Unveiling the “Snakes” of the Clark County Family Court!

Unveiling the “Snakes” of the Clark County Family Court!

Clark County Nevada

October 13, 2021


Veterans In Politics video internet talk show interviewed Jesus Arevalo former Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department (LVMPD) Officer.

Arevalo has been in the family court system for 24 years.

The corruption is huge, with Judges and Attorneys sitting on the same boards together and attorneys appearing before the same judge.

Judges that worked for the same law firm when they were an attorney and never recused the firm once they are a judge.

Taking disability payments from Veterans and First Responders. That is protected under federal law.

Judges signing false court documents under penalty of perjury.

Attorneys hired by a judge to help out a family member, but still, have the same attorney appear before the court and not recusing them.

Arevalo spoke about Marshal Willick’s disability. Arevalo continued by saying that Willick over charges litigants, bills them for an active attorney who is actually a suspended attorney, having a convicted sex offender working in his law firm, and his misdeeds in Carson City as a law clerk. Arevalo stated that Willick encourages his clients to lie because it’s family court.

We are not criticizing the entire family court system, but there is much more work to do in an effort to rid ourselves of the remaining snakes within the system.

We need a Deputy Attorney General to oversee the family court Cabal!

We don’t want to say anything more because we would like you to watch the video.

Please click on the link below:

Jesus Arevalo former LVMPD Officer will give you an explosive look at Family Court on VIP TALKSHOW




Clark Bossert runs for Congress for the “sake-of-freedom”!

Clark Bossert runs for Congress for the “sake-of-freedom”!

Clark County Nevada

October 5, 2021


Veterans In Politics video internet talk show interviewed Clark Bossert candidate for Nevada’s 3rd Congressional District.

Bossert is a Christian man, educated, knowledgeable, rational thinker, and extremely passionate about our country.

The host asked Bossert what is the role of government. Bossert responded it’s life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

When asked about foreign policy Bossert said that we should stand with our allies.

Bossert believes the Afghanistan disaster was orchestrated and he believed that the President should be charged with dereliction of duty.

Bossert said that our government has no tools to combat inflation.

Bossert believes that the family court system is deliberately suffocating litigants by sucking money out of the parties. Bossert continued by saying that the system is set up to give children to the worse parent known that the better parent would continue to fight for their children in turn keeping the case active for years and drum up cost.

Bossert believes in term limits for US Congress and Senate to avoid corruption. Bossert continues by saying if you cant get the job done in 12 years, you are not fit to lead.

Bossert said the three ways you can be a “swamp creature” are first if you care too much about money, secondly, if you are worried about the next election, last but not least if you have skeletons in your closet. This is how you get leveraged by people pulling on your strings to do their bidding.

The host brought up racism in our country and Bossert responded that the “silver bullet solution” to end racism in our country is radical humility, radical repentance, and radical forgiveness that’s how we can move forward, that’s the answer. It breaks my heart to see minority communities, not thriving…

Clark Bossert is a very impressive candidate, he is worthy of consideration.

To learn more about Clark Bossert:


Please click on the link below:

Clark Bossert candidate for Nevada’s Congressional District 3 on the Veterans In Politics Talk-show



Vietnam 5 tour combat veteran gets screwed-over by a Family Court Judge tells his story

Vietnam 5 tour combat veteran gets screwed-over by a Family Court Judge tells his story

Clark County Nevada

September 28, 2021


Veterans In Politics video internet talk show interviewed Wayne Conte Army Combat Veteran who did five tours in the country of Vietnam with special guest Cathie France and advocate for Conte.

When Veterans In Politics first started to take a hard look at family court in 2016, many asked us why.

Our response is the Clark County family court has constantly ignored the federal law that protects Veterans Service Connected Disability Benefits which cannot be counted as income and levy in any way. But civilians who never served will never understand that concept. Our veterans are not above the law, but they never asked to be disabled while serving in our country’s military.

We as a nation owe this debt to our veterans who put themselves in harm’s way to protect our freedoms and way of life.

Conte was given one of the worse family court judges Sandra Pomrenze and he paid the price.

A little history on Pomrenze she was caught telling a Black American litigant that she needs to cut her daughter’s “nappy hair”. Below is the link:

Judge Sandra Pomrenze’s comment about girl’s hair


Pomrenze is a biased and rude judge who loves to hear herself talk. Pomrenze denied Dr. Robert Medoff and his wife visitation of their granddaughter who they have raised for 8 years. This would be considered a “civil death”.

Judge Pomrenze knew that she wouldn’t survive reelection so she graciously decided not to run for reelection. Instead to our surprise, she was added to the Senior Judge List as a reward for doing such a great job on the bench. I think  NOT!

