150 Militia Take Over Makhuer National Wildlife Preserve Headquarters

John Lamb and Brand Thornton with the end of the day recap, Malheur Protest Trial 2 March 6

http://youtu.be/Vr2TOXHP2XM

https://youtu.be/Vr2TOXHP2XM

Judge Brown Throwing a Fit ~ Prosecution discredited in Malheur II?


Prosecution Discredited in Malheur II ?


“WE THOUGHT HE WAS TRYING TO GET A SHOT ON US,” FISHER EXPLAINED OF THE HELICOPTER.

March 6, 2017 FBI, Featured, government, Oregon

http://www.avantlink.com/gbi/11653/2...9211/image.jpg

https://i0.wp.com/redoubtnews.com/wp...size=641%2C360
One of the protester's signs outside the Federal Courthouse in Portland, OR

Prosecution Discredited in Malheur II ?

by Shari Dovale

Today’s court testimony brought to light many of the government’s shenanigans. At least 15 witnesses testified today, some of them for just a few minutes, as Judge Anna Brown tried to limit everything the defense was presenting.

But she did not keep everything out, as much as she seem to try.

BJ Soper, a founding member of the Pacific Patriots Network, more than contradicted the testimony of Blaine Cooper. Soper was at the meeting on December 29, 2015 that Cooper testified was where the plan of taking over the refuge was discussed.

Soper said that the people attending were bouncing around different ideas and ways of bringing more attention to the Hammond family’s issues. Protesting at the refuge was just one of many ideas brought up that day, with no special emphasis put to it.

https://i1.wp.com/redoubtnews.com/wp...size=300%2C169
Nick Fisher riding Lady Liberty in front of the Federal Courthouse.

Also testifying to discredit Cooper were his parents, Stanley Hicks, Sr. and Linda Hicks. They confirmed that Cooper had a reputation for lying. “He’s prone to lie when it serves his purpose,’ Hicks said.

Nick Fisher took the stand as an eyewitness to the fear that the protesters faced after the murder of LaVoy Finicum. Fisher, from Kansas City, Missouri, told of how they heard the Apache helicopters coming in and how the protesters were told they had “52 minutes” left.

“We thought he was trying to get a shot on us,” Fisher explained of the helicopter. “It was flying crazy.” Fisher choked up when he thought of the pure fear that raced through him.

Assistant US attorney (AUSA) Ethan Knight tried to minimize his fear by asking him if the helicopter could have been from a local FOX affiliate out of Seattle. “It was my understanding, “Fisher countered, “that it was a No-Fly Zone.”

Acquitted defendant from the first Malheur Protest Trial in October 2016, Jeff Banta, testified today of details during the final days at the refuge. Banta arrived for his second visit on January 25^th, the day before Finicum was murdered.

The prosecutors tried to make light of his testimony by asking him if he ever claimed to be a television reality star. “I’m not? Ok.” Banta replied sarcastically.

https://i2.wp.com/redoubtnews.com/wp...size=258%2C191

Sandy Anderson, who was at the refuge as one of the “Final Four” until February 11^th, testified to how terrified the protesters were after Finicum’s death. “How could we leave?” she said.

She explained that Jason Patrick brought a reporter to them and that made her feel better because there would be a record proving they were not the aggressors. They were just defending themselves.

When asked if she was armed, Anderson replied “We always have our Second Amendment with us.”

Rancher Duane Schrock described the atmosphere at the refuge as that of a “family reunion.” He also said that he never saw a gun unholstered. When the prosecutors asked Schrock if he saw US Fish & Wildlife employees at the refuge, he said that he didn’t know everyone, but it was an ‘Open Door Policy’.

Terri Linnell, also known as “Mama Bear” took the stand and explained how she was paid $3,000 plus expenses by the FBI to inform on specific personnel at the refuge.

Linnell was asked if she felt like the protest was illegal. She said No, as an informant she was not allowed to do anything illegal. “There are rules to keep from entrapment,” she explained.

She tried to provide information and context on several of the points brought out, but the prosecutors continued their objections. “Stop! Stop!” Judge Brown finally told her.

Some off the biggest concerns for Linnell were the men pretending to be a Judge and US Marshals. She said they were Sovereign Citizens and she was afraid that protesters might actually believe them.

Brand Thornton did not testify, however, his prior testimony was read into the record for the jury.

https://i0.wp.com/redoubtnews.com/wp...size=138%2C138
Former Assemblywoman Michele Fiore came in from Nevada to testify about the meeting held early in January with members of the Coalition of Western States, otherwise known as COWS. Fiore always connects with the people as she has an outgoing and bright personality. Walking out of the courtroom, Judge Brown stared daggers at her as she waved to the jury and even said “Bye, Your Honor,” as she walked out of the courtroom.

The biggest news today came about the 2 men posing as Navy Seals. The defense team presented evidence that suggested self-described U.S. Navy Seal Danny Williams, of Burns, was cooperating with the FBI while at the refuge.

Investigator Mark Robertson testified that Williams made several phone calls to the FBI from the refuge, and played an audio recording proving it.

Todd Bethel took video at the refuge which had Williams saying he was a Navy Seal, rank E-18, and had been a Seal for eight years. When asked how he got past the FBI checkpoint, he replied “What do you expect out of a U.S. Navy Seal?”

(To those that do not understand the military rankings, there is no such thing as an E-18)

The prosecution had previously tried to discredit any mention of these ‘navy seals’, even suggesting they were a fabrication. Now, the truth has come out and the government’s version is, again, discredited.

Judge Brown is not too happy with how thing went today.

The prosecution will put on a rebuttal case tomorrow, including questioning Chad Karges again, as well as FBI Agent Ronnie Walker.

