[00:00.000 --> 00:06.800]  The following news flash is brought to you by the Lone Star Lowdown.
[00:06.800 --> 00:14.080]  Markets for Monday the 22nd of July 2019 open with Precious Metals, Gold $1,429.00, Silver
[00:14.080 --> 00:24.200]  $16.45.00, Copper $2.75.00, Oil, Texas Crew $55.63.00, Brent Crew $62.47.00, and Cryptos
[00:24.200 --> 00:34.800]  and Order of Market Cap, Bitcoin Core $10,566.52, Ethereum $227.26, XRP Ripple $0.33, Light
[00:34.800 --> 00:46.160]  Coin $100.31, and Bitcoin Cash is at $324.10 of Crypto Coin.
[00:46.160 --> 00:52.480]  Today in history, the year 1916, the preparedness day bombing, a Thai suitcase bomb, was detonated
[00:52.480 --> 00:57.800]  on Market Street in San Francisco during the World War I preparedness day parade, killing
[00:57.800 --> 01:04.800]  10 and injuring 40.
[01:04.800 --> 01:09.520]  In recent news, since Governor Greg Abbott signed House Bill 1325, legalizing hemp into
[01:09.520 --> 01:14.160]  Texas law back in June, county prosecutors around the state, including Houston, Austin
[01:14.160 --> 01:18.120]  and San Antonio, have been dropping marijuana possession charges and even refusing to file
[01:18.120 --> 01:22.800]  new ones since they are stipulating that they do not have the time or the laboratory equipment
[01:22.800 --> 01:24.800]  to test the herb for THC.
[01:24.800 --> 01:28.480]  Margaret Moore, the Travis County District Attorney, announced earlier this month that
[01:28.480 --> 01:33.200]  she was dismissing 32 felony possession and delivery of marijuana cases because of the
[01:33.200 --> 01:34.200]  law.
[01:34.200 --> 01:37.640]  Mr. Abbott and other state officials, including the Attorney General, stipulated in a letter
[01:37.640 --> 01:42.160]  to county district attorneys back on Thursday that marijuana has not been decriminalized
[01:42.160 --> 01:48.320]  in Texas and that these actions demonstrate a misunderstanding of how HB 1325 works, as
[01:48.320 --> 01:54.560]  well as other cities, too, like the District Attorney in El Paso, Kaima Esparza, a Democrat
[01:54.560 --> 01:59.040]  who also stated earlier this month that the law, quote, will not have an effect on the
[01:59.040 --> 02:01.800]  prosecution of marijuana cases in El Paso.
[02:01.800 --> 02:06.800]  However, the issue was succinctly summarized by Mr. Brandon Ball, an assistant public defender
[02:06.800 --> 02:10.800]  in Harris County, who stated that, quote, the law is constantly changing on what makes
[02:10.800 --> 02:13.520]  something illegal based on its chemical makeup.
[02:13.520 --> 02:17.440]  It's important that if someone is charged with something, the test matches what they're
[02:17.440 --> 02:22.640]  charged with.
[02:22.640 --> 02:27.280]  A paper by Tulane University identified a five-and-a-half-inch American pocket shark
[02:27.280 --> 02:32.400]  as the first of its kind in the Gulf of Mexico, the specimen being only the second pocket
[02:32.400 --> 02:38.040]  shark ever captured or recorded with the other one being found way back in 1979 in the East
[02:38.040 --> 02:39.520]  Pacific Ocean.
[02:39.520 --> 02:43.840]  According to the university paper, the shark secretes a luminous fluid from a gland near
[02:43.840 --> 02:50.120]  its front fins for the purpose it is hypothesized to lure and prey who may be drawn into the
[02:50.120 --> 03:20.000]  flow.
[03:20.000 --> 03:23.520]  The cops, you get your rights while I'm later, though you all get signed, alright?
[03:23.520 --> 03:25.840]  I'm sick of people being victimized by criminal cops
[03:25.840 --> 03:28.080]  Psychopathic predators, terrorizing neighborhoods,
[03:28.080 --> 03:30.960]  Glock's equipped with pepper spray, mate, cuffs, tazers, and Glock's
[03:30.960 --> 03:33.520]  They like serial killers acting out subliminal thoughts
[03:33.520 --> 03:36.080]  Forget what you talk, these cops have got a license to kill
[03:36.080 --> 03:38.720]  Witness intimidation means that they can use it at will
[03:38.720 --> 03:41.360]  Codestinal teams at the pixel level let out a squeal
[03:41.360 --> 03:43.840]  And if they go to court, they know the judge will make them a deal
[03:43.840 --> 03:46.240]  For real, that's why they're talking like me
[03:46.240 --> 03:51.360]  Here's your show with your host Eddie Bragg, it is August 15, 2019
[03:51.360 --> 03:53.360]  We are live tonight
[03:53.360 --> 03:55.760]  I'm gonna go ahead and open up the call to raise the post
[03:55.760 --> 03:58.480]  And start calling in and get you in line
[03:58.480 --> 04:02.160]  So I'm gonna try to be real short and sweet with this
[04:02.160 --> 04:09.120]  Um, over the last week I have had a couple of instances to publish
[04:09.120 --> 04:12.960]  New articles on the legal blog, uh, which is that located at
[04:12.960 --> 04:20.880]  tau of law, T-A-O-O-F-L-A-W dot wordpress dot com
[04:20.880 --> 04:25.040]  And I've gone over some issues in there about
[04:25.040 --> 04:27.440]  How things are being handled and how people are taking them
[04:27.440 --> 04:29.760]  And people that are attacking me for trying to spread this
[04:29.760 --> 04:33.680]  Information and calling me a liar and all this other stuff
[04:33.680 --> 04:39.200]  So again, all it really takes is someone's actual effort to go
[04:39.200 --> 04:41.520]  And verify the information I'm putting out there
[04:41.520 --> 04:44.800]  Because I always provide the means to verify it
[04:44.800 --> 04:48.640]  With the information, I either make a specific citation
[04:48.640 --> 04:52.160]  I make a specific citation with an internet link to it
[04:52.160 --> 04:56.480]  I do whatever I can to make verifying the information
[04:56.480 --> 05:00.960]  As easy as possible if someone just wants to do so
[05:00.960 --> 05:03.840]  Now the problem is we've got a lot of people out there
[05:03.840 --> 05:06.560]  That just don't want to do so
[05:06.560 --> 05:10.480]  And they don't want to do so because what they believe
[05:10.480 --> 05:12.880]  Is all that matters to them
[05:12.880 --> 05:15.440]  Facts are completely irrelevant
[05:15.440 --> 05:19.040]  Black letter law is completely irrelevant
[05:19.040 --> 05:23.440]  Logical inferences and conclusions made from that black letter law
[05:23.440 --> 05:25.920]  Are also completely irrelevant
[05:25.920 --> 05:30.560]  Even when we have an issue of the black letter law
[05:30.560 --> 05:36.240]  Creating a constitutional violation or a rights violation
[05:36.240 --> 05:38.960]  This is the kind of people that ignore it
[05:38.960 --> 05:40.880]  To maintain the status quo
[05:40.880 --> 05:45.600]  And they attack anyone that brings it up as being an issue
[05:45.600 --> 05:48.560]  And I've got a multitude of people attempting to do that
[05:48.560 --> 05:50.720]  And there are a multitude of people out there
[05:50.720 --> 05:51.840]  That are attempting to do that
[05:51.840 --> 05:56.320]  Not just to me, but to anyone that does what we do here
[05:57.920 --> 06:00.960]  Now I will be straightforward and honest
[06:00.960 --> 06:03.040]  I don't know of a lot of people out there
[06:03.040 --> 06:07.920]  That are doing what we do as in depth and as detailed as we do it
[06:07.920 --> 06:11.120]  And as accurately as we do it
[06:11.120 --> 06:15.280]  I don't know of anyone out there in fact that is doing that
[06:15.280 --> 06:21.040]  I don't know anyone out there that is digging into this stuff farther
[06:21.040 --> 06:24.240]  Than what is right there on the surface
[06:24.240 --> 06:27.920]  I don't know of anybody out there that is taking this stuff apart
[06:27.920 --> 06:32.240]  And reassembling it with a thread that shows where each piece connects to the other
[06:32.240 --> 06:33.840]  The way that we do
[06:33.840 --> 06:38.960]  I know lots of people out there that are digging hard and throwing dirt
[06:38.960 --> 06:41.360]  And shoveling it by the mountains full
[06:41.360 --> 06:47.600]  But they're not getting anywhere because they're not using what exists
[06:47.600 --> 06:52.720]  Their problem is that they're using inference upon inference upon inference
[06:53.280 --> 06:56.160]  To come to a conclusion that is absolutely incorrect
[06:58.800 --> 07:01.200]  And I say that because it's very much like
[07:01.200 --> 07:05.760]  All of the people out there dealing with income taxes for instance
[07:06.800 --> 07:09.360]  There are a thousand different ways
[07:10.000 --> 07:13.920]  That people have come up with to avoid paying income taxes
[07:13.920 --> 07:16.720]  Based upon what they think they understand
[07:16.720 --> 07:20.080]  In some small part of the law but not the law as a whole
[07:20.720 --> 07:23.840]  I mean you've got all kinds of people that say
[07:23.840 --> 07:30.400]  Don't sign the form or the W-4 or any of your other 1040 forms or anything like that
[07:30.400 --> 07:33.600]  Because of the Fifth Amendment rule
[07:33.600 --> 07:36.560]  But the courts have already ruled against the Fifth Amendment in that regard
[07:36.560 --> 07:39.360]  And so it's no longer valid but people are still doing it
[07:39.360 --> 07:42.800]  They're saying sign a zero return which is also wrong
[07:42.800 --> 07:45.200]  They're saying do this, do this, do this, do this
[07:45.840 --> 07:49.360]  And it's all wrong under the law
[07:50.560 --> 07:55.840]  Now there are, there's at least one demonstrably provable exception to that
[07:55.840 --> 08:00.320]  And that is Dave Champion's book, Income Tax Shattering the Miss
[08:00.320 --> 08:05.120]  Everything that's in that book is something that I verified long before Dave ever finished that book
[08:05.120 --> 08:07.520]  Long before I ever knew who Dave even was
[08:08.320 --> 08:10.640]  When I was a computer consultant traveling all over
[08:10.640 --> 08:15.840]  I spent all of my time up in Virginia doing research when I was not working
[08:17.120 --> 08:23.680]  Every evening I would either go home and use the online access I'd gotten that day
[08:23.680 --> 08:27.360]  To the Library of Congress or I would go directly to the Library of Congress
[08:27.360 --> 08:29.200]  And I would study right there
[08:29.200 --> 08:33.120]  I would have reference upon reference upon reference piled up on tables in front of me
[08:33.680 --> 08:37.680]  And not enough dimes in my pocket to make photo copies of all the pages that I had
[08:38.720 --> 08:46.080]  But I found a lot of interesting stuff including the original 1922 enactment of the income tax code
[08:46.080 --> 08:52.320]  And nothing could be more direct and clear in what it says and what it applies to than that original code
[08:52.320 --> 08:57.040]  And just like any other law it cannot be changed
[08:57.040 --> 09:00.560]  Its purpose cannot be changed by amending it
[09:01.520 --> 09:05.200]  If you're going to change the basic purpose of a law
[09:05.200 --> 09:09.760]  The constitution of the state or in this case the federal government requires
[09:10.400 --> 09:17.760]  That everything in that act be repealed and it be reenacted as a brand new act with a brand new stated purpose
[09:17.760 --> 09:24.160]  Okay, you cannot change the original intent of any law by amendment
[09:24.160 --> 09:28.640]  All right, nor can you do it by re-codification
[09:28.640 --> 09:36.000]  Which means simply reorganizing and renumbering and maybe yes or maybe no
[09:36.000 --> 09:40.800]  Making substantive changes to those statutes when you do so
[09:40.800 --> 09:47.200]  As long as you're telling the public what you're doing and it's not changing the original purpose of the law
[09:47.200 --> 09:53.200]  Okay, the problem is for Texas is they violate all of those rules
[09:53.200 --> 09:59.200]  Okay, they did not tell the people the truth about what they were attempting to do
[09:59.200 --> 10:03.200]  And they re-codified the transportation code in 1995
[10:03.200 --> 10:07.200]  They told us they were making no substantive changes to the law
[10:07.200 --> 10:11.200]  However, when you read the old law and you read the new law
[10:11.200 --> 10:15.200]  You realize there are a multitude of substantive changes
[10:15.200 --> 10:19.200]  They actually change the driver's license being one of them
[10:19.200 --> 10:21.200]  Okay
[10:21.200 --> 10:35.200]  The driver's license originally defined itself as being the chauffeur's operators and commercial operators license or any of the temporary forms of those licenses
[10:35.200 --> 10:39.200]  But the re-codification completely eliminated those original licenses
[10:39.200 --> 10:47.200]  The only thing that's in chapter 521 dealing with a driver's license are the temporary forms of those original licenses
[10:47.200 --> 10:51.200]  The actual licenses no longer exist in Texas law
[10:51.200 --> 10:59.200]  Therefore, their temporary forms cannot exist under Texas law
[10:59.200 --> 11:07.200]  Currently, straight up black and white, you look at it, there is no license requirement in the entire state of Texas
[11:07.200 --> 11:13.200]  Provided you understand this little snafu that created for themselves
[11:13.200 --> 11:17.200]  And you raise it as an issue
[11:17.200 --> 11:23.200]  But so many of these naysayers out there are not willing to do the research
[11:23.200 --> 11:25.200]  Not willing to look at the black and white facts
[11:25.200 --> 11:33.200]  They're not willing to look at any of the logical conclusions that must be drawn based upon what is there and what is not
[11:33.200 --> 11:41.200]  And what the differences between the original and the new version are to understand any of this
[11:41.200 --> 11:47.200]  They would rather maintain what they think they know and what they believe as being the facts
[11:47.200 --> 11:51.200]  And that is not how reality works
[11:51.200 --> 11:59.200]  And I feel sorry for these people because it seems like bootlicking is a way of life with them
[11:59.200 --> 12:09.200]  They are more willing to be trod upon than they are to be free by insisting that the courts themselves are not part of this scheme
[12:09.200 --> 12:13.200]  When in fact the evidence clearly shows that they are
[12:13.200 --> 12:23.200]  And there is no denying that if you understand what the courts are actually doing when they write a court opinion
[12:23.200 --> 12:33.200]  When the court constantly uses something like the transportation code and its statutes to make reference to the facts of a case
[12:33.200 --> 12:47.200]  Without first requiring the state itself to prove that the regulated subject matter to which that code applies even exists in the case
[12:47.200 --> 12:49.200]  That's fraud
[12:49.200 --> 12:59.200]  Because none of the things they keep referencing in the code mean a damn thing in the world if they cannot prove the code itself is relevant
[12:59.200 --> 13:05.200]  And they cannot do that if they cannot prove the existence of the actual subject matter
[13:05.200 --> 13:09.200]  The legislator said that that code is applicable to
[13:09.200 --> 13:17.200]  It is not rocket science, it is not a difficult step of understanding to get to that conclusion
[13:17.200 --> 13:31.200]  Okay, you can't put something in a box, throw away the box and then say that everything in the box applies to what's happening right now and I'm going to use it
[13:31.200 --> 13:33.200]  Because you don't have it anymore
[13:33.200 --> 13:37.200]  So how are you going to use it?
