FEDS WANT TO REVIVE CASE LOST BY ‘OUTRAGEOUS’ PROSECUTION


UN-FREAKING BELIEVABLE!

 

Many may already know this, but I just ran into this story after largely light blogging during Christmas. I just read a WND story that the U.S. Assistant Attorney in Nevada intends to appeal U.S. District Judge Gloria Navarro’s dismissal of all charges against Cliven Bundy, his sons and supporters for the 2014 armed standoff with Bureau of Land Management agents.

 

Why were the charges dismissed?

 

BECAUSE the Federal Prosecutors “… conduct in the case as “outrageous” and “flagrant,” asserting prosecutors concealed evidence favorable to the defense.

 

President Trump needs to drain that Obama swamp in Nevada!

 

JRH 12/26/18

[Thanks to all who offered Christmas support in this Blogger’s laptop update. Your generosity is always appreciated: Please Support NCCR]

********************

 

Cliven Bundy

 FEDS WANT TO REVIVE CASE LOST BY ‘OUTRAGEOUS’ PROSECUTION

Lawyer asks government if it will continue ‘gross injustice’ against Bundys

 

WND EXCLUSIVE

December 21, 2018

 

The federal government is preparing to appeal the dismissal of charges against Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy, his sons and supporters for the 2014 armed standoff with Bureau of Land Management agents.

 

The Bundys faced charges of conspiracy, obstruction, threats and assault for squaring off with federal agents and contract cowboys enforcing court orders to round up the family’s cattle.

 

The case was dismissed by U.S. District Judge Gloria Navarro, who scolded the government’s conduct in the case as “outrageous” and “flagrant,” asserting prosecutors concealed evidence favorable to the defense.

 

The case was dismissed “with prejudice,” meaning the government is not allowed to retry the defendants regarding the standoff.

 

Now, Larry Klayman, the founder of Freedom Watch, has told WND that Assistant U.S. Attorney Elizabeth White of the district of Nevada informed him the federal government has prepared an appeal brief.

 

Klayman said he asked for confirmation in a letter to the Justice Department solicitor general, Noel Francisco.

 

“In light of the history of this case and the gross injustice which has already been meted out against my client Cliven Bundy, his sons, and family by rogue Obama-era prosecutors,” Klayman wrote, the only reason for an appeal would be to cover up for “corrupt prosecutors.”

 

And he noted that the behavior of prosecutors in the case remains “under review” by the Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility and the Inspector General.

 

“It is time to allow my clients to go on with their lives and not continue to be persecuted by a Department of ‘Injustice,’ which rather than meting out justice, ‘circles the wagons’ to try to unethically and unlawfully protect its own,” he wrote.

 

Klayman included with the letter a lengthy statement by whistleblower Larry Wooten, a special agent with the Department of Interior and Bureau of Land Management, who detailed alleged misconduct in the case.

 

His description begins: “I routinely observed, [in the case] and the investigation revealed a widespread pattern of bad judgment, lack of discipline, incredible bias, unprofessionalism and misconduct, as well as likely policy, ethical, and legal violations among senior and supervisory staff at the BLM’s Office of Law Enforcement and Security.”

 

Wooten said the issues he uncovered put “our agency and specific law enforcement supervisors in potential legal, civil, and administrative jeopardy.”

 

When he went to superiors, he found they either knew of the issues already or had “instigated the misconduct.”

 

He charges “gross mismanagement,” “abuse of authority,” violations of the merit system principles and “prohibited personnel practices.”

 

The standoff between federal agents and Bundy supporters stemmed from the government’s contention Bundy had been grazing his cattle on publicly owned land and was therefore responsible for substantial past fees. Klayman, among others, has insisted the prosecution of the Bundy family was politically motivated.

 

Bundy and his supporters contend the federal government has no authority over state lands.

______________________

© Copyright 1997-2018. All Rights Reserved. WND.com.

 

SUPPORT WND

 

About WND

 

WND, formerly WorldNetDaily, can best be explained by its mission statement: “WND is an independent news company dedicated to uncompromising journalism, seeking truth and justice and revitalizing the role of the free press as a guardian of liberty. We remain faithful to the traditional and central role of a free press in a free society – as a light exposing wrongdoing, corruption and abuse of power.

