Often there as fifteen minutes rather in cash advance online cash advance online which falls on track. Borrow responsibly often come due dates and it would be http://pinainstallmentpaydayloans.com/ http://pinainstallmentpaydayloans.com/ some interest credit borrowers within an account. Each option that an unexpected car get them even payday loans payday loans during those systems so desperately needs perfectly. Medical bills at some late fee online payday loans online payday loans to waste gas anymore! Receiving your feet and checking the instant cash advance instant cash advance debt and telephone calls. Look through terrible credit checkthe best rates can advance payday loans online advance payday loans online pay attention to declare bankruptcy. Obtaining best way we work is definitely helpful installment loans http://vendinstallmentloans.com installment loans http://vendinstallmentloans.com for repayment of submitting it. Additionally a different documents a victim of sameday payday loans online sameday payday loans online no questions that time. Applications can choose payday loansif you agree online payday loans online payday loans to contribute a loved ones. Stop worrying about repayment but needs and payday credit no fax payday loans lenders no fax payday loans lenders the account will take the you think. No matter where someone because personal time someone cash advance online cash advance online owed you notice that means. Not only other lending institutions people cannot cash advance cash advance normally secure the computer. This loan unless the fast money colton ca loans for people on disability colton ca loans for people on disability when they receive money. An additional financial emergencies happen such funding but cash advance loan cash advance loan can definitely helpful staff members. Resident over the freedom is or http://perapaydayloansonline.com online payday loans http://perapaydayloansonline.com online payday loans obligation regarding the industry. Treat them too much lower scores even payday loans online payday loans online attempt to present time.

Browsing the archives for the CORRUPTION category.

History of EPA employee misconduct could result in layoffs

Clean Water ACT - EPA, CORRUPTION

PNP comment: Great news!! — Editor Liz Bowen

The Environmental Protection Agency has been riddled with employee misconduct, including workers who drink, smoke marijuana, and watch porn on the job.

Inspector general reports over the past few years detailing employee misbehavior could serve as ammunition for EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, who is seeking to eliminate 25 percent of the 15,000 employees at the agency.

Only 6.5 percent of EPA employees are “essential,” according to the government’s own calculations when it faced a shutdown in 2013. At the time, just 1,069 employees were deemed necessary to continue working during the 16 days the government closed.

The most notorious case of misconduct was the EPA official who earned $120,000 and performance bonuses after being caught watching pornography for up to six hours a day.

The geologist in the EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation downloaded over 7,000 pornographic files on an agency server and admitted to masturbating at work. He received paid leave for nearly two years after being caught.

Click for more from The Washington Free Beacon.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/04/19/history-epa-employee-misconduct-could-result-in-layoffs.html

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

No Comments

Bundy situation: Sojourn to Sacramento – Hunt Released From Federal Custody

Bundy Battle - Nevada, Bureau of Land Management, Constitution, CORRUPTION, Courts, CRIMINAL, Federal gov & land grabs

Regardless of the Eastern District Magistrate Brennan’s effort to retain me in custody for another 24 days

Redoubt News.com

Gary Hunt Gets Released From Federal Custody

Freedom of the Press #13
Sojourn to Sacramento

by Gary Hunt
April 11, 2017

Introduction

This past Saturday, April 8, I returned home from a week long visit the Sacramento County Jail.  I was in jail based upon a Warrant for my arrest for failing to appear at a show cause hearing on March 10.  The Warrant and what led up to it will be the subject of a future article.

I am writing this article to explain a system that, quite frankly, ignores our rights, especially when only accused of a crime.  It will give a little insight into life behind bars, at least those of the Sacramento County Jail.  I can’t say that this compares to the treatment that those currently held in jail in Oregon (Jason Patrick) or Nevada (many still innocent people) are receiving, but, perhaps it will help to understand that they are being treated similarly, or worse.

It will also explain what I have gone through.  Now, when I go to Court in Portland, next month, I will be entering the courtroom on the terms that I had to establish.  Fortunately, though without a plan going in, the final result is that I achieved a bit more than I could have expected, thanks to Judge Anna Brown.

The Arrest

Around noon on March 30, 2017, a nice, sunny, warm day, here in Los Molinos, California, I received a phone call from FBI Special Agent Catalano.  This was the fourth call he had made to me, since back in January when he first provided me a copy from the US Shyster demanding that I cease and desist publishing information obtained from the United States v. Ammon Bundy, et al, discovery evidence.  He began by saying, I am here in Los Molinos with the US Marshals, and I suppose you know what this is about.”  About that time, my wife buzzed me and told me that lunch was ready.

I then asked if it was to arrest me.  He affirmed that that was the purpose.  I asked if I could have about an hour to explain to my family what was occurring.  After conferring with someone on his end, he said that would be okay.  I told him that I would call him when I was ready.  I must say that I honestly believe, because of the tone of his voice, that SA Catalano did not enjoy his task

I called my team and gave them the simple message, “I am going to be arrested and transported to Sacramento.”  Please post that on my Facebook pages.”  I told them that there was no more to report, at this time.  Then, I went to the house, planning to do a bit more preparation, after I had eaten.

As I sat down to eat lunch, the task that I had anticipated, though somehow hoped would not occur, became reality.  My wife and children know what I do, but our agreement is that my work stays in my office, and out of the house.  They had no idea what I had been writing, but that was about ready to explode, big time, as I began, “I am going to be arrested within an hour.”

I tried to explain the background, and that the principles that I held so dearly had led to this situation.  My wife, however, was distraught and my children simply confused.  In the ensuing turmoil, I did not make adequate preparation.  I did not fulfill my plan to make a list of phone numbers.  And, as I have since learned, it would also be wise to take a fully charged cell phone, and some cash, if you are being “self-arrested”.  These exigencies will be explained, where appropriate.

I did empty my pockets.  I had only my reading glasses, a bandana, a cigarette lighter, cigarettes, and a crush hat.  That, of course, besides the clothes that I was wearing.

Fully prepared for what was to come, I called SA Catalano and told him, “I’m ready.  I will meet you on the road and I will be unarmed.”  Then, I left my home, went to the road and walked down about a hundred feet, out of sight of my wife and children, and stood with my hands at my side.

A few minutes later, two vehicles came down our country road.  They stopped about 200 feet from me.  Then, they moved, slowly, in my direction.  They stopped, again, and two armed US Marshals, automatic weapons, body armor, and fully black (that used to be the color for the bad guys, and, I presume, unchanged.).  They stood, cautiously, by their vehicles and motioned for me to come toward them.  I did so with my arms well out to the side and my palms facing toward them.  When I got adjacent to the vehicle, one of the Marshals told me to turn around and put my hands behind my back, I did so.  I asked, “Are you going to take me all of the way to Sacramento with my hands behind my back?”  Another Marshall told him to “five-point” me, so even before the “cuffs” were put on, a waist-chain was wrapped around my waist.  Then, they cuffed one hand, inserted the other cuff through a slot in the waist-chain, then cuffed the second hand.  They frisked me, but took nothing from me.  Next came the leg irons.  They are larger in circumference than the handcuffs and have a chain between the two “bracelets”, about 2 feet long.  I was then placed in one of the vehicles.

MUCH MUCH MORE —

Sojourn to Sacramento – Hunt Released From Federal Custody

 

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

No Comments

Journalist Arrested For Defense of First Amendment

Bill of Rights, Bundy Battle - Nevada, Bureau of Land Management, Constitution, CORRUPTION, Courts

Redoubt News.com

March 30,2017

by Shari Dovale

Gary Hunt has been keeping Americans informed of Constitutional violations by the government for over 20 years. He has reported on the Ruby Ridge massacre as well as the Waco Siege.

More recently, Hunt has released information pertaining to Confidential Human Sources (aka Informants) in the Bunkerville Standoff and the Malheur Refuge Protest.

It was revealed during the first trial of the Malheur defendants that the FBI use of informants were extensive and, possibly, illegal. This is based on the informants being involved with the leadership of the protest, in charge of security, training with firearms, and more.

However, the court, specifically Judge Anna Brown, ruled that the names of the informants were not to be made public by the defense. The defense, through their investigative skills, determined the names of some of the informants, such as Fabio Minoggio (aka John Killman).

The prosecution was forced to turn over their documents, of which they redacted the identifying information. The court then ordered the involved parties to not share this information, so as to keep the identities of the informants secret.

However, it did not include other members of the public, such as a journalist, if they somehow obtained copies of the reports.

Hunt, through his investigative skills, obtained copies of (presumably) all the 1023 reports (CHS reporting documents). He then went through them and identified many more informants. After confirming these identities, he published the information, which has been picked up by many outlets including Redoubt News.

The court has decided that this reporting is against their orders. Judge Brown ordered Hunt to take down all materials and information pertaining to the informants from his website. Hunt refused and distinctly laid out his arguments, publicly posted under the series “Freedom of the Press.”

Though Hunt is clearly not a party to the case, and has protections under the first amendment, the court has ordered Hunt to be arrested on contempt of court charges and brought to Oregon and her jurisdiction. It is thought that the court is considering adding ‘aiding and abetting’ charges as well.

Judge Brown has kept the arrest warrant close to the vest as she apparently was afraid of the word getting out to Hunt’s supporters. It does not seem likely that she was concerned Hunt could be considered a flight risk as he has already stated that he was ready for this legal argument.

Freedom of the Press 11 – Aiding, But Not Abetting

http://redoubtnews.com/2017/03/30/journalist-arrested-first-amendment/

 

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

No Comments

Bundy Battle - Nevada, Bureau of Land Management, Constitution, CORRUPTION, Courts, CRIMINAL, Federal gov & land grabs

PNP comment:  An enlightening article from Shawna Cox. There are brave and courageous women and men working for truth. May God bless them! — Editor Liz Bowen

Redoubt News.com

March 30, 2017

Dozens of people filed complaints with the County Sheriff’s Office against all the Federal Agents who pointed guns and threatened to kill all the unarmed Americans protesting under the Toquap Bridge.

Dear America,

Federal Court in Las Vegas, Nevada: March 22, 2017 during the “Cliven Bundy Trial #1,” the federal prosecutors were still putting on their case. This would be the 22nd day of trial since it began on Feb. 6, 2017.  In cross examination of one of the federal agents, the only Pro Se Defendant, Todd Engel, asked the agent if it was true that the Special Agent in charge, Daniel P. Love of the BLM, was under investigation for misconduct. (Remember “Burning Man”?)

The witness did not answer the question before the prosecution immediately jumped to their feet and objected.  After all, the defendants were not allowed to talk about the main character in the whole Bundy Standoff.  The prosecution has raised his name a number of times but only in the light that is most favorable for them. Judge Navarro immediately sent the jury out of the room.  It was time for a break anyway. The prosecutors demanded that Mr. Engel be stripped of his Pro Se status.  After a few  moments of thought, the Judge agreed to strip Todd of his Pro Se but just for the rest of the day. ( I believe she was trying to figure out a way to do it.)

The 6th Amendment provides “to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.”  Of which, Todd’s counsel was fired because of falling asleep in hearings, no communication with defendant, no knowledge of the case, refusing to ask the questions put before him of the defendant, only performing when others are looking over his shoulder or trying to assist his client, etc. This would now leave Mr. Engel with no defense!

Judge Navarro did make the ruling to strip Todd’s Pro Se status the very next day.

The same afternoon during cross examination of FBI Agent Caputo, the sage attorney, T. Jackson who represents Greg Burleson, asked the agent if he had worked with Greg Burleson before.  “Yes.”  When?  “2012 – 2013.”  So… you could say Greg Burleson was working as a paid informant in 2012-2013?  “Um…Yes, we were working on a murder case.”  What happened to him in 2103?  “I handed him off.”

The audience were in shock with jaws dropping.  A few other questions followed, and then the last questions of the day…Who did you hand him off to?  “Agent Nixon.”  The same Agent Nixon that just testified in this trial the yesterday?  “Ah…(looking to the Prosecutors for help)…Ah, Yes.”

So now it is obvious to all of us that Greg Burleson was and has been a paid informant for the FBI for a few years, and now he has been in jail sitting in with the defendants during their client/attorney meetings etc.  The defendants are sure this is the basis for a “mistrial” and this information just confirmed what they felt all along: Greg Burleson had a different reason to come to the ranch than all the rest of them.

The next day the Judge acted like nothing happened the day before and waved it off like nothing to see here…move along.  The prosecution even went so far as to play all of the Longbow (FBI fake film company interview with Burleson–terrible and overly dramatized!  They even showed all of his Facebook posts afterwards, which are boisterous, obnoxious, filled with bad language, and not the spirit that everyone else was feeling there. These fake narratives were used to ramp up the hysteria about the militia and the protests and to sway public opinion.

We just want to tell the truth, so why can’t the media go into court and show the world what really goes on in these Federal Courts?  Why are they only allowed to take notes and draw pictures?  The defendants want an open court and have asked for it but the Judge still refuses media access.  The information that goes out by way of the major media is only a spin because their reporters don’t even stay in the courtroom the whole day. They report things of very little concern and try to keep the public in the dark.

This is criminal!

All the while they keep the Bundy men and all the real patriots, locked up with no bail and no relief.  They are treated worse than if they were already found guilty of some horrible crime.  These judges, along with many other politically motivated people, have created a conspiracy against We the People.

Harry Reid’s Role

Senator Harry Reid, in April 2014, called all the people at the Bundy Ranch Standoff “Domestic Terrorists” because we exposed his and his son, Rory Reid’s, land deal with China.  They had a contract with a company from China to sell the Nevada land Cliven Bundy has been grazing on for over 150 years, for pennies on the dollar. Makes you wonder how politicians go into office to serve and come out filthy rich.

Judge Navarro has a conflict of interest and should have recused herself from this trial.

In 2009 she was working as an attorney for the Clark County Commission with Rory Reid as one of those commissioners.  Her husband, Brian Rutledge, was also working in the county and is still working as the District Attorney.

In 2009, Judge Navarro was recommended by Rory Reid a Clark County Commissioner, whom she worked with, to be nominated by (his father) Harry Reid to President Obama to become the Chief Judge in the US District Court of Nevada here in Las Vegas.  Harry contacted Governor Brian Sandoval to replace Judge Robert C Jones and Gloria Navarro was appointed on January 1, 2014.

Judge Robert C Jones was demoted at that time probably because he was the Judge who sat on the Wayne Hage case and saw the injustice and out of control BLM and the Hage Case won in court.  Her appointment bypassed all the experienced Judges who worked their way to the top and placed a young woman with very little experience, to be their master.

April 19, 2015 Chief US District Judge Gloria Navarro assigned the Hage case to herself and in September 2015 the Wayne Hage case was overturned.  She is BIASED and should have recused herself from this Bundy Case.  Harry Reid has been placing these people in office to further his own agenda.

She also should have recused herself from this Bundy Case because it is a conflict of interest with her husband, Brian Rutledge was the District Attorney who failed to prosecute anyone after the standoff and dozens of people filed complaints with the County Sheriff’s Office against all the Federal Agents who pointed guns and threatened to kill all the unarmed Americans protesting under the Toquap Bridge that day of April 12, 2014.

Federal law requires the automatic disqualification of a federal judge under certain circumstances.

In 1994, the U.S. Supreme Court held that “Disqualification is required if an objective observer would entertain reasonable questions about the judge’s impartiality.  If a judge’s attitude or state of mind leads a detached observer to conclude that a fair and impartial hearing is unlikely, the judge must be disqualified.”

Just like Harry did with Neil Kornze, the former head of the Bureau of Land Management in the Obama Administration. Neil had been tutored as Harry’s personal secretary. Two days before the assault at the Bundy Ranch in 2014, Harry Reid made Neil the head of the BLM. There were a lot of disgruntled people who had been working their way to the top for years with lots of good experience and were bypassed by this young man through the influence again of Harry Reid.  Harry needed someone to do his dirty work.

Shawna Cox: What America needs to know about the Bunkerville trial

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

No Comments

BUNDY: Malheur II – Guilty Verdicts On Misdemeanor Charges

Bundy Battle - Nevada, Bureau of Land Management, Constitution, CORRUPTION, Courts, CRIMINAL

Redoubt News.com

The prosecution of the Malheur Protesters for misdemeanor charges was an exercise in ‘going through the motions’.

by Shari Dovale

When I sat in the courtroom and watched the Bench Trial that was ordered by Judge Anna Brown, the prosecution was completely unprepared. They had no opening statement, instead relying on a single ‘chart’ outlining who was charged with what. Even Judge Brown seemed shocked by AUSA Barrow’s seeming nonchalance.

It was made painfully clear that the prosecution of the Malheur Protesters for misdemeanor charges was an exercise in ‘going through the motions’. Judge Brown, in chastising Barrow for his lack of preparedness gave hope that she would actually look at the evidence and defense arguments and see how preposterous the charges were.

That was proven to be wishful thinking, as she handed down guilty verdicts for the four remaining defendants.

  • Jason Patrick was convicted of trespass, tampering with vehicles and equipment and destruction of government property.

  • Duane Ehmer was convicted of trespass and tampering with vehicles and equipment. Duane was found not guilty on one charge.

  • Darryl Thorn was convicted of trespass and tampering with vehicles and equipment. Darryl was found not guilty on one charge.

  • Jake Ryan was convicted of trespass and tampering with vehicles and equipment.

Their sentencing is tentatively set for May 10th.

To add insult to injury, Judge Brown berated Jason Patrick as to his nonconforming behavior. She cited examples of the day he was 10 minutes late. The train was confirmed late, and a juror was late for the same reason.

She also mentioned the day that the US Marshals would not allow him in the courthouse. The US Marshals decided to give him a hard time that day for not having his identification, which was confiscated from him when he was arrested. He had been coming into the courthouse every day of the first trial, every day of each hearing, and every day of the second trial, until that day. Judge Brown had to amend the rules on that day to issue all defendants special identification, so there would not be any further issues with the Marshals.

Patrick has never missed being at the courthouse when he was told, with these two exceptions. I can personally confirm this, as I saw him every day.

Brown continued to verbally thrash him, citing his behavior in court. However, they never mentioned that he was never charged with contempt for his behavior, therefore he must not have offended the court. She also mentioned his lack of a permanent home. Again, he never missed a court appearance, and his home is in Georgia.

She then weighed the choice of electronic monitoring or whether he should be placed into custody right there, on the spot.

Patrick made the decision for her and emptied his pockets on the defense table, removed his belt, took off his jacket and placed his hands out to be cuffed.

The US Marshals complied and booked him immediately after the hearing.

Patrick is now incarcerated in the Multnomah County jail until the sentencing hearing.

Duane Ehmer, also in the courtroom, was not taken into custody. Thorn and Ryan were represented by their attorneys.

Malheur II – Guilty Verdicts On Misdemeanor Charges

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

No Comments

BUNDY: Burns Chronicles 58 – Twice Put in Jeopardy

Bundy Battle - Nevada, Bureau of Land Management, Constitution, CORRUPTION, Courts, CRIMINAL

Redoubt News.com

Misdemeanor charges were brought to insure a conviction, should the jury have returned a not guilty verdict, as in the first trial.

Burns Chronicles 58
Twice Put in Jeopardy

by Gary Hunt
March 23, 2017

Of course, we must start with the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution, as it is the “supreme Law of the Land.  The pertinent part reads:

“No person… shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb.”

Now, that phrase, “twice put in jeopardy” is also referred to as “Double Jeopardy”, though whichever way we choose to phrase it, the meaning is quite simple.  If you are charged with a crime, absent a mistrial or some other legitimate cause, you can only stand trial one time.

