Bundy Mistrial, Their Faith & Constitutional Patriots


John R. Houk

© December 23, 2017

 

I’ve been following the trials and tribulations the Bundy family of ranchers a number of years. The Bundys have received persecution from the Federal government, especially the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) over property and public grazing land.

 

In the last post about the Bundys and Federal Prosecutors, “Will Bundy Prosecution MISCONDUCT be Given Pass by Judge Navarro?”, I elaborated a tiny bit of the misdeeds of the BLM grabbing Land and then exorbitantly charging ranchers to graze on Federally seized land.

 

I found out in a Tim Brown post that U.S. Federal Judge Gloria Navarro has declared a mistrial because of the blatant prosecutorial misconduct. Brown implies the few that have face minor charges and have been convicted might have their convictions tossed. Essentially this is yet another stain on Obama Administration non-legislated rules and regulations making it easier for government agencies to seize land and tell land owners how to work their own property.

 

Now comes the observation that will surely get me in trouble with members of the Church of Latter Day Saints (aka Mormons).

 

I consider myself a Conservative Biblically-oriented Christian. Most Mormons also consider themselves the same. However, most Christians that believe the Christian standard for faith in the Trinity believe Father, Son and Holy Spirit are three Persons that constitute ONE God. The persons of the Godhood unity are all coequal as one.

Mormons don’t believe that standard:

 

According to Mormonism, Jesus is a created being, the first spirit to be born of the Father (Mormon Doctrine, p.129) and a celestial mother (Mormon Doctrine, p.516). Therefore, Jesus could not be the eternal God or part of an eternal Trinity. Mormons also teach that both the Father and the Son are men with bodies of flesh and bone (Doctrine & Covenants 132:20; Articles of Faith, p 38); as two separate people, the Father and the Son cannot be considered “one.”

 

… READ ENTIRITY (Question: “Do Mormons believe in the Trinity?” GotQuestions.org)

 

Since Christ is the same yesterday, today and forever; Christians believe Jesus is eternal and not a created being. As with the Trinity and the coequal Godhood, Christ as God is the coequal unborn Creator who emptied His Divine characteristics to be born in the flesh. Hence Jesus is not only coequal in the Godhood, He is both fully man and full God. This perfect nature is the basis of the Redemption of a believing humanity.

 

Mormons are not so taught:

 

8. Prior to creation human spirits were literal children of heavenly parents. Although their spirits were created, the essential “intelligence” of these spirits is considered eternal, and without beginning. At a family council, God the Father told the spirit-children that according to his “plan of salvation” they would have to leave their heavenly home, take on human bodies, and be tested before they could progress to godhood. Satan rejected this plan and wanted to implement one that would have involved loss of moral agency. Jesus opposed Satan and offered an alternative plan in which he would take on human form and live a sinless life so that his spirit brothers and sisters could become gods. When his plan was not accepted, Lucifer is said to have rebelled and taken “the third part” of the hosts of heaven with him to the earth to serve as tempters. READ ENTIRETY (9 Things You Should Know About Mormonism; By Joe Carter; The Gospel Coalition; 7/15/14)

 

Here are some more excerpts on the Mormon Jesus-Satan brotherhood:

 

The “christ” of Mormonism and the Christ of biblical Christianity are two distinctly different people. While it is true that when asking a Mormon if they believe in Christ they will confirm that belief, the “christ” that the Mormon believes in is not the Christ talked about in the Bible. … As will be pointed out below, the “christ” of Mormonism is not the Christ of true biblical Christianity.

 

In Mormonism, Mormons deny Jesus Christ’s unique divinity. Mormonism teaches that Jesus Christ is a created person. Mormons teach that every person including Christ has had two births. The first birth occurs as a spirit child in preexistence state.  This first birth happens when sexual relations occur between an exalted man, a god, and his goddess wife.  The second birth occurs much later as a human being.

 

… Mormon theology states that Christ was the first and foremost of subsequent billions of spirit children created through sexual intercourse between the earth god and his celestial wife. Mormon theology also teaches that later in order to produce the body for Jesus Christ the earth god again had to have sexual intercourse this time with the “virgin” Mary, who became Jesus’ earthly mother.