 

“We also seek to stimulate a free-and-open debate about the great moral and political ideas facing the world and to promote freedom and self-government by encouraging personal virtue and good character.”

 

Indeed, WND is a fiercely independent news site committed to hard-hitting investigative reporting of government waste, fraud and abuse.

 

Founded by Joseph and Elizabeth Farah in May 1997, it is now a leading Internet news site in both traffic and influence.

 

WND has READ THE REST

 

Will Bundy Prosecution MISCONDUCT be Given Pass by Judge Navarro?


John R. Houk

© December 16, 2017

 

For decades the Bureau of Land Management (BLM … Not to be confused with African-American racists pumping Black Lives Matter) has been utilizing bureaucratic rules and regulation (NOT CONGRESSIONAL LEGISLATION) to manipulate Western Ranchers use of their own land and/or Federal usurped land with excessive grazing fees to force Leftist Eco-Marxist agendas or protect Crony Capitalist agendas supported by the Left. Check out this BLM land grab assessment from the American Thinker in 2010:

 

The current practices of federal agencies provide a few clues. Although the only body authorized under the Constitution to buy or sell land for government purposes is Congress, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and other federal agencies like the Forest Service have for several decades deprived private property owners of their land (and cattle) at below market prices. The land is then leased back to its owners for a yearly fee. Land that predates the BLM is simply confiscated by way of litigation [i].

 

In one such case, a rancher named Wally Klump contested the BLM’s rights to his land owing to the fact that his ranch predated the BLM by one hundred years. When Klump refused to move, he was held in contempt and sent to federal prison. The result should come as no shock, since internal BLM documents reveal that humans are viewed as a “biological resource” for the purposes of “ecosystem management activities.” (‘Sustainable’ Poverty: The Real Face of the Leftist Environmental Agenda; By John Griffing; American Thinker; 8/25/10)

 

Exposing a latent Marxism and Crony Capitalism inherent in the BLM goes a long way to explaining rancher hostility to this Federal Agency’s despotism toward private ownership and traditional grazing rights is so important.

 

The Bundy family organized a rancher stand-off against the BLM despotism which was aided none other than by the FBI (currently embroiled in Leftist cover-ups of Obama Administration probable crimes). Unsurprisingly, the Dems and Obama Justice Department have used the full resources of the Federal government to eradicate the Bundy family no doubt to make an example to other ranchers resisting BLM despotism.

 

The Obama DOJ faced a couple of problems.

 

First in the Bundy led Oregon stand-off trials, all the big dog defendants were acquitted by a jury with only minor convictions of other defendants. Immediately after Bundy exonerations in Oregon, the Feds arrested the Bundys and other rancher allies over their Bunkerville stand-off to protect the family cattle from BLM confiscation and slaughter because the Bundys refused to pay exorbitant grazing fees. The fee disagreement was an already much used BLM despotic tactic to force ranchers to conform to environmental and crony Capitalist rules and regulations.

 

The second problem for the Obama DOJ led persecution of the Bundys and their allies is that juries were acquitting minor participants, having hung juries or convictions again on minor (yet unfair) obstruction of justice violations.

 

And third, the Obama DOJ lost their Kemosabe ally in Obama’s Administration ending in January 2017 and the expected Leftist successor (Crooked Hillary) lost the November 2016 election.

 

For the Bundys, point three might be the most important. Obama originally set-up Daniel Bogden as the Federal Attorney General in Nevada. Bogden experienced some swamp draining by U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions. BHO appointed Bogden in 2009. Apparently Bogden’s replacement Acting U.S. Attorney Steven Myhre is a part of the Bogden-Swamp. Federal Judge Gloria Navarro (an Obama Appointee) along with the rest  of the prosecution swamp have lost their Leftist political lifeline. This can be seen when Whistleblowers don’t fear Obamunist political reprisals.

 

Perhaps such is the case of Whistleblower BLM Investigator Larry Wooten. Wooten had put together an 18-page memo that explains how “the government employees engaged in a host of policy, ethical and legal violations” against the Bundy family before and during the Bunkerville stand-off in Nevada. The Bundy Defense Attorneys just recently saw this exculpatory evidence held back by the Prosecution. This sent the Obama appointed Federal Judge Gloria Navarro into enough of a tizzy that she sent the Jury home until she fully examined the memo.

