View Full Version : Federal Judge Accuses Federal Agents of RICO Type Racketering
palani
29th July 2013, 04:36 AM
More at the article.
Federal Judge Rules for Property Rights, Smacks Down Abusive Feds
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/15602-federal-judge-r
In an historic 104-page ruling, Chief Judge Robert C. Jones of the Federal District Court of Nevada has struck a major blow for property rights and, at the same time, has smacked down federal agencies that have been riding roughshod over Western ranchers and property owners. The long-awaited ruling, which had been expected before the end of last year, was finally issued at the end of May. The court case, U.S. v. Hage, has been keenly watched by legal analysts and constitutional scholars — but has been completely ignored by the major media.
As we reported last November ("Judge Blasts Federal Conspiracy; Ranch Family Vindicated — Again!"), in June 2012, Judge Jones had issued a scorching preliminary bench ruling that charged federal officials of the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) with an ongoing series of illegal actions against Nevada rancher E. Wayne Hage (shown on left) that the judge described as “abhorrent” and a literal, criminal conspiracy.
monty
22nd March 2016, 04:33 PM
But the 9th Circuit reveresed and remanded it back to the District Court on Jan. 15
This case is close to home, my brother's in law and business partner.
http://youtu.be/VjzUqVR7UoY
http://youtu.be/VjzUqVR7UoY
monty
22nd March 2016, 04:36 PM
http://youtu.be/21fHjDIdlUI
http://youtu.be/21fHjDIdlUI
monty
22nd March 2016, 04:52 PM
http://youtu.be/OORZ5mN8eU0
http://youtu.be/OORZ5mN8eU0
monty
22nd March 2016, 05:01 PM
E. Wayne Hage passed away in 2005. We buried him overlooking the ranch he loved.
The battle against the BLM still rages.
http://youtu.be/9SGZK6piJs4
http://youtu.be/9SGZK6piJs4
Bigjon
23rd March 2016, 12:03 AM
I think we need to learn the law.
Dumbed down are us.
I present this as an example for learning the law as opposed to statutes.
https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=950170795050509&id=737999312934326&substory_index=0 (https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=950170795050509&id=737999312934326&substory_index=0)
The STATE OF TEXAS vs John Q. PUBLIC
Note: Take a second to notice who the plaintiff is in the photo attached to this article wink emoticon ... That photo has nothing to do with anything other than to show you what a criminal 'complaint' looks like where a prosecutor is bringing forth false claims against a 'man' by filing complaints in court that no living man can actually take the stand and verify. The 'United States of America' is not a living man wink emoticon
If you feel this Notice could be of benefit to you, feel free to use it - or don't. It has been successful at making five cases disappear in a puff of smoke, thus far. Simply trying to help my fellow Patriots in this brutal game of government interference of our Rights by sharing strategies that have been effective to this point when dealing with gov't agencies/agents who insist on interfering with the Rights of man.
Edit: As of November 2, 2015 the Notice has been successful at making 6 cases vanish from Pacer without a trace - gone - poof - never happened.
Anytime a prosecuting attorney is bringing charges against you for anything pertaining to a code or statute violation such as those found in US Codes or State Statutes, he is operating under the presumption that you are one of that corporation's own internal employees who is contractually obligated to abide by those internal statutes. It is a con, and they make billions of dollars every year off of unsuspecting Americans because we don't know the difference between a criminal complaint and an actual claim.
I explain this in more detail here:
https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=950165995050989&id=737999312934326&substory_index=0
If you are not employed by that corporation, such as the 'IRS', or the 'CITY OF GALVESTON', or the 'STATE OF TEXAS', or the 'UNITED STATES', and being compensated to abide by that corporation's internal rules/codes/statutes/regulations, they simply do not apply to you, as Slavery and Involuntary Servitude are against the Law on American soil (see Amendment XIII), and no man may compel performance (force him to abide by internal corporate statutes) from another man, without fairly and justly compensating that man for his performance.
Gov't employees have signed into an employment contract to hold those gov't jobs, and they are being compensated to abide by that corporation's internal statutes, but you and I are not, therefore, they simply do not apply to us.
Yes, it is a nationwide con that has been ongoing for years. It is how they control society under corporate statutes; it is how they interfere with your Rights; it is how they make billions of dollars due to our ignorance of the Law; it is how they incarcerate us for victimless crimes where there is no injured party.
Anytime a prosecutor brings forth a criminal complaint against you, it reads like this:
STATE OF TEXAS vs John Q. Public
If he had an actual claim, it would read like this:
Bob T. Jones II vs John Q. Public (Bob being the prosecutor himself in his capacity as a man).
He's filing a complaint on behalf of some entity that goes by that name (STATE OF TEXAS), but he has no verifiable claim because nothing you may have done harmed HIM or his property, and he cannot produce his Plaintiff to point you out across the courtroom and say,
"That man sitting right over there caused me harm by his failure to file an income tax form, or his failure to obtain a concealed carry permit, or his possession of cannabis oil, etc."
He's only complaining, because gov't cannot bring forth actual claims against man because man created gov't. All they can do is complain if you are not an employee of that agency who is being compensated to abide by that agencies internal-corporate statutes. But his complaints are causing you harm; they are harming your good name within your community; they are depriving you of your property without due process of law, and they are wasting your very valuable time, money, and resources having to deal with a complaint that no one can take the stand and verify in open court.
Therefore, the prosecutor is filing false claims against his fellow man, and that is an unlawful act in which he most certainly can be held accountable.
To use this Notice in an existing case,
Just replace 'STATE OF TEXAS' with 'IRS' or 'CITY OF GALVESTON', or 'CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES', or 'UNITED STATES', etc. depending on your specific situation. If there is no property involved and it's just some prosecutor attempting to bring you up on criminal complaint for something (anything), just take out the parts having to do with property.
Handwrite the Notice and make COPIES of the Notice. You'll want to enter a COPY into the prosecutor's case, not the original, as doing so would be surrendering your property to the court. You want to keep the original so they cannot alter it in any way shape or form. The only body that may hold and verify the original would be a Jury of your Peers. You have to be very vigilant in protecting your property (claims and notices) when dealing with these courts and prosecutors; if they can change or alter it in anyway to get themselves off the hook, bet your ass they will do just that. Protect yourself and only enter a COPY into their case so they know you still possess the original if they decide to trespass on your property by altering it in any way-shape or form.
Court Clerks are notorious for changing claims into complaints without your knowledge, so stay vigilant [I]like emoticon
Remember: America is STILL a Common Law Nation (as is Canada, England, Australia, and a few others). Common Law is unwritten Law - It is nowhere to be found in codes/statutes/rules/regulations. Basically, you can do anything you damned well please as long as you are not harming your fellow man or his property, and you have the right to face your accuser (see Article VI) and settle with him on the private side before it goes public if for some reason you DO trespass on your fellow [wo]man.
Therefore,
If the prosecutor is stating the 'IRS', or the 'STATE OF IDAHO', etc. is the Plaintiff, then make the Son-of-a-Bitch put his Plaintiff on the witness stand so you may cross examine him and compensate him for any harm you may have caused him or his personal property by your failure to file paperwork, or failure to obtain a concealed carry permit, or failure to obtain a Class III weapons tax stamp, or possession of marijuana, etc. If he can't produce the Plaintiff (the Plaintiff MUST Appear), then sue his ass for filing false claims against you and take his house or retirement fund. Someone (a living wo[man]) has to show up and verify the harm.
Here is the Notice:
" i: a man; require the STATE OF TEXAS to show up and verify his/her claim against me so i may cross examine my accuser (the plaintiff must appear) and compensate him/her for any harm i may have caused. If this man/woman that goes by the name 'STATE OF TEXAS' cannot show up to verify his/her claim, i require this matter immediately discharged. It is my belief there is no man/woman named 'STATE OF TEXAS' who can verify this claim by uttering with his/her voice I've done wrong or caused him/her personal harm, injury, or loss, therefore pressing it upon the record in open court. It is also my belief, that someone is filing complaints (false claims) on behalf of this entity known as the 'STATE OF TEXAS' in an attempt to unjustly enrich themselves and the 'STATE OF TEXAS' (whoever those individuals may be) and deprive me of my property without due process of law. If this matter is not immediately discharged, i will be requiring leave of court so i may bring a proper and verifiable claim before the court to address this trespass against me in the proper venue-a court of record (trespasses being: filing false claims, barratry, extortion, malicious prosecution, unjust enrichment, theft, robbery, etc.), in which i will be requiring compensation for the trespasses and wasting my valuable time, money, and resources having to deal with this complaint, as i do not have time to answer complaints without compensation at this time. If there is an actual verifiable claim before the court, i will be more than happy to show up free of charge and address any proper and verifiable claim against me. i also require and order the immediate restoration of my property (see Exhibit A) and one dollar per second from the commencement of the crime till my property is restored - your name here.'
Note: If there is no theft/robbery of property involved, just leave that out of the Notice. Property is anything you enjoy exclusive Right to. If it is a CPS case involving children, you use the word property, not 'children'. The STATE has no control over property, but they do have control over words they use in their statutes such as 'child', 'infant', 'children', 'motor vehicle', 'marijuana', 'automatic weapons', 'firearms', 'land', 'homes', 'bicycles', etc. You always want to use that word 'property', period! And 'Exhibit A' should be a photo of the property attached to the back of your Notice; a photocopy of that property is fine.
Either someone can show up and VERIFY the claim by pressing it upon the record in open court, or there is no case, period. The prosecutor cannot verify the claim because he has no first hand knowledge, and nothing you may have done caused harm, injury, or loss to himself or his property.
Simply put, he's filing false claims to unjustly enrich himself, and this entity known as the 'STATE OF TEXAS', or 'IRS', or 'UNITED STATES', etc. You're letting the man/woman who's prosecuting this case against you know, that if they don't discharge this nonsense before the next hearing, you are going to stop the next hearing in its tracks by saying "i require leave of court so I may bring a proper and verifiable claim against YOU for filing false claims against me, and I will be requiring compensation for the trespasses.
Your claim supercedes his silly complaint. You can verify your claim, but he cannot verify the complaint, as he himself has no first hand knowledge, and nothing you may have done caused harm, injury, or loss to himself or his property, and he cannot produce his Plaintiff because there is no man named 'STATE OF TEXAS' who can take the stand and verify the complaint, either.
Court is a place for man to settle claims, not complaints.
You'll want to enter that Notice into an existing case they have against you. If the prosecutor doesn't discharge/dismiss the case after reading that Notice, he's calling your bluff. When you get to the hearing, simply keep your mouth shut and keep referring the judge back to your Notice anytime he's asks you questions because he's more than likely trying to pull you out of the Common Law and back into their jurisdiction (control).
If they insist on continuing or ignoring you, then do what you said you would do in the Notice and REQUIRE (to demand by right and by authority) leave of court for a few days so you can perfect your actual claim against the prosecutor and drag his ass into court as a defendant for filing false claims against you. Because the compensation you will be requiring for the trespass shall exceed twenty dollars, you'll be able to drag him into a trial by jury (see Article VII) as a defendant for filing false claims against you that no Plaintiff showed up to verify.
If a prosecutor is claiming the 'UNITED STATES' is the Plaintiff in his suit against you, then for the love of God make him produce his Plaintiff so you may cross examine your accuser. Article VI guarantees you that right (that Right predates the Constitution). He can't produce the Plaintiff, because the 'UNITED STATES' is not a living man who can utter with his voice you've done wrong and caused him personal harm, injury, or loss ..... and this is how you call them out on it and hold them personally accountable for filing false claims against you.
In order for their to be a controversy for a judge to hear, there MUST be a living man or woman willing to take the stand and VERIFY harm, injury, or loss you may have caused. If no living man or woman can take the stand, then there is NO CONTROVERSY, and what the hell are you doing there?
If there is no [wo]man willing to take the stand and VERIFY that YOU have caused them or their property, harm, injury, or loss, then there is no controversy; if there is no controversy, there is no jurisdiction of ANY court; or ANY judge to ever entertain the case, because there is no case [I]wink emoticon
A corporation such as the UNITED STATES or the STATE OF TEXAS cannot take the stand, it is a fictitious-corporate entity created by man. It does not speak; it does not eat; it does not drink; it cannot bring forth a claim against a living man, period.
Here's Karl Lentz explaining the concept of filing a claim against their complaint in the comment section below. Listen to the entire 4 minutes, you'll be glad you did.
And if you'd like to learn REAL and actual LAW of this Land and how to defend yourself against gov't agents, this would be a good place to start:
https://www.facebook.com/Karl-LentzCraig-Lynch-videos-889…/… (https://www.facebook.com/Karl-LentzCraig-Lynch-videos-889352897838357/?fref=ts)
Bigjon
23rd March 2016, 01:20 AM
Judge Darby (https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=172625606457387&id=100011298466016&fref=nf)March 21 at 1:03pm (https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=172625606457387&id=100011298466016) ·
The courts never were for the people... that is because they are owned and operated by the Lawyers Guild as for profit corporations.
All courts have a DUN number...
All courts are repugnant to the constitution because they are not constitutional courts. They are statutory special Admiralty courts, or courts of the SEA. They are not of the Land.
Why else do you think that you can be declared in contempt of court when you bring up the constitution in any court?
The lawyers Guild controls all politics, all government, and protects the bankers and the agents when they murder Americans or worse…
the Lawyers Guild control all legislation and laws that are passed against the people. In every state, in every country of the world.
This is why we need to force the return of Land Jurisdiction that our forefathers gave us and we lost around 1861…
Statutory Jurisdiction puts the Judges and lawyers Guild as the King and the people as the peasants to those kings…
whereas Land Jurisdiction places the People as the King and the judges at the bottom (they only act as referees to ensure that the constitution is followed). They do not stand in Judgment or dictate from the bench, they do not tell the jury what they will consider or not, they do not tell the jury (the people) what verdict they will produce…
the lawyers cannot decide what issues will be prosecuted or what information is relevant to be seen by the Grand juries…
Grand Juries are not vetted by the Lawyers, they are not controlled by the lawyers and they do not withhold information from the Grand Juries…
Read the Book “Consent of the Governed” to understand.
Read the Magna Carta specifically sections 48, 52, and 61.
Give up the programmed notion that the Lawyers Guild controlled government is legitimate, give up the programmed concept that the for profit Admiralty Lawyer’s Guild controlled courts are constitutional and that you will find any justice there…
Bring back the proper constitutional courts of the People and throw the lawyers back into the SEA.
