BUNDY...The True Story — Narrated by Ammon Bundy

Post Reply
User avatar
Posts: 509
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2017 4:11 pm

When Government Can’t Take 'Not Guilty' For an Answer

Post by Floyd » Thu Aug 31, 2017 7:17 am

http://reason.com/archives/2017/08/29/w ... guilty-for

The feds are engaged in an extended grudge match against western dissidents, without regard for the cost to justice or the taxpayers.
J.D. Tuccille | August 29, 2017

"The federal government is all about keeping the status quo," attorney Jess Marchese tells me. "They're not going to cede power."

I had asked Marchese, who represents Eric Parker in legal proceedings resulting from the 2014 Bundy ranch standoff over control of western lands, why he thought the federal government was taking yet another crack at his client who, along with codefendant O. Scott Drexler, will face the third trial in a row on a diminishing set of charges. The Las Vegas lawyer's take was that this had become a matter of pride for both the federal government and for Acting U.S. Attorney Steven W. Myhre after juries repeatedly frustrated federal prosecutors.

A mistrial was declared in April by U.S. District Court Judge Gloria Navarro after two of the six defendants in that trial were convicted on lesser charges, while jurors voted 10-2 in favor of acquitting two and split on the others, according to news reports. Just last week, jurors returned not a single "guilty" verdict in the retrial of the four remaining defendants. Found "not guilty" on all charges, Richard Lovelien of Oklahoma and Steven Stewart of Idaho were released after the federal government failed twice in its efforts to send them to prison. That left two defendants in limbo after the charges against them resulted in hung juries. Again.

User avatar
Posts: 509
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2017 4:11 pm

Ryan Bundy Holds the Key

Post by Floyd » Thu Aug 31, 2017 3:47 pm

https://itmattershowyoustand.com/2017/0 ... s-the-key/

View the above web site to see the photographic evidence

Gary Hunt
Outpost of Freedom
August 30, 2017

On January 26, 2016, several people, in two private vehicles were on their way to a scheduled meeting John Day, Oregon. While in a forested area, with extremely poor, if not non-existent, cell phone coverage, they were set upon by modern day highwaymen (highwaymen were people who stopped travelers and robbed them). The driver and passengers of the second vehicle submitted to the demands of the heavily armed interlopers, at gunpoint, to leave the vehicle and sit on the side of the snow-covered roadway.

The driver second vehicle, a white pick-up truck, following the exit of one of the passengers, sped away, seeking the assistance of a peace officer, Sheriff Glenn Palmer, of Grant County, Oregon. However, within a couple of miles they found that the highwaymen had set up a barricade across the road, barring passage. The highwaymen, hidden behind their vehicles, began firing shots at the white truck. This forced the truck off the road, where some rather adept driving may have saved one of the highwaymen’s life, by swerving, at the last moment.

The truck then came to a stop, and the driver, LaVoy Finicum, exited. In the back seat were three people; Shawna Cox, Victoria Sharp, and Ryan Bundy. Bundy sat on the left and Cox on the right.

Having already been shot at, there was concern for the safety of the party. Finicum, in an effort to draw fire away from those still in the truck, began moving towards the rear and away from the truck.

There were lots of loud noises. Some from 40 mm projectiles of rubber bullets and tear gas (OSP recovered 13 40 mm casings), others from flash-bang type grenades. Included, however, were two shots that came from the left-rear of the truck. One hit the top of the truck and one broke the driver side rear window. The round that broke the window may well have hit the side of the truck, pressuring the window to break, and deflecting into the shoulder of Ryan Bundy. This is the more logical explanation, as the velocity of the bullet, absent any other external resistance, should have penetrated much further than the fleshy part of Bundy’s shoulder.

Now, this gets interesting since the Oregon State Police (OSP) had to account for shots fired, though they could not account for two shots. Shell casings were missing, and the rather perplexing task resulted in speculation regarding the bullet impact on the driver’s side of the truck. Their conclusion was that it must have come from the shooter that fired three shots as the white truck approached the highwaymen, as shown in this OSP exhibit:

The government tried to attribute the shot at the rear door to the three shots fired as the vehicle approached the barricade. However, this does not quite work, as if you look at the yellow line in the third image. You see that if it did hit the truck, it would be a glancing strike. It would have been deflected upon impact, and the initial point of impact would be the most damaged. Any additional damage would have been less, as the bullet was deflected away from the truck body. As you can see, the greater impact was on the right side of the gap between the door and frame.

