[00:00.000 --> 00:07.520]  The following newsflash is brought to you by the Lone Star Lowdown.
[00:07.520 --> 00:13.920]  Markets for Wednesday, the 15th of March, 2017, are currently trading with gold at $1,212.75
[00:13.920 --> 00:20.880]  an ounce, silver at $17.11 an ounce, Texas crude at $47.72 a barrel, and Bitcoin is sitting
[00:20.880 --> 00:26.160]  at about $1,253 U.S. currency.
[00:26.160 --> 00:32.320]  Today in history, the year 1916, United States President Woodrow Wilson sent 6,600 United
[00:32.320 --> 00:36.880]  States troops over the U.S.-Mexican border to pursue Pancho Villa in what is known as
[00:36.880 --> 00:38.720]  the Mexican Expedition.
[00:38.720 --> 00:42.880]  The expedition was launched in retaliation for Villa's attack on the town of Columbus,
[00:42.880 --> 00:43.880]  New Mexico.
[00:43.880 --> 00:51.880]  The Pancho Villa Expedition was launched today in history.
[00:51.880 --> 00:52.880]  And recent news.
[00:52.880 --> 00:56.580]  The Justice Department Wednesday today publicly charged two Russian spies and two hackers
[00:56.580 --> 01:01.360]  for the 2014 data breach connected to half a billion Yahoo accounts, one of the largest
[01:01.360 --> 01:03.160]  known hacks in American history.
[01:03.160 --> 01:07.600]  The four men are collectively facing 47 criminal charges, including conspiracy, computer fraud,
[01:07.600 --> 01:12.040]  economic espionage, theft of trade secrets, and aggravated identity theft.
[01:12.040 --> 01:16.600]  One of the three Russian Federal Security Service agents, Alexey Alekseyevich Parlan,
[01:16.600 --> 01:21.120]  was already among the FBI's most wanted cybercriminals, all three of whom are Russian nationals in
[01:21.120 --> 01:22.120]  residence.
[01:22.120 --> 01:25.840]  The U.S. Department of Justice officials did not explain what the FSB agents were necessarily
[01:25.840 --> 01:30.480]  looking for, but did note that, quote, some victim accounts were of predictable interest
[01:30.480 --> 01:35.640]  to the FSB, including personal accounts belonging to Russian journalists, Russian and U.S. government
[01:35.640 --> 01:39.640]  officials, employees of prominent Russian cybersecurity companies, along with Russian
[01:39.640 --> 01:44.760]  investment banking firms, a French transportation company, U.S. financial services and private
[01:44.760 --> 01:50.080]  equity firms, a Swiss bitcoin wallet and banking firm, and a U.S. airline.
[01:50.080 --> 01:54.200]  Yahoo had publicly revealed in September of last year that hackers breach its network
[01:54.200 --> 02:04.800]  in late 2014, stealing personal data associated with more than 500 million users.
[02:04.800 --> 02:08.240]  Republican Senator from Kentucky Rand Paul, when talking to the media concerning the release
[02:08.240 --> 02:13.360]  by MSNBC of a few pages of President Trump's 2005 tax return, which showed that Trump made
[02:13.360 --> 02:20.240]  $153 million in 2005 and paid $36.5 million in income taxes for the year, which is in
[02:20.240 --> 02:24.320]  severe contrast to the Democratic socialist Senator Bernie Sanders, who in 2014 only paid
[02:24.320 --> 02:29.600]  a tax rate of about 13.5 percent, far below Trump's 2005 rate of 25.
[02:29.600 --> 02:33.440]  Paul said that, quote, since Senator Sanders is such a good socialist, I think he'd want
[02:33.440 --> 02:34.640]  to pay his fair share.
[02:34.640 --> 02:38.280]  I'm expecting news any day that he's going to send a couple of hundred thousand into
[02:38.280 --> 02:43.000]  the IRS so he can pay his fair share.
[02:43.000 --> 02:47.080]  The Lone Star Lowdown is currently looking for sponsors, product or service that you
[02:47.080 --> 02:52.080]  like to advertise with us, feel free to give me a call at 210-363-2257.
[02:52.080 --> 03:18.800]  This is Rick Brody with your lowdown for March 15th, 2017.
[03:18.800 --> 03:24.520]  We are back, Randy Kelton, Wheel of Real Radio, and we're talking to Olivier in Tennessee.
[03:24.520 --> 03:27.440]  Okay, Olivier, where were we?
[03:27.440 --> 03:33.600]  I was telling you about my first encounter with the attorney, and I was explaining everything
[03:33.600 --> 03:38.400]  to him about the right to life promotion under personally illiterate, protected by the Fourth
[03:38.400 --> 03:39.400]  Amendment.
[03:39.400 --> 03:43.600]  And he was looking at me like, you know, the state's on the road.
[03:43.600 --> 03:44.600]  I'm like, no, they don't.
[03:44.600 --> 03:47.920]  I'm like, and he's like, well, the state have power over the federal.
[03:47.920 --> 03:48.920]  I'm like, no, they don't.
[03:48.920 --> 03:49.920]  I'm like, he talks you backwards.
[03:49.920 --> 03:56.440]  But he's like, well, I'm going to get all your files and look over everything, and we'll
[03:56.440 --> 04:00.800]  get a chance to chalk it up, and I'll make a few types of sense, you know?
[04:00.800 --> 04:03.680]  We'll get a chance to chalk it up or whatever.
[04:03.680 --> 04:04.680]  I said, okay, fine.
[04:04.680 --> 04:09.640]  Then yesterday, when I went to meet with him, he was very excited to see me.
[04:09.640 --> 04:19.040]  He gave me a document, 18 pages, 18 pages of case law proving my point, and like this
[04:19.040 --> 04:22.240]  time, when he was talking to me, he was questioning me.
[04:22.240 --> 04:26.840]  He was questioning me, but he was not questioning me like I was crazy.
[04:26.840 --> 04:31.920]  He was questioning me like, these are the questions, these are the answers I need to
[04:31.920 --> 04:38.640]  know because you brought this situation up, and if I found 18 pages of documentation saying
[04:38.640 --> 04:44.440]  that you're right, that means every argument, you know the arguments better than I do, so
[04:44.440 --> 04:52.200]  it was very kind of humbling to see the tone change because he was like more asking questions
[04:52.200 --> 04:53.640]  but not saying that I'm crazy.
[04:53.640 --> 05:00.280]  He's just trying to see how well this argument sticks, because I like 10 cases, and he's
[05:00.280 --> 05:02.280]  ready to go to trial on every one of them.
[05:02.280 --> 05:05.640]  He said, look, this is going to be very good practice.
[05:05.640 --> 05:11.440]  You know, this is a precedent case, and apparently you're correct.
[05:11.440 --> 05:17.440]  If you haven't harmed anyone, they have no authority to do anything for you.
[05:17.440 --> 05:21.000]  Oh, this is good.
[05:21.000 --> 05:25.480]  You got an attorney who will actually, you give him the opportunity to actually do his
[05:25.480 --> 05:31.400]  job, and he may see an opportunity to make a name for himself.
[05:31.400 --> 05:39.280]  It is, because I have over 12 cases, I have over 12 cases, and he also mentioned that
[05:39.280 --> 05:46.720]  he's never seen that judge, because I missed court because of what happened in Georgia,
[05:46.720 --> 05:51.840]  and he said that he never seen that judge not put out a case yet, so of course, someone
[05:51.840 --> 05:52.840]  said yes.
[05:52.840 --> 06:00.760]  He did not argue, he did not argue in my defense, he just said, he said I didn't see him, I
[06:00.760 --> 06:03.840]  never talked to him, I don't know what was going on.
[06:03.840 --> 06:14.440]  She continued it to the next month, and everyone in there was like, oh my God, what just happened?
[06:14.440 --> 06:19.960]  This is what happens when you take them on with their law.
[06:19.960 --> 06:27.240]  We have a lot of people out there pushing around a bunch of patriot mythology, and I
[06:27.240 --> 06:33.000]  have been called all over the country to help get people out of jail for using some of these
[06:33.000 --> 06:39.800]  supposed silver bullocks, tricks, and gimmicks, but when you come after them with their own
[06:39.800 --> 06:43.840]  law the way you do, you get their respect.
[06:43.840 --> 06:44.840]  Right.
[06:44.840 --> 06:53.680]  One quick, come on, I wanted to get something else on the video that she sent me, right?
[06:53.680 --> 06:58.960]  Now, on this video, we can clearly see that he had no reason to pull me over and all that
[06:58.960 --> 06:59.960]  good stuff.
[06:59.960 --> 07:06.160]  Now, when they pulled me over, arrest me, charge me with possession, or charge me with
[07:06.160 --> 07:16.880]  a criminal license, what's it called, evading arrest, and tap into evidence, right?
[07:16.880 --> 07:21.800]  In the video, then they run my license, and then it comes back, my license comes back
[07:21.800 --> 07:22.800]  valid.
[07:22.800 --> 07:30.080]  Now, my license has been valid ever since 2014, and ever since then, so that means every
[07:30.080 --> 07:38.240]  arrest that they have arrested me on for suspending a license has been perjured, perjured in their
[07:38.240 --> 07:39.240]  blood.
[07:39.240 --> 07:40.240]  Okay.
[07:40.240 --> 07:43.160]  There's a legal term for that.
[07:43.160 --> 07:44.160]  It's called oops.
[07:44.160 --> 07:45.160]  Oops.
[07:45.160 --> 07:46.160]  That's an oops.
[07:46.160 --> 07:56.720]  I don't think I'm going to find that in the black and white law.
[07:56.720 --> 07:58.520]  So for you, this is perfect.
[07:58.520 --> 08:10.160]  This is a perfect example of police harassment, so you may have a good case.
[08:10.160 --> 08:18.960]  My question about that was, can I wait until the case is over with and dismissed to file
[08:18.960 --> 08:24.720]  criminal charges against the officers, or I'm actually thinking, should I be filing
[08:24.720 --> 08:30.400]  criminal charges against police officers because without them, I wouldn't be getting this money?
[08:30.400 --> 08:32.880]  It was like a setup anyway, you know?
[08:32.880 --> 08:34.520]  I had a bad license.
[08:34.520 --> 08:39.440]  I got mad about the situation, and I wanted to pull points.
[08:39.440 --> 08:49.120]  So I'm filing criminal charges and everything, but they're ignorant to the fact that I had
[08:49.120 --> 08:54.240]  a higher understanding of the situation and fully knew what I was getting myself into.
[08:54.240 --> 08:57.240]  So does that matter, or should I just...
[08:57.240 --> 08:58.240]  Okay.
[08:58.240 --> 09:00.840]  Here's my position on criminal complaints.
[09:00.840 --> 09:09.400]  One of two things that are likely to happen, one, the jurisdictions will actually prosecute
[09:09.400 --> 09:16.080]  these guys, but the likelihood of that is somewhere between little and none.
[09:16.080 --> 09:24.320]  If they don't, you'll be able to go to the courts and say, I realize that I'm coming
[09:24.320 --> 09:30.720]  here making what sounds like outrageous claims against these officers.
[09:30.720 --> 09:34.800]  We want to believe that our police officers are good guys, and I have no reason to believe
[09:34.800 --> 09:37.440]  these are not good guys.
[09:37.440 --> 09:44.080]  And this is not necessarily a situation where the police got together and decided to single
[09:44.080 --> 09:46.680]  me out for special persecution.
[09:46.680 --> 09:51.920]  This is a standard procedure of the policing department.
[09:51.920 --> 09:55.440]  They do this kind of garbage to everybody.
[09:55.440 --> 10:03.800]  And the reason they can do this is all of the officials that are in a position to protect
[10:03.800 --> 10:08.080]  us from this kind of abuse, they protect the officers.
[10:08.080 --> 10:14.440]  Here, I filed this criminal complaint with a magistrate and the magistrate had a duty
[10:14.440 --> 10:18.480]  to examine into the criminal complaint and refused.
[10:18.480 --> 10:23.480]  And I went to the next one in line and the next one in line, everybody refused.
[10:23.480 --> 10:32.880]  The state is demonstrating a predicate acts in concert and collusion with these officers
[10:32.880 --> 10:39.640]  for the purpose of shielding them from prosecution.
[10:39.640 --> 10:41.600]  That's what you can use the complaints for.
[10:41.600 --> 10:45.440]  They're not going to move against them, they're not going to act on them.
[10:45.440 --> 10:51.840]  When they don't act on them, they commit criminal complaints, you get to tie up everybody.
[10:51.840 --> 10:57.280]  Okay, got it.
[10:57.280 --> 11:01.720]  And that's why when I file a complaint and they don't do what they're supposed to, goody
[11:01.720 --> 11:06.000]  goody, I get to go to the next step.
[11:06.000 --> 11:09.960]  This is my tar baby.
[11:09.960 --> 11:11.440]  I want everybody stuck to it.
[11:11.440 --> 11:16.520]  When I get to the final place, I want everybody behind me stuck to that thing.
[11:16.520 --> 11:17.520]  Okay.
[11:17.520 --> 11:22.680]  Here's my last little thing I wanted to find out.
[11:22.680 --> 11:30.040]  The appeal court has just, my court has told me that they're sending my transcript to the
[11:30.040 --> 11:35.080]  appeal court, but now it's going to be time for the brief and I noticed that this attorney,
[11:35.080 --> 11:41.520]  he gave me this paperwork that he gave me the other day, has so much law about our rights
[11:41.520 --> 11:42.520]  and stuff like that.
[11:42.520 --> 11:47.120]  It's basically written up in a brief form, so I got so much of the case of that, which
[11:47.120 --> 11:48.800]  I could put in the brief.
[11:48.800 --> 11:54.000]  But my question is, when I answer these, when I write this brief, do I have to write a brief
[11:54.000 --> 11:58.360]  for each defendant or is this brief for the whole case?
[11:58.360 --> 12:05.000]  No, law is the same for all defendants, so it'll be for the whole case.
[12:05.000 --> 12:15.680]  If all of the defendants are essentially acting in furtherance of the same scheme.
[12:15.680 --> 12:22.440]  So 90% of what they've done is all going to be the same, so you can use the same one for
[12:22.440 --> 12:31.400]  each litigant and did you file a separate suit in each case?
[12:31.400 --> 12:40.160]  I filed, I filed one suit with all the litigants in.
[12:40.160 --> 12:46.440]  Okay good, then yeah, you only have to file one brief and the only time you have to address
[12:46.440 --> 12:53.800]  a specific individual is if he did something that was separate or stood out from what the
[12:53.800 --> 12:54.800]  others did.
[12:54.800 --> 12:59.480]  You have to address it individually, but otherwise use the one brief.
[12:59.480 --> 13:00.480]  Okay.
[13:00.480 --> 13:06.920]  Since they're all in the same case, what I was going to go through, if you had filed
[13:06.920 --> 13:12.760]  against each one separate, you could file a jointer and join them all together in one
[13:12.760 --> 13:21.000]  suit because all of them would be being charged for essentially the same thing and under judicial
[13:21.000 --> 13:25.920]  economy, you could address them all at once to make life easier for you, but you already
[13:25.920 --> 13:29.040]  have them in one suit, so you don't have to worry about that.
[13:29.040 --> 13:30.040]  Yeah.
[13:30.040 --> 13:35.160]  Okay, so I already got them all in suit.
[13:35.160 --> 13:43.640]  Now when they, if they don't, how about if they, if the defendants don't answer the
[13:43.640 --> 13:45.640]  fear court?
[13:45.640 --> 13:52.680]  Oh, if the, okay, if the indian, the defendants don't answer the pleading?
[13:52.680 --> 13:53.680]  Yes.
[13:53.680 --> 14:01.480]  Yeah, default, then they, whatever they don't deny, they stipulate to.
[14:01.480 --> 14:07.440]  And this is a situation with this towing company.
[14:07.440 --> 14:08.440]  Right.
[14:08.440 --> 14:15.120]  They didn't answer the plea, they didn't answer to put the complaint in the lower courts.
[14:15.120 --> 14:22.040]  So I don't think they're going to be answering or submitting anything to the field courts.
[14:22.040 --> 14:25.680]  See, this is going to be real hard for the court of appeals.
[14:25.680 --> 14:33.480]  You know, how are they going to say, oh yeah, we have a client, a litigant here who didn't
[14:33.480 --> 14:40.080]  bother to answer the suit, but we want to rule in his favor anyway.
[14:40.080 --> 14:45.080]  That will completely undermine the corpus juris.
[14:45.080 --> 14:49.240]  The whole body of law will be undermined by that.
[14:49.240 --> 14:57.880]  So if they make that ruling in your case, it becomes case law and every other jurisdiction
[14:57.880 --> 15:03.080]  in the state can use that ruling.
[15:03.080 --> 15:09.440]  These are exactly the kinds of things you want to bring the kinds of things where if
[15:09.440 --> 15:18.200]  they rule against you, they screw up the body of law, makes it harder for the court of appeals
[15:18.200 --> 15:20.280]  to screw you around.
[15:20.280 --> 15:21.280]  Okay.