Also realize that there are many paid people that create confusion and dissent.
Plants of the Government to separate and confuse people with emotional arguments that have no validity…
But cause you to be confused and lose track of the important issue at hand… to trash the messenger and focus your attention on the messenger rather than the true nature of the Message…
DO NOT BE FOOLED BY THESE TRICKSTERS. Your best amour is knowledge… their best attack is emotion… understand how they operate.
palani
23rd March 2016, 02:59 AM
Read the Book “Consent of the Governed” to understand.
Read the Magna Carta specifically sections 48, 52, and 61.
Reading is a skill taught in kindergarden. Understanding is never taught and is a skill that must be cultivated.
The Law of the Forest was established at the same time as the Magna Carte yet few people have heard of it and it is never quoted (except possibly by me). In it you will find that a forest might contain many parks, warrens and chases. That would make a forest a 'container'.
a Forrest doth comprehend in it a Chase, a Parke, and a Warren
A forest is a certain Territorie of woody grounds and fruitfull pastures, priviledged for wild beasts and fowles of Forest, Chase and Warren, to rest and abide in, in the safe protection of the King, for his princely delight and pleasure, which territorie of ground, so priviledged, is meted and bounded with unremoveable, markes, meetes, and boundaries, either known by matter of record, or else by prescription:
And also replenished with wilde beastes of benerie or Chase, and with great coverts of vert, for the succour of the said wild beastes, to have there abode in: for the preservation and continuance of which said place, together with the vert and Venison, there are certain particular Lawes, Priviledges and Officers, belonging to the same, meete for that purpose, that are onely proper unto a Forrest, and not to any other place.
If you have the capacity to understand what the quoted piece is talking about then you may advance one step up in status. I doubt if many people really have that capacity though.
Bigjon
23rd March 2016, 08:39 AM
This is very good information.
A must listen.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fD8nBdYRSCg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fD8nBdYRSCg)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fD8nBdYRSCg
Recommended Website: https://fourcornersdoctrine.wordpress.com/
Books
http://www.jasonwhoyt.com/shop
http://www.amazon.com/You-Know-Some...8-1&keywords=you+know+something+is+wrong+when (http://www.amazon.com/You-Know-Something-Wrong-When/dp/1491279184/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1444223112&sr=8-1&keywords=you+know+something+is+wrong+when)
monty
23rd March 2016, 08:45 AM
I think we need to learn the law.
Dumbed down are us.
I present this as an example for learning the law as opposed to statutes.
https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=950170795050509&id=737999312934326&substory_index=0 (https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=950170795050509&id=737999312934326&substory_index=0)
The STATE OF TEXAS vs John Q. PUBLIC
Note: Take a second to notice who the plaintiff is in the photo attached to this article wink emoticon ... That photo has nothing to do with anything other than to show you what a criminal 'complaint' looks like where a prosecutor is bringing forth false claims against a 'man' by filing complaints in court that no living man can actually take the stand and verify. The 'United States of America' is not a living man wink emoticon
If you feel this Notice could be of benefit to you, feel free to use it - or don't. It has been successful at making five cases disappear in a puff of smoke, thus far. Simply trying to help my fellow Patriots in this brutal game of government interference of our Rights by sharing strategies that have been effective to this point when dealing with gov't agencies/agents who insist on interfering with the Rights of man.
Edit: As of November 2, 2015 the Notice has been successful at making 6 cases vanish from Pacer without a trace - gone - poof - never happened.
Anytime a prosecuting attorney is bringing charges against you for anything pertaining to a code or statute violation such as those found in US Codes or State Statutes, he is operating under the presumption that you are one of that corporation's own internal employees who is contractually obligated to abide by those internal statutes. It is a con, and they make billions of dollars every year off of unsuspecting Americans because we don't know the difference between a criminal complaint and an actual claim.
I explain this in more detail here:
https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=950165995050989&id=737999312934326&substory_index=0
If you are not employed by that corporation, such as the 'IRS', or the 'CITY OF GALVESTON', or the 'STATE OF TEXAS', or the 'UNITED STATES', and being compensated to abide by that corporation's internal rules/codes/statutes/regulations, they simply do not apply to you, as Slavery and Involuntary Servitude are against the Law on American soil (see Amendment XIII), and no man may compel performance (force him to abide by internal corporate statutes) from another man, without fairly and justly compensating that man for his performance.
Gov't employees have signed into an employment contract to hold those gov't jobs, and they are being compensated to abide by that corporation's internal statutes, but you and I are not, therefore, they simply do not apply to us.
Yes, it is a nationwide con that has been ongoing for years. It is how they control society under corporate statutes; it is how they interfere with your Rights; it is how they make billions of dollars due to our ignorance of the Law; it is how they incarcerate us for victimless crimes where there is no injured party.
Anytime a prosecutor brings forth a criminal complaint against you, it reads like this:
STATE OF TEXAS vs John Q. Public
If he had an actual claim, it would read like this:
Bob T. Jones II vs John Q. Public (Bob being the prosecutor himself in his capacity as a man).
He's filing a complaint on behalf of some entity that goes by that name (STATE OF TEXAS), but he has no verifiable claim because nothing you may have done harmed HIM or his property, and he cannot produce his Plaintiff to point you out across the courtroom and say,
"That man sitting right over there caused me harm by his failure to file an income tax form, or his failure to obtain a concealed carry permit, or his possession of cannabis oil, etc."
He's only complaining, because gov't cannot bring forth actual claims against man because man created gov't. All they can do is complain if you are not an employee of that agency who is being compensated to abide by that agencies internal-corporate statutes. But his complaints are causing you harm; they are harming your good name within your community; they are depriving you of your property without due process of law, and they are wasting your very valuable time, money, and resources having to deal with a complaint that no one can take the stand and verify in open court.
Therefore, the prosecutor is filing false claims against his fellow man, and that is an unlawful act in which he most certainly can be held accountable.
To use this Notice in an existing case,
Just replace 'STATE OF TEXAS' with 'IRS' or 'CITY OF GALVESTON', or 'CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES', or 'UNITED STATES', etc. depending on your specific situation. If there is no property involved and it's just some prosecutor attempting to bring you up on criminal complaint for something (anything), just take out the parts having to do with property.
Handwrite the Notice and make COPIES of the Notice. You'll want to enter a COPY into the prosecutor's case, not the original, as doing so would be surrendering your property to the court. You want to keep the original so they cannot alter it in any way shape or form. The only body that may hold and verify the original would be a Jury of your Peers. You have to be very vigilant in protecting your property (claims and notices) when dealing with these courts and prosecutors; if they can change or alter it in anyway to get themselves off the hook, bet your ass they will do just that. Protect yourself and only enter a COPY into their case so they know you still possess the original if they decide to trespass on your property by altering it in any way-shape or form.
Court Clerks are notorious for changing claims into complaints without your knowledge, so stay vigilant [I]like emoticon
Remember: America is STILL a Common Law Nation (as is Canada, England, Australia, and a few others). Common Law is unwritten Law - It is nowhere to be found in codes/statutes/rules/regulations. Basically, you can do anything you damned well please as long as you are not harming your fellow man or his property, and you have the right to face your accuser (see Article VI) and settle with him on the private side before it goes public if for some reason you DO trespass on your fellow [wo]man.
Therefore,
If the prosecutor is stating the 'IRS', or the 'STATE OF IDAHO', etc. is the Plaintiff, then make the Son-of-a-Bitch put his Plaintiff on the witness stand so you may cross examine him and compensate him for any harm you may have caused him or his personal property by your failure to file paperwork, or failure to obtain a concealed carry permit, or failure to obtain a Class III weapons tax stamp, or possession of marijuana, etc. If he can't produce the Plaintiff (the Plaintiff MUST Appear), then sue his ass for filing false claims against you and take his house or retirement fund. Someone (a living wo[man]) has to show up and verify the harm.
Here is the Notice:
" i: a man; require the STATE OF TEXAS to show up and verify his/her claim against me so i may cross examine my accuser (the plaintiff must appear) and compensate him/her for any harm i may have caused. If this man/woman that goes by the name 'STATE OF TEXAS' cannot show up to verify his/her claim, i require this matter immediately discharged. It is my belief there is no man/woman named 'STATE OF TEXAS' who can verify this claim by uttering with his/her voice I've done wrong or caused him/her personal harm, injury, or loss, therefore pressing it upon the record in open court. It is also my belief, that someone is filing complaints (false claims) on behalf of this entity known as the 'STATE OF TEXAS' in an attempt to unjustly enrich themselves and the 'STATE OF TEXAS' (whoever those individuals may be) and deprive me of my property without due process of law. If this matter is not immediately discharged, i will be requiring leave of court so i may bring a proper and verifiable claim before the court to address this trespass against me in the proper venue-a court of record (trespasses being: filing false claims, barratry, extortion, malicious prosecution, unjust enrichment, theft, robbery, etc.), in which i will be requiring compensation for the trespasses and wasting my valuable time, money, and resources having to deal with this complaint, as i do not have time to answer complaints without compensation at this time. If there is an actual verifiable claim before the court, i will be more than happy to show up free of charge and address any proper and verifiable claim against me. i also require and order the immediate restoration of my property (see Exhibit A) and one dollar per second from the commencement of the crime till my property is restored - your name here.'
Note: If there is no theft/robbery of property involved, just leave that out of the Notice. Property is anything you enjoy exclusive Right to. If it is a CPS case involving children, you use the word property, not 'children'. The STATE has no control over property, but they do have control over words they use in their statutes such as 'child', 'infant', 'children', 'motor vehicle', 'marijuana', 'automatic weapons', 'firearms', 'land', 'homes', 'bicycles', etc. You always want to use that word 'property', period! And 'Exhibit A' should be a photo of the property attached to the back of your Notice; a photocopy of that property is fine.
Either someone can show up and VERIFY the claim by pressing it upon the record in open court, or there is no case, period. The prosecutor cannot verify the claim because he has no first hand knowledge, and nothing you may have done caused harm, injury, or loss to himself or his property.
Simply put, he's filing false claims to unjustly enrich himself, and this entity known as the 'STATE OF TEXAS', or 'IRS', or 'UNITED STATES', etc. You're letting the man/woman who's prosecuting this case against you know, that if they don't discharge this nonsense before the next hearing, you are going to stop the next hearing in its tracks by saying "i require leave of court so I may bring a proper and verifiable claim against YOU for filing false claims against me, and I will be requiring compensation for the trespasses.
Your claim supercedes his silly complaint. You can verify your claim, but he cannot verify the complaint, as he himself has no first hand knowledge, and nothing you may have done caused harm, injury, or loss to himself or his property, and he cannot produce his Plaintiff because there is no man named 'STATE OF TEXAS' who can take the stand and verify the complaint, either.
Court is a place for man to settle claims, not complaints.
You'll want to enter that Notice into an existing case they have against you. If the prosecutor doesn't discharge/dismiss the case after reading that Notice, he's calling your bluff. When you get to the hearing, simply keep your mouth shut and keep referring the judge back to your Notice anytime he's asks you questions because he's more than likely trying to pull you out of the Common Law and back into their jurisdiction (control).
If they insist on continuing or ignoring you, then do what you said you would do in the Notice and REQUIRE (to demand by right and by authority) leave of court for a few days so you can perfect your actual claim against the prosecutor and drag his ass into court as a defendant for filing false claims against you. Because the compensation you will be requiring for the trespass shall exceed twenty dollars, you'll be able to drag him into a trial by jury (see Article VII) as a defendant for filing false claims against you that no Plaintiff showed up to verify.
If a prosecutor is claiming the 'UNITED STATES' is the Plaintiff in his suit against you, then for the love of God make him produce his Plaintiff so you may cross examine your accuser. Article VI guarantees you that right (that Right predates the Constitution). He can't produce the Plaintiff, because the 'UNITED STATES' is not a living man who can utter with his voice you've done wrong and caused him personal harm, injury, or loss ..... and this is how you call them out on it and hold them personally accountable for filing false claims against you.
In order for their to be a controversy for a judge to hear, there MUST be a living man or woman willing to take the stand and VERIFY harm, injury, or loss you may have caused. If no living man or woman can take the stand, then there is NO CONTROVERSY, and what the hell are you doing there?
If there is no [wo]man willing to take the stand and VERIFY that YOU have caused them or their property, harm, injury, or loss, then there is no controversy; if there is no controversy, there is no jurisdiction of ANY court; or ANY judge to ever entertain the case, because there is no case [I]wink emoticon
A corporation such as the UNITED STATES or the STATE OF TEXAS cannot take the stand, it is a fictitious-corporate entity created by man. It does not speak; it does not eat; it does not drink; it cannot bring forth a claim against a living man, period.
Here's Karl Lentz explaining the concept of filing a claim against their complaint in the comment section below. Listen to the entire 4 minutes, you'll be glad you did.
And if you'd like to learn REAL and actual LAW of this Land and how to defend yourself against gov't agents, this would be a good place to start:
https://www.facebook.com/Karl-LentzCraig-Lynch-videos-889…/ (https://www.facebook.com/Karl-LentzCraig-Lynch-videos-889352897838357/?fref=ts)
Bigjon
23rd March 2016, 05:04 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2aQmMZxp8SY
Oregon National Guard refuses to help the people of Burns Oregon.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2aQmMZxp8SY
The first 11 minutes document the typical bureaucratic run-a-round.
monty
1st April 2016, 07:05 PM
Judge Darby (https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=172625606457387&id=100011298466016&fref=nf)March 21 at 1:03pm (https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=172625606457387&id=100011298466016) ·
The courts never were for the people... that is because they are owned and operated by the Lawyers Guild as for profit corporations.
All courts have a DUN number...
All courts are repugnant to the constitution because they are not constitutional courts. They are statutory special Admiralty courts, or courts of the SEA. They are not of the Land.
Why else do you think that you can be declared in contempt of court when you bring up the constitution in any court?
The lawyers Guild controls all politics, all government, and protects the bankers and the agents when they murder Americans or worse…
the Lawyers Guild control all legislation and laws that are passed against the people. In every state, in every country of the world.
