[00:00.000 --> 00:20.240]  BAD BOYS
[00:30.000 --> 00:32.000]  Whatcha gonna do when they come for you?
[00:32.000 --> 00:34.000]  Bad boys, bad boys
[00:34.000 --> 00:35.000]  Whatcha gonna do?
[00:35.000 --> 00:37.000]  Whatcha gonna do when they come for you?
[00:37.000 --> 00:40.000]  When you were eight and you had bad traits
[00:40.000 --> 00:43.000]  You go to school and learn the golden rule
[00:43.000 --> 00:46.000]  So why are you acting like a bloody fool?
[00:46.000 --> 00:48.000]  If you get hot then you must get cool
[00:48.000 --> 00:50.000]  Bad boys, bad boys
[00:50.000 --> 00:51.000]  Whatcha gonna do?
[00:51.000 --> 00:53.000]  Whatcha gonna do when they come for you?
[00:53.000 --> 00:55.000]  Bad boys, bad boys
[00:55.000 --> 00:56.000]  Whatcha gonna do?
[00:56.000 --> 00:59.000]  Whatcha gonna do when they come for you?
[00:59.000 --> 01:00.000]  You chuck it on that one
[01:00.000 --> 01:02.000]  You chuck it on this one
[01:02.000 --> 01:03.000]  You chuck it on your mother
[01:03.000 --> 01:04.000]  And you chuck it on your father
[01:04.000 --> 01:06.000]  You chuck it on your brother
[01:06.000 --> 01:07.000]  And you chuck it on your sister
[01:07.000 --> 01:09.000]  You chuck it on that one
[01:09.000 --> 01:10.000]  And you chuck it on me
[01:10.000 --> 01:11.000]  Bad boys, bad boys
[01:11.000 --> 01:12.000]  Whatcha gonna do?
[01:12.000 --> 01:15.000]  Whatcha gonna do when they come for you?
[01:15.000 --> 01:17.000]  Bad boys, bad boys
[01:17.000 --> 01:18.000]  Whatcha gonna do?
[01:18.000 --> 01:20.000]  Whatcha gonna do when they come for you?
[01:20.000 --> 01:23.000]  Bad boys, bad boys
[01:23.000 --> 01:24.000]  Whatcha gonna do?
[01:24.000 --> 01:26.000]  Whatcha gonna do when they come for you?
[01:26.000 --> 01:28.000]  Bad boys, bad boys
[01:28.000 --> 01:32.000]  Bad boys, bad boys, what you gonna do? What you gonna do when they come for you?
[01:32.000 --> 01:37.000]  Nobody now give you no break. Police now give you no break.
[01:37.000 --> 01:43.000]  That old soldier man now give you no break. Not even your agent now give you no breaks.
[01:43.000 --> 01:48.000]  Bad boys, bad boys, what you gonna do? What you gonna do when they come for you?
[01:48.000 --> 01:54.000]  Bad boys, bad boys, what you gonna do? What you gonna do when they come for you?
[01:54.000 --> 01:59.000]  Bad boys, bad boys, what you gonna do? What you gonna do when they come for you?
[01:59.000 --> 02:06.000]  Bad boys, bad boys, what you gonna do? What you gonna do when they come for you?
[02:25.000 --> 02:32.000]  Why did you have to act so mean? Don't you know you're a human being?
[02:32.000 --> 02:37.000]  Born of a mother with a lover for father. Reflection comes and reflection goes.
[02:37.000 --> 02:48.000]  I know sometimes you wanna let go. I know sometimes you wanna let go.
[02:48.000 --> 02:53.000]  Bad boys, bad boys, what you gonna do? What you gonna do when they come for you?
[02:53.000 --> 02:59.000]  Bad boys, bad boys, what you gonna do? What you gonna do when they come for you?
[02:59.000 --> 03:08.000]  You're too bad? You're too rude? You're too bad? You're too rude?
[03:10.000 --> 03:13.000]  Bad boys, bad boys, what you gonna do?
[03:13.000 --> 03:17.000]  Good evening, this is The Rule of Law Radio. Randy Kelton and I'm Brat Fountain.
[03:17.000 --> 03:22.000]  fountain on this Thursday, the 27th of March, 2025.
[03:22.320 --> 03:25.560]  It's amazing how fast this first quarter has gone by.
[03:26.840 --> 03:30.380]  And well, this evening, I'm going to go ahead
[03:30.380 --> 03:32.700]  and open up the phone lines.
[03:32.700 --> 03:36.880]  And anybody can call in with questions,
[03:36.880 --> 03:41.880]  your legal issues, comments, 512-646-1984.
[03:41.880 --> 03:46.880]  512-646-1984.
[03:50.120 --> 03:54.200]  And while we're waiting for your questions
[03:54.200 --> 03:57.560]  to come rolling in, I'll just touch on something
[03:57.560 --> 04:02.560]  that is relatively, it's fresh on my mind.
[04:03.160 --> 04:05.280]  And so I think it would be of interest
[04:05.280 --> 04:09.440]  to probably a lot of people.
[04:10.440 --> 04:15.440]  Habeas corpus, there is a long standing pathway
[04:20.200 --> 04:23.040]  that people have to justice.
[04:23.040 --> 04:28.040]  When someone is unlawfully restrained in their liberty,
[04:29.200 --> 04:33.960]  the appropriate remedy is habeas relief.
[04:35.160 --> 04:38.260]  Habeas corpus, it's a Latin phrase.
[04:39.800 --> 04:41.660]  Do you have the body?
[04:41.660 --> 04:46.660]  And it mean, the purpose of this is for a higher judge
[04:50.240 --> 04:54.600]  to come stomping around and asking a lower judge,
[04:54.600 --> 04:55.760]  what are you doing?
[04:57.480 --> 05:01.360]  So you have some judicial officer of some kind
[05:01.360 --> 05:03.320]  that has unlawfully restrained,
[05:03.320 --> 05:06.880]  or it could be anybody that has unlawfully restrained
[05:06.920 --> 05:11.920]  a person and that person or any person on his behalf
[05:14.360 --> 05:19.360]  can petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
[05:19.540 --> 05:23.360]  We, the people don't issue the writ.
[05:23.360 --> 05:26.680]  We simply go to the judge whose duty it is
[05:27.540 --> 05:29.040]  to issue the writ.
[05:29.040 --> 05:32.440]  And we say, hey, old Bob over here,
[05:32.440 --> 05:34.800]  it looks like he got thrown in jail
[05:35.080 --> 05:37.240]  and I don't think that's right.
[05:37.240 --> 05:40.220]  I don't think there's any law to back it up.
[05:40.220 --> 05:42.520]  What's he doing being held in jail?
[05:42.520 --> 05:46.880]  And so then the judge who receives that petition
[05:46.880 --> 05:51.740]  as a duty, not a discretionary action,
[05:51.740 --> 05:55.960]  but a ministerial duty to issue that writ.
[05:57.400 --> 05:59.220]  What is that writ?
[05:59.220 --> 06:00.980]  The writ of habeas corpus.
[06:01.100 --> 06:06.100]  It is, put simply, it is from that judge
[06:07.820 --> 06:09.380]  who receives your petition.
[06:11.380 --> 06:14.580]  It is a document that goes from the judge
[06:14.580 --> 06:19.580]  to whomever is unlawfully holding our friend Bob here.
[06:21.580 --> 06:26.580]  And it says in the writ, it says, show why,
[06:27.940 --> 06:30.260]  show some kind of a reason why you're holding him
[06:30.260 --> 06:34.040]  according to the law or cut him loose now.
[06:37.300 --> 06:42.020]  So it's a very powerful and little used remedy.
[06:42.820 --> 06:46.220]  Right now, the reason why that's fresh on my mind,
[06:46.220 --> 06:49.660]  like I said, there was a fellow man
[06:49.660 --> 06:52.380]  who was being unlawfully restrained
[06:52.380 --> 06:57.300]  and I filed a petition for a judge
[06:57.340 --> 07:00.860]  to issue the writ of habeas corpus to get him out of there.
[07:01.700 --> 07:06.180]  Well, they decided they were gonna ignore it.
[07:06.180 --> 07:08.500]  And I sent to another judge.
[07:08.500 --> 07:10.780]  And this other judge decided that they were gonna try
[07:10.780 --> 07:15.780]  to convert it into a PRP, personal restraint petition,
[07:17.060 --> 07:20.500]  which has weird rules and, oh, you didn't follow
[07:20.500 --> 07:23.780]  the formatting and you didn't show that your next friend
[07:23.780 --> 07:27.180]  and the status of your relationship is not significant enough
[07:27.180 --> 07:31.020]  to warrant your involvement with Bob over here.
[07:31.020 --> 07:35.260]  Well, I didn't file any personal restraint petition.
[07:36.700 --> 07:41.540]  It was simply a petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
[07:41.540 --> 07:42.460]  It was different.
[07:43.820 --> 07:48.820]  America is not as old as habeas relief.
[07:50.620 --> 07:55.620]  When we the people are asking a judge to issue this writ,
[07:55.620 --> 07:58.660]  this writ predates America.
[07:58.660 --> 08:03.660]  This is very ancient and cannot be taken away
[08:04.780 --> 08:05.900]  from the people.
[08:06.820 --> 08:10.820]  This is in some ways our last,
[08:14.980 --> 08:16.980]  I don't know, I'd be over dramatic
[08:16.980 --> 08:18.340]  calling it the last bastion,
[08:18.340 --> 08:21.900]  but it's a very important remedy
[08:21.900 --> 08:23.740]  that I think is overlooked.
[08:26.620 --> 08:30.100]  I would encourage us to all take a look at that.
[08:30.100 --> 08:31.940]  There are state habeas
[08:31.940 --> 08:35.980]  and there are federal habeas processes.
[08:37.300 --> 08:42.100]  This particular one that I did was in Washington State.
[08:42.100 --> 08:43.380]  I didn't use the federal one
[08:43.380 --> 08:47.620]  because it looks a little more fuzzy in the state.
[08:47.620 --> 08:52.620]  Washington State is like Texas in that the language
[08:53.620 --> 08:58.620]  is extremely clear on there being a mandate.
[09:00.580 --> 09:03.380]  This is not something that a judge gets to decide
[09:03.380 --> 09:05.660]  whether he wants to issue the writ or not.
[09:07.580 --> 09:12.220]  So like I told you, these judges are not issuing the writ.
[09:12.220 --> 09:14.020]  They decided they weren't going to.
[09:15.140 --> 09:17.100]  One ignored it, one denied it,
[09:17.100 --> 09:19.380]  one tried to convert it into something it's not
[09:19.380 --> 09:21.500]  and then say that it doesn't fit those rules
[09:21.500 --> 09:24.260]  because it's insufficient because whatever,
[09:24.260 --> 09:25.580]  irrelevant nonsense.
[09:26.420 --> 09:28.580]  So I'm suing these judges.
[09:29.900 --> 09:33.540]  I'm suing these judges for violating
[09:33.540 --> 09:37.260]  my federally protected right,
[09:38.180 --> 09:41.340]  my first amendment right to petition the courts
[09:41.340 --> 09:43.620]  for redress of grievances
[09:43.620 --> 09:47.060]  and my fifth amendment right to due process.
[09:47.980 --> 09:51.940]  This is so clearly laid out in their duties
[09:51.940 --> 09:55.860]  and it uses mandatory language, shall and must.
[09:55.860 --> 09:58.940]  There's no discretionary language for them.
[09:58.940 --> 10:01.260]  So they don't get to say whether they want to deny it
[10:01.260 --> 10:03.740]  or sit on it or ignore it or do anything else.
[10:03.740 --> 10:04.980]  They must issue the writ.
[10:06.020 --> 10:08.220]  When they don't, they've committed a crime
[10:09.700 --> 10:13.580]  and they've deprived me of my federally protected rights.
[10:14.540 --> 10:17.100]  And because they're state actors,
[10:17.100 --> 10:21.740]  that exactly lines up with Title 42,
[10:21.740 --> 10:25.020]  Section 1983, civil rights suit.
[10:26.020 --> 10:27.980]  So that's what I'm doing right now.
[10:27.980 --> 10:32.100]  I do see a couple of people getting on the caller board.
[10:32.100 --> 10:36.820]  Let's go ahead and go to Joseph in Texas.
[10:36.820 --> 10:37.860]  Good evening, Joseph.
[10:39.420 --> 10:40.260]  Hello there.
[10:40.260 --> 10:41.100]  You've lined up.
[10:41.100 --> 10:41.940]  Hey.
[10:43.620 --> 10:45.020]  Sorry?
[10:45.020 --> 10:46.660]  Are you flying solo tonight?
[10:48.140 --> 10:49.500]  Oh, for now, yes.
[10:51.220 --> 10:53.060]  I think Randy may be able to join us later on.
[10:53.060 --> 10:55.460]  He said he got his time zones mixed up.
[10:56.420 --> 11:00.060]  So we maybe can find out later on or tomorrow
[11:00.060 --> 11:01.460]  what he meant by that, but.
[11:03.020 --> 11:03.860]  Yes.
[11:03.860 --> 11:06.260]  I have got a,
[11:07.420 --> 11:12.420]  I went and I've got a SECPA case with a debt collector.
[11:13.780 --> 11:16.620]  That I'm trying to figure out heads and tails of.
[11:17.940 --> 11:21.940]  I did a, under the FCRA, the Mike Mears course,
[11:23.340 --> 11:27.020]  I did a federal suit against them,
[11:27.020 --> 11:30.780]  but it turns out that particular statute has a,
[11:30.780 --> 11:34.500]  it does not have a private cause of action.
[11:34.500 --> 11:36.060]  You've actually got to go through,
[11:36.060 --> 11:39.020]  do things a different path than he lays out.
[11:39.020 --> 11:40.380]  So what I've got then is,
[11:41.620 --> 11:43.420]  I had a debt collector reach out to me
[11:44.260 --> 11:45.100]  and send me a notice.
[11:45.100 --> 11:46.900]  So I followed the FDCPA,
[11:46.900 --> 11:49.900]  the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act,
[11:50.980 --> 11:53.180]  and told them that, responded to their letters,
[11:53.180 --> 11:56.700]  that you need to validate this debt.
[11:56.700 --> 11:58.100]  And they didn't.
[11:58.100 --> 12:00.660]  And they ignored that, and then they went
[12:00.660 --> 12:05.460]  and they brought a case in county court for the debt.
[12:05.460 --> 12:10.460]  And I have tried to do a removal to federal court
[12:11.420 --> 12:16.420]  because what they did, bringing a case in county court,
[12:16.900 --> 12:19.820]  was a violation of federal law.
[12:20.660 --> 12:24.260]  So they did not properly validate or prove the debt,
[12:24.260 --> 12:25.860]  and then they brought the case in county court.
[12:25.860 --> 12:26.980]  So they're-
[12:26.980 --> 12:28.780]  Oh wait, how is that a violation?
[12:30.900 --> 12:35.900]  So when I sent them the response to their notice,
[12:35.900 --> 12:40.900]  the dispute letter, they are supposed to show
[12:43.740 --> 12:46.380]  proper validation of the debt.
[12:46.380 --> 12:49.300]  And the law says that they're supposed to go back
[12:49.300 --> 12:50.420]  to the beginning of the account.
[12:50.420 --> 12:53.060]  They're supposed to show everything from beginning to end
[12:53.060 --> 12:55.380]  to show how they reached the balance
[12:55.380 --> 12:57.380]  of the debt that they're alleging.
[12:57.380 --> 12:58.500]  And they did not do that.
[12:58.500 --> 13:00.660]  And since they did not do that,
[13:00.660 --> 13:04.420]  the FDCPA barred them from proceeding until they did that.
[13:04.460 --> 13:05.820]  They just disregarded that.
[13:06.780 --> 13:09.460]  Okay, so there's a provision.
[13:09.460 --> 13:12.060]  Let me see if I understand what you're telling us.
[13:12.060 --> 13:15.900]  You're saying that there is a provision in the US code
[13:16.780 --> 13:20.940]  that prevents them from starting a case in county court
[13:20.940 --> 13:25.820]  until they have answered your validation.
[13:27.820 --> 13:28.860]  Correct. Is that right?
[13:28.860 --> 13:30.860]  They have to prove the debt, correct.
[13:32.540 --> 13:33.380]  Okay.
[13:34.700 --> 13:35.540]  Well, so then that, yeah,
[13:35.540 --> 13:36.820]  that could go to the county court,
[13:36.820 --> 13:38.220]  not having jurisdiction.
[13:39.500 --> 13:43.540]  But how is it that you want to remove this to federal court?
[13:46.780 --> 13:48.100]  Am I walking off a cliff
[13:48.100 --> 13:50.860]  or do I tell you when we go back to the break?
[13:50.860 --> 13:52.300]  Yeah, we've got a few more seconds.
[13:52.300 --> 13:54.580]  Let's talk about this on the other side.
[13:54.580 --> 13:55.820]  Anybody else wants to call in?
[13:55.820 --> 13:59.220]  It's 512-646-19.
[13:59.220 --> 14:01.380]  Are you being harassed by debt collectors
[14:01.380 --> 14:04.260]  with phone calls, letters, or even lawsuits?
[14:05.100 --> 14:06.460]  Stop debt collectors now
[14:06.460 --> 14:08.620]  with the Michael Mears Proven Method.
[14:08.620 --> 14:11.380]  Michael Mears has won six cases in federal court
[14:11.380 --> 14:14.260]  against debt collectors, and now you can win too.
[14:14.260 --> 14:16.980]  You'll get step-by-step instructions in plain English
[14:16.980 --> 14:20.420]  on how to win in court using federal civil rights statutes,
[14:20.420 --> 14:24.180]  what to do when contacted by phone, mail, or court summons,
[14:24.180 --> 14:26.220]  how to answer letters and phone calls,
[14:26.220 --> 14:28.820]  how to get debt collectors out of your credit reports,
[14:28.820 --> 14:30.660]  how to turn the financial tables on them
[14:30.660 --> 14:33.460]  and make them pay you to go away.
[14:33.500 --> 14:35.700]  The Mears Proven Method is the solution
[14:35.700 --> 14:37.580]  for how to stop debt collectors.
