DUMMY TYRANNY: WE'LL ARREST YOU NOW AND FIGURE IT OUT LATER #Police are dumber than a box of rocks! I mean, I say that... But they are PLENTY SMART & DEVIOUS when trying to jam you up! It is more like they are inherently #Evil They ENJOY ruining lives and economically terrorizing the rest of us! They ENJOY their perceived "Authority" over other Americans, no matter how illegitimate it is! And I have to tell you... Police CHECK EVERY BOX ON THIS LIST! Things which YHWH HATES! Proverbs 6 16 These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him: 17 A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, 18 An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief, 19 A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren. I really want everyone to realize that when you participate in "The System" of "Maritime Admiralty Law" that the #Corporation of the United States operates under YOU ARE PARTICIPATING IN #SATAN'S SYSTEM! When you give your CONSENT by "voting" to remain a #Slave... When you CONSENT to live under their unlawful "Statutes and Codes"... When you CONSENT to being a SLAVE by paying "taxes"... When you CONSENT to believing in #NASA's fictional tales... ALL OF THESE THINGS put you squarely inside of Satan's Kingdom on Earth! It is time to REVOKE YOUR CONSENT! And live by YHWH's LAWS! Throw man's statutes and codes out the window! Break the chains of your slavery to other MEN... STOP worshiping Satan's worthless paper "Notes of DEBT" and the #Bankers who peddle it. STOP allowing people with nothing more than a PRINTING PRESS to control the entirety of creation! There are 8 BILLION PEOPLE on this earth... And it is time to stop CONSENTING to being ruled by the clever POS who printed up the MONOPOLY MONEY that has allowed them to STEAL everything on earth! It is time to be a MAN! It is time to stop allowing the 10% of the population calling itself "government" to run roughshod over the rest of us and steal our shit, and cage us at will! https://old.bitchute.com/video/3581pIoeVCM/

Urgent: MI Senate voting TODAY on a dangerous bill package that make elections less secure. Please contact your MI State Senator and share your thoughts and concerns on the bills below: Find and contact your State Senator HERE: https://senate.michigan.gov/FindYourSenator/ → HB 6052: Serial (stub) numbers on top of ballots are one of the final barriers to absentee ballot vote fraud, yet 6052 eliminates the requirement for absentee ballots to to have tear-off serial numbers. Plus, it allows for on-demand printing, so counties can take over the voting processes from their local municipalities, with no absentee ballot numbering system to allow clerks to track how many ballots were issued or where they came from. → HB 6053 imposes a shortened window of for corrective action, allowing making complaints on polling places, drop box locations, early voting will be inadmissible less than 45 days before an election. Since absentee voting is already in progress during this time frame, remediation of problems will be less likely → HB 6055 assaults the authority of local clerks. It takes away local control of clerks to administer elections. Instead, 6055 requires a school district “coordinating committee...to designate the clerk responsible for the school district election.” → HB 5551 prohibits “an individual from being a member of the board of state canvassers” or “board of county canvassers if that individual has been convicted of an election-related offense” but does specify what such an offense looks like. Some are concerned this could be weaponized to keep good, qualified candidates away from the positions that verify and certify the integrity of our elections. These bills have already passed the House, and if passed by the Senate today, will head to the Governor’s desk for signature. #Michigan #Elections #Urgent #CurrentEvents #ElectionIntegrity #SecureElections #ProtectOurVotes #ActNow #TakeAction #Senate #House #MISenate #StandForTruth #YourVoiceMatters