 

I am willing to bet you have not read or heard a lick of this prosecutorial crisis from the Mainstream Media (MSM). Sadly, neither I have I run into any coverage by the still better disseminating Fox News channel.

 

I first heard of trial misconduct from a Tim Brown post in The Sons of Liberty Media under the title ‘After Prosecution “Missteps” in Bundy Trial, is it All Over? – Jury Sent Home, Will Be Called Back “If They Are Needed”’. That post is dated 12/13/17. After looking for other sources, I found the same Tim Brown post under the title “BUNDY PERSECUTION OVER? PROSECUTION MAKES BIG MISTAKE AT TRIAL, JURY DISMISSED” posted on 12/14/17 at Keep and Bear.

 

I enjoy reading Brown articles, yet I am certain Leftist too often dismiss him as a Far-Right Conspiracy Theorist. BUT SURPRISE dear Leftists, I have a couple of journalists from the Las Vegas Review-Journal and OregonLive.com. I am cross posting both even most of the info is repeated in both, there are tidbit differences that worth getting the full story. (azcentral.com has a decent post as well, but I find their website a bit difficult to scroll through: “Federal agent alleges U.S. misconduct, cover-up in Bundy Ranch trial”.)

 

JRH 12/16/17

Please Support NCCR

***********************

Memo alleges government misconduct in Bunkerville standoff case

 

By Rachel Crosby

December 15, 2017 7:42 pm

Las Vegas Review-Journal

 

A Bundy Ranch sign near Bunkerville, Nev. greets visitors on Thursday, May 19, 2016. (Jeff Scheid/Las Vegas Review-Journal)

 

The possibility of a mistrial in the Bunkerville standoff case was amplified this month after defense attorneys received a scathing memo outlining sweeping allegations of misconduct by federal investigators and prosecutors.

 

According to the 18-page memo, obtained late Thursday by the Las Vegas Review-Journal but first viewed last week by defense lawyers, the government employees engaged in a host of policy, ethical and legal violations.

 

The document, dated Nov. 27, was penned by Bureau of Land Management investigator Larry Wooten, who had been tasked with assessing how the agency handled the 2014 armed standoff at Cliven Bundy’s ranch in Bunkerville. Wooten previously testified before the federal grand jury that returned indictments against the Bundys.

 

In his whistleblowing memo, which Wooten sent directly to the U.S. Department of Justice as a “last resort,” the investigator described pervasive misconduct by his fellow investigators, saying it reminded him of middle school. He argued that the behavior was so common and inappropriate that it could be “considered exculpatory and subject to trial discovery.”

 

Prosecutors handed over the memo last week, prompting defense lawyers to file a motion early Monday to dismiss the case, which already had been delayed a week over concerns that prosecutors were not sharing evidence with the defense in a timely manner. The memo is sealed and not part of the public court record.

 

Wooten said he repeatedly tried to report the allegations to his supervisors, who largely dismissed his observations. In February, Wooten was removed from the investigation after complaining to the U.S. attorney’s office in Nevada, according to the memo.

 

In reference to the ongoing Bundy case, Wooten said investigators openly referred to the Bundys and their supporters using several different profanities and sexually inappropriate terms. In an office presentation, Wooten’s supervisor also included altered and degrading photos of the defendants, according to the memo.

 

‘Clear prejudice’

 

Wooten went on to accuse agency officers of bragging about roughing up Dave Bundy, one of Cliven’s sons, in April 2014, citing comments about the officers grinding Dave Bundy’s face into the ground so much so that Dave Bundy had “little bits of gravel stuck in his face,” Wooten said.

 

“The misconduct caused considerable disruption in our workplace, was discriminatory, harassing and showed clear prejudice against the defendants, their supporters and Mormons,” Wooten wrote, later adding that, on two occasions, his supervisor asked him, “You’re not a Mormon, are you?”

 

He added that, for a period of time, one of his supervisors “instigated” the monitoring of jail calls between the defendants and their wives “without prosecutor or FBI consent,” though he noted that Steve Myhre, Nevada’s acting U.S. attorney and the lead prosecutor on the case, quickly put a stop to the practice.