[14:37.580 --> 14:39.980]  Personal consultation is available as well.
[14:39.980 --> 14:43.380]  For more information, please visit ruleoflawradio.com
[14:43.380 --> 14:45.620]  and click on the blue Michael Mears banner
[14:45.620 --> 14:48.420]  or email michaelmears at yahoo.com.
[14:48.420 --> 14:50.780]  That's ruleoflawradio.com
[14:50.780 --> 14:55.780]  or email m-i-c-h-a-e-l-m-i-r-r-a-s at yahoo.com
[14:56.220 --> 14:58.780]  to learn how to stop debt collectors now.
[15:00.380 --> 15:03.180]  Are you looking to have a closer relationship with God
[15:03.180 --> 15:05.500]  and a better understanding of his word?
[15:05.500 --> 15:08.580]  Then tune in to logosradio.com on Wednesdays
[15:08.580 --> 15:11.820]  from eight to 10 p.m. Central Time for scripture talk
[15:11.820 --> 15:14.340]  where Nana and her guests discuss the scriptures
[15:14.340 --> 15:17.020]  in accord with 2 Timothy 2.15.
[15:17.020 --> 15:19.420]  Study to show thyself approved unto God,
[15:19.420 --> 15:21.540]  a workman that needeth not to be ashamed,
[15:21.540 --> 15:23.980]  rightly dividing the word of truth.
[15:23.980 --> 15:26.460]  Starting in January, our first hour studies
[15:26.460 --> 15:29.060]  are in the Book of Mark where we'll go verse by verse
[15:29.060 --> 15:31.540]  and discuss the true gospel message.
[15:31.580 --> 15:34.420]  Our second hour topical studies will vary each week
[15:34.420 --> 15:36.260]  with discussions on sound doctrine
[15:36.260 --> 15:38.580]  and Christian character development.
[15:38.580 --> 15:40.260]  We wish to reflect God's light
[15:40.260 --> 15:43.060]  and be a blessing to all those with a hearing ear.
[15:43.060 --> 15:44.940]  Our goal is to strengthen our faith
[15:44.940 --> 15:47.580]  and to transform ourselves more into the likeness
[15:47.580 --> 15:49.620]  of our Lord and Savior Jesus.
[15:49.620 --> 15:53.340]  So tune in to scripture talk live on logosradio.com
[15:53.340 --> 15:55.540]  Wednesdays from eight to 10 p.m.
[15:55.540 --> 15:58.780]  to inspire and motivate your studies of the scriptures.
[15:59.780 --> 16:03.780]  If you are listening to the Logos Radio Network,
[16:03.780 --> 16:07.780]  logosradionetwork.com.
[16:07.780 --> 16:08.620]  Thank you.
[16:28.620 --> 16:29.740]  All right.
[16:29.740 --> 16:33.900]  So we are back on the air here with Joseph from Texas.
[16:33.900 --> 16:35.500]  And Joseph, as we went out,
[16:35.500 --> 16:37.980]  we were wondering about your federal case.
[16:37.980 --> 16:42.380]  How are you getting this case removed to federal court?
[16:43.300 --> 16:46.540]  Did they bring a federal issue?
[16:47.460 --> 16:49.220]  I mean, why is it that,
[16:49.220 --> 16:52.460]  to me it sounds like you certainly could challenge
[16:52.460 --> 16:57.460]  the legitimacy of a case starting in county court.
[16:59.940 --> 17:03.380]  That's obviously black and white.
[17:04.380 --> 17:06.820]  But I'm curious about this removal.
[17:06.820 --> 17:08.820]  How is it that you're,
[17:08.820 --> 17:10.860]  on what basis are you saying
[17:10.860 --> 17:12.940]  that the federal court has jurisdiction?
[17:14.820 --> 17:18.300]  So the county case,
[17:19.340 --> 17:24.340]  I thought that I had a good line in the Mike Mears course
[17:25.060 --> 17:27.580]  on understanding where the jurisdiction lies.
[17:27.580 --> 17:32.340]  So I went back in 2008 to 2012.
[17:32.340 --> 17:33.780]  There's a number of recordings
[17:33.780 --> 17:35.340]  where Mike Mears is interviewed
[17:35.340 --> 17:37.540]  and he's on the rule of law radio.
[17:37.540 --> 17:39.340]  And one of the things he explains is
[17:39.340 --> 17:43.300]  that county courts don't usually adhere to
[17:43.300 --> 17:48.300]  or abide by the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, FDCPA.
[17:50.020 --> 17:53.620]  So his recommended course of action
[17:53.620 --> 17:55.460]  is get them out of the county court,
[17:55.460 --> 17:57.580]  get them into a federal court.
[17:57.580 --> 18:00.340]  And when you do that, you get to bring,
[18:00.340 --> 18:03.700]  he advises you bring in the,
[18:03.700 --> 18:04.700]  oh, let's see, what is it?
[18:04.700 --> 18:09.700]  You bring in the original creditor as a co-defendant.
[18:09.740 --> 18:12.500]  In this case, since I'm doing a removal,
[18:12.500 --> 18:14.500]  it would be a co-plaintiff.
[18:16.380 --> 18:21.380]  But what I did was I did a notice of removal on the basis.
[18:21.780 --> 18:23.220]  Now, the way that I tried to write this
[18:23.220 --> 18:27.300]  is that the basis is there is a federal question
[18:27.300 --> 18:30.340]  and that federal question is they violated federal law
[18:30.340 --> 18:33.020]  to get into the county court.
[18:33.020 --> 18:34.700]  So they don't have any,
[18:34.700 --> 18:37.140]  they don't have a legal leg to stand on
[18:37.140 --> 18:39.340]  in trying to bring a civil case against me
[18:39.340 --> 18:40.740]  in the county court.
[18:40.740 --> 18:42.580]  That's the basis of the federal aspect.
[18:42.580 --> 18:45.700]  Does that color it properly for you?
[18:45.700 --> 18:46.540]  I think so.
[18:46.540 --> 18:48.260]  And that's what we're needing to get at
[18:48.260 --> 18:49.660]  is a federal question.
[18:50.700 --> 18:51.900]  I hope that'll stand for you.
[18:51.900 --> 18:54.420]  It sounds like it's a question
[18:54.420 --> 18:56.260]  that certainly needs to be answered.
[18:57.300 --> 19:00.500]  How do you think you got the authority
[19:00.500 --> 19:02.340]  to start a case over here
[19:02.340 --> 19:04.700]  when the law clearly says you can't?
[19:06.940 --> 19:08.140]  Right, right.
[19:08.140 --> 19:10.780]  And so there's a couple of things I'm looking at here.
[19:10.780 --> 19:15.700]  Now, I did make a mistake in my notice of removal.
[19:15.700 --> 19:19.020]  I did not properly explain
[19:19.020 --> 19:22.060]  what they called diversity jurisdiction.
[19:22.060 --> 19:24.060]  And actually, that's the original creditor.
[19:24.060 --> 19:26.740]  So I'm going to be fixing that.
[19:26.740 --> 19:29.580]  I got a response back from the judge.
[19:29.580 --> 19:32.780]  The judge sent back an order to show cause.
[19:32.780 --> 19:34.380]  And basically, he got me on two points.
[19:34.380 --> 19:39.060]  He said, well, you didn't clarify diversity jurisdiction,
[19:39.060 --> 19:42.620]  which since the creditor is based out of a different state
[19:42.620 --> 19:46.380]  than Texas and a different district or federal district,
[19:46.380 --> 19:48.620]  I've got that covered.
[19:48.620 --> 19:49.460]  So that's good.
[19:49.460 --> 19:52.100]  But the other part is I brought,
[19:52.100 --> 19:57.100]  with all of the FDCPA violations,
[19:58.180 --> 20:01.740]  I wrote that up as if I would a regular complaint.
[20:01.740 --> 20:03.180]  And I'm basically saying, look,
[20:03.180 --> 20:05.100]  because of all of their violations,
[20:05.100 --> 20:06.980]  there are statutory fines,
[20:06.980 --> 20:11.980]  but there also is room for a punitive damages.
[20:13.300 --> 20:15.100]  So I alleged that essentially,
[20:15.100 --> 20:17.460]  I guess it would come across as a counterclaim.
[20:17.460 --> 20:19.740]  And I did not realize this,
[20:19.780 --> 20:22.140]  but there is, you are barred,
[20:22.140 --> 20:27.140]  the diversity jurisdiction with a federal question,
[20:27.220 --> 20:31.740]  you are barred from considering a counterclaim
[20:31.740 --> 20:33.260]  for the dollar amount.
[20:33.260 --> 20:37.980]  So the dollar amount threshold has to be $75,000 or greater.
[20:37.980 --> 20:40.060]  So I'm standing back from this and I'm thinking,
[20:40.060 --> 20:43.180]  I'm not quite sure how I understand to proceed forward.
[20:44.420 --> 20:48.940]  Conceptually, what I need to be able to say to the court
[20:48.940 --> 20:50.460]  is because there is a,
[20:50.460 --> 20:53.300]  and I actually learned something about something called
[20:53.300 --> 20:55.660]  a federal ingredient.
[20:55.660 --> 20:58.220]  And what I'm trying to understand,
[20:58.220 --> 20:59.740]  if this is the right approach,
[20:59.740 --> 21:01.420]  is from what I understand it,
[21:01.420 --> 21:04.380]  if there is a federal ingredient
[21:04.380 --> 21:09.380]  to either the original cause or in this case,
[21:09.780 --> 21:11.860]  they're barred from,
[21:11.860 --> 21:14.580]  they should be barred from proceeding in county court
[21:14.580 --> 21:17.540]  because they violated a federal law to get there.
[21:17.540 --> 21:21.020]  Because of that federal ingredient as it's coined,
[21:22.060 --> 21:24.460]  they are not allowed to proceed in the county court.
[21:24.460 --> 21:27.620]  Therefore, there is a federal question.
[21:27.620 --> 21:29.500]  So I'm trying to understand.
[21:29.500 --> 21:30.340]  I think you're right.
[21:30.340 --> 21:33.420]  And I think that's a good way to phrase it.
[21:33.420 --> 21:36.700]  It sounds like that that is going to help you
[21:36.700 --> 21:40.780]  probably better than the removal itself.
[21:40.780 --> 21:44.260]  Because if I'm understanding you correctly,
[21:44.260 --> 21:46.620]  the case can't happen.
[21:48.180 --> 21:52.220]  They cannot commence a case, lawfully.
[21:53.180 --> 21:55.300]  So to remove it
[21:56.460 --> 22:00.100]  infers that the case that they brought
[22:00.100 --> 22:02.300]  actually belongs in federal court.
[22:03.180 --> 22:04.700]  But what you're saying here,
[22:06.620 --> 22:08.140]  bringing in other issues and saying,
[22:08.140 --> 22:10.940]  hey, look, we have federal ingredient,
[22:10.940 --> 22:14.780]  which just means that the state laws can't govern the case
[22:14.780 --> 22:17.100]  and you need to deal with federal laws.
[22:17.140 --> 22:20.100]  So that seems to fit.
[22:20.100 --> 22:23.260]  I think you've got something there.
[22:23.260 --> 22:24.100]  That's better.
[22:24.100 --> 22:25.140]  That and the diversity.
[22:25.140 --> 22:27.100]  I'm glad you mentioned diversity.
[22:27.100 --> 22:28.460]  And for anybody who's listening
[22:28.460 --> 22:29.900]  that doesn't understand about these,
[22:29.900 --> 22:31.660]  you don't have to have all of them.
[22:32.900 --> 22:35.620]  The federal court can hear a case
[22:35.620 --> 22:39.940]  if it has either A or B or C.
[22:39.940 --> 22:43.300]  And he was talking about a federal question.
[22:43.300 --> 22:46.140]  That's one way that you can get into the federal court.
[22:46.180 --> 22:48.460]  The diversity of jurisdiction
[22:48.460 --> 22:52.620]  is when everything's not all in the same state.
[22:52.620 --> 22:55.780]  So you have a judge that's way over here
[22:55.780 --> 22:59.580]  that's causing you trouble and a creditor
[22:59.580 --> 23:02.700]  and they're all in different places.
[23:02.700 --> 23:06.100]  So that's perfect to take to the fence.
[23:08.020 --> 23:09.860]  Yeah, I think that's good for you.
[23:10.940 --> 23:15.380]  So is that, that's really, that's just your question
[23:15.380 --> 23:18.100]  is whether you think this could work out?
[23:19.580 --> 23:20.940]  Yeah, somewhat.
[23:20.940 --> 23:22.780]  So you're at least giving me
[23:22.780 --> 23:24.020]  a little bit of a sanity check there
[23:24.020 --> 23:25.180]  and I appreciate that.
[23:26.420 --> 23:28.900]  I've kind of got a question about parties
[23:28.900 --> 23:30.940]  but one of the things I'm looking at is
[23:30.940 --> 23:34.580]  I had 30 days to file a notice of removal.
[23:34.580 --> 23:36.860]  So I filed that on the 30th day.
[23:36.860 --> 23:39.100]  Now if that notice of removal fails,
[23:40.020 --> 23:44.340]  I don't believe I have time on the clock
[23:44.340 --> 23:46.900]  to do a formal counter,
[23:46.900 --> 23:50.580]  like if I go to county court and file a counter suit
[23:50.580 --> 23:52.420]  and basically say, look, the grounds of this suit
[23:52.420 --> 23:54.700]  is they're proceeding in a way
[23:54.700 --> 23:56.900]  that they're not legally allowed to proceed.
[23:58.420 --> 24:00.260]  I think that is one feasible option
[24:00.260 --> 24:01.740]  if the federal case fails.
[24:01.740 --> 24:04.100]  Yeah, absolutely.
[24:04.100 --> 24:06.820]  But if I'm outside of the date,
[24:06.820 --> 24:10.260]  outside of the timeframe to properly bring a counter suit,
[24:11.140 --> 24:12.940]  and I have to either operate from county court
[24:12.940 --> 24:15.780]  or if I just have to go start a brand new federal case
[24:15.780 --> 24:17.340]  that's gonna have jurisdiction,
[24:18.460 --> 24:21.220]  do you know how that would possibly slow down
[24:21.220 --> 24:24.700]  or stop the county case that they currently have right now
[24:24.700 --> 24:26.820]  that they should not have jurisdiction for?
[24:28.980 --> 24:32.700]  Well, if you are trying to address the same issue
[24:32.700 --> 24:37.500]  in a state court that you then bring to a federal court,
[24:37.500 --> 24:39.500]  the feds are gonna say,
[24:39.500 --> 24:42.140]  we're just gonna let the state court handle that.
[24:42.140 --> 24:43.860]  You're already in state court.
[24:44.940 --> 24:47.780]  We're gonna let you see that through.
[24:49.820 --> 24:53.580]  They'll be talking about Rooker Feldman and Heck V. Humphrey
[24:53.580 --> 24:57.380]  and they're gonna want you to deal with your state case
[24:58.860 --> 25:02.660]  instead of trying to ask the feds to rule
[25:02.660 --> 25:06.620]  in a way that could tend to be seen
[25:06.620 --> 25:08.580]  as usurping the state's power.
[25:08.820 --> 25:10.140]  I get that.
[25:10.140 --> 25:12.700]  How do I get the attention of a county judge
[25:12.700 --> 25:15.780]  to understand that it is a federal issue
[25:15.780 --> 25:17.540]  and they have violated it?
[25:17.540 --> 25:21.340]  Is that just regular proceedings of filing motions
[25:21.340 --> 25:23.180]  and challenging what actually challenges
[25:23.180 --> 25:24.540]  jurisdiction of the court?
[25:25.860 --> 25:26.700]  I would.
[25:26.700 --> 25:31.700]  That seems appropriate for a jurisdictional challenge
[25:32.500 --> 25:33.860]  and even if they say,
[25:33.860 --> 25:35.740]  oh, I'm pretty sure we have jurisdiction,
[25:36.100 --> 25:38.580]  if they say, oh, I'm pretty sure we have jurisdiction,
[25:38.580 --> 25:41.020]  I would go immediately to the district
[25:41.020 --> 25:44.860]  and look for an interlocutory order
[25:44.860 --> 25:49.860]  because jurisdiction is an important issue.
[25:51.380 --> 25:56.380]  And if that case cannot start because the law says so,
[25:59.340 --> 26:00.860]  then the case cannot start.
[26:01.220 --> 26:04.220]  Okay, so my recourse is going to the district
[26:04.220 --> 26:07.060]  for an interlocutory to,
[26:07.060 --> 26:10.060]  now, would that be like a writ of mandamus essentially?
[26:12.860 --> 26:15.460]  Interlocutory is in between the speaking.
[26:15.460 --> 26:17.180]  You're not waiting for anything to happen
[26:17.180 --> 26:18.820]  in the lower court for them to figure out
[26:18.820 --> 26:19.660]  how to do things right.
[26:19.660 --> 26:24.580]  You're asking the higher court to butt in.
[26:24.580 --> 26:27.060]  And so, yes, it is very similar to a mandamus.
[26:27.260 --> 26:29.460]  Or a writ of prohibition,
[26:29.460 --> 26:32.140]  depending on whether you're asking them to do something
[26:32.140 --> 26:33.500]  or not do something.
[26:33.500 --> 26:34.900]  It is very similar.
[26:36.540 --> 26:38.020]  The rules are slightly different.
[26:38.020 --> 26:39.580]  The grounds are slightly different.
[26:39.580 --> 26:42.420]  So, you're a little paying attention there to that.
[26:42.420 --> 26:43.980]  Also, a thing that may fit for you
[26:43.980 --> 26:47.580]  is a writ of certiorari, also called a cert.
[26:49.100 --> 26:50.780]  We'll have to pick this up on the other side
[26:50.780 --> 26:52.540]  because we're going to go to our sponsors.
[26:52.540 --> 26:53.940]  We're going to go to our sponsors,
[26:53.940 --> 26:55.580]  and we're going to go to our sponsors.
[26:55.700 --> 26:57.660]  Because we're going to go to our sponsors.
[26:57.660 --> 26:58.500]  But certiorari.
[27:00.420 --> 27:03.220]  Businesses ask you for a lot of personal information,
[27:03.220 --> 27:05.220]  and you may trust them to keep it safe.