Senior judges handle about 20 percent of the total district and appellate caseload. By taking senior status, even if maintaining a full caseload, a judge creates a vacancy on the court, to be filled by the nomination and confirmation process of Senior Judges.

Now back to Conte:

Conte served over 20 years in the military and suffered from Agent Orange which gave him life-threatening cancer. Conte is now 100 service-connected disabled veterans.

Conte tells his story on how he was currently married to a Japanese woman and a Philippine woman fraudulently made a marriage certificate including him as her husband while he was stationed in the far east.

Conte finally divorced the Japanese woman and the Philippine woman shows up with a marriage certificate that was registered 9 days before the actual marriage date.

Conte said that Pomrenze discussed his case off the record in a closed-door meeting in the judge’s Chambers without his presence.

Conte said that he had no documentation to prove that he wasn’t married to the Phillippine woman and Judge Pomrenze accepted the fraud marriage document. Conte argued that the marriage certificate was registered 9 days before the marriage date and his military orders didn’t put him in the Philippines on the date of marriage.

The host asked if the case was sealed and France said that it is sealed but it’s completely deleted from the Clark County District Court website as if it never existed.

Completely removing a case is against the Nevada Revised Statute, Justice Court Rules of Civil Procedures, and Nevada Rules of Civil Procedures all states the following:

(c) Sealing of entire court file prohibited.  Under no circumstances shall the court seal an entire court file. An order entered under these rules must, at a minimum, require that the following information is available for public viewing on-court indices: (i) the case number(s) or docket code(s) or number(s); (ii) the date that the action was commenced; (iii) the names of the parties, the counsel of record, and the assigned judge; (iv) the notation “case sealed”; (v) the case type and cause(s) of action, which may be obtained from the Civil Cover Sheet; (vi) the order to seal and written findings supporting the order; and (vii) the identity of the party or other person who filed the motion to seal.

But judges and attorneys do it every day, Just asked Attorneys Marshal Willick and Jennifer Abrams it’s a normal practice to violate this rule without any consequences.

France said that Conte’s attorney received a document from the Philippine government indicating that the marriage between Conte and the Phillippine woman never existed and presented the document to the court.

France continued by saying that Pomrenze dismissed the document because the spelling of Wayne Conte’s first name was misspelled with an (i) instead of a (y).

France continued by stating that Conte’s attorney removed himself from the case 3 weeks before trial and Pomrenze never allowed Conte to find new counsel. Instead forced him into representing himself. Which is against our US Constitution’s 6th and 14th Amendments.

Conte had no idea how to represent himself. Pomrenze sets up Conte to fail and award his fraudulent wife $1,000 per month in alimony for 15 years. There were no children involved in this court case.

Conte’s new attorney never did an Appellee to the Nevada Supreme Court because he recently was disbarred. So the 30 days statute of limitations lapsed.

In September 2020 Conte filed a lawsuit in Federal Court against Pomrenze and the State of Nevada. The case is currently in discovery. Conte is suing for $100 million.

Conte refuses to pay the alimony because they weren’t married.

Conte first filed suit against Pomrenze in the Eighth Judicial District Court and was denied by Senior Judge James Bixler instead Bixler awarded the opposing attorney Richard Crane with the Willick Law Group $4900 in attorneys fees.

Crane was temporarily suspended from practicing law by the Nevada Supreme Court after he pleaded guilty to one count of sexually motivated coercion with a minor. Richard L. Crane a member of the Willick Law Group, which focuses on family law was sentenced to five years probation by District Judge David Barker.

Conte speaks about how Richard Crane became involved with his case on the opposing side. Conte indicated that all of his money is protected by federal law.

In 2019 Crane files a Writ of Execution to take $16,414.32 against Cont’s bank account which had Conte’s disability payment.

A Veterans Disability payment cannot be garnished unless it’s instead of military retirement. In addition, NRS 125.165 indicates that alimony can not be used from a veteran’s service-connected disability benefits. A veteran’s service-connected disability payment is the veteran’s sole property.

Conte filed a motion to stop the garnishment on his bank account. Pomrenze told Crane not to file the Writ of Execution against Conte’s bank account but Richard Crane violated the judge’s orders and did it anyway and never returned the money to Conte. No consequences were ordered on Crane.

Now the family court is attempting to put Wayne Conte on the vexatious litigant list. This will stifle his rights to defend himself and chill his free speech. A violation of his Sixth Amendment. How unconstitutional is this?

Conte said since the Willick Law Group has taken over the case as opposing counsel he had his apartment and vehicle broken into with documents scattered.

Conte said Crane has a restraining order against him because he wrote a letter to Crane saying that he will get fucked!

