[00:00:04] Speaker A: And serve the truth.
[00:00:11] Speaker B: I know you're out there. I can feel you now.
I know that you're afraid. You're afraid of us. You're afraid of change.
I don't know the future. I didn't come here to tell you how this is going to end. I came here to tell you how it's going to begin.
[00:00:36] Speaker C: Take the blue pill.
Take the red pill. Take the blue pill. Take the red pill. Take the blue pill.
Take the red pill. Take the blue pill. Take the red pill. Take the blue pill.
You take the red pill. And I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes.
After this, there is no turning back.
You take the blue pill. The story ends. You wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. Take the red pill. Take the red pill. Take the red pill. Take the red pill. Take the red pill. Take the red pill. Take the red pill. You stay in Wonderland. You stay in Wonderland. I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes.
[00:01:34] Speaker B: Now transmitting from an undisclosed location in the northeast quadrant of the United States, it's the Red Pill reality show on the trim radio network with your host, Riscala Stevens. Saturday nights from 09:00 p.m. eastern until midnight. Call in lines are open. Dial 803-200-2277 to reach your host directly. And now your host, Riskalla.
[00:02:06] Speaker A: Hello and welcome, everyone. It is a Red Bull reality show. And I don't know what's going on with my camera again. I love it. Oh, my goodness. Well, tonight I'm going to have Mike Zarzano on with me. He's going to tell us a little bit about the success that he has had in one of the greatest weapons that we have against this corrupt administration. We call a government a bunch of communists. And that being the grand jury and the option of a grand jury, he has had the experience of actually starting one from scratch.
And he's going to give us a little bit of a breakdown on that. Now, normally I do about a half hour monologue. We're not going to do that tonight because he's very short on time. He's got to travel in the morning. He's got to get up real early. So he's only going to be with me for a limited time. So without further ado, let me bring him on. Mike Sanzano, welcome to the Red Pill reality show. And again, thank you, my friend. I appreciate you sharing the information.
[00:03:02] Speaker D: Well, thank you for having me tonight. I really appreciate it.
[00:03:07] Speaker A: So I don't, I'm not sure why our pictures or both of our pictures are coming up like this.
This is technology. This is what we have to deal with. Anyway, I've got. I've got some. Let's see if I can find them. Here.
Here's one of them. I had it. There we go. Is this it? So this is something that I ran across you. I think we're involved with this. Right?
And this is a indictment.
Can you hear me?
[00:03:37] Speaker D: Yeah, I can hear you. I'm having a hard time seeing it. Describe to me the document. It's a little bit small for me to read.
[00:03:44] Speaker A: I'm sorry, I can't make it any bigger. This is an indictment, it looks like. United States District Court, Southern District of Florida against Juan Andre Donato Bautista.
[00:03:58] Speaker D: Was that regarding the Smartmatic corporation and the fraud in Puerto Rico?
[00:04:04] Speaker A: Yeah, I think that's what this is all about. Yep.
[00:04:07] Speaker D: Yeah, no, we. We were not involved in that.
We certainly liked seeing it happen, that's for sure. But no, that that was a case of actual criminal activity that was uncovered by the state of Florida and they prosecuted it. And that, that's ongoing at this time. And there were several other co conspirators in that crime regarding Smartmatic company and it's ongoing. That's going to be very interesting to see where that goes because it's going to show collusion with government entities to manipulate the vote count in a nation and that's where we're at today.
I just wanted to clarify something, though, Roscala, you said in the very beginning there about the grand juries in the state of the. In the state of Florida. I did not start those, I started the petition request to Governor DeSantis and Ashley Moody, the attorney general, pursuant to Florida Statute 905.33.
That was what motivated us to launch this effort back in April of 22. So just to bring everybody up to par here on this statute, Florida has very favorable law regarding the people's ability to petition their government for redress. And if the people would like to see this statute, they could just google or search it. Florida statute 905.33 and it reads as follows. Petition two. Supreme Court by governor, order.
Whenever the governor, for good and sufficient reason, deems it to be in the public interest to empanel a statewide grand jury, she or he may petition in writing to the Supreme Court for an order in paneling a statewide grand jury. The petition shall state the general crimes or wrongs to be inquired into, and shall state that said crimes or wrongs are of a multi circuit nature. Let me stop right there. That's exactly what we realized that in the state of Florida, we had several crimes ongoing that involved multiple counties. So right away we realized that these crimes rose to the level of a statewide grand jury. And keep in mind, in the state of Florida, there have only been 22 of these statewide grand juries in the history of Florida. And that's what makes this so interesting. This grand jury, the statewide grand jury, is very powerful and can be used by the people as a weapon to fight tyranny, to fight crime within the system.
And the 19th grand jury of the state of Florida was a very interesting grand jury. The 19th statewide grand jury investigated specifically corruption in the state of Florida, because for a long time, Florida was the most corrupt state in the nation.
Now, what you have on your screen right now for the people to see is the petition that we filed with the governor, with Ashley Moody by certified communication back in April of 22. April 4, I believe, of 22. And we had four different requests for four different grand juries.
The illegal border impact upon the state of Florida, the 2020 election, abnormalities, anomalies, suspicions, the perverse curriculum that was being forced upon multiple counties in the state of Florida. And then finally the COVID scamdemic or pandemic.
And we petitioned the governor for all four of those grand jury inquiries. And within 90 days, the governor announced that he was going to request the Supreme Court to empanel the very first grand jury that we requested, and that was for the open illegal border impact upon Florida. Child trafficking, drug trafficking, et cetera. And that grand jury produced over 350 pages and six presentments of scathing, shocking information regarding what happened to the state of Florida with the illegal open border.
And that grand jury, before they concluded, they stated that their job was not finished and that they requested an additional grand jury be convened to finish their job. And unfortunately, today that has not been accomplished. The government of Florida has not convened that additional grand jury at the request of the 21st Florida statewide grand jury, now within. By December of 22. Desantis. Governor Desantis. And we must give much credit to Governor DeSantis for doing this. We simply requested he do it. And in good timing, he agreed and petitioned the Supreme Court. The second grand jury that he had the Supreme Court convene was on the COVID And when Governor DeSantis announced that one, it went worldwide news. It hit all the news channels, all the news outlets, both mainstream and alternative media, and it was really, really successful in the media. And that grand jury is still in session to this day. It is involving five circuit court districts in the Tampa and central Florida area.
The fifth, 6th, 10th, 12th and 13th circuits. It involves 14 counties total. And that grand jury will adjourn in December of this year. December 23, I believe, is the exact date of adjournment.
And what we realized before we began petitioning for this of Governor DeSantis, we realized that it was going to be important to make a statement from organizations, businesses, churches, all of these different types of entities. And at the bottom of our petition, you'll see a selection of just some of those names of those groups and entities. And I believe that that's what really had the biggest impact, was the united effort of all of these different groups agreeing to one thing, requesting a grand jury be convened at the statewide level. And so we just want to make sure everybody understands that this was Governor DeSantis that did this at our request. And it was in the public interest, as the requirement states in the statute 905.33.
And it goes on. Let me finish reading what it has to say in the rest of the statute. It says, the petition shall state the general crimes of wrongs to be inquired, and shall state said crimes or wrongs are of a multi circuit nature, as I previously read to be in context here. But it goes on to say, the Supreme Court may order the empaneling of a statewide grand jury in accordance with the petition for a term of twelve calendar months. Upon petition by a majority of the statewide grand jury or by the legal advisor to the statewide grand jury, the Supreme Court, by order, may extend the term of the statewide grand jury for a period of up to six months. And that's exactly what they did with the first grand jury, the 21st grand jury examining the border impact, and also the 22nd grand jury. They also requested an extension of time. So both of these grand juries will have a total of 18 months. And that's a long time. And justice does take time, unfortunately.
But what people must understand is the grand jury is not just for the indictment of criminals, everyday drug crimes or thieves or robbers. It's also a court of inquiry, an investigative body to examine our government, our officials, our leadership. And just to give you an example, your audience can go onto our website and you can read a little booklet that we reprinted from Readers Digest in 1937.
Just keep in mind, 1937, the Great Depression was slowing down. It was starting to recover. But the people in America had just realized their farms were confiscated, their property, their houses, their gold was confiscated in 1933 by Roosevelt.
[00:14:42] Speaker A: I remember reading about that. That's crazy.
[00:14:45] Speaker D: Yeah. Yeah, it's very crazy. Private property being confiscated by the government and in this little pamphlet that we have on our website, countycongress.com. and I'll show the people here the front of it. It's called the people's big stick, and it's from Reader's Digest. 1937. October of 1937. In this little article, the writer goes on to describe how citizens all across America were able to fight crime, fight tyranny and government by requesting grand juries be convened. Now, back then, before 1946, it was a totally different situation in american jurisprudence. The courts in America were much more favorable and friendly to we the people.
For example, in 19, I believe it was 1912, down here in Florida, we uncovered in the archives in Manatee County, a situation where in county government, the jail had become very dirty. And people were complaining.
The courthouse needed painting, and the citizens felt that there was a need to get these things tidied up and to get the painting done on the jail. And most importantly, $9,000 had come up missing in the courthouse. So the citizens requested that their county commissioners convene a grand jury. The commissioners complied, and they took a pool of citizens from the voter roll.
And at that time, the citizens had to qualify to be eligible on the grand jury. You had to be an honorable citizen.
And so they compiled all this list, and they selected a grand jury. And this grand jury met for the sole purpose of investigating their own county government, why the jail was dirty, why $9,000 was missing, and why was the courthouse needing painting so badly? So after the hearing and the gathering of this grand jury, they concluded that they needed to fund the painting of the courthouse, they needed to clean up the jail, and they need to buy a safe for the judge's chamber there in the courthouse. And that's what happened. And this is how our government used to work, folks.
We at one time had strong oversight to everything in our government.
But it's a participatory game, and it is a game, believe me.
And unless you participate, you can expect failure. You can expect what we have today.
That's why our government has resulted in failure, because the board of directors, that's you, we the people, we have failed to, to maintain order within our government. We have failed to provide oversight.
We have felt for many, many years that just too many other things were more important. And we will elect the officials, and they will do the job for us. Well, that's not how republics work. And that's exactly why Benjamin Franklin responded to a lady at the end of the continental convention, constitutional convention. He was asked, what have you given us, Mister Franklin? The lady requested, and he said, a republic if.
If you can keep it. And that's what we must realize, folks. You cannot expect a republic to self maintain. It requires maintenance. We, the people, are the maintenance workers of the republic.
Yeah, it's really quite simple. This is nothing new.
This is something that everybody in America must understand, especially those that are young. Gen Z, Gen X, all the younger folks that are coming up.
They must understand that they have to get involved. You cannot just sit idly by as a spectator. And it is a game, it is a sport, and it's required for you to participate. Everybody must participate. That's why they had assembly meetings in their counties. In the early colonies, when the pilgrims landed, one of the first things they built was a school building, an assembly shelter house for not just government, but also to meet, to worship God.
And the assembly was for both worshiping God and self governance. And the people would meet weekly, monthly, to discuss issues of importance and controversy.
And we need to return to this. And now more than ever, with the electronic Internet, we have the capability to do this now more than ever, to meet virtually and to discuss these problems and issues. And this is why we have come up with the idea called a county congress.
It is a congress of citizens. County by county is the model, and it's nothing new. The founders, the pilgrims, originated it. And unfortunately, uh, due to the swamp, we have neglected it. The swamp has captured our government because of neglect.
[00:20:48] Speaker A: Yep.
Yep. This is all by design, everything that you've described.
[00:20:53] Speaker D: That's right.
[00:20:54] Speaker A: It's all by design.
And it's sad. And. And I think one of the main. You touched on part of it. Derek, as people who live in a Republican, I've always said that it is our responsibility as a citizen. You have a responsibility, and the responsibility is to your country to maintain. I came from a background where I vaguely remember, but I remember our family had to leave, literally in the middle of the night, because my dad was being looked for, if you will, by a dictator. So, unfortunately for us, that we were living in a different country. He was an american, he was a dual citizen. He was an american citizen, born in Boston, and he was an egyptian citizen. And we happened to be in Cairo at the time when all that went down. Yeah. So I remember. I remember that. And I don't ever want to have anybody else have to live through something so scary that I kept asking my mom, where we going? It's literally in the middle of the night. By that time, I'm, you know, I'm five years old. I'm out like a light, yet I'm wide awake and my mom's got me by the hand and, you know, rushing me to a taxi. And the next thing I know, we're on a. On a port boarding a ship. And it was just so. The whole thing was bizarre. It's almost like I couldn't believe it.
So I have a bit of a taste in my mouth of what it's like, and it's not a good thing at all.
And if we allow these people see, and that's the key word, we allow. We have allowed these people to do this because I believe if enough of us would stand up and stand straight and not, not move from our positions, and our positions being we want to get rid of the corruption that has infiltrated what we call a government, which has just become a mafia at this point, really. I mean, it's no different than a mafia. It's being operated like a mafia. If you speak out against them, they retaliate against you. That's what a mafia does, right? I mean, you know, they know they have their hands around the money. They know how to make the money, how to get the money.
It's sad. It's sad that we have allowed that. And my interest in doing this, and this is like the third time that we've talked about this, is hopefully generate some, even a drop's worth of curiosity to look into this and see what we can do.
Because if anybody feels like, I feel. I'm absolutely frustrated. And it's sad for someone like me who sees through the bull feces, I mean, right through it. And then I have personal friends of mine who are very intelligent, but somehow they're blinded. And for the life of me, I can't figure out how they are blinded. But if we could call it, if.
[00:23:43] Speaker D: I may interject at that point there, you bring up a great issue there. You know, most people have pride in their government. They have pride in the system, especially if they work in the system. And for these people to admit that there is failure in the legal system would be a major, major step.
They have a form of cognitive dissonance that has taken over in their mindset. They are not willing to admit failure. And the same is so in the military. You know, we have a military leadership that led us into a war in Iraq after 911 because they made the claim of weapons of mass destruction. Well, that claim was shown to be fraudulent, and it was later shown to be fraudulent that Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with 911. And now we're finding out that shockingly that the 19 hijackers that we were told that did it, many of those people are still alive. And this was proven either in court or public documents. So we have a massive fraud that has been perpetuated upon the american people on that day of 911. And there's a lot to answer for. There were a group of lawyers called the 911 lawyers committee that were requesting a grand jury, a federal grand jury, to investigate the evidence that over 3700 architects and engineers had uncovered. Now these are professional men and women with reputations.
