[00:00.000 --> 00:06.840]  The following news flash is brought to you by The Lone Star Lowdown.
[00:06.840 --> 00:15.560]  Markets for Monday 22 July 2019 Open with Precious Metals, Gold $1,429.00, Silver $16.45.00,
[00:15.560 --> 00:24.640]  Copper $2.75.00, Oil, Texas Crude $55.63.00, Brent Crude $62.47.00, and Cryptos in order
[00:24.640 --> 00:37.280]  of Market Cap, Bitcoin Core $10,566.52, Ethereum $227.26, XRP Ripple $0.33, Litecoin $100.31,
[00:37.280 --> 00:41.720]  and Bitcoin Cash is at $324.10 of Crypto Coin.
[00:41.720 --> 00:52.520]  Today in history, the year 1916, the preparedness day bombing, a tying suitcase bomb, was detonated
[00:52.520 --> 00:57.840]  on Market Street in San Francisco during the World War I preparedness day parade, killing
[00:57.840 --> 01:04.880]  10 and injuring 40 today in history.
[01:04.880 --> 01:09.520]  And recent news, since Governor Greg Abbott signed House Bill 1325 legalizing Hemp and
[01:09.520 --> 01:14.240]  attacks his law back in June, county prosecutors around the state, including Houston, Austin,
[01:14.240 --> 01:18.160]  and San Antonio, have been dropping marijuana possession charges and even refusing to file
[01:18.160 --> 01:22.360]  new ones since they are stipulating that they do not have the time or the laboratory
[01:22.360 --> 01:24.920]  equipment to test the year for THC.
[01:24.920 --> 01:28.560]  Margaret Moore, the Travis County District Attorney, announced earlier this month that
[01:28.560 --> 01:33.120]  she was dismissing 32 felony possession and delivery of marijuana cases because of the
[01:33.120 --> 01:34.120]  law.
[01:34.120 --> 01:37.720]  Mr. Abbott and other state officials, including the Attorney General, stipulated in a letter
[01:37.720 --> 01:42.200]  to county district attorneys back on Thursday that marijuana has not been decriminalized
[01:42.200 --> 01:48.360]  in Texas and that these actions demonstrate a misunderstanding of how HB 1325 works, as
[01:48.360 --> 01:54.600]  well as other cities, too, like the District Attorney in El Paso, Cayma Esparza, a Democrat
[01:54.600 --> 01:59.080]  who also stated earlier this month that the law, quote, will not have an effect on the
[01:59.080 --> 02:01.880]  prosecution of marijuana cases in El Paso.
[02:01.880 --> 02:06.880]  However, the issue was succinctly summarized by Mr. Brandon Ball, an assistant public defender
[02:06.880 --> 02:10.880]  in Harris County, who stated that, quote, the law is constantly changing on what makes
[02:10.880 --> 02:13.600]  something illegal based on its chemical makeup.
[02:13.600 --> 02:17.480]  It's important that if someone is charged with something, the test matches what they're
[02:17.480 --> 02:22.680]  charged with.
[02:22.680 --> 02:27.520]  A paper by Tulane University identified a five and a half inch American pocket shark.
[02:27.520 --> 02:32.480]  As the first of its kind in the Gulf of Mexico, the specimen being only the second pocket
[02:32.480 --> 02:38.120]  shark ever captured or recorded with the other one being found way back in 1979 in the East
[02:38.120 --> 02:39.600]  Pacific Ocean.
[02:39.600 --> 02:44.320]  According to the university paper, the shark secretes a lumus fluid from a gland near its
[02:44.320 --> 02:51.320]  front fins for the purposes hypothesized to lure and prey who may be drawn into the glow.
[03:14.320 --> 03:43.320]  Okay, howdy, howdy, Randy Carlton, Brett Fountain, Debra Stevens, Rula Law Radio on this Thursday,
[03:43.320 --> 03:56.920]  the 17th day of September 2020, my goodness, 2020 is going by quickly, practically over.
[03:56.920 --> 04:03.920]  I have been working on a lawsuit against the governor.
[04:03.920 --> 04:13.280]  The hardest part about building the lawsuit is figuring out what claims you want to make.
[04:13.280 --> 04:20.880]  If you have an issue, you want to just put together a suit and tell the judge what a
[04:20.880 --> 04:25.320]  no good rotten scoundrel the other guy was and how he ought to give you a whole bunch
[04:25.320 --> 04:26.320]  of money.
[04:26.320 --> 04:30.480]  That's really nice to think about, but it don't work that way.
[04:30.480 --> 04:40.760]  You got to figure out how to claim your injury under a generally a recognized or a proposed
[04:40.760 --> 04:43.560]  new cause of action.
[04:43.560 --> 04:52.360]  The cause of action can ring in tort and that's where or can ring in contract.
[04:52.360 --> 05:02.320]  In this case, I'm going after the governor for a constitutional tort.
[05:02.320 --> 05:14.520]  Constitutional tort is defined and a 42 U.S. Code 1983, that statute was written to address
[05:14.520 --> 05:18.440]  constitutional torts.
[05:18.440 --> 05:29.720]  What I'm maintaining is that while the legislature in a time of crisis or pandemic, as in this
[05:29.720 --> 05:43.040]  case, has the authority under Anderson v. Massachusetts, 1905 case, to pass legislation
[05:43.040 --> 05:50.880]  that denies, that interferes with the rights of the public.
[05:50.880 --> 05:59.200]  That legislation is generally subject to a short term life, the life of the pandemic
[05:59.200 --> 06:02.880]  or the emergency.
[06:02.880 --> 06:08.440]  But the key part of it is, and this is an argument I've seen used, I saw one argument
[06:08.440 --> 06:19.000]  by a judge that yes, the governor could absolutely order face masks because of Anderson v. Massachusetts.
[06:19.000 --> 06:23.400]  Well, that's not what Anderson v. Massachusetts said.
[06:23.400 --> 06:31.760]  What Anderson v. Massachusetts said was that the legislature could pass law that has the
[06:31.760 --> 06:35.920]  effect of denying a citizen a right in a emergency.
[06:35.920 --> 06:41.560]  Well, what if a judge out of the goodness of his heart really, really wants to legislate
[06:41.560 --> 06:43.520]  from the bench, Randy?
[06:43.520 --> 06:48.200]  Well, Anderson v. Massachusetts didn't say they could do that.
[06:48.200 --> 06:51.040]  It said the legislature could pass law.
[06:51.040 --> 07:01.520]  It didn't say a judge or a governor or anyone else could pass law by fiat, just because
[07:01.520 --> 07:04.040]  it's an emergency.
[07:04.040 --> 07:09.680]  And we've seen comments from Supreme Courts that say that in an emergency, the Constitution
[07:09.680 --> 07:18.440]  does, what was the term, the Constitution still applies, the Constitution gets suspended.
[07:18.440 --> 07:20.040]  So we have a governor here.
[07:20.040 --> 07:30.160]  Now the governor could have said, if you don't wear a mask and it can be shown that you contracted
[07:30.160 --> 07:42.440]  the COVID virus and moved around in the public and subsequently people with whom you interacted
[07:42.440 --> 07:52.160]  can be shown to have contracted the coronavirus with a reasonable consideration that it was
[07:52.160 --> 07:58.600]  your contaminant influence that caused it, you can be charged with reckless endangerment.
[07:58.600 --> 08:07.520]  He could have done that and he could have put the decision on me, do I want to go out
[08:07.520 --> 08:14.400]  and risk infecting somebody else and risk possibly going to jail for that, or do I want to put
[08:14.400 --> 08:15.400]  that mask on?
[08:15.400 --> 08:23.040]  Do you know if he'd have done that, I'd have put the mask on without a question because
[08:23.040 --> 08:28.720]  I chose to, but he didn't do that.
[08:28.720 --> 08:34.520]  He issued an order that ordered me to put that mask on and I'm typical of a lot of arrogant
[08:34.520 --> 08:43.320]  Americans, you're not going to tell me what to do, you're my servant, I'm not your servant
[08:43.320 --> 08:46.800]  and we have a lot of people that are raising objections to it.
[08:46.800 --> 08:53.960]  He could have avoided all that, but he decided to issue this mandate.
[08:53.960 --> 08:59.360]  Well good luck with that Bubba, since you had to swear on an oath, swear to your oath
[08:59.360 --> 09:04.560]  before you took office and that oath, very first part of it was that you would protect
[09:04.560 --> 09:10.320]  in the polled constitution in the United States and uphold the laws of the state.
[09:10.320 --> 09:16.120]  First thing, protecting the polled constitution, what part of that was hard for you to understand?
[09:16.120 --> 09:27.320]  That was a contract guy and we would not let you take office until you agreed to that contract.
[09:27.320 --> 09:33.920]  So the pandemic comes along, you forget all about that, well here's the deal.
[09:33.920 --> 09:44.040]  If the governor had acted within the scope of his authority and screwed up horribly,
[09:44.040 --> 09:48.400]  he has a right to immunity.
[09:48.400 --> 09:59.160]  Policemen, they can make horrible mistakes and they have to qualify for immunity.
[09:59.160 --> 10:05.440]  But you cannot commit an act that's outside the scope of your authority.
[10:05.440 --> 10:11.920]  If you do that, you're on your own, primary case, El Paso, Sheriff's deputy picked up
[10:11.920 --> 10:19.360]  this 19-year-old girl at the municipal court jail, a municipal jail, a transporter to the
[10:19.360 --> 10:25.240]  county jail and decided to have himself a little recreation on the way and stopped
[10:25.240 --> 10:26.840]  and raped her.
[10:26.840 --> 10:30.800]  And then once he was sued, he claimed qualified immunity.
[10:30.800 --> 10:40.680]  And the court said rape, he said he was acting within the scope of his employment while transporting
[10:40.680 --> 10:43.520]  this woman from one location to another.
[10:43.520 --> 10:53.040]  And the judge said that rape is not within scope.
[10:53.040 --> 11:02.960]  Issuing edicts without legislative support is not within scope.
[11:02.960 --> 11:08.680]  So I'll go after the governor personally.
[11:08.680 --> 11:12.560]  He wanted to do this great thing and protect all the public.
[11:12.560 --> 11:17.080]  You know, I lost a brother in Vietnam.
[11:17.080 --> 11:23.640]  He was the last guy off the LZ, they got on a helicopter and he's the last guy out.
[11:23.640 --> 11:29.360]  And he said that when he stepped on the bouncing Betty, he knew what it was and he said I knew
[11:29.360 --> 11:31.040]  I was dead.
[11:31.040 --> 11:35.520]  So he dropped down and captured the projectile and he just blew him all to pieces.
[11:35.520 --> 11:42.040]  Well, that was a brave and courageous thing to do, but he had to pay the consequences
[11:42.040 --> 11:44.880]  of it.
[11:44.880 --> 11:50.880]  I think the governor should be no less responsible.
[11:50.880 --> 11:54.320]  He decided to do this thing and he thought it was such a great thing to do.
[11:54.320 --> 11:57.000]  Well, good for you.
[11:57.000 --> 12:03.000]  But there are consequences and you owe those consequences to all the people that you have
[12:03.000 --> 12:07.080]  harmed by your behavior.
[12:07.080 --> 12:14.680]  So I'm going after him, doesn't matter, you know, a paralegal looked at my opening argument
[12:14.680 --> 12:21.520]  and said, well, you should argue that some people have medical conditions.
[12:21.520 --> 12:24.880]  No, no, no, no, no, we're not going there.
[12:24.880 --> 12:31.280]  It doesn't matter if you have a medical condition, if you don't have a medical condition.
[12:31.280 --> 12:39.840]  It doesn't have anything to do with the authority of the governor to render this fiat, is this
[12:39.840 --> 12:41.920]  order by fiat.
[12:41.920 --> 12:47.080]  So we only talk about the one issue.
[12:47.080 --> 12:50.400]  He stepped across the line, he is responsible.
[12:50.400 --> 12:58.920]  I went to my local court today and got a bailiff that didn't know me, he was a new bailiff
[12:58.920 --> 13:07.520]  and I walked up to him and he said, what's going to happen, but I'm sorry for him.
[13:07.520 --> 13:15.680]  He turned out to really be a sharp individual, a guy in front of me, he walks up to him,
[13:15.680 --> 13:20.400]  he's got this little temperature thing and he said, do you have any guns, knives or nuclear
[13:20.400 --> 13:21.400]  weapons?
[13:21.400 --> 13:22.400]  Huh?
[13:22.400 --> 13:27.520]  So I knew then I had a pretty cool guy.
[13:27.520 --> 13:34.400]  So as he's talking to this guy, he points at me and points to his mask and I just looked
[13:34.400 --> 13:35.400]  at him.
[13:35.400 --> 13:40.080]  So this guy goes through and I come up to him, he said, you need to wear a mask.
[13:40.080 --> 13:45.800]  I said, no, and it took a second for that to sink in.
[13:45.800 --> 13:48.000]  Wait, wait, wait a minute, wait a minute.
[13:48.000 --> 13:57.040]  You said, no, yeah, yeah, I said, no, no, wait a minute, but there's a, the governor
[13:57.040 --> 13:58.040]  issued an order.
[13:58.040 --> 14:08.320]  I said, oh, the governor used that order for toilet paper and we had a really good interaction
[14:08.320 --> 14:17.000]  and then I realized he was a new bailiff and I said, you know, I got a dime here and I'm
[14:17.000 --> 14:23.480]  going to put somebody on it, but I really don't want it to be you.
