Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Another video from Lorie Kramer on the Malheur 2 verdicts. She combines several videos int one long video.
http://youtu.be/9ck7XlRYyjo
https://youtu.be/9ck7XlRYyjo
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
KrisAnne Hall on the persecution
KrisAnne Hall
21 hrs ·
For those of you following #BundyTrial2:
The defendants were found guilty of the charges of Conspiracy. As a former prosecutor I can give a bit of insight on the charge of Conspiracy...
When a prosecutor charges a defendant with Conspiracy to a crime, what they are really saying is:
"I don't have enough evidence to prove the commission of a real crime beyond a reasonable doubt, so I am going to make sure the jury finds the defendant guilty of a crime I have created in my head."
Reputable prosecutors don't charge Conspiracy. That is left to those who are just looking for a win. These government attorneys have crossed the line from being prosecutors to become persecutors. They have risen to the level of tyrants.
Conspiracy charges prove their only concern was to get a guilty verdict on anything possible just to prove a point and deprive these people of their Liberty.
In light of my statements above, maybe it was a good thing that the defense attorneys in these trials decided to not call me as a witness. But, it would have been great to have had the opportunity to speak freely in that courtroom. https://www.facebook.com/images/emoj...1/16/1f601.png
Now President Donald J. Trump needs to issue a full pardon.
P.S. these federal prosecutors were not going to take any chances of suffering the humiliation handed to the feds in the last trial, so they resorted to the tactics of weak attorneys and cowards. This is a very sad indictment on the personal character of these federal attorneys. I wonder how they sleep at night. They had better pray their loved ones don't fall under the thumb of people like themselves.
#socalledjudges #LibertyFirst #LibertyMatters Bundy Ranch
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
The PERSECUTION of the Malheur 2 Trial Protesters
The Persecution of the Malheur Protesters
THE DEFENDANTS NOW HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO BRING THIS CASE TO THE APPELLATE COURT.
March 12, 2017 BLM, Constitution, FBI, Featured, Oregon
http://www.avantlink.com/gbi/11653/2...9211/image.jpg
https://i2.wp.com/redoubtnews.com/wp...size=641%2C360
Protest sign outside the Federal Courthouse in Portland. (photo: Redoubt News)
The Persecution of the Malheur Protesters
By Shari Dovale
The high-profile case of the Constitutional Protest at the Malheur Wildlife Refuge finished with the government rejoicing at guilty verdicts on Friday, March 10, 2016.
The acquittals of Ammon and Ryan Bundy, as well as 5 others last fall, was a very harsh blow to the government that reportedly spent in excess of $100 million on their persecution of these patriotic American citizens.
Changing their tactics for the second trial, prosecutors Ethan Knight and Geoff Barrow, along with Judge Anna Brown, ensured a biased verdict.
Repeatedly during the course of the trial, Judge Anna Brown refused to allow testimony and evidence to be presented by the defense that could have cast doubt on the government’s case.
On one particular day, Judge Brown’s rulings cut the defendants witness list from 18 down to 8. Then she chastised the defense for not having enough witnesses to fill the afternoon.
When she did allow defense witnesses to testify, she severely limited their testimony, with several witnesses only on the stand for minutes, and a few telling me later that they were not allowed to give the jury the whole truth.
A major point of contention in these trials were the Confidential Human Sources (CHS) also known as paid FBI Informants. Evidence of 15 informants came out in the first trial, but when the defense tried to pursue this during the second trial, Judge Brown shut them down.
Defense lawyers reportedly issued subpoenas to at least 3 informants, Will Kullman, Fabio Minoggio, and Allen Varner. Yet none of the 3 gave any testimony.
It was brought to light that the Informants were allowed to break the law, and possibly entrap the defendants. FBI Special Agent Ronnie Walker admitted under oath that paid FBI informants who infiltrated the protest were authorized to conduct illegal activities while at the refuge.
One of these examples was Fabio Minoggio, who gave firearms training and led the protesters to practice shooting weapons on a (repeatedly played) video at the refuge boat launch. Minoggio, otherwise known as John Killman, also provided training to protesters in hand-to-hand combat, how to “clear” a vehicle, and interrogating people.