Conte is now looking for a reduction in alimony because the Phillippine woman is making 20% more than his disability payments.

Now Judge Mary Perry is on the case. Whoopee!

Please click on the link below:

Vietnam 5 tour combat veteran gets screwed-over by a Family Court Judge tells his story on VIPI talk


Veterans In Politics video internet talk show interviewed Crissy Peña on Day Trading and cryptocurrency.

Crissy Peña discuss financial investments on the Veterans In Politics Video Internet talk-show



Stan Hyt 30 years with the LVMPD entered the race for Clark County Sheriff!

Stan Hyt 30 years with the LVMPD entered the race for Clark County Sheriff!

Clark County Nevada

September 19, 2021


Veterans In Politics video internet talk show interviewed Stan Hyt candidate for Clark County Sheriff.

Hyt a graduate of San Diego State University with a Bachelor of Science Degree in Criminal Justice Administration. Soon after in January of 1978 he was hired by the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department (LVMPD) and served 30 years with this department.

Hyt said he will protect the resident’s rights not to wear a mask and get Covid vaccines. Hyt said his wife and he already had Covid and he took NyQuil. Hyt said that he would stand up for our civil liberties.

Hyt said the new mandate to become a Las Vegas Police Officer, you have to take the Covid vaccine. Hyt doesn’t understand how the current sheriff who is a candidate for Republican Governor can mandate the Covid vaccines and endorses sanctuary cities be a candidate for Republican Governor. Hyt added that Joseph Lombardo current Clark County Sheriff has broken off relations with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

Hyt said that he would like to meet with the leadership of all the law enforcement agencies, county, state, and federal.

Hyt said the mandates for the vaccines are unconstitutional.

Hyt said we need to stop the endorsement of Sheriff from the current Sheriff and let the people decide without any influence.

Hyt said weapons are legal to have, there is no reason why an officer should pull a resident out of their vehicle for a traffic stop when the resident informs the officer that there are weapons in the vehicle. Officers are not allowed to “fish” they need “probable cause”. Hyt said that this is an abuse of authority. Hyt supports constitutional carry.

Some of Hyts focus is to improve police morale, use nonlethal force, smaller taxes, and have less government.

The Host indicated that Metro’s Internal Affairs, The Citizen Review Board, and the Use Of Force Review Board are all a “joke” set up to pacify the public and to protect bad officers.

Hyt took pop shots at the two current challengers in the race for sheriff indicating that Assemblyman Tom Roberts’s votes like a democrat and many questions came about during the October 1st shooting at Mandalay Bay that caused his exit from LVMPD.  Hyt also commented on former Undersheriff Kevin McMahill as another Lombardo and stated that McMahill stands by the mandates to vaccinate all police officers including new hires. Both are former officers retired from the LVMPD.

The Host asked about Las Vegas City Councilman and Mayor Pro Tem Stavros Anthony as a possible candidate for Sheriff. Hyt said that he met with Anthony and he indicated that he would not run for Sheriff.

Hyt said that we need to bring the Gang Unit back to the LVMPD indicating that they are a valuable asset adding that LVMPD has a budget of $630 million dollars annually. With 5 thousand employees and many ranks and files leaving the force.

The Host asked about an annual physical fitness test requirement for LVMPD officers and Hyt stated that he didn’t want to take away an officer’s livelihood because they can’t pass a physical requirement. The Host indicated that physical fitness should be part of an officer’s requirement no different than the military especially when you are dealing with a potential adversary on the streets.

The Host asked what type of programs are in place for police officers that are going through the Clark County Family Court System when you have officers losing their children, losing their assets, and struggling to put food on the table for themselves. Hyt said that he would not oppose a program that would help officers that are going through these crises including alcohol addictions.

The shooting of Stanly Gibson, Erik Scott, and Trevon Cole was also mentioned in this interview.

The Host also brought up the safety of inmates within the Clark County Detention Center.

Please click on the link below to view this very informative interview in the mind of Stan Hyt.

Please click on Stan Hyt website:


Stan Hyt candidate for Clark County Sheriff on the Veterans in Politics Video Internet talk-show





DATELINE: LAS VEGAS, NEV., (Sept. 18, 2021).  Once upon a time, divorce laws required parties to prove “fault.”  Couples had to prove their spouses committed infidelities so horrific—that the court should dissolve the marriage.


In 1931, hoping to attract residents, Nevada enacted new divorce laws.  Nevada changed its residency requirements to six weeks and adopted a “no-fault” divorce.  Couples wishing to divorce could get un-hitched in just six weeks!—and they didn’t have to prove who cheated on whom!