And I know a lot of people out there still believe the government conspiracy theory about 911 and 19 hijackers. But do you really think 3700 architects and engineers are going to buy into a fairy tale conspiracy theory? No, of course not. They didn't make a decision to request a grand jury until many years and hours of experience, professional investigation. And so when they made this request for a grand jury, it eventually was denied and some frivolous cause or reason of standing. And like we always hear, you know, oh, you didn't have standing. And this is an outrage.
We the people, what can we do.
[00:26:23] Speaker A: In that case, Mike? What do we do in something like.
[00:26:27] Speaker D: That'S a great question you ask. And that's what I wanted to talk about tonight.
You know, we have a situation here in Florida where we had, we requested all these grand juries. The governor agreed with us in two of the four that we requested promptly. He requested the supreme Court, as I said earlier, and they convened the grand jury.
The first grand jury we attempted to be heard, and we were either ignored or denied to give testimony. However, one of the people that we wanted to testify was Tom Homan, former ICE director under President Trump. He did get to testify, but there were others that we wanted to testify. There was a situation where a deputy sheriff was actually killed on a highway by an illegal that was working for a corporation on a road. And the law states that, you know, these companies cannot hire illegals to work for them. So there was a gross oversight there, mismanagement of hiring this illegal. And we wanted that situation to go before this grand jury for possible criminal charges. Well, at the end of the day, when this grand jury was over, there were no criminal charges, no indictments whatsoever. However, there were six presentments totaling 350 pages.
And the second grand jury, which is ongoing right now, we have people in the state of Florida that have become injured by the vaccinations, severely injured. Many people in the state of Florida have evidence of being injured by this vaccine. And we want these people to testify. And they are being denied. They are being refused.
And this is wrong.
This is an outrage. And Governor DeSantis needs to know about this.
So I would like as an action tonight for your audience, if you go on our website, thefloridafix.com, you can download the petition, make a copy, and sign the bottom of it, and then accompany that petition with a letter of your own requesting the governor.
Demand his prosecutor, state prosecutor, Mister Cox convened the grand jury to hear the witnesses, the people that have been injured, that have ongoing bodily injuries due to these vaccinations. Request the governor to contact these people. Have them contact us. We have the list.
We have a whole list of professionals that want to testify.
We have the nation's top bioweapons expert, Professor Francis Boyle. He is willing to testify.
So these things need to be done by the people. The people out there in your audience rescala, are very important. They have the ability to move mountains with their prayers and with their action, their letter writing, their phone calls, requesting that these people be allowed to testify. Now, the surgeon general of the state of Florida, Mister Latipo, he is aware of these vaccine injured citizens. Now, why he is not pushing this issue, I don't know. And I don't know how hard or how not hard he has pushed. I just know these people are going unattended to, and that is wrong. They need to have their story heard.
[00:30:36] Speaker A: Somebody in the upper administration in Florida has asked for a ban on the vaccine, and one of the counties has declared the vaccine a bioweapon.
Did you know that?
[00:30:54] Speaker D: Yeah. I think that that's the work of Doctor Joseph Sansone and maybe Collier county in Naples and Lee county in the Fort Myers area.
Yes, they. They have been making these statements and requests for quite a long time, and they're going unheard, unanswered, and it's wrong. So there's another way.
[00:31:19] Speaker A: Fighting a very powerful enemy. Sadly, the pharmaceutical industries are extremely powerful. Probably in reality, more powerful than our actual government is these corporations. Maybe, you know, the industry itself, the pharmaceutical industry. But there are other industries as well who are just extremely powerful, far more powerful than our government. You know, just to give you an idea, I remember when we had a. The catastrophe in the gulf where they were leaking oil out in the gulf, and I was trying to get information on it, and one of the people that was there was telling me that wouldn't even allow the military to, to enter the air within a certain area. They wanted everybody away. And the military was. Was, I remember, like 3 miles away or five something, whatever the distance was. And they were not allowing anybody else to pass that point. And I. So I said, well, who gave the military the orders to do that? And it was.
I can't think of the name of the oil company. It was the oil company, the oil companies who gave the order for the military to keep everybody out.
[00:32:26] Speaker D: Yeah. Yeah. Roscala. What we have in America today is called corporate capture. We have a corporate community that has bought and paid for all of our politicians, and they've become political parasites. They have latched themselves to our government through their money, through their power, and they are basically, you know, sucking our blood.
Our monetary blood is being sucked by these corporate powers throughout America. And they are the ones responsible for electing many, many of these politicians, both city, state, and federal. All three levels have been corporately captured. And then the other capture is done internally by the administrative state.
And people just need to really wake up. Our country is in jeopardy in the most severe way. We have never been in such a dangerous spot as we are right now.
Yeah. That fact that you're putting up there is just one of the startling results of these vaccines.
Another great example of the findings of a researcher by Ed Dowd. He wrote a book, cause unknown. I urge everyone to get it. Go to your library, buy it on Amazon, or go to his website, Edward Dowd, cause unknown.
But back to how the people can help. This is going to be a battle of we the people. We don't have the billions that these corporations have, but we have the millions. We have the people, the people power. And so we have organized a system of texting that we can get people information by. If everyone out there that is listening were to get involved today and get on our texting service, we could inform you with the strategies that are going to be used in the very near future and how you can get involved. And you don't even have to live in the state of Florida. You can help us from whatever state you're in, actually, whatever country you're in, because so goes America, so goes the world. We are the bastion of freedom, and if America goes, freedom is going with it elsewhere. So let me just instruct the people out there how you can get involved. It's very simple with your cell phone. That little cell phone is a mighty powerful weapon, as many of you know already.
I'm preaching to the choir. I know that the people that listen to your show, Roscala, are the best and the brightest, and they know the power of the Internet. And that's what we need to harness. So if you take out your cell phone and you type in the word text, the word jury, just type in the word jury in the text to the phone number 21,000.
Type in the phone number 21,000.
And then down below, text the word jury, and then send it, and you will get back a message from us, and we will be able to communicate with you in the future by that database, that texting service. This makes it real simple. We can give you links, we can give you videos, we can give you teleconferencing numbers where we will have meetings. This is how we, the people, can assemble in the comfort of our own home. People are tired of going to meetings and rallies. They are rallied out. They are meeting out. They are tired. They need to be doing things the easiest, the cheapest, and the quickest. And that's why we need to do this. From the comfort of your own home, you just text the word jury to 21,000. 21,000 is like the phone number. Instead of a phone number with an area code, our texting number is simply 21,000. So you text the word jury to 21,000. Now what we're going to do, back to your question, you know, how can we make a difference?
The grand jury is controlled, and this is contrary to what Anthony Scalia determined in 1992 in a Supreme Court case, United States versus Williams. Scalia wrote the opinion that the grand jury is a separate entity from the government. Once the grand jury is convened, it is independent from the government, and it is supposed to act on its own. If the grand jury, once it is convened, it has the authority to hire its own independent investigators.
In the state of Florida, we have a very favorable system here. The grand jury even has a budget that it can use to hire its own independent investigators. It does not have to obey the prosecutor, the judge, once it's convened. If the grand jury wants to have another grand jury convened when they adjourn, it has the right to do so. The mistake the 21st grand jury made was it didn't demand it. It simply asked.
But if it had demanded a grand jury be convened, it would have happened. So what we would like to do is we need to educate the grand jury that is currently in session. We want to educate them with the facts of their authority. We are not. Jerry, we are not manipulating the grand jury. We are not tampering with the grand jury. We want to fully inform the grand jury based upon the law of the federal law and the state of Florida law. So for any of the law enforcement out there, that might be listening. We respect the law. We respect the government of Florida, the federal government of the United States for America. But we want the jury to be properly educated about their authority. So in an effort to educate the grand jury of the state of Florida in the Tampa area, that's where the five circuit courts districts are in and around Tampa, we have a plan to publish in the state of Florida in major newspapers. We would like to educate that grand jury, the 22nd grand jury of the state of Florida, statewide grand jury. We want to publish in newspapers an open letter to this grand jury, giving them their proper authority with the statutes and the federal laws to fully inform them. And by the way, Rascala, I'd like to make your audience aware of an organization called FeedjA. That's the acronym for an organization that is dedicated to fully informing the grand jury institution all across America. It's called the fully informed jury association. And I would urge everyone to become a member of that and go on their website, download their information, and get educated on how we, the people can take back our country. The grand jury is the third of four boxes of government, and people really need to get this understood. The first box of government that we, the people use to get policy implemented is the soapbox.
We all have a little soapbox, whether we go to the town hall meeting, the city council, you call your congressman, you get on your soapbox and you tell them what you want done. If that doesn't work, you go to the ballot box. When the elections come around and you use that box, the ballot box. Now, we're at the third box right now because the first and the second box has failed us because of administrative capture, corporate capture, manipulating the elections with their money, and also criminal activity, manipulating the elections with fraudulent software and hardware in the machines. So let me share with you the third box. That's the grand jury box.
When the grand jury meets and they determine their decision, they put all their decisions in the grand jury box, and that's how it's determined. They select from the grand jury box, they count the vote, and that's how the decisions are made in the grand jury, whether to indict or not to indict, whether to write a presentment or not to write a presentment. So that's where we're at right now. We are at the third box, the grand jury box. Now, we all know that our founders used those first three boxes to persuade Great Britain against committing further tyranny.
The fourth and final box, our founders chose to use it. And the first example of that was in Boston, there in.
In the early days, when shots were fired and it was heard around the world. That was the use of the fourth box, the cartridge box. Now we don't want to go there.
Pardon me.
We have a situation where the United States government is a total tyranny. It is actually a beast. And we, the people do nothing, stand a chance in an armed conflict. We do not want armed conflict with this government.
They have demonstrated their power, their intent. January 6. We saw what they did to many, many innocent people.
And don't think for a minute they will not repeat it. They most certainly will. So we want to.
They're desperate.
[00:43:45] Speaker A: I'm just saying they're desperate right now, and anyone who's desperate, they're the most dangerous of all.
[00:43:53] Speaker D: They're like cornered rats.
[00:43:56] Speaker A: Yeah.
And so we have to be extremely careful. Be aware of your surroundings.
I feel so bad for many of those January 6 people.
Technically, the most that they did, and I don't even know if they could really hold them to it, but would be trespassing. They were trespassing, but trespassing on federal property. Well, who pays for the federal property? The people pay for the federal price.
[00:44:22] Speaker D: And there was certainly, you know, and there was certainly some disorderly conduct. Let's. Let's be honest. There. There is no doubt about that. Some of those people acted disorderly, and they should have been charged properly, but not with the types of crimes and sentences they were given. It's outrageous.
[00:44:41] Speaker A: So solitary confinement.
Confinement, yeah.
[00:44:48] Speaker D: And many people were not given their. Their medicine, their. Their medical attention was denied.
People became very sick and ill.
It's just outrageous. But I cannot emphasize enough to the people right now, and I know many people already realize this, but this grand jury effort in the state of Florida is the most powerful.
It's the most powerful weapon we have at our disposal right now. It's the third and final peaceful effort. The third box is the last peaceful effort of redress. Now, we certainly can take a matters to the court. We can file court action, but how many of us have 20, $30,000 to put a lawyer on retainer to fight in the courts? Not many of us. So this, again, is why we must use the grand jury.
The grand jury is designed with the people's interest at heart, and that's why the founders gave it to us. They were genius in everything they did, and they set it up in such a way that we still have this institution. Now there is an attack on the grand jury by the bar mafia. Now, I have some very good friends that are lawyers that work within the legal system of the bar, they are bar members. However, not everyone in the bar is part of the mafia. There's a lot of good people trapped in. In this bar mafia, and the bar mafia is set up in such a way that they control you by their power of influence. You know, if you want to have success in your court cases, you certainly don't want to rock the boat of the bar mafia. And if you do rock the boat of the bar mafia, you'll have difficulty winning cases. This is how they exercise their power. This is how they hold their power over the bar and all the members.
So it's a very difficult spot. If you're a lawyer and you want to fight the system, you better either be very independently wealthy or very good at what you do and know the law. For example, there, and I won't name any names yet, but there's a lawyer in the state of Florida that is very soon going to make national news with the effort that they have implemented. This lawyer has uncovered a fraud within the bar mafia. Where legal experts have captured the elderly system in the state of Florida. They have captured the legal system that oversees, you know, the elderly people in their health issues, in their estates. The institution of the bar has allowed a corruption to run rampant within the state of Florida because the state of Florida is God's waiting room. That's where a lot of people go and retire, and they wait and enjoy life here in their last years. And I. It's a great place to live. If you enjoy the outdoors, you enjoy beautiful scenes and water and fishing, it's the place to be. So because of that fact, the bar mafia, over many decades of time, has captured and been able to influence that industry of elderly people and that industry surrounding all the facets of being an elderly citizen. And so this particular lawyer has uncovered crimes of the most dire type. You will not believe it when this comes out. It is going to rock the system like never before. And this is where the people can also get involved. They can demand justice. And unfortunately, the justice system has become just us of the bar mafia. And that's because of the inaction of the people. The people cannot sit idly by and be a spectator.
This game is serious, this sport is brutal, and it requires your involvement. Both men, man and woman, and youth, teenagers, college students, everybody must get involved. And the way you can get involved is by becoming a part of your local assembly.
We, along with other several groups and organizations in the future, will be organizing county assemblies, state assemblies, and even regional assemblies.
We have put together a website.
It's under development. It's not done, but if you would like to go there and just take a quick look, it's called New America us.
New America us. And stay tuned. Be sure to text the word jury to 21,000. That'll be the best way for you to get connected. And if you would like to email for specific questions or comments, you may email
[email protected]. floridacountycongressmail.com and we would look forward to hearing from anyone out there that has concerns, ideas, questions. If you would like to donate to this publication effort, we are going to purchase full page advertisements in several major newspapers around the Tampa St. Petersburg area. We are going to need funding for that.
Please, any way you can get in touch with us if you would like to participate again? Floridacountycongressmail.com text the word jury to 21,000.
Please go to the website thefloridafix.com. download the petition, send it to Governor DeSantis. Thank him for requesting the Supreme Court to convene these grand juries. If it weren't for Governor DeSantis, the american people, the people of Florida would not have realized how bad the border effect is upon the state of Florida and other states. This is the most comprehensive investigation done in the state of Florida. It's the 21st grand jury. If you would like to read it, all you have to do is do a search, type in 21st statewide Florida grand jury, and you will come up with all the various presentments and then also do the same on the 22nd Florida statewide grand jury. So far there have been two presentments, quite lengthy, detailing the problems with the vaccinations.
[00:52:32] Speaker A: 22Nd is going to be dealing primarily with the vaccinations.