 

… In Mormon theology, there are infinite numbers of planets and infinite numbers of “gods” for each of those planets.  The essence of Christ is no different from the essence of any spirit child of Elohim, whether of men or of Satan and his demons. Every person on earth has the same essence or divine spark that Christ has. This means that every person can have the ability to become their own god or goddess. …

 

 

Mormon theology also teaches that Christ has a family relation with Satan. In other words, Jesus Christ is Satan’s brother. This is contrary to biblical Christianity and is just another example of how the two Jesus’ differ.  In Mormon theology since Satan (and his demons) was also a pre-existent spirit child of Elohim and his celestial wife, Satan is Christ’s brother. Looking closely at this teaching, we can logically conclude that the devil and all the demons are the spirit brothers of everyone on earth. This would mean that Christ, the Devil and we are all brothers and interrelated.

 

 

… Brigham Young’s controversial Adam-God discourse of April 9th 1852, he taught that the body of Jesus Christ was the product of sexual intercourse between God (Adam) and Mary, who then married Joseph.  This teaching is also used later to justify the marriage of more than one women. At the very core, this teaching denies that Jesus Christ was conceived by the Holy Ghost, and it maintains that Jesus was the literal offspring of the Father because according to Mormonism, the Holy Ghost does not have a physical body and could not have had sexual relations with Mary. In Mormon theology, the Father has a physical body and could have had sexual relations with Mary. The Father is “of flesh and bones.” READ ENTIRETY (WHO IS THE MORMON JESUS? EmpoweredByChrist.org)

 

So, here’s the thing. I’m not a big fan of Mormonism. The Church of Christ of the Latter Saints are a cult spinoff of the true Christian faith. AND YET, present day Mormons observe a morality that places many a mainstream Christian to shame. AND present-day Mormons are Patriots that honor the Flag, our nation and most importantly the U.S. Constitution initiated by America’s Founding Fathers.

 

The Bundys are these kind of Patriots. As a Christian American, I stand with the Bundys to protect their Constitutional Rights the American Left has slowly snuffed out for decades.

 

And with these my personal thoughts, I encourage to read the Tim Brown post about Judge Gloria Navarro calling a mistrial due egregious prosecutorial misconduct. I like Brown’s thought the weight of the law should be turned on the crooked prosecutors who have persecuting the Bundy family and other Ranchers.

 

JRH 12/23/17

Please Support NCCR

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

Judge Declares Mistrial In Bundy Ranch Case Due To Multiple Brady Violations By Prosecution

 

By TIM BROWN 

DECEMBER 21, 2017

Freedom Outpost

 

After sealed hearings took place in Nevada in the Bundy Ranch standoff trials, Judge Gloria Navarro declared a mistrial due to multiple Brady violations by the prosecution, but will this mean there won’t be a retrial?  Probably not.

 

Navarro blasted the prosecution for their lawless behavior in not turning over several exculpatory items to defense teams that were favorable to them.

 

Among those items were the cameras that were set up prior to the impoundment in 2014 in Bunkerville, Threat Assessment reports, names of potential witnesses, and reports from the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) reprimanding the BLM for not enforcing the court orders for years.

 

In all, there were at least seven Brady violations.

 

These violations are constitutional violations of the Fifth Amendment and Due Process.

 

Again, I ask, why are no charges being levied against Steven Myhre, his team of attorneys and the BLM in all of this?  They have been determined by a judge to be in violation of the law!

 

The prosecution didn’t act negligently nor did they violate the law unwillingly, but willingly.

 

Shari Dovale has more:

 

The government falsely represented that the view of the Bundy home was unintentional. This is huge. There could be, at minimum, sanctions coming for Acting US attorney Steven Myhre and other prosecutors.

 

Moving on to another item, Navarro referenced the snipers and that the indictment charges false representation, “But now we know there were snipers.”

 

She found that the information is favorable to the accused and bolsters the defense… “The court does find prejudice toward the defendants. This information may have caused a difference in the opening statements, cross examination of witnesses and undermines the outcome,” she said.

 

The judge continued her rebuke of the government for about an hour. She included other evidence, such as the threat assessment report and a log of activities surrounding the impoundment.

 

All together [sic], between 12/12/17 and 12/17/17, over 5,000 pages of new discovery and evidence has been revealed and there may still be outstanding discovery.

 

Several motions were made after mistrial was declared.

 

Ryan Bundy asked that the terms of the release of the defendants be changed so that they might be able to go home for the holidays to be with their families and the Las Vegas Review-Journal requested the unsealing of the evidence.

 

Additionally, the defense asked the Greg Burleson and Todd Engel be released, and it is expected that they will ask for their convictions to be overturned due to the suppression of evidence in their trial.

 

Wendy Kay Facebook Video of Ryan Bundy Speaking Outside Las Vegas Courthouse

12/20/17 1:08pm

All of these were considered by Judge Navarro and concerning the release of the defendants, she said that she would need to deal with pretrial services before ruling on that.

