OREGON TRIAL

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

<meta http-equiv=”refresh” content=”0; URL=/?_fb_noscript=1″ />(72) Facebook

BE SMART ABOUT HOW THE FEDS PLAY:

Answer me this question… Gary Hunt was at the Refuge. Gary Hunt issued a CALL TO ACTION after LaVoy was killed to get more Patriots to the Refuge. Gary Hunt was at Waco. Gary Hunt was at Ruby Ridge. Google “Gary Hunt OKC”.

Gary Hunt has had a terrible time controlling those who’ve questioned him about the previous federal “OPs” that he has been present for. Time and time again, Gary Hunt has tried to talk his way out of all of this, radio shows, one on one conversations, etc. This has still persistently followed him in the Patriot Movement.

A legitimate journalist doesn’t belong to Operation Mutual Defense. He would be a reporter of the news, not a news maker. A legitimate journalist would not have issued a CALL TO ACTION. Gary Hunt was one of the founders of OMD and again, I reiterate, he was AT THE REFUGE on 1/24 and HE issued a Call to Action after LaVoy’s murder.

The truth is, the informants that Gary Hunt outted from MNWR were low level informants who weren’t very good at what they did. The transcripts of Will Kullman attempting to get one particular Patriot to incriminate himself via a text conversation was almost laughable. He never exposed the big dogs.

He curiously also worked very hard to justify Terri Linnell, who I believe works under him. He also worked very hard to clear MD Laughter, with her little “Presidential Secret Service” pin on her lapel, when we know she had a part in setting up Brian Cavalier, Thomas Stewart-Lavorcarra and quite possibly Blaine Cooper. Laughter has a close relationship with known informant, Mark McConnell.

Hunt also has a close relationship with Barb Berg, who is a close friend of Laughter, Melissa Langley(not her real last name) and Chastity Bendele. This group of women has attacked the Bundys covertly and lately overtly on both FB and Twitter. Barb Berg also has a close relationship with Terri Linnell.

Gary Hunt is constantly surrounded by known informants. Sadly, he was directing the traffic behind the scenes at Bundy Ranch as well with his foot soldiers. ASK YOURSELF WHO THOSE FOOT SOLDIERS ARE.

It’s all about the optics, folks. The feds used their tried and true method of driving an informant deeper into the Patriot Movement by arresting him.

Want to know one final piece of information? Melvin Lee has had this “war” with Gary Hunt. We really thought it was for appearances and to help drive Hunt deeper into the Movement. We’ve seen his posts for the last eight months about Hunt. So, we watched yesterday to see if the discord between the two was real. Had Gary Hunt really been such an enemy of Melvin Lee, Lee would have been crowing on social media yesterday in victory.

Yet, not one word was written. Not one.

<meta http-equiv=”refresh” content=”0; URL=/?_fb_noscript=1″ />(3) Facebook

MALHEUR WILDLIFE REFUGE TAKEOVER MISDEMEANOR VERDICTS – IN PURE JUDICIAL TYRANNY

I, Samuel Thomas Lewis, Affiant, being of lawful age, qualified and competent to testify to, and having firsthand knowledge of the following facts, do hereby swear that the following facts are true, correct and not misleading:

US District Court

Portland, Oregon

8 March 2017

Presiding: The Honorable Anna J. Brown

Government Witness: Ronnie Walker (in court the whole time)

A photograph showing that the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge was closed was shown. Area near
Linda Beck’s office shown as private.

Jason Patrick shown driving a Dodge Durango on Refuge on 01-27-2016. Darryl Thom was shown driving an excavator
Defense:

At what point were discussions made with negotiators? During the post occupation search of the Refuge? Do you have specific information of ATV on the left or the right? No

On 7 March 2017, Darryl Thom again asserted his right to have a trial by jury, as per the Sixth Amendment to the US Constitution. Judge Brown replied that the decision to have a trial by judge had already been made, and that he would need to make an appeal if found guilty.

Sixth Amendment to the Constitution:

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

(Apparently, the Honorable Anna J. Brown does not choose to abide by the Constitution regarding the right to a trial by jury.)

Regarding the cutting of the fence, Jason Patrick stated that he did not know to whom the fence belonged, whether it was to the Government or to a private landholder.

Government closing argument:
• Showed a photo of a truck blocking the front gate.
• The defendants took control of the Refuge and treated it as their own property.
• Photos show that defendants went where only employees can go.
• Stated that the Refuge is only open during the day and they were at the Refuge at night and that the Refuge is closed at night.
• They placed their own signs on the Refuge.
• Bunkhouse is not a public area

The Government asserts that all four of the defendants were trespassing. Darryl Thom and Patrick Ryan were depicted in videos.

The Defense argued that the Government needs to show beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendants were trespassing. They stated that there is no evidence and desired a more definite definition of trespassing. It is not clear that signs coincided with regulations. There is no indication that the defendants saw a sign. The Government has not produced evidence that it was not lawful for the defendants to be on the Refuge.

There was no notice given to Duane Ehmer to leave the Refuge.

The Defense also raised questions regarding the fundamental rights to ownership of the Refuge. Count 2
Chad Karges identified Durango as belonging to the Refuge.

Defense asserted that there is nothing in the record to indicate that Ryan Patrick knew of the ownership of the Refuge or the vehicles.

The Government claimed that by the very nature, heavy construction vehicles would belong to the
Refuge. Count 4
Karges testified that the property belongs to the Refuge. Agent Walker identified the vehicle as a front-end loader. Count 5
ATV being ridden was Government property.

Friedman (defense attorney) stated that there is no way an individual could know what was private and what was Government property.

Count 6- Cutting of Fence
The fence bounds the Puckett Ranch from the Refuge. There was question as to the ownership of the fence.

Count 7 – Maroon Pouch

Ammon Bundy had received the pouch. Duane Ehmer was hiding it for safekeeping. The Government maintains that Ehmer was “up to no good” with the pouch.

US District Court

Portland, Oregon

21 March 2017

The following verdicts were arrived at by Judge Brown, without the assistance of a jury:

• Jason Patrick was convicted of trespass, tampering with vehicles and equipment and destruction of government property.
• Duane Ehmer was convicted of trespass and tampering with vehicles and equipment. Duane was found not guilty on one charge.
• Darryl Thorn was convicted of trespass and tampering with vehicles and equipment. Darryl was found not guilty on one charge.
• Jake Ryan was convicted of trespass and tampering with vehicles and equipment.

The judge addressed the issues of restitution. There should be an evidentiary hearing. A joint status report is due in two weeks.

The subject of Jason Patrick wearing a GPS monitoring device was addressed. The defense did not believe it to be necessary or appropriate, as Jason Patrick had met all reasonable expectations. He had found spot employment with B.J. Soper. However, full time employment was unrealistic, due to the demands of the trial. Jason Patrick also has a pending trial date in Georgia, but his presence there has not yet been required. He was alleged to have made a terroristic threat in Georgia. He was overheard outside saying that he should just kill everybody. Appeared to the defense that this should have been considered disorderly conduct, rather than a terrorist threat

The Government asserted that he had no stable residence and that home detention and location monitoring are not unreasonable. The Government needs to know where he is. Jason uses his family as his secretary. The government is OK with the Western District of Washington installing the monitoring.

Judge Brown stated that he has no locol ties. She also raised concern with his interaction with Officer Nitchik (sp?) She berated him for a day that he was late to court, but that was also a day that a juror was late to court due to the train system. She believes that there is every incentive for Jason Patrick to continue his “defiant behavior”. She needs to know his location prior to sentencing. She needs to know his schedule. She presented the alternative that he could go into custody.

Jason Patrick chose the option to go into custody. The marshals took his belt and coat, handcuffed him, and led him away. Court was recessed. Sentencing is set for 10 May 2017.

After the court appearance, Jason Patrick’s attorney, Andrew Kohlmetz, stated that Jason Patrick had chosen that option due to his knowing that he would be required to serve time, and that, by being taken into custody, he could receive credit for that time served.

<meta http-equiv=”refresh” content=”0; URL=/?_fb_noscript=1″ />(3) “In the second trial of the occupation of the… – Angie Huntington Bundy

“In the second trial of the occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge the jury is only going to render a verdict on the felony charge of conspiracy. They are not going to decide whether or not the defendants are guilty of criminal trespass.. The judge is going to do that herself. With Judge Brown acting as both judge and jury on the misdemeanor charge I wonder if it even matters whether or not the defendants were given an official NOTICE OF TRESSPASS in writing…

As far as the more serious charge of conspiracy goes… the government already tried that case in the first trial. They should not be allowed to have a second chance to reprosecute this matter. It was already decided by a jury in the first trial of the first group of defendants. They decided that the first seven defendants were NOT GUILTY OF CONSPIRACY… If the so called leaders of the so called conspiracay are not guilty of a conspiracy then how can the followers be guilty. The answer is of course they cannot be!

The only reason the judge decided to separate the defendants into two groups was precisely to give the prosecution two chances to try the case.” – Scott Rohter

Blaine Cooper becomes 1st occupier to testify for government in refuge takeover trial | OregonLive.com<!–

Blaine Cooper becomes 1st occupier to testify for government in refuge takeover trial
OregonLive.com
Maxine Bernstein | The Oregonian/OregonLive
Cooper’s testimony about a Dec. 29, 2015 dining-room sit down in Burns marked the first time any one has referenced a late December 2015 meeting in which there was talk between Bundy and five other men about seizing the federal wildlife refuge before the Jan. 2, 2016 occupation.

0
02/27/2017
02/27/2017

–>

By Maxine Bernstein | The Oregonian/OregonLive OregonLive.com
Email the author | Follow on Twitter
on February 27, 2017 at 7:02 PM, updated February 27, 2017 at 8:07 PM

http://b.mbid.io/nucleus?slot_key=oregonlive.com%2FLeaderboard%40728×90%23above&impression=%7B%22sizes%22%3A%5B%22728×90%22%5D%2C%22placement%22%3A%22advancedigital%3Aoregonlive.com%2FLeaderboard%23atf%22%2C%22sync%22%3Afalse%2C%22slot%22%3A%22atf%22%2C%22id%22%3A%22slotcnpelhde%22%2C%22pub%22%3A%22advancedigital%22%2C%22kv%22%3A%7B%22imp%22%3A%22slotcnpelhde%22%2C%22version%22%3A%22v3%22%2C%22platform-list%22%3A%22apnh%20aol%20casale%20centro%20oxm%20pubmatic%20rubicon%20sonobi%20yieldbot%22%7D%2C%22strategy%22%3A%22parallel%22%2C%22pageurl%22%3A%22http%253A%252F%252Fwww.oregonlive.com%252Foregon-standoff%252F2017%252F02%252Fblaine_cooper_becomes_1st_coop.html%2523incart_river_home%22%2C%22hidden%22%3Afalse%7D&received_prices=%5B2047%2C18%2C720%2C1057%5D&targeted_prices=%5B%5D&duration=2307&bids=%7B%22centro%22%3A2047%2C%22apnh%22%3A18%2C%22casale%22%3A720%2C%22oxm%22%3A-1000%2C%22rubicon%22%3A1057%2C%22aol%22%3A-100000%7D&user=%7B%22u%22%3A%221488255882559-6800-bad1-5a77-e6a4248487aa%22%2C%22pv_id%22%3A1488256162541%7D&v=v2.1.4

Oregon standoff trial

Ammon Bundy called a clandestine meeting around the dining room of their host’s home in Burns on Dec. 29, 2015, and directed the six other men there to leave their cellphones and laptops behind in a separate room.

Bundy then discussed his idea of taking over the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, said occupier Blaine Cooper, called as a government witness on the fifth day of the second Oregon standoff trial.

Cooper’s testimony about the dining-room sit-down marked the first time anyone in court has referenced a late December meeting between Bundy and the other men about seizing the refuge before the Jan. 2, 2016, occupation.

During his three hours and forty minutes on the stand, Cooper also became the first cooperating witness to testify against fellow refuge occupiers.

Four defendants — Jason Patrick, 43, of Bonaire, Georgia, Duane Ehmer, 46, of Irrigon, Darryl Thorn, 32, of Marysville, Washington, and Jake Ryan, 28, of Plains, Montana — are in the midst of trial, charged with conspiring to impede federal employees from carrying out their work at the federal refuge through intimidation, threat or force.

During cross-examination, defense lawyers sought to impeach Cooper’s testimony by citing contradictory statements Cooper made on jail phone calls, including one to his wife on April 5, 2016, saying “I didn’t know they were going in there” in reference to the refuge.

They also played inflammatory videos that Cooper made, including one when he tore out pages of the Koran, wrapped them in bacon, threw them into an outdoor fire pit and then shot arrows at the Koran. They pointed out that Cooper, despite being a convicted felon, was seen with an AR-15 rifle at the Bundy ranch in 2014 in Nevada. And they elicited testimony that Cooper had spent time in institutions because of behavioral and mental health problems earlier in his life.

Cooper, his hair disheveled, shuffled into the courtroom, his ankles chained together, wearing an ill-fitting dark suit, blue-striped dress shirt and tan jail slippers – a stark contrast to the confident, camouflage-clad figure he portrayed on his Third Watch Videos that he distributed on social media during the refuge occupation.

Cooper, 37, has entered guilty pleas to conspiracy to impede federal workers in the Oregon case and guilty pleas in Nevada to conspiracy to commit an offense against the United States and assault on a federal officer.

He acknowledged that he agreed to cooperate with the government in the hope of reducing a recommended six-year prison sentence. Cooper has been described by prosecutors as a recruiter, calling men to come to the Oregon refuge with guns and to Bunkerville, Nevada, in April 2014 during a standoff with federal agents outside the ranch of patriarch Cliven Bundy.

The December 2015 meeting lasted about a half-hour in the Burns home of Patty Overton with Cooper, Ammon Bundy, Ryan Payne, Jason Patrick, Joseph O’Shaughnessy, Corey Lequieu and B.J. Soper, Cooper said.

They talked of going into the Malheur refuge with guns, Cooper said, and if they encountered any refuge staff there, they’d ask them to leave politely. If not, “we’d probably remove them at that point,” Cooper said.

They spoke of having security checkpoints at the front gates, he said, and discussed logistics, such as food and power at the facility and what to do if counter-protesters came.

The refuge seizure, Cooper said, sprung from frustrations born out of having Ammon Bundy’s redress of grievance and petitions, distributed through legal avenues, ignored by local, state and federal officials. Bundy wanted the sheriff to prevent the return to prison of Harney County ranchers Dwight Hammond Jr. and son Steven Hammond, who were set to surrender on Jan. 4, 2016, to serve out mandatory minimum five-year sentences for setting fire to public land.

“The idea was to stay there as long as it took” to redistrict the refuge land and give it to the people of Harney County, Cooper said.

Everybody in the group favored the takeover except O’Shaughnessy and Soper, Cooper said.  O’Shaughnessy agreed to be a “buffer,” provide medical support on the outskirts.

“He thought we could go to jail,” Cooper said.

But the consensus “to me was to make sure nobody came in, whether it be the FBI, BLM.”

“And U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service?” Assistant U.S. Attorney Geoffrey Barrow asked.

“And Fish & Wildlife Service,” Cooper added.

After the Jan. 2 rally in Burns to support the Hammonds, Cooper said he returned to Overton’s house to get into “militia gear,” including body armor, camouflage clothing and boots.

He said others had assault rifles; he brought a GoPro and camera. As they drove to the refuge, he noticed some law enforcement vehicles and heard occupier Jon Ritzheimer say, “Somebody let the cat out of the bag.” But a good omen, he testified, was spotting a bald eagle on the drive to the refuge.

Cooper identified the type of guns that each of the men who arrived first at the refuge carried in sweeps of the property. At one point, he stood in the witness stand and showed how the others cleared the refuge building, stretching out his left hand in front of him while making believe he was pointing a rifle in his right hand.

He testified that Patrick had an AR-15 rifle during the initial sweep.  According to Cooper, the men would say as they went building to building, “Is anybody in here? The militia is here … hello?”

Occupier Brand Thornton blew a shofar, a symbol “for battle — that God is with us,” Cooper testified.

Cooper admitted that he cut part of a barbed-wire fence on the refuge boundary during the occupation, saying that was an act of civil disobedience, a symbol that “we were taking the land back for the people.”

Cooper left the night of Jan. 26, first driving with others east out of the refuge until they encountered several law enforcement SUVs. They headed back west and then drove south to Cedar City , Utah, through Nevada, he said.

Barrow asked Cooper why he agreed to cooperate with prosecutors.

Cooper said his tearful phone calls with his daughters convinced him to make amends.

“My little girl Sissy,” Cooper said. “She cries to me a half hour a day … how she wants her Daddy to come home. She tells me I shouldn’t have gone to the refuge, and should come forward and tell the truth.”

After he entered guilty pleas, Barrow asked Cooper, why did he record messages that were posted on social media, claiming he wasn’t guilty.

“Ethically, morally, spiritually,  I felt like I did the right thing. I had a duty to God to do that, under the Constitution,” Cooper said, referring to his role in the refuge occupation. At first, he said he didn’t understand the law of conspiracy, but after consulting with his attorney, he realized, “I did in fact commit a crime and I have to accept responsibility.”

When Cooper was arrested Feb. 11, 2016, defense lawyer Andrew Kohlmetz pointed out that he admitted to an FBI agent that he had carried an AR-15 at the Bundy Ranch in Nevada and also fired a handgun while wearing a mask in a video filmed outside his Arizona home in front of his family – both while a felon.

Cooper said he didn’t remember, so Kohlmetz played the recording of the FBI interview.  The agent asks Cooper why he carried the weapons if he was prohibited from possessing them. Cooper responded “The Second Amendment says I have the right to bear arms and says it shall not be infringed.”

Cooper, on the stand, denied that he ever possessed a gun, outside of the Bundy Ranch in 2014, since his felony convictions.

Kohlmetz, standby lawyer for Patrick, asked Cooper what his jail experience has been like. Cooper described it as “horrible.”

“Is it true you told folks on the phone while you’ve been in jail you would do anything to shorten that experience?” Kohlmetz asked.

“Yes sir I may have said that,” he answered.

Under questioning by Kohlmetz, Cooper acknowledged that he had tried in 1997 to join the U.S. Marine Corps, but was rejected because of an arrest warrant. In 2006, at age 27, he changed his name from Stanley Hicks Jr. to Blaine Cooper. Cooper said he took his stepfather’s last name because his father was physically abusive.

Kohlmetz asked if Cooper took the name of Jesse Ventura’s Blain Cooper character in the movie “Predator,” and Cooper said he didn’t know the last name of Ventura’s character.

Of the Dec. 29 meeting, Kohlmetz said: “You never told this story until today.”

Cooper responded: “My attorney had this information from the beginning.”

Kohlmetz played an April 5, 2016, jail phone call between Cooper and his wife. “Because phone calls are recorded, I can’t say a lot,” Cooper said on the recording. “I can tell you I didn’t know they were going in there.”

Under additional questioning from defense lawyer Jesse Merrithew, Cooper said in the Dec. 29, 2015 meeting with Bundy and others, taking over the refuge “was agreed upon but not when.”

Kohlmetz, citing another phone call Cooper made to his wife, said Cooper suggested he was going to destroy computer evidence in the case. The lawyer asked what happened to a video Cooper took of the initial sweep of the refuge. Cooper said he had his GoPro and a camera, but the memory cards were missing.

Kohlmetz also played a video of Cooper from jail, when he said Cooper “lied under oath” when pleading guilty in Nevada.

Asked about social media posts in which he first expressed interest in withdrawing his guilty plea but then changed his mind, Cooper said, “A lot of people thought that Trump would pardon us.”

He also said he had his attorneys tell Ammon Bundy and his brother, Ryan, about his guilty pleas before he entered them in court because he didn’t want to “go behind their back.”

“I thought I had a duty and obligation to let them know that,” he said, getting emotional. “I love the Bundys very much. They’re some of the best friends I have.”

Cooper also wrote to Ammon Bundy before he testified Monday.

“I wanted to let you know I decided to do whatever I have to do to get home to my kids,” Cooper wrote.  He said he couldn’t justify sitting in prison for six years if he could do something to cut that time in half. He also said “God sent me two crappy attorneys,” who manipulated him into the plea deals.

Ammon Bundy’s wife, Lisa Bundy, was in court with her sister-in-law Angie Huntington Bundy, Ryan Bundy’s wife.  When Cooper took the stand, Lisa Bundy waved to him, and mouthed, “We love you.”

After his testimony, Lisa Bundy said, “I’m so sad that he’s lying. He’s a pathological liar.”

Bundy said her husband was home with her and their family in Idaho between Christmas 2015 and Dec. 31, 2015, and couldn’t have been at the meeting Cooper testified about in Burns. There could have been a meeting, but not on the date Cooper said it occurred, she said.

— Maxine Bernstein

mbernstein@oregonian.com
503-221-8212

Advertisements

The Last Refuge

Rag Tag Bunch of Conservative Misfits – Contact Info: TheLastRefuge@reagan.com
Skip to content
Home
About Us
E-Mail Guidelines
Guidelines For Comments
← January 3rd – 2016 Presidential Election – Open Discussion Thread

Donald Trump Full “unabridged/extended” Interview on Face The Nation (video)… →

Full Story About What’s Going on In Oregon – “Militia” Take Over Malheur National Wildlife Refuge In Protest to Hammond Family Persecution…

Posted on January 3, 2016 by sundance

Grab a Cup of Coffee – Because This is Soup-to-Nuts.

Many people will awaken today to the news of approximately 100 to 150 armed militia taking control of a closed Wildlife Park Headquarters, and not know the full back-story – so here it is:

burns 4burns 5

The short summary is: in an effort to draw attention to a ridiculous arrest of a father and son pair of Oregon Ranchers (“Dwight Lincoln Hammond, Jr., 73, and his son, Steven Dwight Hammond, 46,) who are scheduled to begin five year prison sentences (turning themselves in tomorrow January 4th 2016), three brothers from the Cliven Bundy family and approximately 100/150 (and growing) armed militia (former U.S. service members) have taken control of Malheur Wildlife Refuge Headquarters in the wildlife reserve. They are prepared to stay there indefinitely.

Here’s the long version: including history, details, links, video(s) and explanations:

Hammond Family
Hammond Family

HISTORY: (aa) The Harney Basin (where the Hammond ranch is established) was settled in the 1870’s. The valley was settled by multiple ranchers and was known to have run over 300,000 head of cattle. These ranchers developed a state of the art irrigated system to water the meadows, and it soon became a favorite stopping place for migrating birds on their annual trek north.

(ab) In 1908 President Theodor Roosevelt, in a political scheme, create an “Indian reservation” around the Malheur, Mud & Harney Lakes and declared it “as a preserve and breeding ground for native birds”. Later this “Indian reservation” (without Indians) became the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge.

(a) In 1964 the Hammonds’ purchased their ranch in the Harney Basin. The purchase included approximately 6000 acres of private property, 4 grazing rights on public land, a small ranch house and 3 water rights. The ranch is around 53 miles South of Burns, Oregon.

(a1) By the 1970’s nearly all the ranches adjacent to the Blitzen Valley were purchased by the US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and added to the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge. The refuge covers over 187,000 acres, stretches over 45 miles long and 37 miles wide. The expansion of the refuge grew and surrounds to the Hammond’s ranch. Approached many times by the FWS, the Hammonds refused to sell. Other ranchers also choose not to sell.

(a2) During the 1970’s the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), in conjunction with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), took a different approach to get the ranchers to sell. Ranchers were told: “grazing was detrimental to wildlife and must be reduced”; 32 out of 53 permits were revoked and many ranchers were forced to leave. Grazing fees were raised significantly for those who were allowed to remain. Refuge personnel took over the irrigation system claiming it as their own.

(a3) By 1980 a conflict was well on its way over water allocations on the adjacent privately owned Silvies Plain. The FWS wanted to acquire the ranch lands on the Silvies Plain to add to their already vast holdings. Refuge personnel intentionally diverted the water bypassing the vast meadow lands, directing the water into the rising Malheur Lakes. Within a few short years the surface area of the lakes doubled. Thirty-one ranches on the Silvies plains were flooded. Homes, corrals, barns and graze-land were washed a way and destroyed. The ranchers who once fought to keep the FWS from taking their land, now broke and destroyed, begged the FWS to acquire their useless ranches. In 1989 the waters began to recede; now the once thriving privately owned Silvies plains are a proud part of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge claimed by the FWS.

(a4) By the 1990’s the Hammonds were one of the very few ranchers who still owned private property adjacent to the refuge. Susie Hammond in an effort to make sense of what was going on began compiling facts about the refuge. In a hidden public record she found a study done by the FWS in 1975. The study showed the “no use” policies of the FWS on the refuge were causing the wildlife to leave the refuge and move to private property. The study showed the private property adjacent to the Malheur Wildlife Refuge produced four times more ducks and geese than the refuge. The study also showed the migrating birds were 13 times more likely to land on private property than on the refuge. When Susie brought this to the attention of the FWS and refuge personnel, her and her family became the subjects of a long train of abuses and corruptions.

