Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 66

Thread: Federal Court Jurisdiction as stated by the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure

  1. #51
    Iridium monty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    8,940
    Thanks
    7,783
    Thanked 8,331 Times in 5,107 Posts

    Re: Federal Court Jurisdiction as stated by the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure

    Quote Originally Posted by Tumbleweed View Post
    I hadn't heard that his blood was found inside his vehicle and that's pretty interesting if it was.
    I think Ryan Bundy wrote in one of his court filings that LaVoy was shot before he got out of the truck. It may have been Shawna Cox. I will try to find that paper again and post it.
    The only thing declared necessary in the Constitution & Bill of Rights is the #2A Militia of the several States.
    “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a freeState”
    https://ConstitutionalMilitia.org


  2. The Following User Says Thank You to monty For This Useful Post:

    Tumbleweed (2nd September 2016)

  3. #52
    Iridium monty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    8,940
    Thanks
    7,783
    Thanked 8,331 Times in 5,107 Posts

    Re: Federal Court Jurisdiction as stated by the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure

    https://shastalantern.net/2016/03/10...-was-murdered/

    6th Finicum’s vehicle began, once again, taking live fire this time from .223 rifle fire at the exact moment the vehicle crested the corner and approached the ambush. Finicum was never provided the opportunity to slow his vehicle before Law Enforcement began using deadly force, .223 rounds were found to have penetrated the windshield, hood and radiator prior to LaVoy ditching his vehicle into the snow bank. This is confirmed by the FBI drone surveillance video, the Cox cellphone video and officer’s testimony. In testimony the officer that discharged his weapon stated he felt justified in using deadly force due to “It was clear to me, the speed the truck was traveling…was traveling at a speed which I knew from my training and experience, it was…it became apparent to me based off my training and experience as a crash, you know, technician, and overall time as a police officer, I knew there was…it had crossed the threshold of being able to stop prior to…that’s when I felt the use of force was my only option…” In short, the officer discharged his weapon, exercising his intent to implement deadly force and justified that action, because in his training and expertise there was not enough time for the suspect vehicle to stop safely. This confirms point 5 that the roadblock was illegal and intended as an ambush.
    The only thing declared necessary in the Constitution & Bill of Rights is the #2A Militia of the several States.
    “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a freeState”
    https://ConstitutionalMilitia.org


  4. The Following User Says Thank You to monty For This Useful Post:

    Tumbleweed (2nd September 2016)

  5. #53
    Iridium monty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    8,940
    Thanks
    7,783
    Thanked 8,331 Times in 5,107 Posts

    Re: Federal Court Jurisdiction as stated by the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure

    Letter 7b Ed and Elaine Brown, Dr. Edwardo Rivera, Cheek defense, Article III Judges . . .

    Article III Courts, Article IV Courts video on jurisdiction, but daily motions are denied in the Article IV Adminstrative Courts - Bundy Trials, a prime example.



    https://youtu.be/ifYtJY_D80E
    The only thing declared necessary in the Constitution & Bill of Rights is the #2A Militia of the several States.
    “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a freeState”
    https://ConstitutionalMilitia.org


  6. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to monty For This Useful Post:

    Bigjon (17th December 2016),Tumbleweed (17th December 2016)

  7. #54
    Iridium monty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    8,940
    Thanks
    7,783
    Thanked 8,331 Times in 5,107 Posts

    Re: Federal Court Jurisdiction as stated by the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure

    Burns, Oregon ~ Environmentalist groups sue to have Hammond grazing rights revoked.

    Activists Sue BLM To Block Hammond’s Grazing Permits

    Three environmental activist groups have filed suit to block the renewal of a 10-year grazing permit for Hammond Ranches Inc., operated by Dwight Hammond Jr., and his son Steven Hammond.
    The complaint, filed May 13, 2019, in U.S. District Court in Pendleton, OR, was filed by Western Watersheds Project, the Center for Biological Diversity and Wildearth Guardians. Defendants were named as the U.S. interior secretary, the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and the BLM’s district manager in Burns, OR. The complaint argues that then-Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke’s renewal of the grazing permit after the Hammonds were issued pardons violated federal administrative regulations because it failed to consider the Hammond’s unsatisfactory record.

    Continued

    Hammond’s salvation lies in the fact the U.S. District Courts are Article I bankruptcy courts/Article IV territorial courts. As such they lack jurisdiction to hear this case.