[27:05.220 --> 27:07.820]  But it turns out that even the most trusted companies
[27:07.820 --> 27:10.700]  may be unwittingly revealing your secrets.
[27:10.700 --> 27:11.860]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht,
[27:11.860 --> 27:14.420]  and I'll be right back with details.
[27:14.420 --> 27:16.380]  Privacy is under attack.
[27:16.380 --> 27:18.260]  When you give up data about yourself,
[27:18.260 --> 27:19.980]  you'll never get it back again.
[27:19.980 --> 27:21.780]  And once your privacy is gone,
[27:21.780 --> 27:24.780]  you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[27:24.780 --> 27:27.700]  So protect your rights, say no to surveillance,
[27:27.700 --> 27:30.060]  and keep your information to yourself.
[27:30.060 --> 27:32.580]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[27:32.580 --> 27:33.940]  This public service announcement
[27:33.940 --> 27:36.140]  is brought to you by Startpage.com,
[27:36.140 --> 27:38.020]  the private search engine alternative
[27:38.020 --> 27:40.100]  to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[27:40.100 --> 27:42.380]  Start over with Startpage.
[27:43.860 --> 27:45.700]  Data privacy is a big deal,
[27:45.700 --> 27:47.820]  so nearly every company has a policy
[27:47.820 --> 27:50.660]  explaining how they handle your personal information.
[27:50.660 --> 27:53.300]  But what happens if it escapes their control?
[27:53.300 --> 27:54.740]  It's not an idle question.
[27:55.700 --> 27:57.020]  According to a recent survey,
[27:57.020 --> 28:00.020]  a shocking 90% of US companies admit
[28:00.020 --> 28:03.620]  their security was breached by hackers in the last year.
[28:03.620 --> 28:05.940]  That's one more reason you should trust your searches
[28:05.940 --> 28:07.620]  to Startpage.com.
[28:07.620 --> 28:08.860]  Unlike other search engines,
[28:08.860 --> 28:11.700]  Startpage doesn't store any data on you.
[28:11.700 --> 28:14.020]  They've never been hacked, but even if they were,
[28:14.020 --> 28:15.940]  there would be nothing for criminals to see.
[28:15.940 --> 28:17.620]  The cupboard would be bare.
[28:17.620 --> 28:18.860]  Too bad other companies
[28:18.860 --> 28:21.340]  don't treat your data the same way.
[28:21.340 --> 28:22.620]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht.
[28:22.660 --> 28:25.220]  For more information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[28:29.900 --> 28:30.740]  I lost my son.
[28:30.740 --> 28:31.580]  My nephew.
[28:31.580 --> 28:32.420]  My uncle.
[28:32.420 --> 28:33.240]  My son.
[28:33.240 --> 28:34.300]  On September 11th, 2001.
[28:34.300 --> 28:36.660]  Most people don't know that a third tower
[28:36.660 --> 28:37.980]  fell on September 11th.
[28:37.980 --> 28:41.020]  World Trade Center 7, a 47-story skyscraper,
[28:41.020 --> 28:42.300]  was not hit by a plane.
[28:42.300 --> 28:43.980]  Although the official explanation
[28:43.980 --> 28:46.060]  is that fire brought down Building 7.
[28:46.060 --> 28:48.860]  Over 1,200 architects and engineers
[28:48.860 --> 28:49.900]  have looked into the evidence.
[28:49.900 --> 28:51.780]  And believe there is more to the story.
[28:51.780 --> 28:53.340]  Bring justice to my son.
[28:53.340 --> 28:54.180]  My uncle.
[28:54.180 --> 28:55.000]  My nephew.
[28:55.000 --> 28:55.840]  My son.
[28:55.840 --> 28:57.180]  Go to buildingwhat.org.
[28:57.180 --> 28:59.940]  Why it fell, why it matters, and what you can do.
[29:01.540 --> 29:03.100]  Rule of Law Radio is proud to offer
[29:03.100 --> 29:04.660]  the rule of law traffic seminar.
[29:04.660 --> 29:07.020]  In today's America, we live in an us-against-them society.
[29:07.020 --> 29:09.300]  And if we, the people, are ever going to have a free society,
[29:09.300 --> 29:12.180]  then we're going to have to stand and defend our own rights.
[29:12.180 --> 29:14.020]  Among those rights are the right to travel freely
[29:14.020 --> 29:15.500]  from place to place, the right to act
[29:15.500 --> 29:17.420]  in our own private capacity, and most importantly,
[29:17.420 --> 29:19.180]  the right to due process of law.
[29:19.180 --> 29:21.660]  Traffic courts afford us the least expensive opportunity
[29:21.740 --> 29:23.740]  to learn how to enforce and preserve our rights
[29:23.740 --> 29:24.980]  through due process.
[29:24.980 --> 29:26.540]  Former Sheriff's Deputy Eddie Craig,
[29:26.540 --> 29:27.980]  in conjunction with Rule of Law Radio,
[29:27.980 --> 29:30.100]  has put together the most comprehensive teaching tool
[29:30.100 --> 29:32.740]  available that will help you understand what due process is
[29:32.740 --> 29:34.700]  and how to hold courts to the rule of law.
[29:34.700 --> 29:36.820]  You can get your own copy of this invaluable material
[29:36.820 --> 29:40.060]  by going to ruleoflawradio.com and ordering your copy today.
[29:40.060 --> 29:42.100]  By ordering now, you'll receive a copy of Eddie's book,
[29:42.100 --> 29:44.620]  The Texas Transportation Code, The Law Versus the Lie.
[29:44.620 --> 29:47.100]  Video and audio of the original 2009 seminar,
[29:47.100 --> 29:48.380]  hundreds of research documents
[29:48.380 --> 29:50.060]  and other useful resource material.
[29:50.060 --> 29:51.260]  Learn how to fight for your rights
[29:51.260 --> 29:54.020]  with the help of this material from ruleoflawradio.com.
[29:54.020 --> 29:55.380]  Order your copy today, and together,
[29:55.380 --> 29:58.220]  we can have the free society we all want and deserve.
[30:01.780 --> 30:06.140]  Live, free speech radio, logosradionetwork.com.
[30:06.140 --> 30:10.820]  Yeah, Mr. Officer, you're takin' the line to hand.
[30:12.820 --> 30:16.420]  Won't you follow the law of the land?
[30:16.420 --> 30:19.180]  I don't understand.
[30:19.180 --> 30:22.300]  Your job is to protect and to serve,
[30:22.300 --> 30:25.300]  not beat and abuse.
[30:25.300 --> 30:28.300]  Officer!
[30:28.300 --> 30:32.300]  When you gonna stop abuse?
[30:33.260 --> 30:36.260]  When you gonna stop abuse?
[30:36.260 --> 30:39.260]  Your power.
[30:39.260 --> 30:42.260]  When you gonna stop abuse?
[30:42.260 --> 30:45.260]  Your power.
[30:45.260 --> 30:48.260]  When you gonna stop abuse?
[30:48.260 --> 30:51.260]  Your power.
[30:51.260 --> 30:54.260]  When you gonna stop abuse?
[30:54.260 --> 30:57.260]  Your power.
[30:57.260 --> 30:59.260]  So please Mr. Mackle and teach officers
[30:59.260 --> 31:02.260]  not to abuse their power.
[31:02.260 --> 31:07.260]  Request to the leader, the captain of all officers.
[31:07.260 --> 31:09.260]  Tell them to uphold the law,
[31:09.260 --> 31:12.260]  and please don't abuse their power.
[31:12.260 --> 31:15.260]  They beat and they beat and they cheat and they cheat
[31:15.260 --> 31:18.260]  and they lie every hour.
[31:18.260 --> 31:23.260]  So Mr. Officer, please stop abusing your power.
[31:23.260 --> 31:29.260]  You pull me over and tell me to be silent, Mr.
[31:29.260 --> 31:32.260]  I want to speak to my lawyer.
[31:32.260 --> 31:37.260]  Mr. Officer, you're actin' like you're the judge.
[31:37.260 --> 31:40.260]  Findin' me guilty, sir.
[31:40.260 --> 31:43.260]  So when you gonna stop abuse?
[31:43.260 --> 31:46.260]  Your power.
[31:46.260 --> 31:48.260]  When you gonna stop abuse?
[31:48.260 --> 31:51.260]  Your power.
[31:51.260 --> 31:54.260]  When you gonna stop abuse?
[31:54.260 --> 31:57.260]  Your power.
[31:57.260 --> 31:59.260]  When you gonna stop abuse?
[31:59.260 --> 32:02.260]  Your power.
[32:02.260 --> 32:05.260]  So Mr. Officer abusing his power.
[32:05.260 --> 32:07.260]  Please Mr. Mackle and help the officer.
[32:07.260 --> 32:10.260]  So they could understand they should uphold the law
[32:10.260 --> 32:13.260]  instead of abusing the power.
[32:13.260 --> 32:16.260]  You know they act like they're judge and jury.
[32:16.260 --> 32:19.260]  But Mr. Officer, you're supposed to protect me.
[32:19.260 --> 32:21.260]  Uphold the law and do it properly.
[32:21.260 --> 32:24.260]  And the citizens of this country wouldn't be so angry.
[32:24.260 --> 32:26.260]  Look what they do to Rodney King.
[32:26.260 --> 32:29.260]  They beat the man for nothing.
[32:29.260 --> 32:32.260]  So officer, don't you realize?
[32:32.260 --> 32:35.260]  People tired of your lies.
[32:35.260 --> 32:37.260]  So when you gonna stop abuse?
[32:37.260 --> 32:40.260]  Your power.
[32:40.260 --> 32:43.260]  When you gonna stop abuse?
[32:43.260 --> 32:46.260]  Your power.
[32:46.260 --> 32:48.260]  When you gonna stop abuse?
[32:48.260 --> 32:51.260]  Your power.
[32:51.260 --> 32:54.260]  When you gonna stop abuse?
[32:54.260 --> 32:57.260]  Your power.
[32:57.260 --> 32:59.260]  So hey officer, stop abusing your power.
[32:59.260 --> 33:02.260]  Your job is to uphold the law.
[33:02.260 --> 33:05.260]  But yet officer, you're not doing your job.
[33:05.260 --> 33:08.260]  You're abusing the citizens every hour.
[33:08.260 --> 33:11.260]  You can say you have the right to be silent.
[33:11.260 --> 33:13.260]  So silent I'm gonna stay sir.
[33:13.260 --> 33:16.260]  I wanna speak to the lawyer.
[33:16.260 --> 33:19.260]  Mr. Officer.
[33:20.260 --> 33:23.260]  All right, we are back.
[33:23.260 --> 33:25.260]  Rule of Law Radio.
[33:25.260 --> 33:27.260]  And we're speaking with Joseph in Texas.
[33:27.260 --> 33:31.260]  And Joseph, about your federal case.
[33:31.260 --> 33:34.260]  Let's see, where were we on your federal case?
[33:34.260 --> 33:37.260]  We were deciding...
[33:37.260 --> 33:41.260]  Oh yes, Rit of Sir Sherwari.
[33:41.260 --> 33:46.260]  We were deciding whether you could use an interlocutory appeal.
[33:46.260 --> 33:51.260]  Or if you could...
[33:51.260 --> 33:54.260]  If you could ask for a writ of mandamus.
[33:54.260 --> 33:58.260]  Either one, I believe either one fits.
[33:58.260 --> 34:03.260]  This is a dispositive matter.
[34:03.260 --> 34:06.260]  Are you familiar with dispositive?
[34:06.260 --> 34:09.260]  I believe that's before you get to the merits.
[34:09.260 --> 34:11.260]  It's a threshold issue, right?
[34:11.260 --> 34:14.260]  Are you there?
[34:15.260 --> 34:18.260]  I hope we haven't lost you.
[34:18.260 --> 34:20.260]  Maybe you can still hear us.
[34:20.260 --> 34:26.260]  A dispositive matter is one that will dispose of the case.
[34:26.260 --> 34:29.260]  So there will be a final ruling one way or the other.
[34:29.260 --> 34:32.260]  All of the issues raised will be handled.
[34:32.260 --> 34:34.260]  There's nothing outstanding.
[34:34.260 --> 34:37.260]  That's dispositive.
[34:37.260 --> 34:42.260]  And what you're asking for is...
[34:42.260 --> 34:43.260]  What you're asking for...
[34:43.260 --> 34:45.260]  Oh, Joseph, are you back?
[34:45.260 --> 34:46.260]  I hope so.
[34:46.260 --> 34:47.260]  Can you hear me now?
[34:47.260 --> 34:50.260]  Hello, Joseph.
[34:50.260 --> 34:55.260]  Okay, well...
[34:55.260 --> 35:00.260]  A dispositive matter is one which disposes of the case.
[35:00.260 --> 35:03.260]  And in this situation, that's what you're asking for.
[35:03.260 --> 35:08.260]  You're asking that the higher court would...
[35:08.260 --> 35:11.260]  Would step in and intervene into the middle.
[35:11.260 --> 35:14.260]  Well, intervene is probably not the best word.
[35:14.260 --> 35:16.260]  That has special meanings.
[35:16.260 --> 35:22.260]  But they would step into the case in the county
[35:22.260 --> 35:26.260]  and would tell the county what to do.
[35:26.260 --> 35:32.260]  For instance, confirm to the county that jurisdiction is not proper.
[35:32.260 --> 35:34.260]  The court can't acquire jurisdiction
[35:34.260 --> 35:38.260]  while the requirements of the law have not been met.
[35:38.260 --> 35:41.260]  In order for the court to have jurisdiction,
[35:41.260 --> 35:44.260]  first, the plaintiff has to do X, Y, and Z.
[35:44.260 --> 35:47.260]  And plaintiff failed to do X, Y, and Z.
[35:47.260 --> 35:54.260]  So plaintiff can't be a plaintiff.
[35:54.260 --> 35:56.260]  Does that make sense?
[35:56.260 --> 35:57.260]  Can you hear me?
[35:57.260 --> 35:59.260]  Oh, Joseph, I'm sorry.
[35:59.260 --> 36:03.260]  It looks like we may have lost you.
[36:03.260 --> 36:04.260]  I'm still here.
[36:04.260 --> 36:06.260]  You got me on mute.
[36:06.260 --> 36:07.260]  I see you on the board.
[36:07.260 --> 36:08.260]  I've got you unmuted.
[36:08.260 --> 36:11.260]  But I'm not hearing you.
[36:11.260 --> 36:12.260]  Well...
[36:12.260 --> 36:14.260]  All right.
[36:14.260 --> 36:15.260]  Can you hear me?
[36:15.260 --> 36:16.260]  All right.
[36:16.260 --> 36:21.260]  Let me just try something here.
[36:21.260 --> 36:29.260]  Okay.
[36:29.260 --> 36:30.260]  Well, I'm sorry, Joseph.
[36:30.260 --> 36:31.260]  I don't hear you.
[36:31.260 --> 36:34.260]  And I see you on the board, but...
[36:34.260 --> 36:36.260]  I'm still here.
[36:36.260 --> 36:38.260]  I'm not sure what that's about.
[36:38.260 --> 36:39.260]  All right.
[36:39.260 --> 36:47.260]  So hopefully that handles your question about the federal case.
[36:47.260 --> 36:49.260]  And wish you well on that.
[36:49.260 --> 36:53.260]  Sorry, I'm unable to hear you to say goodbye to you properly.
[36:53.260 --> 37:02.260]  But now we'll go here to our next caller is Eric in Massachusetts.
[37:02.260 --> 37:03.260]  Good evening, Eric.
[37:03.260 --> 37:05.260]  What's on your mind?
[37:05.260 --> 37:07.260]  Hey, I'm supposed to still on the line.
[37:07.260 --> 37:08.260]  I can hear him.
[37:08.260 --> 37:10.260]  Hello, Eric.
[37:10.260 --> 37:11.260]  Can you hear me?
[37:11.260 --> 37:14.260]  Oh.
[37:14.260 --> 37:16.260]  That's the problem.
[37:16.260 --> 37:20.260]  Oh, so it's not just Joseph here.
[37:20.260 --> 37:24.260]  I'm having some kind of audio problems.
[37:24.260 --> 37:43.260]  Sorry about that.
[37:43.260 --> 37:53.260]  It looks like I'm not even live.
[37:53.260 --> 37:56.260]  Like more than one issue here.
[37:56.260 --> 37:57.260]  Okay.
[37:57.260 --> 38:05.260]  Well, if anybody can still hear me, I will address this about Eric.
[38:05.260 --> 38:11.260]  Sorry, not Eric, but Joseph was wondering about his case going to the feds.
[38:11.260 --> 38:18.260]  So the initial take on it was to just simply address it in the county as a
[38:18.260 --> 38:20.260]  challenge to jurisdiction.
[38:20.260 --> 38:22.260]  Court lacks jurisdiction.
[38:22.260 --> 38:23.260]  Case can't start.
[38:23.260 --> 38:26.260]  Law says so.
[38:26.260 --> 38:30.260]  However, I'm unfamiliar with this Michael Maris approach.
[38:30.260 --> 38:34.260]  So I know some people have talked about it and I'm just not, I've never done
[38:34.260 --> 38:35.260]  it.
[38:35.260 --> 38:38.260]  I've never gotten into it or even been taught about it.
[38:38.260 --> 38:44.260]  So I'm not sure what exactly he espouses or what he has done or sold.
[38:44.260 --> 38:48.260]  He has some kind of process that he sells a package.
[38:48.260 --> 38:50.260]  I'm not sure I've ever seen all that stuff.
[38:50.260 --> 38:56.260]  So without you telling me a little more detail about exactly what it was that you
[38:56.260 --> 39:04.260]  were trying to do with this counterclaim or cross-claim, I'm not sure.
[39:04.260 --> 39:06.260]  I can't really speak to that part.
[39:06.260 --> 39:14.260]  So what I can address is in the county court, when you go to the district for a
[39:14.260 --> 39:21.260]  writ of certiorari, you are asking the district to agree with you that this
[39:21.260 --> 39:24.260]  county court never had jurisdiction in the first place.
[39:24.260 --> 39:27.260]  And they can do that.
[39:27.260 --> 39:28.260]  And they've done it for me.