With the advent of new divorce laws, divorce mills sprung up throughout Nevada.  Reno became the Divorce Capital of America.  Nevada ranchers cashed in on the divorce gold rush—they offered accommodations at “divorce ranches” where folks would stay for six weeks to establish residency.  In 1951, Rita Hayworth took up residency in Tahoe before filing for divorce.


“No-fault” divorce demonstrated the popular belief that unhappy spouses should be able to quickly end a soured marriage—and move on with their lives.  In 1969, California followed Nevada.  Then-Governor Reagan signed the Family Law Act, which created “no-fault” divorce for California couples with “irreconcilable differences.”


Sadly, Nevada has reverted back to a “fault” based system.  Nowadays, attorneys fight to show the ex is “at fault,” and if successful, their clients are eligible to be the “prevailing party,” which triggers an attorney’s fees award.


But there are no winners or losers in family court; after all, when parties go to family court, they seek no redress for wrongdoings.  Rather, they seek only to divide marital assets and/or possession time of children.  And, because nobody wins in family court, the notion of “prevailing party” makes no sense.


Where cunning attorneys can show the ex is “at-fault,” the attorneys’ clients are adjudged the “prevailing party”—which results in attorney’s fees.  This is the precise point where the corruption pathogen takes hold and begins to fester.  Next thing you know, attorneys from the Legal Aid Center of Southern Nevada, (“LACSN”), pretend to be “pro bono”—with an underlying expectation they’re gonna get paid—but only if they show the other party is “at-fault!”


Enter the notorious “faux Bono” lawyers—pretending to be do-gooders, supposedly donating time to charity cases—when in fact—they are money-grubbing, contingency fee lawyers—willing to wager they can show the ex is “at-fault”—and totally confident that crooked-ass judges will ensure the ex is “at-fault.”  (Get it?)


Take, for example, Vince Ochoa.  Once a LACSN team member, Ochoa is now a LACSN lackey.  Nowadays, Ochoa’s job is to ensure that LACSN attorneys get paid!—by hook or by crook!  Ochoa knows the scam.  Ochoa understands that attorneys cannot donate campaign funds to the bench unless they have disposable income; and so, Ochoa ensures the LACSN attorneys get paid!


Do LACSN lawyers ever represent BOTH spouses in family court?  No, of course, not!  Why?—because one LACSN lawyer would have to lose!—and go home empty-handed!  And no gold-digging LACSN lawyer will take a “pro bono” gig if there’s a possibility they might have to work for free!


If your ex is represented by LACSN, your crooked-ass judge will find YOU “at fault,” and your ex will be the “prevailing party”—because the LACSN lawyer must get paid.  Let’s say your ex LIES in open court and falsely accuses YOU of behaving badly.  Bamm!  The crooked-ass judge will believe your ex—guaranteed!  Family courts reward perjury.  Judges embrace the lies—because lies provide the necessary pretext to declare YOU “at fault.”  This means your ex is the “prevailing party,” and their LACSN attorney gets a handsome attorney’s fees award.


“Pro bono” is a Latin term meaning “for good” or “for charity.”  In contrast, “pro pecunia” is the Latin term meaning “for money.”  The “faux Bono” lawyer is NOT in the game for charitable reasons.  Getting paid is the sole objective.  The “faux Bono” lawyer is basically a contingency fee lawyer—a bus bench lawyer—like Saul Goodman—but with lower ethical standards.


Greedy attorneys and crooked-ass judges have effectively re-transformed Nevada law—from “no-fault”—back to “fault-based” divorce.  Just think—only sixteen (16) civil judges for the entire civil docket, but twenty-six (26) for family court.  Why?—because they need TEN extra judges to manage the bustling child kidnapping industry—which generates gazillions of dollars—and causes widespread misery more dismal, more costly, and more destructive than any blight, pestilence, or plague imaginable.  Sit down, Covid—the family court is the real scourge!


Back in the day, enlightened Nevada lawmakers had a vision—to un-hitch couples after only six weeks’ residency.  But those days are gone forever.  Today, divorce is big business.  Nobody gets out in six weeks.  If your kid is five, and your spouse files for divorce, the custody battle will last 13 years—until the kid turns 18—guaranteed.


Regular civil courts have fast-track procedures—to quickly dispo cases, but not so family court.  It’s a criminal cabal—where lawless and psychopathic judges choke the life out of couples, stranding them in family court quicksand—opening their veins and bleeding them dry—draining the family’s assets and stealing the children’s futures.


If you can’t afford a lawyer, and if your ex has a really good job, LACSN will represent YOU in family court—for FREE!  On the other hand, if you can’t afford a lawyer—and your ex is on disability or welfare, then forget it—LACSN won’t touch your case with a 39-and-a-half-foot-pole.  LACSN discriminates against the poor, (i.e., “intra-class” discrimination).  LACSN treats poor people differently from one another—based only on whether the ex has a paycheck that LACSN can garnish.


