BNN - Brandenburg News Network

BNN 9/4/2025 Free Speech in Public Meetings - Karen the Riveter

Published Sept. 4, 2025, 9 a.m.

9am Free Speech in Public Meetings - Karen the Riveter There are two main jurisdictions in our system of government. One is the "*private", wherein *sovereign men and women (private *citizens) live and operate. As you'll soon see, the government (which we created) cannot step into that jurisdiction without our permission. The second is the "commercial" jurisdiction. This is where the business of protecting the people's rights and commerce operates. Any "*code laws" (statutory laws), rules or policies made by any level of government can only affect their operations. They are not allowed to limit ours, unless we trespass on the rights of other sovereign men or women. When a government body (even a corporate one) makes deliberations or decisions, it should take place openly, where the private citizens can a) witness it and b) tell them what they think about it. Unfortunately, all too often, those in the elected seats (Michigan Code Law calls them,- "*public bodies"; we'll call them, "*public functionaries": those who holds an office or trust, or, "public servants") are outright taught or otherwise believe that the people are an inconvenient "audience" that they don't want to deal with at all. That is incorrect! What can the people do about this? X/Twitter: https://x.com/i/broadcasts/1OyKAjanyggGb Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/636616148890812/videos/1830507184208116 Rumble: https://rumble.com/v6yhj7a-bnn-brandenburg-news-network-942025-free-speeh-in-public-meetings-karen-the.html https://rumble.com/v6yhj4s-bnn-brandenburg-news-network-942025-free-speeh-in-public-meetings-karen-the.html Odysee: https://odysee.com/@BrandenburgNewsNetwork:d/bnn-2025-09-04-free-speech-in-public-meetings-karen-the-riveter:5 BNN Live: https://Live.BrandenburgNewsNetwork.com Guests: Donna Brandenburg, Karen the Riveter

Transcript in English (auto-generated)

Good morning and welcome to Brandenburg News Network. I am Donna Brandenburg and it's the fourth day of September, twenty twenty five. Welcome to our show today. We're going to be talking about free speech in public meetings. Now, if you've been following me for a while, you know that we've had a little problem here in Byron Township. And people not absolutely following the law who are sitting in the seats as board members, township supervisors specifically, as well as most of the people that are in office. Now, before I bring Karen, I want to let you know that Karen is an amazing friend, but she's also a really good researcher. And I asked her to write a primer for me and some more information and then an article about on free speech and public meetings, which she has done. And we're going to go over that today. But also, she's pretty adept at handling herself in a meeting. So she's the perfect person to do this. So I think that going through this with her today is going to be absolutely wonderful. And we're just going to devote the entire show to this today because we need to master these skills in order to have rights, we have to be able to assert our rights. So morning, Karen, how you doing? Good morning. I don't know about being adept. I try. I guess I do a pretty decent job. Well, after after I put them in their place, two weeks before you came in, and they were they were nervous and scared to say a word, which was kind of all at the same time. And Coincidentally, I slapped him with an emergency injunction about an hour before the meeting started. Yeah, they were nervous to begin with. Yeah, you got to use those mental terror tactics when you're facing domestic terrorists, which they are. So I don't know where we want to get started with this. I think what I'm going to do is pull up your Substack article first here. And then we'll see. I'm looking at my feed, too, just so you know. It's already froze up once. Yeah, you're on a little delay now. Somebody doesn't want us talking about this subject. Yeah, that doesn't surprise me. Someone does not want us talking about this subject. Yeah. So that's OK. Ignore the delay. And we're going to just keep hammering through this. And that's that's just going to be what it's going to be. You know, when you run into difficulties like yesterday, our day before yesterday, the Internet connection went completely out, which was kind of shocking. Oh, Love said it froze three times for her. So this is going to be on and off, and it's going to freeze a little bit. But stick with us. We're going to keep coming back if something goes wrong. And realize we're dealing with not only algorithms, but we're dealing with I think we're dealing with demonic forces. I really do. And if they don't want something to get out, they just kind of come in and mess with it a little bit. And that's okay. We're going to keep going and just assert the name of Jesus Christ all over this and that this message gets out to every single person out there who needs to hear it and that all the plans of the enemy are silenced and left with no power as we go in to this time talking about those things. That gives us our rights back. Satan can just go pound sand somewhere. We're not dealing with this dude. So anyhow, where would you like to start? The Bible says many times, be ye of good courage. Well, maybe we should start there. The point being is that if you're going to stick up for your rights, you're going to come under fire. There's going to be flak. If you're not taking on flak from somewhere, you're probably not over the target and you're probably not doing something. But if you're getting pushback or if you're getting censored or if you're getting attacked publicly and privately, you're probably not very effective. So when things happen like this, we just got to keep going. You just keep going. Just keep pushing through. And finally, you're going to get through on the other side because God will use that time to strengthen you. You'll get better with practice. And then all of a sudden, you've leveled up in the game. Yes. You know, we talked about yesterday, I was thinking this morning of all the times that I have been to public meetings and stood up to say something. And it's quite a lot. It kind of surprises me actually thinking about it. And how did I have the courage to do it? Well, I'm not afraid of public speaking. It energizes me. I get anxious, but I'm not fearful of it. Toastmasters was a help to that. I also had a lot of experience teaching. In various, I mean, I can think of three different ways I've had experience teaching. So that gives me a little fortitude in front of an audience of people that I'm not worried about a crowd. So that helps me. But two, the experience taught me about what it's like to stand up in public meetings and say your piece. And at some point, I heard about New York Times versus Sullivan, and I learned about the Open Meetings Act. And I started to see where they were using various tactics, I will use that term, to violate the rights of the people. And I stood up to stop that. There's been at least one time I can really think of where it worked. And I still didn't quite have the knowledge at that time, but it worked anyway. And another time in your township, it didn't work, but it brought forward why. Exactly. It kind of did work because they took a lesson from that. And so did everybody else in the room where they see somebody that was literally attacked. I was and you were that we were attacked by these people. They gaveled out and just walked off. Don Tillman did as a sole operator up there, which that's what a tyrant is. Tyrant's going to gavel out and say, I can run this meeting any way I want, which is exactly what he did. And the people in the room got an opportunity to see their wrongs against you, against me, against the entire room, because they literally attacked us. And then that's when the room got the courage to stand up. Yeah. And this is why I think it's important for everyone to consider doing this. Because it doesn't matter if you have the knowledge that is in the article. It doesn't matter if you know it by heart. You can also print it off and take it with you. I have it in a PDF format, which is out there on Telegram. And it's linked to. Twitter now, I couldn't figure out how to post a document on Twitter, but it is there. So for anybody who wants it, it's available. You can study it, get to know it and use it. But even if you don't, even if all you do is stand up and say, I don't like what you're doing. And this is why it affects me or this is why it affects my neighbor. You are doing exactly what you're supposed to be doing. I can prove to you by these documents that is your duty. And also by standing up, you give somebody else the courage. For example, in your case, there's a seventeen year old girl that's studying this in your community. She hasn't stood up yet, but she's preparing to. And that gives me goosebumps. I'm excited about that. Because that's how it's supposed to work. You might have this girl, by the time she's eighteen, she might be well versed in this. She might be a powerhouse in your community. She might be able to retire us. Yeah. She might be that someone who, as she's learning, like I did, you make a difference. For example, I was thinking this morning, one of the first times I ever went before a public board was a city of Muskegon had passed dog law and it was an error. I told them so. I communicated with one of them privately more about it. I offered to rewrite the law for them, which now I would do differently. But at the time I got a mentor to help me because he was more familiar with dog law than I was. I rewrote it and they changed it because of me, because a little old me that didn't know everything, I was able to make an impact and a responsible dog ownership was something that was important to me. That's how I got started. But then when the scam Demick happened, a lot of people were going to board meetings. Because they really disagreed with what was affecting them personally or their kids or their neighbors. And I saw a lot more activity then, but I think it's fallen back because we just don't see how much we're being impacted now. But we need to get back at it. And we can't be as effective when they are censoring us. in the public meetings, which is so wrong. And I show you why in these documents, how it's illegal in my article. And so if you know who you are and you know why they're violating the law or how they're violating the law, then it enables you, it empowers you to stand on your rights make a difference it doesn't matter whether it's water wars or they want to vaccinate your kids or whether they they want a noise ordinance if you have something to say but they cut you off or they say well you're not from here you're from the neighboring township you can't speak or you must identify yourself well maybe you don't want them harassing you tomorrow And maybe you don't want to say who you are. Your name is your property. How dare they trespass on that? That's how I feel about it. So if I don't want to say my name, why should I? You have to know who you are in order to instruct them properly and ensure that they don't trespass on your rights. They don't have the right to tell you when you can speak, when you can stop speaking. Speaking. And there's one little tricky part in there with the agenda. Public board meetings have to operate smoothly. There's a time and place to speak. But even that, as I mentioned in the article, can be questioned. If your public comment is only isolated to one place, but you need to correct them in the moment, I think you have the right to do that. And I've done it. And I've seen other people join me with that. In my township, in an orderly fashion, they listened to us. They heard what we had to say. It was very peaceful. It was not disruptive, really. But we had to stop it in the moment. Oh, we violated the agenda. Oh, shame on us. But it needed to happen in that time. And thankfully, my township was as intimidated by the people as they needed to be in that moment. To back up and say, okay, what have we done wrong? Why are they so upset? Oh, we can fix that. And we got an immediate remedy. You can do that peacefully. It's not just our right. It's our duty. You have to speak up. and correct them or else they're sort of like a dog that bites. Once a dog bites, they kind of get empowered and they will continue to get a little more aggressive unless somebody puts them in check. And I really think that's what's happened. They've turned our township board meetings into tribunals. And I have been talking to everybody. I've talked to EGLE, the FBI and such. There was an FBI agent I talked to, and he said also, he said, look at all of your township and municipalities. Almost the entire state is stacked, just like the Supreme Court was stacked, correct? They were stacked or they are stacked with developers, realtors, and appraisers and assessors and builders. And so what they're doing is they're taking advantage of all of these, their power for self-enrichment to build, to develop. And they are tied in with these big corporations like BlackRock and such because what they do is they're the ones, the bankers are the ones that are bankrolling this stuff. And they hang on to it, and then all of a sudden they'll sell a house for eight hundred and fifty thousand dollars in a place where there's only like the values might be three hundred thousand. But they sell it to themselves. Are they paying that amount? I doubt it, but that's what it's showing up on the balance sheet, and it shows up on the tax records. So now they've got three comps to look at and compare the rest of the township. And what ends up happening is a lot of people can't afford to stay there anymore. And so they go in and the developers, the realtors, they all make money off of displacing people. And it goes with the water wars. I mean, this is a concerted effort to destroy the rights of those people that they've sworn an oath to protect. So what are we going to do about it? We have to speak up. And if they try to limit you, we're going to show you why they can't do that. Can you do the primer first? And there's four points in the primer. Just run through that real quickly so we have like a table of contents. The four main arguments are in part two regarding the New York Times versus Sullivan. Let's come back. Let's come back to that then. And let's just let's just start here and we'll go through this article. And then I'm just going to sit back and let you talk because, you know, this this is something that we all need to know. And just I really want to just focus on what you have to say here. OK, well, in the article, one of the first things I say besides kind of what we already started to say. is that there's there's basically if you break down government there's two jurisdictions there's private and there's public private or commercial so a private citizen is you and I we're not elected in this in an office we don't work for the corporate government we are sovereign women living on the land in michigan you could say um And as a people, we have that sovereign right and duty to address the public functionaries. I sometimes use the word public servant in the article, too. So when we go to the Michigan Constitution, we're going to start in the preamble. Which is, if you scroll down a little bit, if people want to read along, I'll just read the preamble real quick. And now I'm going to use the. Nineteen sixty three version. Parts of it are different than the other four versions. But we're going to use this one. Because it's the one that most people will find easily. The preamble states. We the people. Of the state of Michigan. Grateful to almighty God. For the blessings of freedom. And earnestly desiring to secure these blessings. Undiminished to ourselves. And our prosperity. Posterity. Do ordain and establish this constitution. So if you go right to the start and the end, who established the Constitution? We, the people. We're the authors. That Constitution, just like the U.S. Constitution, it's a, I like the phrase, the fence. It's like a fence that keeps government in. They cannot trespass on our jurisdiction. They are limited to the scope of the authority themselves. given to them by the Constitution, which we, the people, wrote. So, regardless of whether we passed a one-nineteen-sixty-three version or not, there is four other versions. Eighteen-thirty-five is the first one, I think, is the year. And so, they were instituted by us, not the other way around. We are not governed. We're the masters. So we are the bosses. My township clerk once said, we are the bosses. And no, no, you're not the bosses of us. You got that wrong, honey. Who made you think of anything? Oh, man, it was bad. I still have the recording on my phone. I can play it to anybody anytime. It was great. Article one, section one. It's called the Declaration of Rights section. That article one. And so Declaration of Rights, Section One, Political Power. All political power is inherent in the people. Government is instituted for their equal benefit, security, and protection. So that last statement is all they have to do. They are for our benefit, security, and protection. That's it. Outside the scope of that, they're, as you would say, maladministration. They cannot do anything else other than those three things. And all political power is inherent in the people. We have the control. We're the masters in this relationship. So when they make a public law or a rule or a policy or an ordinance, those things can only apply to them. They cannot apply to the people. They've tried to trick us about that. And they use the vocabulary like person, for example, to try to trick us about that and convince us that driver's license, for example, that they can do all those things. But government is instituted for our equal benefit, security and protection, not for them. If you scroll down a little bit, I have a image there. The sub stack is nicely broken up by some memes and mostly screenshots in part one, which is nice to kind of give your brain a little bit of a break. But the printable version does not have these in it. I encourage everybody to go to the links that are on the bottom and they are linkable from the PDF too. So you can read the constitution for yourself. Don't just trust what I have to say. If I'm wrong about it, as we mentioned yesterday, if Greg finds some problems with it, he can let me know. We'll see how it goes. But we're all in a learning process. So if you haven't read it, try reading it. It's kind of an important thing to do. So we go on to Article One, Section Three. This is important to the context of this particular discussion. The people have the right peaceably to assemble, to consult for the common good, to instruct their representatives, and to petition the government for redress of grievances. Does that not sound like a public meeting? Sure does to me. Yes. So we can assemble together, we can instruct them for our