[15:21.280 --> 15:24.160]  And quick overview of the breach.
[15:24.160 --> 15:25.960]  A breach is not that difficult, right?
[15:25.960 --> 15:30.000]  It's just the title or whatever is going on.
[15:30.000 --> 15:31.000]  Yeah.
[15:31.000 --> 15:39.160]  It's an argument or whatever, then all the different arguments against whoever and try
[15:39.160 --> 15:43.760]  to make it as neat and as coordinated as possible, right?
[15:43.760 --> 15:54.760]  Yeah, the trick to a brief is you find in case law where judges have rendered rulings
[15:54.760 --> 16:02.320]  that say what you want to say and you cut those rulings out and stick them in your brief
[16:02.320 --> 16:09.600]  and then just write lead-ins and lead-outs so that this section leads into the next section.
[16:09.600 --> 16:16.280]  If you're spending a lot of time writing the body of the brief, you haven't done enough
[16:16.280 --> 16:17.280]  research.
[16:17.280 --> 16:24.920]  And when you cut and paste the court opinions into the brief, the court will see that and
[16:24.920 --> 16:29.160]  they'll know exactly what you've done.
[16:29.160 --> 16:36.040]  And that will give your presentation that much more credibility.
[16:36.040 --> 16:40.360]  Never make a proactive statement of law out of your own mouth.
[16:40.360 --> 16:43.200]  Make it out of the mouth of the court and that'll be clearly what you're doing.
[16:43.200 --> 16:46.280]  So no, it's not that terribly difficult.
[16:46.280 --> 16:53.480]  It is kind of hard for us as proceeds to stay on point, but it just takes a little discipline.
[16:53.480 --> 16:54.480]  Hang on.
[16:54.480 --> 16:55.480]  About to go to break.
[16:55.480 --> 16:56.480]  Randy Kelton, Real Law Radio.
[16:56.480 --> 16:57.480]  We'll be right back.
[16:57.480 --> 16:58.480]  Dang, Cookie.
[16:58.480 --> 16:59.480]  Cookie?
[16:59.480 --> 17:00.480]  Me love cookies.
[17:00.480 --> 17:01.480]  Oh, hi, Cookie Munchers.
[17:01.480 --> 17:02.480]  No, these are yucky cookies.
[17:02.480 --> 17:09.480]  Cookies? Yucky? No, no bad cookies.
[17:09.480 --> 17:11.200]  You can't even eat these cookies.
[17:11.200 --> 17:12.200]  These are cyber cookies.
[17:12.200 --> 17:13.200]  No, Cookie.
[17:13.200 --> 17:17.200]  No, they are cyber cookies and they clog up your computer.
[17:17.200 --> 17:18.200]  These have apple.
[17:18.200 --> 17:19.200]  Really?
[17:19.200 --> 17:20.200]  Oh, an actual apple.
[17:20.200 --> 17:21.200]  Yummy apple.
[17:21.200 --> 17:26.840]  I'm going to throw away these yucky cookies in the trash.
[17:26.840 --> 17:32.960]  I click control, shift, delete, and then scroll down to cookies and clear them.
[17:32.960 --> 17:34.560]  Bye bye, yucky cookies.
[17:34.560 --> 17:40.200]  Now I go to logosradionetwork.com and I click on the Amazon box on the upper right-hand
[17:40.200 --> 17:46.280]  side, bookmark the link, and I can go to Amazon through this link and order you some yummy
[17:46.280 --> 17:47.280]  new cookies.
[17:47.280 --> 17:48.280]  New cookies for me?
[17:48.280 --> 17:51.080]  Consider it an early Christmas present.
[17:51.080 --> 17:55.880]  And every time I order on Amazon, I go through this link and I give a little present to this
[17:55.880 --> 17:56.880]  radio network, too.
[17:56.880 --> 17:57.880]  Tea is for Cookie.
[17:57.880 --> 17:58.880]  Tea is for Cookie.
[17:58.880 --> 18:05.320]  Are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters, or even lawsuits?
[18:05.320 --> 18:09.440]  Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Mears proven method.
[18:09.440 --> 18:13.760]  Michael Mears has won six cases in federal court against debt collectors and now you
[18:13.760 --> 18:14.760]  can win, too.
[18:14.760 --> 18:19.600]  You'll get step-by-step instructions in plain English on how to win in court using federal
[18:19.600 --> 18:25.040]  civil rights statutes, what to do when contacted by phones, mail, or court summons, how to
[18:25.040 --> 18:29.520]  answer letters and phone calls, how to get debt collectors out of your credit report,
[18:29.520 --> 18:34.160]  how to turn the financial tables on them and make them pay you to go away.
[18:34.160 --> 18:39.280]  The Michael Mears proven method is the solution for how to stop debt collectors.
[18:39.280 --> 18:41.160]  Personal consultation is available as well.
[18:41.160 --> 18:46.960]  For more information, please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the blue Michael Mears banner
[18:46.960 --> 18:49.960]  or email michaelmears at yahoo.com.
[18:49.960 --> 18:59.000]  That's ruleoflawradio.com or email m-i-c-h-a-e-l-m-i-r-r-a-m at yahoo.com to learn how to stop debt
[18:59.000 --> 19:00.000]  collectors now.
[19:00.000 --> 19:05.000]  You're listening to the Logos Radio Network, logosradionetwork.com.
[19:05.000 --> 19:19.200]  We'll don't let nothing get to you, one of the father candidates, but only bad-mind people
[19:19.200 --> 19:28.200]  Okay, we are back, Randy Kelton with our radio, we're talking to Olivier in Tennessee and
[19:28.200 --> 19:38.680]  Olivier, the best trick I can give you for writing an effective brief is put a heading
[19:38.680 --> 19:43.480]  on every paragraph.
[19:43.480 --> 19:49.920]  Before you write the paragraph, write down a heading that says what this paragraph is
[19:49.920 --> 19:50.920]  about.
[19:50.920 --> 19:55.040]  And when you're finished, you can take those out if you want to.
[19:55.040 --> 20:03.680]  But as you go down through a complex argument, if you're not careful, you will drift from
[20:03.680 --> 20:09.840]  your focus and go back and re-argue something you've already argued.
[20:09.840 --> 20:12.400]  Or you'll drift off point.
[20:12.400 --> 20:18.400]  If you put a heading on every paragraph, and if you do this in Microsoft Word, you use
[20:18.400 --> 20:23.720]  their tool for applying headings.
[20:23.720 --> 20:32.200]  If you do that, then you can go to view navigation bar and it will give you a table of contents
[20:32.200 --> 20:35.600]  on the side of the document.
[20:35.600 --> 20:41.280]  And when I'm writing a really complex document, I keep that up on the side so I put in this
[20:41.280 --> 20:43.520]  heading for this next paragraph.
[20:43.520 --> 20:48.760]  And then I go over there and look in the table of contents and see if it's already there.
[20:48.760 --> 20:54.240]  And a lot of times, I find it's already there and I've drifted off topic.
[20:54.240 --> 20:57.080]  And I'm being redundant.
[20:57.080 --> 21:03.640]  And once I see it, then I can make a reference back to the original paragraph or adjust the
[21:03.640 --> 21:09.240]  way I'm writing this one and it helps your document flow a whole lot better.
[21:09.240 --> 21:15.480]  That little trick will avoid the major problems that pro-says tend to have writing briefs.
[21:15.480 --> 21:19.160]  Does that make sense, Olivier?
[21:19.160 --> 21:23.600]  Yes, it does.
[21:23.600 --> 21:25.960]  It is much more powerful than you would think.
[21:25.960 --> 21:30.400]  When you start doing that, it kind of becomes habit after a while.
[21:30.400 --> 21:34.480]  It teaches you to not just ramble.
[21:34.480 --> 21:39.020]  What am I going to try to say in this next paragraph?
[21:39.020 --> 21:42.320]  Write it down and then you say that in the paragraph.
[21:42.320 --> 21:43.320]  And it makes it easier.
[21:43.320 --> 21:48.280]  I had a lot of trouble knowing when to stop talking.
[21:48.280 --> 21:50.480]  If you listen to my show, you notice that.
[21:50.480 --> 21:51.480]  Right.
[21:51.480 --> 21:58.520]  The paperwork that the attorney gave me was like a big brief because it was like one section
[21:58.520 --> 22:05.080]  where it says that, you know, the people on the road and then he gave a whole bunch of
[22:05.080 --> 22:14.280]  case law about judges' opinions on why the people on the road, what aspect, you know,
[22:14.280 --> 22:21.160]  where that came from, where the notion that the people on the road, not the state, then
[22:21.160 --> 22:30.960]  the next section, it'd be like, you know, corporations versus individual rights and
[22:30.960 --> 22:31.960]  privileges.
[22:31.960 --> 22:37.240]  And it feels like a big brief, so I understand what you're talking about.
[22:37.240 --> 22:38.240]  Okay.
[22:38.240 --> 22:45.680]  Talk to your lawyer if he's interested in this and you've got him excited about doing
[22:45.680 --> 22:50.320]  this, you might see if he wants to come on this radio show.
[22:50.320 --> 22:51.560]  Okay.
[22:51.560 --> 22:58.080]  I'd like to interview a lawyer on the show because there are some specific things that
[22:58.080 --> 23:02.080]  I'd very much like to ask a lawyer on the air.
[23:02.080 --> 23:03.080]  Okay.
[23:03.080 --> 23:06.720]  I think he would doubt that.
[23:06.720 --> 23:13.080]  There are things that we don't understand about where a lawyer lives and the best way
[23:13.080 --> 23:19.480]  for us to be able to effectively deal with a lawyer is to understand the influences that
[23:19.480 --> 23:21.920]  affect him.
[23:21.920 --> 23:29.040]  And if I can get him on and he'll talk candidly, it'll surprise you at what he has to deal
[23:29.040 --> 23:30.040]  with.
[23:30.040 --> 23:37.720]  You'll better understand the position they're in and also we'll get some opinions that will
[23:37.720 --> 23:46.840]  be more authoritative and we'll get him some exposure because lawyers like to exhibit what
[23:46.840 --> 23:55.200]  they do and it's not just that they're boasting or anything, but 50% of a lawyer's business
[23:55.200 --> 23:58.600]  is generally from referrals.
[23:58.600 --> 24:03.200]  So if you're a lawyer and you've got this client and he brings up an issue you're not
[24:03.200 --> 24:07.800]  terribly familiar with, first thing you're going to do is go check your bar journals
[24:07.800 --> 24:15.400]  and such and see if you can find where someone has written an article on this issue.
[24:15.400 --> 24:20.360]  And if you get someone who's addressed the issue and he knows how to handle it, you're
[24:20.360 --> 24:24.640]  not going to take his information and use it as a lawyer.
[24:24.640 --> 24:31.400]  You're going to contact this guy and bring him on to handle this issue and get your client
[24:31.400 --> 24:36.080]  to pay for it and that's okay because he gets the best of the best.
[24:36.080 --> 24:43.720]  So your lawyer may want to do an interview that he can refer people to, like other lawyers
[24:43.720 --> 24:49.880]  to this radio interview, that always looks good for lawyers and he'll give us some good
[24:49.880 --> 24:50.880]  information.
[24:50.880 --> 24:51.880]  Okay.
[24:51.880 --> 24:58.680]  I'm going to definitely run that file.
[24:58.680 --> 25:02.160]  And it might get you a little more credibility.
[25:02.160 --> 25:11.920]  You tell him you may not be famous in Tennessee, but you're famous in Texas.
[25:11.920 --> 25:19.960]  No, like he really sees how important this case is, like he's really, he calls it Rosa
[25:19.960 --> 25:20.960]  Parks.
[25:20.960 --> 25:21.960]  Rosa Parks of traffic.
[25:21.960 --> 25:29.560]  He said, yeah, he's like, so you're sitting on the bus on Ms. Olivier?
[25:29.560 --> 25:32.560]  I said, yes, I am.
[25:32.560 --> 25:36.880]  Well, good, good.
[25:36.880 --> 25:43.560]  He may see this as a seminal case that'll make his name for him and that's wonderful.
[25:43.560 --> 25:44.560]  Right.
[25:44.560 --> 25:50.240]  Cause I got 10 on his desk already plus two, three more in bind over status.
[25:50.240 --> 25:53.040]  So he's loving me.
[25:53.040 --> 25:58.320]  All of them same argument, same motion, same argument.
[25:58.320 --> 25:59.320]  They see me.
[25:59.320 --> 26:00.320]  Oh, I know him.
[26:00.320 --> 26:02.720]  He don't have a license.
[26:02.720 --> 26:08.240]  They profiled me and I never committed a crime, no tail light, no nothing.
[26:08.240 --> 26:11.680]  Oh, go get him, arrest him.
[26:11.680 --> 26:12.680]  Perfect.
[26:12.680 --> 26:13.680]  Perfect.
[26:13.680 --> 26:19.480]  You got a good case and you handled it well.
[26:19.480 --> 26:20.480]  Yeah.
[26:20.480 --> 26:23.480]  With your help.
[26:23.480 --> 26:30.880]  Well, help a lot of people and there are very few that really pick it up.
[26:30.880 --> 26:35.240]  There are a few, you'll hear them on this radio station and you guys are the reason
[26:35.240 --> 26:38.720]  I keep doing this.
[26:38.720 --> 26:39.720]  It's worth the time.
[26:39.720 --> 26:40.720]  Besides it's fun.
[26:40.720 --> 26:41.720]  Okay.
[26:41.720 --> 26:44.720]  Do you have anything else, Olivia?
[26:44.720 --> 26:47.200]  No, that's all.
[26:47.200 --> 26:48.200]  Thank you.
[26:48.200 --> 26:49.200]  Okay.
[26:49.200 --> 26:50.200]  Thank you.
[26:50.200 --> 26:51.200]  And keep us up to date.
[26:51.200 --> 26:52.200]  Okay.
[26:52.200 --> 27:00.680]  So Rick in Michigan, hello Rick.
[27:00.680 --> 27:01.680]  Hello Rick.
[27:01.680 --> 27:03.680]  Are you there?
[27:03.680 --> 27:07.160]  I must have put him to sleep.
[27:07.160 --> 27:09.440]  I have that effect on people.
[27:09.440 --> 27:10.440]  Okay.
[27:10.440 --> 27:13.480]  We are going to Tony in Pennsylvania.
[27:13.480 --> 27:20.680]  Hello, Tony.
[27:20.680 --> 27:32.200]  Well it looks like could be that my caller bridge has flaked out or I have put everybody
[27:32.200 --> 27:34.880]  to sleep.
[27:34.880 --> 27:38.280]  Let me try Rick again.
[27:38.280 --> 27:39.280]  I'm here.
[27:39.280 --> 27:40.280]  Rick are you there?
[27:40.280 --> 27:41.280]  Okay.
[27:41.280 --> 27:42.280]  Good.
[27:42.280 --> 27:43.280]  Good.
[27:43.280 --> 27:44.280]  Good.
[27:44.280 --> 27:47.000]  I had two callers at once that weren't responding so I was afraid that my equipment was messing
[27:47.000 --> 27:48.000]  up.
[27:48.000 --> 27:49.000]  Okay.
[27:49.000 --> 27:51.000]  Rick what do you have for us today?
[27:51.000 --> 28:03.280]  Well I just have a question for you about bar grievance and my question is basically
[28:03.280 --> 28:10.280]  we have a lot of judges in this country that are making these arbitrary decisions based
[28:10.280 --> 28:21.920]  on politics against our president and his legal and constitutional actions and my question
[28:21.920 --> 28:41.480]  is can the people, just people that are being, as I see it, unconstitutionally, I don't know,
[28:41.480 --> 28:42.480]  I guess.
[28:42.480 --> 28:43.480]  Okay.
[28:43.480 --> 28:44.480]  I think I understand where you are going.
[28:44.480 --> 28:56.200]  I'm not a judge here who is ruling based on political considerations and not on law.
[28:56.200 --> 28:59.120]  Here's my position on judges.
[28:59.120 --> 29:06.360]  It is the duty of the judge to determine the facts in accordance with the rules of evidence
[29:06.360 --> 29:11.200]  then apply the laws that comes to him to the facts in the case.
[29:11.200 --> 29:22.840]  If you look at his, at the case and the ruling and the ruling does not show that he considered
[29:22.840 --> 29:29.440]  all of the facts, not just the facts he wants to, but all of the facts in the case and all
[29:29.440 --> 29:35.240]  of the case law and law and statute is put before him.
[29:35.240 --> 29:42.720]  If he fails to consider all of that and renders a ruling that eliminates part of that, that's
[29:42.720 --> 29:47.480]  the violation of his duties in office and I'm about to go to break.
[29:47.480 --> 29:51.840]  I'll talk about something that I've been working on to handle that when we come back.
[29:51.840 --> 29:56.600]  It's Randy Kelton, Wheel of Law Radio, we'll be right back.
[29:56.600 --> 30:05.800]  Is too much internet driving Americans crazy?
[30:05.800 --> 30:10.120]  New research says the web can make us lonely and depressed and even psychotic.
