Politically High-Tech
A podcast with facts and opinions on different topics like politics, policy, technology especially AI, spirituality and development! For this podcast, development simply means tip, product and/or etc. can benefit humanity. This show aims to show political viewpoints and sometimes praises/criticizes them. He is a wildcard sometimes. For Technology episodes, this show focuses on products (mostly AI) with pros, cons and sometimes give a hint of future update. For Development episodes, the podcast focuses on tips to improve as a human spiritually, socially, emotionally and more. All political, AI lovers and haters, and all religions are welcome! This is an adult show. Minors should not be listening to this podcast! This podcast proudly discriminates bad characters and nothing else.
Politically High-Tech
234- Combating Government Overreach with Tactical Civics
Is government overreach compromising your freedoms, and can you resist it peacefully? Join us in this eye-opening episode of Politically High Tech as we welcome Kirk Arnold Beck, an educator with four decades of teaching experience who transitioned into a passionate advocate for constitutional rights. Through compelling historical anecdotes and personal stories, Kirk explains how affidavits can serve as a peaceful yet powerful tool against unjust government actions. We explore the crucial role of public education in preserving our republic and underscore the importance of asserting your rights respectfully and nonviolently.
Curiosity and intuition are your allies when navigating the labyrinth of legal proceedings. In this episode, we tackle the subtle nuances of the law, including the unexpected recommendation for psychiatric evaluations by attorneys and the fairness of traffic court practices. Learn how understanding your First Amendment rights, particularly the right to petition, can empower you to contest legal authorities effectively. Our conversation features thought-provoking cases and personal experiences that illustrate the intersection of legal obligations and individual freedoms, urging you to stay vigilant and engaged.
Discover the practical application of common law principles and the underappreciated power of the right to petition for redress of grievances. We delve into the importance of pre-trial motions, proper legal procedures, and the role of tactical civics in combating governmental corruption. Kirk shares his journey of halting unconstitutional bills and challenging state mandates, showcasing the power of informed civic action. As we discuss modern political leadership and the importance of unity, stay tuned until the end for a special gift from Kirk designed to help you defend your liberties. This episode is a comprehensive guide to understanding and exercising your rights in the face of government and corporate overreach.
Follow Kirk Beck at ...
https://www.affidavitsecrets.com/politically
Join his class for Zoom Thursdays 9pm Pacific Time
ID 655 269 0083
Additional website reference by Guest. It's goal is to return Grand Jury's power back to the people. CHECK IT OUT!!!
https://tacticalcivics.com/
If you want to be a guest on my podcast, join PodMatch by clicking on the link provided.
https://www.joinpodmatch.com/politically-high-tech
Follow your host at
YouTube and Rumble for video content
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCUxk1oJBVw-IAZTqChH70ag
https://rumble.com/c/c-4236474
Facebook to receive updates
https://www.facebook.com/EliasEllusion/
Twitter (yes, I refuse to call it X)
https://x.com/politicallyht
Welcome everyone to Politically High Tech with your host, elias. I have a guest here who's just not going to try to put government back in its right place. Going to try to put government back in its right place and I know how some people say when they hear these words they're going to think about abolish or get rid of government. I don't hear that, I just hear just put it at the right box instead of just trying to overexpand. You know that political cartoon with the octopus having its tentacles everywhere in so many parts of our lives or different regions of the country. I mean graphically speaking. The octopus, if it's smart, should fold those tentacles or it might have to be severed off. Figuratively speaking, not literally, okay, just figuratively speaking. So I have a guest here who's gonna share us some.
Speaker 1:Now it's not just for governments, also for corporations, because corporations have a lot of influence. I mean so much influence and politics policy. You know some of the laws tend to favor big businesses. That really screws the little guy over. Okay, and it's going to be called the power of paper and I am very curious about that. It sounds peaceful and it sounds nice, but before we get into that, I want Mr Kirk Arnold back, if I get the whole name right, to introduce himself, and what do you want the audience to know about you? Thank you.
Speaker 2:Thank you very much, elias, for having me on the program. I'm an educator of 40 years, mostly in mathematics, both in private and public schools, but near the end of my in-class experience I began to say something that now is coming true. I said I really wanted to teach something that really matters. Mathematics is very important, but it's not as important as liberty and freedom. Living in what as many consider the greatest country in the world Think of all the problems we've got here and yet we have tens of thousands of people trying to get into this country illegally. It's obviously worse over there than it is here, and what I'm trying to educate Americans to is the fact that we can lose it if we don't defend it.
Speaker 2:Franklin was asked by a woman I forgot her name, powell, this is Powell and she asked what kind of government did you give us? And he said a republic, if you can keep it. He never intended it to be elected officials. He never intended it to be elected officials keeping it. It's always got to be we, the people who understand how the mechanism is working. It's a republic, it's not a democracy. A republic is much, much different and much, much better than any democracy that's ever existed.
Speaker 2:Madison said that democracy is nothing more than a mob. He called it a mobocracy. And Madison also said that education of the people is the key to people being free. Unfortunately, I think there's a lot of people who don't want to be educated. They like living in, they've got, they're all their little goodies, they're happy with life as it is and unless government starts encroaching upon them, they don't have much time for what I'm talking about. I do want to mention right now that those who stick on to the end of this presentation, I do have a free gift for them, something that could be very helpful to them if they decide to defend liberty and push back appropriately, nonviolently, respectfully against government agents who are stepping outside the box because they're not used to having somebody saying no. And that's what I'm trying to teach Americans to do how to say no. So for the last, I'd say seven or eight years.