We must consider the possibility that the shot came from the left rear of the truck, which was the location of the FBI HRT (Hostage Rescue Team) members, including FBI HRT SA W. Joseph Astarita. Its initial impact would be the greatest, then, if it dented the side of the truck sufficiently, it would possibly enter the door, itself, behind the sheet metal surface. Upon impacting the door bracket that holds the window in place, if it exerted pressure on that frame, it could cause sufficient pressure for the window, itself, to buckle, spewing out pieces of glass when it burst, as seen in the video (linked below), rather than a break because of a direct impact by a bullet.

That same bullet could then deflect off the door/window frame and enter Ryan Bundy’s shoulder moving upward into the fleshy part, from the rear of the shoulder, as Ryan had turned to the right, and had bent over in an effort to protect the women.

Now, the question is, is that a bullet in Ryan’s shoulder? Well, the medical records from Harney District Hospital, in Burns, where Ryan was taken after the highwaymen kidnapped him and the others, except LaVoy, who lay dead where he fell after being shot in the back three times. The hospital reports indicate that there was “oozing” bleeding from Ryan’s right shoulder. Some of the language used in various reports from the hospital includes a written notation, “… consistent with bullet fragment versus other metallic foreign bodies.” Then, in two typed reports, we find, ” INDICATIONS: Gunshot wound to right shoulder”, and ” INDICATIONS: penetrating gunshot wound”. So, based on the X ray and the medical reports made within hours of the shooting, there can be little doubt that the highwaymen shot Ryan Bundy.

Now, considering where the shot probably hit, LaVoy had just exited the truck, and Ryan Bundy had just leaned over to protect the women. It is obvious that the shooter did not hit his target; perhaps he flinched, or is just a bad shot. However, every indication is that Astarita was trying to murder either LaVoy Finicum or Ryan Bundy, or both.

Here is what appears to be the scenario that resulted in a bullet in Ryan Bundy’s shoulder:

Now, some will suggest that it was a bullet that shattered the window, as seen in the video of this moment in time. There are three versions:

Real Time (0:56)

Half Speed Slow Motion (1:51)

Quarter Speed Slow Motion (3:42)

Now, most people believe that the window that shattered was shattered when hit by a bullet. To put their minds to rest, when a bullet strikes a safety-glass window, it leaves a hole about the size of the projectile. Then there is a much-disrupted area of extremely shattered glass, though still bound by the plastic, usually just a few inches in diameter. Finally, there is some cracking outside of that radius.

Why is this so important? Well, Maxine Bernstein, Oregon Live, made the point in her recent article, “LaVoy Finicum Shooting: Prosecutors seeking missing shell casings, metal fragment from Ryan Bundy’s shoulder“, dated August 3, 2017. Maxine has covered the entire story, from the courtroom standpoint, from the beginning. In this article, she seems to have a little insight into what may be the defense’s strongest argument, a lack of evidence, when she wrote:

The case against an FBI agent charged with lying about firing two shots at Oregon standoff spokesman Robert “LaVoy” Finicum most likely will turn on expert testimony about the validity of the Deschutes County Sheriff’s Office investigation, a defense lawyer said Thursday.

No one reported that they saw or heard agent W. Joseph Astarita fire and no direct evidence exists linking any bullet or shell casing to Astarita’s rifle, one of his lawyers said.

Prosecutors countered that the investigation continues and revealed for the first time that not only are shell casings from Astarita’s alleged shots missing, but so are shell casings from some of the Oregon State Police shots fired at the Jan. 26, 2016, roadblock.

Eight shots were fired. Six shell casings in roadway are all gone,” said Assistant U.S. Attorney Pam Holsinger, chief of the Criminal Division in the Oregon U.S. Attorney’s Office. She didn’t elaborate. State troopers fired six of the eight shots, with the other two eventually linked to Astarita, investigators and prosecutors said.

Astarita is charged with three counts of making a false statement (18 US Code §1001) and two counts of obstruction of justice (18 US Code §1512(b)(3)). What he is not charged with is, though it has become apparent that he did in fact, attempt to murder LaVoy Finicum and/or Ryan Bundy. As indicated by Maxine’s article, the prosecution is suggesting that there is no evidence — not of murder, rather, that Astarita lied.

