• "Spreading the ideas of freedom loving people on matters regarding high finance, politics, constructionist Constitution, and mental masturbation of all types"

Scorpio

Hunter of Chin Li's Boo Hoo Flu
Founding Member
Board Elder
Site Mgr
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 25, 2010
Messages
32,429
Likes
46,697
#1
One shot dead as FBI arrests Oregon occupation leader, others

Reuters
By Curtis Skinner and Dan Whitcomb 2 hrs ago




1/31 SLIDES © Keith Ridler/AP Photo
Ammon Bundy, the leader of an armed group occupying the headquarters of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge near Burns, Oregon, was arrested along with four others on Jan. 26 near Burns. Shots were fired and one person in Bundy's party died. Another militia member was arrested in Burns, according to the FBI.

Jan 26 (Reuters) - One protester was shot dead and eight others were arrested on Tuesday after authorities confronted members of an armed group that has staged a month-long occupation of a federal wildlife reserve in Oregon, activists and officials said.
The FBI said gunshots rang out after officers stopped a car carrying protest leader Ammon Bundy and others near the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge. Activists said Robert LaVoy Finicum, a rancher who acted as a spokesman for the occupiers, was killed.

FBI agents were setting up a perimeter on Tuesday night around the wildlife refuge, where some people were still holding out, continuing their protest against federal control of large tracts of the country, a law enforcement official told Reuters.

One of the remaining occupiers, Jason Patrick, told Reuters by phone they would stay until the "redress of grievances".

"I've heard 'peaceful resolution' for weeks now and now there's a cowboy who is my friend who is dead - so prepare for the peaceful resolution," Patrick said.

The takeover at Malheur that started Jan. 2 was a flare-up in the so-called Sagebrush Rebellion, a decades-old conflict over the U.S. government's control of millions of acres of territory in the west. Protesters say they are defending the Constitution.
Federal officials said they had probable cause to arrest Finicum, who told NBC News earlier this month that he would rather die than be detained.

Protest leader Ammon Bundy and four other senior members were taken into custody following the confrontation along Highway 395, near the reserve in northeast Oregon around 4:25 p.m. local time (0025 GMT), the FBI said.

A sixth person was arrested by Oregon State Police in Burns, Oregon, about 1 1/2 hours later. The FBI said a seventh person was later arrested, 50-year-old Peter Santilli, a journalist who livestreamed events at the refuge.

The FBI said they also arrested an eighth person in Peoria, Arizona, in relation to the occupation.

All of those arrested face federal charges of conspiracy to use force, intimidation or threats to impede federal officers from discharging their duties, the FBI said.

The protester Patrick likened Finicum's death to the killing of Tamir Rice, an unarmed 12-year-old African American boy fatally shot by police outside a Cleveland recreation center in 2014. The officers were not charged.

© Joe Raedle/Getty Images Lavoy Finicum walks through the compound as he and others occupy the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge headquarters on January 15, 2016 near Burns, Oregon.

"The government can kill who they want for whatever reason they want with impunity," Patrick said.

Asked how the occupiers would respond to law enforcement entering the refuge he did not indicate a clear plan.

"I don't know what to tell you but if somebody saying 'peaceful resolution' comes in and points guns at me..." he said before trailing off.

The Oregonian reported that Bundy had been en route to a community meeting in John Day, Oregon, where he was scheduled to be a guest speaker, when authorities stopped his vehicle.

The newspaper said 43-year-old Ryan Bundy, Ammon's brother, suffered a minor gunshot wound.

(Reporting by Curtis Skinner in San Francisco and Dan Whitcomb in Los Angeles; Additional reporting by Julia Edwards in Washington, Jonathan Allen in New York and Victoria Cavaliere in Los Angeles; Editing by Lisa Shumaker, Sara Catania and Andrew Heavens)

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/on...ts-oregon-occupation-leader-others/ar-BBoKsvV
 

REO 54

Midas Member
Midas Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
6,484
Likes
4,579
#2
The Clintons: is the Oregon standoff really about uranium?

Jan27by Jon Rappoport


Excerpt from article......


"
“Clinton Foundation took massive payoffs, promised Hammond Ranch and other publicly owned lands to Russians, along with one-fifth of our uranium ore.”

Down in the body of that article, the author provides a link to a page at the US Bureau of Land Management (BLM), which is a federal agency under the Department of the Interior.

On that BLM page (“National BLM > OR/WA > Energy > Uranium Energy”), in a section titled, “Uranium on BLM-Administered Lands in OR/WA,” [(image of webpage forthcoming)] is the following statement:

“In September 2011, a representative from Oregon Energy, L.L.C. (formally Uranium One), met with local citizens, and county and state officials, to discuss the possibility of opening a uranium oxide (‘yellowcake’) mine in southern Malheur County in southeastern Oregon. Oregon Energy is interested in developing a 17-Claim parcel of land known as the Aurora Project through an open pit mining method. Besides the mine, there would be a mill for processing. The claim area occupies about 450 acres and is also referred to as the ‘New U’ uranium claims.