Speaker 2:Well, let's go back More than 40 years ago. I got my first traffic ticket at 2 o'clock in the morning for a rolling stop, and that started the process of curiosity why am I getting stopped? I'm not hurting anybody and where's the money going? It just didn't seem right to me, but, like most Americans, I didn't really think too much about it. But as time went on, I had many other encounters, usually along the lines of traffic, and every time I always tried to defend myself using what I thought was good law.
Speaker 2:I found out well, there's something called jurisdiction, and you need to know jurisdiction when you go into court. So it begins, elias, with what is an affidavit? It's simply a statement of facts that's notarized by a government official. A person could be at the bank, could be at AAA, but somebody who's taken a test and knows how to notarize an affidavit so that it is a legal document that must be rebutted. Otherwise, its contents if indeed crafted according to constitutional law proper evidence, facts and truth it can't be rebutted. So that should be the end of the game, and in many cases it is.
Speaker 2:And I personally have five victories of varying degrees, two of them in a courtroom, three of them outside the courtroom. Two of them in a courtroom, three of them outside the courtroom. And I learned this about eight years ago, when I was on a jury pool and I was sitting right behind the defendant who was defending himself against 17 felony accounts 17, all having to do with a real estate scam and the judge was admonishing the defendant by saying sir, you had an opportunity to have an attorney, you've chosen not to have an attorney. Blah, blah, blah, blah blah. He's scolding him in front of everybody. And then, but I'm sitting right behind him and he's going like this he's shaking his head, he does not agree, he's not verbalizing, but his body language is telling everybody who's noticing he does not agree with what the judge is saying. By then I had enough experience that I kind of had an idea of what was going on.
Speaker 2:Two days later I was part of the pool being selected and the judge went through his caveats to the jury. I've heard them now a fourth time and the one that caused me the biggest problem was the fact that he's defending himself against 17 felony accounts. Is that going to change your ability to render a proper verdict? I didn't say anything, but my body language gave it away and as soon as he got done he asked me a question or two and for five minutes he let me take over his courtroom and I just made some points. There were two things. I'm only going to mention one of them. It was that question of shaking his head. I had problems with that and I think I know what's going on, and I specified I think he wants to have an attorney as an assistant. He doesn't want to give up his right to defend himself. Well, probably nobody else in the courtroom certainly on the jury pool was thinking along those lines.
Speaker 2:As soon as I got done, he said let's take a 15-minute break. As soon as we got back, the judge said Mr Beck, you've been selected, you can leave and go home. So I did, but being a curious guy that I am, I decided to come back the next day, and now I'm sitting right behind the defendant. So far I don't like what's going on in this courtroom and I wanted to show some support for him. But I also wanted to talk to him and find out his position.
Speaker 2:So at break we went out for lunch together and that's when he told me two things. One I was absolutely right he wanted to have an attorney. He went out for lunch with an attorney. He came back into the courtroom. The judge said well, are you able to work together? The attorney stood up and said something that totally shocked the defendant. The attorney said your Honor, based on my time with the defendant, I would suggest a complete total psychiatric evaluation of the defendant. Wow, the defendant was not aware of that, was not expecting anything like that.
Speaker 2:The second thing he told me is he's getting help in his case from constitutionalists named Jack and Margie Flynn. Whenever I do a podcast, I always mention Jack and Margie Flynn, because I would not be here, I would not have any victories and, under the present turmoil going on in our country, I would be very pessimistic about the outcome. But thanks to truths that they shared with me, I now have a great deal of optimism as I do these podcasts and the number of people who gain an interest and want to study it more begins to grow and hopefully explode. Across the country, we can see a renaissance of freedom that we haven't perhaps seen in a very, very long time. I'm taking your breath. I'm taking your breath.
Speaker 1:Yeah, no that's. I normally have like two, either a comment and a thought, or just. I think that would inspire someone. I mean, let's just use a normal person. They want to think of it when it went home, went back to their normal lives, right. But you had such a curiosity, and curiosity probably stronger than a child, to see what's going on. Yes, yes, and the reason why I say that? Because even children's curiosity can be temporary thwarted by parents' restrictions and contraptions, what have you? But you had an intuition. Okay, I'm so curious about what's going on. It doesn't seem right. You spoke with a, you know.
Speaker 1:You said okay, a person, the defendant was an attorney, but not the right to lose the ability to defend himself, right, most people just either or or it was just like that third option, that almost, I would say, vast majority, the supreme vast majority of people and I'm going to give the mathematic number here, 99.99% would not think what you're thinking. Okay, it's a very rare anomaly, but that's why people think different. Those are the ones I learned from, not the ones that go with a yes or no. So that's predictable. But you caught that nuance, that third, I could call it the third option. So, yeah, you want an attorney, but you also want to have the ability to defend yourself, because it's either yes or no, it's black and white, it's either or um. So I I think that's very, very, very interesting.
Speaker 1:And the fact that attorney recommended the defense, recommended a psychiatric evaluation, was like what? So that would come in? I certainly would not, and I'm pretty good at predicting things. I wouldn't see that one coming. I certainly would not, and I'm pretty good at predicting things. I wouldn't see that one coming and I wouldn't even bet money because of what the heck? Wow.
Speaker 2:Yeah, that's just taking it back.