[13:37.200 --> 13:43.200]  The box in this case is the transportation code and the subject matter that rules over it
[13:43.200 --> 13:57.200]  And that is transportation and transportation by legal definition isn't always has been use of the highways for business purposes to generate private profit or gain
[13:57.200 --> 13:59.200]  That's all it's ever been
[13:59.200 --> 14:03.200]  That's the only thing they can call a privilege
[14:03.200 --> 14:11.200]  The usage of public property the roads for private gain
[14:11.200 --> 14:17.200]  Is the privilege, the privilege is not to use the road in the first place
[14:17.200 --> 14:23.200]  It is not to use your car on the road in the first place
[14:23.200 --> 14:33.200]  The privilege is to use what would normally be a car on the road for business purposes to generate private profit or gain upon that road
[14:33.200 --> 14:51.200]  Thus converting it into a privileged activity and the car into a motor vehicle and the person behind the wheel into a driver and the person who owns and controls everything about it including the money that's generated is the operator
[14:51.200 --> 15:01.200]  And then those people either work for themselves as private carriers or they work for themselves as public carriers or contract carriers
[15:01.200 --> 15:11.200]  That is what transportation applies to it is what it has always applied to and you cannot get the courts to address this
[15:11.200 --> 15:29.200]  What nobody that keeps throwing out these court cases wants to admit is that all the court cases that are being cited out there about the right to travel directly recognize the distinction in the language of the opinion
[15:29.200 --> 15:45.200]  Okay, everybody understand that in every single one of these opinions that the United States Supreme Court has ruled upon they have always distinguished in the language of the opinion unless the entire thing had nothing at all to do with private
[15:45.200 --> 15:55.200]  Between the private side and the right of the people to use the roads and the commercial side and the privilege of using the roads for business purposes
[15:55.200 --> 16:13.200]  They have always distinguished it however the state courts have concluded that if it goes against the grain of what they're wanting which is absolute control of your movement and where they can force you to register everything where they can monitor your whereabouts at all times
[16:13.200 --> 16:31.200]  Through that information then they're going to ignore the fact that the Supreme Court made a distinction and they're going to try to use the state law in a way for which the state law itself was not intended and makes no such distinction
[16:31.200 --> 16:47.200]  Okay, and therein lies a problem and you wonder why we're here is to try to make sense out of all this and to help you do it too
[16:47.200 --> 17:01.200]  Alright folks y'all hang on we'll be right back after this break the calling number is 512-646-1984 we'll be right back so y'all hang in there
[17:01.200 --> 17:19.200]  Rule of Law Radio is proud to offer the Rule of Law Traffic Seminar in today's America we live in an us against them society and if we the people are ever going to have a free society then we're going to have to stand and defend our own rights
[17:19.200 --> 17:35.200]  So the traffic courts afford us the least expensive opportunity to learn how to enforce and preserve our rights through due process
[17:35.200 --> 17:50.200]  Our own copy of this invaluable material by going to ruleoflawradio.com and ordering your copy today by ordering now you'll receive a copy of Eddie's book the Texas Transportation Code the law versus the lie video and audio of the original 2009 seminar hundreds of research documents and other useful resource material
[17:50.200 --> 17:54.200]  Learn how to fight for your rights with the help of this material from ruleoflawradio.com
[17:54.200 --> 18:00.200]  Order your copy today and together we can have the free society we all want and deserve
[18:00.200 --> 18:09.200]  Are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters, or even lawsuits? Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Mirris proven method
[18:09.200 --> 18:15.200]  Michael Mirris has won six cases in federal court against debt collectors and now you can win too
[18:15.200 --> 18:21.200]  You'll get step-by-step instructions in plain English on how to win in court using federal civil rights statutes
[18:21.200 --> 18:27.200]  What to do when contacted by phones, mail, or court summons? How to answer letters and phone calls?
[18:27.200 --> 18:34.200]  Get debt collectors out of your credit reports. How to turn the financial tables on them and make them pay you to go away
[18:34.200 --> 18:39.200]  The Michael Mirris proven method is the solution for how to stop debt collectors
[18:39.200 --> 18:47.200]  Personal consultation is available as well. For more information please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the blue Michael Mirris banner
[18:47.200 --> 18:57.200]  Or email Michael Mirris at yahoo.com. That's ruleoflawradio.com or email m-i-c-h-a-e-l-m-i-r-r-a-s at yahoo.com
[18:57.200 --> 19:18.200]  To learn how to stop debt collectors next, you are listening to the Logos Radio Network. Logos Radio Network.com
[19:28.200 --> 19:46.200]  Alright folks, we are back. This is rule of law radio. The calling number is 512-646-1984
[19:46.200 --> 19:52.200]  The lines are open if you want to call and get in line. I got one of the things I want to get into here and then I'll try to start taking calls
[19:52.200 --> 20:04.200]  This segment or the start of the next one if I don't get that far. Alright, now just to give an example of how the state and the courts are complicit in wrongdoing against the public
[20:04.200 --> 20:21.200]  Let's talk about a recent lawsuit settlement in Texas where Harris County got sued for its unconstitutional and completely code of criminal procedure illegal bail program
[20:21.200 --> 20:29.200]  Okay? Harris County was keeping people locked up in jail who couldn't pay the bond because they didn't have the money to pay the bond
[20:29.200 --> 20:38.200]  In other words, they were creating once again debtor's prisons. What they've gotten in trouble for, the other counties in the state have gotten in trouble for before as well
[20:38.200 --> 20:48.200]  But Harris County has been doing this for decades. Every county in fact has been doing this for decades. Here, Travis County is absolutely no different
[20:48.200 --> 20:59.200]  They don't look at the ability of the person to pay. Even on minor cases like traffic tickets, they don't look at the ability of the person to pay
[20:59.200 --> 21:04.200]  If they can come up with any reason whatsoever to force you to pay a bond
[21:04.200 --> 21:13.200]  And that bond can either be through a bond agency or it can be through cash. And in this case, Harris County was insisting every bond be paid in cash
[21:13.200 --> 21:22.200]  Now here's the problem with that first and foremost. The Texas Code of Criminal Procedure never authorizes a cash bond
[21:22.200 --> 21:34.200]  Nowhere in the language have I found a reference to the state's ability to require a court's ability to require a cash bond in a case. Nowhere
[21:34.200 --> 21:45.200]  In every single case, the definition of bond is determined by the Code of Criminal Procedure and in there it defines a bond as a written undertaking
[21:45.200 --> 21:56.200]  In other words, it's a contractual binding promise to make your appearance, to do whatever is required in the case and be present
[21:56.200 --> 22:09.200]  But nowhere does it say cash is required and that the court can make it required. Okay? Not as the initial bond
[22:09.200 --> 22:19.200]  Yet that is what they were doing in every single case. And even in cases where you cannot be sentenced to jail such as traffic tickets
[22:19.200 --> 22:27.200]  You could spend a week or more in jail because you couldn't pay the cash bond
[22:27.200 --> 22:34.200]  You couldn't be sentenced to jail, but they're going to hold you in jail for longer than they could ever sentence you for in the first place
[22:34.200 --> 22:51.200]  And Texas law is very clear on this, that no person can be punished in any manner that's not defined by the law. And the law does not authorize this. So how were they getting away with it?
[22:51.200 --> 23:06.200]  Because the courts themselves were the ones doing it. The bar associations, the prosecutors associations, they were the ones that were coming up with these schemes and doing this to people
[23:06.200 --> 23:17.200]  All in the name of money. They don't care if you show up. Why would they care? They've got your cash. They hope you don't show up
[23:17.200 --> 23:25.200]  Because the cash has to be twice the amount of what they could have collected from you if they had convicted you
[23:25.200 --> 23:33.200]  So why was there any motivation whatsoever to treat people fairly?
[23:33.200 --> 23:45.200]  And to do what the law actually required in relation to a bond which was simply a signature and let them out
[23:45.200 --> 23:52.200]  Again, not rocket science, right there in black and white
[23:52.200 --> 24:07.200]  And yet despite the black and white letter of the law, you will find court opinions by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals and the appellate courts that say, it doesn't matter. It doesn't matter. It's irrelevant. That's not how we do it here
[24:07.200 --> 24:18.200]  It's just like when that district court judge said in that criminal case way back when the state of Texas does not recognize bifurcated representation
[24:18.200 --> 24:29.200]  Now what that means in layman's terms is the state of Texas courts do not recognize the right of a defendant to open their mouth and make their own arguments or their own conclusions
[24:29.200 --> 24:44.200]  Or any statements or file any pleadings themselves in their own case if they have an attorney. Only the attorney is allowed to do it, okay?
[24:44.200 --> 24:54.200]  The attorney is the only one that can speak for you. The attorney is the only one that can write and file for you. You're not allowed to do one single thing in your own case
[24:54.200 --> 25:04.200]  Now why do I bring that up as a problem? Well, I bring it up as a problem because it violates the Texas Constitution's Bill of Rights, okay?
[25:04.200 --> 25:09.200]  And I'll tell you exactly how that works
[25:09.200 --> 25:13.200]  Let me get this pulled up here
[25:13.200 --> 25:19.200]  If I can anyway, my typing is
[25:19.200 --> 25:24.200]  Counsel
[25:24.200 --> 25:28.200]  Okay, it's article 10. Let's see
[25:28.200 --> 25:33.200]  In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall have a public, yeah
[25:33.200 --> 25:39.200]  Let's see. Where is the exact statement?
[25:39.200 --> 25:44.200]  Okay, right here, section 10 of article 1
[25:44.200 --> 25:57.200]  He shall not be compelled to give evidence against himself and shall have the right of being heard by himself or counsel or both
[25:57.200 --> 26:04.200]  You get that? Himself or counsel or both
[26:04.200 --> 26:10.200]  And yet you have a district judge in the state of Texas saying Texas does not recognize bifurcated representation
[26:10.200 --> 26:22.200]  Well, the Texas Constitution's Bill of Rights does, so who is this Texas they're talking about that doesn't recognize it when the Constitution itself absolutely does
[26:22.200 --> 26:27.200]  The Texas courts
[26:27.200 --> 26:38.200]  And you want me to trust a Texas court opinion as being right about anything? Not a snowball chance and you know where
[26:38.200 --> 26:54.200]  All comes back to what I have said repeatedly in relation to allowing the Bar Association to completely usurp an entire department of our government and place it entirely under their control
[26:54.200 --> 26:59.200]  And that is what they've done with the judiciary, absolutely 100%
[26:59.200 --> 27:10.200]  No one that is not an attorney can sit in any position in the judicial branch that has any chance in hell of changing anything
[27:10.200 --> 27:18.200]  You can be a judge in a court as long as that court is not a court of record and it is not a court that can set precedent
[27:18.200 --> 27:25.200]  You get it? You can't write an opinion to set precedent and you can't do it in a court of record
[27:25.200 --> 27:33.200]  Therefore, no court that you can sit in has any power to make any changes to anything
[27:33.200 --> 27:46.200]  It's just like when the Texas courts and the county courts at law ignore the fact that the original trial court at the JP or municipal level never established proper jurisdiction
[27:46.200 --> 27:57.200]  And yet they proceed with a trial de novo without ever addressing the original jurisdiction challenge as if somehow that's okay
[27:57.200 --> 28:06.200]  Because since the appellate court at the county level for the trial de novo does not have original jurisdiction
[28:06.200 --> 28:18.200]  They only have secondary review jurisdiction for appellate process if it's a court of no record which JP's are not and many small municipal courts are not
[28:18.200 --> 28:22.200]  So you start over, but that's a problem
[28:22.200 --> 28:34.200]  And the reason it's a problem is because this court would not have jurisdiction to hold a case of any kind if the original trial court never had original jurisdiction shown in the first place
[28:34.200 --> 28:37.200]  But they never address it
[28:37.200 --> 28:45.200]  They ignore it as if it's not a problem when in fact it is a very real jurisdictional problem
[28:45.200 --> 28:49.200]  And they ignore it
[28:49.200 --> 28:54.200]  This, ladies and gentlemen, is why I do not accept court opinions on their face
[28:54.200 --> 29:07.200]  This is why I can go back and show you third court of appeals and court of criminal appeals cases that violate law left and right when you look at the actual law versus how they ruled
[29:07.200 --> 29:19.200]  This is nothing short of legislating from the bench and this is nothing short of sedition because they flat out don't care that they're doing it and they know that no one is going to stop them
[29:19.200 --> 29:27.200]  Because there is no process in place by which the courts themselves can be required to act to do so
[29:27.200 --> 29:45.200]  I found out just the other day that the legislative drafting manual in Texas specifically says that there is Texas case law that prevents the courts from looking at constitutional violations of how a bill was enacted if it gets signed before that challenge is raised
[29:45.200 --> 29:52.200]  Now you want to talk about criminal? There it is, 8.03 of the Texas legislative drafting manual
[29:52.200 --> 29:56.200]  Look it up, y'all hang on, we'll be right back
[30:03.200 --> 30:09.200]  People eat at McDonald's because it's a lot cheaper than a wholesome meal at home, but is it really?
[30:09.200 --> 30:14.200]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albright and I'll set the record straight on which hits your wallet harder, next
[30:14.200 --> 30:20.200]  Privacy is under attack, when you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again
[30:20.200 --> 30:25.200]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too
[30:25.200 --> 30:30.200]  So protect your rights, say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself
[30:30.200 --> 30:33.200]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to
[30:33.200 --> 30:40.200]  This public service announcement is brought to you by StartPage.com, the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo and Bing
[30:40.200 --> 30:43.200]  Start over with StartPage
[30:43.200 --> 30:51.200]  Why are Americans overweight? We're often told it's because badminton junk food is the only thing low income families can afford
[30:51.200 --> 30:57.200]  But let's set the record straight, processed food is actually way more expensive than food cooked at home
[30:57.200 --> 31:01.200]  Example, feeding a family of four at Mickey D's costs about 30 bucks
[31:01.200 --> 31:07.200]  At home, a roasted chicken with potatoes and a salad costs less than half that, plus it's a lot healthier
[31:07.200 --> 31:14.200]  Truth is, most people are able to afford real food, it's the cooking we don't like, because we view it as back breaking work
[31:14.200 --> 31:21.200]  We need to start appreciating the pleasures of a warm, savory kitchen and the closeness that comes from nourishing our families
[31:21.200 --> 31:26.200]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albright, more news and information at CatherineAlbright.com
[31:30.200 --> 31:36.200]  This is Building 7, a 47 story skyscraper that fell on the afternoon of September 11
[31:36.200 --> 31:43.200]  The government says that fire brought it down, however, 1,500 architects and engineers concluded it was a controlled demolition
[31:43.200 --> 31:49.200]  Over 6,000 of my fellow service members have given their lives, and thousands of my fellow first responders are dying
[31:49.200 --> 31:55.200]  I'm not a conspiracy theorist, I'm a structural engineer, I'm a New York City correctional, I'm an Air Force pilot, I'm a father who lost his son
[31:55.200 --> 31:58.200]  We're Americans, and we deserve the truth
[31:58.200 --> 32:01.200]  Go to RememberBuilding7.org today
[32:01.200 --> 32:06.200]  Hey, it's Danny here for Hill Country Home Improvements. Did your home receive hail or wind damage from the recent storms?
