Published Nov. 4, 2025, 9:02 a.m.
9am John Tatar - Lawful Defense Tatar Tuesday with John Tatar. Studying the Constitution. Know the law and use the law - using the law to defend yourself. All things Constitution and Lawful Process. Tatar Tuesday with John Tatar 10am Mike - Mike Bambas will be talking about the citizen's rights and process of holding to the law. We will be taking the Trading with the Enemy Act, as well as, other lawful practices not followed by our government including a lawful path to convict political criminals of concrete violations of acts leading to treason X/Twitter: https://x.com/i/broadcasts/1DXGyWVojAnxM Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/636616148890812/videos/1526848605162683 Rumble: https://rumble.com/v717erm-bnn-brandenburg-news-network-1142025-lawful-defense-and-pro-se-mike.html https://rumble.com/v717epq-bnn-brandenburg-news-network-1142025-lawful-defense-and-pro-se-mike.html BNN Live: https://Live.BrandenburgNewsNetwork.com Guests: Donna Brandenburg, John Tatar, Mike
Good morning. Welcome to Brandenburg News Network. I am Donna Brandenburg. And welcome to our show today. It looks like we've got a little bit of a delay going on right now for a minute, but we'll get past it. At any rate, it is the fourth day of November, twenty twenty five. And welcome to the show. First off, we're starting with lawful defense with John Tater. And then at ten o'clock, it'll be pro se. Mike's going to be on talk about all sorts of things. A lot of fun to explore today. And I'm bring John on right now. See if this will stop with a delay. Hey, John, how you doing? I'm good so far. Days are young. Anything can happen. Yeah, I think we got a little bit of a delay today because they don't want us talking about what we're going to talk about today. And that's the way it usually goes. Yeah, it looks like the voice is not matching what your lips are saying. Well, that could be a good thing. I don't know. So anyhow, we were talking a few minutes before we got online. And what I want to tell everybody about is, first of all, I went to that court appearance by Stephanie Lambert yesterday. And honestly, what I can say about the whole thing with the court appearance was, it was a lot of theater and nonsense. And it proved to me that it's almost impossible to get a fair trial, redress a grievance in our court system. The judge was literally making up rules on what his interpretation and instead of just sticking to the law. So they, he was literally, uh, doing legislating from the bench, creating law and procedure from the bench. He wasn't sticking to the law. And I got to tell you, both him and the prosecutor were a little bit on the slimy side, if you really want to know the truth, because they didn't seem to be wanting justice. They wanted to ram this thing through. and finish it and get out of the courtroom. That's what I kept hearing over and over again, instead of taking their time to do a thorough job and make sure that justice was served. No, they wanted to get out and get on their way because they'd spent enough time on this already. And that was what was said. And, you know, it was really tragic. And then the prosecutor has the audacity to basically say, we need to address these crimes that have been committed. He literally accused Stephanie Lambert in the courtroom of committing the crimes instead of the presumption of innocence. Is this a criminal case or a civil case? I believe this is a criminal case because they're trying to put Stephanie in jail for exploring, and how do I say this, for calling into question the tabulators. They found Chinese chips in there that were communicating to China in the tabulators. So these bastards that are sitting on the bench prosecuting in place in Michigan, They're literally obstructing justice. Absolutely. I take it this was district court or was it circuit court? It was at state, not federal. It was over in Oakland County and I wasn't paying attention enough because I was trying to listen to the proceedings that were going on, honestly, to know the answer to that question. So I should have, I should know that question, but I don't. So, so there you go. Circuit court. We do probably know it's a state court, not a federal court. Am I correct? Yeah, I believe it was a state court. And so I'm going to assume it's a circuit court over there, but I can't confirm or deny because I wasn't really paying that much attention to it. So I was kind of trying to listen to the proceedings and figure it out. And, you know, I only have so much bandwidth. You know, I try to do better than that, but it doesn't always work out for me. But that was really crazy. And then the other thing I wanted to talk about this morning. What's the name of the judge? Jeffrey. Hold on. I had that. I can get that for you. Okay. And his name was, hang on a minute. Jeffrey Mattis. And that is, yeah, that's the circuit court. So Jeffrey Mattis. in Oakland County. I thought it was a joke. I really did. I was like, how do you just sort of create things on the fly, which is what Jonathan Brader did to me when they kicked me off the Republican ticket illegally, unlawfully. It was proven. I had to sue a circuit court, Supreme Court of Michigan, and federal court. And the federal court judge said it was an illegal removal. These people are just horrible. I can't even tell you how horrible they are. Well, this is Circuit Judge Mattis, and his name should be said as many times as possible, such as Berg, who is the federal court judge that's ruling on my case. These guys are criminals. They are. It needs to be brought out, and it needs to be publicly known pointed out because we can't seem to get it to correct itself through the judicial system, through the Judicial Tenure Commission. We can't seem to get them to pay any attention to this stuff because they're all part of the problem. Beyond a shadow of a doubt, I can say that they are literally controlling the jury and influencing decisions in the way they want it to go by these jury instructions. It's another way to rig the system against we the people. And he kept calling the prosecutor the people. I'm like... That Yahoo doesn't represent me. They haven't looked into the election crimes, and there's election crimes that were committed, and it wasn't by Stephanie Lambert. It was by the people within the system were being attacked within the system. And I'm just disgusted with the whole thing. I mean, they all need to be tried for treason and go to jail, in my opinion. I'm so tired of it. It's absolutely disgusting. Well, and it starts with the bar. We have to get rid of the bars. And anybody that goes out and hires an attorney, remember that that attorney doesn't work for you as a client. That attorney works for the judicial system. And so that attorney's allegiance is not to the individual that they're representing, but to the system itself. And they are there to protect the system, not the people. So this is part of the problem, and a lot of people don't get it. A lot of people don't understand that the judicial system is not for our benefit. It's for their benefit. It's for the government's benefit. And that's not the way the judicial system was set up originally by our founding fathers. But it is the way it has morphed over the years to today, where we have a judicial system that is totally corrupt and not capable of any form of justice or the rule of law. They're not there. It was absolutely crystal clear to me. I mean, I can say beyond a shadow of a doubt that I believe that this thing is being rigged from within. I believe they're rigging it against Stephanie Lambert and that they're not following the law. They're just like making it up as they go because they don't have any rails because they deny the law. That's what I saw in there. This is the rule of men and not the rule of law. And that's where That's where the whole problem of this whole system that we are in the middle of lies. The freaking judge has got some little beady little eyes, too. I'm going to tell you that for sure. We are suffering from a system that has been corrupted way back when. As you put it in Kagan's book, rule Kagan's mind or Kagan's ruling when she ruled on the Humphreys case or used the Humphreys case and said that that's ninety years of precedent that ninety years ago they set up the Humphreys case, which said that professionals make decisions or write laws such as the IRS. They know what the laws and what the laws should be, not the judges. And so when you go up against one of these organizations, and probably the elections have their own organization set up, when you go up against these professionals, so-called professionals, who have been doing this for years and years and years, they are the end all and they are the ones that make the rules and the laws and the judges just go along with what they say so this is why we have had the problem with all of these alphabet organizations that according to norton versus shelby county do not exist they don't exist because they were not brought on constitutionally and so the judges are using unconstitutional laws from unconstitutional alphabet agencies to rule against the public. Well, you want to hear what they've been doing. This is such a situation of systemic corruption. It defies the ability to even describe it to people because if people don't understand how corrupt it is, they wouldn't even believe us if we told them at this point in time. No, they don't. So the last two council meetings here, the board meetings for Byron Township, I presented them and read my notice to them in the board meeting. Guess what? It was never included in the minutes. They never included that in the minutes of the meeting. They conveniently left it out. And then today, I got to tell you today, we've got a couple of bond initiatives up for extra taxes, people. And I'm going to read this to you because I put this out last night. We have a choice whether to burden our family, seniors, businessmen with another hundred and ten million dollars in long term debt through Byron Center Public School Bond Renewal. Now, there's three different extra tax bonds. initiatives on the ballot today. That's what they're voting on. That's it, right? So it's just, are we going to vote ourselves more taxes? You got to be flipping crazy. It's high in opinion. Anyhow, this is not a free upgrade. This is like a third of your mortgage on your property taxes. Here's what they're not telling you. You pay the full one hundred and ten million plus interest. Every homeowner renter, though higher rent and local businesses will fund this bond via property taxes. Even if the district claims no tax increase, the debt millage is extended for decades, preventing tax relief and locking us into payments. Total cost, it's probably closer to one hundred and fifty plus, maybe two hundred million dollars coming out of our pockets. People have to understand that. The hidden downsides is that ties of our future. Byron Center already has a hundred and fifty six million dollars of bonds and over eighteen million in loans outstanding. This proposal piles on more debt, limiting our abilities to actually serve the people because they're doing it on stupid stuff like a new football stadium, art classes, and the kids can't read, okay? I really want to see something put into the future that has some go to it, not all this play time. Anyhow. Keeping in mind that Byron Township has a population of twenty-eight thousand people, now we can do the math. The debt of a hundred and forty-six million with another eighteen million in outstanding loans is an egregious amount of spending on the backs of Byron Township residents. The no tax hike promise depends on endless population growth if enrollment slows as seen statewide Future tax increases are inevitable. The priorities are backwards. This bond cannot pay teachers, reduce class sizes, or improve security. It funds stadiums, art wings, and some HVAC. Nice, but not essential when core education needs aren't met because they've already got two pretty much brand new high schools and schools. This is crap. Our kids are going to pay later. The children will still be paying this off in, who knows, twenty fifty. Or is that fair to them? And there are some smarter upgrades that we really should be talking about. So I'm really concerned about this because of the. The endless borrowing, the endless borrowing that this township, the county, the state is always in. They think they have an endless supply of money. They kind of do because they keep raising taxes. You wouldn't believe the taxes that I'm paying. It's incredible out here. It's just going to continue more. Now, with the capture of the water wars, it is just unbelievable. Yeah, to the text, to love the vote today. Well, until the public wakes up, and that's a big problem because the public doesn't get it because you have your child coming home and saying, oh, yeah, we're going to get a new stadium if you vote. It's only point one zero zero one percent of your tax increase. Vote for yes. And so people run out and vote for yes based on emotions rather than understanding that the Taxes are not to be raised by the public. We're not out there to vote on this. That's not our job. This is a republic. This is not a democracy. When we, the public, vote on taxes and laws and stuff, it turns into a democracy. Democracies always fail. We're going to lose this battle if we don't turn it around and go back to the republic. The republic We hire people such as your council, such as your state reps and senators and so on and so forth that go to that particular seat of government and make those tax increases if necessary. But then again, now we have that one individual that we can go after if that tax money is not being appropriated properly. If that tax money doesn't need to be, if we don't need to fund that to begin with, then we can go after that individual. That's how we have