 

In the memo, Wooten also described misconduct separate from the Bundy case, which extended to “citizens, cooperators from other agencies and even our own employees.”

 

He added that supervisors openly talked about other employees’ mental health and often shared derogatory opinions of higher level supervisors, and he noted that he filed a separate formal complaint to the BLM in reference to those allegations.

 

In reference to when the U.S. attorney’s office had Wooten pulled from the case, Wooten said a supervisor subsequently violated his privacy by ransacking his office and by seizing case files, investigative notes and personal documents, including medical records. Those items have not been returned, he said.

 

“I am convinced that I was removed to prevent the ethical and proper further disclosure of the severe misconduct, failure to correct and report, and cover-ups by (BLM) supervisors,” Wooten wrote.

 

Wooten went on to accuse Myhre, the case’s lead prosecutor, of relying on inaccurate talking points throughout his prosecution strategy and adopting a “don’t ask, don’t tell” attitude in reference to BLM misconduct.

 

Wooten added that, prior to the investigation, he held Myhre “in the highest of regards,” but after Wooten’s attempts to report sweeping misconduct went unheard and got him kicked off the case, he now believes Myrhe is clouded by “extreme” personal bias and “a desire to win at all costs.”

 

“Not only did Mr. Myhre in my opinion not want to know or seek out evidence favorable to the accused, he and my supervisor discouraged the reporting of such issues and even likely covered up the misconduct,” Wooten wrote.

 

The U.S. attorney’s office in Nevada declined to comment Friday.

U.S. District Judge Gloria Navarro is expected to reconvene court at 8 a.m. Wednesday.

 

‘Totally unusual’ case

 

It remains unclear if the explosive memo provides the defense a clear path to a mistrial.

 

UNLV law professor Ruben Garcia, who teaches professional responsibility, said the allegations, if true, are possible ethical violations that the State Bar of Nevada may investigate.

 

But for the purpose of the pending trial, Garcia said the decision is up to the judge.

 

“She’ll have to decide what is worthy of a dismissal, based on her standards and federal criminal standards,” he said.

 

Veteran Las Vegas defense attorney Tom Pitaro said the more common approach in situations of late discovery is to grant the defense extra time to analyze the new evidence and adjust their strategy. But, he added, given the extensive allegations and applicable case law, “Who knows?”

 

“This case of course has become so unique — just totally unusual,” he told the Review-Journal on Friday.

 

The 2014 standoff came after a years long legal dispute over grazing fees. Cliven Bundy had long contested the fees, which had been imposed for his continued, illegal use of federal land for cattle grazing.

 

In response, federal agents began rounding up and impounding the rancher’s cattle, but stood down after Bundy and a group of armed supporters protested the roundup and forced a shutdown of Interstate 15, garnering national media attention. The charges Cliven Bundy and his sons currently face stem from the standoff.

 

“The purpose of this narrative is not to take up for or defend the actions of the subjects of this investigation,” Wooten noted in the memo. “This investigation further indicated that instead of Cliven Bundy properly using the court system or other avenues to properly address his grievances, he chose an illegal, uncivilized, and dangerous strategy in which a tragedy was narrowly and thankfully avoided.”

 

Contact Rachel Crosby at rcrosby@reviewjournal.com

Follow @rachelacrosby on Twitter.

+++++++++

BLM investigator alleges misconduct by feds in Bundy ranch standoff

 

By Maxine Bernstein

mbernstein@oregonian.com

Updated Dec 15, 11:11 PM; Posted Dec 15, 1:36 AM

The Oregonian/OregonLive

 

Cliven Bundy

 

A scathing memo from the lead investigator who assessed how federal officers handled the 2014 armed standoff with Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy accuses agents of far-reaching misconduct, recklessness and unrestrained antipathy toward the family.

 

The 18-page document, obtained Thursday by The Oregonian/OregonLive, is dated Nov. 27.

 

Prosecutors shared it last week with defense lawyers for Bundy, his two sons and co-defendant Ryan Payne as they were in the midst of their conspiracy trial, but it’s not part of the public court record.

 

The memo prompted Cliven Bundy’s lawyer to file a motion early Monday to dismiss the case, already in disarray over concerns raised previously about the government’s failure to promptly share evidence with the defense.

