Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Ammon Bundy: 'We will continue to stand'
"We will continue to stand," Ammon Bundy vowed Monday as he prepared to head this week to Nevada to face the next trial in his fight against the federal government after his stunning courtroom triumph in Oregon.
"It was our duty to stand. We did it peacefully. We did it legally, and the jury's verdicts confirmed that,'' Bundy said during a phone call with The Oregonian/OregonLive from the Multnomah County Detention Center.
The leader of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge takeover also added his voice to the call for prosecutors to drop charges against other occupiers scheduled to face trial on the same conspiracy charge in February. Defense lawyers want U.S. attorneys to dismiss the case.
"There was no conspiracy," Bundy said in his first interview after his acquittal. "It would be a waste of court time and resources."
He said he was optimistic last Thursday as he was led into the courtroom to hear the verdicts against him, his brother and five other defendants in the 41-day refuge seizure.
Once the judge read off "not guilty'' for him, he knew everyone else also had been acquitted, he said.
"I felt pretty comfortable. I felt at peace with what was going to happen,'' he said. "I knew what we did was right. We had no ill intent.''
Bundy, 41, testified that he proposed the armed takeover in a backroom of a Burns restaurant on Jan. 2 to draw attention to the plight of two Harney County ranchers imprisoned for setting fire to public land and to protest federal mismanagement of vast tracts of territory in the West.
The trial ended in yet one more display of government overreach, he said, when U.S. marshals arrested his attorney, Marcus Mumford.
Mumford had repeatedly challenged U.S. District Judge Anna J. Brown and her order that Bundy remain in custody after he was acquitted. Deputy marshals used a stun gun on Mumford and tackled him. He was cited for disregarding a lawful order and creating a disturbance.
Bundy said Mumford was trying to argue that the judge earlier said in court that she had no authority over detention orders made by the court in Nevada, so he was questioning why she now had the right to order Bundy held.
It was, Bundy said, "another example of the government not following the law.''
He said he hasn't talked to Mumford since then, but has spoken with Mumford's co-counsel, J. Morgan Philpot. It took several hours that night before he was returned to Multnomah County Detention Center across the street. Once there, he called his wife, Lisa Bundy.
Bundy said he expects that he and brother Ryan Bundy will be moved Tuesday morning to Nevada. He said he didn't have any contact with his brother on Monday, Ryan Bundy's 44th birthday.
"It's par for the course,'' he said.
At this point, a court-appointed attorney from Nevada is assigned to represent him in the Nevada case. It hasn't been decided if Mumford or Philpot will be involved, he said.
Ammon and Ryan Bundy are among 19 people indicted in the 2014 standoff in Nevada near the ranch of father Cliven Bundy over grazing rights. They face 16 felony counts, including extortion, obstruction of justice, conspiracy to commit an offense against the United States, conspiracy to impede or injure a federal officer, assault on a federal officer, and threatening a federal officer.
"We know what we did in Nevada was right,'' Ammon Bundy said. "We're very confident God will continue to protect us and show forth his hand in Nevada.''
The indictment in Nevada followed Ammon Bundy's arrest in Oregon.
"The charges in Nevada are very vindictive,'' he said. He intends to show that U.S. Bureau of Land Management agents set dogs on him, fired a Taser at him and shot his family's cattle, he said.
Prosecutors argued that Bundy was inspired to seize the eastern Oregon refuge after the armed Nevada standoff thwarted federal officers from impounding his father's cattle. The agents were acting on federal court orders because the senior Bundy hadn't been paying his grazing fees.
He said he's still confounded that many people ally themselves with the government.
"For some reason there are people who want to sympathize with the federal government than stand with the people,'' Bundy said. "I just implore the people of Oregon to see what's really happening, like the jury did.''
http://www.oregonlive.com/oregon-sta...ontinue_t.html
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
http://www.resurrecttherepublic.com/...itia-movement/
The Federal Government’s “Conspiracy Theory” against the Bundy’s Hammonds and the Militia Movement
http://i2.wp.com/www.resurrecttherep...size=585%2C300
A well organized Militia, (which can not be without being first and foremost armed) being necessary for the security of a free state (free from the tyrannical abuse of the government which was considered a necessary evil bound by the chains of the Constitution) the right of the People to keep and bear arms, shall NOT BE INFRINGED (In other words the government is unable, not authorized, disallowed to, and prohibited to create and or pass ANY AND ALL LEGISLATION, that would hinder the ability for any free man or woman to so create, join, coordinate, or in any way organize said militias, and thus the right to keep and to bear come BEFORE ANY SUCH MILITIA BE BORN)….. Let us be clear….. Any and all government sponsored, passed, promulgated, or considered act to infringe upon this right, is has and has been an act of treason, treachery, and no such act, law, executive order or Martial Law move, can be in any way lawful into the American Republic as it has been proven that many of the legislators and trusted representatives have already moved to and have openly discussed going against this protection / restriction upon them. So no future move to alter, deface, or in any way add to or remove the 2nd Amendment will be tolerated. Period. I hope “Shall Not Be” is clear enough.
The verdict is in – and it is NOT GUILTY on all counts. I was on location at what Ammon Bundy, Ryan Bundy, LaVoy Finicum, and supporters called the Harney County Resource Center.
It was I, who designed the sign that was placed upon the spot of the “at least then temporary” Malheur National Wildlife Refuge.
http://i2.wp.com/www.resurrecttherep...size=300%2C179
Harney County Resource Center Sign, designed by Thomas Lacovara-Stewart, commisioned and approved by Ryan Bundy, LaVoy Finicum, and Ammon Bundy
I met with Ammon and Ryan personally and showed them the first draft, which was slightly altered before going to the sign maker. I designed it on the same device I am using to write this article. And I am proud of it.
I am also the individual who discovered the Native American artifacts being stored disrespectfully in a dark filthy rodent infested basement next to an old hot water heater on its last leg. You can watch myself, LaVoy Finicum, David Fry, Blaine Cooper (filming) reveal our findings while pleading with the Paiutes who we found out we’re bought off tribal representatives who subscribe to liberal Marxist propagandized agenda tactics, rather than caring in reality for their cultural heritage.
https://youtu.be/iOsNslLHMQ8
http://i2.wp.com/www.resurrecttherep...size=300%2C109
What I gained by covering the stand off was faith. Faith in God, my fellow man, and in those who the government called “the leadership” of the stand off (so called). While I was there primarily to act as a media entity, I can not, will not, and never have tried to claim that I was not partial to the Bundy’s case against Federal encroachment and usurpation. In fact, my research shows, and in fact proves, that the jurisdiction that they operate under is unlawful.
https://youtu.be/t78NqvlQ0hc
The Bundys and the rest of the group have been called “anti-government” by many main stream media outlets and politicians. The problem with that is the lack of comprehension as to who and what a “Constitutionalist” is. To call someone who stands for the Constitution “anti-government” is like calling cattle “anti-grass” or most politicians “anti-deceptive”. We The People “are” the government. And I am no “self hater”. That being said, the case the government had on the group “Conspiracy to Impede” was just what they like to call us “Constitutionalists” – Conspiracy Theorists. It is rather a sweet victory to feed back upon them, after a jury heard all they had to offer, the same term they always mislabel all of us with, only this time more accurately calling them what millions of dollars of taxpayers resources spent on the attempt to justify their protection of several rogue agencies exactly what it was – a “Conspiracy Theory” that went BUST, before their eyes.
Ammon asked that I bring with me my research into the jurisdiction that was revoked by the Oregon House in 1868. I did so. I passed it out to as many media entities as possible, including but not limited to FOX News. And they kept it silent.
In 1868 the Oregon House of Representatives decried this “14th Amendment Reconstruction” usurpation and fraud, as they discovered that it was not as it was proposed to “set anyone free”, but in fact it was intended to do exactly what it has, enslave the American people in “debt enslavement”, and attempt to make it unquestionable, only then to turn control of it over later to the Federal Reserve International Banking Private Criminal Banking Cartel Karl Marx said was necessary for the establishment of a Communist nation.
The Federal Government as well as main stream media pundits have embraced many Marxist values and certainly the terminology that was re-invented by Marxists of the Frankfurt School which infected America after the threat of WW2 caused the Frankfurt School of Social Justice and Marxist Studies to flee. Unfortunately they fled to New York’s Columbia University. This is where this subversion of the American Culture and the American Republics United should have ended and been recognized for what it was – a foreign ideology hell bent to destroy all of Western Civilization which saw the most advancement of any of the recorded times of human history. No one can name any other culture, or civilization which has accomplished more in the timeframe it has. Yet we are infected with the threat upon free speech, and free thinking.
American universities have all but been high jacked with the new form of Marxist ideology. One divorced from mere economics and “workers of the world” style struggle, but those of the Frankfurt School variety – or “Neo-Marxists” which took Karl’s failed vision and re-invented it, marrying it to culture, and minority groups and movements. Some of these movements are based on little more than the enabling of mental illnesses, or alternative lifestyles that while some have always existed, they did so in quiet as they were usually morally depraved, or so out of the so called “norm” that they themselves caused their own existence to be often shunned from the main stream. Of course this will be blamed on the ever so Conspiratorially evil “Patriarchy”.