common good, which is what exactly I was trying to do with your township, and petition them for a redress of grievances. Now, I acknowledged when I was there, I'm not from here, but I think you screwed up with the way you changed this agenda. And I asked them, and Tillman proudly stated that they changed the format on their agenda to remove one of the public comment time periods on the agenda. without consulting the public. It kind of looked like it was planned so they could just get up and walk out because he literally just gaveled that meeting out. One sole person on the board, the township supervisor, and he and Peggy Sattler got up and walked out. There was no consent from anybody else there, and everybody else looked a little lost. But because they didn't stand up and stop it either and keep the meeting going, they're all so complicit in what was done there. Yep, yep. So I suggested to them, and I'm still not certain about this because it's an administrative concept, but I suggested to them there may be a violation of the Open Meetings Act because they made a change to the format of the agenda without making that decision in front of the people. That's a violation of the OMA, All Decisions, it says in the Open Meetings Act. Must be made in front of people. And they didn't do that. So I said to him. I think that's a violation. But even if you had all the good intentions in the world. The people behind me probably don't think so. And I got some very vocal assent to that commentary. We have the right to petition you for the redress of grievances. And that's what I did. I think you messed up here. You're going to have to fix that. That's what that means. And so I wasn't even coming to them. I wasn't planning to come to them for a redress of grievances, except for the fact that they had a time limit. That time limit is wrong. And that's where I was trying to instruct them why they were wrong. And they didn't want to hear it, unfortunately. And my township people did. And I told them privately after a meeting. So it doesn't always have to happen in a public meeting. But sometimes it needs to. Let's go down to Bill of Rights, Article I. The reason I say it that way is because originally the Bill of Rights was an article. Or they were articles originally. And they were adapted or adopted in as amendments to the Constitution. But I like to see it as a separate document. So you can call it First Amendment. I sometimes call it First Article. The Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press or of the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. It seems to me like they took some of that language straight out of there and put it into the Michigan Constitution. This article, the First Amendment, I scrolled too fast. I'm scrolling on my laptop here, is to limit them in their capacity. It's a reminder to them they are not allowed to trespass on our rights. So a rule limiting free speech in a public meeting setting is a violation of this amendment. And by the way, if you go to the nineteen oh eight constitution in article two, section four is where the Declaration of Rights is in that particular constitution. They call it liberty of speech. Which is kind of interesting. And that's that's probably grounds for a whole other study. But I wanted to mention it in there because someone pointed that out to me. Also. Note that the primary context of the Bill of Rights is the people, again, assembling together and petitioning the government. That's the primary concept of the first article. Is it burning the flag? Is that why they wrote that? No, it's so that the public can get together and say what they need to say for their own posterity. When you see the people that are out there burning flags and doing all that sort of thing, it looks to me not like a protest, but a child's temper tantrum. And because they just don't like it. But if you don't come at this with some study of why and ground it back to the law, all it is is just. acting out and taking out your frustrations. And they're literally looking at people who do that and laugh at them. You're not going to get any gain that way just by yelling and screaming and acting like an idiot. You've got to put things in a lawful perspective so they have no room to argue. Yeah. Do you think that that is more effective or what I did at your township is more effective? Oh my gosh. What, what to stand up there and read the law. and give them a real basis for the argument is way more effective. Because honestly, you and I both kind of shut those meetings down when they couldn't even argue with us. Because first off, they didn't know the law at all. And I mean at all. You know, honestly, they probably should have said, tell me more. We want to follow the law and do a good job for we the people. They didn't. They shut us down. Yeah. And one reason, as we've talked before, is because the primary source of their education, quote unquote, on the subject is from the Michigan Townships Association, which is attorneys. So the attorneys have become... Yeah, if he was there when I was there, I didn't know. He wasn't. He didn't show up. He didn't find that. Though he has the, I don't know, the motivation to show up for other times. But after they got slapped with an emergency injunction, he didn't feel inclined to be there at the meeting that night. Right. They're all cowards. Yes. This is why we didn't make a fuss about it, but I did mention before that... the township suddenly decided that they would cancel the next board meeting, which you and I were planning to go to. And we'll start round two of this. We'll make sure that the people have the right to say what they got to say. Let's educate them and then I'll step aside and let the people who live there make their complaints. But they didn't give us a chance. And I think what they'll do, we'll say, Well, we didn't have a quorum because school season's starting and we had too many on vacation. You know what they said? They said, we don't have anything on the agenda. And I'm like, oh my. Yeah, right. You didn't have anything on the agenda. You sure did. Because we kept trying to get on the agenda to show them how... How they need to shut this thing down that where they're still stealing the water, they're still pumping the water. I was over there yesterday and they are still pumping the water out of the water, out of the groundwater, the water table. Twelve wells have failed here. And Peggy Sattler and we actually have this documented. she was told people are out of water. They literally have destroyed their wells. And why are you, why are you still pumping? And she's like, yeah, I know. What, how, how do you justify that kind of a response? But anyhow, I digress. Please continue. Well, that's a problem that they have a scheduled meeting and their excuse. I would get that in writing. If you don't have it in writing yet, get that in writing because that'll be a problem for them too. They have a duty and an obligation to the people to meet when they're supposed to be meeting. And if they don't have anything on the agenda but public comment, then that's what they need to have. And they know that. Yeah, I think they're going to come smack face-to-face with reality and the truth here pretty quickly because they really have done nothing for we the people. It's all for the developers. And they're all builders, developers, and realtors except a couple of them. I shouldn't say all of them are, but most of them have ties in that somehow. Well, they could fix it if they wanted to. But they won't. No, probably peasants were peasants. Well, we're going to we're going to at least educate the people, even if they don't want to hear it, if the public servants don't want to hear it. So another. So when when we have gone to public meetings in the past, I say we because I haven't been alone in this. When you go to public meetings, they'll often do a certain number of, they perform tricks for you. I have seen it on videos where they have a registration form or they refuse to let people in a school board meeting if they don't have children in the system. They can't do that. And the Open Meetings Act is actually a law which prevents some of those things. This particular one is called Open Meetings Act. It is an act of the Michigan legislature from nineteen seventy six. All fifty states have some kind of Open Meetings Act. They might call it something different. I discovered that it's sometimes called the Sunshine Law. Ours was last amended in twenty twenty one. So unfortunately, it still has commentary in there regarding COVID. because they wanted to make electronic means of having meetings commonplace. And while the good thing is some locations still allow people to get in on a Zoom or something to view it and to make public comment, it also can be a limitation of your rights if they decide to cut you off and such. And that was another trick that they did. In my particular township, a lot of people do not have internet access or it's not a good enough access for Zoom. So it will not meet the needs in my township. And they know that. So they're not doing Zoom, but they do have a man who voluntarily... records the meetings and airs them on the website by the township so that even if you can't be there, you can go back and observe what happened in the past. Can you air a grievance to them privately? Yes, you can. But if you can make the next public meeting, you can still comment on the previous one. So anyway, the Open Meetings Act is supposed to be about requiring your local government to whether it is on a township, city, county, or state level, to make their decisions where the public can see it. So even your library, which is part of the public government, will have public board meetings. Any kind of public function has to have their meetings done in public. What they can do is have closed sessions during the public meeting. So the public can't witness it. But if they stick around, they can find out what happens during that private session because they might come out of the private session and say, well, we made a decision and here's the decision on a particular subject. So this is to protect people's privacy when it comes to like hiring and firing people that will work for the the government or whatever. There's certain things in the Open Meetings Act which allow them to do that privately. Other than that, all decisions must be made publicly. And this is a good thing. So we need to know how the Open Meeting Act works and how it doesn't work. So according to the OMA, all of them must be open, but they can't limit who can go. They can't require people to register. And they can't kick anyone out unless they breach the peace by intentionally inciting violence. That is a term I put in my glossary, which I looked up. There's no definition strictly in the Michigan Code statutory law for breach of peace, but there is some discussion of it. But I put that in there because occasionally if someone gets really angry and they get a little too loud, they'll try to send a deputy to kick them out. Yeah, that's not OK. You have the right, as you'll find in part two, to be robust and vehement. And even, you know, you can cuss at them. You can be loud at them as long as you are doing it peacefully and you're not inciting violence. And you don't attack them personally. So I can't say, well, I saw what you did with your wife last month or whatever. You can't do that. You leave their family alone. You can talk to them about their public duties in the public meeting. But they have to make all the decisions in the public view. Now, they can put public comment on the agenda. But as we addressed, there might be times where you need to speak up outside of that limitation placed on the people. But that's what the act says. So I wanted to talk about a particular section of the OMA, which the Open Meetings Act, by the way, is Michigan Code Law, and this particular section is . I think it's is where it starts. So if you want to go and read it and you don't have an easy link, you can look it up. If you just do a Google search, you'll find it. Part five says a person and we define person. A person is not a private man or woman in the code law. It's a fictional entity. So that's something to keep in mind. And that's why I emphasize it with italics in the writing. A person must be permitted to address meaning of the public body under rules and established and recorded by the public body. So can a public body establish rules for a private man or woman in whom all political power is inherent? Donna, you can answer that. No, they cannot. So does the Open Meeting Act have a violation in it? Yes, it does. That can be nullified if the people speak up about it. You can't make a rule that about my right to speak freely in your meeting in this context so can they establish rules no not for the people now if they want to limit themselves to three minutes they can do that kind of foolish but I think it's kind of foolish to limit us so you know you never know I think they're listening to this because if they're not, we're going to have to school them the next time that we show up there. We'll see if they cancel again. We had somebody in the chat that said that she knows somebody in a neighboring township and asked if canceling a meeting due to nothing on the agenda was a thing. And she was stunned and said that there's always something on the agenda. This was a form of silencing us and censoring us. That's exactly what it was. It wasn't that there was nothing on the agenda because we were asking to be on the agenda. They refused over and over again. They have refused. So it's good to look through case studies of what they're doing so that we can apply them to other areas in the state so people know this is what they're doing. It's a form of censorship. Yeah. And what you'll find is they're violating number one in the four main arguments of part two. They have an obligation, a responsibility to receive instruction from you. And they're violating that. So technically, I think you could sue and you would win. Because they canceled the meeting without cost. This is something else that was there that someone else said that, let's see, I'm going to go back to that a minute. This is Cher said, that's what I was told too, nothing on the agenda. Then I was told that they were told by the attorney to walk out of the previous meeting if things got heated. Wow. There is absolutely... a paper trail here to honestly paper them with so many lawsuits that they have no idea which way to turn. Their attorney told them to abandon their office. Yeah. How foolish is that? Well, I can't say I'm real impressed with this attorney because as we've said before, I said in the meeting that there's not one attorney anywhere in the United States that has a license to practice law. It's a private membership. It's a country club card for lack of better words. And I don't know if people understand how serious this is because they're being paid with a license to practice law, a licensed attorney, on and on. That's misrepresentation. That's fraud. You know, we talk from time to time about people having a hard time accepting the truth because it really kind of takes the rug out from under you. When you're like, well, I believe this all my life and it's false. Where do I go from here? And I think these people are kind of in that position where they're like, well, I always thought that I could do this thing. Their attorney is still telling them they can and people are telling them, no, you can't. And they don't know what to do with that. Well, you can't continue to be corrupt. That's what we're telling you. We're going to hold you accountable to that. Your attorney is not going to save you. And that's a really scary place for them to be. So I don't blame them for going with what he, I do blame them, but why would they walk out? Because fight or flight right there, you know, I can't fight these people because they're suing me. So I might as well just run away, run away. Yeah. And, and, you know, to this point, I, I just hired, we were talking about this earlier. I hired a, an attorney who, a couple of days ago. And I know that I know this person and he is like me. He is completely and totally angry, pissed off about people using their positions in order to mislead, commit fraud, or mail administration. And, and you know what, not all attorneys are, are bad. I, you know, the system is not correct, but when you've got a system that we're all operating in this system, that's completely rife with systemic corruption. Sometimes you pick up the weapons of your enemy and use them in, in the place where they're, where you are on a battlefield. I mean, talk to any soldier who's been in active combat. Are they just going to walk past assets that are laying on the ground after they've just like eliminated them? No, they're not. They're going to absolutely grab anything they can in order to hit the goal. Does that make sense? Yeah. Because World War II, you know, they drop somebody in a battlefield and grab their firearm and whatever and keep marching on. You're not going to leave an asset and justify that if you are in a battle. Now, does that mean I'm advocating breaking the law? No, I'm advocating not being stupid. If we've got attorneys out there that can help us write this system, which the guy I hired is that guy. And he's in with a whole bunch of other guys that are those guys that are going to, they don't care about money. They're like me. They don't really care about money. They want to see things righted. Yes. Stephanie is another one who comes to mind. Stephanie Lambert is another perfect example. And I love I absolutely love Stephanie Lambert and Stephanie Scott who are fighting over there in Hillsdale. Stephanie Lambert has been just absolutely put through the through the ringer on on what she's done. I mean, she's been detained. She's been I don't think she's been arrested, arrested. I don't know. I shouldn't comment on it, but she's been incarcerated. And what they did to her was just horrifying. And so they will try any tactic, just like they did with the Jay Sixers, to intimidate people and make them back down, including acts of humiliation and, quite honestly, crimes against humanity. You've got to be willing to stand. If you're going to stand up and fight, you've got to be willing to stand without backing down. Yeah. And this ideal that, well, I won't do anything until it comes to me. It's already it's in your home. It's not just at your door. It's there already. Yeah, that's like that's like being totally blind to the truth. Well, you know, if it affects me and my family, then we'll really be in a fight. No, you just pay taxes. What's that? You pay taxes, don't you? Well, they disqualified themselves for having a weak constitution personally and having any ethics. When you see something that's wrong, you have to stop and you have to be willing to stand up for other people. You can't just turn a blind eye. If you do, you've disqualified yourself entirely from anything