Re: Armed Feds Prepare For Showdown With Nevada Cattle Rancher
Review-Journal reporter Jenny Wilson, she often puts her mainstream spin on things she writes
Questions remain after mistrial in Bunkerville standoff case
Posted on April 26, 2017 by Doug Knowles
https://i2.wp.com/itmattershowyousta...20%2C468&ssl=1Supporters pray outside the Lloyd George U.S. Courthouse as they await the jury’s verdict in the first Bunkerville standoff trial on Monday, April 24, 2017, in Las Vegas. Bizuayehu Tesfaye Las Vegas Review-Journal @bizutesfaye
By Jenny Wilson Las Vegas Review-Journal April 25, 2017 – 6:24 pm
A federal jury’s failure to reach a unanimous verdict on 50 of the 60 counts in the first Bunkerville standoff case — and the mistrial that resulted — has spurred a flurry of concerns about speedy-trial rights among others accused of conspiring with rancher Cliven Bundy.
Eleven people still await trial on charges that they organized a mass assault on federal agents who tried to seize Bundy’s cattle from public land in April 2014.
The first trial ended Monday when U.S. District Judge Gloria Navarro declared a mistrial and set a new trial date of June 26. Jurors convicted two of the first six defendants on some of the counts but deadlocked on most of the charges contained in the indictment. The new trial date coincides with the previously scheduled start date for the second group of defendants: Cliven, Ammon and Ryan Bundy; Ryan Payne; and Peter Santilli.
One question is hanging over the federal courthouse in the wake of Monday’s mistrial: What happens next? Federal prosecutors still have not decided whether to retry the defendants. Taxpayers already have been saddled with significant costs, which only will balloon in a repeat trial. And the remaining 11 defendants who have been in prison for over a year do not want to wait any longer for their day in court.
That is why some defense attorneys who represent the second group of defendants, charged as “leaders” of the armed protests in Bunkerville, are hoping that if prosecutors decide to retry any or all of the men in the first group, they will do so by combining them with the second group.
“The sensible thing would be to take the three or four and just push them into our group and let it go forward,” defense attorney Christopher Rasmussen said.
The attorney represents Santilli, a local radio personality who plans to argue at trial that he is innocent because he was a member of the media reporting on what he viewed as government overreach.
“Why keep the Bundys and Santilli in custody another four months?” asked Rasmussen, who has filed a motion requesting that Santilli be tried on June 26, when the first group of defendants is retried. “We’re just hoping to go forward as quickly as possible.”
The original plan was for the second trial to open 30 days after the first. Navarro already pushed that back to give prosecutors time to regroup and to prepare in between trials.
“They’re happy that the jury believed there was no conspiracy. That’s what they’ve always said, that nobody conspired with anybody,” Rasmussen said of Santilli and the others awaiting trial. “But they’re really frustrated. They want to go to trial.”
Supporters of the Bundy family and those closest to them, who, like Santilli, are charged as “leaders” of the standoff, also were encouraged by Monday’s results.
“If we can’t get a ‘not guilty,’ we’ll take that,” said Deb Jordan, Santilli’s girlfriend, after the jurors revealed they were “hopelessly deadlocked.”
Rasmussen’s recent motion, however, could have other aims. He previously has argued through legal filings that the at-times unruly behavior of the others in Santilli’s trial group — like the Bundy brothers, who have refused to come into the courtroom for a routine hearing and instead chosen to watch proceedings from a holding cell — could be prejudicial.
Review-Journal writer Blake Apgar contributed to this report. Contact Jenny Wilson at jenwilson@reviewjournal.com or 702-384-8710. Follow @jennydwilson on Twitter.
Bundy brothers
The Bundy brothers awaiting trial are growing impatient, and they have been causing a stir at the federal facility where they are housed.
“Ryan and Ammon Bundy refused to follow facility rules by refusing to submit to a strip search and put on handcuffs prior to leaving segregation for movement to the lawyer visitation room. As a result, they were not transported to the interview room,” a recent court filing said. The filing also said, “Ammon and Ryan Bundy’s objection to being transported in handcuffs to and from their attorney visits is not a new complaint.”
Share this:
Re: Armed Feds Prepare For Showdown With Nevada Cattle Rancher
The Bundy supporters compiled a slideshow of all the exculpatory evidence the judge wouldn't allow. They hav uploaded it to jewtube hoping to get enough exposure for the jury members see they were lied to and manipulated. . .
https://scontent.fbog2-1.fna.fbcdn.n...b2&oe=598D9BE6
Mollie Dunn Powell shared a link.
2 h
We are trying to share this short video of photos judge Gloria Navarro blocked the jury from seeing in Nevada. She barred almost all exculpatory evidence the defense intended to present. We hope that once the jury has an opportunity to see how manipulated and lied to they were, they will speak out which could impact the prosecution's continuing forward. Please help us by sharing this! Thank you!
Bundy Ranch Trial Slideshow
A Slideshow of information that Judge Gloria Navarro didn't want the jury to see.
YOUTU.BE
http://youtu.be/rppsvdHGO7c
Re: Armed Feds Prepare For Showdown With Nevada Cattle Rancher
Kelli Stewart, John Lamb, Morgan Philpot and Rick Koeber discuss the official jury verdict with apparent lines through the not guilty check marks on Docket 1903 that Deb Jordan pulled up in Pacer.
This video is about an hour and a quarter.
http://youtu.be/XDY943GE57o
https://youtu.be/XDY943GE57o
Re: Armed Feds Prepare For Showdown With Nevada Cattle Rancher
Did Judge Navarro manipulate the verdict?