Speaker 1:I mean you cannot make this stuff up. You cannot really make this stuff up. You could try, but I doubt it's going to be as interesting as that. Yeah, so the affidavit secrets. It touches on how to deal with court proceedings, especially the government, and corporations seem to overstep their legal boundaries or try to overpower.
Speaker 2:I started what I call law school kindergarten. It's called traffic court. That's where I spend most of my time. I get it, elias. I've only had one speeding ticket in all the years I've been traveling, but I'm a recidivist when it comes to rolling stops. I just can't seem to stop. So I've gotten about five of those out here and every time I go to court I argue my right, I'm not hurting anybody. That's what always bothered me. Why am I in court? If I'm not hurting anybody, then the money is going to go where the guy who wrote the ticket. He's going to get some hurting anybody. Then the money's going to go where the guy who wrote the ticket. He's going to get some of the money and the government's going to get some of the money and the people are not going to.
Speaker 2:I thought, hey, if they give me a traffic ticket for $250 and say $200 of it goes to a fund for victims of reckless driving, like my good friend. Shelly lost her husband who was hit by a reckless driver and he died. She went to court. The court found the woman negligent and awarded a $2 per month $2 per month payment to Shelly by the negligent driver for the rest of her life. That lasted about six months, and then she Shelley has never gotten even the $2. It seemed to me like if the system is equitable, if my money that I'm getting from a driver's ticket goes to help Shelley, it makes more sense. But now we've got a real conflict of interest the people writing the tickets getting the money. It can't be right. It just can't be right. So I'm thinking what's going on here? Okay, so I've done a lot of study on traffic, so my first encounter was another rolling stop. Only this time I decided to follow my teacher's lesson plan. I wrote the attorney a nice letter, not an affidavit, and I explained to him the points of law that he violates every time he stops somebody. Every time the two points of law, but the first paragraph and, by the way, this is what the free gift is You're going to get to see that first paragraph. It outlines to the recipient their lawful responsibility to answer what's in my affidavit.
Speaker 2:In the First Amendment we have five rights. I once went to a political well, it was actually a Fourth of July parade I was way at the back, so I was going around talking to all the different people and I was asking them one question because my billboard said can you name the five rights embedded in the First Amendment? Nobody could name all five. I wasn't going to some back alley barbecue, I was going to a political rally. It was a 4th of July parade. Nobody could give me all five.
Speaker 2:And some were telling me well, it's the Second Amendment, the right to bear arms? No, that's the Second Amendment, but you have the right for assembly. You have the right to bear arms. No, that's the Second Amendment, but you have the right for assembly. You have the right for press, you have the right of petition, which is the one I'm going to be talking about. You also have religion, you have speech. Those are the five, but the one that I never really understood was petition.
Speaker 2:I just thought it was a letter. Well, I sent my letter to the deputy and I pointed out what he did wrong. But then my mentor said okay, he's had a chance to get out of this. So here we go, put it as an affidavit. Now, mind you, my letter. He got something that he's not used to getting. First of all, he doesn't get a letter from people. Second of all, he doesn't get a letter that he has to sign for. Now he's getting an affidavit, he's got to sign for it again.
Speaker 2:Now I don't know for sure why I win. I don't know exactly what's going through their head and they're not going to tell me, but I'm suspecting that he ran an affidavit upstairs to somebody in legal and they came down and basically said just let him go. We got too many fish out there, don't worry about it, just let him go. Nevertheless, the deputy who got the affidavit I told him what he did wrong. I just didn't say I didn't like what you did. I told him the two points and there's two or four more points I could have added out, but that's what was in the middle. And then the final paragraph simply says you have 30 days to rebut. And here comes the hard words you have 30 days to rebut that which is in this affidavit, otherwise everything in it can be used against you in any court in America. Wow, now that's not a threat, but it's definitely a warning. You need to deal with it.
Speaker 2:So three months later, I walked into the traffic court and I took a witness with me, because I've been to court before and I know what can happen in there. I always have to have a witness with me. I expected I was going to have to stand up and say something, but the deputy came in, gave the judge a piece of paper and two minutes later the judge said Mr Beck, are you here? Yeah, mr Beck, your case has been dropped, you may leave. It's a $240 ticket Gone. What did it cost me? Well, it cost me about $9 for the proof of service, the green card Actually, nine times two, because I did it for the letter as well. Plus, I had to go to court.
Speaker 2:Now, for most people that's a big problem. I'm retired so I can go to court every other day, but that's a problem for people. I don't want to go to court. How much is the ticket? I'll just pay it. They don't understand what. I know that I have a right to travel. Elias, listen carefully. You have a right to travel. You do not have a right to drive. Driving is commerce. Traveling is a protected right, critically important, because that's part of my affidavit.
Speaker 2:You are arresting me for utilizing my right to travel. That's wrong and technically you're making a false arrest. See, you could go to most people and say a large group of people, and you say how many of you have ever been arrested, and almost everyone would say I've never been arrested, I've never been arrested, I've never been arrested. How many of you have had a traffic stop? Oh yeah, oh yeah, say I've never been arrested, I've never been arrested, I've never been arrested. How many of you have had a traffic stop? Oh yeah, oh yeah, oh yeah, everybody's had that. Well, again, you need to know what the vocabulary is you have been arrested, you just weren't taken into custody, but you were arrested. You were the arrestee and that officer was the arrestor, and that's just the law.