Oregon and the stand off that the Bundy Family saw themselves involved in, was and is very much a stand against these subversive un-American and un-Constitutional, even I can say an anti-Constitutional modus operandi, which threatens the very identity of the American culture that the Framers of this Republic or amalgamation of Republics sought to provide.
In other words, the concept that the government tried to prosecute, was “Conspiracy to Impede Officers of the United States – yada yada yada….. And all they were able to come up with by failing to recognize the entire purpose, as well as legitimacy of the People being masters of their own destiny and being able to withdraw their consent when the government became oppressive and destructive to the very essence of why the people created it, they by failing to recognize their place as servants, came up with a huge “Conspiracy Theory” of their own.
And the jurors, thank God who saw through all of the Federal governments control and subversive tactics to persuade, limit, withhold, and tamper with said jury, recognized this as what it was – the “Conspiracy Theory” that was a joke, but which also saw a good man murdered.
http://youtu.be/nbKXQb0V_vM
http://youtu.be/CTnR2le-onA
We all were praying long and hard for this verdict. We knew in our hearts that this was a righteous stand. The Federal Government’s over reach, and blatant misuse of force continued even after the verdict was in as NOT GUILTY. Without the court having the jurisdiction to do what the attorney asked, to then be ignored by US Marshalls who were told to step back, only shows just how far gone we have allowed them to go. It is time they be reminded who the boss is.
http://youtu.be/nttl-PRGB14
Support us by sharing and "liking' our posts.
We at RTR TRUTH MEDIA exist and work very hard every day to expose the corruption in government and in the corporations behind, under and over them. We have revealed and exposed the fact that in 1868, a Secret Constitution was created by the Corporate Personhood created by the unlawful armed coercion of 11 States delegates being forced out of the ratification process of the 14th Amendment and Reconstruction. This enslaved is all and used Black Americans, as if slavery was not bad enough on everyone affected, we were all pitted against eachother under the guise of freedom, which never was to be, replacing rights with "PRIVLEGES" . How about we end slavery once and for all ?
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Shari Dovale, Redoubt News
http://redoubtnews.com/2016/11/01/go...malheur-trial/
Government Overreach Lost the Malheur Trial
THE JURY WAS NOT HAPPY WITH JUDGE BROWN NOT ALLOWING THE CONSTITUTION IN HER COURTROOM.
November 1, 2016 BLM, DHS, Featured, government 3
http://redoubtnews.com/wp-content/up.../HS-banner.png
http://i2.wp.com/redoubtnews.com/wp-...size=678%2C381
Jeff Banta, Neil Wampler, David Fry and Shawna Cox were acquitted in the Malheur Protest Trial.
Government Overreach Lost the Malheur Trial
by Shari Dovale
While the Bundy supporters continue to celebrate the acquittal of all 7 defendants, the prosecution is taking hits for reinforcing the narrative of government overreach.
It is widely held that the prosecution in the Malheur Protest Trial would have easily won a victory if they had not got greedy and attempted to go for the maximum prison sentences possible. They could have gone for trespassing or vandalism, but have stated that they chose they higher charge of conspiracy because of the amount of prison time involved.
They wanted the Bundy’s in jail for a very long time. It seems that they needed to send a message to the American people that disagreeing with the government will not be tolerated.
The prosecution was willing to lie to meet their ends, but the jury saw through them. When they presented their Big Gun Show, with the numerous weapons and ammo found at the refuge, they didn’t think they would be called out to admit who actually owned those guns, and who actually brought them to the refuge.
The FBI tried to slide through it by saying they never bothered to check the ownership of the weapons. Really?
The prosecution never thought the defense would call them out on the Confidential Informants(CI) used to set up the protesters. Oops!
Yes, their CI was none other than the man that ran the firing range and taught the protesters about firearms and hand-to-hand combat. He was also present for the video that was used as evidence against the defendants.
Then they grasped at a few more straws and brought in Facebook Memes to use as evidence. They should have thought about how many jurors use Facebook and share memes. This just reinforced the government being completely out-of-touch with the people.
However, their greed came back to haunt them when the jury refused to convict on the conspiracy or firearms charges.
Judge Anna Brown made every attempt to bolster the prosecution’s case, yet her greed also worked against her. The jury noted that there was evidence that she was not allowing them to see. They also noticed the slew of objections that she sustained for the prosecution compared with the defense.
Brown made the decision to word the jury instructions in such a way that the intent was paramount. The prosecution just couldn’t prove it.
And the jury was not happy with her not allowing the Constitution in her courtroom.
This trial has proven the government overreach that the defendants were protesting against. They made the mistake of believing that in a very Liberal Portland the people would just fall all over themselves to believe whatever rhetoric the government spews.
The people are getting fed up with the mistreatment from their elected officials.
The citizens want their country back!
The Americans are coming!
Share this:
Verdict Watch – Malheur Protest TrialOctober 24, 2016In "BLM"
Malheur 7 – The Petulant ProsecutionOctober 20, 2016In "BLM"
Judge Rules Against Political Prisoners AGAINJuly 16, 2016In "Constitution"
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
We should all join Bill Goode beating the drums for corraling the federales
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1717765141769695/
https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net...d3&oe=5896A4E1
Bill Goode
3 hrs
With the removal of the Clintons, we need to heavily beat the drums for 1) release of all our political prisoners in Pahrump and elsewhere; 2) pursuit of indictments for those responsible for the assassination of LaVoy Finicum; 3) getting Morton County deputies and police to back off from the protestors at Standing Rock and 4) How could I forget - Release the Hammonds.
Sarah Redd-Buck, Nathan Seim, Gavin Seim, Michele Fiore, Matthew Shea, Carol Bundy, Angie Huntington Bundy, Joel Alcott, Dara Vanesian,Mike Arnold,Briana Bundy, Michelle Arnettt, Robert Bristow,Shawna Cox, Gary Hunt, Barbara Berg, Susan DeLemus, Dan H. Bailey, Jonathon Skipper Speece, Linsay Tyler,Ollie Smith,Jaime Spears Aldazabal,Deb Jordan, Deborah Sue Venetucci, John Lamb, Maureen Valdez, Kelli Stewart, Jeanette Finicum,Tal Pollard, Lazaro Ecenarro,Jenn Cannon, David Fry,Diane Bundy, Morgan Philpot, Thom Davis,Brand Thornton, Kate Hefley Dalley, Gerard Aprea, Teresa Brookshire, Matthew Deatherage, Lesa Antone, Janalee Tobias, Summer Iz, Annette Hardman, Duane Ehmer, Donna Hammond, Doug Knowles, Melina Bilodeau, Jake R Morphonios, Thara Tenney , et all. Did I miss anyone? https://www.facebook.com/images/emoj...1/16/1f609.png;) If so, please feel free to join in. FB limits me to 50 tags. https://www.facebook.com/images/emoj...1/16/1f609.png;)
I don't believe this is a short lived opportunity, as a massive tide has turned against the powers that be, and I don't believe anyone could reverse that tide if they wanted to. The verdict last week has bulit on that tide, or may have come as a result of it.
But the urgency is that our patriot defendants are desperately needed to support their families and should not spend any longer in jail, protestors at Standing Rock need relief from the Morton County Sheriff and justice needs to be brought for LaVoy.
The powers that be over these issues, that have any manner of foresight, must see the writing on the wall. If they don't, well they need to be enlightened, most quickly for our patriot defendants in jail, so they can get back to supporting their families. This is an opportunity we have not seen before to cause the powers that be to see the writing on the wall.
LikeCommentShare
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Juror #4's email exchange with The Oregonion detailing how the jury arrived at the "not guilty" verdict
http://www.oregonlive.com/oregon-sta...4s_emails.html
http://image.oregonlive.com/home/oli...atars/4406.pngBy Maxine Bernstein | The Oregonian/OregonLive
Email the author | Follow on Twitter
on November 03, 2016 at 5:00 AM, updated November 03, 2016 at 5:55 PM
Transcript of Juror 4's emails: His explanation for Ammon Bundy verdict
Juror 4 has so far provided the only public explanation of the behind-the-scenes discussions that led to the acquittal of Ammon Bundy, his brother and five others on federal conspiracy charges stemming from the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge occupation.
Readers have asked to hear more from him about the jury's reasoning in reaching the surprising decision.
Juror 4 – a 44-year-old business administration student at Marylhurst University who served in the Navy during the Iraq War – went into detail in a series of email exchanges with The Oregonian/OregonLive that were used in news stories.
Here's a transcript of the emails, with some minor editing for brevity or clarity. He's asked not to be identified for fear of retribution. The judge sealed the names of all nine women and three men on the jury, citing public safety.
Juror 4 makes references to U.S. District Judge Anna J. Brown; prosecutor Ethan Knight; Juror 11 who the judge removed from the jury after Juror 4 questioned his objectivity; Juror 18, who replaced Juror 11; and Ryan Payne, one of the leaders of the occupation with Ammon Bundy.
He also references a Jan. 2 rally for Harney County ranchers and then the takeover of the refuge later that day.