[39:28.260 --> 39:31.260]  So I would encourage you to look into that option.
[39:31.260 --> 39:35.260]  That's a writ of certiorari.
[39:35.260 --> 39:38.260]  Okay.
[39:38.260 --> 39:46.260]  As for the issues that you raised, removal by itself doesn't seem to me to
[39:46.260 --> 39:53.260]  make a whole lot of sense because if you're removing a case, the case needs to
[39:53.260 --> 40:04.260]  have some validity and it needs to have some federal issues in the case that
[40:04.260 --> 40:07.260]  the state is not able to hear.
[40:07.260 --> 40:14.260]  Not new issues that you bring, but they brought the case.
[40:14.260 --> 40:19.260]  So you're the defendant and they're the plaintiff.
[40:19.260 --> 40:23.260]  So whatever's in the four corners of the pleading is where you have to draw the
[40:23.260 --> 40:25.260]  line.
[40:25.260 --> 40:33.260]  And when you're saying this case is by law prevented and prohibited from
[40:33.260 --> 40:41.260]  commencing, that doesn't give it any legs to stand on and go into the federal
[40:41.260 --> 40:43.260]  court.
[40:43.260 --> 40:45.260]  Hopefully that made sense.
[40:45.260 --> 40:46.260]  All right.
[40:46.260 --> 40:50.260]  Well, I'm not sure if I should encourage people to call in.
[40:50.260 --> 40:56.260]  We seem to be having some audio issues, but 512-646-1984.
[40:56.260 --> 40:59.260]  We'll be right back.
[40:59.260 --> 41:02.260]  Do you have a business with five employees or more?
[41:02.260 --> 41:06.260]  How would you like to save hundreds of thousands of dollars in FICA taxes?
[41:06.260 --> 41:10.260]  Do you have a major medical plan that nobody can afford to be on?
[41:10.260 --> 41:15.260]  Or how would you like to save in premium costs on a current major medical plan
[41:15.260 --> 41:17.260]  by lowering the claims cost?
[41:17.260 --> 41:23.260]  The CHAMP plan is a section 125 IRS approved preventative health plan that
[41:23.260 --> 41:28.260]  provides your employees with doctors, medications, emergency care, and
[41:28.260 --> 41:32.260]  Teladoc all at zero cost with zero co-pay.
[41:32.260 --> 41:37.260]  If you are an employee, you also will get a pay raise by paying less in FICA
[41:37.260 --> 41:38.260]  taxes.
[41:38.260 --> 41:43.260]  As an employer, you will save hundreds of thousands of dollars in matching
[41:43.260 --> 41:44.260]  FICA taxes.
[41:44.260 --> 41:49.260]  The CHAMP plan can help add working capital, market resale value, or pay
[41:49.260 --> 41:50.260]  down lines of credit.
[41:50.260 --> 41:59.260]  Call Scott at 214-730-2471 or DallasMMS.com.
[41:59.260 --> 42:02.260]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[42:02.260 --> 42:07.260]  Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary, the affordable, easy
[42:07.260 --> 42:13.260]  to understand, 4-CD course that will show you how in 24 hours, step by step.
[42:13.260 --> 42:17.260]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing.
[42:17.260 --> 42:21.260]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[42:21.260 --> 42:26.260]  Thousands have won with our step by step course, and now you can too.
[42:26.260 --> 42:31.260]  Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case
[42:31.260 --> 42:32.260]  winning experience.
[42:32.260 --> 42:37.260]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand
[42:37.260 --> 42:41.260]  about the principles and practices that control our American courts.
[42:41.260 --> 42:47.260]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil
[42:47.260 --> 42:50.260]  cases, pro se tactics, and much more.
[42:50.260 --> 42:56.260]  Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner or call toll free,
[42:56.260 --> 42:59.260]  866-LAW-EZ.
[43:00.260 --> 43:19.260]  If you did not have any problems, where are you going to look for one?
[43:19.260 --> 43:25.260]  If you could not wait any bit too long, would your purposes be done?
[43:25.260 --> 43:29.260]  If you could not wait any bit too long, would your purposes be done?
[43:29.260 --> 43:33.260]  If you could not wait any bit too long, would your purposes be done?
[43:33.260 --> 43:37.260]  If you could not wait any bit too long, would your purposes be done?
[43:37.260 --> 43:41.260]  If you could not wait any bit too long, would your purposes be done?
[43:41.260 --> 43:45.260]  If you could not wait any bit too long, would your purposes be done?
[43:45.260 --> 43:49.260]  If you could not wait any bit too long, would your purposes be done?
[43:49.260 --> 43:53.260]  If you could not wait any bit too long, would your purposes be done?
[43:53.260 --> 43:57.260]  If you could not wait any bit too long, would your purposes be done?
[43:57.260 --> 44:01.260]  If you could not wait any bit too long, would your purposes be done?
[44:01.260 --> 44:05.260]  If you could not wait any bit too long, would your purposes be done?
[44:05.260 --> 44:09.260]  If you could not wait any bit too long, would your purposes be done?
[44:09.260 --> 44:13.260]  If you could not wait any bit too long, would your purposes be done?
[44:13.260 --> 44:17.260]  If you could not wait any bit too long, would your purposes be done?
[44:17.260 --> 44:21.260]  If you could not wait any bit too long, would your purposes be done?
[44:21.260 --> 44:25.260]  If you could not wait any bit too long, would your purposes be done?
[44:25.260 --> 44:29.260]  If you could not wait any bit too long, would your purposes be done?
[44:29.260 --> 44:33.260]  If you could not wait any bit too long, would your purposes be done?
[44:33.260 --> 44:37.260]  If you could not wait any bit too long, would your purposes be done?
[44:37.260 --> 44:41.260]  If you could not wait any bit too long, would your purposes be done?
[44:41.260 --> 44:45.260]  If you could not wait any bit too long, would your purposes be done?
[44:45.260 --> 44:49.260]  Action Out on the opposed
[44:49.260 --> 44:53.980]  Action Out on the opposed
[44:53.980 --> 45:18.060]  Okay, we are back.
[45:18.060 --> 45:20.620]  This is the Rule of Law Radio for Andy Kelton.
[45:20.620 --> 45:23.820]  I'm Brett Fountain, and we're going to try this again.
[45:23.820 --> 45:26.380]  Let's go to Eric in Massachusetts.
[45:27.220 --> 45:28.140]  Good evening, Eric.
[45:28.140 --> 45:29.060]  What's on your mind?
[45:30.220 --> 45:30.820]  Can you hear me?
[45:31.700 --> 45:32.460]  Yes, sir.
[45:33.300 --> 45:34.380]  Testing, testing.
[45:36.460 --> 45:37.420]  I'm glad that worked.
[45:39.740 --> 45:44.100]  Actually, Joseph and I have been talking a lot, uh, the past week or so, both
[45:44.100 --> 45:47.140]  working on federal issues.
[45:47.180 --> 45:52.140]  I don't think there is an interlocutory appeal in federal court, but you can
[45:52.140 --> 45:53.540]  correct me if I'm wrong on that.
[45:54.300 --> 45:57.540]  So, um, cause I was looking it up.
[45:57.540 --> 46:02.460]  I'm, I'm actually filing potentially writ, a mandamus to the appeals court,
[46:03.180 --> 46:04.940]  the first circuit in my case.
[46:06.260 --> 46:11.140]  Uh, speaking of which circling back on some of this stuff, uh, federal judges
[46:11.140 --> 46:13.500]  right now are getting hammered, which is great.
[46:14.020 --> 46:18.660]  Um, especially with what, like you're doing, but there's a lot of scrutiny
[46:18.660 --> 46:20.220]  on federal judges right now.
[46:20.220 --> 46:26.980]  And, uh, the current administration is, is trying to get rid of as many as possible.
[46:28.180 --> 46:30.340]  So that's, that's a really good thing.
[46:30.340 --> 46:33.500]  And just even the amount of scrutiny, having people look at.
[46:33.820 --> 46:35.700]  Yes, scrutiny is good.
[46:37.140 --> 46:37.660]  Exactly.
[46:37.900 --> 46:38.620]  Exactly.
[46:38.700 --> 46:43.140]  So, well, what did you think of my take on, uh,
[46:43.620 --> 46:51.420]  the, um, propriety of a removal of a case, removal to the fed of a case
[46:51.420 --> 46:57.220]  that never should have started and in fact was prohibited by law
[46:57.220 --> 46:59.180]  from starting in the county.
[47:01.220 --> 47:02.100]  Does that make sense?
[47:02.100 --> 47:09.940]  That the, that my position is that removal to the fed is not really
[47:09.940 --> 47:16.780]  appropriate when the case is, uh, there's no jurisdiction and the case may not start.
[47:19.940 --> 47:20.420]  Yeah.
[47:21.940 --> 47:23.500]  Uh, I don't, I don't know.
[47:23.540 --> 47:30.340]  Um, I mean, he did what Joseph was doing and I was encouraging to ask you.
[47:30.900 --> 47:35.380]  He was kind of doing a weird move and I think you get it that he was removing
[47:35.380 --> 47:39.700]  it to federal court, but then somehow bringing a counterclaim.
[47:40.740 --> 47:45.260]  And if he brings a claim, then he can, then the four corners of the
[47:45.260 --> 47:49.540]  pleadings would include federal issues and so forth.
[47:50.980 --> 47:58.020]  But since the ones who started it, the plaintiffs didn't bring those issues.
[47:58.940 --> 48:02.060]  There's nothing about federal in, in there.
[48:02.060 --> 48:04.780]  So I don't know that it makes sense to remove.
[48:04.780 --> 48:08.420]  Well, I forget what his reasons were for removing it.
[48:08.420 --> 48:11.620]  Um, why he wanted it in federal, I think because of the federal
[48:11.620 --> 48:18.340]  issues that he wanted to raise the other thought I had was he could file a federal
[48:18.340 --> 48:23.540]  claim and then enjoin them maybe, or remove and enjoin, right?
[48:23.580 --> 48:24.580]  That makes sense.
[48:24.940 --> 48:26.060]  And that seems cleaner.
[48:26.540 --> 48:31.900]  And also, uh, did he, do you know, uh, I'm sorry, he's dropped off.
[48:31.940 --> 48:35.980]  Did he, do you know, I'm sorry, he's dropped off, but since you've been talking,
[48:35.980 --> 48:41.900]  maybe you can speak to whether or not he is intending to file a counterclaim or,
[48:42.460 --> 48:47.380]  or was that a part of a Michael Mears thing that he is decided to not pursue?
[48:48.780 --> 48:54.260]  Well, I think I'll speak, uh, ignorantly and quickly about the Michael Mears thing.
[48:54.300 --> 48:59.140]  I think that's just, you know, he talks about how to fight, uh, you know,
[48:59.140 --> 49:02.860]  credit card debt and stuff like that, how to fight people, collections, basically.
[49:03.180 --> 49:05.580]  So I don't think Mears, and again, I could be wrong.
[49:05.580 --> 49:09.660]  I don't think he gets too far into filing in federal court and removing and
[49:09.660 --> 49:16.100]  rounding, and so I, you know, this, he, this is, I think in part Joseph's ideas.
[49:16.900 --> 49:25.020]  Um, so I don't know how Joseph was introducing the counterclaim into it.
[49:25.060 --> 49:29.420]  And that's what he, uh, he and I were sort of brainstorming is how to do that.
[49:29.420 --> 49:35.660]  And I mentioned again, do another claim, do another filing and then remove and,
[49:35.740 --> 49:39.820]  and, and join, um, I'm not sure what he ended up doing.
[49:40.380 --> 49:45.980]  Um, I can't explain that myself, but I think, yeah, I don't, I don't know.
[49:45.980 --> 49:48.060]  I don't know how he, how he did it.
[49:49.500 --> 49:50.180]  Well, what about you?
[49:50.180 --> 49:50.980]  What's on your mind?
[49:51.980 --> 49:55.740]  Yeah, I'm, I'm, I have both, you know, a case I'm trying to get out of federal
[49:55.740 --> 49:58.540]  court and a case I'm trying to get in federal court.
[50:01.820 --> 50:03.700]  Some people are just never satisfied.
[50:07.220 --> 50:13.820]  I think Randy accused me of that, but, um, so this is really related to that.
[50:13.820 --> 50:18.380]  I had a, um, I'm actually going to pop my motion to remain, which I think is very
[50:18.420 --> 50:24.500]  good on, uh, the, uh, law society page.
[50:24.820 --> 50:30.580]  Um, yeah, so I'm trying to get this case out of federal.
[50:30.580 --> 50:37.460]  So I filed it in state the, and I talked to you about this in November, you and,
[50:37.580 --> 50:45.260]  and Randy, so I filed it in state, my former partner who lives in Florida per se,
[50:45.940 --> 50:49.060]  his attorney removed it to federal court.
[50:49.060 --> 50:50.860]  And I was complaining up and down.
[50:50.940 --> 50:52.460]  You guys like that.
[50:52.460 --> 50:57.740]  The process is bogus in that it automatically gets done and there's no,
[50:58.220 --> 51:00.260]  no, there's no consider.
[51:01.260 --> 51:01.620]  Oh yeah.
[51:01.620 --> 51:04.580]  I remember that, that issue you were concerned about.
[51:05.860 --> 51:06.140]  Right.
[51:06.140 --> 51:09.980]  But what's interesting is Joseph, he actually shared me, shared the
[51:09.980 --> 51:12.460]  document with me, which I may actually use.
[51:13.340 --> 51:21.940]  Um, the judge didn't accept his removal and you need to, you need to correct this.
[51:21.980 --> 51:23.980]  He, he did a show cause order.
[51:26.420 --> 51:31.700]  So, yes, it's in the county court or was that a federal judge that said that
[51:32.700 --> 51:36.180]  the federal judge, no, we're not interested in the, yeah.
[51:36.180 --> 51:39.100]  Cause the county court wouldn't be able to do that.
[51:40.060 --> 51:44.580]  That would be, you know, the cliquest plan issue.
[51:44.580 --> 51:46.740]  Like you can't let the states, whatever.
[51:47.180 --> 51:51.420]  So I agree with this process where the judge reviews it and says,
[51:51.700 --> 51:53.380]  and he reviewed it within 24 hours.
[51:54.020 --> 51:58.180]  So the judge reviewed Joseph's case and said, but wait a minute, you can't move this.
[51:58.180 --> 51:59.780]  You get, you know, here's a show cause order.
[52:00.100 --> 52:00.540]  Perfect.
[52:00.540 --> 52:01.340]  I accept that.
[52:02.140 --> 52:05.740]  But in my case, it was just automatically, and there was all these efficiencies.
[52:06.660 --> 52:07.380]  Um,
[52:08.340 --> 52:09.700]  I think that makes a lot of sense.
[52:10.580 --> 52:10.980]  Right.
[52:11.140 --> 52:11.460]  Right.
[52:11.540 --> 52:18.540]  And so, uh, that's addressed in my motion to remand in that I just posted on the page.
[52:18.540 --> 52:26.620]  So in my case, again, it was automatically accepted and the filing was deficient.
[52:26.620 --> 52:29.540]  There was no testimony witness.
[52:29.620 --> 52:35.900]  Um, you know, the attorney didn't present himself as attorney for the client.
[52:35.980 --> 52:41.500]  He just, just basically removed it, you know, and just claimed to be working
[52:41.500 --> 52:45.700]  for on their behalf, but had no, you know, no authority to do so stated.
[52:45.700 --> 52:47.100]  No, or prove no authority.
[52:47.660 --> 52:49.100]  And then he's making claims again.
[52:49.100 --> 52:51.140]  He's a witness violation of rules.
[52:54.500 --> 52:57.980]  I like that rule a lot, but I don't even know if the courts even really
[52:57.980 --> 53:02.660]  recognize it because attorneys don't, you know, accuse each other of it.
[53:03.460 --> 53:03.900]  So,
[53:05.100 --> 53:07.580]  Oh, he wouldn't want to irritate a fellow bar member, right?
[53:08.060 --> 53:09.140]  Exactly.
[53:09.620 --> 53:13.300]  So I'd be, you know, moving this long for six months and it's, it's, you
[53:13.300 --> 53:15.460]  know, it's still really not compliant.
[53:16.060 --> 53:23.420]  Basically I made a motion to remand of a 12 before that, you know, he wasn't,
[53:23.620 --> 53:25.220]  the attorney still isn't compliant.
[53:25.220 --> 53:29.180]  There's five elements, five or six elements to a proper removal.
[53:29.180 --> 53:30.460]  And he's still missing one.
[53:31.300 --> 53:39.700]  Um, so I, you know, I was in, in first circuit, your, well, excuse me, not
[53:39.700 --> 53:44.620]  first circuit in federal district in my area, in my state, you have an obligation
[53:44.620 --> 53:46.660]  to talk to the other attorney and say, Hey, I'm going to file this.
[53:47.540 --> 53:51.500]  So I said, Hey, you haven't replied to, you know, my complaint.
[53:51.540 --> 53:55.340]  I'm going to file a motion to, uh, for summary judgment.
[53:55.820 --> 54:00.780]  Well, he quickly writes up and electronically files a, you know, motion
[54:00.780 --> 54:05.100]  for an extension and he got that extension in three hours.
[54:06.500 --> 54:06.900]  Wow.
[54:07.980 --> 54:08.300]  Yeah.
[54:08.300 --> 54:09.380]  I was like, wait a minute.
[54:09.380 --> 54:10.420]  What's going on here?
[54:10.420 --> 54:13.860]  Like, how is that even possible in three hours before you even
[54:13.860 --> 54:15.140]  have a chance to oppose it?
[54:16.500 --> 54:16.900]  Yes.
[54:17.940 --> 54:18.380]  Right.
[54:19.940 --> 54:20.380]  Right.
[54:20.820 --> 54:22.420]  And so I'm like, what is going on here?
[54:22.980 --> 54:29.500]  So he does, he does three extensions and on the third extension, he
[54:29.500 --> 54:31.180]  then writes a 12 B motion.
[54:31.980 --> 54:36.100]  So now I'm really upset and I stated the court, Hey, you should be upset about
[54:36.100 --> 54:40.820]  this too, because he asked you for an extension, you granted it on the basis
[54:40.820 --> 54:46.700]  that it was for, you know, filing the reply and he uses it as a 12 B.