(b) In the early 1990’s the Hammonds filed on a livestock water source and obtained a deed for the water right from the State of Oregon. When the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) found out the Hammonds obtained new water rights near the Malhuer Wildlife Refuge, they were agitated and became belligerent and vindictive toward the Hammonds. The US Fish and Wildlife Service challenged the Hammonds right to the water in an Oregon State Circuit Court. The court found the Hammonds legally obtained rights to the water in accordance to State law and therefore the use of the water belongs to the Hammonds.*

(c) In August 1994 the BLM & FWS illegally began building a fence around the Hammonds water source. Owning the water rights, and knowing that their cattle relied on that water source daily, the Hammonds tried to stop the building of the fence. The BLM & FWS called the Harney County Sheriff department and had Dwight Hammond (Father) arrested and charged with “disturbing and interfering with” federal officials or federal contractors (two counts, each a felony). Dwight spent one night in the Deschutes County Jail in Bend, and a second night behind bars in Portland. He was then hauled before a federal magistrate and released without bail. A hearing on the charges was postponed and the federal judge never set another date.

(d) The FWS also began restricting access to upper pieces of the Hammond’s private property. In order to get to the upper part of the Hammond’s ranch they had to go on a road that went through the Malhuer Wildlife Refuge. The FWS began barricading the road and threatening the Hammonds if they drove through it. The Hammonds removed the barricades and gates and continued to use their right of access. The road was proven later to be owned by the County of Harney. This further enraged the BLM & FWS.

(e) Shortly after the road & water disputes, the BLM & FWS arbitrarily revoked the Hammond’s upper grazing permit without any given cause, court proceeding or court ruling. As a traditional “fence out state” Oregon requires no obligation on the part of an owner to keep his or her livestock within a fence or to maintain control over the movement of the livestock. The Hammonds still intended to use their private property for grazing. However, they were informed a federal judge ruled, in a federal court, the federal government did not have to observe the Oregon fence out law. “Those laws are for the people, not for them”.

(f) The Hammonds were forced to either build and maintain miles of fences or be restricted from the use of their private property. Cutting their ranch in almost half, they could not afford to fence the land, so the cattle were removed.

(g) The Hammonds experienced many years of financial hardship due to the ranch being diminished. The Hammonds had to sell their ranch and home in order to purchase another property that had enough grass to feed their cattle. This property included two grazing rights on public land. Those were also arbitrarily revoked later.

(h) The owner of the Hammond’s original ranch passed away from a heart attack and the Hammonds made a trade for the ranch back.

(i) In the early fall of 2001, Steven Hammond (Son) called the fire department, informing them that he was going to be performing a routine prescribed burn on their ranch. Later that day he started a prescribed fire on their private property. The fire went onto public land and burned 127 acres of grass. The Hammonds put the fire out themselves. There was no communication about the burn from the federal government to the Hammonds at that time. Prescribed fires are a common method that Native Americans and ranchers have used in the area to increase the health & productivity of the land for many centuries.

(j) In 2006 a massive lightning storm started multiple fires that joined together inflaming the countryside. To prevent the fire from destroying their winter range and possibly their home, Steven Hammond (Son) started a backfire on their private property. The backfire was successful in putting out the lightning fires that had covered thousands of acres within a short period of time. The backfire saved much of the range and vegetation needed to feed the cattle through the winter. Steven’s mother, Susan Hammond said: “The backfire worked perfectly, it put out the fire, saved the range and possibly our home”.

(j1) The next day federal agents went to the Harney County Sheriff’s office and filled a police report making accusation against Dwight and Steven Hammond for starting the backfire. A few days after the backfire a Range-Con from the Burns District BLM office asked Steven if he would meet him in town (Frenchglen) for coffee. Steven accepted. When leaving he was arrested by the Harney County Sheriff Dave Glerup and BLM Ranger Orr. Sheriff Glerup then ordered him to go to the ranch and bring back his father. Both Dwight and Steven were booked and on multiple Oregon State charges. The Harney County District Attorney reviewed the accusation, evidence and charges, and determined the accusations against Dwight & Steven Hammond did not warrant prosecution and dropped all the charges.

(k) In 2011, 5 years after the police report was taken, the U.S. Attorney Office accused Dwight and Steven Hammond of completely different charges; they accused them of being “Terrorists” under the Federal Anti terrorism Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996. This act carries a minimum sentence of five years in prison and a maximum sentence of death. Dwight & Steven’s mug shots were all over the news the next week posing them as “Arsonists”. Susan Hammond (Wife & Mother) said: “I would walk down the street or go in a store, people I had known for years would take extreme measures to avoid me”.

(l) Shortly after the sentencing, Capital Press ran a story about the Hammonds. A person who identified as Greg Allum posted three comments on the article, calling the ranchers “clowns” who endangered firefighters and other people in the area while burning valuable range land. Greg Allum, a retired BLM heavy equipment operator, soon called Capital Press to complain he had not made those comments and requested they be taken down from the website. Capital Press removed the comments. A search of the Internet Protocol address associated with the comments revealed the origin as the BLM’s office in Denver, Colorado. Allum said, he is friends with the Hammonds and he was alerted to the comments by neighbors who knew he wouldn’t have written them. “I feel bad for them. They lost a lot and they’re going to lose more,” Allum said of the ranchers. “They’re not terrorists”. “There’s this hatred in the BLM for them, and I don’t get it,” the retired BLM employee said. Jody Weil, deputy state director for communications at BLM’s Oregon office, indicated to reporters that if one of their agents falsified the comments, they would keep it private and not inform the public.

(m) In September 2006, Dwight & Susan Hammond’s home was raided. The agents informed the Hammonds they were looking for evidence that would connect them to the fires. The Hammonds later found out a boot print and a tire tracks were found near one of the many fires. No matching boots or tires were found in the Hammonds home or on their property. Susan Hammond (Wife) later said; ” I have never felt so violated in my life. We are ranchers not criminals”. Steven Hammond openly maintains his testimony that he started the backfire to save the winter grass from being destroyed and the backfire ended up working so well it put out the fire altogether.

(n) During the trial proceedings, Federal Court Judge Michael Hogan did not allow time for certain testimonies and evidence into the trail which would exonerate the Hammonds. Federal prosecuting attorney, Frank Papagni, was given full access for six days. He had ample time to use any evidence or testimony that strengthened the demonization of the Hammonds. The Hammonds attorney was only allowed 1 day. Many of the facts about the fires, land and why the Hammonds acted the way they did was not allowed into the proceedings and was not heard by the jury. Example: Judge Hogan did not allow time for the jury to hear or review certified scientific findings the fires improved the health and productivity of the land. Or, that the Hammonds had been subject to vindictive behavior by multiple federal agencies for years.

(o) Federal attorneys, Frank Papagni, hunted down a witness who was not mentally capable to be credible. Dusty Hammond (grandson and nephew) testified that Steven told him to start a fire. He was 13-years-old at the time, and 24-years-old when he testified (11 years later). At 24 Dusty had been suffering with mental problems for many years. He had estranged his family including his mother. Judge Hogan noted that Dusty’s memories as a 13-year-old boy were not clear or credible. However, Judge Hogan allowed the prosecution to continually use Dusty’s testimony. When speaking to the Hammonds about this testimony, they understood Dusty was manipulated and expressed nothing but love for their troubled grandson.

(p) Judge Michael Hogan & Frank Papagni tampered with the jury many times throughout the proceedings, including during the selection process. Hogan & Papagni only allowed people on the jury who did not understand the customs and culture of the ranchers or how land is used and cared for in the Diamond Valley. All of the jurors had to drive back and forth to Pendleton every day. Some drove more than two hours each way. By day 8 they were exhausted and expressed desires to be home.

On the final day, Judge Hogan kept pushing them to make a verdict. [Several times during deliberation, Judge Hogan pushed them to make a decision.] Judge Hogan also would not allow the jury to hear what punishment could be imposed upon an individual convicted as a terrorist under the 1996 act. The jury, not understanding the customs and cultures of the area and influenced by the prosecutors for six straight days, very exhausted, pushed for a verdict by the judge, unaware of the ramification of convicting someone as a terrorist, gave a verdict and went home.

(q) June 22, 2012, Dwight and Steven were found guilty of starting both the 2001 and the 2006 fires by the jury. However, the federal courts convicted them both as “Terrorists” under the 1996 Anti terrorism Act. Judge Hogan sentenced Dwight (Father) to 3 months in prison and Steven (son) to 12 months in federal prison. Both were also stipulated to pay $400,000 to the BLM. Judge Hogan overruling the minimum terrorist sentence, commented if the full five years were required it would be a violation of the 8th amendment (cruel and unusual punishment). The day of the sentencing Judge Hogan retired as a federal judge. In his honor the staff served chocolate cake in the courtroom.

(r) On January 4, 2013, Dwight and Steven reported to prison. They fulfilled their sentences, (Dwight 3 months, Steven 12 months). Dwight was released in March 2013 and Steven, January 2014.

(s) Sometime in June 2014, Rhonda Karges, Field Manager for the BLM, and her husband Chad Karges, Refuge Manager for the Malheur Wildlife Refuge (which surrounds the Hammond ranch), along with attorney Frank Papagni exemplified further vindictive behavior by filing an appeal with the 9th District Federal Court seeking Dwight’s and Steven’s return to federal prison for the entire 5 years.*

(t) In October 2015, the 9th District Court “re-sentenced” Dwight and Steven, requiring them to return to prison for several more years. Steven (46) has a wife and 3 children. Dwight (74) will leave Susan (74) to be alone after 55 years of marriage. If he survives, he will be 79 when he is released.

(u) During the court preceding the Hammonds were forced to grant the BLM first right of refusal; if the Hammonds ever sold their ranch they would have to sell it to the BLM.

(v) Dwight and Steven are ordered to report to federal prison again on January 4th, 2016 to begin their re-sentencing. Both their wives will have to manage the ranch for several years without them.

To date the Hammonds have paid $200,000 to the BLM, and the remainder $200,000 must be paid before the end of year (2015). If the Hammonds cannot pay the fines to the BLM, they will be forced to sell the ranch to the BLM or face further prosecution. (more citations here)

View this document on Scribd

Hammond Family
Hammond Family

Now you can watch this video where Ammon Bundy responds to why he and his brothers are involved. (This was recorded two days ago on Jan 1st):

After a protest rally supporting the Hammond family yesterday, a pre-planned group, including the Bundy Brothers, left a peaceful protest at the Harney County Sheriff’s Office and went to the closed (for holiday) Malheur Wildlife Refuge, where they have seized and occupied the refuge headquarters.
Statement from Harney County Sheriff Dave Ward:
“After the peaceful rally was completed today, a group of outside militants drove to the Malheur Wildlife Refuge, where they seized and occupied the refuge headquarters. A collective effort from multiple agencies is currently working on a solution. For the time being please stay away from that area. More information will be provided as it becomes available. Please maintain a peaceful and united front and allow us to work through this situation.” (link)
Malheur National Wildlife Refuge Headquarters
Malheur National Wildlife Refuge Headquarters

(Via Oregon Live) […] The Bundy family of Nevada joined with hard-core militiamen Saturday to take over the headquarters of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, vowing to occupy the remote federal outpost 50 miles southeast of Burns for years.

The occupation came shortly after an estimated 300 marchers — militia and local citizens both — paraded through Burns to protest the prosecution of two Harney County ranchers, Dwight Hammond Jr. and Steven Hammond, who are to report to prison on Monday.

Among the occupiers is Ammon Bundy, son of Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy, and two of his brothers. Militia members at the refuge claimed they had as many as 100 supporters with them. The refuge, federal property managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, was closed and unoccupied for the holiday weekend.

In phone interviews from inside the occupied building Saturday night, Ammon Bundy and his brother, Ryan Bundy, said they are not looking to hurt anyone. But they would not rule out violence if police tried to remove them, they said.

“The facility has been the tool to do all the tyranny that has been placed upon the Hammonds,” Ammon Bundy said.

“We’re planning on staying here for years, absolutely,” he added. “This is not a decision we’ve made at the last minute.” (more)
Malheur National Wildlife Refuge is located roughly south of the town of Burns, Oregon. The refuge area is roughly T shaped with the southernmost base at Frenchglen, the left top at Malheur Lake and the right top at Harney Lake.
Malheur National Wildlife Refuge is located roughly south of the town of Burns, Oregon. The refuge area is roughly T shaped with the southernmost base at Frenchglen, the left top at Malheur Lake and the right top at Harney Lake.

A letter dated January 1st outlines the position of the Bundy brothers, as well as the 150+ in the Militia as it relates to the Hammond family:

With great concern and love and much consideration from prayer, I come to you Harney County Sheriff of Oregon David M. Ward, rancher Steven Dwight Hammond, and rancher Dwight Lincoln Hammond, Jr.,

I, Cliven D. Bundy, have been involved for several weeks in the background striving to understand and comprehend your dilemmas in Harney County, Oregon. I understand the grass that was burned on each side of the fence was grazing rights that had been created through beneficial use, one side of the fence being private property and the other side of the fence being private property rights. The fires that were set were for a good purpose and had good results.

The United States Justice Department has NO jurisdiction or authority within the State of Oregon, County of Harney over this type of ranch management. These lands are not under U.S. treaties or commerce, they are not article 4 territories, and Congress does not have unlimited power. These lands have been admitted into statehood and are part of the great State of Oregon and the citizens of Harney County enjoy the fullness of the protections of the U.S. Constitution. The U.S. Constitution limits United States government.

It is my suggestion, Steven Hammond, that you go and check yourself into Harney County jail asking for protective custody. It is my suggestion, Dwight Hammond, that you go and check yourself into Harney County jail asking for protective custody. It is my suggestion, Harney County Sheriff David Ward, accept these two ranchers into your jail, notify the United States Solicitor in Washington DC that you have these two ranchers in Harney County jail, that they will remain there indefinitely under your protective custody and the protection of We the People of Harney County and We the People of the United States of America.

I suggest an Evidentiary Hearing or a Grand Jury be formed by We the People.

I feel that this action is immediately important, that it should be taken place before 10:00 am Saturday, January 2, 2016. I will hold these suggestions private until that time then I will release this letter to those having state and county jurisdiction and to the media.

Cliven D. Bundy (LINK)

waving_usa_flag.jpg

Prayers for everyone !

References:

♦ Full Facts On Hammond Case HERE

♦ BEST Local Reporter Twitter Feed HERE

♦ Oregon Live Article HERE

♦ Bundy Ranch Facebook HERE

♦ Bundy Ranch Website HERE

♦ Malhuer National Wildlife Refuge – Resource HERE

update-1Here are some interesting links about US Attorney Amanda Marshall who made the recommendation to challenge the Hammonds’ original sentences. She resigned in May 2015 for “health reasons” amid a scandal – she is accused of stalking a subordinate, federal prosecutor Scott Kerin. She is an Obama appointee who had no experience as a federal prosecutor when she took the job (see below*).

1) About Amanda Marshall, from the Oregonian’s list of “players” in the Hammond family case.

http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2016/01/militia_standoff_in_oregon_key.html

“Amanda Marshall: Former U.S. Attorney for Oregon. Marshall recommended that the federal government challenge the Hammonds’ original prison sentences. By law, the convictions come with mandatory five-year sentences, but U.S. District Judge Michael Hogan in 2012 balked at the punishment and instead sentenced Dwight Hammond to three months and Steven Hammond to one year. Marshall called Hogan’s punishments “unlawful.” The solicitor general authorized a rare appeal of an Oregon judge’s order. The appeals court sided with the prosecution, and the Hammonds returned to federal court last year to face a second sentencing. At that hearing, U.S. Chief District Judge Ann Aiken ordered the pair to finish five-year terms.”

Oregon’s top federal prosecutor traveled from commune to the corner office

http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2012/01/oregons_top_federal_prosecutor.html

2) The Scandal:

Oregon U.S. Attorney Amanda Marshall resigns amid internal review, cites health issues
http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2015/04/oregon_us_attorney_amanda_mars.html#incart_story_package

Federal Prosecutor Allegedly Stalked By U.S. Attorney Amanda Marshall Was Under Armed Protection – Scott Kerin reportedly had a contract taken out on his life by a Mexican drug cartel.
http://www.wweek.com/portland/blog-32962-federal_prosecutor_allegedly_stalked_by_us_attorney_amanda_marshall_was_under_armed_protection.html

U.S. Justice Department looking into U.S. Attorney Amanda Marshall’s relationship with employee
http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2015/03/us_justice_department_looking.html
“This is a crucial time in the U.S. Attorney’s office in Oregon, which investigates and prosecutes federal crimes. The office is leading a sweeping influence-peddling investigation of former Gov. John Kitzhaber and his companion, Cylvia Hayes.
Marshall was the surprise choice to replace interim U.S. Attorney Dwight Holton in 2010. She had no experience as a federal prosecutor.* Rather, she was plucked from a child advocacy legal job inside the Oregon Department of Justice. Before that, she served as a deputy district attorney in Coos County.
Kerin is married to a fellow-federal prosecutor in the Portland office. Marshall is married to Ladd Wiles, who last May was elected Circuit Court judge in Yamhill County.”

NOTE: In the above story, her attorney, Charese Rohny, misleads the Oregonian by saying that the victim Kerin was the subject of an OIG investigation, which was untrue, as it was Marshall who OIG was investigating.

Advertisements

Prosecutors want California man to remove blog posts on FBI informants in refuge occupation case | OregonLive.com<!–

Prosecutors want California man to remove blog posts on FBI informants in refuge occupation case
OregonLive.com
Maxine Bernstein | The Oregonian/OregonLive
Prosecutors on Friday asked a judge to order Gary Hunt to immediately remove all material about the confidential sources from his website and prevent him from continuing to share the sensitive information.

0
01/07/2017
01/07/2017

–>

As a second trial looms in the takeover of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, federal prosecutors are perturbed that a California man associated with a network of militia groups obtained FBI reports on its confidential sources and has written about them in an online blog.

Prosecutors on Friday asked a judge to order Gary Hunt to immediately remove all material about the confidential sources from his website and prevent him from continuing to share the sensitive information.

The presence of nine informants on the eastern Oregon refuge during the 41-day occupation last winter as well as six other informants who worked on the case for the FBI was revealed during testimony during the first trial of occupation leaders.

Hunt, according to prosecutors, apparently got hold of the FBI reports on the informants that prosecutors gave to defense attorneys as part of their sharing of discovery evidence before trial. The court ordered the reports not be shared with others. Occupation leader Ammon Bundy and six others were acquitted of conspiracy and other charges after a five-week trial that ended Oct. 27.

“Public dissemination of the material produced under this Court’s Protective Order could threaten ongoing investigations and the safety of government confidential human sources, informants or others,” wrote Assistant U.S. Attorney Pamala Holsinger.

Ads by ZINC

 

Hunt said that an FBI agent contacted him Thursday, handing him a cease-and-desist order signed by Holsinger, chief of the criminal division in the Oregon U.S. Attorney’s Office.

FBI Special Agent Matthew Catalano reached Hunt by phone and requested a meeting. They met at a restaurant near Hunt’s home after the agent assured Hunt he didn’t have a warrant for his arrest, according to a court filing.

Hunt said the agent asked where he got the documents, wanted him to remove his blog posts and hand over the reports he had.

Hunt, who wasn’t charged in the occupation, said the government doesn’t have the authority to control his work because the court’s protective order doesn’t apply to him. The order restricted defendants in the case and their attorneys or defense staff from disseminating the material.

But prosecutors contend Hunt is “illegally in possession of protected sensitive discovery materials in this case” and not authorized to distribute them, according to their motion.

Hunt didn’t comply with the cease-and-desist order within 24 hours, so prosecutors on Friday filed a request for the court to order his compliance.

“I don’t think it has merit,” Hunt said.

Hunt, 70, was a member of the advisory board for Operation Mutual Defense, a network of militias and supporters founded by Ryan Payne, one of the refuge occupation’s organizers. The board was involved in early talks on how to help Harney County ranchers Dwight Hammond Jr. and son Steven Hammond, who were scheduled to return to federal prison on Jan. 4, 2016, for setting fire to public land. Bundy frequently cited protest over the Hammonds’ treatment by the federal government as one of the reasons for seizing the refuge on Jan2.

The advisory board ultimately voted not to support any action in Burns without the Hammond family’s invitation. But Hunt ended up visiting the refuge during the takeover. He went to Burns on Jan. 24, checked into the Silver Spur Motel and drove out to the refuge. On the evening of Jan. 26 after state police shot and killed occupation spokesman Robert “LaVoy” Finicum at a roadblock, Hunt put out a call for supporters to go to the refuge, but retracted it by the next day, he said.

Hunt, who lives in Northern California, has written stories under the heading “Burns Chronicles” on his Outpost of Freedom website.

Hunt quotes from FBI reports on the agency’s 15 informants during the occupation. The 130 reports, spanning 246 pages, were subject to a protective order, and each page contains the printed words, “Dissemination limited by court order,”  FBI agent Ronnie Walker wrote in an affidavit attached to the prosecutors’ court filing.

The names of the confidential sources in the FBI reports shared with defense lawyers were redacted.

In one blog post, Hunt surmised that a fellow member of the Operation Mutual Defense’s advisory board was an informant who provided the FBI details from the board meetings and access to the board’s electronic folders containing various documents, Walker wrote in the affidavit.

Hunt said he has written about the informants because he believes that “every defendant has a right to meet his accusers” to prepare their defense. He expects his blog posts might help the second round of defendants charged in the refuge takeover, who are set to go to trial on Feb. 14.

“If the government can get into my records, email and drop box accounts, why can’t we look at their records?” he said.

Hunt has not posted on his blog the FBI records, but has quoted excerpts from them.

In another blog post called, “Informants, What To Do About Them?” Hunt wrote, “The matter of informants, and the government’s efforts to protect the names of those who have snuck into our midst is a denial of justice and to some degree, the Sixth Amendment right “to be confronted with the witnesses against him.”

Walker argued in the affidavit that the identification of informants could put them at risk, noting that some defendants and other people associated with the refuge occupation “have advocated for violence against federal employees, law enforcement, and and/or informants.”

Walker cited comments from an unidentified person caught on a video found on defendant Jason Patrick’s cellphone. They came during a group meeting at the refuge after Ammon Bundy’s arrest. The person said to the group, ” (Let’s) regroup, get in, go find out who works for the Feds and start executing them. Execute them, their families, everyone. … Make it a statement. If you work for those crooked (expletive) you’re going to die.”

U.S. District Judge Anna J. Brown, who presided over the initial Bundy trial and also is handlng the second trial in February, is expected to rule on the prosecutors’ motion. Hunt said Friday he has not obtained a lawyer.

One positive development that may come of this, Hunt said, is that his personal standoff with the FBI may put to rest some speculation that Hunt was an informant for the feds.

— Maxine Bernstein

mbernstein@oregonian.com
503-221-8212
@maxoregonian

Federal Prosecutors Plow Forward With Criminal Charges Against Bundy Lawyer Tased in the Courtroom – Willamette Week &lt;img src=”http://b.scorecardresearch.com/p?c1=2&amp;c2=8030908&amp;cv=2.0&amp;cj=1″/&gt;

Federal Prosecutors Plow Forward With Criminal Charges Against Bundy Lawyer Tased in the Courtroom

Other lawyers outraged by the U.S. Attorney for Western Washington pursuing the charges.

A Bundy supporter celebrates the acquittal. (Joe Riedl)

Federal prosecutors pressed forward Friday with charges against lawyer Marcus Mumford that back up the claims of a handful of U.S. Marshals who tackled and Tased Mumford as he argued in court for the release of his client, Ammon Bundy.

Moments after the stunning Oct. 27 acquittal of Bundy and his co-defendants, Mumford argued that Bundy should be immediately released to walk freely out of the courtroom. Half a dozen U.S. Marshals quickly closed in as Judge Anna J. Brown explained that Bundy was still under a custody hold over his pending charges in Nevada, related to the 2014 standoff at his father’s Bunkerville ranch.

But Mumford grew increasingly impassioned, and the marshals ended up piling atop him and shocking him with a stun gun. They arrested him and charged him with failure to comply with a federal police officer and impeding government employees.

Some observers had expected the government to drop the charges. But prosecutors with the U.S. Attorney for Western Washington today plowed ahead on misdemeanor charges that could make them look ridiculous.

It’s a strategy of doubling down by federal prosecutors. The office of U.S. Attorney for Oregon Billy Wiliams was humiliated by the October acquittals of militants who seized Malheur National Wildlife Refuge. Yet the U.S. Attorney for Western Washington—who took over the Mumford case from Williams—continues to pursue the prosecution.

That tack is also reflected in prosecutors’ plan to march forward in February with the conspiracy charges against the second round of Malheur occupiers—the same that they were unable to prove last fall.

Mumford today pleaded not guilty to the charges of disrupting government duties and failing to comply with a lawful order. His lawyer, Michael Levine, said he’d never heard of a similar courtroom situation.

