Posted on 02/24/2016 4:28:21 PM PST by azkathy
U.S. District Judge Anna J. Brown said Wednesday she will push to try the federal conspiracy case stemming from the armed takeover of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge as soon as practically possible.
"My firm assertion is the case will be tried sooner than a year from now unless something makes that impossible,'' Brown said in court.
As the hearing began, every spot in the 14th floor courtroom was filled, with 10 defendants in the case and their lawyers seated in the jury box.
Ammon Bundy, the leader of the occupation, and co-defendant Ryan Payne sat between their lawyers at two defense tables. U.S. District Judge Robert E. Jones, who is assigned to a related case with nine co-defendants, sat in the witness stand. .
Ten of the original 16 people indicted in the alleged conspiracy appeared in court and entered not guilty pleas. Of those, Kenneth Medenbach said he wished to represent himself and was not ready to issue a plea yet, but the judge entered a not guilty plea on his behalf.
After the judge explained their rights to a trial and their presumption of innocence, several of the defendants directly challenged her assertions.
"It's difficult to understand the presumption of innocence when I've spent the last month in a jail cell and led around in chains wherever I go,'' Payne said.
Co-defendant Ryan Bundy, standing beside his lawyer in the jury box, grabbed hold of a wireless microphone that the lawyers were passing from one to another and told the court that he shared the same reservation. He is Ammon Bundy's older brother.
"We're being treated as we're guilty,'' he said. "So I don't understand the presumption of innocence.''
(Excerpt) Read more at oregonlive.com ...
Mother Odalis Sharp said she drove with eight of her 10 children from Kansas to support the defendants in the case. She said they face injustice, and "God-fearing, land-loving people are standing for them.''
The Sharp family sat in the second row of the courtroom gallery. Odalis Sharp had her Bible open on her lap during the proceeding, with one of her younger daughters resting her head on her mother's lap at times.
spiritdrivenvan.JPG The Sharp family of singers drove off after the federal court hearing in Portland in their blue van with the words, "Spirit Driven'' on the side. (Maxine Bernstein |The Oregonian) Maxine Bernstein | The Oregonian/OregonLive
Ammon Bundy turned in his seat and blew them a kiss when they entered.
Victoria Sharp, 18, who was riding in Robert "LaVoy" Finicum's truck and was among those stopped by police Jan. 26 when the occupation leaders were arrested, also attended the hearing with her family. She gave a thumbs-up to Jason Patrick, who smiled from the jury box.
Finicum, a spokesman for the occupation, was shot and killed by police during the traffic stop when he drove away and then reached in his jacket for a gun, the FBI said.
Several defendants also waved to the Sharps from the jury box.
After court, the family sang on the steps outside the federal courthouse in downtown Portland. They then drove off in their blue van that read "Spirit Driven'' on the outside, with Finicum's cattle brand 'LVF' etched into a back window."
-- Maxine Bernstein
mbernstein@oregonian.com
We should ask Maxine to report Victoria's story about the vehicle being shot up with her in it.
bookmark
Thanks Kathy.
Is Bundy still occupying a federal facility, or is he occupying a county facility?
Federal
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qzidxqDmcQ
Victoria Sharp and her family sing. Odalis Sharp (Mom speaks.)
Occupying a federal jail now for speaking out and exercising his 1st and 2nd amendment rights. Listen to Victoria’s mom, they tried to murder her daughter.
Ping to #5 also
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NvogGzWp53E
Marty Gleave Sheriff of Piute County Utah discussing problems with Forest Service LEO’s and the cuts to ranchers permits.
Will you stand with the Finicum Family and all the Patriots imprisoned unjustly? We all stand together or we hang separately.
There are rally’s being held in over 40 states on March 5th
My question...why is this not being dissected over and over by the MSM as most things are?
The Administration probably put a gag order out to the complicit media.
Oregon ping
Thanks for posting this story.
There’s a lot in it about the judge wrangling with the prosecutors because the prosecutors want to operate a grand jury for up to 90 days.
The judge wants to try the defendants on existing charges ASAP and not have additional charges dropped on them.
The feds may be angling not only for additional charges on existing defendants, but maybe charges on additional people.
It is amazing what the FED’s are doing here. Patriots are rising to fight the abuse of our First and Second Amendment Rights.
Here is a list of states that are holding rallies on March 5, 2016. I am looking for a link that isn’t on Facebook.Colorado, Oregon, North Carolina, Tennessee, Michigan, Idaho, Illinois, Washington State, Kansas, Oklahoma, Florida, Arizona, Texas, Nevada, NewYork, Arkansas, California, Delaware, Georgia, South Carolina, Utah, West Virginia, Alambama, Montana, Minnesota, North Dakota, Virgina, Kentucky, Ohio, New Jersey, Alaska, Indiana, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Missouri, Maryland, Wyoming, Wisconsin, Louisiana, Nebraska
I think many of the organizers are young and a little inexperienced so they are struggling to find ways to get the word out. (Don’t get me wrong, there are many Experienced Patriots involved too but Facebook has been the best resource to spread the word and unite.)