Another informant was Allen Varner, who was reported to be a leader of a security team on the refuge. He was in position to order defendants to break the law, therefore setting them up for prosecution.
However, jurors were not allowed to hear most of these details.
One of the most damaging points of this trial was when Judge Brown insisted that Ammon Bundy, and the other defendants from the first trial, were to be called “Co-Conspirators” though they were acquitted of these charges. Legally, they are NOT conspirators, but were constantly referred to as such. This had to have prejudiced the jury in favor of the prosecution.
Brown also allowed video excerpts that could not be authenticated. This is a direct slap at the Constitution’s Sixth Amendment, which reads in part: “to be confronted with the witnesses against him”. The defense could not cross examine a video, and the person that made the video was excused by Judge Brown from testifying.
Judge Brown did suggest that Ryan Bundy could testify to the video, which was another vindictive blow to the defense, as Bundy is under indictment in Nevada for the Bunkerville Standoff, and could not possibly wave his rights under the Fifth Amendment: “nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself”.
Other defense witnesses reported threats and intimidation from the prosecution. At least four witnesses were told to speak to council as their testimony could allow the government to prosecute them as well, with Brand Thornton and BJ Soper among this list. This was clear intimidation of witnesses and, again, hampered the defense.
It was publicized after the last trial that Judge Brown talked to the jurors about how better to try these cases. They told her that they really wanted to convict and suggested that the prosecution should have allowed misdemeanor charges, including trespass, to give the jury more options.
The prosecution added several of these charges, just a couple of weeks before the start of the second trial, that were not made during the first trial. The charges were considered misdemeanors, though they carry monetary penalties as well as jail time. Despite this, Judge Brown decided that the jurors would not deliberate on these charges. She held a Bench Trial so she could decide the fate of the defendants herself.
It was well known in the courtroom that the Bench Trial was treated as ‘a given’ by the prosecution. Judge Brown seems to have heard these rumors and berated AUSA Barrow for not being prepared. When asked for his opening statement, Barrow handed out a sheet of paper that gave a graph of the charges and indicated that this should be enough of a statement. His lack of presentation was another indication that he felt the Bench Trial was an exercise in ‘going through the motions‘.
Yet the defendants should have been allowed a jury trial on these charges as well. The sixth amendment clearly outlines: “In ALL criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury.” No where does it say that misdemeanors will not be allowed a jury trial.
The only bright spot in this entire propaganda-hyped persecution is that these defendants now have the opportunity to bring this case to the next level. After the May 10th sentencing, defendants will file for their appeals. We can only hope that Judge Brown allows them to remain free, and not incarcerated, during the process.
The Bill of Rights
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Amendment II
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
Amendment III
No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.
Amendment VII
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
Amendment VIII
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
Share this:
BREAKING: Judge Brown Signs Order Against Free PressFebruary 16, 2017In "BLM"
Facebook Evidence Allowed Into Bundy TrialSeptember 12, 2016In "Constitution"
Malheur Jury Rejects the Thought PoliceOctober 28, 2016In "BLM"
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Teres Brookshire says:
Teresa Brookshire shared a link.
Yesterday at 7:59am
Barf bags should be readily available. Enhancement mentioned.
https://external.fbog2-1.fna.fbcdn.n...DlnsIYXdsr3zQF
Prosecutors reflect on refuge takeover trials after Friday's verdicts
"Anytime there's a case of national significance, we consult with main Justice,'' Oregon's U.S. Attorney…
OREGONLIVE.COM|BY MAXINE BERNSTEIN, THE OREGONIAN/OREGONLIVE
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Another by Teresa Brookshire:
https://scontent.fbog2-1.fna.fbcdn.n...98&oe=592F0BB7
Teresa Brookshire shared a link.
March 10 at 3:58pm
A little something else to get your blood boiling again-in reference to the "militants" verdict today.
https://external.fbog2-1.fna.fbcdn.n...CU23naQ83958G8
Maxine Bernstein on Twitter
“WildEarth Guardians Exec Dir John Harding:'These verdicts bring some measure of justice...' #oregonstandoff”
TWITTER.COM
LikeCommentShare
Vickey Gray I guess John Harding, has not read the environmental study done of the Refuge. It is a toxic dump nothing lives there except coyotes and carp. I do love all the nonprofit's willing to be exposed in the corruption. Remember this began in 1992, Earthjustice and federal judge Haggerty. What goes around comes around. Anyone one know the real meaning of the word "riparian"? Also let's look up how much money these nonprofits have made bring fraudulent lawsuits under the "Equal Access to Justice Act" I will give you a hint from 2000 through 2009 $ 4.8 BILLION. They defraud american's.
