Posted on 01/02/2016 6:57:32 PM PST by Nextrush
Embattled Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy told OPB that approximately 150 militiamen have occupied Malheur National Wildlife Refuge Building on Saturday evening.
The militiamen are in Burns, Oregon to support Dwight Hammond and his son, Steven Hammond. They're ranchers convicted of arson, who are due to report to prison on Monday.
The militiamen broke in to the federal building with supplies, including food and a generator. Cliven Bundy spoke to his son, Ammon Bundy, on the phone after they occupied the building.
"He told me that they were there for the long run. I guess they figured they're going to be there for whatever it takes--and I don't know what that means," Bundy said.......
(Excerpt) Read more at opb.org ...
Here is a working link:
http://www.opb.org/news/article/militiamen-break-into-malheur-national-wildlife-refuge-building/
Hammond Family Declared as Terrorist and Sentenced to Five Years in Federal Prison
A federal judge in Eugene, Ore., gave the father and son credit for time served but ordered them to serve the remainder of their mandatory five-year sentences for burning BLM rangeland.
EUGENE, Ore. â A father and son who raise cattle in Eastern Oregon are headed back to federal prison for committing arson on public land. (NEVER MIND THE LAND USED TO BELONG TO THEM BEFORE BLM STOLE IT)
Dwight Lincoln Hammond, 73, and his son, Steven Dwight Hammond, 46, were sentenced on Oct. 7 to five years in prison for illegally setting fires on U.S. Bureau of Land Management property near Diamond, Ore.
The ranchers had already served shorter sentences because the federal judge originally overseeing their case said the five-year minimum requirement âwould shock the conscience.â
The Hammonds were subject to re-sentencing because the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals threw out those original prison terms for igniting fires in 2001 and 2006 as too lenient.
Previously, U.S. District Judge Michael Hogan, who is now retired, found that a five-year term would violate the constitutional prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment because itâs âgrossly disproportionate to the severity of the offenses here.â
Dwight Lincoln Hammond, who was only convicted of the 2001 fire, received three months in prison, while his son was sentenced to one year, followed by three years of supervised release for each man.
Federal prosecutors challenged those sentences, and the 9th Circuit agreed that judges donât have the âdiscretion to disregardâ such requirements.
The appeals court rejected claims by the ranchersâ defense attorney that the federal arson statute was intended to punish terrorism, rather than burning to remove invasive species or improve rangeland.
At the Oct. 7 re-sentencing hearing, U.S. District Judge Ann Aiken said the ranchers cannot disregard the law in regard to setting fires on BLM property.
âYou donât have the right to make decisions on public lands when theyâre not yours,â she said.
Aiken compared the situation to âeco-terrorismâ cases in which activists damaged property in reaction to environmental decisions with which they disagreed.
âThey didnât necessarily like how the government was handling things, either,â she said.
Similarly, people who violate hunting and fishing regulations are also subject to sanctions, Aiken said.
âThe rules are there for a reason,â she said.
Aiken said she would use discretion in sentencing the Hammonds if she could, but that wasnât a possibility given the mandatory minimums and the juryâs decision to convict them of arson.
âIt wasnât a jury of people from Eugene, it wasnât a jury of people from Portland. It was a jury of people from Pendleton â your peers,â she said.
Frank Papagni, the U.S. attorney who prosecuted the Hammonds, said the ranchers should be subject to the five-year sentence but disagreed with recommendations from the U.S. Probation Office that they receive even longer sentences.
The U.S. Probation Office said that Dwight Hammond should serve five years and three months, while Steven Hammond should serve six year and six months years.
Papagni said those enhanced sentences were inappropriate because the fires didnât directly endanger the lives of nearby firefighters and hunters.
Nonetheless, the five-year terms are appropriate for the Hammondsâ actions, he said.
âThese grazing leases donât give them the exclusive right to use these lands,â Papagni said. âIt doesnât give them the right to burn the property. Itâs not theirs.â
Attorneys for the Hammonds did not object to the five-year sentences in light of the 9th Circuit ruling, but asked that they receive credit for time served.
