Detecting language using up to the first 30 seconds. Use `--language` to specify the language Detected language: English [00:00.000 --> 00:12.440] Bad boys? Whatcha gon' do? [00:12.440 --> 00:18.200] When sheriff John Brown come for you [00:18.200 --> 00:25.840] Tell me, whatcha gonna do? [00:25.840 --> 00:31.840] Bad boys, bad boys, whatcha gonna do? Whatcha gonna do when they come for you? [00:31.840 --> 00:37.340] Bad boys, bad boys, whatcha gonna do? Whatcha gonna do when they come for you? [00:37.340 --> 00:42.840] When you were eight and you had bad traits You go to school and learn the golden rule [00:42.840 --> 00:48.340] So why are you acting like a bloody fool? If you get hot then you must get cool [00:48.340 --> 00:53.840] Bad boys, bad boys, whatcha gonna do? Whatcha gonna do when they come for you? [00:53.840 --> 00:59.340] Bad boys, bad boys, whatcha gonna do? Whatcha gonna do when they come for you? [00:59.340 --> 01:04.840] You chuck it on that one, you chuck it on this one You chuck it on your mother and you chuck it on your father [01:04.840 --> 01:10.340] You chuck it on your brother and you chuck it on your sister You chuck it on that one and you chuck it on me [01:10.340 --> 01:15.340] Bad boys, bad boys, whatcha gonna do? Whatcha gonna do when they come for you? [01:15.340 --> 01:21.340] Bad boys, bad boys, whatcha gonna do? Whatcha gonna do when they come for you? [01:21.340 --> 01:29.980] Okay. Howdy, howdy, Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain, Rule of Law Radio on this Thursday, the 17th [01:29.980 --> 01:38.340] day of January 2025. And Brett had something really important he was going to start with. [01:38.340 --> 01:43.660] He didn't tell me what it was, so it'll be a surprise to all of us. [01:43.660 --> 01:49.940] That's one way to do it. All right. So, well, okay, so one thing that does come to mind, [01:49.940 --> 01:58.860] that's really been particularly on my mind for the last couple of days is essential elements. [01:58.860 --> 02:07.020] And the reason for that is there's somebody that we're trying to help right now, and she's [02:07.020 --> 02:17.940] just beside herself. This sweet lady is frustrated with the justice system, and she's just beside [02:17.980 --> 02:28.300] herself. How can it be that they've got everything they need to prosecute this case and go after [02:28.300 --> 02:35.780] the bad guy, and why are they not doing it? She doesn't understand. There has to be a [02:35.780 --> 02:43.340] complaint. The complaint has to allege facts. Those facts have to go to essential elements. [02:43.340 --> 02:49.080] Nobody has done that yet, so she's all frustrated with the prosecutor. She's hired an attorney [02:49.080 --> 02:57.060] to help her argue with the prosecutor, and the prosecutor's duty has not been invoked. [02:57.060 --> 03:09.340] People, listen, essential elements are essential. When we, for any cause of action, in this [03:09.340 --> 03:17.300] case, it's criminal, but for any cause of action, if you want to have a success in there, [03:17.300 --> 03:22.700] you have to allege facts. Of course, later, those facts can be proven. They don't have [03:22.700 --> 03:29.300] to be proven right up front, but your complaint, your initial document, your complaint or petition [03:29.300 --> 03:38.660] has to go to all the essential elements of that particular cause. So this poor sweet [03:38.660 --> 03:46.620] lady, I mean, she's just as precious as can be, and she's in the right, and the offender [03:46.620 --> 03:54.100] does need to get prosecuted, but that's going to have to happen in court. She thinks that [03:54.100 --> 04:02.460] if she can just gather some more expert witnesses and more people that can say, I have reason [04:02.460 --> 04:07.860] to believe and do believe, but that won't get her anywhere. She doesn't realize yet [04:07.980 --> 04:14.340] how important it is to allege all of the facts that go to the essential elements. [04:14.340 --> 04:20.360] Yeah, and those people who can say they have reason to believe and do believe, they need [04:20.360 --> 04:22.860] to say that in writing. [04:22.860 --> 04:28.380] Yes. So that's good enough. Let's draw a distinction here, because a lot of people [04:28.380 --> 04:36.900] don't understand that distinction either about upon information and belief. So we have the [04:36.900 --> 04:43.980] first level of getting somebody to the magistrate for a probable cause determination hearing. [04:43.980 --> 04:49.220] In Texas, it's known as an examination trial, but in different states, they call it different [04:49.220 --> 04:56.060] things. But it's just a place where the magistrate will make a determination of whether or not [04:56.060 --> 05:03.080] there is probable cause to bind over that person to a certain court that's appropriate [05:03.080 --> 05:12.320] to hear that case. Now, before that, you can have a complaint that alleges facts that [05:12.320 --> 05:21.720] are not based on firsthand evidence or firsthand knowledge. That kind of assertion is what [05:21.720 --> 05:27.640] we call upon information and belief. I have reason to believe and I do believe. And then [05:27.640 --> 05:34.000] you list out those facts. You still have to allege facts that go to the essential elements, [05:34.000 --> 05:39.200] but you don't have to have firsthand knowledge. And that's okay. That's good enough to get [05:39.200 --> 05:47.660] the magistrate to hold that hearing and see if there's probable cause. But at that hearing, [05:47.660 --> 05:53.340] the rules of evidence kick in. That means upon information and belief, you can use it [05:53.340 --> 06:00.340] for toilet paper. There better be some witnesses with firsthand evidence. There better be somebody [06:00.340 --> 06:05.140] there who can be cross-examined on the stand and say, Is this really what you saw, what [06:05.140 --> 06:13.100] you heard? And this information and belief won't cut it anymore. And unfortunately for [06:14.100 --> 06:26.840] sweet lady here, they had an affidavit of information and belief. And that got the perpetrator [06:26.840 --> 06:34.660] dragged into a magistrate. The magistrate found probable cause. And now it's the prosecutor's [06:34.740 --> 06:45.740] turn to commence a case, right? Wrong. The prosecutor does not have a sufficient complaint [06:45.740 --> 06:56.080] on which to base an information. The prosecutor would probably be happy to go ahead and draw [06:56.080 --> 07:04.340] up an information based on a sufficient complaint, but there's not one. Nobody has complained. [07:04.340 --> 07:14.980] Nobody has written down these essential elements. Simple factual statements that track with [07:14.980 --> 07:21.220] the language of the code and say, Here's what the crime is. Simple facts to state that. [07:21.220 --> 07:23.660] And then the prosecutor could do his job. [07:23.660 --> 07:29.260] How did the person get before a magistrate without a complaint? [07:29.260 --> 07:36.540] They did have a complaint, but it was the complaint of an officer. So it was hearsay. [07:36.540 --> 07:43.440] It was upon information and belief, and that's not good enough for the prosecuting attorney [07:43.440 --> 07:45.060] to draw up an information. [07:45.060 --> 07:50.980] The prosecutor can't get enough evidence beyond the belief. [07:50.980 --> 07:55.180] Exactly. [07:55.340 --> 08:05.020] It was enough to get a determination of probable cause, but that's just a magistrate's court. [08:05.020 --> 08:09.540] And that's just, if you've got a bad guy out here, you can get him off the street. Now, [08:09.540 --> 08:20.380] when you go to a trial court, that hearsay stuff, you've got to have best evidence witness. [08:20.380 --> 08:24.180] You have to have more than I have reason to believe. [08:24.180 --> 08:32.860] Right. They have to have firsthand knowledge, personal knowledge. They have to know from [08:32.860 --> 08:39.800] what they personally saw, witnessed, heard. They have to be able to testify to what their [08:39.800 --> 08:47.220] own senses picked up. They can't say they believe or somebody said. [08:47.220 --> 08:53.700] There's an example that I use to talk about, okay, my next door neighbor, 90-year-old woman, [08:53.700 --> 08:59.980] comes to me and she says she saw her next door neighbor kill somebody in the backyard. [08:59.980 --> 09:04.180] Well, why don't you call the police? Oh, I'm terrified of them. I'm afraid you'll kill [09:04.180 --> 09:14.420] me. If I believe her, then I have reason to believe, and I do believe that this guy did [09:15.420 --> 09:25.340] police and I swear out a complaint and based on reasonable belief. But, and that's enough [09:25.340 --> 09:31.160] to get an indictment and enough to get a determination of probable cause. But when the person is [09:31.160 --> 09:38.580] arrested and brought before the court, I'm not a witness. The person who actually saw [09:38.580 --> 09:46.500] it would have to be the witness because she's first-person witness. I'm not. [09:46.500 --> 09:52.900] I think there are provisions for if somebody's scared for their life, they can do an in-camera. [09:52.900 --> 09:58.420] That means they can go into the judge's chambers and they're still swearing under oath, but [09:58.420 --> 10:03.220] it's just not before the accused, right? [10:03.700 --> 10:12.180] Right. You have a right to be faced with your accuser sometimes, but there are exceptions. [10:12.180 --> 10:13.180] Fearing for one's life? [10:13.180 --> 10:22.980] Yeah. Well, yeah, if you're a five-year-old and you're accusing an adult of harming you, [10:22.980 --> 10:30.300] being faced with that accuser is going to be really tough on the witness. So, in the [10:30.540 --> 10:38.220] of justice, they've developed other methods. All of this is really reasonable. I should [10:38.220 --> 10:43.340] be able to say, you know, my neighbor tells me this guy did this horrible thing, but [10:43.340 --> 10:47.660] she's afraid to say anything about it. We should be able to get something done that [10:47.660 --> 10:53.740] way. But on the other guy's side, once they've brought him into court, now they're going [10:53.980 --> 11:02.980] to have to show enough reason to keep denying him in his liberty and require him to stand [11:02.980 --> 11:03.980] and answer. [11:03.980 --> 11:04.980] Exactly. [11:04.980 --> 11:13.980] If you look at it objectively, it's all really reasonable. And if it seems like something [11:13.980 --> 11:20.540] ought to be a certain way, especially in law, I bet it pretty well is. This is a matter [11:20.540 --> 11:26.540] of finding where it is. People ask me, how do you know all this law? Most of them don't. [11:26.540 --> 11:35.540] But I try to just be a reasonable human being. And if something seems wrong, it probably [11:35.540 --> 11:42.380] is, and it's in the law somewhere. A jerk is just a reasonable person of ordinary prudence [11:42.380 --> 11:43.380] digging it out. [11:44.220 --> 12:03.060] Well, I have had essential elements on my mind. I've been wishing I could get some [12:03.060 --> 12:12.780] sense into this sweet lady. She's really frustrated with the injustice of it all and doesn't realize [12:13.180 --> 12:19.580] that she's got the answer right there in her own hands, and she can't quite see it yet. [12:19.580 --> 12:28.060] Maybe I can get through to her. And just sit down, help her write a complaint, and go to [12:28.060 --> 12:35.660] the essential elements. People, please go to the essential elements. Anything else isn't [12:35.660 --> 12:40.060] worth mentioning. And if you don't mention all of the essential elements, you haven't [12:40.060 --> 12:42.660] alleged a crime. [12:43.540 --> 12:48.580] We say that about traffic. The cop gives me a ticket, and I want it dismissed for failure [12:48.580 --> 12:57.620] to state a client because they didn't allege that I fell within the statutory scheme by [12:57.620 --> 13:00.340] operating on the highway's incomers. [13:00.340 --> 13:08.460] Right. I'm sure there's a fellow over in France right now named Pierre, and he also did not [13:08.460 --> 13:17.740] have plates on his car that said Texas. They failed to say all the elements. [13:17.740 --> 13:20.860] I got some on my car that say deadheading. [13:22.060 --> 13:22.380] Right. [13:23.420 --> 13:30.060] So they pull me over. They have no reason to believe that I'm operating in commerce. [13:31.820 --> 13:36.860] They think that I must absolutely display plates. [13:38.620 --> 13:45.340] But I only have to display those plates if I'm acting under the authority of the contract [13:45.340 --> 13:49.820] I entered into with them when I paid the flat owed you tax. [13:50.620 --> 13:50.860] Right. [13:52.220 --> 13:56.380] Absent that showing that I'm under the contract, they don't have all the elements. [13:57.260 --> 14:01.260] Okay, well, we're just about to go to sponsors. Yes, I just turned them on. [14:02.540 --> 14:08.380] We're already starting to get them filled up. 512-646-1984. We will be right back. [15:08.460 --> 15:11.100] And increase your income. Order now. [15:12.780 --> 15:17.820] Are you looking to have a closer relationship with God and a better understanding of his word? [15:17.820 --> 15:23.020] Then tune in to logosradionetwork.com on Wednesdays from 8 to 10 p.m. Central time for [15:23.020 --> 15:28.780] scripture talk, where Nana and her guests discuss the scriptures in accord with 2nd Timothy 2.15. [15:29.500 --> 15:33.980] Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, [15:33.980 --> 15:39.180] rightly dividing the word of truth. Starting in January, our first hour studies are in the [15:39.180 --> 15:44.700] book of Mark, where we'll go verse by verse and discuss the true gospel message. Our second hour [15:44.700 --> 15:49.740] topical studies will vary each week with discussions on sound doctrine and Christian character [15:49.740 --> 15:55.420] development. We wish to reflect God's light and be a blessing to all those with a hearing ear. [15:55.420 --> 16:00.060] Our goal is to strengthen our faith and to transform ourselves more into the likeness of [16:00.060 --> 16:05.740] our Lord and Savior Jesus. So tune in to scripture talk live on logosradionetwork.com [16:05.740 --> 16:10.940] Wednesdays from 8 to 10 p.m. to inspire and motivate your studies of the scriptures. [16:30.060 --> 16:44.060] Look what we get. Who reacts? The Christian. I wonder what they are. They don't have the answer. [16:44.060 --> 16:53.660] Open up your body. Who reacts? The Christian. Look what we get. And they don't have the answer. [16:53.660 --> 17:08.860] Okay, we are back. Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain, [17:08.860 --> 17:17.500] ruler of our radio. And we're going to go to Joseph in Texas. Joseph, what do you have for us today? [17:17.500 --> 17:24.540] Well, gentlemen, good evening. I'm in a loud environment. Can you hear me okay? [17:25.580 --> 17:27.340] Yes. Well, I want people to hush. [17:30.540 --> 17:41.740] That's fair. All right. Municipal judges, municipal attorneys. That's kind of the [17:41.740 --> 17:49.180] realm of where my head is right now. So a municipal judge on the record said, [17:50.060 --> 17:57.500] yes, we have an oath of office for that municipal attorney. Now let's go on and proceed and leave [17:57.500 --> 18:06.140] that topic behind us. The only problem with that is the municipal attorney prior to that hearing [18:06.140 --> 18:15.020] said that he did not have an oath of office on record. And a subsequent public records request, [18:15.020 --> 18:20.780] two of them, one to the county clerk and one to the municipal, proper municipal authorities, [18:21.500 --> 18:28.140] both came back with responses that stated there are no records responsive to your request. [18:28.220 --> 18:37.660] All right, then. That puts all three of them in a bad looking position, right? [18:38.380 --> 18:44.300] Well, that misstatement was not just a misstatement. It was very material. [18:45.580 --> 18:54.060] Yes. Now, there have been additional public records requests, again, each to the county [18:54.060 --> 18:59.020] and to the municipality in question, just to make sure all the bases are being covered. [18:59.580 --> 19:06.220] And for these three municipal attorneys, none of them have an oath of office on file. [19:06.940 --> 19:11.020] Now, a lot of people will say, oh, well, you shouldn't look at that. Don't go after their [19:11.020 --> 19:19.820] oath and their bond. And that's not my point. My point is that any conviction in that municipal [19:19.820 --> 19:27.580] courtroom where any one of those municipal attorneys was the attorney representing the state, [19:28.700 --> 19:35.100] if they did not have an oath of office on file, then they are in violation of Texas local government [19:35.100 --> 19:44.940] code 22.005. Subsection A basically says you are to have an oath of office signed and on file prior [19:44.940 --> 19:51.820] to taking action in that office or that position, whether you are appointed or elected. [19:52.380 --> 20:01.820] Texas local government code 22.071 defines the different offices of the municipality. [20:02.460 --> 20:10.140] One of those that it specifically names is municipal attorney. In addition to not following [20:10.140 --> 20:20.380] 22.005 and 22.071, I believe any attorney who presents himself as a city attorney or a municipal [20:20.380 --> 20:28.300] attorney and proceeds to attempt to represent the state of Texas in a criminal matter is violating [20:28.300 --> 20:36.300] Texas penal code 37.11. So this is... Yes. I think you're exactly right. 37.11 is impersonating [20:36.300 --> 20:45.100] public official or public servant. And it is in my opinion that I don't care how minor, [20:45.100 --> 20:55.180] miniscule or unimportant you think a law is. You, of all people, follow it. One of my favorite quotes [20:55.180 --> 21:01.020] is from H.G. Wells in his outline of history on speaking to the corruption of the popes [21:01.020 --> 21:03.980] during the Dark Ages. He very aptly observed, [21:04.780 --> 21:12.140] The giver of the law most owes the law allegiance. He of all beings should behave as though the law [21:12.140 --> 21:19.180] compels him. But it is the universal failing of mankind that what we are given to administer [21:19.820 --> 21:27.340] we promptly presume be own of all people who should be taken to the letter of law. [21:27.500 --> 21:32.700] It should not be me when I stopped at the stop sign, the guy in front of me, [21:32.700 --> 21:34.780] run in front of it and stopped up at the intersection. [21:37.180 --> 21:42.700] It should be that policeman. He's saying, technically, I didn't stop at the appropriate [21:42.700 --> 21:49.260] place. Okay, that's pretty technical. So you're going to hold me to a technical point of law [21:49.260 --> 21:54.220] you can't even define. Well, you're committing first degree felony aggravated assault. [21:55.180 --> 21:56.380] How does that work, Bubba? [21:58.700 --> 22:08.860] Now, there is the basis of what research, reading, public records requests have uncovered. [22:10.300 --> 22:16.140] This is happening all the time. I don't see a question yet. This is like a very common [22:17.100 --> 22:23.900] lawlessness. This lawlessness is easy to find. What do you want to know about it? [22:23.900 --> 22:25.500] You're preaching to the gallery here. [22:26.060 --> 22:32.140] No, I know. I know. I know. So stick with me. So Brett, you're right, except I have never heard, [22:32.140 --> 22:37.980] and maybe I just missed the conversation, but I have never heard anyone cite the local government [22:37.980 --> 22:43.820] code in that sense. I've heard plenty of people say, well, that's a crazy idea. Well, that's [22:43.820 --> 22:48.220] nonsense. Or you're never going to get them to follow that part of what the legislature [22:49.020 --> 22:52.300] put into law. I don't care about that. What I'm curious about is [22:52.460 --> 23:01.820] outside of verified criminal complaints, how far up the chain could someone go to hold any municipal [23:01.820 --> 23:09.020] judge, any acclaimed municipal attorney accountable for their actions? I don't think that's a county [23:09.020 --> 23:13.660] court or district court issue. It might even be a federal court kind of issue, or you've got to go [23:13.660 --> 23:20.860] to federal to get any kind of relief or remedy. And whether that is a monetary, hey, you violated [23:20.860 --> 23:27.020] my rights, or all of the cases that have been convicted against me by these people need to be- [23:27.020 --> 23:29.420] Oh, wait, it's not just you. [23:30.140 --> 23:30.940] I know. [23:31.900 --> 23:35.580] You think there might be others similarly situated? [23:38.780 --> 23:45.340] Right. Others similarly situated. You're right, Randy. And I'm trying to figure out, [23:45.580 --> 23:51.580] I'm trying to figure out, that's a big piece of pie. What is a reasonable bite to cake? [23:52.140 --> 23:56.540] Because criminal complaints aren't going to do anything. Maybe they might treat one person [23:56.540 --> 24:04.860] differently, but how do we get these people to follow the law or remove from office? Because [24:04.860 --> 24:09.820] that basically goes up the chain at the municipality. How do you actually get them [24:10.380 --> 24:16.780] removed from their position? It's not a JP case. I don't think it's a county case, so- [24:17.420 --> 24:21.420] Wait, they can't be removed from their positions if they don't have a position. [24:23.900 --> 24:24.380] Right. [24:24.380 --> 24:28.780] You can't be simultaneously saying they don't have a position, oh, and we need to get them removed. [24:30.220 --> 24:34.780] You can hold them accountable for pretending like they have that position. You can maybe [24:34.780 --> 24:43.500] ask them to, or ask that they be made to give back all of their paychecks, but you can't really [24:44.140 --> 24:50.220] say, remove them from the position that they, oh, don't have. You know what I mean? [24:50.220 --> 24:54.780] Well, and I don't think you're splitting hairs, but you could go so far to say, [24:54.780 --> 25:01.180] how do we remove them from this pretending that they're doing? Get them to return all the pay [25:01.180 --> 25:07.500] they have received, and oh, by the way, let's reverse all the convictions that they have been [25:07.500 --> 25:14.620] a part of where they have represented the state of Texas. So how would you go about accomplishing [25:14.620 --> 25:18.380] that, Brett and Brandy? And I think that criminal complaints are a required part of it, [25:18.380 --> 25:20.700] Bard-Reben says per se, but above- [25:20.700 --> 25:26.780] You start out with a set of petitions for declaratory judgment. [25:26.780 --> 25:35.580] And you ask the court to rule that the legislature passed this law, and this law applies to these [25:35.580 --> 25:43.500] public officials. Figure out what are the essential elements, and then go for those [25:43.500 --> 25:50.620] essential elements in petitions for declaratory judgment. Petition for declaratory judgment can't [25:50.620 --> 26:02.060] be dismissed under Rule 12 or a state equivalent. Rule 12 goes to failure to state a claim on which [26:02.060 --> 26:09.500] recovery can be had or to immunity, official immunity. Under declaratory judgment, you have [26:09.500 --> 26:19.500] neither one of those. I had the federal judge in Fort Worth, Judge McBride, dismiss my suit [26:19.500 --> 26:23.980] for failure to state a claim on which recovery can be had, dismissed with prejudice. [26:25.580 --> 26:29.340] It was a petition for declaratory judgment. I asked for a ruling on point of law. [26:31.180 --> 26:35.260] And when he dismissed it with prejudice for failure to state a claim, I went straight to the [26:36.300 --> 26:44.380] head U.S. attorney, what they call it, the SAC, this special agent in charge in Dallas, and filed [26:44.380 --> 26:51.660] criminal charges against it. Oh, boy. I had three other people file that exact same suit, [26:51.660 --> 26:59.580] and he didn't dismiss any of those. That got his attention. But this is how we do it. We got our [26:59.580 --> 27:05.020] ruling zone declaratory judgment. Once we got those, then we come back in, and the civil suit, [27:05.020 --> 27:09.020] it's a done deal. Hang on, Randy Kelvin, Brett Fountain, we'll be right back. [27:14.380 --> 27:25.820] I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, and I'll be right back with details. [27:44.940 --> 27:48.540] This public service announcement is brought to you by StartPage.com, [27:48.540 --> 27:54.460] the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing. Start over with StartPage. [27:56.300 --> 28:01.420] Data privacy is a big deal, so nearly every company has a policy explaining how they handle [28:01.420 --> 28:07.100] your personal information. But what happens if it escapes their control? It's not an idle question. [28:07.100 --> 28:12.700] According to a recent survey, a shocking 90% of U.S. companies admit their security was [28:12.700 --> 28:17.500] breached by hackers in the last year. That's one more reason you should trust your searches [28:17.500 --> 28:23.500] to StartPage.com. Unlike other search engines, StartPage doesn't store any data on you. They've [28:23.500 --> 28:28.220] never been hacked, but even if they were, there would be nothing for criminals to see. The cupboard [28:28.220 --> 28:33.820] would be bare. Too bad other companies don't treat your data the same way. I'm Dr. Catherine [28:33.820 --> 28:37.340] Albrecht. More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com. [28:37.340 --> 28:48.140] I lost my son, my nephew, my uncle, my son on September 11, 2001. Most people don't know that [28:48.140 --> 28:54.300] a third tower fell on September 11. World Trade Center 7, a 47-story skyscraper, was not hit by [28:54.300 --> 28:59.980] a plane. Although the official explanation is that fire brought down Building 7, over 1,200 [28:59.980 --> 29:04.140] architects and engineers have looked into the evidence and believe there is more to the story. [29:04.140 --> 29:10.300] Bring justice to my son, my uncle, my nephew, my son. Go to buildingwhat.org. Why it fell, [29:10.300 --> 29:16.060] why it matters, and what you can do. Rule of Law Radio is proud to offer the rule of law [29:16.060 --> 29:20.060] traffic seminar. In today's America, we live in an us-against-them society, and if we the people [29:20.060 --> 29:24.460] are ever going to have a free society, then we're going to have to stand and defend our own rights. [29:24.460 --> 29:28.140] Among those rights are the right to travel freely from place to place, the right to act in our own [29:28.140 --> 29:32.540] private capacity, and most importantly, the right to due process of law. Traffic courts afford us [29:32.540 --> 29:37.260] the least expensive opportunity to learn how to enforce and preserve our rights through due process. [29:37.260 --> 29:41.340] Former Sheriff's Deputy Eddie Craig, in conjunction with Rule of Law Radio, has put together the most [29:41.340 --> 29:45.420] comprehensive teaching tool available that will help you understand what due process is and how [29:45.420 --> 29:49.660] to hold courts to the rule of law. You can get your own copy of this invaluable material by going to [29:49.660 --> 29:54.220] ruleoflawradio.com and ordering your copy today. By ordering now, you'll receive a copy of Eddie's [29:54.220 --> 29:58.940] book, The Texas Transportation Code, The Law Versus the Lie, video and audio of the original 2009 [29:58.940 --> 30:03.020] seminar, hundreds of research documents, and other useful resource material. Learn how to fight [30:03.020 --> 30:07.260] for your rights with the help of this material from ruleoflawradio.com. Order your copy today, [30:07.260 --> 30:10.380] and together we can have the free society we all want and deserve. [30:14.140 --> 30:18.140] Live free speech radio, logosradionetwork.com. [30:28.940 --> 30:39.100] I want you to follow the law of the land. I don't understand. Your job is to protect and [30:39.100 --> 30:50.860] to serve. Not beat and abuse. Not be served. When you're going to stop abuse, your power. [30:50.860 --> 30:55.420] Okay. We are back, Randy Kelbret, Brown Rule of Law Radio. Okay. So, [30:55.820 --> 30:59.820] what is your intended strategy, Joseph? [31:05.100 --> 31:08.780] Oh, I guess we could hear you better if I unmute you. [31:08.780 --> 31:09.420] Can you hear me? [31:10.140 --> 31:11.260] Now I can hear you better. [31:12.620 --> 31:21.180] All right. One would be to, if there were any convictions to do what you just said, [31:21.260 --> 31:25.980] do a petition for declaratory judgment, but where would that go? Because this would be a [31:25.980 --> 31:31.260] municipal case that already convicted and done and over with. How would you get that to be undone? [31:31.260 --> 31:34.860] Would that be at the county layer, or would that need to be a higher or a federal case? [31:34.860 --> 31:40.700] That is a good question. Since there are no claims, [31:42.780 --> 31:48.700] so you decide what court you go into by the level of the claim. There has to be rules [31:49.660 --> 31:53.100] on where to file a petition for declaratory judgment. [31:54.060 --> 31:58.780] Well, I would say start with, for the declaratory judgment, start at the district level. That's [31:58.780 --> 32:07.980] your general level. But as for the overturning previous convictions that were invalid, [32:09.980 --> 32:15.020] start with, I would say for that, go to the appellate court for the municipality, [32:15.020 --> 32:20.300] which would be the county, and do a petition for rid of mandamus. So you're going to ask the [32:20.300 --> 32:25.420] county court to mandate to the lower court that they do this and such. [32:29.260 --> 32:35.180] And that would be a