RSS

Tuesday Night Radio Show: Attorney Licenses, Administrative Law, National Debt

11 Mar

American Independence Hour hosted by Alfred Adask; 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM Central time, Tuesday nights, on AmericanVoiceRadio.com and also on the KU band, free-to-air satellite link at Galaxy 19.  There’ll be call-ins at 1-800-596-8191

American Independence Hour--Internet Radio [courtesy Google Images]

American Independence Hour–Internet Radio
[courtesy Google Images]

Tonight we’ll be talking about:

1) attorney licenses (and especially the venue of those licenses);

2) Administrative Law (the “4th branch of government”); and,

3) the National Debt.

I hope that some of you will call in with questions or comments at:

1-800-596-8191

 
41 Comments

Posted by on March 11, 2014 in Radio

 

Tags:

41 responses to “Tuesday Night Radio Show: Attorney Licenses, Administrative Law, National Debt

  1. Frank Moorman

    March 11, 2014 at 8:25 PM

    Called in and got hung up on-twice!

     
    • Adask

      March 11, 2014 at 10:28 PM

      I have no idea why. Perhaps the producer made a mistake. Perhaps there was a technical problem.

       
      • J.M.

        March 12, 2014 at 1:19 AM

        They, the “peace officers” as some say, have only “heard” of the Constitution, When asked if they took an oath to uphold, support, & defend it, some say, I may have, don’t recall. I believe they take an oath, if they do at all, in this sense. When I joined the Air force, I recall being asked to raise my right hand & repeat after me, I did as instructed. It was the oath taking aspect. I did not know anything about the Constitution but I took an oath to uphold,support, & defend it. For the first time, MANY years later, I started looking into this Constitution to see what it was/is etc. Why do the “peace officers” ask, with a smirk on their face, are you another one of those Constitutionalsts? I tried to cross examine a State Trooper in “court” about whether he took this “required”(< ? oath ) the Judge objected, said I was not allowed to ask that question. I asked the trooper, who pays your salary, JUDGE objected, said I was not allowed to ask that question. But, as you say, Alfred, they do whatever they want to in an administrative court. We have U.S. District Court & District Court of the United States. Put in your heading, or caption District Court of the United States, & the Clerk transfers it over to U.S. District Court & everything we try to do to overcome it is ignored. Next up whatever circuit court of appeals Court sits on your petition to change this tactic of the lower court, & when the lower court dismisses your petition for failure to state a claim etc. THEN the court of appeals acts & denies your petition because it is now a "moot point/issue." But it is as you say, administrative Court decisions. We can only do the best we can with what we have to work with & the knowledge or lack of same. Maybe this lack of knowledge that is destroying "God's" people applies here, in circumstances we have now.

         
      • J.M.

        March 12, 2014 at 3:31 AM

        @ I have no idea why. Perhaps the producer made a mistake. Perhaps there was a technical problem

        No, it’s my fault.

         
      • J.M.

        March 12, 2014 at 8:47 PM

        Alfred,

        @ > Administrative law is a violation of the separation of powers.

        Believe it was CJR books you talked about. Lost my notes. Anyway, I would think this administrative law is “justified” by Appropriate Legislation, which I call Treason Legislation. I have none of their “stamp of approval documents” but still, this has only made it worse because IF I had their required documents, it would have saved me from a lot of agony. I said before on a prior message that they are brutal. Ruthless is a more “appropriate” word.” Also, a message I sent to Toland, on this thread, appears twice. I only sent it once.

         
      • J.M.

        March 12, 2014 at 10:34 PM

        @ > Administrative

        No precicise and invariable definition of the word can be given. Its meaning depends upon the particular facts and circumstances, and a definition given is sometimes no more than a description. Nissen v. City of Winston-Salem, 175 S.E. 310, 312, 206 N. C. 888

         
    • J.M.

      March 14, 2014 at 6:42 PM

      Frank Moorman
      March 11, 2014 at 8:25 PM
      @ > Called in and got hung up on-twice!