control of the government. But right now, when we vote on a tax increase, we've agreed to it. And then the government turns around and says, well, you voted for it. You said it was okay to raise taxes. Right. So we end up in a democracy. Democracies always fail. People need to wake up. Well, this is the same thing that happened at the Revolutionary War, really. Because when we went for our independence, it was basically with the loyalists who were being paid by the state. When you have people that are paid by the state, to get behind or not get behind these issues that's why the government's grown so doggone much they're always going to vote themselves a race the teachers are voting themselves this this initiative this raise in effect that's really what's happening and so the teachers aren't teachers aren't voting on it they don't have a right to vote for a race they shouldn't but they are How can they do that? Let me put it right now. It's like they're voting for more toys. So they're pushing for bigger schools, more stadiums, more art, and on and on and on. That's not the teachers. They may be behind the voting. But if the teachers live in the community, they're voting themselves an advantage. Do you see what I'm saying? maybe i wasn't fortunately i was never one of those well i wouldn't say that i never voted i never voted for a raise of a millage for school of any kind if a teacher is voting themselves more toys in the school they're voting for an advantage for themselves right and i'm i'm sorry but that's that's when you outnumber the working population by people who get a paycheck from the state Who's going to win that battle at the voting booth? The ones that are going to benefit out of it, right? Let's turn it around, though. Let's not say we're... It's not that the teachers are voting for a race. First of all, most of the teachers, a lot of the teachers are left of center, let's put it that way. And so they have a tendency of following the democracy because they think we have a democracy because most of them are Democrats. Not all of them. I was not. I was not a Democrat in the teaching system ever. In my thirty-one years that I taught school, I was never on the Democratic side or the democracy side. I was on the side of what I thought was correct. And I'm not going to say I was a Republican, although I tended to lean in that direction. But I never voted for an increase in any of that stuff, in millages or any of that stuff. I never voted for that. Let me redirect this a little bit then, because if you've got, let's just say the teachers unions and all this sort of thing, they're in voting. You're bringing in another organization. Right. And the teacher union is that people that are getting a paycheck from the state are We've got the same problem in entitlement payments and everything, welfare and the whole ten yards. If you get a payment from the state and you can vote yourself basically a benefit, they're going to vote for a benefit, the majority of them. Oh, yeah, we want new. We'll just share it. We'll just have the community pay for it, that sort of thing. But you know what? I don't know. I've got a problem because we're about at the max of spending here and max of taxation because people don't really understand the eighty five percent plus tax rate we're paying because we're literally paying taxes on everything that should never be taxed. Of course. But I don't take it. I take it back to the general public. The general public out there doesn't all work for government. The general public, we outnumber the, because I'm no longer a teacher, we outnumber those people that are in the professional teaching system or government system. We outnumber them. But we don't get it. We don't understand it. So we got to put the blame back where it comes from. It's not up to us as individuals to vote for millage increases. It's up to the individuals that are sitting in the government positions, such as council, such as state reps, to make that decision. That's what they're there for. They have all the statistics. They have all the paperwork. They know exactly what's going on. They could say that, yeah, we need this increase and therefore we're going to raise the taxes. Now the public looks at it and they say, wait a minute, we don't need this. You're out of office. And they throw them out of office or, oh, yeah, we like you and we like what you're doing and we need this increase. So we're going to vote for you again at the next election. That's how we control the government. But right at this moment, when we're voting on those issues as public individuals, as private citizens, and we're voting ourselves a tax increase, we got nobody to blame but ourselves. That's the problem. I agree with that, but I also agree with the fact that people are voting in elections to vote themselves more money or gain. They really are. Look at the things like the teachers' union, the municipal unions, the whatever. I don't bring in the teachers' unions because they're corrupt as they can possibly be. Well, it is part of the conversation. They're no better than the UAW. or any of the other unions out there. I was part of that teacher union in the past and I actually said, I'm not paying my dues to the union because you're voting, you're putting your money into the Democrats and I don't buy that. And they wrote me back and eventually we had a war and I lost. Well, I think we're talking the same thing. I really do. We're just using different words to say it that, you know, we've got it. We just got to vote no on this and we got to kick them all out of office. The public has to vote no. And we have more numbers in numbers to vote no and make it work. But we have to, as public, vote no. And eventually they're going to say, well, we can't win those kind of battles anymore because the public's awake. And that's the problem. We have been asleep for too many years and we've allowed this nonsense to continue. And so that's where we have to put an end to it. We are not a democracy. We are a republic. We say, hey, Representative so-and-so, that's why I hired you. You're supposed to make those decisions, not me. And I'm not going to make that decision. So it's going to be no. And it should be no on anything, any kind of proposals they bring out. We should vote no on every single proposal they bring out, no matter what it is. Because we should not be making those decisions on those proposals. I agree with that. And, you know, I also agree with the fact that there's, there's people that are voting themselves raises. I mean, for throughout the whole government, I mean, the systemic corruption is just crazy. I wanted to show you this too. Did you, have you heard recently about the ghost, the ghost students? They've got ghost students in the school systems now where they claim they have, they claim they have students and it's been coming out all over the place. This is a new thing. So anyhow, So we're looking here. I wanted to bring this up. Bayou Residents or Bayou Residents Man, I can't talk this morning, Renaissance Man. And anyhow, I thought this was pretty interesting. Two reports caught my eye over the weekend. Just remind yourself as you read them that they are fruit of four years of the Biden administration. And if President Trump is forced to back down his policies through losses in the midterm elections or current rulings will be in the same So he's talking about SNAP and the hidden reality. Eighty three million citizens and illegal aliens are dependent on food aid each year. So to twenty two percent of the entire U.S. population uses SNAP to buy food during the calendar year. This is not a small anti-poverty program. It's a vast parallel food economy. The only way such numbers make sense is if many more illegal immigrants are benefiting from the system than politicians admit. This goes back to the ghost entities. The programs are supposedly distinct from SNAP. Yeah, they're funny. halts when SNAP halts. So this is kind of interesting. And the administrative pipelines are connected. States have long played a shell game, quietly routing federal funds into state-level programs for illegal immigrants, thus funding our invasion. And the shutdown has revealed the link. So I think this has been, what a time to be alive right now, going through this government shutdown. I think it's fantastic. Turns out, you know, I'm not noticing it. No, when we realize what the whole process is, that the government shutdown is a fraud, is fake. Here's another problem to that whole thing. Those people that are ruling on the shutting down of government are still getting paid. That's the senators and congressmen. And they're the ones that should have taken the bite right off the bat. If we shut down the government, their paychecks stopped. immediately and but they don't and so there there's no skin off their nose if this thing goes on for a hundred and eighty days or two hundred days or whatever however long it goes on because they're going to get their their hundred and seventy thousand dollars a year uh just because they get it and and that never stops that's the problem They're supposedly, if you want to listen to the public, they're supposedly, or the news media, they're supposedly our leaders. They're supposed to be leading us. Leaders lead into battle. Leaders don't follow behind and let the brunt of the battle go on with the public. And here are so-called leaders, which they're not. They're really representatives. But we've lost that contact of calling them representatives because they really don't represent us. They do whatever they want to do, and we end up being the chattel following behind them. That whole process of what it is, is the difference between a democracy and a republic. And we need to wake up and say, hey, we have a republic form of government guaranteed to us by the Constitution. Article IV, Section IV of the Constitution guarantees a republican form of government. So what is this democracy business? And all of those people that stand on the platform that are running for office saying, I want to protect our democracy, they should be kicked off the platform. Get out of office, resign your position, go and learn what you're supposed to be doing. Learn what the republic is and get rid of those people. Yeah, I've been really listening to several other things, too. I'm sorry, I think we still have a little bit of delay here. So there's another theory out there that I've been kind of watching, and that's, is President Trump getting past, trying to get past, because if he does that, it looks like he's got minimal restrictions on laying people off, which would be outstanding. So I'm kind of... Excited about that. And then the other thing that I've been looking into is the continuity of government plan. Now, I've seen a bunch of posts and such that say there's quite a few people that have gone into bunkers. And from what I found, because I kind of, you know, I'm a nerd. I'm going to look it up. Right. So I started looking into the continuity of government plan and what I could find that's been leaked out. It's supposed to be super secret. But there's things that you can actually find out there. In fact, I've got a whole big file on it right now of what I could find. And it really does say quite a bit about, let me see if I can pull it up here, about the continuity of government plan. And it talks about the bunkers. It took me a while to find the information, but I endeavor to persevere. So that's kind of how it goes. And what got me on this little tangent here was the fact that President Trump is talking about running for a third term. And if it was legitimate or what are the grounds that it could happen, or what are the grounds that would prohibit it? Because everybody's saying the twenty-second amendment prohibited it, but that was done in the nineteen fifties. And what about the continuity of government plan and who really has the power? So I started looking into this and it really looks like there are situations where the vote, the public vote can be suspended. that it can be suspended, but it doesn't look like it's all quite plain and to the point either. But I think FDR, he served four terms, didn't he? He did. Yeah. There's actually the fourth, the twenty-second amendment is an unconstitutional amendment. It was written in the fifties too, wasn't it? I'm not sure of the date. I thought it was written a little before that time, but it might have been the fifties. I don't know. What I do know is that it's an unconstitutional amendment and it can be amended, such as the Eighteenth Amendment on prohibition was amended. That can be amended and taken off out of the Constitution. It was never meant to be in there in the first place. uh and the reason that it was put there was to try to control the office of the presidency but they did not control uh the office of this of the representatives of the state rev or of the federal representatives and senators they didn't control that they could run until they die which is what we have uh you know eighty year old ninety year old uh representatives in congress and they should have been also term limited. If you're going to term limit the president, you need to term limit them also because it was unconstitutional to begin with. So this said that FDR was elected four times, in the year of the Great Depression, World War II. And that there was no constitutional limit before nineteen fifty one. The two term tradition began with George Washington and was voluntarily broken only by FDR. Right. They were legal because the twenty second amendment had not been passed yet. And then I've got another it's going to take me a minute to find this, but. continuity of government plan is kind of out there and it's just kind of a secret one but enough of it's been leaked that if you dig into it you can actually find quite a bit and i was really really kind of studying this uh bunker network you know