[30:10.120 --> 30:15.600]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht and I'll talk about the internet's impact on our state of mind
[30:15.600 --> 30:17.800]  in a moment.
[30:17.800 --> 30:19.520]  Privacy is under attack.
[30:19.520 --> 30:23.920]  When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again and once your privacy
[30:23.920 --> 30:28.120]  is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[30:28.120 --> 30:33.360]  So protect your rights, say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself.
[30:33.360 --> 30:35.880]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[30:35.880 --> 30:41.480]  This message is brought to you by Startpage.com, the private search engine alternative to Google,
[30:41.480 --> 30:43.200]  Yahoo and Bing.
[30:43.200 --> 30:45.200]  Start over with Startpage.
[30:45.200 --> 30:51.120]  It's no secret many Americans spend more time tweeting, texting and emailing than they do
[30:51.120 --> 30:54.800]  sleeping, but can too much time online make us plum crazy?
[30:54.800 --> 30:59.840]  Proof is piling up that the internet may be making us lonelier, more depressed, prone
[30:59.840 --> 31:05.240]  to obsessive compulsive disorders and in extreme cases even psychotic.
[31:05.240 --> 31:10.520]  Researchers are documenting actual changes in the brain caused by even moderate web exposure.
[31:10.520 --> 31:15.640]  They're finding that digitized minds are constantly scanning for a fix just like drug addicts
[31:15.640 --> 31:21.080]  with every ping delivering a squirt of dopamine, that mini reward system for opening that message
[31:21.080 --> 31:22.080]  box.
[31:22.080 --> 31:23.680]  Maybe it's time we stopped answering the call.
[31:23.680 --> 31:28.880]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albright for Startpage.com, the world's most private search engine.
[31:28.880 --> 31:35.320]  Did you know there are 3 million edible food plants on earth and none have the nutritional
[31:35.320 --> 31:36.920]  value of the hemp plant?
[31:36.920 --> 31:39.800]  HempUSA.org offers you hemp protein powder.
[31:39.800 --> 31:45.360]  It does not contain chemicals or THC, is non-GMO and is 100% gluten free.
[31:45.360 --> 31:51.200]  The protein powder burns fat, builds muscle, contains 53% protein and feeds the body the
[31:51.200 --> 31:52.200]  nutrients it needs.
[31:52.200 --> 32:00.400]  Call 888-910-4367 and see what our powder, seeds and oil can do for you, only at HempUSA.org.
[32:00.400 --> 32:05.280]  Rule of Law Radio is proud to offer the Rule of Law Traffic Seminar.
[32:05.280 --> 32:08.840]  In today's America we live in an us against them society and if we the people are ever
[32:08.840 --> 32:12.760]  going to have a free society then we're going to have to stand and defend our own rights.
[32:12.760 --> 32:16.240]  Among those rights are the right to travel freely from place to place, the right to act
[32:16.240 --> 32:19.960]  in our own private capacity and most importantly the right to due process of law.
[32:19.960 --> 32:24.120]  Traffic courts afford us the least expensive opportunity to learn how to enforce and preserve
[32:24.120 --> 32:25.520]  our rights through due process.
[32:25.520 --> 32:29.480]  Former Sheriff's Deputy Eddie Craig in conjunction with Rule of Law Radio has put together the
[32:29.480 --> 32:33.240]  most comprehensive teaching tool available that will help you understand what due process
[32:33.240 --> 32:35.400]  is and how to hold courts to the rule of law.
[32:35.400 --> 32:39.640]  You can get your own copy of this invaluable material by going to ruleoflawradio.com and
[32:39.640 --> 32:40.640]  ordering your copy today.
[32:40.640 --> 32:44.440]  By ordering now you'll receive a copy of Eddie's book, The Texas Transportation Code, The
[32:44.440 --> 32:48.720]  Law Versus the Lie, video and audio of the original 2009 seminar, hundreds of research
[32:48.720 --> 32:50.680]  documents and other useful resource material.
[32:50.680 --> 32:54.280]  Learn how to fight for your rights with the help of this material from ruleoflawradio.com.
[32:54.280 --> 33:22.560]  Order your copy today and together we can have the free society we all want and deserve.
[33:22.560 --> 33:29.640]  We are back, Randy Kelton, Rule of Law Radio and we're talking to Rick in Michigan and
[33:29.640 --> 33:34.800]  this is exactly the right question.
[33:34.800 --> 33:42.400]  What do you do when a judge fails to properly perform his duty?
[33:42.400 --> 33:50.360]  Quick story, I filed a quiet title action in a Fort Worth court.
[33:50.360 --> 33:57.640]  The Bank of Wells Fargo removed it to the federal court, but it was a quiet title action.
[33:57.640 --> 34:03.720]  They removed it to the federal court, filed a rule of 12 motion to dismiss for failure
[34:03.720 --> 34:05.800]  of state of claim which can be had.
[34:05.800 --> 34:09.720]  What was the quiet title?
[34:09.720 --> 34:14.840]  The quiet title asks for a ruling on the rights of the parties.
[34:14.840 --> 34:17.720]  There are no claims.
[34:17.720 --> 34:18.720]  So they were right.
[34:18.720 --> 34:22.080]  I failed to make a claim on which recovery can be had because it's a special kind of
[34:22.080 --> 34:24.000]  suit that doesn't have a claim.
[34:24.000 --> 34:30.320]  The federal judge, because he knew who I was and he was kind of annoyed at me, he knows
[34:30.320 --> 34:36.120]  I called him a stinker on the air and he had dismissed several of my other cases.
[34:36.120 --> 34:41.520]  He dismissed my case with prejudice for failure to state a claim on which can be had.
[34:41.520 --> 34:48.360]  Now, here I have a case that doesn't have any claims by its nature and he dismissed
[34:48.360 --> 34:52.560]  it because I didn't make any claims.
[34:52.560 --> 35:00.400]  The way I read that is he exerted or purported to exert an authority he did not expressly
[35:00.400 --> 35:05.840]  have and in the process denied me the full free access to her enjoyment right.
[35:05.840 --> 35:11.720]  And the way I read the penal code, access, that's a class A misdemeanor.
[35:11.720 --> 35:17.760]  Now, these judges have rendered these bogus rulings and they'll say, oh, that's okay.
[35:17.760 --> 35:25.280]  You can appeal it, say, yeah, go before a corrupt judge and he renders a bogus ruling
[35:25.280 --> 35:27.440]  and they say, oh, that's okay.
[35:27.440 --> 35:33.040]  You can go before a whole panel of corrupt judges and they'll really screw you, Royale.
[35:33.040 --> 35:36.200]  I got a better idea.
[35:36.200 --> 35:43.880]  I'll appeal to a grand jury and you're in Michigan, does Michigan have grand juries?
[35:43.880 --> 35:48.000]  Yeah, we do.
[35:48.000 --> 35:54.360]  You appeal to a grand jury to indict the judge for failing to perform a duty he was required
[35:54.360 --> 36:02.360]  to perform and see what a grand jury thinks of his shenanigans.
[36:02.360 --> 36:03.360]  And here's the deal.
[36:03.360 --> 36:08.520]  This is a judge you're referring to as a federal judge?
[36:08.520 --> 36:12.000]  Well, he is a federal judge.
[36:12.000 --> 36:15.880]  He's in a federal courthouse.
[36:15.880 --> 36:25.160]  However, that federal courthouse does not belong to the federal government.
[36:25.160 --> 36:36.320]  The only places in the country where the feds have original jurisdiction are areas of the
[36:36.320 --> 36:42.280]  country that have been ceded by the states to the federal government.
[36:42.280 --> 36:52.840]  There's 10 square miles off the edge of state of Maryland that was ceded to the federal
[36:52.840 --> 36:53.840]  government.
[36:53.840 --> 36:59.200]  The federal government has full control over Washington, D.C.
[36:59.200 --> 37:02.360]  Washington, D.C. is not a city and a state.
[37:02.360 --> 37:13.320]  Washington, D.C. is a federal enclave exempted out of the states and is separate.
[37:13.320 --> 37:18.080]  Most every federal prison has been ceded by the state to the federal government so they
[37:18.080 --> 37:22.120]  have full control over it.
[37:22.120 --> 37:27.080]  No federal courthouses have been ceded to the federal government.
[37:27.080 --> 37:30.240]  They all belong to the state.
[37:30.240 --> 37:35.640]  So when the judge sits on that bench in that federal courthouse and he commits a criminal
[37:35.640 --> 37:43.040]  act, he violates state law, not federal law.
[37:43.040 --> 37:49.280]  So the rule is take the state to the fed and the fed to the state.
[37:49.280 --> 37:55.520]  So if you think this judge acted in violation of law, it doesn't matter if it's state or
[37:55.520 --> 38:03.680]  federal law, are you familiar with 18 U.S. Code 242?
[38:03.680 --> 38:05.680]  No.
[38:05.680 --> 38:12.800]  That is the Ku Klux Klan Act passed in 1871 during the reconstruction.
[38:12.800 --> 38:23.240]  The North won the war, but they didn't go in and remove all the mayors and the constables
[38:23.240 --> 38:24.240]  and the sheriffs.
[38:24.240 --> 38:31.200]  If they had, they'd have had anarchy and chaos and all these guys in place and gave them
[38:31.200 --> 38:33.600]  new marching orders.
[38:33.600 --> 38:39.240]  And for the most part, they said that those Yankee carpent backers can go scratch, we're
[38:39.240 --> 38:42.600]  going to do what we want to.
[38:42.600 --> 38:49.080]  And in order to get control, they passed the Ku Klux Klan Act and it essentially said that
[38:49.080 --> 38:57.520]  if a public official acting under the color or pretense of an official capacity exerts
[38:57.520 --> 39:04.440]  or purports to exert an authority he does not expressly have or fails to perform a duty
[39:04.440 --> 39:08.680]  he's required to perform and in the process denies a citizen in the full and free access
[39:08.680 --> 39:14.280]  to or enjoying the right, that's class A misdemeanor.
[39:14.280 --> 39:23.080]  Every state has a statute that reflects ATUS Code 242, it's generally labeled official
[39:23.080 --> 39:25.520]  misconduct.
[39:25.520 --> 39:31.240]  In Texas we have, it's broken into two, we have official misconduct which goes to misusing
[39:31.240 --> 39:41.800]  public equipment and official oppression which goes to denying a citizen access to a right.
[39:41.800 --> 39:44.320]  It's a crime.
[39:44.320 --> 39:49.280]  Even if the federal judge does it in the courthouse, if that judge in the courthouse pulls out
[39:49.280 --> 39:55.800]  a pistol and shoots somebody, the feds are not going to prosecute him, the state's going
[39:55.800 --> 39:57.920]  to prosecute him.
[39:57.920 --> 40:04.200]  There was a film in California, Presidio, and it was about a murder on the Presidio.
[40:04.200 --> 40:09.320]  The Presidio was a federal, was a army installation.
[40:09.320 --> 40:12.400]  Somebody was killed on the army installation.
[40:12.400 --> 40:16.840]  The FBI didn't come in and investigate that, the local sheriff did.
[40:16.840 --> 40:17.840]  Same situation here.
[40:17.840 --> 40:25.360]  That judge sitting in that courthouse is subject to the penal laws of the state of Michigan.
[40:25.360 --> 40:29.480]  So see what a Michigan grand jury thinks of his shenanigans.
[40:29.480 --> 40:33.840]  Does that sound interesting, Rick?
[40:33.840 --> 40:34.840]  It sure does.
[40:34.840 --> 40:39.840]  The only problem is grand juries aren't easily accessed by the people.
[40:39.840 --> 40:46.600]  Okay, we know that, and that's okay.
[40:46.600 --> 40:51.920]  Rick, I'm an engineer, I'm not a philosopher.
[40:51.920 --> 40:54.200]  I don't care how things are supposed to be.
[40:54.200 --> 41:03.760]  Well, I do care, but when I'm doing engineering, I want to know how things actually work.
[41:03.760 --> 41:09.480]  I may care, I may have an idea how I think they should work, but when I'm engineering,
[41:09.480 --> 41:15.000]  I want to know how things actually work, and I've designed within those parameters.
[41:15.000 --> 41:18.240]  The federal courts are corrupt, I got that point.
[41:18.240 --> 41:20.180]  I expect that.
[41:20.180 --> 41:22.840]  The local courts are corrupt.
[41:22.840 --> 41:26.600]  You'll never win your case simply because you have the law and the facts on your side.
[41:26.600 --> 41:29.800]  Think so as naive.
[41:29.800 --> 41:37.280]  You'll win your case if you have the politics on your side, and all politics is local.
[41:37.280 --> 41:41.840]  This is all about politics.
[41:41.840 --> 41:47.440]  You probably will never get a federal judge indicted.
[41:47.440 --> 41:57.640]  However, when you start making criminal accusations against a federal judge, you're going to scare
[41:57.640 --> 42:01.880]  the bejesus out of him.
[42:01.880 --> 42:08.000]  State grand jury, nobody controls the state grand jury.
[42:08.000 --> 42:15.960]  I know Judge Scalia, the Supreme Court said that any prosecutor worth his salt can get
[42:15.960 --> 42:18.200]  a ham sandwich indicted.
[42:18.200 --> 42:21.800]  Well, that might be true.
[42:21.800 --> 42:28.200]  The problem the prosecutor has is keeping that ham sandwich from getting indicted.
[42:28.200 --> 42:31.920]  That they don't have much control over.
[42:31.920 --> 42:38.280]  If you go down to the grand jury and start filing criminal charges, the prosecuting attorney
[42:38.280 --> 42:42.760]  is going to do everything he can to stop you.
[42:42.760 --> 42:54.600]  One thing to understand, a judge has almost absolute immunity except for criminal acts.
[42:54.600 --> 42:57.720]  He has no immunity for criminal acts.
[42:57.720 --> 43:04.800]  When you go down and make a criminal accusation against someone, you have the same immunity
[43:04.800 --> 43:07.040]  that judge has.
[43:07.040 --> 43:09.840]  I do this all the time.
[43:09.840 --> 43:16.160]  When I start filing criminal charges against high level public officials, everybody runs
[43:16.160 --> 43:18.720]  like rabbits.
[43:18.720 --> 43:21.920]  The natural concern is that they'll come after you.
[43:21.920 --> 43:24.080]  No, they won't.
[43:24.080 --> 43:25.480]  They're going to hit the road.
[43:25.480 --> 43:28.240]  They want nothing to do with you.
[43:28.240 --> 43:35.120]  When I start filing these complaints, if I have a bailiff or a constable or a police
[43:35.120 --> 43:41.080]  officer say, oh, Mr. Kelton, you better be careful, you could get into a lot of trouble
[43:41.080 --> 43:45.200]  tampering with a witness, obstruction of justice, both of them felonies.
[43:45.200 --> 43:49.200]  You want to dance about it, go threaten somebody else, and they'll say, oh, I wasn't threatening
[43:49.200 --> 43:50.200]  you.
[43:50.200 --> 43:54.160]  That's the way I took it, and that's all it takes.
[43:54.160 --> 43:56.360]  One of those, they'll back away from you.
[43:56.360 --> 43:57.360]  Hang on, about to go to break.
[43:57.360 --> 43:58.360]  We'll be right back.
[43:58.360 --> 44:07.960]  Hello, my name is Stuart Smith from NaturesPureOrganics.com, and I would like to invite you to come by
[44:07.960 --> 44:12.920]  our store at 1904 Guadalupe Street, Sweet D here in Austin, Texas, buying Brave New
[44:12.920 --> 44:16.840]  Books and Chase Bank to see all our fantastic health and wellness products with your very
[44:16.840 --> 44:17.840]  own eyes.
[44:17.840 --> 44:22.640]  Have a look at our Miracle Healing Clay that started our adventure in alternative medicine.
[44:22.640 --> 44:26.640]  Take a peek at some of our other wonderful products, including our Australian Eme oil,
[44:26.640 --> 44:30.320]  lotion candles, olive oil, soaps, and colloidal silver and gold.
[44:30.320 --> 44:43.200]  Call 512-264-4043, or find us online at NaturesPureOrganics.com, that's 512-264-4043, NaturesPureOrganics.com.
[44:43.200 --> 45:01.320]  Don't forget to like us on Facebook for information on events and our products, NaturesPureOrganics.com.
[45:01.320 --> 45:04.520]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[45:04.520 --> 45:11.280]  Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary, the affordable, easy to understand, 4-CD course
[45:11.280 --> 45:14.280]  that will show you how in 24 hours, step-by-step.
[45:14.280 --> 45:19.040]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing.
[45:19.040 --> 45:23.240]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[45:23.240 --> 45:29.000]  Thousands have won with our step-by-step course, and now you can too.
[45:29.000 --> 45:34.920]  Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case-winning experience.
[45:34.920 --> 45:39.520]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand about the
[45:39.520 --> 45:43.720]  principles and practices that control our American courts.
[45:43.720 --> 45:49.920]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases,
[45:49.920 --> 45:52.120]  pro se tactics, and much more.