Like · 11 hrs · Edited
https://mobile.twitter.com/maxoregon...01638283874304
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Kelli Stewart always has a good analysis of the court proceedings. I haven't listend to this one yet.
http://youtu.be/CJRSzt1r5iQ
https://youtu.be/CJRSzt1r5iQ
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
It sounds like they will be appealing the verdict. I have read that jurisdiction can be challenged at any time, even on appeal. This makes me think even though this group may not have challenged the courts jurisdiction they still may challengi it in the appeals court. Angus McIntosh had all the research on the prior ownership backed up by title searches and case law on the Malheur Reserve. I don't know what they will be allowed to submit when challenging jurisdiction in an appeals court. If they are allowed to use McIntosh as an expert witness with his documentation the lack of jurisdiction should be a slam dunk. Ammon's first attorney, Mike Arnold presented a very detailed motion but Judge Anna Brown wouldn't allow it. Otherwise, I don't know what these attorneys have presented in this trial that can be used in an appeal.
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
The most recent post by Gary Hunt regarding the US Attorneys in Oregon andmtheir attempt to have him charged with contempt of court
March 12, 2017, 9:58 pm
Freedom of the Press #12
Fully Biased Instigators
http://outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/w...BI-300x162.jpgGary Hunt,
Outpost of Freedom
March 13, 2017
When I was in the Army, I had to obey the orders that were given to me, by my superiors. That obligation ceased nearly fifty years ago.
Since that time, I have only taken “orders” from my employer or supervisor, though I have given “orders” to subordinates, as a part of my supervisory responsibilities in various positions I have held.
I have also given “orders” for food or other purchases, as I don’t expect waitresses or clerks to be mind readers.
In all of the above instances, there has been a relationship predicated on the fact that there was some implied obligation by virtue of the relationship, fiduciary or voluntary, between the “orderer” and the “orderee“. Yes, I made those two words up, but I suppose that all reading this will get the point being made.
This tribulation began when the U. S. Department of Justice “Demanded” that I Cease and Desist publishing a series of articles exposing informants, both inside and outside of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge during the occupation by those seeking a “Redress of Grievances” (First Amendment). The Letter also wanted me to return information that I had obtained without any illegal act on my part. And, in a somewhat ridiculous (impossible) Demand, that I remove the articles from my website “and any other website”.
However, I have no more control over “any other website” than the Justice Department has over me.
An FBI agent delivered the Letter. I asked the agent what obliged me to recognize the authority of the Letter. He said that he did not know. (See Freedom of the Press #1 – Meeting with the FBI)
Since that time, the Court has “Ordered” me to do things that I didn’t want to do. I have refused service on two of them; the second (middle) one was never even offered to me to be refused. In each instance, I have asked for some law that I violated or how I came under the jurisdiction of the Court in Portland, Oregon. I have yet to receive a qualified answer thereto.
Now, I say “qualified answer”, in that the US Shysters have included case law in their Motions, though when I researched those cases submitted, I found that those cases really supported my position, not the government’s position.
The government is using the Court as a forum, while I cannot do so, since I would be submitting to the Court’s jurisdiction. So, my recourse is to use the “Court of Public Opinion”. The government has introduced articles from both the “Burns Chronicles” and “Freedom of the Press” series into the Court Record. As I have pointed out, one cannot submit a page of a book into the record without submitting the whole book. The articles are nothing less than pages of a book, and must be taken as a whole. This is especially true with “Freedom of the Press”, as it is chapters in an ongoing story — recorded as that story plays out.
The government has set forth arguments, made assertions, and have otherwise provided “papers” to the Court which represent that I am subject to jurisdiction. However, each of those assertions has been disproven in my responses. So, though they began by using my articles in an effort to defame me, and have selectively chosen what “evidence” they want in the Record, the government has been remarkably consistent in ignoring content that disputes those claims.