This is why we need to force the return of Land Jurisdiction that our forefathers gave us and we lost around 1861…
Statutory Jurisdiction puts the Judges and lawyers Guild as the King and the people as the peasants to those kings…
whereas Land Jurisdiction places the People as the King and the judges at the bottom (they only act as referees to ensure that the constitution is followed). They do not stand in Judgment or dictate from the bench, they do not tell the jury what they will consider or not, they do not tell the jury (the people) what verdict they will produce…
the lawyers cannot decide what issues will be prosecuted or what information is relevant to be seen by the Grand juries…
Grand Juries are not vetted by the Lawyers, they are not controlled by the lawyers and they do not withhold information from the Grand Juries…
Read the Book “Consent of the Governed” to understand.
Read the Magna Carta specifically sections 48, 52, and 61.
Give up the programmed notion that the Lawyers Guild controlled government is legitimate, give up the programmed concept that the for profit Admiralty Lawyer’s Guild controlled courts are constitutional and that you will find any justice there…
Bring back the proper constitutional courts of the People and throw the lawyers back into the SEA.
Also realize that there are many paid people that create confusion and dissent.
Plants of the Government to separate and confuse people with emotional arguments that have no validity…
But cause you to be confused and lose track of the important issue at hand… to trash the messenger and focus your attention on the messenger rather than the true nature of the Message…
DO NOT BE FOOLED BY THESE TRICKSTERS. Your best amour is knowledge… their best attack is emotion… understand how they operate.
The National Lawyers Guild was a communist organization:
National Lawyers Guild
(Redirected from National Lawyer's Guild (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=National_Lawyer%27s_Guild&redirect=no))
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/1/1a/National_lawyers_guild_emblem.jpg/150px-National_lawyers_guild_emblem.jpg (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:National_lawyers_guild_emblem.jpg)National Lawyers Guild emblem
The National Lawyers Guild (NLG) is a public interest (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_interest) association of lawyers, law students, paralegals (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paralegal), jailhouse lawyers (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jailhouse_lawyer), law collective (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_collective) members, and other activist legal workers, in the United States. The group was founded in 1937 as an alternative to the American Bar Association (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Bar_Association) (ABA) in protest of that organization's exclusionary membership practices and conservative political orientation. They were the first US bar association to allow the admission of minorities to their ranks.
The group declares itself to be "dedicated to the need for basic and progressive change in the structure of our political and economic system . . . to the end that human rights shall be regarded as more sacred than property interests."[1] (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Lawyer%27s_Guild#cite_note-history-1)
The group has at times been the focus of controversy. As during the McCarthy era (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_McCarthy) when it was accused of operating as a communist front group, and in 2003 when NLG attorney Lynne Stewart (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynne_Stewart) was convicted of conspiracy and providing material support to terrorists (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Providing_material_support_to_terrorists), sentenced to ten years in prison, and disbarred, for helping pass messages from prison for Omar Abdel-Rahman (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omar_Abdel-Rahman), her former client and mastermind of the 1993 World Trade Center bombings (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993_World_Trade_Center_bombings), to his followers in al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Gama%27a_al-Islamiyya), an organization designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Terrorist_Organization) by the US Secretary of State (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Secretary_of_State), and for committing perjury (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perjury).[2] (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Lawyer%27s_Guild#cite_note-usdoj.gov-2)[3] (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Lawyer%27s_Guild#cite_note-nypost.com-3)[4] (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Lawyer%27s_Guild#cite_note-activistdefense.wordpress.com-4)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Lawyers_Guild
The Federal Bar Association is a Corporation:
36 U.S. Code § 70501 - Organization
Current through Pub. L. 114-38 (http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-114publ38/html/PLAW-114publ38.htm). (See Public Laws for the current Congress (http://thomas.loc.gov/home/LegislativeData.php?n=PublicLaws).)
US Code (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/36/70501?qt-us_code_temp_noupdates=0#qt-us_code_temp_noupdates)
Notes (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/36/70501?qt-us_code_temp_noupdates=1#qt-us_code_temp_noupdates)
prev (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/36/70312) | next (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/36/70502)
(a)Federal Charter.—The Foundation of the Federal Bar Association (in this chapter, the “corporation”) is a federally chartered corporation.
(b)Place of Incorporation and Domicile.—The corporation is declared to be incorporated and domiciled in the District of Columbia.
(c)Perpetual Existence.—Except as otherwise provided, the corporation has perpetual existence.
(Pub. L. 105–225 (http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-105publ225/html/PLAW-105publ225.htm), Aug. 12, 1998, 112 Stat. 1351 (http://uscode.house.gov/statviewer.htm?volume=112&page=1351).)
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/36/70501
monty
1st May 2016, 06:25 PM
Do the right thing and lose your job . . . . . . . .
http://overpassesforamerica.com/?p=27864
OBAMA DEMOTES JUDGE WHO SIDED WITH RANCHERS & TRADITIONAL MARRIAGE #o4a #RTMr Americana, Overpasses News Desk
March 26th, 2016
Overpasses For America (http://overpassesforamerica.com/)
VIA WORLD TRIBUNE (http://www.worldtribune.com/u-s-sidelined-judge-who-ruled-for-key-rancher-against-feds-rejected-same-sex-marriage/)
http://overpassesforamerica.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Robert-Clive-Jones.jpg (http://overpassesforamerica.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Robert-Clive-Jones.jpg)
The U.S. government has downgraded a judge who had ruled in favor of a Nevada rancher and against the Feds.
Reno Judge Robert Clive Jones, appointed by President George W. Bush in 2003, has repeatedly clashed with the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals not only on the rancher case but on the gay marriage issue.
Jones is being relegated to what is called “senior status,” making him a part-time judge.
In a decades-long dispute between the government and the E. Wayne Hage family’s Pine Creek Ranch near Tonopah, Jones had ruled in favor of the rancher.
The case is well known in the West among property rights advocates who charge the government “exercises a heavy hand” in relations with those who make their livelihood off the land, a report in the Las Vegas Review-Journal said.
At issue was whether Hage, who is now deceased, and his son, Wayne Hage, who is currently defending the case, had grazed cattle on federal land without authorization.
Jones ruled in favor of the Hages and the appeals court overturned the decision, citing Jones’s bias.
“Defendants openly trespassed on federal lands. Rather than simply resolving the fact-specific inquiries as to when and where the cattle grazed illegally, the district court applied an ‘easement by necessity’ theory that plainly contravenes the law,” the 9th Circuit panel wrote in an opinion authored by Judge Susan Graber.
“The district court also encouraged defendants to file a counterclaim that was clearly time-barred. … Moreover, as discussed more fully in a separate disposition filed today, the court grossly abused the power of contempt by holding two federal agency officials in contempt of court for taking ordinary, lawful actions that had no effect whatsoever on this case.”
The defendants argued that, because they had water rights, a necessary easement over federal lands to get their cattle to the water was implied.
http://overpassesforamerica.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/forts-ports-10-miles-bundy-lavoy1.jpg (http://overpassesforamerica.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/forts-ports-10-miles-bundy-lavoy1.jpg)
In a separate opinion that is not published, the appeals court reversed contempt citations Jones made against the Bureau of Land Management and U.S. Forest Service employees, the Review-Journal reported.
Hage said the 9th Circuit ruling “is a big disappointment, not just for my family but for the entire industry. They felt relief at the Jones decision. Ranchers’ rights had been upheld, but now it has all been overturned. It looks to me like the 9th Circuit just swelled the ranks of the militias.”
On April 19, Chief U.S. District Judge Gloria Navarro in Nevada assigned the Hage case to herself.
Several of Jones’s other high-profile decisions in recent years have been overturned by the 9th Circuit. His rejection of same-sex marriage in Nevada in 2012 was reversed in 2014, as was his 2012 effort to pull “None of These Candidates” off Nevada ballots.
Jones also was overturned in September 2015 when the 9th Circuit revived a lawsuit against the Nevada Health and Human Services Department over the issue of disenfranchising potential low-income and disabled voters.
The full-time position Jones is vacating will be filled by presidential appointment, according to Carl Tobias, a professor at the University of Richmond School of Law in Virginia.
A nominee likely won’t be confirmed by the U.S. Senate until 2017 because of the election year, Tobias said.
JOIN OVERPASSES FOR AMERICA TODAY, HELP SAVE AMERICA!!
overpassesforamerica.com
overpasses.org
America’s largest Patriot ACTION Movement
Arrest Obama! (http://overpassesforamerica.com/?p=1637)
Bigjon
1st May 2016, 11:39 PM
Anna von Reitz (https://www.facebook.com/avonreitz?fref=nf)
April 29 at 4:26pm (https://www.facebook.com/avonreitz/posts/1011695815546165) ·
Which Is The Real American Government --- Unanswered Letters 2 -- Reply for Pat Anderson
There has been a LOT of confusion in this process, Pat---- unavoidably so, with the meanings of words being deliberately obscured and many facets of our history buried in reams of the most boring verbiage on Earth.
But....here is the skinny of it all, as delved out from the public records we have.
The Forefathers established nation-states in each of the colonies. Nations are political entities composed of members of Jural Assemblies--- unincorporated associations of people who join together for the purpose of defining and enforcing local law--- and in our case, that means the Common Law of the land, because our nation-states and our jural assemblies are all land-based and this is the form of law that our Forefathers chose to operate the land jurisdiction.
States are also political entities "standing for" those nations, created for the purpose of administration of public works and trusteeship of public resources. So you have the nation, a political entity structured as an unincorporated association of free people acting as a Jural Assembly to define and enforce the law, and you have the state, which is entrusted with providing public services and trusteeship of public property which is owned "in common".
The word "state" has another meaning, too, which is the geographic territory in which the members of the state jural assembly lives and over which their authority extends.
A "county" is similarly structured. The word can stand for the organization charged with administration of public works and trusteeship of public resources within the boundaries of the geographic territory, or it can mean the literal geographic territory in which the county jural assembly lives and over which their authority extends.
In the American System, generally speaking, townships make up counties, counties make up states, and the political power vested in these organic states and their living people forming their jural assemblies flows upward---- from the bottom up, not the top down.
These American nation-states which occupy the land mass of our country are all organized as--literally-- separate countries within the "perpetual" Union of States created by The Articles of Confederation (1781). This is how the nation-states on the land are organized and how they have always been organized. There has been no change in this basic concept and structure since 1781.
Contrary to popular misinformation, the adoption of The Constitution(s) nearly a decade later had nothing to do with and did not destroy, amend, or replace The Articles of Confederation nor affect the Union of States created by The Articles of Confederation.
The Constitution adopted by the States of America just described is called, appropriately enough, "The Constitution for the united States of America".
A "constitution" is by definition a "debt agreement or contract", and in this case, it memorialized a contract for services between the States and the new "Federal Government" they organized as means to provide these "services in common" and which acknowledged the debt that the original States incurred as a result.
The States farmed out some of their work to the federal entity they created, and in exchange, those services were standardized within all the participating States. The agreement resulted in establishing a common defense, a common form of money, a common trade policy, and so on. ALL of the duties assigned to the new "federal government" were international in nature. The States retained all authority related to their land jurisdiction. Period.
Please note that the "federal government" created was a voluntary association of independent nation-states and was never a sovereign government at all.
Once this new association of the States of America was created and adopted--on top of and in addition to and not in any way competing with the Union of States created by The Articles of Confederation--- the service contract became operative and the "federal government" began providing the mutually agreed-upon "governmental services" the associated States contracted to receive and pay for.
The Federal Government was and is a subcontractor of the States of America. It has no other business being here, and since we and our States of America created the "Federal Government" we retain the right to amend its service contract, renegotiate its service contract, or terminate its service contract at will.
As part of its services contract, the Federal Government is required to protect and defend our National Trust, known as the United States Trust. This is set forth in the Preamble of The Constitution and was further elucidated by the Bill of Rights.
The organization thus created and popularly known as the Federal Government has no duties related to the land jurisdiction of the United States, except the "Interstate Commerce Clause" provision which exists merely to "regulate" and expedite free trade between the independent nation-states in the same way that the Federal Government is supposed to regulate and expediate American free trade with and among all the other nations of the world.
Please note that because the Federal Government's duties are all international in nature, it functions naturally in the international jurisdiction of the sea and under the Law of the Sea-----not the Law of the Land. The only form of "common law" available to the Federal Government is international Martial Common Law. When federal officials and agencies refer to The Constitution as the "Law of the Land" they mean that literally, as in the foreign law of our separate and natural jurisdiction on the land---- it's our Law that they have to respect when they come ashore on our soil. Please also note that the Federal Jurisdiction created by The Constitution is operated from the top down, not from the bottom up. It depends on executive power being exercised to direct all of its activities.
What has occurred here has been a gradual usurpation by the Federal Government which is now operated via two huge international "governmental services corporations" ---- THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, INC. fronted by the FEDERAL RESERVE, INC. and the UNITED STATES, INC., fronted by the IMF.
Various semantic deceits based on similar or even identical names being used to promote fraud against the States of America and the American People have been employed by these corporations and their managers. Chief among these frauds have been the creation of "federated states, counties, and municipalities".
The two giant federal service corporations made a successful bid to co-opt the organizations that were providing us with State and County level services. They promised the State and County organizations a cut of "federal revenue sharing" in exchange for all of them incorporating as franchises---- like Dairy Queen franchises. This was done as a "private business deal" without public announcement or permission or plebiscite, and it has had profound adverse results.
The Checks and Balances upon which our lawful government depends have been eradicated. Instead of the "State" and "County" organizations representing the interests of the States of America and the American People, they have been commandeered to represent the interests of the parent "federal" corporations instead. This has been done via the simple act of incorporating.
Whenever you incorporate anything, you take it straight off the jurisdiction of the land and out from under the Law of the Land and set sail in the international jurisdiction of the sea. This is how our Constitution has been side-stepped by these organizations and the way that improper fraudulent claims have been exercised against the land and the people of the States of America.
Now, finally getting to your question, Pat---- what about all these new organizations running around and claiming to "be" the legitimate government? We've got Tim Turner's "Republic of the united States of America (RuSA)" and we've got Russell Gould's "Unity States of the World" and we've got the French "Neu Republique" and it seems that absolutely everyone has "offered" to stand in for our government, but the fact remains that this is a government of the people, by the people and for the people---- and that means that we actually have to show up and do the work of governing ourselves.
The last few years have been like that old television show---- "Will the real United States of America please stand up?"
The problem with all the aforementioned groups is that they have all concentrated on seizing power from the criminally mismanaged governmental services corporations instead of concentrating on restoring the lawful government from the ground up. They all want to walk onto center stage, claim the baton, and continue to repeat the same mistakes with whatever variations. And that doesn't solve the real problem which is ignorance of who we are and how our government is supposed to work: from the bottom up.