that's a public service because they'll just use their their their their power to, to only take care of themselves. You have to be completely selfless. I watched a movie last night. Well, part of a movie. I didn't watch the whole movie. Had Christopher Plummer as a Nazi, which was crazy. Cause I, I know him from the sound of music when he's very anti-Nazi. He's a Nazi Colonel, I think. And he is so angry about this priest that's been secretly keeping and moving out of danger some POWs that escaped. And, oh, he just harasses all the priests. He captures them, he arrests them, he tortures them. I think he kills them too. And at some point later on in the story, he needs to get his family to safety. He never thought his family would be in jeopardy in Rome. And all of a sudden he comes to the priest and he says, I want you to get my wife and children out. And it's what you're saying. Oh, suddenly it's affecting me. I need help. And the priest refused to help him, which I found kind of surprising. Well, he said he wasn't going to help him. And then he finds out later after he's being arrested that his family did get out safely. And he says, I don't know how, but he knows it was the priest. And according to the story. Oh, you know, there's times where when, when you don't act. And you have the ability to act. God literally, and that justice and that judgment is going to come from God himself. If you abandon other people, you think God's going to stick up for you? He might. But he also might give you the time to feel what you've done to others so you never do it again. This is a biblical concept, too. It's in there. It happened many times that people... Were doing the wrong thing. They were corrected. They chose to do the right thing. And good things happened to them. As a result of that. Luke doesn't hold up in God's presence and he sees us all absolutely completely. I'm going to use the word naked, completely naked before God almighty. And that's our emotions. That's the way we think. That's our actions. It's everything. And as I taught my kids when they were growing up is it doesn't matter where you are. You don't hide from God. So, so whether it's in the dark or in the light, Make sure that what you're doing is spotless. Now, that doesn't always happen because we're human beings. And we don't always make good decisions at the time. But when we look at that, we can correct ourselves and say, okay, I'm never going to do this again. And you repent and you move on. You learn from your mistakes. So do you want to get back on? We've gotten on a wonderful little rabbit trail here. But you know what? To your point, you cannot act or do anything apart from presence of God in your life, or you're just going to be like a leaf blowing around for the next little shiny thing that grabs your attention. And this is one reason why I like to say peacefully, lawfully, repeatedly, because when we're asking you to stand on your rights, we're not asking you to be violent about it. You can't be You can't go to the public meeting and be like, oh, OK, I'm going to be a participant this time. I'm going to have the courage. And then you go about it the wrong way. If you go about it in an ungodly way, it's not going to work out very well for you. And it should. Here's another thing, too, just as a. a person, you know, I used to be terrified of doing exactly what we're doing right now. You know, I'd rather work, I would have rather worked behind the scenes and never, you know, I'd speak up when something needed to be said. However, to speak in a meeting was kind of like to go up in front of the public functionaries who have this godlike power. somewhere and you finally realize after you do this for a while, just wait a minute, these are the least educated people in the whole fricking room, right? But what's really helpful is write your thought, if you've never done it before, step one, write down what you want to say and read it. Because then you can fall, instead of going up there going, I don't know what I want to say and being afraid when you get up there or somebody interrupting you, you can just read what you wrote. And after you do this a few times, you're going to feel the courage to go off script. And it's a learned skill. And the more you practice it, the easier it gets. You walk up there and do exactly what God says in the Bible. Don't even worry about what you're going to say. Because quite honestly, God himself, if you have the courage to stand up there, God will give you the words you need to say. You never have to be afraid. God equips you for that moment in time. And if you listen to him, he'll give you those words. Even if you think you made a mistake, those were what exactly you needed to say at that time. However, if you want to practice, go up there to every single meeting, show up. And even if you just write a paragraph and read it the first time, no matter what it is, no matter if you're talking about, I don't know, whatever it is that's on your heart and do it every time. After a couple of times, It's going to get real comfortable, and you're going to be able to go up there and speak eloquently, with purpose, and hitting the mark every time, and you'll get more comfortable with extravagantly speaking. As we talked about yesterday, I think one of the aspects of it is that people get intimidated by all these people staring back at you. If that bothers you, turn around and look at the people behind you. Byron Township. This is what I've seen Tim Newhouse do. And he's the planning commission head, chairman, whatever you want to call him. And then Don Tillema. They will both look at you and say, turn around and speak to the board. I've seen him do it multiple times. You're to speak to us. which is absolutely like sitting up there like a little tyrannical king or queen. They have turned these meetings into tribunals. They don't act like employees. They act like kings and queens and tyrants. And that's how you should view them as then. You know, if you don't respect them, you can respect the seat they're in without respecting them. Because if they've done wrong, you have to show them why they are doing wrong in their seat. In your township, there's a little lectern on the floor right in front of them and in front of everybody. You don't have to be there. And you don't have to be recorded with a microphone. If you want to stand over at the side, you can. If you want to stand in the back of the room, you can. It helps everybody to hear you if you use the microphone. And so it may not be convenient to move that around. If you've got to be in front of them, like I said yesterday, even the Supreme Court, they're just people. They are no more powerful than you are. You are more powerful as a sovereign woman than the Supreme Court is because the grand jury is there. They are under the authority of the Constitution. Well, they're supposed to be under the authority of the Constitution in a lawful society as a representative republic demands it, but they may not be acting like it. And whether they're doing right or wrong, you are a more powerful woman or man at any age than any of them are. So keep that in mind. They are not the whether they're wearing a suit and tie or casual wear, they're staring at you and glaring at you or smiling at you. None of that makes any difference. And like you said, you don't have to make eye contact with them. If it's a public speaking thing, that's a scare, then do what you have to to mitigate that. You can practice in front of a mirror, practice at home. I used to do that with, um, I would speak aloud what I wanted to say to see can I do it within a time limit of the one or two minutes. Usually it was like one or two minutes that I had. Can I say what I have to say in this time frame? And then I get there with my written out thing and I listen to what other people have to say. Well, they already made this point and that point, but I see I can make a different point here. But that's the Toastmaster in me. I did a lot. I had a really good club I was a member of for about seven years. And there were a lot of times where someone was scheduled to do a speech and they would ask for somebody to replace them because they didn't show up. And so I had a lot of practice writing a speech on the spot. Sometimes all I had time for was writing down three points to make and I'd have to get up in front of people and deliver a speech. You learn real quick doing that. And so I'm comfortable in that setting like when I got in front of your township I was going to read some quotes Some of the quotes which are in this part two But they weren't I could see from their faces they weren't really listening And I thought I got to simplify this a little bit more. I'm going to go with the four main arguments I'm going to do that instead and give them an introduction and they caught me off by point four um, so that's unfortunate but The people behind me may have benefited from hearing it, too, because maybe they learned something. Maybe they're triggered to go and read it themselves. And that's the thing where you you don't have to be an expert. You can change your mind about what you have to say. Nothing has to be perfect in this. But you do have to have the courage to stand up because that's your duty to do it. Yeah, I don't I don't even know if I'm going to the next the next meeting. I think I'm going to make a few points. And we can work on it together if you want some help with it. You know, we've talked about the value of an outline to help you stay on topic. I think for me, what I want to do is drive the point home is that we are peasants in their eyes. They have no respect. They absolutely have complete and utter disdain for the population. How dare we come there and question them? Don Tillema actually said it right out loud. He goes, I'm in charge of this meeting and I can run this meeting any way I want. It's exactly what he said. And it sucks to be him. We have them on tape, all of it. And we're going to tape those meetings because people need to see it. And, you know, the problem that we have right now with social media too, is that people are constantly shiny thing. We're, we're designed to, to be interrupted and look for the unusual. The stuff when things really get done is when you can stay on point and stay with an issue and just keep carrying that ball until you get it into the end zone. Well, you know what? A lot of that time is just is kind of boring, quite actually. The meetings are boring. This isn't all about being entertained, going to township or city meetings. They're not entertainers. They're not even educated. So you're going to have to sit through there. through their nonsense and idiocy a lot of the time. Because they're wasting your time on purpose. They're only talking heads for the majority of them. And they're trying to figure out how to screw you over more than what they already had. Because they have complete contempt for you. Because you're a peasant. You're the audience. That's what the MPA says. Yep, worthy audience. That's it. To their little six-year-old narcissistic play they got going on up there. Well, as we said, having knowledge is power. So let's get back to the Open Meetings Act handbook. That's the next item which you've had on your screen all this time. So this was published in twenty twenty two. I think there was one previous to that. But Dana Nestle. authored this one she's the attorney general and the nice thing about it is if if the legalese is hard for you to wade through reading this would give you a better comprehension of it it's got a handy index to the topics so if you're looking for a particular topic like adjourning a meeting You can find it by the index in the handbook better than you can quickly in the law. But if you're trying to study them side by side, that can be kind of tricky to do. So it's one of those things where I got kind of stuck during the meeting because I knew that I had read something, but I couldn't remember where I read it. And that's where studying these things is even more helpful. So we're going to look at a couple of things in the handbook because when they say they have a right to do something, this is where they're getting some of it. It doesn't say it in the OMA, but sometimes the attorneys from the MTA might quote you out of the handbook. So I included a screenshot where the part in yellow we're going to talk about later, the part I underlined in red, Not very nicely, but it's there about the length of time a person can speak. This is in the opinion that we're going to talk about in a moment. So MCL fifteen point two six three section three part five is elaborated on in the OMA handbook on page fifteen. So this is Dana Nessel's opinion when she said. The board may establish a rule requiring individuals to identify themselves if they wish to speak at a meeting. That's not in the law. Does she have the right to tell them that they can make rules regarding our right to speak? No. Absolutely not. And she gives an additional reference, not in the OMA, because you're not going to find it there. It's an opinion by former Attorney General Frank J. Kelly. It's called OAG number five, one, eight, three. So if you look it up online, it's going to be hard to find on the government page because as anyone who has ever looked for anything on the Michigan government page knows it's hard to find anything there. But if you just Google OAG number five, one, eight, three, it'll come up. I also have a link for it in the documents here. It says, The rules regulating the right of the public address may include such controls, which we know they can't do, that a public body may limit the time a person may be permitted to address the public body and the portion of the agenda set aside for public address. So this is where those boards are going to get the idea from that they can limit the time. Is it in the law? No. And would that matter? No. This is Frank J. Kelly's opinion, that they can set these rules limiting our rights. And also, I pointed out, and here's where the yellow highlight comes into play, if you scroll down. I wanted to point out that at least four times between the two opinions that I talk about here, Kelly used this language, And I put in parentheses because it's in one of those parts, but not the other. The regulation, however, must be reasonable, flexible, and applied in a manner which will encourage greater public participation. Oops, I got a misspelling there. Rats. Rather than discourage, there's another one. Or prohibit it. Maybe that was his misspelling. Little typos there. So even Kelly had good intentions to support the public discourse. So when you bring this up to them about why, it's just what I did to Tillman. I said, do you know why you think you have that three-minute rule? Well, we made a rule. I think he said something to that effect. He's sassy in answering me. And I said, well, I'll tell you why. I know he doesn't know why. He's doing this because Kelly had a bunch of questions that people asked him The year after the OMA was enacted, within that year or two, people were asking how to apply the new Open Meetings Act. He answered a lot of those questions. That's what these opinions are about. It's kind of like, well, it's an expression of the law, but he's saying this is how you can use it. He's just an attorney. Is he always right? No. Is it the law? No. But that's where they get it from. So if they continue to try to say they can do this, you'll say, no, it's not in the law. Here's where you get it from. The next one is OAG number five, three, three, two. Can I point here just one second? Sure. This is the biggest problem that we have right now is that they are legislating or creating law through the judicial process and the townships. They don't have the right to create any of these laws against we the people. Ordinance is not a law. It's an idea they have, but they don't have the right to do this. It's without force of law. Because they're literally creating, even in the meetings, they're literally just saying, no, we're going to do this. We're going to do this. We can do whatever we want. And I mean, Tillema said that outright. He said, I can run this meeting. I can do whatever I want. Yep. Stepping outside the scope of his authority. Yep. Problem solved. So I included the other one because it's right on the same topic and I wanted people to have the access to it. Oh, it's an opinion. Attorney General is what that stands for. Five, three, three, two with regards to time limit rules. So he said each person could be limited, but the whole public can't be limited. Once again, he said, nevertheless, although the right to address a public body may be limited by reasonable rules of the public body, which is wrong, the provision may not be construed as empowering a public body to develop rules which completely deny the right of a person to address the body. So the Open Meetings Act, I think, does specifically state in that they cannot limit the whole of the public body time frame. So, for example, they can't say, we'll give you thirty minutes as a whole to say what you have to say. And I stood on that one with Muskegon Community College when they had a meeting regarding DEI. And they had a lot of people who wanted to comment. At one point, they got tired of hearing kind of the same thing over and over. Most of the people were against it. If not all at that particular time. Well, we're going to limit. Let's have like two more people. And then, oh, I'm not on the agenda. What do I do? I stand up and I raise my hand and I say, may I? And the little old woman at the front of the board just stared back at me. What? What? And I said... I'm just going to tell you that. I have the right to tell you. I have the duty to tell you. You're violating the law. You cannot limit how many people can speak if it takes you all night to listen to them. If they want to speak, you have to hear it. And they were stunned, especially since I said I told them it could be a misdemeanor if they violated it. And that one woman on the board said, you know, I think I would like to hear what the rest of the people have to say. That's the power of one woman standing up outside the agenda and telling them what the law is. It worked in that circumstance because they were so shocked and it was only a few more people anyway. So they just decided people were in a line and they knew that it was just a few more. Well, you know, maybe it'll just be to our benefit to let them speak today. But that's where they get some of this from. And if you know that, you can tell them. And you can tell them, well, even though Attorney General did say you could do this, which he's wrong, he also supported the right of the people to have their opportunity to say what they have to say. And that's important. I think it's worthwhile to note. So even if they say, well, We have the right to do this because what? What about Michigan Constitution Article I, Section I? What about Section III? What about the First Amendment? Those things are here for