All seven defendants faced a charge of conspiring to impede employees of the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service or U.S. Bureau of Land Management from doing their work through intimidation, threat or force during the 41-day occupation.
His initial email:
It should be known that all 12 jurors felt that this verdict was a statement regarding the various failures of the prosecution to prove "conspiracy" in the count itself - and not any form of affirmation of the defense's various beliefs, actions, or aspirations. Proving the elements of conspiracy, especially given the body of evidence we were forced to restrict ourselves to consider when judging, was far too great a standard to meet (without using our imaginations, prejudices, etc.).
The judge floored us when she said that there was no statute against impeding federal officers (by force, threat, or intimidation), nor was there a significant penalty applied to criminal trespass. We all queried about alternative charges that could stick and were amazed that this 'conspiracy' charge seemed the best
possible option. It was not lost on us that our verdict(s) might inspire future actions that are regrettable, but that sort of thinking was not permitted when considering the charges before us.
The prosecution asked us to neglect Judge Brown's final (binding) instructions when they asserted in closing that adverse possession = conspiracy to impede (as per Mr. Knight's closing argument), as if defining actions was all that was needed to convict. All 12 agreed that impeding existed, even if as an effect of the occupation, and that something was very wrong. But we were not asked to judge on bullets and hurt feelings, rather to decide if an agreement was made with an illegal object in mind. It seemed this basic, high standard of proof was lost upon the prosecution throughout. Inference, while possibly compelling, proved to be insulting or inadequate to 12 diversely situated people as a means to convict. The air of triumphalism that the prosecution brought was not lost on any of us, nor was it warranted given their burden of proof.
Regarding my role in crafting the letter that led to the dismissal of juror 11, I can say that it was not only necessary but also borne out of much patience in dealing with a fellow who had zero business being on this jury in the first place. He effectively wasted a great deal of our time as he (irrationally) promoted his theory of conspiracy despite the absence of evidence. Also, he violated Judge Brown's explicit orders by hearkening to 'evidence' that was never admitted in this case, refused to consider the defendant's state of mind, and used imaginative theories to explain key actions. How this juror slipped through the cracks is mind boggling and very disconcerting.
You should know that the sentiments expressed in that letter were the exact thoughts I had when juror 11 first made his opening remarks on day one of deliberations, but I resisted the impulse to send the question at that time and give this fellow the chance to convince/explain. It seemed wise to suspend my shock/disbelief in him until a thorough examination of his mindset was complete (and the other jurors could weigh in themselves on his various theories). The vast majority of time was spent trying to deal with his bizarre theories, compared against what was admitted and/or expected of us as standards of judgment. While I wish now that I had sent the letter on day one, since it would have alleviated much stress for all of us, I would wish to have the time/opportunity to expand or alter my perspective that we afforded him.
As I peruse the responses of many interested parties in this case, many of which express 'profound regret' over the verdicts, I am baffled by the flippant sentiments that seem to dominate the landscape. Several questions immediately percolate in my mind: do these folks even know what it took to arrive at a verdict on any one of these counts? How could 12 diverse people find such agreement unless there was a colossal failure on the part of the prosecution? Don't they know that 'not guilty' does not mean 'innocent'? I have many such thoughts swirling around in my head that I'd like to vent, but I need to break it off for now.
***
We asked a series of follow-up questions: How did the jury feel about starting all over again? Did other jurors know about your note regarding Juror 11 -- and how did they react to it? How did the jury start anew? Why the substantially shorter time period for the final verdicts?
Juror 4's response:
The feeling, at the time of the reset, was universal relief that we even had a chance to hear from a more objective juror. It was not a relief to think we could be there today (Friday) or Monday, frankly, but all said they were more than willing to start over in order to erase the ill feelings created while deliberating with juror 11. We had no knowledge about juror 18's leanings in any regard prior to her coming in (we maintained a strict standard to not discuss the case with each other before deliberating).
Only juror #1 knew about my note (since he had to pass it on to the judge), or so I thought. Juror 11, when we later were arguing about his bias, said he knew what I must have been doing when I folded a note and quietly handed it to Juror 1. My note was a last resort, frankly, because I made the entire jury uneasy by directly challenging juror 11 (on Tuesday morning; more than 16 hours of deliberations had passed) about his stated bias. Many jurors were upset at my direct approach and seemingly personal challenge to him. What I had said to him was far more upsetting than the contents of my note, and so I don't think the jurors should have been surprised. Of course, I didn't openly state to the jury that I had an open question before the court until the next morning (Wednesday) when juror 11 played the victim. I again reiterated that this whole issue was of his own making, and although he calmly explained what his bias was or meant to him in this case, I was anxious to hear from the court.
It is a fact that we were so exhausted by this time that we nearly submitted final ballots on Wednesday, with juror 11's input (equaling a mistrial on most counts). It is also true that I told the jury that if I did not get an answer to my question from the court, I would be forced to take my grievance to the media immediately afterwards. We had no idea of what had transpired in court as a result of my question, but you begin to feel neglected after almost 24 hours of silence.
All of the other 10 jurors were relieved that juror 11 was excused, and most of them personally thanked me for doing what I did (even though I upset them in the process).
Starting anew was filled with trepidation by the remaining 11 jurors, because we didn't want to allow any whiff of prior deliberations to influence our new juror. This was all about her, frankly. We let her purge her feelings, as we all had the opportunity to do, and we let her direct the review of evidence. To her credit, she was fairly focused on getting her thoughts communicated quickly and purposefully so that time was not lost. The rapidity of her pace caused us to caution her, slow her a bit, but she was very business-like. It was clear that by 11:00 a.m., our new juror had resolved any questions regarding counts 1 and 2. She was relieved, and perhaps a bit surprised, that there was unanimity on these points.
While we had a robust process for counts 4 and 5, we had reached a point of impasse by 2:00. There were no throw away words expressed on this day. The extremes we felt pressed into really crystallized our purpose, even if we had to go through the essential elements again, and it made for a swift process.
Before we sent our final word to the court, I asked our new juror if she could explain why this process was so fast, to which she replied confidently and affirmatively. She's a sharp lady and can handle herself, I think.
Q. Wondered if there were turning points or particular moments in the trial that stuck out for jurors in helping the jury reach the not guilty pleas.
A. Turning points? Let me begin by speaking for myself before I attempt to recall those of others. I expected there to be a witness to the January 2nd meeting at Ye Olde Castle before the protest/rally that would confirm the prosecution's assertion of intent to impede, and the absence of such evidence became a seed of doubt that grew. I expected that there must be proof of conspiracy between Ammon and Ryan Payne (most logical link, owing to their initial visit to the Hammond's place in early November) but he wasn't even called for either side, nor were there any phone calls, emails, etc. that would demonstrate agreement here. These two major holes in the evidence record proved to cause insurmountable doubt for me.
Others said that, while the evidence record was not adequate, certain moments turned them. One said they did a full 180 degree turn when they realized there were six informants that went unnamed on the refuge during the occupation, and the choice of the prosecution to allow that much room for mysterious influence there (remember Fabio?) was decisive. One said that the doctrine of adverse possession seemed to govern every thought, word, and deed of the 'leadership' such that it could not be deemed intent to impede federal workers. Another said that the repeated objections to the reading of the constitution became a wedge issue for them. Those turning points are the most distinct ones I can remember, and so I'll leave it there.
Q. What about counts 4 and 5? What was the thinking with those? (Count 4 was a property theft charge against defendant Kennth Medenbach for driving a refuge truck to the Safeway in Burns and Count 5 was a property theft charge against Ryan Bundy for helping to remove FBI surveillance cameras from two utility poles near the refuge.)
A. With count four, we were split for a good while and it didn't look like we could agree. Because this law requires us to consider intent, one of the jurors pressed hard on the issue of what Medenbach was thinking (adverse possession: he believed it was no longer a refuge truck). The video/audio evidence of his arrest was instructive, confirming a mindset. Some jurors were impressed by the surprise Medenbach expressed to the state police officer when told that the rig was reported as stolen. Another said if he had been caught with it while not doing 'resource center' business, so to speak, then it would have demonstrated his intent was not consistent with the claim. Eventually, none of us could imagine he was not going to return the vehicle to the refuge.
Count five plagued us most of the day. We had to table the discussion a couple times because the contentions over the wording of the law as it relates to 'knowingly stole' proved to be a major hang up for one juror. There were many different definitions of 'stole' at play in the minds of several jurors. In the morning, 11 out of 12 were prepared to vote guilty, but after simmering and revisiting the debate a few times, the number of votes for not guilty grew to three. A couple of jurors came to believe that having the media present, offering back the cameras to the F.B.I., and taking steps to safeguard them after removal was proof of something other than theft. The majority could not deny that the intent to deprive was clearly present in Ryan. Since we were moving the opposite way of consensus and three jurors were resolved to vote not guilty, we agreed to end deliberations.
Q. What did you and others think of Ammon Bundy's testimony?
A. It was clear that there was no juror who received Ammon's testimony as fully honest, and several who felt manipulated. Even those who felt he was sincere in his beliefs found examples of inconsistency in his testimony.
