All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 18, 2021 - Clif High
57:35
Woo Fighting - Explorers' Guide to SciFi World

Strategies and tactics for legal efforts against the deathjab

| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hello humans.
Welcome in Oslander.
Welcome to the Outland.
Welcome to the Woo.
Okay, so I've got a bunch of stuff to do.
I've got to move gravel and all this kind of stuff.
But I'm getting a bunch of emails from individuals that are involved in legal matters.
I'm not going to offer legal advice.
I'm not a lawyer.
I don't have any claim to that, although I do claim to have some success in legal matters.
But I'm not going to offer legal advice, but a lot of these individuals that I'm interacting with on Twitter and through email have never had a fight before.
They're young kids.
They've never been faced with anything at all like this before, and they have no idea of the strategy and the tactics to be employed.
So this is about how to do woo fighting, okay?
How to really fight.
And so, and what is important in fighting.
So I'll explain a few things here.
I've really got to hurry and get to my tractor work while the weather is good.
But okay, so here's the deal.
There was this butthead by the name of Corey Goode, and he was in league with David Wilcock.
They had a TV show on Gaia TV.
I maintain that they stole, they plagiarized information out of my Alta reports and put it into their Gaia TV shows to boost their ratings and to guide their plot narrative to trends that I was tracking, okay?
And they never acknowledged this or anything.
I also, I maintain, I contend that Corey Good's narrative of being a secret space program, time-traveling astronaut over 104 years old, all of this kind of shit, is horseshit.
It's bogus.
It's bullshit.
And I got sued by him in a RICO suit, very complex RICO suit with all of these other fuckers.
And you can go on PACER.
Now, PACER is the place where it's a government database.
It costs you 10 cents per page to search and look for.
It's PACER.gov, I believe.
It costs you 10 cents a page to look for, to retrieve a case document.
And so you could go and you could find my case there.
It'd be Good versus Gaia, Zvodnik, High, Widener, Montalobano.
And then he's got other cases, all right?
So Corey Good's suing other fuckers too.
Other poor bastards, right?
So anyway, though, so I got out of that case.
I did a legal maneuver.
I had an attorney.
He wasn't doing shit in the way of getting me anywhere.
He was not aggressive.
He didn't know how to fight.
He was a professional attorney.
And I fired him, right?
I just got disgusted.
We were into it for months.
It cost a lot of money.
He had other attorneys doing shit with him.
None of this made any sense at all.
It was basically a rape the client kind of a thing.
And they were cooperating, in essence, with Corey Good's suit.
Corey Good had hit me with a strategic lawsuit against public participation.
That's a slab.
None of this is really pertinent, but this is just history on this.
So he'd hit me one of those, and I had to file many, many, many, many documents once I fired my attorney.
But these documents from a pro se, okay?
Pro se means for self.
So here's something you need to know.
Go to pacer.gov and get documents to track your own court case.
But legal stuff uses Latin, whereas medical stuff uses Greek.
Okay, so here it's pro se, meaning for self.
So if you file documents for yourself, you're filing them pro se.
Now here's the thing about this.
In the United States, anyway, our court system is set up to assist the pro se filer because of the way in which our court system developed, basically.
I'm not going to get into details because I'm not getting into the legal advice nor this law course.
But bear in mind that Latin triumphs everything.
And if you can get the definition of Latin that's being used, you will understand what is going on.
So bring up a Google Translate, put it on detect language and cut and paste the Latin in there to see what they're actually saying.
And then investigate the nature of how they're using the words.
you will find in our legal system that if you can go all the way back to a Latin root, they can't go any further back in trying to interpret that language, all right?
So that's just a clue for you there.
Now, our legal system operates on a jurisprudence, okay?
So this is where it gets, it starts getting tricky in this.
And so you'll find that a lot of our language like jurisdiction derives from language like jurisprudence.
And so this is a legal phrase.
Jurisprudence means a prudent jury, okay?
An informed jury, an accurate jury, etc., etc.
So our system is based on jurisdiction.
And the root word here is dict, meaning word, okay?
So everything comes down to language.
That's what is presented on the face of it.
But there's these other elements that are good strategy and tactics for you.
So here's the strategy.
So you're fighting the them, so you're presented with a problem.
You're a young guy, a young woman, you're presented with a problem.
The problem is that they're saying you must take this death jab in order to keep your job, in order to get a license, in order to travel, in order to go to school.
Okay?
So it comes down to death jab and then whatever is the reward if you do that.
That is the crux of the situation that they're placing you in.
Now, you want the reward, the travel, the schooling, the job, whatever it is, but you're not going to have the death jab.
So that's the first thing to decide, is that you will win.
This is a strategy and a tactic, all right?
You will win.
You will not take the death jab ergo, even if you have to forego the reward temporarily and recoup later, you will win.
So knowing that, you can be calm about this, and you can also understand something.
If you're getting into the situation of where you're going to put in a cease and desist order, whether you're going to put in a legal, file any kind of legal papers against whoever is putting you in this position, the school, your employer, the government, whoever the fuck it is, does not matter, then you know right from the beginning you will win.
