Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
^ Mark McConell is a lying bastard working for the Jewish owned and controlled government working to destroy this country.
This is a good lesson for anyone who forms a group to promote the constitution or hold the government accountable for their actions that are bringing on the ((( new world order/communism.)))
I got fed up with the full video posted earlier of the lying son of bitches version of the events when they were stopped and Lavoy was shot. I had to turn it off.
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Tumbleweed
^ Mark McConell is a lying bastard working for the Jewish owned and controlled government working to destroy this country.
This is a good lesson for anyone who forms a group to promote the constitution or hold the government accountable for their actions that are bringing on the ((( new world order/communism.)))
I got fed up with the full video posted earlier of the lying son of bitches version of the events when they were stopped and Lavoy was shot. I had to turn it off.
Quoted for truth. I did not and will not watch those videos for the reasons you stated.
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
RangeFire! report for day 8. http://rangefire.us/2016/09/13/ongoi...ge-commentary/
DAY 8, Thursday, September 22, 2016
There were two major themes in the case today. One was presentation of recordings of the negotiation discussions between the remaining hold-out occupiers at the Refuge, and the FBI. Many of the conversations are between FBI negotiators and Defendant Jeff Banta, whose discussions with the the FBI were played for the the jury. The other theme was Judge Brown’s discussion with Attorney Marcus Mumford about his questions about the shooting death of LaVoy Finicum. We will talk more about that below.
Jeff Banta’s conversations with the FBI were very interesting and remarkably candid. They help show that there were multiple diverse ideas and agendas at the Refuge and among refuge occupiers. The idea that all refuge occupiers on the same sheet of music and part of one grand conspiracy to impede federal officers might be a stretch.
Banta told FBI negotiators that he had to gone to the Refuge to support Dwight and Steven Hammond. He wanted to have a chance to meet their family. He thought if they were going to prison, he might even see if he could work for them as a ranch hand and help them out. He thought Bundys might be able to help make an introduction with the Hammonds. When negotiators asked Banta what he wanted and what it would take to get the remaining occupiers to leave, he said “There’s only one way out, and that’s to free the Hammonds.”
Banta decribed some of the other occupiers who had been at the Refuge as disorganized, and compared them to cartoon characters. He said he wouldn’t put much stock in many of them. “Half of them have their screws loose, I’m telling ya,” he said.
One interesting piece of evidence presented was an an aerial surveillance video showing Banta riding an ATV to a remote part of the refuge to remove a surveillance camera that was mounted on a tripod. In light of this, it is interesting to compare this evidence with evidence that others had removed surveillance cameras and were charged with theft of government property, but Banta was not. On this point, it is also worth noting that although no evidence has been presented that Banta was ever armed or possessed any firearm(s) on the Refuge, he has been charged with possession firearms, and on September 12th Banta had to remind Judge Brown that he too is still charged with possession.
Now, let’s turn attention to the discussion about evidence regarding LaVoy Finicum’s shooting death. Judge Brown has allowed the prosecution to present a variety of evidence about the shooting, but has refused to allow Attorney Mumford to ask questions about it on cross examination. Ultimately, Judge Brown reminded Mumford, repeatedly, that she had already ruled that she was not going to allow such questioning, and warned him that she was going to hold him in contempt, and fine him $1000, if he continued to pursue that line of questioning. She asked him if he understood. He responded “I understand the words,” implying that he understood what she was saying, but was struggling to understand why she was saying it, and refusing to treat both sides the same when it came to this line of questioning.
In light of this subject matter, the timing of a new anonymous video that has just been posted regarding detailed forensic analysis of LaVoy Finicum’s shooting is more than interesting. Because this video is very thought-provokiing, we are going to share it here, as well as in a separate post.
http://youtu.be/pLIUDBrU9Cs
Recap of the Second Week of Trial — still to come
For contrasting perspectives and reporting, you can also follow Maxine Bernstein for OregonLive, and Conrad Wilson for Oregon Public Broadcasting (OPB)
RANGE / RANGEFIRE! — Addressing Issues Facing the West / Spreading America’s Cowboy Spirit Beyond the Outback
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
These 2 videos are beginning to raise a lot of awareness around the internet. Read Gary Hunt's comment re Ryan Payne.
http://rangefire.us/wp-content/uploa...re-Logo-1B.jpg
Startling & Thought-Provoking New Analysis of LaVoy Finicum Shooting
September 23, 2016 - Government/Politics, Oregon Standoff - Tagged: Bundy, FBI, Finicum, Malheur, Oregon Standoff, Range, RANGEfire - 1 comment
http://rangefire.us/wp-content/uploa...-1-300x181.jpg
If you have been following our commentary and coverage of the Oregon Standoff Trial (or anyone else’s), you know that evidence regarding the shooting death of LaVoy Finicum has become a major point of contention in the case.