[00:52:36] Speaker D: That's right. The 22nd statewide grand jury is solely focused on the COVID scamdemic, I call it, as many other people call it. But it's the pandemic. And that that grand jury, they requested an additional six months, which they were granted, and that will end December 23. So we really got to be getting busy about getting in touch with DeSantis. Ashley Moody, the attorney general, and also the statewide prosecutor, Christopher Cox. He is the one controlling this grand jury. He's the one that has the ability to put witnesses on the stand, Mister Cox, and he is in.
[00:53:23] Speaker A: Mike, you said earlier that they don't have to listen to the prosecutor. So I'm kind of confused if.
[00:53:30] Speaker D: Well, yeah, that's why we're going to be publishing newspapers, articles, open letter to the grand jury.
That's the problem you're bringing out.
[00:53:44] Speaker A: Maybe the light just went off in my brain. They don't know that. They.
They don't have the knowledge. Right, right.
[00:53:52] Speaker D: That's why I was saying we want to fully inform the grand jury of their authority, their statutory authority. They unfortunately rescala, you know, the people out here, we all have our own lives. We've got, you know, mortgages to pay, children to send to college.
[00:54:11] Speaker A: Reality.
[00:54:11] Speaker D: We have reality. Yeah, reality. Right, right. So everybody can't be a grand jury expert, but these things used to be taught in school. I come from a background in a country school in central Ohio surrounded by cattle farms, dairy farms, and grain and agriculture. We had good old fashioned teachers where I came from. We had in fifth grade and 6th grade civics english class. And these two teachers, Mister Moody and Mister Jackson, I give them honor.
I can't say enough about these two men, how profound they were and what an effect they had on my life. These men taught us about our government and how we needed to keep maintaining it. We needed to be involved. And this was rare. When I was in school, I graduated supposed to. In 1981, I moved to Florida and graduated a year early in 1980 in Orlando. But in the early 1970s, where I come from, in the state of Ohio, the teachers were still giving prayers in the morning in violation of the law.
[00:55:31] Speaker A: I remember that. So I have. Kelly has been standing by in the background. He has something he wants to add as well. So I'm going to bring him on. You go ahead and continue. But I wanted to let you know I'm going to bring him on.
[00:55:45] Speaker D: Yeah, yeah.
And the classes, when we had class, the teachers would start the school with prayer. And this was already decided in court that it was illegal, but the teachers refused to obey the law. That's the type of background in the country schools in Ohio that I came from. And today we need to return to that in the state of Florida, in Texas, in Oklahoma, and several other states, they are advocating that we return to that type of a classroom environment. So. Well, I'll yield now to Kelly. And welcome, Kelly.
Thank you.
[00:56:30] Speaker B: Good evening. How are you all?
Yeah, okay, good. Well, yeah, I'm glad to be on the show again. And. Hello, Mike and Ruskala.
Yeah, we're talking about prayer.
And in proverbs 29 seven, it reads, the righteous care about justice for the poor, but the wicked have no such concern.
Proverbs 29 seven. So, yeah, this grand jury is a great instrument to bring about justice for the poor.
And one of the problems with not administering justice for the poor is they have no solution, and so they get influenced by socialism. Oh, yeah. Socialism will change things. Oh, so it will change things.
[00:57:19] Speaker D: Oh, yeah.
[00:57:20] Speaker B: You know what? Where we had 80 million people murdered, socialist regimes anyway.
So, yeah, you uphold justice. You give people the opportunities. You know, there's so many to come, so many things to comment on here, but forced compassion. Yeah. Okay, so young people like to force people to be compassionate. I've gotten a lot of mileage out of that simple phrase. Oh, you're socialist. I'll bet you care about people. Oh, yes, I do. You know the government's force, right? Well, yeah. So with socialism, we have combining your desires to help people you don't even know, and you're gonna force rich folks to care for the poor through the government. That's called forced compassion. And people take a double take, and they think about it. And I, you know, it's. I'm getting a lot of mileage on that simple phrase of forced compassion. But anyway, the grand jury number 21 and 22, I read the preliminary report that the immigration grand jury statewide of Florida came out with. And they said 95,000 illegal.
Illegal students are in the Florida schools, which means Florida is funding the feeding and education of 95,000 people that shouldn't be here in the first place. What is the cost per student, per year? What? I don't know, Mike.
10,000, 20,000? I don't know what the numbers are.
[00:58:48] Speaker A: It's in the tens of thousands of dollars. And while I'm at it, I know Mike is very limited on his time tonight. So, Mike, you just feel free whenever you have to go. I don't want you to feel committed that you have to stay. I know you got to get up early, but I'd like you to stay as long as you can. Okay.
[00:59:06] Speaker D: All right.
Pretty soon.
[00:59:10] Speaker B: Okay, well, I want to plug a plug in for what Mike is doing, so. Grand jury 21, illegal immigration. They're done.
Grand jury number 22, the COVID And I know people who have died shortly after the jab. Well, I guess I don't know them anymore, but I've heard first and second hand stories. Very alarming. And now criminal parts of this should be examined, which. There is a third degree murder, which is like manslaughter. I don't know what Florida state laws are, but it would be nice to get to that. Now, as far as getting to a grand jury, Mike is tried, and the attorney general is blocking his right to petition for redress of grievance, First Amendment violation, because it's a grand jury that decides or not. It'd be nice if they write a letter. When I was on the grand jury, we would write people that, hey, we don't have enough time for your concern, but thank you for at least petitioning. At least we communicate back with them. It's the grand jury's choice, not the attorney general's. So going around with the. I love the idea of an open letter in the newspapers. Okay, grand jury, here is your power. Here's what we want you to look at. Here's some evidence. Subpoena these people.
And that would help immensely, as the grand jury would so choose, of course, include their independent power, us versus Williams. But to get an ad in the paper, multiple papers, to get the attention of a grand jury, yes, you can do this. It's called the right to petition for redress agreements. Okay? We're talking 1020, preferably $30,000. And it's always hard to ask for money. I'm not in Florida. I'm in California, actually. State of Jefferson is what we call it here because we want out of California. But what I want to do is I want to ask if your listeners can, if they know anybody that's very wealthy, okay.
To help fund $1,000.02, three five, maybe the whole 20 or $30,000, because these full page ads are expensive.
And so this is extremely important to fund this, to get the grand jury, the statewide grand jury, to open up not just the fraud of COVID but also any type of mortality and injuries, bio weapons, etcetera. People call them that. This is very important because they are done in December, which means they might spend all of November writing the. Their presentments.
It's being on a grand jury, and we kind of have a cutoff date, okay, no more investigation. Now we have to write. We go into committees and rewrite. And I read one of the preliminary presentments of the COVID grand jury, and they said the lockdowns, after talking to all sorts of experts about this, lockdowns are only effective during the first ten days.
By then, the virus is out in the public, and you got to get on top of this right away. So that's a very important presentment. Now, people were taking the jab when they didn't want to do. Part of it was isolation.
The isolation is what pushed people like Ernest, Ernest Ramirez junior to take it. He was 16 years old. He died five days after the jab. And I have the evidence from his vaccine card and the death certificate. So this should not have happened. But he was so isolated from the lockdowns, he wanted to go back to normal. So these kinds of things, that's a good start for the grand jury lockdowns. But again, I want to ask people if you know anybody really uber wealthy who can help Mike Zarzano to get these newspaper ads out. And I guess with that, I want to, want to turn it over to Mike to see if, you know, there's a donation button, if there's a way to get in contact with you so that you can. I know it's hard to plug for your own cause. That's why I'm plugging for you, Mike, because I totally support Mike. And I talk about every week or every other week, so, you know, and publishing a book on the grand jury said, I totally support what he's doing to, I'm encouraging people. Please, if you know anybody wealthy, please put them in contact with Mike Sarzano. I yield.
[01:03:22] Speaker D: Well, thank you very much, Kelly. And I do just want to repeat one more time for the people that would like to get in contact with us to help in one way or another. They can email
[email protected].
and they need to also text the word jury to 21,000 to get involved. And you'll receive instructions on how you can do just that. This must be a we the people effort. We don't have the millions and billions, but we've got the large numbers of people, and that's where we can make a difference. And I just want to thank you, Rescala, for having me on tonight. I appreciate it. I am going to have to go now, but I just want to thank you and salute what you're doing and you as well, Kelly.
[01:04:09] Speaker A: Okay, my pleasure, my friend. And I appreciate that all the efforts that you're doing and the work that you're doing. And hopefully it will bring us to a point where the people really do bring back the power that we have, and we just have to restore that power. And I really believe in this grand jury thing. See, I didn't know a whole lot about that. We weren't taught that in school.
And when I first heard about it, I always thought grand juries were only issued by, like, high end judges and they were only for really big criminal stuff. I had no idea that, that it was, you know, that and it was also controlled by the prosecutors. I didn't know that. They can be on their own, like you said, you know, they don't have to listen to the prosecutor. They can come to their own conclusions. One thing I know you need, I know you need to go, but I wanted to ask you this because I was curious if, if we're part of a grand jury and we assign an investigator, and he's not a, he's not a county or city or federal paid investigator, he's a private investigator, would he have the authority like anybody else?
[01:05:26] Speaker D: Well, you have to, you have to really be careful. The, the members of the grand jury, once they are convened, they become their own authority, their own power.
They do have to remain within certain judicial limits. But as far as who they hire to investigate where they get legal counsel, that can be decided by the grand jury once they are convened. But we really need to be careful here. I don't want to give any false. I'm certainly not giving any legal advice, and I want to clarify that. And I also want to state that the grand jury does have limits, but those limits are not restricting who they can hire, where they can go in their investigation. As long as it has to do with exposing crime within the county or the state, state of their jurisdiction, they are permitted to do it. And this is where we come in with producing these newspaper open letters. We want to inform, fully inform the grand jury of their authority and their rights based upon the law. And this is where the grand jury has been captured. You know, the prosecutors like to brag, oh, we can indict a ham sandwich. Well, that's pretty much true, because they've captured the system by ignorance. The people have become ignorant, unfortunately, and I use that word with all respect, it just means lack of knowledge. So let's not get emotional over the word ignorant. But the fact is, the american people know more about the football games and the NASCAR races than they do about their own government. And this is what needs to change. And it is changing. People are waking up, thanks to shows like yours and others. So I just wanted to clarify that we really have to be careful.
And for people that are interested in learning more about the grand jury, we have done exhaustive research and put it on our website for people to be able to download and read one book in particular.
It's almost 300 pages. I think it's about 200 and 8275 pages. It's called the people's panel, the people's panel by younger. And it's an exhaustive work on the grand jury, the history of it, the functioning of it, and the legalities of it. And we have that entire book on our website county college, congress.com. and you can go there and download it if you want to make a hard copy. The best way is to go to like staples or Home office Depot and they will spiral bind it for you and make a nice little booklet out of it so you can write it and make notes and all that. But it's an excellent work on the grand jury. And then, of course, we have the people's big stick, the little pamphlet from Readers Digest, 1932 or 1937, rather. This little article talks about what the american people did in the thirties after the Great Depression, how they organized themselves and they got grand juries convened, statutory grand juries, lawful grand juries were convened and they overthrew crime and criminals and mafia members, boss Tweed and many others. So this is an exciting time, but the people must become active. It's not spectator time, folks. It's participation time. And if you care about your grandchildren and your future, you'll get involved today rather than tomorrow. Thank you.
[01:09:33] Speaker A: God bless you, my friend.
[01:09:35] Speaker D: All right, good night.
[01:09:37] Speaker A: Good night. So I think one of the people is asking, what's the difference between a grand jury and a federal grand jury? I think the difference is federal grand juries on a federal level. And Kelly can, can clarify that, but I think that's the difference. It's just one grand jury's based either in a state or a county. For a city, I'm not sure, but one of them is statewide and the other one is federal wide. Kelly, am I right or wrong?
[01:10:02] Speaker B: There's many types of grand juries.
I guess we can start at the state level.
So California has a grand jury that is nicknamed a civil grand jury, which in certain circumstances has indictment power.
When there's a criminal grand jury in place and the civil grand jury doesn't have indictment power, that's just within a county. Okay. And you can have, if the population is very large like LA, you can have multiple grand juries. Okay. So that's kind of a county level. And then there's a state grand jury, which the typical statutes many of the states, the attorney general can request of the supreme court to impanel a statewide grand jury. And in Pennsylvania, for example, the attorney general of, of Pennsylvania has to go to only one supreme court judge of Pennsylvania. Now, if the, that Supreme Court judge, because the supreme court judges and states will have certain districts to deal with certain things.
If that Supreme Court judge says no to the state attorney general, for a statewide grand jury, that is an automatic appeal, almost surgery, in other words, very quickly. And then the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania would say, oh, yeah. Well, we agree. We're going to override our buddy on the Supreme Court. Yes, you're going to have a statewide grand jury. So there's a statewide grand jury. Florida has unique statute of the governor can ask for it. And that's what happened there. In Mike's situation, he got two out of four, which, if you're batting in baseball, that's a very high batting average. All right, federal grand juries, there's two types. There is a regular grand jury, which is impaneled commonly every. I think they go for a year. And so that's regular. It's already in place. This is where you hear of indictments here and there. Like Senator Menendez out of New Jersey was indicted last year. In his trial was on July 16. Guilty. Of course, he's appealing it, and he's still running for office as an independent. The Democrats disowned him. It seems the Democrats are. Seem to be disowning each other a lot these days.
[01:12:21] Speaker A: All kinds of stuff.
[01:12:22] Speaker B: Yeah. Like Alan Dershowitz said, I'm done with the Democrats. He didn't say he's endorsing Trump, but recently he came out and said, I'm done with the Democrats. But anyway, so that's federal districts. I believe there's 89 federal districts. Each one would have a grand jury.
Because of the requirement of the Fifth Amendment, no person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury.
So in the Fifth Amendment, you can't move forward criminally without a grand jury. So the federal grand juries have in their normal course of business, if you will. They already have them. Oh, except for Covid. Oh, except for Covid. We can't have grand juries during COVID But we don't want to spread the disease. Yeah, well, when the cats are away, the mice will play. And that's frustrating what happened there. But, um, had there been grand juries and had they known what they're doing, there would win a lot of the whole COVID lockdowns. Everything else would have probably ended a lot quicker than we even imagined, because, hey, this is an. Right, so that's a federal grand jury. But there's one more federal grand jury, and it's called the special federal grand jury.
The special federal grand jury was created during the Ricoh era, and they were going after drug kingpins and the drug trade, the drug wars. Okay.
And so the special grand jury is allowed only when a federal district has 4 million population or more.
And they can investigate all over the country, even crimes in other states. The district federal grand jury, the regulator, can only investigate crimes within their district, but the special can investigate nationwide. Now, all these grand juries, county, state, federal, have subpoena power nationwide. And that was proven when Lindsey Graham had to appear before the Fulton county grand jury of Georgia. I was adjudicated there. And it was very wonderful ruling because, you know, United States senator wanted to get out of it. And the court said, uh, nope, you're going to show up. This is the 11th Circuit appellate district of the federal court. And then he went to Justice Scalia and Scalia said, I agree with the lower court. You are going to show up, but you have, your congressional immunities only apply to what legislation you're presently working on.