Where lawyers have the expectation of a payday—and they call themselves “pro bono,”—it’s inherently deceitful—a deceptive trade practice, [see NRS 598].  The venerable term “pro bono” must be reserved for attorneys with no expectation of pecuniary gain.  The moniker ”pro bono” must be unavailable to money-grubbing shysters.


We call for mandatory 50-50 custody legislation in Nevada!—and not just a rebuttable presumption of joint custody—but full, equal, and undivided joint custody—as Equal Protection demands.


It’s been said that equal parenting is integral for a child’s well-being.  If this is true, then the current system detriments children.  The system generates the most revenue by making parenting “unequal.”  Nevada is at a crossroads; we must decide—what’s more important?—the future of our children?—or Jennifer Abrams’ ability to buy another Porsche?


VETERAN in POLITICS INT’L (“Where Change Happens”)



How Animal Law Applies to Many Areas of Mainstream Practice

How Animal Law Applies to Many Areas of Mainstream Practice

A new book shows how laws protecting animals intersect with family law, criminal law, wills and estates, and professional liability.


Family Court Debate turns heated with local veterans group and family attorney!

Family Court Debate turns heated with local veterans group and family attorney!

Clark County Nevada

August 22, 2021


Veterans In Politics video internet talk show interviewed Louis Schneider a former Prosecutor and owner of Law Offices of Louis Schneider.

Schneider hails from Massachusetts has made Nevada his home.

Schneider has been practicing law for 17 years added that he has chosen family law over criminal law because in family law you can make a real difference, and in criminal law, most of your clients have done something wrong and you get them a soft landing.

Schneider has his own personal demons about the family court in Massachusetts.

Schneider said in family law he will not take a relocation case because it’s heartbreaking to take one parent from the other.

Schneider said in Nevada the judges have to reunite the parents by law, but we all know that’s not what happens.

Schneider said family court judges are the hardest working judges in the county.

Schneider kept repeating the judges look for the “best interest of the children”. The host repeatedly asks what does that means, but couldn’t get a straight answer.

The host brought up the issue that judges abuse their discretion, fail to follow the rule of evidence, and fail to follow Nevada Law and Federal Law. Schneider said he doesn’t see that in the courtroom.



The host wanted to know why the family court judge order litigants to get a drug test on pure allegations without any evidence to support the allegations.

The host pounded on the issue and said according to Nevada Law only a criminal judge can order drug testing of litigants and civil judges has no jurisdiction to make such an order adding that family court judges are civil judges not criminal.

Schneider added that former family court judge Cynthia Dianne Steel wouldn’t order a litigant to take a drug test because it’s a violation of their constitutional rights without probable cause and it’s a criminal court case matter.

Schneider said if you are ordered to take a drug test and you refuse, it’s deemed dirty.

The host said wait a minute if you stand up for your constitutional rights and the law, how is your lack of drug testing deemed dirty? The host said that judges are legislating from the bench. If they want to change the law they need to lobby the legislature for the law to change until then they need to follow the law.

Schneider said it’s the policy of the court. But here is the problem a court policy is not law!

The host brought up the 14th Amendment that gives you equal protection under the law adding if judges want to skirt the law they are no different than anyone else.

Schneider refuses to listen to the law by echoing the safety of children, in other words, you can violate the law if it’s for the safety of the children.

The host once again saying that is not the law, amend the law and stop violating the law. A family court judge cannot order a litigant to take a drug test.



The host suggested having a jury trial or a tribunal in family court when dealing with the relocation of children and termination of parental rights.

Schneider said that family court cases are complex and you can’t trust a jury to do that. The host pushed back and said wait a minute, in criminal court a jury decides prison or freedom, life or death, but a jury can’t make a decision on relocation or termination of parental rights, that is totally Ludacris!

Taking someone’s child is a civil death.

The host said one person that has the power to take a child from a parent breeds bias and corruption.

Schneider said a jury doesn’t have the understanding about family court, but yet a jury can decide if you live or die. We still can’t make sense from what Schneider is trying to say he is basically telling us that juries are idiots.

The host brought up the fact that the Constitution said that a parent has a right to parent their children.

The host stated that mediation is mandatory under Nevada State Law. Schneider said he believes mediation is the policy of the court, but yet some judges don’t order litigants to go to mediation before trial.



Rena Hughes former disgraced judge who was sanctioned by the Nevada Commission on Judicial Discipline and the only sitting judge to lose her election in the primary. Hughes alienated a child from her mother, conducted ex-parte communication, threatened the 11-year-old child with jail, denied court observers in the courtroom, and a tyrant in a black robe.