So that's your very first strategic thing.
Get that thought in your head that there's no way they can defeat you because in order for a defeat to occur, it must occur with your acknowledgement.
So if they were to defeat you, then you would have to take the jab.
So as long as you're not taking the jab, they can never, ever, ever defeat you.
And so this is one of those things where no matter what they throw at you, no matter how rough it may get, you will become stronger from this.
You will learn a great deal and you will become very, very, very much more powerful because you're going to watch them do all of this and you're going to call them on all of this shit and make them pay up in some form as it happens when you win, when they acknowledge that you win.
So that's how this is going to end.
They will acknowledge that you are the victor.
So there's the first point, that's the first element of your strategy.
Now this is a tactic as well.
No matter how fierce and yelling they are, no matter how terrible they are, no matter how devious, duplicitous, lying motherfuckers they are, you will always have in your mind, you'll use this as a tactic.
You'll always have in your mind that you will win.
You've already won.
We just have not gotten to that point where it has been decided by them capitulating and acknowledging that capitulation that you have won.
So you will in the future win.
You are winning now.
And when we arrive at that future, you will have won.
So get that in your head and they can never ever defeat you.
So we've already won now.
Now, the only thing that is in doubt, the only question that is arised here is what strategy or what element of our strategy, which is a tactic,
caused them to capitulate Okay, so that's what is in doubt at the moment.
No doubt that you've won, just what is it in the future you're going to do that will cause them to acknowledge, oh shit, you know, she beat the crap out of us.
We don't want to get her to really pissed and have her super sue us or anything.
We better, you know, give her whatever the hell the reward is that we were holding out on her, trying to get her to take the death jab.
That ain't going to happen, so we'd better give her the reward now.
Okay, so that's how this is going to end.
We will discover, that's what we're doing.
We're in the woo.
We're doing woo fighting.
And so I always win when I do woofing.
I won against Corey Good, all right?
So I fired my attorney.
I filed it.
You can go look up my case there and go and read the documents and see how I laid it out.
And I filed a please dismiss me from this case because I do not belong here.
In other words, I said to the judge, Corey Good has no jurisdiction over me.
He has no right of control over my words.
And that everything that he has thrown at me is bogus.
Now, I did this in a kind of a tricky way.
I used strategy and I used tactics.
And so I know that all of this is psychological on the part of judges.
And so this is what you're going to face too, right?
Is that all of this is psychological.
So first off, you will win.
So no matter what they do, do not accept that as a defeat.
So you'll put in some paperwork and your paperwork's going to be fucked up.
You're doing this for yourself.
You've got no fucking clue as to what you're doing.
But you're going to submit it anyway.
You don't care how ugly it is, how piss poor it is.
You will submit it.
You'll pay your $32 to sue them or file the injunction or whatever it is.
And you'll submit it.
And they will have to process it.
They will have to use procedure.
Okay?
And so what they're going to have to do is because they have to honor their own rules, right?
Their own rules as to how things must proceed.
So what you do is whatever your court is, whatever court you're filing in, whether you're filing in a labor court, whether you're filing in a city court, a county court, a municipal court, which is different than a city court,
a military court, or a federal court or a state court, any of those courts, the very first thing you do is find out who the judge is that you're submitting it to.
When you submit this, you'll find out.
Oh, judge, the clerk of the court will say, okay, this is being filed.
They'll stamp it, get the date, take your money, all of this kind of shit.
And they'll give you back some receipts.
On there will be the name of the judge and the name of the court in an exactitude that you can use for a search.
So go and search for the procedures, the rules of procedures that affect that court.
So if it's a state court, you know that you go to that state's websites on their court and you'll find all of the procedures.
And then each and every one of these judges will have an attendant addendum.
And so in my case, the judge says, I'm not going to take any filing on any motions that are over 4,000 words in this form.
And I want all of the responses to these motions to be under 2,700 words.
And so on.
There's word links because these bastards have to read this shit.
And they have to read each and every word.
They can't skip over because each and every word, jurisdiction, the words rule, the jurisdiction aspect of this, they have to have each and every word understood and everything.
So procedure and exactitude dominate the lives of judges, okay?
Then they must follow their own procedure and follow their own rules.
So if, for instance, you find that the people that are opposing you don't follow that judge's rules, file something right away and point it out, okay?
Because you can file addendums to any of the shit that they file in responses to them and always point out where they fuck up and following the rules.
Even if you're not quite exactly sure, point out to the judge to go and look at this.
Now you have to fit your response into the judge's word lists, right?
Okay, but now judges here, okay, so now that is a series of tactics that you'll always file and always point out where they are screwing up, even if you're sort of uncertain as to the exact part of diesel, the screw-up, right?
Just because everything you generate must be responded to.
It ties them up.
So the way it works is you will file a motion.
All right.
And this motion means that you want to move the court.
Whatever the hell that court is, you know, the state court, the federal court, or whatever, you want to move it with that motion.
Court, get in motion.
Go do something for me.