[32:06.200 --> 32:11.200]  Come on, we all know the government caused it with their chemtrails, but good luck getting them to pay for it
[32:11.200 --> 32:16.200]  Okay, I might be kidding about the chemtrails, but I'm serious about your roof, that's why you have insurance
[32:16.200 --> 32:21.200]  And Hill Country Home Improvements can handle the claim for you with little to no out-of-pocket expense
[32:21.200 --> 32:27.200]  And we accept Bitcoin as a multi-year A-plus member of the Better Business Bureau with zero complaints
[32:27.200 --> 32:32.200]  We trust Hill Country Home Improvements to handle your claim and your roof right the first time
[32:32.200 --> 32:38.200]  Just call 512-992-8745 or go to hillcountryhomeimprovements.com
[32:38.200 --> 32:45.200]  Mention the crypto show and get $100 off, and we'll donate another $100 to the Logos Radio Network to help continue this programming
[32:45.200 --> 32:50.200]  So if those out-of-town roofers come knocking, your door should be locked in
[32:50.200 --> 32:57.200]  That's 512-992-8745 or hillcountryhomeimprovements.com
[32:57.200 --> 32:59.200]  Discounts are based on full roof replacement
[32:59.200 --> 33:21.200]  I actually be kidding about chemtrails
[33:29.200 --> 33:51.200]  Alright folks, we are back. This is Rule of Law Radio. Call in number is 512-646-1984
[33:51.200 --> 33:56.200]  If you want to call and talk or ask a question or whatever, we are here
[33:56.200 --> 34:05.200]  Alright, like I said before, I took the break. Texas Legislative Drafting Manual for 2018, which you can find online in PDF form
[34:05.200 --> 34:12.200]  Go to section 802 for one thing to read, and then go to section 803 for the thing I was talking about
[34:12.200 --> 34:23.200]  Where it specifically says that the courts are barred from looking into constitutional violations that are used to enact law after the fact
[34:23.200 --> 34:35.200]  And from the language that exists there, it looks like even if the law was illegally enacted according to the Constitution, the courts themselves, by their own opinions
[34:35.200 --> 34:45.200]  Not by the Constitution and not by law, but by their own opinions, may not look into that constitutional violation once it's been signed
[34:45.200 --> 34:57.200]  Now I haven't got the opportunity to read all the opinions listed in that citation from the Drafting Manual, but I'm quite sure when I read it I'm not going to come away happy
[34:57.200 --> 35:07.200]  Because I'm going to have yet more evidence in my hands that the Texas courts are undermining the Texas Constitution for their own power and gain and that of government as a whole
[35:07.200 --> 35:12.200]  And I am getting really, really sick and tired of that
[35:12.200 --> 35:24.200]  The rule of law is for everyone, not just those who think they can be made to obey it and those who think they aren't
[35:24.200 --> 35:36.200]  And these people definitely think they aren't. They tell us no one's above the law, but they refuse to tell us that except for us, we'll pardon quotations that they always hide at the end of it
[35:36.200 --> 35:38.200]  Because that's exactly what's happening
[35:38.200 --> 35:58.200]  We are being governed by criminals. There is no ifs, ands, or buts about that. Our government is comprised of criminals. Our courts are comprised of criminals. Our prosecutors, our defense attorneys, they are comprised of criminals
[35:58.200 --> 36:09.200]  And these are criminals that conspire to deprive us of rights and property at every single turn
[36:09.200 --> 36:18.200]  It doesn't surprise me why some people go off the deep end these days and they go out and do horrible things
[36:18.200 --> 36:32.200]  So think about that as well. It may be the prescription drugs that start off these shootings that are going on right now and a lot of them are playing to be that way and they're instigated to be that way. Don't get me wrong on that either. I'm fully aware of that
[36:32.200 --> 36:44.200]  But the point here is what are the motives that are being given to these people to incite them to such a level that they would be willing to take up arms and murder innocent people rather than the guilty parties
[36:44.200 --> 37:04.200]  Now say what you want about Chris Dorner. They call him a mass murderer, but the fact was he didn't target the public, not intentionally. Now he did accidentally kill somebody he shouldn't have, but he was targeting corrupt cops for the most part
[37:04.200 --> 37:18.200]  That's who he was after. On the inside he knew who he was facing and why. And he decided there was, he was one of the only people that could do something about it and he knew who to do it to
[37:18.200 --> 37:40.200]  That's why the cops are so anxious to kill him. He knew too much and he was willing to do what was necessary to expose it and they knew it. That's why on the final video the night he died all you could hear on the video from outside was burn it down, kill him, burn it down, kill him. That was cops saying that
[37:40.200 --> 37:50.200]  Now think about that.
[37:50.200 --> 38:00.200]  Alright, now let's see what we got on the phone calls here. Alright, I don't have a name. All I got is area code 505. Who am I talking to and where are you?
[38:00.200 --> 38:02.200]  Hey, this is Rob in New Mexico.
[38:02.200 --> 38:04.200]  Rob in New Mexico. Hi Rob.
[38:04.200 --> 38:10.200]  Hey, got an issue with the livestock board.
[38:10.200 --> 38:14.200]  Yeah, I saw you posted a notice on Facebook.
[38:14.200 --> 38:29.200]  Yeah. Now as far as their authority to do anything, I've got that pretty much covered. I guess my question for you is regarding plain view searches.
[38:29.200 --> 38:31.200]  Okay.
[38:31.200 --> 38:46.200]  I mean if they're standing at my gate and they can see things in my yard, can they perform a search, take down information, use that information?
[38:46.200 --> 38:57.200]  Yeah, the plain view doctrine clearly allows them. If what they can see gives them ample probable cause to believe there's criminal conduct, then yeah, they can use it if they can see it.
[38:57.200 --> 39:06.200]  Yeah, that's not quite where I'm going with that. Basically what they did, I asked them if they had a warrant and they said no, they'd get one.
[39:06.200 --> 39:14.200]  I said well, get a warrant and I'll give you whatever the warrant calls for. And they insisted that I identify myself and I told them no.
[39:14.200 --> 39:22.200]  And they threatened to arrest my wife and I inside our yard for failure to identify and I told them no.
[39:22.200 --> 39:32.200]  And so what they did was they took down plate numbers and used those to run a search to determine identity.
[39:32.200 --> 39:34.200]  Right. And?
[39:34.200 --> 39:36.200]  Of course, inside the yard.
[39:36.200 --> 39:37.200]  Okay.
[39:37.200 --> 39:39.200]  Is that, can they do that?
[39:39.200 --> 39:41.200]  Again.
[39:41.200 --> 39:42.200]  Yeah.
[39:42.200 --> 39:47.200]  Okay.
[39:47.200 --> 39:59.200]  Now, then the other question I guess would be if they're conducting an investigation that they don't have any authority to conduct, can they still do that?
[39:59.200 --> 40:06.200]  Well, of course they can do it. The question is what can they do with it, whatever they gather from that investigation.
[40:06.200 --> 40:18.200]  The thing about it here is based upon the exact same scenario I have with the helping out somebody here with the Texas Environmental Commission,
[40:18.200 --> 40:29.200]  they have no authority to act on private individuals unless those private individuals are polluting public waterways and such.
[40:29.200 --> 40:30.200]  Right.
[40:30.200 --> 40:35.200]  They can't go after somebody that doesn't have one of their licenses or anything else.
[40:35.200 --> 40:44.200]  Now, in New Mexico, do you have to have any sort of permission to be in the livestock industry there?
[40:44.200 --> 40:49.200]  You have to have a license, a permit, be certified to be something or whatever.
[40:49.200 --> 40:53.200]  Yeah, no, I just posted the code on your page.
[40:53.200 --> 41:01.200]  No, I saw the code. That's not my question. That code is not everything. That code is one section out of the whole thing.
[41:01.200 --> 41:08.200]  That tells me what the purpose of the livestock board is. It doesn't answer my question about what are the requirements to participate
[41:08.200 --> 41:20.200]  and become a member of whatever the livestock thing is that that board is meant to oversee.
[41:20.200 --> 41:24.200]  I'm not a member of what the board is meant to oversee.
[41:24.200 --> 41:29.200]  Well, how can you say that when you don't know what the requirements are to be a member?
[41:29.200 --> 41:35.200]  If the membership requirement is that you're raising any kind of potential livestock in the state of New Mexico,
[41:35.200 --> 41:41.200]  then you very well could be whether you know it or want it to be or not according to the way the laws are written.
[41:41.200 --> 41:48.200]  If they're not charging you a fee to participate, okay, then they are going to be able to get away with that
[41:48.200 --> 41:51.200]  because they didn't have to charge you anything.
[41:51.200 --> 41:59.200]  They could simply say, look, we can protect the animals in the entire state no matter what their purpose is.
[41:59.200 --> 42:00.200]  You see what I'm saying?
[42:00.200 --> 42:02.200]  That's what they're claiming.
[42:02.200 --> 42:06.200]  I know that's what they're claiming, but that's the reason for my question.
[42:06.200 --> 42:12.200]  They tried to get us to fill out an affidavit of ownership, which we declined.
[42:12.200 --> 42:19.200]  Okay, again, that doesn't answer my question and it isn't helping you.
[42:19.200 --> 42:29.200]  You need to find out what this board is required to govern and whatever it is that it's meant to oversee.
[42:29.200 --> 42:38.200]  We know what its duties are according to what you posted, but that isn't everything.
[42:38.200 --> 42:39.200]  Okay.
[42:39.200 --> 42:41.200]  All right, so you're going to have to do some digging.
[42:41.200 --> 42:43.200]  You're going to have to do some dot connecting.
[42:43.200 --> 42:50.200]  And I will, but wouldn't it be, wouldn't the burden be on them to prove that I was engaged in that activity?
[42:50.200 --> 42:55.200]  How are you going to know what burden they have if you don't know how they get you there?
[42:55.200 --> 43:02.200]  If they can just say it and you don't have any way to say judge the law does not support that conclusion, then what?
[43:02.200 --> 43:05.200]  Okay.
[43:05.200 --> 43:08.200]  Okay.
[43:08.200 --> 43:09.200]  Very good.
[43:09.200 --> 43:10.200]  Okay.
[43:10.200 --> 43:11.200]  All right, I'll look into that.
[43:11.200 --> 43:12.200]  Thank you very much.
[43:12.200 --> 43:13.200]  You're welcome.
[43:13.200 --> 43:14.200]  Good luck, man.
[43:14.200 --> 43:15.200]  You're welcome.
[43:15.200 --> 43:16.200]  Thank you.
[43:16.200 --> 43:17.200]  All right.
[43:17.200 --> 43:25.200]  Again, folks, call in number 5126461984 if you want to call and get in line with a question or whatever.
[43:25.200 --> 43:29.200]  In the meantime, we appear to have Truth Raider on the line.
[43:29.200 --> 43:33.200]  What can we do for you, Carl?
[43:33.200 --> 43:34.200]  Never mind.
[43:34.200 --> 43:35.200]  I got music.
[43:35.200 --> 43:37.200]  Hang on and I'll get back with you when we get back from the break.
[43:37.200 --> 43:38.200]  Okay.
[43:38.200 --> 43:41.200]  All right, folks, this is Rule of the Law Radio.
[43:41.200 --> 43:43.200]  Monday night show with your host Eddie Craig.
[43:43.200 --> 43:46.200]  I would like for y'all to give us a call, get in line, whatever it is you would like to do.
[43:46.200 --> 43:50.200]  If you would like to talk or ask a question or bring up some issue or whatever, that's okay.
[43:50.200 --> 43:51.200]  That's what we're here for.
[43:51.200 --> 44:00.200]  Y'all hang on and we'll be right back after this break.
[44:00.200 --> 44:03.200]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[44:03.200 --> 44:14.200]  Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary, the affordable, easy-to-understand four-CD course that will show you how in 24 hours, step-by-step.
[44:14.200 --> 44:18.200]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing.
[44:18.200 --> 44:22.200]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[44:22.200 --> 44:27.200]  Thousands have won with our step-by-step course and now you can, too.
[44:27.200 --> 44:34.200]  Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case-winning experience.
[44:34.200 --> 44:43.200]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand about the principles and practices that control our American courts.
[44:43.200 --> 44:52.200]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases, pro se tactics, and much more.
[44:52.200 --> 45:02.200]  Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner or call toll-free 866-LAW-EZ.
[45:02.200 --> 45:10.200]  At Capital Coin and Bullion, our mission is to be your preferred shopping destination by delivering excellent customer service and outstanding value at an affordable price.
[45:10.200 --> 45:16.200]  We provide a wide assortment of favorite products featuring a great selection of high quality coins and precious metals.
[45:16.200 --> 45:20.200]  We cater to beginners in coin collecting as well as large transactions for investors.
[45:20.200 --> 45:25.200]  We believe in educating our customers with resources from top accredited metal dealers and journalists.
[45:25.200 --> 45:28.200]  If we don't have what you're looking for, we can find it.
[45:28.200 --> 45:33.200]  In addition, we carry popular young Jevity products such as Beyond Tangy Tangerine and Pollen Burst.
[45:33.200 --> 45:38.200]  We also offer One World Way, Mountain House Storeable Foods, Berkey Water Products,
[45:38.200 --> 45:40.200]  ammunition at 10% above wholesale, and more.
[45:40.200 --> 45:44.200]  We broker metals IRA accounts and we also accept bitcoins as payment.
[45:44.200 --> 45:47.200]  Call us at 512-646-6440.
[45:47.200 --> 45:52.200]  We're located at 7304 Burnett Road, Suite A, about a half mile south of Anderson.
[45:52.200 --> 45:55.200]  We're open Monday through Friday, 10 to 6, Saturdays, 10 to 2.
[45:55.200 --> 46:22.200]  Visit us at CapitalCoinandBullion.com or call 512-646-6440.
[46:25.200 --> 46:35.200]  We're open Monday through Friday, 10 to 6, Saturdays, 10 to 2.
[46:35.200 --> 46:51.200]  Visit us at CapitalCoinandBullion.com or call 512-646-6440.
[46:51.200 --> 47:16.200]  Visit us at CapitalCoinandBullion.com or call 512-646-6440.
[47:16.200 --> 47:26.200]  We're open Monday through Friday, 10 to 2.
[47:26.200 --> 47:37.200]  Visit us at CapitalCoinandBullion.com or call 512-646-1984.
[47:37.200 --> 47:47.200]  That's some information I left you a message last night, and I'm just following up on what I left you in the message from last night.
[47:47.200 --> 47:54.200]  That's some information from the City of Milwaukee concerning the municipal traffic orchard.
[47:54.200 --> 48:00.200]  Okay, well I haven't heard the message, which is the point I'm trying to make, so what are we talking about?
[48:00.200 --> 48:07.200]  She has a contract with the City of Milwaukee.
[48:07.200 --> 48:08.200]  Who does?
