Categorized | Call of Shame, Interviews

#CoS – Marc on Free Talk Live [Michael W. Dean’s “Apology”] – Jul 2, 2012 – [UPDATE]

Posted on December 23rd, 2014 by Calvin

Marc joins Ian, Mark, and Julia on Free Talk Live to take Mike Dean to task on his preemptive, aggressive, ad hominem personal attack and expose his baseless accusations.

Issues Addressed:

For those, like Mike, who are too lazy (or intentionally disingenuous) to investigate the outcome that many people have been able to independently replicate by questioning the facts in an alleged “case,” such as the 14+ GB radio archive available, there is:

Another Ticket Kicked out – Standing Not Such a “baseless notion” After All

Ticket Kicked Out in Indiana – Cop Blows Off Subpoena Twice

Ticket Kicked Out in Tempe

Adventures in the RGV (a scroll or two down on the right-hand side of the site)

and there is also the “success stories” section on the main website and on the forum just to spotlight a few…

or you can just refuse to look at the evidence if your sole objective is to achieve a malicious personal smear campaign in the face of readily available facts.  Despite all the attacks, Marc is always willing to publicly confront critics on the three hour LIVE radio broadcast or arrange for discussion or debate on any other radio show of choice.

UPDATE [Dec 20, 2014]: We spent yet another show addressing the assertions of this particular critic once again.

UPDATE [Dec 23, 2014]: It’s hard what to make of this bit considering his actions and behavior towards Marc and others… seems a little hypocritically self-descriptive to me.

And there’s another issue worth addressing about dishonest Mike. He is misleading people to believe that “a caller is facing 45 years in prison from taking Marc’s advice” [here and here]. The truth is “the caller” was facing that sentence before he even established contact with Marc based upon his alleged misuse and threats made involving a firearm in Flordia, something he (“the caller”) was very strangely uncomfortable and unwilling to elaborate about, even privately. Keep in mind of the infamous case where a woman in Florida who is facing 60 years in prison for firing a warning shot because of her aggressively advancing abusive husband, so keep that in perspective to “the caller’s” more serious multiple-felony charges levied against him. The fact is; Florida is very heavy-handed on misuse of firearms, but does Mike care to take this into consideration and disclose it to his audience? No, because he has an agenda to misdirect, discredit, and disrupt at the expense of any and all contradictory facts. So take Mike’s disgraceful fallacious defensive posturing with a grain of salt and know that he is totally incorrect with his assessment that Marc’s “legal-advice” has caused any of the potential sentence the defendant was facing.


39 Comments For This Post

  1. Incubus Says:

    Good on ya Marc for exposing this coward. Like a cockroach, as soon as you shine the light they run for cover. Michael can’t stand the truth. It’s poison to rats like him.

  2. Jon Says:

    This guy is a typical brainwashed Bar Card Carrying Bottom Feeder. I hope listeners realize how corrupt, stupid the people are who are even willing to be attorneys (not lawyers). No empathy and total narcissism. The Law merchant system is very bad and totally self serving. Empirical crap that needs to be challenged and abolished. We will always support you Marc . . .

  3. NonE Says:

    The problem is that principles and a nickel, err… five dollar bill, will buy you a cup of coffee. It appears that most people deserve all the Michael Dubya Dean they can get. And Obama, come to think of it. As someone said and I will misquote horribly… they deserve all the democracy they can get and they’re gonna get it good and hard.

    – NonE (<- whom notavoter just called Very Good NonE, speaking of grammar and puctuation and such. 😉 😉 🙂

  4. NonE Says:

    “puctuation” is a technical hockey term, in case you were maybe, like, confuezd.

    – NonE

  5. Chris Says:

    “Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.”
    -H. L. Mencken

    There ya go, NonE

  6. Chris Says:

    I think Mike’s most spectacular failure of the night came after Marc called him out on his lies. The third and last story as to why Mike did not call Marc is because he “wanted it to be out there”.