So the jurisdiction is one of the interesting things. So, excuse me, county grand jury only has, only has jurisdiction where a crime has been committed. Triable, if you will, triable within county. Okay.
The statewide, obviously cast jurisdiction throughout the state. The federal normal has jurisdiction only within their federal district. And then finalist special has a nationwide. So you can't, I guess I'm telling you, a trend here, but we have, you know, county, state, federal and special. Federal grand jury.
And I wanted to read something to you about why our federal government has gone amok when the Justice Department has basically the block petitions to grand jury. I've experienced that. Mike's experience that Paul Nelly, he was on the show, he's experienced that, oh, we're just not going to honor your first amendment right to petition for redress of grievances.
But when, once again, when the cats are away, the mice will play.
[01:16:06] Speaker D: So.
[01:16:06] Speaker B: And that's what happened with the 911 investigation, though they did get to a grand jury for a while. Then all of a sudden it's called the lawyers inquest for 911 truth and Mick Harris. And he'd be an interesting person to get on your show. He was an attorney that worked on that case and it was going forward, they tried to get more evidence to the grand jury and guess what happened? Well, just department changing of the guard, Obama, forget it was really a challenge, but so what am I saying here is if I. This is how the Justice Department is being weaponized.
You protect your political enemies because without an indictment, you're not to be held to answer. Okay, with.
So you block petitions to grand juries, you tell the prosecutors to not indict, not sign the indictment, which makes it invalid if federal rules, criminal procedure rule six, plus us versus Cox, that grand jury is considered to be presentment on the federal level and the changing of the guard with the new attorney general they can take that presentment and turn into an indictment.
But you can also weaponize to go against your political enemies.
And so this is one of the biggest problems here. FRCP rule six.
I talked with trying to remember his name, Roger Roots.
He wrote in the Creighton Law Review many years ago, if it's not a runaway grand jury, it's not a real grand jury. Okay and so again independent, but here is something about the Fifth Amendment from a couple court cases, 1973 and then we go back to 1718 1887. Okay and this, this explains it all. Okay, and the reason why they set up the Fifth Amendment is so that the government cannot stomp out political reformers.
The grand jury has said ignoramus, let him speak his mind. They've done this a number of times, protecting political reformers. So as a perjury or the trial jury.
All right, so, and by the way when we're talking about grand jury versus the petty jury, just throw out what you know with the petty jury. The petty jury, they just sit and listen. They can't even talk about the case over lunch and they come back and they sit and listen and they deliberate and that's it. Verdict. The grand jury. You can call your buddies on the grand jury. I, when I was, I talked to a former grand juror today, just catching up with him. But dirt when you're in session you can actually call your committee members, you can call other grand jury members about what you're investigating. Meeting. It's a completely different.
The grand jury is like playing football. The petty jury is like playing badminton. Okay so it's just. Anyway, but so to protect political allies we protect. To protect free speech, our right to bear arms, all sorts of rights.
The Fifth Amendment was established so that political reformers were protected. I'm being repetitive, but basically you're standing as a grand jury. You're standing between the prosecution and the accused. If the Germans had a grand jury and you and I were on the grand jury and nazi prosecutor. Hey, I got ten jews here. We want to kill them right away. We're the grand jury. No, why do you want to kill them? Oh, because they're Jews. Had they committed a crime? No. Well then you're not going to kill them for being Jews. Same with the Pettitur. It can do jury nullification but that's another story. So.
[01:19:53] Speaker A: Something I'm curious about here. So we have different kinds of grand juries is one grand jury. I don't know if this is the correct way to put it. Is one grand jury more powerful than another grand jury, or are they all the same?
[01:20:14] Speaker B: Well, there's criminal and then there's presentments. Presentments meaning we need this local bridge fixed. Okay.
But indictments criminal if it is in county like Butler County, Pennsylvania, or Trump assassination attempt, copenhagen have Corey Copenhaver was killed, two others injured.
They have the same end effect, which, whether it's a federal grand jury or a county grand jury or a state grand jury, they send somebody to trial, and in trial they're convicted and then sentence and go to jail. So, yes, they have the same power in the sense of probable cause.
Okay. Criminal penalties, probable cause means you're heading to trial.
So, yes, they have the same power, state, county, or federal. But the point of the problems with, with federal is, is it would they'd have to be tried under, say, hate crimes, whereas murder is more of a state issue.
And so the federal grand jury can say, hey, a local county grand jury, here's our findings. Do your own investigation and then you. Because certain murder, certain charges are only in the hands of the state, then they'd have to turn it over to the county for law violations against the laws of the state. So it's kind of a yes and no answer.
But who has jurisdiction to try a murder case of the murder of Corey Copenhaver, the shooting of David Dutch and John Copenhaver? Well, it would be Pennsylvania. So they have the same. But jurisdiction to send somebody to court is based on the jurisdiction, state versus federal.
[01:22:09] Speaker A: So let me give you an example.
I have a friend who has. Believes that they have evidence against a doctor, and this doctor, they believe is performing malpractice and fraud, charging different prices for the same procedure to different people, depending upon whether they're rich or not, I'm guessing. But different prices. They found out that this is going on, and they've attempted to report that to whoever it is that you report it to. I'm not sure.
And I think it was a medical board, and they got nowhere. Would this be a, would this be an example for a grand jury, medical malpractice?
[01:23:06] Speaker B: Probably not, unless somebody died. Okay. Which could be a third degree murder, felony, financial fraud. Yes, that would have jurisdiction by the grand jury, and that would typically be a county grand jury.
[01:23:25] Speaker A: Well, they could and they would. They wouldn't have the. Whatever is necessary to bring this person to trial at that point.
[01:23:33] Speaker B: Right. So would the federal government really care about medical fraud and Orlando malpractice that led to murder. No federal grand jury wouldn't care.
[01:23:45] Speaker A: That's sad.
[01:23:47] Speaker B: Well, actually, that's a good thing.
That's a good thing because I believe in states rights. Absolutely. Article nine and ten of the Bill of Rights.
With, as you see, the federal government has way, way too much power and being weaponized versus keeping things within the state jurisdiction in the county, you are protected a lot more from the tyranny of, say, Adolf Hitler. Okay, so keeping things local is the best situation.
Because if we have a tyrannical government, and the federal government wrote all sorts of laws, I mean, you just say there's a federal law of, you doubt shall not rip off your mattress tag.
They would use that like Pee Wee Herman, you know, that movie. And he met somebody in prison that tore the mattress tag off, went to jail. It's kind of a joke. But if the federal government had that much power to reach into people's bedrooms and rip off. Oh, my gosh, you tore off a mattress pad.
That frightens me. And should any patriot, that the federal government would have that much reach into people's lives, therefore, I mean, the founding generation sets us up, counties and states.
And in prince versus us, that's a famous sheriff Mac, keeping our gun rights. When Clinton ordered, everybody grab your guns. You know, Clinton ordered law enforcement, hey, go grab the guns out there. Sheriff Mack was in Prince versus us. Prince was another sheriff. And Scalia brilliantly said this. We have in this country, we are. We are a system of dual sovereignty states versus the feds to keep each other in check. So we don't want the feds to be the end all, be all of everything. And it was never set up this way. You look at article two of the articles, Confederation. Each state retains its rights except what we have delegated in the articles of Confederation. Look at article nine and ten of the Bill of Rights. Hey, look, just because we've created federal government doesn't mean you're the end all, be all of everything affirmed again in Prince versus us.
So it depends upon, I mean, some things. Some Georgia. Okay, Paul, Nelly, he was on. I said, does Georgia require a grand jury indictment, even for shoplifting? And he said, yes.
Well, the feds aren't going to care about shoplifting.
So, yeah, it. Where will the triumph, where will the crime be committed? Offenses? When I took the oath on the grand jury, it says, I swear to diligently inquire and true presentments make against all offenses against the people of the state of California. Okay, well, that's based on California law. So grand juries can issue a presentment regarding a federal matter, but it's more of a report and informational thing. They can kind of cross jurisdictions and give that to a federal grand jury and then the federal grand jury can run with it. I'd love to see the civil grand jury of San Francisco county, investigate the Federal Reserve in San Francisco and then turn it over to the feds or a statewide grand jury in California. Investigate the Federal Reserve. Audit the Fed. That was Ron Paul Singh. Okay, how about, is it Dallas, Texas, where the other federal reserve. I mean, it would be great. Grand juries tear that up. You know what's going on here? Why are you printing our money? Why are we having this inflation. Don't tell me about the qe whatever money supply thing.
[01:27:23] Speaker A: I don't think. I don't think they would allow it. They're too powerful.
There was an audit. When was that? Gosh. It's an audit a while back of the fed. And they were yelling and screaming and they only got like, I think was 80% audit. They didn't even get a complete audit in just a little bit. Or the almost whatever they found. They found all kinds of fraud. Never did anything about it. Nothing ever happens. It's so frustrating.
[01:27:49] Speaker B: Right. Well, this is. This is where a grand jury can investigate the Federal reserve, a corporation operating within their county. They can issue a presentment.
Presentment is a report. It's information.
It used to. Used to be a probable cause for trial, but that's a whole other. We don't have time for the details of that. But I wanted to get into why there are federal grand juries in every federal district, and this is a summary of two court cases. But I'll. And actually a judge of 1792.
Okay, so no indictment, no accountability on the federal level. Per the Fifth Amendment, for a federal felony, if there is no indictment nor a presentment, then there is no accountability. This means that absent an indictment or a presentment, federal government officials and employees can get away with breaking the law. This is best explained by a US Supreme Court ruling of 1887, which is ex parte bain, 121 US one.
It reads the declaration of article five of the amendments to the Constitution that, quote, no person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime unless honor, presentment, or indictment of a grand jury is. That was, unquote, is jurisdictional. Comma. This is a judge's ruling, is jurisdictional, and no court of the United States has authority to try a prisoner without indictment or presentment in such cases.
In 1973, SCOTUS, Justice William O. Douglas wrote the same for no matter how obnoxious a person may be, the United States cannot prosecute for a felony without a grand jury indictment. It, the grand jury is the only accusatorial body of the federal government recognized by the Constitution.
And so thus we see the necessity of a grand jury to issue an indictment. Otherwise, the courts can't go forward. They don't have jurisdiction. Now, Judge John Houston's charge to the grand jury of Chatham County, Georgia.
This was February 14, 1792. Now, a charge, some of your new listeners.
So you get sworn in as a grand jury, and then the judge gives a charge. What's charge? A charge is a motivational speech. It's like a judge being on a soapbox of the necessity for the grand jury to do its job in bringing punishment upon criminals. All right, so this is the charge. 1792, quote, in regard to the proceedings of a grand jury, there is nothing in the scale of social life of more importance. They, grand jury members are the bulwark of liberty, for judges and other ministers of justice are bound down to inaction until a grand jury shall say a man has deserved to be put on his trial. And if you are informed or within yourselves know of any public wrongs or grievances in your county, it is also within your province to bring him under judicial correction by a presentment.
So, obviously, I've been a little obsessed because we have this peaceful method of resolving our problems, and I don't want to see bloodshed. What are we going to replace it with? If there is a revolution or a civil war, what are we going to replace it with?
Probably something worse.
[01:31:35] Speaker A: Knowing my argument has always been, I don't want to replace it. I want to restore.
If it. If it was. Here's one of the things that I see where things have gone awry. All of the, all of the framework that this country was placed under, the men who did that and the women were of a moral, a high moral compass. They were, they were basically God loving people. And they understood the primary ten reasons that God gave us, which people call the Ten Commandments. They understood them on a first, on a day to day level.
As we have progressed down the road, those have slowly been shifted aside. And in some places, you can't even post the Ten Commandments in a federally owned building and some county owned buildings as well. So as that had been pushed aside, all the moral compass that was, that was used to produce the framework of this country no longer exists. And so, you know, it's like we're playing a game. And in many cases, this is a game, sadly. But we're playing a game, and the referee is supposed to see to it that each of us is doing a fair job. However, the referee has been taken over by another side, and the referee will do whatever that side wants, whether they want to allow this or not. To allow that. That's not what the framework was originally intended for. Because if there were people of high moral compass, they would say, no, we're not doing that. I don't care how much money. It doesn't matter. And if they were a. A person of high moral compass, they wouldn't be able to be blackmailed. Oh, yeah. You have a picture of me doing. I'd like to see that picture. It looks like it's been photoshopped to me. You want me to take it and have it forensically investigated? You follow what I'm saying? They wouldn't. Yeah, they wouldn't be in a position where they could be blackmailed and they wouldn't be in a position where they could be purchased because they understood that there's the. The price is their life. Maybe that's the best. I'm trying to figure out the best way to put it. Their price is. Is their life. You. You can't give me enough money to do what you want.
There's no amount of money that you can give me that can replace my life. So it is my life. That is my price.
[01:34:07] Speaker B: Oh, exactly. Yeah. The grand jury and the petty jury have protected life and limb from political prosecution. Political prosecution. And this is one of the. How political reformers were protected.
And through years of liberty like this, we have developed, you know, the United States constitution and the amendments.
But we would go back to Magna Carta if you want. But basically, we have gone to a system that we have, and the corporations have too much power. And that's holy. Totally for another day. If you ever read Bastiat, Frederick Bastiat's the law.
Oh, my gosh. That's a fascinating read.
He warned us about corporations taking over as they had taken over in Europe in mid 1800. It's kind of like Tocqueville, but mid 18 hundreds. He was basically saying, the corporations have captured the governments of France, but not so in America. Mid 18 hundreds. But that's. That's for another day. It's astounding writing. He was French. Came and visited America.
I want to read something to you.
Thing I found of recent.
But. And by the way, Pennsylvania folk listening. Happy 301st anniversary of the grand jury. Yes. 301 on September 17 723 of documented charge from Judge Logan in Philadelphia county.
So I can say a documented, happy 301st anniversary to the grand jury in Pennsylvania. Gentlemen of the grand jury.
A grand jury. A grand jury being an essential part of a court of quarter sessions, instituted for the administration of justice, which is the great end of all governments. I could go on and on and read about this, but the judge was acknowledging 301 years ago the necessity of the grand jury to assist the courts.
So, yeah, it's fear and 17. Here's one of the things that Mike is doing, which I think is stunningly brilliant, and I hope he gets funding.
See, I've got this book. It's got 1500 pages of charges of grand juries from, like, the 16 hundreds to 1801. And what the grand juries would do is they'd publish. They would request the judge to publish this charge in a local paper.