that purpose. We're not going to go over all of the Glossary terms, but there's a glossary in there. So when it encouraged me, I had support writing this to do a glossary on a lot of the terms that are in the article. So if you want to know what I mean by some things, what Noah Webster's dictionary means, what Black's law means. I kind of put together my own version of a glossary. I really would like everybody to look these terms up if they're confusing to you. Breach the peace is one of them. I found some things in the law, so I quote them in there. Where does a breach of peace come in? Where doesn't it come in? You might want to look at that and maybe study it more than I did. If you think your sheriff deputies are Or your board is going to try to pull that kind of stunt on you. If you get loud, they might try to do that. But when we go into the New York Times versus Sullivan opinion, you're going to find you can be as loud as you need to be to be heard. You can get excitable, and that's okay. But there's a selection of glossary terms there that are kind of handy. I like free, unrestrained, unobstructed, allowed, open, candid, frank, unreserved. And I didn't look up Liberty. I left that discussion for perhaps another time. But there's a set of links in there and they are in the PDF also. So if you have a hard time finding things or you just want to easy click on it and I I want to also say I know a lot of other authors charge for sub stack articles mine are always free and you don't have to subscribe to see them and you can share them for free I don't get any benefit off doing it except just I feel like it's it's my role to play Civic duty. Everyone has a civic duty. And that's another thing, and it's a great point to bring up, because how many people are making money off of what they're doing or are they treating this as their civic duty when they are operating to have an effect on how wrong everything is right now? systemic or systemic corruption that we're dealing with. You don't get paid for that. You shouldn't get paid for, for making money off of other people's pain. You should just do it because it's the right thing to do. I respect you. And like I said yesterday, when you took a break in the middle of the show, just to stand up, stretch, get a coffee, whatever, whatever it is you need, your intro is only a minute long. Donna shows you never have to fast forward eight to twenty minutes to get through all the advertisements and the sponsors announcements and the gobbledygook and the five minutes of fancy recordings because she might be a little late or to make sure to build enough audience. You try to start at nine and if you're a couple minutes late it's because you're rushing through trying to get ready to get everything on the show. And maybe you have a tactical difficulty. Donna is rarely late. Within one or two minutes, you start the show and you're starting the show. You got one minute to wait through the little intro, which is kind of cool. And then the show starts and she's talking and there's no sponsors. And That's because, like you said, Donna's doing what she feels like is her duty to do. It's her role to play. At some point, she may not be able to do any shows because she's too busy in the courthouse. Could be. You would have been really proud of me at the filing that I did yesterday. You know, when you get into this sort of thing like filing pro se, I really do think that there was a huge benefit for me going and just doing this stuff and figuring out how to file pro se. because you, first of all, you can see how they're manipulating things from the clerk's perspective underneath the judge. It's not just the judge. It's the whole operation that is literally working to, how should I say this? They're working against justice. They're trying to, they're trying to, I would say that there, that there are people hiding things that give others a plausible deniability on their actions to either act or not act. And so start seeing how this works. It kind of is an eye opener, just like being in politics. But the other thing is, is learning how to build a good case and then understanding the administrative state of how to file, how to put it in place, how many days you have to respond, What's an appropriate response? How long your responses can be depending on what type of a case it is. And even learning what the different cases are. If you want to get in and learn something, just jump in and do it. I know yesterday I filed again. I learned another process yesterday, which is bringing in all the exhibits into a filing so that it makes it easy for the judge to go through what you put in front of them. You don't want them to have to hunt around for things. You want to make it be real easy. One, two, three, four, five exhibit, you know, and that sort of thing so that they can quickly go through it and reference things, make it easy for them and cut the verbiage out. What the opposing attorneys do is they try to put so much language in it to like overwhelm you, the plaintiff. with their with their crap that's what they're trying to do and if you go in and actually read what they've written it's like it's like kind of childish and most of it won't even stand so you can at face value go through it and go well this is crap this is crap this is crap let's get down to something that actually has some meaning to it and it becomes a uh a focused study on issues and the law and how to apply it mm-hmm Yeah, kind of interesting. The process is interesting. And going and asserting your rights in an open meeting. Now, those meetings are boring. I'm going to tell you that. A lot of times, yes. I've never seen one public meeting that I'm not like, You know, I've got these protein bars that have caffeine in them. I might sit there and I'll be kicking back and eating one of these protein bars or drinking a coffee just to stay awake because they're boring. OK, totally and completely and utterly boring so that I can sit there and pay attention to what they're saying, which most of it is just crap. There's a lot of times where I go to and it's like, oh, I'm just kind of wasting my time. But no, you didn't. Because, like, for example, my township the day after I went to yours. And so I had I wanted to ask them a perspective on a couple of things. And I said I told them I said this happened to my friend's township. And I'm curious what you think of this thing and where I wanted to know what they make of it. And I got to get back to one of my trustees to ask him because he has access to the MTA. And I want to know what they what they make of it. But anyway, they were all listening. It's after the meeting. They could go home, but they're all sitting there listening to me. But I was passionately talking to them about it. And so the clerk said, I just have to ask, are you angry with us? And I said, no. I said, no. If I was mad about something that you did, I would have been over there, appointed the lector. I would have been over there telling you so. No, I don't have to complain. In fact, what I did do was I... I told them I wanted them to put back the agenda and the meeting minutes on the website. They had not been doing that. I wanted it back on there. There's your instruction. But I thanked them for putting the videos on there, which they didn't have to do. That helped me because I couldn't get the minutes to know what happened in the meeting last time that I wasn't there. So I praised them while also giving them instruction. They're all new. So I think as part of their newness, they didn't know how to operate the website to put their agenda and stuff on there. But they need to do it. But they thought I was being angry just because I was kind of passionate and informed. And they're not used to that. They're not used to people being aware. And attentive during their meetings. It's usually the same old people just kind of sitting there and listening or complaining about something No, it doesn't have to be uh you did something wrong every meeting or You don't have to say anything. Sometimes it's just yeah. Yeah. Okay. They're just doing their thing and that's all there is to it but in your township I tried to give them an education on the first two pieces, the Constitution and the First Amendment. Then I went to New York Times versus Sullivan, which they lied and said they hadn't seen. But They did lie because I had brought that up to them the two weeks before. And so they said, no, we've never heard of this. It's like, yeah, you did because I made an issue of that. And that was the issue for me not sitting down, which they called the sheriff's on. So it was a blatant, blatant lie. Yeah. And what I told him was. um what I'm about to say which is in part two but I also said look if you try to stop me from continuing to speak and you try to get the deputy to haul me away I'm going to tell him the same thing I'm going to tell you if I need to sue you I'm going to win because this question has already been answered that's why I bolded it in part two because this supreme court opinion If you're not going to listen to what I have to say, you do have to listen to what the Supreme Court's going to have to say about it. This particular case was about the New York Times Company versus L.B. Sullivan. It was about a newspaper. But the context of the opinion includes the type of speech we're talking about with regards to public meetings. So I say this opinion from nineteen sixty four is an expression of what free speech means in the context of the relationship between public functionaries and the people. They cannot trespass on our right to speak freely to them, whether we're instructing or airing a grievance, or even if we want to take a moment and praise them for following up with what we told them the month before. The question of whether they can trespass on us on this context has already been answered by the Supreme Court. They don't want to hear it because it has more authority to them than my voice does, even though that's erroneous. Well, you're a peasant, so am I. Yeah, yeah. So the four main arguments that I pull out of the opinion, the opinion is really long. The link that I gave you in the articles will link you to a version of the opinion that includes paragraph numbers. So that the quotes, like if you look at number five, it says paragraph sixty five. You can go scroll on down through those numbers and find exactly the quote that I'm referring to. There's a lot more context and a lot more to this opinion. And there's a lot more commentary in there that totally works. for what we're talking about here. But I wanted to focus on four main topics that I call four main arguments that stood out to me for this important context. And then I give you at least one quote which match up. And I think these quotes are really powerful. And you can use them as part of your public comment to defend your right to speech if you need to, or even if you just want to because you want to instruct them and make sure that they don't pass a rule. So let's go through them real quick. Number one, public functionaries have the responsibility and obligation to be instructed and reproached by the people, and they must not infringe on the rights of the people to do so. That's strictly laid out in this opinion. Number two, public discussion is a civic political duty of the people and must not be inhibited. So we're not just saying it when we say it's your duty. The Supreme Court reminds us that this reminds them that it is. The people have the right to educate and even debate public functionaries. And I added each other because sometimes that's what you're doing in a public meeting. Number four, free speech allows for a peaceful means of approach and must not be limited. You'll notice that they all have statements about not being limited. So. Let's see. We can go to number one, I suppose. I have highlighted in black and bold the. The most important comments. If I had a limited amount of time. Or I really want to focus. The whole comment is really great. But. These officials are responsible to the people. For the way they perform their duties. That's from the Supreme Court. They're responsible to us. For how they perform their duties. Boom. Freedom to discuss public affairs. And public officials issues. is unquestionably, as the court today holds, the kind of speech the First Amendment was primarily designed to keep within the area of free discussion. So like I said about the First Amendment, what does it sound like? It sounds like a public meeting. But I doubt that a country can live in freedom where its people can be made to suffer physically or financially for criticizing the government, its actions, or its officials. for a representative democracy ceases to exist the moment that the public functionaries are by any means absolved from their responsibility to their constituents. And this happens whenever the constituent can be restrained in any manner. from speaking, writing, or publishing his opinions upon any public measure or upon the conduct of those who may advise or execute it. An unconditional right to say what one pleases about public affairs is what I continue to be the minimum guarantee of the First Amendment. That's powerful. They cannot restrain you from speaking to them about a public measure like sucking the water out of your system or upon the conduct of those who may execute it. So you can say to them, your conduct upon this issue is horrible and you can use whatever kind of language you want to use and you're protected from that or for that. Government may be responsive to the will of the people and that changes may be by lawful means an opportunity essential to the security of the republic is a fundamental principle of our constitutional system. Very strongly worded. The next bold section says every citizen may speak his mind and every newspaper express its view on matters of public concern. It may not be barred from speaking or publishing because those in control of government said think. that what is being said or written is unwise, unfair, false, or malicious. In the democratic society, one who assumes to act for the citizens is in an executive, legislative, or judicial capacity must expect that his official acts will be commented on and criticized. such criticism cannot in my opinion be muzzled or deterred by the courts at the instance of public officials under the label of libel which is what the case was about but so this is saying again You can't stop these people from saying what they want to say, even if you don't like it. The first person who commented at the college meeting about DEI was giving the definition of DEI and they cut her off for it because they didn't want to hear that. This is a violation of exactly what they're talking about. That's a First Article or First Amendment violation right there. Number two is kind of short. Political discussion is a political duty. So that's a duty of the people. I'm not going to read the whole quote. Get the article. Thus, we consider this case against the background of a profound national commitment to the principle that debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide open, and that it may well include vehement, caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials. That's my favorite one right there. favorite one I almost underlined it but I thought that's a little too much I italicized it and bolded it you can say things which sound unpleasantly sharp and they have to sit there and listen to you Supreme Court has already defended your right to do that so guess what if they sue you or you sue them for what you say you're going to use the Supreme Court's opinion as part of your defense and you're going to win. They're not going to like it. Number three is real quick. I just had one quote. Under the system of our system of government, counter-argument and education are the weapons available to expose these matters, not abridgment of speech. So sometimes people will argue. That means you may argue with the public functionaries. Just like it did Tillman that day. Argue with them a little bit. It's totally acceptable. Sometimes they'll just sit there and they refuse to comment back. You just say whatever you want to say. You'll ask them questions and they won't answer. Again, they have a responsibility to listen to what you have to say. They have a responsibility to answer you when you're airing a grievance. And if they refuse to do so, that's a problem for them. I think his last name is Tillamook. Okay, I call him Tillman because that's how I thought it was. Yeah, so I just thought I'd interject that right now. We want to make sure that we name people that are absolutely breaking the law, which he did. There's one last one. Free speech allows for peaceful means of approach and must not be limited. That's really, really important. See, what happens if they cancel meetings or they cut the people off? Then you get to a riot. You get to people bringing their tar and feathers. You get to people throwing eggs at the building or going to visit their homes and threatening them personally. You get violence in the streets because the people don't feel like they're allowed to be hurt. If they're not heard, it can lead to people, especially people who don't have God in their lives, to be more violent out of simple frustration. And so here it's saying, if you want a peaceful means of reproach, you got to let them talk in a public meeting. Imperative is the need to preserve and violate the constitutional rights of free speech and free press, and free assembly in order to maintain the opportunity for free political discussion to the end that government may be responsive to the will of the people and that changes, if desired, may be obtained by peaceful means. Therein lies the security of the republic, the very foundation of constitutional government. That kind of gives me goosebumps. It's a good one. One main function of the First Amendment is to ensure ample opportunity for the people to determine and resolve public issues. Where public matters are involved, the doubt should be resolved in favor of freedom of expression rather than against it, which is exactly what Frank J. Kelly said, even while he was trying to limit public space. Chief Justice Hughes says, for these reasons, I strongly believe that the Constitution accords citizens and press an unconditional freedom to criticize official conduct. Here's the title I was talking about yesterday. I think I said twenty-four yesterday. If they have violations of free speech rights as described in this opinion, you can sue them in a civil court for, that's what this says, for declaratory relief, which is a court declaration that the official's actions were unconstitutional. A public functionary could be impeached or they could have a criminal investigation as well. So, and then I have the, you know, the, the lion meme that I like, but it, so then there's a summary. And again, we're, we're saying you are the boss. You are the master in this relationship that does not entitled you to be