    Here is a man who thinks so highly of his own subjective opinion, that he completely abandoned all courtesy, and respect towards Marc–a fellow LRN host. He felt no need to back up his opinion with facts at all, only a pathetic appeal to authority–EPIC FAIL. He painted Marc as some fly-by-night ambulance chaser, and he offered no apology. The apology was only made for the comments after the initial attack.

    Man, you’d swear this guy should have a black robe on. Only Judges hold their own subjective opinions in such high regard. What a narcissist.

  7. NonE Says:

    You’re right, Chris. He IS a judge. He’s just not officially proclaimed as such. But in his mind he knows the truth and has every right to force it upon others. (Thanks for the Mencken thing! The world doesn’t often offer up such people as him, sadly.)

    – the Very Good NonE

  8. Packabowlla Says:

    yo’s Well done Marc. Has anyone seen this Mike dude in daylight uuummmmmmmmmmmm i wonder perhaps garlic and a wood stake. Peace
    Pro. Mobutu Packabowlla.

  9. dan gould Says:

    Ah very well, NonE 🙂

  10. Bucky Says:

    I am interested to hear this. I wrote on Mikes page about 3 days ago that was in support of Marc. It has not been published yet. And here he was accusing Marc of ‘cherry picking’.

  11. Andy Says:

    IMO, about the only truth I heard from Dean was that he wanted there to be an opposing opinion to show up in Google search. {It seems to me the quantloosers would have done it already} I haven’t seen Dean’s website so I don’t know where he’s coming from or his veracity. Was he looking to draw traffic to his website?

  12. Marc Stevens Says:

    @ Andy – The facts prove it was to discredit me as some kind of delusional liberty activist deliberately creating pawns from vulnerable people who just wanted to avoid going to jail and have them go to prison, all to satisfy my depraved plans for society.

    His credibility and motive can be summed up with his excuse on FTL for not calling me: “I don’t know.”

    The quatloos guys won’t even discuss their attacks on air. At least Mike got an the air. But, it’s there as a evidence of why the quatloos guys like Dan Evans refuse to confront me publicly. They have no evidence, only personal attacks.

  13. ScareCro Says:

    Michael summed up his entire “argument” in his letter best when he said: “I forwarded the episode to a lawyer friend for his opinion.”

    lol, he just sunk his own battleship.

  14. Justin Says:

    I read the posts and comments on both sites, and all I can say is that I didn’t see MWD calling anyone a bottom feeder or implying that they might be vampires.

    Name calling? Seriously? Tiny bit juvenile don’t ya think?

    You guys obviously have a difference of opinion, no doubt about that, but to be quite honest I don’t think anyone involved is handling it in the best possible matter. At least Michael’s willing to let it go and agree to disagree. All this aggression doesn’t seem to me to be in line with this fabled nonagression principle that I hear so much about, yet see so seldom actually practiced. No one here has ever put their foot in their mouth? Is this how you’d like to be treated on the occasion that you happened to do so? I would bet there’s not one among us that hasn’t said something they regretted, or that was misunderstood. A little compassion goes a long way.

    Come on guys, having the sense to be involved in the liberty movement is a giant plus mark on anyone’s character in my opinion. To expect everyone to agree on every single point, including how one should appropriately go about expressing a grievance, is nothing but pure lunacy and setting oneself up for failure. How Michael handled his disagreement isn’t how I would’ve handled it either, but that doesn’t mean it was wrong. Just because he didn’t handle it the way Marc Stevens would’ve handled it doesn’t mean it was wrong either.

    What say we all get back to fighting tyranny in our own, individual ways and quit fighting amongst ourselves?

  15. Marc Stevens Says:

    The name calling is always wrong and I asked them to be stopped. If you read the comments, you would have seen/heard Mike saying I’m delusional, like a rabid dog and others. Mike referred to my audience as minions.

    It’s not accurate to write it’s a difference of opinion, Mike has his facts wrong and doesn’t care even when the facts are before him. He deliberately did not call me because his agenda was not the truth, it was to discredit; his motive was not honest.