[45:52.120 --> 45:59.920]  Please visit RuleOfLawRadio.com and click on the banner or call toll-free, 866-LAW-EZ.
[45:59.920 --> 46:24.360]  Okay.
[46:24.360 --> 46:25.360]  We are back.
[46:25.360 --> 46:31.200]  Randy Kelton, Rule of Law Radio, and Rick, as you may have surmised by now, you stepped
[46:31.200 --> 46:33.760]  into one of my favorite subjects.
[46:33.760 --> 46:34.760]  Okay.
[46:34.760 --> 46:41.880]  Say that again, I didn't have you unmuted yet.
[46:41.880 --> 46:43.160]  Okay.
[46:43.160 --> 46:52.040]  So I guess in terms of my question, I was really interested in the bar grievance aspect of
[46:52.040 --> 46:58.520]  it versus filing criminal complaints against judges.
[46:58.520 --> 47:09.160]  Is it possible to bar grieve against an attorney slash judge if, even though you're not being
[47:09.160 --> 47:15.800]  represented or it's like the other counsel or...
[47:15.800 --> 47:16.800]  Okay, okay.
[47:16.800 --> 47:17.800]  Hold on.
[47:17.800 --> 47:20.800]  I know where you're going.
[47:20.800 --> 47:29.720]  You cannot bar grieve a judge because when a judge is elected to the bench, they generally
[47:29.720 --> 47:36.280]  drop their bar card because they cannot practice law while they sit as an elected judge.
[47:36.280 --> 47:41.640]  So technically, they were lawyers, but they're not lawyers anymore.
[47:41.640 --> 47:46.240]  If they get off the bench, they can reactivate their bar card.
[47:46.240 --> 47:52.080]  But they are susceptible to judicial conduct complaints.
[47:52.080 --> 48:01.640]  And if it is a federal case, unlike the states where the states have a professional conduct,
[48:01.640 --> 48:11.700]  they have a commission that handles the profession, like you have one for plumbers and doctors
[48:11.700 --> 48:17.600]  and private investigators and lawyers, the feds different.
[48:17.600 --> 48:22.560]  When you file a judicial conduct complaint against a judge, it's like filing a lawsuit
[48:22.560 --> 48:28.460]  against him and it files in the court of appeals.
[48:28.460 --> 48:37.320]  So if the judge is a rogue judge and he has entered a ruling that's clearly false and
[48:37.320 --> 48:46.000]  bogus, you file a judicial conduct complaint against him, it goes to the court of appeals.
[48:46.000 --> 48:52.360]  But you need to understand, it's all political.
[48:52.360 --> 48:56.800]  If the court of appeals, if this judge is a Democrat and the court of appeals are all
[48:56.800 --> 49:02.520]  Democrats, they're going to do everything they can to cover his behind.
[49:02.520 --> 49:06.360]  But if the court of appeals happens to be Republicans and the judge is a Democrat, he
[49:06.360 --> 49:09.160]  could have himself a problem.
[49:09.160 --> 49:11.960]  Gotcha.
[49:11.960 --> 49:18.520]  In the end, the law is just how we play the game.
[49:18.520 --> 49:22.040]  But at the end of the day, it's the politics.
[49:22.040 --> 49:27.800]  And that's why when it's judges, I really like the grand jury.
[49:27.800 --> 49:34.600]  Now the likelihood of you ever getting your complaint in front of a grand jury is really
[49:34.600 --> 49:36.680]  slim.
[49:36.680 --> 49:47.800]  However, when you start making grand jury noises, first you get immunity.
[49:47.800 --> 49:49.360]  They can't touch you.
[49:49.360 --> 49:57.160]  They can't even frown at you or they risk witness tampering and obstruction of justice.
[49:57.160 --> 50:03.040]  And while you may not get to the grand jury, you get to stomp around all over them and
[50:03.040 --> 50:11.000]  rail in righteous indignation and read them the riot act and create lots of politics.
[50:11.000 --> 50:15.520]  We have a whole way to go about that.
[50:15.520 --> 50:22.320]  We file against the person that we're after with a lower level judge, and he refuses to
[50:22.320 --> 50:23.320]  act on it.
[50:23.320 --> 50:27.500]  They tell you, oh, you need to take that to the police department.
[50:27.500 --> 50:33.160]  And we say, oh, OK, so you go to the police department with a complaint against that judge
[50:33.160 --> 50:39.360]  for not doing his job because magistrates are supposed to take complaints.
[50:39.360 --> 50:43.740]  And now you've got the police department calling the judge saying, I've got a guy here trying
[50:43.740 --> 50:46.760]  to get me to arrest you.
[50:46.760 --> 50:48.280]  And that's going to make him real unhappy.
[50:48.280 --> 50:52.240]  And then when the police department refuses to act, which they most certainly are not
[50:52.240 --> 50:58.480]  going to go arrest a judge, then you can file with a higher level judge and you just create
[50:58.480 --> 51:02.240]  all of this politics.
[51:02.240 --> 51:08.920]  All these guys calling each other and they got you in there trying to damage their career
[51:08.920 --> 51:12.720]  because they wouldn't do something about this other guy.
[51:12.720 --> 51:14.960]  It makes everybody unhappy.
[51:14.960 --> 51:21.240]  That's the most we can hope for and force them to change.
[51:21.240 --> 51:29.400]  The bar grievances, bar grievances you can file against lawyers and just about for the
[51:29.400 --> 51:36.920]  most part, you need to be a litigant unless the lawyer is a prosecutor.
[51:36.920 --> 51:45.320]  Now if you're a litigant in a case, you can file against opposing counsel if he does something
[51:45.320 --> 51:50.840]  that's improper and in violation of the bar association standards.
[51:50.840 --> 51:54.240]  They'll say you can't, but you can.
[51:54.240 --> 51:55.240]  Okay.
[51:55.240 --> 52:01.960]  In fact, you can file a bar grievance against the lawyer just because you don't like the
[52:01.960 --> 52:04.360]  way he parted his hair.
[52:04.360 --> 52:09.200]  There's nothing to stop you.
[52:09.200 --> 52:13.480]  And then the bar is going to get your grievance and they're going to send you a letter and
[52:13.480 --> 52:19.920]  say we examined into your accusations, but it does not rise to the level of misconduct.
[52:19.920 --> 52:27.280]  If you accuse the lawyer of shooting his client, they're going to send you a letter back that
[52:27.280 --> 52:32.800]  says we examined into your accusation, but it does not rise to the level of misconduct.
[52:32.800 --> 52:35.560]  They're scoundrels.
[52:35.560 --> 52:40.000]  They're just there to protect the lawyers, but that's a good thing.
[52:40.000 --> 52:43.760]  It's all politics.
[52:43.760 --> 52:51.000]  The reason it's a good thing is their insurance carrier knows they're going to throw it in
[52:51.000 --> 52:53.200]  the trash.
[52:53.200 --> 52:57.800]  So how does their insurance carrier measure their level of risk?
[52:57.800 --> 52:58.800]  By valid bar grievances?
[52:58.800 --> 53:02.000]  Heck, they throw them all in the trash.
[53:02.000 --> 53:03.520]  By the numbers.
[53:03.520 --> 53:07.360]  One bar grievance for first year in practice, they cancel immediately.
[53:07.360 --> 53:08.360]  Two bar grievances.
[53:08.360 --> 53:09.720]  Any one year of practice, they cancel.
[53:09.720 --> 53:12.320]  Three, they cancel your malpractice insurance.
[53:12.320 --> 53:16.600]  I'm sorry, they cancel your law firm's malpractice insurance.
[53:16.600 --> 53:18.720]  This is not hard to understand.
[53:18.720 --> 53:25.500]  There are nine major underwriters in the U.S. that underwrite all of the errors and emissions
[53:25.500 --> 53:27.040]  policies for lawyers.
[53:27.040 --> 53:30.040]  They're all underwritten by Lloyds of London.
[53:30.040 --> 53:36.160]  They all have the same criteria, just like your auto insurance.
[53:36.160 --> 53:42.280]  You buy a new car, you go down to Wal-Mart, you come out, somebody's bashing the fender.
[53:42.280 --> 53:49.160]  You call the insurance, they come out and fix it, double your collision insurance.
[53:49.160 --> 53:52.200]  You come back next month, somebody's bashed another one in.
[53:52.200 --> 53:55.360]  They come out and fix it, they cancel.
[53:55.360 --> 53:59.920]  Your fault, their fault, nobody's fault, they don't care.
[53:59.920 --> 54:03.360]  You are an unacceptable risk, they will cancel.
[54:03.360 --> 54:07.160]  Exactly the same for lawyers.
[54:07.160 --> 54:15.400]  Except, malpractice insurance starts about 25 grand a year.
[54:15.400 --> 54:20.280]  One bar agreements, if they don't cancel, they double.
[54:20.280 --> 54:23.360]  So lawyers are extremely vulnerable.
[54:23.360 --> 54:31.340]  And they're especially vulnerable because the bars don't actively police the lawyers.
[54:31.340 --> 54:40.520]  And it is the job of the insurance carrier to get out of having to pay a claim.
[54:40.520 --> 54:44.400]  So they're going to do everything they can to get out from the claim.
[54:44.400 --> 54:51.080]  When you file a grievance, if the lawyer doesn't give notice to the insurance carrier and you
[54:51.080 --> 54:56.280]  subsequently sue the lawyer, they won't cover his claim.
[54:56.280 --> 55:00.920]  So he's got to tell on himself.
[55:00.920 --> 55:05.920]  That's basically it for bar grievances.
[56:30.920 --> 56:48.960]  The way they do tickets is the policeman comes in, he drops off all his tickets, and the
[56:48.960 --> 56:56.040]  clerk actually files the complaint based on what he reads in the ticket.
[56:56.040 --> 57:00.400]  That's purely hearsay, but that's okay for a complaint.
[57:00.400 --> 57:09.120]  The complaint gives a magistrate jurisdiction to hold an examining trial and make a determination
[57:09.120 --> 57:11.640]  of probable cause.
[57:11.640 --> 57:17.180]  Once the magistrate has issued a probable cause determination, then that determination
[57:17.180 --> 57:20.760]  is forwarded to the clerk of the court of jurisdiction.
[57:20.760 --> 57:27.160]  And now the court of jurisdiction has jurisdiction in the case.
[57:27.160 --> 57:31.120]  And they'll hold an arraignment.
[57:31.120 --> 57:36.960]  They don't need to test the probable cause because the magistrate should have already
[57:36.960 --> 57:37.960]  done that.
[57:37.960 --> 57:42.560]  So look at Florida law.
[57:42.560 --> 57:47.720]  We have specific statutes in Texas that say if a person is arrested without a warrant,
[57:47.720 --> 57:57.520]  they are to be taken directly to the nearest magistrate for probable cause determination.
[57:57.520 --> 58:06.400]  This requirement of probable cause has been in code since 1216 A.D.
[58:06.400 --> 58:12.760]  So it's going to be written into Florida code.
[58:12.760 --> 58:24.200]  Look carefully at the code and you will find, look how the magistrate and the trial court
[58:24.200 --> 58:30.360]  interact with one another and go after the fact that there was no examining trial.
[58:30.360 --> 58:39.680]  Hang on, Randy Kelton, Rue de la Radio, got our call in numbers 512-646-1984, we'll be
[58:39.680 --> 58:49.600]  right back.
[58:49.600 --> 58:53.720]  Would you like to make more definite progress in your walk with God?
[58:53.720 --> 58:58.920]  Bibles for America is offering a free study Bible and a set of free Christian books that
[58:58.920 --> 59:00.240]  can really help.
[59:00.240 --> 59:04.720]  The New Testament recovery version is one of the most comprehensive study Bibles available
[59:04.720 --> 59:05.720]  today.
[59:05.720 --> 59:09.600]  It's an accurate translation and it contains thousands of footnotes that will help you
[59:09.600 --> 59:12.720]  to know God and to know the meaning of life.
[59:12.720 --> 59:17.960]  The free books are a three volume set called Basic Elements of the Christian Life.
[59:17.960 --> 59:22.240]  Chapter by chapter, Basic Elements of the Christian Life clearly presents God's plan
[59:22.240 --> 59:27.160]  of salvation, growing in Christ and how to build up the church.
[59:27.160 --> 59:32.160]  To order your free New Testament recovery version and Basic Elements of the Christian
[59:32.160 --> 59:44.920]  Life, call Bibles for America toll free at 888-551-0102, that's 888-551-0102 or visit
[59:44.920 --> 59:47.560]  us online at bfa.org.
[59:47.560 --> 59:59.920]  You're listening to the Logos Radio Network at logosradionetwork.com.
[59:59.920 --> 01:00:05.080]  The following newsflash is brought to you by the Lone Star Lowdown, providing your jelly
[01:00:05.080 --> 01:00:12.520]  bulletins for the commodities market, today in history, news updates, and the inside scoop
[01:00:12.520 --> 01:00:20.440]  into the tides of the alternatives.
[01:00:20.440 --> 01:00:25.520]  Markets for Friday the 10th of March 2017 are currently trading with gold at $1,197.81
[01:00:25.520 --> 01:00:34.080]  an ounce, silver at $16.89 an ounce, taxes crude at $49.28 a barrel, and Bitcoin is at
[01:00:34.080 --> 01:00:42.880]  $1,198 U.S. currency.
[01:00:42.880 --> 01:00:48.640]  Today in history, the year 1959, the Tibetan uprising, fearing the abduction attempt by
[01:00:48.640 --> 01:00:53.840]  China, 300,000 Tibetans surround the Dalai Lama's palace to prevent his removal.
[01:00:53.840 --> 01:01:01.880]  Today in history, in recent news, according to new figures released by the U.S. Customs
[01:01:01.880 --> 01:01:05.320]  and Border Protection, the number of immigrants caught by Border Patrol agents attempting
[01:01:05.320 --> 01:01:10.000]  to cross the Southwest border has dropped 40% since President Trump took office.
[01:01:10.000 --> 01:01:14.800]  On average, 1,300 a day were being stopped in January, and now that figure has dropped
[01:01:14.800 --> 01:01:20.920]  to about 840, which is totally unlike the usual 10 to 20% surge usually seen in February.
[01:01:20.920 --> 01:01:25.480]  Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly stated that, quote, the early results show that enforcement
[01:01:25.480 --> 01:01:29.240]  matters, deterrence matters, and that the comprehensive immigration enforcement can
[01:01:29.240 --> 01:01:30.520]  make an impact.
[01:01:30.520 --> 01:01:34.880]  Fewer people are putting themselves and their families at risk of exploitation, assault,
[01:01:34.880 --> 01:01:39.320]  and injury by human traffickers, and the physical dangers of the treacherous journey north.
[01:01:39.320 --> 01:01:44.160]  Faya Hipsman, a policy analyst at the Migration Policy Institute think tank in Washington,
[01:01:44.160 --> 01:01:48.160]  D.C., attributes the change to perception, saying that, quote, what we're seeing is
[01:01:48.160 --> 01:01:49.600]  really about perception.
[01:01:49.600 --> 01:01:54.840]  The orders offer the possibility of very meaningful changes at the border, increased attentions,
[01:01:54.840 --> 01:01:58.960]  more people subject to rapid deportations, so that creates a perception that it's more
[01:01:58.960 --> 01:02:01.120]  difficult to reach the United States.
[01:02:01.120 --> 01:02:04.880]  More importantly, there is a lot of fear inside of the U.S., and those feedback loops reach
[01:02:04.880 --> 01:02:11.400]  people who are thinking about making the journey.
[01:02:11.400 --> 01:02:15.520]  The Volkswagen Group pleaded guilty Friday today to three charges of fraud, obstruction
[01:02:15.520 --> 01:02:19.720]  of justice, and misrepresenting the capability of vehicles with diesel engines it imported
[01:02:19.720 --> 01:02:20.920]  into the United States.
[01:02:20.920 --> 01:02:25.840]  U.S. District Court Judge Sean Cox in Detroit accepted the plea, but wants more time to
[01:02:25.840 --> 01:02:31.400]  review the terms of the settlement, which proposes a $2.8 billion criminal fine, a $1.5
[01:02:31.400 --> 01:02:35.680]  billion settlement for environmental customs and financial violations, and settlements
[01:02:35.680 --> 01:02:41.240]  worth about $17 billion for U.S. consumers and dealers who own the automakers' diesel
[01:02:41.240 --> 01:02:42.240]  vehicles.
[01:02:42.240 --> 01:02:44.040]  Another hearing was set for April 21.
[01:02:44.040 --> 01:02:48.560]  Eligible Volkswagen and Audi vehicles include a wide variety of two- and three-liter, four-
[01:02:48.560 --> 01:02:52.960]  and six-cylinder diesel engine models spanning from 2009 to 2016.
[01:02:52.960 --> 01:03:22.320]  This was Rick Rooney with your Lowdown for March 10, 2017.
[01:03:22.960 --> 01:03:31.120]  Okay, we are back.
[01:03:31.120 --> 01:03:37.440]  Randy Kelton with the Rue de la Radio, and we're talking to Terrence in Florida.
