Transcription
And I think a lot of us have have researched things that tell us completely opposite of this. I don't believe y'all study hard enough because I was come on man, if we all we all have experienced this nonsense. We all have heard different. Well, maybe we all heard it, but you can tell our experience that it was nonsense. Abut that's that's the difference. We're seeing Ser gret Do's actual dockets that's dispelling what we've been hearing otherwise. And I I'm not doing this to undercut what other people are doing. I I welcome us all to come together so we can get people through this issue. But I'm in a bad mood and I think people are taking advantage of people. Plus Florida State start out 0 and 2. So I'm just going to take my vengeance out on every. And we appreciate that honestly. You know, this is something I needed to hear. Well, probably not hear, you probably needed to see. Yeah, definitely. Okay, so and by the way, which you can go ahead and finish this part off too, because this is a part of it. And why they say that. And this is the case that came out of. Go ahead. Okay. Finding that a case which began with a petition to DET, which did what? Which what with began with? That's the basis of the case. It began with what? A petition to determine paternity and now appears to involve Child Support Enforcement did not arise under federal law. And explaining that federal courts generally do not decide Domestic Relations. Crazy, I didn't mean to laugh before it was done, but I already understand. And it's and actually based upon those of you all who've been walking me for a while. Um, like you ba and you uh Kendrick, you understand it clearly, especially y'all two because y'all have something else in com that's really clear to you, to isn't it Kendrick? That's real clear to you, ain't it bro? Absolutely. Hey, you did say that um, just to be clear that um, state statutes and case law and your own specific case is not plagiarism, right? No, I don't know if I said it that way. I say there's no plagiarism in the law, it's precedent. You see because it's they're just they're citing different cases, right? That's not plagiarism. It's just we have a precedent that explains what you're talking about. Do you didn't create? Get your dumb ass out of here. Somebody that probably tried to kick me in the ass down the steps, but the best what I would say is I learned because I was willing to go in there and figure it out when I couldn't get an answer and everybody else could not give me something more consistently. I went in there and did it. So I think we've established some other stuff, right? So everybody's good with this stuff, right? By the way, you all are going to get y'all. If you want this, it'll be in the resources folder in your Dropbox. I mean, not Dropbox, what it called, but actually it's already in my Dropbox. The highlighted one will be in your one drive. Y'all's one drives. Everybody okay? Y'all might want to take a little shot, little sip on a stretch is right there now while do dumb ass alleges that he was denied due process in that proceeding, that argument is due to be raised as a defense to what? Go ahead, Jonathan. Can you see that? Jonathan? Jonathan might have passed out. That argument is due to the the raise as defense to the Department of Revenue state law action. Is it is it coming clear to everybody a little bit now? Crystal clear. So what kind of action? Everybody all together, unmute. What kind of action is your child support action? State law. A state. State. You got it. To uh champ, you got it. Yeah, my customer, my customer gone now. They taking a little time. Go grab some ice from. You got all right, you good? I'll be right back. Don't get some ice. So makes sense, everybody? All the federal government does is provide funding and it provides a standard by which the agencies have to particularly operate. But your issue is your order. And they say explain to that extent, respond. And it under Domestic Relations case alleges constitutional violations resulting from that proceeding. Y'all see that? Those issues are raised by way of defense and do not establish Federal question jurisdiction. Is everybody okay with what you're saying? Anybody have any questions? You want to put it in the chat room and y'all and actually I blame Flores and Collins who must be still asleep. He has to work late cuz I wouldn't even have thought about this until you said something. I looked at the damn or no dude, it's not how it works because this is actually a part of what you have going on a little bit later on the day when we get together, right? Flores, you see how clear it is now and how how easy it is now to focus on where the issues are. So hopefully, well, not hopefully, you probably have now essentially erased X amount of stuff from your plate right now, right? Or from your desk right now, right? Just throw this in the trash can because it's not even useful. When it say those issues are raised by way of defense, that means that when it first happened, when they first started, I should have tried to get rid of it defensively by by through this other stuff in the state law, using state law. Also, here's the big part.