    I don’t expect to agree on everything; there is an appropriate way to handle disagreements: you call first, you investigate, and if you get your facts wrong, you don’t ratchet up the personal attacks and lies.

    You really think Mike handled this right correctly? He never called the show or me privately, never emailed or skyped me. You don’t consider a lack of investigation to be wrong?

  16. Calvin Says:

    Justin said: “I read the posts and comments on both sites, and all I can say is that I didn’t see MWD calling anyone a bottom feeder or implying that they might be vampires.”


    Although he doesn’t call Marc a ‘vampire’ directly, I think there’s ample space to imagine he would apply his metaphorical interpretation of ‘vampire’ to Marc in some twisted way.

    The post here has been updated to explore a very seemingly self-descriptive observation of Mike’s. Its rather amusing he misses the application of his term ‘serenity vampires‘ to himself, but then again, hypocrites are known for their blind-spots. He seems to me to be subconsciously warning other people about people like himself.

  17. Justin Says:

    I didn’t say anyone was wrong, nor did I say that anyone was right. That’s not for me to decide.

    While relying solely on facts works absolutely splendidly for winning arguments, any lawyer licensed or otherwise should very well know that winning the argument does not in any way prove one to be right. It only proves who is more skilled at the art of debate.

    I however, have no time nor desire to enter into such debates, I was only asking that people stop and take a look at how they were acting. A mob descending on someone to pick the flesh off of their bones isn’t exactly what I would call nonaggression, whether they were right, wrong, or otherwise. All y’all, just think about it for a sec if you would, that’s all I’m asking. If you said something, no matter how out of line it may be, is that how you’d like to be treated? In an age when our right to free speech is being attacked from every possible angle, the last thing we need is to take a chance on making someone gunshy about speaking their mind by excessively chastising them for an opinion we don’t happen to agree with.

    With that Mr. Stevens, I bid you good day, and the best of all possible luck in each and every one of your endeavors. You are obviously a hard core activist that most definitely does not give up without a fight, and I do respect that.

  18. Chris Says:


    The fact that you are comaring these comments here to a violation of the non-aggression principle leads me to believe that you do not understand the fundamentals of the principle you have accused others of violating. Besides, your bias is showing in your first post. You obviously did not read Mike’s open letter, and then the comment where he compared Marc to a rabid dog–a freakin’ rabid dog–get it?

    You said..

    “While relying solely on facts works absolutely splendidly for winning arguments, any lawyer licensed or otherwise should very well know that winning the argument does not in any way prove one to be right. It only proves who is more skilled at the art of debate.”

    Right, which is why Marc sticks to the facts. Otherwise, it’s a competition to see who has the better OPINION. Marc points this out, every week on his show, and now he’s being slandered as a scoundrel. Should he discard the truth, because the Judge might not allow the truth in his courtroom? Is there any virtue in that?

    What I find interesting is that now others have joined the witch hunt against Marc. People who openly say, “the justice system is a joke” and “there is no justice in the so-called justice system”, and in the very same breath, they say, that, when someone is in trouble, they NEED to get a lawyer? Ummm…what?

    Lysander Spooner, wrote, in part, No Treason as a defense for Confederate soldiers who were facing charges of TREASON. Much more serious a charge than a stupid 1st offense drug possession charge. Some of these soldiers could have been put to death for their “treason”. Spooner, correctly, pointed out that these soldiers had never consented to the Constitution, therefore there is no treason. Should Spooner have hung a disclaimer on his No Treason. And more importantly..

    Will those who are leading this anarchist witch hunt against Marc give Spooner the same treatment?

  19. Chris Says:


    IIRC, you did a read of Spooner’s No Treason. You better quickly go back and add a disclaimer to it, before the anarchists, so-called, call you out on it!