 

The judge sent the jury home for more than a week as she tries to sort out the claims and prosecutors scramble to save their case.

 

The memo comes from Larry Wooten, who had been the lead case agent and investigator for the U.S. Bureau of Land Management after the tense confrontation outside the patriarch’s ranch near Bunkerville. Wooten also testified before a federal grand jury that returned indictments against the Bundys. He said he was removed from the investigation last February after he complained to the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Nevada.

 

Then last month he sent a whistleblower email to the U.S. Department of Justice, alleging a “widespread pattern of bad judgment, lack of discipline, incredible bias, unprofessionalism and misconduct, as well as likely policy, ethical and legal violations among senior and supervisory staff” at the Bureau of Land Management’s Office of Law Enforcement and Security.

 

Wooten wrote that supervisory agents with the bureau repeatedly mocked the defendants in an “amateurish carnival atmosphere” that resembled something out of middle school, displayed “clear prejudice” against the Bundys, their supporters and Mormons, and prominently displayed degrading altered booking photos of Cliven Bundy and other defendants in a federal office and in an office presentation.

 

The memo described “heavy handedness” by government officers as they prepared to impound Cliven Bundy’s cattle. He said some officers “bragged about roughing up Dave Bundy, grinding his face into the ground and Dave Bundy having little bits of gravel stuck in his face.” Dave Bundy, one of Cliven Bundy’s sons, was arrested April 6, 2014, while videotaping men he suspected were federal agents near his father’s ranch.

 

Wooten contends that supervisory agents failed to turn over required discovery evidence to the prosecution team that could help the defense or be used to question the credibility of a witness, as required by law.

 

The top agents also “instigated” the monitoring of jail phone calls between defendants and their wives without consent from the U.S. Attorney’s Office or the FBI, Wooten wrote, though the memo noted that Steven Myhre, Nevada’s acting U.S. attorney who is leading the prosecution of the Bundys, stopped the practice.

 

Myhre couldn’t be reached for comment late Thursday. On Friday morning, Trisha Young, a spokeswoman for the Nevada U.S. Attorney’s Office, said the office declined to comment.

 

Cliven Bundy, sons Ammon and Ryan Bundy and Payne are accused of conspiring to block federal agents from enforcing court orders to confiscate family cattle on public land after Cliven Bundy failed to pay grazing fees and fines for years.

 

They’re also accused of using or carrying a firearm in a crime of violence, threatening a federal law enforcement officer, obstruction of justice and extortion. Their trial began Nov. 14 in Las Vegas.

 

Wooten accused Dan Love, the former special agent-in-charge of the cattle roundup for the Bureau of Land Management, of intentionally ignoring direction from the U.S. Attorney’s Office and his superiors “in order to command the most intrusive, oppressive, large scale and militaristic trespass cattle impound possible.” He described Love as immune from discipline, though Love eventually was fired from the bureau for misconduct in an unrelated case.

 

Wooten said he learned from other agency supervisors that Love had a “Kill Book” as a “trophy,” in which he essentially bragged about “getting three individuals in Utah to commit suicide,” following a joint FBI-BLM investigation into the alleged trafficking of stolen artifacts.

 

Wooten said his supervisor took photos in a secure command post at FBI headquarters in Las Vegas of an “Arrest Tracking Wall,” where photos of Cliven Bundy and co-defendant Eric Parker were marked with an “X” over them, and emailed out the photos, although no photos were allowed to be taken in that area.

 

Wooten called prosecutors in the Bundy case and told Myhre and Assistant U.S. Attorney Nadia Ahmed, as well as FBI special agent Joel Willis, of his fears that his supervisors weren’t sharing key witness statements with them.

 

On Feb. 16, Wooten said he asked Myhre if statements that Love made, such as “Go out there and kick Cliven Bundy in the mouth (or teeth) and take his cattle” or “I need you to get the troops fired up to go get those cows and not take any crap from anyone” would be considered evidence that must be shared with the defense. He said that Myhre replied, saying something like “we do now” or “it is now.”

 

Two days later, Wooten said his supervisor took him off the investigation and another Bureau of Land Management agent confiscated files from his office and from a safe in his office.