Did Judge Navarro Manipulate The Verdicts?
WHAT DID JUDGE NAVARRO KNOW, AND WHEN DID SHE KNOW IT?
April 27, 2017 BLM, Constitution, Nevada
https://redoubtnews.com/wp-content/u...ct-678x381.jpg
Did Judge Navarro Manipulate The Verdicts?
By Shari Dovale
The first tier defendants in the Bundy-Bunkerville Protest Trial completed this week with mixed verdicts. The jury found former FBI Informant Greg Burleson guilty on 8 of 10 charges, with brandishing enhancements for the firearms charges.
Additionally, the jury found Todd Engel of Boundary County, Idaho, guilty of 2 of the charges against him.
But what about the main charges of Conspiracy?
- Conspiracy to Commit an Offense Against the United States
- Conspiracy to Impede or Injure a Federal Officer
Court documents were released this week that suggest the jury had unanimously found all defendants Not Guilty of these two charges.
It is important to review the timeline for the events as we look at the documents.
The jury received the case for deliberations on Thursday, April 13th, though they did not have their first full day of deliberations until the following Monday, April 17th.
The jury sent questions to the court, which Judge Navarro promptly sealed from public view. No one has access to the actual wording of the questions from the jury, except the judge and the attorneys. This becomes an important point later in the discussion.
Based on the responses and discussion from the court, the gallery surmised that the jury had ‘hypothetical’ questions pertaining to the possibility of a hung jury. This meant they did not have consensus on all of the charges the defendants were facing.
Judge Navarro’s main concern through this entire trial has been the possibility of jury nullification. She appeared to have the same fears regarding the jury’s questions and responded that she was concerned with the jury considering sentencing or other extremes. She wanted to guide the jury “back down to a more narrow point of view.”
Three days later, the jury had more questions, which the court promptly sealed again from public view. These questions specifically seem to pertain to the conspiracy charges.
It was felt that the jury was confused on the jury instructions. The instructions apparently contradicted themselves, in that on one page they refer to “the defendants” yet another page would refer to “a person”.
The jury appeared unsure that if they found the defendants ‘guilty’ or ‘not guilty’ of the conspiracy charges, would they then be required to find all other charges with the same verdict?
Therefore, on April 20th, it would indicate that they had found agreement on several of the charges.
The jury took the weekend off and resumed their deliberations on the following Monday, April 24th. It was shortly after beginning that they came back with a response of having an agreement on some charges, yet they were deadlocked on many others.
Judge Navarro sent them back to deliberate longer under an “Allen Charge”, which is an instruction given by a court to a deadlocked jury to encourage it to continue deliberating until it reaches a verdict.
Some states prohibit Allen charges, because they deem them coercive, but the U.S. Supreme Court upheld their use in Allen v. U.S., 164 U.S. 492 (1896). Also called dynamite charge, nitroglycerin charge, shotgun charge, and third-degree instruction.
The prosecution had asked for the Allen charge, but the defense did not.
Later that same day, the jury stated they could not reach a full agreement and Judge Navarro accepted guilty verdicts on the aforementioned charges while declaring a mistrial on the remaining charges, including the two main conspiracy charges.
This is where it gets interesting.
*Disclaimer: I do not claim to be a legal expert, so my conclusions are not based on legal training.
The documents released are the official jury verdict forms. You can view them below.
The official forms are a part of the trial documents and cannot be altered or removed from the record. These documents are given to the jury for their deliberations. If a mistake is made on these documents, the jury foreman is to destroy that copy and request a new form.
The documents clearly show that the jury had reached an agreement on the conspiracy charges, marking ‘not guilty’ next to the names of all the defendants for both charges. However, it does appear that there had been a ‘strike-through’ made on these checkmarks.
However, there are no marks at all listed on the ‘guilty’ side of these charges. If the jury had changed their minds, it would be reasonable that they would have either gotten a new form, or marked the other side of the current form.
This suggests that the jury had unanimously decided that there was no actual conspiracy.
Going back to the questions that the jury posed to the court last Thursday, the jury gave the impression they were confused on whether or not they would be required to find all charges not guilty if they found the conspiracy charges not guilty. They clearly were in agreement on the guilty charges for Greg Burleson and Todd Engel.
There was a very interesting discussion between several people that was broadcast live. The points were made that this could be a case of “implied acquittal”. Following the case of Brazzel v. Washington, 484 F.3d 1087 (9th Cir. 2007), the court observed that:
“The doctrine of implied acquittal states that when a jury convicts on a lesser alternate charge and fails to reach a verdict on the greater charge–without announcing any splits or divisions and having had a full and fair opportunity to do so–the jury’s silence on the second charge is an implied acquittal.
A verdict of implied acquittal is final and bars a subsequent prosecution for the same offense. Putting a defendant in jeopardy a second time is not necessarily harmless error or moot, even if the defendant is only convicted of the lesser crime, because the Double Jeopardy Clause is cast in terms of the risk or hazard of trial and conviction, not of the ultimate legal consequences of the verdict.”
This begs the question of whether or not the jury was genuinely deadlocked on the conspiracy charges? It also asks, “Did Judge Navarro know about the verdict before she ruled on the mistrial?”
If the jury was unanimous, then the acquittals should be entered into the record. However, Judge Navarro ruled a mistrial, therefore declaring the jury to be NOT unanimous on the conspiracy charges.
They were clearly unanimous at one point, so when did they become Not Unanimous? Before or after the Allen Charge?
Navarro accepted the guilty verdicts, yet did not accept the not guilty verdicts. It does seem plausible that she could have known the jury had reached consensus on the two main charges but they were confused, based on her instructions, as to the remainder of the charges. They clearly intended to find guilt on the 2 charges against Todd Engel and the 8 charges against Greg Burleson.