It is expected that the jury should get the case sometime tomorrow afternoon.

Share this:

• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• 87
  Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  87
• Click to share on Google+ (Opens in new window)
• Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)

Felon Blaine Cooper Testifies for Govt in Malheur IIFebruary 27, 2017In "BLM"
Malheur II - What Judge Brown DID Allow This WeekMarch 3, 2017In "BLM"
Excitement in the Courtroom – Malheur 7October 11, 2016In "BLM"

SSgt. Moe, Maureen Peltier facebook video end of day March 6 Malheur Protest Trial 2

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?sto...81001932112681

SSgt. Moe's March 6 update, both videos combined

http://youtu.be/LRCtQQ0Qr6o

https://youtu.be/LRCtQQ0Qr6o

John Lamb with his mid-day report for The Malheur Protest Trial2 March 7

The judge allowed the prosecution to re-call the Fish & Wildlife manager and the biologist so the could testify how fearful they both felt. To me, I think their feelings should be irrelevant since they had zero contact with the protesters. Their fear was perpetrated by false media hype and Dave Ward's perconceived worries.

http://youtu.be/WbRaJp8MIF4

https://youtu.be/WbRaJp8MIF4

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by monty

John Lamb with his mid-day report for The Malheur Protest Trial2 March 7

The judge allowed the prosecution to re-call the Fish & Wildlife manager and the biologist so the could testify how fearful they both felt. To me, I think their feelings should be irrelevant since they had zero contact with the protesters. Their fear was perpetrated by false media hype and Dave Ward's perconceived worries.

https://youtu.be/WbRaJp8MIF4

---

It also shouldn't matter because they were on "holidays" weren't they? The facility was closed for seasonal reasons?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Glass

It also shouldn't matter because they were on "holidays" weren't they? The facility was closed for seasonal reasons?

---

That has been reported by some witnesses.

John Lamb ~ End of Day Malheur Trial 2 March 7 video says opening arguments, should be closing arguments

http://youtu.be/0Z5OBzPyOjo

https://youtu.be/0Z5OBzPyOjo

SSgt. Moe with a detailed report on Malheur Trial 2 for March 7

http://youtu.be/0ATf4EhEKC4

https://youtu.be/0ATf4EhEKC4

The jury has the case, meanwhile the obviously biased judge is going to preside over the misdemeanor bench trial. There is truly somthing wrong here.


Case Goes to the Jury in Malheur II


THE BENCH TRIAL FOR THE REMAINING MISDEMEANOR CHARGES WILL TAKE PLACE TOMORROW.

March 7, 2017 BLM, FBI, Featured, Oregon

http://www.avantlink.com/gbi/11653/2...9211/image.jpg

https://i1.wp.com/redoubtnews.com/wp...size=641%2C360

Case Goes to the Jury in Malheur II

by Shari Dovale

Malheur Protest Trial II in Portland began with a rebuttal case by the prosecution.

Chad Karges, manager of the Malheur Refuge took the stand and said that he was so afraid when he heard of militia being in town that he put loaded guns next to every door in his house. He also told his children and grandchildren in late December not to visit Burns.

The fact that there hadn’t even been a rally as yet, let alone moving the protest to the refuge, when this took place suggests that Karges was afraid of Ammon Bundy just being in his county.
Karges admitted that he preempted Bundy by telling his employees not to return to work 2 days before the rally took place. However, he went to the refuge on January 1^st and found nothing unusual taking place.

Linda Beck also took the stand again and explained how she was afraid for her life before the rally took place. During the first trial, and again in the second, she testified that she took a regular vacation on December 17^th. During today’s testimony, Beck claimed she would not normally have taken a vacation and only did so, two weeks before the rally, because she was afraid of the people in her town.

The point was made by the prosecution that the idea of occupying the refuge was not even brought up until December 29^th, nearly two weeks after Beck left on vacation.
Beck also said that, as she was so afraid of these gun-toting militia, that she went out and bought a gun herself. However, she did not learn of the takeover until after it happened.
It does seem a bit odd that neither of these witnesses mentioned any of this during the first trial.

AUSA Knight also managed to play part of the OPB/John Sepulvado interview with Ryan Bundy. This was allowed by Judge Brown without any authentication being provided.
When the rebuttal case was finished, AUSA Knight went into his closing statements, “This case is about 4 defendants that went too far.”

He spent quite a bit of time explaining, even stressing, to the jurors that the government does not have to show any formal agreement to have a conspiracy. The government does not have to show that anyone was even threatened. The jurors were told to only worry about an agreement, and that could be implied or inferred.

Knight also reminded the jurors that acts by Ammon or Ryan Bundy can be used against these four defendants, as that is part of the conspiracy.

Knight also showed the video, again, of the protesters firing guns at the boat launch. This has already been discussed to have been orchestrated by the FBI Informant Fabio Minoggio, aka John Killman. But, AUSA Knight would like everyone to believe that their were no Informants in the video.

Knight’s narrative did not fit the testimony.

Knight stated that Ammon Bundy, Blaine Cooper and BJ Soper all testified that they discussed AND AGREED to the takeover of the Malheur Refuge on December 29^th.
That is not what BJ Soper testified to, as he stated it was tossed out as one of many ideas, however, it was not agreed upon.

Knight also made the stretch that since Jason Patrick was sitting in a chair that did not belong to him he was obviously a leader in the conspiracy.

Each of the defense attorneys were given time to make their case to the jury. They all hit their stride and made good points in favor of their clients.

The highlight of the day was Michele Kohler, attorney for Duane Ehmer. She pointed out a video introduced by the prosecution. The video depicts Blaine Cooper, Ammon Bundy, LaVoy Finicum, as well as several others. They are talking about making a hard stand at the refuge and wanting others to join them.