[54:47.020 --> 54:55.340]  So I, uh, file what I filed, but I filed this motion to remand and previously
[54:56.660 --> 55:00.740]  I had, I told you that I did a unusual thing, which is a motion to dismiss
[55:00.740 --> 55:05.420]  because it was a deficient filing, a deficient removal to remand or
[55:05.420 --> 55:08.020]  through removal is a deficient removal.
[55:08.020 --> 55:11.180]  So I did a unusual thing, which is a motion to dismiss.
[55:11.900 --> 55:12.540]  I can hang on.
[55:13.020 --> 55:13.660]  I can hang on.
[55:16.340 --> 55:18.060]  What was the grounds for this missile?
[55:19.340 --> 55:21.020]  Well, again, he was deficient.
[55:21.620 --> 55:28.340]  He did not have a complete removal filing, so he removed it while
[55:28.620 --> 55:30.300]  because it was defective, right?
[55:31.180 --> 55:31.500]  Yeah.
[55:31.940 --> 55:32.300]  Okay.
[55:33.460 --> 55:33.900]  All right.
[55:34.340 --> 55:36.300]  Well, that's going to be interesting.
[55:36.300 --> 55:38.540]  Let's talk some more about that on the other side.
[55:38.580 --> 55:42.220]  If we're about to go to our sponsors, anybody else wants to call in?
[55:42.220 --> 55:45.900]  It's 512-646-1984.
[55:46.060 --> 55:46.780]  We'll be right back.
[55:49.220 --> 55:53.700]  The Bible remains the most popular book in the world, yet countless
[55:53.700 --> 55:56.620]  readers are frustrated because they struggle to understand it.
[55:57.260 --> 56:01.220]  Some new translations try to help by simplifying the text, but in the
[56:01.220 --> 56:05.020]  process can compromise the profound meaning of the scripture.
[56:05.820 --> 56:07.620]  Enter the recovery version.
[56:08.260 --> 56:12.980]  First, this new translation is extremely faithful and accurate, but the real
[56:12.980 --> 56:18.460]  story is the more than 9,000 explanatory footnotes, difficult and profound
[56:18.460 --> 56:22.980]  passages are opened up in a marvelous way, providing an entrance into the
[56:22.980 --> 56:26.420]  riches of the word beyond which you've ever experienced before.
[56:26.980 --> 56:30.580]  Bibles for America would like to give you a free recovery version
[56:30.580 --> 56:31.700]  simply for the asking.
[56:32.300 --> 56:36.900]  This comprehensive yet compact study Bible is yours just by calling us
[56:36.900 --> 56:46.380]  toll-free at 1-888-551-0102, or by ordering online at freestudybible.com.
[56:46.740 --> 56:49.060]  That's freestudybible.com.
[56:52.020 --> 56:58.180]  You're listening to the Logos Radio Network at logosradionetwork.com.
[57:01.260 --> 57:04.900]  The Bill of Rights contains the first 10 amendments of our constitution.
[57:04.980 --> 57:08.340]  They guarantee the specific freedoms Americans should know and protect.
[57:08.420 --> 57:09.820]  Our liberty depends on it.
[57:10.140 --> 57:10.460]  I'm Dr.
[57:10.460 --> 57:13.580]  Catherine Albrecht, and I'll be right back with an unforgettable way to
[57:13.580 --> 57:15.820]  remember one of your constitutional rights.
[57:16.260 --> 57:17.980]  Privacy is under attack.
[57:18.220 --> 57:21.580]  When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[57:21.820 --> 57:26.180]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[57:26.620 --> 57:30.100]  So protect your rights, say no to surveillance and keep your
[57:30.100 --> 57:31.620]  information to yourself.
[57:31.860 --> 57:34.020]  Privacy, it's worth hanging onto.
[57:34.380 --> 57:38.100]  This public service announcement is brought to you by startpage.com, the
[57:38.100 --> 57:41.620]  private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[57:41.900 --> 57:44.020]  Start over with StartPage.
[57:45.340 --> 57:47.860]  Imagine your mom and dad are getting ready for bed.
[57:48.020 --> 57:50.900]  They pull back the covers and find a third party there.
[57:51.100 --> 57:53.980]  He announces, I'm with the military and I'm sleeping here tonight.
[57:54.260 --> 57:57.820]  That shocking image of a third party in my parents' bed reminds me what the
[57:57.820 --> 57:59.820]  third amendment was designed to prevent.
[58:00.060 --> 58:03.500]  It protects us from being forced to share our homes with soldiers, a
[58:03.500 --> 58:05.900]  common demand in the days of our founding fathers.
[58:06.180 --> 58:08.420]  Third party, third amendment, get it?
[58:08.660 --> 58:12.300]  So if you answer a knock at your door and guys in fatigues demand lodging,
[58:12.380 --> 58:15.660]  tell them to dust off their copy of the Bill of Rights and re-read the third
[58:15.660 --> 58:16.180]  amendment.
[58:16.700 --> 58:17.020]  I'm Dr.
[58:17.020 --> 58:20.780]  Catherine Albrecht, more news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[58:20.860 --> 58:24.420]  The Bill of Rights contains the first 10 amendments of our constitution.
[58:24.580 --> 58:27.860]  They guarantee the specific freedoms Americans should know and protect.
[58:28.020 --> 58:29.500]  Our liberty depends on it.
[58:29.780 --> 58:30.060]  I'm Dr.
[58:30.060 --> 58:33.140]  Catherine Albrecht, and I'll be right back with an unforgettable way to
[58:33.140 --> 58:35.260]  remember one of your constitutional rights.
[58:35.740 --> 58:37.620]  Privacy is under attack.
[58:37.860 --> 58:40.700]  When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it.
[58:40.700 --> 58:41.620]  You'll never get it.
[58:41.620 --> 58:42.660]  You'll never get it.
[58:42.660 --> 58:43.660]  You'll never get it.
[58:43.660 --> 58:44.660]  You'll never get it.
[58:44.660 --> 58:45.660]  You'll never get it.
[58:45.660 --> 58:46.660]  You'll never get it.
[58:46.660 --> 58:47.660]  You'll never get it.
[58:47.660 --> 58:48.660]  You'll never get it.
[58:48.660 --> 58:49.660]  You'll never get it.
[58:49.660 --> 58:50.660]  You'll never get it.
[58:50.660 --> 58:51.660]  You'll never get it back again.
[58:51.660 --> 58:55.900]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish
[58:55.900 --> 58:56.340]  too.
[58:56.340 --> 59:00.980]  So protect your rights, say no to surveillance and keep your information to
[59:00.980 --> 59:01.700]  yourself.
[59:01.700 --> 59:04.060]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[59:04.380 --> 59:08.100]  This public service announcement is brought to you by Startpage.com, the
[59:08.100 --> 59:11.580]  private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo and Bing.
[59:11.900 --> 59:14.020]  Start over with Startpage.
[59:15.580 --> 59:19.860]  Imagine four eyes staring at you through binoculars, a magnifying glass or a pair
[59:19.860 --> 59:20.980]  of x-ray goggles.
[59:21.220 --> 59:25.020]  That imagery reminds me that the Fourth Amendment guarantees Americans freedom
[59:25.020 --> 59:26.820]  from unreasonable search and seizure.
[59:27.060 --> 59:29.980]  Fourth Amendment, four eyes staring at you, get it?
[59:30.380 --> 59:33.380]  Unfortunately, the government is trampling our Fourth Amendment rights in
[59:33.380 --> 59:34.380]  the name of security.
[59:34.580 --> 59:38.900]  Case in point, TSA airport scanners that peer under your clothing.
[59:39.220 --> 59:42.420]  When government employees demand a peep at your privates without probable
[59:42.420 --> 59:45.900]  cause, I say it's time to sound the constitutional alarm bells.
[59:46.180 --> 59:49.820]  Join me in asking our representatives to dust off the Bill of Rights and use
[59:49.820 --> 59:52.460]  their googly eyes to take a gander at the Fourth.
[59:53.140 --> 59:57.300]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, more news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[01:00:49.940 --> 01:00:53.060]  Howdy, howdy, Randy Kelton, Brent Fountain, Wheel of War Radio.
[01:00:53.580 --> 01:00:55.140]  Finally got back, got everything up.
[01:00:55.140 --> 01:01:04.100]  I just got in from Arizona on this Thursday, the 27th day of March, 2025.
[01:01:04.980 --> 01:01:06.980]  A third of the year gone already.
[01:01:07.780 --> 01:01:09.220]  No, a quarter of the year gone already.
[01:01:09.620 --> 01:01:10.180]  A quarter.
[01:01:10.500 --> 01:01:10.900]  A quarter.
[01:01:12.300 --> 01:01:12.700]  Okay.
[01:01:12.780 --> 01:01:15.180]  And we're talking to Eric in Massachusetts.
[01:01:15.180 --> 01:01:16.420]  Eric, I've been listening.
[01:01:17.420 --> 01:01:18.500]  I haven't been talking.
[01:01:20.500 --> 01:01:21.900]  I talk as I've been working.
[01:01:24.620 --> 01:01:26.380]  I imagine everybody appreciated that.
[01:01:29.980 --> 01:01:33.900]  I was explaining, uh, where I kind of stand on this case.
[01:01:33.900 --> 01:01:39.780]  So the judge within three hours granted the defendant an extension
[01:01:39.780 --> 01:01:41.700]  without even getting a reply from me.
[01:01:42.700 --> 01:01:49.220]  Um, and then I filed a motion for a man, which I think is very well written.
[01:01:49.220 --> 01:01:50.180]  I could be wrong.
[01:01:50.780 --> 01:01:54.980]  Uh, and I sent it up to the law society group so you can review it.
[01:01:55.740 --> 01:02:02.500]  Um, and prior in the very beginning, this is where we ended the call before
[01:02:02.500 --> 01:02:07.540]  the commercial is I filed a motion to dismiss because the filing was deficient.
[01:02:07.700 --> 01:02:07.980]  Right.
[01:02:07.980 --> 01:02:13.220]  And there's five elements that are required for a removal, which
[01:02:13.220 --> 01:02:17.300]  are stated in my remand filing.
[01:02:17.580 --> 01:02:17.980]  Okay.
[01:02:18.820 --> 01:02:21.940]  So again, untraditional motion to dismiss the court doesn't really accept that.
[01:02:21.940 --> 01:02:26.140]  What the, what the judge did do is the judge said, all right, well, look, I'm
[01:02:26.140 --> 01:02:31.980]  going to accept this as a, a motion to remain, she decided, all right, well,
[01:02:32.100 --> 01:02:36.540]  this motion dismissed is a motion to remain and I didn't really think much of it.
[01:02:36.540 --> 01:02:40.140]  And I still don't necessarily think much of it, but when I filed this
[01:02:40.260 --> 01:02:44.820]  current motion to remand, she's like, you're really litigating this issue.
[01:02:45.460 --> 01:02:49.420]  If you do this again, I'm going to sanction you.
[01:02:50.580 --> 01:02:55.380]  So what I raised was, you know, jurisdiction, subject matter, jurisdiction issues.
[01:02:56.340 --> 01:03:00.700]  It's about 10 pages of subject matter jurisdiction issues, but I have a half
[01:03:00.700 --> 01:03:07.020]  a page of like personal jurisdiction and that's based on, you know, completeness
[01:03:07.020 --> 01:03:12.420]  trying to answer and present a case and the process in the most complete manner,
[01:03:12.420 --> 01:03:17.500]  which I based it on a federal filing, a federal decision from a judge.
[01:03:18.340 --> 01:03:26.020]  So I was then very put off by that this week and kind of confused because subject
[01:03:26.020 --> 01:03:30.540]  matter jurisdiction is one that's never waived and can be raised at any time
[01:03:30.540 --> 01:03:32.780]  as stated in their own rules.
[01:03:33.540 --> 01:03:40.540]  So now I'm forced to file a writ of mandamus to the appeals court and say,
[01:03:40.540 --> 01:03:45.620]  well, the judge has stated she's not going to consider my jurisdiction,
[01:03:46.660 --> 01:03:49.300]  uh, you know, subject matter jurisdiction anymore.
[01:03:49.700 --> 01:03:52.380]  And if I raise these issues, she's tired my hands.
[01:03:52.580 --> 01:03:55.660]  If I raise these issues, she's going to sanction me.
[01:03:56.540 --> 01:04:01.940]  I need you to order this, this, um, remand back to state court.
[01:04:02.500 --> 01:04:06.820]  Is this, are these issues that have been previously adjudicated?
[01:04:08.540 --> 01:04:09.580]  They really haven't.
[01:04:09.580 --> 01:04:14.740]  And she said that in her, in her decision, it's very misleading.
[01:04:14.740 --> 01:04:17.780]  It's very, um, deceptive.
[01:04:17.980 --> 01:04:22.300]  So she's saying she accuses me of filing a motion to remand before.
[01:04:22.580 --> 01:04:23.340]  That's not the case.
[01:04:23.340 --> 01:04:24.980]  It was a motion to dismiss.
[01:04:25.580 --> 01:04:30.420]  And as, as I just kind of side mentioned before the break, I may use Joseph's,
[01:04:31.060 --> 01:04:37.580]  uh, filing as an example of how the judge could have actually taken it as a motion
[01:04:37.580 --> 01:04:43.220]  for show cause order or show cause hearing rather than making the assumption
[01:04:43.220 --> 01:04:45.540]  that it's a motion to remand, which it really wasn't.
[01:04:45.740 --> 01:04:47.980]  It was more of a motion for show cause.
[01:04:48.740 --> 01:04:49.140]  Right.
[01:04:49.620 --> 01:04:54.820]  So she's now again, sort of tying my hands and saying, I'm not going to
[01:04:54.820 --> 01:04:58.460]  listen to anything you raise regarding jurisdiction.
[01:04:59.300 --> 01:05:03.060]  And that's just not, that's not within the federal rules.
[01:05:04.060 --> 01:05:05.940]  It can be raised at any point in time.
[01:05:08.460 --> 01:05:10.260]  So that's basically my question.
[01:05:12.420 --> 01:05:14.180]  That's a valid, that's a valid issue.
[01:05:14.180 --> 01:05:20.140]  If it is a jurisdictional issue that has not been previously raised and adjudicated,
[01:05:21.420 --> 01:05:22.460]  then they're bound to hear it.
[01:05:24.220 --> 01:05:24.620]  Right.
[01:05:26.580 --> 01:05:26.900]  Right.
[01:05:27.060 --> 01:05:31.860]  And so again, she's, she's saying, if you raise this issue again, if you, if you
[01:05:31.860 --> 01:05:33.660]  bring this up again, I'm going to sanction you.
[01:05:34.540 --> 01:05:39.620]  So, so Randy, what do you think about the concept of going to the appellate
[01:05:39.620 --> 01:05:46.900]  court, uh, asking for a writ of mandamus or a writ of prohibition?
[01:05:47.460 --> 01:05:54.300]  I was thinking, man, I was thinking mandamus when a mandate order her to
[01:05:54.300 --> 01:06:02.300]  hear your properly pledged issues or, or to help see why they're not properly
[01:06:02.380 --> 01:06:08.660]  pledged is challenging jurisdiction is not grounds for sanctions.
[01:06:10.340 --> 01:06:16.020]  Unless it is a issue that has already been brought, argued and ruled on.
[01:06:16.620 --> 01:06:17.060]  Sure.
[01:06:17.460 --> 01:06:19.940]  And that's what it appears as though she's claiming.
[01:06:21.340 --> 01:06:22.100]  She is.
[01:06:23.220 --> 01:06:24.340]  Bring these again.
[01:06:25.340 --> 01:06:29.180]  And you need to address the fact that you haven't brought them.
[01:06:29.340 --> 01:06:32.020]  It's not an, again, first flush.
[01:06:33.020 --> 01:06:37.540]  Well, and even if he had brought them, they haven't been adjudicated.
[01:06:40.100 --> 01:06:40.420]  Right.
[01:06:41.500 --> 01:06:48.020]  So my, my, what I really want is the appeals court to issue the motion to
[01:06:48.020 --> 01:06:50.180]  remand, do you think they can do that?
[01:06:51.500 --> 01:06:57.900]  Because she's already stated, she won't listen to my filing, you know, if gave
[01:06:58.860 --> 01:07:01.460]  you bring it up again, I'm going to sanction you.
[01:07:02.260 --> 01:07:08.980]  So you can't, the only thing you can ask the appellate court to do on a, the
[01:07:08.980 --> 01:07:13.620]  mandamus nature is to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
[01:07:14.700 --> 01:07:21.980]  Can't ask them to order a remand, but you can do, or you can't ask them to remand.
[01:07:22.500 --> 01:07:26.940]  You could ask them for a mandamus or to the trial court to remand it.
[01:07:28.700 --> 01:07:29.100]  Yes.
[01:07:30.220 --> 01:07:35.380]  But they can, they can adjudicate that this case needs to be remanded based
[01:07:35.380 --> 01:07:36.740]  on subject matter jurisdiction.
[01:07:36.740 --> 01:07:38.100]  They can adjudicate that, correct?
[01:07:38.780 --> 01:07:39.540]  Yes, they can.
[01:07:40.660 --> 01:07:41.340]  They're like in Dr.
[01:07:41.340 --> 01:07:42.860]  Joe, that's what they did in his case.
[01:07:42.860 --> 01:07:47.420]  They said the trial court never had jurisdiction from the beginning, but
[01:07:47.420 --> 01:07:49.340]  they did not dismiss the case.
[01:07:50.780 --> 01:07:55.740]  They said they returned this to the trial court and ordered the trial court to
[01:07:56.380 --> 01:08:01.260]  convene a hearing to render a ruling, not inconsistent with this order.
[01:08:03.020 --> 01:08:06.180]  They went back to the trial court and ordered the trial court to do what the
[01:08:06.180 --> 01:08:07.700]  trial court was supposed to have done.
[01:08:10.220 --> 01:08:11.580]  Is that case available?
[01:08:12.700 --> 01:08:14.180]  Yeah, that's the state.
[01:08:14.180 --> 01:08:15.020]  That's a great one.