mandate that they overturn a conviction on the basis [32:35.980 --> 32:40.140] that it was not prosecuted by anyone who had the authority to do so. [32:40.860 --> 32:42.220] Yeah, it was ultra-various. [32:42.220 --> 32:50.940] It's a question about declaratory judgment. If you're asking them to overturn a ruling, [32:50.940 --> 32:53.420] that's not a petition for declaratory judgment. [32:55.420 --> 32:55.980] Exactly. [32:55.980 --> 33:02.220] Something that has defendants and people who can be affected by it. [33:02.380 --> 33:08.380] And declaratory judgment, you're just asking for a rule on point of law, [33:10.460 --> 33:12.460] like Speedy Trial. [33:12.460 --> 33:15.580] Well, Joseph, oh, go ahead. [33:15.580 --> 33:20.620] I argue that while the Speedy Trial Act has been overturned, the preamble to the Speedy Trial Act [33:20.620 --> 33:29.660] stated clearly what the legislative intent was as to the definition of speedy. And they said 30 [33:29.660 --> 33:41.020] days for misdemeanor, Class C, 60B, 90A, and 120 felony. Move the court to rule on, [33:42.060 --> 33:49.340] did the legislature intend that a person be prosecuted within 30 days on a Class C misdemeanor? [33:50.060 --> 33:56.540] Don't accuse the other guy of not doing it. Just ask the court for a ruling on point of law. [33:56.540 --> 34:03.580] And once you got that, then you can come back and move to overturn a decision. It's a lot more [34:03.580 --> 34:08.460] serious decision overturned than it is just getting a rule on point of law. Now, they may know [34:09.180 --> 34:16.620] if they rule this way, that you're going to be able to use it to get that conviction overturned, [34:16.620 --> 34:23.820] but that's not the point. That's not what's before them. And they tend to only rule on [34:23.820 --> 34:27.020] what's before them. And that's something important for people to understand. [34:27.980 --> 34:35.260] When I sat as a mock judge in a trial in Massachusetts, these guys were giving me [34:35.260 --> 34:40.140] all this legal theory and all this patriot mythology. And I'm sitting up here thinking, [34:40.140 --> 34:46.860] facts and law, facts and law, facts and law. Give me facts and give me law that relate to those facts. [34:46.940 --> 34:54.460] And they gave me none of that. And I'm frustrated. I know this guy, he's going to go to jail. [34:55.660 --> 35:00.460] And we're trying to teach him how to handle himself in court. And he couldn't get it. Finally, [35:00.460 --> 35:06.300] I called a recess and I told the guy, when we come back, if this guy helping you, if he says [35:06.300 --> 35:13.260] anything, you have my permission to shoot him because he's going to get you put in jail. [35:13.820 --> 35:20.620] And he did. They had two mock trials with a jury they just picked off the street. [35:21.660 --> 35:25.580] And both of them found him guilty. He went to Pennsylvania and they threw him in jail for two [35:25.580 --> 35:31.500] years. He didn't get it. Facts and law, that's the only thing the judge cares about. You can blab all [35:31.500 --> 35:39.340] you want to about how horrible that other guy is and how great you are and blah, blah, blah. [35:39.340 --> 35:43.900] The judge is going to sit there and listen to it. And he's going to wait for you to give him [35:43.900 --> 35:47.580] facts and law. If you don't, you don't have anything to work with. [35:48.780 --> 35:57.100] So, Jose, if I had an idea about the strategy, just something for you to consider. What if you [35:57.100 --> 36:03.900] start with a bar grievance? You go to the state bar and you raise a stink, find whichever rule [36:03.900 --> 36:11.420] seems a good fit and bar grieve him for pretending like he's a city attorney when he's really not. [36:13.260 --> 36:20.380] And then taking advantage of the fact that you happen to know that 30 days, [36:21.660 --> 36:26.940] that according to the Texas rules, their procedure requires them to triage every incoming [36:27.740 --> 36:34.780] grievance within 30 days. They have to categorize it and do some initial triage. [36:35.740 --> 36:42.380] So with that, armed with that information, you could let it sit there about three weeks [36:42.940 --> 36:46.940] while you're writing your declaratory judgment and then pop that in there. [36:48.060 --> 36:54.860] And then you claim that you first tried to go to have the state bar deal with this [36:55.500 --> 37:03.420] but they didn't rein in the behavior. Looks like by their silence, they must be condoning this, [37:04.140 --> 37:11.820] that just anybody can pretend that they're a city attorney. And that way, the state bar [37:13.180 --> 37:17.820] has another week or so to scramble and do something to slap this guy. [37:17.820 --> 37:23.500] That's devious. [37:24.860 --> 37:27.500] Remind me to never anger you. [37:31.660 --> 37:39.660] Brett comes off as this nice, devout Christian, turn the other cheek. Yeah, you turn the other [37:39.660 --> 37:51.740] cheek. You are devious, but I like you. First thing is, sorry, Randy, I thought you were finished. [37:54.140 --> 37:58.620] I'm the host. I'm never finished. You have to cut me off. [38:00.060 --> 38:05.100] This is true. So number one, bar grievance. Number two, petition for declaratory judgment. [38:05.100 --> 38:13.180] Number three, once you get that petition for declaratory judgment. Whoa, you missed one. [38:17.180 --> 38:21.260] Criminal complaints. Yeah, criminal complaint for 3711. [38:23.500 --> 38:29.260] Yeah, that's kind of an unspoken already going to do it, but I could file that. That could go [38:29.260 --> 38:36.060] with the bar grievance. Yes, it could. It would also go to in rule eight, I think it's 804, [38:36.060 --> 38:42.380] that they can't commit any crimes that are in the penal code, do any, what is it, moral turpitude. [38:44.140 --> 38:50.140] Okay. All right. So now the petition for declaratory judgment comes back with [38:51.500 --> 38:56.860] what the district court should do. They should say, well, everyone has to follow that law. [38:56.860 --> 39:02.860] No one is exempt from it. Okay, great. Then what? Then I turn around and use that as the basis for [39:02.860 --> 39:09.020] a suit for overturning of any convictions under that municipal... I wouldn't say you need to do [39:09.020 --> 39:14.300] a suit. You're not going to be the plaintiff or there's not really a defendant. All of those [39:14.300 --> 39:21.020] multiple defendants are not, you're not representing them or anything. This is simply, I would put it, [39:21.020 --> 39:26.060] in my mind, I categorize it as a petition for writ of mandamus. So you're going to go to the higher [39:26.060 --> 39:30.460] court and you're going to ask them to issue a writ to the lower court to follow the law. [39:31.660 --> 39:35.980] And I like stirring things up more and getting more clout on my side. [39:37.980 --> 39:44.700] If I get a writ of mandamus, a petition for declaratory judgment, and it states that the [39:44.700 --> 39:52.700] officer, that the prosecutor must have an oath of office in order to represent the municipality, [39:53.660 --> 40:00.380] then I go in and move the court to dismiss all the cases, this prosecutor prosecuted. [40:00.380 --> 40:05.580] Now, they're not going to, but it's easy enough to file the motion [40:07.660 --> 40:14.620] and start cranking the heat up. That's like you've done, Joseph. You ask the court to do [40:14.620 --> 40:19.100] what the court's commanded by law to do and he doesn't. You ask the bailiff to arrest him. [40:19.180 --> 40:23.580] If you get that ruling and the guy's still sitting there as your municipal [40:24.380 --> 40:27.740] attorney, then you file criminal charges against him. He has to bailiff to arrest him. [40:28.620 --> 40:32.460] Now, when the bailiff does it, then you file against the bailiff and that'll really get him [40:32.460 --> 40:40.460] excited. Mr. Bailiff, he's innocent here. He's not doing any of this stuff. And he thinks he's just [40:40.460 --> 40:47.740] there to keep the peace of the court when the citizen breaches it. And he don't think he's there [40:47.740 --> 40:55.020] to keep the peace in the court when someone else breaches it, like one of his lawyers or judges [40:55.020 --> 41:02.780] or clerks or buddies. We need to change that perspective. Remind them who we are. This is [41:02.780 --> 41:07.020] a republic, it's not a democracy. We need to constantly remind them. Randy Kelton, [41:07.020 --> 41:14.060] Red Falcon, Wheel of Law Radio, we'll be right back. Do you have a business with five employees [41:14.060 --> 41:19.100] or more? How would you like to save hundreds of thousands of dollars in FICA taxes? Do you have a [41:19.100 --> 41:25.820] major medical plan that nobody can afford to be on? Or how would you like to save in premium costs [41:25.820 --> 41:33.260] on a current major medical plan by lowering the claims cost? The CHAMP plan is a section 125 IRS [41:33.260 --> 41:39.660] approved preventative health plan that provides your employees with doctors, medications, [41:39.740 --> 41:46.780] emergency care, and Teladoc all at zero cost with zero copay. If you are an employee, [41:46.780 --> 41:52.940] you also will get a pay raise by paying less in FICA taxes. As an employer, you will save [41:52.940 --> 41:59.340] hundreds of thousands of dollars in matching FICA taxes. The CHAMP plan can help add working [41:59.340 --> 42:09.020] capital, market resale value, or pay down lines of credit. Call Scott at 214-730-2471 [42:09.020 --> 42:16.860] or dallasmms.com. Are you wondering what this world is coming to and why God isn't stopping it? [42:16.860 --> 42:23.500] Then tune in to logosradionetwork.com on Wednesdays from 8 to 10 p.m. central time for scripture talk [42:23.500 --> 42:27.340] where Nana and guests study God's word to find these answers and more. [42:27.980 --> 42:33.180] Join us for both verse by verse Bible studies and topical Bible studies designed to explain [42:33.180 --> 42:39.020] God's plan as well as to provoke unto love and good works. Our first hour studies are in the [42:39.020 --> 42:45.180] book of Matthew. Our second hour topics vary each week exploring sound doctrine as well as Christian [42:45.180 --> 42:52.060] character development. Our goal is in accord with Matthew 5 16. Let your light so shine before men [42:52.060 --> 42:57.580] that they may see your good works and glorify your father which is in heaven. We wish to reflect [42:57.580 --> 43:03.180] God's light and to be a blessing to all those who have a hearing ear. So tune in to scripture talk [43:03.180 --> 43:09.900] live on logosradionetwork.com Wednesdays from 8 to 10 p.m. for an inspiring and motivating study [43:09.900 --> 43:13.740] of the scriptures. [43:39.980 --> 43:41.740] Scuffling to keep the peace [43:42.700 --> 43:45.740] All they're taking is a misunderstanding [43:45.740 --> 43:47.740] If somebody calls the police [43:47.740 --> 43:49.740] We're watching the sparks fly [43:53.740 --> 43:55.740] We're watching the sparks fly [43:59.740 --> 44:01.740] We're watching the sparks fly [44:05.740 --> 44:07.740] We're watching the sparks fly [44:10.700 --> 44:12.700] The friction is an addiction [44:12.700 --> 44:14.700] The hard words can leave you cold as nails [44:14.700 --> 44:16.700] Abandoned hostility [44:16.700 --> 44:18.700] Tortured tranquility [44:18.700 --> 44:20.700] Heavy loads of taping on scales [44:20.700 --> 44:22.700] The time is colliding with the conflict [44:22.700 --> 44:24.700] You find out after a while [44:24.700 --> 44:26.700] It's not your moral standard [44:26.700 --> 44:28.700] It's your patience that's on trial [44:28.700 --> 44:30.700] Watching the sparks fly [44:40.700 --> 44:42.700] Okay, Randy Kelton, Fountain Real Law Radio [44:42.700 --> 44:44.700] and on the break we were talking about something [44:44.700 --> 44:46.700] I had a policeman [44:46.700 --> 44:48.700] friend of mine come by [44:48.700 --> 44:50.700] and brought me a present [44:52.700 --> 44:54.700] It's a fiddle about three inches long [44:56.700 --> 44:58.700] You hold the top of it between your thumb and forefinger [44:58.700 --> 45:00.700] and you let the base of it rest against your palm [45:00.700 --> 45:02.700] and it's got a little bow [45:02.700 --> 45:04.700] that you use on it [45:04.700 --> 45:06.700] and this is what it does [45:10.700 --> 45:14.700] There's only one problem with it [45:14.700 --> 45:16.700] is he got me two of them [45:16.700 --> 45:18.700] and the wife got one [45:18.700 --> 45:20.700] and now she'll use it on me [45:24.700 --> 45:26.700] But we can certainly play them [45:26.700 --> 45:28.700] like a cheap fiddle for real [45:30.700 --> 45:32.700] Okay, back to [45:32.700 --> 45:34.700] Joseph [45:34.700 --> 45:36.700] in Texas [45:37.500 --> 45:39.500] All right [45:39.500 --> 45:41.500] Okay, so I need to [45:41.500 --> 45:43.500] clear the air and let somebody else [45:43.500 --> 45:45.500] jump on the horn with you two [45:45.500 --> 45:47.500] but here's my final question [45:47.500 --> 45:49.500] declaratory judgment [45:49.500 --> 45:51.500] bar grievance [45:51.500 --> 45:53.500] criminal complaints [45:53.500 --> 45:55.500] all that makes sense [45:57.500 --> 45:59.500] and Brett, you and Randy have talked about this [45:59.500 --> 46:01.500] to a great extent [46:01.500 --> 46:03.500] but [46:03.500 --> 46:05.500] having actually seen the results [46:06.300 --> 46:08.300] of a records request come back [46:08.300 --> 46:10.300] with no responsive records [46:10.300 --> 46:12.300] or no records responsive [46:12.300 --> 46:14.300] to your request [46:14.300 --> 46:16.300] was really mind blowing [46:16.300 --> 46:18.300] So now that that can actually be quantified [46:18.300 --> 46:20.300] and it's not just a claim [46:20.300 --> 46:22.300] it's not just a motion to show authority [46:22.300 --> 46:24.300] that they ignore [46:24.300 --> 46:26.300] there's actual factual evidence [46:26.300 --> 46:28.300] of what's happening [46:30.300 --> 46:32.300] Does this mean that [46:32.300 --> 46:34.300] if crafted in the right way [46:35.100 --> 46:37.100] someone could then turn around [46:37.100 --> 46:39.100] and file a lawsuit against the municipality [46:41.100 --> 46:43.100] Not yet [46:43.100 --> 46:45.100] Hold on, hold on [46:45.100 --> 46:47.100] It's time to buy me a yacht [46:47.100 --> 46:49.100] That's not exactly intent [46:49.100 --> 46:51.100] but that gets across the base of it [46:51.100 --> 46:53.100] It's time to reach a nice settlement [46:55.100 --> 46:57.100] But you haven't turned the heat up [46:57.100 --> 46:59.100] enough yet [46:59.100 --> 47:01.100] Okay [47:01.100 --> 47:03.100] You get that response back [47:04.300 --> 47:06.300] then that establishes [47:06.300 --> 47:08.300] as an incontrovertible fact [47:08.300 --> 47:10.300] by a third party [47:10.300 --> 47:12.300] best person witness [47:12.300 --> 47:14.300] that this [47:14.300 --> 47:16.300] officer was impersonating [47:16.300 --> 47:18.300] a public official [47:18.300 --> 47:20.300] You take that [47:20.300 --> 47:22.300] to the judge [47:22.300 --> 47:24.300] Well, I would say [47:24.300 --> 47:26.300] take it to a different judge [47:26.300 --> 47:28.300] and name the judge who [47:28.300 --> 47:30.300] lied [47:30.300 --> 47:32.300] as he was [47:32.300 --> 47:34.300] collaborating and corroborating [47:34.300 --> 47:36.300] a story that he knew [47:36.300 --> 47:38.300] to be false [47:38.300 --> 47:40.300] Committed aggravated perjury [47:40.300 --> 47:42.300] in order to further [47:42.300 --> 47:44.300] this criminal [47:44.300 --> 47:46.300] interpress [47:46.300 --> 47:48.300] Right, because Joseph went to the [47:48.300 --> 47:50.300] judge already and he raised the issue [47:50.300 --> 47:52.300] and the judge says, ah, [47:52.300 --> 47:54.300] pooh pooh that [47:54.300 --> 47:56.300] He's got one, no worries [47:56.300 --> 47:58.300] AT US code [47:58.300 --> 48:00.300] 241 [48:00.300 --> 48:02.300] And that one's a felony [48:04.300 --> 48:06.300] Yeah, so I would go to a different [48:06.300 --> 48:08.300] judge and name the [48:08.300 --> 48:10.300] judge and the fake city attorney [48:10.300 --> 48:12.300] together [48:12.300 --> 48:14.300] And the judge will absolutely [48:14.300 --> 48:16.300] refuse to issue a warrant and now [48:16.300 --> 48:18.300] you got him and this judge is [48:18.300 --> 48:20.300] absolutely innocent and that's [48:20.300 --> 48:22.300] the one you want [48:22.300 --> 48:24.300] He's going to rise up and rail [48:24.300 --> 48:26.300] in righteous indignation [48:26.300 --> 48:28.300] What in the heck you guys get [48:28.300 --> 48:30.300] me into [48:30.300 --> 48:32.300] Increases the heat on everybody [48:34.300 --> 48:36.300] And then when you file [48:36.300 --> 48:38.300] I've already got the suit made up [48:38.300 --> 48:40.300] against the judge for not [48:40.300 --> 48:42.300] issuing the warrant [48:42.300 --> 48:44.300] He's really going to be unhappy [48:44.300 --> 48:46.300] Yeah, and to your [48:46.300 --> 48:48.300] other point you were saying that [48:48.300 --> 48:50.300] criminal complaints don't really [48:50.300 --> 48:52.300] They haven't had an effect [48:52.300 --> 48:54.300] Well, I would suggest that [48:54.300 --> 48:56.300] they do have an effect [48:56.300 --> 48:58.300] It would have a greater effect [48:58.300 --> 49:00.300] It's just that we [49:00.300 --> 49:02.300] are mere humans [49:02.300 --> 49:04.300] and we run out of resources [49:04.300 --> 49:06.300] and we've got to go to sleep, we've got to go [49:06.300 --> 49:08.300] to work, we've got other things to do [49:08.300 --> 49:10.300] and we [49:10.300 --> 49:12.300] are [49:12.300 --> 49:14.300] It's difficult to [49:14.300 --> 49:16.300] stay [49:16.300 --> 49:18.300] in [49:18.300 --> 49:20.300] just to keep the pressure [49:20.300 --> 49:22.300] on them and to keep going to the next [49:22.300 --> 49:24.300] level and go to another magistrate [49:24.300 --> 49:26.300] So [49:28.300 --> 49:30.300] In the times when I have done that [49:30.300 --> 49:32.300] when I have really stayed after them [49:32.300 --> 49:34.300] with the criminal complaints and keep going up [49:34.300 --> 49:36.300] the chain and go find other people to [49:36.300 --> 49:38.300] report crime to and [49:38.300 --> 49:40.300] just let it grow exponentially [49:40.300 --> 49:42.300] It has had [49:42.300 --> 49:44.300] an extreme effect [49:44.300 --> 49:46.300] Now, I've never been [49:46.300 --> 49:48.300] called in as a witness [49:48.300 --> 49:50.300] to, you know, for their prosecution [49:50.300 --> 49:52.300] They've probably [49:52.300 --> 49:54.300] never been dragged in anywhere [49:54.300 --> 49:56.300] I'm sure they get phone calls because [49:58.300 --> 50:00.300] the original problem [50:00.300 --> 50:02.300] goes away [50:02.300 --> 50:04.300] Poof! The original problem [50:04.300 --> 50:06.300] gets somehow [50:06.300 --> 50:08.300] just handled [50:08.300 --> 50:10.300] After I asked the judge [50:10.300 --> 50:12.300] to arrest the prosecutor [50:12.300 --> 50:14.300] for not giving my [50:14.300 --> 50:16.300] criminal complaints against the clerk to the grand [50:16.300 --> 50:18.300] jury, the next time I come [50:18.300 --> 50:20.300] in to find out when my court hearing was [50:20.300 --> 50:22.300] Well, they dismissed that two weeks ago [50:22.300 --> 50:24.300] What? What? They can't [50:24.300 --> 50:26.300] do that! You [50:26.300 --> 50:28.300] can't tell them to put that back on [50:28.300 --> 50:30.300] I didn't want it dismissed [50:32.300 --> 50:34.300] That's what happens [50:34.300 --> 50:36.300] I had one dismissed [50:36.300 --> 50:38.300] They were accusing me of driving [50:38.300 --> 50:40.300] with a defective headlight [50:46.300 --> 50:48.300] I had called them out on [50:48.300 --> 50:50.300] due process issues and it went up the chain [50:52.300 --> 50:54.300] Before long, I was doing the same thing [50:54.300 --> 50:56.300] that you're talking about [50:56.300 --> 50:58.300] I carried it all the way up through [50:58.300 --> 51:00.300] I disqualified the [51:00.300 --> 51:02.300] judge, had criminal complaints against [51:02.300 --> 51:04.300] the admin judge for not doing his [51:04.300 --> 51:06.300] duty when there was a disqualification [51:06.300 --> 51:08.300] and on up to the [51:08.300 --> 51:10.300] Court of Appeals and [51:10.300 --> 51:12.300] then finally to the Texas Supreme [51:12.300 --> 51:14.300] Court, the Chief Justice of the Texas [51:14.300 --> 51:16.300] Supreme, Nathan Hecht [51:16.300 --> 51:18.300] is now getting criminal [51:18.300 --> 51:20.300] charges against him [51:20.300 --> 51:22.300] and next thing [51:22.300 --> 51:24.300] you know, the [51:24.300 --> 51:26.300] way back down on the bottom of the [51:26.300 --> 51:28.300] totem pole, they dismissed [51:28.300 --> 51:30.300] in the interest of justice [51:34.300 --> 51:36.300] In the interest of justice [51:36.300 --> 51:38.300] We're not going to say anything about how [51:38.300 --> 51:40.300] much trouble you caused, but [51:40.300 --> 51:42.300] This Supreme Court has put the kibosh [51:42.300 --> 51:44.300] on that [51:44.300 --> 51:46.300] and they've said [51:46.300 --> 51:48.300] that if the court dismisses [51:48.300 --> 51:50.300] that is [51:50.300 --> 51:52.300] tantamount to a [51:52.300 --> 51:54.300] admission of harm [51:54.300 --> 51:56.300] that the prosecution was malicious [51:56.300 --> 51:58.300] and gives you grounds for suit [52:00.300 --> 52:02.300] Even if you were guilty [52:02.300 --> 52:04.300] of sin [52:04.300 --> 52:06.300] if they start prosecuting [52:06.300 --> 52:08.300] you and you beat them up really good [52:08.300 --> 52:10.300] if they dismiss it [52:10.300 --> 52:12.300] then you want [52:12.300 --> 52:14.300] You want your civil suit [52:14.300 --> 52:16.300] Now you have a civil claim [52:16.300 --> 52:18.300] That's what the Supreme Court ruled [52:20.300 --> 52:22.300] So I'm going to jump on that, Randy [52:22.300 --> 52:24.300] Right there [52:24.300 --> 52:26.300] Back to what I was saying a minute ago [52:26.300 --> 52:28.300] This is now [52:28.300 --> 52:30.300] provable [52:30.300 --> 52:32.300] It's not just like I said [52:32.300 --> 52:34.300] a motion to assure authority [52:34.300 --> 52:36.300] that it's ignored [52:36.300 --> 52:38.300] It's not just some guy [52:38.300 --> 52:40.300] raising the issue during a hearing [52:40.300 --> 52:42.300] There is actual proof [52:42.300 --> 52:44.300] that can be put on the record [52:44.300 --> 52:46.300] Now, when you go back [52:46.300 --> 52:48.300] and you get it dismissed [52:48.300 --> 52:50.300] or you have it, I don't know [52:50.300 --> 52:52.300] reversed or whatever it would be [52:52.300 --> 52:54.300] but once all that's done [52:54.300 --> 52:56.300] then they didn't [52:56.300 --> 52:58.300] just mess up on one case [52:58.300 --> 53:00.300] They prosecuted you from beginning to end [53:00.300 --> 53:02.300] wholly incorrectly [53:02.300 --> 53:04.300] This doesn't even include the due process violations [53:04.300 --> 53:06.300] but at that point [53:06.300 --> 53:08.300] it's that much bigger of an issue [53:08.300 --> 53:10.300] Because they did this wrong beginning to end [53:10.300 --> 53:12.300] You can prove it [53:12.300 --> 53:14.300] So is that grounds for a civil suit [53:14.300 --> 53:16.300] against what? [53:16.300 --> 53:18.300] The municipality, just them on their individual [53:18.300 --> 53:20.300] capacity, or against the [53:20.300 --> 53:22.300] actual whole municipality [53:22.300 --> 53:24.300] and the court [53:24.300 --> 53:26.300] That was the definitive [53:26.300 --> 53:28.300] ruling of [53:28.300 --> 53:30.300] SCOTUS, US Supreme [53:32.300 --> 53:34.300] So yes, they don't get to just [53:34.300 --> 53:36.300] dismiss it now [53:36.300 --> 53:38.300] and go on and screw the next guy [53:40.300 --> 53:42.300] If you and I [53:42.300 --> 53:44.300] will stand up and take them on [53:44.300 --> 53:46.300] and that's what I'm [53:46.300 --> 53:48.300] hoping to get put together [53:48.300 --> 53:50.300] You know, Brett, you were talking about all the [53:50.300 --> 53:52.300] work and difficulties [53:52.300 --> 53:54.300] and all the stuff you've got to do [53:54.300 --> 53:56.300] It's my intent [53:56.300 --> 53:58.300] to get all that automated [53:58.300 --> 54:00.300] So you just go in [54:00.300 --> 54:02.300] and answer the questions, boom, it spits out [54:02.300 --> 54:04.300] the next set of documents [54:04.300 --> 54:06.300] You don't have to do any research, you don't have to do anything [54:06.300 --> 54:08.300] Just sign them and file them [54:10.300 --> 54:12.300] We get that going [54:12.300 --> 54:14.300] We'll get this legal system [54:14.300 --> 54:16.300] back [54:16.300 --> 54:18.300] It's actually pretty easy [54:18.300 --> 54:20.300] even without automation [54:20.300 --> 54:22.300] You can take one criminal complaint [54:22.300 --> 54:24.300] that you've already done for say [54:24.300 --> 54:26.300] Texas Penal Code 39.03 [54:26.300 --> 54:28.300] and anybody [54:28.300 --> 54:30.300] else who's done that same thing [54:30.300 --> 54:32.300] You just drag across the part where it's [54:32.300 --> 54:34.300] described his acts [54:34.300 --> 54:36.300] and you stick the other person's acts [54:36.300 --> 54:38.300] Drag across the name, stick that person's name [54:38.300 --> 54:40.300] date, there's very little to change [54:40.300 --> 54:42.300] It's easy for us [54:42.300 --> 54:44.300] because we've done this a lot [54:44.300 --> 54:46.300] Well, I've also gone through the whole automation [54:46.300 --> 54:48.300] process and done a lot of [54:48.300 --> 54:50.300] automation, but I'm saying for people [54:50.300 --> 54:52.300] who haven't, and all they've got [54:52.300 --> 54:54.300] is, they can see an [54:54.300 --> 54:56.300] example of somebody else did a [54:56.300 --> 54:58.300] criminal complaint, 39.03 [54:58.300 --> 55:00.300] Copy and paste, people [55:02.300 --> 55:04.300] That's why I built a lawsuit [55:04.300 --> 55:06.300] against a [55:06.300 --> 55:08.300] magistrate who didn't issue a warrant [55:08.300 --> 55:10.300] and I had it all filled out and I went to [55:10.300 --> 55:12.300] file it and I looked at it and I said, heck with this [55:12.300 --> 55:14.300] I went back and took my name [55:14.300 --> 55:16.300] and the judge's name out [55:16.300 --> 55:18.300] and put in lines [55:18.300 --> 55:20.300] and then I filled it all in by hand [55:20.300 --> 55:22.300] There you go [55:22.300 --> 55:24.300] It's a psychological [55:24.300 --> 55:26.300] effect [55:26.300 --> 55:28.300] The first thing he sees is the header that says [55:28.300 --> 55:30.300] prosayfromhell.com [55:30.300 --> 55:32.300] slash templates [55:32.300 --> 55:34.300] Are you [55:34.300 --> 55:36.300] this prosay from hell? [55:36.300 --> 55:38.300] No, that's just a website where I downloaded this [55:38.300 --> 55:40.300] template [55:40.300 --> 55:42.300] He's thinking, holy crap [55:44.300 --> 55:46.300] That's one of the things I'm trying [55:46.300 --> 55:48.300] to get to. I want everything [55:48.300 --> 55:50.300] automated [55:50.300 --> 55:52.300] Well, there is one point before you get off, Joseph [55:52.300 --> 55:54.300] We're about to go to sponsors, but I wanted to touch [55:54.300 --> 55:56.300] on one thing you mentioned earlier [55:56.300 --> 55:58.300] about proof [55:58.300 --> 56:00.300] Now you have positive proof [56:00.300 --> 56:02.300] Let's talk about that [56:28.300 --> 56:30.300] Let's talk about that [56:30.300 --> 56:32.300] Let's talk about that [56:32.300 --> 56:34.300] Let's talk about that [56:34.300 --> 56:36.300] Let's talk about that [56:36.300 --> 56:38.300] Let's talk about that [56:38.300 --> 56:40.300] Let's talk about that [56:40.300 --> 56:42.300] Let's talk about that [56:42.300 --> 56:44.300] Let's talk about that [56:44.300 --> 56:46.300] Let's talk about that [56:46.300 --> 56:48.300] Let's talk about that [56:48.300 --> 56:50.300] Let's talk about that [56:50.300 --> 56:52.300] Let's talk about that [56:54.300 --> 56:56.300] Let's talk about that [56:56.300 --> 56:58.300] Let's talk about that [56:58.300 --> 57:00.300] Let's talk about that [57:00.300 --> 57:02.300] Let's talk about that [57:02.300 --> 57:04.300] Let's talk about that [57:04.300 --> 57:06.300] Let's talk about that [57:06.300 --> 57:08.300] Let's talk about that [57:08.300 --> 57:10.300] Let's talk about that [57:10.300 --> 57:12.300] Let's talk about that [57:12.300 --> 57:14.300] Let's talk about that [57:14.300 --> 57:16.300] Let's talk about that [57:16.300 --> 57:18.300] Let's talk about that [57:18.300 --> 57:20.300] Let's talk about that [57:22.300 --> 57:24.300] Let's talk about that [57:24.300 --> 57:26.300] Let's talk about that [57:26.300 --> 57:28.300] Let's talk about that [57:28.300 --> 57:30.300] Let's talk about that [57:30.300 --> 57:32.300] Let's talk about that [57:32.300 --> 57:34.300] Let's talk about that [57:34.300 --> 57:36.300] Let's talk about that [57:36.300 --> 57:38.300] Let's talk about that [57:38.300 --> 57:40.300] Let's talk about that [57:40.300 --> 57:42.300] Let's talk about that [57:42.300 --> 57:44.300] Let's talk about that [57:44.300 --> 57:46.300] Let's talk about that [57:48.300 --> 57:50.300] Let's talk about that [57:50.300 --> 57:52.300] Let's talk about that [57:52.300 --> 57:54.300] Let's talk about that [57:54.300 --> 57:56.300] Let's talk about that [57:56.300 --> 57:58.300] Let's talk about that [57:58.300 --> 58:00.300] Let's talk about that [58:00.300 --> 58:02.300] Let's talk about that [58:02.300 --> 58:04.300] Let's talk about that [58:04.300 --> 58:06.300] Let's talk about that [58:06.300 --> 58:08.300] Let's talk about that [58:08.300 --> 58:10.300] Let's