All right.
And so you're going to file a motion.
And so you'll find out that maybe your motion has 4,000 word limit on it.
And they will have the right to respond.
So they will have a response.
And maybe that response is going to be 2,800 words.
And anything over that 2,800 words, that judge cannot consider.
So if they write a 2,900-word response and the real bang is in the last hundred words, the judge cannot legally look at it.
Can't take it into consideration or any of that.
Now, they may, but anyway.
And you get to reply to that, right?
So you get, so you file the motion and you get to reply to their response.
And maybe you get 2,800 words.
Now, each of these things, you file the motion and there's a clock that starts ticking.
And they got 15 days or 20 days, whatever's in that procedure.
They've got some level, it'll be in the procedure rules.
It'll be in their rules as to when all this shit happens.
It's real straightforward.
It's easy to read.
It's tedious, but it's easy, right?
Okay, so you get 15 days to respond.
They get 15 days to respond to you.
As soon as they respond, you can reply.
So that was where my, that was one of my tactics, okay?
My tactics was alacrity.
Lacrity.
Okay, which means speed.
It means exact speed.
So anytime Corey Goods, the butthead who sued me, and I was the victim in this, right?
Cost me a shitload of money.
They threw me in a RICO case, which is a racketeering and corrupt organizations act.
And, you know, and I don't like any of these other fuckers that I don't even know any of these other fuckers that are being sued.
I never did shit with Guyana, any of that stuff.
I didn't belong there.
That was legit.
But anyway, one of the things I did was I filed with alacrity.
So if they respond, so whenever Corey Goods attorney would respond to me, would file something and like a response to my motion or a reply to my thing when I had a reply available, I would respond that same fucking day because that starts a clock on them.
And so if Corey Goods attorney had other shit to do, she was still shit out of luck.
She had a 15-day clock to get back with the reply to my response to her motion.
That kind of thing, right?
So because I was doing it pro se, I had nothing better to do.
I would just sit here and go through and decide, okay, I'm going to do it this way.
I'm going to use these four or five points.
So it was just one of my tactics here to be alacritus, to be very fast, to respond in order to keep the time pressure on them.
I didn't want to stretch out the 15 days and then give it to them and keep this whole thing going months.
So I boom, boom, boom, boom, boom.
So every time I did that sort of thing, it caused big problems for Corey Goods' attorney.
Okay, and then, as part of my tactics was, I pointed out her bad behavior.
Her bad behavior as an attorney.
She was doing all these things wrong.
Okay, she was violating their rules.
And so I pointed it out each and every time.
I took some of my words, some of my words, very precious words, but I made sure that I wrote this and so on.
Another thing is I used every single one of my words that I could, except when I filed the motion.
And I'll get to that in a second.
And so if I had 2,800 words to respond, I used every single word.
And if I got my main point across in 1,200 words, I did not repeat, because judges don't like that.
I didn't waste their time.
I used my extra words to point out in detail where she had screwed up on either their procedure or their rules.
And the rules are in general all about the procedure and how to file and so on.
But then also, she had violated the ethics that an attorney should use in filing cases.
And so I got on her case, this Rule 11 thing.
She was violating Rule 11 all the time, a federal procedure.
And so I made certain that I pointed that out in there, right?
And so that was one of my tactics was to use reply and response words to the maximum wherever possible.
Now, I did not do that on motions.
I filed a motion.
Okay, so these guys in the courts have to do things based on timing.
So, all right, so you're going to win.
We'll take that out of here.
I'm going to need a little bit of room.
They're bound by the rules.
I made a single motion in here, and I did it deliberately as part of a strategy because I observed something.
That, okay, so I was a defendant.
So, plaintiff, which was Corey Good, would file something.
They would file like a motion or they filed their basically the case document.
And then I got to file something.
So I was a defendant and I got to file a reply or a response.
Okay.
Now, there are a shitload of defendants.
And so we all got to file responses here to whatever the fuck she had done, his attorney had done.
And then the court has to work through each and every one of these as and in the order received.
So it gets real complicated.
But you can use that scheduling against your opponent.
You can use that scheduling against the court.
That's what I did.
So one of my tactics was alacrity, as I wanted to say.
Another tactic was pointing out her bad behavior.
And another tactic was using all of my words, right?
And so those were all tactics here.
Now, I had a strategy to which I applied these tactics.
And my strategy went like this.
That I observed that they were stuck with their own rules.
They're hidebound.
They have to.
They must do this.
And so here's a couple of things.
Until the case is cured, so they don't adjudicate a case until it is cured, until all of the procedure has been met and is checked off okay.
When that's done, then they'll start looking at these individual documents here, right?
And now this is an active, ongoing thing.
So it actually looks like this.
So defendant files a response.
Maybe this defendant, though, is filing a motion, which is different from a response.
And then maybe that same defendant gets to file their response here.
And then another defendant filed their response.
And maybe another defendant is filing a reply.
And maybe the plaintiff is filing a motion again, or maybe the plaintiff is filing a reply or a response.