[01:03:37.440 --> 01:03:49.760]  It is my position that the big approach when defending any criminal or any litigation is
[01:03:49.760 --> 01:03:52.600]  to start at the beginning.
[01:03:52.600 --> 01:03:55.640]  Don't presuppose or stipulate anything.
[01:03:55.640 --> 01:04:03.800]  And the place to start in criminal is the authority of the court to hold you to answer
[01:04:03.800 --> 01:04:10.320]  for a criminal claim or a criminal act.
[01:04:10.320 --> 01:04:19.600]  And Gerstein Pugh, let me read, pre-trial probable cause determination and adversary
[01:04:19.600 --> 01:04:22.960]  preliminary hearings.
[01:04:22.960 --> 01:04:32.080]  This is Rule 3.133, pre-trial probable cause determination and adversary preliminary hearing
[01:04:32.080 --> 01:04:33.080]  defended in custody.
[01:04:33.080 --> 01:04:39.360]  In all cases in which the defendant is in custody, a non-adversary probable cause determination
[01:04:39.360 --> 01:04:45.760]  shall be held before a judge within 48 from the time of the defendant's arrest, provided
[01:04:45.760 --> 01:04:50.560]  however that this proceeding shall not be required when a probable cause determination
[01:04:50.560 --> 01:04:56.320]  has been previously made by a judge and an arrest warrant issued for the specific offense
[01:04:56.320 --> 01:04:58.360]  for which the defendant is charged.
[01:04:58.360 --> 01:04:59.360]  Okay.
[01:04:59.360 --> 01:05:00.360]  That's the statute.
[01:05:00.360 --> 01:05:01.360]  Okay.
[01:05:01.360 --> 01:05:07.880]  I am sorry, guys, I think I'm back.
[01:05:07.880 --> 01:05:13.880]  We had a little crash on that last segment.
[01:05:13.880 --> 01:05:18.640]  I kind of got into the board and crashed out the archive.
[01:05:18.640 --> 01:05:25.360]  Deborah may skid me alive for it, but we were busy having a good show.
[01:05:25.360 --> 01:05:26.360]  Okay.
[01:05:26.360 --> 01:05:31.480]  Let me get my pages back up.
[01:05:31.480 --> 01:05:34.840]  Let's go to Tony in Pennsylvania.
[01:05:34.840 --> 01:05:37.840]  Hello, Tony, you there?
[01:05:37.840 --> 01:05:43.480]  Okay, Tony, I didn't get you last time.
[01:05:43.480 --> 01:05:50.520]  David, are you there?
[01:05:50.520 --> 01:05:54.280]  I'm not sure if I'm on, I'm not sure what's going on on here.
[01:05:54.280 --> 01:05:58.800]  I may have messed things up.
[01:05:58.800 --> 01:06:07.320]  So since I don't get either caller, good chance I'm not online in case I was online.
[01:06:07.320 --> 01:06:13.640]  I'm going to bail.
[01:06:13.640 --> 01:06:27.920]  Okay, I hear some noise in the background.
[01:06:27.920 --> 01:06:30.400]  I apologize if you guys can hear me.
[01:06:30.400 --> 01:06:34.240]  We're having a little couple of issues today.
[01:06:34.240 --> 01:06:37.240]  David in South Dakota, are you there?
[01:06:37.240 --> 01:06:48.080]  Okay, I think I'm on the air because I could hear David making noise in the background.
[01:06:48.080 --> 01:06:58.400]  So that means I'm probably on the air and from the caller in Michigan, this is, if we're
[01:06:58.400 --> 01:07:05.840]  going to start taking back our courts, we're going to have to start taking on our courts.
[01:07:05.840 --> 01:07:13.560]  And the one thing that we tend not to understand is that we are the most powerful influence
[01:07:13.560 --> 01:07:15.680]  in the court.
[01:07:15.680 --> 01:07:25.760]  We don't understand that because for the most part, we come before the courts with an issue
[01:07:25.760 --> 01:07:29.800]  with something to lose.
[01:07:29.800 --> 01:07:37.040]  And we depend on the courts to provide us with the remedy that we come seeking.
[01:07:37.040 --> 01:07:44.720]  So we tend to think of the courts from the perspective of needing something from them.
[01:07:44.720 --> 01:07:52.000]  And it kind of gets us to believe that the courts have more power than they do.
[01:07:52.000 --> 01:07:59.080]  In situations like this, the courts and the associated public officials are going to do
[01:07:59.080 --> 01:08:06.600]  everything they can to keep us from understanding what our position really is.
[01:08:06.600 --> 01:08:10.600]  They don't want us to know how powerful we are.
[01:08:10.600 --> 01:08:14.640]  That is the last thing they want to happen.
[01:08:14.640 --> 01:08:19.680]  They want us to think that they control the courts and we're subject to them.
[01:08:19.680 --> 01:08:23.560]  That is not the case.
[01:08:23.560 --> 01:08:32.320]  We control the courts and once we figure it out, then the courts become susceptible to
[01:08:32.320 --> 01:08:33.320]  us.
[01:08:33.320 --> 01:08:38.520]  Skype flaky, I logged on, I'm afraid to disconnect.
[01:08:38.520 --> 01:08:39.520]  Okay.
[01:08:39.520 --> 01:08:40.880]  Well, that was my producer.
[01:08:40.880 --> 01:08:47.080]  He's sending me some messages and apparently his Skype is kind of flaky as well.
[01:08:47.080 --> 01:08:53.400]  So okay, but let me try Tony in Pennsylvania again.
[01:08:53.400 --> 01:08:56.400]  Tony, are you there?
[01:08:56.400 --> 01:08:57.400]  Okay.
[01:08:57.400 --> 01:09:00.360]  It looks like he's not there.
[01:09:00.360 --> 01:09:03.640]  So the call boards may not be up.
[01:09:03.640 --> 01:09:07.400]  If anybody has a question or comment, give us a call.
[01:09:07.400 --> 01:09:12.160]  And if I get another call on the board, even if I don't have a producer, it'll pop up
[01:09:12.160 --> 01:09:17.440]  on my board and I'll know this thing's working and I'm actually getting out on the air.
[01:09:17.440 --> 01:09:22.560]  My board tells me that I am, but I never can be sure.
[01:09:22.560 --> 01:09:29.600]  We are the most powerful people in the courtroom and if you go into a courtroom and you don't
[01:09:29.600 --> 01:09:35.880]  have an issue before the court, the court has no power over you and that's what terrifies
[01:09:35.880 --> 01:09:38.720]  them more than anything.
[01:09:38.720 --> 01:09:45.400]  Like this guy had an issue with the judge who rendered this ruling.
[01:09:45.400 --> 01:09:52.560]  He didn't finish, but I'm sure he was going to, he mentioned the ruling against Trump.
[01:09:52.560 --> 01:10:00.880]  If he truly believes that the judge acted outside law and acted for his own purpose,
[01:10:00.880 --> 01:10:03.480]  he should file against that judge.
[01:10:03.480 --> 01:10:08.920]  He should file criminally against the judge and let the judge explain to a grand jury
[01:10:08.920 --> 01:10:19.960]  of your peers and my peers, his behavior, and not to a appeals court of his peers.
[01:10:19.960 --> 01:10:32.120]  When we start taking these officials on in our capacity as the citizen in a republic,
[01:10:32.120 --> 01:10:41.040]  I don't want to use the word sovereign because our government has taken that term and warped
[01:10:41.040 --> 01:10:48.760]  it into a curse word and besides, we're not really sovereign anyway.
[01:10:48.760 --> 01:10:53.720]  We're personally sovereign along with all our other sovereigns and a more appropriate
[01:10:53.720 --> 01:10:59.360]  term is that we are the masters of our servants.
[01:10:59.360 --> 01:11:04.960]  A judge has a duty to determine the law in accordance with the rule, I'm sorry, determine
[01:11:04.960 --> 01:11:08.080]  the facts in accordance with the rules of evidence and apply the laws that comes to
[01:11:08.080 --> 01:11:09.560]  him to the facts in the case.
[01:11:09.560 --> 01:11:15.000]  It's our duty to hold him to it or her.
[01:11:15.000 --> 01:11:19.840]  When one of our judges steps outside of one of those legal lines, we need to land on them
[01:11:19.840 --> 01:11:24.040]  like a ton of bricks and we can.
[01:11:24.040 --> 01:11:31.640]  When we start filing criminal complaints, we become a protected glass, we become the
[01:11:31.640 --> 01:11:40.840]  most dangerous person in the courtroom, politically dangerous because we can take on the judge
[01:11:40.840 --> 01:11:47.480]  and no one can say anything to us, no one can do anything to us, anyone does, they make
[01:11:47.480 --> 01:11:53.600]  things worse.
[01:11:53.600 --> 01:11:57.480]  The thing is, is we just need to realize it and understand it.
[01:11:57.480 --> 01:12:01.880]  Once we do, we can change everything.
[01:12:01.880 --> 01:12:11.360]  Consider how many private citizens would have to file criminal complaints against a judge
[01:12:11.360 --> 01:12:19.520]  to give him the idea that there's a good chance that one of these individuals may just get
[01:12:19.520 --> 01:12:23.680]  to a grand jury and get me indicted.
[01:12:23.680 --> 01:12:33.960]  It could happen and it's unlikely, but who wants to play Russian Roulette with her career?
[01:12:33.960 --> 01:12:43.120]  Rodney, you there?
[01:12:43.120 --> 01:12:52.880]  I can tell, okay, go ahead Rodney, you there, talk to me.
[01:12:52.880 --> 01:12:53.880]  Yes.
[01:12:53.880 --> 01:12:54.880]  Okay.
[01:12:54.880 --> 01:13:00.960]  I have Rodney from Texas selected on my call screen.
[01:13:00.960 --> 01:13:06.440]  Who am I talking to?
[01:13:06.440 --> 01:13:07.440]  That is odd.
[01:13:07.440 --> 01:13:13.920]  I have a John in Austin and Tony in Pennsylvania, I think I put him to sleep a long time ago.
[01:13:13.920 --> 01:13:18.960]  So at least this tells me I'm certainly on the air and I appreciate your call and let
[01:13:18.960 --> 01:13:19.960]  me know that.
[01:13:19.960 --> 01:13:26.280]  Although I may have the wrong person, the call screener couldn't get back in.
[01:13:26.280 --> 01:13:31.320]  We're having some internet problems, so you may have just came up and that name happened
[01:13:31.320 --> 01:13:32.320]  to land in place.
[01:13:32.320 --> 01:13:33.320]  Okay.
[01:13:33.320 --> 01:13:34.320]  What do you have for us?
[01:13:34.320 --> 01:13:39.320]  We're talking about judicial misconduct, right?
[01:13:39.320 --> 01:13:40.320]  Yes.
[01:13:40.320 --> 01:13:47.360]  We did judicial misconduct for the judge to allow-
[01:13:47.360 --> 01:13:49.080]  Wait, wait, hold on.
[01:13:49.080 --> 01:13:51.520]  Are you on a speaker phone?
[01:13:51.520 --> 01:13:54.520]  No, I want a cell phone.
[01:13:54.520 --> 01:13:55.520]  Oh, okay.
[01:13:55.520 --> 01:13:58.160]  Well, you might want to get a little closer to your mouth.
[01:13:58.160 --> 01:13:59.160]  You're a bit muffled.
[01:13:59.160 --> 01:14:00.160]  Okay.
[01:14:00.160 --> 01:14:01.160]  How about now?
[01:14:01.160 --> 01:14:04.160]  Oh, much better, much better.
[01:14:04.160 --> 01:14:05.160]  Okay.
[01:14:05.160 --> 01:14:06.160]  Good.
[01:14:06.160 --> 01:14:12.880]  Would it be judicial misconduct for a judge to allow blatant violations of federal rules
[01:14:12.880 --> 01:14:15.880]  of evidence 402 and 602?
[01:14:15.880 --> 01:14:20.680]  It is the duty of the judge.
[01:14:20.680 --> 01:14:21.680]  Okay.
[01:14:21.680 --> 01:14:22.680]  Okay.
[01:14:22.680 --> 01:14:23.680]  Hold on.
[01:14:23.680 --> 01:14:24.680]  Okay.
[01:14:24.680 --> 01:14:42.000]  I want to say yes, but this blatant violations, what is blatant?
[01:14:42.000 --> 01:14:50.320]  If it's clear, well, think of it in terms of a grand jury, the grand jury of your peers
[01:14:50.320 --> 01:14:51.320]  and my peers.
[01:14:51.320 --> 01:14:57.560]  If you're a litigant, you're going to have a different perspective on what's blatant
[01:14:57.560 --> 01:15:00.560]  and what's not.
[01:15:00.560 --> 01:15:03.800]  If you're a litigant and a judge is ruled against you, you want to step out of that
[01:15:03.800 --> 01:15:10.960]  context if you can, or explain it to somebody else who doesn't have a dog in the hunt to
[01:15:10.960 --> 01:15:16.160]  see if they agree with you, and if they do, then absolutely.
[01:15:16.160 --> 01:15:23.720]  That judge has a duty to apply the law, and the law includes the rules.
[01:15:23.720 --> 01:15:32.920]  If he fails to properly apply the rules, then he denies you in procedural due process, and
[01:15:32.920 --> 01:15:33.920]  that's clear.
[01:15:33.920 --> 01:15:36.920]  Is this a state judge or a federal judge?
[01:15:36.920 --> 01:15:37.920]  Federal.
[01:15:37.920 --> 01:15:38.920]  Federal.
[01:15:38.920 --> 01:15:39.920]  18 U.S. Code 242.
[01:15:39.920 --> 01:15:40.920]  242.
[01:15:40.920 --> 01:15:54.280]  At the end of the day, it's going to be extremely difficult to get a federal judge put in front
[01:15:54.280 --> 01:15:57.440]  of a grand jury.
[01:15:57.440 --> 01:16:09.520]  However, going after the federal judge will sure give him problems.
[01:16:09.520 --> 01:16:14.440]  Federal judges can be removed from the bench for a couple of things, and bad behavior is
[01:16:14.440 --> 01:16:15.440]  one of them.
[01:16:15.440 --> 01:16:18.440]  Are you familiar with rules 402 and 602?
[01:16:18.440 --> 01:16:20.440]  Wait, you're distorting again.
[01:16:20.440 --> 01:16:22.440]  I have trouble understanding.
[01:16:22.440 --> 01:16:34.440]  Maybe I should get to a good spot and stay there.
[01:16:34.440 --> 01:16:39.440]  Are you familiar with rule 402 and 602 in the federal rules?
[01:16:39.440 --> 01:16:40.440]  No, I'm not.
[01:16:40.440 --> 01:16:47.000]  Let me see if I can look it up here while we're talking.
[01:16:47.000 --> 01:16:49.000]  Can you explain briefly what it says?
[01:16:49.000 --> 01:16:58.440]  Yeah, there's not a lot of evidence or call with the truth that we spent more than you
[01:16:58.440 --> 01:17:00.120]  could really imagine.
[01:17:00.120 --> 01:17:01.120]  I love Logos.
[01:17:01.120 --> 01:17:04.440]  Without the shows on this network, I'd be almost as ignorant as my friends.
[01:17:04.440 --> 01:17:07.280]  I'm so addicted to the truth now that there's no going back.
[01:17:07.280 --> 01:17:08.520]  I need my truth fit.
[01:17:08.520 --> 01:17:13.280]  I'd be lost without Logos, and I really want to help keep this network on the air.
[01:17:13.280 --> 01:17:16.960]  I'd love to volunteer as a show producer, but I'm a bit of a Luddite, and I really don't
[01:17:16.960 --> 01:17:20.320]  have any money to give because I spent it all on supplements.
[01:17:20.320 --> 01:17:21.320]  How can I help Logos?
[01:17:21.320 --> 01:17:22.320]  Well, I'm glad you asked.
[01:17:22.320 --> 01:17:23.320]  Whenever you order anything from Amazon, you can help Logos.
[01:17:23.320 --> 01:17:24.320]  When ordering your supplies or holiday gifts, the first thing you do is clear your cookies.
[01:17:24.320 --> 01:17:25.320]  Now, go to LogosRegionetwork.com.
[01:17:25.320 --> 01:17:26.320]  Click on the Amazon logo and bookmark it.
[01:17:26.320 --> 01:17:43.360]  Now, when you order anything from Amazon, you use that link, and Logos gets a few pesos.
[01:17:43.360 --> 01:17:44.360]  Do I pay extra?
[01:17:44.360 --> 01:17:45.360]  No.
[01:17:45.360 --> 01:17:46.360]  Do I have to do anything different when I order?
[01:17:46.360 --> 01:17:47.360]  No.
[01:17:47.360 --> 01:17:48.360]  Can I use my Amazon Prime?
[01:17:48.360 --> 01:17:49.360]  No.
[01:17:49.360 --> 01:17:50.360]  I mean, yes.
[01:17:50.360 --> 01:17:51.360]  Wow.
[01:17:51.360 --> 01:17:54.360]  Giving without doing anything or spending any money.
