Don’t be a dumb-ass.
Be a smart-ass (legally).
Man Requests Trial by Combat in Divorce, Wants to Forge His Own Swords
In a bizarre filing, a Kansas man has asked an Iowa court to honor his request for trial by combat in a custody hearing with his ex-wife. The 40-year-old man, David Ostrom, wants to meet his ex-wife and her attorney “on the field of battle where I will rend their souls from their corporal bodies.”
https://themindunleashed.com/2020/01/man-requests-trial-by-combat-in-divorce-wants-to-forge-his-own-swords.html
* * *
In his reply Hudson [her attorney said: “Although (Ostrom) and potential combatants do have souls to be rended, they respectfully request that the court not order this done. It should be noted that just because the U.S. and Iowa constitutions do not specifically prohibit battling another person with a deadly katana sword, it does prohibit a court sitting in equity from ordering same.“
A couple quick questions for the all-cap clowns
(7:20)
How come pleading don’t include the required corporate designations such as INC. or INCORPORATED behind the defendant’s all-cap name?
I believe you are naive and close-minded. That’s not good.
January 6 defendant’s pro se win
Justice Department to challenge length of prison sentences for Rhodes and other Oath Keepers
(9:47)
Beeks is only the second Jan. 6 defendant to be acquitted of all charges after a trial. Beeks represented himself at trial, though he was assisted by a lawyer who served as stand-by counsel and delivered his closing argument. Approximately 100 others have been found guilty of at least one count after a trial decided by a jury or judge, and more than 600 have pleaded guilty.
https://apnews.com/article/capitol-riot-oath-keepers-jan-6-trial-674266174e40ff6d04f9dfa9dd13fef4
Why Federal Gun Laws Do NOT Apply In States Of The Union!
(18:00)
It’s all about jurisdiction
Here are his notes keyed to the times in his video, not the airing of this program.
6:33
Exclusive legislative jurisdiction
6:50
To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards and other needful Buildings; -And To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
7:37
Municipal authority
8:35
…and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State…
8:56
Pollard v. Hagan, 4 U.S. 212 1845
9:12
“…the United States never held any municipal sovereignty, jurisdiction, or right of soil in and to the territory, of which Alabama or any of the new States were formed because the United States have NO CONSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY to exercise municipal jurisdiction, sovereignty, or eminent domain within the limits of a State or elsewhere, except in the cases in which it is expressly granted.”
10:38
18 USC, Chapter 44
13:40
18 USC § 10
The term “interstate commerce”, as used in this title, INCLUDES commerce between one State, Territory, Possession, or the District of Columbia and another State, Territory, Possession, or the District of Columbia.
14:26
1939 definitions
The term “interstate or foreign commerce” MEANS commerce between any State, Territory, or possession and any place outside thereof; or between points within the same State, Territory, or possession, or the District of Columbia, but through any place outside thereof ; or within any Territory or possession or the District of Columbia.
Dave expound on Congress’ use of definitions, by using the Income Tax Code.
17:07
26 USC 3121(e)(1) Dealing with FICA (so-called tax)
The term “State” INCLUDES the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and American Samoa.
26 USC 6103 (b)(A)(i)
The term “State” means any of the 50 States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands…
18:21
1968 Definition under Firearms
18 USC 921(a)(2)
The term “interstate or foreign commerce” INCLUDES commerce between any place in a State and any place outside of that State, or within any possession of the United States, or the District of Columbia, but such term does not include commerce between places within the same State but through any place outside of that State. The term “State” INCLUDES the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the possessions of the United States.
21:25
To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State . . .
24:35 Unconstitutional as applied
25:00 Bruen and the Bruen test
25:30 Income tax law parrallel
26:50 McDolluch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. 327 (1819)
“The power to tax is the power to destroy.”
“What is personal liberty if it does not draw after it the right to enjoy the fruits of our own industry? What is political liberty if it imparts only perpetual poverty to us and all our posterity?” – Justice Story, Commentaries on the Constitution
Rights and privileges are opposites
Hour 2
US v. Stilley, 10th Cir. 22-5113
Via email 2023-07-11:
Greetings all:
On July 5, 2023 I filed the reply brief in my appeal of the revocation of supervised release, 3 months in prison, 33 months of additional supervised release with all the original special conditions, etc. I sent you the opening brief on May 2, 2023.
The government filed its response brief 5-31-2023, containing 4,751 countable words. I want you to have access to it, but thought it best to wait until my reply was filed. In that way you wouldn’t have to wait to hear what I think about the government’s positions.
At the bottom of this message please find links to the opening brief, the government’s response brief, and the reply brief just filed. The link to the opening brief has only the brief proper, not the addenda. However, when I cite to the record, I generally include a link to the cite. That way you can see what I’m talking about, whether it is part of the addenda or not. This is true in both the opening and reply briefs.
The reply brief is 6,459 words. That’s 41 words under the 6,500 word max. The opening brief was 14 words under the limit. I didn’t plan on this or try to get a number that merely transposes digits. It just happened.
The first point on appeal is a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence. As you can see, the government made no attempt to rebut that claim, or to show that the evidence was sufficient to convict. It wasn’t, and they know it. They just couldn’t bring themselves to forthrightly admit the undeniable.
The government stubbornly refused to identify the “offense of conviction.” They hate the idea of a firm and fixed indictment. They arrogate to themselves the liberty to change their theory of criminal liability as many times as it takes.
I asked for a 30 day extension for the reply. The government opposed the motion. I was given a two week extension. I filed at 10:00 PM on July 5, 2023, just 2 hours ahead of the deadline.
More time would have allowed me to polish the pleading. The late Charles Krauthammer compared it to sanding an item made of wood. He knew that was critical, and he knew the value of “sleeping on” a completed writing, and editing again.
Still, I’m supremely grateful that I got the 2 weeks. I don’t even want to think about what it would have looked like if I had gotten no extension at all.
All the best.
Oscar
NextGen Bar Exam Multiple Choice Questions Only Require Takers To Spot Issues, And Not Apply the Rules
(14:00)
In law schools, generations of students have been taught the IRAC model to answer legal questions. First, students must spot the issue–what legal doctrine do the facts implicate? Second, students must state the rule–what particular legal precedent, statute, or principle governs this conflict? Third, students must then apply the rule to these facts–under a particular legal standard, how should the court rule? Fourth, students must state the conclusion–who wins, the plaintiff or the defendant?
https://reason.com/volokh/2023/07/12/nextgen-bar-exam-mc-questions-only-require-takers-to-spot-issues-and-not-apply-the-rules/
The Brain
Bruen Is Ending Gun Control Laws Across The County. And It’s Going To Continue!
(27:33)
US firearms laws are territorial only
http://www.originalintent.org/edu/chapter44.php
Credits
Lain Huuto – Ja kasvoille sataa lunta
Cappella Pop Sung by a Choir of Finnish Lawyers
https://youtu.be/h5j0_BdmKoI
Danheim – Mannavegr (Full Album 2017) Viking Era & Viking War Music
https://youtu.be/8tilKaOINmE
Waffenruhe – War Chant Ritual
https://youtu.be/brczxLKD9jY
Sector Space
https://sectorradio.ru/space/
Mason Proffit – Two Hangmen
https://youtu.be/CC3yZdG_2B