“I truly believe it’s unprecedented and I’ve been practicing law for almost 40 years,” Levine said after the hearing. “I can’t recall an incident where an attorney in the midst of an argument on behalf of his client is tackled and Tased twice, surrounded by the force of the state.”

The U.S. Attorney’s Office did not respond to requests for comment.

The packed courtroom on Friday included most of the defense attorneys in the Bundy case, some of whom wore pins that said “Free Marcus Mumford.”

Defense attorney Matt Schindler, who represented Ken Medenbach in the Bundy trial and was standing about 10 feet from the scuffle on the day of the verdict, said after Friday’s hearing that no one from the U.S. Attorney’s office had contacted him or the other defense attorneys who observed the incident to hear their version of events.

“I’m embarrassed that no one from their offices has contacted me,” Schindler said. “They should contact all the witnesses before they make their charging decision. What the fuck? That’s their job. To take the officer’s version of events and evaluate whether to pursue a charge.”

Schindler said he planned to directly challenge the marshals’ version of events outlined in the statement of probable cause issued with Mumford’s citation.

In the statement, U.S. Marshal Colin Fawcett describes Mumford yelling and taking up a “boxer’s stance,” which he called a “pre-assault indicator.” And the statement makes no mention of Tasing Mumford.

Schindler called that version of events “bullshit.”

Schindler said he introduced himself to Assistant U.S. Attorney Timothy Ohms after Friday’s hearing and offered to testify in the trial scheduled for April.

“I explained that it might make sense for someone in his office to contact me about what I witnessed in the courtroom before I’m a witness and calling all of his witnesses liars,” Schindler said.

“To the extent that someone says that Marcus Mumford took a boxer’s stance and attempted some kind of aggressive or violent action, they’re lying,” Schindler said after the hearing. “That’s just a fact. The guy was trying to make a fucking legal argument to a judge. So that’s what I’ll say.”

After the hearing, several lawyers stood clustered in the hallway, discussing their surprise that the government didn’t drop the case.

“That’s what I was expecting to have happen and I’m stunned that it didn’t,” Schindler said. “Again, it’s a demonstration of poor judgment on the part of this office. They have made a series of these kinds of decisions and this is another one.”

Correction: This story originally stated the prosecution is being pursued by the U.S. Attorney for Oregon. In fact, the case has been handed to the U.S. Attorney for Western Washington.

&lt;meta http-equiv=”refresh” content=”0; URL=/Capt.Karl/posts/10202649649958401?_fb_noscript=1″ /&gt;(72) Karl P. Koenigs – PORTLAND OR Trial of the Century – The Malheur…

PORTLAND OR Trial of the Century – The Malheur Wildlife Refuge Takeover Trial. For the dozens of people who observed the trial in the Courthouse, something seems amiss, with Jurist #4 who apparently spoke with the NY Times. WAS THE JURIST’S FAMILY THREATENED WITH DEATH by Loretta Lynch and/or Jame’s Comey’s DOJ / FBI / DHS? ? ? ?

We know from the Court hearing that the DOJ / FBI planted at least nine, if not 15 FBI agents/informants in the midst of the peaceful Patriot takeover of Malheur… Including, among them, “Fabulous Fabio” who performed combat training and shooting thousands of rounds of ammo in semi-automatic weapons.

Jurist #4 SUDDENLY seems to state that all of the Patriot’s arguments, including Ammon Bundy’s, Shawna Cox’s, Ryan Bundy’s, Jeff Banta, their attorneys or the others, in court were meaningless of no value and did not contribute at all to or for their acquittal. Suddenly according to the NYT article, the loss was not due to Jury Nullification or Constitutional torts but solely due to flaws by the U.S. Attorney’s prosecution strategy.

You see folks, neither the Media or the U.S. Government wants our Ninth and TENTH Amendments restored. They want all of the usurpation all of the stealing of our wages and salaries out of our paychecks and more, against our individual Rights, States Rights and State Sovereignty maintained and grown, even from where it is now.

It is as if, suddenly, Constitutional Law and Order on Congress and on the President of The United States and, moreover, that the America and American loving Patriots efforts to restore these canons of our supreme law of the land, upon our Municipal, County, State and U.S. Government usurpers and despots, such as those who had LaVoy Finicum executed in premeditated murder along with the attempted murder of 18 Year Old Victoria Sharp, Shawna Cox and Ryan Bundy who still has a bullet lodged in his shoulder, to “Stop the virus (of the Ninth and TENTH Amendments) from spreading into the next County” (OR Gov. Kate Brown), is valueless and like “Who Cares?”.

When Oregon State and the U.S. Government, in a Joint State and Federal Operation, work together to murder Patriots of Ninth and TENTH Amendment Law and Order, you know that all America and Americans, and our LIVES, LIBERTY and PROPERTY, are in extreme danger.

Which leads me to wonder if Jurist #4’s family might have been threatened with death, by the FBI, DOJ or DHS if he/she didn’t agree to sign off on the article by the New York Times? ? ? ? ? ?

HERE ARE THE FACTS that all Americans need to know and understand to protect and RESTORE –> THEIR LIVES, LIBERTY and PROPERTY and their individual Rights, States Rights, State Sovereignty, their local hometown economies, their local hometown small business manufacturing plants, their jobs, their wages and salaries from the IRS, their INDIVIDUAL American Middle Class wealth and power:

PERTAINING TO THE NEVADA BATTLE OF BUNKERVILLE FEDERAL Trial of THE CENTURY and The Rule of Constitutional LAW and ORDER. This is the MOST IMPORTANT THING TO INDIVIDUAL UNALIENABLE RIGHTS, State Rights and State Sovereignty in all American History, since the Revolutionary War against our first World superpower Government, against our Cops and Troops in Redcoats.

The Bundy’s did not break the law. The Federal Government broke the law.

Maryland, Delaware and New Jersey refused to sign the Articles of Confederation until States with western land claims ceded those lands to the Federal Government. Two of those States were Georgia and Virginia. They agreed to cede their western lands with the provision those lands be used solely for establishing more States. Congress then passed a Resolution on October 10, 1780 whereby the Federal Government would dispose of all land within a Territory to that Territory once the Territory became a State. This was modified to include states formed from land purchased from Foreign Countries with the inception of Louisiana in 1812.

Over the next seven years, people migrated to the west prompting the Second Continental Congress to pass the Northwest Ordinance Act of 1787. It enabled territories to become States once their population reached sixty thousand. Admittance would permit territories to be placed on an equal footing with existing States as sovereigns of their own land with all the same rights and privileges. That provision in the Northwest Ordinance is referred to as The Equal Footing Doctrine. Ratification of the U.S. Constitution recognized the 1780 resolution and the Equal Footing Doctrine in three parts of the Constitution.

Article VI Clause I states “All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation. An Engagement is an agreement. This clause compels the Federal Government to honor the October 10, 1780 Resolution and the Equal Footing Doctrine of the Northwest Ordinance.

Article IV Section III Clause II states “The Congress shall have the Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules or Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States”. The 1780 Resolution and the Northwest Ordinance Act were recognized as rules and regulations at the time the Constitution was adopted by the States. Shall means must. The Federal Government must dispose of land in accordance with the 1780 Resolution and the Northwest Ordinance Act per the Equal Footing Doctrine.

Article I Section VIII Clause XVII states “ To exercise Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District(not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States”. This Clause clearly states the Federal Government can obtain land from a State only when a States cedes land to the Federal Government and that the land can only be used for the erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock yards and other needful buildings. The Federal Government does not have the Constitutional authority to take or seize land from a state.

The Federal Government complied with the above provisions for the first 38 States but did not do so with the last 12 States. Instead the Federal Government retained land within in Territories once they became States or seized land after they became States in violation of the above provisions. Therefore the Federal Government has no claim to the land in question regarding Cliven Bundy. The Federal Government never had the Constitutional authority to charge Mr. Bundy for the use of land that never belonged to the Federal Government.

The Federal Government retaining or seizing land effectively changed or amended the U.S. Constitution without amending the Constitution in accordance of amendment processes specified in Article V.

The land Mr. Bundy’s family has been using since 1877, has always belonged to the State of Nevada or the People of Nevada as an unalienable right since Nevada is and always has been a Sovereign State per the 1780 Resolution and the Equal Footing Clause. The issue is did the State permit The Bundy’s to use that land? If the State did not expressly prohibit the Bundy family from using that land, then it is an unalienable right of the Bundy Family. Mr. Bundy did not violate any Federal Law since the land never Constitutionally belonged to the Federal Government. The Federal Government did violate Mr. Bundy’s unalienable right and is therefore subject to fines and or imprisonment per U.S. Code 18 Sections 241 and 242. The violation can result in a life in prison sentence or death sentence should the violation result in the injured party’s death. U.S. Code 42 Sections 1983, 1985 and 1986 holds liable anyone who violates a person’s unalienable rights. The Federal Government extorted money from the Bundy’s under the guise of grazing fees and therefore must pay back any money taken from the Bundy’s in addition to fines, imprisonment and liability.

MY QUESTION, THEREFORE, IS; WAS JURIST #4’s FAMILY THREATENED by the very same people who executed LaVoy Finicum?

– Capt. Karl
u.S. CONTINENTAL MARSHAL
&
National Chairman and Senior Adviser
SOLIDARITY for Ninth and TENTH Amendments COALITION
&
The Constitutional 10 U.S. Code § 311 American Militia Freedom Forces / Utah State Unorganized Militia
– The A-Team

COMMENTS

&lt;meta http-equiv=”refresh” content=”0; URL=/Capt.Karl/posts/10202649649958401?_fb_noscript=1″ /&gt;(71) Karl P. Koenigs – PORTLAND OR Trial of the Century – The Malheur…

Wain Reily LORD I PRAY FOR YOU TO SPARE US THE SUFFRAGE OF A CLINTON IN CONTROL OF OUR NATION!

◄ Luke 19:39-40 ►
SOME OF THE PHARISEES IN THE CROWD SAID TO HIM, “TEACHER, REBUKE YOUR DISCIPLES.”
BUT JESUS ANSWERED, “I TELL YOU, IF THESE BECOME SILENT, THE STONES WILL CRY OUT!”

◄ 2 Chronicles 7:14 ►
AND MY PEOPLE WHO ARE CALLED BY MY NAME HUMBLE THEMSELVES AND PRAY AND SEEK MY FACE AND TURN FROM THEIR WICKED WAYS, THEN I WILL HEAR FROM HEAVEN, WILL FORGIVE THEIR SIN AND WILL HEAL THEIR LAND.

 

 

 

 

Brand Thornton Matthew Deatherage Matthew Wandersee Gavin Seim Bonnie Bundy Backus Lisa Bundy Angie Huntington Bundy Carol Bundy Jeff Powers Jeff Blakes Frank Vish Carl Brammann Carl R Gottstein Jr. John Lamb John Hackett John R. Lundberg John Bird John Smith Gary L Stephens Gary Darby Gary Gross Jim Moskal Jim A. Fuhrmann Joe Oshaugnessy David Fry Sarah Redd-Buck Cindy Odenbach Cindy Wisner Linda Lake Linda Marshall Gray Josh Muth Josh Gnerlich Doug Robinson Doug Fleming Ron Moore

Image may contain: 1 person , text
LikeShow more reactions

Comment

1 Comment
Comments
Wain Reily
Remove
Wain Reily LORD I PRAY FOR YOU TO SPARE US THE SUFFRAGE OF A CLINTON IN CONTROL OF OUR NATION!

C.O.W.S – COALITION OF WESTERN STATES

C.O.W.S. Responds to Tazing of Marcus Mumford – Redoubt News
http://redoubtnews.com/wp-content/themes/mh-magazine/js/css3-mediaqueries.js

THE TAZING OF ATTORNEY MARCUS MUMFORD PAINTS A DISTURBING PICTURE OF INCREASING DESPOTISM

The Right to a Trial by a Jury of our Peers is a long established fundamental Right, codified in 1215 through the Magna Carta. Last week, through the verdict of the Jury in Oregon acquitting the Malheur protesters, America and the world learned again why this Right is so vital to the preservation of Liberty. In a system where the government writes the laws, interprets the laws, enforces the laws, prosecutes the laws, and even sits in judgement of those laws, Trial by Jury is often the only protection of the Liberty of the people. Unchecked by the Jury, the statements of these government agents tell us exactly what the outcome of that trial would have been:

-Governor Kate Brown: “While I respect the jury’s decision, I am disappointed.”

-Sheriff David Ward: “While I am disappointed in the outcome…”

-Dan Ashe, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service director: “We are profoundly disappointed in the outcome of the trial,”

If the judgement were left up to these people we can see that there would be no justice, only slavish submission to government orders. There would be no Right to Protest government abuse, No Right to Free Speech, No Right to Peaceably Assemble, and No Right to Bear Arms. These people, in their statements, have told us all we need to know about who they are – enemies of Liberty. They are indeed the very reason why we have a Trial by Jury as part of the checks and balances of our system.

The actions of the US Marshalls after the verdict was rendered also give us a shocking picture of what our government agents have become. The fact that attorney Marcus Mumford was violently attacked by these agents, handcuffed and tazed, for simply demanding they show legal cause and jurisdiction for detaining his client should be outrageous to every American. The fact it appeared to be in retaliation for the verdict should have every lawyer and bar association across this country up in arms. The fact that Judge Anna Brown sat by and watched this happen in open court with only a minor hand wave as an objection, should be a wakeup call to us all as to what our Federal Courts have become. These are not the scenes we would expect in a nation dedicated to Liberty and the fundamental Rights of Due Process. This is not a third world banana republic. The attack in court on Mr. Mumford paints a picture of despotism and those responsible must be held accountable if America will ever see Liberty restored. Agents of the Federal Government cannot continue to be above the law.

Every American should remember, a government with this kind of unchecked power will be a foe to all men sooner or later. The sword of the government you cheer today, will be the sword that persecutes you tomorrow and all of history proves that to be true. Any loyalty to an expanding and authoritarian government cannot be rewarded or even tolerated if we wish to remain free.

Yes, Liberty was vindicated in the jury verdict. But where will we go from here? As long as there are governors like Kate Brown, sheriffs like David Ward, judges like Anna Brown, and government agents who can wield violent and arbitrary power, Liberty is not secure and no American can rest in the peaceful enjoyment of their lives, liberty, property, and ability to defend the same.

“when all government, domestic and foreign, in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the centre of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided of one government on another…If the States look with apathy on this silent descent of their government into the gulf which is to swallow all, we have only to weep over the human character formed uncontrollable but by a rod of iron…” Thomas Jefferson, 1812

 

~ Coalition of Western States, November 1, 2016

&lt;meta http-equiv=”refresh” content=”0; URL=/Unity-through-Solutions-Mississippi-1618406628471304/?ref=aymt_homepage_panel&amp;amp;_fb_noscript=1″ /&gt;(1) Facebook

&lt;meta http-equiv=”refresh” content=”0; URL=/?_fb_noscript=1″ /&gt;

 

(2) Verdict Watch

JUROR 4: PROSECUTORS IN OREGON STANDOFF CASE FAILED TO PROVE DEFENDANTS’ ‘INTENT’ TO IMPEDE FEDERAL WORKERS
10-28-16 : The Oregonian

Juror 4 vigorously defends the across-the-board acquittals of Ammon Bundy and his six co-defendants, calling the rulings a “statement” about the prosecution’s failure to prove the fundamental elements of a conspiracy charge.

Juror 4, a full-time Marylhurst business administration student, was the juror who had sent a note to the judge on the fourth day of the initial jury’s deliberations in the case, questioning the impartiality of a fellow juror, No. 12, who the judge bounced from the jury a day later.

“It should be known that all 12 jurors felt that this verdict was a statement regarding the various failures of the prosecution to prove ‘conspiracy’ in the count itself – and not any form of affirmation of the defense’s various beliefs, actions or aspirations,” Juror 4 wrote Friday, in a lengthy email to The Oregonian/OregonLive.

He expressed relief that he can now speak out freely, but wasn’t ready as of Friday morning to drop his anonymity. The judge withheld jurors’ names during the jury selection process and trial, instead referring to each by number.

The jury closely followed U.S. District Judge Anna J. Brown’s instructions on how to apply the law to the evidence and testimony heard during the five-week trial, he said.

The jury returned unanimous verdicts of “not guilty” to conspiracy charges against all seven defendants. Each was accused of conspiring to prevent employees of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Bureau of Land Management from carrying out their official work through intimidation, threat or force during the 41-day occupation.

Juror 4 noted the panel couldn’t simply rely on the defendants’ “defining actions” to convict.

“All 12 agreed that impeding existed, even if as an effect of the occupation,” he wrote.

“But we were not asked to judge on bullets and hurt feelings, rather to decide if any agreement was made with an illegal object in mind,” the Marylhurst student wrote. “It seemed this basic, high standard of proof was lost upon the prosecution throughout.”

Prosecutors had argued that the case, at its core, was about the illegal taking of another’s property, and the heavily-armed guards posted at the front gate to the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge and in the watchtower, in and of itself, represented an “intimidating” threat that kept refuge employees from showing up to work.

They argued that the alleged conspiracy began on Nov. 5, when Ammon Bundy and ally Ryan Payne met with Harney County Sheriff Dave Ward, and promised there would be extreme civil unrest in the community if he didn’t step in and block Harney County ranchers Dwight Hammond Jr. and Steven Hammond, who were slated to return to federal prison on Jan. 4 and serve out a mandatory minimum five-year sentence for arson to federal land.

Defense lawyers urged jurors in closing arguments not to mix-up the “effect” of the occupation – which undoubtedly kept federal employees from doing their jobs – from the “intent” of the occupiers.

Five of the seven defendants, including Ammon Bundy, testified. Many said that they were there to protest in support of the Hammonds and federal government overreach because they received absolutely no response from state or local government officials to their prior efforts to spur change.

The defense lawyers’ arguments, coupled with the jury instructions on how to apply the law to the evidence, resonated with jurors, Juror 4 noted.

“Inference, while possibly compelling, proved to be insulting or inadequate to 12 diversely-situated people as a means to convict,” the juror wrote. “The air of triumphalism that the prosecution brought was not lost on any of us, nor was it warranted given their burden of proof.”

How the jury reached its verdicts in the Oregon standoff case
How the jury reached its verdicts in the Oregon standoff case
Here are some of the key issues covered in more than 30 pages of instructions that U.S. District Judge Anna J. Brown read to jurors and what they used to reach their decision.

Juror 4 plainly stated that fellow Juror 12, during the initial round of deliberations, “had zero business being on this jury in the first place.”

Juror 12 had worked for the U.S. Bureau of Land Management as a ranch tech and firefighter “more than 20 years ago,” he said during jury selection. Asked by the judge during voir dire if that experience would impede his ability to be a fair and impartial judge of the facts, he said, “Not really.”

Juror 4 explained why he didn’t alert the court immediately after he had heard Juror 12, on day one of deliberations reportedly say, “I am very biased.”

It wasn’t until the fourth day into deliberations that Juror 4 sent a note to the court, asking if a juror who had worked previously for the federal land management agency and outright told the panel he was “very biased” could be an impartial judge. The court, flummoxed by the development, a day later dismissed Juror 12 for “good cause,” after the prosecution and defense teams agreed to the dismissal. At the time, parties to the case weren’t sure which way Juror 12’s alleged bias fell.

Juror 4 said he “resisted the impulse” to send the question sooner in an effort to give his fellow juror a chance to explain himself.

In his email to The Oregonian/OregonLive, Juror 4, for the first time, also contended that Juror 12 “violated” the judge’s explicit orders “by hearkening to ‘evidence’ that was never admitted in this case, refused to consider the defendant’s state of mind and used imaginative theories to explain key actions.'”

Juror 4 said, though, he wishes that he “had sent the letter on day one, since it would have alleviated much stress for all of us.”

The Maryville business student, who said his studies have suffered because of his six-week commitment to the case, said he is “baffled” by what he described as observers’ “flippant sentiments” in the wake of the jury’s acquittals.

“Don’t they know that ‘not guilty’ does not mean innocent?” he wrote. “It was not lost on us that our verdict(s) might inspire future actions that are regrettable, but that sort of thinking was not permitted when considering the charges before us.”

The jury, he said, met with Judge Brown after the verdicts were announced, and after the U.S. Marshals’ physical confrontation and arrest of Bundy’s lawyer Marcus Mumford.

He said many of the jurors questioned the judge about why the federal government chose the “conspiracy charge.” He said he learned that a potential alternate charge, such as criminal trespass, wouldn’t have brought as significant a penalty.

The charge of conspiring to impede federal employees from carrying out their official work through intimidation, threat or force brings a maximum sentence of six years in prison.

“We all queried about alternative charges that could stick and were amazed that this ‘conspiracy charge seemed the best possible option,” Juror 4 said.

— Maxine Bernstein

mbernstein@oregonian.com
503-221-8212
@maxoregonian

source:http://www.oregonlive.com/…/juror_4_prosecutors_in_oregon.h…

Ammon Bundy’s attorney, Marcus Mumford, arrested after standoff trial verdict | KATU&lt;iframe src=”//www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-KCZ4GP” height=”0″ width=”0″ style=”display:none;visibility:hidden”&gt;&lt;/iframe&gt;

Ammon Bundy’s attorney, Marcus Mumford, in custody after standoff trial verdict

 10/5/20163    BUNDY Stands Up to Judge Brown in Court – YouTube

Ammon Bundy told US District Court Judge Anna J. Brown that her unjust rulings against the defense throughout the trial has made it necessary for him to take the stand beginning Tuesday. Ammon plans to explain the true reasons that the occupiers entered the Oregon Refuge and stood up to the federal government.

YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/prepare333

Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/redpill333

Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/morphonios

FAIR USE NOTICE: This video may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes only. This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 106A-117 of the U.S. Copyright Law.

Share Video

00:00

00:00

Marcus Mumford, Ammon Bundy’s lawyer during a press conference outside federal court (KATU News photo)

AA

MORE MEDIA

Raw interview with Rick Koerber

PORTLAND, Ore. – Marcus Mumford, the lawyer for Malheur National Wildlife Standoff leader Ammon Bundy, was taken into custody Thursday afternoon shortly after a jury handed down a verdict acquitting the seven standoff members on all counts.

After the jury handed down its decision, Judge Anna Brown allowed all of the refuge occupiers to leave the courtroom except for Ammon and Ryan Bundy. Both men have federal holds for a separate ranching standoff in Nevada that was led by their father Cliven Bundy.

Mumford got into a heated argument that ultimately led to the attorney being led out of the courtroom in handcuffs. Our reporters say Mumford started repeatedly yelling to Judge Brown that his client was free to go.

“When you get acquitted, you get released. That’s how I understand it,” said Mumford.

He said he asked the U.S. Marshals to see their paperwork that gave them authority to keep his client in custody.

Mumford tells KATU News that U.S. Marshals surrounded him and told him that he was resisting arrest. The marshals tackled him and used a stun gun on him several times, Mumford said.

The judge cleared the courtroom after Mumford was tackled.

No word on what charges, if any, Mumford faces.

This is a developing story; updates will be posted as information comes in.

 

Jury finds all 7 wildlife refuge occupiers including Ammon Bundy not guilty on all counts | KATU&lt;iframe src=”//www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-KCZ4GP” height=”0″ width=”0″ style=”display:none;visibility:hidden”&gt;&lt;/iframe&gt;

Jury finds 7 wildlife refuge occupiers, including Ammon Bundy, not guilty on all counts

10/027/2016

THEY were found NOT GUILTY!!! I am so grateful for a God of miracles !!! And for all those who have been praying and being angels of mercy in all of this! I am so grateful those little babies get their daddies again!!!

I know my dad is smiling from heaven at this! I am so grateful for these men and women who stood on their principles enough to suffer all manner of atrocities. My heart is so full I wish I could express it better. Hallelujah!

Malheur Jurors Question Impartiality Of Fellow Jury Member . News | OPB#.WA_SPM4SOvY.facebook

Nation | local | News | An Occupation In Eastern Oregon

Malheur Jurors Question Impartiality Of Fellow Jury Member


Federal prosecutors and the attorneys for seven defendants in the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge trial reconvened Tuesday afternoon at the U.S. District Courthouse in downtown Portland.

Jurors submitted two questions to U.S. District Court Judge Anna Brown. In a hand-written note, the jurors indicated they may not be able to agree on charges for all seven of the defendants.

In a hand written note to U.S. District Court Judge Anna Brown, the jurors indicated they may not be able to agree on charges for all seven of the&nbsp;defendants.

In a hand written note to U.S. District Court Judge Anna Brown, the jurors indicated they may not be able to agree on charges for all seven of the defendants.

Amelia Templeton/OPB

“If we are able to agree on a verdict for 3 of the defendants; but are at a stand off for the others, does our decision for the three stand? Or does this become a mistrial for all the defendants?” the jurors wrote in the note.

“Conversely if we are able to agree on a decision for 10 out of the 13 charges does that decision stand or does it become a mistrial?” the note from the jury continued. “As an example … If we find a defendant guilty of count one, but can’t agree on count two what happens?”