Astarita was first scheduled to stand trial beginning August 29. The trial was been designated :complex” (Yes, that is what they have done in both the Burns and Bunkerville trials) and rescheduled to February 27, 2018.

The roof shot was a shot taken at an occupied vehicle, a criminal offense under state law. The door shot, described above, was taken while LaVoy was still just outside of his door and Ryan was huddled over Victoria Sharp. The shot was fired just between the two of them, indicating that in Astarita’s haste, he simply missed his mark.

Back on March 5, 1770, the King’s soldiers fired on and killed five people. They stood trial before a jury of citizens, though were found not guilty because they had a right to self-defense. However, both the laws and the people had a right to determine what they government could do, and what it could not do.

On January 26, 2016, a government “soldier” (armed with military grade weapon and accoutrements) attempted to kill, or at least, recklessly endangered the occupants of the white truck. He is not charged with such a crime, even though one of the occupants sustained a gunshot wound. Instead, he is charged with being dishonest and impeding an investigation. That would never have happened if we were still under the King. Instead, we have the hens (the United States Attorney and the FBI) guarding the foxhouse (the FBI), so, well, we know, now, just how this may end.

User avatar
Posts: 509
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2017 4:11 pm

The feds are engaged in an extended grudge match against western dissidents, without regard for the cost to justice

Post by Floyd » Fri Sep 01, 2017 10:49 am

http://freerangereport.com/index.php/20 ... -retrials/

With regard to Parker and Drexler, “how close was the jury to reaching verdicts on the unresolved charges?” I asked Marchese.

“There was one holdout,” he told me, obviously frustrated. That is, the jury voted 11-1 to acquit across the board. That one holdout allows the federal government to muster the resources of the federal government to try yet again in hopes that a third set of jurors will finally believe the government and convict Parker and Drexler of assaulting a federal officer and carrying a firearm in the commission of a crime and (in the case of Parker) two additional counts of using a firearm to threaten a federal officer.

The pending third trial is scheduled for September, though an appeal by Marchese may delay matters (and will likely nudge the pending trial of Cliven, Ammon, and Ryan Bundy even further into the future). That penciled-in date is remarkable when you consider that federal juries are traditionally almost rubber stamps for prosecutors.

“It should be known that all 12 jurors felt that this verdict was a statement regarding the various failures of the prosecution to prove ‘conspiracy’ in the count itself—and not any form of affirmation of the defense’s various beliefs, actions or aspirations,” one of the actual jurors told The Oregonian.

Ironically, the Malheur takeover started as a protest against an earlier exercise in prosecutorial excess in another case involving dispute over control of western lands.

Overreaching by the government may have played a similar role in the latest trial. Judge Navarro threw Parker off the stand—ironically, right after he mentioned the First Amendment—cutting short his testimony in his own defense and even striking it from the record. Even before that point, the judge “barred the defense from referencing constitutional rights to freely assemble and to bear arms. She also prohibited mention of alleged misconduct or excessive force by law enforcement,” reported the Las Vegas Review-Journal.

According to Marchese, who spoke to jurors after the trial, Judge Navarro’s heavy-handed courtroom management played a major role in the jury’s refusal to bring a single “guilty” verdict. Defending the status quo, refusing to cede power, the feds pushed too hard and had their anticipated victory stripped from them by offended representatives of the people in the courtroom.

And as with federal conduct of these trials overall, so it is with the behavior of Acting U.S. Attorney Steven W. Myhre.

User avatar
Posts: 509
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2017 4:11 pm

Bunkerville Was Never About The Cows

Post by Floyd » Sun Sep 03, 2017 7:01 pm


After seeing their God-given and Constitutionally-guaranteed rights being trampled on by the over-reaching Federal alphabet agencies, people across the nation rallied to defend the rights our country was founded on.

(Pictured: Cliven Bundy walks by a first amendment area set up by the Bureau of Land Management near Bunkerville, Nev.)
Videos on network news stations and around the internet depicted an elderly woman being thrown to the ground by law enforcement, a man being tazed repeatedly, and a “first amendment zone” set up miles away for protesters to stay out of the way of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM).

These citizens rightfully feared another Waco or Ruby Ridge encounter, and believed that citizens showing up in force, with cameras to record and witnesses to confirm, would reign-in the out-of-control government.

The government came heavily armed with hundreds of officers. They carried military-grade weapons and dressed in Battle-ready uniforms. That side of the fence looked like a war zone from Afghanistan.

The other side of the fence showed men, women, and children standing around under a highway overpass. Some had sidearms, as is legal in Nevada. Some had long guns, as is also legal in the state. Some carried protest signs, and still others rode on horseback.

A few folks had questions as to whether the BLM had legal orders to remove Cliven Bundy’s cattle. Most did not care. They knew nothing about cows, or grazing rights, or ranching in the desert.

They knew about the First Amendment, the Second Amendment and the other rights they saw were not available to these citizens.

They came and they stood. They saw government weapons being pointed at them. They feared for their lives, yet they did not back down. They stood until the cows came home and the federal agents left the area.

User avatar
Posts: 509
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2017 4:11 pm

Trial set for Cliven and sons and 4 others

Post by Floyd » Tue Sep 05, 2017 9:53 am

http://dennismichaellynch.com/date-set- ... efendants/

Also included in the group are defendants online media personality Peter Santilli of Cincinnati and Ryan Payne of Anaconda, Montana.

Ryan Bundy, who has chosen to represent himself, reportedly told the judge that after spending 18 months in custody, he deserved to be released, as his right to a speedy trial had been violated.

When the group was brought to court for the hearing Thursday, Ammon Bundy reportedly refused to go, as he objects to the strip-search procedure to which he is subjected each time he is transported, his attorney, Daniel Hill, said.

The original standoff occurred when the Bundy family and others who came to support them objected to the government’s rounding up of Bundy cattle off what is now called Gold Butte National Monument land, on which they had been grazing.

The Bundy family has grazed their cattle on the land since the early 1900s. They are accused of recruiting “militia members” to prevent the Bureau of Land Management from removing the cattle from the land.

Cliven Bundy has stated that he doesn’t recognize the federal government as having any authority over the land and that it should still be under control of the state.

User avatar
Posts: 509
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2017 4:11 pm

Trump calls out BLM for theft

Post by Floyd » Tue Sep 05, 2017 3:01 pm

Posts: 500
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2017 6:06 pm

Prosecutors AGAIN withholding evidence from defense

Post by neighbor » Sat Sep 09, 2017 3:41 pm

http://thepetesantillishow.com/bundy-ra ... ng-trials/

PROSECUTORS in Las Vegas got back to work on Monday, and in the case of USA vs Cliven Bundy et al — it was dirty “business as usual.”

It was revealed late Monday afternoon that Steven Myhre and the Department of Justice are refusing to hand over audio recordings they are suspected of having in their possession containing radio transmissions the defense believes are recordings between Special Agent In Charge Daniel P. Love, BLM sniper teams, other tactical personnel, and possible informants who were on the ground surveilling Bundy Ranch as far back as March in 2014.

These recordings are vital to the defense in that the indictment against rancher Cliven Bundy and his co-defendants specifically states that Mr. Bundy and several others told lies and exaggerated the situation between Bundy and the BLM for the purpose of recruiting gunmen to come and help get the rancher’s cattle back. Up and until the first trial which began last February, the BLM denied the use of snipers and other tactical personnel during “Operation Gold Butte” the BLM’s official name for the Bundy Ranch cattle impoundment.

Posts: 500
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2017 6:06 pm

More leaked BLM footage

Post by neighbor » Sat Sep 09, 2017 3:57 pm

User avatar
Posts: 509
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2017 4:11 pm

Judge Napolitano on Feds treatment of the Bundys

Post by Floyd » Sun Sep 10, 2017 1:09 pm

The judge makes a few points but is wrong about the Bundys owing even a single penny to the BLM.

Posts: 353
Joined: Tue Jul 11, 2017 4:57 pm

Oregon House passes bill to shield officer who shot ‘LaVoy’ Finicum

Post by learning » Mon Sep 18, 2017 5:14 pm

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/ ... lies-agai/

Protect the guilty and persecute the innocent has become the Oregon state mantra.
The Oregon House overwhelmingly approved a bill Wednesday that would shield the identity of the officer who shot and killed Robert “LaVoy” Finicum, and potentially others, despite cross-ideological opposition from both Finicum supporters and Black Lives Matter.

The 55-3 House vote came in response to threats against the Oregon State Police officer, whose name has yet to be released pending an investigation.

Post Reply