when you look at the bunker network that they don't really want to talk about because they don't want people targeted but it's it's out there i found it and it's an it's open you know it's out in the open if you really want to find it and where you know and where people are but this last week I heard all week that, quite honestly, that there were people that went to the bunkers in the cabinet, which kind of follows along the continuity of government plan of what I could find. Well... No public vote on continuity of government. It's classified. So that's classified. No sunset clause. It's permanent. Could be abused. And what they do, it's kind of interesting on how it ensures that the United States lives on, even if everybody else doesn't. I understand that. And I understand the purpose of continuity of government, government. um i could imagine what america would look like if we had no government and anybody and everybody was able to do whatever they wanted to do that would be a disaster that would be anarchy that would be uh we have to have laws rules and regulations but in the process of a republican form of government we need rules and laws and regulations that we as the public follow now you might say you can use god's laws which are the ten commandments Or there are laws that we need to use, that we need to set up based on you can't murder someone or you can't steal somebody's property, that kind of thing. And those laws to regulate the general public so we wouldn't have a total anarchy form of government. And so I understand why we need a government in place. But we need a controlled government that follows the rule of law. And if we don't have that, which we don't, obviously, because we have a judicial system that is totally out of control. In fact, they're the hamster wheel of injustice. If you get caught up in the hamster wheel of injustice, which has been brought on by one of our people in our group, Janice Daniels calls it the hamster wheel of injustice, which is the court system, because we have a totally lawless court system. We have totally lawless members of the bar, totally lawless judges. totally lawless prosecutors that are out for their own gain or out for the gain of the democracy and not for the gain of the republic. And because they don't believe in the republic, they believe in the democracy. And they believe that they can make decisions based on, and judges call it, we have wide discretion. Oh, yeah. They went to that yesterday. I'm going to grab my Mr. Rogers sweater here a minute because I'm getting cold. So I'll be right back. Just keep talking, please. Which means that they can make the rules and laws as they please because they have wide discretion. That means if they want to lie and commit perjury in court, they have that authority because they think they have authority. immunity they have uh absolute immunity they do not have absolute immunity they do not have any immunity if they step outside their uh judicial duties and that is the rule of law if they step outside the rule of law they have lost everything in in as far as immunity goes that's ex parte young says when you step outside your your judicial uh duties and requirements you are stripped of your uh immunities of your state privilege and you stand in front of the public naked and suffer the consequences that is ex parte young that's a federal supreme court decision uh and that that is what it's all about there is no absolute immunity and there is no wide discretion when they step outside the law Why discretion, according to a lot of the judges, is that, oh, we can violate the law because we have wide discretion and we have judicial immunity. They do not have either of those. And we need to take them to task. And how do we take them to task? We sue them. And when the public gets aware and starts making the decisions to fix this problem, then we'll resolve the problem. And then it goes back to the jury. The jury has to know about jury nullification, that if the law is incorrect or applied illegally, they can nullify it. and throw it out. And therefore, the judge loses the ability to make some sort of ridiculous ruling based on his wide discretion, which he doesn't have. Well, he's making the decision above the jury. If they're instructing the jury like that, what I saw yesterday, he literally, the judge is rigging the jury outcome by the instructions that he's giving them. Yeah, because the jury is... well because the jury is ignorant because the jury is really uh has the power to nullify anything the judge says doesn't have to follow what the judge says if the jury believes that the the the claim is incorrect it's unjust unru unlawful then they could rule against the judge and they should But when did this instructing the jury thing and telling them the judge telling them what the law is, you know, you've got to apply the law this way. Well, you might as well tell them vote this way or you're going to be wrong, you know. And I mean, that's what I saw. It's like the judge was literally telling them which way that they need to vote or how to apply the law to this. I know what the law is. Don't you know what the law is? I mean, why are you following a judge telling you what the law is? If the law is correct and it's just, then you follow, then you do it. And if the law is not just, then you don't do it. I mean, that's called jury nullification. And once the jury starts nullifying these things, saying to the judge, you're nuts, judge. We're not going to follow your philosophy. The judge is going to lose his power. We have the power. We still have that power, but we got to use it. I was shocked, John. I literally was shocked. Okay. So I'm not like you, who's been in this for like, you know, since the dinosaurs walked the earth, you know, I'm saying that as a friend, giving you some rubbing here, but you know what I mean? It is, it is so shocking to go into a courtroom and basically watch that arrogant piece of crap judge determine the rules that the jury has to play under, you might as well say skip the jury because he just rigged the jury. He rigged the outcome by the instructions. If I was on that jury, I would vote not what the judge said. I would vote my conscience. I would vote what the law is. If I don't know the law, I would want to look into the law. You want to know what the court did here in my case? The court literally, when we went to the scheduling conference, I'm going to tell you guys a little bit about it because it doesn't matter because you know what? You're never going to get an honest and fair judgment in the court system. It's too corrupt. You will not get remedy. You will not be able to get justice. a fair judgment in our judicial system. It's an injustice system and it's all rigged from top to bottom. So these clowns, what they did is they canceled the scheduling conference and never said boo to me. So the clerk says, well we talked to the opposing attorneys and told them well just go talk to the uh to the uh plaintiff in the case you know which would be me you go talk to the plaintiff now isn't that them agreeing to that to agree to those terms which they did isn't that acting as an attorney for me without the ability to do so and the judge did it because he said well we didn't have your your email That's crap. It was on the first page of the complaint and they had already used it. I called back to the court and somebody there absolutely confirmed that they did in fact have it in the system. So they lied. The court literally lied. They refused to talk to me in the case, but did all their communication with the opposing attorney. Well, though we say that emails are nice and convenient and easy to deal with, we can't rely upon emails to do anything. No, they literally admitted that they said they didn't have my email. That's why you send certified letters. and then uh even that can be uh brushed aside as we've seen in the past but my point my point you don't i'm not maybe making no i know what you're saying is they had to communicate with me and they didn't i understand i do understand that yeah it was the next party situation where the where the opposing party had a a private conversation with the judge yeah i do understand that's exactly what happened And it's because the members of the bar are all members of the same club and you're not in it. And let's go one step further. They're all there to protect the system, not to protect your personal rights. So we have a big battle on our hands. Yes, we do. That doesn't mean we should slow down or stop or give up. That means we should fight harder or find better ways of dealing with it. I'm having the same problem with my court case against the three judges with Judge Berg, who is supposed to be ruling on a reconsideration. I sent in a reconsideration over a month ago. And I called the clerk of the court yesterday. And the clerk of the court said, oh, well, we're working on it. But reconsiderations take time. Yeah, and they stall everything out, so you can't get redress. Well, they'll eventually probably rule against me, so I'm waiting for that ruling so I can go to the Supreme Court. Because the whole argument is, do judges have immunity? And when the Supreme Court says, no, they do not, based on all of the Supreme Court case laws, then I'm going to go back and I'm going to sue Judge Berg for as much money as I could possibly get out of him. so this is the problem we have to battle these cases as much as we can now it's not the british accredited registry that's a bunch of crap uh i don't buy into that at all uh it is a member of the organ it's a bar member and they're all once you're a member of the bar you swear allegiance to the bar I kind of think there's some legitimacy to the British Accreditation Registry. No, it's another one of those, let's go off on a different tangent, because as long as we keep going off in these different directions, we're never going to get to the truth. And that's the whole idea of all of these patriot things that are out there. None of it's researched. Give me some proof that it is the British accredited registry. We're going to look for truth here, John, because I want to find out. Give me some truth that this really is that fact, not what somebody says it is. There is a court case out there called Women's Reproductive Services that says just because you say it so doesn't make it so. So if you're going to make accusations of such nature, you prove it in some sort of format in writing where it actually started, a date, how it started, that kind of thing. Just to say it so it doesn't make it so. And I'm tired of all of the sidetracks that we've been doing and all of the distractions that we've been doing to get us away from the republic because we've been getting a lot of them. Okay, let's see here. I'm getting an answer here, and we'll see what Copilot says because I'm online here. The bar in legal context like the Bar Exam Association originates from a physical barrier, historically the wooden or metal railing separating the public seminary from the space of the judges. And where does that come from? Oh, so see, this says, well, this is, I just went into Copilot. So, but anyhow, it does say that there is an organization called the British Accreditation Registrar, but it deals with certification and inspection, not legal licensing. I don't know. I'd like to see more about it because I know an awful lot of people that believe that. First of all, is it a license? What's that? Is it a license to practice law? There is no such thing as a license to practice law. Exactly. It's their country club card. It is a bar card that makes them a member of a organization. That's all it is. It is not a license to practice law. So we have to get away from the distractions that are keeping us from the republic. Because only the republic is going to bring this thing back to where it should be. And until we stop going after distractions and talk about the Republic, the Republic, the Republic, Article IV, Section IV of the Constitution, Republic, you are responsible to protect the Republic, we're not going to get anywhere. We're just going to be distracted into all kinds of different directions. And that's the problem that we've been having. That's a problem I've been having over the last forty years, trying to get people to figure it out. And I still don't have people figuring it out. They're still bringing this old retread tires back to the fold that I thought we have stomped on, got rid of a long time ago. These philosophies that we are still under the control of the British government. We are still under this. We are still under that. That's all distractions, folks. I do think that there's some things that have legitimacy out there, like Doug Force, who was part of The Myth is Canada, was on my show, and about a month and a half after he was on my show, he kind of had a mysterious death, and it was kind of weird. I talked to one of his friends last week, and they said, too, it was kind of odd, but he proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that Canada had not properly federated at all. And he said the same thing true as in the United States. And I tried to figure out, he was going to come back on and explain it to me, but he died before we got a chance to talk about it. I think I got it figured out, though, that there were some problems with the Articles of Confederation, and I think that's where the problem stems from, honestly. Well, Canada was part of them back then. With that? Canada was part of the United States back during the Articles of Confederation. It wasn't until the Constitution was developed that Canada broke away or whatever, dissolved that connection. However, that specific thing happened, I don't know. I haven't researched it. Yeah, it's pretty researched out by these guys in Canada, and they're pretty disgusted because it has something to do with the BNI, British North American