In a separate note, the jury also raised questions about the impartiality of one of its members.

In a note to U.S. District Judge Anna Brown, the jury raised questions about the impartiality of one of its&nbsp;members. Brown has sent a note back to the jury asking them for&nbsp;clarification.

In a note to U.S. District Judge Anna Brown, the jury raised questions about the impartiality of one of its members. Brown has sent a note back to the jury asking them for clarification.

Amelia Templeton/OPB

“Can a juror, a former employee of the Bureau of Land Management, who opens their remarks in deliberations by stating ‘I am very biased …’ be considered an impartial judge in this case?” the second note from the jury read.

Brown has sent a note back to the jury asking them for clarification.

“Jurors, before I can respond to your question about the instructions,” she said, “I need to address the other question sent to me.”

Brown asked the jurors to identity the potentially impartial juror by number.

“You may continue to deliberate in the meantime,” Brown said she would write back to the jury.

“We ask that he simply be dismissed,” Per Olson, David Fry’s defense attorney, said in court.

“I can’t do that” Brown said.

“If we do not get to the bottom of this statement that was allegedly made, we are inviting a mistrial,” said Marcus Mumford, defense attorney for Ammon Bundy.

Prosecutors argued the judge should ignore the second question.

“It’s the government’s position that it is not appropriate to respond to this at this stage,” said Assistant U.S. Attorney Ethan Knight.

Brown asked attorneys on both sides of the case to submit potential questions they have for the potentially biased juror, although it is not clear what the judge plans to do with those questions.

The jury began deliberating last Thursday and reconvened Monday.

The government has charged occupation leader Ammon Bundy, his brother Ryan Bundy and five others with conspiring to prevent federal employees from doing their jobs at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge.

Other defendants on trial have been charged with theft of government property and carrying a firearm in a federal facility. The occupation at the refuge near Burns, Oregon, began Jan 2. and lasted 41 days.

&lt;meta http-equiv=”refresh” content=”0; URL=/?_fb_noscript=1″ /&gt;(1) Verdict Watch

&lt;meta http-equiv=”refresh” content=”0; URL=/events/1122873817750261/?object_id=1122873817750261&amp;amp;event_action_source=48&amp;amp;_fb_noscript=1″ /&gt;(26) Karl P. Koenigs – Now you are getting it! There is NO VICTIM in…

Now you are getting it! There is NO VICTIM in the Oregon Trials!

These trials against our constitutional Political Prisoners are utterly fallacious. They are merely “COLOR OF LAW” and therefore all elected and appointed officials, including the BLUEcoats and FEDcoats involved with the arrest and prosecution of our Political Prisoners are subject to INVESTIGATION by our Common Law Grand Juries of Jurisdiction (Usually County):

============================================
DEPRIVATION OF RIGHTS UNDER COLOR OF LAW
SUMMARY:

Section 242 of Title 18 makes it a crime for a person acting under color of any law to willfully deprive a person of a right or privilege protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States.
For the purpose of Section 242, acts under “color of law” include acts not only done by federal, state, or local officials within the their lawful authority, but also acts done beyond the bounds of that official’s lawful authority, if the acts are done while the official is purporting to or pretending to act in the performance of his/her official duties. Persons acting under color of law within the meaning of this statute include police officers, prisons guards and other law enforcement officials, as well as judges, care providers in public health facilities, and others who are acting as public officials. It is not necessary that the crime be motivated by animus toward the race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status or national origin of the victim.

The offense is punishable by a range of imprisonment up to a life term, or the death penalty, depending upon the circumstances of the crime, and the resulting injury, if any.

TITLE 18, U.S.C., SECTION 242:

Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, … shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death
——————————————————————————-
Marbury v. Madison : 5 US 137 (1803)

“No provision of the Constitution is designed to be without effect,” “Anything that is in conflict is null and void of law”, “clearly, for a secondary law to come in conflict with the supreme Law was illogical, for certainly, the supreme Law would prevail over all other laws and certainly our forefathers had intended that the supreme Law would be the bases of all law and for any law to come in conflict would be null and void of law, in would bare no obligation to obey, it would purport to settle as if it had never existed, for unconstitutionality, would date for the enactment of such a law, not from the date so branded in an open court of law, no courts are bound to uphold it, and no Citizens are bound to obey it. It operates as a near nullity or a fiction of law.” If any statement, within any law, which is passed, is unconstitutional, the whole law is unconstitutional by Marbury v. Madison.

Shepard’s Citations: A group of reporters that go through and keep track of all court cases that have come before the courts, especially the Supreme Court and they clarify, before the court, all the cases. All cases which have cited Marbury v. Madison case (854 at last count), to the Supreme Court has not ever been overturned. See Shepard’s Citation of Marbury v. Madison.
=============================================

THAT is the Law which the rulers, leaders and higher powers over America, over The President of The United States, over Congress and over the SCOTUS, as they are listed in THE FIRST THREE WORDS of The Constitution “ordained and established” UPON THEM to “secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity”.

—> And, OUR Constitutional laws UPON our elected and appointed Public SERVANTS, , , And OUR LIBERTY, derived from our Maker, , , WILL REIGN IN America ! ! ! <—> So help us God!

https://youtu.be/TbyT1TCo7OU

May God Save Our American States,
I remain SEMPER FI (Always Faithful),

– Capt. Karl
u.S. CONTINENTAL MARSHAL
&
National Chairman and Senior Adviser
SOLIDARITY for Ninth and TENTH Amendments COALITION
&
The Constitutional 10 U.S. Code § 311 American Militia Freedom Forces / Utah State Unorganized Militia
– The A-Team

John Lamb John Hackett John R. Lundberg John Bird Brand Thornton Matthew Wandersee Matthew Deatherage Matthew Howard III Gavin Seim Bill Wierzbinski Bill English Bill DiGirolamo Bill Sharpe James Sparks James Morris James Madison James Haggerty Joe Oshaugnessy Peter Thomas Santilli Lisa Bundy Angie Huntington Bundy Bonnie Bundy Backus Carol Bundy Tim Guiney Jeff Powers Jeff Blakes Tal Pollard Jim Moskal Billy Breeman Below Bruce Doucette Bruce Paris Cindy Wisner Cindy Odenbach Julie Richards Linda Pieper Dion Wood

Somethings we have forgotten one being that our rights DO NOT come from government. The end of this clip is interesting, remember our founders didn’t want a …
youtube.com

Love

 

Like

 

Love

 

Haha

 

Wow

 

Sad

 

Angry

Comment

3 Comments
Comments
Steve Maxfield
Remove
Steve Maxfield SO is it your intent to start calling these common law gran juries and convicting government officers, then calling on the militia to execute them by public hanging? If so who is your first intended target ? Judge Anna Brown ?

 

John Hackett
Remove
John Hackett Steve…do you believe in the US Constitution?

 

Ashley Jones
Remove
Ashley Jones And Steve answers your question with crickets as the Commies always do.

 

Dion Wood
Remove
Dion Wood Ashley Jones hey, that might be offensive to crickets!😝
Like · Reply · 2 · 4 mins

 

James Haggerty
Remove
James Haggerty That’s funny!

 

Cindy Wisner
Write a reply…
Karl P. Koenigs
Remove

Karl P. Koenigs That would be solely up to the Common Law Grand Jury of Jurisdiction. I, as a Continental Marshal, would have no part in those decisions, findings or rulings.

However, the Continental Marshals have discussed it and we would like to see the GLGJs investigate all of the BLUEcoats and FEDcoats, first and should they be found to have participated in enforcement of “Color Of Law” and Taxation by Citation, where there were NO VICTIMS, in which the person charged could FACE in a Court of Law, then they should be served first and given the opportunity to respond to the True Bills and/or Presentments. If they don’t respond they are a criminal and shall be sentenced in accordance with Common Law as required under The Bill Of Rights.

If the BLUEcoat and/or FEDcoat perp does respond he/she shall be afforded an open public trial by a Jury of his peers, with NO JUDGE to TELL THE JURY “the law as he/she sees fit”, but rather both attorneys or the defendant representing him/her self can cite the law as they see it / find for their side, to the Jury to make a full, fair and informed decision/verdict. And, the Jury has the Right to Jury Nullification if they so decide, as they are the rulers, leaders and higher powers cited in the first three words of The Constitution.

Then, once these hired henchmen and thugs of Constitutional contempt and traitors to their Oath to support and defend our Ninth and TENTH Amendment laws against ALL ENEMIES, both Republican and Democrat, are thinned down to only the ones who honor their Oath, then they too can help facilitate the LEGAL rulings and serve the TRUE Bills and Presentments to our elected Republican and Democrat Municipal, County, State and U.S. Government perpetrators, in all three branches, who created and/or enforced statutes and codes that are repugnant to and in violation of The Constitution and Bill Of Rights which have decimated our individual Rights, wages and salaries, our local hometown economies, the wealth and power of the American Middle Class families, and eviscerated our town, city, County, State and National felicity by pure unmitigated unadulterated contempt for the RULE of Constitutional Law and Order UPON THEM.

So help us God!
==============================================
IF YOU or your constitutional American Militia Freedom Forces or III%er Unit HAVE HAD ENOUGH TREASON to be sworn in as a U.S. CONTINENTAL Marshal, please contact Marshal Tresa Haywood for more information:

Marshal Tresa Haywood
Email: marshalhaywood@afreecountry.com
Phone: 404-640-4279 (email preferred)

May God Save Our American States,

– Capt. Karl
u.S. CONTINENTAL MARSHAL
&
National Chairman and Senior Adviser
SOLIDARITY for Ninth and TENTH Amendments COALITION
&
The Constitutional 10 U.S. Code § 311 American Militia Freedom Forces / Utah State Unorganized Militia
– The A-Team

John Lamb Gavin Seim Brand Thornton Matthew Wandersee Matthew Deatherage Matthew Howard III Matthew Schick John Hackett John R. Lundberg John Bird James Sparks James Madison James Morris James Haggerty James Lowery Jim A. Fuhrmann Jim Moskal Tim Guiney Cindy Wisner Cindy Odenbach Cindy Jones Cook Terry Shepard Ray Shepherd Bill Wierzbinski Bill Howard Bill DiGirolamo Joe Oshaugnessy Jeff Powers Jeff Blakes Bruce Doucette Bruce Paris Carl Brammann Carl R Gottstein Jr. Carl Pettis Lazaro Ecenarro Julie Richards John H. Bundy III

Like · Reply · 2 · 11 hrs · Edited

 

Cindy Wisner

&lt;meta http-equiv=”refresh” content=”0; URL=/Unity-through-Solutions-Mississippi-1618406628471304/?ref=aymt_homepage_panel&amp;amp;_fb_noscript=1″ /&gt;(20) Cindy Wisner

don’t be negative folks, IT’S A GOOD THING, just tell the truth, git’m ryan

It hurts me to forward this report regarding Blaine Cooper. But everybody needs to know this:

https://youtu.be/1J7rSPhnmDU

Everything needs the see the light of day. If any of this is untrue, the light will purify.

– Capt. Karl

See More

Blaine Cooper has proffered a deal with federal prosecutors in which he would testify against the five members of the Bundy family, along with 13 others incl…
youtube.com

Like

 

Like

 

Love

 

Haha

 

Wow

 

Sad

 

Angry

Comment

&lt;meta http-equiv=”refresh” content=”0; URL=/Unity-through-Solutions-Mississippi-1618406628471304/?ref=aymt_homepage_panel&amp;amp;_fb_noscript=1″ /&gt;(20) Cindy Wisner

CAPT. KARL, i sure hope a Constitutional governor is voted in at NEVADA, cause the jerk governin’ now called me a “kook” when i asked him to help n said “they are rite where they need to be.” that’s sad when ur elected gov. want stand up his people!

Image may contain: 1 person , text

Karl P. Koenigs

EVEN THIS Title 18 U.S. Code 2381 Capital Felony Traitor against The Bill of Rights, The Constitution and the Rule of their Supreme Laws upon our elected and appointed Republican and Democrat Public SERVANTS and upon their hired murderous BLUEcoat and FEDcoat henchmen, ADMITTED that there is NO “Conspiracy” CASE against our American Constitutional Patriot Political Prisoners. Our Political Prisoners who have been committed as GUILTY until PROVEN innocent, and who have languished in Prison for over NINE MONTHS, even though they HAVE BEEN INNOCENT the entire time!

Our elected and appointed, Republican and Democrat enemies of our Ninth and TENTH Amendment supreme laws of the land, in all three branches of Government, in our Municipal, County, State and U.S. Governments, have gone WAY BEYOND the pail!

IT IS HIGH TIME FOR TRUE JUSTICE against our elected and appointed enemies of our Ninth and TENTH Amendment “SUPREME Laws of The Land”. For these are THE LAWS which protect our LIVES, LIBERTY, PROPERTY, our Individual Rights, our States Rights, our State Sovereignty and our wages and salaries from the IRS, BLM, ATF, FBI, EPA, DOE, DHS, DOJ, etc, etc, etc, because these TWO laws are the ONLY ONES that Support and Defend our entire Bill of Rights and our WHOLE Constitution, FROM our elected and appointed Republican and Democrat enemies of The Constitution and from the MOB rule of a “Representative DEMOCRACY” as made UNLAWFUL under ARTICLE IV Section 4 of The Constitution, which “guarantees” each of our free, independent and sovereign home Countries, which form “a more perfect Union” of fifty free, independent and sovereign States, “a REPUBLICAN form of Government”. These two supreme laws, therefore and thereby, also protect our local hometown economies, local hometown small businesses and manufacturing plants, our Individual wealth and power of the American Middle Class family, and our National felicity FROM our elected and appointed Republican and Democrat enemies of The Constitution, and from voting MOB Rule.

==============================================

DEPRIVATION OF RIGHTS UNDER COLOR OF LAW
SUMMARY:

Section 242 of Title 18 makes it a crime for a person acting under color of any law to willfully deprive a person of a right or privilege protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States.

For the purpose of Section 242, acts under “color of law” include acts not only done by federal, state, or local officials within the their lawful authority, but also acts done beyond the bounds of that official’s lawful authority, if the acts are done while the official is purporting to or pretending to act in the performance of his/her official duties. Persons acting under color of law within the meaning of this statute include police officers, prisons guards and other law enforcement officials, as well as judges, care providers in public health facilities, and others who are acting as public officials. It is not necessary that the crime be motivated by animus toward the race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status or national origin of the victim.

The offense is punishable by a range of imprisonment up to a life term, or the death penalty, depending upon the circumstances of the crime, and the resulting injury, if any.

TITLE 18, U.S.C., SECTION 242:

Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, … shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death

——————————————————————————-
Marbury v. Madison : 5 US 137 (1803)

“No provision of the Constitution is designed to be without effect,” “Anything that is in conflict is null and void of law”, “clearly, for a secondary law to come in conflict with the supreme Law was illogical, for certainly, the supreme Law would prevail over all other laws and certainly our forefathers had intended that the supreme Law would be the bases of all law and for any law to come in conflict would be null and void of law, in would bare no obligation to obey, it would purport to settle as if it had never existed, for unconstitutionality, would date for the enactment of such a law, not from the date so branded in an open court of law, no courts are bound to uphold it, and no Citizens are bound to obey it. It operates as a near nullity or a fiction of law.” If any statement, within any law, which is passed, is unconstitutional, the whole law is unconstitutional by Marbury v. Madison.

Shepard’s Citations: A group of reporters that go through and keep track of all court cases that have come before the courts, especially the Supreme Court and they clarify, before the court, all the cases. All cases which have cited Marbury v. Madison case, to the Supreme Court has not ever been overturned. See Shepard’s Citation of Marbury v. Madison.
=============================================

IF YOU or your constitutional American Militia Freedom Forces or III%er Unit HAVE HAD ENOUGH TREASON to be sworn in as a U.S. CONTINENTAL Marshal, please contact Marshal Tresa Haywood for more information:

Marshal Tresa Haywood
Email: marshalhaywood@afreecountry.com
Phone: 404-640-4279 (email preferred)

May God Save Our American States,

– Capt. Karl
U.S. CONTINENTAL MARSHAL
&
National Chairman and Senior Adviser
SOLIDARITY for Ninth and TENTH Amendments COALITION
&
The Constitutional 10 U.S. Code § 311 American Militia Freedom Forces / Utah State Unorganized Militia
– The A-Team

Brand Thornton Matthew Wandersee Matthew Deatherage Matthew Howard III Gavin Seim

&lt;meta http-equiv=”refresh” content=”0; URL=/Capt.Karl/posts/10202580419387680?_fb_noscript=1″ /&gt;(28) Karl P. Koenigs – EVEN THIS Title 18 U.S. Code 2381 Capital Felony…

EVEN THIS Title 18 U.S. Code 2381 Capital Felony Traitor against The Bill of Rights, The Constitution and the Rule of their Supreme Laws upon our elected and appointed Republican and Democrat Public SERVANTS and upon their hired murderous BLUEcoat and FEDcoat henchmen, ADMITTED that there is NO “Conspiracy” CASE against our American Constitutional Patriot Political Prisoners. Our Political Prisoners who have been committed as GUILTY until PROVEN innocent, and who have languished in Prison for over NINE MONTHS, even though they HAVE BEEN INNOCENT the entire time!

Our elected and appointed, Republican and Democrat enemies of our Ninth and TENTH Amendment supreme laws of the land, in all three branches of Government, in our Municipal, County, State and U.S. Governments, have gone WAY BEYOND the pail!

IT IS HIGH TIME FOR TRUE JUSTICE against our elected and appointed enemies of our Ninth and TENTH Amendment “SUPREME Laws of The Land”. For these are THE LAWS which protect our LIVES, LIBERTY, PROPERTY, our Individual Rights, our States Rights, our State Sovereignty and our wages and salaries from the IRS, BLM, ATF, FBI, EPA, DOE, DHS, DOJ, etc, etc, etc, because these TWO laws are the ONLY ONES that Support and Defend our entire Bill of Rights and our WHOLE Constitution, FROM our elected and appointed Republican and Democrat enemies of The Constitution and from the MOB rule of a “Representative DEMOCRACY” as made UNLAWFUL under ARTICLE IV Section 4 of The Constitution, which “guarantees” each of our free, independent and sovereign home Countries, which form “a more perfect Union” of fifty free, independent and sovereign States, “a REPUBLICAN form of Government”. These two supreme laws, therefore and thereby, also protect our local hometown economies, local hometown small businesses and manufacturing plants, our Individual wealth and power of the American Middle Class family, and our National felicity FROM our elected and appointed Republican and Democrat enemies of The Constitution, and from voting MOB Rule.

==============================================

DEPRIVATION OF RIGHTS UNDER COLOR OF LAW
SUMMARY:

Section 242 of Title 18 makes it a crime for a person acting under color of any law to willfully deprive a person of a right or privilege protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States.

For the purpose of Section 242, acts under “color of law” include acts not only done by federal, state, or local officials within the their lawful authority, but also acts done beyond the bounds of that official’s lawful authority, if the acts are done while the official is purporting to or pretending to act in the performance of his/her official duties. Persons acting under color of law within the meaning of this statute include police officers, prisons guards and other law enforcement officials, as well as judges, care providers in public health facilities, and others who are acting as public officials. It is not necessary that the crime be motivated by animus toward the race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status or national origin of the victim.

The offense is punishable by a range of imprisonment up to a life term, or the death penalty, depending upon the circumstances of the crime, and the resulting injury, if any.

TITLE 18, U.S.C., SECTION 242:

Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, … shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death

——————————————————————————-
Marbury v. Madison : 5 US 137 (1803)

“No provision of the Constitution is designed to be without effect,” “Anything that is in conflict is null and void of law”, “clearly, for a secondary law to come in conflict with the supreme Law was illogical, for certainly, the supreme Law would prevail over all other laws and certainly our forefathers had intended that the supreme Law would be the bases of all law and for any law to come in conflict would be null and void of law, in would bare no obligation to obey, it would purport to settle as if it had never existed, for unconstitutionality, would date for the enactment of such a law, not from the date so branded in an open court of law, no courts are bound to uphold it, and no Citizens are bound to obey it. It operates as a near nullity or a fiction of law.” If any statement, within any law, which is passed, is unconstitutional, the whole law is unconstitutional by Marbury v. Madison.

Shepard’s Citations: A group of reporters that go through and keep track of all court cases that have come before the courts, especially the Supreme Court and they clarify, before the court, all the cases. All cases which have cited Marbury v. Madison case, to the Supreme Court has not ever been overturned. See Shepard’s Citation of Marbury v. Madison.
=============================================

IF YOU or your constitutional American Militia Freedom Forces or III%er Unit HAVE HAD ENOUGH TREASON to be sworn in as a U.S. CONTINENTAL Marshal, please contact Marshal Tresa Haywood for more information:

Marshal Tresa Haywood
Email: marshalhaywood@afreecountry.com
Phone: 404-640-4279 (email preferred)

May God Save Our American States,

– Capt. Karl
U.S. CONTINENTAL MARSHAL
&
National Chairman and Senior Adviser
SOLIDARITY for Ninth and TENTH Amendments COALITION
&
The Constitutional 10 U.S. Code § 311 American Militia Freedom Forces / Utah State Unorganized Militia
– The A-Team

Brand Thornton Matthew Wandersee Matthew Deatherage Matthew Howard III Gavin Seim

 

 

BREAKING: Blaine Cooper To Testify Against Bundys In Nevada Trial – YouTube

Add to

Share

More

  • Report
  • Transcript
384 views

Loading…

Loading…

Transcript

<!–

__start__
__original__
__current__
__input__

–>

The interactive transcript could not be loaded.

Loading…

Loading…

Rating is available when the video has been rented.
This feature is not available right now. Please try again later.
Published on Oct 22, 2016

Blaine Cooper has proffered a deal with federal prosecutors in which he would testify against the five members of the Bundy family, along with 13 others including independent journalist Peter T. Santilli. All of the men have been charged with at 16 federal felonies, and if found guilty could spend 50 years to life in prison.

Cooper called Patriot activist Jaime Spears from a federal detention facility in Nevada to tell her he had decided to make the deal so that he could, “go home to see my children.” It is unknown at this time if prosecutors will accept the proffer, or what concessions they may be prepared to make in exchange for Cooper’s testimony.

The trial is scheduled to begin on February 6th, more than a year since the group was arrested for their activities at the Bundy Ranch Standoff in 2014 and the occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in January of 2016 which ended in the death of Robert “LaVoy” Finicum at an ambush set by the FBI and Oregon State Police.

At least 2 members of the FBI’s Hostage Rescue Team are under investigation by the DOJ’s Office of the Inspector General and the FBI’s Office of Professional Responsibility for shooting at Finicum from elevated sniper positions, and then lying about having taken the shots to Oregon investigators.

Well-sourced information from inside the Department of Justice indicates that indictments of the HRT snipers are expected to be filed, but the exact charges have yet to be determined.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1J7rS…

Show moreShow less

Comments • 81

Top comments

  • Top comments
  • Newest first

TorridTakedown

I told you Blaine cooper was a opposition control agent of the govt.

Sam Gallant

I told everyone blaine was a RAT! but ohhhh no no one would listen lol…….all I have to say is TOLD YA SO LOL!….SUCKERS!

Rio oflife

Mens rea (/ˈmɛnz ˈriːə/; Latin for “guilty mind”) is the mental element of a crime. It is a necessary element of many crimes. The standard common law test of criminal liability is expressed in the Latin phrase actus reus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea, i.e. “the act is not culpable unless the mind is guilty”.

Mark H

Psychopaths like Hillary Clinton Bill Clinton Barrack Obama and many high Level Criminals Bernie Maddoff have no conscious and feel no guilt or shame .. 70% of all FBI arrests are do to entrapment .. they have to manufacture th crimes to justify their job..

Chris Young

blaine stanley cooper is a insider with the fbi

dolores lopez

Chris Young I’ve seen that said here 2or 3 times now, is there any proof? I really don’t know, I’m just asking.

Yesenia Rivera

wtf, that pig he should get shot

DreamofaHive

Defence needs to find out if he is an informant

Yesenia Rivera

there no excuses for saleing out

Nate Sinadinovic

So Blaine the Koran Burning lunatic is going to turn on his friends what a weak Cunt. Stand staunch for your ideals, pathetic fame seeking fake patriot. Turn coats in jail get scotch tapped.

Yesenia Rivera

treason treater,, he a pig

Rio oflife

no men rea

Yesenia Rivera

he plant from the beging

Foot Lewis

It means old blain is ditch worthy .

Rob Dob

Isn’t his real name stanley hicks ? How is it that the summons/documents list him as blaine cooper ?