And so this is how this professor, law professor, got ahold of these. A number of these were printed in the paper, and we're talking typeset. If you ever done typeset, it has each letter, it was a lead form. The a was reversed, the c was reversed, etcetera. Each single letter had to be set in a row. This is a printing press. You got a lead piece for space, a lead piece for period. So they would publish these in the papers. And this is how the public knew about this. And they kept doing this, I believe, I want to say, into the early 19 hundreds. But basically, the public knew that the grand jury was. Was a part of obtaining justice, to punish the vicious, to protect the virtuous.
I can go on and on, but it's. It's so fundamental. And people got called on to jury duty. They'd be glad to appear.
And the judge would. It depends on the state. But the judge would make sure that the jury members was a fine moral character and not with an axe to grind, but we had this beautiful system, which, by the way, if you want to get into scriptures, I can show you a similar system.
Okay.
It's actually what I call the supreme Court of Israel. Did you know Israel had a supreme court?
[01:38:00] Speaker A: No.
[01:38:02] Speaker B: And if you look at the Torah.
Yeah. Well, the. Well, studying law for decades, and people keep telling me I should go to law school. The other day, somebody called me up and said, are you an attorney? And I said, no, I'm honest.
But there are some really good, wonderful, amazing attorneys. But anyway, the Torah, if you look at the Bible first five, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Deuteronomy, numbers. If you look at that, there is a law system. We have a charter. It's called a constitution.
Great Britain had the great charter, or Magna Carta 1215.
The Torah is the charter, the constitution of Israel. Now, when you examine it from a law point of view, it gets very fascinating in many aspects. Appoint judges in every small town.
That's the command. King Jehoshaphat appointed judges in every small town. Guess what happened? That's what America did from 1620 until the early seventies. You didn't have to have a bar card at all to appoint a judge in ancient Israel. Where was, where was law school? Where was the bar card? You know, God obviously trusted man to be wise enough. Of course, the corruption was another problem, but God trusted man to rule based on the Torah. And I've even seen, oh, some of the judges of old, 17 hundreds. They'd carry their state law book in one hand and a Bible in the other.
But you didn't have to have a bar card. And so we had justices of the peace. If you watch Andy Griffith, he was a sheriff and a justice of the peace, and. But no bar card required to become a judge. Justice Robert who out Jackson, Supreme Court justice. He presided over the Nuremberg trials.
And I can't remember how long he was on the best the bench as a SCOTUS justice. He never had a bar card.
So our nation would have justices of the peace and small town judges elected by the people without a bar card. The first place you'd go to appeal, you didn't like the local order of your small town judge, you go to the superior court. Okay. This is just like Israel.
Samson the prophet. I'm sorry, Samuel. The prophet Samuel was a small was. He wrote a three town circuit. He was an appellate judge judging for Israel. Isn't that fascinating? Three town circuit. But he was not.
He was not the supreme court of Israel. And I'm getting some to something here, but it's arguable that there was a form of grand jury in the Bible. And I'll pull it up because here, I gotta get my. I'll be right back.
[01:40:57] Speaker A: Grand jury. I don't remember anything like that being in the Bible.
[01:41:01] Speaker B: Well, when you study law, then you can look for it, you know?
[01:41:06] Speaker A: I don't remember anything like that. Wow, this is gonna be interesting.
[01:41:09] Speaker B: Deuteronomy 19. While I'm flipping the pages here, deuteronomy 19, the judge, this is a command. One witness is not enough to convict a man of a crime or offense he may have committed, but only upon the testimony of two or three witnesses. The judge must make a thorough investigation. And if a malicious witness is found due to the plaintiff, what the plaintiff intended to do to the defendant, show no mercy, eye for eye, life for life, tooth for tooth, and such a wicked thing will never be done again. In all of Israel, the penalty for perjury, really? Malicious witness, where you're trying to frame somebody, could be death in Israel.
[01:41:51] Speaker A: Wow.
[01:41:52] Speaker B: Trying to frame somebody.
So there's all sorts of law things in them in the Bible, if you have the mind to catch it. It's taking me years to catch it. All right, here's the. I'm turning to deuteronomy 17, and I call this the supreme court of Israel, quote, unquote, the supreme Court.
It was basically a tribunal of many men. Okay? Someone drew a grand jury.
All right? This is deuteronomy 17 eight. If cases come before your courts that are too difficult for you to judge, whether bloodshed, lawsuits, or assaults, take them to the place the Lord your God will choose.
Go to the priests who are levites and to the judges who were in office at that time.
Inquire of them, and they will give you the verdict. You must act according to the decision they give you at the place the Lord will choose. Be careful to do everything they direct you to do. Act according to the law they teach you, and the decisions they give you do not turn aside from what they tell you to the right or to the left. The man who shows contempt for the judge or for the priest who stands ministering there to the Lord your God must be put to death. You must purge the evil from Israel. All the people will hear and be afraid and will not be contemptuous again. So you had a tribunal, and people were contemptuous. They could be put to death.
[01:43:30] Speaker A: Wow. I looked it up while you were reading it, and. And even in the. So I went the Bible gateway, and that's the first. Wow. I'm surprised it's. It even under, just above.
Oh, my gosh. Verse eight, it says, law courts. I never, never caught my attention. Wow, that's amazing.
[01:43:58] Speaker B: Yeah, it's right there. There's a tribunal. And what it tells me, you know, a couple things got. God says it twice. Go to the place I will tell you. Okay, maybe that's through the prophets, maybe through the Levites, I don't know. But they go to some place, they assemble, they investigate. The judge must make a thorough investigation. Deuteronomy 19. Okay.
And so what this tells me, when the Levites are involved, they're regarding righteousness and sacrifices and sin. And God had the wisdom to involve the Levites, because all lawlessness has a sin element to it.
And Levites obviously didn't have a bar card, this tribunal.
[01:44:43] Speaker A: Yeah.
[01:44:44] Speaker B: And so the judges, you know, maybe the elders appointed the judges, or the best of the best, whatever how it worked. But there is your quote unquote Supreme Court, and it's not just one supreme court. You know, they had a chunk of land there in Israel in their glory days and twelve tribes. So obviously, there may have been several of these at various times.
So what am I saying here? This. It was a tribunal, by the way, it was investigating.
Now, a tribunal is different from a grand jury than a petit jury. A tribunal is investigating, and their judge and jury and everything, and they. And they commence sentencing. That's a tribunal. It's a different system.
But this is what it was. But it can be well argued that this was a form of a grand jury, because the Levites and the judges are investigating, and they would probably get other people involved, possibly be soldiers and who knows who else, to find out what the truth is. And they sent out a soldier to summon somebody as a witness. And by the way, there's another verse about witnesses. Do not shrink back, but tell the truth to the courts.
There's a bunch of law in the Torah.
So anyway, if God trusted everyday people in the law courts, and even the quote unquote Supreme Court or tribunal, well, then obviously the grand jury can be trusted.
I mean, yeah, I know there's legal scholars and they say, well, the grand jury, we just can't have them running around doing, come on, people.
For centuries in our country, this was the way it was. And if there's a problem with the quality of the people that's on the judge for not picking quality people, certainly a decent judge can certainly find 23 good men.
Certainly they can. You know, they might have to go through 50 people or 100 people.
I mean, you look at for Dyer when on a petit jury, gosh, a couple times in jury service, they kicked me off because, yeah, I know about jury nullification. The law itself is on trial just as much as it caused to be decided. Chief Justice Harlan Stone, 1942. Yes, I believe I can vote my conscience during nullification. Chip. Bam. I was off the jury. That's the petit jury. But we went, there are like 70, 80 people in the room, and they were going through people left and right and right and left. Finally, they had their twelve, and then they had their two or three alternates.
Okay?
So certainly we can pick high quality people now if they need advice.
I found several charges, even John Jason, this.
The grand jury can ask the court, ask the judge for assistance. Legally, the grand jury can ask the district attorney for legal assistance. Hey, we don't understand some of these legal things and what this implies.
They can ask for help. And in John Jay, in one of his charges to Ulster County, New York, which is 17, 1778, he said, if you need assistance, the court is very pleased to assist the grand jury.
[01:48:05] Speaker A: And what kind of assistance would that be?
[01:48:09] Speaker B: What is legal, what is not? Is there case law that covers this?
What is the procedure? We have some questions.
When I was on the grand jury, the foreman talked to the judge quite a bit. That was a little bit erroneous because she should have brought the judge in instead of having these private conversations.
But, you know, all sorts of legal questions.
And we had county council, if we would have chosen to come in and, and give us legal advice.
[01:48:41] Speaker A: So is it possible, trying to figure out how to word it, where it makes sense?
I think many people would recognize that President Trump is being prosecuted on a, on a false.
I don't know how to put it on a false pretense, I guess, maybe. So if they could prove that, could there be a grand jury to, to make these people face justice for the laws that they've broken in order to get at Trump just because they want to get a truck?
[01:49:25] Speaker B: Absolutely. The grand jury, a different grand jury can, well, it have to be within that jurisdiction. But say, Fulton county, all sorts of false evidence has come out. They get in front of a grand jury, then they can go after the prosecutor. Was it Fannie Willis is her name? Yeah. In 1988, the grand jury of Siski County, California, indicted the district attorney.
[01:49:50] Speaker A: Oh.
[01:49:52] Speaker B: Malfeasance, misfeasance, and derelict of duty, willful misconduct in office by a public officer. So the grand jury can turn around.
[01:50:01] Speaker A: I'd like to see attorney.
There doesn't seem to be any ceiling. I don't even know how to describe it. There doesn't seem to be any end to which a certain party will go and not be punished for it. You know, I go back to just, we look at what happened in Afghanistan. We walked away, ran away with our tail between our legs and left $85 billion worth of our latest equipment there. 13 of our service people were killed during all of that. And nobody, not even a slap on the hand, not a letter of reprimand, not a firing, nothing. As a matter of fact, the dipstick that people called a president was saying, we did a great job. I'm proud of it. Give me a break.
[01:50:55] Speaker B: Well, this is where it gets a little different, because you have military justice and the code of military justice, the grand jury can issue a presentment saying, hey, we don't like what happened. And we would ask the court of military justice to look into this.
[01:51:13] Speaker A: Yeah, but again, it's, you know, like I said, nothing happened. Nothing's going to happen until some serious changes are made.
This is why I was so interested and still continue to, to show interest in this subject, because to me, the only thing left is really what I believe they want us to do, and that is just to rise up ever so slightly. So they take and unleash the power of their military on us and say, well, those people are, they're insurgents, they're domestic terrorists, you know, that kind of thing.
[01:51:46] Speaker B: Yeah. Well, Mike Serzana was trying to get a grand jury going to investigate the Fed showing up and arresting Floridians over J six, you know, the storming of the Capitol building.
And he doesn't, he didn't seem to have much success, but he was trying. But he, Mike was telling me that of any state, Florida has the most j six ers that are getting rounded up by the fed. So it's a very real problem.
But again, that incident occurred in the jurisdiction of Washington, DC. And if you have a judge that picks Trump haters as grand jurors, they're not supposed to, but if you've got grand jurors that pick Trump haters and J six haters, well, then they're going to go after a whole bunch of people.
I mean, again, it's back to weaponization. We have, oh, there's so many things we need to change on the federal level.
[01:52:50] Speaker A: I'm sorry, that's what I was saying earlier about the moral, you know, moral compass. If there were a moral compass, we wouldn't be having this discussion. You wouldn't have to worry about a judge who might show prejudice. You wouldn't have to worry about picking from a pool of people who would be prejudiced just because they heard hearsay, something on a tv or a radio or something like that. Because they would be of a, a mentality, I guess, is the word I'm looking for. Where they were up to, they realized what was going on. They wouldn't allow these people to lie to them straight faced and, and smile at them and not realize it. They wouldn't be ignorant. Maybe that's the best way I could. I can put it. They wouldn't be, they would be asking the questions that needed to be asked long ago, long before now. So. Would never have reached this point.
[01:53:42] Speaker B: Well, yeah, the federal government shouldn't have so much power, but lying to Congress induces a felony. And there was one person prosecuted, indicted by a grand jury for lying to Congress.
I mean, we turned that law on, congressman. We wouldn't have any left.
But, you know, insider trading. Grand jury can say, hey, we don't like this. You got to change the laws. Grand jurors can recommend laws be changed, too. So, yeah, it. It's. Let's see.
Yeah, they can make a recommendation on laws in Indiana. Many years ago, the state of Indiana county grand jury wrote the legislature and said, hey, lighten up on marijuana, because all these marijuana laws are plugging up the courts, and the courts can't get anything done of serious crimes.
[01:54:31] Speaker A: Wow.
[01:54:33] Speaker B: So, yeah, I. California has a pretty good grand jury system in some ways. Another way is we get trained by a bunch of liberals, which is not a. You know, they point blank lied three times, but that's a whole other thing.
Kind of got me into trouble later. But that's another story.
[01:54:54] Speaker A: That's where we are. That is, if there is a fault in the way that this is. The framing of this country was put together, if there is a fault, it would be that all the men and women who were involved were people of high moral compass. We no longer have that. That's why you can do things like they're doing to an ex president, and nobody gets in trouble and they leave a country that we had. Gosh, I don't know how many lives invested in and how much money invested in, and just walk away with our tail between our legs. That wouldn't. That wouldn't happen. It wouldn't. I don't think we would have ever been in the country to begin with. If we had the right people, they would have seen right through all of that. All of that was done for money. Sadly, the. The thing for Afghanistan is Afghanistan had all kinds of precious minerals there that are used in electronics as well as probably the. One of the greatest poppy fields. And poppy fields are one of the bases, base materials used for pharmaceuticals. So it was a win win for them.
Iraq. The first thing they did in Iraq is they stole a man's gold. The same thing they did in Libya. Every time that we find our people going into, quote, preserve freedom, it's not for preservation at all. It's for their own good. And like I said, if there is a fault in the framework of this country, it's because the people who put it together had a high moral compass. They would never, ever even think of doing the things that have been going on for the, especially the last 24 years, especially 911 would have never happened.
The, was it the Oklahoma building that would have never happened.