Speaker 2:Now I know that, since I'm not in commerce, that big DMV book doesn't apply to me. However, I don't like it when people say, well, you just think you're above the law. I am not like it when people say, well, you just think you're above the law, I am not. If I cause harm to another person by my negligence, by driving too fast, by doing things too quickly God forbid being too drunk I've never been drunk in my life, so I don't have to worry about that one or I'm tailgating somebody too closely, if I cause the accident, then according to the common law, I'm responsible. But if I'm not hurting anybody, I haven't violated the common law and I'm under something called statutory law, or I should say statutory jurisdiction, and that's where our courts are today.
Speaker 2:Here is a quote from the Declaration of Independence. Thomas Jefferson wrote this he, speaking of the king, has combined with others, speaking of Parliament and the, to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our Constitution and unacknowledged by our laws, giving his assent to pretended legislation. Colon Jefferson starts to list the things that the king and parliament have done. In the top one quartering soldiers in private homes. You couldn't do that in England, because under common law you could not do it, but under this new colonial jurisdiction, where we're going to treat the people as second class citizens, yeah, under statutory jurisdiction you're stuck.
Speaker 2:Now, the Americans, jefferson, adams, franklin, the rest of them they understood this very well. They knew what was going on, understood this very well. They knew what was going on, and that's why they came together, first of all to petition hey, knock it off. Knock it off or else. And then the or else came to using guns. Our founders gave us, though, was a system of government. We don't need to use guns, we can use the power of paper. We call them accountable to the law. We remind them of their oath of office. Their oath is to the Constitution of the United States, as well as the Constitution of Florida or New York or, in my case, california. You have taken an oath. You wanted the job as a legislator, or you wanted the job as a police chief or deputy sheriff, or you wanted the job as a judge. All of you are accountable to the law. The oath of office to the Constitution that's your responsibility. Constitution that's your responsibility. And here's the paper that says you're outside the box. You need to get back in.
Speaker 2:I said earlier that I have five victories. The first one was in traffic. That was the first time and I was a defendant in that action. Since then, all of my actions have been more on the plaintiff's side, but I do take some precautions. I advise people if you think you're going to have a problem with government, I wouldn't wait until you have the problem.
Speaker 2:No-transcript Now. The police chief in my city, the sheriff in my county and the highway patrol in my region the directors of all three have received an affidavit from me. I gave them 30 days to rebut it and all of them have decided not to rebut and all of them have decided not to rebut. So I just simply point out basically, I'm not in commerce. I'm not above the law, but I'm not in commerce. I haven't contracted according to this DMV code. So I'm just going to travel in my automobile, not my motor vehicle, because that's a very specific term.
Speaker 2:Vehicle is an apparatus that you use in commerce. I'm not in commerce. I'm not moving cargo. I'm not a Uber driver. I just move around. I go to the store, I go to the church. I don't use it in common and if I did because I did about three years ago I went over to the rental car agency. I got one of their motor vehicles and I drove to Mexico because I had some business. I had to take somebody down to Mexico. So when I'm driving, I'm not going to use my automobile, I'm going to use a motor vehicle. I hope this isn't confusing to people, but the bottom line is words have meaning. In America we have something called legal fiction. If the law basically says 2 plus 2 equals 5, then that's what it is, unless you rebut it. Whatever they say is the truth, unless you're going to fight it. The Supreme Court of the United States has said more than once that the American people have zero rights except those that they're willing to defend, and I do. I learned law alliance by doing law.
Speaker 1:I mean that's the best way, right, Just by doing it, instead of just reading the book all day being locked up in the home. That's one way of studying it, but applying the law is the best way to learn one way of studying it, but applying the law, that's the best way to learn. So my argument here. There's a couple of points. I was writing down some things and I'm going to change the line of question because now I got something even more interesting. You point out something that's very interesting and if you would have quizzed me, I would have got four out of five. Guess which one I would have not get petitioned. Yeah, the rest I would have got easy. I would have got press congregation. You know special religion. Yeah, I would have got those, no problem. But yeah, partition is the one I never really pay attention to. Yeah, I heard it a few times, but it never stuck.
Speaker 1:It's like a cheap post-it you put it in your head, it goes away. The rest kind of permeates in the brain for some reason. But I think we need to emphasize that, and this is not about being left or right. This is about knowing your constitution. Don't even pay attention to the right to Petition as well, and it's a very, very important, important thing. I'm certainly learning something here. I'm going to start petitioning when I think I'll be Unjustly stopped or whatever. I just want to be a.
Speaker 1:And you're not above the law. You just happen to know and apply the law. If you was above the law, you would have drove carelessly, hurting people and driving off the crime scene. That's really acting like you're above the law. It's all, forget the cops, I do whatever I want. That's being above the law. And you knowingly hurt someone, by the way, but you just drove over like, ah, I gotta go catch my plane, I gotta go travel to an uncharted country, bye. That's like above the law. And you know. It's just. You know the law, so you're gonna create the petition and carry things. So if people are saying that, it's because they're not used to dealing with someone who's willing to challenge them, right, just like you said, a lot of politicians long-term. They're not used to being challenged. That's why I throw comments like that. I bet it's okay. I just paid the ticket because I got things to do. I don't know what to do. I can't fight. They just pay it out of desperation.
Speaker 1:They just want to get it off their back.