The fact of the matter is that under international law, each and every birthright American State National IS the government. We are all nation-states, sovereigns, and a law unto ourselves. That is the true brilliance of our Forefathers. As long as we know who we are, we call the shots. As long as there is even one American left standing to exercise The Constitution against these rats, the Last Man Standing Rule applies. So, here we are, exercising the Last Man Standing Rule and forcing all this crap to be dug out from under the rug and dealt with once and for all.
Last November we entered a national crisis with hardly anyone being aware of it. Having failed to establish "exclusive legislative rule" and having no excuse for their fraudulent claims and criminal activities on our shores, the IMF doing business as the UNITED STATES, Inc. let the governmental services corporation go insolvent and prepared to liquidate its assets. They did this without naming any Successor to contract. That led to the "federal side" of The Constitution being "vacated" for the first time in over 200 years.
They actually thought that they could pull this off. They thought they could come in here and "pull an FDR" and claim all the land and assets of the States of America and the American People as payment for their private corporate debts. They thought they could "dispense with" the actual Constitution and its guarantees and come in here and rape and pillage at will. The banks were in full hue and cry. Their operatives claimed before the UN Security Council and the UN Trust Committees that we no longer exist, that we no longer had "international representation", that we had no "national currency in circulation".
The banks meant to kill our nation, void our Constitution, and seize our "abandoned" assets to enrich themselves.
So, we formed a new contract agreement with the Native American Nations to represent the States of America and the American People in fulfillment of The Constitution for the united States of America. We issued new Sovereign Letters Patent in rebuttal of the banks and we issued a new Declaration of Joint Sovereignty.
That instantly put the resources and people of the Indigenous Nations on the playing board and on our side. These nations, the Athabascan Nation and the Lakota Nation, are recognized internationally, are members of the United Nations, have more than 15 million members, are competent to fulfill the "federal" side of The Constitution contract, and have agreed to do so.
For the first time in more than three centuries, the American People as a whole have the opportunity to stand together and rule their own destiny on the land and on the sea. We stuck our fingers in the dyke, but it is up to everyone to now work to repair our lawful government and expose the fraud and mismanagement and breach of trust that landed our country in this situation.
All of this is heading toward an inevitable national plebiscite in which the facts are all finally disclosed to everyone and in which each one of us decides the fate of our nation. Meantime, the necessary work of restoring the lawful government on the land has begun. In every corner, township and county, Jural Assemblies are forming and the county level governments owed to the land jurisdiction are booting up.
This, finally, is our government coming from the bottom up, the government of the people, by the people and for the people. This is profoundly not an insurrection. It's a restoration.
What about the "STATE" and "COUNTY" governments presently operating as franchises of these huge multi-national banking cartels? There's no need to fight with them. They are just franchises like Dairy Queen franchises of an insolvent parent corporation on one hand (UNITED STATES, Inc.) and another governmental services corporation (THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Inc.) that doesn't have a valid contract on the other.
Are we supposed to fight with Dairy Queen? Over what? New flavors of ice cream?
No, all that is necessary is that Americans wake up and remember who they are, and start operating their own government the way their government is supposed to work: unincorporated States and Counties operating the land jurisdiction of this nation as a check and a balance against the incorporated Federal Government charged with operations in the international jurisdiction of the sea.
As part of this process we will have the opportunity to call a Continental Congress and review The Contract. We now know, for example, that allowing the United States Congress to have plenary control of the District of Columbia was a mistake. There are several such "holes" in The Constitution that need plugging. Ultimately, the People and their States of America may see fit to amend, rewrite, restructure, or even destroy the existing Constitution in favor of a new consolidated structure that better protects and enunciates the sacredness of each Man and Woman and which provides less leeway for public employees to go astray.
Whatever happens, I know this much: the American People are now awake and thinking about all this like never before, and that process is not likely to reverse. God bless America
palani
2nd May 2016, 04:06 AM
In the American System, generally speaking, townships make up counties, counties make up states, and the political power vested in these organic states and their living people forming their jural assemblies flows upward---- from the bottom up, not the top down.
Counties are made up of townships, villages and cities. There are no people in any of these. A township is equivalent to a manor in English law.
A seat of government is always chosen for each county. A capital is likewise chosen for a grouping of counties calling themselves a state. Territory is attached to the seat of government and territory is attached to the capital. When a change of capital or a change of seat of government occurs you can expect that what is being formed is an entirely new government.
A singular nation-state is composed of these counties. In one view the United States is such a singular nation-state with its' own 14th amendment citizenship (black folks). In another view the United States is a federation of independent countries. The capital of both the nation-state and federation is the District of Columbia or, as it was known in the past, Washington City. Pretty obviously this capital has been located where it is for over 200 years but has not the same government. Did it move? Yes it did. When did zip codes come into use? 1963? Does this constitute a move? Probably it does. When was silver removed from currency? 1965?
Bigjon
2nd May 2016, 06:01 AM
Counties are made up of townships, villages and cities. There are no people in any of these. A township is equivalent to a manor in English law.
A seat of government is always chosen for each county. A capital is likewise chosen for a grouping of counties calling themselves a state. Territory is attached to the seat of government and territory is attached to the capital. When a change of capital or a change of seat of government occurs you can expect that what is being formed is an entirely new government.
A singular nation-state is composed of these counties. In one view the United States is such a singular nation-state with its' own 14th amendment citizenship (black folks). In another view the United States is a federation of independent countries. The capital of both the nation-state and federation is the District of Columbia or, as it was known in the past, Washington City. Pretty obviously this capital has been located where it is for over 200 years but has not the same government. Did it move? Yes it did. When did zip codes come into use? 1963? Does this constitute a move? Probably it does. When was silver removed from currency? 1965?
The 13 former colonies separated from King George and formed States. Those States created the Federal corporation to provide them services.
How is it the Servant now thinks its the master?
Do you think it is the master?
In Minnesota most townships are 6 miles by 6 miles square.
monty
2nd May 2016, 07:37 AM
In Nevada most townships are also 6 miles by 6 miles each containing 36 sections each section is 640 acres. Under the desert entry homestead law a person could homestead one section.
palani
2nd May 2016, 10:20 AM
The 13 former colonies separated from King George and formed States. Those States created the Federal corporation to provide them services.
A 'more perfect union' was required to be able to contract with foreign entities. Take the experience of France. They bankrupted themselves to fund the Revolution (in the western hemisphere .. not their revolution) and were repaid fairly shabbily. The defect was cured by dumping the Articles and producing the constitution. The lack of payment by the U.S. most probably led to the French revolution.
How is it the Servant now thinks its the master? 'Cause they haven't been paid and decided to go into business for themselves. Necessity plays a big role in the current state of affairs.
Do you think it is the master? Don't you believe it rather hard to argue a master-servant relation when the 13th amendment abolished involuntary servitude. That leaves all servitude in the 'voluntary' state.
In Minnesota most townships are 6 miles by 6 miles square.
No. A township is the officers that represent the municipality. Don't confuse land measure with legal fictions.
To review this concept I would direct you to Manwood 'Treatise on the Law of the Forrest'. A Forrest has elements. Lacking any single element then it is not a Forrest. The same is true of a township but I have not run across the elements required to form a township.
In the case of the Forrest the elements are
1) vert ... trees
2) venison ... specific animals
3) officers ... courts, someone to uphold the laws, penalties for violating laws
4) laws .. someone to provide the actual authority for the laws promulgated
So you see it is not wise to assume that a township is merely a block of land 6 miles x 6 miles. This is what you are intended to believe. I do know that at the time any township was created (or charter cities for that matter) no people were included in the legal fiction. This is what you need to concentrate on.... what is NOT written.
Bigjon
2nd May 2016, 03:17 PM
A 'more perfect union' was required to be able to contract with foreign entities. Take the experience of France. They bankrupted themselves to fund the Revolution (in the western hemisphere .. not their revolution) and were repaid fairly shabbily. The defect was cured by dumping the Articles and producing the constitution. The lack of payment by the U.S. most probably led to the French revolution.
'Cause they haven't been paid and decided to go into business for themselves. Necessity plays a big role in the current state of affairs.
The constitution created the Federal Gov, while the State Gov remained under the Articles and Declaration of Independence.
The Articles are alive and well along with our States rights. The Feds have no authority on the land.
As far as Townships go... you need to go back to blighty.
Bigjon
2nd May 2016, 03:25 PM
A Very Critical Point to Understand — Reply for Charles — by Anna von Reitz (http://mainerepublicemailalert.com/2016/05/02/a-very-critical-point-to-understand-reply-for-charles-by-anna-von-reitz/)Posted on May 2, 2016 (http://mainerepublicemailalert.com/2016/05/02/a-very-critical-point-to-understand-reply-for-charles-by-anna-von-reitz/)by David Robinson (http://mainerepublicemailalert.com/author/drobin88/)
Of all the misconceptions and misinformation that has continued to cripple American efforts to self-govern and restore their proper political status and nation this is perhaps The Biggee: the idea that The Constitution (or any other constitution) applies to us, the living people.
.
The only mention of us in The Constitution is in the Preamble, which is a Trust Indenture obligating the “federal government” however construed to act as our Trustee and to defend and protect us and our national trust assets. Two years later this was made more explicit by the Bill of Rights which enumerated some of our trust assets to be protected.
.
Our Natural and Unalienable Rights which include free speech, free assembly and the others listed by the Bill of Rights are MATERIAL assets more precious than gold and the entire Federal Entity created by The Constitution agreement is absolutely bound by it to protect those assets.
.
And that’s it. We don’t live under The Constitution. They do.
.
We are not bound by The Constitution. They are.
.
The problem is that they have mischaracterized us via their fraud scheme and claimed that “we are them” and they have gotten away with it via non-disclosure and semantic deceit and probate fraud–until now.
.
You are a Californian, a Wisconsinite, an Iowan, a Texan, by birth. The organic states are your nations. These are the nation-states you owe your allegiance to as one of the “free, sovereign, and independent people of the United States” — quote the Definitive Treaty of Peace, Paris, 1783. These states are the “land of your birth”— not the “United States” defined as “the territories and District of Columbia”.
.
Wake up, wake up, for God’s sake, wake up! You are not organized under any Constitution! Your lawful government is organized via jural assemblies operating unincorporated courts, unincorporated counties, and unincorporated states.
.
So get busy and restore fully functioning jural assembles that serve you and which serve the land jurisdiction of the United States that you are heir to. Elect the members of your Common Law Courts.
.
Some of you are unnerved and wondering, but, but, but….what about those incorporated “counties” and “states”? Don’t we have to fight with them? No! Tell them the history and the facts and ignore them. These “STATES” and “COUNTIES” are franchises of a foreign corporation selling “governmental services”— like Dairy Queen, like Target.
.
They will go out of business soon enough, once the rest of the American People wake up and stop misidentifying themselves as “US citizens” of any kind, and start taking their governmental services needs to other providers
monty
13th July 2016, 10:42 AM
https://www.facebook.com/115539418607/photos/a.442642773607.233735.115539418607/10153968784708608/?type=3&theater
Close (https://www.facebook.com/115539418607/photos/a.442642773607.233735.115539418607/10153968784708608/?type=3&permPage=1#)
https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xfp1/v/t1.0-9/10399758_10153968784708608_3016696561115473190_n.j pg?oh=3fe6e1111c7015a2fd64a726d5f69fbd&oe=5823FD07&__gda__=1479237986_719ee86132733109eb598a3c262fecc 6
Timeline Photos (https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.442642773607.233735.115539418607&type=3)
4 of 44
https://fbcdn-profile-a.akamaihd.net/hprofile-ak-xfa1/v/t1.0-1/p100x100/13061926_10154070365958608_3125831249209296865_n.j pg?oh=82db7cd13418ddea9ace9e0c32b7c30f&oe=5827EFF9&__gda__=1479664585_73613058440b7409915c74c8d8fa05a 2
(https://www.facebook.com/RANGE-magazine-115539418607/?ref=nf)
RANGE magazine (https://www.facebook.com/RANGE-magazine-115539418607/)
Like This Page (https://www.facebook.com/115539418607/photos/a.442642773607.233735.115539418607/10153968784708608/?type=3&permPage=1#) · March 19 (https://www.facebook.com/115539418607/photos/a.442642773607.233735.115539418607/10153968784708608/?type=3&permPage=1) ·
NEWS FROM THE HAGE FAMILY
It’s been nearly 40 years, spanning two generations, and the Hage family still has not received justice in their legal battle with the BLM and USFS, but they refuse to give up. NEXT STEP: Appealing the Forage Rights Case to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The current generation, Wayne N. and his sister, Ramona, realize the stakes involved affect all the good producers because western water law hangs in the balance.
They are fighting the fight, but could use your help funding the legal battle.
In short, the Hage family has repeatedly established, through costly and endless litigation brought by the United States, that they were not in violation of any state or federal laws governing irrigation and livestock watering or grazing on federally administered land. (Analysis of U.S. v. Hage and Court Decisions available upon request.)
Donations to help fund the Supreme Court appeal would be greatly appreciated. Tax-deductible donations are being accepted and earmarked for U.S. v. Hage by Protect the Harvest, 480 Southpoint Circle, Brownsburg, IN 46112. Phone: (844) 360-8300 (tel:(844) 360-8300), Email: info@protecttheharvest.com.
(Please identify as being for “U.S. v. Hage”)
Direct contributions can also be sent directly to: Wayne N. Hage, P.O. Box 513, Tonopah, NV 89049.
Analysis of U.S. v. Hage and Court Decisions available upon request. For those interested in filing Amicus or Friend of the Court Briefs, contact:
Ramona Hage Morrison, 775.722.2517 (tel:775.722.2517), rhmorrison@sbcglobal.net. or
Mark Pollot, Esq., 208.867.8389 (tel:208.867.8389), ConResCtr@cableone.net..