ridiculous. It does not entitle you to be obnoxious. It does not entitle you to be obstructive and disorderly. It does give you the duty to, Speak up when they're doing the wrong thing and tell them what you do want them to do There may be time where I'll sue them Yes There may be times where you just want to share your opinion on a matter and other people disagree with you you have the duty to defend their right to do that also and I have seen that done where people in the room are Who don't like what somebody has to say. Will make some noise. Or mock them. Behind their back. Whatever it is. That's being disruptive. And the rest of the room. Looked at them and said. Hush. You need to be quiet. Because we want to know. What that person has to say. In that particular meeting. It was worthwhile to know. Where they stood. Why were they upset. I disagreed with them, but I'm going to defend their right all day long to say what they want to say. It doesn't matter whether I disagree or agree with them. You need to be ready not only for yourself and for your own opinion on something, but be ready to defend the rights of other people too. And if you're not prepared, it's going to be harder to do that. You can still stand up and say, hey, I disagree with this. But it helps if you know the laws. And the OMA is one of those handy ones. But, of course, the First Amendment and the constitutions are valuable because they are kind of sometimes what the public functionaries will listen to if they won't listen to you. You might have to teach them what it means sometimes. And also this this in New York Times for Sullivan is based largely on the Fourteenth Amendment also. And you can debate whether that was passed properly or not. But like Donna said, we have what we have. I believe that the Supreme Court probably was unlawful at the time they made this ruling. But that doesn't mean that the ruling or the opinion is. As written is not helpful to us. It's absolutely helpful to us so if you are able to and it It's it that's what's on your heart in the moment Read them one of the quotes or make one of the points that it makes do it in your own way I was trying to read right from it Um, they didn't want to hear it and even afterwards I said, do you want to know where I got about this adjourning the meeting improperly? And one of the trustees wouldn't even make eye contact with me. And she said, no, thanks. I'm not interested. And another man, I was reading. That goes back to the point with listening to them say, you know, I'm tired of listening to all this legal nonsense. It's like, so what? You're just going to run this whole thing by opinion, your opinion, and a total absence of the law. I think if people really listen to what they're saying, the majority of their arguments are basically, don't tell me the law. We're going to go with my opinion because I'm the king and you are a peasant. Yep. But it's when they, you know, when they do make this kind of statements, these are violations. They're not just statements. While they're in that seat, everything they do and say, they're accountable to. On the other hand, I don't want people to be afraid of taking that seat. Like you've been trying to convince people, here we are attacking them. And then you're like, on the other hand, I want you to go for a run for office. Yeah. But, you know, if you have, here's the thing. This is an airing of grievances. A redress of grievances is what we want. There's always ways to fix it. So if you step outside the scope of your authority while you're in office, but you didn't mean to, and the people point out to you, hey, you violated this law or whatever. You didn't think about this circumstance. Oh, that's what happened in Muskegon City when I went to them and said, your dog law didn't take into account a couple of things. You need to fix it. And they went, oh, we hadn't thought about that. I said, I'll write it for you. And they're like, okay. I also did that prevented breed specific legislation in North Muskegon. They wanted to pass a dog law restricting pit bull owners. Because somebody had a neighbor who got a pit bull puppy and they didn't like it. They were afraid. And I went to the city government and I said during a public meeting, here's the statistics on it. Here's what happened in X number of cities where they passed free specific legislation and they turned it around because they realized it was not going to work. It was wrong. It was illegal. It was biased. It wasn't helpful to them. There's another way to do this. I will write for you an educational document that you can pass out freely. And that's what I did. So instead of, and they agreed to that, they did not pass a law restricting dog ownership. Instead, and I don't like pit bulls personally. I mean, I don't mind the dogs. but I wouldn't want one because they have a higher level of responsibility. And the thing, it's not that I don't like them. I don't like the way that, A lot of dog owners own them as a status symbol one way or the other. Either they think, oh, my dog looks powerful or I want. That's what it is. They want to look like a tough guy. Some of them do. Some of them want to uphold this idea that they're the underdogs they've been discriminated against. Look, if you want a pit bull or any dog that's powerful, I don't care what breed it is. You have a higher level of responsibility and liability to to train that dog and manage that dog so that it cannot hurt others. And that's what this was all about. That's what it gets down to. If the lady's pit bull doesn't hurt anybody, it doesn't matter. If she's not following the laws, which they can't really pass laws affecting dog owners anyway, but they do. The laws are there to guide people into being responsible and holding them accountable when they fail to do that. And so at that time, that's what I did was I wrote up an educational pamphlet for them that helped people understand what they should be doing and why. And they put their stamp on it and put it out at the I don't know, the city government building or wherever they put it. But they did make that available to the public. And it prevented them from passing a more restrictive illegal law. So sometimes it's just a matter of standing up and say, this isn't going to work. This is what I think you can do instead. And I've done that in my township too. People are concerned. We have a lot of elderly people in our township and they're afraid of their neighbors. Well, that man is shooting his gun at night and so I'm afraid to go to his house and talk to him. Well, why don't we get a group of people like Bill was talking about yesterday? He's the kind of guy that will stand up for the other. You know, be approachable to your neighbors if there's an issue going on, you know, instead of grab your torches and pitchforks and automatically say, you may not know. Yeah. In their case, though, this man is behaving in a way that frightens them. If they feel unsafe to step outside of their house because they're He might be shooting in their area. They're not going to want to go to his house. They're afraid of a guy who would be that irresponsible. And actually, it turned out he was really, really trying very hard to be responsible to do what he wanted to do. But he probably shouldn't still do it. That's my point. Not assuming that someone is as hostile just based on your own bias or fear. You know, sometimes you just got to fire and then then and talk to people. And you'll be surprised at how how easy it is if you just hold your cool and talk to people like they're like you would want to be talked to. I mean, Jesus made it for us to treat us the way that you would want to be treated and talk to them. and not in a hostile way. Most of the time, you don't have to go to hostilities. Most of the time, it's like, hey, I don't know if you know this, but, and can you help me with this problem? When you ask people for help, even if they're the ones that are the problem, that's a great way of of approaching it. You got a guy that's shooting a gun like that. You could go talk to him and say, Hey, you know, it sounds to me like you have a great skillset and I'm just saying, turn it around. You have a great skillset. You understand firearms. Is there a way that we could talk and work together to help educate people? And maybe, you know, even talking about things like, like how to be, how to be a person of peace so that people aren't afraid of him. You've just put him in charge of the entire neighborhood of keeping the peace. And he's going to watch his own behavior because now he's in charge of it. Does that make sense? Yeah. And in this case, the guy didn't want a problem and he did talk to a few people, but my suggestion was for people like her who live in fear, whether they should or shouldn't, why don't we have, A group of people, men and women, but particularly men, who are available to anybody to act as mitigators in a situation. Hey, did you know? Yeah, you know, yeah, peacemaker. And each situation, they could go meet the complainant and talk about what's going on. And maybe they can solve it without going to the neighbor. Or maybe they go to the neighbor and they say, hey, hey, look, you know, she's kind of a little intimidated, but we wanted to come and talk to you about this thing. And can we get you two together? Can we solve this problem? That gives somebody else the courage to get the problem solved without having to call a sheriff's deputy and intervene and create more of a problem. Um, why can't a community get together? And, and that's why I bring up Bill because Bill was saying, I'm going to help somebody who, if they go after somebody wrongly, you know, he's a right fighter kind of guy. There are men in our community who would easily readily stand up for a little old lady who's afraid of their neighbor. Why don't we get a short list of them? Yeah. Why don't we get a short list of them? and say would you would you like to help with this particular situation we have at hand so we don't have to call the sheriff in because we don't want to waste the sheriff's deputy's time we don't need a posse on this issue we just need a helpful neighbor there's always a solution peacefully and lawfully if the people are willing to do what they're supposed to do and in like we've talked you know this is these are all biblical concepts This diplomacy has to be exercised first before going to grab your torch and torches and pitchforks. And a lot of times people are just clueless. You know, do you remember a couple of years ago when we had clueless bunnies that were all over my driveway? No. And I kept laughing about this. I'm like, yeah, clueless bunny was there. And I was taking pictures of this, this baby bunny that was sitting on the driveway as I'm driving up to him going, wow, look at this big truck. And I ended up naming these bunnies clueless bunnies because they just sat right there and they watch you. And if you didn't get up and shoo them out of the way, they would have watched the truck go right over the top of them. Totally clueless. People are clueless a lot on their behavior. And there are some people too, that if they can just shove something in your face because they like to create conflict, you got to really approach it and understand who you're talking to and what their MO is. Are they openly hostile just because they want to run you around like a little narcissist would like a truck? Or are they just distracted and clueless about what they've done, you know, you don't know, but, but it, you have to make that determination because that's going to determine how you approach them. And this is another important point that in a local township, you start to get to know people and a lot of the same people will come to the meetings. And there may be that one guy that he's just a little ignorant and he's loud and he's obnoxious. And if you have enough people around who know how to handle him, maybe they know him outside of that circumstance or not. But the board shouldn't have to always be the ones to try to limit somebody's behavior or correct it. The public has the right to do that, too. The public around people who are being disruptive can correct. can act appropriately to stop that disruption and then the board doesn't have to feel compelled to try to take some kind of action which limits the rights of everybody else and in most cases I think you can with a good community doing what they're supposed to be doing they self-discipline and you can have an orderly efficient meeting in which the public can have a discourse meaning I could talk to the supervisor in the middle of the meeting and say, I haven't seen that policy that you're trying to pass. We need a copy of it. Whether that happens, maybe you need to wait another month because we need to see that first. And the supervisor could say, you know what, that's a good idea. We haven't put it out there yet. Or I'm sorry that you haven't seen it. Maybe we can wait because you have that concern. And that ends the discussion. And then you move on with the meeting. It doesn't have to be a, well, you're speaking out of turn. And it doesn't have to be a, you will listen to me now. In our township, luckily, I think I've got a group of people right now who will listen to the people they've expressed they want that feedback. So hopefully we'll continue to move forward in a very peaceful way. Your township is not interested in hearing what the people have to say. Not at all. But as they get replaced, I think they'll be replaced by people who will and people who can correct behavior without making even more of a stink. They don't have to be worried about getting sued at every turn. They're getting sued because they're not listening to you. And I think there's going to be more papering that's going to be going on, which is going to be kind of amusing to see. It's like, you know, the action is going to continue until the behavior improves. And quite honestly, I think my path is going to be to figure this out on the local level here because the crimes they've committed, and it's criminal what they've done, is so egregious. that once I get this figured out and the best way to approach it, the quickest way to approach it, my whole thing will be to go across the state and help other people do that in their areas so that they've got, because it is difficult to take those actions. And I understand if you're standing there by yourself and go, what do I do in this situation? It is very difficult for try this. If they have somebody that can walk them through it or somebody to call that can say, well, based on this, this is probably what I would do. Or do you need some help crafting a letter? Do you need some help with this? That's what I think my process is going to be is to help people on a local level actually hold those people accountable so that they can take their townships and their municipalities back. That's probably going to be something that's in my future here, because I having seen the damage that that local people and held by what the FBI agent said, which was that most of townships municipalities are staffed by these people. BlackRock, he didn't say BlackRock, but I'm going to tell you what it is. Developers, realtors, builders, and appraisers, they're being staffed by them. Are they doing this on their own? I don't believe they really are. I think there's too much of a monetary gain there. And when you see the infusion of these large corporations or equity firms, who are bankrolling these developments and such, you can see exactly what they're trying. This is how they're building the Fifteen Minute Cities. It's not going to happen. It is happening. And it's happening right now under everyone's noses with the water wars. It's not a threat that's off in the future. Well, you know, if they're doing it, they're doing it now. Your family is being threatened as we speak. your way of life is being threatened. It's just a matter of time before you realize it. I think as we've talked a number of times from just being the person that stands up in a public meeting to speak or takes them to account in the court system and goes through an entire process, both of these are examples for other people to follow. Even if you can't get to everybody in their personal situation, Your example will stand. Just do what Donna did. Just look it up. Look at her. Just look it up. Look at her shows. Watch her show. You can't talk to her about it. Here's a step-by-step because you may put out, I think you should put a chronological outline of what has happened and the steps that you took. And that alone is enough information for other people to grasp onto. and do the same thing if they need to in their community. And if they look at my example or your example or any of the other many, many people who have stood up, that's all it takes. One person has the courage to stand up. They're gonna make an impression on a few others. Even if they're not at the meeting, they're going to hear about it later on and they're going to want to talk to you before the next meeting. Stand outside before the next meeting because other people may say, and after the meeting. Plan to be there for a little later than after the meeting because like in your township, People stood there for a long time talking. Well, they were shocked because no one got an ability to speak. Don Tillema gaveled the meeting out and him and Peggy, the highest paid people in the township at about ninety grand a year plus an expense account, walked out and the attorney told them to walk out. And so this is this is, you know, not to discuss it. And they just walked out. And so I want to show you the binder and what I filed yesterday, because we're going I'm going to have a law segment on here to show everyone. And we're going to discuss these cases and the process of when they tried to hide it, because I don't believe the judge ever saw the TRO, the temporary restraint that I don't believe that she did. And I can kind of prove that, that the clerk, I believe the clerk stopped it and just said dismiss or denied and then initialed it. It was never signed. It was just initialed. So we came back being a little bit of a smart aleck. and asked for clarification because either the judge was going to give us clarification so we could write our next our next uh brief or it was going to show that the clerk was standing in the ways that as a gatekeeper guess what we have never gotten a clarification and the clarification was filed and when I filed the tro that clerk told me we never received it yes you did and so whenever you go in and file paperwork you make sure that they mark stamped, received, and filed so that you've got a copy that shows that it was in fact received and filed. When you walk out, that's going to be the most important thing that you do is to have documentation because they lie. They falsify documents. They lie. And I've seen them do it now over and over again. The attorney general's office in Michigan, not only myself, but I know two other people who can absolutely