[48:08.200 --> 48:10.200]  The municipal judge.
[48:10.200 --> 48:11.200]  Okay.
[48:11.200 --> 48:18.200]  From January 23rd, 2014 to January 23rd, 2016 and nothing further.
[48:18.200 --> 48:21.200]  That's the information I was able to receive.
[48:21.200 --> 48:29.200]  Does Milwaukee require municipal judges to be under contract, or is that just something they did in that particular instance?
[48:29.200 --> 48:32.200]  Is this the best of the information I know?
[48:32.200 --> 48:34.200]  This is the most current record that we have.
[48:34.200 --> 48:35.200]  I don't know.
[48:35.200 --> 48:37.200]  Okay, well, wait a minute.
[48:37.200 --> 48:39.200]  Well, first off, you're supposed to be in Oregon.
[48:39.200 --> 48:40.200]  What are we talking about?
[48:40.200 --> 48:42.200]  Where are we talking about?
[48:42.200 --> 48:46.200]  We're talking about Milwaukee, part of the carry organ.
[48:46.200 --> 48:47.200]  Oh, okay.
[48:47.200 --> 48:50.200]  When you said Milwaukee, I thought we were talking about Wisconsin.
[48:50.200 --> 48:53.200]  We were like, okay, well, why are we talking about that?
[48:53.200 --> 49:02.200]  Well, I'm not really visible over the radio, but okay.
[49:02.200 --> 49:14.200]  Anyway, back to my point here, where does a law require a municipal judge to have a contract in order to serve as a municipal judge?
[49:14.200 --> 49:19.200]  There's a public resolution number.
[49:19.200 --> 49:21.200]  Resolution is not a law.
[49:21.200 --> 49:29.200]  Resolution is an internal agreement between separate parts of government, usually the houses of the legislature.
[49:29.200 --> 49:32.200]  Or in this case, it would be city council.
[49:32.200 --> 49:34.200]  But city councils don't have houses.
[49:34.200 --> 49:35.200]  They're not usually divided up.
[49:35.200 --> 49:37.200]  They're usually all in one.
[49:37.200 --> 49:43.200]  So it's a single, it's a joint resolution by them requiring contracts for long term appointment of judges.
[49:43.200 --> 49:47.200]  Okay, is this woman supposed to be appointed long term?
[49:47.200 --> 49:52.200]  Or is she now just temporary filling in until somebody comes in with a new contract?
[49:52.200 --> 50:02.200]  Either way, is there an actual requirement?
[50:02.200 --> 50:04.200]  That's what I need to find out.
[50:04.200 --> 50:18.200]  That's all of the initial information that I have is that it's only, it's a two year term from the 23rd, January 2014, 23rd, 2016, two year term.
[50:18.200 --> 50:20.200]  And there's nothing, there's nothing current after that.
[50:20.200 --> 50:26.200]  There's no record of her renewing that agreement, contract or whatever it may be.
[50:26.200 --> 50:28.200]  And that's what I have so far.
[50:28.200 --> 50:33.200]  And there's apparently no law that says that makes any difference whatsoever.
[50:33.200 --> 50:49.200]  There's also nothing that says that they can't amend their agreement verbally or after the fact to extend her tenure beyond a certain time frame until they either get a replacement or they do a new contract or they just did away with the idea of needing the contract.
[50:49.200 --> 50:52.200]  Have you read the contract?
[50:52.200 --> 51:04.200]  I have this right here with from what they, it's called the resolution number.
[51:04.200 --> 51:07.200]  The resolution passed by the city is not the contract.
[51:07.200 --> 51:10.200]  Have you read the employment contract?
[51:10.200 --> 51:17.200]  The one between the judge and the city.
[51:17.200 --> 51:19.200]  I'm just reading what's on this paper.
[51:19.200 --> 51:24.200]  Again, Raider, I don't care what's on the paper if it's not what I'm asking about.
[51:24.200 --> 51:26.200]  Is it the fricking contract?
[51:26.200 --> 51:28.200]  Yes or no?
[51:28.200 --> 51:30.200]  What?
[51:30.200 --> 51:31.200]  I don't know.
[51:31.200 --> 51:33.200]  What do you mean you don't know?
[51:33.200 --> 51:37.200]  If it says resolution, we're not talking about a contract.
[51:37.200 --> 51:43.200]  We're talking about some act of the city council.
[51:43.200 --> 51:44.200]  Yes, sir.
[51:44.200 --> 51:47.200]  Well, this is the best way that I thought they would find.
[51:47.200 --> 51:54.200]  The question to my question then is no, I have not read the agreement between the judge and the city, right?
[51:54.200 --> 51:56.200]  Right.
[51:56.200 --> 51:58.200]  Okay, that's all I wanted.
[51:58.200 --> 52:01.200]  Now let's see where that takes us.
[52:01.200 --> 52:13.200]  You, because you have not read it, do not know what the terms of the agreement between that judge and the city are, how those terms may be altered, under what conditions and circumstances they may be altered,
[52:13.200 --> 52:19.200]  what implications are made by its being out of date?
[52:19.200 --> 52:22.200]  You don't know.
[52:22.200 --> 52:25.200]  No, that's just a record that I received.
[52:25.200 --> 52:28.200]  I'll probably bring it to your attention and see what you've got.
[52:28.200 --> 52:29.200]  Okay, that's fine.
[52:29.200 --> 52:38.200]  But unless you can show me where it is absolutely mandatory that a judge have a contract with the municipality before they can serve, I don't see how it's helping you.
[52:38.200 --> 52:40.200]  Okay.
[52:40.200 --> 53:09.200]  Okay, well, again, if you can't find something that says that contract's mandatory, I don't see how it affects our ability to sit there.
[53:09.200 --> 53:12.200]  Okay.
[53:12.200 --> 53:14.200]  Something I want to bring to your attention.
[53:14.200 --> 53:17.200]  So, that's what I got so far, but if it isn't...
[53:17.200 --> 53:19.200]  You realize I'm in Texas, right?
[53:19.200 --> 53:20.200]  Yeah, yeah.
[53:20.200 --> 53:26.200]  Okay, so it needs to be brought to my attention, why?
[53:26.200 --> 53:39.200]  Well, if it comes up that it is law that all the traffic tickets that she is adjudicated under the proponent to the evidence of her opinion, her legal opinion, it don't matter that they would all have to be overturning thrown out.
[53:39.200 --> 53:48.200]  Again, only if you can show that she was not authorized to sit there as a judge by some other mechanism.
[53:48.200 --> 53:56.200]  All right, I'll get further back to you concerning that, see what the information that I find in the discovery.
[53:56.200 --> 53:57.200]  Okay.
[53:57.200 --> 54:00.200]  Good luck.
[54:00.200 --> 54:01.200]  Thank you.
[54:01.200 --> 54:03.200]  Yeah, I'll see you next time.
[54:03.200 --> 54:06.200]  All right, bye-bye.
[54:06.200 --> 54:08.200]  All right.
[54:08.200 --> 54:12.200]  Since we don't have any other callers up on the board, I'm going to go back to my diatribe here.
[54:12.200 --> 54:29.200]  Okay, so when the courts of the state have taken it upon themselves to rewrite the law, to ignore the law, to write opinions that clearly ignore the law, that do not take into consideration the absence of pertinent and necessary elements of an alleged defense,
[54:29.200 --> 54:47.200]  or the state's requirement to both assert and prove them, then what you have is an organization of criminals undermining the Constitution of the state and the due process rights of the people of that state and the entire judicial department of that state.
[54:47.200 --> 54:50.200]  And that, believe me, ladies and gentlemen, is what we have in Texas.
[54:50.200 --> 54:54.200]  No yes, no ands, no buts.
[54:54.200 --> 55:03.200]  On any given day, I can point at any judge anywhere and say you don't know what the hell you're talking about.
[55:03.200 --> 55:11.200]  What you're saying is not what the law says and requires.
[55:11.200 --> 55:16.200]  And that's unfortunate that I can do that.
[55:16.200 --> 55:24.200]  I have sat and I have read Texas court opinions till my eyes feel like they're burning out of my head.
[55:24.200 --> 55:40.200]  And all it does is make me angrier and angrier and angrier that we allow these people to remain where they are because they are utterly incompetent, or they are utterly corrupt, or they're just plain frickin' stupid.
[55:40.200 --> 55:51.200]  They cannot forego the possibility that they are a combination of all of the above as well.
[55:51.200 --> 55:58.200]  When the system provides no means of correction for itself, then we've got a problem.
[55:58.200 --> 56:11.200]  When the people refuse to acknowledge the existence of the problems and thus force the system to provide a means for correction, we have a problem, which brings us to something else.
[56:11.200 --> 56:18.200]  The United States Supreme Court doctrine on well-established law.
[56:18.200 --> 56:34.200]  Now, when you read up on what constitutes well-established law, you find that there is a severe problem with how it is made to function once again within and by the courts themselves.
[56:34.200 --> 56:39.200]  What this means in most cases is very short and simple.
[56:39.200 --> 56:52.200]  The way the Supreme Court of the United States has worded the doctrine on clearly established or well-established law is this.
[56:52.200 --> 57:05.200]  If we have never ruled on it in a given instance for a particular set of circumstances, then it is not clearly established law.
[57:05.200 --> 57:24.200]  Which means that if you are harmed in a way that the Supreme Court has never directly addressed, even though you are 100% right, you will never be able to collect on the harm done to you because it was not a clearly established precedent at the time.
[57:24.200 --> 57:37.200]  Thus, not clearly established law that would have made the governmental entity or anyone else harming you liable for that.
[57:37.200 --> 57:44.200]  Now, that's where I have a problem with how the courts have set this up and it's very simple.
[57:44.200 --> 58:05.200]  When the United States Supreme Court is saying that you have no rights under the Constitution if we have not ruled that you do, then what they are doing is replacing the supremacy clause of the Constitution themselves as being the law of the land,
[58:05.200 --> 58:20.200]  either at the federal level or within any given state with Supreme Court opinions being the ultimate law everywhere rather than the Constitution.
[58:20.200 --> 58:38.200]  This once again is proof positive the attorneys are undermining the Constitution for their own power and gain because when a court says clearly established law is only what we say, then it throws out the supreme law of the land clause of every Constitution.
[58:38.200 --> 58:41.200]  Am I the only one that sees a problem there?
[58:41.200 --> 58:50.200]  Y'all hang on, we'll be right back after this break and continue on with this.
[58:50.200 --> 58:58.200]  The Bible remains the most popular book in the world yet countless readers are frustrated because they struggle to understand it.
[58:58.200 --> 59:06.200]  Some new translations try to help by simplifying the text but in the process can compromise the profound meaning of the Scripture.
[59:06.200 --> 59:17.200]  Enter the recovery version. First this new translation is extremely faithful and accurate but the real story is the more than 9000 explanatory footnotes.
[59:17.200 --> 59:27.200]  Difficult and profound passages are opened up in a marvelous way providing an entrance into the riches of the word beyond which you've ever experienced before.
[59:27.200 --> 59:43.200]  Bibles for America would like to give you a free recovery version simply for the asking. This comprehensive yet compact study Bible is yours just by calling us toll free at 1-888-551-0102
[59:43.200 --> 59:50.200]  or by ordering online at freestudybible.com. That's freestudybible.com.
[59:50.200 --> 01:00:00.200]  You are listening to the Logos Radio Network. Logosradionetwork.com
[01:00:00.200 --> 01:00:06.200]  The following news flash is brought to you by The Lone Star Lowdown.
[01:00:06.200 --> 01:00:21.200]  Logos markets for Monday the 22nd of July 2019 open with precious metals, gold $1429 an ounce, silver $16.45 an ounce, copper $2.75 an ounce, oil, Texas crude $55.63 a barrel,
[01:00:21.200 --> 01:00:46.200]  and cryptos in order of market cap, Bitcoin Core $10,566.52, Ethereum $227.26, XRP Ripple $0.33, Litecoin $100.31, and Bitcoin Cash is at $324.10 a crypto coin.
[01:00:46.200 --> 01:00:57.200]  Today in history, the year 1916, the Preparedness Day bombing, a time suitcase bomb, was detonated on Market Street in San Francisco during the World War I Preparedness Day Parade,
[01:00:57.200 --> 01:01:00.200]  killing 10 and injuring 40.
[01:01:00.200 --> 01:01:04.200]  Today in history.
[01:01:04.200 --> 01:01:18.200]  In recent news, since Governor Greg Abbott signed House Bill 1325 legalizing Hempett attacks his law back in June, county prosecutors around the state including Houston, Austin, San Antonio have been dropping marijuana possession charges and even refusing to file new ones,
[01:01:18.200 --> 01:01:24.200]  since they are stipulating that they do not have the time or the laboratory equipment to test the herb for THC.
[01:01:24.200 --> 01:01:33.200]  Margaret Moore, the Travis County District Attorney announced earlier this month that she was dismissing 32 felony possession and delivery of marijuana cases because of the law.
[01:01:33.200 --> 01:01:47.200]  Mr. Abbott and other state officials including the Attorney General stipulated in a letter to county district attorneys back on Thursday that marijuana has not been decriminalized in Texas and that these actions demonstrate a misunderstanding of how HB 1325 works,
[01:01:47.200 --> 01:02:01.200]  as well as other cities too, like the district attorney in El Paso, Cayma Esparza, a Democrat who also stated earlier this month that the law, quote, will not have an effect on the prosecution of marijuana cases in El Paso.
[01:02:01.200 --> 01:02:13.200]  However, the issue was succinctly summarized by Mr. Brandon Ball, an assistant public defender in Harris County who stated that, quote, the law is constantly changing on what makes something illegal based on its chemical makeup.
[01:02:13.200 --> 01:02:22.200]  It's important that if someone is charged with something, the test matches what they're charged with.
[01:02:22.200 --> 01:02:39.200]  A paper by Tulane University identified a five and a half inch American pocket shark as the first of its kind in the Gulf of Mexico, the specimen being only the second pocket shark ever captured or recorded with the other one being found way back in 1979 in the East Pacific Ocean.
[01:02:39.200 --> 01:02:51.200]  According to the university paper, the shark secretes a luminous fluid from a gland near its front fins for the purpose it is hypothesized to lure and prey who may be drawn into the glow.
[01:02:51.200 --> 01:03:00.200]  This is Book Roadie with your lowdown for July 22, 2019.
[01:03:00.200 --> 01:03:28.200]  All right, folks, we are back. This is Rule of Law Radio. The calling number is 512-646-1984.
[01:03:28.200 --> 01:03:32.200]  All right, real quick, I want to read something to you here.
[01:03:32.200 --> 01:03:38.200]  How can courts tell when a violation of constitutional rights is justified enough to overcome qualified immunity?
[01:03:38.200 --> 01:03:56.200]  Now, qualified immunity and the clearly established law go hand in hand with the scenario I was talking about, about your rights being harmed by a public official, a cop, or anyone in any way dealing with color of law and the governmental entities that perpetrate color of law offenses.
[01:03:56.200 --> 01:04:06.200]  That's where this goes to, the double-sided sword of clearly established law and qualified immunity.
[01:04:06.200 --> 01:04:18.200]  The Supreme Court tells lower courts to determine whether the violation ran counter to clearly established law, a term that the justices interpret in the narrowest possible ways.