Speaker 2:Petition for redress of grievances better word, petition for remedy of grievances is the only enforcement mechanism in the Bill of Rights. Everything else is defensive. Carry a gun, I mean the right to bear arms, that's a defensive thing. But petition for redress of grievances is something you're putting on them and, by the way, I want to emphasize this. Is something you're putting on them and, by the way, I want to emphasize this Every one of my petitions, my notarized affidavits, goes to a specific human being.
Speaker 2:It is not to an agency. Most people write if you have a problem with the electrical company, you think they're doing something fraudulent. Most people will just write the letter to the electrical company. You think they're doing something fraudulent. Most people will just write the letter to the electrical company. I would never send a letter to the electrical company. I want to know who's at the top of the electrical company. He's going to get my affidavit. Now if I get stopped by any police officer, I might not even get stopped because I'm pretty sure my notarized affidavits have kind of gone into their computer system because I had a deputy sheriff tail me for a while and all of a sudden he just decided to leave. But when we do our job, properly and effectively notify them, we can alleviate a lot of these problems and, I might add, it's the responsible thing to do. Do unto others as you'd have them do unto you. Wouldn't you want to know if you might be hurting somebody? I would. So, as I said, it's the only enforcement agent that we have in the Bill of Rights that I know of. I can't think of the other ones that would be.
Speaker 2:I've gone to court. I want to say this I went to court one time and I was defending myself. It was a misdemeanor. Now, that's not an infraction, Infraction. There's no jury trial, it's not even a crime. That's one of the reasons why traffic tickets don't stick, because they're really not crimes, they're just infraction. Tickets don't stick because they're really not crimes, they're just infraction. But if you don't pay your fine, you become a suspended driver, suspended license guy. That was me. I was so upset that I'm not going to pay the fine. Well, okay.
Speaker 2:So a couple of years later I get another rolling stop, but now, hmm, now this is before I knew the law. So they ticketed me. They actually impounded my automobile and I went to court and I'm defending myself and the DA said something that I knew wasn't right and I objected. The judge said well, mr Beck, you're going to have to explain that to me. So I did, and about two minutes later he said stop. Okay, now listen to what he said.
Speaker 2:Mr Beck, you bring up some very good points. However, that's not why we're here today. You should have brought all that up in a pre-trial motion. That's it. I'm not going to go into the courtroom and start arguing the Constitution. I'm going to bring the Constitution in by way of pretrial motion. We're going to deal with the jurisdiction question at the very beginning, because when I walk into the courtroom on their dime, when they're telling me to be there as soon as I cross in there, I've already tacitly or, I'm not sure, indirectly given them jurisdiction. No, no, no. I go in pretrial and I argue the validity of the higher law, the Constitution.
Speaker 2:That's when I hear people saying the courts are all corrupt and the judges are all frauds. No, they're not. Hey, they've been doing law under statutory jurisdiction for maybe 20 years, 30 years. Nobody's ever come in there and made a big deal about it. So you come in there and start waving your arms and getting upset and he tells you I'll have no more of that. If you continue to talk like that, I'll cite you for contempt. You think he's corrupt? That I'll cite you for contempt. You think he's corrupt? I'm giving the benefit of the doubt. I think he's uneducated. You think judges should know the law? No, the judges are made up of people just like us. If they went to the same public school that you and I went to, we never learned about the petition of redress of grievances. He didn't either, and he went to law school. They didn't teach him the Constitution at all. He just taught him enough so he could go out there and make a good living, and they don't care about the higher law.
Speaker 2:I have a course that I make available to people, and one of the modules is entitled why Lawyers Are Very Seldom Helpful. Now, my lawyers are very seldom helpful. Now, if you're really hurting somebody, you really did cause harm to somebody else. Good idea to have a lawyer. However, if you did not hurt anybody and you take a lawyer with you, you're going to lose because he'll never argue the right way. He can't afford to argue the right way. He's playing outside. Well, he's playing actually outside the box that they're supposed to play in, and only American citizens can do that. Only American citizens can do that. I could go into my four other victories. You might be interested in those.
Speaker 1:I'll be out there, put it in the back burner because for the most part, at least, what we perceive it doesn't matter. Well, unless an incident happens that it is going to matter. And since most of us are clueless, just like you said, we just think the court is corrupt. I rarely say that. I just say I don't think it's the right ruling in my opinion because of ABC and deeper. So they can just brush me off. But you know there are people. You know there are people that do act inappropriate in court, raising your hands up, shouting like a mad person yeah, you got to keep a certain level of decorum. So that part again, I would never call the courts corrupt for that. You got to enforce some kind of level of decorum in there. Right, right, absolutely. So I would never call. Just based on that.
Speaker 1:Maybe some of the rulings I would disagree with, but the one I like, the one personal I like, is that they say that the Google monopoly is illegal. I said, finally, the courts is tackling the big corporate issue. Finally, that's one of my bigger criticisms of the court they're a little too pro-corporate, but that's just more of an opinion. I really say rarely are judges corrupt, but that's just more of an opinion. I rarely say rarely a judge is corrupt, but I have to be really convinced that they're corrupt. They have to be convicted of a crime and even be caught and that's to be almost without a reasonable doubt I'm sure you heard that term before that that person is that that judge is corrupt. I would rarely say that. I just you know I've criticized courts for different reasons, but not in a certain way like that.
Speaker 2:But they need to put like the court.
Speaker 1:That's all I'm going to say. I'm going to let you go through your four victories and if you need extra time, go right ahead and take them, because I'm interested. I'm sure the listeners too.