      You asked Alfred Adask a while back if he would post his home phone number on this blog. I asked you if you would post yours, remember? You never did post your home phone number as I asked / requested you to do. WHY. Well no, I guess my “plea” was not pleading with enough humbleness. There is a poster, Edom’s THORN. Edom’s Thorn has some correct, in my opinion, articles. He knows who Edom is & Israel too. Maybe you would enjoy reading & studying his articles. Frank Moorman, please post your home phone number on this thread. I will write out my requests for a helper to ask you some questions. It may be a while before I can find a helper, but I’ll start searching for one when I see your home phone number. Ohhhh what is your e-mail address. Post it here? I don’t have one. I use somebody else’s, so I cannot post it. It’s part of an agreement we have.

       
  2. Frank Moorman

    March 11, 2014 at 8:26 PM

    At what point in life do attorneys go bad?

     
    • J.M.

      March 11, 2014 at 11:39 PM

      @ > At what point in life do attorneys go bad?

      Not all do, I hope, but I have had some of them to tell me they know the system is corrupt, but they have a family to think of & support. I see their predicament, their situation, their insurmountable problem. I also see, apparently where I do not belong too.

       
  3. J.M.

    March 11, 2014 at 8:57 PM

    Was warned by the Judge not to mention the word Constitution again or I would be held in contempt. She meant it too. Found out the hard way

     
    • Cody

      March 14, 2014 at 1:31 AM

      Remember to incorporate all judicial notice into your pleadings.

       
      • J.M.

        March 14, 2014 at 3:17 AM

        Cody, you say,
        @ >Remember to incorporate all judicial notice into your pleadings.

        What’s that, all judicial notice? Give an example of what you are saying & how to do it. Thanks. Remember, your response will be at least food for thought for everybody else, not just me. I can understand you not responding because I am the one asking. But maybe somebody else would like to know what you are saying. You do care for others,I’m sure you do.Then again, maybe I’m wrong again.

         
      • EarlatOregon

        March 14, 2014 at 11:23 AM

        Perhaps,
        judges do not allow Constitution law into Equity courts,
        altho the judges took an Oath to uphold the Constitution(s),
        then they Out-Law the Constitution’

        Why is that?

        Is the Solution to take the controversy to a Constitutional court.
        (what is a Constitutional court)

        Since judges do take an Oath,
        to uphold the State Constitution,
        and
        Federal Constitution,
        perhaps the Question is:

        “Is this court Competent to Hear Constitutional matters/Questions?”

        if they are Not,
        then move the case to a Court,
        “Competent to hear Constitutional matters/Questions”.

        (I’ll see your Ticket,
        and Raise you a Constitution.)

        are you arguing Federal Constitution law
        or
        State Constitution law?

        Do you even consider State Constitution law?

        .

         
  4. J.M.

    March 11, 2014 at 10:08 PM

    It’s what to do BEFORE that matters e.g.The proper Affidavits made a matter of Public Record & delivered to the “proper” Government agents. I apparently left out somebody “proper.” Still, when we are exercising our “God” given right to travel & are stopped for whatever “quota” reason they want to, & then we are arrested because we don’t have their “stamp of approval documents” & jailed & later forced to appear to appear in their administrative tribunal, then I fail to understand how to overcome this predicament.

     
  5. Toland

    March 12, 2014 at 2:30 AM

    J.M. > “Why do the “peace officers” ask, with a smirk on their face, are you another one of those Constitutionalsts?”

    They do that because the Constitutionalist case has been so weakly presented, in their experience, that they consider it a joke.

     
    • J.M.

      March 12, 2014 at 3:12 AM

      @ They do that because the Constitutionalist case has been so weakly presented, in their experience, that they consider it a joke.

      How do you “know” this is the reason? Are you one of “them?” How do you KNOW “my” Position papers were weak? Apparently you do KNOW what a Court of No Record is too, don’t you? Weak?