USAA Punished for it Claims Handling Punitive Damages Should be Awarded With Caution and Within Narrow Limits Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/usaa-punished-claims-handling-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-nbp2c, see the full video at and at and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 4950 posts. Posted on December 19, 2024 by Barry Zalma DISPUTE OVER HURRICANE DAMAGES RESULTS IN MAJOR PUNITIVE DAMAGES FOR BAD FAITH Although he Mississippi Supreme Court recognized the need to only award punitive damages with caution and within narrow limits, it did not limit its award in accordance with that maxim. After almost 19 years of litigation the last appeal resolved the various disputes. FACTS Hurricane Katrina destroyed Paul and Sylvia Minor’s home on August 29, 2005. The Minors had a homeowner’s insurance policy with United Services Automobile Association (USAA). The USAA policy covered damage caused by wind but excluded damage caused by storm surge or flood. The Minors reported their loss with USAA, which resulted in a years-long coverage dispute. USAA ultimately issued payments for damage it concluded was caused by wind but not for damage it concluded was caused by storm surge or flood. The Minors maintained that they suffered a total loss caused by wind and demanded that USAA pay the policy limits. The case proceeded to trial in 2013, and the jury awarded the Minors $1,547,293.37 in compensatory damages. In United Services Automobile Association v. Estate Of Sylvia F. Minor, Kathryn Minor and Stephen Minor, No. 2023-CA-00049-SCT, Supreme Court of Mississippi, En Banc (December 5, 2024) resolved the bad faith claims. The issue was ultimately presented to a jury. The jury awarded the Minors $10,000,000 in punitive damages and $457,858.89 in extra-contractual damages (solely attorneys’ fees). USAA appealed, raising several assignments of error. Trial To establish its bad faith claim, the Minor Estate introduced various USAA documents, including (1) portions of the USAA underwriting file; (2) the confidential email regarding (a) the engineer’s March 2006 findings and (b) Bergstrom’s conclusion that USAA would be responsible for paying for all the windows and the contents in rooms with windows; and (3) USAA’s letter to the Minors in June 2006 indicating the majority of damage was due to flooding. Punitive Damages Punitive damages are considered an ‘extraordinary remedy’ and should be awarded ‘with caution and within narrow limits.'” The Supreme Court found that the evidence presented at trial demonstrates a type of conduct for which punitive damages were designed. The Minor Estate provided sufficient proof that USAA acted in bad faith, with complete disregard for the Estate’s rights. Whether The $10 Million Punitive Damages Award Should Be Reversed Or, Alternatively, Reduced. USAA alternatively argues that the $10 million verdict should be reduced because it claims that the damages award is a 22:1 ratio and therefore unconstitutionally disproportionate to the extra-contractual damages awarded ($457,858.89). USAA relies on State Farm Mutual Auto Insurance Co. v. Campbell, 538 U.S. 408, 425, 123 S.Ct. 1513, 1524, 155 L.Ed.2d 585 (2003), which states that “[s]ingle-digit multipliers are more likely to comport with due process.” USAA argued that a 1:1 ratio should apply to the damages award here. The Supreme Court found that punitive damages is less than seven times the amount of compensatory damages, which it concluded clearly falls within the guideline provided in Campbell. A punitive damages award not only serves as a deterrent, it also compensates the plaintiff for its public service in bringing the action. The Supreme Court found the trial court’s decision to force the Minor Estate to use nearly half of its award to pay attorneys’ fees does not adequately compensate the Estate for bringing this action against USAA for its bad faith conduct in handling the Minors’ insurance claim from 2005. Therefore, the Supreme Court concluded that the trial court erred by denying the Estate’s post-trial motion for attorneys’ fees. CONCLUSION In sum, the trial judge did not err as a matter of law by submitting the issue of punitive damages to jury, and the $10 million award of punitive damages is not unconstitutionally disproportionate. The Supreme Court affirmed the jury verdict awarding the Minor Estate $10 million in punitive damages and $457,858.89 in extra-contractual damages as to attorneys’ fees and reverse the judgment of the trial court and render attorneys’ fees on behalf of the Estate in the amount of $4,500,000, plus post-judgment interest at an annual rate of 4 percent from October 3, 2022, the date of judgment, until paid. ZALMA OPINION This case that dragged on through the courts of Mississippi for 19 years and resulted in compensatory damages based upon an interpretation finding coverage for the estate and that the insurer’s conduct was so egregious that the estate was entitled to tort damages plus punitive damages many times more than the compensatory damages. The Supreme Court astonishingly concluded that punitive damages were not limited to punishing the insurer but were payment to the estate for its action on behalf of everyone in the state of Mississippi and that they should not be required to pay their lawyers but that payment should come from the insurer as part of its punishment. The Supreme Court ignored the fact that as a result the estate must pay income taxes on the punishment damages since they are not designed to make the insured whole and punished each member and insured of USAA. In my opinion it’s time the courts of the USA do away with the tort of bad faith to avoid excessive judgments and allow contract disputes to be enlarged into a major amount of punishment for an insurer who rejected a claim based on interpretation of contract terms and the facts of a loss, like this case. In that regard see my book, It’s Time to Abolish The Tort of Bad Faith Available as a paperback here. Available as a Kindle book here. (c) 2024 Barry Zalma & ClaimSchool, Inc. Please tell your friends and colleagues about this blog and the videos and let them subscribe to the blog and the videos. Subscribe to my substack at https://barryzalma.substack.com/subscribe Go to X @bzalma; Go to Newsbreak.com https://www.newsbreak.com/@c/1653419?s=01; Go to Barry Zalma videos at Rumble.com at https://rumble.com/account/content?type=all; Go to Barry Zalma on YouTube- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCysiZklEtxZsSF9DfC0Expg Go to the Insurance Claims Library – https://lnkd.in/gwEYk