It just doesn't make, and then you have another defendant filing stuff.
And so this is how it looks in the database in PACER.
You'll see all these documents racked out this way.
In between here, you'll see the judge doing things with these documents, mainly based on procedure, mainly assigning them to another judge.
So, all right, so we have to quickly get to another thing here.
Judges work in the United States.
We've got district judges and magistrate.
For our purposes of this discussion, you can think of a magistrate as an intern judge, right?
A judge who's learning on the job, OJT, on the job training.
All of this procedure shit gets shunted down to this magistrate judge.
The district judge might have a bunch of these magistrate judges handling all different kinds of cases.
And so the district judge that I was dealing with was also handling other Corey Good suit against other people with this particular magistrate judge.
But that district judge could have had other magistrate judges handling other cases because that's how they roll.
They got to do all this shit because there's bazillions of court cases being filed.
So it's all been, you know, systematized to this, and everything's got to be in the groove.
It's all electronic, though.
So you can file all this shit electronically.
Once you get your pro se ability established with that court clerk, you just file it off electronically, zoom, zoom, zoom.
They send you back a response.
It gets posted on the database.
You get your dates and so on.
So anyway, getting back to my strategy.
My strategy centered down to this.
Judges don't ever want to be overturned.
Okay, that's their, that's the worst thing that can happen to a judge is to have something that they adjudicate be overturned, saying that, okay, that fucker made a mistake.
A higher court says that fucker made a mistake.
They don't want that.
So that's your first thing you do is find out where your enemy's boundaries, constraints, and weaknesses are and where are the boundaries and constraints and weaknesses of the overall fighting that you're doing.
This is woo-fighting tactics, right?
Observe the terrain, see what's going on that you can use as a natural augmentation to your strategies and so on.
And so I determined that judges, so judges don't want, do not want appeals and they don't want to be overturned.
That's really what it comes down to, right?
So they want to avoid situations where they might be overturned.
And so they want to make cautious rulings.
They don't ever want to be in a position to make something that is a precedent.
Anything that is precedent-setting, you would think as a judge, oh, hey, man, that was the highlight of my career.
I did this precedent-setting constitutional adjudication.
No, they don't want to do that shit because it gets overturned and there's all these problems.
Okay, so they want to be not middle of the road, but they want to be straight and precise and legal in there and not cause to have cause to do anything precedent setting, especially in bullshit cases about blue chicken cults suing people for RICO and damages and all of the kind of shit that they were suing me for and all these other people, which all of which is 100% horseshit, right?
And sooner or later, the judge has to look at the actual facts that are being written up in all of these things and make an adjudication.
So sooner or later, they've got to hear that Corey Good was saying he's a time-traveling astronaut that's been doing business with eight-foot-high blue space chickens.
And the judge is going to have to say, okay.
You know, anyway, though, so the judge doesn't, no judge wants to make a precedent-setting decision.
So I put the judge in a bind.
All right.
So wherever you can, bind the circumstances to you, not your opponent.
And so what I did was this.
I saw that the judge had to adjudicate these things, and that if I filed appropriately, so if I decided to file in a particular way, I could have this happen, where I could file my motion to dismiss, which is what they ruled on.
Okay.
I'd filed a couple of them up here.
I'd filed these MTDs, these motions to dismiss up here.
But I'd filed them to an original case, and that was struck down because they have to cure the case.
They cured the flaws in the case against us.
She dropped a bunch of shit, rewrote it a bunch of times.
We went through three of those.
It took months.
Anyway, so I'd filed this motion to dismiss a couple of times.
And then the last time I thought, okay, I'm going to get tricky.
It won't cost me anything because I'm pro se.
I was feeling cocky about it anyway.
So what I did was I filed the motion to dismiss to the last to the number three case that was finally accepted.
They got their check mark.
That was the one.
It was cured.
We're going to fight over this particular set of claims against all of the defendants.
And then I ended up getting to file my motion to dismiss.
And then I filed a motion for injunctive relief.
Okay.
Now, defendants don't usually file those.
So this was unusual.
All right.
It's very, very, very rare that a defendant files one of those.
And I did it this way because I knew that the odds were that it would be thrown out.
But I put a line in there that said, as long as my motion to dismiss is being adjudicated, I would like to have a level playing field between myself and butthead Corey Goode.
I didn't call him butthead Corey Good.
I called him plaintiff because the plaintiff had had this website out there claiming I was a involved in trafficking humans, okay, by inference.
And this was written by one of his batshit attorneys, right, who are all now suing him.
Anyway, but they were using this as a fundraiser.
And all of us dark alliance guys are into, you know, intergalactic sex slavery, that sort of thing, right?
Real batshit claims.
And I wanted to have the judge tell him to take that website down and stop funding his lawsuit with this website.
And that was what was in my injunctive relief.
Now, what I did was, you can go and read it.