      They are weaker minded than I am. When I am in my wheel chair, HERE, in the house I am staying in, & because of weakness & other reasons you could care less about, ( I can presume too) & one of these peace officers asks to see a driver license, that’s kinda weak minded isn’t it? Well, no not to you? It’s a reasonable request. Why did you,Toland, just decide to choose this remark you made, out of everything else I have said, to ridicule?

       
      • J.M.

        March 12, 2014 at 3:21 AM

        In thinking twice, Toland, you are right. My position in.of Standing on organic documents, is weak, this day & time. Sorry you are right. Courts of no record do not require ANY kind of law knowledge. Only a high school education or GED. Also it’s not easy when someone IS by himself with no help from NOBODY. Thought I would throw this in to give some people <?? something else to laugh about

         
    • J.M.

      March 12, 2014 at 6:04 PM

      Toland,

      @ > Martin’s jetlag must be contagious.

      THANKS Toland. EXACTLY. Contagious as defined below
      :
      able to be passed from one person or animal to another by touching

      : having a sickness that can be passed to someone else by touching

      : capable of being easily spread to others : causing other people to feel or act a similar way

      We can touch people mentally, & depending on the intent, it can be the best or worse way of “touching.”

      This is EXACTLY what Martens/Jetlag WAS HELLBENT on doing. But, When I see an innocent man trying to feed the beast & the beast is trying to GORE the feeder it sorta ruffles my feathers. Some things I catch, some things I don’t, & some things I Think I understand, I find out later, I did not understand. I guess I try to be overprotective of good people. It is hard to communicate this way. So many things can be understood in different ways by different people.

       
    • J.M.

      March 12, 2014 at 9:50 PM

      Toland, re: The Bar Card,

      I was just playing around with you before on the Bar Card. What a Bar Card really is, is, A Bar Card entitles the holder to a ‘buy 1, get 1’ free drink every time you visit any participating bars:accepting same. But, This is what people need to remember. One use per bar, per day.is all that’s allowed. The Bar Card usually says where the Bars are located, etc I saw some Brown Bars.fishing in Alaska today, on video.Saw one Brown Bar chasing something up a tree. It looked like some kind of cat. I can not say for sure what it was. But I sure know what a Bar is. There are Black Bars too..

       
  6. Toland

    March 12, 2014 at 4:18 AM

    I’m only talking about the general attitude of cops. They are practical rather than theoretical minded. When they see 100 constitutionalists trot out their homespun rhetoric and flop – and then 100 more try the same thing with no sign of having learned from the first 100 – cops tend to take an attitude of contempt. That’s all I’m saying. I don’t know your case, which could have merit.

    By the way, since this is an obsolete thread now anyway, I might as well ask what is this Martens jetlag you keep going on about?

     
    • J.M.

      March 12, 2014 at 10:49 AM

      Toland

      @ I don’t know your case, which could have merit.

      It didn’t. Not to them. They considered it a joke, just as you said. So is,YHWH ha Elohiym considered a joke, by most people, apparently. I’m being honest with you.

      @ .”………………………………..what is this Martens jetlag you keep going on about?

      They were thoughts & actions coming from ONE mind ridiculing, belittling,etc. YHWH ha Elohiym & Alfred Adask, which made me VERY ANGRY. BUT, I WAS WAS WAS right in feeling & thinking this way.

       
      • J.M.

        March 12, 2014 at 10:52 AM

        @ >They were thoughts & actions coming from ONE mind ridiculing, belittling,etc. YHWH ha Elohiym & Alfred Adask, which made me VERY ANGRY. BUT, I WAS WAS WAS right in feeling & thinking this way.

        I still IS right, about that.

         
      • Toland

        March 12, 2014 at 1:18 PM

        J.M.

        Okay, though maybe this thread really isn’t obsolete yet. So I’ll leave it at that. Thanks for explaining.

         
    • J.M.