[14:23.480 --> 14:28.520]  I need the head bailiff, go get Dick Woods down here, he's the one I want to put up on
[14:28.520 --> 14:29.520]  this dime.
[14:29.520 --> 14:35.320]  I said, I don't want you to tell me that I can't go into the courthouse without a mask
[14:35.320 --> 14:36.320]  on.
[14:36.320 --> 14:40.040]  He said, well, you can't, no, don't tell me that.
[14:40.040 --> 14:43.000]  I need Dick to tell me that.
[14:43.000 --> 14:47.240]  They finally got Dick down there, I was talking to you, yakking with him until Dick got down
[14:47.240 --> 14:53.680]  there and I said, Dick, I'm going to come into your courthouse and I'm not going to wear
[14:53.680 --> 14:54.680]  a mask.
[14:54.680 --> 14:55.920]  He said, no, you're not.
[14:55.920 --> 15:00.520]  Well, Dick, what are you going to do about it?
[15:00.520 --> 15:02.960]  He said, well, I wanted you to come in.
[15:02.960 --> 15:05.920]  Well, what if I object to that?
[15:05.920 --> 15:08.480]  Well, you just won't come in.
[15:08.480 --> 15:11.160]  I said, Dick, I see you're wearing a pistol.
[15:11.160 --> 15:13.160]  Yes, I am.
[15:13.160 --> 15:15.200]  Tell me, Dick, is that pistol loaded?
[15:15.200 --> 15:17.760]  Well, I'm not going there with you.
[15:17.760 --> 15:24.160]  I did that to him once in the district court and the district judge ordered him to arrest
[15:24.160 --> 15:25.160]  me.
[15:25.160 --> 15:30.760]  I looked down at his pistol and went through that routine and he took off and another guy
[15:30.760 --> 15:34.440]  came over.
[15:34.440 --> 15:40.280]  Then I filed first degree felony aggravated assault charges against the judge, but I got
[15:40.280 --> 15:46.520]  Dick to tell me that if I tried to come in there without a mask on, that he would take
[15:46.520 --> 15:52.120]  action to prevent me and I couldn't get him to say he would use his pistol.
[15:52.120 --> 15:56.400]  I got the corporal to say he would use his pistol, but I couldn't get Dick to say it
[15:56.400 --> 16:03.320]  because he knew I set him up, but I ran out of time, so I'm going to go back tomorrow
[16:03.320 --> 16:11.000]  and go in with a mask on and then I'm going to go up to the district judge's office who's
[16:11.000 --> 16:14.800]  a real stinker and he really doesn't like me and he's a new judge.
[16:14.800 --> 16:16.600]  You don't have any reason to dislike me.
[16:16.600 --> 16:22.160]  Heck, I hadn't hammered, I only got one little criminal charge filed against him and it was
[16:22.160 --> 16:28.160]  minor little stuff because he wouldn't produce findings fact and concludes the law, but I
[16:28.160 --> 16:36.160]  didn't file it, Tim filed it, I just helped reply to it.
[16:36.160 --> 16:45.720]  Hang on Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain, rule of law radio, I call it 512-646-1984, we have
[16:45.720 --> 17:04.120]  the car lines on, keeping open all night, we'll be right back.
[17:04.120 --> 17:10.000]  It's the 2019 Logos Radio Network annual fundraiser and gun giveaway sponsored by Central Texas
[17:10.000 --> 17:11.000]  Gun Works.
[17:11.000 --> 17:14.640]  Go to logosradionetwork.com and enter to win.
[17:14.640 --> 17:18.240]  Any amount is appreciated, everything helps to keep us on the air.
[17:18.240 --> 17:24.680]  From Central Texas Gun Works, the grand prize up for grabs is the Spike Tactical AR-15.
[17:24.680 --> 17:27.240]  More prizes and sponsors to be announced.
[17:27.240 --> 17:30.440]  Every $25 donation is a chance to win.
[17:30.440 --> 17:36.000]  When you purchase Randy Kelton's ebook, Legal 101, you get four chances to win.
[17:36.000 --> 17:39.400]  Purchase Eddie Craig's traffic seminar and get 10 chances to win.
[17:39.400 --> 17:44.320]  If you've enjoyed the shows on Logos Radio Network, support our fundraiser so we can
[17:44.320 --> 17:48.680]  keep bringing you the best quality programming on talk radio today.
[17:48.680 --> 17:54.760]  We also accept Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies and remember, every $25 donation is a chance
[17:54.760 --> 17:55.760]  to win.
[17:55.760 --> 18:01.480]  Go to logosradionetwork.com for details and donate today.
[18:01.480 --> 18:05.720]  Logos Radio Network welcomes a new show to our lineup for the new year.
[18:05.720 --> 18:12.040]  Scripture Talk with Nana will begin Wednesday, January 8th from 8 to 10 p.m. central time.
[18:12.040 --> 18:15.080]  Our goal is in accord with Matthew 516.
[18:15.080 --> 18:20.120]  Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good works and glorify your Father
[18:20.120 --> 18:21.680]  which is in heaven.
[18:21.680 --> 18:26.800]  We wish to reflect God's light and be a blessing to all those with a hearing ear.
[18:26.800 --> 18:32.040]  Join Nana and guests for both verse by verse Bible studies and topical Bible studies designed
[18:32.040 --> 18:35.160]  to provoke unto love and good works.
[18:35.160 --> 18:39.560]  Our verse by verse Bible studies will begin in the book of Matthew where we will discuss
[18:39.560 --> 18:41.320]  one chapter per week.
[18:41.320 --> 18:46.400]  Our topical Bible studies will vary each week and will explore sound doctrine as well as
[18:46.400 --> 18:48.600]  Christian character development.
[18:48.600 --> 18:54.840]  So mark your calendar and join us live on logosradionetwork.com Wednesdays from 8 to
[18:54.840 --> 19:22.840]  10 p.m. starting January 8th for an inspiring and motivating discussion of the Scriptures.
[19:22.840 --> 19:37.840]  So mark your calendar and join us live on logosradionetwork.com Wednesdays from 8 to
[19:37.840 --> 19:49.840]  10 p.m. starting January 8th for an inspiring and motivating discussion of the Scriptures.
[19:49.840 --> 20:19.840]  So mark your calendar and join us live on logosradionetwork.com
[20:19.840 --> 20:46.720]  Okay, we are back, Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain, Deborah Stevens with our radio and we're talking
[20:46.720 --> 21:14.600]  about Sue and the Governor.
[21:16.720 --> 21:44.600]  We're talking about Sue and the Governor.
[21:44.600 --> 22:14.480]  The state home orders, the business closures and the mask requirements by the Governor were unconstitutional.
[22:14.480 --> 22:43.160]  So I applied to those facts, so I didn't have that and I'm trying to get my pace back working so
[22:43.160 --> 23:10.040]  I listened to that and I spent the last week trying to work out what is the best argument and I went through all of the reasons why I don't want to wear a mask.
[23:10.040 --> 23:36.920]  The Bible remains the most popular book in the world, yet countless readers are frustrated because they struggle to understand it.
[23:36.920 --> 24:06.800]  Some new translations try to help by simplifying the text, but in the process can compromise the profound meaning of the Scripture.
[24:06.800 --> 24:28.680]  Thank you very much.
[24:36.800 --> 24:58.680]  Thank you.
[24:58.680 --> 25:20.560]  Thank you.
[25:28.680 --> 25:50.560]  Thank you.
[25:58.680 --> 26:20.560]  Thank you.
[26:20.560 --> 26:42.440]  Thank you.
[26:42.440 --> 27:09.320]  Thank you.
[27:09.320 --> 27:39.200]  Thank you.
[27:39.200 --> 28:01.080]  Thank you.
[28:01.080 --> 28:27.960]  Thank you.
[28:27.960 --> 28:49.840]  Thank you.
[28:49.840 --> 29:09.720]  Nowhere does it say in the Constitution that those executive orders shall have the full force and effect of law.
[29:09.720 --> 29:21.600]  So executive orders, when it comes to the general citizenry, is basically just a recommendation.
[29:21.600 --> 29:38.600]  All other executive orders that are binding by the power of the Governor have to be upon businesses that are regulated through some kind of bureaucratic agency, namely, like TABC, for example, or restaurant licenses, or things like that, or if you have to participate in the sales tax scheme,
[29:38.600 --> 29:41.560]  grow big, or if you don't have the physical power to get at you but not individuals.
[29:41.560 --> 29:48.000]  So they got a good point there because the statute itself says that.
[29:48.000 --> 30:00.040]  And so the Supreme Court was agreeing with them on a lot of the merits, including that Abbott overstepped even the statute.
[30:00.040 --> 30:03.080]  And I'll tell you what the Supreme Court said on the other side.
[30:03.080 --> 30:07.680]  We'll be right back.
[30:07.680 --> 30:12.680]  It turns out that even the most trusted companies may be unwittingly revealing your secrets.
[30:12.680 --> 30:16.680]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albright and I'll be right back with details.
[30:16.680 --> 30:18.680]  Privacy is under attack.
[30:18.680 --> 30:21.680]  When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[30:21.680 --> 30:26.680]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[30:26.680 --> 30:28.680]  So protect your rights.
[30:28.680 --> 30:31.680]  Say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself.
[30:31.680 --> 30:34.680]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[30:34.680 --> 30:37.680]  This public service announcement is brought to you by StartPage.com,
[30:37.680 --> 30:41.680]  the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[30:41.680 --> 30:44.680]  Start over with StartPage.
[30:45.680 --> 30:47.680]  Data privacy is a big deal.
[30:47.680 --> 30:52.680]  So nearly every company has a policy explaining how they handle your personal information.
[30:52.680 --> 30:54.680]  But what happens if it escapes their control?
[30:54.680 --> 30:56.680]  It's not an idle question.
[30:56.680 --> 31:03.680]  According to a recent survey, a shocking 90% of US companies admit their security was breached by hackers in the last year.
[31:03.680 --> 31:07.680]  That's one more reason you should trust your searches to StartPage.com.
[31:07.680 --> 31:12.680]  Unlike other search engines, StartPage doesn't store any data on you.
[31:12.680 --> 31:16.680]  They've never been hacked, but even if they were, there would be nothing for criminals to see.
[31:16.680 --> 31:18.680]  The cupboard would be bare.
[31:18.680 --> 31:21.680]  Too bad other companies don't treat your data the same way.
[31:21.680 --> 31:23.680]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albright.
[31:23.680 --> 31:26.680]  More news and information at CatherineAlbright.com.
[31:31.680 --> 31:32.680]  I lost my son.
[31:32.680 --> 31:33.680]  My uncle.
[31:33.680 --> 31:34.680]  My uncle.
[31:34.680 --> 31:39.680]  On September 11, 2001, most people don't know that a third tower fell on September 11.
[31:39.680 --> 31:44.680]  World Trade Center 7, a 47-story skyscraper, was not hit by a plane.
[31:44.680 --> 31:47.680]  The official explanation is that fire brought down Building 7.
[31:47.680 --> 31:53.680]  Over 1,200 architects and engineers had looked into the evidence and believed there was more to the story.
[31:53.680 --> 31:54.680]  Bring justice to my son.
[31:54.680 --> 31:55.680]  My uncle.
[31:55.680 --> 31:56.680]  My nephew.
[31:56.680 --> 31:57.680]  My son.
[31:57.680 --> 31:58.680]  Go to buildingwatch.org.
[31:58.680 --> 32:02.680]  Why it's health, why it matters, and what you can do.
[32:28.680 --> 32:32.680]  The Reduction with Rule of Law Radio has put together the most comprehensive teaching tool available
[32:32.680 --> 32:36.680]  that will help you understand what due process is and how to hold courts to the rule of law.
[32:36.680 --> 32:40.680]  You can get your own copy of this invaluable material by going to ruleoflawradio.com
[32:40.680 --> 32:42.680]  and ordering your copy today.
[32:42.680 --> 32:45.680]  By ordering now, you'll receive a copy of Eddie's book, The Texas Transportation Code,
[32:45.680 --> 32:50.680]  The Law vs. the Lie, video and audio of the original 2009 seminar, hundreds of research documents,
[32:50.680 --> 32:52.680]  and other useful resource material.
[32:52.680 --> 32:56.680]  Learn how to fight for your rights with the help of this material from ruleoflawradio.com.
[32:56.680 --> 33:01.680]  Today and together we can have free society we all want and deserve.
[33:01.680 --> 33:27.680]  Live Free Speech Radio, LogosRadionetwork.com.
[33:27.680 --> 33:34.680]  Live Free Speech Radio, LogosRadionetwork.com.
[33:57.680 --> 34:07.680]  Live Free Speech Radio, LogosRadionetwork.com.
[34:27.680 --> 34:37.680]  Live Free Speech Radio, LogosRadionetwork.com.
[34:57.680 --> 35:07.680]  Live Free Speech Radio, LogosRadionetwork.com.
[35:27.680 --> 35:32.680]  Okay, howdy, howdy, Randy Kalkum, Brett Fountain, Will Laurel,
[35:32.680 --> 35:37.680]  and in that last segment we had a little technical difficulty,
[35:37.680 --> 35:44.680]  and I was delivering this exceptionally eloquent oratory,
[35:44.680 --> 35:49.680]  and I was just a patting myself on the back about what a great job I did,
[35:49.680 --> 35:56.680]  and at the same time Deborah was on the air from last Thursday,
[35:56.680 --> 36:01.680]  talking about the sex-ape subject I was talking about.