I wrote it up in a particular way where I ended up pointing out all the evil that he was doing with this website, calling all these people terrible names, hurting their digital reputation forever, and that he was basically a butthead and doing and she was doing uh or that he was doing uh violating rule 11 all of these different uh procedural rules with the way that he had this website set up and not discussing it with the court and all this other stuff and that i wanted the judge to render such relief as the
judge might see fit so uh i didn't ask for anything specific right but i asked for injunctive relief so these two things being filed right next to each other put them into a procedural bind.
If they came and they denied my motion to dismiss, saying you've got to stick in the case, the very next thing they would have to do is they would have to adjudicate a motion for injunctive relief filed by a defendant in a federal case with cross-state implications because I was in Washington and he's suing me out of Colorado.
They would have at that point had to, if they can skip this, they could have skipped this in a particular way and just jumped right to here, but then that referred them back to this.
But then they would have had to have set a precedent.
No matter how the judge ruled, if he ignored it and just held it off to the end of the case, that would be precedent setting.
If he ruled in my favor, that was a precedent setting.
If he ruled against me, it was precedent setting.
All of those would have allowed for appeals in the middle of their fucking case.
They hadn't even gotten to adjudicating anything other than all this procedure shit, right?
And so it put them into kind of a bind.
No matter what they did, there was only one path that would get them out of setting a precedent.
And here's the deal.
I knew I hadn't won when I saw that months before they got to it.
So when the district judge, when this is received by the clerk, this motion to dismiss, it's put on the calendar and it's assigned to this magistrate judge to do the actual work on, right?
To do all the procedure and the initial kind of stuff, which is render an initial opinion that the district judge then validates and stamps and says, I agree with this, or he does it differently.
Usually they do not override their magistrate judges in adjudication of stuff.
They may override them on some subtle procedure things, but they don't usually override them in stuff.
So I knew, now, so when they assigned this, so when they were, when we were down here, I noticed that he assigned this right away to this judge.
It happened like the very same day.
When I filed this motion here, it did not ever get assigned to this judge.
This fucker held it, okay?
So he knew the bind he was in.
He knew that he could not put it on this magistrate judge because then it would have to be processed.
Now, bear in mind, I got out of this like in August of this year, 2021.
That's when they granted my motion to dismiss.
But I'd filed this shit back in, oh, geez, maybe it was 2020.
I don't know.
It was a long time ago.
I haven't done anything for months once I filed these two things.
So I filed my motion to dismiss way the fuck back when.
And so, but I knew, and then I filed the very next day, I filed this, or it was like, I filed that on a Friday, I filed this on a Monday.
But it was still the very next day, really, as far as the court clerk is concerned.
And basically, by the way, the attorneys for all the other defendants take the amount of time allowed to get it right and so on, because they're paid to do this, right?
There's no, so they're not using alacrity or speed as part of their strategies because it's actually against their interest.
They need to be absolutely correct in filing and so on.
As a pro-se guy, I could just sort of wing it to a certain extent.
But in any event, so he never gave the motion for injunctive relief to the magistrate, but this was months before they got around to finally adjudicating this because they got to work through all the other defendants before they get to mine.
But I knew at the time that they did not file it, that he did not give it to the magistrate judge, that boom, I had a strategy.
I had an effective route, that he had to deal with something.
And so I knew I'd put him in a bind.
I also knew that he would get to my motion to dismiss, which was 100% valid.
It was factual.
It was polite.
It was thoughtful.
It was well-worded.
I worked out all of the things and rewrote it many times over about five hours and finally put it in, right?
It takes me about five hours to do the emotion to dismiss or these kind of things.
You know, but I'm likely to make mistakes in there.
The first time I did it, they threw out a bunch of stuff.
This magistrate judge threw out a bunch of crap.
When she finally got around to doing this one, there was one part in there she disagreed with, which was my assessment of the RICO.
I won't go into that.
I won't go into detail.
It's not pertinent.
Most people are not ever going to be sued for being involved in a racketeering organization.
So it's not pertinent, all right?
Anyway, though, so she disagreed with that, but she agreed with all of my other stuff, and she said, Grant it.
And hooray, this guy here said, Oh, fuck, phew, I don't have to look at this because she granted that, so this bastard's out of here.
So, what you want to do for a strategy is get to the point where you make it in the adjudication person, the judge or the panel or whoever the fuck it is, put them in a position to where it is in their interest to make you win.
Okay, this is part of your strategy.
You've already won.
It's just a question of you don't know which of these elements you're going to put in is going to cause you to cause them to actually agree with you that you've won.
But you will put in something that will do so.
And so, the thing is that here's the deal, right?
There is no penalty to putting in a lot of shit.
There's no penalty to gaming the system.
In fact, the people that, as we, as we know, those people in real life that game the fuck out of the system, they usually win.
So, file speedily.
File often.
File diversely.
So, all right, so you've got a school that's threatening you for the death jab and you can't attend.
Okay, so think of all of the different places that that school is vulnerable and file in a court case against them in every single one of these things.
Okay, so let's say that you're at the U of Dub.
You can file at Seattle wherever there is fair housing.
So, I would file all of the fair housing courts, right?
I'd get the fair housing involved because they're denying you the right to attend school and stuff with fair housing.