What is interesting is what most people did not see on the video.

Behind the men talking at the refuge is a US Mail vehicle driving onto the refuge property and delivering the mail. Amazing! This Federal Employee is NOT afraid to come onto the refuge property and do their job!

When Ethan Knight returned for his rebuttal closing arguments, he told the jurors that if they had any doubt, “It is not a reasonable doubt.”

In discussing the two ‘Navy Seals’ he reminded the jury that they “are instructed” that informants cannot be a part of a conspiracy. Basically, he is telling the jury that the informants are to be considered a non-issue.

He continued to hit at the points made by the defense attorneys. The exception was the US Mail vehicle that Kohler brought up. This is the only issue that Knight could not refute.
It sounds like this woman hit a home run.

The case is officially with the jury and their deliberations will begin in the morning.

The Bench Trial for the remaining misdemeanor charges will also take place tomorrow.

Share this:

• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• 115
  Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  115
• Click to share on Google+ (Opens in new window)
• Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)

Brad Steffy, Oregon Wide Open, message for Oregon's governor, Kate Brown. He doesn't mince words. I wonder if Dave Ward is feeling any guilt?

https://www.facebook.com/oregonwideo...88729121320420

OwO

March 1 at 2:15pm
WHEN A GOVERNOR IMPOSES DEATH

Brad Steffey
February 2016

Congratulations Governor Kate Brown, you're famous!

People from all over America are speaking of you. I'm sure you're not bothered in the least by this Southern sentiment because they're beneath you but if you weren't so beyond the average American you might hear some wisdom in his scathing review of your ridiculous strategies.

It's prophetic how someone 3,000 miles away called you out on your decision well before the eventual outcome but yet so many right here cheered you for your haste and intolerance.

Now as you begin to realize your error in judgement and wonder how to undo what you have done you begin to recognize you may have imposed a life sentence upon yourself. A life of guilt and regret.

By now you have learned of the man you killed. You didn't bother to look into who he was before you killed him. He was simply a target. Someone you were told was a threat. A hostile Militant causing fear in Burns. You were played like a fiddle and now it's becoming real to you. You've seen his Children mourning, you've learned what an amazing, kind, peaceful and gracious Man he was.

Alone at night, it's starting to haunt you. You're trying to justify it and align your excuses but you're beginning to realize you can't convince even yourself.

You've recently started wondering, what if? What if you had allowed it to end peacefully? What if you actually made an effort to talk with them and understand or even sent someone to learn what reality was? What if you trusted your own police agency to deal with it and to address the issues that were causing the problem?

What if the Redress of Grievance were considered and it was found that there indeed WAS a miscarriage if justice. You probably haven't even looked at it. That these peaceful Men and Women were simply crying out for those who were YOUR Citizens and who were under attack by a ruthless monster.

You allowed your own good people to be abused, tormented, and victimized. Then you called upon the same thugs that so brutally attacked your Citizens to kill those who came from afar to render aid.

You put your own law enforcement officials at risk. First with a hidden roadblock. They were all huddled behind the trucks blocking the path of a Man desperately trying to find safe harbor in John Day. Your boys had already fired upon him and the 18 year old young lady in his truck. You saw to it that he ran for his life and into the awaiting funnel of death and destruction.

You saw to it that he had no options of peaceful resolve. You left him only one option, carnage.

Were it not for his integrity and quick thinking, you would have several of your own to add to the those who perished, as he could not stop. Had he not swerved to avoid the collision you assured would occur, all who were behind those trucks would have perished.

Whomever orchestrated this roadblock did so with mass casualties in mind. They were willing to sacrifice their own officers to get the end result they wanted and needed. They wanted LaVoy Finicum to be a villain and to finish the narrative that he was a risk and a danger to society.

The men who were ordered to stand their ground behind those trucks should be calling for your resignation. They were victims of your scheme as well.

What do you expect them to do when a speeding truck rounds the turn headed right for them and with no ability to stop. Maybe they were eager to kill or maybe they were just taking orders and put in harms way. Maybe they were victimized as well and used as pawns to carry out your orders. Maybe they're starting to realize what you've done to THEM as they now have to face scrutiny and reconcile their actions.

I don't believe that they wake up in the morning with the intent and desire to kill a saintly man,a young girl, a cowboy and a Mother. But yet you placed them in an impossible situation. You sacrificed them and you killed Mr. Finicum with intent.

There is no plausible deniability. You made your intent clear with the letters you sent to the white house. Why were you in such a hurry? Why were you so intolerant of peace? Why couldn't they spread their message of freedom? What is the harm in spreading a message of peace and freedom Ms. Brown? If that is so offensive to you as to take a life to stop it, what is your scheme?

Where there is concealment and intolerance, there is evil, just like where there is smoke there is fire. Those who were killed and incarcerated were transparent, sharing and peaceful.

You and your crew were and are hostile, covert, and refuse to give us access to the evidence. You won't give us audio of the scene, video from the numerous helmet cams, access to the truck or photo's of it's riddled shell. You pretend to give us an "unedited" video but even that is a lie and has been badly dubbed.

You even try to pass a bill concealing the names of those who killed!

You have only one option and that is to own your mistake, or your vindictive intent. Accept that you erred and ask forgiveness.

Undoubtedly, you will not do so and try to stand on the crumbling ground of your lubricious and decaying foundation.

As you filter all of this, you may find temporary solace in denial and your paid mistresses who assure you.

But at the end of each day you no doubt wince when the reality of your condemnation sweeps over you, and you realize there is no escape. I wonder what it's like to suffocate in your own fear as you realize you have the blood of a saint on your hands and you wonder, what is to happen to me now?

