I tried that and got nothing. It was frustrating. I am struggling with AI. It keeps giving me crap citations. However, I have found that, while AI sucks at case law, it excels at strategy.
I am in the process of moving to my endgame. I filed suit in the Fort Worth Federal court and the judge converted my civil action to a wirt of habeas corpus and sua sponte removed it to Victoria County. I objected and the magistrate judge in Victoria ruled that the federal judge made a mistake and ruled that the civil suit was not a habeas corpus, that it was a class action civil suit but did not remove it back to Fort Worth. I can now construct the strategy that will get me to the Declaratory judgment suit against the president. I already have it written but am not establishing a record in the lower court to support my claim when I get to it.AI is really powerful when you give it sophisticated strategic issues. It is now constructing documents designed and intended to set the record for when I get to the Supreme.
I am struggling to keep up as I have no one sophisticated enough that I can discuss the strategy with.
My ultimate intended outcome is to get the courts to declare that the grand jury is a separate branch of government over which no other branch has standing to exercise authority and that I, as a citizen in a republic, have the power to invoke toward addressing criminal violations of law.
I now have it preparing documents that are presented as legal actions in their own right but are, in actuality, designed to establish the record for when I get to the supreme, the lower courts will have already stipulated to all the issues I am bringing.
AI sucks on the simple stuff but excels when you get into sophisticated manipulations.
Screw that crap that you can't file motions and pleadings. There cannot be a ban, only a stay so, if you file a motion or pleading in the interum, it just sits in the record until the ban is lifted,
Remember, your only purpose in the trial court is to set the record for appeal. If the judge rules against you, so what. You have set the record for appeal.
Usually I agree about the case law but I'm not having that I issue on prosei.ai. https://www.prosei.ai/
You obviously have been out of the game for awhile. Judges are despicable humans. The degree of character, honor and integrity it takes to be a judge is something today’s judges are seriously lacking.
Finding a judge who performs in the intended scope of his duty is like finding a needle at the bottom of the ocean.
You insult everyone of us who have purchased your course and used the very things taught in your course to be met with BAR members, who wear robes, who do not follow law, rules or the constitution to protect their BAR buddies.
If what we do is so lame and unskilled then we owe that to you.
No one here despises you. I’m certain everyone does not agree with you, as you have only expressed the rules and tactics are what we need despite first hand knowledge of the opposite, so it’s not despise it’s constructive debate. Prove your rules and tactics are all it takes. There are people here who have winnable cases and those are the cases the not so honorable judges do back flips to shut down.
I have a winning case right now and one of the defendants is a municipal judge who instructed his court administrator that I was not allowed to inspect the court record pursuant to a non existent rule. He then instructed her to provide me with a record request form that I could file and he would then determine if I could access the records. I handed her the actual law downloaded from the state website that states all court records are publicly accessible for inspection. I have it all on video. This judge was acting in an administrative capacity. Record requests have nothing to do with judicial capacity. Would you like to make a wager that he will receive judicial immunity?
Finding a judge who performs in the intended scope of his duty is like finding a needle at the bottom of the ocean.
You insult everyone of us who have purchased your course and used the very things taught in your course to be met with BAR members, who wear robes, who do not follow law, rules or the constitution to protect their BAR buddies.
If what we do is so lame and unskilled then we owe that to you.
No one here despises you. I’m certain everyone does not agree with you, as you have only expressed the rules and tactics are what we need despite first hand knowledge of the opposite, so it’s not despise it’s constructive debate. Prove your rules and tactics are all it takes. There are people here who have winnable cases and those are the cases the not so honorable judges do back flips to shut down.
I have a winning case right now and one of the defendants is a municipal judge who instructed his court administrator that I was not allowed to inspect the court record pursuant to a non existent rule. He then instructed her to provide me with a record request form that I could file and he would then determine if I could access the records. I handed her the actual law downloaded from the state website that states all court records are publicly accessible for inspection. I have it all on video. This judge was acting in an administrative capacity. Record requests have nothing to do with judicial capacity. Would you like to make a wager that he will receive judicial immunity?
It is possible to get venue change?
How much time have you personally taken to understand natural law? Why criticize someone if you haven’t personally taken a fair and objective approach to the information provided? Do you think it’s fair to criticize Dr Graves when he’s trying his best to have people understand the importance of Natural law? Everyone seems so focused on winning their cases, but don’t seem to understand concepts like truth and justice and how it would relate to metaphysics.
If only more of them know what you and I both know, friend, instead of whining and pontificating about the injustices they've not yet learned how to control. LOL
This is really getting tiring, Nigel.
Phone me if you want to correct me.
Phone me if you want to tell me off.
Continuously complaining about the horrors that have been around since Moses' time, the corruption in the Sanhedrin court that plotted Jesus' murder, the dreadful state of the "bar" in the days of Dickens' England, and the collectivist philosophy of godless judges in the present age HELPS NOBODY.
Do you do it to be noticed?
It isn't helping anyone.
And to imagine I, of all people, do not know about the corruption I've worked these past 55 years to attenuate is nothing short of blindness, sir.