tell you that they destroyed evidence within the attorney general's office. So when you see things, remember, you're going to have to be the one that documents all of this because they will lie to you. We think that they're going to be professional. No, they're not. These people are mobsters. They're gangsters. And they're in it to hide things from other people. We still do not have a publicly available permit for the draining of water. They came up with one, said they had it. It's not publicly available that we found. Tells me it's worse and worse for them. Big frickin problem. And it's not just the township. It goes up higher. The clerk saying that they never received it. Well, who was incompetent there to pull to to refuse to act on a temporary restraining order for them depleting our natural and stealing our natural resources? Who was responsible? It's the Seventeenth Circuit Court, that clerk and the judge. They're absolutely maladministration to say that they never had it. And if I hadn't taken a copy of that, received the received copy, because whenever I walk up to the window, I'm like, stamp it. I want a stamp and a copy of this. Hand it back to me. Now they have nowhere to turn. So I'm pretty sure that the people that are sitting in that office right now are like, oh, crap. Guess what? We're going to bypass you and it's going to get real, real quick. Moral of the story, never piss off somebody who's willing to fight for this country with a no back down attitude. Because you know what? That's like bringing a nail clippers. to a real fight. I want to show you something. I'm going to bring something to the table here. Hang on. Talk amongst yourself a second. I'll be right back. I can hear you, but I want to grab my latest filing in the binder a minute. So my document is not a do-all-end-all-be-all document. It's just my effort to try to help inform people about who you are and what your rights are and how to stand up for them. Or that you should stand up for them. Don't take my word for it. Do your own research and do what you can to whether it's just speaking up or whether it's taking them to court, whatever you have to do peacefully and lawfully. But if you want to read the article, it's pinned on my Telegram account, Karen the Riveter. It's also on Substack, karentheriveter.substack.com. And it is on Twitter. If you're on Twitter, Karen the Riveter, I put it on there yesterday. And there is a link to the Telegram page where I did put it as a PDF. So you can print it out and read it without the pictures. And you don't have to waste the ink on those because I know how that goes. It's just a little over ten pages if you want to print it. But look, it didn't take us that long to talk about it today, so it's not too long. It's not too, too long. I've written several part series for Donna before. It's only two parts. The first part, I think, is the most important part. The second part is just about the New York Times versus Sullivan opinion. So if you want to focus on just one part, you can do that and bring your dictionary. I use Webster's eighteen twenty eight dictionary for a lot of those. OK, so this is the binder that I've been working on with just this one issue. And this is the binder for the temporary injunction, the restraint, the ex parte and the restraining, the temporary restraining order. And I have this thing all, you know, put together with pockets and with the cases and with how they answer the pleadings, as well as affidavits from the people of the township. And it's all clipped. It's got all the notes in it and such, plus a timeline. And this weekend, we're going to be working on putting together a timeline, including all recorded conversations. as well as meeting so that people can follow along with us. This is what I filed yesterday. This is a response to, and it took us a while to put this together. I had somebody else helping me keep my place as I was putting together all the exhibits in the back. And so I don't even know how many pages it is, but I copied it in triplicate. So I'm like copying this stuff in triplicate, but I went and made sure that there was a stamp. You've got to stamp this because they, they lie and they will cover for each other. And so you have, you have to do this. And so, Plaintiff Donna Brandenburg, pro se, pursuant to MCR two point one one nine eight two B submits this reply to defendant Byron Township's response to plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction and Byron Township's answer to complaint defenses and affirmative defenses and reservation of the same. This reply addresses defendant's arguments, incorporates admissions in Exhibit Five, rebuts claims of plaintiff's lack of authority. Their little childish rebuttal was, Dana Brandenberry doesn't have the authority to stand up and bring issue this. What does she know? Well, you know what? Anybody that is living and breathing can know that wells are wrecked and people are out of water. Okay. This is like simple, but they were, they're dumb enough to real not even realize or do their, their checking. And they kind of honestly in their, their pleading, it was quite a bit of, of, uh, inaccuracies and lies. I'm like, I'm like one of the only female pipeline company owners in the United States. We do, um, we do like, uh, uh, anomaly stuff and fix, fix. We don't do, we don't do new lay type stuff typically. And so, because we, you have to maintain the systems. That's, that's primarily what we do. We've done a few small projects, but of new lays, but we do mostly anomalies and, and, uh, take up and relays, that sort of thing, of things that's there because you've got to maintain things, okay? And I like doing that better than anything because it keeps people safe. So anyhow, their whole argument was, Donna Brandenburg doesn't know what she's doing. She's an idiot out here. How dare she actually step in front of Eagle? Well, Eagle never showed up, but I did. And I called and they refused to come out. And so, honestly, the people from Eagle, I've got no respect for them whatsoever. They never even showed up. Tell people what Eagle is. You might not know. It stands for E-P-L-E, right? Let's see. E. Environmental Great Lakes. I don't know. Something. It took the place of the DNR. in the oversight area pretty much that's what that's what it is it's a branch of the dnr so at any rate they wouldn't even come out they wouldn't come out and look they would not and the woman says to me she says to me I need more information I'm like I told you where it is I told you what's happening there's your information right there wouldn't you think you should come out and look at this no I need more information I'm like That is your job. That is not my job. I reported this and you are supposed to oversee it. So really at this point in time, in my opinion, EGLE is rolling right in with this, including the person that answered it. And we have all the names and documentation. They must have public meetings too. I don't know. It's like at this point in time, I'm not sure they're breathing with the way that they're. And, you know, with the type of pipeline we do, I'm way overqualified to, we are way overqualified for a sewer project. It's not something we would ever do because we're overqualified for it. We have welders that weld to nuclear standards. We're not sewer rats that just bolt crap together. It's like, that's really what it comes down to. I mean, it's a way different skillset and ours has a much higher threshold of expertise. you should show you should show those documents again show those documents again show your binder and the other document put them up so people can see yeah and then unqualified donna brandenburg to answer anything and realize that you know I put together I was I was the impetus and put help put together the training look at this This is why Donna says text please first before you call her because she's been busy. If you saw all the stuff in here, and this is only part of it, wait until I get all the videos and photos in there. You have got to be thorough. You've got to document. You've got to put things in order. And you've got to be unrelenting. If you're going to hold somebody accountable, you get on it like an autistic bloodhound and you don't get off that trail until, until you've got some relief. So you want to hear me out? You could have said pit bull and that would have been okay too. Yeah, a pit bull would be good, too. You know, somebody said that to me yesterday. Well, a friend of mine said that yesterday. He's like, you are so funny. He's like, you just don't back down. And I'm like, yeah, I think I'm a honey badger by nature. A wolverine. So even their little on public stuff. they're on public thing. And this, and you know what, I'm just going to start reading this stuff out front because if the people knew what they really did there, if they would look at the court system and go, you lie in bastards, you're part of the problem. And this is why we don't have, which is why I think going through this pro se was more helpful than anything, because guess what? Now they're all involved in this. You want to let them commit the crimes, and then you go after every single last one of them. And that's what President Trump is doing. So anyhow. And that's another good point. We've talked about that before. So as General Flynn often says, local action, national impact. We can't do the national level stuff that the Trump administration is doing. We can't all do what Don is doing there. We don't have the resources, the knowledge, the time that you put into doing that. We're not honey badgers, all of us, but we can make a difference in a local way on our own path. And everybody needs to be doing that. You want to hear the introduction to this? It'll blow everybody's mind. And even the attorney I hired was like, how is is anyone in the state why is no one covering this in the news why isn't anyone giving a crap about this thing I'm like nobody will listen not the drain commission not the road commission not eagle seventeen uh fox seventeen came out and basically went and talked to the township who was going no we've been planning this for twenty years Well, guess what? The Planning Commission doesn't even have minutes from between before two thousand fourteen. So who was planning this for twenty years? Answer it. Riddle me that, you know, Batman, because it's not it's not by anything. It's like so here's here's the introduction. That is a good thing. I'm just going to start reading this stuff. And this is all this is all my pro se stuff. Wait till the chapter eleven. I'm just saying this isn't my fault. Yeah. Shit's going to get real, people. If you think nothing's happening, just, you know what? Stand by. Stay tuned. Buckle up, buckaroos. So anyhow, defendant's response fails to rebut plaintiff's claim and admits a EGLE permit approved for twenty one twenty five expires for twenty one twenty thirty limits withdrawal to one hundred gallons per minute at thirty feet. based on exhibit five nineteen february eagle email now they got forty foot pipes they they've stabbed in the ground okay that is and their pumps here I'm gonna go on yet defended pumps at two thousand gallons per minute per pump below thirty feet so they've got like one thousand gallons per minute that even the eagle permit allowed them according to their little I don't even know if it's a real permit or not at this point in time, but they're using pumps, two thousand gallons per minute pumps below thirty feet. Multiple pumps produce one million gallons per hour. They never even specified it. We'll even tell you how many pumps they have out there. Guess what? We have a count, and we also have drone footage. Screw them. Far exceeding the permitted rate. Exhibit one lacks cost details undermining defendant's expense claims. The township board's refusal to hear complaints violates due process. Defendants claim that EGLE did not require a mitigation plan is misleading. So Eagle's permit even says they don't require a mitigation plan is misleading as their permit request cited. One acre, . one acre of wetland impact to avoid mitigation, yet ongoing activities contribute to the eighty five percent loss of mitigation loss without mitigation violating MCL. Defendants' actions impact Rush Creek watershed, a glacial aquifer. Think about that. Is it replaceable? If it's glacial, and it is according to the documents, how are you going to replace something that the glacier deposited here? These people can't even craft a decent argument. causing contamination risk, sinkholes, we have pictures of them, they've already developed, habitat loss and well depletion severely disrupting two families with special needs members and octogenarians who relocated due to well failure. And we have this in affidavits. These violations cause irreparable harm to plaintiff's property and the watershed with seven, this is when this was dated, seven hundred and eight million gallons were at, drained as of August twenty six to twenty four million gallons a day per. And then it's a C Department of Environmental Quality versus Gomez three eighteen Michigan AP one thirty three two thousand six. We have so that is one paragraph from this. So could could the damaged wells you mentioned sinkholes and it hadn't even occurred to me. Yeah, of course, because they took all the water out of the spongy ground. Yeah, is that going to damage people's homes? And they dumped it on Terry Lanninga's property, gave him a dozer to play with, dumped their sand on there, and dressed it with just enough peat in there to hide the fact that they mixed materials. So nobody would say anything. Guess what? Y'all are screwed because we're not going to stop talking. You're broke. the effing law. And anyone hiding it is going to be rolled right into this thing. So go ahead. What were you going to say? Oh, I just, I was wondering about more sinkholes. being a problem for people. I mean, one thing is your well, but when you have sinkholes on your property and you start losing structures and damaging, risking people's lives to fall in such a thing, that's a whole other ball game they might have to deal with. Oh, it's going to be. It is going to be. So hang on. I'm going to post a couple things to Telegram so y'all can see what's going on here. Just a minute. Here is one of the outlets that We have other ones where they were just like basically pumping it out in the middle of the woods. And I don't even know with no silt, no, no, uh, uh, environmental protection for the stuff around there. But yeah, Eagle can't come out and look at this because they don't have enough information because I guess they just don't do their own freaking jobs. That's maladministration too. Let's see. We've got several of them. Let me see if I can, what I really want to find is I've got some sinkhole pictures here that will show you. And they were, they were dewatering right through the crick. Right through the correct. Failure to protect the rights of the public per the Constitution is a violation of their oath of office. You got a big problem. Huge problem. If I don't if I can't find it right now, I'll find it later. But we have and we've got this is why we're going to do a Web site. I think I think we're just going to put it on the Brandenburg files, which is my little. I'm going to start doing more of my research and documentation and such so that people can actually see what's really going on here and put some intelligent. I got to pull it. It's probably in my email yet and or let me see. I know that I got sent it from several sources, but at any rate, we'll put it up there so you can see the sinkholes. We had one place where there was at least a seven foot sinkhole around one of the casings that they stabbed in the ground, forty feet down. You can't look at that even, you don't even have to have expertise to look at that and say, oh my gosh, we have a problem, but we don't have numbers and letters behind our name. How ever can we stand up and see? Common sense guys, easy, really easy. So, I mean, you know, if you can, if you, if you have ever seen water, you're probably qualified to say, wow, that doesn't work right. So what do you think? I mean, I know you can't come up with an actual figure off the top of your head because you don't know how far this is going to go. But are you thinking it could reach billions to repair the damage already done or will be done? You want to know why? Because it is going to be in the billions of what it's going to take to restore this. They literally filled in the wetlands. and put trunk lines in there. They weren't supposed to dewater during a drought. They took all of their information during a drought cycle. We've got all the charts and graphs. Oh, the horror of the truth, you know? And it's like they took their information from that and they were dewatering during a drought and in a thing that they never had the ability to dewater. And they surely don't have the ability when they were told I walked that right away with Tom Hooker and showed him. He's one of the trustees. I walked the right away with him and showed him what they were doing and such. But they took the right in the use of water from an area that's all on water and sewer. They took that away. They took water away that people couldn't even stay and still can't in their homes. They're dropping off water blocks. The township told one of the water drillers when they were trying to figure out who I was hiring, I'm like, this is none of your business. I will be handling this because you are completely negligent and incompetent. And I'm like, I will be drilling this well, and you're going to pay for it. And so at any rate, that's kind of what happened. But I'm like, you're not stepping one foot on my property because, oh, well, we'll hook up to your neighbor with a hose. Seriously? Yeah, that's what we're going to do. And health department couldn't give a crap, called them. Nobody's going to come out. Don't care. Not my job. Article One, Section One. Government is instituted for their equal benefit, security, and protection. Yeah. And they have failed to do any of that. Any of it. Yep. And so this is this is and this this is just a response. That's just a response to the defendant's response to motion for preliminary injunction. Now, I've got this for like their ex parte as well as, you know, the the clarification on the TRO. Did they answer that? No, the court didn't answer it. because they didn't have an answer and or somebody never saw it. And we're going on two weeks on an emergency injunction on something where somebody was being materially damaged. I want you guys to think about this. Is that a large, oh, I don't know, conspiracy? It kind of looks like it might be RICO to me, but, you know, who am I to say that? Well... Are you going to wait to watch your public functionaries until they do something this damaging to you and your home and property? Are you going to be more attentive so that the moment they step over and cross beyond the scope of their authority, trespass