The bench trial is over with exception of written briefs. Judge's berdict not expected before next week


https://scontent.fbog2-1.fna.fbcdn.n...4f&oe=596B6580

Redoubt News

1 hr ·

Malheur II - Bench trial is done with exceptions for written briefs. Those due Friday. Her verdict not expected before next week.
Judge Brown set the bar higher than expected. AUSA Barrow was scrambling. I have hope.


10 Likes 17 Shares

John Lamb Noon update for the Malheur Misdemeanor trial. Jury is still deliberating

http://youtu.be/RRD0IeOSfZo

https://youtu.be/RRD0IeOSfZo

Judge Brown Presides over Malhuer Bench Trial. Prosecutor did not seem prepared.


Malheur II – UPDATE – Bench Trial

March 8, 2017 BLM, Constitution, Featured, Oregon

http://www.avantlink.com/gbi/11653/2...9211/image.jpg

https://i2.wp.com/redoubtnews.com/wp...size=641%2C495

Malheur II UPDATE

Bench Trial

By Shari Dovale

Today’s court proceedings saw the Bench trial for the 4 remaining defendants in the second Malheur Protest trial in Portland.
Judge Anna Brown presided over the remaining misdemeanor charges while the jury deliberates the felony charges against Jason Patrick, Duane Ehmer, Darryl Thorn and Jake Ryan.

AUSA Geoff Barrow did not seem prepared for the higher standard that Judge Brown expected.

Judge Brown set a much higher bar than anyone expected. She was not happy that the prosecution treated the case as “a given”. She required them to specify exhibits and evidence for each charge and each defendant.

Charges include trespassing against all four, The defense attorneys were much better prepared for today.

When asked how Jake Ryan knew that it was not public access, Barrow sputtered and replied, “Everyone knows that it was Federal property. ”

Jason Patrick took the stand briefly to explain why he cut a strand of barbed wire fencing. He believed that he had permission from the Puckett family, the bordering property owner.

AUSA Barrow just focused on a video in which Patrick used the term “foreign entity”, which Barrow believed referred to the Federal Government. Patrick stuck to his statements, which seem to upset Barrow.

As the proceedings continued, Barrows continued to falter. When asked by Judge Brown to list specific exhibits to make a point, Barrows could not name them. He had to ask for more time.

Though the prosecution was not alone in their belief that this bench trial would have been an excersize in going through the motions, Judge Brown surprised everyone. She seemed to take this trial as seriously as the defendants, and much more than the prosecution.

Written briefs are due to Judge Brown by noon on Friday, at which point she will deliberate before issuing a written ruling.


Share this:

• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• 51
  Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  51
• Click to share on Google+ (Opens in new window)
• Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)

Malheur Protest Trial 2 Begins Jury Selection #MPT2February 14, 2017In "BLM"
MANY *Updates* on the Political Prisoners in Nevada and OregonFebruary 3, 2017In "BLM"
Malheur II – Judge Stops Reporter From TestifyingFebruary 25, 2017In "BLM"

John Lamb end of day update Malhuer Protest Trial. March 8

http://youtu.be/DrxcJcSDBRQ

https://youtu.be/DrxcJcSDBRQ

RangeFire ~ Malhueur Trial Update. Reprint from The Oregonian

http://rangefire.us/2017/03/08/updat...tandoff-trial/

Update in the Second Oregon Standoff Trial


March 8, 2017 - Government/Politics, Oregon Standoff - Tagged: BLM, Bundy, federal, Malheur, Oregon, Oregon Standoff, Range, RANGEfire - no comments


The Second Oregon Standoff Trial has now gone to the jury — at least the felony conspiracy and firearms charges. Judge Anna Brown refused to allow the jury to hear the subsequent misdemeanor charges, including trespass, so the misdemeanor trial continues, with Judge Brown hearing additional evidence and arguments on the misdemeanor charges, as the jury continues to deliberate the felony charges.

This update from Maxine Bernstein in the Oregonian seems to capture the current status of the case fairly well:
Lawyers vigorously challenge misdemeanor charges against refuge occupiers
— by Maxine Bernstein

http://rangefire.us/wp-content/uploa...-2-300x206.jpg

Defense lawyers Wednesday vigorously challenged misdemeanor charges against four defendants accused in the takeover of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge as the judge prodded a prosecutor to make his case against each by citing specific evidence and exhibits.

The defense argued that the federal regulation involving trespass at a national wildlife refuge is vague, that defendants never received formal notice they were trespassing and that no evidence exists that the four saw trespassing signs on the property.

They also said a white Dodge Durango, a green all-terrain vehicle, an excavator and front-loader that defendants used didn’t have U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service decals on them.

Prosecutors countered that the evidence is “overwhelming” and the defense team’s arguments defy common sense.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Geoffrey Barrow initially handed the court a chart outlining the charges and allegations against each defendant but the judge wanted more.

“It’s not the court’s duty to search for the evidence,” U.S. District Judge Anna J. Brown told Barrow.

As a jury began deliberating in the morning on the felony charges against the four refuge occupiers, Brown heard additional testimony and reviewed evidence on the misdemeanor charges against the same defendants.

Jason Patrick, Duane Ehmer, Jake Ryan and Darryl Thorn are each charged with trespassing and tampering with government vehicles and equipment.

Patrick also is charged with destruction and removal of public property, accused of cutting part of a barbed-wire fence on the refuge property. Ehmer is also charged with removal of government and private property, accused of removing a pouch containing refuge gas cards, an employee’s ID card and cash and checks belonging to the nonprofit Friends of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge.

Brown gave prosecutors until noon Friday to file a supplemental legal memo on its case. She’ll issue her findings and verdicts on the misdemeanors in writing, she said.

Her ruling may or may not coincide with the jury’s verdicts on the felony conspiracy, weapons and depredation of government property charges.