Books can profoundly change one's perspective on life by opening up new worlds of thought, offering unique insights into human nature, and challenging preconceived notions. Here’s how they might do this: Exposure to Different Cultures and Experiences Books provide a window into lives vastly different from our own. Reading about diverse cultures, traditions, and experiences can foster empathy and broaden our understanding of the world. Philosophical and Ethical Reflections Works like those of Plato, Nietzsche, or modern thinkers often question our beliefs and values, prompting introspection about what truly matters in life. Emotional Resonance and Connection Fictional stories allow readers to connect deeply with characters, making us more aware of the complexities of emotions and relationships. Practical Wisdom and Skills Non-fiction books offer actionable insights on topics ranging from self-improvement to history, science, and psychology, which can reshape priorities or habits. Inspiration and Motivation Memoirs or stories of resilience (e.g., Viktor Frankl’s Man’s Search for Meaning) can inspire people to overcome their struggles or live with greater purpose. Challenge to Worldviews Books that confront controversial or unfamiliar topics can spark critical thinking, encouraging readers to question their beliefs or biases.

Despite the mainstream media's lies about wind turbines not causing whale deaths, according to the world's leading whale researchers, the wind industry risks driving the North Atlantic right whale to extinction.

Intent to Move is not a Residence Residence Premises Requires the Insured to Live in Residence Post 4944 Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/intent-move-residence-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-qmlxc, see the full video at and at and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 4900 posts. In Paul Villalobos v. Clear Blue Insurance Company, No. 24-20125, United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit (December 10, 2024) the the Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court’s dismissa of Plaintiff-Appellant Paul Villalobos’s breach of contract claim following a coverage dispute between himself and his insurer, Clear Blue Insurance Company, because he admitted he did not live in the insured premises. FACTS Villalobos is named on a Clear Blue homeowners’ policy, which provides coverage for property located at 7503 Muirwood Lane in Houston, Texas (the “Property”). The policy’s “Property Coverages” section states in pertinent part: “We cover . . . [t]he dwelling on the ‘residence premises’ shown in the Declarations.” The policy defines “residence premises,” also in pertinent part, as “[t]he one-family dwelling where you reside . . . on the inception date of the policy period shown in the Declarations.” The Declarations page lists Villalobos as the insured, his mailing address as the Property, and the inception date as September 21, 2021. In mid-November 2021, Villalobos reported to Clear Blue that wind and hail had damaged the Property’s roof earlier that month. Clear Blue denied coverage after Villalobos admitted he lived in Colorado and had never resided at the Property. Villalobos sued Clear Blue, alleging breach of contract, breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing, violations of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act and the Texas Insurance Code, fraud, and ongoing conspiracy to commit illegal acts. ANALYSIS During his deposition, Villalobos testified that he lived in Colorado for over nine years and did not reside at the Property when the Clear Blue policy went into effect. Clear Blue moved for summary judgment on Villalobos’s claims, arguing there was no insurance coverage for Villalobos’s property damage as a matter of law. Applying Louisiana law, the Fifth Circuit has previously determined that an identical residence requirement in a homeowners’ insurance policy required “more than purchasing a home or intending to move into it.” GeoVera Specialty Ins. Co. v. Joachin, 964 F.3d 390, 393 (5th Cir. 2020). Applying Joachin the Fifth Circuit agreed with the district court that the Property did not