PHONE ME!
866-LAW-EASY
Phone me if you want to correct me.
Phone me if you want to tell me off.
Continuously complaining about the horrors that have been around since Moses' time, the corruption in the Sanhedrin court that plotted Jesus' murder, the dreadful state of the "bar" in the days of Dickens' England, and the collectivist philosophy of godless judges in the present age HELPS NOBODY.
Do you do it to be noticed?
It isn't helping anyone.
And to imagine I, of all people, do not know about the corruption I've worked these past 55 years to attenuate is nothing short of blindness, sir.
PHONE ME!
866-LAW-EASY
Com’on, JS this is way off base and you know it. And I was not criticizing the person. I was criticizing the message.
No we are not focused on winning our cases. We are focused on due process.
We are taking (have taken) the course,
we have learned from the course how to follow court procedure,
we have learned from the course how to write properly argued papers,
we have learned from the course winning strategies,
and yet we are losing.
Not because of any of these things.
Pay attention to what is being posted here. We are not losing because we do not know the law, or how to apply the law or how to argue the law.
We are losing because we didn’t go out on the gulf course and have a little chat with the judge or meet him in the sports bar and buy him / her a drink, or have membership in the exclusive club that makes them all above the law.
That’s why we are losing!!!
Yet a certain individual in his advertising campaigns to put more money in his retirement fund makes incessant baseless claims that we didn’t learn any thing from his course.
His advertising method is actually having a reverse effect and is starting to turn others away from the course. And That’s a reality!!
There are many courses in marketing and how to market a product effectively without discrediting your current customers. And that’s exactly what is currently being done — the marketing is either discrediting the current client base, or is discrediting the course, only one possibility is correct.
His marketing clearly shows that we are losing because we have not learned anything from the course that we all paid for and studied.
The only logical conclusion one can draw from that using natural law is that the course does not do all that is promised.
That is the ONLY logical conclusion.
No we are not focused on winning our cases. We are focused on due process.
We are taking (have taken) the course,
we have learned from the course how to follow court procedure,
we have learned from the course how to write properly argued papers,
we have learned from the course winning strategies,
and yet we are losing.
Not because of any of these things.
Pay attention to what is being posted here. We are not losing because we do not know the law, or how to apply the law or how to argue the law.
We are losing because we didn’t go out on the gulf course and have a little chat with the judge or meet him in the sports bar and buy him / her a drink, or have membership in the exclusive club that makes them all above the law.
That’s why we are losing!!!
Yet a certain individual in his advertising campaigns to put more money in his retirement fund makes incessant baseless claims that we didn’t learn any thing from his course.
His advertising method is actually having a reverse effect and is starting to turn others away from the course. And That’s a reality!!
There are many courses in marketing and how to market a product effectively without discrediting your current customers. And that’s exactly what is currently being done — the marketing is either discrediting the current client base, or is discrediting the course, only one possibility is correct.
His marketing clearly shows that we are losing because we have not learned anything from the course that we all paid for and studied.
The only logical conclusion one can draw from that using natural law is that the course does not do all that is promised.
That is the ONLY logical conclusion.
I only needed to understand what natural law really is, to then realize that I have used it all my life. This is the way the bible describes it as well.
We use logic every day in our writing. We have to or we wouldn’t be able to draw the conclusions from the legal theories we are arguing.
Cetient and Calude mainly https://www.cetient.com/
I am working on shifting a gear in this direction. It is time we stopped settling for an appeal to the higher courts. If a judge fails to properly apply the law to the facts and renders a ruling that has the effect of denying a citizen in the full and free access to or enjoyment of a right, that is a criminal act. It is time we appealed, not only to the higher courts, but also to the grand jury. The trial and appellate judges all have their snouts in the same trough. It is time we too the Supreme Court up on their orginalist approach and went back to being citizens in a republic and start taking the recalcitrant judge to criminal as well as appellate task.
I am in the process of practicing what I preach by perusing a federal judge and magistrate criminally.
I must say Randy I'm kinda stunned at this post... Because I Literally had this very thought last night ! ( after some post reading here & on Alfz group )... I'd also directly wondered @ the prospects of your attempts to secure unfettered access to the Grand Jury... For many months I'd been ruminating on the notion that SOME ( certainly not all ) dis favourable Judicial rulings DO in fact "cross the Line" as far as "Criminal" acts are concerned ? It dovetails well with something Alfz has posted several times ie : " there's NO immunity for CRIMINAL acts !"
I must say Randy I'm kinda stunned at this post... Because I Literally had this very thought last night ! ( after some post reading here & on Alfz group )... I'd also directly wondered @ the prospects of your attempts to secure unfettered access to the Grand Jury... For many months I'd been ruminating on the notion that SOME ( certainly not all ) dis favourable Judicial rulings DO in fact "cross the Line" as far as "Criminal" acts are concerned ? It dovetails well with something Alfz has posted several times ie : " there's NO immunity for CRIMINAL acts !"
Comments
Post a Comment