You can donate to the legal fund or support the cause with Liberty products and LaVoy Finicums book here https://www.onecowboystandforfreedom.com/shop/
At the very onset of what would become the Soviet Empire, Vladimir Lenin decreed the creation of a national internal army called the “Cheka.†The Cheka were handed very broad police powers and tasked with the disruption and elimination of any form of dissent within the communist system. Lenin launched what would later be known as the “Red Terrorâ€, in which nearly every Russian population center had an established Cheka office of operations using surveillance, infiltration, nighttime raids, imprisonment, torture and execution to silence opposition to the authority of the state.
Some of these people were active rebels, some were outspoken political opponents and journalists, others were merely average citizens wrongly accused by neighbors or personal enemies. The Cheka created a society of fear and suspicion in which no one could be trusted and little criticism was spoken above a whisper anywhere, even in one’s own home.
It is important to note, however, that the dominance of the Cheka was established incrementally, not all at once.
Agents of the state began their “cleansing†of the Russian population by targeting specific groups at opportune times and worked their way through the citizenry at an exponential pace. The most intelligent, effective and dangerous activists and rebels were slated for destruction first, as they represented a kind of leadership mechanism by which the rest of the population might be mobilized or inspired. More innocuous organizations (like Christian churches and rural farmers) were persecuted as background noise while the political mop-up was underway.
Through this incrementalism, the communists were able to intern or eradicate vast numbers of potential opponents without the rest of Russians raising objections. The general populace was simply thankful that the eye of the Cheka had not been turned upon them, and as long as it was some other group of people unrelated to their daily life that disappeared in the night, they would keep their heads down and their mouths shut.
I would point out that the communists were very careful and deliberate in ensuring that the actions of the internal police were made valid through law and rationalized as a part of “class struggle.†Such laws were left so open to interpretation that literally any evil committed could later be vindicated. Man-made law is often a more powerful weapon than any gun, tank, plane or missile, because it triggers apathy within the masses. For some strange reason, when corrupt governments legalize their criminality through legislation or executive decree, the citizenry suddenly treats that criminality as legitimate and excusable.
Incremental prosecution and oppression is effective when the establishment wishes to avoid outright confrontation with a population. Attempt to snatch up a million people at one time, and you will have an immediate rebellion on your hands. Snatch up a million people one man at a time, or small groups at a time, and people do not know what to think or how to respond. They determine to hope that the authorities never get to them, that it will stop after a few initial arrests, or they hope that if they censor themselves completely, they will never be noticed.
In fact, corrupt governments issue warrants of arrest for a handful of dissenters and initiate imprisonment in a very public manner in the beginning with the express purpose of making examples and inspiring self censorship in the masses so that the authorities do not have to expend large amounts of resources to fight a more complex rebellion.
I bring up the historic example of the Cheka and incrementalism because a trend is brewing within our current establishment by which I believe a similar (if not more sterilized) brand of oppressive action is being planned against the liberty movement.
After the debacle in Burns, Oregon during the refuge standoff, federal officials immediately began a subtle campaign in the media promoting internal police powers that when examined in an honest light, are truly anti-liberty.
It remains my personal position according to the evidence I have seen that the refuge standoff was likely influenced by at least one if not more federal provocateurs and that Ammon Bundy was “encouraged†in his choice of actions and location by this person or persons. The goal? I can only guess that the intent was to trap the liberty movement in a Catch-22 scenario; either we join the poorly planned and executed standoff on some of the worst defensive ground possible and risk everything on one centralized event, or, we refuse to participate in the strategy and watch helplessly as a group of people, many with good intentions but little tactical sense or training, are arrested or killed. Either we gamble everything on the worst possible terms, or, we avoid the gamble and watch as the entire movement is made to look weak or incompetent by association with a few.
The majority of the movement chose the latter action, rightly I feel. Burns was no Bundy Ranch — everything about it felt rigged. And though there were many angry anonymous voices calling us “sunshine patriots†and “keyboard warriors†because we would not participate, apparently none of those loud mouths ever showed up in Burns either, so I am assuming they finally saw the wisdom in our decision.
It would seem as though the feds did not get exactly what they wanted out of the refuge standoff, but they have decided to squeeze as much advantage out of the event as possible.
Cliven Bundy was arrested after arriving by plane in Portland, Oregon, not on any charges relating to the refuge and his son Ammon, but on charges stemming from the Bundy Ranch standoff of 2014.
These charges include a strange and very broad legal measure relating to “interference with the duties of federal officials.†This in particular should be disconcerting to all of us, for “interference†could be any number of activities.
