]  For example, one of them is I pointed out, hey, that's not my plea.
[01:55:35.240 --> 01:55:43.960]  I entered a plea of raising an exception due to the absence of an information and an indictment and or an indictment.
[01:55:43.960 --> 01:55:50.360]  And not only did the judge tell me I couldn't use that, he changed my plea.
[01:55:50.360 --> 01:55:56.760]  They didn't do anything about it. They did not correct the judge, and I believe they have a responsibility to correct.