“On May 7, 2012, Oregon Energy LLC made a presentation to the BLM outlining its plans for development for the mine.

“The Vale District has agreed to work with Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife on mitigation for the ‘New U’ uranium claims, which are located in core sage grouse habitat. Although the lands encompassing the claims have been designated core, the area is frequented by rockhounds and hunters, and has a crisscrossing of off-highway vehicle (OHV) roads and other significant land disturbance from the defunct Bretz Mercury Mine, abandoned in the 1960s.

“However, by the fall of 2012 the company said that it was putting its plans for the mine on hold until the uncertainty surrounding sage grouse issues was resolved.”

The first sentence in that BLM section ties together several key elements of the story: Uranium One; a uranium mine; southern Malheur County. Southern Malheur is the general area of the federal-protestor standoff. Let me give you that first sentence again:

“In September 2011, a representative from Oregon Energy, L.L.C. (formally Uranium One), met with local citizens, and county and state officials, to discuss the possibility of opening a uranium oxide (‘yellowcake’) mine in southern Malheur County in southeastern Oregon.”

More at link:

https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/...-is-the-oregon-standoff-really-about-uranium/
 

the_shootist

Old Pasty White Guy
Midas Member
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
May 31, 2015
Messages
49,788
Likes
87,287
Location
Earth
#3
The Clintons: is the Oregon standoff really about uranium?

Jan27by Jon Rappoport


Excerpt from article......


"
“Clinton Foundation took massive payoffs, promised Hammond Ranch and other publicly owned lands to Russians, along with one-fifth of our uranium ore.”

Down in the body of that article, the author provides a link to a page at the US Bureau of Land Management (BLM), which is a federal agency under the Department of the Interior.

On that BLM page (“National BLM > OR/WA > Energy > Uranium Energy”), in a section titled, “Uranium on BLM-Administered Lands in OR/WA,” [(image of webpage forthcoming)] is the following statement:

“In September 2011, a representative from Oregon Energy, L.L.C. (formally Uranium One), met with local citizens, and county and state officials, to discuss the possibility of opening a uranium oxide (‘yellowcake’) mine in southern Malheur County in southeastern Oregon. Oregon Energy is interested in developing a 17-Claim parcel of land known as the Aurora Project through an open pit mining method. Besides the mine, there would be a mill for processing. The claim area occupies about 450 acres and is also referred to as the ‘New U’ uranium claims.

“On May 7, 2012, Oregon Energy LLC made a presentation to the BLM outlining its plans for development for the mine.

“The Vale District has agreed to work with Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife on mitigation for the ‘New U’ uranium claims, which are located in core sage grouse habitat. Although the lands encompassing the claims have been designated core, the area is frequented by rockhounds and hunters, and has a crisscrossing of off-highway vehicle (OHV) roads and other significant land disturbance from the defunct Bretz Mercury Mine, abandoned in the 1960s.

“However, by the fall of 2012 the company said that it was putting its plans for the mine on hold until the uncertainty surrounding sage grouse issues was resolved.”

The first sentence in that BLM section ties together several key elements of the story: Uranium One; a uranium mine; southern Malheur County. Southern Malheur is the general area of the federal-protestor standoff. Let me give you that first sentence again:

“In September 2011, a representative from Oregon Energy, L.L.C. (formally Uranium One), met with local citizens, and county and state officials, to discuss the possibility of opening a uranium oxide (‘yellowcake’) mine in southern Malheur County in southeastern Oregon.”

More at link:

https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/...-is-the-oregon-standoff-really-about-uranium/
The Clinton stench is everywhere!!!
 

Goldhedge

Moderator
Site Mgr
Sr Site Supporter
GIM Hall Of Fame
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
52,854
Likes
99,948
Location
Rocky Mountains
#4
SECOND JUDGE DOUCETTE OPINION HAMMOND CASE JUDICIAL TYRANNY
AUDIO FEBRUARY 7, 2016 GARY
TO READ THE NEWSLETTER ONLINE YOU CAN VISIT THIS LINK: SECOND JUDGE DOUCETTE REPORTS HAMMOND CASE JUDICIAL TYRANNY
SUMMARY
I.Judge Bruce Doucette, Constitutional Judge, Issues His Report on the Hammond Case As Follows; Also Hear His Audio Statement Below.
II. Friend of the Court Brief on Behalf of the Hammonds

DOWNLOAD FRIEND OF THE COURT BRIEF HERE
III. Did the Hammonds receive Due Process of Law ?
DOWNLOAD THE HAMMOND LEGAL DOCUMEINTS HERE
I. Second Judge Doucette Opinion Hammond Case Judicial Tyranny, Constitutional Judge, Issues His Report on the Hammond Case As Follows; Also Hear His Audio Statement Below.