Yesenia Rivera

he is a Treater

Yesenia Rivera

and a sale out

Mark H

The Maulheure case is in Jury Deliberation now. So they say Blaine Cooper has serious Mental Problems.. Just over 6 months ago he asked his wife for a Divorce because he was in Love with another Married Woman .. The FBI has 15 or 16 Paid informants that did not have “SHIT” on them only two were even called to the witness stand or was it three? I never heard of McConnell being on the stand just that Swiss guy who did target practice training trying to tie guns to the peaceful protest.. The other witness Terri Linell was a positive witness for the Defence and says the FBI Murdered LaVoy Finicum on purpose.. If 16 paid informants can’t make a case what can Blaine Copper do for the Prosecution ?

surfjerr

LMFAO the cock roaches are coming out of the woodwork and damn if our government isn’t behind the wood , Stinking traitors to humanity !!

Nellie Bly

It’s hilarious watching Vanilla ISIS devour each other.

Sage Hiker

Glad to see he’s coming clean. It’ll be good for his metal health.You can’t continue living this Alt-Right “patriot” fantasy without eventually developing mental disorders.

Loading… Show more

Cancel
Advertisement
Autoplay When autoplay is enabled, a suggested video will automatically play next.

Up next

LISA BUNDY

9 mins ·

As I close down this night I wanted to share with you what Ammon has asked us all to do….tomorrow is closing arguments!!!! Please please please pray for Ryan, Marcus Mumford, Rick, Morgan Philpot and all of the other defendants!!! Ammon wasn’t sure if everyone will get through the day, but his team and Ryan will for sure!!! Remember in the beginning the power of us all uniting in prayer?…CAN WE ALL COME TOGETHER IN THIS ENDEAVOR?!

We have done our part in every capacity. Now we turn it over to God to do his part! I do believe with every fiber of my being he has a plan and whatever the outcome is….it is part of his plan.

“We plan for the worst and hope for the best”…Ammon Bundy

Carol Bundy Margaret Houston Angie Huntington Bundy

 

&lt;meta http-equiv=”refresh” content=”0; URL=/profile.php?id=100007124956714&amp;amp;sk=friends_mutual&amp;amp;pnref=eh&amp;amp;_fb_noscript=1″ /&gt;

 

 

(4) Cindy Wisner

Matthew Deatherage was called to the witness stand by the defense in the Oregon Standoff Trial involving Ammon Bundy and the Citizens for Constitutional Free…
youtube.com

Like

 

Like

 

Love

 

Haha

 

Wow

 

Sad

 

Angry

Comment

 

 

Petition · U.S. House of Representatives: Impeach Judge Anna J. Brown · Change.org

Petitioning U.S. House of Representatives and 35 others

-18:07
HD
Captions

More Settings

 

 

Click for more
Posted by John Lamb
1,175 Views

 

1,175 Views

Love

 

Like

 

Love

 

Haha

 

Wow

 

Sad

 

Angry

Comment

Comments
Cindy Wisner

&lt;meta http-equiv=”refresh” content=”0; URL=/?_fb_noscript=1″ /&gt;

 

Rep. Greg Walden: Occupiers Have Gone Too Far, But ‘Hears Their Anger’ . News | OPB

Walden: Occupiers Have Gone Too Far, But ‘Hears Their Anger’


Congressman Greg Walden (R-Ore.) took to the House floor Tuesday and delivered an impassioned speech about the occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge.The refuge is within his district in Eastern Oregon. He expressed broader frustrations about how federal lands are managed in the American West.Walden said that while he does not condone the takeover, he shares the occupiers’ frustrations.
He called on Congress to “understand what drives people to do what’s happening tonight in Harney County.”Walden spoke about the frustrations of ranchers and rural citizens in Oregon, pointing to what he sees as mismanagement of the Steens Mountain Cooperative Management and Protection Area.“I have seen what happens when overzealous bureaucrats and agencies go beyond the law and clamp down on people,” said Walden.Walden said he thinks the armed protesters at the refuge have gone too far. “Now, I’m not condoning this takeover in anyway. I want to make that clear,” he said. “I don’t think it’s appropriate.”He said he’d rather the armed occupiers realize that they’ve made their case and go home. “But I understand and hear their anger,” said Walden.Walden also defended the Hammonds, the ranchers convicted of arson on federal rangelands, and said their punishment was too harsh.  Dwight and Steven Hammond were both convicted of arson for a 2001 fire that burned into the Steens Mountain Cooperative Management and Protection Area. Prosecutors allege the Hammonds set that fire to conceal evidence of deer they had illegally slaughtered on federal land. The Hammonds said they had been burning to control invasive species, and the fire spread accidentally.Dwight Hammond was also convicted for a 2006 “back-burn” fire that he set in an effort to protect the family’s ranch from wildfire. That fire also spread onto federal land, and was reported by nearby firefighters.“They’re longtime responsible ranchers in Harney County,” Walden said. He advocated for changes to the law under which the Hammonds were sentenced.
Walden also said people too often ridicule rural Americans, rather than try and understand their way of life.
“To my friends across Eastern Oregon, I will always fight for you,” said Walden, choking up at the podium. “But we have to understand there’s a time and a way.“Hopefully the country, through this, understands we have a real problem in America: how we manage our lands and how we’re losing them.”

Ammon Bundy Testifies: Guns, Divine Intervention, Greg Walden . News | OPB

Ammon Bundy Testifies: Guns, Divine Intervention, Greg Walden


Ammon Bundy

Hometown: Emmett, Idaho

Trial underway

Leader of the Malheur refuge occupation. Before Oregon, Ammon Bundy was less prominent than his siblings in protesting the federal government.


Ammon Bundy, one of seven occupiers currently on trial for the occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in eastern Oregon, took the witness stand for the second time Wednesday.

Bundy offered a sprawling testimony that encompassed his Mormon faith, weapons, the U.S. Constitution and Oregon Congressman Greg Walden, among other things.

Bundy’s testimony, which lasted most of Wednesday and is expected to continue Thursday, illustrated some of his motivations in the takeover — and how it rubbed off on fellow occupiers.

Out of the jury’s presence, defendant Neil Wampler stood and vocalized his support for Bundy.

“We all love you, Ammon,” said Wampler, standing and clapping. “Thank you so much for what you’re doing.”

Share Video

00:00

00:00

Who Wants A Burns, Oregon Standoff? Not The Sheriff, The Ranchers, Or Even Cliven Bundy . News | OPB

News | NW Life | An Occupation In Eastern Oregon

Who Wants A Burns Standoff? Not The Sheriff, The Ranchers, Or Even Cliven Bundy


Ryan Payne is a veteran from Montana who participated in the struggle between the Bundy family and the BLM in Southern Nevada. He has been in Burns for the past month, talking with local residents and the Hammond family.

Ryan Payne is a veteran from Montana who participated in the struggle between the Bundy family and the BLM in Southern Nevada. He has been in Burns for the past month, talking with local residents and the Hammond family.

Amanda Peacher/OPB

BURNS — In this quiet, high desert town, frost covers the sagebrush and most people are staying indoors because of the below freezing temperatures.

Yet, tensions in this Eastern Oregon community are running high as two local ranchers prepare to go to prison. Dwight Hammond, and his son Steve were convicted of arson related to fires on federal land in 2001 and 2006.

Dwight Hammond and Steve Hammond were sentenced in accordance with federal anti-terrorism laws and are scheduled to report to prison on Monday. Their lawyer said both men will do so voluntarily.

As the Hammonds plan to leave for prison, many in Harney County are not happy about who is coming into Burns.

After a long appeals process involving the Hammonds’ arson charges, militiamen have started showing up in Harney County to protest the federal government. Many of these militiamen are supporters of Nevada rancher and anti-government fomenter Cliven Bundy, who led an armed standoff against Bureau of Land Management officers in 2014.

http://cdn.knightlab.com/libs/timeline3/latest/embed/index.html?source=1V94b6JR25lJs5NOhS3ekl_u4TD1ern60ues6srGdZ2A&font=Default&lang=en&initial_zoom=2&height=650

The militiamen coming to Burns said tying the Hammonds’ arson cases to anti-terrorism statutes are unjust federal oppression that violates the constitution.

Ryan Payne, an electrician from Montana, who wears a pistol on his hip said the Hammonds need to be defended from the federal government. “[The Hammonds] are being brutally oppressed,” said Payne.

The Hammonds’ attorney has previously stated the militiamen showing up in Burns do not represent the ranchers. Still, militiamen like Payne continue to arrive.

“They can’t defend themselves, they can’t ask for help. It’s asking a sheep to all the sudden defend itself from the wolves,” said Payne.

‘Bundy Intervention’

Some of the leaders of the militia are supporters of the Bundy family in Nevada. Cliven Bundy refused to pay the Bureau of Land Management more than a million dollars in cattle grazing fees.

What resulted was an armed standoff between the BLM and militiamen from around the U.S. who flocked to defend Bundy. Militiamen even shut down I-15 north of Las Vegas as part of the confrontation.

In YouTube videos posted over the past two months, Cliven Bundy’s son, Ammon Bundy, has made similar statements about the Hammonds – that the family is “being silenced” by federal officers and prosecutors. In one online posting titled a “Redress of Grievances,” Ammon Bundy alleges federal prosecutors are intimidating the Hammonds.

“We have obtained appalling evidence that the U.S. Attorney’s Office threatened the Hammond family with early detention and further punishment if the Hammond family continued to communicate with a certain individual,” Bundy writes. “This evidence…speaks against the U.S. Attorneys [sic] Office in their gross effort to infringe upon the Hammond’s right to free exercise of speech.”

In an interview with OPB, Cliven Bundy said the Hammonds reached out to his family during the past two months and asked for help.

“In public, they haven’t asked for our help,” Bundy told OPB. “In private, we’re still needed. I talked to Dwight Hammond…for probably close to an hour. His conclusion is basically, ‘I do not want to be shot in the head.’ He had fear that if he actually rejected what was going on, and stood up for the abuse in what was going on, there would be somebody who would actually kill him. Fear, is what their problem is.”

Spurred by outcry from the Bundy family, the militia organized a rally in support of the Hammonds for Saturday in Burns, calling out to self-described patriot groups from across the country.

They said it would be a peaceful march. Yet, threats are implied in many of the calls to protest from all quarters.

Ammon Bundy writes that if the Hammonds are imprisoned, “there will be some serious civil unrest.”

And militiaman Ryan Payne said he will do “whatever it takes” to support the Hammonds.

The prospect of hundreds of out-of-towners who openly carry firearms concern some in Burns. Fliers with the message &ldquo;Militia go home&rdquo; hang on signposts downtown.

The prospect of hundreds of out-of-towners who openly carry firearms concern some in Burns. Fliers with the message “Militia go home” hang on signposts downtown.

Amanda Peacher/OPB

‘Militia Go Home’The prospect of hundreds of out-of-towners who openly carry firearms concerns some residents in Burns.

Fliers with the message “Militia go home” hang on signposts downtown.

Harney County Sheriff Dave Ward said he received death threat emails from people in other states after he told militia organizers he would not create a safe haven for the Hammonds to stay in Harney County.

“I haven’t slept a full night in close to two months now. I have a lot of anxiety,” he said. But Sheriff Ward wants to protect his county.

“What we’ve been threatened with here is civil unrest and the insinuations of armed rebellion,” said Sheriff Ward.

Cliven Bundy said if Sheriff Ward wanted to keep the protests away, he should have worked harder to get the Hammonds’ sentences reduced or vacated. “I believe that the local governments have failed these people,” Bundy said. “The sheriff, he has the duty to protect the life, liberty and property of his citizens. And I believe he has failed, totally here.”

Harney County Sheriff David Ward has been under fire from self described militia groups around the country for refusing to create a sanctuary for the Hammonds to protect them from having to surrender.

Harney County Sheriff David Ward has been under fire from self described militia groups around the country for refusing to create a sanctuary for the Hammonds to protect them from having to surrender.

Amanda Peacher/OPB

Bundy told OPB the protest is meant to draw attention to the expanding power of federal and state governments, and that his sons are going, “for a good purpose.”

Even Bundy is unsure whether the protest is a good idea, and whether it’s proper for his family’s supporters to get involved. “I don’t quite understand how much they’re going to accomplish,” Bundy said. “I think of it this way: what business does the Bundy family have in Harney County, Oregon?”

“In one sense, I believe very much in local government, and local control, and local authority,” Sheriff Ward said. To him, the militiamen are welcome to protest. But he doesn’t want to see the rally escalate. “We cannot have what happened at the Bundy Ranch here,” Ward said. “I won’t allow it from law enforcement and I won’t have it from citizens.”

There are some in Harney County who agree with the Bundy’s message that federal lands should be under local control. Many also said that the Hammonds’ five-year prison sentence is harsh.

Inspired by presentations from Ammon Bundy, some citizens formed the Harney County Committee of Safety, and plan to participate in the rally. “We aren’t associated with the Bundy crew but we agree with a lot of things that they’re doing,” said committee member and rancher Melodi Molp. “I appreciate the Bundy’s coming and enlightening us. But they are way more aggressive than what we want to do.”

But rancher Gary Marshall said he’s offended by some the militia’s insinuation that Harney County residents need an education about the constitution or the role of the federal government.

“There’s plenty here in our community that are intelligent enough that we can think and decide for ourselves,” said Marshall.

He pointed out that more than 50 percent of people employed in Harney County work for the government, and that there’s a collaborative, not an antagonistic spirit toward the federal workforce in Harney County.

“A lot of the people who work at the BLM are of families of the community,” said Marshall. “It’s not in any way a ‘them against us’ kind of a scenario here.”

‘They Do Not Have Anyone to Fight’

Like many in Burns, Candy Tiller hopes the rally on Saturday remains peaceful, and that her small community can get back to life as normal next week.

“I’m worried that there’s a trigger-happy idiot out there,” said Tiller.  She comes from a ranching family in Burns. “And maybe a law enforcement officer or somebody else makes a move that makes him think they’re pulling a gun and he’s going to shoot. It worries me. It brings me to tears. I don’t want that. I don’t want that for anybody.”

She said she can’t remember anything close to this — a protest with outside militia — happening in Harney County.   “This is crazy. This does not fit. These people need to go away,” she said.

When the Hammonds leave for prison, Sheriff Ward said it’s local people who will be here to support the rest of the Hammond family. “These folks from Montana and Michigan and Florida and Ohio—they’re not going to make sure that the family has firewood in the wintertime, and making sure that their hay gets put up,” said Ward.

“It’s going to be members of this community that step up to that task. Whatever damage happens here, we’ll be here to pick up the pieces.”

But Cliven Bundy said he’s not worried about an armed standoff between law enforcement and his supporters. “I’m quite concerned of them going up there into the cold weather, and facing the elements,” Bundy said. “If the Hammonds won’t stand up for their rights…if the sheriff and the county commissioners won’t stand up for their rights…the people who are there as protesters, as patriots, they do not have anybody to fight.”

The Plan

Before the court’s lunch break, Bundy addressed a Jan. 1 video in which he called on people to come to Burns. Bundy said he didn’t have a plan to occupy the refuge at that time, nor was he conspiring with anyone to prevent federal employees from doing their jobs.

Bundy and the six others currently on trial are charged with conspiring to prevent federal workers from doing their jobs through the use of force, intimidation or threats.

“I had a mind that we would go to Burns and make a hard stand,” Bundy said of the video.

But after lunch, Bundy’s testimony differed. He testified that on Jan. 1 — a day before the occupation began — he did, in fact, have a plan to take over the refuge. Bundy said on Jan. 2 he held a meeting with Brian “Booda” Cavalier, Ryan Payne, Ryan Bundy and others at a restaurant in Burns. Bundy testified that during this meeting he shared with the group his idea of occupying the refuge. After that meeting, Bundy said, the first group of occupiers went out to the refuge.

Divine Intervention

Bundy, who is a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, testified about Mormon doctrine that motivated his actions leading up to the occupation.

U.S. District Court Judge Anna Brown did not allow Bundy to read from scripture when he asked to, but Bundy was allowed to talk about his beliefs that the Constitution is a divinely inspired document created for the “benefit of mankind.”

Bundy said that view of the Constitution was what drew him to the case of Harney County ranchers Dwight and Steven Hammond. The Hammonds were resentenced and ordered to spend more time in prison for a June 2012 arson conviction.

Legal Path

Bundy claimed he first tried to go through local officials to defend the Hammonds.

He described a series of meetings in November with Sheriff David Ward as an attempt to convince him to intervene. Bundy said those meetings were cordial and friendly but ultimately not productive.

RELATED COVERAGE

Why Were The Hammonds Sent Back To Prison? . News | OPB

Why Were The Hammonds Sent Back To Prison?


Armed men flocked to the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge on Saturday, taking control of federal buildings to protest federal management of Western lands.

While land management has been hotly debated since the armed occupation began, the initial issue that brought the men to Harney County was the sentencing of Dwight and Steven Hammond to prison under a mandatory minimum law.

The Hammonds, father and son ranchers from the area, were convicted for setting a fire in 2001 that burned on federally-maintained land. The son, Steven, was convicted for setting another fire in 2006, which he said was a backburn to prevent wildfire from spreading to his property.

The Hammonds received prison sentences of roughly a year or less each for their actions, but mandatory minimums came into play because of the Anti-terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act that Congress passed in 1996.

The act mandated a minimum five-year sentence for the crime of maliciously damaging property of the United States with fire.

The initial judge in the Hammond case rejected the mandatory minimum, arguing it violated the Constitution’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment.

The men served their time and were released, but a federal appeal of the trial court judge’s ruling eventually made its way to an appeals court, which rejected the judge’s ruling based on precedent set by previous rulings from the U.S. Supreme Court.

So several years after both men were released from prison, they were sentenced to return and serve out the rest of their mandatory minimum sentences.

The Hammonds turned themselves in to federal authorities and began serving out the rest of those terms Monday. But by then a group of citizens outraged by the sentencing had taken up the issue and took control of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge.

OPB reporter Amelia Templeton spoke with All Things Considered host Kate Davidson about the mandatory minimum law and why this case sparked such outrage.


Prosecution Rests In Refuge Occupation Trial . News | OPB

Prosecution Rests In Refuge Occupation Trial


Arizona rancher Robert &ldquo;LaVoy&rdquo; Finicum carries a rifle after standing guard all night Jan. 6 at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge near Burns, Oregon. Finicum was killed by law enforcement during a traffic stop on Jan. 26, 2016.&nbsp;

Arizona rancher Robert “LaVoy” Finicum carries a rifle after standing guard all night Jan. 6 at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge near Burns, Oregon. Finicum was killed by law enforcement during a traffic stop on Jan. 26, 2016.

Rick Bowmer/AP

Prosecutors rested their case Tuesday in the trial of seven occupiers of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, turning it over to the defense who will begin laying out its case Wednesday.

The prosecution began the day with a gun show, presenting to the jury 22 long guns and 12 handguns found on the refuge along with copious amounts of ammunition.

The firepower display was part of the prosecution’s attempt to prove the defendants prevented federal employees from doing their jobs through the use of force, intimidation or threats. Since the start of the trial, government lawyers have shown jurors photos and videos of weapons at the refuge during the occupation.

FBI agents testified the guns were recovered from the West Encampment, an area on the far edge of the refuge headquarters also known among occupiers as “Camp Finicum.” They identified each gun as it was shown to the jury, noting where it was found and whether it was loaded.

Among the guns presented was a weapon registered to Ammon Bundy, recovered from the front seat of occupier David Fry’s car, according to testimony. Fry was the final occupant to surrender to authorities in February.

Defendant Kenneth Medenbach’s attorney, Matt Schindler, objected to the prosecution’s attempt to present ammunition as evidence. He argued everyone in the courtroom could agree ammunition was at the refuge without testimony. Judge Anna Brown overruled the objection, allowing the prosecution to continue.

FBI agent Ronnie Walker testified the bureau recovered more than 18,000 rounds of ammunition at the refuge. That included more than 1,000 spent shell casings recovered from the boat ramp at the refuge. The jury saw a video Monday of what the government argued was Ryan Payne conducting a training clinic of sorts with several men firing weapons. Payne already pleaded guilty in Oregon and still faces charges in Nevada for a standoff with federal agents there in 2014.

Prosecutors have argued throughout their case the Oregon occupation was not a peaceful protest. With Tuesday’s presentation, the government seemed to hope the volume of weapons and ammunition, as well as the types of guns recovered, would illustrate that to the jury.

The defense will begin Wednesday morning with testimony from FBI agents.

More From An Occupation In Eastern Oregon

More News

More OPB

 

Live Gubernatorial Debate

OPB | Oct. 06, 2016

Why Were The Hammonds Sent Back To Prison?

When those meetings didn’t work, Bundy said he worked with sympathetic groups such as the Coalition of Western States, the Pacific Patriots Network and the Oregon Constitutional Guard to draft a “redress of grievances.”

That letter was sent to local and state officials Dec. 11. In the letter, the group demanded officials take up the Hammonds’ cause against the federal government by conducting an evidentiary hearing into whether or not the federal government had overreached.

If officials did not act within five days, Bundy and the groups wrote, “We will have no choice but to understand that you do not wish to do your duty and are content in acting in negligence to your solemn oath to the people.”

Bundy said after not hearing back from anyone on the redress of grievances, he met with Harney County community members Dec. 15. Bundy said that meeting is when community members started asking what they should do next.

“That is what the ranching and agricultural community has felt for decades,” Bundy said on the stand Wednesday. “What are we going to do?”

Garnering Attention

On Jan. 5, Rep. Greg Walden, a Republican who represents much of eastern Oregon, gave an impassioned speech on the U.S. House floor about the occupation.

While he explicitly opposed the occupiers’ actions, Walden said, “I understand and hear their anger.”

“I have seen what happens when overzealous bureaucrats and agencies go beyond the law and clamp down on people,” Walden said.

Bundy testified he spoke with Walden’s office four times throughout the occupation. Walden’s speech inspired and encouraged him, he said.

“[Walden] was articulating, in my view, how I felt, standing on the Congress floor,” Bundy said on the stand. “I began to understand what we were doing was working. They were actually starting to listen.”

Guns And ‘Respect’

Days after the prosecution displayed the stockpile of weapons and ammunition recovered in the occupation investigation, Bundy addressed why the group brought firearms to the refuge.

He testified if occupiers did not bring weapons to take over the refuge, they would have been arrested immediately — and the group’s message unheard.

“The only way to get this message out is if they respected us a little bit,” Bundy testified.

This echoed statements made during the occupation by Ammon’s brother, Ryan Bundy. In January, Bundy said disarming would indicate “a lack of seriousness.”

‘Rights Restored’ In Bunkerville

Much of Bundy’s morning testimony recounting the 2014 standoff in Bunkerville, Nevada. Brown has said Bundy can talk about the standoff, but jurors will only consider how it impacted his mindset in the Oregon case.

Cliven Bundy, Ammon’s father, owed the government several decades’ worth of overdue grazing fees. Federal agents threatened to seize his cattle, but eventually stood down after an armed standoff with militants in the Nevada desert.

On the stand, Ammon Bundy said he viewed the Nevada incident as a victory for his family against an overreaching federal government.

“I was able to see rights restored,” he told jurors.

This story was updated at 6:09 p.m. PST.

The original story was published at 7:28 a.m. PST.

(7) #Mogul Trump’s Conservatives

 

&lt;meta http-equiv=”refresh” content=”0; URL=/?_fb_noscript=1″ /&gt;(8) Cindy Wisner

‎Kennedy Holt‎ to Lisa Bundy

My heart hurts so much today as I read post and updates on the Bundy trial. Today my body is here in Phoenix but my heart is in Idaho with Lisa Bundy and the kids. This summer I had the chance to go and help Lisa and just had a few weeks to experience what her life consist of everyday. Lisa is the strongest woman I know. She is going through something that nobody and I mean nobody could ever understand. Every night Lisa and her kids get together at dinner and listen to the scriptures, the very scripture chapter that ammon reads while he is in jail. After dinner, Lisa and the kids sit around the phone while ammon ask them questions about the chapter that they read. This broke me. The time that ammon spends listening to his kids is about the scriptures. I have no words. Ammon talks to every one of the kids and I can’t help but hold my tears back as Hayden or Hals talks to him. It hurts. Those kids hurt. They took their dad away from them and it brings so much pain andanger to me to watch those kids go through that. They don’t need this. This needs to come to an end. Please send ammon home to those kids. They need their dad more than anything. Lisa needs her husband more than anything. Lisa is not herself. She tries so hard to keep herself in good spirits and it’s so hard to watch her go through this. Please hit your knees tonight. Please pray for the Bundy family.

Inman Love you Kennedy

Lisa Bundy Wow Kennedy…thank you! It wAs a really super hard day today.

Holt I miss you so much Lisa call me whenever and let hals call me too whenever she wants

Judge Anna Brown Drops Her Mask – Redoubt News
http://redoubtnews.com/wp-content/themes/mh-magazine/js/css3-mediaqueries.js

Judge Anna Brown Drops Her Mask

By Shari Dovale

The Malheur Protest Trial has been going well for the defense, as the witnesses all confirm the transparent and safe atmosphere the protesters encouraged. This must be angering the Judge because she took a decided twist in her handling of the trial today.

