Van Tillian/Clarkian Presuppositional Apologetics.

[Statler Waldorf]

...and THIS logical fallacy is called the non-sequitur ("it doesn't follow").

Another example: I know I have a million dollars in my bank account right now because it were not so, it wouldn't be 8:13 PM in Louisville right now.

The only problem here is that it does follow. You yourself helped prove it when you couldn’t give account for the laws of logic even though you believe they are true. I can give account for them.
A better example than your silly one above would be, “I know that words exist because if they did not exist you would not be able to argue they didn’t, you most certainly can argue they do not exist, so therefore they do exist.”

Some of us back up our "beliefs" with evidence Stat, a concept obviously lost on you.

Oh yeah? What evidence do you have that laws of logic exist since you believe in them?