Does not matter that the fair housing does not trump the public health, right?
You just want to create churn.
You want to create noise at a legal level.
This is part of your strategy: is to file speedily whenever you can file, file often to give yourself more opportunities to file, file diversely to give you more different courts to get the ones that will do you good because you're not like an attorney.
You can't pick and choose which court to go to by virtue of knowing which judge may be sympathetic to your position.
So, you will assume that most of your filings will be dismissed.
Most of your filings will be denied.
But you don't care because it doesn't cost you that much other than your time and your energy to do it.
You're going to get better at it as you go along.
You'll be able to cut and paste from one end to the other frequently.
And so, you'll be able to generate a lot of this to game their system, to overwhelm them to the point where they acknowledge that you have won.
And so, if you're in the U of Dub, you can file at Seattle for housing, right?
You can file sexual harassment because you, and you can state this, it doesn't matter if you can't, you don't have to prove it or anything in these court cases.
You can file sexual harassment against these people because of the way that they're the gestures, the language, and the demeanor that they're using to suggest that you take that death jab is a form of predatory sexual harassment because of all these lewd gestures and stuff that they keep using and their inferences and things, right?
Does not matter if it's 100% provable or true at this point.
It is factually able to be filed this way.
So, you can file that way.
You can, if you're a student, go and look at all of the go and look for all of those laws and areas that affect students, okay?
I'm not a student, so I haven't ever investigated it, but there's dozens and dozens and dozens of areas of law that affect any given point of contact with law.
So, if you've got a housing dispute, maybe you've also got an employment dispute.
Maybe you're a part-time employee.
Maybe you're there on a grant, maybe you're there on a scholarship, maybe you're there on subsidized money.
Go and get each and every one of those pieces of paperwork.
You can find them online, I'm sure.
If you can't, get them to mail you a copy right away, whoever it is.
So if you've got a student loan, get the actual loan language, get the loan contract, read through there because they're a participant, okay?
If the school sends you to a bank to get a loan, they are a participant in that process and therefore must also be affected by and can be sued on the terms that are in that contract.
So for instance, if your student loan contract says that you're guaranteed fair housing and fair housing says no discrimination, sue them under the discrimination, the Fair Housing Act of 1964 and get it into federal court.
And see, each and every one of these things costs them a fucking fortune, right?
Costs you $32, $28, depends on some courts, a couple hundred dollars maybe in copy fees sometimes, but very, relatively very little dollars.
But if you're going to sue the U of Dub, you're going to get all of these state attorneys involved.
You're going to cost that university thousands, tens of thousands of dollars out of its legal budget.
And it doesn't want to spend those dollars ever.
And so you're instantly on their radar.
The more suits you file, the more they have to respond because they have to respond.
So if you've got 30 suits you've filed against the U of Dub, each one of those has a 30 to a 15 day, a 15 to 30 day response time, and then you've got how many attorneys tied up for how many months responding to your shit because they're going to take their time in responding to this.
They will respond on the 15th day.
They will respond on the last day they're allowed, usually, within the last couple of days, because there's no percentage, there's no profit for them to file early, including state attorneys.
And so you will get a response.
It'll probably be very negative, but that's what you want.
And you're irritating them.
Then you're pissing them off.
Okay, so first they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then you piss them off, then you've won.
All right, so that's just the way this shit works.
So anyway, so every single case you can file hurts them, costs them right now, okay?
Even if they nominally win in that.
Every single time, now, never, ever, ever accept defeat.
So if any of these courts come back and say you don't have standing or in any other way dismiss or deny your motion or your case or whatever it is, appeal that some way.
Kick it back to them right away, especially if it's a state court or a federal court.
You can go to the state court and you can go to the federal court and you can say, where are the pro se assistance things here?
So if you get denied, you've got a certain number of days to appeal that denial.
And that causes a whole bunch more flurries.
And you can get the state to help you fill out the paperwork to do these appeals, to do these claims against the state for all of this stuff.
And you can always keep filing a new case with new wording.
Unless they come at you and they say you can't do that.
Okay, they'll say words like prejudice.
All right, so this is dismissed with prejudice, meaning that you are denied the ability to file this and you can't file this language in this court again.
Usually that takes three times of getting thrown out of a court before they get that irritated that they'll go to that language because you can even appeal that.
Okay, and you can sue the judges individually.
So you can sue a judge personally.
So if you get thrown out on a court case, then on the grounds or on the theme of I'm not going to take the death jab because of XYZ, then you can also sue those same people that are causing you problems individually.
And this causes a huge amount of problem for them because each and every one of those individuals that you might sue as an individual has to participate, makes that court case drag on, has to go get their own attorney, starts costing them money.
So if I were in a situation where I was a student at, say, the U of Dub and they were telling me I had to have a shot in order to get my housing, I would go and file a fair housing 1964 federal lawsuit.
I would also file with the city fair housing.
I would file with any state fair housing.
I would also file with any state organization that supports housing in any way, shape, or form that has ever sent money to the U of Dub.