Aiken agreed to that request and said she would recommend both men serve their time together at the federal prison in Sheridan, Ore.
Before the sentencing, the Oregon Farm Bureau tried to convince the BLM to drop the arson charges against the Hammonds and replace them with charges that would not require a mandatory minimum sentence, said Dave Dillon, the organizationâs executive vice president.
When that route did not yield the desired results, the organization decided to circulate a âSave the Hammondsâ petition that has been signed by about 2,400 people.
âWe did not make the progress we thought we should, so weâre taking a more public approach,â Dillon said.
Dillon said he recognized that the Hammonds faced slim chances of receiving less than five years, given the 9th Circuitâs ruling, but said he hoped the petition may convince the Obama administration to grant them clemency.
Not only have both men served time in federal prison, but the BLM has refused to renew their grazing rights for two years, he said.
The BLM likely does not subject its own employees to arson charges when theyâve made mistakes during prescribed burns, so the punishment for the Hammonds was excessive, Dillon said.
âTo treat them as terrorists, we think, is horribly unjust and secondly, hypocritical,â he said. âWhy does the federal government need to get more?â The Hammond family
“And so it begins ?”
No. The fruit is still green. These guys will actually play into the hands of Leviathan.
I object to the Bundy men breaking into the station in the high country, yes. But I object MORE to the pernicious prosecution and re-/post-sentencing of two ranchers for an accidental back fire to protect their cattle and ranches. I also strongly object to the woeful actions of BLM management, which started the whole thing in the 1st place because the feds want their land and ranches. It looks to my eye that the BLM wants to destroy these people.
Drone strike...Obama’s weapon of choice.
Forgot the link to this story: https://www.facebook.com/2MillionBikersDC/posts/1008938755835637:0
“May God damn the Federal government and all who support this regime.”
In all sincerity I think sentence has already been passed, we are just awaiting the date of execution. That may take a while, but the bill will come due.
Military bases?
Thank you for the working link. I also found the Oregon Live one but haven’t read it yet. I did read your link, have to take a break.
The Portland Oregonian/Oregon Live report on this situation tonight includes this paragraph:
“Government sources told The Oregonian/Oregon Live that the militia also was planning to occupy a close wildland fire station near the town of Frenchglen. The U.S. Bureau of Land Management posts crews there during the fire season.”
It looks like federal agents-informants may be in on or part of the militias or individuals involved in this situation.
So. Going back and re-sentencing people, after someone already served time for an action that he himself reported as a public service to the federal authority, the BLM, does not violate his rights. I see.
People can be tried twice for the same situation, if someone in power wants what you have.
They were charged with, and convicted of, terrorism, rather than an out of control weiner roast. They have served the original sentence of three years. Since they were convicted of terrorism, and the minimum sentence for that crime is five years, they have to return to prison and serve another two years. Bullshlt
LOL! Excellent riposte.
You are a bit histrionic.
Perhaps some dry jammies and warm milk and some sleep?
That does not surprise me. As inept as this all sounds, it reeks of a set up. Have people forgotten the prelude to Ruby Ridge so soon?
Setup and ambush is what they do.
How sure are we that it was the bundy men that did the break in???
Our gov is famous for false flag ops to discredit groups over seas. They own the media source!
I sense something bad brewing here.....God help us all to find some peace and rest in the midst of this.
American Land Rights Organization
Hammond Vendetta: Hammonds Headed For Jail On Criminal Charges Filed By BLM on Normally Minor Fire Issues
GENERAL EVENT CHRONOLOGY AND MEDIA LOG
http://www.landrights.org/or/Hammond/index.htm
No not here.
If they are not armed, have no hostages, the area was not posted for no trespassing, and if they did not damage any property, then it’s a simple protest.
From what I’ve read so far, this should be treated no different than all the other protesting going on in the nation. If BLM can get by with it, so should this bunch.
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.