Bryce Duckworth storms off the bench like a toddler, has predetermined a case without hearing any evidence, doesn’t enforce his own court orders, demonstrates bias in the courtroom, and is a total hypocrite.

Charles Hoskin puts his friends in Hearing Masters job positions by ignoring the votes of the majority judges, destroyed hundreds of elderly Nevadans lives even a documentary entitled The Guardians on Amazon showed how this judge reamed havoc on Nevada residents, he has the most letters for Against in the Nevada Commission on Judicial Selection history when he was attempting to secure the appointment to the Nevada Appellate Court.

Duckworth and Hoskin need to join Hughes at The Abrams Law Firm.



Schneider said lawyers are paying for judges’ campaigns that breed abuse.

The host stated he has conversation from attorneys that feel threatened if they run against a judge, this is the reason why corrupt judges get a free ride by running unopposed.

The host stated that we have to find a way to remove bad judges by placing into law Remove or Retain. If a judge runs unopposed and Remove receives the most votes the seat becomes vacated, the Nevada Commission on Judicial Selection interviews candidates and sends three names to the Nevada Governor, from the three names Governor picks a person to fill the vacancy, and the following election year the person picked by the Governor runs for retention.



Schneider said pro se litigants receive a lot of leeway from judges.

Schneider was giving praise to the Legal Aid Center of Southern Nevada for their pro bono work. The host fired back and said before they take your case you have to be destitute out on the streets and if it’s pro bono work why does the judge order the other side to pay for the opposing parties’ pro bono attorney?

The host suggested the name pro bono needs to be changed to something else because pro bono means free.



Schneider said the Nevada State Bar beats up on one-man operations but refuses to go after established law firms.

The host brought up the fact that attorneys walk-off cases without notice abandoning the litigant in the courtroom and the judges allow this to happen. Schneider said that this behavior is against the law.

The host said if we keep turning a deaf ear and a blind eye to the corruption in our courtroom, it becomes normalized.

Schneider said he doesn’t see any corruption in the courtroom and he loves all the judges on the bench.

Schneider said that he takes offense when the host says the family court is corrupt.



Schneider said a family court judge cannot order the federal government to garnish your service-connected disability benefits.

The host said that the federal law protects a veteran’s disability benefits but some family court judges believe that they are entitled to take it from them.



The host said corruption has many faces, many items make a judge corrupt not just cash payments.

The host wanted to know why litigants are considered to be vexatious when attorneys are just as bad or in some cases worse but yet they are not considered vexatious by the court. In addition, this is a violation of their constitutional right to be heard in a court of law.

Vexatious is used to shut the litigant up!


In Closing:

Schneider said all it takes for evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing!

Click on the link below to watch the explosive and informative interview:

Family Court Debate turns heated with local veterans group and family attorney Louis Schneider



Nathan Atkins Army Veteran now a candidate for North Las Vegas Mayor!

Nathan Atkins Army Veteran now a candidate for North Las Vegas Mayor!

Clark County Nevada

August 15, 2021


Veterans In Politics video internet talk show interviewed Nathan Atkins an Army Veteran, Businessman, not a career politician, and candidate for North Las Vegas Mayor.

North Las Vegas is the 4th largest city in Nevada. According to the 2020 senses, North Las Vegas has a population of 265,224 people with only 8 percent of that population decides their city government leaders.

Atkins came from a long line of family tradition by serving our country in the United States military. Atkins served eight years in the United States Army and was discharged as a combat veteran by serving in Desert Storm.

If elected Atkins would be the only military veteran on the North Las Vegas City Council.

We discussed the North Las Vegas Police Department (NLVPD) at great length. Atkins said that as Mayor he would volunteer to do a “Ride Along” program with NLVPD officers.

Atkins said the best way to know what’s going on, you have to spend time in the field and talk to the people. Atkins said that’s the best way to serve the people.

Atkins said, “Garbage doesn’t care what your political party is, it just needs to be picked up”.

Atkins said he believes in Community Partnership that businesses should partner with the city and help educate the children in North Las Vegas. Atkins said that we should develop a direct partnership with business and the city of North Las Vegas, by building a bridge.

We discussed a hurray of issues such as the Chief of Police, the City Manager, the City Attorney, the school’s within North Las Vegas, the North Las Vegas Judicial System, the infrastructure, bringing business and residents to North Las Vegas, the homeless issue, transparency, and public health and public safety.

Atkins answered all of our questions head-on with forethought and intelligence, we didn’t receive any political answer. We received honest and thoughtful answers with new ideas and visions.