talk about that [58:10.300 --> 58:12.300] Let's talk about that [58:12.300 --> 58:14.300] Let's talk about that [58:14.300 --> 58:16.300] Let's talk about that [58:16.300 --> 58:18.300] Let's talk about that [58:18.300 --> 58:20.300] Let's talk about that [58:20.300 --> 58:22.300] Let's talk about that [58:22.300 --> 58:24.300] Let's talk about that [58:24.300 --> 58:26.300] Let's talk about that [58:26.300 --> 58:28.300] Let's talk about that [58:28.300 --> 58:30.300] Let's talk about that [58:30.300 --> 58:32.300] Let's talk about that [58:32.300 --> 58:34.300] Let's talk about that [58:34.300 --> 58:36.300] Let's talk about that [58:36.300 --> 58:38.300] Let's talk about that [58:38.300 --> 58:40.300] Let's talk about that [58:42.300 --> 58:44.300] Let's talk about that [58:44.300 --> 58:46.300] Let's talk about that [58:46.300 --> 58:48.300] Let's talk about that [58:50.300 --> 58:52.300] Let's talk about that [58:52.300 --> 58:54.300] Let's talk about that [58:54.300 --> 58:56.300] Let's talk about that [58:56.300 --> 58:58.300] Let's talk about that [58:58.300 --> 59:00.300] Let's talk about that [59:00.300 --> 59:02.300] Let's talk about that [59:02.300 --> 59:04.300] Let's talk about that [59:04.300 --> 59:06.300] Let's talk about that [59:06.300 --> 59:08.300] Let's talk about that [59:08.300 --> 59:10.300] Let's talk about that [59:10.300 --> 59:12.300] Let's talk about that [59:12.300 --> 59:14.300] Let's talk about that [59:14.300 --> 59:16.300] Let's talk about that [59:16.300 --> 59:18.300] Let's talk about that [59:18.300 --> 59:20.300] Let's talk about that [59:20.300 --> 59:22.300] Let's talk about that [59:22.300 --> 59:24.300] Let's talk about that [59:24.300 --> 59:26.300] Let's talk about that [59:26.300 --> 59:28.300] Let's talk about that [59:28.300 --> 59:30.300] Let's talk about that [59:30.300 --> 59:32.300] Let's talk about that [59:32.300 --> 59:34.300] Let's talk about that [59:34.300 --> 59:36.300] Let's talk about that [59:36.300 --> 59:38.300] Let's talk about that [59:38.300 --> 59:40.300] Let's talk about that [59:40.300 --> 59:42.300] Let's talk about that [59:42.300 --> 59:44.300] Let's talk about that [59:44.300 --> 59:46.300] Let's talk about that [59:46.300 --> 59:48.300] Let's talk about that [59:48.300 --> 59:50.300] Let's talk about that [59:50.300 --> 59:52.300] Let's talk about that [59:52.300 --> 59:54.300] Let's talk about that [59:54.300 --> 59:56.300] Let's talk about that [59:56.300 --> 59:58.300] Let's talk about that [59:58.300 --> 01:00:00.300] Let's talk about that [01:00:00.300 --> 01:00:02.300] Let's talk about that [01:00:02.300 --> 01:00:04.300] Let's talk about that [01:00:04.300 --> 01:00:06.300] Let's talk about that [01:00:06.300 --> 01:00:10.300] Dr. Catherine Albrecht, more news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com [01:00:36.300 --> 01:00:38.300] Dr. Catherine Albrecht [01:00:38.300 --> 01:00:40.300] Dr. Catherine Albrecht [01:00:40.300 --> 01:00:42.300] Dr. Catherine Albrecht [01:00:42.300 --> 01:00:44.300] Dr. Catherine Albrecht [01:00:44.300 --> 01:00:46.300] Dr. Catherine Albrecht [01:00:46.300 --> 01:00:48.300] Dr. Catherine Albrecht [01:00:48.300 --> 01:00:50.300] Dr. Catherine Albrecht [01:00:50.300 --> 01:00:52.300] Dr. Catherine Albrecht [01:00:52.300 --> 01:00:54.300] Dr. Catherine Albrecht [01:00:54.300 --> 01:00:56.300] Dr. Catherine Albrecht [01:00:56.300 --> 01:00:58.300] Dr. Catherine Albrecht [01:00:58.300 --> 01:01:00.300] Dr. Catherine Albrecht [01:01:00.300 --> 01:01:02.300] Dr. Catherine Albrecht [01:01:02.300 --> 01:01:04.300] Dr. Catherine Albrecht [01:01:04.300 --> 01:01:06.300] Dr. Catherine Albrecht [01:01:08.300 --> 01:01:10.300] Dr. Catherine Albrecht [01:01:12.300 --> 01:01:14.300] Dr. Catherine Albrecht [01:01:14.300 --> 01:01:16.300] Dr. Catherine Albrecht [01:01:18.300 --> 01:01:20.300] Dr. Catherine Albrecht [01:01:20.300 --> 01:01:22.300] Dr. Catherine Albrecht [01:01:22.300 --> 01:01:24.300] Dr. Catherine Albrecht [01:01:24.300 --> 01:01:26.300] Dr. Catherine Albrecht [01:01:26.300 --> 01:01:28.300] Dr. Catherine Albrecht [01:01:28.300 --> 01:01:30.300] Dr. Catherine Albrecht [01:01:30.300 --> 01:01:35.340] Radio, Brett never tells me what day it is. And he knows I'm old and I forget those things. [01:01:37.580 --> 01:01:45.580] Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain, Rubella Radio on this, the 17th day of July, Thursday the 17th day [01:01:45.580 --> 01:01:54.620] of July, 2025. We're over halfway through the year. We're in the middle of July in Texas, [01:01:55.580 --> 01:02:03.180] and we haven't hit 100 yet. It's global warming, I tell you. I just listened to a program where [01:02:03.180 --> 01:02:12.540] Argentina is having the coldest winter in their recorded history. And there was PBS, [01:02:13.420 --> 01:02:18.460] and the commentator was kind of dancing on the head of a pin when he said, [01:02:19.420 --> 01:02:29.260] do you think this has to do with climate change? He did not say global warming. [01:02:30.700 --> 01:02:35.180] Okay, Joseph, where were we? [01:02:35.180 --> 01:02:39.260] Pete Slauson All right. When we went out, there was one point about [01:02:40.220 --> 01:02:44.540] our conversation with Joseph that stood out to me that I think may be good to just touch real [01:02:44.540 --> 01:02:50.540] quickly. Joseph, you mentioned that now you have conclusive proof [01:02:52.620 --> 01:03:01.260] of there not being an oath on file. And while you have evidence, I don't think that you can say that [01:03:01.260 --> 01:03:07.420] that's proof. What you're really going after is a negative here. And you can't really prove a [01:03:07.420 --> 01:03:15.420] negative. Who knows? Maybe the lady did her best to research it, and she ended up, she didn't [01:03:15.420 --> 01:03:22.220] realize that one of her assistants had a certain folder on her desk, and she was as diligent as [01:03:22.220 --> 01:03:27.980] she could be, but she didn't realize that they had all the ems over there on that other desk. [01:03:29.020 --> 01:03:32.940] You know, things could turn up later, or they could be falsified later, obviously. But [01:03:32.940 --> 01:03:39.900] to be able to say that it's absolute proof that he didn't have an oath, [01:03:41.100 --> 01:03:46.060] I don't think that's what you've got. You've got good evidence, really good evidence. [01:03:46.060 --> 01:03:49.820] And in fact, it's evidence that's good enough for a judicial notice, which is pretty strong, [01:03:50.380 --> 01:03:55.740] because it's coming from a source whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned, [01:03:57.260 --> 01:04:02.700] the court clerk. However, what if you were to find out later from the Secretary of State [01:04:03.340 --> 01:04:09.980] that they had received a copy of that on, you know, whatever, years ago. And for some reason, [01:04:10.540 --> 01:04:15.820] the city didn't have the original, but the Secretary of State still had a copy of it from [01:04:15.820 --> 01:04:23.180] way back when. You know what I mean? I don't know if you can appreciate the difference there. [01:04:24.140 --> 01:04:32.540] All you need is a reasonable cause to believe that you have ample, absent, [01:04:34.540 --> 01:04:38.780] controverting evidence, sufficient evidence for a conviction. [01:04:39.420 --> 01:04:45.740] Yes, that you've got good evidence, really good evidence, strong evidence, just not quite proof. [01:04:46.060 --> 01:04:52.300] Okay, so hold on a minute. First of all, municipal oaths of office, [01:04:52.300 --> 01:04:58.300] go to the Secretary of the Municipality, not the Attorney General. Second of all. [01:05:01.180 --> 01:05:08.940] Okay, so second of all, these record requests have gone out to the municipality [01:05:09.020 --> 01:05:15.660] and the county clerk for three separate claimed or alleged municipal attorneys. [01:05:16.220 --> 01:05:19.180] All three of them have come back with the same response. [01:05:20.860 --> 01:05:24.300] It's looking pretty bad for them. The future looks bleak. [01:05:25.580 --> 01:05:30.940] Yep. And I'm going to run through the rest of the roster of their municipal attorneys [01:05:30.940 --> 01:05:33.340] and see if I get the same response for all of them too. [01:05:34.300 --> 01:05:40.460] There's a term that comes to mind here, preponderance. [01:05:41.580 --> 01:05:46.220] Yes, in the standards of proof, that's one of them, the preponderance of the evidence. [01:05:47.340 --> 01:05:53.340] Right. So duly noted, Brett, thank you for pointing that out. So my last question I've [01:05:53.340 --> 01:06:00.380] been trying to get at is, if someone had all of this information already proved out, [01:06:00.380 --> 01:06:06.300] they had it all documented, they had all the results of the records request, [01:06:06.860 --> 01:06:13.740] if they wanted to go after the municipality for a comfortable monetary settlement, [01:06:15.820 --> 01:06:17.100] what would that look like? [01:06:20.540 --> 01:06:25.740] I don't know. You have to ask somebody who's actually gotten some money out of this lawlessness. [01:06:26.140 --> 01:06:34.860] I have not yet done that. I've tried, but it hasn't happened yet. So I won't venture to give [01:06:34.860 --> 01:06:40.140] any advice on that point. That's fair. Randy, how about you? [01:06:42.140 --> 01:06:46.940] This is something, a direction I've just recently started to take. [01:06:47.020 --> 01:06:57.020] I've just recently started to take. And I sued a magistrate, but I let it go. I just did not have [01:06:57.020 --> 01:07:03.980] time to follow up. I've got three or four more I can sue. I'm just buried with something more [01:07:03.980 --> 01:07:11.100] important right now, the electronic lawyer project. So I'm spending my time on that. [01:07:11.100 --> 01:07:14.780] It's been 18 years coming. It's time I got it working. [01:07:15.980 --> 01:07:20.700] So I set aside everything else, and I'm getting this project put together. [01:07:20.700 --> 01:07:22.380] It's the most important thing I can do. [01:07:26.380 --> 01:07:28.540] That's my story, and I'm sticking to it. [01:07:30.460 --> 01:07:34.700] With that, I will bid you farewell. Thanks again for all that you do, Brett and Randy. [01:07:35.260 --> 01:07:38.940] I'll catch the rest of everything online. Goodbye, gentlemen. [01:07:39.660 --> 01:07:40.220] Thank you. [01:07:41.100 --> 01:07:47.420] Okay. Now we're going to Chris in Colorado. Hello, Chris. What do you have for us today? [01:07:49.580 --> 01:07:57.100] Hey, guys. I have, hopefully, just a couple quick questions. I'm digging deep into everything I'm [01:07:57.100 --> 01:08:02.380] doing here, finding whatever. I just want to get into it. It's pretty dramatic. [01:08:03.180 --> 01:08:07.660] But one of my first questions is this. If the federal court [01:08:07.660 --> 01:08:17.500] misquotes state Supreme Court law, is that an issue for the state? And have you ever, [01:08:17.500 --> 01:08:19.900] you got any ideas or have you ever heard of anything like that? [01:08:21.500 --> 01:08:27.020] If the federal court violates law? It depends. [01:08:27.020 --> 01:08:28.940] They say misstates the law. [01:08:28.940 --> 01:08:35.740] Misstates. Not if the federal court is misstating federal law. [01:08:37.500 --> 01:08:43.020] If the federal court is misstating state law, then that may be something you can address with [01:08:43.020 --> 01:08:51.740] the state. But I would need more information, more about what you're, you know, I don't have [01:08:51.740 --> 01:08:58.700] enough context. Well, it's pretty simple. The Supreme Court, and this is in Wyoming, [01:08:58.700 --> 01:09:01.500] Supreme Court has made a couple of rulings in their case law that says [01:09:02.300 --> 01:09:08.140] a couple things, you know, one thing or the other. And just in January, which is interesting [01:09:08.140 --> 01:09:14.060] because in my federal case, the defense tried to use this case that came out of nowhere in January [01:09:14.060 --> 01:09:22.140] where the Supreme Court made another statement about one of their laws. Now, in a perfect world, [01:09:22.140 --> 01:09:26.620] this would have burned the defense because I guess they didn't read far enough into the case [01:09:26.620 --> 01:09:31.020] to find out that what they said actually helped me. I think, I think Harmon's talked about this, [01:09:31.020 --> 01:09:36.060] but anyway, but in my case, they didn't even read it up in 10th Circuit. Okay. So [01:09:42.380 --> 01:09:47.500] they can make an exception, basically a tolling exception, equitable topple, sorry, [01:09:47.500 --> 01:09:55.340] equitable tolling, et cetera, et cetera. The federal court said there is nothing in the [01:09:55.340 --> 01:10:01.740] Wyoming Governmental Claims Act that allows for tolling. When the Supreme Court of Wyoming just [01:10:01.740 --> 01:10:07.340] ruled, we would allow for tolling if a proper argument came up, but nobody's argued it. [01:10:09.260 --> 01:10:15.020] I'm the guy who argued it. All right. So that's a misstating of Supreme Court law. [01:10:16.460 --> 01:10:22.140] And they did it in another instance. I won't get off on a tangent, but they also misquoted another [01:10:22.780 --> 01:10:29.260] equitable relief. These are two cases within Wyoming, the Supreme Court of Wyoming. [01:10:29.260 --> 01:10:33.100] I have more from across the nation, but those are two cases right from Wyoming. So [01:10:34.060 --> 01:10:37.420] the only idea I came up with was why don't I call the Supreme Court of Wyoming and talk to them and [01:10:37.420 --> 01:10:41.180] say, hey, do you have any issues with this? But I don't know if that's a smart idea or not. [01:10:44.940 --> 01:10:45.740] To call them up? [01:10:47.660 --> 01:10:48.540] Well, I don't know how to call. [01:10:48.540 --> 01:10:53.980] Are you talking about just call and get ahold of a clerk and [01:10:55.980 --> 01:10:59.100] try to make your case with a clerk? I wouldn't think that'd get you anywhere. [01:11:00.380 --> 01:11:04.300] It ain't going to get me nowhere. But I mean, somewhere in the judiciary up in the Supreme [01:11:04.300 --> 01:11:10.940] Court, there's got to be something. Because the federal court's a misrepresenting law, [01:11:10.940 --> 01:11:13.980] and I don't know how to address that. That's a pretty crazy one to me. [01:11:18.540 --> 01:11:24.780] They've misrepresented. Which law did they misrepresent? [01:11:27.740 --> 01:11:31.180] The federal, okay, there's a Governmental Claims Act, which [01:11:32.940 --> 01:11:36.780] institutions have a requirement that if you're going to sue the government, [01:11:36.780 --> 01:11:41.420] you have to get the government notice. But there are exceptions across the nation where, [01:11:42.140 --> 01:11:50.700] okay, for one, the government hid their status, mainly hospitals, but a government entity or a [01:11:50.700 --> 01:11:58.140] breakoff, they hid their status. A government