Bryan Hyde short video, Observations from court today, 11/1 ~J Grady
Printable View
Bryan Hyde short video, Observations from court today, 11/1 ~J Grady
Carol Bundy and Bryan Hyde short video ~ J Grady
The jury is officially seated. Court was over early today, Nov. 2-John Lamb & Kelli Stewart ~ J Grady
Nov.2, Bryan Hyde and Carol Bundy short update on Bundy Protest trial ~ J Grady
Trial of the Century gets a jury,
Trial-of-the-Century Gets a Jury in Las Vegas
JURORS WILL RETURN TUESDAY MORNING, NOVEMBER 7TH, FOR OPENING ARGUMENTS.
November 2, 2017 BLM, Constitution, Featured 2
https://redoubtnews.com/wp-content/u...gn-678x381.jpgBundy supporters prepare new signs for the current trial in Las Vegas. (Redoubt News)
Trial-of-the-Century Gets a Jury in Las Vegas
by Shari Dovale
The Trial-of-the-Century is fully underway in Las Vegas, Nevada. Four men face charges related to the Bunkerville Standoff in April 2014.
71-year-old Cliven Bundy, two of his sons, Ryan and Ammon, as well as Montana resident Ryan Payne are accused of being the leaders behind the standoff. This event saw the Bureau of Land Management, under discredited Special Agent in Charge (SAC) Dan Love, stop the court-ordered cattle rustling that had begun near the southern Nevada town.
Over four days this week, prosecutors and defense whittled a large group of prospective jurors down to 12 with 4 alternates. A diverse group, they are prepared to serve for an estimated four months.
Jurors will return Tuesday morning, November 7th, for opening arguments. Meanwhile, the attorneys continue with a full schedule in preparation for the opening on Tuesday.
An evidentiary hearing will conclude Friday morning on a motion by Ryan Payne to dismiss the entire case based on an Office of Inspector General (OIG) report and it’s attachments.
Judge Navarro chose to delay the very important hearing in favor of jury selection, which gives every impression that she has already made up her mind to rule against the motion to dismiss. The best the defendants can hope for, under those circumstances, is a directed jury instruction.
The evidentiary hearing is based on the apparent destruction of important, and exculpatory, documents in the ‘Operation Gold Butte’ event, as named by the BLM. It is important to remember that Dan Love testified in this hearing, via SKYPE, from Salt Lake City.
When attorneys Bret Whipple (who represents Cliven Bundy) and Dan Hill (who represents Ammon Bundy) questioned Love regarding Love’s phone calls with the U.S. Attorneys Office during the standoff, prosecutor Steven Myhre sternly objected. Whipple asked if (then-U. S. Attorney) Daniel Bogden had instructed Love to release the cattle. Myhre objected, claiming the U.S. Attorney had no authority to issue such an instruction. However, Daniel Love stated that the order to surrender and release the cows was given immediately after he spoke to Bogden.
This revelation raises the question of whether the Justice Department deliberately entrapped the Bundys, and made a showing of releasing the cattle solely to set up the Bundys to be prosecuted. Was Love directed by the highest-ranking federal prosecutor in Nevada to release the cattle, so that the Justice Department could stage this elaborate criminal prosecution?
Further testimony by Kent Klemen further implicated the US Attorney’s office in the what appears to be quite the cover up. Kleman was in charge of the investigation of the shredded documents.
During Kleman‘s testimony, it was revealed that Acting US Attorney, Steven Myhre, not only asked Kleman to investigate this issue, but set the parameters and directed the course of the investigation. This puts a large “Conflict of Interest” stamp on Myhre’s forehead.
Myhre made repeated attempts to shut down this testimony, calling it ‘privileged’, yet it continued with more details.
It would seem that when the original motion was filed by the defense in October 2016, Myhre called Kleman at that time to determine what happened. Kleman then spoke with Myhre at least weekly for the next year, discussing all aspects of the investigation.