If Judge Navarro knew that the jury had reached an agreement on the 2 main conspiracy charges, yet did not accept them, could there be an argument to her manipulating the verdicts?
Additionally, there is the question that, if Judge Navarro knew of the not guilty agreement before she issued the Allen Charge, did she use that instruction as a tool to coerce the jury to change their verdict?
Therefore, the ultimate question is: “What did Judge Navarro know, and when did she know it?”
We thank Deb Jordan for releasing the documents to the public.
Share this:
Re: Armed Feds Prepare For Showdown With Nevada Cattle Rancher
This is a must read. You cannot imagine how low and disgusting these so called public servants are.
Deb Jordan published information today that reveals what the jury did not hear, and also the conspiracy involving the US Attorney Bogdon, Senator Harry Ried, BLM Director Niel Kornze, Sheriff Gilespe and others. I cannot believe how low these bastard politicians have stooped to frame Cliven Bundy.
Home Of The Pete Santilli Show
APRIL 28, 2017
Home › News › A Deadly Game: What the Jury didn’t hear about what really happened at Bundy Ranch
A Deadly Game: What the Jury didn’t hear about what really happened at Bundy Ranch
petesantillishow 04/28/2017 News
http://thepetesantillishow.com/wp-co...-1-300x226.jpg
GMN – PROVEN – STRONG – ADVOCACY – JOURNALISM
Prosecution in the case of United States vs Cliven Bundy et al, was dealt a heavy blow as they were forced to except a mistrial after almost 3 months of bringing what they felt was their best evidence to a Jury in Las Vegas, Nevada, against 6 men who say, it wasn’t about cows as much as it was about civil rights abuses .
But how much was it about the cows to Special Agent In Charge Daniel P. Love, and The United States Attorney’s who continue to protect him?
After the mistrial was announced Defense attorney’s in the case were given opportunity to speak with jurors who told them they felt the government had brought forward way to much evidence that went nowhere (proved nothing) and that some of it, along with a good deal of their witnesses, were not to be believed.
Judge Gloria Navarro gave the prosecution in the case broad authority during the trial to pile on hour after hour of sometimes repetitive, meaningless Facebook and YouTube analysis that bogged down their case with confusion and boredom, and literally put some jurors to sleep.
According to one alternate juror I spoke with, it was not lost on the jury that the government was working very hard to keep damaging information from them. The Juror also stated that Myhre’s final closing rebuttal had very little impact on the Jury in the end.
Prosecutor Steven Myhre went to great lengths to keep certain information from reaching the ears of the Jury. For instance, motions were filed before the trial began asking Judge Gloria Navarro to not allow defense attorneys to talk about Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM) Special Agent in Charge, Daniel P. Love’s horrendous record of abuse before during or after the protest, that led to his mysterious disappearance because of misconduct. The document also stated, as does many other motions filed by the Prosecutor’s office, that Prosecutor Myhre feared Defense Attorney’s would turn the trial around and effectively put Dan Love and the BLM on trial. When she refused to do that Myhre went another route and decided not to call Love to the stand at all.
Defense attorneys were incensed for a number of reasons. The first of which they argued, was their client’s right to face and question their accuser as outlined in the “confrontation clause” of the Sixth Amendment. The defense threatened, that if the Prosecution failed to call Love to the stand then they would meet the Sixth Amendment obligation by calling him for the defense.
After a valiant argument by the defense team, Navarro still granted the Prosecution’s request and forbid the Defense from calling the agent in charge to testify. Based on her belief in obscure case law, she speculated the court had discretion to fore-go the Constitution if she felt they were going to call Dan Love for the sole purpose of impeaching him. From that point on, no derogatory statements or information that made Dan Love look bad was allowed.
This ruling by Navarro had a staggering effect on the information the defense could and could not bring forward to reveal the true nature of Dan Love’s conduct on April 12th, 2014. Nothing spoke louder about how far Navarro and Myhre would go to keep the information about Dan Love from the Jury than when Defendant Todd Engel, who was representing himself, asked a Government witness — “Isn’t it true that Daniel P. Love is now under investigation for misconduct?”
Mr. Engel was immediately stripped of his right to represent himself.
The failure of Prosecutor Steven Myhre to call star witnesses Daniel Paul Love, and former Sheriff of Clarke County NV, Douglas Gillespi to the stand, at one point could have weighed heavily in the Prosecution’s inability to get the desired guilty verdict against the first round defendants, but reality holds out that it was a lose-lose proposition for Myhre. One alternate juror said, everyone on the jury already knew about Dan Love —
WHAT THE GOVERNMENT KEPT HIDDEN FROM THE JURY
After the April 9th, 2014 video of BLM officers assaulting protestors’ Margaret Houston and Ammon Bundy went viral and subsequently aired on Fox News on April 10th, Love was livid about the bad press and eager to get out from under the scrutiny of the media. Media outlets, both mainstream and independent, descended on the ranch and the idea that government over-reach had led to the violent attack on protestors spread like wild-fire. The video aired around the world and brought news crews from as far away as Japan to Bunkerville, Nevada.
On or about the 11th, the FBI has a conversation with Love where he pleads to have more agents dispersed to Bunkerville, and the FBI refuses that request stating;
“We will not be throwing anymore 3 letter agencies at this thing Agent Love; If you proceed you are on your own.”