entity hid their status, like a doctor or something [01:11:58.140 --> 01:12:02.380] like that. Which is really pretty close to your situation. [01:12:03.740 --> 01:12:11.180] Exactly my situation, yeah. But there's two more. Another government agency misleads a citizen [01:12:11.180 --> 01:12:15.660] as to government status or et cetera, et cetera. There's case law from Texas. [01:12:15.660 --> 01:12:21.900] That one's dead on. Yep. And then three, if you were disabled [01:12:22.620 --> 01:12:28.380] or incapacitated or in the hospital for 11 months, there's a case out of New York, [01:12:28.380 --> 01:12:34.140] the district of New York, where this woman was literally in the hospital for 11 months, [01:12:34.140 --> 01:12:39.500] passed the statute of limitations. She filed the government notice, but didn't file for leave [01:12:39.500 --> 01:12:44.140] because of being incapacitated. And so the court said, you could have asked for leave, [01:12:44.140 --> 01:12:47.180] you could have asked for a delay and filed because of what you are, but you didn't, [01:12:47.180 --> 01:12:54.220] so now we're going to ding you for the government notice. So those are all remedies that are [01:12:54.220 --> 01:13:01.820] available to people. And then in Wyoming, they just stated in January, I think verbatim pretty [01:13:01.820 --> 01:13:08.620] much the statement is, we decide without deciding that tolling can apply to the Wyoming Governmental [01:13:08.620 --> 01:13:16.620] Claims Act. But in this specific case, they didn't argue, there is no argument for that. [01:13:16.620 --> 01:13:20.780] They're trying to argue something else, but they literally just said tolling can apply [01:13:20.780 --> 01:13:29.820] to the governmental act. And the 10th circuit in the Governmental Claims Act allows for tolling. [01:13:32.620 --> 01:13:34.940] They decide without deciding. That's weird. [01:13:35.500 --> 01:13:41.100] It's a weird phrasing, but basically they reiterated it later on, basically stating, [01:13:41.100 --> 01:13:47.740] we will, tolling can apply to the statute, that equitable tolling can apply to the statute. [01:13:47.740 --> 01:13:55.580] The most statute, unless they say specifically that you cannot have tolling, that this deadline, [01:13:55.580 --> 01:14:01.500] you know, five, 10 years, whatever it is, is written in law, equitable rest apply to the statute. [01:14:02.060 --> 01:14:05.980] Yeah, and that makes sense. All right, hold that thought. [01:14:05.980 --> 01:14:09.580] We're going to go to our sponsors. We'll be right back. [01:14:12.300 --> 01:14:17.340] Are you looking to have a closer relationship with God and a better understanding of his word? [01:14:17.340 --> 01:14:22.380] Then tune in to LogosRadioNetwork.com on Wednesdays from 8 to 10 p.m. Central Time [01:14:22.380 --> 01:14:27.660] for scripture talk, where Nana and her guests discuss the scriptures in accord with 2 Timothy [01:14:27.820 --> 01:14:33.500] 2.15. Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, [01:14:33.500 --> 01:14:38.700] rightly dividing the word of truth. Starting in January, our first hour studies are in the [01:14:38.700 --> 01:14:44.220] Book of Mark, where we'll go verse by verse and discuss the true gospel message. Our second hour [01:14:44.220 --> 01:14:48.780] topical studies will vary each week with discussions on sound doctrine and Christian [01:14:48.780 --> 01:14:53.900] character development. We wish to reflect God's light and be a blessing to all those with a [01:14:53.900 --> 01:14:59.420] hearing ear. Our goal is to strengthen our faith and to transform ourselves more into the likeness [01:14:59.420 --> 01:15:05.260] of our Lord and Savior Jesus. So tune in to scripture talk live on LogosRadioNetwork.com [01:15:05.260 --> 01:15:10.460] Wednesdays from 8 to 10 p.m. to inspire and motivate your studies of the scriptures. [01:15:12.220 --> 01:15:18.140] Through advances in technology, our lives have greatly improved, except in the area of nutrition. [01:15:18.140 --> 01:15:23.020] People feed their pets better than they feed themselves, and it's time we changed all that. [01:15:23.100 --> 01:15:29.420] Our primary defense against aging and disease in this toxic environment is good nutrition. [01:15:29.420 --> 01:15:34.140] In a world where natural foods have been irradiated, adulterated, and mutilated, [01:15:34.140 --> 01:15:40.300] Young Jevity can provide the nutrients you need. LogosRadioNetwork gets many requests to endorse [01:15:40.300 --> 01:15:46.140] all sorts of products, most of which we reject. We have come to trust Young Jevity so much, [01:15:46.140 --> 01:15:52.540] we became a marketing distributor along with Alex Jones, Ben Fuchs, and many others. When you order [01:15:52.540 --> 01:15:59.340] from LogosRadioNetwork.com, your health will improve as you help support quality radio. [01:15:59.340 --> 01:16:04.860] As you realize the benefits of Young Jevity, you may want to join us. As a distributor, [01:16:04.860 --> 01:16:11.260] you can experience improved health, help your friends and family, and increase your income. Order [01:17:11.260 --> 01:17:15.980] now. [01:17:15.980 --> 01:17:19.260] Okay, we are back. Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain, [01:17:19.260 --> 01:17:23.820] Wheel of Life Radio, and we're talking to Chris in Colorado. Okay, Chris, where were we? [01:17:28.140 --> 01:17:33.660] Oh, I guess we can tell better if we unmute you. Ah, now we can hear you better. [01:17:33.660 --> 01:17:47.260] I'm wondering, another cord missed. I don't know if it is anymore, but... [01:17:47.900 --> 01:17:51.500] Wait, wait, I'm having trouble hearing you. Are you having trouble, Brett? [01:17:51.500 --> 01:17:52.540] Yeah, it's not just you. [01:17:54.220 --> 01:17:54.460] Yeah. [01:17:54.460 --> 01:17:56.460] Is it a speakerphone or something? [01:17:57.420 --> 01:18:01.180] It's sounding really, you're cutting out a lot. I don't know if you have a noisy environment and [01:18:02.060 --> 01:18:05.740] I don't know what's going on there, but are you able to make any adjustments? [01:18:07.340 --> 01:18:12.300] Well, I got bad service where I am, I'm sorry. If it gets bad, I'll hang up. [01:18:12.860 --> 01:18:14.060] That's a lot better. [01:18:14.060 --> 01:18:15.340] That's much better. [01:18:15.340 --> 01:18:21.100] Okay. Okay. I'm holding the phone right next to my head, so you're contributing to my health [01:18:21.100 --> 01:18:22.700] decline, just so you know. All right. [01:18:23.740 --> 01:18:25.340] Tell him to use wired earbuds. [01:18:25.740 --> 01:18:27.020] Wired earbuds? [01:18:29.820 --> 01:18:32.220] Yeah, Deborah's saying wired earbuds. [01:18:36.060 --> 01:18:38.860] Yeah, I've got them, but they're hiding in the suitcase somewhere. I'm sorry. [01:18:41.980 --> 01:18:47.340] Anyway, I'm just wondering if a state is, if their law is being misused other places, [01:18:49.420 --> 01:18:50.380] what do I do about that? [01:18:53.420 --> 01:18:54.380] That's interesting. [01:18:55.340 --> 01:19:01.900] Well, I think where we left off, you were saying... [01:19:02.860 --> 01:19:09.660] When the Fed improperly, the Fed in a case where the state and the Fed laws are implicated, [01:19:09.660 --> 01:19:17.340] the Fed can rule on the state laws. However, if the Fed's in the Fed ruling on state laws [01:19:17.340 --> 01:19:22.300] and they're ruling improperly, we should have a remedy for that. [01:19:26.220 --> 01:19:26.700] Bivens? [01:19:29.980 --> 01:19:34.300] Not exactly Bivens. Bivens goes to something more intentional. [01:19:36.300 --> 01:19:42.540] There should be something in law that would allow a state [01:19:44.380 --> 01:19:49.180] to overrule a Fed when the Fed is ruling on state law. [01:19:50.540 --> 01:19:54.540] Right. Well, it's like you said earlier, [01:19:54.540 --> 01:19:57.980] when you figure out something should be something that way, probably it is. [01:20:00.140 --> 01:20:01.180] We just got to find it. [01:20:06.700 --> 01:20:11.500] And I don't know, I don't have that answer for you, Chris. That is an interesting question. [01:20:13.660 --> 01:20:15.900] You guys were talking about declaratory judgment earlier. [01:20:16.860 --> 01:20:26.140] I think that would be the tool, but the Fed's think when they rule, it carries. But [01:20:27.180 --> 01:20:33.820] this is like two different jurisdictions. If you got one jurisdiction ruling on law that goes to [01:20:33.820 --> 01:20:39.660] another jurisdiction, and the Fed's want to say, if we rule on law that goes to your jurisdiction, [01:20:39.660 --> 01:20:45.420] you're stuck with it. And the other jurisdiction should be able to say, no, no, no. [01:20:46.060 --> 01:20:54.620] You're a foreign jurisdiction. We should be able to overturn your rulings on our law. [01:20:55.420 --> 01:20:57.900] Yeah, because we know what our legislature meant. [01:21:01.580 --> 01:21:06.460] I don't know. That's an interesting question, not one I've had to deal with before. [01:21:06.460 --> 01:21:15.900] Well, I was thinking naively as a child to walk into the Supreme Court and just start crying [01:21:15.900 --> 01:21:27.980] about it. I'm sure there's better remedies. Okay. Do you have anything else for us? [01:21:28.620 --> 01:21:37.260] Look at the chat. State legislatures ignore U.S. Supreme Court rulings and federal statutes all [01:21:37.260 --> 01:21:48.060] the time. Okay. Our producer's telling us that the state legislatures ignore federal rulings [01:21:48.060 --> 01:21:59.660] in state court. That sounds like kind of a court carved out remedy. If they feel like the Feds have [01:21:59.660 --> 01:22:06.540] ruled wrong on state law, they tell the Feds to go scratch. But that's a pretty crappy remedy. [01:22:06.540 --> 01:22:12.140] We need something with more standing than just a judge thumbing their nose at the Feds. [01:22:12.780 --> 01:22:17.340] Yeah, it's got to go both ways in some ways, because if they have linked jurisdictions, meaning, [01:22:17.900 --> 01:22:18.300] well... [01:22:18.300 --> 01:22:24.380] Yeah, if we're bound, if the state is bound to federal law in a federal circumstance, [01:22:25.420 --> 01:22:28.380] the Feds should be bound to state law in a state circumstance. [01:22:33.260 --> 01:22:34.780] Turnabout's fair play. [01:22:35.340 --> 01:22:37.820] But I don't know. I don't know how to answer that. [01:22:43.020 --> 01:22:46.700] Okay. I'll dig a little deeper. And then the last question I have, pretty brief. [01:22:47.420 --> 01:22:49.740] Have you ever had a judge consolidate cases? [01:22:51.100 --> 01:22:52.700] Yeah, they do that all the time. [01:22:52.700 --> 01:23:06.940] Judicial economy, if you have the same issues based on the same fact set, [01:23:07.820 --> 01:23:09.740] then they can consolidate the cases. [01:23:09.740 --> 01:23:11.580] On the same parties. [01:23:11.580 --> 01:23:20.060] No, not the same issues. I got robbed. I got robbed, and the thieves are one case, [01:23:20.060 --> 01:23:25.980] and then the storage unit who refused to hold a contract, which is protect my stuff, [01:23:25.980 --> 01:23:28.860] it's a whole separate unit, and the judge is like, nah, we're going to throw them together. [01:23:29.820 --> 01:23:32.460] Well, they're both kind of based on the same fact set. [01:23:34.300 --> 01:23:36.220] Did you get robbed from the storage unit? [01:23:37.660 --> 01:23:39.980] Yeah, but they didn't work in collusion. [01:23:41.500 --> 01:23:47.500] Yeah, but the storage unit has its level of complicity along with the thieves. [01:23:48.380 --> 01:23:52.220] Claiming that the storage unit did not provide sufficient security. [01:23:53.420 --> 01:23:56.700] So these two cases are in fact combined. [01:24:02.460 --> 01:24:06.700] Well, I'll look into that more, but that's going to cause a headache because [01:24:07.420 --> 01:24:10.700] storage units are going to say it's all the thieves' fault, and the thieves aren't going [01:24:10.700 --> 01:24:14.540] to pay a single dime, and the thieves are going to say, well, whatever, I'm not paying, and then [01:24:15.100 --> 01:24:16.060] they're both off the hook. [01:24:17.900 --> 01:24:24.460] It depends on a jury. But no, that's not how it works. It's not how it works in the Fed. [01:24:26.140 --> 01:24:29.980] Whoever got the money pays. If they're both in the same lawsuit, [01:24:31.980 --> 01:24:41.660] it doesn't matter who or what the jury assigns damages to. The seminal case on that is a 17-story [01:24:41.660 --> 01:24:47.820] building in New York. A guy in the basement had a restaurant. His stove went out on Saturday night. [01:24:49.500 --> 01:24:53.740] The only plumber he could find was his brother-in-law who didn't have a license. He [01:24:53.740 --> 01:24:58.220] came down. He fixed the stove. They called the city. They called the water department, [01:24:58.220 --> 01:25:06.780] the gas and the city. They both came down and approved it. Sunday morning, the building blew [01:25:06.780 --> 01:25:12.700] up, killed a bunch of people. Well, they sued. The people who were injured sued. [01:25:13.500 --> 01:25:18.540] The plumber didn't have anything to start with. The restaurant owner lost everything in the fire. [01:25:18.540 --> 01:25:25.900] The building owner lost everything in the fire. They held the city and the gas company 1% responsible. [01:25:27.500 --> 01:25:32.220] But since they had the money, they had to pay, and it was up to them to get their money back [01:25:32.220 --> 01:25:36.940] from the other litigants. So I don't think you have the problem you think you do. [01:25:38.780 --> 01:25:46.140] Oh, okay. Well, all right. I'll look into it. I'll sit on it. [01:25:49.500 --> 01:25:51.660] I guess that's not a bad idea. [01:25:51.660 --> 01:25:56.860] Yeah. Brett referenced deep pockets. A lawyer, when he's looking at a lawsuit, [01:25:56.860 --> 01:26:04.380] he's always looking for who's got deep pockets, no matter how little they may be tied to the case, [01:26:06.540 --> 01:26:08.700] because he can always get in the deep pockets. [01:26:11.020 --> 01:26:13.340] Okay. Okay. [01:26:15.500 --> 01:26:23.260] Okay. Thank you, Chris. Okay. Now we're going to go to Mary in Texas. Hello, Ms. Mary. [01:26:24.220 --> 01:26:27.980] Hi, guys. I'm just calling to say hi. How are y'all? [01:26:29.180 --> 01:26:29.740] Doing great. [01:26:31.100 --> 01:26:34.620] How's your Republican Party going in Austin? [01:26:35.660 --> 01:26:37.340] I don't know if I can talk about it. [01:26:39.020 --> 01:26:41.820] Well, how's the part you can talk about going? [01:26:43.580 --> 01:26:49.820] We have a lot of people that want to do something and that want to do the right thing. We really do. [01:26:49.820 --> 01:26:53.260] We have a lot of people that really want to do the right thing. We really do. [01:26:56.700 --> 01:26:58.860] What do they consider the right thing? [01:27:00.620 --> 01:27:03.580] Hang on. We'll talk about that when