I would venture to say I may be sticking my foot in my mouth, but I would venture to say just about everything that has happened, that is a major catastrophe. These school shootings. Moral compass. When I went to school, the last year that I was at school, we had two times that students showed up with their high velocity, high powered 300 six. That's a high powered rifle in the back, hanging in the back of their truck. And they were called the office and told, you're on suspension, don't come back for two days, and don't come back with that thing in your truck. We didn't have a major blowout. We didn't have helicopters. We didn't have the SWAT team. We had. Nobody even thought about shooting another student. It just wasn't, it wasn't even in our thought patterns because of the moral compass that was existing at that time. It's just deteriorated so bad. It's so sad for someone like me who has witnessed this and watched this going, getting worse and worse and worse and people accepting it, people allowing it to continue. And that's the key word, allowing people allowing this to continue because they think it's okay. This is just the way things are rescala. You're just not up with the times. No, you just don't understand the times that I was growing up, there was a completely different atmosphere in this country. It was nothing like what we're seeing today. You could safely walk down the street as a child and not have to be worried about somebody grabbing you or picking you up and never be seen from again. I know because I experienced those days.
It's like I said, for someone like me, who has seen it from what it was and what it is today, it truly, it concerns me because I have children, I have grandchildren. What's going to happen? How much worse is it going to get for them? You know?
[01:58:42] Speaker B: Oh, I'm wondering the same questions.
My mother died in 2018, and she would be so disgusting.
You know, I'm glad she's in heaven, but she won't. I mean, to experience it is another thing. And her disgust I can just hear, and my dad and my grandpas, both grandpas and grandmas, and it's mind blowing. But we did set up the constitution. It's a strange thing, but the constitution gives us our, gives us the right to radically reform our government, even destroy our government, when people don't understand the fundamental principles that the founders intended, and I mean, the founding generation, they actually learned from the British, which is the english system of law. It's fascinating. And you go back to even 1745, I saw a judge's charge where he was praising the english system. This is before King George came in and became a tyrant. But they were praising it. The english system of liberties, of freedom, of economy, the rule of law. And even one judge was commenting that he was upset. This is, I don't know, 1750s.
He was upset that adultery no longer had the death penalty.
[02:00:01] Speaker A: Wow.
[02:00:02] Speaker B: And he said, well, the family is the. Is the bedrock of a society. And he was ranting in his charge. Again, this is a charge is a soapbox. They can say whatever they want and.
But we were designed for a moral people. And freedom, love always offers a choice. God will freedom in every fiber of creation. And that freedom which is given through the constitution while restraining government from tyranny, it also includes the freedom to destroy our own country.
And what I see, I've asked my brother, my two sisters to run for office. The kids are out of the house and grown up. My brother says, ah, it's too corrupt. That's exactly why you got to get in, because you're honest, you know, and.
[02:00:52] Speaker A: It makes it really hard for somebody like that to go forward because you're literally jumping into a pool of sewer, you know, you just jumping in all this garbage.
Very difficult for somebody like that. Anyway, I need to. I need to take a quick break. You want to hang on with me, Kelly, and we'll continue the discussion?
[02:01:11] Speaker B: Okay. I'm only thinking, at the most, 20 minutes more.
[02:01:15] Speaker A: Okay, well, I got to take a quick break. I've got to get some more coffee, and I've got to make a run to a certain room. It's been a while. So while mother nature is acting up on me. So in the interim of all that, we're going to take a quick break and we'll be back in just a moment. Don't go away.
[02:02:00] Speaker E: Talk is tea, my words cut deep we gotta take a stand fighting hand in hand hide behind your lies and your disguise it starts with you and I to keep the Lord alive you gotta change with your sense of dignity, no hate we gotta act differently why wait? Be the positivity stand up, we have enough change with your sense of dignity, no hate we gotta act differently while waiting up whoa.
[02:02:59] Speaker D: Whoa.
[02:03:02] Speaker E: Scrolling down our feet makes us incomplete no, we just can't escape it don't choose to feed the simulation worth more than what the people saying.
Ignore toxic manipulation.
Don't be fooled by everyone behind the scenes on this pain just makes me wanna see.
You gotta change with your sense of dignity. No hate. We gotta act differently while waiting. The positivity. Stand up. We have enough.
Change wages. Sense of dignity. No, hey, we gotta act differently while waiting. The positivity.
You gotta change. Where's your sense of dignity? No, hey, we gotta act differently. Why wait? Be the positivity. All stand up, we had enough.
You gotta change. Change with your sense of dignity. No, hey, we gotta act differently while waiting. The positivity. Stand up, we have enough.
[02:04:44] Speaker A: Change.
[02:04:45] Speaker E: Where's your sense of dignity? No, hey, we gotta act differently while waiting. The positivity. Stand up. We have enough.
Stand up, we had enough.
[02:05:05] Speaker D: And we're back. Hope you didn't go too far because we have more interesting and thought provoking information for you. Coming up on the red pill reality show.
[02:05:22] Speaker A: All right, we are back and I'm going to bring Kelly on here. There we go. Had to take a quick break. Refill the coffee cup, take a quick drop off there.
All right, go ahead, Kelly, I'm back to you.
[02:05:39] Speaker B: So what's one of the challenges with America is both parents have to work, typically, to sustain a lifestyle that they want.
And so they're concerned. The loving people of the country, the parents, they want to raise their kids and focus on them. And, you know, you've heard soccer moms, that kind of stuff.
And I have no fault with these people whatsoever. It would be nice that they take a little time and become informed so they can vote. Well, okay, but when their kids are out of the nest, that's the time when they should be running for office, be it city council, school board, whatever.
And of course, you know, maybe they want to take a year or two and take a break.
Okay, I get that because raising parents is really tough. My son just graduated boot camp from the army. You know, I was like, okay, what do I do now?
So it the narcissistic people, I'm sorry to say this, but people that want power because they want glory and they want to be worshiped and they have less kids, they're the ones that run for office.
That's one of the reasons why our country is a mess. Something about raising kids really matures us and gives us insights in ways we never seen before.
So. Okay, well, meet people in their fifties or early sixties. We'll run for office, please.
Oh, but it's so corrupt. That's exactly why. Because you're not getting involved. Please, please run for office. Even starting out at school board, city council, or even if there's a service district, there's really tens of thousands of service districts that you can run for and get on, and I think that much time, so.
But I think that's one of the problems we were set up for. Moral people. Well, the moral people are the ones raising their kids. I'm being repetitive, but it's very important that when we get older, and I've been encouraged to run for office, and at the time, my girlfriend's like, no, like, okay, because we were thinking about getting married. But I understand that.
[02:07:48] Speaker A: The other thing, Kelly, with respect to running for the office, I don't believe that the founding fathers intended it for it to be a career, either. Go up there, serve the country. That was the key thing. Serve the country one, two, maybe three, uh, you know, cycles, and then come back, let other people go up there and do their part. But I don't think it was intended for people to be in politics for what is like, 40, 45 years. How many people, you know, I wonder.
[02:08:23] Speaker B: How messed up their kids are. You know, as much as I like Sarah Palin, she had a bunch of kids. Maybe she should have waited another five years before running for governor.
Um, you know, but to see that's her choice and maybe her husband, everything. Oh, that's right. The interrupt divorce. That's really sad. I guess Tulsi Gabbard's now in divorce, which is sad, but I think the founders really, I would say, was more of a social. What's word. I'm not saying a source of a social, more that you run for governor after you. You're running for government office after you raise your kids.
And so this is why I've asked my siblings, and I said, hey, you remember when dad was on school board?
Yeah, I remember that. Well, you know, we missed him that one night a week or one every two weeks, whatever. He went to school board, and I said, well, you know, maybe you guys got to run for office. And they said, oh, and they feel unworthy. Okay, well, I don't know about all sorts of. I don't. Is it really, you come from a family of honesty and hard work and success and the kids, that everything you've done, you're the perfect candidate? Well, I. Well, just, you know, Thomas Lott was.
He ran for Congress, and he won.
And he was convinced, even though he had a family, he's like, you know, somebody convinced him this for this family, even though, yeah, I know you got teenagers, but it's. It's for them that you should. And their kids. And their kids. So he did. I mean, there's numerous examples of people running while they have kids.
By the way, when you got teenagers, teenagers just want to run around, be with their friends all the time. Anyway, so that's. That's a good time to. That's a real good time to run for office.
Yeah. So I found something. John Jay and his. His reference to a christian nation and how we started.
If you want to take a little time, I can go through some of his quotes.
[02:10:29] Speaker A: Okay.
[02:10:31] Speaker B: So this is the New York chief justice. John Jay is very first charged to a grand jury.
John Jay was first the supreme court chief justice of New York, and then he became the first supreme court justice of SCOTUS, or Supreme Court, United States. So this is September 9, 1777, in Ulster County, New York. Now, remember, 1776, Declaration of Independence and then Revolutionary War. The articles of Confederation had not yet been issued. That was July 9, 1778. So here we are, September 9, 1777.
Obviously, during the revolution, they still had courts and they had grand juries, so.
But multiple times in this charge, the grand jury John Jay mentioned divine providence, creator, even the gospel of Christ. So here we go. Gentlemen of the grand jury, it affords me very sensible pleasure to congratulate you on the dawn of that free, mild, and equal government which now begins to rise and peak from amidst those clouds of anarchy, confusion, and licentiousness which the arbitrary and violent dominion of the king of Great Britain had spread in greater or lesser degrees throughout this and other american states.
And it gives me particular satisfaction to remark that the first fruits of our excellent constitution appear in a part of this state whose inhabitants have distinguished themselves by having unanimously endeavored to deserve them. Now, if you read John Jay, he's very wordy. He's terribly wordy, but he's brilliant. And New York had a constitution, state constitution, shortly after July 4, 1776. So did. There was four states, by the way, that had constitutions prior to July 4, 1776.
Anyway, now we're going to skip around here, and he's talking about the revolution in the start of the country, in the states. This is one of those single instances in which divine Providence mentioned that there one of the things can appear more unworthy of credit than that in an enlightened age, in a civilized and christian country, in a nation so celebrated for humanity as well as love of liberty and justice, as the English once justly were.
Remember I told you that they adored the English?
[02:13:10] Speaker A: Yeah.
[02:13:12] Speaker B: Well, they learned the english liberties. They learned a lot of liberties from the English. So well that when King George became a tyrant, they caught it and declared independence.
All right.
Will it not appear extraordinary that 13 colonies should immediately become one people? And though without funds, without magazines, without disciplined troops in the face of their enemies, unanimously determined to be free and undaunted by the power of Britain, refer their cause to the justice of the Almighty and resolve to repel force by force. And our enemies, repelled or restrained, are such strong and striking proofs of the interposition of heaven that our having been hitherto delivered from the threatening bondage of Britain, ought like the emancipation of the Jews from egyptian servitude.
Blessed be God. The time now never arrive. But the american people are the first people whom heaven has favored with an opportunity of deliberating upon and choosing the forms of government under which they shall live. So that while you possess wisdom to discern and virtue to appoint men of worth and abilities to fill the offices of the state, you will be happy at home and respectable abroad. Your lives, your liberties, your property will be at the disposal only of your creator and yourselves.
You will know no power but such as you will create nor authority unless derived from your grant no laws but such as acquire all their obligations from your consent.
He goes on to mention deity, creator, gospel of Christ, Ark of God, before the maker breathes into them the breath of life, referring to Adam and the blessings of peace. This is stunning. And then he says, you will be pleased to observe that all offenses committed in this country against the people of this state, from treason to trespass, are proper objects of your attention and inquiry.
And so the people of that day thought that was so good that this was published in, like, the local paper, and it was published. And this is how I have a copy of this in my hand.
[02:15:49] Speaker A: Yeah. And everything that. That you read just now, it takes me back to moral compass. That's. I mean, it's a key thing that I see that we're missing today. We had another school shooting this last week in Georgia.
[02:16:06] Speaker B: Yeah.
[02:16:06] Speaker A: And four people dead, two. Two students, two teachers and nine people wounded. 14 year old. And I'm finding out, it's amazing how much we found out about this 14 year old in, what, a couple of days. We haven't found out anywhere near that amount. And it's been over two months now when an attempt on the next president's life has. Was, you know, almost gone. But this young man, now, I found out. I read an article today, apparently, allegedly, he's. He believes in transgenderism. He. He's a Kamala Harris supporter.
It's just things that just don't add up. Where did he get. He had $1.3 million in three different accounts overseas. Encrypted. How does he know? 14 years old. How do you know all this stuff? Come on. Something.
[02:17:04] Speaker B: Yeah. The. Have you, have you talked with Sheila Matthews?
[02:17:10] Speaker A: I heard the name, but I don't think so.
[02:17:13] Speaker B: Okay. Sheila Matthews is got a website called able child. Able child is. You'll have to. She'll have to explain the name, but her and her co founder have put a link between school shootings, teenagers, and antidepressant medications.
[02:17:32] Speaker A: Yep. I'm not 100% right behind her. Absolutely. I absolutely believe it.
[02:17:38] Speaker B: Yeah.
[02:17:39] Speaker A: The other thing I would like to know is that has this young man had some. We know that the, the guy who tried to kill Trump was apparently visited by somebody who went to the FBI numerous times, went after leaving his home. They pinged his cell phone and found that they left after leaving the meeting. It may not have been in his home after leave, after leaving the meeting with him, went back to FBI headquarters on more than several occasions. So a lot of the shooters I find trying. I'm so upset that I can't think straight without using some colorful language. I'm not trying. I'm trying not to do that.
Dan Pagino said that these guys, the FBI, are doing everything they can to cover their tracks. What is it that they're trying to hide from us? Why is it that we can't know the truth about what is going down? And I have found in many cases where the FBI all of a sudden swoops in at the last minute. Oh, there's these big heroes, right? No. They planned, they worked with these people to get this to happen, and then they swoop in at the last minute to make themselves look like, oh, look at what we did. You need to have. We need more money. That kind of thing. It's, it just, it disturbs me to no end, and it really upsets me, boils my blood that there seemingly is not much we can do about this other than, you know, the grand jury is, is like my, my last bit of hope, because I truly believe that the people who are in power right now are desperate.
They're probably, I'm guessing, but I feel very certain about this. They are probably in the most desperate situation they have ever found themselves. And people who are desperate are very, very dangerous. And anything that somebody who's considered to be a patriot, because they'll consider them to be a domestic terrorist. But anybody who considers themselves to be a patriot and wants to lash out, going to make the biggest mistake that they could ever make. We have to be able to pursue this thing as peacefully as we can. And this is, like, my last hope. This is like, you know, if we need to be able to hold these people, to hold their feet to the fire, maybe that's the best way to put it.
[02:20:10] Speaker B: Hold them accountable. Yeah.
[02:20:12] Speaker A: Yeah. And. And this is my last hope, because, again, I really, and I know this sounds callous to some people, and some people say, well, you're just a conspiracy theorist. If you've read as much information as I have read, I totally, 100% believe that one of their goals is to bring about chaos, because this is how they bring about their power. Their whole modest operandi is order from, or through order from chaos, or order through chaos. They create the chaos, and then they'll bring about the order that is needed. But in the process of doing that, people lose their rights. More and more and more, this is what I see happening. Like I mentioned now, this school shooting in Georgia, four. Four people dead, nine people wounded. The very first thing that I hear from this administration is how guns are just too easily available.