Speaker 2:Okay, I went to my state senator and I went to my state assemblywoman and I took Shelly with me because I was talking about traffic and how it would be nice if you would pass a law to help victims of traffic accidents. But I always began by asking them this very pointed question. But I always began by asking them this very pointed question According to the Declaration of Independence, what is the very purpose of government? Both of these elected officials or someone running to be an elected official ever give me the correct answer. They all know these words life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. They don't know what comes next. Because that's what I ask them. No, you're not correct. The answer comes right after those special words that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men. Stop, when you go to Sacramento or you go to Albany. Your job is to secure the rights of the people.
Speaker 2:Now, california and New York are way out of line. They don't understand this at all. I think New Hampshire has it better, because those people they only get paid 50 bucks a year to go to their capital and they don't want to stay there very long, they just want to get done and go home In California. They're there all year long, except for August, maybe September, and then they go right back to passing more laws 1,200, sometime New laws. 99% of those don't affect me at all, but they affect somebody.
Speaker 2:So I went to my assemblywoman, I told her what her responsibility was and six months later she's sponsoring a bill that's totally unconstitutional. So I put an affidavit together, tried to get a few of my other friends to send basically the same affidavit and we sent it to her. And again we don't know why things happened. And again we don't know why things happen. All we do know is that the bill, although it was passed by the Assembly and passed by the Senate and Jerry Brown was ready to sign it, for some reason they came together and decided well, just drop it, just dropped it. What I do know is that six months later, similar, not a statute, just a resolution where the legislature is saying hey, everybody out there, you should know that this is what you should be doing. She didn't even sponsor the resolution because I think she knows we're watching her and we know about the power of paper. She backed off. And, by the way, that's all we're looking for. We just want elected officials to repent. Just stop doing what you're doing. We don't want to take you to court, we don't want to embarrass you, we just want you to stop what you're doing. So we considered that I considered that a win. Want you to stop what you're doing? So we considered that I considered that a win. So I got number one in traffic. I got number two with my assemblywoman, number three bigger, my county and a lot of people.
Speaker 2:I want to say this a lot of people think California is really wacko. Well, we are, but we have 50, some counties, and over 40 of those counties have sheriffs like mine who basically said I'm not going to do what the governor tells me to do. I don't agree with the governor 90% of the time. A law saying people have to wear masks, that people have to close down their businesses, that people have to social distance. You want me to go into churches and count heads and make sure everybody's standing this far away. Can you imagine our governor? He doesn't want us singing, singing in church.
Speaker 2:Okay, so we've got a medical officer who has control of a code enforcement and he's sending these people out, going to different stores, going to different restaurants and basically telling them hey, we got a mandate from the government. Now they'll use the wrong word. They'll say we got a law. It's not a law, it's just a governor exceeding his authority. So we noted this and we sent an affidavit to the chief medical officer. His name was Kaiser and we told him and this is what's really good we actually found federal code of regulations that he was violating. That in order to do even lawfully, according to setting a law in place, you have to do a certain amount of study. You have to actually create an independent medical review board made up of people who have no monetary interest in the outcome. Only after they go through a process could you then perhaps pass a law. They didn't do that. So we pointed that out to the chief medical officer. He did absolutely nothing. Hey, we're kind of used to that. My coaches said now take the affidavit to Kaiser, put it in another envelope, make this one out to supervisors who pay his salary and then put an affidavit in there, also directly to the supervisor, saying hey, wait a minute, you've got this hireling down here. Who's violating federal law. You've got a responsibility to do something about him. A lot of details. The chief medical officer resigned and now lives in Australia. When I talked to the sheriff about it. He said it didn't make any sense why he resigned from such a high paying job to go live in Australia where he doesn't have a job at all. But that's what happened. So the chief medical officer is gone.
Speaker 2:Now, along the lines of the pandemic, I would go into Best Buy and Best Buy would say I have to wear a mask, I don't have to wear a mask. Yeah, you have to wear a mask. Why? Because it's a law. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. It's not a law, it's a mandate. I have a right to come into your store. Nothing has been followed according to the law, and you're cutting into my rights to come into your store. I don't want to wear a mask. I know enough about masks that it's not going to protect you and it might do harm to me because I don't have COVID.
Speaker 2:Anyway, I was denied, so I filled out an affidavit. I sent it. Well, this is more difficult. This is a corporation now, so I had to find the corporation's entity that receives legal documents. So I had to drive to Glendale, about 40 miles away, and I served them there. And then that affidavit went to Minneapolis and they dealt with it. And on the day of the court hearing they had to show up. A major corporation had to send somebody to court. So people say to me well, did you win? A major corporation had to show up. Now, if you did the same affidavit, I did, and she did one, and they did one. Hey, wait a minute, they're going to have to keep sending somebody over here, or they're going to have to come up with some kind of overall judgment and then, of course, we'll deal with that. It's all about a chess game what they do, we have to counter. They do something we have to counter. We go to court and we learn.
Speaker 2:So the judge, the commissioner actually in this case she hadn't seen anything like what I was bringing to her, even though I filed for pretrial motion. They didn't tell me that my pretrial motion was denied until the day of my trial. So I had to go in there and just kind of present it to a judge who didn't know what was going on. So what did I learn here? Hmm, I put my pretrial motion in two, three weeks in advance. I'll put my pre-trial motion in two, three weeks in advance. If I haven't heard within five, ten days of the hearing, then I'm going to go into court and I'm going to talk about hey, where's my affidavit? I don't know why nobody's responded to me, but I intend to have a hearing on this before I come into your court in seven days. Now, you might not be ready to handle it now, but I'll be back tomorrow and we're going to talk about this. This is my motion in your court.