Act, BNA, BNI, BNI. I have to look it up again. But it's a really interesting, it's really interesting. And we did an interview with Doug Force on BNN. He had all of the information and they turned it into a documentary. There's also a way you can find it on their site with a graphic that shows you how and why, what really happened there. But they all say the same thing happened in the United States. It wasn't properly federated. And I've heard that from people in the Constitution Party, National Constitution Party too, that it goes back to the Articles of Confederation. it wasn't properly federated or turned into a country, which to me, quite honestly, I think that there's a lot of questions that need to be asked about history. And I'm not settled on any one thing right now because there's a lot we don't know, but there's a lot more questions that we need to ask rather than sticking with our biases because we just don't know. The brainwashing and the biases that have been handed down to us through the decades everything needs to be challenged and i mean everything well ohio is not a state true story ohio is still a territory true story in when the the joint resolution committee said we're going to make ohio a state and date it all the way back to eighteen whatever it was eighteen I don't remember the date, the eighteen hundreds. They can't do that. In order to become a state, and Canada can do it, people need to bring in a constitution. They need to vote and have a unanimous vote that they want to become part of the United States, and then we can give them statehood. If they go through the process, we can give them statehood. Of course, the Canadian government and the British government is not going to allow this to just kind of happen, but the people can can rise up and make it happen, just like the people in Ohio should do it appropriately and say, OK, we can't go back to eighteen hundred, but we can apply for our statehood today. However. That makes the laws that were passed by governors and presidents of Ohio back when null and void, just like what's going to happen when Obama is found out to be not a president but an illegal alien to begin with. All of the laws that he passed as a usurper are going to be null and void. Biden the same way. Ketanji Brown. Her admittance to the Supreme Court was done by the auto pen. Can you imagine? Biden had no idea that he was signing it. And so she's out. And eventually, when this thing comes out onto the public, she's going to be gone because you can't put in somebody in office because you're not a legal authority to be in that office to begin with. so we have lots of problems that uh are going to shake out over time and it's going to happen but it's going to take time to happen and i know obama is doing everything he can to slow it down and they're trying to hide hide and confuse the democrats that are out there that are following obama that actually think that obama's a good person They haven't figured it out yet. And why? I don't know. It's all over the news. All you have to do is start paying attention. But they don't. And this is the reason we have the problems we have today. Because we're not paying attention to what's going on. And we're allowing this behemoth called the government to run our lives. And they're not supposed to be doing that. We're supposed to be running their lives. We got it backwards. how we're going to fix it it's going to take a lot of pain and suffering uh can we do it i i believe we can and i believe it is changing and i believe we are getting there but it's going to take time until we get the public waking up to what's going on then going back to byron when we get the public to wake up and say no taxes on millages period it's not going to happen I cannot believe that we have with a population of twenty eight thousand people, one hundred and forty six million dollars of outstanding bonds and eighteen million dollars of outstanding loans. I'm like, are you people out of your freaking mind? I'm like, I'm like, are you, are you, I am so sure, you know, nothing like putting the village idiots in front of the, and in charge of the checkbook. Well, yeah, they're not really idiots. They're, they're shrewd snake oil salesmen and they know how to sell a product. Yeah. And we have the general public, um, Don't get it. Just haven't figured it out yet. Yeah, it's crazy. That's what we have to do. Educate the public. I'm trying to get Mike on here a minute because he said he didn't get the link, but I sent it to him several times, so I don't know what's going on. Let me give him a call real quick, okay? Okay. Can you continue to teach for a minute? Fine subject, right? Okay. Well, you know, this for our problems had started back in ninety years ago, according to Kagan, Supreme Court Justice, if you want to call her that. She said that Humphrey's was a Supreme Court decision and should be followed. It brought in the administrative state. The administrative state says professionals make decisions or write laws. and that means that anybody in a professional position that has been doing it for some time has the right to make a law and the right to make decisions based on that law and that brings us to the internal revenue that brings us to the uh epa uh ada all of the alphabet organizations they said that these are alphabet organizations have the know-all because they're professionals and they make decisions. them, the professionals, away from the public, because they're not part of the public. They are a special organization created by government to run the government, to be executive branch. They're not executive branch, even though they are somewhat in the executive branch. There are legal, illegal organizations That had been set up through this Humphreys case. We believe and I believe after listening to a lot of people on the podcast and so on and so forth, that the Supreme Court is going to overturn Humphreys and get rid of the administrative state, which we should have never had to begin with. because we have three branches of government, legislative who write the laws, executive that carry out the laws, and the judicial that judges the law. We do not have an administrative branch that makes laws, writes laws, and basically tells us what the law is. That branch doesn't exist. It's never existed legally, and it has been the problem of this country for the last ninety years at least, and maybe before. John, didn't you know that as soon as they get voted in, morning, Mike, by the way, as soon as they get voted in, let's see, a judge can be a legislator. A legislator can be a judge and a governor at the same time. The secretary of state can also be the attorney general. The attorney general can take authority over everything. The township can literally decide to collaborate with Eagle and others and intentionally mislead the public, and they don't care. Well, that's part of the, like I said, that's part of the Humphrey's nonsense and the administrative state that we need to get rid of. We need to go back to three branches of government. The state constitution divides the government into three branches back in sixty three, which was not brought in legally because that was a democracy vote to bring in the Constitution. So we have lots of problems. We do. people need to wake up go we are going for the republic we need to reinstate the republic and bring the laws of the republic back online and that's the only way we're going to do this don't get sidetracked and all of the nonsense that's out there because there's so much nonsense out there you got to be able to discern what is real what is logical and what is what is democracy That's basically the best way to put it. Anyway, Wednesday we'll be talking about different kinds of things at TheMagnificentRepublic.com. And on the eleventh, nope, it's not the eleventh. We're already in November. I got the wrong calendar up. On the, hmm, I think it's the nineteenth, we have a meeting at Nicholas. Again, live meeting. It's the nineteenth of November, so put that down on your calendar if you haven't gotten it there yet. But Wednesday will be on Zoom. Go to the Magnificent Republic to find out how to get onto Zoom. Call me, write me an email, whatever you want to do, and we'll get you involved. And people need to get involved. We're going to fix the Republic or people are going to sit by on the sidelines and we're going to end up with a democracy and a failed government. Well, there you go. Well, thanks for being on today, John. I know it's it's ten o'clock. Usually have a hard stop at ten o'clock. So you have a great day today. And I'm just going to move right into Mike. We're not even playing the intro today. I was listening to you guys talk about Trump doing a third term. You guys are putting way too much thought process into that. It's already been determined by the Democrats. Did you know that the Democrats already said that his first term was illegitimate? So, OK, let's take them up on their on Absolutely. Are you still eligible to run again? Hello? That's right. That's right. Now what are they going to do? These people are kind of dumb, you know, really. You couldn't even write this if you wrote a script. You couldn't write the absurdity in what's out there if you tried. That's right. I think they call that the Keystone Cops. That works. We just dated ourselves right there badly. What's funny is I like to rib John about being old, but he's only about ten years older than me, so that's what's really funny. That's still ten years. However you cut it, still ten years. Maybe a little more than that, but not by much. Maybe a little more than that, too. So, anyhow, thanks for being on today, John. You're welcome. Have a great day. Bye. So, hey, Mike, what's going on today? Well, we have some serious developments that have taken place. Okay. And everybody needs to pay attention. I mean, seriously pay attention. Because what has just happened can happen to anybody at any time. And you guys are talking about how the judicial system is basically gone rogue. They're mobsters. It's like mobsters. They are mobsters. They're worse than mobsters. Yeah. Mob actually had a code. These clowns don't have a code. And what I'm about to describe should wake everybody up. And I'm going to give solutions to this problem. You may not agree with these solutions, but if you've got a better solution, I'm all ears. One of my associates, he lives in Washtenaw County. And he's kind of in a remote area. He lives on a dead end road. He backs up to farmland. I think there's only like five houses on his street. But his property backs up to a bunch of acreage, farmland. So he's out there in the, you know, pretty remote. And for some time, a drone has been flying over his house. landing in his backyard on his deck, and then also landing on his house at two o'clock in the morning, repeatedly. Now, this drone isn't your usual, you know, kid's toy. This thing is something between four and five feet in diameter. It has running lights. It obviously has cameras, night vision. No other markings on this drone. He did get a video of it, but it's extremely hard to see it because it's so dark out there that his phone camera just really didn't pick it up. So this went on for some time. And it would wake him up. I mean, he's the type that, you know, an earthquake wouldn't wake his ass up. But this was waking him up at two in the morning. So he called the sheriff's department. And they sent out a couple of deputies and he explained what was going on. And they just kind of like rolled their eyes like, yeah, OK, whatever. And finally, they said, you know, if it happens again, call us. He's like, call you. What are you going to do? He goes, by the time you would get here, it would be gone. And they just kind of shrugged it off. And he says, you know what? Obviously, you don't believe me. Obviously, you're not going to do squat about it. He's not very politically correct. So he, in so many words, told him, get the hell off the property. Don't come back. A week later, he gets a knock on the door. And it's the same deputies back again. And there were two of them at first that he saw originally. Ended up being six of them. They came into his house and he had no reason to suspect anything. He thought it was a followup or they were here for something. And so long story short, during the course of that conversation, they informed him that he was going to come with them. What? They had a petition, not a warrant, a petition. And the petition was for them to take him into custody. So he's like, what the hell are you talking about? And the one deputy said, now, one of two things can happen. We have to take you to the hospital. What? And you can call for the ambulance or we can. If you call, you're paying for it. If we call, we pay for it. He says, well, I'm not consenting to anything. So if you want me to take an ambulance ride, you call for it. So they did. That's kidnapping right there. Once they had him in cuffs, and they cuffed him to the gurney. The deputies went through his entire house and confiscated all the weapons in the house. They took him to U of M. They did blood work as well as other things. And basically it was like a drug testing type of scenario and took all his clothes. They then transported him to another facility where he was originally told that he would be there for one night for observation. Turned into seven. And at the end of the seven days, the nurse came to him and said, here, you need to sign this paperwork. He said, I'm not signing a damn thing. I'm not signing nothing. Well, you have to. This is your bill. Eleven thousand dollars. Holy crap. And he says, well, I'm not paying for it. I didn't, you know, I didn't come here willingly. I came here, I was, you know, handcuffed to a damn gurney. They said, well, you know, I'm now, what isn't clear here is whether or not the eleven thousand is the total bill or what he just