The FBI told Dan Love that it was their opinion he had lost control of the situation and that his obvious escalation was now a matter of public safety. They further advised him it would be in the best interest of public safety to cease all operations and that further activity would risk creating a flashpoint situation if he did any of the following;
- Continue to gather cattle
- Transport cattle from the compound
- Continue to occupy the area
- Create ANY situation where the BLM confronts – the Bundy’s – the Militia – or Protestors in any way, and not to;
- Put BLM officers in a situation where they must leave in mass
What happened on the ground after the FBI had that conversation with Daniel P. Love speaks for itself. Obviously Love was not listening to anyone at this point — Not even the FBI.
During a telephone meeting where Gillespi tries once again to reason with Love – [S.A.C] Love tells the Sheriff he planned to do one of 3 things;
- Stay at the compound and continue the operation
- Get the cattle to a auction house in California, or
- Start killing [shooting] the cattle
What Love failed to tell Gillespi was, he had been killing the cattle all along. Evidence collected after the fact showed [*S.A.C*] Dan Love chose option 3 early on during the operation. Had that evidence been allowed to be brought forward it would have clearly explained why the Bundy family had become so desperate over the course of the cattle roundup and why they went to meet the BLM convoy on the morning of April 9th, 2014. The objective was not to impede the BLM, because obviously whatever they were doing with the equipment seen coming out of the desert had already been done, but to have Gillespi meet the family on Riverside Drive the morning of the confrontation and get answers from the BLM about gunfire from helicopters being used to herd the livestock, gunfire heard coming from the compound, and to explain the use for earthmoving equipment and dump-trucks. They also wanted Gillespi to check on the condition of the herd. Gillespi refused over and over again to assist the family in any way when it came to dealing with the BLM but in an exclusive interview with the Las Vegas Sun 3 months after the protest this information emerged;Gillespie said he initially agreed to a request from Bureau of Land Management officials to assist in the roundup of Bundy’s cattle from public lands —
But when he learned the feds weren’t being truthful with him and he saw they weren’t going to listen to his advice, he told them he wouldn’t send his officers to Bundy’s ranch near Bunkerville.
“‘This is what normally happens,'” Gillespie said, paraphrasing the BLM’s conversation with him before the roundup began in April. “‘The local sheriff backs out. We know what we’re doing.'” —
“I go up there to talk to Cliven (before the roundup), see if I can talk some understanding to him, and the boys are there,” Gillespie said. Further, he learned the BLM had no place to take the cattle.
“That’s when I call the BLM and say my folks are not participating in this,” Gillespie said. “‘You’re telling me things that I’m finding out not to be true. I don’t like the way this is going, and I think you need to put this off and look at the fall.‘”Source Article here courtesy Las Vegas Sun
http://thepetesantillishow.com/wp-co...e1-300x300.jpg
Some would argue Sheriff Gillespi’s unwillingness to come when called numerous times by the family to check on the well-being of the cattle, enabled Dan Love to remain at the compound unchecked, and to ultimately kill cattle and destroy vital infrastructure. Had Gillespi come when called much of the herd would have been saved. But according to Cliven Bundy, many were lost during the roundup process after Love, the BLM, and inexperienced contract cowboys, had run the hooves right off some of the herd, and left newborn babies in the desert to die. Despite having no court order to do so, Dan Love killed Approx. 27 head of cattle that had been shot and buried in a pit that was uncovered shortly after the BLM left the area. Dan Love had denied he was killing cattle to Journalist Pete Santilli on April 10th, 2014.
Click here to see a video of the pit being uncovered.
DAN LOVE DEFIES ORDER FROM GOVERNOR BRIAN SANDOVAL TO RELEASE CATTLE
http://thepetesantillishow.com/wp-co...ow-300x200.jpg
During one of a number of conference calls beginning on April 9th and lasting through the 12th, Sheriff Douglas Gillespi informed Love that Governor Brian Sandoval had given the order to release [State owned cattle] being held by the BLM. Sandoval instructed Gillespi to make it clear to the BLM;Any cattle rounded up by the BLM not carrying the Bundy Brand was now considered property of the State of Nevada and it was his order those cattle be released back out onto public lands. The Federal Government could only claim ownership of cattle carrying the “Bundy Brand” and all others were to be released immediately.
Instead, Dan Love floated an idea back to Sheriff Gillespi, that completely dismissed the Governor of Nevada’s order .. They wanted Gillespi to broker a deal on behalf of the United States Government, where if Cliven Bundy allowed them to sell all of his livestock, “with a promise to later give him the money they made after the cattle were successfully sold at auction,” the BLM would back down and leave the area.
This would explain clearly why testimony from various BLM agents exposed the fact Love was still trying to find a willing auction house in California to take the cattle off his hands in the last hours before the protest on April 11th & 12th.
THE HARRY REID CONNECTION
At some point during the early hours of April 12th, 2014, Sheriff Gillespi received a phone call from the Office of Harry Reid.
It is not clear whether or not it was Harry Reid himself who made the call or a member of his staff, but the message from Reid to Gillespi was clear;“The Department of The Interior has lost faith in your ability to negotiate the deal with Cliven Bundy. You are no longer authorized to offer him that deal. “
Meaning, the deal that involved the selling of Mr. Bundy’s cattle and giving him the profit from the sale was no longer an option.
It was then Harry Reid’s office told Sheriff Gillespi exactly what to say when he took the stage at the Bundy Ranch “rally” on the morning of April 12th. Suddenly, any attempt at de-escalating the situation was forsaken, and a new plan was put into action.