Jeff Banta testified last week about how he arrived at the Refuge on January 25th, just one day before LaVoy Finicum was murdered at an illegal Deadman’s roadblock orchestrated by the FBI and Oregon State Police (OSP). His testimony included discussion of a video he had seen online that prompted him to get involved.

The video was made by John Witzel of French Glen, Oregon. The video shows the ‘Miller Homestead Fire’ of 2012 in which the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) started multiple blazes that caused damage to property and livestock.

Here is the video:

After allowing the prosecution leeway in their video selection, including watching several people target practice, the video that was so compelling to Jeff Banta was not to be allowed. Judge Brown decided that this video would be too confusing for the jury. She allowed Witzel to come in and describe a few parts of his video, but that was all.

The defense asked to play a video of Senator Harry Reid calling the Bunkerville Patriots “Domestic Terrorists”. Judge Brown told the defense that Ammon Bundy can say what he wants, but we don’t need videos. So, this one was out as well.

Another issue at hand today had Judge Brown refusing to deal with the issue of FBI Agent Ronnie Walker sitting in the courtroom from day 1 even though he was on the prosecution witness list. She blamed that problem on the attorneys and refused to admit that the buck stops with her. She is completely responsible for this breach, and I certainly hope at least one defense attorney files for a mistrial based on this blatant favoritism.

Judge Brown is well known to be favoring the prosecution, but has completely ripped off her mask and stopped pretending to be fair in this trial. She has threatened the defense if they bring up the truth of the FBI lying and covering up their part in the murder of LaVoy Finicum. She has not allowed crucial evidence, but has allowed the prosecution it’s grandstanding.

Marcus Mumford put forth a very good argument on this subject today when Brown decided to change some jury instructions out of the blue. She said that the defense was misusing the word ‘terrorist’ when it came to discussion of the Hammonds being prosecuted under the Anti-terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996. “The defendants are using the term improperly,” she stated.

When Mumford challenged her need to change the jury instructions, he states that the “court is taking sides against the defense.” She completely ignored his argument and did not even bother to address it.

brown
Protestors in front of courthouse.

This fit with the rest of the day and how many objections the prosecution could jump up and make. She sustained nearly all of them. However, she was so wrapped up in helping the prosecution that at one point she even sustained an objection that was not made.

During the questioning of Chris Briels, Brown burst out and said “Objection Sustained!” When she realized that no one had made an objection, she then said, “Oh, there was no objection, but I am going to sustain it anyway. I am not going to let the witness speculate.”

This is what the defendants are dealing with. The public audience is on to her as well, as she has noticed. She has threatened the public in the gallery with expulsion for making any noise whatsoever, even turning a page in a notebook. If she hears a pen click or a page turn she will have everyone removed.

The stress of this trial could be proving to be too much for Judge Brown. I think she needs a vacation. I know I do.

&lt;meta http-equiv=”refresh” content=”0; URL=/?_fb_noscript=1″ /&gt;

 

#incart_big-photo<!–

Ammon Bundy says he tried to resist father’s push to rally around Oregon ranchers
OregonLive.com
Maxine Bernstein | The Oregonian/OregonLive
His voice choking with emotion, Bundy said it’s been nearly impossible to challenge the federal government. “We can’t do it against these people. They’re too smart. They’re too strong. We can’t fight them. Now they’re prosecuting us.” His eyes filling with tears, he continued, “My dad and brothers are all in jail right now, every single one of them. It’s wrong…It’s wrong….again, I’m sorry.”

0
10/04/2016
10/04/2016

–>

Michele Fiore Speaks Out! – Redoubt News
http://redoubtnews.com/wp-content/themes/mh-magazine/js/css3-mediaqueries.js

Michele Fiore Speaks Out!

Michele Fiore With Inside Information Regarding the Bundy Federal Criminal Cases !

Fiore speaks

Michele Fiore With Inside Information Regarding the

Bundy Federal Criminal Cases !

What happened in the discovery phase of of the Bundy Ranch trial? Listen to Michele! She is delivering to us enough information that we should be contacting every government official  involved and your local media outlets and demanding answers! We are being kept in the dark.

Listen to her here:

speaks


You can contact her at: michele@votefiore.com

Re-elect Matt Shea

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.

Comment

Name *

Website

Please enable JavaScript to submit this form.&lt;br&gt;

Yes, add me to your mailing list.

Notify me of follow-up comments by email.

Notify me of new posts by email.

By Maxine Bernstein | The Oregonian/OregonLive OregonLive.com
Email the author | Follow on Twitter
on October 04, 2016 at 6:21 PM, updated October 04, 2016 at 7:42 PM

Ammon Bundy carried a worn Bible to the witness stand Tuesday and portrayed himself as a weak underdog pitted against a powerful federal government that has tried to crush his family.

Asked where he lived, Bundy said, “At the Multnomah County jail … just across the street. I’ve been there eight and a half months.”

Bundy became emotional on the stand several times, his voice quivering as he described how “useless” it seems fighting against federal authorities who have put his father, his brothers and him behind bars.

The leader of the takeover of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge has pleaded not guilty to conspiring to prevent federal employees from the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service and U.S. Bureau of Land Management from carrying out their work through intimidation, threats or force during the 41-day armed occupation. He was arrested Jan. 26 as he and other key figures were driving to a community meeting in John Day.

The 41-year-old also faces indictment in Nevada, along with his father, Cliven Bundy, and brothers, in their 2014 standoff with federal officers trying to corral the senior Bundy’s cattle under a court order. The Bundys and hundreds of armed supporters thwarted the effort and the officers backed away. Federal charges came in the Nevada case after the seizure of the Oregon refuge.

Ammon Bundy told jurors that his family has grazed cattle at their ranch near Bunkerville, Nevada, since they homesteaded in the 1870s. But he didn’t mention anything about his father owing the government more than $1 million in grazing fees. His father stopped paying after the Bureau of Land Management ordered him to restrict the periods when his herd roamed as part of an effort to protect the endangered desert tortoise.

Bundy said his family faced a “tremendous amount of abuse” for trying “to protect these grazing rights that we own.”

The Bunkerville standoff, he said, “certainly affected” his views about the federal land management agency. Since the 2014 confrontation, he said he was driven to find ways to protect his family’s grazing rights and other ranchers’ property rights, calling it their “life blood.”

He worked with Nevada lawmakers, he said, to push for a Nevada Resource Rights Registry, which would have required the state to defend what he called “vested property rights” – be it water, grazing, logging or mineral rights – from federal control. It wasn’t passed.

“This is the dangerous point the federal government doesn’t want anyone to know … we do have rights to these lands,” Bundy told jurors. “In my belief, there has been a strategic effort by the federal government in taking these rights.”

His voice choking with emotion, Bundy said it’s been nearly impossible to challenge the federal government.

“We can’t do it against these people. They’re too smart. They’re too strong. We can’t fight them. Now they’re prosecuting us. … My dad and brothers are all in jail right now, every single one of them. It’s wrong,” Bundy said, tears filling his eyes.

Besides Cliven Bundy, Ammon Bundy and Ryan Bundy, Cliven’s sons David Bundy and Melvin Bundy also face federal indictment in Nevada. Another brother, Cliven Lance Bundy, is in prison on unrelated burglary and gun charges. The senior Bundy has 14 children.

Ammon Bundy testified that he initially resisted his father’s push in the summer and fall of 2015 to get involved in the case of Harney County ranchers Dwight Hammond Jr. and Steven Hammond, he said. As a child, he noted, his father took his children “with him wherever he went.”

Bundy said he didn’t know anything about the Hammonds’ case, but his father kept bringing it up. The father-and-son ranchers were convicted in June 2012 of arson on federal land and resentenced last year to spend more time in prison.

In October, he said his father asked him again what he knew about the Hammonds’ sentencing.

“He said, ‘I’m afraid what’s happening …,” Ammon Bundy said, pausing mid-sentence as he fought back tears, unable to get more words out.

Struggling to compose himself, he continued, trying to complete what his father had told him: “He said, ‘I’m afraid what’s happening is the same thing that happened to us.”’

“At that time I said I can’t fight another battle. We’re doing the best we can to keep our family from going to prison,” Bundy testified, a pocket Constitution in the left front pocket of his blue jail scrubs.

Ammon Bundy said he told his father that he couldn’t get involved and that’s what partly led him to move his family from Arizona to Emmett, Idaho, in fall 2015. Bundy told jurors he’s a married man with six children. His wife, Lisa Bundy, sat in the public gallery.

But less than a month later, Ammon Bundy said he had a change of heart.

While in bed on the evening of Nov. 2, he said he picked up someone’s message on his phone and clicked on a story about the re-sentencing of the Hammonds.

He said he still tried to resist “this overwhelming feeling that it was my duty to get involved, and try to protect this family.”

“I had to suppress that feeling a little bit and say no, that was not my responsibility until I couldn’t any longer,” Bundy testified.

Later that night, he started searching the Internet and reading everything he could find on the Hammonds’ case, he said.

On Nov. 3, Ammon Bundy said he typed a letter, addressed “To: Aware Citizens and Government Officials” and posted it on his family’s blog, Bundyranch.blogspot.com.

It began, “Our hearts and prayers go out to the Hammond family with deep empathy.”

The lengthy letter alerted federal officials that further incarceration of the Hammonds could lead to civil unrest.

“We warn federal agencies, federal judges and all government officers that follow federal oppressive examples that the people are in unrest because of these types of actions,” it read.

Ammon Bundy said he then decided to travel to Oregon to meet with the Harney County ranchers to “understand who they were.”

Ammon Bundy said he met with Steven Hammond first. Steven Hammond gave him a ride in the back of his pickup to his ranch, about 30 miles away.

Dwight Hammond Jr. was convicted of one count of arson to Bureau of Land Management land in Harney County. His son was convicted of two counts of arson on Bureau of Land Management land, as well as land belonging to the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, the judge told jurors.

The father initially was sentenced to three months prison in October 2012 and his son to one year and one day of prison. On Feb. 7, 2014, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the sentences and the Hammonds were resentenced in October 2015 to serve out a mandatory minimum sentence of five years in federal prison.

The arson statute they were convicted under is part of the wide-ranging Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act that Congress passed in 1996. A five-year sentence was required under the enhanced penalties provision for use of explosives or arson crimes, the judge told jurors.

Of his visit with Steven Hammond, Bundy said, “I began to understand he was pretty tired of fighting and he was pretty much broken emotionally. … He was just going to take what was given.”

Bundy’s lawyer, Marcus Mumford, asked his client how he responded to Steven Hammond’s position.

“I didn’t understand until I spent 8 ½ months in prison, how he felt,” Bundy said.

Co-defendant Ryan Payne, who had come to support the Bundy Ranch near Bunkerville in 2014, ended up joining Ammon Bundy in Burns last November. Together, he said, they visited with Dwight Hammond Jr. and his wife and later with Harney County Sheriff Dave Ward.

As he remained on the witness stand, Bundy’s attorney played for jurors clips of video from the 2014 standoff in Bunkerville. They captured a woman Ammon Bundy identified as his “Aunt Margaret” getting thrown to the ground by a federal officer after she stood briefly in front of a government vehicle and then Ammon Bundy getting shot with a stun gun three times after he parked his four-wheeler in front of a government dump truck.

Bundy said his goal was to find out what the dump truck was hauling away, as he and others suspected it was his father’s dead cattle.

“I truly believed they didn’t have a right to be there, and my family had a right to be there,” Bundy testified.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Ethan Knight earlier had objected to the videos being presented to jurors, arguing they only revealed a limited slice of what went on at Bunkerville.

“Bunkerville is the evidence equivalent of a Pandora’s box in this case,” Knight argued. “Once we go down this road … we are really embracing more than a mini trial … but events that are not before this court.”

U.S. District Judge Anna J. Brown said the prosecution’s concerns are legitimate, “but that’s a reality in a case like this.”

The judge ruled the videos from Bunkerville could be played solely for showing the impact on Ammon Bundy’s state of mind as he came to Oregon. They could be played for jurors, but won’t be provided to the jury as evidence during their deliberations in the case, the judge said.

Ammon Bundy is expected to return to the witness stand Wednesday morning.

— Maxine Bernstein

(5) Facebook

 &amp;lt;meta http-equiv=”refresh” content=”0; URL=/?_fb_noscript=1″ /&amp;gt;(4) Facebook

Cindy Wisner and Linda Schultz shared Lisa Bundy‘s post.
Image may contain: shoes, one or more people and indoor

Lisa Bundy

13 hrs ·

 

&lt;meta http-equiv=”refresh” content=”0; URL=/?_fb_noscript=1″ /&gt;

 

(5) Facebook

Briana Bundy

1 hr ·

iOS

·

❤️ pray for Ammon my friends! He will have another emotional day tomorrow. And pray for Lisa, his beautiful wife. Pray for the jury to open their hearts to his words. Thank you 🇺🇸

 

Line in front of the courthouse, to get in, started this morning at 530am. Every morning, on the courthouse steps, this guy comes and prays for them all. #godpleaseblessamerica#prayforammontoday

  • FATHER GOD, WE ARE ASKING, SO HARD, FOR JUSTICE TO FALL UPON ALL OF POLITICAL PRISONERS. DEAR LORD, THEY DESERVE MERCY, THEY HAVE BEEN THROUGH MORE THAN A PERSON SHOULD HAVE TO BARE. WE LOVE YOU AND THANK YOU FATHER GOD FOR YOUR BLESSINGS, AMEN.

    Love

     

    Like

     

    Love

     

    Haha

     

    Wow

     

    Sad

     

    Angry

    Comment

    Comments
    Cindy Wisner
Kennedy Holt to Lisa Bundy

2 hrs ·

My heart hurts so much today as I read post and updates on the Bundy trial. Today my body is here in Phoenix but my heart is in Idaho with Lisa Bundy and the kids. This summer I had the chance to go and help Lisa and just had a few weeks to experience what her life consist of everyday. Lisa is the strongest woman I know. She is going through something that nobody and I mean nobody could ever understand. Every night Lisa and her kids get together at dinner and listen to the scriptures, the very scripture chapter that ammon reads while he is in jail. After dinner, Lisa and the kids sit around the phone while ammon ask them questions about the chapter that they read. This broke me. The time that ammon spends listening to his kids is about the scriptures. I have no words. Ammon talks to every one of the kids and I can’t help but hold my tears back as Hayden or Hals talks to him. It hurts. Those kids hurt. They took their dad away from them and it brings so much pain andanger to me to watch those kids go through that. They don’t need this. This needs to come to an end. Please send ammon home to those kids. They need their dad more than anything. Lisa needs her husband more than anything. Lisa is not herself. She tries so hard to keep herself in good spirits and it’s so hard to watch her go through this. Please hit your knees tonight. Please pray for the Bundy family.

See More

Love

 

Like

 

Love

 

Haha

 

Wow

 

Sad

 

Angry

Comment

Comments
Rylee Inman
Remove
Rylee Inman Love you Kennedy
Like · Reply · 1 · 57 mins
Lisa Bundy
Remove
Lisa Bundy Wow Kennedy…thank you! It wAs a really super hard day today.
Like · Reply · 2 · 19 mins
Kennedy Holt
Remove
Kennedy Holt I miss you so much Lisa call me whenever and let hals call me too whenever she wants
Cindy Wisner

Guilty Until Proven Innocent – Ammon And Ryan Bundy Try To Prove Their Innocence Amid A Government Conspiracy To Convince Others Of Their Guilt. | Less Gov Is The Best




<!– [if lte IE 7]>http://lessgovisthebestgov.com/blog/wp-content/themes/hdt-k9-canvas/icons/lte-ie7.js<![endif]–>

The Independent Voice for Conservative Values!
Less Gov is the Best Gov, Because Less Government
is the Best Government!
© Scott Rohter – All rights reserved

Guilty Until Proven Innocent – Ammon and Ryan Bundy try to Prove their Innocence Amid a Government Conspiracy to Convince the Public of their Guilt.

Posted by Scott Rohter on Saturday, September 17, 2016

 

Ammon and Ryan Bundy

Guilty Until Proven Innocent

Ammon and Ryan Bundy Try to Prove their Innocence

Amid a Government Conspiracy to Convince the Public of their Guilt..

By Scott Rohter, June 2016

 

“The time has come to end the occupation of twelve Western States by the Federal Government.” – Scott Michael Rohter

 

They have been locked up in jail for more than seven months without a trial. One of them has been in solitary confinement for over a month for refusing to allow doctors to remove a bullet lodged in his upper right arm. Ammon and Ryan Bundy are political prisoners.  They are being held at the Multnomah County Detention Center in Portland, Oregon across from the Federal Courthouse where they are being tried on charges of conspiracy to impede a Federal officer. They were taken into custody not far from the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge which they were “occupying” in a nationally televised protest over the unjust incarceration of two fellow ranchers, Dwight and Steven Hammond of Oregon on terrorism and arson charges. They are also protesting the federal government’s unconstitutional occupation of 700 million acres of land in twelve Western States for more than 150 years.

The Bundys are leading an effort to try to change the Federal Government’s public land management policies which were rewritten in 1976 when Congress passed the Federal Land Policy Management Act. Friend and fellow rancher, Lavoy Finicum was shot in the back three times by two Oregon State Police officers for his efforts help the Hammonds and support the Bundys. The police officers claimed that they fired their weapons in self-defense.  Lavoy’s murder has been described by a police investigation as a justified use of deadly force. In reality the police investigation was nothing more than a whitewash.

The national rebellion over the Federal government’s public land use policies didn’t just begin with the occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, and it isn’t going to end with the arrest or even with the conviction of Ammon and Ryan Bundy on federal charges stemming from their month long protest in Harney County. The controversy surrounding the Federal government’s administration of America’s public lands has been going on since the 1980s when the Sagebrush Rebellion was launched, and it won’t be settled in an Oregon courtroom during the Bundy trials. It can only be addressed by Congress. In fact the subject might not even come up during their trials since the only issue really at stake is their refusal to leave the Refuge. The defendants claim that they were never given a direct order in writing from the appropriate authorities to leave the Refuge. They would have welcomed such an order because it would have given them the opportunity of challenging the validity of the order in court, but they never got one.

So what led the Bundys to come to Oregon in the first place? What led them to occupy this remote strip of desert land? Knowing this is the key to understanding the unjust nature of the government’s indictment against them. If a rancher’s grievances against the Bureau of Land Management are even mentioned during their trial they will probably be tossed out of court as quickly as they are brought up by a Federal magistrate who was appointed by the Federal government to preside over their trials. The Federal government is both their prosecutor and their judge.

What prompted the defendants to leave their homes and families in Nevada, Arizona, and Idaho and meet at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge near the little town of Burns is a long and convoluted story.

Their original purpose was to support two Oregon ranchers who were unjustly incarcerated for arson under the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act. The defendants wanted to start a national discussion about the Federal government’s mismanagement of America’s public lands and the unconstitutional nature of it’s control of over half the land in twelve Western States. They decided to do this after the Obama Justice Department put Dwight and Steven Hammond in jail for five years for a grass fire they started on their property to control weeds. It was a bogus charge to begin with, but it was a crime for which they had already served their time, and it became a crime for which they are now serving an additional sentence of five years at a Federal Penitentiary in southern California.

The defendants viewed the resentencing of the Hammonds to five more years by the Obama Justice Department as a violation of their civil rights under the Fifth Amendment which states… “Nor shall any man be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb”.  The re-incarceration of the Hammonds for a second time after they had served their original sentences was a clear violation of the Constitution and a clear cut example of Federal government’s unconstitutional method of managing public lands and harassing western ranchers. The Bundys saw the Hammond’s plight as an opportunity to focus national attention on the plight of Western ranchers. What they didn’t take into consideration is that most Americans live in big cities and they don’t understand nor care about the plight of Western ranchers.

The Bundys came to Oregon to support Dwight and Steven Hammond,  and to call attention to the occupation of over 700 million acres of land in twelve Western States by a Federal bureaucracy that is totally and completely out of control. The defendants managed to occupy the headlines for almost a month by occupying a deserted Wildlife Refuge in the middle of winter when no federal employees were there, an act for which they are now paying dearly.

Let me ask you a question. What is a bigger crime? Is it worse to occupy a deserted Wildlife Refuge for a month in the middle of Winter, or to  occupy 700 million acres of land in twelve western states for more than a hundred and fifty years?

All wealth comes from the land, but fully one half of all the land west of the Rocky Mountains is controlled and administered by the Federal government. That explains why most of the counties in Western States are struggling just to meet their budgets and to provide basic government services like public schools, police and fire protection.. All of the Federally controlled lands remain off the tax rolls and the Payments in Lieu of taxes (PILT)  which Western Counties receive from the Federal government does not nearly compensate them for the losses in revenue arising from not having these lands on the tax rolls. It does not enable local government to become self-supporting. On the contrary it keeps local government dependent on Washington.

County government frequently is not able to fund basic government services because too much of the land is not on the tax rolls.  Too much of the land is owned by the Federal Government which does not pay property taxes to fund the operation of local government.

Without a national strategy that supports private property there is not a broad enough tax base to support local government. That is why Western States are so dependent on Washington..

The right to own property is guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. The right to petition the government when any of our rights is violated is also guaranteed by the Constitution.

Cliven Bundy owns a ranch in Nevada on which he and his son Ryan raise cows. They own grazing rights on adjacent land which is administered by the Federal government. There right to the use this land is being adversely impacted by the Federal government’s public land use policies. The Bundys exercised their right to petition the government for a redress of grievances. Only after all their efforts failed did they look for another means to advance their cause.

In 2015 they drafted legislation in the Nevada Legislature regarding the administration of State land by the Federal government, but all of their efforts in search of a solution to their problems failed. That led them to Oregon to occupy the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge. They tried to work within the system without openly defying it even while the government continued to evade the Constitution, but all of their efforts under the law got them nowhere. They are now political prisoners at the Multnomah County Jail in Portland, Oregon where they have been convicted without a trail. They are being held without bail before they have been found guilty of committing a crime. They have been denigrated in the press for standing up to the Federal government’s flagrant violations of the Constitution.

All of our rights are not enumerated in the Constitution, but all of the Federal Government’s powers are definitely enumerated in the Constitution and there is no power given to the Federal to maintain control over such vast amounts of State land.

It was a sad day when two Oregon State Police officers shot an innocent man in the back for just believing in the Constitution. That was the day I realized that something much bigger than Lavoy Finicum had died in my country. Honor, integrity, and respect for the Constitution have all ceased to exist too…

Here us a little lesson in history:

Oregon became a State in 1859. Before that it was part of a vast territory whose ownership and administration was contested even back then by three different countries and a variety of different Indian tribes. The controversy over the ownership of land in the West is much bigger than what happened at the Malheur Wildlife Refuge.

What used to be known as the Oregon Territory included the future States of Oregon, Washington, and Idaho, part of Montana and Wyoming, and most of the province of British Columbia. In 1846 the United States purchased this Territory from England and after a border dispute with Canada was settled, Oregon became the 33rd State to enter the Union, however for the past 157 years Oregon has remained an occupied territory… occupied by the Federal Government which annexed it.

Fifty three percent of Oregon is administered and controlled by Congress through two departments of the Federal bureaucracy… the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management. It is time for this occupation of Oregon by the Federal Government to come to an end.

When Americans think of occupied territory we don’t usually think of the peaceful Pacific Northwest. We usually think of more turbulent places like the Middle East where people have been fighting for control of land ever since Israel became a state again in 1948. Whether all or part of Israel remains occupied by Jews or Arabs or both or they all learn to live together in peace is a question that still remains to be resolved, but for Americans living in occupied territory right here in our own country, Oregon is not the first nor the last State to be occupied by the Federal government.

There are twelve States that are occupied by Washington contrary to the Constitution. They are all west of the Rocky Mountains. They have been occupied ever since they were admitted to the Union. Half of the land in twelve Western States is occupied territory. The total amount of land occupied in these twelve States is over 700 million acres of land..

All of the Federal Government’s powers are enumerated in the Constitution. There is no power vested in Congress to be the nation’s largest landowner. The fact that Congress is and remains in direct violation of the United States Constitution is what prompted the Sagebrush Rebellion of 1979, and it prompted the Bundys to come to Oregon in 2016.

 

The Property Rights Clause only gives Congress the right to manage public lands until such time as there is a permanent home found for them, but ultimately these lands have to be permanently disposed of. The only land that Congress has the authority to retain is a hundred square miles of land called the District of Columbia which is the seat of the Federal government. Together with enough land to build forts and ports and other needful government buildings on, that is all the land the United States government can own under the Constitution.  Congress must find a permanent resolution for public lands which conforms to the Constitution and it must dispose of these lands which it continues to administer. The proper resolution would be to turn these lands over to the States and the Counties and the people from which they were taken when these States were admitted to the Union.

The entire process can be overseen by Congress and the land can be returned to the States with a stipulation that each State should determine how these lands are to be ultimately disposed of. There should be public hearings. Title to the land can be transferred or sold with the proceeds used to pay down the National Debt which is unsustainable at the current level of 20 trillion dollars. No studies need to be done because all of the details on how to successfully manage these lands are already available from the 38 other States that already do so.