  20. Bucky Says:

    I wonder how Michael W. Dean would have taken it if Marc was the one who wrote an open letter to Michael. Or how, if anyone, for that matter, had someone do that to them. Then when you confront the jerk – he just says, ‘well, I didn’t really mean what I said. I’m not sure why I did it – just get over it already. I know that I already have.’

    Would you just let someone walk all over you like that? Or would you call the guy out and make him be accountable for his actions. I have absolutely no respect for this Michael Dean guy. I have no respect for anyone who publicly shits on a person and then deems themselves unaccountable for what they did. Makes me wonder if Michael works for Mainstream Media.

  21. Paul Says:

    @Bucky, you have nailed the essential issue here, I couldn’t say it better, well done!

  22. Calvin Says:

    @Chris: I think you summed it up about right. ONE DOES NOT SIMPLY… remain an anarchist as they crawl to the violence of the STATE/LAW. 😉

    Ironically enough, you see Spooner prostituted on some of these MORAN‘s sites. #FAIL #FACEPALM

  23. Chris Says:


    I’ve come to find that arguing with pragmatists on principle is akin to arguing with Judges on the facts. Unfortunately, the pragmatists calling themselves anarchists become just as irrational as the guy with the dress on.

  24. Half-wit Says:

    I was playing this while doing some house chores with my wife. After it was over my wife asked “why did all those people attack the one guy that just wanted answers?”

  25. Sean Says:

    It comes down to fear. Many of us are dealing with it and so is Mike. He is afraid his friend will go to jail. Fear is not rational. judges can smell it. Only when we can control the fear monkey will we be able to work our way to a free society. BTW nothing Marc hasn’t already said himself.

  26. Andy Says:

    Fear of being in contempt is in fact, goes something like this: I came to this court under threat of violence by the government and now because you know you lose the battle of ideas the inferior mind resorts to more violence and orders others to violently put me in a cage at the barrel of a gun because you fear your inferior mind is being exposed. Psychopaths know they are inferior and is why the resort to violence — further proving the point.

  27. Seth Says:

    Originally posted to Dean’s blog here:

    …but comments have been closed.

    Dean, you done goofed boy.

    You went off half-cocked without checking the facts and lo and behold, it’s your own reputation and credibility that have suffered the most damage in this unfortunate exchange.

    I listened to the freetalk live appearance and that just made you look even worse.

    It didn’t have to though…that’s the thing. If you wanted to pull out of this bad publicity nose-dive you would have dropped the defensive B.S. and simply issued a cut and dried admission of where you effed up.

    It didn’t even have to be a “haranged” or “coerced” apology, which I agree is meaningless.

    Specifically, if you would have merely acknowledged:

    1) The lack of professional courtesy (and journalistic integrity) as evidenced by not bothering to contact Marc directly before posting the “open letter” hit piece,

    2) Each and every fact you got wrong (e.g. Marc does not give legal advice, no one’s ever gotten felony drug charges dismissed using Steven’s techniques, etc etc)

    3) The fact that your story and reasons kept changing as to why you failed to contact Marc before publishing the attack blog post

    …you would be in a much better position that you are now. Instead, you let emotions dictate your actions.

    If you attack someone in a public blog post before doing your homework, expect to be taken to task son.

    Maybe you’ll think twice before popping off half-cocked next time.

  28. Mr. Holipsism Says:

    You handle yourself with excellence, Marc! Great job!

  29. Jake Witmer Says:

    From the above quote from ScareCro: “Michael summed up his entire “argument” in his letter best when he said: “I forwarded the episode to a lawyer friend for his opinion.”

    lol, he just sunk his own battleship”

    You might as well have said, of his film, “Guns and Weed” this: “I forwarded Michael W. Dean’s movie to friends of mine in the ONDCP and the DEA, who deal with drug offenders every day, and they said his movie was pure bullshit.”

    Incentives define human social systems. Perverse or not, disincentive or not, this is true. What kind of people then participate in such systems, depends whether the incentives are voluntary or coercive. If the latter, they are perverse incentives that attract sociopaths and sociopath-influenced conformist opportunists(looters) to participate.