DANIEL BOGDEN’S PLAN
At 7:00 am on the morning of April 12th, 2014, Sheriff Douglas Gillespi hosted a conference call at his home that included;
- Clark County-Under Sheriff – Joe Lombardo
- Clark County-Under Sheriff Kevin – McMahill
- Clark County-Under Sheriff – James Dixon
- Nevada State Attorney – Daniel Bogden
- [SAC-BLM] – Daniel P. Love
- Head Of BLM – Neil Kornze
- Head of Terrorism Task Force-FBI – Laura Bucheit
It is believed it was during this conference call that a plan was set into motion that would involve the entrapment of Cliven Bundy and protestors on the ground in order to create a case for future prosecution. The legal advise was spearheaded by then US State Attorney Daniel Bogden; In fact, it would be Daniel Bogden who in the background advised Daniel P. Love to allow the release the cattle, but to be sure it was Cliven Bundy who pulled the pin ..
What Nevada’s US State Attorney Bogden was now proposing, would change the course of history and put hundreds of lives in danger. This fully explains why a BLM agent was both seen and heard multiple times in courtroom video evidence saying;” If Love’s plan works, he’s a fucking genius; If it doesn’t — well — “
On the video the agent never finishes his thought.
It also ends the mystery of why the BLM was still on the ground and ready to kill, when the unsuspecting protesters arrived. At least one of the agents knew of a plan.
Whether he meant to or not, Gillespi went to the rally on the morning of the 12th and gave an ambiguous statement claiming the BLM was ceasing operations and the Lands would be re-opened to the public. By the time Gillespi made that statement on the stage the wheels were in motion for a confrontation in the Toquop Wash; Daniel P. Love was ready and waiting.
The only thing Dan Love had left to accomplish in the Wash was to create a situation which he and Bogden hoped would lure Cliven Bundy to the compound where he could be coaxed into pulling the pin on the gate.
During a planning meeting on the 11th, the Nevada State Highway Patrol was told to go to the BLM compound on the morning of the 12th to help escort the BLM out of the compound. This information would account for the confusion on the ground between the BLM and the NHP.
It is unclear as to whether or not the NHP knew the plan had changed by the time they arrived on the scene, but either way they learned after they got there the BLM was not prepared to leave and had dug in with weapons pointed at protestors.
http://thepetesantillishow.com/wp-co...13-300x200.jpg
Gillespi was nowhere to be seen after his initial speech at the Bundy rally site on the morning of the 12th, and Under-Sheriff’s Joe Lombardo and Tom Roberts took over the so called negotiations for the cattle release.
Did Lombardo and Roberts know the objective was to get Cliven Bundy to break the plain of the main gate and have him pull the pin on the gate of the cattle holding area?
Only a thorough cross-examination can get to that truth.
THE ALMOST DEADLY END
Dan Love had obviously been told he had lost the support of Sheriff Gillespi, Metro P.D. and the FBI. Governor Brian Sandoval made clear his position throughout the event. State Legislators from Nevada, Arizona, Utah, and Washington State who were in the Toquop Wash the day of the protest, all condemned Love’s actions for still being there when they arrived. The Nevada State Highway Patrol was completely unaware they would be assisting in a standoff.
So did Dan Love fool all of these people into believing they were coming to assist in a departure when in reality the plan was always to prolong the event just long enough to entrap Cliven Bundy?
Was a militarized BLM and Park Service protecting government assets that day, or were they protecting Dan Love while he worked desperately to buy Daniel Bogden’s plan enough time to get Cliven Bundy on the scene – so they could prosecute him in the future?
Did Dan Love, with the assistance of Daniel Bogden, risk hundreds of lives just to get Cliven Bundy to pull a pin on a gate?
Failing to convince Cliven Bundy to come to the BLM Compound, Dan Love ran out of time and left the area, but before he left he asked Under-Sheriff Tom Roberts to make sure a Metro-PD Officer turned on a Body-camera to film the release of the cattle.
Who pulled the pin?
I guess we will find that out in the next trial. #googledanlove
TO SUPPORT PETE SANTILLI PLEASE CLICK HERE – DONATIONS ARE APPRECIATED
AMMON BUNDY, BLM, Bundy Ranch, Bundy Standoff, Bundy Trial, Cliven Bundy, Daniel Bogden, Daniel Love, FBI, Gunmen, Harry Reid, Jury, Mistrial, Nevada, Pete Santilli, Ryan Bundy, Special AgentPost navigation
The Las Vegas Blue Wall Of Silence: Not So Invisible After First Bundy Ranch Trial |
Archives
Re: Armed Feds Prepare For Showdown With Nevada Cattle Rancher
https://www.buzzfeed.com/jimdalrympl...EYZ#.dnqWVl08A
Armed Standoff Leader Claims He's Been Strip Searched "Hundreds Of Times" In Jail While Awaiting Trial
Ryan Bundy says in a lawsuit that he has been forced to strip down while jail authorities "peer" up into his "rear body cavity hundreds of times."
n the suit filed Monday, Ryan Bundy says he has been forced to "undergo oppressive, intrusive, and unlawful body cavity searches multiple times per day" while housed at the Southern Nevada Detention Center. The searches, which required him to remove his clothing and expose himself to jail personnel, were "nonconsensual intrusions" against his Constitutional rights.
Bundy "has been forced and threatened to bend over and expose his anus by spreading his buttock checks wide open" while jailers "peer" into his body cavity "hundreds of times," the lawsuit states. Bundy also alleges there have been 40 "highly intrusive strip/body cavity searches."