[36:01.680 --> 36:07.680]  So, anyway, now I'm not going to talk about this again,
[36:07.680 --> 36:11.680]  I'm going to bring Deborah, she wants to address this issue, Deb.
[36:11.680 --> 36:16.680]  Hi, thanks listeners, sorry, there was some technical issues over here,
[36:16.680 --> 36:24.680]  overheating equipment, so yes, so the Skype machine overheated temporarily,
[36:24.680 --> 36:28.680]  we had to run an archive until I got that situation under control,
[36:28.680 --> 36:32.680]  literally almost putting out fires everywhere we go.
[36:32.680 --> 36:36.680]  So, at any rate, yeah, that was, I guess, serendipity,
[36:36.680 --> 36:39.680]  I was talking about this exact same thing last week,
[36:39.680 --> 36:46.680]  and so I switched over to that archive while we were getting the Skype situation handled,
[36:46.680 --> 36:57.680]  and I didn't mention the cause number last week, it's 20-0430, that's the state case,
[36:57.680 --> 37:01.680]  that's the one I was talking about, it was one of the original,
[37:01.680 --> 37:06.680]  one of the first cases that this lawyer Woodfill, you know,
[37:06.680 --> 37:11.680]  representing Steve Hott's, Hott's, however his name is pronounced,
[37:11.680 --> 37:19.680]  these conservatives out of Houston, they first filed lawsuit concerning the business closures,
[37:19.680 --> 37:22.680]  all right, it was one of the first, they sue Abbott all the time,
[37:22.680 --> 37:29.680]  and so this was one of the first ones, and basically, but the argument is the same
[37:29.680 --> 37:34.680]  when it, if you're talking about masks, all right, the argument is the same,
[37:34.680 --> 37:40.680]  and it doesn't really, what Randy was talking about, you know, a paralegal telling him,
[37:40.680 --> 37:43.680]  oh, you should come up with all these reasons of why you don't want to wear a mask
[37:43.680 --> 37:48.680]  or you shouldn't or, you know, that he doesn't have a right this or that, none of that matters,
[37:48.680 --> 37:51.680]  okay, none of it matters, it doesn't matter whether you want to wear a mask or not,
[37:51.680 --> 37:55.680]  it doesn't matter, it doesn't matter whether you think it's a good idea,
[37:55.680 --> 38:00.680]  it doesn't matter whether you have your research and I have mine and they are opposing research,
[38:00.680 --> 38:07.680]  it doesn't matter, none of that matters, what matters is, does the governor have the authority
[38:07.680 --> 38:14.680]  under constitution and statute to do what he did with these executive orders,
[38:14.680 --> 38:19.680]  that's the only thing that matters, and the answer is no, he does not,
[38:19.680 --> 38:27.680]  and so the Texas Supreme Court unfortunately had to rule in the governor's favor in this first case,
[38:27.680 --> 38:37.680]  but they also gave some very crucial lessons to all of us on what, maybe not how,
[38:37.680 --> 38:44.680]  but basically what needs to be done in order to bring these issues before the Texas Supreme Court
[38:44.680 --> 38:51.680]  because they're chomping at the bit to get this runaway governor under control,
[38:51.680 --> 38:59.680]  and so that lawsuit, that cause number is 20, again 20-0430,
[38:59.680 --> 39:06.680]  and I'll tell you, it's a very entertaining read to read the Texas Supreme Court ruling on that case,
[39:06.680 --> 39:14.680]  basically saying, look, the biggest shocker on that one was that they actually agreed
[39:14.680 --> 39:24.680]  that certain section of the Texas government code very much looked like it's outside the scope of constitution,
[39:24.680 --> 39:29.680]  where it talks about, see, even under the Texas Constitution,
[39:29.680 --> 39:36.680]  the governor can declare disasters, can declare emergencies, and has certain emergency powers,
[39:36.680 --> 39:46.680]  and because of the U.S. Supreme Court case law very well adjudicated having to do with the strict scrutiny test,
[39:46.680 --> 39:57.680]  which I talked about for a few shows now, the government can infringe upon certain fundamental rights in certain cases.
[39:57.680 --> 40:02.680]  Okay, we've mentioned this before, like if you live in an urban area and you own property,
[40:02.680 --> 40:10.680]  okay, your rights over that property only go so far because they're not going to let you poison the aquifer
[40:10.680 --> 40:16.680]  and kill everyone around you with dysentery because you want to build an outhouse in your backyard.
[40:16.680 --> 40:21.680]  All right, so you don't have the right to do just about anything you want on your property
[40:21.680 --> 40:25.680]  because it could harm other people and even kill them. That's just the way it is.
[40:25.680 --> 40:30.680]  If you want to do that, you have to go get a piece of land way out in the country and you do your thing.
[40:30.680 --> 40:37.680]  All right, so the government can infringe on your rights in certain situations and there's a very,
[40:37.680 --> 40:45.680]  it's called a strict scrutiny test. All right, so he does have a governor, he or she has the authority to do certain things
[40:45.680 --> 40:51.680]  and issue executive orders in certain situations, all right, ordering certain things,
[40:51.680 --> 40:59.680]  but it has to be within the scope of his delegated authority under Constitution and statute
[40:59.680 --> 41:03.680]  and apparently even some of the statute is unconstitutional as well.
[41:03.680 --> 41:12.680]  And so the big takeaway here from the Texas Supreme Court ruling is that they basically said straight up
[41:12.680 --> 41:24.680]  that just because there seem to be some confusion here regarding how to bring these issues before the Supreme Court,
[41:24.680 --> 41:30.680]  this does not mean that the governor's actions are beyond judicial review.
[41:30.680 --> 41:36.680]  They made that very clear. And so it's, in fact, that's almost like a quote.
[41:36.680 --> 41:43.680]  If you read the document, you'll find it. This does not mean that the governor's actions are beyond judicial review.
[41:43.680 --> 41:53.680]  They are saying, bring us something. They're telling everyone, bring us something so that we can do what we need to do here.
[41:53.680 --> 42:03.680]  Let me address, I wanted to address strict scrutiny. In this case, we didn't get to strict scrutiny yet.
[42:03.680 --> 42:19.680]  What I got took away from what Fed said is that if the legislature authorizes the governor or any official
[42:19.680 --> 42:29.680]  to issue orders that exceed federal constitutional limits, that's beyond the scope of the Texas legislature.
[42:29.680 --> 42:37.680]  And it's beyond the scope of this officer. If they issue that under this Texas government code,
[42:37.680 --> 42:47.680]  that if you read the government code as authorizing the state legislature to violate federal law,
[42:47.680 --> 42:57.680]  you can't get there, not from the state. You can get there from the Fed, maybe, under Anderson v. Massachusetts.
[42:57.680 --> 43:05.680]  But in that case, the legislature could pass laws that temporarily violated,
[43:05.680 --> 43:12.680]  violated constitutional rights in an emergency, but the governor couldn't do it by fiat.
[43:12.680 --> 43:21.680]  Well, here's what I've read as far as the controlling case law about this strict scrutiny thing.
[43:21.680 --> 43:30.680]  It does not just apply to Congress. It also applies to public servants in the executive branch or even at the local level,
[43:30.680 --> 43:42.680]  like mayors and such, where they are over-exercising their powers under disaster in emergency.
[43:42.680 --> 43:49.680]  They still are bound by the strict scrutiny and some of these other levels of scrutiny as well.
[43:49.680 --> 43:56.680]  They can't just do whatever they want. They have to comply with the same regard as Congress.
[43:56.680 --> 43:59.680]  We'll be right back.
[43:59.680 --> 44:04.680]  I love logos. Without the shows on this network, I'd be almost as ignorant as my friends.
[44:04.680 --> 44:08.680]  I'm so addicted to the truth now that there's no going back. I need my truth fix.
[44:08.680 --> 44:12.680]  I'd be lost without logos and I really want to help keep this network on the air.
[44:12.680 --> 44:17.680]  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
[44:17.680 --> 44:21.680]  because I spent it all on supplements. How can I help logos?
[44:21.680 --> 44:26.680]  Well, I'm glad you asked. Whenever you order anything from Amazon, you can help logos.
[44:26.680 --> 44:30.680]  With ordering your supplies or holiday gifts, first thing you do is clear your cookies.
[44:30.680 --> 44:34.680]  Now, go to LogosRegular Network.com.
[44:34.680 --> 44:37.680]  Click on the Amazon logo and bookmark it.
[44:37.680 --> 44:42.680]  Now, when you order anything from Amazon, you use that link and Logos gets a few pesos.
[44:42.680 --> 44:43.680]  Do I pay extra?
[44:43.680 --> 44:44.680]  No.
[44:44.680 --> 44:46.680]  Do I have to do anything different when I order?
[44:46.680 --> 44:47.680]  No.
[44:47.680 --> 44:48.680]  Can I use my Amazon Prime?
[44:48.680 --> 44:49.680]  No.
[44:49.680 --> 44:50.680]  I mean, yes.
[44:50.680 --> 44:55.680]  Wow. Giving without doing anything or spending any money. This is perfect.
[44:55.680 --> 44:56.680]  Thank you so much.
[44:56.680 --> 44:58.680]  We are Logos.
[44:58.680 --> 45:27.680]  We are Logos.
[45:28.680 --> 45:54.680]  We are Logos.
[45:54.680 --> 46:01.680]  We are Logos.
[46:24.680 --> 46:53.680]  Okay. We are back. Randy Kelsen, Brett Souten, Deborah Stevens, Reelover Radio, and the
[46:53.680 --> 46:58.680]  phones were on and then apparently went off. I got them back on now, so if you tried to
[46:58.680 --> 47:01.680]  call in, you couldn't get through. Try again. We got them back up.
[47:01.680 --> 47:08.680]  And before we go back to Deborah, there's one small point that I wanted to address here.
[47:08.680 --> 47:16.680]  And when I read that Supreme Court decision, they addressed the, I forget the exact statute
[47:16.680 --> 47:26.680]  in the government code that authorized the legislature and public officials in Texas to take extraordinary
[47:26.680 --> 47:31.680]  measures in a pandemic or in an emergency.
[47:31.680 --> 47:33.680]  That's all nice and cool.
[47:33.680 --> 47:42.680]  But what the Supreme appeared to be telling Woodfield is while they can take extraordinary
[47:42.680 --> 47:47.680]  measures, they can't take extraordinary measures.
[47:47.680 --> 47:55.680]  Let me step back. They can take extraordinary measures, but if they do, they have to abide
[47:55.680 --> 47:58.680]  by this strict scrutiny test.
[47:58.680 --> 48:06.680]  They have to make sure that the measures that they take are the least restrictive, that
[48:06.680 --> 48:13.680]  they will achieve the intended purpose. Oh, Deborah, what was the other one?
[48:13.680 --> 48:15.680]  We should get all this right.
[48:15.680 --> 48:18.680]  But they can't even get the strict scrutiny.
[48:18.680 --> 48:26.680]  Okay, that's where I'm going. If they stay within the state and federal constitution,
[48:26.680 --> 48:31.680]  or even if they stayed within the state constitution, maybe.
[48:31.680 --> 48:38.680]  Maybe he could issue orders that violate the state constitution under an order, under a
[48:38.680 --> 48:42.680]  leave from the state legislature.
[48:42.680 --> 48:47.680]  But he can't issue an order that violates the federal constitution.
[48:47.680 --> 48:56.680]  If you interpret this state government code permission to give him permission to violate
[48:56.680 --> 49:01.680]  federal law, then that interpretation of the government code is unconstitutional.
[49:01.680 --> 49:08.680]  In that case, the government code would be unconstitutional and void, leaving the governor
[49:08.680 --> 49:10.680]  with no authority at all.
[49:10.680 --> 49:15.680]  Deborah, does that sound right?
[49:15.680 --> 49:17.680]  I think so.
[49:17.680 --> 49:24.680]  You kind of lost me a little bit, because going back and forth between the Fed and the
[49:24.680 --> 49:30.680]  state, I'm sorry, I was doing a couple of other things at the same time.
[49:30.680 --> 49:33.680]  Okay, I probably lost everybody else too then.
[49:33.680 --> 49:39.680]  All I'm saying is the state legislature can authorize the governor to do anything that
[49:39.680 --> 49:43.680]  the state has the power to authorize him to do.
[49:43.680 --> 49:47.680]  They don't have power to authorize him to violate federal law.
[49:47.680 --> 49:49.680]  That's what I got to say.
[49:49.680 --> 49:54.680]  The federal constitution.
[49:54.680 --> 50:02.680]  Well, they can, Randy, if in the particular instance, it passes the strict scrutiny test.
[50:02.680 --> 50:08.680]  That's what the strict scrutiny test is all about, that depending on the situation, whether
[50:08.680 --> 50:15.680]  it's Congress passing a law, or whether it's a bureaucrat doing something by fiat, whether
[50:15.680 --> 50:24.680]  it's a mayor issuing some kind of edict, whether it's a county judge issuing an order, whether
[50:24.680 --> 50:31.680]  it's the governor doing something by executive order, that's what the strict scrutiny test
[50:31.680 --> 50:39.680]  is all about, that they can do things like that that would infringe upon our federally
[50:39.680 --> 50:47.680]  protected, fundamental rights by the Bill of Rights of the federal constitution unless,
[50:47.680 --> 50:52.680]  if it passes the strict scrutiny test.
[50:52.680 --> 50:54.680]  That's what the whole scrutiny...
[50:54.680 --> 50:56.680]  Okay, well, hey, you know what?
[50:56.680 --> 50:58.680]  Listen, listen, you tell...
