- Jackalope Freedom Festival recap and the short impromptu talk from the campground stage.
- Government fear-mongering the public with their own puppet enemies.
- Marc profiled and stalked by Mesa police for asking spooky terrorist questions of evidence to prove their opinion that their laws apply just because of where we’re geographically located.
- The hyper-paranoid nature of government against perceived, not actual, “threats.”
- Disclosing real threats and vulnerabilities to better inform the public of real risk(s) so that one has a fair opportunity to make a fully informed and intelligent decision.
- Investigative journalists are now becoming the new targets in the ever-expansive GWOT when they expose massive criminal fraud, waste, abuse and cover-up scandals perpetrated by government.
- Asking highly effective questions that best disrupts the false privilege of legitimacy coercive bureaucrats currently enjoy.
- Exposing the double-standard of the STATE in the most simplest terms: “if I provided my products and services in the same manner you provide your products and services [violently], wouldn’t you consider me a criminal?”
- Debunking the assertion that “society has accepted ‘these rules’.”
- Requiring police to use video recording equipment during their operations and openly providing the footage for public review.
- The possible pro-war, anti-corruption position of “anti-war protesters.”
- “The worst atrocities in the world were not committed because of disobedience, they are the result of obedience.”
- Recognizing, objecting to, and countering imminent threats to one’s autonomy.
- Bradley’s lengthy record of success.
- The court staff maintaining a docile and obedient courtroom by minimizing the amount of open objection and dissent in front of the herd-to-be-fleeced audience.
- The point of citing rulings within the motion to dismiss is to expose how the prosecutor and judge are not following their own rules and principals.
- An agent admits their argument is circular, “but its still applicable.”
- The great results produced by people helping each other out in the NSP Skype chat.
- William Grigg‘s discovery of a court ruling where a judge actually breaks rank and goes after the prosecutor’s lack of professionalism and blatant misconduct.
- Filing a motion to change the judge when there is provable collusion and misconduct.
- Stories of unhinged emotional outbursts from judges/robed crusaders.
- Des from England: examining possible enforceable obligations created by deemed/implied contracts <> using effective questions of evidence to challenge actual ownership of an alleged ‘loan‘ and any real obligation to fulfill payment <> police classify a car stolen after a loan default, which lands daughter into the jaws of the asset-predatory police <> the complete abandonment of the principals of ‘fairness,’ ‘impartiality,’ and ‘presumption of innocence’ as unchecked assertions and assumptions fly so freely in the courtroom <> civil asset forfeiture gone wild! <> and when questioning the creditor to validate the debt, they [the creditor] could not provide any of the evidence requested.
- Tom from MI: successful damage-control despite poo-pooing the “Marcratic” method of questioning <>the value and usefulness of connecting and role-playing with the folk in the NSP Skype chat <> disturbing-the-peace “complaint” finally dismissed, without prejudice, from court <> the prosecutor says he’s refiling the complaint as a civil violation after they figured out they could not move forward with a criminal complaint <> and how do you reconcile challenging the applicability of the law while citing their law/rulings/legal-opinion within the motion to dismiss?
- Troy from IL: successfully exercising damage-control with “driving on a suspended license” and “alluding capture” complaints <> cops says he doesn’t need probable cause to stop and question a peacefully traveling individual <> attempted intimidation by use of extreme threats of legal punishment <> the change-of-tone from the court staff after filing Marc’s motion to dismiss <> persistently objecting to logical fallacies and assumptions suffering from factual deficiencies <> the judge becomes stuck when the defendant asks whether the judge has entered a plea on the defendant’s behalf <> building confidence in litigation by engaging in role-playing and talking with those who have been through court, asking the questions of evidence, multiple times <> and having good leverage while plea-bargaining by building a strong case using effective questioning to demonstrate the prosecution’s damning lack of evidence that he should have anyway to be allowed to even bring the complaint before the court.
- Bronson from HI: the judge explains, by citing legal-opinion, how he can enter a plea on the defendant’s behalf <> the judge assigns an adviser to the defendant who attempts to enter a plea on the defendant’s behalf <> recycling convicts through the system and maintaining a revenue-stream by abusive “violation of probation” charges <> over-expansive use of probable cause that police use to search premises <> persistently requesting discovery from an overly-reluctant court and prosecutor <> really feeling the prejudice of the judge <> where is the presumption of innocence after the defendant has been jailed, stabbed, headbutted, choked all before any sort of discovery? <> the out of control, and far from oversight, prison system <> and the appreciation of using the pen, which is mightier than the sword, to challenge bureaucratic psychopaths.