The continual objections to Ammon's answers (usually owing to his own misleading phrasing that was disallowed) became tedious to myself, especially since altering one word would make the answer acceptable (and often did). The emotional appeals riddled throughout, while understandable as a tactic, also became tiresome to me since our feelings as jurors are irrelevant after all. And I don't think it was endearing to us jurors for him to characterize the entire federal court system, of which we were a key part of, as rigged against himself.
A few outstanding things Ammon testified to stood out to me. There apparently were multiple attempts to meet personally with the F.B.I. by Ammon and yet no face-to-face meet up ever occurred, presumably because the bureau did not wish to have that sort of negotiation. And the lack of law enforcement/engagement throughout the occupation, coupled with the visits to the refuge by many politicians, caused me to see how occupiers could view their presence as something other than illegal. Also, after watching an edited version of KATU's Steve Dunn interview with Ammon at the refuge (this was played for the jury by Ammon Bundy's lawyer), there seemed to be consistency of message/belief that I did not expect -- especially if you have 9 months to ponder your defense, even I might alter my emphasis or eliminate something unfavorable. Because of the law's wording, Ammon's state of mind weighed heavily.
Q. Why do you wish to remain anonymous?
A: Because I'd rather not encounter any of the angry commenters on your articles, I prefer to remain simply as Juror 4. I read on twitter that Matt Schindler (one of the defense attorneys) is receiving threats, which is very troubling to me.
-- Maxine Bernstein
mbernstein@oregonian.com
503-221-8212
@maxoregonian
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Teresa Brookshire says: https://www.facebook.com/groups/1717...3365407876334/
John has much information included in this.
Friends,
Most of you have seen this by now on the news. So far the Federal Government has, by some estimates, spent as much as $100 Million of the taxpayer’s money to incarcerate and prosecute over fifty Americans UNDER FEDERAL TERRORISM LAWS.
These have included ranchers, reporters, and women with cameras from all over the country. One of the prisoners is Trump’s campaign manager from New Hampshire.
...Continue Reading
https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net...04&oe=58D5A3D8
Teresa Brookshire
4 hrs
John has much information included in this.
Friends,
Most of you have seen this by now on the news. So far the Federal Government has, by some estimates, spent as much as $100 Million of the taxpayer’s money to incarcerate and prosecute over fifty Americans UNDER FEDERAL TERRORISM LAWS. These have included ranchers, reporters, and women with cameras from all over the country. One of the prisoners is Trump’s campaign manager from New Hampshire.
These people – political prisoners! – have been kept incommunicado and held without bail since last January, often in “seclusion” (solitary confinement) sleeping on the concrete floor of 6 by 9 cells. In some cases prisoners have been beaten (e.g. Ryan Bundy). In one case, LaVoy Finicum, a rancher was chased into a kill zone, ambushed, and gunned down while on his way to a public meeting. That killing can now be legally questioned as unjustified.
The Burns case has its roots in Hillary’s Uranium One deal. Here is the link to my blog post about that long and sordid story, including how I – a novelist who happened to be in Oregon when the standoff occurred – accidentally became involved in this when one of my sources sent me the first radio interview of Victoria Sharp, a terrified young woman barely 18, a singer, who had missed a ride with her family to perform at the planned event in John Day. Victoria was the only witness in the Finicum truck who was not arrested and incarcerated under terrorism laws.
http://blog.johntrudel.com/bloodshed-in-burns-oregon-who-t…/
I have done several interviews with USJF and other groups about Burns. Radio host Victoria Taft did one discussing one of her reporter friends who was in Burns, was separately arrested, and is to go on trial in Portland later this year. These links to interviews are on my author’s page next to my latest novel, Raven’s Redemption.
http://www.johntrudel.com/#rr2
I will post below some of the links to videos discussing the not guilty verdict. I may put something into my next newsletter about this, but I will NOT be giving any interviews until sometime after the election. Here’s why: despite the NOT GUILTY VERDICT most of the defendants are STILL in Federal Custody.
One of the lawyers (Mumford) was attacked in the courtroom and Tasered by Federal Marshals for strongly objecting verbally to this. One of the (acquitted!) defendants, David Fry, objected to this beat down. He was removed from the court and then beaten himself before being released -- behind closed doors and not in public view. So far, there is no indication that either the judge or the Federal (DHS?) thugs will be held accountable for their actions.
The Burns incident, at the core, is driven by Hillary Clinton and the Obama DOJ. Thank God some shards of the justice system are still working, but, depending on who is elected President in a few days, vastly different futures will play out. If you want to free the political prisoners, vote for Trump.
J.
***
Shawna Cox – After Not Guilty verdict
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=visI3z9Njqk
Neil Wampler – Defendant
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jIcC0ALJshs
Mumford Attorney – Attacked by Federal Marshals
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bj75IkYXJj0
Matt Schindler – Attorney
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUPUTryMxS0
Morgan Philpot -- Attorney
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbKXQb0V_vM
Joy in Portland -- Scene outside the Courthouse after Not Guilty Verdict
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjTDP4x4ZlU
Morgan Philpot Attorney speaks to the LaVoy Finicum Killing issue
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DscGFfDZmw0
https://external-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net...&sw=960&sh=502
Bloodshed in Burns, Oregon. Who to Bless? Who to Blame? | Freedom Writers
The recent "incident" in Burns, Oregon is going to take time and more evidence to sort out.
BLOG.JOHNTRUDEL.COM
5 Likes1 Comment1 Share
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Gary Hunt has written a series of articles since the not guilty verdict in the Malheur Protest trial. This one is entitled "Intent v. Effect". The next is regarding the US Marshals attacking Ammon Bundy's attorney in the courtroom. Several concern the FBI informants.
http://outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/?p=1756
« Burns Chronicles No 36 – Words from the Poor Losers
Burns Chronicles No 38 – If You Can’t Continue To Punish Those Who Are Not Guilty, Then Punish Their Attorney »
Burns Chronicles No 37 – Intent v. Effect
October 30, 2016, 10:50 am
Burns Chronicles No 37
Intent v. Effect
Gary Hunt
Outpost of Freedom
October 30, 2016
There has been no substantial interview regarding the deliberations that resulted in 12 Not Guilty Verdicts, and One Verdict where the jury could not get consensus. However, we do have a bit of information that is probably the most critical single piece with regard to understanding just what happened that led to those verdicts.
Juror #4, the juror that brought Judge Brown the indication of bias by Juror #11, has stated that the government failed to show that the occupiers had the intention to impede the government employees. That the failure of the employees to report to the Refuge may have been an effect of the occupation. Since the Jury Instructions required the government to prove “intent”, the jury had to find them Not Guilty, at least with regard to Counts One and Two. In a written statement, Juror #4 said, “All 12 agreed that impeding existed, even if as an effect of the occupation.” The difference between “effect” and “intent”, then, becomes the foundation for this article.
However, first, a bit of an explanation. I seldom bring politics into any of my articles, however, to put this situation in a proper context, I think it is necessary to do so, now. Whether what I am going to bring to your attention had anything to do with their verdict, or not, is yet to be known. If it was not considered, then the irony of the comparison still should be of interest to all.Addressing those matters that were brought to our attention, this past Friday, regarding Hillary Clinton’s email server and the possibility that criminal pedophiliac material may have gone through that server. That material could possibly be emails from former Representative Anthony Weiner (New York (D)), through his wife, Muslimah Huma Abedin*, through Hillary’s rather suspicious email server, to an underage girl.
* Huma Abedin – Former deputy chief of staff to U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and still a prominent figure in Hillary’s campaign for President.
If that were the case, then suspicion of such activity would warrant, as in all pedophile investigations, the seizure of phones, computers, photographs, records, and almost anything that might prove to be evidence of criminal activity.
At present, there is no public knowledge of the suggested connection, FBI Director James Brien “Jim” Comey, Jr., has advised Congress that the Clinton email scandal investigation has been reopened. Rather ironically, this information comes out the day after the Verdict of Not Guilty in the Ammon Bundy trial.
However, this email scandal had its roots back on July 5, 2016, when Comey stated that, “[W]e did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton, or her colleagues, intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information…” (video). In his almost unprecedented statement, he recommended that the Justice Department not prosecute, because of the absence of intent.
However, it appears that the Jury in the Bundy trial had more sense than either Comey or Billy J. Williams, United States Attorney for the Oregon District. Comey chose not to prosecute and Williams, probably based on the recommendation of Greg Bretzing, FBI SAIC, chose to prosecute. All three ignored what even a blind man could see..Criminal activity should be judged on intent. If an act is done inadvertently, with no intention of the act being criminal, then it should not be criminal. However, the government has not been known to play that way. Especially with patriots. But, that is exactly what Clinton did. She set up her private server, she conducted communication with her staff, and others, she allowed others who also worked for the government, to access her computer, and she let those with no ties to the government not only have access, but to maintain, the server.
That’s almost like saying, I jammed the door to the bank so that they couldn’t lock it, but I had no intention of robbing the bank. When the means to create criminal activity are conducted, they become the intent. Neither the jammed door nor the private server were accidental.