owed, because the nurse went on to say that they went through his wallet, got his medical card and had already charged his insurance company. You gotta be kidding me. No. So since then, he has also gotten another bill from the ambulance service for another eighteen hundred dollars. For a six mile drive. He's only six miles from U of M Hospital. So he's beside himself. It's like his property has not been returned to him. Nothing. So he spent the seven days in this facility. At the end of seven days, he was finally released, got home, and he says he wasn't home five minutes. And there's another knock on the front window, two deputies. And he's like, what in the hell? And they want to know if he can show proof that he didn't escape from the facility. And he more or less said, get the hell off the property now. He wasn't going to open the door, nothing. He's a bullet. This is all shit. So no warrant. They took personal property from him in more ways than one. They are trying to bill him for all of this. He called the deputy. He said, hey, he says, I got something here for you. The deputy said, what's that? He goes, you said if you call for the ambulance, you're paying for it. He goes, I got your bill here for you. It's eighteen hundred bucks. Deputy said, we're not responsible for that. He goes, well, you said you would be. He goes, oh, well, we're not. This is the Washtenaw County Sheriff's Department. Now, you take this in conjunction with what Sheriff Murphy did with the CBS News. that they're charging seventy dollars an hour for these deputies to be guns for hire so they're pimping out their deputies they're pulling these shenanigans with petitions he has never seen the petition he's never seen any paperwork they refuse to give him any of this paperwork so some judge allegedly signed this petition for him to be taken into custody, taken for drug testing, and then put into a facility for mental evaluation. Folks, this is called the red flag law. Wake up. This can happen to anybody. All someone has to do is say, I think that person might be a threat. And that's what you're going to end up being. That's what's going to happen to you. They're just going to come in and take you. Now, if you don't see a problem with this, there's a place not, you know, it's about halfway around the world. It's called China. Move there, please. Because that type of communist bullshit does not belong here. Well, I hope he sues everybody that touched this. Yes, he will be. Into oblivion. The problem is, is he really going to get remedy? Look at how corrupt the courts are. I think you can outside of the court if you do your own court record. These courts are, these state courts protect the sheriff's department. State courts are corrupt. We will not receive any remedy. They're one big thug organization. Agreed. Okay? They are terrorists. This is the definition of domestic terrorism. So what do we do? Well, how about this? How about we defund them? All of them. You don't deal with the courts. If you get a court case, take ownership of it. There's a process by which you can. And We can teach you how to do this process. What you're going to do is you're going to do the court case. You're going to take ownership of it. You're going to publish it in the legal news for twenty one days. You're going to get an affidavit of publication. You're going to take that item, that account, and that's what it is. It's an account. A case number is an account number. You're going to put that into a trust. And you're going to change the case number to your own identification number, either by through an R number or some other process. You're going to rename it. And then you're going to transfer granted deed back to the damn court and say, okay, now you're the fiduciary. You must do what's in the best interest of the beneficiary. That would be you. Case is to be vacated. You're going to give them a letter of fiduciary instructions. And they are to vacate the case, release all chattel, incoming and outgoing, that are related to that account, and shut them down. If they still demand fees, pay them in coffee beans. You do not give them anything else. Shut them down. Stop voting on the millages. Police millage? Are you kidding me? For this? This is tyranny, folks. This is tyranny. They already can't blame you for saying the wrong thing on Facebook or Twitter or whatever else. So there's your censorship on the freedom of speech. They prohibit you from the right of free travel. Now they're confiscating weapons under a pretext of a red flag law that's completely unconstitutional. Wake up. So how is this guy doing right now? If people don't wake up, then they have no one to bitch. They should not complain when they're stuck in a cattle car and that door slams shut as they're going off to a concentration camp. Wake up. I don't know how else to say this. How is he doing, Mike? He's madder than a hornet. Well, that's a good reaction, okay? That's a really good reaction because I'm sure they were trying to demoralize him. Oh, yeah. And he doesn't take their crap. okay he will not put up with it and he doesn't you know he he calls it the way it is he don't care so he's self-employed so he doesn't give two shits about anything that they are going to try and do so i'm going to be working with him on putting uh stuff together and yeah he's going to go after them no doubt about it but this is the crap that's going on folks it this is kind of shocking I mean, I didn't even think they were that. I knew they were low, but I didn't know it was that low. Yep. So do we have names of the Washtenaw County sheriffs that were involved in this? I don't want to release any names just yet. We're not going to release any names just yet. I think every one of them needs to be put out there in the public to see what they've done. But the department itself is complying with these red flag laws. That in itself means that the entire department as a whole needs to be not only defunded, but they need to be all tried for treason. Because they're not following the Constitution. They're not following an oath of office. They're not following anything but their own made-up rules and regulations. And this ties into Humphreys. This ties into the APA, the Administrative Procedures Act of this is the administrative tyranny that everybody's having to encounter right now. It's widespread through every aspect of your lives whether you realize it or not. So I have here, I have a document here. This is from the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services. I don't know if you can see this on the screen or not. Okay, hang on a minute. I just wanted to give them the notoriety for being lawbreakers that they deserve. Right here, I have it. This is concrete proof, right here. Michigan Department of Health and Human Services. This is a certified response that I received from them on a FOIA. Says that they're fake. They cannot prove their de jure status, which means they have no authority. Zero, none. They're an office de facto. And as we know, through Norton v. Shelby, they have no authority. We know that anybody who is dragged through that system is being abused by the system because they don't have any authority to do what they're doing. So I have the proof. We have the proof. And there's just no getting around it now. The other side of this element deals with the FBI. The FBI in twenty eleven issued that report stating that anyone who challenges their authority, whether it be the courts or any public functionary, the police, you are an extremist and terrorist. Who the hell is the FBI to say that? Nobody. They don't have that authority. And how do we know that? Why can we say that? Because right here, here's the public law that says that we as sovereign citizens are to be celebrated. Okay? And you might say, well, that really doesn't mean a whole lot. Well, wait a minute. Here it was published. Here it was published on May seventh, nineteen forty. Then in nineteen fifty one, Harry S. Truman recognized it. As a matter of fact, I have proclamations from Obama, Trump, and Biden all recognizing it. I also have documentation to show that it's federally funded, that federal funds are allocated through the Board of Education that they're supposed to be educating the student bodies on the right of citizenship, which has to do with we being the sovereigns, and is to happen on the seventeenth of September of every year. Those proclamations are instructing that to happen. Federal funding is being allocated for that. So for the FBI to be instructing the courts, for them to be instructing law enforcement to do the complete opposite of what these proclamations issued by the President of the United States state, in violation of the intent of Congress, in violation of public law, who's the domestic terrorist now? That would be your law enforcement departments and agencies. Now, I'm not looking to say we go with a lawless system. That's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is they're not acting and doing their job. Now, I don't know about everybody else, but whether you're an employer or an employee, If you have an employee that's not doing their job, are you going to keep paying them or are you going to fire his ass? If you're an employee doing whatever the hell you want and telling the boss, stick it up your ass, I'm going to do whatever I want, how long are you going to keep that job? Everybody better get on board here. Otherwise, you're next. What can you do to stop it? What are you doing to stop it? If you're not getting in the game and doing something, hey, guess what? Line up. There's a line to that camp over there, and you're going to be a good little sheep, a good little puppet, and that's all you're going to be. And you've got no one to blame but yourself. Their boldness has really gotten into an accelerated pace, in my opinion. In the last couple of months, you can really see that they're – their actions are increasing. But on the opposite side, I think that some of this is being allowed to happen to catch them in the act. But that doesn't absolve us from doing what we're supposed to do. But it just really seems like they're scared and they're making mistakes. They're doing stupid stuff because they think that they're going to get a pass through the unlawful injustice system, the injustice system that we have going on. And they're all covering for each other. All of them are. Yeah. And, you know, you listen to people talk about, oh, the Republican Party is doing such a great job. Really? Are they? I don't think they are. I think they're claiming a lot of stuff that they're doing. But it's all it's all like it's just like they're throwing crumbs off the table instead of actually fixing things. The candidates suck. The people in office suck. There's an underlying element. They're not going for the structure that needs to radically be altered because they have literally walked away from the Constitution and the Republic, all of them. They're being instructed. They are. They're being instructed by the Bar Association because every one of them, when you go to these public meetings, well, we can't make a decision right now. We've got to talk and we have to confer with our council. We need to see what the council says. Really? Who's the elected official here? That bar thug? How about this? How about we start suing all the attorneys on all these cases? Let's start suing the prosecutor. Let's start. Now, how do you have a victimless crime? I think it's a good idea. If the elements of a crime do not exist, there is no crime. What are the elements of a crime? One, someone has to be physically injured or there has to be property damage or someone has to be deprived of their rights. If one of those three elements do not exist, there is no crime. Speeding is not a crime. Not having a license is not a crime. How many times have I heard people call me and say, hey, I got a ticket. What's it for? Obstruction. What did you do to obstruct? Well, I didn't show them my license. That's not obstruction. You have the right to remain silent. You have the right not to self-incriminate. So by not showing your license, that's not a crime. But they're turning it into a crime because they want money. What did you say? It's violation of property rights, physical harm, and what's the third one? So long as you don't do physical harm to somebody, you don't do harm or destruction of private property or even public property, property in its whole, or deprive someone of their rights. So without one element of those element being there, there is no crime. How many lawless crimes are being prosecuted there? It's a revolving door through these courts. They're all just revenue raising. That's all it is. And explain to me how the state of Michigan is the plaintiff. How can the state of Michigan be a plaintiff? I'll be right back. I had a judge tell me, well, you owe this money for the court fine. Well, really? So you're acting as a third-party debt collector. No, you owe the court. Well, wait a minute. If I owe the court the fine, then why is the plaintiff the state of Michigan? Should that be going to the state of Michigan? So the state of Michigan is an artificial entity. How do I cross-examine my accuser? The prosecutor is not the state of Michigan. He can't be. He's there putting out statements of counsel, which is inadmissible as evidence. So where is Mr. or Mrs. State of Michigan? There is none. This is fraud. On its face, it's all fraud. So people, stop paying them. Stop approving millages. If you have a court fine, pay in coffee beans. Do it by affidavit. You send it by certified mail. If you need help with that, come on to Wednesday night. Come on to Thursday night. We'll get you the information. We'll set you up with all the information. And this isn't hearsay. This isn't a theory. I've done it. Been doing it. So here's the real kicker. Here's, you know, well, we don't accept coffee beans. Well, first