After they began deliberating, the jurors sent a question to the judge, asking for a transcript of the trial. The judge wrote back that an official transcript isn’t currently available.

The federal government lodged the misdemeanor charges against the defendants in late December after last fall’s across-the-board acquittals of occupation leaders Ammon Bundy, his older brother, Ryan Bundy and five co-defendants on felony charges.

For the trespass allegation, Barrow showed the court photos of a sign in front of fish biologist Linda Beck’s office and other historic stone buildings at refuge headquarters that read, “Closed to Public Access.”

He also showed a photo of the information kiosk across the street from the main entrance to the refuge, which holds a white sign that lists some of the refuge regulations: “Day use only: The refuge is open daily from sunrise to sunset.” It also cited among the prohibited acts: all-terrain vehicles, fires and camping, “which there clearly was” during the 41-day occupation, Barrow said.

He argued that all four defendants were shown in photographs in the refuge bunkhouse, which wasn’t a public area, and several did armed guard duty at the front gate or watchtower.

“They knew they were not authorized to be there because their purpose was to close it off to workers,” Barrow said. “They know it’s a federal wildlife sanctuary, and they’re occupying it.”

The judge advised Barrow, “You need to be defendant specific,” so the court could make a ruling beyond reasonable doubt.

So Barrow showed the court a photo of the firehouse, for example, and pointed to Thorn and Ryan, who were listening to a talk by Ammon Bundy. “It was just not a public area. Their presence there is indicative of trespass,” he said. He reminded the judge of a late Jan. 26, 2016, video in the bunkhouse kitchen, where Patrick, Thorn and Ryan were present.

He pulled up a photo of the front gate’s sign that read, “Refuge Open Sunrise to Sunset.”
Defense lawyers countered that the government never proved any of the defendants saw the signs presented as evidence.

Defense lawyer Jesse Merrithew, representing Ryan, said the general trespass provision in federal regulations governing national wildlife refuges is unclear. It states: “No person shall trespass, including but not limited to entering, occupying, using, or being upon, any national wildlife refuge, except as specifically authorized in this subchapter C or in other applicable Federal regulations.”

“It’s simply unclear what conduct is prescribed by these regulations,” Merrithew said. “It’s not clear the signs coincide with the regulations.”

The judge asked the government to file a legal brief by noon Friday to set out the legal standard for trespass before she can rule.

Merrithew further argued that Ryan, who arrived at the refuge on Jan. 16, 2016, came after the occupiers already had changed the front sign to Harney County Resource Center and there was no evidence that he or anyone else noticed the information kiosk sign on the other side of the road.

Defense lawyers further contended that when a truck blocking the front gate moved out of the way to let visitors onto the refuge, it obscured the “Refuge Open Sunrise to Sunset Sign.”

Defense lawyers Michele Kohler and Marc Friedman argued there was no evidence that anyone told their clients, Ehmer and Thorn, that they weren’t allowed on the refuge, nor were there trespass signs to suggest that what they were doing was illegal.

“It’s not the court’s duty to search for the evidence.” -U.S. District Judge Anna J. Brown


“There was no notice of trespass that was served on anyone,” Friedman said.

Barrow shot back that no notice is required. He called the defense suggestions that no one looked at the signs or the front sign was somehow blocked “simply not credible.”

With Patrick accused of driving a white Dodge Durango on the refuge property, his lawyer pointed out that the SUV had no license plate and no logo or markings on it to identify it as a government vehicle.

“Defendants were on notice all equipment belonged to the refuge,” Barrow responded. “They had every reason to know it didn’t belong to them.”

Andrew Kohlmetz, Patrick’s standby lawyer, countered, “That’s simply not true.” He added that a number of private vehicles were left at the refuge after the arrests of the occupation leaders on Jan. 26, 2016.

“Mr. Patrick was part of the initial team and would have seen all the vehicles that were there and would have seen all the refuge equipment,” Barrow responded.

Regarding the count charging Patrick with tampering with a government vehicle, the judge asked the prosecutor, “That’s it?”

“Yes,” Barrow replied, and moved on.

At one point, Barrow slipped and referred to “Finicum’s arrest” during the hearing, and the judge pointed out his error. Occupation spokesman Robert “LaVoy” Finicum was never arrested but fatally shot by state police after he sped away from a stop outside the refuge.

Lawyers for Ehmer and Ryan, accused of tampering with a refuge excavator to dig trenches, argued the Caterpillar equipment had no markings. The prosecutor showed a video of it, which provided no further evidence of any refuge or government property insignia.

Barrow asked to move on, adding that he would provide further documentation to the court.

On another count of tampering with equipment, Thorn is accused of driving a front-end loader on the property. His lawyer argued that the heavy truck was actually a backhoe.

“The fact is there was no way an individual could know what was refuge property and what was private property,” Friedman said.

Patrick briefly took the stand during the proceeding. When he was sworn in and asked if he’d testify truthfully, he said, “To the point they are allowed in these proceedings, yes.” The judge asked him to answer appropriately. “Yes I will tell the truth,” he said.

Patrick said he overheard a conversation between Ammon Bundy and the owner of a property adjoining the refuge. He said he thought the property owner had given his approval to cut part of a barbed-wire fence bordering his property because he planned to put in a gate.

In cross-examination, Barrow asked, “You knew the fence belonged to the federal government?”
“No sir,” Patrick said.

Barrow played a video of Patrick cutting part of the fence, and explaining to reporters and others that “some foreign entity .. .just roped off” someone’s property.

Patrick asserted he was describing general instances in that video, “but not that particular fence.”
“I don’t know who put up that fence,” Patrick said.