we get back on the other side. [01:27:04.300 --> 01:27:10.860] Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain, we'll have our radio. Call in number 512-646-9084. [01:27:14.140 --> 01:27:19.580] Reality TV, sugar, obesity, jet lag, the list of things that makes us dumber, [01:27:19.580 --> 01:27:24.300] just keeps on growing. But now researchers say we can add stress to the list. [01:27:24.300 --> 01:27:27.180] I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht. Back with details in a moment. [01:27:27.900 --> 01:27:33.500] Privacy is under attack. When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again. [01:27:33.500 --> 01:27:37.900] And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too. [01:27:38.540 --> 01:27:43.900] So protect your rights. Say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself. [01:27:43.900 --> 01:27:46.300] Privacy. It's worth hanging on to. [01:27:46.380 --> 01:27:52.140] This message is brought to you by Startpage.com, the private search engine alternative to Google, [01:27:52.140 --> 01:27:55.420] Yahoo, and Bing. Start over with Startpage. [01:27:57.260 --> 01:28:02.700] Are you always on the go and juggling multiple projects? If so, you might think that multitasking [01:28:02.700 --> 01:28:07.340] proves you're smart. But think again, all that stress might be eating your brain. [01:28:07.900 --> 01:28:11.980] A new study finds stress reduces the number of connections between neurons, [01:28:11.980 --> 01:28:15.020] which actually makes it harder for people to manage problems. [01:28:15.580 --> 01:28:20.060] Researchers at Yale University found that stressed-out people have less gray matter [01:28:20.060 --> 01:28:24.620] in their prefrontal cortex. That's the part of the brain that helps us weigh conflicting [01:28:24.620 --> 01:28:29.580] ideas and regulate our emotions. So take a deep breath and chill out. [01:28:29.580 --> 01:28:32.140] It'll help keep your mind as sharp as a tack. [01:28:32.780 --> 01:28:37.500] I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht for Startpage.com, the world's most private search engine. [01:28:37.500 --> 01:28:48.140] This is Building 7, a 47-story skyscraper that fell on the afternoon of September 11th. [01:28:48.140 --> 01:28:53.660] The government says that fire brought it down. However, 1,500 architects and engineers concluded [01:28:53.660 --> 01:28:57.100] it was a controlled demolition. Over 6,000 of my fellow service members [01:28:57.100 --> 01:29:00.700] have given their lives. Thousands of my fellow first responders are dying. [01:29:00.700 --> 01:29:03.020] I'm not a conspiracy theorist. I'm a structural engineer. [01:29:03.020 --> 01:29:05.500] I'm a New York City correction officer. I'm an Air Force pilot. [01:29:05.500 --> 01:29:09.740] I'm a father who lost his son. We're Americans, and we deserve the truth. [01:29:09.740 --> 01:29:12.460] Go to RememberBuilding7.org today. [01:29:14.220 --> 01:29:18.220] Rule of Law Radio is proud to offer the rule of law traffic seminar. In today's America, [01:29:18.220 --> 01:29:22.060] we live in an us-against-them society, and if we the people are ever going to have a free society, [01:29:22.060 --> 01:29:26.220] then we're going to have to stand and defend our own rights. Among those rights are the right to [01:29:26.220 --> 01:29:30.220] travel freely from place to place, the right to act in our own private capacity, and most importantly, [01:29:30.220 --> 01:29:34.620] the right to due process of law. Traffic courts afford us the least expensive opportunity to [01:29:34.620 --> 01:29:39.020] learn how to enforce and preserve our rights through due process. Former Sheriff's Deputy Eddie [01:29:39.020 --> 01:29:42.700] Craig, in conjunction with Rule of Law Radio, has put together the most comprehensive teaching [01:29:42.700 --> 01:29:46.940] tool available that will help you understand what due process is and how to hold courts to the rule [01:29:46.940 --> 01:29:51.660] of law. You can get your own copy of this invaluable material by going to ruleoflawradio.com and [01:29:51.660 --> 01:29:55.340] ordering your copy today. By ordering now, you'll receive a copy of Eddie's book, The Texas [01:29:55.340 --> 01:29:59.900] Transportation Code, The Law Versus the Lie, video and audio of the original 2009 seminar, [01:29:59.900 --> 01:30:03.820] hundreds of research documents and other useful resource material. Learn how to fight for your [01:30:03.820 --> 01:30:07.740] rights with the help of this material from ruleoflawradio.com. Order your copy today, [01:30:07.740 --> 01:30:10.860] and together we can have the free society we all want and deserve. [01:30:14.140 --> 01:30:19.100] You are listening to the Logos Radio Network, logosradionetwork.com. [01:31:03.820 --> 01:31:16.380] Okay, we are back. Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain, Rule of Law Radio, and we're talking to Mary [01:31:16.380 --> 01:31:27.340] in Texas. Mary, we were talking on the break about these issues and I'm mixing them up with [01:31:27.340 --> 01:31:34.140] Chris before you were there. She was saying that there are a lot of people that are wanting to do [01:31:34.140 --> 01:31:39.100] the right thing and you were asking her what that is. And I think you got to the part that [01:31:39.100 --> 01:31:45.660] she can't talk about. Did I get to the point you can't talk about? I started with the point I can't [01:31:45.660 --> 01:31:58.540] talk about. Okay, I would like to talk to your people. I can give them some tools they may not [01:31:58.540 --> 01:32:05.340] have realized they had. Well, I need a book or something, like a website or a book or something. [01:32:07.580 --> 01:32:12.860] I got Legal 101. This is this guy. Yeah, I need that with the magistrate section [01:32:13.420 --> 01:32:18.300] and what is the grand jury? No, Legal 101 is really not about that. I've got another [01:32:18.300 --> 01:32:26.780] document about the magistrates. Legal 101 is how the system really works as opposed to the stuff [01:32:26.780 --> 01:32:33.660] they teach you in law school. Out here in the real world, this is how it really works. Lawyers, [01:32:34.300 --> 01:32:40.460] they're not out there to win your case. They want to get your retainer. And then they do this flurry [01:32:40.460 --> 01:32:44.940] of motions and use up your retainer and they want to get rid of you and get another client. [01:32:44.940 --> 01:32:49.820] Because if they get past the flurry of motions in the front, now they have to actually start doing [01:32:49.820 --> 01:32:59.260] legal research. Oh my goodness. Profitable. So it ain't like you think it is. Your lawyer is not [01:32:59.260 --> 01:33:07.020] on your side. He's not going to do anything to annoy that judge. Because he's legitimately [01:33:07.020 --> 01:33:12.700] concerned that the judge will screw his next client to get back at him. And unfortunately, [01:33:13.580 --> 01:33:23.500] that's true. This is how it really works. But that's really not what your clients, [01:33:24.700 --> 01:33:30.460] these Republicans need to hear. They need to hear the power of the criminal system. [01:33:31.180 --> 01:33:36.060] They're complaining about these public officials doing things and I'm looking at it and say, [01:33:36.060 --> 01:33:41.500] heck, those are crimes for crying out loud. Report the crime already. [01:33:42.220 --> 01:33:49.980] So if I'm a court watcher and I'm down here watching the vote counters and stuff and I see [01:33:49.980 --> 01:33:55.180] something that I think is improper, I'm not going to go in there and huff and puff and [01:33:55.900 --> 01:33:59.900] rail in righteous indignation. I'm going to call 911. [01:33:59.900 --> 01:34:11.340] I think, I believe that I see actions in here that are criminal. These actions are wrongful. [01:34:11.340 --> 01:34:16.780] You need to go in there and investigate. And whether the policeman finds any criminal wrongdoing [01:34:16.780 --> 01:34:26.620] or not is not so important. But you got these precinct court judges and these people who work [01:34:26.620 --> 01:34:32.620] in the precincts and doing what they're told to do, and they get a cop down there asking them [01:34:32.620 --> 01:34:39.900] questions because somebody thinks they were committing crimes. All these people, especially [01:34:39.900 --> 01:34:44.300] the volunteers, are going to say, holy crap, I'm not going to go to jail. [01:34:45.260 --> 01:34:48.300] Yeah, they're not impressed with you stomping around asking questions, but [01:34:49.260 --> 01:34:52.620] when a cop goes in there, that's different or sheriff. [01:34:52.780 --> 01:34:56.700] And the cop is going to go in there and do everything he can to make peace. [01:34:58.620 --> 01:35:03.180] He's going to try to bring both sides together so there is no problem. And that's exactly how it [01:35:03.180 --> 01:35:08.620] should be. But you got somebody in there that those people have to pay attention to. [01:35:10.220 --> 01:35:14.780] You go in there and they'll just blow you off as a reactionary. They're not going to do that to a [01:35:14.780 --> 01:35:22.380] certified peace officer. You got their attention. This will get them to start doing the right [01:35:22.380 --> 01:35:30.220] thing because you can't risk not. And nobody needs to be arrested. Nobody needs to have [01:35:30.220 --> 01:35:35.820] charges against them. You just call in a third-party arbiter, and the policeman is the [01:35:35.820 --> 01:35:47.340] third-party arbiter. What do you think, Mary? When did the policeman start dispensing legal advice? [01:35:47.500 --> 01:35:53.900] No, he doesn't mean for like a judgment. He's just saying, [01:35:54.540 --> 01:36:00.460] get a third party in there, and this third party is one that they are bound to respect. [01:36:01.740 --> 01:36:07.340] They can't blow off the—I would say get the sheriff in there, but whoever it is, they're [01:36:08.460 --> 01:36:13.980] an executive officer, they're in uniform, and they're there to perform their job, [01:36:13.980 --> 01:36:16.540] which is to investigate a report of crime. [01:36:18.860 --> 01:36:28.700] Mary, consider you're in the—you're working a voting deal, and people are out there watching, [01:36:28.700 --> 01:36:32.940] and they think you're not doing it right. And if they come down there huffing and puffing, [01:36:32.940 --> 01:36:36.380] you'll get security to throw them out, and you go back about what you were doing. [01:36:37.500 --> 01:36:43.260] Consider them just reactionaries. But if a certified peace officer comes down there [01:36:43.260 --> 01:36:47.980] and starts asking you questions, all of a sudden he's got your attention. [01:36:49.180 --> 01:36:53.500] Now, since you're a public official, he's going to do everything he can [01:36:54.300 --> 01:36:59.260] to make sure you don't have any problem. But he's got these citizens out here that called him [01:36:59.980 --> 01:37:05.100] that he's got to answer to, so he's walking this tightrope in between the two of you. [01:37:06.860 --> 01:37:10.700] And he will be motivated to find a middle ground for everybody [01:37:10.700 --> 01:37:18.060] to make sure that there's no nefarious stuff going on in here, so that these people out here [01:37:18.060 --> 01:37:25.180] won't be too excited and give him a lot. This is the perfect solution. Don't think about calling [01:37:25.180 --> 01:37:31.500] the police to get him to arrest somebody. Call the police to act as that third-party arbiter and [01:37:31.500 --> 01:37:37.340] make sure to make sure everybody does things right. Does that make sense, Mary? [01:37:38.140 --> 01:37:42.300] Oh, wow. Well, this is a three-hour conversation. [01:37:46.700 --> 01:37:50.620] Yeah, but what I'm trying to do is craft a metaphor, [01:37:51.980 --> 01:38:03.340] craft a story that we can tell these people so that it fits within their rules of behavior. [01:38:03.340 --> 01:38:12.860] No, I mean, plain constitutional law is not really taught, and the use of criminal [01:38:12.860 --> 01:38:18.620] procedure is not taught. And so teaching people... No, no, no. You don't want any criminal stuff. [01:38:18.620 --> 01:38:24.220] With this, you don't want criminal. All you want is a neutral third-party arbiter. [01:38:25.820 --> 01:38:30.300] Well, that's a challenge of finding one. Now, if I wanted criminal, [01:38:30.300 --> 01:38:34.540] now you just call a policeman. This guy don't have a dog in this hunt, [01:38:35.980 --> 01:38:41.740] and he's been called up on a dime. He does not want to be on. This is political, [01:38:41.740 --> 01:38:47.420] and he don't want to be here. You don't ask the policeman to arrest anybody. Now, [01:38:47.420 --> 01:38:54.780] I do that all the time, just that's what I do. But in your case, if you have something that you [01:38:54.780 --> 01:39:01.820] think is not being done properly, don't go in there and huff and puff and rail rights indignation [01:39:01.820 --> 01:39:05.900] because they're just going to demonize you. Two are going to fight back and forth. It's [01:39:05.900 --> 01:39:14.380] going to just go downhill. Call in a third-party arbiter, a policeman who knows nothing about all [01:39:14.380 --> 01:39:23.820] this stuff, who has no investment in either side whatsoever. He's got a job to do. [01:39:24.780 --> 01:39:29.180] And you drug him up here in the middle of this, and he's dancing on his tippy toes [01:39:29.820 --> 01:39:35.900] between public officials and high-level political officials on both sides. He wants [01:39:35.900 --> 01:39:41.500] to find an equitable solution for everyone. Well, I'll tell you this. In the large cities, [01:39:41.500 --> 01:39:44.940] we have defunded the police. They frequently don't show Randy. [01:39:46.620 --> 01:39:52.780] If they're called to a voting machine or something, politically charged, they'll show. [01:39:53.420 --> 01:39:58.140] When I called 911 at the courthouse, they didn't show because they were defunded. [01:39:59.500 --> 01:40:06.620] But if they're called to something that's politically charged, they're going to show. [01:40:08.380 --> 01:40:12.940] Everything's political. They didn't show for me because I wasn't political enough, [01:40:12.940 --> 01:40:19.900] or at least at the time. But they didn't know that at the time I was in the process filing [01:40:19.900 --> 01:40:27.020] criminal charges against everybody in Texas. The guy I called against, I sued for $20 million and [01:40:27.020 --> 01:40:32.460] the sheriff for $20 million because of what they did there. I go down there. The next time, [01:40:32.460 --> 01:40:39.340] I won't have that problem. But if I'm a political official or this is a politically [01:40:39.340 --> 01:40:43.900] charged circumstance, the police are going to get it. They don't have a dog in the hunt. [01:40:44.780 --> 01:40:51.580] They're the best ones to find a solution. And if you think some bad stuff's going on [01:40:51.580 --> 01:40:57.260] in the voting stuff, this cop will make sure it's not. You put everybody on the dime, [01:40:57.260 --> 01:41:03.420] say, you guys got to be careful. And the problem goes away without any major difficulty. [01:41:06.220 --> 01:41:09.500] Hang on. Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain, Reveal Our Radio. We'll be right back. [01:41:10.140 --> 01:41:16.620] Do you have a business with five employees or more? How would you like to save hundreds of [01:41:16.620 --> 01:41:22.140] thousands of dollars in FICA taxes? Do you have a major medical plan that nobody can afford to be [01:41:22.140 --> 01:41:28.780] on? Or how would you like to save in premium costs on a current major medical plan by lowering the [01:41:28.780 --> 01:41:36.540] claims cost? The CHAMP plan is a section 125 IRS approved preventative health plan that provides [01:41:36.540 --> 01:41:43.420] your employees with doctors, medications, emergency care, and Teladoc all at zero cost, [01:41:43.420 --> 01:41:50.780] with zero copay. If you are an employee, you also will get a pay raise by paying less in FICA taxes. [01:41:50.780 --> 01:41:57.020] As an employer, you will save hundreds of thousands of dollars in matching FICA taxes. [01:41:57.020 --> 01:42:03.340] The CHAMP plan can help add working capital, market resale value, or pay down lines of credit. [01:42:03.420 --> 01:42:15.020] Call Scott at 214-730-2471 or dallasmms.com. Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit? [01:42:15.580 --> 01:42:21.100] Win your case without an attorney with Juris Dictionary, the affordable, easy to understand, [01:42:21.100 --> 01:42:28.380] four CD course that will show you how in 24 hours, step by step. If you have a lawyer, [01:42:28.380 --> 01:42:32.220] know what your lawyer should be doing. If you don't have a lawyer, [01:42:32.220 --> 01:42:37.500] know what you should do for yourself. Thousands have won with our step by step course, [01:42:37.500 --> 01:42:44.620] and now you can too. Juris Dictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case winning [01:42:44.620 --> 01:42:50.620] experience. Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand about [01:42:50.620 --> 01:42:56.940] the principles and practices that control our American courts. You'll receive our audio classroom, [01:42:56.940 --> 01:43:03.660] video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases, pro se tactics, and much more. [01:43:03.660 --> 01:43:11.660] Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner or call toll free 866-LAW-EZ. [01:43:27.100 --> 01:43:27.660] Oh [01:43:34.380 --> 01:43:41.660] Some things in this world I will never understand. Some things I realize fully. [01:43:43.020 --> 01:43:49.660] Somebody's gonna police that policeman. Somebody's gonna police the police. [01:43:50.540 --> 01:43:51.580] Oh [01:43:51.580 --> 01:43:58.860] There's always a room at the top of the hill. I hear through the grapevine and it's lonely [01:43:58.860 --> 01:44:06.540] there still. They're wishing it was more than a position to fill. They know that if they don't do [01:44:06.540 --> 01:44:15.900] it, somebody will. Some things in this world I will never understand. Some things I realize fully. [01:44:16.620 --> 01:44:21.020] Somebody's gonna police that policeman. [01:44:21.020 --> 01:44:28.940] Okay, we are back. Randy Dalton from Rule of Law Radio and we're talking to Mary in Texas. Mary, [01:44:31.820 --> 01:44:39.980] this is a tool that the Republican Party in Austin in a highly democratic area, [01:44:40.700 --> 01:44:48.460] this is a really powerful tool they can use. The policemen are almost universally Republican. [01:44:50.860 --> 01:44:59.820] They are not bleeding heart liberals. And anytime you call them to something that's [01:44:59.820 --> 01:45:05.420] politically charged, you know, if they pull you over on the side of the street, you know, [01:45:05.500 --> 01:45:12.380] they're not very diplomatic. And most of us have very little experience with the police being [01:45:12.380 --> 01:45:20.220] diplomatic. But they certainly can be. And with what you're dealing with, where you're calling [01:45:20.220 --> 01:45:26.140] them into a politically charged circumstance, they get- [01:45:26.140 --> 01:45:33.820] Yeah, now all of a sudden they want to be, they want to de-escalate. They want to keep everybody [01:45:33.820 --> 01:45:43.740] calm and make everybody happy. And Mary, from what I know of you, you really need some de-escalation. [01:45:47.100 --> 01:45:51.020] People listening here, you're wondering why I said that. Well, if you were at the [01:45:51.020 --> 01:45:55.660] Senate Subcommittee on Criminal Justice when she was, I thought I was gonna have to pull her off [01:45:55.660 --> 01:46:01.020] the sergeant at arms. And I got all these guys around us with scars on their knuckles, [01:46:01.020 --> 01:46:05.740] just cracking their knuckles, waiting to get a shot at us. Yeah, that's very critic. [01:46:09.100 --> 01:46:16.940] Well, it helps when you're, what, 5'10", with the hair four inches and heels four inches. [01:46:21.420 --> 01:46:26.540] Well, we didn't go to jail that day. But it wasn't Mary's fault. [01:46:27.420 --> 01:46:33.900] We first went to the DPS office. We didn't stand there like sitting ducks. We went to the DPS [01:46:33.900 --> 01:46:38.700] office. We went to the journalist's office. They told us we had to press pass to record. [01:46:39.260 --> 01:46:45.980] They were violating Open Meetings Act. I asked one of your friends to take the case. He said he was [01:46:45.980 --> 01:46:53.980] gonna go to China instead. And some weird- So, I mean, you know what I'm saying? But a good lobbyist [01:46:53.980 --> 01:46:58.540] told us in the cigarette area outside that, you know, he's not necessarily on our side, [01:46:58.540 --> 01:47:04.140] but they were strictly violating the Open Meetings Act. They shut down our journalistic outfit [01:47:04.700 --> 01:47:10.220] that day and shut off Randy's camera that was in my possession and one of the committees there. [01:47:10.220 --> 01:47:16.060] And it was what? A prudence committee. And I think that day I was wearing all black dressed [01:47:16.060 --> 01:47:22.540] as a journalist or something. Yes, she was dressed like a ninja who was ready to kick everybody's [01:47:22.620 --> 01:47:31.340] behind. She's in the face of the sergeant at arms and I'm telling all these DPS guys here, [01:47:31.340 --> 01:47:40.300] I don't know this woman. But think about it, Mary. By us going to the captain of the [01:47:42.300 --> 01:47:50.540] guards there, the DPS there, and asking him to arrest these senators, all of a sudden, [01:47:51.100 --> 01:47:57.260] when we came back to that hearing, all of these DPS guys, these security guys, [01:47:57.820 --> 01:48:05.980] they were on their tippy toes. They had been warned. I had a redheaded sergeant come up to [01:48:05.980 --> 01:48:13.740] me and I looked at him and I said, you look familiar. I had a redheaded sergeant on the [01:48:13.740 --> 01:48:20.540] security for the Capitol building. He slammed me up against a wall at the [01:48:21.660 --> 01:48:24.780] Secretary of State's building and knocked one of my teeth out. Was that you? [01:48:29.260 --> 01:48:35.340] And they're all ducking and dodging. Now, Mary's in the face of the sergeant at arms big time [01:48:36.300 --> 01:48:39.260] and all of these guys are standing here and they're not saying anything [01:48:39.420 --> 01:48:44.940] about it. Because we just came back from their captain and asked their captain to come and arrest [01:48:44.940 --> 01:48:51.020] the sergeant at arms. Is that what you asked him to do? Because we hadn't met him yet, I don't think. [01:48:51.020 --> 01:48:57.820] We surprised them on the way back, I thought. No, as soon as they wouldn't do that, we left and [01:48:57.820 --> 01:49:02.380] went for somebody to arrest them. And then we come back and the sergeant at arms comes out and you [01:49:02.380 --> 01:49:08.860] get in his face and you've got all these guards here. And I'm watching them, they're all standing [01:49:08.860 --> 01:49:16.380] back. And this is the point. We got somebody higher than them on the dime. We went and asked [01:49:16.380 --> 01:49:23.900] this captain to arrest the sergeant at arms. Man, he does not want to do that. So he contacted these [01:49:23.900 --> 01:49:31.420] guys and told them, don't give these people any crap. They're likely to cause us some serious [01:49:31.420 --> 01:49:38.460] difficulty. We need to find the middle ground. And a couple of the DPS guys, they got to go [01:49:38.460 --> 01:49:44.220] between the two and kind of calm. They worked to calm things down. That's how you want to use the [01:49:44.220 --> 01:49:52.940] police in these highly charged political situations. Don't use them to beat anybody up. You don't want [01:49:52.940 --> 01:50:02.620] anybody arrested. But you want them to think they can be. And you reasonably without excitement or [01:50:02.620 --> 01:50:11.660] anger, make your case. And then he's going to, you call, if you call 911 and ask for somebody to [01:50:11.660 --> 01:50:19.500] come out, you have a problem here. He's going to come out, but he's your arbiter. He's forced to [01:50:19.500 --> 01:50:25.980] be your arbiter because you're the victim. And he's got to go talk to these people to determine [01:50:25.980 --> 01:50:29.980] if they, you know, I have this person here who believes you guys are committing crimes. [01:50:30.780 --> 01:50:35.340] You want to explain what's going on here? And if you're the guy on the other side, [01:50:35.340 --> 01:50:38.620] all of a sudden you're going to get a case of anal restrictor. [01:50:40.940 --> 01:50:46.380] These people are accusing me of a crime. And they got a cop here with a badge and a gun [01:50:47.420 --> 01:50:54.380] asking me about it. And now you're going to do a song and dance and tippy toe around to try to [01:50:54.380 --> 01:50:59.740] find a way to get these people on the other side, not to want you arrested. [01:51:01.900 --> 01:51:08.780] This is a strategy. You need to help these people understand how powerful the police are [01:51:09.980 --> 01:51:20.300] in curbing excess, political excess. Don't want anybody arrested. You know, I make up criminal [01:51:20.300 --> 01:51:26.060] complaints, but I don't really want anybody arrested. I want to get their attention. [01:51:28.780 --> 01:51:36.140] And sometimes it takes a criminal complaint. In your case, probably not. So Mary, think about it. [01:51:37.100 --> 01:51:43.180] In these politically charged circumstances you're having, how could you use the police [01:51:43.900 --> 01:51:51.820] as an arbiter where things are getting ugly and out of hand? How could you use the police to defuse [01:51:51.820 --> 01:52:02.140] things? I have no desire to use the police. It's not about your desire. It's about being [01:52:02.140 --> 01:52:09.340] politically correct. And it's about getting a positive outcome. We use whatever tool we have [01:52:09.900 --> 01:52:17.020] available. You probably haven't been beaten up and thrown in jail as many times as I have. You've [01:52:17.020 --> 01:52:23.020] probably had that a few times, but not as many as I have. And I have reason to be really PO'd at [01:52:23.020 --> 01:52:36.300] them. But that just doesn't work well. It doesn't allow me to use the advantages, the tools that I [01:52:36.300 --> 01:52:42.940] have available to me. Now, if I get a policeman down that has attitude and starts acting injured, [01:52:42.940 --> 01:52:52.780] I'll call 911 on him. But I've worn against calling 911 the third time. That got me carried [01:52:52.780 --> 01:53:01.500] out of the courthouse by the two guys I'd carried 911 on and picked up and thrown down in such a way [01:53:01.500 --> 01:53:09.660] that my face hit the concrete first. So I'll try not to do that again. But it calms things down. [01:53:10.460 --> 01:53:20.140] It gets everybody's attention. When I had a clerk in Victoria County refuse to provide some records [01:53:20.140 --> 01:53:25.260] that I asked for, I come out and I had been joking with the baits earlier and I said, [01:53:25.260 --> 01:53:30.540] hey guys. And they said, well, hello, Mr. Kelton. How's it going? I said, it's going great. But [01:53:30.540 --> 01:53:34.220] look, you guys standing around here doing nothing all day, you got to be getting bored. [01:53:35.020 --> 01:53:39.980] I got something for you to do that'll be kind of exciting. Well, what is that? I need you to go [01:53:39.980 --> 01:53:46.140] in there and arrest the clerk. What? We can't arrest the clerk. Sure can, sure can. Just go in [01:53:46.140 --> 01:53:50.380] there and throw the custom owner and drag her off the jail. You don't have far to go. It's right next [01:53:50.380 --> 01:53:58.940] door. And the clerk is inside listening to me joking with the bailiffs while I'm asking them [01:53:58.940 --> 01:54:06.380] to arrest her. And lo and behold, she all of a sudden got real easy to deal with. [01:54:07.420 --> 01:54:13.500] And I told the bailiffs, darn it. Now she's ruined all my fun. And they said, well, what was that? [01:54:13.580 --> 01:54:15.820] Well, now I don't have grounds to have her arrested. [01:54:18.940 --> 01:54:25.020] You use whatever power you have available. And especially the kind of things you've been [01:54:25.020 --> 01:54:30.780] running into between the Democrats and Republicans where the Republicans, I mean, Democrats are kind [01:54:30.780 --> 01:54:37.340] of more in power in Austin and they take advantage of that. You're calling the police to kind of [01:54:37.340 --> 01:54:47.020] nullify that advantage. Okay. And not to arrest them, just to, you say, I got this problem and [01:54:47.020 --> 01:54:51.340] we need it fixed. Can you help us out? And they'll go over to these other guys and say, hey, these [01:54:51.340 --> 01:54:59.420] guys think they got a problem here. Do you want to tell me why I shouldn't arrest you? See you, [01:54:59.500 --> 01:55:08.860] influence it has. I know you don't like the police, but we're grownups. We don't get to [01:55:08.860 --> 01:55:15.260] have those likes and dislikes. We use the tools available. How would you like to use the police [01:55:16.380 --> 01:55:23.740] to play them like a cheap fiddle? Yeah, I got one. A cop friend of mine gave me one. It's about three [01:55:23.740 --> 01:55:29.180] inches long and I hold it through my thumb and forefinger and I take the little bowl that goes [01:55:29.180 --> 01:55:44.140] with it and I lay on my sad song. I'll get you one of these. That's how you do it. You play them all [01:55:44.140 --> 01:55:50.700] like a cheap fiddle. It doesn't matter what you like or don't like. It's about getting the outcomes [01:55:50.700 --> 01:55:55.820] you intend. Thank you, Mary. Call in tomorrow night. We'll have more time to talk.