Speaker 2:Well, she's a commissioner in small claims court and I sue people in small claims court. It only cost me $50 to sue Best Buy $50? They had to send somebody down here. So that's the nice thing about California is you can sue people in small claims court for discrimination. I don't know if you can do that in South Dakota, but I know you can do it in California. And that's what I was doing when the commissioner ruled against me. I just okay, I'm learning law, so I'm going to put an affidavit and I'm going to send it to her. I found her actual city address and I sent an affidavit to her house and somebody in the house had to sign for it. And my affidavit is basically saying if you don't follow the law, then you're unfit to be a judge. Basically, if I come back into your court again. You will be recused immediately. I will not have a case heard by somebody who publicly admits that they violate their oath of office. So that one we have. Best Buy, we have the chief medical officer, the best one of all. Elias.
Speaker 2:In 2003, I was in South Dakota my home state visiting my mother and I got into trouble Again. Hear this well, nobody got hurt by what I did Nobody. But what I did qualified as a misdemeanor. It had to do with traffic, but it qualified as a misdemeanor. Well, I'm paid the $100 bail and then I oh my gosh, they want me back on tuesday. My flight's on sunday. I've already paid him a hundred dollars. I didn't hurt anybody. I'm going home. Uh, I don't know.
Speaker 2:About 10 years later, I went to get a gun and, uh gosh, you got a bench warrant from south dakota. You, we can't give you a gun, you can't buy one. I don't want to go all the way back to South Dakota and deal with this. There's got to be a better way. I didn't know what to do. Years went by and then I learned about Jack and Margie Flynn, so I recognized wait a minute. I didn't hurt anybody. That's the big T. If you don't hurt somebody. Why are you in court? So I put my paper together as best I could, understanding common law, and I sent an affidavit to the presiding judge of the county in which I was arrested. No response. I put the affidavit in a new envelope with an affidavit made out to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of South Dakota, put it in there. One month later the bench warrant was gone, gone. After 20 years it's gone. So I'm in the process now of honing my skills and building a coalition in my county.
Speaker 2:This podcast is going to be seen by people in all different parts of the country and they need to know how they can learn more. The free gift will help them. The opportunity to take the course is there and if they keep in contact with me right now, I do a class every Thursday night at 9 o'clock Pacific and people just call in and we go over an affidavit. As this thing grows and I start getting more phone calls, I'll probably have one an earlier time of day. It was 9 o'clock in Los Angeles, I mean in New York it's only 6 here, but I know a lot of people. They get more free as maybe the night gets darker and they put their kids to bed. I want to be available to help people because the bottom line is it's we, the people, it's we the people, and if we, the people, are uneducated, we're going to be dealing with uneducated lawyers, sheriffs, police chiefs and judges.
Speaker 2:I asked a judge once she wanted to be a judge. She was a district attorney and I said, amy, what's the Seventh Amendment? I said I don't know. I feel embarrassed. I said, amy, it's the amendment that gives me a right to have a jury trial in your court. What she didn't even know. The Seventh Amendment gives me a right to have a jury trial in her court.
Speaker 2:And then it goes on even better. The Seventh Amendment says and no fact shall be adjudicated but by the rules of common law. The American people need to know what the rules of common law are. Number one notify your adversary. You have a responsibility to notify. Number two affidavits on rebutted stand as truth in the courtroom. There are many more. Number three I don't want to leave without this one. Number three juries have a right not only to judge the facts of the case but whether the law itself is just.
Speaker 2:In 1855, 54, 56, the we, the People of Pennsylvania, said Well, yeah, mr Carter was trying to help the black slave Johnson get to Canada. The facts say truly he's guilty, but the law itself is immoral, not guilty. The final adjudicator of the law is we, the people. We, the people, have this first amendment, this rule, this rule of common law, in our arsenal to deal with government and they might fuss, they might moan and complain, but put it on paper and tell them to rebut it and the lawyers will shut up. They've told me I'm stupid about traffic issues. Okay, there's the affidavit, rebut it. That higher up in the sheriff's department took a look at it and I'm sure he's a lawyer and he said just let him go because he can't rebut it. It's traffic, it's commerce. He's got a right to travel. The affidavit that I put in has four Supreme Court decisions saying that traveling is a constitutional right. You can't tax a constitutional right. That's what a fine is. It's a tax, okay.
Speaker 1:Listeners, I really hope you've been paying attention to this. This is valuable stuff. We've been paying attention to this. This is valuable stuff. This is I'm going to call this a legal type of episode. This is just very, very important. This is current, just that the news, media and even a lot of colleges don't teach you that. I think there's one that's trying to scratch the surface with that. It's Hillside University somewhere in michigan, especially with the constitution.
Speaker 1:Because the scary part, I realize, is to your point. You know I'm going to make a slightly different turn. A lot of people don't understand politics and procedures and processes and that's why they react just like you said with corruption. But I'm going to change the court to um, if the even the judge, I mean, sometimes they can be right, but sometimes they're wrong. And once a person goes to trial, a lot of people don't know the difference between the grand jury and the jury. So no, grand jury is one that's making a determination whether they should go to court or not. This is just the beginning, this is. You know, this person could be still be left off the hook. That's one example of massive ignorance. Oh, he's going to trial, so he's going to make it. So there you go, that book right there, and I'm going to be quiet because I want you to see that I'll show the book a little more.