On the other hand, those who occupied Malheur National Wildlife Refuge (MNWR) conducted their activities in the open. Anybody that wanted to visit was allowed to visit. Anybody who wanted to eat was allowed to eat. Anybody who wanted to spend the night was allowed to spend the night. Only those whose behavior might be of concern for the safety of others were asked to leave.
The government enlisted 15 people to inform on those who occupied the MNWR. At least nine of them actually visited the Refuge and were treated equally with everyone else. They were supposed to “get dirt” on the principals. However, they could get no “dirt”, so the government never called them to testify. The Defendants, however, saw a benefit to having two of the informants testify on their behalf.
On the other side of Burns, at the Airport, the FBI set up their “headquarters”. There were numerous battle dressed guards on duty at the gates and questioned anyone that approached them. Their operation was about as secretive as you could get, and access was denied to all but those chosen soldiers of the government.
When the activity of those at MNWR and those at the airport are compared, which of the two groups reeks of intent? Which one reeks of armed force? Which one reeks of conspiracy?
However, at the other location, the jury clearly understood that there was no intent of conspiracy, and that the government employees would be as welcome as anybody else would, though they stayed away as an effect of the occupation, not as a result of it.
When that government, established to serve the people, determines to serve itself, it has failed its purpose. When that government turns its forces to persecute those who challenge its abuse, intending to make political prisoners of them, it has failed in its purpose. When that government, created by the Constitution, refuses to abide by that Constitution, it has failed in its purpose and has become despotic.“But when long trains of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide for new guards for their future security.”
Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776
Addendum (October 30, 2016)In the article, I had taken some available information that seemed to suggest that Weiner had used Hillary’s server to send email to an underage female. This may still be true, but the bigger story is that Huma Abedin had been sending highly classified documents to her own server that she shares with her husband, Anthony Weiner.
Huma, being an avowed Muslim, may well have sent some of the documents to her friends in Muslim countries. She may also have provided herself and Weiner some “life insurance”, though it appears that that policy may have just expired.Share this:
Like this:
Tags: administrative agencies, Bundy, Burns Oregon, Constitution, corruption, courts, demonization, FBI, Harney County, Honor, jury, law, Moral Values, patriots
Category: Articles | Comment (RSS) | Trackback
Leave a Reply
Name (required)
Mail (will not be published) (required)
Website
Notify me of follow-up comments by email.
Notify me of new posts by email.
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Gary Hunt on US Marshalls attacking Mumford
http://outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/?p=1767
« Burns Chronicles No 37 – Intent v. Effect
Burns Chronicles No 39 – Informants – What to do About Them »
Burns Chronicles No 38 – If You Can’t Continue To Punish Those Who Are Not Guilty, Then Punish Their Attorney
November 5, 2016, 1:52 pm
Burns Chronicles No 38
If You Can’t Continue To Punish Those Who Are Not Guilty,
Then Punish Their Attorney
Gary Hunt
Outpost of Freedom
November 4, 2016
On October 27, 2016, in a Federal Court in Portland, Oregon, Not Guilty Verdicts were read by the Court and affirmed by the Jury. Shortly thereafter, a rather interesting and unusual event occurred.One of the ex-Defendants, Shawna Cox, described what happened when the Jury was excused:* * * * * * * * * * * * *
As we stood for the Jury to leave the room, I watched in disbelief as the Judge told us to all sit down and remain seated while the US Marshalls removed Ammon Bundy, Ryan Bundy, and David Fry from the room.
We were still standing and Mr. Mumford raised both of his arms and leaning down into the microphone on the desk in front of him he said to the Judge: “NO Your Honor. These men are leaving this room with me, as FREE Men! The Jury has just acquitted them and they are free to leave!”
Judge Brown responded, “The Marshalls are going to take them back to the jail.”
Mumford said: “You Honor, the jury has just rendered the Not Guilty verdict, and you have no more jurisdiction, do you?”Judge Brown responded, “Stop yelling at me Mr. Mumford, don’t ever yell at me again, ever. And No, I don’t. But the US Marshalls are going to retain them until they are returned to Nevada to stand trial there.”.Then Mumford said: “I have looked all day yesterday and all this morning and I can find no warrantfor their arrest. Show me the paper! They were taken into custody the first time with no Warrant and you are not going to do it again! Show me the warrant! Show me the paper!”
Judge Brown said: “There is probably paper somewhere”.
During all this conversation, the US Marshalls had moved in close around Mr. Mumford who was still standing in his position behind the court table. There were five of them and more moving in. Mr. Mumford turned toward them still with his hands up and one of the Marshalls grabbed him by the left arm and another immediately grabbed his right arm and pulled him from behind the desk as they all began to push and pull at him.
One Marshall dropped him to his knees while another pushed him to the floor and put a knee into his back. Other Marshalls had moved in and now there was a total of eight. One Marshall on each arm and I could see his hands still open and up while another Marshall is telling him to put his arms behind his back. It was not possible with officers holding his arms.
Then, I saw them shove his head to the floor as he said, “I’m not resisting!” One Marshall had his left leg and was twisting his foot and leg (I was surprised at the stripped colorful sock Mumford was wearing) as his pant leg fell toward his knee.
This upset me and I was yelling: “What are you doing? What’s the matter with you?” Our victory just went out the window, and I was furious!!
More Federal Agents came rushing from the back of the room as the Judge yelled: “Everybody Out! Clear the Courtroom!” They rushed us out of there, but not before I saw a Marshall taze Mr. Mumford and I heard Mumford say, “You are hurting me!”
I was looking back in shock and horror and did not want to leave him there. I wanted to help him! I was very angry* * * * * * * * * * * * *
At that point, the reaming Defendants and attorneys were removed from the room.
Could a mature Judge have dealt with this matter without resorting to force? Heck, I thought that was what our judicial system was all about. Reasoned discussion, then conclusions. However, that is not what happened when the simply question of legal authority arose.
The Federal Protective Services then took Marcus Mumford into custody. He was cited for failure to comply with a federal lawful order and disturbance and released with a January 6 date to return to federal court.
When the government loses a case that might have been the “Trial of the Century”, they, like spoiled children, throw a tantrum. In this case, the tantrum was thrown at one of the few attorneys that really made a difference in this case — by their persistence and pursuit of justice.
And, as so often happens, the government is the victim and Mumford has to return to court after the first of the year — unless the anticipated legal filings result in a dismissal, before January 6, 2017. Share this:
Like this:
Tags: Bundy, Burns Oregon, cops, courts, government, Honor, law, patriots
Category: Articles | Comment (RSS) | Trackback
7 Comments
- http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/9b8b4ec...=156&d=mm&r=pgLynn says:
November 5, 2016 at 4:32 pm
Shameful and CLEARLY shows just how far down the gutter the court system has gone. I’ve read from many other sources who are absolutely shocked at this behavior! They’d better NOT get away with it–from the Judge’s antics to the U.S. Marshalls! Just disgusting!
Reply to this comment
- http://2.gravatar.com/avatar/bce0fe4...=156&d=mm&r=pgStephen Huls says:
November 5, 2016 at 5:13 pm
Amazing how the Radicals in the Federal no justice system react when people / lawyers bring up little things like LAW.. Papers.. authority… they turn into beasty terrorist mode like unto Saudi Arabia or Red China courts. This is Obama / Clintons style of ruling.. Not Constitutional, but Tyranical! I hope Mumford Sues them all, for abuse of power, kidnapping his clients (no warrants / legal right to keep them in prison) and sues the whole place for millions.. for their lawlessness… Obvious the Federal US Marshalls involved in Oregon, Utah, Nevada, and other states out here in the west are more KGB / Gestapo than USA Marshalls, The Marshall system in America has been radicalized, they are oath breakers not keepers, and abuse their power with glee.. such is tyranny such is terrorism.. sad really I hope there is an audit of the Marshalls to bring them back to a place of honor, for at this moment they are a very dark and evil group of thugs..nothing more than mafia enforcers with a badge and a guns… terror and force is what they have done. In the Oregon standoff and Bundy ranch stand, lawless is what it is… some day there maybe a judgment day.. Nuremburg happened. remember that lawless leos..
Reply to this comment
- http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/7a46641...=156&d=mm&r=pgSopater says:
November 5, 2016 at 7:35 pm
This is a tragedy, but at least they didn’t “LaVoy” him.
I hope that Mumford brings charges and justice is served.
Reply to this comment
- http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/6ec4373...=156&d=mm&r=pgSharon Holmes says:
November 5, 2016 at 7:45 pm
Did anyone ever find a warrant from Nevada? Of course not, but the judge in Nevada is out for blood too, so she probably got a judge to issue them.
Reply to this comment
- http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/d43698a...=156&d=mm&r=pgBill Goode says:
November 6, 2016 at 3:34 am
The marshals, that beat & tazed Marcus Mumford, should be charged with assault. Anna Brown should be removed from her judgeship for allowing such abominable behavior in her courtroom by those who were there presumably to keep the peace in the courtroom.
This just shows what a pathetic judge Anna Brown is, allowing this to actually take place in her courtroom.