Here is a press release that spells out more details on their situation:
Hage Set to Appeal Ninth Circuit Ruling in Forage Right
Case to U.S. Supreme Court; Western Water Law Hangs in the Balance
In January, a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals handed down a decision reversing all of the findings of Nevada Federal District Court Chief Judge Robert C. Jones in his 103-page decision in U.S. v. Hage (2007). Judge Jones had found among other things that government officials had “entered into a literal, intentional conspiracy to deprive the Hage family not only of their (grazing) permits but also of their vested water rights.” The Court added, “This behavior shocks the conscience of the Court and provides a sufficient basis for a finding of irreparable harm…”
The Ninth Circuit panel issued a scathing ruling reversing all of the trial court’s decisions, excoriating Judge Jones for supposed bias against the government Defendants. Wayne N. Hage and the Estate of E. Wayne Hage are appealing the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court.The Hage family was warned the Ninth Circuit would rule in favor of the BLM and USFS by the lead Justice Department attorney. He informed Hage during settlement discussions the Justice Department was not concerned how Judge Jones would rule because the DOJ could get any decision they wanted out of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
The ruling from the Ninth Circuit completely overturns 150 years of western water law and precedent as well as the laws governing the infrastructure across federally administered lands in the West. The Ninth Circuit decision, as handed down by the three-judge panel, is also in direct conflict with the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision in the related case, Hage v. U.S., (1991), (between the same parties regarding same property). There the Court recognized access as an essential component of a water right. In addition to a conflict between rulings in two different federal courts, due to the appellate panel’s brazen violations of the appellate rules of procedure regarding findings of fact and other procedural errors, analysts believe there is an increased likelihood that the U.S. Supreme Court will review the Ninth Circuit Court’s ruling. (Analysis of U.S. v. Hage and Court Decisions available upon request.)
Under the rules of appellate procedure the Ninth Circuit was bound by Judge Jones’ findings of fact, unless the justices went to the extreme measure of finding Judge Jones had bias and had abused his discretion, which they did. Interestingly, Judge Jones was not the only trier of fact to make such findings. Chief Judge Loren Smith, from the U.S. Court of Federal Claims in Washington D.C., after hearing similar testimony during two separate trials in the related case of Hage v. U.S. (1991), made virtually identical findings of fact. Two well respected, experienced jurists, both Chief Judges of their respective courts, separated by the width of the country, separated by decades of hearings, having nothing in common but considering the conduct of the U.S. Forest Service and BLM employees against the Hage family, both reached virtually identical conclusions.
Two generations of the Hage family, beginning during the presidency of Jimmy Carter, have spent nearly 40 years in courts defending their Constitutionally protected property interests in federally administered land and their right to be allowed to graze their livestock around their vested waters as Congress clearly sanctioned. They have prevailed in three administrative appeals. They have successfully litigated three substantial federal court cases at the trial level in two separate federal courts. They have successfully defended their vested water rights against competing claims by the United States in a state water adjudication. The courts in multiple published decisions have repeatedly recognized their vested water rights, easements, rights-of-ways, forage, and improvements on federally administered land. Those rights stand on appeal in the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals.
For a Summary of Hage saga:
FOX NEWS SPECIAL, “Enemies of the State,” https://youtu.be/67yR-Gj5u70 (https://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fyoutu.be%2F67yR-Gj5u70&h=jAQGb7k_T&enc=AZNRorVXlnepoclCEiufN_AYtJ6v19gcAR4xmOd3BkblZK nZLc4e-AZ0i92U_DxH9WNMP2hpfjvohz02sSzWhXM-GMiJ1DbqvvM79j0M-9JOf6kILmmvLVy9c6Tl_4egCXAhPNaktlK1tiLD7DAIXrrR&s=1);
“Enemies of the State” (shorter version), https://youtu.be/wJpapKqv2mE (https://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fyoutu.be%2FwJpapKqv2mE&h=xAQFQixGr&enc=AZPFgmxTNx13zbJ4U8o7leMy-1G6R2zJ31pItpepaTFgIfFR5tQ61z2To2nBxHPZ47NZLoVaQ_I kowjP671wQpPHFVim2zrHX_gL_9V-rQcPqTnGKZ8tS2echADhGwpIjTzSNpyHbtI5Gcw_lE0BAic6&s=1).
RANGE magazine (article and winner ) of the Freedom of the Press Award. Click on article in red titled, “Eye of the Storm” at http://www.rangemagazine.com/features/winter-13/range-wi13-contents.htm (http://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.rangemagazine.com%2Ffeatu res%2Fwinter-13%2Frange-wi13-contents.htm&h=pAQEFI-Vb&enc=AZP_6yvcgTf7NNwCx_RUf1ec3bETkCrpn1I7NaI-vzDOMbTilDJbMwLGiJsaPDCofkLOojMi8SSY8QtjXmdNJCCGYI pnh2Ot19CrC7efTCHGxROSMOVWGPaHFIkphWiiTw_PDt2UdJIW piIhIcdAIzwT&s=1).
Photo of Wayne, left, Wayne N., and niece Kristin. Taken in 1999 during branding at Pine Creek Ranch near Tonopah, Nev. Photo taken by Ramona Hage Morrisson.
monty
22nd September 2016, 02:19 PM
Feds don't want Supremes to hear Hage appeal
(http://rangefire.us)http://rangefire.us/2016/09/22/federal-government-urges-supreme-court-not-to-hear-appeal-hage-case-status-report/
http://rangefire.us/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Range-Fire-Logo-1B.jpg
http://rangefire.us/wp-content/themes/max-magazine/images/ad468.png (http://rangefire.us)
Federal Government Urges Supreme Court not to Hear Hage Appeal — Case Status Report
September 22, 2016
- Government/Politics (http://rangefire.us/category/politics/), Land Use News (http://rangefire.us/category/land-use-news/), Property Rights (http://rangefire.us/category/property-rights/), Public Lands (http://rangefire.us/category/public-lands/), Ranching (http://rangefire.us/category/ranching/) - Tagged: appeal (http://rangefire.us/tag/appeal/), BLM Federal (http://rangefire.us/tag/blm-federal/), Hage (http://rangefire.us/tag/hage/), Range (http://rangefire.us/tag/range/), RANGEfire (http://rangefire.us/tag/rangefire/), Supreme Court (http://rangefire.us/tag/supreme-court/) - no comments (http://rangefire.us/2016/09/22/federal-government-urges-supreme-court-not-to-hear-appeal-hage-case-status-report/#respond)
Reposted from (http://freerangereport.com/index.php/2016/09/21/feds-want-convoluted-ruling-nevada-ranching-family-stand/) FREE RANGE REPORT: The heirs and estate of Wayne Hage, an icon of the “Sagebrush Rebellion,” have asked the nation’s highest court to review a ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that overturned a significant victory for the family.
(http://freerangereport.com/index.php/2016/09/21/feds-want-convoluted-ruling-nevada-ranching-family-stand/)
http://rangefire.us/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Hage-Jr-Sr-1-300x238.jpg
E. Wayne Hage_______ Wayne N. Hage with niece
The federal government is urging the U.S. Supreme Court not to review its lawsuit with deceased Nevada rancher Wayne Hage, an icon of the “Sagebrush Rebellion.”
Hage’s decades-long battles with federal agencies have become emblematic of the broader resistance to government management of public lands.
His son, Wayne N. Hage, and estate have asked the nation’s highest court to review a ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that overturned a significant victory for the family.
The U.S. Department of Justice has requested that the Supreme Court let that decision stand because there’s not a significant legal controversy that would justify such a review.
A significant and convoluted legal point is whether the U.S. Forest Service and U.S. Bureau of Land Management denied Hage’s family access to their water rights on public lands.
In 2013, a federal judge held that the agencies had engaged in a “conspiracy” to deprive Hage of his water rights and due process rights, but the 9th Circuit reversed that opinion.
The 9th Circuit found that Hage’s cattle could not cross federal property unless he had a grazing permit, which meant he committed trespass by allowing cattle to access the family’s water rights on public land.
Hage’s family is now seeking asking the U.S. Supreme Court to analyze that decision because it diverges from another appellate ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
Attorneys for Hage argue that the 9th Circuit contradicted legal precedent that allows cattle to access water rights across the West, which was affirmed by the Federal Circuit in regard to Hage.
Department of Justice attorneys, on the other hand, claim there is no conflict between federal appellate courts because the Federal Circuit found that government-installed fencing did not block Hage’s cattle from accessing water.
Mark Pollot, attorney for Hage’s estate, said this interpretation is incorrect because fencing wasn’t his only obstacle to water rights — the federal government also threatened Hage with prosecution.
“There is a vast gulf between what the 9th Circuit said and what the Federal Circuit said,” Pollot said.
monty
23rd September 2016, 08:29 AM
I am going by memory, I believe it has been established and upheld by the courts, ranchers with water rights also have forage rights for two miles from the water. Another little known fact is small farms and ranches without grazing rights have a right to graze their "farm flock" within a 2 mile radius of the farm or homestead.
Many accuse Bundys of claiming the land. They don't claim the land, they claim forage rights around their water rights.
monty
31st October 2016, 05:09 AM
Supremes refuse to hear Hage appeal
http://www.capitalpress.com/Livestock/20161024/supreme-court-turns-down-hage-lawsuit-appeal?utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook_Capital_Press
Supreme Court turns down Hage lawsuit appeal
http://eor-cpwebvarnish.newscyclecloud.com/storyimage/CP/20161024/ARTICLE/161029934/AR/0/AR-161029934.jpg&MaxW=600AP Photo/Elko Daily Free Press, Mark Waite, File
Rancher Wayne Hage is shown in 1997 in the area where federal agents seized 100 head of his cattle in 1991, in Meadow Canyon near Tonopah, Nev. Hage, who battled the federal government for decades over public lands and private property rights and came to epitomize Nevada's Sagebrush Rebellion, died in 2006. An appeal of a decision by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has been turned down by the U.S. Supreme Court.
Buy this photo (http://eopubco.mycapture.com/mycapture/remoteimage.asp?BackText=Back%20to%20Article&image=http%3A%2F%2FEOR-CPwebvarnish.newscyclecloud.com%2Fstoryimage%2FCP% 2F20161024%2FARTICLE%2F161029934%2FAR%2F0%2FAR-161029934.jpg&BackURL=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.capitalpress.com%2Fapps%2 Fpbcs.dll%2Farticle%3Favis%3DCP%26date%3D20161024% 26category%3DARTICLE%26lopenr%3D161029934%26Ref%3D AR%26profile%3D1018&ThumbPath=http%3A%2F%2FEOR-CPwebvarnish.newscyclecloud.com%2Fstoryimage%2FCP% 2F20161024%2FARTICLE%2F161029934%2FAR%2F0%2FAR-161029934.jpg%26MaxW%3D90&PreviewPath=http%3A%2F%2FEOR-CPwebvarnish.newscyclecloud.com%2Fstoryimage%2FCP% 2F20161024%2FARTICLE%2F161029934%2FAR%2F0%2FAR-161029934.jpg%26Q%3D50%26MaxW%3D550&PricingSheetID=2837&AffPhotographerName={null}¬es=http%3A%2F%2FEOR-CPwebvarnish.newscyclecloud.com%2Fstoryimage%2FCP% 2F20161024%2FARTICLE%2F161029934%2FAR%2F0%2FAR-161029934.jpg%26q%3D100)
The U.S. Supreme Court won’t review a court decision that stripped deceased Nevada rancher Wayne Hage of a legal victory against the federal government.
In 2013, the estate of Hage — an icon of the “Sagebrush Rebellion” against federal land policies — prevailed in a lawsuit filed by federal agencies that alleged his cattle trespassed on public land.
U.S. District Judge Robert Jones ruled that Hage’s cattle could legally cross federal property to access a stream in which he owned water rights. The judge also found that federal officials had engaged in a “literal, intentional conspiracy” against him.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed that decision earlier this year, ruling that water right ownership doesn’t give ranchers the right to run cattle across federal land.
Mark Pollot, attorney for Hage’s estate, claimed the 9th Circuit misinterpreted the law and undermined water rights across the West.
He asked the Supreme Court to review the case, but that request has now been denied.
The federal government initially didn’t react to the Supreme Court challenge, but the nation’s highest court ordered it to file a response.
For that reason, Pollot was optimistic that the justices were interested in the case, so their denial comes as a surprise, he said.
“It’s directly contrary to prior decisions by the Supreme Court and to state laws,” Pollot said.
It’s possible the eight justices were evenly split on whether to take the case and realized that it would likely result in a stalemate, which would effectively uphold the 9th Circuit decision, he said.
Though the Hage case wasn’t granted Supreme Court review, Pollot said the litigation is likely to continue.
For one, Hage’s son and namesake is still liable for trespass, which he plans to challenge, he said.
Secondly, there’s a possibility for future problems if federal agencies don’t permit Hage’s estate to divert water from the stream in which it holds water rights, Pollot said.
“We still have some options I’m not ready to discuss,” he said.
monty
1st March 2017, 01:37 PM
Corrupt US District Court Judge Gloria Navarro fines Hage family $587,000.00
http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/bundy-blm/court-rules-hage-family-must-pay-587k-grazing-cattle-federal-land-nevada
25 18 0 Share0
Posted March 1, 2017 - 11:00am UpdatedMarch 1, 2017 - 11:51am
Court rules Hage family must pay $587k for grazing cattle on federal land in Nevada
http://www.reviewjournal.com/sites/default/files/field/media/web1_wayne-hage_199059_8079639.jpgRancher Wayne Hage Sr. is shown in this November 1997 file photo, taken near the spot where federal agents seized 100 head of his cattle in 1991, in Meadow Canyon near Tonopah, Nev. (Associated Press
RELATED
Goldfield rancher agrees to pay fine (http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/goldfield-rancher-agrees-pay-fine)
US Supreme Court closes book on Wayne Hage, Sagebrush Rebellion court case (http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/nevada-legislature/us-supreme-court-closes-book-wayne-hage-sagebrush-rebellion-court-case)
Nevada ranching family loses federal lands court case (http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/nevada/nevada-ranching-family-loses-federal-lands-court-case)
Nevada rancher questions Bundy's legal strategy (http://www.reviewjournal.com/columns-blogs/john-l-smith/nevada-rancher-questions-bundy-s-legal-strategy)
By SEAN WHALEY
REVIEW-JOURNAL CAPITAL BUREAU
CARSON CITY — A U.S. District Court judge has ordered a Nevada ranching family engaged in a long-running dispute with federal agencies to pay $587,000 for grazing cattle on BLM and Forest Service lands without permission.
The order dated Feb. 27 from Gloria Navarro, chief judge of the Las Vegas District Court, also requires the family of the late Wayne Hage to remove any livestock from federal lands within 30 days. Within 45 days the Hage estate has to file a statement of compliance with the order or face contempt of court.
Federal officials believe the Hage family has removed its livestock from the federal lands at issue in the case.