off, there's a court case on it. Montgomery Ward, Eugene Glaser, nineteen eighty two. Judge, if you want to overturn that case, go for it. But until it's overturned, it stands. Number one. Number two. According to Michigan law, MCL, one, uh, uh, twenty one point one, five, three, one, five, four. The only thing you're allowed to accept is gold, silver, silver certificates, Federal Reserve Bank notes. There's six items there. I don't have the ability to do that. I don't have the capability of getting those. So you're asking me to send you a check or cash, Federal Reserve notes, which are fake IOUs or they're worthless or credit card. Those are forms of payment. And you're asking me to break the law. to satisfy this debt. Is that what you're asking me to do, Judge? Ask the judge that. Are you asking me to violate state law to do this? If they refuse the coffee beans and return them, guess what? Under state law, I believe it's MCL-L-L-L-L-L-L-L-L-L-L-L-L-L-L-L-L-L-L-L-L-L-L-L-L-L Payment in full. Payment in full. If you tendered the obligation and they refuse the tender, it's tendered in full. So, judge, I'm just following the law. Are you telling me not to follow the law? Are you ordering me not to follow the law? Just ask him that question. Watch what he does. One of two things happen. He'll turn red. He'll get the stutters. Slam his fist on the desk. You know, you got him. You got him right there. You see how flustered that judge was in the courtroom yesterday with Peter Tickton and Stephanie Lambert. He was absolutely losing it. He actually had to leave a couple of times just to get his composure. That was the judge. Cause the judge literally changed the rules on the fly. He was literally just changing them to whatever he wanted. And his argument was, as we've spent enough time on this, I want to get, get done with this. That's what he said. And then he, he literally, accused Stephanie Lambert of committing crimes. He said the crimes committed here by, and it's like, are you kidding me? How is it that an attorney, a prosecutor that wasn't the judge, the prosecutor can make a statement like that and avoid the whole perceived or assumed innocence. He went right to judgment and conviction. The prosecutor did by his words in the courtroom. Time to shut them down. The judge should have told him, you know, you're done right now. You don't sit there. He literally accused her. Shut the court down. Here's how you do it. How do you do it? Prosecutor. As soon as that prosecutor opens their mouth, judge, objection. What's your objection? It's come to my attention that the prosecuting attorney does not have a license to practice law in the state of Michigan. Swear him under oath. Because all statements of counsel are inadmissible as facts before the court. So he needs to be sworn in. Have him sworn in. We will give you, if you don't do it yourself, we will get you the documents. When I did it with the prosecutor in Livingston County, I had a FOIA response from their office where I have requested a copy of his license to practice law, came back, does not exist. I have one from the AG's office, same response, does not exist. And I have one from the Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs. No license exists. So as soon as he says, yes, I have a license to practice law, he just committed perjury. So then I say, judge, right here, here's number one, prosecutor's office says he doesn't have one. Here's number two, AG says no license. Number three, the licensing board, no license. He just committed perjury. Guess what? He's gone. They have to stop. Because now they got to get a new prosecutor. And what do you think you're going to do to that guy? Same thing. And while we're at it, judge, seeing how we're pulling up all these credentials, How about I need a certified copy of your oath of office, Judge, pursuant to Article XI, Section I of the Michigan Constitution. I also need a certified copy of your anti-bribery statement. And I need a certified copy of your foreign agent registration statement. Because you're a foreign entity here. And last but not least, pursuant to Article VI, Section XIX of the Michigan Constitution, I need a certified copy of your license to practice law. which is a requirement under this constitution. You cannot produce any of those documents. If there's just one of those documents you cannot produce. you are automatically disqualified. Title XXVIII, section four, five, five, in conjunction with the seventh circuit in the case of Taylor v. O'Grady, in the case of Taylor v. O'Grady, in the case of Taylor v. O'Grady, in the case of Taylor v. O'Grady, in the case of Taylor v. O'Grady, in the case of Taylor v. O'Grady, in the case of Taylor v. O'Grady, in the case of Taylor v. O'Grady, in the case of Taylor v. O'Grady, in the case of Taylor v. O'Grady, in the case of Taylor v. O'Grady, in the case of Taylor v. O'Grady, in the case of Taylor v. O'Grady, in the case of Taylor v. O'Grady, in the case of Taylor v. O'Grady, in the case of Taylor v. O'Grady, in the case of Taylor v. O Case closed. So you said anti-bribery, certified oath of office, certified copy of the license to practice law, and what was the last one? Oath, anti-bribery, foreign agent registration statement, and license. Why did they need a foreign agent registration? Oh, because they're a member of the bar. Ah. And the bar is the British accreditation registry. Yes. So see, John says, no, it's not. That's hogwash. But I think it is. I think it's a real thing. Why are they required to have a forest state? I have a four statement on file. Well, there you go. I'm making notes right now. Yeah, they have to produce those documents. Oh, I don't have to produce those. Yeah, you do. Because if you don't, you don't have jurisdiction. You don't have jurisdiction. Now, absolute immunity? Well, the judge, I'm going to name names here. Judge, the clerk, federal judge here in Michigan stated that judges have absolute immunity except if they do not have jurisdiction. Well, wait a minute. Doesn't that contradict the term absolute? If there's a but, if there's an exception, if there's a all except in the manner of, guess what? Absolute just went out the window. It lost all its authority. That term doesn't apply because absolute means just what it says, absolute, no exceptions. But here the judges are saying they have absolute immunity except if there's no jurisdiction. So there is an exception to the absolute. They're admitting to it. So if there's no jurisdiction, they don't have immunity. Okay. Well, let's have some fun with that one. What do we know about the Michigan State Police? De facto. What do we know about city and township police? De facto. You get a ticket. Guess what? Judge, the cop's fake. Doesn't exist. Has no authority. Guess what? You have no jurisdiction. You want to move forward with no jurisdiction? Because you don't have any immunity if you do that. You want to roll the dice? Let's see if it comes up snake eyes. I wish we had like a million more of you around that could go in and just go battle, you know, go battle bot with these guys in court. Because honestly, the problem is, is that the entirety of the United States has been so misled and disempowered to go in and actually talk to. And these guys are completely rogue. I mean, the court system is a bunch of mobsters. And so they do it. They try to do a real good job of intimidating people. You know, you look at. You look at the intimidation that Jocelyn Benson, our sad secretary of state, whatever she is, the imposter, she's an imposter. And so if you look at how they threaten people, it is shocking. I'm still reeling on the guy that got brought in to the mental institution for observation. This is shocking to me. Yeah, at any time they can put out one of these petitions for any damn reason they want. All it takes is someone saying, I think, and they can issue a petition. So basically what are they doing? They're trying to silence you. Sure they are. They're trying to silence their opposition. Sure they are. And they're trying to disarm the people by doing it. Not only of your rights, but of your guns. Violation of your Second Amendment. How is any of this constitutional? It isn't. This is tyranny. And people need to stop allowing it, stop consenting. The only reason why they get away with it is because everybody consents. If everybody stops consenting, guess what? They don't have any power. They don't have any authority. Well, it goes back to wearing the masks on the unconstitutional shutdown, the COVID shutdown. This was absurd. It was so absurd. And it was kind of really telling and both telling and shocking how many people just went along like sheeple. They closed the churches. They closed the businesses. They closed, you know, they were walking around absolutely terrified of each other, how quickly they could take down businesses. the United States by an imagined threat. That's exactly what they did. And I'm going to- This didn't happen overnight. This did not happen overnight. This was a conditioning that took place over many, many years. I mean, you go all the way back to Columbine, you go Oklahoma bombing, the Boston Marathon bombing, the nine-eleven. I mean, you could link all of these events. to where it was a conditioning of the people to make them be complicit. Never in the history of this nation has a city ever been shut down, completely locked down, and a door-to-door search with military was conducted during the Boston Marathon bombing. Never in the history could that have been. I stand on my opinion that that was a trial run for the COVID. It was a trial run to see if we can shut this country down. And they shut a whole city down and did that door-to-door search. Now, what if they shut the country down and do a door-to-door search for weapons? Everybody gonna comply? Folks, wake up. There's a method to their madness. There's a reason why they do something. And you've got to pay attention to what they're doing. You've got to pay attention to what and who is behind the curtain. Pull back that curtain and see who's standing behind it. It's the ones in the shadows that you've got to worry about, not the one making the headlines. The guy in the headlines, he's the puppet. He's the distraction. Who's behind them pulling the strings? It's always second command. That's like what I see in the in the Seventeenth Circuit Court here in Grand Rapids. It's the clerks. I had one of them hang up on me when I was trying to ask a question. Chanel Guidance. She hung up. She got frustrated. I called her back. She didn't pick up on the calling her back. But you can't get back to these people when they do something that's unlawful or outside of what they're. It's just like them saying they didn't have my they didn't have my email address. They sure as heck didn't. I called the court right back and the gal that was there, Jessica, said, I don't understand this. She said, you are in the system. I said, they are doing our ex parte with the opposing attorneys and they are not including me in this. And the opposing attorneys are saying we talked to we talked to the plaintiff. Well, that's a lie. They didn't. They never talked to me. I had one voice message last week, but through this whole process, no one, they completely, the court completely cut me out on the communications with the opposing party. Have them prove it. How are they going to prove that they did talk to you? This is a recording. Was there any proof of service? Of a meeting or a hearing? No, they said they gave me proof of service and it said that they talked to me, but they never talked to me. So they committed fraud upon the court. Yes. Yeah. So the whole thing is... But the judge is going to protect them. The whole thing is so rigged. You know, I got to tell you, I'm really glad that I ran for governor because I could see the fraud that was being committed in the elections as well as in the political parties. It's all fraud. And then now getting to the court system, I kind of love this. I love debugging problems, even if it means I'm getting attacked or my rights are being violated. Because you know what? It drags them out into the light. And right now, they literally, you do not have any chance of getting a fair hearing, a fair trial, or a fair judgment in our justice system. There's not a chance. They've got it rigged at every level, even the jury instructions. That's what I saw yesterday. That's why you have to shut the thing down before it gets out of control. Take control of the court. You have to take control. They're administrators. That's what they are. They're administrators. By moving the case into a trust, now the office of executor appears. And when the officer of executor appears, all administration stops. The executor takes command of the case and the hearing, not the judge. You do that on pro se? On pro se cases, you put it in a trust? Mm-hmm. Yeah. And you become the executor? Yeah. Well, that's interesting. Yep. So there is a process to do it. It doesn't happen overnight, but it can be done. And I've done it. And right now, that's why Judge Bain is currently under investigation, not only from the Judicial Tenure Commission, he's now under investigation by the DOJ. They better wake up because I ain't fooling around no more. Well, I'm looking forward to seeing some justice restored because it's kind of sobering. So what else do you want to talk about today? What else is going on? I'm kind of concerned about this guy that got taken into a mental health facility yesterday. And they must have been watching him. I mean, that drone has got to be, you know, the drones have got to be all part of it. But they were surveilling him to see when he was there, what the setup was so that they could plan to raid him, probably because he said he was a sovereign citizen. No, he never went down that road. And by the way, just to clear the record on that, I'm glad she just said