Re: Armed Feds Prepare For Showdown With Nevada Cattle Rancher
Quote:
Originally Posted by
cheka.
https://www.buzzfeed.com/jimdalrympl...EYZ#.dnqWVl08A
Armed Standoff Leader Claims He's Been Strip Searched "Hundreds Of Times" In Jail While Awaiting Trial
Ryan Bundy says in a lawsuit that he has been forced to strip down while jail authorities "peer" up into his "rear body cavity hundreds of times."
n the suit filed Monday, Ryan Bundy says he has been forced to "undergo oppressive, intrusive, and unlawful body cavity searches multiple times per day" while housed at the Southern Nevada Detention Center. The searches, which required him to remove his clothing and expose himself to jail personnel, were "nonconsensual intrusions" against his Constitutional rights.
Bundy "has been forced and threatened to bend over and expose his anus by spreading his buttock checks wide open" while jailers "peer" into his body cavity "hundreds of times," the lawsuit states. Bundy also alleges there have been 40 "highly intrusive strip/body cavity searches."
Ammon Bundy's wife reported that Ammon and Ryan have been released from solitary and were able to take their first shower in 40 days
Gavin Seim posted a video:
http://youtu.be/oquoFDrQROs
https://youtu.be/oquoFDrQROs
Re: Armed Feds Prepare For Showdown With Nevada Cattle Rancher
Post-trial. Interview with Eric Parker ~ Uploaded by MrsB Stacy
http://youtu.be/NXc_3azKh5Y
https://youtu.be/NXc_3azKh5Y
Re: Armed Feds Prepare For Showdown With Nevada Cattle Rancher
After the Bundy's stood up to the feds in 2014. The BLM also writes its own rules and regulations and ignores provisions of stautory law that say prior established rights must be honored.
http://newswithviews.com/Coffman/mike147.htm
http://newswithviews.com/Coffman/images/text.gif
Re: Armed Feds Prepare For Showdown With Nevada Cattle Rancher
Page has been removed, it must be too revealing,
Home Of The Pete Santilli Show
APRIL 29, 2017
404 - Oops. Page Not Found
Whoops. The page you were looking for has gone extinct. Maybe you can find what you were looking for below.
Page List
Quote:
Originally Posted by
monty
This is a must read. You cannot imagine how low and disgusting these so called public servants are.
Deb Jordan published information today that reveals what the jury did not hear, and also the conspiracy involving the US Attorney Bogdon, Senator Harry Ried, BLM Director Niel Kornze, Sheriff Gilespe and others. I cannot believe how low these bastard politicians have stooped to frame Cliven Bundy.
Home Of The Pete Santilli Show
APRIL 28, 2017
Home › News › A Deadly Game: What the Jury didn’t hear about what really happened at Bundy Ranch
A Deadly Game: What the Jury didn’t hear about what really happened at Bundy Ranch
petesantillishow 04/28/2017 News
http://thepetesantillishow.com/wp-co...-1-300x226.jpg
GMN – PROVEN – STRONG – ADVOCACY – JOURNALISM
Prosecution in the case of United States vs Cliven Bundy et al, was dealt a heavy blow as they were forced to except a mistrial after almost 3 months of bringing what they felt was their best evidence to a Jury in Las Vegas, Nevada, against 6 men who say, it wasn’t about cows as much as it was about civil rights abuses .
But how much was it about the cows to Special Agent In Charge Daniel P. Love, and The United States Attorney’s who continue to protect him?
After the mistrial was announced Defense attorney’s in the case were given opportunity to speak with jurors who told them they felt the government had brought forward way to much evidence that went nowhere (proved nothing) and that some of it, along with a good deal of their witnesses, were not to be believed.
Judge Gloria Navarro gave the prosecution in the case broad authority during the trial to pile on hour after hour of sometimes repetitive, meaningless Facebook and YouTube analysis that bogged down their case with confusion and boredom, and literally put some jurors to sleep.
According to one alternate juror I spoke with, it was not lost on the jury that the government was working very hard to keep damaging information from them. The Juror also stated that Myhre’s final closing rebuttal had very little impact on the Jury in the end.
Prosecutor Steven Myhre went to great lengths to keep certain information from reaching the ears of the Jury. For instance, motions were filed before the trial began asking Judge Gloria Navarro to not allow defense attorneys to talk about Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM) Special Agent in Charge, Daniel P. Love’s horrendous record of abuse before during or after the protest, that led to his mysterious disappearance because of misconduct. The document also stated, as does many other motions filed by the Prosecutor’s office, that Prosecutor Myhre feared Defense Attorney’s would turn the trial around and effectively put Dan Love and the BLM on trial. When she refused to do that Myhre went another route and decided not to call Love to the stand at all.
Defense attorneys were incensed for a number of reasons. The first of which they argued, was their client’s right to face and question their accuser as outlined in the “confrontation clause” of the Sixth Amendment. The defense threatened, that if the Prosecution failed to call Love to the stand then they would meet the Sixth Amendment obligation by calling him for the defense.
After a valiant argument by the defense team, Navarro still granted the Prosecution’s request and forbid the Defense from calling the agent in charge to testify. Based on her belief in obscure case law, she speculated the court had discretion to fore-go the Constitution if she felt they were going to call Dan Love for the sole purpose of impeaching him. From that point on, no derogatory statements or information that made Dan Love look bad was allowed.
This ruling by Navarro had a staggering effect on the information the defense could and could not bring forward to reveal the true nature of Dan Love’s conduct on April 12th, 2014. Nothing spoke louder about how far Navarro and Myhre would go to keep the information about Dan Love from the Jury than when Defendant Todd Engel, who was representing himself, asked a Government witness — “Isn’t it true that Daniel P. Love is now under investigation for misconduct?”
Mr. Engel was immediately stripped of his right to represent himself.