  30. Chris Says:

    Did I hear correctly, did Michael Dean say it was his goal to present a negative or “different side” of Marc Stevens to the world when his name is googled? And that was why he didn’t contact Marc?

  31. Marc Stevens Says:

    @ Chris, Yes, he finally admitted that on FTL. We can only speculate as to why MD did not contact me, he gives a few different stories. Doesn’t matter anyway. He had no evidence. I wish him well though. Critics are always welcome here and on the show.

  32. john mack Says:

    I need your help. Please contact

  33. Marc Stevens Says:

    I’m not available for consults until Monday the 31. But there scripts and templates are available.

  34. Dan Williams Says:

    @Marc Stevens
    Marc, I have some legal issues of great personal importance I would really like to get your opinion on. Any chance we could chat about it privately?

  35. Marc Stevens Says:

    @ Dan, you can set up a consult.

  36. Dan Williams Says:

    @Marc, great. If you could contact me with a number to reach you at, that’d be great. My email is

    Thanks a ton Marc!

  37. Marc Stevens Says:

    MWD also posted a comment rightly criticizing someone for condemning someone without investigation. How ironic of him.

  38. Kenneth Lou Lowndes Says:

    Those hookers in Washington, DC are all bad actors.
    They are Public SERVANTS, and We the people self government have REAL RULES.
    The US Constitution, speaking of itself declares for all that it is the SUPREME LAW of THIS LAND. Second to none and to no one.

    Public SERVANTS are engaged in an all out subversive effort to OVERTHROW our government, and must be STOPPED by all and any means necessary.

    We must END their lawless Mutiny.

    “God Bless the Republic and DEATH to their NEW WORLD ORDER!”

  39. Andy Says:

    Kenneth said: “The US Constitution, speaking of itself declares for all that it is the SUPREME LAW of THIS LAND. Second to none and to no one.”

    “SUPREME LAW of THIS LAND”????… That must mean there’s to be no human interaction whatsoever with regards to the land and law. Let the land and the US CONstitution deal with one another.

    “The US Constitution, speaking of itself”???… I’ve never heard so much as a peep from that four pieces of paper and ink.

    Kenneth, It seems you’ve not read or listened to Marc’s reading of, NO TREASON: THE CONSTITUTION OF NO AUTHORITY, by Lysander Spooner. Here’s a link:

18 Trackbacks For This Post

  1. NSP – Jul 7, 2012 – Guest: Vin James from England | Says:

    […] issues to challenge jurisdiction, using consensual and beneficial legal fictions, non-factual butt-hurt, treading a motions hearing without the judge forcing a plea, traffic violations 101, CDWS: not […]

  2. Mark Stevens - NSP – Sept 28, 2013 – Guests: Jan Irvin and Adam, Plus a NSP Group Chat - Gnostic Media Says:

    […] Handling pseudo-critics that refuse to examine the body of work they are criticizing but want to continue on with their baseless, emotional personal-attacks. […]

  3. NSP – Sept 28, 2013 – Guests: Jan Irvin and Adam, Plus a NSP Group Chat - Unofficial Network Says:

    […] Handling pseudo-critics that refuse to examine the body of work they are criticizing but want to continue on with their baseless, emotional personal-attacks. […]

  4. NSP - May 3, 2014 - Co-host: Calvin - [ Broadcast Version] | Says:

    […] difference between “anarchists,” voluntaryists, and […]

  5. NSP - May 10, 2014 - Co-host: Calvin - [ Broadcast Version] | Says:

    […] we, the NSP community, should address the critics and their criticisms that ultimately rest on “moving the goal-posts” to defend their […]

  6. NSP - Jun 14, 2014 | Says:

    […] The criticism of the lack of success stories of “felony cases being dismissed from Texas courts.” […]

