Freedom of the Press #3 – “Contemptuous Postings” January 11, 2017, 1:42 pm Freedom of the Press #3“Contemptuous Postings”Gary HuntOutpost of FreedomJanuary 11, 2017.Well, even though there were many interruptions, I was working on a response to SA Ronnie Walker’s first Affidavit. […]
Federal prosecutors on Tuesday suggested a judge expand a protective order that now prohibits people charged in the occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge or anyone on their defense teams from sharing the FBI’s reports on its informants.
Calling it an “extraordinary case,” the prosecutors asked U.S. District Judge Anna J. Brown to add language to her order that forbids both “direct and indirect violations – wherever they may occur.”
US Magistrate George Foley, Jr. has Ordered that a Detention Hearing be reopened on January 24, 2017 at 1:30 p.m. Courtroom 3A. We are asking your support by joining us for a Rally in front of the Las Vegas Federal District Court House on the same day between 11:00am to 5:00pm.
Judge Anna Brown, in Portland, Oregon, has made a decision regarding the Justice Department’s efforts to shut down my writings. Before I give you what she has said, I want to thank you all for the incredible outpouring of support for what I have been doing. I have no doubt that Judge Brown has issued the following order realizing that the government, in Ammon Bundy, et al., has overstepped their bounds and has to, now, eat a little of that pie called humble.
The Minute Order filed, today, January 9, 2017, reads as follows:
“Order by Judge Anna J. Brown. The Court has reviewed the governments Motion to Enforce Protective Order and directs the government to file no later than Noon on Tuesday, 1/10/17 a supplemental memorandum that addresses the following issues: (1) The Courts authority to enjoin the actions of a third party under the existing terms of the Protective Order and without advance notice to the third party and an opportunity for that third party to be heard; (2) the Courts jurisdiction to compel an individual who is not present within the District of Oregon to respond to the government’s arguments raised in this Motion via an order to show cause or other form of order; and (3) whether the Court should amend the existing Protective Order in any respect to address the issues raised in the government’s Motion.”
THE PREAMBLE TO THE BILL OF RIGHTS
Congress of the United States
begun and held at the City of New-York, on
Wednesday the fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine.
The Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.
THE FIRST AMENDMENT
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Freedom of the Press #1 – Meeting with the FBIJanuary 7, 2017, 8:20 pm Freedom of the Press #1Meeting with the FBIGary HuntOutpost of FreedomJanuary 7, 2017On the morning of January 5, 2017, I received a phone call from Special Agent […]
As a second trial looms in the takeover of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, federal prosecutors are perturbed that a California man associated with a network of militia groups obtained FBI reports on its confidential sources and has written about them in an online blog.
Prosecutors on Friday asked a judge to order Gary Hunt to immediately remove all material about the confidential sources from his website and prevent him from continuing to share the sensitive information.
The presence of nine informants on the eastern Oregon refuge during the 41-day occupation last winter as well as six other informants who worked on the case for the FBI was revealed during testimony during the first trial of occupation leaders.
Hunt, according to prosecutors, apparently got hold of the FBI reports on the informants that prosecutors gave to defense attorneys as part of their sharing of discovery evidence before trial. The court ordered the reports not be shared with others. Occupation leader Ammon Bundy and six others were acquitted of conspiracy and other charges after a five-week trial that ended Oct. 27.
Statement By Gary Hunt, Outpost Of Freedom, With Regard To The Government Attempting To Silence The Freedom Of The Press
Rumor has it that I was visited by the FBI, yesterday, January 5, 2016. That rumor is true It was not and investigation or an interview. Instead, it was to hand me a letter from the Portland, Oregon, United States Attorney’s Office, sign by Pamela R. Holsinger, Chief, Criminal Division, on behalf of Billy J. Williams. That letter was a Cease and Desist letter.
Today, I told the FBI messenger that I had no intention of complying; that I wanted to look into my legal rights. A few hours later, I was informed by two sources that the government has filed An affidavit, and request for a court order, and a proposed order wherein they order me to remove my articles with discovery information in them, and refrain from publishing any more discovery information.