    Hal Anthony/Jefferson Mining District made this argument to Bundys who refused to follow his advice as Hammonds are likely to do by relying on the advice of bar a$$ociation liyers





    Edit: Hammonds may not be a party to the lawsuit

    Last edited by monty; 18th June 2019 at 12:42 PM. Reason: Add words
    The only thing declared necessary in the Constitution & Bill of Rights is the #2A Militia of the several States.
    “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a freeState”
    https://ConstitutionalMilitia.org


  8. The Following User Says Thank You to monty For This Useful Post:

    Ares (18th June 2019)

  9. #55
    Iridium Bigjon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    5,415
    Thanks
    3,154
    Thanked 1,932 Times in 1,159 Posts

    Re: Federal Court Jurisdiction as stated by the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure

    can you give us a hint as to the minute mark?

    I know you love Hal, but he's not my cup of tea as he kind of wanders all over the map, without saying much.

    sorry to be so blunt, but time is short. Or maybe just the cliff notes?

  10. #56
    Iridium monty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    8,940
    Thanks
    7,783
    Thanked 8,331 Times in 5,107 Posts

    Re: Federal Court Jurisdiction as stated by the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure

    Quote Originally Posted by Bigjon View Post
    can you give us a hint as to the minute mark?

    I know you love Hal, but he's not my cup of tea as he kind of wanders all over the map, without saying much.

    sorry to be so blunt, but time is short. Or maybe just the cliff notes?
    Listen to the first 15-20 minutes. He talks about the lack of court jurisdiction, how to challenge it by Quo Warranto and he felt like Ammon Bundy was premature in taking over the refuge rather than following his advice saying that justice doesn’t necessarily flow out of the barrel of a gun but rather from the lead of a pencil following proper procedures.

    I have listened to half a dozen of his broadcasts and he does try and cram too many topics into one broadcast leaving me wondering what I just listened to.

    On the other hand I have picked up a little knowledge of property/land law from listening to him, that is where my interest lies.
    The only thing declared necessary in the Constitution & Bill of Rights is the #2A Militia of the several States.
    “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a freeState”
    https://ConstitutionalMilitia.org


  11. #57
    Iridium Bigjon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    5,415
    Thanks
    3,154
    Thanked 1,932 Times in 1,159 Posts

    Re: Federal Court Jurisdiction as stated by the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure

    I did listen to the first hour of so and picked up on the court jurisdiction thing.

    Just listened to Ralph Winterrowd and he is saying the courts are just bar courts and their jurisdiction is something we grant them by showing up.

    https://media.blubrry.com/rbn/b/cont...-16_165959.mp3
    https://media.blubrry.com/rbn/b/cont...-16_175959.mp3

    from:http://www.republicbroadcastingarchi...nterrowd-show/


    From what I gather he's saying they went off the lawful path a long time ago. They just did stuff and because it is a closed society without any scrutiny whatever they can get away with is the better to fleece the sheep.

    Paul jj Hansen has a lot of property stuff.
    http://freeinhabitant.info/counselin...ohn-hansen.htm

  12. #58
    Iridium monty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    8,940
    Thanks
    7,783
    Thanked 8,331 Times in 5,107 Posts

    Re: Federal Court Jurisdiction as stated by the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure

    The point of posting that, which I should have stated, is I believe there is a perfect opportunity to put the enviro-terrorists out of the land grabbing business. Hal Anthony discusses the mechanism in the podcast

    Unfortunately, in the words of Hal Anthony “But it takes an integrated willing party. I just don't see it in any of these people, as nice as they might be. A lot frustrating.”.

    The only thing declared necessary in the Constitution & Bill of Rights is the #2A Militia of the several States.
    “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a freeState”
    https://ConstitutionalMilitia.org


  13. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to monty For This Useful Post:

    Ares (19th June 2019),Bigjon (19th June 2019)

  14. #59
    Iridium Bigjon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    5,415
    Thanks
    3,154
    Thanked 1,932 Times in 1,159 Posts

    Re: Federal Court Jurisdiction as stated by the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure


  15. #60
    Great Value Carrots
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    3,332
    Thanks
    498
    Thanked 1,631 Times in 1,142 Posts

    Re: Federal Court Jurisdiction as stated by the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure

    Quote Originally Posted by Bigjon View Post
    Ralph Winterrowd ... saying the courts are just bar courts and their jurisdiction is something we grant them by showing up.
    Wynn-Miller suggests that all courts are nothing but foreign vessels in drydock.

    The judge is in an elevated box. The jury is in a box. This removes them from the court. They are not in the court themselves. The court is the playing field where the action takes place. The elevated position of the judge tells you it is not a level playing field. The flag tells you what law they promote. Specifically the ratio of rise to run is important. The fringe is important. The device at the top of the pole is important.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •