Armed Feds Prepare For Showdown With Nevada Cattle Rancher

[monty]

Interview with Eric Parker on Dec. 9, 2016 status hearing



https://youtu.be/7KfHEkiv478

[monty]

Interview with Eric Parker on Dec. 9, 2016 status hearing



https://youtu.be/7KfHEkiv478

Cliven Bundy's argument on jurisdiction is quite interesting. That argument coupled with the most basic argument, the Constitution didn't give the Congress jurisdiction on public land and the Constitution didn't give the Article IV courts jurisdiction on public lands would blow the case out of the water if the Dept. of Justice wasn't corrupted like it is.

[monty]

This is from July. It gives you an idea of the staked deck Deb Jordan wrote about. Now that Dirty Harry is retiring and Oblowme is finished will any of their hand picked team be replaced.

http://nevadanewsandviews.com/obama-...-in-las-vegas/


Obama, Reid, Their Pet Judges and Prosecutors Running Star Chamber in Las Vegas

NN&V StaffJuly 22, 2016

http://nevadanewsandviews.com/wp-con...a_1556405c.jpg
PC: http://i.telegraph.co.uk/

(From The Publisher, Penny Press)

I would hope that the lawyers representing the Bunkerville 19 take the ridicules pretrial decisions all the way to the United States Supreme Court before they give into the star-chamber the U.S. Attorney wants to run with the help of Presiding Nevada Federal Judge Gloria Navarro and her sycophant, Magistrate Peggy Leen.

For starters, Navarro is trying her best to keep attorney Larry Klayman from representing Cliven Bundy. Additionally, they want to try all 19 together.

Then, there is the fact that most of the 19 are still in jail with no bail. The prosecutors told the Judge that the 70-year-old Bundy was a danger to the community. Bundy is a rancher who—during the 2014 standoff with the BLM—was mostly on his own 160 acres in rural Bunkerville.

And now, Leen has actually ordered that much of the “evidence” be kept secret from the taxpaying public.
These aren’t real secrets like the ones on Hillary Clinton’s illegal email server.

Or the fact that it took the Obama administration almost four years to fess up about the reason for the Benghazi attack and admit that it was actually an act of radical Islamic terror.

No, this is a personal vendetta of soon to be retired Prince Harry Reid who called Bundy and the people who gathered in 2014 in support of him at his ranch “domestic terrorists” all the while reminding Navarro and the prosecutors who was responsible for their appointments.

Exactly what you want from the same judicial system which declined to prosecute Hillary Clinton for misusing classified information.

And you wonder why Donald Trump won the Republican nomination and is on his way to kicking Ms. Clinton’s butt November 8.

At its core, this is a case about government overreach, the First Amendment and the Second Amendment.
Bundy has been fighting the Bureau of Land Management since 1991, when it decided that Bundy’s 950 head of cattle would eradicate the Desert Tortoise so they pulled his grazing allotments. He and his ancestors had been running those allotments since 1877.

It took until 2014—23 years—before the BLM actually did anything. In that time, it became obvious that 950 head of cattle had not only NOT decreased the Desert Tortoise habitat but it is only listed as “threatened” as opposed to “endangered”.

In 2014, they decided to round up and sell Bundy’s cattle.

There followed a great outcry and many folks showed up at the Bundy Ranch to protest. A lot of those folks were armed because Nevada is an open carry state and that is perfectly legal.

While not a shot was fired, the BLM decided that given how stupid they looked, they would free the cattle and return them to Bundy.

At the time, Prince Harry called the whole group “domestic terrorists” and promised Federal retaliation.

The persecution of the Bunkerville 19 two years later is a fulfillment of Reid’s moronic promise.

But this is America.

We don’t keep political prisoners in jail, make evidence a state secret and deny people their choice of counsel.

We don’t even do that to REAL criminals.

The Obama administration looks at terrorism as a crime which should be handled by prosecutors. Otherwise they would have killed the Bunkerville 19 with hellfire missiles from a Predator drone. After all, the home base of the Predator is very close to Bunkerville. Even Khalid Sheikh Mohammed got his choice of lawyer.
But as the Department of Justice has turned the Clark County Detention Center into Nevada’s very own gitmo it looks like Bundy is going to have to live in the shadow of the strip until a court says otherwise. What happened in Bunkerville stays in Vegas.

Fortunately, there is a good chance that Donald Trump will win the next election, appoint a serious judge to replace the late Antonin Scalia and a sane prosecutor to replace Prince Harry’s friends.

At that point, the indictment on charges of conspiracy, assault on a law enforcement officer, carrying a firearm in a crime of violence, obstruction of justice, interference with commerce by extortion and aiding and abetting others in breaking the law may never make it to trial because sane people may be running the Department of Justice.

If there was ever a reason to elect someone whose judicial philosophy is closer to Mike Pence than Barack Obama, this case provides a stark illustration.