Barrow argued that Patrick’s testimony was false. Tim Puckett, the rancher whose cattle graze private rangeland adjoining the refuge, told reporters in January 2016 that he didn’t give Ammon Bundy or anyone permission to enter his ranch to touch the fence.

Patrick’s lawyer suggested that “the snipping of one strand of barbed wire” didn’t amount to significant damage.
Ehmer, accused of removing a refuge maroon pouch from the property, thought the contents contained donations for the occupiers, his lawyer said. It had a sticky note attached that read “New Money,” Kohler said. Ehmer’s intent in taking the pouch was “to try to recover the cash donations.”

The pouch contained refuge gas cards, an employee’s ID card, cash and checks belonging to the nonprofit Friends of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge.

Barrow dismissed Kohler’s argument. Under her scenario, he argued, someone accused of burglarizing a home could later claim, “Oh, I thought that was my accomplice’s cash.”

“It simply isn’t credible,” he said. “Hiding the items from the FBI suggests he knew he was up to no good.”

— Maxine Bernstein


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

John Lamb ~ End of day report Malheur jury deliberations March 9

http://youtu.be/g0aYDARhD8k

https://youtu.be/g0aYDARhD8k

Guilty / Not guilty verdicts

https://scontent.fbog2-1.fna.fbcdn.n...99&oe=5967DF56

Analysis of verdicts

http://youtu.be/_q3uGscESa4

https://youtu.be/_q3uGscESa4

The government shysters

http://youtu.be/0c2AP5aWGFU

https://youtu.be/0c2AP5aWGFU

Gavin Seim
https://youtu.be/IYi6aEks-38

Twitter
https://plus.google.com/communities/...90970244808665

Jeff Sessions has asked all US attornies to tender their resignations

https://plus.google.com/photos/photo...3-9a7ea35faab1
https://plus.google.com/photos/photo...3-9a7ea35faab1

They say they will appeal. I don't know much about procedures for setting up a good case for appeal. I don't think these four guys challenged the courts jurisdiction like Ammon Bundy did. Had they done so I believe they would get the case reversed on appeal. I have no idea haow much time will pass before an appeal can be heard. I guess they can appeal any giilty verdicts from the ebnch trial also.

John Lamb ~ The veridict is in

http://youtu.be/TxtgxrMrcJU

http://youtu.be/TxtgxrMrcJU

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

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

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 10^th 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:

• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• 139
  Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  139
• Click to share on Google+ (Opens in new window)
• Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)

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"

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

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

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

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.

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 8^th of March to respond to what I file with the court. Then on the 10^th 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:

• Email
• Print
• Facebook
  91
• Google
• Pinterest
• Reddit
• Twitter
• More

Like this:



Tags: Ammon Bundy, Burns Oregon, Constitution, courts, demonization, FBI, government, Harney County, Honor, informants, press
Category: Articles | Comment (RSS) | Trackback

Link to Jake Ryans response to govt. supplemental memorandum in the misdemeanor bench trial

https://issuu.com/maxinebernstein/do...anor/1?ff=true

Feds Motion to Dismiss charges against Ammon Bundy's attorney, Marcus Mumford

http://youtu.be/LHlAjbB-X-E

https://youtu.be/LHlAjbB-X-E

Motion to Dismiss Filed For Fed's Charges Against Marcus Mumford - Ammon Bundy's Lawyer
Lo K 30 views

https://yt3.ggpht.com/-PxWb3-ZdzXM/A...ffff/photo.jpg
SUBSCRIBE

527

5

0
Published on Mar 13, 2017Great news! They finally came to their senses and have filed to drop the charges against Marcus Mumford, Ammon Bundy's lawyer, who was assaulted and tazed by Marshals. Mumford was asking questions of the court after the NOT GUILTY verdict on Oct. 27, 2016. Here's the Oregonian's report - http://www.oregonlive.com/oregon-stan... Here's the video of what happened - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89TQ-... Here's Shawna Cox describing what she saw in the courtroom when it happened - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXq7a... FINALLY they did something RIGHT! FREE OUR PATRIOT POLITICAL PRISONERS! God Bless America!

• Category
  
  • News & Politics
  
  
• License
  
  • Standard YouTube License

https://scontent.fbog2-1.fna.fbcdn.n...d5&oe=5931CBFA

Special Attorney for the US Attorney General and Acting US Attorney, they must be Jeff Sessions replacements

Ammon Bundy video (audio only) message:
A Message From Ammon Bundy - Support Grant County Sheriff Glenn Palmer, he is being threatened. PLEASE KEEP SHARING, it keeps the message alive!
https://www.facebook.com/bundyranch/...type=3&theater


Edit: After reading all the comments I see this is dated March 13, 2016, one yearago

Regarding the guilty verdict for impeding a federal officer someone asked if the Refuge was closed for the winter. Thom Davis testified in the trial it was closed. A Lifelong Burns, Oregon resident wrote this:

Kim Fritz From the way I understood it the Refuge manager closed MWR prior to the rally due to rumors, however I also heard testimony that " they don't go down there in Winter"...
My thoughts are with as brutal a storm that came through the workers would have stayed home regardless.
Like · 5 · 13 hrs · Edited


https://scontent.fbog2-1.fna.fbcdn.n...8d&oe=596C5763

Sunda Male
I have lived in Burns Oregon for 70 years.
The Refudge is ALWAYS closed for the winter
Like · 3 · 8 hrs




How can you impede someone from working at a location when it is 'Closed for the Winter'?

My impression from kelli's testimony is the Lieyers for the defense were bought off, to make sure the scumbag feds got their pound of flesh.

We live in a very sick society, one where scum rises to the top.