[01:04:18.200 --> 01:04:27.200]  Will it signal that he found the premise absurd because it effectively requires that there be precedent for every imaginable constitutional violation?
[01:04:27.200 --> 01:04:31.200]  Otherwise, the offender can't be held responsible.
[01:04:31.200 --> 01:04:46.200]  To some observers, qualified immunity smacks of unqualified impunity, letting public officials duck consequences for bad behavior no matter how palpably unreasonable, as long as they were the first to behave badly, he wrote.
[01:04:46.200 --> 01:04:50.200]  Merely proving a constitutional deprivation won't cut it.
[01:04:50.200 --> 01:05:00.200]  Plaintiffs must cite functionally identical precedent that places the legal question beyond debate to every reasonable officer.
[01:05:00.200 --> 01:05:16.200]  Now, that right there is the language that says that the Supreme Court precedent, or any other controlling court's precedent, is superior to the law of the land via the constitutions.
[01:05:16.200 --> 01:05:33.200]  Because here it's saying that even though the Constitution itself specifically prohibits this, and thus in its own black and white lettering is clearly established law, because the court has not put their stamp of approval on it, it doesn't matter.
[01:05:33.200 --> 01:05:35.200]  It is irrelevant.
[01:05:35.200 --> 01:05:41.200]  It is up to the court to decide what it means, why it means that, and who has access to it.
[01:05:41.200 --> 01:05:47.200]  And that, ladies and gentlemen, is not how this system of government was meant to work.
[01:05:47.200 --> 01:05:55.200]  That is the courts making law all on their own, which they are absolutely prohibited from doing.
[01:05:55.200 --> 01:05:57.200]  And yet here we are.
[01:05:57.200 --> 01:06:11.200]  If you are not yet believing that the attorneys are the problem in every single case, then you are not even trying to pay attention.
[01:06:11.200 --> 01:06:16.200]  You're not even trying.
[01:06:16.200 --> 01:06:28.200]  This is the kind of crap we wound up with by sitting quietly in our armchairs and pretending this stuff was not going south a long time ago when this crap started up.
[01:06:28.200 --> 01:06:29.200]  We should have stood up then.
[01:06:29.200 --> 01:06:32.200]  We should have said no.
[01:06:32.200 --> 01:06:36.200]  And yet here we are.
[01:06:36.200 --> 01:06:39.200]  1984 was supposed to be fiction.
[01:06:39.200 --> 01:06:43.200]  It was not supposed to be a guide to government.
[01:06:43.200 --> 01:06:45.200]  But it's what it's become.
[01:06:45.200 --> 01:06:48.200]  And we've allowed it.
[01:06:48.200 --> 01:06:49.200]  All right.
[01:06:49.200 --> 01:06:52.200]  That said, next caller up is Charles in Texas.
[01:06:52.200 --> 01:06:54.200]  Charles, what do you got?
[01:06:54.200 --> 01:06:57.200]  I just want to switch gears a little bit.
[01:06:57.200 --> 01:06:58.200]  Okay.
[01:06:58.200 --> 01:07:01.200]  I switch to me by the fan.
[01:07:01.200 --> 01:07:04.200]  And correct me if I'm wrong.
[01:07:04.200 --> 01:07:12.200]  Did you not say that there were steps to removing your vehicle from, or your car from state registration?
[01:07:12.200 --> 01:07:15.200]  Well, there are no steps in the law for doing it.
[01:07:15.200 --> 01:07:24.200]  I can tell you what I did, but I can't tell you that there's a law that says this is how you do it.
[01:07:24.200 --> 01:07:26.200]  No, I mean, that would be, that would be fine.
[01:07:26.200 --> 01:07:39.200]  Because I think if we took away the power of the government to control how we use our property, we would go a whole lot further to get into some of the steps that we need to get done.
[01:07:39.200 --> 01:07:41.200]  Well, here's the problem.
[01:07:41.200 --> 01:07:49.200]  If you don't know this subject inside and out, just doing the steps that I would give you aren't going to help you.
[01:07:49.200 --> 01:07:53.200]  If you think that's going to somehow stop the cops from pulling you over, you're wrong.
[01:07:53.200 --> 01:07:54.200]  You're dead wrong.
[01:07:54.200 --> 01:07:59.200]  I know that's going to be a battle no matter what.
[01:07:59.200 --> 01:08:01.200]  Yeah, but then you still got to take it to court.
[01:08:01.200 --> 01:08:03.200]  And then the issue becomes there.
[01:08:03.200 --> 01:08:09.200]  What do you know about the law and the procedure and everything else that you can force them to pay attention to?
[01:08:09.200 --> 01:08:13.200]  This is not something that I advise people to take up lightly and just jump into.
[01:08:13.200 --> 01:08:14.200]  I never have.
[01:08:14.200 --> 01:08:18.200]  Everybody's got to make their choice, of course, and that's fine by me.
[01:08:18.200 --> 01:08:28.200]  But I'm telling you up front, if you're going to do this, you better be well prepared long before you ever take that step.
[01:08:28.200 --> 01:08:36.200]  Well, I've been trying to get prepared and be ready.
[01:08:36.200 --> 01:08:39.200]  Well, what are you saying I've been trying to be prepared?
[01:08:39.200 --> 01:08:41.200]  What does that mean?
[01:08:41.200 --> 01:08:44.200]  I've been studying the law.
[01:08:44.200 --> 01:08:45.200]  What law?
[01:08:45.200 --> 01:08:47.200]  I've been studying the stuff that you've given us.
[01:08:47.200 --> 01:08:49.200]  Text your transportation codes.
[01:08:49.200 --> 01:08:50.200]  Okay.
[01:08:50.200 --> 01:08:55.200]  I go through what you've been providing through your seminars.
[01:08:55.200 --> 01:09:00.200]  I haven't had much of a chance to practice it, at least that far.
[01:09:00.200 --> 01:09:02.200]  And how long have you been doing this?
[01:09:02.200 --> 01:09:07.200]  Also about four or five years now.
[01:09:07.200 --> 01:09:08.200]  Okay.
[01:09:08.200 --> 01:09:13.200]  And how well do you know the code of criminal procedure?
[01:09:13.200 --> 01:09:16.200]  Take care on that subject, yes.
[01:09:16.200 --> 01:09:17.200]  Okay.
[01:09:17.200 --> 01:09:24.200]  Well, that's the first thing you're going to have to know, even as well as the law itself, because when this starts, that's the first place you're going.
[01:09:24.200 --> 01:09:39.200]  You don't know what the procedures are, nothing in the transportation code information is going to help you because if you're not timely and diligent in filing your pleadings, making your arguments, and so on and so forth, you're kind of hosed.
[01:09:39.200 --> 01:09:47.200]  Because all they got to do is get you on time every single time.
[01:09:47.200 --> 01:09:50.200]  I got chance to stand.
[01:09:50.200 --> 01:09:54.200]  But in any case, the steps, they're not very hard.
[01:09:54.200 --> 01:09:56.200]  You get the title to the car.
[01:09:56.200 --> 01:10:00.200]  You send in a certified copy of that title.
[01:10:00.200 --> 01:10:07.200]  You ask the Secretary of State to determine whether or not there are any outstanding loans or liens against that title.
[01:10:07.200 --> 01:10:16.200]  And to send you back a certified statement that no such liens or loans exist in relation to that title.
[01:10:16.200 --> 01:10:17.200]  Okay.
[01:10:17.200 --> 01:10:26.200]  And in that paperwork, you're going to specifically state that you wish to remove this car from the jurisdiction of this state.
[01:10:26.200 --> 01:10:27.200]  Do not say the state of Texas.
[01:10:27.200 --> 01:10:28.200]  Do not say anything else.
[01:10:28.200 --> 01:10:32.200]  The phrase you use is this state.
[01:10:32.200 --> 01:10:34.200]  Okay.
[01:10:34.200 --> 01:10:36.200]  Okay.
[01:10:36.200 --> 01:10:46.200]  And what they are supposed to do is take that title that you send in and convert it into a different kind of title and send that back to you.
[01:10:46.200 --> 01:10:49.200]  In place of the one that you sent in.
[01:10:49.200 --> 01:10:52.200]  Which now becomes your new original title.
[01:10:52.200 --> 01:10:53.200]  Okay.
[01:10:53.200 --> 01:10:55.200]  That's the third part of the allodial.
[01:10:55.200 --> 01:11:01.200]  It shows that there are no outstanding lien holders against the property.
[01:11:01.200 --> 01:11:02.200]  Understand.
[01:11:02.200 --> 01:11:04.200]  Okay.
[01:11:04.200 --> 01:11:15.200]  And the problem you're going to have though is the same as it's always been the fact that you have a title, a legal title to the car is not the same as an
[01:11:15.200 --> 01:11:17.200]  equitable title to the car.
[01:11:17.200 --> 01:11:25.200]  Legal title gives you only certain rights, whereas equitable title gives you every right.
[01:11:25.200 --> 01:11:26.200]  Okay.
[01:11:26.200 --> 01:11:27.200]  Yes, sir.
[01:11:27.200 --> 01:11:34.200]  So you need to understand the distinctive differences between legal title and equitable title.
[01:11:34.200 --> 01:11:36.200]  Or equity title in some cases.
[01:11:36.200 --> 01:11:37.200]  Okay.
[01:11:37.200 --> 01:11:38.200]  Yes, sir.
[01:11:38.200 --> 01:11:52.200]  Because, again, you can also ask that the Secretary of State determine whether or not this car is currently registered for use as a motor vehicle in the state of Texas.
[01:11:52.200 --> 01:12:00.200]  And they're going to send you to the Department of Transportation who is responsible for maintaining those records.
[01:12:00.200 --> 01:12:02.200]  Okay.
[01:12:02.200 --> 01:12:03.200]  Mm-hmm.
[01:12:03.200 --> 01:12:12.200]  And what you do is you remove it from the domain of being registered for the purpose of use as a motor vehicle on the highways, et cetera, et cetera.
[01:12:12.200 --> 01:12:14.200]  And that's when your fight's going to start.
[01:12:14.200 --> 01:12:17.200]  Because once, after that point, you have no choice.
[01:12:17.200 --> 01:12:23.200]  Once you get that certification back from them, you have no choice but to take every plate and sticker off of that car.
[01:12:23.200 --> 01:12:25.200]  Otherwise, you're committing fraud.
[01:12:25.200 --> 01:12:35.200]  You're attempting to use state-owned property to protect yourself from some offense that they're going to attempt to charge you with.
[01:12:35.200 --> 01:12:36.200]  Okay.
[01:12:36.200 --> 01:12:41.200]  And they're going to be able to nail you on false and fictitious plates if you leave these on there.
[01:12:41.200 --> 01:12:43.200]  Guaranteed they will be able to nail you.
[01:12:43.200 --> 01:12:44.200]  Okay.
[01:12:44.200 --> 01:12:45.200]  Mm-hmm.
[01:12:45.200 --> 01:12:50.200]  So now once you've taken all those stickers and plates off of your car, you are a moving target.
[01:12:50.200 --> 01:12:53.200]  And you better understand that.
[01:12:53.200 --> 01:12:55.200]  And you better be prepared for it.
[01:12:55.200 --> 01:13:07.200]  From the moment you get stopped all the way up to your day in court and the appeals beyond the day in court, you better be prepared.
[01:13:07.200 --> 01:13:10.200]  It's an all-in situation.
[01:13:10.200 --> 01:13:12.200]  You better make sure you write for the whole front.
[01:13:12.200 --> 01:13:15.200]  Yeah, there is no dip the toe in to get the feel of the pawn.
[01:13:15.200 --> 01:13:16.200]  No, there is not.
[01:13:16.200 --> 01:13:20.200]  Yeah.
[01:13:20.200 --> 01:13:22.200]  I understand.
[01:13:22.200 --> 01:13:42.200]  I think it's time that we need to stop living in fear of what the state can do to us and start to put the fear of dodging for people that we have, that we first have hired to work for us.
[01:13:42.200 --> 01:13:53.200]  I'd rather put the fear of the poor house into them. I'd rather make it where we can absolutely turn them into destitute wards of the state for harming us without lawful authority.
[01:13:53.200 --> 01:14:01.200]  That's what I would prefer because they would have to believe in God to get the fear of God, don't you think?
[01:14:01.200 --> 01:14:04.200]  You got a point. You got me beat on that.
[01:14:04.200 --> 01:14:15.200]  But every damn one of them knows what the poor house is like if they got no money, or at least they can learn really quick, and they won't have a choice but to believe that.
[01:14:15.200 --> 01:14:24.200]  Yeah, because I think nothing talks to them more than the great gods when their wallets harm.
[01:14:24.200 --> 01:14:30.200]  It's amazing how you start believing in something when your wallets get dinged up.
[01:14:30.200 --> 01:14:38.200]  Well, like I said, these folks, as long as they are responsible for watching over themselves, there is no accountability.
[01:14:38.200 --> 01:14:44.200]  There is no justice. There is nothing for the people of Texas to do to keep these people under control.
[01:14:44.200 --> 01:14:50.200]  And we are living in an era that shows that to be absolutely true.
[01:14:50.200 --> 01:15:11.200]  I think we're close to, I think you're right, I think we're real close to people standing up and getting to a point of momless anarchy where we start doing like they did in Tennessee at one time, where the people stood up and they took on the sheriff's department.
[01:15:11.200 --> 01:15:21.200]  I think that's what happened, that the townspeople took on the sheriff's department for illegal action and they took some of the people hostage.
[01:15:21.200 --> 01:15:30.200]  But on another subject, real quick, because I know you got, I got guts to go because you got other people waiting.
[01:15:30.200 --> 01:15:41.200]  I want to progress on your 7-hour 2.0 because I'm really interested in making sure I can get a copy of that.
[01:15:41.200 --> 01:15:52.200]  Well, I'm working on it. I've got literally hundreds and hundreds of files I'm trying to collect into the book.
[01:15:52.200 --> 01:16:03.200]  And then once I have the book together, then I've got to sit down and integrate the legal pleadings. And I'm going to rewrite every single legal pleading from scratch all over again.
[01:16:03.200 --> 01:16:18.200]  I'm going to take everything that I had before. It's all going out the window and I'm going to sit down and go back through all the changes that have been made in the code of criminal procedure, the transportation code, all of it, and flesh out all new arguments and all new documents to go with it.
[01:16:18.200 --> 01:16:23.200]  Well, if you can't wait to make a recommendation.
[01:16:23.200 --> 01:16:26.200]  What do you got playing in the background?
[01:16:26.200 --> 01:16:29.200]  Oh, my brother's watching a TV show.
[01:16:29.200 --> 01:16:35.200]  Okay, can you be elsewhere or turn it down? Because I can't hardly hear you because of it.
[01:16:35.200 --> 01:16:37.200]  Oh, I killed it.
[01:16:37.200 --> 01:16:38.200]  Okay.
[01:16:38.200 --> 01:16:45.200]  Alright, but anyhow, yeah, if you're going to do this, it's an all-in deal, okay?
[01:16:45.200 --> 01:16:49.200]  I'll do it. If you need donations, let me know and I can send donations and I'll get started.