[50:58.680 --> 51:04.680]  Hey, Brett, listen, you tell that to the U.S. Supreme Court because there are...
[51:04.680 --> 51:12.680]  There is decades of jurisprudence and well-established U.S. Supreme Court case law on this strict
[51:12.680 --> 51:15.680]  scrutiny test, okay?
[51:15.680 --> 51:17.680]  I'm not anti-strict scrutiny.
[51:17.680 --> 51:22.680]  I'm anti then using an idea of strict scrutiny to put something in there that doesn't belong
[51:22.680 --> 51:23.680]  there in the first place.
[51:23.680 --> 51:25.680]  Okay, well, that's a different issue.
[51:25.680 --> 51:27.680]  That's a different issue.
[51:27.680 --> 51:29.680]  This is something here.
[51:29.680 --> 51:31.680]  That's a totally different issue.
[51:31.680 --> 51:35.680]  All of this derives from Anderson v. Massachusetts.
[51:35.680 --> 51:41.680]  And that's the one that said that they could impede constitutional rights.
[51:41.680 --> 51:44.680]  But that one was very clear.
[51:44.680 --> 51:52.680]  Only the legislature could pass a law that violated a constitutional right.
[51:52.680 --> 51:55.680]  And that had to pass strict scrutiny.
[51:55.680 --> 52:04.680]  There's nothing in the case law that authorizes a public official to by edict issue an order
[52:04.680 --> 52:08.680]  that breaches constitutional law.
[52:08.680 --> 52:13.680]  And that's what I got that the Texas Supreme was telling Woodfield.
[52:13.680 --> 52:20.680]  Yeah, the legislature could pass legislation, but the governor could not by edict create
[52:20.680 --> 52:21.680]  legislation.
[52:21.680 --> 52:26.680]  Okay, well, that's a different issue that has nothing to do with strict scrutiny.
[52:26.680 --> 52:30.680]  And actually, Randy, listen, listen, hold on, hold on.
[52:30.680 --> 52:35.680]  The Anderson case that you're talking about, okay, has to do with Congress.
[52:35.680 --> 52:39.680]  But there is a mountain of case law.
[52:39.680 --> 52:44.680]  The U.S. Supreme Court, all you have to do is go look strict scrutiny.
[52:44.680 --> 52:49.680]  I mean, just even on the Wikipedia page, there are dozens of links to cases that you can
[52:49.680 --> 52:55.680]  pull up that you don't even need Lexis-Nexis for, or you don't even need PACER for, okay,
[52:55.680 --> 53:02.680]  because it's on Cornell University website where it has to do with public servants issuing
[53:02.680 --> 53:07.680]  executive orders that passed this strict scrutiny test.
[53:07.680 --> 53:10.680]  So it's not just about Congress, all right?
[53:10.680 --> 53:14.680]  It really is not just about Congress.
[53:14.680 --> 53:20.680]  But the thing is, the question is, do you even need to get there?
[53:20.680 --> 53:22.680]  Do you even need to go there?
[53:22.680 --> 53:30.680]  Because you only apply the strict scrutiny test if whatever, like in this case, the governor
[53:30.680 --> 53:38.680]  is doing is within the scope of constitution and statute.
[53:38.680 --> 53:46.680]  And one of the things that the Texas Supreme Court said in this situation is that not only
[53:46.680 --> 53:51.680]  did he do certain things that were outside the scope of statute, okay, so number one,
[53:51.680 --> 53:53.680]  the statute shoots it down right there.
[53:53.680 --> 53:58.680]  You don't even need to question the strict scrutiny, all right?
[53:58.680 --> 54:01.680]  Statutes straight up shoots down what he did.
[54:01.680 --> 54:09.680]  And then furthermore, they were saying that some of the statute of the government code did not
[54:09.680 --> 54:14.680]  comply with the restrictions of the Texas Constitution, okay?
[54:14.680 --> 54:22.680]  So that's where, you know, you have to back up these different levels if that makes sense.
[54:22.680 --> 54:29.680]  Yes, and the Texas Constitution has one of the best paragraphs I've ever seen in a Constitution.
[54:29.680 --> 54:35.680]  At the end of the Bill of Rights, it says the rights enumerated in this section shall be held
[54:35.680 --> 54:39.680]  in violent, in perpetuity.
[54:39.680 --> 54:44.680]  That means nobody can breach them, period.
[54:44.680 --> 54:50.680]  They didn't hiccup, they didn't leave any loopholes, they made it very clear.
[54:50.680 --> 54:58.680]  You can do lots of things, but breach these rights is not amongst those things you can do.
[54:58.680 --> 55:03.680]  And if you can do things that are within the scope of that, but then you have to show that
[55:03.680 --> 55:06.680]  what you're doing meets strict scrutiny.
[55:06.680 --> 55:09.680]  But when you get beyond it, you're outside of scope.
[55:09.680 --> 55:12.680]  Yes.
[55:12.680 --> 55:14.680]  That's my story.
[55:14.680 --> 55:19.680]  Okay, okay, so I think that makes sense now to all of us.
[55:19.680 --> 55:24.680]  So basically it sounds like we're saying, you and I are saying the same thing just coming up.
[55:24.680 --> 55:25.680]  Exactly.
[55:25.680 --> 55:26.680]  It's different angles.
[55:26.680 --> 55:27.680]  Exactly.
[55:27.680 --> 55:35.680]  So I wanted to read also some of the things that the Texas Supreme Court said in their ruling on this case.
[55:35.680 --> 55:39.680]  Again, the cause number 20-0430.
[55:39.680 --> 55:48.680]  And it says here, I mean, this is kind of like right up your alley, Randy, of what you're saying on page one.
[55:48.680 --> 55:49.680]  I'm not going to read the whole thing.
[55:49.680 --> 55:50.680]  It's several pages.
[55:50.680 --> 55:52.680]  I'm just going to read some excerpts.
[55:52.680 --> 56:00.680]  This is Justice Divine concurring in the petition's dismissal for want of jurisdiction.
[56:00.680 --> 56:02.680]  They lacked jurisdiction.
[56:02.680 --> 56:11.680]  And so one of the things that Justice Divine says, while we entrust our health and safety to politically accountable officials,
[56:11.680 --> 56:17.680]  we must not do so at the expense of basic constitutional architecture.
[56:17.680 --> 56:22.680]  And he cites a case here.
[56:22.680 --> 56:36.680]  Bay United Pentecostal Church v. Newsom, and they give a citation there that was a case, 197 U.S. 11, 38.
[56:36.680 --> 56:47.680]  And so he says, we should not, as we recently said, quote, abandon the Constitution at the moment we need it most.
[56:47.680 --> 56:51.680]  And that's in salon a la mode.
[56:51.680 --> 56:53.680]  And that was a 2020 case.
[56:53.680 --> 57:12.680]  That was the case where they ordered this district judge in Dallas to release the salon owner who opened her business early while there was still the so-called lockdown.
[57:12.680 --> 57:22.680]  And so the Texas Supreme Court had to shoot down that district judge because he was holding her in contempt for not apologizing.
[57:22.680 --> 57:24.680]  That's why she went to jail.
[57:24.680 --> 57:29.680]  It wasn't because of the, she didn't go to jail because she violated the order.
[57:29.680 --> 57:37.680]  She went to jail over contempt of court because he ordered her to apologize and she refused.
[57:37.680 --> 57:42.680]  I mean, it's just these people are just insane with their hubris.
[57:42.680 --> 57:50.680]  So anyways, the Texas Supreme Court quoting itself saying, we cannot abandon the Constitution at the moment we need it most.
[57:50.680 --> 57:55.680]  And so we're going to have to take this up again some more on the other side.
[57:55.680 --> 58:00.680]  They get into how, why they didn't have jurisdiction to make a ruling.
[58:00.680 --> 58:05.680]  But the important thing, and I'll go over more of this on the other side.
[58:05.680 --> 58:19.680]  They say, but this is not to say that a governor's emergency related actions are categorically immune from judicial review.
[58:19.680 --> 58:32.680]  There are, of course, other ways in which we may and indeed must weigh in on questions of constitutional magnitude.
[58:32.680 --> 58:40.680]  And so we're going to take this up on the other side because I'm telling you, there's a very scathing ruling that they gave here.
[58:40.680 --> 58:42.680]  They're wanting to take action.
[58:42.680 --> 58:44.680]  We just got to bring them the right questions in the right way.
[58:44.680 --> 58:48.680]  We'll be right back on the other side.
[58:48.680 --> 58:53.680]  The Bible remains the most popular book in the world.
[58:53.680 --> 58:57.680]  Yet countless readers are frustrated because they struggle to understand it.
[58:57.680 --> 59:06.680]  Some new translations try to help by simplifying the text, but in the process can compromise the profound meaning of the Scripture.
[59:06.680 --> 59:08.680]  Enter the recovery version.
[59:08.680 --> 59:17.680]  First, this new translation is extremely faithful and accurate, but the real story is the more than 9000 explanatory footnotes.
[59:17.680 --> 59:27.680]  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.
[59:27.680 --> 59:32.680]  Bibles from America would like to give you a free recovery version simply for the asking.
[59:32.680 --> 59:47.680]  This comprehensive yet compact study Bible is yours just by calling us toll free at 1-888-551-0102 or by ordering online at freestudybible.com.
[59:47.680 --> 59:51.680]  That's freestudybible.com.
[59:51.680 --> 59:59.680]  You're listening to the Logos Radio Network at LogosRadioNetwork.com.
[59:59.680 --> 01:00:05.680]  The following news flash is brought to you by the Lone Star Lowdown.
[01:00:05.680 --> 01:00:33.680]  Markets for Monday the 22nd of July 2019 open with precious metals, gold $1,429 an ounce, silver $16.45 an ounce, copper $2.75 an ounce, oil Texas crude $55.63 a barrel, brand crude $62.47 a barrel, and cryptos in order of market cap, Bitcoin Core $10,566.52, Ethereum $227.26, XRP Ripple $33.00,
[01:00:33.680 --> 01:00:45.680]  Litecoin $100.31 and Bitcoin Cash is at $324.10 a crypto coin.
[01:00:45.680 --> 01:01:03.680]  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, killing 10 and injuring 40.
[01:01:03.680 --> 01:01:24.680]  And 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 and San Antonio have been dropping marijuana possession charges and even refusing to file new ones since they are stipulating that they do not have the time or the laboratory equipment to test the herb for THC.
[01:01:24.680 --> 01:01:33.680]  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.
[01:01:33.680 --> 01:01:47.680]  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.
[01:01:47.680 --> 01:02:01.680]  As well as other cities too, like the District Attorney in El Paso, Kyma 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.
[01:02:01.680 --> 01:02:12.680]  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.
[01:02:12.680 --> 01:02:21.680]  It's important that if someone is charged with something, the test matches what they're charged with.
[01:02:21.680 --> 01:02:26.680]  A paper by Tulane University identified a five and a half inch American pocket shark.
[01:02:26.680 --> 01:02:38.680]  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.
[01:02:38.680 --> 01:02:44.680]  According to the university paper, the shark secretes a luminous fluid from a gland near its front fins.
[01:02:44.680 --> 01:02:50.680]  For the purpose, it is hypothesized to lure and prey who may be drawn into the glow.
[01:02:50.680 --> 01:03:09.680]  This is Rick Rody with your lowdown for July 22, 2019.
[01:03:20.680 --> 01:03:30.680]  This is Rick Rody with your lowdown for July 22, 2019.
[01:03:50.680 --> 01:04:10.680]  This is Rick Rody with your lowdown for July 22, 2019.
[01:04:10.680 --> 01:04:23.680]  Okay, we are back. Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain, Deborah Stevens, Rule of Law Radio on this Thursday, the 17th day of September, 2020.
[01:04:23.680 --> 01:04:29.680]  And we're going to go back to Deb. She wanted to do a little bookend on this issue.
[01:04:29.680 --> 01:04:39.680]  Yes, yes. Before I continue with the Texas Supreme Court ruling on this case 20-0420, we were discussing on the break, you know, how this strict scrutiny test is applied.
[01:04:39.680 --> 01:04:49.680]  Okay, because Randy was mentioning this Anderson case and how it had to do with Congress and the statute and enacting statutes and stuff like that.
[01:04:49.680 --> 01:05:05.680]  Well, since then, it's the case law of this concept of strict scrutiny and there's other levels of scrutiny that are lower than strict scrutiny, depending on the particular right, quote, unquote, that might be violated.
[01:05:05.680 --> 01:05:14.680]  So there's different levels. There's different tiers, a different bar. There's actually three different levels.
[01:05:14.680 --> 01:05:21.680]  The strict scrutiny is, of course, the highest, most restrictive, the highest bar. All right, so that was the one we were talking about.
[01:05:21.680 --> 01:05:27.680]  But you can do your own research. I think we've talked about some of these other levels on previous shows.
[01:05:27.680 --> 01:05:43.680]  But at any rate, the point being that the body of law of controlling case law has grown so that really now it has been formed so that the intent is very clear that the whole, all of these different tests,
[01:05:43.680 --> 01:06:01.680]  whether it's strict scrutiny or whether it has to do with something that just is relative to what they're talking about or anything like this, the whole point is to rein in someone who's in the executive branch
[01:06:01.680 --> 01:06:21.680]  or bureaucratic agency who's been delegated discretionary authority. So say, for example, Congress under Constitution has enacted statute to delegate emergency powers to the governor, for example.