The order was the result of a 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision issued last year that overturned a lower court ruling in favor of the Hage family. The 9th circuit court directed the Las Vegas court to issue a new order complying with the appeals court findings in the decision.
Hage died in 2006, and the fight has been carried on by his family and son, Wayne N. Hage Jr.
The order could bring an end a decades-long dispute that centered on the Hage family’s Pine Creek Ranch near Tonopah. The case is well known in the West and among property-rights advocates who continue to maintain that the federal government exercises a heavy hand in relations with those who make their livelihood off the land.
Navarro calculated the damages based on the number of cattle Hage grazed on the federal lands from 2004 to 2011.
The order also permanently prohibits the Hage family from putting their livestock on federal lands without permission.
In May 2013 U.S. District Judge Robert Clive Jones issued a 104-page opinion detailing what he called the federal government’s vindictive actions against the ranching family.
But on appeal, the 9th circuit court reversed Jones and found in favor of the government claims that Hage was trespassing on public lands by grazing cattle without a permit. The court also criticized Jones, who is now on senior status, for his decision that “plainly” contravened federal law.
Contact Sean Whaley at swhaley@reviewjournal.com or 775-461-3820 (tel:775-461-3820). Follow @seanw801 (http://www.twitter.com/seanw801) on Twitter.
monty
2nd March 2017, 08:29 AM
I don't think we should be surprised by Harry Reid's hand picked judge's descision. What really is sad is Nevada's latino governor Bryan Sandoval, Latina Senator Cortez-Masto and Lantino Congressman Kiuhen, all Reid puppets were elected by George Soros's electronic voting machines. In fact the entire Southern Nevada Division of the US District Court system is mostly hand picked Reid personnell. And we can thank our current Senator Dean Heller for the Soros machines. He was Secretary of State who installed them.
Nevada is still a territory of the USA. It will never have full statehood.
monty
2nd March 2017, 08:42 AM
My friend and former neighbor, Gary Carver, hits the nail on the head
https://s19.postimg.org/b8lof6q77/IMG_1520.png
monty
3rd March 2017, 01:12 PM
The estate of E. Wayne Hage's Pine Creek Ranch has forage rights dating back more then 100 years. The BLM is saying these rights are not inheritable, the same as they have done to Jeanette Finicum. Young Wayne has cattle of his own separate from those of the estate. Young Wayne has never had BLM permits. He was running his cattle on the two mile limit from the ranch water rights, which were always honored in the past, even for ranches with no range rights. Any rancher who did not have forage rights to large areas of land still had the right to graze his animals within 2 miles of the ranch. My dad referred to these as farm flock rights. I am unclear if the Hage estate was fined in court this action also.
Edit: Wayne has informed me he is the only one who was fined.
Edit: The last time I spoke with young Wayne the estate had not seen one penny of the settlement the United States Court of Federal Claims awarded his father.
http://freerangereport.com/index.php/2017/03/03/judge-nevada-ranchers-son-must-pay-587k-remove-cattle/
Judge: Nevada Rancher’s Son Must Pay $587K, Remove Cattle
March 3, 2017 (http://freerangereport.com/index.php/2017/03/03/judge-nevada-ranchers-son-must-pay-587k-remove-cattle/) Associate Editor (http://freerangereport.com/index.php/author/wmaconr/) Leave a comment (http://freerangereport.com/index.php/2017/03/03/judge-nevada-ranchers-son-must-pay-587k-remove-cattle/#respond)
https://i1.wp.com/freerangereport.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/cattledrive1.jpg?resize=300%2C210
March 3, 2017
Associated Press reports:
A Nevada rancher whose father led a decades-long fight with the U.S. government over grazing and property rights has been ordered to pay $587,000 and remove any livestock he has on federal lands by the end of the month.
Wayne N. Hage is the son of cattleman and longtime Sagebrush Rebellion figure Wayne Hage, who died in 2006.
Chief U.S. District Judge Gloria Navarro in Las Vegas says he also has to show by mid-April that he has complied.
Hage tells the Las Vegas Review-Journal (http://bit.ly/2m04XcV) he doesn’t have livestock on the range in question.
He declined to say if he can pay the judgment fees and penalties.
The Hage family battle over property in Nye County preceded the fight involving federal agencies and rancher Cliven Bundy, and an armed standoff in April 2014 near Bunkerville.
Additional Information: In 2013, the Nevada U.S. District Judge Robert Clive Jones ruled that the Hages, because they had the right to use water from nearby streams, also had an easement — a right to bring their cattle across public lands, and let them graze, within a reasonable distance of the water, which he defined as a half mile. The judge dismissed all the trespassing claims except two, awarded the government $165.88 in damages, and ordered federal agencies to issue grazing permits to the family.
This was overturned by the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in 2016 who wrote in their ruling that “An owner of water rights — like all other persons — may graze cattle on federal lands only if he or she has obtained a grazing permit or other grazing authorization. Water rights are irrelevant to that basic requirement.”
Related
Feds want 'convoluted' ruling against Nevada ranching family to stand (http://freerangereport.com/index.php/2016/09/21/feds-want-convoluted-ruling-nevada-ranching-family-stand/) September 21, 2016 In "Government Run Amok"
Nevada, Oregon Bundy trials marred by bumbling prosecutors, tainted witnesses (http://freerangereport.com/index.php/2017/02/16/nevada-oregon-bundy-trials-marred-by-bumbling-prosecutors-tainted-witnesses/)
monty
17th March 2017, 11:28 AM
Judge Robert C. Jones ruled following the law. The corrupt 9th circuit overturned and remanded back to US District Court stipulating Judge Jones be off the case. Obama put Judge Jones out to pasture, appointed Harry Reid's puppet Gloria Navarro to the Nevada District who ignored the law.
Roni Bell Sylvester (https://www.facebook.com/RonitaBell?fref=nf)
Yesterday at 7:36am (https://www.facebook.com/RonitaBell/posts/10207799028766023) ·
Livestock Grazing on Federal Lands
Contraire to popular belief by the uninformed, no act, including FLPMA and ESA has extinguished existing Livestock Grazing rights or make any superior to them.
In other words, "existing rights," including Forage and Water put to beneficial use by Allotment Owners, constitutes their ownership of - i.e. becomes "Property" of Allotment Owners.
Nothing, including the Taylor Grazing Act and Wild Horse and Burro Act, has extinguished those rights or bumped any critter - including Sage Grouse, Feral Horses etc., into "Preference."
Therefore, Allotment Owners do not have to strive for "Preference" position, as no act has ever denied them that historic position.
This knowledge will adjust your thinking, in that it will rightfully place any "after acts and critters" into low secondary positions, and leave Livestock Grazing in Preference.
20 Likes3 Comments17 Shares (https://www.facebook.com/RonitaBell/posts/10207799028766023?comment_tracking=%7B%22tn%22%3A% 22O%22%7D)
monty
17th March 2017, 04:46 PM
Kierán Suckling's Center for Biological Diversity ~ The destroyer of western ranchers, their campaign against grazing
http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/programs/public_lands/grazing/index.html
(http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/)
ABOUT (http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/programs/public_lands/grazing/index.html#)
ACTION (http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/action/)
PROGRAMS (http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/programs/)
SPECIES (http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/species/)
NEWSROOM (http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/breaking/)
PUBLICATIONS (http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/publications/)
SUPPORT (http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/support/)
Sign Up (http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/action/activist/)
Search (http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/programs/public_lands/grazing/index.html#)
http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/assets/img/cbd_home_button_give_108x108.png (https://biologicaldiversity.salsalabs.com/o/2167/p/salsa/donation/common/public/?donate_page_KEY=11364)
GRAZING
http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/assets/img/programs/public_lands/Cattle_KimBartlett.jpg
HOME (http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/) > PROGRAMS (http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/programs/) > PUBLIC LANDS (http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/programs/public_lands/) > GRAZING (http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/programs/public_lands/grazing/) > GRAZING
IN THE NEWS
February 29, 2016 (http://www.opb.org/news/article/backlog-grows-for-rangelands/) – "Backlog Grows For Rangelands Awaiting Environmental Health Checkup," Oregon Public Broadcasting
Get the latest on our work for biodiversity and learn how to help in our free weekly e-newsletter.
RELATED CAMPAIGNS
• Mining (http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/programs/public_lands/mining/index.html)
• Wildlife Services (http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/campaigns/wildlife_services/index.html)
+ DOCUMENTS AND PUBLICATIONS
+ MEDIA
+ SPECIES
Contact: Randi Spivak (rspivak@biologicaldiversity.org)
(rserraglio@biologicaldiversity.org)
GRAZING
The ecological costs of livestock grazing exceed that of any other western land use. In the arid West, livestock grazing is the most widespread cause of species endangerment. By destroying vegetation, damaging wildlife habitats and disrupting natural processes, livestock grazing wreaks ecological havoc on riparian areas, rivers, deserts, grasslands and forests alike — causing significant harm to species and the ecosystems on which they depend.
Despite these costs (http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/programs/public_lands/grazing/pdfs/CostsAndConsequences_01-2015.pdf), livestock grazing continues on state and federal lands throughout the arid West. Livestock grazing is promoted, protected and subsidized by federal agencies on approximately 270 million acres of public land in the 11 western states. Federal-lands livestock grazing enjoys more than $100 million annually in direct subsidies; indirect subsidies may be three times that.
ECOLOGICAL COSTS
Cattle destroy native vegetation, damage soils and stream banks, and contaminate waterways with fecal waste. After decades of livestock grazing, once-lush streams and riparian forests have been reduced to flat, dry wastelands; once-rich topsoil has been turned to dust, causing soil erosion, stream sedimentation and wholesale elimination of some aquatic habitats; overgrazing of native fire-carrying grasses has starved some western forests of fire, making them overly dense and prone to unnaturally severe fires.
Keystone predators like the grizzly and Mexican gray wolf were driven extinct in southwestern ecosystems by “predator control” programs designed to protect the livestock industry. Adding insult to injury — and flying in the face of modern conservation science — the livestock industry remains the leading opponent to otherwise popular efforts to reintroduce species like the Mexican gray wolf in Arizona and New Mexico.
ECONOMIC COSTS
The federal livestock grazing program is heavily subsidized. The western livestock industry would evaporate as suddenly as fur trapping if it had to pay market rates for services it gets from the federal government. In 2015 the Center commissioned resource economists to study the costs of livestock grazing on public lands. We found that the federal lands grazing program generated $125 million less than what the federal government spent on the program in 2014. Further, we found that federal grazing fees are 93 percent less than fees charged for non-irrigated western private grazing land, or just $1.69 per animal per month for each cow and calf that grazes the public land. (It costs more to feed a house cat.)
Despite the extreme damage done by grazing, western federal rangelands account for less than 3 percent of all forage fed to livestock in the United States. If all livestock were removed from public lands in the West, in fact, beef prices would be unaffected.
OUR CAMPAIGN
Since our founding, the Center has led efforts to reform overgrazing on public lands in the West. Our work protecting endangered species has removed cattle from hundreds of vulnerable riparian areas in national forests in Arizona, New Mexico and California over the years; in 1999 and 2000 alone, we brought pressure and lawsuits resulting in cows and sheep being removed or restricted on more than 2.5 million acres of habitat for the desert tortoise, southwestern willow flycatcher and least Bell’s vireo in the vast California Desert Conservation Area, and in 2012 legislation was passed to allow permanent retirement of grazing privileges in the California Desert Conservation Area to offset impacts from development of large-scale industrial solar projects — an unequivocal acknowledgement of the significant impacts that public lands grazing has on the arid western landscapes.
Center legal action has compelled the Forest Service to do an environmental impact statement on the impacts of grazing on more than 13 endangered species; in the late 1990s, our work persuaded the Bureau of Land Management to remove cattle from all or part of 32 allotments along the middle Gila River and the Forest Service to remove cattle from 250 miles of streams on 52 allotments in the upper Gila.
The Center also played a leading role in the Coalition for Sonoran Desert Protection, including drafting of a report criticizing the proposed “Ranch Conservation” element of Pima County’s Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan and promoting alternative recommendations to stop grazing in critical habitat for imperiled species. In 2010, Center work helped stop domestic sheep grazing on 7,500 acres in and around the greater Yellowstone ecosystem to protect grizzly bears, lynx, wolves and bighorn; we also halted grazing on a quarter-million acres of Oregon’s Malheur National Forest to protect steelhead trout. In 2011, Center appeals stopped grazing on 33,000 acres of national forest land in Arizona.
The Center and allies sued the federal government to compel it to fix agency budget woes by reforming the grazing program, which loses money just as rapidly and consistently as it destroys habitat. Unfortunately, in 2014 the Obama administration announced it would refuse to increase grazing fees to levels reflecting grazing’s true financial and environmental costs.
Livestock grazing is also a major threat to greater sage grouse across Sagebrush Sea. In 2014 and 2015 we worked to reign in livestock grazing to protect sage grouse habitat and the myriad other species that this beautiful ecosystem supports in new land-management plans across about 60 million acres of federal public lands.
Photo of cattle on public land by Kim Bartlett, Animal People, Inc.
http://freerangereport.com/index.php/2017/03/14/4-reasons-congress-should-disapprove-economy-killing-sage-grouse-regulations/
4 reasons Congress should disapprove economy-killing sage grouse regulations
March 14, 2017 (http://freerangereport.com/index.php/2017/03/14/4-reasons-congress-should-disapprove-economy-killing-sage-grouse-regulations/) editor (http://freerangereport.com/index.php/author/editor/) Leave a comment (http://freerangereport.com/index.php/2017/03/14/4-reasons-congress-should-disapprove-economy-killing-sage-grouse-regulations/#respond)
Ironically, at the time the Bureau of Land Management and U.S. Forest Service finalized the harmful sage grouse plans in 2015, the bird was doing fine, with an increasing population of nearly 425,000, due to a successful incentive-based approach to conservation led by states.
https://i0.wp.com/freerangereport.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/grouse11.jpg?zoom=2&resize=601%2C143
monty
23rd March 2017, 07:55 AM
Maybe Wayne Hage can accept for value Judge Gloria Navarro's judgement and she can take her $587,000 fine out Wayne's share of this unpaid $14 million dollar judgement:
https://s19.postimg.org/44pjrtc0z/IMG_1547.png
monty
20th April 2018, 05:37 AM
There has been an update on Wayne Hage’s case. He recently,had his hearing at the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The first video is a short video done by the Wall Street Journal. The environmentalist apparently can’t tell a horse from a cow. The second video is the appeal hearing a little more than one hour.
http://youtu.be/tE_JnRBMWAA
https://youtu.be/tE_JnRBMWAA
http://youtu.be/f_Xhz4YjH7U
https://youtu.be/f_Xhz4YjH7U
Tumbleweed
20th April 2018, 11:59 AM
^ It's frustrating and infuriating to listen to what these ranchers have to put up with dealing with the government. The only person in those videos that produces something of value and that is in touch with reality is Hage.
monty
21st April 2018, 04:41 PM
Las Vegas want the water rights. The environmentalists want the cattle off the range. Harry Reid pulls the politician’s strings and the BLM’s strings to accomplish both these ends. Reid has the courts packed with his hand picked judges so guys like Wayne Hage and the Bundys are left to fight the battle with no support from the State.
ziero0
21st April 2018, 05:00 PM
Reid has the courts packed with his hand picked judges so guys like Wayne Hage and the Bundys are left to fight the battle with no support from the State.
