Posted on 02/11/2016 1:51:53 PM PST by Mechanicos
I listened today for a couple of hours as the last of the four who were held up at the Oregon Wildlife refuge left. It was an intense time as David Fry, after almost two hours, came out with his friends. However, behind the scenes, things are taking a very strange twist. In an exclusive interview with Jason Van Tatenhove, media director for Oathkeepers, he told Freedom Outpost that there have been reports of 68 warrants against Americans who stood alongside Cliven Bundy in Nevada in 2014 and several involved in standing between the Bureau of Land Management and the Sugar Pine Mine. ... http://freedomoutpost.com/2016/02/oathkeepers-media-director-investigating-68-warrants-issued-for-those-who-stood-at-bundy-ranch-oregon-refuge-and-mines/
(Excerpt) Read more at freedomoutpost.com ...
The statute the people involved in the Oregon standoff are being charged under is this:
18 U.S. Code § 372 - Conspiracy to impede or injure officer: "If two or more persons in any State, Territory, Possession, or District conspire to prevent, by force, intimidation, or threat, any person from accepting or holding any office, trust, or place of confidence under the United States, or from discharging any duties thereof, or to induce by like means any officer of the United States to leave the place, where his duties as an officer are required to be performed, or to injure him in his person or property on account of his lawful discharge of the duties of his office, or while engaged in the lawful discharge thereof, or to injure his property so as to molest, interrupt, hinder, or impede him in the discharge of his official duties, each of such persons shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than six years, or both."
You're aware that there's a lot of sections of U.S. Code 18?
Yes there are, and the DOJ is now charging Cliven Bundy with a whole batch of them: Cliven Bundy Complaint.
We’ll see, sparky. You’re a troll.
Demshategod, your posts are really most unpleasant. You’re like the person who stands on the corner, shouting “the end is near”, that people cross the street to avoid. Give it a rest.
“I’m not really sure what you can do about that”
Well he could ask God to bring a zot. :-)
Well, I think people calling Cruz a sleaze, saying that only people who cuss can be president, and that Bible believing Christians shouldn’t be president are pretty unpleasant too. I think a zillion birther articles a day are unpleasant.
“I am wondering if they will kill Victoria Sharp? This poor 18 year old trying to do the right thing.”
From the article:
“If that was not enough, reports are that Victoria Sharp’s family’s house has been surrounded by agents. Sharp, as you may recall, provided eyewitness testimony of the murder of LaVoy Finicum and also said that over one hundred shots were fired into their vehicle in an attempt to kill the occupants.”
I really don’t have a problem with that at all. I don’t post here to keep from being zotted.
That's subject to "interpretation" - the interpreation of the US prosecuting attorneys, and the US federal judges.
You don't look good as a Libertarian when you're supporting subjective government over-reach.
It can take years and many thousands of dollars to get out from under a malicious prosecution by a Troll government with a blank checkbook.
Are you truly in favor of that?
We could tell when you got suspended for the duration of Iowa. Are you by any chance trying out for 2 for 2? :-)
You don’t have to read a “zillion” birther articles. I don’t. And you’d be hard pressed to find many, if any, people on Free Republic who openly say that “a Bible believing person can’t be president, but what is apparent to me is your infatuation with Cruz, and hatred of anybody who may or may not support Trump. It’s like you think you’re on some kind of mission from God, and as you stated, will martyr yourself (”until I’m zotted”), proclaiming your own little ‘truth’ even to the point of upsetting other posters, in effect, turning people off from your cause. Lighten up!
They didn't have anything for TWO YEARS?
The British of the late 1700s would be looking on in envy...
...and, ultimately, the jury.
You don't look good as a Libertarian when you're supporting subjective government over-reach.
I'm a small-l libertarian, but also a lawyer. When I post about legal topics, I'm trying to educate people as to what the law is, which very often is not what I think the law should be.
The federal criminal statute of limitations is five years for most felonies (longer for some crimes).
I think they probably had these charges written up two years ago, but were waiting for Bundy to be out of Nevada so they could arrest him without any supporters around.
From your about page:
“Free Republic can no longer be called a conservative forum since it’s overrun with cultists. It’s nationalist at best. Donald Trump dangled a wall in front of you, so you’ve turned weak minded and irrational; savaging true conservatives, obfuscating Trump’s positions, and calling evil good and good evil. That’s not conservatism.”
Your first post occurred 11/05/08, then a 4 1/2 year gap to 4/16/13 ... Then 9 months, 2 1/2 months, 3 weeks. 1 month, 8 months, 3 1/2 months ... But then, beginning in July 2015, you were all over the threads, launching attacks against Trump and any FReeper who supported his candidacy.
You are a TROLL, period. You are likely a PAID OPERATIVE - and there are 12-14 of you here on FR ... The lot of you hit every thread and start arguments - even on threads that have not a thing to do with this election.
What can I do about it? I can report you to the Mods
Oh, Good Lord. Juries are NEVER led around by the nose in the courtroom. /s
Give me a break.
I'm a small-l libertarian, but also a lawyer. When I post about legal topics, I'm trying to educate people as to what the law is, which very often is not what I think the law should be.
We all got a fairly decent legal education here in the use of "the legal escape hatch" by the Clintons during the impeachment wars back in 98-99. Many of us continued our education in lawyer talk and legal doublespeak.
Lawyers always play their facts close to the vest, and you're no exception.
You'll not share an inconvenient legal fact that will torpedo your "argument" on this thread, so there's little use in discussing it with you.
You've chosen a side to "argue" and you're not going to change your tune. :)
No, they didn't, and you know it.
This is laughably thin legal gruel. The Founders would have been gobsmacked by the audacity of the US Attorneys in arguing for this stuff.
**shrug**
And there will be people clapping - until The Federal Hammer comes down on them...
You would be correct. Lets face it this is criminal trespass at best bumped up to Rico status. I blame Congress and NDAA for a lot of this prosecutorial overreach agains’t US citizens.
It would be nice to be paid for posting. My first post was well before 2008. That must be as far back as it goes. I changed my profile page the other day in response to FR’s new zeitgeist. I’ve been posting consistently since 2004. There was a brief time that I quit posting in 2010 I believe.
I guess you’re just making thise numbers up.
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.