This is fast becoming a matter of the First Amendment right of the people to know what their government is doing. This same subject went before the United States Supreme Court, in 1971. That case was “New York Times Co. V. United States 403 U.S. 713”, wherein the Court, in defending the public right to know, stated:
“Our Government was launched in 1789 with the adoption of the Constitution. The Bill of Rights, including the First Amendment, followed in 1791. Now, for the first time in the 182 years since the founding of the Republic, the federal courts are asked to hold that the First Amendment does not mean what it says, but rather means that the Government can halt the publication of current news of vital importance to the people of this country.”
The New York Times prevailed and the government could not restrain the Times from publishing the Pentagon Papers. The matter before us, now, is equally, or more important in that the right of the people to know how their operates in their private lives, with “spies” reporting everything that they can about what you do, with no criminal intent, to the government.
This is what the KGB did in the Soviet Union. It is what the Stasi did in East Germany. Neither country exists, now, as the police state was not compatible with people used to kings and emperors. It is absolutely unacceptable in a country of free and liberty loving people.
If exposing government spies that spy on the people is criminal, then I confess to that crime. If, however, We, the People, have a right to know what our government is doing, then the Court on Oregon is criminal.
On Tuesday, the new Republican-controlled Congress passed a new House rules package, which, among others things, made it easier for federal lands to be transferred to states. What this means is that states that need to raise extra money could, and likely will, lease or sell lands to oil companies, loggers or ranchers instead of maintaining them for public use.
This is a substantial change. Previously, the federal government had to offset any income it lost through land transfers by cutting budgets or raising revenues elsewhere. But the new rule removes that obstacle, which means the federal government will likely be a lot more willing to hand land over to states.
What resulted was an unbelievable show of force, including over 200 agents, among whom were snipers whose weapons were trained on the protesters. Cliven Bundy’s civil disagreement with the BLM erupted into a government assault which violated the property and personal rights of numerous individuals. Citizens were confronted by BLM agents, tazed, brutalized, arrested and threatened with deadly weapons.
Commentary by Free Range Report
Daniel P. Love is hated in the West, and for good reason. Not only is his record of reprehensible behavior towards law-abiding Americans shocking to the conscience, but he embodies everything that is wrong with the Bureau of Land Management; arrogance, hostility, and contempt for property and human rights. His name is connected to several federal operations in which the lives of innocent citizens were lost or changed forever, and not only has he escaped the consequences of his thuggish, militaristic tactics, Daniel P. Love was promoted to become director of the BLM’s most militarized division, the Division of Security, Protection and Intelligence.
The federal court will soon summon 1,000 prospective jurors for the second conspiracy trial stemming from the takeover of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge. They’ll be asked to complete written jury questionnaires that are due back to the court by Jan. 25.
The trial for seven remaining defendants is set for Feb. 14.
The court must decide whether new misdemeanor charges filed against the defendants will be heard by a jury or the judge.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Ethan Knight said legally, the defendants facing Class B misdemeanors – including trespass, destruction or removal of government property and tampering with vehicles and equipment – don’t have a right to a trial by jury. Those charges typically go before the court.
Defense lawyers for the seven defendants set for trial next month expect to argue that a jury consider all the charges – the misdemeanor charges as well as the felony charges of conspiring to prevent employees from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or U.S. Bureau of Land Management from carrying out their work at the refuge and possession of a firearm in a federal facility.
The court could, however, have a jury deliberate on the federal charges, and the judge could hear testimony on the misdemeanor charges during the jury’s deliberations.
Marcus Mumford, Ammon Bundy’s lawyer who U.S. marshals tackled and stunned with a Taser gun in federal court on the day his client was acquitted, returned to the same courtroom Friday to appear in his own criminal case.
His attorney, Michael Levine, entered a not guilty plea on Mumford’s behalf to charges of failing to comply with the lawful direction of a federal police officer and impeding or disrupting official government duties, both misdemeanors. The maximum penalty for each offense is 30 days in custody and a $5,000 fine.