You know, you can get a gun anywhere. Well, it's been like that for the longest time. When did all the school shooting stuff started? It was only like 25, 30 years ago. And why did it start? Because they wanted more and more control over our guns. And almost every shooting of some sort, mass shooting, the individual who does the shooting is involved in some type of psychotropic drug, an antidepressant or something along that line. And they don't ever talk about that. No, no, no. It's the gun's fault. It's the gun's fault. And my argument is we have how many police officers in a particular area at any given time, and they all got guns. I don't see their guns going off and killing people right, left and center. So it's not the guns, it's the hearts and the minds. And back to the moral compass. Like I mentioned earlier, school. Could you imagine somebody pulling up to school today in a pickup truck and they got a high velocity rifle in the back, loaded, probably chambered as well. I don't know, but I know they were loaded. Pulling up to the school like, hey, it's no big deal, lock the door. You don't have to worry about somebody breaking your window to steal your rifle, because the moral was, you just didn't do that. This is what we've lost. And it's sad for somebody like me that, that's witnessing this.
[02:22:29] Speaker B: Yeah. You know when it's sad when somebody drop gets killed from a drunk driver. Of course they blame the drunk driver, but you know, with some of these gun grabbers, the way they think we should ban all cars. Let's ban all cars. They kill people. Oh my gosh. Airplane trash. They should be airplanes.
[02:22:48] Speaker A: You shouldn't have an suv or a big pickup trucker know something that's lifted. You don't need one of those. People don't need one of those.
[02:22:56] Speaker B: Well, you gotta watch out for those assault suv's or a high performance vehicle.
[02:23:00] Speaker A: You know, like maybe a Corvette or Camaro. You know, you don't need one of those.
You know, you don't need that kind of stuff on our, in our neighborhoods. Yeah, well, you don't understand the very fundamental reason that the second amendment was written. It was written for the people to have, and of course it's been lost, but it was written for the people to have the same firepower as the government, so that the government can never overwhelm the people.
I truly believe that if an individual had the wherewithal financially to buy a fighter jet, they should be able to buy a fighter jet. That's part of the second amendment. Oh, no, they never had anything like that in mind. Baloney.
[02:23:49] Speaker B: Can a person. Can. Should a person be allowed to buy a tank and a fully armored and fully loaded, ready to shoot things? Should an average person be able to buy a tank?
[02:23:59] Speaker A: Well, you know, if we go back to. If they had the moral compass. Yeah, that's the thing. We've lost the mortal compass.
[02:24:05] Speaker B: Well, see, what, what? Well, this is where I disagree. I totally. I'm totally for people owning guns without a question. Okay? And gun control is the ability to shoot what you aim at. Like in an elderly lady in Texas, her husband was playing bingo. And this is an exercise in gun control. Two illegals with felonies broke into her house. Two shots, two illegals dead. Now that's gun control.
[02:24:30] Speaker A: That's real.
[02:24:31] Speaker B: What they would have done to her without her gun. All right, so that's. That's gun control. The ability to see what you aim at. All right, so. But the classic armories, which they're disappearing now, but the armories were where they'd have cannons, you know, a big weapon that only the community could afford. So that was kind of the intent. But people were, if they didn't have guns, then the. This is a David Callahan thing with the well regulated. Well regulated militia. State statutes governing the militia, not this roll. Your own militia, which is illegal, but, you know, so if you didn't have a gun and you had to go to militia duty, you would be furnished with a gun, and you'd be accoutred with all sorts of supplies so you could do your job. Most of the battles of the civil war are fought by militias. You know, less than 100 men, people invading the south.
The county militia would say, what are the Union troops doing here? They shouldn't be here. This is our state. So they gather up the militia, and you'd have, you know, these. These scrambles of less than 100 men, 50 on both sides, because they. They felt the federal troops didn't have jurisdiction.
And so. But anyway, that's a whole other thing. Yes, I'm totally against slavery. I'm glad we got that straightened out. I have many black friends. I don't want to be called. Well, whatever they're going to call me, they can call me. They're free to do so.
But we. We. We have gone away from so many principles. Polls, you know, the 17th amendment, where the states would appoint their senators, now it's by popular vote, which is a popularity contest, not pushing back against the federal government for the state's interest. That was the point of the Senate. And, of course, then you had your representatives. We've. We've abandoned that principle. We've abandoned small town judges and not needing a bar card. You know, we've abandoned so many things that. What the scriptures tell us and how to form a government, and now we're suffering for it. And then you. And then you have, you know, the no fault divorce in the early seventies, the Federal Reserve went off the gold standard, 72, and you had bar card in courts. Those are three things that really hurt everything, because pretty soon, due to inflation, the mom had to get into the working force.
And so you.
[02:26:49] Speaker A: When you were talking about off the gold standard back in 72, I was. I've lived through all that. I remember one of the. One of my favorite memories growing up was one of my chores was to cut the grass. And when I would get done, my dad would give me a silver dollar. Well, back then, the silver dollar was. Gosh, it was as big as my palm, almost. I mean, I was a kid, and it was heavy. It was the heaviest of all the coins, and I really like to save them and put them aside. And there was a time when I did that, and I cut the grass, and my dad came home and he said, I don't have any silver dollars? I'm going to give you $2 because I don't have any silver dollars. He gave me two dollar bills and I was very upset. And he said, when you get out of school Monday, you go to the bank. We had a Federal reserve branch not too far from us. Go to the bank, give these to the lady and she'll give you two silver dollars. Those silver dollars today, just the melt value, if you just took them and melted them down, there was somewhere between 18 on the very low side and 32 or $33 on the high side. Those same silver dollars. So the paper that we carried back then didn't say federal Reserve note, it said silver certificate. So that when you went to the bank, you could say, I want silver for this. When we got off the gold standard is when they, those people were allowed to print however much money they want because there's nothing to back it up.
[02:28:20] Speaker B: Yeah. So I'm going to do some quick math. But during COVID silver got over $30 an ounce. I think. Let me look it up right now. I think it's like 20.
[02:28:33] Speaker A: Well, those silver dollars were 90% pure silver and they weighed, I think, 8.875 ounce of an ounce. So it'd be, you know, almost. Almost announced. Not quite. A little over three quarter.
[02:28:49] Speaker B: Yeah. So pure silver right now is 27, 80, 94. Just say $28 per monix.com, $28. All right. Used to be worth a dollar.
One silver certificate, one silver coin.
[02:29:06] Speaker A: Yeah.
[02:29:07] Speaker B: Okay, let's take one divided by 28 and we will see, oh, 3.5%, in other words. Well, we can flip that too. But our current, you know, we're at, how do I say this? 3%. 3.5% of its value that it was in 1971.
That's worthless. Our currency is.
[02:29:39] Speaker A: This is how they stolen money from us.
[02:29:41] Speaker B: Right.
Right. That's based on the silver. Okay, now you're looking at gold is. It's been hovering around 2500. So $20 was what gold was worth back then. And I divided by $2520, gold piece was 1oz.
[02:30:03] Speaker A: So it's over ten times now what? It was over ten.
[02:30:11] Speaker B: Right. So if you look at 20 divided by 2500 and you get .008 or 1%, the dollar has been weakened down to 1% of what if. If we go strictly by the gold and or the silver standard, different opinions between 1% versus three and a half percent. So, yeah, there and then people can see this.
[02:30:33] Speaker A: This is what blows my mind. People can see this in their day to day life when they go grocery shopping, when they have to buy gas when they have to buy clothes, anything that they're buying. I don't know of anything that is not more expensive now than it was, say, even four or five years ago. Everything has just gone up in price. But yet people cannot realize that this is being done systematically and on purpose by a small group of people that want to retain the power.
This has got to come to an end. I, you know, I get frustrated because I. I don't know, sometimes I go, lord, why is it that I see this and I don't, and they don't see this? And then I'm. I'm told about a scripture in ecclesiastes, I think it is, that says, because they believe the lie brought God, brought a delusion upon them. Because I tell these, you know, I tell my friends, some of these people are freaking delusional, man. They're in a. They're in a world that doesn't exist in the same dimension as you and I exist. They're off on some. Some kind of dreamland of some sort. And when they wake up, it's going to be too late. It'll be way too late.
[02:31:43] Speaker B: In second Thessalonians two.
Near the Lord's return, second Thessalonians two. There is a great delusion sent by God. Yeah, I'm just.
[02:31:54] Speaker A: As. They believe the lie, right. It says something like, they believe a lie.
[02:31:57] Speaker B: Yeah. So I'm gonna look at corn, corn flakes prices, eggs and bread from about 1910 till 1970. Okay, this is very interesting. Uh, so eggs and bread were around twelve to $0.15 for a loaf of bread or a dozen eggs. Okay. From 19 10, 19 20, 19 30, 19 40. 1950, 1960.
Went up a little bit in the sixties, but.
But we were still at, I think, in the early seventies. It started getting be those two, around $0.25.
But you're going 15% to 25% over 60 years. That's because the gold back currency, silver currency. All right, now you look at corn flakes.
Was that right? I got the two confused anyway, but you see the consistency of the prices. I put a graph together in my book, by the way. You can see the massive inflation.
And 2011 eggs were $4 a dozen. And that was 2011 when I came out with a book. But now they're ridiculous. I mean, technology should have made things cheaper, okay, but it didn't. That's because we went off the currency, and then it's causing. It's really destroying the families, what it's doing, because that's what they want. Yeah. And they want to destroy the family, and they want kids to be raised in single family homes, and then they become dysfunctional. I mean, I was blessed with two parents that love each other. They worked very hard. They had the american dream. They could put us through college. I have a farm, and he served in the military. He got a little check from the vet, the va, after he died. But.
But see, that's. We were stable. My mom was. I remember when gasoline was like, I want to say $0.18 or fifty eight cents a gallon. This is way back when I was a kid, 30.
[02:34:00] Speaker A: $0.35 is when we were jumping up and down, screaming, how dare you? Because it was, like, 25 and 28 prior to that, and it jumped to 35. I remember when a pack of cigarettes was $0.20 for pack of cigarettes, and that was one of the lures that got the kids to smoke.
[02:34:22] Speaker B: Wow.
So, Thomas. Yeah. Thomas Jefferson said, of a greater threat than standing armies on our soil is a bank issuing the currency of a nation.
[02:34:36] Speaker A: Wow.
[02:34:40] Speaker B: I mean, the founding. Well, see, they suffered from the continental after the declared independence. They're like, hey, let's be in our own currency. Oh, good idea. And there's a phrase that came out of this worth worthless as a continental. And George Washington said, a barrel full of continentals scarcely buys. See, a wheelbarrow full of continentals scarcely buys a wheelbarrow full of provisions. They suffer greatly. And a lot of people lost their fortunes because of that experiment. Well, then they put it in the continental constitution. Gold and silver only.
[02:35:15] Speaker A: Huh.
[02:35:16] Speaker B: And then LBJ took us off the silver standard. Was it 64?
[02:35:20] Speaker A: Nixon was an LBJ. Or was it Nixon silver?
[02:35:24] Speaker B: The silver standard.
[02:35:26] Speaker A: Oh, the silver.
[02:35:27] Speaker B: Yeah, LBJ.
Silver standard, I think was 6463-6465 somewhere in there. And then Nixon temporarily took us off the gold standard in 72. But what they were trying to do was fund the military industrial complex and Vietnam and all that stuff, which was not a declaration of war by the United States Congress.
[02:35:51] Speaker A: Yeah.
[02:35:52] Speaker B: Another principle that we have forgotten.
[02:35:54] Speaker A: Yep.
[02:35:55] Speaker B: I mean, we could go through a long list of the principles, the way our founders set up the country brilliantly, and they're saying, everybody pitch in, get some good officers in our government positions. And then we have abandoned so many things that have. We still have some structure. We still have at least trial by jury. Nazi Germany didn't have trial by jury. They actually. The Weimar Republic terminated that in 1924. Within 20 years, 20 million people were murdered.
And Russia did the same thing. The bolshevik revolutions, Lenin and Stalin, they terminated trial by jury. They had it since the mid 18 hundreds. So did Germany in mid 18 hundreds.
And so they just killed whomever they wanted.
There's an. There's a consistent trend of not just gun confiscation, but also when you terminate trial by jury. Cuba had trial by jury. Castro comes in now we're getting rid of that. 15,000 people were murdered. Well, the reason why Castro couldn't in the keeping up with the Joneses as far as genocide, I know David Callahan calls it a where government kills its own people. But in these democide regimes.
[02:37:05] Speaker D: They had.
[02:37:06] Speaker B: To get rid of trial by jury also.
And then they got rid of. They grabbed the guns. Now imagine you had trial by jury and you're in Cuba and you're arrested for owning a gun. The jury could say, not guilty, let him keep his guns. We don't care. We understand the principle of protecting yourself from the government. Yeah, but when they got rid of that, then the judges and the prosecutors, as you're going to jail because you own a gun. What? Oh, if you don't like that, we'll execute you. No, I'll go to jail. Where is the petty jury, your fellow neighbors, protecting you on the petit jury? William. Not William Penn. It was give me liberty or give me death.
That name slipped me right now. Not William Penn.
[02:37:55] Speaker A: Oh, Thomas P. I don't know who you're talking about. Yeah.
[02:37:58] Speaker B: Give me liberty, give me death. Patrick Henry. Patrick Henry said about the petit jury, in this, I have comfort, or he said, why do we love this trial by jury?
Because as long as my neighbors will protect me, I will. I will keep my being something like that. But it's brilliant. They. So what's going to come next? After, if they really want tyranny, what's going to come next? If they confiscate guns? Good luck with that. The Heller case is they're going to try to get rid of the petit jury and the grand jury. And luckily, it's enshrined in stone in the constitution. So the second amendment, the Fifth Amendment, and the 6th amendment.
It's very easy to argue that without trial by jury. Going back to England, the vikings brought it over. They called it the thing. But without the political reformers, we would not have. Our society was in 1776, and then the constitution, 1780. 317, 82, 83.
It's. But. So they're gonna have to go backwards. Okay, grab guns. Oh, you still gotta try people for owning guns. Jury. Sorry, not guilty. He can keep guns, you know, kind of like Kelly.
[02:39:23] Speaker A: The corruption is so deep and so vast that they could get away with it.
I look at what they did to Donald Trump now.