Reply to this comment
- http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/0765f71...=156&d=mm&r=pgquestion says:
November 6, 2016 at 5:06 pm
What exactly did Mumford do that “made a difference” in this case? I thought it was all the wisdom of the bundys that made the case. Were the lawyers actually helpful?
Reply to this comment
- http://outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/w...2220-48x48.jpgghunt says:
November 6, 2016 at 5:26 pm
Mumford simply tried to get Ammon to walk out of court a free man, like the others (with the exception of Ryan Bundy), since they were found “not guilty”. There was no outstanding warrant for either of the Bundys, and there was no legal paperwork that provided for the government to detain them, further. In a hearing a few weeks ago, it was determined that there was not a shared jurisdiction between the two courts. Absent a warrant, or that shared jurisdiction, they both should have been released.
Nevada would have to issue an arrest warrant for their arrest and had the Marshall’s serve it in court, after the verdict for them to be legally detained.
Mumford’s role in the trial was to “ring bells that could not be unrung”. With the very broad leeway shown to the prosecution, and the very rigid restrictions on the defense, Mumford risked contempt to say things that he normally wouldn’t have to. That helped, considerably in getting a message o the jurors that, had they complied with the judge’s discretion, would never have been heard.
However, the verdict, though it did have some of those elements, was based primarily on the fact that the jury found that impeding officers may have been the effect, but that it was not the intent.
See
Reply to this comment
Leave a Reply
Name (required)
Mail (will not be published) (required)
Website
Notify me of follow-up comments by email.
Notify me of new posts by email.
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Gary Hunt, Outpost of Freedom, "Informants - What to do About Them"
http://outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/?p=1772
Burns Chronicles No 39 – Informants – What to do About Them
November 5, 2016, 2:48 pm
Burns Chronicles #39
Informants – What to do About Them
Gary Hunt
Outpost of Freedom
November 6, 2016
Recently, I watched a video of an interview with Terri Linnell that was couched into an in-studio, live “exposé”, purporting to prove that what Linnell had said was an “obvious lie”. This whole program was based primarily on my article, “Burns Chronicles No 32 – Terri Linnell (Mama Bear)“, and the host’s subsequent interview with Terri.
In the comment section of that video, I disputed a couple of items that were alleged to be truthful, one, in particular, dealing with the time element, and when people might have known when LaVoy had been murdered. After all, this set everything into motion, this past January 26.
However, their estimate of when people outside could have known what had happened came out to 10:00 PM. Heck, I knew by 7:00 PM, and as I recall, it was one of my team members that had called me (in Burns) from another state to tell me what had happened. Subsequently, one of the guests has admitted that they had no idea of what time the information would have gotten out — they were just guessing based upon when they found out about the murder.
I had intended to go back to YouTube and review/comment on the remainder of the 2 hour 25 minute video, since I had commented on perhaps only the first twenty minutes that I have watched. Since I had been working on another article, I postponed that subsequent review.
Then I found myself tagged in a subsequent discussion on Facebook, I was invited to be interviewed because of my disagreement with the host. I accepted, however. I included the provision that my interview had to be done that day. First, the video was damaging by its untruthfulness, and such lies should be outed in a timely manner. Second, I didn’t want to wait the “3 or 4 days” for the host to conduct the interview. I have better things to do than wait around for someone to try to figure what questions he needs to ask to try to cover his blatant misrepresentations. Heck, the interview would have been about the video he had created, so if anyone needed to prepare, it would have been me. However, he turned it back on me for not being willing to abide by his schedule. So be it. I have broad shoulders and take full responsibility for not doing the interview.
Now, why do I bring this up? Well, since I posted the article, which I had agreed not to post until Terri testified in the Portland trial, many alleged patriots have attacked her, verbally. Some understood and appreciate what she had done, but when she left the courtroom, she was stunned and could find no one who would talk with her, nor could she find a place to stay. It was that treatment of Terri that caused me to put pen to paper, in hopes of providing another perspective on how we should treat informants.
So, let’s look at the three informants that testified during the trial. First, we have Mark McConnell, though he still denies, or at least sidesteps, his role. He was outed, intentionally, and quite surprisingly, by the government in their direct examination of an Oregon State Police officer. It was later reconfirmed by the Court that he was, in fact, an informant. Mark professes to be a patriot, and he probably is —along the lines of OathKeepers, where the Constitution is what they are told by their superiors, and is patriotism to the government, not to the country or the Constitution. Mark is one informant that all true patriots should, at least, distance themselves from..I’ll skip to the third informant in the trial, since the nature of all three types is what this is about. That informant is John Killman. John’s real name is Fabio Minoggio. According to his testimony, he was born in Switzerland and served 20 years in the Swiss Army. He took donuts to the Refuge to ingratiate himself, and then provided training in military, self-defense, and even how to remove someone from a car.
He is single and has a 5-year-old son. Minoggio is now an officer with the Hualapai Tribal Police, in Arizona. Little more is known about him, except that he received “expenses”, but claims he was not paid by the FBI.
Now, let’s go to the one that has gained the most notoriety, Terri Linnell. To do so, we must start at the beginning of her decision to testify, as what preceded this event is simply history, and of no consequence at this time. What follows is from an interview I did with Terri. If anyone chooses to dispute this, I would suggest that they come up with more than their personal opinion, or else keep their mouth shut.
Terri had tried to contact Mike Arnold, then Ammon’s attorney, during the summer. Arnold’s office kept trying to get her to speak to one of the investigators. She did not want to speak to the investigator; she would only speak with an attorney. She was concerned if word got out that she was going to testify, the government might do something to stop her.
As the trial approached, Per Olsen’s activity caught her attention, so she called his office, and Per spoke with her. She explained what her testimony would be, and, she advised him that she had been a paid informant for the FBI. Her subpoena was delayed to give the government as little notice as possible.
When she arrived in Portland, she had meetings in the Witness Room, mostly with Amanda, a member of Marcus Mumford’s team. They had no problem with what her testimony would be. The fact that she was an FBI informant led to Amanda beginning to open the door and pursue investigating the informant matter. Amanda began scrutinizing the 1203 forms and realized that there were many informants. This resulting in the admission of the number of informants involved and the eventual identification and calling of Killman (Minoggio) to the stand. and he had no problem with what her testimony would be. Neither had identifiable 1023 reports (FBI – CHS Reporting Document), since the documents in discovery had been heavily redacted.
Her testimony, among other things, cleared David Fry, Neil Wampler, and Shawna Cox, of ever having firearms in the “mess hall”. It also provided testimony that that she heard of no suggestions of any violent activity.
The only downside was when, in cross-examination, she was asked, as the prosecuting attorney purportedly read from a 1023, whether the people had discussed going to other locations to occupy them. She stated that she never said that. So, to clarify the situation, as I know it, many residents in the surrounding area had come to the Refuge and asked for help in their communities. This led to teams going out and explaining Committees of Safety, the Constitution, and land rights matters. The idea was to get others thinking, not to provide an armed force to go to those communities.
Since that time, people have, without a real consideration of both the facts and the consequences of their actions in attacking Terri, have continued to attempt to discredit her, and possibly cause some misguided patriot to cause her physical harm.
Many have suggested that Terri’s testimony led to the murder of LaVoy Finicum. Nothing she testified to could, in any way, shape, or form, led one to such a conclusion. Then those naysayers say, well, she was working with the FBI. However, as I have pointed out in a previous articles, Brandon Curtiss had agreed to help the Sheriff, whatever decision he made — with regard to the Hammonds. It also appears that other alleged patriots passed on much intelligence information to the FBI or Sheriff. We know that there were 15 informants involved. Each of those since found out have, at least, claimed to be on the patriot’s side, such as McConnell and Killman. Both their known and unknown activities had far more to do with raising tensions, especially within the minds of the government people, and would more likely be activities that help shape the situation that resulted in LaVoy’s death.
Mark was outed, Minoggio was tracked down, and Terri came forth voluntarily to try to help the defendants. Mark actually played a hand in the activity that led to LaVoy’s death. Minoggio’s role was simply to gather intelligence and create some “evidence”. Terri’s role was simply to watch six people. LaVoy wasn’t even on her list.
So, the most important questing is:
How Should the Patriot Community Deal with Informants?Mark McConnell is a marked man. Any patriot that thinks that Mark has sympathy for the patriot community deserves what may come to him by associating with Mark. Simple ostracization is about the extent of what can, legally, be done to address the problem of this type of informant. Ban himfrom any events, meetings, even discussions on Facebook and other social media cites. Pretend as if he does not exist. Then, he can return to the hole that he has dug for himself.
Fabio Minoggio aka John Killman is a foreigner. Why he decided to go to Burns and become an informant for the government is unknown. He chose not to use his own name, opting to use an American or Indian sounding name, John Killman. He, like McConnell, should never be accepted into any patriot group, and should be treated just like the scourge that comes to this country, and then works against its people.
Terri Linnell is the one informant that we need to consider, very carefully, as to how we should look at her. It is not really her that is to be considered, rather, it is this type of informant. She had previously informed for the government, however, that back was broken when she chose to testify for the Defendants, even at the risk of exposing her role and relationship with the FBI. When I asked her why she chose to testify, she said, “It was the right thing to do.” So, what we have is an informant that has chosen to change sides. She has chosen to give up the means to make a few extra dollars. She has changed sides!