Mumford was arrested Oct. 27 shortly after the judge announced the jury’s verdict acquitting Bundy and six co-defendants of conspiring to stop federal employees from doing their work at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge. Bundy and armed followers took over the refuge Jan. 2, 2016.
Deputy marshals tackled Mumford as he questioned the government’s authority to continue to hold Bundy on federal charges pending in Nevada and demanded to see paperwork to back it up.
“What happened here is an unprecedented attack on the defense bar,” Levine said after the brief hearing Friday.
He called the use of a stun gun and Mumford’s arrest “outrageous,” saying Mumford was doing nothing more than engaging in zealous advocacy for his client.
There is a word for what President Obama did this past week in declaring Gold Butte a national monument: dictatorial.
In just more than a year Obama has unilaterally declared off-limits to productive economic uses 1 million acres of Nevada land — first the 700,000-acre Basin and Range National Monument straddling the border between Lincoln and Nye counties and now the 300,000-acre Gold Butte National Monument in rural northeast Clark County.
This brings Obama’s total protected acreage to 550 million — more than any predecessor and twice that set aside by Teddy Roosevelt under the Antiquities Act of 1906 — though much of Obama’s designations are underwater.
Early European explorers also hunted in this area, as did Mormon pioneers and miners who settled in Gold Butte, and that tradition has continued into the modern era. Every year hunters travel to Gold Butte in pursuit of Gambel’s quail, chukar partridge, bighorn sheep and even mule deer. Trappers also ply their trade, and anglers pass through on their way to remote corners of Lake Mead.
Today, however, sportsmen are wondering whether they will be able to continue to enjoy the hunting, camping and other outdoor opportunities Gold Butte has long offered visitors. They also are concerned about the future of wildlife water developments that have been installed in the last half century. I suppose it depends on how literally present and future land managers take the wording contained in the president’s proclamation.
“Nothing in this proclamation shall be deemed to enlarge or diminish the jurisdiction of the state of Nevada, including its jurisdiction and authority with respect to fish and wildlife management, including hunting and fishing.” Also, the proclamation states it doesn’t preclude the renewal, maintenance or replacement of “wildlife water catchments … that are located within the monument.”
One of the 17 defendants in the Cliven Bundy case wants a federal jury to visit the spot where the armed standoff unfolded in 2014 between supporters of the Nevada rancher and federal agents who impounded his cattle.
The request appears in a motion filed last week by defense attorney Jess Marchese, who represents Eric Parker. Federal prosecutors have not yet responded to the motion, which argues that while pictures and video are available, they do not illustrate the “sheer enormity” of the site or show every part of the area.
“Personally seeing the actual road, wash, and general terrain would remedy the issue,” the motion says.
As they prepare for a second trial stemming from the occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, prosecutors want the court to reconsider and let refuge employees and Harney County residents testify about the fears they felt as a result of the armed seizure of the refuge.
Defendants, in turn, want the court to allow them to use the principle of adverse possession – staking claim to a property to declare it as their own – as a defense to the new misdemeanor trespass charge they face.
The defendants also will ask a judge to restrict prosecutors from parading dozens of firearms into the courtroom during trial if the firearms haven’t been traced specifically to the defendants charged, according to court documents filed Wednesday.
One Cowboy’s Stand for Freedom Releases new LaVoy Brand Jewelry Item. Women’s Pendant or Man’s Lapel Pin
There are a lot of US Supreme Court decisions on the subject of “pioneer rights”, or settlers’ rights of “possession” or “occupancy” and “use”. The case that specifically refers to “pioneer rights” is Lamb v Davenport, 85 US 307 (1873).