[01:08:16.020 --> 01:08:16.500]  What is it?
[01:08:17.660 --> 01:08:23.300]  The Rousseau V state, uh, send me a email asking for it and I will
[01:08:23.300 --> 01:08:24.540]  attach it and send it to you.
[01:08:25.300 --> 01:08:26.500]  Joe D'Aruzzo is a good friend of mine.
[01:08:26.500 --> 01:08:27.940]  He gets on the show every once in a while.
[01:08:28.940 --> 01:08:33.100]  They prosecuted him and it really screwed him over.
[01:08:33.620 --> 01:08:38.100]  And the court of appeals dismissed the case or didn't dismiss it.
[01:08:38.140 --> 01:08:40.380]  They ordered the trial court to dismiss it.
[01:08:42.500 --> 01:08:48.580]  And Joe was in federal lockup because he had a gun collection.
[01:08:48.580 --> 01:08:51.540]  And once he got the conviction, they come after him for the,
[01:08:52.420 --> 01:08:53.620]  for a felony in possession.
[01:08:55.540 --> 01:08:59.220]  And then he got COVID twice and had a stroke and he's pretty out of it.
[01:09:00.100 --> 01:09:02.220]  So he can't adjudicate his own issues.
[01:09:03.780 --> 01:09:08.740]  And the trial court ordered the, I'm sorry, the court of appeals ordered
[01:09:08.740 --> 01:09:15.100]  the trial court to convene a hearing and, and issue a ruling, not
[01:09:15.100 --> 01:09:16.860]  inconsistent with this order.
[01:09:17.860 --> 01:09:21.180]  The order said trial court never had jurisdiction from the beginning.
[01:09:21.340 --> 01:09:24.180]  So they ordered the trial court to dismiss the case.
[01:09:25.260 --> 01:09:29.700]  Well, they didn't and nobody caught it.
[01:09:31.380 --> 01:09:38.380]  So four years later, I'm looking at the documentation, looking at the
[01:09:38.380 --> 01:09:45.100]  problem of jurisdiction and I read the order that ended the case, but it
[01:09:45.100 --> 01:09:52.580]  didn't end the case, it ordered the trial court to convene a hearing and
[01:09:52.580 --> 01:09:55.700]  ruled to end the case and trial court never did that.
[01:09:57.620 --> 01:09:58.940]  Screwed themselves.
[01:09:59.860 --> 01:10:01.900]  They screwed the pooch.
[01:10:03.660 --> 01:10:05.460]  The clock never stopped.
[01:10:07.420 --> 01:10:10.780]  All this time, these chargers are still hanging over Dr.
[01:10:10.780 --> 01:10:11.620]  Joe's head.
[01:10:13.020 --> 01:10:15.220]  They think they're dismissed, but they're not.
[01:10:16.220 --> 01:10:21.300]  So I filed a motion, you know, prepared him a motion to dismiss the trial
[01:10:21.300 --> 01:10:23.940]  court refused to just to rule on it.
[01:10:24.540 --> 01:10:26.260]  So they removed it.
[01:10:26.300 --> 01:10:30.180]  They said that the felony charges could not be charged.
[01:10:30.180 --> 01:10:32.460]  That the only thing they could charge was a misdemeanor.
[01:10:33.060 --> 01:10:38.460]  So they removed it to the county court and got the county court to dismiss it.
[01:10:40.460 --> 01:10:41.220]  Well, that was okay.
[01:10:41.220 --> 01:10:46.740]  Cause all we needed was the order of dismissal order of dismissal started
[01:10:46.740 --> 01:10:52.100]  the clock, the speedy trial, I mean, the, uh, uh, the statute of limitations
[01:10:52.100 --> 01:11:02.100]  clock five years after they thought it started, so we're still within
[01:11:02.100 --> 01:11:11.860]  statute of limitations anyway, but what it said was cannot issue a ruling,
[01:11:11.940 --> 01:11:19.460]  cannot interpret statute in a way that would render another statute superfluous.
[01:11:21.940 --> 01:11:23.940]  Listen carefully, it's a little complicated.
[01:11:25.060 --> 01:11:30.900]  This was a case where they charged him with a grief felony, legal
[01:11:30.900 --> 01:11:39.380]  practice of medicine, but what they charged him with could only apply
[01:11:39.380 --> 01:11:45.860]  to let's say misdemeanor practice of medicine.
[01:11:47.140 --> 01:11:48.500]  This was a new statute.
[01:11:49.740 --> 01:11:54.380]  The statute has been in place for 15 years and then they changed it from
[01:11:54.700 --> 01:12:00.220]  change that statute to paragraph a and they added paragraph B paragraph B is
[01:12:00.220 --> 01:12:04.740]  the one that made it a felony under certain circumstances and what the
[01:12:04.780 --> 01:12:17.100]  court ruled was you cannot interpret one statute under the, uh, of it's called
[01:12:17.100 --> 01:12:25.860]  three 11 bread, construction act cannot interpret one statute no matter what it
[01:12:25.860 --> 01:12:33.420]  says in such a way that it renders another statute superfluous as no, I've
[01:12:33.420 --> 01:12:36.700]  been after examining trials years.
[01:12:38.340 --> 01:12:43.620]  Courts are saying that, uh, you only have a right to an examining trial in a
[01:12:43.620 --> 01:12:55.180]  felony and I'm saying horse manure, they're relying on this 15.17 Texas code
[01:12:55.180 --> 01:12:58.300]  of criminal procedure that allows them to hold this hearing.
[01:12:58.300 --> 01:12:59.540]  They call them registration.
[01:13:01.780 --> 01:13:02.380]  I'm done.
[01:13:02.380 --> 01:13:03.180]  Look at this.
[01:13:03.220 --> 01:13:04.700]  You know, how do I get to this?
[01:13:04.700 --> 01:13:07.020]  They're using the wrong statute.
[01:13:09.700 --> 01:13:11.020]  You're used over each state.
[01:13:11.620 --> 01:13:19.780]  They're interpreting 15.7 and saying that you can have this abbreviated
[01:13:19.780 --> 01:13:23.260]  hearing where there is no actual examining trial.
[01:13:24.140 --> 01:13:25.780]  And it's not even open to the public.
[01:13:26.740 --> 01:13:33.820]  If you hold this, if you interpret this statute this way and it has the effect
[01:13:33.820 --> 01:13:40.980]  of rendering a whole chapter, chapter 16 superfluous, so therefore no matter what
[01:13:40.980 --> 01:13:49.060]  this statute says, you cannot interpret it because it was a part of previous
[01:13:49.060 --> 01:13:49.420]  statute.
[01:13:50.060 --> 01:13:52.060]  Ah, hang on.
[01:13:52.420 --> 01:13:53.380]  Any Calvin Britt fountain.
[01:13:54.020 --> 01:13:54.940]  Little low radio.
[01:13:59.940 --> 01:14:03.220]  Are you looking to have a closer relationship with God and a better
[01:14:03.220 --> 01:14:08.140]  understanding of his word, then tune into logos, radio network.com on Wednesdays
[01:14:08.140 --> 01:14:12.620]  from eight to 10 PM central time for scripture talk where Nana and her guests
[01:14:12.620 --> 01:14:17.420]  discussed the scriptures in accord with second Timothy two 15 study to show
[01:14:17.420 --> 01:14:21.540]  thyself approved unto God a workman that needed not to be ashamed, rightly
[01:14:21.540 --> 01:14:22.900]  dividing the word of truth.
[01:14:23.500 --> 01:14:27.260]  Starting in January, our first hour studies are in the book of Mark where
[01:14:27.260 --> 01:14:30.660]  we'll go verse by verse and discuss the true gospel message.
[01:14:31.100 --> 01:14:35.300]  Our second hour topical studies will vary each week with discussions on sound
[01:14:35.300 --> 01:14:37.580]  doctrine and Christian character development.
[01:14:38.100 --> 01:14:41.900]  We wish to reflect God's light and be a blessing to all those with a hearing
[01:14:41.900 --> 01:14:42.220]  ear.
[01:14:42.620 --> 01:14:46.620]  Our goal is to strengthen our faith and to transform ourselves more into the
[01:14:46.620 --> 01:14:48.660]  likeness of our Lord and savior Jesus.
[01:14:49.140 --> 01:14:53.860]  So tune into scripture talk live on logos, radio network.com Wednesdays from
[01:14:53.860 --> 01:14:58.140]  eight to 10 PM to inspire and motivate your studies of the scriptures.
[01:14:59.660 --> 01:15:03.660]  Are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters, or even
[01:15:03.660 --> 01:15:04.260]  lawsuits?
[01:15:04.780 --> 01:15:08.260]  Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Mears proven method.
[01:15:08.460 --> 01:15:12.260]  Michael Mears has won six cases in federal court against debt collectors.
[01:15:12.260 --> 01:15:13.860]  And now you can win too.
[01:15:14.020 --> 01:15:18.020]  You'll get step by step instructions and plain English on how to win in court
[01:15:18.020 --> 01:15:20.100]  using federal civil rights statutes.
[01:15:20.180 --> 01:15:24.980]  What to do when contacted by phone, mail, or court summons, how to answer letters
[01:15:24.980 --> 01:15:28.700]  and phone calls, how to get debt collectors out of your credit report, how
[01:15:28.700 --> 01:15:33.060]  to turn the financial tables on them and make them pay you to go away.
[01:15:33.220 --> 01:15:37.980]  The Michael Mears proven method is the solution for how to stop debt collectors.
[01:15:38.020 --> 01:15:40.340]  Personal consultation is available as well.
[01:15:40.460 --> 01:15:44.820]  For more information, please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the blue
[01:15:44.820 --> 01:15:49.700]  Michael Mears banner or email michaelmears at yahoo.com that's rule of
[01:15:49.700 --> 01:15:57.260]  law radio.com or email M I C H A E L M I R R A S at yahoo.com to learn how
[01:15:57.260 --> 01:15:59.060]  to stop debt collectors now.
[01:16:01.060 --> 01:16:05.980]  This is the Logos Logos Radio Network.
[01:16:10.340 --> 01:16:13.340]  I was blindsided, but now I can see your plan I was blindsided, but now I can see your plan
[01:16:13.340 --> 01:16:16.340]  I was blindsided, but now I can see your plan
[01:16:16.340 --> 01:16:18.340]  I was blindsided, but now I can see your plan
[01:16:18.340 --> 01:16:20.340]  I was blindsided, but now I can see your plan
[01:16:20.340 --> 01:16:22.340]  I was blindsided, but now I can see your plan
[01:16:22.340 --> 01:16:24.340]  I was blindsided, but now I can see your plan
[01:16:24.340 --> 01:16:26.340]  I was blindsided, but now I can see your plan
[01:16:26.340 --> 01:16:28.340]  I was blindsided, but now I can see your plan
[01:16:28.340 --> 01:16:30.340]  I was blindsided, but now I can see your plan
[01:16:30.340 --> 01:16:32.340]  I was blindsided, but now I can see your plan
[01:16:32.340 --> 01:16:34.340]  I was blindsided, but now I can see your plan
[01:16:34.340 --> 01:16:36.340]  I was blindsided, but now I can see your plan
[01:16:36.340 --> 01:16:38.340]  I was blindsided, but now I can see your plan
[01:16:38.340 --> 01:16:40.340]  You put the fear in my pockets
[01:16:40.340 --> 01:16:42.340]  You put the fear in my pockets
[01:16:42.340 --> 01:16:44.340]  Took money from my hands
[01:16:44.340 --> 01:16:46.340]  Took money from my hands
[01:16:46.340 --> 01:16:48.340]  Ain't gonna fool me with that
[01:16:48.340 --> 01:16:50.340]  Ain't gonna fool me with that same old trick again
[01:16:54.340 --> 01:16:56.340]  Ain't gonna fool me
[01:17:08.340 --> 01:17:15.340]  Ain't gonna drop me with that same old sucker punch
[01:17:15.340 --> 01:17:20.340]  I get it now, but then I must have been out too much
[01:17:20.340 --> 01:17:25.340]  Back then you had room to move, but now you're feeling the grudge
[01:17:25.340 --> 01:17:31.340]  Ain't gonna get me with that same old sucker punch
[01:17:38.340 --> 01:17:41.340]  Oh no
[01:17:46.340 --> 01:17:48.340]  Well
[01:17:50.340 --> 01:17:55.340]  Ain't gonna please me with that same old man's song
[01:17:55.340 --> 01:17:58.340]  You thought you were out too much
[01:18:08.340 --> 01:18:13.340]  I'm gonna play with my mic when I'm talking
[01:18:13.340 --> 01:18:17.340]  So, okay, now we're talking to Eric in Massachusetts
[01:18:17.340 --> 01:18:20.340]  Am I saying that right, Eric?
[01:18:22.340 --> 01:18:29.340]  Oh, let's unmute my, unmute Eric
[01:18:29.340 --> 01:18:32.340]  A tang is getting toggled, okay, Eric
[01:18:32.340 --> 01:18:38.340]  Alright, so I guess that's good news for me
[01:18:38.340 --> 01:18:44.340]  That I can basically ask the appeals court to adjudicate jurisdiction
[01:18:44.340 --> 01:18:50.340]  Since the trial court judge, the federal trial court judge is refusing to
[01:18:50.340 --> 01:18:57.340]  This Joe DeRusso case, that's a state case, so it's not much use to me
[01:18:57.340 --> 01:18:59.340]  I was thinking it was a federal case
[01:18:59.340 --> 01:19:04.340]  It's a state case, but it's informative
[01:19:04.340 --> 01:19:10.340]  Yeah, it is informative, I just need to find something in my first circuit
[01:19:10.340 --> 01:19:12.340]  Look up
[01:19:12.340 --> 01:19:14.340]  Just reference it as advisory
[01:19:14.340 --> 01:19:17.340]  Look up superfluous
[01:19:20.340 --> 01:19:24.340]  That was a key word that the court used
[01:19:24.340 --> 01:19:27.340]  Or, you know, code construction
[01:19:27.340 --> 01:19:34.340]  Interpretation which nullifies or renders a case superfluous
[01:19:34.340 --> 01:19:39.340]  Do you have x.com?
[01:19:39.340 --> 01:19:42.340]  Yeah, yeah, Twitter, yep
[01:19:42.340 --> 01:19:47.340]  I've used Grok, man, I'm surprised, it's good
[01:19:47.340 --> 01:19:50.340]  I have found some problems with it
[01:19:50.340 --> 01:19:54.340]  Where it has cited statutes that didn't apply
[01:19:54.340 --> 01:19:58.340]  But 90% of it has been dead on
[01:19:58.340 --> 01:20:02.340]  So that one is the best one I've tried so far
[01:20:02.340 --> 01:20:04.340]  So, go ask Grok
[01:20:04.340 --> 01:20:08.340]  Which Grok, there's one with a Q and one with a K
[01:20:08.340 --> 01:20:15.340]  The Grok, the one they're testing
[01:20:16.340 --> 01:20:20.340]  I think they're testing both, with a Q at the end and with a K at the end
[01:20:20.340 --> 01:20:22.340]  The one with the beta
[01:20:22.340 --> 01:20:24.340]  Beta?
[01:20:24.340 --> 01:20:25.340]  Oh
[01:20:25.340 --> 01:20:27.340]  Grok beta
[01:20:27.340 --> 01:20:29.340]  Okay
[01:20:33.340 --> 01:20:37.340]  Okay, open exit, I have an account that I'm not paying for
[01:20:37.340 --> 01:20:41.340]  So it's just a standard account to open
[01:20:41.340 --> 01:20:48.340]  There it is, and it says, Grok has got a circle with a diagonal line through it
[01:20:48.340 --> 01:20:50.340]  Should
[01:20:54.340 --> 01:20:56.340]  Open
[01:20:56.340 --> 01:20:58.340]  There we go
[01:20:58.340 --> 01:21:01.340]  What does it say?
[01:21:01.340 --> 01:21:04.340]  Grok 3 beta
[01:21:04.340 --> 01:21:08.340]  How do they spell it? Can you give me that fourth letter?
[01:21:08.340 --> 01:21:10.340]  D-R-O-K
[01:21:10.340 --> 01:21:14.340]  Okay, that's all I was looking for
[01:21:14.340 --> 01:21:20.340]  When you open your channel
[01:21:20.340 --> 01:21:22.340]  Twitter
[01:21:22.340 --> 01:21:27.340]  It's about four items down at Grok there
[01:21:27.340 --> 01:21:31.340]  It has worked, I tried ChatGPT and it was trash
[01:21:31.340 --> 01:21:33.340]  Everything was wrong
[01:21:33.340 --> 01:21:37.340]  But this one was good, I did have some problems with it
[01:21:37.340 --> 01:21:41.340]  It is arguing issues
[01:21:41.340 --> 01:21:44.340]  Precisely the way
[01:21:44.340 --> 01:21:53.340]  Court officials and prosecutors are arguing the specific issue of 15.17
[01:21:53.340 --> 01:22:01.340]  I asked it to explain the legal ramifications of a magistrate
[01:22:01.340 --> 01:22:10.340]  Failing to give an accused an opportunity to make a statement under 16.04
[01:22:10.340 --> 01:22:17.340]  And it come up with the exact kind of roundabout BS argument that a prosecutor would come up with
[01:22:17.340 --> 01:22:21.340]  Oh, it really didn't mean exactly what it said
[01:22:21.340 --> 01:22:24.340]  What it meant was that you really don't have to do this
[01:22:24.340 --> 01:22:28.340]  15.17 says you can do this crap all in
[01:22:28.340 --> 01:22:32.340]  It just sounded exactly like a prosecutor
[01:22:32.340 --> 01:22:38.340]  Trying to dodge around the very clear statement of law
[01:22:38.340 --> 01:22:41.340]  The law is absolutely clear
[01:22:41.340 --> 01:22:46.340]  The accused must be given opportunity to make a statement
[01:22:46.340 --> 01:22:49.340]  And Grok said, no, no, that really don't mean that
[01:22:49.340 --> 01:22:54.340]  It means that they don't have to be given squat
[01:22:54.340 --> 01:22:57.340]  I couldn't believe I was reading this crap
[01:22:57.340 --> 01:23:06.340]  Well, keep in mind that it's drawing from a source of a lot of input that comes from these lawyers that don't read the law
[01:23:06.340 --> 01:23:09.340]  That's the source
[01:23:09.340 --> 01:23:14.340]  I got that, so I went back in and it had a place where you could enter a comment
[01:23:14.340 --> 01:23:17.340]  And I entered a comment, what the heck are you doing
[01:23:17.340 --> 01:23:24.340]  Misconstruing the clear black letter statement of the law
[01:23:24.340 --> 01:23:28.340]  Oh, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, it's the same crap
[01:23:28.340 --> 01:23:31.340]  And I found this in several places
[01:23:31.340 --> 01:23:34.340]  But it is, the only time I'm finding this
[01:23:34.340 --> 01:23:45.340]  Is where it is arguing an issue that Brett and I and others are having contention
[01:23:45.340 --> 01:23:52.340]  That the mainstream is ruling a different way
[01:23:52.340 --> 01:23:59.340]  What I hoped I could do is ask Grok to read the statute
[01:23:59.340 --> 01:24:05.340]  And interpret the statute based on what it actually said
[01:24:05.340 --> 01:24:08.340]  But it didn't
[01:24:08.340 --> 01:24:16.340]  It interpreted the statute based on how other prosecutors had interpreted the statute
[01:24:16.340 --> 01:24:20.340]  I'm saying that so that when we look at these things
[01:24:20.340 --> 01:24:28.340]  The hardest part of finding with AI is learning how to talk to AI
[01:24:28.340 --> 01:24:32.340]  It's getting ahead for how AI thinks
[01:24:32.340 --> 01:24:37.340]  And it's just like talking to a prosecutor or a judge
[01:24:37.340 --> 01:24:45.340]  How do you frame a question so that they can't dance around it
[01:24:45.340 --> 01:24:49.340]  While it's not giving me the answer I wanted
[01:24:49.340 --> 01:24:55.340]  It is giving me the argument my adversary is going to bring
[01:24:55.340 --> 01:24:59.340]  That's almost as valuable
[01:24:59.340 --> 01:25:01.340]  Does that make sense?