AUDIO STATUS BAR GOES HERE

Audio Player

Dwight-Steve-Hammond- SECOND JUDGE DOUCETTE REPORTS HAMMOND CASE JUDICIAL TYRANNY


II. Friend of the Court Brief on Behalf of the Hammonds
DOWNLOAD FRIEND OF THE COURT BRIEF HERE
Excerpt from the Friend of the Court Brief as follows:

“I talked to local ranchers in the Burns area. I talked to local ranchers in and around the Malheur Wildlife Refuge. I talked to Hammond family members. I talked to local business men and women in the Burns area. I attended several town meetings regarding the Hammonds conviction and resentencing. I talked to the individuals holding the Malheur in hostile adverse possession. I discussed the situation with media personnel. I read and highlighted problems with the Grand Jury Indictment of the Hammonds, presented by U.S. prosecutors Dwight C. Holton and Kirk A. Engdall and filed 6/17/2010,. I read and highlighted problems with the Federal Prosecutor Kelley A. Zusman’s Opposition to Motion To Dismiss Appeal, dated 1/25/2013. I read and highlighted problems with Federal Prosecutors S. Amanda Marshall and Kelley A. Zusman’s Opening Brief Of The Plaintiff United States dated 3/5/2013. I read and highlighted problems in the transcript of the resentencing hearing for the Hammonds dated 10/7/2015 in which the Honorable Ann Aiken presided over.

After studying the situation in depth I have concluded the Hammonds were victims of ineffective council, and a bad faith judicial industry that has nothing to do with justice and everything to do with a perverted judicial industry that allows attorneys to profit off of malicious, bad faith decisions of public officials and public employees. Like the people of Harney County and Judge Hogan who presided over the Hammonds trials, I too concluded the Hammonds are not domestic terrorists.

If anyone involved in this are domestic terrorists, it is the civil conspiracy made up of the BLM management, the Federal Prosecutors and Federal Judges who are all determined to expand the Malheur Wildlife Refuge by attacking one vulnerable rancher at a time. The attorneys who profited from supporting these organized crimes by the act of omission and not exposing them, are as guilty of domestic terrorism as the individuals who organized and led the attacks on these vulnerable ranchers. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Judges are the leaders of the organized criminal attacks, and are instigating organized criminal attacks on all of the economically vulnerable ranchers in and around the Malheur Wildlife Refuge.

Each and every attorney who is in line to profit from stealing the life, liberty and property under the guise he is defending the next economically vulnerable rancher is directly involved in and an active participant in these organized crimes. All of these top ranking federal officials organized to use their official position to criminally expand the Malheur Wildlife Refuge by attacking the Hammonds ability to try to earn a living, by keeping them from using the best management practices available to them…”

DOWNLOAD FRIEND OF THE COURT BRIEF HERE

III. Did the Hammonds receive Due Process of Law ?
DOWNLOAD THE HAMMOND LEGAL DOCUMEINTS HERE
The following nine questions demonstrate glaring examples of Judicial Tyranny Judge Doucette Refers in the Hammond case:
  1. The 5th Amendment to our Constitution for the united States of America requires that ” No person shall be held to answer for a capital or infamous crime, unless upon a presentment or an indictment of a Grand Jury,…”. An infamous crime is defined as a crime involving fraud or dishonesty. Where is the presentment or indictment from an independent grand jury of 25 of the Hammond’s peers as required by the Supreme Law of our Land ? Lacking a presentment or indictment, it is clearly unconstitutional to hold the Hammonds to answer for ANY crime
  2. According to our Constitution for the United States of America at Article 3 Section 2 Clause 3 requires that ” The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by jury;…”. Because our Founders knew the primary way the King delivered tyranny into our society was through the judges, they left no role in the trial of crimes for judges. Criminal trials are to be by juries without judges because everything a judge says will bias the jury. Did the Hammonds receive a trial by a jury of 12 of their peers without a judge as required by the Supreme Law of our Land ?
  3. According to our Constitution for the united States of America at Article 1 Section 9 Clause 7 ” No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State,” Does the judge hold the title Esquire, which is one step below a Knight ? Does the Prosecutor hold a title of Esquire ? If yes, neither can hold any office.
  4. According to the 5th Amendment, ” … nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy …”. The Hammonds were unlawfully and unconstitutionally sentenced to prison and served their assigned terms, and then after they were released , they were given a new and much longer sentence. Were the Hammonds unconstitutionally put in jeopardy twice
  5. According to the 8th Amendment, ” Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” Did the Hammonds receive cruel and unusual punishment unconstitutionally ?
  6. The Oregon Constitution at Article 1 Section 16 requires all “…penalties shall be proportional to the offense.” Was the penalty given to the Hammonds ” proportional”?
  7. According to the 4th Amendment, ” The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” Was the search of the Hammonds and their property in compliance with our 4th Amendment ?
  8. According to Oregon Constitution Article 1 Section 12, the Hammonds can not be exposed to ” double jeopardy” which they were by being sentenced for more time after they had already served their time.
  9. According to Oregon Constitution Article7 Section 3 the case cannot be reheard after the decision by the jury. ” and no fact tried by a jury shall be reexamine in any court of this state,…”
DOWNLOAD THE HAMMOND LEGAL DOCUMENTS HERE

Second Judge Doucette Opinion Hammond Case Judicial Tyranny


http://regenesisradio.com/second-judge-doucette-opinion-hammond-case-judicial-tyranny/