Bundy Archives | Restoring Liberty

By WND. In a blistering rebuke to the federal government, a judge dismissed all charges against rancher Cliven Bundy, two of his sons and militia member Ryan Payne stemming from an armed standoff with federal agents in 2014.

Chief U.S. District Judge Gloria Navarro issued a scathing analysis of the government’s conduct, terming it “outrageous.”

“There has been flagrant misconduct, substantial prejudice and no lesser remedy is sufficient,” she said.

The charges were dismissed “with prejudice,” which means the federal government will not be able to retry the men.

The same judge declared a mistrial in the case late last month, citing prosecutorial misconduct. (Read more from “Bundy Case Dismissed in Staggering Blow to Federal Government” HERE)

_______________________________________

Cliven Bundy Emerges Defiant After Nevada Case Against Him and His Sons Tossed

By Ken Ritter. The Nevada rancher accused of leading an armed standoff that stopped federal agents from rounding up his cattle in 2014 walked out of a courthouse in Las Vegas a free and defiant man Monday, declaring that his fight against U.S. authority is not over.

Cliven Bundy emerged to supporters’ cheers, while environmental and conservation advocates worried that the dismissal of his charges would bolster “violent and racist anti-government” followers who aim to erode established parks, wildlife refuges and other public lands controlled by U.S. officials.

“We’re not done with this,” the 71-year-old Bundy declared in his first minutes of freedom since his arrest in February 2016. (Read more from “Cliven Bundy Emerges Defiant After Nevada Case Against Him and His Sons Tossed” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Yes, I’m using a word that some Oregonians consider to be “offensive.” So, if you are offended at the word “lynching,” grow up! The case currently being heard in Nevada against Bundy Ranch defendants is not a real trial. All the evidence and testimony is being suppressed, not only by the prosecution, but by a treasonous Barack Hussein Obama Soeotor Sobarkah appointee, Judge Gloria Navarro.

In the latest motion by the prosecution, they are seeking to have the entire testimony of Eric Parker stricken from the record and have asked the judge to tell the jury to disregard his testimony.

In a motion by the prosecution, they sought sanctions against defendants Parker, Drexler, and Stewart and their counsel for “repeated and blatant violations of the Court’s Order to preclude jury nullification evidence, argument, and information.

The problem with the prosecution’s argument is that jury nullification is a rightful remedy to this situation where the government is trying to present that it has clean hands in this matter and that the defendants are nothing more than domestic terrorists when the opposite is true.

The prosecution in their motion admitted as much to the fact that they were unable to get a conviction on these men in the first round by stating clearly that “the jury remained deadlocked on all counts as to defendants Parker, Drexler, Stewart, and Lovelien,” and are attempting every way under the sun to get convictions in round two.

However, the Court sought to give an order that is unConstitutional, which precluded the following jury nullification testimony or evidence:

1. April 6, 2014, officer encounters with civilians during the arrest of Dave Bundy, including any testimony concerning, or video/audio depicting, that event;
2. April 9, 2014, officer encounters with civilians during the convoy block, including any testimony concerning, or video/audio recordings depicting officer encounters with Ammon Bundy or Margaret Houston;
3. Third-party/lay person testimony or opinion about the level of force displayed or used by law enforcement officers during impoundment operation, including operations on April 12, 2014 (These were not impoundment operations, they were a slaughter of Cliven Bundy’s cattle, plain and simple).
4. References to the opinion/public statement of Governor Brian Sandoval of April 8, 2014, and/or opinions registered by other political office holders or opinion leaders about BLM [Bureau of Land Management] impoundment operations;
5. References to First Amendment zones;
6. References to Cliven Bundy’s grazing, water, or legacy rights on the public lands;
7. References to infringements on First and Second Amendment rights; and
8. References to punishment the defendants may face if convicted of the offenses.

Every single one of these items are relevant to the case. Yet, Judge Navarro claims that the defense may not defend their defendants with these items!

Jury nullification something that is in the power of the jury despite all the judge and the prosecution are attempting to do in this lynching. (Read more from “Bundy Ranch Case Is Not a Trial – It’s a Lynching” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Posts