Any duties of federal officials that are not moral or constitutional should be interfered with in a tactically intelligent manner whenever possible. Such charges are a deliberate anathema to civil disobedience designed to counter immoral actions by government authorities. For any opposition could be deemed “interference†given a twisting of precedence, and thus treated as illegal.
In my recent article “Liberty Activists And ISIS Will Soon Be Treated As Identical Threats,†I examined statements made by the Justice Department’s chief of national security, John Carlin, in an article published by Reuters. Carlin and the Justice Department have made it clear that they intend to apply rules of prosecution used for foreign terrorist organizations to “domestic extremists.†The Oregon standoff was specifically mentioned as an example of such extremism.
Carlin claimed that domestic extremists represent a “clear and present danger,†alluding to the “Clear And Present Danger Doctrine†allowing the government in “times of national crisis†to prosecute almost anycitizen giving “material support†to enemies of the state. “Material support†in the past has even included verbal opposition to government policies. Meaning, Carlin is testing the waters of material support laws and such tests may target liberty movement speakers and journalists along with anyone involved in physical opposition. As with the Cheka, no one is really safe.
These charges are also being brought in a retroactive manner, long after the supposed crimes have been committed as we have seen with Cliven Bundy. Meaning, the feds plan to retain warrants and prolong charges, only arresting people later when they think they can get away with it. This is where the incrementalism comes in…
Rumors of further indictments have surfaced possibly including dozens of people involved in the Bundy Ranch standoff. And because of the nature of the incremental game the government is playing,verification is difficult until the arrests are activated.
It has come to my attention from personal sources that there may be a lot of truth to the rumors of pending or retroactive indictments, and that the FBI in particular may be biding its time and waiting to bring charges when particular people are at their most vulnerable and when the movement is less likely to react. These sources have indicated that the federal government is seeking to work around the public relations problems of standoff scenarios like Ruby Ridge, Waco, and Bundy Ranch. The feds may claim that they have “seen the light†in terms of avoiding outright mass murder, but I believe they have just found a better way to sneak past public opinion.
If they can manipulate the liberty movement into participation in poorly planned standoffs like Burns, Oregon, they will. Such standoffs are doomed from their inception and can even be controlled from within by agents provocateur. They are not a real threat.
If a standoff occurs organically, as it did at Bundy Ranch in Nevada, and public support is on the side of the liberty movement, then the establishment will simply back off and pluck activists from their homes or at the airport months later.
It is incumbent upon me to offer a warning to federal agencies in the event that incremental prosecution of liberty activists is truly a strategy they are planning to carry out: It is the general consensus of many in the liberty movement that ANY further arrests predicated on activism at Bundy Ranch or similar opposition events in the past to Bureau Of Land Management abuses of power will result in further and expanded engagements by activists. That is to say, such arrests and indictments will not be allowed to continue.
This is not a threat, this is fair warning to government agencies that they are walking a razor’s edge. Incremental prosecutions and dismantling of the liberty movement will not be tolerated; they represent a non-negotiable line in the sand. The feds may or may not care what the consequences will be for crossing this line. They may even think they want such consequences. Regardless, consequences there will be.
While the refuge occupiers essentially handed their heads to the feds on a platter, and the movement was not able to salvage the situation in any viable manner, this does not mean that liberty activists will not take measures during future events depending on the circumstances. Federal agencies may be quick to forget the massive response at Bundy Ranch. This is a mistake. They should probably expect a similar response, if not a more aggressive one, if further arrests are undertaken.
With the ethereal nature of criminal charges like “material support†or “interference with federal officials,†due process becomes a bit of joke. You see, federal agents and agencies, you have to take into account the reality that the liberty movement is well aware of the government push to remove due process altogether. With the AUMF and the NDAA, among other executive actions, we realize that the friendly mask of due process is worn by government today, but not necessarily tomorrow.
If the movement gives ground and does nothing while dozens or more are retroactively imprisoned one case at a time for opposing federal abuse, then how long will it be before the rest of us are imprisoned on even broader charges? How long before the mask comes off and the rendition and indefinite detention provisions of the AUMF and the NDAA come into play? Do you really expect the movement to put faith in due process given the circumstances? Of course you do not.
I would venture to guess that the feds think that any opposition that does arise during the execution of warrants against liberty activists will be “easily managed.†This would be a mistake.
We have seen this all before in the passive sublimation of past societies. We recognize the signs of trespasses to come. And if such trespasses are brought upon the liberty movement or the population at large, then many of us will adopt the attitude that there is not much left to lose.
Personally, I do not look forward to this kind of fight, but I have no illusions that it can be avoided given the course our country has taken. Federal agencies have deemed it a matter of national security to watch us all very closely. They should keep in mind, though, that we are also watching them.
Courtesy of ALT Market.
http://www.boilingfrogspost.com/2016/02/20/obama-set-to-settle-score-against-oregon-sheriff-outspoken-on-gun-control-proposal/
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.