[01:06:21.680 --> 01:06:33.680]  Okay, sometimes this happens with mayors, you know, county judges, whatever. All right. Or you have, say, for example, regulatory agencies.
[01:06:33.680 --> 01:06:53.680]  All right, the strict scrutiny test has been applied to regulatory agencies at the federal and state level because, say, for example, with even like the EPA or the FCC, Congress cannot legislate every little teeny, tiny detail,
[01:06:53.680 --> 01:07:08.680]  especially when it comes to technical things like with radio, for example, like with the FCC, that Congress cannot legislate every detail of their regulatory scheme because technology changes.
[01:07:08.680 --> 01:07:20.680]  It improves. It grows. Okay, they have to have some discretion. They bring on experts to figure out, well, how are we best going to allocate frequencies?
[01:07:20.680 --> 01:07:32.680]  So that, say, for example, somebody with a walkie-talkie doesn't cause a plane crash because they're causing radio interference with air traffic control to a plane.
[01:07:32.680 --> 01:07:48.680]  Okay, it's like there needs to be something in place here so that the spectrum is divvied up and allocated for certain purposes so that, like I said, you don't have people interfering with air traffic control, for example.
[01:07:48.680 --> 01:07:59.680]  All right, stuff like this. Well, all of those things cannot be, every tiny detail of technical things like that cannot be legislated by Congress.
[01:07:59.680 --> 01:08:08.680]  It's unreasonable to expect them to do that. They have enough to do anyway. They would just be doing nothing but that all day long, just for radio, for example.
[01:08:08.680 --> 01:08:20.680]  So Congress has given regulatory agencies discretion within a certain scope to enact a regulatory scheme.
[01:08:20.680 --> 01:08:32.680]  And every single line of their regulatory scheme does not necessarily match, word for word, the statute that brought this regulatory agency into being in the first place.
[01:08:32.680 --> 01:08:45.680]  They have to have, excuse me, some discretion to enact rules, okay, a regulatory scheme. Executive branch in the bureaucracies, they have to have some discretion.
[01:08:45.680 --> 01:08:58.680]  That's reasonable. All right, and so where all the strict scrutiny stuff comes in and these other levels of scrutiny is when you have a situation where a bureaucrat or someone in the executive branch
[01:08:58.680 --> 01:09:18.680]  or a regulatory agency, okay, in and of itself or the head of a regulatory agency is doing things that apparently on its face would look, would appear that they are acting within the scope of their authority with what that's been delegated to them
[01:09:18.680 --> 01:09:37.680]  under Constitution and statute, but it's a runaway discretion, okay, they're abusing their discretion. And so in those cases where they're not clearly overstepping the line of the statute that is keeping the agency in check
[01:09:37.680 --> 01:09:51.680]  or keeping that executive branch member in check or clearly overstepping the line of Constitution, et cetera, okay, or it's starting to look like they're overstepping people's rights, that's when the strict scrutiny comes in,
[01:09:51.680 --> 01:10:03.680]  is to keep runaway discretion in check, okay, does that make, is that, that's kind of what you were saying also, right, Randy? Is Randy there?
[01:10:03.680 --> 01:10:23.680]  Yeah, I'm here. Exactly, that while the, you know, the case law allowed the legislature to abridge certain rights, they didn't necessarily allow elected officials to do that.
[01:10:23.680 --> 01:10:39.680]  And when an elected official exercises an extraordinary power, he has to be able to show that he's acting within reason. So there is some control.
[01:10:39.680 --> 01:10:51.680]  And the distinction I was making is the legislature has no power to authorize an elected official to do something that the legislature can't do.
[01:10:51.680 --> 01:11:07.680]  Yeah, okay, very good. That's exactly right. All right, so now back to the Texas Supreme Court ruling. All right, they're saying here, citing their own case, they cannot abandon the Constitution at the moment we need it most,
[01:11:07.680 --> 01:11:23.680]  and so, but unfortunately, I'm saying unfortunately, but the justice says, I concur in the dismissal of this mandamus petition for want of jurisdiction, but I write separately to express concern over some issues it raises.
[01:11:23.680 --> 01:11:34.680]  And so he goes on to say that, okay, right, this is the Texas, here's where the, here's where the conflict came in about the lack of jurisdiction.
[01:11:34.680 --> 01:11:51.680]  The Texas Constitution says the legislature may quote may confer original jurisdiction on the Supreme Court to issue rits of mandamus in such cases as may be specified, except as against the governor of the state.
[01:11:51.680 --> 01:12:15.680]  That's the Texas Constitution. That is, and they cite the Section 3a, and they say, the Texas government code comports with this specific jurisdictional exception, quote, the Supreme Court or a justice of the Supreme Court may issue rits of mandamus against any officer of the state government except the
[01:12:15.680 --> 01:12:38.680]  governor. And that is, they quote that Texas government code, Section 22.002, Section A. All right, so it's in statute and it's in Constitution. They can't do that. The Supreme Court has no jurisdiction to issue rits of mandamus, okay, if it's an original petition for writ of
[01:12:38.680 --> 01:12:48.680]  mandamus, they can't do it. They can issue rits of mandamus against the governor, but not an original petition for writ of mandamus. All right, there's a distinction there.
[01:12:48.680 --> 01:13:03.680]  And so they say, it is thus clear we lack jurisdiction to issue a writ of mandamus here. But this is not to say that a governor's emergency related actions are categorically immune from judicial review.
[01:13:03.680 --> 01:13:19.680]  There are, of course, other ways in which we may and indeed must weigh in on questions of constitutional magnitude. And when we do, we quote, must not shrink from our duty to say what the law is.
[01:13:19.680 --> 01:13:39.680]  The notion that courts ought to, quote, suspend heightened scrutiny during an emergency is misplaced for it, quote, wholly discounts the independent checking function of courts in a crisis.
[01:13:39.680 --> 01:13:54.680]  All right, so what I just read was verbatim from this ruling and they quote multiple cases here. This isn't just, you know, this guy talking on a soapbox. I mean, they're hyperlinking and quoting cases here.
[01:13:54.680 --> 01:14:10.680]  Lindsay F. Wiley V. and Stephen Vladik, sorry, reinforces arguments for regular judicial review in times of crisis. Okay, they're talking about these different cases that come in.
[01:14:10.680 --> 01:14:32.680]  All right, so it's pretty clear, okay, listen to this, listen to this. All right, he says, okay, relators, that said, I share, relators concern and what they describe as an improper delegation of legislative authority to the executive branch.
[01:14:32.680 --> 01:14:50.680]  Okay, so here it comes where he starts talking about how even that section of the government goes unconstitutional. Okay, and he says, disaster or not, the Texas Constitution doesn't appear to contemplate any circumstances in which we may condone such consolidation of power.
[01:14:50.680 --> 01:15:14.680]  For better or worse, we have witnessed firsthand how end running the traditional lawmaking process can threaten our everyday liberties. All right, and so they're saying the Texas Constitution which states that no branch of government shall exercise any power properly attached to either of the others is not simply a suggestion.
[01:15:14.680 --> 01:15:20.680]  It's not simply a suggestion. It's pretty powerful stuff, Randy.
[01:15:20.680 --> 01:15:28.680]  They're making it clear. You know, they go on to say that you brought this to us using the wrong vehicle.
[01:15:28.680 --> 01:15:30.680]  That's right. That's right.
[01:15:30.680 --> 01:15:33.680]  Bring the right one and we'll kick his behind.
[01:15:33.680 --> 01:15:47.680]  That is exactly what they were saying. He says, okay, they're saying here, the judiciary may not suspend laws, nor may the executive only the legislature.
[01:15:47.680 --> 01:15:55.680]  All right, so they're saying bring it on, but you've got to bring it the right way.
[01:15:55.680 --> 01:16:04.680]  If you keep reading, it's really incredible. I mean, that's just some of it. Here he goes. I'm going to wrap it up with this at the end.
[01:16:04.680 --> 01:16:22.680]  The Texas Constitution does not have a pause button for trying times. It's true that we shouldn't quote sally forth each day looking for wrongs to write, but as bulwarks of liberty courts have a duty to opine on those issues that involve the most rudimentary conception of liberty,
[01:16:22.680 --> 01:16:27.680]  to move about freely and sustain one's way of life.
[01:16:27.680 --> 01:16:42.680]  While I believe we are want of jurisdiction here, our dismissal of this mandamus petition should not be misperceived as a judicial cow-tow.
[01:16:42.680 --> 01:16:48.680]  This should not be perceived as a judicial cow-tow. This I respectfully concur. Pretty amazing stuff, Randy.
[01:16:48.680 --> 01:16:59.680]  Yep, bring me what I need and I'll kick his behind. Absolutely. Good news all around. We'll be back on the other side.
[01:17:19.680 --> 01:17:34.680]  We wish to reflect God's light and be a blessing to all those with a hearing ear. Join Nana and guests for both verse by verse Bible studies and topical Bible studies designed to provoke unto love and good works.
[01:17:34.680 --> 01:17:40.680]  Our verse by verse Bible studies will begin in the book of Matthew where we will discuss one chapter per week.
[01:17:40.680 --> 01:17:47.680]  Our topical Bible studies will vary each week and will explore sound doctrine as well as Christian character development.
[01:17:47.680 --> 01:17:59.680]  So mark your calendar and join us live on LogosRadioNetwork.com Wednesdays from 8 to 10 p.m. starting January 8th for an inspiring and motivating discussion of the scriptures.
[01:18:03.680 --> 01:18:10.680]  It's the 2019 LogosRadio Network annual fundraiser and gun giveaway sponsored by Central Texas Gun Works.
[01:18:10.680 --> 01:18:17.680]  Go to LogosRadioNetwork.com and enter to win. Any amount is appreciated. Everything helps to keep us on the air.
[01:18:17.680 --> 01:18:26.680]  From Central Texas Gun Works, the grand prize up for grabs is a Spikes Tactical AR-15. More prizes and sponsors to be announced.
[01:18:26.680 --> 01:18:35.680]  Every $25 donation is a chance to win. When you purchase Randy Kelton's e-book, Legal 101, you get four chances to win.
[01:18:35.680 --> 01:18:48.680]  Purchase Eddie Craig's traffic seminar and get ten chances to win. If you've enjoyed the shows on LogosRadio Network, support our fundraiser so we can keep bringing you the best quality programming on talk radio today.
[01:18:48.680 --> 01:18:55.680]  We also accept Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. And remember, every $25 donation is a chance to win.
[01:18:55.680 --> 01:19:10.680]  Go to LogosRadioNetwork.com for details and donate today.
[01:19:25.680 --> 01:19:27.680]  Well,
[01:19:31.680 --> 01:19:35.680]  Ain't gonna fool me with that same old shit again.
[01:19:35.680 --> 01:19:40.680]  I was blindsided but now I can see your face.
[01:19:40.680 --> 01:19:47.680]  You put the fear in my pocket, took the money from my head. Ain't gonna fool me with that.
[01:19:47.680 --> 01:20:01.680]  Okay, we are back. Randy Kelton, Bret Fountain, Debra Stevens, Rune Law Radio. And Debra's gonna finish off in this segment and then we're gonna go to the callers. Go ahead, Deb.
[01:20:01.680 --> 01:20:12.680]  Yes, and it is Thursday, September 17th, 2020. And just to finish up here, yeah, if you read this order, it's really truly amazing what they're saying.
[01:20:12.680 --> 01:20:17.680]  They're saying, bring it on. And, you know, we can't wait, basically.
[01:20:17.680 --> 01:20:30.680]  And one of the points that they made is that, and one of the points that the plaintiffs are making too, is that under the Texas Disaster Act and even the Constitution,
[01:20:30.680 --> 01:20:51.680]  pretty much most of the emergency powers that are delegated to the governor all have to do with suspending requirements that normally would be in place by a state regulatory agency that would regulate business or commerce,
[01:20:51.680 --> 01:21:00.680]  or, like, the transportation code, driver's license stuff, okay, some kind of regulatory scheme.
[01:21:00.680 --> 01:21:07.680]  Okay, it says that he can suspend some aspects of regulatory schemes.
[01:21:07.680 --> 01:21:13.680]  Alright, in other words, loosen it up, lighten things up.
[01:21:13.680 --> 01:21:29.680]  Okay, like, maybe you don't, as a hairdresser, you don't necessarily have to have your, if your license was coming up due, you know, this month will give you a pass, okay, you can keep cutting hair, whatever.
[01:21:29.680 --> 01:21:41.680]  Alright, or like with TABC, lightening things up, allowing restaurants to, when everything was shut down, they can only have to go orders, so people couldn't dine in.
[01:21:41.680 --> 01:21:45.680]  Well, it was killing their business, especially if they couldn't sell drinks.
[01:21:45.680 --> 01:22:05.680]  And so they lighten things up and let the restaurants sell alcohol drinks to go if they were prepackaged by the manufacturer, which, of course, put another undue burden on the businesses because now they've got all this stock behind the bar that they can't sell.
[01:22:05.680 --> 01:22:22.680]  But even the TABC kind of gave them a wink-wink and said, well, you know, we're not going to be going around looking to bust restaurants that are running a frozen margarita machine and, you know, serving them out in a star-phone cup with a lid, with a piece of tape.
[01:22:22.680 --> 01:22:29.680]  Or, you know, we're not going to go around looking, you know, to shut them down, but technically, you aren't really supposed to do that.
[01:22:29.680 --> 01:22:45.680]  I mean, basically, it came around instead. Okay, in other words, lighten things up with regulatory schemes, not impose new restrictions that are above and beyond what's already in place, and furthermore, it has to do with businesses.