Now, let’s look at the ramifications of what she has done. She has become an outcast, to some. She is the subject of derision, and is constantly attacked on Facebook and Twitter. We need not go into the character of those that lead, or participate, is such attacks, because that, in the end is inconsequential.
We need to look well beyond this recent event. We know that there were 15 informants involved. Three have been outed, and we have good leads on three more. However, of all of them, only one has stepped back across the line — to the right side. So, what becomes extremely important is what example we leave for the next informant that has questioned their participation in informing against patriots. Do we offer them a comforting welcome? “Hi! Welcome. We are pleased that you have decided that you were on the wrong side and come to join us.”
Or, do we discourage them from coming to our side — which leaves them on the wrong side — because, by example, we have said, “So, you decided to help us by admitting you were an informant. But, since you are an informant, we will never accept you into our community.” If we do this, we can rest assured that we have precluded having some that may help us; may, if they don’t come out in the open, even serve as a double agent; and, deny adding someone to our ranks, when we need every body that we can get. We have forced them to remain our enemy, as there is no refuge, if they did want to leave the bad side.
We can spend hours trying to convince others that our cause is just, hoping to get them to understand the Constitution and the intent of the Founders. Yet, unless we change our ways, we will reject those who, by their own participation, have seen what is right, and what is wrong. We discourage them from making a decision that we spend hours trying to get another to make.
If we do not see the benefit of open arms, though that may never really include trust, we have, in a sense, become our own worst enemy. The entire Burns Chronicles series of articles is listed and linked at Burns Chronicles Share this:
Like this:
Tags: administrative agencies, Bundy, Burns Oregon, cops, courts, FBI, government, Harney County, Honor, informants, jury, law, Moral Values, patriots, police state, press, security
Category: Articles | Comment (RSS) | Trackback
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Gary Hunt, Outpost of Freedom - informant "Wolf"
http://outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/?p=1792
Burns Chronicles No 41 – Dennis Dickenson (Dennis Jones) »
Burns Chronicles No 40 – Allen Varner – Wolf
November 15, 2016, 6:39 pm
Burns Chronicles No 40
Allen Varner (Wolf)
Gary Hunt
Outpost of Freedom
November 15, 2016
When I wrote “What is Brandon Curtiss?“, I had nothing but gratitude for Wolf. He had stepped up when I was faced with Brandon Curtiss and his goons. His involvement allowed me to continue packing in order to leave Burns. The above picture was taken during this event.
There were some unanswered questions from an earlier incident. When the shootout occurred at Camp Lone Star, back on August 29, 2014, Varner was with Kevin “KC” Massey and John Foerster, on the Texas Border near Brownsville, when a Border Patrol (BP) Agent fired in the direction of Foerster. (See “The Arrest of K. C. Massey“.) Now questions arose as to Foerster’s role, but Varner appeared to be without sin. Varner, however, was the first to offer his pistol, in his belt under his shirt, to the BP agent, which led to Massey then turning his pistol over to BP. In hindsight, there were other questionable actions by Varner, though unrelated to the topic at hand.
Varner was quite cooperative in my interview with him and provided some information that only he had, which indicated that much of what BP did, out of sight of Massey, was not consistent with the testimony they offered in court. This could be interpreted as an attempt to ingratiate himself to Massey and myself.
According to Massey, Varner left Camp Lone Star within a couple of days of the shooting. He did not return until two days before Massey’s arrest. Was he there to report when Massey was going to spend the night in the motel room? Only someone at Camp Lone Star would have that information. At that critical time, Varner was at Camp Lone Star.
Now, often people have suspicion that someone could be an informant. I may have reason to believe someone is an informant. However, I will not write that someone is an informant unless I can prove that someone is an informant. So, ironically, the person that helped me while I was in Burns is, well, an informant.
Let’s get to the heart of the matter. To do so, I will be referring to FBI documents that I have obtained. They are marked, at the bottom left corner, “Dissemination Limited by Court Order”. So, let me make this perfectly clear — I have no intention of “disseminating” the documents, nor am I bound by any “Court Order”. I am writing about a Public Trial, which was held in September and October 2016. Had I access to these documents during that trial, I would have written the same article that I am writing now.
A Public Trial, as intended by the Founders, was guaranteed so that we could judge both the alleged crimes of the accused and the role of the government. This article, and subsequent articles on the subject of informants, is about the role of the government.
Informants are nothing less than spies, albeit, they are not spies set against foreign enemies or other countries. No, they are spies sent by the agents of the government to act against their own people. Whether they are paid, as was the case explained in my article “Terri Linnell (Mama Bear)“, to avoid prosecution for a crime they may have committed, or simply because they disagree with the politics of whomever they are informing against, they are nothing less than those contemptible creatures who, in most situations, face death if caught practicing their trade. The only exception would be when they realize that they are on the wrong side, and willingly change to the right side. This is addressed in another article, “Informants – What to do About Them“.
Using form “FD-1023”, also known as “CHS Reporting Document”, agents assigned to an informant provides information, based upon their communication, face to face, via text or email, by phone, or even secret messages, to place this information into the record.Unfortunately, some of the records I have obtained are so severely redacted that nothing but the pre-printed form information is visible. However, often what the informant reported can be compared to information obtained in speaking with victims of the informant, or the information reported may become available in other public forums. Often, such information is “exculpatory” in nature, meaning that it tends to provide evidence that the accused may not be guilty of the crime with which he has been charged. So, I will provide some of the text from the reports and offer a perspective regarding both aspects. The entire body of information will not be provided in this article. A sampling should be sufficient to provide the reader with understanding of just how these spies operate, and how they may set their own trap. The spies will identify themselves as “CHS” (Confidential Human Source).
We will begin with January 4, 2016, two days after the occupation of the Refuge and the first identifiable report from Varner.
There are 25-30 people on the property to include 5 women who are assisting in cooking, etc. Most individuals are carrying side arms and CHS has not seen any Iongrifles, but knows they are there. CHS has not yet seen any explosives and one militia member is in the watch tower approximately 100 feet in the air. The militia will be conducting patrols at night. CHS will obtain license plates later this evening and saw one militia member driving a white 4X4 truck bearing US Government plate number I487752 presumed to belong to the refuge. The militia is expecting the FBI to arrive and know that they are being called trespassers and not domestic terrorists.
CHS observed the following vehicles: [Note: first two vehicle descriptions and plate #s not included for the privacy of the owners]:3) Jason Patrick, White Male, mid 40’s, 5’10″, 230 lbs, beard, mustache, seen driving the white 4X4 truck bearing US Government plate I487752.
So, we can see that this informant, along with others, provided a snapshot, updated frequently, of what was going on and who was present at the Refuge. The next day, January 5:Ammon Bundy, Brian Cavalier (Booda), Jason Patrick, Ryan Bundy, Ryan Payne, Blaine Cooper and Jon Ritzheimer are all staying in the main building up front. Pecking order CHSbased on behavior observed is 1. Ammon Bundy 2. Ryan Payne and Jason Patrick 3. Brian Cavalier (Booda) and 4. Jon Ritzheimer. Booda is in charge of security. Ammon Bundy will more than likely speak with negotiators. CHS is in not staying in the front building and has not yet observed any formal plans. However, CHS is told the plan is to stay and wait for the FBI to make contact. They know the FBI will say they are trespassing, but believe it is B.S. as they do not recognize the land belonging to the federal government. They do not know what the FBI is thinking. By the FBI not taking any action, it has made militia members nervous/scared about the unknown. The militia does not know who will be arrested or exactly what plan of action will be taken when the FBI does make contact. CHS described the atmosphere as nervous, filled with anticipation and confusion if something were to happen. Some people are sleeping and they sleep in shifts.
No alcohol has been observed and approximately six people have been seen carrying side arms and long guns being .308 or 5.56 calibers on an AR platform. CH$ has been looking for explosives and has not observed any. The militia does have access to propane and fuel from the refuge itself. Patrols are being conducted and there is a person in the watch tower 24/7 with a long rifle and radio. There is a shift change in the watch tower at 3 a.m. CHS has not yet seen other set schedules at this time. CHS has asked about night vision equipment and the response received is that no night vision equipment is on site.
The following vehicle was observed on the property.
1999 Black GMC Truck bearing [state] plate # nnnnnnThe militia’s main objective is to have the property administered by the federal government returned to the people (States/counties). The second objective is to win the support of the American public to create the power needed to accomplish the first objective. At this point, everyone is united with these objectives. The militia believe they are currently winning by gaining support of the American public as well as the locals. They feel more empowered since the local are coming by and delivering supplies and the FBI has not yet reached out to the militia.
If the public demands they leave, CHS doesn’t think the militia will leave until additional pressure is placed upon them. CHS did not know what that pressure would be, but just asking the militia to leave will not work. If the FBI continues to do nothing, the militia will just gain more people on site and more power until the FBI is forced to react. None of the core leaders have made life ending preparations at this point, but Ammon Bundy and Ryan Payne have stated they would take a bullet if needed. Jon Ritzheimer stated he would go to jail, but appears very nervous and really does not want to serve any jail time. Militia members for the most part are just wondering around waiting for something to happen.