Congress used to dispose of all lands it acquired by treaty or otherwise before the passage of the Federal Land Policy Management Act (FLPMA) in 1976. After that Congress began to implement its current policy of retaining control of all public land.

Only three percent of the land east of the Mississippi River is controlled by the Federal Government while fifty percent of the land west of the Rocky Mountains remains under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management and the Forest Service. The total amount of land controlled by the Federal Government in the West is bigger than the size of most countries in the world, and the disparity between Western States and Eastern States is continuing to grow with attempts to federalize even more land such as the current proposal to make another national monument in Malheur County next to the one that already exists in Harney County. This disparity between eastern States and western States violates the Equal Footing Principle that was supposed to be applied to western States as they entered the Union.

What follows is a table of western States with their dates of admittance to the Union and the amount of land controlled by the Federal government in each State:

 

Table

1)            California        1850        45% owned by the Federal government

2)            Oregon            1859        53% owned by the Federal government

3)            Nevada            1864       85% owned by the Federal government

4)            Colorado            1876      37% owned by the Federal government

5)            Montana           1889      30% owned by the Federal government

6)         Washington        1889       35% owned by the Federal government

7)           Wyoming           1890      42% owned by the Federal government

8)            Idaho                    1890      50% owned by the Federal government

9)            Utah                      1896   57% owned by the Federal government

10)          Arizona                 1912    48% owned by the Federal government

11)          New Mexico         1912   41% owned by the Federal government

12)          Alaska                    1959   69% owned by the Federal government

 

The occupation of California and Oregon started before the Civil War. The occupation of Nevada began during the Civil War, and the occupation of other Western States began shortly after the Reconstruction Period following the Civil War during which time the Federal Government also occupied Southern States. The occupation of America didn’t end when Federal troops pulled out of the South.  The focus of Washington’s occupation merely shifted from the South to the West. It’s time for the occupation of Western States to come to an end too.

 

Corroborating Sources

http://bigthink.com/strange-maps/291-federal-lands-in-the-us

&lt;meta http-equiv=”refresh” content=”0; URL=/Capt.Karl/posts/10202455074334132?_fb_noscript=1″ /&gt;(4) Karl P. Koenigs – JUST IN…–> Payoffs for Judges, Prosecutors Is…

JUST IN…–> Payoffs for Judges, Prosecutors Is Legal by Statute
By Pat Shannan CAN YOU SAY Portland OR Federal Judge ANNA BROWN? Who is on the Ammon and Ryan Bundy and POLITICAL Prisoners cases? ? ? ? ?

Payoffs for Judges:

Anyone who has ever attended an Internal Revenue Service court case likely noticed the biased attitude of the presiding judge in favor of the prosecution. Perhaps, though, only those of us who have sat in courtrooms, in every section of the country, can attest to this unwavering pattern of unfairness. Whatever happened to the judge’s impartial role of “referee”?

Federal statutes show how and why U.S. law encourages prosecutorial and judicial conflicts of interest, non-neutrality, non-impartiality and corruption of justice in the federal courts. (See page 13 for portions of 5 USC 4502 through 4504 from the United States Code.)

How can the federal judiciary be independent and impartial when
the law permits the federal government to secretly award judges up to $25,000 in undisclosed secret “cash awards,” and to privately, secretly and “erroneously” overpay them up to $10,000, and “waive” these erroneous overpayments?

How can any defendant be found innocent or “guilty beyond a
reasonable doubt” when such statutory “cash award” provisions on
their face create an irrefutable, behind-the-scenes incentive for
the prosecution? These questions and others must be answered by the U.S. District Court in Portland, Oregon following a lawsuit naming multiple defendants in the Department of Justice including Judge Anna J. Brown, who presided over a trial of “conspiracy to impede the IRS” last November.

Defendant Roy Bendshadler’s attorney Nancy Bergeson had complained of suspected “jury tampering” and was found strangled to death in her Portland home the next day. Her cause of death was at first passed off as “natural causes” until a second medical examiner changed it to homicide. The murder is unsolved.

The 94-page action was filed by Michael Sean Mungovan, one of five convicted in the above 2009 case. Mungovan was sentenced to four years in prison on July 28. This was an hour after he had served Judge Brown with a copy of the suit, which should have legally restricted her from any sentencing action over him until it was resolved, according to Mungovan.

None of this is new to the IRS. Its manual on pages 1,229 to 1,291
(Delegation Orders of January 17, 1983) outlines the IRS system
of monetary awards “of up to and including $5,000, for any one
individual employee or group of employees, in his/her immediate
office, including field employees, engaged in National Office
projects; and contributions of employees of other government agencies and armed forces members. “This would include U.S. District Court judges and U.S. attorneys.

The Mungovan suit, composed by Utah lawyer Dr. Dale Livingston,
explains, “These awards include secret cash awards. They are not
limited as to the number of awards that may be awarded to any one person or group. There is no limitation placed upon any award. Any person or group of persons can be awarded this money, including:
U.S. attorneys, federal judges, the president of the United States
or anyone else for that matter.”

Livingston added: “The awards may be given to the same person or group, each minute, each hour, every day, every week, every month, every year or not at all. In other words, the U.S. government and the alleged Internal Revenue Service . . . have a perfectly legal (not lawful) system of bribery. The bribery works against the American people . . . when they expect impartial justice, and there is no proof on the record to the contrary.”

The murder of attorney Bergeson, who only threatened to initiate an investigation into what she believed to have been a stacked jury, sends the warning that Mungovan, by forcing the issue, may have placed a much larger target on his back.

Lack of space here prevents this writer’s attempt to list all the
negative ramifications of such a surreptitious program posing as
“justice for all,” but let us consider for a moment a few of the
many dubious convictions from the recent decades reported in AFP and The Spotlight over the years.

How much money did Judge Paul Benson receive for railroading Yori Kahl and Scott Faul in 1983? There was no evidence these young men ever fired a shot in the melee in Medina, North Dakota, where Yori’s father, Gordon, admitted shooting U.S. Marshal Ken Muir in self-defense. Later it was learned this was the same judge that had sent away Leonard Peltier of Wounded Knee fame for life, with no evidence he had killed the two FBI agents found dead after the 1973 shootout. Are judges paid more for high-profile cases?

How about Judge Walter Smith of Waco, Texas? We cannot imagine how many bucks he may have received after sending away 11 Branch Davidian Church members, who had been acquitted by a jury of capital crimes in 1994, not long after the Waco massacre of men, women and children by federal agents and troops. These 11 churchgoers received a total of 240 years. These outrageous maximum sentences for merely carrying a firearm were applied against people who had not even fired a shot in self-defense at the onrushing U.S. marshals, U.S. military Special Forces soldiers and other federal gunmen.

Then there were the Montana Freemen, who were labeled as “separatist outlaws.” In 1996 they were working to expose the banking fraud of the Federal Reserve System. Many of these men are still in federal prison, yet they never harmed anyone.

Cash incentives paid for convictions help us understand not only
what has happened in the past, but also what we can expect to see in the future.

Brand Thornton Carol Bundy Carl Brammann Matthew Wandersee Mandy Holland Frank Vish John Lamb Gavin Seim Bruce Doucette Bruce Paris John Bird Angie Huntington Bundy Bonnie Bundy Backus

Wow

 

Like

 

Love

 

Haha

 

Wow

 

Sad

 

Angry

Comment

&lt;meta http-equiv=”refresh” content=”0; URL=/?_fb_noscript=1″ /&gt;(1) Cindy Wisner

David Fry

19 hrs ·

Reposting this because James vilshenko (who I believe is mark McConnell) has made such a distraction on the other post.

Mark McConnel…Bad Man….but LISTEN UP! Why do you think the prosecution let out his identity? They are sacrificing his safety in exchange for him to become their scapegoat! DON’T take your focus off the fact that the FBI was behind this the entire time and they would have done what they did with or without him.

&lt;meta http-equiv=”refresh” content=”0; URL=/?_fb_noscript=1″ /&gt;(19) Facebook

Arnold Law FirmLike Page

6 hrs ·

Mark McConnell was an informant who told Government the protest leaders were leaving refuge the day LaVoy was shot.

&lt;meta http-equiv=”refresh” content=”0; URL=/Capt.Karl/posts/10202441829803027?_fb_noscript=1″ /&gt;(16) Karl P. Koenigs – YOU WILL NOT USE THE CONSTITUTION AS A DEFENSE…

YOU WILL NOT USE THE CONSTITUTION AS A DEFENSE IN MY COURTROOM; Ninth and TENTH Amendment Constitution enemy Portland Oregon Federal Judge Anna Brown STILL denies ARTICLE I Section 8 clause 17 or the balance of The Constitution to be used as a defense. (Defendants Ryan and Ammon Bundy have Congressional records, dating 1935, ORDERING that the Malheur Wildlife Refuge lands be divested to private persons and/or to Oregon State.)

– Capt. Karl
==============================================
Oregonian:

Ammon Bundy had $8,031 in cash when arrested, talked on cell en route to jail

on September 20, 2016 at 6:38 PM, updated September 20, 2016 at 11:09 PM
OREGON STANDOFF TRIAL

Updated at 6:38 p.m.

After his arrest on Jan. 26, Ammon Bundy was found with an envelope containing $8,000 of cash in his jacket, a receipt from a Jan. 1 purchase of nearly $200 in ammunition from a BiMart in Idaho and a withdrawal slip in his wallet for $6,000 from a Chase Bank Fred Meyer in Idaho visited the day before, an FBI agent testified Tuesday.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Craig Gabriel told the court the evidence indicates that Bundy planned to remain at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge for a long time.

During transportation to jail by van after a cursory search of him, Harney County Sheriff’s Sgt. Lucas McLain heard Bundy talking on a cell phone.

Lt. Brian Needham turned on the overhead light in the van, and they could see Bundy, who was handcuffed, balancing a cell phone between his shoulder and ear, McLain testified Tuesday.

They stopped the van at the Bureau of Land Management office west of Burns along U.S. 20, and Bundy, along with co-defendant Ryan Payne and Victoria Sharp, were removed from the van to be searched.

McLain said he searched the van and found a cell phone in the crook of the seat where Bundy had been.

“It appeared to be shoved down,” McLain testified.

Bundy’s lawyer Marcus Mumford on cross-examination asked what was wrong with his client talking on the phone.

“He was being transported, sir,” McLain said. “We wanted to make sure there weren’t any communications with any individuals who might intercept that transport.”

McLain said he hadn’t searched Ammon Bundy before he entered the van. It’s unclear who did.

Mumford, during his cross-examination, suggested that Bundy was calling his wife and informing her about his arrest.

Bundy and other leaders of the 41-day refuge occupation were arrested during a police stop on U.S. 395 as they were driving to a community meeting in John Day.

Bundy and six co-defendants now are on trial, charged with conspiring to impede federal employees from conducting their work at the refuge through intimidation, threats or force.

According to McLain, Sharp, an 18-year-old who was part of a singing family that had visited the refuge, and Shawna Cox were seated in the far back of the transport van, Brian Cavalier and Mark McConnell were in the middle seat, and Ryan Payne and Ammon Bundy were in the front seat of the van.

McLain mentioned on the witness stand that Sharp at some point moved from the back to the front seat.

“She actually urinated in the backseat of the van and was ordered to move,” attorney Tiffany Harris pointed out, during her cross-examination. “She had asked several times to relieve herself.”

“I did not order her,” McLain said, but he acknowledged that Sharp had urinated in the van.

Harris is Cox’s standby counsel.

That night, McLain drove the van carrying Ammon Bundy and five others to the Sage Hen Rest Area off Highway 20, about 16 miles west of Burns. That’s where he met up with FBI agents.

FBI Special Agent Ben Jones testified that he received Ammon Bundy’s iPhone from McLain there. Prosecutors offered it into evidence in court Tuesday. Jones held the silver iPhone up in a plastic evidence bag for jurors to see.

Jone said he patted Bundy down at the rest area, and found $8,000 of cash in a white envelope in an inside pocket of his jacket, plus $31 of cash in his wallet, pulled from a back pocket.

Inside Bundy’s wallet were two receipts: A Jan. 1 receipt from BiMart in Emmett, Idaho, for $471.55, which included purchases of Federal ammunition for $189.97, three rifle scopes for $164.91, men’s boots and a duck bib, using his wife Lisa Bundy’s debit card. The other receipt was from a Jan. 25 cash withdrawal of $6,000 from a Chase Bank account at a Fred Meyer in Nampa, Idaho.

The Jan. 1 purchase of ammunition, prosecutors pointed out, occurred a day before the refuge takeover. The Jan. 25 cash withdrawal occurred a day before Bundy’s arrest.

Mumford asked the agent if anything was illegal about Bundy’s purchase of ammunition or rifle scopes?

“In and of itself, nothing illegal,” Jones responded.

Note and Videos on Bundy’s Phone

Jones testified that he found a note on Ammon Bundy’s iPhone, and 20 to 30 videos.

The note was a breakdown of who was doing what duties, such as “defense,” “organization,” “moral(e)” “primary security,” “signage,” “maps and title,” “recording,” “food,” “media,” and “claim.” It listed, for example, that Ryan Payne (spelled Pain in Bundy’s note) was doing defense; Kenneth Medenbach was responsible for signage, Cox for “Maps & Title,” and Ryan Bundy for “Claim.”

A video found on Ammon Bundy’s phone was played for jurors, capturing a meeting he had at the refuge on Jan. 13 with Shawna Cox and a man named David Thomas. Cox is heard saying, “This is the time to stand up because we don’t have another chance.”

“So do you spy on the American people a lot?’ Ryan Bundy to FBI pilot testifying about aerial surveillance of refuge
Asked by another man if Ammon Bundy has reinforcements at the refuge, he replied, “We got some good force outside and in,” according to the video.

Bundy tells the men he’s not afraid, and in fact, considered going to breakfast in Burns on his own.

At another point, Cox is heard saying, “I’m going through the stuff…We’re finding lots of evidence.”

Prosecutors also played audio of Oregon State Police Trooper Joshua Wolcott-Petersen’s Jan. 15 arrest of Medenbach, who was found seated in a white Ford pickup truck belonging to the refuge in a Safeway parking lot in Burns. After Wolcott-Petersen walked up to the driver’s window and asked what he was doing, Medenbach said, “Getting groceries here.”

The trooper told him the truck was reported stolen. “This is a Harney County Resource Center vehicle,” Medenbach said, referencing the new decal he and others had placed on the refuge trucks. He told the trooper the vehicle was at the refuge, unlocked, and the keys were found in it. The audio showed Medenbach complied with the trooper and was arrested.

Removal of 100 ft. of refuge fence

Four more refuge employees testified Tuesday about what they found at the federal wildlife sanctuary when they returned after the occupation in mid-February.

Ryan Curtis, a supervisory forestry technician, identified defendant David Fry on video, seated at Curtis’ desk at the refuge and using his computer.

“That’s my desk and a picture of my daughter,” as the video filmed by Fry scanning Curtis’ personal belongings.

Curtis testified that one of the fire trucks at the refuge “had everything stripped of it” when he returned to work in mid-February after the 41-day occupation of the refuge was over.

Refuge ecologist Jess Wenick, a third-generation Harney County resident and 13-year refuge employee who manages the haying and grazing program and water management program, said occupiers drove out in his work-assigned white pickup truck to cut about 100 feet of fence on the northeast boundary of the federal property Jan. 11.

He identified the refuge Bobcat truck used to remove fence poles from the ground and his work-assigned all-terrain vehicle being used by occupiers without his permission.

Prosecutors played for jurors video of the fence-cutting, which showed occupation spokesman Robert “LaVoy” Finicum removing a pair of pliers from a truck, and Ammon Bundy, Jon Ritzheimer and Finicum taking turns cutting the barbed wire down.

“Taking down the fence. Liberating this area,” co-defendant Blaine Cooper could be heard saying in the video. Cooper already has pleaded guilty to the federal conspiracy charge.

Upon returning to work at the refuge in mid-February, Wenick testified that he found his desk in the main office of the refuge “disorganized and messy,” and his personal paperwork had been rummaged through, including bank account information, Social Security numbers and the “complete family history” of him and his wife.

He noticed a stack of historical documents placed in his office that had been moved, including a number of papers about the controversial case of Harney County ranchers Dwight Hammond Jr. and Steve Hammond, who were ordered to return to federal prison in January to complete a mandatory minimum sentence of five years for arson on federal lands. The pending imprisonment of the father and son prompted the Jan. 2 protest in Burns that preceded the occupation of the wildlife refuge.

Wenick testified that some of the Hammond records are still missing from the refuge. He also said he found a scanner in the refuge office that didn’t belong to the refuge.

He described co-worker Faye Healy’s office next door to his as a “technological sweatshop,” with computer parts strewn about, tobacco spit on the wall and personal photos and a “disturbing odor” in the air.

During Wenick’s cross-examination, Mumford, Bundy’s lawyer, tried repeatedly to get Wenick to discuss how the federal government has authority to own the refuge. Each time, a prosecutor objected and U.S. District Judge Anna J. Brown sustained the objections.

“What authority does the federal government have to maintain the fence?” Mumford asked Wenick.

“Were you involved in the burns that the Hammonds were prosecuted for?” Mumford asked him.

After sustaining objections to those questions, the judge advised Mumford, “Please confine yourself to cross on direct” examination. Later, the judge threatened to halt Mumford’s cross-examination of a witness if he didn’t confine himself to the testimony offered during the prosecutor’s direct questioning. Earlier, Mumford addressed a witness by the wrong name.

Shane Theall, a refuge fire management officer, testified that he found a fire truck outside of its station, with the nozzles, shovels and hoses all pulled off of it, and pocket Constitutions in the old fire house. He said fire clothing and new electronics he had bought were missing. He testified that the fire bunkhouse “smelled terrible,” full of cigarette smoke. He also said a prescribed burn at the refuge scheduled for January didn’t occur.

Asked by defendant Ryan Bundy, who is representing himself, if he ever had any prescribed burns burn more than the area intended, Theall said yes.

“Have you ever been prosecuted as a domestic terrorist for that?” Ryan Bundy followed up. The judge asked jurors to disregard the question after she sustained an objection from a prosecutor.

Refuge maintenance mechanic Edward Moulton testified that he was the last person at the refuge on Dec. 31, and locked his office and the middle and back gates to the refuge. When he returned on Feb. 14, he found beds and cots in his office and a tobacco-rolling station.

Later, when an FBI agent and pilot Jeffrey Cleveland testified that he flew aerial surveillance during the occupation, and spent about 23 hours flying above the refuge on Jan. 18, Ryan Bundy asked him,”So do you spy on the American people a lot?”

The judge sustained another objection to that question.

— Maxine Bernstein

mbernstein@oregonian.com
503-221-8212
@maxoregonian

Angry

 

Like

 

Love

 

Haha

 

Wow

 

Sad

 

Angry

Comment

14 Comments
Comments
Jack Sparks
Remove

Jack Sparks Hang that Fukun judge NOW

Jack Sparks's photo.
Unlike · Reply · 3 · 6 hrs

 

Michael Dittmar
Remove
Michael Dittmar Wake up. The courts are ruled by the British. Look it up. Bar members are loyal to the queen not the Constitution. We have been and are continuing to be defrauded.

 

Drake Kent
Remove
Drake Kent Then you loose your seat and have to show cause in federal court…

 

Adrianne Simone Knobloch
Remove
Adrianne Simone Knobloch If ever a cause to drag a judge out by the hook.
Like · Reply · 1 · 3 hrs

 

Carl Brammann
Remove
Carl Brammann These guys

 

Josh Muth
Remove

Josh Muth Soooo….. still winning in the courts in front of the whole world??

Still think you can win abiding by their rules???

 

Carl Brammann
Remove
Like · Reply · 1 · 1 hr

 

Cindy Wisner
Write a reply…
Karl P. Koenigs
Remove

Karl P. Koenigs IF anybody in the entire World deserves to be hung it is Federal Judge Anna Brown!

=================================================
DEPRIVATION OF RIGHTS UNDER COLOR OF LAW
SUMMARY:

Section 242 of Title 18 makes it a crime for a person acting under color of any law to willfully deprive a person of a right or privilege protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States.
For the purpose of Section 242, acts under “color of law” include acts not only done by federal, state, or local officials within the their lawful authority, but also acts done beyond the bounds of that official’s lawful authority, if the acts are done while the official is purporting to or pretending to act in the performance of his/her official duties. Persons acting under color of law within the meaning of this statute include police officers, prisons guards and other law enforcement officials, as well as judges, care providers in public health facilities, and others who are acting as public officials. It is not necessary that the crime be motivated by animus toward the race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status or national origin of the victim.

The offense is punishable by a range of imprisonment up to a life term, or the death penalty, depending upon the circumstances of the crime, and the resulting injury, if any.

TITLE 18, U.S.C., SECTION 242:

Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, … shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnaping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
===============================================
Title 18 U.S. Code section 2381 Capital Felony Treason

Title 18 U.S. Code section 2381:

When in the presence of two witnesses to the same overt act or in an open court of law if you fail to timely move to protect and defend the constitution of the United States and honor your oath of office you are subject to the charge of capital felony treason, and upon conviction you will be taken by the posse to the nearest busy intersection and at high noon hung by the neck until dead…The body to remain in state till dusk as an example to anyone who takes his oath of office lightly.
======================================

Unlike · Reply · 4 · 1 hr

 

Carl Brammann
Remove
Carl Brammann Preach it brother
Like · Reply · 2 · 1 hr

 

Cindy Wisner
Write a reply…
Josh Muth
Remove

Josh Muth Right.

But it’s USELESS unless there is ENFORCEMEMT.

Who is stepping up to the line and SHOWING them that their actions will NO LONGER be tolerated???

No one.

Words. That’s all thats being thrown around. Words that those violating their Oaths have NO FEAR OF because NOBODY is backing up their fucking mouths.

“You can’t bring a gun in here. It’s a “gun-free” zone.”….

Just.
Fucking.
Words.

Until there is actual FORCE used against them, NOTHING WILL CHANGE.

 

Steve Griffith
Remove
Steve Griffith Sounds like it’s a Maritime aka UCC aka Law of the Seas court.

 

Steve Griffith
Remove
Steve Griffith I don’t know, just from reading here and there

 

Cindy Wisner
Write a reply…
Dan Swallers
Remove
Dan Swallers She’s in probate they administer the estates of the dead watch the video on u tube call a Christian man named Dan & do a little research on that dead entity they’re administering it has a name attached to it

 

Tom Bailey
Remove
Tom Bailey Is she a federal judge or a state judge? State judges tend to ignore federal law and go by their states constitution.
Of course that is presuming they actually obey some set of rules.

Remove

Ray Ubinger
Remove
Ray Ubinger NC state judges go with the feds’ rulings against the 4th Amendment and ignore the stricter counterpart at NC Const. I.20, which specifically mentions “evidence,” not mere “cause.”

Remove

Ray Ubinger
Remove
Ray Ubinger NC state judges go with the feds’ rulings against the 4th Amendment and ignore the stricter counterpart at NC Const. I.20, which specifically mentions “evidence,” not mere “cause.”

Remove

Tom Bailey
Remove
Tom Bailey I think North Carolina courts don’t really feel bound by any rules.

Remove

Cindy Wisner
Write a reply…
Cindy Wisner
Remove
Cindy Wisner thx karl

 

Someone is typing a comment…
Cindy Wisner
Write a comment

&lt;meta http-equiv=”refresh” content=”0; URL=/?_fb_noscript=1″ /&gt;(9) Facebook

I’m sharing this post, today lady liberty hangs her head in shame…..

Brianna Bundy…

Mel was denied reopen of his detention hearing. I had the baby with me because I couldn’t find a sitter. We walked in, he saw us and instantly fell apart. The US Marshall’s got after him for looking at us. He said, “please, I haven’t seen my baby since she was…” They cut him off from finishing his sentence. His attorney did great. He provided more than sufficient cause to reopen. The prosecution made claim that he did not have to be the person participating, but the mere fact that he is a Bundy should be cause enough to deny him. The said he was a monster, they brought up Oregon, of which his attorney brought up was irrelevant to this case, the judge ignored this but went on to repeat things, lies, that other defendants made. Stated that the fact he stands by these men with “horrible character” made him just as bad. She belittled and degraded him even making claim that if released he would retaliate and federal officers would be in danger. It was absolutely UNJUST! This “court” of “liberty and justice for all?” What a corrupt and evil system we have! Where the innocent are guilty until proven innocent and then they are still ignored and ruled to be guilty! You know, I used to believe in justice. I used to believe that all men and women carried the light of Christ. I used to believe in mercy. But today my friends, I starred evil in the eyes. In the eyes of evil prosecutors, evil judge and heartless US Marshall’s. I know I should pray for them, try to show them compassion. I have done that for far too long. Today, I became indifferent. I have no care at all what becomes of these people committing these evil acts towards my family, friends and children. The Lord can do what he wishes with them. I will not plea for their mercy because today, I saw evil.