Politics
July 22, 2016
Related Items

[monty]

I have wondered if any Bundy defendants challenged jurisdiction. Yes, according to their facebook:

Steven TinMan Cambridge
First mistake is not questioning the jurisdiction, second is questioning the authority of this so-called magistrate (bring forth your bond and show me your signed oath), which hold no powers or authority only the jury and the people do.
8 · December 12 at 8:33pm


https://scontent.fbog2-2.fna.fbcdn.n...01&oe=58B1CCA3

Bundy Ranch
We have filed motion after motion after motion on jurisdiction and authority. The judge doesn't even comment on it.
she just puts out a statement like this one that's says they are all denied and dismissed.
6 · December 12 at 9:42pm

[monty]

More on Judge Glorria Navarro upholding Magistrate Peggy Leen's secrecy order

http://nevadanewsandviews.com/mitche...ed-in-secrecy/

Mitchell: Bundy case remains shrouded in secrecy

NN&V STAFFDecember 12, 2016
http://nevadanewsandviews.com/wp-con...04/Thomas2.jpg
(Thomas Mitchell, 4TH ST8) –

In order to maintain public confidence in a civil society, not only must justice be done, it must also be seen to be done.

This past week Nevada’s Chief U.S. District Judge Gloria Navarro upheld a sweeping protective order by a federal magistrate that seals documents and gags participants in the pending trial of Cliven Bundy, four of his sons and a dozen co-defendants on charges resulting from the April 2014 standoff at Bundy’s Bunkerville ranch, because that information might be used to intimidate witnesses.

The protective order was challenged by the Las Vegas Review-Journal, this newspaper and The Associated Press, which argued the order was overly broad and would prevent public scrutiny of a high-profile and significant case.

In upholding the secrecy, Navarro noted that case law dictates, “The district judge ‘may not simply substitute its judgment’ for that of the magistrate judge.”

But she later declared in the 10-page ruling, “The Intervenors proffer nothing but assumptions and conjecture about whether true threats were made as opposed to idle threats. This speculation does not refute (U.S. Magistrate) Judge (Peggy) Leen’s finding of good cause, let alone demonstrate clear error,”though the original order was based largely on assumptions and conjecture about largely anonymous Internet rants.

Navarro also dismissed as inefficient and impractical suggestions that certain information could be selectively redacted, instead of everything being sealed in its entirety as soon as it is filed, due to the fact the case involves 1.4 terabytes of digital information.

Freeing court personnel from a little paperwork trumps the unfettered ability of the defendants to have the public spot flaws in the documents and testimony that will determine whether they are to be incarcerated or freed?

Leen wrote in her order this past summer, “All materials produced by the government in discovery in this case, including, but not limited to: grand jury transcripts, agency reports, witness statements, memoranda of interviews, and any documents and tangible objects produced by the government shall be treated as confidential documents.”

The judge warned that defense attorneys may not even share notes relating to the contents of discovery with anyone not employed to assist the defense, and anything filed in court relating to the discovery must be filed under seal.

Leen reasoned that victims and witnesses could be vulnerable to “cyberbullying, threatening communications, and intimidation from Bundy supporters,” which could have a chilling effect on witnesses. She determined this even though almost all of the 22 allegations of intimidation are more than two years old and nothing substantive has come of any of them.

The defendants face felony charges that include conspiracy, obstruction, extortion and assault, which carry penalties of up to 50 years in prison. The standoff occurred after armed Bureau of Land Management law enforcement agents attempted to roundup Bundy’s cattle after he had refused for 20 years to pay grazing fees in the Gold Butte area. The BLM said he owed $1 million in fees and penalties.

Faced with armed protesters the BLM agents eventually released the cattle and left to avoid potential bloodshed.

Attorney Maggie McLetchie, who represents the media in this case, had argued to the court, “One of the most critical aspects of news reporting is to inform the public of justice being carried out in the courts. In this regard, the press is vital to the health of a democracy. … This right is anchored in the value of keeping ‘a watchful eye on the workings of public agencies,’ and in publishing ‘information concerning the operation of government.’ … ‘In short, justice must not only be done, it must be seen to be done.’”

McLetchie told the Las Vegas newspaper after the recent ruling, “We are disappointed because an overly broad protective order limits how much access the media, and therefore the public, has to information about this high-profile case. … As the case progresses, it will be a challenge to litigate matters in open court when so much is hidden from the public. The order can also have a chill on litigants’ willingness to speak to the press because, with such a broad order, it is hard to know if you can say anything.”

The lack of public scrutiny means that any extenuating or mitigating circumstances that the public might shed light on will not come until the time of trial, when it might be too late.

Mr. Mitchell publishes the 4TH ST8 Blog.
Column originally appears at 4TH ST8.