On Friday, March 10, 2017, the government filed “Government’s Status Report Regarding Order to Show Cause” (Report), asking that the Court “issue a warrant for his arrest to be served by the United States Marshal.” In support of that Report, they also filed the “Affidavit of FBI Special Agent Jason P. Kruger in Support of Government’s Status Report Regarding Order to Show Cause” (Affidavit). This article is my response to which can only be seen as a demonstration of the incompetence of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
The first section of the Report is titled “The Government Has Established by Clear and Convincing Evidence That Gary Hunt Is Violating This Court’s Lawful and Direct Orders“. So, let’s look at some of that “clear and convincing evidence”. (Emphasis, mine.) They do make a statement that the reports from which I obtained my information (Form 1023) “were provided in discovery to the 26 defendants being prosecuted in United States v. Bundy, et al.” We clearly see that some of the people in the US Shyster’s office and some in the Court were also provided copies of those reports.
However, they tend to be suggestive (subjective) rather than objective (what should be “the whole truth”), they conveniently omit any source that may have provided the information to me.
Obviously, to do so would not fit their narrative.
Then, regarding the Cease and Desist Letter of January 5, 2017, they state, “The letter requested Hunt to cease and desist from publicly disseminating the material. The letter also directed Hunt to remove the protected material from his website.” Well, close, but no prize. For example, the Letter said, “you must immediately, cease and desist”. Not quite a request, rather, a demand. When they said that it must be removed from my website, they conveniently omitted “or any other website”. The former would be a rather simple task; the latter, clearly impossible.
In referring to a comment made on Facebook, by Duane Ehmer, one of the defendants, they repeat that Duane has said, back on February 5, 2017, that in response to a question, he replied, “He is working with our lawyers”. As I have pointed out, previously, the answer was posted 17 minutes before the question, “Who is Gary Hunt?”, was asked. However, now there is more to this “Clear and Convincing Evidence”. We will get to that, shortly.
Then, in referring to the Affidavit, they finally get something right when they state:“On March 2, 2017, Hunt was interviewed on an internet-based radio talk show at http://www.blogtalkradio.com/longliv.../we-the-people. The radio show lasts for two hours and forty-nine seconds. During the radio show Hunt discussed the protected material and named seven people he alleged to be FBI CHSs. During the course of the radio show, Hunt stated that he does not recognize the Court’s jurisdiction, nor does he intend to comply with the Court’s Protective Order. Hunt stated he would not make an appearance as directed by the Order to Show Cause, because if he does he would have ‘submitted himself to the jurisdiction of the Court and I ain’t gonna do that.'”Well, it is mostly correct. However, I seldom refer to myself as “himself”. Sounds more like those gender identity people, “today, I am himself. Tomorrow I will be herself.”
The Report concludes with the following:
The government has presented unrefuted clear and convincing evidence through sworn Affidavits of Special Agent Walker and Special Agent Kruger that prove Hunt is continuing to violate this Court’s Orders.Accordingly, at the March 10, 2017, hearing the United States will ask this Court to find that there is clear and convincing evidence that third-party Hunt should be held in civil contempt and issue a warrant for his arrest to be served by the United States Marshal.
I suppose that they have taken a concept from history, that if you repeat something often enough, some will accept it as the truth. That then, should make everything valid evidence, regardless of the truthfulness of it.You will note that two Special Agents were named. “Walker”, being Ronnie Walker that filed the two previous affidavits, and Jason P. Kruger, who filed this Affidavit. It is only the current Affidavit that we will now discuss.
After giving his qualification, Kruger states:
8. On March 9, 2016, Judge Brown entered an Interim Protective Order, court record #288, which stated that defense counsel may provide copies of discovery only to individuals further described in the Order.
9. On March 24, 2016, Judge Brown entered the final Protective Order, court record #342, which stated defense counsel may provide copies of discovery only to:
1) the defendants in this case;
2) persons employed by the attorney of record who are necessary to assist counsel of record in preparation for trial or other proceedings in this case; and
3) persons who defense counsel deems necessary to further legitimate investigations and preparations of this case.