Supposedly there is an ongoing FBI investigation regarding a coverup by FBI HRT agents involved in that incident. In light of all this subject matter, new videos, anonymously produced, and recently posted on social media, are particularly thought provoking. In addition to the first general analysis video, we have now also added an additional video devoted to the purpose of the FBI foam bullet.
RANGE / RANGEFIRE! — Addressing Issues Facing the West / Spreading America’s Cowboy Spirit Beyond the Outback
One thought on “Startling & Thought-Provoking New Analysis of LaVoy Finicum Shooting”
- http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/74a6378...?s=59&d=mm&r=gGary HuntSeptember 23, 2016 at 10:52 am
This is an excellent presentation, with the exception of a blatant attempt to color Ryan Payne as an agent provocateur. He actually contradicts the assertion near the end, in the summation, by suggesting another motive for Ryan’s actions.
McConnell was released, but Payne was not. Payne has pled and is facing years in prison, which is not consistent, as with McConnell, of someone working for the government.
I have been in near constant touch with Ryan for the two years between events, and it was through him that I secured an invitation from Ammon Bundy to visit and have access at the Mulheur National Wildlife Refuge.
Prior to the occupation of the Refuge, I spent ten days with Ryan Payne working on a presentation on Committees of Safety. That presentation was given in Harney County and resulted in the creation of the Harney County Committee of Safety.
These are not the actions of an agent provocateur, they are the actions of a trained combat veteran who is dissatisfied with this government. Of the occupants of the two vehicles, Ryan is the only one with active combat experience. Why he got out of the truck will not be answered until such time as there would be no consequences as a result of that information.
If the creator of this presentation would remove his suggestive presumptions about Ryan Payne, I would give i my full support. If he continues to demonize Payne, based upon his speculation and presumption, I can only throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Reply
Leave a Reply
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
Name *
E-mail *
Website
Notify me of follow-up comments by email.
Notify me of new posts by email.
Search Form
Other Side of the Fence
Recent Comments
Sponsors
Follow me on Twitter
My Tweets
RANGEfire! Powered by WordPress
Max Magazine Theme was created by http://rangefire.us/wp-content/theme...es/logo_12.png
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Quote:
Originally Posted by
monty
These 2 videos are beginning to raise a lot of awareness around the internet. Read Gary Hunt's comment re Ryan Payne.
- http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/74a6378...?s=59&d=mm&r=gGary HuntSeptember 23, 2016 at 10:52 am
This is an excellent presentation, with the exception of a blatant attempt to color Ryan Payne as an agent provocateur. He actually contradicts the assertion near the end, in the summation, by suggesting another motive for Ryan’s actions.
McConnell was released, but Payne was not. Payne has pled and is facing years in prison, which is not consistent, as with McConnell, of someone working for the government.
I have been in near constant touch with Ryan for the two years between events, and it was through him that I secured an invitation from Ammon Bundy to visit and have access at the Mulheur National Wildlife Refuge.
Prior to the occupation of the Refuge, I spent ten days with Ryan Payne working on a presentation on Committees of Safety. That presentation was given in Harney County and resulted in the creation of the Harney County Committee of Safety.
These are not the actions of an agent provocateur, they are the actions of a trained combat veteran who is dissatisfied with this government. Of the occupants of the two vehicles, Ryan is the only one with active combat experience. Why he got out of the truck will not be answered until such time as there would be no consequences as a result of that information.
If the creator of this presentation would remove his suggestive presumptions about Ryan Payne, I would give i my full support. If he continues to demonize Payne, based upon his speculation and presumption, I can only throw the baby out with the bathwater. .
I think the creator of this video analysis is justified in pointing out that Ryan Payne's behavior fits that of an agent provocateur and also an undercover informant for the government.
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Tumbleweed
I think the creator of this video analysis is justified in pointing out that Ryan Payne's behavior fits that of an agent provocateur and also an undercover informant for the government.