The state is composed of counties. The counties are composed of cities, villages and townships. There is no room in this structure for individual rights.
What I have described above the the battlefield. The rules of engagement are not well understood by ranchers.
monty
26th May 2018, 06:09 AM
This forty year battle has been waged against the Hage family for one reason. That is the theft of the water rights. The Pine Creek Ranch has some of the best water rights in central Nevada. The amount of water on the home ranch is amazing for being in the middle of the desert.
Ramona Hage Morrison in the Summer Edition og Range Magazine. The Range Magazine format won’t copy/paste.
http://rangemagazine.com/features/summer-18/range-su18-wayne_hage-land_clearance.pdf
How the federal government won a 40-year battle with a Nevada ranching family
http://www.worldtribune.com/how-the-federal-government-won-a-40-year-battle-with-a-nevada-ranching-family/
World Tribune (http://www.worldtribune.com/author/chrisfister007/)May 23, 2018
by WorldTribune Staff, May 23, 2018
The following article by Ramona Hage Morrison is featured in the Summer 2018 issue of Range magazine.
Recently the Wall Street Journal carried a front-page feature by Jim Carlton highlighting my family, the Hages. It attempted to cover the plight of western ranchers and our 40-year David-and-Goliath struggle to prevent the federal government from taking our ranch without just compensation through government threats, intimidation, prosecution, and abuse of discretion.
http://www.worldtribune.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/ranchhage.jpg
Ramona Hage 'Morrison and Wayne Hage Jr. at Pine Creek Ranch.
Pine Creek Ranch is now in foreclosure. We have won enormous landmark victories for western ranchers in multiple bench trials, including a $14 million judgment against the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and – in a separate court – a ruling that the government had engaged in a conspiracy beginning in the 1970s to take our vested water rights and grazing preferences. However, on appeal, the federal courts twisted themselves into a legal pretzel to rule in favor of the government, finally taking our ranch judicially.
Like so many other ranchers before us (many personal friends), we are packing up and moving off the land in a modern-day, government-sponsored land clearance. What is not well-known is the shocking lengths to which the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, as well as the Department of Justice, went to circumvent law, law of the case, rules of procedure, and rules of ethical conduct to manufacture rulings which whitewash government misconduct. In light of the nonstop headline news swirling around DOJ and federal courts, it is worth noting that the rank lawlessness we are witnessing on the nightly news is not limited to a few political appointees, but is endemic throughout the courts and federal agencies.
Since moving to Pine Creek Ranch as a high school freshman with my parents in 1978, I have had a front-row seat from which to view the lengths to which the government would go to drive my parents and so many other ranchers like them out of business. After winning three administrative appeals against the USFS – each costing between $50,000 to $150,000 to defend – the government retaliated in 1991 by raiding the ranch with a 40-man Forest Service swat team to impound 104 head of cattle. It then sold the cattle and kept the proceeds. The USFS perpetrated the raid based upon false allegations of overgrazing without providing us the constitutional protections of procedural due process of law before the cattle and our livelihood were stolen. Two massive civil cases – the 1991 Constitutional Fifth Amendment Takings Case of Hage v. U.S. and the 2007 trespass case, U.S. v. Hage – were born out of my family having to defend our constitutionally protected property rights in court on a ranch which was otherwise rendered worthless by the government’s actions.
Since 1991, we have slogged through nearly three months of actual court days in several separate bench trials, a jury trial, state water adjudication and contempt hearing against the government, the testimony of numerous witnesses, and review of thousands of exhibits. Two independent federal judges from two separate jurisdictions separated by more than a decade of time, after lengthy trials with actual evidence, concluded that representatives of the United States from the BLM and the USFS acted in coercive, fraudulent manners towards my family.
Judge Loren A. Smith, chief judge of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, after two bifurcated bench trials in a 20-year-long case, with a total of five weeks of trial where actual evidence was presented concerning the manner in which these agents of the U.S. government abused their discretion and power against the Hage family, concluded that any attempt by the Hages to negotiate or attempt to comply with the demands of these agents and their bureaucracies would be futile. Smith ruled in favor of the Hages – finding that the actions of these agents constituted a pattern and practice designed to deprive the Hage family of its vested water rights, 1866 Act ditch rights-of-ways, and range improvements—which resulted in a judgment for the Hages of over $14 million.
The government appealed. After a 30-minute hearing in the appellate court, three judges determined that had the Hages filed a request for a special-use permit the Forest Service would have granted it, and since the Hages did not file such a request, the case was not ripe, and therefore dismissed. This despite the fact that there was no requirement to file for a special-use permit, and despite the fact that Judge Smith specifically found that any attempt by the Hage family to work cooperatively with USFS or BLM agents would be futile. Unfortunately, the U.S. Supreme Court did not grant certiorari on this matter, leaving the Hages without a remedy.
Judge Robert C. Jones, chief judge of the Federal District Court for the District of Nevada, after a four-week civil trial, with careful consideration of over 21 days of testimony and evidence, and an additional four days of a separate contempt-of-court hearing, determined that the representatives of the USFS and BLM acted in a manner specifically to conspire to deprive the Hage family of its vested property rights, in particular stockwater and grazing preferences, as Judge Smith had previously found in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. Jones specifically found that the conduct of these bureaucrats “shocked the conscience” of the court.
The court also named the Department of Justice attorneys as possibly being a part of that conspiracy. Judge Jones found evidence of fraud, mail fraud, and wire fraud on the part of the federal agents and of racketeering or RICO. He specifically charged several of the USFS and BLM representatives with contempt of court and ruled in favor of the defendant, Wayne Hage Jr., and the Estate of Wayne and Jean Hage. Finally, the BLM and USFS, which had arbitrarily canceled the Hages’ grazing permits in the early 1990s, were ordered by the court to reinstate the Hage Estate’s grazing permits.
After a 40-minute hearing in the 9th Circuit, the three-judge panel determined that no lucid judge would have made these findings absent some bias or prejudice against the government. This despite the fact that the findings made by Judge Jones in Nevada, after independent consideration of overwhelming evidence, made virtually identical findings to those previously made by Judge Smith in Washington, D.C.
As a result of the court’s disbelief that representatives of the government would act consistent with the findings of Judge Jones, the 9th Circuit reversed Jones’ decision, remanded the case back to the district court level, and directed Judge Gloria Navarro to rule in favor of the USFS and BLM. This case was also appealed to the Supreme Court, which for the second time did not grant certiorari in the absence of Justice Scalia, again leaving the Hage family without a remedy.
Judge Navarro, a newly Obama-appointed federal district judge from the District of Nevada, was assigned to enter a judgment in favor of the United States against Wayne Hage, as a result of the 9th Circuit’s ruling that Judge Jones was biased and prejudiced against the United States. She dutifully relied on the allegations of representatives of the DOJ regarding damages incurred by defendant Hage. She accepted the government’s allegations without an evidentiary hearing and despite the fact that no evidence concerning the cause or amount of those alleged damages had ever been introduced in any court. This resulted in the United States being awarded a judgment against Wayne Hage Jr. in the amount of nearly $580,000, although the actual amount supported by evidence presented at trial by the government was a mere $15,000. The punitive amount of this judgment is currently on appeal to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.
This same Judge Navarro was the junior judge assigned to the criminal case against the Bundy family and other defendants. Judge Navarro in two separate Bundy defendant trials had, like in the Hage hearing, ruled entirely for the government during the course of those trials, in a manner that was shockingly biased to many court observers. However, last December in the third trial involving Bundy family members, evidence was presented concerning the agents from the Department of Justice, U.S. Attorney’s Office, BLM and FBI engaging in fraud, misrepresentation of material facts to the court, and collusion against the Bundys. These agents had concealed over 3,000 pages of exculpatory evidence from the defense team in violation of Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Judge Navarro was presumably left with no choice but to dismiss the Bundys with prejudice, which she did. She specifically noted that the BLM and DOJ engaged in “flagrant misconduct” and “deliberate attempts to mislead and distort the truth.”
In addition to the fact that three different federal judges have specifically found a pattern and practice of inappropriate and even illegal behavior by representatives of the DOJ, BLM, USFS, U.S. Attorney’s Office, and FBI, additional evidence of gross misconduct has recently come to light via a BLM whistleblower. The so-called “Wooten Memo,” written by the BLM’s lead investigator on the Bundy matter, contains many charges against government agents including a chilling reference to a “kill book” which was bragged about by head BLM enforcement officer Dan Love. The 18-page memo reveals that the pattern and practice of the federal land-management agencies were, by design, intended to violate the constitutional rights and to deprive U.S. citizens such as the Hage and Bundy families of their property. A second Wooten whistleblower memo was just discovered but it has been ordered to be sealed by the court by Judge Navarro, who continues to refuse to release the 3,000 pages of exculpatory evidence to the defendants in the Bundy trials.
The lengths to which the appellate courts have gone to substitute their own findings of fact for those of the trial judge, or to charge the trial judge with bias in order to avoid ruling on the merits of a case, or to utilize any other legal loophole in order to rule over 90 percent of the time in favor of the federal government is a sheer travesty of justice. The Hage cases are Exhibit A for why ranchers do not believe they have a snowball’s chance in hell to prevail against an all-powerful federal master, no matter how strong the evidence or how many judges agree with them.
As a DOJ attorney said to us during court-ordered settlement talks, they weren’t concerned about Judge Jones’ ruling because “we get everything we want from the 9th Circuit.” DOJ attorneys also informed us at another time that it is “Justice Department policy to get privately owned water into government ownership.”
We unfortunately don’t have congressional investigators combing through court documents, emails and texts, secret warrants or phone taps, etc., in numerous cases where the BLM, USFS, EPA and U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, enabled by the Justice Department and FBI, have targeted property owners and other land users for destruction. Dwight and Steven Hammond are currently sitting in jail, charged as domestic terrorists for a backfire that accidentally burned a small piece of adjacent vacant federal land. LaVoy Finicum was shot and killed by snipers on the side of the road. Raymond Yowell, the Dann sisters, Ben Colvin, Danny Martinez, Kit Laney, my family, and many others have watched their livestock and livelihoods hauled off by the BLM and USFS in cattle trucks at gunpoint without being afforded procedural due process of law or just compensation.
It is no surprise to us that agents charged with enforcing the law would attempt to prosecute trumped-up charges to topple a duly elected president. Sadly, the evening news looks eerily familiar.
Subscribe (http://geostrategy-direct-subscribers.com/subscription-information/)to (http://geostrategy-direct-subscribers.com/subscription-information/) Geostrategy-Direct (http://geostrategy-direct-subscribers.com/subscription-information/) __________ Support Free Press Foundation (http://freepressfoundation.org/get-involved/)
Bureau of Land Management (http://www.worldtribune.com/tag/bureau-of-land-management/), Hage v. U.S. (http://www.worldtribune.com/tag/hage-v-u-s/), How the federal government won a 40-year battle with a Nevada ranching family (http://www.worldtribune.com/tag/how-the-federal-government-won-a-40-year-battle-with-a-nevada-ranching-family/), Pine Creek Ranch (http://www.worldtribune.com/tag/pine-creek-ranch/), Ramona Hage Morrison (http://www.worldtribune.com/tag/ramona-hage-morrison/), U.S. Forest Service (http://www.worldtribune.com/tag/u-s-forest-service/), WorldTribune.com (http://www.worldtribune.com/tag/worldtribune-com/)
Tumbleweed
26th May 2018, 08:05 AM
It's communist jews that have taken over this country and they intend to own and control all the wealth and make slaves of us.
monty
26th May 2018, 10:15 AM
It's communist jews that have taken over this country and they intend to own and control all the wealth and make slaves of us.
They have pretty much acheived their goals.