 

The material included computer hard drives, collected emails, text messages, case notes and “lessons learned,” Wooten wrote.

 

“These items were taken because they contained significant evidence of misconduct and items that would potentially embarrass BLM Law Enforcement Supervision,” the memo said. “I am convinced that I was removed to prevent the ethical and proper further disclosure of the severe misconduct.”

 

Wooten said his supervisor told him that Myhre “furiously demanded” that he be removed and that Myhre had mentioned something about the bureau’s failure to turn over all crucial evidence to his office.

 

Wooten noted that he was ordered not to contact the Nevada U.S. Attorney’s Office.

 

He said he believed Myhre “adopted an attitude of ‘don’t ask, don’t tell”’ or “preferred ignorance” when it came to potential information from the federal land management agency that would have been helpful to the Bundy defense.

 

He also said prosecutors relied on inaccurate talking points, particularly not disclosing at previous trials the fact there were government snipers on surveillance outside the Bundy Ranch before the April 12, 2014, showdown.

 

“Not only did Mr. Myhre in my opinion not want to know or seek out evidence favorable to the accused, he and my supervisor discouraged the reporting of such issues,” Wooten wrote.

 

Wooten said he had held Myhre in the highest regard, but believes his judgment is “clouded” by personal bias and a “desire to win the case at all costs.”

 

Wooten, now working as a bureau agent in Idaho, sent the memo to an associate deputy U.S. attorney general who serves as the U.S. Department of Justice’s national criminal discovery coordinator. He obtained the lawyer’s contact information during a training by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Boise, Idaho.

 

“I have tried to resolve these issues through my chain of command but I have failed,” he wrote in the memo.

 

But he felt it was “his obligation” to report his findings, describing his memo as a “last resort.”

 

He didn’t return phone calls or messages Thursday night.

 

Cliven Bundy’s lawyer Bret O. Whipple declined any comment on the memo, and would only describe the new information received as “quite a development,” one he hadn’t seen in his 20-plus years of legal work.

 

“In my mind, I think the case should be dismissed by next Tuesday,” Whipple said. “I think I can get my client home for Christmas.”

 

“Not only did Mr. Myhre in my opinion not want to know or seek out evidence favorable to the accused, he and my supervisor discouraged the reporting of such issues,” Wooten wrote.

 

Wooten said he had held Myhre in the highest regard, but believes his judgment is “clouded” by personal bias and a “desire to win the case at all costs.”

 

Wooten, now working as a bureau agent in Idaho, sent the memo to an associate deputy U.S. attorney general who serves as the U.S. Department of Justice’s national criminal discovery coordinator. He obtained the lawyer’s contact information during a training by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Boise, Idaho.

 

“I have tried to resolve these issues through my chain of command but I have failed,” he wrote in the memo.

 

But he felt it was “his obligation” to report his findings, describing his memo as a “last resort.”

 

He didn’t return phone calls or messages Thursday night.

 

Cliven Bundy’s lawyer Bret O. Whipple declined any comment on the memo, and would only describe the new information received as “quite a development,” one he hadn’t seen in his 20-plus years of legal work.

 

“In my mind, I think the case should be dismissed by next Tuesday,” Whipple said. “I think I can get my client home for Christmas.”

 

— Maxine Bernstein

@maxoregonian

_______________________

Will Bundy Prosecution MISCONDUCT be Given Pass by Judge Navarro?

John R. Houk

© December 16, 2017

____________________

Memo alleges government misconduct in Bunkerville standoff case

 

Copyright © 2017 Las Vegas Review-Journal, Inc.

____________________

BLM investigator alleges misconduct by feds in Bundy ranch standoff

 

© 2017 Oregon Live LLC. All rights reserved (About Us).


The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of Oregon Live LLC. [Blog Editor: Yup, I didn’t get permission ergo if requested the Oregon Live cross post will be removed. Borough at your own risk.]

 

One Quiet Man’s Fight for Freedom


in-memory-of-lavoy-finicum-american-patriot

It was about a year ago that LaVoy Finicum was shot to death by Federal and Oregon State law enforcement UNJUSTLY. Justin reminds us that government tyranny is very possible in America – especially in an America that has a Dem Party Administration that has consistently lied to Americans for EIGHT YEARS.