Atkins said that North Las Vegas should be a city to “Live, Work, and Play” and be assessable to its constituency.


Click here to visit Nathan Atkins for the North Las Vegas website:



Click below to view Nathan Atkins video interview:

Nathan Atkins Army Veteran now a candidate for North Las Vegas Mayor on Veterans In Politics Talk with special cohost Giano Amado



Click here to watch the video Jennifer Abrams don’t want you to see:

Nevada Attorney attacks a Clark County Family Court Judge in Open Court






Former LVMPD Officer relive the controversial shooting of an Army Gulf War Veteran!

Former LVMPD Officer relive the controversial shooting of an Army Gulf War Veteran!

Clark County Nevada

August 8, 2021


Veterans In Politics video internet talk show interviewed Jesus Arevalo former Las Vegas Metropolitan Police (LVMPD) Officer discussed Police Shootings and Family Court two of the most contentious discussions in Nevada.

The most controversial police shooting in Clark County Nevada took place on December 12, 2011. When then Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Officer Jesus Arevalo squeezed 7 rounds off with his personal AR-15 taking the life of Unarmed Disabled Army Gulf War Veteran Stanley Gibson in just 1.2 seconds.

LVMPD aka “Metro” Officer Jesus Arevalo shot and killed Stanley Gibson Army Gulf War Veteran as he sat in his car alone, unarmed, and trapped by several Police cruisers.

The Clark County District Attorney Steve Wolfson sent Arevalo to the Grand Jury, the first LVMPD Officer in the history of Metro to go before a Grand Jury for an Officer-involved shooting. Arevalo was on Paid Administrative Leave for almost 2 years at a tone of $180,000 from taxpayers.

Arevalo discussed how he was used by former Sheriff Doug Gillespie to take the fall for the incident. Arevalo stated that after he was terminated and received a lifetime disability for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) for the shooting of Gibson.

Arevalo also added that Sheriff Gillespie used the incident with Gibson to recover $42 million dollars from Desert Sky Communication to replace the radio system that was currently being used by Metro.  Metro stated that the faulty communication system aided in the death of Gibson.

The Veterans In Politics International (VIPI) was instrumental from the beginning of this shooting. Because of VIPI involvement and the involvement of other activist groups the (CIT) Critical Incident Training is mandatory in the academy where it was a volunteer program. The CIT is used to deescalate a potentially dangerous situation with verbal communication.

With the help of former Nevada State Senator Brower VIPI was able to have the word “Veteran” on Nevada driver’s license to inform law enforcement officers in the event of a traffic stop turn bad that a Veteran might be suffering from PTSD.

VIPI informed the Board of County Commissioners that Metro was renting the land at 400 South Martin Luther King Blvd, Las Vegas, NV 89106 at the time this was the brand new Metro Headquarters. The County was paying $1.4 million dollars per month in rent and VIPI suggested that if the County purchased the land they would save taxpayers millions of dollars in interest each year. The land is now owned by the County.

VIPI was able to convince the Nevada Legislators to send the “More Cops Bill” to the Clark County Board of County Commissioners. Along with many activist groups and the Board of County Commissioners, VIPI was able to delay the “More Cops Bill” and this ultimately forced Sheriff Doug Gillespie to resign after he publicly stated that he would be a candidate for a third term. You are Welcome Joe Lombardo because if it wasn’t for groups like VIPI, Lombardo wouldn’t have become Sheriff of Clark County.

Click on the video link below:

Rondha Gibson widow of Gulf war Veteran Stanley Gibson


There were many extraordinary developments that came out of the shooting of Stanley Gibson, which has essentially saved the lives of many Las Vegas residents by significantly lowering police shootings in Clark County Nevada.

Arevalo continued by saying that he wished he could turn back time and he sincerely apologies for the pain he has caused.

It took VIPI close to 10 years to interview Arevalo about the Stanley Gibson shooting.

Arevalo explained that not only did he lose his job as an LVMPD officer he lost his marriage and now he is in a cesspool at the very spare of the Clark County family court system.

Arevalo discussed Family Court Judge Charles Hoskin and opposing Counsel Family Attorney Marshal Willick.

Arevalo believes that Hoskin should not be on the bench because of all the families he has destroyed during the Guardianship incident and Willick should have never been an attorney because of an incident that took place in a JC Penny dressing room in Carson City.

Watch the powerful interview by clicking on the link below:

Jesus Arevalo former LVMPD Officer discuss Police Shootings & Family Court on VIP talk-show





Dateline—Las Vegas, Nev., (Aug. 3, 2021):  In Nevada, judicial candidates are required to file annual reports that list “who” gave money to the candidate and “how much” they gave; in addition, candidates must file annual expense reports, [see NRS 294A].  Failure to file annual reports results in fines of up to $100 per day, maxing out at $10,000 per violation.