[01:16:49.200 --> 01:17:00.200]  We always need donations, man. I am flying under the radar here, so low right now that my belly's raw from the treetops. Y'all hang on and we'll be right back after the break.
[01:17:00.200 --> 01:17:05.200]  Are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters, or even lawsuits?
[01:17:05.200 --> 01:17:15.200]  Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Merris Proven Method. Michael Merris has won six cases in federal court against debt collectors and now you can win two.
[01:17:15.200 --> 01:17:21.200]  You'll get step-by-step instructions in plain English on how to win in court using federal civil rights statutes.
[01:17:21.200 --> 01:17:27.200]  What to do when contacted by phone, mail, or court summons? How to answer letters and phone calls?
[01:17:27.200 --> 01:17:30.200]  How to get debt collectors out of your credit report?
[01:17:30.200 --> 01:17:39.200]  Get the tables on them and make them pay you to go away. The Michael Merris Proven Method is the solution for how to stop debt collectors.
[01:17:39.200 --> 01:17:49.200]  Personal consultation is available as well. For more information, please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the blue Michael Merris banner or email Michael Merris at yahoo.com.
[01:17:49.200 --> 01:18:00.200]  That's ruleoflawradio.com or email m-i-c-h-a-e-l-m-i-r-r-a-s at yahoo.com to learn how to stop debt collectors now.
[01:18:00.200 --> 01:18:07.200]  I love logos. Without the shows on this network, I'd be almost as ignorant as my friends. I'm so addicted to the truth now that there's no going back.
[01:18:07.200 --> 01:18:13.200]  I need my truth spit. I'd be lost without logos and I really want to help keep this network on the air.
[01:18:13.200 --> 01:18:20.200]  I'd love to volunteer as a show producer, but I'm a bit of a Luddite and I really don't have any money to give because I spent it all on supplements.
[01:18:20.200 --> 01:18:22.200]  How can I help logos?
[01:18:22.200 --> 01:18:27.200]  Well, I'm glad you asked. Whenever you order anything from Amazon, you can help logos.
[01:18:27.200 --> 01:18:31.200]  We'd order new supplies or holiday gifts. First thing you do is clear your cookies.
[01:18:31.200 --> 01:18:37.200]  Now, go to LogosReguleNetwork.com. Click on the Amazon logo and bookmark it.
[01:18:37.200 --> 01:18:43.200]  Now, when you order anything from Amazon, you use that link and Logos gets a few pesos.
[01:18:43.200 --> 01:18:44.200]  Do I pay extra?
[01:18:44.200 --> 01:18:45.200]  No.
[01:18:45.200 --> 01:18:47.200]  Do you have to do anything different when I order?
[01:18:47.200 --> 01:18:48.200]  No.
[01:18:48.200 --> 01:18:49.200]  Can I use my Amazon Prime?
[01:18:49.200 --> 01:18:50.200]  No.
[01:18:50.200 --> 01:18:51.200]  I mean, yes.
[01:18:51.200 --> 01:18:57.200]  Wow. Giving without doing anything or spending any money. This is perfect. Thank you so much.
[01:18:57.200 --> 01:18:58.200]  We are Logos.
[01:18:58.200 --> 01:19:08.200]  Happy holidays, Logos.
[01:19:28.200 --> 01:19:43.200]  Thank you.
[01:19:43.200 --> 01:20:12.200]  All right, folks. We are back. This is Rule of Law Radio, the calling number 512-646-1984.
[01:20:12.200 --> 01:20:15.200]  And we are still talking with Charles in Texas.
[01:20:15.200 --> 01:20:17.200]  All right, Charles, go ahead.
[01:20:17.200 --> 01:20:26.200]  I was going to say, people, get off of the armchair quarterback to stand up and set up
[01:20:26.200 --> 01:20:27.200]  a big counter.
[01:20:27.200 --> 01:20:29.200]  What's Eddie doing?
[01:20:29.200 --> 01:20:36.200]  You know, I would like to be able to send you something, Eddie, to help you out if I can.
[01:20:36.200 --> 01:20:43.200]  You know, I sent you an email. I won't be able to send you something. I don't need anything
[01:20:43.200 --> 01:20:45.200]  back. I don't care.
[01:20:45.200 --> 01:20:47.200]  Well, I appreciate that.
[01:20:47.200 --> 01:20:53.200]  You let me know where to send it and I will make sure to send you something.
[01:20:53.200 --> 01:20:59.200]  Okay. Well, if all of you want them, anyone who does want to make a donation to me directly
[01:20:59.200 --> 01:21:06.200]  needs to go to the ruleoflawradio.com website, not to the logosradionetwork.com website.
[01:21:06.200 --> 01:21:11.200]  The donations on the rule of law radio website have a gold button under my name where you
[01:21:11.200 --> 01:21:14.200]  can make a direct donation if you're going to use a credit card.
[01:21:14.200 --> 01:21:20.200]  If you want to send a money order or silver, then I'll need to give you an actual address
[01:21:20.200 --> 01:21:24.200]  to send that to, in which case send me an email and I will do that.
[01:21:24.200 --> 01:21:29.200]  So whichever way you want to do it determines whatever works best.
[01:21:29.200 --> 01:21:34.200]  Okay, because I used to use PayPal because I know...
[01:21:34.200 --> 01:21:40.200]  Okay, you can do that with PayPal on the ruleoflawradio website. Just go to ruleoflawradio.com.
[01:21:40.200 --> 01:21:44.200]  Click the donations link at the top of the page or down the side.
[01:21:44.200 --> 01:21:49.200]  And then on the donations page, find where it says make a donation to Eddie and there's
[01:21:49.200 --> 01:21:56.200]  a gold button under that. Click that and it will flag that donation to come to me.
[01:21:56.200 --> 01:21:58.200]  Excellent, because I will make sure that...
[01:21:58.200 --> 01:22:01.200]  I will make sure that today because people...
[01:22:01.200 --> 01:22:05.200]  And I'm going to say that I know I'm probably speaking to the choir, but people stand up
[01:22:05.200 --> 01:22:08.200]  and be tired.
[01:22:08.200 --> 01:22:11.200]  Quit waiting for something to happen to you.
[01:22:11.200 --> 01:22:14.200]  You need to make it happen.
[01:22:14.200 --> 01:22:21.200]  And one of the ways I do that is I support people who all make it happen who have helped me personally.
[01:22:21.200 --> 01:22:24.200]  I mean, that's what Congress is.
[01:22:24.200 --> 01:22:25.200]  You're right. We've...
[01:22:25.200 --> 01:22:29.200]  Me too have been compliant and we've got back and we've waited and we let stuff happen
[01:22:29.200 --> 01:22:35.200]  to us instead of standing up and being counted to make it good for ourselves.
[01:22:35.200 --> 01:22:36.200]  You know...
[01:22:36.200 --> 01:22:41.200]  They're never going to give up the power they've taken willingly and that's never going to happen.
[01:22:41.200 --> 01:22:42.200]  Correct.
[01:22:42.200 --> 01:22:44.200]  It's never going to happen in human history.
[01:22:44.200 --> 01:22:50.200]  No government has ever, unless you want to count Marcus Aurelius in Gladiator.
[01:22:50.200 --> 01:22:57.200]  That's the only time where any form of government anywhere has ever attempted to give up the power.
[01:22:57.200 --> 01:23:02.200]  It's compiled within itself back to the people to whom it belonged.
[01:23:02.200 --> 01:23:04.200]  It's never happened.
[01:23:04.200 --> 01:23:06.200]  Never.
[01:23:06.200 --> 01:23:13.200]  There's always had to be a bloody war to get it back.
[01:23:13.200 --> 01:23:20.200]  I think we both agree that that kind of situation might be coming off real soon with everything we've seen.
[01:23:20.200 --> 01:23:25.200]  Oh, I've been saying that for quite a while now because it goes back to what John F. Kennedy said.
[01:23:25.200 --> 01:23:32.200]  He who makes peaceful resolution impossible makes violent revolution inevitable.
[01:23:32.200 --> 01:23:39.200]  And that is exactly what they're doing because there is no way to make peaceful resolution for what's being done to us.
[01:23:39.200 --> 01:23:44.200]  And I just gave you a ton of examples as to why that is.
[01:23:44.200 --> 01:23:47.200]  You're very correct.
[01:23:47.200 --> 01:23:49.200]  I mean, it's very...
[01:23:49.200 --> 01:23:53.200]  I mean, a friend of mine is here in Dallas named Steve Tender.
[01:23:53.200 --> 01:23:56.200]  He does a live stream on YouTube.
[01:23:56.200 --> 01:24:00.200]  He got related live on his live stream.
[01:24:00.200 --> 01:24:06.200]  He got swatted on his live stream.
[01:24:06.200 --> 01:24:10.200]  I mean, he's sitting there watching his live stream and they come in.
[01:24:10.200 --> 01:24:12.200]  They take him out of his own garage.
[01:24:12.200 --> 01:24:17.200]  They've come to him on the ground in his front yard of his own house.
[01:24:17.200 --> 01:24:24.200]  All because somebody made a call saying he's starting to kill himself on live stream.
[01:24:24.200 --> 01:24:30.200]  And it doesn't matter if he's right.
[01:24:30.200 --> 01:24:36.200]  The LCD was there and they swatted him and they put him on the ground.
[01:24:36.200 --> 01:24:43.200]  Well, how serious can you be that you're going to kill yourself if you're willing to get out there and announce it first?
[01:24:43.200 --> 01:24:48.200]  Especially on a forum like that where it's going to be seen by so many and somebody's going to try to prevent it when they see it.
[01:24:48.200 --> 01:24:50.200]  And you ought to know that.
[01:24:50.200 --> 01:24:55.200]  Yep. I mean, the man is...
[01:24:55.200 --> 01:25:03.200]  He's a First Amendment auditor, not really an auditor, but he's supported that kind of community.
[01:25:03.200 --> 01:25:11.200]  But he's also trained Dallas in self-exempt techniques.
[01:25:11.200 --> 01:25:13.200]  So he knew how to control situations.
[01:25:13.200 --> 01:25:21.200]  So from the moment they actually came in and swatted him, he actually had more or less control of the situation.
[01:25:21.200 --> 01:25:34.200]  But the fact is they came in, I mean, on hearsay, swatted, just took him down to the ground, handcuffed him in front of his family, in front of his live stream audience.
[01:25:34.200 --> 01:25:44.200]  And I'm going to tell you something, that these people, our rights don't mean much to any of these people when they put a badge on.
[01:25:44.200 --> 01:25:48.200]  No. The moment they put the badge on, they consider themselves at war with us.
[01:25:48.200 --> 01:26:03.200]  And as far as their concern, coming back from where they've been to become cops, where the people they're over there to kill, at the behest of those who want to make a profit from it, those people don't have any rights either in their eyes.
[01:26:03.200 --> 01:26:13.200]  If you look here and look at us in the same state as they were seeing the people over in those foreign countries, we don't have any rights as far as they're concerned.
[01:26:13.200 --> 01:26:19.200]  They are the ones in charge because they have the gun and they have the numbers, so they think.
[01:26:19.200 --> 01:26:24.200]  And so that's why they are willing to do what they do.
[01:26:24.200 --> 01:26:26.200]  I agree.
[01:26:26.200 --> 01:26:31.200]  Are you a member of the OCT Facebook page?
[01:26:31.200 --> 01:26:33.200]  Open Carry, Texas?
[01:26:33.200 --> 01:26:34.200]  Yes.
[01:26:34.200 --> 01:26:36.200]  Yes?
[01:26:36.200 --> 01:26:46.200]  There's a post on there that disturb me. It's going along the same genre of giving up our rights to get security.
[01:26:46.200 --> 01:26:59.200]  A guy sitting there saying how he's glad that there weren't no open carriers in the Walmart in our past, because they would have been a priority target either by the shooter or by the police and sales.
[01:26:59.200 --> 01:27:06.200]  The shooter would have never gone there if he thought for one minute he was going to encounter a crop of open carriers.
[01:27:06.200 --> 01:27:08.200]  He would have never gone there.
[01:27:08.200 --> 01:27:13.200]  Why do you think he left where he was to go elsewhere?
[01:27:13.200 --> 01:27:20.200]  See, I'm in Facebook jail right now, so I can't respond to that particular comment.
[01:27:20.200 --> 01:27:30.200]  But that's along the same lines of giving up a little bit of freedom to get what you think of security.
[01:27:30.200 --> 01:27:43.200]  And that just calls me to see that kind of apathy and really just lay down and take it in the rear kind of attitude, because that's not what the United States is supposed to be based on.
[01:27:43.200 --> 01:27:50.200]  We live in a country that built the Hoover Dam and went to the moon.
[01:27:50.200 --> 01:28:06.200]  And right now we can't even keep our own bridges and streets from crumbling on a regular basis, because somehow or another we have lost the drive to be the best that we can be in whatever we do.
[01:28:06.200 --> 01:28:13.200]  And I don't know about you, but I find that, no, I know about you. You found that disturbing as I did, I'm pretty sure.
[01:28:13.200 --> 01:28:19.200]  Well, again, you're not going to get an argument out of me about that.
[01:28:19.200 --> 01:28:37.200]  I know that's why whenever I make a post on and argue a point of law with somebody, I always make leaving in for you to correct me, because hey, I don't know. I know I'm not the biased individual in the world.
[01:28:37.200 --> 01:28:52.200]  But I do make sure that when I do know, I make sure to test it out, make sure that I have a correct understanding of what it meant, what it means.
[01:28:52.200 --> 01:29:14.200]  And I thank you for that, because until I start listening to your radio and start putting what you do in practice, I never even considered some of the stuff that I was looking at and some of the stuff I was, some of the stuff I thought I'd move to the test.
[01:29:14.200 --> 01:29:33.200]  So once I did start reading it and start putting it into proper context and start testing what's in those preconceptions, that's what I realized is how much of a fraud that we've been living under.
[01:29:33.200 --> 01:29:35.200]  Yeah, it's a big one.
[01:29:35.200 --> 01:29:45.200]  Well, I appreciate that, and hopefully I wish you lots of luck with it, so keep plugging away at it, learning what you've got to learn and doing what you've got to do. We will get it changed. It's just a matter of how.
[01:29:45.200 --> 01:29:47.200]  Yes, we will.
[01:29:47.200 --> 01:29:51.200]  I'm going to let you go, because I know it's people waiting, and they're tired of the new me.
[01:29:51.200 --> 01:29:53.200]  All right, Charles, thanks for calling in.
[01:29:53.200 --> 01:29:54.200]  See you all.
[01:29:54.200 --> 01:30:02.200]  All right, Adam, you hang on, and I'll pick you up on the other side of the break. We'll be right back, so y'all hang in there.
[01:30:02.200 --> 01:30:09.200]  RFID technology can be used to identify, track, and locate things like boxes as they move through a warehouse.
[01:30:09.200 --> 01:30:13.200]  But would you use the technology to send social smoke signals?
[01:30:13.200 --> 01:30:16.200]  Look after Catherine Albrecht, and I'll be back with more in just a moment.