[01:17:54.360 --> 01:17:55.360]  This is perfect.
[01:17:55.360 --> 01:17:56.360]  Thank you so much.
[01:17:56.360 --> 01:17:57.360]  We are welcome.
[01:17:57.360 --> 01:17:58.360]  Happy holidays, Logos.
[01:17:58.360 --> 01:17:59.360]  At Capital Coin and Bullion, our mission is to be your preferred shopping destination
[01:17:59.360 --> 01:18:00.360]  by delivering excellent customer service and outstanding value at an affordable price.
[01:18:00.360 --> 01:18:01.360]  We provide a wide assortment of your favorite products featuring a great selection of high
[01:18:01.360 --> 01:18:02.360]  quality coins and precious metals.
[01:18:02.360 --> 01:18:03.360]  We cater to beginners in coin collecting as well as large transactions for investors.
[01:18:03.360 --> 01:18:04.360]  We believe in educating our customers with resources from top accredited metals dealers
[01:18:04.360 --> 01:18:05.360]  and journalists.
[01:18:05.360 --> 01:18:06.360]  If we don't have what you need, we can help you.
[01:18:06.360 --> 01:18:07.360]  We can help you with your business.
[01:18:07.360 --> 01:18:08.360]  We can help you with your business.
[01:18:08.360 --> 01:18:09.360]  We can help you with your business.
[01:18:09.360 --> 01:18:10.360]  We can help you with your business.
[01:18:10.360 --> 01:18:11.360]  We can help you with your business.
[01:18:11.360 --> 01:18:12.360]  We can help you with your business.
[01:18:12.360 --> 01:18:13.360]  We can help you with your business.
[01:18:13.360 --> 01:18:14.360]  We can help you with your business.
[01:18:14.360 --> 01:18:33.360]  We can help you with your business.
[01:18:33.360 --> 01:18:56.360]  We can help you with your business.
[01:18:56.360 --> 01:19:24.360]  We can help you with your business.
[01:19:24.360 --> 01:19:25.360]  We can help you with your business.
[01:19:25.360 --> 01:19:26.360]  We can help you with your business.
[01:19:26.360 --> 01:19:27.360]  We can help you with your business.
[01:19:27.360 --> 01:19:28.360]  We can help you with your business.
[01:19:28.360 --> 01:19:29.360]  We can help you with your business.
[01:19:29.360 --> 01:19:30.360]  We can help you with your business.
[01:19:30.360 --> 01:19:31.360]  When you look at your currentRRRODNY.
[01:19:31.360 --> 01:19:32.360]  When you look at your currentRRRODNY.
[01:19:32.360 --> 01:19:33.360]  Now, I'm at Rural of Law Radio, and we're talking to...
[01:19:33.360 --> 01:19:34.360]  einerodney.
[01:19:34.360 --> 01:19:35.360]  What was your name?
[01:19:35.360 --> 01:19:37.240]  You're listed on my screen as Rodney
[01:19:37.240 --> 01:19:38.240]  Yeah.
[01:19:38.240 --> 01:19:43.700]  When that happens again, you might just say, Hey, somebody speak up.
[01:19:43.700 --> 01:19:47.240]  Okay, so we'll just pretend like you're Rodney.
[01:19:47.240 --> 01:19:48.840]  Nobody knows the difference.
[01:19:48.840 --> 01:19:58.040]  I have rule 402 up, rule 402 is really short, relevant evidence is admissible unless any
[01:19:58.040 --> 01:20:03.440]  of the following provides otherwise, United States Constitution, federal statutes, these
[01:20:03.440 --> 01:20:06.480]  rules or other rules prescribed by the Supreme Court.
[01:20:06.480 --> 01:20:11.280]  Now I have notes of advisory committee on proposed rules.
[01:20:11.280 --> 01:20:20.800]  You missed the last line on that one just above notes.
[01:20:20.800 --> 01:20:27.840]  Irrelevant evidence is not admissible, I didn't read that one, okay, what are you referring
[01:20:27.840 --> 01:20:28.840]  to?
[01:20:28.840 --> 01:20:36.480]  Irrelevant evidence would be evidence that has nothing to do with the charges, correct?
[01:20:36.480 --> 01:20:49.360]  Yeah, okay, the rule says irrelevant evidence is not admissible, okay, in the notes it says
[01:20:49.360 --> 01:21:01.640]  the provisions that all relevant evidence is admissible, okay, this provision, oh, I'm
[01:21:01.640 --> 01:21:08.040]  having a little trouble reading that, this provisions that all relevant evidence is admissible
[01:21:08.040 --> 01:21:14.520]  with certain exceptions and that evidence which is not relevant is not admissible, if
[01:21:14.520 --> 01:21:21.640]  not admissible are presupposition involved in the very conception of a rational system
[01:21:21.640 --> 01:21:25.680]  of evidence, this doesn't help.
[01:21:25.680 --> 01:21:34.000]  The next paragraph says not all relevant evidence is admissible, the exclusion of relevant evidence
[01:21:34.000 --> 01:21:39.760]  occurs in a variety of situations which may be called for by these rules, by the rules
[01:21:39.760 --> 01:21:46.480]  of civil and criminal procedure, by bankruptcy rules, by acts of Congress and by constitutional
[01:21:46.480 --> 01:21:49.480]  considerations, okay.
[01:21:49.480 --> 01:21:57.280]  The final thing we're going after is irrelevant evidence is not admissible, okay, is your
[01:21:57.280 --> 01:22:03.160]  issue that irrelevant evidence was allowed in the court or that relevant evidence was
[01:22:03.160 --> 01:22:06.680]  not allowed in the court?
[01:22:06.680 --> 01:22:11.680]  Irrelevant evidence was allowed but relevant evidence, yeah, they didn't have any relevant
[01:22:11.680 --> 01:22:17.280]  evidence.
[01:22:17.280 --> 01:22:23.120]  On what grounds did the court allow the irrelevant evidence in?
[01:22:23.120 --> 01:22:28.200]  Did you hear me?
[01:22:28.200 --> 01:22:38.440]  Okay, the other side, I take it proposed to inner evidence, did you object to the evidence?
[01:22:38.440 --> 01:22:42.600]  Well, yes, yes I did.
[01:22:42.600 --> 01:22:47.680]  On what grounds did the judge allow the evidence in?
[01:22:47.680 --> 01:22:54.040]  You know, I'm not exactly sure, you said overruled or something to do the effect of chosen can
[01:22:54.040 --> 01:23:01.240]  or prior past performance or something like that, you know.
[01:23:01.240 --> 01:23:15.000]  Okay, this is an area that goes to the discretion of the court, so it's hard to go directly
[01:23:15.000 --> 01:23:21.560]  after the judge when we're dealing in areas where there is discretion.
[01:23:21.560 --> 01:23:27.720]  But isn't irrelevant evidence not admissible, a statement that is part of the rules that
[01:23:27.720 --> 01:23:29.800]  you should be enforcing?
[01:23:29.800 --> 01:23:39.640]  Well, the problem is all kinds of exceptions, I would have to see the ruling of the judge.
[01:23:39.640 --> 01:23:44.880]  At the end of the court proceeding, you can request findings of facts and conclusions
[01:23:44.880 --> 01:23:55.560]  at law and ask the court to show the law in support of his ruling, if he doesn't show
[01:23:55.560 --> 01:24:02.760]  any law, then you can go after him.
[01:24:02.760 --> 01:24:12.160]  If he does show law and a reasonable person of ordinary prudence or reasonable people
[01:24:12.160 --> 01:24:19.620]  could come to different conclusions about the relevancy of the evidence, then you have
[01:24:19.620 --> 01:24:22.080]  no claim against the judge.
[01:24:22.080 --> 01:24:30.560]  Okay, because this is in the area of his discretion, and you may be able to get it overturned
[01:24:30.560 --> 01:24:39.520]  in a court of appeals, but it'll be real hard, you know, I suggest going after judges.
[01:24:39.520 --> 01:24:49.680]  But it needs to be absolutely dead bang before you get any kind of shot at them, like in
[01:24:49.680 --> 01:24:53.560]  this case where I went after a federal judge.
[01:24:53.560 --> 01:24:59.040]  I filed a challenge to subject matter jurisdiction.
[01:24:59.040 --> 01:25:05.420]  Without hearing the subject matter jurisdiction challenged, he dismissed with prejudice.
[01:25:05.420 --> 01:25:11.880]  Whether he had jurisdiction or not, not relevant.
[01:25:11.880 --> 01:25:20.680]  Once the subject matter jurisdiction is filed, he is forbidden to do anything until subject
[01:25:20.680 --> 01:25:24.040]  matter jurisdiction is proven.
[01:25:24.040 --> 01:25:27.240]  Absolutely dead bang.
[01:25:27.240 --> 01:25:31.220]  No room for discussion, no room for equivocation.
[01:25:31.220 --> 01:25:34.000]  He is forbidden to do what he did.
[01:25:34.000 --> 01:25:36.520]  Then you can go after him.
[01:25:36.520 --> 01:25:43.800]  But as far as whether evidence is admissible or not, that's debatable.
[01:25:43.800 --> 01:25:44.800]  Why the latitude?
[01:25:44.800 --> 01:25:49.240]  Okay, well what about rule 602, don't you have that one yet?
[01:25:49.240 --> 01:25:54.080]  I don't have all these rules memorized, especially further down in the rules of evidence.
[01:25:54.080 --> 01:25:56.600]  What does it say?
[01:25:56.600 --> 01:26:02.040]  Witness may testify to a matter only if evidence is introduced sufficient to support finding
[01:26:02.040 --> 01:26:06.320]  that the witness has personal knowledge of the matter.
[01:26:06.320 --> 01:26:09.960]  Okay, best evidence rule.
[01:26:09.960 --> 01:26:14.520]  Evidence to personal knowledge may consist of the witness' own testimony.
[01:26:14.520 --> 01:26:20.280]  This rule does not apply to a witness' expert testimony under rule 703, okay?
[01:26:20.280 --> 01:26:26.760]  So every time these witnesses got finished testifying, I asked them if they had any proof
[01:26:26.760 --> 01:26:30.960]  or knowledge that this particular statute applied to me.
[01:26:30.960 --> 01:26:39.440]  Each and every one of them replied no.
[01:26:39.440 --> 01:26:42.000]  Wait a minute, okay.
[01:26:42.000 --> 01:26:45.560]  I don't understand how that's relevant.
[01:26:45.560 --> 01:26:52.800]  You're asking a witness that just testified if rule 602 applies to you, but you weren't
[01:26:52.800 --> 01:26:53.800]  a witness.
[01:26:53.800 --> 01:26:57.080]  Well, I didn't say that at all.
[01:26:57.080 --> 01:26:59.080]  Then I misunderstood.
[01:26:59.080 --> 01:27:04.880]  The witness was when I was doing cross-examination, right?
[01:27:04.880 --> 01:27:06.920]  Okay.
[01:27:06.920 --> 01:27:12.440]  After the prosecutor had queried the witness, it was my turn, so I asked them, you have
[01:27:12.440 --> 01:27:17.800]  any evidence that this statute or code applies to me?
[01:27:17.800 --> 01:27:20.880]  And each one of them answered no.
[01:27:20.880 --> 01:27:26.000]  Well, that's appropriate because you weren't a witness, so the statute doesn't apply to
[01:27:26.000 --> 01:27:27.000]  you.
[01:27:27.000 --> 01:27:29.320]  It only applies to a witness.
[01:27:29.320 --> 01:27:36.440]  Well, Andy, I was asking that of the witnesses.
[01:27:36.440 --> 01:27:38.520]  I was the lawyer, right, on the cross-examination.
[01:27:38.520 --> 01:27:39.520]  Okay.
[01:27:39.520 --> 01:27:49.400]  And I asked each individual witness if they had any evidence that that code applied to
[01:27:49.400 --> 01:27:50.400]  me.
[01:27:50.400 --> 01:27:51.400]  Okay.
[01:27:51.400 --> 01:27:53.400]  Each one of them said something.
[01:27:53.400 --> 01:27:58.320]  This is a code that only applies to a witness.
[01:27:58.320 --> 01:28:06.920]  It doesn't apply to a litigant unless the litigant's a witness.
[01:28:06.920 --> 01:28:07.920]  I would...
[01:28:07.920 --> 01:28:08.920]  So no, it doesn't apply to you.
[01:28:08.920 --> 01:28:18.900]  One of the litigants, I was trying to fight these people off when the prosecutor was done
[01:28:18.900 --> 01:28:20.360]  examining the witness.
[01:28:20.360 --> 01:28:24.720]  They said, do you have any cross, and I said yes.
[01:28:24.720 --> 01:28:30.760]  And I said to the witness, witness, do you have any personal first-hand knowledge that
[01:28:30.760 --> 01:28:33.320]  these codes apply to me?
[01:28:33.320 --> 01:28:38.680]  Each and every one of them said no.
[01:28:38.680 --> 01:28:40.220]  They were the witness.
[01:28:40.220 --> 01:28:41.640]  I was asking the witness that...
[01:28:41.640 --> 01:28:42.640]  Okay.
[01:28:42.640 --> 01:28:43.640]  Maybe we've missed something.
[01:28:43.640 --> 01:28:48.920]  Do you have any personal knowledge that these codes apply to me?
[01:28:48.920 --> 01:28:50.520]  Is that the question?
[01:28:50.520 --> 01:28:51.520]  Yeah.
[01:28:51.520 --> 01:28:54.640]  The statute that they were charging under.
[01:28:54.640 --> 01:28:57.920]  Oh, okay.
[01:28:57.920 --> 01:29:03.840]  I hate pronouns because I never know what they apply to.
[01:29:03.840 --> 01:29:09.200]  You were asking the witness for a conclusion.
[01:29:09.200 --> 01:29:11.000]  It should have got an objection.
[01:29:11.000 --> 01:29:12.000]  No.
[01:29:12.000 --> 01:29:18.640]  I was asking if they had the facts in their position.
[01:29:18.640 --> 01:29:19.640]  To make a...
[01:29:19.640 --> 01:29:24.560]  Well, they obviously already made a legal determination.
[01:29:24.560 --> 01:29:30.120]  I was just asking for if they had to make that determination off.
[01:29:30.120 --> 01:29:36.720]  The witness is testifying to facts within his personal knowledge.
[01:29:36.720 --> 01:29:44.760]  Whether or not a statute applies to you is not a determination a witness can make unless
[01:29:44.760 --> 01:29:50.280]  he is an expert witness.
[01:29:50.280 --> 01:29:52.280]  Were these expert witnesses?
[01:29:52.280 --> 01:29:58.280]  Well, no, one of them was, but most of them weren't.
[01:29:58.280 --> 01:30:01.280]  Well, was he a...
[01:30:01.280 --> 01:30:07.800]  Waikiki has its spam jam and Raleigh, North Carolina has the Bugfest, but you won't find
[01:30:07.800 --> 01:30:12.160]  a wackier food festival than the Roadkill Cook-Off in Marlington, West Virginia.
[01:30:12.160 --> 01:30:17.880]  I've got Dr. Catherine Albrecht back with the stomach-churning details in a moment.
[01:30:17.880 --> 01:30:19.600]  Privacy is under attack.
[01:30:19.600 --> 01:30:24.000]  When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again, and once your privacy
[01:30:24.000 --> 01:30:28.200]  is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish, too.
[01:30:28.200 --> 01:30:33.360]  So protect your rights, say no to surveillance, and keep your information to yourself.
[01:30:33.360 --> 01:30:35.960]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[01:30:35.960 --> 01:30:41.560]  This message is brought to you by Startpage.com, the private search engine alternative to Google,
[01:30:41.560 --> 01:30:43.280]  Yahoo, and Bing.
[01:30:43.280 --> 01:30:46.200]  Start over with Startpage.
[01:30:46.200 --> 01:30:51.480]  Accidentally hitting an animal on the road can make you feel dreadful, but in Marlington,
[01:30:51.480 --> 01:30:56.720]  West Virginia, Roadkill actually gets cooked and celebrated at the annual Roadkill Cook-Off
[01:30:56.720 --> 01:30:58.840]  and Autumn Harvest Festival.
[01:30:58.840 --> 01:31:04.160]  Competitors serve up fender fare ranging from rabbit, raccoon, and possum to armadillo,
[01:31:04.160 --> 01:31:06.160]  alligator, and groundhog.
[01:31:06.160 --> 01:31:10.480]  Fortunately for the queasy, dishes served in the competition don't have to be actual
[01:31:10.480 --> 01:31:14.560]  roadkill, just animals commonly found by the side of the road.
[01:31:14.560 --> 01:31:19.360]  Points are awarded for taste, originality, and showmanship, but as the judges note, points
[01:31:19.360 --> 01:31:23.800]  will be deducted for every chipped tooth resulting from gravel not removed.
[01:31:23.800 --> 01:31:31.280]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht for Startpage.com, the world's most private search engine.
[01:31:31.280 --> 01:31:36.640]  This is Building 7, a 47-story skyscraper that fell on the afternoon of September 11th.
