PROPERTY TAX FRAUD becomes BOND FRAUD becomes VOTER FRAUD!

 PROPERTY TAX FRAUD becomes BOND FRAUD becomes VOTER FRAUD!

Texans and others need to understand this. Scan photos for a rough summary. https://realestatemindset.substack.com/p/fraud-fighter-summit

This is why we can never win, all courts are corrupt and will circle the wagons to protect the system

Gov. Ron DeSantis and Chief Financial Officer Blaise Ingoglia are speaking at the State College of Florida in Bradenton.

"Taxes purely is a government function." ~ Ron DeSantis
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z12t9xQBaR0

If everything is subjective rather than objective, I can see how this becomes a slippery slope with violation of rights. That’s the biggest problem, subjectivity.

Is this the outcome of the guy in North Texas who was challenging the property tax issues and fraud by the tax property county tax appraisals? I think the name of his company is "Mockingbird" or something like that.

This is ludicrous.  The lawlessness of the judiciary only encourages the lawlessness of the people.  This will come to a real ugly head of a situation eventually.  In a constitutional Republic the judiciary derives it's power from only what the people authorize it to do by way of the legislation. I don't recall any legislation that places the judiciary above the laws of this state or the constitution or authorized them to deny we the people of redress of grievances. How do we the people lawfully gut the judiciary from the top down without resorting to mobs armed with torches and pitchforks and even worse?

Mitch (or Mitchell) Vexler of Mockingbird Properties.
He is a commercial real estate investor and advocate who has pursued legal action against appraisal districts (notably Denton Central Appraisal District / DCAD) over property tax valuation practices.


https://grok.com/share/c2hhcmQtMg_3245d049-a7b0-4bb0-8833-a5977ea1e3de

Grok

Jeffrey Bowen Texas Supreme Court Property Tax Suit | Shared Grok Conversation

Vexler, that's the guy! Does he publish methods for others to reach him who are similarly minded re

Again trying to keep this thread together. This is SCOTUS petition in the development.
What is considered “meaningful consideration” is subjective. So I scratched that and am taking a much more detailed approach. Here is the question I’m presenting in my petition and I think this question applies to most people here:

What adjudicative safeguards are constitutionally required before the State permanently extinguishes civil claims at the pleading stage?

Thoughts?

I think this will be covered based on what I’m drafting. Not specifically mentioning it in my petition, but if it is heard and ruled, the end result will cover this.

They will no longer be able to use conclusory statements in their rulings. I’m pushing for the ruling to specifically state which allegation failed and why. That is what should be covered in “adjudicative safeguards”.
But, what's FFAC all about then?! What's the point if it can be capriciously or knowingly omitted?
I don’t know what FAC is.Findings of Facts and Conclusions

Facts and conclusions of law can be and many times are conclusory, or ignore the pleadings that we the pro se plaintiffs made.

The judge I had completely made things up! And then the appellate court just accepted the judge’s ruling.

With the “adjudicative safeguards” they will no longer be able to ignore the plaintiffs allegations or amendments. This is not just a pro se issue.
Plaintiff's allegations are to be taken as FACT. Any actions regarding correcting conclusions cannot (should not) negate the merits of allegations. Conclusions are procedural.
The appellate can and often will support the ruling - that's why you keep going!

YUP!!! But ask Alphonse!! They are NOT taken as fact! The defendant attorney characterizes the allegations as conclusory! It is a lie , but that’s what they do.
I did. That’s why I’m now drafting my petition in SCOTUS.
I do not need to refer to anyone to know for myself based upon my own research. no shade but that ain't my stilo.
Based on what I read, I know enough now to know that some of the 'CONCLUSORY COMMENTARY" may or may not have facts in support of the claims.
Well... It seems like it's an Apples and Oranges comparison ? No ?
He wasn't appearing as "joe 6pack pro se" ? Right ? He's the Administrator of a Licensed Commercial Enterprise of which he submitted & volunteered and is enjoying the privileges related thereto ?
That's not to say that I believe the outcome would be different, only that there's more excuses that can be fabricated against him ?
He's probably considered a "Tax Protestor" or whatever other term makes his arguments "suspect" ?

I didn’t research. I experienced it. My allegations were NOT conclusory. They were factual. I had the very pieces of information the defendants were claiming did not exist, but they claimed those things could not be produced. I didn’t need to produce them I only needed to allege what was in them. The defendants claimed I could not proffer the governor’s executive order mandating masks. That was BS because it was right there in my hand during the hearing. I referred to it in my allegations. That wasn’t good enough for the judge who agreed with the attorney that the governors ordered did not exist! How absurd is that???
why? defendants stated what supporting the assertions?
and if they made shit up.. welppp... this is what put your car on the long road.

isn't there a level between appellate and supreme? circuit? that's where the review really takes place.
You read it correctly. The defendants claim the governor’s executive order did not exist. It is right in their opposition papers. The judge accepted that argument and suggested the same thing in the order.

I filed in the circuit court. I appealed to the Appellate Court of MD. I motioned for reconsideration at both levels, both denied. I petitioned the Supreme Court of MD. Petition discretionary denial. Next step is SCOTUS. And so I go.

edited 00:46 AM