So, you can see that the FBI had a fairly decent picture of what was going on in the Refuge. You can also see what the intended (perhaps exculpatory) purpose of the occupation was, as well as the “state of mind” of the principal players. This was of importance during the trial, so we can understand why the government did not want the Defense to be able to identity and therefore call these people as witnesses.
CHS attended an administrative meeting today at 1:00 p.m. It was decided that three separate militia units will be created and led by Ryan Payne, Jon Ritzheimer and CHS. There are five people assigned to each militia unit leader and they are to conduct security patrols and other missions as requested by the “administration” .The three militia units will grow in size as more people arrive in support of the overall mission. All current fifteen members of the militia units intend to stay for the completion of the occupation…
Now, here is one of the little pieces used to deduce who the informant is. He is one of three militia group leaders. However, if we know (and we do) that Ryan Payne, Jon Ritzheimer, and Allen Varner were those three militia leaders, then we also know who “CHS” is.
CHS goes on to rank the principal players:A ranking by the CHS of the most dangerous members on a scale of 1 to 10, ten being the most dangerous, included the following: Booda 9, Ritzheimer 8, Payne, Ammon Bundy 8 or 9, Ryan Bundy 8 or 9, Robert Finicum would most likely back down.
Rather interesting that he identified Robert (LaVoy) Finicum as most likely to back down.
In the January 6 report, we find more information, some tending to be exculpatory.At least seven different vehicles driven by locals dropped by today to show support and deliver supplies to include, elk meat, steaks, hamburger meat, blankets, hand warmers, etc. The front porch of the bunkhouse used for cooking is now filled with food and supplies. One local stated he would be back again next week to drop off more supplies.CHS and others have been told to use the refuge’s fuel stored in large tanks for their personal use.
A… “Committee of Safety” held a long meeting with the Bundy’s today. [They were] to show their support for the refuge takeover. They were also going to explain at the meeting that the militia at the refuge were not “crazy gun toting people” as portrayed by some of the media.
An individual named McConnell claiming to be the leader of the Three Percenters Militia in Arizona showed up at the refuge last night or early this morning. The individual is physically fit, mid 40’s, 6’ in height, blonde hair, blonde mustache, driving a brown colored jeep. McConnell also claims to be a Marine and/or Navy Seal. CHS considered McConnell as strength for the militia at the refuge. CHS could not describe any weaknesses the militia has at this time. If anything, the militia continues to gain strength in morale because the locals continue to come by to show support and deliver supplies.
CHS described the atmosphere as calm and relaxed but still expecting something to happen. Patrols were done every four hours, people have been sleeping and milling around like a normal day.
In the January 7 report, we have another clue that helps to identify the CHS, along with other information.As of this morning, there were approximately 35-40 people at the refuge. So many people have arrived that the new arrivals are sleeping on the floor and not in bunks. They are expecting a lot more people to show up today. “Will” is from the Seattle area and driving a Nissan X-Terra bearing Washington Marine Corps plate number nnnnnn. Will is the one who brought in the night vision equipment and it appears to be a night vision spotting scope. Will also brought with him a 300 Win Mag rifle. CHS also observed the following license plates: Nevada tag nnnnnn on a Ford F-150, Arizona tag nnnnnn on McConnell’s vehicle.
Last night at approximately 8:30 p.m., Louie Prepper at two others came over from their camp across the street and requested entry into the refuge and to speak with Robert LaVoy Finicum. CHS refused to allow them in resulting in a physical altercation. CHS was struck in the face and cut by Prepper and “Fat boy” (CHS’ description) from Colorado broke the mirror on CHS’ vehicle. CHS got up and kicked Fatboy in the groin causing severe pain to Fatboy. Pete Santilli told CHS to stand down and Prepper and the two others entered to refuge to encounter Blaine Cooper. Cooper got into a physical altercation with Prepper and the two others. Fatboy claimed Cooper broke his nose and was going to file a complaint and they left the refuge.
The ATV was used this morning to take supplies to the watchtower allowing for guards to stay in the tower for long periods of time. Two guys mainly occupy the watch tower which CHS has not yet met.
CHS has observed one 300 WIN Mag rifle, two SKS rifles, three AK-47’s, one 12 GA pump action riot shotgun and quite a few AR-15’s (5.56). Most are mainly carrying side arms and one female is carrying a sidearm.
Patrols continue every four hours and are conducted by 4-5 people in vehicles. Patrol routes around the refuge are not set, more like people driving around in vehicles. People do remain at the front and back gates. Patrols are not done on foot because of the snow. Most active use of communication is via supplied radios, but cellular telephones are also being used.CHS has not heard any rumors about kidnapping a federal agent. Atmosphere remains relaxed.
A Washington Three Percenter Militia member named Darrel is currently assigned in the watch tower. There is now a flare gun in the tower that will be discharged to warn everyone within the refuge of incoming law enforcement raids. CHS observed the night vision equipment brought in last night and it appears to be mountable on a rifle. The militia still fails to have any grasp on organization. Currently, Patrick is attempting to create a list of shifts and assignments for members within the refuge. The three militia units previously created and led by Payne, Ritzheimer and CHS are still in play, but have not yet been assigned to complete any tasks.
CHS observed California license plate number nnnnnn on a dark blue Chevy Blazer. There are roughly 40-45 people within the refuge. The atmosphere remains relaxed and still waiting for something to happen.
You can see that the FBI had status reports that gave them a day-to-day update on the situation at the Refuge. We also see that Varner was still in charge of one of the militia groups. However, another confirmation of his identity is found when he described the broken mirror incident. In an interview with Varner, he said that he swung his fist to hit Louie (Lewis Arthur), hit the mirror instead, and hurt his hand.
We will skip the January 8 report, and since there were are no identifiable reports for January 9 and 10, go to January 11.CHS provided two inert grenades taken from the refuge, a notebook recovered from the ground and showed case agent the hand held radio taken from Ritzheimer. People using cell phones are using the Zello walkie-talkie App to communicate. The notebook had several pages removed and contains limited to no useful information (see attached photographs).
The extra support has again made the administration and supporters feel as if they are winning.
The leadership was 1. Ammon and Ryan Bundy, 2. Jason Patrick, 3. Ryan Payne, 4. Ritzhiemer. Ammon and Ryan Bundy, LaVoy Finicum, and Payne remain as the administration of the refuge. Finicum was the self proclaimed media representative.
They group is calling themselves the “Citizens of Constitutional America” and not a militia. The administration is adamant that they do not call themselves a militia.
They have not constructed any defensive structures or positions such as rifle pits, sand bag cover, etc. The militia will more than likely use the heavy machinery on site for cover and have positioned some of this equipment at the entrances to the refuge. The patrol routes remain random around the perimeter and consist of individuals driving around in vehicles.
The interviewing agents showed the CHS an aerial photograph of the refuge complex with the buildings numbered. CHS described the use of the buildings as follows:Building 19 – Fire Bunkhouse – CHS described this building as having 8 bedrooms, one bedroom has 4 bunks, the remaining rooms have two bunks each¯ All bunks were full.
Building 15 – Payne and Riztheimer were staying in the two small houses across the street from the firehouse(building 19) . These houses have an exterior bathroom nearby¯Building 18 – WarehouseBuilding 11 – Warehouse/garage with lots of equipmentBuilding 17 or 16 -Generator buildingBuilding 1 – Admin buildings were meetings are conductedBuilding 6 – The two Bundy brothers and Finicum’s sleeping quarters
The third clue as to the identity of the source of these reports is related to the “hand-held radio”. Ritzheimer said that he gave it to Varner. In an interview with Varner, when asked directly about the radio, he said that Jon was in his truck with Blaine Cooper and he saw the radio sitting on the seat between them, but it was never given to him. However, at shift change the next morning, the new guard contacted Jon to say that he had no radio with which to communicate. It appears that Varner simply showed the radio to his handler, and then kept it for himself.
Two more identifiable reports were filed on January 15 and 16. They continued updating with regard to the status, positions, state of mind, etc., of those inside the Refuge. So, we can see that from this one source, a lot of information, some accurate, some not so accurate, was made available to the FBI. On top of this, understand that there were eight other informants reporting from inside the Refuge. There were also six additional informants in communication with the occupiers via telephone. Those occupiers inside believed that they were talking to outside “friendlies”, and managed to provide quite a bit of useful information to those informants. This topic will be addressed in a subsequent article.
In all fairness to Varner, I called him after I had finished the article. I read him the statements about the three militia groups, the encounter with Lewis Arthur, and the report where he showed the radio he got from Ritzheimer to the case agent. He stated that somebody lied — that it was bullshit. He concluded with, “I ain’t no informant or agent”. Share this:
Like this:
Tags: Burns Oregon, Camp Lone Star, FBI, Honor, informants, Massey, Moral Values, patriots
Category: Articles | Comment (RSS) | Trackback