[01:22:45.680 --> 01:22:49.680]  It has to do with commerce, which the governor can do.
[01:22:49.680 --> 01:23:04.680]  All right, he is the head of the executive branch, and one of the things that the executive branch does is that there are regulatory agencies that have regulatory schemes, and so all of that is under his control.
[01:23:04.680 --> 01:23:12.680]  Okay, he's the boss of all these regulatory agencies, so he can authorize them to lighten things up.
[01:23:12.680 --> 01:23:32.680]  All right, he can deal with these regulatory schemes. It has nothing to do with us as individuals telling us what to do, or what we can and cannot do in our own homes, which, by the way, when I'm sorting through all this plethora of dozens of executive orders that the guy has issued,
[01:23:32.680 --> 01:23:44.680]  and it's like you have to match and plug in because, oh, well, this supersedes this one, but it doesn't supersede that one, and you have to go back and keep reverse engineering to figure out what he's actually trying to say.
[01:23:44.680 --> 01:23:50.680]  He kind of slipped one time on the shall not gather in groups of more than 10.
[01:23:50.680 --> 01:24:10.680]  Okay, at first that was a separate paragraph in one of his executive orders, and then it lasted for one or two more orders, and then all of a sudden he took that paragraph and he moved it underneath the section where it had to do with regulating businesses.
[01:24:10.680 --> 01:24:30.680]  All right, so he realized his mistake, and so he moved things around so that if you read it with a legal eye, you'll realize all of those things only apply to business situations or public, you know, a public place like a, you know,
[01:24:30.680 --> 01:24:49.680]  government building, okay, not your own private home, okay, he never, there's nothing there that you could construe, at least now that it's revised, that is, that he's telling people they can't meet in groups of more than 10 on private property,
[01:24:49.680 --> 01:25:07.680]  okay, but if you just look at it out of context or read it, you know, just trying to, oh my God, was he telling us that we have to do, you know, or the media, for example, taking things out of context, you know, you could twist it and spin it to make it seem like, oh, oh gosh,
[01:25:07.680 --> 01:25:16.680]  or, you know, people would internalize it and feel like, oh, well, you know, we can't have our Bible study because, you know, the governor says that we're not supposed to meet in groups more than 10.
[01:25:16.680 --> 01:25:20.680]  All right, this is the panopticon, all right, it's fake.
[01:25:20.680 --> 01:25:22.680]  That's not what he said.
[01:25:22.680 --> 01:25:41.680]  What it means is that you can't go in a group with a larger than 10 people to a restaurant that is regulated by his regulatory scheme, like, say, a wedding after party, you know, or a graduation party or something like that.
[01:25:41.680 --> 01:25:47.680]  You have to, if there's 20 people, you have to sit at two different tables, 10 each.
[01:25:47.680 --> 01:25:48.680]  That's what it means.
[01:25:48.680 --> 01:26:01.680]  It doesn't mean that you can't have all 20 people in your house, all right, and so we have to be really clear here about, you know, what exactly he's saying and what it is that he wants us to think, okay?
[01:26:01.680 --> 01:26:05.680]  And of course, you know, he's not the one that's in control here.
[01:26:05.680 --> 01:26:09.680]  He's got his handlers, too, but that's a whole other show.
[01:26:09.680 --> 01:26:17.680]  So that was just my wrap up on that deal, that this all has to do with businesses and commerce has nothing to do with us as individuals.
[01:26:17.680 --> 01:26:33.680]  And if it starts to have something to do with us as individuals, that's when we start looking at things closely, like with the strict scrutiny and the Texas Supreme Court talking about, you know, we're not going to throw liberties under the bus just because there's a pandemic.
[01:26:33.680 --> 01:26:42.680]  Good, then I'm going to go after him with a petition for declaratory judgment that should move quickly.
[01:26:42.680 --> 01:26:51.680]  And it's something I can produce online so everybody in his brother can file one.
[01:26:51.680 --> 01:27:04.680]  And we drag the governor himself personally into court to defend all these suits that are going after him directly.
[01:27:04.680 --> 01:27:06.680]  This is going to be fun.
[01:27:06.680 --> 01:27:08.680]  Okay, are you done Deb?
[01:27:08.680 --> 01:27:11.680]  I think so for now, yes, thank you.
[01:27:11.680 --> 01:27:21.680]  Okay, then we're going to go to Josh in Pennsylvania. Hello, Josh, and thank you for being patient. What do you have for us today?
[01:27:21.680 --> 01:27:26.680]  Oh, no problem. I appreciate listening to you guys' dissertation on all these things.
[01:27:26.680 --> 01:27:34.680]  No, I've gone back and forth to your email about subject matter jurisdiction. I don't know if you're in the mood to talk about that, right?
[01:27:34.680 --> 01:27:36.680]  I'm in the mood.
[01:27:36.680 --> 01:27:44.680]  All right. Well, are you, you remember the context of all this or should I, you know, last me a little bit?
[01:27:44.680 --> 01:27:50.680]  Yeah, bring us all up to speed because everybody here doesn't know what's going on.
[01:27:50.680 --> 01:28:04.680]  All right, well, I recently was given a public defender in my particular case and he basically discounted my subject matter jurisdiction challenge.
[01:28:04.680 --> 01:28:12.680]  And, you know, I did the best I could to try and convince him that it had validity, but nothing really stuck with him.
[01:28:12.680 --> 01:28:22.680]  As far as everybody, I have interacted with in the legal profession, whether they be judges, lawyers or whatnot.
[01:28:22.680 --> 01:28:30.680]  In a court of general jurisdiction, they believe that they have subject matter jurisdiction just assumed.
[01:28:30.680 --> 01:28:40.680]  And I was asserting that I was not engaged in a regular activity, so therefore they don't have subject matter jurisdiction.
[01:28:40.680 --> 01:28:46.680]  And I feel a little fuzzy about that because I haven't been able to really nail that down completely.
[01:28:46.680 --> 01:29:05.680]  Okay, maybe off the right argument slightly, the argument is, is that the complaint itself did not address a necessary element that of commerce.
[01:29:05.680 --> 01:29:14.680]  And therefore, the complaint was insufficient to invoke subject matter jurisdiction of the court.
[01:29:14.680 --> 01:29:22.680]  I'm not invoking it, not about whether they feel like they can have it.
[01:29:22.680 --> 01:29:30.680]  I come to the court and I say, Your Honor, I had a piece of gum and I've been chewing it for a long time and got it just perfect.
[01:29:30.680 --> 01:29:36.680]  And Josh over there stole my piece of gum and chewed it himself.
[01:29:36.680 --> 01:29:44.680]  Judge is going to say, okay, so what? Insufficient to invoke subject matter jurisdiction of the court.
[01:29:44.680 --> 01:29:50.680]  Already being chewed piece of gum is not enough to invoke my jurisdiction to get out of my court.
[01:29:50.680 --> 01:30:00.680]  Hang on, we'll pick this up on the other side. Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain, Debra Stevens, we'll leave our radio. We'll be right back.
[01:30:00.680 --> 01:30:09.680]  Reality TV, sugar, obesity, jet lag, the list of things that makes us dumber just keeps on growing.
[01:30:09.680 --> 01:30:12.680]  But now researchers say we can add stress to the list.
[01:30:12.680 --> 01:30:41.680]  And Dr. Kaepernald Brett, back with details in a moment.
[01:30:43.680 --> 01:30:48.680]  Are you always on the go and juggling multiple projects?
[01:30:48.680 --> 01:30:52.680]  If so, you might think that multitasking proves you're smart.
[01:30:52.680 --> 01:30:56.680]  But think again, all that stress might be eating your brain.
[01:30:56.680 --> 01:31:03.680]  A new study finds stress reduces the number of connections between neurons, which actually makes it harder for people to manage problems.
[01:31:03.680 --> 01:31:10.680]  Researchers at Yale University found that stressed out people have less grain matter in their prefrontal cortex.
[01:31:10.680 --> 01:31:15.680]  That's the part of the brain that helps us weigh conflicting ideas and regulate our emotions.
[01:31:15.680 --> 01:31:20.680]  So take a deep breath and chill out. It'll help keep your mind as sharp as a tack.
[01:31:20.680 --> 01:31:30.680]  I'm Dr. Kaepernald Brett for StartPage.com, the world's most private search engine.
[01:31:30.680 --> 01:31:36.680]  This is Building 7, a 47-story skyscraper that fell on the afternoon of September 11.
[01:31:36.680 --> 01:31:38.680]  The government says that fire brought it down.
[01:31:38.680 --> 01:31:43.680]  However, 1,500 architects and engineers have concluded it was a controlled demolition.
[01:31:43.680 --> 01:31:46.680]  Over 6,000 of my fellow service members have given their lives.
[01:31:46.680 --> 01:31:49.680]  Thousands of my fellow first responders are playing.
[01:31:49.680 --> 01:31:50.680]  I'm not a conspiracy theorist.
[01:31:50.680 --> 01:31:51.680]  I'm a structural engineer.
[01:31:51.680 --> 01:31:52.680]  I'm a New York City correctional.
[01:31:52.680 --> 01:31:53.680]  I'm an Air Force pilot.
[01:31:53.680 --> 01:31:55.680]  I'm a father who lost his son.
[01:31:55.680 --> 01:31:58.680]  We are Americans, and we deserve the truth.
[01:31:58.680 --> 01:32:01.680]  Go to RememberBuilding7.org today.
[01:32:01.680 --> 01:32:05.680]  Rule of Law Radio is proud to offer the Rule of Law Traffic Seminar.
[01:32:05.680 --> 01:32:08.680]  In today's America, we live in an us-against-them society.
[01:32:08.680 --> 01:32:10.680]  And if we, the people, are ever going to have a free society,
[01:32:10.680 --> 01:32:13.680]  then we're going to have to stand and defend our own rights.
[01:32:13.680 --> 01:32:16.680]  Among those rights are the right to travel freely from place to place,
[01:32:16.680 --> 01:32:18.680]  the right to act in our own private capacity,
[01:32:18.680 --> 01:32:20.680]  and most importantly, the right to due process of law.
[01:32:20.680 --> 01:32:24.680]  Traffic courts afford us the least expensive opportunity to learn how to enforce
[01:32:24.680 --> 01:32:26.680]  and preserve our rights through due process.
[01:32:26.680 --> 01:32:29.680]  Former Sheriff's Deputy Eddie Craig, in conjunction with Rule of Law Radio,
[01:32:29.680 --> 01:32:31.680]  has put together the most comprehensive teaching tool available
[01:32:31.680 --> 01:32:35.680]  that will help you understand what due process is and how to hold reports to the Rule of Law.
[01:32:35.680 --> 01:32:39.680]  You can get your own copy of this invaluable material by going to RuleofLawRadio.com
[01:32:39.680 --> 01:32:41.680]  and ordering your copy today.
[01:32:41.680 --> 01:32:44.680]  By ordering now, you'll receive a copy of Eddie's book, The Texas Transportation Code,
[01:32:44.680 --> 01:32:48.680]  The Law vs. the Lie, video and audio of your original 2009 seminar.
[01:32:48.680 --> 01:32:51.680]  Hundreds of research documents and other useful resource material.
[01:32:51.680 --> 01:32:54.680]  Learn how to fight for your rights with the help of this material from RuleofLawRadio.com.
[01:32:54.680 --> 01:33:02.680]  Order your copy today and together we can have the free society we all want and deserve.
[01:33:02.680 --> 01:33:12.680]  You are listening to the Logos Radio Network. LogosRadioNetwork.com.
[01:33:12.680 --> 01:33:41.680]  Logos Radio Network
[01:33:41.680 --> 01:33:48.680]  Logos Radio Network
[01:33:48.680 --> 01:33:52.680]  Okay, we are back. Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain, Debra Stevens, Rule of Law Radio,
[01:33:52.680 --> 01:33:55.680]  and talking to Josh in Pennsylvania.
[01:33:55.680 --> 01:34:05.680]  Josh, the key to subject matter jurisdiction is not whether they have general jurisdiction over the subject matter.
[01:34:05.680 --> 01:34:07.680]  Okay guys, we got that.
[01:34:07.680 --> 01:34:15.680]  The problem here is that the charging instrument is insufficient to invoke the subject matter jurisdiction,
[01:34:15.680 --> 01:34:21.680]  as the complaint had to allege all the elements of the crime.
[01:34:21.680 --> 01:34:29.680]  And since the crime comes out of a regulatory steam,
[01:34:29.680 --> 01:34:38.680]  the complaint itself must allege that you fall within the regulatory screen.
[01:34:38.680 --> 01:34:44.680]  And if it doesn't, the complaint is insufficient to invoke subject matter jurisdiction in court.
[01:34:44.680 --> 01:34:50.680]  So if I got a speeding ticket on a tricycle,
[01:34:50.680 --> 01:34:56.680]  or say my five-year-old is riding a tricycle down the sidewalk,
[01:34:56.680 --> 01:35:05.680]  and they come and give him a ticket for operating a vehicle without a license,
[01:35:05.680 --> 01:35:11.680]  how do you get there? Does not fall within the statutory scheme.
[01:35:11.680 --> 01:35:18.680]  They would have to show how riding that tricycle fell within transportation code, and it doesn't.
[01:35:18.680 --> 01:35:24.680]  So they have to show how you fall within the transportation code, and they could do that.
[01:35:24.680 --> 01:35:30.680]  They could state that he was operating a vehicle and it had a license plate,
[01:35:30.680 --> 01:35:34.680]  then the operator had a driver's license.