The failure of Prosecutor Steven Myhre to call star witnesses Daniel Paul Love, and former Sheriff of Clarke County NV, Douglas Gillespi to the stand, at one point could have weighed heavily in the Prosecution’s inability to get the desired guilty verdict against the first round defendants, but reality holds out that it was a lose-lose proposition for Myhre. One alternate juror said, everyone on the jury already knew about Dan Love —
WHAT THE GOVERNMENT KEPT HIDDEN FROM THE JURY
After the April 9th, 2014 video of BLM officers assaulting protestors’ Margaret Houston and Ammon Bundy went viral and subsequently aired on Fox News on April 10th, Love was livid about the bad press and eager to get out from under the scrutiny of the media. Media outlets, both mainstream and independent, descended on the ranch and the idea that government over-reach had led to the violent attack on protestors spread like wild-fire. The video aired around the world and brought news crews from as far away as Japan to Bunkerville, Nevada.
On or about the 11th, the FBI has a conversation with Love where he pleads to have more agents dispersed to Bunkerville, and the FBI refuses that request stating;
“We will not be throwing anymore 3 letter agencies at this thing Agent Love; If you proceed you are on your own.”
The FBI told Dan Love that it was their opinion he had lost control of the situation and that his obvious escalation was now a matter of public safety. They further advised him it would be in the best interest of public safety to cease all operations and that further activity would risk creating a flashpoint situation if he did any of the following;
- Continue to gather cattle
- Transport cattle from the compound
- Continue to occupy the area
- Create ANY situation where the BLM confronts – the Bundy’s – the Militia – or Protestors in any way, and not to;
- Put BLM officers in a situation where they must leave in mass
What happened on the ground after the FBI had that conversation with Daniel P. Love speaks for itself. Obviously Love was not listening to anyone at this point — Not even the FBI.
During a telephone meeting where Gillespi tries once again to reason with Love – [S.A.C] Love tells the Sheriff he planned to do one of 3 things;
- Stay at the compound and continue the operation
- Get the cattle to a auction house in California, or
- Start killing [shooting] the cattle
What Love failed to tell Gillespi was, he had been killing the cattle all along. Evidence collected after the fact showed [*S.A.C*] Dan Love chose option 3 early on during the operation. Had that evidence been allowed to be brought forward it would have clearly explained why the Bundy family had become so desperate over the course of the cattle roundup and why they went to meet the BLM convoy on the morning of April 9th, 2014. The objective was not to impede the BLM, because obviously whatever they were doing with the equipment seen coming out of the desert had already been done, but to have Gillespi meet the family on Riverside Drive the morning of the confrontation and get answers from the BLM about gunfire from helicopters being used to herd the livestock, gunfire heard coming from the compound, and to explain the use for earthmoving equipment and dump-trucks. They also wanted Gillespi to check on the condition of the herd. Gillespi refused over and over again to assist the family in any way when it came to dealing with the BLM but in an exclusive interview with the Las Vegas Sun 3 months after the protest this information emerged;Gillespie said he initially agreed to a request from Bureau of Land Management officials to assist in the roundup of Bundy’s cattle from public lands —
But when he learned the feds weren’t being truthful with him and he saw they weren’t going to listen to his advice, he told them he wouldn’t send his officers to Bundy’s ranch near Bunkerville.
“‘This is what normally happens,'” Gillespie said, paraphrasing the BLM’s conversation with him before the roundup began in April. “‘The local sheriff backs out. We know what we’re doing.'” —
“I go up there to talk to Cliven (before the roundup), see if I can talk some understanding to him, and the boys are there,” Gillespie said. Further, he learned the BLM had no place to take the cattle.
“That’s when I call the BLM and say my folks are not participating in this,” Gillespie said. “‘You’re telling me things that I’m finding out not to be true. I don’t like the way this is going, and I think you need to put this off and look at the fall.‘”Source Article here courtesy Las Vegas Sun
http://thepetesantillishow.com/wp-co...e1-300x300.jpg
Some would argue Sheriff Gillespi’s unwillingness to come when called numerous times by the family to check on the well-being of the cattle, enabled Dan Love to remain at the compound unchecked, and to ultimately kill cattle and destroy vital infrastructure. Had Gillespi come when called much of the herd would have been saved. But according to Cliven Bundy, many were lost during the roundup process after Love, the BLM, and inexperienced contract cowboys, had run the hooves right off some of the herd, and left newborn babies in the desert to die. Despite having no court order to do so, Dan Love killed Approx. 27 head of cattle that had been shot and buried in a pit that was uncovered shortly after the BLM left the area. Dan Love had denied he was killing cattle to Journalist Pete Santilli on April 10th, 2014.
Click here to see a video of the pit being uncovered.
DAN LOVE DEFIES ORDER FROM GOVERNOR BRIAN SANDOVAL TO RELEASE CATTLE
http://thepetesantillishow.com/wp-co...ow-300x200.jpg
During one of a number of conference calls beginning on April 9th and lasting through the 12th, Sheriff Douglas Gillespi informed Love that Governor Brian Sandoval had given the order to release [State owned cattle] being held by the BLM. Sandoval instructed Gillespi to make it clear to the BLM;Any cattle rounded up by the BLM not carrying the Bundy Brand was now considered property of the State of Nevada and it was his order those cattle be released back out onto public lands. The Federal Government could only claim ownership of cattle carrying the “Bundy Brand” and all others were to be released immediately.
Instead, Dan Love floated an idea back to Sheriff Gillespi, that completely dismissed the Governor of Nevada’s order .. They wanted Gillespi to broker a deal on behalf of the United States Government, where if Cliven Bundy allowed them to sell all of his livestock, “with a promise to later give him the money they made after the cattle were successfully sold at auction,” the BLM would back down and leave the area.