In the summer of 2020, it was discovered that Clark County Family Court Judge, Vincent Ochoa, much maligned for his malevolence and incompetence, failed to file five (5) years’ worth of campaign finance reports—a clear violation of NRS 294A—which meant that Ochoa was facing fines of up to $50,000, [NRS 294A.420].

“If they’re lawless on the bench, then you can bet they’re also lawless off the bench,” says civil rights attorney, T. Matthew Phillips—the determined whistleblower who ratted out Ochoa to Nevada Secretary of State.


By failing to timely file contribution and expense reports, Ochoa violates NRS 294A – for which the Nevada Secretary of State fined Ochoa.  But note, because he’s a judge – Ochoa also violates a parallel provision at Code of Judicial Conduct, Canon No. 4, which requires that judicial candidates “shall report contributions received and campaign expenses,” [see Rule 4.2(A)(5)].

Nevada Secretary of State fined Ochoa, which means he violated campaign laws, [NRS 294A], and this results in an automatic violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct, [Rule 4.2(A) (5)].  And thus, Ochoa violated both NRS and the Code of Judicial Conduct.

Based on this rather obvious campaign reporting violation, Phillips now has an official complaint before the under-staffed Nevada Commission on Judicial Commission.  But will the Commission actually do anything?  How will the Commission process the “Phillips slam-dunk” complaint?


The Nevada Commission on Judicial Discipline has a horrible reputation for NOT protecting the citizens of Nevada.  The Commission has a track record of acting ONLY on complaints from other judges.

Notably, Judge Linda Marie Bell used the Commission to lean on Judge Potter and have him ousted from the bench—for what appears to have been a personal squabble between Bell and Potter.

Linda Marie Bell is upset about ball-gag antics, while, in the real world, legions of frustrated parents, who haven’t seen their children in ages, are upset about sociopath judges who daily flout the Constitution and kidnap children like its lunchtime.

Many are critical of the Commission—for their failure to pursue lawless judges (like Ochoa) who actually harm the public.  Many believe that the Commission should protect parents and children instead of protecting lawless judges.


  1. Matthew Phillips has a “slam-dunk” complaint against Ochoa. First, the Nevada Secretary of State fined Ochoa for failure to file campaign reports, which proves that Ochoa violated NRS 294A. Second, the violation of NRS 294A proves that Ochoa violated the Code of Judicial Conduct, Rule 4.2(A) (5).  Bamm!

Ochoa clearly violated the Code of Judicial Conduct Rule 4.2(A) (5)—and its express requirement that judges must obey NRS 294A.  No one can deny that Ochoa was fined—and no one can deny that Ochoa was fined because he violated NRS 294A.  Under Nevada law, all violations of NRS 294A automatically result in violations of Code of Judicial Conduct Rule 4.2(A)(5)—but it begs the question—which fanciful excuse will the Commission concoct to rescue Ochoa?


The Commission’s favorite “go-to” excuse is that the complained-of judicial indiscretions, instead of being brought to the Commission’s attention, should instead be brought up on appeal.  (They love this excuse!)  But, the truth is, Ochoa’s indiscretions occurred off the bench, which means there’s nothing to appeal.  But again, this begs the question—which whimsical excuse will the Commission fabricate to save Ochoa?

Phillips makes an iron-clad case against Ochoa for violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct, Rule 4.2(A) (5).  Yeah, sure, but will the corrupt and inept Judicial Commission actually do anything about it?

One thing’s for sure; Phillips’ meritorious complaint against Ochoa will surely plumb the depths of corruption and ineptitude at the Commission—which goes out of its way to protect lawless judges.


We totally anticipate business as usual at the Commission.  We wholly expect Nevada Commission on Judicial Discipline will invent some phony-baloney reason to protect Ochoa.  With 100% certainty, the Commission will reject Phillips’ complaint against Ochoa.

And when they do reject Phillips’ complaint, (which they will), Phillips vows to sue the Commission and attorney, Paul C. Dehlye in federal court.  Why?—because Ochoa clearly violated the Code of Judicial Conduct.  It’s not a close call.   If the Commission fails to violate Ochoa, it can only be through willful failure to follow the law.

“We must defund the Commission,” stated Phillips, “because they’re useless.”


Attached is a copy of the complaint Phillips filed with the Nevada Commission on Judicial Discipline.  Read the complaint against Ochoa.  Download it here!file:///C:/Users/Owner/Downloads/Judicial-Commission-Complaint-Ochoa-Aug.-2-2021(1).pdf


VETERANS in POLITICS INT’L (“Where Change Happens!”)