These are some recent article in Free Range Report:
Recent posts
http://www.freerangereport.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/bia-65x65.jpg (http://www.freerangereport.com/index.php/2018/05/26/federal-agencies-dividing-america-with-race-based-policies-tribalism/)FEDERAL MISMANAGEMENT (http://www.freerangereport.com/index.php/category/federal-mismanagement/)Federal agencies dividing America with race-based policies, tribalism (http://www.freerangereport.com/index.php/2018/05/26/federal-agencies-dividing-america-with-race-based-policies-tribalism/)
May 26, 2018 1 (http://www.freerangereport.com/index.php/2018/05/26/federal-agencies-dividing-america-with-race-based-policies-tribalism//#comments)
http://www.freerangereport.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/black-footed-ferrets-967192_960_720-65x65.jpg (http://www.freerangereport.com/index.php/2018/05/25/feds-fabricate-data-to-cover-failures-of-endangered-species-act/)ENDANGERED SPECIES (http://www.freerangereport.com/index.php/category/endangered-species/)Feds fabricate data to cover failures of Endangered Species… (http://www.freerangereport.com/index.php/2018/05/25/feds-fabricate-data-to-cover-failures-of-endangered-species-act/)
May 25, 2018 0 (http://www.freerangereport.com/index.php/2018/05/25/feds-fabricate-data-to-cover-failures-of-endangered-species-act//#comments)
http://www.freerangereport.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Katahdin-Woods-65x65.jpg (http://www.freerangereport.com/index.php/2018/05/24/recent-national-monuments-were-surprise-attacks-on-local-communities/)GOVERNMENT RUN AMOK (http://www.freerangereport.com/index.php/category/government-run-amok/)Recent national monuments were “surprise attacks” on local communities (http://www.freerangereport.com/index.php/2018/05/24/recent-national-monuments-were-surprise-attacks-on-local-communities/)
May 24, 2018 0 (http://www.freerangereport.com/index.php/2018/05/24/recent-national-monuments-were-surprise-attacks-on-local-communities//#comments)
http://www.freerangereport.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/glacier-65x65.jpg (http://www.freerangereport.com/index.php/2018/05/23/montana-lawmakers-call-out-misleading-wilderness-poll/)EXTREME GREENS (http://www.freerangereport.com/index.php/category/extreme-greens/)Montana lawmakers call out misleading wilderness poll (http://www.freerangereport.com/index.php/2018/05/23/montana-lawmakers-call-out-misleading-wilderness-poll/)
May 23, 2018 0 (http://www.freerangereport.com/index.php/2018/05/23/montana-lawmakers-call-out-misleading-wilderness-poll//#comments)
http://www.freerangereport.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Grand_Staircase-Escalante_National_Monument_2279640905.jpg (http://www.freerangereport.com/index.php/2018/05/22/utahs-grand-staircase-escalante-lawsuit-about-economic-survival/)LAND DISPUTES (http://www.freerangereport.com/index.php/category/land-disputes/)Utah’s Grand Staircase-Escalante lawsuit about economic survival (http://www.freerangereport.com/index.php/2018/05/22/utahs-grand-staircase-escalante-lawsuit-about-economic-survival/)
May 22, 2018 0 (http://www.freerangereport.com/index.php/2018/05/22/utahs-grand-staircase-escalante-lawsuit-about-economic-survival//#comments)
http://www.freerangereport.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/pioneer-fire-65x65.jpg (http://www.freerangereport.com/index.php/2018/05/21/judge-rejects-enviro-lawsuit-to-stop-idaho-hazard-trees-salvage-operation/)EXTREME GREENS (http://www.freerangereport.com/index.php/category/extreme-greens/)Judge rejects enviro lawsuit to stop Idaho ‘hazard’ trees… (http://www.freerangereport.com/index.php/2018/05/21/judge-rejects-enviro-lawsuit-to-stop-idaho-hazard-trees-salvage-operation/)
May 21, 2018 1 (http://www.freerangereport.com/index.php/2018/05/21/judge-rejects-enviro-lawsuit-to-stop-idaho-hazard-trees-salvage-operation//#comments)
http://www.freerangereport.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/FRRHammondsmeme-65x65.jpg (http://www.freerangereport.com/index.php/2018/05/20/justice-denied-pendley-makes-the-case-for-hammonds-presidential-pardon/)BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT (http://www.freerangereport.com/index.php/category/bureau-of-land-management/)Justice Denied: Pendley makes the case for Hammonds’ presidential… (http://www.freerangereport.com/index.php/2018/05/20/justice-denied-pendley-makes-the-case-for-hammonds-presidential-pardon/)
May 20, 2018 5 (http://www.freerangereport.com/index.php/2018/05/20/justice-denied-pendley-makes-the-case-for-hammonds-presidential-pardon//#comments)
http://www.freerangereport.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/illegalbordercrossers-65x65.jpg (http://www.freerangereport.com/index.php/2018/05/18/illegals-crossing-border-leave-arizona-ranchers-fearing-for-lives-property/)ENVIRONMENT (http://www.freerangereport.com/index.php/category/environment/)Illegals crossing border leave Arizona ranchers fearing for lives,… (http://www.freerangereport.com/index.php/2018/05/18/illegals-crossing-border-leave-arizona-ranchers-fearing-for-lives-property/)
May 18, 2018 0 (http://www.freerangereport.com/index.php/2018/05/18/illegals-crossing-border-leave-arizona-ranchers-fearing-for-lives-property//#comments)
Another says U.S. farmland disappearing at the rate of 3 acres a minute.
U.S. farmland vanishing at rate of 3 acres every minute
Home (http://www.freerangereport.com/)/Agriculture (http://www.freerangereport.com/index.php/category/agriculture/), Property Rights (http://www.freerangereport.com/index.php/category/property-rights/), Ranching (http://www.freerangereport.com/index.php/category/ranching/)/U.S. farmland vanishing at rate of 3 acres every minute
http://www.freerangereport.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/pexels-photo-1075953-65x65.jpeg
Horn
26th May 2018, 12:57 PM
Still the title of this thread holds some hope.
I think much were built on the Feds actions, which appear to be torn up recently.
China were probably all vested in them also.
monty
7th October 2018, 08:37 PM
Still the title of this thread holds some hope.
I think much were built on the Feds actions, which appear to be torn up recently.
China were probably all vested in them also.
Pehaps so. I have been a liitle lax a out keeping this updated. But behind every cloud ther may be a silver lining.
http://youtu.be/xOv4XhSy-sA
https://youtu.be/xOv4XhSy-sA
monty
9th October 2018, 05:43 PM
Bump. Wayne Hage may have backed the feds into a corner they may not get out of.
monty
9th October 2018, 06:22 PM
Wayne Hage speaking at Nampa, Idaho. This video was originally on Andrea Olson-Parker’s facebook. Vincent Easley II uploaded it to his channel a couple of days ago.
http://youtu.be/v42XLuZI7qw
https://youtu.be/v42XLuZI7qw
monty
20th April 2021, 03:02 PM
Tumbleweed gave me the link to this article. I decided that I would post it here, but not so much because of the information about young Wayne Hage’s lifelong battle with the U.S. government . Rather I want to show the connection between the jews and the holodomor and Wayne Jr.’s wife’s family he briefly mentioned here because that is where we are headed now with the current push to end beef production.
https://www.menofthewest.net/the-storm-over-the-rangelands-wayne-hage-jr-s-lifelong-fight-against-tyranny/
I knew the previous owners who sold to the Hage family the author of this mentions very well because my father and I spent a few days harvesting their grain and visited them traveling around the county one summer with a family friend, then later in life I and a good friend had an automobile repair business where we serviced the pickups and trucks for Pine Creek Ranch.
I knew Wayne Hage and had met his second wife Helen Chenowith-Hage. I am well acquainted with Wayne Jr. and his wife. My brother is married to Wayne Hage’s niece so I have personal knowledge of much of this story.
Property rights are based on contracts, tax rolls, bills of sale, and other documents, some of which go back more than a century. If you can back up your claims with documentation, you can often win in court. It takes long hours spent at the county courthouse and the library to piece together the history of a piece of property, but it is time well spent. Besides, as Hage Jr. said, “It’s a fun puzzle to put together.”peaks“Title transcends government,” he explained. Hage Jr. told a story about visiting a rancher in his wife’s homeland of Kazakhstan whose family owned several million acres. The land had been seized by the USSR in the 1930s, but the family took their title documentation and buried it in a secret location, along with their silver and gold. By the year 2000, Kazakhstan was once again independent, and they were sorting out who owned what land. The title documentation that this family had hidden away so long ago allowed them to reclaim what had been stolen from them so long ago.
The Storm Over the Rangelands: Wayne Hage Junior's Lifelong Fight Against Tyranny - Men Of The West
Brian Almon
In a section of bleachers marked as the “Eisenhower Room” at the 2020 Idaho Republican Convention, an unassuming man in a cowboy hat waits quietly for us to take our seats. His suit is neat and well fitted, but his worn boots suggest he is more at home on the ranch than in front of a convention crowd.
“I was raised in the sage brush,” he said, leaning against the railing.
https://www.menofthewest.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/IMG_8833-1024x768.jpg
We waited patiently while he worked with staff to get the microphones working properly. That finally accomplished, he began to tell his story.
When Wayne Hage Jr. was a small child, his parents Wayne Sr. and Jean Hage purchased Pine Creek Ranch, which consisted of 700,000 acres in central Nevada. Property rights on Pine Creek Ranch had been established through various contracts, some of which predated Nevada’s admission to the Union in 1864. The Federal Government recognized those rights in an 1866 act that allowed ranchers the ability to traverse federal lands with their herds to reach water sources that they owned. Yet throughout the 1960s and 70s, the United States Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management had been taking issue with this practice. It was partly due to the conflict with the federal government that drove the owners of Pine Creek Ranch to sell, but Hage figured he might have better luck.
“If we had kept that place, we were going to kill someone,” the previous owner’s son later said.
85% of land in the state of Nevada is owned by the federal government, and it often seems like they are jealous of the 15% that is still privately owned. Shortly after the Hage family purchased Pine Creek Ranch, they began receiving harassment from federal officials. First, the USFS fenced off the water source that was attached to Pine Creek and told the Hages that they needed a grazing permit to cross federal land – a permit they later rescinded. Then, the government changed fencing regulations, forcing the Hages to spend thousands of dollars and much time and energy replacing their existing fencing. Finally, they fined the Hages for cleaning brush out of irrigation ditches that crossed federal lands.
In 1991, Wayne Hage had enough. He sued the federal government, claiming that these actions amounted to an illegal taking of their property and water rights. Thus began a 25-year-long battle between private ranchers and the full might of the United States government. Wayne Hage Jr. was only fifteen when the court battle began, having spent his entire life thus far tending cattle on Pine Creek Ranch. After high school, the junior Hage attended Hillsdale College in Michigan where he majored in Constitutional law, an education that would serve him well in the long war to protect his family’s property rights.
https://www.menofthewest.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/image.jpg
Wayne Hage, left, his son Wayne N. Hage, and young Hage niece, Kristin, in 1999 during branding at Pine Creek Ranch near Tonopah, Nev. (Photo by Ramona Hage)
https://4thst8.wordpress.com/2012/09/14/weekly-column-hage-ranch-litigation-ripening-or-rotting/
“It’s the nature of governments throughout the ages – not just ours – to encroach on our liberty,” said Hage Jr. His wife grew up in Kazakhstan during the time of the former USSR, so Hage Jr. and his family are familiar with the excesses of totalitarian governments.
In 1998, the Court of Claims ruled that no taking had taken place, since the Hage family had not tried walking their cattle through the off-limits federal land to reach their water. They were forced to break the law to force the issue. The government cited them for trespassing, fined them, and even seized some of their cattle. However, the Hages now had an actionable claim to take to the Court.
About ten years later, the Chief Judge of the District Court for Nevada ruled in favor of the Hage family, saying that not only was the federal government wrong to block access to their water rights, but also that they had engaged in a campaign of intimidation against the Hage family and all of their business partners.
Wayne Hage Jr. recalled Jim Nelson, head of the National Forest Service’s holdings in Nevada, saying, “I’m gonna take out the toughest son of a bitch and the rest of the ranchers will fall in line.”
The Hage family was heartened by the decision of the Nevada District Judge, but their joy would not last. The federal government appealed the decision to the notorious 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. According to Hage Jr., government lawyers started making things up out of whole cloth, lying to the court about circumstances of the case.
https://www.menofthewest.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/1200px-Seal_of_the_United_States_Courts_Ninth_Judicial_Ci rcuit.svg-1024x1024.png
“The Department of Justice is going to lie,” Hage Jr. said.
They painted the district judge as being “biased,” even though he had always been deferential to the BLM and USFS before this ruling. The 9th Circuit reversed the case and ruled against the Hage family. When the Supreme Court declined to grant certiorari, the last hope of the Hages was gone.
The government fined the Hage family several million dollars and foreclosed on their ranch, a process that was completed in 2019. By now, Wayne Hage had died, and both his first wife Jean and his second wife Helen Chenoweth-Hage were gone as well. Wayne Jr. was no longer a 15-year-old ranch hand, but now the family patriarch, with a wife and children of his own. There was a silver lining to the story, however. Some friends of the Hages purchased their ranch at auction and are now renting it back to the family, allowing them to stay on the land that has been in their family for more than forty years.
https://www.menofthewest.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/hage-tsln-050518-1240x727-1-1024x600.jpg
The message that Wayne Hage Jr. had for the Convention was that the fight for property rights is always worth fighting. Throughout the long battle with the government, his family had some wins and some losses, but throughout it all their spirits remained high and their faith in God remained strong.
“No matter how bad things get, there’s always someone out there having a worse time,” said Hage Jr.
The fight between private landowners and the federal government is just beginning. One Idaho rancher who attended the discussion explained that government agencies had come calling on ranches throughout the state offering to take over water rights, to “protect” them. While the government promised to allow ranchers to continue to use these water sources, most of them recognized the obvious poison pill and refused the offer. Yet the government has not let up on their endless hunger for more and more land. Men live but a short time, while the US government seems to last forever.
“There is no justice in America,” said Hage Jr. in a moment of sadness. He quickly perked back up, however. The most important advice the rancher had for everyone in the room was to carefully research and keep track of title claims. “Once you know what you own, you know what to defend,” he said.
Property rights are based on contracts, tax rolls, bills of sale, and other documents, some of which go back more than a century. If you can back up your claims with documentation, you can often win in court. It takes long hours spent at the county courthouse and the library to piece together the history of a piece of property, but it is time well spent. Besides, as Hage Jr. said, “It’s a fun puzzle to put together.”
“Title transcends government,” he explained. Hage Jr. told a story about visiting a rancher in his wife’s homeland of Kazakhstan whose family owned several million acres. The land had been seized by the USSR in the 1930s, but the family took their title documentation and buried it in a secret location, along with their silver and gold. By the year 2000, Kazakhstan was once again independent, and they were sorting out who owned what land. The title documentation that this family had hidden away so long ago allowed them to reclaim what had been stolen from them so long ago.
Even though Wayne Hage Jr. and his family ultimately lost their fight, it was a pyrrhic victory for the federal government. The courts ruled that the Hages had no right to cross federal land without a permit, but they instead must pipe their water through public lands. This ruling ended up giving ranchers tremendous bargaining power with the government. If they are not granted grazing permits, they can now build a pipeline rather than allowing their water source to be used by wild horses or elk herds recently introduced by the US Forest Service. To keep ranchers happy, USFS and BLM now have incentive to grant the permits rather than losing access to these private water sources. Wayne Hage Jr. sees this as a victory in the end.
“We’re better off now than when we owned the place.”
Further reading: “Storm Over Rangelands: Private Rights in Federal Lands (https://www.amazon.com/Storm-over-Rangelands-Private-Federal/dp/0939571153)” by Wayne Hage Sr.
Edit: If you are wondering how I assumed there might be a connection to the Holodomor and Wayne Jr.’s wifes family in Kazakhstan it is speculation but highly likely
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kazakh_famine_of_1932–33
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kazakh_famine_of_1932%E2%80%9333
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.