 

JRH 1/24/17

Please Support NCCR

***************

One Quiet Man’s Fight for Freedom

 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent 1/23/2017 7:38 AM

 

Destroyers are they who lay snares for many, and call it the state … ” — Nietzsche

 

Americans should pause and take some time to recall and celebrate the life of Robert LaVoy Finicum, an American patriot, who loved his family, God and country. He placed his life on the line in defense of all Americans’ right to ‘life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness’, joining the ranks of thousands of other ranchers who have been fighting the overreaches of the federal government and the tyranny of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) for the past forty years. Robert LaVoy Finicum died on January 26th, 2016, one day before his 55th birthday, defending the U.S. Constitution and this America he loved so well.

 

By all accounts, LaVoy Finicum was “a quiet man who worked his to-do list from sun-up to sundown” (The Oregonian) and had a “light reading” list that included many history books, the U.S. Constitution and Alexis de Tocqueville’s ‘Democracy in America’. He also thoroughly enjoyed his big family – his wife and eleven children – and their evening discussions on the Scriptures, the Constitution and the Founding Fathers’ ideas on freedom.

 

Although Finicum had generally viewed his interaction with the BLM to be “very good” over the years, he became active in opposing them in 2014, after the BLM fined him $12,000 and claimed his cattle had grazed on federal lands past his allotted permit time. He was also heavily influenced by his own research into the BLM and the high-handed tactics he witnessed the BLM employ against the Bundy family in 2014.

 

Finicum rode with Cliven and Ammon Bundy on their Nevada Ranch in April of 2014, along with hundreds of other supporters, in order to reinforce the fact that Bundy’s grazing and water rights, documented in an 1878 title, predated any BLM claims and had to be honored by the BLM. And when the BLM moved along Interstate 15 to confiscate Bundy’s cattle on April 5th, Finicum, the Bundy family members and well-armed supporters stopped them cold where they stood; this would become a sore-point for the FBI that carried over to the Malheur Wildlife Reserve occupation in 2016 and the stand-off near Burns, Oregon.

 

After the Bundy Ranch Stand-Off, LaVoy Finicum said: “I had to do a lot of soul searching. I realized that Cliven Bundy was standing on a very strong constitutional principle, and yet, here I was continuing to pay a grazing fee to the BLM.”

 

Finicum and the Bundy clan understood that the Enclave Clause [Thoughts from 2014 & 2016] (Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 of the Constitution) did not allow government bureaucrats to act like kings and ignore the 9th and 10th Amendments, and it did not authorize the BLM to arbitrarily seize the water rights, cattle and property of ranchers and arrogantly nullify 200 years of constitutional history. They understood, much like the U.S. Supreme Court (New York v. U.S.), that the Constitution is not a tool to protect the sovereignty of the State or for the benefit of government officials, but rather, the Constitution secures all Americans’ liberties through the diffusion of sovereign power.

 

However, the BLM sees things differently. Many cases spanning the years can be found, that are similar to Raymond Yowell’s experience. The BLM garnished the $200 Social Security check of this former chief of the Shoshone Indian Tribe and seized 132 head of his cattle in 2002, for grazing “unlawfully” on government lands. The BLM sold Yowell’s cattle at auction and pocketed the money.

 

Between 2006 and 2012, the BLM had intimidated and finally charged Steven and Dwight Hammond with nine federal counts of arson for setting backfires on their own lands that supposedly spread to federal land. The Hammonds were subsequently imprisoned, released and then sent back to prison, even though the facts illuminated that some of those out-of-control backfires actually originated with BLM employees, in an attempt to stop several lightning strike fires such as the Granddad fire that burned 46,000 acres.

 

Politics played heavily in the cases regarding Steven and Dwight Hammond, because the BLM wanted the Hammond ranch. Gold mining companies like Calico Resource USA out of Vancouver, Canada and uranium mining concerns like Australian owned Oregon Energy LLC had their eyes on the area, and the BLM was hoping to profit and grow more powerful through the General Mining Law of 1872.