I would file suits with each of these various courts.
So I'd have a federal court case going, a state court case going.
I'd have a city court case going.
I would go to all the state agencies and file complaints against it on the fair housing.
That would just be the start, okay?
So I'd have like five.
So this would be my full-time job.
Every day I'd get up and see which cases I would have to attend to by going to PACER.
I'd pay my 10 cents to see what new documents they had filed, get all of this stuff.
They have to give you a copy of it, right, by the way.
If you want to wait for them, they have to mail you a copy or send you an email copy of everything they file.
So you don't actually have to pay the money at PACER.
It just is a little quicker because that hits, usually it gets filed there before the emails and stuff get sent out to you.
However, so I would do that on the fair housing side, right?
Then I would do it on, in my case, I would use Americans with Disability Act.
So I would file a suit against the U of Dub saying, I won't take any fucking medicine and you can't make me because I'm a protected class of person under the Americans with Disabilities Act because I am officially a fucking paranoid.
Let them dispute that.
Okay, and paranoid, paranoid schizophrenics are a class of protected individual.
You can't discriminate against me because of my paranoia.
And so I'd file that suit, right?
And I'd do it through the state.
I'd do it through all of the, every single place that I could file, I would file.
And they will get U of Dub by say, if I started this on a Monday, so today would be Monday, I would be a student, I would start filing this shit today.
It would hit their knowledge by Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday.
By Friday, they would get the understanding because I would also be filing new cases on Tuesday, new cases on Wednesday, new cases on Thursday, new cases on Friday.
And then the next Monday, I'd really start getting into it because then they wouldn't have had a chance to respond, but it would become official.
And then I would start using my court cases as PR against them.
Okay, so that's the other aspect of this.
As you have filed, this becomes an asset.
All right, and you can use that for PR.
And with social media, so much of our lives are ruled by the social media aspect of this.
You're a fool not to use PR.
And every time you use PR, telling the horrors of how you've been treated by these evil bastards at U of Dub, you would always, always, always tag the fuckers so that they would know that they're facing a PR nightmare.
This is fighting.
This is woo-fighting.
You know, we're going to knock that fucker off that horse with a rock.
You know, they've got all the weapons.
They've got big spears.
They've got armor.
We're just a poor bastard down here with no tools whatsoever, just being victimized.
So we've got to do woo-fighting.
All right, because we don't have the armaments.
We don't have the organizations.
So we have to look at the terrain around us and use that terrain as our weapons in order to undo our enemy.
And so in this case, our terrain is all of these hills.
So I would use all of these little hills to get that horse to just be fucking exhausted and not know what he's doing just by chasing me all over those little hills, right?
And so that's what I'm going to do.
I would have them chase me through all of these courts, filing constantly because they've got to respond.
They can't not respond because of the legal process, is bound by procedure, and they are ruled by their own rules.
And the book of rules is really, really thin.
I've got it around here.
I actually bought a physical copy so I could peruse it if the computers went down because it happens so often here.
And so the federal rules of federal procedure in federal courts.
And, you know, so you can get these things on Amazon.
It was like $13 or something, very cheap.
Anyway, so I'm using the terrain.
So I'm going to knock the fucker off of his horse with my rock, all right?
And so in this case, maybe my rock is the fair housing.
Maybe they can't dispute fair housing language.
Maybe the rock is going to be the, you know, the debt, right?
The student debt.
Because maybe the language in that contract states that these, that the bank can't collect student debt unless I can go to school under fair housing law.
And hey, that bank's going to get really upset if this word gets around in your PR campaign that nobody has to pay their student loans if they don't get to school because of this shit.
You can just keep the money and say, fuck the bank, because the bank is hamstruck because they can't collect because of the fair housing.
Now, I don't know that that's factual, right?
But maybe that's the case.
Maybe you can file a case stating just that and demand that they adjudicate that and prove you wrong.
So when you file shit, basically you're saying, this is my position.
Prove me wrong, you fuckers.
And you get fierce about it.
Don't take any crap from them.
Every single one of the attorneys I've dealt with did, except for one.
I've got to give him really top dog respect here.
And that's Daniel, the chief attorney there that I had contact with for Gaia TV.
That guy knows how to fight, okay?
And so, but very few of these attorneys know how to fight.
And what you need to do is you need to get passionate.
You need to get concise.
Never waste a word.
Remember, you're under those word limits.
Be every single time you can use a word indicating passion or feeling, do so.
Because attorneys never do so.
So it stands out in the judge's mind.
And the whole goal of your filing any of these things is to change the mind of the fucker looking at them, right?
To make them understand what your position is and why they must agree with you.
That's all you have to do.
And so when you get into legal battles, here's a truism.
This is factually true.
As a pro se filer, I did not give a shit about legal references.
I don't care about any points of law.
Why is this?
Because the whole point of all the courts is to find fact in law.
That is what juris means, okay?
Is to find fact in law.
So to find lawful fact, to find legal fact.
So all of the other attorneys were trying to frame their facts in law.
That's why they keep citing law constantly.