[01:30:16.200 --> 01:30:27.200]  Privacy is under attack. When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again, and once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[01:30:27.200 --> 01:30:35.200]  So protect your rights. Say no to surveillance, and keep your information to yourself. Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[01:30:35.200 --> 01:30:43.200]  This public service announcement is brought to you by StartPage.com, the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[01:30:43.200 --> 01:30:46.200]  Start over with StartPage.
[01:30:46.200 --> 01:30:54.200]  Makers of blue sigs smokeless electronic cigarettes for embedding their product with Radio Frequency Microchips, or RFID technology.
[01:30:54.200 --> 01:31:02.200]  When chip packs get within 30 feet of each other, they light up, vibrate, and swap information so smokers can find each other in a crowd.
[01:31:02.200 --> 01:31:08.200]  Later, the data gets uploaded to Blue Sig's website when users plug their packs into a computer for recharging.
[01:31:08.200 --> 01:31:14.200]  While high-tech cigarettes may help smokers find kindred spirits, they also let Blue Sig identify and track them.
[01:31:14.200 --> 01:31:22.200]  The chips could also be tracked by bar owners, employers, or anyone else who chooses to. That's a high price to pay for a little company.
[01:31:22.200 --> 01:31:27.200]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht. More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[01:31:52.200 --> 01:32:12.200]  Rule of Law Radio is proud to offer the Rule of Law Traffic Seminar. In today's America, we live in an us against them society, and if we, the people, are ever going to have a free society, then we're going to have to stand and defend our own rights.
[01:32:12.200 --> 01:32:19.200]  Among those rights are the right to travel freely from place to place, the right to act in our own private capacity, and most importantly, the right to due process of law.
[01:32:19.200 --> 01:32:25.200]  Traffic courts afford us the least expensive opportunity to learn how to enforce and preserve our rights through due process.
[01:32:25.200 --> 01:32:35.200]  Former Sheriff's Deputy Eddie Craig, in conjunction with Rule of Law Radio, has put together the most comprehensive teaching tool available that will help you understand what due process is and how to hold courts to the rule of law.
[01:32:35.200 --> 01:32:47.200]  You can get your own copy of this invaluable material by going to ruleoflawradio.com and ordering your copy today. By ordering now, you'll receive a copy of Eddie's book, The Texas Transportation Code, The Law vs. the Lie, video and audio of the original 2009 seminar.
[01:32:47.200 --> 01:32:54.200]  Hundreds of research documents and other useful resource material. Learn how to fight for your rights with the help of this material from ruleoflawradio.com.
[01:32:54.200 --> 01:32:59.200]  Order your copy today and together we can have the free society we all want and deserve.
[01:32:59.200 --> 01:33:11.200]  You're listening to the Logos Radio Network at LogosRadioNetwork.com.
[01:33:29.200 --> 01:33:34.200]  Logos Radio Network
[01:33:59.200 --> 01:34:06.200]  Logos Radio Network
[01:34:06.200 --> 01:34:10.200]  Alright folks, we are back. This is Rule of Law Radio.
[01:34:10.200 --> 01:34:17.200]  Alright, we got a half an hour left. Only one caller on the board calling number 512-646-1984 if you want to call and get in line.
[01:34:17.200 --> 01:34:20.200]  And if we get to you, we'll get to you.
[01:34:20.200 --> 01:34:24.200]  Alright, Adam in Texas, what can we do for you?
[01:34:24.200 --> 01:34:25.200]  How you doing Eddie?
[01:34:25.200 --> 01:34:28.200]  I'm doing alright.
[01:34:28.200 --> 01:34:33.200]  Bait my hook and setting out my lines.
[01:34:33.200 --> 01:34:40.200]  Fishing is pretty good if you're fishing for fat, ignorant, arrogant public officials and break the law on a daily basis.
[01:34:40.200 --> 01:34:45.200]  I'm quite sure. The water is overstocked.
[01:34:45.200 --> 01:35:01.200]  Yeah, good fishing. Hey, how far have you been able to go as far as assisting friends or family with counsel?
[01:35:01.200 --> 01:35:07.200]  You know, of course not for monetary gain or putting yourself, holding yourself out to be a lawyer or anything.
[01:35:07.200 --> 01:35:09.200]  How far have you been able to go?
[01:35:09.200 --> 01:35:13.200]  It depends on the court and the person.
[01:35:13.200 --> 01:35:19.200]  Okay. Well, can you give me, like, what's the point in being able to go?
[01:35:19.200 --> 01:35:28.200]  Well, I helped out a friend of mine in municipal court in the little part of Austin that's its own little separate place over here, Sunset Valley.
[01:35:28.200 --> 01:35:34.200]  And they have their own little municipal court where the judge doesn't know the law any better than the court clerk does.
[01:35:34.200 --> 01:35:36.200]  Yeah.
[01:35:36.200 --> 01:35:44.200]  And so I told him what to do in his case. He didn't exactly do it, but we took the case up on appeal to the county court at law.
[01:35:44.200 --> 01:35:50.200]  In the county court at law, I was passing him notes from the gallery as quickly as I could write them down.
[01:35:50.200 --> 01:35:55.200]  One of the bailiffs actually came to him and said, if you want to go up there and set the table and give him a hand right there, you can do that.
[01:35:55.200 --> 01:35:58.200]  I was like, cool, up front I went.
[01:35:58.200 --> 01:36:12.200]  And I sat down and every time the prosecuting attorney, which is there's a guy here that they use who is supposedly their specialist in countering any of the arguments that folks like me bring up.
[01:36:12.200 --> 01:36:15.200]  But he was not the only counsel present that day.
[01:36:15.200 --> 01:36:27.200]  There was also a assistant county attorney and an actual district attorney, all three of them sitting at that table going against my friend who didn't know Jack squat to tell the truth, even though it had been to many of my classes.
[01:36:27.200 --> 01:36:31.200]  He didn't really know how to do this case all out.
[01:36:31.200 --> 01:36:33.200]  He didn't know the law as well as he should have.
[01:36:33.200 --> 01:36:40.200]  And so I'm sitting there writing on a note page. I'm not speaking for him. I'm not allowed to do that.
[01:36:40.200 --> 01:36:46.200]  But I'm writing notes on this page just as fast as I can in the shorthand that I hope he can understand.
[01:36:46.200 --> 01:36:52.200]  And he's having to set up and basically read an argument out of what I wrote him.
[01:36:52.200 --> 01:37:04.200]  And every time I do this, man, all three of those attorneys at that table over there are tearing apart a printed copy of the Code of Criminal Procedure trying to find what I'm talking about because they didn't know.
[01:37:04.200 --> 01:37:10.200]  They flat out did not know.
[01:37:10.200 --> 01:37:16.200]  And whenever they tried to rebut the argument that I was making with it, back to my scratch that I went, no, no, no, no.
[01:37:16.200 --> 01:37:24.200]  Argue this, say this, say this. Well, I had that judge in there looking at these three attorneys like they were the three blind mice playing with the elephant.
[01:37:24.200 --> 01:37:31.200]  What the hell are you guys doing? You got a guy with a patent pencil kicking your ass over here.
[01:37:31.200 --> 01:37:34.200]  But he's still lost. You know why?
[01:37:34.200 --> 01:37:35.200]  Yeah.
[01:37:35.200 --> 01:37:46.200]  Because he didn't bring enough information into his argument from what he should have argued at trial in the municipal court.
[01:37:46.200 --> 01:37:47.200]  That's why he lost.
[01:37:47.200 --> 01:37:55.200]  Not because he was wrong, but because, and this was not even a traffic issue. This was something far more than that.
[01:37:55.200 --> 01:37:58.200]  Okay.
[01:37:58.200 --> 01:38:00.200]  Good story.
[01:38:00.200 --> 01:38:09.200]  I was reading on the O'Connor's, Texas O'Connor's causes of action under responding out superior.
[01:38:09.200 --> 01:38:10.200]  Right.
[01:38:10.200 --> 01:38:16.200]  You know, that deals with corporations and the employees of the corporations.
[01:38:16.200 --> 01:38:25.200]  Am I wrong to conclude? I mean, municipalities are corporations. Are they not? Wouldn't they fall into that?
[01:38:25.200 --> 01:38:33.200]  Well, yeah, they are responding superior if you can show that they directly employ the individual you're talking about.
[01:38:33.200 --> 01:38:42.200]  For instance, on a sheriff's department, the county, the sheriff's department is the respondent superior for the sheriff's deputy.
[01:38:42.200 --> 01:38:43.200]  Right.
[01:38:43.200 --> 01:38:44.200]  Okay.
[01:38:44.200 --> 01:38:59.200]  And the municipality, if you can show that the municipal police department is directly created and employed by the municipality, then it becomes respondent superior to the police officers as well and their department.
[01:38:59.200 --> 01:39:04.200]  But overall, especially if they're writing the policies for them.
[01:39:04.200 --> 01:39:18.200]  But generally, if you look at the way the law is done, most municipalities that are general law municipalities where they actually are their own little internal government.
[01:39:18.200 --> 01:39:28.200]  The case law in Texas is very clear that these municipalities cannot exercise any power that is not specifically expressed in their charter.
[01:39:28.200 --> 01:39:37.200]  So as an example, let's take Austin. The Austin City Charter does not have a single word in it about a police department, not one.
[01:39:37.200 --> 01:39:44.200]  So that means the Austin Police Department can only be a what?
[01:39:44.200 --> 01:39:46.200]  The Austin Police Department.
[01:39:46.200 --> 01:40:02.200]  If the city has no authority to create and maintain a police department under its charter, and yet there is one, what does that mean that the Austin Police Department has to be?
[01:40:02.200 --> 01:40:05.200]  Oh, man. Good question.
[01:40:05.200 --> 01:40:08.200]  It has to be a private company.
[01:40:08.200 --> 01:40:09.200]  Yeah.
[01:40:09.200 --> 01:40:23.200]  It has to be someone contracted with the city to provide those services. And guess what? There is a contract between the Austin Municipal Police Department and the city for those services.
[01:40:23.200 --> 01:40:33.200]  Okay. Yeah, that's good to know. That would mean that anything, I mean, Austin Municipal Officer does wrong. You could hold the city accountable to respond to your superior.
[01:40:33.200 --> 01:40:45.200]  No, because they're a separate entity and the city does not write their policies. The police department itself does.
[01:40:45.200 --> 01:40:47.200]  But they're employed by the city.
[01:40:47.200 --> 01:40:51.200]  No, they're contracted with the city. There's a difference.
[01:40:51.200 --> 01:40:55.200]  Okay.
[01:40:55.200 --> 01:40:59.200]  Okay.
[01:40:59.200 --> 01:41:10.200]  Yeah. All right. Yeah, respond to your superior. Yeah, I just have some questions about that. I was trying to figure out getting into all the causes of action in Texas and there's not that many of them.
[01:41:10.200 --> 01:41:22.200]  I guess if they allow, there's a lot of them that they disallow. But anyways, that's some deep water gets starting to get into that stuff. But it's interesting.
[01:41:22.200 --> 01:41:29.200]  Anyway, well, yeah, I'm helping out a friend with a, with a classy finally ticket and I just wanted to know.
[01:41:29.200 --> 01:41:30.200]  What's the charge?
[01:41:30.200 --> 01:41:35.200]  How far I can open container.
[01:41:35.200 --> 01:41:43.200]  There's an entire article dealing with how to deal with open container on my blog.
[01:41:43.200 --> 01:41:44.200]  Okay.
[01:41:44.200 --> 01:41:52.200]  There's an actual questionnaire to ask the cop when they're on the stand. I've actually got one of those.
[01:41:52.200 --> 01:41:54.200]  Where's your blog at?
[01:41:54.200 --> 01:42:20.200]  The title of law, T-A-O-O-F-L-A-W dot wordpress.com. Now, here's the thing. Let's think about open container. Let's see how this actually works. Do you remember a caller I used to have on here fairly regularly by the name of Doug? Always called in sounding like the last thing in the world he had touched before he touched the phone was his still.
[01:42:20.200 --> 01:42:28.200]  Okay. And he did make one excellent point one night because he got pulled over and cited for open container.
[01:42:28.200 --> 01:42:36.200]  And his argument when he went to court is where is the state's evidence because I drank exhibit B or exhibit A. Sorry.
[01:42:36.200 --> 01:42:37.200]  Yeah.
[01:42:37.200 --> 01:42:52.200]  All right. So the fact of the matter is this is how the state of Texas handles open container. The first thing they do is make the individual pour out the contents. Thus, they cannot identify what contents were in it because they do not test them.
[01:42:52.200 --> 01:42:58.200]  They do not save them. There's no way for them to identify what was in the container to begin with.
[01:42:58.200 --> 01:42:59.200]  Yeah, cooking water.
[01:42:59.200 --> 01:43:01.200]  Exactly. Okay.
[01:43:01.200 --> 01:43:14.200]  Second problem, they don't keep the container. They actually throw it away, throw it back where they got it, whatever, they don't keep the container.
[01:43:14.200 --> 01:43:25.200]  So now I ask you, when they get to court and charge you with open container, what is their evidence other than the cops sworn testimony?
[01:43:25.200 --> 01:43:26.200]  Nothing.
[01:43:26.200 --> 01:43:33.200]  Exactly. So what kind of questions should be asked of the cop?
[01:43:33.200 --> 01:43:38.200]  Well, the first one would be if he's in uniform and his badge after he's gone to duty.
[01:43:38.200 --> 01:43:48.200]  Well, no. Hang on just a second. We don't have to go that route. It's a whole lot simpler than that and very straightforward and absolutely undeniable.
[01:43:48.200 --> 01:43:52.200]  Hang on just a second. Let me take this break and we'll finish this up on the other side. Okay.
[01:43:52.200 --> 01:44:00.200]  All right, folks, this is rule of law radio. We're going to the last segment. So y'all hang on and we will be right back.
[01:44:00.200 --> 01:44:09.200]  Through advances in technology, our lives have greatly improved, except in the area of nutrition. People feed their pets better than they feed themselves.
[01:44:09.200 --> 01:44:17.200]  And it's time we changed all that. Our primary defense against aging and disease in this toxic environment is good nutrition.
[01:44:17.200 --> 01:44:25.200]  In a world where natural foods have been irradiated, adulterated and mutilated, young Jevity can provide the nutrients you need.
[01:44:25.200 --> 01:44:31.200]  Logos Radio Network gets many requests to endorse all sorts of products, most of which we reject.
[01:44:31.200 --> 01:44:39.200]  We have come to trust Jevity so much, we became a marketing distributor along with Alex Jones, Ben Fuchs and many others.
[01:44:39.200 --> 01:44:47.200]  When you order from LogosRadioNetwork.com, your health will improve as you help support quality radio.
[01:44:47.200 --> 01:45:00.200]  As you realize the benefits of Jevity, you may want to join us. As a distributor, you can experience improved health, help your friends and family and increase your income. Order now.
[01:45:00.200 --> 01:45:15.200]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit? Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary, the affordable, easy to understand four CD course that will show you how in 24 hours, step by step.
[01:45:15.200 --> 01:45:22.200]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing. If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[01:45:22.200 --> 01:45:34.200]  Thousands have won with our step by step course and now you can too. Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case winning experience.