satisfy the policy’s residence requirement and was not a covered “residence premises” because: it is undisputed that Villalobos did not reside on the Property on the inception date of the Clear Blue policy; and Villalobos’s only material argument on appeal is that he intended to move onto the Property. Joachin held that “intending to move” is not enough. The Fifth Circuit concluded that there is no coverage under the policy. Accordingly, Villalobos’s breach of contract claim failed and the USDC’s judgment was affirmed. ZALMA OPINION That something as obvious as a home in Texas cannot be the residence premises of a person who lives full time in Colorado. Insurers issue property insurance policies providing coverage similar to a homeowners policy to the owner of a rental property while a homeowners policy limits coverage to the person who actually resides at the property. That this case went to the Fifth Circuit was the waste of Plaintiff’s time and money, the waste of the time of the trial court, and the waste of the time of the Fifth Circuit who rendered a concise and clear opinion. A less kind judge or appellate court would have imposed sanctions on the party plaintiff and his counsel. (c) 2024 Barry Zalma & ClaimSchool, Inc. Please tell your friends and colleagues about this blog and the videos and let them subscribe to the blog and the videos. Subscribe to my substack at https://barryzalma.substack.com/subscribe Go to X @bzalma; Go to Newsbreak.com https://www.newsbreak.com/@c/1653419?s=01; Go to Barry Zalma videos at Rumble.com at https://rumble.com/account/content?type=all; Go to Barry Zalma on YouTube- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCysiZklEtxZsSF9DfC0Expg Go to the Insurance Claims Library – https://lnkd.in/gwEYk

Wednesday, December 11, 2024 Bishop Robert Barron Cycle C Advent 2nd wk of Advent Topics God's love Pride Bible References Matthew 11:28-30 Friends, in today’s Gospel, Jesus offers to free us from the burden of our pride. What is it that makes our lives heavy and weighed down? Precisely the burden of our own egos, the weight of one’s own self. When I am puffing myself up with my own self-importance, I’m laboring under all that weight. Jesus is saying, “Become a child. Take that weight off your shoulders and put on the weight of my yoke, the yoke of my obedience to the Father.”  Anthony de Mello proposed the following parable to describe us prideful souls. A group of people sit on a bus that is passing through the most glorious countryside, but they have the shades pulled down on all the windows and are bickering about who gets front seat on the bus. This is the burden of pride: preferring the narrow and stuffy confines of the bus to the beauty that is effortlessly available all around. This, of course, is why Jesus can say, “My yoke is easy, and my burden is light.” What the Lord proposes is not a freedom from suffering but, what is much more important, a freedom from the self. Gospel Reflections Meditate on Daily Gospel Reflections from Bishop Robert Barron

Tuesday, December 10, 2024 Bishop Robert Barron Cycle C Advent 2nd wk of Advent Bible References Matthew 18:12-14 Friends, in today’s Gospel, Jesus asks: “If a man has a hundred sheep and one of them goes astray, will he not leave the ninety-nine in the hills and go in search of the stray?” Well, of course not! No self-respecting shepherd would ever think of doing that. If you were a shepherd, you’d cut your losses. That sheep is probably dead anyway if it wandered far enough away. But we are to understand that God is like that foolish shepherd. God’s love throws caution to the wind to seek out the lost sheep. We might expect God to be good to those who are good, and kind to those who follow his commandments. Those who don’t, who wander away, are simply lost. God might give them a few minutes, but then they’re on their own. No, God is like this kooky shepherd. God loves irrationally, exuberantly risking it all in order to find the one who wandered away. What good news: God does not love according to a strict justice on our terms but loves in his own extravagant way. Gospel Reflections Meditate on Daily Gospel Reflections from Bishop Robert Barron