I could never survive one 1,000,000th of what he did. You know, they would, they would crush me financially right off the bat. I would be done with, with the whole thing. Then they would put me in prison because they would find me guilty of whatever law that they would make. You know, what I'm saying is if they want to get the way things are today, the corruption is so deep and so vast that if you do something that threatens them somehow, which is what Trump represents, then they're going to do whatever they can. Even if it is breaking the law in public and people know it, they're going to do it and still get away with it. And the only, my only hope is that someday we can hold these people and hopefully soon we can hold these people responsible for this, for what they've done. And I had no idea prior to getting more information about grand juries and the grand jury would be the tool to utilize in order to get it done. If we can't, if we can't get a grand jury because the corruption is so great and so vast, then, you know, we're, we're not left with much of an option at that point. If you, this is a question for you. If you, you have a crime that was committed in one county, but you know that if you go to the head judge there, whoever assigns it, whoever comes to a grand jury, if you know that, if you go to that particular area for the grand jury, they're more of a liberal, we'll say something beeping in the background. They're more of a liberal. Could you go to another county that's more conservative to have a ground jury for a different county or.
[02:41:20] Speaker B: No.
Well.
[02:41:25] Speaker A: Because that's where they trap us. That's where they get us. Oh, yeah. Well, you know, first they'll first decline you, and then if you raise enough, if you raise enough heat, then maybe they'll let you have a grand jury, but then they'll have the grand jury fixed in such a manner that the people in the grand jury are already against you. We haven't even started, you know what I'm saying?
[02:41:43] Speaker B: Well, we, okay.
In Florida and Pennsylvania, they do have multi county grand juries.
That's another grand jury I failed to mention. But multi county grand jury can be several states or several counties. Several counties.
Florida and Pennsylvania has that, and that's where they could do that and investigate the corruption of a judge.
As far as one county investigating another, they wouldn't have indictment power per se, but they would have presentment power. Hey, people came from this county. It's a corrupt that we looked into it, and then they can write a presentment against that judge in another county. How effective would that be? That's a good question. Um, yeah, it's, uh, what typically would happen, though, nowadays, okay, that's where the laws need to change. But the DA has too much persuasion.
Um, let's say Allegheny county and Butler County. Butlers, where Trump was shot, J 13, and then Allegheny's to the south, Pittsburgh.
So if they have a multi county grand jury. Yeah, maybe you got a really good dae because Thomas Matthew Crooks was in Allegheny county, but Butler. Okay, well, multi county. Yeah, that got a good prosecutor from Allegheny looking at things in Butler, multi county. There you go. Allegheny county might say, might have a prosecutor that said, well, let's do a presentment and let's subpoena witnesses and find out what's going on in Butler county.
You might have a DA that would say, no, we're not gonna do that. We just. Now, that's just. And then it's up to the grand jury to decide, not the DA. This is where it gets frustrating.
The. In a presentment that the district attorney signature is not required.
So, yeah, it's.
[02:43:53] Speaker A: I certainly hope that you can get that information to.
Was it number 21 that you wanted, the 21st grand jury in Florida that you wanted to get the information to?
[02:44:04] Speaker B: Well, Mike's trying to get.
So 21 is illegal immigration and they're done. 22 was the COVID Okay. And that's. That's what Mike Sardana is trying to.
[02:44:15] Speaker A: Get a full hope they can do that.
This is a. Much of our problems today are you are because of ignorance. And I think it stems back to moral compass. I just, in my mind, I see people who have a high moral compass have no problem asking questions. It's one of the things that, you know, we haven't done over the years. We've just trusted people to do what was best for us. And while we're busy working and supporting our families, they're figuring out ways to undermine us. And because we didn't do our due diligence, we didn't do the maintenance like you refer to now we find ourselves in a situation where the foundation of our country is getting ready to collapse from under us because the people are so corrupt, they've just eaten everything away so badly. They want to push for a whole new type of government. You know, this is what Kamala wants. She's pushing for a new government. This goes back to the days of Obama when he proclaimed, we are going to fundamentally change. That's heavy duty, people. That's treason. Fundamentally change is what he said over and over and over. Yes, we can. Yes, we can. Fundamentally change. That is treason. And a fundamental change means that you are going to turn the government completely inside out. That's a fundamental change. We don't need a fundamental change. What we need is a fundamental restoration, a restoration to go back to what we used to be, what was intended for us. That's what we need. And I really believe the only way we're ever going to be able to get anywhere near that again is to start at the local level and have the people realize the power that they have. And one of the greatest powers is this ability for us to, to demand, not ask, but demand for a grand jury to be brought up on whatever it is that we need him brought up on. I mean, right now, I'm, I'm helping in whatever way I can push the pressure, put the pressure on Pennsylvania, because like I mentioned earlier, it's been, what, two months now, right? Over two months since they tried to kill, since they tried to kill President Trump. And we don't have hardly know anything, but it's been a week since this young man, 14 years old, figured out how to go get into a school and shoot up the school. And we know more about him than we knew about somebody that almost killed.
[02:46:49] Speaker B: Yeah, well, Georgia has a pretty good grand jury system and they're already in place.
[02:46:56] Speaker A: I hope that they can, I hope that they can get to the bottom of it. I believe me, I don't think that that kid acted alone.
I think he had help somewhere. He's on antidepressants. I don't know, maybe his dad helped. I see. They're holding his dad just as responsible as him. They're holding his dad on man's was a second degree murder or manslaughter.
They're holding him on the damages that his son did.
I don't know. I helped raise seven children and I got to tell you, I think God was really blessing me because some of them could have gone wacko on me with all the craziness that's going on today. Fortunately, was long before all this, you know, insanities. But, you know, it's very possible the more kids you got to, the odds are something's gonna happen with one of them. I never, never had that issue. But if they did, and they would hold me responsible, I don't you know, I don't know. They're saying that this dad taught this kid all kinds of things, and the dad is somewhat responsible for the child's lack of respect for human life.
I don't know. It's a hard call for me, but I would be so broken anyway. If one of my kids ever harmed somebody else on purpose like that, I don't think it would matter to me. Probably my life would be over in my eyes, you know, my kid harmed somebody else, you know, just out of pure evil. Oh, my gosh.
[02:48:27] Speaker B: Yeah. The Michigan, there was that case, a school shooting, and the parents got convicted, and I don't know the details. I just heard the parents were held accountable for their son.
I don't know to what degree, how many years, 1st, 2nd, or third degree murder, I don't know.
But what's going to be interesting is, and Sheila Matthews, you really got to get her on your show about the tie between drugs, depressants, pharmaceuticals.
[02:48:58] Speaker A: You have. If you have contact information for her, text it to me, if you would, and I'll call.
[02:49:05] Speaker B: I'll call her first to make sure it's okay. She probably would be okay. Can I text her your phone number?
[02:49:10] Speaker A: Yeah, yeah, yeah.
[02:49:11] Speaker B: Okay.
[02:49:13] Speaker A: So I'd love to have her on because I have, um. I did. I don't know how many shows I did about vaccines and damage. And I caught. This is before the COVID stuff. I was. I was. Fortunately for me, my eyes were open to this. Long before the COVID stuff, years before the COVID stuff, I was seeing this going on and I was trying to tell people this and that and the other, and they say, you should. I remember one of my friends saying to me, and they were all up under, they were so happy. They were all up on their vaccines so the children can go to school. And I kept telling them, you don't have to do that. There's exemptions for that. No, no, no. What do you know? You've never had a moment's worth of formal education. Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Well, you know, now the children have all kinds of issues. Add, ADhd, allergies, skin issues, you know. Oh, well, that's all in the family, but. Yeah, right. I don't see you, you know, having those issues. Oh, and it must have been my grandparents or my great grand. You're right.
[02:50:10] Speaker B: You know, one of the things that. With the. With the jab, why I didn't. I got a. It's almost nine. I gotta get going here. But one of the reasons why I never took the jab is I'm a civil engineer and I've designed and overseen the construction of chemical process plants.
Okay? And the operation. Now, when I first heard about this, you know, I thought about it. Maybe it took me a week to realize this.
They're not going to get these highly complicated chemicals all put together, plus the manufacturing like a factory, there's no way they're going to get it right the first time.
It's going to take them at least a year to get all the right chemicals in the right proportions, plus the factor of haste and greed.
Okay? Haste and greed. And I've seen process plants break down with this or that whatever component. And it's not just one chemical process plant, it's multiple process plants to provide a certain complicated chemical to another process plant that adds another chemical. And then they go to the manufacturing and the syringe and whatever they're doing. Okay. Or the vials, actually.
And so I'm like, people say, well, you're not a doctor. I said, well, doctors aren't engineers.
They have no clue. They're just blindly trusting the FDA or the CDC.
And I sure hope the CDC and the FDA has chemical engineers, civil engineers, mechanical engineers, electrical engineers that are monitoring these plants. Oh, my gosh. If they would have monitored chemical process plants like Kel OSHA, federal OSHA monitors construction, I don't think there would have been so many bad batches and so many people dead.
So I like, well, you're not a doctor. Yeah, I'm an engineer, and engineers aren't doctor. I'm sorry. You'll take a hike. I'm not. I don't want to hear it. I'm not taking the jab tell they. And it's going to take a year or two to get it right.
[02:52:14] Speaker A: I don't. I don't think that there is anything that is safe anymore. Anything meaning any kind of a shot, any kind of flu shot, any kind of shot. I don't think any of them are safe anymore. I've seen too much evidence that these shots have been these, these vaccines, and some of them truly aren't vaccines. They have to change the definition of a vaccine in order to be able to call it that. I've just seen too much evidence, and some of it is live evidence that is videoed.
They're videotaping it on a microscope live, and they're showing you this garbage that's in these vaccines. It's not good.
Some of the patent numbers that the vaccines were made under, if anybody knows that there's a place in the Bible that says the number of the devil. I think they said the number of satan, whatever is 666. Well one of the patent numbers is 2020 forward slash 060606. Well that's one of the patent numbers.
Just got to do a little reading, a little digging and you'll see that these were not intended to help people at all. They've now admitted that they knew early on that getting this shot does not stop you from getting it. Getting the shot does not stop you from spreading it. And yet 99 plus percent of the general population could get through this without the need of medical intervention of any kind. It was a flu basically. And yet they pushed it on the people and made it sound like, oh my God, all these people are dying. Only to find out later on that they were committing fraud. That people came in, one man came in from a shotgun, from a, not a shotgun, from a shot. He was shot with a gun and they claimed him as a COVID death because they suspected he had Covid. Well he died from a freaking bullet, dude. But that was what they were doing. There was an incentive to the hospitals. Hospitals were paid hundreds of thousands of dollars, millions. Those people who died, quote, under Covid, they were paid hundreds. So there was an incentive to commit legal murder. And now it's all coming out. So those of you who laughed at me because there was a bunch of had personal friends who said, you've gone crazy man, you just gone over the deep end I guess to somebody who's really not aware of what our government would do to somebody. Yeah, I guess it sounds like it's over the deep end. But for somebody like me who read about back in the was the early twenties or thirties at some point where they literally confiscated gold from personal gold from people. I said, oh, that'll never happen. I laughed at that reading that I don't know how many years, decades ago. And I said that's the last thing it'll ever happen here. Right. Well, what happened when they came out with a Covid shot? It's your jab or it's your job. How many people had to make that decision? And now they regret making that decision? They didn't have the right to do that then and they didn't have the right to take the people's gold. But they got away from, they got away with it. They need to be held responsible. And the only way I can see that peacefully, peacefully is hopefully with a grand jury.
[02:55:30] Speaker B: Oh, absolutely. So Ernest Ramirez is somebody that might want to have on your show, he.
His son took the jab March 19 of 2021, and he died on March 24, 2021. Five days, 16 year old stellar athlete.
[02:55:45] Speaker A: Oh, I remember the story. Was he out of Florida?
[02:55:50] Speaker B: Texas.
[02:55:51] Speaker A: Texas. I do remember the story. Was a football player or something, right?
[02:55:55] Speaker B: He was a baseball player at a pitcher. And he was.
[02:55:58] Speaker A: Yeah.
[02:55:58] Speaker B: Anyway, but, yeah, that's for another day. I want to tell you a couple jokes because I want to end this year by nine. I want to tell you a couple jokes. Okay.
[02:56:07] Speaker A: Okay.
[02:56:08] Speaker B: Yeah. All right. So a whistleblower from Pfizer.
Okay, well, what he did is, was he went to a ten story building, got on the roof, he shot himself in the chest. He stabbed himself in the back seven times.
And then he was committing. He's committing suicide on the way down.
And he had a heart attack on the way down.
He hit the ground. The police found him. And obviously the knife marks and the gun wounds.
Do you know what he died of?
COVID Covid-19.
Anyway, so here's another.
Here's another joke, okay? We can solve two problems at once.
In Africa, there are starving people.
And maybe some of your listeners have donated to, you know, feed the african people, whatever. And, yeah, they're starving people. They're so starving, they go to the village next door. They capture and eat people. They're just so starving.
Well, here in America, we have several corrupt politicians. Terribly corrupt.
So what we ought to do is round up the corrupt politicians, take them over to Africa in these starving villages.
[02:57:42] Speaker A: I like that.
[02:57:43] Speaker B: And we would. We would hold them accountable.
[02:57:49] Speaker A: Yeah, that's cool.
[02:57:52] Speaker B: We hold them accountable.
[02:57:55] Speaker A: He was eaten by cannibals, right? Isn't that what he said? My uncle was eaten by cannibals.
How sweet that would be. All right, my friend. Well, thank you. I greatly appreciate you taking out the time to share and educate. And I want to dig into this more and more because we're really not. I'm worried about what's coming up. I know that I mentioned earlier, people are desperate, and desperate people are dangerous people.
I just, you know, we need to be able to have some kind of plan b, if you will, other than violence, because violence is. It's loses. Everybody loses.
That's just not going to be the way to do it.
[02:58:37] Speaker B: Peaceful ways to resolve our problems, hopefully, prayerfully.
[02:58:42] Speaker A: You know, they may leave us that option. That's. That's my concern. They may not leave you that option, but we've got to take every opportunity we can to do it in that manner, because it's like, I said it's a losing battle. God bless you, my friend. Appreciate it. All right.
[02:58:57] Speaker B: Well, thank you, sir.
[02:58:59] Speaker A: Talk to you soon.
[02:59:00] Speaker C: You take the red pill? And I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes.
Chest? This is your left chest? This is your left chest? This is your left chest? This is your left chest? This is your left chest? This is your left chest? This is your left chest? This is your left chest? This is your left chest? This is your left chest? This is your left chest? This is your left chest? This is your left chest?
This is your last chance.
This is your last chance.
[02:59:51] Speaker B: After this.
[02:59:52] Speaker C: There is no turning back.
You take the blue pill the story ends you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. Take the red pill take the red pill take the red pill take the red pill take the red pill take the red pill take the red pill? Take the red pill you stay in wonderland you stay in Wonderland I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes, goes, goes, goes.