Daryl Thorn message after the verdict

http://youtu.be/-Q1BQeaDLpg

https://youtu.be/-Q1BQeaDLpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by monty

Feds Motion to Dismiss charges against Ammon Bundy's attorney, Marcus Mumford

http://youtu.be/LHlAjbB-X-E

https://youtu.be/LHlAjbB-X-E

Motion to Dismiss Filed For Fed's Charges Against Marcus Mumford - Ammon Bundy's Lawyer
Lo K 30 views

https://yt3.ggpht.com/-PxWb3-ZdzXM/A...ffff/photo.jpg
SUBSCRIBE

527

5

0
Published on Mar 13, 2017Great news! They finally came to their senses and have filed to drop the charges against Marcus Mumford, Ammon Bundy's lawyer, who was assaulted and tazed by Marshals. Mumford was asking questions of the court after the NOT GUILTY verdict on Oct. 27, 2016. Here's the Oregonian's report - http://www.oregonlive.com/oregon-stan... Here's the video of what happened - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89TQ-... Here's Shawna Cox describing what she saw in the courtroom when it happened - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXq7a... FINALLY they did something RIGHT! FREE OUR PATRIOT POLITICAL PRISONERS! God Bless America!

• Category
  
  • News & Politics
  
  
• License
  
  • Standard YouTube License

https://scontent.fbog2-1.fna.fbcdn.n...d5&oe=5931CBFA

Special Attorney for the US Attorney General and Acting US Attorney, they must be Jeff Sessions replacements

---

Something I never thought about:

https://scontent.fbog2-2.fna.fbcdn.n...14&oe=59712A94

Vickey Gray The U.S. Attorney's needed Mr. Mumford out of the way or unable to communicate with the 2nd trial. If the people could have had a real defense attorney not "connected" to the Oregon federal district, a fair trial would have occurred.
Like · 3 · Yesterday at 7:08am

Bj Soper was visited by an FBI agent to instruct him how to testify in the Malhuer Trial. This is the letter to the DA. The agent entered his property, passed the No Tresspasing signs after Soper had told him on the telephone he had no intention of speaking with him.

Soper's landlady, in the comments, she will be happy to file a complaint. Soper probably has other options since his sheriff refuses to work with him.

There is no end to the corruption in this communist infested government.

https://www.facebook.com/bj.soper.5/...24083707659851

https://scontent.fbog2-2.fna.fbcdn.n...1b&oe=5926BD11

Bj Soper

Still looking for some accountability from law enforcement... they want respect? Act respectfully.. my letter to my DA on the actions of the local FBI and inaction of my sheriff.


Mr. Hummel,

I write you today out of frustration. On march 2nd of this year, FBI agent Chad Lapp willfully and intentionally violated my demands to not trespass on my property. He walked passed a closed gate and 3 posted no trespassing signs "to leave a card" at my door. This is the abbreviated version of events of the day, and I would be happy to go into further detail.

I have contacted the sheriff who refuses to accept a complaint on the issue but rather chooses to "pass it on to the supervisor" as he stated. To date the supervisor has ignored and nothing has been done to address my complaint. I expressed my displeasure to the sheriff on the action taken and he has since ignored my attempts to communicate.


Here is why I intend to pursue what may seem little to you, but is not to me.


1. The request to talk to me was to discuss the malheur court proceeding and testimony given that I was named in. I had already told agent Lapp I had no intentions of talking to him. Yet he proceeds to trespass on my property anyway.


2. Agent Lapp told me that "the court can compel me to talk", and that if I talked to him first, he could tell me the questions that will be asked so that I can be prepared to answer". Sir, since when is it the job of the FBI to help prosecutors and the court? This was and is tampering with a witness and coercion.


3. I have a trail cam that I set up the day prior to the trespass to photo entry on my property. It just so happens the memory card was missing the same day agent Lapp violated my rights.


4. My driveway is roughly 150 yards long. I have a secondary perimeter fence around my home and a covered patio that agent Lapp felt the need to walk through. Not only did he "leave a card" at the front door, he walked around to the back door and did the same. He willfully searched my property without warrant. Sir I leave my doors unlocked at my home. I live in a safe place. For all I know he could have gone inside and looked around. I mean he walked past a closed gate, 3 no trespassing signs, 150 yards of driveway, why would an unlocked door stop him?


Sir, my issue is more than my privacy and 4th amendment being violated. If I were to do the same thing as agent Lapp, I would be cited if the owner pressed forward. There would be no "supervisor" to pass the buck onto. Agent Lapp is not special and is expected to follow the law just as any other citizen. And I also expect my sheriff to act accordingly when a citizen he is elected to serve requests action to be taken.


Sir, I thank you for your time and await your reply.


Sincerely

Bj Soper

Oregon's communist lesbian governor.

https://scontent.fbog2-2.fna.fbcdn.n...61&oe=595B4037

A letter to the President from Jason Patrick posted on his facebook. I assume he mailed a copy.



https://scontent.fbog2-2.fna.fbcdn.n...1c&oe=5960966F


Jason Patrick

17 hrs ·

Dear president Trump,
I personally am a newly convicted felon under your administration. My crime, standing up to raise awareness of the grievous, unethical, overbearing, tyrannicaly terroristic treatment of the Hammond family of Oregon, namely Dwight Hammond.

Due to my efforts and the efforts of others I realize you are fully aware of this families current situation and yet you have said and done exactly nothing about it.

This is what I have come to expect from government and contributes directly to the events that transpired.

What are you waiting for? Will you say or do anything for Dwight Hammond?

I watch as you you berated the "fake news" as it pertains to you personally. Meanwhile under your administration I've obtained a felony based on "fake charges" fed by "fake news" for the soul purpose only to bring to YOU and YOUR administration's understanding (and anyone else who has ears) the atrocities that happened to the Hammonds.