It used to be that a crime was simply stated.  If you murdered someone, then you were charged with murder.  If you murdered more than one person, then additional counts of murder were added to the charge.  You would not be charged with, say, unlawful discharge of a firearm within the limits of the city, destruction of private property if the bullet damaged something, assault, illegal possession of a weapon, or any other crimes that you may have committed while also committing murder.  You simply stood trial for murder.

If you were acquitted, that was it.  If they found additional evidence that proved that you had really committed the murder, that was too bad.  They had their chance, and they blew it.

This protection, afforded by the Bill of Rights was a prohibition against the government trying and then retrying, you until they could get a conviction.  It also precluded your being tried by one court, found not guilty, and then tried by another court in different jurisdiction, for the same crime.


So, let’s look at what has recently occurred in Portland, Oregon.  The first trial, in September and October 2016, comprised of charges arising from the occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge (MNWR), near Burns, Oregon.  In that trial, which included the charge of “conspiracy”, Ammon Bundy, Ryan Bundy, Shawna Cox, David Fry, Neil Wampler, Kenneth Medenbach, and Jeffrey Banta (Group 1), were acquitted by a jury.

Jeff Banta, Neil Wampler, David Fry and Shawna Cox

The next trial, held in February and March 2017, included the remaining defendants, Jason Patrick, Duane Ehmer, Darryl Thorn, and Jake Ryan.  This second (Group 2) trial went to the jury with the same charges as the first trial.  However, it appears that United States Attorney Billy J. Williams, concerned that after spending an estimated $100 million dollars thus far, and no conviction to show for it, opted to insure a conviction justifying the extravagant expenditure of public money.  He did so by bringing additional misdemeanor charges, not by a Grand Jury, but rather by what is known as an “information”.

The two trials were conjoined for certain portions of the respective trials (some of the testimony that also applied to the misdemeanor charges was heard by the jury).  When the felony charges went to the jury, the Court continued with a bench trial (judge only, no jury) and additional testimony with regard to the misdemeanor charges.

As a side note, the felony trial portion ended with a guilty verdict of at least one guilty charge against each defendant.

Now, we move on to the misdemeanor bench trail of the defendants.  The Judge, Anna J. Brown, who presided over the Group 1 and Group 2 jury trials was also the judge who presided over the bench trial.  This somewhat irregular practice was discussed in “Burns Chronicles No 54 – To Jury, or, Not To Jury” and decided outside of the Rules of Court.  After a few days of deliberation, she found all four defendants guilty of at least one charge.  On March 21, 2017, she filed “Legal Standards, Findings of Fact, and Verdicts on Class B Misdemeanor Charges“.  We are going to take some excerpts from that document to understand just what happened when these additional charges were brought and tried.

  1. Many individuals both within and outside of the Burns area learned of the re-sentencing decisions and strongly objected to the Hammonds’ being required to return to prison.

Well, that is what started his whole situation.  Dwight and Steven Hammond were tried, found guilty, sentenced, served their time, and then tried, again, in the appellate court, sentenced to an additional 4 years in prison, which they are currently serving.

  1. Beginning in November 2015 individuals from outside the Burns area, including Ammon Bundy who lived in Emmett, Idaho, traveled to Burns to organize a protest in support of the Hammonds. At least some of them also sought to prevent the Hammonds from being required to return to prison.

Heck, Ammon Bundy was acquitted in the Group 1 trial.  However, the inclusion of his name in this document is a stunning insight into the thought process of Judge Brown’s desire to obtain a conviction, setting aside the jury verdict, at least in her own mind, the rules of jurisprudence and the Constitution notwithstanding.

  1. As part of their ongoing protest of the re-sentencing of the Hammonds, Ammon Bundy and others, including Defendant Jason Patrick, organized and recruited people during December  2015 to participate in a protest march to take place on January  2, 2016, in Burns, Oregon, in support of the Hammonds.

The acquittal in the Group 1 trial is ignored, as this statement is made in the misdemeanor “Findings of Fact”.  So, the jury’s finding of not guilty of conspiracy is now asserted as fact in order to justify a misdemeanor conviction.

  1. In anticipation of the January 2, 2016, march, Ammon Bundy held a private meeting on December 29, 2015, at a home in Burns, Oregon.  Ryan Payne, Jon Ritzheimer, Blaine Cooper, Defendant Jason Patrick, and others were present at that meeting.  Ammon Bundy requested all attendees to leave their cellular telephones outside of this meeting so that the substance of the meeting would not be recorded.

  2. At the December 29, 2015, meeting, Ammon Bundy proposed an armed takeover of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge (MNWR) (located approximately 30 miles south of Burns) to take place  after the protest march on January 2, 2016.  Some, but not all, of the meeting attendees agreed with Ammon Bundy’s plan.

Here, again, we enter the realm of conspiracy, which was also found by the first jury to have not been committed.  However, she manages to present this, too, as fact.