[01:25:01.340 --> 01:25:03.340]  Yeah, yeah, and AI is
[01:25:03.340 --> 01:25:06.340]  You said that you use chat GPT
[01:25:06.340 --> 01:25:09.340]  And if you used it a month ago or six months ago
[01:25:09.340 --> 01:25:10.340]  It's a different world
[01:25:10.340 --> 01:25:13.340]  I mean, this stuff's changing every second
[01:25:13.340 --> 01:25:16.340]  I watched an interview with Elon Musk
[01:25:16.340 --> 01:25:18.340]  And the interviewer asked him
[01:25:18.340 --> 01:25:24.340]  What would be your advice to kids getting out of college or going to college?
[01:25:24.340 --> 01:25:26.340]  What are their children?
[01:25:26.340 --> 01:25:31.340]  What is the most important skill children can develop?
[01:25:31.340 --> 01:25:34.340]  And he said without hesitation
[01:25:34.340 --> 01:25:38.340]  Learn how to use AI
[01:25:38.340 --> 01:25:42.340]  And in trying to use it, I'm getting that
[01:25:42.340 --> 01:25:45.340]  AI is not a human being
[01:25:45.340 --> 01:25:50.340]  So while you use natural language to talk to AI
[01:25:50.340 --> 01:25:53.340]  AI doesn't think like a human being
[01:25:53.340 --> 01:26:01.340]  And it takes a bit of back and forth with AI to get a feel for how it talks
[01:26:01.340 --> 01:26:04.340]  And each different AI that I've used
[01:26:04.340 --> 01:26:10.340]  It's like it's a thinking machine and it thinks differently
[01:26:10.340 --> 01:26:18.340]  But the advantage to it is it thinks consistently in the way that it thinks
[01:26:18.340 --> 01:26:23.340]  Eric, do you know a different language other than English?
[01:26:23.340 --> 01:26:26.340]  Spanish and a little bit of German
[01:26:26.340 --> 01:26:27.340]  You get it
[01:26:27.340 --> 01:26:32.340]  People who speak different languages don't think like we do
[01:26:32.340 --> 01:26:34.340]  And I wish I had other languages
[01:26:34.340 --> 01:26:36.340]  Never was something I could do
[01:26:36.340 --> 01:26:40.340]  But I did come to realize that when I was in Vietnam
[01:26:40.340 --> 01:26:44.340]  Those people did not think like I thought
[01:26:44.340 --> 01:26:47.340]  So I couldn't evaluate them based on what I thought
[01:26:47.340 --> 01:26:49.340]  And that's what I'm finding with Croc
[01:26:49.340 --> 01:26:51.340]  They each have their own language
[01:26:51.340 --> 01:26:53.340]  Hang on, Randy Kelp, Red Fountain
[01:26:53.340 --> 01:26:55.340]  We'll be right back
[01:27:01.340 --> 01:27:05.340]  Reality TV, sugar, obesity, jet lag
[01:27:05.340 --> 01:27:08.340]  The list of things that makes us dumber just keeps on growing
[01:27:08.340 --> 01:27:11.340]  But now researchers say we can add stress to the list
[01:27:11.340 --> 01:27:15.340]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, back with details in a moment
[01:27:15.340 --> 01:27:17.340]  Privacy is under attack
[01:27:17.340 --> 01:27:21.340]  When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again
[01:27:21.340 --> 01:27:26.340]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too
[01:27:26.340 --> 01:27:31.340]  So protect your rights, say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself
[01:27:31.340 --> 01:27:34.340]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to
[01:27:34.340 --> 01:27:37.340]  This message is brought to you by Startpage.com
[01:27:37.340 --> 01:27:41.340]  The private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo and Bing
[01:27:41.340 --> 01:27:44.340]  Start over with Startpage
[01:27:44.340 --> 01:27:47.340]  Are you always on the go and juggling multiple projects?
[01:27:47.340 --> 01:27:51.340]  If so, you might think that multitasking proves you're smart
[01:27:51.340 --> 01:27:55.340]  But think again, all that stress might be eating your brain
[01:27:55.340 --> 01:27:59.340]  A new study finds stress reduces the number of connections between neurons
[01:27:59.340 --> 01:28:03.340]  Which actually makes it harder for people to manage problems
[01:28:03.340 --> 01:28:09.340]  Researchers at Yale University found that stressed out people have less gray matter in their prefrontal cortex
[01:28:09.340 --> 01:28:14.340]  That's the part of the brain that helps us weigh conflicting ideas and regulate our emotions
[01:28:14.340 --> 01:28:17.340]  So take a deep breath and chill out
[01:28:17.340 --> 01:28:20.340]  It'll help keep your mind as sharp as a tack
[01:28:20.340 --> 01:28:25.340]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht for Startpage.com, the world's most private search engine
[01:28:30.340 --> 01:28:35.340]  This is Building 7, a 47-story skyscraper that fell on the afternoon of September 11
[01:28:35.340 --> 01:28:37.340]  The government says that fire brought it down
[01:28:37.340 --> 01:28:42.340]  However, 1,500 architects and engineers concluded it was a controlled demolition
[01:28:42.340 --> 01:28:45.340]  Over 6,000 of my fellow service members have given their lives
[01:28:45.340 --> 01:28:48.340]  Thousands of my fellow first responders are dying
[01:28:48.340 --> 01:28:49.340]  I'm not a conspiracy theorist
[01:28:49.340 --> 01:28:50.340]  I'm a structural engineer
[01:28:50.340 --> 01:28:52.340]  I'm a New York City correction officer
[01:28:52.340 --> 01:28:53.340]  I'm an Air Force pilot
[01:28:53.340 --> 01:28:54.340]  I'm a father who lost his son
[01:28:54.340 --> 01:28:57.340]  We're Americans and we deserve the truth
[01:28:57.340 --> 01:29:00.340]  Go to RememberBuilding7.org today
[01:29:01.340 --> 01:29:04.340]  Rule of Law Radio is proud to offer the Rule of Law traffic seminar
[01:29:04.340 --> 01:29:07.340]  In today's America, we live in an us-against-them society
[01:29:07.340 --> 01:29:09.340]  And if we the people are ever going to have a free society
[01:29:09.340 --> 01:29:12.340]  Then we're going to have to stand and defend our own rights
[01:29:12.340 --> 01:29:15.340]  Among those rights are the right to travel freely from place to place
[01:29:15.340 --> 01:29:17.340]  The right to act in our own private capacity
[01:29:17.340 --> 01:29:19.340]  And most importantly, the right to due process of law
[01:29:19.340 --> 01:29:25.340]  Traffic courts afford us the least expensive opportunity to learn how to enforce and preserve our rights through due process
[01:29:25.340 --> 01:29:28.340]  Former Sheriff's Deputy Eddie Craig, in conjunction with Rule of Law Radio
[01:29:28.340 --> 01:29:30.340]  Has put together the most comprehensive teaching tool available
[01:29:30.340 --> 01:29:32.340]  That will help you understand what due process is
[01:29:32.340 --> 01:29:34.340]  And how to hold courts to the rule of law
[01:29:34.340 --> 01:29:36.340]  You can get your own copy of this invaluable material
[01:29:36.340 --> 01:29:39.340]  By going to ruleoflawradio.com and ordering your copy today
[01:29:39.340 --> 01:29:41.340]  By ordering now you'll receive a copy of Eddie's book
[01:29:41.340 --> 01:29:44.340]  The Texas Transportation Code, The Law Versus the Lie
[01:29:44.340 --> 01:29:46.340]  Video and audio of the original 2009 seminar
[01:29:46.340 --> 01:29:49.340]  Hundreds of research documents and other useful resource material
[01:29:49.340 --> 01:29:53.340]  Learn how to fight for your rights with the help of this material from ruleoflawradio.com
[01:29:53.340 --> 01:29:58.340]  Order your copy today and together we can have the free society we all want and deserve
[01:30:01.340 --> 01:30:04.340]  You are listening to the Logos Radio Network
[01:30:04.340 --> 01:30:07.340]  LogosRadioNetwork.com
[01:30:30.340 --> 01:30:32.340]  LogosRadioNetwork.com
[01:31:01.340 --> 01:31:03.340]  LogosRadioNetwork.com
[01:31:03.340 --> 01:31:05.340]  LogosRadioNetwork.com
[01:31:05.340 --> 01:31:07.340]  LogosRadioNetwork.com
[01:31:07.340 --> 01:31:09.340]  LogosRadioNetwork.com
[01:31:09.340 --> 01:31:11.340]  LogosRadioNetwork.com
[01:31:11.340 --> 01:31:13.340]  LogosRadioNetwork.com
[01:31:13.340 --> 01:31:15.340]  LogosRadioNetwork.com
[01:31:15.340 --> 01:31:17.340]  LogosRadioNetwork.com
[01:31:17.340 --> 01:31:19.340]  LogosRadioNetwork.com
[01:31:19.340 --> 01:31:21.340]  LogosRadioNetwork.com
[01:31:21.340 --> 01:31:23.340]  LogosRadioNetwork.com
[01:31:23.340 --> 01:31:25.340]  LogosRadioNetwork.com
[01:31:25.340 --> 01:31:27.340]  LogosRadioNetwork.com
[01:31:27.340 --> 01:31:29.340]  LogosRadioNetwork.com
[01:31:29.340 --> 01:31:31.340]  LogosRadioNetwork.com
[01:31:31.340 --> 01:31:33.340]  LogosRadioNetwork.com
[01:31:33.340 --> 01:31:35.340]  LogosRadioNetwork.com
[01:31:35.340 --> 01:31:37.340]  LogosRadioNetwork.com
[01:31:37.340 --> 01:31:39.340]  LogosRadioNetwork.com
[01:31:39.340 --> 01:31:41.340]  LogosRadioNetwork.com
[01:31:41.340 --> 01:31:43.340]  LogosRadioNetwork.com
[01:31:43.340 --> 01:31:45.340]  Logos LadioNetwork.com
[01:31:45.340 --> 01:31:47.340]  LogosRadioNetwork.com
[01:31:47.340 --> 01:31:49.340]  LogosRadioNetwork.com
[01:31:49.340 --> 01:31:51.340]  LogosRadioNetwork.com
[01:31:51.340 --> 01:31:58.220]  off kind of tangent, but we went to something I think is really important. And all of us really
[01:31:58.220 --> 01:32:04.540]  need to get this. I have this questionnaire that this electronic lawyer have been building.
[01:32:05.980 --> 01:32:12.300]  And I took Grock and I said, okay, in the questionnaires, were you stopped in an
[01:32:12.300 --> 01:32:18.060]  automobile? Yes. Were you the driver of the automobile? No. Did the officer try to question
[01:32:18.060 --> 01:32:24.060]  you? Yes. Did you refuse to answer? Yes. Were you arrested for refusing to answer? Yes.
[01:32:25.100 --> 01:32:30.220]  So that's a very specific legal point. So I went into Grock and I said,
[01:32:30.860 --> 01:32:37.900]  explain the legal ramifications of being a passenger in an automobile, stopped for a
[01:32:37.900 --> 01:32:45.420]  traffic violation. Then the passenger is arrested for refusing to answer questions of the police
[01:32:45.420 --> 01:32:55.900]  officer. Bam, it gave me 10 pages. Now, this for the most part accurate. I went through it
[01:32:55.900 --> 01:33:00.860]  and checked its links and stuff. Every once in a while, I get something that's not accurate,
[01:33:01.820 --> 01:33:09.900]  but 90% of it's accurate. I've got a massive questionnaire here. And you know about this,
[01:33:09.900 --> 01:33:13.420]  Eric, the hardest thing to find is the first case on point.
[01:33:15.100 --> 01:33:23.260]  If we can get AI to find the first case on point, who cares if it has errors in it?
[01:33:24.940 --> 01:33:31.660]  That's for me the big deal. You asked me a sophisticated question about law,
[01:33:31.660 --> 01:33:36.300]  and I got to sit down here and think, okay, I've got the search engine here.
[01:33:37.260 --> 01:33:45.260]  What kinds of terms would occur in a case that addressed this particular point of law?
[01:33:46.780 --> 01:33:54.300]  And sometimes it takes me an hour, hour and a half. When I was doing research with law books,
[01:33:54.300 --> 01:33:59.020]  sometimes you can spend a couple of days trying to find the first case on point.
[01:33:59.020 --> 01:34:09.020]  Rock, bam, I got some. They're not necessarily at on point,
[01:34:10.380 --> 01:34:14.540]  but they're in the area. And if one is close, I can bounce off of it quickly.
[01:34:15.740 --> 01:34:19.100]  These tools will be very powerful for us if we learn how to use them.
[01:34:19.820 --> 01:34:27.100]  I'll shut up about that now because we've got to move on. We've got Tino on the line. And okay,
[01:34:29.020 --> 01:34:34.940]  what else do you have that we need to answer? Yeah, just a quick comment on that. I agree,
[01:34:34.940 --> 01:34:40.940]  the stuff's super powerful. Right now, the AIs are not doing a very good job with citations.
[01:34:41.580 --> 01:34:49.660]  But I was speaking to Joseph about that, and he's broken the walls on AI and he's trying to
[01:34:50.460 --> 01:35:01.660]  create his own, but by opening up AI and not having these limitations that it is limited to,
[01:35:01.660 --> 01:35:09.260]  he's trying to figure out a way to get good case citation, which is the important thing.
[01:35:09.260 --> 01:35:14.700]  I personally use, because again, we're all struggling getting good citations, I use
[01:35:15.660 --> 01:35:22.380]  Google Scholar, and I do exactly what you said, Randy, which is try and find a key word that
[01:35:23.340 --> 01:35:27.660]  is going to come up. And also in Google Scholar, I'll look for something that's been cited
[01:35:27.660 --> 01:35:34.540]  a million times because the more citations it has, if it's a common issue, then it's
[01:35:34.540 --> 01:35:41.580]  probably closer to what I'm looking for. I like case text because I can take a statute
[01:35:41.660 --> 01:35:47.260]  in case text, or a case in case text, and take the statement of the case.
[01:35:48.540 --> 01:35:55.180]  And then where I have a case up in case text, if I scroll up, it puts in a search bar.
[01:35:56.140 --> 01:36:01.420]  And I take the statement I want and drop it in that search bar. And to the right,
[01:36:01.980 --> 01:36:07.820]  it will pop up a list of all of the cases where this verbiage has occurred.
[01:36:08.460 --> 01:36:15.820]  And I can go down through that. That has worked really well. But I understand that Thompson
[01:36:15.820 --> 01:36:22.860]  Routers has bought case text and is apparently planning to shut it down shortly.
[01:36:26.140 --> 01:36:33.900]  They're trying to capture everything. So that was disappointing. However, the AI is
[01:36:34.860 --> 01:36:41.180]  the only thing I want to use AI for is to do exactly that. Find me that first case on point,
[01:36:42.540 --> 01:36:43.820]  even near point.
[01:36:46.380 --> 01:36:51.740]  Then I can search the case near point and go in and see the cases it cites.
[01:36:52.940 --> 01:36:57.180]  And if I'm near point, I can generally very quickly get that on point.
[01:36:57.180 --> 01:37:07.100]  Because the case law says, here's the specific, finally focused issue we're talking about. Now,
[01:37:07.100 --> 01:37:12.220]  we've got an issue to this side that the courts have addressed this, this and this on one side,
[01:37:12.220 --> 01:37:16.460]  and they've addressed this other and this other on the other side. And here we're addressing
[01:37:16.460 --> 01:37:23.580]  something right in the middle. So I move off to those cases on the side. And almost always,
[01:37:23.580 --> 01:37:26.540]  I find the point I'm looking for. Does that make sense?
[01:37:28.300 --> 01:37:34.460]  It does. If you're not using it for writing, I think you're missing out, too. It does a great
[01:37:34.460 --> 01:37:39.580]  job on writing stuff sometimes, and sometimes it doesn't. But it helps.
[01:37:39.580 --> 01:37:49.580]  The case law, in my experience, was the only difficulty I had with AI. The verbiage it uses,
[01:37:49.660 --> 01:38:02.060]  the explanation, it was great. It uses language extremely well. Have you ever tried asking
[01:38:04.220 --> 01:38:11.980]  AI engines to do more sophisticated linguistic things like alliteration, rhyme, and primarily
[01:38:12.060 --> 01:38:21.340]  meter? One of the things I want to ask AI to do is take this section of a
[01:38:22.940 --> 01:38:31.660]  document, these three paragraphs, and set the sentences to double meter.