      March 12, 2014 at 1:47 PM

      Toland,

      @ By the way, since this is an obsolete thread now anyway

      What does this mean, obsolete???

      By the way too, I have failed miserably in trying to get this point across, & that IS, I do not want ANYBODY to find out the HARD way what he/she is up against.They, those in this current EVIL system are BRUTAL. It’s not what just happens in their “courts” necessarily, it’s what happens later. The mental & physical torture you are put through & they also have ways of putting you in with hardened CRIMINALS when your “heinous crime” is, no driver license,etc., & somehow these hard hearted criminals have been “notified” that YOU are there for “something to do with child molesting” & this IS something these hardened criminals HATE themselves. Remember, Johnny Cash singing at Folsom Prison, & when he got to the words, but I shot a man in Reno just to WATCH HIM DIE? Remember how the prisoners went wild with glee ? Imagine Johnny Cash singing that song in a Church & to people who love “God.” What would their reaction be? I think it would be a reaction of stunned disbelief & shock & silence. See what I’m trying to say !?!?!! ???

       
      • Toland

        March 12, 2014 at 2:01 PM

        Obsolete means no longer in use.

        I see what you’re saying about the prison. That’s a good observation. Martin’s jetlag must be contagious.

         
    • J.M.

      March 12, 2014 at 8:03 PM

      J.M.

      March 12, 2014 at 6:04 PM

      Toland,

      @ > Martin’s jetlag must be contagious.

      THANKS Toland. EXACTLY. Contagious as defined below
      :
      able to be passed from one person or animal to another by touching

      : having a sickness that can be passed to someone else by touching

      : capable of being easily spread to others : causing other people to feel or act a similar way

      We can touch people mentally, & depending on the intent, it can be the best or worse way of “touching.”

      This is EXACTLY what Martens/Jetlag WAS HELLBENT on doing. But, When I see an innocent man trying to feed the beast & the beast is trying to GORE the feeder it sorta ruffles my feathers. Some things I catch, some things I don’t, & some things I Think I understand, I find out later, I did not understand. I guess I try to be overprotective of good people. It is hard to communicate this way. So many things can be understood in different ways by different people.

       
    • J.M.

      March 14, 2014 at 12:13 AM

      Toland, you say,

      @ They do that because the Constitutionalist case has been so weakly presented, in their experience, that they consider it a joke.

      They do that, why? IF “they” KNEW I am a “joke” why do they ASK me if I am ANOTHER one of those “constitutionalists.” Also, WHY do “they” on occasion, SAY, in a so called STATE court, I invoke my 5th Amendment PRIVILEGE not to respond to that question. < This "invoking" by Him/her is the response to a question, I asked. Invoking a 5th Amendment privilege in a "State" Magistrate Court?

      I can understand this "invoking their 5th Amendment "privilege" (<?) IN a FEDERAL Court, e.g. U.S. District Court, but NOT in a STATE Court, UNLESS, "this" State Court IS quasi Federal, or in someway partially a Federal AND State Court, LIKE in HYBRID. I don't know what IT is?

       
    • J.M.

      March 14, 2014 at 2:48 PM

      Toland, you say,

      @ >Okay, though maybe this thread really isn’t obsolete yet. So I’ll leave it at that. Thanks for explaining.

      I don’t think I explained anything. When is a thread considered obsolete? I don’t know.