[01:31:36.640 --> 01:31:42.080]  The government says that fire brought it down, however, 1,500 architects and engineers concluded
[01:31:42.080 --> 01:31:43.560]  it was a controlled demolition.
[01:31:43.560 --> 01:31:46.400]  Over 6,000 of my fellow service members have given their lives.
[01:31:46.400 --> 01:31:49.160]  Thousands of my fellow first responders are dying.
[01:31:49.160 --> 01:31:50.600]  I'm not a conspiracy theorist.
[01:31:50.600 --> 01:31:51.600]  I'm a structural engineer.
[01:31:51.600 --> 01:31:53.000]  I'm a New York City correction officer.
[01:31:53.000 --> 01:31:54.000]  I'm an Air Force pilot.
[01:31:54.000 --> 01:31:55.600]  I'm a father who lost his son.
[01:31:55.600 --> 01:31:58.200]  We're Americans, and we deserve the truth.
[01:31:58.200 --> 01:32:01.480]  Go to RememberBuilding7.org today.
[01:32:01.480 --> 01:32:03.840]  Hey, it's Danny here for Hill Country Home Improvements.
[01:32:03.840 --> 01:32:06.920]  Did your home receive hail or wind damage from the recent storms?
[01:32:06.920 --> 01:32:10.560]  Come on, we all know the government caused it with their chemtrails, but good luck getting
[01:32:10.560 --> 01:32:11.560]  them to pay for it.
[01:32:11.560 --> 01:32:15.160]  Okay, I might be kidding about the chemtrails, but I'm serious about your roof.
[01:32:15.160 --> 01:32:18.980]  That's why you have insurance, and Hill Country Home Improvements can handle the claim for
[01:32:18.980 --> 01:32:24.200]  you with little to no out-of-pocket expense, and we accept Bitcoin as a multiyear A-plus
[01:32:24.200 --> 01:32:27.320]  member of the Better Business Bureau with zero complaints.
[01:32:27.320 --> 01:32:31.760]  You can trust Hill Country Home Improvements to handle your claim and your roof right the
[01:32:31.760 --> 01:32:32.760]  first time.
[01:32:32.760 --> 01:32:39.000]  Just call 512-992-8745, or go to hillcountryhomeimprovements.com.
[01:32:39.000 --> 01:32:43.480]  Mention the crypto show and get $100 off, and we'll donate another $100 to the Logos
[01:32:43.480 --> 01:32:46.080]  Radio Network to help continue this programming.
[01:32:46.080 --> 01:32:51.200]  So if those out-of-town roofers come knocking, your door should be locking.
[01:32:51.200 --> 01:32:57.160]  That's 512-992-8745, or hillcountryhomeimprovements.com.
[01:32:57.160 --> 01:32:59.080]  Discounts are based on full roof replacement.
[01:32:59.080 --> 01:33:06.080]  May not actually be kidding about chemtrails.
[01:33:06.080 --> 01:33:27.080]  You are listening to the Logos Radio Network, logosradionetwork.com.
[01:33:27.080 --> 01:33:35.000]  Okay, we are back, Randy Kelton with Logos Radio, and we're kind of started in the middle
[01:33:35.000 --> 01:33:36.000]  of something.
[01:33:36.000 --> 01:33:42.040]  So I kind of feel like I'm inside a puzzle.
[01:33:42.040 --> 01:33:45.880]  So are you, I take it you're in a federal court.
[01:33:45.880 --> 01:33:49.520]  Is this a civil or criminal issue?
[01:33:49.520 --> 01:33:50.520]  Criminal.
[01:33:50.520 --> 01:33:51.520]  Okay.
[01:33:51.520 --> 01:33:54.520]  And I take it you're the defendant?
[01:33:54.520 --> 01:33:56.520]  Okay, yep.
[01:33:56.520 --> 01:34:01.400]  I don't think you should be representing yourself.
[01:34:01.400 --> 01:34:08.360]  Now, I have people call into my show to ask me about legal matters all the time.
[01:34:08.360 --> 01:34:14.440]  And I went down to Cherokee County and helped a guy that the courts were going after.
[01:34:14.440 --> 01:34:19.480]  I filed criminal charges against a judge, and they came after me.
[01:34:19.480 --> 01:34:23.000]  And I represented myself in court.
[01:34:23.000 --> 01:34:29.720]  I was absolutely incompetent to represent myself in court.
[01:34:29.720 --> 01:34:32.920]  They don't call it the practice of law for nothing.
[01:34:32.920 --> 01:34:35.320]  Well, it wasn't that.
[01:34:35.320 --> 01:34:39.400]  I had a dog in that hunt.
[01:34:39.400 --> 01:34:43.080]  And that turned out to be my undoing.
[01:34:43.080 --> 01:34:45.960]  They threw the book at me.
[01:34:45.960 --> 01:34:51.160]  I then went after the judge criminally and got it all thrown out.
[01:34:51.160 --> 01:35:01.120]  But I was absolutely incapable of effectively representing myself because I had too much
[01:35:01.120 --> 01:35:02.120]  involvement in it.
[01:35:02.120 --> 01:35:05.840]  I didn't understand that at the time.
[01:35:05.840 --> 01:35:11.440]  But afterward, it was clear that I should not have been representing myself.
[01:35:11.440 --> 01:35:14.360]  I couldn't think clearly.
[01:35:14.360 --> 01:35:19.200]  Everything I said, my liberty was on the line.
[01:35:19.200 --> 01:35:27.800]  So I didn't handle myself well with that said, let's go back to these issues.
[01:35:27.800 --> 01:35:35.040]  Have you represented yourself in cases before, civil or criminal?
[01:35:35.040 --> 01:35:37.040]  Once with the tax-recruiting court.
[01:35:37.040 --> 01:35:38.040]  Okay.
[01:35:38.040 --> 01:35:40.800]  So you do have some experience.
[01:35:40.800 --> 01:35:43.480]  Didn't help.
[01:35:43.480 --> 01:35:49.160]  Well, tax is hard to beat.
[01:35:49.160 --> 01:35:54.040]  I do have some strategies that we've been using.
[01:35:54.040 --> 01:35:58.000]  It's where we go back after them.
[01:35:58.000 --> 01:36:05.360]  But is there more than one indictment involved in your case?
[01:36:05.360 --> 01:36:08.760]  No, but there were seven counts.
[01:36:08.760 --> 01:36:21.120]  Okay, the reason I go there because federal prosecutors are scoundrels and they claim
[01:36:21.120 --> 01:36:25.640]  to have indictments when sometimes they don't.
[01:36:25.640 --> 01:36:32.680]  Every federal prosecutor has a rubber stamp with the foreman's name on it.
[01:36:32.680 --> 01:36:37.520]  The reason I asked that question the way I did is what the prosecutor will generally
[01:36:37.520 --> 01:36:45.960]  do is he will come in with a relatively minor indictment.
[01:36:45.960 --> 01:36:49.720]  Something he can get to the grand jury, it's pretty easy to get an indictment on.
[01:36:49.720 --> 01:36:56.440]  Once he gets the first indictment, then he starts to do his homework and the rest of
[01:36:56.440 --> 01:37:04.520]  the indictments they call superseding indictments and he almost always rubber stamps those.
[01:37:04.520 --> 01:37:09.400]  So you have more than one indictment.
[01:37:09.400 --> 01:37:17.560]  The place I always like to go first is the jurisdiction.
[01:37:17.560 --> 01:37:20.240]  Do they have authority to get me into the court?
[01:37:20.240 --> 01:37:30.560]  Have you put in a request for the court reporter's, what do you call it, the bill of the court
[01:37:30.560 --> 01:37:38.640]  reporter filed with the government to pay for her services as a court reporter for the
[01:37:38.640 --> 01:37:41.760]  grand jury?
[01:37:41.760 --> 01:37:43.320]  I have not looked for that.
[01:37:43.320 --> 01:37:45.240]  This is why we did that.
[01:37:45.240 --> 01:37:47.960]  We had a guy in California.
[01:37:47.960 --> 01:37:54.120]  We requested the voucher for the grand jury, for the court reporter for the grand jury
[01:37:54.120 --> 01:37:58.640]  on the date of his indictment.
[01:37:58.640 --> 01:38:03.720]  We got back, there was no voucher for that day.
[01:38:03.720 --> 01:38:12.720]  Yeah, the prosecutor rubber stamped all the superseding indictments.
[01:38:12.720 --> 01:38:18.560]  Well now I do have a transcript of part of that grand jury investigation and there were
[01:38:18.560 --> 01:38:27.320]  actually, I think there were questions from the jury interspersed with the agent's testimony.
[01:38:27.320 --> 01:38:32.160]  Okay, then you may not have that claim.
[01:38:32.160 --> 01:38:38.160]  Okay, let's go back to 602.
[01:38:38.160 --> 01:38:47.640]  I'm concerned about the way you ask the question because when I heard the question, you're
[01:38:47.640 --> 01:38:57.720]  asking a witness if they have any knowledge that this, whatever statute it is, applies
[01:38:57.720 --> 01:38:58.720]  to you.
[01:38:58.720 --> 01:39:01.520]  You're asking the witness for a conclusion.
[01:39:01.520 --> 01:39:04.000]  Were these witnesses police officers?
[01:39:04.000 --> 01:39:06.320]  No, they were agents.
[01:39:06.320 --> 01:39:12.800]  Somebody who would have had to hold that knowledge and act on that knowledge in order to bring
[01:39:12.800 --> 01:39:16.440]  you to where you're at.
[01:39:16.440 --> 01:39:19.440]  They were IRS agents.
[01:39:19.440 --> 01:39:24.640]  Oh, okay.
[01:39:24.640 --> 01:39:32.320]  This knowledge was, their belief that this applied to you was because of actions that
[01:39:32.320 --> 01:39:33.320]  they took.
[01:39:33.320 --> 01:39:37.080]  Okay, now it kind of makes sense.
[01:39:37.080 --> 01:39:43.640]  So in a criminal indictment, now they have to prove every element of the charge, right?
[01:39:43.640 --> 01:39:44.640]  Exactly.
[01:39:44.640 --> 01:39:52.440]  They never even made a prima facie evidence showing that those codes applied to me.
[01:39:52.440 --> 01:39:57.360]  They assumed it.
[01:39:57.360 --> 01:40:02.840]  Did you enter evidence to indicate that they didn't apply to you?
[01:40:02.840 --> 01:40:05.560]  Well, briefs or filings.
[01:40:05.560 --> 01:40:07.560]  Well, no, no.
[01:40:07.560 --> 01:40:08.560]  Okay.
[01:40:08.560 --> 01:40:09.560]  Prove the negative.
[01:40:09.560 --> 01:40:12.560]  Wait, say that again.
[01:40:12.560 --> 01:40:16.560]  Well, they're the ones that are making the assertion.
[01:40:16.560 --> 01:40:21.040]  They should back it up with whatever they've got to make to, that I think authorizes them
[01:40:21.040 --> 01:40:23.040]  to make that assertion.
[01:40:23.040 --> 01:40:24.040]  Correct?
[01:40:24.040 --> 01:40:25.040]  Okay.
[01:40:25.040 --> 01:40:33.720]  The problem in the courts is that if they make these assertions, I take it you objected
[01:40:33.720 --> 01:40:35.200]  to them.
[01:40:35.200 --> 01:40:39.840]  Well, you can't object to something that was never raised.
[01:40:39.840 --> 01:40:40.840]  Okay.
[01:40:40.840 --> 01:40:45.320]  The judge is going to presume regularity.
[01:40:45.320 --> 01:40:48.040]  You have to challenge it.
[01:40:48.040 --> 01:40:50.000]  And now I think I know where you're going.
[01:40:50.000 --> 01:40:51.000]  You're saying you're not a taxpayer.
[01:40:51.000 --> 01:40:52.000]  Well, I don't know what that is.
[01:40:52.000 --> 01:40:53.000]  I'm not one of them tax protesters or anything.
[01:40:53.000 --> 01:40:54.000]  So I've acted like one in the past.
[01:40:54.000 --> 01:40:55.000]  Oh, okay.
[01:40:55.000 --> 01:40:56.000]  Well, you're saying that this didn't apply to you.
[01:40:56.000 --> 01:41:19.840]  Well, and the only reason I say that is because they don't have any evidence that it does.
[01:41:19.840 --> 01:41:21.160]  Okay.
[01:41:21.160 --> 01:41:26.360]  Have you reached a, has there been a final determination in the case?
[01:41:26.360 --> 01:41:27.360]  Oh yeah.
[01:41:27.360 --> 01:41:29.400]  It was over a year ago.
[01:41:29.400 --> 01:41:30.920]  I'm on appeal right now.
[01:41:30.920 --> 01:41:31.920]  Oh, okay.
[01:41:31.920 --> 01:41:36.800]  Well, these are the kinds of issues that go to appeal.
[01:41:36.800 --> 01:41:37.800]  Right.
[01:41:37.800 --> 01:41:38.800]  Okay.
[01:41:38.800 --> 01:41:42.560]  Well, it's, I finally kind of understand where you're going.
[01:41:42.560 --> 01:41:51.840]  You had an IRS agent claiming, testifying about your liability to a tax when he also
[01:41:51.840 --> 01:41:59.360]  testified that he had no knowledge that the tax applied to you.
[01:41:59.360 --> 01:42:04.520]  So that makes his testimony essentially contradictory.
[01:42:04.520 --> 01:42:13.920]  It makes it, it violates rule 602 as I read it.
[01:42:13.920 --> 01:42:20.160]  I objected to each individual's witness' testimony after they've done doing it.
[01:42:20.160 --> 01:42:26.360]  Unfortunately, I didn't think of where dear witness before we got started, but I objected
[01:42:26.360 --> 01:42:35.640]  to their testimony being included in the record because it was irrelevant.
[01:42:35.640 --> 01:42:36.640]  Okay.
[01:42:36.640 --> 01:42:46.000]  When the IRS agent testified, did he testify to facts that the agent had personal knowledge
[01:42:46.000 --> 01:42:51.000]  of?
[01:42:51.000 --> 01:43:00.440]  Like I sent him this demand for payment, I received no response to this demand for payment.
[01:43:00.440 --> 01:43:08.000]  Were the facts that he testified to facts that he had personal knowledge of?
[01:43:08.000 --> 01:43:13.960]  According to their statute, I owed this X amount of dollars.
[01:43:13.960 --> 01:43:19.480]  According to their statute, I violated another section of it, right?
[01:43:19.480 --> 01:43:26.600]  But not a one of them testified that they knew that that statute or those statutes applied
[01:43:26.600 --> 01:43:27.600]  to me.
[01:43:27.600 --> 01:43:32.560]  Hence, if they can't prove that statutes apply, it doesn't matter what the statutes say.
[01:43:32.560 --> 01:43:33.560]  Is that not correct?
[01:43:33.560 --> 01:43:34.560]  Yes, that's correct.
[01:43:34.560 --> 01:43:48.040]  What I was getting to was they didn't testify that these statutes applied to you.
[01:43:48.040 --> 01:43:51.520]  What did they testify to?
[01:43:51.520 --> 01:43:52.520]  Numbers on paper.
[01:43:52.520 --> 01:43:53.520]  Okay.
[01:43:53.520 --> 01:44:00.320]  Were the numbers, okay, and those are facts, did they have...
[01:44:00.320 --> 01:44:02.720]  Nutritious food is real body armor.
[01:44:02.720 --> 01:44:08.360]  It builds muscle, burns fat, improves digestion, and feeds the entire body the nutrients it
[01:44:08.360 --> 01:44:09.360]  needs.
[01:44:09.360 --> 01:44:13.040]  Did you know the US government banned the hemp plant from growing in the United States
[01:44:13.040 --> 01:44:17.600]  and classified it as a schedule one drug to hide it behind the marijuana plant?
[01:44:17.600 --> 01:44:21.680]  People have been confused about this plant for over 80 years, and many still don't know
[01:44:21.680 --> 01:44:22.680]  what hemp is.
[01:44:22.680 --> 01:44:27.280]  So now you know hemp is not marijuana, and marijuana is not hemp.
[01:44:27.280 --> 01:44:30.160]  They are different varieties of the same species.
[01:44:30.160 --> 01:44:34.920]  HempUSA.org wants the world to know these basic facts, and to help people understand
[01:44:34.920 --> 01:44:39.320]  that hemp protein powder is the best kept health secret you need to know about.
[01:44:39.320 --> 01:44:45.520]  Remember, hemp protein powder contains 53% protein, is gluten free, anti-inflammatory,
[01:44:45.520 --> 01:44:48.200]  and non-GMO, and is loaded with nutrients.
[01:44:48.200 --> 01:44:57.120]  Call 888-910-4367, 888-910-4367, and see what our powder, seeds, and oil can do for you,
[01:44:57.120 --> 01:44:59.120]  only at hempUSA.org.
[01:44:59.120 --> 01:45:05.000]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[01:45:05.000 --> 01:45:11.760]  Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary, the affordable, easy to understand, 4-CD course
[01:45:11.760 --> 01:45:15.760]  that will show you how in 24 hours, step-by-step.