on your rights or someone else, you're there? If you're not being attentive, you're not even going to know until it's too late. Donna was being attentive. And look what happened to her. Do you have the resources to drill a new well quickly? Do you have the resources to find a source of water to take care of your family tomorrow if you can't get it today? You happen to be able to do that, but a lot of people would be they would be a little harder pressed and they need to be thinking about this kind of stuff before it happens to them or someone they love. And if you see what they're doing, the criminals who perpetrated this, this theft and crime got a hold of the well drillers and told them not to drill any more wells in Byron Township. Now, I want you to think about that. This is your government, our government, telling a private company not to drill any more wells in Byron Township. You got an affidavit for it? I have multiple people who confirmed this, and including documentation that cannot be refuted by the well drillers. Remember... Some of us are really good at making sure that evidence is preserved and cannot be disputed when it comes out of their own mouths. Yep. And have a source that was already told to that person the exact same thing. Yep. Sucks to be them. Might as well come clean because the heat's going to continue to get turned up here and I'm having fun. And this is the other thing too, is that I think that we're going to continue and I'm going to continue to do legal updates because people need to see this, that something is going on instead of just sitting here talking. That's one of the reasons why Actually, I haven't brought on many influencers lately. I'm bored to tears with this. I'm sick of people just talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, but they never do anything. Have you, I mean, have you ever seen any other influencers that have taken on themselves to create? And actually when I made this binder, I gave this binder to the other attorney that is got this all in hand too. He's got everything. So, and look at, look at what we have here, guys. Look at all these nice little papers here. Nice little papers. This is on, this is on, let's see, this is the first, that's the first filing right there. And Christina Mims in this. There's the, there's the stamp on it. Ta-da. This is the service document. We've got that. We've got it. Okay. When was it served? Put it right behind it. I'm just going to say this. I don't know if you're going to run for governor, but I want people to think about what we've been saying today. What I've said, Donna has no sponsors for this show. She's not gaining financially by the efforts that she's been putting in week in and week out. You haven't always been doing shows lately because you've been so busy fighting the fight. But for a while there you were, even while you were running for governor and then fighting for it afterward, you were doing shows so that the people could be informed. You're still fighting those things. yeah do you want somebody who talks the talk or do you want somebody who walks the walk while they're still talking about it I I have no problem voting for someone who has a moral and ethical standard who understands the constitutions and law who's willing to do what it takes to fight What I think people don't understand is they think they have to have a title to be effective. Honestly, I probably am more effective without a title because I can say anything I want. When you get an office, then you've got certain things that you have to do and stand for. You may not have the latitude, as we talked before, on what I do from the outside. Oh, here they are. I've got the, I've got the sinkhole pictures right here. Hang on a minute. And I want to show you this. This is around, around one of their twenty, their forty-foot casing in the ground. Because I think this is important for everyone to know, quite honestly. I'm going to show you, see if I can get one. I lost track of how many Olympic-sized swimming pools there were. Every time you gave a new number, I was looking up how many Olympic-sized swimming pools of water they took out of your community. But it's too much now. Too big a number to fathom. This is actually, I think this is real interesting. I'll see if I get the one that shows you how actual deep this is. Okay, so this may not look because you won't have the scale here. But I want you to show you how deep. how deep and how large this is. Hang on a minute. I'm going to throw it to my other phone here and put it right up. I'll put it on telegram. Hang on a minute. So here is picture one. And this is not a biofilm because I was like, well, before we jumped to conclusions, is this a biofilm or is this petroleum? And it is in fact not a biofilm. It's sitting right next to one of the pumps and was without any mitigation or control to the pumps and all the other nonsense. They had nothing sitting to stabilize it on skids or on pallets or platforms, nothing. They had nothing there for this. And so since nobody decides that they're going to listen to us, guess what? We're just going to throw it out there. See what happens. It's going to be great. So let me bring this up here a minute so that you can see. I'm not just talking out of my behind here, guys. I will actually get in it and be obnoxiously, obnoxiously. So this little sinkhole right around one of their pumps that they pump down and they've got these other little ones. These were about three feet, two to three feet apart for probably about a half. about a quarter of a mile in one direction, a quarter of a mile in the other direction. So this casing is about, it's about, I've got a good picture of how far it comes up on my leg. I'm going to say that we're about eighteen inches, sixteen, eighteen inches across. This hole is approximately seven feet from here to here. And about almost, almost three feet down in the ground. That's, like I said, this is a little, this is a little misleading on scale. But this is one of the things that showed up there. And we've got lots of, oh, yeah, by the way, right next to their pumps, guess what? And that's not a bio. Oh, no. So, and none of it was protected. And this is sitting right next to the creek. But do our Byron Township officials care? They do not. And I walked with Tom Hooker down the entire site and showed him all the mixed materials, everything that was there. And we'll go back to this video where this is only one outlet that was going on for weeks and weeks and weeks. And the phase one, there was so much water in the area that they had, that the pipes floated. There's one of the pumps that the pipes floated and they had to dig it up and dewater and relay them. That's how much water that they were fighting to put this through there. Why in the hell did anybody give them a permit in the first time or even approve of this to go right there in the creek bed and cross it three times right there go right next to the creek every step of the way this went right next to the to the night and the night's drain right next to it underground d water how many acres and acres and acres I'm like I'm like at least I'm over a quarter of a mile away from this. And so are the other people. There's people down a couple of streets away that they dropped the water table enough that this thing is not like a couple hundred feet from the site. This is a long way. When you take billions of, if you take over a billion gallons of water out of the water table, you're not taking it out of like a, you know, a ten square foot area. This is a huge area that they've affected. And guess what? They're going to be responsible for taking these damages, the sewer laterals out of the wetlands that they dried out. They filled in and they put sewer laterals in so they can build over the top of it. And guess what? There's so many of us that are eyewitnesses to this. And have been damaged, material damage. You know, and people are real sad. They'll be like, I'm so sorry this happened to you. I'm like going, well, I was until I realized it was a gift from God. And through this, I can literally probably help defend the entire state from the theft of natural resources. Because they're doing it all over. And they're doing it not just for water. They're doing it for timber. They're doing it for minerals and oil, energy reserves, all of it. it's amazing. They're trying to do a battery storage plant over in Ottawa Township right now that they are going to have, get this, this is how criminal these people are. And Donald Trump needs to be paying attention to this because they've got to stop the federal money being paid for these woke energy, green energy nonsense things. This is how green these projects are. And in Ottawa County, they are putting a battery storage area out there And the entire area is going to have a five-mile evacuation area around it if it catches on fire. They can't burn it out. They're going to have to wait and have it burn out. And how is this protecting the people of the area? It is not. They've literally, by spending this money and putting this into Ottawa County, have put people in a five-mile radius area. in absolute danger of their properties being livable. And nobody says anything because it's not affecting them directly. Shame on anybody who decides not to get into this fight. Yep. And it brings us right back to where we started with, for example, your township board knew you were going to stand up and speak. They knew I had been speaking to you prior to the meeting. They saw me as public enemy number one the moment I stood up. Because I had a relationship with you, I didn't mention the lawsuit. I didn't mention the water. All I did was mention my right to speak in front of them. And they shut everybody down because they didn't want to hear any of it. If people don't know how to deal with that, they're not gonna be able to fight when they come for your water and they come for all of your resources and they trespass on your rights. You've got to start with your right to speak freely in the public meeting so that not just the public functionaries, but everybody in your township or your county or your state board, wherever it is, can hear what you have to say when they're doing something wrong on the record. And I tried this, by the way, once before with Muskegon County. I went to the board during one of those stupid Zoom meetings. And I said, I want you to include my comment, my request, my demand in the meeting minutes for this meeting. When they didn't do it, I had no recourse to get it into the meeting minutes because public comment is not allowed before the meeting minutes are approved. So the only thing I could do is go to a public functionary and say, you must stand for me. in that portion of the meeting and tell them they need to put it in the meeting minutes. What did they do? They went immediately to the attorney during the meeting and the attorney said, we don't have to include that. And they said, we don't include public comments in the meeting. Yeah, they do. They used to do. After that meeting, they changed how they were operating the meeting minutes. To not include people's names and commentary. Because they did not want to put my request. And this was regarding the use of Zuckerberg funding for elections. And my township did answer me. The clerk made a printout of exactly how much money. And exactly where it was being spent in our township. The county refused to do it. I told them to post it online where everybody could see it and put it in the record that I requested it. I requested it multiple times in the public meetings and they never did it. They are going to change how they operate when you start speaking. You need to be on top of it before and after. Because I didn't follow up back then, but I should have. Well, and I think this is part of the learning curve too, is you get better, you get better at it as you go along. Like I'm going to tell you right now, when I started this, I was like, okay, I guess nobody else is going to do it. I guess I'm, I'm going to have to just jump in there and figure it out. And, uh, You know, I didn't I didn't know how to do this. I didn't know the first thing about about doing this process. And I'm like, well, I'm going to get in. I'm probably going to make some mistakes because they hide things and they are doing it intentionally to hide it. So they'll change the method of delivery of what your case is or what's going on to confuse you. And it's intentional. There's no two ways about it. They'll say, well, this is our proof of service dated like these Yahoo's, Mika Myers did on August, but then they put it in snail mail. So I had a couple of days delay, but because they dated it at that day, I had seven days to respond based on the date. And so they'll do stuff like this. This is exactly what Mika Myers did when they filed this. You tell me that that's not intentional. They didn't call. They didn't do a darn thing. Threw it some nail mail, put the service notice in that. So it wasn't a true seven days response because I never even had it. Yeah. They do things like that I call dirty. Things that may not be necessarily illegal things. That you can just jump on a lawsuit because you're not going to like like the guys throwing literally throwing dirt at you on the side of the road. That's a dirty comment. Now, is it unsafe? Could you actually sue them for that? Yeah, you probably could have standing on the road. You weren't wearing a hard hat. You weren't wearing eye protections. They had gone home. They weren't even working. And the one guy that was out there went and got one of those sweeps and went past one of my friends and I that were standing there on the road, public road. We were standing there. There were joggers that were going past us at different times, right? He went and got a sweep at the end of the road, came back and turned the brushes on about where we were and just engulfed us in this cloud of debris and dirt. Technically, you could probably call that an assault. You could call that an assault and criminally charge him. It really was. It really was. And he did it intentionally. But you have responded to it. Yeah, you have responded to it. And little things that they do, I call dirty. How many ways can I be mean to Donna and make her life inconvenient and miserable? Yeah, it's like being covered in dirt is like my natural habitat, right? I'm around horses and that sort of thing. So it's like it doesn't even phase me. I'm like, okay, whatever. Well, today is breezy enough. Hopefully the flies will leave your horses alone a little bit. Yeah. It's really been kind of tough and it's those heel biter flies. So, but, but everybody that has horses is talking about it right now. And, uh, and, uh, amazing. Um, you know, there's so many things to be thankful for. And I think we're coming out of, I really, I really want everybody to take heart just cause, just cause somebody like me can get attacked and just kind of laugh in their faces. I don't expect everybody to be like I am. I know that that's not really, um, That's not a normal person's reaction would have been not to just stand there, you know, but to run for cover. And I was just like, F you. I'm going to stand right here. You go right ahead. But I don't run. And, you know, it's like you're going to go after me. Give it your best shot because you're going to have one shot at me. And that's that's all you're going to get. And, you know, I mean that in a legal sense or any other for that matter. It just doesn't bother me that like it does most people. And I don't know why that is. I don't really know why. I'm just wired that way. I always have been. This is why I always tell people to find your role to play. You know, not everybody can do what I did at the meeting with as much confidence as I can do. Right. But you had practice too. Yeah, I had practice. Yeah. But, but even so I, when I first started doing it, I'm nervous, but I just did it anyway. You don't have to do that. If that is not your role to play, find something else to do. Can you be a team member on somebody else's team to support them in their effort? Um, Doing the article wasn't just for Donna, it was for everybody, but it was Donna's request that spurred it into motion. So I was kind of part of a team there to help Donna. When Donna's going to be going to public meetings, she wanted to know these things, these laws and this Supreme Court case. She asked me to help her learn about it in a quick fashion so that she had that ammunition or shield in place so that when she went to the public meetings to deal with this stuff, she had the ability to handle it. I didn't have to go to the meeting. I don't have to do that for Donna. I chose to drive down there and do it. But My point is I was a support person for Team Donna in a sense here. Everybody can support somebody else. You can be their Ed McMahon. You can be their Samwise Gamgee, as I said. You can be the support system for somebody else if you don't have whatever it takes to do something. You know, people had come up to me and said after meetings, oh, I wish I could do what you just did. And I'm like, you can't. But if that's not your role, find it. Don't be sitting on a couch with the remote control watching the news and complaining about stuff and not doing something about it. For example, someone who helped me with this document, she has helped review my sub stacks before. She is a follower of Karen the Riveter. She sends me some stuff so I can share it. Her role to play is a support person. She doesn't want to be out there necessarily. So I'm not going to say her name, but I give her a hat tip sometimes. She is probably listening too. But she is a great helper to me at times to make sure I stay informed. And she proofread my document so that I could be sure that somebody like her can comprehend what I was putting out there. And she enjoyed it. She said it was good. That's what I needed. I needed somebody to be another set of eyes for me. And she took a little bit of her time to do that and might have been inconvenient for her day because I was bothering her sometimes. But she might have been wanting to do other things instead. But she was that support member. You can find something like that. You can be a support even just sharing the document. If you're not the one, maybe you work until six or seven and your board meetings are always earlier. Support somebody else to be there in your stead. There's always something that somebody can do. Here's a problem that we have in society is people want that fame and that glory to stand out in front of everybody. Is it really that great? Think about this. The people that stand up in front are going to be they're going to be attacked. They're going to be confused. If you've got a good leader that is actually a servant leader who looks at the team. is standing in the way, like President Trump said, he's like, they're really after you, I'm just standing in the way. A good leader has got the fortitude to stand against these attacks