[01:45:34.200 --> 01:45:43.200]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand about the principles and practices that control our American courts.
[01:45:43.200 --> 01:45:52.200]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases, prosa tactics, and much more.
[01:45:52.200 --> 01:46:14.200]  Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner or call toll free 866-LAW-EZ.
[01:46:14.200 --> 01:46:23.200]  We are back and we are now in the final segment of the show and we are talking to Adam in Texas. All right, Adam, here's what we're going to need to do. First thing is, I need you to send me an email.
[01:46:23.200 --> 01:46:30.200]  And in the subject line, I specifically need these words because I'm going to set up a filter for it to make sure I see it.
[01:46:30.200 --> 01:46:46.200]  Open our cross examination open container. Okay. All right. I've got a script here that I wrote specifically for this and I put it up on Facebook. So I could be incorrect about it being in an article on my blog.
[01:46:46.200 --> 01:46:59.200]  It might be, but I can email you the document and then you'll have it for sure. But the very first thing you want to know are these facts is whether or not they kept the container, whether or not they tested the contents or anything else about that container.
[01:46:59.200 --> 01:47:15.200]  Okay. Right. If they did not, which they, I have never, ever seen them do, ever. The first thing you need to do is file a motion to suppress relating to any evidence because there is no open container.
[01:47:15.200 --> 01:47:20.200]  There is nothing. There's no test results. There's nothing. Okay.
[01:47:20.200 --> 01:47:32.200]  Second thing is you file a motion and lemony asking the court to order the prosecution and the witness to never mention the container or anything about the contents.
[01:47:32.200 --> 01:47:40.200]  Why? Because there's no container present. There's no evidence. So it's prejudicial to say container when there ain't one.
[01:47:40.200 --> 01:47:41.200]  Yeah.
[01:47:41.200 --> 01:48:05.200]  Now, if the court denies these, you're still going to cross examine the cop in the following way. From this moment forward, when you, at any point after you have filed these motions and you get into court, your friend needs to understand if they hear the words container, open container, contents of a container, anything in reference to that container,
[01:48:05.200 --> 01:48:19.200]  they need to object either citing the motion and lemony if it was granted or citing lack of evidence and facts, facts, not an evidence in the record. Okay.
[01:48:19.200 --> 01:48:24.200]  Because they haven't introduced this container at all.
[01:48:24.200 --> 01:48:40.200]  If the judge overrules and lets them ask the questions about the containers anyway, this is how you're going to cross examine. Everything you ask is a leading question. It needs to be treated that way so that you get a one word answer from the cop, yes or no.
[01:48:40.200 --> 01:48:41.200]  Okay.
[01:48:41.200 --> 01:48:42.200]  Yeah.
[01:48:42.200 --> 01:48:49.200]  All right. First question. You testified that your career has spanned X years as a peace officer overall. Yes or no.
[01:48:49.200 --> 01:48:51.200]  Yes.
[01:48:51.200 --> 01:48:57.200]  Officer, you have alleged that there was an open container in the automobile. Yes or no. Yes.
[01:48:57.200 --> 01:49:03.200]  You do not have the alleged open container here with you today. Yes or no. No.
[01:49:03.200 --> 01:49:10.200]  You do not have any of the fluid contents that you say was inside of the alleged container. Yes or no. No.
[01:49:10.200 --> 01:49:24.200]  You did not perform any chemical analysis tests on the fluid contents that you say were inside of the alleged container. Yes or no. No. You did not taste the fluid contents you say was inside of the alleged container. Yes or no. No.
[01:49:24.200 --> 01:49:35.200]  Then is it fair to say that you do not know for certain if the contents of the alleged container was actually urine instead of alcohol. Yes or no.
[01:49:35.200 --> 01:49:40.200]  Officer goes no, maybe possibly, whatever he says it's not going to matter.
[01:49:40.200 --> 01:49:42.200]  Follow-up question. Yeah.
[01:49:42.200 --> 01:49:52.200]  Officer, you actually poured the unidentified liquid in the alleged container out onto the ground. Didn't you? Yes or no.
[01:49:52.200 --> 01:49:54.200]  And he's going to say yes.
[01:49:54.200 --> 01:50:06.200]  Officer, you actually threw away the alleged container, didn't you? Yes or no. Yes. You testified that you threw away or returned the alleged container. Yes or no. Yes.
[01:50:06.200 --> 01:50:15.200]  You have conducted more than just a few of these traffic stops in your XX years career. Yes or no. Yes.
[01:50:15.200 --> 01:50:22.200]  You can also just ask how many of these stops have you made in your XX years of career. Okay.
[01:50:22.200 --> 01:50:28.200]  You have discovered drugs on some of the traffic stops you've conducted in your career. Yes or no.
[01:50:28.200 --> 01:50:32.200]  And the prosecutor may object to relevance when you bring up the issue of drugs.
[01:50:32.200 --> 01:50:39.200]  And we're just going to say goes to prior testimony, evidence, chain of custody, and the veracity and character of the witness judge.
[01:50:39.200 --> 01:50:43.200]  The judge should say that the objection is overruled. Okay.
[01:50:43.200 --> 01:50:50.200]  So please answer the question. You have discovered drugs in some of the traffic stops you've conducted in your career. Yes or no. Yes.
[01:50:50.200 --> 01:50:57.200]  When you find drugs, those drugs will be considered evidence of a crime, wouldn't they? Yes or no. Yes.
[01:50:57.200 --> 01:51:01.200]  And you're required to protect that evidence. Yes or no. Yes.
[01:51:01.200 --> 01:51:07.200]  And you're required not to tamper with or destroy such evidence in any way. Yes or no. Yes.
[01:51:07.200 --> 01:51:18.200]  If you took some portion of those drugs and kept them for yourself or threw that portion away, would that be considered tampering with or destroying evidence? Yes or no. Officer, yes.
[01:51:18.200 --> 01:51:31.200]  As a peace officer, you know that fabricating, tampering with or destroying evidence is actually a third degree felony offense in Texas under Section 3709 of the Texas Penal Code. Yes or no.
[01:51:31.200 --> 01:51:44.200]  Yes. And yet you just testified in open court that you poured out the liquid contents of the alleged open container, then you disposed of the alleged container, both of which constitute evidence of a crime.
[01:51:44.200 --> 01:51:55.200]  Doesn't that actually prove that you tampered with and destroyed physical evidence relevant to this case? Yes or no. And the cop's going to jump up, I want a lawyer.
[01:51:55.200 --> 01:52:04.200]  That's brilliant. Hey, you're still Eddie at Rule of Law, right? Yes. Eddie at RuleofLawRadio.com.
[01:52:04.200 --> 01:52:22.200]  Okay, yeah, right. Yeah. Yeah, no, that'll be great. In a couple weeks, we're supposed to have the pre-trial where they already said, well, you'll just meet with the city attorney, the prosecuting attorney.
[01:52:22.200 --> 01:52:37.200]  Before that, I'm going to, we're going to file that motion for the attorney to show authority to prosecute under the name of State of Texas, which I've got that on your Rule of Law seminar.
[01:52:37.200 --> 01:52:46.200]  And that in itself is pretty, pretty reviewing as far as, you know, they're only supposed to be prosecuting you first.
[01:52:46.200 --> 01:52:57.200]  Well, the other problem is that there should be also a challenge in there to the attorney acting as counsel for the state. Not just the one, well, actually that is the one.
[01:52:57.200 --> 01:53:12.200]  There's several of them in there. Yeah, the one, the full one is like 70-something pages. And it goes into every possible way that a city attorney is forbidden to act as an attorney for the state.
[01:53:12.200 --> 01:53:32.200]  I mean, it leaves no stone unturned. It goes into everything. Every section of the Code of Criminal Procedure, every state law, every part of the Constitution, and absolutely nowhere is the State of Texas legislature giving the authority to create a new form of prosecutor for the state.
[01:53:32.200 --> 01:53:47.200]  They are giving the authority to create various courts, which they don't do correctly anyway. The municipal courts themselves are unconstitutional in 99% of the cases because they are created by an ordinance of the city, not by an act of the legislature.
[01:53:47.200 --> 01:53:56.200]  Thus, that's a delegation of powers forbidden by the Constitution. And I've actually got case law in that document that says so.
[01:53:56.200 --> 01:54:02.200]  Yeah. On that specific set of facts, no less.
[01:54:02.200 --> 01:54:11.200]  We'll see what happens. But first they got to get through the motions to qualify the official oppression criminal.
[01:54:11.200 --> 01:54:23.200]  Yeah, do not discuss the case at all with the prosecuting attorney. Just say, look, you're the prosecutor, right? Anything I say to you, you can use against me, right? Yes, conversations over. Thank you.
[01:54:23.200 --> 01:54:30.200]  Yeah, yeah, yeah, definitely. Yeah, I'm hip to that. Yeah, the judges, they're going to have to get through what we already threw at them, which was a big one, man.
[01:54:30.200 --> 01:54:38.200]  It was all from your seminar, the disqualification criminal charges tampering with government documents, official oppression.
[01:54:38.200 --> 01:54:57.200]  You know, the judge, right off the bat, the initial parents didn't perform her duties under 15.17g. All that great stuff has already just got thrown at them last week. So we'll see how they digest that before we even get to the pretrial.
[01:54:57.200 --> 01:55:09.200]  Well, the reports on the contents of the seminar have been more favorable than not. Most of the time, if the judge actually reads them and gets into the actual law, they have no choice but to throw it out and they know it.
[01:55:09.200 --> 01:55:22.200]  If they proceed knowing that you know what's in these documents and what to say about it, then they're taking a very big risk in moving forward because they're moving forward with absolutely no jurisdictional protection of any kind.
[01:55:22.200 --> 01:55:27.200]  And that's a danger for them and they know it.
[01:55:27.200 --> 01:55:37.200]  Yeah. No, I'm sure that this municipal judge is probably calling friends and trying to figure out what's going on. They probably just got it in the mail today, Monday.
[01:55:37.200 --> 01:55:48.200]  Well, let me tell you how bad of an impact I made on what they were doing. I literally got an email invitation from a huge law firm in Houston.
[01:55:48.200 --> 01:55:57.200]  I've never heard of these guys, but their office buildings take up an entire city block in Houston.
[01:55:57.200 --> 01:55:58.200]  Yeah.
[01:55:58.200 --> 01:56:08.200]  Okay. And I was invited to come down and talk to a conference of attorneys just out of the blue.
[01:56:08.200 --> 01:56:25.200]  So I looked up this law firm and I looked up what it is they do. This is the law firm that trains the Texas Municipal League on how to help these judges and prosecutors circumvent Texas law to do what they do.
[01:56:25.200 --> 01:56:30.200]  They're the ones that actually trains them on how to do this.
[01:56:30.200 --> 01:56:33.200]  So you drank all their champagne, ate their cookies.
[01:56:33.200 --> 01:56:46.200]  I didn't even go. I said, look, after I found out who they were, I wrote the guy back and I says, if your intent is to take the information I have for the purpose of attempting to find a way to subvert it, forget it, not going to happen.
[01:56:46.200 --> 01:56:54.200]  You face it in court just like you ought to have to. Don't try to devise something behind the scenes to kill it.
[01:56:54.200 --> 01:56:56.200]  Because that's what they would have done.
[01:56:56.200 --> 01:57:00.200]  And I wasn't going to give them that opportunity.
[01:57:00.200 --> 01:57:12.200]  Yeah, I've been noticing that doing research that a lot of these highbrow attorneys, they'll give these seminars and such on, you know, even the 42 USC 1983 and stuff.
[01:57:12.200 --> 01:57:19.200]  You can find it on the internet and things, but if you start to listen to what they're saying, they're actually doing what you're saying.
[01:57:19.200 --> 01:57:28.200]  They're teaching them, the judges, how to circumvent our remedies and our ability to do something about what they're doing.
[01:57:28.200 --> 01:57:29.200]  Absolutely.
[01:57:29.200 --> 01:57:35.200]  It's not there for our education. It's there for them to sharpen their swords.
[01:57:35.200 --> 01:57:36.200]  Yeah.
[01:57:36.200 --> 01:57:42.200]  And they teach them how to use them in a way that is never intended to be allowed.
[01:57:42.200 --> 01:57:43.200]  Yeah.
[01:57:43.200 --> 01:57:57.200]  Hey, I'm going to find out for sure. I've got a public information request to submit tomorrow, but I'm going to be finding out here pretty quick the exact territory limits of the city.
[01:57:57.200 --> 01:58:07.200]  Because this ticket was written and the complaint from the officer, you know, under penalty of perjury says that it was committed within the territory limits of the city.
[01:58:07.200 --> 01:58:13.200]  Well, if I find out when I get a hold of the city map that is fact.
[01:58:13.200 --> 01:58:19.200]  Then you can quash it for stating false and malicious facts. Just move to quash it.
[01:58:19.200 --> 01:58:21.200]  What about also perjury?
[01:58:21.200 --> 01:58:25.200]  You can file charges for perjury.
[01:58:25.200 --> 01:58:26.200]  Yeah.
[01:58:26.200 --> 01:58:28.200]  And he thought it was in the city.
[01:58:28.200 --> 01:58:29.200]  Exactly.
[01:58:29.200 --> 01:58:33.200]  You're not responsible for what he's signing his name to as being factual.
[01:58:33.200 --> 01:58:34.200]  Exactly.
[01:58:34.200 --> 01:58:35.200]  Okay.
[01:58:35.200 --> 01:58:36.200]  Great.
[01:58:36.200 --> 01:58:37.200]  Great.
[01:58:37.200 --> 01:58:38.200]  All right, man. I got to go.
[01:58:38.200 --> 01:58:39.200]  But thanks for calling in.
[01:58:39.200 --> 01:58:40.200]  All right, folks.
[01:58:40.200 --> 01:58:43.200]  This has been the Monday Night Rule of Law radio show with your host, Eddie Craig.
[01:58:43.200 --> 01:58:45.200]  I want to thank you all for listening and all for calling.
[01:58:45.200 --> 01:58:50.200]  And folks, please keep us in your financial prayers and please send money when you can.
[01:58:50.200 --> 01:58:57.200]  Bibles for America is offering absolutely free a unique study Bible called the New Testament Recovery Version.
[01:58:57.200 --> 01:59:04.200]  The New Testament Recovery Version has over 9,000 footnotes that explain what the Bible says verse by verse,
[01:59:04.200 --> 01:59:08.200]  helping you to know God and to know the meaning of life.
[01:59:08.200 --> 01:59:11.200]  Order your free copy today from Bibles for America.
[01:59:11.200 --> 01:59:20.200]  Call us toll free at 888-551-0102 or visit us online at bfa.org.
[01:59:20.200 --> 01:59:25.200]  This translation is highly accurate and it comes with over 13,000 cross references,
[01:59:25.200 --> 01:59:30.200]  plus charts and maps and an outline for every book of the Bible.
[01:59:30.200 --> 01:59:32.200]  This is truly a Bible you can understand.
[01:59:32.200 --> 01:59:40.200]  To get your free copy of the New Testament Recovery Version, call us toll free at 888-551-0102.
[01:59:40.200 --> 01:59:51.200]  That's 888-551-0102 or visit us online at bfa.org.