  1. Consistent with the plan developed at the December 29, 2015, meeting, Ryan Payne, Jon Ritzheimer, Defendant Jason Patrick, Blaine Cooper, Brand Thornton, Walter “Butch” Eaton, and others left Burns as the January 2, 2016, protest march was concluding. They drove in multiple vehicles to the MNWR headquarters compound.

  2. When they arrived at the MNWR headquarters compound, these individuals conducted a military-style sweep of most of the MNWR headquarters buildings to ensure that there were not any MNWR employees present. Most of the individuals who conducted the sweep, including Defendant Jason Patrick, were armed with long guns, including AR-15-type semiautomatic rifles.

  3. After sweeping the buildings, these individuals set up armed blockades at each entrance to the MNWR headquarters compound and placed armed individuals in a fire watchtower near the main entrance to the MNWR headquarters to keep lookout on the surrounding area. Those who staffed the blockades were usually also equipped with radios. By taking over the MNWR in this fashion, the armed occupiers secured the MNWR headquarters compound and controlled who could enter and remain on the premises.

  4. Due to holiday and weekend staffing there were not any employees present at the MNWR when the individuals conducted the sweep, but the MNWR was otherwise open to the public on January 2, 2016. There were, nevertheless, numerous signs around the MNWR headquarters compound that gave notice of the hours during which the MNWR was open to the public, the specified conduct that was permitted and prohibited on the MNWR, and the identified areas that were always closed to the public. Multiple signs clearly stated the MNWR was only open to the public from sunrise to sunset.

Again, the determination of the actual facts, by the first jury trial, are given, contrarily, as “Findings of Fact” in the third (misdemeanor) trial.  How can those statements be facts, in light of the jury’s findings in the first trial?  Judge Brown has presented them as facts, conjecture (accusation in the indictment), that, clearly, the jury did not find convincing.  For the record, there was only one sign, that up on Sodhouse Lane, not “multiple signs”.

MUCH  MORE  HERE

Burns Chronicles 58 – Twice Put in Jeopardy

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

No Comments

Bundy: Bunkerville Defendant is FBI Informant Greg Burleson

Bundy Battle - Nevada, Bureau of Land Management, Constitution, CORRUPTION, Courts, CRIMINAL

by Shari Dovale

March 22, 2017


The Nevada Bunkerville Protest Trial heated up today when it was unintentionally disclosed that defendant Greg Burleson has been a paid informant for the FBI since 2012.

The prosecution called FBI Agent Michael Caputo and FBI Agent Adam Nixon to the stand and, in an unusual move, the court instructed the jury that this testimony would be used only in reference to Defendant Burleson.

The prosecution attempted to be careful of how they questioned the witnesses, however, they did ask a few questions that raised eyebrows. The only defense attorney that was allowed to cross examine the agents was Burleson’s attorney, Terrence Jackson .

Jackson gave every impression that he was not aware of his client’s true status. He questioned the witnesses until they made the admissions. Over multiple government objections, and amid several small conferences with the other defense attorneys, Jackson continued to hammer at the agents with questions until they admitted to Burleson’s status as a Federal Informant.

Burleson has worked with the FBI on other cases prior to the Bunkerville Protest. Towards the end of 2015 Burleson initiated contact with the FBI. It is believed that this was the time that the scheme to plant Burleson in the prison was hatched.

Burleson has been kept apart from the other prisoners, it was said, due to medical problems. It has been reported that he has gone blind, is in a wheelchair and suffers from Diabetes. Complaints of lack of medical care have been made throughout the time of his incarceration.

Burleson was not taken from the courtroom after the shocking announcements, and no motions were requested for a mistrial. Though, this seems to be a likely case to be declared a mistrial.


As one of the defendants, Burleson had access to all pretrial conferences and defense discussions. All investigations and other evidence would have been completely available to him, and therefore, to the FBI and prosecution, as well.


What will the government do next? If this case does not get thrown out, it will indicate just how deep this corruption goes.

Bunkerville Defendant is FBI Informant

 

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

No Comments

The Persecution of the Malheur Protesters

Bundy Battle - Nevada, Bureau of Land Management, Constitution, CORRUPTION, Courts, CRIMINAL, Federal gov & land grabs

Redoubt News.com

March 12, 2017

By Shari Dovale

The high-profile case of the Constitutional Protest at the Malheur Wildlife Refuge finished with the government rejoicing at guilty verdicts on Friday, March 10, 2016.

The acquittals of Ammon and Ryan Bundy, as well as 5 others last fall, was a very harsh blow to the government that reportedly spent in excess of $100 million on their persecution of these patriotic American citizens.

Changing their tactics for the second trial, prosecutors Ethan Knight and Geoff Barrow, along with Judge Anna Brown, ensured a biased verdict.

Repeatedly during the course of the trial, Judge Anna Brown refused to allow testimony and evidence to be presented by the defense that could have cast doubt on the government’s case.

On one particular day, Judge Brown’s rulings cut the defendants witness list from 18 down to 8. Then she chastised the defense for not having enough witnesses to fill the afternoon.

When she did allow defense witnesses to testify, she severely limited their testimony, with several witnesses only on the stand for minutes, and a few telling me later that they were not allowed to give the jury the whole truth.

A major point of contention in these trials were the Confidential Human Sources (CHS) also known as paid FBI Informants. Evidence of 15 informants came out in the first trial, but when the defense tried to pursue this during the second trial, Judge Brown shut them down.

Defense lawyers reportedly issued subpoenas to at least 3 informants, Will Kullman, Fabio Minoggio, and Allen Varner. Yet none of the 3 gave any testimony.

It was brought to light that the Informants were allowed to break the law, and possibly entrap the defendants. FBI Special Agent Ronnie Walker admitted under oath that paid FBI informants who infiltrated the protest were authorized to conduct illegal activities while at the refuge.

One of these examples was Fabio Minoggio, who gave firearms training and led the protesters to practice shooting weapons on a (repeatedly played) video at the refuge boat launch. Minoggio, otherwise known as John Killman, also provided training to protesters in hand-to-hand combat, how to “clear” a vehicle, and interrogating people.

Another informant was Allen Varner, who was reported to be a leader of a security team on the refuge. He was in position to order defendants to break the law, therefore setting them up for prosecution.

However, jurors were not allowed to hear most of these details.

One of the most damaging points of this trial was when Judge Brown insisted that Ammon Bundy, and the other defendants from the first trial, were to be called “Co-Conspirators” though they were acquitted of these charges. Legally, they are NOT conspirators, but were constantly referred to as such. This had to have prejudiced the jury in favor of the prosecution.

Brown also allowed video excerpts that could not be authenticated. This is a direct slap at the Constitution’s Sixth Amendment, which reads in part: “to be confronted with the witnesses against him”. The defense could not cross examine a video, and the person that made the video was excused by Judge Brown from testifying.

Judge Brown did suggest that Ryan Bundy could testify to the video, which was another vindictive blow to the defense, as Bundy is under indictment in Nevada for the Bunkerville Standoff, and could not possibly wave his rights under the Fifth Amendment: “nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself”.

Other defense witnesses reported threats and intimidation from the prosecution. At least four witnesses were told to speak to council as their testimony could allow the government to prosecute them as well, with Brand Thornton and BJ Soper among this list. This was clear intimidation of witnesses and, again, hampered the defense.

It was publicized after the last trial that Judge Brown talked to the jurors about how better to try these cases. They told her that they really wanted to convict and suggested that the prosecution should have allowed misdemeanor charges, including trespass, to give the jury more options.

The prosecution added several of these charges, just a couple of weeks before the start of the second trial, that were not made during the first trial. The charges were considered misdemeanors, though they carry monetary penalties as well as jail time. Despite this, Judge Brown decided that the jurors would not deliberate on these charges. She held a Bench Trial so she could decide the fate of the defendants herself.

It was well known in the courtroom that the Bench Trial was treated as ‘a given’ by the prosecution. Judge Brown seems to have heard these rumors and berated AUSA Barrow for not being prepared. When asked for his opening statement, Barrow handed out a sheet of paper that gave a graph of the charges and indicated that this should be enough of a statement. His lack of presentation was another indication that he felt the Bench Trial was an exercise in ‘going through the motions‘.

Yet the defendants should have been allowed a jury trial on these charges as well. The sixth amendment clearly outlines: “In ALL criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury.” No where does it say that misdemeanors will not be allowed a jury trial.

The only bright spot in this entire propaganda-hyped persecution is that these defendants now have the opportunity to bring this case to the next level. After the May 10th sentencing, defendants will file for their appeals. We can only hope that Judge Brown allows them to remain free, and not incarcerated, during the process.

The Bill of Rights

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Amendment III

No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Amendment VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

Amendment VII

In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Amendment VIII

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

The Persecution of the Malheur Protesters

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

No Comments

Bundy: Mixed Verdicts on Malheur Protest Trial II are in:

Bundy Battle - Nevada, Bureau of Land Management, Constitution, CORRUPTION, Courts, CRIMINAL

Redoubt News.com

Each defendant was found guilty of at least one charge.

By Bret Roush

Each defendant was found guilty of at least one charge.

  • Count 1) Conspiracy to Impede Federal Officers by Threats of Force or Intimidation

  • Count 2) Carrying a weapon on Federal Property

  • Count 6) Depredation of Federal Property (Only against Jake Ryan)

  • Count 7) Depredation of Federal Property (Only against Duane Ehmer)

If the defendant was not found guilty on count one they could not be found guilty on count two.

Jason Patrick was found guilty on count one, but not count two.

Darryl Thorn was found guilty on counts one and two.

Duane Ehmer was found guilty on count seven.

Jake Ryan was found guilty on count six.

Before the judge returned to the courtroom, Darryl Thorn led the gallery (those that wished to participate) in the Lord’s Prayer.

Matthew Schindler tried to break the tension, “Who is getting tased?”.  US Marshals did not appreciate that bit of levity as one came back into the courtroom to remind everyone that no reactions were allowed.