 

As to the request for unsealing the evidence, that would be answered on January 18th, 2018, almost two years since the Bundys were arrested on January 26, 2016.

 

The issue concerning Engel and Burleson will also have to wait until a later date.

 

One thing should be done here and that is to simply release all of these men.  Judge Navarro has to know the level of corruption that is clearly on display from Myhre’s office and the BLM.

 

The only just thing to do would be to release these men and not allow them to face trial again.  The US government has done enough damage to these men and their families.

 

Additionally, Steven Myhre and every person involved in suppressing the evidence should be arrested and charged.  If found guilty, they should not only be disbarred or removed from public service, but they should also face the same penalties that they sought for each and every defendant.  In other words, these people would never see the light of freedom again if convicted.

____________________

Bundy Mistrial, Their Faith & Constitutional Patriots

John R. Houk

© December 23, 2017

___________________

Judge Declares Mistrial In Bundy Ranch Case Due To Multiple Brady Violations By Prosecution

 

Tim Brown is an author and Editor at FreedomOutpost.com, SonsOfLibertyMedia.com, GunsInTheNews.com and TheWashingtonStandard.com. He is husband to his “more precious than rubies” wife, father of 10 “mighty arrows”, jack of all trades, Christian and lover of liberty. He resides in the U.S. occupied Great State of South Carolina. Tim is also an affiliate for the Joshua Mark 5 AR/AK hybrid semi-automatic rifle. Follow Tim on Twitter.

 

Copyright © 2017 FreedomOutpost.com

 

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.]

 

Supporting Bundys in Trials & Tribulations


John R. Houk

© August 24, 2017

 

After the Bundys and most of their fellow ranchers were acquitted over their protest at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge inspired by re-jailing unjustly of a couple Hammond family ranchers because an Obama Administration Federal Prosecutor felt the original time served was not severe enough, the Federal government was in Oregon to arrest them for the Bundy Ranch standoff that occurred prior to Malheur.

 

When you hear or read that Cliven Bundy’s fight to withstand the Bureau of Land Management (henceforth BLM, but not to be with another evil organization with the same acronym Black Lives Matter) was illegal and unconstitutional, then you have to realize you are not getting the entire story. There is some truth to the illegal claim, but Cliven chose to resist the law because bureaucratic rules enforced as Congressional was threatening his ranching business. Here’s a word picture that pro-prosecution people don’t want you to see:

 

A few facts about the Cliven Bundy and the BLM incident

 

For some time, the Bundy’s have owned cattle that have grazed in the Bunkerville, NV area.  Since his cattle grazed on federal land, he paid grazing fees to the federal government. In 1993, the local grazing rules changed when a number of things came together; the Desert tortoise became protected under the species act, and the Fish and Wildlife Service determined that this was one of the areas critical to their long-term survival. Grazing rules were also changed in order to accommodate restoration needed from years of overgrazing and recent fires. These new rules would include Bundy having to reduce his number of cattle. Refusing to comply, he decided to “fire” the BLM, and stop paying grazing fees, while continuing to use federal lands for his cattle to graze. Not only did he not reduce his cattle count, but actually increased them over time.

 

As a result, Cliven Bundy’s cattle have been illegally grazing on federal land for 20 years. Over these 20 years, Cliven Bundy has racked up over $1 million in unpaid grazing fees, and has actually expanded his cattle’s grazing further into federal lands.  He has been taken to court (and defeated) both in 1998 and 2013.

 

 

In response, several protesters (including armed militia members) gathered in defense of Bundy. The standoff came to an end when the BLM, citing safety concerns, decided to stand down.  Supporters of Bundy have of [sic] labeled this successful (and armed, as well as potentially violent) defense of Bundy’s illegal activity as a “win for freedom.” – Long article – READ ENTIRETY (Fact Check – The Bundy Ranch Cattle & The BLM; By Fact and Myth; 4/20/17)

 

Juries are having a difficult time convicting the Bundys and their standoff supporters is because they understand bureaucracy wronged the Bundy Ranch private business and family livelihood in the name of Eco-Marxist rules NOT laws passed by Congress.

 

While I was Gab surfing I ran into a Onehope2016 post notifying readers that four on trial for participating in the Bundy Standoff had four acquittals from a jury. Two of those four received a combination Not Guilty and a hung jury on other charges. I was going to cross post Onehope2016’s link to a Hagmann Report which also linked to further info from The Republic/azcentral.com.

 

These guys had already endured two other hung juries. Today I find out the Federal Prosecutors – undoubtedly holdovers from the Obama swamp – are going to make the two that had a hung jury over some remaining charges, back to court at taxpayers’ expense.