During the investigation, Kleman admitted that he did NOT talk to all the principals involved in the event. This investigator testified that he was told of a “hurried shredding event” yet never bothered to ask WHY they were doing the shredding, though he was told that Command Staff were assisting. In light of this knowledge, it is amazing that Kleman never bothered to ask WHO directed them to shred the documents.
The trial is estimated to last four months, with a few days off for pre-scheduled events, including holidays. The gallery is expected to be full with supporters traveling from around the country to witness the testimony, as well as several media outlets expected on key days.
A final trial for the remaining defendants is not expected to begin until 30 days after a verdict is reached in this trial.
Please support our coverage of your rights. Donate here: paypal.me/RedoubtNews
From the archives, April10, 2014 Krisanne Hall Cliven Bundy, Cows and the Constitution
Cliven Bundy, Cows And The Constitution
April 10, 2014 By KrisAnne Hall 21 Comments
Cliven Bundy, is a Nevada rancher standing in defiance of a 2013 federal court order requiring his family to cease and desist cattle grazing on land that their family has used since 1887. Shiree Bundy Cox, daughter to Cliven Bundy explains this background:
“My great grandpa bought the rights to the Bunkerville allotment back in 1887 around there. Then he sold them to my grandpa who then turned them over to my dad in 1972. These men bought and paid for their rights to the range and also built waters, fences and roads to assure the servival (sic) of their cattle, all with their own money, not with tax dollars.”
So what’s the problem? The federal government came into the picture with gifts of plastic beads and promises to “help” the ranchers manage this land. The RANCHERS then paid a fee to the Bureau of Land Management to pay the salaries and keep the department operating under the premise that the BLM would be working to help the ranchers better their usage of the land. But just like all negotiations with government, the money got big and the federal control got even bigger.
Ms. Cox explains:
“[To] to keep the cows from over grazing, came the bureau of land management. They were supposed to assist the ranchers in the management of their ranges while the ranchers paid a yearly allotment which was to be use[d] to pay the BLM wages and to help with repairs and improvements of the ranches. My dad did pay his grazing fees for years to the BLM until they were no longer using his fees to help him and to improve. Instead they began using these money’s (sic) against the ranchers.”
This is not a case of a gray area of personal property vs. federal property. And now we are repeating a history of Kings and Tyrants because we forgot that the federal government has no Constitutional right to own land. Period. The only authority for federal land ownership is through precedent and practice. As a matter of fact, James Madison WARNED us of this very tyranny in 1792:
“I, sir, have always conceived — I believe those who proposed the Constitution conceived — it is still more fully known, and more material to observe, that those who ratified the Constitution conceived — that this is not an indefinite government, deriving its powers from the general terms prefixed to the specified powers – but a limited government, tied down to the specified powers, which explain and define the general terms.”
Our founders went to great pains to create a limited and defined federal government so we would not have to negotiate with Kings. With amazing foresight, Madison explains the consequence of allowing the federal government to turn these “clauses” into defined powers:
“If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare, they may take the care of religion into their Own hands; they may appoint teachers in every state, county, and parish, and pay them out of their public treasury; they may take into their own hands the education of children, establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union; they may assume the provision for the poor; they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads; in short, everything, from the highest object of state legislation down to the most minute object of police, would be thrown under the power of Congress; for every object I have mentioned would admit of the application of money, and might be called, if Congress pleased, provisions for the general welfare…”
Madison knew exactly what would happen if we ignored his warnings:
“I venture to declare it as my opinion that, were the power of Congress to be established in the latitude contended for, it would subvert the very foundations, and transmute the very nature of the limited government established by the people of America.”