[01:45:15.760 --> 01:45:19.760]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing.
[01:45:19.760 --> 01:45:23.760]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[01:45:23.760 --> 01:45:28.760]  Thousands have won with our step-by-step course, and now you can too.
[01:45:28.760 --> 01:45:34.760]  Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case-winning experience.
[01:45:34.760 --> 01:45:39.760]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand about
[01:45:39.760 --> 01:45:43.760]  the principles and practices that control our American courts.
[01:45:43.760 --> 01:45:49.760]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases,
[01:45:49.760 --> 01:46:12.760]  pro se tactics, and much more. Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner or call toll-free, 866-LAW-EZ.
[01:46:19.760 --> 01:46:32.760]  Okay, we are back, Randy Kelton, Rule of Law Radio, and I'm not sure what you're actually asking me.
[01:46:32.760 --> 01:46:36.760]  I'm still a little confused about the Rule 602.
[01:46:36.760 --> 01:46:44.760]  If the agent testified to numbers on paper that the agent had personal knowledge of,
[01:46:44.760 --> 01:46:51.760]  that's relevant testimony, or that's something he can testify to.
[01:46:51.760 --> 01:46:59.760]  Well, how can he testify to the application of a statute when it hasn't been established, the statute applies yet?
[01:46:59.760 --> 01:47:10.760]  Well, he can, whether the statute applies or not is a determination for the court,
[01:47:10.760 --> 01:47:19.760]  and the court is asking for information so we can make a determination about whether or not the statute applies.
[01:47:19.760 --> 01:47:30.760]  You're trying to force this court into a tiny decision that throws everything out, and they never do that.
[01:47:30.760 --> 01:47:34.760]  This is an issue for appeal.
[01:47:34.760 --> 01:47:37.760]  Hello, Randy, can you hear me?
[01:47:37.760 --> 01:47:39.760]  Yeah, I can hear you.
[01:47:39.760 --> 01:47:50.760]  Okay, well, wouldn't he have to make a legal determination on his own that that law applies before he'd even think about applying it to me?
[01:47:50.760 --> 01:47:52.760]  You're talking about the agent?
[01:47:52.760 --> 01:47:55.760]  Yeah, whoever made those numbers up.
[01:47:55.760 --> 01:48:00.760]  Yeah, that's kind of philosophical, but I would...
[01:48:00.760 --> 01:48:03.760]  No, no, that's factual.
[01:48:03.760 --> 01:48:14.760]  The agent's determination is not controlling.
[01:48:14.760 --> 01:48:19.760]  Well, somebody made the determination, but they never told me about it.
[01:48:19.760 --> 01:48:24.760]  They never brought it up and allowed me the opportunity to investigate.
[01:48:24.760 --> 01:48:27.760]  Did you raise the issue?
[01:48:27.760 --> 01:48:29.760]  Oh, yes, several times, almost.
[01:48:29.760 --> 01:48:45.760]  Okay, so you've raised an objection to the testimony because the testimony wasn't relevant until there was a determination that the requirement applied to you.
[01:48:45.760 --> 01:48:47.760]  That's true.
[01:48:47.760 --> 01:48:54.760]  So apparently the court overruled that and allowed him to testify anyway.
[01:48:54.760 --> 01:48:59.760]  Yeah, well, I actually asked that information after they testified.
[01:48:59.760 --> 01:49:00.760]  Oh.
[01:49:00.760 --> 01:49:06.760]  As I said, I didn't get an opportunity to boarder the witnesses before they testified.
[01:49:06.760 --> 01:49:08.760]  I didn't.
[01:49:08.760 --> 01:49:10.760]  Oh, okay, so this is rebuttal.
[01:49:10.760 --> 01:49:14.760]  This evidence is before the court.
[01:49:14.760 --> 01:49:22.760]  So they were able to put this evidence into the court record without objection.
[01:49:22.760 --> 01:49:38.760]  And what should have happened is when the witness began to testify, you should have objected based on relevancy.
[01:49:38.760 --> 01:49:49.760]  This is no evidence before the court to show that this statute applies to be, therefore, this information is irrelevant.
[01:49:49.760 --> 01:49:50.760]  Correct.
[01:49:50.760 --> 01:49:53.760]  Did you raise that objection?
[01:49:53.760 --> 01:50:00.760]  I don't think so, like you said, or like I said earlier, they don't call it the practice of law for nothing.
[01:50:00.760 --> 01:50:01.760]  Okay.
[01:50:01.760 --> 01:50:04.760]  No, I'm not criticizing at all.
[01:50:04.760 --> 01:50:07.760]  I'm just trying to establish what's going to happen here.
[01:50:07.760 --> 01:50:10.760]  If you object, that doesn't matter.
[01:50:10.760 --> 01:50:14.760]  That doesn't lose you your position.
[01:50:14.760 --> 01:50:18.760]  It just allows them to testify to this.
[01:50:18.760 --> 01:50:27.760]  Once they've testified to it, now you apparently ask the right question to put their testimony at issue.
[01:50:27.760 --> 01:50:31.760]  And now you have that before the Court of Appeals.
[01:50:31.760 --> 01:50:37.760]  The issue is not whether or not you owed the tax.
[01:50:37.760 --> 01:50:49.760]  The issue is whether or not the prosecution put forth evidence that established that you owed the tax.
[01:50:49.760 --> 01:50:54.760]  Or that established that code section applied to me.
[01:50:54.760 --> 01:50:56.760]  Exactly.
[01:50:56.760 --> 01:51:05.760]  And therefore, you know, they can go off of that and write up all kinds of numbers on papers, you see.
[01:51:05.760 --> 01:51:09.760]  So now the Court of Appeals is looking at this.
[01:51:09.760 --> 01:51:16.760]  And first they have to look at relevancy of the testimony.
[01:51:16.760 --> 01:51:26.760]  And if there's no evidence that the statute applied to you, I mean, they didn't charge you with not paying a tax on your pilot's license, did they?
[01:51:26.760 --> 01:51:30.760]  No.
[01:51:30.760 --> 01:51:33.760]  Well, why not?
[01:51:33.760 --> 01:51:40.760]  I said, well, you could have charged me for being AWOL, except for I'm not in the Army, you know.
[01:51:40.760 --> 01:51:41.760]  Yeah.
[01:51:41.760 --> 01:51:42.760]  You don't have one.
[01:51:42.760 --> 01:51:44.760]  This don't apply.
[01:51:44.760 --> 01:51:47.760]  So this is the same case.
[01:51:47.760 --> 01:51:50.760]  I don't want to hog up the whole show here.
[01:51:50.760 --> 01:51:54.760]  I sent you an email about your e-book.
[01:51:54.760 --> 01:51:56.760]  So you can take a look at that.
[01:51:56.760 --> 01:52:00.760]  And I should let you move on to other folks.
[01:52:00.760 --> 01:52:03.760]  Okay. Thank you very much.
[01:52:03.760 --> 01:52:04.760]  Okay.
[01:52:04.760 --> 01:52:08.760]  Now we're going to go to John in Texas.
[01:52:08.760 --> 01:52:09.760]  Hello, John.
[01:52:09.760 --> 01:52:11.760]  Hey, what's going on?
[01:52:11.760 --> 01:52:22.760]  Hey, I don't know if you remember, but when we were talking a few weeks ago about that, I had this hearing and they gave me 11 days of notice for it.
[01:52:22.760 --> 01:52:24.760]  And you had Dan on the other line.
[01:52:24.760 --> 01:52:26.760]  And he said that's not legal.
[01:52:26.760 --> 01:52:28.760]  But I don't know if you remember.
[01:52:28.760 --> 01:52:30.760]  Okay. What was it?
[01:52:30.760 --> 01:52:31.760]  I kind of remember that.
[01:52:31.760 --> 01:52:33.760]  11 days is generally enough.
[01:52:33.760 --> 01:52:38.760]  I think an old criminal, I think, calls for seven days.
[01:52:38.760 --> 01:52:39.760]  Okay. All right.
[01:52:39.760 --> 01:52:41.760]  Well, then I guess that was legal.
[01:52:41.760 --> 01:52:44.760]  They gave me 11 days of notice for this hearing.
[01:52:44.760 --> 01:52:47.760]  And then it wasn't a hearing, of course.
[01:52:47.760 --> 01:52:53.760]  Whenever I got there, they just had me sign the paper saying I would come back for another hearing.
[01:52:53.760 --> 01:52:54.760]  Hold on.
[01:52:54.760 --> 01:52:57.760]  Was this traffic?
[01:52:57.760 --> 01:52:59.760]  Yeah, it's for traffic.
[01:52:59.760 --> 01:53:01.760]  Okay. Hold on.
[01:53:01.760 --> 01:53:03.760]  I'll draw the NOVO right now.
[01:53:03.760 --> 01:53:14.760]  Okay. Read Texas Code of Criminal Procedure 28.01 and 26.01.
[01:53:14.760 --> 01:53:25.760]  28.01 lists all of the things the court can order you to come, the judge can order you to come to court for.
[01:53:25.760 --> 01:53:29.760]  Okay. The first one is an arraignment.
[01:53:29.760 --> 01:53:33.760]  And 26.01 covers arraignments.
[01:53:33.760 --> 01:53:48.760]  And what it says, in a matter of a felony or a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment, there may be an arraignment.
[01:53:48.760 --> 01:53:58.760]  Now, the legislature went to special purpose to specify when an arraignment can be had.
[01:53:58.760 --> 01:54:04.760]  And it specifically eliminated Class C misdemeanors.
[01:54:04.760 --> 01:54:09.760]  So under 28.01, the first thing they can call you to court for is an arraignment.
[01:54:09.760 --> 01:54:12.760]  That's out the window.
[01:54:12.760 --> 01:54:30.760]  After that, every item where the court can order you to trial, where the judge can order you to court, goes to a motion or pleading filed with the court.
[01:54:30.760 --> 01:54:38.760]  When they ordered you to come to court, was there a motion or pleading filed?
[01:54:38.760 --> 01:54:43.760]  No.
[01:54:43.760 --> 01:54:49.760]  You should file criminally against the judge, Class A misdemeanor.
[01:54:49.760 --> 01:54:50.760]  Okay.
[01:54:50.760 --> 01:54:57.760]  Exerting or purporting to exert an authority he does not have.
[01:54:57.760 --> 01:54:59.760]  Okay.
[01:54:59.760 --> 01:55:00.760]  They use these hearings.
[01:55:00.760 --> 01:55:04.760]  They call you into this hearing and they do some nonsense.
[01:55:04.760 --> 01:55:12.760]  And they call you back next month and they do some more nonsense, and they call you back next month until you finally had enough and just pay it to get rid of it.
[01:55:12.760 --> 01:55:15.760]  It's costing you too much time.
[01:55:15.760 --> 01:55:18.760]  And it's all illegal.
[01:55:18.760 --> 01:55:31.760]  I actually brought up, I didn't bring up 26.01 by name, but I told, whenever we got in there and they were about to have me sign the paper, which I kind of feel like was under duress.
[01:55:31.760 --> 01:55:35.760]  I told the prosecutor, I said, all I wanted was a jury trial.
[01:55:35.760 --> 01:55:36.760]  So what is this?
[01:55:36.760 --> 01:55:39.760]  And he said, you know, this is a hearing.
[01:55:39.760 --> 01:55:42.760]  I said, well, I don't need hearings or anything like that.
[01:55:42.760 --> 01:55:44.760]  I need a jury trial.
[01:55:44.760 --> 01:55:49.760]  He's like, well, you know, he just like kind of raised his voice at me and said, well, we're going to follow the law here.
[01:55:49.760 --> 01:55:52.760]  And, you know, it's kind of funny.
[01:55:52.760 --> 01:55:54.760]  But then, you know, five minutes later.
[01:55:54.760 --> 01:55:56.760]  Did you bargrieve this guy?
[01:55:56.760 --> 01:56:06.760]  This is the one that I told you about a few weeks ago that he's no longer with the county because of two bar grievances I filed on him.
[01:56:06.760 --> 01:56:10.760]  But then, you know, they rejected my third one.
[01:56:10.760 --> 01:56:12.760]  Yeah, I sent you my third one by email.
[01:56:12.760 --> 01:56:15.760]  That's the one that the bar rejected.
[01:56:15.760 --> 01:56:17.760]  And I think you got that.
[01:56:17.760 --> 01:56:22.760]  You got that right where the state bar rejected my third grievance.
[01:56:22.760 --> 01:56:23.760]  Yes, I did.
[01:56:23.760 --> 01:56:24.760]  Yes, I did.
[01:56:24.760 --> 01:56:28.760]  And I've got that in a folder for Ken Magnuson.
[01:56:28.760 --> 01:56:41.760]  You know, the state bar is up for sunset and they're having a subcommittee hearing on Tuesday where you can go and testify before the bar.
[01:56:41.760 --> 01:56:43.760]  And I'm trying to get down there.
[01:56:43.760 --> 01:56:46.760]  And this is what I plan to do.
[01:56:46.760 --> 01:56:48.760]  I got three minutes.
[01:56:48.760 --> 01:56:54.760]  And I'm going to tell them, guys, don't change anything.
[01:56:54.760 --> 01:56:58.760]  The bar is perfect like it is.
[01:56:58.760 --> 01:57:04.760]  If you file a bar grievance, the bar is going to throw it in the trash.
[01:57:04.760 --> 01:57:05.760]  And it's wonderful.
[01:57:05.760 --> 01:57:09.760]  It's great because their insurance company knows they're going to throw it in the trash.
[01:57:09.760 --> 01:57:11.760]  So they're going to double the malpractice insurance.
[01:57:11.760 --> 01:57:14.760]  Doesn't matter if it's valid, invalid, just don't matter.
[01:57:14.760 --> 01:57:21.760]  And I got this radio show and I tell everybody, bar grieve lawyers, bar grieve them because they part their hair on the wrong side.
[01:57:21.760 --> 01:57:22.760]  They tie their shoelaces wrong.
[01:57:22.760 --> 01:57:24.760]  Heck, it don't make any difference.
[01:57:24.760 --> 01:57:27.760]  The bar is going to throw it out anyway.
[01:57:27.760 --> 01:57:31.760]  And we get to get their malpractice insurance canceled.
[01:57:31.760 --> 01:57:38.760]  If the bar starts doing it right, then we won't be able to hammer these lawyers so bad.
[01:57:38.760 --> 01:57:41.760]  Sharks.
[01:57:41.760 --> 01:57:44.760]  Of course, then again, they're so crooked.
[01:57:44.760 --> 01:57:52.760]  If they investigated it, they would actually have to file something on all of them because there's so many of them that do so much illegal junk.
[01:57:52.760 --> 01:58:07.760]  But how much time does a judge have to respond to whenever I ask for a dismissal or I put in a request to dismiss?
[01:58:07.760 --> 01:58:08.760]  He doesn't.
[01:58:08.760 --> 01:58:11.760]  He can do it whenever he wants to.
[01:58:11.760 --> 01:58:19.760]  And if you can't get him to move on the case, generally there has to be something in 180 days.
[01:58:19.760 --> 01:58:28.760]  If he doesn't move, you can go to the next higher court, like this would be county court, and petition for writ of mandamus to order him to render a ruling.
[01:58:28.760 --> 01:58:29.760]  Okay.
[01:58:29.760 --> 01:58:31.760]  All right.
[01:58:31.760 --> 01:58:33.760]  We are out of time.
[01:58:33.760 --> 01:58:38.760]  This is Randy Kelton, Roosevelt Radio, and thank you and call in next week.
[01:58:38.760 --> 01:58:40.760]  This is the area I like.
[01:58:40.760 --> 01:58:42.760]  We have fun with this.
[01:58:42.760 --> 01:58:43.760]  We'll be back next week.
[01:58:43.760 --> 01:58:44.760]  Thank you all for listening.
[01:58:44.760 --> 01:58:49.760]  Good night.
[01:58:49.760 --> 01:58:57.760]  Bibles for America is offering absolutely free a unique study Bible called the New Testament Recovery Version.
[01:58:57.760 --> 01:59:07.760]  The New Testament Recovery Version has over 9,000 footnotes that explain what the Bible says verse by verse, helping you to know God and to know the meaning of life.
[01:59:07.760 --> 01:59:10.760]  Order your free copy today from Bibles for America.
[01:59:10.760 --> 01:59:19.760]  Call us toll free at 888-551-0102 or visit us online at bfa.org.
[01:59:19.760 --> 01:59:29.760]  This translation is highly accurate and it comes with over 13,000 cross references plus charts and maps and an outline for every book of the Bible.
[01:59:29.760 --> 01:59:31.760]  This is truly a Bible you can understand.
[01:59:31.760 --> 01:59:40.760]  To get your free copy of the New Testament Recovery Version, call us toll free at 888-551-0102.
[01:59:40.760 --> 01:59:50.760]  That's 888-551-0102 or visit us online at bfa.org.
[01:59:50.760 --> 01:59:52.760]  Looking for some truth?
[01:59:52.760 --> 02:00:11.760]  You found it, LogosRadioNetwork.com.