 

Below is that report from azcentral.com.

 

Here is a link to the Review Journal that is a history Bundy Ranch trials and tribulations that begins with latest info but you can trace back to 2014. The Review Journal link makes an attempt at neutrality in reporting but I could tell there was a bit of support for the Federal Prosecutors.

 

JRH 8/24/17

Please Support NCCR

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

Prosecutors to retry Bundy Ranch standoff defendants for 3rd time

 

By Robert Anglen

Aug. 23, 2017 Updated 4:28 p.m. MT

The Republic | azcentral.com

 

O. Scott Drexler and Eric Parker will be retried on lesser charges

 

Federal prosecutors who didn’t succeed in the Bundy Ranch standoff trial will retry and retry again.

 

The U.S. Attorney’s Office in Las Vegas confirmed Wednesday it will go back to court for the third time in an attempt to convict two men accused of taking up arms against federal agents.

 

Less than 24 hours earlier, a jury had acquitted two standoff defendants and dismissed the most serious charges against two others. Now federal prosecutors say they will retry the men next month on outstanding weapons and assault charges.

 

The move pushes back the trials for 11 other defendants in the 2014 Bundy Ranch standoff, including Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy and his sons Ammon and Ryan Bundy, who have spent 18 months in prison while awaiting their court date.

 

O. Scott Drexler and Eric Parker, both of Idaho, were released from prison Tuesday night after a jury acquitted them of conspiracy and extortion, which were the key elements of the government’s case.

 

But they found out Wednesday they have been ordered back to court Sept. 25 to face the charges on which the jury deadlocked.

 

“Surprised? No. Disappointed? Yes,” said Parker’s lawyer, Jess Marchese. “It’s clear at this point the prosecution is taking this personally now.”

 

Marchese said Acting Nevada U.S. Attorney Steven Myhre twice called Parker a coward during a court hearing Wednesday.

 

Marchese said it was unprofessional and unnecessary. “This is a business,” he said. “And there’s no need for emotion in a business.”

 

Parker and Drexler face one count each of assaulting a federal officer and carrying a firearm in the commission of a crime. Parker faces two additional counts of using a firearm to threaten a federal officer.

 

Jurors twice reject government claims

 

Jurors dealt government prosecutors their second stinging defeat in the case when, after four days of deliberations, they returned no guilty verdicts against four defendants.

 

Richard Lovelien of Oklahoma and Steven Stewart of Idaho were acquitted on all counts and walked out of court Tuesday night free after spending 18 months in prison.

 

This marks the second time a jury failed to convict the defendants on charges related to the standoff, which pitted armed ranchers and militia members against Bureau of Land Management agents in a dusty wash below Interstate 15 about 70 miles north of Las Vegas.

 

A jury in April deadlocked on charges against the four men. It convicted two other defendants on multiple counts. But it could not agree on conspiracy charges against any of the six.

 

The men were being retried on conspiracy, extortion, assault and obstruction charges for helping rancher Cliven Bundy fend off a government roundup of his cattle in what became known as the Battle of Bunkerville.

 

The government launched its second prosecution last month. The case climaxed Aug. 11 when U.S. District Court Judge Gloria Navarro abruptly ended court by ordering Parker off the stand and striking his testimony from the record as jurors watched.

 

The defendant was attempting to tell jurors what he saw during the standoff over a barrage of objections from prosecutors. Navarro ruled Parker violated court orders by discussing prohibited topics. Parker returned to the defense table and started crying while Navarro dismissed the jurors.

 

Marchese said jurors told him Tuesday the incident was a factor in their verdicts. He said jurors were sympathetic to the defendants and their inability to mount a cogent defense in light of restrictions in talking about why they participated in the standoff and what they were thinking while they were there.

 

The case went to the jury Aug. 15 after lawyers for all four defendants waived closing arguments as part of a protest about court proceedings and restrictive legal rulings.

 

Judge’s rulings limit defense

 

Navarro’s rulings, aimed at trying to avoid jury nullification, severely limited defense arguments. Jury nullification occurs when a jury returns a verdict based on its shared belief rather than on the evidence in a case.

 

Navarro barred defendants from discussing why they traveled thousands of miles to join protesters at the Bundy Ranch. She did not allow them to testify about perceived abuses by federal authorities during the cattle roundup that might have motivated them to participate.

 

Navarro also restricted defendants from raising constitutional arguments, or mounting any defense based on their First Amendment rights to free speech and their Second Amendment rights to bear arms. In her rulings, Navarro said those were not applicable arguments in the case.