       
  7. Joe Nagy

    March 12, 2014 at 10:46 AM

    Hi, Al. How are you? Your program was very insightful. I attended many of the Dallas, Texas, meetings up until three years ago when I relocated to the Lehigh Valley. I stumbled upon administrative law after a federal judge dismissed my case due to venue. I’ve since gotten positive results during litigation where I was the private attorney general/counter-plaintiff and I requested a hearing before an administrative law judge (“ALJ”). During one case at the pre-hearing conference, the prosecutor asked me several basic law questions and then said he’d bet me I couldn’t file anything as a private attorney general (“PAG”). I then asked him, what did I win? He was puzzled. I said you stated I couldn’t file anything as a PAG. Here it is, I said, holding up the counter-suit (about 30 pages). He circled the room and said he was going to request the judge dismiss due to non compos mentis (latin-mentally unstable). My altar boy training helped me here and I said I didn’t agree with his opinion as he burst into the courtroom with me following. Yes, the current proceeding was halted for a few. We were next. They had 20 some red light traffic ticket cases waiting (easy $). The judge stated I was a gentleman every time I appeared and he had very limited jurisdiction. He said mine was a very technical proceeding and it is in the best interest of both parties as well as my mental state for us not go to trial and for him to dismiss it.

    In the other case, the party withdrew.

    I want to go on the offensive using the ALJ venue against Pohatcong Township, the Bank of America, and Wells Fargo concerning property rights’ violations and the misapplication of fiduciary property, as the Lord leads. A new day is dawning, Al, thank you, and may God bless.

    Regards,
    Joska “Joe” Nagy

     
    • moon

      March 12, 2014 at 10:32 PM

      Administrative “law”…a 4th branch of “government”…whose “government”?

      Joe seems to have something going that’s working. Rock and roll, Joe, and let us know how it goes. I’m cheering for you. We all have our ways of navigating through this plane of existence. We can learn from each other, however, each situation is unique.

      This blog is a wealth of information and experience to use as one needs it, then save what’s not immediately needed for later.

      Al’s letter of inquiry is something I considered using. The thought of someone (or someones…cop, “prosecutor”, sheriff, “judge”, and/or other) considering answers for all those strategically asked questions makes me laugh. The attorneys create long detailed writings and act as if everyone should abide by every nuance created. Time about is fair play, don’t you think? I didn’t use it, nor did I use the “at arms length” phrase above my signature. I went a different route. Actually, I hadn’t read about “at arms length” when I might have used it. Even when Al first used it, he didn’t comprehend the power of that small phrase. We also have unique learning curves.

      The different route I took doesn’t include my signature at all. A JOHN DOE is included in the papers I was given and other signatures seem to be lacking. After using a tool I found on this blog, I chose to let the “powers that shouldn’t be” make the next move. I want to test several ideas related to my particular situation.

      During my crash course in researching specifics, I discovered that something I did could get a bar attorney disbarred. So, what? I’m not a bar attorney. Apparently, I can make up my own strategy and have fun with it.

      My course of action is based on this: if I’m not the person, subject, name, etc they want me to think I am, why should I cater to their whims? Yes, I’ve considered possibilities of all sorts of actions, but I’m here to have fun. Some say that if you’re not having fun with this, you’re not doing it right.

      If more of us would have more fun, think of the frustration for govco as we’re having more fun.

       
      • J.M.

        March 13, 2014 at 11:30 PM

        moon, you said earlier, in pertinent part,

        @ > “Along the way, I read some info about “gentleman”. It seems I’m neither, nor want to be. Thanks.”

        Then why is it moon, you say, about, Joe Nagy > “Joe seems to have something going that’s working.”

        Didn’t you see, moon, where Joe Nagy said, in pertinent part,> The judge stated I was a gentleman every time I appeared………….

        Once again, moon, you say, “I read some info about “gentleman”. It seems I’m neither, nor want to be.”

        Help me out here, somebody.

         
    • J.M.

      March 13, 2014 at 10:49 PM

      Joe Nagy,
      @ >The judge stated I was a gentleman every time I appeared and he had very limited jurisdiction. He said mine was a very technical proceeding and it is in the best interest of both parties as well as my mental state for us not go to trial and for him to dismiss it.

      Why did the Judge say you are a gentleman? There must be a reason but I fail to see how being a gentleman means you or anyone else wins in their courts.

      Re: Your “mental state?” Will you be more specific as to what this means? Does it have anything to do with incompetency? At one time, a man could not testify against his wife or vice versa because he/she was “deemed” “incompetent” to do so. Their IQ level had nothing to do with it. Both could be in the “Genius” category, & yet deemed to be incompetent per certain situations. What does this “mental state” the Judge talked about mean? Because of your mental state???