I had the same thought when I watched the video but decided not to make any comment not having any firsthand knowledge.
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Shawna Cox has filed another motion re the court lacking jurisdiction over the land and buildings at the Malheur headquarters after Judge Brown denied the first motion. She addresses the fact the United States owns the horses and burros as was ruled on by the Supremes, but the ownership of the land is not addressed in the New Mexico case.
http://s19.postimg.org/ooedurw83/image.png
http://s19.postimg.org/sm1nk6j1f/image.png
http://s19.postimg.org/iq0kkjd9f/image.png
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Second week analysis of the Malheur protest trial from Rangefire.us
http://rangefire.us/2016/09/13/ongoi...ge-commentary/
Recap of the Second Week of Trial
For our second week re-cap, we’re going to share Maxine Bernstein’s most recent article about Attorney Marcus Mumford’s trial tactics in defending Ammon Bundy:
According to legal “Experts,” inviting the warth of Judge Brown may be part of a calculated approach by Ammon Bundy’s lawyer
According to Maxine Bernstein’s article, “It would be nearly impossible for jurors not to notice U.S. District Judge Anna J. Brown’s growing exasperation with Ammon Bundy’s lawyer Marcus Mumford.
Since the Bundy trial began two weeks ago, the judge has repeatedly told Mumford to follow her rulings, reword his questions to government witnesses and occasionally to either stand up when he addresses her or sit down and stop challenging her directives.
Despite her earlier orders that defense lawyers weren’t to raise questions at trial about who owns the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, Mumford tried to solicit responses from the Harney County sheriff and refuge employees on the subject.
Despite the judge’s warnings that she didn’t want any defendant or defense lawyer to ask witnesses about the circumstances surrounding the fatal police shooting of occupation spokesman Robert “LaVoy” Finicum, Mumford passed off as a question a stinging remark that Finicum was shot three times in the back, asked another witness how close police were to him when he was shot and why the FBI wasn’t investigating the shooting.
Each time, prosecutors objected. Each time, the judge asked jurors to disregard Mumford’s bids to get around her edicts.
Out of earshot of the jury, Brown on Thursday had enough.
She threatened Mumford with contempt of court if he continued to delve into Finicum’s shooting. She told him she’d fine him $1,000 for each time he continued to violate her orders.
So how is this of any help to Bundy as he and six others fight federal conspiracy charges in the 41-day armed takeover of the bird sanctuary in eastern Oregon earlier this year?
Trial observers have wondered aloud whether Mumford is grasping at straws or if his approach is part of a calculated plan.
Legal experts, including a fellow defense lawyer in this case, suggest the latter.
“He knows what he’s doing. It’s intentional,” said Matthew Schindler, a lawyer helping co-defendant Kenneth Medenbach. “I don’t believe he makes choices without a strategic focus.”
Mumford may be trying to mimic Bundy’s narrative – that the federal government hasn’t listened to his concerns and that’s why he needed to make a stand.
The judge’s consistent slap down of Mumford’s questions could play into his defense of Bundy, legal scholars and other lawyers say.
He could be setting up an argument to jurors at the end of the trial: “See, they aren’t even letting you hear about the most critical evidence in the case. The government can do what it wants, and they’re not even giving us a fair fight,” said Portland criminal defense lawyer Kevin Sali.
Or perhaps Mumford’s marathon cross-examinations of witnesses – marked by seemingly random questions far beyond the scope of the charges and long pauses as he figures out his next query – might be designed to confuse jurors.
With the government’s case resting heavily on the defendants’ own recorded statements and social media postings, photos and videos before, during and after the refuge occupation, “maybe all that’s left is trying to cast doubt about the government’s actions and the propriety of the government’s actions,” said Tung Yin, a Lewis & Clark Law School professor.
But the tactics could backfire – attorneys can risk losing face in front of jurors when they invite constant scolding.
“The judge – especially someone like Judge Brown, who keeps tight control over her courtroom – will typically be perceived by jurors as a trusted authority figure,” Sali said. “Being repeatedly shot down by such a person can harm a lawyer’s credibility in jurors’ eyes.”
In a case with many defendants, it also could make the other lawyers look better, Yin said.
Over the past two weeks, Mumford asked a refuge employee how many birds he estimated lived outside the refuge compared to the number on the refuge. It was stricken as irrelevant. Another time, Mumford slipped in a reference to adverse possession, a principle his client contends he was exercising when he occupied the refuge in an effort to return the property to the people of Harney County. Never mind that the judge has made clear that the federal government owns the refuge and any references to adverse possession must be restricted to the defendants’ state of mind if they take the stand themselves.