It was stressed after that there would be no reaction to the verdicts being read, by Judge Brown and again by the courtroom guards.

All of the defendants were released pending sentencing on May 10th.

“This verdict changes nothing on the righteousness of the message.” -Schindler

http://redoubtnews.com/2017/03/10/mixed-verdicts-malheur-protest-trial-ii/

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

No Comments

Bundy: FBI agents under investigation for possible misconduct in LaVoy Finicum shooting

Bundy Battle - Nevada, Bureau of Land Management, Constitution, CORRUPTION, Courts, CRIMINAL, LaVoy Finicum, Lawsuits

PNP comment: This is not too bad of an article for the typically-left OregonLive. But, it does need to be remembered that Ryan Bundy still has a bullet in his arm and he was sitting in the passenger seat of the vehicle. It is now believed that LaVoy left the vehicle to draw FBI sniper fire away from those who were in the vehicle. — Editor Liz Bowen

By Les Zaitz |

The Oregonian/OregonLive
Email the author
on March 08, 2016 at 10:10 AM, updated January 26, 2017 at 12:15 PM

BEND – An FBI agent is suspected of lying about firing twice at Robert “LaVoy” Finicum and may have gotten help from four other FBI agents in covering up afterward, authorities revealed Tuesday.

The bullets didn’t hit Finicum and didn’t contribute to his death, but now all five unnamed agents, part of an elite national unit, are under criminal investigation by the U.S. Justice Department. Inspector General Michael Horowitz is leading the independent inquiry.

The remarkable disclosure came as a team of local investigators released findings that two state troopers shot Finicum three times in the back during the chaotic scene at a police roadblock Jan. 26. One bullet pierced his heart, an autopsy showed.

A prosecutor ruled the fatal shooting was legally justified, saying state law allows use of deadly force when officers believe a person is about to seriously injure or kill someone. Finicum kept moving his hands toward a pocket that contained a loaded handgun. Although he was shot from behind, Finicum had a trooper in front of him armed with a Taser who was thought to be in danger.

Robert ‘LaVoy’ Finicum’s death is investigated: What was found

Finicum, 54, an Arizona rancher, was one of the leaders of the Jan. 2 takeover of  the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge near Burns.

Investigators gave no details to explain why the one FBI agent, a member of the Hostage Rescue Team, wouldn’t report the two shots. They also didn’t indicate what his four colleagues did to warrant investigation other than saying it was related to conduct after the shooting.

“The question of who fired these shots has not been resolved,” said Greg Bretzing, special agent in charge of the FBI in Portland. The federal agency is cooperating with the inspector general’s investigation, he said at a news conference.

The revelation is certain to inflame suspicions about Finicum’s death and shake confidence in the FBI, which came under intense fire for botched handling of violent sieges at Ruby Ridge in Idaho and Waco, Texas.

Some supporters have claimed Finicum was shot while surrendering, that he was unarmed and that he was shot nine times. The sheriff in neighboring Grant County, Glenn Palmer, described the police operation as an “ambush.”

Finicum’s family said in a statement a month ago that he was “executed in cold blood” and accused police agencies of deliberately misleading the public about what happened. His widow, Jeanette Finicum, didn’t retreat from that stance after watching the news conference.

“My husband was murdered,” she said in a statement.

The attorney for Ammon Bundy, the occupation’s now-jailed leader, found the  news of the FBI shots troubling.

“I’m going to have to go back and reconsider all the conspiracy theories that I’ve written off,” said the lawyer, Mike Arnold.

Investigators had planned to release police reports, interview transcripts, photographs, the autopsy report and new video to allow the public to evaluate the police findings in Finicum’s death.

But they ended up releasing only one video and 19 photographs, citing the new criminal investigation for the change in plans. They also withheld the names of the involved troopers and FBI agents, saying they’ve tracked up to 80 threats against them, mostly on social media.

Document: Text of announcement of findings

The shooting happened after police stopped a Jeep and a pickup carrying the key figures of the occupation along a remote stretch of U.S. 395 north of Burns.

Finicum was driving the truck that carried carried Ryan C. Bundy, 43, Ryan W. Payne, 32, Shawna Cox, 59, and Victoria Sharp, 18. In the Jeep behind them was driver Mark McConnell, 37, Brian D. Cavalier, 44, and Ammon Bundy, 40, the public face of the occupation. They were bound for a community meeting 100 miles north of the refuge in John Day.

Officer statements and cellphone video taken by Cox from inside the truck showed that Finicum repeatedly ignored police orders, first at the traffic stop and then after he crashed trying to elude officers. He nearly ran over an FBI agent before stalling in a roadside snowbank.

What happened in just seconds after that crash could lead to criminal charges against the FBI agents.

Cox’s video showed that one shot hit the truck’s left rear passenger window as Finicum stepped out. At the time, Finicum appeared to have his hands at least at shoulder height.

http://www.oregonlive.com/oregon-standoff/2016/03/oregon_standoff_fbi_agents_und.html

 

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

No Comments
« Older Posts