Now, the government is contending that I “aided and abetted” someone, though they have yet to identify just who it was that I “aided and abetted”. However, with that in mind, it would appear that they are trying to project me into those who are identified there, probably in the third listed identifications. Thus, it becomes extremely important for the government to rely upon the statement made by Duane Ehmer, on Facebook.
Now, I have written a number of articles in the two series, “Burns Chronicles” and “Freedom of the Press” There is no doubt that the shysters are reading the articles, since they have referred to them numerous times in their numerous submissions to the Court, endeavoring to create an illusion that I am what they are trying to make me out to be.
So, let’s look at what Ehmer has to say, now. He has been given permission by his attorney to clarify his statement, as explained in this posting made on Sunday, March 12, 2017, at about 10:23
AM PDT.
.http://outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/w...-10.23-pdt.jpg
However, as George Washington said in a letter to Charles Thruston:
“Truth will ultimately prevail where pains is taken to bring it to light.”
However, the government and FBI, having repeated their claim as to the significance of a Facebook post so often, we could expect that the Judge will buy their lie, instead of the truth.
The Affidavit also provides a number of quotes from the radio show of March 2. I suppose they want to demonstrate what to them might appear to be belligerence on my part. From my point of view, I am simply stating a fact, that I am not subject to the Court’s jurisdiction, in this current matter, and that I will not be duped into submitting to that jurisdiction by making any appearance.
This is one of the quoted portions of the show:
They’ve had the cease and desist letter and three orders now, and I’m supposed to, by tomorrow, respond in court to them. Then the government has until the 8th of March to respond to what I file with the court. Then on the 10th I’m supposed to appear there for a show cause hearing, to show cause why I shouldn’t be held in contempt of court. But they’re going to be really nice, because they said, ‘Well you can call in and make a phone appearance.’
But if I make an appearance then I have submitted myself to the jurisdiction of the Court and I ain’t gonna do that. Because if I did then they are going to be able to grab me.”
And, that is truthful.
However, while we are discussing the FBI, let’s look a bit into their investigative skills. These are the people that, in a two month period were able to produce a Criminal Complaint charging 26 people with felony crimes. In the next eight months, they were able to put together a case that went to trial, resulting in the acquittal of the Group 1 defendants. However, in over a year, they have been unable to figure out which FBI HRT team members fired two shots on January 26, 2016, and then covered up the fact that they fired those shots. Those two shots were, without a doubt, part and parcel to the murder of LaVoy Finicum, on that date. A real crime, not the manufactured appearance of a crime.
By the Affidavit, we see that they have, through specialized use of their superior investigative skills, found a Facebook post and a radio show. That is all the evidence they have provided to create that which isn’t. They have not interviewed me, though I have explained my position to Special Agent Catalano, as was well explained in a few of the “Freedom of the Press” articles. They haven’t incorporated what I have stated, regarding both case law and factual arguments, along with any other material that should be considered in an objective investigation. After all, it would prove “exculpatory” in the current situation.
Instead, we can see that truth is not the objective of the government. An objective investigation would provide all of the truth, not just those meager pieces made of “whole cloth”, by what Walker and Kruger have put together in an effort to, and I will say it, loud and clear, frame me.
I can understand the US Shysters, seeing this as adversarial, want to “find dirt”, to justify the exclusion of facts that don’t suit their objective. Heck, we have seen that through the last two Malheur trials — every effort to exclude that which might dispute, or interfere with, their desire for a conviction, or in my case, to be incarcerate for “contempt of court”.
The FBI, however, is not a private tool of the US Shysters. It is supposed to be a part of a functional government, whose purpose is to serve its creator, the People. When those powers become so misdirected, as they have in this instance, we can easily see that the government has decided to serve itself, not the People — that, in fact, we have become subject to a police state, every bit the same as the old U.S.S.R., East Germany, and Hitler’s Third Reich.
Share this:
Like this:
Tags: Ammon Bundy, Burns Oregon, Constitution, courts, demonization, FBI, government, Harney County, Honor, informants, press
Category: Articles | Comment (RSS) | Trackback
Re: 150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters
Link to Jake Ryans response to govt. supplemental memorandum in the misdemeanor bench trial
https://issuu.com/maxinebernstein/do...anor/1?ff=true