that. There are two definitions of sovereign citizen. OK, the one I've showed you through the proclamation, nineteen forty and what the FBI did. So whenever someone says, oh, you're one of those sovereign citizens, ask them to identify which definition they're referring to. Because one, if you have a public functionary saying you're you're a sovereign citizen, they're committing an act of bias. They're discriminating against you. It's slander. It's an invasion of your privacy. It's putting you in a false light and that. Right there gives you grounds to yank their ass, kicking and screaming like little and into federal court. And you can hold them civilly liable for those actions. But you have to do it in federal court, not state court. Stay the hell out of the state courts. The state courts are completely corrupt. Yes. I believe that too. I believe that you cannot get remedy in the state courts. And not all the federal courts are literally white on this also. We've got judges, federal judges that aren't doing their job as well. You know what? You know, the last election we had, we had like no opposition for almost any of the judicial seats. It was one person running for that seat with no opposition. Right. And then when you look at how it really works, it's, It's the clerks that are controlling what the judge sees. So like we asked for when we were filing our temporary restraining or when I was filing the temporary restraining order, I went down there and I filed the temporary restraining order. It came back with initials. and a denied that was it i pulled the judge's signature and it didn't match so who the hell signed it i mean this is about as egregious as the auto pen fiduciary have given them a fiduciary responsibility you name them as fiduciaries now they have an obligation to act okay one of our associates did that to the federal uh clerks in in detroit They kept putting his name on the documents incorrectly, okay? And he got tired of it. So he went down there and said, hey, you are not allowed to do this. You keep changing the documents on the record. You're not allowed to do that. And they kept arguing with him. So he got a hold of the head clerk and called her out. And said, hey, you check the paperwork. You're not supposed to be doing that. Well, she started with the excuses. You know what he did? He named her the fiduciary. So she bought. Oh, I don't know. Too late. I'm just named you the fiduciary. Here's your letter of fiduciary instructions. She never bought again. She said this will be done. Wow, that's amazing. So I don't know if you heard earlier too, Byron Township has basically in the last two meetings, I handed them notices that they were supposed to pass on to everyone and I read it publicly in front of the board. They struck it from the record. It's not on the record. They didn't put it in the meeting minutes or anything. That's tampering with the record. Well, there's another one. And what do you do when they tamper? Because I've got three different instances of their tampering. Check the Meetings Act. What is it? Check the Meetings Act. I'm sure there's something in there on falsifying the record. Okay. And you could probably bring a civil claim on that as well. Okay. Well, I've got several instances of that. For the quick remedy, I would do a file suit and ask for injunctive relief that they put it back into the record with an apology. They're like a dog that takes a crap on your living room floor. You got to rub its nose in it. Yeah. So circuit court, assume a circuit court for that? Yeah. Yeah, I would ask for injunctive relief. Don't ask for monetary, just injunctive relief that they put and stop altering and tampering with the record. And they have to put everything back in there like it was supposed to be and give a public apology for what they did. Rub their nose in it a little bit. I know there's people out there saying, well, we need to forgive them. No. We're so past that. I am so sick of listening to people say that. It is so brainwashed into the religious communities. in letting people break the law. We're just going to forgive the rapist who didn't mean to do it. We're going to see that he's, you know, he's he's he didn't mean to do he didn't know he was doing wrong, blah, blah, blah. And just let him out after a day and in the in jail. And so that he's going to go out and do it again. This is nonsense. These people are psychopaths. They don't care. They're going to do it again. Moses carried a big stick and it wasn't because he had a limp. OK, so You know, you got to, you know, what was it? What's the other one? Spare the rod, spoil the child. The shoe fits. Yeah. Well, I just think that I think they need to be lawfully, you know, lawfully protected. lawful consequences. There's got to be consequences for breaking the law. There's got to be consequences for violating people's rights. There's got to be consequences to spitting on the Constitution and overthrowing the United States of America through subversion, through taking over agencies. The enemy is within right now, guys. I am way more concerned with the people that are in office who are working for the government, who are taking a paycheck, who are rigging it from within the system than I am on any outside force here. The enemy is within. Yes. Yes, it is. And it starts with the Bar Association. I'm going to hammer that until someone proves me wrong. And no one so far has ever has been able to prove me wrong. Are you going to go after the Bar Association? I reserve comment at this time. Yeah, that's all you had to say. I can see it in your eyes. So I think that's an important thing because if people are breaking the law, we can't sit there and just let them keep putting the kick me sign on our backs and watching them drag us down and hurt us. That's what they're doing. Yes. Yeah. And the bar, think about it, folks. Who controls the courts? Who controls the courts? You have a prosecutor, bar thug. Judge, bar thug. You hire an attorney, bar thug. Planning Commission, Byron Township, guy that sits at the top of that, Tim Newhouse, he's an attorney. He didn't like that when I told him that it's just a private membership club and it doesn't hold any weight with me. He got a little upset. Why? Public law, nine thirty three out of Montana. They were trying to restore the original Thirteenth Amendment. It got it died on the vine. But those they the representatives there stated in House Bill nine thirty three that the Bar Association is a threat to the constitutional government. So they recognize it. You have legislators out there who do recognize that the Bar Association is a threat at all levels. At all levels. I mean, you know, if you're a Trump supporter, look what they've done to him. Look at the bar thugs have done to him. OK, if you're Obama and Biden supporter, look at the bar thugs did to protect them. Well, they were part of the part of that. They're all part of it. Yeah. So come on. It's right in your face on both sides. It's right in your face on both sides. You can't. I'm a blind man can see this. And if you think that your bar attorney is going to do you any justice, he's not. Corpus Juris Subcondum, Volume Seven, Section Four. Their first obligation is to the court, not the client. That's why your probate courts are robbing everyone blind. They're stealing everybody's assets through the probate courts. I can show you and name names and cases. And people are, oh, well, yeah, they wouldn't do that. Yeah, they will. With a heartbeat, they will. Well, let's take a swipe at Ask My Tax because Ask My Tax is all part of it with the trust attorneys involved. Yeah. And rewriting the trust laws to take our stuff. Every single thing they do is to take our stuff, to subvert us. So we're working so hard to survive that we can't and we don't have the time to fight them. to be with our families, to raise our children, even the schools. I have a real beef with the schools and people who have to put their kids in every little single thing that is extracurricular. Who's raising your kids? You haven't spent any time with them. So half of them don't even know their parents. They just get dropped off and, hey, I'll see you later, taxi service, when I'm done. That's not raising children. That's dropping them off and having the state raise them or other people. If you're going to raise your kids, you've got to be home doing stuff with them and teaching them and that sort of thing in your home. You're letting other people influence them more than you do. Yeah. Here's something else that pisses off judges. Okay. Court watchers. They hate it when you have a bunch of court watchers in the courtroom. Now, my court watchers, I mean, they've been berated. Judge Bain came out from behind the bench to berate them. Why? Because he was pissed off. He was frustrated. What did they do that he saw? I embarrassed him in his courtroom, and he got pissed. And he started calling them sheep for coming and watching me in court. Oh, really? Yes. So we should just go and sit in the courtroom and see the proceedings. Yeah. They don't like that. They don't want people, only the people who have a case before them is all they want in the courtroom. They don't want people there taking notes and watching and listening to what they're saying and what they're doing because they're not, they don't like, they don't want the recordings to get out. Have you ever noticed you can't get a copy of your court proceeding? You can come and watch it in the courthouse, but you don't get a copy of it. Why? Why can't I have a copy of that? It's mine, isn't it? Who owns it? I own the videotape as the taxpayer. I paid a court fee. That's my property. Why am I being denied access to my property? They didn't pay for it. Just like FOIAs. Why are we paying these municipalities for a copy of something? I don't care if it's a transcript. I don't care what it is. Why do we pay? The paper, the ink is all paid for by what? Tax dollars. The person sitting there, the clerk, whoever put that together, they're there for eight hours a day. Whether they're sitting there playing solitaire on their computer or they're collecting documents, they get paid the same. So when they say, well, it's to cover the cost of the clerk getting it, really? Then your system sucks. You know what? Then the system sucks. If you have to pay to get the things that belong to you because it's so inaccessible, the system sucks. You know, it's just like our state website. The state website absolutely sucks. It is not there to serve the people. It's there to hide things. You can't find things on any of these websites that are governmental websites. Look how bad they screw it up. And they do it intentionally. They don't want us to see what's there. Now, everybody remember Obamacare? The Supreme Court issued a ruling on Obamacare regarding the mandate that everybody had to have it, right? In that court opinion, okay, Justice Scalia stated that by way of the Commerce Clause and the Necessary and Proper Clause, we the people are not obligated, mandated. We have no obligation to buy products or services offered by the government. We can refuse. We have that right to refuse. So think about that. Do you have to buy a registration for your car? No. Because you have the right to travel, protected by the First Amendment. Do you have to buy a license? Well, to say you need a license for something means that the activity is illegal to start with. So why else would you need a license? Oh, yeah. The Treaty with the Enemy Act, nineteen thirty three, declared that all commerce is illegal absent a license from the state or the federal government. Notice how they just took it upon themselves to put all this crap in place. Yeah. OK. Naturally, they do it when people are distracted. What was happening back then? Oh, yeah, we're going we're having issues with Europe. We're having issues with Japan. And then here comes World War II, and everybody's distracted. Then the war ends, and everybody comes home, and everybody's just relieved just to be home and try and get their lives back in order again and get things back to normal. So what do they do? They bloat the government with the APA and all these administrations, creating rules and regulations, bypassing the legislative branch, depriving you of your rights, and nobody paid attention because why? We're trying to get our lives back in order from this world war that we just came through. So they use distractions to take more from you. So you are not obligated or mandated to buy a product or service from any state or federal government agency department, nothing. What do you think we're being distracted from right now? What do you see as the biggest distractions? Where do I start? You don't have enough time. The list is long, isn't it? Yeah, it is. One of the distractions right now is, you know, I just had a conversation with someone about digital currency. Oh, that's such, it is a bad idea. I'm going to give you the short narrative on this. Bitcoin, put one in my hand. I want to hold one. Can you put one in my hand, please? No, you cannot. You cannot, you know, they're like, oh, the digital currency. You know what? It's another fiat currency. It is. It's another fiat currency. It violates the Constitution. It violates the laws. Sorry, no. And if they push it and try and mandate that everybody has to do this, then we're going to have to create our own community banks. Which is a good idea anyway. That's the way it used to be. Yes. So we're going to go back to the way things used to be. We're going to get rid of them. We don't have to use them. and we'll create our own community banks to help them. You know, I think this whole snap, this snap benefit thing too, it's like, why are we giving people snap benefits? Why don't we do it through say like community food pantries? So they can't be selling their benefits to the convenience stores or selling, you know, you know what I