Make no mistake, what is happening to Cliven Bundy and his family is the direct fulfillment of Madison’s warnings. We are seeing just what it looks like to “transmute the very nature of the limited government established by the people of America.” Madison will, in a few years, identify this type of government as one who will be “transformed” from the “present republican system” into “an absolute, or, at best, mixed monarchy.”(Virginia Assembly Report 1800) What is the greatest indication that this has already occurred? Alexander Hamilton gives us a telltale sign. In Federalist Paper #78 Hamilton warns that if the People allow the federal government to maintain unconstitutional legislative power, we will declare “that the deputy is greater than his principal; that the servant is above his master; that the representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; that men acting by virtue of powers, may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.”
These are the times we live in. Congress continually creates unconstitutional laws, unconstitutional agencies, and unconstitutional regulation of powers that were to remain in the States. Now, We The People suffer a government that feels it is superior to the People themselves and has the power to rule and reign over them. That, Patriot, is NOT a republic, that is a Kingdom…just as Madison warned.
But don’t worry, the Congressional Research Service has issued a report that says the federal government is perfectly legal in their ownership of land. Rich, isn’t it? That the federal government can tell us what they can and cannot do? I thought we were a government “established among men deriving their just powers from the CONSENT of the GOVERNED.”
In the “Federal Land Ownership: Overview and Data” report issued February 8, 2012, the Congressional Research Service, the brain of Congress, declares that they have the RIGHT to own land. But they can only arrive at this conclusion if we are ignorant of the proper limitation of power for the federal government.
Madison explains in Federalist Paper 45,
“The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined… The [federal powers] will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce… the powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.” (emphasis mine)
But the CRS says their right to own land comes from the ability to create States. That is a complete misapplication of this power. There is NOTHING in the Constitution about the federal government seizing land that is already part of a State and controlling it. As a matter of fact, Madison says the EXACT OPPOSITE. This is CLEARLY a power that is “reserved to the several States”. But since they do not have legal authority they will, as mentioned before, cite “practice and precedent” as the source of their power.
The States have been struggling with the federal government over land for a very long time. And the acquiescence of the States to the usurped power, has created the problems in Nevada today. The CRS clearly states the purpose for federal land:
“Federal lands and resources have been important in American history, adding to the strength and stature of the federal government, serving as an attraction and opportunity for settlement and economic development, and providing a source of revenue for schools, transportation, national defense, and other national, state, and local needs.”
And the federal government has added to its strength to the point that the States are no longer the masters over their creation, but the federal government is supreme over the States. Pay close attention to the “results” of ownership of federal lands and resources…”schools, transportation, and other national, state, and local needs.” This is EXACTLY what Madison warned us would happen if we did not prevent the Congress from obtaining unlimited spending and unlimited power.
From the beginning, federal ownership was not supposed to be permanent. But the government never gives up anything once it has control. In 1976 with the enactment of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA), Congress decided that all the remaining federal land would remain in federal ownership.
No more honoring their “expanded” boundaries, they are going to expand them even further into permanent ownership. This sparked what became known as the Sagebrush Rebellion, an effort to provide state or local control over federal land and management decisions. How did the States choose to fight Congress over the possession of State land? In the federal court system. How do you think this is going to work out? You guessed it. The CRS practically “brags” about it:
“To date, judicial challenges and legislative and executive efforts generally have not resulted in broad changes to the level of federal ownership.”
This is NOT an issue of ranchers and cows. This is NOT about turtles and the environment. It is NOT about missed payment of fees. The feds are going to spend significantly more enforcing the fees, than the loss of the fees themselves. This is NOT about enforcing federal laws. How can cows grazing on land they have been eating from since 1887 be viewed as illegal, and yet the federal government allows illegal aliens to cross borders. Let us not forget, that Congress is trying to change immigration laws to fit the criminals. But when it comes to a man and his cows, we have to enforce this with SWAT teams! Really?