So-and-so case, such-and-so language, so-and-so case in this year, overturned here, all of that shit, right?
And it really annoyed, let me tell you, it annoyed the piss out of Corey Good's attorney that I did not do that.
It annoyed her so much that she cited that I was not putting in legal citations in my documents.
She put it in her documents twice.
She wasted language in her, she wasted words in her documents trying to use my own tactic against me of pointing out where I had failed.
Only it was not a failure.
Because as a pro se person, all I need to do is to present the court with fact that is in law.
Since I lived through it, I just had to present my version, my understanding, my actions as they were affecting that law and the facts about them.
I need not cite any other cases or any of this stuff because I was pro se.
I was involved.
It was personal.
And so it's not an attorney saying my client and this other law applies to my client in my thinking, right?
So I didn't have to cite any law.
There were a couple of times I did because early on in the process I hadn't tumbled to the actual understanding of how this was going on.
So they have to find in this mess of law what is factual.
If I've got fact, if I can say factually that on this date I did this, that's a fact.
So Corey Good's attorney said that I threatened him on Twitter, threatened to beat him up.
And I said no.
In fact, I responded directly to that and said no, I offered to fight Corey, David, and Jay.
Corey Good, David Widener, and Jay Weidener and David Wilcock.
I offered to fight them to settle my grievances with them.
That's not a threat.
And, you know, it's just an offer, and that was the term.
So I just point out the language.
So I point out the fact of the matter, not the way that they construe it, and then the laws that they think they want to apply to that.
So you just have to present fact.
So I actually think it's a good tactic to check the student loan contracts because there's all kinds of shit in there about the schools have to abide by these federal government stuff, including fair housing and all this kind of stuff, especially since there were a bunch of schools in like the 1990s that went bust.
All these little fly-by-night schools that were trying to get in on the new college debt debt rodeo and suck in a lot of money.
And so they caused the debt language contracts to be redone between the federal government, the schools, and the banks.
So there's undoubtedly shit buried in there that you can tease out that will get you a new standing in some other court to file a case against the school or your employer or whoever, right?
So in your employer's case, you would use all the employment law.
I really like all the fair housing and employment law of the 1960 because all these death jab things violate it just so clearly.
And it's awful hard to dispute because it's been so well adjudicated.
And no judge is going to want to say, oh, well, that 1964 law that made fair housing for black people applicable can't be used by a black person saying that they don't want a death jab and the school's denying them housing that they paid for.
You know?
So, you know, so you see what I'm saying?
They're really kind of hamstrung if you do this.
So file speedily, file often, file diverse courts.
It'll be a full-time job until you win, and then you just let all the shit go.
Once you win, you don't have to pursue any of it unless you want to get vengeful and try and recover money, time, and so on to make yourself whole for them fucking with you, right?
So anyway, and then use the PR.
Use the social media.
A lot of this stuff is quickly adjudicated in the court of public opinion, and that court of public opinion can be used.
So if you've got the U of Dub really freaking out that they're thinking that everybody that's got a student debt that's tied to the U of Dub could legally file against them to not pay that debt, they're going to shit their pants.
Everybody in the provost office there, all of the people in the housing, all of the administrators, they're just going to shit constantly until they get that take care of because they can't have that.
They've got to have these funds flowing through.
So if you can touch the money, you touch them.
If you can get at them through these different ways, then you can just, you know, come up with a tactic, file a few pieces of paper, throw it down there, get denied a bunch of times, then get it right, and then you win.
God, guys, sorry it took so long.
But this law shit is complicated.
It's not really complex because it all comes down to words.
And if you can prove to them that that word means this, then they're fucked, basically.
So this is woo-fighting.
And that's how I would go about it.
Just a tactic, just a legal tactic.
And it's sort of the same thinking that I did when I saw how they were hamstrung by the procedures and decided, oh, okay, let's try this, right?
I'm at no loss in terms of anything you do at a pro se.
Basically, you can always plead ignorance with a judge and apologize.
Geez, judge, I'm sorry.
I didn't know.
I thought this meant that, you know?
And they have to basically go along with a certain amount of that because they run into this shit with a lot of bumble-headed idiots like myself.
I fucked up a couple of my papers and the judge called me out on it, but it's no big deal.
It's not like they're going to slap you down and you can't file or something.
So anyway, guys, you know, this is woo-fighting.
Look to the terrain.
Figure out a way to make the people that do the adjudication take your side.
You know, if you can put them into a bind, if you can put them into a PR versus their PR bind, that will work.
If you can do any of these kind of things, then you just, then you win.
So you have to game the system because the attorneys are, because your opponents are.
And the opponents have everything stacked in their favor, except they're not fast, they're not agile, and they don't really look around.
And they're using paid mercenaries.
They're attorneys, right?
Who don't have your passion, your intensity, your need to get it done, and will lose.
And so basically, that's where it's at.
So you've decided you're going to win.
And the only thing that's not known now is which of these tactics within your overall strategy is the one that will have won for you.
Anyway, okay, guys, go find out.
▲
Export Selection