Arguello v United States, 59 US 539 (1855), refers to a “cattle range” held in possession for 50 years (from prior to the Mexican cession to the US) as sufficient evidence of ownership. Essentially, pioneer rights are equivalent to “possessory” or “occupancy” rights that typically have the sanction of State or Territorial legislation, or; local laws, customs and decisions of the courts; or “aboriginal” title” or “possessory” or “occupancy” rights dating from a time prior to US acquisition through “treaty” (ie. Gudalupe-Hidalgo, 1848, or the Oregon-Northwest Treaty with Great Britain, 1846). This same possessory or occupancy right of “actual settlers” gives the settler a “color of title” which has been referred to as the “preference” right. The preference is the preferred right to acquire the government’s “legal title” when the land occupied or in the possession and use of the pioneer is eventually opened to settlement. (See Frisbie v Whitney, 76 US 187 (1869)). This pioneer right of possession and preference gives the occupant the right to sell his improvements as well as his possessory title, and such ownership will “relate back” to the first pioneer’s date of settlement.
But as I related a couple of months ago the law has never been challenged on the basis of its constitutionality.
Article IV, Section 3 of the Constitution reads: “The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States …”
The question is whether Congress has the power to abdicate that power and turn it over to the president, as it did with the Antiquities Act of 1906.
A few dozen people, most of whom were family members or friends of Bunkerville rancher Cliven Bundy, staged a quiet rally Saturday at the state Route 170 access to the Gold Butte land falling under the monument declaration near Bundy’s home.
The demonstrators rang out the year under cloudy skies as they held signs that decried Obama’s authority to restrict access and called on President-elect Donald Trump for help, but throughout the morning hours they primarily visited with each other while watching an occasional vehicle pass.
“We’re proving that the Bundys couldn’t have had a conspiracy, because we’re never organized enough to conspire against anybody,” Carol Bundy, the wife of Cliven, joked in reference to the criminal charges filed against her husband and sons after a violent encounter with federal officers in April 2014.
Mr. Obama has repeatedly abused his authority under the Antiquities Act to declare vast new national monuments, including on the high seas. This week’s monument designations have been strongly opposed by state officials and GOP congressional leaders, including the unanimous delegation from Utah.
Trump Can Reverse Obama’s Last-Minute Land Grab
The White House is trying to lock up millions of acres, but no president can bind his successor.
“Utah is saddened by this announcement today. It is alien to the desires of the overwhelming majority of Utahns. It’s also alien to the desires of the overwhelming number of Native Americans who live in this area, who will use this area, who approached us on how they wanted to function on this land. None of those desires are going to be accomplished by a monument designation.
“It is sad that there are special interest groups that feel that they are empowered, that feel that they can get the President to bend to their every will. Unfortunately, with today’s announcement, maybe there is some truth to that.
“Mr. President, I want you to know that we are saddened by this abuse of the Antiquities Act. It is sad that this entire process has been done in secrecy and in shadows. And Mr. President, I want you to know as Utahns, we will use every tool at our disposal to do the right thing—whether it be legislative action, judicial action, even executive action—because what we have seen so far is a poor procedure. It’s a poor policy and it reflects poorly on your legacy. As Utahns, we will fight to right this wrong.”
Chairman Bishop added:
“The announcement perpetuates two egregious lies. The first being that the size of the monument parallels the Public Lands Initiative. That is not true. The administration is grasping at arguments to justify a lame duck administration’s efforts to do things contrary to the will of the people who live in San Juan County. The second lie is in the creation of a faux commission to give management authority to Native Americans. This is a diversion. The Utah delegation wants to give management authority to Native Americans; the administration can’t. Only Congress can legally do so. This administration over-promised, failed to deliver, and is now trying to hide its ineptitude.”
Just days after a federal judge denied one Oregon standoff defendant’s motion to withdraw his guilty plea, co-defendant Jon Ritzheimer Friday filed his own motion to rescind his guilty plea.
Jon Ritzheimer, who had entered a guilty plea on Aug. 15 to the federal charge of conspiracy stemming from the takeover of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, now argues that he’s innocent of the allegation.
A new court-appointed defense lawyer for Ritzheimer argues that Ritzheimer acknowledged he used force, threats or intimidation to take over the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, but the object of his actions was not to impede federal employees, as was argued at the fall trial of co-defendants Ammon Bundy, Ryan Bundy and five others.
Fox News Special Report’s panel discussed the midnight monument designation by the Obama Administration.
Special Report’s panel discussed the midnight monument designation by the Obama Administration.