       
      • Joe Nagy

        March 14, 2014 at 12:53 AM

        I believe he was referring to my filing criminal charges in the New Jersey Superior Court as a private attorney general who also requested a hearing with an administrative law judge. The prosecutor stated he studied law his whole life and questioned who was I to walk in here with all the above.He was flustered after he bet me I couldn’t file as a PAG and I asked, “What did I win”?

         
    • J.M.

      March 14, 2014 at 3:33 AM

      Joe Nagy, once again you said, in pertinent part,

      @ >The judge stated I was a gentleman every time I appeared and he had very limited jurisdiction. He said mine was a very technical proceeding and it is in the best interest of both parties as well as my mental state for us not go to trial and for him to dismiss it.

      What did the judge mean by saying, as well as your mental state, the best thing to do is dismiss the case? What, in your opinion, or knowledge, did the Judge mean by mentioning your “mental state.” Please do not misunderstand. I am not trying to imply you have a mental defect, NO, not at all, I would like to try at least to understand WHY the judge even mentioned your, “mental state.”

       
    • J.M.

      March 14, 2014 at 12:40 PM

      Joe,et al.
      There was & maybe still is a group called C.R.T.F. They DID show a case where the Court DID SAY people could file as a PAG. I had the case, but I have had many things to disappear. I can bring up some things to research but not all things. If anyone knows how to contact C.R.T. F., They will provide that case, I’m sure, then again, maybe not.

       
  8. EarlatOregon

    March 12, 2014 at 4:13 PM

    A while back the was something about on the Internet,
    about State of Florida and Attorney License,
    and there was a State employees Name to that news story,
    So I went to that website and Contacted her,
    about State of Florida – Attorney License.

    Short story,
    when I asked her why the word “License” was Not on the Document her office issues,
    she told me there will Not be any further contact.

    Try it in your State.

    How do you Know it is a License and Not an ID Card?

    A License has the word License on it.

     
    • J.M.

      March 12, 2014 at 5:42 PM

      EarliatOregon

      @ > How do you Know it is a License and Not an ID Card?

      It’s an ID card, a BAR ID card. but it’s THEIR license to perpetuate EVIL. We have an imorral government for immoral people. Fits like a glove.
      Are you, EarlatOregon the same as EarlinOregon?

       
    • J.M.

      March 14, 2014 at 12:54 PM

      @ >Then move the case to a Court,“Competent to hear Constitutional matters/Questions”.

      Like where?

       
  9. moon

    March 14, 2014 at 9:25 AM

    Joe Nagy, is your method similar to what Bill Thornton talks about? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tkow6bDvNTU

     
  10. Jethro!

    March 14, 2014 at 12:08 PM

    Just listened to the archived show. Excellent show, Al. I hope next week you will be able to get to the subject of attorney licenses and their >>venue<<. If your position is what I suspect it is — that attorney licenses are only for practicing law "in this state" — I wonder if you could explore some remedies available to the People when one of them are attacked (legally) by one. Here's one to consider: a Quo Warranto action vs. a "licensed attorney" might be effective — if you control your venue — to get him thrown off a case against you. "Licensed Attorney Bob" in "The State" would likely occupy no public office and have no judicial representative authority, and thus he would be no more than "just Bob", a non-party.

    Stripping the "licensed attorneys" animating "this state" of their ability to do so might render "this state" completely impotent.

     
    • J.M.

      March 16, 2014 at 5:09 PM

      To who it may concern,
      Jethro says,

      @ >Stripping the “licensed attorneys” animating “this state” of their ability to do so might render “this state” completely impotent.

      It’s the “stripping” part that will not be easily overcome, if it can be at all. “They are entrenched pretty good. They also have the U.S armed forces to come to their aid if necessary.

       

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s