This would explain clearly why testimony from various BLM agents exposed the fact Love was still trying to find a willing auction house in California to take the cattle off his hands in the last hours before the protest on April 11th & 12th.
THE HARRY REID CONNECTION
At some point during the early hours of April 12th, 2014, Sheriff Gillespi received a phone call from the Office of Harry Reid.
It is not clear whether or not it was Harry Reid himself who made the call or a member of his staff, but the message from Reid to Gillespi was clear;“The Department of The Interior has lost faith in your ability to negotiate the deal with Cliven Bundy. You are no longer authorized to offer him that deal. “
Meaning, the deal that involved the selling of Mr. Bundy’s cattle and giving him the profit from the sale was no longer an option.
It was then Harry Reid’s office told Sheriff Gillespi exactly what to say when he took the stage at the Bundy Ranch “rally” on the morning of April 12th. Suddenly, any attempt at de-escalating the situation was forsaken, and a new plan was put into action.
DANIEL BOGDEN’S PLAN
At 7:00 am on the morning of April 12th, 2014, Sheriff Douglas Gillespi hosted a conference call at his home that included;
- Clark County-Under Sheriff – Joe Lombardo
- Clark County-Under Sheriff Kevin – McMahill
- Clark County-Under Sheriff – James Dixon
- Nevada State Attorney – Daniel Bogden
- [SAC-BLM] – Daniel P. Love
- Head Of BLM – Neil Kornze
- Head of Terrorism Task Force-FBI – Laura Bucheit
It is believed it was during this conference call that a plan was set into motion that would involve the entrapment of Cliven Bundy and protestors on the ground in order to create a case for future prosecution. The legal advise was spearheaded by then US State Attorney Daniel Bogden; In fact, it would be Daniel Bogden who in the background advised Daniel P. Love to allow the release the cattle, but to be sure it was Cliven Bundy who pulled the pin ..
What Nevada’s US State Attorney Bogden was now proposing, would change the course of history and put hundreds of lives in danger. This fully explains why a BLM agent was both seen and heard multiple times in courtroom video evidence saying;” If Love’s plan works, he’s a fucking genius; If it doesn’t — well — “
On the video the agent never finishes his thought.
It also ends the mystery of why the BLM was still on the ground and ready to kill, when the unsuspecting protesters arrived. At least one of the agents knew of a plan.
Whether he meant to or not, Gillespi went to the rally on the morning of the 12th and gave an ambiguous statement claiming the BLM was ceasing operations and the Lands would be re-opened to the public. By the time Gillespi made that statement on the stage the wheels were in motion for a confrontation in the Toquop Wash; Daniel P. Love was ready and waiting.
The only thing Dan Love had left to accomplish in the Wash was to create a situation which he and Bogden hoped would lure Cliven Bundy to the compound where he could be coaxed into pulling the pin on the gate.
During a planning meeting on the 11th, the Nevada State Highway Patrol was told to go to the BLM compound on the morning of the 12th to help escort the BLM out of the compound. This information would account for the confusion on the ground between the BLM and the NHP.
It is unclear as to whether or not the NHP knew the plan had changed by the time they arrived on the scene, but either way they learned after they got there the BLM was not prepared to leave and had dug in with weapons pointed at protestors.
http://thepetesantillishow.com/wp-co...13-300x200.jpg
Gillespi was nowhere to be seen after his initial speech at the Bundy rally site on the morning of the 12th, and Under-Sheriff’s Joe Lombardo and Tom Roberts took over the so called negotiations for the cattle release.
Did Lombardo and Roberts know the objective was to get Cliven Bundy to break the plain of the main gate and have him pull the pin on the gate of the cattle holding area?
Only a thorough cross-examination can get to that truth.
THE ALMOST DEADLY END
Dan Love had obviously been told he had lost the support of Sheriff Gillespi, Metro P.D. and the FBI. Governor Brian Sandoval made clear his position throughout the event. State Legislators from Nevada, Arizona, Utah, and Washington State who were in the Toquop Wash the day of the protest, all condemned Love’s actions for still being there when they arrived. The Nevada State Highway Patrol was completely unaware they would be assisting in a standoff.
So did Dan Love fool all of these people into believing they were coming to assist in a departure when in reality the plan was always to prolong the event just long enough to entrap Cliven Bundy?
Was a militarized BLM and Park Service protecting government assets that day, or were they protecting Dan Love while he worked desperately to buy Daniel Bogden’s plan enough time to get Cliven Bundy on the scene – so they could prosecute him in the future?
Did Dan Love, with the assistance of Daniel Bogden, risk hundreds of lives just to get Cliven Bundy to pull a pin on a gate?
Failing to convince Cliven Bundy to come to the BLM Compound, Dan Love ran out of time and left the area, but before he left he asked Under-Sheriff Tom Roberts to make sure a Metro-PD Officer turned on a Body-camera to film the release of the cattle.
Who pulled the pin?
I guess we will find that out in the next trial. #googledanlove
TO SUPPORT PETE SANTILLI PLEASE CLICK HERE – DONATIONS ARE APPRECIATED
AMMON BUNDY, BLM, Bundy Ranch, Bundy Standoff, Bundy Trial, Cliven Bundy, Daniel Bogden, Daniel Love, FBI, Gunmen, Harry Reid, Jury, Mistrial, Nevada, Pete Santilli, Ryan Bundy, Special AgentPost navigation
The Las Vegas Blue Wall Of Silence: Not So Invisible After First Bundy Ranch Trial |
Archives