Nevada
December 12, 2016

[monty]

For Cliven Bundy and for the Red, White and Blue . . . .



https://youtu.be/zXYFlSiIxC0

[monty]

Peter Santilli wants to be included in the first Bundy Standoff trial

https://www.itmattershowyoustand.com...tandoff-trial/

Cliven Bundy co-defendant seeks inclusion in first Bunkerville standoff trial

December 17, 2016 | Doug Knowles |


https://i0.wp.com/www.itmattershowyo...95%2C263&ssl=1

One of Cliven Bundy’s co-defendants in the armed standoff case wants to go to trial sooner than a judge has ordered.

In a motion filed Wednesday, defendant Peter Santilli also argues that the 17 defendants in the standoff case should be tried with two trials instead of the three trials the judge ordered.

The motion is an effort to change U.S. Magistrate Judge Peggy Leen’s order for three separate trials that group the defendants in tiers based on their alleged involvement in the standoff. The order puts Santilli in the second trial. The first trial is set to start on Feb. 6.

Santilli is in the upper tier of five defendants that federal prosecutors allege are leaders and organizers of the armed standoff, a group that includes Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy, his sons Ryan and Ammon Bundy, and Ryan Payne.

The standoff unfolded in April 2014 when Bundy and supporters confronted federal agents who had seized his cattle in a dispute over grazing on public lands without paying grazing fees to the Bureau of Land Management. The BLM had obtained a court order prior to impounding the cattle, which agents released to avoid bloodshed.

No shots were fired in the standoff, which attracted hundreds of Bundy supporters and sympathizers, many of them distrustful of the federal government.

Santilli contends he should be tried first and be among a group of eight to 11 defendants who allegedly organized the protest.

“Santilli has spent months preparing with others to present a group defense based on the notion that he would be tried with the Bundy family members he is alleged to have conspired (with),” says the motion, submitted by attorney Chris Rasmussen.

The motion also argues that the case can be tried with two groups of defendants and that there is precedent for having the first and most involved group tried first.

The defendants face federal charges that include conspiring to assault federal agents on April 12, 2014, several miles from the Bundy ranch near Bunkerville.

Federal prosecutors had asked for three groups of defendants, though the judge’s order schedules the trials differently, with the most prominent group of defendants in the second trial.

Leen, however, wrote in her order that it seems “more fair” to have the defendants in the lowest tier be tried first, as their trial likely will be shorter than the other trials. Those defendants are: Richard Lovelien, Todd Engel, Gregory Burleson, Eric Parker, O. Scott Drexler and Steven Stewart.

Under Leen’s order, the second tier of “mid-level” defendants would be in the third and final trial. Those defendants are Bundy sons Dave and Mel Bundy, Joseph O’Shaughnessy, Brian Cavalier, Jason Woods and Micah McGuire.

Ammon and Ryan Bundy were acquitted in October by a Portland jury after being tried in connection with a 41-day armed takeover of a federal wildlife refuge in Oregon.

Santilli was indicted in the Oregon occupation, but federal prosecutors in September asked the judge to dismiss the indictment, citing the court’s ruling that excludes evidence, including statements Santilli made to counter-protesters and reporters.

Contact Ben Botkin at bbotkin@reviewjournal.com or 702-384-8710. Follow @BenBotkin1 on Twitter.

[monty]

Message to Donald Trump . . . "LET OUR PROPLE GO"

This video was put together by Kelli Stewart



https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Pf1P_m91RBY

[monty]

Jim Lambley on Twister Radio - Global Warming with Mark Andeerson and Briana Bundy/trial update.

http://ice9.securenetsystems.net/med...iana-Bundy.m4a

[monty]

Vicky Davis, TVOI News just revealed alarming information about CIs in the FBI and DEA (Confidential Informants)

TVOI News

16 mins ·


After reading an article in the Las Vegas Review-Journal concerning Pete Santilli's demand to know the names of the Confidential Informants, I thought I'd better get some information out. This information needs to go to the attorneys of all the defendants in Nevada.

On December 7, 2016, there was a hearing of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. Congressman Stephen Lynch made a statement saying that the DEA has approximately 18,000 Confidential Informants (CI) and it costs the government about $237 million per year to pay those CIs. The FBI has probably double that number - 30-40,000 CI's that cost the government about $500 million per year.

We know that a lot of those CIs actually go out and set people up so we can add the cost of jail, lawyers, the courts, prison and prison services to the costs of the CIs.

What the congressman also said was that the Congress has not been able to get any information about these programs that run Confidential Informants because they are "field level" programs so even the headquarters offices do not know about how the programs operate. If the headquarters of the DEA and FBI don't do oversight on these programs and if the congress can't get information on them, then that means we have a covert criminal network functioning under the color of law.

If that isn't good enough information for the Judge to order that the identities of the CIs be released, then I don't know what would be.

You can find the hearing that I'm talking about on C-Span.



https://scontent.fbog2-1.fna.fbcdn.n...94&oe=58B13F4A