A few times, the judge has chided Mumford in front of jurors for mischaracterizing direct testimony during cross-examination. After a few witnesses misinterpreted Mumford’s questions, the judge advised him when jurors were out of the courtroom to simplify them and avoid using complex clauses, something she said experienced lawyers should know.
“On the one hand, a jury who sees an attorney repeatedly asking improper questions and getting shot down by the judge might think that attorney is not very competent, and be biased against the defendant,” said Andrew Kim, a Concordia University School of Law professor. “On the other hand, if the other side, the prosecution, is continually forced to object to questions that sound reasonable to the jury, it could give the impression that they have something to hide, which might work in the defendant’s favor.”
Bundy, considered the leader of the occupation, his older brother, Ryan, and the other five defendants each face a charge of conspiring to impede federal employees from working at the refuge through intimidation, threats or force. Eleven other defendants have pleaded guilty to the charge. Seven others are set for trial in February.
Ryan Bundy, who is representing himself and has no legal education, usually follows Mumford in cross-examining government witnesses. In contrast, his questions, for the most part, have been focused and direct, and on several occasions, the judge has overruled government objections to his questions. Ryan Bundy also has an experienced standby counsel and paralegal assisting him.
Schindler, who typically asks witnesses a few pointed questions and moves on, said he’s proud of Mumford.
“I’ve never seen anybody get Judge Brown so fired up,” Schindler said. “We’re not there to be friends with judges. Justice is not done by sitting down and shutting up.”
Yin said Bundy’s lawyer also may be trying to preserve a record for an appeal if his client is convicted: the court’s restrictions on his ability to question witnesses about Finicum’s shooting, for example.
The judge, though, also is likely wary of providing any fodder for Mumford to appeal.
“A trial judge has to be careful in a criminal trial not to clamp down on the defense,” he said. “It sounds like she might have tolerated more than she would have with Mumford already than she might have, say, with prosecutors or if this were a civil case.”
As for Mumford, this is par for the course for the pugilistic attorney.
While many lawyers in Brown’s courtroom Thursday said they had never witnessed a judge threaten an attorney with contempt before, it’s the second time this year for Mumford.
In February, a federal judge in Utah did the same during a criminal trial for the same type of offense – leading a witness during cross-examination into a forbidden area of inquiry. In that case, Mumford’s client, accountant Scott Leavitt, was acquitted of all 86 charges in an alleged influence-peddling scandal that included allegations of fraud, conspiracy and money laundering.
Mumford, who grew up on an Idaho dairy farm, told students at his alma mater, Idaho State University, in 2010 that he had to be “audacious enough” to enter the field of law with a significant stuttering condition he’s struggled with since age 4 because “the world wasn’t prepared for a stuttering lawyer.”
Mumford went on to graduate from Brigham Young University’s law school. He clerked for a federal appellate judge and worked eight years for one of the country’s biggest law firms, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, before returning to Utah to open his own practice.
Mumford told The Oregonian/OregonLive this week that he has tremendous respect for Judge Brown and doesn’t anticipate he’ll be found in contempt of her rulings. Yet he continued to defend his approach in court.
“My client has a right to confront the witnesses who are testifying against him,” he said. “I must zealously represent his interests. I have an obligation to ask all the relevant questions.”
He said he’s striving to show a link between what he and Ammon Bundy perceive as the government’s “misconduct” in the shooting of Finicum and what they contend is the government’s misleading view and mishandling of the refuge occupation.
“It’s the same governmental mistakes in how they reacted to the occupation itself,” Mumford said. “They didn’t engage in civil debate but engaged in wrongdoing and made up evidence that my client violated federal law.”
“It’s not easy to tell the federal government it’s wrong,” Mumford said.
— Maxine Bernstein
Note: It should be noted that despite his speech impediment and sometimes unorthodox approach, Attorney Marcus Mumford has a number of victories in high profile federal prosecutions in the state of Utah, including a lengthy white-collar conspiracy case earlier this year, in which his client was acquitted of 86 counts of alleded federal violations. Mumford is working with Attorney Morgan Philpot who has less litigation experience, but has political experience and is a former Utah state legislator and candidate for governor. They are also working with Rick Koerber, another of Mumford’s former high-profile clients, who is doing much of the research and writing of motions in the case.
For contrasting perspectives and reporting, you can also follow Maxine Bernstein for OregonLive, and Conrad Wilson for Oregon Public Broadcasting (OPB)
RANGE / RANGEFIRE! — Addressing Issues Facing the West / Spreading America’s Cowboy Spirit Beyond the Outback
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Quote:
Originally Posted by
monty
62 Stautes Chapter 645 Section 7(3)
"Any lands reserved or acquired for THE USE OF THE UNITED STATES"
http://s19.postimg.org/er7yfge03/image.png
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
From the left leaning Lets Talk Nevada
http://letstalknevada.com/bundy-oreg...idence-week-3/
Bundy Oregon Trial Prosecution Evidence, Week 3
Posted on September 23, 2016 by Bill Hurd
The picture is becoming visible of evidence the prosecutors are presenting in the trial in Oregon of
seven defendants in the Malheur Standoff case.
http://letstalknevada.com/wp-content...ce-252x252.jpg
Prosecutors are using video evidence recorded for The Pete Santilli Show. See the September 20 article by Karina Brown in Willamette Week entitled “Deborah Jordan Caught the Malheur Takeover on Camera. Now Her Footage is At the Center of the Bundy Trial” Here.
http://www.wweek.com/news/2016/09/21...e-bundy-trial/
Jordan played a major role in producing Santilli’s show, and he is her boyfriend. She doesn’t seem concerned that video from the show is being used as evidence. That might partially be because Santilli is no longer a defendant in the case. She says the FBI went after Pete because they don’t like him, not for breaking the law. We’ll see if the video evidence is critical in the case, and we note that Santilli is facing serious charges in Nevada for the Bunkerville standoff.
On Wednesday, September 21, there was testimony by a State Trooper that an informant alerted authorities about the trip by occupiers that resulted in the shooting death of LaVoy Finicum and the arrest of Ammon Bundy, Ryan Bundy and others. The informant was Ammon Bundy’s driver, Mark McConnell. McConnell was previously identified as a leader in the III% patriot group. (I wonder how he became an informant.) See the OPD article by Conrad Wilson, Bryan Vance and Bradley Parks “Informant Tipped Off OSP On Day Of Arrests Of Several Malheur Occupation Leaders”. http://www.opb.org/news/series/burns...hawna-cox-fbi/
There also was testimong about the shooting and the weapons that were found.
Thursday, September 22, saw interesting testimony by rancher Andy Dunbar, and a warning by Judge Anna Brown that could lead to contempt charges against Ammon Bundy’s attorney, Marcus Mumford, and others. These were reported by Conrad Wilson, Bryan Vance and Bradley Parks in the OPD article “Outside Looking In: Rancher Describes His View Of The Malheur Occupation”. http://www.opb.org/news/series/burns...RGUAdE.twitter
Dunbar’s ranch is immediately adjacent to the Malheur Refuge. He had great views of the observation tower. He testified about seeing men with long guns appearing to secure a perimeter. He said he saw, through binoculars, a person in the watch tower pointing a gun in his direction. He described the stressful situation in January, and that he still had to tend his cattle during the calving season. He also said he heard gunfire on a number of days.
The threat of contempt charges came when Attorney Mumford violated Judge Brown’s orders restricting how the shooting of LaVoy Finicum may be addressed in the presence of the jury. The attorneys and prosecutors may not mention more than that the shooting occurred and the date, under threat of a $1000 fine per incident.
Also on Thursday, Maxine Bernstein @maxoregonian wrote a series of tweets on telephone calls in the last days of the occupation between an FBI negotiator and now-defendants Jeff Banta and David Fry. These occurred when the FBI was seeking surrender of the last remaining occupiers. (Search on twitter for @maxoregonian.) Bernstein also reports that the trial will resume on Monday, September 26, with testimony by 22 FBI agents about evidence recovered at the refuge. Firearm evidence will be presented on Tuesday, and the defense was told to be ready to start their case on Wednesday.
It looks like the trial is moving right along, but I won’t be surprised by any tactics the defense attorneys use to cause doubt in the minds of the jurors. It is their duty to present the best possible defense.
______________________________
Follow Bill on Twitter HERE
Follow Let’s Talk Nation on Twitter HERE
Like Let’s Talk Nation on Facebook HERE