[01:35:34.680 --> 01:35:37.680]  And that's enough for this.
[01:35:37.680 --> 01:35:42.680]  You didn't have different things to argue. You would at least be able to come before the court.
[01:35:42.680 --> 01:35:45.680]  You could say that's insufficient.
[01:35:45.680 --> 01:35:54.680]  The fact that I am authorized to operate in commerce does not mean that I am operating in commerce.
[01:35:54.680 --> 01:36:00.680]  It would have needed evidence to indicate that I was actually using the license.
[01:36:00.680 --> 01:36:06.680]  I did that in Austin once, and the policeman asked me if I had a license, and I said, yes, I do.
[01:36:06.680 --> 01:36:09.680]  But I'm not using it right now.
[01:36:09.680 --> 01:36:16.680]  And he said, are you one of those guys? Yes, I am. Go on, get out of here.
[01:36:16.680 --> 01:36:19.680]  Only ticket I got out of.
[01:36:19.680 --> 01:36:26.680]  But point is, the complaint is insufficient. Does that make sense, Josh?
[01:36:26.680 --> 01:36:30.680]  Yeah, it does on its surface.
[01:36:30.680 --> 01:36:43.680]  I know most, at least here in Pennsylvania, most offenses that are brought against people are considered summary offenses under the vehicle code.
[01:36:43.680 --> 01:36:48.680]  This one was not brought as a summary offense. It was brought as a misdemeanor,
[01:36:48.680 --> 01:36:53.680]  and they kind of dotted their eyes and crossed their keys with the charging instrument.
[01:36:53.680 --> 01:36:58.680]  That's why I neglected to use that argument.
[01:36:58.680 --> 01:37:08.680]  But again, I'm still hung up on, perhaps I didn't couch the argument correctly, and it's a little too late to do that.
[01:37:08.680 --> 01:37:21.680]  The best I can hope for is to just put my public defender on notice that, you know, I was a pro say I brought the argument as best I could, but this is what I meant by it.
[01:37:21.680 --> 01:37:29.680]  I have a merits argument, and that's what he's arguing for me. I have a leg that's hanging on with it, but go ahead.
[01:37:29.680 --> 01:37:34.680]  How old is your lawyer?
[01:37:34.680 --> 01:37:38.680]  He looks to be early 50s.
[01:37:38.680 --> 01:37:45.680]  Oh, and he's an old guy, so he's probably not the sharpest knife in the drawer.
[01:37:45.680 --> 01:37:53.680]  He would be more malleable if he was young. But if he's old and still doing public defending work,
[01:37:53.680 --> 01:38:02.680]  that means he's not the most aggressive lawyer around, or he'd be out making the big bucks.
[01:38:02.680 --> 01:38:12.680]  So he's down here doing public defendant work where he does the same thing all over and over and over. He doesn't have to stress himself.
[01:38:12.680 --> 01:38:16.680]  Have you bar grieved him yet?
[01:38:16.680 --> 01:38:21.680]  I haven't gotten there yet. I was hoping to...
[01:38:21.680 --> 01:38:28.680]  Okay, my last lawyer, I didn't bar grieve him, but I told him I intended to.
[01:38:28.680 --> 01:38:33.680]  Told him I have motions before the court and I have 19 issues before the court.
[01:38:33.680 --> 01:38:43.680]  You will adequately adjudicate every single one of them. You fail to adjudicate a single issue, I'll bar grieve you for it.
[01:38:43.680 --> 01:38:49.680]  Mr. Kelton, you would grieve me in a heartbeat.
[01:38:49.680 --> 01:38:53.680]  It dismissed the case to protect my lawyer from me.
[01:38:53.680 --> 01:39:02.680]  You got to give your lawyer something to work with, and the best thing he can have to work with is a real jerk for a client.
[01:39:02.680 --> 01:39:05.680]  You need to bar grieve the prosecutor.
[01:39:05.680 --> 01:39:11.680]  Judicial conduct, complain to judge, and then threaten your lawyer.
[01:39:11.680 --> 01:39:16.680]  Have you heard my four-sided chess board analogy?
[01:39:16.680 --> 01:39:21.680]  Yes, and I'm very intimate with it from experience now.
[01:39:21.680 --> 01:39:32.680]  So, for everybody else, you go into court, you got your lawyer to your right, opposing counsel to your left, judge across from you.
[01:39:32.680 --> 01:39:35.680]  Four-sided chess is all about relationships.
[01:39:35.680 --> 01:39:43.680]  Two gang up on one of the others to get them out of the gang, all three gang up on one, get him out.
[01:39:43.680 --> 01:39:50.680]  And then the three left, they get a relationship between two to get the other one out, and then the last two battle it out.
[01:39:50.680 --> 01:39:56.680]  If you're going to have any chance of winning, you have to get in these relationships.
[01:39:56.680 --> 01:39:58.680]  You have a relationship with your lawyer.
[01:39:58.680 --> 01:40:05.680]  Your lawyer has a relationship with opposing counsel, and both lawyers have a relationship with the judge.
[01:40:05.680 --> 01:40:07.680]  You're the odd man out.
[01:40:07.680 --> 01:40:17.680]  So the best way you can win the case is put your lawyer in a position to where he can use his relationship to the judge and opposing counsel
[01:40:17.680 --> 01:40:25.680]  to get his dirty rotten, difficult client from ruining his career.
[01:40:25.680 --> 01:40:28.680]  You guys got to help me out here.
[01:40:28.680 --> 01:40:34.680]  Now, that doesn't mean you're nice to the lawyer, but life is tough.
[01:40:34.680 --> 01:40:36.680]  So use your lawyer to beat the case.
[01:40:36.680 --> 01:40:38.680]  That's how I won the case.
[01:40:38.680 --> 01:40:42.680]  They dismissed the case to protect my lawyer from me.
[01:40:42.680 --> 01:40:43.680]  And that worked.
[01:40:43.680 --> 01:40:48.680]  That's certainly the path I'm on, and I have numerous other things to hammer him with.
[01:40:48.680 --> 01:40:53.680]  I'm just still a little hung up on the subject matter jurisdiction stuff.
[01:40:53.680 --> 01:41:03.680]  One other question on that note, when the issue is raised, is it not true that the burden of proof is on the court to prove jurisdiction?
[01:41:03.680 --> 01:41:04.680]  Yes.
[01:41:04.680 --> 01:41:09.680]  I'm kind of seeing conflicting things on that.
[01:41:09.680 --> 01:41:24.680]  Yes, but if the court has general jurisdiction, if you didn't challenge the sufficiency of the charging instrument, but challenged the general jurisdiction of the court, then they're right.
[01:41:24.680 --> 01:41:27.680]  They have general jurisdiction.
[01:41:27.680 --> 01:41:32.680]  And your challenge was insufficient.
[01:41:32.680 --> 01:41:35.680]  You won't win that one anyway.
[01:41:35.680 --> 01:41:41.680]  Well, I try to use subject matter jurisdiction for a so-and-so judge.
[01:41:41.680 --> 01:41:43.680]  But you need grounds.
[01:41:43.680 --> 01:41:51.680]  When I go after the judge, I need grounds to show that his jurisdiction is questionable.
[01:41:51.680 --> 01:42:04.680]  If they charge you with a criminal offense, as opposed to a transportation-based offense, then your subject matter jurisdiction challenge is much more difficult.
[01:42:04.680 --> 01:42:07.680]  Gotcha.
[01:42:07.680 --> 01:42:14.680]  Like I said at the outset, the charging instrument on the surface looked sufficient.
[01:42:14.680 --> 01:42:19.680]  Because it's a misdemeanor offense, they kind of dotted their eyes and crossed their teeth.
[01:42:19.680 --> 01:42:23.680]  It wasn't like they didn't use a citation.
[01:42:23.680 --> 01:42:31.680]  They actually went to the work of generating an actual criminal complaint.
[01:42:31.680 --> 01:42:34.680]  So that's why I didn't touch it.
[01:42:34.680 --> 01:42:39.680]  But nonetheless, it was over a regulatory offense.
[01:42:39.680 --> 01:42:42.680]  I wasn't charged under the crimes code here.
[01:42:42.680 --> 01:42:44.680]  So that's kind of why I left it alone.
[01:42:44.680 --> 01:42:47.680]  What code were you...
[01:42:47.680 --> 01:42:51.680]  If you weren't charged under the criminal code, what were you charged under?
[01:42:51.680 --> 01:42:55.680]  I was charged under the vehicle code.
[01:42:55.680 --> 01:43:00.680]  Then subject matter jurisdiction is appropriate.
[01:43:00.680 --> 01:43:07.680]  Did they show that you fall within the statutory scheme?
[01:43:07.680 --> 01:43:15.680]  No, they just assumed that if you have four wheels with windows on it...
[01:43:15.680 --> 01:43:21.680]  Okay, then now you have a good appealable issue.
[01:43:21.680 --> 01:43:23.680]  Okay.
[01:43:23.680 --> 01:43:25.680]  We are...
[01:43:25.680 --> 01:43:29.680]  Oh, we're not out of time. We've got another segment down.
[01:43:29.680 --> 01:43:32.680]  We have another segment around. Read my clock room, Brett.
[01:43:32.680 --> 01:43:33.680]  We've got one...
[01:43:33.680 --> 01:43:35.680]  Oh, yeah. We've got another one.
[01:43:35.680 --> 01:43:36.680]  Hang on.
[01:43:36.680 --> 01:43:40.680]  Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain, Rudolph La Radio.
[01:43:40.680 --> 01:43:45.680]  We just got one segment, so I won't give out the call-in number.
[01:43:45.680 --> 01:43:49.680]  Good time to check out our sponsors.
[01:43:49.680 --> 01:43:55.680]  We're selling our e-book and Eddie's traffic seminar help to support this station.
[01:43:55.680 --> 01:43:57.680]  So go there, check it out.
[01:43:57.680 --> 01:43:59.680]  We'll be right back.
[01:44:28.680 --> 01:44:33.680]  How to turn the financial tables on them and make them pay you to go away.
[01:44:33.680 --> 01:44:38.680]  The Michael Mirris proven method is the solution for how to stop debt collectors.
[01:44:38.680 --> 01:44:40.680]  Personal consultation is available as well.
[01:44:40.680 --> 01:44:46.680]  For more information, please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the blue Michael Mirris banner
[01:44:46.680 --> 01:44:49.680]  or email Michael Mirris at yahoo.com.
[01:44:49.680 --> 01:44:56.680]  That's ruleoflawradio.com or email m-i-c-h-a-e-l-m-i-r-r-a-s at yahoo.com.
[01:44:56.680 --> 01:45:00.680]  To learn how to stop debt collectors next.
[01:45:00.680 --> 01:45:03.680]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[01:45:03.680 --> 01:45:06.680]  Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary.
[01:45:06.680 --> 01:45:14.680]  The affordable, easy-to-understand 4-CD course that will show you how in 24 hours, step-by-step.
[01:45:14.680 --> 01:45:18.680]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing.
[01:45:18.680 --> 01:45:22.680]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[01:45:22.680 --> 01:45:27.680]  Thousands have won with our step-by-step course, and now you can too.
[01:45:27.680 --> 01:45:33.680]  Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case-winning experience.
[01:45:33.680 --> 01:45:38.680]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand
[01:45:38.680 --> 01:45:42.680]  about the principles and practices that control our American courts.
[01:45:42.680 --> 01:45:48.680]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases,
[01:45:48.680 --> 01:45:55.680]  prosa tactics, and much more. Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner.
[01:45:55.680 --> 01:46:22.680]  Or call toll-free 866-LAW-E-Z.
[01:46:22.680 --> 01:46:33.680]  Okay, we are back.
[01:46:33.680 --> 01:46:40.680]  Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain, Rule of Law Radio, and we're talking to Josh in Pennsylvania.
[01:46:40.680 --> 01:46:47.680]  Okay, Josh, do you still have subject matter jurisdiction because they still have to show
[01:46:47.680 --> 01:46:57.680]  that commerce did the complaint address commerce?
[01:46:57.680 --> 01:47:03.680]  Oh, somebody muted you. I don't know how that happened.
[01:47:03.680 --> 01:47:10.680]  Brett! Okay, maybe I did it. Go ahead, Josh. I'm sorry.
[01:47:10.680 --> 01:47:16.680]  No, the complaint just cited the particular vehicle code violation.
[01:47:16.680 --> 01:47:23.680]  Okay, then, you know, if you want to have some just good experience here,
[01:47:23.680 --> 01:47:30.680]  file a petition for rid of mandamus.
[01:47:30.680 --> 01:47:36.680]  Oh, wait, wait, wait. I'm sorry. File an interlocutory appeal.
[01:47:36.680 --> 01:47:40.680]  Well, my hands are kind of tied seeing as I have a public defender.
[01:47:40.680 --> 01:47:42.680]  Oh, okay, that's right.
[01:47:42.680 --> 01:47:47.680]  I've already been engaged and I just want to keep him honest and put enough pressure on him
[01:47:47.680 --> 01:47:52.680]  by articulating my argument that I was attempting to make a little more clearly.
[01:47:52.680 --> 01:47:58.680]  So he's motivated enough to get the criminal dismissed however he wants to.
[01:47:58.680 --> 01:48:02.680]  Yeah, tell him to file an interlocutory appeal.
[01:48:02.680 --> 01:48:05.680]  That he won't like.
[01:48:05.680 --> 01:48:18.680]  I'll ask you a question. In Pennsylvania, do you have a right to be heard by yourself or by counsel or both?
[01:48:18.680 --> 01:48:23.680]  That's what it says in Texas and you've got the both option.
[01:48:23.680 --> 01:48:30.680]  Or just because you've got somebody assigned to you as a defense doesn't mean that you don't have a mouth.
[01:48:30.680 --> 01:48:37.680]  You can still file motions. You can still do anything you want to even if they don't like it.
[01:48:37.680 --> 01:48:49.680]  I've not read anything that specific. I just know that if I attempt to go anywhere outside of following his lead,
[01:48:49.680 --> 01:48:57.680]  he's going to have grounds to drop me. I know it.
[01:48:57.680 --> 01:49:04.680]  Would you tell him that if he tries to drop you, that's frowned on by the courts in a criminal case
[01:49:04.680 --> 01:49:10.680]  that you'll bar grieve him into the Stone Age?
[01:49:10.680 --> 01:49:19.680]  Well, he did make one statement to me. He said, you know, I'm your attorney and I'm going to represent you.
[01:49:19.680 --> 01:49:27.680]  But if I don't believe in what you're saying, I can't represent you on those issues.
[01:49:27.680 --> 01:49:33.680]  He said I have issues that he believes in and he's going to represent me on those.
[01:49:33.680 --> 01:49:38.680]  So you tell him that this is law, not a religion?
[01:49:38.680 --> 01:49:43.680]  Well, I'll tell you what. Sometimes they're a little similar.
[01:49:43.680 --> 01:49:48.680]  Everybody's got a different opinion on the same text just depending on how they read it.
[01:49:48.680 --> 01:49:52.680]  And it just depends on the mood of the person that you're dealing with.
[01:49:52.680 --> 01:49:56.680]  But yeah, I hear you. I hear you.
[01:49:56.680 --> 01:50:04.680]  You had to put your lawyer on the dime because, you know, unless you do, it's no skin off his nose.
[01:50:04.680 --> 01:50:10.680]  You can go to jail. He don't care. He'll go on to his next client.
[01:50:10.680 --> 01:50:17.680]  You need to give him something to take to the judge to negotiate with.
[01:50:17.680 --> 01:50:24.680]  On the jail note, there's a possibility I could get a week in jail for this particular crime.
[01:50:24.680 --> 01:50:32.680]  And the interesting thing about it is I'm not afforded a jury trial.
[01:50:32.680 --> 01:50:36.680]  They consider it in Pennsylvania a minor offense.
[01:50:36.680 --> 01:50:41.680]  But then they weren't allowed to do that without your permission.
[01:50:41.680 --> 01:50:52.680]  The Supreme Court came down with a ruling that these exact charges are not eligible for a jury trial because they consider them minor.
[01:50:52.680 --> 01:51:01.680]  Yeah, but they lowered it to these exact charges for the specific purpose of denying you a jury trial.
[01:51:01.680 --> 01:51:07.680]  And they weren't allowed to do that without your permission. Isn't that correct?
[01:51:07.680 --> 01:51:14.680]  No, the original charges are still pending, and that is what the Supreme Court was originally for.
[01:51:14.680 --> 01:51:24.680]  Oh, okay. Oh, you're not the one where they lowered the charge to eliminate a jury?
[01:51:24.680 --> 01:51:25.680]  No, no.
[01:51:25.680 --> 01:51:27.680]  Okay, that was somebody else then.
[01:51:27.680 --> 01:51:33.680]  They did offer me a slap on the wrist and a $20 fine to go away, and I didn't take it.
[01:51:33.680 --> 01:51:42.680]  But even without taking that deal, it didn't matter what they charged me with originally is considered a minor offense.
[01:51:42.680 --> 01:51:45.680]  And I'm not afforded a jury trial.
[01:51:45.680 --> 01:51:55.680]  Oh, okay. Well, that's okay because you're before the judge and you get to hold the judge responsible for his rulings.
[01:51:55.680 --> 01:52:01.680]  If you're before a jury, you can't hold the judge responsible.
[01:52:01.680 --> 01:52:06.680]  Have you filed a judicial conduct complaint against the judge yet?
[01:52:06.680 --> 01:52:11.680]  I've had so many different judges I wouldn't know which one to start with.
[01:52:11.680 --> 01:52:18.680]  All of them.
[01:52:18.680 --> 01:52:23.680]  Well, I'll hold that one in my back pocket.
[01:52:23.680 --> 01:52:29.680]  The more I deal with the courts, the more apparent it becomes.
[01:52:29.680 --> 01:52:36.680]  If I beat these guys, you got to take it to them.
[01:52:36.680 --> 01:52:40.680]  The judge do one thing I don't like, I file against him.
[01:52:40.680 --> 01:52:44.680]  It says one thing to me I don't like, I file against him.
[01:52:44.680 --> 01:52:48.680]  Raise his voice to me, I file against him.
[01:52:48.680 --> 01:52:50.680]  Don't care if he likes it.
[01:52:50.680 --> 01:52:51.680]  I'm not a lawyer.
[01:52:51.680 --> 01:52:53.680]  You can't get my bar card.
[01:52:53.680 --> 01:52:59.680]  The presumption is you're going to do the absolute worst that you think you can get away with no matter what.
[01:52:59.680 --> 01:53:02.680]  So I might as well have some fun at your expense.
[01:53:02.680 --> 01:53:15.680]  We just see how many complaints I can get to the state commission on judicial conduct until they get tired of hearing them and then sting you for it because you're annoying them.
[01:53:15.680 --> 01:53:25.680]  Criminal complaints against the prosecutor and criminal complaints against the judge that goes on his record and never goes away.
[01:53:25.680 --> 01:53:33.680]  They want to sting you with this criminal accusation that goes on your record and never goes away.
[01:53:33.680 --> 01:53:35.680]  Win, lose, doesn't matter.
[01:53:35.680 --> 01:53:38.680]  It'll stay on your record forever.
[01:53:38.680 --> 01:53:39.680]  So what the heck?
[01:53:39.680 --> 01:53:41.680]  Give them a few back.
[01:53:41.680 --> 01:53:48.680]  Give them a reason to want you out of the court.
[01:53:48.680 --> 01:53:57.680]  If you're doing this just to exercise the system, heck, might as well have some fun.
[01:53:57.680 --> 01:53:58.680]  Gotcha, gotcha.
[01:53:58.680 --> 01:54:01.680]  Have you filed any criminal complaints?
[01:54:01.680 --> 01:54:05.680]  Oh, I've filed many things.
[01:54:05.680 --> 01:54:08.680]  Everybody seems to ignore them is what I've been finding.
[01:54:08.680 --> 01:54:11.680]  Oh, that's okay.
[01:54:11.680 --> 01:54:16.680]  Criminal complaints terrifies them.
[01:54:16.680 --> 01:54:19.680]  You've got these prosecutors and judges.
[01:54:19.680 --> 01:54:26.680]  The judge sits up there and screws one litigant after another.
[01:54:26.680 --> 01:54:32.680]  The lawyers help the judge screw one client after another.
[01:54:32.680 --> 01:54:40.680]  The bailiffs, they stand there and watch the judge and prosecutors screw one client after another.
[01:54:40.680 --> 01:54:44.680]  And then all of a sudden you're filing against them.
[01:54:44.680 --> 01:54:54.680]  One thing that you can be sure of, they're more afraid of the system than you are because they know how easy it is to screw somebody.
[01:54:54.680 --> 01:55:05.680]  And when you start throwing down complaints against them, they start looking around and thinking, who around here doesn't like me?
[01:55:05.680 --> 01:55:11.680]  Who here in a setup position that they can take these and use them against me?
[01:55:11.680 --> 01:55:16.680]  They'll never get them to be afraid of you.
[01:55:16.680 --> 01:55:28.680]  What you do is get them to be afraid of the political cannon fodder that you bring to their opponents or anybody that doesn't like them.
[01:55:28.680 --> 01:55:36.680]  Let's say you're a lawyer and you did something to make the sheriff mad at you.
[01:55:36.680 --> 01:55:38.680]  We just had a lawyer here in the county.
[01:55:38.680 --> 01:55:40.680]  I mean, he used to be DA.
[01:55:40.680 --> 01:55:45.680]  He just wrote a scathing letter in the newspaper about the sheriff.
[01:55:45.680 --> 01:55:51.680]  Now the sheriff is not happy with Danny Green.
[01:55:51.680 --> 01:55:57.680]  He could get arrested for DUI even though he hasn't been drinking.
[01:55:57.680 --> 01:56:05.680]  So if he doesn't do something, if he just complains, you know, they can do pretty much what they want to.
[01:56:05.680 --> 01:56:11.680]  But if he files a complaint against the sheriff, nothing the sheriff can do.
[01:56:11.680 --> 01:56:16.680]  If the sheriff does anything, one of his deputies pulls him over.
[01:56:16.680 --> 01:56:20.680]  He accused the sheriff of sending him to do it.
[01:56:20.680 --> 01:56:22.680]  I haven't told this story in a while.
[01:56:22.680 --> 01:56:27.680]  I'm doing plastic welding on a tank in my yard and I live right next to the city hall.
[01:56:27.680 --> 01:56:29.680]  And I'm using a little torch.
[01:56:29.680 --> 01:56:34.680]  We had a fire ban on this new cop in town, didn't know who it was and come up and said, sir, sir.
[01:56:34.680 --> 01:56:38.680]  And I said, yes, you can't have that open flame.
[01:56:38.680 --> 01:56:41.680]  And I looked and I held up this pooping torch, nothing to it.
[01:56:41.680 --> 01:56:43.680]  Oh, no, you don't understand.
[01:56:43.680 --> 01:56:45.680]  We have a fire ban on.
[01:56:45.680 --> 01:56:46.680]  See, I got that.
[01:56:46.680 --> 01:56:47.680]  You see this equipment here?
[01:56:47.680 --> 01:56:49.680]  I can outrun the fire department with it.
[01:56:49.680 --> 01:56:52.680]  I know, sir, but you can have that open flame.
[01:56:52.680 --> 01:56:53.680]  So wait a minute.
[01:56:53.680 --> 01:56:55.680]  You're just joshing me right.
[01:56:55.680 --> 01:56:57.680]  Oh, no, sir.
[01:56:57.680 --> 01:56:59.680]  Wait a minute.
[01:56:59.680 --> 01:57:05.680]  That John Faustell, the district judge, sent you down here to harass me, didn't he?
[01:57:05.680 --> 01:57:13.680]  Just because I found one crummy little making a terrorist threat complaint against him with the attorney general,
[01:57:13.680 --> 01:57:16.680]  he sent you to here here to screw with me, didn't he?
[01:57:16.680 --> 01:57:21.680]  And the guy takes a step back, holds up both hands with his palms out.
[01:57:21.680 --> 01:57:27.680]  One moment, sir, takes his cell phone dials at about 30 seconds.
[01:57:27.680 --> 01:57:34.680]  The chief of police steps out of the city hall, looked over at me and said, Randy, what are you doing to my new officer?
[01:57:34.680 --> 01:57:39.680]  I said, oh, Tom, I was just jerking his chain.
[01:57:39.680 --> 01:57:48.680]  But when I mentioned the possibility of bringing him before that district judge, it terrified him.
[01:57:48.680 --> 01:57:53.680]  These guys are terrified of the system they operate.
[01:57:53.680 --> 01:57:59.680]  You start filing against them, every complaint's like Russian left to them.
[01:57:59.680 --> 01:58:03.680]  Oh, sure, somebody's going to protect me from the grand jury.
[01:58:03.680 --> 01:58:09.680]  But what if they're P.O.'ed at me? What if I gave the prosecutors niece a ticket last week?
[01:58:09.680 --> 01:58:11.680]  And I didn't even know about it.
[01:58:11.680 --> 01:58:14.680]  I could be post.
[01:58:14.680 --> 01:58:17.680]  Anyway, okay, we are out of time.
[01:58:17.680 --> 01:58:19.680]  Randy Kelton's move on radio.
[01:58:19.680 --> 01:58:23.680]  We'll be back tomorrow night on our four-hour info marathon.
[01:58:23.680 --> 01:58:24.680]  And thank you, Josh.
[01:58:24.680 --> 01:58:27.680]  If you have more questions, call back tomorrow night.
[01:58:27.680 --> 01:58:29.680]  We'll have four hours.
[01:58:29.680 --> 01:58:32.680]  We'll take all your questions.
[01:58:32.680 --> 01:58:35.680]  Thank you all for listening and good night.
[01:59:02.680 --> 01:59:08.680]  The Bible says, verse by verse, helping you to know God and to know the meaning of life.
[01:59:08.680 --> 01:59:11.680]  Order your free copy today from Bibles for America.
[01:59:11.680 --> 01:59:20.680]  Call us toll-free at 888-551-0102 or visit us online at bfa.org.
[01:59:20.680 --> 01:59:26.680]  This translation is highly accurate and it comes with over 13,000 cross-references,
[01:59:26.680 --> 01:59:30.680]  plus charts and maps and an outline for every book of the Bible.
[01:59:30.680 --> 01:59:32.680]  Truly a Bible you can understand.
[01:59:32.680 --> 01:59:40.680]  To get your free copy of the New Testament recovery version, call us toll-free at 888-551-0102.
[01:59:40.680 --> 01:59:49.680]  That's 888-551-0102 or visit us online at bfa.org.
[01:59:49.680 --> 02:00:00.680]  You're listening to the Logos Radio Network at logosradionetwork.com.