that most people can't. And I don't know why, but that's just the way that we are. And so if you have someone who is a true leader and you come alongside of them and equip them to do the job, they're not the ones that are standing out with all the yay, fantastic. They're just the one that are taking all the hits for you. There's no honor. If you really want to know the truth, Who in their right mind would want to be in that position? Who in their right mind would want that kind of attention? Only an insane person would want that. It's got to be the person that is willing to do that because of the things and the people that they love, such as America, such as the Americans that you love, your friends, your family. That's why you serve. You don't serve for anybody patting you on the back. If you want to do that, guess what? Hold on. You're going to be in for a rude awakening because the minute you stand up, the people you thought were loving you and supporting you and all these friends you had will all of a sudden become jealous because you're getting attention, good, bad or otherwise. They're not smart enough to figure out that ninety nine percent of it is bad attention. Look at President Trump. Look at all the bad attention he's gotten. The threats to his family. The fact that they came and raided Melania's stuff. Are you kidding me? He was willing to step forward, to stand up and take all of the damage that was going to come at him for us. And as he said, they're after you. I'm just willing to stand up because... We're a people. We're a family. And that's the only person that should ever be in a position of power, the one that doesn't want it. Look at what happened on J-Six. That particular year when he was making his speech, how many people showed up? And so when Donna goes to her next public meeting, I guarantee you there will be a lot of people there. And there will be people who are too shy to stand up and say something. But when she gets attacked, because she might get attacked by that board during that meeting, again, they will, as they have done before, stand in between her and any threat to her. They don't have to say anything in a public comment to make a difference. But they can be that support person. They can show up. Think about the military, right? You know, in a military situation, you protect your general. The one that's going to be out there, the troops protect the general, right? Think about that. Why? Because if they can get the general or somebody that's up close to that area of decision-making, the whole operation falls apart. And that's the person that's going to get attacked. Look at General Flynn, how attacked he's been. People don't have a clue what he stood up for, him and Admiral Rogers. They have no clue what those men stood against. They laid everything, and I mean everything, on the line. for this nation to stand up and raise that flag of this stops now. And guess what? People showed up to support them so they didn't have to stand alone. Nobody can stand and do this alone. You can't, I can't, nobody can. But as a group, as a family who serves each other, who cares more about each other and liberty and this nation more than we do about our next breath. That's when we win. And we will win decidedly. We will silence all dissenters. They will be running from the retribution that's coming from we, the people. And they need to be running because they've committed crimes against us, our family, our children, and what they've done to this nation, to our children. If you don't have motivation to say, well, I'll do it when my well fails or whatever, You better open your eyes because the butchering that's happened to our children, there's a video out there that everyone should watch. I went to a show called Parade when I was in D.C., and there was a reason for me being there. It wasn't just to have fun. Way bigger reason for me to be there. But what really happened with Parade was there was a Jewish gentleman that was in a southern town, and he got blamed. And it was a true story, okay? Just a depiction of a true story. He got blamed for the murder of a child because he was different, really. And they wanted to pin it on somebody else for political reasons. They always got to find a blame person. So if it's somebody they can rally other people's emotions behind, they're going to do it. Attack somebody. And everybody's like, oh, yeah, the village idiots step up and say, that's right. We want justice because we're angry. Well, you know what happened? group of people he was about to get pardoned because the governor started really seeing that this was a setup and he had been involved in it in the beginning. Honestly, if you watched it, his wife was really the one that was the hero in this and said, I want to stand with you, not because you're governor, but because you're a good man and decided to investigate and find out what happened. Well, guess what? A group of the village idiots who just wanted to have their anger sated went in and and took him out of the prison and hung him. And he was an innocent man, Jewish man, an honest man who was framed. this video that I want you to watch you're going to have to be able to watch things with a little bit of an open mind but it goes back to watching and I have nothing against the jewish people nothing at all I have nothing against america though I know it's been infiltrated I have nothing against the chinese people they've been infiltrated everything has been infiltrated by this globalist mafia so when you look at the labels you have to have a little bit of discernment and say okay do we sit here and scream this this group of people are that one are, are the responsible for all evils in the world? No, you use discernment and a judicial mind to look at this and say, there's a whole lot of sifting that needs to be done here, right? This is about the history of the people that I'm going to say, the bankers, the banksters and what happened and how they set up the history of the acknowledged people, Jewish people is the country of Israel, which I don't tie that to the people of Israel any more than I tied the deep state to the people of America. But to watch the structure is important. The documentary is called Europa. And to watch what happened in the Bolsheviks, what the Bolsheviks did in Russia is going to stop your heart in the amount of cruelty that these people who were Satanists, they weren't Jewish at all. They were Satanists that infiltrated and what they actually did. I think everybody needs to watch it with an open mind. I really do. And start putting the pieces together because it's the same situation we have right now in the United States of America. And is it the Jewish people? No. Are they wolves in sheep's clothing? Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. And they've done the same thing with Christians, with Muslims. They're they're they're wolves that have paraded as something they're not as Americans, as Republicans, as Democrats. If you fall in with any club, you've just gotten into a cult, which is probably occult. And you might not even know it. So something to really think through. But it's a twelve hour documentary called Europa, and I think it's worth the watch. The first hour and a half is going to shock you at the amount of cruelty that went on with these people that espouse to be people of God. but do horrible things to human beings. And while they were destroying the, the food source, the farmers always go after the farmers first, because if they can, you know, kill off the farmers, they kill off the people and the water, which is what we're having right now. They're trying, they're doing the same thing. They're after the water, the farms, and putting it in corporate farms so that they've got all the resources and they can starve the rest of us out. One of the gals that was on the chat too yesterday said that her daughter, who was forced to be put on city or municipal water in Jenison, they had a four-time rate increase. I think she's got a six hundred dollar a month water bill. I want you to think about this. This isn't a small issue. This is coming to your town, your backyard. We're just willing to fight it. I have water now because I told him, get the hell off my property. And everybody needs to do the same thing, quite honestly. You get the hell off my property or the fight that you're going to have is like tearing into a bear cat. Ain't stopping. Not going to stop until we write it. So there you go. Well, I love, I absolutely love your article. It's fantastic. And I just really want to thank you. for everything that you put into this and all your friends and my friends too that stepped up to help with this. We have to have everybody in the fight and everybody in the chat that puts extra information in here. I really have to thank you for the posting, for the fact that you have been posting, you've been watching this, you've been coming to meetings. and you're willing to stand up and have your voices heard and tell them, this is enough. We're not going to go down that path of what the Rockefellers did to basically exterminate the Native Americans. We're not going to sit back and watch this. Ain't happening. We're not going to sit there and watch you exterminate the farmers. or the people in our communities and throw our children into indoctrination camps where they learn whatever they learn is that God doesn't exist, can't pray to him. And there's no such thing as a man or a woman. You just decide what you want to be. Incredible, incredible times. But you know what? Even in any time that's a bad time, there's more opportunities in bad times than there are in good times. And certainly people's metal is tested. So be proud that you're born now. Don't get discouraged by it. Be empowered by this. Stand up and feel like, wow, I was chosen to be here now. God must think an awful lot of me. That's how you look at it. That's what I texted. When Donna texted me that they ruined my well, I was like, what, what, what, what, what are you talking about? What? By the next day I texted, somebody thinks you are ready because it was her well that was the first. Timing is everything. Like who else could possibly fight this battle as well as Donna? She was made for this time and this place and she's going to straighten it out. I have no doubt. Yeah, we're going to, we're going to write this thing. And you know, I would just ask everybody, call or text me. You know, if you text me first, if I'm online, I'm not going to answer the call. Okay. That's the way it is. Or, you know, I've got other things that I work on too. And sometimes I get three calls in that came in while I was working on this yesterday, just so you know. And I'm like, I have to, I have to keep focused so I can keep things in order. I was working on, on about three, three things at the same time. And I'm like, I have to I got to I got to focus on this real work. You know, talking isn't real work. OK, I can answer questions and I can do that sort of thing. It helps people be calm. You know, why didn't you answer my call? Why didn't you answer my text? Give me a minute and I will answer and I answer everyone. OK, but in the middle of doing the work that actually moves the line, quite honestly, making feel people feel good in the moment isn't the top of my priority right now. Because if I did that, I would never stay on point to get this stuff done. So, you know. People know we are friends, but we don't talk every day. Nope. I have the time, but she doesn't have the time to talk every day. So usually I'll just throw out a text. I'll send you new information or I'll say, how are you? And maybe tomorrow I'll give an answer. Just let you know I'm thinking about you. Yeah. I would love to know everything, but I can't do that. you're a real friend and you get also give me space as a person. Cause you know me well enough to know that I literally work every single hour. People, people want to know, they've always asked my kids that how many hours does your mom work? And they're like, all of them. I was up last night from about midnight until two thirty, you know, working through things and looking things up and that sort of thing. Cause I, I just don't sleep. If I've got something in my mind, I literally, I don't sleep. I can take a five minute cat nap and, Just go boom and I'm out of here and I'll wake up in five minutes and I'll feel like I had fourteen hours of sleep. So it's it's kind of crazy. But I fundamentally care about finding out. how everything works. Because when you have that knowledge and you know the law or somebody like Karen is gracious, wonderful and smart enough and a friend enough to say, I'll help you. I'm going to be there for you. And you have. You have been for years. You have stayed Right, right there all the time. And it's like, you know, talk about a true friendship. I'm going to tell you what, Karen, is that anytime I call her, she is right there. And you know what? Those are the kind of people, if you step forward and doing something important that you believe in, you better know your friends and who's going to be there on your best day or your worst day that will never turn their back on you ever. You know, and that's what God does to us. He will never leave us or forsake us. He's the greatest friend we'll ever have. It's amazing. Well, with that said, wow, we went way longer than I thought that we were going to go. I tried to warn you after eleven. I just let you go after that. I think that people need to see stuff like this because you know what? It's like, if we can roll the corrupt court system in, have you gotten new math maps in here? Check this out. I've got maps in here to show wetlands and delineations in the exhibits and such. I mean, if, if, if you know that, so they can't get away from it. Here are these, these are actual, actual things. Let's see if I can get it out here. So you can see it. Maybe I ran past one a few minutes ago. I got to go back. We believe, yeah. What's that? I said, we believe, yeah. Yeah, I'll go back to the exhibits. I saw one pop up. Oh, here. And this is also, too, like, this was a topic that I could definitely help you on. Most of the time, I feel incapable of helping Donna more than Donna can help herself. Yeah. Yeah. You just got to stay on it like an autistic bloodhound. And so, you know what? Okay, I need to go move on here because I've got somebody at the door right now who is very important to me that I have to go talk with here for a little while and has the priority for the weekend. So there you go. That's my husband. He's here. So we're going to spend the day together today, which I think is very important. Remember, this is all about our families and the people we love. This is why we fight. We don't fight, even though we do fight for what we hate. We fight against it. We fight for what we love. And remember that. Hold that in your heart every day. Dear Heavenly Father, thank you so much for Karen and all the wonderful people out there who really hunger and thirst for righteousness, for defending those with no voices, who will stand in front of the butchering of the innocent, and who will absolutely never back down or give up because you are the one who is holding us in your hands. It's your strength. It's your discernment. It's your peace. It's your leading. It's your provision. Your names, Jehovah Jireh, Jehovah Nisi, Jehovah Ropak, all of the names of all the characteristics that you have are all good, brave, honorable, integrity, trustworthy every single time. And we want to be like you. Thank you so much for coming alongside of us, God Almighty. I love you so much. You are our best friend, our father, our leader, our guide, our provider, our healer once again. And I pray that you heal this nation, that you rise up a generation of people who will follow you, who will leave their sinfulness, and that will walk out of the captivity of this evil that surrounds us and say, No more. And draw that sword of the spirit and refuse to back down because you are our God. We are here as your ambassadors on this world. And we just ask that you give us the feet to walk the path that you've laid before us because you are good all the time. We will follow you to the end with our last breath. We love you so very much. Our oath is to follow you with every minute, with every action, and to our last breath. And it is an honor to do so. We love you so very much. In the name of Jesus Christ, we pray. Amen. With that said, I'm going to go. Ding, ding, ding, ding. Go to BrandonBurkeForGovernor.com because I'm the best non-consecutor who's ever not. Can he see it in the history of the United States of America? And I'd like to have a discussion with the rightful president of the United States, President Donald J. Trump, and how we boots. I wear them every day, so I win. Who wears it better? And then we talk about all things good and how we're going to fix this stuff. And it's happening right now. So with that said... Got my squeeze standing here smiling at me. It's fantastic. Say hi for me. I've got a very cute husband, by the way. He is very, very cute. And a wonderful, wonderful man. Good man. He is truly, he is a wonderful man. And I have told everybody so many times that if you want to know somebody who is a class act, That's my husband. He's a class act. And he is probably the singularly smartest person I've ever known in my life. And that's not because he's my husband. It's because he's like he reads all the time. And he doesn't allow himself to be programmed or get into stupidville. And everybody's heard me say this. So that's just the way it is. What's that? And he's not confused. He's not confused at all. He's not confused at what a woman is or what a man is. So with that said, God bless you all. God bless all those whom you love. Think about that. And God bless America and make it a great day. It's going to be a great day. Go smile to people. I'm not going to be on tomorrow because I've got some other things to do tomorrow. that require my presence, but I will be back on Monday. Y'all have my phone number. If you're in trouble, give me a call or text and I will do what I can to help you. It doesn't mean that I am going to be, there's a lot of million people in Michigan and how many in the United States and I get calls from everybody. So it's helpful if you are direct, succinct and to the point so we can fix the problem. If you need a therapist, I will listen. However, I can't fix your problems by listening to rants and such. But if you're directing to the point, that's how we should be with the president and everyone else. Don't waste the man's time. Just, you know, I get it. I get it. But there's so much to fix that we need to be focused on what can we do. That's the first priority. And I do very much care. That's why I like to cut it, cut down to the point so we can get this thing fixed. And I love you all so very much. Have a great weekend. And I will see you next week, Monday, nine o'clock with Vicki Davis. Thanks, Karen. I love you. I love you too.