This IS an issue of a federal government completely out of control that acts more like a Kingdom than a republic. The question remains, America, what kind of government do YOU want? A Kingdom or a Republic? The choice is ours, because the powers delegated to this government do come from the consent of the governed. What are you willing to consent to?
http://2.gravatar.com/avatar/eb3d478...b01d?s=140&r=gAbout KrisAnne Hall
KrisAnne Hall is an attorney and former prosecutor, fired after teaching the Constitution to TEA Party groups – she would not sacrifice liberty for a paycheck. She is a disabled veteran of the US Army, a Russian linguist, a mother, a pastor’s wife and a patriot. She now travels the country and teaches the Constitution and the history that gave us our founding documents. KrisAnne Hall does not just teach the Constitution, she lays the foundations that show how reliable and relevant our founding documents are today. She presents the “genealogy” of the Constitution – the 700 year history and five foundational documents that are the very roots of American Liberty.
At today’s evidentiary hearing the persecution was caught withholding evidence . . . AGAIN
Bad Faith!” Govt Caught Withholding Evidence – AGAIN!
“THREE-AND-A-HALF YEARS AND TWO TRIALS AND THIS IS THE FIRST WE LEARNED THERE IS A LIVE STREAM!”
November 3, 2017 BLM, FBI, Featured
https://redoubtnews.com/wp-content/u...an-678x381.jpgRancher Cliven Bundy, 2014. (Photo by Shannon Bushman, used with permission)
“Bad Faith!” Govt Caught Withholding Evidence – AGAIN!
By Shari Dovale
During a final day of testimony in an evidentiary hearing for the Bunkerville Standoff, it was confirmed that there was live video for at least four days of the Bundy Ranch house being played in Dan Love’s office.
The hearing was granted to investigate the allegations of the BLM and/or FBI destroying vital exculpatory evidence prior to their leaving the scene at the Bunkerville Standoff on April 12, 2014.
Multiple witnesses testified that they saw a large screen TV set up in the command center that showed a continuous live stream of the Bundy Ranch. This video has been asked about for many months, yet the government prosecutors have always said that it did not exist.
It was also stated that no search warrant had been seen for this video. This would only add more violations of these defendants rights by including the Fourth Amendment.
Once it was confirmed through testimony, AUSA Nadia Ahmed attempted to downplay the video, and even asked why it mattered. She stated that the camera was located on public land, recording a road nearby, and just “happened” to be pointed towards the Bundy Ranch.
Attorney for Cliven Bundy, Bret Whipple, gave an impassioned argument to dismiss the case based on this new evidence. “Three-and-a-half years and two trials and this is the first we learned there is a live stream,” Whipple said.
“In what plausible situation could there be a live feed and we only find out about it now?” Whipple asked. “It is Bad Faith!”
Whipple had been careful to specifically ask the witnesses about what they saw, or did not see, on the live feed. “On that live feed, did you observe any activity that would support the allegations of Conspiracy to Commit an Offense Against the United States?” Whipple then continued with the other allegations. Each response was a resounding “No.”
As expected, Judge Gloria Navarro discounted the new evidence and ruled against the motion to dismiss. She did say that attorneys could file a new motion based on the new evidence, but stated that the hearing was only supposed to cover the shredded documents, not video of the ranch house.
There are further questions on the belief that there is a second camera that was used by the BLM during the standoff. The government, as before, denies it’s existence.
Please support our coverage of your rights. Donate here: paypal.me/RedoubtNews
John Lamb report on today’s Nov. 3 evidentiary hearing ~ MrsB Stacy
“I don’t recall” standard answer from .gov witnesses ~ Bundy Ranch facebook:
https://scontent-dft4-1.xx.fbcdn.net...60&oe=5AAC72A7
Bundy Ranch shared a post.
https://scontent-dft4-1.xx.fbcdn.net...4b&oe=5AA4D3FETeralee Morley9 hrs ·
I find it interesting... BLM, Forest service, and other agents rate April 12, 2014 fear level as a 10, life altering and suffer from PTSD, but when questioned... they can't recall a thing about that day!
Bryan Hyde updates for Nov. 3 of Bundy Protest trial