&lt;meta http-equiv=”refresh” content=”0; URL=/UnityThroughSolutionsLA/?ref=aymt_homepage_panel&amp;amp;_fb_noscript=1″ /&gt;(3) Mary Schumpf – To Mike Arnold, Carol Bundy Jeanette Finicum Cindy…

To Mike Arnold, Carol Bundy Jeanette Finicum Cindy Wisner
Just In Case anything might help our God fearing honorable and noble Constitutional Patriots.
LEGAL COURT PRECEDENTS SET.
Ammon, Ryan and Cliven Bundy AND Political Prisoners cases:

Get these to the Attorneys, JUST IN CASE, even one, of importance, might have been overlooked:

Bryars v. United States 273USR 28:
“Constitutional provisions, where the security of a person and property are to be liberally construed, and it is the duty of the courts to be watchful for the constitutional rights of the Citizen and against any stealth encroachment therein. When a Federal Officer participates officially with a state official in a search, so that in substance and effect, it is their joint operation, the legality of the search and the use in evidence of the things seized is to be tested in Federal prosecutions as it would be if the undertaking were conclusively the Federal agent.”

Boyd v. United States 116 USR 616:
“The Court is to protect against encroachment of constitutionality or secured liberty. It is equivalent to a compulsory production of papers, to make the non – production of them a confession of the allegations which is pretended they will prove. The seizure of compensatory production of a man’s private papers to be used in evidence against him is equivalent to compelling him to be a witness against himself, violation of the Fifth Amendment, and in a prosecution for a crime, penalty or forfeiture is equally within the prohibition of the Fifth Amendment.”

United States v. Bishop, 412 US 346:
Sets the standard for criminal violation of Willful Intent It must be proven that you are the party. It must be proven that you had the method or opportunity to do the thing. It must be proven that you did this with a Willful Intent. (I had no idea that the Wisconsin Court System repealed the new 2011 Gun Law that I was actively involved in drafting.)
Willfulness – “An evil motive or intent to avoid a known duty or task under a law, with a moral certainty.”
“Now since the prosecutor does not have a cause of action for which relief can be granted, your Honor, may it please the court, Counsel is specifically precluded performing his major task, therefore, your Honor, may it please the court, at this time, I would Motion most graciously for a dismissal of Prejudice, for failure to state a cause of action for which relief may be granted by this Honorable Court and I would like to collect my cost and fees for having to defend this frivolous complaint, Sir, may it please the Court.” Owen v. Independence, 100 Vol. Supreme Court Reports. 1398:(1982)

Norton v. Shelby County 118 USR 425:
“An unconstitutional act is not law. It confers no rights, it imposes no duties, it affords no protections, it creates no office. It is in legal contemplation as inoperative as though it has never been passed.”

U.S. (vs) Dougherty, 473 F2d 1113 at 1139
States: “The jury has an unreviewable and irreversible power.. .to acquit in disregard of the instructions on the law given by the trial judge…”

16Am Jur 2d., Sec. 256:
“The general rule is that a unconstitutional statute, whether Federal or State, though having the form and name of law as in reality no law, but is wholly void and ineffective for any purpose since unconstitutionality dates from the enactment and not merrily from the date of the decision so branding it. An unconstitutional law in legal contemplation is as inoperative as if it never had been passed. Such a statute lives a question that is purports to settle just as it would be had the statute not ever been enacted. No repeal of an enactment is necessary, since an unconstitutional law is void. The general principles follows that it imposes no duty, converse no rights, creates no office, bestows no power of authority on anyone, affords no protection and justifies no acts performed under it. A contract which rests on a unconstitutional statute creates no obligation to be impaired by subsequent legislation. No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law. No courts are bound to enforce it. Persons convicted and fined under a statute subsequently held unconstitutional may recover the fines paid. A void act cannot be legally inconsistent with a valid one and an unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede an existing valid law. Indeed, in so far as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the land, it is superseded thereby.
Since an unconstitutional statute cannot repeal, or in anyway effect an existing one, if a repealing statute is unconstitutional, the statute which it attempts to repeal, remains in full force and effect and where a statute in which it attempts to repeal remains in full force and effect and where a clause repealing a prior law is inserted in the act, which act is unconstitutional and void, the provision of the repeal of the prior law will usually fall with it and will not be permitted to operate as repealing such prior law. The general principle stated above applied to the constitution as well as the laws of the several states insofar as they are repugnant to the constitution and laws of the United States.”

16AmJur2d.,Sec. 117:
“Various facts of circumstances extrinsic to the constitution are often resorted to, by the courts, to aid them and determining its meaning, as previously noted however, such extrinsic aids may not be resorted to where the provision in the question is clear and unambiguous in such a case the courts must apply the terms of the constitution as written and they are not at liberty to search for meanings beyond the instrument.”

16AmJur2d.,Sec. 114:
“As to the construction, with reference to Common Law, an important cannon of construction is that constitutions must be construed with reference to the Common Law.”

“The Common Law, so permitted destruction of the abatement of nuisances by summary proceedings and is was never supposed that a constitutional provision was intended to interfere with this established principle and although there is no common law of the United States in the sense of a national customary law as distinguished from the common law of England, adopted in the several states. In interpreting the Federal Constitution, recourse may still be had to the aid of the Common Law of England. It has been said that without reference to the common law, the language of the Federal Constitution could not be understood.” Erie Railroad v Thompkins

For Ryan Bundy and anyone Pro se:
16AmJur2d., Sec. 97:
“Then a constitution should receive a literal interpretation in favor of the Citizen, is especially true, with respect to those provisions which were designed to safeguard the liberty and security of the Citizen in regard to person and property.” Bary v. United States – 273 US 128
“Any constitutional provision intended to confer a benefit should be liberally construed in favor of the clearly intended and expressly designated beneficiary” (I am the Beneficiary of the US Constitution)

 I have this Constitution… This Constitution is a contract in writing, enforceable in a Court of Law, pursuant to the Statute of Frauds. I’m asking for a specific performance, your honor, in favor of me… I am the beneficiary of the Contract.

Contract Law 101, of any first year law student, states that the contract shall be enforced most favorability in favor of the non-preparer.

Title 18, US Code Sec.2381:
In the presents of two or more witnesses of the same overt act, or in a open court of law, if you fail to timely move to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States and honor your oath of office, you are subject to the charge of capital felony treason.

Marbury v. Madison: 5 US 137 (1803):
“No provision of the Constitution is designed to be without effect,” “Anything that is in conflict is null and void of law”, “Clearly, for a secondary law to come in conflict with the supreme Law was illogical, for certainly, the supreme Law would prevail over all other laws and certainly our forefathers had intended that the supreme Law would be the bases of all law and for any law to come in conflict would be null and void of law, it would bare no power to enforce, in would bare no obligation to obey, it would purport to settle as if it had never existed, for unconstitutionality would date from the enactment of such a law, not from the date so branded in an open court of law, no courts are bound to uphold it, and no Citizens are bound to obey it. It operates as a near nullity or a fiction of law.”
If any statement, within any law, which is passed, is unconstitutional, the whole law is unconstitutional by Marbury v. Madison.
Shephard’s Citations:
A group of reporters that go through and keep track of all court cases that have come before the courts, especially the Supreme Court and they clarify, before the court, all the cases. All cases which have cited Marbury v. Madison case, to the Supreme Court has not ever been over turned. See Shephard’s Citation of Marbury v. Madison.

Title 5, US Code Sec. 556(d), Sec. 557, Sec.706:
Courts lose jurisdiction if they do not follow Due Process Law.

16AmJur2d.,Sec. 258:
“On the other hand it is clear that Congress cannot by authorization or ratification give the slightest effect to a state law or constitution which is in conflict with the Constitution of the United States.”

U.S. Constitution, Bill of Rights
Article One:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

U.S. Constitution, Bill of Rights, Article Two:
A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.

Just In Case anything might help our God fearing honorable and noble Constitutional Patriots.

Like

 

Like

 

Love

 

Haha

 

Wow

 

Sad

 

Angry

https://www.blogger.com/static/v1/jsbin/927992005-ieretrofit.js
Paul Stramer – Lincoln County Watch: Ammon Bundy Totally Vindicated and Now……

The Ninth Circuit Court (15-10-117) just ordered the Federales to prove federal subject matter jurisdiction — not just assume subject matter jurisdiction– over property “owned” by the federal government.
Federal ownership of land may be (and usually is) merely proprietary— meaning that the Federales are acting as property managers— a role that does not create any exclusive use by the federal government and does not create federal subject matter jurisdiction.
This Ninth Circuit case cited above is not directly tied to the Bundy Cases, but addresses the issue of federal subject matter jurisdiction merely presumed to exist on the basis of federal property ownership.
In truth and in fact claims of Federal subject matter jurisdiction require: (1) a Federal use of the land (that is, a use related to the duties directly delegated to the federal government); (2) specific action by the State ceding jurisdiction. Neither one of these conditions were met with regard to the Oregon Wildlife Refuge.
The portions of the Wildlife Refuge including the buildings which the protestors occupied were purchased by the Federales from private land owners back in the 1930’s — under a Congressional Act that not only allowed, but which invited, adverse possession claims such as the protestors brought forward and which additionally ordered the “liquidation” of such properties back to state or private ownership.
Read that as: Federal ownership of the Wildlife Refuge property occupied by the Bundys and others should have been terminated years ago according to the very Acts of Congress which allowed the Federal Government to acquire the property in the first place.
The County Sheriff was always the supreme peacekeeping authority present at the Wildlife Refuge Stand-Off and the officer responsible for protecting the Bundys and enforcing their constitutional guarantees, but instead, Federal Agency personnel—- private corporate subcontractors working for the federal property managers– were allowed to come in under color of law and assert authority and jurisdiction that they never possessed.
These federal “agents”—- private commercial subcontractors—- were allowed to entrap, ambush, and murder an innocent American rancher, mortally endanger his family, and falsely arrest and imprison all the others for all these months.
And Ammon Bundy stands fully vindicated.
What do I think?  I think it is more than past time to prosecute the federal agencies and their personnel to the fullest extent of the organic and public law.
It’s time for the men involved in the LaVoy Finicum ambush to be arrested and charged with premeditated murder, conspiracy against The Constitution, and gross violation of Lavoy Finicum’s most basic and constitutionally protected rights.
It’s time for the mis-named DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, BLM, and FBI corporations, and the appointed politicos responsible for controlling and directing those men involved in spooling up the stand-off and allowing the ambush of LaVoy Finicum to be stripped of any claim of immunity and tried by an international war crimes tribunal for their part in these outrages against Americans who were exercising their right to peaceably assemble and to travel unmolested on the public roads they paid for.
It’s time for the numbnutz County Sheriff to be charged with dereliction of duty, breach of trust, breach of contract and breach of oath, willful endangerment, aiding and abetting murder, conspiracy against The Constitution, and false arrest.
Acting in my capacity as an Article X Judge I gave him more than fair Notice prior to all these events taking place and it is firmly established on the public record that I did.  There can be no excuse for his failure to know the jurisdictional issues because he was told point blank, not once, but twice. He knew, yet he buckled under the political pressure of federal influence and failed to enforce The Constitution and protect the people who were depending on him.
And because of that Sheriff’s failure to exercise his authority and honor and enforce the Law of the Land, a good man, a true American, was ambushed and killed by foreign commercial mercenaries on his way to attend a public meeting.
It’s time for that Sheriff to fry in his own oil for it.
It’s time for “Governor” Brown to be summarily impeached for moral turpitude, gross incompetence, and conspiracy against The Constitution, to have all pretension of foreign or sovereign immunity stripped away, and to stand trial with the rats from the DOJ and BLM and FBI before an international war crimes tribunal.
It’s time for the family of LaVoy Finicum to become multi-millionaires.
It’s time for all the others to be set free and for serious compensation to be paid to them and their families for the time they have spent under false arrest and all they have been through and all that they have suffered and  risked simply to assert rights and prerogatives that were always theirs to begin with.
It’s time for everyone in America to wake up and remember Ruby Ridge, Waco, Oklahoma City, 911, LaVoy Finicum, and so much more—-and to see these things in their proper light.
These things are not being done by our government.
These things are being done by British Subjects and by other foreigners and by their hired-gun subcontractors—-all in the employ of private, for-profit, mostly foreign bank-owned corporations in the business of providing government services.
The DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, BLM, and FBI are all separate for-profit corporations which have functioned in this instance and in many others as crime syndicates and failed even the most basic tests of competency and good faith.  They have violated their charters and besmirched their names and this is not the first time.
I remember reading about Randy Weaver’s wife and baby, just as I read about LaVoy Finicum and the siege at Waco and 911.
And I thought then and I think now—-these rotten, worthless, criminals are our employees.
They are sticking their filthy paws in our pockets and drawing a paycheck for the “service” of preying upon us— for racketeering, for falsely arresting, for mischaracterizing, for thieving, for violating our constitutional guarantees, for trespassing upon us and our property, and yes, even for murdering us—-all in violation of their commercial contracts and in violation of the treaties allowing them to be here.
They need a jack boot so far up their butts the steel toe sees daylight.

&lt;meta http-equiv=”refresh” content=”0; URL=/?_fb_noscript=1″ /&gt;

&lt;meta http-equiv=”refresh” content=”0; URL=/?_fb_noscript=1″ /&gt;(3) Cindy Wisner

Deb Hair All charges have to be dismissed very soon against all of them. They had no jurisdiction. They’re working on NV one now.

Unlike

Love

 

Like

 

Love

 

Haha

 

Wow

 

Sad

 

Angry

Comment

(9) Facebook

FREE THEM NOW. . . ! ! !

Watch this link- – -> https://youtu.be/QIU56co9B5I

September 2016 Federal Nineth Circut case# 15-10117 PDF link:
https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/

…/opin…/2016/08/16/15-10117.pdf See More

No automatic alt text available.

Love

 

Like

 

Love

 

Haha

 

Wow

 

Sad

 

Angry

Comment

&lt;meta http-equiv=”refresh” content=”0; URL=/?_fb_noscript=1″ /&gt;(31) Facebook

,398 Views

2nd Day of Trial

So this is about how today went……
out of 41 objections from the prosecution the judge sided with the defense 8 times. Out of 11 objections from the defense the judge sided with defense 0 times. Unfortunately, the judge seems like she has already made up her mind and at times we wondered why we were even having a trial. At one point the prosecution talked about 2 videos they wanted to be shown to the jury. One of which was an interview with a reporter. Mumford objected to the video because Ward was not in the interview and it had nothing to do with Ward. Judge over ruled. Directly after Mumford asked why Prosecution was able to have a part one and a part two. Judge explained to prosecution that she specifically asked when submitting evidence not to have subtitles but since it was already done we would just go with it. Bias? You decide. Also Ammon and Ryan mentioned that they were transferred from the jail free of handcuffs and as they were waiting by the courthouse door right before coming into the room they put handcuffs on them, escorted them into the room, and then removed them. What was the reason for that? Just for show?

Prosecution said Dave Ward would talk about the Hammonds so Judge wanted to read synopsis of Hammonds to give the jury a background on who they are.

Sheriff Ward was the first witness to take the stand. He came in looking very uptight and nervous. He mentioned that he met Ammon for the first time on Nov 5, 2015 and that He always had polite conversation with Ammon. He said he is an easy guy to have conversation with. At one point When Sheriff Ward was asked a question he said “I don’t recall, my brain is like jello.” Ward met in person and talked on the phone with Ammon several times. One meeting was with about 10 of the guys from the refuge. Even though the sheriff’s office clearly states that guns are prohibited, the sheriff said he allowed the men to come in with their guns because he didn’t want to have a second amendment argument. It was evident that the guns were allowed because Ward was not worried or concerned in any way about his safety or the safety of those in his office. Otherwise, he wouldn’t have allowed it.

The video of the meeting with Sheriff Ward and Ammon was played for the Jury. In the video Ammon asked the sheriff 4 times in 4 different ways about addressing their redress of grievances. “what do you expect people to do if they are bringing up legitimate concerns and they are ignored?” Ammon Bundy
Sheriff Ward continued to beat around the question even while on the stand.
Prosecution asked Sheriff Ward if he was the Law of the Land. He responded yes. They then asked him as sheriff can you overturn the decisions of the federal government or the Hammonds or any of that for that matter? Sheriff Ward said, “no, I do not.”

Earlier in his testimony Ward mentioned that he is the one who approves gun permits in his county and the permits have his signature. Towards the end of his testimony he was asked about what percentage of his community carry guns. Ward said he is unsure.

Infamous quotes today from Sheriff Ward. “We can’t just arrest someone because we don’t like what they have to say.”

“You have to have a victim to arrest someone for a crime.”

Butch Eaton took the stand briefly towards the end of court. Judge asked him to stay the night so that he could continue his testimony tomorrow. He briefly spoke of how he joined a group that headed to the refuge. His story was much different than what he had originally relayed to prosecutors but prosecution reminded him to only give testimony on what he himself saw and now what was relayed to him by someone else or anything he is just assuming. His testimony will continue tomorrow.

PS I am going to miss Sarah so much when I have to part from her tomorrow. No more cuddle time.😜

See More

Harney County Fire Chief Goes Public – Redoubt News
http://redoubtnews.com/wp-content/themes/mh-magazine/js/css3-mediaqueries.js

Harney County Fire Chief Resigns

FBI Caught Posing As Militia At Local Armory

Fire Chief Chris Briels spoke to a crowd today about what has happened in his town of Burns, and Harney County.

As a member of the Committee of Safety, he thought he could help keep the situation calm. He was concerned about violence erupting.

Immediately, the Committee of Safety was told they would not be allowed to use any county building for their meetings, including the Elks club and the Senior Center.

When they were finally given the chance to meet, and speak up, their Committee Chairman, Tim Smith, told them they had been black-balled within the community. As a Committee of Safety, they had only tried to do what they could to mitigate and deescalate the situation.

But, when Briels was told that their were strange-looking men poking around the Armory, he had to check it out. He had been told that these men had been seen, and turned into the police, twice at the armory.

He followed these men from the armory until they stopped. Then he questioned them. They were evasive and dishonest with him. First telling him he was mistaken, they were not at the armory. Then, when caught in that lie, they tried to say they were looking for a place to start a business. They finally admitted to being at the armory, yet they were only looking at deer.

He asked them to be truthful with him, as there was too much fear in their community.

Briels was concerned enough, he took a picture of their vehicle and license plate and went to see the County Sheriff, David Ward. He was not allowed to see the sheriff

Briels called the police dispatch number and had them run the license plate. It came back to undercover FBI agents.

Judge Steve Grasty was beside himself.

He told Mr. Briels today that he was the one causing the fear. Grasty said that he did not have a right to question anyone about what anyone is doing at the armory. Grasty said that Briels did not have the right to follow anyone and question them.

“What do you think?” he asked the crowd. “Do have the right to talk to another human being? Do I have the right to ask what is going on in my community?”

“This is absolutely appalling to me,” Briels stated.

Briels immediately resigned his position as Harney County Fire Chief. “I will not work for someone that I do not trust!” he stressed.

Grasty tried to get Briels to distance himself from the safety committee, but Briels would have none of it. Reminding everyone of the United States Constitution, he said, “We have the Right to Free Speech. We have the Right to Assemble.””I did not just quit this county! But I will not work for a government, or a person, that I do not believe in or have faith in.”

 

Opening Statements in Malheur Protest Trial – Redoubt News
http://redoubtnews.com/wp-content/themes/mh-magazine/js/css3-mediaqueries.js

    1. Far from being dissatisfied with my own court-appointed attorney, I owe her – Lisa Maxfield of Portland – a debt I can never repay. She has worked her fingers to the bone for me and takes any threat to her client personally. Her opening statement yesterday moved the jury, and was met with enthusiastic approbation by her colleagues, and by me. Anybody who stands 6’6″ and wears size 17 shoes will make a powerful impression, and in Matt’s case his physical presence is topped by an articulate and forceful style. I almost feel sorry for the prosecutors – we are putting them in the catbird seat !

Opening Statements in Malheur Protest Trial – Redoubt News
http://redoubtnews.com/wp-content/themes/mh-magazine/js/css3-mediaqueries.js

Opening Statements in Malheur Protest Trial

By Shari Dovale

The Malheur Protest Trial hit high points, and low points today.

The opening statements began with the government prosecution calling the protest a “dangerous invasion.” They tried to define the narrative from the very beginning, but the defense came back with a bang.

Each defense team had an opportunity to give an opening statement. They were all very good. Some of the highlights included Ryan Bundy keeping calm even in the face of opposition from the judge. Judge Anna Brown stopped him on multiple occasions but he didn’t let it rattle him. He was well spoken and made good arguments.

He did attempt to pass out pocket Constitutions to the jury members but the Judge did not allow it. She also did not allow him to read from a legal dictionary, insisting that only she can instruct the jury in the definition of the law.

It does strike us as more bias from the Judge. She will not allow the jury to do any research, even as far as looking up the wording of the laws themselves. She will instruct and interpret all laws for them. Ryan was very professional, did not let it phase him, and came across extremely well.

Shawna Cox had bouts with Judge Brown as well. However, she also came across very well, letting the jury get to know her and why she was there. She made valid points and had the witnesses in the gallery on her side in no time.

The real outstanding statement today came from Matthew Schindler, stand by counsel for Kenneth Medenbach. He was professional, passionate about his client, and spoke eloquently. He came across as truly caring for his client. I gained a great deal of respect for him today.

All of the defense statements were very good, and for the largest part, worked very well together, building on each other and complimenting the case.

I was concerned in the beginning when I saw so many court-appointed attorneys, knowing that they do not always provide the best service to clients. This is certainly not true in this case. These attorneys are putting forth their best efforts and we applaud them.

Another major concern is that Shawna Tells us that they have not yet received all of the discovery evidence. They are already into trial but the government has slacked again.

The judge and the prosecution must be seeing it as well. I don’t believe the bias has ended. The government is not showing their best, as yet, but there is a lot more to go.

Tomorrow begins the witness testimony, and Harney County Sheriff David Ward is up first. This will be interesting to listen to, as we heard him speak multiple times in Burns. I am curious to see how he comes across here.

 

 

 

Facebook

Margret Thatcher once said, ““The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.”

Image may contain: text

Let us Pray,

Heavenly Father as We Celebrate the victory, of Pete’s Acquittal in Oregon father I ask that you Continue your Mercy and Grace as Pete makes his way to Nevada, Father I ask that you Be with those whom are still, continuing on to trial Tomorrow the 7th of September.

Father I ask you Lift the Vale of Corruption and Greed, and replace it With the full Armor of Truth and Transparency, as the rest of our Brother’s embark on to this trial.

Father We know, you are always with us in our times of hardships and in our times of trials. For We know one thing, As long as we hold you dear to our heart’s no matter how tall the climb, or how long the long walk, we can get through our hardships and our trials with us by your side. We know Father, that you always are, our strength, our light, and our truth.

Father in your name, We Pray

Amen.

See More

Image may contain: text

Love

 

Like

 

Love

 

Haha

 

Wow

 

Sad

 

Angry

Comment

Comments
Cindy Wisner
Remove
Unlike · Reply · 1 · 1 min

(1) Cindy Wisner – Arriving in Portland for the Bundy Trial By Shari…

Arriving in Portland for the Bundy Trial

By Shari Dovale and Aubrie Bosworth

Day 1

God is certainly calling the shots in Portland! Some things should have gone horribly wrong today, but everything is working out fine, just as He planned it.

We have made it here, are checked in for the night and have tomorrow’s schedule pretty well laid out.

I am not a big fan of Portland. After all, we had a heck of a time finding dinner! Nearly every place we checked was CLOSED for Labor day. How many food service places do that?

Finally found a Taco Bell that was opened. Wow, Four Mexican meals in 4 days. This is gonna kill me. LOL

The bridges here are many, often, and very tall! Some of them are kinda scary for this girl. But, my sidekick is very encouraging. I am blessed to have her with me.

We are looking forward to covering all the Patriots here in Occupied Territory. There should be plenty to see and tell you about.

They have put the word out that the trial could take up to 3 months. However, they have really scaled back what will be allowed. We all know how much some of these legal-beagles like to talk, so it is anybody’s guess as to how long it will take.

They are limiting the number of courtroom observers to 25, so it will be difficult to get in most days, but we will make every effort. If we can get inside at least one day early on, just so they know we are here, it will be a good thing.

It is difficult sometimes to remember that God is in Control, but that is what we hold on to.

Look for updates on this post, as well as special articles from me, and my hot-shot cub reporter, Aubrie. We are both here to bring you the truth of these events!

Portland
A beautiful day for traveling. Photo Credit: Aubrie Bosworth, Redoubt News

Share this:

Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
31Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)31
Click to share on Google+ (Opens in new window)
Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)

Arnold Law Steps Down as Bundy Attorney

May 26, 2016

In “BLM”

Join the Fight for Freedom and Liberty

September 1, 2016

In “Constitution”

What have they done to Ryan Bundy?

August 13, 2016

In “Constitution”

Like

 

Like

 

Love

 

Haha

 

Wow

 

Sad

 

Angry

Comment

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: