So what if you were framed?

​

Here's a more important question: who do you owe?

​

Or rather, who do you acknowledge has the credit to sponsor you such that you are obligated to maintain standards that they accept as delivery on their original support?

​

Sometimes people take your credit and leverage it for what they think is better credit.

​

Then the new creditor's standards become the ones they base decisions on.

​

Who's to say who owes who what?

​

If you say it's insurance and I sat it's fraud how many people are going to take my "credit" and how many people are going to take "your" credit when it comes to deciding on how they are going to invest their time, energy, money and commitments?

​

But, if I give you credit based on my investigation of  "fraud" and you try to flip it for a couple of years to leverage a new "insurance" scheme, at best it becomes "insurance fraud." Will you try to negotiate it to be "fraud insurance?"

​

I do not read the case law of my political opponents. They would potentially NOT be my political opponents if when I extend them credit on my fraud investigation they did not try to "flip" it into a cover up. I did not even think of it as "credit" so much as "civic duty" until I realized I had been lied to about my "credit history" and what it had been used for.

​

I might have been able to run for Senate in 2018. But I did not because:

​

          a) I did not have an address with which to establish residency, and

          b) I filed with the Supreme Court of Texas to begin the process of putting forth a                     referendum to boycott the 2018 federal election and to consider a vote to Secede.

​

Neither of those things changed during the election season.

​

But, despite encountering abstracts that told me that at least one of who would otherwise have been a political opponent's past work products as Solicitor General might actually offer constructive arguments to support my attempt at filing cases with state and federal courts, I did not read any of his cases. I had ALREADY submitted to his office a request for a formal investigatory process on high-level matters involving unprecedented charges. I did so understanding that he had the authority to act in his ministerial capacity. He never contacted me to follow up on MY work; I was not about to go poking around his until he addressed my original efforts.

​

Here's the other thing...what if I ran for the other Senate position now? I understand there is a Senior/Junior situation regarding Senate members. While that former potential opponent was the "Junior" at the time, if the other Senator is not elected then whoever comes in next will be the "Junior." I just cannot bring myself to accept that after already extending so many opportunities to one Senator that if I WERE to get elected I would be obligated to continue being subordinated to be used for addressing his outstanding debts, especially since now after two-and-a-half years those debts are also TO me.

​

I never thought of it this way until I started paying attention to what members of Congress and the Senate actually DO rather than what they say on television. I wish it were not this way. But...

​

I am not going to read the case law or any of the arguments. I only wanted to stop ongoing acts of "securities fraud" that have apparently involved me since AT LEAST March 13, 2010.

​

That's all I intend to do.

​

7:05 pm CST

Oct. 1, 2019

​

P.S.: I never had any problems with Mexico or anyone from "Mexico" until you were allowed to lien on MY credit. 

​

I never had any problems with "the Middle East" or anyone from "the Middle East" until you were allowed to lien on MY credit.

​

I never had a problem with Holy Women, or People of the Cloth, or even members of law enforcement until you were allowed to lien on MY credit.

​

I don't think what YOU have to offer can really help me anyway.

​

​

​