 

Federal officials did not face the same restrictions. To show defendants were part of a conspiracy, they referenced events that happened months, or years, after the standoff.

 

Federal prosecutors, led by Myhre, argued in court the case wasn’t about the First or Second Amendments; that the Constitution doesn’t give people the right to threaten federal officers.

 

They said the Bundys’ dispute with the BLM was adjudicated and the court issued a lawful order to round up the cattle. When ranchers and the militia conspired to force the release of the cattle, they broke the law, prosecutors argued.

 

Dozens of federal state and local law-enforcement officers testified in the retrial, saying they were outnumbered and outgunned in the wash and feared for their lives.

 

Jurors, however, heard from no defense witnesses. Drexler took the stand and delivered the only defense testimony jurors were allowed to consider.

 

He testified that even though he brought weapons to the standoff, he did not intend to threaten or assault law-enforcement officers.

 

Remaining defendants aimed weapons

 

All four defendants in the retrial admitted bringing guns to the standoff. But pictures of Parker and Drexler aiming their weapons went viral.

 

An image of Parker has come to epitomize the 2014 protest. He is pictured lying prone on an overpass and sighting a long rifle at BLM agents in the wash below. The image galvanized the public and brought international awareness to the feud over public lands and the potential consequences of such a dispute.

 

The Bundy Ranch standoff is one of the most high-profile land-use cases in modern Western history, pitting cattle ranchers, anti-government protesters and militia members against the Bureau of Land Management.

 

For decades, the BLM repeatedly ordered Bundy to remove his cattle from federal lands and in 2014 obtained a court order to seize his cattle as payment for more than $1 million in unpaid grazing fees.

 

Hundreds of supporters from every state in the union, including members of several militia groups, converged on his ranch about 70 miles north of Las Vegas.

 

The standoff was hailed as a victory by militia members. Ammon and Ryan Bundy cited their success at Bundy Ranch in their run-up to the siege of an Oregon wildlife refuge in 2016, also in protest of BLM policies. An Oregon federal jury acquitted Ammon, Ryan and five others in October.

 

No arrests were made in the Bundy Ranch case until after the Oregon siege ended.

 

Last year, the government charged 19 people for their roles in the Nevada standoff. Two men took plea deals. Trials for the remaining defendants were broken into three tiers based on their alleged levels of culpability in the standoff.

 

Although defendants in the first trial and the retrial were considered the least culpable, all 17 defendants face the same charges. Those convicted could spend the rest of their lives in prison.

 

The second trial, which will include Cliven, Ammon and Ryan Bundy, who are considered ringleaders, was supposed to start 30 days after the conclusion of the first trial. But the start date has been delayed because of the retrials.

 

Marchese said Wednesday the remaining 11 defendants remain incarcerated and the delays are wearing on them.

 

“Those guys want their day in court,” he said.

 

Parker plans on returning to Idaho and seeing his family.

“He wants to be a dad,” Marchese said. “He wants to see his kids … and to be a father.”

________________

Supporting Bundys in Trials & Tribulations

John R. Houk

© August 24, 2017

_________________

Prosecutors to retry Bundy Ranch standoff defendants for 3rd time

 

© 2017 www.azcentral.com. All rights reserved.

 

About azcentral.com

 

azcentral.com is the Valley’s #1 site. The top local source for news and information, azcentral.com’s experts deliver topics and insights residents care about like nobody else can. From breaking news, investigative journalism and community stories, to things to dosportspolitics and more, azcentral.com is where Arizona heads to stay connected.

 

azcentral.com tells the full story with in-depth videos and photo galleries, and is updated throughout the day with up-to-the-minute news. Top columns are also featured here, from local favorites that include Clay ThompsonE.J. MontiniDan Bickley and Karina Bland.

 

In addition to 24/7 desktop and mobile access, enjoy more by downloading news and sports apps, the azcentral Fact Check app and more. Also featured is the e-Newspaper, an online edition of The Arizona Republic, and the ability to subscribe to more than 30 email newsletters, ranging from the top 5 daily headlines to things to do on the weekends. For those looking to make a purchase, azcentral.com includes thousands of listings from careerbuilder.com, cars.com and homefinder.com. Plus, subscribers can take advantage of exciting events, deals and extras found only with the azcentral Insider program.

 

As the Valley’s #1 website, azcentral.com is more than a destination for consumers – it’s the #1 advertising solution for Valley businesses. azcentral.com attracts more than three times the traffic of its nearest local competitor. Delivering unrivaled reach, audiences and engagement, plus multilayered digital capabilities to help advertisers, azcentral.com is the powerful digital solution every business needs.