Speaker 2:Talk about it just a little bit so that listeners can see it. Okay, hey, the affidavit process is very effective, especially in defense of your common rights, your common law rights. We're trying to use it effectively in some manner of holding a specific person accountable for what he's doing. It's's effective. But we've got a much bigger problem than that, and the affidavit process is part of the solution. But the real solution is tacticalcivicscom, and we got to get that up because people need to go to where the real final solution is TacticalCivicscom.
Speaker 2:They go into great detail about what's happened to our grand jury process is now controlled by the government. Grand juries are supposed to be controlled by the people's grand jury, with the right to subpoena the superintendent of schools, the fire chief, the police chief, deputy Johnson, the guy down there at the sewage department, wherever there might be corruption. We can call them in to Grand Junction and they're under oath. And it's amazing what this book chronicles as to all the victories the grand juries had against corruption up until like the 1930s. And then, of course, whenever you have a war, things aren't the same after the war as they were before the war. Wars are a great opportunity for government to grow in power and tyranny.
Speaker 2:So I mentioned earlier that I have a free gift. Free gift if you want to go to affidavitsetretscom, forward, slash politically, politically, then we'll know it comes from Elias's audience and we'll send you the template. And doesn't tell you how to deal with your parking ticket, but it tells you how to format your first paragraph and your last paragraph and then you have to do your own homework. But it's not that difficult. If you get on the program sometime we'll go over one or two of these and you'll see any of you. Have questions you can ask.
Speaker 1:I command you? No, I can't see Any of you. Have questions you can ask? I command you? No, I can't command, I can't really do it, but I strongly urge you to go. We need to combat our political ignorance, even legal ignorance, which is even more dire in my opinion, because just listen to his victories. I mean I openly admit it the part of the First Amendment that I forget was the right to petition. The other four would have came just right out A, B, C, D, Fast fire. The fifth was oh, what's that one? I think it starts with a P. I don't know what that is Right to party, I don't know. I would have said something like that, but write a petition.
Speaker 1:So this is the emphasis on write a petition, and it's going to be annoying, you're going to have to do your own homework. But he has a program, so go to it. You will learn how to pretend to beat a lot of your politics.
Speaker 2:I don't want to forget this. Frederick Basia wrote the book the Law and in the book he makes this point If the law can be kept to its proper boundaries, it makes no difference who's elected. And the beautiful thing about what I'm talking about is that I can appeal to people on the left, people on the right Right now. For the first time in my life, I can actually say I'm not that concerned about who's in the White House.
Speaker 2:I don't want to be involved in partisan politics, because George Washington, in his final word to the American people is watch out for political parties. They'll divide and destroy the country, and you can look at the political parties right now. They're not interested in unity, they're interested in power. They just want power and they will destroy the other side. I get tired of both sides attacking the person. I want to know the party's policies. Let's talk only policy, not personalities. The bottom line is I will vote. I believe I have a responsibility to vote, but I think it's a very small portion of what Americans are supposed to be doing in their localities keeping their cities and their counties clean of corruption.
Speaker 1:To be honest, if I want to preach that again, that needs to be preached more often Because, just like this podcast, this has no partisan loyalty. I don't give a rat's behind. Just to keep the language very clean. I don't want to say the A word. You know what it is. I'm not going to say it, especially my old episodes. I was definitely more edgier and definitely more foul-mouthed, but the point stays the same no partisan loyalty. It's about saving America. So it's not favoring the right or favoring the left. This is favoring America as a whole, to cleanse the nation from corruption. Because, just like he said again and he quoted George Washington, so I was nodding my head real hard I was like, yes, he did say that Beware of political partisan. They will destroy this nation. That's such great visionary.
Speaker 1:Look where we're at today. Hey, antetokounmpo's at today, both left and right, attacking each other crazily. You know saying, oh, he's weird, she's weird, she laughs like a demon. That's not important, that's childish nonsense. It's like you said, let's focus on the positive. What are you going to do to help the American people? That's what's important. I cannot emphasize this enough. I just cannot. It's about America At the end of the day. Crazy Trump or crazy Kahneman. I'm calling them both crazy, but those are those de facto party leaders as of now. That's the way I know you could say. Oh. Oh, he's actually Biden Democrat. Yeah, technically, because he's still president, but his term is going to end because he signed out to rerun. Yeah, I get that, but that's not important. You know, joining this tribal war, you're part of the problem.
Speaker 2:You got to be above it.
Speaker 1:Amen. I love that. Put laws at the proper place. It doesn't matter who's elected. That's brilliant. That should be quoted. That should be clipped into a short bite. I'm actually going to do that. That's a reminder to me sometime in the future. Does it clip just that part of what Kirk just mentioned? Just have that as a short and get more people in. Spread some wisdom. All right, I could say more, but anything else you want to add before I wrap this up, no, I've thoroughly enjoyed this.
Speaker 2:This is my sixth podcast and every director of the podcast has said the same thing. Now, mind you, elias, you and the other five are people who are point men. They're interested in what's going on. They've studied a lot, but all six have said the same thing. I didn't know this. I had no idea going to turn into 60,000 people who now know that there's something really big that we, the people, can do to protect liberty in still the greatest country on earth.
Speaker 1:Amen to that. So from wherever or whenever you listen to this podcast, you have a blessed day, afternoon or night.