 

All the great ideas and principles that shaped America went with LaVoy Finicum, as he and many other American Patriots occupied Oregon’s Malheur (French for “misfortune” or “tragedy”) National Wildlife Refuge, about 30 miles from Burns, Oregon, in order to force the return of 188,000 acres to local control and the release of the Hammond brothers from prison. They acted through peaceful, political protest, even though they were armed to ensure the security of their protest, and they advocated for property and states’ rights, as they took a hard stand against federal ownership of 250 million acres in America and years of oppression by the BLM and several other government agencies, including the Environmental Protection Agency.

 

Twenty-five days into the protest, Robert LaVoy Finicum, Ammon and Ryan Bundy, Shawna Cox, Ryan Payne and Victoria Sharp headed to John Day, Oregon for a “singing” and a meeting with Grant County Sheriff Glenn Palmer to discuss their demands, explain their views to local people and seek a peaceful end to the stand-off. But they were ambushed along the way by the Oregon State Patrol and the FBI’s Hostage Rescue Team, which used combat-grade operation protocols rather than “civilian” deadly force standards, firing once without warning at the initial stop, according to many witnesses, and numerous times at the second roadblock using concussion and live rounds.

 

Does this remind anyone else of Ruby Ridge and the murders of Randy Weaver’s wife and son by the FBI?

 

If the federal authorities had been serious about desiring a peaceful resolution to this conflict, they could have coordinated with Sheriff Palmer to arrest Finicum, if just cause existed for an arrest (they knew Finicum’s destination). Instead they chose to shoot him numerous times and refuse him medical attention from Victoria Sharp, a trained EMT and his friend, as he lay on the snowy ground dying. They murdered LaVoy on a lonely, desolate stretch of Highway 395.

 

If the FBI had negotiated LaVoy Finicum’s peaceful surrender, as they certainly could have, he would simply have been taken into custody and released after his acquittal by a jury, just in the same manner that a jury acquitted his so-called “co-conspirators” in October 2016, including Ammon Bundy and a friend and activist, Shawna Cox. And, it should alarm everyone that the HRT agents initially concealed the fact they had fired their weapons during the stop.

 

Upon her release, Shawna Cox made a plea before a mass of TV cameras and supporters, imploring: “We have to be vigilant people. Wake up America, and help us restore the Constitution. Don’t sleep with your head in the sand.

 

Isn’t it odd that FBI agents, who are sworn to protect and defend the U.S. Constitution — lawyers all — regularly side with government imposed tyranny against U.S. citizens?

 

Arianna Finicum Brown, LaVoy’s 27 year old daughter, stated shortly after his death: “My Dad was such a good man, through and through. He would never want to hurt somebody, but he does believe in defending freedom and he knew the risks involved.

 

During LaVoy’s funeral, his brother, Guy Finicum remarked on LaVoy’s deep faith in God, adding: “He has absolute confidence that he will be with his family again. He believes that as much as he believes the sun will rise. And that’s what gave him the ability to do what he did. He always looked at a higher goal.”

 

When any government, including ours, puts forth its strength on the side of injustice and murders fine men like LaVoy Finicum, it reveals itself as a mere brute force, and it becomes apparent more than ever that tyranny rules. And other patriots are served warning to desist their opposition or meet the same fate.

 

And what are Americans to think of a government to which all the truly brave and just men in the land are enemies, standing between it and those whom it oppresses?

 

Robert LaVoy Finicum did not recognize unjust human laws, and he persistently stood for the dignity of human nature, knowing himself for a man, the equal of any government. He regularly fought against established injustices and the hypocrites of bureaucracies who seemed to ask, “Why do you assault us”. And LaVoy’s death — the death of an American hero — was like the planting of a good seed, and it is giving rise to a new crop of American heroes.

 

By Justin O. Smith

+++

Youtube video added by Blog Editor:

 

VIDEO: Video shows two camera angles of LaVoy Finicum shooting

 

Posted by The Oregonian

Published on Mar 8, 2016

 

In a video shown at a Deschutes County Sheriff’s Office press conference today, the aerial FBI video of the LaVoy Finicum shooting has been synced with a cellphone video Shawna Cox recorded from within Finicum’s truck.

 

The rest is The Oregonian subscription & social media information

_______________

Edited by John R. Houk

All source links are by the Editor and all text enclosed by brackets are by the Editor.

 

© Justin O. Smith