mean? If there was something available where they got actually nutritious food instead of buying cigarettes, pop and alcohol or whatever it is that they can buy on that snap benefit or sell them. I've heard of multiple situations where they were selling those snap, their snap benefits to, uh, convenience stores and gas stations for like four thousand dollars for two thousand dollars because they wanted the drug money well i mean there's no oversight to the to the destruction of the united states and we're literally funding it notice how they took away the farmer's right to sell their produce on the side of the road i didn't know they did that Okay. When did this happen? I would tell them to go screw themselves. Well, they did it to the milk farmers. You can't sell raw milk. Oh, well. Okay. And I see all these people saying, well, you know, they had the lady in Detroit who was arrested for selling hot dogs. And it was a big thing on Facebook about it. And I'm looking at all these different things about the comments and like, oh, well, she should have known better. She should have had a license to sell hot dogs. And, you know, for our safety, you know, we have to have the health department come in there and inspect and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, make sure that nobody gets sick. And finally, I went, OK, enough. So I had a trip in and I tripped in and said, okay, first off a license, really? That means that selling hot dogs is illegal. Let me ask you something. Does your kids, the next time they set up a lemonade stand, do they have a license to sell? Yeah, or do we just give preferential treatment to one segment of the population over another? That's unconstitutional. You can't do it. Or how about this? When was the last time the health department came in and inspected your kitchen to make sure you could do cookies for a fundraiser? Or churches. Or churches. Did the health department come in and certify church kitchens or any of the other things like that? This is so ridiculous. It's just revenue raising for the state. The government is a for-profit corporation. Shouldn't be, but that's how they function. It's just crazy. Well, Mike, thanks for coming on today. I've got, I actually have some law work I'm going to do today because there is a, there's a couple of, there's a couple of responses that we have to craft. And I think it's going to be kind of epic, not just to the township for like striking the record, but the court literally said, I can't, when this whole thing comes out, people are going to be absolutely shocked at the level of corruption and what they're willing to do to harm we the people to get what they want. I mean, I really believe that these people are absolutely, they're just organized crime. I really do. This is some mafia crap going on here. Oh, yeah, it is. It really is. We've talked about it. I can't even tell you how many people I really question their deaths that I know because it's odd and it doesn't make sense. You know, you go back to the dead doctors thing that was going on a few years ago. You have to question this. You have to question Scalia's death. You know, you really have to question this, all of it, because in all the ones that that surrounded Hillary Clinton, that's the tip of the iceberg right there, because it's going on the murders, the assassinations, the canceling. We were talking about Arctic Frost yesterday. That was there were people that were being targeted for deportation, silencing and unaliving. In Arctic Frost, that's what that was all about. Well, guess what? They've got another list that the Defense Intelligence will not release yet that has seven hundred people on a new list for assassinations. and for silencing. It's happening in our country. This is some third world dictator crap going on here. There is a list. Keep your eyes on it. We've been trying to find it. It just hasn't been declassified yet. But there's a list out there that has seven hundred people on it to shut them up. And I'm going to guess that the majority of them are talking about election integrity, child trafficking, the drug trafficking, CPS, and actually hitting hard on the government agencies, which are full-time thug life. I'm going to guarantee you that that's what's happening. Yeah. Yeah. Again, who controls the government? Banks. And who's their enforcers? The bar associations. Yeah. Yeah. Yep. There you go. I'm going to say a prayer here today and we're going to, we have to go out there and be loved. Let people know what's going on because if not you, who's going to do it. There's, there's so many people that are compromised that will do anything for a dollar. You know, I've, I've trained a lot of employees over the years and I've told them, I said, you've got to understand you're in, you're in a, a realm right now, honestly, where, where, People will lie. People are professional liars. That's what they do. People lie. Okay. Everyone has almost everyone else, not say everyone, but almost everyone has a threshold of lying. When you figure that out, you'll figure out how much it takes to compromise a person or when they got compromised. Some people will lie over five dollars. Some people will lie over five hundred dollars. But you go, you know, you you go, uh, under that they're not willing to lie. Some people, the threshold is ten thousand dollars are willing to lie for some people. It's one hundred thousand. When you get into one hundred thousand dollar range, you've got a lot less people. The flock really starts thinning out of the people who will stand against this stuff. When you get into the millions or billions, which most of these people in the political arena are dealing with or the corporate arena, there's not many people that will that will stand for that. Or when they start threatening their family or the children, most people will cave. I listened to a girl give a testimony years ago, and she was talking about a congressman that had raped her. And the congressman was sitting there crying as he was raping her, saying, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry. The testimony from this girl was horrifying. And she was like, he was absolutely blackmailed, didn't excuse him from his behavior. But the question to all of us, and it's an ethical question, is what are you willing to stand for? What are you willing to stand for and stand against this evil that's taken over a nation? Here, I have this book. I thought this was pretty interesting. Because there's so much of it, and it's so egregious, the amount of blackmail that's going on right now. I'm going to tell you what. We have to go to base level and say, I will not be compromised even over a stick of gum. You know what I mean? That I won't be compromised. I will not be compromised by somebody putting a gun to my head. I will not be compromised. I will stand faithful to the end. regardless of the consequences. That's when things really start getting serious and you really find out who people are. And I don't think there's many of us that would fall into that category of absolute unwavering stubbornness. I think the only people that really can do it are the ones that are being carried by God Almighty. And their devotion to God, because they know that this isn't all that there is, that the devotion to God is so strong that there's nothing or no one that could ever compromise them. And I think those people exist. I just don't think there's very many of them anymore. Because the faith of our nation is just kind of needing a little work right now because people do not really live their faith or what they profess that they do. When God says to follow him with an unwavering devotion, that is you stay faithful to that. I mean, look at Abraham willing to slay his son. And God, you know, under God, that's devotion right there that willing to give up one of your children because God told you to and God made a way. It always happens if you follow God. And this is something that everyone needs to remember. If you follow God, you have his favor upon you. He will find a way when there seems to be no way. It may not be exactly what you think it should be, but he will find a way. But you have to follow him and show yourself approved. I really believe that. So Maxwell Prime, another example, her father, ding, ding, ding, ding. There you go. Al showed up this morning. So yeah, Whitney Webb had an excellent exposure of him. Oh, I didn't know that. Well, this is kind of crazy because I just, I don't ever plan what I'm going to say when I get online. It's just is what it is guys. So hopefully that came from God. I want to look at that. Let me see if I can grab that and, and, uh, I'll have to see if I can grab that. Well, maybe not. See what I can do there. Anyhow, so let's say a prayer and we're going to go on to our day because I've got some legal pummeling to do today. And I think you do too. So dear Heavenly Father, thank you so much for Mike and for John Tater and for Ryan, my friend Ryan and Al that were with us today. And and Lynn and all the good people that are out there that consistently show up every single time because they really just want to learn. It's just amazing. And I'm thankful that you're giving us the answers to things that we've been questioning and wondering for a very long time. Please bless and protect President Trump and all those who are standing with him, who are taking back this nation. Please protect General Flynn and Admiral Rogers and all the very brave people who I know have been attacked brutally. Please bless Stephanie Scott and Stephanie Lambert and Peter Tickton. And I'm going to pray for the judge too, that you would please bless that judge and the prosecutor. Give them a come to Jesus moment. We want to see them coming to you so that you change all those people who are breaking the law, who have been involved in the destruction of people's lives, that you would turn them around, turn them to you, that they would repent, be forgiven, and that they would truly turn around and have a relationship with you in eternal life. because of our Savior, Jesus Christ. Thank you so much for this day. Help us to stand no matter what happens. We love you. We know that you will do as we ask when it's according to your will. And we just love you. In the name of Jesus Christ, we pray. Amen. So there we go. So there we go, boys and girls. Go to brandenburgforgotten.com because I'm the best non-conceder who's ever not conceded in 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 Trump. Call my boots. Who wears them better? It's going to be me. I wear them every day. And then we go and we fix things. And We write this nation as a republic, not this fraudulent, de facto, unconstitutional democracy bull crap that's going on out there. We need to get away from that. We need to know that. We need to stand under all circumstances. Do you have any last words? And then I'm going to do the thing. Just get engaged, guys, because what happened to my associate can happen to you. And if you think otherwise... You know what? When that knock comes on the door and they're coming through that door to come and get you, then you're going to realize too late. Let us know if we can help him. It sounds absolutely horrible. I'm like totally and completely horrified by this right now. I mean, I'm literally horrified by this. So, yeah, it's just, you know, everybody's got to pay attention to their surroundings, pay attention to who you're engaging with, and do not. I mean, if the cop comes and knocks on your door, do not let them in your house under any circumstance. Matter of fact, don't even open the door. Talk to them through the door. Talk to them through a window. You don't have to answer questions. You have the right not to self-incriminate. And they will use anything that you say against you. They will twist it. They will lie about it. They will do whatever they can because they're manipulators. They're paid to lie. They are. And so do not talk to them. They cannot be trusted. They know how to get a forced confession out of people who weren't guilty just because they put people in a state of panic. to answer their questions, to catch them in things that they don't mean. It's coercion. It's threat. It's duress. And shame on anyone who participates in these practices. There's going to be a come to Jesus day when you have to face God Almighty, and it's not going to be fun. And I spoke about my challenge to any sheriff anywhere in the state to come on this show and show me where I'm wrong. Tell me where I'm wrong and what I'm projecting here. You tell me that this is not what's really happening. Come on, come on in the show. I encourage you, let's have a conversation on it. But you want to know something? They won't. None of them will. There's so many people drunk with power. It's just sickening. And I mean, that's everywhere you look. It's this ego drunk with power crap. I'm literally shocked every day. And I shouldn't be. I've been in this long enough. But it's still shocking. But anyhow, well, guys, we're going to keep stepping up to the plate here and doing the right thing. So God bless you all. God bless all those whom you love. And God bless America. Stay strong, even in the presence of things that are really bad. Stay strong. Push back against this. Don't be afraid because God's going to carry you through difficult times. He says he blesses us in all things and that all things work for good to those who love the Lord. Maybe it's just a growth time. And so trust him and move forward every single day. We'll see you tomorrow with Liberty Essentials. And I hope Greg's going to be on, Greg Martini. We had a great time visiting with him last week. Greg was here for a few days, and it was absolutely wonderful. Al, I'm going to reach out to you by text message because I'd like that link that I can put up on my Telegram and X pages. Have a great day, guys. Thanks, Mike. We'll see you.