  7. NSP - Jul 26, 2014 - Co-host: JT - [UPDATED: FULL PODCAST] | Says:

    […] response to the all-too-familiar over-emotional critic spouting-off that “Marc Stevens is a COMPLETE F**KING MORON […]

  8. NSP - Sept 20, 2014 - Co-host: Calvin and Guests: Jeff Berwick, Bradley, & Keith - Says:

    […] Critics who like to move the goal-post to avoid being called out on their BS. […]

  9. NSP - Dec 20, 2014 - Co-hosts: Calvin and JT - Says:

    […] again, responding to the half-baked criticisms of, seemingly, the only person who is confused in thinking that Marc puts himself out there as an legal counselor of some […]

  10. #CoS – Marc on Free Talk Live [Michael W. Dean’s “Apology”] – Jul 2, 2012 – [UPDATE] - Freedom's Floodgates Says:

    […] By Calvin […]

  11. NSP - Feb 7, 2015 - Says:

    […] to (ironically) engage in condemnation before investigation despite provided contrary […]

  12. NSP - Jan 10, 2015 - [UPDATE: FULL PODCAST] - Says:

    […] the emotional “Guns and Weed” host on has an ironic history of making accusations without first doing investigation, even when the facts are brought to […]

  13. NSP - Mar 28, 2015 - Says:

    […] Free Talk Live, for the support in the face of numerous technical difficulties. After you’ve lined our pockets for selling you snake oil and send some LOV3 out to Jace’s brother; please consider AMPing our home network […]

  14. NSP - Apr 11, 2015 - [ Broadcast Version] - Says:

    […] don’t matter when it comes to statist bureaucrats, their cohorts, their apologists, and their useful idiots because nobody really […]

  15. NSP - Apr 18, 2015 - Co-host: Calvin - Says:

    […] critic’s claims that questioning jurisdiction has never gotten a complaint dismissed, you can use the success stories as a reference to KOPIMI and build a temple of questioning that […]

  16. NSP - May 9, 2015 - Co-host: Vin James - Says:

    […] Being wrongfully accused of the crime of stolen valor by an over-emotional troll. […]

  17. NSP - Jun 6, 2015 - [UPDATE: FULL PODCAST] - Says:

    […] libertarian punk suggests using an attorney, who historically don’t challenge all of the prosecutions assertions, when fighting your […]

  18. NSP - Jun 20, 2015 - Guests: Brian and Derrick J - Says:

    […] flubs from critics of past and […]

Leave a Reply

Advertise Here

Upcoming Events

: Tune-in to the LIVE No STATE Project broadcast as we report on the weekly happenings in legal-land and current events. You may call-in to the show at (218) 632-9399 passcode is 2020#, or Skype-in, with your thoughts on tickets, tyrants, assessments, activism, anarchy, agorism, or, of course; any and all criticisms. If you are being attacked by those with arbitrary titles and shiny badges, or if you have an interesting observation or criticism; then feel free to call-in to the LIVE show at (218) 632-9399, or you'll need to contact Marc on Skype by searching for username: frankrizzo3, and we can also add you to the NSP skype group chat where you can engage in some courtroom role-play exercises to refine your litigation skills and boost your confidence if you have a court hearing coming up. Also, here is a comprehensive list of the many ways you can interact with the No STATE Project broadcast and community.

Wednesday, 6-7pm EST: Tune-in to the new No STATE Project midweek commercial-free video-stream now broadcast via You can join Marc live, or contact Marc to ask a question if you cannot make it on live. You can find archives of the Wednesday broadcast here on the website and on YouTube.

If you want to join the forum, you must email me a username so I can create the account. This is to stop the flood of spambots.

Contact update: If you email me a wall of text, then I probably will not read it. If you email me telling me to call you right away I won't. You'll have to set up a phone consult so we can set an appointment.

Mailing address has changed as of 1 October 2016. The new mailing address is: G.M. or Occupant 1496 N. Higley Rd., Suite 102-37 Gilbert, Arizona 85234.

Join Marc Stevens' Newsletter

Advertise Here