[01:38:33.020 --> 01:38:40.060]  So that one sentence has X number of syllable sounds, the next sentence has Y number of
[01:38:40.060 --> 01:38:46.540]  syllable sounds, and the next X, the next Y, the next X. You don't want to do an iambic pentameter
[01:38:46.540 --> 01:38:53.500]  or something that has two things on it, you'll catch it. But if you take a document or a statement
[01:38:53.500 --> 01:39:03.260]  that you want someone to really lock into, and you take the cadence and set the meter to
[01:39:10.060 --> 01:39:15.980]  da-da-da-da-da-da-da, da-da-da-da-da-da-da, you always want it to land on an odd.
[01:39:17.260 --> 01:39:25.660]  A part of the brain notices that cadence, and the reader will read the whole section
[01:39:26.620 --> 01:39:32.540]  to make sure that the last syllable sound lands right on the meter.
[01:39:33.020 --> 01:39:43.260]  Gwett, you're a musician, I suspect you get that. It's like music without the harmony and the tone.
[01:39:43.260 --> 01:39:48.540]  My grandfather used to sing a little tune and he would leave out the last note.
[01:39:48.540 --> 01:39:56.940]  He would omit, just to drive me nuts. Yeah, pattern interruption. I wrote a letter to the
[01:39:57.100 --> 01:40:05.580]  Chief of Police of Fort Worth, it was a two-page letter. I went back and set it to meter. The first
[01:40:05.580 --> 01:40:12.620]  sentence had 13 syllable sounds, the second had nine. I went through it and averaged out all the,
[01:40:12.620 --> 01:40:17.500]  you know, I looked at all of the sentences, counted the syllable sounds, and I got a high
[01:40:17.500 --> 01:40:24.780]  average and a low average, and went back and set the first to 13, second to nine, 13, nine, 13, nine.
[01:40:25.740 --> 01:40:33.420]  Everybody I gave it to read that document to the end before making one statement.
[01:40:35.580 --> 01:40:43.580]  They were stuck, they were locked into the meter, but it was such an odd meter that the conscious
[01:40:43.580 --> 01:40:52.460]  mind didn't detect it. Oh, that was great fun. I want to see if AI can do that. I am blabbing
[01:40:52.460 --> 01:40:56.700]  too much, we got another caller. Hang on, Randy Kelton, Breath Fountain,
[01:40:56.700 --> 01:41:02.300]  Will's Law Radio, we'll be right back. Do you have a business with five employees or more?
[01:41:02.300 --> 01:41:07.100]  How would you like to save hundreds of thousands of dollars in FICA taxes? Do you have a major
[01:41:07.100 --> 01:41:13.420]  medical plan that nobody can afford to be on? Or how would you like to save in premium costs
[01:41:13.420 --> 01:41:20.860]  on a current major medical plan by lowering the claims cost? The CHAMP plan is a section 125 IRS
[01:41:20.860 --> 01:41:27.260]  approved preventative health plan that provides your employees with doctors, medications,
[01:41:27.260 --> 01:41:34.380]  emergency care, and Teladoc all at zero cost with zero copay. If you are an employee,
[01:41:34.380 --> 01:41:40.540]  you also will get a pay raise by paying less than FICA taxes. As an employer, you will save
[01:41:40.540 --> 01:41:46.860]  hundreds of thousands of dollars in matching FICA taxes. The CHAMP plan can help add working
[01:41:46.860 --> 01:41:58.860]  capital, market resale value, or pay down lines of credit. Call Scott at 2147302471 or dallasmms.com.
[01:42:17.100 --> 01:42:21.500]  Should be doing if you don't have a lawyer know what you should do for yourself.
[01:42:22.220 --> 01:42:28.620]  Thousands have won with our step by step course and now you can too. Jurisdictionary was created
[01:42:28.620 --> 01:42:34.700]  by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case winning experience. Even if you're not in a
[01:42:34.700 --> 01:42:40.140]  lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand about the principles and practices
[01:42:40.140 --> 01:42:45.820]  that control our American courts. You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar,
[01:42:45.820 --> 01:42:54.220]  tutorials, forms for civil cases, pro se tactics, and much more. Please visit ruleoflawradio.com
[01:42:54.220 --> 01:42:59.340]  and click on the banner or call toll free 866-LAW-EZ.
[01:43:15.820 --> 01:43:29.340]  Some things in this world I will never understand. Some things I realize fully.
[01:43:30.700 --> 01:43:37.340]  Somebody's gonna police that policeman. Somebody's gonna police the bully.
[01:43:37.340 --> 01:43:46.540]  There's always a room at the top of the hill. I hear through the grave mine and it's lonely
[01:43:46.540 --> 01:43:53.660]  there still. They're wishing there was more. Okay, we are back. Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain,
[01:43:53.660 --> 01:43:59.180]  Rule of Law Radio and we're going to set it to meter Tina.
[01:43:59.180 --> 01:44:04.060]  Good evening, Brandy.
[01:44:04.060 --> 01:44:11.100]  You're English and what I have found about the English
[01:44:12.060 --> 01:44:17.420]  is they understand in school, they learn English in a way Americans do not.
[01:44:19.420 --> 01:44:20.060]  This is true.
[01:44:21.420 --> 01:44:25.340]  You would probably be really good at this.
[01:44:26.140 --> 01:44:30.380]  Well, if anyone wants to learn English even better, they should go to my nephew's side.
[01:44:30.380 --> 01:44:36.940]  I've sent you it. He's really rocking it on teaching English the proper way.
[01:44:37.980 --> 01:44:40.380]  He's teaching me some things I didn't know.
[01:44:41.580 --> 01:44:43.180]  Would you send me a link to that?
[01:44:43.980 --> 01:44:45.980]  I did, but I'll send you another link.
[01:44:45.980 --> 01:44:47.980]  You send me another link.
[01:44:47.980 --> 01:44:51.260]  He's teaching you? That's amazing.
[01:44:52.540 --> 01:44:54.060]  That's really stunning.
[01:44:54.060 --> 01:44:58.300]  That's really stunning. You're so sedulous.
[01:45:00.220 --> 01:45:04.540]  What? Are you cussing at her?
[01:45:06.700 --> 01:45:11.260]  I thought I might throw her a word that not many people use.
[01:45:11.260 --> 01:45:15.180]  Brett would not do that because he's not churlish.
[01:45:16.940 --> 01:45:21.260]  I'll get churlish if he keeps saying sedulous. What does that mean, Brett?
[01:45:21.740 --> 01:45:29.660]  She's just diligent, dedicated. She's thorough, attentive.
[01:45:33.820 --> 01:45:39.900]  That's basically what I'm calling in about, actually, to teach people we should be diligent
[01:45:39.900 --> 01:45:47.740]  and follow up because I have an interesting story regarding that bankruptcy that I just got
[01:45:47.740 --> 01:45:51.100]  the couple barred, permanently barred from filing another one.
[01:45:54.620 --> 01:45:56.700]  One of the other creditors said, I don't know why you're doing this.
[01:45:56.700 --> 01:45:59.660]  You're wasting your time. We're going to have to fight again.
[01:46:00.940 --> 01:46:04.300]  He was just absolutely shocked that we got a permanent bar.
[01:46:04.940 --> 01:46:08.700]  He's been trying to attach the husband's wages, garnish them.
[01:46:09.980 --> 01:46:16.540]  It turned out just a couple of days ago that the wife called the husband's work and said,
[01:46:16.540 --> 01:46:19.580]  you can't garnish his wages because we are in bankruptcy.
[01:46:22.620 --> 01:46:26.540]  This is six months after they dismissed their own bankruptcy.
[01:46:27.900 --> 01:46:32.140]  We have documentation that says it was dismissed and that you have a permanent bar.
[01:46:32.940 --> 01:46:42.220]  That debt was discharged in the prior bankruptcy. They flat out lied to his employer.
[01:46:43.020 --> 01:46:43.820]  Wow.
[01:46:43.820 --> 01:46:47.740]  Because we've got the permanent bar and he'd sent that document in.
[01:46:48.860 --> 01:46:54.780]  I have now asked him to write up what was said, who said it, on what day.
[01:46:57.260 --> 01:47:01.740]  I said, I'm going to write it up as an affidavit and then I'm going to file it with the court
[01:47:02.300 --> 01:47:09.900]  so that it's on record that six months after this, they're trying to lie to their employers
[01:47:09.900 --> 01:47:16.380]  because the judge had said, you have the opportunity to appeal this down the road
[01:47:16.380 --> 01:47:20.140]  if you need to, but the bar will be very high for you to pass.
[01:47:20.140 --> 01:47:28.140]  Well, if I put in that they were deliberately trying to deceive people and employers,
[01:47:28.140 --> 01:47:31.900]  then it's going to make that bar even higher, I believe. What do you think?
[01:47:32.060 --> 01:47:39.980]  Trying to circumvent the restriction? I would say that would raise the bar considerably.
[01:47:40.940 --> 01:47:44.860]  Yes, because they're effectively disobeying the court's order.
[01:47:45.980 --> 01:47:53.900]  The court's order was that you not file for bankruptcy again, and they're effectively
[01:47:53.900 --> 01:47:57.500]  disobeying by lying to people to say that they have a bankruptcy.
[01:47:57.500 --> 01:48:08.460]  Yes. It actually blew my mind, but it made me laugh all day because here they've got a permanent
[01:48:08.460 --> 01:48:16.140]  bar and I said, what will they try next? It just goes to show too, and I want to show the court
[01:48:17.020 --> 01:48:23.820]  the judge was right in giving the permanent bar because they thumbed their nose at him after he
[01:48:23.820 --> 01:48:28.700]  gave them a chance. I told them in the papers, this is like a slap in the face to the honorable
[01:48:28.700 --> 01:48:33.580]  judge and court after he gave them a second chance. They just dismissed it six months later.
[01:48:34.620 --> 01:48:40.220]  He saw all that, and now I want him to see that they're still trying their tricks.
[01:48:42.380 --> 01:48:48.700]  I'd like to see it as part of the record for anyone looking into that record that they will
[01:48:48.700 --> 01:48:56.220]  see this. It's a permanent part of it. Do you think I'm right to just file an affidavit into
[01:48:56.220 --> 01:49:00.860]  the court if he's going to write it up? Because he's the one who spoke to them.
[01:49:02.220 --> 01:49:06.220]  You think they should know. Absolutely, you're right to do that.
[01:49:07.580 --> 01:49:11.900]  This is not something the court can keep track of itself. It depends on the litigants
[01:49:12.860 --> 01:49:15.500]  to get good information. Exactly.
[01:49:17.260 --> 01:49:20.540]  Yeah. And other people, I mean, somebody could come in as an amicus and
[01:49:21.660 --> 01:49:23.980]  supply the court with additional perspective.
[01:49:26.780 --> 01:49:31.100]  I'm also going, when I file the notice or whatever, however I file it,
[01:49:31.100 --> 01:49:35.740]  I'm going to send a copy to the probation department in her criminal case.
[01:49:35.740 --> 01:49:46.700]  Just to show them that she's trying to circumvent the court's orders and that it just never stops.
[01:49:46.700 --> 01:49:53.340]  So it just showed me that by following through and attempting to file for a bar,
[01:49:53.340 --> 01:49:57.820]  which I didn't think I would get a permanent bar, I thought I might get five years at most.
[01:49:58.780 --> 01:50:03.820]  And just doing all that follow-up has made me realize that you can never
[01:50:05.100 --> 01:50:08.460]  rest on your laurels. You have to keep following through.
[01:50:11.100 --> 01:50:18.220]  Price of freedom, eternal diligence, something like that.
[01:50:20.140 --> 01:50:27.660]  Yep. But once I get the permanent order from the judge, all I've got is the tentative order
[01:50:27.660 --> 01:50:33.500]  on the permanent bar. Once that he writes the permanent order up, I'll put my documents on
[01:50:33.500 --> 01:50:38.060]  the website, but I just don't want to do it until he's done the permanent, you know, the final order.
[01:50:40.700 --> 01:50:43.420]  And then everybody can take a look and if it helps them.
[01:50:45.820 --> 01:50:48.060]  You're definitely doing your due diligence.
[01:50:50.620 --> 01:50:53.660]  Yes. Watching these guys like a hawk.
[01:50:53.660 --> 01:51:03.260]  Well, you're never going to forget me. And I'm going to get a hundred dollars a month basically
[01:51:03.260 --> 01:51:09.020]  for the rest of her life, because she's never going to pay off the debt. She is not even going
[01:51:09.020 --> 01:51:15.260]  to make a difference in the interest, but every month she has to pay and, you know, I will get
[01:51:15.260 --> 01:51:21.420]  that check. So as long as she lives, and even if she files the social security, I will still get
[01:51:21.420 --> 01:51:27.660]  money because this debt, you know, because it's a criminal restitution and they can't,
[01:51:27.660 --> 01:51:33.340]  you know, stop it with the filing for social security. It still goes through.
[01:51:36.540 --> 01:51:42.300]  So, you know, word of wise, you know, just keep following up, keep looking, keep seeing what's
[01:51:42.300 --> 01:51:48.140]  happening and, you know, make sure that everything is part of the record for the court to see,
[01:51:48.140 --> 01:51:51.740]  especially if they're screwing up big time and they're lying.
[01:51:51.740 --> 01:51:55.660]  And, you know, you really get to know when they're lying. Now, it doesn't work when attorneys are
[01:51:55.660 --> 01:52:00.300]  lying because the court, you know, lets them get away with it. But I'm working on some other
[01:52:00.300 --> 01:52:08.460]  things for that. But this case, it worked. Wonderful. And thank you again for all your
[01:52:08.460 --> 01:52:13.900]  support and everyone's support throughout this. You know, I've appreciated everybody's input and
[01:52:13.900 --> 01:52:21.020]  comments and just saying, hey, keep going, Tina. It's really, you know, I've learned an awful lot.
[01:52:21.020 --> 01:52:26.380]  And I called a couple of the attorneys that helped me on the bankruptcy clinic to let them know.
[01:52:26.380 --> 01:52:30.860]  And their staff could not believe we got a permanent bar. They said, nobody gets that.
[01:52:30.860 --> 01:52:34.460]  They said, our attorneys have never gotten a permanent bar to anybody.
[01:52:35.260 --> 01:52:39.820]  And they were just really happy for me that we put a stop to these people.
[01:52:40.300 --> 01:52:47.260]  This is good. Yeah. Okay. Thank you, Tina. Thank you guys.
[01:52:48.700 --> 01:52:53.500]  Okay. We have show tomorrow. Okay. Thank you. Call. Yeah. Call back in tomorrow.
[01:52:54.540 --> 01:52:58.220]  We're about, we've got one more caller and got a couple of minutes left.
[01:52:58.220 --> 01:53:01.500]  Hello, Mike. What do you have for us today?
[01:53:04.300 --> 01:53:07.820]  Well, we only got a few minutes left, so I'll probably call tomorrow.
[01:53:08.460 --> 01:53:11.420]  That'll work. I was going to say, if you can't get everything called tomorrow,
[01:53:11.420 --> 01:53:14.860]  but give us a synopsis so we'll know what to expect.
[01:53:17.660 --> 01:53:22.380]  Oh, this corruption out there in this small little Poladot County in Georgia.
[01:53:24.140 --> 01:53:27.260]  Oh, okay. So you're not in Tennessee now, you're in Georgia?
[01:53:28.460 --> 01:53:30.460]  Well, I'm in Tennessee. It's just-
[01:53:30.460 --> 01:53:38.700]  Okay. David Toulis, you need to have him call into the show and tell me,
[01:53:38.700 --> 01:53:44.460]  he was going to do a spot on the show. We need to get him on. Are you still around Chattanooga?
[01:53:45.900 --> 01:53:49.020]  Yeah. Mm-hmm. If you get home-
[01:53:49.020 --> 01:53:51.180]  Yeah, that's where David is. Give him a call.
[01:53:52.380 --> 01:53:57.980]  Yeah. Have him, he's got, give me a couple of emails on what's going on with his case.
[01:53:57.980 --> 01:54:03.340]  We need to bring him back on and have him upgrade everybody. I've looked at some,
[01:54:03.340 --> 01:54:13.980]  he's getting some nice press on what he's doing. His Eye of Sauron litigation, that sounds good.
[01:54:15.900 --> 01:54:23.260]  And then, Mike, you said you were addressing or wanting to address some corruption in Georgia?
[01:54:23.260 --> 01:54:25.580]  Yeah. What kind of corruption?
[01:54:26.060 --> 01:54:32.300]  This lawlessness, blatant corruption within state-
[01:54:32.300 --> 01:54:37.820]  Like amongst judges or prosecutors, cops, attorneys, who?
[01:54:39.100 --> 01:54:40.860]  Yes, all you just mean.
[01:54:42.860 --> 01:54:47.260]  Did you just happen to be rolling through one of their towns and they decided to tag you?
[01:54:48.060 --> 01:54:57.020]  No, it has something to do with employment. And they think they can just go off hearsay
[01:54:57.980 --> 01:55:03.740]  and not have documented form of a separation notice, which is required by Georgia law.
[01:55:03.740 --> 01:55:10.380]  But like I say, it's pretty much a law, but they just go off hearsay and hearsay is not allowed
[01:55:10.380 --> 01:55:15.420]  in the court of law. Right. It's not allowed in the court of law.
[01:55:15.740 --> 01:55:18.620]  Right. It's not admissible evidence.
[01:55:20.140 --> 01:55:23.740]  All right. Well, look forward to hearing some more about that tomorrow then.
[01:55:25.180 --> 01:55:26.460]  Okay, y'all have a good night.
[01:55:29.980 --> 01:55:37.420]  Okay. Thank you all for listening. We'll be back tomorrow night for our info marathon and
[01:55:37.500 --> 01:55:41.820]  I'll be in town and Brett will be in town and Brett will be
[01:55:44.780 --> 01:55:48.940]  clear of bees. So it should be a good show.