Because of my efforts you are now fully aware. Yet, you've done nothing for them. For this I am sickened.

BE DIFFERENT! DO SOMETHING! Do it now. Dwight Hammond should be home with his wife and family.

Trump administration felon,

Jason Patrick

Of course the law enforcement community will spin the narrative for the feds. They know who butters their bread.

Contrary to what the media spin and the LEO testimony says, Wayne Hage told my brother and me he went down to Bunkerville fully expecting to see rifles and pistols and an aggressive militia. He said he was very surprised that the were very professional an did not allow any wild behavior.

https://thenevadaindependent.com/art...ranch-standoff

The Nevada Independent - Metro comes through once more for federal officers in Bundy ranch standoff

March 12, 2017
Metro’s finest again provided timely backup for embattled Bureau of Land Management officers.


This time they weren’t outside Bunkerville defending a desert wash packed with rowdy protesters and impounded cattle. They were in U.S. District Judge Gloria Navarro’s courtroom testifying about the tense atmosphere and imminent danger present during an April 12, 2014 standoff between supporters of Bunkerville rancher Cliven Bundy and federal law enforcement trying to protect a BLM roundup.


Although no shots were fired that day, federal officers previously testified that alarming investigative intelligence, combined with the guns present in the agitated crowd and para-military dress of some of the protesters, made them afraid for their safety. Six defendants the government describes as Bundy’s gunmen are on trial accused of threatening and intimidating BLM and U.S. Parks Service law enforcement officers.


In recent weeks, on cross examination,the defense has managed to portray the federal cops as inexperienced wannabes who lacked judgment and overreacted under stress. After the decision was made to discontinue the roundup, some of BLM rangers and Park police initially refused orders to put away their weapons, stand down and pack up. Some of their responses under oath made them appear more fearful than professional.


But the defense this past week had little success with Metro Sgt. Tom Jenkins and none at all with Sheriff Joseph Lombardo.


Jenkins brought more than two decades of law enforcement experience into court. He’s worked many protests, a few of which have turned violent. Attorneys could doubt his memory of the day’s events, but there was no questioning his resume.


Jenkins’ day on April 12 began as a member of an escort unit whose duty was to provide security for Sheriff Doug Gillespie. The sergeant wound up supervising the riot skirmish line police threw out in an effort to keep the protest from degrading into violence.


He noted the weapons present in the crowd, but his concern really grew when they begin being waved around and pointed in the direction of law enforcement. If you want to get a cop’s attention, just wave a gun at him.
“From the time we got there until the time we left,” Jenkins replied when asked how often protesters flashed their handguns and rifles Metro’s way.


And although lengthy recorded exhibits didn’t always concur with the sergeant’s memory of the subject, he was unflappable on the stand under incisive cross examination. When asked to elaborate on those who were doing the pointing, Jenkins reduced his description to “White males, pointing weapons at the convoy.”


And he appeared to set the defense team on its heels when he allowed that not only were his officers concerned for their safety, “They were scared. They were crying.”


He also said the officers wanted to retrieve their semi-automatic rifles from nearby police vehicles and don their flak vests, but were instructed not to by Assistant Sheriff Tom Roberts in an effort to keep from escalating tensions as the crowd grew and got louder. Testimony notwithstanding, video presented during the trial shows most of the protesters were unarmed.
But of course those weren’t the people police were watching.


When Lombardo’s took the stand Thursday, he reminded those who have followed his career that the public needn’t worry about his leadership skills. An assistant sheriff at the time of the standoff, Lombardo accompanied Sheriff Doug Gillespie to Bundy’s makeshift stage outside his ranch in an attempt to cool the heated rhetoric and avoid bloodshed. He stood patiently during Bundy’s windy grandstanding and impossible demands — disarm all federal law enforcement and bulldoze the entrance booths at the region’s federal conservation and recreation areas — and then returned to Las Vegas believing the botched cattle roundup was reaching a peaceful resolution.


For the first time jurors saw video of the elder Bundy holding forth with armed, uniformed members of the Arizona State Militia, who call themselves the “Praetorian Guard,” standing guard. Dozens of his hundreds of followers were armed with handguns and rifles.


When Bundy instructed his followers to go get his cattle, Lombardo’s day grew complicated and dangerous. He attempted to negotiate with one of Bundy’s sons, Dave Bundy, in a plea for patience and enough time to allow the BLM to make a safe exit.


It was Lombardo, jurors learned, who essentially put his career on the line to overrule BLM Supervisory Special Agent Dan Love and press for the release of the impounded cattle during the height of the armed standoff’s tensions.
“He advised me they were federal cattle and it was his decision,” Lombardo said.
Fortunately, Lombardo prevailed.


The sheriff estimated it would have taken 500 officers to fully secure the area, and he had just 50. Concerned that even an accidental discharge of a firearm would set off a shootout, Lombardo and his troops worked to de-escalate the scene and back federal law enforcement away from a gate that had become the last point of separation between increasingly agitated protesters and the officials sent to round up and remove Bundy’s trespassing cattle from federal public lands.


A cop since 1988, Lombardo made it clear he feared for the safety of the officers and protesters in the highly charged atmosphere. They don’t call in the SWAT team for traffic tickets.


Led in the courtroom by Assistant U.S. Attorney Steven Myhre, the prosecution appears to be finishing the long process of entering most of the voluminous photographic, video and audio into the record. The foundation of its case appears set.
The testimony of Jenkins and Lombardo was bound to hit home with jurors.


Bring guns to a peaceful protest, and you’re bound to get everyone’s attention.


John L. Smith is a longtime Las Vegas journalist and author.

Contact him at jlnevadasmith@gmail.com. On Twitter: @jlnevadasmith.